Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer: Assessing treatment progress and managing poor responders

  • Published:
Current Oncology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is no clear consensus regarding the most effective management of poor responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Intensifying or changing primary systemic treatment has not been shown to offer any benefit. There is a paucity of trials testing the utility of adjuvant chemotherapy in this setting. Adjuvant hormonal treatment significantly decreases relapse rates in patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, regardless of initial response to chemotherapy. Neoadjuvant hormonal therapy is usually reserved for patients who are not candidates for chemotherapy or surgery. In patients with HER-2-overexpressing tumors who are candidates for chemotherapy, trastuzumab improves outcomes when administered in the preoperative or postoperative setting. This article examines issues related to the assessment of response to preoperative therapy and the clinical use of these assessments. It reviews important clinical evidence related to the utility of further treatment in patients with breast cancer that has responded poorly to neoadjuvant treatment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. van der Hage JA, Cornelis JH, van de Velde CJ, et al.: Preoperative chemotherapy in primary operable breast cancer: results from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer trial 10902. J Clin Oncol 2001, 19:4224–4237.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E, et al.: Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Clin Oncol 1997, 15:2483–2493.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD, et al.: Preoperative chemotherapy: updates of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26:778–785.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, Brambilla C, et al.: Primary chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: eight year experience of the Milan Cancer Institute. J Clin Oncol 1998, 16:93–100.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Mauri D, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis JP: Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant systemic treatment in breast cancer: a meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005, 97:188–193.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Smith IE, Dowsett M, Ebbs SR, et al.: Neoadjuvant treatment of postmenopausal breast cancer with anastrozole, tamoxifen, or both in combination: the Immediate Preoperative Anastrozole, Tamoxifen, or Combined with Tamoxifen (IMPACT) multicenter double-blind randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 2005, 23:5108–5116.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Chagpar AB, Middleton LP, Sahin AA, et al.: Accuracy of physical examination, ultrasonography, and mammography in predicting residual pathologic tumor size in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg 2006, 243:257–264.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. von Minckwitz G, Kummel S, Vogel P, et al.: Intensified neoadjuvant chemotherapy in early-responding breast cancer: phase III randomized GeparTrio study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008, 100:552–562.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. von Minckwitz G, Kummel S, Vogel P, et al.: Neoadjuvant vinorelbine-capecitabine versus docetaxel-doxorubicincyclophosphamide in early nonresponsive breast cancer: phase III randomized GeparTrio trial. J Nat Cancer Inst 2008, 100:542–551.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Esserman L, Kaplan E, Partridge S, et al.: MRI phenotype is associated with response to doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage III breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2001, 8:549–559.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Balu-Maestro C, Chapellier C, Bleuse A, et al.: Imaging in evaluation of response to neoadjuvant breast cancer treatment benefits of MRI. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2002, 72:145–152.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Partridge SC, Gibbs JE, Lu Y, et al.: Accuracy of MR imaging for revealing residual breast cancer in patients who have undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005, 179:1193–1199.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Buchholz T, Lehman CD, Harris JR, et al.: Statement of the science concerning locoregional treatments after preoperative chemotherapy for breast cancer: a National Cancer Institute Conference. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26:791–797.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tao Y, Klause A, Vickers A, et al.: Clinical and biomarker endpoint analysis in neoadjuvant endocrine therapy trials. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 2005, 95:91–95.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Ellis MJ, Coop A, Singh B, et al.: Letrozole inhibits tumor proliferation more effectively than tamoxifen independent of HER1/2 expression status. Cancer Res 2003, 63:6523–6531.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Eiermann W, Paepke S, Appfelstaedt J, et al.: Preoperative treatment of postmenopausal breast cancer patients with letrozole: a randomized double-blind multicenter study. Ann Oncol 2001, 12:1527–1532.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Cataliotti L, Buzdar AU, Noguchi S, et al.: Comparison of anastrazole versus tamoxifen as preoperative therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: the Pre-Operative “Arimidex” Compared to Tamoxifen (PROACT) trial. Cancer 2006, 106:2095–2103.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Gralow JR, Burstein HJ, Wood W, et al.: Preoperative therapy in invasive breast cancer: pathologic assessment and systemic therapy issues in operable disease. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26:814–819.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Huang EH, Strom EA, Perkins GH, et al.: Comparison of risk of local-regional recurrence after mastectomy or breast conservation therapy for patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation stratified according to a prognostic index score. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006, 66:352–357.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ogston KN, Miller ID, Payne S, et al.: A new histological grading system to assess response of breast cancers to primary chemotherapy: prognostic significance and survival. Breast 2003, 12:320–327.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Symmans WF, Peintinger F, Hatzis C, et al.: Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2007, 25:4414–4422.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kuerer HM, Newman LA, Smith TL, et al.: Clinical course of breast cancer patients with complete pathologic primary tumor and axillary lymph node response to doxorubicinbased neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 1999, 17:460–469.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Carey LA, Metzger R, Dees EC, et al.: American Joint Committee on Cancer tumor-node-metastasis stage after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and breast cancer outcome. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005, 97:1137–1142.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Formenti SC, Volm M, Skinner KA, et al.: Preoperative twice-weekly paclitaxel with concurrent radiation therapy followed by surgery and postoperative doxorubicin-based chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer: a phase I/II trial. J Clin Oncol 2003, 21:864–870.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Mazouni C, Peintinger F, Wan-Kau S, et al.: Residual ductal carcinoma in situ in patients with complete eradication of invasive breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not adversely affect patient outcome. J Clin Oncol 2007, 25:2650–2655.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Rajan R, Poniecka A, Smith TL, et al.: Change in tumor cellularity of breast carcinoma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a variable in the pathologic assessment of response. Cancer 2004, 100:1365–1373.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Thomas E, Holmes FA, Smith TL, et al.: The use of alternate, non-cross-resistant adjuvant chemotherapy on the basis of pathologic response to a neoadjuvant doxorubicin-based regimen in women with operable breast cancer: long-term results from a prospective randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 2004, 22:2294–2302.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Smith IC, Heys SD, Hutcheon AW, et al.: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: significantly enhanced response with docetaxel. J Clin Oncol 2002, 20:1456–1466.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Bear HD, Anderson S, Brown A, et al.: The effect on tumor response of adding sequential preoperative docetaxel to preoperative doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide: preliminary results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. J Clin Oncol 2003, 21:4165–4174.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. von Minckwitz G, Rezai M, Loibl S, et al.: Capecitabine given concomitantly or in sequence with EC? Docetaxel as neoadjuvant treatment for early breast cancer-GBG/AGO intergroup-study [abstract]. Presented at the 30th Annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. San Antonio, TX; December 13–16, 2007.

  31. Semiglazov VF, Amiglozov V, Ivanov V, et al.: The relative efficacy of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy versus chemotherapy in postmenopausal women with ER-positive breast cancer [abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2004, 23:7(Suppl):519.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ellis MJ, Ma C: Letrozole in the neoadjuvant setting: the P024 trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2007, 105(Suppl 1):33–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Buzdar AU, Valero V, Ibrahim NK, et al.: Neoadjuvant therapy with paclitaxel followed by 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy and concurrent trastuzumab in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer: an update of the initial randomized study population and data of additional patients treated with the same regimen. Clin Cancer Res 2004, 13:228–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Gianni L, Semiglazov V, Manikhas GM, et al.: Neoadjuvant trastuzumab plus doxorubicin, paclitaxel, and CMF in locally advanced breast cancer (NOAH trial): feasibility, safety, and anti-tumor effects [abstract 532]. Presented at the 43rd Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Chicago, IL; June 1–5, 2007.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Taussig Cancer Center, Cleveland Clinic, R35, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA

    George Thomas Budd

Authors
  1. Robert Wesolowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. George Thomas Budd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to George Thomas Budd.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wesolowski, R., Budd, G.T. Neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer: Assessing treatment progress and managing poor responders. Curr Oncol Rep 11, 37–44 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-009-0007-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-009-0007-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation