Residual cancer burden after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and long-term survival outcomes in breast cancer: a multicentre pooled analysis of 5161 patients

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have independently validated the prognostic relevance of residual cancer burden (RCB) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We used results from several independent cohorts in a pooled patient-level analysis to evaluate the relationship of RCB with long-term prognosis across different phenotypic subtypes of breast cancer, to assess generalisability in a broad range of practice settings. METHODS: In this pooled analysis, 12 institutes and trials in Europe and the USA were identified by personal communications with site investigators. We obtained participant-level RCB results, and data on clinical and pathological stage, tumour subtype and grade, and treatment and follow-up in November, 2019, from patients (aged ≥18 years) with primary stage I-III breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery. We assessed the association between the continuous RCB score and the primary study outcome, event-free survival, using mixed-effects Cox models with the incorporation of random RCB and cohort effects to account for between-study heterogeneity, and stratification to account for differences in baseline hazard across cancer subtypes defined by hormone receptor status and HER2 status. The association was further evaluated within each breast cancer subtype in multivariable analyses incorporating random RCB and cohort effects and adjustments for age and pretreatment clinical T category, nodal status, and tumour grade. Kaplan-Meier estimates of event-free survival at 3, 5, and 10 years were computed for each RCB class within each subtype. FINDINGS: We analysed participant-level data from 5161 patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy between Sept 12, 1994, and Feb 11, 2019. Median age was 49 years (IQR 20-80). 1164 event-free survival events occurred during follow-up (median follow-up 56 months [IQR 0-186]). RCB score was prognostic within each breast cancer subtype, with higher RCB score significantly associated with worse event-free survival. The univariable hazard ratio (HR) associated with one unit increase in RCB ranged from 1·55 (95% CI 1·41-1·71) for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative patients to 2·16 (1·79-2·61) for the hormone receptor-negative, HER2-positive group (with or without HER2-targeted therapy; p<0·0001 for all subtypes). RCB score remained prognostic for event-free survival in multivariable models adjusted for age, grade, T category, and nodal status at baseline: the adjusted HR ranged from 1·52 (1·36-1·69) in the hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative group to 2·09 (1·73-2·53) in the hormone receptor-negative, HER2-positive group (p<0·0001 for all subtypes). INTERPRETATION: RCB score and class were independently prognostic in all subtypes of breast cancer, and generalisable to multiple practice settings. Although variability in hormone receptor subtype definitions and treatment across patients are likely to affect prognostic performance, the association we observed between RCB and a patient's residual risk suggests that prospective evaluation of RCB could be considered to become part of standard pathology reporting after neoadjuvant therapy. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute at the US National Institutes of Health.

Shown for reading. Its publisher allows quoting it, not republishing it.

References 31

1. 1.

   Rubens RD, Sexton S, Tong D, Winter PJ, Knight RK, Hayward JL. Combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 1980; 16: 351–56.

   Not in our library10.1016/0014-2964(80)90352-7

2. 2.

   Mauri D, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis JPA. Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant systemic treatment in breast cancer: a meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005; 97: 188–94.

   Not in our library10.1093/jnci/dji021

3. 3.

   Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 2672–85.

   Not in our library10.1200/jco.1998.16.8.2672

4. 4.

   Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet 2014; 384: 164–72.

   Not in our library10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62422-8

5. 5.

   Spring L, Greenup R, Niemierko A, Pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and long-term outcomes among young women with breast cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2017; 15: 1216–23.

   Not in our library10.6004/jnccn.2017.0158

6. 6.

   Boughey JC, Alvarado MD, Lancaster RB, Surgical standards for management of the axilla in breast cancer clinical trials with pathological complete response endpoint. NPJ Breast Cancer 2018; 4: 26.

   Not in our library10.1038/s41523-018-0074-6

7. 7.

   Masuda N, Lee S-J, Ohtani S, Adjuvant capecitabine for breast cancer after preoperative chemotherapy. N Engl J Med 2017; 376: 2147–59.

   Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa1612645

8. 8.

   von Minckwitz G, Huang C-S, Mano MS, Trastuzumab emtansine for residual invasive HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2019; 380: 617–28.

   Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa1814017

9. 9.

   Symmans WF, Peintinger F, Hatzis C, Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 4414–22.

   Not in our library10.1200/jco.2007.10.6823

10. 10.

    Peintinger F, Sinn B, Hatzis C, Reproducibility of residual cancer burden for prognostic assessment of breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Mod Pathol 2015; 28: 913–20.

    Not in our library10.1038/modpathol.2015.53

11. 11.

    Naidoo K, Parham DM, Pinder SE. An audit of residual cancer burden reproducibility in a UK context. Histopathology 2017; 70: 217–22.

    Not in our library10.1111/his.13054

12. 12.

    Symmans WF, Wei C, Gould R, Long-term prognostic risk after neoadjuvant chemotherapy associated with residual cancer burden and breast cancer subtype. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35: 1049–60.

    Not in our library10.1200/jco.2015.63.1010

13. 13.

    Sharma P, López-Tarruella S, Garcia-Saenz JA, Pathological response and survival in triple-negative breast cancer following neoadjuvant carboplatin plus docetaxel. Clin Cancer Res 2018; 24: 5820–29.

    Not in our library10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-18-0585

14. 14.

    Steenbruggen TG, van Seijen M, Janssen LM, Prognostic value of residual disease after neoadjuvant therapy in HER2-positive breast cancer evaluated by residual cancer burden, neoadjuvant response index, and neo-bioscore. Clin Cancer Res 2019; 25: 4985–92.

    Not in our library10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-19-0560

15. 15.

    Hamy A-S, Darrigues L, Laas E, Prognostic value of the residual cancer burden index according to breast cancer subtype: validation on a cohort of BC patients treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy. PLoS One 2020; 15: e0234191.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0234191

16. 16.

    Earl HM, Hiller L, Dunn JA, Efficacy of neoadjuvant bevacizumab added to docetaxel followed by fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide, for women with HER2-negative early breast cancer (ARTemis): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2015; 16: 656–66.

    Not in our library10.1016/s1470-2045(15)70137-3

17. 17.

    Campbell JI, Yau C, Krass P, Comparison of residual cancer burden, American Joint Committee on Cancer staging and pathologic complete response in breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: results from the I-SPY 1 trial (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657). Breast Cancer Res Treat 2017; 165: 181–91.

    Not in our library10.1007/s10549-017-4303-8

18. 18.

    Symmans WF, Yau C, Chen Y-Y, Assessment of residual cancer burden and event-free survival in neoadjuvant treatment for high-risk breast cancer: an analysis of data from the I-SPY2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol 2021; 7: 1654–63.

    Not in our library10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.3690

19. 19.

    Echavarría I, López-Tarruella S, Picornell AC, Pathological response in a triple negative breast cancer cohort treated with neoadjuvant carboplatin and docetaxel according to Lehmann’s refined classification. Clin Cancer Res 2018; 24: 1845–52.

    Not in our library10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-17-1912

20. 20.

    Yee D, DeMichele AM, Yau C, Association of event-free and distant recurrence-free survival with individual-level pathologic complete response in neoadjuvant treatment of stages 2 and 3 breast cancer: three-year follow-up analysis for the I-SPY2 adaptively randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol 2020; 6: 1355–62.

    Not in our library10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.2535

21. 21.

    Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 1991; 19: 403–10.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1365-2559.1991.tb00229.x

22. 22.

    Wolff AC, Hammond MEH, Hicks DG, Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31: 3997–4013.

    Not in our library10.1200/jco.2013.50.9984

23. 23.

    Curigliano G, Burstein HJ, Winer EP, De-escalating and escalating treatments for early-stage breast cancer: the St Gallen international expert consensus conference on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2017. Ann Oncol 2017; 28: 1700–12.

    Not in our library10.1093/annonc/mdx308

24. 24.

    Fisher B, Bauer M, Margolese R, Five-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy and segmental mastectomy with or without radiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1985; 312: 665–73.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejm198503143121101

25. 25.

    Du L, Yau C, Brown-Swigart L, Predicted sensitivity to endocrine therapy for stage II–III hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative (HR+/HER2–) breast cancer before chemo-endocrine therapy. Ann Oncol 2021; 32: 642–51.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.annonc.2021.02.011

26. 26.

    Earl HM, Hiller L, Dunn JA, Disease-free and overall survival at 3·5 years for neoadjuvant bevacizumab added to docetaxel followed by fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide, for women with HER2 negative early breast cancer: ARTemis Trial. Ann Oncol 2017; 28: 1817–24.

    Not in our library10.1093/annonc/mdx173

27. 27.

    Whitworth P, Beitsch P, Mislowsky A, Chemosensitivity and endocrine sensitivity in clinical luminal breast cancer patients in the prospective neoadjuvant breast registry symphony trial (NBRST) predicted by molecular subtyping. Ann Surg Oncol 2017; 24: 669–75.

    Not in our library10.1245/s10434-016-5600-x

28. 28.

    Li CI, Anderson BO, Daling JR, Moe RE. Trends in incidence rates of invasive lobular and ductal breast carcinoma. JAMA 2003; 289: 1421–24.

    Not in our library10.1001/jama.289.11.1421

29. 29.

    Kong X, Liu Z, Cheng R, Variation in breast cancer subtype incidence and distribution by race/ethnicity in the United States from 2010 to 2015. JAMA Netw Open 2020; 3: e2020303.

    Not in our library10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.20303

30. 30.

    Bossuyt V, Symmans WF. Standardizing of pathology in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23: 3153–61.

    Not in our library10.1245/s10434-016-5317-x

31. 31.

    Mukhtar RA, Yau C, Rosen M, Tandon VJ, Hylton N, Esserman LJ. Clinically meaningful tumor reduction rates vary by prechemotherapy MRI phenotype and tumor subtype in the I-SPY 1 TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657). Ann Surg Oncol 2013; 20: 3823–30.

    Not in our library10.1245/s10434-013-3038-y

Cited by papers we hold 2

• Pembrolizumab and chemotherapy in high-risk, early-stage, ER+/HER2− breast cancer: a randomized phase 3 trial · 2025
  No notice
• Triple-Negative Breast Cancer and Predictive Markers of Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review · 2023
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.