Can some patients avoid adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer?

Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology

Volumn 8, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 272-279

  Bedard, Philippe L ^a   Cardoso, Fatima ^b  

^a PRINCESS MARGARET HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b Champalimaud Cancer Center   (Portugal)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTHRACYCLINE; CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE; DOCETAXEL; DOXORUBICIN; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; EPIRUBICIN; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; FLUOROURACIL; HORMONE RECEPTOR; KI 67 ANTIGEN; METHOTREXATE; PACLITAXEL; PLASMINOGEN ACTIVATOR INHIBITOR 1; TAMOXIFEN; TAXANE DERIVATIVE; UROKINASE;

BREAST CANCER; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER COMBINATION CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER INFILTRATION; CANCER SURVIVAL; CHEMOSENSITIVITY; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG CYTOTOXICITY; DRUG DOSE INCREASE; DRUG DOSE SEQUENCE; DRUG EFFICACY; EARLY CANCER; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION; HUMAN; LOW DRUG DOSE; MOLECULAR DIAGNOSIS; MULTIGENE FAMILY; MULTIPLE CYCLE TREATMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; REVIEW; RISK REDUCTION; SYSTEMIC THERAPY; TREATMENT DURATION; TUMOR VOLUME;

ADJUVANTS, PHARMACEUTIC; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CHEMOTHERAPY, ADJUVANT; FEMALE; HUMANS; NEOPLASM STAGING; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 79955579548     PISSN: 17594774     EISSN: 17594782     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2011.19     Document Type: Review

References (89)

1. [No authors listed] Effects of adjuvant tamoxifen and of cytotoxic therapy on mortality in early breast cancer. An overview of 61 randomized trials among 28,896 women. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. N. Engl. J. Med. 319, 1681-1692 (1988).
2. Ferlay, J., Parkin, D. M. & Steliarova-Foucher, E. Estimates of cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2008. Eur. J. Cancer 46, 765-781 (2010).
3. Goldhirsch, A. et al. Thresholds for therapies: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2009. Ann. Oncol. 20, 1319-1329 (2009).
4. Ravdin, P. M. et al. Computer program to assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 19, 980-991 (2001). (Pubitemid 32176272)
5. Oakman, C., Santarpia, L. & Di Leo, A. Breast cancer assessment tools and optimizing adjuvant therapy. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 7, 725-732 (2010).
6. Perou, C. M. et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 406, 747-752 (2000).
7. Sotiriou, C. et al. Breast cancer classification and prognosis based on gene expression profiles from a population-based study. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 10393-10398 (2003). (Pubitemid 37071889)
8. Sorlie, T. et al. Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 8418-8423 (2003). (Pubitemid 36842560)
9. [No authors listed] Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 365, 1687-1717 (2005).
10. [No authors listed] Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Lancet 352, 930-942 (1998).
11. Peto, R. The worldwide overview: new results for systemic adjuvant therapies. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Presented at 30th Annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 106 (Suppl. 1) (2007).
12. [No authors listed] Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. The Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Lancet 351, 1451-1467 (1998).
13. International Breast Cancer Study Group. Endocrine responsiveness and tailoring adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal lymph node-negative breast cancer: a randomized trial. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 94, 1054-1065 (2002).
14. Colleoni, M. et al. Duration of adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: a joint analysis of two randomised trials investigating three versus six courses of CMF. Br. J. Cancer 86, 1705-1714 (2002). (Pubitemid 34712912)
15. Fisher, B. et al. Tamoxifen and chemotherapy for lymph node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 89, 1673-1682 (1997). (Pubitemid 27508191)
16. Fisher, B. et al. Treatment of lymph-node-negative, oestrogen-receptor- positive breast cancer: long-term findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project randomised clinical trials. Lancet 364, 858-868 (2004).
17. Berry, D. A. et al. Estrogen-receptor status and outcomes of modern chemotherapy for patients with node-positive breast cancer. JAMA 295, 1658-1667 (2006).
18. Symmans, W. F. et al. Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 4414-4422 (2007). (Pubitemid 350013847)
19. Bonadonna, G. et al. Primary chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: eight-year experience at the Milan Cancer Institute. J. Clin. Oncol. 16, 93-100 (1998). (Pubitemid 28041584)
20. Bear, H. D. et al. Sequential preoperative or postoperative docetaxel added to preoperative doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide for operable breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. J. Clin. Oncol. 24, 2019-2027 (2006). (Pubitemid 46622110)
21. van der Hage, J. A. 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. 19, 4224-4237 (2001).
22. Fisher, B. 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. 15, 2483-2493 (1997). (Pubitemid 27289876)
23. Liedtke, C. et al. Response to neoadjuvant therapy and long-term survival in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 1275-1281 (2008).
24. Ring, A. E. et al. Oestrogen receptor status, pathological complete response and prognosis in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer 91, 2012-2017 (2004). (Pubitemid 40128767)
25. Bear, H. D. 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. 21, 4165-4174 (2003). (Pubitemid 46606185)
26. Colleoni, M. et al. Expression of, ER, PgR, HER1, HER2, and response: a study of preoperative chemotherapy. Ann. Oncol. 19, 465-472 (2008). (Pubitemid 351325666)
27. Guarneri, V. et al. Prognostic value of pathologic complete response after primary chemotherapy in relation to hormone receptor status and other factors. J. Clin. Oncol. 24, 1037-1044 (2006). (Pubitemid 46638799)
28. Ring, A. E., Smith, I. E., Ashley, S., Fulford, L. G. & Lakhani, S. R. Oestrogen receptor status, pathological complete response and prognosis in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer 91, 2012-2017 (2004). (Pubitemid 40128767)
29. von Minckwitz, G. et al. Integrated meta-analysis on 6402 patients with early breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant anthracycline-taxane ± trastuzumab containing chemotherapy [abstract]. Cancer Res. 69 (2 Suppl.), a79 (2009).
30. Livasy, C. et al. Biomarkers associated with pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in women with locally advanced breast cancer: results from the I-SPY TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012 & ACRIN 6657) [abstract]. Cancer Res. 69 (2 Suppl.), a5102 (2009).
31. Albain, K. S. et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy and timing of tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive, node-positive breast cancer: a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 374, 2055-2063 (2009).
32. Albain, K., Barlow, O. & O'Malley, F. Concurrent (CAFT) versus sequential (CAF-T) chemohormonal therapy (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, 5-fluorouracil, tamoxifen) versus T alone for postmenopausal, node-positive, estrogen (ER) and/or progesterone (PgR) receptor-positive breast cancer; mature outcomes and new biologic correlates on phase II intergroup trial 0100 (SWOG-8814) [abstract 37]. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 88 (Suppl. 1), S20 (2004).
33. Arpino, G., Bardou, V. J., Clark, G. M. & Elledge, R. M. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: tumor characteristics and clinical outcome. Breast Cancer Res. 6, R149-R156 (2004).
34. Cristofanilli, M. et al. Invasive lobular carcinoma classic type: response to primary chemotherapy and survival outcomes. J. Clin. Oncol. 23, 41-48 (2005). (Pubitemid 41702621)
35. Tubiana-Hulin, M. et al. Response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in lobular and ductal breast carcinomas: a retrospective study on 860 patients from one institution. Ann. Oncol. 17, 1228-1233 (2006). (Pubitemid 44288213)
36. Pestalozzi, B. C. et al. Distinct clinical and prognostic features of infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: combined results of 15 International Breast Cancer Study Group clinical trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 3006-3014 (2008).
37. Colleoni, M. et al. Increasing steroid hormone receptors expression defines breast cancer subtypes non responsive to preoperative chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 116, 359-369 (2009).
38. Purushotham, A., Pinder, S., Cariati, M., Harries, M. & Goldhirsch, A. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy: not the best option in estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, invasive classical lobular carcinoma of the breast? J. Clin. Oncol. 28, 3552-3554 (2010).].
39. Hu, Z. et al. The molecular portraits of breast tumors are conserved across microarray platforms. BMC Genomics 7, 96 (2006).
40. Fan, C. et al. Concordance among gene-expression-based predictors for breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 355, 560-569 (2006). (Pubitemid 44200649)
41. Nielsen, T. O. et al. Immunohistochemical and clinical characterization of the basal-like subtype of invasive breast carcinoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 10, 5367-5374 (2004). (Pubitemid 39100473)
42. Cheang, M. C. et al. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 101, 736-750 (2009).
43. Carey, L., Winer, E., Viale, G., Cameron, D. & Gianni, L. Triple-negative breast cancer: disease entity or title of convenience? Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 7, 683-692 (2010).
44. Carey, L. A. et al. The triple negative paradox: primary tumor chemosensitivity of breast cancer subtypes. Clin. Cancer Res. 13, 2329-2334 (2007). (Pubitemid 46698581)
45. Darb-Esfahani, S. et al. Identification of biology-based breast cancer types with distinct predictive and prognostic features: role of steroid hormone and HER2 receptor expression in patients treated with neoadjuvant anthracycline/taxane-based chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res. 11, R69 (2009).
46. Sweep, C. G. et al. External quality assessment of trans-European multicentre antigen determinations (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) of urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) and its type 1 inhibitor (PAI-1) in human breast cancer tissue extracts. Br. J. Cancer 78, 1434-1441 (1998). (Pubitemid 28517539)
47. Look, M. P. et al. Pooled analysis of prognostic impact of urokinase-type plasminogen activator and its inhibitor PAI-1 in 8377 breast cancer patients. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 94, 116-128 (2002). (Pubitemid 34121291)
48. Jänicke, F. et al. Randomized adjuvant chemotherapy trial in high-risk, lymph node-negative breast cancer patients identified by urokinase-type plasminogen activator and plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 93, 913-920 (2001). (Pubitemid 32624648)
49. Harbeck, N. et al. Final 10-year analysis of prospective multicenter Chemo N0 trial for validation of ASCO-recommended biomarkers uPA/PAI-1 for therapy decision making in node-negative breast cancer [abstract]. J. Clin. Oncol. 27 (Suppl.), a511 (2009).
50. Harbeck, N. et al. Enhanced benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients classified high-risk according to urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) and plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 (n = 3,424). Cancer Res. 62, 4617-4622 (2002).
51. Thomssen, C. et al. ASCO-recommended prognostic factors uPA/PAI-1 in node-negative (N0) breast cancer patients (pts) compared to clinicopathological risk assessment within the NNBC 3-Europe trial [abstract]. J. Clin. Oncol. 27 (Suppl.), a544 (2009).
52. Thomssen, C. et al. Feasibility of measuring the prognostic factors uPA and PAI-1 in core needle biopsy breast cancer specimens. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 101, 1028-1029 (2009).
53. Sotiriou, C. & Pusztai, L. Gene-expression signatures in breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 360, 790-800 (2009).
54. Chang, H. Y. et al. Robustness, scalability, and integration of a wound-response gene expression signature in predicting breast cancer survival. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 3738-3743 (2005). (Pubitemid 40354681)
55. Paik, S. et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 351, 2817-2826 (2004). (Pubitemid 40051905)
56. Sotiriou, C. et al. Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 98, 262-272 (2006). (Pubitemid 43264710)
57. van 't Veer, L. J. et al. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 415, 530-536 (2002).
58. Wang, Y. et al. Gene-expression profiles to predict distant metastasis of lymph-node-negative primary breast cancer. Lancet 365, 671-679 (2005). (Pubitemid 40260888)
59. Paik, S. et al. Expression of the 21 genes in the Recurrence Score assay and tamoxifen clinical benefit in the NSABP study B-14 of node negative, estrogen receptor positive breast cancer [abstract]. J. Clin. Oncol. 23 (Suppl.), a510 (2005).
60. Paik, S. et al. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 24, 3726-3734 (2006). (Pubitemid 46622311)
61. Sparano, J. A. & Paik, S. Development of the 21-gene assay and its application in clinical practice and clinical trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 721-728 (2008). (Pubitemid 351264384)
62. Gianni, L. et al. Gene expression profiles in paraffin-embedded core biopsy tissue predict response to chemotherapy in women with locally advanced breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 23, 7265-7277 (2005). (Pubitemid 46202341)
63. Buyse, M. et al. Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 98, 1183-1192 (2006). (Pubitemid 44390989)
64. van de Vijver, M. J. et al. A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 347, 1999-2009 (2002). (Pubitemid 35461656)
65. Esserman, L. J. et al. Breast cancer molecular profiles and tumor response of neoadjuvant doxorubicin and paclitaxel: The I-SPY TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012, ACRIN 6657) [abstract]. J. Clin. Oncol. 27 (Suppl.), LBA515 (2009).
66. Pusztai, L. et al. Combined use of genomic prognostic and treatment response predictors in lymph node-negative breast cancer [abstract]. ASCO Breast Cancer Symp. a53 (2007).
67. Straver, M. et al. The 70-gene signature as a response predictor for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 119, 551-558 (2010).
68. Knauer, M. et al. The predictive value of the 70-gene signature for adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 120, 655-661 (2010).
69. Cardoso, F. et al. Clinical application of the 70-gene profile: the MINDACT trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 729-735 (2008). (Pubitemid 351264385)
70. Liedtke, C. et al. Genomic grade index is associated with response to chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 27, 3185-3191 (2009).
71. Wirapati, P. et al. Meta-analysis of gene expression profiles in breast cancer: toward a unified understanding of breast cancer subtyping and prognosis signatures. Breast Cancer Res. 10, R65 (2008).
72. Desmedt, C. et al. Biological processes associated with breast cancer clinical outcome depend on the molecular subtypes. Clin. Cancer Res. 14, 5158-5165 (2008).
73. Bedard, P. L. et al. Limited clinical utility of prognostic gene expression profiles in grade 3 node-negative early stage breast cancer [abstract]. Cancer Res. 69 (Suppl.), a103 (2009).
74. Mook, S. et al. The 70-gene prognosis-signature predicts disease outcome in breast cancer patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes in an independent validation study. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 116, 295-302 (2009).
75. Saghatchian, M. et al. Combining genomic profiling (70 Gene-Mammaprint) with nodal status allows to classify patients with primary breast cancer and positive lymph nodes (1-9) into very distinct prognostic subgroups that could help tailor treatment strategies [abstract]. Cancer Res. 69 (Suppl. 3), a102 (2009).
76. Albain, K. S. et al. Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 11, 55-65 (2010).
77. Ravdin, P. M. et al. The decrease in breast-cancer incidence in 2003 in the United States. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 1670-1674 (2007). (Pubitemid 46631679)
78. Lippman, M. E. et al. The relation between estrogen receptors and response rate to cytotoxic chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 298, 1223-1228 (1978). (Pubitemid 8357640)
79. Knauer, M. et al. Identification of a low-risk subgroup in HER-2-positive breast cancer by the 70-gene prognosis signature. Br. J. Cancer 103, 1788-1793 (2010).
80. Alexe, G. et al. High expression of lymphocyte-associated genes in node-negative HER2+ breast cancers correlates with lower recurrence rates. Cancer Res. 67, 10669-10676 (2007). (Pubitemid 350145892)
81. Rody, A. et al. T-cell metagene predicts a favorable prognosis in estrogen receptor-negative and HER2-positive breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res. 11, R15 (2009).
82. Simes, R. J. & Coates, A. S. Patient preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy of early breast cancer: how much benefit is needed? J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 2001, 146-152 (2001).
83. Cocquyt, V. F. et al. Different responses to preoperative chemotherapy for invasive lobular and invasive ductal breast carcinoma. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 29, 361-367 (2003). (Pubitemid 36675693)
84. Chaturvedi, S. et al. Primary Chemotherapy for breast cancer. Does histological type of cancer matter? [abstract 2089]. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 88 (Suppl. 1), S106 (2004).
85. Wenzel, C. et al. Invasive ductal carcinoma and invasive lobular carcinoma of breast differ in response following neoadjuvant therapy with epidoxorubicin and docetaxel + G-CSF. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 104, 109-114 (2007). (Pubitemid 46976638)
86. Straver, M. E. et al. The relevance of breast cancer subtypes in the outcome of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 17, 2411-2418 (2010).
87. Rouzier, R. et al. Breast cancer molecular subtypes respond differently to preoperative chemotherapy. Clin. Cancer Res. 11, 5678-5685 (2005). (Pubitemid 41170290)
88. de Ronde, J. J. et al. Concordance of clinical and molecular breast cancer subtyping in the context of preoperative chemotherapy response. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 119, 119-126 (2010).
89. Bhargava, R. et al. Immunohistochemical surrogate markers of breast cancer molecular classes predicts response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a single institutional experience with 359 cases. Cancer 116, 1431-1439 (2010).