A common language in neoadjuvant breast cancer clinical trials: Proposals for standard definitions and endpoints

The Lancet Oncology

Volumn 13, Issue 6, 2012, Pages

  Fumagalli, Debora ^a   Bedard, Philippe L ^b   Nahleh, Zeina ^c   Michiels, Stefan ^a   Sotiriou, Christos ^a   Loi, Sherene ^a   Sparano, Joseph A ^d   Ellis, Matthew ^e   Hylton, Nola ^f   Zujewski, Jo Anne ^g   Hudis, Clifford ^h   Esserman, Laura ⁱ   Piccart, Martine ^a  

^a JULES BORDET INSTITUTE   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c Paul L Foster School of Medicine   (United States)

^d ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e USA   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^g NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^h MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANASTROZOLE; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; KI 67 ANTIGEN; LETROZOLE; PROGESTERONE RECEPTOR; TAMOXIFEN;

ADJUVANT THERAPY; BREAST CANCER; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); ECHOGRAPHY; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAMMOGRAPHY; MINIMAL RESIDUAL DISEASE; MOLECULAR IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATIENT SELECTION; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREOPERATIVE TREATMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESIDUAL CANCER BURDEN; REVIEW; STANDARDIZATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

ADULT; AGED; BELGIUM; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASTECTOMY; NEOADJUVANT THERAPY; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM STAGING; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PROGNOSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 84861553242     PISSN: 14702045     EISSN: 14745488     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70378-3     Document Type: Review

References (75)

1. De Lena M, Varini M, Zucali R, et al. Multimodal treatment for locally advanced breast cancer: result of chemotherapy-radiotherapy versus chemotherapy-surgery. Cancer Clinical Trials 1981, 4:229-236.
2. 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.
3. Wolmark N, Wang J, Mamounas E, Bryant J, Fisher B Preoperative chemotherapy in patients with operable breast cancer: nine-year results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2001, 30:96-102.
4. van der Hage JA, van de Velde CJ, Julien JP, Tubiana-Hulin M, Vandervelden C, Duchateau L 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.
5. 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.
6. Bear HD, Anderson S, Smith RE, 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 2006, 24:2019-2027.
7. von Minckwitz G, Raab G, Caputo A, et al. Doxorubicin with cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel every 21 days compared with doxorubicin and docetaxel every 14 days as preoperative treatment in operable breast cancer: the GEPARDUO study of the German Breast Group. J Clin Oncol 2005, 23:2676-2685.
8. Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2000, 406:747-752.
9. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001, 98:10869-10874.
10. Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J, et al. Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003, 100:8418-8423.
11. Sotiriou C, Neo SY, McShane LM, et al. Breast cancer classification and prognosis based on gene expression profiles from a population-based study. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003, 100:10393-10398.
12. Rouzier R, Perou CM, Symmans WF, et al. Breast cancer molecular subtypes respond differently to preoperative chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 2005, 11:5678-5685.
13. Untch M, Rezai M, Loibl S, et al. Neoadjuvant treatment with trastuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer: results from the GeparQuattro study. J Clin Oncol 2010, 28:2024-2031.
14. Gianni L, Eiermann W, Semiglazov V, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with trastuzumab followed by adjuvant trastuzumab versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (the NOAH trial): a randomised controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort. Lancet 2010, 375:377-384.
15. 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.
16. Ellis MJ, Coop A, Singh B, et al. Letrozole is more effective neo-adjuvant endocrine therapy than tamoxifen for ErbB-1- and/or ErbB-2-positive, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: evidence from a phase III randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 2001, 19:3808-3816.
17. Weigelt B, Geyer FC, Reis-Filho JS Histological types of breast cancer: how special are they?. Mol Oncol 2010, 4:192-208.
18. Mook S, Schmidt MK, Rutgers EJ, et al. Calibration and discriminatory accuracy of prognosis calculation for breast cancer with the online Adjuvant! program: a hospital-based retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol 2009, 10:1070-1076.
19. Guix M, Granja Nde M, Meszoely I, et al. Short preoperative treatment with erlotinib inhibits tumor cell proliferation in hormone receptor-positive breast cancers. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26:897-906.
20. Martin L-A, Davies GLS, Weigel MT, et al. Pre-surgical study of the biological effects of the selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor celecoxib in patients with primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010, 123:829-836.
21. Chevallier B, Roche H, Olivier JP, Chollet P, Hurteloup P Inflammatory breast cancer: pilot study of intensive induction chemotherapy (FEC-HD) results in a high histologic response rate. Am J Clin Oncol 1993, 16:223-228.
22. Sataloff DM, Mason BA, Prestipino AJ, Seinige UL, Lieber CP, Baloch Z Pathologic response to induction chemotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the breast: a determinant of outcome. J Am Coll Surg 1995, 180:297-306.
23. 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.
24. Green MC, Buzdar AU, Smith T, et al. Weekly paclitaxel improves pathologic complete remission in operable breast cancer when compared with paclitaxel once every 3 weeks. J Clin Oncol 2005, 23:5983-5992.
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.
26. Rouzier R, Extra JM, Klijanienko J, et al. Incidence and prognostic significance of complete axillary downstaging after primary chemotherapy in breast cancer patients with T1 to T3 tumors and cytologically proven axillary metastatic lymph nodes. J Clin Oncol 2002, 20:1304-1310.
27. Lester SC, Bose S, Chen Y-Y, et al. Protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with invasive carcinoma of the breast. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2009, 133:1515-1538.
28. Breast. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual 2010, 347-376. Anon, Springer, New York. 7th edn. S.B. Edge, D.R. Byrd, C.C. Compton (Eds.).
29. Breast cancer treatment (PDQ) National Cancer Institute, (accessed Dec 15, 2011). http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/breast/healthprofessional/page3.
30. Carey L, 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.
31. 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.
32. Pusztai L Preoperative systemic chemotherapy and pathologic assessment of response. Pathol Oncol Res 2008, 14:169-171.
33. Nahlah Z, Sivasubramaniam D, Dhaliwal S, Sundarajan V, Komrokji R Residual cancer burden in locally advanced breast cancer: a superior tool. Curr Oncol 2008, 15:271-278.
34. Residual cancer burden calculator MD Anderson Cancer Center, (accessed Dec 16, 2011). http://www3.mdanderson.org/app/medcalc/index.cfm?pagename=jsconvert3.
35. Dowsett M, Ebbs SR, Dixon JM, et al. Biomarker changes during neoadjuvant anastrozole, tamoxifen, or the combination: influence of hormonal status and HER-2 in breast cancer-a study from the IMPACT trialists. J Clin Oncol 2005, 23:2477-2492.
36. Dowsett M, Smith IE, Ebbs SR, et al. Short-term changes in Ki-67 during neoadjuvant treatment of primary breast cancer with anastrozole or tamoxifen alone or combined correlate with recurrence-free survival. Clin Cancer Res 2005, 11:951-958s.
37. Dowsett M, Smith IE, Ebbs SR, et al. Proliferation and apoptosis as markers of benefit in neoadjuvant endocrine therapy of breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2006, 12:1024-1130s.
38. 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.
39. Dowsett M, Smith IE, Ebbs SR, et al. Prognostic value of Ki67 expression after short-term presurgical endocrine therapy for primary breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007, 99:167-170.
40. Jones RL, Salter J, A'Hern R, et al. The prognostic significance of Ki67 before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2009, 116:53-68.
41. Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, A'Hern R Assessment of ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the international ki67 in breast cancer working group. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011, 103:1656-1664.
42. Ellis MJ, Tao Y, Luo J, et al. Outcome prediction for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer based on postneoadjuvant endocrine therapy tumor characteristics. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008, 100:1380-1388.
43. Hudis CA, Barlow WE, Costantino JP, et al. Proposal for standardized definitions for efficacy end points in adjuvant breast cancer trials: the STEEP system. J Clin Oncol 2007, 25:2127-2132.
44. Oude Munnink TH, Nagengast WB, Brouwers AH, et al. Molecular imaging of breast cancer. Breast 2009, 18:S66-S73.
45. Esserman L, Hylton N, Yassa L, Barclay J, Frankel S, Sickles E Utility of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of breast cancer: evidence for improved preoperative staging. J Clin Oncol 1999, 17:110-119.
46. Van Goethem M, Schelfout K, Dijckmans L, et al. MR mammography in the pre-operative staging of breast cancer in patients with dense breast tissue: comparison with mammography and ultrasound. Eur Radiol 2004, 14:809-816.
47. Londero V, Bazzocchi M, Del Frate C, et al. Locally advanced breast cancer: comparison of mammography, sonography and MR imaging in evaluation of residual disease in women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur Radiol 2004, 14:1371-1379.
48. Yeh E, Slanetz P, Kopans DB, et al. Prospective comparison of mammography, sonography, and MRI in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for palpable breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005, 184:868-877.
49. Fangberget A, Nilsen LB, Hole K, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer-response evaluation and prediction of response to treatment using dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Eur Radiol 2011, 21:1188-1199.
50. Li XR, Cheng LQ, Liu M, et al. DW-MRI ADC values can predict treatment response in patients with locally advanced breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Med Oncol 2011, published online Feb 1. 10.1007/s12032-011-9842-y.
51. Loo CE, Straver ME, Rodenhuis S, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging response monitoring of breast cancer during neoadjuvant chemotherapy: relevance of breast cancer subtype. J Clin Oncol 2011, 29:660-666.
52. Kawashima H, Inokuchi M, Furukawa H, Kitamura S Triple-negative breast cancer are the imaging findings different between responders and nonresponders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy?. Acad Radiol 2011, 18:963-969.
53. Rosen EL, Blackwell KL, Baker JA, et al. Accuracy of MRI in the detection of residual breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003, 181:1275-1282.
54. Partridge SC, Gibbs JE, Lu Y, Esserman LJ, Sudilovsky D, Hylton NM Accuracy of MR imaging for revealing residual breast cancer in patients who have undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002, 179:1193-1199.
55. Kim HJ, Im YH, Han BK, et al. Accuracy of MRI for estimating residual tumor size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer: relation to response patterns on MRI. Acta Oncol 2007, 46:996-1003.
56. Duch J, Fuster D, Muñoz M, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT for early prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009, 36:1551-1557.
57. Straver ME, Aukema TS, Olmos RA, et al. Feasibility of FDG PET/CT to monitor the response of axillary lymph node metastases to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010, 37:1069-1076.
58. Choi JH, Lim HI, Lee SK, et al. The role of PET CT to evaluate the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer: comparison with ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging. J Surg Oncol 2010, 102:392-397.
59. Monzawa S, Adachi S, Suzuki K, et al. Diagnostic performance of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography of breast cancer in detecting axillary lymph node metastasis: comparison with ultrasonography and contrast-enhanced CT. Ann Nucl Med 2009, 23:855-861.
60. Yeh E, Slanetz P, Kopans DB, et al. Prospective comparison of mammography, sonography, and MRI in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for palpable breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005, 184:868-877.
61. Khan A, Sabel MS, Nees A, et al. Comprehensive axillary evaluation in neoadjuvant chemotherapy patients with ultrasonography and sentinel lymph node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 2005, 12:697-704.
62. Tardivon AA, Ollivier L, El Khoury C, Thibault F Monitoring therapeutic efficacy in breast carcinomas. Eur Radiol 2006, 16:2549-2558.
63. Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J, et al. Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003, 100:8418-8423.
64. Hu Z, Fan C, Oh DS, et al. The molecular portraits of breast tumors are conserved across microarray platforms. BMC Genomics 2006, 7:96.
65. Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MC, et al. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:1160-1167.
66. Weigelt B, Mackay A, A'hern R, et al. Breast cancer molecular profiling with single sample predictors: a retrospective analysis. Lancet Oncol 2010, 11:339-349.
67. Cuzick J, Dowsett M, Wale C, et al. Prognostic value of a combined ER, PgR, Ki67, Her2 immunohistochemical (IHC4) score and comparison with the GHI recurrence score: results from TransATAC. Cancer Res 2009, 69:74. (abstr).
68. Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D, et al. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009, 101:736-750.
69. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010, 25:2784-2795.
70. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007, 25:118-145.
71. Sotiriou C, Pusztai L Gene-expression signatures in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2009, 360:790-800.
72. Gianni L, Zambetti M, Clark K, 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 2005, 23:7265-7277.
73. Straver ME, Glas AM, Hannemann J, et al. The 70-gene signature as a response predictor for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010, 119:551-558.
74. Liedtke C, Hatzis C, Symmans WF, et al. Genomic grade index is associated with response to chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:3185-3191.
75. Ellis MJ, Suman VJ, Hoog J, et al. Randomized phase II neoadjuvant comparison between letrozole, anastrozole, and exemestane for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-rich stage 2 to 3 breast cancer: clinical and biomarker outcomes and predictive value of the baseline PAM50-based intrinsic subtype-ACOSOG Z1031. J Clin Oncol 2011, 29:2342-2349.