Pathologic response and long-term follow-up in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A comparison between classifications and their practical application

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 137, Issue 8, 2013, Pages 1074-1082

  Corben, Adriana D ^a,c   Abi Raad, Rita ^b,d   Popa, Ion ^a   Teo, Clarence H Y ^a,e   Macklin, Eric A ^a   Koerner, Frederick C ^a   Taghian, Alphonse G ^b   Brachtel, Elena F ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b Department of Radiation Oncology ^*  (United States)

^c MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^d YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e TAN TOCK SENG HOSPITAL   (Singapore)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; DOXORUBICIN; PACLITAXEL;

ADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY; ADJUVANT THERAPY; ADULT; AGED; BREAST TUMOR; CLASSIFICATION; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MIDDLE AGED; MINIMAL RESIDUAL DISEASE; PATHOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; AGED; ANTINEOPLASTIC COMBINED CHEMOTHERAPY PROTOCOLS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CHEMOTHERAPY, ADJUVANT; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; DOXORUBICIN; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MIDDLE AGED; NEOADJUVANT THERAPY; NEOPLASM, RESIDUAL; PACLITAXEL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84881042024     PISSN: 00039985     EISSN: 15432165     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2012-0290-OA     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (44)

1. Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, Brambilla C, et al. Primary chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: eight-year experience at the Milan Cancer Institute. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(1):93-100.
2. 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(5):814-819.
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. 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. 2007;13(1):228-233.
5. von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer JU, et al. Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(15):1796-1804.
6. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(8): 2672-2685.
7. Fisher ER, Wang J, Bryant J, Fisher B, Mamounas E, Wolmark N. Pathobiology of preoperative chemotherapy: findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel (NSABP) protocol B-18. Cancer. 2002;95(4):681-695.
8. Katz A, Saad ED, Porter P, Pusztai L. Primary systemic chemotherapy of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8(1):55-62.
9. 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(5):778-785.
10. 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(9712):377-384.
11. 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(12):2024-2031.
12. Bhargava R, Beriwal S, Dabbs DJ, et al. Immunohistochemical surrogate markers of breast cancer molecular classes predicts response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a single institutional experience with 359 cases. Cancer. 2010; 116(6):1431-1439.
13. Fisher B, Dignam J, Tan-Chiu E, et al. Prognosis and treatment of patients with breast tumors of one centimeter or less and negative axillary lymph nodes. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93(2):112-120.
14. Pinder SE, Provenzano E, Earl H, Ellis IO. Laboratory handling and histology reporting of breast specimens from patients who have received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Histopathology. 2007;50(4):409-417.
15. Sahoo S, Lester SC. Pathology of breast carcinomas after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: an overview with recommendations on specimen processing and reporting. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133(4):633-642.
16. Feldman LD, Hortobagyi GN, Buzdar AU, Ames FC, Blumenschein GR. Pathological assessment of response to induction chemotherapy in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 1986;46(5):2578-2581.
17. Sharkey FE, Addington SL, Fowler LJ, Page CP, Cruz AB. Effects of preoperative chemotherapy on the morphology of resectable breast carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 1996;9(9):893-900.
18. Moll UM, Chumas J. Morphologic effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer. Pathol Res Pract. 1997;193(3):187-196.
19. 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(7):1365-1373.
20. Rabban JT, Glidden D, Kwan ML, Chen YY. Pure and predominantly pure intralymphatic breast carcinoma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: an unusual and adverse pattern of residual disease. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33(2):256-263.
21. 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(5):320-327.
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(3):297-306.
23. 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(28):4414-4422.
24. MD Anderson Residual Cancer Burden Calculator. http://www3. mdanderson.org/app/medcalc/index.cfm?pagename=jsconvert3. Published 2007. Accessed October 24, 2012.
25. Chollet P, Amat S, Belembaogo E, et al. Is Nottingham prognostic index useful after induction chemotherapy in operable breast cancer? Br J Cancer. 2003;89(7):1185-1191.
26. Chollet P, Abrial C, Durando X, et al. A new prognostic classification after primary chemotherapy for breast cancer: residual disease in breast and nodes (RDBN). Cancer J. 2008;14(2):128-132.
27. Abrial SC, Penault-Llorca F, Delva R, et al. High prognostic significance of residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a retrospective study in 710 patients with operable breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;94(3):255-263.
28. 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(19):2650-2655.
29. Edge SB, Byrd SB, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A, eds. American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Cancer Staging Manual 7th ed. Breast, pages 347-376. Springer 2010, New York.
30. Chevallier B, Chollet P, Merrouche Y, et al. Lenograstim prevents morbidity from intensive induction chemotherapy in the treatment of inflammatory breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13(7):1564-1571.
31. Rouzier R, Pusztai L, Delaloge S, et al. Nomograms to predict pathologic complete response and metastasis-free survival after preoperative chemotherapy for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(33):8331-8339.
32. Penault-Llorca F, Abrial C, Raoelfils I, et al. Comparison of the prognostic significance of Chevallier and Sataloff's pathologic classifications after neoadjuvant chemotherapy of operable breast cancer. Hum Pathol. 2008;39(8): 1221-1228.
33. Shien T, Shimizu C, Seki K, et al. Comparison among different classification systems regarding the pathological response of preoperative chemotherapy in relation to the long-term outcome. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;113(2):307-313.
34. Taghian AG, Abi-Raad R, Assaad SI, et al. Paclitaxel decreases the interstitial fluid pressure and improves oxygenation in breast cancers in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: clinical implications. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(9):1951-1961.
35. 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(1):118-145.
36. 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(5):403-410.
37. Robbins P, Pinder S, de Klerk N, et al. Histological grading of breast carcinomas: a study of interobserver agreement. Hum Pathol. 1995;26(8):873-879.
38. Klauber-DeMore N, Ollila DW, Moore DT, et al. Size of residual lymph node metastasis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer patients is prognostic. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13(5):685-691.
39. Galea MH, Blamey RW, Elston CE, Ellis IO. The Nottingham Prognostic Index in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1992;22(3):207-219.
40. Schneeweiss A, Katretchko J, Sinn HP, et al. Only grading has independent impact on breast cancer survival after adjustment for pathological response to preoperative chemotherapy. Anticancer Drugs. 2004;15(2):127-135.
41. Sullivan PS, Apple SK. Should histologic type be taken into account when considering neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast carcinoma? Breast J. 2009; 15(2):146-154.
42. 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. 2010; 28(22):3552-3554.
43. Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MC, et al. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(8):1160-1167.
44. Tordai A, Wang J, Andre F, et al. Evaluation of biological pathways involved in chemotherapy response in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2008; 10(2):R37.