scholarly journals Randomized Phase III Postoperative Trial of Platinum-Based Chemotherapy Versus Capecitabine in Patients With Residual Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: ECOG-ACRIN EA1131

2021 ◽  
pp. JCO.21.00976
Author(s):  
Ingrid A. Mayer ◽  
Fengmin Zhao ◽  
Carlos L. Arteaga ◽  
William F. Symmans ◽  
Ben H. Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Triple Negative Breast Cancer ◽  
Triple Negative ◽  
Invasive Disease ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Basal Subtype ◽  
Platinum Agents

PURPOSE Patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and residual invasive disease (RD) after completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) have a high-risk for recurrence, which is reduced by adjuvant capecitabine. Preclinical models support the use of platinum agents in the TNBC basal subtype. The EA1131 trial hypothesized that invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) would not be inferior but improved in patients with basal subtype TNBC treated with adjuvant platinum compared with capecitabine. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with clinical stage II or III TNBC with ≥ 1 cm RD in the breast post-NAC were randomly assigned to receive platinum (carboplatin or cisplatin) once every 3 weeks for four cycles or capecitabine 14 out of 21 days every 3 weeks for six cycles. TNBC subtype (basal v nonbasal) was determined by PAM50 in the residual disease. A noninferiority design with superiority alternative was chosen, assuming a 4-year iDFS of 67% with capecitabine. RESULTS Four hundred ten of planned 775 participants were randomly assigned to platinum or capecitabine between 2015 and 2021. After median follow-up of 20 months and 120 iDFS events (61% of full information) in the 308 (78%) patients with basal subtype TNBC, the 3-year iDFS for platinum was 42% (95% CI, 30 to 53) versus 49% (95% CI, 39 to 59) for capecitabine. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were more common with platinum agents. The Data and Safety Monitoring Committee recommended stopping the trial as it was unlikely that further follow-up would show noninferiority or superiority of platinum. CONCLUSION Platinum agents do not improve outcomes in patients with basal subtype TNBC RD post-NAC and are associated with more severe toxicity when compared with capecitabine. Participants had a lower than expected 3-year iDFS regardless of study treatment, highlighting the need for better therapies in this high-risk population.

scholarly journals Locally Advanced Breast Cancer (LABC): Real-World Outcome of Patients From Cancer Institute, Chennai

2021 ◽  
pp. 767-781
Author(s):  
Manikandan Dhanushkodi ◽  
Velusamy Sridevi ◽  
Viswanathan Shanta ◽  
Ranganathan Rama ◽  
Rajaraman Swaminathan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Triple Negative Breast Cancer ◽  
Tumor Size ◽  
Triple Negative ◽  
Locally Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Locally Advanced

PURPOSE There are sparse data on the outcome of patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC). This report is on the prognostic factors and long-term outcome from Cancer Institute, Chennai. METHODS This is an analysis of untreated patients with LABC (stages IIIA-C) who were treated from January 2006 to December 2013. RESULTS Of the 4,577 patients with breast cancer who were treated, 2,137 patients (47%) with LABC were included for analysis. The median follow-up was 75 months (range, 1-170 months), and 2.3% (n = 49) were lost to follow-up at 5 years. The initial treatment was neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiation (NACR) (77%), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (15%), or others (8%). Patients with triple-negative breast cancer had a pathologic complete response (PCR) of 41%. The 10-year overall survival was for stage IIIA (65.1%), stage IIIB (41.2%), and stage IIIC (26.7%). Recurrence of cancer was observed in 27% of patients (local 13% and distant 87%). Multivariate analysis showed that patients with a tumor size > 10 cm (hazard ratio [HR], 2.19; 95% CI, 1.62 to 2.98; P = .001), hormone receptor negativity (HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.22 to 1.72; P = .001), treatment modality (neoadjuvant chemotherapy, HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.73; P = .001), lack of PCR (HR, 2.36; 95% CI, 1.85 to 3.02; P = .001), and the presence of lymphovascular invasion (HR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.60 to 2.44; P = .001) had decreased overall survival. CONCLUSION NACR was feasible in inoperable LABC and gave satisfactory long-term survival. PCR was significantly higher in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. The tumor size > 10 cm was significantly associated with inferior survival. However, this report acknowledges the limitations inherent in experience of management of LABC from a single center.

Single-institution experience with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for metaplastic breast cancer (MBC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (27_suppl) ◽  
pp. 140-140
Author(s):  
Anna Kaminsky
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Carcinoma ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Triple Negative Breast Cancer ◽  
Tumor Volume ◽  
Triple Negative ◽  
Volume Reduction ◽  
Tumor Volume Reduction ◽  
Metaplastic Breast Carcinoma

140 Background: Metaplastic breast carcinoma (MBC) is a rare subtype that accounts for <1% of all breast carcinomas. MBC is frequently triple-negative and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is often used in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). The objective of this analysis is to ascertain response rates of MBC to NAC as compared to non-metaplastic TNBC. Methods: We searched the Magee Women’s Cancer Center of UPMC IRB-approved neo-adjuvant treatment database which contains outcome data on 594 patients treated from 2004-2010. 116 patients with triple negative breast cancer (ER /PR negative or ER /PR weakly positive [H score of 10 or less] and HER2 negative or indeterminate [HER2 1+ or 2+ without amplification by FISH]), were identified. Nine of these TNBCs had metaplastic subtype and two groups were analyzed: metaplastic breast carcinoma (MBC) (N= 9) and non-metaplastic breast carcinoma (NMBC) (N = 107). Tumor volume reduction (TVR), pathologic complete response (pCR), recurrence and mortality were compared in both groups. Results: Average follow-up in MBC group was 43 months and no patients were lost to follow-up. Average tumor size on presentation in MBC group was 4.47 cm while in NMBC group it was 3.33 cm. pCR was noted in 0/9 MBC and 43/107 NMBC cases (p = 0.0253). 6/9 patients had mastectomy, 2/9 had breast conserving surgery (BCS) and 1/9 patients did not have a surgery yet. Average TVR was 28% in MBC cases compared to 74% in NMBCs when cases with pCR were included (p = 0.0001) and 56% when cases with pCR were excluded (p = 0.0202). Follow up on 9 MBC cases revealed 1 recurrence and subsequent death (11%). Follow-up on 64 NMBC patients who failed to achieve pCR revealed 22 recurrences (34%) and 18 of them subsequently died (28%). Follow-up on 43 NMBC cases that achieved pCR revealed 3 recurrences (7%) and 1 death (2%). Conclusions: MBC was characterized by larger size at baseline as compared to NMBC. There were no pCR’s seen in MBC, but some MBC did achieve response that allowed for breast conservation. Although the average tumor volume reduction was significantly less in MBC compared to NMBC, the NMBC that failed to achieve pCR fared much worse than MBC who did not achieve pCR. Therefore, the triple-negative paradox is likely not applicable to MBC.

Single institution experience with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for metaplastic breast cancer (MBC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1038-1038 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Kaminsky ◽  
Rohit Bhargava ◽  
Kandace P McGuire ◽  
Shannon Puhalla
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Carcinoma ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Triple Negative Breast Cancer ◽  
Tumor Volume ◽  
Triple Negative ◽  
Volume Reduction ◽  
Tumor Volume Reduction ◽  
Metaplastic Breast Carcinoma

1038 Background: Metaplastic breast carcinoma (MBC) is a rare subtype that accounts for <1% of all breast carcinomas. MBC is frequently triple negative and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is often used in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). The objective of this analysis is to ascertain response rates of MBC to NAC as compared to non-metaplastic TNBC. Methods: We searched the Magee Women’s Cancer Center of UPMC IRB-approved neo-adjuvant treatment database which contains outcome data on 594 patients treated from 2004-2010. 116 patients with triple negative breast cancer (ER /PR negative or ER /PR weakly positive (H score of 10 or less) and HER2 negative or indeterminate (HER2 1+ or 2+ without amplification by FISH)), were identified. Nine of these TNBCs had metaplastic subtype and 2 groups were analyzed: metaplastic breast carcinoma (MBC) (N= 9) and non-metaplastic breast carcinoma (NMBC) (N = 107). Tumor volume reduction (TVR), pathologic complete response (pCR), recurrence and mortality were compared in both groups. Results: Mean follow up in MBC group was 43 months and no patients were lost to follow up. Mean tumor size on presentation in MBC group was 4.47 cm while in NMBC group it was 3.33 cm. pCR was noted in 0/9 MBC and 43/107 NMBC cases (p = 0.0253). 6/9 patients had mastectomy, 2/9 had breast conserving surgery (BCS) and 1/9 patients did not have a surgery yet. Average TVR was 28% in MBC cases compared to 74% in NMBCs when cases with pCR were included (p = 0.0001) and 56% when cases with pCR were excluded (p = 0.0202). Follow up on 9 MBC cases revealed 1 recurrence and subsequent death (11%). Follow up on 64 NMBC patients who failed to achieve pCR revealed 22 recurrences (34%) and 18 of them subsequently died (28%).Follow up on 43 NMBC cases that achieved pCR revealed 3 recurrences (7%) and 1 death (2%). Conclusions: MBC was characterized by larger size at baseline as compared to NMBC. There were no pCR’s seen in MBC, but some MBC did achieve response that allowed for breast conservation. Although the average tumor volume reduction was significantly less in MBC compared to NMBC, the NMBC that failed to achieve pCR fared much worse than MBC who did not achieve pCR. Therefore, the triple negative paradox is likely not applicable to MBC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document