Does neoadjuvant chemotherapy increase breast conservation in operable breast cancer: an Egyptian experience

N Abdel-Bary, Af El-Kased, Haz Aiad, N Abdel-Bary, Af El-Kased, Haz Aiad

Abstract

Introduction: The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer is well established, as are its indications. Likewise, the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer is well established. The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in operable breast cancer has only recently become of interest to researchers.

Patients and methods: This study included 34 cases of operable breast cancer that were given four cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the form of FEC100 then subjected to surgery. The surgery done was either breast conserving surgery or modified radical mastectomy. All patients completed the treatment regimen and no patients were excluded from the study. All surgical specimens were studied pathologically for chemotherapy effect.

Results: An overall objective response was observed in 70.6% of the patients. Seven patients (20.6%) experienced a clinical complete response (cCR), 17 patients (50.0%) had partial response, nine patients (26.5%) had no change of their disease and only one patient had disease progression. Of the seven patients who had a cCR, only four patients (11.8%) had pathologic complete response (pCR), while pCR for the whole group was 14.7%(5/34). Tumour size of more than 2 cm was observed in 28 patients (82.4%) at time of presentation, while tumour size of 2 cm or less was seen in six patients (17.6%) only. After completion of the course of chemotherapy, 23 patients (67.6%) were observed to have tumours of 2 cm or less that allowed for less extensive resections. Twenty-three patients underwent breast conservative surgery (67.6%) while modified radical mastectomy was performed in 11 patients (32.4%).

Conclusion: The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in operable breast cancer in this study was associated with tumour and axillary downstaging, which increased the proportion of cases undergoing breast conservation, with acceptable side effects and reasonable cost. During the limited follow-up time of this study no loco regional recurrences were recorded and one distant treatment failure was recorded. Its impact if any on overall or disease-free survival was not addressed in this study. Larger multi-centre randomized studies with a long follow-up are needed to compare the overall and disease-free survival benefit of this treatment modality, especially in different subtypes stratified by pathological response.

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
Completion of lumpectomy (note resection of pectoral fascia)
Figure 2:
Figure 2:
Bisected lumpectomy specimen with grossly adequate margins
Figure 3:
Figure 3:
Full axillary dissection, showing vein and nerve to serratus anterior
Figure 4a:
Figure 4a:
Lymph node, showing partial replacement by evidence of tumour regression (H&E x200)
Figure 4b:
Figure 4b:
High-power view of Figure 4a, showing from right to left fibrosis, aggregates of foamy histiocytes and necrosis (H&E x400)

References

    1. Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: An overview of the randomized trials. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Lancet. 1998;352:930–42. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)03301-7.
    1. Goldhirsch A, Glick JH, Gelber RD, et al. Meeting highlights: International consensus panel on the treatment of primary breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90:1601–8. doi: 10.1093/jnci/90.21.1601.
    1. Hortobagyi GN, Ames FC, Buzdar AU, et al. Management of stage III primary breast cancer with primary chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation therapy. Cancer. 1988;62:2507–16. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19881215)62:;2-D.
    1. Bonadonna G, Veronesi U, Brambilla C, et al. Primary chemotherapy to avoid mastectomy in tumours with diameters of three centimeters or more. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1990;82:1539–45. doi: 10.1093/jnci/82.19.1539.
    1. Fisher B, Gunduz N, Saffer E. Influence of the interval between primary tumour removal and chemotherapy on kinetics and growth metastases. Cancer Res. 1983;43:1488–92.
    1. Fisher B, Gunduz N, Coyle J, et al. Presence of a growth-stimulating factor in serum following primary tumour removal in mice. Cancer Res. 1989;49:1996–2001.
    1. Fisher B, Saffer E, Rudock C, et al. Effect of local or systemic treatment prior to primary tumour removal on the production and response to a serum growth-stimulating factor in mice. Cancer Res. 1989;49:2002–4.
    1. Goldie JH, Coldman AJ. A mathematic model for relating the drug sensitivity of tumours to their spontaneous mutation rate. Cancer Treat Rep. 1979;63:1727–33.
    1. Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E, et al. Effect of preoperative therapy for primary breast cancer (BQ) on local-regional disease, disease-free survival (DFS) and survival (S): Results from NSABP B-18. Proc Annu Meet Am Soc Clin Oncol. 1997;16(127):449. (abstract)
    1. EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group . Manual for Clinical Research in Breast Cancer. Almere, The Netherlands: Excerpta Medica; 1998. pp. 96–97.
    1. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, Winkler A. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer. 1981;47:207–14. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19810101)47:;2-6.
    1. Pathology Reporting of Breast Disease. Sheffield: NHS Publications; 2005. NHSBSP Publication no. 58.
    1. Smith IC, Heys SD, Hutcheon AW, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: significantly enhanced response with docetaxel. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:1456–66. doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.6.1456.
    1. van der Hage JA, van de Velde CJH, Julien J, 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(22):4224–37.
    1. Lerouge D, Touboul E, Lefranc JP, Genestie C, Moureau-Zabotto L, Blondon J. Locally advanced non inflammatory breast cancer treated by combined chemotherapy and preoperative irradiation: updated results in a series of 120 patients. Cancer Radiother. 2004;8(3):155–67.
    1. Pierga JY, Mouret E, Laurence V, et al. Prognostic factors for survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in operable breastcancer. The role of clinical response. Eur J Cancer. 2003;39:1089–96. doi: 10.1016/S0959-8049(03)00069-8.
    1. Mauriac L, MacGrogan G, Avril A, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast carcinoma larger than 3 cm: A unicentre randomized trial with a 124-month median follow-up. Ann Oncol. 1999;10:47–52. doi: 10.1023/A:1008337009350.
    1. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, et al. Effect of pre-operative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:2672–85.
    1. Schwartz GF, Meltzer AJ, Lucarelli EA, Cantor JP, Curcillo PG., 2nd Breast conservation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage II carcinoma of the breast. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;201(3):327–34. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2005.03.015.
    1. Powles TJ, Hickish TF, Makris A, et al. Randomized trial of chemoendocrine therapy started before or after surgery for treatment of primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:547–52.
    1. Van Praagh I, Cure H, Leduc B, Charrier S, Le Bouedec G, Achard JL, et al. Efficacy of a primary chemotherapy regimen combining vinorelbine, epirubicin, and methotrexate (VEM) as neoadjuvant treatment in 89 patients with operable breast cancer. Oncologist. 2002;7(5):418–23. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.7-5-418.
    1. Clahsen PC, van de Velde CJH, Julien JP, et al. Improved local control and disease-free survival after perioperative chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:745–53.
    1. Makris A, Powles TJ, Ashley SE, et al. A reduction in the requirements for mastectomy in a randomized trial of neoadjuvant chemoendocrine therapy in breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 1998;9:1179–84. doi: 10.1023/A:1008400706949.
    1. Kuerer HM, Singletary SE, Buzdar AU, Ames FC, Valero V, Buchholz TA, et al. Surgical conservation planning after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage II and operable stage III breast carcinoma. Am J Surg. 2001;182(6):601–8. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9610(01)00793-0.
    1. Kurbet S, de Barros AC, Pinotti JA. The safe association of intraoperative evaluation of surgical margins and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer larger than 3 centimeters. Tumouri. 2006;92(1):21–5.
    1. Scholl SM, Fourquet A, Asselain B, et al. Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in premenopausal patients with tumours considered too large for breast conserving surgery: Preliminary results of a randomized trial: S6. Eur J Cancer. 1994;30A:645–52. doi: 10.1016/0959-8049(94)90537-1.
    1. Mauriac L, Durand M, Avril A, et al. Effects of primary chemotherapy in conservative treatment of breast cancer patients with operable tumours larger than 3 cm. Ann Oncol. 1991;2:347–54.
    1. Kuerer HM, Sahin AA, Hunt KK, Newman LA, Breslin TM, Ames FC, et al. Incidence and impact of documented eradication of breast cancer axillary lymph node metastases before surgery in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg. 1999;230(1):72–8.
    1. Cure H, Amat S, Penault-Llorca F, et al. Prognostic value of residual node involvement in operable breast cancer after induction chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2002;76:37–45. doi: 10.1023/A:1020274709327.
    1. Newman LA, Pernick NL, Adsay V, et al. Histopathologic evidence of tumour regression in the axillary lymph nodes of patients treated with preoperative chemotherapy correlates with breast cancer outcome. Ann Surg Oncol. 2003;10:734–9. doi: 10.1245/ASO.2003.03.081.
    1. Clahsen PC, van de Velde CJH, Duval C, et al. The utility of mitotic index, estrogen receptor and Ki-67 measurements in the creation of novel prognostic indices for node-negative breast cancer. Eur J Surg Cancer. 1999;25:356–63. doi: 10.1053/ejso.1999.0657.
    1. Poulsen B, Graversen HP, Beckmann J, et al. A comparative study of post-operative psychosocial function in women with primary operable breast cancer randomized to breast conservation therapy or mastectomy. Eur J Surg Cancer. 1997;23:327–34. doi: 10.1016/S0748-7983(97)90804-0.

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera