Christina Yau(University of California, San Francisco), Marie Osdoit(University of California, San Francisco), Marieke van der Noordaa(University of California, San Francisco), Sonal Shad(University of California, San Francisco), Jane Wei(University of California, San Francisco), Diane De Croze(Institut Curie), Anne‐Sophie Hamy(Institut Curie), Marick Laé(Université de Rouen Normandie), Fabien Reyal(Institut Curie), Gabe S. Sonke(The Netherlands Cancer Institute), Tessa G. Steenbruggen(The Netherlands Cancer Institute), Maartje van Seijen(The Netherlands Cancer Institute), Jelle Wesseling(The Netherlands Cancer Institute), Miguel Martín(Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón), Marı́a del Monte-Millán(Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón), Sara López‐Tarruella(Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón), Judy C. Boughey(Mayo Clinic in Arizona), Matthew P. Goetz(Mayo Clinic in Arizona), Tanya L. Hoskin(Mayo Clinic in Florida), Rebekah Gould(The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center), Vicente Valero(The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center), Stephen B. Edge(Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center), Jean Abraham(University of Cambridge), John M.S. Bartlett(Ontario Institute for Cancer Research), Carlos Caldas(University of Cambridge), Janet Dunn(University of Warwick), Helena Earl(University of Cambridge), Larry Hayward(Western General Hospital), Louise Hiller(University of Warwick), Elena Provenzano(University of Cambridge), Stephen‐John Sammut(University of Cambridge), Jeremy Thomas(Western General Hospital), David Cameron(Western General Hospital), A Graham(Western General Hospital), Peter Hall(Western General Hospital), Lorna Mackintosh(Western General Hospital), Fang Fan(University of Kansas Medical Center), Andrew K. Godwin(University of Kansas Medical Center), Kelsey Schwensen(University of Kansas Medical Center), Priyanka Sharma(University of Kansas Medical Center), Angela DeMichele(University of Pennsylvania), Kimberly Cole(Yale University), Lajos Pusztai(Yale University), Mi‐Ok Kim(University of California, San Francisco), Laura van ‘t Veer(University of California, San Francisco), Laura Esserman(University of California, San Francisco), W. Fraser Symmans(The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center), Kathi Adamson, Kathy S. Albain, Adam L. Asare, Smita Asare, Ronald Balassanian(Western General Hospital), Heather Beckwith, Scott Berry, Donald A. Berry, Meredith Buxton(Mayo Clinic in Arizona), Yunn‐Yi Chen, Beiyun Chen, A. Jo Chien, Jane Yuet Ching Hui(Yale University), Amy S. Clark, Julia L. Clennell, Brian Datnow, Xiuzhen Duan, Kirsten K. Edmiston(University of Pennsylvania), Anthony Elias, Erin D. Ellis, David Euhus, Oluwole Fadare, Michael D. Feldman(University of California, San Francisco), Andres Forero‐Torres, Barbara Haley, Hyo S. Han(University of Pennsylvania), Shuko Harada, Patricia Haugen, Teresa Helsten, Gillian L. Hirst, Nola M. Hylton, Claudine Isaacs, Kathleen Kemmer, Qamar J. Khan, Laila Khazai, Molly Klein, Gregor Krings, Julie E. Lang, Lauren LeBeau, Brian Leyland‐Jones, Minetta C. Liu, Shelly S. Lo, Janice Lu, Anthony M. Magliocco, Jeffrey B. Matthews, Michelle Melisko(Western General Hospital), Paulette Mhawech‐Fauceglia, Stacy L. Moulder, Rashmi K. Murthy, Rita Nanda, Donald W. Northfelt, Idris Tolgay Ocal, Olufunmilayo I. Olopade, Stefan E. Pambuccian, Melissa Paoloni, John W. Park, Barbara A. Parker, Jane Perlmutter, Garry Peterson, Mara H. Rendi, Hope S. Rugo, Sunati Sahoo(University of Warwick), Sharon B. Sams, Ashish Sanil(Yale University), Husain Sattar, Richard B. Schwab, Ruby Singhrao, Katherine Steeg, Erica Stringer-Reasor, Ossama Tawfik, Debasish Tripathy, Megan L. Troxell, Laura J. van’t Veer, Sara J. Venters, Tuyethoa N. Vinh(The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center), Rebecca K. Viscusi, Anne M. Wallace, Shi Wei, Amy Wilson(University of California, San Francisco), Douglas Yee, Jay Zeck
Edinburgh Research Explorer
January 1, 2000
Cited by 353Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

BackgroundPrevious studies have independently validated the prognostic relevance of residual cancer burden (RCB) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We used results from several independent cohorts in a pooled patient-level analysis to evaluate the relationship of RCB with long-term prognosis across different phenotypic subtypes of breast cancer, to assess generalisability in a broad range of practice settings.MethodsIn this pooled analysis, 12 institutes and trials in Europe and the USA were identified by personal communications with site investigators. We obtained participant-level RCB results, and data on clinical and pathological stage, tumour subtype and grade, and treatment and follow-up in November, 2019, from patients (aged ≥18 years) with primary stage I–III breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery. We assessed the association between the continuous RCB score and the primary study outcome, event-free survival, using mixed-effects Cox models with the incorporation of random RCB and cohort effects to account for between-study heterogeneity, and stratification to account for differences in baseline hazard across cancer subtypes defined by hormone receptor status and HER2 status. The association was further evaluated within each breast cancer subtype in multivariable analyses incorporating random RCB and cohort effects and adjustments for age and pretreatment clinical T category, nodal status, and tumour grade. Kaplan-Meier estimates of event-free survival at 3, 5, and 10 years were computed for each RCB class within each subtype.FindingsWe analysed participant-level data from 5161 patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy between Sept 12, 1994, and Feb 11, 2019. Median age was 49 years (IQR 20–80). 1164 event-free survival events occurred during follow-up (median follow-up 56 months [IQR 0–186]). RCB score was prognostic within each breast cancer subtype, with higher RCB score significantly associated with worse event-free survival. The univariable hazard ratio (HR) associated with one unit increase in RCB ranged from 1·55 (95% CI 1·41–1·71) for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative patients to 2·16 (1·79–2·61) for the hormone receptor-negative, HER2-positive group (with or without HER2-targeted therapy; p<0·0001 for all subtypes). RCB score remained prognostic for event-free survival in multivariable models adjusted for age, grade, T category, and nodal status at baseline: the adjusted HR ranged from 1·52 (1·36–1·69) in the hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative group to 2·09 (1·73–2·53) in the hormone receptor-negative, HER2-positive group (p<0·0001 for all subtypes).InterpretationRCB score and class were independently prognostic in all subtypes of breast cancer, and generalisable to multiple practice settings. Although variability in hormone receptor subtype definitions and treatment across patients are likely to affect prognostic performance, the association we observed between RCB and a patient's residual risk suggests that prospective evaluation of RCB could be considered to become part of standard pathology reporting after neoadjuvant therapy.FundingNational Cancer Institute at the US National Institutes of Health.


Related Papers