Prognostic assessment of breast carcinoma submitted to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with pathological non-complete response

BMC Cancer. 2019 Jun 17;19(1):601. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5812-0.

Abstract

Background: Breast cancer with pathological non-complete response (non-pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has a worse prognosis. Despite Neo-Bioscore has been validated as an independent prognostic model for breast cancer submitted to NAC, non-pCR carcinoma was not assessed in this setting.

Methods: This is a retrospective trial that included women with localized breast cancer who underwent NAC and had non-pCR carcinoma in surgical specimen between 01/01/2013 to 12/31/2015 with a three-year follow-up. Survival analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier estimator and hazard ratio (HR) set by log-rank test for the primary and secondary endpoints, respectively Disease-Free Survival (DFS) and Overall Survival (OS). According to Neo-Bioscore, the proposed prognostic model named Clustered Neo-Bioscore was classified into low (0-3), low-intermediate (4-5), high-intermediate (6) and high (7) risk. The prognostic accuracy for recurrence risk was assessed by time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (time-ROC) methodology. Multivariate Cox regression assessed the menopausal status, histological grade, Ki-67, estrogen receptor, HER2, tumor subtype, pathological and clinical stages. Confidence interval at 95% (CI95%) and statistical significance at set 2-sided p-value less than 0.05 were adopted.

Results: Among the 310 women enrolled, 267 patients (86.2%) had non-pCR carcinoma presenting size T3/T4 (63.3%), node-positive axilla (74.9%), stage III (62.9%), Ki-67 ≥ 20% (71.9%) and non-luminal A (78.3%). Non-pCR carcinoma presented worse DFS-3y (HR = 3.88, CI95% = 1.18-11.95) but not OS-3y (HR = 2.73, CI95% = 0.66-11.40). Clustered Neo-Bioscore discerned the recurrence risk for non-pCR carcinoma: low (DFS-3y = 0.86; baseline), low-intermediate (DFS-3y = 0.70; HR = 2.61), high-intermediate (DFS-3y = 0.13, HR = 14.05), and high (DFS-3y = not achieved; HR = 22.19). The prognostic accuracy was similar between Clustered Neo-Bioscore and Neo-Bioscore (0.76 vs 0.78, p > 0.05). Triple-negative subtype (HR = 3.6, CI95% = 1.19-10.92) and pathological stages II (HR = 5.35, CI95% = 1.19-24.01) and III (HR = 6.56, CI95% = 1.29-33.32) were prognoses for low-intermediate risk, whereas pathological stage III (HR = 13.0, CI95% = 1.60-106.10) was prognosis for low risk.

Conclusions: Clustered Neo-Bioscore represents a novel prognostic model of non-pCR carcinoma undergoing NAC with a more simplified and appropriate score pattern in the assessment of prognostic factors.

Keywords: Breast; Carcinoma; Disease-free survival; Neoadjuvant therapy; Prognosis.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial

MeSH terms

  • Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols / therapeutic use*
  • Breast Neoplasms / drug therapy*
  • Data Accuracy
  • Disease-Free Survival
  • Female
  • Follow-Up Studies
  • Humans
  • Kaplan-Meier Estimate
  • Ki-67 Antigen / blood
  • Menopause / physiology
  • Multivariate Analysis
  • Neoadjuvant Therapy*
  • Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
  • Neoplasm Staging / methods*
  • Prognosis
  • Proportional Hazards Models
  • Receptor, ErbB-2
  • Receptors, Estrogen
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Tumor Burden

Substances

  • Ki-67 Antigen
  • Receptors, Estrogen
  • ERBB2 protein, human
  • Receptor, ErbB-2