Gene signatures can provide prognostic and predictive information to help in the treatment of early-stage breast cancer. Although many of these signatures have been described, only a few have been properly validated. MammaPrint and OncoType offer prognostic information and identify low-risk patients who do not benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. With regard to prediction of response, molecular subtypes of breast cancer differ in their sensitivity to chemotherapy, although further studies are needed in this field. Cost, small sample size, and the need to use central laboratories are common limitations to the widespread use of these tools.
Background: Few studies have evaluated the impact of the time interval between neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and surgery in breast cancer. In Latin America, where the vast majority of hospitals are oversaturated, it is important to define which patients to give priority and to be clear about ideal time or maximum to schedule surgery after NAC without altering the prognosis. The objective of this work is to establish the ideal time interval for post-neoadjuvant surgery and evaluate the impact on patient survival. Methods: We reviewed the clinical histories of breast cancer with clinical stage II and III who received NAC between 2005 and 2014. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to the time interval to surgery: <4, 4-8 and >8 weeks. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and comparisons of survival curves using the logrank or Breslow test, both globally and by molecular subtypes. The optimal time to surgery has been determined by the Cox model. Results: During the study period, 583 patients who had post NA surgery before six months were registered. The median age was 49 years (range: 24-85), 82% had clinical stage III, 53% histological grade III, 32.7% were luminal A, 15.6% luminal B, 24.4% Her2 and 27.3% TN. According to the time interval to surgery, 67 (11.5%) patients had surgery before 4 weeks, 204 (35.0%) between 4 to 8 weeks, and 312 (53.5%) after 8 weeks. The groups do not present differences in relation to the clinical characteristics (p> 0.05). The median follow-up time was 4.8 years. The 5-year OS rate according to the time interval was 57.9, 61.5, and 62.7% (p = 0.581) and the RFS rate was 40.6, 52.3, and 51.1% (p = 0.411). No differences were found in the survival curves by molecular subtypes , except for luminal b like . In the multivariate analysis, the effect of the time interval to surgery was not significant in OS and RFS; however, the HR curve suggests that the appropriate cut-off point for surgical time would be 8 weeks. Table 1:Time Interval :OS - RFS RFS OS MEDIAN5 - yearsPMEDIAN5 - yearsPWeeks for NAC to Surgery <4 weeks3.240.6 6.157.9 4-8 weeks6.352.3 9.161.5 >8 weeks5.151.10.416.762.70.581 Weeks for NAC to Surgery <8 weeks549.5 9.160.7 >8 weeks5.151.10.5856.762.70.414 Table 2 :Time Interval - Molecular Subtype RFS OS MEDIAN5 - yearsPMEDIAN5 - yearsPLUMINAL A LIKE < 8 weeks----74.1 ----84 >8 weeks7.163.80.719.973.90.236 *LUMINAL B LIKE < 8 weeks2.336.8 5.460.5 >8 weeks5.857.60.46----820.08 HER2 <8 weeks2.228.7 3.938.4 >8weeks3.645.90.57.26.261.30.616 TRIPLE NEGATIVE <8 weeks3.144.2 3.448.4 >8 weeks2.041.80.9143.743.90.516* ER + PR >20% KI67>14% , HER2 NEGATIVE Conclusion: The time interval between the end of neoadjuvant period and surgery has no impact on recurrence-free survival or on overall survival, despite this we suggest that the period of time between neoadjuvant and surgery not be greater than 8 weeks. More studies will be required to determine the ideal time interval and which cases should be prioritized according to the characteristics of our patients. Citation Format: Rebaza LP, Galarreta JA, Castañeda C, Cotrina JM, Vilchez S, de la Cruz M, Ponce J, Aguilar A, Flores C, Castillo M, Galvez M, Vigil C. Impact of the time interval between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery in Latin-Americans breast cancer patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-14-12.
Purpose : Breast Cancer (BC) is a genetic, heterogeneous disease and has a remarkable variability according to racial factors. Hypothetic explanations for these disparities include differences in tumor biology. The present study was designed to compare clinical and pathological features between Peruvian Latinas and Spanish women with BC; interest of this analysis increases if we take into account the relationship among historic ancestries of both ethnic groups (Incas emporium and Spanish conquers). Methods : Information was retrospectively reviewed from patients files and pathologic reports from Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplasicas (INEN) in Lima- Peru, and Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre in Madrid- Spain. In order to produce comparative information and avoid subjective clinical measurements we selected only non-metastatic and non-bilateral invasive BC cases that underwent surgery as initial therapy. BC cases were classified as molecular subtypes: Luminal A [RE+ and/or RP+, HER2−], Lum B [RE+ and/or RP+, HER2+], triple negative (TN) [RE-, RP-, HER2−] and HER2 [RE-, RP-, HER2+]. Variables were compared with the X2 test and survival curves were evaluated with Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The study included 3765 BC cases. The Spanish cohort involved 1539 (40.9%) women consecutively diagnosed between 1997 and 2007 (median follow-up of 7.9 years). The Peruvian cohort involved 2226 (59.1%) women consecutively diagnosed between 2000 and 2006 (median follow-up of 6.3 years). In terms of pathological features, grade I tumors were more frequent in Spanish (16.2%) than Peruvian women (9.6%) (p<0.001). Higher rates of lobular histology were also found in Spanish (12.5%) than Peruvian (6.0%) women (p<0.001). Spanish cases presented at earlier stages when evaluated by lymph node status (N0 in 58.9% vs 47.1%) (p<0.001) or by tumor size (T1 in 37.9% vs 17-2%). Conservative surgery were more frequent among Spanish cases (50.6% vs 16.8%) (p<0.001). TN molecular subtype were more frequent among Peruvian cases (22.5% vs 12.4%) (p<0.001). Brain (10.4% vs5.3%), and skin and subcutaneous (7.1% vs 2.4%) metastases were more frequently found in Peruvian patients. On the other hand, contralateral breast cancer was more frequent among Spanish patients (12.2% vs 2.8%). And when evaluated by molecular subtypes, bone metastases in TN were more frequent among Spanish (25.4%) than Peruvian (18.5%) cases. Disease-free survival rates at 7 years were similar between Spanish and Peruvian patients (80,3% vs 79,6%, p=0.197). However, overall survival at 7 years was better in Spanish women (90.4% vs 82.6%, p<0.001). Conclusion : Epidemiologic differences in terms of histological features, clinical stage at diagnosis, molecular subtypes distribution, recurrence patterns and prognosis were found among Spanish and Peruvian BC patients in this retrospective analysis. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2011;71(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-14-09.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.