| Autor: |
Chen, Sheng, Liu, Yin, Ouyang, Qian-Wen, Huang, Liang, Luo, Rong-Cheng, Shao, Zhi-Ming |
| Zdroj: |
Annals of Surgical Oncology: An Oncology Journal for Surgeons; Jan2015, Vol. 22 Issue 1, p32-39, 8p |
| Abstrakt: |
Purpose: This study was designed to examine the relationship between different methodologies for response evaluation and long-term survival estimation in patients underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) for breast cancer. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 569 patients who were diagnosed with LABC and received NCT followed by breast and axilla surgery. The RECIST 1.1 criteria and Miller-Payne (MP) grading scale were used to evaluate patient responses to NCT. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses were performed to investigate the correlation between treatment response and long-term patient survival. Results: Clinical response (RFS [ P < 0.001]; OS [ P = 0.003]), pathological response evaluated by pCR (RFS [ P < 0.001]; OS [ P < 0.001]), and MP grade (RFS [ P < 0.001]; OS [ P < 0.001]) were significant predictors of risks of relapse and survival. However, in hormone receptor-positive (ER and/or PR+) subtypes, the clinical response ( P = 0.004 for Luminal-A and P = 0.038 for Luminal-B) and MP grade ( P = 0.002 for Luminal-A and P < 0.001 for Luminal-B) significantly predicted RFS independently according to multivariate Cox regression model. MP grade ( P = 0.015 for Luminal-A and P = 0.009 for Luminal-B) also was an independent predictor of patients' OS. However, these two methods failed to predict patient survival in hormone receptor-negative (ER and PR−) subtypes. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that the value of response evaluation methods varies for different breast cancer subtypes. Conceiving of further prospective approaches for new individualized response-evaluation models are needed in the neoadjuvant setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink