A prospective study on tumour response assessment methods after neoadjuvant endocrine therapy in early oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

Aromatase inhibitors Ki67 Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy Oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer Pathological and radiological tumour response Preoperative endocrine prognostic index (PEPI) score Tumour cellularity size

Journal

Breast cancer research : BCR
ISSN: 1465-542X
Titre abrégé: Breast Cancer Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100927353

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
03 Jan 2024
Historique:
received: 01 08 2023
accepted: 18 12 2023
medline: 4 1 2024
pubmed: 4 1 2024
entrez: 4 1 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) in oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+) /HER2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer allows real-time evaluation of drug efficacy as well as investigation of the biological and molecular changes that occur after estrogenic deprivation. Clinical and pathological evaluation after NET may be used to obtain prognostic and predictive information of tumour response to decide adjuvant treatment. In this setting, clinical scales developed to evaluate response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy are not useful and there are not validated biomarkers to assess response to NET beyond Ki67 levels and preoperative endocrine prognostic index score (mPEPI). In this prospective study, we extensively analysed radiological (by ultrasound scan (USS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)) and pathological tumour response of 104 postmenopausal patients with ER+ /HER2- resectable breast cancer, treated with NET for a mean of 7 months prior to surgery. We defined a new score, tumour cellularity size (TCS), calculated as the product of the residual tumour cellularity in the surgical specimen and the tumour pathological size. Our results show that radiological evaluation of response to NET by both USS and MRI underestimates pathological tumour size (path-TS). Tumour size [mean (range); mm] was: path-TS 20 (0-80); radiological-TS by USS 9 (0-31); by MRI: 12 (0-60). Nevertheless, they support the use of MRI over USS to clinically assess radiological tumour response (rad-TR) due to the statistically significant association of rad-TR by MRI, but not USS, with Ki67 decrease (p = 0.002 and p = 0.3, respectively) and mPEPI score (p = 0.002 and p = 0.6, respectively). In addition, we propose that TCS could become a new tool to standardize response assessment to NET given its simplicity, reproducibility and its good correlation with existing biomarkers (such as ΔKi67, p = 0.001) and potential added value. Our findings shed light on the dynamics of tumour response to NET, challenge the paradigm of the ability of NET to decrease surgical volume and point to the utility of the TCS to quantify the scattered tumour response usually produced by endocrine therapy. In the future, these results should be validated in independent cohorts with associated survival data.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) in oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+) /HER2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer allows real-time evaluation of drug efficacy as well as investigation of the biological and molecular changes that occur after estrogenic deprivation. Clinical and pathological evaluation after NET may be used to obtain prognostic and predictive information of tumour response to decide adjuvant treatment. In this setting, clinical scales developed to evaluate response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy are not useful and there are not validated biomarkers to assess response to NET beyond Ki67 levels and preoperative endocrine prognostic index score (mPEPI).
METHODS METHODS
In this prospective study, we extensively analysed radiological (by ultrasound scan (USS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)) and pathological tumour response of 104 postmenopausal patients with ER+ /HER2- resectable breast cancer, treated with NET for a mean of 7 months prior to surgery. We defined a new score, tumour cellularity size (TCS), calculated as the product of the residual tumour cellularity in the surgical specimen and the tumour pathological size.
RESULTS RESULTS
Our results show that radiological evaluation of response to NET by both USS and MRI underestimates pathological tumour size (path-TS). Tumour size [mean (range); mm] was: path-TS 20 (0-80); radiological-TS by USS 9 (0-31); by MRI: 12 (0-60). Nevertheless, they support the use of MRI over USS to clinically assess radiological tumour response (rad-TR) due to the statistically significant association of rad-TR by MRI, but not USS, with Ki67 decrease (p = 0.002 and p = 0.3, respectively) and mPEPI score (p = 0.002 and p = 0.6, respectively). In addition, we propose that TCS could become a new tool to standardize response assessment to NET given its simplicity, reproducibility and its good correlation with existing biomarkers (such as ΔKi67, p = 0.001) and potential added value.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Our findings shed light on the dynamics of tumour response to NET, challenge the paradigm of the ability of NET to decrease surgical volume and point to the utility of the TCS to quantify the scattered tumour response usually produced by endocrine therapy. In the future, these results should be validated in independent cohorts with associated survival data.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38173005
doi: 10.1186/s13058-023-01756-8
pii: 10.1186/s13058-023-01756-8
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

3

Subventions

Organisme : Fundación Científica Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer
ID : PRDGI19007LOPE
Organisme : Fundación Científica Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer
ID : PRDGI19007LOPE
Organisme : Instituto de Salud Carlos III
ID : PI21/01208
Organisme : Instituto de Salud Carlos III
ID : PI20/01253
Organisme : Instituto de Salud Carlos III
ID : CP18/00076
Organisme : Instituto de Salud Carlos III
ID : FI19/00193
Organisme : Instituto de Salud Carlos III
ID : PI21/01208
Organisme : Instituto de Salud Carlos III
ID : PI20/01253
Organisme : Instituto de Salud Carlos III
ID : CP18/00076
Organisme : Instituto de Salud Carlos III
ID : FI19/00193
Organisme : Instituto de Salud Carlos III
ID : PI21/01208
Organisme : Instituto de Salud Carlos III
ID : PI20/01253
Organisme : Instituto de Salud Carlos III
ID : CP18/00076
Organisme : Instituto de Salud Carlos III
ID : FI19/00193
Organisme : Basque Department of Health
ID : 2020111040
Organisme : Ikerbasque, Basque Foundation for Science
ID : IKERBASQUE/RA/2020/001
Organisme : Fundación SEOM, Spain
ID : SEOM Avon Fellowship 2020

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

Burstein HJ. Systemic therapy for estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;383:2557–70.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1307118 pubmed: 33369357
Spring LM, Gupta A, Reynolds KL, Gadd MA, Ellisen LW, Isakoff SJ, et al. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2:1477–86.
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.1897 pubmed: 27367583 pmcid: 5738656
Sella T, Weiss A, Mittendorf EA, King TA, Pilewskie M, Giuliano AE, et al. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy in clinical practice: a review. JAMA Oncol. 2021;7:1700–8.
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.2132 pubmed: 34499101
Lerebours F, Pulido M, Fourme E, Debled M, Becette V, Bonnefoi H, et al. Predictive factors of 5-year relapse-free survival in HR+/HER2- breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant endocrine therapy: pooled analysis of two phase 2 trials. Br J Cancer. 2020;122:759–65.
doi: 10.1038/s41416-020-0733-x pubmed: 32001832 pmcid: 7078275
Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, Mehta K, Costantino JP, Wolmark N, et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. The Lancet. 2014;384:164–72.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62422-8
Eiermann W, Paepke S, Appfelstaedt J, Llombart-Cussac A, Eremin J, Vinholes J, et al. Preoperative treatment of postmenopausal breast cancer patients with letrozole: a randomized double-blind multicenter study. Ann Oncol. 2001;12:1527–32.
doi: 10.1023/A:1013128213451 pubmed: 11822750
Cataliotti L, Buzdar AU, Noguchi S, Bines J, Takatsuka Y, Petrakova K, et al. Comparison of anastrozole versus tamoxifen as preoperative therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: the Pre-Operative ‘Arimidex’ Compared to Tamoxifen (PROACT) trial. Cancer. 2006;106:2095–103.
doi: 10.1002/cncr.21872 pubmed: 16598749
Smith IE, Dowsett M, Ebbs SR, Dixon JM, Skene A, Blohmer J-U, et al. Neoadjuvant treatment of postmenopausal breast cancer with anastrozole, tamoxifen, or both in combination: the Immediate Preoperative Anastrozole, Tamoxifen, or Combined with Tamoxifen (IMPACT) multicenter double-blind randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:5108–16.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.005 pubmed: 15998903
Korde LA, Somerfield MR, Carey LA, Crews JR, Denduluri N, Hwang ES, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, and targeted therapy for breast cancer: ASCO guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:1485–505.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.03399 pubmed: 33507815 pmcid: 8274745
Martí C, Yébenes L, Oliver JM, Moreno E, Frías L, Berjón A, et al. The clinical impact of neoadjuvant endocrine treatment on luminal-like breast cancers and its prognostic significance: results from a single-institution prospective cohort study. Curr Oncol. 2022;29:2199–210.
doi: 10.3390/curroncol29040179 pubmed: 35448153 pmcid: 9026529
Cardoso F, Kyriakides S, Ohno S, Penault-Llorca F, Poortmans P, Rubio IT, et al. Early breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2019;30:1674.
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdz189 pubmed: 31236598
Lerebours F, Rivera S, Mouret-Reynier MA, Alran S, Venat-Bouvet L, Kerbrat P, et al. Randomized phase 2 neoadjuvant trial evaluating anastrozole and fulvestrant efficacy for postmenopausal, estrogen receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer patients: Results of the UNICANCER CARMINA 02 french trial. Cancer. 2016;122:3032–40.
doi: 10.1002/cncr.30143 pubmed: 27315583
Skriver SK, Laenkholm AV, Rasmussen BB, Handler J, Grundtmann B, Tvedskov TF, et al. Neoadjuvant letrozole for postmenopausal estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer patients, a study from the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG). Acta Oncol (Madr). 2018;57:31–7.
doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2017.1401228
Ueno T, Saji S, Masuda N, Kuroi K, Sato N, Takei H, et al. Impact of clinical response to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy on patient outcomes: a follow-up study of JFMC34-0601 multicentre prospective neoadjuvant endocrine trial. ESMO Open. 2018;3:e000314.
doi: 10.1136/esmoopen-2017-000314 pubmed: 29531841 pmcid: 5844383
Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:228–47.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026 pubmed: 19097774
Ogston KN, Miller ID, Payne S, Hutcheon AW, Sarkar TK, Smith I, et al. A new histological grading system to assess response of breast cancers to primary chemotherapy: prognostic significance and survival. Breast. 2003;12:320–7.
doi: 10.1016/S0960-9776(03)00106-1 pubmed: 14659147
Sataloff DM, Mason BA, Prestipino AJ, Seinige UL, Lieber CP, Baloch Z. Pathologic response to induction chemotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the breast: a determinant of outcome. J Am Coll Surg. 1995;180:297–306.
pubmed: 7874340
Symmans WF, Wei C, Gould R, Yu X, Zhang Y, Liu M, et al. Long-term prognostic risk after neoadjuvant chemotherapy associated with residual cancer burden and breast cancer subtype. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:1049–60.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.1010 pubmed: 28135148 pmcid: 5455352
Guarneri V, Dieci MV, Bisagni G, Frassoldati A, Bianchi GV, De Salvo GL, et al. De-escalated therapy for HR+/HER2+ breast cancer patients with Ki67 response after 2-week letrozole: results of the PerELISA neoadjuvant study. Ann Oncol. 2019;30:921–6.
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdz055 pubmed: 30778520 pmcid: 6594455
Smith I, Robertson J, Kilburn L, Wilcox M, Evans A, Holcombe C, et al. Long-term outcome and prognostic value of Ki67 after perioperative endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer (POETIC): an open-label, multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21:1443–54.
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30458-7 pubmed: 33152284 pmcid: 7606901
Ellis MJ, Tao Y, Luo J, A’Hern R, Evans DB, Bhatnagar AS, et al. Outcome prediction for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer based on postneoadjuvant endocrine therapy tumor characteristics. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:1380–8.
doi: 10.1093/jnci/djn309 pubmed: 18812550 pmcid: 2556704
Suman VJ, Ellis MJ, Ma CX. The ALTERNATE trial: assessing a biomarker driven strategy for the treatment of post-menopausal women with Er+/Her2- invasive breast cancer. Chin Clin Oncol. Shanghai: AME Publishing Company; 2015.
Ellis MJ, Suman VJ, Hoog J, Goncalves R, Sanati S, Creighton CJ, et al. Ki67 proliferation index as a tool for chemotherapy decisions during and after neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor treatment of breast cancer: results from the American college of surgeons oncology group Z1031 trial (alliance). J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:1061–9.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.69.4406 pubmed: 28045625 pmcid: 5455353
Nielsen TO, Leung SCY, Rimm DL, Acs B, et al. Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: updated recommendations from the international Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2021;113:808–19.
doi: 10.1093/jnci/djaa201 pubmed: 33369635
Agostinetto E, Gligorov J, Piccart M. Systemic therapy for early-stage breast cancer: learning from the past to build the future. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2022;19:763–74.
doi: 10.1038/s41571-022-00687-1 pubmed: 36253451 pmcid: 9575647
Thomssen C, Balic M, Harbeck N, Gnant M. St. Gallen/Vienna 2021: a brief summary of the consensus discussion on customizing therapies for women with early breast cancer. Breast Care. 2021;16:135–43.
doi: 10.1159/000516114 pubmed: 34002112 pmcid: 8089428
Denkert C, Seither F, Schneeweiss A, Link T, Blohmer JU, Just M, et al. Clinical and molecular characteristics of HER2-low-positive breast cancer: pooled analysis of individual patient data from four prospective, neoadjuvant clinical trials. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22:1151–61.
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00301-6 pubmed: 34252375
Kang S, Lee SH, Lee HJ, Jeong H, Jeong JH, Kim JE, et al. Pathological complete response, long-term outcomes, and recurrence patterns in HER2-low versus HER2-zero breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Cancer. 2022;176:30–40.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.08.031 pubmed: 36183652
Heil J, Kuerer HM, Pfob A, Rauch G, Sinn HP, Golatta M, et al. Eliminating the breast cancer surgery paradigm after neoadjuvant systemic therapy: current evidence and future challenges. Ann Oncol. 2020;31:61–71.
doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2019.10.012 pubmed: 31912797
Hortobagyi GN, Connolly JL, Orsi CJD, Edge SB, Mittendorf EA, Rugo HS, et al. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual 8th Edition. Definitions. (2020)
Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, A’Hern R, Bartlett J, Coombes RC, Cuzick J, et al. Assessment of Ki67 in Breast Cancer: recommendations from the international Ki67 in breast cancer working Group. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:1656–64.
doi: 10.1093/jnci/djr393 pubmed: 21960707 pmcid: 3216967
Hammond MEH, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, Allred DC, Hagerty KL, Badve S, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College Of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:2784–95.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.25.6529 pubmed: 20404251 pmcid: 2881855
Skriver SK, Jensen MB, Knoop AS, Ejlertsen B, Laenkholm AV. Tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes and response to neoadjuvant letrozole in patients with early oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: analysis from a nationwide phase II DBCG trial. Breast Cancer Res. 2020;22:1–8.
doi: 10.1186/s13058-020-01285-8
Martí C, Sánchez-méndez JI. The present and future of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy for breast cancer treatment. Cancers (Basel). 2021;13:2538.
doi: 10.3390/cancers13112538 pubmed: 34064183 pmcid: 8196711
Reis J, Lindstrøm JC, Boavida J, Gjesdal KI, Park D, Bahrami N, et al. Accuracy of breast MRI in patients receiving neoadjuvant endocrine therapy: comprehensive imaging analysis and correlation with clinical and pathological assessments. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2020;184:407–20.
doi: 10.1007/s10549-020-05852-7 pubmed: 32789592 pmcid: 7599143
Fowler AM, Mankoff DA, Joe BN. Imaging neoadjuvant therapy response in breast cancer. Radiology. 2017;285:358–75.
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170180 pubmed: 29045232

Auteurs

Joanna I López-Velazco (JI)

Biogipuzkoa (Previously Known As Biodonostia) Health Research Institute, Paseo Dr Begiristain S/N, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.

Sara Manzano (S)

Biogipuzkoa (Previously Known As Biodonostia) Health Research Institute, Paseo Dr Begiristain S/N, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.

María Otaño (M)

Gipuzkoa Cancer Unit, OSI Donostialdea - Onkologikoa Foundation, Paseo Dr Begiristain 121, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.

Kepa Elorriaga (K)

Gipuzkoa Cancer Unit, OSI Donostialdea - Onkologikoa Foundation, Paseo Dr Begiristain 121, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.

Núria Bultó (N)

Gipuzkoa Cancer Unit, OSI Donostialdea - Onkologikoa Foundation, Paseo Dr Begiristain 121, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.

Julio Herrero (J)

Gipuzkoa Cancer Unit, OSI Donostialdea - Onkologikoa Foundation, Paseo Dr Begiristain 121, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.

Ainhara Lahuerta (A)

Biogipuzkoa (Previously Known As Biodonostia) Health Research Institute, Paseo Dr Begiristain S/N, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.
Gipuzkoa Cancer Unit, OSI Donostialdea - Onkologikoa Foundation, Paseo Dr Begiristain 121, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.

Virginia Segur (V)

Gipuzkoa Cancer Unit, OSI Donostialdea - Onkologikoa Foundation, Paseo Dr Begiristain 121, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.

Isabel Álvarez-López (I)

Biogipuzkoa (Previously Known As Biodonostia) Health Research Institute, Paseo Dr Begiristain S/N, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.
Gipuzkoa Cancer Unit, OSI Donostialdea - Onkologikoa Foundation, Paseo Dr Begiristain 121, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.

Maria M Caffarel (MM)

Biogipuzkoa (Previously Known As Biodonostia) Health Research Institute, Paseo Dr Begiristain S/N, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain. MARIA.MUNOZCAFFAREL@biodonostia.org.
IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science, Bilbao, Spain. MARIA.MUNOZCAFFAREL@biodonostia.org.

Ander Urruticoechea (A)

Biogipuzkoa (Previously Known As Biodonostia) Health Research Institute, Paseo Dr Begiristain S/N, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain. aurruticoechea@onkologikoa.org.
Gipuzkoa Cancer Unit, OSI Donostialdea - Onkologikoa Foundation, Paseo Dr Begiristain 121, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain. aurruticoechea@onkologikoa.org.

Classifications MeSH