Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Preoperative Systemic Chemotherapy and Pathologic Assessment of Response

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Pathology & Oncology Research

Abstract

Preoperative systemic (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy is both routine therapeutic modality for locally advanced breast cancer and a translational research model to identify biomarkers that predict treatment response. It is imperative that pathologic response be strongly prognostic in order to optimize the clinical and scientific information that can be gained from neoadjuvant clinical trials. Dichotomization of response as pathologic complete response (pCR) or residual disease (RD) is overly simplistic for these objectives, particularly because residual disease (RD) after neoadjuvant treatment includes a broad range of actual responses from near-pCR to frank resistance. More effective or prolonged neoadjuvant treatments should reduce the extent of RD in many patients, possibly blurring the prognostic distinction between pCR and RD. On the other hand, it should be possible to identify patients with resistant disease in order to develop predictive tests for this adverse outcome. Our research group recently proposed to measure residual cancer burden (RCB) as a continuous variable derived from the primary tumor dimensions, cellularity of the tumor bed, and axillary nodal burden. Each component contributes meaningful pathologic information and can be obtained using routine pathologic materials and methods of interpretation that could easily be implemented in routine diagnostic practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD, Geyer CE, Kahlenberg MS, Robidoux A, Margolese RG, Hoehn JL, Vogel VG, Dakhil SR, Tamkus D, King KM, Pajon ER, Wright MJ, Robert J, Paik S, Mamounas EP, Wolmark N (2008) Preoperative chemotherapy: updates of national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol 26:778–785

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Boughey JC, Peintinger F, Meric-Bernstam F, Perry AC, Hunt KK, Babiera GV, Singletary SE, Bedrosian I, Lucci A, Buzdar AU, Pusztai L, Kuerer HM (2006) Impact of preoperative versus postoperative chemotherapy on the extent and number of surgical procedures in patients treated in randomized clinical trials for breast cancer. Ann Surg 244:464–470

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bonadonna G, Veronesi U, Brambilla C et al (1990) Primary chemotherapy to avoid mastectomy in tumors with diameters of three centimeters or more. J Natl Cancer Inst 82:1539–1545

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Mauri D, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis JP (2005) Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant systemic treatment in breast cancer: A meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 97:188–194

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chen AM, Meric-Bernstam F, Hunt KK et al (2004) Breast-conserving therapy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: The M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. J Clin Oncol 22:2303–2312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N et al (1998) Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 16:2672–2685

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Smith IC, Heys SD, Hutcheon AW, Miller ID, Payne S, Gilbert FJ, Ah-See AK, Eremin O, Walker LG, Sarkar TK et al (2002) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: significantly enhanced response with docetaxel. J Clin Oncol 20:1456–1466

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. von Minckwitz G, Kummel S, Vogel P et al (2008) Neoadjuvant vinorelbine–capecitabine versus docetaxel–doxorubicin–cyclophosphamide in early nonresponsive breast cancer: phase III randomized GeparTrio trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:542–551

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Wolff AC, Berry D, Carey LA, Colleoni M, Dowsett M, Ellis M, Je G, Mankoff D, Paik S, Pusztai L, Smith ML, Zujewski JA (2008) Research issues affecting preoperative systemic therapy for operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:806–813

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Carey LA, Metzger R, Dees EC et al (2005) American Joint Committee on Cancer tumor–node–metastasis stage after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and breast cancer outcome. J Natl Cancer Inst 97:1137–1142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kuerer HM, Newman LA, Smith TL et al (1999) Clinical course of breast cancer patients with complete pathologic primary tumor and axillary lymph node response to doxorubicin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 17:460–469

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rouzier R, Extra JM, Klijanienko J et al (2002) Incidence and prognostic significance of complete axillary downstaging after primary chemotherapy in breast cancer patients with T1 to T3 tumors and cytologically proven axillary metastatic lymph nodes. J Clin Oncol 20:1304–1310

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mazouni C, Peintinger F, Kau SW, Andre F, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Symmans WF, Meric-Bernstam F, Valero V, Hortobagyi GN, Pusztai L (2007) Residual ductal carcinoma in situ in patients with complete eradication of invasive breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not adversely affect patient outcome. J Clin Oncol 25:2650–2655

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Symmans WF, Peintinger F, Hatzis C, Rajan R, Kuerer HM, Valero V, Assad L, Poniecka A, Hennessy TJ, Green MC, Buzdar AU, Singletary SE, Hortobagyi GN, Pusztai L (2007) Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 25:4414–4422

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Esteva FJ, Hortobagyi GN (2008) Can early response assessment guide neoadjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage breast cancer? J Natl Cancer Inst 100:521–523

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rouzier R, Pusztai L, Delaloge S, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Andre F, Hess KR, Buzdar AU, Garbay JR, Spielmann M, Mathieu MC, Symmans WF, Wagner P, Atallah D, Valero V, Berry DA, Hortobagyi GN (2005) Nomograms to predict pathologic complete response and metastasis-free survival after preoperative chemotherapy for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:8331–8339

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Andre F, Mazouni C, Liedtke C, Kau SW, Frye D, Green M, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Symmans WF, Hortobagyi GN, Pusztai L (2008) HER2 expression and efficacy of preoperative paclitaxel/FAC chemotherapy in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 108:183–190

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Gianni L, Zambetti M, Clark K, Baker J, Cronin M, Wu J, Mariani G, Rodriguez J, Carcangiu M, Watson D, Valagussa P, Rouzier R, Symmans WF, Ross JS, Hortobagyi GN, Pusztai L, Shak S (2005) Gene expression profiles in paraffin-embedded core biopsy tissue predict response to chemotherapy in women with locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:7265–7277

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, P.O. Box 301439, Houston, TX, 77230-1439, USA

    Lajos Pusztai

Authors
  1. Lajos Pusztai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lajos Pusztai.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pusztai, L. Preoperative Systemic Chemotherapy and Pathologic Assessment of Response. Pathol. Oncol. Res. 14, 169–171 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12253-008-9070-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12253-008-9070-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation