The effect of prolonged neoadjuvant endocrine therapy on the efficacy of treatment with breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: At present, there is no consensus on the required duration of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET), yet there is no consistent conclusion on the factors influencing the efficacy of treatment with breast cancer after prolonged treatment. OBJECTIVE: To explore the effect of prolonged NET on the efficacy of patients with breast cancer and analyze the factors influencing the efficacy of treatment with breast cancer after the treatment duration is prolonged. METHODS: The case histories of 51 patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer and received NET in our hospital from September 2017 to December 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients received NET for over 12 months. The clinical efficacy and tumor size changes after treatment for six months and 12 months were compared, and the factors influencing the efficacy of treatment with breast cancer after patients' treatment duration was prolonged were analyzed. RESULTS: (1) Among the 51 patients, the objective remission rate (ORR) of NET, at T = 6 months was 21.6%, and the average tumor size was 15.52 ± 7.30 mm. The ORR of the NET at T = 12 months was 52.9%, and the average tumor size was 13.79 ± 7.43 mm. (2) After the treatment duration was prolonged, the clinical ORRs of patients with estrogen receptor (ER) (+) and progesterone receptor (PR) (+) were significantly higher than that of patients with ER (+) and PR (-) and patients with ER (-) and PR (+), which was (P < 0.05). (3) There was no significant difference between the patients' axillary lymph node status and the Ki67 expression before treatment and the clinical ORR after prolonged treatment, which was (P> 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: (1) Prolonging the NET duration for patients with breast cancer can improve their clinical ORR and further reduce the tumor size, but patients' conditions should be closely monitored during the treatment process to prevent the progression of disease due to drug resistance. (2) The expression state of ER or PR may be used as a factor influencing the efficacy of treatment with breast cancer after prolonged treatment. (3) There was no significant effect on the patients' axillary lymph node status and the Ki67 expression before treatment on the clinical efficacy after prolonged treatment.

Application of triple evaluation method in predicting the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the factors related to the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer and find appropriate evaluation methods for evaluating the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy METHODS: A total of 143 patients with breast cancer treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy at Baotou Cancer Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. The chemotherapy regimen was mainly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin for 1 week, docetaxel combined with carboplatin for 3 weeks, and was replaced with epirubicin combined with cyclophosphamide after evaluation of disease progression. All HER2-positive patients were treated with simultaneous targeted therapy, including trastuzumab single-target therapy and trastuzumab combined with pertuzumab double-target therapy. Combined with physical examination, color Doppler ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), a systematic evaluation system was initially established-the "triple evaluation method." A baseline evaluation was conducted before treatment. The efficacy was evaluated by physical examination and color Doppler every cycle, and the efficacy was evaluated by physical examination, color Doppler, and MRI every two cycles. RESULTS: The increase in ultrasonic blood flow after treatment could affect the efficacy of monitoring. The presence of two preoperative time-signal intensity curves is a therapeutically effective protective factor for inflow. The triple evaluation determined by physical examination, color Doppler ultrasound, and MRI in determining clinical efficacy is consistent with the effectiveness of the pathological gold standard. CONCLUSION: The therapeutic effect of neoadjuvant therapy can be better evaluated by combining clinical physical examination, color ultrasound, and nuclear magnetic resonance evaluation. The three methods complement each other to avoid the insufficient evaluation of a single method, which is convenient for most prefecty-level hospitals. Additionally, this method is simple, feasible, and suitable for promotion.

Impact of Homologous Recombination Deficiency on Outcomes in Patients With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Treated With Carboplatin-Based Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Secondary Analysis of the NeoCART Randomized Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: Pathologic complete response (pCR) rates of patients with triple-negative breast cancer who were administered docetaxel plus carboplatin were significantly higher than those of patients administered epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel in the neoadjuvant NeoCART trial. Here, we performed a preplanned secondary analysis of the homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) score as a predictor of the pCR in patients with triple-negative breast cancer from the NeoCART cohort. METHODS: Pretherapeutic tumor tissues were assessed retrospectively by DNA extraction and sequencing. BRCA1/2 mutations were evaluated in both somatic and germline forms. HRD scores were calculated from genome-wide allele-specific copy number results and comprised telomeric allelic imbalance, loss of heterozygosity, and large-scale state transitions. High HRD scores were defined as ≥ 38, and HRD was defined as either a high HRD score or a deleterious BRCA1/2 mutation. RESULTS: HRD testing was completed for 43 (79.6%) of 54 NeoCART cohort patients. Thirty of 43 (69.8%) tumors had high HRD scores, and eight patients had BRCA-mutated tumors. No significant association between BRCA1/2 mutation status and pCR was observed either in the general population or in the two treatment arms. Docetaxel plus carboplatin group patients who achieved pCR had higher HRD scores than non-pCR patients, and this difference approached significance (61.69 ± 24.26 v 39.44 ± 22.83, P = .061). No significant correlations between HRD scores and pCR (61.29 ± 24.02 v 53.21 ± 24.31, P = .480) or residual cancer burden 0/1 (62.50 ± 22.50 v 51.85 ± 24.74, P = .324) were observed in the epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel group. CONCLUSION: HRD is a potential predictive biomarker for clinical benefit from neoadjuvant carboplatin-based chemotherapy and provides a possibility for screening the optimum chemotherapy backbone to combine with immunotherapy.

A multicentre single arm phase 2 trial of neoadjuvant pyrotinib and letrozole plus dalpiciclib for triple-positive breast cancer.

Current therapies for HER2-positive breast cancer have limited efficacy in patients with triple-positive breast cancer (TPBC). We conduct a multi-center single-arm phase 2 trial to test the efficacy and safety of an oral neoadjuvant therapy with pyrotinib, letrozole and dalpiciclib (a CDK4/6 inhibitor) in patients with treatment-naïve, stage II-III TPBC with a Karnofsky score of ≥70 (NCT04486911). The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients with pathological complete response (pCR) in the breast and axilla. The secondary endpoints include residual cancer burden (RCB)-0 or RCB-I, objective response rate (ORR), breast pCR (bpCR), safety and changes in molecular targets (Ki67) from baseline to surgery. Following 5 cycles of 4-week treatment, the results meet the primary endpoint with a pCR rate of 30.4% (24 of 79; 95% confidence interval (CI), 21.3-41.3). RCB-0/I is 55.7% (95% CI, 44.7-66.1). ORR is 87.4%, (95% CI, 78.1-93.2) and bpCR is 35.4% (95% CI, 25.8-46.5). The mean Ki67 expression reduces from 40.4% at baseline to 17.9% (P < 0.001) at time of surgery. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events are neutropenia, leukopenia, and diarrhoea. There is no serious adverse event- or treatment-related death. This fully oral, chemotherapy-free, triplet combined therapy has the potential to be an alternative neoadjuvant regimen for patients with TPBC.

Integrative Analysis of Peripheral Blood Indices for the Renal Sinus Invasion Prediction of T1 Renal Cell Carcinoma: An Ensemble Study Using Machine Learning-Assisted Decision-Support Models.

PURPOSE: Renal sinus invasion is an attributive factor affecting the prognosis of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This study aimed to construct a risk prediction model that could stratify patients with RCC and predict renal sinus invasion with the help of a machine learning (ML) algorithm. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively recruited 1229 patients diagnosed with T1 stage RCC at the Baotou Cancer Hospital between November 2013 and August 2021. Iterative analysis was used to screen out predictors related to renal sinus invasion, after which ML-based models were developed to predict renal sinus invasion in patients with T1 stage RCC. The receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), decision curve analysis (DCA), and clinical impact curve (CIC) were performed to evaluate the robustness and clinical practicability of each model. RESULTS: A total of 21 candidate variables were shortlisted for model building. Iterative analysis screened that neutrophil to albumin ratio (NAR), hemoglobin level * albumin level * lymphocyte count/platelet count ratio (HALP), prognostic nutrition index (PNI), body mass index*serum albumin/neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (AKI), NAR, and fibrinogen (FIB) concentration (NARFIB), platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and R.E.N.A.L score was related to renal sinus invasion and contributed significantly to ML-based algorithm. The areas under the ROC curve (AUCs) of the random forest classifier (RFC) model, support vector machine (SVM), eXtreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), artificial neural network (ANN), and decision tree (DT) ranged from 0.797 to 0.924. The optimal risk probability of renal sinus invasion predicted was RFC (AUC = 0.924, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.414-1.434), which showed robust discrimination for identifying high-risk patients. CONCLUSION: We successfully develop practical models for renal sinus invasion prediction, particularly the RFC, which could contribute to early detection via integrating systemic inflammatory factors and nutritional parameters.

Neoadjuvant docetaxel plus carboplatin vs epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel in triple-negative, early-stage breast cancer (NeoCART): Results from a multicenter, randomized controlled, open-label phase II trial.

Previous studies have shown that the addition of carboplatin to neoadjuvant chemotherapy improved the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate in patients suffering from triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and patients who obtained a pCR could achieve prolonged event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS). However, no studies have assessed the effects of the combination of docetaxel and carboplatin without anthracycline with taxane-based and anthracycline-based regimens. The NeoCART study was designed as a multicenter, randomized controlled, open-label, phase II trial to assess the efficacy and safety of docetaxel combined with carboplatin in untreated stage II-III TNBC. All eligible patients were randomly assigned, at a 1:1 ratio, to an experimental docetaxel plus carboplatin (DCb) for six cycles group (DCb group) or an epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide for four cycles followed by docetaxel for four cycles group (EC-D group). PCR (ypT0/is ypN0) was evaluated as the primary outcome. Between 1 September 2016 and 31 December 2019, 93 patients were randomly assigned and 88 patients were evaluated for the primary endpoint (44 patients in each group). In the primary endpoint analysis, 27 patients in the DCb group (61.4%, 95% CI 47.0-75.8) and 17 patients in the EC-D group achieved a pCR (38.6%, 95% CI 24.3-53.0; odds ratio 2.52, 95% CI 2.4-43.1; Pnoninferiority = .004). Noninferiority was met, and the DCb regimen was confirmed to be superior to the EC-D regimen (P = .044, superiority margin of 5%). At the end of the 37-month median follow-up period, OS and EFS rates were equivalent in both groups.

Anthracycline-containing versus carboplatin-containing neoadjuvant chemotherapy in combination with trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer: the neoCARH phase II randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Although dual blockade HER2-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with excellent outcomes for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer, pertuzumab is not available to all patients due to cost. The optimal neoadjuvant chemotherapy for HER2-positive breast cancer in the presence of a single HER2 blockade is unknown. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel/trastuzumab (EC-TH) with docetaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab (TCH) neoadjuvant setting for HER2-positive breast cancer under the single HER2 blockade. METHODS: Patients with stage II-IIIC HER2-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned to either eight cycles of EC-TH every 3 weeks during all chemotherapy cycles, or six cycles of TCH every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response (pCR) (defined as the absence of invasive tumor cells in breast and axilla, ypT0/is ypN0). RESULTS: From May 2017 to November 2019, 140 patients were randomly assigned, and 135 patients were ultimately found evaluable for the primary endpoint. The pCR was recorded in 25 of 67 patients [37.3%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 25.8-50.0] in the EC-TH group and in 38 of 68 patients (55.9%, 95% CI, 43.3-67.9) in the TCH group (p = 0.032). The most common adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia in 24 of 67 (35.8%) patients in the EC-TH group versus 27 of 68 (39.7%) in the TCH group (p = 0.642), anemia in 33 of 67 (49.3%) patients in the EC-TH group versus 34 of 68 (50.0%) in the TCH group (p = 0.931), and thrombocytopenia in five of 67 (7.5%) patients in the EC-TH group versus 17 of 68 (25.0%) in the TCH group (p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: For patients receiving the single HER2 blockade trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer, TCH regimen might be a preferred neoadjuvant therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03140553) on 2 May 2017.