RESUMO
Neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (P + CT) has emerged as a standard of care for stage II-III triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, the best anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC) schedule remains to be determined. While the KEYNOTE-522 regimen employs AC every 3 weeks (q3w AC), previous studies have shown overall survival benefits of dose-dense regimens for early-stage breast cancer. The Neo-Real study (GBECAM-0123) is a real-world data effort evaluating patients with TNBC treated with neoadjuvant P + CT in ten cancer centers since July 2020. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of dose-dense AC (ddAC) versus q3w AC. Among 333 patients included until November 2023, 311 completed neoadjuvant therapy and 279 underwent surgery with pathology reports available; ddAC was used in 58.2% and q3w AC in 41.8% of the cases. Most patients (69.1%) had stage II TNBC. A pCR was observed in 65.4% with ddAC and 58.7% with q3w AC (P = 0.260), while RCB 0-1 occurred in 82.4% and 73.5%, respectively (P = 0.115). Patients with stage III disease had a numerically higher pCR with ddAC (59% vs 40%, P = 0.155), while pCR rates were similar regardless of AC regimen in stage II disease (66.6% vs 64.5%; P = 0.760). While no significant disparities in drug discontinuation was noted, ddAC showed a trend towards higher rates of grade ≥3 AE (40.5% vs. 30.7%, P = 0.092). The Neo-Real study could not rule out a difference between ddAC and q3w AC during neoadjuvant P + CT. The observation of a potentially higher pCR with ddAC in stage III disease warrants further investigation.
RESUMO
Background: Oncotype DX (ODX) is a validated assay for the prediction of risk of recurrence and benefit of chemotherapy (CT) in both node negative (N0) and 1-3 positive nodes (N1), hormone receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) early breast cancer (eBC). Due to limited access to genomic assays in Brazil, treatment decisions remain largely driven by traditional clinicopathologic risk factors. ODX has been reported to be cost-effective in different health system, but limited data are available considering the reality of middle-income countries such as Brazil. We aim to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ODX across strata of clinical risk groups using data from a dataset of patients from Brazilian institutions. Methods: Clinicopathologic and ODX information were analyzed for patients with T1-T3, N0-N1, HR+/HER2- eBC who had an ODX performed between 2005 and 2020. Projections of CT indication by clinicopathologic criteria were based on binary clinical risk categorization based on the Adjuvant! Algorithm. The ODX score was correlated with the indication of CT according to TAILORx and RxPONDER data. Two decision-tree models were developed. In the first model, low and high clinical risk patients were included while in the second, only high clinical risk patients were included. The cost for ODX and CT was based on the Brazilian private medicine perspective. Results: In all, 645 patients were analyzed; 411 patients (63.7%) had low clinical risk and 234 patients (36.3%) had high clinical risk disease. The ODX indicated low (<11), intermediate (11-25), and high (>25) risk in 119 (18.4%), 415 (64.3%), and 111 (17.2%) patients, respectively. Among 645 patients analyzed in the first model, ODX was effective (5.6% reduction in CT indication) though with an incremental cost of United States Dollar (US$) 2288.87 per patient. Among 234 patients analyzed in the second model (high clinical risk only), ODX led to a 57.7% reduction in CT indication and reduced costs by US$ 4350.66 per patient. Conclusions: Our study suggests that ODX is cost-saving for patients with high clinical risk HR+/HER2- eBC and cost-attractive for the overall population in the Brazilian private medicine perspective. Its incorporation into routine practice should be strongly considered by healthcare providers.