Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. Effects of primary chemotherapy in conservative treatment of breast cancer patients with operable tumors larger than 3 cm. Results of a randomized trial in a single centre. Primary (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy and radiotherapy compared with primary radiotherapy alone in stage IIb-IIIa breast cancer. Preoperative FLAC/granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor chemotherapy for stage II breast cancer: a prospective randomized trial. Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in premenopausal patients with tumours considered too large for breast conserving surgery: preliminary results of a randomised trial: S6. Prospective randomized study of surgical morbidity following primary systemic therapy for breast cancer. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in operable breast cancer. A reduction in the requirements for mastectomy in a randomized trial of neoadjuvant chemoendocrine therapy in primary breast cancer. Estrogen-receptor-directed neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer: results of a randomised trial using formestane and methotrexate, mitozantrone and mitomycin C (MMM) chemotherapy. Preoperative chemotherapy in primary operable breast cancer: results from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer trial 10902.
To determine, in women with primary operable breast cancer, if preoperative doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan; AC) therapy yields a better outcome than postoperative AC therapy, if a relationship exists between outcome and tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy, and if such therapy results in the performance of more lumpectomies.
                Women (1,523) enrolled onto National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-18 were randomly assigned to preoperative or postoperative AC therapy. Clinical tumor response to preoperative therapy was graded as complete (cCR), partial (cPR), or no response (cNR). Tumors with a cCR were further categorized as either pathologic complete response (pCR) or invasive cells (pINV). Disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and survival were estimated through 5 years and compared between treatment groups. In the preoperative arm, proportional-hazards models were used to investigate the relationship between outcome and tumor response.
                There was no significant difference in DFS, DDFS, or survival (P = .99, .70, and .83, respectively) among patients in either group. More patients treated preoperatively than postoperatively underwent lumpectomy and radiation therapy (67.8% v 59.8%, respectively). Rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after lumpectomy were similar in both groups (7.9% and 5.8%, respectively; P = .23). Outcome was better in women whose tumors showed a pCR than in those with a pINV, cPR, or cNR (relapse-free survival [RFS] rates, 85.7%, 76.9%, 68.1%, and 63.9%, respectively; P < .0001), even when baseline prognostic variables were controlled. When prognostic models were compared for each treatment group, the preoperative model, which included breast tumor response as a variable, discriminated outcome among patients to about the same degree as the postoperative model.
                Preoperative chemotherapy is as effective as postoperative chemotherapy, permits more lumpectomies, is appropriate for the treatment of certain patients with stages I and II disease, and can be used to study breast cancer biology. Tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy correlates with outcome and could be a surrogate for evaluating the effect of chemotherapy on micrometastases; however, knowledge of such a response provided little prognostic information beyond that which resulted from postoperative therapy. 272 women with operable breast adenocarcinomas larger than 3 cm were included in a randomized trial. The patients in group A (n = 138) with histological nodal involvement (N+) or a lack of estrogen and progesterone receptors (EPR-) were treated by initial mastectomy and axillary node dissection + adjuvant chemotherapy. Those in group B (n = 134) were treated by initial chemotherapy (the same as in group A) followed by loco-regional treatment, adjusted according to their response to chemotherapy. Prognostic factors were identical in the two groups. In group A, 32 patients received no adjuvant treatment (N- and EPR+), while 104 were given adjuvant chemotherapy (N+ and/or EPR-). Two patients were lost to follow-up. In group B, all patients received initial chemotherapy; 44 were in complete clinical remission and were treated with radiotherapy only; 40 with residual tumor (less than 20 mm) were treated with tumorectomy + axillary node dissection + radiotherapy; 49 with residual tumors (greater than 20 mm) had mastectomies. Conservative treatment was administered to 84 patients in group B (62.6%). EPR-tumors responded better to chemotherapy than did EPR+ ones (p = .003). After a median follow-up of 34 months, isolated local recurrences were more frequent in the group with initial chemotherapy, which, however, experienced a better overall survival (p = 0.04). A phase III randomized trial was activated to evaluate the efficacy of preoperative combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy as compared to preoperative radiation therapy alone, in patients with breast cancer presenting with a clinical stage of IIb-IIIa (TNM classification).
                From 1985 to 1990, 271 patients, aged 27-55 years, with stage IIb-IIIa breast cancer were randomized to receive either one or two courses of thiotepa 20 mg (i.m. injection) on the days 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 (total dose per course 120 mg), methotrexate 40 mg/m2, i.v. on days 1 and 8, and 5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m2, i.v. on days 1 and 8 (TMF regimen) plus radiotherapy (Group I, 137 patients), or preoperative radiation therapy only (Group II, 134 patients). After the preoperative treatment all patients underwent mastectomy and complete axillary clearance, and then received 4-6 courses of TMF. The trial was conducted in a single institution (N.N. Petrov Research Institute of Oncology, St. Petersburg).
                Histopathological assessment of the mastectomy specimens showed complete regression of the tumour in 29.1% of the patients in group I and in 19.4% of the patients e.c. in group II. The estimated 5-year overall survival percentages were 86.1% for group I, and 78.3% for group II (P > 0.05). 5-year disease-free survival percentages were 81.0% and 71.6%, respectively (p < 0.05).
                Despite the low number of the patients included in the trial, we were able to detect a significant improvement in treatment results with a combination of chemotherapy and radiation therapy given prior to mastectomy over those of local therapy alone with radiation therapy followed by mastectomy, for average- and high-risk patients with operable breast cancer. Preoperative chemotherapy for stage II breast cancer may reduce locoregional tumors and provides initial treatment for systemic micrometastases. We conducted a prospective, randomized trial to evaluate the ability of intensive preoperative chemotherapy to enhance the outcome of this approach.
                Patients with clinical stage II breast cancer (T2N0, T1N1, and T2N1) were prospectively randomized to receive either preoperative or postoperative chemotherapy with five 21-day cycles of fluorouracil, leucovorin calcium, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FLAC)/granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor. Local therapy consisted of modified radical mastectomy or segmentectomy/axillary dissection/breast radiotherapy, according to patient preference.
                Fifty-three women were randomized (26 preoperative chemotherapy and 27 postoperative chemotherapy). The objective clinical response rate of the primary tumor to preoperative chemotherapy was 80%, and the pathologic complete response rate was 20%. Preoperative chemotherapy reduced the overall incidence and number of axillary lymph node metastases. There was no difference in the use of breast-conserving local therapy between the two treatment arms. There were 20 local/regional or distant recurrences (9 preoperative and 11 postoperative). There was no difference in the overall or disease-free survival between the preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy arms.
                Preoperative FLAC/granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor chemotherapy was effective against local/regional tumors in stage II breast cancer but was otherwise comparable to postoperative chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to assess a potential advantage in survival by neoadjuvant as compared to adjuvant chemotherapy. 414 premenopausal patients with T2-T3 N0-N1 M0 breast cancer were randomised to receive either four cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, 5-fluorouracil), followed by local-regional treatment (group I) or four cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy after primary irradiation +/- surgery (group II). Surgery was limited to those patients with a persisting mass after irradiation, and aimed to be as conservative as possible. 390 patients were evaluable. With a median follow-up of 54 months, we observed a statistically significant difference (P = 0.039) in survival in favour of the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group. A similar trend was seen when the time to metastatic recurrence was evaluated (P = 0.09). At this stage, no difference in disease-free interval or local recurrence between these two groups could be observed. The mean total dose of chemotherapy administered was similar in both groups. On average, group I had more intensive chemotherapy regimes (doxorubicin P = 0.02) but fewer treatment courses (P = 0.008) as compared to the treated patients in group II. Haematological tolerance was reduced when chemotherapy succeeded to exclusive irradiation. Breast conservation was identical for both groups at the end of primary treatment (82 and 77% for groups I and II, respectively). Of the 191 evaluable patients in the neoadjuvant treatment arm, 65% had an objective response (> 50% regression) following four cycles of chemotherapy. The objective response rate to primary irradiation (55 Gy) was 85%. Improved survival figures in the neoadjuvant treatment arm could be the result of the early initiation of chemotherapy, but we cannot exclude that this difference might be attributable to a slightly more aggressive treatment. So far, the trend in favour of decreased metastases was not statistically significant. The local control appeared similar in both subgroups. The influence of primary systemic therapy in treating operable breast cancer on postmastectomy morbidity rates was investigated. The contribution of other risk factors was assessed by multiple logistic regression. Seventy-nine eligible patients were randomly allocated, 39 to undergo immediate modified radical mastectomy, and 40 to receive initial cytotoxic or endocrine treatment followed by mastectomy. Postoperative wound seroma, infection and necrosis were recorded prospectively. Fourteen minor and six major complications occurred in 17 patients treated conventionally, while 14 patients developed 11 minor and six major complications after systemic therapy (P > 0.4). Median hospital stay was 8 days for both groups. Age, smoking, immediate breast reconstruction and the type of primary systemic treatment given were not independent predictors of complication risk. Obesity emerged as a significant risk factor for postmastectomy complications (P = 0.015). Primary systemic therapy does not increase the rate of morbidity after mastectomy. Primary chemotherapy in localised breast cancer may prevent tumour spread during surgical treatment and reduce proliferation of micrometastases. A randomised clinical trial, in 196 premenopausal and postmenopausal patients with operable (T2-3, N0-1b) breast cancer, was started in November 1983 at the Institut Curie to compare neoadjuvant and adjuvant regimens of chemotherapy with radiotherapy with or without surgery. The patients have been followed up for 35-70 months (median 54). A neoadjuvant group received two monthly cycles of intravenous doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/5-fluorouracil before locoregional therapy and four cycles subsequently. Six monthly cycles following locoregional therapy were administered to the adjuvant group. Because of inclusion of postmenopausal and/or node-negative patients, compliance was less than optimal in 39 patients who were analysed separately according to actual dose received. Tumour response, evaluated after two cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, was significantly associated with dose (P = 0.003). Survival showed a slight non-significant advantage for the neoadjuvant group. Survival plotted by actual dose was also similar. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was safe and at least as effective as the adjuvant regimen. Patients have been accrued to a subsequent larger trial of chemotherapy as first-line treatment. A prospective randomised trial was undertaken to evaluate the role of neoadjuvant chemoendocrine therapy prior to surgery in primary operable breast cancer.
                Three hundred nine women (median age 56 years, range 27-70) with primary operable breast cancer confirmed on fine needle aspiration (FNA) cytology were recruited to this study. They were treated with a combination of mitozantrone and methotrexate (+/- mitomycin-C) combined with tamoxifen (2MT). Patients received eight cycles of 2MT (four prior to surgery in the neoadjuvant group) and tamoxifen for five years with appropriate surgery and radiotherapy. The two groups were comparable for age, menopausal status, stage and surgical requirements.
                The clinical response rates to neoadjuvant therapy were as follows: 22% complete response (CR), 29% minimal residual disease (MRD), 33% partial response (PR), 15% no change (NC) and only two patients had clinical evidence of progressive disease. Surgical requirements were reduced from 31 patients (22%) of the adjuvant group having mastectomy to 14 (10%) in the neoadjuvant group (P < 0.003). At a median follow-up of 48 months (range 10-70 months) there is no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of local relapse, metastatic relapse or overall survival. Symptomatic and haematologic acute toxicity was low and similar for adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy.
                This randomised trial has shown a significant reduction in the surgical requirements for mastectomy, after treatment with neoadjuvant chemoendocrine therapy, with no deterioration in local or distal relapse. We wanted to determine whether neoadjuvant systemic chemoendocrine therapy guided by the estrogen receptor (ER) status of the primary breast cancer, followed by conventional surgery and/or radiotherapy, reduces local and distant recurrence and improves survival compared with adjuvant treatment given conventionally postoperatively.
                Two hundred ten patients with primary breast cancer (T1-T4, N0, N1-2) were randomised to receive treatment with neoadjuvant chemoendocrine therapy or conventional post-operative chemoendocrine therapy. Systemic therapy was based on the estrogen receptor (ER) status of the primary tumour obtained by trucut core biopsy. ER-negative patients received MMM chemotherapy (methotrexate (30 mg/m2), mitozantrone (7 mg/m2) and mitomycin (7 mg/m2) three-weekly for three months and ER-positive patients who were premenopausal received goserelin (3.75 mg monthly), and post menopausal women formestane (250 mg every two weeks) over three months.
                With a minimum of five years follow-up, there is no evidence of any survival benefit from the pretreatment neoadjuvant therapy regimen, with five year overall survival being 79% +/- 4.7% (neoadjuvant) and 87% +/- 3.4% (adjuvant). Similarly, there was no apparent benefit in terms of disease-free survival. There was, however, a significant reduction in the incidence of distant metastases in responders (4 of 51; 8%) compared with non-responders (17 of 49; 35%) (P < 0.01). There was a reduction in the need for surgery in responding patients with T1 and T2 tumours, since 10 of 74 (14%) had no detectable residual tumour, without any apparent increase in the risk of local or distant recurrence.
                In this study neoadjuvant treatment with endocrine or chemotherapy provided no obvious survival benefit to women with breast cancer. However, it does allow avoidance of surgery in some cases. Also, the patients whose tumours respond to neoadjuvant systemic therapy have a lower incidence of distant metastases after five year follow-up compared to those whose tumours fail to respond. To evaluate whether preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with primary operable breast cancer results in better overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival rates and whether preoperative chemotherapy permits more breast-conserving surgery procedures than postoperative chemotherapy.
                Six hundred ninety-eight breast cancer patients (T1c, T2, T3, T4b, N0 to 1, and M0) were enrolled onto a randomized phase III trial that compared four cycles of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide administered preoperatively versus the same regimen administered postoperatively (the first cycle administered within 36 hours after surgery). Patients were followed up for OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and locoregional recurrence (LRR).
                At a median follow-up of 56 months, there was no significant difference in terms of OS (hazards ratio, 1.16; P =.38), PFS (hazards ratio, 1.15; P =.27), and time to LRR (hazards ratio, 1.13; P =.61). Fifty-seven patients (23%) were downstaged by the preoperative chemotherapy, whereas 14 patients (18%) underwent mastectomy and not the planned breast-conserving therapy.
                The use of preoperative chemotherapy yields similar results in terms of PFS, OS, and locoregional control compared with conventional postoperative chemotherapy. In addition, preoperative chemotherapy enables more patients to be treated with breast-conserving surgery. Because preoperative chemotherapy does not improve disease outcome compared with postoperative chemotherapy, future trials should involve quality-of-life studies to investigate whether patients will benefit from this treatment modality.
This review suggests safe application of preoperative chemotherapy in the treatment of women with early stage breast cancer in order to down-stage surgical requirement, to evaluate chemosensitivity and to facilitate translational research.