Novel Postneoadjuvant Prognostic Breast Cancer Staging System
Abstract
PURPOSE Prognostic staging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is not included in American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC) staging. This study addressed this deficiency by including responses to therapy with standardized staging variables in a validated prognostic staging system for patients treated with NACT. METHODS The National Cancer Database was queried to identify 140,605 patients treated with NACT between 2010 and 2018. Three response categories (no response, partial response, and complete response [pCR]) were created on the basis of comparison of clinical and post-NACT pathologic staging. Univariate and multivariate analyses of clinical stage, estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and grade were analyzed for each category. Predictive models for each response category were validated using the bootstrap technique. Calibration plots compared predicted and observed 3-year survival probabilities in the training and validation data sets. RESULTS Each validated model demonstrated statistically significant survival differences in the postneoadjuvant prognostic stage assignment. Of all patients with a pCR, 94.2% were assigned to postneoadjuvant ypStage I compared with 35.5% of patients with no response. Advancing clinical stage had a progressive but small impact on overall survival (OS) with pCR (high-grade, triple-negative breast cancer [TNBC]: cStage I, 97% v cStage IIIB/IIIC, 91%; grade 2 luminal A: 97% v 91%) but was associated with a profound decrease in OS with no response for TNBC or HER2+ disease (high-grade TNBC 89% v 50%) and less profound for grade 2 luminal A disease with no response (97% v 81%). CONCLUSION We present a novel, validated prognostic staging system that predicts OS according to the response to NACT. These data will provide AJCC stage assignments for a growing proportion of patients treated with NACT.
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (20)
Lavisha Singh
Northshore University Healthcare, Evanston, IL
Jennifer K. Plichta
Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
David J. Winchester
David J. Winchester, MD, FACS, City of Hope, Zion, IL
Stephen B. Edge
Kimberly H. Allison
Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA
William E. Barlow
Cancer Research and Biostatistics (CRAB), Seattle, WA
Veerle Bossuyt
Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
Mariana Chavez-MacGregor
Emily F. Conant
Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
James L. Connolly
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA
Jennifer F. De Los Santos
Washington University, St Louis, MO
Daniel F. Hayes
University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
Nola M. Hylton
University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
Elizabeth A. Mittendorf
Elena Provenzano
Kilian E. Salerno
Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
Priyanka Sharma
W. Fraser Symmans
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology, Houston, TX
Donald Weaver
Gabriel N. Hortobagyi
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX