Zhang Jiaqiang, Lu Chang-Yun, Chen Ho-Min, Wu Szu-Yuan
Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Henan Provincial People's Hospital, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.
Department of General Surgery, Lo-Hsu Medical Foundation, Lotung Poh-Ai Hospital, Yilan, Taiwan.
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Mar 1;4(3):e211785. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.1785.
Although neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) is an alternative to chemotherapy for strongly hormone receptor (HR)-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (ERBB2)-negative breast cancer, evidence is currently lacking regarding the probable survival outcomes of NET in comparison with those of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for this cancer.
To evaluate all-cause mortality among patients with strongly HR-positive and ERBB2-negative breast cancer treated with NET vs NACT.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study included patients with a diagnosis of invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) with strong HR positivity and ERBB2 negativity, treated between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2016, with follow-up from the index date (ie, date of IDC diagnosis) to December 31, 2018. The data came from the Taiwan Cancer Registry Database. Data were analyzed from January to November 2020.
NET vs NACT for IDC with strong HR positivity and ERBB2 negativity.
The primary end point was all-cause mortality. Propensity score matching was performed, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to analyze all-cause mortality among patients undergoing different neoadjuvant treatments.
A total of 640 patients (297 [46.4%] aged 20-49 years) undergoing NET (145 patients [22.7%]) or NACT (495 patients [77.3%]) were eligible for further analysis. In the multivariate Cox regression analyses, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for all-cause mortality among the NET cohort compared with the NACT cohort was 2.67 (95% CI, 1.95-3.51; P < .001). The aHRs for age were 1.13 (95% CI, 1.03-2.24), 1.25 (95% CI, 1.13-2.45), and 1.37 (95% CI, 1.17-3.49) for all-cause mortality among patients aged 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and 70 years or older, respectively, compared with those aged 20 to 49 years (P = .002); the aHR for all-cause mortality among premenopausal women was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.13-1.56) compared with postmenopausal women (P < .001); and that of patients with a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 2 or greater was 1.77 (1.37-2.26) compared with those with a score of 0 (P < .001). The aHRs of all-cause mortality for clinical tumor stage 2, 3, and 4 compared with 1 were 1.84 (95% CI, 1.07-3.40), 1.97 (95% CI, 1.03-3.77), and 2.49 (95% CI, 1.29-4.81), respectively (P = .009). The aHRs for all-cause mortality by clinical nodal (cN) stages were 1.49 (95% CI, 1.13-1.99) and 1.84 (95% CI, 1.31-2.61) for cN stage 1 and cN stages 2 or 3, respectively, compared with cN stage 0 (P = .005); those for differentiation were 1.77 (95% CI, 1.24-2.54) and 2.31 (95% CI, 1.61-3.34) for differentiation grade 2 and differentiation grade 3, respectively, compared with differentiation grade 1 (P < .001).
The findings of this study suggest that for patients with strongly HR-positive and ERBB2-negative IDC, NACT may be considered the first choice for neoadjuvant treatment.
尽管新辅助内分泌治疗(NET)是激素受体(HR)强阳性且人表皮生长因子受体2(ERBB2)阴性乳腺癌化疗的替代方案,但目前缺乏NET与新辅助化疗(NACT)相比可能的生存结局的证据。
评估接受NET与NACT治疗的HR强阳性且ERBB2阴性乳腺癌患者的全因死亡率。
设计、设置和参与者:这项队列研究纳入了2009年1月1日至2016年12月31日期间诊断为浸润性导管癌(IDC)且HR强阳性和ERBB2阴性的患者,从索引日期(即IDC诊断日期)至2018年12月31日进行随访。数据来自台湾癌症登记数据库。2020年1月至11月进行数据分析。
HR强阳性和ERBB2阴性的IDC患者接受NET与NACT治疗。
主要终点是全因死亡率。进行倾向评分匹配,并使用Cox比例风险模型分析接受不同新辅助治疗患者的全因死亡率。
共有640例患者(297例[46.4%]年龄在20 - 49岁)接受NET(145例[22.7%])或NACT(495例[77.3%]),符合进一步分析条件。在多变量Cox回归分析中,NET队列与NACT队列相比,全因死亡率的调整后风险比(aHR)为2.67(95%CI,1.95 - 3.51;P < .001)。50至59岁、60至69岁和70岁及以上患者与20至49岁患者相比,全因死亡率的aHR分别为1.13(95%CI,1.03 - 2.24)、1.25(95%CI,1.13 - 2.45)和1.37(95%CI,1.17 - 3.49)(P = .002);绝经前女性与绝经后女性相比,全因死亡率的aHR为1.35(95%CI,1.13 - 1.56)(P < .001);Charlson合并症指数评分为2或更高的患者与评分为0的患者相比,aHR为1.77(1.37 - 2.26)(P < .001)。临床肿瘤分期为2、3和4期与1期相比,全因死亡率的aHR分别为1.84(95%CI,1.07 - 3.40)、1.97(95%CI,1.03 - 3.77)和2.49(95%CI,1.29 - 4.81)(P = .009)。临床淋巴结(cN)分期为1期和cN分期为2或3期与cN分期为0期相比,全因死亡率的aHR分别为1.49(95%CI,1.13 - 1.99)和1.84(95%CI,1.31 - 2.61)(P = .005);分化程度为2级和3级与1级相比,全因死亡率的aHR分别为1.77(95%CI,1.24 - 2.54)和2.31(95%CI,1.61 - 3.34)(P < .001)。
本研究结果表明,对于HR强阳性和ERBB2阴性的IDC患者,NACT可能被视为新辅助治疗的首选。