1
|
The Present and Future of Neoadjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Breast Cancer Treatment. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13112538. [PMID: 34064183 PMCID: PMC8196711 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13112538] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2021] [Revised: 05/16/2021] [Accepted: 05/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary The treatment of breast cancer has evolved considerably over the last two decades, leading toward individualized disease management. Hormone-sensitive breast cancers constitute the vast majority of cases and endocrine therapy is the mainstay of their treatment. On the other hand, neoadjuvant or pre-surgical treatments provide a number of advantages for tumor management. In this review we will discuss the existing evidence on neoadjuvant endocrine therapy, as well as its possible future indications. Abstract Endocrine therapy (ET) has established itself as an efficacious treatment for estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancers, with a reduction in recurrence rates and increased survival rates. The pre-surgical approach with chemotherapy (NCT) has become a common form of management for large, locally advanced, or high-risk tumors. However, a good response to NCT is not usually expected in ER+ tumors. Good results with primary ET, mainly in elderly women, have encouraged studies in other stages of life, and nowadays neoadjuvant endocrine treatment (NET) has become a useful approach to many ER+ breast cancers. The aim of this review is to provide an update on the current state of art regarding the present and the future role of NET.
Collapse
|
2
|
Boughdad S, Champion L, Becette V, Cherel P, Fourme E, Lemonnier J, Lerebours F, Alberini JL. Early metabolic response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy: comparison to morphological and pathological response. Cancer Imaging 2020; 20:11. [PMID: 31992361 PMCID: PMC6986018 DOI: 10.1186/s40644-020-0287-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2019] [Accepted: 01/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) has shown efficacy in terms of clinical response and surgical outcome in postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor-positive / HER2-negative breast cancer (ER+/HER2- BC) but monitoring of tumor response is challenging. The aim of the present study was to investigate the value of an early metabolic response compared to morphological and pathological responses in this population. Methods This was an ancillary study of CARMINA 02, a phase II clinical trial evaluating side-by-side the efficacy of 4 to 6 months of anastrozole or fulvestrant. Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography using 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose (FDG-PET/CT) scans were performed at baseline (M0), early after 1 month of treatment (M1) and pre-operatively in 11 patients (74.2 yo ± 3.6). Patients were classified as early “metabolic responders” (mR) when the decrease of SUVmax was higher than 40%, and “metabolic non-responders” (mNR) otherwise. Early metabolic response was compared to morphological response (palpation, US and MRI), variation of Ki-67 index, pathological response according to the Sataloff classification and also to Preoperative Endocrine Prognostic Index (PEPI) score. It was also correlated with overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Results Tumor size measured on US and on MRI was smaller in mR than mNR, with the highest statistically significant difference at M1 (p = 0.01 and 7.1 × 10− 5, respectively). No statistically significant difference in the variation of tumor size between M0 and M1 assessed on US or MRI was observed between mR and mNR. mR had a better clinical response: no progressive disease in mR vs 2 in mNR and 2 partial response in mR vs 1 partial response in mNR. One patient with a pre-operative complete metabolic response had the best pathological response. Pathological response did not show any statistically significant difference between mR and mNR. mR had better OS and RFS (Kaplan-Meier p = 0.08 and 0.06, respectively). All cancer-related events occurred in mNR: 3 patients died, 2 of them from progressive disease. Conclusions FDG-PET/CT imaging could become a “surrogate marker” to monitor tumor response, especially as NET is a valuable treatment option in postmenopausal women with ER+/HER2- BC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Boughdad
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Institut Curie-Saint-Cloud, 92210, Saint-Cloud, France
| | - Laurence Champion
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Institut Curie-Saint-Cloud, 92210, Saint-Cloud, France
| | | | - Pascal Cherel
- Department of Radiology, Institut Curie, Saint-Cloud, France
| | | | | | | | - Jean-Louis Alberini
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Institut Curie-Saint-Cloud, 92210, Saint-Cloud, France. .,Université Versailles Saint-Quentin, Paris-Saclay, Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, France.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ceugnart L, Olivier A, Oudoux A. [Breast cancer: News tools in imaging]. Presse Med 2019; 48:1101-1111. [PMID: 31676215 DOI: 10.1016/j.lpm.2019.10.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2019] [Accepted: 10/01/2019] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer imaging is always improving for the last 20 years in spite of digitalization and computer development. News tools in mammography (Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, Contrast enhanced mammography), sonography (elastography, Automated echography), MRI (Diffusion, abbreviated MRI) and Nuclear medicine has the great potential to be the future of breats imaging. But true revolution will be to use the huge volume of "hidden" imaging data, by Intelligence Artificial process or Biological progress (in genomics, proteiomics) to purpose to our patient a personalized imaging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luc Ceugnart
- Centre régional de lutte contre le cancer Oscar-Lambret, pôle imagerie, secteur imagerie, Lille, France.
| | - Anais Olivier
- Centre régional de lutte contre le cancer Oscar-Lambret, pôle imagerie, secteur médecine nucléaire, Lille, France
| | - Aurore Oudoux
- Centre régional de lutte contre le cancer Oscar-Lambret, pôle imagerie, secteur médecine nucléaire, Lille, France
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
de Cremoux P, Biard L, Poirot B, Bertheau P, Teixeira L, Lehmann-Che J, Bouhidel FA, Merlet P, Espié M, Resche-Rigon M, Sotiriou C, Groheux D. 18FDG-PET/CT and molecular markers to predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and outcome in HER2-negative advanced luminal breast cancers patients. Oncotarget 2018; 9:16343-16353. [PMID: 29662649 PMCID: PMC5893244 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.24674] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2017] [Accepted: 02/26/2018] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens in advanced luminal breast cancer patients is difficult to predict. Intrinsic properties of breast tumors, including altered gene expression profile and dynamic evaluation of metabolic properties of tumor cells using positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) of tumor cells, have been identified to guide patient's prognosis. The aim of this study is to determine if both analyses may improve the prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ER-positive / HER2-negative breast cancers (BCs) patients. Methods We used metabolic PET parameters, at diagnosis and after two cycles of chemotherapy and proliferation gene expression profile on biopsy at diagnosis, in particular, the genomic grade index (GGI) analyzed by reverse transcription and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). The pathological response was the surrogate endpoint. Results The change of FDG uptake between baseline PET and interim PET after 2 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (ΔSUVmax) was highly associated with pCR (p=0.008). We also observed an ability of P53 mutated status (p=0.042), in addition to histological grade (p=0. 0004), and PR expression (p=0.01) to predict pCR in ER-positive BCs, whereas no proliferation marker predicted pCR (P=0.39 for GGI). Finally, only ΔSUVmax was significantly associated with event free survival (p=0.047). Conclusions Our results confirm the predictive and prognostic value of tumor ΔSUVmax in ER-positive /HER2-negative advanced BCs patients. These findings can be helpful to select high-risk patients within trials investigating novel treatment strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patricia de Cremoux
- Molecular Oncology Unit, Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris, France.,University Paris-Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, INSERM/CNRS UMR944/7212, Paris, France
| | - Lucie Biard
- Department of Biostatistics, Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris, France.,University Paris-Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, INSERM UMR 1153 ECSTRA team, Paris, France
| | - Brigitte Poirot
- Molecular Oncology Unit, Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Philippe Bertheau
- Department of Pathology, Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris, France.,University Paris-Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, INSERM UMR-S-1165, Paris, France
| | - Luis Teixeira
- University Paris-Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, INSERM/CNRS UMR944/7212, Paris, France.,Breast Diseases Unit, Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Jacqueline Lehmann-Che
- Molecular Oncology Unit, Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris, France.,University Paris-Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, INSERM/CNRS UMR944/7212, Paris, France
| | | | - Pascal Merlet
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Marc Espié
- University Paris-Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, INSERM/CNRS UMR944/7212, Paris, France.,Breast Diseases Unit, Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Matthieu Resche-Rigon
- Department of Biostatistics, Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris, France.,University Paris-Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, INSERM UMR 1153 ECSTRA team, Paris, France
| | - Christos Sotiriou
- Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - David Groheux
- University Paris-Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, INSERM/CNRS UMR944/7212, Paris, France.,Department of Nuclear Medicine, Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Anderson CJ, Lewis JS. Current status and future challenges for molecular imaging. PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS. SERIES A, MATHEMATICAL, PHYSICAL, AND ENGINEERING SCIENCES 2017; 375:rsta.2017.0023. [PMID: 29038378 DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2017.0023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/06/2017] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
Molecular imaging (MI), used in its wider sense of biology at the molecular level, is a field that lies at the intersection of molecular biology and traditional medical imaging. As advances in medicine have exponentially expanded over the last few decades, so has our need to better understand the fundamental behaviour of living organisms in a non-invasive and timely manner. This commentary draws from topics the authors addressed in their presentations at the 2017 Royal Society Meeting 'Challenges for chemistry in molecular imaging', as well as a discussion of where MI is today and where it is heading in the future.This article is part of the themed issue 'Challenges for chemistry in molecular imaging'.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolyn J Anderson
- Departments of Medicine, Radiology, Bioengineering, and Pharmacology & Chemical Biology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15219, USA
| | - Jason S Lewis
- Department of Radiology and the Program in Molecular Pharmacology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|