Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Anticancer Research
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Anticancer Research

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies

Evaluation of Concordance Between Histopathological, Radiological and Biomolecular Variables in Breast Cancer Neoadjuvant Treatment

ORESTE CLAUDIO BUONOMO, ANDREA GRASSO, CHIARA ADRIANA PISTOLESE, LUCIA ANEMONA, ILARIA PORTARENA, ROSARIA MEUCCI, LJUBA MORANDO, CAMILLA DEIANA, MARCO MATERAZZO and GIANLUCA VANNI
Anticancer Research January 2020, 40 (1) 281-286; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.13950
ORESTE CLAUDIO BUONOMO
1Breast Unit-Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata (PTV) University, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ANDREA GRASSO
1Breast Unit-Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata (PTV) University, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: andry993@tiscali.it
CHIARA ADRIANA PISTOLESE
2Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Molecular Imaging and Radiotherapy, Policlinico Tor Vergata (PTV) University, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
LUCIA ANEMONA
3Anatomic Pathology, Department of Experimental Medicine, Policlinico Tor Vergata (PTV) University, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ILARIA PORTARENA
4Department of Oncology, Policlinico Tor Vergata (PTV) University, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ROSARIA MEUCCI
2Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Molecular Imaging and Radiotherapy, Policlinico Tor Vergata (PTV) University, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
LJUBA MORANDO
1Breast Unit-Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata (PTV) University, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
CAMILLA DEIANA
1Breast Unit-Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata (PTV) University, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
MARCO MATERAZZO
1Breast Unit-Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata (PTV) University, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
GIANLUCA VANNI
1Breast Unit-Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata (PTV) University, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background/Aim: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for breast cancer (BC) is the gold standard treatment for locally advanced tumors (LABC) that aims at achieving a complete pathological response (pCR). Studies have been conducted to evaluate and identify te concordance between radiological, histopathological and biological variables of BC and final response to therapy, verified by definitive histological examination after surgery. Patients and Methods: Ninety-five BC patients were examined and subjected to NAC. Immunohistochemical markers including oestrogen-receptor (ER), progesterone-receptor (PR), Ki67 index, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) score were examined before and after neoadjuvant treatment. Results: Younger age and a significant decrease in ER expression were associated with better prognosis. Triple Negative (TN) and Her2-type breast cancers benefited most from neoadjuvant chemotherapy with higher frequency of pCR. Conclusion: HER2-type and TN BC are correlated with best response to NAC. A statistically significant correlation between radiological images and definitive histological examination was not observed.

  • Breast cancer
  • neoadjuvant chemotherapy
  • complete pathological response
  • MRI accuracy
  • histological examination

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is now considered the gold standard treatment for advanced breast cancer (BC) (1) and inflammatory carcinoma (2) to reduce the extent of subsequent surgical treatment (3, 4). Up to 40% of patients undergoing NAC were able to benefit from conservative treatments with oncoplastic techniques through radio-guided localization lesion and peripheral nerve block (5-8), due to downsizing and downstaging yielded by NAC. Important aspects in the use of NAC concern the early introduction of systemic therapy and the in vivo assessment of tumor response (9). Randomized studies have not actually shown a clear increase in the overall survival of patients following neoadjuvant therapy, therefore the pre-operative and post-operative systemic strategy appear to be equivalent (10-15). Patients with total absence of BC after NAC, namely pathological complete response (pCR), demonstrate an advantage in overall survival (OS) and events-free survival (EFS) as recently confirmed by a metanalysis study presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium in 2018 (16-18), where Spring et al. showed that patients who obtained a pCR had reduced relapse probability of 69% than their counterparts with residual disease [HR=0.31, 95% probability intervals (PI)=0, 24-39] (16). The importance of NAC has been suggested by oncological clinical studies; in fact, pCR rate is routinely used as a surrogate outcome related to OS and EFS in new drug development in biological and immunological therapy (19, 20). Furthermore, different gains of OS and EFS after pCR seem to correlate to different BC subtypes (21). However, only a small percentage of patients obtain a pCR and a statistically significant gain on disease-free survival (DFS) and/or OS.

Recent studies have indicated that predictive molecular biomarkers may optimize the selection of effective therapies in NAC candidate patients, thus reducing costs and side effects in BC and oncology treatments in general (22-25).

The present study aimed to evaluate and identify a concordance between radiological, histopathological and biological variables of the neoplasia, assessed before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy treatment, and the final response to therapy, verified by definitive histological examination after surgery. Consequently, having established a correlation between them, these characteristics could be used to define a more personalized therapeutic strategy for the patient by selecting specific cases that would yield the benefit of less invasive surgical treatments, such as conservative surgical procedures (24, 26-29) (quadrantectomy or glandular resection) or oncoplastic surgery (6, 30, 31).

Patients and Methods

Our retrospective monocentric study examined ninety-five patients, from 2005 to 2019, having mammary neoplasia as a first diagnosis, undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy and, subsequently, surgery at the Tor Vergata Hospital in Rome. All patients were evaluated by a multidisciplinary team composed of an oncoplastic breast surgeon, a radiologist, an anatomopathologist, an oncologist, a radiotherapist and a specialized nurse.

All patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with a contrast medium and a biopsy using a mammotome or tru-cut method to determine the histology and biological structure of the tumor. In particular, hormonal receptor status of ER and PR, Ki67 and HER2 overexpression were evaluated. On the basis of the immunohistochemical characteristics, the tumors were subsequently classified into luminal and non-luminal categories. Additional eligibility criteria included a Performance Status assessed on an ECOG scale of 0/1, haemoglobin levels >12g/dl, white blood cells >4.0×109/l and platelets >100×109/l. All patients had also adequate renal, hepatic and cardiac function indicated by an Ejection Fraction (FE) >50%.

For the clinical evaluation of chemotherapy response, a mammary MRI was performed during and at the end of the treatment; a physical examination was also performed on the same day of the chemotherapy session. At the end of the neoadjuvant therapy, the patients underwent surgery and, subsequently, where necessary, adjuvant radiotherapy treatment. At the time of diagnosis, the patients tested had an average age of 51.9 years. The general admission criteria were successful neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, surgical treatment, and subsequent follow-up at the departments of General Surgery C, Medical Oncology, Pathological Anatomy, and Radiology at the Tor Vergata hospital.

The entire patient population was divided into two groups: the first consisting of seventy patients, who had a residual tumor or progression of the disease and did not reach the complete pathological response; the second consisting of twenty-five women who achieved pCR, confirmed by definitive histology indicating the absence of neoplasia.

At the end of the last chemotherapy cycle, all patients underwent mastectomy or quadrantectomy as deemed required on the basis of the last MRI. The choice of the surgical procedure was made during a multidisciplinary meeting, and was based on patient's preference, scientific evidence at the time of diagnosis, and the therapeutic program.

If possible, an oncoplastic conservative surgical approach was adopted on all patients following neoadjuvant chemotherapy, as required on the basis of the extemporaneous, definitive, and radical histological examination (no Ink on Tumor).

In the case of non-palpable neoplasia susceptible to conservative surgical treatment, the localization of the lesion was achieved by wire-guided localization or radio-guided occult lesion localization according to the surgeon's preference (8, 32). Either ultrasound or mammography were used for guidance in performing the surgical procedure based on the specific clinical case and preference of the breast radiologist. If the preoperative examinations indicated the presence of microcalcifications, specimen mammography was used to verify the radicality of the surgical procedure carried out.

Furthermore, the oncological radicality was assessed by studying the margins by extemporaneous histological examination using haematoxylin-eosin staining.

Patients diagnosed with infiltrating or micro-infiltrating neoplasia underwent sentinel node biopsy or axillary dissection, depending on the patient's clinical characteristics, the clinical stage of the regional lymph nodes (cN), the clinical stage of the tumor (cT) and other clinical-instrumental parameters.

The diagnosis of infiltrating carcinoma was carried out by micro-histological biopsy (VAB or Mammotome procedure), eco-guided diagnostic needle biopsy, performed on small portions of tissue taken from a nodule or a suspected area.

Localisation of the sentinel lymph node, where necessary, was performed through Segmental Lymphatic Scintigraphy using 99mTc Albumin nanocolloid by Gamma Detection System (33).

Statistical analysis. Patients and tumor characteristics were analysed by Student's t-test for quantitative variables and the Pearson Chi-square test for qualitative or categorical variables. In the case of statistically significant values, the odds ratio (OR) was calculated based on the contingency tables (Chi square test), to evaluate the strength of the statistical association between the variables considered.

Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Software (IBM SPSS V.20, Chicago, IL, USA).

Results

Age at diagnosis. Considering the two populations examined, statistically significant differences emerged regarding the average age at the time of diagnosis (p=0.018), which demonstrated a gap of about 5 years among those who obtained pCR (47.96 years), compared to the second group of patients who instead had no pCR (53.39 years) (34).

Immunohistochemistry. The immunohistochemical histological examination showed significant correlations with the achievement of pCR. The mean expression value of the oestrogen receptor (ER) was much lower among the pCR+ patients compared to pCR−: 63% vs. 46.84% (p=0.031), respectively (35) (Table I).

Immunophenotype. Taking into consideration each different tumour subtype, it was found that patients with biological features of Luminal B - represent the highest percentage in both the total number of patients, 41 out of 95 (43.1%), and those with pCR, which were 11 out of 25 (44%) (p=0.043) (Table II). It is also encouraging that the analysis concerning the HER2 Type and the TN BC confirmed the data presented in the literature, which indicate that these two subtypes benefit most from NAC with a remarkable sensitivity compared to the others (34, 36) (Table II). Although the HER2 Type represents a small percentage of patients studied, i.e. 5 (5.2% of the total), 4 of these achieved pCR (80% of the total HER2 Type, 16% of the total cases with pCR). For the TN group, 3 of the 8 cases obtained pCR (37% of the total with TNBC, and 12% of the total cases with pCR) (Table II).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Expression of ER, PR and Ki-67 in tumors in pCR+ and pCR−.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Subdivision of the sample according to the immunological subtype in pCR+ and pCR− groups.

Subsequently, the sample was subdivided in luminal (Lum) and non-luminal (NLum) to highlight the different response to NAC based on the positivity or not of hormone receptors.

Eighty-two patients belonged to the Lum group (86.3%), while 13 to the NLum group (13.6%) (Table III). Of great importance are the data showing that among the Nlum, 7 patients obtained pCR after surgery, which is more than half of the patients of this group (Table III).

Index cT. A greater frequency of cT2 (neoplasia with a size between 2 cm and 5 cm) was found in this sample corresponding to 52.6%; this group also includes the highest percentage of patients, 16 out of 25 (64%), who then obtained pCR.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table III.

Subdivision of patients according to the Lum and Nlum groups.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table IV.

Histological subdivision in the pCR+ and pCR−.

By calculating the dimensions of the larger diameter at the time of diagnosis, no statistically significant value was reached regarding the correlation between the initial dimensions of the neoplasia and the final pCR. The pCR+ group had an average diameter of 38.63 mm while that of the pCR− group was 39.95 mm.

Histology. The comparison between the initial histological examination and pCR did not yield any statistical significance (Table IV).

RECIST criteria. Complete response was found in only 14 patients, in which remission of the disease was no longer visible through MRI with contrast medium. Of these, 5 obtained to pCR, while 9 still had residual tumor. Conversely, 57 of the total number of patients belonged to the partial response (PR) group, characterized by a considerable reduction of disease (>30%), but not its complete disappearance on MRI. Of these 57 patients, 17 obtained pCR in the definitive histological examination, while 40 did not reach pCR (Table V).

EFS and OS. Given an average follow-up period of 5.3 years, we highlighted how the achievement of pCR has been an endpoint of primary importance because it was associated with a higher percentage of EFS (37) compared to those who did not reach EFS 76.7% vs. 72.8% (Table VI).

The same result was also observed in the OS analysis, in which the percentage was always higher in the pCR+ population (37), 96.1% against 88.4% compared to pCR−, which still presented with neoplasia in the final histological examination after surgery (Table VI). Analysis of EFS and OS scores based on the Lum and NLum subdivision of mammary carcinomas demonstrated that in luminal subjects the percentages of EFS and OS did not differ significantly with respect to pCR achievement, i.e. EFS 72% vs. 75%; OS 94% vs. 90% (Table VI). The NLum group presented a different situation: the percentages of EFS and OS with respect to pCR were significantly higher; 86% vs. 50% and 100% vs. 66%, respectively.

Discussion

Our study demonstrated that age can be a predictor of response to therapy because the average age of patients who underwent pCR was 5 years smaller than those who had residual neoplasia still visible upon the final histological examination. Literature also shows that the age at onset of neoplasia constitutes an unfavourable prognostic factor (34). The ER expression is another factor which was analysed. A lower ER value was statistically associated with a better response to chemotherapy (35). HER2 Type and TN neoplasms benefit most from NAC with a clearly higher frequency of pCR (34, 38). The HER2 types were the subtypes with the highest pCR rates of 80%. There were also significant differences between Lum and NLum subjects in their response to NAC: pCR was reached in 21% of Lum patients and 53% of NLum patients. Data, therefore, confirmed that the absolute indications for women with breast cancer are over-expression of HER2, high Ki67 score, and negative hormone receptors. Our study did not yield a statistically valid predictive value that could correlate the complete response, on the basis of an MRI performed at the end of chemotherapy, and the pCR. Therefore, histological examination of the biopsies' sample at the end of NAC is essential before subsequent surgical treatment. In our opinion, either molecular or nuclear dedicated breast imaging could improve the sensibility and complete surgical resection of any residual tumors (39-41). Additionally, EFS and OS indices have been calculated and proven to be greater, as also reported in literature, in those patients who obtained pCR.

In conclusion, it would be plausible to underscore that tumors belonging to the HER2 Type class and the TN BC are those most sensitive and with the best response to NAC, with statistically higher pCR rates than luminal. A statistically significant agreement between radiological images and definitive histological examination was not observed. In fact, no evidence was found from our study that would allow an association to be made between the disappearance of tumors in preoperative MRI and subsequent pCR. The results obtained from the follow-up of the patients confirmed that a higher percentage of patients reached pCR with respect to both EFS and OS.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table V.

Subdivision according to RECIST criteria of pCR+ and pCR− groups.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table VI.

Events Free Survival and Overall survival values in the pCR+ and pCR− groups.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table VII.

Subdivision of pCR+ and pCR− groups into Lum and NLum for the evaluation of EFS Ed OS.

Acknowledgements

The study was in part supported by a grant from the Italian Ministry of Health.

Footnotes

  • Authors' Contributions

    Study conception and design: Buonomo Oreste Claudio, Grasso Andrea; Acquisition of data: Materazzo Marco, Chiara Adriana Pistolese; Analysis of data: Ilaria Portarena, Lucia Anemona; Interpretation of data: Buonomo Oreste Claudio; Drafting of article: Materazzo Marco, Gianluca Vanni, Andrea Grasso; Critical revision: Rosaria Meucci, Camilla Deiana, Ljuba Morando.

  • Conflicts of Interest

    The Authors declare no conflicts of interest in regard to this study.

  • Received November 29, 2019.
  • Revision received December 4, 2019.
  • Accepted December 6, 2019.
  • Copyright© 2020, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved

References

  1. ↵
    1. AIOM (Associazione Italiana Oncologia Medica)
    - Linee guida NEOPLASIE DELLA MAMMELLA, 2019. Avaible at: https://www.aiom.it/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2019_LG_AIOM_Mammella.pdf (Last accessed on 3rd December 2019)
  2. ↵
    1. Del Prete S,
    2. Caraglia M,
    3. Luce A,
    4. Montella L,
    5. Galizia G,
    6. Sperlongano P,
    7. Cennamo G,
    8. Lieto E,
    9. Capasso E,
    10. Fiorentino O,
    11. Aliberti M,
    12. Auricchio A,
    13. Iodice P,
    14. Addeo R
    : Clinical and pathological factors predictive of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: A single center experience. Oncol Lett 18: 3873-3879, 2019. PMID: 31516598. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2019.10729
    OpenUrl
  3. ↵
    1. Brzezinska M,
    2. Dixon JM
    : Inflammatory breast cancer: no longer an absolute contraindication for breast conservation surgery following good response to neoadjuvant therapy. Gland Surg 7: 520-524, 2018. PMID: 30687625. DOI: 10.21037/gs.2018.08.04
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    1. Caldana M,
    2. Pellini F,
    3. Lombardi D,
    4. Mirandola S,
    5. Invento A,
    6. Pollini GP
    : Breast cancer and neoadjuvant chemotherapy: indications for and limits of breast-conserving surgery. Ann Ital Chir 89: 392-397, 2018. PMID: 30569900.
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Golshan M,
    2. Cirrincione CT,
    3. Sikov WM,
    4. Carey LA,
    5. Berry DA,
    6. Overmoyer B,
    7. Henry NL,
    8. Somlo G,
    9. Port E,
    10. Burstein HJ,
    11. Hudis C,
    12. Winer E,
    13. Ollila DW,
    14. for the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology
    : Impact of neoadjuvant therapy on eligibility for and frequency of breast conservation in stage II-III HER2-positive breast cancer: surgical results of CALGB 40601 (Alliance). Breast Cancer Res Treat 160: 297-304, 2016. PMID: 27704226. DOI:10.1007/s10549-016-4006-6.
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Calì Cassi L,
    2. Vanni G,
    3. Petrella G,
    4. Orsaria P,
    5. Pistolese C,
    6. Lo Russo G,
    7. Innocenti M,
    8. Buonomo O
    : Comparative study of oncoplastic versus non-oncoplastic breast conserving surgery in a group of 211 breast cancer patients. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 20: 2950-2954, 2016. PMID: 27460720.
    OpenUrl
    1. Calì Cassi L,
    2. Biffoli F,
    3. Francesconi D,
    4. Petrella G,
    5. Buonomo O
    : Anesthesia and analgesia in breast surgery: the benefits of peripheral nerve block. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 21: 1341-1345, 2017. PMID: 28387892.
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    1. Buonomo O,
    2. Cabassi A,
    3. Guadagni F,
    4. Piazza A,
    5. Felici A,
    6. Piccirillo R,
    7. Atzei GP,
    8. Cipriani C,
    9. Schiaroli S,
    10. Mariotti S,
    11. Guazzaroni MN,
    12. Cossu E,
    13. Simonetti G,
    14. Pernazza E,
    15. Casciani CU,
    16. Roselli M
    : Radioguided-surgery of early breast lesions. Anticancer Res 21: 2091-2097, 2001. PMID: 11501831.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Rastogi P,
    2. Anderson SJ,
    3. Bear HD,
    4. Geyer CE,
    5. Kahlenberg MS,
    6. Robidoux A,
    7. Margolese RG,
    8. Hoehn JL,
    9. Vogel VG,
    10. Dakhil SR,
    11. Tamkus D,
    12. King KM,
    13. Pajon ER,
    14. Wright MJ,
    15. Robert J,
    16. Paik S,
    17. Mamounas EP,
    18. Wolmark N
    : Preoperative chemotherapy: Updates of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol 26: 778-785, 2008. PMID: 18258986. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.0235
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Schott AF,
    2. Hayes DF
    : Defining the benefits of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 30: 1747-1749, 2012. PMID: 22508810. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2011.41.3161.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    1. Ring AE,
    2. Smith IE,
    3. Ashley S,
    4. Fulford LG,
    5. Lakhani SR
    : Oestrogen receptor status, pathological complete response and prognosis in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer. Br J Cancer 91: 2012-2017, 2004. PMID: 15558072. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602235
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Gralow JR,
    2. Burstein HJ,
    3. Wood W,
    4. Hortobagyi GN,
    5. Gianni L,
    6. von Minckwitz G,
    7. Buzdar AU,
    8. Smith IE,
    9. Symmans WF,
    10. Singh B,
    11. Winer EP
    : Preoperative therapy in invasive breast cancer: pathologic assessment and systemic therapy issues in operable disease. J Clin Oncol 26: 814-819, 2008. PMID: 18258991. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.3510
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Schwartz GF,
    2. Hortobagyi GN,
    3. Masood S
    : Proceedings of the consensus conference on neoadjuvant chemotherapy in carcinoma of the breast, April 26-28, 2003. In: Human Pathology. Philadelphia, PA, USA, pp. 781-784, 2004. PMID: 15197792. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.20298
    1. Scholl SM,
    2. Fourquet A,
    3. Asselain B,
    4. Pierga JY,
    5. Vilcoq JR,
    6. Durand JC,
    7. Dorval T,
    8. Palangié T,
    9. Jouve M,
    10. Beuzeboc P
    : Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in premenopausal patients with tumours considered too large for breast conserving surgery: preliminary results of a randomised trial: S6. Eur J Cancer 30A: 645-652, 1994. PMID: 8080680. DOI: 10.1016/0959-8049(94)90537-1
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  10. ↵
    1. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG)
    : Long-term outcomes for neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from ten randomised trials. Lancet Oncol 19: 27-39, 2018. PMID: 29242041. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30777-5
    OpenUrl
  11. ↵
    1. Spring L,
    2. Fell G,
    3. Arfe A,
    4. Trippa L,
    5. Greenup R,
    6. Reynolds K,
    7. Smith B,
    8. Moy B,
    9. Isakoff S,
    10. Parmigiani G,
    11. Bardia A
    : Abstract GS2-03: Pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and impact on breast cancer recurrence and mortality, stratified by breast cancer subtypes and adjuvant chemotherapy usage: Individual patient-level meta-analyses of over 27,000 patients. American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), pp. GS2-03-GS2-03, 2019. DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445
    1. LeVasseur N,
    2. Sun J,
    3. Gondara L,
    4. Diocee R,
    5. Speers C,
    6. Lohrisch C,
    7. Chia S
    : Impact of pathologic complete response on survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage breast cancer: a population-based analysis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol, 2019. PMID: 31741041. DOI: 10.1007/s00432-019-03083-y
  12. ↵
    1. Zhu X,
    2. Xue J,
    3. Gu X,
    4. Chen G,
    5. Cao F,
    6. Shan H,
    7. Wang D,
    8. Qiao X,
    9. Liu C,
    10. Zhang Y
    : Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plays an adverse role in the prognosis of grade 2 breast cancer. J Cancer 10: 5661-5670, 2019. PMID: 31737103. DOI: 10.7150/jca.33168
    OpenUrl
  13. ↵
    1. Marzocchella L,
    2. Sini V,
    3. Buonomo O,
    4. Orlandi A,
    5. Masuelli L,
    6. Bonanno E,
    7. Lista F,
    8. Turriziani M,
    9. Manzari V,
    10. Roselli M,
    11. Modesti A,
    12. Bei R
    : Spontaneous immunogenicity of ribosomal P0 protein in patients with benign and malignant breast lesions and delay of mammary tumor growth in P0-vaccinated mice. Cancer Sci 102: 509-515, 2011. PMID: 21175994. DOI: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2010.01814.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. De Azambuja E,
    2. Holmes AP,
    3. Piccart-Gebhart M,
    4. Holmes E,
    5. Di Cosimo S,
    6. Swaby RF,
    7. Untch M,
    8. Jackisch C,
    9. Lang I,
    10. Smith I,
    11. Boyle F,
    12. Xu B,
    13. Barrios CH,
    14. Perez EA,
    15. Azim HA,
    16. Kim SB,
    17. Kuemmel S,
    18. Huang CS,
    19. Vuylsteke P,
    20. Hsieh RK,
    21. Gorbunova V,
    22. Eniu A,
    23. Dreosti L,
    24. Tavartkiladze N,
    25. Gelber RD,
    26. Eidtmann H,
    27. Baselga J
    : Lapatinib with trastuzumab for HER2-positive early breast cancer (NeoALTTO): survival outcomes of a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial and their association with pathological complete response. Lancet Oncol 15: 1137-1146, 2014. PMID: 25130998. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70320-1
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Buonomo OC,
    2. Caredda E,
    3. Portarena I,
    4. Vanni G,
    5. Orlandi A,
    6. Bagni C,
    7. Petrella G,
    8. Palombi L,
    9. Orsaria P
    : New insights into the metastatic behavior after breast cancer surgery, according to well-established clinicopathological variables and molecular subtypes. PLoS One 12, 2017. PMID: 28922402. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0184680
  16. ↵
    1. Toss A,
    2. Venturelli M,
    3. Peterle C,
    4. Piacentini F,
    5. Cascinu S,
    6. Cortesi L
    : Molecular biomarkers for prediction of targeted therapy response in metastatic breast cancer: Trick or treat? Int J Mol Sci 18, 2017. PMID: 28054957. DOI: 10.3390/ijms18010085
    1. Roselli M,
    2. Guadagni F,
    3. Buonomo O,
    4. Belardi A,
    5. Ferroni P,
    6. Diodati A,
    7. Anselmi D,
    8. Cipriani C,
    9. Casciani CU,
    10. Greiner J,
    11. Schlom J
    : Tumor markers as targets for selective diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Anticancer Res 16: 2187-2192, 1996. PMID: 8694541.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Ferroni P,
    2. Roselli M,
    3. Spila A,
    4. D'Alessandro R,
    5. Portarena I,
    6. Mariotti S,
    7. Palmirotta R,
    8. Buonomo O,
    9. Petrella G,
    10. Guadagni F
    : Serum sE-selectin levels and carcinoembryonic antigen mRNA-expressing cells in peripheral blood as prognostic factors in colorectal cancer patients. Cancer 116: 2913-2921, 2010. PMID: 20336782. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.25094
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Ferroni P,
    2. Palmirotta R,
    3. Spila A,
    4. Martini F,
    5. Formica V,
    6. Portarena I,
    7. Del Monte G,
    8. Buonomo O,
    9. Roselli M,
    10. Guadagni F
    : Prognostic value of carcinoembryonic antigen and vascular endothelial growth factor tumor tissue content in colorectal cancer. Oncology 71: 176-184, 2006. PMID: 17652942. DOI: 10.1159/000106072
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Kaufmann M,
    2. Hortobagyi GN,
    3. Goldhirsch A,
    4. Scholl S,
    5. Makris A,
    6. Valagussa P,
    7. Blohmer JU,
    8. Eiermann W,
    9. Jackesz R,
    10. Jonat W,
    11. Lebeau A,
    12. Loibl S,
    13. Miller W,
    14. Seeber S,
    15. Semiglazov V,
    16. Smith R,
    17. Souchon R,
    18. Stearns V,
    19. Untch M,
    20. Von Minckwitz G
    : Recommendations from an international expert panel on the use of neoadjuvant (primary) systemic treatment of operable breast cancer: An update. J Clin Oncol 24: 1940-1949, 2006. PMID: 16622270. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.02.6187
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Sanford RA,
    2. Lei X,
    3. Barcenas CH,
    4. Mittendorf EA,
    5. Caudle AS,
    6. Valero V,
    7. Tripathy D,
    8. Giordano SH,
    9. Chavez-MacGregor M
    : Impact of time from completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy to surgery on survival outcomes in breast cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol 23: 1515-1521, 2016. PMID: 26678405. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-5020-3
    OpenUrl
    1. Peled AW,
    2. Wang F,
    3. Foster RD,
    4. Alvarado M,
    5. Ewing CA,
    6. Sbitany H,
    7. Esserman LJ
    : Expanding the indications for total skin-sparing mastectomy: Is it safe for patients with locally advanced disease? Ann Surg Oncol 23: 87-91, 2016. PMID: 26170194. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4734-6
    OpenUrl
  20. ↵
    1. Truin W,
    2. Vugts G,
    3. Roumen RMH,
    4. Maaskant-Braat AJG,
    5. Nieuwenhuijzen GAP,
    6. van der Heiden-van der Loo M,
    7. Tjan-Heijnen VCG,
    8. Voogd AC
    : Differences in response and surgical management with neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive lobular versus ductal breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 23: 51-57, 2016. PMID: 25980321. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4603-3
    OpenUrl
  21. ↵
    1. Franceschini G,
    2. Di Leone A,
    3. Natale M,
    4. Sanchez MA,
    5. Masett R
    : Conservative surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with operable breast cancer. Ann Ital Chir 89: 290, 2018. PMID: 30352955.
    OpenUrl
  22. ↵
    1. Šuk J,
    2. Schwarzbacherová I,
    3. Kimleová K
    : Breast conservative surgery after neoadjuvant oncologic treatment for breast carcinoma at the 1st Department of Surgery, 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University and General Teaching Hospital in Prague over a ten-year period (2004-2013). Rozhl Chir 96: 432-437, 2017. PMID: 29308910.
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Chan BKY,
    2. Wiseberg-Firtell JA,
    3. Jois RHS,
    4. Jensen K,
    5. Audisio RA
    : Localization techniques for guided surgical excision of non-palpable breast lesions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015, 2015. PMID: 26718728. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009206.pub2
  24. ↵
    1. Buonomo O,
    2. Granai A V,
    3. Felici A,
    4. Piccirillo R,
    5. De Liguori Carino N,
    6. Guadagni F,
    7. Polzoni M,
    8. Mariotti S,
    9. Cipriani C,
    10. Simonetti G,
    11. Cossu E,
    12. Schiaroli S,
    13. Altomare V,
    14. Cabassi A,
    15. Pernazza E,
    16. Casciani CU,
    17. Roselli M
    : Day-surgical management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast using wide local excision with sentinel node biopsy. Tumori 88: S48-49, 2002. PMID: 12365390.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Mangone L,
    2. Mancuso P,
    3. Tagliabue G,
    4. Filiberti RA,
    5. Carrozzi G,
    6. Iacovacci S,
    7. Mazzucco W,
    8. Tumino R,
    9. Minicozzi P,
    10. Sant M,
    11. Giorgi Rossi P
    : Neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Tumori J: 030089161986950, 2019. PMID: 31496430. DOI: 10.1177/0300891619869505
  26. ↵
    1. Heitz F,
    2. Kümmel S,
    3. Lederer B,
    4. Solbach C,
    5. Engels K,
    6. Ataseven B,
    7. Sinn B,
    8. Blohmer JU,
    9. Denkert C,
    10. Barinoff J,
    11. Fisseler-Eckhoff A,
    12. Loibl S
    : Impact of nuclear oestrogen receptor beta expression in breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 79: 1110-1117, 2019. PMID: 31656321. DOI: 10.1055/a-0987-9898
    OpenUrl
  27. ↵
    1. Li F,
    2. Ma L,
    3. Geng C,
    4. Liu C,
    5. Deng H,
    6. Yue M,
    7. Ding Y,
    8. Wang X,
    9. Liu Y
    : Analysis of the relevance between molecular subtypes and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer as well as its prognostic factors. Pathol Res Pract 214: 1166-1172, 2018. PMID: 29945816. DOI: 10.1016/j.prp.2018.06.010
    OpenUrl
  28. ↵
    1. Dong JM,
    2. Wang HX,
    3. Zhong XF,
    4. Xu K,
    5. Bian J,
    6. Feng Y,
    7. Chen L,
    8. Zhang L,
    9. Wang X,
    10. Ma DJ,
    11. Wang B
    : Changes in background parenchymal enhancement in HER2-positive breast cancer before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: Association with pathologic complete response. Med (United States) 97, 2018. PMID: 30412117. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012965
  29. ↵
    1. Li F,
    2. Ma L,
    3. Geng C,
    4. Liu C,
    5. Deng H,
    6. Yue M,
    7. Ding Y,
    8. Wang X,
    9. Liu Y
    : Analysis of the relevance between molecular subtypes and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer as well as its prognostic factors. Pathol Res Pract 214: 1166-1172, 2018. PMID: 29945816. DOI: 10.1016/j.prp.2018.06.010
    OpenUrl
  30. ↵
    1. Schillaci O,
    2. Cossu E,
    3. Buonomo O,
    4. Granai A V,
    5. Pistolese CA,
    6. Danieli R,
    7. Simonetti G,
    8. Coover LR,
    9. Kuhn PJ
    : Dedicated breast camera: is it the best option for scintimammography? J Nucl Med 46: 550; author reply 551, 2005. PMID: 15750173.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Orsaria P,
    2. Chiaravalloti A,
    3. Caredda E,
    4. Marchese PV,
    5. Titka B,
    6. Anemona L,
    7. Portarena I,
    8. Schillaci O,
    9. Petrella G,
    10. Palombi L,
    11. Buonomo OC
    : Evaluation of the usefulness of FDG-PET/CT for nodal staging of breast cancer. Anticancer Res 38: 6639-6652, 2018. PMID: 30504372. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.13031
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  31. ↵
    1. Orsaria P,
    2. Chiaravalloti A,
    3. Fiorentini A,
    4. Pistolese C,
    5. Vanni G,
    6. Granai AV,
    7. Varvaras D,
    8. Danieli R,
    9. Schillaci O,
    10. Petrella G,
    11. Buonomo OC
    : PET Probe-guided surgery in patients with breast cancer: Proposal for a methodological approach. In Vivo (Brooklyn) 31: 101-110, 2017. PMID: 28064227. DOI: 10.21873/invivo.11031
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Anticancer Research: 40 (1)
Anticancer Research
Vol. 40, Issue 1
January 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Anticancer Research.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Evaluation of Concordance Between Histopathological, Radiological and Biomolecular Variables in Breast Cancer Neoadjuvant Treatment
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Anticancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Anticancer Research web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
5 + 6 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Evaluation of Concordance Between Histopathological, Radiological and Biomolecular Variables in Breast Cancer Neoadjuvant Treatment
ORESTE CLAUDIO BUONOMO, ANDREA GRASSO, CHIARA ADRIANA PISTOLESE, LUCIA ANEMONA, ILARIA PORTARENA, ROSARIA MEUCCI, LJUBA MORANDO, CAMILLA DEIANA, MARCO MATERAZZO, GIANLUCA VANNI
Anticancer Research Jan 2020, 40 (1) 281-286; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.13950

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Evaluation of Concordance Between Histopathological, Radiological and Biomolecular Variables in Breast Cancer Neoadjuvant Treatment
ORESTE CLAUDIO BUONOMO, ANDREA GRASSO, CHIARA ADRIANA PISTOLESE, LUCIA ANEMONA, ILARIA PORTARENA, ROSARIA MEUCCI, LJUBA MORANDO, CAMILLA DEIANA, MARCO MATERAZZO, GIANLUCA VANNI
Anticancer Research Jan 2020, 40 (1) 281-286; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.13950
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgements
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Unusual Presentation of a Post-procedural Breast Hematoma: A Case Report
  • Tor Vergata University-Hospital in the Beginning of COVID-19-Era: Experience and Recommendation for Breast Cancer Patients
  • The Effect of Coronavirus (COVID-19) on Breast Cancer Teamwork: A Multicentric Survey
  • Does Age Matter? Estimating Risks of Locoregional Recurrence After Breast-conservative Surgery
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • The Systemic Inflammation Score Is an Independent Prognostic Factor for Esophageal Cancer Patients who Receive Curative Treatment
  • Impact of Cytoreductive Nephrectomy Following Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Therapy for Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma
  • Usefulness of Prophylactic Administration of Pegfilgrastim for Esophageal Cancer Chemotherapy: A Single-center Retrospective Study
Show more Clinical Studies

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Breast cancer
  • neoadjuvant chemotherapy
  • complete pathological response
  • MRI accuracy
  • histological examination
Anticancer Research

© 2022 Anticancer Research

Powered by HighWire