Neoadjuvant therapy

About: Neoadjuvant therapy is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 12444 publications have been published within this topic receiving 386654 citations.

Biochemical Outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam Radiation Therapy, or interstitial Radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer

Abstract: Context.—Interstitial radiation (implant) therapy is used to treat clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate, but how it compares with other treatments is not known.Objective.—To estimate control of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiation (RT), or implant with or without neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer.Design.—Retrospective cohort study of outcome data compared using Cox regression multivariable analyses.Setting and Patients.—A total of 1872 men treated between January 1989 and October 1997 with an RP (n=888) or implant with or without neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (n=218) at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, or RT (n=766) at the Joint Center for Radiation Therapy, Boston, Mass, were enrolled.Main Outcome Measure.—Actuarial freedom from PSA failure (defined as PSA outcome).Results.—The relative risk (RR) of PSA failure in low-risk patients (stage T1c, T2a and PSA level ≤10 ng/mL and Gleason score ≤6) treated using RT, implant plus androgen deprivation therapy, or implant therapy was 1.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-2.7), 0.5 (95% CI, 0.1-1.9), and 1.1 (95% CI, 0.3-3.6), respectively, compared with those patients treated with RP. The RRs of PSA failure in the intermediate-risk patients (stage T2b or Gleason score of 7 or PSA level >10 and ≤20 ng/mL) and high-risk patients (stage T2c or PSA level >20 ng/mL or Gleason score ≥8) treated with implant compared with RP were 3.1 (95% CI, 1.5-6.1) and 3.0 (95% CI, 1.8-5.0), respectively. The addition of androgen deprivation to implant therapy did not improve PSA outcome in high-risk patients but resulted in a PSA outcome that was not statistically different compared with the results obtained using RP or RT in intermediate-risk patients. These results were unchanged when patients were stratified using the traditional rankings of biopsy Gleason scores of 2 through 4 vs 5 through 6 vs 7 vs 8 through 10.Conclusions.—Low-risk patients had estimates of 5-year PSA outcome after treatment with RP, RT, or implant with or without neoadjuvant androgen deprivation that were not statistically different, whereas intermediate- and high-risk patients treated with RP or RT did better then those treated by implant. Prospective randomized trials are needed to verify these findings.

Natural history of progression after PSA elevation following radical prostatectomy.

Abstract: Context In men who develop an elevated serum prostate-specific antigen level (PSA) after having undergone a radical prostatectomy, the natural history of progression to distant metastases and death due to prostate cancer is unknown. Objective To characterize the time course of disease progression in men with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Design A retrospective review of a large surgical series with median (SD) follow-up of 5.3 (3.7) years (range, 0.5-15 years) between April 1982 and April 1997. SettingAn urban academic tertiary referral institution.Patients A total of 1997 men undergoing radical prostatectomy, by a single surgeon, for clinically localized prostate cancer. None received neoadjuvant therapy, and none had received adjuvant hormonal therapy prior to documented distant metastases. Main Outcome Measures After surgery, men were followed up with PSA assays and digital rectal examinations every 3 months for the first year, semiannually for the second year, and annually thereafter. A detectable serum PSA level of at least 0.2 ng/mL was evidence of biochemical recurrence. Distant metastases were diagnosed by radionuclide bone scan, chest radiograph, or other body imaging, which was performed at the time of biochemical recurrence and annually thereafter. Results The actuarial metastasis-free survival for all 1997 men was 82% (95% confidence interval, 76%-88%) at 15 years after surgery. Of the 1997 men, 315 (15%) developed biochemical PSA level elevation. Eleven of these underwent early hormone therapy after the recurrence and are not included in the study. Of the remaining 304 men, 103 (34%) developed metastatic disease within the study period. The median actuarial time to metastases was 8 years from the time of PSA level elevation. In survival analysis, time to biochemical progression (P<.001), Gleason score (P<.001), and PSA doubling time (P<.001) were predictive of the probability and time to the development of metastatic disease. An algorithm combining these parameters was constructed to stratify men into risk groups. Once men developed metastatic disease, the median actuarial time to death was 5 years. The time interval from surgery to the appearance of metastatic disease was predictive of time until death (P<.02). Conclusions Several clinical parameters help predict the outcomes of men with PSA elevation after radical prostatectomy. These data may be useful in the design of clinical trials, the identification of men for enrollment into experimental protocols, and counseling men regarding the timing of administration of adjuvant therapies.

Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy and Long-Term Survival in Patients With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Abstract: Purpose Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is defined by the lack of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) expression. In this study, we compared response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and survival between patients with TNBC and non-TNBC. Patients and Methods Analysis of a prospectively collected clinical database was performed. We included 1,118 patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center for stage I-III breast cancer from 1985 to 2004 and for whom complete receptor information were available. Clinical and pathologic parameters, pathologic complete response rates (pCR), survival measurements, and organ-specific relapse rates were compared between patients with TNBC and non-TNBC. Results Two hundred fifty-five patients (23%) had TNBC. Patients with TNBC compared with non-TNBC had significantly higher pCR rates (22% v 11%; P = .034), but decreased 3-year progression-free survival rates (P < .0001) and 3-yea...

Definition and Impact of Pathologic Complete Response on Prognosis After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Various Intrinsic Breast Cancer Subtypes

Abstract: Purpose The exact definition of pathologic complete response (pCR) and its prognostic impact on survival in intrinsic breast cancer subtypes is uncertain. Methods Tumor response at surgery and its association with long-term outcome of 6,377 patients with primary breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant anthracycline-taxane–based chemotherapy in seven randomized trials were analyzed. Results Disease-free survival (DFS) was significantly superior in patients with no invasive and no in situ residuals in breast or nodes (n = 955) compared with patients with residual ductal carcinoma in situ only (n = 309), no invasive residuals in breast but involved nodes (n = 186), only focal-invasive disease in the breast (n = 478), and gross invasive residual disease (n = 4,449; P < .001). Hazard ratios for DFS comparing patients with or without pCR were lowest when defined as no invasive and no in situ residuals (0.446) and increased monotonously when in situ residuals (0.523), no invasive breast residuals but involved nodes ...

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy or Primary Surgery in Stage IIIC or IV Ovarian Cancer

Abstract: Of the 670 patients randomly assigned to a study treatment, 632 (94.3%) were eligible and started the treatment. The majority of these patients had extensive stage IIIC or IV disease at primary debulking surgery (metastatic lesions that were larger than 5 cm in diameter in 74.5% of patients and larger than 10 cm in 61.6%). The largest residual tumor was 1 cm or less in diameter in 41.6% of patients after primary debulking and in 80.6% of patients after interval debulking. Postoperative rates of adverse effects and mortality tended to be higher after primary debulking than after interval debulking. The hazard ratio for death (intention-to-treat analysis) in the group assigned to neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking, as compared with the group assigned to primary debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy, was 0.98 (90% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.13; P = 0.01 for noninferiority), and the hazard ratio for progressive disease was 1.01 (90% CI, 0.89 to 1.15). Complete resection of all macroscopic disease (at primary or interval surgery) was the strongest independent variable in predicting overall survival. Conclusions Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery was not inferior to primary debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy as a treatment option for patients with bulky stage IIIC or IV ovarian carcinoma in this study. Complete resection of all macroscopic disease, whether performed as primary treatment or after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, remains the objective whenever cytoreductive surgery is performed. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00003636.)