4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Primary Surgery with Systemic Therapy in Patients with de Novo Stage IV Breast Cancer: 10-year Follow-up; Protocol MF07-01 Randomized Clinical Trial

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS
Volume 233, Issue 6, Pages 742-752

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2021.08.686

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that patients diagnosed with de novo stage IV breast cancer who underwent locoregional treatment followed by systemic therapy had a higher overall survival rate at the end of the 10-year follow-up period compared to those who received only systemic therapy.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the overall survival (OS) data of patients diagnosed with de novo stage IV breast cancer (BC) who received locoregional treatment (LRT) over a 10-year follow-up. STUDY DESIGN: The MF07-01 is a 1:1 multicenter, randomized clinical trial comparing the LRT with systemic therapy (ST), where ST was given to all patients either immediately after randomization or after surgical resection of the intact primary tumor. RESULTS: A total of 278 patients were randomized and 265 patients were in the final analysis. At 10-year follow-up, survivals were 19% (95% CI 13%-28%) and 5% (95% CI 2%-12%) in the LRT group and ST group, respectively. Median survival was 46 months for the LRT group and 35 months for the ST group, and hazard of death was 29% lower in the LRT group compared with the ST group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.71; 95% CI 0.59-0.86; p = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a diagnosis of de novo stage IV BC who underwent LRT followed by ST had a 14% higher chance of OS by the end of the 10-year follow-up compared with the patients who received only ST. The longer study follow-up revealed that LRT should be presented to patients when discussing treatment options. ((C) 2021 by the American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available