4.5 Article

The use of neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer that is triple negative: retrospective analysis of 144 patients

Journal

BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT
Volume 138, Issue 3, Pages 783-794

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10549-013-2497-y

Keywords

Breast cancer; Platinum salts; Neoadjuvant therapy; Triple negative

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Triple-negative breast cancers comprise about 20 % of breast cancers. They have poor prognosis and have no standard therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate pathologic complete response (pCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in patients with TNBC treated with neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy. This is a retrospective study of one hundred and forty-four women with TNBC treated with neoadjuvant platinum-containing chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer at the University of Miami between January 1, 1999, and January 1, 2011. The medical record was reviewed to obtain data on clinical characteristics, including ethnicity, race, age, clinical stage, treatment regimen, and vital status. This study was approved by the University of Miami IRB. All patients had locally advanced breast cancer with at least one of the following features at presentation: T3, T4, N2, and N3. The mean tumor size by palpation was 9.4 cm. The clinical T-stage at presentation was 1.4 % T1, 8.3 % T2, 52.8 % T3, and 37.5 % T4 (19.4 % T4d). The nodal status by physical exam at presentation was 23 % N0, 37.5 % N1, 34 % N2, and 5.5 % N3. pCR in breast and axilla was seen in 31 %. PFS and OS were 55 and 59 %, respectively, at 7 years. Cisplatin offered a survival advantage over carboplatin in both PFS (P = 0.007) and OS (P = 0.018). Node positivity was the most important predictor of survival. Cisplatin/docetaxel neoadjuvant therapy was well tolerated and an effective therapy in locally advanced TNB.

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