Prognostic value of the Residual Cancer Burden index according to breast cancer subtype: Validation on a cohort of BC patients treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Introduction The Residual Cancer Burden (RCB) quantifies residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Its predictive value has not been validated on large cohorts with long-term follow up. The objective of this work is to independently evaluate the prognostic value of the RCB index depending on BC subtypes (Luminal, HER2-positive and triple negative (TNBCs)). Methods We retrospectively evaluated the RCB index on surgical specimens from a cohort of T1-T3NxM0 BC patients treated with NAC between 2002 and 2012. We analyzed the association between RCB index and relapse-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS) among the global population, after stratification by BC subtypes. Results 717 patients were included (luminal BC (n = 222, 31%), TNBC (n = 319, 44.5%), HER2-positive (n = 176, 24.5%)). After a median follow-up of 99.9 months, RCB index was significantly associated with RFS. The RCB-0 patients displayed similar prognosis when compared to the RCB-I group, while patients from the RCB-II and RCB-III classes were at increased risk of relapse (RCB-II versus RCB-0: HR = 3.25 CI [2.1–5.1] p<0.001; RCB-III versus RCB-0: HR = 5.6 CI [3.5–8.9] p<0.001). The prognostic impact of RCB index was significant for TNBC and HER2-positive cancers; but not for luminal cancers (Pinteraction = 0.07). The prognosis of RCB-III patients was poor (8-years RFS: 52.7%, 95% CI [44.8–62.0]) particularly in the TNBC subgroup, where the median RFS was 12.7 months. Conclusion RCB index is a reliable prognostic score. RCB accurately identifies patients at a high risk of recurrence (RCB-III) with TNBC or HER2-positive BC who must be offered second-line adjuvant therapies.

[1]  L. Esserman,et al.  Abstract GS5-01: Residual cancer burden after neoadjuvant therapy and long-term survival outcomes in breast cancer: A multi-center pooled analysis , 2020 .

[2]  A. Vincent-Salomon,et al.  Interaction between Molecular Subtypes and Stromal Immune Infiltration before and after Treatment in Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy , 2019, Clinical Cancer Research.

[3]  P. Fasching,et al.  Trastuzumab Emtansine for Residual Invasive HER2‐Positive Breast Cancer , 2019, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  A. Vincent-Salomon,et al.  Lymphovascular invasion after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is strongly associated with poor prognosis in breast carcinoma , 2018, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[5]  F. Rojo,et al.  Neoadjuvant Therapy with Weekly Nanoparticle Albumin-Bound Paclitaxel for Luminal Early Breast Cancer Patients: Results from the NABRAX Study (GEICAM/2011-02), a Multicenter, Non-Randomized, Phase II Trial, with a Companion Biomarker Analysis. , 2017, The oncologist.

[6]  T. Nielsen,et al.  Update on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in breast cancer, including recommendations to assess TILs in residual disease after neoadjuvant therapy and in carcinoma in situ: A report of the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group on Breast Cancer. , 2017, Seminars in cancer biology.

[7]  A. Vincent-Salomon,et al.  Stromal lymphocyte infiltration after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with aggressive residual disease and lower disease-free survival in HER2-positive breast cancer , 2017, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[8]  L. Emens Breast Cancer Immunotherapy: Facts and Hopes , 2017, Clinical Cancer Research.

[9]  Jeffrey I. Campbell,et al.  Comparison of residual cancer burden, American Joint Committee on Cancer staging and pathologic complete response in breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: results from the I-SPY 1 TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657) , 2017, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[10]  Sung-Bae Kim,et al.  Adjuvant Capecitabine for Breast Cancer after Preoperative Chemotherapy , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  Donald A. Berry,et al.  Pembrolizumab plus standard neoadjuvant therapy for high-risk breast cancer (BC): Results from I-SPY 2. , 2017 .

[12]  Mei Liu,et al.  Long-Term Prognostic Risk After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Associated With Residual Cancer Burden and Breast Cancer Subtype. , 2017, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  Janice S. Sung,et al.  A Pilot Study of Preoperative Single-Dose Ipilimumab and/or Cryoablation in Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer with Comprehensive Immune Profiling , 2016, Clinical Cancer Research.

[14]  G. Hortobagyi,et al.  The Neo-Bioscore Update for Staging Breast Cancer Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Incorporation of Prognostic Biologic Factors Into Staging After Treatment. , 2016, JAMA oncology.

[15]  Mitchell D Schnall,et al.  Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: Functional Tumor Volume by MR Imaging Predicts Recurrence-free Survival-Results from the ACRIN 6657/CALGB 150007 I-SPY 1 TRIAL. , 2016, Radiology.

[16]  S. Mallal,et al.  RAS/MAPK Activation Is Associated with Reduced Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Therapeutic Cooperation Between MEK and PD-1/PD-L1 Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors , 2015, Clinical Cancer Research.

[17]  Christos Hatzis,et al.  Reproducibility of residual cancer burden for prognostic assessment of breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy , 2015, Modern Pathology.

[18]  L. Esserman,et al.  Recommendations for standardized pathological characterization of residual disease for neoadjuvant clinical trials of breast cancer by the BIG-NABCG collaboration. , 2015, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[19]  S. Jung,et al.  Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT for Early Prediction of Pathologic Response (by Residual Cancer Burden Criteria) of Locally Advanced Breast Cancer to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy , 2014, Clinical nuclear medicine.

[20]  Gideon Blumenthal,et al.  Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis , 2014, The Lancet.

[21]  Elizabeth L. Cureton,et al.  Local Recurrence Rates are Low in High-Risk Neoadjuvant Breast Cancer in the I-SPY 1 Trial (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657) , 2014, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[22]  Yan Peng,et al.  Modulatory effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on biomarkers expression; assessment by digital image analysis and relationship to residual cancer burden in patients with invasive breast cancer. , 2014, Human pathology.

[23]  L. Pusztai,et al.  Abstract P6-06-37: Predicting improvements in survival based on improvements in pathologic response rate to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in different breast cancer subtypes , 2013 .

[24]  A. Taghian,et al.  Pathologic response and long-term follow-up in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a comparison between classifications and their practical application. , 2013, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[25]  J. García-Saenz,et al.  Correlation between response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and survival in locally advanced breast cancer patients. , 2013, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[26]  P. Fasching,et al.  Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. , 2012, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[27]  Stef van Buuren,et al.  MICE: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R , 2011 .

[28]  Peter Regitnig,et al.  Genomic index of sensitivity to endocrine therapy for breast cancer. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[29]  P. LoRusso,et al.  Tremelimumab in Combination with Exemestane in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer and Treatment-Associated Modulation of Inducible Costimulator Expression on Patient T Cells , 2010, Clinical Cancer Research.

[30]  G. Hortobagyi,et al.  Staging of breast cancer in the neoadjuvant setting. , 2008, Cancer research.

[31]  Janice N Cormier,et al.  Combined use of clinical and pathologic staging variables to define outcomes for breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[32]  Christos Hatzis,et al.  Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. , 2007, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[33]  Anthony Rhodes,et al.  American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. , 2006, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[34]  Roman Rouzier,et al.  Breast Cancer Molecular Subtypes Respond Differently to Preoperative Chemotherapy , 2005, Clinical Cancer Research.

[35]  C K Osborne,et al.  Estrogen receptor status by immunohistochemistry is superior to the ligand-binding assay for predicting response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[36]  M. Dowsett,et al.  Residual proliferative cancer burden to predict long-term outcome following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. , 2015, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[37]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .