Assessment of pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast carcinoma using Sataloff system
Abstract
Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is frequently administered to patients with breast carcinoma. Response to chemotherapeutic regime can be assessed clinically as well as by pathological examination of the breast tissue. It is essential to accurately categorize the patients with residual disease according to the standard guidelines for pathological evaluation of breast specimens after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The present study was undertaken to assess the histomorphological changes in mastectomy specimens and axillary lymphatic nodes of patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, grade the pathological response using Sataloff system and to compare the clinical and pathological response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Methods: Present prospective study included a total of 31 patients with locally advanced breast carcinoma, diagnosed with infiltrating ductal carcinoma, not otherwise specified on biopsy specimen and subsequently treated with 2 to 6 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy was assessed in breast and axillary lymphatic nodes according to Sataloff criteria. Results: Clinical response observed was complete (cCR) in four cases (12.9%), partial response (cPR) in 24 cases (77.4%), and no response (cNR) in three cases (9.7%). Based on tumor response, breast and lymph nodes were graded as pathological complete response (pCR), pathological partial response (pPR), and pathological no response (pNR) in five (16.1%), 18 (58.1%) and eight (25.8%) cases respectively using Sataloff criteria. Ductal carcinoma in situ and lymphovascular invasion were seen in 11 (35.4%) and 16 cases (51.6%), respectively. Conclusion: The pathological assessment of tumor response remains the gold standard, as neither the clinical nor the radiological responses are sensitive predictors of tumor response after treatment. However pathological examination is quite challenging and demands sufficient experience along with detailed clinical and radiological data of pre- and postoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy for precise response evaluation.
References
Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2015;65(2):87-108. doi: 10.3322/caac.21262
Vujaskovic Z, Kim DW, Jones E, Lan L, Mccall L, Dewhirst MW, Blackwell K. A phase I/II study of neoadjuvant liposomal doxorubicin, paclitaxel, and hyperthermia in locally advanced breast cancer. International Journal of Hyperthermia 2010;26(5):514-521. doi: 10.3109/02656731003639364
Sahoo S, Lester SC. Pathology of breast carcinomas after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: an overview with recommendations on specimen processing and reporting. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2009; 133:633–42.
Teshome M, Hunt KK. Neoadjuvant Therapy in the Treatment of Breast Cancer. Surgical Oncology Clinics of North America 2014;23(3):505-523. doi: 10.1016/j.soc.2014.03.006
Tanioka M, Shimizu C, Yonemori K, Yoshimura K, Tamura K, Kouno T, Fujiwara Y. Predictors of recurrence in breast cancer patients with a pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. British Journal of Cancer 2010;103(3):297-302. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605769
Lambein K, Van de Vijver K, Faverly D, Colpaert C. Belgian guidelines for laboratory handling and pathology reporting of breast carcinoma after neoadjuvan therapy. Belg J Med Oncol 2011; 5:144-53.
Mauri D, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis JPA. Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant systemic treatment in breast cancer: a meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005; 97:188–94.
Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, Mehta K, Costantino JP, Wolmark N, Wickerham DL. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. The Lancet 2014;384(9938):164-172. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62422-8
Earl H, Provenzano E, Abraham J, Dunn J, Vallier A, Gounaris I, Hiller L. Neoadjuvant trials in early breast cancer: pathological response at surgery and correlation to longer term outcomes – what does it all mean. BMC Medicine 2015;13(1) doi: 10.1186/s12916-015-0472-7
Mamounas EP, Anderson SJ, Dignam JJ, Bear HD, Julian TB, Geyer CE, Wolmark N. Predictors of Locoregional Recurrence After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Results From Combined Analysis of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18 and B-27. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2012;30(32):3960-3966. doi: 10.1200/jco.2011.40.8369
Provenzano E, Bossuyt V, Viale G, Cameron D, Badve S, Denkert C, Kuehn T. Standardization of pathologic evaluation and reporting of postneoadjuvant specimens in clinical trials of breast cancer: recommendations from an international working group. Modern Pathology 2015;28(9):1185-1201. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2015.74
Vasudevan D, Jayalakshmy PS, Kumar S, Mathew S. Assessment of Pathological Response of Breast Carcinoma in Modified Radical Mastectomy Specimens after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy. International Journal of Breast Cancer 2015:1-8. doi: 10.1155/2015/536145
Park CK, Jung W, Koo JS. Pathologic Evaluation of Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Therapy. Journal of Pathology and Translational Medicine 2016;50(3):173-180. doi: 10.4132/jptm.2016.02.02
DeVita VT, Lawrence TS, Rosenberg SA. DeVita, Hellman, and Rosenberg’s Cancer: Principles and practice of oncology. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. 2009. p. 337-49.
Sataloff DM, Mason BA, Prestipino AJ, Seinige UL, Lieber CP, Baloch Z. Pathologic response to induction chemotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the breast: a determinant of outcome. J Am Coll Surg1995; 180:297–306.
Wang-Lopez Q, Chalabi N, Abrial C, Radosevic-Robin N, Durando X, Mouret-Reynier M, Nabholtz J. Can pathologic complete response (pCR) be used as a surrogate marker of survival after neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology 2015;95(1):88-104. doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2015.02.011
von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer J, Costa SD, Eidtmann H, Fasching PA, Konecny GE. Definition and Impact of Pathologic Complete Response on Prognosis After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Various Intrinsic Breast Cancer Subtypes. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2012;30(15):1796-1804. doi: 10.1200/jco.2011.38.8595
Shintia C, Endang H, Diani K. Assessment of pathological response to Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer using the Miller-Payne system and TUNEL. Malays J Pathol 2016; 38:25-32.
Rajan R, Poniecka A, Smith TL, Yang Y, Frye D, Pusztai L, Symmans WF. Change in tumor cellularity of breast carcinoma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a variable in the pathologic assessment of response. Cancer 2004;100(7):1365-1373. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20134
Sethi D, Sen R, Parshad S, Sen J, Khetarpal S, Garg M. Histopathologic changes following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer. Indian Journal of Cancer 2013;50(1):58. doi: 10.4103/0019-509x.112301
Smith IC, Heys SD, Hutcheon AW, Miller ID, Payne S, Gilbert FJ, Ogston KN. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer: Significantly Enhanced Response With Docetaxel. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2002;20(6):1456-1466. doi: 10.1200/jco.2002.20.6.1456
Bear HD, Anderson S, Brown A, Smith R, Mamounas EP, Fisher B, Wolmark N. The Effect on Tumor Response of Adding Sequential Preoperative Docetaxel to Preoperative Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide: Preliminary Results From National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2003;21(22):4165-4174. doi: 10.1200/jco.2003.12.005
Chin SN, Green CMA, Gordon-Strachan GM, Wharfe GHF. Locally Advanced Breast Cancer in Jamaica: Prevalence, Disease Characteristics and Response to Preoperative Therapy. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention 2014;15(7):3323-3326. doi: 10.7314/apjcp.2014.15.7.3323
Fayanju OM, Nwaogu I, Jeffe DB, Margenthaler JA. Pathological complete response in breast cancer patients following neoadjuvant chemotherapy at a Comprehensive Cancer Center: The natural history of an elusive prognosticator. Molecular and Clinical Oncology 2015;3(4):775-780. doi: 10.3892/mco.2015.535
Penault-Llorca F, Abrial C, Raoelfils I, Cayre A, Mouret-Reynier M, Leheurteur M, Chollet P. Comparison of the prognostic significance of Chevallier and Sataloff's pathologic classifications after neoadjuvant chemotherapy of operable breast cancer. Human Pathology 2008;39(8):1221-1228. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2007.11.019
Rousseau C, Devillers A, Sagan C, Ferrer L, Bridji B, Campion L, Delecroix V. Monitoring of Early Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Stage II and III Breast Cancer by [ 18 F]Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2006;24(34):5366-5372. doi: 10.1200/jco.2006.05.7406
Frierson HF, Fechner RE. Histologic Grade of Locally Advanced Infiltrating Ductal Carcinoma After Treatment with Induction Chemotherapy. American Journal of Clinical Pathology 1994;102(2):154-157. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/102.2.154
Sharkey FE, Addington SL, Fowler LJ, Page CP, Cruz AB. Effects of preoperative chemotherapy on the morphology of resectable breast carcinoma.Mod Pathol 1996; 9:893-900.
Ju NR, Jeffe DB, Keune J, Aft R. Patient and tumor characteristics associated with breast cancer recurrence after complete pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2013;137(1):195-201. doi: 10.1007/s10549-012-2312-1
Bossuyt V, Provenzano E, Symmans WF, Boughey JC, Coles C, Curigliano G, MacGrogan G. Recommendations for standardized pathological characterization of residual disease for neoadjuvant clinical trials of breast cancer by the BIG-NABCG collaboration. Annals of Oncology 2015;26(7):1280-1291. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdv161
