Novel Postneoadjuvant Prognostic Breast Cancer Staging System

L Lavisha Singh (Northshore University Healthcare, Evanston, IL) J Jennifer K. Plichta (Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC) D David J. Winchester (David J. Winchester, MD, FACS, City of Hope, Zion, IL) S Stephen B. Edge K Kimberly H. Allison (Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA) W William E. Barlow (Cancer Research and Biostatistics (CRAB), Seattle, WA) V Veerle Bossuyt (Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA) M Mariana Chavez-MacGregor E Emily F. Conant (Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA) J James L. Connolly (Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA) J Jennifer F. De Los Santos (Washington University, St Louis, MO) D Daniel F. Hayes (University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI) N Nola M. Hylton (University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA) E Elizabeth A. Mittendorf E Elena Provenzano K Kilian E. Salerno (Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD) P Priyanka Sharma W W. Fraser Symmans (The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology, Houston, TX) D Donald Weaver G Gabriel N. Hortobagyi (The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX)

Abstract

PURPOSE Prognostic staging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is not included in American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC) staging. This study addressed this deficiency by including responses to therapy with standardized staging variables in a validated prognostic staging system for patients treated with NACT. METHODS The National Cancer Database was queried to identify 140,605 patients treated with NACT between 2010 and 2018. Three response categories (no response, partial response, and complete response [pCR]) were created on the basis of comparison of clinical and post-NACT pathologic staging. Univariate and multivariate analyses of clinical stage, estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and grade were analyzed for each category. Predictive models for each response category were validated using the bootstrap technique. Calibration plots compared predicted and observed 3-year survival probabilities in the training and validation data sets. RESULTS Each validated model demonstrated statistically significant survival differences in the postneoadjuvant prognostic stage assignment. Of all patients with a pCR, 94.2% were assigned to postneoadjuvant ypStage I compared with 35.5% of patients with no response. Advancing clinical stage had a progressive but small impact on overall survival (OS) with pCR (high-grade, triple-negative breast cancer [TNBC]: cStage I, 97% v cStage IIIB/IIIC, 91%; grade 2 luminal A: 97% v 91%) but was associated with a profound decrease in OS with no response for TNBC or HER2+ disease (high-grade TNBC 89% v 50%) and less profound for grade 2 luminal A disease with no response (97% v 81%). CONCLUSION We present a novel, validated prognostic staging system that predicts OS according to the response to NACT. These data will provide AJCC stage assignments for a growing proportion of patients treated with NACT.

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 43, Issue 17
Published June 10, 2025
Pages 1948-1960
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (20)

L

Lavisha Singh

Northshore University Healthcare, Evanston, IL

J

Jennifer K. Plichta

Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC

D

David J. Winchester

David J. Winchester, MD, FACS, City of Hope, Zion, IL

S

Stephen B. Edge

K

Kimberly H. Allison

Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA

W

William E. Barlow

Cancer Research and Biostatistics (CRAB), Seattle, WA

V

Veerle Bossuyt

Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

M

Mariana Chavez-MacGregor

E

Emily F. Conant

Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA

J

James L. Connolly

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA

J

Jennifer F. De Los Santos

Washington University, St Louis, MO

D

Daniel F. Hayes

University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI

N

Nola M. Hylton

University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA

E

Elizabeth A. Mittendorf

E

Elena Provenzano

K

Kilian E. Salerno

Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD

P

Priyanka Sharma

W

W. Fraser Symmans

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology, Houston, TX

D

Donald Weaver

G

Gabriel N. Hortobagyi

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX