Subscribe to RSS
Please copy the URL and add it into your RSS Feed Reader.
https://www.thieme-connect.de/rss/thieme/en/10.1055-s-00000125.xml
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Senologie - Zeitschrift für Mammadiagnostik und -therapie 2022; 19(04): 365-375
DOI: 10.1055/a-1962-3985
DOI: 10.1055/a-1962-3985
Übersicht
Update Mammakarzinom 2022 Teil 3 – Brustkrebs in frühen Krankheitsstadien
Update Breast Cancer 2022 Part 3 – Early-Stage Breast Cancer
Zusammenfassung
In dieser Übersichtsarbeit werden neueste Entwicklungen in der Prävention von Brustkrebs und Behandlung von Patientinnen mit frühen Krankheitsstadien mit Mammakarzinom zusammengefasst. Die Ermittlung von individuellen Erkrankungsrisiken nach molekularen Subtypen wurde in einer großen epidemiologischen Studie untersucht. Im Bereich der Behandlung gibt es neue Daten zur Langzeitnachbeobachtung der Aphinity-Studie ebenso wie neue Daten zur neoadjuvanten Therapie von HER2-positiven Patientinnen mit Atezolizumab. Biomarker wie Residual Cancer Burden wurden im Zusammenhang mit einer Pembrolizumab-Therapie untersucht. Eine Untersuchung des Genomic-Grade-Indexes bei älteren Patientinnen reiht sich ein in die Gruppe von Studien, die versucht, durch moderne Multigentests Patientinnen zu identifizieren, bei denen eine Chemotherapie vermieden werden kann, weil diese eine exzellente Prognose haben. Diese und weitere Aspekte der neuesten Entwicklungen bei der Diagnostik und Therapie des Mammakarzinoms werden in dieser Übersichtsarbeit beschrieben.
Abstract
This review summarizes recent developments in the prevention and treatment of patients with early-stage breast cancer. The individual disease risk for different molecular subtypes was investigated in a large epidemiological study. With regard to treatment, new data are available from long-term followup of the Aphinity study, as well as new data on neoadjuvant therapy with atezolizumab in HER2-positive patients. Biomarkers, such as residual cancer burden, were investigated in the context of pembrolizumab therapy. A Genomic Grade Index study in elderly patients is one of a group of studies investigating the use of modern multigene tests to identify patients with an excellent prognosis in whom chemotherapy may be avoided. These and other aspects of the latest developments in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer are described in this review.
Schlüsselwörter
Brustkrebs - Frühstadium - adjuvante Therapie - neoadjuvante Therapie - Chemotherapie - endokrine TherapieKey words
breast cancer - early stage - adjuvant treatment - neoadjuvant treatment - chemotherapy - endocrine therapyPublication History
Received: 20 July 2022
Accepted: 31 July 2022
Article published online:
06 December 2022
© 2022. This article was originally published by Thieme as Tanja N. Fehm et al., Update Breast Cancer 2022 Part 3 – Early-Stage Breast Cancer. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2022; 82: 912-922 as an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
Literatur
- 1 Lakhani SR, Reis-Filho JS, Fulford L. et al. Prediction of BRCA1 status in patients with breast cancer using estrogen receptor and basal phenotype. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11: 5175-5180 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-2424.
- 2 Couch FJ, Hart SN, Sharma P. et al. Inherited mutations in 17 breast cancer susceptibility genes among a large triple-negative breast cancer cohort unselected for family history of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33: 304-311 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2014.57.1414.
- 3 Fasching PA, Loibl S, Hu C. et al. BRCA1/2 Mutations and Bevacizumab in the Neoadjuvant Treatment of Breast Cancer: Response and Prognosis Results in Patients With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer From the Gepar-Quinto Study. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36: 2281-2287 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2017.77.2285.
- 4 Fasching PA, Yadav S, Hu C. et al. Mutations in BRCA1/2 and Other Panel Genes in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer-Association With Patient and Disease Characteristics and Effect on Prognosis. J Clin Oncol 2021; 39: 1619-1630 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.20.01200.
- 5 Shimelis H, LaDuca H, Hu C. et al. Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Risk Genes Identified by Multigene Hereditary Cancer Panel Testing. J Natl Cancer Inst 2018; 110: 855-862 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djy106.
- 6 Mavaddat N, Dorling L. Breast Cancer Association Consortium. et al. Pathology of Tumors Associated With Pathogenic Germline Variants in 9 Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes. JAMA Oncol 2022; 8: e216744 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.6744.
- 7 Hoyer J, Vasileiou G, Uebe S. et al. Addition of triple negativity of breast cancer as an indicator for germline mutations in predisposing genes increases sensitivity of clinical selection criteria. BMC Cancer 2018; 18: 926 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4821-8.
- 8 Kraus C, Hoyer J, Vasileiou G. et al. Gene panel sequencing in familial breast/ovarian cancer patients identifies multiple novel mutations also in genes others than BRCA1/2. Int J Cancer 2017; 140: 95-102 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.30428.
- 9 Escala-Garcia M, Guo Q, Dork T. et al. Genome-wide association study of germline variants and breast cancer-specific mortality. Br J Cancer 2019; 120: 647-657 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-019-0393-x.
- 10 Stevens KN, Fredericksen Z, Vachon CM. et al. 19p13.1 is a triple-negative-specific breast cancer susceptibility locus. Cancer Res 2012; 72: 1795-1803 DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-3364.
- 11 Stevens KN, Vachon CM, Lee AM. et al. Common breast cancer susceptibility loci are associated with triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer Res 2011; 71: 6240-6249 DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-1266.
- 12 Broeks A, Schmidt MK, Sherman ME. et al. Low penetrance breast cancer susceptibility loci are associated with specific breast tumor subtypes: findings from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Hum Mol Genet 2011; 20: 3289-3303 DOI: 10.1093/hmg/ddr228.
- 13 Fasching PA, Pharoah PD, Cox A. et al. The role of genetic breast cancer susceptibility variants as prognostic factors. Hum Mol Genet 2012; 21: 3926-3939 DOI: 10.1093/hmg/dds159.
- 14 Escala-Garcia M, Abraham J, Andrulis IL. et al. A network analysis to identify mediators of germline-driven differences in breast cancer prognosis. Nat Commun 2020; 11: 312 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-14100-6.
- 15 Fagerholm R, Khan S, Schmidt MK. et al. TP53-based interaction analysis identifies cis-eQTL variants for TP53BP2, FBXO28, and FAM53A that associate with survival and treatment outcome in breast cancer. Oncotarget 2017; 8: 18381-18398 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.15110.
- 16 Vachon CM, Scott CG, Tamimi RM. et al. Joint association of mammographic density adjusted for age and body mass index and polygenic risk score with breast cancer risk. Breast Cancer Res 2019; 21: 68 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-019-1138-8.
- 17 Hack CC, Emons J, Jud SM. et al. Association between mammographic density and pregnancies relative to age and BMI: a breast cancer caseonly analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2017; 166: 701-708 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-017-4446-7.
- 18 Vachon CM, Pankratz VS, Scott CG. et al. The contributions of breast density and common genetic variation to breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015; DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dju397.
- 19 Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Menarche, menopause, and breast cancer risk: individual participant meta-analysis, including 118 964 women with breast cancer from 117 epidemiological studies. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13: 1141-1151 DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70425-4.
- 20 Colditz GA, Bohlke K. Priorities for the primary prevention of breast cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 2014; 64: 186-194 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21225.
- 21 Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Breast cancer and breastfeeding: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 47 epidemiological studies in 30 countries, including 50302 women with breast cancer and 96973 women without the disease. Lancet 2002; 360: 187-195 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)09454-0.
- 22 Rudolph A, Song M, Brook MN. et al. Joint associations of a polygenic risk score and environmental risk factors for breast cancer in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Int J Epidemiol 2018; 47: 526-536 DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyx242.
- 23 Brouckaert O, Rudolph A, Laenen A. et al. Reproductive profiles and risk of breast cancer subtypes: a multi-center case-only study. Breast Cancer Res 2017; 19: 119 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-017-0909-3.
- 24 Yang XR, Chang-Claude J, Goode EL. et al. Associations of breast cancer risk factors with tumor subtypes: a pooled analysis from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011; 103: 250-263 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djq526.
- 25 Milne RL, Gaudet MM, Spurdle AB. et al. Assessing interactions between the associations of common genetic susceptibility variants, reproductive history and body mass index with breast cancer risk in the breast cancer association consortium: a combined case-control study. Breast Cancer Res 2010; 12: R110 DOI: 10.1186/bcr2797.
- 26 Stickeler E, Aktas B, Behrens A. et al. Update Breast Cancer 2021 Part 1 – Prevention and Early Stages. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2021; 81: 526-538 DOI: 10.1055/a-1464-0953.
- 27 Huober J, Schneeweiss A, Hartkopf AD. et al. Update Breast Cancer 2020 Part 3 – Early Breast Cancer. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2020; 80: 1105-1114 DOI: 10.1055/a-1270-7208.
- 28 Jung AY, Ahearn TU, Behrens S. et al. Distinct reproductive risk profiles for intrinsic-like breast cancer subtypes: pooled analysis of populationbased studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2022; DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djac117.
- 29 Ramazzini B. De morbis artificium diatriba. 1700
- 30 Kiechl S, Schramek D, Widschwendter M. et al. Aberrant regulation of RANKL/OPG in women at high risk of developing breast cancer. Oncotarget 2017; 8: 3811-3825 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.14013.
- 31 Sigl V, Jones LP, Penninger JM. RANKL/RANK: from bone loss to the prevention of breast cancer. Open Biol 2016; DOI: 10.1098/rsob.160230.
- 32 Sigl V, Owusu-Boaitey K, Joshi PA. et al. RANKL/RANK control Brca1 mutation-driven mammary tumors. Cell Res 2016; 26: 761-774 DOI: 10.1038/cr.2016.69.
- 33 Wunderle M, Ruebner M, Haberle L. et al. RANKL and OPG and their influence on breast volume changes during pregnancy in healthy women. Sci Rep 2020; 10: 5171 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-62070-3.
- 34 Mintz R, Wang M, Xu S. et al. Hormone and receptor activator of NFkappaB (RANK) pathway gene expression in plasma and mammographic breast density in postmenopausal women. Breast Cancer Res 2022; 24: 28 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-022-01522-2.
- 35 Ditsch N, Wöcke A, Untch M. et al. AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2022. Breast Care 2022; DOI: 10.1159/000524879.
- 36 Francis PA, Pagani O, Fleming GF. et al. Tailoring Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Premenopausal Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2018; 379: 122-137 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1803164.
- 37 Regan MM, Francis PA, Pagani O. et al Absolute improvements in freedom from distant recurrence with adjuvant endocrine therapies for premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) HER2-negative breast cancer (BC): Results from TEXT and SOFT. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36 Abstr. 503 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2018.36.15_suppl.503.
- 38 Pagani O, Regan MM, Walley BA. et al. Adjuvant exemestane with ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2014; 371: 107-118 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1404037.
- 39 Francis PA, Regan MM, Fleming GF. et al. Adjuvant ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2015; 372: 436-446 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1412379.
- 40 Baek SY, Noh WC, Ahn SH. et al. Adding ovarian function suppression to tamoxifen in young women with hormone-sensitive breast cancer who remain premenopausal or resume menstruation after chemotherapy: 8-year follow-up of the randomized ASTRRA trial. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40: 506-506 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.506.
- 41 von Minckwitz G, Procter M, de Azambuja E. et al. Adjuvant Pertuzumab and Trastuzumab in Early HER2-Positive Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 122-131 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1703643.
- 42 von Minckwitz G, Huang CS, Mano MS. et al. Trastuzumab Emtansine for Residual Invasive HER2-Positive Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2019; 380: 617-628 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814017.
- 43 Chan A, Moy B, Mansi J. et al. Final Efficacy Results of Neratinib in HER2-positive Hormone Receptor-positive Early-stage Breast Cancer From the Phase III ExteNET Trial. Clin Breast Cancer 2021; 21: 80-91.e7 DOI: 10.1016/j.clbc.2020.09.014.
- 44 Martin M, Holmes FA, Ejlertsen B. et al. Neratinib after trastuzumabbased adjuvant therapy in HER2-positive breast cancer (ExteNET): 5-year analysis of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2017; 18: 1688-1700 DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30717-9.
- 45 Fasching PA, Hartkopf AD, Gass P. et al. Efficacy of neoadjuvant pertuzumab in addition to chemotherapy and trastuzumab in routine clinical treatment of patients with primary breast cancer: a multicentric analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2019; 173: 319-328 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-018-5008-3.
- 46 Gianni L, Pienkowski T, Im YH. et al. Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in women with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a randomised multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13: 25-32 DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70336-9.
- 47 Gianni L, Pienkowski T, Im YH. et al. 5-year analysis of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in patients with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17: 791-800 DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)00163-7.
- 48 Loibl S, Jassem J, Sonnenblick A. et al Updated Results of Aphinity at 8.4 years median follow up. ESMO Virtual Plenary 2022; July 14, 2022
- 49 Schmid P, Cortes J, Dent R. et al. Event-free Survival with Pembrolizumab in Early Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2022; DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2112651.
- 50 Schmid P, Cortes J, Pusztai L. et al. Pembrolizumab for Early Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2020; 382: 810-821 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1910549.
- 51 Huober J, Barrios CH, Niikura N. et al. Atezolizumab With Neoadjuvant Anti-Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Therapy and Chemotherapy in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Early Breast Cancer: Primary Results of the Randomized Phase III IMpassion050 Trial. J Clin Oncol 2022; DOI: 10.1200/JCO.21.02772.
- 52 Miles D, Gligorov J, Andre F. et al. Primary results from IMpassion131, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised phase III trial of first-line paclitaxel with or without atezolizumab for unresectable locally advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2021; 32: 994-1004 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.05.801.
- 53 Jacob JB, Jacob MK, Parajuli P. Review of immune checkpoint inhibitors in immuno-oncology. Adv Pharmacol 2021; 91: 111-139 DOI: 10.1016/bs.apha.2021.01.002.
- 54 Schmid P, Cortes J, Dent R. et al. KEYNOTE-522: Phase III study of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs. placebo + chemotherapy, followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab vs. placebo for early-stage TNBC. Ann Oncol 2021; DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.06.014.
- 55 Schmid P, Cortes J, Dent R. et al. KEYNOTE-522: Phase 3 Study of Pembrolizumab + Chemotherapy versus Placebo + Chemotherapy as Neoadjuvant Treatment, Followed by Pembrolizumab versus Placebo as Adjuvant Treatment for Early Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC). Ann Oncol 2019; DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdz1394.
- 56 Huang M, OʼShaughnessy J, Zhao J. et al. Evaluation of Pathologic Complete Response as a Surrogate for Long-Term Survival Outcomes in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2020; 18: 1096-1104 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2020.7550.
- 57 Huang M, OʼShaughnessy J, Zhao J. et al. Association of Pathologic Complete Response with Long-Term Survival Outcomes in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. Cancer Res 2020; 80: 5427-5434 DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-20-1792.
- 58 Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M. et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet 2014; 384: 164-172 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62422-8.
- 59 von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer JU. et al. Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30: 1796-1804 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2011.38.8595.
- 60 Pusztai L, Denkert C, OʼShaughnessy J. et al. Event-free survival by residual cancer burden after neoadjuvant pembrolizumab + chemotherapy versus placebo + chemotherapy for early TNBC: Exploratory analysis from KEYNOTE-522. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40: 503-503 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.503.
- 61 Symmans WF, Yau C, Chen YY. et al. Assessment of Residual Cancer Burden and Event-Free Survival in Neoadjuvant Treatment for High-risk Breast Cancer: An Analysis of Data From the I-SPY2 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol 2021; 7: 1654-1663 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.3690.
- 62 Symmans WF, Wei C, Gould R. et al. Long-Term Prognostic Risk After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Associated With Residual Cancer Burden and Breast Cancer Subtype. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35: 1049-1060 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.1010.
- 63 Symmans WF, Peintinger F, Hatzis C. et al. Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 4414-4422 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.10.6823.
- 64 MD Anderson Cancer Center. Residual Cancer Burden Calculator. Online (Stand: 16.07.2022):. http://www3mdandersonorg/app/medcalc/indexcfm?pagename=jsconvert3
- 65 Gerdes J, Lelle RJ, Pickartz H. et al. Growth fractions in breast cancers determined in situ with monoclonal antibody Ki-67. J Clin Pathol 1986; 39: 977-980 DOI: 10.1136/jcp.39.9.977.
- 66 Urruticoechea A, Smith IE, Dowsett M. Proliferation marker Ki-67 in early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 7212-7220 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.07.501.
- 67 Viale G, Giobbie-Hurder A, Regan MM. et al. Prognostic and predictive value of centrally reviewed Ki-67 labeling index in postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer: results from Breast International Group Trial 1-98 comparing adjuvant tamoxifen with letrozole. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 5569-5575 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2008.17.0829.
- 68 Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D. et al. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009; 101: 736-750 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djp082.
- 69 Yerushalmi R, Woods R, Ravdin PM. et al. Ki67 in breast cancer: prognostic and predictive potential. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 174-183 DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70262-1.
- 70 Fasching PA, Heusinger K, Haeberle L. et al. Ki67, chemotherapy response, and prognosis in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment. BMC Cancer 2011; 11: 486 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-11-486.
- 71 Heusinger K, Jud SM, Haberle L. et al. Association of mammographic density with the proliferation marker Ki-67 in a cohort of patients with invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012; 135: 885-892 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-012-2221-3.
- 72 von Minckwitz G, Schmitt WD, Loibl S. et al. Ki67 measured after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for primary breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2013; 19: 4521-4531 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-3628.
- 73 Penault-Llorca F, Radosevic-Robin N. Ki67 assessment in breast cancer: an update. Pathology 2017; 49: 166-171 DOI: 10.1016/j.pathol.2016.11.006.
- 74 Fasching PA, Gass P, Haberle L. et al. Prognostic effect of Ki-67 in common clinical subgroups of patients with HER2-negative, hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2019; 175: 617-625 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-019-05198-9.
- 75 Smith I, Robertson J, Kilburn L. et al. Long-term outcome and prognostic value of Ki67 after perioperative endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer (POETIC): an openlabel, multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2020; 21: 1443-1454 DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30458-7.
- 76 Nielsen TO, Leung SCY, Rimm DL. et al. Assessment of Ki67 in Breast Cancer: Updated Recommendations From the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group. J Natl Cancer Inst 2021; 113: 808-819 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djaa201.
- 77 Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, Rimm DL. et al. Ki67 as a Companion Diagnostic: Good or Bad News?. J Clin Oncol 2022; DOI: 10.1200/JCO.22.00581.
- 78 Tarantino P, Burstein HJ, Lin NU. et al. Should Ki-67 be adopted to select breast cancer patients for treatment with adjuvant abemaciclib?. Ann Oncol 2022; 33: 234-238 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.12.004.
- 79 Harbeck N, Rastogi P, Martin M. et al. Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: updated efficacy and Ki-67 analysis from the monarchE study. Ann Oncol 2021; 32: 1571-1581 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.09.015.
- 80 Buus R, Sestak I, Kronenwett R. et al. Molecular Drivers of Oncotype DX, Prosigna, EndoPredict, and the Breast Cancer Index: A TransATAC Study. J Clin Oncol 2021; 39: 126-135 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.20.00853.
- 81 Cardoso F, vanʼt Veer LJ, Bogaerts J. et al. 70-Gene Signature as an Aid to Treatment Decisions in Early-Stage Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2016; 375: 717-729 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1602253.
- 82 Paik S, Shak S, Tang G. et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 351: 2817-2826 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa041588.
- 83 Piccart M, van ʼt Veer LJ, Poncet C. et al. 70-gene signature as an aid for treatment decisions in early breast cancer: updated results of the phase 3 randomised MINDACT trial with an exploratory analysis by age. Lancet Oncol 2021; 22: 476-488 DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00007-3.
- 84 Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF. et al. Adjuvant Chemotherapy Guided by a 21-Gene Expression Assay in Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2018; 379: 111-121 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1804710.
- 85 Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF. et al. Prospective Validation of a 21-Gene Expression Assay in Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2015; 373: 2005-2014 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1510764.
- 86 Kalinsky K, Barlow WE, Gralow JR. et al. 21-Gene Assay to Inform Chemotherapy Benefit in Node-Positive Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2021; 385: 2336-2347 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2108873.
- 87 Toussaint J, Sieuwerts AM, Haibe-Kains B. et al. Improvement of the clinical applicability of the Genomic Grade Index through a qRT-PCR test performed on frozen and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues. BMC Genomics 2009; 10: 424 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-10-424.
- 88 Sotiriou C, Desmedt C. Gene expression profiling in breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2006; 17 (Suppl. 10) x259-x262 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdl270.
- 89 Brain E, Viansone AA, Bourbouloux E. et al. Final results from a phase III randomized clinical trial of adjuvant endocrine therapy ± chemotherapy in women ≥ 70 years old with ER+ HER2-breast cancer and a high genomic grade index: The Unicancer ASTER 70s trial. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40: 500-500 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.500.