Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38173005›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2024

A prospective study on tumour response assessment methods after neoadjuvant endocrine therapy in early oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

Joanna I López-Velazco, Sara Manzano, María Otaño, Kepa Elorriaga, Núria Bultó, Julio Herrero, Ainhara Lahuerta, Virginia Segur, Isabel Álvarez-López, Maria M Caffarel and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Patient outcomes and clinician perspectives following one year ofTranslational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Joanna I López-Velazco *Biogipuzkoa (Previously Known As Biodonostia) Health Research Institute, Paseo Dr Begiristain S/N, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.
Sara Manzano *Biogipuzkoa (Previously Known As Biodonostia) Health Research Institute, Paseo Dr Begiristain S/N, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.
María OtañoGipuzkoa Cancer Unit, OSI Donostialdea - Onkologikoa Foundation, Paseo Dr Begiristain 121, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.
Kepa ElorriagaGipuzkoa Cancer Unit, OSI Donostialdea - Onkologikoa Foundation, Paseo Dr Begiristain 121, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.
Núria BultóGipuzkoa Cancer Unit, OSI Donostialdea - Onkologikoa Foundation, Paseo Dr Begiristain 121, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.
Julio HerreroGipuzkoa Cancer Unit, OSI Donostialdea - Onkologikoa Foundation, Paseo Dr Begiristain 121, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.
Ainhara LahuertaBiogipuzkoa (Previously Known As Biodonostia) Health Research Institute, Paseo Dr Begiristain S/N, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.
Virginia SegurGipuzkoa Cancer Unit, OSI Donostialdea - Onkologikoa Foundation, Paseo Dr Begiristain 121, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.
Isabel Álvarez-LópezBiogipuzkoa (Previously Known As Biodonostia) Health Research Institute, Paseo Dr Begiristain S/N, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain.
Maria M Caffarel *Biogipuzkoa (Previously Known As Biodonostia) Health Research Institute, Paseo Dr Begiristain S/N, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain. MARIA.MUNOZCAFFAREL@biodonostia.org.
Ander Urruticoechea *Biogipuzkoa (Previously Known As Biodonostia) Health Research Institute, Paseo Dr Begiristain S/N, 20014, San Sebastian, Spain. aurruticoechea@onkologikoa.org.
Onkologikoa · ESBiogipuzkoa Health Research Institute · ESIkerbasque · ES

Funding

Basque Department of Health 2020111040Fundación Científica Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer PRDGI19007LOPEFundación SEOM, Spain SEOM Avon Fellowship 2020Ikerbasque, Basque Foundation for Science IKERBASQUE/RA/2020/001Instituto de Salud Carlos III CP18/00076Instituto de Salud Carlos III FI19/00193Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI20/01253Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI21/01208
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) in oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+) /HER2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer allows real-time evaluation of drug efficacy as well as investigation of the biological and molecular changes that occur after estrogenic deprivation. Clinical and pathological evaluation after NET may be used to obtain prognostic and predictive information of tumour response to decide adjuvant treatment. In this setting, clinical scales developed to evaluate response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy are not useful and there are not validated biomarkers to assess response to NET beyond Ki67 levels and preoperative endocrine prognostic index score (mPEPI).

methodsIn this prospective study, we extensively analysed radiological (by ultrasound scan (USS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)) and pathological tumour response of 104 postmenopausal patients with ER+ /HER2- resectable breast cancer, treated with NET for a mean of 7 months prior to surgery. We defined a new score, tumour cellularity size (TCS), calculated as the product of the residual tumour cellularity in the surgical specimen and the tumour pathological size.

resultsOur results show that radiological evaluation of response to NET by both USS and MRI underestimates pathological tumour size (path-TS). Tumour size [mean (range); mm] was: path-TS 20 (0-80); radiological-TS by USS 9 (0-31); by MRI: 12 (0-60). Nevertheless, they support the use of MRI over USS to clinically assess radiological tumour response (rad-TR) due to the statistically significant association of rad-TR by MRI, but not USS, with Ki67 decrease (p = 0.002 and p = 0.3, respectively) and mPEPI score (p = 0.002 and p = 0.6, respectively). In addition, we propose that TCS could become a new tool to standardize response assessment to NET given its simplicity, reproducibility and its good correlation with existing biomarkers (such as ΔKi67, p = 0.001) and potential added value.

conclusionOur findings shed light on the dynamics of tumour response to NET, challenge the paradigm of the ability of NET to decrease surgical volume and point to the utility of the TCS to quantify the scattered tumour response usually produced by endocrine therapy. In the future, these results should be validated in independent cohorts with associated survival data.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleHumansKi-67 AntigenNeoadjuvant TherapyProspective StudiesReceptors, EstrogenReproducibility of ResultsErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesKi-67 AntigenReceptors, EstrogenAromatase inhibitorsKi67Neoadjuvant endocrine therapyOestrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancerPathological and radiological tumour responsePreoperative endocrine prognostic index (PEPI) scoreTumour cellularity size

Identifiers

PMID38173005
PMCPMC10765775
OpenAlexW4390570705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.