Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Locally Advanced Breast Cancer

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Breast Cancer Management for Surgeons

  • 2576 Accesses

Abstract

Locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) represents up to 10% of newly diagnosed breast cancer cases in developed/high-income countries; these numbers are much higher in low-income countries and in underserved populations. The risk of treatment failure is high and only approximately 50% of patients survive 5 years. The most aggressive form of LABC is inflammatory breast cancer (IBC). LABC patients should be managed with multidisciplinary therapy involving systemic and locoregional modalities. Underutilisation of trimodal therapy negatively impacts survival in particular in inflammatory breast cancer. Systemic treatment is usually administered before locoregional modalities, to permit or facilitate local treatment and improve surgical outcomes in patients for whom primary surgery is technically not feasible or facilitate less extensive surgery. Standard systemic therapy options include chemotherapy (ChT), endocrine therapy (ET) and molecularly targeted therapy with HER2-directed agents. Radiotherapy is usually administered postoperatively but in some situations may enable surgery in cases remaining inoperable following systemic therapy or be administered with curative intent if surgery remains impossible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tryfonidis K, Senkus E, Cardoso MJ, Cardoso F. Management of locally advanced breast cancer-perspectives and future directions. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2015;12:147–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. National Cancer Database Program. 2016. https://oliver.facs.org/BMPub/Docs/.

  3. Allemani C, Sant M, Weir HK, et al. Breast cancer survival in the US and Europe: a CONCORD high-resolution study. Int J Cancer. 2013;132:1170–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Seidman H, Gelb SK, Silverberg E, LaVerda N, Lubera JA. Survival experience in the breast cancer detection demonstration project. CA Cancer J Clin. 1987;37:258–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. El Saghir NS, Adebamowo CA, Anderson BO, et al. Breast cancer management in low resource countries (LRCs): consensus statement from the breast health global initiative. Breast. 2011;20(Suppl 2):S3–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ly M, Antoine M, Dembélé AK, et al. High incidence of triple-negative tumors in sub-saharan Africa: a prospective study of breast cancer characteristics and risk factors in Malian women seen in a Bamako university hospital. Oncology. 2012;83:257–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Agboola AJ, Musa AA, Wanangwa N, et al. Molecular characteristics and prognostic features of breast cancer in Nigerian compared with UK women. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;135:555–69.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. El-Hawary AK, Abbas AS, Elsayed AA, Zalata KR. Molecular subtypes of breast carcinoma in Egyptian women: clinicopathological features. Pathol Res Pract. 2012;208:382–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lara-Medina F, Pérez-Sánchez V, Saavedra-Pérez D, et al. Triple-negative breast cancer in Hispanic patients: high prevalence, poor prognosis, and association with menopausal status, body mass index, and parity. Cancer. 2011;117:3658–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Devi CR, Tang TS, Corbex M. Incidence and risk factors for breast cancer subtypes in three distinct South-East Asian ethnic groups: Chinese, Malay and natives of Sarawak, Malaysia. Int J Cancer. 2012;131:2869–77.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Clarke CA, Keegan TH, Yang J, et al. Age-specific incidence of breast cancer subtypes: understanding the black-white crossover. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104:1094–101.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Jack RH, Davies EA, Renshaw C, et al. Differences in breast cancer hormone receptor status in ethnic groups: a London population. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49:696–702.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fan L, Zheng Y, Yu KD, et al. Breast cancer in a transitional society over 18 years: trends and present status in Shanghai, China. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;117:409–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. American Cancer Society. Breast cancer facts and figures 2007–2008. Atlanta: American Cancer Society, Inc; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Berg JW, Hutter RV. Breast cancer. Cancer. 1995;75:257–69.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chang S, Parker SL, Pham T, Buzdar AU, Hursting SD. Inflammatory breast carcinoma incidence and survival: the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program of the National Cancer Institute, 1975-1992. Cancer. 1998;82:2366–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Taghian A, El-Ghamry M, Merajver S. Overview in the treatment of newly diagnosed, non-metastatic breast cancer. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/overview-of-the-treatment-of-newly-diagnosed-non-metastatic-breast-cancer.

  18. Bonnefoi H, Piccart M, Bogaerts J, et al. TP53 status for prediction of sensitivity to taxane versus non-taxane neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer (EORTC 10994/BIG 1-00): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:527–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Buzdar AU, Singletary SE, Booser DJ, et al. Combined modality treatment of stage III and inflammatory breast cancer. M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 1995;4:715–34.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hance KW, Anderson WF, Devesa SS, et al. Trends in inflammatory breast carcinoma incidence and survival: the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program at the National Cancer Institute. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:966–75.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Wingo PA, Jamison PM, Young JL, Gargiullo P. Population-based statistics for women diagnosed with inflammatory breast cancer (United States). Cancer Causes Control. 2004;15(3):321–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Diab SG, Elledge RM, Clark GM. Tumour characteristics and clinical outcome of elderly women with breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:550–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Yancik R, Ries LG, Yates JW. Breast cancer in aging women. A population-based study of contrasts in stage, surgery, and survival. Cancer. 1989;63:976–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 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;384:164–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer JU, et al. Defınition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1796–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dawood S, Merajver SD, Viens P, et al. International expert panel on inflammatory breast cancer: consensus statement for standardized diagnosis and treatment. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:515–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. van Golen KL, Davies S, Wu ZF, et al. A novel putative low-affinity insulin-like growth factor-binding protein, LIBC (lost in inflammatory breast cancer), and RhoC GTPase correlate with the inflammatory breast cancer phenotype. Clin Cancer Res. 1999;5:2511–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kleer CG, Zhang Y, Pan Q, et al. WISP3 is a novel tumour suppressor gene of inflammatory breast cancer. Oncogene. 2002;21:3172–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Colpaert CG, Vermeulen PB, Benoy I, et al. Inflammatory breast cancer shows angiogenesis with high endothelial proliferation rate and strong E-cadherin expression. Br J Cancer. 2003;88:718–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Dawood S, Ueno NT, Valero V, et al. Differences in survival among women with stage III inflammatory and noninflammatory locally advanced breast cancer appear early: a large population-based study. Cancer. 2011;117:1819–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Tai P, Yu E, Shiels R, et al. Short- and long-term cause-specific survival of patients with inflammatory breast cancer. BMC Cancer. 2005;5:137.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Dawood S, Lei X, Dent R, et al. Survival of women with inflammatory breast cancer: a large population-based study. Ann Oncol. 2014;25:1143–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Swain SM, Sorace RA, Bagley CS, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the combined modality approach of locally advanced nonmetastatic breast cancer. Cancer Res. 1987;47:3889–94.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hortobagyi GN, Blumenschein GR, Spanos W, et al. Multimodal treatment of locoregionally advanced breast cancer. Cancer. 1983;51:763–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Powles TJ, Hickish TF, Makris A, et al. Randomized trial of chemoendocrine therapy started before or after surgery for treatment of primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:547–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:2672–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Semiglazov VF, Topuzov EE, Bavli JL, et al. Primary (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy and radiotherapy compared with primary radiotherapy alone in stage IIb-IIIa breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 1994;5:591–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Rueth NM, Lin HY, Bedrosian I, et al. Underuse of trimodality treatment affects survival for patients with inflammatory breast cancer: an analysis of treatment and survival trends from the National Cancer Database. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:2018–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Touboul E, Buffat L, Lefranc JP, et al. Possibility of conservative local treatment after combined chemotherapy and preoperative irradiation for locally advanced noninflammatory breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996;34:1019–28.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy: updates of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:778–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Thompson AM, Moulder-Thompson SL. Neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(Suppl 10):x231–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Whitman GJ, Strom EA. Workup and staging of locally advanced breast cancer. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2009;19:211–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Perez CA, Fields JN, Fracasso PM, et al. Management of locally advanced carcinoma of the breast. II. Inflammatory carcinoma. Cancer. 1994;74:466–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Panades M, Olivotto IA, Speers CH, et al. Evolving treatment strategies for inflammatory breast cancer: a population-based survival analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:1941–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Yamauchi H, Woodward WA, Valero V, et al. Inflammatory breast cancer: what we know and what we need to learn. Oncologist. 2012;17:891–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Olson JE, Neuberg D, Pandya KJ, et al. The role of radiotherapy in the management of operable locally advanced breast carcinoma: results of a randomized trial by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Cancer. 1997;79:1138–49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Overgaard M, Hansen PS, Overgaard J, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy in high-risk premenopausal women with breast cancer who receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group 82b trial. N Engl J Med. 1997;337:949–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Overgaard M, Jensen MB, Overgaard J, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy in high-risk postmenopausal breast-cancer patients given adjuvant tamoxifen: Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group DBCG 82c randomised trial. Lancet. 1999;353:1641–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Recht A, Gray R, Davidson NE, et al. Locoregional failure 10 years after mastectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy with or without tamoxifen without irradiation: experience of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:1689–700.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Taghian A, Jeong JH, Mamounas E, et al. Patterns of locoregional failure in patients with operable breast cancer treated by mastectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy with or without tamoxifen and without radiotherapy: results from five National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project randomized clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:4247–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Mamounas EP, Anderson SJ, Dignam JJ, et al. Predictors of locoregional recurrence after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: results from combined analysis of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:3960–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Ragaz J, Jackson SM, Le N, et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy in node-positive premenopausal women with breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1997;337:956–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Ragaz J, Olivotto IA, Spinelli JJ, et al. Locoregional radiation therapy in patients with high-risk breast cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy: 20-year results of the British Columbia randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:116–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Huang EH, Tucker SL, Strom EA, et al. Postmastectomy radiation improves local-regional control and survival for selected patients with locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and mastectomy. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:4691–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Calitchi E, Kirova YM, Otmezguine Y, et al. Long-term results of neoadjuvant radiation therapy for breast cancer. Int J Cancer. 2001;96:253–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Esserman LJ, Berry DA, DeMichele A, et al. Pathologic complete response predicts recurrence-free survival more effectively by cancer subset: results from the I-SPY 1 TRIAL – CALGB 150007/150012, ACRIN 6657. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:3242–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy: updates of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:778–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Bear HD, Anderson S, Smith RE, et al. Sequential preoperative or postoperative docetaxel added to preoperative doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide for operable breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2019–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Shao N, Wang S, Yao C, et al. Sequential versus concurrent anthracyclines and taxanes as adjuvant chemotherapy of early breast cancer: a meta-analysis of phase III randomized control trials. Breast. 2012;21:389–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Earl HM, Vallier AL, Hiller L, et al. Effects of the addition of gemcitabine, and paclitaxel-first sequencing, in neoadjuvant sequential epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel for women with high-risk early breast cancer (Neo-tAnGo): an open-label, 2×2 factorial randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:201–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Petrelli F, Coinu A, Lonati V. Neoadjuvant dose-dense chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer: a meta-analysis of published studies. Anti-Cancer Drugs. 2016;27:702–8.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Citron ML, Berry DA, Cirrincione C, et al. Randomized trial of dose-dense versus conventionally scheduled and sequential versus concurrent combination chemotherapy as postoperative adjuvant treatment of node-positive primary breast cancer: first report of Intergroup Trial C9741/Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 9741. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:1431–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Jones S, Holmes FA, O'Shaughnessy J, et al. Docetaxel with cyclophosphamide is associated with an overall survival benefit compared with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide: 7-year follow-up of US Oncology research trial 9735. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1177–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Blum JL, Flynn PJ, Yothers G, et al. Anthracyclines in early breast cancer: the ABC trials-USOR 06-090, NSABP B-46-I/USOR 07132, and NSABP B-49 (NRG Oncology). J Clin Oncol. 2017 Apr 11:JCO2016714147. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.71.4147 [Epub ahead of print].

    Google Scholar 

  65. Chen XS, Nie XQ, Chen CM, et al. Weekly paclitaxel plus carboplatin is an effective nonanthracycline-containing regimen as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2010;21:961–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. von Minckwitz G, Schneeweiss A, Loibl S, et al. Neoadjuvant carboplatin in patients with triple-negative and HER2-positive early breast cancer (GeparSixto; GBG 66): a randomized phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:747–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Sikov WM, Berry DA, Perou CM, et al. Impact of the addition of carboplatin and/or bevacizumab to neoadjuvant once-per-week paclitaxel followed by dose-dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide on pathologic complete response rates in stage II to III triple-negative breast cancer: CALGB 40603 (Alliance). J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:13–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. von Minckwitz G, Loibl S, Schneeweiss A, et al. Early survival analysis of the randomized phase II trial investigating the addition of carboplatin to neoadjuvant therapy for triple-negative and HER2-positive early breast cancer (GeparSixto). Cancer Res. 2016;76(4 Suppl):S2–04.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Hahnen E, Lederer B, Hauke J, et al. Germline mutation status, pathological complete response, and disease-free survival in triple-negative breast cancer: secondary analysis of the GeparSixto randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2017 Jul 13. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.1007 [Epub ahead of print].

    Google Scholar 

  70. von Minckwitz G, Eidtmann H, Rezai M, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and bevacizumab for HER2-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:299–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Golshan M, Cirrincione CT, Sikov WM. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage II-III triple negative breast cancer on eligibility for breast-conserving surgery and breast conservation rates: surgical results from CALGB 40603 (Alliance). Ann Surg. 2015;262:434–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. von Minckwitz G, Rezai M, Loibl S, et al. Capecitabine in addition to anthracycline- and taxane-based neoadjuvant treatment in patients with primary breast cancer: phase III GeparQuattro study. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:2015–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. von Minckwitz G, Blohmer J, Costa S, et al. Response-guided neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:3623–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Alba E, Calvo L, Albanell J, et al. Chemotherapy (CT) and hormonotherapy (HT) as neoadjuvant treatment in luminal breast cancer patients: results from the GEICAM/2006-03, a multicenter, randomized, phase-II study. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:3069–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Semiglazov VF, Semiglazov VV, Dashyan GA, et al. Phase 2 randomized trial of primary endocrine therapy versus chemotherapy in postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Cancer. 2007;110:244–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Ellis MJ, Ma C. Letrozole in the neoadjuvant setting: the P024 trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007;105(Suppl 1):33–43.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Cataliotti L, Buzdar AU, Noguchi S, et al. Comparison of anastrozole versus tamoxifen as preoperative therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: the pre-operative «Arimidex» compared to Tamoxifen (PROACT) trial. Cancer. 2006;106:2095–103.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Ellis MJ, Suman VJ, Hoog J, et al. Randomized phase II neoadjuvant comparison between letrozole, anastrozole, and exemestane for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-rich stage 2 to 3 breast cancer: clinical and biomarker outcomes and predictive value of the baseline PAM50-based intrinsic subtype – ACOSOG Z1031. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2342–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Gianni L, Eiermann W, Semiglazov V, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with trastuzumab followed by adjuvant trastuzumab versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (the NOAH trial): a randomised controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort. Lancet. 2010;375:377–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Buzdar AU, Valero V, Ibrahim NK, Francis D, Broglio KR, Theriault RL, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy with paclitaxel followed by 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy and concurrent T in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer: an update of the initial randomized study population and data of additional patients treated with the same regimen. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:228–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Petrelli F, Borgonovo K, Cabiddu M, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and concomitant trastuzumab in breast cancer: a pooled analysis of two randomized trials. Anti-Cancer Drugs. 2011;22:128–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Bayraktar S, Bayraktar UD, Reis IM, et al. Neoadjuvant dose-dense Docetaxel, Carboplatinum and Trastuzumab chemotherapy for HER2 overexpressing breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(15S):e11557.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Buzdar AU, Suman VJ, Meric-Bernstam F, et al. Fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC-75) followed by paclitaxel plus trastuzumab versus paclitaxel plus trastuzumab followed by FEC-75 plus trastuzumab as neoadjuvant treatment for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (Z1041): a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:1317–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. Untch M, Loibl S, Bischoff J, et al. Lapatinib versus trastuzumab in combination with neoadjuvant anthracycline-taxane-based chemotherapy (GeparQuinto, GBG 44): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:135–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Baselga J, Bradbury I, Eidtmann H, et al. Lapatinib with trastuzumab for HER2-positive early breast cancer (NeoALTTO): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2012;379:633–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Guarneri V, Frassoldati A, Bottini A, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy plus trastuzumab, lapatinib, or both in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer: results of the randomized phase II CHER-LOB study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1989–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Schneeweiss A, Chia S, Hickish T, et al. Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab in combination with standard neoadjuvant anthracycline-containing and anthracycline-free chemotherapy regimens in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer: a randomized phase II cardiac safety study (TRYPHAENA). Ann Oncol. 2013;24:2278–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. 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;377:122–31.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:228–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Chagpar AB, Middleton LP, Sahin AA, et al. Accuracy of physical examination, ultrasonography, and mammography in predicting residual pathologic tumor size in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg. 2006;243:257–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  93. Yuan Y, Chen XS, Liu SY, Shen KW. Accuracy of MRI in prediction of pathologic complete remission in breast cancer after preoperative therapy: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195:260–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Cheng X, Li Y, Liu B, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT and PET for evaluation of pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: a meta-analysis. Acta Radiol. 2012;53:615–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Wang Y, Zhang C, Liu J, et al. Is 18F-FDG PET accurate to predict neoadjuvant therapy response in breast cancer? A meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;131:357–69.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Mghanga FP, Lan X, Bakari KH, et al. Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography in monitoring the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a meta-analysis. Clin Breast Cancer. 2013;13:271–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Symmans WF, Peintinger F, Hatzis C, et al. Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:4414–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Mathieu MC, Mazouni C, Kesty NC, et al. Breast cancer index predicts pathological complete response and eligibility for breast conserving surgery in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:2046–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Nahleh Z, Sivasubramaniam D, Dhaliwal S, et al. Residual cancer burden in locally advanced breast cancer: a superior tool. Curr Oncol. 2008;15:271–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  100. Ellis MJ, Tao Y, Luo J, et al. Outcome prediction for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer based on postneoadjuvant endocrine therapy tumor characteristics. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:1380–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  101. Thomas E, Holmes FA, Smith TL, et al. The use of alternate, non-cross-resistant adjuvant chemotherapy on the basis of pathologic response to a neoadjuvant doxorubicin-based regimen in women with operable breast cancer: long-term results from a prospective randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:2294–302.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Alvarez RH, Booser DJ, Cristofanilli M, et al. Phase 2 trial of primary systemic therapy with doxorubicin and docetaxel followed by surgery, radiotherapy, and adjuvant chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil based on clinical and pathologic response in patients with stage IIB to III breast cancer : long-term results from the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center Study ID97-099. Cancer. 2010;116:1210–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Masuda N, Lee SJ, Ohtani S, et al. Adjuvant capecitabine for breast cancer after preoperative chemotherapy. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:2147–59.

    Google Scholar 

  104. Joensuu H, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen PL, Huovinen R, et al. Adjuvant Capecitabine in Combination With Docetaxel, Epirubicin, and Cyclophosphamide for Early Breast Cancer: The Randomized Clinical FinXX Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3:793–800.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Medical University of Gdańsk, Dębinki 7, 80-211, Gdańsk, Poland

    Elżbieta Senkus MD, PhD

  2. Department of Clinical Oncology, Wroclaw Medical University, Borowska 213, 50-556, Wrocław, Poland

    Aleksandra Łacko MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Elżbieta Senkus MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aleksandra Łacko MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elżbieta Senkus MD, PhD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The Medical School Department of Oncology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom

    Lynda Wyld

  2. Athens University Medical School, Athens, Greece

    Christos Markopoulos

  3. Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland

    Marjut Leidenius

  4. Department of Oncology & Radiotherapy, Gdańsk Medical University Department of Oncology & Radiotherapy, Gdańsk, Poland

    Elżbieta Senkus-Konefka

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Senkus, E., Łacko, A. (2018). Locally Advanced Breast Cancer. In: Wyld, L., Markopoulos, C., Leidenius, M., Senkus-Konefka, E. (eds) Breast Cancer Management for Surgeons. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56673-3_48

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56673-3_48

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-56671-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-56673-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation