Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2008 Aug 15;68(16):6477-81.
doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-07-6520.

Staging of breast cancer in the neoadjuvant setting

Affiliations
Review

Staging of breast cancer in the neoadjuvant setting

Jacqueline S Jeruss et al. Cancer Res. .

Abstract

The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy has become more prevalent in the treatment of breast cancer patients. The finding of a pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (no evidence of residual invasive cancer in the breast and lymph nodes at the time of surgical resection) has been shown to correlate with improved survival. The current version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging for breast cancer has a pretreatment clinical stage designation that is determined by clinical and radiographic examination of the patient and a postoperative pathologic stage classification based on the findings in the breast and regional lymph nodes removed at surgery. Pathologic staging has not been validated for patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy; thus, prognosis is determined for these patients based on the pretreatment clinical stage. We hypothesized that clinical and pathologic staging variables could be combined with biological tumor markers to provide a novel means of determining prognosis for patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Two scoring systems, based on summing binary indicators for clinical and pathologic substages, negative estrogen receptor status, and grade 3 tumor pathology, were devised to predict 5-year patient outcomes. These scoring systems facilitated separation of the study population into more refined subgroups by outcome than the current AJCC staging system for breast cancer, and provide a novel means for evaluating prognosis after neoadjuvant therapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
DSS for pathologic stage IIA patients stratified by the CPS-EG scoring system. Through application of the CPS-EG scoring system to AJCC pathologic stage IIA patients, 5 prognostic groups were determined having the following 5-y DSS outcomes: score 1, 100%; score 2, 98%; score 3, 86%; score 4, 85%; and score 5, 64%.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Mack JW, Wolfe J, Cook EF, Grier HE, Cleary PD, Weeks JC. Hope and prognostic disclosure. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5636–42. - PubMed
    1. Pollak KI, Arnold RM, Jeffreys AS, et al. Oncologist communication about emotion during visits with patients with advanced cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5748–52. - PubMed
    1. Singletary SE, Connolly JL. Breast cancer staging: working with the sixth edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. CA Cancer J Clin. 2006;56:37–47. quiz 50–31. - PubMed
    1. Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:2483–93. - PubMed
    1. 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. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances