Outcomes of single versus double hormone receptor positive breast cancer.

Authors

null

Josee-Lyne Ethier

Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada

Alberto Ocana , Maribel Casas , Maria Sanchez-Arago , Rosalia Caballero , Alvaro Rodriguez-Lescure , Amparo Ruiz , Emilio Alba , Lourdes Calvo , Manuel Ruiz , Ana Santaballa , Cesar Augusto Rodriguez , Carmen Crespo , Manuel Ramos Vazquez , Jose Manuel Gracia , Ana Lluch , Isabel Alvarez , Eva Maria Carrasco , Eitan Amir , Miguel Martin , Josee-Lyne Ethier

Organizations

Albacete University Hospital, Albacete, Spain, GEICAM, Madrid, Spain, GEICAM Spanish Breast Cancer Group, Madrid, Spain, Hospital General de Elche, Alicante, Spain, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain, IBIMA-Hospital Regional Universitario y Virgen de la Victoria, Malaga, Spain, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de A Coruña, A Coruna, Spain, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Sevilla, Spain, Hospital Universitario La Fe, Valencia, Valencia, Spain, Hospital Universitario De Salamanca-IBSAL, Salamanca, Spain, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain, Centro Oncológico de Galicia, A Coruña, Spain, Hospital de Cabueñes, Gijon, Spain, Hospital Clinico Universitario de Valencia, Valencia, Spain, Hospital Donostia, San Sebastian, Spain, Department of Medical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañon, Madrid, Spain, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada

Research Funding

Other Foundation

Background: Retrospective data suggest that compared to double hormone receptor positive (HR+) (estrogen [ER+] and progesterone receptor [PgR+] positive), single receptor-positive (ER+/PgR- or ER-/PgR+) breast cancer (BC) patients have worse outcomes. Additionally, whether the ER-/PgR+ group is a real phenomenon or an analytic artifact remains elusive. Here, we evaluate the molecular classification and clinical outcomes of single versus double receptor positive BC patients enrolled in the GEICAM/9906 trial. Methods: We analyzed data from the GEICAM/9906 trial, a prospective adjuvant randomized phase-III study comparing six cycles of FEC to four cycles of FEC followed by eight weekly cycles of paclitaxel. HR+ patients received endocrine treatment at completion of chemotherapy. HER2+ patients did not receive adjuvant trastuzumab. Archival tumors were retrieved retrospectively and classified into intrinsic subtypes using the PAM50 gene expression assay. Distant metastasis free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS) were explored using a cox proportional hazard analysis Results: Of the 1,246 trial participants, data on intrinsic subtypes by central determination were available for 816 patients, from them 675 were double or single receptor positive. HER2+ disease was more common in the ER+/PgR- group (19%) than in the ER-/PgR+ or ER+/PgR+ groups (each 10%). The luminal A subtype was predominant within the double receptor positive (46%) and ER-/PgR+ (53%) patients. The majority of ER+/PgR- BC were luminal B (49%) or HER2 enriched (31%). Compared to double receptor positive patients, DMFS was similar in ER-/PgR+ patients (HR 1.12, 95%CI 0.52-2.40, p = 0.77), but worse in ER+/PgR- patients (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.09-2.34, p = 0.02). Similar results were observed for OS (HR 1.39, 95% CI 0.71-2.74, p = 0.34 and HR 1.71 95% CI 1.20-2.74, p = 0.003 respectively). Conclusions: The ER-/PgR+ subgroup resembles double receptor positive disease in terms of distribution of molecular subtypes and outcomes. The poor outcomes of the ER+/PgR- group may be explained by the higher proportion of patients with HER2-positive disease who did not receive adjuvant trastuzumab.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2016 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Breast Cancer—HER2/ER

Track

Breast Cancer

Sub Track

ER+

Citation

J Clin Oncol 34, 2016 (suppl; abstr 569)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.569

Abstract #

569

Poster Bd #

57

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts