Breast (Jun 2023)

Tailoring the optimal duration of the extended adjuvant endocrine therapy in patients with early-stage breast cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

  • Laura Pala,
  • Tommaso De Pas,
  • Eleonora Pagan,
  • Isabella Sala,
  • Chiara Catania,
  • Emma Zattarin,
  • Paolo Arnone,
  • Massimo M. Grassi,
  • Marco Colleoni,
  • Antonio C. Wolff,
  • Javier Cortes,
  • Martine Piccart,
  • Richard D. Gelber,
  • Giuseppe Viale,
  • Vincenzo Bagnardi,
  • Fabio Conforti

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 69
pp. 258 – 264

Abstract

Read online

Background: Controversy exists regarding the optimal duration of the extended adjuvant endocrine treatment (ET) in patients with early-stage breast-cancer (eBC).We performed a systematic review and trial-level meta-analysis of all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing a “limited-extended” adjuvant ET (defined as more than 5 but less than 7.5 years of treatment overall) versus a “full-extended” adjuvant ET (defined as more than 7.5 years of treatment overall) in eBC. Methods: To be eligible, RCTs had to i) compare a “limited-extended” adjuvant ET versus a “full-extended” adjuvant ET in patients with eBC; and ii) report disease-free survival (DFS) hazard ratio (HR) according to the disease nodal-status [i.e., nodal-negative (N-ve) versus nodal-positive (N + ve)].The primary endpoint was to assess the difference in efficacy of full-versus limited-extended ET, measured in terms of the difference in DFS log-HR, according to the disease nodal-status. Secondary endpoint was the difference in efficacy of full-versus limited-extended ET according to tumor size (i.e., pT1 vs pT2/3/4), histological grade (i.e., G1/G2 vs G3), patients’ age (i.e., ≤60 vs > 60 years) and previous type of ET (i.e., aromatase inhibitors vs tamoxifen vs switch strategy). Results: Three phase III RCTs fulfilled the inclusion criteria. A total of 6689 patients were included in the analysis, of which 3506 (53%) had N + ve disease.The full-extended ET provided no DFS-benefit as compared with the limited-extended ET in patients with N-ve disease (pooled DFS-HR = 1.04, 95%CI: 0.89 to 1.22; I2 = 18%).Conversely, in patients with N + ve disease the full-extended ET significantly improved DFS, with a pooled DFS-HR of 0.85 (95%CI: 0.74 to 0.97; I2 = 0%).There was a significant interaction between the disease nodal-status and the efficacy of the full-versus limited-extended ET (p-heterogeneity = 0.048).The full-extended ET provided no significant DFS-benefit as compared with the limited-extended ET in all the other subgroups analyzed. Conclusions: Patients with eBC and N + ve disease can obtain a significant DFS-benefit from the full-extended as compared with the limited-extended adjuvant ET.

Keywords