BACKGROUND: According to current guidelines, endocrine therapy (ET) is recommended as first-line treatment of luminal-like metastatic breast cancer (MBC), whereas chemotherapy (CT) should be considered in presence of life-threatening disease. In daily practice, CT is often used outside of this clinical circumstance. Factors influencing first-line choice and the relative impact on outcome are unknown. METHODS: A consecutive series of luminal-like HER2-negative MBC patients treated from 2004 to 2014 was analyzed to test the association of disease- and patient-related factors with the choice of first-line treatment (ET vs. CT). A propensity score method was used to estimate impact of first-line strategy on outcome. RESULTS: Of 604 consecutive luminal-like MBC patients identified, 158 cases were excluded due to unknown or positive HER2-status. Among 446 HER2-negative cases, 171 (38%) received first-line CT. On multivariate analysis, the only factors significantly associated with lower CT use were old age (OR 0.25, 95%C.I. 0.13-0.49) or presence of bone metastases only (OR 0.26, 95%C.I. 0.13-0.53). In propensity score matched population, no differences were observed between CT and ET as first-line treatment either in terms of overall survival (37.5 months and 33.4 months respectively, log-rank test, P = 0.62) or progression-free survival (13.3 months and 9.9 months respectively, log-rank test, P = 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: High percentage of patients with luminal-like MBC received CT as first-line therapy in real-life. The choice was mainly driven by age and site of metastases. With the limitations of a non-randomized comparison, no differences on patients' outcome were observed depending on the first-line strategy.

Chemotherapy versus endocrine therapy as first-line treatment in patients with luminal-like HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: A propensity score analysis

DE ANGELIS, CARMINE;MILANO, MONICA;STANZIONE, BRIGIDA;GARGIULO, PIERA;DE PLACIDO, SABINO;ARPINO, GRAZIA;
2017

Abstract

BACKGROUND: According to current guidelines, endocrine therapy (ET) is recommended as first-line treatment of luminal-like metastatic breast cancer (MBC), whereas chemotherapy (CT) should be considered in presence of life-threatening disease. In daily practice, CT is often used outside of this clinical circumstance. Factors influencing first-line choice and the relative impact on outcome are unknown. METHODS: A consecutive series of luminal-like HER2-negative MBC patients treated from 2004 to 2014 was analyzed to test the association of disease- and patient-related factors with the choice of first-line treatment (ET vs. CT). A propensity score method was used to estimate impact of first-line strategy on outcome. RESULTS: Of 604 consecutive luminal-like MBC patients identified, 158 cases were excluded due to unknown or positive HER2-status. Among 446 HER2-negative cases, 171 (38%) received first-line CT. On multivariate analysis, the only factors significantly associated with lower CT use were old age (OR 0.25, 95%C.I. 0.13-0.49) or presence of bone metastases only (OR 0.26, 95%C.I. 0.13-0.53). In propensity score matched population, no differences were observed between CT and ET as first-line treatment either in terms of overall survival (37.5 months and 33.4 months respectively, log-rank test, P = 0.62) or progression-free survival (13.3 months and 9.9 months respectively, log-rank test, P = 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: High percentage of patients with luminal-like MBC received CT as first-line therapy in real-life. The choice was mainly driven by age and site of metastases. With the limitations of a non-randomized comparison, no differences on patients' outcome were observed depending on the first-line strategy.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11588/686549
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 41
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 42
social impact