Cited by 396Breast Cancer Treatment StudiesEstrogen and related hormone effectsAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies

Neoadjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Estrogen Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Open access
Spring, Laura M., Gupta, Arjun, Reynolds, Kerry L., Gadd, Michele A., Ellisen, Leif W., Isakoff, Steven J., Moy, Beverly, Bardia, Aditya·2016·JAMA Oncology

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) tumors of the breast are generally highly responsive to endocrine treatment. Although endocrine therapy is the mainstay of adjuvant treatment for ER+ breast cancer, the role of endocrine therapy in the neoadjuvant setting is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) on the response rate and the rate of breast conservation surgery (BCS) for ER+ breast cancer. DATA SOURCES: Based on PRISMA guidelines, a librarian-led search of PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE was performed to identify eligible trials published from inception to May 15, 2015. The search was performed in May 2015. STUDY SELECTION: Inclusion criteria were prospective, randomized, neoadjuvant clinical trials that reported response rates with at least 1 arm incorporating NET (n = 20). Two authors independently analyzed the studies for inclusion. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Pooled odds ratios (ORs), 95% CIs, and P values were estimated for end points using the fixed- and random-effects statistical model. RESULTS: The analysis included 20 studies with 3490 unique patients. Compared with combination chemotherapy, NET as monotherapy with aromatase inhibitors had a similar clinical response rate (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.50-2.35; P = .85; n = 378), radiological response rate (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.92-2.07; P = .12; n = 378), and BCS rate (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.41-1.03; P = .07; n = 334) but with lower toxicity. Aromatase inhibitors were associated with a significantly higher clinical response rate (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.36-2.10; P < .001; n = 1352), radiological response rate (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.18-1.89; P < .001; n = 1418), and BCS rate (OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.24-2.12; P < .001; n = 918) compared with tamoxifen. Dual combination therapy with growth factor pathway inhibitors was associated with a higher radiological response rate (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.04-2.43; P = .03; n = 355), but not clinical response rate (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.54-1.07; P = .11; n = 537), compared with endocrine monotherapy. The incidence of pathologic complete response was low (<10%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy, even as monotherapy, is associated with similar response rates as neoadjuvant combination chemotherapy but with significantly lower toxicity, suggesting that NET needs to be reconsidered as a potential option in the appropriate setting. Additional research is needed to develop rational NET combinations and predictive biomarkers to personalize the optimal neoadjuvant strategy for ER+ breast cancer.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.1897

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [61]Ma CX Gao F Northfelt D A phase II trial of neoadjuvant palbociclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitor, in combination with anastrozole for clinical stage 2 or 3 estrogen receptor positive HER2 negative (ER+HER2−) breast cancer (BC) Presented at: San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium December 11, 2015 San Antonio, TX Abstract S6-05

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Spring, L. M., Gupta, A., Reynolds, K. L., Gadd, M. A., Ellisen, L. W., Isakoff, S. J., Moy, B., & Bardia, A.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Bardia, Aditya
Venue
JAMA Oncology
Published
2016-11-01
Volume
2
Issue
11
Pages
1477
ISSN
2374-2437 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2467606258
Cited by
396
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 52 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 56 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 8
FWCI
9.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR001102)
  • National Cancer Institute (K12CA087723, T32CA071345)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Estrogen and related hormone effects
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Advanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Keywords
neoadjuvant endocrine therapy, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, aromatase inhibitors, breast-conserving surgery, clinical response rate, combination chemotherapy, treatment toxicity, randomized controlled trials meta-analysis
MeSH terms
Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Receptors, Estrogen, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Chemotherapy, Adjuvant, Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal, Neoadjuvant Therapy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review