Evidence Hub

Circulating tumour cells and pathological complete response: independent prognostic factors in inflammatory breast cancer in a pooled analysis of two multicentre phase II trials (BEVERLY-1 and -2) of neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with bevacizumab

Pierga JY, Bidard FC, Autret A, Petit T, Andre F, Dalenc F, Levy C, Ferrero JM et al.

Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology, 2017

55 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We present a pooled analysis of predictive and prognostic values of circulating tumour cells (CTC) and circulating endothelial cells (CEC) in two prospective trials of patients with inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with neoadjuvant and adjuvant bevacizumab.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Nonmetastatic T4d patients were enrolled in two phase II multicentre trials, evaluating bevacizumab in combination with sequential neoadjuvant chemotherapy of four cycles of FEC followed by four cycles of docetaxel in HER2-negative tumour (BEVERLY-1) or docetaxel and trastuzumab in HER2-positive tumour (BEVERLY-2). CTC and CEC were detected in 7.5 and 4 ml of blood, respectively, with the CellSearch System.

RESULTS: From October 2008 to September 2010, 152 patients were included and 137 were evaluable for CTC and CEC. At baseline, 55 patients had detectable CTC (39%). After four cycles of chemotherapy, a dramatic drop in CTC to a rate of 9% was observed (P < 0.01). Pathological complete response (pCR) rate was 40%. No correlation was found between CTC or CEC levels and pCR rate. Median follow-up was 43 months. CTC detection (≥1 CTC/7.5 ml) at baseline was associated with shorter 3-year disease-free survival (39% versus 70% for patients without CTC, P < 0.01, HR 2.80) and shorter 3-year overall survival (OS) (P < 0.01). In multivariate analysis, independent prognostic parameters for shorter survival were absence of hormonal receptors, no pCR…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 55 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free