Evidence Hub

Role of imaging based response assesment for adapting neoadjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer: A systematic review

Oguz Lafci, Daphne Resch, A. Santonocito, P. Clauser, T. Helbich, P. Baltzer

European Journal of Radiology, 2025

3 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE

The objective of this systematic review is to investigate the role of imaging in response monitoring during neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) for breast cancer and assess whether treatment modifications based on imaging response are implemented in clinical practice.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted, analyzing five clinical practice guidelines and 147 clinical trial publications involving NST for breast cancer. The snowballing technique was employed, using a "start set" of clinical guidelines to trace relevant trials. Additionally, a PubMed search was conducted to identify trials published between 2023-2024. The review analyzed the use of imaging modalities, timing, and response criteria, and whether escalation, de-escalation, or change of treatment occurred based on imaging response.

RESULTS

Imaging was utilized in 81 % (119/147) of the trials, with ultrasound, MRI, and mammography being the most frequently employed modalities. Mid-treatment imaging was applied in 56 % (83/147) of the trials. However, only 15 % (22/147) of the trials implemented treatment modifications based on imaging response, highlighting the limited application of imaging response-guided therapy. No standardized imaging protocols or consistent response-guided treatment strategies were identified across the trials or clinical practice guidelines, with considerable variability in imaging methods, timing, and response criteria.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review underscores the critical…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

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