Abstract P5-13-04: Needle-to-knife wait time and impact on pCR in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction: In the setting of pre-operative neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for the treatment of breast cancer, it is important to ensure coordination between medical and surgical oncology. A study by Sanford et al. show that patients receiving surgery >8 weeks after NAC have worse overall survival. As NAC continues to expand its role in breast cancer treatment, a closer look at the maximal acceptable time between NAC and surgery becomes more important. We wished to assess the impact of time between last dose of chemotherapy and surgery on pathological complete response (pCR), disease free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and surgical complications. Methods: A cohort study was conducted utilizing the BC Cancer Agency's prospective neoadjuvant database, located in Vancouver, BC. Patients were selected if they had undergone NAC with curative intent for treatment of breast cancer, followed by surgical resection. Patients who received neoadjuvant radiation and/or hormone therapy were excluded. Patients were divided into three groups: those who had surgery <4 weeks from last dose of chemo, 4-8 weeks from last dose, and >8 weeks from last dose. Charts were audited for demographic data, tumour characteristics, and complications from surgery. Data was analyzed using a Chi Squared test to determine any differences in pCR, OS, DFS, and surgical complications, between the three different time intervals. Results: 347 patients were identified and included in this study. The median time to surgery after last dose of chemotherapy was 4.86 weeks (range 0.86-22.86 weeks). The percentage of patients that achieved pCR was 31.3%, 30.5%, and 28.6% in the <4 weeks, 4-8 weeks, and >8 weeks groups respectively (p= NS for all comparisons). There was no difference in pCR observed between the three groups based on receptor status. At the median follow up of 3 years, DFS was 85%, 85.8%, and 85.7% in all three groups. Likewise OS was 95%, 90%, and 89% respectively. The rate of surgical complications are 16%, 23.4%, and 21.4% for the three groups respectively (p=NS). Conclusions: This study demonstrated no difference between receiving surgery <4 weeks, 4-8 weeks, or >8 weeks after last dose of NAC on pCR, survival, or surgical complications. This finding was preserved in all receptor subtypes. This has important implications for resource allocation. This data may also help in counselling and easing patient anxiety in terms of the urgency (or lack thereof) and wait times for surgery. Subsequent studies with larger sample sizes will help to ensure that clinical differences in outcomes are not affected by wait times. Comparison of outcome measures based on needle to knife time < 4 weeks (n=80)4-8 weeks (n=239)>8weeks (n=28)p (<4 weeks vs. < 8 weeks)pCR31.3% (25)30.5% (73)28.6% (8)0.791HR+Her2-4.5% (1/22)6.5% (6/92)0% (0/5)--TNBC31.5% (6/19)42.1% (24/57)0% (0/6)--Her2+46.1% (18/39)48.8% (44/90)47.1% (8/17)--3 year DFS85%85.5%85.7%0.9273 year OS95%90%89%0.290Surgical Complication16.3%23.4%21.4%0.536 Citation Format: Lai V, Hajjaj O, Chia S, Simmons C. Needle-to-knife wait time and impact on pCR in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-13-04.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».