Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display

3541 - Survival impact of adjuvant chemotherapy in screening breast cancer

Date

10 Oct 2016

Session

Poster display

Presenters

Irene Zarcos Pedrinaci

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2016) 27 (6): 43-67. 10.1093/annonc/mdw364

Authors

I. Zarcos Pedrinaci1, A. Romero2, J. Louro2, M. Banqué2, M. Vernet3, L. Serrano4, R. Funez5, F. Medina6, D. Perez7, A. Rueda8, M. Sala2, M. Redondo9

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medical Oncology, A.S Hospital Costa del Sol, 29603 - Malaga/ES
  • 2 Epidemiology, University Hospital del Mar, Barcelona/ES
  • 3 Surgery, University Hospital del Mar, Barcelona/ES
  • 4 Pathology, University Hospital del Mar, Barcelona/ES
  • 5 Pathology, A.S Hospital Costa del Sol, 29603 - Malaga/ES
  • 6 Surgery, A.S Hospital Costa del Sol, 29603 - Malaga/ES
  • 7 Oncology, A.S Hospital Costa del Sol, 29603 - Malaga/ES
  • 8 Medical Oncology, Hospital Costa del Sol, 29602 - Malaga/ES
  • 9 Research Unit, A.S Hospital Costa del Sol, 29603 - Malaga/ES
More

Resources

Abstract 3541

Background

Breast cancers (BC) detected by mammographic screening have shown to have better prognosis than symptomatic ones. The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) in some localized BC is controversial, as it has potential side effects. The objective of this study is to analyze survival differences of adjuvant CT among screening BC.

Methods

This is a cohort study with 1.248 breast cancers included from 4 screening national programs, between 2000-2006. Follow-up was ended in 2014. Risk of death was estimated through Cox analysis. Hazard Ratio was adjusted by chemotherapy groups (with or without CT) and stage.

Results

Two hundred sixty six prevalent cases were diagnosed (41,7% with CT), 633 Incident (40,9% with CT), and 349 interval carcinomas (59,6% with CT). After a median follow-up of 102 months deaths were 22.1% for Interval, 10.4% for Incident and 7,9% for prevalent carcinomas. Prevalent and Incident carcinomas who did not receive CT had no differences in death risk with respect to those who received CT adjusting by the stage. However, comparing to Prevalent carcinomas without CT, Interval carcinomas have shown an increase risk of death more pronounced when CT is not administered (Table).

Risk of death was estimated through Cox analysis. ** Hazard Ratio adjusted by chemotherapy groups (with or without CT) and stage

Death Risk
HR aHR**
Screening BC group
Prevalent Ref
Incident 1,42 (0,87-2,34)
Interval 3,5 (2,15-5,7)
Group + CT
Prevalent without CT Ref Ref
Prevalent with CT 0,54 (0,22-1,34) 1,72 (0,66-4,47)
Incident with CT 1,34 (0,67-2,67) 2,12 (0,92-4,89)
Incident without CT 0,91 (0,45-1,82) 1,82 (0,79-4,17)
Interval with CT 2,44 (1,25-4,75) 3,14 (1,37-7,17)
Interval without CT 3,3 (1,66-6,56) 3,69 (1,56-8,74)

Conclusions

Interval carcinoma is a screen-detected tumor with a worse prognosis compared to Incident and prevalent carcinomas. Adjuvant CT did not modify survival in Prevalent and incident carcinomas. Therefore, the detection methods should be taken into account before administering adjuvant CT.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Red de Investigación en Servicios de Salud en Enfermedades Crónicas (REDISSEC)

Funding

Red de Investigación en Servicios de Salud en Enfermedades Crónicas (REDISSEC)

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings