Efficacy and safety of TE/TEC/intensive paclitaxel neoadjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of breast cancer

• Published in: Oncology letters Vol. 17; no. 1; pp. 907 - 912
• Main Authors: Liu, Yang, Xu, Zhaoguo, Zhang, Zhenyong, Wen, Guangfu, Sun, Jiaxing, Han, Feng
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Greece Spandidos Publications 01.01.2019; Spandidos Publications UK Ltd; D.A. Spandidos
• Subjects: Adjuvant chemotherapy; Antineoplastic agents; Biopsy; Breast cancer; Cancer therapies; Chemotherapy; Combination chemotherapy; Comparative analysis; Dosage and administration; Drug therapy; Epidermal growth factor; Liver; Lymphatic system; Metastasis; Oncology; Ultrasonic imaging; China; neoadjuvant chemotherapy; paclitaxel; breast cancer; adverse reactions; efficacy; molecular typing
• ISSN: 1792-1074; 1792-1082
• DOI: 10.3892/ol.2018.9658

Efficacy and safety of paclitaxel/docetaxel + epirubicin (TE), paclitaxel/docetaxel + epirubicin + cytoxan (TEC) and intensive paclitaxel (IP) neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) were compared for the treatment of breast cancer. The clinical data of 326 patients with stage II-III unilateral primary breast cancer treated in Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University from January 2012 to April 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients received NCT for 4 cycles, including 115 cases of TE group, 109 cases of TEC group, and 102 cases of paclitaxel weekly group. The clinical efficacy was evaluated and complete response (CR) + partial response (PR) indicated clinically effective. The pathological effect was evaluated and the grade III+IV+V indicated pathologically effective. The rates of clinical efficacy and pathological CR (pCR) were compared, and the incidence of adverse reactions was also observed. The effects of different molecular typing on clinical efficacy and pCR were compared. Our results showed that the clinical effective rates in TE, TEC and IP groups were 80.9, 89.0 and 77.5%, respectively, and there were no statistically significant differences (P=0.074). The pCR rates in the three groups were 9.57, 8.26 and 5.88%, respectively, and the differences were not statistically significant (P=0.602). The incidence rate of neutropenia was statistically different among the three groups of patients (P<0.001), which was the highest in TEC group and the lowest in IP group. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence rates of adverse reactions (P>0.05). Estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2)-positive states were significantly correlated with the high clinical effective rate and high pCR rate (P<0.05). In conclusion, IP has the lowest incidence rate of neutropenia. Additionally, ER-negative, PR-negative and HER-2-positive states are significantly correlated with the high clinical effective rate and high pCR rate.