Update Breast Cancer 2022 Part 3 – Early-Stage Breast Cancer

Tanja N. Fehm; Manfred Welslau; Volkmar Müller; Diana Lüftner; Florian Schütz; Peter A. Fasching; Wolfgang Janni; Christoph Thomssen; Isabell Witzel; Erik Belleville; Michael Untch; Marc Thill; Hans Tesch; Nina Ditsch; Michael P. Lux; Bahriye Aktas; Maggie Banys-Paluchowski; Andreas Schneeweiss; Cornelia Kolberg-Liedtke; Andreas D. Hartkopf; Achim Wöckel; Hans-Christian Kolberg; Nadia Harbeck; Elmar Stickeler

doi:10.1055/a-1912-7105

Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, Inhaltsverzeichnis

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2022; 82(09): 912-921
DOI: 10.1055/a-1912-7105

GebFra Science

Review/Übersicht

Update Breast Cancer 2022 Part 3 – Early-Stage Breast Cancer

Artikel in mehreren Sprachen: English | deutsch

Tanja N. Fehm

¹Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany

,

Manfred Welslau

²Onkologie Aschaffenburg, Aschaffenburg, Germany

,

Volkmar Müller

³Department of Gynecology, Hamburg-Eppendorf University Medical Center, Hamburg, Germany

,

Diana Lüftner

⁴Immanuel Hospital Märkische Schweiz & Medical University of Brandenburg Theodor-Fontane, Brandenburg, Buckow, Germany

,

Florian Schütz

⁵Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Diakonissen-Stiftungs-Krankenhaus Speyer, Speyer, Germany

,

Peter A. Fasching

⁶Erlangen University Hospital, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany

,

Wolfgang Janni

⁷Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany

,

Christoph Thomssen

⁸Department of Gynaecology, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany

,

Isabell Witzel

³Department of Gynecology, Hamburg-Eppendorf University Medical Center, Hamburg, Germany

,

Erik Belleville

⁹ClinSol GmbH & Co KG, Würzburg, Germany

,

Michael Untch

¹⁰Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics, Breast Cancer Center, Gynecologic Oncology Center, Helios Klinikum Berlin Buch, Berlin, Germany

,

Marc Thill

¹¹Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Department of Gynecology and Gynecological Oncology, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

,

Hans Tesch

¹²Oncology Practice at Bethanien Hospital, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

,

Nina Ditsch

¹³Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany

,

Michael P. Lux

¹⁴Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Frauenklinik St. Louise, Paderborn, St. Josefs-Krankenhaus, Salzkotten, St. Vincenz Krankenhaus GmbH, Germany

,

Bahriye Aktas

¹⁵Department of Gynecology, University of Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany

,

Maggie Banys-Paluchowski

¹⁶Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany

,

Andreas Schneeweiss

¹⁷National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany

,

Cornelia Kolberg-Liedtke

¹⁸Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany

,

Andreas D. Hartkopf

⁷Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany

,

Achim Wöckel

¹⁹Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany

,

Hans-Christian Kolberg

²⁰Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Marienhospital Bottrop, Bottrop, Germany

,

Nadia Harbeck

²¹Breast Center, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics and CCC Munich LMU, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany

,

Elmar Stickeler

²²Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, RWTH University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany

› Institutsangaben

Abstract

This review summarizes recent developments in the prevention and treatment of patients with early-stage breast cancer. The individual disease risk for different molecular subtypes was investigated in a large epidemiological study. With regard to treatment, new data are available from long-term follow-up of the Aphinity study, as well as new data on neoadjuvant therapy with atezolizumab in HER2-positive patients. Biomarkers, such as residual cancer burden, were investigated in the context of pembrolizumab therapy. A Genomic Grade Index study in elderly patients is one of a group of studies investigating the use of modern multigene tests to identify patients with an excellent prognosis in whom chemotherapy may be avoided. These and other aspects of the latest developments in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer are described in this review.

Key words

breast cancer - early stage - adjuvant treatment - neoadjuvant treatment - chemotherapy - endocrine therapy

Volltext

Referenzen

References/Literatur
1 Lakhani SR, Reis-Filho JS, Fulford L. et al. Prediction of BRCA1 status in patients with breast cancer using estrogen receptor and basal phenotype. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11: 5175-5180
2 Couch FJ, Hart SN, Sharma P. et al. Inherited mutations in 17 breast cancer susceptibility genes among a large triple-negative breast cancer cohort unselected for family history of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33: 304-311
3 Fasching PA, Loibl S, Hu C. et al. BRCA1/2 Mutations and Bevacizumab in the Neoadjuvant Treatment of Breast Cancer: Response and Prognosis Results in Patients With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer From the GeparQuinto Study. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36: 2281-2287
4 Fasching PA, Yadav S, Hu C. et al. Mutations in BRCA1/2 and Other Panel Genes in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer-Association With Patient and Disease Characteristics and Effect on Prognosis. J Clin Oncol 2021; 39: 1619-1630
5 Shimelis H, LaDuca H, Hu C. et al. Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Risk Genes Identified by Multigene Hereditary Cancer Panel Testing. J Natl Cancer Inst 2018; 110: 855-862
6 Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Mavaddat N, Dorling L. et al. Pathology of Tumors Associated With Pathogenic Germline Variants in 9 Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes. JAMA Oncol 2022; 8: e216744
7 Hoyer J, Vasileiou G, Uebe S. et al. Addition of triple negativity of breast cancer as an indicator for germline mutations in predisposing genes increases sensitivity of clinical selection criteria. BMC Cancer 2018; 18: 926
8 Kraus C, Hoyer J, Vasileiou G. et al. Gene panel sequencing in familial breast/ovarian cancer patients identifies multiple novel mutations also in genes others than BRCA1/2. Int J Cancer 2017; 140: 95-102
9 Escala-Garcia M, Guo Q, Dork T. et al. Genome-wide association study of germline variants and breast cancer-specific mortality. Br J Cancer 2019; 120: 647-657
10 Stevens KN, Fredericksen Z, Vachon CM. et al. 19p13.1 is a triple-negative-specific breast cancer susceptibility locus. Cancer Res 2012; 72: 1795-1803
11 Stevens KN, Vachon CM, Lee AM. et al. Common breast cancer susceptibility loci are associated with triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer Res 2011; 71: 6240-6249
12 Broeks A, Schmidt MK, Sherman ME. et al. Low penetrance breast cancer susceptibility loci are associated with specific breast tumor subtypes: findings from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Hum Mol Genet 2011; 20: 3289-3303
13 Fasching PA, Pharoah PD, Cox A. et al. The role of genetic breast cancer susceptibility variants as prognostic factors. Hum Mol Genet 2012; 21: 3926-3939
14 Escala-Garcia M, Abraham J, Andrulis IL. et al. A network analysis to identify mediators of germline-driven differences in breast cancer prognosis. Nat Commun 2020; 11: 312
15 Fagerholm R, Khan S, Schmidt MK. et al. TP53-based interaction analysis identifies cis-eQTL variants for TP53BP2, FBXO28, and FAM53A that associate with survival and treatment outcome in breast cancer. Oncotarget 2017; 8: 18381-18398
16 Vachon CM, Scott CG, Tamimi RM. et al. Joint association of mammographic density adjusted for age and body mass index and polygenic risk score with breast cancer risk. Breast Cancer Res 2019; 21: 68
17 Hack CC, Emons J, Jud SM. et al. Association between mammographic density and pregnancies relative to age and BMI: a breast cancer case-only analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2017; 166: 701-708
18 Vachon CM, Pankratz VS, Scott CG. et al. The contributions of breast density and common genetic variation to breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015;
19 Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Menarche, menopause, and breast cancer risk: individual participant meta-analysis, including 118 964 women with breast cancer from 117 epidemiological studies. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13: 1141-1151
20 Colditz GA, Bohlke K. Priorities for the primary prevention of breast cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 2014; 64: 186-194
21 Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Breast cancer and breastfeeding: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 47 epidemiological studies in 30 countries, including 50302 women with breast cancer and 96973 women without the disease. Lancet 2002; 360: 187-195
22 Rudolph A, Song M, Brook MN. et al. Joint associations of a polygenic risk score and environmental risk factors for breast cancer in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Int J Epidemiol 2018; 47: 526-536
23 Brouckaert O, Rudolph A, Laenen A. et al. Reproductive profiles and risk of breast cancer subtypes: a multi-center case-only study. Breast Cancer Res 2017; 19: 119
24 Yang XR, Chang-Claude J, Goode EL. et al. Associations of breast cancer risk factors with tumor subtypes: a pooled analysis from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011; 103: 250-263
25 Milne RL, Gaudet MM, Spurdle AB. et al. Assessing interactions between the associations of common genetic susceptibility variants, reproductive history and body mass index with breast cancer risk in the breast cancer association consortium: a combined case-control study. Breast Cancer Res 2010; 12: R110
26 Stickeler E, Aktas B, Behrens A. et al. Update Breast Cancer 2021 Part 1 – Prevention and Early Stages. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2021; 81: 526-538
27 Huober J, Schneeweiss A, Hartkopf AD. et al. Update Breast Cancer 2020 Part 3 – Early Breast Cancer. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2020; 80: 1105-1114
28 Jung AY, Ahearn TU, Behrens S. et al. Distinct reproductive risk profiles for intrinsic-like breast cancer subtypes: pooled analysis of population-based studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2022;
29 Ramazzini B. De morbis artificium diatriba. 1700.
30 Kiechl S, Schramek D, Widschwendter M. et al. Aberrant regulation of RANKL/OPG in women at high risk of developing breast cancer. Oncotarget 2017; 8: 3811-3825
31 Sigl V, Jones LP, Penninger JM. RANKL/RANK: from bone loss to the prevention of breast cancer. Open Biol 2016;
32 Sigl V, Owusu-Boaitey K, Joshi PA. et al. RANKL/RANK control Brca1 mutation-driven mammary tumors. Cell Res 2016; 26: 761-774
33 Wunderle M, Ruebner M, Haberle L. et al. RANKL and OPG and their influence on breast volume changes during pregnancy in healthy women. Sci Rep 2020; 10: 5171
34 Mintz R, Wang M, Xu S. et al. Hormone and receptor activator of NF-kappaB (RANK) pathway gene expression in plasma and mammographic breast density in postmenopausal women. Breast Cancer Res 2022; 24: 28
35 Ditsch N, Wöcke A, Untch M. et al. AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2022. Breast Care 2022;
36 Francis PA, Pagani O, Fleming GF. et al. Tailoring Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Premenopausal Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2018; 379: 122-137
37 Regan MM, Francis PA, Pagani O. et al. Absolute improvements in freedom from distant recurrence with adjuvant endocrine therapies for premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) HER2-negative breast cancer (BC): Results from TEXT and SOFT. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36 (Suppl.) Abstr.. 503
38 Pagani O, Regan MM, Walley BA. et al. Adjuvant exemestane with ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2014; 371: 107-118
39 Francis PA, Regan MM, Fleming GF. et al. Adjuvant ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2015; 372: 436-446
40 Baek SY, Noh WC, Ahn S-H. et al. Adding ovarian function suppression to tamoxifen in young women with hormone-sensitive breast cancer who remain premenopausal or resume menstruation after chemotherapy: 8-year follow-up of the randomized ASTRRA trial. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40: 506
41 von Minckwitz G, Procter M, de Azambuja E. et al. Adjuvant Pertuzumab and Trastuzumab in Early HER2-Positive Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 122-131
42 von Minckwitz G, Huang CS, Mano MS. et al. Trastuzumab Emtansine for Residual Invasive HER2-Positive Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2019; 380: 617-628
43 Chan A, Moy B, Mansi J. et al. Final Efficacy Results of Neratinib in HER2-positive Hormone Receptor-positive Early-stage Breast Cancer From the Phase III ExteNET Trial. Clin Breast Cancer 2021; 21: 80-91.e7
44 Martin M, Holmes FA, Ejlertsen B. et al. Neratinib after trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy in HER2-positive breast cancer (ExteNET): 5-year analysis of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2017; 18: 1688-1700
45 Fasching PA, Hartkopf AD, Gass P. et al. Efficacy of neoadjuvant pertuzumab in addition to chemotherapy and trastuzumab in routine clinical treatment of patients with primary breast cancer: a multicentric analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2019; 173: 319-328
46 Gianni L, Pienkowski T, Im YH. et al. Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in women with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a randomised multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13: 25-32
47 Gianni L, Pienkowski T, Im YH. et al. 5-year analysis of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in patients with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17: 791-800
48 Loibl S, Jassem J, Sonnenblick A. et al. Updated Results of Aphinity at 8.4 years median follow up. ESMO Virtual Plenary 2022; July 14, 2022.
49 Schmid P, Cortes J, Dent R. et al. Event-free Survival with Pembrolizumab in Early Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2022;
50 Schmid P, Cortes J, Pusztai L. et al. Pembrolizumab for Early Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2020; 382: 810-821
51 Huober J, Barrios CH, Niikura N. et al. Atezolizumab With Neoadjuvant Anti-Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Therapy and Chemotherapy in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Early Breast Cancer: Primary Results of the Randomized Phase III IMpassion050 Trial. J Clin Oncol 2022;
52 Miles D, Gligorov J, Andre F. et al. Primary results from IMpassion131, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised phase III trial of first-line paclitaxel with or without atezolizumab for unresectable locally advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2021; 32: 994-1004
53 Jacob JB, Jacob MK, Parajuli P. Review of immune checkpoint inhibitors in immuno-oncology. Adv Pharmacol 2021; 91: 111-139
54 Schmid P, Cortes J, Dent R. et al. KEYNOTE-522: Phase III study of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs. placebo + chemotherapy, followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab vs. placebo for early-stage TNBC. Ann Oncol 2021;
55 Schmid P, Cortes J, Dent R. et al. KEYNOTE-522: Phase 3 Study of Pembrolizumab + Chemotherapy versus Placebo + Chemotherapy as Neoadjuvant Treatment, Followed by Pembrolizumab versus Placebo as Adjuvant Treatment for Early Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC). Ann Oncol 2019;
56 Huang M, OʼShaughnessy J, Zhao J. et al. Evaluation of Pathologic Complete Response as a Surrogate for Long-Term Survival Outcomes in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2020; 18: 1096-1104
57 Huang M, OʼShaughnessy J, Zhao J. et al. Association of Pathologic Complete Response with Long-Term Survival Outcomes in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. Cancer Res 2020; 80: 5427-5434
58 Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M. et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet 2014; 384: 164-172
59 von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer JU. et al. Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30: 1796-1804
60 Pusztai L, Denkert C, OʼShaughnessy J. et al. Event-free survival by residual cancer burden after neoadjuvant pembrolizumab + chemotherapy versus placebo + chemotherapy for early TNBC: Exploratory analysis from KEYNOTE-522. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40: 503-503
61 Symmans WF, Yau C, Chen YY. et al. Assessment of Residual Cancer Burden and Event-Free Survival in Neoadjuvant Treatment for High-risk Breast Cancer: An Analysis of Data From the I-SPY2 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol 2021; 7: 1654-1663
62 Symmans WF, Wei C, Gould R. et al. Long-Term Prognostic Risk After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Associated With Residual Cancer Burden and Breast Cancer Subtype. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35: 1049-1060
63 Symmans WF, Peintinger F, Hatzis C. et al. Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 4414-4422
64 MD Anderson Cancer Center. Residual Cancer Burden Calculator. Accessed July 16, 2022 at: http://www3.mdanderson.org/app/medcalc/index.cfm?pagename=jsconvert3
65 Gerdes J, Lelle RJ, Pickartz H. et al. Growth fractions in breast cancers determined in situ with monoclonal antibody Ki-67. J Clin Pathol 1986; 39: 977-980
66 Urruticoechea A, Smith IE, Dowsett M. Proliferation marker Ki-67 in early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 7212-7220
67 Viale G, Giobbie-Hurder A, Regan MM. et al. Prognostic and predictive value of centrally reviewed Ki-67 labeling index in postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer: results from Breast International Group Trial 1-98 comparing adjuvant tamoxifen with letrozole. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 5569-5575
68 Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D. et al. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009; 101: 736-750
69 Yerushalmi R, Woods R, Ravdin PM. et al. Ki67 in breast cancer: prognostic and predictive potential. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 174-183
70 Fasching PA, Heusinger K, Haeberle L. et al. Ki67, chemotherapy response, and prognosis in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment. BMC Cancer 2011; 11: 486
71 Heusinger K, Jud SM, Haberle L. et al. Association of mammographic density with the proliferation marker Ki-67 in a cohort of patients with invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012; 135: 885-892
72 von Minckwitz G, Schmitt WD, Loibl S. et al. Ki67 measured after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for primary breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2013; 19: 4521-4531
73 Penault-Llorca F, Radosevic-Robin N. Ki67 assessment in breast cancer: an update. Pathology 2017; 49: 166-171
74 Fasching PA, Gass P, Haberle L. et al. Prognostic effect of Ki-67 in common clinical subgroups of patients with HER2-negative, hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2019; 175: 617-625
75 Smith I, Robertson J, Kilburn L. et al. Long-term outcome and prognostic value of Ki67 after perioperative endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer (POETIC): an open-label, multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2020; 21: 1443-1454
76 Nielsen TO, Leung SCY, Rimm DL. et al. Assessment of Ki67 in Breast Cancer: Updated Recommendations From the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group. J Natl Cancer Inst 2021; 113: 808-819
77 Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, Rimm DL. et al. Ki67 as a Companion Diagnostic: Good or Bad News?. J Clin Oncol 2022;
78 Tarantino P, Burstein HJ, Lin NU. et al. Should Ki-67 be adopted to select breast cancer patients for treatment with adjuvant abemaciclib?. Ann Oncol 2022; 33: 234-238
79 Harbeck N, Rastogi P, Martin M. et al. Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: updated efficacy and Ki-67 analysis from the monarchE study. Ann Oncol 2021; 32: 1571-1581
80 Buus R, Sestak I, Kronenwett R. et al. Molecular Drivers of Oncotype DX, Prosigna, EndoPredict, and the Breast Cancer Index: A TransATAC Study. J Clin Oncol 2021; 39: 126-135
81 Cardoso F, vanʼt Veer LJ, Bogaerts J. et al. 70-Gene Signature as an Aid to Treatment Decisions in Early-Stage Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2016; 375: 717-729
82 Paik S, Shak S, Tang G. et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 351: 2817-2826
83 Piccart M, van ʼt Veer LJ, Poncet C. et al. 70-gene signature as an aid for treatment decisions in early breast cancer: updated results of the phase 3 randomised MINDACT trial with an exploratory analysis by age. Lancet Oncol 2021; 22: 476-488
84 Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF. et al. Adjuvant Chemotherapy Guided by a 21-Gene Expression Assay in Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2018; 379: 111-121
85 Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF. et al. Prospective Validation of a 21-Gene Expression Assay in Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2015; 373: 2005-2014
86 Kalinsky K, Barlow WE, Gralow JR. et al. 21-Gene Assay to Inform Chemotherapy Benefit in Node-Positive Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2021; 385: 2336-2347
87 Toussaint J, Sieuwerts AM, Haibe-Kains B. et al. Improvement of the clinical applicability of the Genomic Grade Index through a qRT-PCR test performed on frozen and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues. BMC Genomics 2009; 10: 424
88 Sotiriou C, Desmedt C. Gene expression profiling in breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2006; 17 (Suppl. 10) x259-x262
89 Brain E, Viansone AA, Bourbouloux E. et al. Final results from a phase III randomized clinical trial of adjuvant endocrine therapy ± chemotherapy in women ≥ 70 years old with ER+ HER2- breast cancer and a high genomic grade index: The Unicancer ASTER 70s trial. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40: 500