Neoadjuvant Treatment with HER2-Targeted Therapies in HER2-Positive Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Methods: A network meta-analysis was applied to estimate the risk ratios along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for pathological complete response (pCR) and serious adverse events (SAE). A mixed-effect parametric survival analysis was conducted to assess the disease-free survival (DFS) between treatments.
Results: Twenty-one RCTs with eleven regimens of neoadjuvant anti-HER2 therapy (i.e., trastuzumab + chemotherapy (TC), lapatinib + chemotherapy (LC), pertuzumab + chemotherapy (PC), pertuzumab + trastuzumab (PT), trastuzumab emtansine + pertuzumab (T-DM1P), pertuzumab + trastuzumab + chemotherapy (PTC), lapatinib + trastuzumab + chemotherapy (LTC), trastuzumab emtansine + lapatinib + chemotherapy (T-DM1LC), trastuzumab emtansine + pertuzumab + chemotherapy(T-DM1PC), PTC followed by T-DM1P (PTC_T-DM1P), and trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1)) and chemotherapy alone were included. When compared to TC, only PTC had a significantly higher DFS with a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 0.54 (0.32-0.91). The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) suggested that T-DM1LC (91.9%) was ranked first in achieving pCR, followed by the PTC_T-DM1P (90.5%), PTC (74.8%), and T-DM1PC (73.5%) regimens. For SAEs, LTC, LC, and T-DM1LC presented with the highest risks (SUCRA = 10.7%, 16.8%, and 20.8%), while PT (99.2%), T-DM1P (88%), and T-DM1 (83.9%) were the safest regimens. The T-DM1PC (73.5% vs. 71.6%), T-DM1 (70.5% vs. 83.9%), and PTC_T-DM1P (90.5% vs. 47.3%) regimens offered the optimal balance between pCR and SAE.
Conclusions: The T-DM1PC, T-DM1, and PTC_T-DM1P regimens had the optimal balance between efficacy and safety, while DFS was highest for the PTC regimen. However, these results were based on a small number of studies, and additional RCTs assessing the efficacy of regimens with T-DM1 are still needed to confirm these findings.
The optimal neoadjuvant treatment strategy for HR+/HER2 + breast cancer: a network meta-analysis.
Liu S, Yu M, Mou E, Wang M, Liu S, Xia L Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):713.
PMID: 39753653 PMC: 11699132. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-84039-2.
Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Therapy for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review.
Qari A, Mowais A, Alharbi S, Almuayrifi M, Al Asiri A, Alwatid S Eur J Breast Health. 2024; 20(3):156-166.
PMID: 39257007 PMC: 11589290. DOI: 10.4274/ejbh.galenos.2024.2023-12-16.
Gunasekara A, Youngkong S, Anothaisintawee T, Dejthevaporn T, Fernandopulle R, Chaikledkaew U Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):16736.
PMID: 39033229 PMC: 11271297. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-67598-2.
Kang Z, Jin Y, Yu H, Li S, Qi Y BMC Cancer. 2024; 24(1):708.
PMID: 38851684 PMC: 11162572. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12478-1.
Predictors of recurrence in breast cancer patients with pathological partial response.
Trabulus F, Nazli M, Arslan E, Mermut O, Dal F, Akce B Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2024; 70(3):e20231215.
PMID: 38656005 PMC: 11042820. DOI: 10.1590/1806-9282.20231215.