Impact of concurrent use of goserelin on the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in young breast cancer patients.
- Author:
Miaoyu LIU
1
;
Siyuan WANG
1
;
Lin PEI
2
;
Shu WANG
1
Author Information
1. Breast Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China.
2. Clinical Laboratory, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Breast cancer, young;
Goserelin;
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy
- MeSH:
Humans;
Goserelin/administration & dosage*;
Female;
Breast Neoplasms/pathology*;
Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods*;
Adult;
Middle Aged;
Young Adult;
Adolescent;
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant;
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use*;
Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/therapeutic use*;
Treatment Outcome;
Receptor, ErbB-2
- From:
Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences)
2025;57(2):291-297
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To explore the effect of concurrent administration of goserelin for ovarian function protection on the pathological complete response (pCR) rate and objective response rate (ORR) of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in young breast cancer patients.
METHODS:The study enrolled breast cancer patients aged 18-45 with clinical stages ⅡA~ⅢC from January 2016 to May 2020. According to patients' willingness, they were divided into two groups: Those who chose to receive goserelin to protect ovarian function during NAC (goserelin group) and those who did not (chemotherapy group). The pCR rate and ORR were compared between the two groups, and subgroup analysis was conducted for patients with different molecular subtypes.
RESULTS:A total of 93 patients were included in this study (31 in the goserelin group and 62 in the chemotherapy group). After propensity score weighting (PSW) adjustment, baseline data such as age, preoperative clinical stage, postoperative pathological stage, pa-thological type, hormone receptor status, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and Ki-67 expression, molecular subtypes, and chemotherapy regimens were well-matched between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the pCR rate between the goserelin group and the chemotherapy group, with rates of 29.0% and 25.8%, respectively (P=0.741). Similarly, there was no significant difference in ORR between the two groups (90.3% vs. 87.1%, P=0.746). Subgroup analysis revealed that among the patients with hormone receptor-positive tumors, there were no significant differences in pCR rate (6.3% vs. 7.7%, P=0.852) or ORR (87.5% vs. 82.1%, P=0.839) between the goserelin and chemotherapy groups. Among the patients with hormone receptor-negative tumors, there were also no significant differences in pCR rate (53.3% vs. 56.5%, P=0.847) or ORR (93.3% vs. 95.7%, P=0.975) between the two groups. One year after the completion of chemotherapy, the incidence of chemotherapy-induced amenorrhea (CIA) was significantly lower in the goserelin group compared with the chemotherapy group (9.5% vs. 33.3%, P=0.036).
CONCLUSION:For young breast cancer patients with clinical stages of ⅡA~ⅢC, there was no statistical difference in pCR rate and ORR whether or not using goserelin during NAC. However, it is still necessary to expand the sample size and carry out a longer follow-up to evaluate the effect of goserelin on the long-term survival of young patients.
