Review Article

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Targeted Therapy in Breast Cancer: Past, Present, and Future

Table 5

The most important neoadjuvant phase-III trials in HER2-positive cancer.

TrialPhase ( )TumorsTreatmentPrimary endpointOther outcomesRef.

Buzdar et al.III (42/164)HER2+, II-IIIA4 × Pac → 4 × FEC ± H (24 × weekly)pCR 67 versus 25% ( );
(closed early because of pCR difference)
cORR 96 versus 84% ( = na);
no clinical cardiac failure;
>10% decrease in LVE 7 versus 5 patients
[28]

NOAHIII (99 Her2+/343)T3 N1 or T4 or N2-33 × APac → 4 × Pac → 3 × CMF ± H3 y-EFS 71 versus 56% ( )bpCR 43 versus 22% ( );
tpCR 38 versus 19% ( );
3 y-OS 87 versus 79% ( );
despite concurrent administration
with doxorubicin CHF only 2%
[16]

GeparQuattroIII (445 HER2+/1509)T1c–4d N0–3 (N0 only if HR−)4 × EC → 4 × Doc
+ H (HER2+) ± X (combination or sequence)
tpCR 32 versus 16% ( )BCT 63 versus 65% (ns);
pCR Doc versus Doc + X versus Doc→ X
22 versus 20 versus 22% (ns);
BCT 70 versus 68 versus 65% (ns)
[12, 30]

TECHNOII (217)HER2+, ≥2 cm or cT4d4 × EC → 4 × Pac
+ H
pCR 39%BCT 65%; CHF 3.7%
3 y-DFS 78%
3 y-DFS pCR versus non: 96 versus 86% ( )
[29]

GeparQuinto (Her2 positive)III (620)cT3/4; cT2 if HR− or cN+; cT1 if HR− or SLN+4 × EC → 4 × Doc
+ H versus L
pCR 30 versus 23% ( )cORR 90% both (ns)
diarrhea ≥ gr 3: 3 versus 12% ( )
CHF 1 versus 7 (ns)
[34]

CHER-LOBII (121)HER2+, II-IIIA12 × Pac → 4 × FEC + H versus L versus L + HpCR 25 versus 26 versus 47% (L/H versus L + H: = .019)BCT 67 versus 58 versus 70%;
diarrhea ≥ gr 3: 3 versus 36 versus 35%
[32]

NEO-ALTTOIII (455)HER2+, ≥2 cm6 × H (w) versus L versus L + H (w) → combination with 12 × Pac (w) → S → FEC + same schedule for 1 ypCR 30 versus 25 versus 51% (H versus L + H: ; H versus L: )cORR after 6 weeks 30 versus 53 versus 67% (both );
cORR at surgery 71 versus 74 ( ) versus 80% ( );
diarrhea ≥ gr 3: 2 versus 23 versus 21%
[63]

NSABP B-41III (522)HER2+, ≥2 cm4 × AC → 4 × Doc + H (w) versus L versus L + H (w) (+H for 1 y adjuvant for all)pCR 53 versus 53 versus 62% (H versus L + H: ; H versus L: )diarrhea ≥ gr 3: 2 versus 20 versus 27% ( ) 
CHF ≥ gr 3: 4 versus 4 versus 2% ( )
[33]

NeoSphereII (417)HER2+, ≥2 cm or cT4d(A) 4 × Doc + H versus
(B) 4 × Doc + H + P versus
(C) H + P versus
(D) 4 × Doc + P
pCR 29 versus 46 versus 17 versus 24%
(B versus A: ;
C versus A: ;
B versus D: )
cORR 81 versus 88 versus 66 versus 74%[35]

TRYPHAENA II (225)HER2+, II-III3 × FEC + H + P → 3 × Doc + H + P versus
3 × FEC → 3 × Doc + H + P versus 6 × Doc + Carbo + H + P
Cardiac safety: symptomatic LVSD 0 versus 2.7 versus 0%pCR 62 versus 57 versus 66%;
cORR 92 versus 95 versus 90%
[36]

Pac: paclitaxel; FEC: 5FU, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide; H: trastuzumab; APac: doxorubicin, paclitaxel; X: capecitabine; L: lapatinib; w: weekly; Doc: docetaxel; Carbo: carboplatin; na: not available; bpCR: pathological complete response in breast tissue; tpCR: total pathological complete response (inbreast and axillary nodes); LVSD: left ventricular end-systolic dimension.