Analysis reveals long-term survival and potential curability in metastatic breast cancer patients, indicating effective treatment outcomes.
Background Treatment advances in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) have led to prolongation in overall survival (OS), nevertheless MBC is considered an incurable disease. Real-world data provides an opportunity to assess outcomes in an unselected patient population receiving standard-of-care therapy and assess for potential curability. Method Patient, tumour and treatment characteristics collected prospectively were analysed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed for characteristics associated with OS ≥ 10-years. Time-to-next treatment (TTNT) and OS were compared to published clinical trials with significant survival benefits. Patients were deemed long-term survivors (LTS) if OS ≥ 5 or 10 yrs (TN or non-TN disease respectively). OS surpassing results in the recent ESME cohort analysis were deemed long-term responders (LTR). A stringent definition was used to define potentially cured patients. Results MBC patients (N = 920) diagnosed between February 1999 to January 2021 were included. OS ≥ 10yrs was significantly more likely in those with de novo MBC, one anatomical metastatic site throughout the illness, HER2-positive disease, ≤ 3 metastatic sites at diagnosis, pathological concordance between primary/metastatic tissue and clinical trial participation (all p < 0.001). Efficacy of first-line chemotherapy (n = 452) or endocrine therapy (n = 272) demonstrated similar or longer TTNT and/or OS compared to published results for most regimens evaluated. LTS or LTR were seen in 16% of patients, with 8.7% potentially cured. Conclusion Effective clinical trial outcomes can be achieved in a real-world setting. OS ≥ 10-years and durable responses, with potential cure is possible. Real-world data provides valuable long-term outcome information and optimism for MBC patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: