鐘輝鳳,陳曉品
(重慶醫(yī)科大學,重慶400016)
三陰乳腺癌治療現(xiàn)狀
鐘輝鳳,陳曉品
(重慶醫(yī)科大學,重慶400016)
三陰乳腺癌(TNBC),即雌激素受體、孕激素受體、人表皮生長因子受體-2(Her-2)均為陰性的乳腺癌,約占乳腺癌的15.0%~25.0%,具有易復發(fā)、易轉移和預后差的特點,且不能從內(nèi)分泌治療和Her-2靶向藥物治療獲益。其治療為化療、手術及放療的綜合治療,有效的靶向治療正在探索中。該文主要就TNBC的局部治療、全身治療及預后進行了綜述。
乳腺腫瘤/治療;受體,雌激素;受體,孕酮;受體,表皮生長因子;三陰乳腺癌
三陰乳腺癌(triple-negative breast cancer,TNBC)是雌激素受體(estrogen receptor,ER)、孕激素受體(progesterone receptor,PR)、人表皮生長因子受體-2(human epidermal growth factor receptor-2,Her-2)均為陰性的一類特殊乳腺癌,約占乳腺癌的15.0%~25.0%。據(jù)2010年美國臨床腫瘤學會(american society of clinical oncology,ASCO)/美國病理學家協(xié)會(college of american pathologists,CAP)指南,ER、PR陰性是指免疫組化檢測腫瘤細胞核免疫染色陽性少于1.0%[1]。2013年ASCO/CAP推薦,Her-2陰性指標:(1)免疫組化0或1+;(2)在原位雜交(in-situ hybridization,ISH)檢測中平均每個細胞核中Her-2基因拷貝數(shù)少于4個,Her-2基因/17號染色體的平均比值小于2.0[2]。其在肥胖的[體質量指數(shù)(body mass index,BMI)≥30 kg/m2]、絕經(jīng)前的非洲裔美國女性發(fā)病率高。相比非三陰乳腺癌,具有腫瘤體積大(直徑大于2.0 cm)、腫瘤組織學分化等級高(3級)、發(fā)生淋巴轉移率較低[3]的特點。此外,TNBC發(fā)生遠處轉移的風險在2年內(nèi)迅速升高,2~3年達到高峰,5年后的轉移率明顯降低,8年后出現(xiàn)遠處轉移的概率極低[4]。且遠處轉移的主要器官:肺約40.0%,腦約30.0%,肝約20.0%,骨約10.0%。
乳腺癌的治療需根據(jù)臨床分期、病理結果、手術方式等因素進行綜合治療。Ⅰ期患者傾向于行保乳術治療,若腫瘤直徑大于0.5 cm或腋窩淋巴結微轉移灶直徑小于2.0 mm則需術后輔以化療;Ⅱ~Ⅲ期患者有保乳意愿者需給予術前輔助化療;Ⅳ期及復發(fā)患者則給予以全身化療為主的綜合治療。
局部治療包括手術切除及放療(radiationtherapy,RT),外科手術治療方式包括保乳術(breast conservative therapy,BCT)、乳房改良根治術(modified radical mastectomy,MRM)、單純?nèi)榉扛涡g(simple mastectomy,SM)等。Black等[5]隨訪了Ⅰ~Ⅱ期TNBC患者20年發(fā)現(xiàn),BCT治療10年內(nèi)局部復發(fā)率(20.0%)高于MRM(12.0%),但二者總生存率(分別為44.0%、39.0%)比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P>0.05)。Abdulkarim等[6]發(fā)現(xiàn),T1~2N0 TNBC患者分別行BCT、MRM、MRM聯(lián)合RT的5年局部無復發(fā)率分別為94.0%、85.0%、87.0%,三者比較,差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.01),5年生存率分別為87.0%、82.0%、68.0%,三者比較,差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.01)。表明BCT與MRM對患者總生存時間無明顯影響,早期TNBC患者行BCT治療所獲得的療效優(yōu)于MRM。但BCT亦有局限性,如病理切緣陽性、病變廣泛、既往做過乳腺或胸壁放療等是禁忌證。
Steward等[7]對Ⅰ~Ⅲ期TNBC患者分別行BCT、SM、MRM后輔助/不輔助放療進行的一項隨訪結果顯示,術后輔助放療可顯著提高患者總生存時間(輔助、不輔助放療分別為77.3%、59.8%),且術后放療可提高BCT組患者總生存時間(危險比:0.30,95%可信區(qū)間:0.16~0.58,P=0.001),但SM組(危險比:0.38;95%可信區(qū)間:0.05~3.04,P=0.340)和MRM組(危險比:0.77,95%可信區(qū)間:0.46~1.34,P=0.380)患者總生存時間無明顯改善。但Dragun等[8]研究發(fā)現(xiàn),在BCT和乳房切除術后輔以放療,1~3年內(nèi)無進展生存時間和局部復發(fā)率無明顯改善,但未輔以放療患者3年后局部復發(fā)風險增高。雖不同實驗結果之間存在差異,但多數(shù)學者認為,術后放療有助于控制局部復發(fā)及提高總生存率。此外,對于手術切緣陽性、腋窩淋巴結陽性、腫瘤直徑大于5.0cm的患者進行術后放療是必要的。
TNBC缺乏內(nèi)分泌治療及Her-2靶向藥物(如曲妥珠單抗、帕妥珠單抗等)治療,其全身治療主要為化療,包括術前輔助化療(即新輔助化療)和術后化療。隨著大量的臨床研究的進行,考慮到藥物不良反應及便于臨床應用TNBC以蒽環(huán)類或紫杉類藥物為基礎的化療方案作為治療的一線方案,紫杉類、蒽環(huán)類、環(huán)磷酰胺(TAC)為首選化療方案[9],并發(fā)現(xiàn)蒽環(huán)類、環(huán)磷酰胺(AC)序貫紫杉類(T)方案(即AC→T方案)優(yōu)于同步TAC方案[10]。但用于TNBC的分子靶向藥物目前暫無被推薦的,相關臨床研究仍在進行中?,F(xiàn)有的Ⅲ期臨床隨機對照試驗結果表明,貝伐單抗(阿瓦斯汀)/西妥昔單抗(愛必妥)聯(lián)合化療方案可提高患者無進展生存時間,但對總生存時間無影響[11]。
2.1 術前及術后輔助治療與非三陰乳腺癌比較,術前輔助化療可明顯縮小TNBC患者的腫瘤病灶,甚至部分患者能達到病理完全緩解(pathological complete response,PCR)。PCR是指治療后,病理分期達到y(tǒng)pT0 ypN0或ypT0/is ypN0[12],已作為預測長期臨床受益(包括總生存時間、無進展生存時間等)的指標[13]。臨床上患者獲得PCR可降低BCT后局部復發(fā)率[14],改善預后。有研究發(fā)現(xiàn),單用紫杉醇者PCR僅為12.0%,蒽環(huán)類為基礎的化療方案,PCR為20.0%[13],而使用標準的TAC方案者PCR為27.9%[15]。雖然標準方案可提高PCR,但與Her-2陽性患者獲得約60.0%PCR比較,仍有明顯差距[16]。多數(shù)TNBC患者具有攜帶乳腺癌易感基因-1(breast cancer susceptibility gene-1,BRCA1)突變基因的特點,Byrski等[17]對發(fā)生BRCA1突變的乳腺癌患者分別予以卡鉑,蒽環(huán)類、紫杉類(AT),環(huán)磷酰胺、甲氨蝶呤、氟尿嘧啶(CMF)、AC,氟尿嘧啶、蒽環(huán)類、環(huán)磷酰胺(FAC)治療,結果顯示,給予卡鉑治療后達PCR患者的比例顯著高于其他治療方案。Petrelli等[18]進行的回顧性研究表明,TNBC患者給予術前蒽環(huán)類或紫杉類藥物為基礎的方案化療,加鉑類(順鉑、卡鉑)獲得PCR的最小值為45.0%,顯著高于未加鉑類的化療方案。有研究發(fā)現(xiàn),卡鉑聯(lián)合紫杉類藥物的方案可使50.0%~55.0%的患者達PCR[19-20],TAC方案聯(lián)合卡鉑也明顯提高了PCR[21],但聯(lián)合卡鉑的方案可導致嚴重不良反應[22]。對于聯(lián)合鉑類藥物的方案是否能提高患者遠期生存率,目前暫無明確結果。在其他的治療方案中,TAC聯(lián)合吉西他濱或卡培他濱,目前認為對于提高PCR無明顯作用[23]。
此外,貝伐單抗作為分子靶向藥物,通過使血管內(nèi)皮生長因子(vascular endothelial growth factor,VEGF)失去生物活性而減少了腫瘤的血管形成,從而抑制腫瘤生長,被應用于全身治療。多個關于蒽環(huán)類或紫杉類藥物為基礎的化療方案聯(lián)合貝伐單抗用于術前輔助治療的研究顯示,貝伐單抗可明顯提高PCR(34.5%~42.0%),但相應地增加了藥物不良反應,如高血壓、黏膜炎、左室功能不全、手-足綜合征等[15,23-25]。Sikov等[21]對Ⅱ~Ⅲ期TNBC患者給予紫杉醇80 mg/m2,每周1次,治療12個周期,序貫4個周期的AC 60/600 mg/m2,每2周1次,聯(lián)合或不聯(lián)合9個周期貝伐單抗10 mg/kg,每2周1次,結果發(fā)現(xiàn),聯(lián)合貝伐單抗組和不聯(lián)合貝伐單抗組患者PCR分別為52.0%、44.0%。盡管該研究中聯(lián)合貝伐單抗提高PCR的作用不明顯,但PCR仍有所提高。
用于術前輔助治療的方案同樣適用于術后輔助治療,且輔以術后化療能有效改善患者預后。Colleoni等[26]對術后淋巴結陰性的乳腺癌患者輔以化療(方案為CMF)是否獲益進行了臨床研究,結果發(fā)現(xiàn),TNBC患者輔以化療可明顯降低10年總體發(fā)病率(化療后為21.0%,未化療為36.0%)。但不同化療方案對改善預后作用不同。Swain等[10]對比分析了AC→T、AC、TAC 3個方案在TNBC患者的無病生存率(分別為74.0%、69.0%、69.0%)、總生存率(分別為83.0%、79.0%、79.0%),以AC→T方案的治療更優(yōu)。有Meta分析結果顯示,為控制局部復發(fā)、提高無病生存率和總生存率,聯(lián)合紫杉類的化療方案優(yōu)于未聯(lián)合紫杉類者[27],聯(lián)合卡培他濱的化療方案可提高患者無病生存率[28]。但聯(lián)合貝伐單抗的化療方案用于術后輔助治療,患者無明顯受益[29]。
在TNBC的全身治療中,多藥物的聯(lián)合治療方案可提高TNBC患者的總生存時間、降低無病生存率和復發(fā)率等。但多種藥物聯(lián)合的治療方案依然需要進行長期的隨訪觀察和大樣本的臨床研究,新的藥物應用和研究仍需進一步探索。
2.2 復發(fā)轉移后的輔助治療TNBC易發(fā)生遠處轉移,發(fā)生轉移患者總生存時間明顯縮短。因此,需有效、規(guī)范地治療以提高患者總生存時間。多項Ⅲ期臨床研究已證實,聯(lián)合貝伐單抗的治療方案可顯著提高患者無進展生存時間和藥物總反應率,但對總生存時間無明顯影響[30-31]。Robert等[31]研究顯示,卡培他濱聯(lián)合或不聯(lián)合貝伐單抗的總反應率和中位無進展生存時間分別為35.4%、23.6%,9.2、7.2個月,總生存時間(危險比:0.85,95%可信區(qū)間:0.63~1.14,P=27.000)無明顯改善;紫杉類/蒽環(huán)類為基礎的化療方案聯(lián)合或不聯(lián)合貝伐單抗的總反應率和中位無進展生存時間分別為51.3%、37.9%,8.3、7.1個月,總生存時間(危險比:1.03,95%可信區(qū)間:0.77~1.38,P= 0.830)無明顯改善。且一項正在進行的Ⅲ期臨床研究表明,紫杉醇聯(lián)合貝伐單抗的治療方案與卡培他濱聯(lián)合貝伐單抗的方案比較,總反應率(分別為44.0%、27.0%,P<0.01)和中位無進展生存時間(分別為11.0、8.1個月,危險比:1.36,95%可信區(qū)間:10.4~12.9,P=0.005)更優(yōu)[32]。表明化療聯(lián)合貝伐單抗,尤其是紫杉醇聯(lián)合貝伐單抗用于治療TNBC,相比單一的化療,可提高患者無進展生存時間,但未改善患者總生存時間(這也是美國食品藥品監(jiān)督管理局未批準貝伐單抗用作一線藥物治療TNBC的重要因素),或許需更多相關研究來證實貝伐單抗的有效性。
Villarreal-Garza等[33]進行的聯(lián)合/不聯(lián)合鉑類的化療方案對改善中位總生存時間的研究發(fā)現(xiàn),作為一線治療方案時二者無明顯差異(各為2.0個月,P=0.900);作為二、三線治療方案時聯(lián)合鉑類的化療方案可明顯提高總生存時間(二線治療方案分別為4.0、1.0個月,P= 0.004;三線治療方案分別為4.0、0.5個月,P=0.004)。此外,在順鉑聯(lián)合/不聯(lián)合西妥昔單抗的一項Ⅱ期臨床研究中單藥順鉑的總反應率為10.0%,而聯(lián)合用藥為20.0%;無進展生存時間分別為1.5、3.7個月(危險比:0.67,95%可信區(qū)間:0.47~0.97,P=0.032);總生存時間分別為9.4、12.9個月(危險比:0.82,95%可信區(qū)間:0.56~1.20,P=0.310)。表明聯(lián)合用藥的治療方案優(yōu)于單一用藥的方案,但這仍需大量樣本和長期隨訪觀察。
其他的靶向藥物,如舒尼替尼,單藥治療無臨床獲益[34],聯(lián)合紫杉醇的療效較貝伐單抗聯(lián)合紫杉醇差,且不良反應明顯[35]。iniparib聯(lián)合吉西他濱、卡鉑的Ⅱ期臨床研究結果顯示,可改善患者總生存時間且未增加不良反應[36],但Ⅲ期臨床研究結果卻未達到總生存時間和無進展生存時間的共同主要終點的統(tǒng)計學標準,被認為是非真正的多聚腺苷二磷酸核糖聚合酶(poly ADP-ribose polymerase,PARP)抑制劑[37]。
在我國,TNBC患者的中位無進展生存時間約為38.5個月,中位生存時間約為43.0個月,5年內(nèi)無進展生存率約為75.7%,總生存率為86.6%,較非三陰乳腺癌患者5年內(nèi)無進展生存率、總生存率(分別約為79.6%、93.5%)低[38]。一旦確診發(fā)生遠處轉移后,患者總生存時間約為1年[3],尤其是發(fā)生腦轉移后的中位生存時間為4.0~7.0個月[39]。
目前,TNBC的治療方法有限,且缺乏有效的靶向藥物??刂凭植繌桶l(fā)、提高術前輔助化療的PCR、發(fā)現(xiàn)反應率高且毒性小的藥物(尤其是靶向藥物)可能是改善TNBC預后的關鍵。
[1]Hammond ME,Hayes DF,Wolff AC,et al.American Society of Clinical Oncology/College Of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer[J].J Oncol Pract,2010,6(4):195-197.
[2]Rakha EA,Starczynski J,Lee AH,et al.The updated ASCO/CAP guideline recommendations for HER2 testing in the management of invasive breast cancer:a critical review of their implications for routine practice[J]. Histopathology,2014,64(5):609-615.
[3]Lin NU,Vanderplas A,Hughes ME,et al.Clinicopathologic features,patterns of recurrence,and survival among women with triple-negative breast cancer in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network[J].Cancer,2012,118(22):5463-5472.
[4]Dent R,Trudeau M,Pritchard KI,et al.Triple-negative breast cancer:clinical features and patterns of recurrence[J].Clin Cancer Res,2007,13(15 Pt 1):4429-4434.
[5]Black DM,Hunt KK,Mittendorf EA.Long term outcomes reporting the safety of breast conserving therapy compared to mastectomy:20-year results of EORTC 10801[J].Gland Surg,2013,2(3):120-123.
[6]Abdulkarim BS,Cuartero J,Hanson J,et al.Increased risk of locoregional recurrence for women with T1-2N0 triple-negative breast cancer treated with modified radical mastectomy without adjuvant radiation therapycompared with breast-conserving therapy[J].J Clin Oncol,2011,29(21):2852-2858.
[7]Steward LT,Gao F,Taylor MA,et al.Impact of radiation therapy on survival in patients with triple-negative breast cancer[J].Oncol Lett,2014,7(2):548-552.
[8]Dragun AE,Pan J,Rai SN,et al.Locoregional recurrence in patients with triple-negative breast cancer:preliminary results of a single institution study[J].Am J Clin Oncol,2011,34(3):231-237.
[9]Burstein HJ.Patients with triple negative breast cancer:is there an optimal adjuvant treatment[J].Breast,2013,22 Suppl 2:S147-148.
[10]Swain SM,Jeong JH,Geyer CE,et al.Longer therapy,iatrogenic amenorrhea,and survival in early breast cancer[J].N Engl J Med,2010,362(22):2053-2065.
[11]Bramati A,Girelli S,Torri V,et al.Efficacy of biological agents in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer[J].Cancer Treat Rev,2014,40(5):605-613.
[12]Cortazar P,Zhang L,Untch M,et al.Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer:the CTNeoBC pooled analysis [J].Lancet,2014,384(9938):164-172.
[13]Liedtke C,et al.Response to neoadjuvant therapy and long-term survival in patients with triple-negative breast cancer[J].J Clin Oncol,2008,26(8):1275-1281.
[14]Caudle AS,Yu TK,Tucker SL,et al.Local-regional control according to surrogate markers of breast cancer subtypes and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients undergoing breast conserving therapy[J].Breast Cancer Res,2012,14(3):R83.
[15]von Minckwitz G,et al.Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and bevacizumab for HER2-negative breast cancer[J].N Engl J Med,2012,366(4):299-309.
[16]Schneeweiss A,Chia S,Hickish T,et al.Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab in combination with standard neoadjuvant anthracycline-containing and anthracycline-free chemotherapy regimens in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer:a randomized phaseⅡcardiac safety study(TRYPHAENA)[J].Ann Oncol,2013,24(9):2278-2284.
[17]Byrski T,Gronwald J,Huzarski T,et al.Pathologic complete response rates in young women with BRCA1-positive breast cancers after neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J].J Clin Oncol,2010,28(3):375-379.
[18]Petrelli F,Coinu A,Borgonovo K,et al.The value of platinum agents as neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancers:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J].Breast Cancer Res Treat,2014,144(2):223-232.
[19]Kern P,Kalisch A,Kolberg HC,et al.Neoadjuvant,anthracycline-free chemotherapy with carboplatin and docetaxel in triple-negative,early-stage breast cancer:a multicentric analysis of feasibility and rates of pathologic complete response[J].Chemotherapy,2013,59(5):387-394.
[20]Chang HR,Glaspy J,Allison MA,et al.Differential response of triplenegative breast cancer to a docetaxel and carboplatin-based neoadjuvant treatment[J].Cancer,2010,116(18):4227-4237.
[21]Sikov WM,Berry DA,Perou CM,et al.Impact of the Addition of Carboplatin and/or Bevacizumab to Neoadjuvant Once-per-Week Paclitaxel Followed by Dose-Dense Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide on Pathologic Complete Response Rates in StageⅡtoⅢTriple-Negative Breast Cancer:CALGB 40603(Alliance)[J].J Clin Oncol,2015,33(1):13-21.
[22]Kern P,Kalisch A,Kolberg HC,et al.Neoadjuvantcarboplatin in patients with triple-negative and HER2-positive early breast cancer(GeparSixto;GBG 66):a randomised phase 2 trial[J].Lancet Oncol,2014,15(7):747-756.
[23]Bear HD,Tang G,Rastogi P,et al.Bevacizumab added to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer[J].N Engl J Med,2012,366(4):310-320.
[24]Gerber B,Loibl S,Eidtmann H,et al.Neoadjuvant bevacizumab and anthracycline-taxane-based chemotherapy in 678 triple-negative primary breast cancers;results from the geparquinto study(GBG 44)[J].Ann Oncol,2013,24(12):2978-2984.
[25]Kim HR,Jung KH,Im SA,et al.Multicentre phaseⅡtrial of bevacizumab combined with docetaxel-carboplatin for the neoadjuvant treatment of triple-negative breast cancer(KCSG BR-0905)[J].Ann Oncol,2013,24(6):1485-1490.
[26]Colleoni M,Cole BF,Viale G,et al.Classical cyclophosphamide,methotrexate,and fluorouracil chemotherapy is more effective in triple-negative,node-negative breast cancer:results from two randomized trials of adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy for node-negative breast cancer[J].J Clin Oncol,2010,28(18):2966-2973.
[27]Qin YY,Li H,Guo XJ,et al.Adjuvant chemotherapy,with or without taxvant anes,in early or operable breast cancer:a meta-analysis of 19 randomized trials with 30698 patients[J].PLoS One,2011,6(11):e26946.
[28]Jiang Y,Yin W,Zhou L,et al.First efficacy results of capecitabine with anthracycline-and taxane-based adjuvant therapy in high-risk early breast cancer:a meta-analysis[J].PLoS One,2012,7(3):e32474.
[29]Cameron D,Brown J,Dent R,et al.Adjuvant bevacizumab-containing therapy in triple-negative breast cancer(BEATRICE):primary results of a randomised,phase 3 trial[J].Lancet Oncol,2013,14(10):933-942.
[30]Qin YY,Li H,Guo XJ,et al.Phase III study of bevacizumab plus docetaxel compared with placebo plus docetaxel for the first-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer[J]. J Clin Oncol,2010,28(20):3239-3247.
[31]Robert NJ,Diéras V,Glaspy J,et al.RIBBON-1:randomized,double-blind, placebo-controlled,phaseⅢtrial of chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab for first-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative,locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer[J].J Clin Oncol,2011,29(10):1252-1260.
[32]Lang I,Brodowicz T,Ryvo L,et al.Bevacizumab plus paclitaxel versus bevacizumab plus capecitabine as first-line treatment for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer:interim efficacy results of the randomised,openlabel,non-inferiority,phase 3 TURANDOT trial[J].Lancet Oncol,2013,14(2):125-133.
[33]Villarreal-Garza C,Khalaf D,Bouganim N,et al.Platinum-based chemotherapy in triple-negative advanced breast cancer[J].Breast Cancer Res Treat,2014,146(3):567-72.
[34]Barrios CH,Liu MC,Lee SC,et al.Phase III randomized trial of sunitinib versus capecitabine in patients with previously treated HER2-negative advanced breast cancer[J].Breast Cancer Res Treat,2010,121(1):121-131.
[35]Robert NJ,Saleh MN,Paul D,et al.Sunitinib plus paclitaxel versus bevacizumab plus paclitaxel for first-line treatment of patients with advanced breast cancer:a phaseⅢ,randomized,open-label trial[J].Clin Breast Cancer,2011,11(2):82-92.
[36]O′Shaughnessy J,Osborne C,Pippen JE,et al.Iniparib plus chemotherapy in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer[J].N Engl J Med,2011,364(3):205-214.
[37]Mateo J,Ong M,Tan DS,et al.Appraising iniparib,the PARP inhibitor that never was—what must we learn?[J].Nat Rev Clin Oncol,2013,10(12):688-696.
[38]Zhang L,Hao C,Dong G,et al.Analysis of Clinical Features and Outcome of 356 Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Patients in China[J].Breast Care(Basel),2012,7(1):13-17.
[39]Morris PG,Murphy CG,Mallam D,et al.Limited overall survival in patients with brain metastases from triple negative breast cancer[J].Breast J,2012,18(4):345-350.
Current status of treatment of triple-negative breast cancer
Zhong Huifeng,Chen Xiaopin
(Chongqing Medical University,Chongqing 400016,China)
Triple-negative breast cancer(TNBC)means the breast cancer with estrogen receptor,progestrone receptor,human epidermal growth factor receptor 2(Her-2)being negative,accounting for about 15.0%-25.0%of breast cancers.It is charaterized with tending to recrudesce,metastasis and being poor in prognosis,which didit benefit from adjusting Endocrine level and Her-2 targeted drugs.It′s treatment is comprehensive including chemotherapy,surgery and radiotherapy,while the effective targeted therapy is in process.This article focuses on the local and general therapies as well as prognosis.
Breast neoplasms/therapy;Receptors,estrogen;Receptors,progesterone;Receptors,epidermal growth factor;Triple-negative breast cancer
10.3969/j.issn.1009-5519.2015.04.003
:A
:1009-5519(2015)04-0488-03
2014-11-05)
鐘輝鳳(1990-),女,江西贛州人,碩士研究生,主要從事腫瘤專業(yè)相關研究;E-mail:871181172@qq.com。
陳曉品(E-mail:cxp640910@163.com)。