Skip to main content

Table 5 Review of studies comparing MBC and TNBC

From: Assessment of outcomes and novel immune biomarkers in metaplastic breast cancer: a single institution retrospective study

 Outcomes (MBC vs TNBC)
Author (year)Sample (N)MatchingAnalysisDFS % (p)DFS HR (p)OS % (p)OS HR (p)Chemotherapy
Lee H, et al. (2012) [31]MBC = 67
TNBC = 520
1:8
-Stage
Univariate 3.65 (p < 0.001) 3.5 (p < 0.001)MBC and TNBC stage I–III:
-16.7% and 20.5% anthracycline- and taxane (combination)-based NACTx
MBC and TNBC recurrence or stage IV:
-17% anthracycline based
-35% taxane based
-30% capecitabine containing
-17% other
Distribution of regimens between MBC and TNBC (p = 0.280)
Multivariate 2.53 (p = 0.005) 2.56 (p = 0.017)
Aydiner A, et al. (2015) [32]MBC = 54 TNBC = 511:1
-Clinical and pathologic features
-Demographic features
-Treatment modality
UnivariatePFS*
3 years
51% vs 82% (p = 0.013)
 3 years
68% vs 94%
(p = 0.009)
 MBC and TNBC stage I–IV:
- 36% and 28% anthracycline based
- 2% and 8% taxane based
- 48% and 64% anthracycline + taxane based
- 14% and 0% other regimens
Distribution of regimens between MBC and TNBC (p = 0.67)
Multivariate PFS*
0.09
(p < 0.001)
 0.35 (p = 0.19)
El Zein D, et al. (2017) [33]MBC = 46 TNBC = 5081:1
-Age
-Stage
-Grade
-Treatment setting
-Treatment modality
Univariate5 years
74% vs 90% (p < 0.001)
 5 years
65% vs 87% (p = 0.002)
 MBC stage I–III:
-78.6% AC/T
-4.3% CMF
-2.1% MAID
-6.5% carboplatin based
-4.3% gemcitabine based
Distribution of regimens between MBC and TNBC (p = N/A)
Multivariate 1.99 (p = 0.05) 1.50 (p = 0.25)
Song Y, et al. (2013) [34]MBC = 55
TNBC = 131
1:2
-Age
-Period of diagnosis
Univariate5 years
46% vs 60% (p < 0.001)
 5 years
55% vs 73% (p < 0.001)
 MBC stage I–III:
-37.5% TAC adjuvant CTx
-14.5% CMF adjuvant CTx
-14.5% FAC adjuvant CTx
-18.75% FAC→TC adjuvant CTx
-8.3% TAC + cisplatin/capecitabine adjuvant CTx
-6.25% TAC + capecitabine/vinorelbine adjuvant CTx
Distribution of regimens betweenMBC and TNBC (p = N/A)
MultivariateNot performed vs TN-IDC Not performed vs TN-IDC 
Current studyMBC = 44
TNBC = 130
1:3
-Age
-Stage
UnivariateDDFS*
5 years
78% vs 79% (p = 0.35)
 5 years
79% vs 81% (p = 0.32)
 MBC and TNBC stage I–IV:
-70.5% and 77.7% AC
-4.5% and 6.9% TC
-2.3% and 0.8% FEC
-0.0% and 0.8% docetaxel + carboplatin
-13.6% and 11.5% paclitaxel + carboplatin
-0.0% and 0.8% gemcitabine + cisplatin
-0.0% and 1.5% gemcitabine + paclitaxel
No significant differences in regimen use between MBC and TNBC.
MBC and TNBC stage I–IV:
-77.3% and 80.0% anthracycline received
-13.6% and 13.1% platinum received
-70.5% and 85.4% taxane received
Significant difference in taxane use between groups (p = 0.041)
Multivariate DDFS*
1.64 (p = 0.22)
 1.64 (p = 0.26)
  1. Abbreviations: MBC = metaplastic breast cancer, TNBC = triple negative breast cancer, DFS disease-free survival, PFS = progression-free survival; OS = overall survival, HR = hazard ratio, CTx = chemotherapy; TAC = taxane/paclitaxel, anthracyclines, and cyclophosphamide, CMF = cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil, FAC→TC = fluorouracil, doxorubicin/anthracyclines and cyclophosphamide to taxane, paclitaxel/cisplatin/carboplatin, AC/T = doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide with/without paclitaxel or docetaxel; MAID = mesnex, doxorubicin, ifosfamide, and dacarbazine, AC = doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide, TC = cyclophosphamide and docetaxel, FEC = fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide