Relapse-free survival and metastasis-free survival between patients with breast cancer receiving adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy: A retrospective study in Iran.
{"title":"Relapse-free survival and metastasis-free survival between patients with breast cancer receiving adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy: A retrospective study in Iran.","authors":"Mina Azarnia, Mehran Sharifi, Zahra Rezaeian, Saeedeh Arabzadeh, Shaghayegh Haghjooy Javanmard","doi":"10.22088/cjim.17.2.347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Breast cancer is the most common malignancy among women in Iran and worldwide. Although both neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapies are widely used, their impact on relapse-free survival (RFS) and metastasis-free survival (MFS) in real-world settings remains unclear. This study aimed to compare RFS and MFS between neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients who had received adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy at Seyed Al-Shohada Hospital during July 2016 and July 2020. The cut-off date was July 202. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression models were used to evaluate RFS and MFS. To address potential confounding by indication due to non-randomized treatment assignment, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied using propensity scores based on age, tumor grade, and molecular subtype.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Neoadjuvant therapy was significantly associated with increased relapse risk compared to adjuvant therapy in both multivariate (HR = 3.06, P = 0.030) and IPTW-weighted models (HR = 6.10, P = 0.002). No significant difference in MFS was observed between treatment groups. TNBC was identified as the strongest predictor of metastasis (HR = 6.45, P = 0.001). Subtype-specific analyses revealed better outcomes with adjuvant therapy in Luminal A and improved MFS/RFS with neoadjuvant therapy in TNBC.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Adjuvant therapy was associated with better local disease control (RFS), while MFS was primarily influenced by tumor subtype. These findings highlighted the importance of subtype-tailored therapeutic strategies and supported the use of causal methods such as IPTW in observational oncology research.</p>","PeriodicalId":9646,"journal":{"name":"Caspian Journal of Internal Medicine","volume":"17 2","pages":"347-359"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13524354/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Caspian Journal of Internal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22088/cjim.17.2.347","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Breast cancer is the most common malignancy among women in Iran and worldwide. Although both neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapies are widely used, their impact on relapse-free survival (RFS) and metastasis-free survival (MFS) in real-world settings remains unclear. This study aimed to compare RFS and MFS between neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients.
Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients who had received adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy at Seyed Al-Shohada Hospital during July 2016 and July 2020. The cut-off date was July 202. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression models were used to evaluate RFS and MFS. To address potential confounding by indication due to non-randomized treatment assignment, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied using propensity scores based on age, tumor grade, and molecular subtype.
Results: Neoadjuvant therapy was significantly associated with increased relapse risk compared to adjuvant therapy in both multivariate (HR = 3.06, P = 0.030) and IPTW-weighted models (HR = 6.10, P = 0.002). No significant difference in MFS was observed between treatment groups. TNBC was identified as the strongest predictor of metastasis (HR = 6.45, P = 0.001). Subtype-specific analyses revealed better outcomes with adjuvant therapy in Luminal A and improved MFS/RFS with neoadjuvant therapy in TNBC.
Conclusion: Adjuvant therapy was associated with better local disease control (RFS), while MFS was primarily influenced by tumor subtype. These findings highlighted the importance of subtype-tailored therapeutic strategies and supported the use of causal methods such as IPTW in observational oncology research.