Primary Endocrine Therapy vs Upfront Surgery for Older Women With Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors

Neil Carleton, Jian Zou, Yangyang Mu, Steffi Oesterreich, Shannon Puhalla, Julia Foldi, George Tseng, Adrian V Lee, Priscilla F McAuliffe

Published in

JAMA network open. Volume 9. Issue 11. Pages e2643218. Nov 02, 2026. Epub Nov 02, 2026.

Abstract

As the population of older women with breast cancer grows, an increasing number are considered for primary endocrine therapy (pET), yet clinicians lack a framework for identifying which patients are appropriate candidates, resulting in reliance on chronologic age and life expectancy rather than tumor biology.
To evaluate survival and variables associated with response duration for patients treated with pET.
PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception through March 26, 2026.
Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and non-RCT (observational) cohorts comparing pET with surgery in operable, nonmetastatic, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer.
Data were extracted independently by 2 reviewers per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Hazard ratios (HRs) not directly reported were reconstructed from Kaplan-Meier curves. Randomized clinical trial-derived HRs for overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were pooled using a random-effects model, given anticipated heterogeneity across trials spanning 5 decades and differing tumor biology criteria. Observational cohorts were analyzed descriptively, not pooled for comparative survival, given susceptibility to confounding by indication.
The main outcomes were OS and BCSS (RCTs) assessed using meta-analysis. Time to progression, salvage intervention rates, and variables associated with progression and mortality (observational cohorts) were assessed using descriptive analyses.
Twenty-nine studies (6 RCTs and 23 observational cohorts; 22 821 patients; overall median [IQR] age, 83.1 [77.0-85.0] years) met the inclusion criteria. Patients from RCTs were generally younger (median [IQR] age, 77.0 [75.8-78.0] years) than those from the observational studies (median [IQR] age, 84.0 [81.5-86.0] years). Treatment with pET was not associated with a statistically significant OS difference vs surgery (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.98-1.33), though the point estimate favored surgery. Median time to progression ranged from 19.7 months (range, 13.5-26.0 months) in tumor biology-unselected, tamoxifen-era cohorts to more than 50 months in ER-selected and aromatase inhibitor-treated cohorts. Tumor biology was consistently associated with progression risk.
This systematic review and meta-analysis of more than 22 000 patients with ER-positive breast cancer found no statistically significant survival difference between pET and upfront surgery. Durable disease control under pET seemed to be concentrated in patients with favorable biology. These findings support a framework incorporating tumor biology and frailty, rather than age alone, to identify candidates for pET.

PMID:
42993545
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 07 Nov 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.