Purpose: Investigates the link between HER2 status and histological response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with early TNBC. Methods: We retrieved clinical and anatomopathological data retrospectively from 449 patients treated for the first time with standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early unilateral BC between 2005 and 2020. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response (pCR, i.e., ypT0 ypN0), according to HER2 status. Secondary endpoints included invasive disease-free survival (I-DFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: 437 patients were included, and 121 (27.7%) patients had HER2-low tumours. The pCR rate was not significantly different between the HER2-low group vs. the HER2-0 group (35.7% versus 41.8%, p = 0.284) in either univariate analysis or multivariate analysis adjusted for TNM classification and grade (odds ratio [OR] = 0.70, confidence interval [CI] 95% 0.45–1.08). With a median follow-up of 72.9 months, no significant survival differences were observed between patients with HER2-low tumours vs. patients with HER2-0 tumours in terms of I-DFS (p = 0.487) and OS (p = 0.329). Conclusions: In our cohort, HER2 status was not significantly associated with pCR in a manner consistent with data published recently on TNBC. However, the prognostic impact of HER2-low expression among TNBC patients warrants further evaluation.

In controlled phase II trials, major prognostic factors need to be well balanced between arms. The main procedures used are SPBR (Stratified Permuted Block Randomization) and minimization. First, we provide a systematic review of the treatment allocation procedure used in gastrointestinal oncology controlled phase II trials published in 2019. Second, we performed simulations using data from six phase II studies to measure the impacts of imbalances and bias on the efficacy estimations. From the 40 articles analyzed, all mentioned randomization in both the title and abstract, the median number of patients included was 109, and 77.5% were multicenter. Of the 27 studies that reported at least one stratification variable, 10 included the center as a stratification variable, 10 used minimization, 9 used SBR, and 8 were unspecified. In real data studies, the imbalance increased with the number of centers. The total and marginal imbalances were higher with SBR than with minimization, and the difference increased with the number of centers. The efficiency estimates per arm were close to the original trial estimate in both procedures. Minimization is often used in cases of numerous centers and guarantees better similarity between arms for stratification variables for total and marginal imbalances in phase II trials.