الفهرس 
INTRODUCTIONOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 113 |  |  |
| | | from | 113 | | |
Abstract
The aim of using Neoadjuvant chemotherapy has exceeded down staging
locally advanced cases and the ability to do BCS especially in the era of
advanced techniques of oncoplastic surgery. NACT is now accepted to be
used in all cases where chemotherapy was indicated at diagnosis for the aim
of improving DFS and OS. Another benefit of NACT is in vivo sensitivity
testing of the response of various breast cancer molecular subtypes to
different chemotherapy regimens.
The criteria to assess pathologic response have not been standardized yet;
however, in the majority of the studies, the degree of response to treatment
has a strong correlation with survival
Metformine is oral hypoglycemic drug commonly used to treat type 2 DM.
The anti-neoplastic effect of metformin involves both direct (insulinindependent)
and indirect (insulin-dependent) actions of the drug.
We did a prospective control study which included 59 female patients
with stage II,III breast cancer eligible for neoadjuvant chemotherapy . Only
triple negative subtype was excluded from our study. Our sample was divided
into group (A) with 27 patients represented metformine group received
standard NAC with metformine 850mg BID, and group (B) included 32
patients represented control group and received only neoadjuvant
chemotherapy.
The main finding of our study is that the rate of complete pathological
response was 14.8% (4 patients) in group (A) ”metformin group” versus 6.3%
(2 patients) in group (B) ”non-metformin group” with a P-value of 0.39.
When we used residual cancer burden scoring system in the analysis of
pathological response and combined class (RCB 0/1/2) versus RCB class 3