Efficacy and safety of goserelin vs. leuprolide in premenopausal breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy: A retrospective cohort study.
Xu Jiahao J, Tai Yicheng Y, Fang Qi Q, Xue Hui H et al.
Goserelin and leuprolide are gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists used for ovarian function suppression in premenopausal breast cancer patients. Whether their different molecular structures lead to clinically meaningful differences in efficacy and safety remains unclear. To compare the efficacy and safety of goserelin versus leuprolide as adjuvant endocrine therapy (combined with tamoxifen) in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer after curative surgery. This retrospective cohort study initially recruited 215 young cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy with tamoxifen combined with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 187 patients were included and divided into two groups according to the gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist they actually received: leuprolide (n=90) or goserelin (n=97). The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of patients achieving substantial estrogen reduction (estradiol ≤30 pg/mL or falling into the pre-specified laboratory range) after 6 months. Secondary outcomes included liver function parameters and thyroid function parameters. Exploratory outcomes included changes from baseline to six months in testosterone, luteinizing hormone (LH), follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), and prolactin levels, as well as descriptive assessment of the tumor marker carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). Between-group differences were expressed as risk differences (RDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Baseline demographic and cancer-related characteristics were balanced between the two groups. After six months of adjuvant therapy, the two groups showed similar primary efficacy: the proportion of patients with substantial estrogen reduction was 88.89% in the leuprolide group and 92.78% in the goserelin group (RD = -3.89%, 95% CI: -12.18% to 4.40%; p = 0.354). Regarding safety, the leuprolide group had a significantly higher rate of liver function abnormalities (30.00% vs. 13.40%; RD = 16.60%, 95% CI: 4.96% to 28.24%; p = 0.012), driven mainly by a lower rate of normal aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels (85.56% vs. 96.91%; RD = -11.35%, 95% CI: -19.39% to -3.31%; p < 0.05). In contrast, the leuprolide group had a higher rate of normal thyroid function (88.89% vs. 76.29%; RD = 12.60%, 95% CI: 1.94% to 23.26%; p = 0.018), mainly due to a higher normal thyroid-stimulating hormone rate (93.33% vs. 83.51%; RD = 9.82%, 95% CI: 0.82% to 18.82%; p < 0.05). Carcinoembryonic antigen normalization rates were also comparable (93.33% vs. 92.78%; RD = 0.55%, 95% CI: -6.74% to 7.84%; p = 0.549). Leuprolide and goserelin demonstrate similar efficacy when used as adjuvant therapy in combination with tamoxifen for young women with breast cancer. However, leuprolide may pose a potential risk of hepatic impairment, whereas goserelin appears to be associated with a higher incidence of thyroid injury. These findings provide a theoretical basis for personalized clinical management in this patient population.