Landscape of HER2-low metastatic breast cancer (MBC): results from the Austrian AGMT_MBC-Registry.

BACKGROUND: About 50% of all primary breast cancers show a low-level expression of HER2 (HER2-low), defined as immunohistochemically 1+ or 2+ and lack of HER2 gene amplification measured by in situ hybridization. This low HER2 expression is a promising new target for antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) currently under investigation. Until now, little is known about the frequency and the prognostic value of low HER2-expression in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The MBC-Registry of the Austrian Study Group of Medical Tumor Therapy (AGMT) is a multicenter nationwide ongoing registry for MBC patients in Austria. Unadjusted, univariate survival probabilities of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by the log-rank test. Multivariable adjusted hazard ratios were estimated by Cox regression models. In this analysis, only patients with known HER2 status and available survival data were included. RESULTS: As of 11/15/2020, 1,973 patients were included in the AGMT-MBC-Registry. Out of 1,729 evaluable patients, 351 (20.3%) were HER2-positive, 608 (35.2%) were HER2-low and 770 (44.5%) were completely HER2-negative (HER2-0). Low HER2-expression was markedly more frequent in the hormone-receptor(HR)+ subgroup compared to the triple-negative subgroup (40% vs. 23%). In multivariable analysis, low HER2 expression did not significantly influence OS neither in the HR+ (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.74-1.05; P = 0.171) nor in the triple-negative subgroup (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.68-1.25; P = 0.585), when compared to completely HER2-negative disease. Similar results were observed when HER2 IHC 2+ patients were compared to IHC 1+ or 0 patients. CONCLUSION: Low-HER2 expression did not have any impact on prognosis of metastatic breast cancer in this real-world population.

Conventional versus reverse sequence of neoadjuvant epirubicin/cyclophosphamide and docetaxel: sequencing results from ABCSG-34.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative chemotherapy containing anthracyclines and taxanes is well established in early-stage breast cancer. Previous studies have suggested that the chemotherapy sequence may matter but definitive evidence is missing. ABCSG trial 34 evaluated the activity of the MUC1 vaccine tecemotide when added to neoadjuvant treatment; the study provided the opportunity for the second randomisation to compare two different anthracycline/taxane sequences. METHODS: HER2-negative early-stage breast cancer patients were recruited to this randomised multicentre Phase 2 study. Patients in the chemotherapy cohort (n = 311) were additionally randomised to a conventional or reversed sequence of epirubicin/cyclophosphamide and docetaxel. Residual cancer burden (RCB) with/without tecemotide was defined as primary study endpoint; RCB in the two chemotherapy groups was a key secondary endpoint. RESULTS: No significant differences in terms of RCB 0/I (40.1% vs. 37.2%; P = 0.61) or pathologic complete response (pCR) rates (24.3% vs. 25%, P = 0.89) were observed between conventional or reverse chemotherapy sequence. No new safety signals were reported, and upfront docetaxel did not result in decreased rates of treatment delay or discontinuation. CONCLUSION: Upfront docetaxel did not improve chemotherapy activity or tolerability; these results suggest that upfront neoadjuvant treatment with anthracyclines remains a valid option.

Impact of Breast Surgery in Primary Metastasized Breast Cancer: Outcomes of the Prospective Randomized Phase III ABCSG-28 POSYTIVE Trial.

BACKGROUND: Conflicting evidence exists regarding the value of surgical resection of the primary in stage IV breast cancer patients. OBJECTIVE: The prospective randomized phase III ABCSG-28 POSYTIVE trial evaluated median survival comparing primary surgery followed by systemic therapy to primary systemic therapy in de novo stage IV breast cancer. METHODS: Between 2011 and 2015, 90 previously untreated stage IV breast cancer patients were randomly assigned to surgical resection of the primary tumor followed by systemic therapy (Arm A) or primary systemic therapy (Arm B) in Austria. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the primary study endpoint. RESULTS: The trial was stopped early due to poor recruitment. Ninety patients (45 arm A, 45 arm B) were included; median follow-up was 37.5 months. Patients in the surgery arm had more cT3 breast cancer (22.2% vs 6.7%) and more cN2 staging (15.6% vs 4.4%). Both groups were well balanced with respect to the type of first-line systemic treatment. Median survival in arm A was 34.6 months, versus 54.8 months in the nonsurgery arm [hazard ratio (HR) 0.691, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.358-1.333; P = 0.267]; time to distant progression was 13.9 months in the surgery arm and 29.0 months in the nonsurgery arm (HR 0.598, 95% CI 0.343-1.043; P = 0.0668). CONCLUSION: The prospective phase III trial ABCSG-28 (POSYTIVE) could not demonstrate an OS benefit for surgical resection of the primary in breast cancer patients presenting with de novo stage IV disease.

Self-reported sexual health: Breast cancer survivors compared to women from the general population - an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivorship is of increasing importance in post-treatment care. Sexual health (SH) and femininity can be crucial issues for women surviving cancer. We aimed to determine a more complete understanding of the contribution that a breast cancer (BC) diagnosis and its treatment exert on patients' follow-up SH. For this purpose, self-reported levels and predictors of SH in breast cancer survivors (BCS) were compared with those of women with no previous or current BC (WNBC). METHODS: BCS and WNBC underwent a comprehensive, cross-sectional patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessment. Validated PRO instruments were used to measure SH, body image, anxiety and depression and menopausal symptoms. Assessments were performed within the routine clinical setting. Instruments used were the Sexual Interest and Desire Inventory - Female, Sexual Activity Questionnaire, Body Image Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the Menopause-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire. RESULTS: One hundred five BCS (average time since diagnosis of 3 years) and 97 WNBC with a mean age of 49 years completed the assessment. SH was significantly worse in BCS compared to WNBC (p = 0.005; BCS SIDI-F mean = 24.9 vs. WNBC mean = 29.8). 68.8% of BCS and 58.8% of WNBC met criteria of a hypo-active sexual desire disorder. Higher depressive symptoms, higher age and lower partnership satisfaction were predictive for poorer SH in BCS. CONCLUSION: SH problems are apparent in BCS and differ significantly from those seen in the general population. Consequently, BC survivorship care should include interventions to ameliorate sexual dysfunction and provide help with depressive symptoms and partnership problems, which are associated with poor BCS SH.

Personalized treatment of women with early breast cancer: a risk-group specific cost-effectiveness analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy accounting for companion prognostic tests OncotypeDX and Adjuvant!Online.

BACKGROUND: Due to high survival rates and the relatively small benefit of adjuvant therapy, the application of personalized medicine (PM) through risk stratification is particularly beneficial in early breast cancer (BC) to avoid unnecessary harms from treatment. The new 21-gene assay (OncotypeDX, ODX) is a promising prognostic score for risk stratification that can be applied in conjunction with Adjuvant!Online (AO) to guide personalized chemotherapy decisions for early BC patients. Our goal was to evaluate risk-group specific cost effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy for women with early stage BC in Austria based on AO and ODX risk stratification. METHODS: A previously validated discrete event simulation model was applied to a hypothetical cohort of 50-year-old women over a lifetime horizon. We simulated twelve risk groups derived from the joint application of ODX and AO and included respective additional costs. The primary outcomes of interest were life-years gained, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs and incremental cost-effectiveness (ICER). The robustness of results and decisions derived were tested in sensitivity analyses. A cross-country comparison of results was performed. RESULTS: Chemotherapy is dominated (i.e., less effective and more costly) for patients with 1) low ODX risk independent of AO classification; and 2) low AO risk and intermediate ODX risk. For patients with an intermediate or high AO risk and an intermediate or high ODX risk, the ICER is below 15,000 EUR/QALY (potentially cost effective depending on the willingness-to-pay). Applying the AO risk classification alone would miss risk groups where chemotherapy is dominated and thus should not be considered. These results are sensitive to changes in the probabilities of distant recurrence but not to changes in the costs of chemotherapy or the ODX test. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our modeling study, chemotherapy is effective and cost effective for Austrian patients with an intermediate or high AO risk and an intermediate or high ODX risk. In other words, low ODX risk suggests chemotherapy should not be considered but low AO risk may benefit from chemotherapy if ODX risk is high. Our analysis suggests that risk-group specific cost-effectiveness analysis, which includes companion prognostic tests are essential in PM.

Adjuvant denosumab in breast cancer (ABCSG-18): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant endocrine therapy compromises bone health in patients with breast cancer, causing osteopenia, osteoporosis, and fractures. Antiresorptive treatments such as bisphosphonates prevent and counteract these side-effects. In this trial, we aimed to investigate the effects of the anti-RANK ligand antibody denosumab in postmenopausal, aromatase inhibitor-treated patients with early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. METHODS: In this prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, postmenopausal patients with early hormone receptor-positive breast cancer receiving treatment with aromatase inhibitors were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either denosumab 60 mg or placebo administered subcutaneously every 6 months in 58 trial centres in Austria and Sweden. Patients were assigned by an interactive voice response system. The randomisation schedule used a randomly permuted block design with block sizes 2 and 4, stratified by type of hospital regarding Hologic device for DXA scans, previous aromatase inhibitor use, and baseline bone mineral density. Patients, treating physicians, investigators, data managers, and all study personnel were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was time from randomisation to first clinical fracture, analysed by intention to treat. As an additional sensitivity analysis, we also analysed the primary endpoint on the per-protocol population. Patients were treated until the prespecified number of 247 first clinical fractures was reached. This trial is ongoing (patients are in follow-up) and is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, number 2005-005275-15, and with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00556374. FINDINGS: Between Dec 18, 2006, and July 22, 2013, 3425 eligible patients were enrolled into the trial, of whom 3420 were randomly assigned to receive denosumab 60 mg (n=1711) or placebo (n=1709) subcutaneously every 6 months. Compared with the placebo group, patients in the denosumab group had a significantly delayed time to first clinical fracture (hazard ratio [HR] 0·50 [95% CI 0·39-0·65], p<0·0001). The overall lower number of fractures in the denosumab group (92) than in the placebo group (176) was similar in all patient subgroups, including in patients with a bone mineral density T-score of -1 or higher at baseline (n=1872, HR 0·44 [95% CI 0·31-0·64], p<0·0001) and in those with a bone mineral density T-score of less than -1 already at baseline (n=1548, HR 0·57 [95% CI 0·40-0·82], p=0·002). The patient incidence of adverse events in the safety analysis set (all patients who received at least one dose of study drug) did not differ between the denosumab group (1366 events, 80%) and the placebo group (1334 events, 79%), nor did the numbers of serious adverse events (521 vs 511 [30% in each group]). The main adverse events were arthralgia and other aromatase-inhibitor related symptoms; no additional toxicity from the study drug was reported. Despite proactive adjudication of every potential osteonecrosis of the jaw by an international expert panel, no cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw were reported. 93 patients (3% of the full analysis set) died during the study, of which one death (in the denosumab group) was thought to be related to the study drug. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant denosumab 60 mg twice per year reduces the risk of clinical fractures in postmenopausal women with breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitors, and can be administered without added toxicity. Since a main side-effect of adjuvant breast cancer treatment can be substantially reduced by the addition of denosumab, this treatment should be considered for clinical practice. FUNDING: Amgen.

Dual-energy contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM).

Dual-energy contrast-enhanced mammography is one of the latest developments in breast care. Imaging with contrast agents in breast cancer was already known from previous magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography studies. However, high costs, limited availability-or high radiation dose-led to the development of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM). We reviewed the current literature, present our experience, discuss the advantages and drawbacks of CESM and look at the future of this innovative technique.

Prophylactic long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSF) in gynecologic malignancies: an oncologic expert statement.

We reviewed the status of the use of the prophylactic long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) pegfilgrastim and lipegfilgrastim in gynecologic malignancies. Long-acting G-CSFs should not be used in weekly regimens. Filgrastim is not indicated in patients with febrile and/or severe neutropenia after administration of long-acting G-CSF in the same cycle. One study has shown a moderate effect on febrile neutropenia of ciprofloxacin when co-administered with pegfilgrastim. There is broad evidence from meta-analyses that pegfilgrastim effectively reduces severe neutropenia. In parallel, its adverse effects have been studied extensively. All-cause mortality was significantly reduced by pegfilgrastim. The glycopegylated long-acting G-CSF, lipegfilgrastim has demonstrated antineutropenic efficacy similar to that of pegfilgrastimin in one breast cancer study. In another pivitol non-small cell lung cancer study, impaired survival was observed in the lipegfilgrastim group during the first 30 days of study. The European Medicines Agency claimed more profound safety data to be provided for lipegfilgrastim by 2017.

L1CAM is expressed in triple-negative breast cancers and is inversely correlated with androgen receptor.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease displaying distinct molecular features and clinical outcome. The molecular profile of triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs) overlaps with that of basal-like breast cancers that in turn show similarities with high-grade serous ovarian and endometrial carcinoma. L1CAM is an established biomarker for the latter cancers and we showed before that approximately 18% of primary breast cancers are positive for L1CAM and have a bad prognosis. Here we analysed the expression of L1CAM breast cancer subtypes. METHODS: We analyzed mRNA and protein expression data from different breast cancer cohorts for L1CAM, estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, Her-2 and Androgen receptor (AR) and correlated the data. We performed Western blot analysis on tumor cell lysates and carried out chromatin-immuno-precipitation (CHIP) after AR overexpression. RESULTS: We find that L1CAM is expressed preferentially though not exclusively in TNBCs. Using the human cancer genome atlas database and two independent breast cancer cohorts we find that L1CAM is inversely correlated with androgen receptor (AR) expression. We found that L1CAM(high)AR(low) primary breast tumors have the worst clinical outcome. Overexpression of AR in MDA-MB436 breast cancer cells decreased L1CAM expression at the protein and mRNA level and CHIP-analysis revealed binding of AR to the L1CAM promoter region. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that L1CAM in breast cancer is under AR control. The data also strongly advocate the use of L1CAM assessment in breast cancer diagnosis. We suggest that L1CAM expression could be causally related to the bad prognosis of TNBCs.

Clinical applications of next-generation sequencing-based ctDNA analyses in breast cancer: defining treatment targets and dynamic changes during disease progression.

The advancements in the detection and characterization of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) have revolutionized precision medicine and are likely to transform standard clinical practice. The non-invasive nature of this approach allows for molecular profiling of the entire tumor entity, while also enabling real-time monitoring of the effectiveness of cancer therapies as well as the identification of resistance mechanisms to guide targeted therapy. Although the field of ctDNA studies offers a wide range of applications, including in early disease, in this review we mainly focus on the role of ctDNA in the dynamic molecular characterization of unresectable locally advanced and metastatic BC (mBC). Here, we provide clinical practice guidance for the rapidly evolving field of molecular profiling of mBC, outlining the current landscape of liquid biopsy applications and how to choose the right ctDNA assay. Additionally, we underline the importance of exploring the clinical relevance of novel molecular alterations that potentially represent therapeutic targets in mBC, along with mutations where targeted therapy is already approved. Finally, we present a potential roadmap for integrating ctDNA analysis into clinical practice.

Capecitabine plus paclitaxel versus epirubicin plus paclitaxel as first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer: efficacy and safety results of a randomized, phase III trial by the AGO Breast Cancer Study Group.

Capecitabine/taxane combinations are highly active in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We conducted a randomized, phase III, noninferiority trial comparing capecitabine plus paclitaxel (XP) with epirubicin plus paclitaxel (EP) as first-line therapy for MBC, regarding progression-free survival (PFS) as primary efficacy endpoint. Females who had received no prior chemotherapy for MBC were randomized to six 3-weekly cycles of XP (capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) b.i.d., days 1-14; paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) 3-h infusion, day 1) or EP (epirubicin 60 mg/m(2) 1-h infusion, day 1; paclitaxel as above). Secondary endpoints included response rate, overall survival, tolerability, and quality of life (QoL). Each arm included 170 patients, most of whom received all six cycles as planned. The difference in means of (logarithmic) PFS times (-0.205) did not meet the pre-defined level for noninferiority (-0.186). However, PFS was similar in the two arms [HR: XP vs. EP: 1.012 (95 % CI 0.785-1.304); median 10.4 months XP vs. 9.2 months EP]. Overall survival was also similar [HR 1.027 (95 % CI 0.740-1.424); median 22.0 vs. 26.1 months], and response rate was 47 % versus 42 %. Both regimens were tolerable: there were more grade 3/4 diarrhea and grade 3 hand-foot syndromes with XP and more grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities with EP. There were no major differences in QoL. Although, noninferiority of XP to EP was formally not proven, first-line XP was active and feasible. XP is a valid first-line alternative to anthracycline/taxane regimens, especially in patients previously treated with adjuvant anthracyclines.

Endocrine therapy plus zoledronic acid in premenopausal breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian suppression plus tamoxifen is a standard adjuvant treatment in premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer. Aromatase inhibitors are superior to tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients, and preclinical data suggest that zoledronic acid has antitumor properties. METHODS: We examined the effect of adding zoledronic acid to a combination of either goserelin and tamoxifen or goserelin and anastrozole in premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer. We randomly assigned 1803 patients to receive goserelin (3.6 mg given subcutaneously every 28 days) plus tamoxifen (20 mg per day given orally) or anastrozole (1 mg per day given orally) with or without zoledronic acid (4 mg given intravenously every 6 months) for 3 years. The primary end point was disease-free survival; recurrence-free survival and overall survival were secondary end points. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 47.8 months, 137 events had occurred, with disease-free survival rates of 92.8% in the tamoxifen group, 92.0% in the anastrozole group, 90.8% in the group that received endocrine therapy alone, and 94.0% in the group that received endocrine therapy with zoledronic acid. There was no significant difference in disease-free survival between the anastrozole and tamoxifen groups (hazard ratio for disease progression in the anastrozole group, 1.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 1.53; P=0.59). The addition of zoledronic acid to endocrine therapy, as compared with endocrine therapy without zoledronic acid, resulted in an absolute reduction of 3.2 percentage points and a relative reduction of 36% in the risk of disease progression (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.91; P=0.01); the addition of zoledronic acid did not significantly reduce the risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.32 to 1.11; P=0.11). Adverse events were consistent with known drug-safety profiles. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of zoledronic acid to adjuvant endocrine therapy improves disease-free survival in premenopausal patients with estrogen-responsive early breast cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00295646.)

Adherence evaluation of endocrine treatment in breast cancer: methodological aspects.

BACKGROUND: Current studies on adherence to endocrine therapy in breast cancer patients suffer from methodological limitations due to a lack of well-validated methods for assessing adherence. There is no gold standard for measuring adherence. The aim of our study was to compare four different approaches for evaluating adherence to anastrozole therapy for breast cancer with regard to concordance between methods. METHODS: Outpatients with early breast cancer treated with anastrozole completed the multi-method assessment of adherence. We implemented a self-report scale (the Simplified Medication Adherence Questionnaire), physician- ratings, refill records and determination of anastrozole serum concentration. RESULTS: Comparison of the four approaches using Spearman rank correlation revealed poor concordance across all methods reflecting weak correlations of 0.2-0.4. Considering this data incomparability across methods, we still observed high adherence rates of 78%-98% across measures. CONCLUSION: Our findings contribute to the growing body of knowledge on the impact that methodological aspects exert on the results of adherence measurement in breast cancer patients receiving endocrine treatment. Our findings suggest that the development and validation of instruments specific to patients receiving endocrine agents is imperative in order to arrive at a more accurate assessment and to subsequently obtain more precise estimates of adherence rates in this patient population.

HE4 is an independent prognostic marker in endometrial cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prognostic value of pretherapeutic serum HE4 in endometrial cancer in comparison to CA125. METHODS: HE4 and CA125 serum levels were analyzed by means of chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassays in 183 patients with endometrial cancer treated at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, between 1999 and 2009. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox's proportional hazards analysis were performed to determine the prognostic significance of HE4, CA125 and the combination of both markers. RESULTS: In univariate analysis both markers, HE4 and CA125, were of prognostic value for overall survival (p<0.001 and p=0.028) and disease-free survival (p=0.015 and p=0.045). In multivariate analysis HE4 was seen to have independent prognostic value in overall survival (HR 2.407, p=0.017) in contrast to CA125. The combination of both markers showed a higher hazard ratio (HR 4.04, p=0.023) for overall survival in comparison to HE4 alone. In the subgroup endometrioid histological type (n=132) only HE4 was of prognostic value for overall survival in univariate (p=0.001) and multivariate analysis (p=0.023). CONCLUSIONS: Pretherapeutic serum HE4 levels alone and in combination with CA125 are an independent prognostic marker in endometrial cancer patients.

Adjuvant endocrine therapy plus zoledronic acid in premenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer: 62-month follow-up from the ABCSG-12 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Analysis of the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group trial-12 (ABCSG-12) at 48 months' follow-up showed that addition of zoledronic acid to adjuvant endocrine therapy significantly improved disease-free survival. We have now assessed long-term clinical efficacy including disease-free survival and disease outcomes in patients receiving anastrozole or tamoxifen with or without zoledronic acid. METHODS: ABSCG-12 is a randomised, controlled, open-label, two-by-two factorial, multicentre trial in 1803 premenopausal women with endocrine-receptor-positive early-stage (stage I-II) breast cancer receiving goserelin (3.6 mg every 28 days), comparing the efficacy and safety of anastrozole (1 mg per day) or tamoxifen (20 mg per day) with or without zoledronic acid (4 mg every 6 months) for 3 years. Randomisation (1:1:1:1 ratio) was computerised and based on the Pocock and Simon minimisation method to balance the four treatment arms across eight prognostic variables (age, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, pathological tumour stage; lymph-node involvement, type of surgery or locoregional therapy, complete axillary dissection, intraoperative radiation therapy, and geographical region). Treatment allocation was not masked. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (defined as disease recurrence or death) and analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00295646; follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: At a median follow-up of 62 months (range 0-114.4 months), more than 2 years after treatment completion, 186 disease-free survival events had been reported (53 events in 450 patients on tamoxifen alone, 57 in 453 patients on anastrozole alone, 36 in 450 patients on tamoxifen plus zoledronic acid, and 40 in 450 patients on anastrozole plus zoledronic acid). Zoledronic acid reduced risk of disease-free survival events overall (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51-0.91; p=0.009), although the difference was not significant in the tamoxifen (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.44-1.03; p=0.067) and anastrozole arms (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.45-1.02; p=0.061) assessed separately. Zoledronic acid did not significantly affect risk of death (30 deaths with zoledronic acid vs 43 deaths without; HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.41-1.07; p=0.09). There was no difference in disease-free survival between patients on tamoxifen alone versus anastrozole alone (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.81-1.44; p=0.591), but overall survival was worse with anastrozole than with tamoxifen (46 vs 27 deaths; HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.08-2.83; p=0.02). Treatments were generally well tolerated, with no reports of renal failure or osteonecrosis of the jaw. Bone pain was reported in 601 patients (33%; 349 patients on zoledronic acid vs 252 not on the drug), fatigue in 361 (20%; 192 vs 169), headache in 280 (16%; 147 vs 133), and arthralgia in 266 (15%; 145 vs 121). INTERPRETATION: Addition of zoledronic acid improved disease-free survival in the patients taking anastrozole or tamoxifen. There was no difference in disease-free survival between patients receiving anastrozole and tamoxifen overall, but those on anastrozole alone had inferior overall survival. These data show persistent benefits with zoledronic acid and support its addition to adjuvant endocrine therapy in premenopausal patients with early-stage breast cancer. FUNDING: AstraZeneca; Novartis.

Is the toxicity of adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy underestimated? Complementary information from patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

Adjuvant endocrine treatment-related adverse effects have a strong impact on patients' quality of life and thereby limit therapy's risk benefit ratio resulting in morbidity and treatment discontinuation. Still, many AI adverse effects remain untreated given that they are unrecognized by conservative methods (e.g., proxy ratings). The ability of complementary patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to provide a more comprehensive assessment of side-effects is to be explored. A cross-sectional study sample of 280 postmenopausal, early stage breast cancer patients was subjected to a comprehensive PRO assessment (FACT-B/+ES) at their after-care appointment. Prevalence and severity of patient-reported physical side-effects and psychosocial burden related to adjuvant AI therapy were compared with prevalences derived from pivotal phase IV trials (ATAC 2005, BIG1-98 2005). Across all symptom categories, highest prevalence rates were found for joint pain (59.6%), hot flushes (52%), lost interest in sexual intercourse (51.4%), and lack of energy (40.3%). Overall, PROs resulted in significantly higher prevalence rates as compared to physician ratings for all symptoms published in pivotal clinical trials except vaginal bleeding and nausea. The treatment duration exerted no significant impact on symptom frequency (P > 0.05). Established prevalence rates of endocrine treatment-related toxicity seem to be underestimated. The incorporation of PRO data should be mandatory or at least highly recommended in clinical treatment planning to arrive at a more accurate assessment of a patient's actual symptom burden enabling improved individualized management of side-effects and mediating the preservation of treatment adherence.

Single-agent pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer: results of an Austrian observational trial.

BACKGROUND: In advanced breast cancer, multiple sequential lines of treatments are frequently applied. Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) has a favourable toxicity profile and can be used in first or higher lines of therapy. PLD has demonstrated response activity even after prior anthracycline exposure. METHODS: 129 consecutive patients with advanced breast cancer, of whom the majority had been massively pretreated, received PLD as monotherapy within licensed approval, for which efficacy and toxicities were documented. RESULTS: In a routine therapy setting, PLD was administered in a slightly reduced dose (median, 40 mg/m2 per cycle). Response rate (complete and partial remission) was 26%, and stable disease was observed in 19% of patients. Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 5.8 months and 14.2 months, respectively. There was no difference in terms of response and PFS, no matter if patients had already received anthracycline treatment. Interestingly, PFS proved similar regardless whether PLD was administered as palliative therapy in first, second or third line. Furthermore, PFS and OS were similar in patients with response or stable disease, underscoring the view that disease stabilization is associated with a profound clinical benefit. The most common side effects reported were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (17%), exanthema (14%) and mucositis (12%). CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy and toxicity data in these "real life" patients permit the conclusion that PLD is a valuable option in the treatment of advanced breast cancer even in heavily pretreated patients.

Capecitabine in combination with bendamustine in pretreated women with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: results of a phase II trial (AGMT MBC-6).

BACKGROUND: Bendamustine, a medication approved for the treatment of indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma, has already shown anticancer activity in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Here, we present the results of a phase II trial of bendamustine in combination with capecitabine in pre-treated patients with MBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: AGMT MBC-6 is a multicentre, open-label, single-arm phase II study in HER2-negative MBC. All patients were pre-treated with anthracyclines and/or taxans and had measurable disease. Patients received per os 1000 mg/m2 capecitabine twice daily on days 1 to 14 in combination with 80 mg/m2 bendamustine intravenously on days 1 and 8 of a 3-week cycle for a maximum of eight cycles, followed by a capecitabine maintenance therapy. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: From September 2013 to May 2015, 40 patients were recruited in eight Austrian centres. The median age was 60 years (range 29-77). Twenty-five per cent of patients had triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and 93% showed visceral involvement. With 17 partial and one complete remission, ORR was 46%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.1-10.7]. The most common non-haematological adverse events (AEs) of grade 3 were hand-foot syndrome (13%), fatigue (10%), nausea (8%), and dyspnoea (8%). One grade 4 non-haematological AE (hepatic failure) and three grade 4 haematological AEs (neutropenia) were observed. One patient died of restrictive cardiomyopathy, in which a relationship to capecitabine cannot be excluded, but seems unlikely. CONCLUSION: The combination of capecitabine and bendamustine shows promising efficacy and moderate toxicity. Further evaluation of this drug combination is warranted.The clinical trial AGMT MBC-6 was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, (https://clinicaltrials.gov/; identifier: NCT01891227).

Development and validation of a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for the simultaneous quantification of tamoxifen, anastrozole, and letrozole in human plasma and its application to a clinical study.

There is substantial evidence that circulating estrogens promote the proliferation of breast cancer. Consequently, adjuvant hormonal treatment strategies targeting estrogen action have been established. Such hormonal therapies include selective estrogen receptor modulators, such as tamoxifen, which interfere at the estrogen receptors directly, or non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors, such as anastrozole and letrozole, which inhibit estrogen synthesis through blocking the aromatase, a key enzyme of estrogen production. Despite considerable therapeutic success, in several cases, the use of these drugs is limited by side effects that have been described to significantly impair the adherence of patients to endocrine treatment. However, objective data concerning patient adherence and its clinical relevance are limited. One promising approach to check patient-reported adherence is drug monitoring in human plasma. Therefore, a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method to determine the plasma concentrations of tamoxifen, anastrozole, and letrozole has been developed and fully validated according to guidelines for clinical and forensic toxicology. The validation criteria evaluated were selectivity, linearity, accuracy and precision, limit of quantification, recovery and matrix effects, sample stability, and carryover. The six-point calibration curves showed linearity over the range of concentrations from 25 to 500 ng/ml for tamoxifen, 5 to 200 ng/ml for anastrozole, and 10 to 300 ng/ml for letrozole. The intra- and inter-day precision and accuracies were always better than 15%. The validated procedure was successfully applied to a clinical study (Patient-Reported Outcomes in Breast Cancer Patients undergoing Endocrine Therapy, PRO-BETh). A major aim of PRO-BETh study is the comprehensive evaluation of adherence to treatment in pre- and post-menopausal women with breast cancer. Plasma samples of 310 breast cancer patients undergoing anti-estrogen therapy were analyzed. Eight samples did not contain a quantifiable amount of drug, strongly indicating non-adherence of the corresponding patients to adjuvant breast cancer treatment. Furthermore, plasma concentrations at the lower end of the observed plasma level distribution might represent a hint but not a confirmation for non-adherence in terms of non-daily and irregular intake of the prescribed drug.

Adjuvant endocrine therapy of premenopausal women with early breast cancer: an overview.

Tamoxifen is currently the standard of care for premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancers. However, endocrine strategies in premenopausal women include not only estrogen receptor blockade with tamoxifen but also temporary suppression of ovarian estrogen synthesis by luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists, or permanent interruption of ovarian estrogen synthesis with oophorectomy or radiotherapy. Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists have proven to be as effective as surgical oophorectomy in adjuvant treatment of premenopausal breast cancer. The addition of LHRH agonists compared to no therapy reduces the annual odds of recurrence and death in premenopausal women aged less than 50 years with estrogen receptor-positive tumors. Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists alone or in combination with tamoxifen have shown disease-free survival rates similar to chemotherapy with CMF (cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/5-fluorouracil) and other second-generation chemotherapies. The role of aromatase inhibitors in combination with ovarian suppression is still not established, especially as a large phase III randomized study (Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group Trial 12) did not show superior efficacy compared with ovarian suppression plus tamoxifen in premenopausal early stage disease. Patients currently continue to receive ovarian suppression and tamoxifen. CYP2D6 status may become an important discriminator for the type of endocrine therapy for the premenopausal patient in the future.