Metabolomic prediction of breast cancer treatment induced neurological and metabolic toxicities.

BACKGROUND: Long-term treatment-related toxicities, such as neurological and metabolic toxicities, are major issues in breast cancer. We investigated the interest of metabolomic profiling to predict toxicities. METHODS: Untargeted high-resolution metabolomic profiles of 992 patients with ER+/HER2- breast cancer from the prospective CANTO cohort were acquired (n=1935 metabolites). A residual-based modeling strategy with a discovery and validation cohort was used to benchmark machine learning algorithms, taking into account confounding variables. RESULTS: Adaptive LASSO has a good predictive performance, has limited optimism bias, and allows the selection of metabolites of interest for future translational research. The addition of low-frequency metabolites and non-annotated metabolites increases the predictive power. Metabolomics adds extra performance to clinical variables to predict various neurological and metabolic toxicity profiles. CONCLUSIONS: Untargeted high-resolution metabolomics allows better toxicity prediction by considering environmental exposure, metabolites linked to microbiota, and low-frequency metabolites.

VERITAC-2: a Phase III study of vepdegestrant, a PROTAC ER degrader, versus fulvestrant in ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer.

Vepdegestrant (ARV-471) is an oral PROTAC ER degrader that binds an E3 ubiquitin ligase and ER to directly trigger ubiquitination of ER and its subsequent proteasomal degradation. In a first-in-human Phase I/II study, vepdegestrant monotherapy was well tolerated with clinical activity in pretreated patients with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. The global, randomized Phase III VERITAC-2 study compares efficacy and safety of vepdegestrant versus fulvestrant in adults with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer after treatment with a CDK4/6 inhibitor plus endocrine therapy. Progression-free survival by blinded independent central review (primary end point) will be assessed in the intention-to-treat population and ESR1 mutation-positive subpopulation. Secondary end points include overall survival, tumor response, safety, pharmacokinetics, patient-reported outcomes, and circulating tumor DNA biomarkers.Clinical trial registration: NCT05654623 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

VERITAC-2 is a clinical trial comparing vepdegestrant, a new drug that degrades estrogen receptors, to an existing treatment called fulvestrant in patients with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer: Estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer grows in response to estrogen, a hormone in the body, and has low levels or no HER2 protein. People living with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer that has grown, spread to another part of the body, or cannot be removed by surgery are often treated with cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors and endocrine therapies, but their cancer may get worse on these treatments and new treatments are needed. Fulvestrant, an endocrine therapy that attaches to estrogen receptors, lowers estrogen's effect on tumors and can slow or stop cancer growth. Vepdegestrant, a new medicine being tested for ER+ breast cancer, is a PROteolysis TArgeting Chimera (PROTAC) protein degrader that attaches to estrogen receptors and causes them to be tagged for removal by the cell's natural protein disposal system. By removing estrogen receptors, vepdegestrant may cause tumors to stop growing or shrink.This paper describes the Phase III VERITAC-2 clinical study comparing vepdegestrant versus fulvestrant in people living with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer previously treated with a CDK4/6 inhibitor and endocrine therapy.Patients will be randomly assigned to receive vepdegestrant (a pill taken once daily by mouth) or fulvestrant (a shot given into the muscle). The purpose of the study is to find out how long people live without their cancer getting worse with vepdegestrant or fulvestrant. VERITAC-2 will also look at how long people live during the study, side effects people may experience, and the overall well-being of people throughout the study.

Low BCL-xL expression in triple-negative breast cancer cells favors chemotherapy efficacy, and this effect is limited by cancer-associated fibroblasts.

Triple negative breast cancers (TNBC) present a poor prognosis primarily due to their resistance to chemotherapy. This resistance is known to be associated with elevated expression of certain anti-apoptotic members within the proteins of the BCL-2 family (namely BCL-xL, MCL-1 and BCL-2). These regulate cell death by inhibiting pro-apoptotic protein activation through binding and sequestration and they can be selectively antagonized by BH3 mimetics. Yet the individual influences of BCL-xL, MCL-1, and BCL-2 on the sensitivity of TNBC cells to chemotherapy, and their regulation by cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), major components of the tumor stroma and key contributors to therapy resistance remain to be delineated. Using gene editing or BH3 mimetics to inhibit anti-apoptotic BCL-2 family proteins in TNBC line MDA-MB-231, we show that BCL-xL and MCL-1 promote cancer cell survival through compensatory mechanisms. This cell line shows limited sensitivity to chemotherapy, in line with the clinical resistance observed in TNBC patients. We elucidate that BCL-xL plays a pivotal role in therapy response, as its depletion or pharmacological inhibition heightened chemotherapy effectiveness. Moreover, BCL-xL expression is associated with chemotherapy resistance in patient-derived tumoroids where its pharmacological inhibition enhances ex vivo response to chemotherapy. In a co-culture model of cancer cells and CAFs, we observe that even in a context where BCL-xL reduced expression renders cancer cells more susceptible to chemotherapy, those in contact with CAFs display reduced sensitivity to chemotherapy. Thus CAFs exert a profound pro-survival effect in breast cancer cells, even in a setting highly favoring cell death through combined chemotherapy and absence of the main actor of chemoresistance, BCL-xL.

Mesenchymal-like immune-altered is the fourth robust triple-negative breast cancer molecular subtype.

BACKGROUND: Robust molecular subtyping of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a prerequisite for the success of precision medicine. Today, there is a clear consensus on three TNBC molecular subtypes: luminal androgen receptor (LAR), basal-like immune-activated (BLIA), and basal-like immune-suppressed (BLIS). However, the debate about the robustness of other subtypes is still open. METHODS: An unprecedented number (n = 1942) of TNBC patient data was collected. Microarray- and RNAseq-based cohorts were independently investigated. Unsupervised analyses were conducted using k-means consensus clustering. Clusters of patients were then functionally annotated using different approaches. Prediction of response to chemotherapy and targeted therapies, immune checkpoint blockade, and radiotherapy were also screened for each TNBC subtype. RESULTS: Four TNBC subtypes were identified in the cohort: LAR (19.36%); mesenchymal stem-like (MSL/MES) (17.35%); BLIA (31.06%); and BLIS (32.23%). Regarding the MSL/MES subtype, we suggest renaming it to mesenchymal-like immune-altered (MLIA) to emphasize its specific histological background and nature of immune response. Treatment response prediction results show, among other things, that despite immune activation, immune checkpoint blockade is probably less or completely ineffective in MLIA, possibly caused by mesenchymal background and/or an enrichment in dysfunctional cytotoxic T lymphocytes. TNBC subtyping results were included in the bc-GenExMiner v5.0 webtool ( http://bcgenex.ico.unicancer.fr ). CONCLUSION: The mesenchymal TNBC subtype is characterized by an exhausted and altered immune response, and resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors. Consensus for molecular classification of TNBC subtyping and prediction of cancer treatment responses helps usher in the era of precision medicine for TNBC patients.

Did the COVID-19 pandemic delay treatment for localized breast cancer patients? A multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Longer times between diagnosis and treatments of cancer patients have been estimated as effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, relatively few studies attempted to estimate actual delay to treatment at the patient level. OBJECTIVE: To assess changes in delays to first treatment and surgery among newly diagnosed patients with localized breast cancer (BC) during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We used data from the PAPESCO-19 multicenter cohort study, which included patients from 4 French comprehensive cancer centers. We measured the delay to first treatment as the number of days between diagnosis and the first treatment regardless of whether this was neoadjuvant chemotherapy or surgery. COVID-19 pandemic exposure was estimated with a composite index that considered both the severity of the pandemic and the level of lockdown restrictions. We ran generalized linear models with a log link function and a gamma distribution to model the association between delay and the pandemic. RESULTS: Of the 187 patients included in the analysis, the median delay to first treatment was 42 (IQR:32-54) days for patients diagnosed before and after the start of the 1st lockdown (N = 99 and 88, respectively). After adjusting for age and centers of inclusion, a higher composite pandemic index (> = 50 V.S. <50) had only a small, non-significant effect on times to treatment. Longer delays were associated with factors other than the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: We found evidence of no direct impact of the pandemic on the actual delay to treatment among patients with localized BC.

Association between endocrine adjuvant therapy intake timing and disease-free survival in patients with high-risk early breast cancer: results of a sub-study of the UCBG- UNIRAD trial.

BACKGROUND: Circadian rhythms regulate cellular physiology and could influence the efficacy of endocrine therapy (ET) in breast cancer (BC). We prospectively tested this hypothesis within the UNIRAD adjuvant phase III trial (NCT01805271). METHODS: 1278 patients with high-risk hormonal receptor positive (HR+)/HER2 negative (HER2-) primary BC were randomly assigned to adjuvant ET with placebo or everolimus. Patients prospectively reported in a diary the daily timing of ET intake among four 6-h slots (06:00-11:59 (morning), 12:00-17:59 (afternoon), 18:00-23:59 (evening), or 24:00-05:59 (nighttime). The association between ET timing and disease-free survival (DFS) was a prespecified secondary endpoint of the trial and the results of this observational study are reported here. FINDINGS: ET timing was recorded by 855 patients (67.2%). Patients declaring morning (n = 465, 54.4%) or afternoon (n = 45, 5.4%) ET intake were older than those declaring evening (n = 339, 39.6%) or nighttime (n = 5, 0.6%) intake. With a median follow-up of 46.7 months, 118 patients had a local (n = 30) or metastasis relapse (n = 84), and 41 patients died. ET intake timing was not associated with DFS in the whole population (HR = 0.77, 95% CI [0.53-1.12]). The association between ET intake timing and DFS according to the stratification factors revealed interactions with ET agent (tamoxifen versus Aromatase inhibitors (AI) with an increased DFS in the group of evening/nighttime versus morning/afternoon tamoxifen intake (HR = 0.43, 95% CI [0.22-0.85]), while no association was found for AI intake (HR = 1.07, 95% CI [0.68-1.69]). The interaction between ET intake timing and ET agent remained in multivariable analysis (HR = 0.38 [0.16-0.91]). INTERPRETATION: Tamoxifen intake in the evening/nighttime could be recommended in patients with high-risk HR+/HER2- BC while awaiting for results from further ET timing studies. FUNDING: UNIRAD was Supported by a grant from the French Ministry of Health PHRC 2012 and received funding from La Ligue contre le Cancer, Cancer Research-UK, Myriad Genetics, and Novartis.

Neoadjuvant anthracycline-based (5-FEC) or anthracycline-free (docetaxel/carboplatin) chemotherapy plus trastuzumab and pertuzmab in HER2 + BC patients according to their TOP2A: a multicentre, open-label, non-randomized phase II trial.

PURPOSE: Previous studies have reported the benefit of dual HER2-targeting combined to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-amplified breast cancer (HER2 + BC). Moreover, besides the cardiac toxicity following their association to Trastuzumab, anthracyclines chemotherapy may not profit all patients. The NeoTOP study was designed to evaluate the complementary action of Trastuzumab and Pertuzumab, and the relevance of an anthracycline-based regimen according to TOP2A amplification status. METHODS: Open-label, multicentre, phase II study. Eligible patients were aged ≥ 18 with untreated, operable, histologically confirmed HER2 + BC. After centralized review of TOP2A status, TOP2A-amplified (TOP2A+) patients received FEC100 for 3 cycles then 3 cycles of Trastuzumab (8 mg/kg then 6 mg/kg), Pertuzumab (840 mg/kg then 420 mg/kg), and Docetaxel (75mg/m2 then 100mg/m2). TOP2A-not amplified (TOP2A-) patients received 6 cycles of Docetaxel (75mg/m2) and Carboplatin (target AUC 6 mg/ml/min) plus Trastuzumab and Pertuzumab. Primary endpoint was pathological Complete Response (pCR) using Chevallier's classification. Secondary endpoints included pCR (Sataloff), Progression-Free Survival (PFS), Overall Survival (OS), and toxicity. RESULTS: Out of 74 patients, 41 and 33 were allocated to the TOP2A + and TOP2A- groups respectively. pCR rates (Chevallier) were 74.4% (95%CI: 58.9-85.4) vs. 71.9% (95%CI: 54.6-84.4) in the TOP2A + vs. TOP2A- groups. pCR rates (Sataloff), 5-year PFS and OS were 70.6% (95%CI: 53.8-83.2) vs. 61.5% (95%CI: 42.5-77.6), 82.4% (95%CI: 62.2-93.6) vs. 100% (95%CI: 74.1-100), and 90% (95%CI: 69.8-98.3) vs. 100% (95%CI: 74.1-100). Toxicity profile was consistent with previous reports. CONCLUSION: Our results showed high pCR rates with Trastuzumab and Pertuzumab associated to chemotherapy. They were similar in TOP2A + and TOP2A- groups and the current role of neoadjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy remains questioned. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02339532 (registered on 14/12/14).

p4EBP1 staining predicts outcome in ER-positive endocrine-resistant metastatic breast cancer patients treated with everolimus and exemestane.

BACKGROUND: To identify patients most likely to respond to everolimus, a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor, a prospective biomarker study was conducted in hormone receptor-positive endocrine-resistant metastatic breast cancer patients treated with exemestane-everolimus therapy. METHODS: Metastatic tumor biopsies were processed for immunohistochemical staining (p4EBP1, PTEN, pAKT, LKB1, and pS6K). ESR1, PIK3CA and AKT1 gene mutations were detected by NGS. The primary endpoint was the association between the p4EBP1 expression and clinical benefit rate (CBR) at 6 months of everolimus plus exemestane treatment. RESULTS: Of 150 patients included, 107 were evaluable for the primary endpoint. p4EBP1 staining above the median (Allred score ≥6) was associated with a higher CBR at 6 months (62% versus 40% in high-p4EBP1 versus low-p4EBP1, χ2 test, p = 0.026) and a longer progression-free survival (PFS) (median PFS of 9.2 versus 5.8 months in high-p4EBP1 versus low-p4EBP1; p = 0.02). When tested with other biomarkers, only p4EBP1 remained a significant predictive marker of PFS in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.591; p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study identified a subset of patients with hormone receptor-positive endocrine-resistant metastatic breast cancer and poor outcome who would derive less benefit from everolimus and exemestane. p4EBP1 may be a useful predictive biomarker in routine clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02444390.

European value-based healthcare benchmarking: moving from theory to practice.

BACKGROUND: Value-based healthcare (VBHC) is a conceptual framework to improve the value of healthcare by health, care-process and economic outcomes. Benchmarking should provide useful information to identify best practices and therefore a good instrument to improve quality across healthcare organizations. This paper aims to provide a proof-of-concept of the feasibility of an international VBHC benchmarking in breast cancer, with the ultimate aim of being used to share best practices with a data-driven approach among healthcare organizations from different health systems. METHODS: In the VOICE community-a European healthcare centre cluster intending to address VBHC from theory to practice-information on patient-reported, clinical-related, care-process-related and economic-related outcomes were collected. Patient archetypes were identified using clustering techniques and an indicator set following a modified Delphi was defined. Benchmarking was performed using regression models controlling for patient archetypes and socio-demographic characteristics. RESULTS: Six hundred and ninety patients from six healthcare centres were included. A set of 50 health, care-process and economic indicators was distilled for benchmarking. Statistically significant differences across sites have been found in most health outcomes, half of the care-process indicators, and all economic indicators, allowing for identifying the best and worst performers. CONCLUSIONS: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first international experience providing evidence to be used with VBHC benchmarking intention. Differences in indicators across healthcare centres should be used to identify best practices and improve healthcare quality following further research. Applied methods might help to move forward with VBHC benchmarking in other medical conditions.

Radium-223 in women with hormone receptor-positive bone-metastatic breast cancer receiving endocrine therapy: pooled analysis of two international, phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Most women with advanced breast cancer have skeletal metastases. Radium-223 is an alpha-emitting radionuclide that selectively targets areas of bone metastases. METHODS: Two double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of radium-223 were conducted in women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), bone-predominant metastatic breast cancer. All patients received endocrine therapy (ET), as a single agent of the investigator's choice (Study A) or exemestane + everolimus (Study B). Patients were randomized to receive radium-223 (55 kBq/kg) or placebo intravenously every 4 weeks for six doses. Accrual was halted following unblinded interim analyses per protocol amendments, and both studies were terminated. We report pooled analyses of symptomatic skeletal event-free survival (SSE-FS; primary endpoint), radiologic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS; secondary), and time to bone alkaline phosphatase (ALP) progression (exploratory). RESULTS: In total, 382 patients were enrolled, and 196 SSE-FS events (70% planned total) were recorded. Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) and nominal p values for radium-223 + ET versus placebo + ET were: SSE-FS 0.809 (0.610-1.072), p = 0.1389; rPFS 0.956 (0.759-1.205), p = 0.7039; OS 0.889 (0.660-1.199), p = 0.4410; and time to bone ALP progression 0.593 (0.379-0.926), p = 0.0195. Radium-223- or placebo-related treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 50.3% versus 35.1% of patients (grade 3/4: 25.7% vs. 8.5%), with fractures/bone-associated events in 23.5% versus 23.9%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HR+ bone-metastatic breast cancer, numeric differences favoring radium-223 + ET over placebo + ET for the primary SSE-FS endpoint were suggestive of efficacy, in line with the primary outcome measure used in the underlying phase 2 studies. No similar evidence of efficacy was observed for secondary progression or survival endpoints. Adverse events were more frequent with radium-223 + ET versus placebo + ET, but the safety profile of the combination was consistent with the safety profiles of the component drugs. Clinical trial registration numbers Study A: NCT02258464, registered October 7, 2014. Study B: NCT02258451, registered October 7, 2014.

AMEERA-4: a randomized, preoperative window-of-opportunity study of amcenestrant versus letrozole in early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Window-of-opportunity (WOO) studies provide insights into the clinical activity of new drugs in breast cancer. METHODS: AMEERA-4 (NCT04191382) was a WOO study undertaken to compare the pharmacodynamic effects of amcenestrant, a selective estrogen receptor degrader, with those of letrozole in postmenopausal women with newly diagnosed, operable estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (ER+/HER2-) breast cancer. Women were randomized (1:1:1) to receive amcenestrant 400 mg, amcenestrant 200 mg, or letrozole 2.5 mg once daily for 14 days before breast surgery. The primary endpoint was change in Ki67 between baseline and Day 15 (i.e., day of surgery). RESULTS: Enrollment was stopped early because of slow recruitment, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The modified intent-to-treat population consisted of 95 study participants with baseline and post-treatment Ki67 values, whereas the safety population included 104 participants who had received at least one dose of study medication. Relative change from baseline in Ki67 was - 75.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] - 81.9 to - 67.9) for amcenestrant 400 mg, - 68.2% (- 75.7 to - 58.4) for amcenestrant 200 mg, and - 77.7% (- 83.4 to - 70.0) for letrozole (geometric least-squares mean [LSM] estimates). Absolute change in ER H-score from baseline (LSM estimate) was - 176.7 in the amcenestrant 400 mg arm, - 202.9 in the amcenestrant 200 mg arm, and - 32.5 in the letrozole arm. There were no Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Both amcenestrant and letrozole demonstrated antiproliferative activity in postmenopausal women with previously untreated, operable ER+/HER2- breast cancer and had good overall tolerability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04191382 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04191382 . Registered 9 December 2019.

Landscape of baseline and acquired genomic alterations in circulating tumor DNA with abemaciclib alone or with endocrine therapy in advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To identify potential predictors of response and resistance mechanisms in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) treated with the CDK4/6 inhibitor abemaciclib +/- endocrine therapy (ET), baseline and acquired genomic alterations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) were analyzed and associated with clinical outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MONARCH 3: postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC and no prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting were randomized to abemaciclib or placebo plus nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI). nextMONARCH: women with HR+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer that progressed on/after prior ET and chemotherapy were randomized to abemaciclib alone (two doses) or plus tamoxifen. Baseline and end-of-treatment plasma samples from patients in MONARCH 3 and nextMONARCH (monotherapy arms) were analyzed to identify somatic genomic alterations. Association between genomic alterations and median progression-free survival (mPFS) was assessed. RESULTS: Most patients had ≥1 genomic alteration detected in baseline ctDNA. In MONARCH 3, abemaciclib+NSAI was associated with improved mPFS versus placebo+NSAI, regardless of baseline alterations. ESR1 alterations were less frequently acquired in the abemaciclib+NSAI arm than placebo+NSAI. Acquired alterations potentially associated with resistance to abemaciclib +/- NSAI included RB1 and MYC. CONCLUSIONS: In MONARCH 3, certain baseline ctDNA genomic alterations were prognostic for ET but not predictive of abemaciclib response. Further studies are warranted to assess whether ctDNA alterations acquired during abemaciclib treatment differ from other CDK4/6 inhibitors. Findings are hypothesis-generating, further exploration is warranted into mechanisms of resistance to abemaciclib and ET.

COVID-19 Infection despite Previous Vaccination in Cancer Patients and Healthcare Workers: Results from a French Prospective Multicenter Cohort (PAPESCO-19).

In a multicenter prospective cohort of cancer patients (CP; n = 840) and healthcare workers (HCWs; n = 935) vaccinated against COVID-19, we noticed the following: i/after vaccination, 4.4% of HCWs and 5.8% of CP were infected; ii/no characteristic was associated with post-vaccine COVID-19 infections among HCWs; iii/CP who developed infections were younger, more frequently women (NS), more frequently had gastrointestinal, gynecological, or breast cancer and a localized cancer stage; iv/CP vaccinated while receiving chemotherapy or targeted therapy had (NS) more breakthrough infections after vaccination than those vaccinated after these treatments; the opposite was noted with radiotherapy, immunotherapy, or hormonotherapy; v/most COVID-19 infections occurred either during the Alpha wave (11/41 HCW, 20/49 CP), early after the first vaccination campaign started, or during the Omicron wave (21/41 HCW, 20/49 CP), more than 3 months after the second dose; vi/risk of infection was not associated with values of antibody titers; vii/the outcome of these COVID-19 infections after vaccination was not severe in all cases. To conclude, around 5% of our CPs or HCWs developed a COVID-19 infection despite previous vaccination. The outcome of these infections was not severe.

Intrathecal Catheter for Chemotherapy in Leptomeningeal Carcinomatosis From HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Most oncological treatments for leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) do not cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB). One therapeutic option is intrathecal (IT) chemotherapy. Both the brain-implanted Omaya reservoir and lumbar puncture (LP) are classic routes for IT chemotherapy delivery. An intrathecal catheter (IC) connected to a subcutaneous port is a recently developed option for the management of chemotherapy infusions. It is essential to evaluate the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy infusion using such device. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective monocentric study within Institut de cancerologie de l'Ouest at Angers, including all patients with advanced breast cancer (aBC) with LM implanted with an IT device for IT chemotherapy between January 2013 and May 2020. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and secondary endpoints included surgical feasibility, patient safety, and progression-free survival (PFS). The catheter was inserted through an LP, the tip was positioned at the right level and connected to a subcutaneous port implanted under the skin of the anterior thoracic wall. IT chemotherapy is painless and easy for qualified nurses to administer on an outpatient basis. RESULTS: Thirty women underwent the implantation. No failures occurred during the procedure. A total of 77% of patients reported no complications after implantation. Only three complications required surgical treatment. The median number of IT chemotherapy courses per patient was 8 (range, 2-27). The tolerance profile for iterative IT chemotherapy was manageable in ambulatory care. With a median follow-up of 76.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.6-not available), the median OS was 158 days (95% CI, 87-235), and the median PFS was 116 days (95% CI, 58-174). CONCLUSION: Infusing chemotherapy using an implanted catheter is an efficient option for managing IT chemotherapy with a good tolerance profile. Patient-reported outcomes for the evaluation of IT chemotherapy toxicity are currently being developed.

Adjuvant endocrine therapy uptake, toxicity, quality of life, and prediction of early discontinuation.

BACKGROUND: Many patients receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) for breast cancer experience side effects and reduced quality of life (QoL) and discontinue ET. We sought to describe these issues and develop a prediction model of early discontinuation of ET. METHODS: Among patients with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative stage I-III breast cancer of the Cancer Toxicities cohort (NCT01993498) who were prescribed adjuvant ET between 2012 and 2017, upon stratification by menopausal status, we evaluated adjuvant ET patterns including treatment change and patient-reported discontinuation and ET-associated toxicities and impact on QoL. Independent variables included clinical and demographic features, toxicities, and patient-reported outcomes. A machine-learning model to predict time to early discontinuation was trained and evaluated on a held-out validation set. RESULTS: Patient-reported discontinuation rate of the first prescribed ET at 4 years was 30% and 35% in 4122 postmenopausal and 2087 premenopausal patients, respectively. Switching to a new ET was associated with higher symptom burden, poorer QoL, and higher discontinuation rate. Early discontinuation rate of adjuvant ET before treatment completion was 13% in postmenopausal and 15% in premenopausal patients. The early discontinuation model obtained a C index of 0.62 in the held-out validation set. Many aspects of QoL, most importantly fatigue and insomnia (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL questionnaire 30), were associated with early discontinuation. CONCLUSION: Tolerability and adherence to ET remains a challenge for patients who switch to a second ET. An early discontinuation model using patient-reported outcomes identifies patients likely to discontinue their adjuvant ET. Improved management of toxicities and novel more tolerable adjuvant ETs are needed for maintaining patients on treatment.

Prognostic Markers of DNA Methylation and Next-Generation Sequencing in Progressive Glioblastoma from the EORTC-26101 Trial.

PURPOSE: The EORTC-26101 study was a randomized phase II and III clinical trial of bevacizumab in combination with lomustine versus lomustine alone in progressive glioblastoma. Other than for progression-free survival (PFS), there was no benefit from addition of bevacizumab for overall survival (OS). However, molecular data allow for the rare opportunity to assess prognostic biomarkers from primary surgery for their impact in progressive glioblastoma. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We analyzed DNA methylation array data and panel sequencing from 170 genes of 380 tumor samples of the EORTC-26101 study. These patients were comparable with the overall study cohort in regard to baseline characteristics, study treatment, and survival. RESULTS: Of patients' samples, 295/380 (78%) were classified into one of the main glioblastoma groups, receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK)1, RTK2 and mesenchymal. There were 10 patients (2.6%) with isocitrate dehydrogenase mutant tumors in the biomarker cohort. Patients with RTK1 and RTK2 classified tumors had lower median OS compared with mesenchymal (7.6 vs. 9.2 vs. 10.5 months). O6-methylguanine DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation was prognostic for PFS and OS. Neurofibromin (NF)1 mutations were predictive of response to bevacizumab treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Thorough molecular classification is important for brain tumor clinical trial inclusion and evaluation. MGMT promoter methylation and RTK1 classifier assignment were prognostic in progressive glioblastoma. NF1 mutation may be a predictive biomarker for bevacizumab treatment.

AMEERA-3: Randomized Phase II Study of Amcenestrant (Oral Selective Estrogen Receptor Degrader) Versus Standard Endocrine Monotherapy in Estrogen Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Amcenestrant (oral selective estrogen receptor degrader) demonstrated promising safety and efficacy in earlier clinical studies for endocrine-resistant, estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (ER+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (aBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In AMEERA-3 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04059484), an open-label, worldwide phase II trial, patients with ER+/HER2- aBC who progressed in the (neo)adjuvant or advanced settings after not more than two previous lines of endocrine therapy (ET) were randomly assigned 1:1 to amcenestrant or single-agent endocrine treatment of physician's choice (TPC), stratified by the presence/absence of visceral metastases, previous/no treatment with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0/1). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent central review, compared using a stratified log-rank test (one-sided type I error rate of 2.5%). RESULTS: Between October 22, 2019, and February 15, 2021, 290 patients were randomly assigned to amcenestrant (n = 143) or TPC (n = 147). PFS was numerically similar between amcenestrant and TPC (median PFS [mPFS], 3.6 v 3.7 months; stratified hazard ratio [HR], 1.051 [95% CI, 0.789 to 1.4]; one-sided P = .643). Among patients with baseline mutated ESR1; (n = 120 of 280), amcenestrant numerically prolonged PFS versus TPC (mPFS, 3.7 v 2.0 months; stratified HR, 0.9 [95% CI, 0.565 to 1.435]). Overall survival data were immature but numerically similar between groups (HR, 0.913; 95% CI, 0.595 to 1.403). In amcenestrant versus TPC groups, treatment-emergent adverse events (any grade) occurred in 82.5% versus 76.2% of patients and grade ≥3 events occurred in 21.7% versus 15.6%. CONCLUSION: AMEERA-3 did not meet its primary objective of improved PFS with amcenestrant versus TPC although a numerical improvement in PFS was observed in patients with baseline ESR1 mutation. Efficacy and safety with amcenestrant were consistent with the standard of care for second-/third-line ET for ER+/HER2- aBC.

Evaluating everolimus for the treatment of breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Everolimus is an oral drug that inhibits mTOR with immunosuppressive and antiproliferative characteristics. It is commonly used in association with exemestane in hormone receptor (HR)-positive advanced breast cancer (ABC). AREAS COVERED: The current review summarizes the publications relating to everolimus from clinical research in breast cancer. Everolimus showed treatment efficacy and an acceptable safety tolerance with the prevention of side effects in Phase II/III studies. BOLERO-2 study showed a progression-free survival improvement in patients with HR - positive ABC previously treated with aromatase inhibitors (AI) and leading to its acceptance in this indication. The absence of a post-CDK4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i.) study and the arrival of new drugs may raise questions about its current place in the therapeutic strategy. EXPERT OPINION: Everolimus is relevant in the management of HR - positive ABC. Because of its efficacy, acceptable tolerability and the absence of drugs that have shown a greater benefit, it remains a second-line treatment option in HR-positive, HER2 negative (score 0) patients without BRCA mutation or visceral crisis and can be discussed with fulvestrant in second line after CDK4-6i. It is likely that within 5 years this treatment will be replaced in second-line HR-positive breast cancer by new emerging treatments: drug-conjugated antibodies, tyrosine kinase inhibitors or immunotherapy in combination with chemotherapy.

Pattern and risk factors of isolated local relapse among women with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer and lymph node involvement: 10-year follow-up analysis of the PACS 01 and PACS 04 trials.

PURPOSE: We aimed to determine the pattern of isolated local recurrences (ILR) in women with stage II-III hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 breast cancer (HR + /HER2-BC) after 10-year follow-up. METHODS: UNICANCER-PACS 01 and PACS 04 trials included 5,008 women with T1-T3 and N1-N3 to evaluate the efficacy of different anthracycline ± taxanes-containing regimens after modified mastectomy or lumpectomy plus axillary lymph node dissection. We analyzed the data from 2,932 women with HR + /HER2- BC to evaluate the cumulative incidence of ILR and describe the factors associated with ILR. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 9.1 years (95% CI 9.0-9.2 years), the cumulative incidence of ILR increased steadily between 1 and 10 years from 0.2% to 2.5%. The multivariable analysis showed that older age (subhazard ratios [sHR] = 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.99) and mastectomy (sHR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.86) were associated with lower risk of ILR, and no adjuvant endocrine therapy (sHR = 2.73, 95% CI 1.32 7-5.67) with increased risk of ILR. CONCLUSION: In this population of high-risk patients with localized HR + /HER2- BC, the risk of ILR was low but remained constant over 10 years. Younger age at diagnosis, breast-conserving surgery, and adjuvant endocrine therapy were independent risk factors of ILR.

Opportunities and Obstacles to the Development of Health Data Warehouses in Hospitals in France: The Recent Experience of Comprehensive Cancer Centers.

Big Data and Artificial Intelligence can profoundly transform medical practices, particularly in oncology. Comprehensive Cancer Centers have a major role to play in this revolution. With the purpose of advancing our knowledge and accelerating cancer research, it is urgent to make this pool of data usable through the development of robust and effective data warehouses. Through the recent experience of Comprehensive Cancer Centers in France, this article shows that, while the use of hospital data warehouses can be a source of progress by taking into account multisource, multidomain and multiscale data for the benefit of knowledge and patients, it nevertheless raises technical, organizational and legal issues that still need to be addressed. The objectives of this article are threefold: 1. to provide insight on public health stakes of development in Comprehensive Cancer Centers to manage cancer patients comprehensively; 2. to set out a challenge of structuring the data from within them; 3. to outline the legal issues of implementation to carry out real-world evidence studies. To meet objective 1, this article firstly proposed a discussion on the relevance of an integrated approach to manage cancer and the formidable tool that data warehouses represent to achieve this. To address objective 2, we carried out a literature review to screen the articles published in PubMed and Google Scholar through the end of 2022 on the use of data warehouses in French Comprehensive Cancer Centers. Seven publications dealing specifically with the issue of data structuring were selected. To achieve objective 3, we presented and commented on the main aspects of French and European legislation and regulations in the field of health data, hospital data warehouses and real-world evidence.