Window of opportunity trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors in triple-negative breast cancer.

Patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) have a relatively poor clinical outcome. The immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) pembrolizumab combined with chemotherapy is the current standard of care in TNBC patients with stage II and III. Monotherapy with ICIs has not been comprehensively assessed in the neoadjuvant setting in TNBC patients, given unfavorable results in metastatic trials. ICIs, however, have been tested in the window of opportunity (WOO) before surgery or standard chemotherapy-based neoadjuvant treatment. The WOO design is well suited to assess an ICI alone or in combination with other ICIs, targeted therapy, radiotherapy or cryotherapy, and measure their pharmacodynamic and clinical effect in this treatment-naive population. Some patients show a good response to ICIs in WOO studies. Biomarkers like tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, programmed death ligand-1, and interferon-γ signature may predict activity and may identify patients likely to benefit from ICIs. Moreover, an increase in tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, programmed death ligand-1 expression or T cell receptor expansion following administration of ICIs in the WOO setting could potentially inform of immunotherapy benefit, which would allow tailoring further treatment. This article reviews WOO trials that assessed immunotherapy in the early-stage TNBC population, and how these results could be translated to test de-escalation strategies of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and immunotherapy without compromising a patient's prognosis.

Elacestrant in ESR1-mutant, endocrine-responsive metastatic breast cancer: should health authorities consider post hoc data to inform priority access?

For patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC) progressed on first-line endocrine therapy plus a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i), fulvestrant, a selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD) administered intramuscularly, represented the only monotherapy option until the approval of elacestrant. This oral SERD has been approved for patients with ESR1-mutant HR+/HER2- mBC by the European Medicines Agency, the Food and Drug Administration, and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, according to the results of the randomized phase III EMERALD trial, which demonstrated elacestrant superiority over standard endocrine monotherapy. Consequently, elacestrant has been incorporated in the European Society for Medical Oncology and American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines. However, in Europe, the access to this recommended drug depends on the decision of the National Health Authorities of each state. In this communication, we describe the main results and implications of the EMERALD trial, in the context of the biomarker-driven algorithm for patients with HR+/HER2- mBC progressed on CDK4/6i, and conclude that a subgroup of patients with ESR1-mutant tumors and specific clinical features can really derive a clinically meaningful benefit from elacestrant, sparing access to more toxic combination approaches and preserving the quality of life.

Capivasertib and fulvestrant for patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer: characterization, time course, and management of frequent adverse events from the phase III CAPItello-291 study.

BACKGROUND: Capivasertib is a potent, selective pan-AKT inhibitor. In CAPItello-291, the addition of capivasertib to fulvestrant resulted in a statistically significant (P < 0.001) improvement in progression-free survival over fulvestrant monotherapy in patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer and disease progression on or after aromatase inhibitor-based therapy. Characterization of the capivasertib-fulvestrant adverse event (AE) profile as managed in CAPItello-291 can inform future management guidance and optimize clinical benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven hundred and eight patients were randomized 1 : 1 to capivasertib (400 mg twice daily; 4 days on, 3 days off) or placebo, plus fulvestrant, on a 4-week cycle. Dose reductions/interruptions for capivasertib/placebo were permitted (up to two dose reductions). Safety analyses included exposure, AE, and clinical laboratory data and were conducted in patients who received at least one dose of capivasertib, fulvestrant, or placebo. Frequent AEs associated with phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase (AKT) pathway inhibition (diarrhea, rash, hyperglycemia) were characterized using group terms. AEs were summarized using descriptive statistics; time-to-event analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Safety analyses included 705 patients: capivasertib-fulvestrant (n = 355) and placebo-fulvestrant (n = 350). Frequent any-grade AEs with capivasertib-fulvestrant were diarrhea (72.4%), rash (38.0%), and nausea (34.6%); frequent grade ≥3 AEs were rash (12.1%), diarrhea (9.3%), and hyperglycemia (2.3%). Diarrhea, rash, and hyperglycemia occurred shortly after starting capivasertib-fulvestrant [median days to onset (interquartile range) of any grade: 8 (2-22), 12 (10-15), and 15 (1-51), respectively], and were managed with supportive medications, dose reductions, interruptions, and/or discontinuation. Discontinuation rates were 2.0%, 4.5%, and 0.3%, respectively. Overall, 13.0% discontinued capivasertib due to AEs. CONCLUSIONS: Frequent AEs associated with PI3K/AKT pathway inhibition occurred early and were manageable. The low rate of treatment discontinuations suggests that, when appropriately managed, these AEs do not pose a challenge to clinical benefit.

Palbociclib combined with endocrine treatment in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer patients with high relapse risk after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: subgroup analyses of premenopausal patients in PENELOPE-B.

BACKGROUND: The PENELOPE-B study demonstrated that the addition of 1-year post-neoadjuvant palbociclib to endocrine therapy (ET) in patients with high-risk early breast cancer (BC) did not improve invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) compared to placebo. Here, we report results for premenopausal women. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative BC at high risk of relapse [defined as no pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and a clinical, pathological stage, estrogen receptor, grading (CPS-EG) score ≥3 or 2/ypN+] were randomized to receive 13 cycles of palbociclib or placebo + standard ET. Ovarian function (OF) was evaluated by centrally assessed estradiol, follicle-stimulating hormone and anti-Müllerian hormone serum levels. RESULTS: Overall, 616 of 1250 randomized patients were premenopausal; of these, 30.0% were <40 years of age, 47.4% had four or more metastatic lymph nodes, and 58.2% had a CPS-EG score ≥3. 66.1% of patients were treated with tamoxifen alone, and 32.9% received ovarian function suppression (OFS) in addition to either tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor (AI). After a median follow-up of 42.8 months (97.2% completeness) no difference in iDFS between palbociclib and placebo was observed [hazard ratio = 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-1.30, P = 0.737]. The estimated 3-year iDFS rate was marginally higher in the palbociclib arm (80.6% versus 78.3%). Three year iDFS was higher in patients receiving AI than tamoxifen plus OFS or tamoxifen alone (86.0% versus 78.6% versus 78.0%). Patients receiving tamoxifen plus OFS showed a favorable iDFS with palbociclib (83.0% versus 74.1%, hazard ratio = 0.52, 95% CI 0.27-1.02, P = 0.057). Hematologic adverse events were more frequent with palbociclib (76.1% versus 1.9% grade 3-4, P < 0.001). Palbociclib seems not to negatively impact the OF throughout the treatment period. CONCLUSIONS: In premenopausal women, who received tamoxifen plus OFS as ET, the addition of palbociclib to ET results in a favorable iDFS. The safety profile seems favorable and in contrast to chemotherapy palbociclib does not impact OF throughout the treatment period.

Pan-Asian adapted ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with early breast cancer.

The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with early breast cancer were updated and published online in 2023, and adapted, according to previously established standard methodology, to produce the Pan-Asian adapted (PAGA) ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of Asian patients with early breast cancer. The adapted guidelines presented in this manuscript represent the consensus opinions reached by a panel of Asian experts in the treatment of patients with breast cancer representing the oncological societies of China (CSCO), Indonesia (ISHMO), India (ISMPO), Japan (JSMO), Korea (KSMO), Malaysia (MOS), the Philippines (PSMO), Singapore (SSO), Taiwan (TOS) and Thailand (TSCO), co-ordinated by ESMO and KSMO. The voting was based on scientific evidence and was independent of the current treatment practices, drug access restrictions and reimbursement decisions in the different Asian regions represented by the 10 oncological societies. The latter are discussed separately in the manuscript. The aim is to provide guidance for the optimisation and harmonisation of the management of patients with early breast cancer across the different regions of Asia, drawing on the evidence provided by both Western and Asian trials, whilst respecting the differences in screening practices, molecular profiling, as well as the age and stage at presentation. Attention is drawn to the disparity in the drug approvals and reimbursement strategies, between the different regions of Asia.

Long-term outcomes of a randomized, open-label, phase II study comparing cabazitaxel versus paclitaxel as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with triple-negative or luminal B/HER2-negative breast cancer (GENEVIEVE).

BACKGROUND: The GENEVIEVE study, comparing neoadjuvant cabazitaxel versus paclitaxel in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and luminal B/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer (BC), previously reported significant differences in pathological complete response (pCR) rates. Effects on long-term outcome are unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: GENEVIEVE randomized patients with cT2-3, any cN or cT1, cN+/pNSLN+, centrally confirmed TNBC or luminal B/HER2-negative BC (latter defined as estrogen/progesterone receptor-positive and >14% Ki-67-stained cells) to receive either cabazitaxel 25 mg/m2 q3w for four cycles or paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 weekly for 12 weeks. Anthracycline-containing chemotherapy was allowed in case of histologically proven invasive residuals as neoadjuvant treatment or after surgery as adjuvant treatment. Here we report the secondary endpoints invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of the 333 patients randomized, 74.7% and 83.2% completed treatment in the cabazitaxel and paclitaxel arms, respectively. After a median follow-up of 89.3 months (interquartile range 68.8-97.3 months), 80 iDFS events (43 after cabazitaxel and 37 after paclitaxel) and 47 deaths (23 after cabazitaxel and 24 after paclitaxel) were reported. IDFS rates were not significantly different between the cabazitaxel and paclitaxel arms after a 3-year (83.6% versus 85.0%) and 5-year follow-up (76.2% versus 78.3%) [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.27, 95% confidence interval 0.82-1.96, P = 0.294], respectively. DDFS rates at 3 years (88.6% versus 87.8%) and 5 years (82.1% versus 82.8%) for cabazitaxel and paclitaxel were comparable (HR = 1.15, P = 0.573). Similarly, OS rates at 3 years (91.6% versus 91.8%) and 5 years (89.2% versus 86.8%) showed no significant differences (HR = 1.05, P = 0.872). Subgroup analysis for TNBC and luminal B/HER2-negative BCs indicated no significant variations in 3- or 5-year iDFS, DDFS, or OS. CONCLUSIONS: The significant differences in pCR rates observed in both treatment arms did not significantly impact long-term outcomes for patients treated with cabazitaxel versus paclitaxel in the GENEVIEVE trial.

Understanding breast cancer complexity to improve patient outcomes: The St Gallen International Consensus Conference for the Primary Therapy of Individuals with Early Breast Cancer 2023.

The 18th St Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference held in March 2023, in Vienna, Austria, assessed significant new findings for local and systemic therapies for early breast cancer with a focus on the evaluation of multimodal treatment options. The emergence of more effective, innovative agents in both the preoperative (primary or neoadjuvant) and post-operative (adjuvant) settings has underscored the pivotal role of a multidisciplinary approach in treatment decision making, particularly when selecting systemic therapy for an individual patient. The importance of multidisciplinary discussions regarding the clinical benefits of interventions was explicitly emphasized by the consensus panel as an integral part of developing an optimal treatment plan with the 'right' degree of intensity and duration. The panelists focused on controversies surrounding the management of common ductal/no special type and lobular breast cancer histology, which account for the vast majority of breast tumors. The expert opinion of the panelists was based on interpretations of available data, as well as current practices in their professional environments, personal and socioeconomic factors affecting patients, and cognizant of varying reimbursement and accessibility constraints around the world. The panelists strongly advocated patient participation in well-designed clinical studies whenever feasible. With these considerations in mind, the St Gallen Consensus Conference aims to offer guidance to clinicians regarding appropriate treatments for early-stage breast cancer and assist in balancing the realistic trade-offs between treatment benefit and toxicity, enabling patients and clinicians to make well-informed choices through a shared decision-making process.

ESMO Expert Consensus Statements on the management of breast cancer during pregnancy (PrBC).

The management of breast cancer during pregnancy (PrBC) is a relatively rare indication and an area where no or little evidence is available since randomized controlled trials cannot be conducted. In general, advances related to breast cancer (BC) treatment outside pregnancy cannot always be translated to PrBC, because both the interests of the mother and of the unborn should be considered. Evidence remains limited and/or conflicting in some specific areas where the optimal approach remains controversial. In 2022, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) held a virtual consensus-building process on this topic to gain insights from a multidisciplinary group of experts and develop statements on controversial topics that cannot be adequately addressed in the current evidence-based ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline. The aim of this consensus-building process was to discuss controversial issues relating to the management of patients with PrBC. The virtual meeting included a multidisciplinary panel of 24 leading experts from 13 countries and was chaired by S. Loibl and F. Amant. All experts were allocated to one of four different working groups. Each working group covered a specific subject area with two chairs appointed: Planning, preparation and execution of the consensus process was conducted according to the ESMO standard operating procedures.

ESMO expert consensus statements (ECS) on the definition, diagnosis, and management of HER2-low breast cancer.

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-low breast cancer has recently emerged as a targetable subset of breast tumors, based on the evidence from clinical trials of novel anti-HER2 antibody-drug conjugates. This evolution has raised several biological and clinical questions, warranting the establishment of consensus to optimally treat patients with HER2-low breast tumors. Between 2022 and 2023, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) held a virtual consensus-building process focused on HER2-low breast cancer. The consensus included a multidisciplinary panel of 32 leading experts in the management of breast cancer from nine different countries. The aim of the consensus was to develop statements on topics that are not covered in detail in the current ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline. The main topics identified for discussion were (i) biology of HER2-low breast cancer; (ii) pathologic diagnosis of HER2-low breast cancer; (iii) clinical management of HER2-low metastatic breast cancer; and (iv) clinical trial design for HER2-low breast cancer. The expert panel was divided into four working groups to address questions relating to one of the four topics outlined above. A review of the relevant scientific literature was conducted in advance. Consensus statements were developed by the working groups and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment before voting. This article presents the developed statements, including findings from the expert panel discussions, expert opinion, and a summary of evidence supporting each statement.

Long-term survival of breast cancer patients with brain metastases: subanalysis of the BMBC registry.

BACKGROUND: Up to 30% of metastatic breast cancer (BC) patients develop brain metastases (BM). Prognosis of patients with BM is poor and long-term survival is rare. Identification of factors associated with long-term survival is important for improving treatment modalities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 2889 patients of the national registry for BM in BC (BMBC) were available for this analysis. Long-term survival was defined as overall survival (OS) in the upper third of the failure curve resulting in a cut-off of 15 months. A total of 887 patients were categorized as long-term survivors. RESULTS: Long-term survivors compared to other patients were younger at BC and BM diagnosis (median 48 versus 54 years and 53 versus 59 years), more often had HER2-positive tumors (59.1% versus 36.3%), less frequently luminal-like (29.1% versus 35.7%) or triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) (11.9% versus 28.1%), showed better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) at the time of BM diagnosis (ECOG 0-1, 76.9% versus 51.0%), higher pathological complete remission rates after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (21.6% versus 13.7%) and lower number of BM (n = 1, BM 40.9% versus 25.4%; n = 2-3, BM 26.5% versus 26.7%; n ≥4, BM 32.6% versus 47.9%) (P < 0.001). Long-term survivors had leptomeningeal metastases (10.4% versus 17.5%) and extracranial metastases (ECM, 73.6% versus 82.5%) less frequently, and asymptomatic BM more often at the time of BM diagnosis (26.5% versus 20.1%), (P < 0.001). Median OS in long-term survivors was about two times higher than the cut-off of 15 months: 30.9 months [interquartile range (IQR) 30.3] overall, 33.9 months (IQR 37.1) in HER2-positive, 26.9 months (IQR 22.0) in luminal-like and 26.5 months (IQR 18.2) in TNBC patients. CONCLUSIONS: In our analysis, long-term survival of BC patients with BM was associated with better ECOG PS, younger age, HER2-positive subtype, lower number of BM and less extended visceral metastases. Patients with these clinical features might be more eligible for extended local brain and systemic treatment.

Cardiac safety of dual anti-HER2 blockade with pertuzumab plus trastuzumab in early HER2-positive breast cancer in the APHINITY trial.

BACKGROUND: Trastuzumab increases the incidence of cardiac events (CEs) in patients with breast cancer (BC). Dual blockade with pertuzumab (P) and trastuzumab (T) improves BC outcomes and is the standard of care for high-risk human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early BC patients. We analyzed the cardiac safety of P and T in the phase III APHINITY trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 55% was required at study entry. LVEF assessment was carried out every 3 months during treatment, every 6 months up to month 36, and yearly up to 10 years. Primary CE was defined as heart failure class III/IV and a significant decrease in LVEF (defined as ≥10% from baseline and to <50%), or cardiac death. Secondary CE was defined as a confirmed significant decrease in LVEF, or CEs confirmed by the cardiac advisory board. RESULTS: The safety analysis population consisted of 4769 patients. With 74 months of median follow-up, CEs were observed in 159 patients (3.3%): 83 (3.5%) in P + T and 76 (3.2%) in T arms, respectively. Most CEs occurred during anti-HER2 therapy (123; 77.4%) and were asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic decreases in LVEF (133; 83.6%). There were two cardiac deaths in each arm (0.1%). Cardiac risk factors indicated were age > 65 years, body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2, baseline LVEF between 55% and <60%, and use of an anthracycline-containing chemotherapy regimen. Acute recovery from a CE based on subsequent LVEF values was observed in 127/155 patients (81.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Dual blockade with P + T does not increase the risk of CEs compared with T alone. The use of anthracycline-based chemotherapy increases the risk of a CE; hence, non-anthracycline chemotherapy may be considered, particularly in patients with cardiovascular risk factors.

A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase II study to evaluate the tolerability of an induction dose escalation of everolimus in patients with metastatic breast cancer (DESIREE).

BACKGROUND: Stomatitis is one of the main reasons to discontinue everolimus in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). To decrease stomatitis and subsequently early treatment discontinuations or dose reductions, the DESIREE trial investigated the use of a stepwise dose-escalation schedule of everolimus (EVE esc). PATIENTS AND METHODS: DESIREE is a phase II, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with HR+/HER2- mBC and progression/relapse after nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor treatment. Patients were randomised to EVE esc (2.5 mg/day, week 1; 5 mg/day, week 2; 7.5 mg/day, week 3; 10 mg/day, weeks 4-24) or everolimus 10 mg/day (EVE 10mg) for 24 weeks plus exemestane. The primary endpoint was the incidence of stomatitis episodes grade ≥2 within 12 weeks of treatment. The secondary endpoints included toxicity, relative total dose intensity (RTDI) and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS: A total of 160 patients were randomised and 156 started treatment (EVE esc: 80; EVE 10mg: 76). The median age of patients was 64 years (range 33-85), 56.3% patients in the EVE esc arm versus 42.1% in the EVE 10mg arm had liver metastasis (P = 0.081) and 62.5% versus 51.3% received over one metastatic therapy line (P = 0.196). Within 12 weeks, the incidence of stomatitis episodes grade ≥2 was significantly lower in the EVE esc arm compared with the EVE 10mg arm (28.8% versus 46.1%; odds ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.24-0.92; P = 0.026). Toxicity was in line with the known safety profile without new safety concerns. The median RTDI was 91.1% in the EVE esc arm versus 80.0% in the EVE 10mg arm (P = 0.329). Discontinuation rate in the first 3 weeks was 6.3% versus 15.8%, respectively (P = 0.073). QoL was comparable between the two treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: A dose-escalation schema of everolimus over 3 weeks can be successfully used to reduce the incidence of high-grade stomatitis in the first 12 weeks of treatment in patients with HR+/HER2- mBC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT02387099; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02387099.

Overall survival in the OlympiA phase III trial of adjuvant olaparib in patients with germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 and high-risk, early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The randomized, double-blind OlympiA trial compared 1 year of the oral poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, olaparib, to matching placebo as adjuvant therapy for patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 (gBRCA1/2pv) and high-risk, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, early breast cancer (EBC). The first pre-specified interim analysis (IA) previously demonstrated statistically significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant disease-free survival (DDFS). The olaparib group had fewer deaths than the placebo group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance for overall survival (OS). We now report the pre-specified second IA of OS with updates of IDFS, DDFS, and safety. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One thousand eight hundred and thirty-six patients were randomly assigned to olaparib or placebo following (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation therapy if indicated. Endocrine therapy was given concurrently with study medication for hormone receptor-positive cancers. Statistical significance for OS at this IA required P < 0.015. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 3.5 years, the second IA of OS demonstrated significant improvement in the olaparib group relative to the placebo group [hazard ratio 0.68; 98.5% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.97; P = 0.009]. Four-year OS was 89.8% in the olaparib group and 86.4% in the placebo group (Δ 3.4%, 95% CI -0.1% to 6.8%). Four-year IDFS for the olaparib group versus placebo group was 82.7% versus 75.4% (Δ 7.3%, 95% CI 3.0% to 11.5%) and 4-year DDFS was 86.5% versus 79.1% (Δ 7.4%, 95% CI 3.6% to 11.3%), respectively. Subset analyses for OS, IDFS, and DDFS demonstrated benefit across major subgroups. No new safety signals were identified including no new cases of acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. CONCLUSION: With 3.5 years of median follow-up, OlympiA demonstrates statistically significant improvement in OS with adjuvant olaparib compared with placebo for gBRCA1/2pv-associated EBC and maintained improvements in the previously reported, statistically significant endpoints of IDFS and DDFS with no new safety signals.

Neoadjuvant durvalumab improves survival in early triple-negative breast cancer independent of pathological complete response.

BACKGROUND: Addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is a promising strategy in early breast cancer, but the optimal duration of therapy is currently unknown. In the GeparNuevo (NCT02685059) trial, addition of durvalumab to NACT as previously reported led to a moderate increase in pathological complete response (pCR) rate by an absolute 9% (P = 0.287). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with cT1b-cT4a-d triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) received durvalumab 1.5 g or placebo every 4 weeks added to nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 weekly for 12 weeks, followed by durvalumab/placebo every 4 weeks plus epirubicin/cyclophosphamide every 2 weeks followed by surgery. Durvalumab was not continued after surgery. The primary objective was pCR. Secondary endpoints included invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 174 patients were randomised between June 2016 and October 2017. After a median follow-up of 43.7 months, 34 events had occurred. Despite a non-significant increase in the pCR rate, significant differences were observed for 3-year iDFS, DDFS and OS: iDFS was 85.6% with durvalumab versus 77.2% with placebo [hazard ratio (HR) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24-0.97, stratified log-rank P = 0.036]; DDFS 91.7% versus 78.4% (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13-0.74, P = 0.005); OS 95.2% versus 83.5% (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.08-0.72, P = 0.006). pCR patients had 3-year iDFS of 95.5% with durvalumab and 86.1% without (HR 0.22, 95% CI 0.05-1.06). In the non-pCR cohort 3-year iDFS was 76.3% versus 69.7% (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.29-1.54). Multivariable analysis confirmed a durvalumab effect independent of the pCR effect. No new safety signals occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Durvalumab added to NACT in TNBC significantly improved survival despite a modest pCR increase and no adjuvant component of durvalumab. Additional studies are needed to clarify the optimal duration and sequence of checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of early TNBC.

Characteristics of patients with brain metastases from human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: subanalysis of Brain Metastases in Breast Cancer Registry.

BACKGROUND: Up to 40% of patients with metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer develop brain metastases (BMs). Understanding of clinical features of these patients with HER2-positive breast cancer and BMs is vital. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 2948 patients from the Brain Metastases in Breast Cancer registry were available for this analysis, of whom 1311 had primary tumors with the HER2-positive subtype. RESULTS: Patients with HER2-positive breast cancer and BMs were-when compared with HER2-negative patients-slightly younger at the time of breast cancer and BM diagnosis, had a higher pathologic complete response rate after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and a higher tumor grade. Furthermore, extracranial metastases at the time of BM diagnosis were less common in HER2-positive patients, when compared with HER2-negative patients. HER2-positive patients had more often BMs in the posterior fossa, but less commonly leptomeningeal metastases. The median overall survival (OS) in all HER2-positive patients was 13.2 months (95% confidence interval 11.4-14.4). The following factors were associated with shorter OS (multivariate analysis): older age at BM diagnosis [≥60 versus <60 years: hazard ratio (HR) 1.63, P < 0.001], lower Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status (2-4 versus 0-1: HR 1.59, P < 0.001), higher number of BMs (2-3 versus 1: HR 1.30, P = 0.082; ≥4 versus 1: HR 1.51, P = 0.004; global P = 0.015), BMs in the fossa anterior (HR 1.71, P < 0.001), leptomeningeal metastases (HR 1.63, P = 0.012), symptomatic BMs at diagnosis (HR 1.35, P = 0.033) and extracranial metastases at diagnosis of BMs (HR 1.43, P = 0.020). The application of targeted therapy after the BM diagnosis (HR 0.62, P < 0.001) was associated with longer OS. HER2-positive/hormone receptor-positive patients showed longer OS than HER2-positive/hormone receptor-negative patients (median 14.3 versus 10.9 months; HR 0.86, P = 0.03), but no differences in progression-free survival were seen between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: We identified factors associated with the prognosis of HER2-positive patients with BMs. Further research is needed to understand the factors determining the longer survival of HER2-positive/hormone receptor-positive patients.