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.

ESO-ESMO fifth international consensus guidelines for breast cancer in young women (BCY5).

We dedicate this manuscript in memory of a dear friend and colleague Bella Kaufman. The fifth International Consensus Symposium for Breast Cancer in Young Women (BCY5) took place virtually in October 2020, organized by the European School of Oncology (ESO) and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO). Consensus recommendations for the management of breast cancer in young women were updated from BCY4 with incorporation of new evidence to inform the guidelines. Areas of research priorities as well as specificities in different geographic and minority populations were identified. This manuscript summarizes the ESO-ESMO international consensus recommendations, which are also endorsed by the European Society of Breast Specialists (EUSOMA).

Current and future diagnostic and treatment strategies for patients with invasive lobular breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Invasive lobular breast cancer (ILC) is the second most common type of breast cancer after invasive breast cancer of no special type (NST), representing up to 15% of all breast cancers. DESIGN: Latest data on ILC are presented, focusing on diagnosis, molecular make-up according to the European Society for Medical Oncology Scale for Clinical Actionability of molecular Targets (ESCAT) guidelines, treatment in the early and metastatic setting and ILC-focused clinical trials. RESULTS: At the imaging level, magnetic resonance imaging-based and novel positron emission tomography/computed tomography-based techniques can overcome the limitations of currently used imaging techniques for diagnosing ILC. At the pathology level, E-cadherin immunohistochemistry could help improving inter-pathologist agreement. The majority of patients with ILC do not seem to benefit as much from (neo-)adjuvant chemotherapy as patients with NST, although chemotherapy might be required in a subset of high-risk patients. No differences in treatment efficacy are seen for anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) therapies in the adjuvant setting and cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitors in the metastatic setting. The clinical utility of the commercially available prognostic gene expression-based tests is unclear for patients with ILC. Several ESCAT alterations differ in frequency between ILC and NST. Germline BRCA1 and PALB2 alterations are less frequent in patients with ILC, while germline CDH1 (gene coding for E-cadherin) alterations are more frequent in patients with ILC. Somatic HER2 mutations are more frequent in ILC, especially in metastases (15% ILC versus 5% NST). A high tumour mutational burden, relevant for immune checkpoint inhibition, is more frequent in ILC metastases (16%) than in NST metastases (5%). Tumours with somatic inactivating CDH1 mutations may be vulnerable for treatment with ROS1 inhibitors, a concept currently investigated in early and metastatic ILC. CONCLUSION: ILC is a unique malignancy based on its pathological and biological features leading to differences in diagnosis as well as in treatment response, resistance and targets as compared to NST.

Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: updated efficacy and Ki-67 analysis from the monarchE study.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) previously demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer at the second interim analysis, however follow-up was limited. Here, we present results of the prespecified primary outcome analysis and an additional follow-up analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This global, phase III, open-label trial randomized (1 : 1) 5637 patients to adjuvant ET for ≥5 years ± abemaciclib for 2 years. Cohort 1 enrolled patients with ≥4 positive axillary lymph nodes (ALNs), or 1-3 positive ALNs and either grade 3 disease or tumor ≥5 cm. Cohort 2 enrolled patients with 1-3 positive ALNs and centrally determined high Ki-67 index (≥20%). The primary endpoint was IDFS in the intent-to-treat population (cohorts 1 and 2). Secondary endpoints were IDFS in patients with high Ki-67, DRFS, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: At the primary outcome analysis, with 19 months median follow-up time, abemaciclib + ET resulted in a 29% reduction in the risk of developing an IDFS event [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-0.87; nominal P = 0.0009]. At the additional follow-up analysis, with 27 months median follow-up and 90% of patients off treatment, IDFS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.82; nominal P < 0.0001) and DRFS (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.83; nominal P < 0.0001) benefit was maintained. The absolute improvements in 3-year IDFS and DRFS rates were 5.4% and 4.2%, respectively. Whereas Ki-67 index was prognostic, abemaciclib benefit was consistent regardless of Ki-67 index. Safety data were consistent with the known abemaciclib risk profile. CONCLUSION: Abemaciclib + ET significantly improved IDFS in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer, with an acceptable safety profile. Ki-67 index was prognostic, but abemaciclib benefit was observed regardless of Ki-67 index. Overall, the robust treatment benefit of abemaciclib extended beyond the 2-year treatment period.

Analysis of mutation status and homologous recombination deficiency in tumors of patients with germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and metastatic breast cancer: OlympiAD.

BACKGROUND: Presence of a germline BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation (gBRCAm) may sensitize tumors to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition via inactivation of the second allele, resulting in gene-specific loss of heterozygosity (gsLOH) and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). Here we explore whether tissue sample testing provides an additional route to germline testing to inform treatment selection for PARP inhibition. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prespecified exploratory analysis, BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations in blood samples (gBRCAm) and tumor tissue (tBRCAm) were analyzed from patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer and known gBRCAm, enrolled in the phase III OlympiAD trial. The frequency and nature of tBRCAm, HRD score status [HRD-positive (score ≥42) versus HRD-negative (score <42) using the Myriad myChoice® CDx test] and rates of gsLOH were determined, and their impact on clinical efficacy (objective response rate and progression-free survival) was explored. RESULTS: Tissue samples from 161/302 patients yielded tBRCAm, HRD and gsLOH data for 143 (47%), 129 (43%) and 125 (41%) patients, respectively. Concordance between gBRCAm and tBRCAm was 99%. gsLOH was observed in 118/125 (94%) patients [BRCA1m, 73/76 (96%); BRCA2m, 45/49 (92%)]. A second mutation event was recorded for two of the three BRCA1m patients without gsLOH. The incidence of HRD-negative was 16% (21/129) and was more common for BRCA2m (versus BRCA1m) and/or for hormone receptor-positive (versus triple-negative) disease. Olaparib antitumor activity was observed irrespective of HRD score. CONCLUSIONS: gBRCAm identified in patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer by germline testing in blood was also identified by tumor tissue testing. gsLOH was common, indicating a high rate of biallelic inactivation in metastatic breast cancer. Olaparib activity was seen regardless of gsLOH status or HRD score. Thus, additional tumor testing to inform PARP inhibitor treatment selection may not be supported for these patients.

ESO-ESMO 4th International Consensus Guidelines for Breast Cancer in Young Women (BCY4).

The 4th International Consensus Conference for Breast Cancer in Young Women (BCY4) took place in October 2018, in Lugano, Switzerland, organized by the European School of Oncology (ESO) and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO). Consensus recommendations for the management of breast cancer in young women were updated from BCY3 with incorporation of new evidence to inform the guidelines. Areas of research priorities were also identified. This article summarizes the ESO-ESMO international consensus recommendations, which are also endorsed by the European Society of Breast Specialists (EUSOMA).

OlympiAD final overall survival and tolerability results: Olaparib versus chemotherapy treatment of physician's choice in patients with a germline BRCA mutation and HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: In the OlympiAD study, olaparib was shown to improve progression-free survival compared with chemotherapy treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in patients with a germline BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation (BRCAm) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC). We now report the planned final overall survival (OS) results, and describe the most common adverse events (AEs) to better understand olaparib tolerability in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: OlympiAD, a Phase III, randomized, controlled, open-label study (NCT02000622), enrolled patients with a germline BRCAm and HER2-negative mBC who had received ≤2 lines of chemotherapy for mBC. Patients were randomized to olaparib tablets (300 mg bid) or predeclared TPC (capecitabine, vinorelbine, or eribulin). OS and safety were secondary end points. RESULTS: A total of 205 patients were randomized to olaparib and 97 to TPC. At 64% data maturity, median OS was 19.3 months with olaparib versus 17.1 months with TPC (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.66-1.23; P = 0.513); median follow-up was 25.3 and 26.3 months, respectively. HR for OS with olaparib versus TPC in prespecified subgroups were: prior chemotherapy for mBC [no (first-line setting): 0.51, 95% CI 0.29-0.90; yes (second/third-line): 1.13, 0.79-1.64]; receptor status (triple negative: 0.93, 0.62-1.43; hormone receptor positive: 0.86, 0.55-1.36); prior platinum (yes: 0.83, 0.49-1.45; no: 0.91, 0.64-1.33). Adverse events during olaparib treatment were generally low grade and manageable by supportive treatment or dose modification. There was a low rate of treatment discontinuation (4.9%), and the risk of developing anemia did not increase with extended olaparib exposure. CONCLUSIONS: While there was no statistically significant improvement in OS with olaparib compared to TPC, there was the possibility of meaningful OS benefit among patients who had not received chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Olaparib was generally well-tolerated, with no evidence of cumulative toxicity during extended exposure. Please see the article online for additional video content.

Borealis-1: a randomized, first-line, placebo-controlled, phase II study evaluating apatorsen and chemotherapy for patients with advanced urothelial cancer.

BACKGROUND: Five-year survival of patients with inoperable, advanced urothelial carcinoma treated with the first-line chemotherapy is 5%-15%. We assessed whether the Hsp27 inhibitor apatorsen combined with gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) could improve overall survival (OS) in these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase II trial randomized 183 untreated urothelial carcinoma patients (North America and Europe) to receive GC plus either placebo (N = 62), 600 mg apatorsen (N = 60), or 1000 mg apatorsen (N = 61). In the experimental arm, treatment included loading doses of apatorsen followed by up to six cycles of apatorsen plus GC. Patients receiving at least four cycles could continue apatorsen monotherapy as maintenance until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was OS. RESULTS: OS was not significantly improved in the single or combined 600- or 1000-mg apatorsen arms versus placebo [hazard ratio (HR), 0.86 and 0.90, respectively]. Exploratory study of specific statistical modeling showed a trend for improved survival in patients with baseline poor prognostic features treated with 600 mg apatorsen compared with placebo (HR = 0.72). Landmark analysis of serum Hsp27 (sHsp27) levels showed a trend toward survival benefit for poor-prognosis patients in 600- and 1000-mg apatorsen arms who achieved lower area under the curve sHsp27 levels, compared with the placebo arm (HR = 0.45 and 0.62, respectively). Higher baseline circulating tumor cells (≥5 cells/7.5 ml) was observed in patients with poor prognosis in correlation with poor survival. Treatment-emergent adverse events were manageable and more common in both apatorsen-treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Even though apatorsen combined with standard chemotherapy did not demonstrate a survival benefit in the overall study population, patients with poor prognostic features might benefit from this combination. Serum Hsp27 levels may act as a biomarker to predict treatment outcome. Further exploration of apatorsen in poor-risk patients is warranted.

Clinical use of biomarkers in breast cancer: Updated guidelines from the European Group on Tumor Markers (EGTM).

Biomarkers play an essential role in the management of patients with invasive breast cancer. For selecting patients likely to respond to endocrine therapy, both oestrogen receptors (ERs) and progesterone receptors (PRs) should be measured on all newly diagnosed invasive breast cancers. On the other hand, for selecting likely response to all forms of anti-HER2 therapy (trastuzumab, pertuzumab, lapatinib or ado-trastuzumab emtansine), determination of HER2 expression or gene copy number is mandatory. Where feasible, measurement of ER, PR and HER2 should be performed on recurrent lesions and the primary invasive tumour. Although methodological problems exist in the determination of Ki67, because of its clearly established clinical value, wide availability and low costs relative to the available multianalyte signatures, Ki67 may be used for determining prognosis, especially if values are low or high. In oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative, lymph node-negative patients, multianalyte tests such as urokinase plasminogen activator (uPA)-PAI-1, Oncotype DX, MammaPrint, EndoPredict, Breast Cancer Index (BCI) and Prosigna (PAM50) may be used to predict outcome and aid adjunct therapy decision-making. Oncotype DX, MammaPrint, EndoPredict and Prosigna may be similarly used in patients with 1-3 metastatic lymph nodes. All laboratories measuring biomarkers for patient management should use analytically and clinically validated assays, participate in external quality assurance programs, have established assay acceptance and rejection criteria, perform regular audits and be accredited by an appropriate organisation.