Prognostic value of comorbidities in older patients with cancer: the ELCAPA cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In older patients, comorbidities competed with cancer for mortality risk. We assessed the prognostic value of comorbidities in older patients with cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed all patients >70 years of age with colorectal, breast, prostate, or lung cancer included in the prospective ELCAPA cohort. The Cumulative Illness Rating Scale-Geriatrics (CIRS-G) score was used to assess comorbidities. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) at 3, 12, and 36 months. The adjusted difference in the restricted mean survival time (RMST) was used to assess the strength of the relationship between comorbidities and survival. RESULTS: Of the 1551 patients included (median age 82 years; interquartile range 78-86 years), 502 (32%), 575 (38%), 283 (18%), and 191 (12%) had colorectal, breast, prostate, and lung cancer, respectively, and 50% had metastatic disease. Hypertension, kidney failure, and cognitive impairment were the most common comorbidities (67%, 38%, and 29% of the patients, respectively). A CIRS-G score >17, two or more severe comorbidities, more than seven comorbidities, heart failure, and cognitive impairment were independently associated with shorter OS. The greatest effect size was observed for CIRS-G >17 (versus CIRS-G <11): at 36 months, the adjusted differences in the RMST (95% confidence interval) were -6.0 months (-9.3 to -2.6 months) for colorectal cancer, -9.1 months (-13.2 to -4.9 months) for breast cancer, -8.3 months (-12.8 to -3.9 months) for prostate cancer, and -5.5 months (-9.9 to -1.1 months) for lung cancer (P < 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Comorbidities' type, number, and severity were independently associated with shorter OS. A 17-point cut-off over 56 for the total CIRS-G score could be considered in clinical practice.

Alpelisib and fulvestrant in PIK3CA-mutated hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative advanced breast cancer included in the French early access program.

SOLAR-1 and BYLieve trials documented the efficacy of the PI3K-inhibitor alpelisib in pre-treated PIK3CA-mutant, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) patients. We report here real-life data of patients prospectively registered in the French alpelisib early access program (EAP) opened to PIK3CA-mutant HR+/HER2- ABC patients treated with alpelisib and fulvestrant. Primary endpoint was PFS by local investigators using RECIST1.1. Eleven centers provided individual data on 233 consecutive patients. Patients had received a median number of 4 (range: 1-16) prior systemic treatments for ABC, including CDK4/6 inhibitor, chemotherapy, fulvestrant and everolimus in 227 (97.4%), 180 (77.3%), 175 (75.1%) and 131 (56.2%) patients, respectively. After a median follow-up of 7.1 months and 168 events, median PFS was 5.3 months (95% CI: 4.7-6.0). Among 186 evaluable patients, CBR at 6 months was 45.3% (95% CI: 37.8-52.8). In multivariable analysis, characteristics significantly associated with a shorter PFS were age < 60 years (HR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.1-2.1), >5 lines of prior treatments (HR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.0-2.0) and the C420R PI3KCA mutation (HR = 4.1, 95% CI = 1.3-13.6). N = 91 (39.1%) patients discontinued alpelisib due to adverse events. To our knowledge, this is the largest real-life assessment of alpelisib efficacy. Despite heavy pre-treatments, patients derived a clinically relevant benefit from alpelisib and fulvestrant.

Primary results from IMpassion131, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised phase III trial of first-line paclitaxel with or without atezolizumab for unresectable locally advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: In the phase III IMpassion130 trial, combining atezolizumab with first-line nanoparticle albumin-bound-paclitaxel for advanced triple-negative breast cancer (aTNBC) showed a statistically significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive populations, and a clinically meaningful overall survival (OS) effect in PD-L1-positive aTNBC. The phase III KEYNOTE-355 trial adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy for aTNBC showed similar PFS effects. IMpassion131 evaluated first-line atezolizumab-paclitaxel in aTNBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients [no prior systemic therapy or ≥12 months since (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy] were randomised 2:1 to atezolizumab 840 mg or placebo (days 1, 15), both with paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, 15), every 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were tumour PD-L1 status, prior taxane, liver metastases and geographical region. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS, tested hierarchically first in the PD-L1-positive [immune cell expression ≥1%, VENTANA PD-L1 (SP142) assay] population, and then in the ITT population. OS was a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Of 651 randomised patients, 45% had PD-L1-positive aTNBC. At the primary PFS analysis, adding atezolizumab to paclitaxel did not improve investigator-assessed PFS in the PD-L1-positive population [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-1.12; P = 0.20; median PFS 6.0 months with atezolizumab-paclitaxel versus 5.7 months with placebo-paclitaxel]. In the PD-L1-positive population, atezolizumab-paclitaxel was associated with more favourable unconfirmed best overall response rate (63% versus 55% with placebo-paclitaxel) and median duration of response (7.2 versus 5.5 months, respectively). Final OS results showed no difference between arms (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.76-1.64; median 22.1 months with atezolizumab-paclitaxel versus 28.3 months with placebo-paclitaxel in the PD-L1-positive population). Results in the ITT population were consistent with the PD-L1-positive population. The safety profile was consistent with known effects of each study drug. CONCLUSION: Combining atezolizumab with paclitaxel did not improve PFS or OS versus paclitaxel alone. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT03125902.

[Expert centre Cancer du sein et Grossesse (CALG): Concordance between the proposed therapeutics and those finally received]. / Centre expert Cancer du sein et Grossesse (CALG) : concordance entre la proposition du CALG et la prise en charge effective.

OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer associated with pregnancy (CSAG) is a rare condition whose management justifies the use of expert center. The Pregnancy-Associated Cancer Network (CALG) was created in France to optimize therapeutic management. The objective of our study was to evaluate its impact on the therapeutic management of CSAGs and the discrepancy rate between the CALG proposal and the treatment performed. METHOD: A retrospective study including 58 CSAGs for which the opinion of the CALG network was solicited between January 2015 and November 2017. A questionnaire was addressed to the practitioner requesting the network. These practitioners were contacted to know the treatments received by the patient to assess the discrepancy rate. RESULTS: In 70% of the cases, the CALG network was solicited before any therapeutic treatment. When the opinion was requested after initiation of therapy, the discrepancy rate between the CALG proposal and the one practiced was 47%. Of the 46 physicians contacted, the response rate was 62.5% (30/46). In 90% of cases, the therapy proposed by the CALG network was the one received by the patient. CONCLUSION: This study emphasizes the need to refer to an expert center before treatment of a CSAG and the need for the contribution of doctors requesting the expert center to inform them of the follow-up of patients and children.

Efficacy and safety of subcutaneous trastuzumab and intravenous trastuzumab as part of adjuvant therapy for HER2-positive early breast cancer: Final analysis of the randomised, two-cohort PrefHer study.

AIM: To assess efficacy (event-free survival, EFS) and safety in patients followed up for 3 years in the PrefHer study (NCT01401166). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Post surgery and post chemotherapy in the (neo)adjuvant setting, patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer were randomised to receive four cycles of the subcutaneous form of trastuzumab (Herceptin® SC [H SC] via single-use injection device [Cohort 1] or delivery via a hand-held syringe from an SC Vial [Cohort 2]; 600 mg fixed dose) followed by four of the intravenous form of trastuzumab (Herceptin® [H IV]; 8 mg/kg loading, 6 mg/kg maintenance doses) in the adjuvant setting or vice versa every 3 weeks. Patients could have received H before randomisation. H was then continued to complete a total of 18 cycles, including any cycles received before randomisation. RESULTS: A total of 488 patients were randomised across both cohorts. After median follow-up of 36.1 months, 3-year EFS across both groups in the evaluable intention-to-treat population (467 patients) was 90.6% overall, 89.9% in Cohort 1, and 91.1% in Cohort 2. No new safety signals were identified during long-term follow-up, with only one cardiac serious adverse event in the safety population (483 patients). CONCLUSIONS: Three-year EFS data following H SC and H IV treatment are consistent with those reported by previous trials for H in the adjuvant setting. The overall safety profile during adjuvant treatment was as expected.

Safety and tolerability of subcutaneous trastuzumab for the adjuvant treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive early breast cancer: SafeHer phase III study's primary analysis of 2573 patients.

AIM: To assess the safety and tolerability of adjuvant subcutaneous trastuzumab (Herceptin® SC, H SC), delivered from an H SC Vial via hand-held syringe (Cohort A) or single-use injection device (Cohort B), with or without chemotherapy, for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive stage I to IIIC early breast cancer (EBC) in the phase III SafeHer study (NCT01566721). METHODS: Patients received 600 mg fixed-dose H SC every 3 weeks for 18 cycles. The chemotherapy partner was at the investigators' discretion (H SC monotherapy was limited to ≤10% of the population). Data from the first H SC dose until 28 days (plus a 5-day window) after the last dose are presented. Results are descriptive. RESULTS: In the overall population, 2282/2573 patients (88.7%) experienced adverse events (AEs). Of the above, 128 (5.0%) patients experienced AEs leading to study drug discontinuation; 596 (23.2%) experienced grade ≥ 3 AEs and 326 (12.7%) experienced serious AEs. Grade ≥ 3 cardiac disorders were reported in 24 patients (0.9%), including congestive heart failure in eight (0.3%). As expected, the AE rates varied according to the timing of chemotherapy in both cohorts, with higher rates in concurrent versus sequential chemotherapy subgroups. In the concurrent chemotherapy subgroup, AEs were more common during the actual period of concurrent chemotherapy compared with the period when patients did not receive concurrent chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: SafeHer confirms the safety and tolerability of the H SC 600 mg fixed dose for 1 year (every 3 weeks for 18 cycles) as adjuvant therapy with concurrent or sequential chemotherapy for HER2-positive EBC. These primary analysis results are consistent with the known safety profile for intravenous H and H SC.

Patients' preference of trastuzumab administration (subcutaneous versus intravenous) in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: Results of the randomised MetaspHer study.

HannaH (NCT00950300) and PrefHer (NCT01401166) studies validated the subcutaneous (H-s.c.) formulation of trastuzumab as effective and safe as intravenous (H-i.v.) and highly preferred by patients in early breast cancer. The present randomised MetaspHer trial (NCT01810393) is the first study assessing patient's preference in metastatic setting. METHODS: Patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer who completed a first line chemotherapy with trastuzumab and achieved a long-term response lasting more than 3 years were randomised to receive 3 cycles of 600-mg fixed-dose adjuvant H-s.c., followed by 3 cycles of standard H-i.v., or the reverse sequence. Primary end-point was overall preference for H-s.c. or H-i.v. at cycle six, assessed by Patient Preference Questionnaire (PPQ). Secondary end-points included healthcare professional (HCP) satisfaction; safety and tolerability; quality of life. RESULTS: Hundred and thirteen patients were randomised and treated. H-s.c. was preferred by 79/92 evaluable intent-to-treat patients (85.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI; 78.8-93.0]; p < 0.001), 13/92 preferred H-i.v. (14.1%, 95% CI [7.0-21.3]). HCPs were most satisfied with H-s.c. (56/88 available data, 63.6%, [53.6-73.7]). On the safety population, adverse events occurred in 73 (67.6%) and 49 (44.1%) patients during the H-s.c. and H-i.v. periods, respectively; 7 (6.5%) and 4 (3.6%) were grade ≥ III, 3 (2.8%) and 2 (1.8%) were serious. CONCLUSION: The safety was consistent with the known H-i.v. and H-s.c. profiles without safety concern raised. Definitively, patients preferred H-s.c. as reported in early stage by PrefHer study.

Circulating tumour cells and pathological complete response: independent prognostic factors in inflammatory breast cancer in a pooled analysis of two multicentre phase II trials (BEVERLY-1 and -2) of neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with bevacizumab.

Background: We present a pooled analysis of predictive and prognostic values of circulating tumour cells (CTC) and circulating endothelial cells (CEC) in two prospective trials of patients with inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with neoadjuvant and adjuvant bevacizumab. Patients and methods: Nonmetastatic T4d patients were enrolled in two phase II multicentre trials, evaluating bevacizumab in combination with sequential neoadjuvant chemotherapy of four cycles of FEC followed by four cycles of docetaxel in HER2-negative tumour (BEVERLY-1) or docetaxel and trastuzumab in HER2-positive tumour (BEVERLY-2). CTC and CEC were detected in 7.5 and 4 ml of blood, respectively, with the CellSearch System. Results: From October 2008 to September 2010, 152 patients were included and 137 were evaluable for CTC and CEC. At baseline, 55 patients had detectable CTC (39%). After four cycles of chemotherapy, a dramatic drop in CTC to a rate of 9% was observed (P < 0.01). Pathological complete response (pCR) rate was 40%. No correlation was found between CTC or CEC levels and pCR rate. Median follow-up was 43 months. CTC detection (≥1 CTC/7.5 ml) at baseline was associated with shorter 3-year disease-free survival (39% versus 70% for patients without CTC, P < 0.01, HR 2.80) and shorter 3-year overall survival (OS) (P < 0.01). In multivariate analysis, independent prognostic parameters for shorter survival were absence of hormonal receptors, no pCR and CTC detection at baseline. CEC level at baseline or variations during treatment had no prognostic value. Conclusion: In this pooled analysis of two prospective trials in nonmetastatic IBC, detection rate of CTC was 39% with a strong and independent prognostic value for survival. Combination of pCR after neoadjuvant treatment with no CTC detection at baseline isolated a subgroup of IBC with excellent OS (94% 3-year OS), suggesting that CTC count could be part of IBC stratification in prospective trials.

Final results of the TANIA randomised phase III trial of bevacizumab after progression on first-line bevacizumab therapy for HER2-negative locally recurrent/metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The randomised phase III TANIA trial demonstrated that continuing bevacizumab with second-line chemotherapy for locally recurrent/metastatic breast cancer (LR/mBC) after progression on first-line bevacizumab-containing therapy significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with chemotherapy alone [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.93]. We report final results from the TANIA trial, including overall survival (OS) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with HER2-negative LR/mBC that had progressed on or after first-line bevacizumab plus chemotherapy were randomised to receive standard second-line chemotherapy either alone or with bevacizumab. At second progression, patients initially randomised to bevacizumab continued bevacizumab with their third-line chemotherapy, but those randomised to chemotherapy alone were not allowed to cross over to receive third-line bevacizumab. The primary end point was second-line PFS; secondary end points included third-line PFS, combined second- and third-line PFS, OS, HRQoL and safety. RESULTS: Of the 494 patients randomised, 483 received second-line therapy; 234 patients (47% of the randomised population) continued to third-line study treatment. The median duration of follow-up at the final analysis was 32.1 months in the chemotherapy-alone arm and 30.9 months in the bevacizumab plus chemotherapy arm. There was no statistically significant difference between treatment arms in third-line PFS (HR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.59-1.06), combined second- and third-line PFS (HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.68-1.05) or OS (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.76-1.21). Third-line safety results showed increased incidences of proteinuria and hypertension with bevacizumab, consistent with safety results for the second-line treatment phase. No differences in HRQoL were detected. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, continuing bevacizumab beyond first and second progression of LR/mBC improved second-line PFS, but no improvement in longer term efficacy was observed. The second-line PFS benefit appears to be achieved without detrimentally affecting quality of life. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT01250379.

[Impact of the 21-gene assay in decision-making during multidisciplinary breast meeting: A French experience]. / Impact d'un test de signature génomique en sénologie sur les décisions en réunion de concertation pluridisciplinaire : une expérience française.

OBJECTIVES: The 21-gene assay (Oncotype DX(®)) test is used to estimate the risk of recurrence and to predict the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy at an early stage of endocrine responsive breast cancers, without HER2 overexpression or amplification. This test corresponds to a recurrence score (RS), classifying patients into three groups (low, intermediate or high risk). The objective of this two-center prospective study is to define the impact of Oncotype DX(®) in clinical practice. METHODS: Between August 2013 and May 2015, an Oncotype DX(®) test was decided in multidisciplinary meeting, to certain patients with an indication of adjuvant chemotherapy for HR+ and HER2 negative cancers. The therapeutic changes after knowledge of RS were collected. An estimate of the economic impact was performed and a correlation between the RS and usual breast cancer prognostic markers was investigated. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients had a test, twenty-six (66.7%) of them have finally been no indication retaining chemotherapy. The economy obtained through the use of the test was estimated around 173,000euros. It has not been demonstrated correlation between the RS, the usual decisional and prognostic factors for breast cancer or with adjuvant! Online. CONCLUSIONS: The RS has an additional decision value compared to other common decision criteria. Use of Oncotype DX(®) reduced in our experience the indications of adjuvant chemotherapy. The medical and economic impact could be significant.

Impact of screening on clinicopathological features and treatment for invasive breast cancer: results of two national surveys.

PURPOSE: Several studies showed a breast cancer downstaging due to screening. A first national survey was conducted in France in 2001-2002 to evaluate in the current clinical practice the clinicopathological features and treatments of 1049 firstly operated breast cancers. In order to assess the impact of the national screening program implemented in all regions in France in 2004, a new survey was performed in 2007-2008. MATERIAL: The new survey included 1433 firstly operated breast cancers prospectively collected. These new data were compared to the results of the first national survey. RESULTS: According to TN classification, we found in the second survey T0: 27.6%, T1: 48.6%, T2: 21.3%, T3T4: 3.8% and Tx: 0.7%. Infiltrating ductal and lobular carcinomas represented 80% and 13% of tumours. Hormone receptors were positive in 85.3% and Her-2 overexpressed in 12.4% of tumours (83.9% and 20.6% in the first survey); 68.2% and 32% were pN0 and pN1-3. Lumpectomy and mastectomy were performed in 77% and 23% of the cases. Axillary dissection, sentinel node biopsy or both were performed in 42.6%, 41% and 16.4% of the cases, respectively. Radiotherapy, chemotherapy, hormonotherapy and trastuzumab were given to 93%, 51%, 83% and 9.3% of the patients. Compared with the results from the first survey, we found an increase of infraclinical lesions (T0 from 8.4 to 27.6%) and a wide decrease of pN+ rate (from 44% to 32%). The mastectomy rate was constant (23%), as well as radiotherapy use, whereas chemotherapy use decreased from 62.8 to 55.6%. CONCLUSION: A complete national screening coverage clearly provides a favourable modification of breast cancer clinicopathological features. Both locoregional and adjuvant treatments were greatly downscaled.

Guidelines for time-to-event end point definitions in breast cancer trials: results of the DATECAN initiative (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event Endpoints in CANcer trials)†.

BACKGROUND: Using surrogate end points for overall survival, such as disease-free survival, is increasingly common in randomized controlled trials. However, the definitions of several of these time-to-event (TTE) end points are imprecisely which limits interpretation and cross-trial comparisons. The estimation of treatment effects may be directly affected by the definitions of end points. The DATECAN initiative (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event Endpoints in CANcer trials) aims to provide recommendations for definitions of TTE end points. We report guidelines for randomized cancer clinical trials (RCTs) in breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A literature review was carried out to identify TTE end points (primary or secondary) reported in publications of randomized trials or guidelines. An international multidisciplinary panel of experts proposed recommendations for the definitions of these end points based on a validated consensus method that formalize the degree of agreement among experts. RESULTS: Recommended guidelines for the definitions of TTE end points commonly used in RCTs for breast cancer are provided for non-metastatic and metastatic settings. CONCLUSION: The use of standardized definitions should facilitate comparisons of trial results and improve the quality of trial design and reporting. These guidelines could be of particular interest to those involved in the design, conducting, reporting, or assessment of RCT.

Current applications of PET imaging of sex hormone receptors with a fluorinated analogue of estradiol or of testosterone.

Currently, the most frequent approach in the oncologic applications of positron emission tomography (PET) is detecting the hypermetabolic activity of the cancer tissue. A more specific approach, which may be complementary, is detecting the overexpression of receptors. In this review article, we aim to evaluate the results that are currently available for PET imaging of the sex hormone receptors in clinical oncology. The indication of PET and now PET/CT has been more disputed in breast carcinoma than in many other primary cancers (e.g., lung, head and neck, colorectal, lymphoma). 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG), the glucose analogue for PET imaging, has a limited sensitivity to detect the primary breast tumors in case of lobular or in situ forms or small sized tumors localised on systematic mammography, and to identify minimal node invasion in the axilla. Using 16α-[¹8F]fluoro-17ß-estradiol (FES), a fluorinated estradiol analogue, PET is able to detect the over-expression of the oestrogen receptor (ER) in lesions, at a whole-body level. FES and FDG appear complementary for a better diagnostic performance in staging locally advanced breast cancer or restaging recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. Another potential indication is predicting the response to starting or resuming hormone therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer, in relation with the ER status of all lesions revealed by FES PET. In two retrospective studies, FDG PET was also able to predict the response to hormone therapy, on basis of a metabolic flare, observed either after 7-10 days of treatment or during an estradiol challenge. A prospective comparison of those approaches is warranted. One study reported predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy thanks to a low value of FES SUV(max) or FES/FDG SUV(max) ratio. The presence of ER in uterine tumors, including the benign ones, in ovarian cancers or even in meningiomas, may have therapeutic consequences and FES PET could have a clinical utility in those settings; only initial results are available. The indication of PET and PET/CT has been even more disputed in prostate carcinoma, due to the lack of significant FDG uptake in most cases, at least before the castration-resistant stage. Using FDHT, a fluorinated testosterone analogue, PET is able to detect the over-expression of the androgen receptor (AR) in lesions, at a whole-body level. At least partly due to the rather large number of alternative tracers that are in development or even routinely available in some countries, few FDHT studies have been published until now. From absorbed dose values previously published for FES by the team of University of Washington School of Medicine at Seattle, and for FDHT by the teams of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center at New York and of Washington University at St. Louis, we applied the coefficients of ICRP publication 103 and calculated an effective dose per unit of injected activity of 0.023 mSv/MBq for FES and 0.018 mSv/MBq for FDHT. The radiation exposure is of the same order of magnitude as with FDG.