Clinical efficacy of CDK4/6 inhibitor plus endocrine therapy in HR-positive/HER2-0 and HER2-low-positive metastatic breast cancer: a secondary analysis of PALOMA-2 and PALOMA-3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors in combination with traditional endocrine therapy (ET) are now the recommended first-line treatment for hormone receptor (HR)-positive and HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, the benefits of adding CDK4/6 inhibitors to ET in HER2-low-positive and HER2-0 subgroups remain unclear. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with ET in patients with HR-positive, HER2-low-positive and HER2-0 MBC. METHODS: This secondary analysis assessed progression-free survival (PFS) among HER2-low-positive and HER2-0 patients enrolled in the double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised clinical trials PALOMA-2 and PALOMA-3. The study included 1186 HER2-negative, HR-positive female patients, with available immunohistochemistry (IHC) and/or in situ hybridization (ISH) results, across 17 countries enrolled between February 2013 and August 2014. HER2-low-positive status was defined by IHC 1+ or 2+ with negative ISH, and HER2-zero by IHC 0. Data analyses were conducted between March and May 2023. In the PALOMA-2 trial, patients were randomly assigned to receive either palbociclib or placebo, in combination with letrozole in the first-line treatment for HR-positive MBC. Patients in the PALOMA-3 study, who had progression or relapse during previous ET, were randomly allocated to receive either palbociclib plus fulvestrant or placebo plus fulvestrant. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. Kaplan-Meier approach and Cox proportional hazards model were applied to estimate the association of treatment strategies with PFS among HER2-0 and HER2-low-positive populations. The two trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01740427 and NCT01942135. FINDINGS: Of the 666 patients with MBC from the PALOMA-2 study, there were 153 HER2-0 and 513 HER2-low-positive patients. In the HER2-0 population, no significant difference in PFS was observed between the palbociclib-letrozole and placebo-letrozole groups (hazard ratio = 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-1.30, p = 0.34). In the HER2-low-positive population, palbociclib-letrozole demonstrated a significantly lower risk of PFS than placebo-letrozole group (hazard ratio = 0.52, 95% CI 0.41-0.66, p < 0.0001). The PALOMA-3 study analysed 520 patients with MBC. Within the 153 HER2-0 patients, the palbociclib-fulvestrant group showed a significantly longer PFS than the placebo-fulvestrant group (hazard ratio = 0.54, 95% CI 0.30-0.95, p = 0.034). Among the 367 HER2-low-positive patients, palbociclib-fulvestrant improved PFS (hazard ratio = 0.39, 95% CI 0.28-0.54, p < 0.0001). INTERPRETATION: The combination of a CDK4/6 inhibitor with ET significantly improved PFS in HER2-low-positive patients, while for HER2-0 patients, benefits were primarily observed in patients who had progressed on previous ET. Furthermore, HER2-0 patients may derive limited benefits from first-line CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment. Further work is needed to validate these findings and to delineate patient subsets that are most likely to benefit from the combination of CDK4/6 inhibitors and ET as first-line treatments. FUNDING: None.

Clinical Characteristics and Prognosis of HER2-0 and HER2-Low-Positive Breast Cancer Patients: Real-World Data from Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

In our study, we observed the long-term survival outcomes investigated for HER2-0 and HER2-low-positive breast cancer patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Between 1998 and 2020, 10,333 patients with primary breast cancer were treated, including 1373 patients with HER2-0 or HER2-low-positive disease with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Descriptive analyses were performed, and logistic regression models and survival analyses were calculated for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Among the 1373 patients, 930 (67.73%) had HER2-low-positive and 443 (32.27%) had HER2-0 tumors. Patients with HER2-0 tumors had a significantly better pathological complete response, 29.25% vs. 20.09%, and pathological complete response/in situ, 31.97% vs. 24.08%, than patients with HER2-low-positive tumors (p < 0.001; p = 0.003), regardless of the hormone receptor (HR) status. No statistically significant differences were observed for the HR-positive (p = 0.315; p = 0.43) or HR-negative subgroups (p = 0.573; p = 0.931). DFS and OS were significantly longer for HR-positive, HER2-low-positive patients (log-rank p = 0.02; p = 0.012). OS was significantly longer for HR-negative, HER2-0 patients (log-rank p = 0.032). No significant DFS differences were found for the HR-negative cohort (log-rank p = 0.232). For the overall cohort, no significant differences were noted between HER2-low-positive and HER2-0 patients, either for DFS (log-rank p = 0.220) or OS (log-rank p = 0.403). These results show different survival outcomes for HER2-0 and HER2-low-positive tumors relative to HR status. These different cohorts can be identified using standardized immunohistochemistry, even retrospectively.

Comparison of the pCR Rate and DFS Among Breast Cancer Patients with Different Hormone Receptor and HER2 Statuses.

Background: Recent studies have investigated the features of breast cancer (BC) with low human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression or HER2-0 expression. However, the results were inconsistent. In this study, we investigated the differences in the pathological complete response (pCR) rate and disease-free survival (DFS) between HER2-low and HER2-0 BC patients and between subgroups. Methods: HER2-negative BC patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy between January 2013 and December 2019 in our hospital were retrospectively reviewed. First, the pCR rate and DFS were compared between HER2-low and HER2-0 patients and among different hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 statuses. Subsequently, DFS was compared between different HER2 status populations with or without pCR. Finally, a Cox regression model was used to identify the prognostic factors. Results: Overall, 693 patients were selected: 561 were HER2-low, and 132 were HER2-0. Between the two groups, there were significant differences in N stage (P = 0.008) and HR status (P = 0.007). No significant difference in the pCR rate (12.12% vs 14.39%, P = 0.468) or DFS was observed, independent of HR status. HR+/HER2-low patients had a significantly worse pCR rate (P < 0.001) and longer DFS (P < 0.001) than HR-/HER2-low or HER2-0 patients. In addition, a longer DFS was found in HER2-low patients versus HER2-0 patients among those who did not achieve pCR. Cox regression showed that N stage and HR status were prognostic factors in the overall and HER2-low populations, while no prognostic factor was found in the HER2-0 group. Conclusion: This study suggested that HER2 status is not associated with the pCR rate or DFS. Longer DFS was found only among patients who did not achieve pCR in the HER2-low versus HER2-0 population. We speculated that the interaction of HR and HER2 might have played a crucial role in this process.

Low HER2 expression is a predictor of poor prognosis in stage I triple-negative breast cancer.

Introduction: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is negative for hormone receptors and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). In stage I TNBC, adjuvant therapy or follow-up are performed according to risk factors, but clinical trial data is scarce. In recent years, it has been reported that HER2-low cases (1+/2+ and in situ hybridization negative) have different prognoses than HER2-0 cases. However, the risk of recurrence and risk factors in this HER2-low population for stage I TNBC have not yet been investigated. Methods: Herein, out of 174 patients with TNBC who underwent surgery from June 2004 to December 2009 at the National Cancer Center Hospital (Tokyo), we retrospectively examined 42 cases diagnosed as T1N0M0 TNBC after excluding those treated with preoperative chemotherapy. Results: All patients were female, the median age was 60.5 years, and 11 cases were HER2-low and 31 cases were HER2-0. The median follow-up period was 121 months. Postoperative adjuvant therapy was administered in 30 patients and recurrence occurred in 8 patients. HER2-low cases showed a significantly shorter disease-free survival (HR: 7.0; 95% CI: 1.2- 40.2; P=0.0016) and a trend towards shorter overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-31.4) compared with that of HER2-0 cases. HER2 was also identified as a factor for poor prognosis from the point- estimated values in univariate and multivariate analyses after confirming that there was no correlation between the other factors. Conclusion: For patients with stage I TNBC, the HER2-low population had a significantly worse prognosis than the HER2-0 population.

The frequency of low HER2 expression in breast cancer and a comparison of prognosis between patients with HER2-low and HER2-negative breast cancer by HR status.

PURPOSE: The DESTINY-Breast04 clinical trial is currently investigating whether trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) is effective in HER2-low as well as HER2-positive breast cancer. This highlights the interest in treatment strategies for patients with HER2-low breast cancer. The current study was therefore designed to determine the frequency of HER2-low among all breast cancers, and to compare the prognosis of HER2-low patients with that of HER2-negative patients. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the biological data from 4,918 of 4,977 primary breast cancer patients who attended our institute. We quantified the overall frequency of breast cancer patients with a new HER2-low subtype that was defined by an immunohistochemistry score of IHC1 + or IHC2 + /ISH-. We then compared the clinical characteristics and prognosis of HER2-low patients with that of patients who did not have HER2 amplification (HER2-0). RESULTS: Low HER2 expression was found in 3169 (64.4%) patients; 2860 (58.1%) were HR-positive and 309 (6.3%) were HR-negative. Among HER2-0 patients, 681 (13.9%) were HR-positive and 157 (3.2%) were HR-negative. The HER2-0 group tended to have more poor prognostic factors than the HER2-low group, irrespective of HR status. There were no statistically significant differences between the prognosis of HER2-low and HER2-0 patients, regardless of HR status. However, patients in the HER2-low group tended to have better prognosis than those in the HER2-0 group. CONCLUSION: HER2-low patients did not have a significantly different prognosis than HER2-0 patients, regardless of HR status. However, we should consider tailoring therapies for patients with HRE2-low early breast cancer according to their HR status.