Abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor as initial therapy for HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer: final overall survival results of MONARCH 3.

BACKGROUND: In MONARCH 2, the addition of abemaciclib to fulvestrant significantly improved both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) with disease progression on prior endocrine therapy. In MONARCH 3, the addition of abemaciclib to a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) as initial therapy for HR+, HER2- ABC significantly improved PFS. Here, we present the prespecified final OS results for MONARCH 3. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MONARCH 3 is a randomized, double-blind, phase III study of abemaciclib plus NSAI (anastrozole or letrozole) versus placebo plus NSAI in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC without prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting. The primary objective was investigator-assessed PFS; OS was a gated secondary endpoint, and chemotherapy-free survival was an exploratory endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 493 women were randomized 2 : 1 to receive abemaciclib plus NSAI (n = 328) or placebo plus NSAI (n = 165). After a median follow-up of 8.1 years, there were 198 OS events (60.4%) in the abemaciclib arm and 116 (70.3%) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.804; 95% confidence interval 0.637-1.015; P = 0.0664, non-significant). Median OS was 66.8 versus 53.7 months for abemaciclib versus placebo. In the subgroup with visceral disease, there were 113 OS events (65.3%) in the abemaciclib arm and 65 (72.2%) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.758; 95% confidence interval 0.558-1.030; P = 0.0757, non-significant). Median OS was 63.7 months versus 48.8 months for abemaciclib versus placebo. The previously demonstrated PFS benefit was sustained, and chemotherapy-free survival numerically improved with the addition of abemaciclib. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Abemaciclib combined with an NSAI resulted in clinically meaningful improvement in median OS (intent-to-treat population: 13.1 months; subgroup with visceral disease: 14.9 months) in patients with HR+ HER2- ABC; however, statistical significance was not reached.

A propensity score-weighted study comparing a two- versus four-weekly pegylated liposomal doxorubicin regimen in metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: A 4-weekly schedule of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) has been approved for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Phase II trials have suggested interest in a 2-weekly regimen. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of these two schedules. METHODS: Data from MBC patients treated with PLD between 2011 and 2021 were retrospectively collected. The objective was to demonstrate the noninferiority of the 2-weekly versus the 4-weekly schedule in terms of 6-month progression-free survival (PFS). The prespecified noninferiority margin was calculated as 1.20. A propensity score to receive either schedule was estimated using a gradient boosting algorithm. Survival analyses using Cox regression models weighted by the propensity score were performed to compare the schedules. RESULTS: Among the 192 patients included, 96 (50%) underwent each schedule. The median number of previous systemic therapies was 4 (IQR, 3 to 6). Anthracyclines were previously given in early breast cancer in 63.9% of patients. The median follow-up was 10.0 months (IQR, 5.0 to 20.1). A comparable distribution of adverse events was observed. The median PFS was 3.2 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 3.9), and the median overall survival was 12.1 months (95% CI, 10.8 to 14.9). The weighted hazard ratio for PFS was 1.12 (90% CI, 0.82 to 1.54), including the noninferiority boundaries. CONCLUSION: PLD appeared to be a well-tolerated drug in this heavily pretreated MBC population. The efficacy and safety of the 2-weekly schedule did not provide any advantage, suggesting no interest in changing the registered regimen.

Real-world clinical profile, treatment patterns and patient-reported outcomes in a subset of HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer patients with poor prognostic factors: data from an international study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) and disease-related poor prognostic factors are not well characterized. We aimed to describe patient demographics, disease characteristics, treatment patterns and patient-reported outcomes in a subset of HR+/HER2- ABC patients with these factors [at the time when cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4 and 6 inhibitors were being introduced] and understand how these factors informed treatment decisions at the time of the survey. METHODS: Real-world data were derived from a large, multinational, point-in-time survey of oncologists and their consulting patients with HR+/HER2- ABC in the EU5 and USA over March-June 2017, at the start of the changing treatment landscape. Analysis focused on four poor prognostic factors: visceral metastases, liver metastases (subset of visceral metastases), progesterone receptor-negative status and high tumor grade. RESULTS: In total, 2259 patients with HR+/HER2- ABC had records eligible for this analysis. At least one poor prognostic factor was present in 63% of patients (most common visceral metastases; least common progesterone receptor-negative status), with varying degrees of overlap between factors. For physician-reported outcomes, pain increased, whereas performance status and activities of daily living declined with presence of poor prognostic factors, especially liver metastases. No clear trends were observed for patient-reported outcomes. Treatment with combined endocrine therapy plus CDK4 and 6 inhibitors was infrequent, as these agents were entering the market. CONCLUSIONS: More than 60% of the HR+/HER2- ABC Adelphi Real World Disease Specific Programme™ sample had ≥1 disease-related poor prognostic factor, and patients appeared to be heterogeneous regarding occurrence and distribution of these factors. These patients typically have increased pain and reduced performance status, highlighting the importance of implementing effective therapy with CDK4 and 6 inhibitors. Future studies could inform how the treatment landscape has evolved over time with respect to patients with poor prognostic factors.

Delayed care for patients with newly diagnosed cancer due to COVID-19 and estimated impact on cancer mortality in France.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) wave on cancer patient management was measured within the nationwide network of the Unicancer comprehensive cancer centers in France. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The number of patients diagnosed and treated within 17 of the 18 Unicancer centers was collected in 2020 and compared with that during the same periods between 2016 and 2019. Unicancer centers treat close to 20% of cancer patients in France yearly. The reduction in the number of patients attending the Unicancer centers was analyzed per regions and cancer types. The impact of delayed care on cancer-related deaths was calculated based on different hypotheses. RESULTS: A 6.8% decrease in patients managed within Unicancer in the first 7 months of 2020 versus 2019 was observed. This reduction reached 21% during April and May, and was not compensated in June and July, nor later until November 2020. This reduction was observed only for newly diagnosed patients, while the clinical activity for previously diagnosed patients increased by 4% similar to previous years. The reduction was more pronounced in women, in breast and prostate cancers, and for patients without metastasis. Using an estimated hazard ratio of 1.06 per month of delay in diagnosis and treatment of new patients, we calculated that the delays observed in the 5-month period from March to July 2020 may result in an excess mortality due to cancer of 1000-6000 patients in coming years. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the delays in cancer patient management were observed only for newly diagnosed patients, more frequently in women, for breast cancer, prostate cancer, and nonmetastatic cancers. These delays may result is an excess risk of cancer-related deaths in the coming years.

Adjuvant T-DM1 versus trastuzumab in patients with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant therapy for HER2-positive breast cancer: subgroup analyses from KATHERINE.

BACKGROUND: In the KATHERINE study (NCT01772472), patients with residual invasive early breast cancer (EBC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) plus human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted therapy had a 50% reduction in risk of recurrence or death with adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) versus trastuzumab. Here, we present additional exploratory safety and efficacy analyses. PATIENTS AND METHODS: KATHERINE enrolled HER2-positive EBC patients with residual invasive disease in the breast/axilla at surgery after NACT containing a taxane (± anthracycline, ± platinum) and trastuzumab (± pertuzumab). Patients were randomized to adjuvant T-DM1 (n = 743) or trastuzumab (n = 743) for 14 cycles. The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). RESULTS: The incidence of peripheral neuropathy (PN) was similar regardless of neoadjuvant taxane type. Irrespective of treatment arm, baseline PN was associated with longer PN duration (median, 105-109 days longer) and lower resolution rate (∼65% versus ∼82%). Prior platinum therapy was associated with more grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia in the T-DM1 arm (13.5% versus 3.8%), but there was no grade ≥3 hemorrhage in these patients. Risk of recurrence or death was decreased with T-DM1 versus trastuzumab in patients who received anthracycline-based NACT [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.51; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38-0.67], non-anthracycline-based NACT (HR = 0.43; 95% CI: 0.22-0.82), presented with cT1, cN0 tumors (0 versus 6 IDFS events), or had particularly high-risk tumors (HRs ranged from 0.43 to 0.72). The central nervous system (CNS) was more often the site of first recurrence in the T-DM1 arm (5.9% versus 4.3%), but T-DM1 was not associated with a difference in overall risk of CNS recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: T-DM1 provides clinical benefit across patient subgroups, including small tumors and particularly high-risk tumors and does not increase the overall risk of CNS recurrence. NACT type had a minimal impact on safety.

[Overall survival and survival without local recurrence in case of radiotherapy of the tumor bed of ductal carcinomas in situ of the breast: Review of the literature]. / Survie globale et sans récidive locale en cas de radiothérapie du lit tumoral des carcinomes canalaires in situ du sein : revue de la littérature.

INTRODUCTION: Carcinomas in situ represent more than 15 to 20% of breast cancers. Radiotherapy of whole breast is part of the therapeutic standard and follows surgery. However, the indication of tumor bed irradiation is still controversial and heterogeneous according to international practice even though it is a very frequent clinical situation. The aim of this study is to define the indications of tumor bed irradiation in the context of ductal carcinomas in situ and to discuss accelerated partial irradiation of the breast. METHOD: The selected papers were published between 2015 and 2020 and included as MeSH terms "ductal carcinoma in situ" and "boost" for the analysis of tumor bed irradiation, and "ductal carcinoma in situ" and "accelerated partial breast irradiation" for the analysis of accelerated partial irradiation. RESULTS: Boost was more often performed when risk factors for local recurrence were present, such as age less than 40 or 50 years old, clinical mode of detection, tumor size greater than 15 to 20mm, high nuclear grade, presence of necrosis, positive or insufficient surgical margins, associated atypical hyperplastic lesions, and lobular carcinoma in situ. Accelerated partial irradiation is an option for favorable or intermediate prognosis CCIS, further studies involving more patients are required. CONCLUSION: Radiotherapy of the mammary gland in the context of DCIS has shown its effectiveness in terms of local and locoregional control of the disease, thus reducing in situ and infiltrating recurrences. However, the indication of operating bed irradiation is still debated, and the practice is very heterogeneous depending on the country. Another possible alternative for patients with a favorable prognosis and a small tumor bed volume would be IPA.

[Diffusion prophylactic axillary irradiation in breast cancer - Literature review]. / Irradiation axillaire prophylactique « de diffusion ¼ dans le cancer du sein ­ revue de la littérature.

PURPOSE: In breast cancer, radiotherapy is an essential component of the treatment. However, indications of irradiation of the internal mammary chain and axillary area are debatables. Axillary recurrence in patients with invasive breast carcinoma remains an issue. Currently, the substitution of axillary lymph node dissection by sentinel node biopsy leads to revisit the role of axillary irradiation. Breast irradiation including level I, II and III might decrease the risk of axillary recurrence. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A literature search was performed in PubMed and the Cochrane library to identify articles publishing data regarding dose-volume analysis of axillary levels in breast irradiation aiming to determine the potential therapeutic implications. RESULTS: Eleven articles were retained. A total of 375 treatment plans were analyzed. The results concerning the irradiation technique, initial dose prescribed to breast, delineated volumes and dose received at axillary levels were heterogeneous. The average dose delivered to axilla levels I-III with 3D-conformal radiotherapy using standard fields were between 24Gy and 43.5Gy, 3Gy and 32.5Gy and between 1.0Gy and 20.5Gy respectively. The average doses delivered to axilla levels I-III with 3D-conformal radiotherapy using high tangential fields were between 38Gy and 49.7Gy, 11Gy and 47.1Gy and 5Gy 38.7Gy, 32.1Gy and 5Gy (result available for only one study) respectively. Finally, the average doses delivered to axilla levels I-III with intensity modulated radiation therapy were between 14.5Gy and 42.6Gy, 3.4Gy and 35Gy and between 1.2Gy and 25.5Gy respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Incidental axillary dose seems insufficient to be therapeutic regardless of the irradiation technique. There are meaningful differences between intensity modulated radiation therapy and 3D-conformal radiotherapy.

Systemic high-dose intravenous methotrexate in patients with central nervous system metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Infusion of high-dose intravenous methotrexate (MTX) has been demonstrating to penetrate the blood-brain barrier. The aim of this present study was to assess the efficacy and safety of high dose MTX in patients with central nervous system (CNS) metastases of breast cancer. METHODS: Twenty-two patients with CNS metastases treated by MTX (3 g/m2) between April 2004 and October 2009 were enrolled. Clinical response rate, time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), and safety were assessed. RESULTS: In terms of brain metastases, 2 patients (9%) achieved a partial response, 10 patients (45%) had disease stabilization, and 10 patients (45%) had disease progression. In others metastatic sites, 7 patients (39%) achieved a disease stabilization, and 11 patients (61%) had disease progression. TTP and OS were 2.1 (95%CI 1.4-2.9) and 6.3 (95%CI 1.8-10) months, respectively. CONCLUSION: High-dose MTX demonstrated a moderate activity at 3 g/m2. Nonetheless, the favorable toxicity profile should suggest the possibility to increase the dosage and further study are planned.

In situ delivery of allogeneic natural killer cell (NK) combined with Cetuximab in liver metastases of gastrointestinal carcinoma: A phase I clinical trial.

Despite successful introduction of NK-based cellular therapy in the treatment of myeloid leukemia, the potential use of NK alloreactivity in solid malignancies is still elusive. We performed a phase I clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of in situ delivery of allogeneic NK cells combined with cetuximab in liver metastasis of gastrointestinal origin. The conditioning chemotherapy was administrated before the allogeneic NK cells injection via hepatic artery. Three escalating doses were tested (3.106, 8.106 and 12.106 NK cells/kg) following by a high-dose interleukin-2 (IL-2). Cetuximab was administered intravenously every week for 7 weeks. Nine patients with liver metastases of colorectal or pancreatic cancers were included, three per dose level. Hepatic artery injection was successfully performed in all patients with no report of dose-limiting toxicity. Two patients had febrile aplasia requiring a short-term antibiotherapy. Grade 3/4 anemia and thrombopenia were also observed related to the chemotherapy. Objective clinical responses were documented in 3 patients and among them 2 occurred in patients injected with cell products harboring two KIR ligand mismatches and one in a patient with one KIR ligand mismatch. Immune monitoring revealed that most patients presented an increase but transient of IL-15 and IL-7 cytokines levels one week after chemotherapy. Furthermore, a high expansion of FoxP3+regulatory T cells and PD-1+ T cells was observed in all patients, related to IL-2 administration. Our results demonstrated that combining allogeneic NK cells transfer via intra-hepatic artery, cetuximab and a high-dose IL-2 is feasible, well tolerated and may result in clinical responses.

A phase III study comparing SB3 (a proposed trastuzumab biosimilar) and trastuzumab reference product in HER2-positive early breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant-adjuvant treatment: Final safety, immunogenicity and survival results.

BACKGROUND: The equivalent efficacy between SB3, a proposed trastuzumab biosimilar, and the trastuzumab reference product (TRZ) in terms of the breast pathologic complete response rate after neoadjuvant therapy in patients with early or locally advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer was demonstrated in the previous report. Here, we report the final safety, immunogenicity and survival results after neoadjuvant-adjuvant treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomised 1:1 to receive neoadjuvant SB3 or TRZ for 8 cycles concurrently with chemotherapy (4 cycles of docetaxel followed by 4 cycles of 5-fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide). Patients then underwent surgery, followed by 10 cycles of adjuvant SB3 or TRZ as randomised. End-points included safety, immunogenicity, event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival through the adjuvant period. RESULTS: Of 875 patients randomised, 764 (SB3, n = 380; TRZ, n = 384) completed the study. The median follow-up duration was 437 days in the SB3 group and 438 days in the TRZ group. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was comparable between groups (SB3, 97.5%; TRZ, 96.1%) during the overall study period. Up to the end of study, the overall incidence of antidrug antibody was low in both treatment groups (3 patients each). EFS was comparable between groups with a hazard ratio (SB3/TRZ) of 0.94 (95% confidence interval, 0.59-1.51) and EFS rates at 12 months of 93.7% for SB3 and 93.4% for TRZ. CONCLUSIONS: Final safety, immunogenicity and survival results of this study further support the biosimilarity established between SB3 and TRZ. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02149524); EudraCT (2013-004172-35).

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.

Prognostic and predictive indicators in early-stage breast cancer and the role of genomic profiling: Focus on the Oncotype DX® Breast Recurrence Score Assay.

Although useful prognostic and predictive insights can be gained from patient and tumour characteristics in early-stage breast cancer, it is not always straightforward to predict the likely risk of recurrence for each individual patient following breast surgery. One of the most difficult challenges faced by clinicians is identifying patients who may benefit most from adjuvant chemotherapy, and distinguishing these cases from those where endocrine therapy may be sufficient for cure. Genomic tests such as the Oncotype DX® Breast Recurrence Score® Assay have been developed to provide a robust and clinically validated assessment of a patient's individual tumour signature. The Oncotype DX Assay is included in treatment guidelines for estimating both the risk of distant recurrence and predicting adjuvant chemotherapy benefit for early-stage breast cancer patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, oestrogen-receptor positive, and axillary lymph node negative or positive (1-3 positive nodes) disease. In this article, we review unmet needs for prognostication and prediction in early-stage breast cancer, and consider how the information provided by the Recurrence Score is complementary to that gained from the assessment of more traditional clinicopathologic criteria. Routine use of the assay in clinical practice, limitations and possible future directions are also discussed.

Final efficacy and updated safety results of the randomized phase III BEATRICE trial evaluating adjuvant bevacizumab-containing therapy in triple-negative early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this analysis was to assess the long-term impact of adding bevacizumab to adjuvant chemotherapy for early triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). METHODS: Patients eligible for the open-label randomized phase III BEATRICE trial had centrally confirmed triple-negative operable primary invasive breast cancer (pT1a-pT3). Investigators selected anthracycline- and/or taxane-based chemotherapy for each patient. After definitive surgery, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive ≥4 cycles of chemotherapy alone or with 1 year of bevacizumab (5 mg/kg/week equivalent). Stratification factors were nodal status, selected chemotherapy, hormone receptor status, and type of surgery. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS; previously reported). Secondary outcome measures included overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS: After 56 months' median follow-up, 293 of 2591 randomized patients had died. There was no statistically significant difference in OS between treatment arms in either the total population (hazard ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-1.17; P = 0.52) or pre-specified subgroups. The 5-year OS rate was 88% (95% CI 86-90%) in both treatment arms. Updated IDFS results were consistent with the primary IDFS analysis. Five-year IDFS rates were 77% (95% CI 75-79%) with chemotherapy alone versus 80% (95% CI 77-82%) with bevacizumab. From 18 months after first study dose to study end, new grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 4.6% and 4.5% of patients in the two arms, respectively. CONCLUSION: Final OS results showed no significant benefit from bevacizumab therapy for early TNBC. Late-onset toxicities were rare in both groups. Five-year OS and IDFS rates suggest that the prognosis for patients with TNBC is better than previously thought. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT00528567.

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.

Pooled analyses of eribulin in metastatic breast cancer patients with at least one prior chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Based on data from two multicenter, phase III clinical trials (Studies 301 and 305), eribulin (a microtubule dynamics inhibitor) is indicated in the European Union (EU) for patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) after ≥1 prior chemotherapy for advanced disease, including an anthracycline and a taxane in either the adjuvant or metastatic setting. Data from Studies 305 and 301 were pooled to investigate the efficacy of eribulin in various subgroups of patients who matched the EU label, including those with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative and triple-negative disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In Study 305 (NCT00388726), patients were randomized 2:1 to eribulin mesylate 1.4 mg/m(2) (equivalent to eribulin 1.23 mg/m(2) [expressed as free base]) intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 21 days] or treatment of physician's choice after 2-5 prior chemotherapies (≥2 for advanced disease), including an anthracycline and a taxane (in early/advanced setting). In Study 301 (NCT00337103), patients were randomized 1:1 to eribulin (as above) or capecitabine (1.25 g/m(2) orally twice daily on days 1-14 every 21 days) following ≤3 prior chemotherapies (≤2 for advanced disease), including an anthracycline and a taxane. Efficacy end points were investigated in the intent-to-treat population and subgroups, pooled as discussed above. RESULTS: Overall, 1644 patients were included (eribulin: 946; control: 698); baseline characteristics were well matched. Overall survival was significantly longer with eribulin versus control (P < 0.01), as were progression-free survival and clinical benefit rate (both P < 0.05). Significant survival benefits with eribulin versus control were observed in a wide range of patient subgroups, including HER2-negative or triple-negative disease (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our findings underline the survival benefit achieved by eribulin used according to EU label in the overall MBC population and in various subgroups of interest, including patients with HER2-negative and triple-negative disease.

Prostate cancer screening: contrasting trends.

PURPOSE: Our previously published data showed rapidly increasing rates of prostate cancer screening in men aged 50-74, which rose from 36% in 2005 to 48% in 2008. Based on men's reported intentions at that time, this was expected to rise to 70% in 2011. Here we report the actual rate of prostate cancer screening. METHOD: Three nationwide observational telephone surveys (EDIFICE opinion polls) were conducted in 2005, 2008, and 2011. The overall target was a representative sample of > 1,500 individuals living in France and aged 40-75 years, including 481 men aged 50-74 years. RESULTS: Within this male population, the rate of screening reported remained stable between 2008 and 2011 (48 and 49%, respectively). However, comparison of privileged versus disadvantaged populations showed significant differences, with a relative decrease in screening among those of higher socioprofessional status (p = 0.03) and from higher-income groups (p = 0.02). For households with a monthly income above 2,500€, the screening rate decreased from 61% in 2008 to 51% in 2011 (p = 0.05), while for those with an income below 2,500€, it increased from 36% in 2008 to 44 % in 2011 (p = 0.18). CONCLUSION: A plateau or even a reduction in prostate cancer screening is currently being observed; this is possibly due to progressive recognition among the population at large of the controversy surrounding prostate cancer screening, whereas this speculation was formerly limited to health-care professionals. After previously being more likely to undergo prostate cancer screening, it is the younger, wealthier populations that are currently showing the most noteworthy step backwards.

Melanoma risk-takers: fathers and sons.

OBJECTIVES: The incidence of skin cancers, melanoma in particular, is increasing rapidly. Consequently, specific recommendations for sun-protection measures now exist. This survey set out to assess the compliance of the general population with these guidelines. METHODS: The French nationwide observational survey, EDIFICE Melanoma, was conducted (28 September to 20 October 2011) through phone interviews of a representative sample of 1502 subjects aged ≥ 18 years, using the quota method. Sun-protection was defined as frequent or systematic use of clothes or sunscreen. The group of individuals who declared exposure to the sun (N = 1172) was subdivided: risk-takers (N = 442), and those who used sun protection (N = 730). RESULTS: Risk-takers were significantly more often male (62% vs. 44%, P < 0.01), had a lower level of education (40% vs. 26%, P < 0.01), lower incomes (2587 euros vs. 2948 euros/month) and were more often smokers (42% vs. 31%, P < 0.01). In contrast, age, marital status and use of sunbeds were not significantly different between the two groups. Interestingly, risk-takers had less risk factors for melanoma. However, they were less well-informed about high-risk exposure and optimal use of sunscreen. Sun-protection measures for their children were less stringent than those of the group who used sun protection: systematic/frequent use of sunglasses (42% vs. 59%, P < 0.01), systematic use of sunscreen (77% vs. 86%, P < 0.01), and frequent renewal (69% vs. 82%, P < 0.01), high sun protection factors (SPF) (46% vs. 56%, P < 0.01), use of clothing (84% vs. 92%, P < 0.01) and hats (88% vs. 94%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Risk-takers are characterized by a lesser understanding of sun-protection measures and behaviours. Their children benefit less from protective measures than those of people who use sun protection themselves. Improved understanding may well improve behaviours; one can therefore legitimately predict a considerable impact on parents' attitude to their own protection and that of their children.