Pamiparib in combination with tislelizumab in patients with advanced solid tumours: results from the dose-expansion stage of a multicentre, open-label, phase I trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the antitumour activity, safety, and tolerability of pamiparib plus tislelizumab in patients with previously treated advanced solid tumours. METHODS: In this study, patients were enrolled into eight arms by tumour type. All received pamiparib 40 mg orally twice daily plus tislelizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), assessed by the investigator per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours v1.1. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), safety, and tolerability. RESULTS: Overall, 180 patients were enrolled. In the overall population, the ORR was 20.0% (range: 0-47.4 across study arms), with median DoR of 17.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.2, not estimable [NE]). The highest ORR was observed in the triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) arm (patients with BRCA1/2 mutations and/or homologous recombination deficiency) (ORR: 47.4%; median DoR: 17.1 months [95% CI: 3.0, NE]). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of ≥Grade 3 occurred in 61.7% of patients. Serious TEAEs occurred in 50.0% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Pamiparib plus tislelizumab showed a variable level of antitumour activity in patients with advanced solid tumours, with the highest ORR in TNBC and was associated with a manageable safety profile. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT02660034.

Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Advanced Endometrial Cancer Treated With Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab or Treatment of Physician's Choice.

PURPOSE: Lenvatinib and pembrolizumab (LEN+PEMBRO) demonstrated clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in efficacy versus treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in patients with advanced endometrial cancer (aEC) in the phase 3 Study 309/KEYNOTE-775. Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) is reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive LEN+PEMBRO (n = 411; LEN 20 mg/day; PEMBRO 200 mg Q3W) or TPC (n = 416; doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 Q3W or paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 [weekly, 3 weeks on/1 week off]). Impact of treatment on HRQoL assessed by the global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL) score of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) was a secondary objective; other scales of the Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30), EORTC QLQ-Endometrial, 24 questions (EORTC QLQ-EN24), and EuroQoL 5 dimensions, 5 levels (EQ-5D-5L) were exploratory objectives. HRQoL was assessed on day 1 of each cycle. Completion/compliance, change from baseline, time to first and definitive deterioration were assessed. No multiplicity adjustments were applied for HRQoL endpoints. RESULTS: The latest timepoint at which the predefined rates of completion (≥60%) and compliance (≥80%) were met was week 12. HRQoL at week 12 between treatment groups was generally similar. Time to first deterioration symptom scales favoured LEN+PEMBRO for QLQ-C30 dyspnoea, and QLQ-EN24 for poor body image, tingling/numbness, and hair loss; and TPC was favoured for QLQ-C30 pain, appetite loss, and diarrhoea, and QLQ-EN24 muscular pain. While the QLQ-C30 physical functional scale favoured TPC, other functional scales were generally similar between arms. Time to definitive deterioration favoured LEN+PEMBRO on most scales. CONCLUSION: HRQoL data from Study 309/KEYNOTE-775, with previously published efficacy and safety results, indicate that LEN+PEMBRO has an overall favourable benefit/risk profile versus TPC for the treatment of patients with aEC. CLINICALTRIALS: GOV: NCT03517449.

Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab in Previously Treated Advanced Endometrial Cancer: Updated Efficacy and Safety From the Randomized Phase III Study 309/KEYNOTE-775.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.We report the final prespecified analysis for overall survival (OS), along with updated progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR), and safety from the open-label, randomized, phase III Study 309/KEYNOTE-775. In total, 827 patients with advanced, recurrent, or metastatic endometrial cancer (EC) were randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib 20 mg orally once daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks (n = 411) or chemotherapy of the treating physician's choice (doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks or paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 intravenously once weekly [3 weeks on; 1 week off] [n = 416]). Efficacy was reported for patients with mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) tumors and all-comers, and by subgroups (histology, prior therapy, MMR status). Updated safety was also reported.Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab showed benefits in OS (pMMR HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.83; all-comer HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.77), PFS (pMMR HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.72; all-comer HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.66), and ORR (pMMR patients, 32.4% v 15.1%; all-comers, 33.8% v 14.7%) versus chemotherapy. OS, PFS, and ORR favored lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in all subgroups of interest. No new safety signals were observed. Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab continued to show improved efficacy versus chemotherapy and manageable safety in patients with previously treated advanced EC.

Comparison of the clinical effectiveness of treatments for aromatase inhibitor-induced arthralgia in breast cancer patients: A systematic review with network meta-analysis.

Aromatase inhibitor-induced arthralgia (AIA) contributes to poor adherence of aromatase inhibitor therapies in patients with breast cancer. A systematic review using network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to examine the clinical effectiveness of multiple therapies and rank probabilities for the management of AIA. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing treatments for AIA in postmenopausal women with stage 0-III hormone receptor-positive breast cancer were searched from inception to October 2021. The main NMA involved 1516 participants from 17 RCTs. Acupuncture was the highest ranked intervention to improve pain intensity followed by sham acupuncture, multicomponent herbal medicine, exercise, duloxetine, vitamin D, omega-3 fatty acids, physical therapy, testosterone, and inactive controls. Single natural products were inferior to controls. The current review provides new insights into the management of AIA in breast cancer survivors for increased survival and can be utilized to make evidence-based decisions regarding treatment.

Pertuzumab study in the neoadjuvant setting for HER2-positive nonmetastatic breast cancer in Australia (PeRSIA).

The pertuzumab study in the neoadjuvant setting for HER2+ nonmetastatic breast cancer in Australia (PeRSIA-ML39622) is an analysis of safety and effectiveness data from the pertuzumab patient registry. Although the prognosis of patients with early stage HER2+ breast cancer has been greatly improved by advances in chemotherapy approximately 25% to 30% of patients develop recurrent disease. Our study aimed to examine the effectiveness of neoadjuvant pertuzumab on surgical outcomes, describe the medium-term effectiveness outcomes of patients treated with pertuzumab, and describe the planned and actual anticancer treatment regimens that patients received. Deidentified data were collected from the patients' medical records and entered into REDCap, between March 2018 and July 2019 (n = 95). The adverse events (AEs) reported most frequently were diarrhea (20; 21.1%), rash (4; 4.2%), and LVSD (4; 4.2%; two patients during neoadjuvant treatment and two patients during adjuvant treatment). AEs, ≥Grade 3 were diarrhea (2; 2.1%) and LVSD (1; 1.1%). Following surgery, a breast pathological complete response (bpCR) was achieved in 65 patients (70.7%; 95% CI: 60.2%-79.7%) and total pathological complete response (tpCR) in 59 patients (64.1%; 95% CI: 53.4%-73.9%). All patients who did not achieve a tpCR obtained a partial response (33/92, 35.9%). Our study is the first to capture real-world data on the use of pertuzumab in the neoadjuvant setting in Australia. The effectiveness and safety data are consistent with those reported in clinical trials of pertuzumab in patients with HER2+ breast cancer, with no new safety concerns.

Metastatic primary breast neuroendocrine neoplasms: a case series.

BACKGROUND: Breast neuroendocrine neoplasms represent a rare subtype of breast cancer which have not been well studied or characterised, particularly in the metastatic setting. AIM: To present clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and outcomes of a series of patients with metastatic neuroendocrine carcinoma of the breast and review the current literature. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review to identify and describe patients with metastatic neuroendocrine carcinoma of the breast at our centre between 2011 and 2021. Medical records, pathology and imaging results were examined to evaluate the clinical and histopathological features as well as the treatment pathways and prognosis of these patients. RESULTS: We present a series of seven female patients with metastatic neuroendocrine carcinoma of the breast, as defined by the World Health Organization classification, over a period of 10 years (2011-2021) from a single centre. Median age at diagnosis was 48 years (range 39-63). Six of seven tissue samples expressed synaptophysin and chromogranin and were also oestrogen and progesterone receptor positive; median Ki-67 index was 50% (range 20-90%). All seven patients had demonstrated avidity on 18 F-FDG PET imaging, and the six who underwent 68 Ga-DOTATATE PET all had significant avidity. Treatment modalities and sequencing varied, but all patients received chemotherapy during their disease course. Six patients received three or more lines of treatment. Median overall survival was 31.8 months (range 3.7-108.6). Median progression-free survival (PFS) with first-line therapy for metastatic disease was 5.8 months (range 1.8-37.8). CONCLUSIONS: This series shows the use of multiple modalities in treating this disease, with different sequencing in different patients. Despite multiple modalities used in the first-line setting, first-line PFS remains short. Larger series and further molecular characterisation are required to aid clinicians in managing this condition and to guide optimal treatment sequencing to improve outcomes in this rare patient group.

Real-World Outcomes of Ribociclib and Aromatase Inhibitor Use in First Line Hormone Receptor Positive, HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend combining a CDK4/6 inhibitor and endocrine therapy (ET) as first line treatment for hormone receptor (HR) positive, HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Results from MONALEESA-2 demonstrate superior progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with ribociclib (CDK4/6 inhibitor) and ET compared to ET alone. Real world outcomes have yet to be reported. MATERIALS AND METHODS: KARMA is a non-interventional registry of Australian patients receiving first-line treatment with ribociclib and aromatase inhibitor (AI), obtained via a Medicine Access Program (MAP) for HR+, HER2- MBC. Outcomes were compared with the ribociclib/letrozole cohort in MONALEESA-2. RESULTS: Data from 160 patients at 17 sites was analysed. Median follow-up is 36.5 months. Compared to MONALEESA-2, patients were numerically younger (54.3 vs. 62 years), with higher rates of bone-only metastases (31% vs. 21%). A total of 63 of 160 (39%) patients remain on treatment. A total of 56% of patients had at least 1 dose reduction, with neutropenia (68%) and abnormal liver enzymes (17%) the most common reasons. A total of 17 of 160 (11%) discontinued treatment due to toxicity, with no treatment related deaths. Median PFS was not reached (95% CI 29.9- NR), with PFS at 12 months and 18 months being 76% and 67% respectively versus 25.3 months, 73% and 63% in MONALEESA-2. CONCLUSION: The ribociclib and AI combination was well tolerated in this real-world setting. The KARMA registry cohort achieved a superior PFS (>36.5 months) to MONALEESA-2, potentially due to more favourable baseline disease characteristics. Less frequent assessment scheduling in this non trial setting may also contribute.

Breast Radiotherapy after Oncoplastic Surgery-A Multidisciplinary Approach.

Oncoplastic breast surgery encompasses a range of techniques used to provide equitable oncological outcomes compared with standard breast surgery while, simultaneously, prioritizing aesthetic outcomes. While the outcomes of oncoplastic breast surgery are promising, it can add an extra complexity to the treatment paradigm of breast cancer and impact on decision-making surrounding adjuvant therapies, like chemotherapy and radiotherapy. As such, early discussions at the multidisciplinary team meeting with surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists present, should be encouraged to facilitate best patient care.

Event-free Survival with Pembrolizumab in Early Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The addition of pembrolizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy led to a significantly higher percentage of patients with early triple-negative breast cancer having a pathological complete response (defined as no invasive cancer in the breast and negative nodes) at definitive surgery in an earlier analysis of this phase 3 trial of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy. The primary results regarding event-free survival in this trial have not been reported. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, patients with previously untreated stage II or III triple-negative breast cancer to receive neoadjuvant therapy with four cycles of pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo every 3 weeks plus paclitaxel and carboplatin, followed by four cycles of pembrolizumab or placebo plus doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide or epirubicin-cyclophosphamide. After definitive surgery, patients received adjuvant pembrolizumab (pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group) or placebo (placebo-chemotherapy group) every 3 weeks for up to nine cycles. The primary end points were pathological complete response (the results for which have been reported previously) and event-free survival, defined as the time from randomization to the date of disease progression that precluded definitive surgery, local or distant recurrence, occurrence of a second primary cancer, or death from any cause. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 1174 patients who underwent randomization, 784 were assigned to the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group and 390 to the placebo-chemotherapy group. The median follow-up at this fourth planned interim analysis (data cutoff, March 23, 2021) was 39.1 months. The estimated event-free survival at 36 months was 84.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 81.7 to 86.9) in the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group, as compared with 76.8% (95% CI, 72.2 to 80.7) in the placebo-chemotherapy group (hazard ratio for event or death, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.82; P<0.001). Adverse events occurred predominantly during the neoadjuvant phase and were consistent with the established safety profiles of pembrolizumab and chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with early triple-negative breast cancer, neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy, followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab after surgery, resulted in significantly longer event-free survival than neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; KEYNOTE-522 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03036488.).

Lenvatinib plus Pembrolizumab for Advanced Endometrial Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Standard therapy for advanced endometrial cancer after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy remains unclear. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with advanced endometrial cancer who had previously received at least one platinum-based chemotherapy regimen to receive either lenvatinib (20 mg, administered orally once daily) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg, administered intravenously every 3 weeks) or chemotherapy of the treating physician's choice (doxorubicin at 60 mg per square meter of body-surface area, administered intravenously every 3 weeks, or paclitaxel at 80 mg per square meter, administered intravenously weekly [with a cycle of 3 weeks on and 1 week off]). The two primary end points were progression-free survival as assessed on blinded independent central review according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, and overall survival. The end points were evaluated in patients with mismatch repair-proficient (pMMR) disease and in all patients. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 827 patients (697 with pMMR disease and 130 with mismatch repair-deficient disease) were randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (411 patients) or chemotherapy (416 patients). The median progression-free survival was longer with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab than with chemotherapy (pMMR population: 6.6 vs. 3.8 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50 to 0.72; P<0.001; overall: 7.2 vs. 3.8 months; hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.66; P<0.001). The median overall survival was longer with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab than with chemotherapy (pMMR population: 17.4 vs. 12.0 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.84; P<0.001; overall: 18.3 vs. 11.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.75; P<0.001). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 88.9% of the patients who received lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab and in 72.7% of those who received chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab led to significantly longer progression-free survival and overall survival than chemotherapy among patients with advanced endometrial cancer. (Funded by Eisai and Merck Sharp and Dohme [a subsidiary of Merck]; Study 309-KEYNOTE-775 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03517449.).

Results of PD-L1 Analysis of Women Treated with Durvalumab in Advanced Endometrial Carcinoma (PHAEDRA).

Women with advanced endometrial carcinoma (EC) with mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency have improved outcomes when treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors; however, additional biomarkers are needed to identify women most likely to respond. Scores for programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), immunohistochemical staining of tumor (TC+), immune cells (IC+) and presence of tumor-associated immune cells (ICP) on MMR deficient (n = 34) and proficient (n = 33) EC from women treated with durvalumab in the PHAEDRA trial (ANZGOG1601/CTC0144) (trial registration number ACTRN12617000106336, prospectively registered 19 January 2017) are reported and correlated with outcome. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses and area under the ROC curve were used to determine optimal cutpoints. Performance was compared with median cutpoints and two algorithms; a novel algorithm derived from optimal cutpoints (TC+ ≥ 1 or ICP ≥ 10 or IC+ ≥ 35) and the Ventana urothelial carcinoma (UC) algorithm (either TC+ ≥ 25, ICP > 1 and IC+ ≥ 25 or ICP = 1 and IC+ = 100). The cutpoint ICP ≥ 10 had highest sensitivity (53%) and specificity (82%), being prognostic for progression-free survival (PFS) (p = 0.01), while the optimal cutpoints algorithm was associated with overall survival (p = 0.02); these results were not significant after adjusting for MMR status. The optimal cutpoints algorithm identified non-responders (p = 0.02) with high sensitivity (88%) and negative predictive value (92%), remaining significant after adjustment for MMR. Although MMR status had the strongest association with response, further work to determine the significance of ICP ≥ 10 and the novel optimal cutpoint algorithm is needed.

Pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy in a patient with Lynch syndrome with synchronous mixed clear cell carcinoma of ovarian origin and endometroid endometrial carcinoma.

A 48-year-old woman was diagnosed with synchronous mixed clear cell carcinoma of ovarian origin and endometroid endometrial carcinoma after presenting with intermenstrual bleeding for 2 years prior. Shortly after diagnosis she became progressively unwell requiring intensive care unit admission with respiratory failure, pleural effusions and pulmonary emboli. Following a total abdominal hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, laparotomy and emergency percutaneous thrombectomy, she remained critically unwell and was deemed not safe for chemotherapy. Given a high index of suspicion for Lynch syndrome, the patient was treated with adjuvant pembrolizumab and achieved a complete response. Lynch syndrome was subsequently confirmed through germline genetic testing. The patient made an excellent recovery and remains disease-free at 23 months.

Clinical activity of durvalumab for patients with advanced mismatch repair-deficient and repair-proficient endometrial cancer. A nonrandomized phase 2 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we assessed the activity of durvalumab, an antibody to programmed death ligand-1, in two cohorts of women with advanced endometrial cancers (AEC)-mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) and mismatch repair deficient (dMMR). METHODS: A multicenter phase two study was performed in women with AEC with pMMR tumor progressing after one to three lines of chemotherapy and women with AEC with dMMR tumor progressing after zero to three lines of chemotherapy. Mismatch repair status was based on immunohistochemistry expression. All women received durvalumab 1500 mg given every 4 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective tumor response by RECIST V.1.1 modified for immune-based therapeutics. RESULTS: Seventy-one women were recruited: 35 dMMR and 36 pMMR. Median follow-up was 19 vs 21 months in dMMR versus pMMR, respectively. Median age was 67 years. Histology in dMMR versus pMMR included endometrioid (94% vs 57%) and serous (0% vs 31%) and was high grade in 26% vs 74%. The objective tumor response rate (OTRR) in the dMMR cohort was 47% (17/36, 95% CI 32 to 63), including 6 complete responses and 11 partial responses (PRs)) vs 3% in the pMMR cohort (1/35, 95% CI 1 to 15, PR). In the dMMR cohort, durvalumab was the first-line therapy in 58% (OTRR 57%) and the second-line therapy in 39% (OTRR 38%). Median progression-free survival was 8.3 months in the dMMR cohort vs 1.8 months in the pMMR cohort. The 12-month overall survival (OS) rate was 71% in dMMR vs 51% in pMMR, with median OS not reached for dMMR vs 12 months for pMMR. Immune-related adverse events occurred in 14 women, mostly grades 1-2. CONCLUSION: Durvalumab monotherapy showed promising activity and acceptable safety in AEC with dMMR regardless of prior lines of chemotherapy, but activity was limited in AEC with pMMR. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ANZGOG1601, ACTRN12617000106336, and NCT03015129.

Microdiscectomy compared with transforaminal epidural steroid injection for persistent radicular pain caused by prolapsed intervertebral disc: the NERVES RCT.

BACKGROUND: Sciatica is a common condition reported to affect > 3% of the UK population at any time and is most often caused by a prolapsed intervertebral disc. Currently, there is no uniformly adopted treatment strategy. Invasive treatments, such as surgery (i.e. microdiscectomy) and transforaminal epidural steroid injection, are often reserved for failed conservative treatment. OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of microdiscectomy with transforaminal epidural steroid injection for the management of radicular pain secondary to lumbar prolapsed intervertebral disc for non-emergency presentation of sciatica of < 12 months' duration. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomised to either (1) microdiscectomy or (2) transforaminal epidural steroid injection. DESIGN: A pragmatic, multicentre, randomised prospective trial comparing microdiscectomy with transforaminal epidural steroid injection for sciatica due to prolapsed intervertebral disc with < 1 year symptom duration. SETTING: NHS services providing secondary spinal surgical care within the UK. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 163 participants (aged 16-65 years) were recruited from 11 UK NHS outpatient clinics. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was participant-completed Oswestry Disability Questionnaire score at 18 weeks post randomisation. Secondary outcomes were visual analogue scores for leg pain and back pain; modified Roland-Morris score (for sciatica), Core Outcome Measures Index score and participant satisfaction at 12-weekly intervals. Cost-effectiveness and quality of life were assessed using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version; Hospital Episode Statistics data; medication usage; and self-reported cost data at 12-weekly intervals. Adverse event data were collected. The economic outcome was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained from the perspective of the NHS in England. RESULTS: Eighty-three participants were allocated to transforaminal epidural steroid injection and 80 participants were allocated to microdiscectomy, using an online randomisation system. At week 18, Oswestry Disability Questionnaire scores had decreased, relative to baseline, by 26.7 points in the microdiscectomy group and by 24.5 points in the transforaminal epidural steroid injection. The difference between the treatments was not statistically significant (estimated treatment effect -4.25 points, 95% confidence interval -11.09 to 2.59 points). Nor were there significant differences between treatments in any of the secondary outcomes: Oswestry Disability Questionnaire scores, visual analogue scores for leg pain and back pain, modified Roland-Morris score and Core Outcome Measures Index score up to 54 weeks. There were four (3.8%) serious adverse events in the microdiscectomy group, including one nerve palsy (foot drop), and none in the transforaminal epidural steroid injection group. Compared with transforaminal epidural steroid injection, microdiscectomy had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £38,737 per quality-adjusted life-year gained and a probability of 0.17 of being cost-effective at a willingness to pay threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. LIMITATIONS: Primary outcome data was invalid or incomplete for 24% of participants. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated robustness to assumptions made regarding missing data. Eighteen per cent of participants in the transforaminal epidural steroid injection group subsequently received microdiscectomy prior to their primary outcome assessment. CONCLUSIONS: To the best of our knowledge, the NErve Root Block VErsus Surgery trial is the first trial to evaluate the comparative clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of microdiscectomy and transforaminal epidural steroid injection. No statistically significant difference was found between the two treatments for the primary outcome. It is unlikely that microdiscectomy is cost-effective compared with transforaminal epidural steroid injection at a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year for sciatica secondary to prolapsed intervertebral disc. FUTURE WORK: These results will lead to further studies in the streamlining and earlier management of discogenic sciatica. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN04820368 and EudraCT 2014-002751-25. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 24. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?: Sciatica or pain related to nerve irritation travelling down the leg is common in young working adults and most likely to be caused by a 'slipped' (prolapsed) disc. Although the majority of cases get better on their own and within 4­6 weeks, a significant group of patients struggle with disabling symptoms sometimes beyond 1 year. Consequently, patients struggle to maintain their home and working lives. Many treatments are available for sciatica, but simpler treatments (e.g. pain tablets, physiotherapy and changing one's lifestyle) are often not very effective and patients have often tried all of them by the time they are seen in hospital to have tests, such as scans, done. Surgery to remove part of the disc is recommended in cases where the pain is accompanied by severe weakness in one or both legs, or where doctors think that nerves may be damaged because patients have bladder, bowel and sexual functioning difficulties (i.e. red flag symptoms). Surgery works well in alleviation of referred leg pain and also to relieve pressure on a physically compressed nerve that may be showing clinical sign of injury/weakness. An alternative to surgery is to inject a mixture of anaesthetic and steroid close to the site of the disc injury and nerve, but at the moment we do not know whether or not these injections work in the long term. They are cheaper and less invasive, with fewer risks than surgery, such as from anaesthetic or infection. WHAT DID OUR STUDY INVESTIGATE?: This study compared the usefulness of surgery with injections for patients who have had sciatica for < 1 year and who have tried simple remedies but are still in pain. Patients were allocated to have either surgery or the injection. Symptoms (e.g. pain) were assessed after 18 weeks. WHAT DID WE FIND?: We found that there was no significant difference between surgery and injection at the primary end point. Surgery was not significantly different from injection in terms of clinical outcome and was not cost-effective compared with injection. OUR CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Given the cost of surgery and the risks to patients, we suggest that further studies should be carried out to explore whether or not all patients with sciatica due to a slipped disc should be considered suitable for an injection, unless there is a good reason not to.

Why pathologists and oncologists should know about tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in triple-negative breast cancer: an Australian experience of 139 cases.

The presence of increased tumour infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) is established as a positive prognostic factor in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). The majority of studies have examined the role of TILs in predicting response to chemotherapy, but their role as a general prognostic marker in TNBC is unclear. Moreover, there is a lack of consensus in the literature regarding a suitable cut-off point by which to stratify patients into prognostic groups. Therefore, we sought to confirm the prognostic value of TILs in an independent cohort of unselected TNBCs, and to determine an appropriate cut-off point by which to stratify TIL scores into prognostically significant categories. We used the International TILs Working Group (ITWG) methodology to assess the density of stromal TILs in our cohort of 139 TNBC patients undergoing curative resection at our institution. The percentage TILs scores were categorised first into three groups: low (0-10%), intermediate (15-50%), and high (55-100%). A second binary variable was also created by separating cases into low TILs (≤50%) and high TILs (>50%) groups. Using the three-tiered system, mean disease-free survival was 156, 99 and 94 months for the high, intermediate and low TILs groups, respectively (p=0.030). However, no statistically significant improvement was observed for overall survival. Using the two-tiered system, statistically significant improvements in both overall survival (p=0.030) and disease-free survival (p=0.010) were observed. This survival benefit remained statistically significant in multivariate analyses (p=0.010, p=0.014). We conclude that TILs scored using the ITWG system and dichotomised at a cut-off score of 50%, are a powerful predictor of all-cause and disease-free survival in TNBC regardless of chemotherapy treatment.

Electrophysiological and phenotypic profiles of taxane-induced neuropathy.

OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively describe patient-reported, functional and neurophysiological outcomes to elucidate the phenotypic profile of taxane-induced neuropathy. METHODS: Taxane-treated patients (n = 47) completed cross-sectional bilateral clinical and sensory assessments and nerve conduction studies. Patients reported symptom severity via Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity (FACT/GOG-Ntx13) questionnaire. RESULTS: Symptoms of neuropathy were reported by 81% of patients. On clinical examination, 62% had 2 or more abnormalities, with 20% indicating significant symptomatic and objective neuropathy. Nerve conduction studies were consistent with a sensory predominant axonal neuropathy. However, features more typical of entrapment neuropathy were also present in > 50%, which were not associated with overall severity of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) or clinical risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variation in CIPN phenotypes associated with taxane-treatment. Understanding their clinical associations may assist in identification of patients at risk of severe neurotoxicity. This would enable treatment modification decisions but also limit early cessation of effective anti-cancer treatment in patients with less severe neurological sequelae. SIGNIFICANCE: Understanding the CIPN phenotype may inform treatment decisions which could impact clinical and survival outcomes.

Bevacizumab and platinum-based combinations for recurrent ovarian cancer: a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: State-of-the art therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer suitable for platinum-based re-treatment includes bevacizumab-containing combinations (eg, bevacizumab combined with carboplatin-paclitaxel or carboplatin-gemcitabine) or the most active non-bevacizumab regimen: carboplatin-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin. The aim of this head-to-head trial was to compare a standard bevacizumab-containing regimen versus carboplatin-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin combined with bevacizumab. METHODS: This multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, was done in 159 academic centres in Germany, France, Australia, Austria, and the UK. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) had histologically confirmed epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube carcinoma with first disease recurrence more than 6 months after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Patients were stratified by platinum-free interval, residual tumour, previous antiangiogenic therapy, and study group language, and were centrally randomly assigned 1:1 using randomly permuted blocks of size two, four, or six to receive six intravenous cycles of bevacizumab (15 mg/kg, day 1) plus carboplatin (area under the concentration curve [AUC] 4, day 1) plus gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2, days 1 and 8) every 3 weeks or six cycles of bevacizumab (10 mg/kg, days 1 and 15) plus carboplatin (AUC 5, day 1) plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (30 mg/m2, day 1) every 4 weeks, both followed by maintenance bevacizumab (15 mg/kg every 3 weeks in both groups) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. There was no masking in this open-label trial. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Efficacy data were analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This completed study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01837251. FINDINGS: Between Aug 1, 2013, and July 31, 2015, 682 eligible patients were enrolled, of whom 345 were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin-bevacizumab (experimental group) and 337 were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin-gemcitabine-bevacizumab (standard group). Median follow-up for progression-free survival at data cutoff (July 10, 2018) was 12·4 months (IQR 8·3-21·7) in the experimental group and 11·3 months (8·0-18·4) in the standard group. Median progression-free survival was 13·3 months (95% CI 11·7-14·2) in the experimental group versus 11·6 months (11·0-12·7) in the standard group (hazard ratio 0·81, 95% CI 0·68-0·96; p=0·012). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were hypertension (88 [27%] of 332 patients in the experimental group vs 67 [20%] of 329 patients in the standard group) and neutropenia (40 [12%] vs 73 [22%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 33 (10%) of 332 patients in the experimental group and 28 (9%) of 329 in the standard group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in one patient in the experimental group (<1%; large intestine perforation) and two patients in the standard group (1%; one case each of osmotic demyelination syndrome and intracranial haemorrhage). INTERPRETATION: Carboplatin-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin-bevacizumab is a new standard treatment option for platinum-eligible recurrent ovarian cancer. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Taxane-induced peripheral neuropathy: differences in patient report and objective assessment.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a dose-limiting side-effect of neurotoxic cancer treatment impacting on long-term quality of life. Symptoms include numbness, tingling, and pain, affecting the distal extremities. However, patients often report symptoms discrepant from the expected symmetrical distribution and the degree of concurrence with objective assessment remains ill-defined. This study aimed to investigate severity and symmetry of neuropathy symptoms to enable comparison of objective measures and patient report. METHODS: Forty-five taxane-treated patients (F = 43, 66 ± 1.5 years, 19 months post-treatment) completed bilateral neuropathy assessments via clinical examination, sensory nerve conduction studies (NCS), and patient questionnaires. The laterality index (LI) was calculated as a ratio of smaller to larger side-to-side differences. RESULTS: Neuropathy was reported by 89% of the cohort. On clinical examination, 83% had ≥ 2 abnormalities, with 38-35% having upper or lower limb sensory amplitudes below normative range. Thirty-five percent indicated side-to-side symptom asymmetry; however, there was no significant asymmetry evident on clinical examination (LI Asym = .60 ± .10, Sym = .76 ± .05, NS) and no difference in side-to-side NCS (median LI:Asym = .69 ± .06, Sym = .81 ± .04, NS; Sural LI:Asym = .80 ± .04, Sym = .81 ± .04, NS). Accordingly, there was no statistical association between patient-reported and objective assessment of side-to-side asymmetry, suggesting discordance between patient experience and objective assessment. Similarly, discrepancies in symptom severity between hands and feet were reported by 32% of the cohort. However, patients reporting differences in symptom severity between the hands and feet were just as likely to present with comparable assessments as to demonstrate objective discrepancies. CONCLUSIONS: Discrepancies may exist between the patient experience of CIPN and objective assessments. Understanding these discrepancies may help to elucidate underlying mechanisms and better inform treatment strategies.

Veliparib with First-Line Chemotherapy and as Maintenance Therapy in Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Data are limited regarding the use of poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, such as veliparib, in combination with chemotherapy followed by maintenance as initial treatment in patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. METHODS: In an international, phase 3, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed the efficacy of veliparib added to first-line induction chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel and continued as maintenance monotherapy in patients with previously untreated stage III or IV high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive chemotherapy plus placebo followed by placebo maintenance (control), chemotherapy plus veliparib followed by placebo maintenance (veliparib combination only), or chemotherapy plus veliparib followed by veliparib maintenance (veliparib throughout). Cytoreductive surgery could be performed before initiation or after 3 cycles of trial treatment. Combination chemotherapy was 6 cycles, and maintenance therapy was 30 additional cycles. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the veliparib-throughout group as compared with the control group, analyzed sequentially in the BRCA-mutation cohort, the cohort with homologous-recombination deficiency (HRD) (which included the BRCA-mutation cohort), and the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 1140 patients underwent randomization. In the BRCA-mutation cohort, the median progression-free survival was 34.7 months in the veliparib-throughout group and 22.0 months in the control group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 0.68; P<0.001); in the HRD cohort, it was 31.9 months and 20.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95 CI, 0.43 to 0.76; P<0.001); and in the intention-to-treat population, it was 23.5 months and 17.3 months (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.83; P<0.001). Veliparib led to a higher incidence of anemia and thrombocytopenia when combined with chemotherapy as well as of nausea and fatigue overall. CONCLUSIONS: Across all trial populations, a regimen of carboplatin, paclitaxel, and veliparib induction therapy followed by veliparib maintenance therapy led to significantly longer progression-free survival than carboplatin plus paclitaxel induction therapy alone. The independent value of adding veliparib during induction therapy without veliparib maintenance was less clear. (Funded by AbbVie; VELIA/GOG-3005 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02470585.).

Tailored NEOadjuvant epirubicin, cyclophosphamide and Nanoparticle Albumin-Bound paclitaxel for breast cancer: The phase II NEONAB trial-Clinical outcomes and molecular determinants of response.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the feasibility of achieving high response rates in stage II or III breast cancer by tailoring neoadjuvant therapy using clinical and histopathological features and the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score. Genomic determinants of response and resistance were also explored. PATIENTS AND OUTCOME MEASURES: Fifty-one patients were enrolled. The primary cohort comprised 40 patients: 15 human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2)-amplified; 15 triple-negative (TNBC); and ten hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-non-amplified tumours; with recurrence scores ≥25. Patients were treated with epirubicin and cyclophosphamide, followed by nab-paclitaxel, with the addition of trastuzumab if HER2-amplified. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response (pCR) in the breast. Pre- and post-treatment tumour samples underwent variant burden, gene and gene pathway, mutational signature profile and clonal evolution analyses. RESULTS: The pCR rates were: overall 55% (n = 22), HER2-amplified 80% (n = 12), triple-negative 46% (n = 7) and HR-positive, HER2-non-amplified 30% (n = 3). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events included febrile neutropenia (8%), neutropenia (18%), sensory neuropathy (5%), deranged transaminases (5%), fatigue (2%), diarrhoea (2%), and pneumothorax (2%). Molecular analyses demonstrated strong similarities between residual disease and matched primary tumour. ATM signalling pathway alterations and the presence of a COSMIC Signature 3 implied the majority of tumours contained some form of homologous repair deficiency. ATM pathway alterations were identified in the subset of TNBC patients who did not achieve pCR; Signature 3 was present in both pCR and non-pCR subgroups. Clonal evolution analyses demonstrated both persistence and emergence of chemoresistant clones. CONCLUSIONS: This treatment regime resulted in a high rate of pCR, demonstrating that tailored neoadjuvant therapy using a genomic recurrence score is feasible and warrants further investigation. Molecular analysis revealed few commonalities between patients. For TNBC future clinical gains will require precision medicine, potentially using DNA sequencing to identify specific targets for individuals with resistant disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01830244.