Identification of Patients with Early HR+ HER2- Breast Cancer at High Risk of Recurrence.

Breast cancer incidence has increased in the last two decades and, simultaneously, survival has improved due to earlier detection and improved treatment options. Despite this improvement, locoregional recurrences and distant metastases occur in up to 10 and 30% of women diagnosed with early breast cancer, respectively. Around 70% of breast cancers are hormone receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-), and associated with a persistent risk of relapse up to 20 years after diagnosis/initial treatment. We conducted a narrative review by combining PubMed searches with our clinical experience to describe patient characteristics, biomarkers, and genomic profiling tools available to clinicians for the identification of patients with HR+, HER2- early breast cancer at high risk of recurrence and to provide recommendations to classify patients into recurrence risk categories. National and international treatment guidelines are also summarised. Accurate assessment of the risk of recurrence in these patients is crucial as the predicted risk guides treatment decisions; imprecise estimations can result in over- or undertreatment, with either scenario having negative consequences for patients. Multiple prognostic tools and factors are recommended for early breast cancer, and no single test provides accurate prognosis in isolation. Since no single test can provide accurate prognosis in isolation, a combination of tools should be used. Risk thresholds are important to guide optimised and balanced therapeutic decisions in HR+, HER2- early breast cancer. However, prognostic assessment should be performed on a case-by-case basis, making patient-specific prognostic approaches essential to avoid over- or undertreatment.

Real-World Analysis of Clinical and Demographic Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Outcomes in Predominantly Older Patients with HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer Receiving Abemaciclib in Routine Clinical Practice.

INTRODUCTION: Hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) is the most frequently diagnosed metastatic breast cancer (mBC) subtype. Combinations of endocrine therapy (ET) with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4 & 6is) improve outcomes compared with ET alone. The efficacy and safety of abemaciclib among patients with HR+/HER2- mBC has been demonstrated in the MONARCH clinical trials; however, there is a paucity of real-world evidence, particularly in older patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This retrospective cohort study analyzed the electronic medical record data/charts of adult patients with HR+/HER2- mBC receiving abemaciclib in US-based community oncology settings (1 September 2017 to 30 September 2019). Patients with other primary malignancies, clinical trial enrollment, and incomplete charts were excluded. Patient characteristics, treatment attributes and patterns, and real-world outcomes (clinical benefit rate [CBR] and stable disease among patients with response data available, time to chemotherapy [TTC], time to treatment discontinuation [TTD], and progression-free survival [PFS]) were summarized. Multivariable models evaluated the association between demographic/clinical characteristics and outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 448 final patients, 99% were female, with a median age of 67 years (25% were ≥ 75 years) and median follow-up of 11 months; most (60%) initiated abemaciclib within 2 years of mBC diagnosis. Patients received a median of 1 (P25 = 0, P75 = 3) prior line of therapy for mBC before abemaciclib, including other CDK4 & 6is (48%) and prior chemotherapy (31%); most (57%) had visceral disease. The CBR for the overall population was 53%, with 48% achieving stable disease. The median TTC was not reached; median TTD was 249 days (95% confidence interval [CI]: 202, 304). The median PFS was 329 days (95% CI 266, 386). The discontinuation rate of abemaciclib owing to adverse events (30%) trended higher with age (years) (P = 0.027): 18-49 (n = 42; 19%), 50-64 (n = 155; 25%), 65-74 (n = 138; 32%), 75-84 (n = 82; 37%), ≥ 85 (n = 31; 49%); only 23% of patients overall had a dose hold or reduction prior to discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: These patients were older than those in the MONARCH studies with substantial visceral disease, and prior chemotherapy and CDK4 & 6i use. Discontinuation rates were higher than in previous real-world studies (11.9%), highlighting the need for proactive management to optimize outcomes, particularly in older patients with mBC.

Characteristics and Outcomes in Cases of US Male Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer Receiving Abemaciclib in Routine Clinical Practice.

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer in males constitutes approximately 1% of all breast cancer cases globally. Despite extensive treatment experience with abemaciclib in women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), real-world evidence in male MBC is lacking. METHODS: This analysis was a part of a broader, retrospective study that analyzed electronic medical records and charts of 448 men and women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) MBC who initiated an abemaciclib-containing regimen from January 2017 through September 2019. Data were collected from the Florida Cancer Specialists & Research Institute and the Electronic Medical Office Logistics Health Oncology Warehouse Language™ databases and summarized descriptively. Real-world best response was described: complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), or progressive disease (PD). RESULTS: Data for six male patients with MBC who were treated with abemaciclib in combination with an aromatase inhibitor (AI) or fulvestrant are presented. Four patients were aged ≥ 75 years, and four patients had ≥ 3 metastatic sites, including visceral involvement. Abemaciclib was initiated in/after third-line (≥ 3L) in four patients, and patients had history of treatment with AI (n = 4), chemotherapy (n = 3), and/or prior cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (n = 2) in the metastatic setting. Abemaciclib + fulvestrant was the most common abemaciclib-containing regimen (n = 4). Best response was documented in four patients: 1 each with CR, PR, SD, and PD. CONCLUSION: Prevalence of male MBC in this dataset was consistent with expected prevalence in the broader population. Most male patients received an abemaciclib-containing regimen in ≥ 3L, with anti-cancer activity observed despite heavy metastatic burden and prior treatments in a metastatic setting.

Adjuvant Abemaciclib Combined with Endocrine Therapy: Efficacy Results in monarchE Cohort 1.

The monarchE Cohort 1 patient population was enrolled based on high-risk clinicopathological features that can easily be identified as part of routine clinical breast cancer evaluation. Efficacy data from Cohort 1 demonstrate substantial evidence of benefit for adjuvant abemaciclib+ET in patients with HR+, HER2- early breast cancer at high risk of recurrence (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03155997 [monarchE]).

Population-based estimate for the correlation of the Oncotype Dx Breast Recurrence Score® result and Ki-67 IHC MIB-1 pharmDx in HR+, HER2-, node-positive early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The United States Food and Drug Administration recently approved a Ki-67 immunohistochemistry (IHC) assay to identify patients with early breast cancer at high disease recurrence risk. The Oncotype Dx Breast Recurrence Score® assay has been validated in hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) invasive breast cancer (IBC) to predict chemotherapy benefit and distant recurrence risk, regardless of nodal status. This study assessed the correlation between Recurrence Score® (RS) results and the Ki-67 IHC MIB-1 pharmDx assay. METHODS: HR+, HER2-, N1 IBC samples with RS results were examined by Ki-67 IHC; 311 specimens were collected, including 275 without regard to RS ("unselected RS") and 36 more with RS 26-100; 12 were lymph node negative upon pathology report review, and one had no Ki-67 score, leaving 262 unselected RS and 298 total samples. Spearman rank correlation was calculated using the unselected samples and a weighted rank correlation using all samples. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for predicting high RS (26-100) from Ki-67 was constructed. RESULTS: The Spearman rank correlation between Ki-67 and RS results was moderately positive (unselected RS samples: 0.396; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.288-0.493; all samples: 0.394; 95% CI 0.294-0.486). While 71% of samples with RS 26-100 had Ki-67 ≥ 20%, 75% with RS 0-25 had Ki-67 < 20%. ROC area under the curve was 0.792 (95% CI 0.725-0.859). CONCLUSIONS: The moderately positive correlation is consistent with previous analyses suggesting the Oncotype Dx® assay and Ki-67 IHC MIB-1 assay should not be used interchangeably in clinical practice.

Two Instrument Comparison of Reagents From a US FDA-Approved Assay for the Assessment of Ki-67 in High-Risk Early Breast Cancer.

The objective of this study was to measure concordance of results obtained from the US Food and Drug Administration-approved Ki-67 immunohistochemistry MIB-1 pharmDx assay performed on the Dako Omnis automated staining instrument (Omnis) versus results produced from the assay reagents applied using an optimized protocol on the more widely available Autostainer Link 48 (ASL48) platform. Tissue sections obtained from 40 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded breast carcinoma samples, with available Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score (RS) results, were stained. Three certified pathologists scored slides at 3 timepoints, totaling 360 observations for each instrument (N=720 total) using the approved scoring approach. Using the ≥20% cutoff, agreement was calculated with corresponding 2-sided 95% percentile bootstrap confidence intervals (CIs). Pairwise comparisons (N=360) from the interinstrument evaluation, performed with all observers, resulted in 325 (90.3%) concordant outcomes (244 negative and 81 positive) and 35 (9.7%) discordant outcomes. The overall agreement was 90.3% (95% confidence interval, 85.6% to 94.4%). No significant systematic differences were observed between instruments. Specimens scored from the Omnis were on average <1% higher than ASL48, with high correlation and little bias between the continuous Ki-67 scores (concordance correlation coefficient=0.916). Most specimens with a Ki-67 score ≥20% had a RS >25. This study demonstrated that good concordance can be achieved with the reagents run on the ASL48 instrument when using an optimized protocol and standardized scoring.

First-line therapy for treatment-naive patients with advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review of published randomized controlled trials.

In the recent years, a number of targeted therapies have been approved for first-line treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. A systematic review was conducted to assess the clinical efficacy, safety and effect of all first-line treatments evaluated to date on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). A systematic search of Embase, Cochrane and MEDLINE databases was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (1980-2015) evaluating any targeted therapy/immunotherapy against placebo or any other targeted intervention/immunotherapy in treatment-naive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Conference proceedings from major cancer congresses (2007-2015) were handsearched. Sixteen randomized controlled trials were identified, mostly phase III. Overall, targeted therapies were associated with either improved [sunitinib, bevacizumab+interferon α (IFNα) and temsirolimus] or comparable (sorafenib) progression-free survival (PFS) versus IFNα monotherapy. Sunitinib demonstrated comparable PFS and overall survival to pazopanib, comparable PFS to sorafenib and shorter PFS compared with bevacizumab+IFNα (although no conclusions were made with regard to superiority/inferiority). Compared with sorafenib, tivozanib demonstrated a significantly longer PFS, and both tivozanib and axitinib demonstrated higher response rates. Nintedanib demonstrated comparable PFS and overall survival to sunitinib in a phase II trial. Temsirolimus, sunitinib and sorafenib treatment led to better HRQoL versus IFNα; pazopanib was associated with better HRQoL versus sunitinib. No direct meta-analyses or indirect treatment comparison analysis were undertaken because of noncomparability of the trials. In general, targeted therapies demonstrated favourable clinical efficacy and improved HRQoL compared with IFNα monotherapy. The newer therapies, tivozanib and axitinib (but not nintedanib), appeared to exhibit greater clinical benefit (response rate) than older tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Dose-dependent change in biomarkers during neoadjuvant endocrine therapy with fulvestrant: results from NEWEST, a randomized Phase II study.

NEWEST (Neoadjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Women with Estrogen-Sensitive Tumors) is the first study to compare biological and clinical activity of fulvestrant 500 versus 250 mg in the neoadjuvant breast cancer setting. We hypothesized that fulvestrant 500 mg may be superior to 250 mg in blocking estrogen receptor (ER) signaling and growth. A multicenter, randomized, open-label, Phase II study was performed to compare fulvestrant 500 mg (500 mg/month plus 500 mg on day 14 of month 1) versus fulvestrant 250 mg/month for 16 weeks prior to surgery in postmenopausal women with ER+ locally advanced breast cancer. Core biopsies at baseline, week 4, and surgery were assessed for biomarker changes. Primary endpoint: change in Ki67 labeling index (LI) from baseline to week 4 determined by automated computer imaging system (ACIS). Secondary endpoints: ER protein expression and function; progesterone receptor (PgR) expression; tumor response; tolerability. ER and PgR were examined retrospectively using the H score method. A total of 211 patients were randomized (fulvestrant 500 mg: n = 109; 250 mg: n = 102). At week 4, fulvestrant 500 mg resulted in greater reduction of Ki67 LI and ER expression versus 250 mg (-78.8 vs. -47.4% [p < 0.0001] and -25.0 vs. -13.5% [p = 0.0002], respectively [ACIS]); PgR suppression was not significantly different (-22.7 vs. -17.6; p = 0.5677). However, H score detected even greater suppression of ER (-50.3 vs. -13.7%; p < 0.0001) and greater PgR suppression (-80.5 vs. -46.3%; p = 0.0018) for fulvestrant 500 versus 250 mg. At week 16, tumor response rates were 22.9 and 20.6% for fulvestrant 500 and 250 mg, respectively, with considerable decline in all markers by both ACIS and H score. No detrimental effects on endometrial thickness or bone markers and no new safety concerns were identified. This provides the first evidence of greater biological activity for fulvestrant 500 versus 250 mg in depleting ER expression, function, and growth.

Fulvestrant revisited: efficacy and safety of the 500-mg dose.

Postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer are candidates for endocrine therapy. As the disease will eventually progress in most patients, it is important to investigate agents with novel modes of action to reduce the likelihood of treatment cross-resistance. Fulvestrant is an estrogen receptor antagonist with no known agonist effects that has been shown to be as effective as anastrozole following failure on tamoxifen, at the approved dose of 250 mg/mo. However, pharmacokinetic modelling and evidence of clinical efficacy in early trials, together with the favorable tolerability profile of fulvestrant 250 mg, led to suggestions that increasing the fulvestrant dose would lead to an improved benefit-risk profile. This review describes the rationale behind the development of a 500 mg/mo higher dose of fulvestrant and details relevant clinical trials, including the pivotal phase III COmparisoN of Faslodex In Recurrent or Metastatic breast cancer (CONFIRM) study. CONFIRM demonstrated a significant improvement in progression-free survival for fulvestrant 500 mg versus 250 mg in postmenopausal patients who had progressed on previous endocrine therapy. Here, we present and discuss a pooled safety analysis of CONFIRM and three further clinical studies demonstrating fulvestrant 500 mg to be well-tolerated with no evidence of dose-related adverse events. Overall, these data indicate an improved benefit-risk profile for fulvestrant 500 mg versus 250 mg following failure on prior endocrine therapy, and suggest that fulvestrant 500 mg may be considered in future as initial endocrine treatment for advanced breast cancer.

Results of the CONFIRM phase III trial comparing fulvestrant 250 mg with fulvestrant 500 mg in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: We compared fulvestrant 500 mg regimen with the approved dose of fulvestrant 250 mg per month for treatment of postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive advanced breast cancer who experienced progression after prior endocrine therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Comparison of Faslodex in Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer (CONFIRM) is a double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, phase III study. Patients were randomly assigned to fulvestrant 500 mg (500 mg intramuscularly [IM] on day 0, then 500 mg IM on days 14 and 28 and every 28 days thereafter) or 250 mg every 28 days. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included objective response rate, clinical benefit rate (CBR), duration of clinical benefit (DoCB), overall survival (OS), and quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: PFS was significantly longer for fulvestrant 500 mg (n = 362) than 250 mg (n = 374) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.94; P = .006), corresponding to a 20% reduction in risk of progression. Objective response rate was similar for fulvestrant 500 mg and 250 mg (9.1% v 10.2%, respectively). CBR was 45.6% for fulvestrant 500 mg and 39.6% for fulvestrant 250 mg. DoCB and OS were 16.6 and 25.1 months, respectively, for the 500-mg group, whereas DoCB and OS were 13.9 and 22.8 months, respectively, in the 250-mg group. Fulvestrant 500 mg was well tolerated with no dose-dependent adverse events. QOL was similar for both arms. CONCLUSION: Fulvestrant 500 mg was associated with a statistically significant increase in PFS and not associated with increased toxicity, corresponding to a clinically meaningful improvement in benefit versus risk compared with fulvestrant 250 mg.

Aromatase inhibitor-induced carpal tunnel syndrome: results from the ATAC trial.

PURPOSE: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a condition in which the median nerve is compressed, leading to pain and muscle weakness in the fingers and hand. Aromatase inhibitors lead to profound estrogen suppression and may be expected to increase the risk of CTS in postmenopausal women receiving adjuvant therapy for early breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The current analyses were based on the 100-month median follow-up data in postmenopausal women in the two monotherapy arms (anastrozole, n = 3,092; tamoxifen, n = 3,094). Here, we investigate the natural history of patients who presented with CTS during adjuvant treatment for breast cancer and the relative importance of a range of known risk factors for CTS. RESULTS: After 100 months of follow-up, 80 cases (2.6%) of CTS were reported in the anastrozole arm, compared with 23 cases (0.7%) in the tamoxifen arm (P < .0001). The majority of CTS cases were reported as mild to moderate intensity and occurred early. None of the women stopped treatment medication as a result of CTS. CTS was significantly increased for women who used prior hormone replacement therapy (P = .007) or received prior chemotherapy (P = .01). Those who were 60 years of age or older at entry were at lower risk of CTS compared with their counterparts (P = .002). CONCLUSION: Although the use of anastrozole is associated with a greater incidence of CTS, it is rare, and most cases were of mild to moderate intensity and short duration. CTS has little impact on the overall risk-to-benefit ratio for the use of anastrozole in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer.

Pharmacokinetic profile of the fulvestrant loading dose regimen in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Fulvestrant is at least as effective as anastrozole in the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer whose disease has previously progressed or recurred on antiestrogen therapy. Pharmacokinetic data have shown that, at the approved dose (250 mg/month), it takes approximately 3-6 months for fulvestrant to reach steady-state levels. Theoretically, a more rapid attainment of steady state might reduce the number of early progressions. A pharmacokinetic model simulating plasma concentrations expected to be achieved with a fulvestrant loading dose (LD) regimen suggested that steady state might be achieved earlier with the LD. The aim of this study was to characterize the pharmacokinetics of the fulvestrant LD regimen. This pharmacokinetic substudy was conducted within a phase III trial, EFECT (Evaluation of Fulvestrant versus Exemestane Clinical Trial), comparing fulvestrant with exemestane in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive advanced breast cancer whose disease had progressed or recurred following nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received fulvestrant intramuscularly using a LD regimen of 500 mg on day 0, 250 mg on days 14 and 28, and then 250 mg each month thereafter. Blood samples were collected throughout the first month and on day 28 of each subsequent month. Plasma fulvestrant concentrations were determined by highperformance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry, and pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated with nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients receiving fulvestrant were enrolled into the pharmacokinetic substudy, and 269 fulvestrant plasma concentrations were recorded. Maximum fulvestrant concentration (19.7 ng/mL) was observed at an average of 12 days within the first month and maintained at 12-15 ng/mL throughout the remainder of the dosing period. CONCLUSION: Steady-state plasma levels were attained within the first month of treatment with fulvestrant LD, in line with the predictions of the pharmacokinetic model.

Risk factors for joint symptoms in patients enrolled in the ATAC trial: a retrospective, exploratory analysis.

BACKGROUND: Joint symptoms (eg, arthralgia and arthritis) are a well-known side-effect of aromatase inhibitors. Low oestrogen concentrations and postmenopausal status are associated with the development of these symptoms. Chemotherapy can also induce joint symptoms, but tamoxifen seems to have little effect on their incidence. The aim of this study was to assess the relative importance of different risk factors for treatment-emergent joint symptoms in patients assigned to anastrozole or tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for postmenopausal breast cancer. METHODS: The Arimidex Tamoxifen Alone or in Combination (ATAC) trial randomly assigned 9366 postmenopausal women to anastrozole (1 mg/day), to tamoxifen (20 mg/day), or to a combination of both. Our analyses were based on data from case reports of 5433 women who were randomly assigned to anastrozole or tamoxifen, who started with their allocated treatment, and who did not have joint symptoms at entry (anastrozole group: n=2698; tamoxifen group: n=2735). The analysis was restricted to the occurrence of joint symptoms at any time during active treatment or within 14 days of its discontinuation. Joint symptoms were defined as any report of arthralgia, arthrosis, arthritis, or joint disorder on a case-report form. Joint disorders were defined as reports of cervical spondylosis, osteoarthritis, and disc herniation. The date of occurrence was recorded, along with a severity score (ie, mild, moderate, or severe). Our analyses were done by use of logistic regression. The ATAC trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN18233230. FINDINGS: 777 of 1914 women (40.6%) who used hormone replacement therapy (HRT) before trial entry developed joint symptoms compared with 1001 of 3519 women (28.4%) without previous HRT use (odds ratio [OR] 1.72 [95% CI 1.53-1.93]). Women with hormone-receptor-negative breast cancer developed significantly fewer joint symptoms compared with those with hormone-receptor-positive tumours (124 of 461 [26.9%] vs 1556 of 4548 [34.2%]; OR 0.71 [0.57-0.88]). Women for whom chemotherapy was part of their initial treatment developed significantly more joint symptoms than those who did not receive it (461 of 1219 women [37.8%] vs 1317 of 4214 women [31.3%]; OR 1.34 [1.17-1.53]). Obese women (body-mass index [BMI] >30 kg/m(2)) reported more joint symptoms than women with a BMI of 25-30 kg/m(2) or those with a BMI <25 kg/m(2) (504 of 1354 women [37.2%] vs 502 of 1926 women [31.3%; OR 1.01 (0.88-1.16)] vs 592 of 1908 women [31.0%; OR 1.32 (1.14-1.53)]) and women on anastrozole reported more joint symptoms compared with those on tamoxifen (949 of 2698 women [35.2%] vs 829 of 2735 women [30.3%]; OR 1.25 [1.11-1.40]). All significant risk factors from the univariate analysis were included in a multivariate analysis and remained significant with little change. INTERPRETATION: In this trial, the major risk factors for developing joint symptoms were previous HRT, hormone-receptor positivity, previous chemotherapy, obesity, and treatment with anastrozole. Discussion of identified risk factors is appropriate when counselling women before initiation of adjuvant hormonal treatment.

Double-blind, randomized placebo controlled trial of fulvestrant compared with exemestane after prior nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, advanced breast cancer: results from EFECT.

PURPOSE: The third-generation nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are increasingly used as adjuvant and first-line advanced therapy for postmenopausal, hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer. Because many patients subsequently experience progression or relapse, it is important to identify agents with efficacy after AI failure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Evaluation of Faslodex versus Exemestane Clinical Trial (EFECT) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, multicenter phase III trial of fulvestrant versus exemestane in postmenopausal women with HR+ advanced breast cancer (ABC) progressing or recurring after nonsteroidal AI. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP). A fulvestrant loading-dose (LD) regimen was used: 500 mg intramuscularly on day 0, 250 mg on days 14, 28, and 250 mg every 28 days thereafter. Exemestane 25 mg orally was administered once daily. RESULTS: A total of 693 women were randomly assigned to fulvestrant (n = 351) or exemestane (n = 342). Approximately 60% of patients had received at least two prior endocrine therapies. Median TTP was 3.7 months in both groups (hazard ratio = 0.963; 95% CI, 0.819 to 1.133; P = .6531). The overall response rate (7.4% v 6.7%; P = .736) and clinical benefit rate (32.2% v 31.5%; P = .853) were similar between fulvestrant and exemestane respectively. Median duration of clinical benefit was 9.3 and 8.3 months, respectively. Both treatments were well tolerated, with no significant differences in the incidence of adverse events or quality of life. Pharmacokinetic data confirm that steady-state was reached within 1 month with the LD schedule of fulvestrant. CONCLUSION: Fulvestrant LD and exemestane are equally active and well-tolerated in a meaningful proportion of postmenopausal women with ABC who have experienced progression or recurrence during treatment with a nonsteroidal AI.

Occult primary breast carcinoma presenting as axillary lymphadenopathy.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to review the need for radiotherapy or not in patients with occult primary breast cancer presenting with axillary metastases treated with breast conservation usually with no surgery to the breast. METHODS: From 1975 to 2001, 58 patients were treated with axillary lymphadenopathy from a cryptic primary breast carcinoma. After clinical and radiological assessment, 29 patients retained a diagnosis of occult primary breast carcinoma. Clinical and pathological data were collected retrospectively on the 29 patients and survival was calculated from the date of initial diagnosis using the Kaplan-Meier method. The median follow-up was 44 months. RESULTS: Median age at diagnosis was 57 years (range 28-81 years). Sixteen patients had radiotherapy to the ipsilateral breast. Eleven patients received no local therapy to the ipsilateral breast and two patients had quadrantectomies which were negative for malignancy. Locoregional relapse occurred in 12.5% of patients who had received radiotherapy and 69% of those who had not received any radiotherapy (P=0.02). Fifty-seven per cent of patients having a local relapse were salvaged with further surgery. The eventual breast conservation rate was 93%. Patients who received radiotherapy to the breast had significantly improved relapse-free survival (HR=0.31; P=0.04) and local relapse-free survival (HR=0.09; P=0.004). There were no significant differences in overall survival between those patients who had breast irradiation and those who did not (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.18-4.5). CONCLUSION: Occult primary carcinoma with axillary metastases can be treated successfully with breast preservation but radiotherapy to the breast is necessary to minimize the risk of locoregional recurrence.

Rendimiento de los criterios de Light en la diferenciación de transudados y exudados pleurales / Performance of Ligth's criteria in the differentiation of pleural transudates and exudates

Los criterios más usados para diferenciar entre exudado y transudado en derrames pleurales han sido los propuestos por Light (Ann Int Med 1972; 77:507-13) que consideran que existe un exudado ante la presencia de por lo menos una de las siguientes alteraciones: relación proteínas pleura/plasma > 0,5; relación LDH pleura/plasma > 0,6; LDH pleural > 200 U/L. Por no existir consenso sobre el rendimiento de estos criterios, decidimos evaluar su contribución diagnóstica en nuestro medio. Se estudió los pacientes ingresados en nuestro hospital entre marzo 1987 y diciembre 1988 y se formuló el diagnóstico a través de la aplicación de criterios clínicos, citológicos, histológicos o bacteriológicos. Se excluyó los casos mixtos o que no reunieron elementos de certeza suficientes. Quedaron 98 líquidos para análisis que se clasificaron según su etiología: 32 transudados (insuficiencia cardíaca 18, cirrosis hepática 14) y 66 exudados (Tbc 13, neoplasia 36, paraneumónicos 3, empiemas 8, enfermedad tejido conectivo 5). Paralelamente y sin el conocimiento del diagnóstico clínico se calificó el derrame pleural según los criterios de laboratorio expuesto. En nuestros pacientes, la sensibilidad para exudados fue de 100%, similar al 99% de Light, y la especificidad fué de 78%, lo que resulta muy inferior al 98 de Light. Concluímos que con los criterios analizados la detección de los exudados es muy satisfactoria (0% de falsos negativos) pero que el error de calificar transudados como exudados es frecuente (22% de falsos positivos)

Utilidad de la concentración de colesterol en derrames pleurales para diferenciar entre transudados y exudados / Pleural fluid cholesterol concentration permits differentiation between transudates and exudates

El método usual de diferenciación entre transudados y exudados a través de la concentración de proteínas y LDH en líquido pleural y plasma puede conducir a errores hasta en un 30% de los casos. Se ha comunicados recientemente que la concentración de colesterol es significativamente mayor en los exudados por lo cual se decidió estudiar su valor diagnóstico en comparación a las proteínas y LDH. Para ello medimos estos indicadores en 80 muestras de líquido pleural con diagnóstico etiológico único y comprobado. De acuerdo a la etiología 20 fueron transudados y 60 exudados. En los primeros la concentración de colesterol fue de 19,5 ñ 10,5 y en los segundos 83,5 ñ 37,2 mg/dl (p < 0,001). Se ensayó diversos puntos de corte resultando más útil el de 45 mg/dl: sobre este nivel, la sensibilidad para exudados fue de 88% y la especificidad de 100%. Hubo 7 exudados falsos negativos: 2 neoplasias y 5 de 9 empiemas. Los transudados mal calificados por proteínas y/o LDH bien identificados por el nivel de colesterol y los exudados erróneamente calificados por colesterol fueron bien calificados por proteínas y/o LDH. Ningún derrame fue mal calificados por ambos métodos. Concluímos que una concentración de colesterol sobre 45 mg/dl asegura que el derrame es un exudado, pero puede haber falsos negativos en aproximadamente un 12%. Nuestros resultados suguieren que la sola determinación del colesterol podría reemplazar a las 4 determinaciones que exigen las proteínas y LDH en pleura y plasma para la diferenciación inicial de exudados y transudados, pero que si se sospecha empiema debe preferirse el último método