Adjuvant Olaparib for Patients with BRCA1- or BRCA2-Mutated Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors target cancers with defects in homologous recombination repair by synthetic lethality. New therapies are needed to reduce recurrence in patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline mutation-associated early breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial involving patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative early breast cancer with BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants and high-risk clinicopathological factors who had received local treatment and neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to 1 year of oral olaparib or placebo. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 1836 patients underwent randomization. At a prespecified event-driven interim analysis with a median follow-up of 2.5 years, the 3-year invasive disease-free survival was 85.9% in the olaparib group and 77.1% in the placebo group (difference, 8.8 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.5 to 13.0; hazard ratio for invasive disease or death, 0.58; 99.5% CI, 0.41 to 0.82; P<0.001). The 3-year distant disease-free survival was 87.5% in the olaparib group and 80.4% in the placebo group (difference, 7.1 percentage points; 95% CI, 3.0 to 11.1; hazard ratio for distant disease or death, 0.57; 99.5% CI, 0.39 to 0.83; P<0.001). Olaparib was associated with fewer deaths than placebo (59 and 86, respectively) (hazard ratio, 0.68; 99% CI, 0.44 to 1.05; P = 0.02); however, the between-group difference was not significant at an interim-analysis boundary of a P value of less than 0.01. Safety data were consistent with known side effects of olaparib, with no excess serious adverse events or adverse events of special interest. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with high-risk, HER2-negative early breast cancer and germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants, adjuvant olaparib after completion of local treatment and neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with significantly longer survival free of invasive or distant disease than was placebo. Olaparib had limited effects on global patient-reported quality of life. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca; OlympiA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02032823.).

Long-term outcomes of dual vs single HER2-directed neoadjuvant therapy in NSABP B-41.

BACKGROUND: The primary aim of this randomized neoadjuvant trial in operable, HER2-positive breast cancer, was to determine the efficacy on pathologic complete response (pCR) of substituting lapatinib (L) for trastuzumab (T) or adding L to T, in combination with weekly paclitaxel (WP) following AC. Results on pCR were previously reported. Here, we report data on planned secondary endpoints, recurrence-free interval (RFI) post-surgery, and overall survival (OS). METHODS: All patients received standard AC q3 weeks × 4 cycles followed by WP (80 mg/m2) on days 1, 8, and 15, q28 days × 4 cycles. Concurrently with WP, patients received either T (4 mg/kg load, then 2 mg/kg) weekly until surgery, L (1250 mg) daily until surgery, or weekly T plus L (750 mg) daily until surgery. Following surgery, all patients received T to complete 52 weeks of HER2-targeted therapy. 522 of 529 randomized patients had follow-up. Median follow-up was 5.1 years. RESULTS: RFI at 4.5 years was 87.2%, 79.4% (p = 0.34; HR = 1.37; 95% CI 0.80, 2.34), and 89.4% (p = 0.37; HR = 0.70; 0.37, 1.32) for arms T, L, and TL, respectively. The corresponding five-year OS was 94.8%, 89.1% (p = 0.34; HR = 1.46; 0.68, 3.11), and 95.8% (p = 0.25; HR = 0.58; 0.22, 1.51), respectively. Patients with pCR had a much better prognosis, especially in the ER-negative cohort: RFI (HR = 0.23, p < 0.001) and OS (HR = 0.28, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although pCR, RFI, and OS were numerically better with the dual combination and less with L, the differences were not statistically significant. However, achievement of pCR again correlated with improved outcomes, especially remarkable in the ER-negative subset. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT00486668.

Behavioral and health outcomes from the NRG Oncology/NSABP B-36 trial comparing two different adjuvant therapy regimens for early-stage node-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The NSABP B-36 compared four cycles of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) with six cycles of 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC-100) in node-negative early-stage breast cancer. A sub-study within B-36, focusing on symptoms, quality of life (QOL), menstrual history (MH), and cardiac function (CF) was conducted. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients completed the QOL questionnaire at baseline, during treatment, and every 6 months through 36 months. FACT-B Trial Outcome Index (TOI), symptom severity, and SF-36 Vitality and Physical Functioning (PF) scales scores were compared between the two groups using a mixed model for repeated measures analysis. MH was collected at baseline and subsequently assessed if menstrual bleeding occurred within 12 months prior to randomization. Post-chemotherapy amenorrhea outcome was examined at 18 months and was defined as lack of menses in the preceding year. Logistic regression was used to test for association of amenorrhea and treatment. CF assessment was done at baseline and 12 months. Correlation analysis was used to address associations between changes in baseline and 12-month PF and concurrent CF changes measured by LVEF. RESULTS: FEC-100 patients had statistically significantly lower TOI scores during chemotherapy (P = 0.02) and at 6 months (P < 0.001); lower Vitality score at 6 months (P < 0.01), and lower PF score during the first year than AC patients. There were no statistically significant QOL score differences between the two groups beyond 12 months. No significant differences in symptom severity between the two groups were observed. Rates of amenorrhea were significantly different between FEC-100 and AC (67.4% vs. 59.1%, P < 0.001). There was no association between changes in LVEF and PF (P = 0.38). CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant QOL differences between the two groups favored AC; however, the magnitude was small and unlikely to be clinically meaningful. There was a clinical and statistically significant difference in risk for amenorrhea, favoring AC. TRIAL REGISTRY: NCT00087178; Date of registration: 07/08/2004.

Definitive results of a phase III adjuvant trial comparing six cycles of FEC-100 to four cycles of AC in women with operable node-negative breast cancer: the NSABP B-36 trial (NRG Oncology).

PURPOSE: Results from adjuvant trials evaluating 6 cycles of epirubicin-based chemotherapy regimens suggested these programs may be more effective than 4 cycles of doxorubicin-based chemotherapy. METHOD: NSABP B-36 was a phase III clinical trial originally designed as a 2 × 2 factorial study comparing 6 cycles of 5-FU, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC-100) to 4 cycles of conventional doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) with celecoxib or placebo. Shortly after activation, concerns regarding increased cardiovascular risks among selective COX-2 inhibitors resulted in a decision to remove the celecoxib/placebo from the trial. Women with histologically node-negative invasive breast cancer who had undergone primary surgery with a lumpectomy or total mastectomy were eligible. Primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Between May 2004 and July 2008, 2722 patients were enrolled. Administration of FEC-100 did not result in improvement in DFS compared to AC (HR 1.09; 95% CI 0.92-1.29, p value = 0.31). The effect of FEC-100 compared to AC on DFS was significantly different for receptor-positive (HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.05-1.66) compared to receptor-negative patients (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.66-1.11) (treatment-by-receptor status interaction p value = 0.02). There was no statistically significant difference in the effect of treatment on overall survival (OS) with FEC-100 compared to AC (HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.84-1.35, p value = 0.61). Overall, Grade 3 and 4 adverse events were more frequent in the FEC-100 group. CONCLUSION: The results of B-36 do not support use of six-cycle anthracycline-based regimens in node-negative breast cancer. Prolongation of anthracycline-based therapy with FEC-100 does not improve DFS or OS, relative to AC for 4 cycles, and was associated with expected increases in toxicity. A statistically significant interaction between treatment and hormone receptor status favoring AC in hormone-receptor-positive breast cancers is consistent with the hypothesis that optimal duration of chemotherapy may be four cycles in these patients. Late cardiac events and deaths prior to recurrence or second cancer were infrequent on both arms, but slightly higher with FEC-100. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00087178.

A qualitative study to evaluate physician attitudes regarding omission of surgery among exceptional responders to neoadjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer (NRG-CC006).

PURPOSE: Accrual to clinical trials that challenge well-established treatment paradigms represents a unique challenge. Physician opinions on investigation of a novel approach to breast cancer treatment, in which patients with complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy are offered omission of lumpectomy, are unknown. NRG-CC006 sought to describe physician attitudes toward a novel approach to breast cancer treatment. METHODS: We recruited 18 participants in the fields of surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology to participate in the semi-structured telephone interviews. Main outcomes are qualitative themes associated with omission of surgery. RESULTS: Of 18 interview participants, specialty and gender were evenly represented across surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology. Qualitative themes included general attitudes toward treatment de-escalation, stakeholder considerations, and trial/protocol considerations. The vast majority of participants expressed interest in investigation of omission of surgery, with all participants endorsing need for further investigation into treatment de-escalation. Stakeholder considerations in opening such a trial emphasized need for multidisciplinary involvement and, particularly, the unique role of surgeons as gatekeepers in breast cancer treatment. Finally, participants endorsed a need for further foundational studies to develop ways to predict complete pathologic response to chemotherapy without surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians expressed interest in investigating a novel approach to breast cancer treatment that would omit surgery in complete responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Multidisciplinary input, and specifically surgeon engagement, will be key to the success of future investigations. Ongoing work to develop approaches to predict pathologic complete response accurately is needed to achieve the promise of this idea. ClinTrials #: BR005: NCT03188393 June 13, 2017.

Use of letrozole after aromatase inhibitor-based therapy in postmenopausal breast cancer (NRG Oncology/NSABP B-42): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of extended therapy with aromatase inhibitors in patients with postmenopausal breast cancer is unknown. In the NSABP B-42 study, we aimed to determine whether extended letrozole treatment improves disease-free survival after 5 years of aromatase inhibitor-based therapy in women with postmenopausal breast cancer. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial was done in 158 centres in the USA, Canada, and Ireland. Postmenopausal women with stage I-IIIA hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, who were disease-free after about 5 years of treatment with an aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen followed by an aromatase inhibitor, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 5 years of letrozole (2·5 mg orally per day) or placebo. Randomisation was stratified by pathological node status, previous tamoxifen use, and lowest bone mineral density T score in the lumbosacral spine, total hip, or femoral neck. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival, defined as time from randomisation to breast cancer recurrence, second primary malignancy, or death, and was analysed by intention to treat. To adjust for previous interim analyses, the two-sided statistical significance level for disease-free survival was set at 0·0418. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00382070, is active, and is no longer enrolling patients. FINDINGS: Between Sept 28, 2006, and Jan 6, 2010, 3966 patients were randomly assigned to receive letrozole (n=1983) or placebo (n=1983). Follow-up information was available for 3903 patients for the analyses of disease-free survival. Median follow-up was 6·9 years (IQR 6·1-7·5). Letrozole treatment did not significantly improve disease-free survival (339 disease-free survival events were reported in the placebo group and 292 disease-free survival events were reported in the letrozole group; hazard ratio 0·85, 95% CI 0·73-0·999; p=0·048). 7-year disease-free survival estimate was 81·3% (95% CI 79·3-83·1) in the placebo group and 84·7% (82·9-86·4) in the letrozole group. The most common grade 3 adverse events were arthralgia (47 [2%] of 1933 patients in the placebo group vs 50 [3%] of 1941 patients in the letrozole group) and back pain (44 [2%] vs 38 [2%]). The most common grade 4 adverse event in the placebo group was thromboembolic event (eight [<1%]) and the most common grade 4 adverse events in the letrozole group were urinary tract infection, hypokalaemia, and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (four [<1%] each). INTERPRETATION: After 5 years of aromatase inhibitor-based therapy, 5 years of letrozole therapy did not significantly prolong disease-free survival compared with placebo. Careful assessment of potential risks and benefits is required before recommending extended letrozole therapy to patients with early-stage breast cancer. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute, Korea Health Technology R&D Project, Novartis.

Pathologic complete response and outcomes by intrinsic subtypes in NSABP B-41, a randomized neoadjuvant trial of chemotherapy with trastuzumab, lapatinib, or the combination.

PURPOSE: NSABP B-41, a phase three randomized trial, evaluated neoadjuvant lapatinib, trastuzumab, or the combination with chemotherapy in patients with HER2-positive operable breast cancer. Though no significant difference in pathologic complete response (pCR) was found among the three arms, pCR was associated with prolonged survival. We analyzed tumor intrinsic subtypes with Prediction Analysis of Microarray 50 in a subset of B-41 patients to determine their value in predicting HER2-targeting benefit. METHODS: Pearson's Chi square test and logistic regression were used to compare pCR in the breast and nodes (ypT0/Tis ypN0). Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox models were used to compare event-free and overall survival among subtypes. RESULTS: Intrinsic subtypes were determined in 271 baseline core biopsy samples. The pCR rate among patients with HER2-enriched (HER2E) subtype was greater compared to other subtypes combined (120/197, 60.9% versus 19/74, 25.7%; p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis among patients receiving trastuzumab-containing regimens (with clinical factors and HER2E subtype as factors), HER2E subtype was most strongly associated with pCR [OR 8.41 (95% CI 2.52-28.1) p < 0.001]. Patients with HER2E tumors did not benefit more from dual HER2-targeted therapy versus trastuzumab. The pCR rate was higher among HER2E tumors versus other subtypes in both estrogen receptor-positive and -negative tumors (p ≤ 0.001). Higher ESR1 gene expression was associated with lower pCR rate. No association was observed between subtype and long-term outcomes. CONCLUSION: Patients with HER2E tumors were most likely to attain pCR versus other subtypes. HER2E subtype represents a favorable marker for predicting HER2-targeting benefit, particularly with trastuzumab-based therapies.

Lapatinib as a component of neoadjuvant therapy for HER2-positive operable breast cancer (NSABP protocol B-41): an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: We studied the effect on tumour response to neoadjuvant therapy of the substitution of lapatinib for trastuzumab in combination with weekly paclitaxel after doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide treatment, and of the addition of lapatinib and trastuzumab combined after doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide treatment in patients with HER2-positive operable breast cancer to determine whether there would be a benefit of dual HER2 blockade in these patients. METHODS: For this open-label, randomised phase 3 trial we recruited women aged 18 years or older with an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 with operable HER2-positive breast cancer. Each received four cycles of standard doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks followed by four cycles of weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2)) intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15, every 4 weeks. Concurrently with weekly paclitaxel, patients received either trastuzumab (4 mg/kg load, then 2 mg/kg intravenously) weekly until surgery, lapatinib (1250 mg orally) daily until surgery, or weekly trastuzumab plus lapatinib (750 mg orally) daily until surgery. After surgery, all patients received trastuzumab to complete 52 weeks of HER2-targeted therapy. Randomisation (ratio 1:1:1) was done centrally with stratification by clinical tumour size, clinical nodal status, hormone-receptor status, and age. The primary endpoint was the pathological complete response in the breast, and analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat population. FINDINGS: Patient accrual started on July 16, 2007, and was completed on June 30, 2011; 529 women were enrolled in the trial. 519 patients had their pathological response determined. Breast pathological complete response was noted in 93 (52·5%, 95% CI 44·9-59·5) of 177 patients in the trastuzumab group, 91 (53·2%, 45·4-60·3) of 171 patients in the lapatinib group (p=0·9852); and 106 (62·0%, 54·3-68·8) of 171 patients in the combination group (p=0·095). The most common grade 3 and 4 toxic effects were neutropenia (29 [16%] patients in the trastuzumab group [grade 4 in five patients (3%), 28 [16%] in the lapatinib group [grade 4 in eight patients (5%)], and 29 [17%] in the combination group [grade 4 in nine patients (5%)]) and grade 3 diarrhoea (four [2%] patients in the trastuzumab group, 35 [20%] in the lapatinib group, and 46 [27%] in the combination group; p<0·0001). Symptomatic congestive heart failure defined as New York Heart Association Class III or IV events occurred in seven (4%) patients in the trastuzumab group, seven (4%) in the lapatinib group, and one (<1%) in the combination group; p=0·185). INTERPRETATION: Substitution of lapatinib for trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy resulted in similar high percentages of pathological complete response. Combined HER2-targeted therapy produced a numerically but insignificantly higher pathological complete response percentage than single-agent HER2-directed therapy; these findings are consistent with results from other studies. Trials are being undertaken to further assess these findings in the adjuvant setting.

Breast Cancer Index and Prediction of Extended Aromatase Inhibitor Therapy Benefit in Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer from the NRG Oncology/NSABP B-42 Trial.

PURPOSE: BCI (H/I) has been shown to predict extended endocrine therapy (EET) benefit. We examined BCI (H/I) for EET benefit prediction in NSABP B-42, which evaluated extended letrozole therapy (ELT) in patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer after 5 years of ET. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A stratified Cox model was used to analyze RFI as the primary endpoint, with DR, BCFI, and DFS as secondary endpoints. Because of a nonproportional effect of ELT on DR, time-dependent analyses were performed. RESULTS: The translational cohort included 2,178 patients (45% BCI (H/I)-High, 55% BCI (H/I)-Low). ELT showed an absolute 10-year RFI benefit of 1.6% (P = 0.10), resulting in an underpowered primary analysis (50% power). ELT benefit and BCI (H/I) did not show a significant interaction for RFI (BCI (H/I)-Low: 10 years absolute benefit 1.1% [HR, 0.70; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.43-1.12; P = 0.13]; BCI (H/I)-High: 2.4% [HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.55-1.26; P = 0.38]; Pinteraction = 0.56). Time-dependent DR analysis showed that after 4 years, BCI (H/I)-High patients had significant ELT benefit (HR = 0.29; 95% CI, 0.12-0.69; P < 0.01), whereas BCI (H/I)-Low patients were less likely to benefit (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.33-1.39; P = 0.29; Pinteraction = 0.14). Prediction of ELT benefit by BCI (H/I) was more apparent in the HER2- subset after 4 years (ELT-by-BCI (H/I) Pinteraction = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: BCI (H/I)-High versus BCI (H/I)-Low did not show a statistically significant difference in ELT benefit for the primary endpoint (RFI). However, in time-dependent DR analysis, BCI (H/I)-High patients experienced statistically significant benefit from ELT after 4 years, whereas (H/I)-Low patients did not. Because BCI (H/I) has been validated as a predictive marker of EET benefit in other trials, additional follow-up may enable further characterization of BCI's predictive ability.

Phase III Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Endocrine Therapy ± 1 Year of Everolimus in Patients With High-Risk, Hormone Receptor-Positive, Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT-serine threonine kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway abnormalities contribute to endocrine resistance. Everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, improved progression-free survival in hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer (BC) when combined with endocrine therapy (ET). In this phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed the efficacy of everolimus + ET as adjuvant therapy in high-risk, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative BC after adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to physician's choice ET and 1 year of everolimus (10 mg orally once daily) or placebo stratified by risk group. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) evaluated by a stratified log-rank test with the hazard ratio (HR) estimated by Cox regression. Subset analyses included preplanned evaluation by risk group and exploratory analyses by menopausal status and age. Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and safety. Everolimus did not improve IDFS/OS when added to ET in patients with early-stage high-risk, hormone receptor-positive BC. RESULTS: One thousand and nine hundred thirty-nine patients were randomly assigned with 1,792 eligible for analysis. Overall, no benefit of everolimus was seen for IDFS (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.14]) or OS (HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.26]). The assumption of proportional hazards was not met suggesting significant variability in the HR over time since the start of treatment. In an unplanned subgroup analysis among postmenopausal patients (N = 1,221), no difference in IDFS (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.86 to 1.36]) or OS (HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.60]) was seen. In premenopausal patients (N = 571), everolimus improved both IDFS (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.94]) and OS (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.28 to 0.86]). Treatment completion rates were lower in the everolimus arm compared with placebo (48% v 73%) with higher grade 3 and 4 adverse events (35% v 7%). CONCLUSION: One year of adjuvant everolimus + ET did not improve overall outcomes. Subset analysis suggests mTOR inhibition as a possible target for patients who remain premenopausal after chemotherapy.

Utility of the 70-Gene MammaPrint Assay for Prediction of Benefit From Extended Letrozole Therapy in the NRG Oncology/NSABP B-42 Trial.

PURPOSE: MammaPrint (MP) determines distant metastatic risk and may improve patient selection for extended endocrine therapy (EET). This study examined MP in predicting extended letrozole therapy (ELT) benefit in patients with early-stage breast cancer (BC) from the NSABP B-42 trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MP was tested in 1,866 patients randomly assigned to receive ELT or placebo. The primary end point was distant recurrence (DR). Secondary end points were disease-free survival (DFS) and BC-free interval (BCFI). Tumors were classified as MP high risk (MP-HR) or low risk (MP-LR). MP-LR tumors were further classified as ultralow risk (MP-UL) or low non-ultralow risk (MP-LNUL). RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in ELT benefit on DR between MP-HR and MP-LR (interaction P = .38). MP-LR tumors (n = 1,160) exhibited a statistically significant 10-year benefit of 3.7% for DR (hazard ratio [HR], 0.43 [95% CI, 0.25 to 0.74]; P = .002), whereas MP-HR tumors (n = 706) exhibited a nonsignificant 2.4% benefit (HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.34 to 1.24]; P = .19). The 10-year ELT benefit was significant for DFS (7.8%) and BCFI (7.0%) for MP-LR tumors, whereas MP-HR tumors did not significantly benefit (interaction DFS: P = .015, BCFI: P = .006). In exploratory analysis, the 10-year ELT benefit was significant and more pronounced in MP-LNUL (n = 908) tumors: 4.0% for DR, 9.5% for DFS, and 7.9% for BCFI; the benefit in MP-UL (n = 252) tumors was not significant: 3% for DR, 1.8% for DFS, and 4.1% for BCFI. CONCLUSION: The primary hypothesis of predictive ability of MP on DR was not confirmed. However, the secondary outcomes demonstrated MP was predictive of ELT response and identified a subset of patients with early-stage hormone receptor-positive BC (MP-LR) with improved outcomes from ELT. These data could have important clinical implications in patient selection beyond clinical risk assessment for EET.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in OlympiA: A Phase III, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Adjuvant Olaparib in gBRCA1/2 Mutations and High-Risk Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Early Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: The OlympiA randomized phase III trial compared 1 year of olaparib (OL) or placebo (PL) as adjuvant therapy in patients with germline BRCA1/2, high-risk human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer after completing (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy ([N]ACT), surgery, and radiotherapy. The patient-reported outcome primary hypothesis was that OL-treated patients may experience greater fatigue during treatment. METHODS: Data were collected before random assignment, and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. The primary end point was fatigue, measured with the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue scale. Secondary end points, assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire, Core 30 item, included nausea and vomiting (NV), diarrhea, and multiple functional domains. Scores were compared between treatment groups using mixed model for repeated measures. Two-sided P values <.05 were statistically significant for the primary end point. All secondary end points were descriptive. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred and thirty-eight patients (NACT: 746, ACT: 792) contributed to the analysis. Fatigue severity was statistically significantly greater for OL versus PL, but not clinically meaningfully different by prespecified criteria (≥3 points) at 6 months (diff OL v PL: NACT: -1.3 [95% CI, -2.4 to -0.2]; P = .022; ACT: -1.3 [95% CI, -2.3 to -0.2]; P = .017) and 12 months (NACT: -1.6 [95% CI, -2.8 to -0.3]; P = .017; ACT: -1.3 [95% CI, -2.4 to -0.2]; P = .025). There were no significant differences in fatigue severity between treatment groups at 18 and 24 months. NV severity was worse in patients treated with OL compared with PL at 6 months (NACT: 6.0 [95% CI, 4.1 to 8.0]; ACT: 5.3 [95% CI, 3.4 to 7.2]) and 12 months (NACT: 6.4 [95% CI, 4.4 to 8.3]; ACT: 4.5 [95% CI, 2.8 to 6.1]). During treatment, there were some clinically meaningful differences between groups for other symptoms but not for function subscales or global health status. CONCLUSION: Treatment-emergent symptoms from OL were limited, generally resolving after treatment ended. OL- and PL-treated patients had similar functional scores, slowly improving during the 24 months after (N)ACT and there was no clinically meaningful persistence of fatigue severity in OL-treated patients.

Talking numbers: how women and providers use risk scores during and after risk counseling - a qualitative investigation from the NRG Oncology/NSABP DMP-1 study.

OBJECTIVES: Little research exists on how risk scores are used in counselling. We examined (a) how Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT) scores are presented during counselling; (b) how women react and (c) discuss them afterwards. DESIGN: Consultations were video-recorded and participants were interviewed after the consultation as part of the NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Decision-Making Project 1 (NSABP DMP-1). SETTING: Two NSABP DMP-1 breast cancer care centres in the USA: one large comprehensive cancer centre serving a high-risk population and an academic safety-net medical centre in an urban setting. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty women evaluated for breast cancer risk and their counselling providers were included. METHODS: Participants who were identified as at increased risk of breast cancer were recruited to participate in qualitative study with a video-recorded consultation and subsequent semi-structured interview that included giving feedback and input after viewing their own consultation. Consultation videos were summarised jointly and inductively as a team.tThe interview material was searched deductively for text segments that contained the inductively derived themes related to risk assessment. Subgroup analysis according to demographic variables such as age and Gail score were conducted, investigating reactions to risk scores and contrasting and comparing them with the pertinent video analysis data. From this, four descriptive categories of reactions to risk scores emerged. The descriptive categories were clearly defined after 19 interviews; all 30 interviews fit principally into one of the four descriptive categories. RESULTS: Risk scores were individualised and given meaning by providers through: (a) presenting thresholds, (b) making comparisons and (c) emphasising or minimising the calculated risk. The risk score information elicited little reaction from participants during consultations, though some added to, agreed with or qualified the provider's information. During interviews, participants reacted to the numbers in four primary ways: (a) engaging easily with numbers; (b) expressing greater anxiety after discussing the risk score; (c) accepting the risk score and (d) not talking about the risk score. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the necessity that patients' experiences must be understood and put into relation to risk assessment information to become a meaningful treatment decision-making tool, for instance by categorising patients' information engagement into types. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01399359.

Ten-year update: NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-42 randomized trial: extended letrozole therapy in early-stage breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-42 trial evaluated extended letrozole therapy (ELT) in postmenopausal breast cancer patients who were disease free after 5 years of aromatase inhibitor (AI)-based therapy. Seven-year results demonstrated a nonstatistically significant trend in disease-free survival (DFS) in favor of ELT. We present 10-year outcome results. METHODS: In this double-blind, phase III trial, patients with stage I-IIIA hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, disease free after 5 years of an AI or tamoxifen followed by an AI, were randomly assigned to 5 years of letrozole or placebo. Primary endpoint was DFS, defined as time from random assignment to breast cancer recurrence, second primary malignancy, or death. All statistical tests are 2-sided. RESULTS: Between September 2006 and January 2010, 3966 patients were randomly assigned (letrozole: 1983; placebo: 1983). Median follow-up time for 3923 patients included in efficacy analyses was 10.3 years. There was statistically significant improvement in DFS in favor of letrozole compared with placebo (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.74 to 0.96; P = .01; 10-year DFS: placebo = 72.6%, letrozole = 75.9%, absolute difference = 3.3%). There was no difference in the effect of letrozole on overall survival (HR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.82 to 1.15; P = .74). Letrozole statistically significantly reduced breast cancer-free interval events (HR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.62 to 0.91; P = .003; absolute difference in cumulative incidence = 2.7%) and distant recurrences (HR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.55 to 0.92; P = .01; absolute difference = 1.8%). The rates of osteoporotic fractures and arterial thrombotic events did not differ between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: The beneficial effect of ELT on DFS persisted at 10 years. Letrozole also improved breast cancer-free interval and distant recurrences without improving overall survival. Careful assessment of potential risks and benefits is necessary for selecting appropriate candidates for ELT.

NSABP B-41, a Randomized Neoadjuvant Trial: Genes and Signatures Associated with Pathologic Complete Response.

PURPOSE: In NSABP B-41, pathologic complete response (pCR) was associated with prolonged survival among women with HER2-positive operable breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and lapatinib, trastuzumab, or the combination. We used a large human breast cancer gene expression panel to select candidate prognostic biomarkers for pCR among women treated with trastuzumab in NSABP B-41. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had a baseline preadjuvant treatment core biopsy sample, known pCR status, and no withdrawal of consent. We analyzed extracted RNA using the human nCounter Breast Cancer 360 gene expression panel. Gene counts were normalized to housekeeping genes and transformed into logarithmic scale with base 2. To screen for candidate genes and metagene signatures prognostic of pCR, we used univariate logistic regression. Variable selection was done by multivariable logistic regression with lasso regularization. RESULTS: Analyses of data from 130 patients revealed that a composite of gene expression from 19 genes and one gene signature appeared to predict pCR in women with HER2-positive early-stage breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy with trastuzumab-containing regimens. The identified genes are involved in important pathways such as epithelial-mesenchymal transition, adhesion and migration, estrogen receptor signaling, DNA damage and repair, apoptosis, and proliferation. The AUC from a 10-fold cross-validation on predicting pCR, with these 20 genomic markers in a logistic regression model, was 0.73. CONCLUSIONS: The expression level of ERBB2, ESR1, and a few other genomic markers was highly predictive of pCR after trastuzumab-containing regimens. These findings need to be validated and calibrated in future studies.

Regression on quantile residual life.

A time-specific log-linear regression method on quantile residual lifetime is proposed. Under the proposed regression model, any quantile of a time-to-event distribution among survivors beyond a certain time point is associated with selected covariates under right censoring. Consistency and asymptotic normality of the regression estimator are established. An asymptotic test statistic is proposed to evaluate the covariate effects on the quantile residual lifetimes at a specific time point. Evaluation of the test statistic does not require estimation of the variance-covariance matrix of the regression estimators, which involves the probability density function of the survival distribution with censoring. Simulation studies are performed to assess finite sample properties of the regression parameter estimator and test statistic. The new regression method is applied to a breast cancer data set with long-term follow-up to estimate the patients' median residual lifetimes, adjusting for important prognostic factors.

Exploring Explanatory Models of Risk in Breast Cancer Risk Counseling Discussions: NSABP/NRG Oncology Decision-Making Project 1.

BACKGROUND: Explanatory models represent patient understanding of etiology, pathophysiology, illness, symptoms, and treatments, but little attention has been paid to how they are used by patients "at risk" for future disease. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to elucidate what constitutes an explanatory model of risk and to describe explanatory models of risk related to developing breast cancer. METHODS: Thirty qualitative interviews with women identified as at an increased risk for breast cancer were conducted. Interviews were coded to identify domains of explanatory models of risk using a priori codes derived from the explanatory model of illness framework. Within each domain, a grounded thematic analysis described participants' explanatory models related to breast cancer risk. RESULTS: The domains of treatment and etiology remained similar in a risk context compared with illness, whereas course of illness, symptoms, and pathophysiology differed. We identified a new, integrative concept relative to other domains within explanatory models of risk: social comparisons, which was dominant in risk perhaps due to the lack of physical experiences associated with being "at risk." CONCLUSIONS: Developing inclusive understandings of risk and its treatment is key to developing a framework for the care of high-risk patients that is both evidence based and sensitive to patient preferences. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The concept of "social comparisons" can assist healthcare providers in understanding women's decision making under conditions of risk. Ensuring that healthcare providers understand patient perceptions of risk is important because it relates to patient decision making, particularly due to an increasing focus on risk assessment in cancer.

Understanding Decision Making about Breast Cancer Prevention in Action: The Intersection of Perceived Risk, Perceived Control, and Social Context: NRG Oncology/NSABP DMP-1.

BACKGROUND: Literature on decision making about breast cancer prevention focuses on individual perceptions and attitudes that predict chemoprevention use, rather than the process by which women decide whether to take risk-reducing medications. This secondary analysis aimed to understand how women's perceptions of breast cancer risk and locus of control influence their decision making. METHODS: Women were accrued as part of the NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Decision-Making Project 1, a study aimed at understanding contributors to chemoprevention uptake. Thirty women participated in qualitative in-depth interviews after being counseled about chemoprevention. Deductive codes grouped women based on dimensions of risk perception and locus of control. We used a constant comparative method to make connections among inductive themes focused on decision making, deductive codes for perceived risk and perceived locus of control, and the influence of explanatory models within and across participants. RESULTS: Participants were predominantly non-Hispanic white (63%), with an average age of 50.9 years. Decision making varied across groups: the high-perceived risk/high-perceived control group used "social evidence" to model the behaviors of others. High-perceived risk/low-perceived control women made decisions based on beliefs about treatment, rooted in the experiences of social contacts. The low-perceived risk/low-perceived control group interpreted signs of risk as part of the normal continuum of bodily changes in comparison to others. Low-perceived risk/high-perceived control women focused on maintaining a current healthy trajectory. CONCLUSION: "Social evidence" plays an important role in the decision-making process that is distinct from emotional aspects. Attending to patients' perceptions of risk and control in conjunction with social context is key to caring for patients at high risk in a way that is evidence based and sensitive to patient preferences.

Stromal Tumor-infiltrating Lymphocytes in NRG Oncology/NSABP B-31 Adjuvant Trial for Early-Stage HER2-Positive Breast Cancer.

We retrospectively assessed association of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) with clinical outcomes and molecular variables reportedly predictive of trastuzumab-benefit in National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-31 (N = 2130). sTILs were assessed in 1581 eligible B-31 cases utilizing all available hematoxylin and eosin slides. Mean concordance between main reviewer and six other pathologists was 90.8% in 100 cases. Cox regressions were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs). In chemotherapy and trastuzumab added to chemotherapy arms, increases in sTILs, as a semicontinuous variable (combined arms HR = 0.42, 95% confidence interval = 0.27 to 0.64, two-sided P < .001) or as lymphocyte-predominant breast cancer with more than 50% sTILs (combined arms HR = 0.65, 95% confidence interval = 0.49 to 0.86, two-sided P = .003) were statistically significantly associated with improved disease-free survival. There was no association of sTILs with trastuzumab benefit. However, higher sTILs were statistically significantly associated with higher trastuzumab benefit groups by 8-gene prediction model (two-sided P < .001). Neither PIK3CA mutations nor Fc-gamma-receptor polymorphisms were associated with sTILs. sTILs may have utility as a prognostic biomarker identifying HER2-positive early breast cancer at low recurrence risk.