Phase 1b study of combined selinexor and eribulin for the treatment of advanced solid tumors and triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Selinexor (KPT-330) is a potent inhibitor of exportin 1 (XPO1), in turn inhibiting tumor growth. Selinexor enhances the antitumor efficacy of eribulin in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) in vitro and in vivo. Given the unmet medical need in TNBC and sarcoma, the authors explored the safety and efficacy of this combination. METHODS: The authors conducted a phase 1b trial of combined selinexor and eribulin using a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design in patients who had advanced solid tumors and in those who had TNBC in a dose-expansion cohort. RESULTS: Patients with TNBC (N = 19), sarcoma (N = 9), and other cancers (N = 3) were enrolled in the dose-escalation cohort (N = 10) and in the dose-expansion cohort (N = 21). The median number lines of prior therapy received was four (range, from one to seven prior lines). The most common treatment-related adverse events for selinexor were nausea (77%), leukopenia (77%), anemia (68%), neutropenia (68%), and fatigue (48%). One dose-limiting toxicity occurred at the first dose level with prolonged grade 3 neutropenia. The recommended phase 2 dose was 80 mg of selinexor orally once per week and 1 mg/m2 eribulin on days 1 and 8 intravenously every 3 weeks. The objective response rate (ORR) was 10% in three patients. In the dose-escalation cohort, the ORR was 10%, whereas six patients with had stable disease. In the TNBC dose-expansion cohort (n = 18), ORR was 11%, and there were two confirmed partial responses with durations of 10.8 and 19.1 months (ongoing). CONCLUSIONS: Selinexor and eribulin had an acceptable toxicity profile and modest overall efficacy with durable responses in select patients. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Effective therapies for advanced, triple-negative breast cancer and sarcoma represent an unmet need. Exportin 1 is associated with the transport of cancer-related proteins. Preclinical studies have demonstrated tumor growth inhibition and enhanced tumor sensitivity in patients who receive selinexor combined with eribulin. In this phase 1b study, the authors evaluated the safety profile and clinical activity of the combination of selinexor, a potent oral inhibitor of exportin 1, and eribulin in patients with advanced cancers enriched for triple-negative breast cancer or sarcoma. The combination was well tolerated; most adverse events were mild or moderate, reversible, and managed with dose modifications or growth factor support. The combination of selinexor and eribulin produced an antitumor response, particularly in some patients with triple-negative breast cancer. This work lays the foundation for prospective investigations of the role of selinexor and eribulin in the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer.

Effects of systemic therapy and local therapy on outcomes of 873 breast cancer patients with metastatic breast cancer to brain: MD Anderson Cancer Center experience.

Outcomes of treatments for patients with breast cancer brain metastasis (BCBM) remain suboptimal, especially for systemic therapy. To evaluate the effectiveness of systemic and local therapy (surgery [S], stereotactic radiosurgery [SRS] and whole brain radiotherapy [WBRT]) in BCBM patients, we analyzed the data of 873 BCBM patients from 1999 to 2012. The median overall survival (OS) and time to progression in the brain (TTP-b) after diagnosis of brain metastases (BM) were 9.1 and 7.1 months, respectively. WBRT prolonged OS in patients with multiple BM (hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52-0.88; P = .004). SRS alone, and surgery or SRS followed by WBRT (S/SRS + WBRT), were equivalent in OS and TTP-b (median OS, 14.9 vs 17.2 months; median TTP-b, 8.2 vs 8.6 months). Continued chemotherapy prolonged OS (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.30-0.41; P < .001) and TTP-b (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.33-0.70; P < .001), however, with no advantage of capecitabine over other chemotherapy agents used (median OS, 11.8 vs 12.4 months; median TTP-b, 7.2 vs 7.4 months). Patients receiving trastuzumab at diagnosis of BM, continuation of anti-HER2 therapy increased OS (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.34-0.83; P = .005) and TTP-b (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.23-0.74; P = .003); no additional benefit was seen with switching over between trastuzumab and lapatinib (median OS, 18.4 vs 22.7 months; median TTP-b: 7.4 vs 8.7 months). In conclusion, SRS or S/SRS + WBRT were equivalent for patients' OS and local control. Continuation systemic chemotherapy including anti-HER2 therapy improved OS and TTP-b with no demonstrable advantage of capecitabine and lapatinib over other agents of physicians' choice was observed.

Molecular Spectra and Frequency Patterns of Somatic Mutations in Arab Women with Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The role of somatic mutations in breast cancer prognosis and management continues to be recognized. However, data on the molecular profiles of Arab women are limited. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study based on medical chart review of all Arab women diagnosed with breast cancer at a single institution between 2010 and 2018 who underwent next-generation sequencing with Ampliseq 46-Gene or 50-Gene. RESULTS: A total of 78 Arab women were identified, with a median age at diagnosis of 52.3 years (range: 37-82 years; 38.5% ≤50 years). The majority of patients had stage III or IV disease (74.4%). Next-generation sequencing revealed the following somatic mutation rates: TP53, 23.1%; ATM, 2.6%; IDH1, 2.6%; IDH2, 3.8%; PTEN, 7.7%; PIK3CA, 15.4%; APC, 7.7%; NPM1, 2.5%; MPL, 1.3%; JAK2, 2.5%; KIT, 7.7%; KRAS, 3.8%; and NRAS, 3.8%. CONCLUSION: Our study illustrates frequencies of somatic mutations in Arab women with breast cancer and suggests potential variations from estimates reported in the Western population. These data calls for larger epidemiologic studies considering the evolving role of such mutations in prognostication and personalized management.

A Randomized Phase II Study of Sequential Eribulin Versus Paclitaxel Followed by FAC/FEC as Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients with Operable HER2-Negative Breast Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: The combination of eribulin with 5-fluorouracil, either doxorubicin or epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FAC/FEC) was not superior to the combination of paclitaxel with FAC/FEC and was associated with greater hematologic toxicity. Eribulin followed by an anthracycline-based regimen is not recommended as a standard neoadjuvant therapy in nonmetastatic operable breast cancer. BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy is the standard of care for locally advanced operable breast cancer. We hypothesized eribulin may improve the pathological complete response (pCR) rate compared with paclitaxel. METHODS: We conducted a 1:1 randomized open-label phase II study comparing eribulin versus paclitaxel followed by 5-fluorouracil, either doxorubicin or epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FAC/FEC) in patients with operable HER2-negative breast cancer. pCR and toxicity of paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 weekly for 12 doses or eribulin 1.4 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle for 4 cycles followed by FAC/FEC were compared. RESULTS: At the interim futility analysis, in March 2015, 51 patients (28 paclitaxel, 23 eribulin) had received at least one dose of the study drug and were thus evaluable for toxicity; of these, 47 (26 paclitaxel, 21 eribulin) had undergone surgery and were thus evaluable for efficacy. Seven of 26 (27%) in the paclitaxel group and 1 of 21 (5%) in the eribulin group achieved a pCR, and this result crossed a futility stopping boundary. In the paclitaxel group, the most common serious adverse events (SAEs) were neutropenic fever (grade 3, 3 patients, 11%). In the eribulin group, nine patients (39%) had neutropenia-related SAEs, and one died of neutropenic sepsis. The study was thus discontinued. For the paclitaxel and eribulin groups, the 5-year event-free survival (EFS) rates were 81.8% and 74.0% (hazard ratio [HR], 1.549; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.817-2.938; p = .3767), and the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 100% and 84.4% (HR, 5.813; 95% CI, 0.647-52.208; p = .0752), respectively. CONCLUSION: We did not observe a higher proportion of patients undergoing breast conservation surgery in the eribulin group than in the paclitaxel group. The patients treated with eribulin were more likely to undergo mastectomy and less likely to undergo breast conservation surgery, but the difference was not statistically significant. As neoadjuvant therapy for operable HER2-negative breast cancer, eribulin followed by FAC/FEC is not superior to paclitaxel followed by FAC/FEC and is associated with a higher incidence of neutropenia-related serious adverse events.

Central nervous system miliary metastasis in breast cancer: a case series analysis and proposed identification criteria of a rare metastasis subtype.

BACKGROUND: CNS miliary metastasis (MiM) is poorly recognised in breast and other malignancies. Given its rarity, little epidemiologic, radiographic and clinical data are known. Although usually identified on neuroimaging, criteria for radiographic diagnosis do not exist. In this analysis, we establish its presence in breast cancer and identify factors contributing to outcome. METHODS: We identified 546 female patients with brain metastasis from breast cancer between 2000 and 2015. Radiographic criteria were established through review of neuroimages by a senior Neuroradiologist, and defined as: (1) ≥20 lesions per image on ≥2 non-contiguous MRI images or ≥10 lesions per image on ≥2 non-contiguous CT images, and (2) bilateral lesions located in both the supratentorial and infratentorial compartments. RESULTS: Twenty-one MiM cases were identified (3.8%). Number and anatomical distribution of metastases best identified MiM, while lesion size did not. Ten patients were diagnosed with MiM as initial CNS metastasis; 11 developed MiM following known CNS metastasis. Breast cancer subtype did not influence MiM development before or after other CNS metastasis. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to propose radiographic criteria for MiM diagnosis. Additional analysis is needed to verify data, but our results may enable a standardised approach for future MiM research.

A Practical Approach to the Management of Cancer Patients During the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An International Collaborative Group.

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly spread globally since being identified as a public health emergency of major international concern and has now been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). In December 2019, an outbreak of atypical pneumonia, known as COVID-19, was identified in Wuhan, China. The newly identified zoonotic coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), is characterized by rapid human-to-human transmission. Many cancer patients frequently visit the hospital for treatment and disease surveillance. They may be immunocompromised due to the underlying malignancy or anticancer therapy and are at higher risk of developing infections. Several factors increase the risk of infection, and cancer patients commonly have multiple risk factors. Cancer patients appear to have an estimated twofold increased risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 than the general population. With the WHO declaring the novel coronavirus outbreak a pandemic, there is an urgent need to address the impact of such a pandemic on cancer patients. This include changes to resource allocation, clinical care, and the consent process during a pandemic. Currently and due to limited data, there are no international guidelines to address the management of cancer patients in any infectious pandemic. In this review, the potential challenges associated with managing cancer patients during the COVID-19 infection pandemic will be addressed, with suggestions of some practical approaches. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The main management strategies for treating cancer patients during the COVID-19 epidemic include clear communication and education about hand hygiene, infection control measures, high-risk exposure, and the signs and symptoms of COVID-19. Consideration of risk and benefit for active intervention in the cancer population must be individualized. Postponing elective surgery or adjuvant chemotherapy for cancer patients with low risk of progression should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Minimizing outpatient visits can help to mitigate exposure and possible further transmission. Telemedicine may be used to support patients to minimize number of visits and risk of exposure. More research is needed to better understand SARS-CoV-2 virology and epidemiology.

A phase Ib study of entinostat plus lapatinib with or without trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer that progressed during trastuzumab treatment.

BACKGROUND: Human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) is an effective therapeutic target in breast cancer; however, resistance to anti-HER2 agents such as trastuzumab and lapatinib develops. In a preclinical model, an HDAC inhibitor epigenetically reversed the resistance of cancer cells to trastuzumab and showed synergistic efficacy with lapatinib in inhibiting growth of trastuzumab-resistant HER2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer. METHODS: A phase 1b, dose escalation study was performed to assess maximum tolerated dose, safety/toxicity, clinical efficacy and explored pharmacodynamic biomarkers of response to entinostat combined with lapatinib with or without trastuzumab. RESULTS: The combination was safe. The MTD was lapatinib, 1000 mg daily; entinostat, 12 mg every other week; trastuzumab, 8 mg/kg followed by 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Adverse events included diarrhoea (89%), neutropenia (31%), and thrombocytopenia (23%). Neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and hypokalaemia were noted. Pharmacodynamic assessment did not yield conclusive results. Among 35 patients with evaluable response, PR was observed in 3 patients and CR in 3 patients, 1 maintained SD for over 6 months. DISCUSSION: This study identified the MTD of the entinostat, lapatinib, and trastuzumab combination that provided acceptable tolerability and anti-tumour activity in heavily pre-treated patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer, supporting a confirmatory trial.

Effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen on relapse-free survival among patients with breast cancer achieving a pathologic complete response: an early step in the de-escalation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with breast cancer who have a pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) have improved survival. We hypothesize that once pCR has been achieved, there is no difference in subsequent postsurgical recurrence-free survival (RFS), whichever NACT regimen is used. METHODS: Data from patients with breast cancer who achieved pCR after NACT between 1996 and 2011 were reviewed. RFS was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and differences between groups were assessed using log-rank testing. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis adjusted for age, menopausal status, stage, grade, tumor subtype, and adjuvant endocrine HER2-targeted radiation treatment. RESULTS: Among 721 patients who achieved pCR after NACT, 157 (21.8%) were hormone receptor-positive (HR), 310 (43.3%) were HER2-amplified, and 236 (32.7%) were triple-negative; 292 (40.5%) were stage IIA, 153 (21.2%) were stage IIB, 78 (10.8%) were stage IIIA, 66 (9.2%) were stage IIIB, and 132 (18.3%) were stage IIIC. Most patients (367 [50.9%]) had been treated with adriamycin-based chemotherapy plus taxane (A + T), 56 (7.8%) without taxane (A no T), 227 (31.5%) with HER2-targeted therapy, and 71 (9.8%) provider choice. Median follow-up was 7.1 years. Adjuvant chemotherapy was employed in 196 (27%) patients, adjuvant endocrine in 261 (36%), and adjuvant radiation in the majority (559 [77.5%]). There was no statistically significant difference in RFS by NACT group. Adjusted RFS hazard ratios, comparing each treatment with the reference group A + T, were 1.25 (95% CI 0.47-3.35) for A no T, 0.90 (95% CI 0.37-2.20) for HER2-targeted therapy, and 1.28 (95% CI 0.55-2.98) for provider choice. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that postsurgical RFS is not significantly influenced by the choice of NACT or cancer subtype among patients achieving pCR.

Developing anti-HER2 vaccines: Breast cancer experience.

Breast cancer accounts for more than one million new cases annually and is the leading cause of death in women globally. HER2 overexpression induces cellular and humoral immune responses against the HER2 protein and is associated with higher tumor proliferation rates. Trastuzumab-based therapies are effectively and widely used as standard of care in HER2-amplified/overexpressed breast cancer patients; one cited mechanism of action is the induction of passive immunity and antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity against malignant breast cancer cells. These findings drove the efforts to generate antigen-specific immunotherapy to trigger the patient's immune system to target HER2-overexpressing tumor cells, which led to the development of various vaccines against the HER2 antigen. This article discusses the various anti-HER2 vaccine formulations and strategies and their potential role in the metastatic and adjuvant settings.

Profiles of brain metastases: Prioritization of therapeutic targets.

We sought to compare the tumor profiles of brain metastases from common cancers with those of primary tumors and extracranial metastases in order to identify potential targets and prioritize rational treatment strategies. Tumor samples were collected from both the primary and metastatic sites of nonsmall cell lung cancer, breast cancer and melanoma from patients in locations worldwide, and these were submitted to Caris Life Sciences for tumor multiplatform analysis, including gene sequencing (Sanger and next-generation sequencing with a targeted 47-gene panel), protein expression (assayed by immunohistochemistry) and gene amplification (assayed by in situ hybridization). The data analysis considered differential protein expression, gene amplification and mutations among brain metastases, extracranial metastases and primary tumors. The analyzed population included: 16,999 unmatched primary tumor and/or metastasis samples: 8,178 nonsmall cell lung cancers (5,098 primaries; 2,787 systemic metastases; 293 brain metastases), 7,064 breast cancers (3,496 primaries; 3,469 systemic metastases; 99 brain metastases) and 1,757 melanomas (660 primaries; 996 systemic metastases; 101 brain metastases). TOP2A expression was increased in brain metastases from all 3 cancers, and brain metastases overexpressed multiple proteins clustering around functions critical to DNA synthesis and repair and implicated in chemotherapy resistance, including RRM1, TS, ERCC1 and TOPO1. cMET was overexpressed in melanoma brain metastases relative to primary skin specimens. Brain metastasis patients may particularly benefit from therapeutic targeting of enzymes associated with DNA synthesis, replication and/or repair.