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

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

Neoadjuvant durvalumab improves survival in early triple-negative breast cancer independent of pathological complete response.

BACKGROUND: Addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is a promising strategy in early breast cancer, but the optimal duration of therapy is currently unknown. In the GeparNuevo (NCT02685059) trial, addition of durvalumab to NACT as previously reported led to a moderate increase in pathological complete response (pCR) rate by an absolute 9% (P = 0.287). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with cT1b-cT4a-d triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) received durvalumab 1.5 g or placebo every 4 weeks added to nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 weekly for 12 weeks, followed by durvalumab/placebo every 4 weeks plus epirubicin/cyclophosphamide every 2 weeks followed by surgery. Durvalumab was not continued after surgery. The primary objective was pCR. Secondary endpoints included invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 174 patients were randomised between June 2016 and October 2017. After a median follow-up of 43.7 months, 34 events had occurred. Despite a non-significant increase in the pCR rate, significant differences were observed for 3-year iDFS, DDFS and OS: iDFS was 85.6% with durvalumab versus 77.2% with placebo [hazard ratio (HR) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24-0.97, stratified log-rank P = 0.036]; DDFS 91.7% versus 78.4% (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13-0.74, P = 0.005); OS 95.2% versus 83.5% (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.08-0.72, P = 0.006). pCR patients had 3-year iDFS of 95.5% with durvalumab and 86.1% without (HR 0.22, 95% CI 0.05-1.06). In the non-pCR cohort 3-year iDFS was 76.3% versus 69.7% (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.29-1.54). Multivariable analysis confirmed a durvalumab effect independent of the pCR effect. No new safety signals occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Durvalumab added to NACT in TNBC significantly improved survival despite a modest pCR increase and no adjuvant component of durvalumab. Additional studies are needed to clarify the optimal duration and sequence of checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of early TNBC.

Long-term efficacy and safety of addition of carboplatin with or without veliparib to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer: 4-year follow-up data from BrighTNess, a randomized phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Primary analyses of the phase III BrighTNess trial showed addition of carboplatin with/without veliparib to neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved pathological complete response (pCR) rates with manageable acute toxicity in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Here, we report 4.5-year follow-up data from the trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with untreated stage II-III TNBC were randomized (2 : 1 : 1) to paclitaxel (weekly for 12 doses) plus: (i) carboplatin (every 3 weeks for four cycles) plus veliparib (twice daily); (ii) carboplatin plus veliparib placebo; or (iii) carboplatin placebo plus veliparib placebo. All patients then received doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide every 2-3 weeks for four cycles. The primary endpoint was pCR. Secondary endpoints included event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Since the co-primary endpoint of increased pCR with carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus carboplatin with paclitaxel was not met, secondary analyses are descriptive. RESULTS: Of 634 patients, 316 were randomized to carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel, 160 to carboplatin with paclitaxel, and 158 to paclitaxel. With median follow-up of 4.5 years, the hazard ratio for EFS for carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus paclitaxel was 0.63 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-0.92, P = 0.02], but 1.12 (95% CI 0.72-1.72, P = 0.62) for carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus carboplatin with paclitaxel. In post hoc analysis, the hazard ratio for EFS was 0.57 (95% CI 0.36-0.91, P = 0.02) for carboplatin with paclitaxel versus paclitaxel. OS did not differ significantly between treatment arms, nor did rates of myelodysplastic syndromes, acute myeloid leukemia, or other secondary malignancies. CONCLUSIONS: Improvement in pCR with the addition of carboplatin was associated with long-term EFS benefit with a manageable safety profile, and without increasing the risk of second malignancies, whereas adding veliparib did not impact EFS. These findings support the addition of carboplatin to weekly paclitaxel followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage TNBC.

Neoadjuvant paclitaxel/olaparib in comparison to paclitaxel/carboplatinum in patients with HER2-negative breast cancer and homologous recombination deficiency (GeparOLA study).

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and toxicity of olaparib as combination therapy in early breast cancer (BC) patients with homologous recombinant deficiency (HRD) [score high and/or germline (g) or tumour (t) BRCA1/2 mutation] is not well described. GeparOLA (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02789332) investigated olaparib in combination with paclitaxel in HER2-negative early BC with HRD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with untreated primary HER2-negative cT2-cT4a-d or cT1c with either cN+ or pNSLN+ or cT1c and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) or cT1c and Ki-67>20% BC with HRD were randomised either to paclitaxel (P) 80 mg/m2 weekly plus olaparib (O) 100 mg twice daily for 12 weeks or P plus carboplatinum (Cb) area under the curve 2 weekly for 12 weeks, both followed by epirubicin/cyclophosphamide (EC). Stratification factors were hormone receptor (HR) status (HR+ versus HR-) and age (<40 versus ≥40 years). The primary endpoint was pathological complete response (pCR; ypT0/is ypN0). A two-sided one-group χ2-test was planned to exclude a pCR rate of ≤55% in the PO-EC arm. Secondary end points were other pCR definitions, breast conservation rate, clinical/imaging response, tolerability and safety. RESULTS: A total of 107 patients were randomised between September 2016 and July 2018; 106 (PO N = 69; PCb N = 37) started treatment. Median age was 47.0 years (range 25.0-71.0); 36.2% had cT1, 61.0% cT2, 2.9% cT3, and 31.8% cN-positive tumours; grade 3 tumours: 86.8%; Ki-67>20%: 89.6%; TNBC: 72.6%; confirmed gBRCA1/2 mutation: 56.2%. The pCR rate with PO was 55.1% [90% confidence interval (CI) 44.5% to 65.3%] versus PCb 48.6% (90% CI 34.3% to 63.2%). Analysis for the stratified subgroups showed higher pCR rates with PO in the cohorts of patients <40 years and HR+ patients. CONCLUSION: GeparOLA could not exclude a pCR rate of ≤55% in the PO arm. PO was significantly better tolerated and the combination merits further evaluation.

Tumor mutational burden and immune infiltration as independent predictors of response to neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibition in early TNBC in GeparNuevo.

BACKGROUND: The predictive value of tumor mutational burden (TMB), alone or in combination with an immune gene expression profile (GEP), for response to neoadjuvant therapy in early triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is currently not known, either for immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) or conventional chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We obtained both whole exome sequencing and RNA-Seq data from pretreatment samples of 149 TNBC of the recent neoadjuvant ICB trial, GeparNuevo. In a predefined analysis, we assessed the predictive value of TMB and a previously developed immune GEP for pathological complete remission (pCR). RESULTS: Median TMB was 1.52 mut/Mb (range 0.02-7.65) and was significantly higher in patients with pCR (median 1.87 versus 1.39; P = 0.005). In multivariate analysis, odds ratios for pCR per mut/Mb were 2.06 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.33-3.20, P = 0.001] among all patients, 1.77 (95% CI 1.00-3.13, P = 0.049) in the durvalumab treatment arm, and 2.82 (95% CI 1.21-6.54, P = 0.016) in the placebo treatment arm, respectively. We also found that both continuous TMB and immune GEP (or tumor infiltrating lymphocytes) independently predicted pCR. When we stratified patients in groups based on the upper tertile of TMB and median GEP, we observed a pCR rate of 82% (95% CI 60% to 95%) in the group with both high TMB and GEP in contrast to only 28% (95% CI 16% to 43%) in the group with both low TMB and GEP. CONCLUSIONS: TMB and immune GEP add independent value for pCR prediction. Our results recommend further analysis of TMB in combination with immune parameters to individually tailor therapies in breast cancer.

A randomised phase II study investigating durvalumab in addition to an anthracycline taxane-based neoadjuvant therapy in early triple-negative breast cancer: clinical results and biomarker analysis of GeparNuevo study.

BACKGROUND: Combining immune-checkpoint inhibitors with chemotherapy yielded an increased response rates in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Therefore, we evaluated the addition of durvalumab to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in primary TNBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: GeparNuevo is a randomised phase II double-blind placebo-controlled study randomising patients with TNBC to durvalumab or placebo given every 4 weeks in addition to nab-paclitaxel followed by standard EC. In the window-phase durvalumab/placebo alone was given 2 weeks before start of nab-paclitaxel. Randomisation was stratified by stromal tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte (sTILs). Patients with primary cT1b-cT4a-d disease, centrally confirmed TNBC and sTILs were included. Primary objective was pathological complete response (pCR) (ypT0 ypN0). RESULTS: A total of 174 patients were randomised, 117 participated in the window-phase. Median age was 49.5 years (range 23-76); 47 patients (27%) were younger than 40 years; 113 (65%) had stage ≥IIA disease, 25 (14%) high sTILs, 138 of 158 (87%) were PD-L1-positive. pCR rate with durvalumab was 53.4% (95% CI 42.5% to 61.4%) versus placebo 44.2% (95% CI 33.5% to 55.3%; unadjusted continuity corrected χ2P = 0.287), corresponding to OR = 1.45 (95% CI 0.80-2.63, unadjusted Wald P = 0.224). Durvalumab effect was seen only in the window cohort (pCR 61.0% versus 41.4%, OR = 2.22, 95% CI 1.06-4.64, P = 0.035; interaction P = 0.048). In both arms, significantly increased pCR (P < 0.01) were observed with higher sTILs. There was a trend for increased pCR rates in PD-L1-positive tumours, which was significant for PD-L1-tumour cell in durvalumab (P = 0.045) and for PD-L1-immune cell in placebo arm (P = 0.040). The most common immune-related adverse events were thyroid dysfunction any grade in 47%. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the addition of durvalumab to anthracycline-/taxane-based NACT increases pCR rate particularly in patients treated with durvalumab alone before start of chemotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02685059.

Pelvic exenteration as ultimate ratio for gynecologic cancers: single-center analyses of 37 cases.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic exenterations are a last resort procedure for advanced gynecologic malignancies with elevated risks in terms of patients' morbidity. METHODS: This single-center analysis reports surgical details, outcome and survival of all patients treated with exenteration for non-ovarian gynecologic malignancies at our university hospital during a 13-year time period. We collected data regarding patients and tumor characteristics, surgical procedures, peri- and postoperative management, transfusions, complications, and analyzed the impact on survival outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 37 patients between 2005 and 2013 with primary or relapsed cervical cancer (59.5%), vulvar cancer (24.3%) or endometrial cancer (16.2%). Median age was 60 years and most patients (73%) had squamous cell carcinomas. Median progression-free survival was 26.2 months and median overall survival was 49.9 months. The 5-year survival rates were 34.4% for progression-free survival and 46.4% for overall survival. There were no significant differences in progression-free survival and overall survival with regard to disease entity. Patients with tumor at the resection margins (R1) had a nearly significantly worse progression-free survival (median: 28.5 vs. 7.3 months, HR 2.59, 95% CI 0.98-6.88, p = 0.056) and a significantly worse overall survival (median: not reached vs. 10.9 months, HR 4.04, 95% CI 1.40-11.64, p = 0.010) compared to patients with complete tumor resection (R0). In addition, patients without lymphovascular space invasion had a significantly better progression-free survival (p = 0.017) and overall survival (p = 0.034) then patients with lymphovascular space invasion. We observed complications in 14 patients (37.8%), 10 of those were classified as Clavien-Dindo 3 or 4. There was a trend to worse progression-free survival in patients that suffered complications (p = 0.052). Median total amount of transfused blood products was 4 (range 0-20). CONCLUSION: Pelvic exenteration is a procedure that provides substantial progression-free survival and overall survival improvement and-in selected patients-can even achieve cure in otherwise hopeless clinical situations. Patients need to be offered earnest counseling for sufficient informed consent with realistic expectations what to expect.

Ten-year results of intense dose-dense chemotherapy show superior survival compared with a conventional schedule in high-risk primary breast cancer: final results of AGO phase III iddEPC trial.

Background: Primary breast cancer (BC) patients with extensive axillary lymph-node involvement have a limited prognosis. The Arbeitsgemeinschaft fuer Gynaekologische Onkologie (AGO) trial compared intense dose-dense (idd) adjuvant chemotherapy with conventionally scheduled chemotherapy in high-risk BC patients. Here we report the final, 10-year follow-up analysis. Patients and methods: Enrolment took place between December 1998 and April 2003. A total of 1284 patients with 4 or more involved axillary lymph nodes were randomly assigned to receive 3 courses each of idd sequential epirubicin, paclitaxel and cyclophosphamide (iddEPC) q2w or standard epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel (EC â†’ P) q3w. Event-free survival (EFS) was the primary end point. Results: A total of 658 patients were assigned to receive iddEPC and 626 patients were assigned to receive EC â†’ P. The median duration of follow-up was 122 months. EFS was 47% (95% CI 43% to 52%) in the standard group and 56% (95% CI 52% to 60%) in the iddEPC group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.87; log-rank P = 0.00014, one-sided]. This benefit was independent of menopausal, hormone receptor or HER2 status. Ten-year overall survival (OS) was 59% (95% CI 55% to 63%) for patients in the standard group and 69% (95% CI 65% to 73%) for patients in the iddEPC group (HR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.60-0.87; log-rank P = 0.0007, two-sided). Nine versus two cases of secondary myeloid leukemia/myelodysplastic syndrome were observed in the iddEPC and the EC â†’ P arm, respectively. Conclusion: The previously reported OS benefit of iddEPC in comparison to conventionally dosed EC â†’ P has been further increased and achieved an absolute difference of 10% after 10 years of follow-up.

Expression of Cyclin D1 protein in residual tumor after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer (BC) shows a poor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). New treatment targets like the Cyclin D1-CDK4/CDK6 complex are promising adjuvant/post-neoadjuvant therapeutic strategies. Evaluating Cyclin D1 overexpression in residual tumor could recognize those patients that benefit most from such post-neoadjuvant treatment. In this study, we determined Cyclin D1 expression in residual BC after NACT. Secondary aims were to correlate Cyclin D1 expression levels with clinicopathological parameters and to assess its prognostic value after NACT. METHODS: We retrospectively assessed the nuclear expression of Cyclin D1 on tissue microarrays with residual tumor from 284 patients treated in the neoadjuvant GeparTrio (n = 186) and GeparQuattro (n = 98) trials. Evaluation was performed with a standardized immunoreactive score (IRS) after selecting a cut-off value. RESULTS: A high expression level (IRS ≥ 6) of Cyclin D1 was found in 37.3% of the assessed specimens. An increased Cyclin D1 expression was observed in HR-positive tumors, compared to HR-negative tumors (p = 0.02). Low Cyclin D1 levels correlated with clinical tumor stage 1-3 (p = 0.03). Among patients with HR-positive/Her2-negative tumors and high Cyclin D1 expression, a better disease-free survival (DFS) was graphically suggested, but not significant (p = 0.21). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates a measurable nuclear expression of Cyclin D1 in post-neoadjuvant residual tumor tissue of HR-positive BC. Cyclin D1 expression was not prognostic for DFS after NACT. Our results and defined cut-off suggest that the marker can be used to stratify tumors according to protein expression levels. Based on this, a prospective evaluation is currently performed in the ongoing Penelope-B trial.

German Adjuvant Intergroup Node-positive Study (GAIN): a phase III trial comparing two dose-dense regimens (iddEPC versus ddEC-PwX) in high-risk early breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Dose-dense (dd) regimens are one of the preferred options for the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer patients with intermediate to high risk. The German Adjuvant Intergroup Node-positive trial aimed at optimizing intense dd (idd) strategies by evaluating drug combinations and the addition of capecitabine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women (aged 18 years and biologically <65 years) with histologically involved axillary lymph nodes were randomly assigned to receive three courses each of epirubicin (E) 150 mg/m2, paclitaxel (P) 225 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide (C) 2500 mg/m2 (reduced to 2000 mg/m2 after recruitment of 1200 patients) q2w intravenously (i.v.) (iddEPC-regimen) or ddEC (E 112.5 mg/m2 + C 600 mg/m2, i.v. q2w for 4 cycles) followed by paclitaxel weekly (Pw 67.5 mg/m2 i.v. q8d for 10 weeks) plus capecitabine (X 2000 mg/m2 p.o. days 1-14, q22 for 4 cycles) (ddEC-PwX-regimen). Further randomization assigned patients to ibandronate for 2 years versus observation and to pegfilgrastim day 2 versus 4. RESULTS: From June 2004 to August 2008, 2994 patients were randomized to either iddEPC (N = 1498), or ddEC-PwX (N = 1496) and started treatment. Median age was 50 years; pN1 (37.8%), pN2 (35.3%); pN3 (26.9%); 46.4% were G3 tumors; 76.9% hormone receptor-positive and 22% HER2-positive. After a median follow-up of 74 months, 645 events and 383 deaths were recorded. Hematological adverse events grades 3-4 were more common with iddEPC (P < 0.001), nonhematological with ddEC-PwX (P = 0.04), even if the toxicity profile of the two regimens was different. At 5 years, estimated disease-free survival rates for ddEC-PwX and iddEPC were 81.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 79.5-83.6] versus 80.2% (95% CI 78.0-82.2). Hazard ratio (HR)=0.95 (95% CI 0.81-1.11, log-rank P = 0.49). Five-year overall survival rates were 89.4% for ddEC-PwX (95% CI 87.7-91.0) and 89.0% for iddEPC (95% CI 87.2-90.6), HR = 0.85 (95% CI 0.69-1.04, log-rank P = 0.10). CONCLUSION: Adding capecitabine to ddEC-Pw did not improve outcome in comparison to iddEPC but increased toxicity and should not be recommended for further use.

De-escalating and escalating treatments for early-stage breast cancer: the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus Conference on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2017.

The 15th St. Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference 2017 in Vienna, Austria reviewed substantial new evidence on loco-regional and systemic therapies for early breast cancer. Treatments were assessed in light of their intensity, duration and side-effects, seeking where appropriate to escalate or de-escalate therapies based on likely benefits as predicted by tumor stage and tumor biology. The Panel favored several interventions that may reduce surgical morbidity, including acceptance of 2 mm margins for DCIS, the resection of residual cancer (but not baseline extent of cancer) in women undergoing neoadjuvant therapy, acceptance of sentinel node biopsy following neoadjuvant treatment of many patients, and the preference for neoadjuvant therapy in HER2 positive and triple-negative, stage II and III breast cancer. The Panel favored escalating radiation therapy with regional nodal irradiation in high-risk patients, while encouraging omission of boost in low-risk patients. The Panel endorsed gene expression signatures that permit avoidance of chemotherapy in many patients with ER positive breast cancer. For women with higher risk tumors, the Panel escalated recommendations for adjuvant endocrine treatment to include ovarian suppression in premenopausal women, and extended therapy for postmenopausal women. However, low-risk patients can avoid these treatments. Finally, the Panel recommended bisphosphonate use in postmenopausal women to prevent breast cancer recurrence. The Panel recognized that recommendations are not intended for all patients, but rather to address the clinical needs of the majority of common presentations. Individualization of adjuvant therapy means adjusting to the tumor characteristics, patient comorbidities and preferences, and managing constraints of treatment cost and access that may affect care in both the developed and developing world.

Randomised phase III trial of FEC120 vs EC-docetaxel in patients with high-risk node-positive primary breast cancer: final survival analysis of the ADEBAR study.

BACKGROUND: Taxane-containing adjuvant chemotherapy has been established as standard treatment in node-positive breast cancer. This study compared efficacy and tolerability of epirubicin (E)/cyclophosphamide (C) followed by docetaxel (Doc) with a dose-dense 5-fluorouracil (F)+E+ C regimen. METHODS: The ADEBAR study was a randomised phase III trial for women with primary invasive breast cancer and ⩾4 metastatic axillary lymph nodes (n=1364). Treatment consisted of four 21-day cycles of E plus C, followed by four 21-day cycles of Doc (EC-Doc), or six 28-day cycles of E plus F plus C (FEC120). RESULTS: Disease-free survival (DFS) was similar in the two treatment arms as shown by multivariate Cox regression adjusted for other prognostic factors (EC-Doc vs FEC120, hazard ratio (HR): 1.087; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.878-1.346, P=0.444). In addition, there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between the two groups (HR: 0.974; 95% CI: 0.750-1.264, P=0.841). Haematologic toxicity was more common in FEC120 recipients; non-haematologic toxicities occurred more frequently in the EC-Doc arm. The serious adverse event rate was significantly higher in the FEC120 group (29.7% vs 22.5%). CONCLUSIONS: EC-Doc provides a feasible and effective alternative therapy option to FEC120 with a different safety profile in this high-risk breast cancer cohort.

Comparison of prognostic and predictive impact of genomic or central grade and immunohistochemical subtypes or IHC4 in HR+/HER2- early breast cancer: WSG-AGO EC-Doc Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Potential prognostic and predictive markers in early, intermediate-risk breast cancer (BC) include histological grade, Ki-67, genomic signatures, e.g. genomic grade index (GGI), and intrinsic subtypes. Their prognostic/predictive impact in hormone receptor (HR: ER and/or PR) positive/HER2- BC is controversial. WSG-AGO EC-Doc demonstrated superior event-free survival (EFS) in patients with 1-3 positive lymph node receiving epirubicin/cyclophosphamide-docetaxel (EC-Doc) versus 5-fluoruracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide (FEC). METHODS: In a representative trial subset, we quantify concordance among factors used for clinical chemotherapy indication. We investigate the impact of central histology (n = 772), immunohistochemistry for intrinsic subtyping and IHC4, and dichotomous (GG) or continuous (GGI) genomic grade (n = 472) on patient outcome and benefit from taxane chemotherapy, focusing on HR+/HER2- patients (n = 459). RESULTS: Concordance of local grade (LG) with central (CG) or genomic grade was modest. In HR+/HER2- patients, low (GG-1: 16%), equivocal (GG-EQ: 17%), and high (GG-3: 67%) GG were associated with respective 5-year EFS of 100%, 93%, and 85%. GGI was prognostic for EFS within all LG subgroups and within CG3, whereas IHC4 was prognostic only in CG3 tumors.In unselected and HR+/HER2- patients, CG3 and luminal-A-like subtype entered the multivariate EFS model, but not IHC4 or GG. In the whole population, continuous GGI entered the model [hazard ratio (H.R.) of 75th versus 25th = 2.79; P = 0.01], displacing luminal-A-like subtype; within HR+/HER2- (H.R. = 5.36; P < 0.001), GGI was the only remaining prognostic factor.In multivariate interaction analysis (including central and genomic grade), luminal-B-like subtype [HR+ and (Ki-67 ≥20% or HER2+)] was predictive for benefit of EC-Doc versus FEC in unselected but not in HR+/HER2- patients. CONCLUSION: In the WSG-AGO EC-Doc trial for intermediate-risk BC, CG, intrinsic subtype (by IHC), and GG provide prognostic information. Continuous GGI (but not IHC4) adds prognostic information even when IHC subtype and CG are available. Finally, the high interobserver variability for histological grade and the still missing validation of Ki-67 preclude indicating or omitting adjuvant chemotherapy based on these single factors alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The WSG-AGO/EC-Doc is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02115204.

Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) versus lapatinib plus capecitabine in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer and central nervous system metastases: a retrospective, exploratory analysis in EMILIA.

BACKGROUND: We characterized the incidence of central nervous system (CNS) metastases after treatment with trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) versus capecitabine-lapatinib (XL), and treatment efficacy among patients with pre-existing CNS metastases in the phase III EMILIA study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In EMILIA, patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive advanced breast cancer previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane were randomized to T-DM1 or XL until disease progression. Patients with treated, asymptomatic CNS metastases at baseline and patients developing postbaseline CNS metastases were identified retrospectively by independent review; exploratory analyses were carried out. RESULTS: Among 991 randomized patients (T-DM1 = 495; XL = 496), 95 (T-DM1 = 45; XL = 50) had CNS metastases at baseline. CNS progression occurred in 9 of 450 (2.0%) and 3 of 446 (0.7%) patients without CNS metastases at baseline in the T-DM1 and XL arms, respectively, and in 10 of 45 (22.2%) and 8 of 50 (16.0%) patients with CNS metastases at baseline. Among patients with CNS metastases at baseline, a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) was observed in the T-DM1 arm compared with the XL arm [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.38; P = 0.008; median, 26.8 versus 12.9 months]. Progression-free survival by independent review was similar in the two treatment arms (HR = 1.00; P = 1.000; median, 5.9 versus 5.7 months). Multivariate analyses demonstrated similar results. Grade ≥3 adverse events were reported in 48.8% and 63.3% of patients with CNS metastases at baseline administered T-DM1 and XL, respectively; no new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective, exploratory analysis, the rate of CNS progression in patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer was similar for T-DM1 and for XL, and higher overall in patients with CNS metastases at baseline compared with those without CNS metastases at baseline. In patients with treated, asymptomatic CNS metastases at baseline, T-DM1 was associated with significantly improved OS compared with XL.

Expression of secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine (SPARC) in breast cancer and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine (SPARC) has been suggested as a new biomarker and therapeutic target in breast cancer, as well as other tumor types. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated the frequency of SPARC expression among different molecular breast cancer subtypes and its role for therapy response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In this study, pretherapeutic core biopsies of 667 patients from the neoadjuvant GeparTrio trial were evaluated for SPARC expression by immunohistochemistry using a standardized immunoreactive score (IRS). RESULTS: An increased SPARC expression (IRS ≥6) was observed in 26% of all tumors. In triple-negative tumors, SPARC expression was increased in 37% of tumors, compared with other molecular subtypes (23% HR+/HER2-, 29% HR+/HER2+ and 22% HR-/HER2+; P = 0.038). Increased SPARC expression was associated with an increased pathological complete response (pCR) rate of 27%, compared with 15% in tumors with low SPARC expression (P < 0.001). In the triple-negative subgroup, pCR rates were 47% in tumors with high SPARC expression, compared with 26% in tumors with low SPARC expression (P = 0.032). In multivariable analysis, SPARC was independently predictive in the overall population (P = 0.010) as well as the triple-negative subgroup (P = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: SPARC is frequently expressed in breast cancer with triple-negative breast cancer revealing the highest expression rate. High SPARC expression of the primary tumor is associated with a higher chance of achieving a pathological complete remission after TAC or TAC-NX chemotherapy. As SPARC is an albumin-binding protein and might mediate intratumoral accumulation of albumin bound drugs, SPARC should be further evaluated as a predictive marker especially for response to albumin-bound drugs like nab-paclitaxel. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT00544765.

Survival after adding capecitabine and trastuzumab to neoadjuvant anthracycline-taxane-based chemotherapy for primary breast cancer (GBG 40--GeparQuattro).

BACKGROUND: The GeparQuattro study showed that adding capecitabine or prolonging the duration of anthracycline-taxane-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 24 to 36 weeks did not increase pathological complete response (pCR) rates. Trastuzumab-treated patients with HER2-positive disease showed a higher pCR rate than patients with HER2-negative disease treated with chemotherapy alone. We here present disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) analyses. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 1495) with cT ≥ 3 tumors, or negative hormone-receptor status, or positive hormone-receptor and clinically node-positive disease received four times epirubicin/cyclophosphamide and were thereafter randomly assigned to four times docetaxel (Taxotere), or four times docetaxel/capecitabine over 24 weeks, or four times docetaxel followed by capecitabine over 36 weeks. Patients with HER2-positive tumors received 1 year of trastuzumab, starting with the first chemotherapy cycle. Follow-up was available for a median of 5.4 years. RESULTS: Outcome was not improved for patients receiving capecitabine (HR 0.92; P = 0.463 for DFS and HR 93; P = 0.618 for OS) as well as for patients receiving 36 weeks of chemotherapy (HR 0.97; P = 0.818 for DFS and HR 0.97; P = 0.825 for OS). Trastuzumab-treated patients with HER2-positive disease showed similar DFS (P = 0.305) but a significantly better adjusted OS (P = 0.040) when compared with patients with HER2-negative disease treated with chemotherapy alone. Recorded long-term cardiac toxicity was low. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term results, similar to the results of pCR, do not support the use of capecitabine in the neoadjuvant setting in addition to an anthracycline-taxane-based chemotherapy. However, the results support previous data showing a benefit of trastuzumab as predicted by higher pCR rates.

Final analysis of the prospective WSG-AGO EC-Doc versus FEC phase III trial in intermediate-risk (pN1) early breast cancer: efficacy and predictive value of Ki67 expression.

BACKGROUND: Taxane-based adjuvant chemotherapy is standard in node-positive (N+) early breast cancer (BC). The magnitude of benefit in intermediate-risk N+ early BC is still unclear. WSG-AGO epiribicine and cyclophosphamide (EC)-Doc is a large trial evaluating modern taxane-based chemotherapy in patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes (LNs) only. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 2011 BC patients (18-65 years, pN1) were entered into a randomized phase III trial comparing 4 × E90C600 q3w followed by 4 × docetaxel 100 q3w (n = 1008) with the current standard: 6 × F500E100C500 q3w (n = 828) or C600M40F600 d1, 8× q4w (n = 175). Primary end point was event-free survival (EFS); secondary end points were overall survival (OS), toxicity, translational research, and quality of life. Central tumor bank samples were evaluable in a representative collective (n = 772; 40%). Ki-67 was assessed centrally in hormone receptor-positive disease as a surrogate marker for the distinction of luminal A/B-like tumors. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced between study arms in both main study and central tumor bank subset. At 59-month median follow-up, superior efficacy of EC-Doc [versus FEC (a combination of 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide)] was seen in EFS and OS: 5-year EFS: 89.8% versus 87.3% (P = 0.038); 5-year OS: 94.5% versus 92.8% (P = 0.034); both tests one-tailed. EC-Doc caused more toxicity. In hormone receptor-positive (HR)+ disease, only high-Ki-67 tumors (≥ 20%) derived significant benefit from taxane-based therapy: hazard ratio = 0.39 (95% CI 0.18-0.82) for EC-Doc versus FEC (test for interaction; P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: EC-Doc significantly improved EFS and OS versus FEC in intermediate-risk BC (1-3 LNs) within all subgroups as defined by local pathology. In HR+ disease, patients with luminal A-like tumors may be potentially over-treated by taxane-based chemotherapy. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02115204.

Survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab or everolimus for HER2-negative primary breast cancer (GBG 44-GeparQuinto)†.

BACKGROUND: The GeparQuinto study showed that adding bevacizumab to 24 weeks of anthracycline-taxane-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy increases pathological complete response (pCR) rates overall and specifically in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). No difference in pCR rate was observed for adding everolimus to paclitaxel in nonearly responding patients. Here, we present disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) analyses. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 1948) with HER2-negative tumors of a median tumor size of 4 cm were randomly assigned to neoadjuvant treatment with epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel (EC-T) with or without eight infusions of bevacizumab every 3 weeks before surgery. Patients without clinical response to EC ± Bevacizumab were randomized to 12 weekly cycles paclitaxel with or without everolimus 5 mg/day. To detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.75 (α = 0.05, ß = 0.8) 379 events had to be observed in the bevacizumab arms. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 3.8 years, 3-year DFS was 80.8% and 3-year OS was 89.7%. Outcome was not different for patients receiving bevacizumab (HR 1.03; P = 0.784 for DFS and HR 0.974; P = 0.842 for OS) compared with patients receiving chemotherapy alone. Patients with TNBC similarly showed no improvement in DFS (HR = 0.99; P = 0.941) and OS (HR = 1.02; P = 0.891) when treated with bevacizumab. No other predefined subgroup (HR+/HER2-; locally advanced (cT4 or cN3) or not; cT1-3 or cT4; pCR or not) showed a significant benefit. No difference in DFS (HR 0.997; P = 0.987) and OS (HR 1.11; P = 0.658) was observed for nonearly responding patients receiving paclitaxel with or without everolimus overall as well as in subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term results, in opposite to the results of pCR, do not support the neoadjuvant use of bevacizumab in addition to an anthracycline-taxane-based chemotherapy or everolimus in addition to paclitaxel for nonearly responding patients. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT 00567554, www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Symptoms of endocrine treatment and outcome in the BIG 1-98 study.

There may be a relationship between the incidence of vasomotor and arthralgia/myalgia symptoms and treatment outcomes for postmenopausal breast cancer patients with endocrine-responsive disease who received adjuvant letrozole or tamoxifen. Data on patients randomized into the monotherapy arms of the BIG 1-98 clinical trial who did not have either vasomotor or arthralgia/myalgia/carpal tunnel (AMC) symptoms reported at baseline, started protocol treatment and were alive and disease-free at the 3-month landmark (n = 4,798) and at the 12-month landmark (n = 4,682) were used for this report. Cohorts of patients with vasomotor symptoms, AMC symptoms, neither, or both were defined at both 3 and 12 months from randomization. Landmark analyses were performed for disease-free survival (DFS) and for breast cancer free interval (BCFI), using regression analysis to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI). Median follow-up was 7.0 years. Reporting of AMC symptoms was associated with better outcome for both the 3- and 12-month landmark analyses [e.g., 12-month landmark, HR (95 % CI) for DFS = 0.65 (0.49-0.87), and for BCFI = 0.70 (0.49-0.99)]. By contrast, reporting of vasomotor symptoms was less clearly associated with DFS [12-month DFS HR (95 % CI) = 0.82 (0.70-0.96)] and BCFI (12-month DFS HR (95 % CI) = 0.97 (0.80-1.18). Interaction tests indicated no effect of treatment group on associations between symptoms and outcomes. While reporting of AMC symptoms was clearly associated with better DFS and BCFI, the association between vasomotor symptoms and outcome was less clear, especially with respect to breast cancer-related events.