Dose intensity in anthracycline-based chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: mature results of the randomised clinical trial ANZ 9311.

PURPOSE: The separate impacts of dose and dose intensity of chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer remain uncertain. The primary objective of this trial was to compare a short, high-dose, intensive course of epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (EC) with a longer conventional dose regimen delivering the same total dose of chemotherapy. METHODS: This open label trial randomised 235 women with metastatic breast cancer to receive either high-dose epirubicin 150 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 1500 mg/m2 with filgrastim support every 3 weeks for 3 cycles (HDEC) or standard dose epirubicin 75 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2 every 3 weeks for 6 cycles (SDEC). Primary outcomes were time to progression, overall survival and quality of life. RESULTS: In 118 patients allocated HDEC 90% of the planned dose was delivered, compared to 96% in the 117 participants allocated SDEC. There were no significant differences in the time to disease progression (5.7 vs. 5.8 months, P = 0.19) or overall survival (14.5 vs. 16.5 months, P = 0.29) between HDEC and SDEC, respectively. Patients on HDEC reported worse quality of life during therapy, but scores improved after completion to approximate those reported by patients allocated SDEC. Objective tumour response was recorded in 33 (28%) on HDEC and 42 patients (36%) on SDEC. HDEC produced more haematologic toxicity. CONCLUSION: For women with metastatic breast cancer, disease progression, survival or quality of life were no better with high-dose intensity compared to standard dose EC chemotherapy. Australian Clinical Trials Registry registration number ACTRN12605000478617.

Observation versus late reintroduction of letrozole as adjuvant endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (ANZ0501 LATER): an open-label randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the effectiveness of adjuvant endocrine therapy in preventing breast cancer recurrence, breast cancer events continue at a high rate for at least 10 years after completion of therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomised open label phase III trial recruited postmenopausal women from 29 Australian and New Zealand sites, with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer, who had completed ≥4 years of endocrine therapy [aromatase inhibitor (AI), tamoxifen, ovarian suppression, or sequential combination] ≥1 year prior, to oral letrozole 2.5 mg daily for 5 years, or observation. Treatment allocation was by central computerised randomisation, stratified by institution, axillary node status and prior endocrine therapy. The primary outcome was invasive breast cancer events (new invasive primary, local, regional or distant recurrence, or contralateral breast cancer), analysed by intention to treat. The secondary outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Between 16 May 2007 and 14 March 2012, 181 patients were randomised to letrozole and 179 to observation (median age 64.3 years). Endocrine therapy was completed at a median of 2.6 years before randomisation, and 47.5% had tumours of >2 cm and/or node positive. At 3.9 years median follow-up (interquartile range 3.1-4.8), 2 patients assigned letrozole (1.1%) and 17 patients assigned observation (9.5%) had experienced an invasive breast cancer event (difference 8.4%, 95% confidence interval 3.8% to 13.0%, log-rank test P = 0.0004). Twenty-four patients (13.4%) in the observation and 14 (7.7%) in the letrozole arm experienced a DFS event (log-rank P = 0.067). Adverse events linked to oestrogen depletion, but not serious adverse events, were more common with letrozole. CONCLUSION: These results should be considered exploratory, but lend weight to emerging data supporting longer duration endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, and offer insight into reintroduction of AI therapy. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (www.anzctr.org.au), ACTRN12607000137493.

A survey of Australian and New Zealand clinical practice with neoadjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) has become an established treatment option for women with operable breast cancer. AIM: We aimed to better understand NAST treatment patterns, barriers and facilitators in Australia and New Zealand. METHODS: We undertook a cross-sectional survey of the current clinical practice of Australian and New Zealand breast cancer specialists. Questions included referral patterns for NAST, patient selection, logistics, decision making and barriers. RESULTS: Of 207 respondents, 162 (78%) reported routinely offering NAST to selected patients with operable breast cancer (median 9% of patients offered NAST). Specialty, location, practice type, gender or years of experience did not predict for offering NAST. In all, 45 and 58% wanted to increase the number of patients who receive NAST in routine care and in clinical trials respectively. Facilitators included the multidisciplinary team meeting and access to NAST clinical trials. Specialist-reported patient barriers included: patient desire for immediate surgery (63% rated as important/very important); lack of awareness of NAST (50%); concern about progression (43%) and disinterest in downstaging (32%). Forty-three per cent of participants experienced system-related barriers to the use of NAST, including other clinicians' lack of interest (27%); lack of clinical trials (24%) and unacceptable wait for a medical oncology appointment (37%). CONCLUSION: This group of Australian and New Zealand clinicians are interested in NAST for operable breast cancer in routine care and clinical trials. Patient- and system-related barriers that prevent the optimal uptake of this treatment approach will need to be systematically addressed if NAST is to become a more common approach.

Administration of chemotherapy with palliative intent in the last 30 days of life: the balance between palliation and chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Appropriately timed cessation of chemotherapy is an important aspect of good quality palliative care. There is wide variation in the reported rates of chemotherapy administration within the last 30 days of life. AIMS: To identify predictors of death within 30 days of receiving palliative chemotherapy, and to propose a standard definition by which oncologists and cancer centres can be compared. METHODS: Patients who received palliative chemotherapy at a regional cancer centre and its rural outreach unit between 2009 and 2011 were included. An adjusted logistic regression model, including all variables, was fit to identify predictors of death within 30 days of receiving palliative chemotherapy. RESULTS: Over a 3-year period, 1131 patients received palliative chemotherapy, 138 (12%) died within 30 days of receiving palliative chemotherapy. Predictors of death within 30 days of palliative chemotherapy were: less than 30 days contact with palliative care (odds ratio 3.30 (95% confidence interval 2.04-5.34), P < 0.001) and male gender (odds ratio 2.02 (95% confidence interval 1.24-3.31), P = 0.0049), but treating clinician, tumour chemoresponsiveness, age, body mass index and survival from initial diagnosis were not. CONCLUSION: Patients who received chemotherapy in the last 30 days of life were more likely to be male and have a shorter duration of palliative care team involvement. In this study, the observed rate of death within 30 days of chemotherapy is within the range of published data. It is recommended that a standard definition be used to benchmark medical oncology centres and individual oncologists, and to allow comparison over time.

The implementation of a decision aid for women with early-stage breast cancer considering contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: Despite little survival benefit and potential for harm, contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rates are increasing amongst early-stage breast cancer patients at low contralateral breast cancer risk. We developed a CPM decision aid (DA) and conducted a pilot implementation. METHODS: Surgeons and oncologists recruited eligible patients considering CPM. Consenting patients received the DA, completed a questionnaire and participated in a semi-structured interview. Clinicians were interviewed at study close. RESULTS: Eleven clinicians and 31 patients participated. Three themes emerged: perceived utility and impact of the DA, disagreement regarding timing of delivery and target population, and implementation strategies. Both women and clinicians found the DA valuable, indicating it confirmed rather than changed preferences. Women (all of whom raised CPM themselves), preferred offering the DA early in treatment discussions whilst clinicians favoured targeting women who enquired about CPM. CONCLUSION: A DA about CPM is feasible and acceptable, but questions remain about the role of DAs in these types of decisions where one option has limited medical benefit. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Some women have a high need to make an informed choice about CPM. Tools to support this could include a DA with a clear recommendation against CPM and an explanation why.

Assessment of the management of carcinomatous meningitis from breast cancer globally: a study by the Breast International Group Brain Metastasis Task Force.

BACKGROUND: Carcinomatous meningitis (CM) is a severe complication of breast cancer. The Breast International Group (BIG) carried out a survey to describe the approach to CM internationally. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A questionnaire on the management of CM was developed by the Brain Metastases Task Force of BIG and distributed to its groups, requesting one answer per group site. RESULTS: A total of 241 sites responded, 119 from Europe, 9 from North America, 39 from Central/South America, 58 from Asia, and 16 in Australia/New Zealand, with 24.5% being general hospitals with oncology units, 44.4% university hospitals, 22.4% oncology centers, and 8.7% private hospitals. About 56.0% of sites reported seeing <5 cases annually with 60.6% reporting no increase in the number of cases of CM recently. Nearly 63.1% of sites investigate for CM when a patient has symptoms or radiological evidence, while 33.2% investigate only for symptoms. For diagnosis, 71.8% of sites required a positive cerebrospinal fluid cytology, while magnetic resonance imaging findings were sufficient in 23.7% of sites. Roughly 97.1% of sites treat CM and 51.9% also refer patients to palliative care. Intrathecal therapy is used in 41.9% of sites, mainly with methotrexate (74.3%). As many as 20 centers have a national registry for patients with breast cancer with central nervous system metastases and of those 5 have one for CM. Most (90.9%) centers would be interested in participating in a registry as well as in studies for CM, the latter preferably (62.1%) breast cancer subtype specific. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to map out the approach to CM from breast cancer globally. Although guidelines with level 1 evidence are lacking, there is a high degree of homogeneity in the approach to CM globally and great interest for conducting studies in this area.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with sequential anthracycline-docetaxel with gemcitabine for large operable or locally advanced breast cancer: ANZ 0502 (NeoGem).

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy has a sound rationale for use in women with large operable breast cancer, and achievement of pathological complete response (pCR) is prognostic. Epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel is a standard chemotherapy regimen for early breast cancer. In metastatic breast cancer the combination of gemcitabine and a taxane has shown promising results. This phase II study investigated the efficacy and safety of incorporating gemcitabine into neoadjuvant therapy. METHODS: Female patients with operable breast cancer that was clinically T2 (≥3 cm) or T3-4, N0-1, M0 were enrolled to receive 24 weeks of neoadjuvant chemotherapy using epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel and gemcitabine, plus trastuzumab if HER2-positive. The primary endpoint was the pathological complete response (pCR) rate in the breast in separate HER2-negative and HER2-positive cohorts. Secondary endpoints included pCR in both the breast and axillary lymph nodes, clinical and radiological response rates, disease free survival and safety. RESULTS: 81 patients were enrolled: 63 HER2-negative and 18 HER2-positive. 67 (84%) completed all cycles of chemotherapy, and 78 (96%) proceeded to surgery. pCR was achieved by 12 (20%) patients with HER2-negative, and 9 (53%) with HER2-positive disease. At the first interim analysis, addition of prophylactic G-CSF was recommended due to excess neutropenia. The HER2-negative cohort was closed to accrual because it did not meet the pre-specified target for pCR, and the HER2-positive cohort was closed due to slow accrual. At a median follow-up of 24 months, 12 of 81 (15%) patients had experienced a relapse of their breast cancer. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant gemcitabine, when added to docetaxel, after epirubicin and cyclophosphamide, did not reach the pre-specified expectations for pCR rate in HER2-negative tumours. Excess neutropenia was observed, requiring growth factor support. Addition of gemcitabine to docetaxel in this schedule cannot be recommended. Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (www.anzctr.org.au) registration number ACTRN12606000191594.