Standard-of-care systemic therapy with or without stereotactic body radiotherapy in patients with oligoprogressive breast cancer or non-small-cell lung cancer (Consolidative Use of Radiotherapy to Block [CURB] oligoprogression): an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with metastatic cancer eventually develop resistance to systemic therapy, with some having limited disease progression (ie, oligoprogression). We aimed to assess whether stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) targeting oligoprogressive sites could improve patient outcomes. METHODS: We did a phase 2, open-label, randomised controlled trial of SBRT in patients with oligoprogressive metastatic breast cancer or non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after having received at least first-line systemic therapy, with oligoprogression defined as five or less progressive lesions on PET-CT or CT. Patients aged 18 years or older were enrolled from a tertiary cancer centre in New York, NY, USA, and six affiliated regional centres in the states of New York and New Jersey, with a 1:1 randomisation between standard of care (standard-of-care group) and SBRT plus standard of care (SBRT group). Randomisation was done with a computer-based algorithm with stratification by number of progressive sites of metastasis, receptor or driver genetic alteration status, primary site, and type of systemic therapy previously received. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, measured up to 12 months. We did a prespecified subgroup analysis of the primary endpoint by disease site. All analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03808662, and is complete. FINDINGS: From Jan 1, 2019, to July 31, 2021, 106 patients were randomly assigned to standard of care (n=51; 23 patients with breast cancer and 28 patients with NSCLC) or SBRT plus standard of care (n=55; 24 patients with breast cancer and 31 patients with NSCLC). 16 (34%) of 47 patients with breast cancer had triple-negative disease, and 51 (86%) of 59 patients with NSCLC had no actionable driver mutation. The study was closed to accrual before reaching the targeted sample size, after the primary efficacy endpoint was met during a preplanned interim analysis. The median follow-up was 11·6 months for patients in the standard-of-care group and 12·1 months for patients in the SBRT group. The median progression-free survival was 3·2 months (95% CI 2·0-4·5) for patients in the standard-of-care group versus 7·2 months (4·5-10·0) for patients in the SBRT group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·53, 95% CI 0·35-0·81; p=0·0035). The median progression-free survival was higher for patients with NSCLC in the SBRT group than for those with NSCLC in the standard-of-care group (10·0 months [7·2-not reached] vs 2·2 months [95% CI 2·0-4·5]; HR 0·41, 95% CI 0·22-0·75; p=0·0039), but no difference was found for patients with breast cancer (4·4 months [2·5-8·7] vs 4·2 months [1·8-5·5]; 0·78, 0·43-1·43; p=0·43). Grade 2 or worse adverse events occurred in 21 (41%) patients in the standard-of-care group and 34 (62%) patients in the SBRT group. Nine (16%) patients in the SBRT group had grade 2 or worse toxicities related to SBRT, including gastrointestinal reflux disease, pain exacerbation, radiation pneumonitis, brachial plexopathy, and low blood counts. INTERPRETATION: The trial showed that progression-free survival was increased in the SBRT plus standard-of-care group compared with standard of care only. Oligoprogression in patients with metastatic NSCLC could be effectively treated with SBRT plus standard of care, leading to more than a four-times increase in progression-free survival compared with standard of care only. By contrast, no benefit was observed in patients with oligoprogressive breast cancer. Further studies to validate these findings and understand the differential benefits are warranted. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute.

Homologous recombination-deficient mutation cluster in tumor suppressor RAD51C identified by comprehensive analysis of cancer variants.

Mutations in homologous recombination (HR) genes, including BRCA1, BRCA2, and the RAD51 paralog RAD51C, predispose to tumorigenesis and sensitize cancers to DNA-damaging agents and poly(ADP ribose) polymerase inhibitors. However, ∼800 missense variants of unknown significance have been identified for RAD51C alone, impairing cancer risk assessment and therapeutic strategies. Here, we interrogated >50 RAD51C missense variants, finding that mutations in residues conserved with RAD51 strongly predicted HR deficiency and disrupted interactions with other RAD51 paralogs. A cluster of mutations was identified in and around the Walker A box that led to impairments in HR, interactions with three other RAD51 paralogs, binding to single-stranded DNA, and ATP hydrolysis. We generated structural models of the two RAD51 paralog complexes containing RAD51C, RAD51B-RAD51C-RAD51D-XRCC2 and RAD51C-XRCC3. Together with our functional and biochemical analyses, the structural models predict ATP binding at the interface of RAD51C interactions with other RAD51 paralogs, similar to interactions between monomers in RAD51 filaments, and explain the failure of RAD51C variants in binding multiple paralogs. Ovarian cancer patients with variants in this cluster showed exceptionally long survival, which may be relevant to the reversion potential of the variants. This comprehensive analysis provides a framework for RAD51C variant classification. Importantly, it also provides insight into the functioning of the RAD51 paralog complexes.

Sacituzumab Govitecan in Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer have a poor prognosis. Sacituzumab govitecan is an antibody-drug conjugate composed of an antibody targeting the human trophoblast cell-surface antigen 2 (Trop-2), which is expressed in the majority of breast cancers, coupled to SN-38 (topoisomerase I inhibitor) through a proprietary hydrolyzable linker. METHODS: In this randomized, phase 3 trial, we evaluated sacituzumab govitecan as compared with single-agent chemotherapy of the physician's choice (eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, or gemcitabine) in patients with relapsed or refractory metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. The primary end point was progression-free survival (as determined by blinded independent central review) among patients without brain metastases. RESULTS: A total of 468 patients without brain metastases were randomly assigned to receive sacituzumab govitecan (235 patients) or chemotherapy (233 patients). The median age was 54 years; all the patients had previous use of taxanes. The median progression-free survival was 5.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.3 to 6.3; 166 events) with sacituzumab govitecan and 1.7 months (95% CI, 1.5 to 2.6; 150 events) with chemotherapy (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.52; P<0.001). The median overall survival was 12.1 months (95% CI, 10.7 to 14.0) with sacituzumab govitecan and 6.7 months (95% CI, 5.8 to 7.7) with chemotherapy (hazard ratio for death, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.59; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with an objective response was 35% with sacituzumab govitecan and 5% with chemotherapy. The incidences of key treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher were neutropenia (51% with sacituzumab govitecan and 33% with chemotherapy), leukopenia (10% and 5%), diarrhea (10% and <1%), anemia (8% and 5%), and febrile neutropenia (6% and 2%). There were three deaths owing to adverse events in each group; no deaths were considered to be related to sacituzumab govitecan treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Progression-free and overall survival were significantly longer with sacituzumab govitecan than with single-agent chemotherapy among patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. Myelosuppression and diarrhea were more frequent with sacituzumab govitecan. (Funded by Immunomedics; ASCENT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02574455; EudraCT number, 2017-003019-21.).

Timing of exercise therapy when initiating adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: a randomized trial.

AIMS: The most appropriate timing of exercise therapy to improve cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) among patients initiating chemotherapy is not known. The effects of exercise therapy administered during, following, or during and following chemotherapy were examined in patients with breast cancer. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a parallel-group randomized trial design, 158 inactive women with breast cancer initiating (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy were allocated to receive (1:1 ratio): usual care or one of three exercise regimens-concurrent (during chemotherapy only), sequential (after chemotherapy only), or concurrent and sequential (continuous) (n = 39/40 per group). Exercise consisted of treadmill walking three sessions/week, 20-50 min at 55%-100% of peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak) for ≈16 (concurrent, sequential) or ≈32 (continuous) consecutive weeks. VO2peak was evaluated at baseline (pre-treatment), immediately post-chemotherapy, and ≈16 weeks after chemotherapy. In intention-to-treat analysis, there was no difference in the primary endpoint of VO2peak change between concurrent exercise and usual care during chemotherapy vs. VO2peak change between sequential exercise and usual care after chemotherapy [overall difference, -0.88 mL O2·kg-1·min-1; 95% confidence interval (CI): -3.36, 1.59, P = 0.48]. In secondary analysis, continuous exercise, approximately equal to twice the length of the other regimens, was well-tolerated and the only strategy associated with significant improvements in VO2peak from baseline to post-intervention (1.74 mL O2·kg-1·min-1, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There was no statistical difference in CRF improvement between concurrent vs. sequential exercise therapy relative to usual care in women with primary breast cancer. The promising tolerability and CRF benefit of ≈32 weeks of continuous exercise therapy warrant further evaluation in larger trials.

TROPION-Breast02: Datopotamab deruxtecan for locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

Despite recent treatment advances, the prognosis for patients with locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) remains poor. The antibody-drug conjugate datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) is composed of a humanized anti-TROP2 IgG1 monoclonal antibody linked to a topoisomerase I inhibitor payload via a stable, cleavable linker. The phase III TROPION-Breast02 trial in patients previously untreated for locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic TNBC, who are not candidates for PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors is evaluating efficacy and safety of Dato-DXd versus investigator's choice of chemotherapy (ICC). Approximately 600 patients will be randomized 1:1 to Dato-DXd 6 mg/kg iv. every 3 weeks or ICC (paclitaxel, nab-paclitaxel, carboplatin, capecitabine or eribulin mesylate). Dual primary end points are progression-free survival by blinded independent central review and overall survival.

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a subtype of breast cancer that is hard to treat. Tumors lack receptors for estrogen and progesterone, which means that standard endocrine therapy is ineffective, and it does not express HER2, so HER2 therapies are also not appropriate. However, the majority of TNBC tumors do possess a cell surface protein called TROP2 which provides a way of directing treatment inside tumor cells that is more selective than traditional chemotherapy. Datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) is a drug that consists of two parts: datopotamab (an antibody) and DXd (the cancer-cell killing toxic component), which are joined via a stable linker. Datopotamab binds to the TROP2 protein found on TNBC tumors and is taken into the cell. The linker is then broken and releases DXd, which kills the tumor cell. By binding to cancer cells before releasing the payload, treatment is directed to the tumor, minimizing side effects in the rest of the body. The TROPION-Breast02 study aims to discover whether Dato-DXd is more effective than standard-of-care chemotherapy, allowing patients with TNBC to live longer without their breast cancer getting worse. This study is also looking at how Dato-DXd may affect patients' overall functioning and quality of life. TROPION-Breast02 will recruit approximately 600 patients who: Have cancer that has spread from the original site (metastatic), or cancer that returned to the same site (locally recurrent) that cannot be surgically removed Have not received any prior treatment for this stage of cancer Cannot receive an alternative type of anticancer treatment called PD-(L)1 inhibitors Had any length of time between their last treatment with the aim of cure and return of their disease Eligible patients will be randomly assigned to a treatment group in equal numbers to either Dato-DXd or an appropriate chemotherapy (one of five available options, chosen by the treating doctor). Each patient will generally continue to receive their designated treatments if the tumor is controlled by the drug, there are no unacceptable side effects, or the patient chooses to stop treatment. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05374512 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Analysis of patients without and with an initial triple-negative breast cancer diagnosis in the phase 3 randomized ASCENT study of sacituzumab govitecan in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) is an antibody-drug conjugate composed of an anti-Trop-2 antibody coupled to SN-38 via a proprietary hydrolyzable linker. In the ASCENT study, SG improved survival versus single-agent treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in pre-treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). Hormone/HER2 receptor changes are common, particularly at relapse/metastasis. This subanalysis assessed outcomes in patients who did/did not have TNBC at initial diagnosis, before enrollment. METHODS: TNBC diagnosis was only required at study entry. Patients with mTNBC refractory/relapsing after ≥ 2 prior chemotherapies were randomized 1:1 to receive SG or TPC. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in patients without brain metastases. RESULTS: Overall, 70/235 (30%) and 76/233 (33%) patients who received SG and TPC, respectively, did not have TNBC at initial diagnosis. Clinical benefit with SG versus TPC was observed in this subset. Median PFS was 4.6 versus 2.3 months (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.32-0.72), median overall survival was 12.4 versus 6.7 months (HR 0.44; 95% CI 0.30-0.64), and objective response rate (ORR) was 31% versus 4%; those who also received prior CDK4/6 inhibitors had ORRs of 21% versus 5%. Efficacy and safety for patients with TNBC at initial diagnosis were generally similar to those who did not present with TNBC at initial diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Patients without TNBC at initial diagnosis had improved clinical outcomes and a manageable safety profile with SG, supporting SG as a treatment option for mTNBC regardless of subtype at initial diagnosis. Subtype reassessment in advanced breast cancer allows for optimal treatment. Clinical trial registration number NCT02574455, registered October 12, 2015.

Adjuvant enzalutamide for the treatment of early-stage androgen-receptor positive, triple-negative breast cancer: a feasibility study.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy with or without immunotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). A subset of TNBCs express the androgen receptor (AR), representing a potential new therapeutic target. This study assessed the feasibility of adjuvant enzalutamide, an AR antagonist, in early-stage, AR-positive (AR +) TNBC. METHODS: This study was a single-arm, open-label, multicenter trial in which patients with stage I-III, AR ≥ 1% TNBC who had completed standard-of-care therapy were treated with enzalutamide 160 mg/day orally for 1 year. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of 1 year of adjuvant enzalutamide, defined as the treatment discontinuation rate of enzalutamide due to toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or other events related to tolerability. Secondary endpoints included disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and genomic features of recurrent tumors. RESULTS: Fifty patients were enrolled in this study. Thirty-five patients completed 1 year of therapy, thereby meeting the prespecified trial endpoint for feasibility. Thirty-two patients elected to continue with an optional second year of treatment. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events were uncommon. The 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year DFS were 94%, 92% , and 80%, respectively. Median OS has not been reached. CONCLUSION: This clinical trial demonstrates that adjuvant enzalutamide is a feasible and well-tolerated regimen in patients with an early-stage AR + TNBC. Randomized trials in the metastatic setting may inform patient selection through biomarker development; longer follow-up is needed to determine the effect of anti-androgens on DFS and OS in this patient population.

Androgen receptor splice variant-7 in breast cancer: clinical and pathologic correlations.

Androgen receptor (AR) inhibitor therapy is a developing treatment for AR-positive breast cancer (BC) with ongoing clinical trials. AR splice variant-7 (AR-V7) is a truncated variant of AR that leads to AR inhibitor therapy resistance in prostate cancer; recent studies have identified AR-V7 in BC and theorized that AR-V7 can have a similar impact. This study assessed the prevalence and clinicopathologic features associated with AR-V7 in a large BC cohort. BC samples were evaluated by MSK-Fusion targeted RNAseq for AR-V7 detection and MSK-IMPACT targeted DNAseq, including triple-negative tumors with no driver alteration and estrogen receptor-positive/ESR1 wildtype tumors progressing on therapy. Among 196 primary and metastatic/recurrent cases (196 RNAseq, 194DNAseq), 9.7% (19/196) were AR-V7 positive and 90.3% (177/196) AR-V7 negative. All AR-V7 positive BC were AR-positive by immunohistochemistry (19/19). The prevalence of AR-V7 by receptor subtype (N = 189) was: 18% (12/67) in ER-/PgR-/HER2-negative BC, 3.7% (4/109) in ER-positive/HER2-negative BC, and 15.4% (2/13) in HER2-positive BC; AR-V7 was detected in one ER-positive/HER2-unknown BC. Apocrine morphology was observed in 42.1% (8/19) of AR-V7 positive BC and 3.4% (6/177) AR-V7 negative BC (P < 0.00001). Notably, AR-V7 was detected in 2 primary BC and 7 metastatic/recurrent BC patients with no prior endocrine therapy. We conclude that positive AR IHC and apocrine morphology are pathologic features that may indicate testing for AR-V7 is warranted in both primary and metastatic BC in the appropriate clinical context. The study findings further encourage the assessment of AR-V7 as a predictive biomarker for AR antagonist benefit in ongoing clinical BC trials.

Palbociclib with adjuvant endocrine therapy in early breast cancer (PALLAS): interim analysis of a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Palbociclib added to endocrine therapy improves progression-free survival in hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative, metastatic breast cancer. The PALLAS trial aimed to investigate whether the addition of 2 years of palbociclib to adjuvant endocrine therapy improves invasive disease-free survival over endocrine therapy alone in patients with hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative, early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: PALLAS is an ongoing multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study that enrolled patients at 406 cancer centres in 21 countries worldwide with stage II-III histologically confirmed hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, within 12 months of initial diagnosis. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) in permuted blocks of random size (4 or 6), stratified by anatomic stage, previous chemotherapy, age, and geographical region, by use of central telephone-based and web-based interactive response technology, to receive either 2 years of palbociclib (125 mg orally once daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle) with ongoing standard provider or patient-choice adjuvant endocrine therapy (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor, with or without concurrent luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonist), or endocrine therapy alone, without masking. The primary endpoint of the study was invasive disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who started palbociclib or endocrine therapy. This report presents results from the second pre-planned interim analysis triggered on Jan 9, 2020, when 67% of the total number of expected invasive disease-free survival events had been observed. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02513394) and EudraCT (2014-005181-30). FINDINGS: Between Sept 1, 2015, and Nov 30, 2018, 5760 patients were randomly assigned to receive palbociclib plus endocrine therapy (n=2883) or endocrine therapy alone (n=2877). At the time of the planned second interim analysis, at a median follow-up of 23·7 months (IQR 16·9-29·2), 170 of 2883 patients assigned to palbociclib plus endocrine therapy and 181 of 2877 assigned to endocrine therapy alone had invasive disease-free survival events. 3-year invasive disease-free survival was 88·2% (95% CI 85·2-90·6) for palbociclib plus endocrine therapy and 88·5% (85·8-90·7) for endocrine therapy alone (hazard ratio 0·93 [95% CI 0·76-1·15]; log-rank p=0·51). As the test statistic comparing invasive disease-free survival between groups crossed the prespecified futility boundary, the independent data monitoring committee recommended discontinuation of palbociclib in patients still receiving palbociclib and endocrine therapy. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (1742 [61·3%] of 2840 patients on palbociclib and endocrine therapy vs 11 [0·3%] of 2903 on endocrine therapy alone), leucopenia (857 [30·2%] vs three [0·1%]), and fatigue (60 [2·1%] vs ten [0·3%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 351 (12·4%) of 2840 patients on palbociclib plus endocrine therapy versus 220 (7·6%) of 2903 patients on endocrine therapy alone. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: At the planned second interim analysis, addition of 2 years of adjuvant palbociclib to adjuvant endocrine therapy did not improve invasive disease-free survival compared with adjuvant endocrine therapy alone. On the basis of these findings, this regimen cannot be recommended in the adjuvant setting. Long-term follow-up of the PALLAS population and correlative studies are ongoing. FUNDING: Pfizer.

PARP (Poly ADP-Ribose Polymerase) inhibitors for locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer remains a challenge to treat. With emerging study results, it is important to interpret the available clinical data and apply the evidence offering the most effective treatment to the right patient. Poly(ADP Ribose) Polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are a new class of drug and their role in the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer is being established. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy, safety profile, and potential harms of Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. The primary outcome of interest was overall survival; secondary outcomes included progression-free survival, tumour response rate, quality of life, and adverse events. SEARCH METHODS: On 8 June 2020, we searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via OvidSP, Embase via OvidSP, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) search portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched proceedings from the major oncology conferences as well as scanned reference lists from eligible publications and contacted corresponding authors of trials for further information, where needed. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials on participants with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer comparing 1) chemotherapy in combination with PARP inhibitors, compared to the same chemotherapy without PARP inhibitors or 2) treatment with PARP inhibitors, compared to treatment with other chemotherapy. We included studies that reported on our primary outcome of overall survival and secondary outcomes including progression-free survival, tumour response rate, quality of life, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures defined by Cochrane. Summary statistics for the endpoints used hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for overall survival and progression-free survival, and odds ratios (OR) for response rate (RR) and toxicity. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 49 articles for qualitative synthesis, describing five randomised controlled trials that were included in the quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). A sixth trial was assessed as eligible but had ended prematurely and no data were available for inclusion in our meta-analysis. Risk of bias was predominately low to unclear across all studies except in regards to performance bias (3/5 high risk) and detection bias for the outcomes of quality of life (2/2 high risk) and reporting of adverse events (3/5 high risk). High-certainty evidence shows there may be a small advantage in overall survival (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.00; 4 studies; 1435 patients). High-certainty evidence shows that PARP inhibitors offer an improvement in PFS in locally advanced/metastatic HER2-negative, BRCA germline mutated breast cancer patients (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71; 5 studies; 1474 patients). There was no statistical heterogeneity for these outcomes. Subgroup analyses for PFS outcomes based on trial level data were performed for triple-negative breast cancer, hormone-positive and/or HER2-positive breast cancer, BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations, and patients who had received prior chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer or not. The subgroup analyses showed a persistent PFS benefit regardless of the subgroup chosen. Pooled analysis shows PARP inhibitors likely result in a moderate improvement in tumour response rate compared to other treatment arms (66.9% vs 48.9%; RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.54; 5 studies; 1185 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The most common adverse events reported across all five studies included neutropenia, anaemia and fatigue. Grade 3 or higher adverse events probably occur no less frequently in patients receiving PARP inhibitors (59.4% for PARP arm versus 64.5% for non-PARP arm, RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.04; 5 studies; 1443 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Only two studies reported quality of life outcomes so this was not amenable to meta-analysis. However, both studies that did assess quality of life showed PARP inhibitors were superior compared to physician's choice of chemotherapy in terms of participant-reported outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In people with locally advanced or metastatic HER2-negative, BRCA germline mutated breast cancer, PARP inhibitors offer an improvement in progression-free survival, and likely improve overall survival and tumour response rates. This systematic review provides evidence supporting the use of PARP inhibitors as part of the therapeutic strategy for breast cancer patients in this subgroup. The toxicity profile for PARP inhibitors is probably no worse than chemotherapy but more information is required regarding quality of life outcomes, highlighting the importance of collecting such data in future studies. Future studies should also be powered to detect clinically important differences in overall survival and could focus on the role of PARP inhibitors in other relevant breast cancer populations, including HER2-positive, BRCA-negative/homologous recombination repair-deficient and Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PDL1) positive.

Dermatologic adverse events related to the PI3Kα inhibitor alpelisib (BYL719) in patients with breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Rash develops in approximately 50% of patients receiving alpelisib for breast cancer, often requiring dose modifications. Here, we describe the clinicopathologic, laboratory, and management characteristics of alpelisib-related dermatologic adverse events (dAEs). METHODS: A single center-retrospective analysis was conducted. Data were abstracted from electronic medical records. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients (mean age 56 years, range 27-83) receiving alpelisib most frequently in combination with endocrine therapy (79, 77.5%) were included. We identified 41 (40.2%) patients with all-grade rash distributed primarily along the trunk (78%) and extremities (70%) that developed approximately within two weeks of treatment initiation (mean 12.8 ± 1.5 days) and lasted one-week (mean duration 7.1 ± 0.8 days). Of 29 patients with documented morphology of alpelisib-related dAEs, 26 (89.7%) had maculopapular rash. Histology showed perivascular and interface lymphocytic dermatitis. All-grade rash correlated with an increase in serum eosinophils from 2.7 to 4.4%, p < 0.05, and prophylaxis with non-sedating antihistamines (n = 43) was correlated with a reduction of grade 1/2 rash (OR 0.39, p = 0.09). Sixteen (84.2%) of 19 patients with grade 3 dAEs resulted in interruption of alpelisib, which were managed with antihistamines, topical and systemic corticosteroids. We did not observe rash recurrence in 12 (75%) patients who were re-challenged. CONCLUSIONS: A maculopapular rash associated with increased blood eosinophils occurs frequently with alpelisib. While grade 3 rash leads to alpelisib therapy interruption, dermatologic improvement is evident with systemic corticosteroids; and most patients can continue oncologic treatment at a maintained or reduced dose upon re-challenge with alpelisib.

Clinical and pathologic features associated with PD-L1 (SP142) expression in stromal tumor-infiltrating immune cells of triple-negative breast carcinoma.

The Ventana PD-L1 SP142 immunohistochemistry (IHC) assay is the FDA-approved companion diagnostic assay for atezolizumab therapy selection for patients with PD-L1-positive locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast carcinoma (TNBC). We aimed to elucidate clinical, pathologic, and molecular features associated with PD-L1 expression in TNBCs. Clinical, pathologic, and next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based molecular data for TNBCs tested with PD-L1 (SP142) IHC at our institution between 11/2018 and 12/2019 were retrieved and reviewed. PD-L1 positivity was defined as ≥1% IC staining. Patients with metastatic TNBC treated at first line with atezolizumab regimens were evaluated for treatment response and for time to treatment failure (TTF). Among 156 TNBCs, PD-L1 was positive in 47.4% of cases. Primary TNBCs were significantly more frequently PD-L1 positive, compared with recurrent/metastatic samples (p = 0.002). PD-L1-positive TNBCs had increased stromal IC, compared with PD-L1-negative samples (p < 0.001). The repertoire of somatic genetic alterations of PD-L1-positive and PD-L1-negative TNBCs was similar. Matched primary and recurrent/metastatic TNBC samples were available for eight patients, in whom four had discordant results. Thirty patients with metastatic TNBC were treated with atezolizumab regimens, with treatment failure occurring in 16 patients and a median TTF of 5.1 months in this early evaluation. The findings of this study show stromal ICs in primary TNBCs are more likely to show PD-L1 positivity than in recurrent or metastatic samples. This information should guide selection of samples suitable for testing. Further studies are needed to identify other features associated with PD-L1-positive breast carcinomas and clinical benefit of treatment.

Male breast cancer: a disease distinct from female breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Male breast cancer (BC) is rare, representing approximately 1% of cancers that occur in men and approximately 1% of all BCs worldwide. Because male BC is rare, not much is known about the disease, and treatment recommendations are typically extrapolated from data available from clinical trials enrolling female BC patients. METHODS: We review the epidemiology, risk factors, prognosis, and the varied molecular and clinicopathologic features that characterize male BC. In addition, we summarize the available data for the use of systemic therapy in the treatment of male BC and explore the ongoing development of targeted therapeutic agents for the treatment of this subgroup of BCs. RESULTS: There are important biological differences between male and female BC. Male BC is almost exclusively hormone receptor positive (+), including the androgen receptor (AR), and is associated with an increased prevalence of BRCA2 germline mutations, especially in men with increased risk for developing high-risk BC. Additional research is warranted to better characterize male BC. To accomplish this, a multi-national consortium approach, such as the International Male Breast Cancer Program, is needed in response to the scarcity of patients. This approach allows the pooling of information from a large number of men with BC and the creation of registries for future therapeutic-focused clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Given the unique biology of BC in men, promising new therapeutic targets are currently under investigation, including the use of poly-ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors or AR-targeted agents either as monotherapy or in combination with other agents.

Emerging Novel Therapeutics in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

The mortality from breast cancer has steadily decreased due in part to early detection and advances in therapy. The treatment options for breast cancer vary considerably depending on the histological subtype. There are a number of very effective targeted therapies available for estrogen receptor-positive disease and for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive disease. However, triple-negative breast cancer is a particularly aggressive subtype. This subtype represents an unmet need for improved therapies. TNBC is a heterogenous subtype of breast cancer that is beginning to be refined by its molecular characteristics and clinical response to a targeted therapeutic approach. Here we review the recent advances in the treatment of TNBC with emphasis on the many emerging novel targeted therapies.

Phase 1 study of seviteronel, a selective CYP17 lyase and androgen receptor inhibitor, in women with estrogen receptor-positive or triple-negative breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Seviteronel (INO-464) is an oral, selective cytochrome P450c17a (CYP17) 17,20-lyase (lyase) and androgen receptor inhibitor with in vitro and in vivo anti-tumor activity. This open-label phase 1 clinical study evaluated safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and activity of once-daily (QD) seviteronel in women with locally advanced or metastatic TNBC or ER+ breast cancer. METHODS: Seviteronel was administered in de-escalating 750, 600, and 450 mg QD 6-subject cohorts. The 750 mg QD start dose was a phase 2 dose determined for men with castration-resistant prostate cancer in (Shore et al. J Clin Oncol 34, 2016). Enrollment at lower doses was initiated in the presence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). The primary objective of this study was to determine seviteronel safety, tolerability, and MTD. The secondary objectives included description of its PK in women and its initial activity, including clinical benefit rate at 4 (CBR16) and 6 months (CBR24). RESULTS: Nineteen women were enrolled. A majority of adverse events (AEs) were Grade (Gr) 1/2, independent of relationship; the most common were tremor (42%), nausea (42%), vomiting (37%), and fatigue (37%). Four Gr 3/4 AEs (anemia, delirium, mental status change, and confusional state) deemed possibly related to seviteronel occurred in four subjects. DLTs were observed at 750 mg (Gr 3 confusional state with paranoia) and 600 mg (Gr 3 mental status change and Gr 3 delirium) QD, with none at 450 mg QD. The recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was 450 mg QD, and at the RP2D, 4 of 7 subjects reached at least CBR16 (2 TNBC subjects and 2 ER+ subjects achieved CBR16 and CBR24, respectively); no objective tumor responses were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily seviteronel was generally well tolerated in women with and 450 mg QD was chosen as the RP2D.

Endocrine therapy and related issues in hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer: a roundtable discussion by the breast cancer therapy expert group (BCTEG).

PURPOSE: Management of breast cancer is a rapidly evolving field, and, although evidence-based guidelines are available for clinicians to provide direction on critical issues in patient care, clinicians often left to address these issues in the context of community practice situations with their patients. These include the patient's comorbid conditions, actual versus perceived benefit of treatments, patient's compliance as well as financial/reimbursement issues, and long-term tolerability of therapy. METHODS: A meeting of global oncology experts was convened in January 2017 with the belief that there is a gap in clinical practice guidance on several fundamental issues in breast cancer care, particularly in the community setting, where oncologists may encounter multiple tumor types. The goal was to discuss some of the most important questions in this area and provide some guidance for practicing oncologists. RESULTS: Topics addressed included risk of contralateral breast cancer recurrence in patients with estrogen receptor-positive early breast cancer who have undergone 5 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy, adverse events associated with endocrine therapy and their management, emergent data on adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy and its apparent benefit in reducing breast cancer recurrence, recent findings of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy trials, and the use of currently available genomic biomarker tests as a means of further informing treatment decisions. CONCLUSIONS: A summary of the discussion on these topics and several 'expert opinion statements' are provided herein in an effort to convey the collective insights of the panel as it relates to current standard practice.

First international TNBC conference meeting report.

Recently, Georgia State University's Centennial Hall was the premier location for the 2017 International Conference on Triple Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC): Illuminating Actionable Biology, which was held from Sept. 18 to 20, 2017, in Atlanta, USA. The conference featured a stellar line-up of domestic and international speakers and diverse participants including TNBC survivors, luminaries in breast cancer research, medical students and fellows, clinicians, translational researchers, epidemiologists, biostatisticians, bioinformaticians, and representatives from the industry. This report distills the burning questions that spiked the event and summarizes key themes, findings, unique opportunities and future directions that emerged from this confluence of thought leaders.

The Androgen Receptor: Is It a Promising Target?

A growing body of literature supports the conclusion that the androgen receptor (AR) plays an important role in breast cancer pathogenesis and may prove to be a relevant therapeutic target for patients with AR-driven breast cancer. This has been most apparent in the subset of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), in whom approximately 50% of tumors may have androgen dependence. Recent phase 2 clinical trials of agents that antagonize AR or reduce androgen production have shown clinical benefit and efficacy to varying degrees. This review highlights three of these recent trials of AR+ TNBC and acknowledge ongoing research in this exciting area.

Selection of appropriate biomarkers to monitor effectiveness of ovarian function suppression in pre-menopausal patients with ER+ breast cancer.

Use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists has been widely adopted to provide reversible ovarian function suppression for pre-menopausal breast cancer patients who are also receiving aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen therapy based on results of 25 randomized trials representing almost 15,000 women demonstrating a survival benefit with this approach. Past clinical trials designed to establish the efficacy of GnRH agonists have monitored testosterone in the prostate cancer setting and estradiol in the breast cancer setting. We explore the merits of various biomarkers including estradiol, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), and luteinizing hormone (LH) and their utility for informing GnRH agonist treatment decisions in breast cancer. Estradiol remains our biomarker of choice in ensuring adequate ovarian function suppression with GnRH agonist therapy among pre-menopausal women with breast cancer. We recommend future trials to continue to focus on estradiol levels as the primary endpoint, as they have in the past.

Dose dense doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide in a modified KEYNOTE522 regimen for triple negative breast cancer.

The KEYNOTE-522 (KN522) regimen for neoadjuvant treatment of triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) utilized q3week dosing for doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide (AC); however, dose-dense AC (ddAC) has demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) compared to q3week AC in anthracycline and taxane-based regimens. We performed a retrospective analysis assessing the use of ddAC in KN522 and the impact of sequencing ddAC before or after carboplatin/paclitaxel (CbT) plus pembrolizumab on multiple outcomes. 128 patients with TNBC were included. Overall pathologic complete response (pCR) rate of 56%. Sequencing of ddAC vs CbT first showed no difference in pCR rate (ddAC 55% vs. CbT 58%, p = 0.77). However, ddAC first compared to CbT first correlated with a significant increase in the incidence of overall treatment delays (ddAC 70% vs. CbT 51%, p = 0.03), with cytopenias most frequent (ddAC 59% vs. CbT 31%, p = 0.001). ddAC in a modified KN522 regimen is safe, tolerable, and effective. Efficacy is comparable regardless of chemotherapy sequencing, but ddAC first is significantly associated with higher rates of treatment delays and cytopenias.