The effects of adding palbociclib to endocrine therapy to treat advanced breast cancer: a plain language summary of a study using the PALOMA-2 and PALOMA-3 trial results.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of an article that reported results of a study using data from two phase 3 clinical trials called "PALOMA-2" and "PALOMA-3." Both PALOMA-2 and PALOMA-3 trials included women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. HR+/HER2- breast cancer means the breast cancer cells of these women have receptors for female sex hormones and little or no HER2 receptors. Both PALOMA trials tested the effect of adding a medication called palbociclib (brand name, Ibrance®) to a hormone therapy. Hormone therapy, also known as endocrine therapy, is a treatment that blocks or removes hormones that cause cancer cells to grow and divide. In both trials, women took endocrine therapy with either palbociclib or a placebo. WHAT WAS THE AIM OF THIS STUDY?: The researchers aimed to see if the results from the PALOMA trials were similar for subgroups of women in the 2 trials. The subgroups in the study included women who shared certain features about their cancer or treatment history, for example, women whose cancer had spread to the liver. For each subgroup, the study compared the results from the 2 treatment groups: (1) women who took palbociclib plus endocrine therapy, and (2) women who took placebo plus endocrine therapy. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS & WHAT DO THEY MEAN?: The same effect was found in all subgroups. Compared with those who took placebo, women who took palbociclib lived longer without their cancer getting worse (growing or spreading). Also, among women who had chemotherapy after stopping the trial treatment, those who took palbociclib started chemotherapy later than those who took placebo. Because palbociclib slows cancer growth and leads to tumor shrinkage, this may have played a part in starting chemotherapy later. These results show that palbociclib plus endocrine therapy is better at slowing the progression of advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer than endocrine therapy alone. This can be said for women with different advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer features and treatment history. Overall, the results support women taking palbociclib with an endocrine therapy if they have advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer.

Characteristics, Treatment, and Outcomes of Real-World Talazoparib-Treated Patients With Germline BRCA-Mutated Advanced HER2-Negative Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Talazoparib is a poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor approved for the treatment of adult patients with deleterious or suspected deleterious germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm), HER2-negative, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (LA/mBC), with approval based on the EMBRACA trial. To date, there are no published data on talazoparib use in the real-world United States (USA) setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Characteristics, treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes of real-world US patients with gBRCAm HER2-negative LA/mBC treated with talazoparib monotherapy were collected via retrospective chart review and summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Among 84 eligible patients, 35.7% had hormone receptor-positive tumors and 64.3% had triple-negative LA/mBC (TNBC). At talazoparib initiation, 29.8% had ECOG PS of ≥2 and 19.0% had brain metastasis. Mutations in gBRCA1 or 2 were detected among 64.3% and 35.7% of patients, respectively. Talazoparib was given as 1st-line therapy in 14.3% of patients, 2nd-line in 40.5%, and 3rd- or 4th-line in 45.2%. Median time to talazoparib treatment failure was 8.5 months (95% CI, 8.0-9.7), median progression-free survival was 8.7 months (95% CI, 8.0-9.9), the median time from initiation to chemotherapy was 12.2 months (95% CI, 10.5-20.1), and the overall response rate was 63.1%. No differences in clinical outcomes were observed between patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative LA/mBC and patients with TNBC by using unadjusted statistical comparisons. Brain metastasis and ECOG PS ≥2 at talazoparib initiation were associated with treatment failure and progression or mortality. CONCLUSION: Overall, talazoparib clinical outcomes in this real-world population are consistent with findings from EMBRACA.

Metastatic HER2-Positive Breast Cancer: Is There an Optimal Sequence of Therapy?

OPINION STATEMENT: Approximately 20% of breast cancers overexpress human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2+), conferring a particularly aggressive subtype of the disease with an increased risk for the development of systemic and brain metastases. However, the advent of trastuzumab and more recently several other HER2-targeting novel therapies has led to significant improvements in the prognosis, making the diagnosis a "double-edged sword." The current standard first-line therapy for patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is a taxane combined with trastuzumab and pertuzumab. Trastuzumab deruxtecan should be used preferentially in the second line, with the only caveat being patients with CNS involvement where the tucatinib, capecitabine, and trastuzumab regimen could be considered. In the third line setting, given the survival benefits demonstrated with the tucatinib regimen in patients with and without CNS metastases, this is the preferred strategy. In the fourth line and beyond, there is no clear standard. Options include margetuximab in combination with chemotherapy, neratinib + capecitabine, or trastuzumab + chemotherapy. There are several novel therapies under investigation reporting promising results in the late-line setting. The treatment landscape of HER2-positive advanced disease is evolving constantly, with several active therapies being moved to the early-stage setting. Accordingly, it will be critical to identify biomarkers and mechanisms of resistance to optimize therapy selection and maximize patient outcomes and quality of life. Here, we provide an overview of the current and future management of HER2-positive advanced breast cancer and address the specific scenarios which may impact treatment selection including triple-positive breast cancer and the presence of brain metastases. Finally, we highlight promising novel treatments and ongoing trials that may impact future treatment sequencing.

Ovarian Function Suppression: A Deeper Consideration of the Role in Early Breast Cancer and its Potential Impact on Patient Outcomes: A Consensus Statement from an International Expert Panel.

It has been suggested that the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) early breast cancer may be related, at least in part, to CT-induced ovarian function suppression (OFS) in this subgroup of patients. Although this hypothesis has not been directly tested in large randomized clinical trials, the observations from prospective studies have been remarkably consistent in showing a late benefit of CT among the subgroup of patients who benefit (ie, women who were close to menopause). The hypothesis has important clinical implications, as it may be possible to spare the associated adverse effects of adjuvant CT in a select group of women with early breast cancer, in favor of optimizing OFS and endocrine therapy (ET), without compromising clinical outcomes. Such an approach has the added benefit of preserving the key quality of life outcomes in premenopausal women, particularly by preventing the irreversible loss of ovarian function that may result from CT use. For this reason, we convened an international panel of clinical experts in breast cancer treatment to discuss the key aspects of the available data in this area, as well as the potential clinical implications for patients. This article summarizes the results of these discussions and presents the consensus opinion of the panel regarding optimizing the use of OFS for premenopausal women with HR+, HER2- early breast cancer.

Impact of genomic assays on treatment and outcomes in locally advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Genomic profiling in early-stage breast cancer provides prognostic and predictive information. Genomic profiling assays have not been validated in locally advanced breast cancer (LABC). We examined a large cancer registry to evaluate genomic profiling in LABC and its effect on treatment decisions and survival. METHODS: Females with ER+/HER2- LABC who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy were selected from the National Cancer Database 2004-2017. We compared characteristics between patients with and without genomic profiling and with low genomic risk, 21-gene recurrence score ≤ 25 or low-risk 70-gene signature, treated with endocrine therapy ± chemotherapy. Propensity score methods were utilized to account for covariates that may have predicted treatment. Univariable and multivariable survival analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of 18,437 patients with LABC, 1258 (7%) had genomic profiling and 1022 (81%) had low genomic risk results. 562 patients (55%) with low genomic risk received chemotherapy and endocrine therapy (chemoendocrine). Patients who received chemoendocrine therapy were younger, had fewer comorbidities, presented with higher stage disease, had higher grade tumors, more frequently had partial mastectomy, and more often received radiation than those who received endocrine therapy alone. On multivariable analysis, endocrine therapy alone was associated with worse OS compared to chemoendocrine therapy (HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.13-2.78, p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: In women with LABC and low genomic risk, endocrine therapy alone was associated with worse OS compared to chemoendocrine therapy. This suggests that genomic profiling is not predictive in LABC. Accordingly, genomic profiling should not be routinely utilized to make adjuvant treatment decisions in LABC in the absence of further data which shows a benefit.

Real-world patient-reported outcomes and physician satisfaction with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors versus chemotherapy in patients with germline BRCA1/2-mutated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer from the United States, Europe, and Israel.

BACKGROUND: In clinical trials, poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) versus chemotherapy resulted in significantly improved progression-free survival, manageable adverse event profiles, and favorable patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) and germline BRCA1/2 mutations (gBRCA1/2mut). The objective of this study was to evaluate PROs and physician satisfaction with treatment in patients with gBRCA1/2mut HER2- ABC receiving PARPi or physician's choice of chemotherapy in a multi-country, real-world setting. METHODS: This retrospective analysis used data from the Adelphi Real World ABC Disease Specific Programmes in the United States, European Union, and Israel. PROs were assessed at a single timepoint using the EuroQol 5-Dimensions 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) scale, Cancer Therapy Satisfaction Questionnaire (CTSQ), and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the breast cancer-specific module (QLQ-BR23). Baseline PROs were not assessed. Physician satisfaction with treatment scores was dichotomized to a 0/1 variable (0 = very dissatisfied/dissatisfied/moderately satisfied; 1 = satisfied/very satisfied). Scores were compared using inverse-probability-weighted regression adjustment, controlling for multiple confounding factors. RESULTS: The study included 96 patients (PARPi, n = 38; platinum/non-platinum-based chemotherapy, n = 58). Patients receiving PARPi versus chemotherapy reported significantly better scores on the EQ-5D-5L Health Utility Index. On the EORTC QLQ-C30 functional scales, patients receiving PARPi reported significantly better scores (mean ± SE) for physical functioning (80.0 ± 2.4 vs 71.9 ± 3.4; p < 0.05) and social functioning (82.0 ± 6.2 vs 63.6 ± 3.7; p < 0.05) and, on the symptom scales, reported significantly better scores for constipation (1.9 ± 1.8 vs 18.7 ± 3.2; p < 0.001), breast symptoms (0.4 ± 3.9 vs 13.3 ± 2.6; p < 0.01), arm symptoms (2.6 ± 1.3 vs 11.4 ± 2.4; p = 0.001), and systemic therapy side effects (13.5 ± 1.8 vs 29.4 ± 2.3; p < 0.001). In contrast, patients receiving chemotherapy scored significantly better on the nausea/vomiting scale (18.3 ± 2.8 vs 34.5 ± 5.1; p < 0.01). Patients receiving PARPi reported numerically better satisfaction scores on the CTSQ scales. Physicians were more likely to be satisfied/very satisfied with PARPi versus chemotherapy (95.4% ± 7.3% vs 40.8% ± 6.2%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The PRO findings in this real-world population of patients with gBRCA1/2mut HER2- ABC complement those from the pivotal clinical trials, providing further support for treatment with PARPi in these patients.

A prospective study to evaluate febrile neutropenia incidence in patients receiving pegfilgrastim on-body injector vs other choices.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) and related clinical outcomes among patients treated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy for nonmyeloid malignancies who received pegfilgrastim on-body injector (OBI) or other options (Other) for FN prophylaxis. METHODS: In this prospective observational study, adult patients with breast, prostate, or lung cancer, or non-Hodgkin lymphoma at risk for FN were stratified into subgroups based on FN prophylaxis used in the first chemotherapy cycle: pegfilgrastim OBI vs Other (pegfilgrastim or biosimilar pegfilgrastim prefilled syringe, daily filgrastim, or no granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [G-CSF]) for up to 4 planned chemotherapy cycles. RESULTS: This US study enrolled 2575 eligible patients (OBI, 1624; Other, 951). FN incidence was lower in the OBI group (6.4% [95% CI, 5.2-7.6%]) than in the Other group (9.4% [7.5-11.2%]), with a relative risk (RR) of 0.66 (0.47-0.91; p = .006). A decreased risk of dose delays among patients receiving pegfilgrastim OBI vs Other was observed (RR for ≥ 5 days: 0.64 [0.42-0.96], p = .023; RR for ≥ 7 days: 0.62 [0.40-0.91], p = .016). Adherence, defined as G-CSF support for all chemotherapy cycles, was 94.0% (92.9-95.2%) in the OBI group compared with 58.4% (55.2-61.5%) in the Other group. Compliance with pegfilgrastim, defined as administration the day after chemotherapy, was 88.3% in the OBI group and 48.8% in the prefilled syringe group. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving pegfilgrastim OBI had a lower incidence of FN compared with those receiving alternatives. The OBI was associated with improved adherence to and compliance with clinically recommended G-CSF prophylaxis.

A prospective cohort study to evaluate the incidence of febrile neutropenia in patients receiving pegfilgrastim on-body injector versus other options for prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia: breast cancer subgroup analysis.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer chemotherapy often carries a high risk of febrile neutropenia (FN); guidelines recommend prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), such as pegfilgrastim. Neulasta® Onpro® on-body injector (OBI) is a delivery device administering pegfilgrastim approximately 27 h after application. METHODS: This prospective study examined patients with breast cancer who received chemotherapy with a high risk of FN, receiving OBI ("OBI") or other options (other G-CSF or none; "other"). The primary endpoint was FN incidence; secondary endpoints included chemotherapy delivery, adherence (G-CSF in all cycles), compliance (G-CSF day after chemotherapy), and FN incidence in patients receiving curative or palliative treatment. RESULTS: A total of 1776 patients with breast cancer were enrolled (OBI, n = 1196; other, n = 580). Across all cycles, FN incidence was lower for OBI (4.4% [95% CI, 3.3-5.6%]) than other (7.4% [5.3-9.6%]). For curative treatment, the FN incidence across all cycles was lower for OBI (4.6% [3.4-5.8%]) than for other (7.1% [5.0-9.3%]). For palliative treatment (OBI, n = 33; other, n = 20), 3 patients (15%) in the other and none in the OBI group had FN. After adjusting for baseline covariates, FN incidence remained lower for OBI (4.6% [3.5-6.1%]) versus other (7.8% [5.7-10.5%]). Adherence was higher for OBI (93.8%) than for other G-CSF (69.8%), as was compliance (90.5 and 53.2%, respectively). Chemotherapy dose delays/reductions were similar for OBI (4.7%/32.3%, respectively) and other (4.7%/30.0%) groups. CONCLUSION: Pegfilgrastim OBI was associated with a lower FN incidence in patients with breast cancer compared to other options for FN prophylaxis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov , NCT02178475, registered 30 June, 2014.

Use of Molecular Assays and Circulating Tumor DNA in Early-Stage Colorectal Cancer: A Roundtable Discussion of the Gastrointestinal Cancer Therapy Expert Group.

The use of genomic testing is rapidly emerging as an important clinical tool both for cancer diagnosis and for guiding treatment decisions in a wide range of malignancies, including gastrointestinal (GI) cancers such as colorectal cancer (CRC). Advances in technologies such as polymerase chain reaction and next-generation sequencing methods have made it possible to noninvasively screen for CRC through, for example, the use of blood- or stool-based testing, with high specificity. Tests are also available that can provide prognostic information beyond traditional clinicopathologic factors such as tumor size, grade, and nodal status, which can enable clinicians to more accurately risk stratify patients for recurrence. Lastly, in the setting of resected CRC, tests are now available that can detect circulating tumor DNA as a means for noninvasive minimal/molecular residual disease monitoring, thereby potentially guiding the use of adjuvant chemotherapy and/or escalating or de-escalating therapy. The Gastrointestinal Cancer Therapy Expert Group (GICTEG) recently convened a virtual meeting to discuss current issues related to genomic testing in GI cancer, with the goal of providing guidance on the use of these tests for the practicing community oncologist, for whom GI cancer may be only one of many tumor types encountered. This article provides a summary of the discussion and highlights the key opinions of the GICTEG on this topic. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The Gastrointestinal Cancer Therapy Expert Group seeks to provide practical guidance and opinion on the treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies, including colorectal cancer (CRC), for the practicing community oncologist in situations for which guidelines from established bodies, such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the American Society of Clinical Oncology, may be less clear. In the present report, clinical guidance on the use of molecular assays for a range of clinical indications in CRC is presented, including the use of circulating tumor DNA to detect minimal/molecular residual disease in patients with successfully resected early-stage CRC.

A prospective observational study of patient-reported functioning and quality of life in advanced and metastatic breast cancer utilizing a novel mobile application.

PURPOSE: To assess and describe patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in women with locally advanced/unresectable or metastatic breast cancer (aBC/mBC) with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR + /HER2 -) status receiving palbociclib combination therapy in a US real-world setting. METHODS: A prospective, noninterventional, multicenter longitudinal study was conducted in US patients initiating treatment with palbociclib combination therapy for HR + /HER2 - aBC/mBC. PRO data (SF-12; CES-D-10; mood; pain; fatigue; interference of aBC/mBC or its treatment on family life, social life, physical activity, energy, and productivity; overall health rating; and quality of life [QOL]) were collected via a custom-developed mobile application at daily, weekly, and cycle-based intervals. Patient medical information (demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment information, and adverse events) was collected from medical records at baseline and at the end of the 6-month follow-up period. RESULTS: Patients' general health status (SF-12) remained consistent throughout treatment and was generally consistent with published norms for individuals diagnosed with cancer. The presence of depression (CES-D-10) was low and did not change substantially over time. Mean pain and fatigue scores using an 11-point numeric rating scale were low and remained stable. Patients, on average, reported neutral or positive moods. Patient-reported QOL and overall health was primarily "Good," "Very good," or "Excellent." Findings were consistent regardless of patient experience with neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with palbociclib, on average, reported consistently low levels of pain and fatigue as well as good QOL and overall health that remained stable throughout the first 6 months of treatment regardless of episodes of neutropenia.

Prophylactic pegfilgrastim to prevent febrile neutropenia among patients receiving biweekly (Q2W) chemotherapy regimens: a systematic review of efficacy, effectiveness and safety.

BACKGROUND: Pegfilgrastim, a long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), is commonly used to prevent febrile neutropenia (FN), a potentially life-threatening complication, following myelosuppressive chemotherapy. The FDA label for pegfilgrastim specifies that it should not be administered 14 days before or within 24 h of administration of myelosuppressive chemotherapy, precluding the use of pegfilgrastim in biweekly (Q2W) regimens. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer guidelines support the use of prophylactic pegfilgrastim in patients receiving Q2W regimens. The objective of this study was to systematically review evidence from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies that describe the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic pegfilgrastim in preventing FN among patients receiving Q2W regimens. METHODS: An Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library literature search was conducted to evaluate the evidence regarding efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of prophylactic pegfilgrastim versus no prophylactic pegfilgrastim or prophylaxis with other G-CSF in patients who were receiving Q2W chemotherapy regimens with high (> 20%) or intermediate (10-20%) risk of FN for a non-myeloid malignancy. Studies that addressed absolute or relative risk of FN, grade 1-4 neutropenia, all-cause or any hospitalization, dose delays or dose reductions, adverse events, or mortality were included. Studies where the comparator was a Q3W chemotherapy regimen with primary prophylactic pegfilgrastim were also included. RESULTS: The initial literature search identified 2258 publications. Thirteen publications met the eligibility criteria, including eight retrospective, one prospective, one phase 1 dose escalation study, and three RCTs. In nine of the 13 studies reporting incidence of FN, and in seven of the nine studies reporting incidence of neutropenia, administration of prophylactic pegfilgrastim in patients receiving Q2W regimens resulted in decreased or comparable rates of FN or neutropenia compared with patients receiving filgrastim, no G-CSF, lipefilgrastim or pegfilgrastim in Q3W regimens. In six of the nine studies reporting safety data, lower or comparable safety profiles were observed between pegfilgrastim and comparators. CONCLUSIONS: In a variety of non-myeloid malignancies, administration of prophylactic pegfilgrastim was efficacious in reducing the risk of FN in patients receiving high- or intermediate-risk Q2W regimens, with an acceptable safety profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration no: CRD42019155572 .

MammaPrint guides treatment decisions in breast Cancer: results of the IMPACt trial.

BACKGROUND: Increased usage of genomic risk assessment assays suggests increased reliance on data provided by these assays to guide therapy decisions. The current study aimed to assess the change in treatment decision and physician confidence based on the 70-gene risk of recurrence signature (70-GS, MammaPrint) and the 80-gene molecular subtype signature (80-GS, BluePrint) in early stage breast cancer patients. METHODS: IMPACt, a prospective, case-only study, enrolled 452 patients between November 2015 and August 2017. The primary objective population included 358 patients with stage I-II, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. The recommended treatment plan and physician confidence were captured before and after receiving results for 70-GS and 80-GS. Treatment was started after obtaining results. The distribution of 70-GS High Risk (HR) and Low Risk (LR) patients was evaluated, in addition to the distribution of 80-GS compared to IHC status. RESULTS: The 70-GS classified 62.5% (n = 224/358) of patients as LR and 37.5% (n = 134/358) as HR. Treatment decisions were changed for 24.0% (n = 86/358) of patients after receiving 70-GS and 80-GS results. Of the LR patients initially prescribed CT, 71.0% (44/62) had CT removed from their treatment recommendation. Of the HR patients not initially prescribed CT, 65.1% (41/63) had CT added. After receiving 70-GS results, CT was included in 83.6% (n = 112/134) of 70-GS HR patient treatment plans, and 91.5% (n = 205/224) of 70-GS LR patient treatment plans did not include CT. For patients who disagreed with the treatment recommended by their physicians, most (94.1%, n = 16/17) elected not to receive CT when it was recommended. For patients whose physician-recommended treatment plan was discordant with 70-GS results, discordance was significantly associated with age and lymph node status. CONCLUSIONS: The IMPACt trial showed that treatment plans were 88.5% (n = 317/358) in agreement with 70-GS results, indicating that physicians make treatment decisions in clinical practice based on the 70-GS result. In clinically high risk, 70-GS Low Risk patients, there was a 60.0% reduction in treatment recommendations that include CT. Additionally, physicians reported having greater confidence in treatment decisions for their patients in 72% (n = 258/358) of cases after receiving 70-GS results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: "Measuring the Impact of MammaPrint on Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Treatment in Breast Cancer Patients: A Prospective Registry" (NCT02670577) retrospectively registered on Jan 27, 2016.

Vinorelbine plus Capecitabine (Vinocap): a retrospective analysis in heavily pretreated HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Metastatic breast cancer is regarded as an incurable entity. In heavily pretreated patients with increasingly limited options for palliative management, ensuring proper quality of life continues is to be an elusive issue. With this in mind, the authors evaluated the efficacy and safety of the Vinorelbine/Capecitabine doublet (VINOCAP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The investigators retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 67 women with HER2 negative MBC treated at a large breast cancer practice and a local cancer center with Vinorelbine 22.5 mg/m2 IV on days 1 and 8 combined with Capecitabine 1 g PO BID for 14 consecutive days of 21 day cycles. Patients had been treated with an average of 4 prior lines of chemotherapy. Patient characteristics and outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 67 patients received VINOCAP, and an additional 2 underwent repeat exposure yielding a cohort of 69. Clinical benefit rate, defined as complete response (CR), partial response (PR) or stable disease ≥ 6 months (SD), was 55.07%. Complete response was seen in 4.34%, PR in 18.8% and SD ≥ 6 months in 31.9%. Median progression-free survival was 6.2 months and overall survival 35.47 months after VINOCAP exposure. The most common grade 3-4 toxicity was neutropenia in 10% of cases. Dose had to be reduced in 18% of cases due to toxicity of any type. The regimen was well tolerated, and serious side effects were uncommon. CONCLUSION: Vinorelbine/Capecitabine appears to be an active and well-tolerated regimen in women with MBC. In particular, encouraging was the efficacy of VINOCAP as fourth or greater line of chemotherapy.

Use of cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors for hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, metastatic breast cancer: a roundtable discussion by The Breast Cancer Therapy Expert Group (BCTEG).

PURPOSE: To provide an overview of clinical data supporting the use of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK 4/6) inhibitors in the treatment of hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-), metastatic breast cancer (mBC), from the perspective of the practicing oncologist community. METHODS: A recent roundtable discussion was convened by The Breast Cancer Therapy Expert Group (BCTEG) to review existing data on this topic and its impact on their current practice. RESULTS: Level 1 evidence now supports use of a CDK 4/6 inhibitor in combination with endocrine therapy for patients with HR+, HER2-, mBC. Currently, there are no biomarkers that reliably define patients who will, or will not, benefit from the addition of a CDK 4/6 inhibitor to their endocrine therapy. Additional research is needed to identify the optimal sequencing of CDK 4/6 inhibitors in relation to other therapies as well as the optimal duration of therapy; at present, evidence suggests that use in the upfront setting is better than waiting for a later line of therapy, or adding after endocrine therapy has started. CONCLUSIONS: Thus far, three CDK 4/6 inhibitors-palbociclib, ribociclib, and more recently, abemaciclib-have been approved for use in the setting of HR+, HER2-, mBC.  The degrees to which these agents differ in terms of CDK4/6 affinity, side-effect profiles, dosing, degree of central nervous system (CNS) penetration, optimal use in combination with antiestrogen therapy, and across other subsets of breast cancer, remain an active area of investigation.

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.

Survival of patients with de-novo metastatic breast cancer: analysis of data from a large breast cancer-specific private practice, a university-based cancer center and review of the literature.

Approximately 6 % of patients with breast cancer are diagnosed with de-novo distant metastases. We set out to look at two cohorts of patients seen at breast cancer-specific practices, compare the results to other reports and larger databases, and see how advances in treatment have impacted overall survival (OS). The records from a large breast cancer oncology private practice and a second data set from the University of Miami/Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center (UM/SCCC) tumor database were, retrospectively, reviewed to identify patients with de-novo metastases. We included those patients identified to have metastatic disease within 3 months of diagnosis of a breast primary cancer. Patients diagnosed between 1996 and 2006 were chosen for our study population. The OS for the private practice was 41.0 months (46.0 for ER positive and 26.0 for ER negative) and 36.0 months for UM/SCCC (52 months for ER positive and 36 months for ER negative). ER negativity and CNS- or visceral-dominant disease were associated with a significantly worse prognosis within the private practice. Dominant site was associated with a significantly worse prognosis within the UM/SCCC database but with a trend also for ER negativity. Age and ethnicity did not contribute significantly to the survival of patients within either cohort. The median survival in both cohorts and most other reported series was larger than that seen in the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program and the National Cancer Database. The median OS among patients with de-novo metastatic breast cancer treated within two breast-specific oncology practices was over 3 years, which appears better than larger, more inclusive databases and publications from earlier decades.

A retrospective study evaluating a fixed low dose capecitabine monotherapy in women with HER-2 negative metastatic breast cancer.

To determine if a low fixed dosing strategy of capecitabine would produce comparable clinical activity with less adverse toxicities compared to published data with higher doses in the setting of metastatic breast cancer (mBC). We retrospectively analyzed patients treated with a low fixed dose of capecitabine (CAPE-L) at 1,000 mg twice daily for 14 days every 21 days. Outcomes included clinical benefit rate (CBR), overall response rates (ORR), time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). A historical comparison group of mBC patients treated on 12 prior trials at the package-insert dose of capecitabine (n = 1,949) was utilized. Eighty-six patients were analyzed in our cohort. Positive hormone receptor status (79.1 vs. 50.6 %), and capecitabine as first-line chemotherapy (44.2 vs. 16.5 %) were more frequent in our cohort relative to the historical comparison. The median starting dose in our cohort was 633.5 mg/m(2). The CBR was similar between the CAPE-L and the standard dose cohorts (55.8 vs. 49.5 %), as was ORR (24.3 vs. 24 %), and median TTP (7 mo, 95 % CI 5.5-8.5 vs. 5.1 mo, 95 % CI 4.5-5.7). Median OS was longer in our cohort (24 mo, 95 % CI 16.8-31.2) than the historic standard dose cohort (12.1 mo, 95 % CI 9.6-14.4), a difference that was likely explained by the higher proportion of patients in the CAPE-L cohort who received capecitabine as first-line chemotherapy and who had hormone receptor positive disease. As expected, adverse events were less frequent with CAPE-L. We found that CAPE-L, which translates into a dose of 600-650 mg/m(2), appeared to have good clinical efficacy and acceptable toxicity.

An overview of the therapeutic strategies for neoplastic meningitis due to breast cancer: when and why?

INTRODUCTION: Neoplastic meningitis (NM), also known as leptomeningeal carcinomatosis, is characterized by the infiltration of tumor cells into the meninges, and poses a significant therapeutic challenge owing to its aggressive nature and limited treatment options. Breast cancer is a common cause of NM among solid tumors, further highlighting the urgent need to explore effective therapeutic strategies. This review aims to provide insights into the evolving landscape of NM therapy in breast cancer by collating existing research, evaluating current treatments, and identifying potential emerging therapeutic options. AREAS COVERED: This review explores the clinical features, therapeutic strategies, recent advances, and challenges of managing NM in patients with breast cancer. Its management includes multimodal strategies, including systemic and intrathecal chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and supportive care. This review also emphasizes targeted drug options and optimal drug concentrations, and discusses emerging therapies. Additionally, it highlights the variability in treatment outcomes and the potential of combination regimens to effectively manage NM in breast cancer. EXPERT OPINION: Challenges in treating NM include debates over clinical trial end points and the management of adverse effects. Drug resistance and low response rates are significant hurdles, particularly inHER2-negative breast cancer. The development of more precise and cost-effective medications with improved selectivity is crucial. Additionally, global efforts are needed for infrastructure development and cancer control considering the diverse nature of the disease.

PACE: A Randomized Phase II Study of Fulvestrant, Palbociclib, and Avelumab After Progression on Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4/6 Inhibitor and Aromatase Inhibitor for Hormone Receptor-Positive/Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6is) are an important component of treatment for hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC), but it is not known if patients might derive benefit from continuation of CDK4/6i with endocrine therapy beyond initial tumor progression or if the addition of checkpoint inhibitor therapy has value in this setting. METHODS: The randomized multicenter phase II PACE trial enrolled patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2- MBC whose disease had progressed on previous CDK4/6i and aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy. Patients were randomly assigned 1:2:1 to receive fulvestrant (F), fulvestrant plus palbociclib (F + P), or fulvestrant plus palbociclib and avelumab (F + P + A). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in patients treated with F versus F + P. RESULTS: Overall, 220 patients were randomly assigned between September 2017 and February 2022. The median age was 57 years (range, 25-83 years). Most patients were postmenopausal (80.9%), and 40% were originally diagnosed with de novo MBC. Palbociclib was the most common previous CDK4/6i (90.9%). The median PFS was 4.8 months on F and 4.6 months on F + P (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11 [90% CI, 0.79 to 1.55]; P = .62). The median PFS on F + P + A was 8.1 months (HR v F, 0.75 [90% CI, 0.50 to 1.12]; P = .23). The difference in PFS with F + P and F + P + A versus F was greater among patients with baseline ESR1 and PIK3CA alterations. CONCLUSION: The addition of palbociclib to fulvestrant did not improve PFS versus fulvestrant alone among patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2- MBC whose disease had progressed on a previous CDK4/6i plus AI. The increased PFS seen with the addition of avelumab warrants further investigation in this patient population.