Safety and efficacy analysis of neoadjuvant pertuzumab, trastuzumab and standard chemotherapy for HER2-positive early breast cancer: real-world data from NeoPowER study.

BACKGROUND: The addition of pertuzumab (P) to trastuzumab (H) and standard chemotherapy (CT) as neoadjuvant treatment (NaT) for patients with HER2 + breast cancer (BC), has shown to increase the pathological complete response (pCR) rate, without main safety concerns. The aim of NeoPowER trial is to evaluate safety and efficacy of P + H + CT in a real-world population. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of stage II-III, HER2 + BC patients treated with NaT: who received P + H + CT (neopower group) in 5 Emilia Romagna institutions were compared with an historical group who received H + CT (control group). The primary endpoint was the safety, secondary endpoints were pCR rate, DRFS and OS and their correlation to NaT and other potential variables. RESULTS: 260 patients were included, 48% received P + H + CT, of whom 44% was given anthraciclynes as part of CT, compared to 83% in the control group. The toxicity profile was similar, excluding diarrhea more frequent in the neopower group (20% vs. 9%). Three patients experienced significant reductions in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), all receiving anthracyclines. The pCR rate was 46% (P + H + CT) and 40% (H + CT) (p = 0.39). The addition of P had statistically correlation with pCR only in the patients receiving anthra-free regimens (OR = 3.05,p = 0.047). Preoperative use of anthracyclines (OR = 1.81,p = 0.03) and duration of NaT (OR = 1.18,p = 0.02) were statistically related to pCR. 12/21 distant-relapse events and 14/17 deaths occurred in the control group. Patients who achieve pCR had a significant increase in DRFS (HR = 0.23,p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Adding neoadjuvant P to H and CT is safe. With the exception of diarrhea, rate of adverse events of grade > 2 did not differ between the two groups. P did not increase the cardiotoxicity when added to H + CT, nevertheless in our population all cardiac events occurred in patients who received anthracycline-containing regimens. Not statistically significant, higher pCR rate is achievable in patients receiving neoadjuvant P + H + CT. The study did not show a statistically significant correlation between the addition of P and long-term outcomes.

Real-World Data and Clinical Implications of Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS)-Based Analysis in Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients.

Over the last two decades, the use of Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) in medical oncology has increased the likelihood of identifying druggable mutations that may be potentially susceptible to targeted treatments. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) currently does not recommend the use of the NGS test to determine the therapeutic course of patients with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) in daily clinical practice. However, the aim of this work is to evaluate the potential contribution of the NGS test in selecting targeted therapies for patients with mBC. Data were retrospectively collected from 101 patients diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer and treated at the Modena Cancer Center between January 2015 and April 2022. A NGS test was performed on the tumor tissue of each patient at the Laboratory of Molecular Pathology of the University Hospital of Modena. This study analyzed the clinical-pathological characteristics and mutational profile of the population using NGS tests, with a focus on actionable mutations that could be targeted in advanced stages of clinical development. The indicator of this study was to quantify the actionable mutations that resulted in a change of cancer treatment. In total, 101 patients with metastatic breast cancer were analyzed, including 86 with luminal phenotype, 10 who were HER2-positive and 5 who were triple-negative. Median age was 52 years. NGS analysis was conducted on 47 samples of primary breast cancer, 52 on metastatic sites of disease and 2 on liquid biopsies. A total of 85 gene mutations were found. The most common mutations were identified in the PIK3CA (47%), FGFR (19%) and ERBB2 genes (12%), and to a lesser extent in other genes. Of the 61 patients with pathogenic mutations, 46 (75%) had at least one actionable mutation. Of these, nine received treatment with a molecular target drug: eight patients with a mutation of the PIK3CA gene were treated with alpelisib and fulvestrant; one patient with FGFR1/2 amplifications received TAS120. Median PFS for these patients was 3.8 months. The study results show that using the NGS test on cancer tissue of metastatic breast cancer could influence the therapeutic choices, considering the small sample size and limited follow-up. About 9% of the study population had their therapy modified based on the results of NGS. The growing number of detectable mutations and increased accessibility of the test may lead to a greater number of potential therapeutic implications for the NGS assay. Perspectives suggest that NGS analysis can be implemented in daily clinical practice, particularly in contexts where a Molecular Tumor Board (MTB) is active.

T-DM1 efficacy in trastuzumab-pertuzumab pre-treated HER2 positive metastatic breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines consider T-DM1 the standard 2nd line therapy for HER2 positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients following trastuzumab (T) + pertuzumab (P) and taxane 1st line treatment. Despite this, there are no prospective studies supporting this sequence. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis using real world data to determine the efficacy of T-DM1 after 1st line TP in HER2 positive MBC patients. We used a random-effect model to find differences in the rate of 1-year progression free survival (PFS) between TP pre-treated population and the EMILIA phase III pivotal trial. RESULTS: Seven studies were eligible. The meta-analysis showed a combined 1-year PFS risk difference for T-DM1 efficacy after TP in 2nd or more lines of -0.122, with lower and upper limits of -0.253 and 0.010, respectively (p = 0.07), with low heterogeneity among studies (I2 0.01%, p = 0.836). Considering the four studies on T-DM1 in 2nd line setting, 1-year PFS risk was -0.034 (95% CI -0.207 - 0,139; p = 0.701) (I2 0.01%, p = 0.91). CONCLUSION: Overall, the efficacy of T-DM1 after TP seems to be similar to that previously reported in the EMILIA trial. In the second line setting, data are not mature enough to confirm T-DM1 efficacy in TP pre-treated population.

Role of Intrinsic Subtype Analysis with PAM50 in Hormone Receptors Positive HER2 Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Endocrine therapy (ET), associated with CDK 4/6 inhibitors, represents the first choice of treatment for HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (mBC). Primary or secondary endocrine resistance could develop; however validated biomarkers capable of predicting such a conditions are not available. Several studies have shown that HR+/HER2- mBC comprises five intrinsic subtypes. The purpose of this systematic review was to analyze the potential correlations between intrinsic subtype, efficacy of treatment, and patient outcome. Five papers that analyzed the intrinsic subtype with PAM50 assay in patients (pts) with HR+/HER2- mBC treated with ET (alone or in combination) within seven phase III clinical trials (EGF30008, BOLERO-2, PALOMA-2,3, MONALEESA-2,3,7) were identified. Non-luminal subtypes are more frequent in endocrine-resistant pts and in metastatic sites (vs. primary tumors), have less benefit from ET, and worse prognosis. Among these, HER2-enriched subtypes are similar to HER2+ tumors and benefit from the addition of anti-HER2 agents (lapatinib) and, for less clear reasons, of ribociclib (unconfirmed data for palbociclib and everolimus). Basal-like subtypes are similar to triple-negative tumors, making them more sensitive to chemotherapy. The intrinsic subtype is also not static but can vary over time with the evolution of the disease. Currently, the intrinsic subtype does not play a decisive role in the choice of treatment in clinical practice, but has potential prognostic and predictive value that should be further investigated.

Second-line Eribulin in Triple Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer patients. Multicentre Retrospective Study: The TETRIS Trial.

Introduction: Large and consistent evidence supports the use of eribulin mesylate in clinical practice in third or later line treatment of metastatic triple negative breast cancer (mTNBC). Conversely, there is paucity of data on eribulin efficacy in second line treatment. Methods: We investigated outcomes of 44 mTNBC patients treated from 2013 through 2019 with second line eribulin mesylate in a multicentre retrospective study involving 14 Italian oncologic centres. Results: Median age was 51 years, with 11.4% of these patients being metastatic at diagnosis. Median overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) from eribulin starting were 11.9 (95%CI: 8.4-15.5) and 3.5 months (95%CI: 1.7-5.3), respectively. We observed 8 (18.2%) partial responses and 10 (22.7%) patients had stable disease as best response. A longer PFS on previous first line treatment predicted a better OS (HR=0.87, 95%CI: 0.77-0.99, p= 0.038) and a longer PFS on eribulin treatment (HR=0.92, 95%CI: 0.85-0.98, p=0.018). Progression free survival to eribulin was also favorably influenced by prior adjuvant chemotherapy (HR=0.44, 95%CI: 0.22-0.88, p=0.02). Eribulin was generally well tolerated, with grade 3-4 adverse events being recorded in 15.9% of patients. Conclusions: The outcomes described for our cohort are consistent with those reported in the pivotal Study301 and subsequent observational studies. Further data from adequately-sized, ad hoc trials on eribulin use in second line for mTNBC are warranted to confirm our findings.

Impact of BMI on HER2+ metastatic breast cancer patients treated with pertuzumab and/or trastuzumab emtansine. Real-world evidence.

Body mass index (BMI) is a main indicator of obesity and its association with breast cancer is well established. However, little is known in the metastatic setting, especially in HER2-positive patients. We assessed the influence of BMI on clinical outcomes of patients treated with pertuzumab and/or trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) for HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (mBC). BMI was addressed as a categorical variable, being classified on the basis of the following ranges, that is, 18.5-24.9, 25-29.9, and 30.0-34.9, namely, normal weight, overweight, and Class I obesity. The outcomes chosen were progression-free survival to first-line chemotherapy (PFS1) and overall survival (OS). Overall (N = 709), no impact of BMI was observed on PFS1 (p = .15), while BMI ≥ 30 was associated with worse OS (p = .003). In subjects who progressed to first line (N = 575), analyzing data across PFS1 quartiles and strata of disease burden, BMI predicted lower PFS1 in patients within the I PFS1 quartile and with the lowest disease burden (p = .001). Univariate analysis showed a detrimental effect of BMI ≥ 30 on OS for women within the I PFS1 quartile (p = .03). Results were confirmed in multivariate analysis. According to PFS1 quartiles a higher percentage of patients with high BMI and low disease burden progressed within 6 months of therapy. The effect of BMI on prognosis was also confirmed in multivariate analysis of OS for overall population. In our cohort, a BMI ≥ 30 correlated with worse OS in patients with HER2+ mBC who received pertuzumab and/or T-DM1 but had no impact on PFS to first line. BMI predicted worse I PFS1 quartile.

Distinct HR expression patterns significantly affect the clinical behavior of metastatic HER2+ breast cancer and degree of benefit from novel anti-HER2 agents in the real world setting.

We analyzed data from 738 HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (mbc) patients treated with pertuzumab-based regimens and/or T-DM1 at 45 Italian centers. Outcomes were explored in relation to tumor subtype assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC). The median progression-free survival at first-line (mPFS1) was 12 months. Pertuzumab as first-line conferred longer mPFS1 compared to other first-line treatments (16 vs. 9 months, p = 0.0001), regardless of IHC subtype. Median PFS in second-line (mPFS2) was 7 months, with no difference by IHC subtype, but it was more favorable with T-DM1 compared to other agents (7 vs. 6 months, p = 0.03). There was no PFS2 gain in patients with tumors expressing both hormonal receptors (HRs; p = 0.17), while a trend emerged for tumors with one HR (p = 0.05). Conversely, PFS2 gain was significant in HRs-negative tumors (p = 0.04). Median overall survival (mOS) was 74 months, with no significant differences by IHC subtypes. Survival rates at 2 and 3 years in patients treated with T-DM1 in second-line after pertuzumab were significantly lower compared to pertuzumab-naïve patients (p = 0.01). When analyzed by IHC subtype, the outcome was confirmed if both HRs or no HRs were expressed (p = 0.02 and p = 0.006, respectively). Our results confirm that HRs expression impacts the clinical behavior and novel treatment-related outcomes of HER2-positive tumors when treatment sequences are considered. Moreover, multivariate analysis showed that HRs expression had no effect on PFS and OS. Further studies are warranted to confirm our findings and clarify the interplay between HER2 and estrogen receptor pathways in HER2-positive (mbc) patients.

Combined endocrine approaches vs endocrine therapy alone as first line treatment in elderly patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2 negative, advanced breast cancer: to prescribe for the patient or the physician? A meta-analysis of phase II and III randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients are underrepresented in clinical study where combined endocrine strategies were compared to endocrine therapy (ET) in hormone receptors positive, HER2 negative, metastatic breast cancer. The role of the new endocrine approaches in elderly women is still unclear. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of first line phase II/III randomized trials on ET versus combined strategies considering clinical benefit and safety profile. Trials with hazard ratio (HR) for PFS in elderly patients were included. RESULTS: Overall, the meta-analysis showed a PFS advantage for the experimental arms [HR 0.77, p 0.016] with a significant high/moderate heterogeneity [I2 65.46%, p 0.005]. For patients on CDK 4/6 inhibitors and ET, HR was 0.57 (p < 0.0001), with low heterogeneity [I2 0.0001%, p 0.96]. Hematological adverse events, as well as diarrhea with Abemaciclib, were significantly higher in elderly population. CONCLUSIONS: The magnitude of PFS benefit due to the combined strategies in elderly patients is similar to those reported in the overall clinical trial population. Adding CDK4/6 inhibitors to ET significantly prolongs PFS, even if toxicity profile have to be carefully considered. Future trials should be designed taking into account patients' age, geriatric assessment and comorbidity.

Palbociclib plus endocrine therapy in HER2 negative, hormonal receptor-positive, advanced breast cancer: A real-world experience.

Data from 423 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-), hormone receptor-positive (HR+) advanced breast cancer (aBC) patients treated with palbociclib and endocrine therapy (ET) were provided by 35 Italian cancer centers and analyzed for treatment outcomes. Overall, 158 patients were treated in first line and 265 in second/later lines. We observed 19 complete responses and 112 partial responses. The overall response rate (ORR) was 31% (95% confidence interval [CI], 26.6-35.4) and clinical benefit was 52.7% (95% CI, 48-57.5). ORR was negatively affected by prior exposure to everolimus/exemestane ( p = 0.002) and favorably influenced by early line-treatment ( p < 0.0001). At 6 months, median progression-free survival was 12 months (95% CI, 8-16) and median overall survival was 24 months (95% CI, 17-30). More favorable outcomes were associated with palbociclib in early lines, no visceral metastases and no prior everolimus/exemestane. The main toxicity reported was neutropenia. Our results provide further support to the use of palbociclib with ET in HER2-, HR+ aBC. Differences in outcomes across patients subsets remain largely unexplained.

Adjuvant anastrozole versus exemestane versus letrozole, upfront or after 2 years of tamoxifen, in endocrine-sensitive breast cancer (FATA-GIM3): a randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty exists about the optimal schedule of adjuvant treatment of breast cancer with aromatase inhibitors and, to our knowledge, no trial has directly compared the three aromatase inhibitors anastrozole, exemestane, and letrozole. We investigated the schedule and type of aromatase inhibitors to be used as adjuvant treatment for hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. METHODS: FATA-GIM3 is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial of six different treatments in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed invasive hormone receptor-positive breast cancer that had been completely removed by surgery, any pathological tumour size, and axillary nodal status. Key exclusion criteria were hormone replacement therapy, recurrent or metastatic disease, previous treatment with tamoxifen, and another malignancy in the previous 10 years. Patients were randomly assigned in an equal ratio to one of six treatment groups: oral anastrozole (1 mg per day), exemestane (25 mg per day), or letrozole (2·5 mg per day) tablets upfront for 5 years (upfront strategy) or oral tamoxifen (20 mg per day) for 2 years followed by oral administration of one of the three aromatase inhibitors for 3 years (switch strategy). Randomisation was done by a computerised minimisation procedure stratified for oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 status; previous chemotherapy; and pathological nodal status. Neither the patients nor the physicians were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. The minimum cutoff to declare superiority of the upfront strategy over the switch strategy was assumed to be a 2% difference in disease-free survival at 5 years. Primary efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat; safety analyses included all patients for whom at least one safety case report form had been completed. Follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, number 2006-004018-42, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00541086. FINDINGS: Between March 9, 2007, and July 31, 2012, 3697 patients were enrolled into the study. After a median follow-up of 60 months (IQR 46-72), 401 disease-free survival events were reported, including 211 (11%) of 1850 patients allocated to the switch strategy and 190 (10%) of 1847 patients allocated to upfront treatment. 5-year disease-free survival was 88·5% (95% CI 86·7-90·0) with the switch strategy and 89·8% (88·2-91·2) with upfront treatment (hazard ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·73-1·08; p=0·23). 5-year disease-free survival was 90·0% (95% CI 87·9-91·7) with anastrozole (124 events), 88·0% (85·8-89·9) with exemestane (148 events), and 89·4% (87·3 to 91·1) with letrozole (129 events; p=0·24). No unexpected serious adverse reactions or treatment-related deaths occurred. Musculoskeletal side-effects were the most frequent grade 3-4 events, reported in 130 (7%) of 1761 patients who received the switch strategy and 128 (7%) of 1766 patients who received upfront treatment. Grade 1 musculoskeletal events were more frequent with the upfront schedule than with the switch schedule (924 [52%] of 1766 patients vs 745 [42%] of 1761 patients). All other grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in less than 2% of patients in either group. INTERPRETATION: 5 years of treatment with aromatase inhibitors was not superior to 2 years of tamoxifen followed by 3 years of aromatase inhibitors. None of the three aromatase inhibitors was superior to the others in terms of efficacy. Therefore, patient preference, tolerability, and financial constraints should be considered when deciding the optimal treatment approach in this setting. FUNDING: Italian Drug Agency.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer: A multicentric retrospective observational study in real-life setting.

We aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in a cohort of 213 triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients treated in real-world practice at eight Italian cancer centers. We computed descriptive statistics for all the variable of interest. Factors testing significant in univariate analysis were included in multivariate models. Survival data were compared by Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank test. The median follow-up was 45 months. We observed 60 (28.2%) pathological complete response (pCR). The sequential anthracyclines-taxanes-based regimens produced the highest rate of pCR (42.6%), followed by concomitant anthracycline-taxane (24.2%), and other regimens (15.6%) (p = 0.008). When analyzing the role of baseline Ki-67, a 50% cut-off was the optimal threshold value for pCR prediction (p = 0.0005). The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 57.3% and the 5-year overall survival (OS) was 70.8%. In patients not achieving pCR, the optimal Ki-67 variation between biopsy and surgical specimen with prognostic relevance on long-term outcomes was 13% (p = 0.04). Patients with a Ki-67 reduction (rKi-67)<13% had worse outcomes compared to those who experienced pCR or a rKi-67≥13%. The number of NACT cycles also affected long-term outcomes (5-year DFS 65.7% vs 51.6% in patients having received >6 cycles compared with their counterparts, p = 0.02). In multivariate analysis, node status, grading, and bio-pathological treatment response (including pCR and rKi-67) impacted DFS and OS. Our results confirmed the advantage conferred by more than 6 cycles of a sequential antracycline-taxane-based NACT. Higher baseline Ki-67 values shows greater predictive significance on pathogical response, while the rKi-67 plays a prognostic role on long-term outcomes.

A Real-World Multicentre Retrospective Study of Paclitaxel-Bevacizumab and Maintenance Therapy as First-Line for HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Bevacizumab in combination with taxanes in HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients has shown improved progression-free survival (PFS), despite the lack of clear overall survival (OS) benefit. We performed a retrospective analysis to evaluate the impact of paclitaxel-bevacizumab and of maintenance therapy with bevacizumab (BM) and endocrine therapy (ET) in the real-world practice. We identified 314 HER2-negative MBC patients treated in 12 cancer centers. Overall, the median PFS and OS were 14 and 40 months, respectively. Among the 254 patients potentially eligible for BM, 183 received BM after paclitaxel discontinuation until progression/toxicity. PFS and OS were improved in patients who had received BM in comparison with those potentially eligible but who did not receive BM (P< 0.0001 and P = 0.001, respectively). Results were confirmed when adjusting for propensity score. Among the 216 hormone-receptor positive patients eligible for BM, a more favorable PFS and OS were observed when maintenance ET was administered (P < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis showed that PS, BM, number of disease sites and maintenance ET were related to PFS, while response and maintenance ET were related to OS. In hormone-receptor positive patients, BM produced a significant PFS and a trend towards OS benefit only in absence of maintenance ET (P = 0.0007 and P = 0.06, respectively). In the triple-negative subgroup, we observed a trend towards a better OS for patients who received BM (P = 0.06), without differences in PFS (P = 0.21). Our results confirmed the efficacy of first-line paclitaxel-bevacizumab in real-world practice; both BM and maintenance ET significantly improved PFS and OS compared to no maintenance therapies. J. Cell. Physiol. 232: 1571-1578, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Dose intensity and efficacy of the combination of everolimus and exemestane (EVE/EXE) in a real-world population of hormone receptor-positive (ER+/PgR+), HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC) patients: a multicenter Italian experience.

AIM: This retrospective analysis focused on the effect of treatment with EVE/EXE in a real-world population outside of clinical trials. We examined the efficacy of this combination in terms of PFS and RR related to dose intensity (5 mg daily versus 10 mg daily) and tolerability. METHODS: 163 HER2-negative ER+/PgR+ ABC patients, treated with EVE/EXE from May 2011 to March 2016, were included in the analysis. The primary endpoints were the correlation between the daily dose and RR and PFS, as well as an evaluation of the tolerability of the combination. Secondary endpoints were RR, PFS, and OS according to the line of treatment. Patients were classified into three different groups, each with a different dose intensity of everolimus (A, B, C). RESULTS: RR was 29.8% (A), 27.8% (B) (p = 0.953), and not evaluable (C). PFS was 9 months (95% CI 7-11) (A), 10 months (95% CI 9-11) (B), and 5 months (95% CI 2-8) (C), p = 0.956. OS was 38 months (95% CI 24-38) (A), median not reached (B), and 13 months (95% CI 10-25) (C), p = 0.002. Adverse events were stomatitis 57.7% (11.0% grade 3-4), asthenia 46.0% (6.1% grade 3-4), hypercholesterolemia 46.0% (0.6% grade 3-4), and hyperglycemia 35.6% (5.5% grade 3-4). The main reason for discontinuation/interruption was grade 2-3 stomatitis. CONCLUSIONS: No correlation was found between dose intensity (5 vs. 10 mg labeled dose) and efficacy in terms of RR and PFS. The tolerability of the higher dose was poor in our experience, although this had no impact on efficacy.

ESAS and FACT-B in eribulin-treated metastatic breast cancer patients: a multicenter, prospective and observational study.

AIM: Quality of life (QoL) is a critical issue for women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Eribulin mesylate represents a novel and active drug for pretreated MBC. Regretfully, few data exploring health-related (HR) QoL are available in unselected populations. PATIENTS & METHODS: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in 50 MBC patients treated with eribulin mesylate, in order to evaluate HRQoL and patients' well-being by using the Edmonton symptoms assessment scale (ESAS) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast questionnaires. RESULTS: A significant ESAS score improvement was observed with a 10% median decrease. No differences were revealed for the QoL scores. CONCLUSION: The analysis of ESAS and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scores showed that eribulin mesylate contributes to preserve QoL in MBC patients.

Ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in HER2+ advanced breast cancer patients: does pretreatment with pertuzumab matter?

AIM: We evaluated the outcomes of patients treated with ado-trastuzumab emantasine (T-DM1) after first-line pertuzumab/trastuzumab, compared with those receiving a trastuzumab-only-based regimen. PATIENTS & METHODS: Patients who received second-line T-DM1 after pertuzumab/trastuzumab (n = 34) were compared with those who received only trastuzumab (n = 73). RESULTS: Overall response rate was 33.3% in patients with prior pertuzumab and 57.1% in the remaining subjects. Disease control rate was 47 and 43%, respectively, and the clinical benefit rate was 43.3 and 71.1%, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 5.0 and 11.0 months, respectively (hazard ratio: 2.02; 95% CI: 1.14-3.58; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Patients treated with T-DM1 who previously received pertuzumab present poorer clinical outcomes compared with those receiving a trastuzumab-only-based regimen in the first-line setting.

Body Mass Index and Treatment Outcomes in Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients Treated With Eribulin.

Eribulin has shown survival advantage and manageable toxicity in heavily pre-treated metastatic breast cancer (mBC). We assessed whether body mass index (BMI) impacts treatment outcomes in 101 patients treated with eribulin at six Italian Oncologic Centers. BMI was addressed as a categorical variable (18.5-24.9 vs. at least 25). Clinical benefit rate (CBR) was assessed overall and in subgroups defined by BMI, line of therapy (LOT), and hormone receptor (HR) status. Analysis of CBR by LOT and HR status were further stratified by BMI. Survival curves were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Predictors of survival were tested in Cox models. Patients treated with eribulin as third line showed greater CBR when their BMI was in the lowest category (77.8 vs. 58.1%, P = 0.03). Median progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in normal and overweight patients were 4 (95% CI, 3-5) versus 3 (2.1-4) months, P = 0.02 and 13 (11-15) versus 12 (6-18) months, P = 0.96, respectively. Median PFS and OS in estrogen receptor (ER) positive and negative tumours were 4 (3-5) versus 3 (2-4) months, P = 0.005 and 14 (10-18) versus 7 (4-10), P = 0.02, respectively. In multivariate analyses, BMI impacted PFS at a nearly significant extent (P = 0.05), while ER expression significantly affected PFS and OS (P = 0.01 and 0.02, respectively). No relevant findings emerged concerning toxicity. We found evidence of greater efficacy of eribulin in leaner mBC patients, particularly if given as third line and in ER positive tumors. Further studies are warranted to confirm our findings.

Eribulin in heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer patients and clinical/biological feature correlations: impact on the practice.

AIM: This multicenter study describes the effectiveness of eribulin in current practice. PATIENTS & METHODS: In total, 78 patients with advanced metastatic breast cancer, previously treated with two or more chemotherapy lines were enrolled. RESULTS: The median duration of response and disease stability were 7.5 (5.4-9.5) and 8.9 (6.2-11.6) months, respectively, with a clinical benefit (CB) at 6 months in 41% of patients. CB in visceral and nonvisceral metastases were 72.7 and 88.9%, respectively. Eribulin was active also in brain metastases, with 47% CB. The activity was shown in all biological subtypes. Toxicities were manageable. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms the effectiveness of eribulin mesylate in the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer and two or more lines of chemotherapy, in particular in the good disease control at the different metastatic sites.

Outcomes of HER2-positive early breast cancer patients in the pre-trastuzumab and trastuzumab eras: a real-world multicenter observational analysis. The RETROHER study.

Addition of trastuzumab to adjuvant chemotherapy has dramatically reduced the risk of recurrence and has become the standard of care for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer patients. Since most data on trastuzumab benefits come from clinical trials, conducted in selected patient populations, we performed a retrospective analysis of HER2-positive early breast cancer patients treated in the "pre-trastuzumab" and "trastuzumab" eras, with the aim to determine patients' outcomes in real-world practice. 925 consecutive HER2-positive breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy in ten Italian oncologic centers were identified. Patients who had received adjuvant chemotherapy alone (cohort A, 352 patients), and patients who had received adjuvant chemotherapy followed or combined with trastuzumab (cohort B, 573 patients) were analyzed. Relapse rate at 3 years, relapse-free survival, and overall survival were significantly more unfavorable in the cohort A than in the cohort B (p < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, factors related to relapse were younger age, advanced stage at diagnosis, absence of hormonal and of trastuzumab therapy. The benefit derived from the addition of trastuzumab was independent of nodal status and hormonal receptors expression. A subgroup analysis including 163 "triple positive" tumors with high levels of estrogen and progesterone receptor (TP50) suggested that addition of trastuzumab to adjuvant chemotherapy and hormonal therapy did not translate into better outcomes. In our analysis, trastuzumab benefit was confirmed in all but a small subset of TP50 tumors subgroups. In this subset further investigations are needed.

Erlotinib versus docetaxel as second-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and wild-type EGFR tumours (TAILOR): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Erlotinib is registered for treatment of all patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, its efficacy for treatment of patients whose tumours are EGFR wild-type-which includes most patients-is still contentious. We assessed the efficacy of erlotinib compared with a standard second-line chemotherapy in such patients. METHODS: We did this randomised controlled trial in 52 Italian hospitals. We enrolled patients who had metastatic NSCLC, had had platinum-based chemotherapy, and had wild-type EGFR as assessed by direct sequencing. Patients were randomly assigned centrally (1:1) to receive either erlotinib orally 150 mg/day or docetaxel intravenously 75 mg/m(2) every 21 days or 35 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15, every 28 days. Randomisation was stratified by centre, stage, type of first-line chemotherapy, and performance status. Patients and investigators who gave treatments or assessed outcomes were not masked to treatment allocation, investigators who analysed results were. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00637910. FINDINGS: We screened 702 patients, of whom we genotyped 540. 222 patients were enrolled (110 assigned to docetaxel vs 112 assigned to erlotinib). Median overall survival was 8·2 months (95% CI 5·8-10·9) with docetaxel versus 5·4 months (4·5-6·8) with erlotinib (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·73, 95% CI 0·53-1·00; p=0·05). Progression-free survival was significantly better with docetaxel than with erlotinib: median progression-free survival was 2·9 months (95% CI 2·4-3·8) with docetaxel versus 2·4 months (2·1-2·6) with erlotinib (adjusted HR 0·71, 95% CI 0·53-0·95; p=0·02). The most common grade 3-4 toxic effects were: low absolute neutrophil count (21 [20%] of 104 in the docetaxel group vs none of 107 in the erlotinib group), skin toxic effects (none vs 15 [14%]), and asthenia (ten [10%] vs six [6%]). INTERPRETATION: Our results show that chemotherapy is more effective than erlotinib for second-line treatment for previously treated patients with NSCLC who have wild-type EGFR tumours.

Maintenance single-agent bevacizumab or observation after first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicenter retrospective study.

The addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy has improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in both first- and second line treatment, but the role of maintenance bevacizumab remains controversial. The association of various clinical factor and survival was examined in this retrospective cohort analysis. The clinical data from 220 previously untreated patients with mCRC, not progressive at the end of standard chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, were collected and analyzed. Patients were classified into two subgroups: those given with maintenance bevacizumab: "maintenance bevacizumab cohort (n = 118; MB)", and those discontinuing bevacizumab as a result of physician's or patient's decision: "no maintenance bevacizumab cohort (n = 102; noMB)". The baseline factors were well balanced between the study subgroups. Median PFS and OS for the general population was 10 months (range 7-15) and 22.5 months (range 18-26), respectively. Median PFS was 13 and 8 months in the BM and noBM cohorts, respectively (p < 0.0001). In the multivariate analysis, maintenance therapy resulted independently associated with improved PFS (HR 1.73; p < 0.001), but only objective response (OR) after first-line chemotherapy was associated with improved OS. Maintenance chemotherapy cannot be considered a standard of care after induction chemotherapy for mCRC, because the optimal balance between efficacy and safety of maintenance therapy remains a significant challenge. The results of our retrospective study suggest that maintenance therapy with bevacizumab is a safe and valuable option, particularly in those patients achieving an objective response after first-line chemotherapy.