Anthracyclines versus No Anthracyclines in the Neoadjuvant Strategy for HER2+ Breast Cancer: Real-World Evidence.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Deescalation strategies omitting anthracyclines (AC) have been explored in early human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer (HER2+ EBC), showing similar efficacy regarding pathological complete response (pCR) and long-term outcomes as AC-containing regimens. The standard treatment for this tumor subtype is based on chemotherapy and dual HER2 blockade with trastuzumab and pertuzumab, with AC-containing regimens remaining a frequent option for these patients, even in non-high-risk cases. The primary aim of this study was to assess and compare the effectiveness of neoadjuvant regimens with and without AC used in the treatment of HER2+ EBC in the clinical practice according to the pCR achieved with each. METHODS: This retrospective multicentric study included patients with HER2+ EBC from Portuguese, Spanish, and Chilean hospitals (January 2018-December 2021). Patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) with dual HER2 blockade (trastuzumab and pertuzumab), followed by surgery, were included. Statistical analysis used chi-squared/Fisher's exact test for associations, multivariate logistic regression for pCR, and Kaplan-Meier method for event-free survival (EFS). IBM SPSS Statistics 29.0 analyzed the data. RESULTS: The study included 371 patients from eight hospitals. Among them, 237 received sequential AC and taxane-based chemotherapy with 4 cycles of trastuzumab and pertuzumab, while 134 received 6 cycles of TCHP (docetaxel, carboplatinum, trastuzumab, and pertuzumab). The average age of the patients was 52.8 years and 52.7 years, respectively. Omitting AC from the neoadjuvant approach did not preclude achieving pCR [p = 0.246, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.235-0.257] and was safe regardless of patient characteristics. Relapse rates were 6.8% (16 patients) in the AC group and 4.5% (6 patients) in the TCHP group. Over a median follow-up of 2.9 years, the estimated 3-year EFS was 92.5% in the AC group and 95.4% in the TCHP group (hazard ratio 0.602, 95% CI 0.234-1.547, p = 0.292, favoring TCHP). CONCLUSION: This study reports real-world evidence showing similar pCR and EFS outcomes with treatment regimens with and without AC and raises awareness of possible overtreatment and long-term toxicity in some patients with HER2+ EBC with the use of AC.

Use of Alfentanil in Palliative Care.

Alfentanil is used for chronic pain relief in palliative care. However, there is a dearth of data on its use. For this reason, a decision was made to review the use of alfentanil in palliative care. Retrospective study was carried out in a palliative care service. The files of patients who received alfentanil as an intravenous or subcutaneous continuous infusion for pain relief, between January 2018 and April 2019. In total, 111 patients received alfentanil out of 113 admissions. Of them, 56 were male, and the median age was 70 years. The median number of days on alfentanil was 6 (range 1 to 129). The most frequent primary reasons for switching to alfentanil was uncontrolled pain in 52 (46%) patients and renal impairment in 24 (21%) patients. The median 24-h initial dose of alfentanil was 4 mg (1-20), and the median final 24-h dose of alfentanil was 5 mg (1-60), (p < 0.001). The initial 24-h median number of rescue doses was 2 (0-8), and the final median number of rescue doses was 1 (0 to 8), (p = 0.025). In 56 patients who were on alfentanil for at least 7 days, the dose decreased in 3 (5%), remained stable in 10 (18%) and increased in 43 (77%). The patient on alfentanil for 129 days maintained the same dose throughout that period. Alfentanil can be a useful second-line opioid. The induction of tolerance does not seem to be particularly rapid with alfentanil.