Comparison of Management and Outcomes in ERBB2-Low vs ERBB2-Zero Metastatic Breast Cancer in France.

Importance: ERBB2-low (ie, ERBB2 immunohistochemistry score of 1+ or 2+ in the absence of ERBB2 gene amplification) breast cancer (BC) is a new entity, with emerging dedicated treatments. Little is known about its prognosis and response to conventional therapy compared with ERBB2-zero breast tumors (ie, those with an immunohistochemistry score of 0). Objective: To compare the outcomes for patients with ERBB2-low metastatic BC (MBC) with those of patients with ERBB2-zero MBC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was conducted from the Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics MBC platform and included patients with MBC treated between 2008 and 2016 in 18 French comprehensive cancer centers. The data analysis was conducted from July 16, 2020, to April 1, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was overall survival (OS), and the secondary outcome was progression-free survival under first-line treatments (PFS1). Results: The median (range) age was 60.0 (22.0-103.0) years. Among 15 054 patients with MBC, 4671 (31%) had ERBB2-low MBC and 10 383 (69%) had ERBB2-zero MBC. The proportion of ERBB2-low cancers was higher among patients with hormone receptor-positive MBC than those with hormone receptor-negative disease (4083 patients [33.0%] vs 588 patients [21.0%]). With a median follow-up of 49.5 months (95% CI, 48.6-50.4 months), the median OS of the ERBB2-low group was 38.0 months (95% CI, 36.4-40.5 months) compared with 33.9 months (95% CI, 32.9-34.9 months) for the ERBB2-zero group (P < .001). After adjustment for age, visceral metastases, number of metastatic sites, de novo disease, period of care, and hormone receptor status, patients with ERBB2-low MBC had slightly better OS compared with patients with ERBB2-zero MBC (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-0.99; P = .02). In contrast, PFS1 did not differ by ERBB2 status (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.95-1.02; P = .45). No significant differences in OS and PFS1 were observed in multivariate analyses by hormone receptor status and types of frontline treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this large cohort study, patients with ERBB2-low MBC had a slightly better OS than those with completely ERBB2-zero tumors, but identical PFS1, which could help guide treatment selection.

Survival Impact of Locoregional Treatment of the Primary Tumor in De Novo Metastatic Breast Cancers in a Large Multicentric Cohort Study: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Improvement in overall survival (OS) by locoregional treatment (LRT) of the primary tumor in de novo metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of LRT on OS in a large retrospective cohort of de novo MBC patients, with regard to immunohistochemical characteristics and pattern of metastatic dissemination. METHODS: We conducted a multicentric retrospective study of patients diagnosed with de novo MBC selected from the French Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics MBC database (NCT03275311) between 2008 and 2014. Overall, 4276 women were included in the study. LRT comprised either radiotherapy, surgery, or both. RESULTS: LRT was used in 40% of patients. Compared with no LRT, patients who received LRT were younger (p < 0.0001) and were more likely to have only one metastatic site (p < 0.0001) or bone-only metastases (p < 0.0001). LRT was associated with a significantly better OS based on landmark multivariate analysis at 1-year (hazard ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.55-0.76, p < 0.001). Similar results were observed in all sensitivity analyses, including propensity score matching. In subgroup analysis, LRT was associated with better OS in patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative (61.6 vs. 45.9 months, p < 0.001) and HER2-positive tumors (77.2 vs. 52.6 months, p = 0.008), but not in triple-negative tumors (19 vs. 18.6 months, p = 0.54), and was also associated with a reduction in the risk of death in visceral metastatic patients (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: LRT was associated with a significantly better OS in de novo MBC patients, including patients with visceral involvement at diagnosis; however, LRT did not impact OS in triple-negative MBC.

Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria, contrast enhancement and perfusion MRI for assessing progression in glioblastoma.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria in glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), with respect to the Macdonald criteria and changes in contrast-enhancement (CE) volume. Related variations in relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) were investigated. METHODS: Forty-three patients diagnosed between 2006 and 2010 were included. All underwent surgical resection, followed by temozolomide-based chemoradiation. MR images were retrospectively reviewed. Times to progression (TTPs) according to RANO criteria, Macdonald criteria and increased CE volume (CE-3D) were compared, and the percentage change in the 75th percentile of rCBV (rCBV75) was evaluated. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 22.7 months, a total of 39 patients had progressed according to RANO criteria, 32 according to CE-3D, and 42 according to Macdonald. Median TTPs were 6.4, 9.3, and 6.6 months, respectively. Overall agreement was 79.07% between RANO and CE-3D and 93.02% between RANO and Macdonald. The mean percentage change in rCBV75 at RANO progression onset was over 73% in 87.5% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, our findings suggest that CE-3D criterion is not yet suitable to assess progression in routine clinical practice. Indeed, the accurate threshold is still not well defined. To date, in our opinion, early detection of disease progression by RANO combined with advanced MRI imaging techniques like MRI perfusion and diffusion remains the best way to assess disease progression. Further investigations that would examine the impact of treatment modifications after progression determined by different criteria on overall survival would be of great value.