Longitudinal monitoring of circulating tumor DNA to detect relapse early and predict outcome in early breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Detection of molecular residual disease (MRD) allows for the identification of breast cancer patients at high-risk of recurrence, with the potential that early initiation of treatment at early stages of relapse could improve patient outcomes. The Invitae Personalized Cancer Monitoring™ assay (PCM) is a newly developed next-generation sequencing approach that utilizes up to 50 patient-specific, tumor-informed DNA variants, to detect circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). The ability of the PCM assay to detect MRD before clinical relapse was evaluated. METHODS: The cohort included 61 female patients with high-risk breast cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Plasma samples were collected before and during neoadjuvant therapy, after surgery and during monitoring. PCM was used to detect ctDNA at each time point. RESULTS: The sensitivity to detect ctDNA in plasma from patients who relapsed during the monitoring phase was 76.9% (10/13). Specificity and positive predictive values were both 100% with all (10/61, 16%) of the patients who had ctDNA detected during the monitoring phase subsequently relapsing. Detection of ctDNA during monitoring was associated with a high-risk of future relapse (HR 37.2, 95% CI 10.5-131.9, p < 0.0001), with a median lead-time from ctDNA detection to clinical relapse of 11.7 months. CONCLUSION: PCM detected ctDNA in patients who relapsed with a long lead-time over clinical relapse, shows strong association with relapse-free survival and may be used to identify patients at high-risk for relapse, allowing for earlier intervention.

Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer: a plain language summary of the monarchE study.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This article summarizes the most recent results of the monarchE study. This study was completed in participants with a type of breast cancer called HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer. In this study, abemaciclib, a non-chemotherapy treatment, was administered with standard of care endocrine therapy after curative surgery. Most participants had received prior chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. The study investigated if abemaciclib helped participants live longer without their cancer returning compared with participants who only received standard of care endocrine therapy. The study participants were assigned to 1 of 2 treatment groups. Participants in Group A were assigned to receive standard of care endocrine therapy with abemaciclib for 2 years, followed by endocrine therapy for a total of at least 5 years. Participants in Group B were assigned to receive standard of care endocrine therapy only for at least 5 years. The effect of treatment was compared between these 2 groups. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Overall, the results showed that the cancer was 34% less likely to come back after surgery in the participants in Group A (abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy) compared with those in Group B (endocrine therapy only). At 4 years since the start of the study treatment, more participants who received the combination of abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy remained free of cancer compared with participants who received endocrine therapy alone (86% versus 79%). Participants who received abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy had more side effects than those who received endocrine therapy alone, but most of these effects were mild to moderate and reversible upon the end of therapy. The most common side effects in the abemaciclib group were diarrhea, infections, low number of white blood cells, and tiredness. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: This study found that administering abemaciclib in combination with standard endocrine therapy after curative breast surgery helped lower the risk of cancer returning in people with HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer. Abemaciclib is a new treatment option for people with this diagnosis. People with high-risk early breast cancer should always talk to their doctors and nurses before making any decisions about their treatment.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03155997 (monarchE study).

Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer (monarchE): results from a preplanned interim analysis of a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy previously showed a significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival and distant relapse-free survival in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2; also known as ERBB2)-negative, node-positive, high-risk, early breast cancer. Here, we report updated results from an interim analysis to assess overall survival as well as invasive disease-free survival and distant relapse-free survival with additional follow-up. METHODS: In monarchE, an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who had hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-positive, early breast cancer at a high risk of recurrence with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were recruited from 603 sites including hospitals and academic and community centres in 38 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by means of an interactive web-based response system (block size of 4), stratified by previous chemotherapy, menopausal status, and region, to receive standard-of-care endocrine therapy of physician's choice for up to 10 years with or without abemaciclib 150 mg orally twice a day for 2 years (treatment period). All therapies were administered in an open-label manner without masking. High-risk disease was defined as either four or more positive axillary lymph nodes, or between one and three positive axillary lymph nodes and either grade 3 disease or tumour size of 5 cm or larger (cohort 1). A smaller group of patients were enrolled with between one and three positive axillary lymph nodes and Ki-67 of at least 20% as an additional risk feature (cohort 2). This was a prespecified overall survival interim analysis planned to occur 2 years after the primary outcome analysis for invasive disease-free survival. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all treated patients. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03155997, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between July 17, 2017, and Aug 12, 2019, 5637 patients were randomly assigned (5601 [99·4%] were women and 36 [0·6%] were men). 2808 were assigned to receive abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy and 2829 were assigned to receive endocrine therapy alone. At a median follow-up of 42 months (IQR 37-47), median invasive disease-free survival was not reached in either group and the invasive disease-free survival benefit previously reported was sustained: HR 0·664 (95% CI 0·578-0·762, nominal p<0·0001). At 4 years, the absolute difference in invasive disease-free survival between the groups was 6·4% (85·8% [95% CI 84·2-87·3] in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group vs 79·4% [77·5-81·1] in the endocrine therapy alone group). 157 (5·6%) of 2808 patients in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group died compared with 173 (6·1%) of 2829 patients in the endocrine therapy alone group (HR 0·929, 95% CI 0·748-1·153; p=0·50). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (in 548 [19·6%] of 2791 patients receiving abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy vs 24 [0·9%] of 2800 patients in the endocrine therapy alone group), leukopenia (318 [11·4%] vs 11 [0·4%]), and diarrhoea (218 [7·8%] vs six [0·2%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 433 (15·5%) of 2791 patients receiving abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy versus 256 (9·1%) of 2800 receiving endocrine therapy. There were two treatment-related deaths in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group (diarrhoea and pneumonitis) and none in the endocrine therapy alone group. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant abemaciclib reduces the risk of recurrence. The benefit is sustained beyond the completion of treatment with an absolute increase at 4 years, further supporting the use of abemaciclib in patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. Further follow-up is needed to establish whether overall survival can be improved with abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy in these patients. FUNDING: Eli Lilly.

Adjuvant Abemaciclib Combined with Endocrine Therapy: Efficacy Results in monarchE Cohort 1.

The monarchE Cohort 1 patient population was enrolled based on high-risk clinicopathological features that can easily be identified as part of routine clinical breast cancer evaluation. Efficacy data from Cohort 1 demonstrate substantial evidence of benefit for adjuvant abemaciclib+ET in patients with HR+, HER2- early breast cancer at high risk of recurrence (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03155997 [monarchE]).

A review on the added value of whole-body MRI in metastatic lobular breast cancer.

Invasive lobular breast carcinomas (ILC) account for approximately 15% of breast cancer diagnoses. They can be difficult to diagnose both clinically and radiologically, due to their infiltrative growth pattern. The pattern of metastasis of ILC is unusual, with spread to the serosal surfaces (pleura and peritoneum), retroperitoneum and gastrointestinal (GI)/genitourinary (GU) tracts and a higher rate of leptomeningeal spread than IDC. Routine staging and response assessment with computed tomography (CT) can be undertaken quickly and measurements can be reproduced easily, but this is challenging with metastatic ILC as bone-only/bone-predominant patterns are frequently seen and assessment of the disease status is limited in these scenarios. Functional imaging such as whole-body MRI (WBMRI) allows the assessment of bone and soft tissue disease by providing functional information related to differences in cellular density between malignant and benign tissues. A number of recent studies have shown that WBMRI can detect additional sites of disease in metastatic breast cancer (MBC), resulting in a change in systemic anti-cancer therapy. Although WBMRI and fluorodeoxyglucose-positron-emission tomography-computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) have a comparable performance in the assessment of MBC, WBMRI can be particularly valuable as a proportion of ILC are non-FDG-avid, resulting in the underestimation of the disease extent. In this review, we explore the added value of WBMRI in the evaluation of metastatic ILC and compare it with other imaging modalities such as CT and FDG-PET/CT. We also discuss the spectrum of WBMRI findings of the different metastatic sites of ILC with CT and FDG-PET/CT correlation. KEY POINTS: • ILC has an unusual pattern of spread compared to IDC, with metastases to the peritoneum, retroperitoneum and GI and GU tracts, but the bones and liver are the commonest sites. • WBMRI allows functional assessment of metastatic disease, particularly in bone-only and bone-predominant metastatic cancers such as ILC where evaluation with CT can be challenging and limited. • WBMRI can detect more sites of disease compared with CT, can reveal disease progression earlier and provides the opportunity to change ineffective systemic treatment sooner.

Impact of timing of adjuvant chemothapy for early breast cancer: the Royal Marsden Hospital experience.

BACKGROUND: The optimal time to deliver adjuvant chemotherapy has not been defined. METHODS: A retrospective study of consecutive patients receiving adjuvant anthracycline and/or taxane 1993-2010. Primary endpoint included 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) in patients commencing chemotherapy <31 versus ≥31 days after surgery. Secondary endpoints included 5-year overall survival (OS) and sub-group analysis by receptor status. RESULTS: We identified 2003 eligible patients: 1102 commenced chemotherapy <31 days and 901 ≥31 days after surgery. After a median follow-up of 115 months, there was no difference in 5-year DFS rate with chemotherapy <31 compared to ≥31 days after surgery in the overall population (81 versus 82% hazard ratio (HR) 1.15, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.92-1.43, p = 0.230). The 5-year OS rate was similar in patients who received chemotherapy <31 or ≥31 days after surgery (90 versus 91%, (HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.89-1.64, p = 0.228). For 250 patients with triple-negative breast cancer OS was significantly worse in patients who received chemotherapy ≥31 versus <31 days (HR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.11-4.30, p = 0.02). DISCUSSION: Although adjuvant chemotherapy ≥31 days after surgery did not affect DFS or OS in the whole study population, in TN patients, chemotherapy ≥31 days after surgery significantly reduced 5-year OS; therefore, delays beyond 30 days in this sub-group should be avoided.

Pneumonitis and pulmonary fibrosis associated with breast cancer treatments.

To review the available published data regarding the incidence, mechanisms of pathogenesis, clinical presentations and management of pneumonitis caused by anti-cancer treatments (radiotherapy (RT) and systemic agents) that are included in the guidelines of the treatment of breast cancer (BC) and address the issues on the current grading classification of pneumonitis. A literature search was performed between July and October 2013 using PubMed for papers published from January 1989 to October 2013. Any clinical trial, case report, case series, meta-analysis or systematic review that reported on pulmonary toxicity of any BC therapeutic modality was included (only papers published in English). Most of anticancer treatments currently used in the management of BC may induce some degree of pneumonitis that is estimated to have an incidence of 1-3 %. There is an obvious distinction between chemotherapy- and targeted treatment-related lung toxicity. Moreover, the current classification of pneumonitis needs to be modified as there is a clear diversity in grade 2. As pneumonitis is relatively common and reported as side effect of new anticancer agents, physicians need to be aware of the clinical and radiological manifestations of drug- and RT-induced toxicities in patients with BC. A key recommendation is the subdivision of grade 2 cases to two subgroups. We provide an algorithm, along with real life cases as managed in the breast Unit of Royal Marsden Hospital, with the aim to guide physicians in managing all possible eventualities that may come across in clinical practise.

Expression of regulators of mitotic fidelity are associated with intercellular heterogeneity and chromosomal instability in primary breast cancer.

Regulators of transition through mitosis such as SURVIVIN and Aurora kinase A (AURKA) have been previously implicated in the initiation of chromosomal instability (CIN), a driver of intratumour heterogeneity. We investigate the relationship between protein expression of these genes and directly quantified CIN, and their prognostic utility in breast cancer. The expression of SURVIVIN and AURKA was determined by immunohistochemistry in a cohort of 426 patients with primary breast cancer. The association between protein expression and histopathological characteristics, clinical outcome and CIN status, as determined by centromeric FISH and defined by modal centromere deviation, was analysed. Significantly poorer clinical outcome was observed in patients with high AURKA expression levels. Expression of SURVIVIN was elevated in ER-negative relative to ER-positive breast cancer. Both AURKA and SURVIVIN increased expression were significantly associated with breast cancer grade. There was a significant association between increased CIN and both increased AURKA and SURVIVIN expression. AURKA gene amplification was also associated with increased CIN. To our knowledge this is the largest study assessing CIN status in parallel with the expression of the mitotic regulators AURKA and SURVIVIN. These data suggest that elevated expression of AURKA and SURVIVIN, together with AURKA gene amplification, are associated with increased CIN in breast cancer, and may be used as a proxy for CIN in breast cancer samples in the absence of more advanced molecular measurements.

The optimal duration of adjuvant endocrine therapy for early stage breast cancer--with what drugs and for how long?

Adjuvant endocrine therapy has made a significant impact in improving overall survival for women with hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer. The anti-estrogen tamoxifen is the most widely used therapy, although in post-menopausal women, aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have further improved outcomes either as an alternative to tamoxifen for 5 years, or given in sequential fashion following initial tamoxifen therapy. However, late recurrence remains perhaps the biggest risk in HR-positive breast cancer, with more than half all recurrences occurring beyond 5 years since primary diagnosis. As such, the current debate is whether extended AI or prolonged tamoxifen therapy should be given, and if so, to whom. We review some of the recent studies that have addressed this question and demonstrated further reduction in risk of recurrence, and discuss the clinical issues that face women and their health care providers in determining who should use which drug, and for how long.

Impact of dose reductions on adjuvant abemaciclib efficacy for patients with high-risk early breast cancer: analyses from the monarchE study.

In monarchE, adjuvant abemaciclib significantly improved invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS), with sustained benefit beyond the 2-year treatment period. Abemaciclib dose reductions were allowed to proactively manage adverse events. Exploratory analyses to investigate the impact of dose reductions on efficacy were conducted. Across the three patient subgroups as defined by relative dose intensity (≤66%, 66-93%, ≥93%), the estimated 4-year IDFS rates were generally consistent (87.1%, 86.4%, and 83.7%, respectively). In the time-dependent Cox proportional hazard model, the effect of abemaciclib was consistent at the full dose compared to being reduced to a lower dose (IDFS hazard ratio: 0.905; 95% confidence interval: 0.727, 1.125; DRFS hazard ratio: 0.942; 95% confidence interval: 0.742, 1.195). These analyses showed that the efficacy of adjuvant abemaciclib was not compromised by protocol mandated dose reductions for patients with node positive, hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative, high-risk early breast cancer.

Long-term patient-reported outcomes from monarchE: Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy as adjuvant therapy for HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk, early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: In monarchE, abemaciclib demonstrated a sustained benefit in invasive disease-free survival and a tolerable safety profile at 42-months median follow-up. With no expected disease-related symptoms, therapies in the adjuvant setting should preserve quality of life (QoL). With all patients off abemaciclib, we report updated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for the full 2-year treatment period and follow-up. METHODS: Patients completed PROs including FACT-B, FACT-ES, and FACIT-Fatigue at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months during treatment, and 1, 6, and 12 months after treatment discontinuation. Mixed effects repeated measures model estimated changes from baseline within and between arms for QoL scales and individual items. Meaningful changes were prespecified and no statistical testing was performed. Frequencies of responses to items associated with relevant adverse events and treatment bother were summarized. RESULTS: At baseline, completion rates for PRO instruments were >96 %. Mean changes from baseline for all QoL scales were numerically similar within and between arms (ie, less than prespecified thresholds). The same was observed for all individual items, except diarrhea. Within abemaciclib arm, meaningful differences for diarrhea were observed at 3 and 6 months (mean increases of 1.19 and 1.03 points on 5-point scale, respectively). During treatment, most patients in both arms (69-78 %) reported being bothered "a little bit" or "not at all" by side effects. Overall, patterns for fatigue were similar between arms. During post-treatment follow-up, PROs in both arms were similar to baseline. CONCLUSION: PRO findings confirm a tolerable and reversible toxicity profile for abemaciclib. QoL was preserved with the addition of adjuvant abemaciclib to endocrine therapy, supporting its use in patients with HR+, HER2-, high-risk early breast cancer.

A randomized and open-label trial evaluating the addition of pazopanib to lapatinib as first-line therapy in patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer.

This phase II study (VEG20007; NCT00347919) with randomized and open-label components evaluated first-line lapatinib plus pazopanib therapy and/or lapatinib monotherapy in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2)-positive advanced/metastatic breast cancer. Patients were enrolled sequentially into two cohorts: Cohort 1, patients were randomly assigned to lapatinib 1,000 mg plus pazopanib 400 mg or lapatinib 1,500 mg monotherapy; Cohort 2, patients received lapatinib 1,500 mg plus pazopanib 800 mg. The primary endpoint was week-12 progressive disease rate (PDR) for Cohort 1. The principal secondary endpoint was week-12 response rate (RR) for Cohort 2. Efficacy was assessed in patients with centrally confirmed HER2 positivity (modified intent-to-treat population [MITT]). The study enrolled 190 patients (Cohort 1, combination n = 77, lapatinib n = 73; Cohort 2, n = 40). The MITT population comprised n = 141 (Cohort 1) and n = 36 (Cohort 2). In Cohort 1, week-12 PDRs were 36.2 % (combination) versus 38.9 % (lapatinib; P = 0.37 for the difference). Week-12 RRs were 36.2 % (combination) versus 22.2 % (lapatinib). In Cohort 2, week-12 RR was 33.3 %. In Cohort 1, grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) included diarrhea (combination, 9 %; lapatinib, 5 %) and hypertension (combination, 5 %; lapatinib, 0 %). Grades 3/4 AEs in Cohort 2 included diarrhea (40 %), hypertension (5 %), and fatigue (5 %). Alanine aminotransferase elevations >5 times the upper limit of normal occurred in Cohort 1 (combination, 18 %; lapatinib, 5 %) and Cohort 2 (20 %). Upon conclusion, the combination of lapatinib plus pazopanib did not improve PDR compared with lapatinib monotherapy, although RR was increased. Toxicity was higher with the combination, including increased diarrhea and liver enzyme elevations.

A randomized phase II study of lapatinib + pazopanib versus lapatinib in patients with HER2+ inflammatory breast cancer.

This multi-center Phase II study evaluated lapatinib, pazopanib, and the combination in patients with relapsed HER2+ inflammatory breast cancer. In Cohort 1, 76 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive lapatinib 1,500 mg + placebo or lapatinib 1,500 mg + pazopanib 800 mg (double-blind) once daily until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. Due to high-grade diarrhea observed with this dose combination in another study (VEG20007), Cohort 1 was closed. The protocol was amended such that an additional 88 patients (Cohort 2) were randomized in a 5:5:2 ratio to receive daily monotherapy lapatinib 1,500 mg, lapatinib 1,000 mg + pazopanib 400 mg, or monotherapy pazopanib 800 mg, respectively. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety. In Cohort 1, ORR for the lapatinib (n = 38) and combination (n = 38) arms was 29 and 45 %, respectively; median PFS was 16.1 and 14.3 weeks, respectively. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were more frequent in the combination arm (71 %) than in the lapatinib arm (24 %). Dose reductions and interruptions due to AEs were also more frequent in the combination arm (45 and 53 %, respectively) than in the lapatinib monotherapy arm (0 and 11 %, respectively). In Cohort 2, ORR for patients treated with lapatinib (n = 36), lapatinib + pazopanib (n = 38), and pazopanib (n = 13) was 47, 58, and 31 %, respectively; median PFS was 16.0, 16.0, and 11.4 weeks, respectively. In the lapatinib, combination, and pazopanib therapy arms, grade ≥3 AEs were reported for 17, 50, and 46 % of patients, respectively, and the incidence of discontinuations due to AEs was 0, 24, and 23 %, respectively. The lapatinib-pazopanib combination was associated with a numerically higher ORR but no increase in PFS compared to lapatinib alone. The combination also had increased toxicity resulting in more dose reductions, modifications, and treatment delays. Activity with single-agent lapatinib was confirmed in this population.

Adjuvant Systemic Therapy for Postmenopausal, Hormone Receptor-Positive Early Breast Cancer.

There is now a deeper understanding of the biology of hormone receptor-positive (HR+) early breast cancer (EBC) that can be used to inform assessment of risk and prognosis, and also guide more effective adjuvant systemic therapies. For postmenopausal HR+ EBC endocrine therapy remains the mainstay of treatment with extended duration up to 10 years for some, the addition of targeted CDK 4/6 inhibitors for those with node-positive high-risk disease, and de-escalation of chemotherapy use for those in whom it is unlikely to be of benefit. As such, systemic adjuvant therapy is now highly tailored and individualized.

Estrogen/HER2 receptor crosstalk in breast cancer: combination therapies to improve outcomes for patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2-positive breast cancer.

The human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) is overexpressed in 13-22% of breast cancers (BC). Approximately 60-70% of HER2+ BC co-express hormone receptors (HRs). HR/HER2 co-expression modulates response to both anti-HER2-directed and endocrine therapy due to "crosstalk" between the estrogen receptor (ER) and HER2 pathways. Combined HER2/ER blockade may be an effective treatment strategy for patients with HR+/HER2+ BC in the appropriate clinical setting(s). In this review, we provide an overview of crosstalk between the ER and HER2 pathways, summarize data from recently published and ongoing clinical trials, and discuss clinical implications for targeted treatment of HR+/HER2+ BC.

Imaging in metastatic breast cancer, CT, PET/CT, MRI, WB-DWI, CCA: review and new perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most frequent cancer in women and remains the second leading cause of death in Western countries. It represents a heterogeneous group of diseases with diverse tumoral behaviour, treatment responsiveness and prognosis. While major progress in diagnosis and treatment has resulted in a decline in breast cancer-related mortality, some patients will relapse and prognosis in this cohort of patients remains poor. Treatment is determined according to tumor subtype; primarily hormone receptor status and HER2 expression. Menopausal status and site of disease relapse are also important considerations in treatment protocols. MAIN BODY: Staging and repeated evaluation of patients with metastatic breast cancer are central to the accurate assessment of disease extent at diagnosis and during treatment; guiding ongoing clinical management. Advances have been made in the diagnostic and therapeutic fields, particularly with new targeted therapies. In parallel, oncological imaging has evolved exponentially with the development of functional and anatomical imaging techniques. Consistent, reproducible and validated methods of assessing response to therapy is critical in effectively managing patients with metastatic breast cancer. CONCLUSION: Major progress has been made in oncological imaging over the last few decades. Accurate disease assessment at diagnosis and during treatment is important in the management of metastatic breast cancer. CT (and BS if appropriate) is generally widely available, relatively cheap and sufficient in many cases. However, several additional imaging modalities are emerging and can be used as adjuncts, particularly in pregnancy or other diagnostically challenging cases. Nevertheless, no single imaging technique is without limitation. The authors have evaluated the vast array of imaging techniques - individual, combined parametric and multimodal - that are available or that are emerging in the management of metastatic breast cancer. This includes WB DW-MRI, CCA, novel PET breast cancer-epitope specific radiotracers and radiogenomics.

Efficacy and safety results by menopausal status in monarchE: adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy in patients with HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer.

Background: Abemaciclib is the first and only cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitor approved for adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-), node-positive, and high-risk early breast cancer (EBC), with indications varying by geography. Premenopausal patients with HR+, HER2- tumors may have different tumor biology and treatment response compared to postmenopausal patients. Objectives: We describe the efficacy and safety of abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) for the large subgroup of premenopausal patients with HR+, HER2- EBC in monarchE. Design: Randomized patients (1:1) received adjuvant ET with or without abemaciclib for 2 years plus at least 3 additional years of ET as clinically indicated. Methods: Patients were stratified by menopausal status (premenopausal versus postmenopausal) at diagnosis. Standard ET (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor) with or without gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist was determined by physician's choice. Invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) by menopausal status were assessed at data cutoff on 1 April 2021 (median follow-up of 27 months). Results: Among randomized patients, 2451 (43.5%) were premenopausal and 3181 (56.4%) were postmenopausal. The choice of ET for premenopausal patients varied considerably between countries. Treatment benefit was consistent across menopausal status, with a numerically greater effect size in premenopausal patients. For premenopausal patients, abemaciclib with ET resulted in a 42.2% and 40.3% reduction in the risk of developing IDFS and DRFS events, respectively. Absolute improvement at 3 years was 5.7% for IDFS and 4.4% for DRFS rates. Safety profile for premenopausal patients was consistent with the overall safety population. Conclusion: Abemaciclib with ET demonstrated clinically meaningful treatment benefit for IDFS and DRFS versus ET alone regardless of menopausal status and first ET, with a numerically greater benefit in the premenopausal compared to the postmenopausal population. Safety data in premenopausal patients are consistent with the overall safety profile of abemaciclib.