Predictive Significance of an Optimized Panel for Basal-like Breast Cancer: Results from the Canadian Cancer Trials Group MA.5 and MA.12 Phase III Clinical Trials.

PURPOSE: Accurate IHC biomarkers incorporating nestin positivity or inositol polyphosphate-4-phosphate (INPP4B) loss have recently been optimized to identify the basal-like intrinsic breast cancer subtype regardless of estrogen, progesterone, or Her2 status. We examined the predictive capacity of these basal biomarkers in the CCTG MA.5 chemotherapy and MA.12 endocrine therapy trials. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Formalin-fixed paraffin embedded blocks of primary tumors from patients randomized in the two trials were used to build tissue microarrays. IHC staining for nestin and INPP4B followed published methods and REMARK criteria. A prespecified statistical plan tested the hypothesis that patients with basal breast cancer (nestin+ or INPP4B-) would not benefit from anthracycline substitution in MA.5 or from tamoxifen in MA.12. RESULTS: Nestin positivity or INPP4B loss was observed in 110/453 (24%) interpretable samples from MA.5 and 47/366 (13%) from MA.12, and was associated with high grade, younger age, estrogen receptor negativity, triple-negative, core basal, and PAM50 basal-like subtypes. In the MA.5 trial, patients assigned as basal experienced lower benefit from anthracycline versus nonanthracycline adjuvant chemotherapy [HR, 1.49; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-3.10] when compared with non-basal (nestin- and INPP4B+) cases where there was a higher benefit from anthracyclines (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.54-1.04; P interaction = 0.01). In the MA.12 trial, patients assigned as basal did not demonstrate a benefit from adjuvant tamoxifen versus placebo (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.12-1.86; P = 0.29), whereas nonbasal cases displayed significant benefit (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.98; P = 0.04), although the interaction test was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The nestin/INPP4B IHC panel identifies women with basal breast cancers who benefit from nonanthracycline chemotherapy but not endocrine adjuvant treatments.

Association between BMI, vitamin D, and estrogen levels in postmenopausal women using adjuvant letrozole: a prospective study.

Studies have suggested that women with elevated BMI or 25-OH vitamin D levels may derive less benefit from AIs versus tamoxifen. We prospectively investigated whether high BMI or 25-OH vitamin D levels were associated with higher estrogen levels in post-menopausal women receiving standard adjuvant letrozole (2.5 mg/day). Furthermore, we evaluated whether an increased dose of letrozole resulted in lower serum estrogens in women with BMI > 25 kg/m2. Correlation between entry BMI and day 29 serum biomarkers (estrogens, 25-OH vitamin D, insulin, CRP, leptin) was assessed in all patients. On day 29, participants with BMI > 25 kg/m2 switched to letrozole 5 mg/day for 4-weeks and blood was drawn upon completion of the study. The change in serum estrogen levels was assessed in these patients (BMI > 25 kg/m2). 112 patients completed days 1-28. The Pearson correlations of estradiol and estrone with BMI or serum 25-OH vitamin D levels were near zero (-0.04 to 0.07, p = 0.48-0.69). Similar results were obtained for correlation with markers of obesity (insulin, CRP, and leptin) with estradiol and estrone (-0.15 to 0.12; p = 0.11-0.82). Thirty-one patients (BMI > 25 kg/m2) completed the interventional component; Increasing the dose of letrozole did not further reduce estradiol or estrone levels (change 0.1 and 0.4 pmol/L respectively; p = 0.74 and 0.36). There was no observed association between markers of obesity (BMI, insulin, leptin, and CRP), serum 25-OH vitamin D levels and estradiol or estrone levels. Additionally, an increased dose of letrozole did not further reduce estradiol or estrone levels compared to the standard dose.

Incidence of Brain Metastases in Nonmetastatic and Metastatic Breast Cancer: Is There a Role for Screening?

BACKGROUND: Current National Comprehensive Cancer Network and American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines recommend against screening breast cancer patients for asymptomatic brain metastases. Because brain metastases are a major cause of morbidity and mortality from breast cancer, we undertook a literature review to ascertain whether there might be a role for brain metastases screening in high-risk patient subgroups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was conducted on the OvidSP platform in the MedLine database, using MeSH terms and subject headings related to breast cancer, brain metastases, and incidence. The search was conducted without language or publication restrictions, and included articles indexed from January 1, 2006 to June 10, 2018. Experimental and observational studies that reported the incidence of brain metastases in patients with nonmetastatic or metastatic breast cancer were included. RESULTS: One hundred seventy studies were identified, with 33 included in the final analysis. Among nonmetastatic breast cancer patients, incidence of brain metastases as site of first recurrence per year of median follow-up ranged from 0.1% to 3.2%. Although incidence of brain metastases was much higher among the metastatic breast cancer population overall, it was particularly high among metastatic HER2-overexpressing (HER2+) and triple-negative populations, ranging between 22% and 36% for the former, and 15%-37% for the latter in the absence of screening. CONCLUSION: In patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer, screening for asymptomatic brain metastases cannot currently be justified. However, due to the high incidence of brain metastases among patients with metastatic HER2+ and triple-negative breast cancer, studies to determine the value of screening for brain metastases should be undertaken in these subgroups.

A meta-analysis of clinical benefit rates for fulvestrant 500 mg vs. alternative endocrine therapies for hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Fulvestrant, a selective estrogen receptor degrader, is approved for first- and second-line treatment of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer (ABC). METHODS: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating fulvestrant 500 mg in postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive ABC, to evaluate differences in clinical benefit rate (CBR; proportion of patients experiencing best overall response of complete response, partial response, or stable disease for ≥ 24 weeks) between fulvestrant 500 mg and comparator endocrine therapies. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for CBR were calculated; fixed effects (FE) models were constructed (first- and second-line data, alone and combined). RESULTS: Six RCTs were included. Four studies evaluated fulvestrant 500 mg vs. fulvestrant 250 mg; two evaluated fulvestrant 500 mg vs. anastrozole 1 mg. In total, 1054 and 534 patients were included (first- and second-line treatment, respectively). Analysis of OR and 95% CI of CBR by therapy line favored fulvestrant 500 mg vs. comparator therapy. Assessing all results combined in the FE model indicated significant improvement in CBR with fulvestrant 500 mg vs. comparator treatments (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.13-1.57; p = 0.001). Restricting the FE model to therapy line demonstrated significant improvement in CBR vs. comparator treatments (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.02-1.73; p = 0.035) for first-line, and a trend to improvement vs. comparator treatments (OR 1.27; 95% CI 0.90-1.79; p = 0.174) for second-line. CONCLUSIONS: In postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive ABC, fulvestrant 500 mg first-line was associated with significantly greater CBR (more patients benefiting from treatment) vs. comparator endocrine therapy.

Vitamin D Levels, Vitamin D Receptor Polymorphisms, and Inflammatory Cytokines in Aromatase Inhibitor-Induced Arthralgias: An Analysis of CCTG MA.27.

BACKGROUND: Approximately half of women taking aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy develop AI-induced arthralgia (AIA), and many might discontinue AI therapy because of the pain. Using plasma samples from the MA.27 study, we assessed several factors potentially associated with AIA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MA.27 is a phase III adjuvant trial comparing 2 AIs, exemestane versus anastrozole. Within an 893-participant nested case-control AIA genome-wide association study, we nested a 72 AIA case-144 control assessment of vitamin D plasma concentrations, corrected for seasonal and geographic variation. We also examined 9 baseline inflammatory cytokines: interleukin (IL)-1ß, IL-6, tumor necrosis factor-α, interferon (IFN)γ, IL-10, IL-12p70, IL-17, IL-23, and chemokine ligand (CCL)-20. Finally, we analyzed the multivariate effects of baseline factors: vitamin D level, previously identified musculoskeletal single nucleotide polymorphisms, age, body mass index, and vitamin D receptor (VDR) Fok-I variant genotype on AIA development. RESULTS: Changes in vitamin D from baseline to 6 months were not significantly different between cases and controls. Elevated inflammatory cytokine levels were not associated with development of AIA. The multivariate model included no clinical factors associated with AIA. However, women with the VDR Fok-I variant genotype were more likely to have a lower IL-1ß level (P = .0091) and less likely to develop AIA after 6 months of AI compared with those with the wild type VDR (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: In this nested case-control correlative study, vitamin D levels were not significantly associated with development of AIA; however, patients with the Fok-I VDR variant genotype were more likely to have a significant reduction in IL-1ß level, and less likely to develop AIA.

Prognostic associations of 25 hydroxy vitamin D in NCIC CTG MA.21, a phase III adjuvant randomized clinical trial of three chemotherapy regimens in high-risk breast cancer.

Low vitamin D levels have been associated with poor breast cancer outcomes in observational studies. We examined the association of vitamin D blood levels with relapse-free survival (RFS), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), and overall survival (OS) in the MA.21 randomized clinical trial. Fasting blood was collected pre-chemotherapy in 934/2104 (44.4 %) of subjects; 25 hydroxy vitamin D was measured (radioimmunoassay, Diasorin) in one batch. Vitamin D was assessed as a transformed continuous factor, and categorically (quartiles and clinical classifications). Univariate and multivariate prognostic analyses (adjusted for treatment, stratification factors, and baseline imbalances) were performed using Cox models. Most patients were young (median 47.8 years), white (91.6 %) and premenopausal (69.4 %) with grade III (52 %), HER2 negative or missing (89.5 %), ER positive (61.9 %), T1-2 (89.4 %), N + (72.7 %) breast cancer. Compared to the full population, those with vitamin D levels were more likely to be white, PS 1 or 2, to have undergone mastectomy, and to have an ER + tumor. Mean vitamin D was 69.7 nmol/L (27.9 ng/ml) and did not vary by tumor subtype. The majority (80.5 %) had levels >50 nmol/L (20 ng/ml), considered adequate by Institute of Medicine. Continuous vitamin D was not multivariately associated with RFS, BCSS, or OS (p = 0.36, 0.26, 0.33, respectively); categorical vitamin D was also not associated with outcome. Vitamin D associations with RFS did not differ within ER/HER2 subgroups. There was no evidence that vitamin D blood level was associated with RFS, BCSS, and OS in MA.21; the majority of subjects had adequate vitamin D levels at study entry.

Predicting Anthracycline Benefit: TOP2A and CEP17-Not Only but Also.

PURPOSE: Evidence supporting the clinical utility of predictive biomarkers of anthracycline activity is weak, with a recent meta-analysis failing to provide strong evidence for either HER2 or TOP2A. Having previously shown that duplication of chromosome 17 pericentromeric alpha satellite as measured with a centromere enumeration probe (CEP17) predicted sensitivity to anthracyclines, we report here an individual patient-level pooled analysis of data from five trials comparing anthracycline-based chemotherapy with CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil) as adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fluorescent in situ hybridization for CEP17, HER2, and TOP2A was performed in three laboratories on samples from 3,846 of 4,864 eligible patients from five trials evaluating anthracycline-containing chemotherapy versus CMF. Methodologic differences did not affect HER2-to-CEP17 ratios but necessitated different definitions for CEP17 duplication: > 1.86 observed copies per cell for BR9601, NEAT, Belgian, and DBCG89D trials and > 2.25 for the MA.5 trial. RESULTS: Fluorescent in situ hybridization data were available in 89.3% (HER2), 83.9% (CEP17), and 80.6% (TOP2A) of 3,846 patient cases with available tissue. Both CEP17and TOP2A treatment-by-marker interactions remained significant in adjusted analyses for recurrence-free and overall survival, whereas HER2 did not. A combined CEP17 and TOP2A-adjusted model predicted anthracycline benefit across all five trials for both recurrence-free (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.82; P = .001) and overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.85; P = .005). CONCLUSION: This prospectively planned individual-patient pooled analysis of patient cases from five adjuvant trials confirms that patients whose tumors harbor either CEP17 duplication or TOP2A aberrations, but not HER2 amplification, benefit from adjuvant anthracycline chemotherapy.

Effects of adjuvant exemestane versus anastrozole on bone mineral density for women with early breast cancer (MA.27B): a companion analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of breast cancer with aromatase inhibitors is associated with damage to bones. NCIC CTG MA.27 was an open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial in which women with breast cancer were assigned to one of two adjuvant oral aromatase inhibitors-exemestane or anastrozole. We postulated that exemestane-a mildly androgenic steroid-might have a less detrimental effect on bone than non-steroidal anastrozole. In this companion study to MA.27, we compared changes in bone mineral density (BMD) in the lumbar spine and total hip between patients treated with exemestane and patients treated with anastrozole. METHODS: In MA.27, postmenopausal women with early stage hormone (oestrogen) receptor-positive invasive breast cancer were randomly assigned to exemestane 25 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg, daily. MA.27B recruited two groups of women from MA.27: those with BMD T-scores of -2·0 or more (up to 2 SDs below sex-matched, young adult mean) and those with at least one T-score (hip or spine) less than -2·0. Both groups received vitamin D and calcium; those with baseline T-scores of less than -2·0 also received bisphosphonates. The primary endpoints were percent change of BMD at 2 years in lumbar spine and total hip for both groups. We analysed patients according to which aromatase inhibitor and T-score groups they were allocated to but BMD assessments ceased if patients deviated from protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00354302. FINDINGS: Between April 24, 2006, and May 30, 2008, 300 patients with baseline T-scores of -2·0 or more were accrued (147 allocated exemestane, 153 anastrozole); and 197 patients with baseline T-scores of less than -2·0 (101 exemestane, 96 anastrozole). For patients with T-scores greater than -2·0 at baseline, mean change of bone mineral density in the spine at 2 years did not differ significantly between patients taking exemestane and patients taking anastrozole (-0·92%, 95% CI -2·35 to 0·50 vs -2·39%, 95% CI -3·77 to -1·01; p=0·08). Respective mean loss in the hip was -1·93% (95% CI -2·93 to -0·93) versus -2·71% (95% CI -4·32 to -1·11; p=0·10). Likewise for those who started with T-scores of less than -2·0, mean change of spine bone mineral density at 2 years did not differ significantly between the exemestane and anastrozole treatment groups (2·11%, 95% CI -0·84 to 5·06 vs 3·72%, 95% CI 1·54 to 5·89; p=0·26), nor did hip bone mineral density (2·09%, 95% CI -1·45 to 5·63 vs 0·0%, 95% CI -3·67 to 3·66; p=0·28). Patients with baseline T-score of -2·0 or more taking exemestane had two fragility fractures and two other fractures, those taking anastrozole had three fragility fractures and five other fractures. For patients who had baseline T-scores of less than -2·0 taking exemestane, one had a fragility fracture and four had other fractures, whereas those taking anastrozole had five fragility fractures and one other fracture. INTERPRETATION: Our results demonstrate that adjuvant treatment with aromatase inhibitors can be considered for breast cancer patients who have T-scores less than -2·0. FUNDING: Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute, Pfizer, Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Randomized trial of decongestive lymphatic therapy for the treatment of lymphedema in women with breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Because of its morbidity and chronicity, arm lymphedema remains a concerning complication of breast cancer treatment. Although massage-based decongestive therapy is often recommended, randomized trials have not consistently demonstrated benefit over more conservative measures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women previously treated for breast cancer with lymphedema were enrolled from six institutions. Volumes were calculated from circumference measurements. Patients with a minimum of 10% volume difference between their arms were randomly assigned to either compression garments (control) or daily manual lymphatic drainage and bandaging followed by compression garments (experimental). The primary outcome was percent reduction in excess arm volume from baseline to 6 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 103 women were randomly assigned, and 95 were evaluable. Mean reduction of excess arm volume was 29.0% in the experimental group and 22.6% in the control group (difference, 6.4%; 95% CI, -6.8% to 20.5%; P = .34). Absolute volume loss was 250 mL and 143 mL in the experimental and control groups, respectively (difference, 107 mL; 95% CI, 13 to 203 mL; P = .03). There was no difference between groups in the proportion of patients losing 50% or greater excess arm volume. Quality of life (Short Form-36 Health Survey) and arm function were not different between groups. CONCLUSION: This trial was unable to demonstrate a significant improvement in lymphedema with decongestive therapy compared with a more conservative approach. The failure to detect a difference may have been a result of the relatively small size of our trial.

Effect of continuous statistically standardized measures of estrogen and progesterone receptors on disease-free survival in NCIC CTG MA.12 Trial and BC Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: We hypothesized improved inter-laboratory comparability of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) across different assay methodologies with adjunctive statistical standardization, akin to bone mineral density (BMD) z-scores. We examined statistical standardization in MA.12, a placebo-controlled pre-menopausal trial of adjuvant tamoxifen with locally assessed hormone receptor +/- tumours, and in a cohort of post-menopausal British Columbia (BC) tamoxifen-treated patients. METHODS: ER and PgR were centrally assessed for both patient groups with real time quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and immunohistochemistry (IHC). Effects on disease-free survival (DFS) were investigated separately for 345 MA.12 and 673 BC patients who had both qPCR and IHC assessments. Comparisons utilized continuous laboratory units and statistically standardized z-scores. Univariate categorization of ER/PgR was by number of standard deviations (SD) above or below the mean (z-score ≥1.0 SD below mean; z-score <1.0 SD below mean; z-score ≤1.0 SD above mean; z-score >1.0 SD above mean). Exploratory multivariate examinations utilized step-wise Cox regression. RESULTS: Median follow-up for MA.12 was 9.7 years; for BC patients, 11.8 years. For MA.12, 101 of 345 (29%) patients were IHC ER-PgR-. ER was not univariately associated with DFS (qPCR, P = 0.19; IHC, P = 0.08), while PgR was (qPCR, P = 0.09; IHC, P = 0.04). For BC patients, neither receptor was univariately associated with DFS: for ER, PCR, P = 0.36, IHC, P = 0.24; while for PgR, qPCR, P = 0.17, IHC, P = 0.31. Multivariately, MA.12 patients randomized to tamoxifen had significantly better DFS (P = 0.002 to 0.005) than placebo. Meanwhile, jointly ER and PgR were not associated with DFS whether assessed by qPCR or by IHC in all patients, or in the subgroup of patients with IHC positive stain, for pooled or separate treatment arms. Different results by type of continuous unit supported the concept of ER level being relevant for medical decision-making. For postmenopausal BC tamoxifen patients, higher qPCR PgR was weakly associated with better DFS (P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: MA.12 pre-menopausal patients in a placebo-controlled tamoxifen trial had similar multivariate prognostic effects with statistically standardized hormone receptors when tumours were assayed by qPCR or IHC, for hormone receptor +/- and + tumours. The BC post-menopausal tamoxifen cohort did not exhibit a significant prognostic association of ER or PgR with DFS. Adjunctive statistical standardization is currently under investigation in other NCIC CTG endocrine trials.

Responsiveness of intrinsic subtypes to adjuvant anthracycline substitution in the NCIC.CTG MA.5 randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Recent studies suggest that intrinsic breast cancer subtypes may differ in their responsiveness to specific chemotherapy regimens. We examined this hypothesis on NCIC.CTG MA.5, a clinical trial randomizing premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer to adjuvant CMF (cyclophosphamide-methotrexate-fluorouracil) versus CEF (cyclophosphamide-epirubicin-fluorouracil) chemotherapy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Intrinsic subtype was determined for 476 tumors using the quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR PAM50 gene expression test. Luminal A, luminal B, HER2-enriched (HER2-E), and basal-like subtypes were correlated with relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS), estimated using Kaplan-Meier plots and log-rank testing. Multivariable Cox regression analyses determined significance of interaction between treatment and intrinsic subtypes. RESULTS: Intrinsic subtypes were associated with RFS (P = 0.0005) and OS (P < 0.0001) on the combined cohort. The HER2-E showed the greatest benefit from CEF versus CMF, with absolute 5-year RFS and OS differences exceeding 20%, whereas there was a less than 2% difference for non-HER2-E tumors (interaction test P = 0.03 for RFS and 0.03 for OS). Within clinically defined Her2(+) tumors, 79% (72 of 91) were classified as the HER2-E subtype by gene expression and this subset was strongly associated with better response to CEF versus CMF (62% vs. 22%, P = 0.0006). There was no significant difference in benefit between CEF and CMF in basal-like tumors [n = 94; HR, 1.1; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.6-2.1 for RFS and HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.7-2.5 for OS]. CONCLUSION: HER2-E strongly predicted anthracycline sensitivity. The chemotherapy-sensitive basal-like tumors showed no added benefit for CEF over CMF, suggesting that nonanthracycline regimens may be adequate in this subtype although further investigation is required.

TIMP-1 in combination with HER2 and TOP2A for prediction of benefit from adjuvant anthracyclines in high-risk breast cancer patients.

HER2 amplification, TOP2A aberrations, and absence of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase (TIMP-1) expression in breast carcinomas have been shown to be associated with incremental benefit from anthracycline-containing adjuvant chemotherapy, and this study was undertaken to validate these findings in a similar, but independent, randomized clinical trial. TIMP-1 was examined by immunohistochemistry in archival tumor tissue from 403 of 716 premenopausal high-risk patients with known HER2 and TOP2A status who were randomized to cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF) or cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) in the MA.5 trial. Ninety-eight (24%) patients had no TIMP-1 staining of tumor cells, 27% were HER2 amplified, and 18% were TOP2A aberrant. Forty-four percentage was classified as HT responsive (HER2 amplified and/or TIMP-1 negative) and 37% as 2T responsive (TOP2A aberrant and/or TIMP-1 negative). There was no heterogeneity in treatment effect of CEF versus CMF according to TIMP-1. In HT-responsive patients, CEF was superior to CMF with an improved RFS (adjusted HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.42-0.97), but this was not significant for OS (adjusted HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.42-1.04). A significant HT profile versus treatment interaction was detected for OS (P = 0.03). In 2T-responsive patients, CEF seemed to improve RFS compared to CMF (adjusted HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.43-1.03) and improved OS (adjusted HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36-0.93). A significant 2T profile versus treatment interaction was detected for OS (P = 0.01). With this study, we validate a more substantial reduction in mortality by CEF compared to CMF in patients with an HT- or 2T-responsive profile; however, we could not show a similarly significant reduction in RFS events, where a benefit of CEF over CMF was found irrespective of TIMP-1 status. Further studies are necessary before the HT and 2T profiles may be used to direct the use of anthracyclines.

Randomized trial of tamoxifen versus combined tamoxifen and octreotide LAR Therapy in the adjuvant treatment of early-stage breast cancer in postmenopausal women: NCIC CTG MA.14.

PURPOSE: Somatostatin analogs act directly on breast cancer cells and indirectly on insulin and insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) levels. This trial was undertaken to assess whether octreotide would lower insulin and IGF-1 levels and reduce risk of breast cancer recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The NCIC CTG MA.14 (NCIC Clinical Trials Group MA.14) trial randomly assigned postmenopausal women to 5 years of tamoxifen 20 mg daily (TAM) or TAM plus 2 years of octreotide 90 mg depot intramuscular injections monthly (TAM-OCT) as adjuvant therapy. The primary end point was event-free survival (EFS). Secondary end points were relapse-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity, and effects of treatment on IGF physiology. RESULTS: Among 667 women with a median follow-up of 7.9 years, 220 events occurred-108 with TAM-OCT and 112 with TAM. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs; TAM-OCT to TAM) were 0.93 for EFS (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.22; P = .62), 0.84 for RFS (95% CI, 0.59 to 1.18; P = .31), and 0.97 for OS (95% CI, 0.69 to 1.37; P = .86). Among patients with normal baseline gallbladder imaging, cholecystectomy was required in 23.0% of those receiving TAM-OCT but in only 1.4% of those receiving TAM (P < .001). At 4 months, TAM-OCT had significantly (P < .001) lowered IGF-1, IGF binding protein 3, and C-peptide levels. Older age (P = .02), tumor size (P = .001), nodal status (P = .01), high C-peptide levels (P < .001), and higher body mass index (BMI) in models excluding C-peptide (P < .001) were associated with poorer EFS in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Octreotide-related changes in circulating IGF-1 and C-peptide levels were statistically significant. Octreotide did not add significant clinical benefit. High C-peptide levels (surrogate for insulin secretion rate) and high BMI were associated with poor outcome.

Aromatase inhibitor therapy: toxicities and management strategies in the treatment of postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer.

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have been shown to reduce the risk of breast cancer recurrence and are widely used today as adjuvant therapy in women with early stage endocrine-responsive breast cancer. Aromatase inhibitors may be prescribed as initial hormonal therapy, sequentially following 2-3 years of tamoxifen, or as extended adjuvant therapy (following 5 years of tamoxifen). Aromatase inhibitors are generally well tolerated; however, certain side effects, particularly arthralgia/musculoskeletal symptoms and gynecologic effects, may result in poor adherence to treatment. Patients receiving adjuvant therapy with an AI should be counseled regarding possible side effects and the importance of completing treatment. Interventions to ameliorate side effects should be individualized based on symptoms, comorbid conditions, and pre-existing therapies. In addition, bone and cardiovascular health should be monitored during AI therapy. Prompt therapeutic management of common side effects associated with AIs may provide patients with the opportunity to receive the full benefit of their adjuvant hormonal treatment while minimizing toxicity.

Cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and Fluorouracil versus dose-dense epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by Paclitaxel versus Doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by Paclitaxel in node-positive or high-risk node-negative breast cancer.

PURPOSE Cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF) and doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by paclitaxel (T) are commonly used adjuvant regimens in women with early breast cancer. In a previous trial in women with locally advanced breast cancer, 3 months of high-dose epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (EC) administered every 2 weeks (dose-dense) was equivalent to 6 months of CEF. We hypothesized that 3 months of paclitaxel after dose-dense EC (EC/T) would be superior to CEF or AC/T. METHODS After lumpectomy or mastectomy, women 60 years of age or younger with axillary node-positive or high-risk node-negative breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive CEF, EC/T, or AC/T for 6 months. This article reports the interim analysis for recurrence-free survival (RFS), which was planned after 227 recurrences. Results A total of 2,104 patients were enrolled. The median follow-up is 30.4 months. Hazard ratios for recurrence are as follows: AC/T versus CEF, 1.49 (95% CI, 1.12 to 1.99), P = .005; AC/T versus EC/T, 1.68 (95% CI, 1.25 to 2.27), P = .0006; and EC/T versus CEF, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.64 to 1.22), P = .46. Three-year RFS rates for CEF, EC/T, and AC/T are 90.1%, 89.5%, and 85.0%, respectively. There was more febrile neutropenia with CEF (22.3%) and EC/T (16.4%) compared with AC/T (4.8%), but more neuropathy with the last two regimens. CONCLUSION Three-weekly AC/T is significantly inferior to CEF or EC/T in terms of RFS. It is too early to detect any difference between CEF and dose-dense EC/T.

Adjuvant chemotherapy and timing of tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive, node-positive breast cancer: a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Tamoxifen is standard adjuvant treatment for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. We assessed the benefit of adding chemotherapy to adjuvant tamoxifen and whether tamoxifen should be given concurrently or after chemotherapy. METHODS: We undertook a phase 3, parallel, randomised trial (SWOG-8814, INT-0100) in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive, node-positive breast cancer to test two major objectives: whether the primary outcome, disease-free survival, was longer with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil (CAF) given every 4 weeks for six cycles plus 5 years of daily tamoxifen than with tamoxifen alone; and whether disease-free survival was longer with CAF followed by tamoxifen (CAF-T) than with CAF plus concurrent tamoxifen (CAFT). Overall survival and toxicity were predefined, important secondary outcomes for each objective. Patients in this open-label trial were randomly assigned by a computer algorithm in a 2:3:3 ratio (tamoxifen:CAF-T:CAFT) and analysis was by intention to treat of eligible patients. Groups were compared by stratified log-rank tests, followed by Cox regression analyses adjusted for significant prognostic factors. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00929591. FINDINGS: Of 1558 randomised women, 1477 (95%) were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. After a maximum of 13 years of follow-up (median 8.94 years), 637 women had a disease-free survival event (tamoxifen, 179 events in 361 patients; CAF-T, 216 events in 566 patients; CAFT, 242 events in 550 patients). For the first objective, therapy with the CAF plus tamoxifen groups combined (CAFT or CAF-T) was superior to tamoxifen alone for the primary endpoint of disease-free survival (adjusted Cox regression hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.91; p=0.002) but only marginally for the secondary endpoint of overall survival (HR 0.83, 0.68-1.01; p=0.057). For the second objective, the adjusted HRs favoured CAF-T over CAFT but did not reach significance for disease-free survival (HR 0.84, 0.70-1.01; p=0.061) or overall survival (HR 0.90, 0.73-1.10; p=0.30). Neutropenia, stomatitis, thromboembolism, congestive heart failure, and leukaemia were more frequent in the combined CAF plus tamoxifen groups than in the tamoxifen-alone group. INTERPRETATION: Chemotherapy with CAF plus tamoxifen given sequentially is more effective adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive, node-positive breast cancer than is tamoxifen alone. However, it might be possible to identify some subgroups that do not benefit from anthracycline-based chemotherapy despite positive nodes. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute (US National Institutes of Health).

Ovarian suppression/ablation in premenopausal ER-positive breast cancer patients. Issues and recommendations.

Endocrine therapy remains pivotal in the adjuvant therapy of premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Ovarian ablation, used alone, is effective in delaying recurrence and increasing survival in such women. When added to chemotherapy, it is less clear that this technique is effective, perhaps because of the endocrine ablative effect of chemotherapy. Adjuvant trials comparing ovarian ablation with or without tamoxifen to CMF-type chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil) suggest that the endocrine therapy is equivalent to or better than this chemotherapy in women whose tumors express estrogen and/or progesterone receptors. Endocrine therapy with ovarian ablation, tamoxifen, or the combination is also useful in the metastatic setting in premenopausal women.

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss in breast and prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Bone loss resulting from the treatment of breast and prostate cancer is an emerging problem. Bisphosphonates have a potential role in the prevention of this cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL). METHODS: Studies evaluating the incidence and prevalence of CTIBL in early breast and prostate cancer patients and trials evaluating the preventative role of bisphosphonates were identified by a search of the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases through the end of March 2008. Reference lists from retrieved articles were cross referenced, and further information was obtained from relevant scientific meetings. RESULTS: Several therapies commonly used in the treatment of women and men with breast and prostate cancers, in particular the aromatase inhibitors (AIs) for breast cancer and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer, are associated with significant bone loss and with an increase in fracture risk. The use of bisphosphonates seems to attenuate the bone loss, although the long-term impact remains unclear because of insufficient follow-up. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant endocrine therapy with an AI or androgen deprivation can be considered a risk factor for the development of osteopenia, osteoporosis, and bone fracture, which can be mitigated by appropriate bisphosphonate therapy. Clear identification of risk factors for osteoporosis in individual patients should aid treatment decisions about whether to use bisphosphonates when starting or switching to an AI or ADT. Patients need to be educated about this risk and other measures to avoid this complication, including lifestyle modifications that may benefit their general and bone health.

Aromatase inhibitors in adjuvant therapy for hormone receptor positive breast cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: A systematic review was undertaken to review the evidence for the use of third-generation aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole, letrozole and exemestane) as adjuvant therapy for post-menopausal women with early-stage, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and to develop and support recommendations for their use, with regard to three areas: aromatase inhibitors compared to tamoxifen, aromatase inhibitors in sequence with tamoxifen for a total of five years, and aromatase inhibitors given after five years of tamoxifen therapy. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, American Society of Clinical Oncology and San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium proceedings, and the Cochrane Library were searched to May 2007 for reports of randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Nine randomized controlled trials and one meta-analysis of three of these trials were identified that reported efficacy data. Eight of these trials reported significantly improved disease-free survival in the arms that involved aromatase inhibitors. The meta-analysis reported significantly improved overall survival among all patients, as did one individual trial. One trial of five years letrozole or placebo after five years tamoxifen found improved overall survival among node-positive patients. CONCLUSIONS: Aromatase inhibitors provide an alternative to tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy for post-menopausal, hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer patients. The options include anastrozole and letrozole for five years, as well as anastrozole and exemestane following two to three years of tamoxifen, for a total five years of hormonal therapy. Five years of letrozole should be considered following five years of tamoxifen. Patients receiving aromatase inhibitors should be monitored for changes in bone mineral density and for cardiovascular disease risk factors and outcomes.

Randomized trial of high-dose chemotherapy with autologous peripheral-blood stem-cell support compared with standard-dose chemotherapy in women with metastatic breast cancer: NCIC MA.16.

PURPOSE: We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial to compare progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and quality of life in women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) receiving high-dose chemotherapy plus autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT; HDCT) compared with standard-dose therapy. PATIENT AND METHODS: Between April 1997 and December 2000, 386 women with MBC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease were registered. After initial response to anthracycline- or taxane-based induction chemotherapy, 224 patients were randomly assigned: 112 to high-dose cyclophosphamide, mitoxantrone, and carboplatin chemotherapy and ASCT (HDCT), and 112 to standard therapy (ST). Median age was 47 years (range, 25 to 67 years). Thirty two percent of women randomly assigned had estrogen and progesterone receptor-negative breast cancer, 42% had visceral metastases, and 58% had bone metastases. Complete remission rates before random assignment were 11% for those receiving HDCT and 12% for those receiving ST. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 48 months, 79 deaths were observed in the HDCT arm and 77 deaths were observed in the ST arm; seven patients (6%) in the HDCT arm died as a result of toxicity. The median OS was 24 months for the HDCT arm (95% CI, 21 to 35 months) and 28 months for ST (95% CI, 22 to 33 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.9; 95% CI, 0.6 to 1.2; P = .43). PFS was 11 months for HDCT and 9 months for ST (HR, 0.6 in favor of HDCT; 95% CI, 0.5 to 0.9; P = .006). CONCLUSION: HDCT did not improve OS in women with MBC when used as consolidation after response to induction chemotherapy.