A Randomized Controlled Phase 2 Study of Neoadjuvant Eribulin Versus Paclitaxel in Women with Operable Breast Cancer: The JONIE-3 Study.

OBJECTIVE: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is essential for surgical downstaging of early-stage breast cancer, but taxane administration is associated with neuropathy. We investigated whether eribulin induces less neuropathy than paclitaxel. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised study (UMIN000012817), patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between December 2013 and April 2016 were randomly assigned to group E (eribulin followed by fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide; FEC) or group P (paclitaxel followed by FEC). The primary endpoint was incidence of grade 1 or higher peripheral neuropathy according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). Secondary endpoints were pathological complete response (pCR), clinical response, breast-conserving surgery, adverse events, disease-free survival (DFS), and patient neurotoxicity questionnaire (PNQ) analysis. RESULTS: One hundred and eighteen cases were analyzed for safety and 115 were evaluated for efficacy. Peripheral sensory neuropathy was significantly lower in group E after week 6, while peripheral motor neuropathy in group E was significantly lower at weeks 9, 12, and 15. pCR in groups E and P was 20.7% and 29.8% (P = .289), respectively, and clinical response was 55.2% and 77.2% (P = .017), respectively. Three-year DFS was 89.7% in group E and 86.0% in group P (P = .561). Neutropenia was more frequent and more severe in group E. PNQ was evaluated for 4 years, and item 1 (sensory) was consistently lower in group E. CONCLUSION: Neuropathy was significantly less frequent and less severe in patients who received eribulin compared with paclitaxel. Thus, eribulin could be a good alternative to paclitaxel in patients suffering severe neuropathy.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy With Anthracycline-Based Regimen for BRCAness Tumors in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: A subgroup of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) shows impaired BRCA1 function owing to causes other than mutation, which is called "BRCAness." DNA-damaging agents are known to have more efficacy in BRCA1-mutant tumors than mitotic poisons. We conducted a prospective single-arm clinical trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) using an anthracycline-based regimen without taxanes for BRCAness TNBCs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: BRCAness was examined using the multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) method in TNBC cases. For BRCAness cases, NAC was performed with anthracycline-based regimens without additional taxanes. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients with TNBC were enrolled. MLPA was successfully performed in 25 patients. Eighteen patients (72%) showed BRCAness. Twenty-three patients received NAC as per the protocol. On analysis, the clinical response rate (complete response plus partial response) was 76.4%, and the pathological complete response rate was 35.3%. CONCLUSIONS: The interim analysis revealed that the pathological complete response rate was lower than estimated. Therefore, BRCAness by MLPA was not sufficient to predict the therapeutic response to anthracycline-based regimens in TNBC.

Anthracycline could be essential for triple-negative breast cancer: A randomised phase II study by the Kanagawa Breast Oncology Group (KBOG) 1101.

BACKGROUND: It is important to determine whether anthracycline-containing regimens or taxane-containing regimens are more effective in individual patients. The present study compared the efficacy of six cycles of docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (TC6) with that of three cycles of 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel (FEC-D) in Japanese patients with hormone receptor (HR)-negative breast cancer (BC) to identify subtypes requiring anthracycline treatment. METHODS: The study included 103 patients with operable HR-negative BC. Of these patients 53 received FEC-D and 50 received TC6. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response (pCR). The secondary endpoints were safety, breast-conserving surgery, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). The predictive factors for each regimen were evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 103 patients, 97 completed the study (FEC-D, 50 patients; TC6, 47 patients). The pCR rate was higher with FEC-D (36%) than with TC6 (25.5%); however, the difference was not significant (P = 0.265). TC6 was safer than FEC-D, as the adverse events with docetaxel in the FEC-D regimen were similar to those with the TC6 regimen. Among patients with basal BC, the pCR rate was significantly higher with FEC-D (42.9%) than with TC6 (13.6%; P = 0.033). Among patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), the DFS and OS were significantly better with FEC-D than with TC6 (P = 0.016 and P = 0.034, respectively). CONCLUSION: TC6 was not as effective as FEC-D for treating HR-negative BC, as TC6 was not sufficient to treat TNBC, particularly the basal subtype. Our findings suggest that anthracyclines are better treatment options than taxanes for basal BC.