Early Locoregional Breast Surgery and Survival in de novo Metastatic Breast Cancer in the Multicenter National ESME Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate the impact of local surgery performed during the year after MBC diagnosis on patients' outcomes from a large reallife cohort. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Locoregional treatment for patients with MBC at the time of diagnosis remains debated. METHODS: Women with newly diagnosed, de novo stage IV MBC and who started MBC treatment between January 2008 and December 2014 in one of the 18 French Comprehensive Cancer Centers were included (NCT03275311). The impact of local surgery performed during the first year on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) was evaluated by the Cox proportional hazards model in a 12 month-landmark analysis. RESULTS: Out of 16,703 patients in the ESME database, 1977 had stage IV MBC at diagnosis, were alive and progression-free at 12 months and eligible for this study. Among them, 530 (26.8%) had received primary breast cancer surgery within 12 months. A greater proportion of patients who received surgery had less than 3 metastatic sites than the no-surgery group (90.8% vs 78.2%, P < 0.0001). Surgery within 12 months was associated with treatment with chemotherapy, HER2-targeted therapy (89.1% vs 69.6%, P < 0.0001) and locoregional radiotherapy (81.7% vs 32.5%, P < 0.0001). Multivariable analyses showed that surgery performed within 12 months was associated with longer OS and PFS (adjusted HR [95%CI] = 0.75 [0.61-0.92] and 0.72 [0.63-0.83], respectively), which were also affected by pattern and number of metastatic sites, histological subtype, and age. CONCLUSIONS: In the large ESME cohort, surgery within 1 year after de novo MBC diagnosis was associated with a significantly better OS and PFS.

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.

Efficacy of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) and lapatinib after dual HER2 inhibition with trastuzumab and pertuzumab in patient with metastatic breast cancer: Retrospective data from a French multicenter real-life cohort.

PURPOSE: Trastuzumab-emtansine (T-DM1), as well as lapatinib plus capecitabine were proven effective in two Phase III studies, following first-line trastuzumab plus a taxane. The introduction of dual HER2 blockade by trastuzumab and pertuzumab as first-line has positioned T-DM1 into second-line, and lapatinib plus capecitabine beyond, without formal evaluation of these strategies. METHODS: ESME Data Platform (NCT03275311) included individual data from all patients aged ≥18 years, in whom first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) was initiated between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2016 in one of the 18 French Comprehensive Cancer Centers. The efficacy of T-DM1 and lapatinib plus capecitabine combination, following double blockade associating trastuzumab and pertuzumab were evaluated in this national real-life database. Eligibility criteria were: female, MBC, HER2+ tumor, first-line taxane-based chemotherapy and dual HER2-blockage by trastuzumab plus pertuzumab. Cohort A received second-line T-DM1, and Cohort B second-line T-DM1 and third or fourth-line lapatinib plus capecitabine. RESULTS: Cohort A comprised 233 patients, and Cohort B 47 patients. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.1 months in Cohort A and 4.6 months in Cohort B. Median overall survival were 36.7 months and 12.9 months, respectively. PFS was significantly dependent on the preceding treatment line's duration. In cohort A, HER2 expression status was a significant predictive factor of PFS. CONCLUSION: First-line trastuzumab plus pertuzumab do not markedly diminish T-DM1's efficacy in second-line. Similarly, sequential treatment with trastuzumab plus pertuzumab then T-DM1 does not noticeably modify the efficacy of lapatinib plus capecitabine.

Progression-free survival on endocrine therapy, before or after chemotherapy, in hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: A major question when treating HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is whether early introduction of chemotherapy (CT) increases endocrine resistance. We aimed to describe progression-free survival (PFS) under first endocrine therapy (ET) depending on whether given before or after CT in a large nationwide cohort, in the pre-CDK era. METHODS: The real-life retrospective ESME database includes all patients with MBC whose first-line treatment was initiated between 2008 and 2014 in one of the 18 French Comprehensive Cancer Centres. Our primary objective was to compare PFS from start of first ET in patients with HR+/HER2- MBC who received ET or CT first. RESULTS: We identified 6293 patients who received at least one ET line during their first two therapeutic lines for MBC. As first-line therapy, 3832 (60.9%) received ET alone (ET1 1st group), whilst 2461 (39.1%) received CT, including 2024 patients (32.2%) with maintenance ET after CT (ET1 after CT group). Median PFS under first ET was 12.4 months (95% CI 11.9-13.1) in ET 1st group vs. 12.6 months in ET1 after CT group (95% CI 12.1-13.4), HR 0.96 (95% CI 0.90-1.01, P = 0.1277). CONCLUSIONS: PFS under first ET appears identical whether prescribed before or after chemotherapy. These data suggest chemotherapy does not promote endocrine resistance.

Impact of body mass index on overall survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: High Body mass index (BMI) is a risk factor for breast cancer among postmenopausal women and an adverse prognostic factor in early-stage. Little is known about its impact on clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: The National ESME-MBC observational cohort includes all consecutive patients newly diagnosed with MBC between Jan 2008 and Dec 2016 in the 18 French comprehensive cancer centers. RESULTS: Of 22 463 patients in ESME-MBC, 12 999 women had BMI data available at MBC diagnosis. Median BMI was 24.9 kg/m2 (range 12.1-66.5); 20% of women were obese and 5% underweight. Obesity was associated with more de novo MBC, while underweight patients had more aggressive cancer features. Median overall survival (OS) of the BMI cohort was 47.4 months (95% CI [46.2-48.5]) (median follow-up: 48.6 months). Underweight was independently associated with a worse OS (median OS 33 months; HR 1.14, 95%CI, 1.02-1.27) and first line progression-free survival (HR, 1.11; 95%CI, 1.01; 1.22), while overweight or obesity had no effect. CONCLUSION: Overweight and obesity are not associated with poorer outcomes in women with metastatic disease, while underweight appears as an independent adverse prognostic factor.

Real-world Evaluation of Oral Vinorelbine in the Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer: An ESME-MBC Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Vinorelbine is indicated for use in the treatment of MBC as a single agent or in combination but there is little real world data on this molecule and even less on its oral form. We exploited the Unicancer Epidemiology Strategy Medical-Economics (ESME) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) database to investigate current patterns of use of oral vinorelbine (OV), as well as outcomes of patients receiving this drug. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively from women and men treated for MBC between 2008 and 2014 at one of 18 French Comprehensive Cancer Centres. The efficacy of OV was evaluated in terms of progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) and treatment duration. The population and patterns of OV usage were also described. RESULTS: A total of 1806 patients (11% of the ESME MBC database) were included in this analysis. OV was prescribed as monotherapy (46%) or in combination (29%), especially with capecitabine. mainly in later treatment lines. Median PFS was 3.3 months: 2.9 months for single agent, 3.6 months for combination therapy. Median OS was 40.9 months. CONCLUSION: Real-world data offer complementary results to the data from traditional clinical trials, but they concern a much larger population. In this ESME MBC cohort, OV was only prescribed to a small subset of MBC patients. OV was mainly given as single agent to patients with heavily pre-treated MBC; less commonly, it was co-administered with capecitabine or anti-HER2, in earlier lines of therapy. PFS was modest but in line with previous reports.

Contemporary outcomes of metastatic breast cancer among 22,000 women from the multicentre ESME cohort 2008-2016.

AIM: Real-world data inform the outcome comparisons and help the development of new therapeutic strategies. To this end, we aimed to describe the full characteristics and outcomes in the Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics (ESME) cohort, a large national contemporary observational database of patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: Women aged ≥18 years with newly diagnosed MBC and who initiated MBC treatment between January 2008 and December 2016 in one of the 18 French Comprehensive Cancer Centers (N = 22,109) were included. We assessed the full patients' characteristics, first-line treatments, overall survival (OS) and first-line progression-free survival, as well as updated prognostic factors in the whole cohort and among the 3 major subtypes: hormone receptor positive and HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-, n = 13,656), HER2-positive (HER2+, n = 4017) and triple-negative (n = 2963) tumours. RESULTS: The median OS of the whole cohort was 39.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 38.7-40.3). Five-year OS was 33.8%. OS differed significantly between the 3 subtypes (p < 0.0001) with a median OS of 43.3 (95% CI, 42.5-44.5) in HR+/HER2-; 50.1 (95% CI, 47.6-53.1) in HER2+; and 14.8 months (95% CI, 14.1-15.5) in triple-negative subgroups, respectively. Beyond performance status, the following variables had a constant significant negative prognostic impact on OS in the whole cohort and among subtypes: older age at diagnosis of metastases (except for the triple-negative subtype), metastasis-free interval between 6 and 24 months, presence of visceral metastases and number of metastatic sites ≥ 3. CONCLUSIONS: The ESME program represents a unique large-scale real-life cohort on MBC. This study highlights important situations of high medical need within MBC patients. DATABASE REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT032753.

Management and outcome of male metastatic breast cancer in the national multicenter observational research program Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics (ESME).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Because of its low prevalence, metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in males is managed based on clinical experience with women. Using a real-life database, we aim to provide a comprehensive analysis of male MBC characteristics, management and outcome. METHODS: The Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics Data Platform collected data for all men and women ⩾18 years with MBC in 18 participating French Comprehensive Cancer Centers from January 2008 to November 2016. Demographic, clinical, and pathological characteristics were retrieved, as was treatment modality. Men were matched 1:1 to women with similar characteristics. RESULTS: Of 16,701 evaluable patients, 149 (0.89%) men were identified. These men were older (median age 69 years) and predominantly had hormone receptor HR+/HER2- disease (78.3%). Median overall survival (OS) was 41.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI: 26.9-49.7)] and similar to women. Median progression-free survival (PFS) with first-line therapy was 9.3 months [95% CI (7.4-11.5)]. In the HR+/HER2- subpopulation, endocrine therapy (ET) alone was the frontline treatment for 43% of patients, including antiestrogens (n = 19), aromatase inhibitors (n = 15) with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) analogs (n = 3), and various sequential treatments. Median PFS achieved by frontline ET alone was similar in men [9.8 months, 95% CI (6.9-17.4)] and in women [13 months, 95% CI (8.4-30.9)] (p = 0.80). PFS was similar for HR+/HER2- men receiving upfront ET or chemotherapy: 9.8 months [95% CI (6.9-17.4)] versus 9.5 months [95% CI (7.4-11.7)] (p = 0.22), respectively. CONCLUSION: MBC management in men and women leads to similar outcomes, especially in HR+/HER2- patients for whom ET should also be a cornerstone. Unsolved questions remain and successfully recruiting trials for men are still lacking.

Assessment of the efficacy of successive endocrine therapies in hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: a real-life multicentre national study.

BACKGROUND: For luminal metastatic breast cancer (MBC), endocrine therapy (ET) is the recommended initial treatment before chemotherapy. Our objective was to evaluate the efficacy of multiple ET lines in a real-life study. METHODS: The Breast Cancer Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics (ESME) project analysed data from all patients with systemic treatment for MBC initiated between 2008 and 2014 in one of the 18 French Comprehensive Cancer Centres. The primary end-point was the successive progression-free survival (PFS) evaluation. RESULTS: The ESME research programme included 9921 patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) negative (HER2-) MBC. Before any chemotherapy, 4195 (43.4%), 1252 (29.8%) and 279 (6.6%) patients received one, two or three ET ± targeted therapy, respectively. The median PFS for first-, second- and third-line ET ± targeted therapy was 11.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.8-12.1), 5.8 (95% CI, 5.3-6.1) and 5.5 (95% CI, 4.6-6.3) months, respectively. In a multivariate analysis, time from diagnosis to metastatic recurrence (P < 0.0001), presence of symptoms at metastatic relapse (P = 0.01), number of metastatic sites (P = 0.0003) and their localisation (P < 0.0001) were prognostic factors for PFS1. Duration of previous PFS was the only prognostic factor for subsequent PFS (10% threshold). Ten percent of the patients showed long-term response to ET, with a total treatment duration before chemotherapy ≥43.6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Median PFS in our HR+/HER2- real-life cohort is similar to median first-line PFS reported in clinical trials, regardless of ET used as second- and third-line treatment. Despite the international consensus on early initiation of ET, the latter is not prescribed in most of the cases. Patients with a low tumour burden may achieve prolonged response on ET.

Bevacizumab plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with HER2-negative inflammatory breast cancer (BEVERLY-1): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting in patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer improves progression-free survival and the proportion of patients achieving pathological complete response. In the BEVERLY-1 (UCBG-0802) trial we aimed to assess the addition of bevacizumab to neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of patients with HER2-negative inflammatory breast cancer. METHODS: We did this phase 2, single-arm trial at 20 hospitals in France. We enrolled women aged 18 years or older who had non-metastatic HER2-negative inflammatory breast cancer. Patients underwent 3-week treatment cycles, receiving neoadjuvant intravenous fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2)), epirubicin (100 mg/m(2)), cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m(2)), and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) during cycles 1-4, then docetaxel (100 mg/m(2)) and bevacizumab during cycles 5-8. 2-4 weeks after surgery, patients received adjuvant radiotherapy, hormone therapy (if they had a hormone receptor-positive tumour), and adjuvant intravenous bevacizumab. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response in breast and axillary lymph nodes after neoadjuvant treatment, determined after centralised review in accordance with Sataloff classification and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Our analysis of toxic effects included all patients who received at least one dose of bevacizumab. The trial is complete and follow-up is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00820547. FINDINGS: Between Jan 16, 2009, and Sept 8, 2010, we enrolled 101 patients, one of whom withdrew consent before treatment, leaving 100 patients in the primary endpoint analysis. After neoadjuvant therapy, 19 (19% [95% CI 12-28]; p=0·16) of 100 patients achieved a pathological complete response according to centralised review. The most frequent grade 3-4 events during the neoadjuvant phase were neutropenia (89 [89%] of 100 patients), febrile neutropenia (37 [37%]), and mucositis (23 [23%]) and during the adjuvant phase the most frequent grade 3-4 adverse event was proteinuria (5 [7%] of 75 patients). One (1%) patient died of thrombotic microangiopathy after cycle 1, which was thought to be related to bevacizumab. Two patients (3%) developed transitory heart failure. 48 (48%) patients had serious adverse events, the most frequent of which was febrile neutropenia (28 [28%]). INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that the addition of bevacizumab to neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy does not provide clinical benefit to patients with non-metastatic HER2-negative inflammatory breast cancer. Longer follow-up and correlative studies to identify patients who might benefit from bevacizumab are needed. FUNDING: Roche, La Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer, UNICANCER, and Chugai Pharma.

Docetaxel reintroduction in patients with metastatic castration-resistant docetaxel-sensitive prostate cancer: a retrospective multicentre study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the potential benefit of reintroducing docetaxel chemotherapy in patients with progressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who had initially responded to first-line docetaxel-based regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Records were evaluated retrospectively from French patients with mCRPC who had been included in seven controlled clinical studies of docetaxel as first-line treatment. We identified patients who were confirmed as responders to first-line treatment, discontinued for reasons other than disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, and who received further docetaxel chemotherapy for disease progression. The primary objective was to assess efficacy in terms of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response after resuming a docetaxel-based chemotherapy. Secondary objectives were overall survival and tolerance. RESULTS: Of the 148 patients who responded to first-line docetaxel, 50 received further therapy with docetaxel and were analysed. The median (range) response duration to first-line docetaxel was 10.3 (4.6-45.7) months and the median docetaxel-free interval was 18.4 (5.0-46.7) months. Docetaxel was reintroduced as second-line therapy in 52% of patients and as further lines in 48%. After docetaxel reintroduction, 24 patients (48%) had a 50% decrease in PSA level (95% confidence interval, CI, 34.1-61.8%). The median (95% CI) overall survival from docetaxel reintroduction was 16 (13-20) months. Re-treatment was well tolerated (6% of grade 3-4 haemotoxicity). CONCLUSION: Docetaxel reintroduction appears to be effective, with favourable tolerance profiles, in patients with mCRPC having responded to first-line docetaxel, and should be prospectively assessed in clinical trials against alternative therapies or investigational agents given alone or in combination, to define further management.

Robotic stereotactic radioablation concomitant with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy for breast tumors.

PURPOSE: Robotic stereotactic radioablation (RSR) allows stereotactic irradiation of thoracic tumors; however, it has never been used for breast tumors and may have a real potential. We conducted a Phase I study, including neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), a two-level dose-escalation study (6.5 Gy x 3 fractions and 7.5 Gy x 3 fractions) using RSR and breast-conserving surgery followed by conventional radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To define toxicity, we performed a dermatologic exam (DE) including clinical examination by two independent observers and technical examination by colorimetry, dermoscopy, and skin ultrasound. DE was performed before NACT (DE0), at 36 days (DE1), at 56 days (DE2), after the NACT treatment onset, and before surgery (DE3). Surgery was performed 4-8 weeks after the last chemotherapy session. A pathologic examination was also performed. RESULTS: There were two clinical complete responses and four clinical partial responses at D56 and D85. Maximum tolerable dose was not reached. All patients tolerated RSR with no fatigue; 2 patients presented with mild pain after the third fraction of the treatment. There was no significant toxicity measured with ultrasound and dermoscopy tests. Postoperative irradiation (50 Gy) has been delivered without toxicity. CONCLUSION: The study showed the feasibility of irradiation with RSR combined with chemotherapy and surgery for breast tumors. There was no skin toxicity at a dose of 19.5 Gy or 22.5 Gy delivered in three fractions combined with chemotherapy. Lack of toxicity suggested that the dose could be increased further. Pathologic response was acceptable.

Sequential adjuvant epirubicin-based and docetaxel chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer patients: the FNCLCC PACS 01 Trial.

PURPOSE: The PACS 01 trial compared six cycles of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) with a sequential regimen of three cycles of FEC followed by three cycles of docetaxel (FEC-D) as adjuvant treatment for women with node-positive early breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between June 1997 and March 2000, 1,999 patients with operable node-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned to either FEC every 21 days for six cycles, or three cycles of FEC followed by three cycles of docetaxel, both given every 21 days. Hormone-receptor-positive patients received tamoxifen for 5 years after chemotherapy. The primary end point was 5-year disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 60 months. Five-year DFS rates were 73.2% with FEC and 78.4% with FEC-D (unadjusted P = .011; adjusted P = .012). Multivariate analysis adjusted for prognostic factors showed an 18% reduction in the relative risk of relapse with FEC-D. Five-year overall survival rates were 86.7% with FEC and 90.7% with FEC-D, demonstrating a 27% reduction in the relative risk of death (unadjusted P = .014; adjusted P = .017). The incidence of grade 3 to 4 neutropenia, the need for hematopoietic growth factor, and incidence of nausea/vomiting were higher with FEC. Docetaxel was associated with more febrile neutropenia in the fourth cycle, stomatitis, edema, and nail disorders. Though rare overall, there were fewer cardiac events after FEC-D (P = .03), attributable mainly to the lower anthracycline cumulative dose. CONCLUSION: Sequential adjuvant chemotherapy with FEC followed by docetaxel significantly improves disease-free and overall survival in node-positive breast cancer patients and has a favorable safety profile.