Understanding breast cancer complexity to improve patient outcomes: The St Gallen International Consensus Conference for the Primary Therapy of Individuals with Early Breast Cancer 2023.

The 18th St Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference held in March 2023, in Vienna, Austria, assessed significant new findings for local and systemic therapies for early breast cancer with a focus on the evaluation of multimodal treatment options. The emergence of more effective, innovative agents in both the preoperative (primary or neoadjuvant) and post-operative (adjuvant) settings has underscored the pivotal role of a multidisciplinary approach in treatment decision making, particularly when selecting systemic therapy for an individual patient. The importance of multidisciplinary discussions regarding the clinical benefits of interventions was explicitly emphasized by the consensus panel as an integral part of developing an optimal treatment plan with the 'right' degree of intensity and duration. The panelists focused on controversies surrounding the management of common ductal/no special type and lobular breast cancer histology, which account for the vast majority of breast tumors. The expert opinion of the panelists was based on interpretations of available data, as well as current practices in their professional environments, personal and socioeconomic factors affecting patients, and cognizant of varying reimbursement and accessibility constraints around the world. The panelists strongly advocated patient participation in well-designed clinical studies whenever feasible. With these considerations in mind, the St Gallen Consensus Conference aims to offer guidance to clinicians regarding appropriate treatments for early-stage breast cancer and assist in balancing the realistic trade-offs between treatment benefit and toxicity, enabling patients and clinicians to make well-informed choices through a shared decision-making process.

ESMO Expert Consensus Statements on the management of breast cancer during pregnancy (PrBC).

The management of breast cancer during pregnancy (PrBC) is a relatively rare indication and an area where no or little evidence is available since randomized controlled trials cannot be conducted. In general, advances related to breast cancer (BC) treatment outside pregnancy cannot always be translated to PrBC, because both the interests of the mother and of the unborn should be considered. Evidence remains limited and/or conflicting in some specific areas where the optimal approach remains controversial. In 2022, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) held a virtual consensus-building process on this topic to gain insights from a multidisciplinary group of experts and develop statements on controversial topics that cannot be adequately addressed in the current evidence-based ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline. The aim of this consensus-building process was to discuss controversial issues relating to the management of patients with PrBC. The virtual meeting included a multidisciplinary panel of 24 leading experts from 13 countries and was chaired by S. Loibl and F. Amant. All experts were allocated to one of four different working groups. Each working group covered a specific subject area with two chairs appointed: Planning, preparation and execution of the consensus process was conducted according to the ESMO standard operating procedures.

ESMO expert consensus statements (ECS) on the definition, diagnosis, and management of HER2-low breast cancer.

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-low breast cancer has recently emerged as a targetable subset of breast tumors, based on the evidence from clinical trials of novel anti-HER2 antibody-drug conjugates. This evolution has raised several biological and clinical questions, warranting the establishment of consensus to optimally treat patients with HER2-low breast tumors. Between 2022 and 2023, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) held a virtual consensus-building process focused on HER2-low breast cancer. The consensus included a multidisciplinary panel of 32 leading experts in the management of breast cancer from nine different countries. The aim of the consensus was to develop statements on topics that are not covered in detail in the current ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline. The main topics identified for discussion were (i) biology of HER2-low breast cancer; (ii) pathologic diagnosis of HER2-low breast cancer; (iii) clinical management of HER2-low metastatic breast cancer; and (iv) clinical trial design for HER2-low breast cancer. The expert panel was divided into four working groups to address questions relating to one of the four topics outlined above. A review of the relevant scientific literature was conducted in advance. Consensus statements were developed by the working groups and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment before voting. This article presents the developed statements, including findings from the expert panel discussions, expert opinion, and a summary of evidence supporting each statement.

Tucatinib versus placebo added to trastuzumab and capecitabine for patients with pretreated HER2+ metastatic breast cancer with and without brain metastases (HER2CLIMB): final overall survival analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the primary analysis of the HER2CLIMB trial, tucatinib added to trastuzumab and capecitabine significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer. We report efficacy and safety outcomes, including the final OS and safety outcomes from follow-up in HER2CLIMB. PATIENTS AND METHODS: HER2CLIMB is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with locally advanced or metastatic HER2+ breast cancer, including patients with brain metastases. Patients were randomized 2 : 1 to receive tucatinib or placebo, in combination with trastuzumab and capecitabine. After the primary analysis (median follow-up of 14 months), the protocol was amended to allow for unblinding sites to treatment assignment and cross-over from the placebo combination to the tucatinib combination. Protocol prespecified descriptive analyses of OS, PFS (by investigator assessment), and safety were carried out at ∼2 years from the last patient randomized. RESULTS: Six hundred and twelve patients enrolled in the HER2CLIMB trial. At a median OS follow-up of 29.6 months, median duration of OS was 24.7 months for the tucatinib combination group versus 19.2 months for the placebo combination group [hazard ratio (HR) for death: 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.59-0.90, P = 0.004] and OS at 2 years was 51% and 40%, respectively. HRs for OS across prespecified subgroups were consistent with the HR for the overall study population. Median duration of PFS was 7.6 months for the tucatinib combination group versus 4.9 months for the placebo combination group (HR for progression or death: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.47-0.70, P < 0.00001) and PFS at 1 year was 29% and 14%, respectively. The tucatinib combination was well tolerated with a low rate of discontinuation due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: With additional follow-up, the tucatinib combination provided a clinically meaningful survival benefit for patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer.

Neoadjuvant durvalumab improves survival in early triple-negative breast cancer independent of pathological complete response.

BACKGROUND: Addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is a promising strategy in early breast cancer, but the optimal duration of therapy is currently unknown. In the GeparNuevo (NCT02685059) trial, addition of durvalumab to NACT as previously reported led to a moderate increase in pathological complete response (pCR) rate by an absolute 9% (P = 0.287). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with cT1b-cT4a-d triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) received durvalumab 1.5 g or placebo every 4 weeks added to nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 weekly for 12 weeks, followed by durvalumab/placebo every 4 weeks plus epirubicin/cyclophosphamide every 2 weeks followed by surgery. Durvalumab was not continued after surgery. The primary objective was pCR. Secondary endpoints included invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 174 patients were randomised between June 2016 and October 2017. After a median follow-up of 43.7 months, 34 events had occurred. Despite a non-significant increase in the pCR rate, significant differences were observed for 3-year iDFS, DDFS and OS: iDFS was 85.6% with durvalumab versus 77.2% with placebo [hazard ratio (HR) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24-0.97, stratified log-rank P = 0.036]; DDFS 91.7% versus 78.4% (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13-0.74, P = 0.005); OS 95.2% versus 83.5% (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.08-0.72, P = 0.006). pCR patients had 3-year iDFS of 95.5% with durvalumab and 86.1% without (HR 0.22, 95% CI 0.05-1.06). In the non-pCR cohort 3-year iDFS was 76.3% versus 69.7% (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.29-1.54). Multivariable analysis confirmed a durvalumab effect independent of the pCR effect. No new safety signals occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Durvalumab added to NACT in TNBC significantly improved survival despite a modest pCR increase and no adjuvant component of durvalumab. Additional studies are needed to clarify the optimal duration and sequence of checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of early TNBC.

Long-term efficacy and safety of addition of carboplatin with or without veliparib to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer: 4-year follow-up data from BrighTNess, a randomized phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Primary analyses of the phase III BrighTNess trial showed addition of carboplatin with/without veliparib to neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved pathological complete response (pCR) rates with manageable acute toxicity in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Here, we report 4.5-year follow-up data from the trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with untreated stage II-III TNBC were randomized (2 : 1 : 1) to paclitaxel (weekly for 12 doses) plus: (i) carboplatin (every 3 weeks for four cycles) plus veliparib (twice daily); (ii) carboplatin plus veliparib placebo; or (iii) carboplatin placebo plus veliparib placebo. All patients then received doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide every 2-3 weeks for four cycles. The primary endpoint was pCR. Secondary endpoints included event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Since the co-primary endpoint of increased pCR with carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus carboplatin with paclitaxel was not met, secondary analyses are descriptive. RESULTS: Of 634 patients, 316 were randomized to carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel, 160 to carboplatin with paclitaxel, and 158 to paclitaxel. With median follow-up of 4.5 years, the hazard ratio for EFS for carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus paclitaxel was 0.63 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-0.92, P = 0.02], but 1.12 (95% CI 0.72-1.72, P = 0.62) for carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus carboplatin with paclitaxel. In post hoc analysis, the hazard ratio for EFS was 0.57 (95% CI 0.36-0.91, P = 0.02) for carboplatin with paclitaxel versus paclitaxel. OS did not differ significantly between treatment arms, nor did rates of myelodysplastic syndromes, acute myeloid leukemia, or other secondary malignancies. CONCLUSIONS: Improvement in pCR with the addition of carboplatin was associated with long-term EFS benefit with a manageable safety profile, and without increasing the risk of second malignancies, whereas adding veliparib did not impact EFS. These findings support the addition of carboplatin to weekly paclitaxel followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage TNBC.

Overall survival in the OlympiA phase III trial of adjuvant olaparib in patients with germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 and high-risk, early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The randomized, double-blind OlympiA trial compared 1 year of the oral poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, olaparib, to matching placebo as adjuvant therapy for patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 (gBRCA1/2pv) and high-risk, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, early breast cancer (EBC). The first pre-specified interim analysis (IA) previously demonstrated statistically significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant disease-free survival (DDFS). The olaparib group had fewer deaths than the placebo group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance for overall survival (OS). We now report the pre-specified second IA of OS with updates of IDFS, DDFS, and safety. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One thousand eight hundred and thirty-six patients were randomly assigned to olaparib or placebo following (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation therapy if indicated. Endocrine therapy was given concurrently with study medication for hormone receptor-positive cancers. Statistical significance for OS at this IA required P < 0.015. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 3.5 years, the second IA of OS demonstrated significant improvement in the olaparib group relative to the placebo group [hazard ratio 0.68; 98.5% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.97; P = 0.009]. Four-year OS was 89.8% in the olaparib group and 86.4% in the placebo group (Δ 3.4%, 95% CI -0.1% to 6.8%). Four-year IDFS for the olaparib group versus placebo group was 82.7% versus 75.4% (Δ 7.3%, 95% CI 3.0% to 11.5%) and 4-year DDFS was 86.5% versus 79.1% (Δ 7.4%, 95% CI 3.6% to 11.3%), respectively. Subset analyses for OS, IDFS, and DDFS demonstrated benefit across major subgroups. No new safety signals were identified including no new cases of acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. CONCLUSION: With 3.5 years of median follow-up, OlympiA demonstrates statistically significant improvement in OS with adjuvant olaparib compared with placebo for gBRCA1/2pv-associated EBC and maintained improvements in the previously reported, statistically significant endpoints of IDFS and DDFS with no new safety signals.

The journey of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes as a biomarker in breast cancer: clinical utility in an era of checkpoint inhibition.

In 2014, we described a method to quantify percentage of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) on hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides of breast cancer samples using light microscopy that could be performed easily by pathologists with no extra stains. The aim of detailing the method was to facilitate independent research groups replicating our prognostic findings using TIL quantity in early-stage breast cancers. A global working group of breast pathologists was convened to standardize, test reproducibility, and refine the method. A website was also established which allowed free training (www.tilsinbreastcancer.org). As a result of this work, TIL data have been collected in over 20 000 primary breast cancer samples worldwide and the robust associations with better prognoses in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and HER2+ BC have been confirmed. This has resulted in the inclusion of the TIL biomarker in several international breast cancer guidelines as well as in national criteria for routine pathology reporting. TIL therefore represents the first biological prognostic biomarker for early-stage TNBCs, and here its prognostic effect is linear, with values of 30%-50% being suggested as suitable for use in potential chemotherapy de-escalation studies. The efficacy of immune checkpoint-targeted agents in breast cancer now provides direct evidence that host immune responses can modify tumor growth in some patients. With the recent granting of accelerated approvals for the first PD-1/PD-L1 targeting agents in early and advanced TNBC, our focus has now moved to investigating the clinical utility of TIL in the setting of immune checkpoint agents, with or without PD-L1 protein assessment. Emerging data suggest that TIL quantity can help clinicians identify patients with breast cancer who benefit most from PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition. In patients with advanced TNBC and HER2+ disease a TIL cut-off of 5% or 10%, with PD-L1 expression can define 'immune-enriched' tumors and currently seems to have the most clinical relevance in this context.

Outcome of breast cancer patients with low hormone receptor positivity: analysis of a 15-year population-based cohort.

BACKGROUND: Guideline recommendations for the treatment of breast cancer with low hormone receptor (HR) expression (1%-9%) are ambiguous and several studies showed more similarities with HR-negative tumors than with HR strongly positive tumors (≥10%). We used a population-based 15-year cohort to compare patient characteristics and outcome of HR low positive tumors with HR-negative and HR strongly positive tumors, respectively. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 38  560 women diagnosed with early invasive breast cancer between 2004 and 2018 within the scope of the Munich Cancer Registry with 4.9 million inhabitants were included. Descriptive analyses of prognostic factors, treatment, and outcome analyses using the Kaplan-Meier method; cumulative incidence in consideration of competing risks; and multivariate analyses (Cox regression and Fine-Gray model) were conducted. Endpoints were time to local recurrence (TTLR), time to lymph node recurrence (TTLNR), time to metastasis (TTM), overall survival (OS), and relative survival (RS). RESULTS: A total of 861 patients (2%) had HR low positive, 4862 (13%) HR-negative, and 32  837 (85%) HR strongly positive tumors. Within the HER2-negative cohort (n = 33  366), survival of HR low positive tumors was significantly worse than that of HR strongly positive tumors [OS hazard ratio 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.55-0.78)], whereas between HR low positive and HR-negative tumors no significant survival difference could be detected [OS hazard ratio 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.78-1.11)]. TTLR, TTLNR, and TTM showed similar results. By contrast, within the HER2-positive cohort (n = 5194), no statistically significant differences between the three HR groups could be detected in multivariate analyses. CONCLUSION: Current definitions for HR positivity and its clinical relevance should be reconsidered. Patients with HR low positive/HER2-negative tumors could be regarded and treated similar to patients with triple-negative tumors.

Association of RAD51 with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) and clinical outcomes in untreated triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC): analysis of the GeparSixto randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Current genetic and genomic tests measuring homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) show limited predictive value. This study compares the performance of an immunohistology-based RAD51 test with genetic/genomic tests to identify patients with HRD primary triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and evaluates its accuracy to select patients sensitive to platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective, blinded, biomarker analysis from the GeparSixto randomized clinical trial. TNBC patients received neoadjuvant paclitaxel plus Myocet®-nonpegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PM) or PM plus carboplatin (PMCb), both arms including bevacizumab. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor samples were laid on tissue microarrays. RAD51, BRCA1 and γH2AX were quantified using an immunofluorescence assay. The predictive value of RAD51 was assessed by regression models. Concordance analyses were carried out between RAD51 score and tumor BRCA (tBRCA) status or genomic HRD score (Myriad myChoice®). Associations with pathological complete response (pCR) and survival were studied. Functional HRD was predefined as a RAD51 score ≤10% (RAD51-low). RESULTS: Functional HRD by RAD51-low was evidenced in 81/133 tumors (61%). RAD51 identified 93% tBRCA-mutated tumors and 45% non-tBRCA mutant cases as functional HRD. The concordance between RAD51 and genomic HRD was 87% [95% confidence interval (CI) 79% to 93%]. In patients with RAD51-high tumors, pCR was similar between treatment arms [PMCb 31% versus PM 39%, odds ratio (OR) 0.71, 0.23-2.24, P = 0.56]. Patients with RAD51-low tumors benefited from PMCb (pCR 66% versus 33%, OR 3.96, 1.56-10.05, P = 0.004; interaction test P = 0.02). This benefit maintained statistical significance in the multivariate analysis. Carboplatin addition showed similar disease-free survival in the RAD51-high [hazard ratio (HR) 0.40, log-rank P = 0.11] and RAD51-low (0.45, P = 0.11) groups. CONCLUSIONS: The RAD51 test identifies tumors with functional HRD and is highly concordant with tBRCA mutation and genomic HRD. RAD51 independently predicts clinical benefit from adding Cb to NACT in TNBC. Our results support further development to incorporate RAD51 testing in clinical decision-making.

Alpelisib plus fulvestrant for PIK3CA-mutated, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative advanced breast cancer: final overall survival results from SOLAR-1.

BACKGROUND: Activation of the phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K) pathway via PIK3CA mutations occurs in 28%-46% of hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancers (ABCs) and is associated with poor prognosis. The SOLAR-1 trial showed that the addition of alpelisib to fulvestrant treatment provided statistically significant and clinically meaningful progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in PIK3CA-mutated, HR+, HER2- ABC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Men and postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC whose disease progressed on or after aromatase inhibitor (AI) were randomized 1 : 1 to receive alpelisib (300 mg/day) plus fulvestrant (500 mg every 28 days and once on day 15) or placebo plus fulvestrant. Overall survival (OS) in the PIK3CA-mutant cohort was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier methodology and a one-sided stratified log-rank test was carried out with an O'Brien-Fleming efficacy boundary of P ≤ 0.0161. RESULTS: In the PIK3CA-mutated cohort (n = 341), median OS [95% confidence interval (CI)] was 39.3 months (34.1-44.9) for alpelisib-fulvestrant and 31.4 months (26.8-41.3) for placebo-fulvestrant [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.86 (95% CI, 0.64-1.15; P = 0.15)]. OS results did not cross the prespecified efficacy boundary. Median OS (95% CI) in patients with lung and/or liver metastases was 37.2 months (28.7-43.6) and 22.8 months (19.0-26.8) in the alpelisib-fulvestrant and placebo-fulvestrant arms, respectively [HR = 0.68 (0.46-1.00)]. Median times to chemotherapy (95% CI) for the alpelisib-fulvestrant and placebo-fulvestrant arms were 23.3 months (15.2-28.4) and 14.8 months (10.5-22.6), respectively [HR = 0.72 (0.54-0.95)]. No new safety signals were observed with longer follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Although the analysis did not cross the prespecified boundary for statistical significance, there was a 7.9-month numeric improvement in median OS when alpelisib was added to fulvestrant treatment of patients with PIK3CA-mutated, HR+, HER2- ABC. Overall, these results further support the statistically significant prolongation of PFS observed with alpelisib plus fulvestrant in this population, which has a poor prognosis due to a PIK3CA mutation. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV ID: NCT02437318.

Reconstructing tumor history in breast cancer: signatures of mutational processes and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy⋆.

BACKGROUND: Different endogenous and exogenous mutational processes act over the evolutionary history of a malignant tumor, driven by abnormal DNA editing, mutagens or age-related DNA alterations, among others, to generate the specific mutational landscape of each individual tumor. The signatures of these mutational processes can be identified in large genomic datasets. We investigated the hypothesis that genomic patterns of mutational signatures are associated with the clinical behavior of breast cancer, in particular chemotherapy response and survival, with a particular focus on therapy-resistant disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Whole exome sequencing was carried out in 405 pretherapeutic samples from the prospective neoadjuvant multicenter GeparSepto study. We analyzed 11 mutational signatures including biological processes such as APOBEC-mutagenesis, homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), mismatch repair deficiency and also age-related or tobacco-induced alterations. RESULTS: Different subgroups of breast carcinomas were defined mainly by differences in HRD-related and APOBEC-related mutational signatures and significant differences between hormone-receptor (HR)-negative and HR-positive tumors as well as correlations with age, Ki-67 and immunological parameters were observed. We could identify mutational processes that were linked to increased pathological complete response rates to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with high significance. In univariate analyses for HR-positive tumors signatures, S3 (HRD, P < 0.001) and S13 (APOBEC, P = 0.001) as well as exonic mutation rate (P = 0.002) were significantly correlated with increased pathological complete response rates. The signatures S3 (HRD, P = 0.006) and S4 (tobacco, P = 0.011) were prognostic for reduced disease-free survival of patients with chemotherapy-resistant tumors. CONCLUSION: The results of this investigation suggest that the clinical behavior of a tumor, in particular, response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and disease-free survival of therapy-resistant tumors, could be predicted by the composition of mutational signatures as an indicator of the individual genomic history of a tumor. After additional validations, mutational signatures might be used to identify tumors with an increased response rate to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and to define therapy-resistant subgroups for future therapeutic interventions.

Neoadjuvant paclitaxel/olaparib in comparison to paclitaxel/carboplatinum in patients with HER2-negative breast cancer and homologous recombination deficiency (GeparOLA study).

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and toxicity of olaparib as combination therapy in early breast cancer (BC) patients with homologous recombinant deficiency (HRD) [score high and/or germline (g) or tumour (t) BRCA1/2 mutation] is not well described. GeparOLA (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02789332) investigated olaparib in combination with paclitaxel in HER2-negative early BC with HRD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with untreated primary HER2-negative cT2-cT4a-d or cT1c with either cN+ or pNSLN+ or cT1c and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) or cT1c and Ki-67>20% BC with HRD were randomised either to paclitaxel (P) 80 mg/m2 weekly plus olaparib (O) 100 mg twice daily for 12 weeks or P plus carboplatinum (Cb) area under the curve 2 weekly for 12 weeks, both followed by epirubicin/cyclophosphamide (EC). Stratification factors were hormone receptor (HR) status (HR+ versus HR-) and age (<40 versus ≥40 years). The primary endpoint was pathological complete response (pCR; ypT0/is ypN0). A two-sided one-group χ2-test was planned to exclude a pCR rate of ≤55% in the PO-EC arm. Secondary end points were other pCR definitions, breast conservation rate, clinical/imaging response, tolerability and safety. RESULTS: A total of 107 patients were randomised between September 2016 and July 2018; 106 (PO N = 69; PCb N = 37) started treatment. Median age was 47.0 years (range 25.0-71.0); 36.2% had cT1, 61.0% cT2, 2.9% cT3, and 31.8% cN-positive tumours; grade 3 tumours: 86.8%; Ki-67>20%: 89.6%; TNBC: 72.6%; confirmed gBRCA1/2 mutation: 56.2%. The pCR rate with PO was 55.1% [90% confidence interval (CI) 44.5% to 65.3%] versus PCb 48.6% (90% CI 34.3% to 63.2%). Analysis for the stratified subgroups showed higher pCR rates with PO in the cohorts of patients <40 years and HR+ patients. CONCLUSION: GeparOLA could not exclude a pCR rate of ≤55% in the PO arm. PO was significantly better tolerated and the combination merits further evaluation.

Continuous versus intermittent extended adjuvant letrozole for breast cancer: final results of randomized phase III SOLE (Study of Letrozole Extension) and SOLE Estrogen Substudy.

BACKGROUND: Late recurrences in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancers remain an important challenge. Avoidance or delayed development of resistance represents the main objective in extended endocrine therapy (ET). In animal models, resistance was reversed with restoration of circulating estrogen levels during interruption of letrozole treatment. This phase III, randomized, open-label Study of Letrozole Extension (SOLE) studied the effect of extended intermittent letrozole treatment in comparison with continuous letrozole. In parallel, the SOLE estrogen substudy (SOLE-EST) analyzed the levels of estrogen during the interruption of treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: SOLE enrolled 4884 postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, lymph node-positive, operable breast cancer between December 2007 and October 2012 and among them, 104 patients were enrolled in SOLE-EST. They must have undergone local treatment and have completed 4-6 years of adjuvant ET. Patients were randomized between continuous letrozole (2.5 mg/day orally for 5 years) and intermittent letrozole treatment (2.5 mg/day for 9 months followed by a 3-month interruption in years 1-4 and then 2.5 mg/day during all of year 5). RESULTS: Intention-to-treat population included 4851 women in SOLE (n = 2425 in the intermittent and n = 2426 in the continuous letrozole groups) and 103 women in SOLE-EST (n = 78 in the intermittent and n = 25 in the continuous letrozole groups). After a median follow-up of 84 months, 7-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 81.4% in the intermittent group and 81.5% in the continuous group (hazard ratio: 1.03, 95% confidence interval: 0.91-1.17). Reported adverse events were similar in both groups. Circulating estrogen recovery was demonstrated within 6 weeks after the stop of letrozole treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Extended adjuvant ET by intermittent administration of letrozole did not improve DFS compared with continuous use, despite the recovery of circulating estrogen levels. The similar DFS coupled with previously reported quality-of-life advantages suggest intermittent extended treatment is a valid option for patients who require or prefer a treatment interruption.

Adjuvant T-DM1 versus trastuzumab in patients with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant therapy for HER2-positive breast cancer: subgroup analyses from KATHERINE.

BACKGROUND: In the KATHERINE study (NCT01772472), patients with residual invasive early breast cancer (EBC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) plus human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted therapy had a 50% reduction in risk of recurrence or death with adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) versus trastuzumab. Here, we present additional exploratory safety and efficacy analyses. PATIENTS AND METHODS: KATHERINE enrolled HER2-positive EBC patients with residual invasive disease in the breast/axilla at surgery after NACT containing a taxane (± anthracycline, ± platinum) and trastuzumab (± pertuzumab). Patients were randomized to adjuvant T-DM1 (n = 743) or trastuzumab (n = 743) for 14 cycles. The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). RESULTS: The incidence of peripheral neuropathy (PN) was similar regardless of neoadjuvant taxane type. Irrespective of treatment arm, baseline PN was associated with longer PN duration (median, 105-109 days longer) and lower resolution rate (∼65% versus ∼82%). Prior platinum therapy was associated with more grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia in the T-DM1 arm (13.5% versus 3.8%), but there was no grade ≥3 hemorrhage in these patients. Risk of recurrence or death was decreased with T-DM1 versus trastuzumab in patients who received anthracycline-based NACT [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.51; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38-0.67], non-anthracycline-based NACT (HR = 0.43; 95% CI: 0.22-0.82), presented with cT1, cN0 tumors (0 versus 6 IDFS events), or had particularly high-risk tumors (HRs ranged from 0.43 to 0.72). The central nervous system (CNS) was more often the site of first recurrence in the T-DM1 arm (5.9% versus 4.3%), but T-DM1 was not associated with a difference in overall risk of CNS recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: T-DM1 provides clinical benefit across patient subgroups, including small tumors and particularly high-risk tumors and does not increase the overall risk of CNS recurrence. NACT type had a minimal impact on safety.

Time course and management of key adverse events during the randomized phase III SOLAR-1 study of PI3K inhibitor alpelisib plus fulvestrant in patients with HR-positive advanced breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Alpelisib (α-selective phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor) plus fulvestrant is approved in multiple countries for men and postmenopausal women with PIK3CA-mutated, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer following progression on or after endocrine therapy. A detailed understanding of alpelisib's safety profile should inform adverse event (AE) management and enhance patient care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: AEs in the phase III SOLAR-1 trial were assessed in patients with and without PIK3CA mutations. The impact of protocol-specified AE-management recommendations was evaluated, including an amendment to optimize hyperglycemia and rash management. RESULTS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive fulvestrant plus alpelisib (n = 284) or placebo (n = 287). The most common grade 3/4 AEs with alpelisib were hyperglycemia (grade 3, 32.7%; grade 4, 3.9%), rash (grade 3, 9.9%), and diarrhea (grade 3, 6.7%). Median time to onset of grade ≥3 toxicity was 15 days (hyperglycemia, based on fasting plasma glucose), 13 days (rash), and 139 days (diarrhea). Metformin alone or in combination with other antidiabetic agents was used by most patients (87.1%) with hyperglycemia. Preventive anti-rash medication resulted in lower incidence (any grade, 26.7% versus 64.1%) and severity of rash (grade 3, 11.6% versus 22.7%) versus no preventative medication. Discontinuations due to grade ≥3 AEs were lower following more-detailed AE management guidelines (7.9% versus 18.1% previously). Patients with PIK3CA mutations had a median alpelisib dose intensity of 248 mg/day. Median progression-free survival with alpelisib was 12.5 and 9.6 months for alpelisib dose intensities of ≥248 mg/day and <248 mg/day, respectively, compared with 5.8 months with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Hyperglycemia and rash occurred early during alpelisib treatment, while diarrhea occurred at a later time point. Early identification, prevention, and intervention, including concomitant medications and alpelisib dose modifications, resulted in less severe toxicities. Reductions in treatment discontinuations and improved progression-free survival at higher alpelisib dose intensities support the need for optimal AE management. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV ID: NCT02437318.

Tumor mutational burden and immune infiltration as independent predictors of response to neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibition in early TNBC in GeparNuevo.

BACKGROUND: The predictive value of tumor mutational burden (TMB), alone or in combination with an immune gene expression profile (GEP), for response to neoadjuvant therapy in early triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is currently not known, either for immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) or conventional chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We obtained both whole exome sequencing and RNA-Seq data from pretreatment samples of 149 TNBC of the recent neoadjuvant ICB trial, GeparNuevo. In a predefined analysis, we assessed the predictive value of TMB and a previously developed immune GEP for pathological complete remission (pCR). RESULTS: Median TMB was 1.52 mut/Mb (range 0.02-7.65) and was significantly higher in patients with pCR (median 1.87 versus 1.39; P = 0.005). In multivariate analysis, odds ratios for pCR per mut/Mb were 2.06 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.33-3.20, P = 0.001] among all patients, 1.77 (95% CI 1.00-3.13, P = 0.049) in the durvalumab treatment arm, and 2.82 (95% CI 1.21-6.54, P = 0.016) in the placebo treatment arm, respectively. We also found that both continuous TMB and immune GEP (or tumor infiltrating lymphocytes) independently predicted pCR. When we stratified patients in groups based on the upper tertile of TMB and median GEP, we observed a pCR rate of 82% (95% CI 60% to 95%) in the group with both high TMB and GEP in contrast to only 28% (95% CI 16% to 43%) in the group with both low TMB and GEP. CONCLUSIONS: TMB and immune GEP add independent value for pCR prediction. Our results recommend further analysis of TMB in combination with immune parameters to individually tailor therapies in breast cancer.

Scoring of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes: From visual estimation to machine learning.

The extent of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), along with immunomodulatory ligands, tumor-mutational burden and other biomarkers, has been demonstrated to be a marker of response to immune-checkpoint therapy in several cancers. Pathologists have therefore started to devise standardized visual approaches to quantify TILs for therapy prediction. However, despite successful standardization efforts visual TIL estimation is slow, with limited precision and lacks the ability to evaluate more complex properties such as TIL distribution patterns. Therefore, computational image analysis approaches are needed to provide standardized and efficient TIL quantification. Here, we discuss different automated TIL scoring approaches ranging from classical image segmentation, where cell boundaries are identified and the resulting objects classified according to shape properties, to machine learning-based approaches that directly classify cells without segmentation but rely on large amounts of training data. In contrast to conventional machine learning (ML) approaches that are often criticized for their "black-box" characteristics, we also discuss explainable machine learning. Such approaches render ML results interpretable and explain the computational decision-making process through high-resolution heatmaps that highlight TILs and cancer cells and therefore allow for quantification and plausibility checks in biomedical research and diagnostics.

Estimating the benefits of therapy for early-stage breast cancer: the St. Gallen International Consensus Guidelines for the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2019.

BACKGROUND: The 16th St. Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference 2019 in Vienna, Austria reviewed substantial new evidence on loco-regional and systemic therapies for early breast cancer. DESIGN: Treatments were assessed in light of their intensity, duration and side-effects, estimating the magnitude of clinical benefit according to stage and biology of the disease. The Panel acknowledged that for many patients, the impact of adjuvant therapy or the adherence to specific guidelines may have modest impact on the risk of breast cancer recurrence or overall survival. For that reason, the Panel explicitly encouraged clinicians and patients to routinely discuss the magnitude of benefit for interventions as part of the development of the treatment plan. RESULTS: The guidelines focus on common ductal and lobular breast cancer histologies arising in generally healthy women. Special breast cancer histologies may need different considerations, as do individual patients with other substantial health considerations. The panelists' opinions reflect different interpretation of available data and expert opinion where is lack of evidence and sociocultural factors in their environment such as availability of and access to medical service, economic resources and reimbursement issues. Panelists encourage patient participation in well-designed clinical studies whenever available. CONCLUSIONS: With these caveats in mind, the St. Gallen Consensus Conference seeks to provide guidance to clinicians on appropriate treatments for early-stage breast cancer and guidance for weighing the realistic tradeoffs between treatment and toxicity so that patients and clinical teams can make well-informed decisions on the basis of an honest reckoning of the magnitude of clinical benefit.

Dose tailoring of adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer based on hematologic toxicities: further results from the prospective PANTHER study with focus on obese patients.

Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) for breast cancer improves relapse-free survival (BCRFS) and overall survival. Differences in terms of efficacy and toxicity could partly be explained by the significant interpatient variability in pharmacokinetics which cannot be captured by dosing according to body surface area. Consequently, tailored dosing was prospectively evaluated in the PANTHER trial. Patients and methods: PANTHER is a multicenter, open-label, randomized phase III trial which compared tailored, dose-dense (DD) epirubicin/cyclophosphamide (E/C) and tailored docetaxel (D) (tDD) with standard interval 5-fluorouracil/E/C and D. The primary end point was BCRFS and the primary efficacy analysis has been previously published. In this secondary analysis, we aimed to retrospectively explore the concept of dose tailoring. Our two hypotheses were that BCRFS would not vary depending on the cumulative administered epirubicin dose; and that dose tailoring would lead to appropriate dosing and improved outcomes for obese patients, who are known to have worse prognosis and increased toxicity after DD ACT. Results: Patients treated with tDD had similar BCRFS regardless of the cumulative epirubicin dose (P = 0.495), while obese patients in this group [body mass index (BMI) ≥30] had improved BCRFS compared with nonobese ones (BMI <30) [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30-0.89, P = 0.02]. Moreover, tDD was associated with improved BCRFS compared with standard treatment only in obese patients (HR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.26-0.90, P = 0.022) but not in nonobese ones (HR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.60-1.04, P = 0.089). The differences were not formally statistically significant (P for interaction 0.175). There were no differences in terms of toxicity across the epirubicin dose levels or the BMI groups. Conclusions: Dose tailoring is a feasible strategy that can potentially improve outcomes in obese patients without increasing toxicity and should be pursued in further clinical studies. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00798070.