Aromatase inhibition plus/minus Src inhibitor saracatinib (AZD0530) in advanced breast cancer therapy (ARISTACAT): a randomised phase II study.

PURPOSE: The development of oestrogen resistance is a major challenge in managing hormone-sensitive metastatic breast cancer. Saracatinib (AZD0530), an oral Src kinase inhibitor, prevents oestrogen resistance in animal models and reduces osteoclast activity. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of saracatinib addition to aromatase inhibitors (AI) in patients with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: This phase II multicentre double-blinded randomised trial allocated post-menopausal women to AI with either saracatinib or placebo (1:1 ratio). Patients were stratified into an "AI-sensitive/naïve" group who received anastrozole and "prior-AI" group who received exemestane. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and toxicity. RESULTS: 140 patients were randomised from 20 UK centres to saracatinib/AI (n = 69) or placebo/AI (n = 71). Saracatinib was not associated with an improved PFS (3.7 months v. 5.6 months placebo/AI) and did not reduce likelihood of bony progression. There was no benefit in OS or ORR. Effects were consistent in "AI-sensitive/naive" and "prior-AI" sub-groups. Saracatinib was well tolerated with dose reductions in 16% and the main side effects were gastrointestinal, hypophosphatemia and rash. CONCLUSION: Saracatinib did not improve outcomes in post-menopausal women with metastatic breast cancer. There was no observed beneficial effect on bone metastases. CRUKE/11/023, ISRCTN23804370.

Fulvestrant plus capivasertib versus placebo after relapse or progression on an aromatase inhibitor in metastatic, oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer (FAKTION): overall survival, updated progression-free survival, and expanded biomarker analysis from a randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Capivasertib, an AKT inhibitor, added to fulvestrant, was previously reported to improve progression-free survival in women with aromatase inhibitor-resistant oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. The benefit appeared to be independent of the phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT/phosphatase and tensin homologue (PTEN) pathway alteration status of tumours, as ascertained using assays available at the time. Here, we report updated progression-free survival and overall survival results, and a prespecified examination of the effect of PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway alterations identified by an expanded genetic testing panel on treatment outcomes. METHODS: This randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial recruited postmenopausal adult women aged at least 18 years with ER-positive, HER2-negative, metastatic or locally advanced inoperable breast cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, who had relapsed or progressed on an aromatase inhibitor, from across 19 hospitals in the UK. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intramuscular fulvestrant 500 mg (day 1) every 28 days (plus a 500 mg loading dose on day 15 of cycle 1) with either capivasertib 400 mg or matching placebo, orally twice daily on an intermittent weekly schedule of 4 days on and 3 days off, starting on cycle 1 day 15. Treatment continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, loss to follow-up, or withdrawal of consent. Treatment was allocated by an interactive web-response system using a minimisation method (with a 20% random element) and the following minimisation factors: measurable or non-measurable disease, primary or secondary aromatase inhibitor resistance, PIK3CA status, and PTEN status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints shown in this Article were overall survival and safety in the intention-to-treat population, and the effect of tumour PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway status identified by an expanded testing panel that included next-generation sequencing assays. Recruitment is complete. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01992952. FINDINGS: Between March 16, 2015, and March 6, 2018, 183 participants were screened for eligibility and 140 (77%) were randomly assigned to receive fulvestrant plus capivasertib (n=69) or fulvestrant plus placebo (n=71). Median follow-up at the data cut-off of Nov 25, 2021, was 58·5 months (IQR 45·9-64·1) for participants treated with fulvestrant plus capivasertib and 62·3 months (IQR 62·1-70·3) for fulvestrant plus placebo. Updated median progression-free survival was 10·3 months (95% CI 5·0-13·4) in the group receiving fulvestrant plus capivasertib compared with 4·8 months (3·1-7·9) for fulvestrant plus placebo (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·56 [95% CI 0·38-0·81]; two-sided p=0·0023). Median overall survival in the capivasertib versus placebo groups was 29·3 months (95% CI 23·7-39·0) versus 23·4 months (18·7-32·7; adjusted HR 0·66 [95% CI 0·45-0·97]; two-sided p=0·035). The expanded biomarker panel identified an expanded pathway-altered subgroup that contained 76 participants (54% of the intention-to-treat population). Median progression-free survival in the expanded pathway-altered subgroup for participants receiving capivasertib (n=39) was 12·8 months (95% CI 6·6-18·8) compared with 4·6 months (2·8-7·9) in the placebo group (n=37; adjusted HR 0·44 [95% CI 0·26-0·72]; two-sided p=0·0014). Median overall survival for the expanded pathway-altered subgroup receiving capivasertib was 38·9 months (95% CI 23·3-50·7) compared with 20·0 months (14·8-31·4) for those receiving placebo (adjusted HR 0·46 [95% CI 0·27-0·79]; two-sided p=0·0047). By contrast, there were no statistically significant differences in progression-free or overall survival in the expanded pathway non-altered subgroup treated with capivasertib (n=30) versus placebo (n=34). One additional serious adverse event (pneumonia) in the capivasertib group had occurred subsequent to the primary analysis. One death, due to atypical pulmonary infection, was assessed as possibly related to capivasertib treatment. INTERPRETATION: Updated FAKTION data showed that capivasertib addition to fulvestrant extends the survival of participants with aromatase inhibitor-resistant ER-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. The expanded biomarker testing suggested that capivasertib predominantly benefits patients with PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway-altered tumours. Phase 3 data are needed to substantiate the results, including in patients with previous CDK4/6 inhibitor exposure who were not included in the FAKTION trial. FUNDING: AstraZeneca and Cancer Research UK.

Fulvestrant plus capivasertib versus placebo after relapse or progression on an aromatase inhibitor in metastatic, oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer (FAKTION): a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Capivasertib (AZD5363) is a potent selective oral inhibitor of all three isoforms of the serine/threonine kinase AKT. The FAKTION trial investigated whether the addition of capivasertib to fulvestrant improved progression-free survival in patients with aromatase inhibitor-resistant advanced breast cancer. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial, postmenopausal women aged at least 18 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 and oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, metastatic or locally advanced inoperable breast cancer who had relapsed or progressed on an aromatase inhibitor were recruited from 19 hospitals in the UK. Enrolled participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intramuscular fulvestrant 500 mg (day 1) every 28 days (plus a loading dose on day 15 of cycle 1) with either capivasertib 400 mg or matching placebo, orally twice daily on an intermittent weekly schedule of 4 days on and 3 days off (starting on cycle 1 day 15) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, loss to follow-up, or withdrawal of consent. Treatment allocation was done using an interactive web-response system using a minimisation method (with a 20% random element) and the following minimisation factors: measurable or non-measurable disease, primary or secondary aromatase inhibitor resistance, PIK3CA status, and PTEN status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival with a one-sided alpha of 0·20. Analyses were done by intention to treat. Recruitment is complete, and the trial is in follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01992952. FINDINGS: Between March 16, 2015, and March 6, 2018, 183 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 140 (76%) were eligible and were randomly assigned to receive fulvestrant plus capivasertib (n=69) or fulvestrant plus placebo (n=71). Median follow-up for progression-free survival was 4·9 months (IQR 1·6-11·6). At the time of primary analysis for progression-free survival (Jan 30, 2019), 112 progression-free survival events had occurred, 49 (71%) in 69 patients in the capivasertib group compared with 63 (89%) of 71 in the placebo group. Median progression-free survival was 10·3 months (95% CI 5·0-13·2) in the capivasertib group versus 4·8 months (3·1-7·7) in the placebo group, giving an unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0·58 (95% CI 0·39-0·84) in favour of the capivasertib group (two-sided p=0·0044; one-sided log rank test p=0·0018). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (22 [32%] of 69 patients in the capivasertib group vs 17 [24%] of 71 in the placebo group), diarrhoea (ten [14%] vs three [4%]), rash (14 [20%] vs 0), infection (four [6%] vs two [3%]), and fatigue (one [1%] vs three [4%]). Serious adverse reactions occurred only in the capivasertib group, and were acute kidney injury (two), diarrhoea (three), rash (two), hyperglycaemia (one), loss of consciousness (one), sepsis (one), and vomiting (one). One death, due to atypical pulmonary infection, was assessed as possibly related to capivasertib treatment. One further death in the capivasertib group had an unknown cause; all remaining deaths in both groups (19 in the capivasertib group and 31 in the placebo group) were disease related. INTERPRETATION: Progression-free survival was significantly longer in participants who received capivasertib than in those who received placebo. The combination of capivasertib and fulvestrant warrants further investigation in phase 3 trials. FUNDING: AstraZeneca and Cancer Research UK.

Palbociclib and endocrine therapy in heavily pretreated hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: the UK Compassionate Access Programme experience.

PURPOSE: Palbociclib is approved in 1st line for hormone receptor (HR)-positive HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC). A Compassionate Access Programme previously allowed patients to receive it in 4th line. However, Palbociclib has not been specifically tested in this population. We aimed to determine the safety and efficacy profile of Palbociclib within the Programme across ten institutions in the United Kingdom. METHODS: We retrospectively identified HR-positive HER2-negative ABC patients on the Programme between December 2015 and September 2017. Demographics, disease characteristics, prior treatments, blood tests, toxicities, treatment delays and responses were recorded. Simple statistics, Fisher's exact test, χ2 method and Cox regression were used. RESULTS: 118 patients identified had a median age of 59. 82.2% were postmenopausal and 92.4% performance status 0-1. 81.4% had visceral involvement and 6.8% bone-only disease after a median of 5 prior treatments and 3 prior chemotherapies. Clinical benefit rate was 47.5%, overall response rate 15.8%, median PFS 4.5 months and median OS 15.8 months. Longer progression-free survival on prior endocrine therapy was a predictor of longer PFS and OS. 89.7% developed neutropenia (grade ≥ 3 in 56.8%). 5.1% experienced febrile neutropenia. 48.3% had dose reductions and 3.4% discontinued Palbociclib following toxicity. No statistically significant difference in grade ≥ 3 neutropenia was observed according to metastatic sites nor previous treatments. CONCLUSIONS: This is the most extensive analysis of palbociclib in ≥ 4th-line setting. Clinical benefit was confirmed particularly for endocrine-sensitive, predominantly bony disease and in earlier lines of treatment. Safety was similar to PALOMA trials with higher febrile neutropenia rate.

Pertuzumab and trastuzumab with or without metronomic chemotherapy for older patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (EORTC 75111-10114): an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial from the Elderly Task Force/Breast Cancer Group.

BACKGROUND: Despite the high incidence of metastatic breast cancer and its related mortality in the elderly population, our knowledge about optimal treatment for older patients with cancer is far from adequate. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of dual anti-HER2 treatment with or without metronomic chemotherapy in older patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: We did a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial in 30 centres from eight countries in Europe, in patients with histologically proven, HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, without previous chemotherapy for metastatic disease, who were 70 years or older, or 60 years or older with confirmed functional restrictions defined by protocol, and had a life expectancy of more than 12 weeks and a performance status according to WHO scale of 0-3. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by an online randomisation system based on the minimisation method to receive metronomic oral cyclophosphamide 50 mg per day plus trastuzumab and pertuzumab, or trastuzumab and pertuzumab alone. Trastuzumab was given intravenously with a loading dose of 8 mg/kg, followed by 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Pertuzumab was given intravenously with a loading dose of 840 mg, followed by 420 mg every 3 weeks. Patients were stratified by hormone receptor positivity, previous HER2 treatment, and baseline geriatric screening. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival at 6 months as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. A difference of 10% or greater between the two groups was sought. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat; safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. In case of progression, all patients were offered trastuzumab emtansine. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01597414, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between July 2, 2013, and May 10, 2016, 80 patients, of whom 56 (70%) had a potential frailty profile according to the geriatric screening G8 score (≤14), were randomly assigned to receive trastuzumab and pertuzumab (n=39) or trastuzumab and pertuzumab plus metronomic oral cyclophosphamide (n=41). Estimated progression-free survival at 6 months was 46·2% (95% CI 30·2-60·7) with trastuzumab and pertuzumab versus 73·4% (56·6-84·6) with trastuzumab and pertuzumab plus metronomic oral cyclophosphamide (hazard ratio [HR] 0·65 [95% CI 0·37-1·12], p=0·12). At a median follow-up of 20·7 months (IQR 12·5-30·4), the median progression-free survival was 5·6 months (95% CI 3·6-16·8) with trastuzumab and pertuzumab versus 12·7 months (6·7-24·8) with the addition of metronomic oral cyclophosphamide. The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (in six [15%] of 39 patients in the trastuzumab and pertuzumab group vs five [12%] of 41 in the trastuzumab and pertuzumab plus metronomic oral cyclophosphamide group), diarrhoea (four [10%] vs five [12%]), dyspnoea (two [5%] vs four [10%]), fatigue (three [8%] vs two [5%]), pain (two [5%] vs two [5%]), and a thromboembolic event (0 [0%] vs four [10%]). Severe cardiac toxicities were occasionally observed in both groups. In the trastuzumab and pertuzumab group four patients died without progression, due to cardiac arrest during treatment (n=1), peritoneal infection (n=1), respiratory failure (n=1), and sudden death without a specified cause (n=1). In the trastuzumab and pertuzumab plus metronomic oral cyclophosphamide group, one patient died from heart failure. INTERPRETATION: Addition of metronomic oral cyclophosphamide to trastuzumab plus pertuzumab in older and frail patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer increased median progression-free survival by 7 months compared with dual HER2 blockade alone, with an acceptable safety profile. Trastuzumab and pertuzumab plus metronomic oral cyclophosphamide, followed by trastuzumab emtansine after disease progression, might delay or supersede the need for taxane chemotherapy in this population. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Comparison of Circulating Tumor DNA Assays for Molecular Residual Disease Detection in Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Detection of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in patients who have completed treatment for early-stage breast cancer is associated with a high risk of relapse, yet the optimal assay for ctDNA detection is unknown. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The cTRAK-TN clinical trial prospectively used tumor-informed digital PCR (dPCR) assays for ctDNA molecular residual disease (MRD) detection in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer. We compared tumor-informed dPCR assays with tumor-informed personalized multimutation sequencing assays in 141 patients from cTRAK-TN. RESULTS: MRD was first detected by personalized sequencing in 47.9% of patients, 0% first detected by dPCR, and 52.1% with both assays simultaneously (P < 0.001; Fisher exact test). The median lead time from ctDNA detection to relapse was 6.1 months with personalized sequencing and 3.9 months with dPCR (P = 0.004, mixed-effects Cox model). Detection of MRD at the first time point was associated with a shorter time to relapse compared with detection at subsequent time points (median lead time 4.2 vs. 7.1 months; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Personalized multimutation sequencing assays have potential clinically important improvements in clinical outcome in the early detection of MRD.

Single domain intracellular antibodies from diverse libraries: emphasizing dual functions of LMO2 protein interactions using a single VH domain.

Interfering intracellular antibodies are valuable for biological studies as drug surrogates and as potential macromolecular drugs per se. Their application is still limited because of the difficulty of acquisition of functional intracellular antibodies. We describe the use of the new intracellular antibody capture procedure (IAC(3)) to facilitate direct isolation of functional single domain antibody fragments using four independent target molecules (LMO2, TP53, CRAF1, and Hoxa9) from a set of diverse libraries. Initially, these have variability in only one of the three antigen-binding CDR regions of VH or VL and first round single domains are affinity matured by iterative randomization of the two other CDRs and reselection. We highlight the approach using a single domain binding to LMO2 protein. Our results show that interfering with LMO2 protein function demonstrates a role specifically in erythroid differentiation, confirm a necessary and sufficient function for LMO2 as a cancer therapy target in T-cell neoplasia and allowed for the first time production of soluble recombinant LMO2 protein by co-expression with intracellular domain antibodies. Co-crystallization of LMO2 and the anti-LMO2 VH protein was successful. These results demonstrate that this third generation IAC(3) offers a robust toolbox for various biomedical applications and consolidates functional features of the LMO2 protein complex, which includes the importance of Lmo2-Ldb1 protein interaction.

Long term outcome data from the EORTC 75111-10114 ETF/BCG randomized phase II study: Pertuzumab and trastuzumab with or without metronomic chemotherapy for older patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, followed by T-DM1 after progression.

INTRODUCTION: Older patients are at higher risk of chemotherapy-induced toxicity, raising interest in less toxic anti-HER2 regimens for older persons with HER2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase II study randomized (1:1) patients with HER2+ MBC, aged 70+ or frail 60+, to first line chemotherapy with metronomic oral cyclophosphamide (M) + Trastuzumab (T) and Pertuzumab (P) or TP alone. T-DM1 was offered in case of progression. RESULTS: In total, 39 and 41 patients were randomized to TP and TPM arm respectively. Median follow-up is 54.0 months. 24-month PFS was 18.7% (95% CI 8.2-32.4) and 28.7% (95% CI 15.8-43.0), respectively. A total of 49 (61.3%) patients died of whom 37 (75.5%) from disease progression; number of deaths per arm was 27 (69.2%) for TP and 22 (53.7%) for TPM. There was no significant difference in OS between the two arms (median OS TP vs TPM: 32.1 vs 37.5 months, p 0.25). Among the 40 patients who have started T-DM1 after disease progression on TP/TPM, PFS rate at 6 months after start of T-DM1 was 43.6% (95% CI: 27.7-58.5) and grade 3 or higher AE occurred in 18 pts (45%). CONCLUSIONS: Metronomic chemotherapy-based dual blockade (TPM), followed by T-DM1 after progression, provides an active and relatively well tolerated treatment option in an older/frail HER2+ MBC population, with a median survival of over 3 years. Nevertheless, the majority of this older/frail population died from breast cancer, highlighting the need for well tolerated and efficacious treatments in these patients.

Concept: A randomised multicentre trial of first line chemotherapy comparing three weekly cabazitaxel versus weekly paclitaxel in HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Paclitaxel is commonly used as first-line chemotherapy for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. However, with response rates of 21.5-53.7% and significant risk of peripheral neuropathy, there is need for better chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This open-label phase II/III trial randomised HER2-negative MBC patients 1:1 to either 6 cycles of three-weekly cabazitaxel (25 mg/m2), or, weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) over 18 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), time to response (TTR), overall survival (OS), safety and tolerability and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS: 158 patients were recruited. Comparing cabazitaxel to paclitaxel, median PFS was 6.7 vs 5.8 months (HR 0.87; 80%CI 0.70-1.08, P = 0.4). There was no difference in median OS (20.6 vs 18.2 months, HR 1.00; 95%CI 0.69-1.45, P = 0.99), ORR (41.8% vs 36.7%) or TTR (HR 1.09; 95%CI 0.68-1.75, P = 0.7). Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 41.8% on cabazitaxel and 46.8% on paclitaxel; the most common being neutropenia (16.5%) and febrile neutropenia (12.7%) cabazitaxel and neutropenia (8.9%) and lung infection (7.6%) paclitaxel. Peripheral neuropathy of any grade occurred in 54.5% paclitaxel vs 16.5% cabazitaxel. Mean EQ-5D-5L single index utility score (+0.05; 95%CI 0.004-0.09, P = 0.03) and visual analogue scale score (+7.7; 95%CI 3.1-12.3, P = 0.001) were higher in cabazitaxel vs paclitaxel. CONCLUSIONS: Three-weekly cabazitaxel in HER2-negative MBC does not significantly improve PFS compared to weekly paclitaxel, although it has a lower risk of peripheral neuropathy with better patient reported QoL outcomes. It is well tolerated and requires fewer hospital visits.

Elacestrant (oral selective estrogen receptor degrader) Versus Standard Endocrine Therapy for Estrogen Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer: Results From the Randomized Phase III EMERALD Trial.

PURPOSE: Patients with pretreated estrogen receptor (ER)-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer have poor prognosis. Elacestrant is a novel, oral selective ER degrader that demonstrated activity in early studies. METHODS: This randomized, open-label, phase III trial enrolled patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who had one-two lines of endocrine therapy, required pretreatment with a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor, and ≤ 1 chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned to elacestrant 400 mg orally once daily or standard-of-care (SOC) endocrine monotherapy. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review in all patients and patients with detectable ESR1 mutations. RESULTS: Patients were randomly assigned to elacestrant (n = 239) or SOC (n = 238). ESR1 mutation was detected in 47.8% of patients, and 43.4% received two prior endocrine therapies. PFS was prolonged in all patients (hazard ratio = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.88; P = .002) and patients with ESR1 mutation (hazard ratio = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.77; P = .0005). Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 7.2% receiving elacestrant and 3.1% receiving SOC. Treatment-related adverse events leading to treatment discontinuations were 3.4% in the elacestrant arm versus 0.9% in SOC. Nausea of any grade occurred in 35.0% receiving elacestrant and 18.8% receiving SOC (grade 3/4, 2.5% and 0.9%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Elacestrant is the first oral selective ER degrader demonstrating a significant PFS improvement versus SOC both in the overall population and in patients with ESR1 mutations with manageable safety in a phase III trial for patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer.

Biomarker Analysis of the Phase III NALA Study of Neratinib + Capecitabine versus Lapatinib + Capecitabine in Patients with Previously Treated Metastatic Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Neratinib plus capecitabine (N+C) demonstrated significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in NALA (NCT01808573), a randomized phase III trial comparing N+C with lapatinib + capecitabine (L+C) in 621 patients with HER2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who had received ≥2 prior HER2-directed regimens in the metastatic setting. We evaluated correlations between exploratory biomarkers and PFS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Somatic mutations were evaluated by next-generation sequencing on primary or metastatic samples. HER2 protein expression was evaluated by central IHC, H-score, and VeraTag/HERmark. p95 expression (truncated HER2) was measured by VeraTag. HRs were estimated using unstratified Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Four hundred and twenty samples had successful sequencing: 34.0% had PIK3CA mutations and 5.5% had HER2 (ERBB2) mutations. In the combined patient populations, PIK3CA mutations trended toward shorter PFS [wild-type vs. mutant, HR = 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-1.03], whereas HER2 mutations trended toward longer PFS [HR = 1.69 (95% CI, 0.97-3.29)]. Higher HER2 protein expression was associated with longer PFS [IHC 3+ vs. 2+, HR = 0.67 (0.54-0.82); H-score ≥240 versus <240, HR = 0.77 (0.63-0.93); HERmark positive vs. negative, HR = 0.76 (0.59-0.98)]. Patients whose tumors had higher HER2 protein expression (any method) derived an increased benefit from N+C compared with L+C [IHC 3+, HR = 0.64 (0.51-0.81); H-score ≥ 240, HR = 0.54 (0.41-0.72); HERmark positive, HR = 0.65 (0.50-0.84)], as did patients with high p95 [p95 ≥2.8 relative fluorescence (RF)/mm2, HR = 0.66 (0.50-0.86) vs. p95 < 2.8 RF/mm2, HR = 0.91 (0.61-1.36)]. CONCLUSIONS: PIK3CA mutations were associated with shorter PFS whereas higher HER2 expression was associated with longer PFS. Higher HER2 protein expression was also associated with a greater benefit for N+C compared with L+C.

The AusPSIs: the Australian version of the Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality patient safety indicators.

Many countries are seeking ways to measure the safety and performance of their health systems. The ability to track improvement and monitor safety event rates at a population level is provided by routinely collected administrative data in conjunction with a set of well-developed indicators such as the patient safety indicators from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) in the United States of America. These indicators are currently in the International Classification of Diseases Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) whereas Australia has coded its data in ICD-10-Australian Modification (ICD-10-AM) since 1998. We describe the process recently undertaken to translate and revise the patient safety indicators (PSIs) so they can be of use with ICD-10-AM. The initial translation (electronic mapping, review and revision by expert coder, programming of codes and testing on data from 1996-1998 [ICD 9-CM] to 1998-2006 [ICD-10-AM, through 4 editions]) found that differences between ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-AM datasets presented some challenges. After this phase, which was faithful to AHRQ's case definitions, the indicators were refined for use with the condition onset flag, resulting in the AusPSIs.