Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Nature ; 629(8014): 1142-1148, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38588696

ABSTRACT

PARTNER is a prospective, phase II-III, randomized controlled clinical trial that recruited patients with triple-negative breast cancer1,2, who were germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 wild type3. Here we report the results of the trial. Patients (n = 559) were randomized on a 1:1 basis to receive neoadjuvant carboplatin-paclitaxel with or without 150 mg olaparib twice daily, on days 3 to 14, of each of four cycles (gap schedule olaparib, research arm) followed by three cycles of anthracycline-based chemotherapy before surgery. The primary end point was pathologic complete response (pCR)4, and secondary end points included event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS)5. pCR was achieved in 51% of patients in the research arm and 52% in the control arm (P = 0.753). Estimated EFS at 36 months in the research and control arms was 80% and 79% (log-rank P > 0.9), respectively; OS was 90% and 87.2% (log-rank P = 0.8), respectively. In patients with pCR, estimated EFS at 36 months was 90%, and in those with non-pCR it was 70% (log-rank P < 0.001), and OS was 96% and 83% (log-rank P < 0.001), respectively. Neoadjuvant olaparib did not improve pCR rates, EFS or OS when added to carboplatin-paclitaxel and anthracycline-based chemotherapy in patients with triple-negative breast cancer who were germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 wild type. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03150576 .


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Phthalazines , Piperazines , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Anthracyclines/therapeutic use , Anthracyclines/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Carboplatin/administration & dosage , Carboplatin/therapeutic use , Genes, BRCA1 , Genes, BRCA2 , Paclitaxel/administration & dosage , Paclitaxel/therapeutic use , Pathologic Complete Response , Phthalazines/administration & dosage , Phthalazines/therapeutic use , Piperazines/administration & dosage , Piperazines/therapeutic use , Progression-Free Survival , Prospective Studies , Survival Analysis , Time Factors , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms/metabolism , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Adolescent , Young Adult
2.
Mod Pathol ; 30(8): 1069-1077, 2017 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28548129

ABSTRACT

The ARTemis Trial tested standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy±bevacizumab in the treatment of HER2-negative early breast cancer. We compare data from central pathology review with report review and also the reporting behavior of the two central pathologists. Eight hundred women with HER2-negative early invasive breast cancer were recruited. Response to chemotherapy was assessed from local pathology reports for pathological complete response in breast and axillary lymph nodes. Sections from the original core biopsy and surgical excision were centrally reviewed by one of two trial pathologists blinded to the local pathology reports. Pathologists recorded response to chemotherapy descriptively and also calculated residual cancer burden. 10% of cases were double-reported to compare the central pathologists' reporting behavior. Full sample retrieval was obtained for 681 of the 781 patients (87%) who underwent surgery within the trial and were evaluable for pathological complete response. Four hundred and eighty-three (71%) were assessed by JSJT, and 198 (29%) were assessed by EP. Residual cancer burden calculations were possible in 587/681 (86%) of the centrally reviewed patients, as 94/681 (14%) had positive sentinel nodes removed before neoadjuvant chemotherapy invalidating residual cancer burden scoring. Good concordance was found between the two pathologists for residual cancer burden classes within the 65-patient quality assurance exercise (kappa 0.63 (95% CI: 0.57-0.69)). Similar results were obtained for the between-treatment arm comparison both from the report review and the central pathology review. For pathological complete response, report review was as good as central pathology review but for minimal residual disease, report review overestimated the extent of residual disease. In the ARTemis Trial central pathology review added little in the determination of pathological complete response but had a role in evaluating low levels of residual disease. Calculation of residual cancer burden was a simple and reproducible method of quantifying response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy as demonstrated by performance comparison of the two pathologists.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasm, Residual/epidemiology , Pathology, Clinical/standards , Quality Assurance, Health Care , Adult , Aged , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
3.
Lancet Oncol ; 16(6): 656-66, 2015 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25975632

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The ARTemis trial was developed to assess the efficacy and safety of adding bevacizumab to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-negative early breast cancer. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, we enrolled women (≥18 years) with newly diagnosed HER2-negative early invasive breast cancer (radiological tumour size >20 mm, with or without axillary involvement), at 66 centres in the UK. Patients were randomly assigned via a central computerised minimisation procedure to three cycles of docetaxel (100 mg/m(2) once every 21 days) followed by three cycles of fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2)), epirubicin (100 mg/m(2)), and cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m(2)) once every 21 days (D-FEC), without or with four cycles of bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) (Bev+D-FEC). The primary endpoint was pathological complete response, defined as the absence of invasive disease in the breast and axillary lymph nodes, analysed by intention to treat. The trial has completed and follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2008-002322-11), ISRCTN (68502941), and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01093235). FINDINGS: Between May 7, 2009, and Jan 9, 2013, we randomly allocated 800 participants to D-FEC (n=401) and Bev+D-FEC (n=399). 781 patients were available for the primary endpoint analysis. Significantly more patients in the bevacizumab group achieved a pathological complete response compared with those treated with chemotherapy alone: 87 (22%, 95% CI 18-27) of 388 patients in the Bev+D-FEC group compared with 66 (17%, 13-21) of 393 patients in the D-FEC group (p=0·03). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were reported at expected levels in both groups, although more patients had grade 4 neutropenia in the Bev+D-FEC group than in the D-FEC group (85 [22%] vs 68 [17%]). INTERPRETATION: Addition of four cycles of bevacizumab to D-FEC in HER2-negative early breast cancer significantly improved pathological complete response. However, whether the improvement in pathological complete response will lead to improved disease-free and overall survival outcomes is unknown and will be reported after longer follow-up. Meta-analysis of available neoadjuvant trials is likely to be the only way to define subgroups of early breast cancer that would have clinically significant long-term benefit from bevacizumab treatment. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Taxoids/administration & dosage , Adult , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Bevacizumab , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Cyclophosphamide/administration & dosage , Cyclophosphamide/adverse effects , Disease-Free Survival , Docetaxel , Drug Administration Schedule , Epirubicin/administration & dosage , Epirubicin/adverse effects , Female , Fluorouracil/administration & dosage , Fluorouracil/adverse effects , Humans , Lymph Nodes/drug effects , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Middle Aged , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Receptor, ErbB-2/genetics , Taxoids/adverse effects
4.
Nat Commun ; 15(1): 7731, 2024 Sep 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39231944

ABSTRACT

Whole genome sequencing (WGS) provides comprehensive, individualised cancer genomic information. However, routine tumour biopsies are formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded (FFPE), damaging DNA, historically limiting their use in WGS. Here we analyse FFPE cancer WGS datasets from England's 100,000 Genomes Project, comparing 578 FFPE samples with 11,014 fresh frozen (FF) samples across multiple tumour types. We use an approach that characterises rather than discards artefacts. We identify three artefactual signatures, including one known (SBS57) and two previously uncharacterised (SBS FFPE, ID FFPE), and develop an "FFPEImpact" score that quantifies sample artefacts. Despite inferior sequencing quality, FFPE-derived data identifies clinically-actionable variants, mutational signatures and permits algorithmic stratification. Matched FF/FFPE validation cohorts shows good concordance while acknowledging SBS, ID and copy-number artefacts. While FF-derived WGS data remains the gold standard, FFPE-samples can be used for WGS if required, using analytical advancements developed here, potentially democratising whole cancer genomics to many.


Subject(s)
Formaldehyde , Neoplasms , Paraffin Embedding , Tissue Fixation , Whole Genome Sequencing , Humans , Paraffin Embedding/methods , Neoplasms/genetics , Neoplasms/pathology , Whole Genome Sequencing/methods , Tissue Fixation/methods , Genomics/methods , Mutation , Genome, Human , Artifacts
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL