Adjuvant anastrozole versus exemestane versus letrozole, upfront or after 2 years of tamoxifen, in endocrine-sensitive breast cancer (FATA-GIM3): a randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty exists about the optimal schedule of adjuvant treatment of breast cancer with aromatase inhibitors and, to our knowledge, no trial has directly compared the three aromatase inhibitors anastrozole, exemestane, and letrozole. We investigated the schedule and type of aromatase inhibitors to be used as adjuvant treatment for hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. METHODS: FATA-GIM3 is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial of six different treatments in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed invasive hormone receptor-positive breast cancer that had been completely removed by surgery, any pathological tumour size, and axillary nodal status. Key exclusion criteria were hormone replacement therapy, recurrent or metastatic disease, previous treatment with tamoxifen, and another malignancy in the previous 10 years. Patients were randomly assigned in an equal ratio to one of six treatment groups: oral anastrozole (1 mg per day), exemestane (25 mg per day), or letrozole (2·5 mg per day) tablets upfront for 5 years (upfront strategy) or oral tamoxifen (20 mg per day) for 2 years followed by oral administration of one of the three aromatase inhibitors for 3 years (switch strategy). Randomisation was done by a computerised minimisation procedure stratified for oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 status; previous chemotherapy; and pathological nodal status. Neither the patients nor the physicians were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. The minimum cutoff to declare superiority of the upfront strategy over the switch strategy was assumed to be a 2% difference in disease-free survival at 5 years. Primary efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat; safety analyses included all patients for whom at least one safety case report form had been completed. Follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, number 2006-004018-42, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00541086. FINDINGS: Between March 9, 2007, and July 31, 2012, 3697 patients were enrolled into the study. After a median follow-up of 60 months (IQR 46-72), 401 disease-free survival events were reported, including 211 (11%) of 1850 patients allocated to the switch strategy and 190 (10%) of 1847 patients allocated to upfront treatment. 5-year disease-free survival was 88·5% (95% CI 86·7-90·0) with the switch strategy and 89·8% (88·2-91·2) with upfront treatment (hazard ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·73-1·08; p=0·23). 5-year disease-free survival was 90·0% (95% CI 87·9-91·7) with anastrozole (124 events), 88·0% (85·8-89·9) with exemestane (148 events), and 89·4% (87·3 to 91·1) with letrozole (129 events; p=0·24). No unexpected serious adverse reactions or treatment-related deaths occurred. Musculoskeletal side-effects were the most frequent grade 3-4 events, reported in 130 (7%) of 1761 patients who received the switch strategy and 128 (7%) of 1766 patients who received upfront treatment. Grade 1 musculoskeletal events were more frequent with the upfront schedule than with the switch schedule (924 [52%] of 1766 patients vs 745 [42%] of 1761 patients). All other grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in less than 2% of patients in either group. INTERPRETATION: 5 years of treatment with aromatase inhibitors was not superior to 2 years of tamoxifen followed by 3 years of aromatase inhibitors. None of the three aromatase inhibitors was superior to the others in terms of efficacy. Therefore, patient preference, tolerability, and financial constraints should be considered when deciding the optimal treatment approach in this setting. FUNDING: Italian Drug Agency.

Patterns of Care and Clinical Outcomes of First-Line Trastuzumab-Based Therapy in HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients Relapsing After (Neo)Adjuvant Trastuzumab: An Italian Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the patterns of care and clinical outcomes of metastatic breast cancer patients treated with first-line trastuzumab-based therapy after previous (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 416 consecutive, HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer patients who had received first-line trastuzumab-based therapy were identified at 14 Italian centers. A total of 113 patients had presented with de novo stage IV disease and were analyzed separately. Dichotomous clinical outcomes were analyzed using logistic regression and time-to-event outcomes using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: In the 202 trastuzumab-naïve patients and 101 patients with previous trastuzumab exposure, we observed the following outcomes, respectively: overall response rate, 69.9% versus 61.3% (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.62; p = .131), clinical benefit rate, 79.1% versus 72.5% (adjusted OR, 0.73; p = .370), median progression-free survival (PFS), 16.1 months versus 12.0 months (adjusted hazards ratio [HR], 1.33; p = .045), and median overall survival (OS), 52.2 months versus 48.2 months (adjusted HR, 1.18; p = .404). Patients with a trastuzumab-free interval (TFI) <6 months, visceral involvement, and hormone receptor-negative disease showed a worse OS compared with patients with a TFI of ≥6 months (29.5 vs. 48.3 months; p = .331), nonvisceral involvement (48.0 vs. 60.3 months; p = .270), and hormone receptor-positive disease (39.8 vs. 58.6 months; p = .003), respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite the inferior median PFS, trastuzumab-based therapy was an effective first-line treatment for patients relapsing after (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab. Previous trastuzumab exposure and the respective TFI, type of first site of disease relapse, and hormone receptor status should be considered in the choice of the best first-line treatment option for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer patients.

Ovarian Reserve after Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Worldwide, breast cancer (BC) is the most common malignancy in the female population. In recent years, its diagnosis in young women has increased, together with a growing desire to become pregnant later in life. Although there is evidence about the detrimental effect of chemotherapy (CT) on the menses cycle, a practical tool to measure ovarian reserve is still missing. Recently, anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) has been considered a good surrogate for ovarian reserve. The main objective of this paper is to evaluate the effect of CT on AMH value. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on the PubMed and Scopus electronic databases on articles retrieved from inception until February 2021. Trials evaluating ovarian reserves before and after CT in BC were included. We excluded case reports, case-series with fewer than ten patients, reviews (narrative or systematic), communications and perspectives. Studies in languages other than English or with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) patients were also excluded. AMH reduction was the main endpoint. Egger's and Begg's tests were used to assess the risk of publication bias. RESULTS: Eighteen trials were included from the 833 examined. A statistically significant decline in serum AMH concentration was found after CT, persisting even after years, with an overall reduction of -1.97 (95% CI: -3.12, -0.82). No significant differences in ovarian reserve loss were found in the BRCA1/2 mutation carriers compared to wild-type patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although this study has some limitations, including publication bias, failure to stratify the results by some important factors and low to medium quality of the studies included, this metanalysis demonstrates that the level of AMH markedly falls after CT in BC patients, corresponding to a reduction in ovarian reserve. These findings should be routinely discussed during oncofertility counseling and used to guide fertility preservation choices in young women before starting treatment.

Clinical outcomes of patients with breast cancer relapsing after (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab and receiving trastuzumab rechallenge or lapatinib-based therapy: a multicentre retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In the prepertuzumab era, we evaluated the clinical outcomes of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer who underwent first-line trastuzumab-based or lapatinib-based therapy according to prior exposure to (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this multicentre retrospective cohort study conducted in 14 Italian centres of the Gruppo Italiano Mammella, consecutive patients undergoing first-line trastuzumab or lapatinib-based therapy were included. Analyses were performed according to the type of first-line therapy for metastatic disease (trastuzumab or lapatinib). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were analysed using logistic regression and time-to-event outcomes using Cox proportional hazard models controlling for relevant demographic, clinicopathological and therapy characteristics. RESULTS: Out of 450 patients included in the study, 416 (92%) received trastuzumab and 34 (7.5%) lapatinib. As compared with the trastuzumab cohort, more patients in the lapatinib cohort had a trastuzumab-free interval <1 month (37% vs 13.9%; p=0.017) and brain metastasis as first site of relapse (38.2% vs 9.4%; p<0.001). Among the 128 patients who relapsed after prior (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab, 101 (78.9%) received first-line trastuzumab and 27 (21.1%) first-line lapatinib. The following outcomes were observed with first-line lapatinib or trastuzumab, respectively: overall response rate 45.5% vs 61.3% (p=0.184), clinical benefit rate 68.2% vs 72.5% (p=0.691), median progression-free survival (PFS) 11.4 vs 12.0 months (p=0.814) and median overall survival (OS) 34.7 vs 48.2 months (p=0.722). In patients with brain metastasis as first site of relapse, median PFS was 12.2 vs 9.9 months (p=0.093) and median OS 33.7 vs 28.5 months (p=0.280), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HER2-positive breast cancer relapsing after prior (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab, first-line treatment with trastuzumab or lapatinib was not associated with a significant difference in the clinical outcomes. A non-significant trend favouring the use of lapatinib was observed in patients with brain metastasis as the first site of relapse.

Safety and efficacy study of metronomic vinorelbine, cyclophosphamide plus capecitabine in metastatic breast cancer: A phase II trial.

In a phase II study we assessed the safety and efficacy of metronomic oral chemotherapy with vinorelbine, cyclophosphamide capecitabine in patients with metastatic breast cancer, either as first-line (naïve group) or second-line or greater therapy (pre-treated group). Eligible patients had histologically or cytologically proven, hormone-receptor positive metastatic breast cancer. The primary end point was median time to progression (TTP). A total of 43 patients in the naïve group and 65 in the pre-treated group were enrolled. The median TTP was 25.1 months in the naïve group and 11.2 months in the pre-treated group. The most frequently reported grade 2 treatment-related adverse events were leukopenia and hand and foot syndrome. Metronomic combination of cyclophosphamide, capecitabine and vinorelbine showed significant activity and good tolerability in patients hormonal receptor positive, metastatic breast cancer patients.