Successful Ovarian Stimulation for Fertility Preservation in a Patient with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: Switch from Nilotinib to Interferon-α.

The development of tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has improved survival of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Some patients may become resistant to TKIs and require hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) that is highly gonadotoxic. Fertility preservation with ovarian stimulation might be indicated but is challenging if patients need to remain on TKIs until HSCT because TKIs may compromise follicular development and response to ovarian stimulation. We report the case of a patient with CML resistant to TKI and planned for an HSCT, in which treatment by TKI was replaced by interferon-α before and during ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation. Successful ovarian stimulation was performed, allowing cryopreservation of nine zygotes. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation was performed, and at present, 3 years later, the patient presents a sustained major molecular response.

[BRCA mutations: from Angelina Jolie to specific therapies]. / Mutations de BRCA1/2: d'Angelina Jolie à la thérapie.

While mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 are found in only a minority of breast cancer patients, their impact for those patients is important. It is a powerful risk factor for this disease with respectively 65% and 45% of the women developing breast cancer. It requires a specific screening program starting at age of 25 that includes magnetic resonance imaging and risk reduction measures such as bilateral mastectomy and oophorectomy can be proposed. The psychological impacts of the mutation and its implications are not negligible. The testimony of Angelina Jolie in 2013 certainly contributed to public awareness and helped the affected women to cope better with the situation. Cancer treatments are also influenced by detection of a mutation with an increased role for platinum derivatives and the recently developed specific therapies, such as PARP inhibitors.

[Aromatase inhibitors in the adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal patients with early breast cancer: a little, a lot or no way?]. / Cancer du sein: inhibiteurs de l'aromatase en situation adjuvante, un peu, beaucoup ou pas du tout?

Several large randomized trials showed that tamoxifen alone is no more the standard adjuvant hormonal therapy for menopausal patients. Aromatase inhibitors, given upfront or sequentially after tamoxifen, confirmed their efficacy by improving disease free survival, risk of distant metastasis and overall survival in some situations or subgroups of patients. These drugs are usually well tolerated, but they clearly increase bone mineral density loss as well as the risk of fractures and their long term safety on the cardio-vascular system needs to be followed. Thus, even if the role of the aromatase inhibitors is now evident in the adjuvant therapy of postmenopausal women the benefice/risk ratio should be carefully evaluated for each patient.

[Breast cancer: pathology, the cornerstone of therapeutic decision]. / Cancer du sein : la pathologie, pierre angulaire de la décision therapeutique.

Tailoring adjuvant therapy in breast cancer patients relies on prognostic and predictive factors, most of which are currently established by histopathological analysis of tumors. The quality of the assessment of the former (i.e.: tumor size, lymph node status, tumor grade, HER2 status, and lymphovascular invasion) and the latter (estrogen and progesteron receptors expression, HER2 overexpression or amplification) is an essential prerequisite for an optimal therapeutic decision. If the prognostic and predictive values of multigenes signatures are confirmed by on-going clinical studies, this approach could enter the clinical practice in the coming years and result in improved accuracy of adjuvant therapies in breast cancer patients. This approach might especially allow avoiding overtreatment in patients at low risk of recurrence.

[Present chemoprevention and future vision]. / Chimioprévention actuelle et visions futures.

Cancer chemoprevention is defined as the use of natural or synthetic agents to reverse, suppress or prevent carcinogenic progression to invasive cancer. The success of several clinical trials within high-risk patients suggests that chemoprevention is a rational and promising strategy. This review will resume the principal molecular mechanisms of chemoprevention and discuss results and clinical outcome of selected clinical trials. The difficulties in clinical application and future directions will be highlighted.

Fulvestrant with or without selumetinib, a MEK 1/2 inhibitor, in breast cancer progressing after aromatase inhibitor therapy: a multicentre randomised placebo-controlled double-blind phase II trial, SAKK 21/08.

BACKGROUND: Second line endocrine therapy has limited antitumour activity. Fulvestrant inhibits and downregulates the oestrogen receptor. The mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway is one of the major cascades involved in resistance to endocrine therapy. We assessed the efficacy and safety of fulvestrant with selumetinib, a MEK 1/2 inhibitor, in advanced stage breast cancer progressing after aromatase inhibitor (AI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomised phase II trial included postmenopausal patients with endocrine-sensitive breast cancer. They were ramdomised to fulvestrant combined with selumetinib or placebo. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR) in the experimental arm. ClinicalTrials.gov Indentifier: NCT01160718. RESULTS: Following the planned interim efficacy analysis, recruitment was interrupted after the inclusion of 46 patients (23 in each arm), because the selumetinib-fulvestrant arm did not reach the pre-specified DCR. DCR was 23% (95% confidence interval (CI) 8-45%) in the selumetinib arm and 50% (95% CI 27-75%) in the placebo arm. Median progression-free survival was 3.7months (95% CI 1.9-5.8) in the selumetinib arm and 5.6months (95% CI 3.4-13.6) in the placebo arm. Median time to treatment failure was 5.1 (95% CI 2.3-6.7) and 5.6 (95% CI 3.4-10.2) months, respectively. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events observed in the selumetinib-fulvestrant arm were skin disorders, fatigue, nausea/vomiting, oedema, diarrhoea, mouth disorders and muscle disorders. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of selumetinib to fulvestrant did not show improving patients' outcome and was poorly tolerated at the recommended monotherapy dose. Selumetinib may have deteriorated the efficacy of the endocrine therapy in some patients.

Pregnancy after breast cancer: Are young patients willing to participate in clinical studies?

Young patients with breast cancer (BC) are often concerned about treatment-induced infertility and express maternity desire. Conception after BC does not seem to affect outcome, but information in estrogen-receptor positive (ER+) disease is not definitive. From September 2012-March 2013, 212 evaluable patients with ER+ early BC, <37 years at diagnosis, from 5 regions (Europe/US/Canada/Middle-East/Australia) answered a survey about fertility concerns, maternity desire and interest in a study of endocrine therapy (ET) interruption to allow pregnancy. Overall, 37% of respondents were interested in the study; younger patients (≤30 years) reported higher interest (57%). Motivation in younger patients treated >30 months was higher (83%) than in older women (14%), interest was independent of age in patients treated for ≤30 months. A prospective study in this patient population seems relevant and feasible. The International-Breast-Cancer-Study-Group (IBCSG), within the Breast-International-Group (BIG) - North-American-Breast-Cancer-Groups (NABCG) collaboration, is launching a study (POSITIVE) addressing ET interruption to allow pregnancy.

Fertility preservation in cancer patients. Review of the French speaking part of Switzerland and recommendations for different situations.

Due to constant progress in oncology, survival rates of patients (children and adults) with cancer are increasing. Consequently, the reproductive future of young cancer patients needs to be addressed carefully. Fertility preservation techniques are available and issues such as the time available for fertility treatments, patients' age, presence of a partner and patients' personal wishes have to be considered. In Switzerland, a first therapeutic network (Réseau Romand de Cancer et Fertilité), was created in the French speaking part of Switzerland in 2006. Since 2010, a global Swiss network (FertiSave) has been created. The goal of these networks is to maximise the safety and efficacy of fertility preservation options offered to cancer patients without compromising their oncological prognosis. Patients' needs have to be identified, the therapeutic options evaluated rapidly and the optimal treatment promptly implemented in these urgent situations. This article reviews the fertility preservation options currently available and makes recommendations for different specific cancer situations, consistent with the latest scientific evidence and in general agreement with international recommendations.

A threefold dose intensity treatment with ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide for patients with small cell lung cancer: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The dose intensity of chemotherapy can be increased to the highest possible level by early administration of multiple and sequential high-dose cycles supported by transfusion with peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPCs). A randomized trial was performed to test the impact of such dose intensification on the long-term survival of patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). METHODS: Patients who had limited or extensive SCLC with no more than two metastatic sites were randomly assigned to high-dose (High, n = 69) or standard-dose (Std, n = 71) chemotherapy with ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide (ICE). High-ICE cycles were supported by transfusion with PBPCs that were collected after two cycles of treatment with epidoxorubicin at 150 mg/m(2), paclitaxel at 175 mg/m(2), and filgrastim. The primary outcome was 3-year survival. Comparisons between response rates and toxic effects within subgroups (limited or extensive disease, liver metastases or no liver metastases, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, normal or abnormal lactate dehydrogenase levels) were also performed. RESULTS: Median relative dose intensity in the High-ICE arm was 293% (range = 174%-392%) of that in the Std-ICE arm. The 3-year survival rates were 18% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 10% to 29%) and 19% (95% CI = 11% to 30%) in the High-ICE and Std-ICE arms, respectively. No differences were observed between the High-ICE and Std-ICE arms in overall response (n = 54 [78%, 95% CI = 67% to 87%] and n = 48 [68%, 95% CI = 55% to 78%], respectively) or complete response (n = 27 [39%, 95% CI = 28% to 52%] and n = 24 [34%, 95% CI = 23% to 46%], respectively). Subgroup analyses showed no benefit for any outcome from High-ICE treatment. Hematologic toxicity was substantial in the Std-ICE arm (grade > or = 3 neutropenia, n = 49 [70%]; anemia, n = 17 [25%]; thrombopenia, n = 17 [25%]), and three patients (4%) died from toxicity. High-ICE treatment was predictably associated with severe myelosuppression, and five patients (8%) died from toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term outcome of SCLC was not improved by raising the dose intensity of ICE chemotherapy by threefold.

Anastrozole ('Arimidex') versus tamoxifen as first-line therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer: results of the double-blind cross-over SAKK trial 21/95--a sub-study of the TARGET (Tamoxifen or 'Arimidex' Randomized Group Efficacy and Tolerability) trial.

It is desirable to identify the most effective sequence of endocrine therapies for the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced, hormone-responsive breast cancer. In a retrospective analysis of two large, randomized, comparative Phase III trials in this patient population, the Tamoxifen or 'Arimidex' Randomized Group Efficacy and Tolerability (TARGET) trial and the North American trial, we ascertained that tumors responding to anastrozole as first-line therapy may subsequently respond to tamoxifen as second-line therapy. In a double-blind cross-over trial, the SAKK 21/95 sub-trial (including patients from the Swiss centres in the TARGET trial), we further investigated the clinical impact of anastrozole followed by tamoxifen compared with that of tamoxifen followed by anastrozole. Patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who had continued on randomized treatment until objective disease progression and were still considered suitable for endocrine therapy, could continue on blinded therapy crossing-over to the alternative treatment. They were assessed for time to progression (TTP) from treatment randomization, TTP after crossing-over treatments, time from randomization to progression after crossing-over treatments and overall survival. Median TTP from randomization for patients receiving first-line treatment with anastrozole (n = 31) and tamoxifen (n = 29) was 11.3 and 8.3 months, respectively, p = 0.75. Median TTP from treatment cross-over was 6.7 months for tamoxifen after progression on anastrozole (n = 19) and 5.7 months for anastrozole after progression on tamoxifen (n = 18), while median time from randomization to second progression was 28.2 and 19.5 months, respectively. Overall survival from randomization for the anastrozole-tamoxifen sequence and the tamoxifen-anastrozole sequence was 69.7 versus 59.3 months, respectively, p = 0.10. The relative risk of death was higher for the tamoxifen followed by anastrozole sequence (1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.89-2.98). Tamoxifen is an effective second-line therapy after anastrozole. Our data, together with the better tolerability profile of anastrozole compared with tamoxifen, support the use of anastrozole as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive tumors. Treatment with tamoxifen may still be useful upon subsequent progression.

Does subjective burden of early breast cancer and its treatment affect immune measures during adjuvant therapy?

Psychosocial factors have been described as affecting cellular immune measures in healthy subjects. In patients with early breast cancer we explored bi-directional psycho-immune effects to determine whether subjective burden has an impact on immune measures, and vice versa. Patients (n = 239) operated for early breast cancer and randomized into International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) adjuvant clinical trials were assessed immediately before the beginning of adjuvant treatment (baseline) and 3 and 6 months thereafter, at the beginning of the corresponding treatment cycle. Cellular immune measures (leukocytes, lymphocytes, lymphocyte subset counts), markers of activation of the cellular immune system (beta2-microglobulin, soluble interleukin-2 receptor serum levels), and self-report subjective burden (global indicators of physical well-being, mood, coping effort) were assessed concurrently. The relationship between subjective burden and gradients of immune measures was investigated with regression analyses controlling for adjuvant treatment. There was a pattern of small negative associations between all variables assessing subjective burden before the beginning of adjuvant therapy with the gradients of the markers of activation of the cellular immune system and NK cell counts. In particular, better mood predicted a decline in the course of beta2-microglobulin and IL-2r at months 3 and 6. The gradient of beta2-microglobulin was associated with mood and coping effort at month 3. However, the effect sizes were very small. In conclusion, in this explorative investigation, there was an indication for subjective burden affecting and being affected by markers of activation of the cellular immune system during the first 3 and 6 months of adjuvant therapy. The question of clinical significance remains unanswered. These associations have to be investigated with refined assessment tools and schedules.