TGFß attenuates tumour response to PD-L1 blockade by contributing to exclusion of T cells.

Therapeutic antibodies that block the programmed death-1 (PD-1)-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway can induce robust and durable responses in patients with various cancers, including metastatic urothelial cancer. However, these responses only occur in a subset of patients. Elucidating the determinants of response and resistance is key to improving outcomes and developing new treatment strategies. Here we examined tumours from a large cohort of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer who were treated with an anti-PD-L1 agent (atezolizumab) and identified major determinants of clinical outcome. Response to treatment was associated with CD8+ T-effector cell phenotype and, to an even greater extent, high neoantigen or tumour mutation burden. Lack of response was associated with a signature of transforming growth factor ß (TGFß) signalling in fibroblasts. This occurred particularly in patients with tumours, which showed exclusion of CD8+ T cells from the tumour parenchyma that were instead found in the fibroblast- and collagen-rich peritumoural stroma; a common phenotype among patients with metastatic urothelial cancer. Using a mouse model that recapitulates this immune-excluded phenotype, we found that therapeutic co-administration of TGFß-blocking and anti-PD-L1 antibodies reduced TGFß signalling in stromal cells, facilitated T-cell penetration into the centre of tumours, and provoked vigorous anti-tumour immunity and tumour regression. Integration of these three independent biological features provides the best basis for understanding patient outcome in this setting and suggests that TGFß shapes the tumour microenvironment to restrain anti-tumour immunity by restricting T-cell infiltration.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in patients with previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (IMmotion151): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: A phase 2 trial showed improved progression-free survival for atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who express programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). Here, we report results of IMmotion151, a phase 3 trial comparing atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial, patients with a component of clear cell or sarcomatoid histology and who were previously untreated, were recruited from 152 academic medical centres and community oncology practices in 21 countries, mainly in Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific region, and were randomly assigned 1:1 to either atezolizumab 1200 mg plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks or sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily for 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off. A permuted-block randomisation (block size of 4) was applied to obtain a balanced assignment to each treatment group with respect to the stratification factors. Study investigators and participants were not masked to treatment allocation. Patients, investigators, independent radiology committee members, and the sponsor were masked to PD-L1 expression status. Co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the PD-L1 positive population and overall survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02420821. FINDINGS: Of 915 patients enrolled between May 20, 2015, and Oct 12, 2016, 454 were randomly assigned to the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 461 to the sunitinib group. 362 (40%) of 915 patients had PD-L1 positive disease. Median follow-up was 15 months at the primary progression-free survival analysis and 24 months at the overall survival interim analysis. In the PD-L1 positive population, the median progression-free survival was 11·2 months in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group versus 7·7 months in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·74 [95% CI 0·57-0·96]; p=0·0217). In the ITT population, median overall survival had an HR of 0·93 (0·76-1·14) and the results did not cross the significance boundary at the interim analysis. 182 (40%) of 451 patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 240 (54%) of 446 patients in the sunitinib group had treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events: 24 (5%) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 37 (8%) in the sunitinib group had treatment-related all-grade adverse events, which led to treatment-regimen discontinuation. INTERPRETATION: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab prolonged progression-free survival versus sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma and showed a favourable safety profile. Longer-term follow-up is necessary to establish whether a survival benefit will emerge. These study results support atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as a first-line treatment option for selected patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and Genentech Inc.

Atezolizumab versus chemotherapy in patients with platinum-treated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor211): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Few options exist for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma after progression with platinum-based chemotherapy. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1]) versus chemotherapy in this patient population. METHODS: We conducted this multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial (IMvigor211) at 217 academic medical centres and community oncology practices mainly in Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients (aged ≥18 years) with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1), via an interactive voice and web response system with a permuted block design (block size of four), to receive atezolizumab 1200 mg or chemotherapy (physician's choice: vinflunine 320 mg/m2, paclitaxel 175 mg/m2, or 75 mg/m2 docetaxel) intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by PD-L1 expression (expression on <1% [IC0] or 1% to <5% [IC1] of tumour-infiltrating immune cells vs ≥5% of tumour-infiltrating immune cells [IC2/3]), chemotherapy type (vinflunine vs taxanes), liver metastases (yes vs no), and number of prognostic factors (none vs one, two, or three). Patients and investigators were aware of group allocation. Patients, investigators, and the sponsor were masked to PD-L1 expression status. The primary endpoint of overall survival was tested hierarchically in prespecified populations: IC2/3, followed by IC1/2/3, followed by the intention-to-treat population. This study, which is ongoing but not recruiting participants, is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02302807. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2015, and Feb 15, 2016, we randomly assigned 931 patients from 198 sites to receive atezolizumab (n=467) or chemotherapy (n=464). In the IC2/3 population (n=234), overall survival did not differ significantly between patients in the atezolizumab group and those in the chemotherapy group (median 11·1 months [95% CI 8·6-15·5; n=116] vs 10·6 months [8·4-12·2; n=118]; stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·87, 95% CI 0·63-1·21; p=0·41), thus precluding further formal statistical analysis. Confirmed objective response rates were similar between treatment groups in the IC2/3 population: 26 (23%) of 113 evaluable patients had an objective response in the atezolizumab group compared with 25 (22%) of 116 patients in the chemotherapy group. Duration of response was numerically longer in the atezolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (median 15·9 months [95% CI 10·4 to not estimable] vs 8·3 months [5·6-13·2]; HR 0·57, 95% CI 0·26-1·26). In the intention-to-treat population, patients receiving atezolizumab had fewer grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events than did those receiving chemotherapy (91 [20%] of 459 vs 189 [43%] of 443 patients), and fewer adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation (34 [7%] vs 78 [18%] patients). INTERPRETATION: Atezolizumab was not associated with significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy in patients with platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma overexpressing PD-L1 (IC2/3). However, the safety profile for atezolizumab was favourable compared with chemotherapy, Exploratory analysis of the intention-to-treat population showed well-tolerated, durable responses in line with previous phase 2 data for atezolizumab in this setting. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech.

Trastuzumab emtansine versus capecitabine plus lapatinib in patients with previously treated HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (EMILIA): a descriptive analysis of final overall survival results from a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab emtansine is indicated for the treatment of patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane. Approval of this drug was based on progression-free survival and interim overall survival data from the phase 3 EMILIA study. In this report, we present a descriptive analysis of the final overall survival data from that trial. METHODS: EMILIA was a randomised, international, open-label, phase 3 study of men and women aged 18 years or older with HER2-positive unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a hierarchical, dynamic randomisation scheme and an interactive voice response system to trastuzumab emtansine (3·6 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks) or control (capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 self-administered orally twice daily on days 1-14 on each 21-day cycle, plus lapatinib 1250 mg orally once daily on days 1-21). Randomisation was stratified by world region (USA vs western Europe vs or other), number of previous chemotherapy regimens for unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic disease (0 or 1 vs >1), and disease involvement (visceral vs non-visceral). The coprimary efficacy endpoints were progression-free survival (per independent review committee assessment) and overall survival. Efficacy was analysed in the intention-to-treat population; safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment, with patients analysed according to the treatment actually received. On May 30, 2012, the study protocol was amended to allow crossover from control to trastuzumab emtansine after the second interim overall survival analysis crossed the prespecified overall survival efficacy boundary. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00829166. FINDINGS: Between Feb 23, 2009, and Oct 13, 2011, 991 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to either trastuzumab emtansine (n=495) or capecitabine and lapatinib (control; n=496). In this final descriptive analysis, median overall survival was longer with trastuzumab emtansine than with control (29·9 months [95% CI 26·3-34·1] vs 25·9 months [95% CI 22·7-28·3]; hazard ratio 0·75 [95% CI 0·64-0·88]). 136 (27%) of 496 patients crossed over from control to trastuzumab emtansine after the second interim overall survival analysis (median follow-up duration 24·1 months [IQR 19·5-26·1]). Of those patients originally randomly assigned to trastuzumab emtansine, 254 (51%) of 495 received capecitabine and 241 [49%] of 495 received lapatinib (separately or in combination) after study drug discontinuation. In the safety population (488 patients treated with capecitabine plus lapatinib, 490 patients treated with trastuzumab emtansine), fewer grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred with trastuzumab emtansine (233 [48%] of 490) than with capecitabine plus lapatinib control treatment (291 [60%] of 488). In the control group, the most frequently reported grade 3 or worse adverse events were diarrhoea (103 [21%] of 488 patients) followed by palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (87 [18%]), and vomiting (24 [5%]). The safety profile of trastuzumab emtansine was similar to that reported previously; the most frequently reported grade 3 or worse adverse events in the trastuzumab emtansine group were thrombocytopenia (70 [14%] of 490), increased aspartate aminotransferase levels (22 [5%]), and anaemia (19 [4%]). Nine patients died from adverse events; five of these deaths were judged to be related to treatment (two in the control group [coronary artery disease and multiorgan failure] and three in the trastuzumab emtansine group [metabolic encephalopathy, neutropenic sepsis, and acute myeloid leukaemia]). INTERPRETATION: This descriptive analysis of final overall survival in the EMILIA trial shows that trastuzumab emtansine improved overall survival in patients with previously treated HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer even in the presence of crossover treatment. The safety profile was similar to that reported in previous analyses, reaffirming trastuzumab emtansine as an efficacious and tolerable treatment in this patient population. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.

Occurrence and outcome of de novo metastatic breast cancer by subtype in a large, diverse population.

PURPOSE: To examine the occurrence and outcomes of de novo metastatic (Stage IV) breast cancer, particularly with respect to tumor HER2 expression. METHODS: We studied all 6,268 de novo metastatic breast cancer cases diagnosed from 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2011 and reported to the California Cancer Registry. Molecular subtypes were classified according to HER2 and hormone receptor (HR, including estrogen and/or progesterone receptor) expression. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) of Stage IV versus Stage I-III breast cancer; Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess relative hazard (RH) of mortality. RESULTS: Five percent of invasive breast cancer was metastatic at diagnosis. Compared to patients with earlier stage disease, patients with de novo metastatic disease were significantly more likely to have HER2+ tumors (HR+/HER2+: OR 1.29, 95 % CI 1.17-1.42; HR-/HER2+: OR 1.40, 95 %CI 1.25-1.57, vs. HR+/HER2-). Median survival improved over time, but varied substantially across race/ethnicity (Asians: 34 months; African Americans: 6 months), neighborhood socioeconomic status (SES) (highest: 34 months, lowest: 20 months), and molecular subtype (HR+/HER2+: 45 months; triple negative: 12 months). In a multivariable model, triple negative (RH 2.85, 95 % CI 2.50-3.24) and HR-/HER2+ (RH 1.60, 95 % CI 1.37-1.87) had worse, while HR+/HER2+ had similar, risk of all-cause death compared to HR+/HER2- breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS: De novo metastatic breast cancer was more likely to be HER2+. Among metastatic tumors, those that were HER2+ had better survival than other subtypes.

Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography Evaluation of Hepatic Metastases in Breast Cancer Patients Before and After Cytotoxic Chemotherapy or Targeted Therapy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate change in size vs computed tomography (CT) density of hepatic metastases in breast cancer patients before and after cytotoxic chemotherapy or targeted therapy. METHODS: A database search in a single institution identified 48 breast cancer patients who had hepatic metastases treated with either cytotoxic chemotherapy alone or targeted therapy alone, and who had contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) scans of the abdomen at baseline and within 4 months of initiation of therapy in the past 10 years. Two radiologists retrospectively evaluated CT scans and identified up to 2 index lesions in each patient. The size (centimeters) of each lesion was measured according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria, and CT density (Hounsfield units) was measured by drawing a region of interest around the margin of the entire lesion. The percent change in sum of lesion size and mean CT density on pre- and post-treatment scans was computed for each patient; results were compared within each treatment group. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients with 68 lesions received cytotoxic chemotherapy only; 9 patients with 15 lesions received targeted therapy only. The mean percent changes in sum of lesion size and mean CT density were statistically significant within the cytotoxic chemotherapy group before and after treatment, but not significant in the targeted therapy group. The patients in the targeted therapy group tend to have better 2-year survival. The patients who survived at 2 years tend to have more decrease in tumour size in the cytotoxic chemotherapy group. CONCLUSION: Cytotoxic chemotherapy produced significant mean percent decrease in tumour size and mean CT density of hepatic metastases from breast cancer before and after treatment, whereas targeted therapy did not. Nonetheless, there is a trend that the patients in the targeted therapy group had better 2-year survival rate. This suggests that RECIST is potentially inadequate in evaluating tumour response in breast cancer liver metastases treated with targeted therapy alone, calling for an alternative marker for response evaluation in this subset of patients.

Pilot study to assess toxicity and pharmacokinetics of docetaxel in patients with metastatic breast cancer and impaired liver function secondary to hepatic metastases.

BACKGROUND: Limited clinical data are available regarding the safety of docetaxel in metastatic breast cancer patients with liver dysfunction. METHODS: Eligible patients had breast cancer with impaired liver function secondary to hepatic metastases and were candidates for docetaxel therapy. They were assigned to one of five groups on the basis of total bilirubin, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and alkaline phosphatase levels. All other causes of liver dysfunction were excluded, and bile duct obstruction was corrected, if possible, prior to study entry. Patients received docetaxel every three weeks. The chemotherapy dose was chosen on the basis of the patient's level of hepatic dysfunction and escalated as tolerated. The primary outcome of this study was safety. The secondary outcomes were pharmacokinetic data and efficacy in terms of time to disease progression. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were enrolled. No unexpected toxicities occurred. Grade 3/4 fatigue (65%), neutropenia (30%), myalgias (26%), neutropenic fever (26%), vomiting (9%), and rash (9%) were the most common serious adverse events. The median time to progression was three months (range 1-18 months). Pharmacokinetic results indicated that patients with more severe hepatic dysfunction may have been underdosed based on our conservative dosing strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Docetaxel can be administered to patients with metastatic breast cancer and liver dysfunction after dose attenuation. However, because of a narrow therapeutic index in this clinical setting, therapy should be closely monitored with subsequent dose escalation when possible.

Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy and Long-Term Survival in Patients With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is defined by the lack of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) expression. In this study, we compared response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and survival between patients with TNBC and non-TNBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Analysis of a prospectively collected clinical database was performed. We included 1,118 patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center for stage I-III breast cancer from 1985 to 2004 and for whom complete receptor information were available. Clinical and pathologic parameters, pathologic complete response rates (pCR), survival measurements, and organ-specific relapse rates were compared between patients with TNBC and non-TNBC. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-five patients (23%) had TNBC. Patients with TNBC compared with non-TNBC had significantly higher pCR rates (22% v 11%; P = .034), but decreased 3-year progression-free survival rates (P < .0001) and 3-year overall survival (OS) rates (P < .0001). TNBC was associated with increased risk for visceral metastases (P = .0005), lower risk for bone recurrence (P = .027), and shorter postrecurrence survival (P < .0001). Recurrence and death rates were higher for TNBC only in the first 3 years. If pCR was achieved, patients with TNBC and non-TNBC had similar survival (P = .24). In contrast, patients with residual disease (RD) had worse OS if they had TNBC compared with non-TNBC (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Patients with TNBC have increased pCR rates compared with non-TNBC, and those with pCR have excellent survival. However, patients with RD after neoadjuvant chemotherapy have significantly worse survival if they have TNBC compared with non-TNBC, particularly in the first 3 years.

Molecular Subsets in Renal Cancer Determine Outcome to Checkpoint and Angiogenesis Blockade.

Integrated multi-omics evaluation of 823 tumors from advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients identifies molecular subsets associated with differential clinical outcomes to angiogenesis blockade alone or with a checkpoint inhibitor. Unsupervised transcriptomic analysis reveals seven molecular subsets with distinct angiogenesis, immune, cell-cycle, metabolism, and stromal programs. While sunitinib and atezolizumab + bevacizumab are effective in subsets with high angiogenesis, atezolizumab + bevacizumab improves clinical benefit in tumors with high T-effector and/or cell-cycle transcription. Somatic mutations in PBRM1 and KDM5C associate with high angiogenesis and AMPK/fatty acid oxidation gene expression, while CDKN2A/B and TP53 alterations associate with increased cell-cycle and anabolic metabolism. Sarcomatoid tumors exhibit lower prevalence of PBRM1 mutations and angiogenesis markers, frequent CDKN2A/B alterations, and increased PD-L1 expression. These findings can be applied to molecularly stratify patients, explain improved outcomes of sarcomatoid tumors to checkpoint blockade versus antiangiogenics alone, and develop personalized therapies in RCC and other indications.

Comparison of ductal lavage and random periareolar fine needle aspiration as tissue acquisition methods in early breast cancer prevention trials.

PURPOSE: Short-term phase I and phase II breast cancer prevention trials require tissue acquisition at baseline and after intervention to evaluate modulation of potential biomarkers. Currently used tissue acquisition methods include ductal lavage (DL), random periareolar fine needle aspiration (RPFNA), and core needle biopsy. The optimum method to retrieve adequate samples and the most accepted method by study participants is not known. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We compared RPFNA and DL as breast tissue acquisition methods for short-term breast cancer prevention trials by evaluating sample adequacy and tolerability in subjects who participated in two prospective phase II breast cancer prevention trials. Eighty-six women at increased risk for breast cancer were included in this study and underwent baseline DL and RPFNA. High risk was defined as having a 5-year Gail score of >1.67% or a history of atypical hyperplasia (AH), lobular carcinoma, or breast cancer. RESULTS: Median age was 54.5 years (range, 39-75 years); 75% of the women were postmenopausal. About 51% of the women yielded nipple aspiration fluid, and breast fluid samples via DL were retrieved in 73% of these subjects. Of these samples, 71% were adequate samples (greater than 10 epithelial cells). However, when the entire cohort was considered, only 31% of the subjects had adequate samples. RPFNA was also attempted in all subjects, and sample retrieval rate was 100%. Out of these, 96% of the subjects had adequate samples. In DL samples, AH rate was 3.7% was and hyperplasia (H) rate was 11.1%. In RPFNA samples, AH rate was 12.9%, and H rate was 24.7%. Cytology findings in RPFNA samples correlated with age, menopausal status, and breast cancer risk category (previous history of lobular carcinoma in situ). Both procedures were well tolerated, and no complications occurred among participants. CONCLUSIONS: Considering that the main end point for short-term prevention trials is the modulation of biomarkers, it is important to optimize adequate sample acquisition; therefore, RPFNA is a more practical option for future phase I and II breast cancer prevention trials compared with DL.

Neoadjuvant therapy with paclitaxel followed by 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy and concurrent trastuzumab in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer: an update of the initial randomized study population and data of additional patients treated with the same regimen.

PURPOSE: Findings from our previously published phase III randomized trial showed a high pathologic complete remission (CR) rate in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer after the concurrent administration of trastuzumab and paclitaxel, followed by concurrent trastuzumab and 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) preoperative chemotherapy. The safety and efficacy data of initial population were updated, with inclusion of additional experience with the same therapy. STUDY DESIGN: The initial randomized study population of 42 patients were randomly assigned to either four cycles of paclitaxel followed by four cycles of FEC or to the same chemotherapy with simultaneous weekly trastuzumab for 24 weeks. All data were updated through November 2005. RESULTS: Pretreatment characteristics of the initial patients and of the second cohort were similar. In the second cohort, pathologic CR rate was 54.5% (95% confidence interval, 32.2-75.6%) and the pathologic CR rate among all patients treated with chemotherapy plus trastuzumab was 60% (95% confidence interval, 44.3-74.3%). Three patients in the chemotherapy only group have recurred, and one has died. There has been no recurrences in the patients randomized to chemotherapy plus trastuzumab, and the estimated disease-free survival at 1 and 3 years was 100% (P = 0.041). In additional cohort treated with chemotherapy and trastuzumab at the median follow-up of 16.3 months, no patients had recurred. No new safety concerns were observed in this study. CONCLUSION: Our expanded cardiac safety data and the updated efficacy data showed that the natural history of this subset of breast cancer patients can be substantially modified by this treatment approach.

Weekly paclitaxel improves pathologic complete remission in operable breast cancer when compared with paclitaxel once every 3 weeks.

PURPOSE: To determine the impact a change in schedule of paclitaxel administration from once every 3 weeks to frequent administration would have on the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate in the breast and lymph nodes for patients with invasive breast cancer treated with primary systemic chemotherapy (PST). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with clinical stage I-IIIA breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive PST of paclitaxel doses administered either weekly (for a total of 12 doses of paclitaxel) or once every 3 weeks (four cycles), followed by four cycles of fluorouracil/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (FAC) in standard doses every 3 weeks. Two different doses of paclitaxel were used based on lymph node status defined by ultrasound and fine needle aspiration. Clinical response and extent of residual disease in the breast and lymph nodes was assessed after completion of all chemotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 258 patients were randomly assigned to receive doses of paclitaxel administered either weekly or once every 3 weeks, followed by FAC. Of these 258 patients, 110 patients had histologic lymph node involvement and 148 patients had clinical N0 disease. Weekly paclitaxel followed by FAC was administered to 127 patients and once-every-3-weeks paclitaxel followed by FAC was administered to 131 patients. Clinical response to treatment was similar between groups (P = .25). Patients receiving weekly paclitaxel had a higher pCR rate (28.2%) than patients treated with once-every-3-weeks paclitaxel (15.7%; P = .02), with improved breast conservation rates (P = .05). CONCLUSION: The change in schedule of paclitaxel from once every 3 weeks to a more frequent administration significantly improved the ability to eradicate invasive cancer in the breast and lymph nodes.

Significantly higher pathologic complete remission rate after neoadjuvant therapy with trastuzumab, paclitaxel, and epirubicin chemotherapy: results of a randomized trial in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to determine whether the addition of trastuzumab to chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting could increase pathologic complete response (pCR) rate in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -positive disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients with HER2-positive disease with operable breast cancer were randomly assigned to either four cycles of paclitaxel followed by four cycles of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide or to the same chemotherapy with simultaneous weekly trastuzumab for 24 weeks. The primary objective was to demonstrate a 20% improvement in pCR (assumed 21% to 41%) with the addition of trastuzumab to chemotherapy. The planned sample size was 164 patients. RESULTS: Prognostic factors were similar in the two groups. After 34 patients had completed therapy, the trial's Data Monitoring Committee stopped the trial because of superiority of trastuzumab plus chemotherapy. pCR rates were 25% and 66.7% for chemotherapy (n = 16) and trastuzumab plus chemotherapy (n = 18), respectively (P = .02). The decision was based on the calculation that, if study continued to 164 patients, there was a 95% probability that trastuzumab plus chemotherapy would be superior. Of the 42 randomized patients, 26% in the chemotherapy arm achieved pCR compared with 65.2% in the trastuzumab plus chemotherapy arm (P = .016). The safety of this approach is not established, although no clinical congestive heart failure was observed. A more than 10% decrease in the cardiac ejection fraction was observed in five and seven patients in the chemotherapy and trastuzumab plus chemotherapy arms, respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite the small sample size, these data indicate that adding trastuzumab to chemotherapy, as used in this trial, significantly increased pCR without clinical congestive heart failure.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer.

Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy has been shown to prolong survival in all subsets of patients with breast cancer. In addition, among patients with locally advanced breast cancer, neoadjuvant orpreoperative chemotherapy has improved the ability to perform breast-conserving therapy. This observation, combined with multiple preclinical hypotheses and the results of laboratory studies, has prompted investigation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a treatment strategy for operable breast cancer. In this article, both the evidence supporting this treatment approach and some of the problems associated with it are reviewed. Currently, seven randomized studies comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery or surgery followed, in turn, by adjuvant chemotherapy have been completed and their results analyzed. Despite exciting preclinical evidence, no trial to date has shown a survival advantage for the neoadjuvant treatment approach. Nonetheless, evidence from more recent phase III trials and the fact that neoadjuvant chemotherapy is not harmful topatients validate its use in operable breast cancer.

Phase I trial of exemestane in combination with metformin and rosiglitazone in nondiabetic obese postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Obese women with breast cancer have worse prognosis than women with normal body mass index. Endocrine therapy resistance is in part mediated by insulin resistance in obese women with breast cancer. We investigated the tolerability and pharmacokinetics of exemestane in combination with metformin and rosiglitazone in nondiabetic overweight and obese postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: Patients had previously received chemotherapy and endocrine therapy for breast cancer. Exemestane was given as 25 mg orally per day. Metformin (M) and rosiglitazone (R) were given twice daily. Dose level 1 consisted of M 1,500 mg/day and R 6 mg/day. Dose level 2 consisted of M 2,000 mg/day and R 8 mg/day. Plasma concentrations of exemestane were measured on days 1, 8, and 15. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled. Fourteen patients received exemestane, metformin, and rosiglitazone. Six patients received exemestane with metformin only (2,000 mg/day). Both regimens were well tolerated at the highest doses tested, and there were no notable changes in plasma exemestane levels. Six patients (30%) had stable disease for 6 months or longer. CONCLUSIONS: Oral daily administration of exemestane (25 mg) and metformin (2,000 mg) with and without rosiglitazone (8 mg) daily was well tolerated. Exemestane pharmacokinetics were not altered by metformin and rosiglitazone.

Radiation dose escalation for loco-regional recurrence of breast cancer after mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: Radiation is a standard component of treatment for patients with locoregional recurrence (LRR) of breast cancer following mastectomy. The current study reports the results of a 10% radiation dose escalation in these patients. METHODS: 159 patients treated at MD Anderson Cancer Center between 1994-2006 with isolated LRR after mastectomy alone were reviewed. Patients in the standard treatment group (65 pts, 40.9%) were treated to 50 Gy comprehensively plus a boost of 10 Gy. The dose escalated group (94 pts, 59.1%) was treated to 54 Gy comprehensively and a minimum 12 Gy boost. Median dose in the standard dose and dose escalated group was 60 Gy (±1 Gy, 95% CI) and 66 Gy (±0.5 Gy, 95% CI) respectively. Median follow up for living patients was 94 months from time of recurrence. RESULTS: The actuarial five year locoregional control (LRC) rate was 77% for the entire study population. The five year overall survival and disease-free survival was 55% and 41%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, initial tumor size (p = 0.03), time to initial LRR (p = 0.03), absence of gross tumor at the time of radiation (p = 0.001) and Her2 status (p = 0.03) were associated with improved LRC. Five year LRC rates were similar in patients with a complete response to chemotherapy without surgery and patients with a complete surgical excision (77% vs 83%, p = NS), compared to a 63% LRC rate in patients with gross disease at the time of radiation (p = 0.024). LRC rates were 80% in the standard dose group and 75% in the dose escalated group (p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: While LRR following mastectomy is potentially curable, distant metastasis and local control rates remain suboptimal. Radiation dose escalation did not appear to improve LRC. Given significant local failure rates, these patients are good candidates for additional strategies to improve their outcomes.

Short-term biomarker modulation prevention study of anastrozole in women at increased risk for second primary breast cancer.

The selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERM), Tamoxifen and raloxifen reduce risk breast cancer. Patient acceptance of SERMs for breast cancer prevention is low due to toxicities. New agents with a better toxicity profile are needed. Aromatase inhibitors (AI) reduce the risk of contralateral breast cancer and risk of new breast cancer in high risk women. However, the mechanism by which AIs reduce breast risk is not known. Surrogate biomarkers are needed to evaluate the effect of preventive agents. The objective of this prospective short-term prevention study was to evaluate the effect of anastrozole on biomarkers in breast tissue and serum of women at increased risk for developing a contralateral breast cancer. Women with a history of stage I, II breast cancer who started anastrozole for standard adjuvant treatment were eligible. Patients underwent baseline fine needle aspiration of the unaffected breast and serum collection for biomarker analysis before starting anastrozole at 1 mg per oral/day and again at 6 months. Biomarkers included changes in cytology, insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), IGF-binding protein 1 (IGFBP-1), and IGFBP-3. Thirty-seven patients were enrolled. There was a significant modulation in serum IGFBP-1 levels between pre- and postsamples (P = 0.02). No change was observed in IGF-1, IGFBP-3, and breast cytology.We showed a significant modulation of IGFBP-1 levels with six months anastrozole. Anastrozole is currently being studied as a prevention agent in a large phase III trial and our results provide support for continued evaluation of IGFBP-1 as a surrogate endpoint biomarker in prospective breast chemoprevention studies.

Resection of liver metastases from breast cancer: estrogen receptor status and response to chemotherapy before metastasectomy define outcome.

BACKGROUND: The oncologic benefit of resecting liver metastases in patients with breast cancer is unclear. This study was performed to identify predictors of survival after hepatectomy. METHODS: Between 1997 and 2010, 86 patients underwent resection of breast cancer liver metastases. Clinicopathologic characteristics of the primary breast neoplasm, timing of metastasis development, and treatment were recorded. Response to prehepatectomy chemotherapy was evaluated according to Response Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria, and the best response to chemotherapy during treatment and the response immediately before hepatectomy were noted. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify predictors of disease-free survival and overall survival. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients (69%) had estrogen receptor- or progesterone receptor- positive primary breast neoplasms. Fifty-three patients (62%) had a solitary breast cancer liver metastasis, and 73 (85%) had breast cancer liver metastases ≤5 cm. Sixty-five patients (76%) received prehepatectomy hormonal and/or chemotherapy. Four patients (6%) had progressive disease as the best response, and 19 patients (30%) had progressive disease before hepatectomy (P < .001). Seventy percent of patients who received preoperative chemotherapy or hormonal therapy had either response or stable disease immediately before hepatectomy. No postoperative deaths were observed. At a 62-month median follow-up, the disease-free survival and overall survival were 14 and 57 months, respectively. On univariate analysis, estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor status of the primary breast neoplasm, best radiographic response, and preoperative radiographic response were associated with overall survival. On multivariate analysis, estrogen receptor-negative primary breast disease (P = .009; hazard ratio, 3.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-8.2) and preoperative progressive disease (P = .003; hazard ratio, 3.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-9.2) were associated with decreased overall survival. CONCLUSION: Resection of breast cancer liver metastases in patients with estrogen receptor-positive disease that is responding to chemotherapy is associated with improved survival. The timing of operative intervention may be critical; resection before progression is associated with a better outcome.

Phase III trial evaluating weekly paclitaxel versus docetaxel in combination with capecitabine in operable breast cancer.

PURPOSE: We investigated whether capecitabine and docetaxel followed by fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) or weekly paclitaxel (WP) followed by FEC would improve relapse-free survival (RFS) in operable breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this single-institution study, patients with clinical stages I to IIIC breast cancer were randomly assigned on a 1:1 basis to WP 80 mg/m(2) for 12 weeks followed by fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2), epirubicin 100 mg/m(2), and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m(2) (FEC-100) every 3 weeks for four cycles or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 and capecitabine (XT) 1,500 mg/m(2) on days 1 through 14 every 3 weeks for four cycles followed by FEC for four cycles and stratified by timing of chemotherapy (preoperative v adjuvant). Accrual was stopped short of 930 patients on the basis of a Bayesian predictive calculation that additional accrual would be unlikely to change the qualitative comparison of the two regimens. RESULTS: After enrollment of 601 patients and a median follow-up of 50 months, we observed no improvement in RFS between XT (87.5%; 95% CI, 82.7% to 91.1%) and WP (90.7%; 95% CI, 86.4% to 93.7%; P = .51). In the preoperative group, the pathologic complete response rate was 19.8% and 16.4% in the XT and WP arms, respectively (P = .45). Rates of breast-conserving surgery were similar between the two groups (P = .48). The XT arm had a significantly higher incidence of stomatitis (P < .001), hand-foot syndrome (P < .001), and neutropenic infection (P < .001). CONCLUSION: There was no difference in efficacy between WP and XT as used in this randomized phase III trial. XT was associated with higher GI, skin, and neutropenic-related toxicities.

Phase II trial of anastrozole plus goserelin in the treatment of hormone receptor-positive, metastatic carcinoma of the breast in premenopausal women.

PURPOSE: To explore the antitumor activity of the aromatase inhibitor, anastrozole, in the treatment of premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, metastatic breast cancer who have been rendered functionally postmenopausal with the use of the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist, goserelin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Premenopausal women with estrogen and/or progesterone receptor-positive, metastatic or recurrent breast cancer were enrolled in this prospective, single-arm, multicenter phase II trial. Patients were treated with goserelin 3.6 mg subcutaneous monthly and began anastrozole 1-mg daily 21 days after the first injection of goserelin. Patients continued on treatment until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were enrolled of which 32 were evaluable for response and toxicity. Estradiol suppression was assessed, with mean estradiol levels of 18.7 pg/mL at 3 months and 14.8 pg/mL at 6 months. One participant (3.1%) experienced a complete response, 11 (34.4%) experienced partial response, and 11 (34.4%) experienced stable disease for 6 months or longer for a clinical benefit rate of 71.9%. Median time to progression was 8.3 months (range, 2.1 to 63+) and median survival was not been reached (range, 11.1 to 63+). The most common adverse events were fatigue (50%), arthralgias (53%), and hot flashes (59%). There were no grade 4 to 5 toxicities. CONCLUSION: The combination of goserelin plus anastrozole has substantial antitumor activity in the treatment of premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer.