Genetic Polymorphisms and Correlation with Treatment-Induced Cardiotoxicity and Prognosis in Patients with Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Cardiac toxicity is a serious potential complication of HER2-directed therapies and anthracyclines. HER2 codon 655 and SLC28A3 gene polymorphisms have been reported to be associated with cardiac toxicity from anti-HER2 and anthracycline therapy, respectively. Association of the polymorphism at HER2 codon 655 with prognosis has also been reported. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Whole blood samples from patients treated on a randomized adjuvant breast cancer trial (BCIRG-006) that compared chemotherapy with or without trastuzumab plus either anthracycline or nonanthracycline chemotherapy were tested for genetic polymorphisms in HER2 codon 655 and SLC28A3. Genotypes were correlated with cardiac function and disease-free survival (DFS) outcomes. RESULTS: Of 3,222 patients enrolled in BCIRG-006, 662 patient samples were successfully genotyped for the rs1136201 allele in HER2 (codon 655): 424 (64%) were AA, 30 (4.5%) were GG, and 208 (31%) were AG genotype. In addition, 665 patient samples were successfully genotyped for the rs7853758 allele in the SLC28A3 gene: 19 (3%) were AA, 475 (71%) were GG, and 171 (26%) were AG genotype. Follow-up time was 10 years. No correlation between DFS, cardiac event rate, or mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and rs1136201 genotype was seen in the trastuzumab-treated or non-trastuzumab-treated patients. Moreover, mean LVEF and cardiac event rates were similar in all rs7853758 genotype groups treated with anthracycline-based therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest study to date to evaluate whether two polymorphisms are associated with DFS and/or cardiac toxicity in HER2-positive breast cancer treated with trastuzumab and/or anthracyclines, we observed no correlation.

New clinical and biological insights from the international TARGIT-A randomised trial of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy during lumpectomy for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The TARGIT-A trial reported risk-adapted targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) during lumpectomy for breast cancer to be as effective as whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). Here, we present further detailed analyses. METHODS: In total, 2298 women (≥45 years, invasive ductal carcinoma ≤3.5 cm, cN0-N1) were randomised. We investigated the impact of tumour size, grade, ER, PgR, HER2 and lymph node status on local recurrence-free survival, and of local recurrence on distant relapse and mortality. We analysed the predictive factors for recommending supplemental EBRT after TARGIT-IORT as part of the risk-adapted approach, using regression modelling. Non-breast cancer mortality was compared between TARGIT-IORT plus EBRT vs. EBRT. RESULTS: Local recurrence-free survival was no different between TARGIT-IORT and EBRT, in every tumour subgroup. Unlike in the EBRT arm, local recurrence in the TARGIT-IORT arm was not a predictor of a higher risk of distant relapse or death. Our new predictive tool for recommending supplemental EBRT after TARGIT-IORT is at https://targit.org.uk/addrt . Non-breast cancer mortality was significantly lower in the TARGIT-IORT arm, even when patients received supplemental EBRT, HR 0.38 (95% CI 0.17-0.88) P = 0.0091. CONCLUSION: TARGIT-IORT is as effective as EBRT in all subgroups. Local recurrence after TARGIT-IORT, unlike after EBRT, has a good prognosis. TARGIT-IORT might have a beneficial abscopal effect. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN34086741 (21/7/2004), NCT00983684 (24/9/2009).

Long term survival and local control outcomes from single dose targeted intraoperative radiotherapy during lumpectomy (TARGIT-IORT) for early breast cancer: TARGIT-A randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether risk adapted intraoperative radiotherapy, delivered as a single dose during lumpectomy, can effectively replace postoperative whole breast external beam radiotherapy for early breast cancer. DESIGN: Prospective, open label, randomised controlled clinical trial. SETTING: 32 centres in 10 countries in the United Kingdom, Europe, Australia, the United States, and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 2298 women aged 45 years and older with invasive ductal carcinoma up to 3.5 cm in size, cN0-N1, eligible for breast conservation and randomised before lumpectomy (1:1 ratio, blocks stratified by centre) to either risk adapted targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) or external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). INTERVENTIONS: Random allocation was to the EBRT arm, which consisted of a standard daily fractionated course (three to six weeks) of whole breast radiotherapy, or the TARGIT-IORT arm. TARGIT-IORT was given immediately after lumpectomy under the same anaesthetic and was the only radiotherapy for most patients (around 80%). TARGIT-IORT was supplemented by EBRT when postoperative histopathology found unsuspected higher risk factors (around 20% of patients). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Non-inferiority with a margin of 2.5% for the absolute difference between the five year local recurrence rates of the two arms, and long term survival outcomes. RESULTS: Between 24 March 2000 and 25 June 2012, 1140 patients were randomised to TARGIT-IORT and 1158 to EBRT. TARGIT-IORT was non-inferior to EBRT: the local recurrence risk at five year complete follow-up was 2.11% for TARGIT-IORT compared with 0.95% for EBRT (difference 1.16%, 90% confidence interval 0.32 to 1.99). In the first five years, 13 additional local recurrences were reported (24/1140 v 11/1158) but 14 fewer deaths (42/1140 v 56/1158) for TARGIT-IORT compared with EBRT. With long term follow-up (median 8.6 years, maximum 18.90 years, interquartile range 7.0-10.6) no statistically significant difference was found for local recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio 1.13, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.41, P=0.28), mastectomy-free survival (0.96, 0.78 to 1.19, P=0.74), distant disease-free survival (0.88, 0.69 to 1.12, P=0.30), overall survival (0.82, 0.63 to 1.05, P=0.13), and breast cancer mortality (1.12, 0.78 to 1.60, P=0.54). Mortality from other causes was significantly lower (0.59, 0.40 to 0.86, P=0.005). CONCLUSION: For patients with early breast cancer who met our trial selection criteria, risk adapted immediate single dose TARGIT-IORT during lumpectomy was an effective alternative to EBRT, with comparable long term efficacy for cancer control and lower non-breast cancer mortality. TARGIT-IORT should be discussed with eligible patients when breast conserving surgery is planned. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN34086741, NCT00983684.

Effect of Delayed Targeted Intraoperative Radiotherapy vs Whole-Breast Radiotherapy on Local Recurrence and Survival: Long-term Results From the TARGIT-A Randomized Clinical Trial in Early Breast Cancer.

Importance: Conventional adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer given daily for several weeks is onerous and expensive. Some patients may be obliged to choose a mastectomy instead, and some may forgo radiotherapy altogether. We proposed a clinical trial to test whether radiotherapy could be safely limited to the tumor bed. Objective: To determine whether delayed second-procedure targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) is noninferior to whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in terms of local control. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this prospective, randomized (1:1 ratio) noninferiority trial, 1153 patients aged 45 years or older with invasive ductal breast carcinoma smaller than 3.5 cm treated with breast conservation were enrolled from 28 centers in 9 countries. Data were locked in on July 3, 2019. Interventions: The TARGIT-A trial was started in March 2000; patients were randomized after needle biopsy to receive TARGIT-IORT immediately after lumpectomy under the same anesthetic vs EBRT and results have been shown to be noninferior. A parallel study, described in this article, was initiated in 2004; patients who had their cancer excised were randomly allocated using separate randomization tables to receive EBRT or delayed TARGIT-IORT given as a second procedure by reopening the lumpectomy wound. Main Outcomes and Measures: A noninferiority margin for local recurrence rate of 2.5% at 5 years, and long-term survival outcomes. Results: Overall, 581 women (mean [SD] age, 63 [7] years) were randomized to delayed TARGIT-IORT and 572 patients (mean [SD] age, 63 [8] years) were randomized to EBRT. Sixty patients (5%) had tumors larger than 2 cm, or had positive nodes and only 32 (2.7%) were younger than 50 years. Delayed TARGIT-IORT was not noninferior to EBRT. The local recurrence rates at 5-year complete follow-up were: delayed TARGIT-IORT vs EBRT (23/581 [3.96%] vs 6/572 [1.05%], respectively; difference, 2.91%; upper 90% CI, 4.4%). With long-term follow-up (median [IQR], 9.0 [7.5-10.5] years), there was no statistically significant difference in local recurrence-free survival (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57-1.003; P = .052), mastectomy-free survival (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.65-1.18; P = .38), distant disease-free survival (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.72-1.39; P = .98), or overall survival (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.68-1.35; P = .80). Conclusions and Relevance: These long-term data show that despite an increase in the number of local recurrences with delayed TARGIT-IORT, there was no statistically significant decrease in mastectomy-free survival, distant disease-free survival, or overall survival. Trial Registration: ISRCTN34086741, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00983684.

Outcomes in Clinically Relevant Patient Subgroups From the EMBRACA Study: Talazoparib vs Physician's Choice Standard-of-Care Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Talazoparib is a poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor that causes death in cells with breast cancer susceptibility gene 1 or 2 (BRCA1/2) mutations. METHODS: EMBRACA (NCT01945775) was a randomized phase III study comparing efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of talazoparib (1 mg) with physician's choice of chemotherapy (PCT: capecitabine, eribulin, gemcitabine, vinorelbine) in locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer with a germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA1/2) mutation. Prespecified patient subgroups were analyzed for progression-free survival, objective response, clinical benefit, duration of response, and safety. PROs were evaluated in hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) or triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) subgroups. RESULTS: Of 431 patients, 287 were randomly assigned to talazoparib and 144 to PCT. Prespecified subgroup analyses showed prolonged progression-free survival with talazoparib (HR+/HER2-: hazard ratio = 0.47, 95% confidence interval = 0.32 to 0.71; TNBC: hazard ratio = 0.60, 95% confidence interval = 0.41 to 0.87) and greater objective response rate (odds ratio = 1.97 to 11.89), clinical benefit rate (odds ratio = 2.05 to 7.77), and duration of response with talazoparib in all subgroups. PROs in HR+/HER2- and TNBC subgroups showed consistent overall improvement and delay in time to definitive clinically meaningful deterioration with talazoparib vs PCT. Across subgroups, common adverse events included anemia, fatigue, and nausea with talazoparib and neutropenia, fatigue, and nausea with PCT. Seven patients (2.4%) receiving talazoparib had grade II alopecia and 22.7% had grade I alopecia. CONCLUSIONS: Across all patient subgroups with gBRCA-mutated advanced breast cancer, talazoparib demonstrated clinically significant superiority in outcomes compared with PCT.

Trastuzumab emtansine with or without pertuzumab versus trastuzumab with taxane for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive advanced breast cancer: Final results from MARIANNE.

BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 MARIANNE trial, trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) with or without pertuzumab showed noninferior progression-free survival and better tolerability than trastuzumab plus a taxane (HT) for the first-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive advanced breast cancer. This article reports the final descriptive overall survival (OS) analysis, updated safety data, and additional patient-reported outcomes and biomarker analyses. METHODS: OS was assessed in 1095 patients with HER2-positive breast cancer and no prior therapy for advanced disease who had been randomized to HT, T-DM1 plus a placebo (hereafter T-DM1), or T-DM1 plus pertuzumab (T-DM1+pertuzumab). A post hoc exploratory landmark analysis of OS, baseline patient and disease characteristics, and tumor biomarkers in patients with and without an objective tumor response (OR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors within 6.5 months of randomization was conducted. RESULTS: The median OS was similar across groups (50.9, 53.7, and 51.8 months for the HT, T-DM1, and T-DM1+pertuzumab groups, respectively). Among patients with an OR, the median OS was longer with T-DM1 (64.4 months) and T-DM1+pertuzumab (not reached) versus HT (56.3 months). No baseline characteristics or biomarkers were strongly associated with OR. The incidence of grade 3 or higher adverse events was greater with HT (55.8%) than T-DM1 (47.1%) or T-DM1+pertuzumab (48.6%). The median time to clinically meaningful deterioration (a 3-point or greater change) in neurotoxicity symptoms was shorter with HT (2.1 months) and T-DM1+pertuzumab (4.2 months) than T-DM1 (6.2 months). Fewer patients reported alopecia and diarrhea and were bothered by treatment side effects in the T-DM1 arm. CONCLUSIONS: These results support T-DM1 as a first-line treatment for patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer who are deemed unsuitable for taxane-based therapy.

Correction to: Relationship between tumor biomarkers and efficacy in MARIANNE, a phase III study of trastuzumab emtansine ± pertuzumab versus trastuzumab plus taxane in HER2-positive advanced breast cancer.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported the following errors in the article.

Relationship between tumor biomarkers and efficacy in MARIANNE, a phase III study of trastuzumab emtansine ± pertuzumab versus trastuzumab plus taxane in HER2-positive advanced breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The phase III EMILIA and TH3RESA trials demonstrated clinical benefits of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) therapy in patients with previously treated HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Data from these and other trials showed that T-DM1-associated survival benefits were observed across biomarker subgroups tested in these trials. Prespecified, exploratory analyses of the phase III MARIANNE study examined the effects of HER2-related biomarkers on PFS in patients administered T-DM1 in the first-line MBC setting. METHODS: In MARIANNE, patients with previously untreated HER2-positive MBC were randomized (1:1:1) to trastuzumab plus taxane, T-DM1 plus placebo, or T-DM1 plus pertuzumab. Biomarker subgroups included HER2 and HER3 mRNA expression levels (≤median vs. >median), HER2 staining intensity (IHC 3+ vs. 2+ vs. 0/1+), PIK3CA status (mutated vs. non-mutated), PTEN H-score (≤median vs. >median), and PTEN protein expression level (0 vs. 1+ vs. 2+ vs. 3+ vs. 4+). PFS was analyzed descriptively for each subgroup using Kaplan-Meier methodology. Additional exploratory post-hoc analyses evaluated the effects of HER2 heterogeneity. Multivariate analyses were also performed. RESULTS: Median PFS was numerically longer for patients with HER2 mRNA levels >median versus ≤median across treatment arms. In general, there were no predictive biomarkers of benefit for either T-DM1 treatment arm; most hazard ratios were close to 1 with wide confidence intervals that included the value 1. Focal HER2 expression (IHC 3+ or IHC 2+) was present in 3.8% of patients and was associated with numerically shorter PFS in the T-DM1-containing treatment arms versus trastuzumab plus taxane. Compared with non-mutated PIK3CA, mutated PIK3CA was associated with numerically shorter median PFS across treatment groups. Post-hoc multivariate analysis showed HER2 mRNA expression and mutated PIK3CA were prognostic for PFS (P ≤ 0.001 for both biomarkers). CONCLUSIONS: In MARIANNE, biomarkers related to the HER2 pathway did not have predictive value for PFS when comparing T-DM1 (with or without pertuzumab) with trastuzumab plus taxane. However, HER2 mRNA level and PIK3CA mutation status showed prognostic value. Evaluation of other potential biomarkers, including immune markers, is ongoing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration number: NCT01120184 . Date of registration: April 28, 2010 (registered prospectively).

Assessment of ERBB2/HER2 Status in HER2-Equivocal Breast Cancers by FISH and 2013/2014 ASCO-CAP Guidelines.

Importance: The 2013/2014 American Society of Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologists (ASCO-CAP) guidelines for HER2 testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) designated an "equivocal" category (average HER2 copies per tumor cell ≥4-6 with HER2/CEP17 ratio <2.0) to be resolved as negative or positive by assessments with alternative control probes. Approximately 4% to 12% of all invasive breast cancers are characterized as HER2-equivocal based on FISH. Objective: To evaluate the following hypotheses: (1) genetic loci used as alternative controls are heterozygously deleted in a substantial proportion of breast cancers; (2) use of these loci for assessment of HER2 by FISH leads to false-positive assessments; and (3) these HER2 false-positive breast cancer patients have outcomes that do not differ from clinical outcomes for patients with HER2-negative breast cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: We retrospectively assessed the use of chromosome 17 p-arm and q-arm alternative control genomic sites (TP53, D17S122, SMS, RARA, TOP2A), as recommended by the 2013/2014 ASCO-CAP guidelines for HER2 testing, in patients whose data were available through Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium (METABRIC) and whose tissues were available through the Breast Cancer International Research Group clinical trials. We used data from an international cohort database of invasive breast cancers (1980 participants) and international clinical trial of adjuvant chemotherapy in invasive, node-positive breast cancer patients. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary objectives were to (1) assess frequency of heterozygous deletions in chromosome 17 genomic sites used as FISH internal controls for evaluation of HER2 status among HER2-equivocal cancers; (2) characterize impact of using deleted sites for determination of HER2-to-internal-control-gene ratios; (3) assess HER2 protein expression in each subgroup; and (4) compare clinical outcomes for each subgroup. Results: Of the 1980 patients in METABRIC,1915 patients were fully evaluated. In addition, 100 HER2-equivocal breast cancers by FISH and 100 comparator FISH-negative breast cancers from the BCIRG-005 trial were analyzed. Heterozygous deletions, particularly in specific p-arm sites, were common in both HER2-amplified and HER2-not-amplified breast cancers. Use of alternative control probes from these regions to assess HER2 by FISH in HER2-equivocal as well as HER2-not-amplified breast cancers resulted in high rates of false-positive ratios (HER2-to-alternative control ratio ≥2.0) owing to heterozygous deletions of control p-arm genomic sites used in ratio denominators. Misclassification of HER2 status was observed not only in breast cancers with ASCO-CAP equivocal status but also in breast cancers with an average of fewer than 4.0 HER2 copies per tumor cell when using alternative control probes. Conclusions and Relevance: The indiscriminate use of alternative control probes to calculate HER2 FISH ratios in HER2-equivocal breast cancers may lead to false-positive interpretations of HER2 status resulting from unrecognized heterozygous deletions in 1 or more of these alternative control genomic sites and incorrect HER2 ratio determinations.

Talazoparib in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer and a Germline BRCA Mutation.

BACKGROUND: The poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) inhibitor talazoparib has shown antitumor activity in patients with advanced breast cancer and germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 ( BRCA1/2). METHODS: We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial in which patients with advanced breast cancer and a germline BRCA1/2 mutation were assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive talazoparib (1 mg once daily) or standard single-agent therapy of the physician's choice (capecitabine, eribulin, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine in continuous 21-day cycles). The primary end point was progression-free survival, which was assessed by blinded independent central review. RESULTS: Of the 431 patients who underwent randomization, 287 were assigned to receive talazoparib and 144 were assigned to receive standard therapy. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the talazoparib group than in the standard-therapy group (8.6 months vs. 5.6 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.71; P<0.001). The interim median hazard ratio for death was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.55 to 1.06; P=0.11 [57% of projected events]). The objective response rate was higher in the talazoparib group than in the standard-therapy group (62.6% vs. 27.2%; odds ratio, 5.0; 95% CI, 2.9 to 8.8; P<0.001). Hematologic grade 3-4 adverse events (primarily anemia) occurred in 55% of the patients who received talazoparib and in 38% of the patients who received standard therapy; nonhematologic grade 3 adverse events occurred in 32% and 38% of the patients, respectively. Patient-reported outcomes favored talazoparib; significant overall improvements and significant delays in the time to clinically meaningful deterioration according to both the global health status-quality-of-life and breast symptoms scales were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced breast cancer and a germline BRCA1/2 mutation, single-agent talazoparib provided a significant benefit over standard chemotherapy with respect to progression-free survival. Patient-reported outcomes were superior with talazoparib. (Funded by Medivation [Pfizer]; EMBRACA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01945775 .).

Randomised, open-label, phase II study comparing the efficacy and the safety of cabazitaxel versus weekly paclitaxel given as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with operable triple-negative or luminal B/HER2-negative breast cancer (GENEVIEVE).

BACKGROUND: The GENEVIEVE study compared the pathological complete response (pCR) rate (ypT0/is ypN0/+) in patients with operable human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer (BC) treated with either cabazitaxel or paclitaxel. METHODS: GENEVIEVE was a prospective, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase II study comparing the efficacy and the safety of four 3-weekly cycles cabazitaxel versus 12 weeks of paclitaxel given as neoadjuvant treatment. Primary end-point was the pCR rate defined as the complete absence of invasive carcinoma on histological examination of the breast irrespective of lymph node involvement (ypT0/is, ypN0/+) after the taxane treatment. Patients could receive an anthracycline-based therapy thereafter. RESULTS: Overall, 333 patients were randomised and started treatment with 74.7% and 83.2% of patients completing treatment in the cabazitaxel and paclitaxel arms, respectively. Patients in cabazitaxel arm had a significantly lower pCR rate compared to the paclitaxel arm (1.2% versus 10.8%; p = 0.001). A total of 42 (25.3%) patients in the cabazitaxel arm and 17 (10.2%) in the paclitaxel arm had at least one serious adverse event (p < 0.001). Dose reductions were observed in 9.6% patients in the cabazitaxel arm compared to 11.4% in the paclitaxel arm (p = 0.721). Main reason for dose reductions was non-haematological toxicities in 3.0% versus 7.8% (p = 0.087), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The GENEVIEVE study showed no short-term effect of cabazitaxel in triple-negative or luminal B/HER2-negative primary BC, while there seemed to be no differences in drug exposure and patient compliance between the two arms. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01779479.

Trastuzumab Emtansine With or Without Pertuzumab Versus Trastuzumab Plus Taxane for Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive, Advanced Breast Cancer: Primary Results From the Phase III MARIANNE Study.

Purpose Trastuzumab and pertuzumab are human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -targeted monoclonal antibodies, and trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) is an antibody-drug conjugate that combines the properties of trastuzumab with the cytotoxic activity of DM1. T-DM1 demonstrated encouraging efficacy and safety in a phase II study of patients with previously untreated HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Combination T-DM1 and pertuzumab showed synergistic activity in cell culture models and had an acceptable safety profile in a phase Ib and II study. Methods In the MARIANNE study, 1,095 patients with centrally assessed, HER2-positive, advanced breast cancer and no prior therapy for advanced disease were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to control (trastuzumab plus taxane), T-DM1 plus placebo, hereafter T-DM1, or T-DM1 plus pertuzumab at standard doses. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS), as assessed by independent review. Results T-DM1 and T-DM1 plus pertuzumab showed noninferior PFS compared with trastuzumab plus taxane (median PFS: 13.7 months with trastuzumab plus taxane, 14.1 months with T-DM1, and 15.2 months with T-DM1 plus pertuzumab). Neither experimental arm showed PFS superiority to trastuzumab plus taxane. Response rate was 67.9% in patients who were treated with trastuzumab plus taxane, 59.7% with T-DM1, and 64.2% with T-DM1 plus pertuzumab; median response duration was 12.5 months, 20.7 months, and 21.2 months, respectively. The incidence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events was numerically higher in the control arm (54.1%) versus the T-DM1 arm (45.4%) and T-DM1 plus pertuzumab arm (46.2%). Numerically fewer patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events in the T-DM1 arms, and health-related quality of life was maintained for longer in the T-DM1 arms. Conclusion T-DM1 showed noninferior, but not superior, efficacy and better tolerability than did taxane plus trastuzumab for first-line treatment of HER2-positive, advanced breast cancer.

Pooled analysis of prospective European studies assessing the impact of using the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay on clinical decision making in women with oestrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early-stage breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The 21-gene Recurrence Score assay (Oncotype DX) provides prognostic/predictive information in oestrogen receptor positive (ER+) early breast cancer, but access/reimbursement has been limited in most European countries in the absence of prospective outcome data. Recently, two large prospective studies and a real-life 5-year outcome study have been reported. We performed a pooled analysis of prospective European impact studies to generate robust data on impact of use in different clinical subgroups. METHODS: The analysis included four studies (French, German, Spanish, and British) in ER+ human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer patients (n = 527). Node-positive patients were excluded. RESULTS: The analysis demonstrated that treatment recommendations changed in 32% of patients post-testing; chemotherapy recommendation rate decreased from 55% to 34%. Change rates in the individual studies ranged from 30% to 37%. The highest change rates were in patients originally recommended chemotherapy and in grade II tumours; there was no subgroup without a treatment recommendation change. Notably, 31% of patients with an intermediate Recurrence Score result had a treatment recommendation change suggesting that testing provides actionable information in this group. With the exception of the German study (where chemotherapy rates remained high [41%] post-testing), between-study variability in treatment recommendations decreased post-testing (chemotherapy: from 36-52% to 26-29%; hormonal therapy: from 48-64% to 71-74%). Physicians' confidence regarding treatment recommendations improved in all the studies after testing. CONCLUSION: Recurrence Score testing led to changes in adjuvant chemotherapy use in approximately a third of patients, to an overall reduced chemotherapy use, and to more homogeneous decision making.

HER2 Gene Amplification Testing by Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization (FISH): Comparison of the ASCO-College of American Pathologists Guidelines With FISH Scores Used for Enrollment in Breast Cancer International Research Group Clinical Trials.

Purpose ASCO and the College of American Pathologists (ASCO-CAP) recently recommended further changes to the evaluation of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 gene (HER2) amplification by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). We retrospectively assessed the impact of these new guidelines by using annotated Breast Cancer International Research Group (BCIRG) -005, BCIRG-006, and BCIRG-007 clinical trials data for which we have detailed outcomes. Patients and Methods The HER2 FISH status of BCIRG-005/006/007 patients with breast cancers was re-evaluated according to current ASCO-CAP guidelines, which designates five different groups according to HER2 FISH ratio and average HER2 gene copy number per tumor cell: group 1 (in situ hybridization [ISH]-positive): HER2-to-chromosome 17 centromere ratio ≥ 2.0, average HER2 copies ≥ 4.0; group 2 (ISH-positive): ratio ≥ 2.0, copies < 4.0; group 3 (ISH-positive): ratio < 2.0, copies ≥ 6.0; group 4 (ISH-equivocal): ratio < 2.0, copies ≥ 4.0 and < 6.0; and group 5 (ISH-negative): ratio < 2.0, copies < 4.0. We assessed correlations with HER2 protein, clinical outcomes by disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) and benefit from trastuzumab therapy (hazard ratio [HR]). Results Among 10,468 patients with breast cancers who were successfully screened for trial entry, 40.8% were in ASCO-CAP ISH group 1, 0.7% in group 2; 0.5% in group 3, 4.1% in group 4, and 53.9% in group 5. Distributions were similar in screened compared with accrued subpopulations. Among accrued patients, FISH group 1 breast cancers were strongly correlated with immunohistochemistry 3+ status (P < .0001), whereas groups 2, 3, 4, and 5 were not; however, groups 2, 4 and, 5 were strongly correlated with immunohistochemistry 0/1+ status (all P < .0001), whereas group 3 was not. Among patients accrued to BCIRG-005, group 4 was not associated with significantly worse DFS or OS compared with group 5. Among patients accrued to BCIRG-006, only group 1 showed a significant benefit from trastuzumab therapy (DFS HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.83; P < .0001; OS HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.85; P = .0006), whereas group 2 did not. Conclusion Our findings support the original categorizations of HER2 by FISH status in BCIRG/Translational Research in Oncology trials.

Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. METHODS: In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358. RESULTS: Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6-8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·64-1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95% CI <1·25), but its superiority to tamoxifen was not (p=0·49). A total of 69 deaths were recorded (33 for anastrozole vs 36 for tamoxifen; HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·58-1·50], p=0·78), and no specific cause was more common in one group than the other. The number of women reporting any adverse event was similar between anastrozole (1323 women, 91%) and tamoxifen (1379 women, 93%); the side-effect profiles of the two drugs differed, with more fractures, musculoskeletal events, hypercholesterolaemia, and strokes with anastrozole and more muscle spasm, gynaecological cancers and symptoms, vasomotor symptoms, and deep vein thromboses with tamoxifen. CONCLUSIONS: No clear efficacy differences were seen between the two treatments. Anastrozole offers another treatment option for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS, which may be be more appropriate for some women with contraindications for tamoxifen. Longer follow-up will be necessary to fully evaluate treatment differences. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, Breast Cancer Research Fund, AstraZeneca, Sanofi Aventis.

A randomized phase 2 study comparing EC or CMF versus nab-paclitaxel plus capecitabine as adjuvant chemotherapy for nonfrail elderly patients with moderate to high-risk early breast cancer (ICE II-GBG 52).

BACKGROUND: Although greater than 40% of breast cancers occur in patients aged ≥65 years, these individuals are frequently undertreated. Taxane-based adjuvant chemotherapy is considered the treatment of choice but to the authors' knowledge has only limited evidence in elderly patients. METHODS: Patients aged ≥65 years with a Charlson comorbidity index ≤2 and pT1/2 pN0/1 disease and either human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive, hormone receptor-negative, grade 3 (according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 3.0]), high uPA/PAI-1 or any stage pT3/4 pN2/3 breast cancer were randomized to receive 4 cycles of adjuvant epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (EC) (epirubicin at a dose of 90 mg/m(2) and cyclophosphamide at a dose of 600 mg/m(2) intravenously [iv] on day 1 every 3 22 days) or 6 cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) (cyclophosphamide at a dose of 500 mg/m(2), methotrexate at a dose of 40 mg/m(2), and 5-fluorouracil at a dose of 600 mg/m(2) iv on days 1 plus 8 every 29 days) versus 6 cycles of nab-paclitaxel and capecitabine (nPX) (nab-paclitaxel at a dose of 100 mg/m(2) iv on days 1, 8, and 15 every 21 days with 1 week of rest every 6 weeks plus capecitabine at a dose of 2000 mg/m(2) orally on days 1-14 every 21 days). Primary endpoints were treatment discontinuations and overall frequency of adverse events. RESULTS: Thirteen of 198 patients (6.6%) discontinued EC/CMF and 69 of 193 patients (35.8%) discontinued nPX (P<.001) with 1 and 5 deaths observed during treatment, respectively. Grade 3 to 5 adverse events were more frequent among patients treated with EC/CMF (90.9%) than among those treated with nPX (64.8%) (P<.001), with hematological toxicities being more frequent with EC/CMF (88.4% vs 22.3%; P<.001), but nonhematological toxicities (hand-foot syndrome, diarrhea, mucositis, fatigue, sensory neuropathy, thromboembolisms, and metabolic disorders) being more frequent with nPX (58.5% vs 18.7%; P<.001). None of the geriatric scores (Charlson comorbidity index, Vulnerable Elders Survey [VES-13], Instrumental Activities of Daily Living [IADL], and G8) independently predicted grade 3 to 5 toxic events or treatment discontinuations. No differences in survival between the treatment groups were observed after 22.8 months. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with EC/CMF, treatment with nPX led to more treatment discontinuations and nonhematological toxicities in elderly patients with moderate or high-risk breast cancer.

PTEN Loss Is Associated with Worse Outcome in HER2-Amplified Breast Cancer Patients but Is Not Associated with Trastuzumab Resistance.

PURPOSE: To investigate the clinical relevance of PTEN in HER2-amplified and HER2-nonamplified disease. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We assessed PTEN status in two large adjuvant breast cancer trials (BCIRG-006 and BCIRG-005) using a PTEN immunohistochemical (IHC) assay that was previously validated in a panel of 33 breast cancer cell lines and prostate cancer tissues with known PTEN gene deletion. RESULTS: In the HER2-positive patient population, absence of tumor cell PTEN staining occurred at a rate of 5.4% and was independent of ER/PR status. In contrast, 15.9% of HER2-negative patients exhibited absence of PTEN staining with the highest frequency seen in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) subgroup versus ER/PR-positive patients (35.1% vs. 10.9%). Complete absence of PTEN staining in tumor cells was associated with poor clinical outcome in HER2-positive disease. Those patients whose cancers demonstrated absent PTEN staining had a significant decrease in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with patients with tumors exhibiting any PTEN staining patterns (low, moderate, or high). Trastuzumab appeared to provide clinical benefit even for patients lacking PTEN staining. In the HER2-negative population, there were no statistically significant differences in clinical outcome based on PTEN status. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the largest to date examining PTEN status in breast cancer and the data suggest that the rate and significance of PTEN status differ between HER2-positive and HER2-negative disease. Furthermore, the data clearly suggest that HER2-positive patients with PTEN loss still benefit from trastuzumab.

PTK7 as a potential prognostic and predictive marker of response to adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients, and resistance to anthracycline drugs.

Biomarkers predicting resistance to particular chemotherapy regimens could play a key role in optimally individualized treatment concepts. PTK7 (protein tyrosine kinase 7) belongs to the receptor tyrosine kinase family involved in several physiological, but also malignant, cell behaviors. Recent studies in acute myeloid leukemia have associated PTK7 expression with resistance to anthracycline therapy. PTK7 mRNA expression in primary tumor tissue (PTT) and corresponding lymph node tissue (LNT) were retrospectively measured in 117 patients with early breast cancer; PTK7 expression was available in 103 PTT and 108 LNT samples. Median age was 60 years (range, 27-87 years). At a median follow-up of 28.5 months, 6 deaths and 16 recurrences had occurred. PTK7 expression correlations with clinicopathological features were computed and PTK7 expression effects on patient outcome were analyzed in three cohorts defined by adjuvant treatment: anthracycline-based treatment, other chemotherapy regimens (including taxane or other substances), or no chemotherapy. Association of PTK7 expression with clinicopathological features was seen only for age in PTT and nodal stage in LNT. High LN PTK7 was associated with poorer disease-free survival (DFS) in the total population (3-year DFS: low [81.7%] versus high [70.4%]; P=0.016) and in patients without adjuvant chemotherapy (3-year DFS: low [91.7%] versus high [22.3%]; P<0.001), but not in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (P=0.552). DFS stratified by PTK7 expression was compared in treatment cohorts: In patients with low LN PTK7 expression, neither chemotherapy cohort showed significantly better survival than the no-chemotherapy cohort. In patients with high LN PTK7 expression, those receiving chemotherapy, including substances other than anthracyclines, but not those receiving only anthracycline-based chemotherapy, showed significantly better DFS than those receiving no chemotherapy (P=0.001). Our results support earlier findings that PTK7 may be a prognostic and predictive marker associated with resistance to anthracycline-based chemotherapy. Further investigations are needed to validate these findings in breast cancer.