Genomics to select treatment for patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Cancer progression is driven in part by genomic alterations1. The genomic characterization of cancers has shown interpatient heterogeneity regarding driver alterations2, leading to the concept that generation of genomic profiling in patients with cancer could allow the selection of effective therapies3,4. Although DNA sequencing has been implemented in practice, it remains unclear how to use its results. A total of 1,462 patients with HER2-non-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer were enroled to receive genomic profiling in the SAFIR02-BREAST trial. Two hundred and thirty-eight of these patients were randomized in two trials (nos. NCT02299999 and NCT03386162) comparing the efficacy of maintenance treatment5 with a targeted therapy matched to genomic alteration. Targeted therapies matched to genomics improves progression-free survival when genomic alterations are classified as level I/II according to the ESMO Scale for Clinical Actionability of Molecular Targets (ESCAT)6 (adjusted hazards ratio (HR): 0.41, 90% confidence interval (CI): 0.27-0.61, P < 0.001), but not when alterations are unselected using ESCAT (adjusted HR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.56-1.06, P = 0.109). No improvement in progression-free survival was observed in the targeted therapies arm (unadjusted HR: 1.15, 95% CI: 0.76-1.75) for patients presenting with ESCAT alteration beyond level I/II. Patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations (n = 49) derived high benefit from olaparib (gBRCA1: HR = 0.36, 90% CI: 0.14-0.89; gBRCA2: HR = 0.37, 90% CI: 0.17-0.78). This trial provides evidence that the treatment decision led by genomics should be driven by a framework of target actionability in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Fluorouracil and dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with early-stage breast cancer (GIM2): end-of-study results from a randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous analyses of the GIM (Gruppo Italiano Mammella) 2 study showed that addition of fluorouracil to epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel in patients with node-positive early breast cancer does not improve outcome, whereas dose-dense chemotherapy induces a significant improvement in both disease-free survival and overall survival as compared with a standard schedule. Here, we present long-term results of the study. METHODS: In this 2 × 2 factorial, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients aged 18-70 years with operable, node-positive, breast cancer with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 from 81 hospitals in Italy. Eligible patients were randomly allocated (1:1:1:1) to one of the four following study groups: four cycles of standard-interval intravenous EC (epirubicin 90 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2) on day 1 every 3 weeks, followed by four cycles of intravenous paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) on day 1 every 3 weeks (q3EC-P group); four cycles of intravenous FEC (fluorouracil 600 mg/m2, epirubicin 90 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2) on day 1 every 3 weeks, followed by four cycles of intravenous paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) on day 1 every 3 weeks (q3FEC-P group); dose-dense EC-P regimen, with the same doses and drugs as the q3EC-P group but administered every 2 weeks (q2EC-P group); and the dose-dense FEC-P regimen, with the same doses and drugs as the q3FEC-P group but given every 2 weeks (q2FEC-P). Randomisation, with stratification by centre, with permuted blocks of size 12, was done with a centralised, interactive, internet-based system that randomly generated the treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, comparing different chemotherapy schedule (dose-dense vs standard-dose intervals) and regimen (FEC-P vs EC-P). Safety population included all patients that received at least one dose of any study drug according to the treatment received. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00433420, and is now closed. FINDINGS: Between April 24, 2003, and July 3, 2006, 2091 patients were randomly assigned to treatment: 545 to q3EC-P, 544 to q3FEC-P, 502 to q2EC-P, and 500 to q2FEC-P. 88 patients were enrolled in centres providing only standard interval schedule and were assigned only to q3FEC-P and q3EC-P; thus, 2091 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis for the comparison of EC-P (1047 patients) versus FEC-P (1044 patients) and 2003 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis for the comparison of dose-dense (1002 patients) versus standard interval analysis (1001 patients). After a median follow-up of 15·1 years (IQR 8·4-16·3), median disease-free survival was not significantly different between FEC-P and EC-P groups (17·09 years [95% CI 15·51-not reached] vs not reached [17·54-not reached]; unadjusted hazard ratio 1·12 [95% CI 0·98-1·29]; log-rank p=0·11). Median disease-free survival was significantly higher in the dose-dense interval group than the standard-interval group (not reached [95% CI 17·45-not reached] vs 16·52 [14·24-17·54]; 0·77 [95% CI 0·67-0·89]; p=0·0004). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (200 [37%] of 536 patients in the q3EC-P group vs 257 [48%] of 533 in the q3FEC-P group vs 50 [10%] of 496 q2EC-P vs 97 [20%] of 492) and alopecia (238 [44%] vs 249 [47%] vs 228 [46%] vs 235 [48%]). During extended follow-up, no further grade 3-4 adverse events or deaths related to toxic-effects were reported. Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in nine (2%) patients in the q3EC-P group, seven (1%) in the q3FEC-P group, nine (2%) in the q2EC-P group, and nine (2%) in the q2FEC-P group. No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Updated results from the GIM2 study support that optimal adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with high-risk early breast cancer should not include fluorouracil and should use a dose-dense schedule. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pharmacia, Dompè Biotec Italy, Italian Ministry of Health, Fondazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro, and Alliance Against Cancer.

Surgical and Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic and Conventional Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Reconstruction: International Multicenter Pooled Data Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM) has been developed to reduce conspicuous scar and increase the quality of life in women. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical and oncologic outcomes of RNSM with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) compared with conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (CNSM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international multicenter, pooled analysis of individual patient-level data enrolled a total of 755 procedures in 659 women (609 had breast cancer and 50 underwent risk-reducing mastectomy) who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy with IBR. Surgical and oncologic outcomes, including 30-days postoperative (POD 30d) complication rate, nipple necrosis rate, grade of Clavien-Dindo classification, disease-free survival, and overall survival, were evaluated. Propensity score-matched analyses were performed to adjust for confounding factors. RESULTS: The median age of both the RNSM and CNSM groups was 45 years. The RNSM group had lower body mass index (BMI) and a higher proportion of benign disease compared with the CNSM group. POD 30d complications and postoperative complication grade III rates were lower in the RNSM group than in the CNSM group (p < 0.05). The nipple necrosis rate was 2.2% and 7.8% for RNSM and CNSM, respectively (p = 0.002). After propensity score matching, significantly lower rates of POD 30d complications, nipple necrosis, and postoperative complication grade III occurred in the RNSM group than in the CNSM group (all p < 0.05). Oncologic outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: RNSM can provide better cosmetic results with favorable surgical and oncologic outcomes for women with early breast cancer or BRCA mutation.

Extended Adjuvant Endocrine Treatment in Luminal Breast Cancers in the Era of Genomic Tests.

In patients with early-stage endocrine receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer (BC), adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) for 5 years is the standard of care. However, for some patients, the risk of recurrence remain high for up to 15 years after diagnosis and extended ET beyond 5 years may be a reasonable option. Nevertheless, this strategy significantly increases the occurrence of side effects. Here we summarize the available evidence from randomized clinical trials on the efficacy and safety profile of extended ET and discuss available clinical and genomic tools helpful to select eligible patients in daily clinical practice.

Extended therapy with letrozole as adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal patients with early-stage breast cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of extending aromatase inhibitor therapy beyond 5 years in the context of previous aromatase inhibitors remains controversial. We aimed to compare extended therapy with letrozole for 5 years versus the standard duration of 2-3 years of letrozole in postmenopausal patients with breast cancer who have already received 2-3 years of tamoxifen. METHODS: This multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial was done at 69 hospitals in Italy. Women were eligible if they were postmenopausal at the time of study entry, had stage I-III histologically proven and operable invasive hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, had received adjuvant tamoxifen therapy for at least 2 years but no longer than 3 years and 3 months, had no signs of disease recurrence, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or lower. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 2-3 years (control group) or 5 years (extended group) of letrozole (2·5 mg orally once a day). Randomisation, with stratification by centre, with permuted blocks of size 12, was done with a centralised, interactive, internet-based system that randomly generated the treatment allocation. Participants and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analysis was done for patients who received at least 1 month of study treatment. This trial was registered with EudraCT, 2005-001212-44, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01064635. FINDINGS: Between Aug 1, 2005, and Oct 24, 2010, 2056 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive letrozole for 2-3 years (n=1030; control group) or for 5 years (n=1026; extended group). After a median follow-up of 11·7 years (IQR 9·5-13·1), disease-free survival events occurred in 262 (25·4%) of 1030 patients in the control group and 212 (20·7%) of 1026 in the extended group. 12-year disease-free survival was 62% (95% CI 57-66) in the control group and 67% (62-71) in the extended group (hazard ratio 0·78, 95% CI 0·65-0·93; p=0·0064). The most common grade 3 and 4 adverse events were arthralgia (22 [2·2%] of 983 patients in the control group vs 29 [3·0%] of 977 in the extended group) and myalgia (seven [0·7%] vs nine [0·9%]). There were three (0·3%) serious treatment-related adverse events in the control group and eight (0·8%) in the extended group. No deaths related to toxic effects were observed. INTERPRETATION: In postmenopausal patients with breast cancer who received 2-3 years of tamoxifen, extended treatment with 5 years of letrozole resulted in a significant improvement in disease-free survival compared with the standard 2-3 years of letrozole. Sequential endocrine therapy with tamoxifen for 2-3 years followed by letrozole for 5 years should be considered as one of the optimal standard endocrine treatments for postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. FUNDING: Novartis and the Italian Ministry of Health. TRANSLATION: For the Italian translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive early breast cancer patients before and after the introduction of trastuzumab: Exploratory analysis of the GIM2 trial.

Dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy is standard of care in high-risk early breast cancer patients. However, its role in HER2-positive patients is still uncertain. In this exploratory analysis of the GIM2 trial, we investigated the efficacy of dose-dense chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer patients with or without exposure to trastuzumab. In the GIM2 trial, node-positive early breast cancer patients were randomized to receive four cycles of (fluorouracil)epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by four cycles of paclitaxel administered every 2 (dose-dense) or 3 (standard-interval) weeks. After approval of adjuvant trastuzumab, protocol was amended in April 2006 to allow use of trastuzumab for 1 year after chemotherapy completion in HER2-positive patients. The efficacy of dose-dense chemotherapy in terms of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed according to HER2 status and trastuzumab use. Out of 2,003 breast cancer patients, HER2 status was negative/unknown in 1,551 patients; among the 452 patients with HER2-positive breast cancer, chemotherapy alone or followed by trastuzumab was given to 320 and 132 patients, respectively. Median follow-up was 8.1 years. No significant interaction between HER2 status, trastuzumab use and chemotherapy treatment was observed for both DFS (p = 0.698) and OS (p = 0.708). Nevertheless, there was no apparent benefit in the HER2-positive group treated with trastuzumab (DFS: HR, 0.99; 95% CI 0.52-1.89; OS: HR, 0.95; 95% CI 0.37-2.41). Although dose-dense chemotherapy was associated with a significant survival improvement in high-risk breast cancer patients, its benefit appeared to be smaller (if any) in patients with HER2-positive disease who received adjuvant trastuzumab.

Endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: extending endocrine sensitivity.

Targeted agents have significantly prolonged survival and improved response rates in first- and second-line settings of hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. Optimal sequencing of the available options may prolong endocrine sensitivity, slow disease progression and delay the need for chemotherapy. However, the optimal treatment sequence remains unclear and therapeutic decisions are complex. We review the latest recommendations and supporting evidence for endocrine therapy in women with hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer and discuss strategies for the optimal sequential therapy in scenarios of response to endocrine therapy. Although more data are needed to define the best sequence of endocrine treatments, more personalized sequential strategies, which take into account response to previous treatments as well as disease symptoms and safety issues, will be increasingly feasible.

Trastuzumab-related cardiotoxicity in patients with nonlimiting cardiac comorbidity.

BACKGROUND: Significant and symptomatic cardiac comorbidity is a contraindication to adjuvant trastuzumab in breast cancer patients. However, some patients with asymptomatic, nonlimiting cardiac comorbidity and normal baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) receive adjuvant trastuzumab in the clinical practice. We sought to describe the tolerability of trastuzumab in these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients with baseline asymptomatic, nonlimiting cardiac comorbidity receiving adjuvant trastuzumab at six Institutions between July 2007 and January 2016. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients with HER2-positive, surgery treated breast cancer at high risk of relapse were studied. Median age was 64 years (range 36-82), median baseline LVEF 61% (range 50%-85%). Thirteen patients (35%) received trastuzumab with adjuvant anthracycline and taxane-based regimens, 19 (51%) with taxane-based, three (8%) with off-label vinorelbine and two (5%) with off-label endocrine therapy. Most frequent cardiac comorbidities were ischemic heart disease (35%), valvular disease (30%), atrial fibrillation (19%), and conduction disorders (14%). Nine patients (24.3%) experienced a cardiac event: congestive heart failure (one patient, 3%), asymptomatic LVEF reduction (six patients, 16%), and rhythm disturbances (two patients, 5%). Trastuzumab had to be discontinued either permanently (five patients, 14%) or temporarily (two patients, 5%). At the time of last follow-up visit, all patients showed LVEF within normal limits, except one who had experienced a symptomatic cardiac event (LVEF value at last follow-up 46%). CONCLUSIONS: Caution is needed in patients with significant ongoing cardiovascular risk factors, but when adjuvant trastuzumab is deemed beneficial on breast cancer outcomes, nonlimiting cardiac comorbidity should not preclude treatment.

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

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

Everolimus Plus Exemestane in Advanced Breast Cancer: Safety Results of the BALLET Study on Patients Previously Treated Without and with Chemotherapy in the Metastatic Setting.

BACKGROUND: The BALLET study was an open-label, multicenter, expanded access study designed to allow treatment with everolimus plus exemestane in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer progressed following prior endocrine therapy. A post hoc analysis to evaluate if previous chemotherapy in the metastatic setting affects the safety profile of the combination regimen of everolimus and exemestane was conducted on the Italian subset, as it represented the major part of the patients enrolled (54%). PATIENTS AND METHODS: One thousand one hundred and fifty-one Italian patients were included in the present post hoc analysis, which focused on two sets of patients: patients who never received chemotherapy in the metastatic setting (36.1%) and patients who received at least one chemotherapy treatment in the metastatic setting (63.9%). RESULTS: One thousand one hundred and sixteen patients (97.0%) prematurely discontinued the study drug, and the main reasons reported were disease progression (39.1%), local reimbursement of everolimus (31.1%), and adverse events (AEs) (16.1%). The median duration of study treatment exposure was 139.5 days for exemestane and 135.0 days for everolimus. At least one AE was experienced by 92.5% of patients. The incidence of everolimus-related AEs was higher (83.9%) when compared with those that occurred with exemestane (29.1%), and the most commonly reported everolimus-related AE was stomatitis (51.3%). However, no significant difference in terms of safety related to the combination occurred between patients without and with chemotherapy in the metastatic setting. CONCLUSION: Real-life data of the Italian patients BALLET-related cohort were an adequate setting to state that previous chemotherapy did not affect the safety profile of the combination regimen of everolimus and exemestane. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: With the advent of new targeted agents for advanced or metastatic breast cancer, multiple lines of therapy may be possible, and components of the combined regimens can overlap from one line to another. Thus, it is important to assess even the potential of cumulative and additive toxic effects among the drugs. Previous chemotherapy did not affect the safety profile of the combination regimen of everolimus and exemestane. The continuous monitoring of the safety signals of this drug combination from general clinical practice is important, in particular for stomatitis.

Primary tumor location predicts the site of local relapse after nipple-areola complex (NAC) sparing mastectomy.

PURPOSE: To assess the oncological safety of nipple-areola complex (NAC) sparing mastectomy in breast cancer patients. METHODS: From 2010 to 2015, 518 breast cancer patients were submitted to NAC sparing mastectomy. Breast MRI and intraoperative assessment of the subareolar (SD) and proximal (ND) nipple ducts were performed to predict NAC involvement. Significant associations between pre- and postoperative variables with SD/ND involvement and with the risk of local recurrence were retrospectively investigated. RESULTS: SD/ND were involved in 26.1% of the cases. Final pathology of SD/ND was predicted by tumor-NAC distance at MRI and intraoperative pathology with 75 and 93% accuracy, respectively. NAC involvement was more frequent in case of positive ND than positive SD (68.3 vs. 38.3%; p = 0.003). Fourteen (2.7%) local relapses developed over a mean follow-up of 33 months. Ki-67 ≥25% (p = 0.002) and high tumor grade (p = 0.027) correlated with local recurrence. Most relapses developed in the subcutaneous tissue of the quadrant where the primary tumor was located (12/14; 85.7%). No local relapses occurred in patients who received post-mastectomy radiotherapy as compared to patients who did not, although they had a higher rate of positive surgical margins (40.5 vs. 16.2%; p = 0.000). CONCLUSIONS: NAC involvement can be predicted by MRI and intraoperative pathology of ND/SD. Local recurrences after NAC sparing mastectomy almost invariably develop in the same quadrant where the primary tumor was located and in highly proliferative tumors.

Ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in HER2+ advanced breast cancer patients: does pretreatment with pertuzumab matter?

AIM: We evaluated the outcomes of patients treated with ado-trastuzumab emantasine (T-DM1) after first-line pertuzumab/trastuzumab, compared with those receiving a trastuzumab-only-based regimen. PATIENTS & METHODS: Patients who received second-line T-DM1 after pertuzumab/trastuzumab (n = 34) were compared with those who received only trastuzumab (n = 73). RESULTS: Overall response rate was 33.3% in patients with prior pertuzumab and 57.1% in the remaining subjects. Disease control rate was 47 and 43%, respectively, and the clinical benefit rate was 43.3 and 71.1%, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 5.0 and 11.0 months, respectively (hazard ratio: 2.02; 95% CI: 1.14-3.58; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Patients treated with T-DM1 who previously received pertuzumab present poorer clinical outcomes compared with those receiving a trastuzumab-only-based regimen in the first-line setting.

Fluorouracil and dose-dense chemotherapy in adjuvant treatment of patients with early-stage breast cancer: an open-label, 2 × 2 factorial, randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Whether addition of fluorouracil to epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel (EC-P) is favourable in adjuvant treatment of patients with node-positive breast cancer is controversial, as is the benefit of increased density of dosing. We aimed to address these questions in terms of improvements in disease-free survival. METHODS: In this 2 × 2 factorial, open-label, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients aged 18-70 years with operable, node positive, early-stage breast cancer from 81 Italian centres. Eligible patients were randomly allocated in a 1:1:1:1 ratio with a centralised, interactive online system to receive either dose-dense chemotherapy (administered intravenously every 2 weeks with pegfilgrastim support) with fluorouracil plus EC-P (FEC-P) or EC-P or to receive standard-interval chemotherapy (administered intravenously every 3 weeks) with FEC-P or EC-P. The primary study endpoint was disease-free survival, assessed with the Kaplan-Meier method in the intention-to-treat population. Our primary comparisons were between dose schedule (every 2 weeks vs every 3 weeks) and dose type (FEC-P vs EC-P). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00433420. FINDINGS: Between April 24, 2003, and July 3, 2006, we recruited 2091 patients. 88 patients were enrolled in centres that only provided standard-intensity dosing. After a median follow-up of 7·0 years (interquartile range [IQR] 4·5-6·3), 140 (26%) of 545 patients given EC-P every 3 weeks, 157 (29%) of 544 patients given FEC-P every 3 weeks, 111 (22%) of 502 patients given EC-P every 2 weeks, and 113 (23%) of 500 patients given FEC-P every 2 weeks had a disease-free survival event. For the dose-density comparison, disease-free survival at 5 years was 81% (95% CI 79-84) in patients treated every 2 weeks and 76% (74-79) in patients treated every 3 weeks (HR 0·77, 95% CI 0·65-0·92; p=0·004); overall survival rates at 5 years were 94% (93-96) and 89% (87-91; HR 0·65, 0·51-0·84; p=0·001) and for the chemotherapy-type comparison, disease-free survival at 5 years was 78% (75-81) in the FEC-P groups and 79% (76-82) in the EC-P groups (HR 1·06, 0·89-1·25; p=0·561); overall survival rates at 5 years were 91% (89-93) and 92% (90-94; 1·16, 0·91-1·46; p=0·234). Compared with 3 week dosing, chemotherapy every 2 weeks was associated with increased rate of grade 3-4 of anaemia (14 [1·4%] of 988 patients vs two [0·2%] of 984 patients; p=0·002); transaminitis (19 [1·9%] vs four [0·4%]; p=0·001), and myalgias (31 [3·1%] vs 16 [1·6%]; p=0·019), and decreased rates of grade 3-4 neutropenia (147 [14·9%] vs 433 [44·0%]; p<0·0001). Addition of fluorouracil led to increased rates of grade 3-4 neutropenia (354 [34·5%] of 1025 patients on FEC-P vs 250 [24·2%] of 1032 patients on EC-P; p<0·0001), fever (nine [0·9%] vs two [0·2%]), nausea (47 [4·6%] vs 28 [2·7%]), and vomiting (32 [3·1%] vs 15 [1·4%]). INTERPRETATION: In patients with node-positive early breast cancer, dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy improved disease-free survival compared with standard interval chemotherapy. Addition of fluorouracil to a sequential EC-P regimen was not associated with an improved disease-free survival outcome. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pharmacia, and Dompè Biotec.

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

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

Biomarkers of drugs targeting HER-family signalling in cancer.

The epidermal growth factor receptor family (EGFR/HER) is frequently deregulated in human cancers. Several aberrations at various levels have been successfully exploited as targets for anti-cancer therapies. However, with very few exceptions, drugs targeting HER signalling have shown only modest activity when used alone in cancers where a HER-related target can be identified. Optimization of the use of these drugs either alone or in combination with other anti-cancer agents would require a more precise definition of alterations that could predict for activity or resistance. Clinical validation of the several potential biomarkers emerging from clinical and translational studies is a challenging process. Thanks to combined efforts, collection of tumour tissues and other potentially relevant patients' materials has become more and more frequently mandatory in prospective studies with biologically targeted therapies. As a consequence, information on the value of promising biomarkers of drugs targeting HER-family receptor targeting is becoming available. This review will focus on breast cancer, where the HER2 subset has been the subject of a major research effort in the last two decades, and on gastric cancer, where HER2 targeting has emerged recently as a successful strategy.

A retrospective analysis of the activity and safety of oral Etoposide in heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer patients.

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients derive benefit from chemotherapy, but options become limited after several prior chemotherapeutic regimens. Oral etoposide (VP-16) has previously been found to be clinically active in MBC patients in phase II trials. However, with increasing availability of other drugs, etoposide use has declined in spite of its unfavorable toxicity profile probably being overestimated. We therefore evaluated the clinical benefit and safety of oral etoposide in a population of MBC patients who had failed multiple regimens of currently used therapies. Sixty-six patients with MBC previously treated with a median of eight (range 2-13) regimens of therapy were eligible for the study. Patients received 50 mg/day oral etoposide in 20-day cycles with 1-week of rest. All patients were evaluated for clinical benefit (clinical benefit rate [CBR], complete response, partial response, and disease stabilization >24 weeks), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicities. Median PFS was 4 months, CBR was 18% (overall response rate 4%), and median OS from the start of treatment was 11 months. Little clinically significant or high-grade toxicity were observed. No patients withdrew from treatment due to etoposide-induced toxicity. The favorable clinical response, low toxicity, and low cost of the drug suggest that etoposide is a viable option for patients with heavily pretreated MBC.