Tailoring neo/adjuvant systemic therapy in breast cancer: "The advent of a personalized approach"-The Breast-Gynecological and Immuno-Oncology International Cancer Conference (BGICC) consensus and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The management of early breast cancer (BC) has witnessed an uprise in the use of neoadjuvant therapy and a remarkable reshaping of the systemic therapy postneoadjuvant treatment in the last few years, with the evolution of many controversial clinical situations that require consensus. METHODS: During the 14th Breast-Gynecological and Immuno-Oncology International Cancer Conference held in Egypt in 2022, a panel of 44 BC experts from 13 countries voted on statements concerning debatable challenges in the neo/adjuvant treatment setting. The recommendations were subsequently updated based on the most recent data emerging. A modified Delphi approach was used to develop this consensus. A consensus was achieved when ≥75% of voters selected an answer. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The consensus recommendations addressed different escalation and de-escalation strategies in the setting of neoadjuvant therapy for early BC. The recommendations recapitulate the available clinical evidence and expert opinion to individualize patient management and optimize therapy outcomes. Consensus was reached in 63% of the statements (52/83), and the rationale behind each statement was clarified.

21-Gene Assay to Inform Chemotherapy Benefit in Node-Positive Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The recurrence score based on the 21-gene breast-cancer assay has been clinically useful in predicting a chemotherapy benefit in hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, axillary lymph-node-negative breast cancer. In women with positive lymph-node disease, the role of the recurrence score with respect to predicting a benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy is unclear. METHODS: In a prospective trial, we randomly assigned women with hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, one to three positive axillary lymph nodes, and a recurrence score of 25 or lower (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a worse prognosis) to endocrine therapy only or to chemotherapy plus endocrine (chemoendocrine) therapy. The primary objective was to determine the effect of chemotherapy on invasive disease-free survival and whether the effect was influenced by the recurrence score. Secondary end points included distant relapse-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 5083 women (33.2% premenopausal and 66.8% postmenopausal) underwent randomization, and 5018 participated in the trial. At the prespecified third interim analysis, the chemotherapy benefit with respect to increasing invasive disease-free survival differed according to menopausal status (P = 0.008 for the comparison of chemotherapy benefit in premenopausal and postmenopausal participants), and separate prespecified analyses were conducted. Among postmenopausal women, invasive disease-free survival at 5 years was 91.9% in the endocrine-only group and 91.3% in the chemoendocrine group, with no chemotherapy benefit (hazard ratio for invasive disease recurrence, new primary cancer [breast cancer or another type], or death, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.26; P = 0.89). Among premenopausal women, invasive disease-free survival at 5 years was 89.0% with endocrine-only therapy and 93.9% with chemoendocrine therapy (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.83; P = 0.002), with a similar increase in distant relapse-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.87; P = 0.009). The relative chemotherapy benefit did not increase as the recurrence score increased. CONCLUSIONS: Among premenopausal women with one to three positive lymph nodes and a recurrence score of 25 or lower, those who received chemoendocrine therapy had longer invasive disease-free survival and distant relapse-free survival than those who received endocrine-only therapy, whereas postmenopausal women with similar characteristics did not benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; RxPONDER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01272037.).

A randomized phase III double-blind placebo-controlled trial of first-line chemotherapy and trastuzumab with or without bevacizumab for patients with HER2/neu-positive metastatic breast cancer: a trial of the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (E1105).

BACKGROUND: In 2008, bevacizumab received accelerated Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for use in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Based on the pre-clinical and preliminary clinical activity of the trastuzumab and bevacizumab combination, ECOG-ACRIN E1105 trial was developed to determine if the addition of bevacizumab to a chemotherapy and trastuzumab combination for first-line therapy would improve progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with HER2-positive MBC. FINDINGS: 96 patients were randomized to receive standard first-line chemotherapy and trastuzumab with or without bevacizumab between November 2007 and October 2009, and 93 began protocol therapy. Induction therapy was given for 24 weeks, followed by maintenance trastuzumab with or without bevacizumab. 60% (56/93) began carboplatin and 74% (69/93) completed 6 cycles of induction therapy. Primary endpoint was PFS. Median PFS was 11.1 and 13.8 months for placebo and bevacizumab arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 95%, Confidence Interval [Cl] for bevacizumab vs. placebo: 0.73 [0.43-1.23], p = 0.24), and at a median follow-up of 70.7 months, median survival was 49.1 and 63 months (HR [95% Cl] for OS: 1.09 [0.61-1.97], p = 0.75). The most common toxicities across both arms were neutropenia and hypertension, with left ventricular systolic dysfunction, fatigue, and sensory neuropathy reported more frequently with bevacizumab. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, the addition of bevacizumab did not improve outcomes in patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer. Although the trial was underpowered due to smaller than anticipated sample size, these findings corroborated other clinical trials during this time. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION: NCT00520975.

Randomized Phase II Study of Two Doses of Pixantrone in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer (NCCTG N1031, Alliance).

BACKGROUND: Anthracycline use in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is hindered by cumulative exposure limits and risk of cardiotoxicity. Pixantrone, a novel aza-anthracenedione with structural similarities to mitoxantrone and anthracyclines, is theorized to exhibit less cardiotoxicity, mainly due to lack of iron binding. We conducted a randomized phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2 dosing schedules of pixantrone in patients with refractory HER2-negative MBC. METHODS: Intravenous pixantrone was administered at 180 mg/m2 every 3 weeks (group A) versus 85 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle (group B). Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), median 6-month PFS, overall survival (OS), safety, quality of life, and serial assessment of circulating tumor cells. A 20% ORR was targeted as sufficient for further testing of pixantrone in this patient population. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were evaluable, with 2 confirmed partial responses in group A and 1 in group B. The trial was terminated due to insufficient activity. Overall median PFS and OS were 2.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.0-4.1) and 16.8 (95% CI: 8.9-21.6) months, respectively. Notable overall grade 3-4 adverse events were the following: neutrophil count decrease (62%), fatigue (16%), and decrease in ejection fraction (EF) (4%). CONCLUSION: Pixantrone has insufficient activity in the second- and third-line MBC setting. It appears, however, to have limited cardiotoxicity. (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01086605).

Incidence of adverse events with therapies targeting HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: a literature review.

PURPOSE: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted therapies improve survival for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer but carry risks of hematologic, cardiopulmonary, gastro-hepatobiliary, and other adverse events (AEs). In this review, we describe published AE incidences for HER2-targeted therapies for metastatic breast cancer (mBC). METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase to identify studies on HER2-targeted therapies in HER2-positive mBC, reporting on AEs of special interest, and published between January 1, 2009, and February 6, 2020. Treatment regimens were categorized into mutually exclusive therapy-based categories, with primary therapy determined by worldwide approval date. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-three included articles assessed a combined 29,238 patients treated with the following therapy-based regimens: trastuzumab or biosimilars (78 studies), lapatinib (40), T-DM1 (ado-trastuzumab emtansine) (20), pertuzumab (14), neratinib (8), MM-302 (1), T-DXd (2), tucatinib (3), and pyrotinib (3). While direct comparisons of AE incidence are not warranted owing to study heterogeneity, proportions of patients experiencing any Grade 3 + AE ranged across therapy-based regimens from 39.4% (lapatinib) to 66.3% (neratinib). The most common hematologic AE of special interest, of any grade and regardless of causality, was leukopenia/white blood cells decreased [21.4% (T-DXd)-46.2% (pyrotinib)]. Cardiopulmonary AEs of special interest included interstitial lung disease [2.7% (trastuzumab)-5.2% (T-DXd)], pneumonitis [0.2% (lapatinib)-7.4% (trastuzumab)], and decreased ejection fraction [1% (T-DXd)-13.6% (trastuzumab)]. Gastro-hepatobiliary AEs of special interest included nausea [33.9% (trastuzumab)-78.3% (T-DXd)], vomiting [19.2% (T-DM1)-48.2% (T-DXd)], diarrhea [19.6% (T-DM1)-96.9% (pyrotinib)], and hepatotoxicity [5.9% (lapatinib)-53.6% (T-DM1)]. CONCLUSION: Differing AE profiles for anti-HER2 therapies should be considered when assessing benefit-risk profile for treatment options.

Behavioral and health outcomes from the NRG Oncology/NSABP B-36 trial comparing two different adjuvant therapy regimens for early-stage node-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The NSABP B-36 compared four cycles of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) with six cycles of 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC-100) in node-negative early-stage breast cancer. A sub-study within B-36, focusing on symptoms, quality of life (QOL), menstrual history (MH), and cardiac function (CF) was conducted. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients completed the QOL questionnaire at baseline, during treatment, and every 6 months through 36 months. FACT-B Trial Outcome Index (TOI), symptom severity, and SF-36 Vitality and Physical Functioning (PF) scales scores were compared between the two groups using a mixed model for repeated measures analysis. MH was collected at baseline and subsequently assessed if menstrual bleeding occurred within 12 months prior to randomization. Post-chemotherapy amenorrhea outcome was examined at 18 months and was defined as lack of menses in the preceding year. Logistic regression was used to test for association of amenorrhea and treatment. CF assessment was done at baseline and 12 months. Correlation analysis was used to address associations between changes in baseline and 12-month PF and concurrent CF changes measured by LVEF. RESULTS: FEC-100 patients had statistically significantly lower TOI scores during chemotherapy (P = 0.02) and at 6 months (P < 0.001); lower Vitality score at 6 months (P < 0.01), and lower PF score during the first year than AC patients. There were no statistically significant QOL score differences between the two groups beyond 12 months. No significant differences in symptom severity between the two groups were observed. Rates of amenorrhea were significantly different between FEC-100 and AC (67.4% vs. 59.1%, P < 0.001). There was no association between changes in LVEF and PF (P = 0.38). CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant QOL differences between the two groups favored AC; however, the magnitude was small and unlikely to be clinically meaningful. There was a clinical and statistically significant difference in risk for amenorrhea, favoring AC. TRIAL REGISTRY: NCT00087178; Date of registration: 07/08/2004.

Randomized Phase II Trial of Capecitabine and Lapatinib with or without IMC-A12 (Cituxumumab) in Patients with HER2-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer Previously Treated with Trastuzumab and Chemotherapy: NCCTG N0733 (Alliance).

PURPOSE: To compare efficacy and safety of capecitabine and lapatinib with or without IMC-A12 (cituxumumab) in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) previously treated with trastuzumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Following an initial safety run-in cohort, patients were randomized 1:2 to Arm A (capecitabine and lapatinib) or to Arm B (capecitabine, lapatinib, and cituxumumab). Given the frequency of non-hematologic grade ≥ 3 adverse events in those receiving the three-drug combination in the safety cohort, lapatinib and capecitabine doses were reduced in Arm B only. The primary objective was to determine if the addition of cituxumumab to capecitabine and lapatinib improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with capecitabine and lapatinib. Secondary objectives included a comparison between arms of other clinical endpoints, safety, change in overall quality of life (QOL) and self-assessed fatigue, rash, diarrhea, and hand-foot syndrome. RESULTS: From July 2008 to March 2012, 68 patients (out of 142 planned) were enrolled and 63 were evaluable, including 8 for the safety run-in and 55 for the randomized cohort. Study enrollment was stopped early due to slow accrual. The addition of cituxumumab to capecitabine and lapatinib did not improve PFS (HR 0.93, 95% CI: 0.52-1.64). Furthermore, no difference in objective response rate or overall survival (OS) was observed. No difference between arms was observed in grade ≥ 3 adverse events, overall QOL change from baseline after 4 cycles of treatment. CONCLUSION: The addition of cituxumumab to lapatinib and capecitabine did not improve PFS or OS compared with lapatinib and capecitabine in patients with HER2-positive MBC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00684983.

Impact of adjuvant trastuzumab on locoregional failure rates in a randomized clinical trial: North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 (alliance) study.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to assess the impact of trastuzumab on locoregional failure. METHODS: The analysis included 2763 patients with HER2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer who were randomly assigned to adjuvant doxorubicin (A), cyclophosphamide (C), paclitaxel (T) and trastuzumab (H) (arm A, AC→T [n = 922]; arm B, AC→T→H [n = 988]; arm C, AC→T+H→H [n = 853]). Radiotherapy was given after AC→T concurrently with H. Radiotherapy was given after lumpectomy (L) or after mastectomy (M) with ≥4 positive lymph nodes but was optional for 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes. Locoregional failures at 10 years (LFR10) as first events were compared using competing risk analysis. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 13.0 years. The first site of failure was local-only in 96 cases, locoregional in 16 cases, regional in 32 cases, and not specified in 2 cases; LFR10 was 4.8% (95% CI 4.1%-5.7%). LFR10 was 5.5% (95% CI 4.3%-7.2%), 4.9% (95% CI 3.7%-6.4%), and 2.8% (95% CI 1.9%-4.1%) in arms A, B, and C (B vs A: hazard ratio [HR] 0.91, P = .62; C vs A: HR 0.72, P = .12). For estrogen receptor-positive patients, LFR10 was 3.7% (95% CI 2.8%-4.8%) and for estrogen receptor-negative patients, it was 6.1% (95% CI 5.0%-7.4%; HR 0.61, P = .004). Local treatment included L+RT (n = 1044 [38%]), M+RT (n = 1025 [37%]), and M (n = 694 [25%]). LFR10 was 6.% (95% CI 5.0%-7.8%), 3.0% (95% CI 2.1%-4.3%), and 5.5% (95% CI 4.0%-7.4%) for L+RT, M+RT, and M, respectively (M+RT vs L+RT: HR 0.43, P < .001; M vs L+RT: HR 0.88, P = .57). For 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes, LFR10 was 6.5% (95% CI 4.8%-8.9%), 4.1% (95% CI 2.4%-7.0%), and 4.3% (95% CI 2.9%-6.5%) in L+RT, M+RT, and M, respectively (M vs L+RT: HR 0.68, P = .14; M vs M+RT: HR 1.2, P = .6). CONCLUSION: Low 10-year LFRs were seen regardless of trastuzumab use. Differences in local therapy in patients with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes did not appear to improve local control. Local therapy studies for HER2+ and other tumor characteristics are important as the role of local therapies continues to evolve.

N083E (Alliance): long-term outcomes of patients treated in a pilot phase II study of docetaxel, carboplatin, trastuzumab, and lapatinib as adjuvant therapy for early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The addition of lapatinib (L) to trastuzumab (T) was previously found to be synergistic in preclinical models and in the neoadjuvant setting. Prior to the results of the ALTTO trial, this study assessed the safety and feasibility of adding L to the standard adjuvant docetaxel, carboplatin, and trastuzumab (TCH) regimen in early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer (HER2+ BC). METHODS: In this single-arm, 2-stage, phase II study, patients with stages I-III HER2+ BC received TCH plus L at 1000 mg daily for a total of 12 months. The primary endpoint was the safety and tolerability, including the rate of diarrhea. Secondary endpoints included adverse event (AE) profile using the NCI CTCAE v3.0 and cardiac safety. RESULTS: Thirty eligible patients were enrolled. Median follow-up is 5.3 years. Diarrhea was the most common AE with 50% Grade (G)1/2 and 43% G3 diarrhea. However, it was responsive to dose reduction of L (750 mg) and institution of anti-diarrheal medications. Cardiovascular AE were infrequent and no patients experienced congestive heart failure while on treatment. CONCLUSION: TCHL was a tolerable regimen at a starting L dose of 750 mg PO daily when given concurrently with chemotherapy.

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).

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Pertuzumab With Trastuzumab and Chemotherapy Compared to Trastuzumab and Chemotherapy in the Adjuvant Treatment of HER2-Positive Breast Cancer in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: The APHINITY trial assessed the effectiveness and the safety of adding pertuzumab to trastuzumab and chemotherapy (THP) compared to trastuzumab and chemotherapy (TH) in the adjuvant management of human epidermal growth factor 2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer. We performed a study to project the potential cost-effectiveness of THP vs. TH. STUDY DESIGN: Trial-based cost-utility modeling analysis. METHODS: We performed an economic evaluation from a payer perspective using a Markov model with six health states: invasive disease-free survival, non-metastatic recurrence, remission, first-line metastatic, subsequent line metastatic, and death. We parameterized the model using data from both arms in APHINITY extrapolated to a patient's lifetime horizon. Estimates of health state utilities were based on EQ-5D trial data and the literature, and costs were estimated from government sources and the published literature. The primary outcomes of the model were life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Uncertainty was addressed via univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: For the intention-to-treat population, the model projected improved outcomes (by 0.50 LYs and 0.45 QALYs) and increased costs (by $74 420) for ICERs of $147 774/LY gained and $167 185/QALY gained for PHT vs. HT patients. In the node-positive patient population, the model projected improved outcomes (by 0.86 LYs and 0.76 QALYs) and increased costs (by $66 647) for ICERs of $77 684/LY gained and $87 929/QALY gained. For the hormone-receptor-negative patient population, the model projected health gains, increased costs, and ICERs of $147 022/LY gained and $166 518/QALY gained. The results were sensitive to changes in the model time horizon. CONCLUSION: The addition of pertuzumab to the available regimens for HER2+ early breast cancer is likely to be cost-effective for patients in the U.S. at high risk of recurrence.

Generation of HER2-specific antibody immunity during trastuzumab adjuvant therapy associates with reduced relapse in resected HER2 breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Resected HER2 breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant trastuzumab and chemotherapy have superior survival compared to patients treated with chemotherapy alone. We previously showed that trastuzumab and chemotherapy induce HER2-specific antibodies which correlate with improved survival in HER2 metastatic breast cancer patients. It remains unclear whether the generation of immunity required trastuzumab and whether endogenous antibody immunity is associated with improved disease-free survival in the adjuvant setting. In this study, we addressed this question by analyzing serum anti-HER2 antibodies from a subset of patients enrolled in the NCCTG trial N9831, which includes an arm (Arm A) in which trastuzumab was not used. Arms B and C received trastuzumab sequentially or concurrently to chemotherapy, respectively. METHODS: Pre-and post-treatment initiation sera were obtained from 50 women enrolled in N9831. Lambda IgG antibodies (to avoid detection of trastuzumab) to HER2 were measured and compared between arms and with disease-free survival. RESULTS: Prior to therapy, across all three arms, N9831 patients had similar mean anti-HER2 IgG levels. Following treatment, the mean levels of antibodies increased in the trastuzumab arms but not the chemotherapy-only arm. The proportion of patients who demonstrated antibodies increased by 4% in Arm A and by 43% in the Arms B and C combined (p = 0.003). Cox modeling demonstrated that larger increases in antibodies were associated with improved disease-free survival in all patients (HR = 0.23; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: These results show that the increased endogenous antibody immunity observed in adjuvant patients treated with combination trastuzumab and chemotherapy is clinically significant, in view of its correlation with improved disease-free survival. The findings may have important implications for predicting treatment outcomes in patients treated with trastuzumab in the adjuvant setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00005970 . Registered on July 5, 2000.

Prospective Validation of a 21-Gene Expression Assay in Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies with the use of a prospective-retrospective design including archival tumor samples have shown that gene-expression assays provide clinically useful prognostic information. However, a prospectively conducted study in a uniformly treated population provides the highest level of evidence supporting the clinical validity and usefulness of a biomarker. METHODS: We performed a prospective trial involving women with hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2)-negative, axillary node-negative breast cancer with tumors of 1.1 to 5.0 cm in the greatest dimension (or 0.6 to 1.0 cm in the greatest dimension and intermediate or high tumor grade) who met established guidelines for the consideration of adjuvant chemotherapy on the basis of clinicopathologic features. A reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction assay of 21 genes was performed on the paraffin-embedded tumor tissue, and the results were used to calculate a score indicating the risk of breast-cancer recurrence; patients were assigned to receive endocrine therapy without chemotherapy if they had a recurrence score of 0 to 10, indicating a very low risk of recurrence (on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a greater risk of recurrence). RESULTS: Of the 10,253 eligible women enrolled, 1626 women (15.9%) who had a recurrence score of 0 to 10 were assigned to receive endocrine therapy alone without chemotherapy. At 5 years, in this patient population, the rate of invasive disease-free survival was 93.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 92.4 to 94.9), the rate of freedom from recurrence of breast cancer at a distant site was 99.3% (95% CI, 98.7 to 99.6), the rate of freedom from recurrence of breast cancer at a distant or local-regional site was 98.7% (95% CI, 97.9 to 99.2), and the rate of overall survival was 98.0% (95% CI, 97.1 to 98.6). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative, axillary node-negative breast cancer who met established guidelines for the recommendation of adjuvant chemotherapy on the basis of clinicopathologic features, those with tumors that had a favorable gene-expression profile had very low rates of recurrence at 5 years with endocrine therapy alone. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00310180.).

Genome-wide association study of cardiotoxicity in the NCCTG N9831 (Alliance) adjuvant trastuzumab trial.

OBJECTIVES: The major clinical side effect of the ERBB2-targeted breast cancer therapy, trastuzumab, is a decline in the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Improved markers are needed to better identify patients susceptible to cardiotoxicity. METHODS: The NCCTG N9831 trial compared adjuvant doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by either weekly paclitaxel (arm A); paclitaxel then trastuzumab (arm B); or concurrent paclitaxel and trastuzumab (arm C) in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer. A genome-wide association study was performed on all patients with available DNA (N=1446). We used linear regression to identify single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with decline in LVEF, adjusting for age, baseline LVEF, antihypertensive medications, and the first two principle components. RESULTS: In total, 618 863 SNPs passed quality control and DNA from 1191 patients passed genotyping quality control and were identified as Whites of non-Hispanic origin. SNPs at six loci were associated with a decline in LVEF (P=7.73×10 to 8.93×10), LDB2, BRINP1, chr6 intergenic, RAB22A, TRPC6, and LINC01060, in patients who received chemotherapy plus trastuzumab (arms BC, N=800). None of these loci were significant in patients who received chemotherapy only (arm A, N=391) and did not increase in significance in the combined analysis of all patients. We did not observe association, P<0.05, with SNPs previously associated with trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity at ERBB2, I655V, and P1170A. We replicated association, P<0.05, with SNPs previously associated with anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity at CBR3 and ABCB1. CONCLUSION: Our study identified six putative novel cardiotoxicity loci in patients treated with combination chemotherapy and trastuzumab that require further investigation and confirmed known associations of anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity.

Efficacy and Safety of Pertuzumab and Trastuzumab Administered in a Single Infusion Bag, Followed by Vinorelbine: VELVET Cohort 2 Final Results.

BACKGROUND: VELVET Cohort 1 demonstrated the applicability of pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and vinorelbine as an alternative first-line treatment regimen for patients with HER2-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who cannot receive docetaxel. Co-infusion of pertuzumab and trastuzumab may reduce clinic time and medical resource utilization. We report results from Cohort 2, in which pertuzumab and trastuzumab were co-infused, followed by vinorelbine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During cycle 1, patients with HER2-positive locally advanced or MBC received loading doses of pertuzumab (840 mg) and trastuzumab (8 mg/kg) on consecutive days, followed by vinorelbine (25 mg/m2) on days two and nine. From cycle 2 onwards, patients received a co-infusion of pertuzumab (420 mg) and trastuzumab (6 mg/kg) on day one, followed by vinorelbine (30-35 mg/m2) on days one and eight (or days two and nine). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) in patients with measurable disease. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. RESULTS: Cohort 2 enrolled 107 patients. The ORR was 63.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 53.0-73.6) in patients with measurable disease (91/107; 85.0%). Median PFS was 11.5 months (95% CI 10.3-15.8). The most common adverse events [AEs] were diarrhea (57.9%), neutropenia (57.0%), and nausea (41.1%). Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 85 patients (79.4%) and serious AEs in 44 patients (41.1%). Eighteen patients (16.8%) had AEs suggestive of congestive heart failure. CONCLUSION: These results support the feasibility of pertuzumab and trastuzumab co-infusion from a safety perspective and support Cohort 1 conclusions that vinorelbine offers an alternative chemotherapy companion for pertuzumab and trastuzumab. The Oncologist 2017;22:1160-1168 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Combined treatment with pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel is the standard of care for first-line HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. However, some patients cannot, or choose not to, receive docetaxel. VELVET Cohort 2 results support the results from Cohort 1 that suggest that pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and vinorelbine is a suitable alternative for these patients. In addition to this, results from Cohort 2 support the feasibility of administering pertuzumab and trastuzumab together in a single infusion bag, which has the potential to offer greater patient convenience and reduce active health care professional time and medical resource utilization compared with administering them separately.

Adjuvant exemestane with ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant therapy with an aromatase inhibitor improves outcomes, as compared with tamoxifen, in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. METHODS: In two phase 3 trials, we randomly assigned premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer to the aromatase inhibitor exemestane plus ovarian suppression or tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression for a period of 5 years. Suppression of ovarian estrogen production was achieved with the use of the gonadotropin-releasing-hormone agonist triptorelin, oophorectomy, or ovarian irradiation. The primary analysis combined data from 4690 patients in the two trials. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 68 months, disease-free survival at 5 years was 91.1% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 87.3% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence, second invasive cancer, or death, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60 to 0.85; P<0.001). The rate of freedom from breast cancer at 5 years was 92.8% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, as compared with 88.8% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for recurrence, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.80; P<0.001). With 194 deaths (4.1% of the patients), overall survival did not differ significantly between the two groups (hazard ratio for death in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.51; P=0.37). Selected adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported for 30.6% of the patients in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 29.4% of those in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group, with profiles similar to those for postmenopausal women. CONCLUSIONS: In premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer, adjuvant treatment with exemestane plus ovarian suppression, as compared with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, significantly reduced recurrence. (Funded by Pfizer and others; TEXT and SOFT ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00066703 and NCT00066690, respectively.).

Prolonged survival in patients with breast cancer and a history of brain metastases: results of a preplanned subgroup analysis from the randomized phase III BEACON trial.

PURPOSE: Conventional chemotherapy has limited activity in patients with breast cancer and brain metastases (BCBM). Etirinotecan pegol (EP), a novel long-acting topoisomerase-1 inhibitor, was designed using advanced polymer technology to preferentially accumulate in tumor tissue including brain metastases, providing sustained cytotoxic SN38 levels. METHODS: The phase 3 BEACON trial enrolled 852 women with heavily pretreated locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer between 2011 and 2013. BEACON compared EP with treatment of physician's choice (TPC; eribulin, vinorelbine, gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel, paclitaxel, ixabepilone, or docetaxel) in patients previously treated with anthracycline, taxane, and capecitabine, including those with treated, stable brain metastases. The primary endpoint, overall survival (OS), was assessed in a pre-defined subgroup of BCBM patients; an exploratory post hoc analysis adjusting for the diagnosis-specific graded prognostic assessment (GPA) index was also conducted. RESULTS: In the trial, 67 BCBM patients were randomized (EP, n = 36; TPC, n = 31). Treatment subgroups were balanced for baseline characteristics and GPA indices. EP was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of death (HR 0.51; P < 0.01) versus TPC; median OS was 10.0 and 4.8 months, respectively. Improvement in OS was observed in both poorer and better GPA prognostic groups. Survival rates at 12 months were 44.4% for EP versus 19.4% for TPC. Consistent with the overall BEACON population, fewer patients on EP experienced grade ≥3 toxicity (50 vs. 70%). CONCLUSIONS: The significant improvement in survival in BCBM patients provides encouraging data for EP in this difficult-to-treat subgroup of patients. A phase three trial of EP in BCBM patients is underway (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02915744).

Treatment strategies for advanced hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor 2-negative breast cancer: the role of treatment order.

Although survival rates among patients with breast cancer have improved in recent years, those diagnosed with advanced disease with distant metastasis face a 5-year survival rate of less than 25%, making the management of these patients an area still in significant need of continued research. Selecting the optimal treatment order from among the variety of currently available therapy options presents a relevant challenge for medical oncologists. With the understanding that the majority of patients with breast cancer and those who succumb to this disease have HR-positive disease, this review will focus on treatment options and treatment order in patients with HR-positive advanced breast cancer. While endocrine therapy is considered the preferred treatment for first-line therapy in HR-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer, selection of the specific agent depends on the menopausal status of the patient. Palbociclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitor, is also recommended as first-line treatment in patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative disease. In patients with endocrine therapy-resistant disease, specific strategies include sequencing of other antiestrogen receptor agents, or agents that target other molecular pathways. Future treatment strategies for patients with primary or secondary resistance to endocrine therapy for advanced disease are discussed. These strategies include first-line therapy with high-dose fulvestrant or everolimus (in combination with exemestane or letrozole or with other endocrine therapies), use of the PI3K inhibitors (e.g., buparlisib, alpelisib, pictilisib, taselisib), entinostat, CDK 4/6 inhibitors (e.g., palbociclib, ribociclib, abemaciclib), and novel selective estrogen receptor degradation agents that may enhance the targeting of acquired mutations in the ESR1 gene.