Central pathology review with two-stage quality assurance for pathological response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the ARTemis Trial.

The ARTemis Trial tested standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy±bevacizumab in the treatment of HER2-negative early breast cancer. We compare data from central pathology review with report review and also the reporting behavior of the two central pathologists. Eight hundred women with HER2-negative early invasive breast cancer were recruited. Response to chemotherapy was assessed from local pathology reports for pathological complete response in breast and axillary lymph nodes. Sections from the original core biopsy and surgical excision were centrally reviewed by one of two trial pathologists blinded to the local pathology reports. Pathologists recorded response to chemotherapy descriptively and also calculated residual cancer burden. 10% of cases were double-reported to compare the central pathologists' reporting behavior. Full sample retrieval was obtained for 681 of the 781 patients (87%) who underwent surgery within the trial and were evaluable for pathological complete response. Four hundred and eighty-three (71%) were assessed by JSJT, and 198 (29%) were assessed by EP. Residual cancer burden calculations were possible in 587/681 (86%) of the centrally reviewed patients, as 94/681 (14%) had positive sentinel nodes removed before neoadjuvant chemotherapy invalidating residual cancer burden scoring. Good concordance was found between the two pathologists for residual cancer burden classes within the 65-patient quality assurance exercise (kappa 0.63 (95% CI: 0.57-0.69)). Similar results were obtained for the between-treatment arm comparison both from the report review and the central pathology review. For pathological complete response, report review was as good as central pathology review but for minimal residual disease, report review overestimated the extent of residual disease. In the ARTemis Trial central pathology review added little in the determination of pathological complete response but had a role in evaluating low levels of residual disease. Calculation of residual cancer burden was a simple and reproducible method of quantifying response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy as demonstrated by performance comparison of the two pathologists.

Efficacy of neoadjuvant bevacizumab added to docetaxel followed by fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide, for women with HER2-negative early breast cancer (ARTemis): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The ARTemis trial was developed to assess the efficacy and safety of adding bevacizumab to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-negative early breast cancer. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, we enrolled women (≥18 years) with newly diagnosed HER2-negative early invasive breast cancer (radiological tumour size >20 mm, with or without axillary involvement), at 66 centres in the UK. Patients were randomly assigned via a central computerised minimisation procedure to three cycles of docetaxel (100 mg/m(2) once every 21 days) followed by three cycles of fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2)), epirubicin (100 mg/m(2)), and cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m(2)) once every 21 days (D-FEC), without or with four cycles of bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) (Bev+D-FEC). The primary endpoint was pathological complete response, defined as the absence of invasive disease in the breast and axillary lymph nodes, analysed by intention to treat. The trial has completed and follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2008-002322-11), ISRCTN (68502941), and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01093235). FINDINGS: Between May 7, 2009, and Jan 9, 2013, we randomly allocated 800 participants to D-FEC (n=401) and Bev+D-FEC (n=399). 781 patients were available for the primary endpoint analysis. Significantly more patients in the bevacizumab group achieved a pathological complete response compared with those treated with chemotherapy alone: 87 (22%, 95% CI 18-27) of 388 patients in the Bev+D-FEC group compared with 66 (17%, 13-21) of 393 patients in the D-FEC group (p=0·03). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were reported at expected levels in both groups, although more patients had grade 4 neutropenia in the Bev+D-FEC group than in the D-FEC group (85 [22%] vs 68 [17%]). INTERPRETATION: Addition of four cycles of bevacizumab to D-FEC in HER2-negative early breast cancer significantly improved pathological complete response. However, whether the improvement in pathological complete response will lead to improved disease-free and overall survival outcomes is unknown and will be reported after longer follow-up. Meta-analysis of available neoadjuvant trials is likely to be the only way to define subgroups of early breast cancer that would have clinically significant long-term benefit from bevacizumab treatment. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis.

[18F]-3'Deoxy-3'-fluorothymidine positron emission tomography and breast cancer response to docetaxel.

PURPOSE: To establish biomarkers indicating clinical response to taxanes, we determined whether early changes in [(18)F]-3'deoxy-3'-fluorothymidine positron emission tomography (FLT-PET) can predict benefit from docetaxel therapy in breast cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: This was a prospective unblinded study in 20 patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage II-IV breast cancer unresponsive to first-line chemotherapy or progressing on previous therapy. Individuals underwent a baseline dynamic FLT-PET scan followed by a scan 2 weeks after initiating the first or second cycle of docetaxel. PET variables were compared with anatomic response midtherapy (after 3 cycles). RESULTS: Average and maximum tumor standardized uptake values at 60 minutes (SUV(60,av) and SUV(60,max)) normalized to body surface area ranged between 1.7 and 17.0 and 5.6 and 26.9 × 10(-5) m(2)/mL, respectively. Docetaxel treatment resulted in a significant decrease in FLT uptake (P = 0.0003 for SUV(60,av) and P = 0.0002 for SUV(60,max)). Reduction in tumor SUV(60,av) was associated with target lesion size changes midtherapy (Pearson R for SUV(60,av) = 0.64; P = 0.004) and predicted midtherapy target lesion response (0.85 sensitivity and 0.80 specificity). Decreases in SUV(60,av) in responders were due, at least in part, to reduced net intracellular trapping of FLT (rate constant, K(i)). Docetaxel significantly reduced K(i) by 51.1% (±28.4%, P = 0.0009). CONCLUSION: Changes in tumor proliferation assessed by FLT-PET early after initiating docetaxel chemotherapy can predict lesion response midtherapy with good sensitivity warranting prospective trials to assess the ability to stop therapy in the event of non-FLT-PET response.