The Cardiovascular Risks Associated with Aromatase Inhibitors, Tamoxifen, and GnRH Agonists in Women with Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cardiovascular disease accounts for up to 10% of all-cause mortality in women with a diagnosis of breast cancer, and the causes for this are multifaceted. Many women at risk of or with a diagnosis of breast cancer are on endocrine-modulating therapies. It is therefore important to understand the effect of hormone therapies on cardiovascular outcomes in breast cancer patients to mitigate against any adverse effects and to identify those most at risk so that they can be proactively managed. Here we discuss the pathophysiology of these agents, their effect on the cardiovascular system, and the latest evidence on their cardiovascular risks association. RECENT FINDINGS: Tamoxifen appears to be cardioprotective during treatment but not over the longer term, while the effect of AIs on cardiovascular outcomes remains controversial. Heart failure outcomes remain understudied, and the cardiovascular effects of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists (GNRHa) in women need further research, especially since data from men with prostate cancer have indicated an increased risk of cardiac events in GNRHa users. There remains a need for a greater understanding of the effects of hormone therapies on cardiovascular outcomes in breast cancer patients. Further areas of research in this area include developing evidence to better define the optimal preventive and screening methods for cardiovascular effects and the risk factors for patients on hormonal therapies.

Oncology clinic-based germline genetic testing for exocrine pancreatic cancer enables timely return of results and unveils low uptake of cascade testing.

BACKGROUND: Traditional medical genetics models are unable to meet the growing demand for germline genetic testing (GT) in patients with exocrine pancreatic cancer (PC). This study investigates the impact of an ambulatory oncology clinic-based GT model. METHODS: From 2012 to 2021, patients with PC were prospectively enrolled and considered for GT. Two chronological cohorts were compared: (1) the preuniversal genetic testing (pre-UGT) cohort, which received GT based on clinical criteria or family history; and (2) the post-UGT cohort, where an 86-gene panel was offered to all patients with PC. RESULTS: Of 847 eligible patients, 735 (86.8%) were enrolled (pre-UGT, n=579; post-UGT, n=156). A higher proportion of the post-UGT cohort received prospective GT (97.4% vs 58.5%, p<0.001). The rate of pathogenic germline alterations (PGA) across both cohorts was 9.9%, with 8.0% of PGAs in PC susceptibility genes. The post-UGT cohort had a higher prevalence of overall PGAs (17.2% vs 6.6%, p<0.001) and PGAs in PC susceptibility genes (11.9% vs 6.3%, p<0.001). The median turnaround time from enrolment to GT report was shorter in the post-UGT cohort (13 days vs 42 days, p<0.001). Probands with a PGA disclosed their GT results to 84% of their first-degree relatives (FDRs). However, only 31% of informed FDRs underwent GT, and the number of new cases per index case was 0.52. CONCLUSION: A point-of-care GT model is feasible and expedites access to GT for patients with PC. Strategies to increase the uptake of cascade testing are needed to maximise the clinical impact of an oncology clinic-based GT model.

Aromatase Inhibitors and the Risk of Cardiovascular Outcomes in Women With Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The association between aromatase inhibitors and cardiovascular outcomes among women with breast cancer is controversial. Given the discrepant findings from randomized controlled trials and observational studies, additional studies are needed to address this safety concern. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to the Hospital Episode Statistics and Office for National Statistics databases. The study population consisted of women newly diagnosed with breast cancer initiating hormonal therapy with aromatase inhibitors or tamoxifen between April 1, 1998, and February 29, 2016. We usedCox proportional hazards models with inverse probability of treatment and censoring weighting to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs comparing new users of aromatase inhibitors with new users of tamoxifen for each of the study outcomes (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, heart failure, and cardiovascular mortality). RESULTS: The study population consisted of 23 525 patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer, of whom 17 922 initiated treatment with either an aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen (8139 and 9783, respectively). The use of aromatase inhibitors was associated with a significantly increased risk of heart failure (incidence rate, 5.4 versus 1.8 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.86 [95% CI, 1.14-3.03]) and cardiovascular mortality (incidence rate, 9.5 versus 4.7 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.11-2.04]) compared with the use of tamoxifen. Aromatase inhibitors were associated with elevated HRs, but with CIs including the null value, for myocardial infarction (incidence rate, 3.9 versus 1.8 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.37 [95% CI, 0.88-2.13]) and ischemic stroke (incidence rate, 5.6 versus 3.2 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.82-1.72]). CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based study, aromatase inhibitors were associated with increased risks of heart failure and cardiovascular mortality compared with tamoxifen. There were also trends toward increased risks, although nonsignificant, of myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. The increased risk of cardiovascular events associated with aromatase inhibitors should be balanced with their favorable clinical benefits compared with tamoxifen.

Clinical impact of COVID-19 on patients with cancer (CCC19): a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Data on patients with COVID-19 who have cancer are lacking. Here we characterise the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 and identify potential prognostic factors for mortality and severe illness. METHODS: In this cohort study, we collected de-identified data on patients with active or previous malignancy, aged 18 years and older, with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection from the USA, Canada, and Spain from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) database for whom baseline data were added between March 17 and April 16, 2020. We collected data on baseline clinical conditions, medications, cancer diagnosis and treatment, and COVID-19 disease course. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality within 30 days of diagnosis of COVID-19. We assessed the association between the outcome and potential prognostic variables using logistic regression analyses, partially adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, and obesity. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Of 1035 records entered into the CCC19 database during the study period, 928 patients met inclusion criteria for our analysis. Median age was 66 years (IQR 57-76), 279 (30%) were aged 75 years or older, and 468 (50%) patients were male. The most prevalent malignancies were breast (191 [21%]) and prostate (152 [16%]). 366 (39%) patients were on active anticancer treatment, and 396 (43%) had active (measurable) cancer. At analysis (May 7, 2020), 121 (13%) patients had died. In logistic regression analysis, independent factors associated with increased 30-day mortality, after partial adjustment, were: increased age (per 10 years; partially adjusted odds ratio 1·84, 95% CI 1·53-2·21), male sex (1·63, 1·07-2·48), smoking status (former smoker vs never smoked: 1·60, 1·03-2·47), number of comorbidities (two vs none: 4·50, 1·33-15·28), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or higher (status of 2 vs 0 or 1: 3·89, 2·11-7·18), active cancer (progressing vs remission: 5·20, 2·77-9·77), and receipt of azithromycin plus hydroxychloroquine (vs treatment with neither: 2·93, 1·79-4·79; confounding by indication cannot be excluded). Compared with residence in the US-Northeast, residence in Canada (0·24, 0·07-0·84) or the US-Midwest (0·50, 0·28-0·90) were associated with decreased 30-day all-cause mortality. Race and ethnicity, obesity status, cancer type, type of anticancer therapy, and recent surgery were not associated with mortality. INTERPRETATION: Among patients with cancer and COVID-19, 30-day all-cause mortality was high and associated with general risk factors and risk factors unique to patients with cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to better understand the effect of COVID-19 on outcomes in patients with cancer, including the ability to continue specific cancer treatments. FUNDING: American Cancer Society, National Institutes of Health, and Hope Foundation for Cancer Research.

Aurora kinase A inhibitor, LY3295668 erbumine: a phase 1 monotherapy safety study in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors.

Background Aurora A kinase (AurA) overexpression likely contributes to tumorigenesis and therefore represents an attractive target for cancer therapeutics. This phase 1 study aimed to determine the safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of LY3295668 erbumine, an AurA inhibitor, in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors. Methods Patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, and disease progression after one to four prior treatment regimens were enrolled. Primary objective was to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD); secondary objectives included evaluation of the tolerability and safety profile and pharmacokinetics of LY3295668. All patients received twice-daily (BID) oral LY3295668 in 21-day cycles in an ascending-dose schedule. Results Twelve patients were enrolled in phase 1 (25 mg, n = 8; 50 mg, n = 2; 75 mg, n = 2) and one patient was enrolled after. Overall, four patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) within the first cycle (75 mg: Grade 3 diarrhea [one patient], Grade 4 mucositis and Grade 3 corneal deposits [one patient]; 50 mg: mucositis and diarrhea [both Grade 3, one patient]; 25 mg: Grade 3 mucositis [one patient]). Patients exhibiting DLTs had the highest model-predicted exposures at steady state. Mucositis was the most common adverse event (67%), followed by diarrhea, fatigue, alopecia, anorexia, constipation, and nausea. Nine patients had best response of stable disease; the disease control rate was 69%. Conclusions MTD of LY3295668 was 25 mg BID. LY3295668 had a manageable toxicity profile and demonstrated activity in some patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03092934. Registered March 22, 2017. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03092934 .

Cardiotoxicity of Use of Sequential Aromatase Inhibitors in Women With Breast Cancer.

The association between use of aromatase inhibitors (AIs) and cardiovascular outcomes is controversial. While some observational studies have assessed the cardiovascular safety of AIs as upfront treatments, their cardiotoxicity as sequential treatments with tamoxifen remains unknown. Thus, we conducted a population-based cohort study using data from the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to the Hospital Episode Statistics and Office for National Statistics databases. We employed a prevalent new-user design to propensity-score match, in a 1:2 ratio, patients switching from tamoxifen to AIs with patients continuing tamoxifen between 1998 and 2016. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the study outcomes (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, heart failure, and cardiovascular mortality). Overall, 1,962 patients switching to AIs were matched to 3,874 patients continuing tamoxifen. Compared with tamoxifen, AIs were associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.08, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02, 4.27). The hazard ratios were elevated for ischemic stroke (HR = 1.58, 95% CI: 0.85, 2.93) and heart failure (HR = 1.69, 95% CI: 0.79, 3.62) but not cardiovascular mortality (HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.49, 1.54), with confidence intervals including the null value. The elevated hazard ratios observed for the cardiovascular outcomes should be corroborated in future large observational studies.

Weight-lowering Effects of Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and Detection of Breast Cancer Among Obese Women with Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: It has been proposed that the weight loss associated with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) may improve detection of breast cancer in patients undergoing this treatment. We aimed to determine whether the weight-lowering effects of GLP-1 RAs are associated with an increased detection of breast cancer among obese women with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we conducted a propensity score-matched cohort study among female obese patients with type 2 diabetes newly treated with antidiabetic drugs between 1 January 2007 and 31 January 2018. New users of GLP-1 RAs (n = 5,510) were matched to new users of second- to third-line noninsulin antidiabetic drugs (n = 5,510). We used time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of breast cancer associated with different GLP-1 RA maximal weight loss categories (<5%, 5%-10%, >10%). RESULTS: Breast cancer incidence gradually increased with GLP-1 RA maximal weight loss categories, with the highest HR observed for patients achieving at least 10% weight loss (HR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.1, 2.8). In secondary analyses, the HR for >10% weight loss was highest in the 2-3 years since treatment initiation (HR = 2.9, 95% CI = 1.2, 6.9). CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based study, the detection of breast cancer gradually increased with GLP-1 RA weight loss categories, particularly among those achieving >10% weight loss. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that substantial weight loss with GLP-1 RAs may improve detection of breast cancer among obese patients with type 2 diabetes.

A systemic inflammation response index (SIRI) correlates with survival and predicts oncological outcome for mFOLFIRINOX therapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Systemic inflammatory response and survival has not been evaluated as a predictive factor of chemotherapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic and predictive value of a baseline Systemic Inflammation Response Index (SIRI) in metastatic pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Retrospective study of 164 metastatic pancreatic cancer patients. Associations between overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), chemotherapy and SIRI were analyzed. SIRI is defined by neutrophil x monocyte/lymphocyte 109/L. RESULTS: Median age 66 years. 22 (13%) received mFOLFIRINOX, 59 (36%) gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel, 40 (24%) gemcitabine, 13 (8%) other regimens and 30 (18%) had not received treatment. Patients with SIRI<2.3 × 109/L showed a statistically significant improvement in OS compared to SIRI≥2.3 × 109/L [16 months versus 4.8 months, Hazard Ratio (HR) 2.87, Confidence Interval (CI) 95% 2.02-4.07, p < 0.0001] that was confirmed in multivariate analysis. In addition, patients with SIRI<2.3 × 109 showed a longer PFS (12 versus 6 months, HR 1.92, IC 95% 1.314-2.800, P = 0.001). Furthermore, we observed that patients with SIRI ≥2.3 × 109/L were more likely to benefit from mFOLFIRINOX therapy. Patients with an elevated SIRI treated with mFOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine showed a clinically and statistically significant difference in median OS of 17 months compared to 6 and 4 months respectively (p < 0.001). Conversely, the difference was not clinically significant in the SIRI<2.3 × 109/L subgroup: 15.9 months versus 16.5 and 16, respectively. CONCLUSION: An elevated SIRI (≥2.3 × 109/L) was an independent prognostic factor for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, warranting prospective evaluation.

The use of drugs acting on the renin-angiotensin system and the incidence of pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly used antihypertensives. Recently, these drugs have been associated with a protective effect against pancreatic cancer, but data on this putative association remain limited. Thus, the objective of this study was to determine whether the use of ACEIs and/or ARBs is associated with a decreased risk of pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study, using a nested case-control analysis within the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink population. The cohort consisted of all patients newly treated with antihypertensive drugs between 1 January 1995 and 31 December 2009, with follow-up until 31 December 2010. Cases were patients with newly diagnosed pancreatic cancer, which were matched with up to 10 controls on age, sex, calendar year of cohort entry, and duration of follow-up. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of pancreatic cancer incidence associated with ever use of ACEIs and ARBs. A secondary analysis was conducted to assess whether the incidence of pancreatic cancer varied with cumulative duration of use of these drugs. RESULTS: A cohort of 547 566 was assembled. During 3 040 332 person-years of follow-up, a total of 866 patients were newly diagnosed with pancreatic cancer (rate: 3/10 000 per year) and matched to 8636 controls. Overall, when compared with other antihypertensive drugs, the use of ACEIs was not associated with a decreased risk of pancreatic cancer overall (OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.86-1.17) or according to cumulative duration of use. The use of ARBs was not associated with a decreased risk of pancreatic cancer overall (OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.75-1.15), whereas a cumulative duration of use of 1-3 years was associated with a 38% decrease (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.41-0.94), which returned to the null after >3 years of use (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.74-1.46). CONCLUSIONS: The use of ARBs and ACEIs was not associated with an overall decreased risk of pancreatic cancer when compared with patients using other antihypertensive drugs. Additional research is needed to determine whether ARBs may confer a short-term protective effect.

Use of Calcium Channel Blockers and Risk of Breast Cancer: A Population-based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Several observational studies have associated use of calcium channel blockers with an increased risk of breast cancer, but this association remains controversial. The objective of this study was to determine whether these drugs are associated with an increased risk of breast cancer overall, and to assess whether this risk varies with cumulative duration of use. METHODS: We identified a cohort of 273,152 women newly treated with antihypertensive drugs between 1 January 1995 and 31 December 2009, followed until 31 December 2010, using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We treated calcium channel blocker use as a time-varying variable, and lagged exposure by 1 year for latency considerations and to minimize reverse causality. We used time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals of incident breast cancer associated with use of calcium channel blockers overall and by cumulative duration of use (<5, 5-10, and ≥10 years). RESULTS: During 1,567,104 person-years of follow-up, 4,520 women were newly diagnosed with breast cancer (incidence rate: 2.9 per 1,000 per year). Compared with use of other antihypertensive drugs, use of calcium channel blockers was not associated with increased risk of breast cancer overall (hazard ratio: 0.97, 95% confidence interval: 0.91, 1.03). Similarly, there was no evidence of a duration-response relationship in terms of cumulative duration of use (P trend = 0.26). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this large population-based study indicate that long-term use of calcium channel blockers is not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.

Measuring the impact of guideline-based antiemetic therapy on nausea and vomiting control in breast cancer patients with multiple risk factors.

PURPOSE: The objective of this exploratory analysis was to determine if individual patient risk factors could be used to optimize chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). METHODS: Through validated risk prediction models which quantify patient risk factors, 152 patients with early-stage breast cancer scheduled to received adjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy were categorized as being at low (level 0) or high-risk (level 1) for CINV. Prior to the first cycle of chemotherapy, low-risk patients received ondansetron and dexamethasone, while high-risk level 1 patients also received aprepitant. For subsequent cycles, patients who experienced CINV had their antiemetics changed in a stepwise manner to level 2 (extended-duration dexamethasone) or level 3 (extended-duration dexamethasone and low-dose olanzapine). RESULTS: The study enrolled 152 patients who received 484 cycles of chemotherapy. Forty patient cycles were classified as low risk (level 0) compared to 201, 162 and 81 that were classified as high-risk levels 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Complete control of acute and delayed vomiting was comparable and was achieved in over 85 % of patients across all risk levels (p = 0.56 and p = 0.99). In contrast, complete control of acute and delayed nausea was reduced in risk levels 1 to 3 compared to level 0 (acute = 51.2, 58.0, 45.7 vs. 70.0 %; p = 0.013)-(delayed = 32.8, 45.7, 34.6 vs. 62.5 %; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the addition of aprepitant, extended-duration dexamethasone and olanzapine, patients at high risk for CINV due to personal risk factors failed to achieve good nausea control.

Use of conjoint analysis to assess breast cancer patient preferences for chemotherapy side effects.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to evaluate preferences associated with grade I/II and grade III/IV chemotherapy side effects among breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. We also assessed trade-offs that patients are willing to make between treatment side effects and the route and schedule of treatment administration. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, patients receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer completed a one-time Web survey. Conjoint analysis was used to elicit preferences for 17 grade I/II and III/IV side effects associated with available chemotherapies and regimens. In the analysis, the risk of each side effect was increased by 5%, holding all others constant, and the respective impact on patient preferences was identified. RESULTS: A total of 102 women participated (mean age 54 ± 11). Among the grade I/II side effects, a 5% reduction in the risk of sensory neuropathy, nausea, and motor neuropathy had the highest impact on preferences. Among grade III/IV side effects, motor neuropathy, nausea/vomiting, and myalgia made the most difference. An oral twice-daily regimen was most preferred; however, patients were willing to receive an intravenous regimen relative to oral to avoid an increased risk of 5% in the majority of side effects. Avoiding an increased chance of grade III/IV motor neuropathy was associated with willingness to tolerate one of the least preferred administration schedules. CONCLUSION: This study identified relative preferences among both mild/moderate to severe side effects from the patient perspective. Patients appear to be willing to make trade-offs between side effects and different regimens. These findings may help to inform medical decision-making processes.

Cardiac glycosides and the risk of breast cancer in women with chronic heart failure and supraventricular arrhythmia.

The aim of this study is to determine whether the use of cardiac glycosides (CGs), drugs used in the treatment of congestive heart failure (CHF) and supra-ventricular arrhythmia, is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. A cohort of 53,454 women newly diagnosed with CHF or supra-ventricular arrhythmia between January 1, 1988 and December 31, 2010, followed until December 31, 2012, was identified using the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink. A nested case-control analysis was performed, where all incident cases of breast cancer occurring during follow-up were identified and matched with up to 10 controls on age, cohort entry date, and duration of follow-up. Conditional logistic regression models were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) of incident breast cancer associated with the use of CGs, along with measures of cumulative duration of use and dose. All analyses considered a one year lag period prior to the event, necessary for latency considerations and to minimize detection bias. The 898 breast cancer cases diagnosed beyond one year of follow-up were matched to 8,940 controls. Overall, use of CGs was not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer when compared to non-use (OR 1.07, 95 % CI 0.90-1.26). Furthermore, the risk did not vary with cumulative duration of use or cumulative dose. The findings of this large population-based study indicate that the use of CGs is not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. This should provide reassurance to physicians and patients using these drugs.

Platinum-based chemotherapy in triple-negative advanced breast cancer.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC) versus conventional non-PBC regimens in a metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) setting. We reviewed the electronic patient records of patients with confirmed metastatic TNBC at four major cancer centres in Canada. All patients were allocated into two groups based on type of chemotherapy received (PBC vs. non-PBC) and line of treatment (first-, second-, or third-line). The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of PBC in metastatic TNBC in terms of median duration of overall survival (OS) from diagnosis of distant metastatic disease and compare it with the efficacy of conventional non-platinum-based chemotherapy in metastatic TNBC after controlling for known prognostic factors. A total of 153 metastatic TNBC patients were identified, 58 treated with PBC and 95 with non-PBC. The median time in first-line PBC versus non-PBC was not different between the two groups (2 vs. 2 months, p = 0.9), the median time on treatment in second and third-line therapy was longer for the PBC group compared to the conventional treated group (4 vs. 1 months, p = 0.004; 4 vs. 0.5 months, p = 0.004, respectively). Patients who received PBC had a longer OS compared to those managed conventionally (14.5 vs. 10 months, p = 0.041). This study evaluates the survival outcomes in a homogenous group of TNBC metastatic patients treated with or without PBC. Our results confirmed our hypothesis of a better OS among PBC-treated TNBC patients compared to conventionally managed TNBC patients. Currently ongoing Phase III trials assessing the benefit of PBC versus other chemotherapeutic regimens in advanced TNBC will help define the role of these agents for the management of this breast cancer subtype.

A phase II, multicentre trial evaluating the efficacy of de-escalated bisphosphonate therapy in metastatic breast cancer patients at low-risk of skeletal-related events.

The optimal frequency of intravenous (IV) bisphosphonate administration is unclear. We thus performed a study evaluating the effects of switching from 3-4 to 12 weekly therapy in patients with biochemically defined low-risk bone metastases. Patients with serum C-telopeptide (CTx) levels ≤600 ng/L after ≥3 months of 3-4 weekly IV pamidronate were switched to 12 weekly therapy for 48 weeks. Primary endpoint was the proportion of patients maintaining CTx levels in the lower-risk range. All endpoints (serum CTx and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BSAP), skeletal-related events (SREs) and self-reported pain) were measured at baseline, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 weeks. Treatment failure was defined as biochemical failure (CTx > 600 ng/L) or a SRE. Exploratory biomarkers including; serum TGF-ß, activin-A, bone sialoprotein (BSP), procollagen type 1 N-terminal propeptide and urinary N-telopeptide (NTx) were assessed at baseline as predictors for failure to complete treatment. Seventy-one patients accrued and 43 (61 %) completed 48 weeks of de-escalated therapy. Reasons for failure to complete treatment included; biochemical failure (CTx > 600 ng/L) (n = 10, 14.1 %), on-study SRE (n = 9, 12.7 %), disease progression (n = 7, 9.9 % including death from disease [n = 1, 1.4 %]) or patient choice (n = 2, 2.8 %). Elevated baseline levels of CTx, BSAP, NTx and BSP were associated with treatment failure. The majority of patients in this biochemically defined low-risk population could switch from 3-4 weekly to 12 weekly bisphosphonate therapy with no effect on CTx levels or SREs during the 48 week study. Larger trials are required to assess the roles of biomarkers as predictors of adequacy of de-escalated therapy.

Antibody-Drug Conjugates for the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with Central Nervous System Metastases.

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) represent an emerging class of targeted anticancer agents that have demonstrated impressive efficacy in numerous cancer types. In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), ADCs have become a component of the treatment armamentarium for a subset of patients with metastatic disease. Emerging data suggest that some ADCs exhibit impressive activity even in central nervous system (CNS) metastases, a disease site that is difficult to treat and associated with poor prognosis. Herein, we describe and summarize the existing evidence surrounding ADCs in NSCLC with a focus on CNS activity.

Neoadjuvant Capecitabine in Operable HPV-Negative Head and Neck Cancer: Fortuitous Findings in a Resource Constrained Setting.

OBJECTIVE: Limited progress has occurred in treating operable human papillomavirus (HPV)-negative head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Accessing timely care remains challenging in public health care systems, potentially resulting in disease progression before treatment initiation. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective cohort of patients receiving neoadjuvant capecitabine (NC) was compared to stage-matched patients undergoing standard of care (SC). SETTING: This study was performed at 2 academic centers in Montreal, Canada. METHODS: To ascertain the effect of 2 cycles of NC in operable HPV-negative HNSCC patients on clinical-to-pathologic stage migration. Comparison to an SC group was performed to site and TNM stage matched patients. Pathologic treatment response was measured using the modified Ryan score. RESULTS: We compared 16 NC patients (11 oral cavity, 3 skin, 2 larynx) with 32 SC patients. Ten NC patients exhibited a pathologic response (1 complete, 3 major, 6 minor). Clinical-to-pathologic stage migration differed significantly between NC and SC groups: downstage (6 vs 1), upstage (3 vs 14), no change (7 vs 17, P = .0047). There was no severe treatment toxicity related to capecitabine. All patients in the NC group underwent surgery. CONCLUSION: NC followed by surgery demonstrates measurable pathologic response in HPV-negative HNSCC, suggesting potential utility in resource-limited health care settings.

Quality of Life After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Transoral Robotic Surgery for Oropharynx Cancer.

Importance: Efforts are underway to deintensified treatment protocols for patients with human papillomavirus virus-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPV-OPSCC) to achieve similar excellent oncologic outcomes while reducing treatment-related adverse effects. Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) as primary treatment often requires adjuvant therapy due to the high incidence of nodal metastasis. Treatment with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by TORS and neck dissection (NECTORS), reserving radiation therapy for salvage, yields excellent oncologic outcomes. Objective: To assess patient-reported quality of life (QOL) and functional outcomes among patients with HPV-OPSCC who undergo NECTORS. Design, Settings, and Participants: This was a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients with HPV-OPSCC treated with the NECTORS protocol in 2017 to 2022. Consecutive patients with stage III or IVa HPV-OPSCC treated with NECTORS in 2017 to 2022 who had completed the primary QOL questionnaire at baseline and at least once during the 24-month follow-up period were included. Ninety-four patients were eligible, and 67 were included in the analyses. Outcome Measures: QOL questionnaires at baseline, and at month 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 posttreatment. Global score on the 30-item European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core quality of life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) was the primary outcome; the head and neck extension module (EORTC QLQ-HN35); the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory for dysphagia-related QOL; and the Decision Regret Scale were also used. Paired t tests assessed change between the baseline and 12- or 24-month patient-reported outcomes. Results: Among the study population of 67 patients (median [range] age, 63 [58-67] years; 54 [80.6%] male) with HPV-OPSCC, the most frequent cancer subsites were palatine tonsil (41 [61%]) and base of tongue (26 [39%]); none required adjuvant RT. Global QOL at 24 months improved compared with baseline (mean difference, 9.49; 95% CI, 2.45 to 16.53). All EORTC QLQ-C30 functional scores returned to baseline or improved within 3 to 6 months posttreatment and remained stable at 24 months. EORTC QLQ-HN35 symptom scale scores improved or were stable at 24 months. The MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory scores demonstrated no significant difference between baseline and month 12 for global scores (mean difference, 6.15; 95% CI, -4.18 to 16.49) and composite scores (mean difference, 2.73; 95% CI, -1.62 to 7.09). Median (range) score on the Decision Regret Scale was 5 of 100 (0-30), representing mild overall regret. Conclusion and Relevance: The findings of this multicenter cohort study indicate that use of the NECTORS protocol is associated with excellent QOL outcomes. QOL measures returned to baseline levels or were better than baseline, which represents positive outcomes for patients with HPV-OPSCC who undergo this treatment regimen.

Osimertinib is associated with improved outcomes in pre-treated non-small cell lung cancer leptomeningeal metastases: A systematic review and meta-analysiss.

Purpose: Leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) is a severe complication of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In patients with NSCLC LM harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations, osimertinib is favored over alternative EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). However, the efficacy of osimertinib relative to other EGFR-TKIs is not well established for patients with LM. We aimed to compare the efficacy of EGFR-TKIs in EGFR-mutated NSCLC LM. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis performed according to PRISMA guidelines included studies of adult patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC and a diagnosis of LM who received an EGFR-TKI for the treatment of LM. We searched Medline ALL, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection. The evaluation of biases was done by using the Ottawa-Newscastle scale. The hazard ratio was used as the parameter of interest for overall survival (OS) and central nervous system-specific progression-free survival (PFS). Results: 128 publications were included with 243 patients and 282 lines of EGFR-TKI for NSCLC LM that met inclusion criteria. The median PFS in patients receiving any EGFR-TKI was 9.1 months, and the median OS was 14.5 months. In univariate analyses of the entire cohort, osimertinib treatment demonstrated significantly prolonged PFS, but not OS, compared to other EGFR-TKIs. Osimertinib demonstrated significantly prolonged PFS and OS in the subset of patients who were previously treated with EGFR-TKIs, but not in EGFR-TKI naïve patients. Conclusion: Osimertinib is associated with improved outcomes compared to other EGFR-TKIs, particularly in patients previously treated with EGFR-TKIs. An important limitation is that most patients were derived from retrospective reports. These results highlight the need for prospective studies for this difficult-to-treat patient population.