A multi-center pragmatic, randomized, feasibility trial comparing standard of care schedules of filgrastim administration for primary febrile neutropenia prophylaxis in early-stage breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The most effective duration of filgrastim as primary febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis in early breast cancer (EBC) patients is unknown. Despite significant differences in cost and toxicity, no prospective trial has been performed to optimize practice. We assessed the feasibility of using a novel pragmatic trial model to compare the most commonly used schedules of filgrastim. METHODS: Early breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy were randomized to 5, 7, or 10 days of filgrastim as primary FN prophylaxis. The trial methodology integrated broad eligibility criteria, simply defined endpoints, an integrated consent model incorporating oral consent, and web-based randomization in the clinic. Feasibility was reflected through a combination of primary endpoints including patient and physician engagement (if > 50% of appropriate patients approached agree to participate, and if > 50% of physicians approached patients for the study). Secondary endpoints included the first occurrence rates of FN, treatment-related hospital admission, or chemotherapy dose reductions/delays/discontinuation. RESULTS: From May 2015 to August 2016, 142/149 (95.3%) patients approached agreed to participate and were randomized. Seventeen of 24 (70.8%) medical oncologists approached and randomized patients. The 142 patients received a total of 495 cycles of chemotherapy. Aggregate incidences of a first event by patient were FN (8/142, 5.6%), treatment-related hospitalization (6/142, 4.2%), chemotherapy discontinuation (7/142, 4.9%), chemotherapy delays (5/142, 3.5%), and chemotherapy dose reduction (18/142, 12.7%). Overall, 31.7% (45/142) of patients and 9.0% (45/495) of chemotherapy cycles were associated with one of these first events. CONCLUSION: This study met its feasibility endpoints. This novel pragmatic trial approach offers a means of comparing standard of care treatments in a practical and cost-effective manner. The trial will now be expanded to compare rates of FN between the three filgrastim schedules. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02428114.

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.

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.

The impact of endocrine therapy on sexual dysfunction in postmenopausal women with early stage breast cancer: encouraging results from a prospective study.

The goal of this project was to investigate the contentious issue of a possible effect of endocrine therapy (ET) on sexual dysfunction (SD) in postmenopausal early stage breast cancer survivors. To date, few studies have assessed sexual functioning prior to initiating ET and none have taken sexual distress into account when reporting the prevalence of ET-induced SD. We report the findings of a study on the change in SD (defined as experiencing sexual problems causing distress) during the first 6 months of ET usage. Between January 2009 and May 2011, 118 patients entered the study and 66 completed questionnaires prior to initiation of ET and after 6 months of use. Sexual functioning (SF) was evaluated with the female sexual function index while sexual distress was assessed with the female sexual distress scale (FSDS-R). Gynecological symptoms were measured with the FACT-B ES subscale. Over time, the level of gynecological symptoms increased (p < 0.001), whereas no decline in SF was observed. The percentage of women who reported experiencing at least one sexual problem (85 %) and the percentage who were sexually distressed (30 %) remained the same across time. Importantly, the change in the prevalence of SD between baseline (24 %) and 6 months (29 %) was not statistically significant. Women experiencing SD at baseline were more likely to experience SD after 6 months of ET usage (OR = 7.4, 95 % CI = 1.5-36.9) than women who had no SD prior to initiating ET. The observation that SF remained stable across time is encouraging news. However, longer follow-up and the inclusion of women who were premenopausal at diagnosis are needed to determine the potential influence of extended duration of ET (e.g., at least 5 years) on SD. Further studies, including assessing the impact of early identification of patients at risk of developing SD and timely intervention, are warranted.

Does integration of Magee equations into routine clinical practice affect whether oncologists order the Oncotype DX test? A prospective randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: The three Magee Equations provide an estimate of the Oncotype DX recurrence score using commonly available clinicopathologic information (tumour size, grade, oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER2, and Ki67). We assessed whether integration of Magee Equations into routine clinical practice affected the frequency of Oncotype DX requests. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed, node negative, hormone receptor positive, and HER2 negative invasive breast cancer were randomized to undergo a Magee calculation or not. At the first clinic assessment, the oncologist was provided with all routinely available clinicopathologic information (including Ki67) either with or without the results of Magee Equations. Primary outcome was frequency of Oncotype DX ordering. Secondary outcomes included frequency of chemotherapy use, time to commencement of radiotherapy, or systemic therapy. Physician comfort with systemic therapy choices and the use of Ki67 and Magee Equations was also assessed. RESULTS: Data from 175 randomized patients was available, 84 patients (48%) with and 91 (52%) without calculated Magee Equations. Oncotype DX was ordered in 10 (12.05%) and 13 (14.44%) (RR 0.83, 0.39-1.80; P = 0.64) in the Magee and no Magee groups, respectively. There were no statistically or clinically significant differences between the randomized groups for any of the secondary outcomes. Availability of both Ki67 and Magee Equations was associated with increased physician comfort around systemic treatment decisions. CONCLUSIONS: In a practice where Ki67 is routinely available, addition of Magee Equations into routine clinic practice was not associated with a reduction in Oncotype DX use. Availability of both Ki67 and Magee Equations did however increase physician comfort with systemic therapy decisions.

Risk Model-Guided Antiemetic Prophylaxis vs Physician's Choice in Patients Receiving Chemotherapy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Despite multiple patient-centered factors being associated with the risk of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), these factors are rarely considered when making antiemetic recommendations. OBJECTIVE: To compare risk model-guided (RMG) antiemetic prophylaxis with physician's choice (PC) in patients receiving chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized clinical trial of 324 patients with early-stage breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide and an anthracycline) for the first time at 2 specialty cancer care centers in Ottawa from April 10, 2012, to September 2, 2014. Patients were randomized to either the RMG arm (n = 154) or the PC control arm (n = 170). Prior to each cycle of chemotherapy patients in the RMG group were categorized as low or high risk for CINV, and their antiemetic treatments were adjusted accordingly. INTERVENTIONS: Patients considered to be at low risk received standard dexamethasone and a 5-HT3 antagonist, while those at high risk also received aprepitant with or without olanzapine, based on their risk level. The PC control group received antiemetic agents according to the treating physician's discretion. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end points were control of both nausea and vomiting in the acute posttreatment period (first 24 hours after therapy) and in the delayed posttreatment period (days 2-5 after therapy). RESULTS: The total numbers of chemotherapy cycles delivered in the RMG and PC control groups were 497 and 551 respectively. In the acute period, significantly more patients in the RMG group reported no nausea (53.7% [95% CI, 49.2%-58.1%] vs 41.6% [95% CI, 37.4%-45.3%]; P < .001) and no vomiting (91.8% [95% CI, 89.0%-94.0%] vs 82.2% [95% CI, 78.8%-85.3%]; P < .001) compared with the PC control group. Similarly, significantly more patients in the RMG group reported no nausea (39.6% [95% CI, 35.3%-44.1%] vs 30.7% [95% CI, 26.8%-34.7%]; P = .01) and no vomiting (87.1% [95% CI, 83.8%-90.0%) vs 78.0% [95% CI, 74.3%-81.4%]; P < .001) in the delayed period respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this trial, the RMG antiemetic prophylaxis led to improved control of acute and delayed CINV compared with physician's choice of therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01913990.

Phase 2 study of T138067-sodium in patients with malignant glioma: Trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group.

We studied the activity of T138067-sodium in patients with malignant gliomas. T138067-sodium is a unique new chemotherapy agent that inhibits microtubule formation by binding irreversibly and specifically to beta(1), beta(2)and beta(4) isotypes of 3-tubulin, causing cell arrest at G(2)/M and inducing apoptosis. Patients with recurrent anaplastic astrocytoma or glioblastoma multiforme were treated intravenously with 330 mg/m(2) of T138067-sodium weekly. Treatment was continued until the patient experienced either unacceptable toxicity or progressive disease. Patients had to have histologically proven glioma, have bidimensionally measurable disease at least 1 cm x 1 cm, and have received no more than one prior adjuvant chemotherapy. No chemotherapy or radiotherapy for recurrent disease was permitted. Nineteen patients entered the trial. One patient was found to be ineligible. There were two patients with anaplastic astrocytoma and 16 with glioblastoma multiforme. Only two patients had received prior adjuvant chemotherapy. The first seven patients had full pharmacokinetic sampling. No dose-limiting toxicity was seen, and pharmacokinetic results were consistent with those from nonglioma patients. The most common drug-related effects were fatigue (33%), nausea (28%), neutropenia (28%), and anorexia (17%). No patients stopped the study because of toxicity. No responses were seen in the 15 eligible patients who completed at least one cycle. Three patients had stable disease with a median duration of 2.6 months. Our results suggest that given in this dose and schedule T138067-sodium does not have activity in this population of anaplastic astrocytoma and glioblastoma multiforme.

Pharmacokinetic profile of intramuscular fulvestrant in advanced breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To characterise the pharmacokinetics of a long-acting formulation of fulvestrant following intramuscular administration of single and multiple doses. STUDY DESIGN: Pharmacokinetic investigations of single and multiple doses of fulvestrant were conducted within two global phase III efficacy studies that compared intramuscular fulvestrant with oral anastrozole in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive advanced breast cancer (study 0020, conducted in Europe, Australia and South Africa, and study 0021, conducted in North America). METHODS: Patients received once-monthly intramuscular injections of fulvestrant 250 mg (1 x 5 mL for < or =21 months in study 0020; 2 x 2.5 mL for < or =30 months in study 0021). Serial blood samples were collected for the first 28 days after the initial dose and immediately prior to all subsequent monthly doses. Plasma fulvestrant concentrations were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. PATIENTS: Twenty-six (study 0020) and 193 (study 0021) postmenopausal women, comprising the pharmacokinetic subgroups of the phase III efficacy trials, were studied. Patients had shown disease progression or recurrence following previous hormonal therapy for advanced disease or had relapsed after adjuvant endocrine therapy with a nonsteroidal antiestrogen. OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: For single-dose fulvestrant 250 mg, area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to 28 days (AUC(28)), maximum observed plasma concentration (C(max)), minimum observed plasma concentration at 28 days (C(min)) and time to maximum plasma concentration (t(max)) were determined. For multiple-dose fulvestrant 250 mg once monthly, steady-state trough concentrations (C(trough)) were determined. Plasma fulvestrant concentrations reached a peak at a median of 7 days (range 2-8 days) postdose, and declined biexponentially with a slower phase commencing approximately 2-3 weeks postdose. Intersubject variability in C(max) and AUC(28) was approximately 6-fold and 4-fold, respectively. Mean parameters for single-dose fulvestrant were: AUC(28), 148 microg. day/L; C(max), 8.2 microg/L; C(min), 2.6 microg/L; t(max), 7.0 days. Geometric mean C(trough) increased from 2.57 to 6.15 microg/L (study 0020) and from 2.38 to 6.52 microg/L (study 0021) over the first 6 months, reaching steady-state concentrations of approximately 6-7 microg/L (study 0020) or 9 microg/L (study 0021). Preliminary pharmacokinetic analysis, using a naive pooled data approach, suggests that observed single- and multiple-dose plasma profiles can be adequately described with a two-compartment kinetic model. Model-generated steady-state AUC(28) values were approximately 300 microg. day/L. CONCLUSIONS: The intramuscular formulation of fulvestrant displays predictable kinetics and approximately 2-fold accumulation on administration once monthly. At the proposed therapeutic dosage (250 mg once monthly), plasma fulvestrant concentrations are maintained within a narrow range throughout the administration interval, thus ensuring stable systemic drug exposure during long-term treatment.

Use of trastuzumab beyond disease progression: observations from a retrospective review of case histories.

HER2 overexpression is associated with poor breast cancer prognosis and is the target for the humanized monoclonal antibody trastuzumab. This novel agent, when administered until disease progression in combination with chemotherapy, extends the survival of women with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, the optimal duration of trastuzumab therapy remains to be confirmed. We conducted a retrospective case review study of women with HER2-positive MBC who continued to receive trastuzumab beyond disease progression. Objectives were to assess whether treatment beyond disease progression shows any evidence of efficacy and to evaluate the feasibility of this approach. One hundred five patients (median age, 47 years; range, 24-77 years) were identified in 13 centers. Women had received /=1 more trastuzumab regimen. Trastuzumab treatment beyond progression appears to be of value, producing responses and clinical benefit, and is well tolerated without significant cardiac toxicity. The feasibility of this approach warrants examination in prospective trials.

A phase II study of biweekly pemetrexed and gemcitabine in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Pemetrexed (PEM) is a novel folate antimetabolite which inhibits thymidylate synthase, dihydrofolate reductase and glycinamide ribonucleotide formyl transferase. This phase II study was designed to assess the efficacy of Gemcitabine (GEM) and PEM given in a novel schedule in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. METHODS: Eligible patients had MBC and received one prior chemotherapy regimen for metastatic disease; Performance status (PS) 0-2; measurable disease (RECIST criteria). PEM(500 mg/m2) was administered intravenously (IV) over 10 min prior to GEM(1,500 mg/m2) IV given over 30 min on day 1 every 14 days. RESULTS: Median age of the 16 patients in the study was 54 years (range 33-77). Fourteen patients had a PS of 0/1 and were evaluable for response. There were no reported complete or partial responses, seven patients with stable disease, six patients with disease progression and one patient with unknown response. Most common toxicities were skin rash: Grade 1/2(8) and Grade 3/4(1). Grade 3/4 non-hematological toxicities were fatigue(1); anorexia(1); pneumonia(1); peripheral ischemia(1) and elevation of liver transaminases(1). Three patients experienced febrile neutropenia (FN). This study did not meet the predefined criteria to proceed with additional accrual. CONCLUSIONS: This regimen of PEM and GEM showed no clinical activity in the dose and schedule tested.

Phase II trial of SarCNU in malignant glioma: unexpected pulmonary toxicity with a novel nitrosourea: a phase II trial of the national cancer institute of canada clinical trials group.

PURPOSE: A multi-centre phase II study of SarCNU-a novel chloroethylnitrosourea (CNU)-in patients with recurrent malignant glioma to assess response rate, survival and effects of treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ten patients with histologically proven malignant glioma (seven with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) and three with anaplastic astrocytoma) received SarCNU (860 mg/m(2)) orally on days 1, 5 and 9 on a 6 week schedule. RESULTS: A total of ten patients were treated on protocol before accrual was suspended for a high rate of pulmonary toxicity. Of eight evaluable patients, five demonstrated at least one grade deterioration in DLCO from baseline. This necessitated premature closure of the trial. Stable disease was seen in five of seven evaluable patients (median duration 4.8 months; range 0.8-9.2) with progressive disease in the remainder. CONCLUSION: Despite promising preclinical data, SarCNU caused pulmonary toxicity in patients with recurrent malignant glioma and we plan no further studies in this indication.

A phase II study of topotecan in patients with anaplastic oligodendroglioma or anaplastic mixed oligoastrocytoma.

To determine the efficacy and toxicity of a novel chemotherapeutic approach with topotecan, a camptothecin analog, for progressive or recurring anaplastic oligodendroglioma or mixed oligoastrocytoma.Patients from seven centers with recurrent or progressive disease were treated with topotecan, 1.5 mg/m(2) intravenously (i.v.), 30 min dailyx5 days every 3 weeks. Efficacy and toxicity were assessed clinically and radiologically. The study was planned to accrue up to 30 evaluable patients if there was at least one response among the first 15 patients treated. Sixteen eligible patients entered the study. No response was documented in 14 evaluable patients. Eleven patients had stable disease of a median of 3.8 months and three had progressive disease. Sixteen patients were evaluable for toxicity. The most significant toxic effect was myelosuppression. Grade 3 or 4 granulocytopenia was experienced by 15 of 16 patients and led to dose reduction in nearly half of the cycles delivered. Other adverse effects were fatigue, nausea, stomatitis, alopecia, and vomiting.Topotecan, delivered in the dailyx5 regimen, is relatively well tolerated. We could not demonstrate significant activity among the population studied to justify completing accrual to 30 patients. Topotecan did not demonstrate, with this small sample size, efficacy as a salvage chemotherapy monotherapy after exposure to procarbazine, CCNU and vincristine. Further trials with different agents in this indication are certainly warranted.

Fulvestrant versus anastrozole for the treatment of advanced breast carcinoma in postmenopausal women: a prospective combined analysis of two multicenter trials.

BACKGROUND: Fulvestrant (ICI 182,780) is a new type of estrogen receptor (ER) antagonist that down-regulates the ER and has no known agonist effects. The authors report the prospectively planned combined analysis of data from 2 Phase III trials comparing fulvestrant 250 mg monthly (n=428) and anastrozole 1 mg daily (n=423) in postmenopausal women with advanced breast carcinoma (ABC) who previously had progressed after receiving endocrine treatment. METHODS: The primary endpoint was time to progression (TTP). Secondary endpoints included objective response (OR), duration of response (DOR), and tolerability. The trials were designed to demonstrate superiority of fulvestrant over anastrozole. Noninferiority of fulvestrant versus anastrozole was determined using a retrospectively applied statistical test. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 15.1 months, approximately 83% of patients in each treatment arm had progressed. The median TTP was 5.5 months in the fulvestrant group and 4.1 months in the anastrozole group, and the OR rates were 19.2% and 16.5% for fulvestrant and anastrozole, respectively (although the difference between treatments was not statistically significant). In patients who responded, further follow-up (median, 22.1 months) was performed to obtain more complete information on DOR; the median DOR (from randomization to disease progression) in patients who responded to treatment was 16.7 months in the fulvestrant group and 13.7 months in the anastrozole group. In a statistical analysis of DOR (using all randomized patients; from the start of response to disease progression), DOR was significantly longer for patients in the fulvestrant group compared with patients in the anastrozole group. Both drugs were tolerated well; withdrawals due to drug-related adverse events were 0.9% and 1.2% in the fulvestrant group and the anastrozole group, respectively. The incidence of joint disorders was significantly lower in the fulvestrant group (P=0.0036). CONCLUSIONS: Fulvestrant was tolerated well and was at least as effective as anastrozole in the second-line treatment of patients with ABC. This new hormonaltherapy may provide a valuable treatment option for ABC in postmenopausal women.