Adjuvant platinum versus capecitabine for residual, invasive, triple-negative breast cancer: Patient-reported outcomes in ECOG-ACRIN EA1131.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a better tool for evaluating the experiences of patients who have symptomatic, treatment-associated adverse events (AEs) compared with clinician-rated AEs. The authors present PROs assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and treatment-related neurotoxicity for adjuvant capecitabine versus platinum on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG-ACRIN) EA1131 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02445391). METHODS: Participants completed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale (platinum arm only) at baseline, cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), 6 months, and 15 months. Because of early termination, power was insufficient to test the hypothesis that HRQoL, as assessed by the NFBSI-16 treatment side-effect (TSE) subscale, would be better at 6 and 15 months in the capecitabine arm; all analyses were exploratory. Means were compared by using t-tests or the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and proportions were compared by using the χ2 test. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-six of 330 eligible patients provided PROs. The mean NFBSI-16 TSE subscale score was lower for the platinum arm at baseline (p = .02; absolute difference, 0.6 points) and for the capecitabine arm at C3D1 (p = .04; absolute difference, 0.5 points), but it did not differ at other times. The mean change in TSE subscale scores differed between the arms from baseline to C3D1 (platinum arm, 0.15; capecitabine arm, -0.72; p = .03), but not from baseline to later time points. The mean decline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale scores exceeded the minimal meaningful change (1.38 points) from baseline to each subsequent time point (all p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the similar frequency of clinician-rated AEs, PROs identified greater on-treatment symptom burden with capecitabine and complemented clinician-rated AEs by characterizing patients' experiences during chemotherapy.

Randomized Phase III Postoperative Trial of Platinum-Based Chemotherapy Versus Capecitabine in Patients With Residual Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: ECOG-ACRIN EA1131.

PURPOSE: Patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and residual invasive disease (RD) after completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) have a high-risk for recurrence, which is reduced by adjuvant capecitabine. Preclinical models support the use of platinum agents in the TNBC basal subtype. The EA1131 trial hypothesized that invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) would not be inferior but improved in patients with basal subtype TNBC treated with adjuvant platinum compared with capecitabine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with clinical stage II or III TNBC with ≥ 1 cm RD in the breast post-NAC were randomly assigned to receive platinum (carboplatin or cisplatin) once every 3 weeks for four cycles or capecitabine 14 out of 21 days every 3 weeks for six cycles. TNBC subtype (basal v nonbasal) was determined by PAM50 in the residual disease. A noninferiority design with superiority alternative was chosen, assuming a 4-year iDFS of 67% with capecitabine. RESULTS: Four hundred ten of planned 775 participants were randomly assigned to platinum or capecitabine between 2015 and 2021. After median follow-up of 20 months and 120 iDFS events (61% of full information) in the 308 (78%) patients with basal subtype TNBC, the 3-year iDFS for platinum was 42% (95% CI, 30 to 53) versus 49% (95% CI, 39 to 59) for capecitabine. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were more common with platinum agents. The Data and Safety Monitoring Committee recommended stopping the trial as it was unlikely that further follow-up would show noninferiority or superiority of platinum. CONCLUSION: Platinum agents do not improve outcomes in patients with basal subtype TNBC RD post-NAC and are associated with more severe toxicity when compared with capecitabine. Participants had a lower than expected 3-year iDFS regardless of study treatment, highlighting the need for better therapies in this high-risk population.

Gemcitabine and irinotecan in locally advanced or metastatic biliary cancer: preliminary report.

Chemotherapy has had limited success in biliary tract cancer. Of the newer agents, gemcitabine (Gemzar) and irinotecan (CPT-11, Camptosar) both have single-agent activity in patients with advanced disease. We conducted a phase II trial to study the efficacy and toxicity of the combination of gemcitabine plus irinotecan in patients with locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer. The study has enrolled 14 patients with histologically or cytologically documented cancer of the biliary tract or gallbladder with bidimensionally measurable disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, decompressed biliary tree, and no prior exposure to chemotherapy. Gemcitabine at 1,000 mg/m2 and irinotecan at 100 mg/m2 were both administered on days 1 and 8, every 21 days. In patients who had less than grade 3 hematologic and less than grade 2 nonhematologic toxicity following cycle 1, the dose of irinotecan was increased to 115 mg/m2 for subsequent cycles. A total of 65 cycles of chemotherapy have been administered, with an average of 4.5 cycles per patient (range: 1 to 11 cycles). The median treatment duration was 3 months (range: 0.75 to 8 months). An objective partial response was determined radiographically in two patients (14%) while stable disease for periods ranging from 4 to 11.5 months was noted in six patients (43%). Toxicity consisted of grade 3/4 neutropenia in seven patients (50%) with no episodes of febrile neutropenia, grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia in four (28%), grade 3 diarrhea in two (14%), and grade 3 nausea in one patient. The combination of gemcitabine plus irinotecan appears to possess modest clinical activity, and it is well tolerated in patients with advanced biliary cancer. Patient accrual is ongoing to this study.