Falls prechemotherapy and toxicity-related hospitalization during adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer in older women: Results from the prospective multicenter HOPE trial.

BACKGROUND: Older women with breast cancer frequently experience toxicity-related hospitalizations during adjuvant chemotherapy. Although the geriatric assessment can identify those at risk, its use in clinic remains limited. One simple, low-cost marker of vulnerability in older persons is fall history. Here, the authors examined whether falls prechemotherapy can identify older women at risk for toxicity-related hospitalization during adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. METHODS: In a prospective study of women >65 years old with stage I-III breast cancer treated with adjuvant chemotherapy, the authors assessed baseline falls in the past 6 months as a categorical variable: no fall, one fall, and more than one fall. The primary end point was incident hospitalization during chemotherapy attributable to toxicity. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between falls and toxicity-related hospitalization, adjusting for sociodemographic, disease, and geriatric covariates. RESULTS: Of the 497 participants, 60 (12.1%) reported falling before chemotherapy, and 114 (22.9%) had one or more toxicity-related hospitalizations. After adjusting for sociodemographic, disease, and geriatric characteristics, women who fell more than once within 6 months before chemotherapy had greater odds of being hospitalized from toxicity during chemotherapy compared to women who did not fall (50.0% vs. 20.8% experienced toxicity-related hospitalization, odds ratio, 4.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.66-11.54, p = .003). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of older women with early breast cancer, women who experienced more than one fall before chemotherapy had an over 4-fold increased risk of toxicity-related hospitalization during chemotherapy, independent of sociodemographic, disease, and geriatric factors.

Adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab for node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer: final 10-year analysis of the open-label, single-arm, phase 2 APT trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to report on long-term outcomes of patients with small, node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab and to establish potential biomarkers to predict prognosis. METHODS: In this open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study, patients aged 18 years or older, with small (≤3 cm), node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, were recruited from 16 institutions in 13 cities in the USA. Eligible patients were given intravenous paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) with intravenous trastuzumab (loading dose of 4 mg/kg, subsequent doses 2 mg/kg) weekly for 12 weeks, followed by trastuzumab (weekly at 2 mg/kg or once every 3 weeks at 6 mg/kg) for 40 weeks to complete a full year of trastuzumab. The primary endpoint was 3-year invasive disease-free survival. Here, we report 10-year survival outcomes, assessed in all participants who received protocol-defined treatment, with exploratory analyses using the HER2DX genomic tool. This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00542451, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Oct 29, 2007, and Sept 3, 2010, 410 patients were enrolled and 406 were given adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab and included in the analysis. Mean age at enrolment was 55 years (SD 10·5), 405 (99·8%) of 406 patients were female and one (0·2%) was male, 350 (86·2%) were White, 28 (6·9%) were Black or African American, and 272 (67·0%) had hormone receptor-positive disease. After a median follow-up of 10·8 years (IQR 7·1-11·4), among 406 patients included in the analysis population, we observed 31 invasive disease-free survival events, of which six (19·4%) were locoregional ipsilateral recurrences, nine (29·0%) were new contralateral breast cancers, six (19·4%) were distant recurrences, and ten (32·3%) were all-cause deaths. 10-year invasive disease-free survival was 91·3% (95% CI 88·3-94·4), 10-year recurrence-free interval was 96·3% (95% CI 94·3-98·3), 10-year overall survival was 94·3% (95% CI 91·8-96·8), and 10-year breast cancer-specific survival was 98·8% (95% CI 97·6-100). HER2DX risk score as a continuous variable was significantly associated with invasive disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] per 10-unit increment 1·24 [95% CI 1·00-1·52]; p=0·047) and recurrence-free interval (1·45 [1·09-1·93]; p=0·011). INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab is a reasonable treatment standard for patients with small, node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer. The HER2DX genomic tool might help to refine the prognosis for this population. FUNDING: Genentech.

Feasibility of introducing a smartphone navigation application into the care of breast cancer patients (The FIONA Study).

PURPOSE: Patients with breast cancer (BC) face complex medical information and decisions. The Outcomes4Me mobile app provides evidence-based BC education, symptom management tracking and clinical trial matching. This study sought to evaluate the feasibility of introducing this app into routine BC care. METHODS: In this pilot study among BC patients undergoing therapy at an academic cancer center, patients were followed for 12 weeks with survey administration and electronic health record (EHR) abstraction at baseline and completion. Feasibility was defined as 40% of patients engaging with the app 3 or more times during the study. Additional endpoints included app usability (system usability scale), patient care experience, symptom evaluation, and clinical trial matching. RESULTS: The study enrolled 107 patients from 6/01/2020 to 3/31/2021. Utilization of the app was deemed feasible with 60% of patients engaging with the app at least 3 times. SUS score of 70 indicated above average usability. New diagnosis and higher education level was associated with greater app engagement, with usability similar across all age groups. 41% of patients found the app helped track symptoms. Cognitive and sexual symptoms were infrequently reported, but were more frequently captured in the app than in the EHR. After using the app, 33% of patients reported increased interest in clinical trial enrollment. CONCLUSION: Introducing the Outcomes4Me patient navigation app into routine BC care is feasible and may improve the patient experience. These results support further evaluation of this mobile technology platform to improve BC education, symptom management, and decision making. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: Clinicaltrials.gov registration #: NCT04262518.

Qualitative study of Oncology Clinicians' Perceptions of Barriers to Offering Clinical Trials to Underserved Populations.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer clinical trials represent the "gold standard" for advancing novel cancer therapies. Optimizing trial participation is critical to ensuring the generalizability of findings across patients, yet trial enrollment rates, particularly among minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations, remain suboptimal. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with oncologists at a large academic medical center to explore their (1) attitudes and perceived barriers to offering clinical trials to minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients, and (2) recommendations for improving the enrollment of minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients in cancer clinical trials. RESULTS: Of 23 medical oncologists approached, 17 enrolled (74% response rate; mean age = 47; female = 42%; White = 67%). Content analysis revealed several barriers to enrollment: (1) ethical dilemmas; (2) ambivalence about trial risks and benefits; and (3) concern about patient well-being. Concerns about the legitimacy of informed consent, perceived lack of equipoise, and fear of personal bias influenced clinicians' decisions to recommend trials during treatment discussions. Concerns about creating an imbalance between trial risks and benefits among patients with high-level needs, including patients with literacy, psychiatric, and other socioeconomic vulnerabilities, impacted clinicians' enthusiasm to engage in trial discussions. Clinicians identified patient, provider, and system-level solutions to address challenges, including increasing patient and clinician support as well as involving external personnel to support trial enrollment. CONCLUSION: Findings reveal multi-level barriers to offering cancer clinical trials to underrepresented patients. Targeted solutions, including system level changes to support clinicians, patient financial support, and implementation of clinical trial navigation programs were recommended to help reduce access barriers and increase enrollment of underrepresented patients into cancer clinical trials.

Developing a Virtual Equity Hub: Adapting the Tumor Board Model for Equity in Cancer Care.

We define cancer equity as all people having as the same opportunity for cancer prevention, treatment, and survivorship care. However, marginalized populations continue to experience avoidable and unjust disparities in cancer care, access to clinical trials, and cancer survival. Racial and ethnic minorities, and individuals with low socioeconomic status, Medicaid insurance, limited health literacy, disabilities, and mental health disorders are more likely to experience delays to cancer diagnosis and less likely to receive guideline-concordant cancer care. These disparities are impacted by the social determinants of health including structural discrimination, racism, poverty, and inequities in access to healthcare and clinical trials. There is an urgent need to develop and adapt evidence-based interventions in collaboration with community partners that have potential to address the social determinants of health and build capacity for cancer care for underserved populations. We established the Virtual Equity Hub by developing a collaborative network connecting a comprehensive cancer center, academic safety net hospital, and community health centers and affiliates. The Virtual Equity Hub utilizes a virtual tumor board, an evidence-based approach that increases access to multi-specialty cancer care and oncology subspecialty expertise. We adapted the tumor board model by engaging person-centered teams of multi-disciplinary specialists across health systems, addressing the social determinants of health, and applying community-based research principles with a focus on populations with poor cancer survival. The virtual tumor board included monthly videoconferences, case discussion, sharing of expertise, and a focus on addressing barriers to care and trial participation. Specifically, we piloted virtual tumor boards for breast oncology, neuro-oncology, and individuals with cancer and serious mental illness. The Virtual Equity Hub demonstrated promise at building capacity for clinicians to care for patients with complex needs and addressing barriers to care. Research is needed to measure the impact, reach, and sustainability of virtual equity models for patients with cancer.

Breast cancer polygenic risk scores are associated with short-term risk of poor prognosis breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Polygenic risk scores (PRS) for breast cancer may help guide screening decisions. However, few studies have examined whether PRS are associated with risk of short-term or poor prognosis breast cancers. The study purpose was to evaluate the association of the 313 SNP breast cancer PRS with 2-year risk of poor prognosis breast cancer. METHODS: We evaluated the association of breast cancer PRS with breast cancer overall, ER + and ER- breast cancer, and poor prognosis breast cancer diagnosed within 2 years of a negative mammogram among a cohort of 3657 women using logistic regression adjusted for age, breast density, race/ethnicity, year of screening, and genetic ancestry principal components. Breast cancers were considered poor prognosis if they were metastatic, positive lymph nodes, ER/PR + HER2- and > 2 cm, ER/PR/HER2-, or HER2 + and > 1 cm. RESULTS: Of the 308 breast cancers, 137 (44%) were poor prognosis. The overall breast cancer PRS was significantly associated with breast cancer diagnosis within 2 years (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.23-1.57, p < 0.001). The breast cancer PRS was also associated specifically with diagnosis of poor prognosis disease (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.03-1.49, p = 0.018), but was more strongly associated with good prognosis cancer (OR 1.52 95% CI 1.29-1.80 p = 3.60 × 10-7) The ER + PRS was significantly associated with ER/PR + breast cancer (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.24-1.61, p < 0.001) and the ER- PRS was significantly associated with ER- breast cancer (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.08-2.02, p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Breast cancer PRS was independently and significantly associated with diagnosis of both breast cancer overall and poor prognosis breast cancer within 2 years of a negative mammogram, suggesting PRS may help guide decisions about screening intervals and supplemental screening.

Outcomes after treatment of breast cancer during pregnancy including taxanes and/or granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use: findings from a multi-institutional retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines support comparable treatment for women diagnosed with breast cancer during pregnancy (PrBC) and nonpregnant women with limited case-specific modifications to ensure maternal-fetal safety. Experience during pregnancy with modern agents, such as taxanes or granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (GCSF), is limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified a multi-institutional cohort of PrBC between 1996 and 2020. Propensity score analyses with multiple imputation for missing variables were applied to determine the associations between chemotherapy exposures during pregnancy, with or without taxanes or GCSF, and a compound maternal-fetal outcome including spontaneous preterm birth, preterm premature rupture of membranes, chorioamnionitis, small for gestational age newborns, congenital malformation, or 5-min Apgar score < 7. RESULTS: Among 139 PrBC pregnancies, 82 (59.0%) were exposed to chemotherapy, including 26 (31.7%) to taxane and 18 (22.0%) to GCSF. Chemotherapy use, in general, and inclusion of taxane and/or GCSF, specifically, increased over time. Pregnancies resulting in live singleton births (n = 123) and exposed to chemotherapy were as likely to reach term as those that were not (59.5% vs. 63.6%, respectively, punadjusted = 0.85). Among women treated with chemotherapy, propensity score-matched odds ratios (OR) for the composite maternal-fetal outcome were not significantly increased with taxane (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.27-5.72) or GCSF (OR 2.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-9.22) with similar effects in multiple imputation and sensitivity models. CONCLUSION: The judicious increased use of taxane chemotherapy and/or growth factor support during pregnancy was not associated with unfavorable short-term maternal-fetal outcomes. While these findings are reassuring, case numbers remain limited and continued surveillance of these patients and progeny is warranted.

Pilot study to assess prolonged overnight fasting in breast cancer survivors (longfast).

PURPOSE: Retrospective analysis of nightly fasting among women with breast cancer suggests that fasting < 13 h may be associated with a higher risk of breast cancer recurrence. We sought to evaluate prolonged overnight fasting (POF), an accessible nonpharmacological intervention, in a prospective feasibility study. METHODS: We designed a single-arm, pilot study to evaluate the feasibility of fasting for 13 h overnight for 12 weeks among women with a history of early-stage breast cancer survivors. Baseline and end of study assessments included measurements of body mass index (BMI), blood biomarkers, quality of life (QOL), mood, fatigue, and physical activity. Patient-reported outcome questionnaires were also administered at 6 weeks. Feasibility was defined as ≥ 60% of participants documenting fasting for 13 h on at least 70% of nights during the study period. RESULTS: Forty women with a history of breast cancer were enrolled with a median age of 60 (range 35-76) and median time since diagnosis of 4.5 years (range 0.8-20.7). At baseline, BMI was ≥ 25 in 37.5%. Ninety-five percent of participants fasted ≥ 13 h for at least 70% of study days (95% CI 83-99%). There was a statistically significant improvement in anxiety (p = 0.0007) at 6 weeks and BMI (p = 0.0072), anxiety (p = 0.0141), depression (p = 0.0048), and fatigue (p = 0.0105) at 12 weeks. There was no significant change in overall QOL, physical activity levels, or blood biomarkers at 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: POF is feasible among patients with a history of breast cancer and may potentially improve BMI, mood, and fatigue without detrimental effects on overall QOL.

Randomized Trial of a Palliative Care Intervention to Improve End-of-Life Care Discussions in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Studies show that early, integrated palliative care (PC) improves quality of life (QoL) and end-of-life (EoL) care for patients with poor-prognosis cancers. However, the optimal strategy for delivering PC for those with advanced cancers who have longer disease trajectories, such as metastatic breast cancer (MBC), remains unknown. We tested the effect of a PC intervention on the documentation of EoL care discussions, patient-reported outcomes, and hospice utilization in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with MBC and clinical indicators of poor prognosis (n=120) were randomly assigned to receive an outpatient PC intervention (n=61) or usual care (n=59) between May 2, 2016, and December 26, 2018, at an academic cancer center. The intervention entailed 5 structured PC visits focusing on symptom management, coping, prognostic awareness, decision-making, and EoL planning. The primary outcome was documentation of EoL care discussions in the electronic health record (EHR). Secondary outcomes included patient-report of discussions with clinicians about EoL care, QoL, and mood symptoms at 6, 12, 18, and 24 weeks after baseline and hospice utilization. RESULTS: The rate of EoL care discussions documented in the EHR was higher among intervention patients versus those receiving usual care (67.2% vs 40.7%; P=.006), including a higher completion rate of a Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment form (39.3% vs 13.6%; P=.002). Intervention patients were also more likely to report discussing their EoL care wishes with their doctor (odds ratio [OR], 3.10; 95% CI, 1.21-7.94; P=.019) and to receive hospice services (OR, 4.03; 95% CI, 1.10-14.73; P=.035) compared with usual care patients. Study groups did not differ in patient-reported QoL or mood symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: This PC intervention significantly improved rates of discussion and documentation regarding EoL care and delivery of hospice services among patients with MBC, demonstrating that PC can be tailored to address the supportive care needs of patients with longer disease trajectories. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02730858.

Assessment of patient navigation programs for breast cancer patients across the city of Boston.

PURPOSE: Healthcare systems contribute to disparities in breast cancer outcomes. Patient navigation is a widely cited system-based approach to improve outcomes among populations at risk for delays in care. Patient navigation programs exist in all major Boston hospitals, yet disparities in outcomes persist. The objective of this study was to conduct a baseline assessment of navigation processes at six Boston hospitals that provide breast cancer care in preparation for an implementation trial of standardized navigation across the city. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods study in six hospitals that provide treatment to breast cancer patients in Boston. We administered a web-based survey to clinical champions (n = 7) across six sites to collect information about the structure of navigation programs. We then conducted in-person workflow assessments at each site using a semi-structured interview guide to understand site-specific implementation processes for patient navigation programs. The target population included administrators, supervisors, and patient navigators who provided breast cancer treatment-focused care. RESULTS: All sites offered patient navigation services to their patients undergoing treatment for breast cancer. We identified wide heterogeneity in terms of how programs were funded/resourced, which patients were targeted for navigation, the type of services provided, and the continuity of those services relative to the patient's cancer treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The operationalization of patient navigation varies widely across hospitals especially in relation to three core principles in patient navigation: providing patient support across the care continuum, targeting services to those patients most likely to experience delays in care, and systematically screening for and addressing patients' health-related social needs. Gaps in navigation across the care continuum present opportunities for intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial Registration Number NCT03514433, 5/2/2018.

Disparities in phase 1 cancer clinical trial enrollment.

BACKGROUND: Phase 1 trials are increasingly important in the molecularly driven era of oncology, but few studies have examined phase 1 participation disparities. The authors of this study investigated factors associated with phase 1 versus phase 2/3 trial enrollment. METHODS: They authors conducted a cross-sectional study using serial samples of patients age ≥18 years enrolling on cancer trials from October 2011 to November 2014 at an academic cancer center. They used univariable and multivariable logistic regression models to analyze sociodemographic and clinical associations with phase 1 versus phase 2/3 trial enrollment. RESULTS: Among 3103 patients enrolled in cancer trials, 2657 unique patients participated in phase 1/2/3 trials. For patients enrolled in phase 1 (n = 1401) versus phase 2/3 (n = 1256) trials, we found no significant differences by age, insurance status, marital status, and income. Overall, 1216 (93%) White, 72 (6%) Asian, and 21 (2%) Black patients enrolled on phase 1 trials, whereas 1068 (93%) White, 40 (3%) Asian, and 43 (4%) Black patients enrolled on phase 2/3 trials. Adjusting for age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance status, marital status, income, cancer type, disease status, travel distance, and trial year, compared with White patients, Black patients had lower phase 1 enrollment (odds ratio [OR], 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-0.82), as did Hispanic/Latino (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.08-0.79) and male patients (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.94). Asian patients had higher phase 1 enrollment (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.88-2.16). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in phase 1 versus phase 2/3 cancer clinical trial enrollment underscore the urgent need for interventions addressing inequities in early-phase trial participation. LAY SUMMARY: Phase 1 trials are of increasing importance in oncology. The authors of the study analyzed all patients enrolling on cancer clinical trials at a large academic cancer center from October 2011 to November 2014. Among the 2657 trial participants, when age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance status, marital status, income, cancer type, disease status, travel distance, and trial year were taken into account, Black, Hispanic/Latino, and male patients were less likely to enroll on phase 1 trials versus phase 2/3 trials. These findings suggest a need for targeted interventions to improve access to and education about phase 1 trials for Black and Hispanic/Latino patients.

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: past, present, and future.

The development and approval of cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4 and 6 inhibitors for hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer represents a major milestone in cancer therapeutics. Three different oral CDK4/6 inhibitors, palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib, have significantly improved progression-free survival by a number of months when combined with endocrine therapy. More recently, improvement in overall survival has been reported with ribociclib and abemaciclib. The toxicity profile of all three drugs is well described and generally easily manageable with dose reductions when indicated. More myelotoxicity is observed with palbociclib and ribociclib, but more gastrointestinal toxicity is observed with abemaciclib. Emerging data is shedding light on the resistance mechanisms associated with CDK4/6 inhibitors, including cell cycle alterations and activation of upstream tyrosine kinase receptors. A number of clinical trials are exploring several important questions regarding treatment sequencing, combinatorial strategies, and the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors in the adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings, thereby further expanding and refining the clinical application of CDK4/6 inhibitors for patients with breast cancer.

Sacituzumab Govitecan for Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Clinical Overview and Management of Potential Toxicities.

Patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer have a poor prognosis. Sacituzumab govitecan (IMMU-132) is an antibody-drug conjugate that contains the irinotecan active metabolite, SN-38, linked to a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting trophoblast cell surface antigen 2, which is overexpressed in many solid tumors. In a basket design phase I/II study, sacituzumab govitecan demonstrated promising single-agent therapeutic activity in multiple cancer cohorts, leading to accelerated approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration of sacituzumab govitecan-hziy (TRODELVY) for the treatment of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer who had received at least two prior therapies in the metastatic setting. Recently, results of the phase III trial, ASCENT, were confirmatory. There is limited available information on the adverse event management with sacituzumab govitecan needed to maximize the dose and duration of effective therapy while maintaining patient quality of life. This review summarizes the clinical development and the practical management of patients receiving sacituzumab govitecan. Sacituzumab govitecan has a well-defined and manageable toxicity profile, and rapid recognition and appropriate early and proactive management will allow clinicians to optimize sacituzumab govitecan treatment for patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Sacituzumab govitecan (TRODELVY) is a novel antibody-drug conjugate composed of the active metabolite of irinotecan (SN-38) conjugated to a monoclonal antibody targeting trophoblast cell surface antigen 2, an epithelial cell surface antigen overexpressed in many cancers. Because of the rapid approval of sacituzumab govitecan, there is limited available information on adverse event (AE) management with this agent. As such, this article reviews the clinical development of the drug, the AE profile, and provides recommendations regarding AE management to help optimize therapy with sacituzumab govitecan.

Efficacy of Neratinib Plus Capecitabine in the Subgroup of Patients with Central Nervous System Involvement from the NALA Trial.

BACKGROUND: Neratinib has efficacy in central nervous system (CNS) metastases from HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We report outcomes among patients with CNS metastases at baseline from the phase III NALA trial of neratinib plus capecitabine (N + C) versus lapatinib plus capecitabine (L + C). MATERIALS AND METHODS: NALA was a randomized, active-controlled trial in patients who received two or more previous HER2-directed regimens for HER2-positive MBC. Patients with asymptomatic/stable brain metastases (treated or untreated) were eligible. Patients were assigned to N + C (neratinib 240 mg per day, capecitabine 750 mg/m2 twice daily) or L + C (lapatinib 1,250 mg per day, capecitabine 1,000 mg/m2 twice daily) orally. Independently adjudicated progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and CNS endpoints were considered. RESULTS: Of 621 patients enrolled, 101 (16.3%) had known CNS metastases at baseline (N + C, n = 51; L + C, n = 50); 81 had received prior CNS-directed radiotherapy and/or surgery. In the CNS subgroup, mean PFS through 24 months was 7.8 months with N + C versus 5.5 months with L + C (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-1.05), and mean OS through 48 months was 16.4 versus 15.4 months (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.59-1.38). At 12 months, cumulative incidence of interventions for CNS disease was 25.5% for N + C versus 36.0% for L + C, and cumulative incidence of progressive CNS disease was 26.2% versus 41.6%, respectively. In patients with target CNS lesions at baseline (n = 32), confirmed intracranial objective response rates were 26.3% and 15.4%, respectively. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: These analyses suggest improved PFS and CNS outcomes with N + C versus L + C in patients with CNS metastases from HER2-positive MBC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: In a subgroup of patients with central nervous system (CNS) metastases from HER2-positive breast cancer after two or more previous HER2-directed regimens, the combination of neratinib plus capecitabine was associated with improved progression-free survival and CNS outcomes compared with lapatinib plus capecitabine. These findings build on previous phase II and III studies describing efficacy of neratinib in the prevention and treatment of CNS metastases, and support a role for neratinib as a systemic treatment option in the management of patients with HER2-positive brain metastases following antibody-based HER2-directed therapies.

Neratinib + capecitabine sustains health-related quality of life in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer and ≥ 2 prior HER2-directed regimens.

PURPOSE: To characterize health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) from the NALA phase 3 study. METHODS: In NALA (NCT01808573), patients were randomized 1:1 to neratinib + capecitabine (N + C) or lapatinib + capecitabine (L + C). HRQoL was assessed using seven prespecified scores from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality Of Life Questionnaire core module (QLQ-C30) and breast cancer-specific questionnaire (QLQ-BR23) at baseline and every 6 weeks. Descriptive statistics summarized scores over time, mixed models evaluated differences between treatment arms, and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to assess time to deterioration in HRQoL scores of ≥ 10 points. RESULTS: Of the 621 patients randomized in NALA, patients were included in the HRQoL analysis if they completed baseline and at least one follow-up questionnaire. The summary, global health status, physical functioning, fatigue, constipation, and systemic therapy side effects scores were stable over time with no persistent differences between treatment groups. There were no differences in time to deterioration (TTD) for the QLQ-C30 summary score between treatment arms; the hazard ratio (HR) for N + C vs. L + C was 0.94 (95% CI 0.63-1.40). Only the diarrhea score worsened significantly more in the N + C arm as compared to the L + C arm, and this remained over time (HR for TTD for N + C vs. L + C was 1.71 [95% CI 1.32-2.23]). CONCLUSION: In NALA, patients treated with N + C maintained their global HRQoL over time, despite a worsening of the diarrhea-related scores. These results may help guide optimal treatment selection for HER2-positive MBC.

Sociodemographic Factors Associated With Rapid Relapse in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Multi-Institution Study.

BACKGROUND: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) accounts for disproportionately poor outcomes in breast cancer, driven by a subset of rapid-relapse TNBC (rrTNBC) with marked chemoresistance, rapid metastatic spread, and poor survival. Our objective was to evaluate clinicopathologic and sociodemographic features associated with rrTNBC. METHODS: We included patients diagnosed with stage I-III TNBC in 1996 through 2012 who received chemotherapy at 1 of 10 academic cancer centers. rrTNBC was defined as a distant metastatic recurrence event or death ≤24 months after diagnosis. Features associated with rrTNBC were included in a multivariable logistic model upon which backward elimination was performed with a P<.10 criterion, with a final multivariable model applied to training (70%) and independent validation (30%) cohorts. RESULTS: Among all patients with breast cancer treated at these centers, 3,016 fit the inclusion criteria. Training cohort (n=2,112) bivariable analyses identified disease stage, insurance type, age, body mass index, race, and income as being associated with rrTNBC (P<.10). In the final multivariable model, rrTNBC was significantly associated with higher disease stage (adjusted odds ratio for stage III vs I, 16.0; 95% CI, 9.8-26.2; P<.0001), Medicaid/indigent insurance, lower income (by 2000 US Census tract), and younger age at diagnosis. Model performance was consistent between the training and validation cohorts. In sensitivity analyses, insurance type, low income, and young age were associated with rrTNBC among patients with stage I/II but not stage III disease. When comparing rrTNBC versus late relapse (>24 months), we found that insurance type and young age remained significant. CONCLUSIONS: Timing of relapse in TNBC is associated with stage of disease and distinct sociodemographic features, including insurance type, income, and age at diagnosis.

Clinical Outcomes With Abemaciclib After Prior CDK4/6 Inhibitor Progression in Breast Cancer: A Multicenter Experience.

BACKGROUND: Inhibitors of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6i) are widely used as first-line therapy for hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer (HR+ MBC). Although abemaciclib monotherapy is also FDA-approved for treatment of disease progression on endocrine therapy, there is limited insight into the clinical activity of abemaciclib after progression on prior CDK4/6i. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified patients with HR+ MBC from 6 cancer centers in the United States who received abemaciclib after disease progression on prior CDK4/6i, and abstracted clinical features, outcomes, toxicity, and predictive biomarkers. RESULTS: In the multicenter cohort, abemaciclib was well tolerated after a prior course of CDK4/6i (palbociclib)-based therapy; a minority of patients discontinued abemaciclib because of toxicity without progression (9.2%). After progression on palbociclib, most patients (71.3%) received nonsequential therapy with abemaciclib (with ≥1 intervening non-CDK4/6i regimens), with most receiving abemaciclib with an antiestrogen agent (fulvestrant, 47.1%; aromatase inhibitor, 27.6%), and the remainder receiving abemaciclib monotherapy (19.5%). Median progression-free survival for abemaciclib in this population was 5.3 months and median overall survival was 17.2 months, notably similar to results obtained in the MONARCH-1 study of abemaciclib monotherapy in heavily pretreated HR+/HER2-negative CDK4/6i-naïve patients. A total of 36.8% of patients received abemaciclib for ≥6 months. There was no relationship between the duration of clinical benefit while on palbociclib and the subsequent duration of treatment with abemaciclib. RB1, ERBB2, and CCNE1 alterations were noted among patients with rapid progression on abemaciclib. CONCLUSIONS: A subset of patients with HR+ MBC continue to derive clinical benefit from abemaciclib after progression on prior palbociclib. These results highlight the need for future studies to confirm molecular predictors of cross-resistance to CDK4/6i therapy and to better characterize the utility of abemaciclib after disease progression on prior CDK4/6i.

The adjuvant use of capecitabine for residual disease following pre-operative chemotherapy for breast cancer: Challenges applying CREATE-X to a US population.

INTRODUCTION: The CREATE-X study, conducted in Japan and South Korea, established capecitabine as an adjuvant treatment option for patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) who have residual disease (RD) following neoadjuvant anthracycline or taxane-based chemotherapy. However, there are no reports on the tolerability and outcomes of adjuvant capecitabine in the US setting following publication of the CREATE-X data. METHODS: We retrospectively collected treatment and tolerability data from the medical records of the first 23 TNBC patients who received adjuvant capecitabine for RD post neoadjuvant chemotherapy at our institution. Disease-free survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: The median starting dosage of capecitabine was 1871 mg/m2/day, most commonly divided into two daily doses on days 1-14 of each 21 day cycle. 34.8% of patients completed the treatment as prescribed. Side effects associated with treatment were common with 69.6% of patients experiencing hand-foot syndrome, 39.1% of patients experiencing diarrhea, and 13.0% of patients requiring hospitalization for side effects. Of 23 patients treated with adjuvant capecitabine, 34.8% completed the planned dose, 30.4% completed with dose reduction, and 34.8% discontinued early. At a median follow-up time of 14 months, the median disease-free survival was 22 months, with 30.4% of patients experiencing recurrence. CONCLUSION: Tolerability was poor overall compared to the CREATE-X cohort. Administering adjuvant capecitabine for TNBC patients with residual disease in the United States is challenging given differences in tolerability. More research is needed to understand how poor tolerability will affect the efficacy of this approach in the US population.

A system for risk stratification and prioritization of breast cancer surgeries delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic: preparing for re-entry.

PURPOSE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, most breast surgery for benign and malignant conditions has been postponed, creating a backlog of patients who will need surgery. A fair and transparent system for assessing the risk of further delaying surgery for individual patients to prioritize surgical scheduling is needed. METHODS: Factors related to risk of delaying surgery for breast patients were identified. Scores were assigned to each factor, with higher scores indicating a greater risk from delaying surgery. REDCap and Microsoft Excel tools were designed to track and score delayed patients. RESULTS: Published data and multidisciplinary clinical judgement were used to assign risk scores based on patient and tumor factors, length of delay, and tumor response to preoperative therapy. Patients completing neoadjuvant chemotherapy were assigned the highest scores as their options for delaying surgery are most limited. Among patients receiving neoadjuvant endocrine therapy or no medical therapy, higher scores were assigned for low-estrogen receptor or high-genomic risk scores, higher grade, larger tumors, younger age and longer delay. High priority scores were assigned for progression during preoperative therapy. Low scores were assigned for re-excisions, atypical lesions and other benign indications. There was good agreement of the tool's ranking of sample patients with rankings by experienced clinicians. The tool generates risk-stratified patient lists by surgeon or institution to facilitate assignment of surgery dates. CONCLUSIONS: This tool generates a clinically consistent, risk-stratified priority list of breast surgical procedures delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic. This systematic approach may facilitate surgical scheduling as conditions normalize.

Different associations of tumor PIK3CA mutations and clinical outcomes according to aspirin use among women with metastatic hormone receptor positive breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The relationships among PIK3CA mutations, medication use and tumor progression remains poorly understood. Aspirin use post-diagnosis may modify components of the PI3K pathway, including AKT and mTOR, and has been associated with lower risk of breast cancer recurrence and mortality. We assessed time to metastasis (TTM) and survival with respect to aspirin use and tumor PIK3CA mutations among women with metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: Patients with hormone receptor positive, HER2 negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer treated in 2009-2016 who received tumor genotyping were included. Aspirin use between primary and metastatic diagnosis was extracted from electronic medical records. TTM and survival were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Among 267 women with metastatic breast cancer, women with PIK3CA mutated tumors had longer TTM than women with PIK3CA wildtype tumors (7.1 vs. 4.7 years, p = 0.008). There was a significant interaction between PIK3CA mutations and aspirin use on TTM (p = 0.006) and survival (p = 0.026). PIK3CA mutations were associated with longer TTM among aspirin non-users (HR = 0.60 95% CI:0.44-0.82 p = 0.001) but not among aspirin users (HR = 1.57 0.86-2.84 p = 0.139). Similarly, PIK3CA mutations were associated with reduced mortality among aspirin non-users (HR = 0.70 95% CI:0.48-1.02 p = 0.066) but not among aspirin users (HR = 1.75 95% CI:0.88-3.49 p = 0.110). CONCLUSIONS: Among women who develop metastatic breast cancer, tumor PIK3CA mutations are associated with slower time to progression and mortality only among aspirin non-users. Larger studies are needed to confirm this finding and examine the relationship among aspirin use, tumor mutation profile, and the overall risk of breast cancer progression.