Dutch national immunization schedule: compliance and associated characteristics for the primary series.

In the Netherlands, the recommended priming immunization schedule for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and polio (DTaP-IPV) is at 2, 3 and 4 months of age. We evaluated the compliance with the recommended schedule, as well as its characteristics. We included all infants born between 2007 and 2012 who received minimally one DTaP-IPV vaccination (n = 1,061,578). Infants complied with the schedule if they received the first vaccination between 6 and 9 weeks of age, and the second and third vaccination 2-6 weeks after the first and second vaccination. We examined associations between compliance and several characteristics using log-binomial regression. Compliance for the first, second and third vaccination was 81.6, 88.3 and 84.2%, respectively. Compliance with the total recommended schedule was 64.5%, and increased from 60.1% for 2007 to 68.5% for 2012. Compliance was higher for full-term infants (65.9%), infants with normal birth weight (66.0%) and when both parents were born in the Netherlands (66.8%). CONCLUSION: Delayed vaccination during the primary vaccination schedule occurs in one sixth of the Dutch children. Efforts to improve compliance should be focused in particular on preterm infants, infants with low birth weight and infants whose parents are not born in the Netherlands. What is Known: • A delayed start of vaccination leads to a longer period at risk for infectious diseases, e.g. pertussis • Delayed vaccination is associated with several factors including prematurity, low birth weight, family size, birth order, low socioeconomic status and health status of the child What is New: • Compliance with the recommended priming immunization schedule for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and polio was 64.5%, and increased from 60.1% for 2007 to 68.5% for 2012 • If the first vaccination was delayed, there was a higher chance that the following vaccinations were administered 'out-of-schedule' as well, resulting in even a higher age at second and third vaccination.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in OlympiA: A Phase III, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Adjuvant Olaparib in gBRCA1/2 Mutations and High-Risk Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Early Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: The OlympiA randomized phase III trial compared 1 year of olaparib (OL) or placebo (PL) as adjuvant therapy in patients with germline BRCA1/2, high-risk human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer after completing (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy ([N]ACT), surgery, and radiotherapy. The patient-reported outcome primary hypothesis was that OL-treated patients may experience greater fatigue during treatment. METHODS: Data were collected before random assignment, and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. The primary end point was fatigue, measured with the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue scale. Secondary end points, assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire, Core 30 item, included nausea and vomiting (NV), diarrhea, and multiple functional domains. Scores were compared between treatment groups using mixed model for repeated measures. Two-sided P values <.05 were statistically significant for the primary end point. All secondary end points were descriptive. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred and thirty-eight patients (NACT: 746, ACT: 792) contributed to the analysis. Fatigue severity was statistically significantly greater for OL versus PL, but not clinically meaningfully different by prespecified criteria (≥3 points) at 6 months (diff OL v PL: NACT: -1.3 [95% CI, -2.4 to -0.2]; P = .022; ACT: -1.3 [95% CI, -2.3 to -0.2]; P = .017) and 12 months (NACT: -1.6 [95% CI, -2.8 to -0.3]; P = .017; ACT: -1.3 [95% CI, -2.4 to -0.2]; P = .025). There were no significant differences in fatigue severity between treatment groups at 18 and 24 months. NV severity was worse in patients treated with OL compared with PL at 6 months (NACT: 6.0 [95% CI, 4.1 to 8.0]; ACT: 5.3 [95% CI, 3.4 to 7.2]) and 12 months (NACT: 6.4 [95% CI, 4.4 to 8.3]; ACT: 4.5 [95% CI, 2.8 to 6.1]). During treatment, there were some clinically meaningful differences between groups for other symptoms but not for function subscales or global health status. CONCLUSION: Treatment-emergent symptoms from OL were limited, generally resolving after treatment ended. OL- and PL-treated patients had similar functional scores, slowly improving during the 24 months after (N)ACT and there was no clinically meaningful persistence of fatigue severity in OL-treated patients.

Genomic and Transcriptomic Analyses of Breast Cancer Primaries and Matched Metastases in AURORA, the Breast International Group (BIG) Molecular Screening Initiative.

AURORA aims to study the processes of relapse in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) by performing multi-omics profiling on paired primary tumors and early-course metastases. Among 381 patients (primary tumor and metastasis pairs: 252 targeted gene sequencing, 152 RNA sequencing, 67 single nucleotide polymorphism arrays), we found a driver role for GATA1 and MEN1 somatic mutations. Metastases were enriched in ESR1, PTEN, CDH1, PIK3CA, and RB1 mutations; MDM4 and MYC amplifications; and ARID1A deletions. An increase in clonality was observed in driver genes such as ERBB2 and RB1. Intrinsic subtype switching occurred in 36% of cases. Luminal A/B to HER2-enriched switching was associated with TP53 and/or PIK3CA mutations. Metastases had lower immune score and increased immune-permissive cells. High tumor mutational burden correlated to shorter time to relapse in HR+/HER2- cancers. ESCAT tier I/II alterations were detected in 51% of patients and matched therapy was used in 7%. Integration of multi-omics analyses in clinical practice could affect treatment strategies in MBC. SIGNIFICANCE: The AURORA program, through the genomic and transcriptomic analyses of matched primary and metastatic samples from 381 patients with breast cancer, coupled with prospectively collected clinical data, identified genomic alterations enriched in metastases and prognostic biomarkers. ESCAT tier I/II alterations were detected in more than half of the patients.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 2659.

Lucitanib for the Treatment of HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer: Results from the Multicohort Phase II FINESSE Study.

PURPOSE: The FGFR1 gene is amplified in 14% of patients with HR + /HER2 - breast cancer. Efficacy and safety of lucitanib, an inhibitor of VEGFR1-3, FGFR1-3, and PDGFRα/ß, were assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with HR + /HER2 - metastatic breast cancer (MBC) received oral lucitanib in three centrally confirmed cohorts: (i) FGFR1 amplified, (ii) FGFR1 nonamplified, 11q13 amplified, and (iii) FGFR1 and 11q13 nonamplified. Key inclusion criteria included Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status ≤2, ≥1 line of anticancer therapy, but ≤2 lines of chemotherapy. Primary endpoint was overall response rates (ORR) by RECIST1.1. Simon's two-stage design was used: If ≥2 patients responded among 21 patients, 20 additional patients could be enrolled in each cohort. FGFR1 copy-number variation (CNV) was determined by FISH and droplet digital PCR, whereas FGFR1 expression was determined by IHC. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients (32/18/26 in cohorts 1/2/3) from nine countries were enrolled. The prespecified primary endpoint was met in cohort 1 with ORR of 19% [95% confidence interval (CI), 9%-35%], but not in cohorts 2 and 3 with ORR of 0% (95% CI, 0%-18%) and 15% (95% CI, 6%-34%), respectively. Frequent adverse events included hypertension (87%), hypothyroidism (45%), nausea (33%), and proteinuria (32%). Exploratory biomarker analyses suggested higher ORR in patients with high FGFR1 amplification (≥4 CNV) than those without high amplification (22% vs. 9%). ORR in patients with FGFR1-high tumors (IHC, H-score ≥50) was 25% versus 8% in FGFR1-low cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Lucitanib had modest antitumor activity and significant hypertension-related toxicity in patients with HR + /HER2 - MBC. Although based on small sample sizes, exploratory biomarker analyses suggested that patients with high FGFR1 amplification or expression might derive greater benefit.