Adjuvant docetaxel and cyclophosphamide plus trastuzumab in patients with HER2-amplified early stage breast cancer: a single-group, open-label, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Previous results suggest that docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide improves disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival compared with doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide in early stage breast cancer. We assessed the addition of 1 year of trastuzumab to a non-anthracycline regimen, docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide, in patients with HER2-amplified early stage breast cancer and examined whether this regimen was equally effective in patients with TOP2A-amplified and TOP2A-non-amplified disease. METHODS: This was an open-label, single-group, phase 2 study. Eligible patients were aged 18-75 years; had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less; HER2-amplified early stage breast cancer; operable, histologically confirmed, invasive carcinoma of the breast; adequate tumour specimen available for FISH analysis of TOP2A status; and adequate haematological, renal, hepatic, and cardiac function. Patients received four 21-day cycles of intravenous docetaxel 75 mg/m(2), plus intravenous cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2), plus intravenous trastuzumab 4 mg/kg (loading dose) on day 1 and 2 mg/kg on days 1, 8, and 15 during chemotherapy, followed by trastuzumab 6 mg/kg every three weeks for the remainder of 1 year. The primary endpoint was 2-year DFS in TOP2A-amplified and TOP2A-non-amplified patients; the primary analysis was done by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00493649. FINDINGS: 493 patients were enrolled between June 15, 2007, and Aug 5, 2009. After a median follow-up of 36·1 months (IQR 35·5-36·7), 2-year DFS was 97·8% (95% CI 94·2-99·2) and 2-year overall survival was 99·5% (95% CI 96·2-99·9) for the 190 patients with TOP2A-amplified disease; 2-year DFS was 97·9% (95% CI 94·9-99·1) and 2-year overall survival was 98·8% (95% CI 96·2-99·6) for the 248 patients with TOP2A-non-amplified disease; 55 patients were not assessable for TOP2A status. In the 486 patients who received at least one dose of study drug, the most common adverse events of any grade were fatigue (284 patients, 58·4%), neutropenia (250, 51·4%), and nausea (217, 44·7%). The most common grade 3-4 toxic effects were neutropenia (229, 47·1%), febrile neutropenia (30, 6·2%), fatigue (21, 4·3%), and diarrhoea (16, 3·3%). Cardiac dysfunction occurred in 29 (6·0%) patients (12 [2·5%] grade 1, 15 [3·1%] grade 2, and two [0·4%] grade 3). 23 patients had at least one study-related serious adverse event. 16 patients stopped trastuzumab because of cardiac dysfunction. INTERPRETATION: A short, four-cycle regimen of docetaxel and cyclophosphamide combined with trastuzumab could be an option for adjuvant treatment of women with lower risk HER2-amplified early breast cancer, irrespective of TOP2A status. FUNDING: Sanofi.

Management of Diarrhea in Patients with HER2-Positive Breast Cancer Treated with Neratinib: A Case Series and Summary of the Literature.

INTRODUCTION: Neratinib and neratinib-based combinations have demonstrated efficacy for treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) early-stage and metastatic breast cancers. However, diarrhea has been reported as a common adverse event leading to neratinib discontinuation. Results from the CONTROL trial suggest that proactive diarrhea management with antidiarrheal prophylaxis or dose escalation of neratinib from a lower starting dose to the full FDA-approved dose of 240 mg/day can reduce the incidence, duration, and severity of neratinib-associated diarrhea in patients with early-stage breast cancer. Dose escalation has been included in the FDA-approved label for both early-stage and metastatic HER2+ breast cancer since June 2021. CASE SERIES: This series of five cases details real-world clinical implementation of strategies for management of neratinib-induced diarrhea in patients with early-stage and metastatic HER2+ breast cancer, including a patient with a pre-existing gastrointestinal disorder. MANAGEMENT AND OUTCOME: In four of five cases, diarrhea was managed with neratinib dose escalation, and antidiarrheal prophylaxis with loperamide plus colestipol was used in the remaining case. Management of diarrhea allowed all patients to remain on therapy. DISCUSSION: This case series shows that neratinib-associated diarrhea can be managed effectively with neratinib dose escalation from a lower initial starting dose and/or prophylactic antidiarrheal medications in a real-world clinical setting. The findings highlight the importance of patient-provider communication in proactive management of adverse events. Widespread implementation of the strategies described here may improve adherence and thereby clinical outcomes for patients with HER2+ breast cancer treated with neratinib.

Investigating the transparency of reporting in two-sample summary data Mendelian randomization studies using the MR-Base platform.

BACKGROUND: Two-sample Mendelian randomization (2SMR) is an increasingly popular epidemiological method that uses genetic variants as instruments for making causal inferences. Clear reporting of methods employed in such studies is important for evaluating their underlying quality. However, the quality of methodological reporting of 2SMR studies is currently unclear. We aimed to assess the reporting quality of studies that used MR-Base, one of the most popular platforms for implementing 2SMR analysis. METHODS: We created a bespoke reporting checklist to evaluate reporting quality of 2SMR studies. We then searched Web of Science Core Collection, PsycInfo, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar citations of the MR-Base descriptor paper to identify published MR studies that used MR-Base for any component of the MR analysis. Study screening and data extraction were performed by at least two independent reviewers. RESULTS: In the primary analysis, 87 studies were included. Reporting quality was generally poor across studies, with a mean of 53% (SD = 14%) of items reported in each study. Many items required for evaluating the validity of key assumptions made in MR were poorly reported: only 44% of studies provided sufficient details for assessing if the genetic variant associates with the exposure ('relevance' assumption), 31% for assessing if there are any variant-outcome confounders ('independence' assumption), 89% for the assessing if the variant causes the outcome independently of the exposure ('exclusion restriction' assumption) and 32% for assumptions of falsification tests. We did not find evidence of a change in reporting quality over time or a difference in reporting quality between studies that used MR-Base and a random sample of MR studies that did not use this platform. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of reporting of two-sample Mendelian randomization studies in our sample was generally poor. Journals and researchers should consider using the STROBE-MR guidelines to improve reporting quality.

Mapping population vulnerability and community support during COVID-19: a case study from Wales.

BACKGROUND: Disasters such as the COVID-19 pandemic pose an overwhelming demand on resources that cannot always be met by official organisations. Limited resources and human response to crises can lead members of local communities to turn to one another to fulfil immediate needs. This spontaneous citizen-led response can be crucial to a community's ability to cope in a crisis. It is thus essential to understand the scope of such initiatives so that support can be provided where it is most needed. Nevertheless, quickly developing situations and varying definitions can make the community response challenging to measure. AIM: To create an accessible interactive map of the citizen-led community response to need during the COVID-19 pandemic in Wales, UK that combines information gathered from multiple data providers to reflect different interpretations of need and support. APPROACH: We gathered data from a combination of official data providers and community-generated sources to create 14 variables representative of need and support. These variables are derived by a reproducible data pipeline that enables flexible integration of new data. The interactive tool is available online (www.covidresponsemap.wales) and can map available data at two geographic resolutions. Users choose their variables of interest, and interpretation of the map is aided by a linked bee-swarm plot. DISCUSSION: The novel approach we developed enables people at all levels of community response to explore and analyse the distribution of need and support across Wales. While there can be limitations to the accuracy of community-generated data, we demonstrate that they can be effectively used alongside traditional data sources to maximise the understanding of community action. This adds to our overall aim to measure community response and resilience, as well as to make complex population health data accessible to a range of audiences. Future developments include the integration of other factors such as well-being.

NSABP B-47/NRG Oncology Phase III Randomized Trial Comparing Adjuvant Chemotherapy With or Without Trastuzumab in High-Risk Invasive Breast Cancer Negative for HER2 by FISH and With IHC 1+ or 2.

PURPOSE: Adjuvant trastuzumab reduces invasive breast cancer (IBC) recurrence and risk for death in patients with HER2-amplified or overexpressing IBC. A subset of patients in the landmark trastuzumab adjuvant trials who originally tested HER2-positive but were HER2-negative by central HER2 testing appeared to possibly benefit from trastuzumab. The objective for the NSABP B-47 trial was to determine whether the addition of trastuzumab to adjuvant chemotherapy (CRx) would improve invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) in patients with HER2-negative breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 3,270 women with high-risk primary IBC were randomly assigned to CRx with or without 1 year of trastuzumab. Eligibility criteria included immunohistochemistry (IHC) score 1+ or 2+ with fluorescence in situ hybridization ratio (FISH) < 2.0 or, if ratio was not performed, HER2 gene copy number < 4.0. CRx was either docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide or doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by weekly paclitaxel for 12 weeks. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 46 months, the addition of trastuzumab to CRx did not improve IDFS (5-year IDFS: 89.8% with CRx plus trastuzumab [CRxT] v 89.2% with CRx alone; hazard ratio [HR], 0.98; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.25; P = .85). These findings did not differ by level of HER2 IHC expression, lymph node involvement, or hormone-receptor status. For distant recurrence-free interval, 5-year estimates were 92.7% with CRxT compared with 93.6% for CRx alone (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.50; P = .55) and for overall survival (OS) were 94.8% with CRxT and 96.3% in CRx alone (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.95; P = .15). There were no unexpected toxicities from the addition of trastuzumab to CRx. CONCLUSION: The addition of trastuzumab to CRx did not improve IDFS, distant recurrence-free interval, or OS in women with non-HER2-overexpressing IBC. Trastuzumab does not benefit women without IHC 3+ or FISH ratio-amplified breast cancer.

The effect of tamoxifen or exemestane on bone mineral density during the first 2 years of adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant therapy with aromatase inhibitors is associated with increased bone loss in postmenopausal women with breast cancer. We assessed changes in bone mineral density (BMD) from baseline to 24 months in patients receiving either tamoxifen (T) or exemestane (E). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 578 women randomly assigned to T 20 mg per day orally or E 25 mg/day orally enrolled in this substudy; baseline, 12-month, and 24-month BMD measurements of the femur and lumbar spine by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry were planned. Women receiving bone antiresorptive agents were excluded. Mean BMD changes from baseline to 12 and 24 months were tested between the treatment groups using 2-sample t tests and both g/cm2 (as percent changes) and T scores (as differences from baseline). RESULTS: A total of 167 women with all 3 imaging studies were evaluable and form the basis of this report (T=89, E=78). Using T scores, the mean difference from baseline was significant between the 2 groups at 12 months at both the spine (P=.0002) and the hip (P=.0004), and at 24 months only at the hip (P=.02). CONCLUSION: More bone loss occurred during the first 12 months of treatment with E compared with T, but by 2 years the differences were less apparent and bone loss with E had slowed.

Patients with Slowly Proliferative Early Breast Cancer Have Low Five-Year Recurrence Rates in a Phase III Adjuvant Trial of Capecitabine.

PURPOSE: We conducted a randomized phase III study to determine whether patients with early breast cancer would benefit from the addition of capecitabine (X) to a standard regimen of doxorubicin (A) plus cyclophosphamide (C) followed by docetaxel (T). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Treatment comprised eight cycles of AC→T (T dose: 100 mg/m(2) on day 1) or AC→XT (X dose: 825 mg/m(2) twice daily, days 1-14; T dose: 75 mg/m(2) on day 1). The primary endpoint was 5-year disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Of 2,611 women, 1,304 were randomly assigned to receive AC→T and 1,307 to receive AC→XT. After a median follow-up of 5 years, the study failed to meet its primary endpoint [HR, 0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.67-1.05; P = 0.125]. A significant improvement in overall survival, a secondary endpoint, was seen with AC→XT versus AC→T (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51-0.92; P = 0.011). There were no unexpected adverse events. Of patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive/HER2-negative disease, 70% of whom were node-positive, 26% and 59% had tumors with a centrally assessed Ki-67 score of <10% or <20%, respectively, and only 17 (2%) and 53 (6%) DFS events, respectively, occurred in these groups at 7 years. CONCLUSIONS: The very low event rate in patients with ER-positive, low Ki-67 cancers, regardless of nodal status, strongly suggests that these patients should not be enrolled in adjuvant trials that assess 5-year DFS rates and that central Ki-67 analyses can identify these patients.

A phase II trial of pemetrexed and gemcitabine in patients with metastatic breast cancer who have received prior taxane therapy.

PURPOSE: This phase II trial assessed efficacy and safety of pemetrexed plus gemcitabine to treat metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer in patients previously treated with taxanes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible women with advanced breast cancer treated with taxanes in the adjuvant or metastatic setting received pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 on day 1 followed by gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. Hematologic toxicities limiting day 8 gemcitabine dosing were observed in the first 20 patients, prompting a protocol amendment to evaluate pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 followed by gemcitabine 1500 mg/m2 on day 1 of a 14-day cycle. Patients received folic acid, vitamin B12, and dexamethasone. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Between July 2003 and September 2006, 73 evaluable women (median age, 52.1 years; range, 28-73 years) were enrolled (21-day schedule: 21 patients, 52% estrogen receptor-positive, 24% HER2-positive; 14-day schedule: 52 patients, 58% ER-positive, 15% HER2-positive). For patients on the 21-day and 14-day schedules, median number of cycles was 4 (range, 1-8 cycles) and 5 (range, 1-38 cycles), respectively. The ORRs were 23.8% and 19.2%, respectively; median survival times were 16.2 months and 13.4 months. The most common grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities were neutropenia (71% vs. 33%) and leukopenia (24% vs. 14%); febrile neutropenia occurred in 10% and 6%. The most common grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicity was fatigue (29% vs. 10%). CONCLUSION: Pemetrexed/gemcitabine given on a 21-day or 14-day schedule is active in patients with advanced breast cancer previously treated with taxanes. A 14-day schedule appears to result in fewer serious toxicities.

Adapting Practice in the Face of New Data.

Oncologists are often faced with new information on tests, therapies, and treatment regimens. Determining how to incorporate that data into practice patterns is not easy. Regardless of what motivates you to make a change in practice, the explosion of new oncology data demands that you continually reevaluate how you practice.