Phase II trial of eribulin in patients who do not achieve pathologic complete response (pCR) following neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Women with residual invasive breast cancer at the primary site or axillary lymph nodes following neoadjuvant chemotherapy have a high risk of recurrence. Eribulin improves survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer who progress after anthracycline and taxane therapy. This phase 2 trial assessed the efficacy of postoperative eribulin in breast cancer patients who did not achieve a pCR following standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: Women with localized breast cancer who had residual invasive cancer following ≥ 4 cycles of standard anthracycline and/or taxane-containing neoadjuvant chemotherapy received adjuvant eribulin treatment. HER2-positive patients also received trastuzumab for 1 year. Adjuvant hormonal therapy and locoregional radiotherapy were administered as per institutional guidelines. Primary endpoint was the 2-year DFS rate. Three patient cohorts were analyzed: TNBC (Cohort A), HR+/HER2- (Cohort B), and HER2+ (Cohort C). RESULTS: One hundred twenty-six patients (Cohort A-53, Cohort B-42, and Cohort C-31) were enrolled. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy included a taxane and an anthracycline in 70%. Eribulin was well tolerated; 84% of patients received the planned 6 cycles. After a median follow-up of 28 months, the 24-month DFS rates were 56% (95% CI 42, 69), 83% (95% CI 67, 91), and 73% (95% CI 53, 86) for Cohorts A, B, and C, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (26%), leukopenia (13%), and neuropathy (7%). CONCLUSION: Administration of adjuvant eribulin after neoadjuvant chemotherapy was feasible and well tolerated. The 24-month DFS rate did not reach the study target levels in any of the cohorts and was similar to DFS previously described in these cohorts following neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone.

Randomized controlled trial of cryotherapy to prevent paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy (RU221511I); an ACCRU trial.

PURPOSE: This pilot trial aimed to assess if cooling hands and feet with crushed ice during receipt of paclitaxel helps prevent peripheral neuropathy. METHODS: This prospective, randomized trial compared cryotherapy to standard care in patients initiating paclitaxel weekly x 12. For those on cryotherapy, hands and feet were cooled starting 15 min prior to and ending 15 min after each paclitaxel dose. EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 was completed at baseline, weekly x12, then monthly x6. Area under the curve (AUC) was calculated for subscale scores, adjusting for baseline, and compared between arms (Wilcoxon rank-sum test). Cross-study comparisons used data from 2 prior similarly-conducted neuropathy trials. RESULTS: Forty-six patients were accrued. Three withdrew and one was ineligible. Of the remaining 42 (21 cryotherapy, 21 control), 39 (19 cryotherapy, 20 control) were analyzable for AUC. Cryotherapy was well tolerated, but the AUC of the CIPN20 sensory scores over 12 weeks of paclitaxel was not found to differ between the study arms (mean difference 3.45, 95% CI -3.13 to 10.02, p = 0.26). However, the control arm of the current trial experienced less neuropathy than did the placebo arms of two previous similar trials. When our cryotherapy arm was compared to the combined control arms from all three trials, the cryotherapy arm had less neuropathy (Wilcoxon Rank-Sum p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: While there was no difference in CIPN20 scores identified between the 2 study arms in the current phase II trial, further investigation is needed given that the control arm experienced less neuropathy than was expected.