Early prediction of endocrine responsiveness in ER+/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC): pilot study with 18F-fluoroestradiol (18F-FES) CT/PET.

BACKGROUND: 18F-fluoroestradiol (FES) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) is considered an accurate diagnostic tool to determine whole-body endocrine responsiveness. In the endocrine therapy (ET)-FES trial, we evaluated 18F-FES PET/CT as a predictive tool in estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients underwent an 18F-FES PET/CT at baseline. Patients with standardized uptake value (SUV) ≥ 2 received single-agent ET until progressive disease; patients with SUV < 2 were randomized to single-agent ET (arm A) or chemotherapy (ChT) (arm B). The primary objective was to compare the activity of first-line ET versus ChT in patients with 18F-FES SUV < 2. RESULTS: Overall, 147 patients were enrolled; 117 presented with 18F-FES SUV ≥ 2 and received ET; 30 patients with SUV < 2 were randomized to ET or ChT. After a median follow-up of 62.4 months, 104 patients (73.2%) had disease progression and 53 died (37.3%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.4 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.1-59.6 months] in patients with SUV < 2 randomized to arm A versus 23.0 months (95% CI 7.7-30.0 months) in arm B, [hazard (HR) = 0.71, 95% CI 0.3-1.7 months]; median PFS was 18.0 months (95% CI 11.2-23.1 months) in patients with SUV ≥ 2 treated with ET. Median overall survival (OS) was 28.2 months (95% CI 14.2 months-not estimable) in patients with SUV < 2 randomized to ET (arm A) versus 52.8 months (95% CI 16.2 months-not estimable) in arm B (ChT). Median OS was not reached in patients with SUV ≥ 2. 60-month OS rate was 41.6% (95% CI 10.4% to 71.1%) in arm A, 42.0% (95% CI 14.0% to 68.2%) in arm B, and 59.6% (95% CI 48.6% to 69.0%) in patients with SUV ≥ 2. In patients with SUV ≥ 2, 60-month OS rate was 72.6% if treated with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) versus 40.6% in case of fulvestrant or tamoxifen (P < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The ET-FES trial demonstrated that ER+/HER2- MBC patients are a heterogeneous population, with different levels of endocrine responsiveness based on 18F-FES CT/PET SUV.

Event-free survival by residual cancer burden with pembrolizumab in early-stage TNBC: exploratory analysis from KEYNOTE-522.

BACKGROUND: KEYNOTE-522 demonstrated statistically significant improvements in pathological complete response (pCR) with neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy and event-free survival (EFS) with neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab in patients with high-risk, early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Prior studies have shown the prognostic value of the residual cancer burden (RCB) index to quantify the extent of residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In this preplanned exploratory analysis, we assessed RCB distribution and EFS within RCB categories by treatment group. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1174 patients with stage T1c/N1-2 or T2-4/N0-2 TNBC were randomized 2 : 1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks given with four cycles of paclitaxel + carboplatin, followed by four cycles of doxorubicin or epirubicin + cyclophosphamide. After surgery, patients received pembrolizumab or placebo for nine cycles or until recurrence or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoints are pCR and EFS. RCB is a prespecified exploratory endpoint. The association between EFS and RCB was assessed using a Cox regression model. RESULTS: Pembrolizumab shifted patients into lower RCB categories across the entire spectrum compared with placebo. There were more patients in the pembrolizumab group with RCB-0 (pCR), and fewer patients in the pembrolizumab group with RCB-1, RCB-2, and RCB-3. The corresponding hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for EFS were 0.70 (0.38-1.31), 0.92 (0.39-2.20), 0.52 (0.32-0.82), and 1.24 (0.69-2.23). The most common first EFS events were distant recurrences, with fewer in the pembrolizumab group across all RCB categories. Among patients with RCB-0/1, more than half [21/38 (55.3%)] of all events were central nervous system recurrences, with 13/22 (59.1%) in the pembrolizumab group and 8/16 (50.0%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy resulted in fewer EFS events in the RCB-0, RCB-1, and RCB-2 categories, with the greatest benefit in RCB-2. These findings demonstrate that pembrolizumab not only increased pCR rates, but also improved EFS among most patients who do not have a pCR.

Significantly longer time to deterioration of quality of life due to CANKADO PRO-React eHealth support in HR+ HER2- metastatic breast cancer patients receiving palbociclib and endocrine therapy: primary outcome analysis of the multicenter randomized AGO-B WSG PreCycle trial.

BACKGROUND: The multicenter, randomized, phase IV, intergroup AGO-B WSG PreCycle trial (NCT03220178) evaluated the impact of CANKADO-based electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) assessment on quality of life (QoL) in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients receiving palbociclib and an aromatase inhibitor or palbociclib + fulvestrant. CANKADO PRO-React, a European Union-registered medical device, is an interactive autonomous application reacting to patient self-reported observations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2017 and 2021, 499 patients (median age 59 years) from 71 centers were randomized (2 : 1, stratified by therapy line) between an active version of CANKADO PRO-React (CANKADO-active arm) and a version with limited functionality (CANKADO-inform arm). A total of 412 patients (271 CANKADO-active; 141 CANKADO-inform) were available for analysis of the primary endpoint, time to deterioration (TTD) of QoL [10-point drop on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) score], using an Aalen-Johansen estimator for cumulative incidence function of TTD DQoL (QoL deterioration) with 95% pointwise confidence intervals (CIs). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and DQoL. RESULTS: In all patients [intention-to-treat (ITT)-ePRO], cumulative incidence of DQoL was significantly more favorable (lower) in the CANKADO-active arm (hazard ratio 0.698, 95% CI 0.506-0.963). Among first-line patients (n = 295), the corresponding hazard ratio was 0.716 (0.484-1.060; P = 0.09), and in second-line patients (n = 117) it was 0.661 (0.374-1.168; P = 0.2). Absolute patient numbers declined in later visits; FACT-G completion rates were 80% and higher until about visit 30. Mean FACT-G scores showed a steady decline from baseline and an offset in favor of CANKADO-active. No significant differences in clinical outcome were observed between arms: median PFS (ITT population) was 21.4 (95% CI 19.4-23.7) (CANKADO-active) and 18.7 (15.1-23.5) months (CANKADO-inform); median OS was not reached (CANKADO-active) and 42.6 months (CANKADO-inform). CONCLUSIONS: PreCycle is the first multicenter randomized eHealth trial demonstrating a significant benefit for MBC patients receiving oral tumor therapy when using an interactive autonomous patient empowerment application.

Nab-paclitaxel weekly versus dose-dense solvent-based paclitaxel followed by dose-dense epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide in high-risk HR+/HER2- early breast cancer: results from the neoadjuvant part of the WSG-ADAPT-HR+/HER2- trial.

BACKGROUND: In high-risk hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) early breast cancer (EBC), nanoparticle albumin-bound (nab)-paclitaxel showed promising efficacy versus solvent-based (sb)-paclitaxel in neoadjuvant trials; however, optimal patient and therapy selection remains a topic of ongoing research. Here, we investigate the potential of Oncotype DX® recurrence score (RS) and endocrine therapy (ET) response (low post-endocrine Ki67) for therapy selection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Within the WSG-ADAPT trial (NCT01779206), high-risk HR+/HER2- EBC patients were randomized to (neo)adjuvant 4× sb-paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 q2w or 8× nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 q1w, followed by 4× epirubicin + cyclophosphamide (90 mg + 600 mg) q2w; inclusion criteria: (i) cN0-1, RS 12-25, and post-ET Ki67 >10%; (ii) cN0-1 with RS >25. Patients with cN2-3 or (G3, baseline Ki67 ≥40%, and tumor size >1 cm) were allowed to be included without RS and/or ET response testing. Associations of key factors with pathological complete response (pCR) (primary) and survival (secondary) endpoints were analyzed using statistical mediation and moderation models. RESULTS: Eight hundred and sixty-four patients received neoadjuvant nab-paclitaxel (n= 437) or sb-paclitaxel (n = 427); nab-paclitaxel was superior for pCR (20.8% versus 12.9%, P = 0.002). pCR was higher for RS >25 versus RS ≤25 (16.0% versus 8.4%, P = 0.021) and for ET non-response versus ET response (15.1% versus 6.0%, P = 0.027); no factors were predictive for the relative efficacy of nab-paclitaxel versus sb-paclitaxel. Patients with pCR had longer distant disease-free survival [dDFS; hazard ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20-0.91, P = 0.024]. Despite favorable prognostic association of RS >25 versus RS ≤25 with pCR (odds ratio 3.11, 95% CI 1.71-5.63, P ≤ 0.001), higher RS was unfavorably associated with dDFS (hazard ratio 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.05, P = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk HR+/HER2- EBC, neoadjuvant nab-paclitaxel q1w appears superior to sb-paclitaxel q2w regarding pCR. Combining RS and ET response assessment appears to select patients with highest pCR rates. The disadvantage of higher RS for dDFS is reduced in patients with pCR. These are the first results from a large neoadjuvant randomized trial supporting the use of RS to help select patients for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk HR+/HER2- EBC.

Treatment and outcome in metastatic lobular breast cancer in the prospective German research platform OPAL.

PURPOSE: Evidence about routine treatment and outcome of patients with invasive lobular cancer (ILC) is limited, especially regarding metastatic disease. Here we present prospective real-world data of patients with metastatic ILC (mILC) as compared to patients with metastatic invasive ductal cancer (mIDC) receiving systemic therapy in routine care in Germany. METHODS: Prospective data on patient and tumor characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of patients with mILC (n = 466) and mIDC (n = 2100), recruited between 2007 and 2021 into the Tumor Registry Breast Cancer/OPAL were analyzed. RESULTS: Compared to mIDCs, patients with mILC were older at start of first-line treatment (median 69 vs. 63 years) and had more often lower grade (G1/G2: 72.8% vs. 51.2%), hormone receptor (HR)-positive (83.7% vs. 73.2%) and less often HER2-positive (14.2% vs. 28.6%) tumors, which metastasized more frequently to the bone (19.7% vs. 14.5%) or peritoneum (9.9% vs. 2.0%), and less frequently to the lungs (0.9% vs. 4.0%). Median OS of patients with mILC (n = 209) and mIDC (n = 1158) was 30.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 25.3, 36.0] and 33.7 months [95% CI 30.3, 37.9], respectively. Multivariate survival analysis did not show a significant prognostic impact of the histological subtype [HR mILC vs. mIDC 1.18 (95% CI 0.97-1.42)]. CONCLUSION: Overall, our real-world data confirm clinicopathological differences between mILC and mIDC breast cancer patients. Despite patients with mILC presenting with some favorable prognostic factors, ILC histopathology was not associated with a better clinical outcome in multivariate analysis, suggesting the need for more tailored treatment strategies for patients with the lobular subtype.

ESO-ESMO fifth international consensus guidelines for breast cancer in young women (BCY5).

We dedicate this manuscript in memory of a dear friend and colleague Bella Kaufman. The fifth International Consensus Symposium for Breast Cancer in Young Women (BCY5) took place virtually in October 2020, organized by the European School of Oncology (ESO) and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO). Consensus recommendations for the management of breast cancer in young women were updated from BCY4 with incorporation of new evidence to inform the guidelines. Areas of research priorities as well as specificities in different geographic and minority populations were identified. This manuscript summarizes the ESO-ESMO international consensus recommendations, which are also endorsed by the European Society of Breast Specialists (EUSOMA).

Risk-adapted modulation through de-intensification of cancer treatments: an ESMO classification.

BACKGROUND: The landscape of clinical trials testing risk-adapted modulations of cancer treatments is complex. Multiple trial designs, endpoints, and thresholds for non-inferiority have been used; however, no consensus or convention has ever been agreed to categorise biomarkers useful to inform the treatment intensity modulation of cancer treatments. METHODS: An expert subgroup under the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Precision Medicine Working Group shaped an international collaborative project to develop a classification system for biomarkers used in the cancer treatment de-intensification, based on a tiered approach. A group of disease-oriented clinical, translational, methodology and public health experts, and patients' representatives provided an analysis of the status quo, and scanned the horizon of ongoing clinical trials. The classification was developed through multiple rounds of expert revisions and inputs. RESULTS: The working group agreed on a univocal definition of treatment de-intensification. Evidence of reduction in the dose-density, intensity, or cumulative dose, including intermittent schedules or shorter treatment duration or deletion of segment(s) of the standard regimens, compound(s), or treatment modality must be demonstrated, to define a treatment de-intensification. De-intensified regimens must also portend a positive impact on toxicity, quality of life, health system burden, or financial toxicity. ESMO classification categorises the biomarkers for treatment modulation in three tiers, based on the level of evidence. Tier A includes biomarkers validated in prospective, randomised, non-inferiority clinical trials. The working group agreed that in non-inferiority clinical trials, boundaries are highly dependent upon the disease scenario and endpoint being studied and that the absolute differences in the outcomes are the most relevant measures, rather than relative differences. Biomarkers tested in single-arm studies with a threshold of non-inferiority are classified as Tier B. Tier C is when the validation occurs in prospective-retrospective quality cohort investigations. CONCLUSIONS: ESMO classification for the risk-guided intensity modulation of cancer treatments provides a set of evidence-based criteria to categorise biomarkers deemed to inform de-intensification of cancer treatments, in risk-defined patients. The classification aims at harmonising definitions on this matter, therefore offering a common language for all the relevant stakeholders, including clinicians, patients, decision-makers, and for clinical trials.

Outcome of breast cancer patients with low hormone receptor positivity: analysis of a 15-year population-based cohort.

BACKGROUND: Guideline recommendations for the treatment of breast cancer with low hormone receptor (HR) expression (1%-9%) are ambiguous and several studies showed more similarities with HR-negative tumors than with HR strongly positive tumors (≥10%). We used a population-based 15-year cohort to compare patient characteristics and outcome of HR low positive tumors with HR-negative and HR strongly positive tumors, respectively. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 38  560 women diagnosed with early invasive breast cancer between 2004 and 2018 within the scope of the Munich Cancer Registry with 4.9 million inhabitants were included. Descriptive analyses of prognostic factors, treatment, and outcome analyses using the Kaplan-Meier method; cumulative incidence in consideration of competing risks; and multivariate analyses (Cox regression and Fine-Gray model) were conducted. Endpoints were time to local recurrence (TTLR), time to lymph node recurrence (TTLNR), time to metastasis (TTM), overall survival (OS), and relative survival (RS). RESULTS: A total of 861 patients (2%) had HR low positive, 4862 (13%) HR-negative, and 32  837 (85%) HR strongly positive tumors. Within the HER2-negative cohort (n = 33  366), survival of HR low positive tumors was significantly worse than that of HR strongly positive tumors [OS hazard ratio 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.55-0.78)], whereas between HR low positive and HR-negative tumors no significant survival difference could be detected [OS hazard ratio 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.78-1.11)]. TTLR, TTLNR, and TTM showed similar results. By contrast, within the HER2-positive cohort (n = 5194), no statistically significant differences between the three HR groups could be detected in multivariate analyses. CONCLUSION: Current definitions for HR positivity and its clinical relevance should be reconsidered. Patients with HR low positive/HER2-negative tumors could be regarded and treated similar to patients with triple-negative tumors.

Phase III randomized study of taselisib or placebo with fulvestrant in estrogen receptor-positive, PIK3CA-mutant, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer: the SANDPIPER trial.

BACKGROUND: The phase III SANDPIPER study assessed taselisib (GDC-0032), a potent, selective PI3K inhibitor, plus fulvestrant in estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, PIK3CA-mutant locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Postmenopausal women with disease recurrence/progression during/after an aromatase inhibitor were randomized 2 : 1 to receive taselisib (4 mg; taselisib arm) or placebo (placebo arm) plus fulvestrant (500 mg). Stratification factors were visceral disease, endocrine sensitivity, and geographic region. Patients with PIK3CA-mutant tumors (central cobas® PIK3CA Mutation Test) were randomized separately from those without detectable mutations. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (INV-PFS) in patients with PIK3CA-mutant tumors. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate, overall survival, clinical benefit rate, duration of objective response, PFS by blinded independent central review (BICR-PFS), safety, and time to deterioration in health-related quality of life. RESULTS: The PIK3CA-mutant intention-to-treat population comprised 516 patients (placebo arm: n = 176; taselisib arm: n = 340). INV-PFS was significantly improved in the taselisib {7.4 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.26-9.07]} versus placebo arm (5.4 months [95% CI, 3.68-7.29]) (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0.70; 95% CI, 0.56-0.89; P = 0.0037) and confirmed by BICR-PFS (HR 0.66). Secondary endpoints, including objective response rate, clinical benefit rate, and duration of objective response, showed consistent improvements in the taselisib arm. Safety was assessed in all randomized patients who received at least one dose of taselisib/placebo or fulvestrant regardless of PIK3CA-mutation status (n = 629). Serious adverse events were lower in the placebo versus taselisib arm (8.9% versus 32.0%). There were more discontinuations (placebo arm: 2.3%; taselisib arm: 16.8%) and dose reductions (placebo arm: 2.3%; taselisib arm: 36.5%) in the taselisib arm. CONCLUSION: SANDPIPER met its primary endpoint; however, the combination of taselisib plus fulvestrant has no clinical utility given its safety profile and modest clinical benefit.

Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: updated efficacy and Ki-67 analysis from the monarchE study.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) previously demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer at the second interim analysis, however follow-up was limited. Here, we present results of the prespecified primary outcome analysis and an additional follow-up analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This global, phase III, open-label trial randomized (1 : 1) 5637 patients to adjuvant ET for ≥5 years ± abemaciclib for 2 years. Cohort 1 enrolled patients with ≥4 positive axillary lymph nodes (ALNs), or 1-3 positive ALNs and either grade 3 disease or tumor ≥5 cm. Cohort 2 enrolled patients with 1-3 positive ALNs and centrally determined high Ki-67 index (≥20%). The primary endpoint was IDFS in the intent-to-treat population (cohorts 1 and 2). Secondary endpoints were IDFS in patients with high Ki-67, DRFS, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: At the primary outcome analysis, with 19 months median follow-up time, abemaciclib + ET resulted in a 29% reduction in the risk of developing an IDFS event [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-0.87; nominal P = 0.0009]. At the additional follow-up analysis, with 27 months median follow-up and 90% of patients off treatment, IDFS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.82; nominal P < 0.0001) and DRFS (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.83; nominal P < 0.0001) benefit was maintained. The absolute improvements in 3-year IDFS and DRFS rates were 5.4% and 4.2%, respectively. Whereas Ki-67 index was prognostic, abemaciclib benefit was consistent regardless of Ki-67 index. Safety data were consistent with the known abemaciclib risk profile. CONCLUSION: Abemaciclib + ET significantly improved IDFS in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer, with an acceptable safety profile. Ki-67 index was prognostic, but abemaciclib benefit was observed regardless of Ki-67 index. Overall, the robust treatment benefit of abemaciclib extended beyond the 2-year treatment period.

Congruence and trajectories of device-measured and self-reported physical activity during therapy for early breast cancer.

PURPOSE: This study examines congruence between self-reported and device-measured physical activity data in women with early breast cancer and compares trajectories under different treatments. METHODS: Women with non-metastatic breast cancer were recruited before primary therapy. In four weeks distributed over six months after treatment start, patients reported time spent on work, transport, chores and sports via diary and wore Garmin® vivofit 3 accelerometers to assess steps taken. Associations between these measures and agreement regarding guideline adherence were tested with Spearman's Correlation Coefficient and Weighted Kappa statistic. Effects of time and treatment were evaluated using mixed analyses of variance. RESULTS: Ninety-nine participants (median age = 50) were treated with adjuvant (N = 23), neoadjuvant (N = 21) or without chemotherapy (N = 55). Coherence between self-report and device data was strong (r = 0.566). Agreement about reaching recommendations was only "fair" (kappa coefficient = 0.321 and 0.249, resp.). Neither treatment or week nor their interaction had effects on step counts (all p > 0.05). Self-reported activity time was lower for patients with chemotherapy than for those without (adjuvant: ∆ = 69min, p = 0.006, neoadjuvant: ∆ = 45min, p = 0.038) and lower in week 18 than in week 3 (∆ = 43min, p = 0.010). CONCLUSION: Results show that consumer-grade activity monitors and self-reports correlate but show different perspectives on physical activity in breast cancer patients. In general, patients perceive some decline regardless of primary treatment regimen. Those affected should be offered assistance to gain the benefits of activity. Accelerometers may help professionals to identify these individuals and patients to verify appraisal of their activity levels.

ESO-ESMO 4th International Consensus Guidelines for Breast Cancer in Young Women (BCY4).

The 4th International Consensus Conference for Breast Cancer in Young Women (BCY4) took place in October 2018, in Lugano, Switzerland, organized by the European School of Oncology (ESO) and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO). Consensus recommendations for the management of breast cancer in young women were updated from BCY3 with incorporation of new evidence to inform the guidelines. Areas of research priorities were also identified. This article summarizes the ESO-ESMO international consensus recommendations, which are also endorsed by the European Society of Breast Specialists (EUSOMA).

Strong impact of MammaPrint and BluePrint on treatment decisions in luminal early breast cancer: results of the WSG-PRIMe study.

PURPOSE: The WSG-PRIMe Study prospectively evaluated the impact of the 70-gene signature MammaPrint® (MP) and the 80-gene molecular subtyping assay BluePrint® on clinical therapy decisions in luminal early breast cancer. METHODS: 452 hormone receptor (HR)-positive and HER2-negative patients were recruited (N0, N1). Physicians provided initial therapy recommendations based on clinicopathological factors. After prospective risk classification by MammaPrint/BluePrint was revealed, post-test treatment recommendations and actual treatment were recorded. Decisional Conflict and anxiety were measured by questionnaires. RESULTS: Post-test switch (in chemotherapy (CT) recommendation) occurred in 29.1% of cases. Overall, physician adherence to MP risk assessment was 92.3% for low-risk and 94.3% for high-risk MP scores. Adherence was remarkably high in "discordant" groups: 74.7% of physicians initially recommending CT switched to CT omission following low-risk MP scores; conversely, 88.9% of physicians initially recommending CT omission switched to CT recommendations following high-risk MP scores. Most patients (99.2%) recommended to forgo CT post-test and 21.3% of patients with post-test CT recommendations did not undergo CT; among MP low-risk patients with pre-test and post-test CT recommendations, 40% did not actually undergo CT. Luminal subtype assessment by BluePrint was discordant with IHC assessment in 34% of patients. Patients' State Anxiety scores improved significantly overall, particularly in MP low-risk patients. Trait Anxiety scores increased slightly in MP high risk and decreased slightly in MP low-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: MammaPrint and BluePrint test results strongly impacted physicians' therapy decisions in luminal EBC with up to three involved lymph nodes. The high adherence to genetically determined risk assessment represents a key prerequisite for achieving a personalized cost-effective approach to disease management of early breast cancer.

Palbociclib plus letrozole as first-line therapy in estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer with extended follow-up.

PURPOSE: In the initial PALOMA-2 (NCT01740427) analysis with median follow-up of 23 months, palbociclib plus letrozole significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) [hazard ratio (HR) 0.58; P < 0.001]. Herein, we report results overall and by subgroups with extended follow-up. METHODS: In this double-blind, phase 3 study, post-menopausal women with ER+/HER2- ABC who had not received prior systemic therapy for their advanced disease were randomized 2:1 to palbociclib-letrozole or placebo-letrozole. Endpoints include investigator-assessed PFS (primary), safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of approximately 38 months, median PFS was 27.6 months for palbociclib-letrozole (n = 444) and 14.5 months for placebo-letrozole (n = 222) (HR 0.563; 1-sided P < 0.0001). All subgroups benefited from palbociclib treatment. The improvement of PFS with palbociclib-letrozole was maintained in the next 2 subsequent lines of therapy and delayed the use of chemotherapy (40.4 vs. 29.9 months for palbociclib-letrozole vs. placebo-letrozole). Safety data were consistent with the known profile. Patients' quality of life was maintained. CONCLUSIONS: With approximately 15 months of additional follow-up, palbociclib plus letrozole continued to demonstrate improved PFS compared with placebo plus letrozole in the overall population and across all patient subgroups, while the safety profile remained favorable and quality of life was maintained. These data confirm that palbociclib-letrozole should be considered the standard of care for first-line therapy in patients with ER+/HER2- ABC, including those with low disease burden or long disease-free interval. Sponsored by Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01740427.

Safety and efficacy of alternating treatment with EP2006, a filgrastim biosimilar, and reference filgrastim: a phase III, randomised, double-blind clinical study in the prevention of severe neutropenia in patients with breast cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy.

Background: In 2015, the biosimilar filgrastim EP2006 became the first biosimilar approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for commercial use in the United States, marketed as Zarxio® (Sandoz). This phase III randomised, double-blind registration study in patients with breast cancer receiving (neo)adjuvant myelosuppressive chemotherapy (TAC; docetaxel + doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide) compares reference filgrastim, Neupogen® (Amgen), with two groups receiving alternating treatment with reference and biosimilar every other cycle. Patients and methods: A total of 218 patients receiving 5 µg/kg/day filgrastim over six chemotherapy cycles were randomised 1: 1: 1: 1 into four arms. Two arms received only one product, biosimilar or reference (unswitched), and two arms (switched) received alternating treatments every other cycle (biosimilar then reference or vice versa over six cycles). Since the switch occurred from cycle 2 onwards, this analysis compared pooled switched groups to the unswitched reference group for efficacy during cycles 2-6. Safety was also assessed. Non-inferiority in febrile neutropenia (FN) rates between groups for cycles 2-6 was shown if 95% were within a pre-defined margin of - 15%. Results: A total of 109 patients switched treatment, and 52 patients received reference in all cycles. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The incidence of FN was 0% (reference) versus 3.4% (n = 3, switched) across cycles 2-6, with a difference of - 3.4% (95% confidence interval: -9.65% to 4.96%), showing non-inferiority. Infections occurred in 9.3% (switched) versus 9.9% (reference). Hospitalisation due to FN was low (one patient in cycle 6; switched). Adverse events related to filgrastim were reported in 42.1% (switched) versus 39.2% (reference) (all cycles). Musculoskeletal/connective tissue disorders related to filgrastim occurred in 35.5% (switched) versus 39.2% (reference) (all cycles), including bone pain (30.8% versus 33.3%). No neutralising antibodies were detected. Conclusions: There were no clinically meaningful results regarding efficacy, safety or immunogenicity when switching from reference to biosimilar filgrastim/EP2006, or vice versa.

Ten-year results of intense dose-dense chemotherapy show superior survival compared with a conventional schedule in high-risk primary breast cancer: final results of AGO phase III iddEPC trial.

Background: Primary breast cancer (BC) patients with extensive axillary lymph-node involvement have a limited prognosis. The Arbeitsgemeinschaft fuer Gynaekologische Onkologie (AGO) trial compared intense dose-dense (idd) adjuvant chemotherapy with conventionally scheduled chemotherapy in high-risk BC patients. Here we report the final, 10-year follow-up analysis. Patients and methods: Enrolment took place between December 1998 and April 2003. A total of 1284 patients with 4 or more involved axillary lymph nodes were randomly assigned to receive 3 courses each of idd sequential epirubicin, paclitaxel and cyclophosphamide (iddEPC) q2w or standard epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel (EC â†’ P) q3w. Event-free survival (EFS) was the primary end point. Results: A total of 658 patients were assigned to receive iddEPC and 626 patients were assigned to receive EC â†’ P. The median duration of follow-up was 122 months. EFS was 47% (95% CI 43% to 52%) in the standard group and 56% (95% CI 52% to 60%) in the iddEPC group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.87; log-rank P = 0.00014, one-sided]. This benefit was independent of menopausal, hormone receptor or HER2 status. Ten-year overall survival (OS) was 59% (95% CI 55% to 63%) for patients in the standard group and 69% (95% CI 65% to 73%) for patients in the iddEPC group (HR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.60-0.87; log-rank P = 0.0007, two-sided). Nine versus two cases of secondary myeloid leukemia/myelodysplastic syndrome were observed in the iddEPC and the EC â†’ P arm, respectively. Conclusion: The previously reported OS benefit of iddEPC in comparison to conventionally dosed EC â†’ P has been further increased and achieved an absolute difference of 10% after 10 years of follow-up.

nab-Paclitaxel plus carboplatin or gemcitabine versus gemcitabine plus carboplatin as first-line treatment of patients with triple-negative metastatic breast cancer: results from the tnAcity trial.

Background: Metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) has a poor prognosis and aggressive clinical course. tnAcity evaluated the efficacy and safety of first-line nab-paclitaxel plus carboplatin (nab-P/C), nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nab-P/G), and gemcitabine plus carboplatin (G/C) in patients with mTNBC. Patients and methods: Patients with pathologically confirmed mTNBC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic BC received (1 : 1 : 1) nab-P 125 mg/m2 plus C AUC 2, nab-P 125 mg/m2 plus G 1000 mg/m2, or G 1000 mg/m2 plus C AUC 2, all on days 1, 8 q3w. Phase II primary end point: investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), percentage of patients initiating cycle 6 with doublet therapy, and safety. Results: In total, 191 patients were enrolled (nab-P/C, n = 64; nab-P/G, n = 61; G/C, n = 66). PFS was significantly longer with nab-P/C versus nab-P/G [median, 8.3 versus 5.5 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.59 [95% CI, 0.38-0.92]; P = 0.02] or G/C (median, 8.3 versus 6.0 months; HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.37-0.90]; P = 0.02). OS was numerically longer with nab-P/C versus nab-P/G (median, 16.8 versus 12.1 months; HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.47-1.13]; P = 0.16) or G/C (median, 16.8 versus 12.6 months; HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.52-1.22]; P = 0.29). ORR was 73%, 39%, and 44%, respectively. In the nab-P/C, nab-P/G, and G/C groups, 64%, 56%, and 50% of patients initiated cycle 6 with a doublet. Grade ≥3 adverse events were mainly hematologic. Conclusions: First-line nab-P/C was active in mTNBC and resulted in a significantly longer PFS and improved risk/benefit profile versus nab-P/G or G/C.

Impact of palbociclib plus letrozole on patient-reported health-related quality of life: results from the PALOMA-2 trial.

Background: Patient-reported outcomes are integral in benefit-risk assessments of new treatment regimens. The PALOMA-2 study provides the largest body of evidence for patient-reported health-related quality of life (QOL) for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) receiving first-line endocrine-based therapy (palbociclib plus letrozole and letrozole alone). Patients and methods: Treatment-naïve postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) MBC were randomized 2 : 1 to palbociclib plus letrozole (n = 444) or placebo plus letrozole (n = 222). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed at baseline, day 1 of cycles 2 and 3, and day 1 of every other cycle from cycle 5 using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Breast and EuroQOL 5 dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaires. Results: As of 26 February 2016, the median duration of follow-up was 23 months. Baseline scores were comparable between the two treatment arms. No significant between-arm differences were observed in change from baseline in FACT-Breast Total, FACT-General Total, or EQ-5D scores. Significantly greater improvement in pain scores was observed in the palbociclib plus letrozole arm (-0.256 versus -0.098; P = 0.0183). In both arms, deterioration of FACT-Breast Total score was significantly delayed in patients without progression versus those with progression and patients with partial or complete response versus those without. No significant difference was observed in FACT-Breast and EQ-5D index scores in patients with and without neutropenia. Conclusions: Overall, women with MBC receiving first-line endocrine therapy have a good QOL. The addition of palbociclib to letrozole maintains health-related QOL and improves pain scores in treatment-naïve postmenopausal patients with ER+/HER2- MBC compared with letrozole alone. Significantly greater delay in deterioration of health-related QOL was observed in patients without progression versus those who progressed and in patients with an objective response versus non-responders. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01740427 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01740427).