Long-term outcomes of a randomized, open-label, phase II study comparing cabazitaxel versus paclitaxel as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with triple-negative or luminal B/HER2-negative breast cancer (GENEVIEVE).

BACKGROUND: The GENEVIEVE study, comparing neoadjuvant cabazitaxel versus paclitaxel in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and luminal B/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer (BC), previously reported significant differences in pathological complete response (pCR) rates. Effects on long-term outcome are unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: GENEVIEVE randomized patients with cT2-3, any cN or cT1, cN+/pNSLN+, centrally confirmed TNBC or luminal B/HER2-negative BC (latter defined as estrogen/progesterone receptor-positive and >14% Ki-67-stained cells) to receive either cabazitaxel 25 mg/m2 q3w for four cycles or paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 weekly for 12 weeks. Anthracycline-containing chemotherapy was allowed in case of histologically proven invasive residuals as neoadjuvant treatment or after surgery as adjuvant treatment. Here we report the secondary endpoints invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of the 333 patients randomized, 74.7% and 83.2% completed treatment in the cabazitaxel and paclitaxel arms, respectively. After a median follow-up of 89.3 months (interquartile range 68.8-97.3 months), 80 iDFS events (43 after cabazitaxel and 37 after paclitaxel) and 47 deaths (23 after cabazitaxel and 24 after paclitaxel) were reported. IDFS rates were not significantly different between the cabazitaxel and paclitaxel arms after a 3-year (83.6% versus 85.0%) and 5-year follow-up (76.2% versus 78.3%) [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.27, 95% confidence interval 0.82-1.96, P = 0.294], respectively. DDFS rates at 3 years (88.6% versus 87.8%) and 5 years (82.1% versus 82.8%) for cabazitaxel and paclitaxel were comparable (HR = 1.15, P = 0.573). Similarly, OS rates at 3 years (91.6% versus 91.8%) and 5 years (89.2% versus 86.8%) showed no significant differences (HR = 1.05, P = 0.872). Subgroup analysis for TNBC and luminal B/HER2-negative BCs indicated no significant variations in 3- or 5-year iDFS, DDFS, or OS. CONCLUSIONS: The significant differences in pCR rates observed in both treatment arms did not significantly impact long-term outcomes for patients treated with cabazitaxel versus paclitaxel in the GENEVIEVE trial.

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.

Neoadjuvant durvalumab improves survival in early triple-negative breast cancer independent of pathological complete response.

BACKGROUND: Addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is a promising strategy in early breast cancer, but the optimal duration of therapy is currently unknown. In the GeparNuevo (NCT02685059) trial, addition of durvalumab to NACT as previously reported led to a moderate increase in pathological complete response (pCR) rate by an absolute 9% (P = 0.287). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with cT1b-cT4a-d triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) received durvalumab 1.5 g or placebo every 4 weeks added to nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 weekly for 12 weeks, followed by durvalumab/placebo every 4 weeks plus epirubicin/cyclophosphamide every 2 weeks followed by surgery. Durvalumab was not continued after surgery. The primary objective was pCR. Secondary endpoints included invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 174 patients were randomised between June 2016 and October 2017. After a median follow-up of 43.7 months, 34 events had occurred. Despite a non-significant increase in the pCR rate, significant differences were observed for 3-year iDFS, DDFS and OS: iDFS was 85.6% with durvalumab versus 77.2% with placebo [hazard ratio (HR) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24-0.97, stratified log-rank P = 0.036]; DDFS 91.7% versus 78.4% (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13-0.74, P = 0.005); OS 95.2% versus 83.5% (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.08-0.72, P = 0.006). pCR patients had 3-year iDFS of 95.5% with durvalumab and 86.1% without (HR 0.22, 95% CI 0.05-1.06). In the non-pCR cohort 3-year iDFS was 76.3% versus 69.7% (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.29-1.54). Multivariable analysis confirmed a durvalumab effect independent of the pCR effect. No new safety signals occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Durvalumab added to NACT in TNBC significantly improved survival despite a modest pCR increase and no adjuvant component of durvalumab. Additional studies are needed to clarify the optimal duration and sequence of checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of early TNBC.

Optimizing treatment management of trastuzumab deruxtecan in clinical practice of breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) targets human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and has been evaluated in patients with HER2-positive unresectable/metastatic breast cancer in the phase II DESTINY-Breast01 trial (NCT03248492; DS8201-A-U201) and the randomized phase III DESTINY-Breast03 trial (NCT03529110; DS8201-A-U302). Approximately 20 additional studies are ongoing in breast cancer, including HER2-low breast cancer, and other solid tumor types within the DESTINY trial program. T-DXd has demonstrated a generally manageable safety profile, with low-grade hematologic and gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs) among the most common; interstitial lung disease (ILD)/pneumonitis has been observed in patients receiving T-DXd and can be severe. This review discusses the management of common AEs and AEs of special interest in patients with HER2-positive unresectable/metastatic breast cancer, including nausea and vomiting, neutropenia, infusion-related reactions, alopecia, fatigue, ILD/pneumonitis, and left ventricular dysfunction. METHODS: Expert opinions, institutional protocols, and strategies to help optimize AE management and maximize the potential benefits of T-DXd in patients with breast cancer from five oncologists treating patients with T-DXd in North America and Europe are discussed. RESULTS: Prophylaxis for nausea and vomiting and proactive management of ILD/pneumonitis are especially important in treating patients with T-DXd. Management strategies for other T-DXd-related AEs of interest (e.g. neutropenia, infusion-related reactions, alopecia, fatigue, and left ventricular dysfunction) are also discussed. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides context for understanding the usage, monitoring, and management practices of other health care providers and institutions with experience using T-DXd to help with safe and effective management of T-DXd-related AEs, particularly since the duration of T-DXd treatment may be quite long. Proper management of T-DXd-related AEs will allow optimal exposure and benefit from T-DXd and will help avoid premature discontinuation or improper dose reductions.

Long-term efficacy and safety of addition of carboplatin with or without veliparib to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer: 4-year follow-up data from BrighTNess, a randomized phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Primary analyses of the phase III BrighTNess trial showed addition of carboplatin with/without veliparib to neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved pathological complete response (pCR) rates with manageable acute toxicity in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Here, we report 4.5-year follow-up data from the trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with untreated stage II-III TNBC were randomized (2 : 1 : 1) to paclitaxel (weekly for 12 doses) plus: (i) carboplatin (every 3 weeks for four cycles) plus veliparib (twice daily); (ii) carboplatin plus veliparib placebo; or (iii) carboplatin placebo plus veliparib placebo. All patients then received doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide every 2-3 weeks for four cycles. The primary endpoint was pCR. Secondary endpoints included event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Since the co-primary endpoint of increased pCR with carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus carboplatin with paclitaxel was not met, secondary analyses are descriptive. RESULTS: Of 634 patients, 316 were randomized to carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel, 160 to carboplatin with paclitaxel, and 158 to paclitaxel. With median follow-up of 4.5 years, the hazard ratio for EFS for carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus paclitaxel was 0.63 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-0.92, P = 0.02], but 1.12 (95% CI 0.72-1.72, P = 0.62) for carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus carboplatin with paclitaxel. In post hoc analysis, the hazard ratio for EFS was 0.57 (95% CI 0.36-0.91, P = 0.02) for carboplatin with paclitaxel versus paclitaxel. OS did not differ significantly between treatment arms, nor did rates of myelodysplastic syndromes, acute myeloid leukemia, or other secondary malignancies. CONCLUSIONS: Improvement in pCR with the addition of carboplatin was associated with long-term EFS benefit with a manageable safety profile, and without increasing the risk of second malignancies, whereas adding veliparib did not impact EFS. These findings support the addition of carboplatin to weekly paclitaxel followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage TNBC.

Adjuvant T-DM1 versus trastuzumab in patients with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant therapy for HER2-positive breast cancer: subgroup analyses from KATHERINE.

BACKGROUND: In the KATHERINE study (NCT01772472), patients with residual invasive early breast cancer (EBC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) plus human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted therapy had a 50% reduction in risk of recurrence or death with adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) versus trastuzumab. Here, we present additional exploratory safety and efficacy analyses. PATIENTS AND METHODS: KATHERINE enrolled HER2-positive EBC patients with residual invasive disease in the breast/axilla at surgery after NACT containing a taxane (± anthracycline, ± platinum) and trastuzumab (± pertuzumab). Patients were randomized to adjuvant T-DM1 (n = 743) or trastuzumab (n = 743) for 14 cycles. The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). RESULTS: The incidence of peripheral neuropathy (PN) was similar regardless of neoadjuvant taxane type. Irrespective of treatment arm, baseline PN was associated with longer PN duration (median, 105-109 days longer) and lower resolution rate (∼65% versus ∼82%). Prior platinum therapy was associated with more grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia in the T-DM1 arm (13.5% versus 3.8%), but there was no grade ≥3 hemorrhage in these patients. Risk of recurrence or death was decreased with T-DM1 versus trastuzumab in patients who received anthracycline-based NACT [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.51; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38-0.67], non-anthracycline-based NACT (HR = 0.43; 95% CI: 0.22-0.82), presented with cT1, cN0 tumors (0 versus 6 IDFS events), or had particularly high-risk tumors (HRs ranged from 0.43 to 0.72). The central nervous system (CNS) was more often the site of first recurrence in the T-DM1 arm (5.9% versus 4.3%), but T-DM1 was not associated with a difference in overall risk of CNS recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: T-DM1 provides clinical benefit across patient subgroups, including small tumors and particularly high-risk tumors and does not increase the overall risk of CNS recurrence. NACT type had a minimal impact on safety.

Reconstructing tumor history in breast cancer: signatures of mutational processes and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy⋆.

BACKGROUND: Different endogenous and exogenous mutational processes act over the evolutionary history of a malignant tumor, driven by abnormal DNA editing, mutagens or age-related DNA alterations, among others, to generate the specific mutational landscape of each individual tumor. The signatures of these mutational processes can be identified in large genomic datasets. We investigated the hypothesis that genomic patterns of mutational signatures are associated with the clinical behavior of breast cancer, in particular chemotherapy response and survival, with a particular focus on therapy-resistant disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Whole exome sequencing was carried out in 405 pretherapeutic samples from the prospective neoadjuvant multicenter GeparSepto study. We analyzed 11 mutational signatures including biological processes such as APOBEC-mutagenesis, homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), mismatch repair deficiency and also age-related or tobacco-induced alterations. RESULTS: Different subgroups of breast carcinomas were defined mainly by differences in HRD-related and APOBEC-related mutational signatures and significant differences between hormone-receptor (HR)-negative and HR-positive tumors as well as correlations with age, Ki-67 and immunological parameters were observed. We could identify mutational processes that were linked to increased pathological complete response rates to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with high significance. In univariate analyses for HR-positive tumors signatures, S3 (HRD, P < 0.001) and S13 (APOBEC, P = 0.001) as well as exonic mutation rate (P = 0.002) were significantly correlated with increased pathological complete response rates. The signatures S3 (HRD, P = 0.006) and S4 (tobacco, P = 0.011) were prognostic for reduced disease-free survival of patients with chemotherapy-resistant tumors. CONCLUSION: The results of this investigation suggest that the clinical behavior of a tumor, in particular, response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and disease-free survival of therapy-resistant tumors, could be predicted by the composition of mutational signatures as an indicator of the individual genomic history of a tumor. After additional validations, mutational signatures might be used to identify tumors with an increased response rate to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and to define therapy-resistant subgroups for future therapeutic interventions.

Neoadjuvant paclitaxel/olaparib in comparison to paclitaxel/carboplatinum in patients with HER2-negative breast cancer and homologous recombination deficiency (GeparOLA study).

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and toxicity of olaparib as combination therapy in early breast cancer (BC) patients with homologous recombinant deficiency (HRD) [score high and/or germline (g) or tumour (t) BRCA1/2 mutation] is not well described. GeparOLA (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02789332) investigated olaparib in combination with paclitaxel in HER2-negative early BC with HRD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with untreated primary HER2-negative cT2-cT4a-d or cT1c with either cN+ or pNSLN+ or cT1c and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) or cT1c and Ki-67>20% BC with HRD were randomised either to paclitaxel (P) 80 mg/m2 weekly plus olaparib (O) 100 mg twice daily for 12 weeks or P plus carboplatinum (Cb) area under the curve 2 weekly for 12 weeks, both followed by epirubicin/cyclophosphamide (EC). Stratification factors were hormone receptor (HR) status (HR+ versus HR-) and age (<40 versus ≥40 years). The primary endpoint was pathological complete response (pCR; ypT0/is ypN0). A two-sided one-group χ2-test was planned to exclude a pCR rate of ≤55% in the PO-EC arm. Secondary end points were other pCR definitions, breast conservation rate, clinical/imaging response, tolerability and safety. RESULTS: A total of 107 patients were randomised between September 2016 and July 2018; 106 (PO N = 69; PCb N = 37) started treatment. Median age was 47.0 years (range 25.0-71.0); 36.2% had cT1, 61.0% cT2, 2.9% cT3, and 31.8% cN-positive tumours; grade 3 tumours: 86.8%; Ki-67>20%: 89.6%; TNBC: 72.6%; confirmed gBRCA1/2 mutation: 56.2%. The pCR rate with PO was 55.1% [90% confidence interval (CI) 44.5% to 65.3%] versus PCb 48.6% (90% CI 34.3% to 63.2%). Analysis for the stratified subgroups showed higher pCR rates with PO in the cohorts of patients <40 years and HR+ patients. CONCLUSION: GeparOLA could not exclude a pCR rate of ≤55% in the PO arm. PO was significantly better tolerated and the combination merits further evaluation.

Tumor mutational burden and immune infiltration as independent predictors of response to neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibition in early TNBC in GeparNuevo.

BACKGROUND: The predictive value of tumor mutational burden (TMB), alone or in combination with an immune gene expression profile (GEP), for response to neoadjuvant therapy in early triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is currently not known, either for immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) or conventional chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We obtained both whole exome sequencing and RNA-Seq data from pretreatment samples of 149 TNBC of the recent neoadjuvant ICB trial, GeparNuevo. In a predefined analysis, we assessed the predictive value of TMB and a previously developed immune GEP for pathological complete remission (pCR). RESULTS: Median TMB was 1.52 mut/Mb (range 0.02-7.65) and was significantly higher in patients with pCR (median 1.87 versus 1.39; P = 0.005). In multivariate analysis, odds ratios for pCR per mut/Mb were 2.06 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.33-3.20, P = 0.001] among all patients, 1.77 (95% CI 1.00-3.13, P = 0.049) in the durvalumab treatment arm, and 2.82 (95% CI 1.21-6.54, P = 0.016) in the placebo treatment arm, respectively. We also found that both continuous TMB and immune GEP (or tumor infiltrating lymphocytes) independently predicted pCR. When we stratified patients in groups based on the upper tertile of TMB and median GEP, we observed a pCR rate of 82% (95% CI 60% to 95%) in the group with both high TMB and GEP in contrast to only 28% (95% CI 16% to 43%) in the group with both low TMB and GEP. CONCLUSIONS: TMB and immune GEP add independent value for pCR prediction. Our results recommend further analysis of TMB in combination with immune parameters to individually tailor therapies in breast cancer.

A randomised phase II study investigating durvalumab in addition to an anthracycline taxane-based neoadjuvant therapy in early triple-negative breast cancer: clinical results and biomarker analysis of GeparNuevo study.

BACKGROUND: Combining immune-checkpoint inhibitors with chemotherapy yielded an increased response rates in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Therefore, we evaluated the addition of durvalumab to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in primary TNBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: GeparNuevo is a randomised phase II double-blind placebo-controlled study randomising patients with TNBC to durvalumab or placebo given every 4 weeks in addition to nab-paclitaxel followed by standard EC. In the window-phase durvalumab/placebo alone was given 2 weeks before start of nab-paclitaxel. Randomisation was stratified by stromal tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte (sTILs). Patients with primary cT1b-cT4a-d disease, centrally confirmed TNBC and sTILs were included. Primary objective was pathological complete response (pCR) (ypT0 ypN0). RESULTS: A total of 174 patients were randomised, 117 participated in the window-phase. Median age was 49.5 years (range 23-76); 47 patients (27%) were younger than 40 years; 113 (65%) had stage ≥IIA disease, 25 (14%) high sTILs, 138 of 158 (87%) were PD-L1-positive. pCR rate with durvalumab was 53.4% (95% CI 42.5% to 61.4%) versus placebo 44.2% (95% CI 33.5% to 55.3%; unadjusted continuity corrected χ2P = 0.287), corresponding to OR = 1.45 (95% CI 0.80-2.63, unadjusted Wald P = 0.224). Durvalumab effect was seen only in the window cohort (pCR 61.0% versus 41.4%, OR = 2.22, 95% CI 1.06-4.64, P = 0.035; interaction P = 0.048). In both arms, significantly increased pCR (P < 0.01) were observed with higher sTILs. There was a trend for increased pCR rates in PD-L1-positive tumours, which was significant for PD-L1-tumour cell in durvalumab (P = 0.045) and for PD-L1-immune cell in placebo arm (P = 0.040). The most common immune-related adverse events were thyroid dysfunction any grade in 47%. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the addition of durvalumab to anthracycline-/taxane-based NACT increases pCR rate particularly in patients treated with durvalumab alone before start of chemotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02685059.

Dose tailoring of adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer based on hematologic toxicities: further results from the prospective PANTHER study with focus on obese patients.

Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) for breast cancer improves relapse-free survival (BCRFS) and overall survival. Differences in terms of efficacy and toxicity could partly be explained by the significant interpatient variability in pharmacokinetics which cannot be captured by dosing according to body surface area. Consequently, tailored dosing was prospectively evaluated in the PANTHER trial. Patients and methods: PANTHER is a multicenter, open-label, randomized phase III trial which compared tailored, dose-dense (DD) epirubicin/cyclophosphamide (E/C) and tailored docetaxel (D) (tDD) with standard interval 5-fluorouracil/E/C and D. The primary end point was BCRFS and the primary efficacy analysis has been previously published. In this secondary analysis, we aimed to retrospectively explore the concept of dose tailoring. Our two hypotheses were that BCRFS would not vary depending on the cumulative administered epirubicin dose; and that dose tailoring would lead to appropriate dosing and improved outcomes for obese patients, who are known to have worse prognosis and increased toxicity after DD ACT. Results: Patients treated with tDD had similar BCRFS regardless of the cumulative epirubicin dose (P = 0.495), while obese patients in this group [body mass index (BMI) ≥30] had improved BCRFS compared with nonobese ones (BMI <30) [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30-0.89, P = 0.02]. Moreover, tDD was associated with improved BCRFS compared with standard treatment only in obese patients (HR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.26-0.90, P = 0.022) but not in nonobese ones (HR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.60-1.04, P = 0.089). The differences were not formally statistically significant (P for interaction 0.175). There were no differences in terms of toxicity across the epirubicin dose levels or the BMI groups. Conclusions: Dose tailoring is a feasible strategy that can potentially improve outcomes in obese patients without increasing toxicity and should be pursued in further clinical studies. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00798070.

Systematic analysis of parameters predicting pathological axillary status (ypN0 vs. ypN+) in patients with breast cancer converting from cN+ to ycN0 through primary systemic therapy (PST).

Optimization of axillary staging among patients converting from clinically node-positive disease to clinically node-negative disease through primary systemic therapy is needed. We aimed at developing a nomogram predicting the probability of positive axillary status after chemotherapy based on clinical/pathological parameters. Patients from study arm C of the SENTINA trial were included. Univariable/multivariable analyses were performed for 13 clinical/pathological parameters to predict a positive pathological axillary status after chemotherapy using logistic regression models. Odds ratios and 95%-confidence-intervals were reported. Model performance was assessed by leave-one-out cross-validation. Calculations were performed using the SAS Software (Version 9.4, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). 369 of 553 patients in Arm C were included in multivariable analysis. Stepwise backward variable selection based on a multivariable analysis resulted in a model including estrogen receptor (ER) status (odds ratio (OR) 3.916, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.318-6.615, p < 0.001), multifocality (OR 2.106, 95% CI 1.203-3.689, p = 0.0092), lymphovascular invasion (OR 9.196, 95% CI 4.734-17.864, p < 0.001), and sonographic tumor diameter after PST (OR 1.034, 95% CI 1.010-1.059, p = 0.0051). When validated, our model demonstrated an accuracy of 70.2% using 0.5 as cut-point. An area under the curve of 0.81 was calculated. The use of individual parameters as predictors of lymph node status after chemotherapy resulted in an inferior accuracy. Our model was able to predict the probability of a positive axillary nodal status with a high accuracy. The use of individual parameters showed reduced predictive performance. Overall, tumor biology was the strongest parameter in our models.

Survival analysis of carboplatin added to an anthracycline/taxane-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy and HRD score as predictor of response-final results from GeparSixto.

Background: In the neoadjuvant GeparSixto study, adding carboplatin to taxane- and anthracycline-based chemotherapy improved pathological complete response (pCR) rates in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Here, we present survival data and the potential prognostic and predictive role of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). Patients and methods: Patients were randomized to paclitaxel plus nonpegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Myocet®) (PM) or PM plus carboplatin (PMCb). The secondary study end points disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. Median follow-up was 47.3 months. HRD was among the exploratory analyses in GeparSixto and was successfully measured in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor samples of 193/315 (61.3%) participants with TNBC. Homologous recombination (HR) deficiency was defined as HRD score ≥42 and/or presence of tumor BRCA mutations (tmBRCA). Results: A significantly better DFS (hazard ratio 0.56, 95% CI 0.34-0.93; P = 0.022) was observed in patients with TNBC when treated with PMCb. The improvement of OS with PMCb was not statistically significant. Additional carboplatin did not improve DFS or OS in patients with HER2-positive tumors. HR deficiency was detected in 136 (70.5%) of 193 triple-negative tumors, of which 82 (60.3%) showed high HRD score without tmBRCA. HR deficiency independently predicted pCR (ypT0 ypN0) [odds ratio (OR) 2.60, 95% CI 1.26-5.37, P = 0.008]. Adding carboplatin to PM significantly increased the pCR rate from 33.9% to 63.5% in HR deficient tumors (P = 0.001), but only marginally in HR nondeficient tumors (from 20.0% to 29.6%, P = 0.540; test for interaction P = 0.327). pCR rates with carboplatin were also higher (63.2%) than without carboplatin (31.7%; OR 3.69, 1.46-9.37, P = 0.005) in patients with high HRD score but no tmBRCA. DFS rates were improved with addition of carboplatin, both in HR nondeficient (hazard ratio 0.44, 0.17-1.17, P = 0.086) and HR deficient tumors (hazard ratio 0.49, 0.23-1.04, P = 0.059). Conclusions: The addition of carboplatin to neoadjuvant PM improved DFS significantly in TNBC. Long-term survival analyses support the neoadjuvant use of carboplatin in TNBC. HR deficiency in TNBC and HRD score in non-tmBRCA TNBC are predictors of response. HRD does not predict for carboplatin benefit.

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.

German Adjuvant Intergroup Node-positive Study (GAIN): a phase III trial comparing two dose-dense regimens (iddEPC versus ddEC-PwX) in high-risk early breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Dose-dense (dd) regimens are one of the preferred options for the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer patients with intermediate to high risk. The German Adjuvant Intergroup Node-positive trial aimed at optimizing intense dd (idd) strategies by evaluating drug combinations and the addition of capecitabine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women (aged 18 years and biologically <65 years) with histologically involved axillary lymph nodes were randomly assigned to receive three courses each of epirubicin (E) 150 mg/m2, paclitaxel (P) 225 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide (C) 2500 mg/m2 (reduced to 2000 mg/m2 after recruitment of 1200 patients) q2w intravenously (i.v.) (iddEPC-regimen) or ddEC (E 112.5 mg/m2 + C 600 mg/m2, i.v. q2w for 4 cycles) followed by paclitaxel weekly (Pw 67.5 mg/m2 i.v. q8d for 10 weeks) plus capecitabine (X 2000 mg/m2 p.o. days 1-14, q22 for 4 cycles) (ddEC-PwX-regimen). Further randomization assigned patients to ibandronate for 2 years versus observation and to pegfilgrastim day 2 versus 4. RESULTS: From June 2004 to August 2008, 2994 patients were randomized to either iddEPC (N = 1498), or ddEC-PwX (N = 1496) and started treatment. Median age was 50 years; pN1 (37.8%), pN2 (35.3%); pN3 (26.9%); 46.4% were G3 tumors; 76.9% hormone receptor-positive and 22% HER2-positive. After a median follow-up of 74 months, 645 events and 383 deaths were recorded. Hematological adverse events grades 3-4 were more common with iddEPC (P < 0.001), nonhematological with ddEC-PwX (P = 0.04), even if the toxicity profile of the two regimens was different. At 5 years, estimated disease-free survival rates for ddEC-PwX and iddEPC were 81.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 79.5-83.6] versus 80.2% (95% CI 78.0-82.2). Hazard ratio (HR)=0.95 (95% CI 0.81-1.11, log-rank P = 0.49). Five-year overall survival rates were 89.4% for ddEC-PwX (95% CI 87.7-91.0) and 89.0% for iddEPC (95% CI 87.2-90.6), HR = 0.85 (95% CI 0.69-1.04, log-rank P = 0.10). CONCLUSION: Adding capecitabine to ddEC-Pw did not improve outcome in comparison to iddEPC but increased toxicity and should not be recommended for further use.

Dual HER2-blockade with pertuzumab and trastuzumab in HER2-positive early breast cancer: a subanalysis of data from the randomized phase III GeparSepto trial.

Background: The neoadjuvant phase III GeparSepto study showed that substituting nab-paclitaxel for standard solvent-based paclitaxel significantly improved the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate achieved with a sequential neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen of paclitaxel, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide for high-risk primary breast cancer. Recent trials demonstrated that in HER2+ breast cancer pCR can be increased by using pertuzumab in addition to trastuzumab and chemotherapy. The present analysis focuses on efficacy and safety data from the subset of patients with HER2+ tumors from the GeparSepto trial (n = 396) in comparison to the HER2- cohort. Patients and methods: Patients with histologically confirmed breast cancer (n = 1206) received four cycles of weekly paclitaxel [either solvent-based (Pac) or nab-paclitaxel (nab-Pac), according to randomization] followed by 4 cycles of epirubicin 90 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 q3w, with concurrent trastuzumab and pertuzumab q3w for those with HER2+ tumors. The primary endpoint was pCR defined as ypT0 ypN0. Results: Higher rates of pCR were achieved in HER2+ than in HER2- tumors (57.8% versus 22.0%, P < 0.0001), with the highest rate in the HER2+/HR- cohort (71.0%; 66.7% Pac, 74.6% nab-Pac). In HER2+/HR+ tumors, the pCR rate was 52.9% (49.7% Pac, 56.4% nab-Pac). Grade ≥3 toxic effects were significantly more common in HER2+ than in HER2- patients, with grade 3-4 diarrhea in 7.6% versus 0.9% (P < 0.001) and febrile neutropenia in 6.3% versus 3.3% (P = 0.023) of patients. Left ventricular ejection fraction decreases from baseline were uncommon, with 2.0% versus 0.4% of patients showing decreases to <50% along with a ≥10% decrease from baseline. Conclusion: In HER2+ early breast cancer, a dual HER2-targeted combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab, together with taxane-epirubicin-cyclophosphamide neoadjuvant chemotherapy, achieved high rates of pCR.

Higher rate of severe toxicities in obese patients receiving dose-dense (dd) chemotherapy according to unadjusted body surface area: results of the prospectively randomized GAIN study.

BACKGROUND: In routine clinical practice, chemotherapy doses are frequently capped at a body surface area (BSA) of 2.0 m2 or adjusted to an ideal weight for obese patients due to safety reasons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between August 2004 and July 2008, a total of 3023 patients were enrolled in the GAIN study, a randomized phase III adjuvant trial, comparing two types of dose-dense (dd) regimen [epirubicin, docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (iddETC) versus epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (EC) followed by docetaxel (T) plus capecitabine (X)]. We retrospectively evaluated a total of 555 patients with a BMI of ≥30 for safety and outcome. RESULTS: Eighteen percent of all patients were obese: 31% of those received chemotherapy according to an unadjusted BSA. For the remaining patients, BSA was adjusted to ideal weight or was capped at 2.0 m2. A total of 15% of obese patients receiving full (unadjusted) dose of chemotherapy versus 6% of obese patients with an adjusted BSA experienced febrile neutropenia (P = 0.003) and 9% versus 3% high-grade thrombopenia (P = 0.002). Overall, 17% versus 10% had a thromboembolic event (P = 0.017), which was high grade in 13% versus 6%, respectively (P = 0.019), and 3% versus 0.3% high-grade hot flushes (P = 0.013). Dizziness (5% versus 11%; P = 0.016), diarrhea (19% versus 27%; P = 0.033) and an increase in serum creatinine (7% versus 14%; P = 0.019) were higher in the adjusted group. However, no differences in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were observed between non-obese patients, obese patients receiving full-dose chemotherapy or according to an adjusted BSA [5-year DFS 81% (confidence interval 79% to 83%) versus 82% (75% to 87%) versus 81% (76% to 84%); P = 0.761; 5-year OS 90% (88% to 91%) versus 86% (80% to 91%) versus 88% (84% to 91%); P = 0.143]. CONCLUSION: Obese patients receiving dd chemotherapy according to their real BSA have a higher risk of developing severe toxicities without influencing survival. Therefore, a dose adjustment of intense dd chemotherapy should be carried out to avoid life-threatening complications.