Safety analysis, association with response and previous treatments of everolimus and exemestane in 181 metastatic breast cancer patients: A multicenter Italian experience.

PURPOSE: The everolimus and exemestane combination represents a treatment option for the endocrine sensitive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. The toxicity profile reported in the Bolero 2 trial showed the feasibility in the selected patients. Few data are available for the unselected population. METHODS: In order to evaluate the safety in the unselected population of the clinical practice and to evaluate a possible association of toxicities with previous treatments, clinical data from 181 consecutive patients were retrospectively collected. RESULTS: Due to toxic events, everolimus dosage was reduced to 5 mg in 27% of patients. No association was found in the analysis between toxicity and number of prior therapies, neither between toxicity and response. In the multivariate analysis the previous exposure to anthracyclines for advanced disease represents the only predictive factor of developing grade ≥2 toxicity (OR = 2.85 CI 95% 1.07-7.59, p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: The association of everolimus and exemestane has confirmed to be a safe and effective treatment for endocrine sensitive MBC patients even in routine clinical practice. The rate of treatment discontinuation due to toxicity is low and none association between previous number of treatments and response or between toxicity and response was found.

Optimal tolerability and high efficacy of a modified schedule of lapatinib-capecitabine in advanced breast cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Diarrhea in relation to the lapatinib-capecitabine regimen is a common and debilitating side effect which may interfere with optimal treatment delivery. We performed a post hoc analysis in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive advanced breast cancer patients treated with a modified schedule in its administration, aimed primarily to evaluate grade (G) ≥ 2 diarrhea incidence and, secondarily, treatment efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Treatment schedule consisted of lapatinib 1,250 mg daily for the first 10 days, then in combination with capecitabine, 2,000 mg/m(2), starting day 11 for the first cycle, and thereafter from day 8, for 14 days of a 21-day cycle, in 3 daily administrations. Lapatinib was dissolved in water, and cholestyramine was continuously given twice a day. RESULTS: Among 38 patients treated and analyzed, the incidence of G ≥ 2 diarrhea was 13.2 %. In 28 patients diarrhea was not observed, while G1-2 diarrhea was reported in 9 (23.7 %) patients; a single episode of G3 diarrhea was observed in 1 (2.6 %) patient. Overall response rate was 34.2 %, clinical benefit 55.3 %, and median progression-free survival 10 months. CONCLUSION: The results of the present post hoc analysis are very encouraging, both in terms of tolerability and treatment efficacy, and all data compare favorably with previous reports of "conventional" administration of the lapatinib-capecitabine regimen.

Recurrence risk in small, node-negative, early breast cancer: a multicenter retrospective analysis.

PURPOSE: Recurrences and deaths are known to occur, even if less frequently, in small, node-negative breast cancer patients, and decision on adjuvant treatments remains controversial. In the present analysis, we evaluate recurrence risk in patients with pT1 a, b, c, node-negative, breast cancer, accordingly with some prognostic biological factors. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 900 node-negative patients (pT1a, b, c) surgery treated between 2000 and 2009 in four Italian oncologic centers. We defined 3 different cohorts: ER positive (ER+); Her-2 positive (Her-2+); and triple negative (TN). RESULTS: pT1a was seen in 7.6% of patients, 37.7 % pT1b, 54.8 % pT1c. Concerning the 3 different cohorts, 58.2 % were ER+; 10.8 % were Her-2+; 8.2 % were TN. Overall, chemotherapy was given to 3.0 %, 27.2 %, 69.8 % of pT1a, b, c, respectively, and to 22.7 %, 58.8 %, 68.9 % of ER+, Her-2+, TN subgroups. At a median follow-up of 67 months, 5-year DFS was 96.3 %, 89.2 %, 89.4 % in pT1a, b, c, respectively (100 %, 93.6 %, 89.8 % in ER+; 100 %, 78.7 %, 85.0 % in Her-2+; 100 %, 76.8 %, 85.2 % in TN) (p = ns). At multivariate analysis, histologic grade and Ki-67 resulted independent prognostic factors. Overall, 5-year OS was 98 %, without differences among pT1a, b, c, or among the 3 cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 5-year DFS was very favorable in this series of small, node-negative breast cancers, but Her-2+ and TN cohorts have a higher recurrence rate than ER+ cohort (p < 0.0001); pT1c, but also pT1b, in Her-2+ and TN subgroups, have a worse outcome, and effective chemotherapy treatment should be considered in these unfavorable subgroups.