Phase II open-label study of sunitinib in patients with advanced breast cancer.

This multicenter, open-label phase II study was conducted to evaluate sunitinib monotherapy in patients with either metastatic or locoregionally recurrent advanced breast cancer. Patients received sunitinib 37.5 mg on a continuous daily dosing schedule. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR); the predefined target ORR was 25 %. All 83 patients enrolled into the study received study treatment. The majority of patients (90 %) had metastatic disease; 92 % had received prior systemic therapies, and 60 % had received two or more regimens for early and/or advanced disease. The ORR was 8 % (95 % exact CI, 4-17), comprising seven partial responses. In patients with superficial lesions (defined as cutaneous or palpable chest wall lesions), the ORR was 20 % (three of 15 evaluable patients), which was higher than that in patients with non-superficial disease (9 %; six of 64 patients). Median progression-free survival in the overall population was 3.6 months (95 % CI, 2.4-3.9); median overall survival was 15.6 months (95 % CI, 14.0-22.7). No new or unexpected safety findings were reported. The most commonly reported adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (60 %), diarrhea (54 %), and nausea (49 %). The most commonly reported grade 3/4 AEs were fatigue (17 %), neutropenia (16 %), and thrombocytopenia (11 %). Four patients (5 %) had a dose reduction due to an AE, and 39 patients (47 %) had temporary discontinuations of therapy due to AEs. Two on-study deaths were reported, one due to a pulmonary embolism (considered related to treatment) and one attributed to dyspnea and a myocardial infarction (considered unrelated to treatment). Patient-reported outcomes suggested that sunitinib treatment did not have a negative impact overall on patients' functional domains or the majority of symptom scales. The trial did not meet its prespecified primary endpoint, and in view of the negative results obtained in several other trials, sunitinib will not be developed further for this indication.

Beliefs and perceptions of women with newly diagnosed breast cancer who refused conventional treatment in favor of alternative therapies.

PURPOSE: Although breast cancer is a highly treatable disease, some women reject conventional treatment opting for unproven "alternative therapy" that may contribute to poor health outcomes. This study sought to understand why some women make this decision and to identify messages that might lead to greater acceptance of evidence-based treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study explored treatment decision making through in-depth interviews with 60 breast cancer patients identified by their treating oncologists. Thirty refused some or all conventional treatment, opting for alternative therapies, whereas 30 accepted both conventional and alternative treatments. All completed the Beck Anxiety Inventory and the Rotter Locus of Control scale. RESULTS: Negative first experiences with "uncaring, insensitive, and unnecessarily harsh" oncologists, fear of side effects, and belief in the efficacy of alternative therapies were key factors in the decision to reject potentially life-prolonging conventional therapy. Refusers differed from controls in their perceptions of the value of conventional treatment, believing that chemotherapy and radiotherapy were riskier (p < .0073) and less beneficial (p < .0001) than did controls. Controls perceived alternative medicine alone as riskier than did refusers because its value for treating cancer is unproven (p < .0001). Refusers believed they could heal themselves naturally from cancer with simple holistic methods like raw fruits, vegetables, and supplements. CONCLUSION: According to interviewees, a compassionate approach to cancer care plus physicians who acknowledge their fears, communicate hope, educate them about their options, and allow them time to come to terms with their diagnosis before starting treatment might have led them to better treatment choices.

Phase II study of predictive biomarker profiles for response targeting human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) in advanced inflammatory breast cancer with lapatinib monotherapy.

PURPOSE: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is one of the most aggressive forms of breast cancer. Lapatinib, an oral reversible inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human EGFR 2 (HER-2), demonstrated clinical activity in four of five IBC patients in phase I trials. We conducted a phase II trial to confirm the sensitivity of IBC to lapatinib, to determine whether response is HER-2 or EGFR dependent, and to elucidate a molecular signature predictive of lapatinib sensitivity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Our open-label multicenter phase II trial (EGF103009) assessed clinical activity and safety of lapatinib monotherapy in patients with recurrent or anthracycline-refractory IBC. Patients were assigned to cohorts A (HER-2-overexpressing [HER-2+]) or B(HER-2-/EGFR+) and fresh pretreatment tumor biopsies were collected. RESULTS: Forty-five patients (30 in cohort A; 15 in cohort B) received lapatinib 1,500 mg once daily continuously. Clinical presentation and biomarker analyses demonstrated a tumor molecular signature consistent with IBC. Lapatinib was generally well tolerated, with primarily grade 1/2 skin and GI toxicities. Fifteen patients (50%) in cohort A had clinical responses to lapatinib in skin and/or measurable disease (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) compared with one patient in cohort B. Within cohort A, phosphorylated (p) HER-3 and lack of p53 expression predicted for response to lapatinib (P < .05). Tumors coexpressing pHER-2 and pHER-3 were more likely to respond to lapatinib (nine of 10 v four of 14; P = .0045). Prior trastuzumab therapy and loss of phosphate and tensin homolog 10 (PTEN) did not preclude response to lapatinib. CONCLUSION: Lapatinib is well tolerated with clinical activity in heavily pretreated HER-2+, but not EGFR+/HER-2-, IBC. In this study, coexpression of pHER-2 and pHER-3 in tumors seems to predict for a favorable response to lapatinib. These findings warrant further investigation of lapatinib monotherapy or combination therapy in HER-2+ IBC.