A UK prospective multicentre decision impact, decision conflict and economic evaluation of the 21-gene assay in women with node+ve, hormone receptor+ve, HER2-ve breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: For a tumour profiling test to be of value, it needs to demonstrate that it is changing clinical decisions, improving clinical confidence, and of economic benefit. This trial evaluated the use of the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® assay against these criteria in 680 women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative early breast cancer with 1-3 lymph nodes positive (LN+) in the UK National Health Service (NHS). METHODS: Prior to receipt of the Recurrence Score (RS) result, both the physician and the patient were asked to state their preference for or against chemotherapy and their level of confidence on a scale of 1-5. Following receipt of the RS result, the physician and patient were asked to make a final decision regarding chemotherapy and record their post-test level of confidence. RESULTS: Receipt of the RS result led to a 51.5% (95% CI, 47.2-55.8%) reduction in chemotherapy, significantly increased the relative and absolute confidence for both physicians and patients and led to an estimated saving to the NHS of £787 per patient. CONCLUSION: The use of the Oncotype DX assay fulfils the criteria of changing clinical decisions, improving confidence and saving money.

Efficacy of Reduced-Intensity Chemotherapy With Oxaliplatin and Capecitabine on Quality of Life and Cancer Control Among Older and Frail Patients With Advanced Gastroesophageal Cancer: The GO2 Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Older and/or frail patients are underrepresented in landmark cancer trials. Tailored research is needed to address this evidence gap. Objective: The GO2 randomized clinical trial sought to optimize chemotherapy dosing in older and/or frail patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer, and explored baseline geriatric assessment (GA) as a tool for treatment decision-making. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, noninferiority, open-label randomized trial took place at oncology clinics in the United Kingdom with nurse-led geriatric health assessment. Patients were recruited for whom full-dose combination chemotherapy was considered unsuitable because of advanced age and/or frailty. Interventions: There were 2 randomizations that were performed: CHEMO-INTENSITY compared oxaliplatin/capecitabine at Level A (oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1, capecitabine 625 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-21, on a 21-day cycle), Level B (doses 0.8 times A), or Level C (doses 0.6 times A). Alternatively, if the patient and clinician agreed the indication for chemotherapy was uncertain, the patient could instead enter CHEMO-BSC, comparing Level C vs best supportive care. Main Outcomes and Measures: First, broad noninferiority of the lower doses vs reference (Level A) was assessed using a permissive boundary of 34 days reduction in progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio, HR = 1.34), selected as acceptable by a forum of patients and clinicians. Then, the patient experience was compared using Overall Treatment Utility (OTU), which combines efficacy, toxic effects, quality of life, and patient value/acceptability. For CHEMO-BSC, the main outcome measure was overall survival. Results: A total of 514 patients entered CHEMO-INTENSITY, of whom 385 (75%) were men and 299 (58%) were severely frail, with median age 76 years. Noninferior PFS was confirmed for Levels B vs A (HR = 1.09 [95% CI, 0.89-1.32]) and C vs A (HR = 1.10 [95% CI, 0.90-1.33]). Level C produced less toxic effects and better OTU than A or B. No subgroup benefited from higher doses: Level C produced better OTU even in younger or less frail patients. A total of 45 patients entered the CHEMO-BSC randomization: overall survival was nonsignificantly longer with chemotherapy: median 6.1 vs 3.0 months (HR = 0.69 [95% CI, 0.32-1.48], P = .34). In multivariate analysis in 522 patients with all variables available, baseline frailty, quality of life, and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio were independently associated with OTU, and can be combined in a model to estimate the probability of different outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: This phase 3 randomized clinical trial found that reduced-intensity chemotherapy provided a better patient experience without significantly compromising cancer control and should be considered for older and/or frail patients. Baseline geriatric assessment can help predict the utility of chemotherapy but did not identify a group benefiting from higher-dose treatment. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN44687907.

Safety and Efficacy of the Addition of Lapatinib to Perioperative Chemotherapy for Resectable HER2-Positive Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Randomized Phase 2 Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Perioperative chemotherapy and surgery are a standard of care for operable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Anti-HER2 therapy improves survival in patients with advanced HER2-positive disease. The safety and feasibility of adding lapatinib to perioperative chemotherapy should be assessed. OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety of adding lapatinib to epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (ECX) chemotherapy and to establish a recommended dose regimen for a phase 3 trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Phase 2 randomized, open-label trial comparing standard ECX (sECX: 3 preoperative and 3 postoperative cycles of ECX with modified ECX plus lapatinib (mECX+L). This multicenter national trial was conducted in 29 centers in the United Kingdom in patients with histologically proven, HER2-positive, operable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Registration for ERBB/HER2 testing took place from February 25, 2013, to April 19, 2016, and randomization took place between May 24, 2013, and April 21, 2016. Data were analyzed May 10, 2017, to May 25, 2017. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized 1:1 open-label to sECX (3 preoperative and 3 postoperative cycles of 50 mg/m2 of intravenous epirubicin on day 1, 60 mg/m2 intravenous cisplatin on day 1, 1250 mg/m2 of oral capecitabine on days 1 through 21) or mECX+L (ECX plus lapatinib days 1 through 21 in each cycle and as 6 maintenance doses). The first 10 patients in the mECX+L arm were treated with 1000 mg/m2 of capecitabine and 1250 mg of lapatinib per day, after which preoperative toxic effects were reviewed according to predefined criteria to determine doses for subsequent patients. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Proportion of patients experiencing grade 3 or 4 diarrhea with mECX+L. A rate of 20% or less was considered acceptable. No formal comparison between arms was planned. RESULTS: Between February 2013, and April 2016, 441 patients underwent central HER2 testing and 63 (14%) were classified as HER2 positive. Forty-six patients were randomized; 44 (24 sECX, 20 mECX+L) are included in this analysis. Two of the first 10 patients in the mECX+L arm reported preoperative grade 3 diarrhea; thus, no dose increase was made. The primary endpoint of preoperative grade 3 or 4 diarrhea rates were 0 of 24 in the sECX arm (0%) and 4 of 20 in the mECX+L arm (21%). One of 24 in the sECX arm and 3 of 20 in the mECX+L arm stopped preoperative treatment early, and for 4 of 19 in the mECX+L arm, lapatinib dose was reduced. Postoperative complication rates were similar in each arm. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Administration of 1250 mg of lapatinib per day in combination with ECX chemotherapy was feasible with some increase in toxic effects, which did not compromise operative management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.org identifier: 46020948; clinicaltrialsregister.eu identifier: 2006-000811-12.

Characterisation of male breast cancer: a descriptive biomarker study from a large patient series.

Male breast cancer (MBC) is rare. We assembled 446 MBCs on tissue microarrays and assessed clinicopathological information, together with data from 15 published studies, totalling 1984 cases. By immunohistochemistry we investigated 14 biomarkers (ERα, ERß1, ERß2, ERß5, PR, AR, Bcl-2, HER2, p53, E-cadherin, Ki67, survivin, prolactin, FOXA1) for survival impact. The main histological subtype in our cohort and combined analyses was ductal (81%, 83%), grade 2; (40%, 44%), respectively. Cases were predominantly ERα (84%, 82%) and PR positive (74%, 71%), respectively, with HER2 expression being infrequent (2%, 10%), respectively. In our cohort, advanced age (>67) was the strongest predictor of overall (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) (p = 0.00001; p = 0.01, respectively). Node positivity negatively impacted DFS (p = 0.04). FOXA1 p = 0.005) and AR p = 0.009) were both positively prognostic for DFS, remaining upon multivariate analysis. Network analysis showed ERα, AR and FOXA1 significantly correlated. In summary, the principle phenotype of MBC was luminal A, ductal, grade 2. In ERα+ MBC, only AR had prognostic significance, suggesting AR blockade could be employed therapeutically.

A Case-Matched Gender Comparison Transcriptomic Screen Identifies eIF4E and eIF5 as Potential Prognostic Markers in Male Breast Cancer.

Purpose: Breast cancer affects both genders, but is understudied in men. Although still rare, male breast cancer (MBC) is being diagnosed more frequently. Treatments are wholly informed by clinical studies conducted in women, based on assumptions that underlying biology is similar.Experimental Design: A transcriptomic investigation of male and female breast cancer was performed, confirming transcriptomic data in silico Biomarkers were immunohistochemically assessed in 697 MBCs (n = 477, training; n = 220, validation set) and quantified in pre- and posttreatment samples from an MBC patient receiving everolimus and PI3K/mTOR inhibitor.Results: Gender-specific gene expression patterns were identified. eIF transcripts were upregulated in MBC. eIF4E and eIF5 were negatively prognostic for overall survival alone (log-rank P = 0.013; HR = 1.77, 1.12-2.8 and P = 0.035; HR = 1.68, 1.03-2.74, respectively), or when coexpressed (P = 0.01; HR = 2.66, 1.26-5.63), confirmed in the validation set. This remained upon multivariate Cox regression analysis [eIF4E P = 0.016; HR = 2.38 (1.18-4.8), eIF5 P = 0.022; HR = 2.55 (1.14-5.7); coexpression P = 0.001; HR = 7.04 (2.22-22.26)]. Marked reduction in eIF4E and eIF5 expression was seen post BEZ235/everolimus, with extended survival.Conclusions: Translational initiation pathway inhibition could be of clinical utility in MBC patients overexpressing eIF4E and eIF5. With mTOR inhibitors that target this pathway now in the clinic, these biomarkers may represent new targets for therapeutic intervention, although further independent validation is required. Clin Cancer Res; 23(10); 2575-83. ©2016 AACR.

Supportive care after breast cancer surgery.

Routine follow-up after treatment for breast cancer aims to monitor for recurrence, manage late effects of treatment and give patients information, support and reassurance. However, most symptoms of local recurrence are first identified by patients so time spent following up women who are essentially well may not be clinically beneficial or cost effective. To better use its resources, Calderdale and Huddersfield Foundation Trust developed a follow-up education programme for patients at low-to-moderate risk; after two years an audit showed it reduced overall patient anxiety and routine hospital appointments, maintained standards of care and provided patient with an effective support network.

A comparative biomarker study of 514 matched cases of male and female breast cancer reveals gender-specific biological differences.

Male breast cancer remains understudied despite evidence of rising incidence. Using a co-ordinated multi-centre approach, we present the first large scale biomarker study to define and compare hormone receptor profiles and survival between male and female invasive breast cancer. We defined and compared hormone receptor profiles and survival between 251 male and 263 female breast cancers matched for grade, age, and lymph node status. Tissue microarrays were immunostained for ERα, ERß1, -2, -5, PR, PRA, PRB and AR, augmented by HER2, CK5/6, 14, 18 and 19 to assist typing. Hierarchical clustering determined differential nature of influences between genders. Luminal A was the most common phenotype in both sexes. Luminal B and HER2 were not seen in males. Basal phenotype was infrequent in both. No differences in overall survival at 5 or 10 years were observed between genders. Notably, AR-positive luminal A male breast cancer had improved overall survival over female breast cancer at 5 (P = 0.01, HR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.26-0.87) but not 10 years (P = 0.29, HR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.46-1.26) and both 5 (P = 0.04, HR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.07-0.97) and 10 years (P = 0.04, HR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.12-0.97) in the unselected group. Hierarchical clustering revealed common clusters between genders including total PR-PRA-PRB and ERß1/2 clusters. A striking feature was the occurrence of ERα on distinct clusters between genders. In female breast cancer, ERα clustered with PR and its isoforms; in male breast cancer, ERα clustered with ERß isoforms and AR. Our data supports the hypothesis that breast cancer is biologically different in males and females suggesting implications for clinical management. With the incidence of male breast cancer increasing this provides impetus for further study.