Prognostic stratification ability of the CPS+EG scoring system in HER2-low and HER2-zero early breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The CPS+EG scoring system was initially described in unselected early breast cancer (eBC) patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), leading to refined prognostic stratification, and thus helping to select patients for additional post-NAC treatments. It remains unknown whether the performance is the same in new biological breast cancer entities such as the HER2-low subtype. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Outcomes (disease-free (DFS) and overall survival OS)) of 608 patients with HER2-non amplified eBC and treated with NAC were retrospectively analyzed according to CPS-EG score. We compared the prognostic stratification abilities of the CPS+EG in HER2-low and HER2-0 eBC, analyzing ER+ and ER- tumors separately. RESULTS: In ER+ eBC, the CPS+EG scoring system seems to retain a prognostic value, both in HER2-low and HER2-0 tumors, by distinguishing populations with significantly different outcomes (good: score 0-1, poor: score 2-3, and very poor: score 4-5). Using C-indices for DFS and OS, CPS+EG provided the highest prognostic information in ER+ eBC, especially in HER2-0 tumors. In contrast, in ER- eBC, the CPS+EG does not appear to be able to distinguish different outcome groups, either in HER2-low or HER2-0 tumors. In ER- eBC, C-indices for DFS and OS were highest for pathological stage, reflecting the predominant prognostic importance of residual disease in this subtype. CONCLUSIONS: HER2-low status does not influence the prognostic performance of the CPS+EG score. Our results confirm the usefulness of the CPS+EG score in stratifying the prognosis of ER+ eBC after NAC, for both HER2-0 and HER2-low tumors. For ER- eBC, HER2-low status does not influence the performance of the CPS+EG score, which was lower than that of the pathological stage alone.

Neoadjuvant anthracycline-based (5-FEC) or anthracycline-free (docetaxel/carboplatin) chemotherapy plus trastuzumab and pertuzmab in HER2 + BC patients according to their TOP2A: a multicentre, open-label, non-randomized phase II trial.

PURPOSE: Previous studies have reported the benefit of dual HER2-targeting combined to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-amplified breast cancer (HER2 + BC). Moreover, besides the cardiac toxicity following their association to Trastuzumab, anthracyclines chemotherapy may not profit all patients. The NeoTOP study was designed to evaluate the complementary action of Trastuzumab and Pertuzumab, and the relevance of an anthracycline-based regimen according to TOP2A amplification status. METHODS: Open-label, multicentre, phase II study. Eligible patients were aged ≥ 18 with untreated, operable, histologically confirmed HER2 + BC. After centralized review of TOP2A status, TOP2A-amplified (TOP2A+) patients received FEC100 for 3 cycles then 3 cycles of Trastuzumab (8 mg/kg then 6 mg/kg), Pertuzumab (840 mg/kg then 420 mg/kg), and Docetaxel (75mg/m2 then 100mg/m2). TOP2A-not amplified (TOP2A-) patients received 6 cycles of Docetaxel (75mg/m2) and Carboplatin (target AUC 6 mg/ml/min) plus Trastuzumab and Pertuzumab. Primary endpoint was pathological Complete Response (pCR) using Chevallier's classification. Secondary endpoints included pCR (Sataloff), Progression-Free Survival (PFS), Overall Survival (OS), and toxicity. RESULTS: Out of 74 patients, 41 and 33 were allocated to the TOP2A + and TOP2A- groups respectively. pCR rates (Chevallier) were 74.4% (95%CI: 58.9-85.4) vs. 71.9% (95%CI: 54.6-84.4) in the TOP2A + vs. TOP2A- groups. pCR rates (Sataloff), 5-year PFS and OS were 70.6% (95%CI: 53.8-83.2) vs. 61.5% (95%CI: 42.5-77.6), 82.4% (95%CI: 62.2-93.6) vs. 100% (95%CI: 74.1-100), and 90% (95%CI: 69.8-98.3) vs. 100% (95%CI: 74.1-100). Toxicity profile was consistent with previous reports. CONCLUSION: Our results showed high pCR rates with Trastuzumab and Pertuzumab associated to chemotherapy. They were similar in TOP2A + and TOP2A- groups and the current role of neoadjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy remains questioned. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02339532 (registered on 14/12/14).

Updated progression-free survival and final overall survival with maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab according to clinical risk in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer in the phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial.

OBJECTIVE: In the PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial (NCT02477644), adding maintenance olaparib to bevacizumab provided a substantial progression-free survival benefit in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive tumors, irrespective of clinical risk. Subsequently, a clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival was reported with olaparib plus bevacizumab in the HRD-positive subgroup. We report updated progression-free survival and overall survival by clinical risk and HRD status. METHODS: Patients in clinical response after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab received maintenance olaparib (up to 24 months) plus bevacizumab (up to 15 months in total) or placebo plus bevacizumab. This post hoc analysis evaluated 5-year progression-free survival and mature overall survival in patients classified by clinical risk and HRD status. RESULTS: Of 806 randomized patients, 74% were higher-risk and 26% were lower-risk. In higher-risk HRD-positive patients, the hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival was 0.46 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.34 to 0.61), with 5-year progression-free survival of 35% with olaparib plus bevacizumab versus 15% with bevacizumab alone; and the HR for overall survival was 0.70 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.00), with 5-year overall survival of 55% versus 42%, respectively. In lower-risk HRD-positive patients, the HR for progression-free survival was 0.26 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.45), with 5-year progression-free survival of 72% with olaparib plus bevacizumab versus 28% with bevacizumab alone; and the HR for overall survival was 0.31 (95% CI 0.14 to 0.66), with 5-year overall survival of 88% versus 61%, respectively. No benefit was seen in HRD-negative patients regardless of clinical risk. CONCLUSION: This post hoc analysis indicates that in patients with newly diagnosed advanced HRD-positive ovarian cancer, maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab should not be limited to those considered at higher risk of disease progression. Five-year progression-free survival rates support long-term remission and suggest an increased potential for cure with particular benefit suggested in lower-risk HRD-positive patients.

Low RNA disruption during neoadjuvant chemotherapy predicts pathologic complete response absence in patients with breast cancer.

In previously reported retrospective studies, high tumor RNA disruption during neoadjuvant chemotherapy predicted for post-treatment pathologic complete response (pCR) and improved disease-free survival at definitive surgery for primary early breast cancer. The BREVITY (Breast Cancer Response Evaluation for Individualized Therapy) prospective clinical trial (NCT03524430) seeks to validate these prior findings. Here we report training set (Phase I) findings, including determination of RNA disruption index (RDI) cut points for outcome prediction in the subsequent validation set (Phase II; 454 patients). In 80 patients of the training set, maximum tumor RDI values for biopsies obtained during neoadjuvant chemotherapy were significantly higher in pCR responders than in patients without pCR post-treatment (P = .008). Moreover, maximum tumor RDI values ≤3.7 during treatment predicted for a lack of pCR at surgery (negative predictive value = 93.3%). These findings support the prospect that on-treatment tumor RNA disruption assessments may effectively predict post-surgery outcome, possibly permitting treatment optimization.

Real-World Impact of Adjuvant Anti-HER2 Treatment on Characteristics and Outcomes of Women With HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer in the ESME Program.

BACKGROUND: Although adjuvant cancer treatments increase cure rates, they may induce clonal selection and tumor resistance. Information still lacks as whether (neo)adjuvant anti-HER2 treatments impact the patterns of recurrence and outcomes of HER2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We aimed to assess this in the large multicenter ESME real-world database. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined the characteristics and outcomes (overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival under first-line treatment (PFS1)) of HER2+ patients with MBC from the French ESME program with recurrent disease, as a function of the previous receipt of adjuvant trastuzumab. Multivariable analyses used Cox models adjusted for baseline demographic, prognostic factors, adjuvant treatment received, and disease-free interval. RESULTS: Two thousand one hundred and forty-three patients who entered the ESME cohort between 2008 and 2017 had a recurrent HER2+ MBC. Among them, 56% had received (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab and 2.5% another anti-HER2 in this setting. Patients pre-exposed to trastuzumab were younger, had a lower disease-free interval, more HR-negative disease and more metastatic sites. While the crude median OS appeared inferior in patients exposed to adjuvant trastuzumab, as compared to those who did not (37.2 (95%CI 34.4-40.3) versus 53.5 months (95% CI: 47.6-60.1)), this difference disappeared in the multivariable model (HR = 1.05, 95%CI 0.91-1.22). The same figures were observed for PFS1. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with relapsed HER2+ MBC, the receipt of adjuvant trastuzumab did not independently predict for worse outcomes when adjusted to other prognostic factors.

Atezolizumab Combined With Bevacizumab and Platinum-Based Therapy for Platinum-Sensitive Ovarian Cancer: Placebo-Controlled Randomized Phase III ATALANTE/ENGOT-ov29 Trial.

PURPOSE: Platinum-based doublets with concurrent and maintenance bevacizumab are standard therapy for ovarian cancer (OC) relapsing after a platinum-free interval (PFI) >6 months. Immunotherapy may be synergistic with bevacizumab and chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ATALANTE/ENGOT-ov29 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02891824), a placebo-controlled double-blinded randomized phase III trial, enrolled patients with recurrent epithelial OC, one to two previous chemotherapy lines, and PFI >6 months. Eligible patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to atezolizumab (1,200 mg once every 3 weeks or equivalent) or placebo for up to 24 months, combined with bevacizumab and six cycles of chemotherapy doublet, stratified by PFI, PD-L1 status, and chemotherapy regimen. Coprimary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and PD-L1-positive populations (alpha .025 for each population). RESULTS: Between September 2016 and October 2019, 614 patients were randomly assigned: 410 to atezolizumab and 204 to placebo. Only 38% had PD-L1-positive tumors. After 3 years' median follow-up, the PFS difference between atezolizumab and placebo did not reach statistical significance in the ITT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.99; P = .041; median 13.5 v 11.3 months, respectively) or PD-L1-positive (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.16; P = .30; median 15.2 v 13.1 months, respectively) populations. The immature overall survival (OS) HR was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.01; median 35.5 v 30.6 months with atezolizumab v placebo, respectively). Global health-related quality of life did not differ between treatment arms. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 88% of atezolizumab-treated and 87% of placebo-treated patients; grade ≥3 AEs typical of immunotherapy were more common with atezolizumab (13% v 8%, respectively). CONCLUSION: ATALANTE/ENGOT-ov29 did not meet its coprimary PFS objectives in the ITT or PD-L1-positive populations. OS follow-up continues. Further research on biopsy samples is warranted to decipher the immunologic landscape of late-relapsing OC.

Adjuvant endocrine therapy uptake, toxicity, quality of life, and prediction of early discontinuation.

BACKGROUND: Many patients receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) for breast cancer experience side effects and reduced quality of life (QoL) and discontinue ET. We sought to describe these issues and develop a prediction model of early discontinuation of ET. METHODS: Among patients with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative stage I-III breast cancer of the Cancer Toxicities cohort (NCT01993498) who were prescribed adjuvant ET between 2012 and 2017, upon stratification by menopausal status, we evaluated adjuvant ET patterns including treatment change and patient-reported discontinuation and ET-associated toxicities and impact on QoL. Independent variables included clinical and demographic features, toxicities, and patient-reported outcomes. A machine-learning model to predict time to early discontinuation was trained and evaluated on a held-out validation set. RESULTS: Patient-reported discontinuation rate of the first prescribed ET at 4 years was 30% and 35% in 4122 postmenopausal and 2087 premenopausal patients, respectively. Switching to a new ET was associated with higher symptom burden, poorer QoL, and higher discontinuation rate. Early discontinuation rate of adjuvant ET before treatment completion was 13% in postmenopausal and 15% in premenopausal patients. The early discontinuation model obtained a C index of 0.62 in the held-out validation set. Many aspects of QoL, most importantly fatigue and insomnia (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL questionnaire 30), were associated with early discontinuation. CONCLUSION: Tolerability and adherence to ET remains a challenge for patients who switch to a second ET. An early discontinuation model using patient-reported outcomes identifies patients likely to discontinue their adjuvant ET. Improved management of toxicities and novel more tolerable adjuvant ETs are needed for maintaining patients on treatment.

Real-world clinical and survival outcomes of patients with early relapsed triple-negative breast cancer from the ESME national cohort.

BACKGROUND: Early metastatic relapse of triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) after anthracyclins and/or taxanes based (A/T) primary treatment represents a highly aggressive cancer situation requiring urgent characterisation and handling. Epidemio-Strategy-Medico-Economical-Metastatic Breast Cancer (ESME-MBC) database, a multicenter, national, observational cohort (NCT03275311) provides recent data on this entity. METHODS: All ESME patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2020 with mTNBC occurring as a relapse after a systemic neoadjuvant/adjuvant taxane and/or anthracycline-based chemotherapy were included. Early relapses were defined by a metastatic diagnosis up to 12 months of the end of neo/adjuvant A/T chemotherapy. We assessed overall survival (OS) and progression-free-survival under first-line treatment (PFS1) by early versus late relapse (≥12 months). RESULTS: Patients with early relapse (N = 881, 46%) were younger and had a larger tumour burden at primary diagnosis than those with late relapses (N = 1045). Early relapse rates appeared stable over time. Median OS was 10.1 months (95% CI 9.3-10.9) in patients with early relapse versus 17.1 months (95% CI 15.7-18.2) in those with late relapse (adjusted hazard-ratio (aHR): 1.92 (95% CI 1.73-2.13); p < 0.001). The median PFS1 was respectively 3.1 months (95% CI 2.9-3.4) and 5.3 months (95% CI 5.1-5.8); (aHR: 1.66; [95% CI 1.50-1.83]; p < 0.001). Among early relapsed patients, a higher number of metastatic sites, visceral disease but not treatment types, were independently associated with a poorer OS. CONCLUSION: These real-world data provide strong evidence on the dismal prognosis, higher treatment resistance and major unmet medical need associated with early relapsed mTNBC. Database registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT032753.

Long-Term Results with Everolimus in Advanced Hormone Receptor Positive Breast Cancer in a Multicenter National Real-World Observational Study.

Everolimus is the first oral targeted therapy widely used in advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer. We sought to evaluate the impact of everolimus-based therapy on overall survival in the ESME-MBC database, a national metastatic breast cancer cohort that collects retrospective data using clinical trial-like methodology including quality assessments. We compared 1693 patients having received everolimus to 5928 patients not exposed to everolimus in the same period. Overall survival was evaluated according to treatment line, and a propensity score with the inverse probability of treatment weighting method was built to adjust for differences between groups. Crude and landmark overall survival analyses were all compatible with a benefit from everolimus-based therapy. Adjusted hazard ratios for overall survival were 0.34 (95% CI: 0.16-0.72, p = 0.0054), 0.34 (95% CI: 0.22-0.52, p < 0.0001), and 0.23 (95% CI: 0.14-0.36, p < 0.0001) for patients treated with everolimus in line 1, 2, and 3 and beyond, respectively. No clinically relevant benefit on progression-free survival was observed. Causes for everolimus discontinuation were progressive disease (56.2%), adverse events (27.7%), and other miscellaneous reasons. Despite the limitations inherent to such retrospective studies, these results suggest that adding everolimus-based therapy to the therapeutic sequences in patients with advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer may favorably affect overall survival.

Clinical outcome of patients with isolated central nervous system progression on first-line pertuzumab and trastuzumab treatment for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer in a real-life cohort.

BACKGROUND: More than 10% of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (mBC) will develop Central Nervous System (CNS) metastases as first and isolated site of relapse on trastuzumab and pertuzumab first-line therapy. However, few clinical data are available to guide the best strategy in this setting. METHODS: Patients experiencing isolated CNS progression on trastuzumab and pertuzumab first-line therapy were retrospectively identified from the French Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics (ESME) real-life database between 2008 and 2016. RESULTS: Among 995 patients treated with first-line trastuzumab and pertuzumab for HER2-positive mBC, 132 patients (13%) experienced isolated CNS progression with a median time of 12 months after mBC diagnosis. Twelves patients did not receive any treatment and were excluded from the analysis. Among the 120 patients considered, 76 (63%) received CNS-directed local therapy, 73 (60%) continued trastuzumab and pertuzumab, whereas 47 (39%) started another systemic treatment. After a median follow-up of 21 months, there was no difference in progression-free survival for patient who continued trastuzumab-pertuzumab or switched to another systemic treatment. In multivariate analysis, trastuzumab-pertuzumab continuation was associated with longer OS (HR 0,28 IC 95%: 0,14-0,54 p < 0,001). mOS was not reached (95% 37.6-NE) and was 23.2 months (95% CI 15.5-53.6) in patients who continued trastuzumab and pertuzumab therapy and in patients who switched for another systemic therapy, respectively. CONCLUSION: In this real-life cohort, trastuzumab-pertuzumab continuation after local treatment for isolated CNS progression did not negatively impact PFS and OS. Prospective trials and assessment of new strategies are warranted in this specific situation.

Real-World Data on Olaparib in Relapsed BRCA-mutated Ovarian Cancer: A Multicenter GINECO RETROLA Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Olaparib was approved in 2014 by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) as maintenance treatment for patients with breast cancer gene (BRCA)-mutated platinum-sensitive relapsed high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) following the results of the Study 19. We present the results of a national real-world study on the effectiveness of olaparib in relapsed BRCA-mutated EOC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with EOC, peritoneal, and/or fallopian-tube cancer treated with olaparib in a French Center between May 2014 and March 2017 were included. The primary end-point of the study was progression-free survival. RESULTS: Of the 128 patients analyzed, 89 were treated according to the EMA label. The median progression-free survival was 17.0 months. The most common treatment-related toxicity was fatigue. Treatment-related myelodysplastic syndrome (n=5) and a second cancer (n=1) were diagnosed. CONCLUSION: In this real-life setting, olaparib confirmed its efficacy and safety profile, as previously shown in clinical trials.

Survival outcomes of metastatic breast cancer patients by germline BRCA1/2 status in a large multicenter real-world database.

The outcomes and best treatment strategies for germline BRCA1/2 mutation (gBRCAm) carriers with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remain uncertain. We compared the overall survival and the first line progression free survival (PFS1) of patients with a gBRCAm identified at initiation of first-line treatment with those of BRCA wild-type (WT) and not-tested (NT) individuals in the ESME real-world database of MBC patients between 2008 and 2016 (NCT03275311). Among the 20 624 eligible patients, 325 had a gBRCAm, 1138 were WT and 19 161 NT. Compared with WT, gBRCAm carriers were younger, and had more aggressive diseases. At a median follow-up of 50.5 months, median OS was 30.6 (95%CI: 21.9-34.3), 35.8 (95%CI: 32.2-37.8) and 39.3 months (95% CI: 38.3-40.3) in the gBRCAm, WT and NT subgroups, respectively. Median PFS1 was 7.9 (95%CI: 6.6-9.3), 7.8 (95%CI: 7.3-8.5) and 9.7 months (95%CI, 9.5-10.0). In the multivariable analysis conducted in the whole cohort, gBRCAm status had however no independent prognostic impact on OS and PFS1. Though, in the triple-negative subgroup, gBRCAm patients had better OS and PFS1 (HR vs WT = 0.76; 95%CI: 0.60-0.97; P = .027 and 0.69; 95% CI: 0.55-0.86; P = .001, respectively). In contrast, in patients with HR+/HER2 negative cancers, PFS1 appeared significantly and OS non significantly lower for gBRCAm carriers (PFS1: HR vs WT = 1.23; 95%CI: 1.03-1.46; P = .024; OS:HR = 1.22, 95% CI: 0.97-1.52, P = .089). In conclusion, gBRCA1/2 status appears to have divergent survival effects in MBC according to IHC subtype.

Switch to fulvestrant and palbociclib versus no switch in advanced breast cancer with rising ESR1 mutation during aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib therapy (PADA-1): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In advanced oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, acquired resistance to aromatase inhibitors frequently stems from ESR1-mutated subclones, which might be sensitive to fulvestrant. The PADA-1 trial aimed to show the efficacy of an early change in therapy on the basis of a rising ESR1 mutation in blood (bESR1mut), while assessing the global safety of combination fulvestrant and palbociclib. METHODS: We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial in 83 hospitals in France. Women aged at least 18 years with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were recruited and monitored for rising bESR1mut during first-line aromatase inhibitor (2·5 mg letrozole, 1 mg anastrozole, or 25 mg exemestane, orally once per day, taken continuously) and palbociclib (125 mg orally once per day on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle) therapy. Patients with newly present or increased bESR1mut in circulating tumour DNA and no synchronous disease progression were randomly assigned (1:1) to continue with the same therapy or to switch to fulvestrant (500 mg intramuscularly on day 1 of each 28-day cycle and on day 15 of cycle 1) and palbociclib (dosing unchanged). The randomisation sequence was generated within an interactive web response system using a minimisation method (with an 80% random factor); patients were stratified according to visceral involvement (present or absent) and the time from inclusion to bESR1mut detection (<12 months or ≥12 months). The co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival from random assignment, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all randomly assigned patients), and grade 3 or worse haematological adverse events in all patients. The trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03079011), and is now complete. FINDINGS: From March 22, 2017, to Jan 31, 2019, 1017 patients were included, of whom 279 (27%) developed a rising bESR1mut and 172 (17%) were randomly assigned to treatment: 88 to switching to fulvestrant and palbociclib and 84 patients to continuing aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib. At database lock on July 31, 2021, randomly assigned patients had a median follow-up of 35·3 months (IQR 29·2-41·4) from inclusion and 26·0 months (13·8-34·3) from random assignment. Median progression-free survival from random assignment was 11·9 months (95% CI 9·1-13·6) in the fulvestrant and palbociclib group versus 5·7 months (3·9-7·5) in the aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib group (stratified HR 0·61, 0·43-0·86; p=0·0040). The most frequent grade 3 or worse haematological adverse events were neutropenia (715 [70·3%] of 1017 patients), lymphopenia (66 [6·5%]), and thrombocytopenia (20 [2·0%]). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in step 2 were neutropenia (35 [41·7%] of 84 patients in the aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib group vs 39 [44·3%] of 88 patients in the fulvestrant and palbociclib group) and lymphopenia (three [3·6%] vs four [4·5%]). 31 (3·1%) patients had grade 3 or worse serious adverse events related to treatment in the overall population. Three (1·7%) of 172 patients randomly assigned had one serious adverse event in step 2: one (1·2%) grade 4 neutropenia and one (1·2%) grade 3 fatigue among 84 patients in the aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib group, and one (1·1%) grade 4 neutropenia among 88 patients in the fulvestrant and palbociclib group. One death by pulmonary embolism in step 1 was declared as being treatment related. INTERPRETATION: PADA-1 is the first prospective randomised trial showing that the early therapeutic targeting of bESR1mut results in significant clinical benefit. Additionally, the original design explored in PADA-1 might help with tackling acquired resistance with new drugs in future trials. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Genomics to select treatment for patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Cancer progression is driven in part by genomic alterations1. The genomic characterization of cancers has shown interpatient heterogeneity regarding driver alterations2, leading to the concept that generation of genomic profiling in patients with cancer could allow the selection of effective therapies3,4. Although DNA sequencing has been implemented in practice, it remains unclear how to use its results. A total of 1,462 patients with HER2-non-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer were enroled to receive genomic profiling in the SAFIR02-BREAST trial. Two hundred and thirty-eight of these patients were randomized in two trials (nos. NCT02299999 and NCT03386162) comparing the efficacy of maintenance treatment5 with a targeted therapy matched to genomic alteration. Targeted therapies matched to genomics improves progression-free survival when genomic alterations are classified as level I/II according to the ESMO Scale for Clinical Actionability of Molecular Targets (ESCAT)6 (adjusted hazards ratio (HR): 0.41, 90% confidence interval (CI): 0.27-0.61, P < 0.001), but not when alterations are unselected using ESCAT (adjusted HR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.56-1.06, P = 0.109). No improvement in progression-free survival was observed in the targeted therapies arm (unadjusted HR: 1.15, 95% CI: 0.76-1.75) for patients presenting with ESCAT alteration beyond level I/II. Patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations (n = 49) derived high benefit from olaparib (gBRCA1: HR = 0.36, 90% CI: 0.14-0.89; gBRCA2: HR = 0.37, 90% CI: 0.17-0.78). This trial provides evidence that the treatment decision led by genomics should be driven by a framework of target actionability in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

[Practical management of PARP inhibitors: A French DELPHI consensus]. / Gestion pratique des inhibiteurs de PARP : Un consensus national DELPHI.

OBJECTIVE: Despite an increasing number of therapeutic indications, there are no specific recommendations regarding the management of PARP inhibitors other than what is specified in the SmPC of each substance. A Delphi French consensus was conducted to establish practical guidelines to meet the needs identified by healthcare professionals and patients. METHOD: Following the Delphi method, statements to optimize PARP inhibitor management were drafted by a multidisciplinary Steering Committee made up of 17 experts. These statements were submitted to the independent and anonymous vote of clinicians involved in treating patients on PARP inhibitors. RESULTS: This article presents 52 statements on the following topics: initiation and treatment; management of adverse events (hematological effects, gastrointestinal effects, renal effects, pulmonary effects, cutaneous effects, hypertension, insomnia, fatigue, dizziness); special populations and situations; communication with the patient; adherence. Forty-nine statements obtained voter consensus after 3 voting rounds. A hematologist and a nephrologist supplemented this task by drafting an expert opinion on the risk of occurrence of secondary leukemia and nephrological toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: This paper is the first Delphi consensus on the practical management of PARP inhibitors. The pragmatic recommendations resulting from this paper should make it possible to manage the side effects of PARP inhibitors better and thus prevent early treatment discontinuation and improve patient adherence by preserving quality of life.

Comparison of Management and Outcomes in ERBB2-Low vs ERBB2-Zero Metastatic Breast Cancer in France.

Importance: ERBB2-low (ie, ERBB2 immunohistochemistry score of 1+ or 2+ in the absence of ERBB2 gene amplification) breast cancer (BC) is a new entity, with emerging dedicated treatments. Little is known about its prognosis and response to conventional therapy compared with ERBB2-zero breast tumors (ie, those with an immunohistochemistry score of 0). Objective: To compare the outcomes for patients with ERBB2-low metastatic BC (MBC) with those of patients with ERBB2-zero MBC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was conducted from the Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics MBC platform and included patients with MBC treated between 2008 and 2016 in 18 French comprehensive cancer centers. The data analysis was conducted from July 16, 2020, to April 1, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was overall survival (OS), and the secondary outcome was progression-free survival under first-line treatments (PFS1). Results: The median (range) age was 60.0 (22.0-103.0) years. Among 15 054 patients with MBC, 4671 (31%) had ERBB2-low MBC and 10 383 (69%) had ERBB2-zero MBC. The proportion of ERBB2-low cancers was higher among patients with hormone receptor-positive MBC than those with hormone receptor-negative disease (4083 patients [33.0%] vs 588 patients [21.0%]). With a median follow-up of 49.5 months (95% CI, 48.6-50.4 months), the median OS of the ERBB2-low group was 38.0 months (95% CI, 36.4-40.5 months) compared with 33.9 months (95% CI, 32.9-34.9 months) for the ERBB2-zero group (P < .001). After adjustment for age, visceral metastases, number of metastatic sites, de novo disease, period of care, and hormone receptor status, patients with ERBB2-low MBC had slightly better OS compared with patients with ERBB2-zero MBC (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-0.99; P = .02). In contrast, PFS1 did not differ by ERBB2 status (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.95-1.02; P = .45). No significant differences in OS and PFS1 were observed in multivariate analyses by hormone receptor status and types of frontline treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this large cohort study, patients with ERBB2-low MBC had a slightly better OS than those with completely ERBB2-zero tumors, but identical PFS1, which could help guide treatment selection.

Validation of the geriatric vulnerability score in older patients with ovarian cancer: an analysis from the GCIG-ENGOT-GINECO EWOC-1 study.

BACKGROUND: Older patients with ovarian cancer represent a heterogeneous population. The French National Group of Investigators for the Study of Ovarian and Breast Cancer developed the geriatric vulnerability score (GVS) to identify geriatric parameters predictive of poor outcomes. A prospective validation of the GVS was needed. METHODS: The EWOC-1 study (NCT02001272) was an international, open-label, phase 2, three-arm trial designed according to a two-step process. Patients aged 70 years or older with newly diagnosed stage III or IV ovarian cancer were identified and the GVS determined. Those with a GVS of 3 or greater were randomly assigned to the EWOC-1 trial, stratified by country and surgical outcome, to receive three different carboplatin with or without paclitaxel regimens; those not included in the EWOC-1 trial were followed up in the EWOC-1 registry. External validation of the GVS was a secondary endpoint of the trial. Three validation cohorts were identified: the total population (validation cohort 1 [V1], n=447), the registry-only population (validation cohort 2 [V2], n=327), and the carboplatin-paclitaxel-treated population (validation cohort 3 [V3], n=320). FINDINGS: From Dec 11, 2013, to Nov 16, 2018, 447 patients were included in 48 academic centres in six countries; 120 in the EWOC-1 trial and 327 in the EWOC-1 registry. Median follow-up was 19·7 (95% CI 8·5-29·7) months for the total cohort; missing values were low (<2%). According to the maximum likelihood analysis, the hazard ratio (HR) of death in V1 was 1·8 (95% CI 1·1-3·1, p=0·029) for those with a GVS of 1; 2·4 (1·4-4·0, p=0·0009) with a GVS of 2; 4·1 (2·5-7·0, p<0·0001) for a GVS of 3; 5·5 (3·3-9·3, p<0·0001) for a GVS of 4; and 9·1 (4·7-17·5, p<0·0001) for a GVS of 5 compared with a score of 0. Whatever the validation cohort, GVS of 3 or more significantly segregated two groups with different overall survival: V1 (median 13·2 [95% CI: 10·8-18·7] vs 40·8 [32·0-45·6] months; HR 2·8 [95% CI 2·2-3·7]; p<0·0001); V2 (11·9 [95% CI 8·8-18·1] vs 40·8 [32·0-45·6] months, HR 3·5 [2·5-4·9]; p<0·0001); and V3 (18·1 [95% CI 15·8-31·8] vs 43·0 [40·6-49·7] months, HR 2·6 [1·9 to 3·7]; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: The GVS has high prognostic performance for overall survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer, independently of geographic and historic effect (V1), as well as treatment patterns (V3), validated in an international population. Even though the GVS is time consuming it will allow the stratification of populations for clinical research and might permit the orientation of the geriatric intervention to specific domains. FUNDING: French National Cancer Institute. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Efficacy of taxanes rechallenge in first-line treatment of early metastatic relapse of patients with HER2-negative breast cancer previously treated with a (neo)adjuvant taxanes regimen: A multicentre retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Taxanes are one of the most effective chemotherapies (CT) in breast cancer (BC), but the efficacy of taxanes rechallenge in early metastatic relapse has been poorly studied in patients previously treated by taxanes in the (neo)adjuvant setting. Our study aimed to analyse the efficacy of taxane rechallenge in case of early metastatic relapse in a multicentre retrospective observational study compared with other chemotherapies. METHODS: We analysed the French national ESME metastatic BC (MBC) database and selected HER2- MBC patients who received CT in first-line treatment for a metastatic relapse occurring 3-24 months after previous (neo)adjuvant taxanes treatment. RESULTS: Of 23,501 female patients with MBC in ESME, 1057 met the selection criteria. 58.4% received a taxane-based regimen (75.4% concomitant bevacizumab) and 41.6% received other CT. In hormone-receptor positive (HR+)/HER2- MBC, multivariate analysis showed no difference in OS between taxanes without bevacizumab compared to other CT (HZR = 1.3 [0.97; 1.74], but taxanes was significantly associated with worse PFS (HZR = 1.48 [1.14; 1.93]). In TNBC, taxanes without bevacizumab and carboplatin/gemcitabine were not superior to other CT for OS (HZR = 1.07 [0.79; 1.44] and HZR = 0.81 [0.58; 1.13], respectively), while for PFS, taxanes was inferior (HZR = 1.33 [1.06-1.67]) and carboplatin plus gemcitabine was superior to other CT (HZR = 0.63 [0.46; 0.87]). For both subtypes, the worse outcome observed with paclitaxel was no longer observed with the addition of bevacizumab. CONCLUSIONS: With the limitation of retrospective design, taxanes rechallenge in early metastatic relapse of BC may result in a worse PFS in TNBC and HR+/HER2- MBC, which was not observed with the addition of bevacizumab.

Paclitaxel with or without pazopanib for ovarian cancer relapsing during bevacizumab maintenance therapy: The GINECO randomized phase II TAPAZ study.

BACKGROUND: Anti-angiogenic rechallenge with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy is effective in recurrent ovarian cancer (rOC); however, data are limited on tyrosine kinase inhibitors after progression on maintenance bevacizumab. METHODS: In the randomized phase II TAPAZ trial, patients with rOC during the first year of bevacizumab maintenance therapy were assigned 2:1 to either weekly paclitaxel 65 mg/m2 plus pazopanib 600-800 mg daily or standard weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2. The primary endpoint was 4-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate. RESULTS: Overall, 116 patients were randomized and treated: 79 with combination therapy and 37 with single-agent paclitaxel. Median follow-up was 13.1 months. There was no difference between treatment arms in 4-month PFS rate (61% [95% CI, 51-73%] with the combination versus 68% [95% CI, 54-85%] with paclitaxel alone), median PFS (4.9 [95% CI, 4.1-6.1] versus 5.8 [95% CI, 4.8-7.4] months, respectively) or median overall survival (13.6 versus 12.9 months, respectively). The combination was associated with more grade 3/4 toxicities (87% versus 70%, respectively) and toxicity-related paclitaxel discontinuations (22% versus 11%). Pazopanib was discontinued for toxicity in 44% of patients, most commonly for gastrointestinal and vascular events. There were two treatment-related deaths, both in the combination arm (pulmonary embolism and gastrointestinal perforation). At month 4, patient-reported outcomes deteriorated from baseline in the combination arm, particularly for abdominal/gastrointestinal symptoms, which showed a clinically important difference versus paclitaxel alone. CONCLUSIONS: In rOC progressing during maintenance bevacizumab, adding pazopanib to paclitaxel did not improve efficacy, increased toxicity, and compromised chemotherapy delivery. CLINICALTRIALS: govregistration:NCT02383251.

Everolimus Added to Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy in Patients With High-Risk Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Primary Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Everolimus, an oral inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin, improves progression-free survival in combination with endocrine therapy (ET) in postmenopausal women with aromatase inhibitor-resistant metastatic breast cancer. However, the benefit of adding everolimus to ET in the adjuvant setting in early breast cancer is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomized double-blind phase III study, women with high-risk, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative primary breast cancer were randomly assigned to everolimus or placebo for 2 years combined with standard ET. Stratification factors included ET agent, receipt of neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy, progesterone receptor status, duration of ET before random assignment, and lymph node involvement. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT01805271). RESULTS: Between June 2013 and March 2020, 1,278 patients were randomly allocated to receive everolimus or placebo. At the first interim analysis, the trial was stopped for futility and a full analysis undertaken once data snapshot complete. One hundred forty-seven patients have had a DFS event reported and at 3 years, DFS did not differ between patients who received ET plus everolimus (88% [95% CI, 85 to 91]) or ET plus placebo (89% [95% CI, 86 to 91; hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.32; P = .77]). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events were reported in 22.9% of patients (29.9% with everolimus v 15.9% with placebo, P < .001). 53.4% everolimus-treated patients permanently discontinued experimental treatment early compared with placebo-treated 22.3%. CONCLUSION: Among high-risk patients, everolimus added to adjuvant ET did not improve DFS. Tolerability was a concern, with more than half of patients stopping everolimus before study completion. Everolimus cannot be recommended in the adjuvant setting.