Desire for pregnancy and fertility preservation in young patients with breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Data on the desire for pregnancy and the status of fertility preservation (FP) in patients with breast cancer remain unclear. This study aimed to determine the status of patients with breast cancer who desired pregnancy and FP implementation before systemic therapy. METHODS: This retrospective study surveyed the institutional clinical databases and electronic medical records of patients aged < 43 years with stages 0-III primary breast cancer during surgery and treated between April 2020 and March 2021. All patients were enquired about their desire for pregnancy in a questionnaire by "present," "absent," and "unsure" at their first visit. The correlation between the desire for pregnancy, implementation of FP, and clinicopathological factors was investigated. RESULTS: Among 1005 patients who underwent surgery for primary breast cancer, 146 were included in the analysis. Of them, 34 (23.3%) patients had a desire for pregnancy, and 45 (30.8%) chose "unsure." Factors associated with the desire for pregnancy were younger age during surgery (p < 0.0022), unmarried status (p < 0.001), nulliparity (p < 0.001), early-stage disease (p = 0.0016), and estrogen receptor positivity (p = 0.008). Among 115 patients who underwent systemic therapy, 13 (11.3%) underwent FP before systemic therapy. Patients who were nulliparous frequently pursued FP (p = 0.0195). The proportion of FP implementation was low in patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.0863). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that unmarried, nulliparous, and younger patients were more interested in pregnancy, and nulliparous patients frequently pursued FP.

Absolute lymphocyte count predicts efficacy of palbociclib in patients with metastatic luminal breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) is a predictive and prognostic factor for various tumor types, including breast cancer. Palbociclib is a CDK4/6 inhibitor widely used for the treatment of metastatic estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. However, predictive biomarkers of the efficacy of palbociclib remain unelucidated. We conducted a retrospective study to examine the predictive value of the baseline ALC in patients treated with palbociclib. METHODS: The medical records of patients with ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer treated with palbociclib plus hormonal therapy between December 2017 and December 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. The cutoff value of ALC was set at 1800 cells/µL at the initiation of palbociclib treatment. The clinical benefit rate (CBR) was defined as the rate of complete or partial response or stable disease for at least 6 months. Progression-free survival (PFS) rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: All of the 202 patients were women, with a median age of 59 years and a performance status (PS) of ≤ 2. The median numbers of lines of chemotherapy and endocrine therapy before palbociclib treatment were 0 (range, 0-9) and 1 (range, 0-7), respectively. Fifty-one patients had liver metastases. Forty-six patients tested negative for progesterone receptor (PgR) expression. The median follow-up time was 9.1 months. The CBR was significantly higher in the ALC-high group than in the ALC-low group (79% vs. 60%; P = 0.018). The median PFS was significantly longer in the ALC-high group than in the ALC-low group (26.8 months vs. 8.4 moths, respectively; P = 0.000013). ALC, age, PS, PgR status, prior chemotherapy, prior endocrine therapy, and liver metastasis were entered into the multivariate analysis. ALC was identified as an independent factor for PFS (P = 0.00085), along with liver metastasis (P = 0.0020), PS (P = 0.026), and prior endocrine therapy (P = 0.019). CONCLUSION: ALC can serve as a predictor of palbociclib efficacy in patients with metastatic ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.

Primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for patients with non-round cell soft tissue sarcomas: a systematic review for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is an essential supportive agent for chemotherapy-induced severe myelosuppression. We proposed two clinical questions (CQ): CQ #1, "Does primary prophylaxis with G-CSF benefit chemotherapy for non-round cell soft tissue sarcoma (NRC-STS)?" and CQ #2, "Does G-CSF-based intensified chemotherapy improve NRC-STS treatment outcomes?" for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology. METHODS: A literature search was performed on the primary prophylactic use of G-CSF for NRC-STSs. Two reviewers assessed the extracted papers and analyzed overall survival, incidence of febrile neutropenia, infection-related mortality, quality of life, and pain. RESULTS: Eighty-one and 154 articles were extracted from the literature search for CQs #1 and #2, respectively. After the first and second screening, one and two articles were included in the final evaluation, respectively. Only some studies have addressed these two clinical questions through a literature review. CONCLUSION: The clinical questions were converted to future research questions because of insufficient available data. The statements were proposed: "The benefit of primary G-CSF prophylaxis is not clear in NRC-STS" and "The benefit of intensified chemotherapy with primary G-CSF prophylaxis is not clear in NRC-STSs." G-CSF is often administered as primary prophylaxis when chemotherapy with severe myelosuppression is administered. However, its effectiveness and safety are yet to be scientifically proven.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during chemotherapy for invasive breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy for breast cancer can cause neutropenia, increasing the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) and serious infections. The use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) as primary prophylaxis has been explored to mitigate these risks. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of primary G-CSF prophylaxis in patients with invasive breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted according to the "Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development" using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies assessing using G-CSF as primary prophylaxis in invasive breast cancer were included. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and FN incidence. Meta-analyses were performed for outcomes with sufficient data. RESULTS: Eight RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis, and five RCTs were meta-analyzed for FN incidence. The meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in FN incidence with primary G-CSF prophylaxis (risk difference [RD] = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.01-0.43, p = 0.04). Evidence for improvement in OS with G-CSF was inconclusive. Four RCTs suggested a tendency for increased pain with G-CSF, but statistical significance was not reported. CONCLUSIONS: Primary prophylactic use of G-CSF is strongly recommended for breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, as it has been shown to reduce the incidence of FN. While the impact on OS is unclear, the benefits of reducing FN are considered to outweigh the potential harm of increased pain.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for patients with Ewing sarcomas: a systematic review for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma can lead to severe myelosuppression. We proposed two clinical questions (CQ): CQ #1, "Does primary prophylaxis with G-CSF benefit chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma?" and CQ #2, "Does G-CSF-based intensified chemotherapy improve Ewing sarcoma treatment outcomes?". METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi web databases, including English and Japanese articles published from 1990 to 2019. Two reviewers assessed the extracted papers and analyzed overall survival (OS), febrile neutropenia (FN) incidence, infection-related mortality, quality of life (QOL), and pain. RESULTS: Twenty-five English and five Japanese articles were identified for CQ #1. After screening, a cohort study of vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide chemotherapy with 851 patients was selected. Incidence of FN was 60.8% with G-CSF and 65.8% without; statistical tests were not conducted. Data on OS, infection-related mortality, QOL, or pain was unavailable. Consequently, CQ #1 was redefined as a future research question. As for CQ #2, we found two English and five Japanese papers, of which one high-quality randomized controlled trial on G-CSF use in intensified chemotherapy was included. This trial showed trends toward lower mortality and a significant increase in event-free survival for 2-week interval regimen with the G-CSF primary prophylactic use compared with 3-week interval. CONCLUSION: This review indicated that G-CSF's efficacy as primary prophylaxis in Ewing sarcoma, except in children, is uncertain despite its common use. This review tentatively endorses intensified chemotherapy with G-CSF primary prophylaxis for Ewing sarcoma.

Therapeutic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with febrile neutropenia: a comprehensive systematic review for clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Febrile neutropenia represents a critical oncologic emergency, and its management is pivotal in cancer therapy. In several guidelines, the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia is not routinely recommended except in high-risk cases. The Japan Society of Clinical Oncology has updated its clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF, incorporating a systematic review to address this clinical question. METHODS: The systematic review was conducted by performing a comprehensive literature search across PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web, focusing on publications from January 1990 to December 2019. Selected studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and cohort and case-control studies. Evaluated outcomes included overall survival, infection-related mortality, hospitalization duration, quality of life, and pain. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 332 records. Following two rounds of screening, two records were selected for both qualitative and quantitative synthesis including meta-analysis. Regarding infection-related mortality, the event to case ratio was 5:134 (3.73%) in the G-CSF group versus 6:129 (4.65%) in the non-G-CSF group, resulting in a relative risk of 0.83 (95% confidence interval, 0.27-2.58; p = 0.54), which was not statistically significant. Only median values for hospitalization duration were available from the two RCTs, precluding a meta-analysis. For overall survival, quality of life, and pain, no suitable studies were found for analysis, rendering their assessment unfeasible. CONCLUSION: A weak recommendation is made that G-CSF treatment not be administered to patients with febrile neutropenia during cancer chemotherapy. G-CSF treatment can be considered for patients at high risk.

Effectiveness and safety of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor priming regimen for acute myeloid leukemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Clinical Practice Guideline for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remain poor. Although the concomitant use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and anti-chemotherapeutic agents has been investigated to improve the antileukemic effect on AML, its usefulness remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the effects of G-CSF priming as a remission induction therapy or salvage chemotherapy. METHODS: We performed a thorough literature search for studies related to the priming effect of G-CSF using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library. A qualitative analysis of the pooled data was performed, and risk ratios (RRs) with confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and summarized. RESULTS: Two reviewers independently extracted and accessed the 278 records identified during the initial screening, and 62 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility in second screening. Eleven studies were included in the qualitative analysis and 10 in the meta-analysis. A systematic review revealed that priming with G-CSF did not correlate with an improvement in response rate and overall survival (OS). The result of the meta-analysis revealed the tendency for lower relapse rate in the G-CSF priming groups without inter-study heterogeneity [RR, 0.91 (95% CI 0.82-1.01), p = 0.08; I2 = 4%, p = 0.35]. In specific populations, including patients with intermediate cytogenetic risk and those receiving high-dose cytarabine, the G-CSF priming regimen prolonged OS. CONCLUSIONS: G-CSF priming in combination with intensive remission induction treatment is not universally effective in patients with AML. Further studies are required to identify the patient cohort for which G-CSF priming is recommended.

Effectiveness of G-CSF in chemotherapy for digestive system tumors: a systematic review of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 delineated by the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) reportedly reduces the risk of neutropenia and subsequent infections caused by cancer chemotherapy. Although several guidelines recommend using G-CSF in primary prophylaxis according to the incidence rate of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN), the effectiveness of G-CSF in digestive system tumor chemotherapy remains unclear. To address these clinical questions, we conducted a systematic review as part of revising the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 published by the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology. METHODS: This systematic review addressed two main clinical questions (CQ): CQ1: "Is primary prophylaxis with G-CSF effective in chemotherapy?", and CQ2: "Is increasing the intensity of chemotherapy with G-CSF effective?" We reviewed different types of digestive system tumors, including esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, biliary tract, colorectal, and neuroendocrine carcinomas. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web databases were searched for information sources. Independent systematic reviewers conducted two rounds of screening and selected relevant records for each CQ. Finally, the working group members synthesized the strength of evidence and recommendations. RESULTS: After two rounds of screening, 5/0/3/0/2/0 records were extracted for CQ1 of esophageal/gastric/pancreatic/biliary tract/colorectal/ and neuroendocrine carcinoma, respectively. Additionally, a total of 2/6/1 records were extracted for CQ2 of esophageal/pancreatic/colorectal cancer, respectively. The strength of evidence and recommendations were evaluated for CQ1 of colorectal cancer; however, we could not synthesize recommendations for other CQs owing to the lack of records. CONCLUSION: The use of G-CSF for primary prophylaxis in chemotherapy for colorectal cancer is inappropriate.

Comparison between a single dose of PEG G-CSF and multiple doses of non-PEG G-CSF: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUD: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is widely used for the primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia (FN). Two types of G-CSF are available in Japan, namely G-CSF chemically bound to polyethylene glycol (PEG G-CSF), which provides long-lasting effects with a single dose, and non-polyethylene glycol-bound G-CSF (non-PEG G-CSF), which must be sequentially administrated for several days. METHODS: This current study investigated the utility of these treatments for the primary prophylaxis of FN through a systematic review of the literature. A detailed literature search for related studies was performed using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library. Data were independently extracted and assessed by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis or meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate six outcomes. RESULTS: Through the first and second screenings, 23 and 18 articles were extracted for qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis, respectively. The incidence of FN was significantly lower in the PEG G-CSF group than in the non-PEG G-CSF group with a strong quality/certainty of evidence. The differences in other outcomes, such as overall survival, infection-related mortality, the duration of neutropenia (less than 500/µL), quality of life, and pain, were not apparent. CONCLUSIONS: A single dose of PEG G-CSF is strongly recommended over multiple-dose non-PEG G-CSF therapy for the primary prophylaxis of FN.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF after induction therapy for acute myeloid leukemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan society of clinical oncology.

Although granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) reduces the incidence, duration, and severity of neutropenia, its prophylactic use for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remains controversial due to a theoretically increased risk of relapse. The present study investigated the effects of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis for AML with remission induction therapy. A detailed literature search for related studies was performed using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library. Data were independently extracted and assessed by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis of pooled data was conducted, and the risk ratio with corresponding confidence intervals was calculated in the meta-analysis and summarized. Sixteen studies were included in the qualitative analysis, nine of which were examined in the meta-analysis. Although G-CSF significantly shortened the duration of neutropenia, primary prophylaxis with G-CSF did not correlate with infection-related mortality. Moreover, primary prophylaxis with G-CSF did not affect disease progression/recurrence, overall survival, or adverse events, such as musculoskeletal pain. However, evidence to support or discourage the use of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis for adult AML patients with induction therapy remains limited. Therefore, the use of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis can be considered for adult AML patients with remission induction therapy who are at a high risk of infectious complications.

Optimal timing of prophylactic pegylated G-CSF after chemotherapy administration for patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

INTRODUCTION: The timing of prophylactic pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration during cancer chemotherapy varies, with Day 2 and Days 3-5 being the most common schedules. Optimal timing remains uncertain, affecting efficacy and adverse events. This systematic review sought to evaluate the available evidence on the timing of prophylactic pegylated G-CSF administration. METHODS: Based on the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development, we searched the PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and Cochrane Library databases for literature published from January 1990 to December 2019. The inclusion criteria included studies among the adult population using pegfilgrastim. The search strategy focused on timing-related keywords. Two reviewers independently extracted and assessed the data. RESULTS: Among 300 initial search results, only four articles met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis for febrile neutropenia incidence suggested a potential higher incidence when pegylated G-CSF was administered on Days 3-5 than on Day 2 (odds ratio: 1.27, 95% CI 0.66-2.46, p = 0.47), with a moderate certainty of evidence. No significant difference in overall survival or mortality due to infections was observed. The trend of severe adverse events was lower on Days 3-5, without statistical significance (odds ratio: 0.72, 95% CI 0.14-3.67, p = 0.69) and with a moderate certainty of evidence. Data on pain were inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Both Day 2 and Days 3-5 were weakly recommended for pegylated G-CSF administration post-chemotherapy in patients with cancer. The limited evidence highlights the need for further research to refine recommendations.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis of G-CSF during chemotherapy for prostate cancer, Japanese clinical guideline for appropriate use of G-CSF: clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel (DTX) is commonly used as a primary chemotherapy, and cabazitaxel (CBZ) has shown efficacy in patients who are DTX resistant. Primary prophylactic granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) therapy is currently used with CBZ treatment in routine clinical care in Japan. METHODS: In this study, we performed a systematic review following the Minds guidelines to investigate the effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during chemotherapy for prostate cancer and to construct G-CSF guidelines for primary prophylaxis use during chemotherapy. A comprehensive literature search of various electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi) was performed on January 10, 2020, to identify studies published between January 1990 and December 31, 2019 that investigate the impact of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during CBZ administration on clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Ultimately, nine articles were included in the qualitative systematic review. Primary G-CSF prophylaxis during CBZ administration for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer was difficult to assess in terms of correlation with overall survival, mortality from infection, and patients' quality of life. These difficulties were owing to the lack of randomized controlled trials comparing patients with and without primary prophylaxis of G-CSF during CBZ administration. However, some retrospective studies have suggested that it may reduce the incidence of febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSION: G-CSF may be beneficial as primary prophylaxis during CBZ administration for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer, and we made a "weak recommendation to perform" with an annotation of the relevant regimen.

Trastuzumab deruxtecan for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-low advanced or metastatic breast cancer: recommendations from the Japanese Breast Cancer Society Clinical Practice Guidelines.

The Japanese Breast Cancer Society Clinical Practice Guidelines are published as timely guidance on clinical issues in breast cancer treatment in Japan. In the recent edition of these guidelines, we addressed a new clinical question 34 (CQ 34, systemic treatment part) "Is trastuzumab deruxtecan recommended for patients with unresectable or metastatic HER2-low breast cancer?" and a new future research question 7 (FRQ 7, pathological diagnosis part) "How is HER2-low breast cancer diagnosed for the indication of trastuzumab deruxtecan?". These questions address use of trastuzumab deruxtecan in patients with unresectable or metastatic HER2-low breast cancer who have previously received chemotherapy for metastatic disease. The strengths of evidence and recommendation were determined through a quantitative and qualitative systematic review using multiple outcomes, including efficacy and safety. We conclude that trastuzumab deruxtecan is recommended for this patient population (strength of recommendation: 1; strength of evidence: moderate; CQ34) and that HER2-low expression for the indication of trastuzumab deruxtecan should be diagnosed using companion diagnostics based on appropriate criteria (FRQ7).

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor during dose-dense chemotherapy for urothelial cancer: Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) decreases the incidence, duration, and severity of febrile neutropenia (FN); however, dose reduction or withdrawal is often preferred in the management of adverse events in the treatment of urothelial cancer. It is also important to maintain therapeutic intensity in order to control disease progression and thereby relieve symptoms, such as hematuria, infection, bleeding, and pain, as well as to prolong the survival. In this clinical question, we compared treatment with primary prophylactic administration of G-CSF to maintain therapeutic intensity with conventional standard therapy without G-CSF and examined the benefits and risks as major outcomes. A detailed literature search for relevant studies was performed using PubMed, Ichu-shi Web, and Cochrane Library. Data were extracted and evaluated independently by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis of the pooled data was performed, and the risk ratios with corresponding confidence intervals were calculated and summarized in a meta-analysis. Seven studies were included in the qualitative analysis, two of which were reviewed in the meta-analysis of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) therapy, and one randomized controlled study showed a reduction in the incidence of FN. Primary prophylactic administration of G-CSF may be beneficial, as shown in a randomized controlled study of dose-dense MVAC therapy. However, there are no studies on other regimens, and we made a "weak recommendation to perform" with an annotation of the relevant regimen (dose-dense MVAC).

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis to develop clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is commonly administered to cancer patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy, especially when incidence rate of febrile neutropenia (FN) surpasses 20%. While primary prophylaxis with G-CSF has been proven effective in preventing FN in patients with cancer, there is limited evidence regarding its efficacy in specifically, lung cancer. Our systematic review focused on the efficacy of G-CSF primary prophylaxis in lung cancer. METHODS: We extracted studies on non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) using the PubMed, Ichushi Web, and Cochrane Library databases. Two reviewers assessed the extracted studies for each type of lung cancer and conducted quantitative and meta-analyses of preplanned outcomes, including overall survival, FN incidence, infection-related mortality, quality of life, and musculoskeletal pain. RESULTS: A limited number of studies were extracted: two on NSCLC and six on SCLC. A meta-analysis was not conducted owing to insufficient data on NSCLC. Two case-control studies explored the efficacy of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF in patients with NSCLC (on docetaxel and ramucirumab therapy) and indicated a lower FN frequency with G-CSF. For SCLC, meta-analysis of five studies showed no significant reduction in FN incidence, with an odds ratio of 0.38 (95% confidence interval 0.03-5.56, P = 0.48). Outcomes other than FN incidence could not be evaluated due to low data availability. CONCLUSION: Limited data are available on G-CSF prophylaxis in lung cancer. Primary prophylaxis with G-CSF may be weakly recommended in Japanese patients with NSCLC undergoing docetaxel and ramucirumab combination therapy.

IL25+ macrophages are a key determinant of treatment resistance of IL17RB+ breast cancer.

Recurrence and metastasis are resistant to multimodal treatments, and are the major causes of death in breast cancer. Accumulating evidence suggests that the IL17RB signaling pathway plays a key role in progression and metastasis of breast cancer. Clinical significance of the IL17RB positivity in tumor tissues has been also reported as a poor prognostic factor in breast cancer. However, the molecular mechanisms underlying the poor prognosis of patients with IL17RB+ breast cancer, particularly the immunological aspects, remain to be fully elucidated, and elimination of the IL17RB+ tumors has not been practically achieved in clinical settings. In this study, we identified a distinct molecular mechanism underlying the intractability of the IL17RB+ tumors through tumor biological and immunological investigation using mouse and human breast cancer cells transduced with il17rb gene. IL17RB overexpression in tumor cells confers cancer stemness, including high invasive and self-renewal abilities, and high resistance to CDK4/6 inhibitors that have been considered as a promising agent for treating breast cancer despite the limited efficacy. In the mice implanted with the IL17RB+ tumors, IL25+ macrophages (Møs) are expanded locally in tumor tissues and systemically in spleen, and promote the IL17RB+ tumor progression directly by intensifying the tumor functions, and indirectly via impairment of anti-tumor effector CTLs and NK cells utilizing the secreted IL25. Blocking IL25 with the specific mAb, however, interferes the adverse events, and successfully elicits significant anti-tumor efficacy in combination with CDK4/6 inhibitors providing better survival in murine mammary tumor models. These results suggest that the IL25+ Mø is a key determinant of building the solid treatment resistance of the IL17RB+ breast cancer. Targeting the IL17RB-IL25 axis may be a promising strategy to improve clinical outcomes in the treatment of breast cancer patients, particularly with IL17RB+ tumors.

The Japanese Breast Cancer Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for systemic treatment of breast cancer, 2022 edition.

The Japanese Breast Cancer Society (JBCS) Clinical Practice Guidelines for systemic treatment of breast cancer were updated to the 2022 edition through a process started in 2018. The updated guidelines consist of 12 background questions (BQs), 33 clinical questions (CQs), and 20 future research questions (FRQs). Multiple outcomes including efficacy and safety were selected in each CQ, and then quantitative and qualitative systematic reviews were conducted to determine the strength of evidence and strength of recommendation, which was finally determined through a voting process among designated committee members. Here, we describe eight selected CQs as important updates from the previous guidelines, including novel practice-changing updates, and recommendations based on evidence that has emerged specifically from Japanese clinical trials.

Mitigation of paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy in breast cancer patients using limb-cooling apparatus: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Background: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is one of the most common adverse events that can significantly impair the quality of life of patients. Although limb cooling may be beneficial for preventing CIPN, logistical challenges exist in ensuring consistent efficacy and safety. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial is to validate whether limb cooling with strict temperature control can reduce CIPN in patients with breast cancer receiving weekly paclitaxel as a perioperative treatment. Methods: This study is a multicenter, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial. We plan to enroll patients with breast cancer who are scheduled to receive 12 weekly doses of paclitaxel (60 min 80 mg/m2 intravenous infusion) as perioperative chemotherapy. Patients will be randomly divided into the intervention or control groups and undergo limb cooling therapy maintained at a constant temperature of 13°C and 25°C, respectively. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients who report Patient Neurotoxicity Questionnaire (PNQ) ≥ D in their limbs by the end of the study treatment or at the time of discontinuation. Discussion: The results of this trial will contribute to the establishment of new evidence for limb cooling therapy in the mitigation of CIPN and present a safe and stable cooling device that may be suitable for use in the clinic. Clinical trial registration: https://jrct.niph.go.jp/en-latest-detail/jRCT2032210115, identifier jRCT2032210115.

Multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II study of prophylactic olanzapine for patients with metastatic breast cancer receiving T-DXd treatment: protocol for the ERICA study (WJOG14320B).

INTRODUCTION: The antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) has led to a change in the clinical management of breast cancer. Nausea and vomiting are the most common adverse events of T-DXd, which cannot be completely alleviated by standard prophylactic regimens. Olanzapine is particularly effective in preventing delayed nausea caused by chemotherapy. In this study, we will evaluate the efficacy of olanzapine in managing persistent nausea and vomiting during T-DXd treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The ERICA study is a multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised phase II study with the aim to evaluate the antiemetic effects of the prophylactic olanzapine (5 mg orally, on days 1-6) or placebo combined with a 1,5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3)-receptor antagonist and dexamethasone in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer undergoing T-DXd treatment. For a period of 22 days from the day of T-DXd treatment, patients will document their experience in an electronic symptom diary daily during observational periods. The primary endpoint is the complete response rate, defined as no vomiting and no rescue medications during the 'delayed phase' of 24-120 hours post-T-DXd administration. In addition, we define 120-504 hour as the 'persistent phase' and 0-504 hours as the 'overall phase' for secondary endpoint analysis. We have estimated that a total sample size of at least 156 patients is needed to allow a power of 80% at a one-sided significance level of 20% in this study. The target sample size is set to 166 to account for possible case exclusions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol is approved by the West Japan Oncology Group protocol review committee and the SHOWA University Clinical Research Review Board. The study results will be presented at international conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: jRCTs031210410.

[Challenges to International Collaborative Clinical Research and Approval Disparities].

The standard treatment and prognosis of breast cancer are improving as because of international collaborative clinical research. Generally, the standard treatment for breast cancer in Japan is not different from that in the US, Europe or other Asian countries, however, some novel agents have not been developed or have been delayed. For example, no institution in Japan has participated in the clinical trials of sacituzumab-govitecan. Institutions in Japan participated in the clinical trial of alpelisib and neratinib, however, the development of these drugs was delayed due to the racial difference and lack of a company in charge. On the other hand, there are international collaborative trials that Japan has participated in or has taken the lead, such as POSITIVE trial, CREATE-X trial, and PATHWAY trial. There are many challenges for Japan to participate in or lead international collaborative trials with Europe, US, or Asia. It is necessary to build a network and infrastructure for international collaborative trials based on the cooperation between the institutions and clinical trial groups in the world.