Second breast cancer: recurrence score results, clinicopathologic characteristics, adjuvant treatments, and outcomes-exploratory analysis of the Clalit registry.

Data on using the 21-gene Recurrence Score (RS) testing on second breast cancer (BC; second primary or local recurrence) are lacking. This cohort study examined patients with first and second BC, who underwent 21-gene testing both times. It included a 'study-cohort' (60 N0/N1mi/N1 ER + HER2‒ BC patients with ≥2 RS results >1 year apart) and a 'general 21-gene-tested BC-cohort' (2044 previously described N0/N1mi/N1 patients). The median time between the first and second BC was 5.2 (IQR, 3.1-7.1) years; the second BC was ipsilateral in 68%. Patient/tumor characteristics of the first- and second-BC in the 'study-cohort' were similar, except for the RS which was higher in the second BC (median [IQR]: 23 [17-30] vs 17 [14-22], p < 0.001). Overall, 56 patients had follow-up data, of whom 5 experienced distant recurrence (2 RS 11-25 patients and 3 RS 26-100 patients). Studies exploring the prognostic utility of the RS in this setting are warranted.

The Place of Chemotherapy in The Evolving Treatment Landscape for Patients With HR-positive/HER2-negative MBC.

Endocrine therapy (ET) for the treatment of patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR-positive/HER2-negative) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) has changed markedly over recent years with the emergence of new ETs and the use of molecularly targeted agents. Cytotoxic chemotherapy continues, however, to have an important role in these patients and it is important to maximize its efficacy while minimizing toxicity to optimize outcomes. This review examines current HR-positive/HER2-negative MBC clinical guidelines and addresses key questions around the use of chemotherapy in the face of emerging therapeutic options. Specifically, the indications for chemotherapy in patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative MBC and the choice of optimal chemotherapy are discussed.

Oncology Treatments during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Israel: the ONCOR Study.

BACKGROUND: The increased susceptibility of cancer patients to coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infections and complications calls for special precautions while treating cancer patients during COVID-19 pandemics. Thus, oncology departments have had to implement a wide array of prevention measures. OBJECTIVES: To address issues associated with cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic and to assess the implementation of measures aimed at containment of COVID-19 diffusion while allowing continuation of quality cancer care. METHODS: A national survey among oncology departments in Israel was conducted between 12 April 2020 and 14 April 2020. Eighteen heads of hospital-based oncology departments completed a self-report questionnaire regarding their institute's preparedness for treatment of cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: In this national survey, prevention measures against COVID-19 spread were taken prior to patients' arrival and at arrival or while staying in the departments. Most participants (78-89%) reported using a quick triage of patients and caregivers prior to their entrance to the oncology units, limiting the entrance of caregivers, and reducing unnecessary visits to the clinic. Switching to oral therapies rather than intravenous ones when possible was considered by 82% and shortage in personal protective equipment was reported by five (28%) heads of oncology departments. Some differences between large and small/medium sized medical centers were observed regarding issues related to COVID-19 containment measures and changes in treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Oncology departments in Israel were able to prepare and adapt their services to guidelines and requirements related to the COVID-19 pandemic with little harm to their treatment capacity.

Safety and tolerability of subcutaneous trastuzumab at home administration, results of the phase IIIb open-label BELIS study in HER2-positive early breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The subcutaneous (SC) administration of trastuzumab is highly preferred by patients. At home, administration of trastuzumab SC might further improve patient benefit. The aims of the BELIS study are to evaluate the safety and tolerability of trastuzumab SC when administered at home by a healthcare professional (HCP) and to evaluate patient-reported outcomes for treatment experience of at home cancer therapy. METHODS: This open-label phase IIIb study enrolled HER2-positive early breast cancer patients in Belgium and Israel who completed the first six cycles of trastuzumab IV (neo)adjuvant therapy. The study consisted of three consecutive treatment periods: three cycles of trastuzumab IV and SC each at the hospital and six cycles of trastuzumab SC at home. RESULTS: Between November 2013 and December 2014, 23 centres enrolled 102 patients in the intent-to-treat population of which 101 patients entered the safety population. No new safety signals were detected with as expected, more mild administration site events with trastuzumab SC when compared to IV treatment. All patients agreed that they had benefit from at home administration to a large (18/81; 22%) or very large (63/81; 78%) extent. All HCPs (21/21) agreed that SC is the quickest method from start of preparation to finish of administration and that less resource use is needed. CONCLUSION: The results of the BELIS study support that trastuzumab SC can be safely administered at home by a HCP and all patients considered this setting as beneficial. HCPs consider the SC formulation as the quickest method to administer trastuzumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT Identifier: 2013-000123-13. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01926886.

Advanced Breast Cancer at Diagnosis: Over One Third Adherent to Screening Recommendations.

Background: Advanced breast cancer (ABC) at diagnosis carries a worse prognosis, and can be attributed to delay in diagnosis, failure of screening tests, or aggressive biology. Better understanding of factors related with ABC at diagnosis could help decrease the proportion of such cases. Patients and Methods: This is a retrospective study of all patients diagnosed and treated for breast cancer (BC) at a single institution between 2012 and 2015. Data were collected from medical records and phone interviews, and included demographic, clinical, and tumor-related data, and adherence to screening recommendations. Results: Of 555 newly diagnosed BC patients, 390 (70.3%) were diagnosed early (stage 0-IIa), and 165 (29.7%) were diagnosed with ABC (stage IIb-IV). Of the165 patients diagnosed with ABC, 57 (34.5%) underwent screening mammography as recommended. More patients with ABC were <50 years (29.1% vs. 19%, p = 0.006). ABC was associated with higher grade, higher proliferation rate, Her2/neu overexpression, luminal B-like, and triple negative phenotypes. Mammography within 30 months of diagnosis was more prevalent among those diagnosed early (64.6% vs. 34.5%, p = 0.003). Only 31 (18.8%) of the screening eligible patients who were diagnosed at advanced stage did not adhere to screening recommendations. Conclusions: ABC at diagnosis is related to aggressive tumor biology and age <50 years. It is also associated with lower adherence to screening mammography; however, more than one third of patients diagnosed with ABC who were eligible for screening underwent screening mammography as recommended. Further research is needed to elucidate factors related with ABC at diagnosis, review screening guidelines, and develop more effective screening modalities.

Ten-year clinical outcomes in N0 ER+ breast cancer patients with Recurrence Score-guided therapy.

The 21-gene Recurrence Score (RS) assay is a validated prognosticator/predictor of chemotherapy (CT) benefit in early-stage estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer (BC). Long-term data from real-life clinical practice where treatment was guided by the RS result are lacking. We performed exploratory analysis of the Clalit Health Services (CHS) registry, which included all CHS patients with node-negative ER+ HER2-negative BC who underwent RS testing between 1/2006 and 12/2009 to determine 10-year Kaplan-Meier estimates for distant recurrence/BC-specific mortality (BCSM) in this cohort. The analysis included 1365 patients. Distribution of RS results: RS 0-10, 17.8%; RS 11-25, 62.5%; RS 26-100, 19.7%. Corresponding CT use: 0, 9.4, and 69.9%. Ten-year distant recurrence rates in patients with RS 0-10, 11-25, and 26-100: 2.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-6.2%), 6.1% (95% CI, 4.4-8.6%), and 13.1% (95% CI, 9.4-18.3%), respectively (P < 0.001); corresponding BCSM rates: 0.7% (95% CI 0.1-5.1%), 2.2% (95% CI, 1.3-3.7%), and 9.5% (95% CI, 6.0-14.9%) (P < 0.001). When the analysis included patients treated with endocrine therapy alone (95.5/87.5% of patients with RS 0-10/11-25), 10-year distant recurrence and BCSM rates for RS 0-10 patients were 2.7% (95% CI, 1.1-6.5%) and 0.8% (95% CI, 0.1-5.3%), respectively, and for RS 11-25 patients, 5.7% (95% CI, 3.9-8.3%) and 2.0% (95% CI, 1.1-3.7%), respectively. For RS 11-25 patients, no statistically significant differences were observed in 10-year distant recurrence/BCSM rates between CT-treated and untreated patients; however, this should be interpreted cautiously since the number of events was low and patients were not randomized. In conclusion, in node-negative ER+ HER2-negative BC patients, where treatment decisions in real-life clinical practice incorporated the RS, patients with RS 0-25 (~80% of patients, <10% CT use) had excellent outcomes at 10 years. Patients with RS 26-100 had high distant recurrence risk despite CT use and are candidates for new treatment approaches.

Veliparib with First-Line Chemotherapy and as Maintenance Therapy in Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Data are limited regarding the use of poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, such as veliparib, in combination with chemotherapy followed by maintenance as initial treatment in patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. METHODS: In an international, phase 3, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed the efficacy of veliparib added to first-line induction chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel and continued as maintenance monotherapy in patients with previously untreated stage III or IV high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive chemotherapy plus placebo followed by placebo maintenance (control), chemotherapy plus veliparib followed by placebo maintenance (veliparib combination only), or chemotherapy plus veliparib followed by veliparib maintenance (veliparib throughout). Cytoreductive surgery could be performed before initiation or after 3 cycles of trial treatment. Combination chemotherapy was 6 cycles, and maintenance therapy was 30 additional cycles. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the veliparib-throughout group as compared with the control group, analyzed sequentially in the BRCA-mutation cohort, the cohort with homologous-recombination deficiency (HRD) (which included the BRCA-mutation cohort), and the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 1140 patients underwent randomization. In the BRCA-mutation cohort, the median progression-free survival was 34.7 months in the veliparib-throughout group and 22.0 months in the control group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 0.68; P<0.001); in the HRD cohort, it was 31.9 months and 20.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95 CI, 0.43 to 0.76; P<0.001); and in the intention-to-treat population, it was 23.5 months and 17.3 months (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.83; P<0.001). Veliparib led to a higher incidence of anemia and thrombocytopenia when combined with chemotherapy as well as of nausea and fatigue overall. CONCLUSIONS: Across all trial populations, a regimen of carboplatin, paclitaxel, and veliparib induction therapy followed by veliparib maintenance therapy led to significantly longer progression-free survival than carboplatin plus paclitaxel induction therapy alone. The independent value of adding veliparib during induction therapy without veliparib maintenance was less clear. (Funded by AbbVie; VELIA/GOG-3005 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02470585.).

Uterine cancer in Jewish Israeli BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

BACKGROUND: BRCA1/2 mutation carriers have an increased risk of developing ovarian cancer, leading to the recommendation of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) at 35-40 years of age. The role, if any, that BRCA mutations play in conferring uterine cancer risk, is unresolved. METHOD: Jewish Israeli women, carriers of one of the predominant Jewish mutations in BRCA1/2 from 1998 to 2016, were recruited. Cancer diagnoses were determined through the Israeli National Cancer Registry. Uterine cancer risk was assessed by computing the standardized incidence ratio of observed-to-expected number of cases, using the exact 2-sided P value of Poisson count. RESULTS: Overall, 2627 eligible mutation carriers were recruited from 1998 to 2016, 2312 (88%) of whom were Ashkenazi Jews (1463 BRCA1, 1154 BRCA2 mutation carriers, 10 double mutation carriers). Among these participants, 1310 underwent RRSO without hysterectomy at a mean (± standard deviation) age of 43.6 years (± 4.4 years). During 32,774 women-years of follow up, 14 women developed uterine cancer, and the observed-to-expected rate of all histological subtypes was 3.98 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.17-6.67; P < .001). For serous papillary (n = 5), the observed-to-expected ratio was 14.29 (95% CI, 4.64-33.34; P < .001), and for sarcoma (n = 4) it was 37.74 (95% CI, 10.28-96.62). These rates were also higher than those detected in a group of 1844 age- and ethnicity-matched women (53% with breast cancer). CONCLUSION: Israeli BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers are at an increased risk for developing uterine cancer, especially serous papillary and sarcoma. These elevated risks of uterine cancer should be discussed with BRCA carriers.

Everolimus Plus Letrozole for Treatment of Patients With HR+, HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer Progressing on Endocrine Therapy: An Open-label, Phase II Trial.

PURPOSE: In the Breast cancer trials of OraL EveROlimus-2 (BOLERO-2) trial, everolimus plus exemestane improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) recurring or progressing on/after prior endocrine therapy (ET), suggesting that dual blockade using targeted therapy and ET was an effective treatment option. Here, we investigated the clinical benefit of combining everolimus with different endocrine partner, letrozole, in a similar patient population. METHODS: In this phase II, open-label, single-arm, multicenter trial, postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC who had recurrence/progression on/after prior ET received everolimus 10 mg daily and letrozole 2.5 mg daily. The primary end point was objective response rate; key secondary end points included disease-control rate, PFS, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients were enrolled and followed-up for a median duration of 11.4 months. Everolimus plus letrozole achieved an overall response rate of 23.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.4%-36.0%). The median PFS was 8.8 months (95% CI, 6.6-11.0 months), and the overall survival was 22.9 months (95% CI, 18.5-28.9 months). Disease-control rate was achieved in 51 (85%) patients. The safety profile was consistent with previously published data: The most frequently reported any grade adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (61.1%), stomatitis (54.2%), and rash (33.4%). The most frequently reported grade 3 AEs were stomatitis and anemia (8.3% each), fatigue and diarrhea (5.6% each), and hyperglycemia (4.2%). Only 1 patient had grade 4 AE of anemia. CONCLUSIONS: Everolimus plus letrozole demonstrated clinical benefit and could be a valid treatment option for postmenopausal women recurring/progressing on prior endocrine therapy.

Clinical outcomes in ER+ HER2 -node-positive breast cancer patients who were treated according to the Recurrence Score results: evidence from a large prospectively designed registry.

The Recurrence Score® is increasingly used in node-positive ER+ HER2-negative breast cancer. This retrospective analysis of a prospectively designed registry evaluated treatments/outcomes in node-positive breast cancer patients who were Recurrence Score-tested through Clalit Health Services from 1/2006 through 12/2011 (N = 709). Medical records were reviewed to verify treatments/recurrences/survival. Median follow-up, 5.9 years; median age, 62 years; 53.9% grade 2; 69.8% tumors ≤ 2 cm; 84.5% invasive ductal carcinoma; 42.0% N1mi, and 37.2%/15.5%/5.2% with 1/2/3 positive nodes; 53.4% Recurrence Score < 18, 36.4% Recurrence Score 18-30, and 10.2% Recurrence Score ≥ 31. Overall, 26.9% received adjuvant chemotherapy: 7.1%, 39.5%, and 86.1% in the Recurrence Score < 18, 18-30, and ≥ 31 group, respectively. The 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimates for distant recurrence were 3.2%, 6.3%, and 16.9% for these respective groups and the corresponding 5-year breast cancer death estimates were 0.5%, 3.4%, and 5.7%. In Recurrence Score < 18 patients, 5-year distant-recurrence rates for N1mi/1 positive node/2-3 positive nodes were 1.2%/4.4%/5.4%. As patients were not randomized to treatment and treatment decision is heavily influenced by Recurrence Score, analysis of 5-year distant recurrence by chemotherapy use was exploratory and should be interpreted cautiously: In Recurrence Score < 18, recurrence rate was 7.7% in chemotherapy-treated (n = 27) and 2.9% in chemotherapy-untreated patients (n = 352); P = 0.245. In Recurrence Score 18-30, recurrence rate in chemotherapy-treated patients (n = 102) was significantly lower than in untreated patients (n = 156) (1.0% vs. 9.7% P = 0.019); in Recurrence Score ≤ 25 (the RxPONDER study cutoff), recurrence rate was 2.3% in chemotherapy-treated (n = 89) and 4.4% in chemotherapy-untreated patients (n = 488); P = 0.521. In conclusion, our findings support using endocrine therapy alone in ER+ HER2-negative breast cancer patients with micrometastases/1-3 positive nodes and Recurrence Score < 18.

Clinical outcomes in patients with node-negative breast cancer treated based on the recurrence score results: evidence from a large prospectively designed registry.

The 21-gene Recurrence Score® (RS) assay is a validated prognostic/predictive tool in ER + early-stage breast cancer. However, clinical outcome data from prospective studies in RS ≥ 11 patients are lacking, as are relevant real-life clinical practice data. In this retrospective analysis of a prospectively designed registry, we evaluated treatments/clinical outcomes in patients undergoing RS-testing through Clalit Health Services. The analysis included N0 ER + HER2-negative breast cancer patients who were RS-tested from 1/2006 through 12/2010. Medical records were reviewed to verify treatments/recurrences/survival. The cohort included 1801 patients (median follow-up, 6.2 years). Median age was 60 years, 50.4% were grade 2 and 81.1% had invasive ductal carcinoma; 48.9% had RS < 18, 40.7% RS 18-30, and 10.4% RS ≥ 31, with chemotherapy use of 1.4, 23.7, and 87.2%, respectively. The 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimates for distant recurrence were 0.8, 3.0, and 8.6%, for patients with RS < 18, RS 18-30 and RS ≥ 31, respectively; the corresponding 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimates for breast cancer death were 0.0, 0.9, and 6.2%. Chemotherapy-untreated patients with RS < 11 (n = 304) and 11-25 (n = 1037) (TAILORx categorization) had 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimates for distant recurrence risk/breast cancer death of 1.0%/0.0% and 1.3%/0.4%, respectively. Our results extend those of the prospective TAILORx trial: the 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimates for distant recurrence and breast cancer death rate for the RS < 18 patients were very low supporting the use of endocrine therapy alone. Furthermore, in chemotherapy-untreated patients with RS 11-25 (where TAILORx patients were randomized to chemoendocrine or endocrine therapy alone), 5-year distant recurrence rates were also very low, suggesting that chemotherapy would not have conferred clinically meaningful benefit.

Niraparib Maintenance Therapy in Platinum-Sensitive, Recurrent Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Niraparib is an oral poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase (PARP) 1/2 inhibitor that has shown clinical activity in patients with ovarian cancer. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of niraparib versus placebo as maintenance treatment for patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, patients were categorized according to the presence or absence of a germline BRCA mutation (gBRCA cohort and non-gBRCA cohort) and the type of non-gBRCA mutation and were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive niraparib (300 mg) or placebo once daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: Of 553 enrolled patients, 203 were in the gBRCA cohort (with 138 assigned to niraparib and 65 to placebo), and 350 patients were in the non-gBRCA cohort (with 234 assigned to niraparib and 116 to placebo). Patients in the niraparib group had a significantly longer median duration of progression-free survival than did those in the placebo group, including 21.0 vs. 5.5 months in the gBRCA cohort (hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17 to 0.41), as compared with 12.9 months vs. 3.8 months in the non-gBRCA cohort for patients who had tumors with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.59) and 9.3 months vs. 3.9 months in the overall non-gBRCA cohort (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.61; P<0.001 for all three comparisons). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events that were reported in the niraparib group were thrombocytopenia (in 33.8%), anemia (in 25.3%), and neutropenia (in 19.6%), which were managed with dose modifications. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer, the median duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer among those receiving niraparib than among those receiving placebo, regardless of the presence or absence of gBRCA mutations or HRD status, with moderate bone marrow toxicity. (Funded by Tesaro; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01847274 .).

HER2-Mutated Breast Cancer Responds to Treatment With Single-Agent Neratinib, a Second-Generation HER2/EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor.

Activating mutations in the HER2 tyrosine kinase have been identified in human breast cancers that lack HER2 gene amplification. These patients are not candidates for HER2-targeted drugs under current standards of care, but preclinical data strongly suggest that these patients will benefit from anti-HER2 drugs. This case report describes a young woman with metastatic breast cancer whose tumor was found to carry a HER2 L755S mutation, which is in the kinase domain of HER2. Treatment with the second-generation HER2/EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor neratinib resulted in partial response and dramatic improvement in the patient's functional status. This partial response lasted 11 months, and when the patient's cancer progressed, she was treated with neratinib plus capecitabine and her cancer again responded. This second response parallels the benefit seen with continuing trastuzumab in HER2-amplified breast cancer after disease progression. This case represents the first report, to our knowledge, of successful single-agent treatment of HER2-mutated breast cancer. Two clinical trials of neratinib for HER2-mutated metastatic breast cancer are currently enrolling patients. Further, data from The Cancer Genome Atlas project have identified HER2 mutations in a wide range of solid tumors, including bladder, colorectal, and non-small cell lung cancers, suggesting that clinical trials of neratinib or neratinib-based combinations for HER2-mutated solid tumors is warranted.

D538G mutation in estrogen receptor-α: A novel mechanism for acquired endocrine resistance in breast cancer.

Resistance to endocrine therapy occurs in virtually all patients with estrogen receptor α (ERα)-positive metastatic breast cancer, and is attributed to various mechanisms including loss of ERα expression, altered activity of coregulators, and cross-talk between the ERα and growth factor signaling pathways. To our knowledge, acquired mutations of the ERα have not been described as mediating endocrine resistance. Samples of 13 patients with metastatic breast cancer were analyzed for mutations in cancer-related genes. In five patients who developed resistance to hormonal therapy, a mutation of A to G at position 1,613 of ERα, resulting in a substitution of aspartic acid at position 538 to glycine (D538G), was identified in liver metastases. Importantly, the mutation was not detected in the primary tumors obtained prior to endocrine treatment. Structural modeling indicated that D538G substitution leads to a conformational change in the ligand-binding domain, which mimics the conformation of activated ligand-bound receptor and alters binding of tamoxifen. Indeed, experiments in breast cancer cells indicated constitutive, ligand-independent transcriptional activity of the D538G receptor, and overexpression of it enhanced proliferation and conferred resistance to tamoxifen. These data indicate a novel mechanism of acquired endocrine resistance in breast cancer. Further studies are needed to assess the frequency of D538G-ERα among patients with breast cancer and explore ways to inhibit its activity and restore endocrine sensitivity.

Pretreatment CA 15-3 levels do not predict disease-free survival in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.

AIMS: To evaluate the role of pretreatment CA 15-3 levels as a predictor of disease-free survival in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: A cohort of 65 patients with FIGO stage III or IV epithelial ovarian cancer was evaluated. Patients were treated either with primary cytoreductive surgery followed by adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy or with neoadjuvant chemotherapy with interval debulking surgery. All patients had pretreatment CA 15-3 and CA 125 tumor marker determinations. The patients were divided into a group with elevated CA 15-3 and a group with normal levels. The two groups were compared with regard to clinical and survival measures. RESULTS: The patients' median age was 65 years (range, 37-90); 34 (52%) were at stage III and 31 (48%) at stage IV. CA 15-3 was elevated (>30 units/mL) in 44 (68%) patients, with a median level of 39 units (range, 4-2282). CA 125 was elevated (>35 units/mL) in 61 (94%) patients, with a median level of 947 units (range, 4-30,642). CA 125 and CA 15-3 levels were not correlated (r = 0.015, P = 0.332). The median follow-up was 22 months (range, 3-120 months). Fifty-three (81%) patients had disease recurrence and 43 (66%) died. Survival analysis showed that patients with elevated and normal CA 15-3 levels had similar recurrence-free survival (P = 0.78) and overall survival (P = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Although elevated in the majority of patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, CA 15-3 levels are not predictive of survival.

The impact of the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay on clinical decision-making in node-positive (up to 3 positive nodes) estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients.

Oncotype DX testing is reimbursed in Israel for node-negative and node-positive (N1+; up to 3 positive nodes including micrometastases), estrogen receptor positive (ER+), breast cancer patients. This retrospective study evaluated the impact of Oncotype DX testing on treatment decisions in N1+/ER+ breast cancer patients. To this end, we compared treatments for all N+ patients for whom testing had been ordered with treatments for patients with similar characteristics where the test had not been available. The retrospective analysis included 951 patients (282 Oncotype DX, 669 controls), all of whom received endocrine therapy with or without chemotherapy. In Oncotype DX patients, 7.1, 37.0, and 100 % of those with low, intermediate, and high Recurrence Score results (Oncotype DX summary score) received chemotherapy, respectively (P < 0.0001, all comparisons). Chemotherapy use was lower in Oncotype DX patients versus controls (24.5 vs. 70.1 %). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis in which the probability of receiving chemotherapy was modeled as a function of Oncotype DX testing, age, tumor size, tumor grade, nodal status, and the interactions between Oncotype DX testing and the other covariates, Oncotype DX testing was associated with significantly lower odds of receiving chemotherapy (odds ratio 0.16; 95 % CI 0.11-0.24; P < 0.0001). In summary, our findings suggest that Oncotype DX testing has a significant impact on reducing chemotherapy use in N1+/ER+ breast cancer patients in Israel.

Germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in ethnically diverse high risk families in Israel.

Three mutations in BRCA1 (185delAG, 5382InsC) and BRCA2 (6174delT) predominate among high risk breast ovarian cancer Ashkenazi Jewish families, with few "private" mutations described. Additionally, the spectrum of BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations among high risk Jewish non Ashkenazi and non Jewish Israelis is undetermined. Genotyping by exon-specific sequencing or heteroduplex analysis using enhanced mismatch mutation analysis was applied to 250 high risk, predominantly cancer affected, unrelated Israeli women of Ashkenazi (n = 72), non Ashkenazi (n = 90), Moslem (n = 45), Christian Arabs (n = 21), Druze (n = 17), and non Jewish Caucasians (n = 5). All Jewish women were prescreened and did not harbor any of the predominant BRCA1 or BRCA2 Jewish mutations. Age at diagnosis of breast cancer (median ± SD) (n = 219) was 40.1 ± 11.7, 45.6 ± 10.7, 38.7 ± 9.2, 45.5 ± 11.4 ± and 40.7 ± 8.1 years for Ashkenazi, non Ashkenazi, Moslem, Christian, and Druze participants, respectively. For ovarian cancer (n = 19) the mean ages were 45.75 ± 8.2, 57.9 ± 10.1, 54 ± 8, 70 ± 0, and 72 ± 0 for these origins, respectively. Overall, 22 (8.8%) participants carried 19 clearly pathogenic mutations-10 BRCA1 and 9 BRCA2 (3 novel): 3 in Ashkenazim, 6 in 8 non-Ashkenazim, 6 in 7 Moslems, 2 in Druze, and 2 in non Jewish Caucasians. Only three mutations (c.1991del4, C61G, A1708E) were detected in 2 seemingly unrelated families of Moslem and non- Ashkenazi origins. There were no inactivating mutations among 55 Ashkenazi high risk breast cancer only families. In conclusion, there are no predominant recurring germline mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes among ethnically diverse Jewish and non Jewish high risk families in Israel.