Patient-centered dosing: oncologists' perspectives about treatment-related side effects and individualized dosing for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

PURPOSE: Although metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is treatable, it is not curable and most patients remain on treatment indefinitely. While oncologists commonly prescribe the recommended starting dose (RSD) from the FDA-approved label, patient tolerance may differ from that seen in clinical trials. We report on a survey of medical oncologists' perspectives about treatment-related toxicity and willingness to discuss flexible dosing with patients. METHODS: We disseminated a confidential survey via social media/email in Spring 2021. Eligible respondents needed to be US-based medical oncologists with experience treating patients with MBC. RESULTS: Of 131 responses, 119 were eligible. Physicians estimated that 47% of their patients reported distressing treatment-related side effects; of these, 15% visited the Emergency Room/hospital and 37% missed treatment. 74% (n = 87) of doctors reported improvement of patient symptoms after dose reduction. 87% (n = 104) indicated that they had ever, if appropriate, initiated treatment at lower doses. Most (85%, n = 101) respondents did not believe that the RSD is always more effective than a lower dose and 97% (n = 115) were willing to discuss individualized dosing with patients. CONCLUSION: Treatment-related side effects are prevalent among patients with MBC, resulting in missed treatments and acute care visits. To help patients tolerate treatment, oncologists may decrease initial and/or subsequent doses. The majority of oncologists reject the premise that a higher dose is always superior and are willing to discuss individualized dosing with patients. Given potential improvements regarding quality of life and clinical care, dose modifications should be part of routine shared decision-making between patients and oncologists.

Tumor Immune Microenvironment and Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Hormone Receptor/HER2+ Early Stage Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pathologic response at the time of surgery after neoadjuvant therapy for HER2 positive early breast cancer impacts both prognosis and subsequent adjuvant therapy. Comprehensive descriptions of the tumor microenvironment (TME) in patients with HER2 positive early breast cancer is not well described. We utilized standard stromal pathologist-assessed tumor infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) quantification, quantitative multiplex immunofluorescence, and RNA-based gene pathway signatures to assess pretreatment TME characteristics associated pathologic complete response in patients with hormone receptor positive, HER2 positive early breast cancer treated in the neoadjuvant setting. METHODS: We utilized standard stromal pathologist-assessed TIL quantification, quantitative multiplex immunofluorescence, and RNA-based gene pathway signatures to assess pretreatment TME characteristics associated pathologic complete response in 28 patients with hormone receptor positive, HER2 positive early breast cancer treated in the neoadjuvant setting. RESULTS: Pathologist-assessed stromal TILs were significantly associated with pathologic complete response (pCR). By quantitative multiplex immunofluorescence, univariate analysis revealed significant increases in CD3+, CD3+CD8-FOXP3-, CD8+ and FOXP3+ T-cell densities as well as increased immune cell aggregates in pCR patients. In subsets of paired pre/post-treatment samples, we observed significant changes in gene expression signatures in non-pCR patients and significant decreases in CD8+ densities after treatment in pCR patients. No RNA based pathway signature was associated with pCR. CONCLUSION: TME characterization HER2 positive breast cancer patients revealed several stromal T-cell densities and immune cell aggregates associated with pCR. These results demonstrate the feasibility of these novel methods in TME evaluation and contribute to ongoing investigations of the TME in HER2+ early breast cancer to identify robust biomarkers to best identify patients eligible for systemic de-escalation strategies.

Erratum: Author Correction: Surgical Standards for Management of the Axilla in Breast Cancer Clinical Trials with Pathological Complete Response Endpoint.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/s41523-018-0074-6.].

Surgical Standards for Management of the Axilla in Breast Cancer Clinical Trials with Pathological Complete Response Endpoint.

Advances in the surgical management of the axilla in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, especially those with node positive disease at diagnosis, have led to changes in practice and more judicious use of axillary lymph node dissection that may minimize morbidity from surgery. However, there is still significant confusion about how to optimally manage the axilla, resulting in variation among practices. From the viewpoint of drug development, assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy remains paramount and appropriate assessment of residual disease-the primary endpoint of many drug therapy trials in the neoadjuvant setting-is critical. Therefore decreasing the variability, especially in a multicenter clinical trial setting, and establishing a minimum standard to ensure consistency in clinical trial data, without mandating axillary lymph node dissection, for all patients is necessary. The key elements which include proper staging and identification of nodal involvement at diagnosis, and appropriately targeted management of the axilla at the time of surgical resection are presented. The following protocols have been adopted as standard procedure by the I-SPY2 trial for management of axilla in patients with node positive disease, and present a framework for prospective clinical trials and practice.