Experiences of Master of Nursing Education Students in Their Pursuit of Nursing Education.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing concern in nursing education related to the shortage of nursing faculty. The experiences of nursing students, including their relationships with nursing faculty, could influence their decision to pursue graduate studies or academic nursing education. METHOD: This phenomenological study explored the experiences of Master of Science in Nursing education students and graduates that led them to pursue nursing education. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 10 participants. RESULTS: Based on participants' responses, five themes emerged: (1) faculty encouragement, mentoring, and enthusiasm; (2) teaching experience; (3) exposure to the faculty role; (4) awareness of the nurse faculty shortage; and (5) funding. CONCLUSION: Findings from this study contribute to nursing education by highlighting strategies that could be reinforced into graduate or possibly undergraduate experiences to encourage students to pursue advanced study and academic nursing education, which potentially could help mitigate the nursing faculty shortage. [J Nurs Educ. 2023;62(7):393-398.].

Trilaciclib Prior to Chemotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Final Efficacy and Subgroup Analysis from a Randomized Phase II Study.

PURPOSE: We report final antitumor efficacy results from a phase II study of trilaciclib, an intravenous cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor, administered prior to gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GCb) in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (NCT02978716). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to group 1 [GCb (days 1, 8); n = 34], group 2 [trilaciclib prior to GCb (days 1, 8); n = 33], or group 3 [trilaciclib (days 1, 8) and trilaciclib prior to GCb (days 2, 9); n = 35]. Subgroup analyses were performed according to CDK4/6 dependence, level of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, and RNA-based immune signatures using proportional hazards regression. T-cell receptor (TCR) ß CDR3 regions were amplified and sequenced to identify, quantify, and compare the abundance of each unique TCRß CDR3 at baseline and on treatment. RESULTS: Median overall survival (OS) was 12.6 months in group 1, not reached in group 2 (HR = 0.31; P = 0.0016), 17.8 months in group 3 (HR = 0.40; P = 0.0004), and 19.8 months in groups 2 and 3 combined (HR = 0.37; P < 0.0001). Efficacy outcomes were comparable regardless of cancer CDK4/6 dependence status and immune signatures. Administering trilaciclib prior to GCb prolonged OS irrespective of PD-L1 status but had greater benefit in the PD-L1-positive population. T-cell activation was enhanced in patients receiving trilaciclib. CONCLUSIONS: Administering trilaciclib prior to GCb enhanced antitumor efficacy, with significant improvements in OS. Efficacy outcomes in immunologic subgroups and enhancements in T-cell activation suggest these improvements may be mediated via immunologic mechanisms.

Preference for the fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer (PHranceSCa): A randomised, open-label phase II study.

AIM: The aim of the study was to assess patient preference for the fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection (PH FDC SC) in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer in PHranceSCa (NCT03674112). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who completed neoadjuvant P + H + chemotherapy + surgery were randomised 1:1 to three intravenous (IV) P + H cycles followed by three cycles of PH FDC SC or vice versa (crossover) and then chose subcutaneous (SC) injection or IV infusion to continue up to 18 cycles (continuation). Assessments were via patient and healthcare professional (HCP) questionnaires. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty patients were randomised (cut-off: 24 February 2020); 136 (85.0%, 95% confidence interval: 78.5-90.2%) preferred SC; 22 (13.8%) preferred IV; 2 (1.3%) had no preference. The main reasons for SC preference were reduced clinic time (n = 119) and comfort during administration (n = 73). One hundred and forty-one patients (88.1%) were very satisfied/satisfied with SC injection versus 108 (67.5%) with IV infusion; 86.9% chose PH FDC SC continuation. HCP perceptions of median patient treatment room time ranged from 33.0-50.0 min with SC and 130.0-300.0 min with IV. Most adverse events (AEs) were grade 1/2 (no 4/5s); serious AE rates were low. AE rates before and after switching were similar (cycles 1-3 IV → cycles 4-6 SC: 77.5% → 72.5%; cycles 1-3 SC → cycles 4-6 IV: 77.5% → 63.8%). CONCLUSION: Most patients strongly preferred PH FDC SC over P + H IV. PH FDC SC was generally well tolerated, with no new safety signals (even when switching), and offers a quicker alternative to IV infusion.

Efficacy and Safety of Weekly Paclitaxel With or Without Oral Alisertib in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Elevated expression of AURKA adversely affects prognosis in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-negative and triple-negative breast cancer and is associated with resistance to taxanes. Objective: To compare paclitaxel alone vs paclitaxel plus alisertib in patients with ER-positive and ERBB2-negative or triple-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Design, Setting, and Participants: In this randomized clinical trial conducted with the US Oncology Network, participants were randomized to intravenous (IV) paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 on a 28-day cycle or IV paclitaxel 60 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 plus oral alisertib 40 mg twice daily on days 1 to 3, 8 to 10, and 15 to 17 on a 28-day cycle. Stratification was by prior neo or adjuvant taxane and by line of metastatic therapy. Eligible patients were those who had undergone endocrine therapy, 0 or 1 prior chemotherapy regimens for MBC, more than 12 months treatment-free interval from neo or adjuvant taxane therapy, and with measurable or evaluable lytic bone-disease. Data were analyzed from March 2019 through May 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) with secondary end points of overall survival (OS), overall response rate, clinical benefit rate, safety, and analysis of archival breast cancer tissues for molecular markers associated with benefit from alisertib. Results: A total of 174 patients were randomized, including with 86 randomized to paclitaxel and 88 patients randomized to paclitaxel plus alisertib, and 169 patients received study treatment. The final cohort included 139 patients with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 62 (27-84) years with ER-positive and ERBB2-negative MBC, with 70 randomized to paclitaxel and 69 randomized to paclitaxel plus alisertib. The TNBC cohort closed with only 35 patients enrolled due to slow accrual and were not included in efficacy analyses. The median (IQR) follow-up was 22 (10.6-25.1) months, and median (IQR) PFS was 10.2 (3.8-15.7) months with paclitaxel plus alisertib vs 7.1 (3.8-10.6) months with paclitaxel alone (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37-0.84; P = .005). Median (IQR) OS was 26.3 (12.4-37.2) months for patients who received paclitaxel plus alisertib vs 25.1 (11.0-31.4) months for paclitaxel alone (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.58-1.38; P = .61). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 56 patients (84.8%) receiving paclitaxel plus alisertib vs 34 patients (48.6%) receiving paclitaxel alone. The main grade 3 or 4 adverse events with paclitaxel plus alisertib vs paclitaxel alone were neutropenia (50 patients [59.5%] vs 14 patients [16.4%]), anemia (8 patients [9.5%] vs 1 patient [1.2%]), diarrhea (9 patients [10.7%] vs 0 patients), and stomatitis or oral mucositis (13 patients [15.5%] vs 0 patients). One patient receiving paclitaxel plus alisertib died of sepsis. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that the addition of oral alisertib to a reduced dose of weekly paclitaxel significantly improved PFS compared with paclitaxel alone, and toxic effects with paclitaxel plus alisertib were manageable with alisertib dose reduction. These data support further evaluation of alisertib in patients with ER-positive, ERBB2-negative MBC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02187991.

Eribulin Plus Pembrolizumab in Patients with Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (ENHANCE 1): A Phase Ib/II Study.

PURPOSE: As monotherapies, eribulin (chemotherapy) and pembrolizumab (immunotherapy) have shown promise for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). This phase Ib/II study examined eribulin plus pembrolizumab as a potential mTNBC treatment in first-line and later-line settings. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label, single-arm, phase Ib/II study, eligible patients had mTNBC, measurable disease, and ≤2 prior systemic anticancer therapies in the metastatic setting. Patients were enrolled by number of prior systemic anticancer therapies (stratum 1: 0 vs stratum 2: 1-2) in the metastatic setting and further analyzed by tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression status. All patients received intravenous eribulin 1.4 mg/m2 on day 1 and day 8, plus intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg on day 1, of 21-day cycles. The primary objectives were the safety, tolerability, and objective response rate (ORR) of this combination. RESULTS: The study included 167 patients (phase Ib, n = 7; phase II, n = 160). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (66%), nausea (58%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (41%), alopecia (40%), and constipation (37%). ORRs were 25.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 15.8-38.0] for stratum 1 (n = 66) and 21.8% (95% CI: 14.2-31.1) for stratum 2 (n = 101). Patients with PD-L1-positive tumors (combined positive score ≥1) had numerically higher ORR than those with PD-L1-negative tumors, particularly in stratum 1 [stratum 1: 34.5% (95% CI: 17.9-54.3) vs 16.1% (95% CI: 5.5-33.7); stratum 2, 24.4% (95% CI: 12.9-39.5) vs 18.2% (95% CI: 8.2-32.7)]. CONCLUSIONS: Eribulin plus pembrolizumab was generally well tolerated and showed promising antitumor activity in mTNBC. Efficacy outcomes appeared influenced by line of therapy and PD-L1 status.

Phase I Study of Elacestrant (RAD1901), a Novel Selective Estrogen Receptor Degrader, in ER-Positive, HER2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: This phase I study (RAD1901-005; NCT02338349) evaluated elacestrant, an investigational oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD), in heavily pretreated women with estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer, including those with estrogen receptor gene alpha (ESR1) mutation. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose and/or recommended phase II dose (RP2D). METHODS: The study consisted of a 3 + 3 design (elacestrant capsules) followed by expansion at RP2D (400-mg capsules, then 400-mg tablets) for the evaluation of safety and antitumor activity. Elacestrant was taken once daily until progression or intolerability. RESULTS: Of 57 postmenopausal women enrolled, 50 received RP2D (400 mg once daily): median age, 63 years; median three prior anticancer therapies, including cyclin-dependent kinase 4,6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i; 52%), SERD (52%), and ESR1 mutation (circulating tumor DNA; 50%). No dose-limiting toxicities occurred; the most common adverse events at RP2D (400-mg tablet; n = 24) were nausea (33.3%) and increased blood triglycerides and decreased blood phosphorus (25.0% each). Most adverse events were grade 1-2 in severity. The objective response rate was 19.4% (n = 31 evaluable patients receiving RP2D), 15.0% in patients with prior SERD, 16.7% in patients with prior CDK4/6i, and 33.3% in patients with ESR1 mutation (n = 5/15). The clinical benefit rate (24-week) was 42.6% overall (n = 47 patients receiving RP2D), 56.5% (n = 23, ESR1 mutation), and 30.4% (n = 23, prior CDK4/6i). Elacestrant clinical benefit was associated with decline in ESR1 mutant allele fraction. CONCLUSION: Elacestrant 400 mg orally once daily has an acceptable safety profile and demonstrated single-agent activity with confirmed partial responses in heavily pretreated patients with estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer. Notably, responses were observed in patients with ESR1 mutation as well as those with prior CDK4/6i and prior SERD. A phase III trial investigating elacestrant versus standard endocrine therapy is ongoing.

Trilaciclib plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Trilaciclib is an intravenous cell-cycle inhibitor that transiently maintains immune cells and haemopoietic stem and progenitor cells in G1 arrest. By protecting the immune cells and bone marrow from chemotherapy-induced damage, trilaciclib has the potential to optimise antitumour activity while minimising myelotoxicity. We report safety and activity data for trilaciclib plus gemcitabine and carboplatin chemotherapy in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 2 study, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with evaluable, biopsy-confirmed, locally recurrent or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer who had no more than two previous lines of chemotherapy were recruited from 26 sites in the USA, three in Serbia, two in North Macedonia, one in Croatia, and one in Bulgaria; sites were academic and community hospitals. Availability of diagnostic samples of tumour tissue confirming triple-negative breast cancer was a prerequisite for enrolment. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by an interactive web-response system, stratified by number of previous lines of systemic therapy and the presence of liver metastases, to receive intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 and intravenous carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve 2 µg × h/mL) on days 1 and 8 (group 1), gemcitabine and carboplatin plus intravenous trilaciclib 240 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 (group 2), or gemcitabine and carboplatin on days 2 and 9 plus trilaciclib on days 1, 2, 8, and 9 (group 3) of 21-day cycles. Patients continued treatment until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or discontinuation by the investigator. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of combining trilaciclib with gemcitabine and carboplatin chemotherapy. The primary endpoints were duration of severe neutropenia during cycle 1 and the occurrence of severe neutropenia during the treatment period. Overall survival was included as a key secondary endpoint. Analyses were in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with EudraCT, 2016-004466-26, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02978716, and is ongoing but closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Feb 7, 2017, and May 15, 2018, 142 patients were assessed for eligibility and 102 were randomly assigned to group 1 (n=34), group 2 (n=33), or group 3 (n=35). Of all patients, 38 (37%) had received one or two lines of previous chemotherapy in the metastatic setting. Median follow-up was 8·4 months (IQR 3·8-13·6) for group 1, 12·7 months (5·5-17·4) for group 2, and 12·9 months (6·7-16·8) for group 3. Data cutoff for myelosuppression endpoints was July 30, 2018, and for antitumour activity endpoints was May 17, 2019. During cycle 1, mean duration of severe neutropenia was 0·8 day (SD 2·4) in group 1, 1·5 days (3·5) in group 2, and 1·0 day (2·6) in group 3 (group 3 vs group 1 one-sided adjusted p=0·70). Severe neutropenia occurred in nine (26%) of 34 patients in group 1, 12 (36%) of 33 patients in group 2, and eight (23%) of 35 patients in group 3 (p=0·70). Overall survival was 12·6 months (IQR 5·8-15·6) in group 1, 20·1 months (9·4-not reached) in group 2, and 17·8 months (8·8-not reached) in group 3 (group 3 vs group 1 two-sided p=0·0023). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (22 [73%] of 34), neutropenia (21 [70%]), and thrombocytopenia (18 [60%]) in group 1; neutropenia (27 [82%] of 33), thrombocytopenia (18 [55%]) and anaemia (17 [52%]) in group 2; and neutropenia (23 [66%] of 35), thrombocytopenia (22 [63%]), and nausea (17 [49%]) in group 3. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: No significant differences were observed in myelosuppression endpoints with trilaciclib plus gemcitabine and carboplatin in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer; however, the regimen was generally well tolerated and overall survival results were encouraging. Further studies of trilaciclib in this setting are warranted. FUNDING: G1 Therapeutics.

Health-related quality of life in patients receiving first-line eribulin mesylate with or without trastuzumab for locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Eribulin mesylate is a nontaxane microtubule dynamics inhibitor approved for second-line (European Union) or third-line (United States) treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Two phase 2 single trials, evaluating first-line eribulin as monotherapy (Study 206; NCT01268150) or in combination with trastuzumab (Study 208; NCT01269346) in locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer, demonstrated objective response rates of 28.6 and 71.2%, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 6.8 and 11.6 months, respectively. Tolerability profiles were similar to those from previous studies. This secondary analysis was conducted to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in both phase 2 trials. METHODS: Patients received eribulin mesylate 1.4 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle. Patients in Study 208 also received intravenous trastuzumab on day 1 of each cycle (8 mg/kg in cycle 1, then 6 mg/kg). HRQoL was assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life (QLQ-C30) assessment tool and the Quality-of-Life Questionnaire for Breast Cancer (QLQ-BR23) at baseline and cycles 2, 4, and 6. Results for clinically meaningful changes were based on previously published minimum important differences. RESULTS: Of the 108 patients (56 in Study 206 and 52 in Study 208) treated, 57 and 87%, respectively, completed 6 cycles. Completion rates for both questionnaires were 94 and 98%, respectively, at cycle 6. Most patients had stable/improved HRQoL scores with some exceptions; for example, more patients experienced a worsening in cognitive functioning and systemic therapy side effects than experienced improvement. Mean QLQ-C30 symptom scores correlated with corresponding adverse event rates for nausea/vomiting, dyspnea, appetite loss, constipation, and diarrhea in Study 206 and for fatigue, nausea/vomiting, pain, dyspnea, insomnia, constipation, and diarrhea in Study 208. CONCLUSIONS: First-line eribulin ± trastuzumab therapy did not lead to deterioration of overall HRQoL in most patients, with more than 60% of patients having stable/improved global health status/quality-of-life scores. Eribulin has been demonstrated to be comparable with other chemotherapy agents with an acceptable safety profile. Therefore, further evaluation is warranted to determine whether eribulin ± trastuzumab therapy may be a potential option for first-line treatment in some patients with metastatic breast cancer who were recently treated in the neoadjuvant setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01268150 (December 29, 2010), NCT01269346 (January 4, 2011).

Evaluation of Miracle Mouthwash plus Hydrocortisone Versus Prednisolone Mouth Rinses as Prophylaxis for Everolimus-Associated Stomatitis: A Randomized Phase II Study.

BACKGROUND: Mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor-associated stomatitis (mIAS) is a frequent adverse event (AE) associated with mTOR inhibitor therapy and can impact treatment adherence. The objectives are to evaluate two steroid-based mouthrinses for preventing/ameliorating mIAS in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) treated with everolimus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, randomized phase II study enrolled 100 postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive MBC within the US Oncology Network who were initiating therapy with an aromatase inhibitor + everolimus (AIE; 10 mg/day). Patients were randomized to prophylactic therapy with one of two oral rinses (Arm 1: Miracle Mouthwash [MMW] 480 mL recipe: 320 mL oral Benadryl [diphenhydramine; Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, NJ, USA], 2 g tetracycline, 80 mg hydrocortisone, 40 mL nystatin suspension, water; or Arm 2: prednisolone [P] 15 mg/5 mL oral solution, 1.8% alcohol). Patients were instructed to swish/expectorate 10 mL of the assigned rinse for 1-2 minutes four times daily starting with day 1 of AIE treatment, for the first 12 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients received treatment (49 MMW; 51 P). The incidence of stomatitis/oral AEs during the first 12 weeks was 35% (n = 17/49) and 37% (19/51) in the MMW and P arms, respectively. The incidence of grade 2 oral AEs was 14% (7/49) and 12% (6/51) with MMW or P, respectively. There were two grade 3 oral AEs (MMW arm) and no grade 4 events. There was one everolimus dose reduction (MMW) and six dose delays (four MMW, two P) and one dose reduction + delay (MMW) during the first 12 weeks of treatment. No patients stopped steroid mouthwash therapy because of rinse-related toxicity. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic use of steroid-containing oral rinses can prevent/ameliorate mIAS in patients with MBC treated with AIE. MMW + hydrocortisone is an affordable option, as is dexamethasone oral rinse. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This prospective phase-II study showed that two steroid-containing mouthrinses substantially reduced incidences of all-grade and grade ≥2 stomatitis and related oral adverse events (AEs), and the number of everolimus dose-delays and/or dose-reduction in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients receiving everolimus treatment plus an aromatase inhibitor. Both oral rinses were well tolerated and demonstrated similar efficacy. Prophylactic use of steroid mouth rinse provides a cost-effective option that substantially decreases the incidence and severity of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor-associated stomatitis and related oral AEs as well as the need for dose modification in MBC patients undergoing treatment with an mTOR inhibitor.

Ixabepilone and Carboplatin for Hormone Receptor Positive/HER2-neu Negative and Triple Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Hormonal therapies and single-agent sequential chemotherapeutic regimens are the standards of care for HER2- metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, treating patients with hormone-refractory and triple negative (TN) MBC remains challenging. We report the results of combined ixabepilone and carboplatin in a single-arm phase II trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the present prospective analysis of hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/HER2- and TN MBC cohorts, patients could have received 0 to 2 chemotherapy regimens for MBC before enrollment. All patients received ixabepilone 20 mg/m2 and carboplatin (area under the curve, 2.5) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). The secondary objectives included progression-free survival (PFS), clinical benefit rate (CBR), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. RESULTS: We enrolled 54 HR+ and 49 TN patients (median, 1 previous chemotherapy regimen for metastatic disease; most in addition to adjuvant chemotherapy). The ORR was 34% and 30.4% for the HR+ and TN patients, respectively, with a corresponding CBR of 56.6% and 41.3%. The ORRs were similar in taxane-pretreated patients (ORR, 31.4% and 28.6% for HR+ and TN patients, respectively). The median OS was 17.9 months for HR+ patients and 12.5 months for TN patients. The median PFS was similar for both groups at 7.6 months. Grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities included neuropathy (9%) and fatigue (8%). Nine patients developed grade 3/4 neuropathy, 7 of whom had received previous taxane treatment. CONCLUSION: Ixabepilone plus carboplatin is active even in later-line HR+ and TN disease. Toxicities were manageable without cumulative myelosuppression. This combination is a reasonable option for those patients with MBC who require combination chemotherapy.

APF530 versus ondansetron, each in a guideline-recommended three-drug regimen, for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting due to anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide-based highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens: a post hoc subgroup analysis of the Phase III randomized MAGIC trial.

BACKGROUND: APF530, a novel extended-release granisetron injection, was superior to ondansetron in a guideline-recommended three-drug regimen in preventing delayed-phase chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) among patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) in the double-blind Phase III Modified Absorption of Granisetron In the prevention of CINV (MAGIC) trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This MAGIC post hoc analysis evaluated CINV prevention efficacy and safety of APF530 versus ondansetron, each with fosaprepitant and dexamethasone, in patient subgroup receiving an anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide (AC) regimen. Patients were randomized 1:1 to APF530 500 mg subcutaneously (granisetron 10 mg) or ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg intravenously (IV) (≤16 mg); stratification was by planned cisplatin ≥50 mg/m2 (yes/no). Patients were to receive fosaprepitant 150 mg IV and dexamethasone 12 mg IV on day 1, then dexamethasone 8 mg orally once daily on day 2 and twice daily on days 3 and 4. Patients were mostly younger females (APF530 arm, mean age 54.1 years, female, 99.3%; ondansetron arm, 53.8 years, female 98.3%). The primary end point was delayed-phase (>24-120 hours) complete response (CR). RESULTS: APF530 versus ondansetron regimens achieved numerically better CINV control in delayed and overall (0-120 hours) phases for CR, complete control, total response, rescue medication use, and proportion with no nausea. APF530 trends are consistent with the overall population, although not statistically superior given the underpowered AC subgroup analysis. The APF530 regimen in this population was generally well tolerated, with safety comparable to that of the overall population. CONCLUSION: APF530 plus fosaprepitant and dexamethasone effectively prevented CINV among patients receiving AC-based HEC, a large subgroup in whom CINV control has traditionally been challenging.

PD-L1 Expression by Two Complementary Diagnostic Assays and mRNA In Situ Hybridization in Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Therapeutic antibodies to immune checkpoints show promising results. Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), an immune checkpoint ligand, blocks the cancer immunity cycle by binding the PD-L1 receptor (programmed death 1). We investigated PD-L1 protein expression and messenger RNA (mRNA) levels in SCLC. METHODS: PD-L1 protein expression and mRNA levels were determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) with SP142 and Dako 28-8 PD-L1 antibodies and in situ hybridization in primary tumor tissue microarrays in both tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating immune cells (TIICs) obtained from a limited-disease SCLC cohort of 98 patients. An additional cohort of 96 tumor specimens from patients with extensive-disease SCLC was assessed for PD-L1 protein expression in tumor cells with Dako 28-8 antibody only. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of PD-L1 protein expression in tumor cells was 16.5%. In the limited-disease cohort, the prevalences of PD-L1 protein expression in tumor cells with SP142 and Dako 28-8 were 14.7% and 19.4% (tumor proportion score cutoff ≥1%) and PD-L1 mRNA ISH expression was positive in 15.5% of tumor samples. Increased PD-L1 protein/mRNA expression was associated with the presence of more TIICs (p < 0.05). The extensive-disease cohort demonstrated a 14.9% positivity of PD-L1 protein expression in tumor cells with Dako 28-8 antibody. CONCLUSIONS: A subset of SCLCs is characterized by positive PD-L1 and/or mRNA expression in tumor cells. Higher PD-L1 and mRNA expression correlate with more infiltration of TIICs. The prevalence of PD-L1 in SCLC is lower than that published for NSCLC. The predictive role of PD-L1 expression in SCLC treatment remains to be established.

Clinical effects of prior trastuzumab on combination eribulin mesylate plus trastuzumab as first-line treatment for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer: results from a Phase II, single-arm, multicenter study.

Eribulin mesylate, a novel nontaxane microtubule dynamics inhibitor in the halichondrin class of antineoplastic drugs, is indicated for the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer who previously received ≥2 chemotherapy regimens in the metastatic setting. Primary data from a Phase II trial for the first-line combination of eribulin plus trastuzumab in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive patients showed a 71% objective response rate and tolerability consistent with the known profile of these agents. Here, we present prespecified analyses of efficacy of this combination based on prior trastuzumab use. Patients received eribulin mesylate 1.4 mg/m2 (equivalent to 1.23 mg/m2 eribulin [expressed as free base]) intravenously on days 1 and 8 plus trastuzumab (8 mg/kg intravenously/cycle 1, then 6 mg/kg) on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Objective response rates, progression-free survival, and tolerability were assessed in patients who had and had not received prior adjuvant or neoadjuvant (neo/adjuvant) trastuzumab treatment. Fifty-two patients (median age: 59.5 years) received eribulin/trastuzumab for a median treatment duration of ~31 weeks; 40.4% (n=21) had been previously treated with neo/adjuvant trastuzumab prior to treatment with eribulin plus trastuzumab for metastatic disease (median time between neo/adjuvant and study treatment: 23 months). In trastuzumab-naïve patients (n=31) compared with those who had received prior trastuzumab, objective response rate was 77.4% versus 61.9%, respectively; duration of response was 11.8 versus 9.5 months, respectively; clinical benefit rate was 87.1% versus 81.0%, respectively; and median progression-free survival was 12.2 versus 11.5 months, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (occuring in ≥5% of patients) in patients who received prior trastuzumab versus trastuzumab naïve patients, respectively, were neutropenia (47.6% vs 32.3%), peripheral neuropathy (14.3% vs 25.8%), febrile neutropenia (14.3% vs 3.2%), fatigue (9.5% vs 6.5%), nausea (9.5% vs 0%), vomiting (9.5% vs 3.2%), and leukopenia (9.5% vs 3.2%). In patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive metastatic breast cancer, first-line eribulin/trastuzumab treatment demonstrated substantial antitumor activity and was well tolerated, regardless of prior neo/adjuvant trastuzumab treatment.

Molecular Alterations and Everolimus Efficacy in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Overexpressing Metastatic Breast Cancers: Combined Exploratory Biomarker Analysis From BOLERO-1 and BOLERO-3.

PURPOSE: Two recent phase III trials, BOLERO-1 and BOLERO-3 (Breast Cancer Trials of Oral Everolimus), evaluated the addition of everolimus to trastuzumab and chemotherapy in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-overexpressing advanced breast cancer. The current analysis aimed to identify biomarkers to predict the clinical efficacy of everolimus treatment. METHODS: Archival tumor samples from patients in BOLERO-1 and BOLERO-3 were analyzed using next-generation sequencing, immunohistochemistry, and Sanger sequencing. RESULTS: Biomarker data were available for 549 patients. PIK3CA activating mutations and PTEN loss were reported in 30% and 16% of BOLERO-1 samples and in 32% and 12% of BOLERO-3 samples, respectively. PI3K pathway was hyperactive (PIK3CA mutations and/or PTEN loss and/or AKT1 mutation) in 47% of BOLERO-1 and 41% of BOLERO-3 samples. In both studies, differential progression-free survival (PFS) benefits of everolimus were consistently observed in patient subgroups defined by their PI3K pathway status. When analyzing combined data sets of both studies, everolimus was associated with a decreased hazard of progression in patients with PIK3CA mutations (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.00), PTEN loss (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.96), or hyperactive PI3K pathway (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.93). Patients with wild-type PIK3CA (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.46), normal PTEN (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.26), or normal PI3K pathway activity (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.62) did not derive PFS benefit from everolimus. CONCLUSION: This analysis, although exploratory, suggests that patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive advanced breast cancer having tumors with PIK3CA mutations, PTEN loss, or hyperactive PI3K pathway could derive PFS benefit from everolimus.

APF530 (granisetron injection extended-release) in a three-drug regimen for delayed CINV in highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

AIM: APF530, extended-release granisetron, provides sustained release for ≥5 days for acute- and delayed-phase chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). We compared efficacy and safety of APF530 versus ondansetron for delayed CINV after highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC), following a guideline-recommended three-drug regimen. METHODS: HEC patients received APF530 500 mg subcutaneously or ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg intravenously, with dexamethasone and fosaprepitant. Primary end point was delayed-phase complete response (no emesis or rescue medication). RESULTS: A higher percentage of APF530 versus ondansetron patients had delayed-phase complete response (p = 0.014). APF530 was generally well tolerated; treatment-emergent adverse event incidence was similar across arms, mostly mild-to-moderate injection-site reactions. CONCLUSION: APF530 versus the standard three-drug regimen provided superior control of delayed-phase CINV following HEC. ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02106494.

Case Studies in the Management of Metastatic Breast Cancer with Eribulin.

Outcomes for triple-negative or hormone-refractory metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are poor and treatment options are limited. Described herein are cases of two women who developed MBC following adjuvant chemotherapy and endocrine therapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative ductal carcinoma. Both underwent treatment with fulvestrant, followed by paclitaxel and letrozole or nab-paclitaxel. Following disease progression, both patients started single-agent eribulin mesylate (1.4 mg/m(2) on Days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle). The first patient is currently continuing on eribulin at full dose, despite interruption for hip surgery and the presence of grade 1 neuropathy in the hands and feet. The second patient had a partial response with eribulin, which was sustained for 4 months. She was able to tolerate the full dose of eribulin despite slight worsening of the neuropathy that was present at baseline. Eribulin may be a beneficial option for hormone-refractory MBC with extensive treatment experience.

Impact of prior anthracycline or taxane use on eribulin effectiveness as first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer: results from two phase 2, multicenter, single-arm studies.

Eribulin mesylate has efficacy in patients who have received ≥2 prior chemotherapies for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) including an anthracycline and taxane. Phase 2 trials showed clinical activity and acceptable tolerability of first-line eribulin (HER2- MBC; Study 206) and eribulin plus trastuzumab (HER2+ MBC; Study 208). Prespecified analyses evaluated efficacy by prior anthracycline and/or taxane use. Patients received eribulin mesylate (1.4 mg/m(2) IV; Days 1 and 8) and, in Study 208, trastuzumab (8 mg/kg IV/Cycle 1, then 6 mg/kg; Day 1) in 21-day cycles. Endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and tolerability. In Study 206 (N = 56), 48 % of patients had received prior anthracycline, 46 % prior taxane, 36 % prior anthracycline and taxane, and 41 % were chemotherapy-naïve. In Study 208 (N = 52), these percentages were 21, 44, 17, and 52 %, respectively. In Study 206, ORR and median PFS were similar for anthracycline-pretreated (25.9 %, 5.8 months), taxane-pretreated (26.9 %, 5.8 months), anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated (25.0 %, 6.7 months), and anthracycline/taxane-naïve patients (30.4 %, 7.6 months). In Study 208, ORR/median PFS were 63.6 %/6.7 months among anthracycline-pretreated patients, 56.5 %/6.8 months among taxane-pretreated patients, 55.6 %/5.9 months among anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated patients, and 81.5 %/13.1 months among anthracycline/taxane-naïve patients. Tolerability was generally similar among subgroups. In these studies, first-line eribulin in HER2- MBC and eribulin/trastuzumab in HER2+ MBC was effective with acceptable tolerability, regardless of prior anthracycline/taxane treatment. Prior chemotherapy was associated with lower ORR and shorter PFS with eribulin/trastuzumab in HER2+ MBC but not with eribulin in HER2- MBC.

Potential of overcoming resistance to HER2-targeted therapies through the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway.

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) overexpression occurs in up to 30% of breast cancers and is a marker of aggressive disease. While HER2-targeted therapies have improved outcomes in these tumors, resistance to these agents develops in a large proportion of patients. Determining molecular mechanisms underlying resistance might help improve outcomes for patients with HER2-positive disease by allowing development of strategies to overcome resistance. Activation of signaling pathways involving the phosphoinositide 3-kinase/protein kinase B/mammalian target of rapamycin (PI3K/Akt/mTOR) pathway might contribute to the development of resistance to HER2-targeted therapies. Several inhibitors of this pathway are under investigation in this disease setting and phase 3 data for everolimus in combination with trastuzumab and chemotherapy in trastuzumab-refractory, advanced disease are promising. In this review, molecular mechanisms underlying resistance to HER2-targeted therapies are considered and evidence for strategies to manage resistance is evaluated, including the use of inhibitors of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway.

Phase 2, multicenter, single-arm study of eribulin mesylate with trastuzumab as first-line therapy for locally recurrent or metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess efficacy and safety of eribulin with trastuzumab as first-line therapy for locally recurrent or metastatic HER2+ breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicenter, phase II, single-arm study, patients with recurrent or metastatic HER2+ breast cancer received eribulin mesylate at 1.4 mg/m(2) intravenously (I.V.) on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle with an initial trastuzumab dose of 8 mg/kg I.V. on day 1, followed by 6 mg/kg of trastuzumab on day 1 of each subsequent cycle. Tumor assessments were conducted every 6 weeks for the first 6 cycles and every 12 weeks thereafter. The primary end point was ORR, and secondary end points included PFS, TTR, DOR, and safety. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were enrolled. Fifty-one patients (98.1%) had metastatic disease, 25 (48.1%) with liver metastases, 24 (46.2%) with lung metastases, and 19 (36.5%) with bone metastases. Patients received a median of 10.0 cycles of eribulin and 11.0 cycles of trastuzumab. The ORR was 71.2% (n = 37) with median TTR of 1.3 months, DOR of 11.1 months, and PFS of 11.6 months. The most common Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia in 20 (38.5%) patients, peripheral neuropathy in 14 (26.9%; all Grade 3) patients, fatigue in 4 (7.7%) patients, and febrile neutropenia in 4 (7.7%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the high ORR, prolonged median PFS, and acceptable safety profile, combination eribulin/trastuzumab is an acceptable treatment option for locally recurrent or metastatic HER2+ breast cancer.

Everolimus for women with trastuzumab-resistant, HER2-positive, advanced breast cancer (BOLERO-3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Disease progression in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer receiving trastuzumab might be associated with activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR intracellular signalling pathway. We aimed to assess whether the addition of the mTOR inhibitor everolimus to trastuzumab might restore sensitivity to trastuzumab. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we recruited women with HER2-positive, trastuzumab-resistant, advanced breast carcinoma who had previously received taxane therapy. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a central patient screening and randomisation system to daily everolimus (5 mg/day) plus weekly trastuzumab (2 mg/kg) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m(2)) or to placebo plus trastuzumab plus vinorelbine, in 3-week cycles, stratified by previous lapatinib use. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by local assessment in the intention-to-treat population. We report the final analysis for PFS; overall survival follow-up is still in progress. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01007942. FINDINGS: Between Oct 26, 2009, and May 23, 2012, 569 patients were randomly assigned to everolimus (n=284) or placebo (n=285). Median follow-up at the time of analysis was 20.2 months (IQR 15.0-27.1). Median PFS was 7.00 months (95% CI 6.74-8.18) with everolimus and 5.78 months (5.49-6.90) with placebo (hazard ratio 0.78 [95% CI 0.65-0.95]; p=0.0067). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (204 [73%] of 280 patients in the everolimus group vs 175 [62%] of 282 patients in the placebo group), leucopenia (106 [38%] vs 82 [29%]), anaemia (53 [19%] vs 17 [6%]), febrile neutropenia (44 [16%] vs ten [4%]), stomatitis (37 [13%] vs four [1%]), and fatigue (34 [12%] vs 11 [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 117 (42%) patients in the everolimus group and 55 (20%) in the placebo group; two on-treatment deaths due to adverse events occurred in each group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of everolimus to trastuzumab plus vinorelbine significantly prolongs PFS in patients with trastuzumab-resistant and taxane-pretreated, HER2-positive, advanced breast cancer. The clinical benefit should be considered in the context of the adverse event profile in this population.