Circulating microRNAs and therapy-associated cardiac events in HER2-positive breast cancer patients: an exploratory analysis from NeoALTTO.

PURPOSE: The relevance of cardiotoxicity in the context of HER2-positive breast cancer is likely to increase with increasing patient treatment exposure, number of treatment lines, and prolonged survival. Circulating biomarkers to early identify patients at risk of cardiotoxicity could allow personalized treatment and follow-up measures. The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between circulating microRNAs and adverse cardiac events in HER2-positive breast cancer patients. METHODS: We based our work on plasma samples from NeoALTTO trial obtained at baseline, after 2 weeks of anti-HER2 therapy, and immediately before surgery. Eleven patients experienced either a symptomatic or asymptomatic cardiac event. Circulating microRNAs were profiled in all patients presenting a cardiac event (case) and in an equal number of matched patients free of reported cardiac events (controls) using microRNA-Ready-to-Use PCR (Human panel I + II). Sensitivity analyses were performed by increasing the number of controls to 1:2 and 1:3. Normalized microRNA expression levels were compared between cases and controls using the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: Eight circulating microRNAs resulted differentially expressed after 2 weeks of anti-HER2 therapy between patients experiencing or not a cardiac event. Specifically, the expression of miR-125b-5p, miR-409-3p, miR-15a-5p, miR-423-5p, miR-148a-3p, miR-99a-5p, and miR-320b increased in plasma of cases as compared to controls, while the expression of miR-642a-5p decreases. Functional enrichment analysis revealed that all these microRNAs were involved in cardiomyocyte adrenergic signaling pathway. CONCLUSION: This study provides proof of concept that circulating microRNAs tested soon after treatment start could serve as biomarkers of cardiotoxicity in a very early stage in breast cancer patients receiving anti-HER2 therapy.

Circulating tumor DNA for predicting recurrence in patients with operable breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The incorporation of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) into the management of operable breast cancer (BC) has been hampered by the heterogeneous results from different studies. We aimed to assess the prognostic value of ctDNA in patients with operable (non metastatic) BC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search of databases (PubMed/Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL) and conference proceedings was conducted to identify studies reporting the association of ctDNA detection with disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with stage I-III BC. Log-hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled at each timepoint of ctDNA assessment (baseline, after neoadjuvant therapy, and follow-up). ctDNA assays were classified as primary tumor-informed and non tumor-informed. RESULTS: Of the 3174 records identified, 57 studies including 5779 patients were eligible. In univariate analyses, ctDNA detection was associated with worse DFS at baseline [HR 2.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.92-4.63], after neoadjuvant therapy (HR 7.69, 95% CI 4.83-12.24), and during follow-up (HR 14.04, 95% CI 7.55-26.11). Similarly, ctDNA detection at all timepoints was associated with worse OS (at baseline: HR 2.76, 95% CI 1.60-4.77; after neoadjuvant therapy: HR 2.72, 95% CI 1.44-5.14; and during follow-up: HR 9.19, 95% CI 3.26-25.90). Similar DFS and OS results were observed in multivariate analyses. Pooled HRs were numerically higher when ctDNA was detected at the end of neoadjuvant therapy or during follow-up and for primary tumor-informed assays. ctDNA detection sensitivity and specificity for BC recurrence ranged from 0.31 to 1.0 and 0.7 to 1.0, respectively. The mean lead time from ctDNA detection to overt recurrence was 10.81 months (range 0-58.9 months). CONCLUSIONS: ctDNA detection was associated with worse DFS and OS in patients with operable BC, particularly when detected after treatment and using primary tumor-informed assays. ctDNA detection has a high specificity for anticipating BC relapse.

Safety of pregnancy after breast cancer in young women with hormone receptor-positive disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing evidence on the safety of pregnancy after anticancer treatments in breast cancer survivors, many physicians and patients remain concerned about a potential risk of pregnancy specifically in the case of hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search of Medline, Embase and Cochrane library with no language or date restriction up to 31 March 2023 was carried out. To be included, articles had to be retrospective and prospective case-control and cohort studies as well as clinical trials comparing survival outcomes of premenopausal women with or without a pregnancy after prior diagnosis of hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were the outcomes of interest. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Study protocol is registered in PROSPERO (n. CRD42023394232). RESULTS: Out of 7796 screened studies, 8 were eligible to be included in the final analysis. A total of 3805 patients with hormone receptor-positive invasive early breast cancer were included in these studies, of whom 1285 had a pregnancy after breast cancer diagnosis. Median follow-up time ranged from 3.8 to 15.8 years and was similar in the pregnancy and non-pregnancy cohorts. In three studies (n = 987 patients) reporting on DFS, no difference was observed between patients with and those without a subsequent pregnancy (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.75-1.24, P = 0.781). In the six studies (n = 3504 patients) reporting on OS, patients with a pregnancy after breast cancer had a statistically significant better OS than those without a pregnancy (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27-0.77, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis of retrospective cohort studies provides updated evidence that having a pregnancy in patients with prior history of hormone receptor-positive invasive early breast cancer appears safe without detrimental effect on prognosis.

Prognostic value of HER2-low status in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-low expression in breast cancer has been recently identified as a new therapeutic target. However, it is unclear if HER2-low status has an independent impact on prognosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature research was carried out to identify studies comparing survival outcomes of patients affected by HER2-low versus HER2-zero breast cancer. Using random-effects models, pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the metastatic setting as well as disease-free survival (DFS), OS and pathological complete response (pCR) in the early setting. Subgroup analyses by hormone receptor (HoR) status were carried out. The study protocol is registered on PROSPERO (n.CRD42023390777). RESULTS: Among 1916 identified records, 42 studies including 1 797 175 patients were eligible. In the early setting, HER2-low status was associated with significant improved DFS (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79-0.92, P < 0.001) and OS (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85-0.95, P < 0.001) when compared to HER2-zero status. Improved OS was observed for both HoR-positive and HoR-negative HER2-low populations, while DFS improvement was observed only in the HoR-positive subgroup. HER2-low status was significantly associated with a lower rate of pCR as compared to HER2-zero status both in the overall population (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.62-0.88, P = 0.001) and in the HoR-positive subgroup (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.65-0.90, P = 0.001). In the metastatic setting, patients with HER2-low breast cancers showed better OS when compared with those with HER2-zero tumours in the overall population (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-0.98, P = 0.008), regardless of HoR status. No significant PFS differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with HER2-zero status, HER2-low status appears to be associated with a slightly increased OS both in the advanced and early settings, regardless of HoR expression. In the early setting, HER2-low tumours seem to be associated to lower pCR rates, especially if HoR-positive.

COVID-19 in cancer patients: update from the joint analysis of the ESMO-CoCARE, BSMO, and PSMO international databases.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has significantly affected patients with cancer and revealed unanticipated challenges in securing optimal cancer care across different disciplines. The European Society for Medical Oncology COVID-19 and CAncer REgistry (ESMO-CoCARE) is an international, real-world database, collecting data on the natural history, management, and outcomes of patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: This is the 2nd CoCARE analysis, jointly with Belgian (Belgian Society of Medical Oncology, BSMO) and Portuguese (Portuguese Society of Medical Oncology, PSMO) registries, with data from January 2020 to December 2021. The aim is to identify significant prognostic factors for COVID-19 hospitalization and mortality (primary outcomes), as well as intensive care unit admission and overall survival (OS) (secondary outcomes). Subgroup analyses by pandemic phase and vaccination status were carried out. RESULTS: The cohort includes 3294 patients (CoCARE: 2049; BSMO: 928, all hospitalized by eligibility criteria; PSMO: 317), diagnosed in four distinct pandemic phases (January to May 2020: 36%; June to September 2020: 9%; October 2020 to February 2021: 41%; March to December 2021: 12%). COVID-19 hospitalization rate was 54% (CoCARE/PSMO), ICU admission 14%, and COVID-19 mortality 22% (all data). At a 6-month median follow-up, 1013 deaths were recorded with 73% 3-month OS rate. No significant change was observed in COVID-19 mortality among hospitalized patients across the four pandemic phases (30%-33%). Hospitalizations and ICU admission decreased significantly (from 78% to 34% and 16% to 10%, respectively). Among 1522 patients with known vaccination status at COVID-19 diagnosis, 70% were non-vaccinated, 24% had incomplete vaccination, and 7% complete vaccination. Complete vaccination had a protective effect on hospitalization (odds ratio = 0.24; 95% confidence interval [0.14-0.38]), ICU admission (odds ratio = 0.29 [0.09-0.94]), and OS (hazard ratio = 0.39 [0.20-0.76]). In multivariable analyses, COVID-19 hospitalization was associated with patient/cancer characteristics, the first pandemic phase, the presence of COVID-19-related symptoms or inflammatory biomarkers, whereas COVID-19 mortality was significantly higher in symptomatic patients, males, older age, ethnicity other than Asian/Caucasian, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2, body mass index <25, hematological malignancy, progressive disease versus no evident disease, and advanced cancer stage. CONCLUSIONS: The updated CoCARE analysis, jointly with BSMO and PSMO, highlights factors that significantly affect COVID-19 outcomes, providing actionable clues for further reducing mortality.

Cardiac safety of dual anti-HER2 blockade with pertuzumab plus trastuzumab in early HER2-positive breast cancer in the APHINITY trial.

BACKGROUND: Trastuzumab increases the incidence of cardiac events (CEs) in patients with breast cancer (BC). Dual blockade with pertuzumab (P) and trastuzumab (T) improves BC outcomes and is the standard of care for high-risk human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early BC patients. We analyzed the cardiac safety of P and T in the phase III APHINITY trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 55% was required at study entry. LVEF assessment was carried out every 3 months during treatment, every 6 months up to month 36, and yearly up to 10 years. Primary CE was defined as heart failure class III/IV and a significant decrease in LVEF (defined as ≥10% from baseline and to <50%), or cardiac death. Secondary CE was defined as a confirmed significant decrease in LVEF, or CEs confirmed by the cardiac advisory board. RESULTS: The safety analysis population consisted of 4769 patients. With 74 months of median follow-up, CEs were observed in 159 patients (3.3%): 83 (3.5%) in P + T and 76 (3.2%) in T arms, respectively. Most CEs occurred during anti-HER2 therapy (123; 77.4%) and were asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic decreases in LVEF (133; 83.6%). There were two cardiac deaths in each arm (0.1%). Cardiac risk factors indicated were age > 65 years, body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2, baseline LVEF between 55% and <60%, and use of an anthracycline-containing chemotherapy regimen. Acute recovery from a CE based on subsequent LVEF values was observed in 127/155 patients (81.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Dual blockade with P + T does not increase the risk of CEs compared with T alone. The use of anthracycline-based chemotherapy increases the risk of a CE; hence, non-anthracycline chemotherapy may be considered, particularly in patients with cardiovascular risk factors.

Changes in anticancer treatment plans in patients with solid cancer hospitalized with COVID-19: analysis of the nationwide BSMO-COVID registry providing lessons for the future.

BACKGROUND: Solid cancer is an independent prognostic factor for poor outcome with COVID-19. As guidelines for patient management in that setting depend on retrospective efforts, we here present the first analyses of a nationwide database of patients with cancer hospitalized with COVID-19 in Belgium, with a focus on changes in anticancer treatment plans at the time of SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Nineteen Belgian hospitals identified all patients with a history of solid cancer hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 2020 and February 2021. Demographic, cancer-specific and COVID-specific data were pseudonymously entered into a central Belgian Society of Medical Oncology (BSMO)-COVID database. The association between survival and primary cancer type was analyzed through multivariate multinomial logistic regression. Group comparisons for categorical variables were carried out through a Chi-square test. RESULTS: A total of 928 patients were registered in the database; most of them were aged ≥70 years (61.0%) and with poor performance scores [57.2% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) ≥2]. Thirty-day COVID-related mortality was 19.8%. In multivariate analysis, a trend was seen for higher mortality in patients with lung cancer (27.6% versus 20.8%, P = 0.062) and lower mortality for patients with breast cancer (13.0% versus 23.3%, P = 0.052) compared with other tumour types. Non-curative treatment was associated with higher 30-day COVID-related mortality rates compared with curative or no active treatment (25.8% versus 14.3% versus 21.9%, respectively, P < 0.001). In 33% of patients under active treatment, the therapeutic plan was changed due to COVID-19 diagnosis, most frequently involving delays/interruptions in systemic treatments (18.6%). Thirty-day COVID-related mortality was not significantly different between patients with and without treatment modifications (21.4% versus 20.5%). CONCLUSION: Interruption in anticancer treatments at the time of SARS-CoV-2 infection was not associated with a reduction in COVID-related mortality in our cohort of patients with solid cancer, highlighting that treatment continuation should be strived for, especially in the curative setting.

Efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitors for the treatment of patients with HER2-positive breast cancer with brain metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases (BMs) are frequent events in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and are associated with poor prognosis. Small-molecule anti-HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are promising agents for the treatment of BM. In this study, we assess the clinical outcomes of patients with HER2-positive MBC and BM treated with TKI-containing regimens compared with those treated with non-TKI-containing regimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and conference proceedings (ASCO, SABCS, ESMO, and ESMO Breast) were searched up to June 2021. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with BM. Secondary endpoints included PFS in patients without BM and overall survival (OS). The study was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Overall effects were pooled using random-effects models. RESULTS: This systematic review and meta-analysis included data from 2437 patients (490 with and 1947 without BM at baseline) enrolled in five trials assessing tucatinib-, lapatinib-, pyrotinib-, or afatinib-based combinations. A nonstatistically significant PFS benefit favoring TKI-containing regimens was observed in both patients with BM [hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-1.12; P = 0.13] and without BM (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.24-1.26; P = 0.16). Sensitivity analysis, excluding each study singly, demonstrated a significant PFS benefit favoring TKI-containing regimens in patients with BM after the exclusion of afatinib from the analysis (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.90; P = 0.016). No statistically significant differences in OS were observed between the comparison groups. CONCLUSIONS: A trend in PFS favoring TKI-containing regimens was observed in patients with BM. Sensitivity analysis including only trials that evaluated regimens containing tucatinib, lapatinib, or pyrotinib demonstrated a significant PFS benefit favoring TKI-containing regimens in patients with BM.

How we treat patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer.

HER2-positive breast cancer represents 15%-20% of breast malignancies and is characterized by an aggressive behavior and high recurrence rates. Anti-HER2-directed agents represent the mainstay of treatment of patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). In this review we propose a treatment algorithm for patients with HER2-positive MBC based on the currently available literature on the topic. The combination of trastuzumab, pertuzumab and a taxane (THP) remains the preferred first-line therapy in most scenarios. Results of trials recently presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress 2021 might have direct clinical impact in the second- and later-line settings. The randomized DESTINY-BREAST03 study compared trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) with trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in patients previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane. T-DXd significantly improved progression-free survival and showed a trend towards improved overall survival, establishing this agent as preferred second-line therapy. Treatment with T-DM1, or the combination of tucatinib, trastuzumab and capecitabine, are considered reasonable options after second-line therapy. For subsequent lines, trastuzumab duocarmazine, neratinib plus capecitabine or the continuation of trastuzumab with different chemotherapy partners are valid options. For patients experiencing disease relapse up to 6 months after completion of adjuvant therapy, as well as for those relapsing within 12 months from the completion of pertuzumab-based adjuvant treatment, we recommend T-DXd as preferred first-line option. For those relapsing between 6 and 12 months after non-pertuzumab-based adjuvant treatment, we recommend first-line THP. Finally, for patients with active brain metastasis, tucatinib-based combination represents a suitable second-line option.

Safety of assisted reproductive techniques in young women harboring germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 with a pregnancy after prior history of breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge is growing on the safety of assisted reproductive techniques (ART) in cancer survivors. No data exist, however, for the specific population of breast cancer patients harboring germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a multicenter retrospective cohort study across 30 centers worldwide including women diagnosed at ≤40 years with stage I-III breast cancer, between January 2000 and December 2012, harboring known germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants. Patients included in this analysis had a post-treatment pregnancy either achieved through use of ART (ART group) or naturally (non-ART group). ART procedures included ovulation induction, ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection, and embryo transfer under hormonal replacement therapy. RESULTS: Among the 1424 patients registered in the study, 168 were eligible for inclusion in the present analysis, of whom 22 were in the ART group and 146 in the non-ART group. Survivors in the ART group conceived at an older age compared with those in the non-ART group (median age: 39.7 versus 35.4 years, respectively). Women in the ART group experienced more delivery complications compared with those in the non-ART group (22.1% versus 4.1%, respectively). No other apparent differences in obstetrical outcomes were observed between cohorts. The median follow-up from pregnancy was 3.4 years (range: 0.8-8.6 years) in the ART group and 5.0 years (range: 0.8-17.6 years) in the non-ART group. Two patients (9.1%) in the ART group experienced a disease-free survival event (specifically, a locoregional recurrence) compared with 40 patients (27.4%) in the non-ART group. In the ART group, no patients deceased compared with 10 patients (6.9%) in the non-ART group. CONCLUSION: This study provides encouraging safety data on the use of ART in breast cancer survivors harboring germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2, when natural conception fails or when they opt for ART in order to carry out preimplantation genetic testing.

Assessment of potential process quality indicators for systemic treatment of breast cancer in Belgium: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Quality indicators (QIs) for the management of breast cancer (BC) have been published in Europe and internationally. In Belgium, a task force was established to select measurable process indicators of systemic treatment for BC, focusing on appropriateness of delivered care. The objective of this study was to evaluate the results of the selected QIs, both nationally and among individual centres. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Female Belgian residents with unilateral primary invasive BC diagnosed between 2010 and 2014 were selected from the Belgian Cancer Registry database. The national number enabled linkage with the national reimbursement database, which contains information on all reimbursed medical procedures. A total of 12 process indicators were measured on the population and hospital level. Intercentre variability was assessed by median results and interquartile ranges. RESULTS: A total of 48 872 patients were included in the study. QIs concerning specific BC subtypes only applied to patients diagnosed in 2014 (n = 9855). Clinical stage (cStage) I patients (n = 17 116) were staged with positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Among patients who were pT1aN0 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive (n = 47), 25.5% (n = 12) received adjuvant trastuzumab. Among patients with de novo metastatic luminal A/B-like HER2-negative BC (n = 295), 17.3% (n = 51) received upfront chemotherapy. (Neo)adjuvant chemotherapy was administered in 52.4% (n = 12 592) of operated women with cStage I-III, in 37.0% (n = 1270) of operated women with cStage I-III luminal A/B-like HER2-negative BC, and in 19.1% of operated women with cStage I luminal A/B-like HER2-negative BC. In the population of operated patients with cStage I-III, of those younger than 70 years that started adjuvant endocrine therapy (n = 3591), 81.7% (n = 2932) continued treatment for ≥4.5 years. Among patients in cStage I-III older than 70 years (n = 8544), 19.0% (n = 1622) received (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy, whereas among patients with cStage I-III luminal A/B-like HER2-negative BC (n = 1388), 13.0% (n = 181) received (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. In patients with cStage I-II luminal A/B-like HER2-negative BC older than 70 years (n = 1477), 11.6% (n = 171) were not operated and received upfront endocrine treatment. CONCLUSION: Well-considered QIs using population-based data can evaluate quality of care and expose disparities among treatment centres. Their use in daily practice should be implemented in all centres treating BC.

Impact of COVID-19 on social media as perceived by the oncology community: results from a survey in collaboration with the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the OncoAlert Network.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted all aspects of modern-day oncology, including how stakeholders communicate through social media. We surveyed oncology stakeholders in order to assess their attitudes pertaining to social media and how it has been affected during the pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 40-item survey was distributed to stakeholders from 8 July to 22 July 2020 and was promoted through the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the OncoAlert Network. RESULTS: One thousand and seventy-six physicians and stakeholders took part in the survey. In total, 57.3% of respondents were medical oncologists, 50.6% aged <40 years, 50.8% of female gender and mostly practicing in Europe (51.5%). More than 90% of respondents considered social media a useful tool for distributing scientific information and for education. Most used social media to stay up to date on cancer care in general (62.5%) and cancer care during COVID-19 (61%) given the constant flow of information. Respondents also used social media to interact with other oncologists (78.8%) and with patients (34.4%). Overall, 61.1% of respondents were satisfied with the role that social media was playing during the COVID-19 pandemic. On the other hand, 41.1% of respondents reported trouble in discriminating between credible and less credible information and 30% stated social networks were a source of stress. For this reason, one-third of respondents reduced its use during the COVID-19 pandemic. Regarding meeting attendance, a total of 59.1% of responding physicians preferred in-person meetings to virtual ones, and 51.8% agreed that virtual meetings and social distancing could hamper effective collaboration. CONCLUSION: Social media has a useful role in supporting cancer care and professional engagement in oncology. Although one-third of respondents reported reduced use of social media due to stress during the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority found social media useful to keep up to date and were satisfied with the role social media was playing during the pandemic.

CDK4/6 inhibitors as adjuvant treatment for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The combination of cyclin-dependent kinases 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6is) and endocrine therapy (ET) is standard of care for patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (BC). However, studies evaluating adjuvant CDK4/6is provided contradictory results thus far. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess if the addition of CDK4/6is to adjuvant ET impacts on survival's outcomes and safety of patients with HR+/HER2- early BC (EBC). This study was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and was registered in the PROSPERO database (ID: CRD42020218597). A systematic review of PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE databases and major conference proceedings was performed up to 15 December 2020. All randomized controlled trials including patients with HR+/HER2- EBC treated with CDK4/6is plus ET versus ET alone in the adjuvant setting were included. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) for survival and safety outcomes, respectively, were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) using random effect models. RESULTS: With data available from three studies (N = 12 647), the addition of CDK4/6is to adjuvant ET showed a trend for a benefit in terms of invasive disease-free survival (IDFS; HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.71-1.01; P = 0.071). No significant improvement in distant relapse-free survival was observed (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.58-1.19; P = 0.311). The risk of all-grade toxicities and early treatment discontinuation increased significantly with the addition of CDK4/6is to ET (OR 9.36, 95% CI 3.46-25.33, P < 0.001, and OR 22.11, 95% CI 9.45-51.69, P < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: The administration of adjuvant CDK4/6is to patients with HR+/HER2- EBC showed a trend for an IDFS benefit and an increase in the risk of toxicities and treatment discontinuation. The role of adjuvant CDK4/6is remains controversial and a longer follow-up of these randomized controlled trials is needed before supporting a straightforward change in clinical practice.

Beta-blockers in early-stage breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical and retrospective studies suggest that beta-blockers are active against breast cancer. We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the impact of beta-blockers on the outcomes of patients with early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies comparing outcomes of patients with early-stage breast cancer according to beta-blocker use (yes versus no). The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS), defined as the occurrence of breast cancer recurrence or death. Secondary objectives were pathologic complete response (pCR), breast cancer recurrence, breast cancer-specific mortality and overall survival (OS). Hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted from each study and a pooled analysis with the random-effect model was conducted. The Higgins' I-squared test was used to quantify heterogeneity. Egger's test was applied to assess publication bias. All P values were two-sided and considered significant if ≤0.05. RESULTS: Overall, 13 studies were included as follows: RFS (6), pCR (2), breast cancer recurrence (6), breast cancer-specific mortality (7) and OS (5). The use of beta-blockers was associated with a significant RFS improvement in the overall population (N = 21 570; HR 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56-0.96; P = 0.025) and in patients with triple-negative disease (N = 1212; HR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.35-0.81; P = 0.003). No significant differences in terms of pCR (N = 1554; OR 0.77; 95% CI, 0.44-1.36; P = 0.371), breast cancer recurrence (N = 37 957; OR 0.66; 95% CI, 0.42-1.03; P = 0.065), breast cancer-specific mortality (N = 64 830; HR 0.77; 95% CI, 0.56-1.08; P = 0.130) or OS (N = 103 065; HR 1.03; 95% CI, 0.87-1.23; P = 0.692) were observed according to beta-blocker use. DISCUSSION: In this meta-analysis, beta-blocker use was associated with a longer RFS in patients with early-stage breast cancer, with a more pronounced effect observed in those with triple-negative disease. Beta-blockers arise as an interesting option to be explored in prospective studies for patients with early-stage breast cancer.

Impact of ARTs on oncological outcomes in young breast cancer survivors.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the risk of recurrence in young breast cancer survivors who undergo ARTs following completion of anticancer treatment? SUMMARY ANSWER: ART in breast cancer survivors does not appear to have a negative impact on disease-free survival. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In healthy women, fertility treatment does not increase the risk of developing breast cancer. At the time of breast cancer diagnosis and before starting anticancer treatments, several studies have shown the safety of performing ART. However, the safety of ART in breast cancer survivors following completion of anticancer treatment remains under-investigated. In general, breast cancer survivors are counselled to avoid any hormonal treatment but there are limited data available on the effect of short exposure to high oestradiol levels during ART. The largest study in this regard included 25 breast cancer survivors exposed to ART and did not show a detrimental effect of ART on patient survival. Hence, taking into account that pregnancy after breast cancer does not affect cancer prognosis, defining the safety of ART in breast cancer survivors remains a priority. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We conducted a retrospective multicentric matched cohort study including a cohort of breast cancer survivors who underwent ART (exposed patients) between January 2006 and December 2016. Exposed patients who were eligible for the study were matched according to known breast cancer prognostic factors. Matched breast cancer survivors did not undergo ART (non-exposed patients) and were disease-free for a minimum time that was not less than the time elapsed between breast cancer diagnosis and first ART for the matched ART-exposed patients. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Data were retrieved from all survivors who had been diagnosed with breast cancer in eight participating centres at an age of ≤40 years, without metastasis, ongoing pregnancy, pre-existing neoplasia or ovarian failure. ART included ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI, clomiphene citrate treatment and hormone replacement therapy for embryo transfer. Data were collected from an oncological database for the selection of breast cancer patients in the non-exposed group. Exposed patients were matched (1:2) for germline BRCA status, tumour stage, anticancer treatment and age, whenever feasible. Matched groups were compared at baseline according to characteristics using conditional logistic regression. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed to compare time to recurrence between groups, with the time of ART as starting point that has been adjusted in the non-exposed group. The analyses were performed using Stata IC/15.1. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 39 breast cancer patients in the ART group were eligible for the analysis and were matched with 73 controls. There was no statistical difference between the two groups for the presence of BRCA mutation, tumour characteristics, use of (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and of adjuvant endocrine therapy. Exposed patients were younger than non-exposed patients (mean age 31.8 vs 34.3 years, respectively; P < 0.001). In the ART group, 89.7% were nulliparous at diagnosis compared to 46.6% of controls (P < 0.001). ART was performed at a mean age of 37.1 years old, after a median time of 4.1 years following breast cancer diagnosis (range: 1.5-12.5). Median anti-Müllerian hormone at the time of ART was 0.28 ng/ml (range: 0-4.4) and median serum oestradiol peak level was 696.5 pg/ml (range: 139.7-4130). Median follow-up time from first attempt of ART was 4.6 years (range: 2.4-12.5) in the ART group. Adjusted follow-up time for the non-exposed group was 6.9 years (range: 1.1-16.5 years) (P = 0.004). In the ART group, 59% of patients had a pregnancy after breast cancer compared to 26% in the non-exposed patients (P = 0.001). Breast cancer relapsed in 7.7% versus 20.5% women in the ART and non-exposed groups, respectively (hazard ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.13-1.62, P = 0.23). Median time to relapse was 1.3 (range: 0.3-2.7) years versus 4.5 (range: 0.4-11.1) years after ART and adjusted time in the ART and non-exposed groups, respectively (P = 0.14). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Although this is the first and largest multicentric study addressing the impact of ART on breast cancer recurrence to provide data on oestrogen exposure, only a small number of patients could be included. This reflects the reluctance of breast cancer survivors and/or oncologists to perform ART, and highlights the need for a prospective data registry to confirm the safety of this approach. This would offer the possibility for these patients, who are at a high risk of infertility, to fully benefit from ART. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Although recent studies have proven that pregnancy after breast cancer has no detrimental impact on prognosis, counselling patients about the safety of ART remains challenging. Our study provides reassuring data on the use of ART in breast cancer survivors with favourable prognostic factors, for when natural conception fails. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): M.C. and I.D. are funded by FNRS, Télévie-FNRS and Fonds Erasme. M.D.V. is a CooperSurgical scientific advisory board member and receives lecture fees for MSD, Gedeon-Richter and Ferring, outside the submitted work. M.L. has acted as a consultant for Roche and Novartis and has received honoraria from Theramex, Roche, Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis and Takeda, outside the submitted work. I.D. has acted as a consultant for ROCHE and has received speaker's fees from Novartis, outside the submitted work. E.d.A. has received honoraria and is a Roche/GNE, Novartis, SeaGen and Zodiac scientific advisory board member, has received travel grants from Roche/GNE and GSK/Novartis, and has received research grants from Roche/GNE, Astra-Zeneca, GSK/Novartis and Servier, outside the submitted work. A.D. is a recipient of a research grant from Ferring Pharmaceuticals and receives lecture and/or consultancy fees from Merck, Gedeon-Richter and Ferring Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.