Cortisol as Biomarker for CYP17-Inhibition is Associated with Therapy Outcome of Abiraterone Acetate.

BACKGROUND: Abiraterone acetate is an irreversible 17α-hydroxylase/C17, 20-lyase (CYP17) inhibitor approved for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. Inhibition of this enzyme leads to low testosterone and cortisol levels in blood. There is growing evidence that clinical efficacy of abiraterone is related to the rate of suppression of serum testosterone. However, quantification of very low levels of circulating testosterone is challenging. We therefore aimed to investigate whether circulating cortisol levels could be used as a surrogate biomarker for CYP17 inhibition in patients with mCRPC treated with abiraterone acetate. PATIENTS AND METHODS: mCRPC patients treated with abiraterone acetate were included. Abiraterone and cortisol levels were measured with a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). On treatment cortisol and abiraterone concentrations were related to treatment response and progression free survival. RESULTS: In total 117 patients were included with a median cortisol concentration of 1.13 ng/ml (range: 0.03 - 82.2) and median abiraterone trough concentration (Cmin) of 10.2 ng/ml (range: 0.58 - 92.1). In the survival analyses, abiraterone Cmin ≥ 8.4 ng/mL and cortisol < 2.24 ng/mL were associated with a longer prostate-specific antigen (PSA) independent progression-free survival than patients with an abiraterone concentration ≥ 8.4 ng/mL and a cortisol concentration ≥ 2.24 ng/mL (13.8 months vs. 3.7 months). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that cortisol is not an independent predictor of abiraterone response in patients with mCRPC, but it is of added value in combination with abiraterone levels, to predict a response on abiraterone.

Exposure-Response Analyses of Olaparib in Real-Life Patients with Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib is given in a fixed dose of twice-daily 300 mg in patients who are diagnosed with ovarian cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer or pancreas cancer and has a high interpatient variability in pharmacokinetic exposure. The objective of this study was to investigate whether pharmacokinetic exposure of olaparib is related to efficacy and safety in a real-life patient' cohort. METHODS: A longitudinal observational study was conducted in patients who received olaparib for metastatic ovarian cancer of whom pharmacokinetic samples were collected. A Kaplan-Meier analyses was used to explore the relationship between olaparib exposure, measured as (calculated) minimum plasma concentrations (Cmin), and efficacy, Univariate and multivariate cox-regression analyses were performed. Also, the Cmin of patients who experienced toxicity was compared with patients who did not experience any toxicity. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were included in the exposure-efficacy analyses, with a median olaparib Cmin of 1514 ng/mL. There was no statistical significant difference in PFS of patients below and above the median Cmin concentration of olaparib, with a hazard ratio of 1.06 (95% confidence interval: 0.46-2.45, p = 0.9)). For seven patients pharmacokinetic samples were available before toxicity occurred, these patients had a higher Cmin of olaparib in comparison with patients who had not experienced any toxicity (n = 33), but it was not statistically significant (p = 0.069). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that exposure of olaparib is not related to PFS. This suggests that the approved dose of olaparib yields sufficient target inhibition in the majority of patients.

Phase 1 Study to Evaluate the Safety of Reducing the Prophylactic Dose of Dexamethasone around Docetaxel Infusion in Patients with Prostate and Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence that supports the registered high dose of dexamethasone used around docetaxel. However, this high dose is associated with considerable side effects. This study evaluates the feasibility of reducing the prophylactic oral dosage of dexamethasone around docetaxel infusion. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had a histologically confirmed diagnosis of prostate or breast cancer and had received at least three cycles of docetaxel as monotherapy or combination therapy. Prophylactic dexamethasone around docetaxel infusion was administered in a de-escalating order per cohort of patients. Primary endpoint was the occurrence of grade III/IV fluid retention and hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs). RESULTS: Of the 46 enrolled patients, 39 were evaluable (prostate cancer (n = 25), breast cancer (n = 14). In patients with prostate cancer, the dosage of dexamethasone was reduced to a single dose of 4 mg; in patients with breast cancer, the dosage was reduced to a 3-day schedule of 4 mg-8 mg-4 mg once daily, after which no further reduction has been tested. None of the 39 patients developed grade III/IV fluid retention or HSR. One patient (2.6%) had a grade 1 HSR, and there were six patients (15.4%) with grade I or II edema. There were no differences in quality of life (QoL) between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: It seems that the prophylactic dose of dexamethasone around docetaxel infusion can be safely reduced with respect to the occurrence of grade III/IV HSRs or the fluid retention syndrome.

Daily Oral Ibandronate With Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy in Postmenopausal Women With Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer (BOOG 2006-04): Randomized Phase III TEAM-IIB Trial.

PURPOSE: For postmenopausal patients with breast cancer, previous subgroup analyses have shown a modest benefit from adjuvant bisphosphonate treatment. However, the efficacy of oral nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates such as ibandronate is unclear in this setting. TEAM-IIB investigates adjuvant ibandronate in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer. METHODS: TEAM-IIB is a randomized, open-label, multicenter phase III study. Postmenopausal women with stage I-III ER+ breast cancer and an indication for adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) were randomly assigned 1:1 to 5 years of ET with or without oral ibandronate 50 mg once daily for 3 years. Major ineligibility criteria were bilateral breast cancer, active gastroesophageal problems, and health conditions that might interfere with study treatment. Primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS), analyzed in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Between February 1, 2007, and May 27, 2014, 1,116 patients were enrolled, 565 to ET with ibandronate (ibandronate arm) and 551 to ET alone (control arm). Median follow-up was 8.5 years. DFS was not significantly different between the ibandronate and control arms (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.24; log-rank P = .811). Three years after random assignment, DFS was 94% in the ibandronate arm and 91% in the control arm. Five years after random assignment, this was 89% and 86%, respectively. In the ibandronate arm, 97/565 (17%) of patients stopped ibandronate early because of adverse events. Significantly more patients experienced GI issues, mainly dyspepsia, in the ibandronate arm than in the control arm (89 [16%] and 54 [10%], respectively; P < .003). Eleven patients in the ibandronate arm developed osteonecrosis of the jaw. CONCLUSION: In postmenopausal women with ER+ breast cancer, adjuvant ibandronate 50 mg once daily does not improve DFS and should not be recommended as part of standard treatment regimens.

Integrated analysis of pain, health-related quality of life, and analgesic use in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with Radium-223.

BACKGROUND: Radium-223 (Ra-223), an alpha-emitting radiopharmaceutical, established an improved overall survival and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. However, effects on pain were not specifically evaluated. Here we assess integrated HRQoL, pain, and opioid use in a contemporary, more extensively pretreated, symptomatic and asymptomatic mCRPC population. METHODS: mCRPC patients scheduled for Ra-223 treatment were included and analyzed for HRQoL, pain, and opioid use, using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) questionnaires and recording of opioid use and dosage, respectively. Primary outcome measure was the percentage of patients experiencing a complete pain response (score of 0 on the BPI-SF Worst pain item and no increase in daily use of analgesics). A complete or partial pain response (better BPI-SF score and decrease in opioid use) and a better or no change in HRQoL was evaluated as an integrated overall clinical response (IOCR). Secondary endpoints included the time to pain progression (TPP) and Total FACT-P deterioration (TTFD), defined as time from first Ra-223 treatment to clinical meaningful increase in BPI-SF Worst pain item score and Total FACT-P score, respectively. RESULTS: This registry included 300 patients, of whom 105 (35%) were evaluable for FACT-P and BPI-SF during Ra-223 treatment. Forty-five (43%) patients had pain at baseline (PAB) (BPI-SF Worst pain score 5-10 points) and 60 (57%) had no pain at baseline (no-PAB) (BPI-SF Worst pain score 0-4 points). Complete pain response was achieved in 31.4% of the patients, while 58% had an IOCR. The median TTP and TTFD were 5.6 and 5.7 months, respectively, while the difference between PAB and no-PAB patients was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary, extensively pretreated mCRPC patients, Ra-223 treatment induced complete pain responses while integrated analysis of HRQoL, pain response, and opioid use demonstrated that the majority of patients derive clinical benefit.

RNA Biomarkers as a Response Measure for Survival in Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

Treatment evaluation in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer is challenging. There is an urgent need for biomarkers to discriminate short-term survivors from long-term survivors, shortly after treatment initiation. Thereto, the added value of early RNA biomarkers on predicting progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were explored. The RNA biomarkers: KLK3 mRNA, miR-375, miR-3687, and NAALADL2-AS2 were measured in 93 patients with mCRPC, before and 1 month after start of first-line abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide treatment, in two prospective clinical trials. The added value of the biomarkers to standard clinical parameters in predicting PFS and OS was tested by Harell's C-index. To test whether the biomarkers were independent markers of PFS and OS, multivariate Cox regression was used. The best prediction model for PFS and OS was formed by adding miR-375 and KLK3 (at baseline and 1 month) to standard clinical parameters. Baseline miR-375 and detectable KLK3 after 1 month of therapy were independently related to shorter PFS, which was not observed for OS. In conclusion, the addition of KLK3 and miR-375 (at baseline and 1 month) to standard clinical parameters resulted in the best prediction model for survival assessment.

Adjuvant chemotherapy in small node-negative triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Recommendations on adjuvant chemotherapy in pT1N0M0 triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) differ among international guidelines owing to lack of randomized trial data. We evaluated associations of adjuvant chemotherapy with a long-term outcome in a population-based cohort of pT1N0M0 TNBC. METHODS: All patients diagnosed with pT1N0M0 TNBC in the Netherlands between 2005 and 2016 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patient, tumour and treatment characteristics were recorded. The date and cause of death were obtained from Statistics Netherlands. We used multivariable Cox regression models to evaluate associations of adjuvant chemotherapy with breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS), adjusted for baseline characteristics and performed sensitivity analyses using propensity score (PS) weighting. RESULTS: We identified 4366 patients: 284 with pT1a, 923 with pT1b and 3159 with pT1c tumours. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered in 53% of patients. Patients receiving chemotherapy had more unfavourable baseline characteristics including younger age, larger tumours and higher tumour grade. At 8.2 years median follow-up (interquartile range = 5.8-10.9), 671 patients had died, of whom 311 because of breast cancer. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, chemotherapy was associated with improved BCSS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.48-0.89). The effect of chemotherapy differed by tumour size (pT1a: aHR = 4.28, 95% CI = 1.12-16.44; pT1b: aHR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.51-2.49; pT1c: aHR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.43-0.82; pinteraction = 0.02). Findings for OS were in line with BCSS results. PS-weighting analysis confirmed the results of the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with better BCSS and OS in pT1N0M0 TNBC. Better outcome is most evident in pT1c tumours and may not outweigh harm in pT1a/pT1b tumours.

Prognostic Value of Novel Liquid Biomarkers in Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Treated with Enzalutamide: A Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Several treatment options were recently added for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, response to therapy is variable, and biomarkers that can guide treatment selection and response evaluation are lacking. Circulating RNAs are a promising source of biomarkers. We explored messenger RNAs (mRNAs), microRNAs (miRNAs), and long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) as potential biomarkers in liquid biopsies of patients with mCRPC treated with enzalutamide. METHODS: Forty patients were included in this prospective multicenter observational study. Whole blood was drawn at baseline and 1, 3, and 6 months after start of therapy. Four mRNAs, 6 miRNAs, and 5 lncRNAs were analyzed by quantitative PCR. RNA levels in 30 healthy individuals were used as controls. RNA expression data were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses, and the primary end point was progression-free survival. Clinical factors were included in the multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Levels of 2 miRNAs, miR-375 and miR-3687, and 1 lncRNA, N-acetylated alpha-linked acidic dipeptidase like 2 antisense RNA 2 (NAALADL2-AS2), were more than 2-fold higher in patients with mCRPC compared with healthy volunteers. Patients with higher levels of miR-375 or miR-3687 showed a shorter time to progression. Patients with higher levels of NAALADL2-AS2 showed a longer time to progression. In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, higher miR-375, miR-3687 and serum prostate-specific antigen concentrations were shown to be independent predictors for shorter time to progression. CONCLUSIONS: We identified miR-3687 as a novel prognostic marker for response in patients with CRPC treated with enzalutamide, and we confirmed the prognostic value of miR-375.

Exposure-response analysis of endoxifen serum concentrations in early-breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Tamoxifen is part of endocrine therapy in breast cancer treatment. Studies have indicated the use of endoxifen concentrations, tamoxifen active metabolite, to guide tamoxifen efficacy. Three endoxifen thresholds have been suggested (5.9 ng/ml, 5.2 ng/ml and 3.3 ng/ml) for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Our aim was to validate these thresholds and to examine endoxifen exposure with clinical outcome in early-breast cancer patients using tamoxifen. METHODS: Data from 667 patients from the CYPTAM study (NTR1509) were available. Patients were stratified (above or below), according to the endoxifen threshold values for tamoxifen efficacy and tested by Cox regression. Logistic regressions to estimate the probability of relapse and tamoxifen discontinuation were performed. RESULTS: None of the thresholds showed a statistically significant difference in relapse-free survival: 5.2 ng/ml threshold: hazard ratio (HR): 2.545, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.912-7.096, p value: 0.074; 3.3 ng/ml threshold: HR: 0.728; 95% CI 0.421-1.258, p value: 0.255. Logistic regression did not show a statistically significant association between the risk of relapse (odds ratio (OR): 0.971 (95% CI 0.923-1.021, p value: 0.248) and the risk for tamoxifen discontinuation (OR: 1.006 95% CI 0.961-1.053, p value: 0.798) with endoxifen concentrations. CONCLUSION: Our findings do not confirm the endoxifen threshold values for TDM nor does it allow definition of a novel threshold. These findings indicate a limited value of TDM to guide tamoxifen efficacy.

Concomitant intake of abiraterone acetate and food to increase pharmacokinetic exposure: real life data from a therapeutic drug monitoring programme.

AIM: Abiraterone acetate is approved for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. At the currently used fixed dose of 1000 mg once daily in modified fasting state, 40% of patients do not reach the efficacy threshold of a minimum plasma concentration (Cmin) ≥ 8.4 ng/mL and are thereby at risk of decreased treatment efficacy. This study aims to evaluate whether pharmacokinetically (PK) guided abiraterone acetate dosing with a food intervention is feasible and results in an increased percentage of patients with concentrations above the target. METHODS: Patients starting regular treatment with abiraterone acetate in modified fasting state were included. Pharmacokinetic analysis was performed 4, 8 and 12 weeks after start of treatment and every 12 weeks thereafter. In case of Cmin < 8.4 ng/mL and acceptable toxicity, a PK-guided intervention was recommended. The first step was concomitant intake of abiraterone acetate with a light meal or a snack. RESULTS: In total, 32 evaluable patients were included, of which 20 patients (63%) had a Cmin < 8.4 ng/mL at a certain time point during treatment. These patients were recommended to take abiraterone acetate concomitantly with food, after which Cmin increased from 6.9 ng/mL to 27 ng/mL (p < 0.001) without additional toxicities. This intervention led to adequate exposure in 28 patients (87.5%). CONCLUSION: Therapeutic drug monitoring of abiraterone was applied in clinical practice and proved to be feasible. Concomitant intake with food resulted in a significant increase in Cmin and offers a cost-neutral opportunity to optimise exposure in patients with low Cmin.

A cost analysis of upfront DPYD genotype-guided dose individualisation in fluoropyrimidine-based anticancer therapy.

BACKGROUND: Fluoropyrimidine therapy including capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil can result in severe treatment-related toxicity in up to 30% of patients. Toxicity is often related to reduced activity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase, the main metabolic fluoropyrimidine enzyme, primarily caused by genetic DPYD polymorphisms. In a large prospective study, it was concluded that upfront DPYD-guided dose individualisation is able to improve safety of fluoropyrimidine-based therapy. In our current analysis, we evaluated whether this strategy is cost saving. METHODS: A cost-minimisation analysis from a health-care payer perspective was performed as part of the prospective clinical trial (NCT02324452) in which patients prior to start of fluoropyrimidine-based therapy were screened for the DPYD variants DPYD*2A, c.2846A>T, c.1679T>G and c.1236G>A and received an initial dose reduction of 25% (c.2846A>T, c.1236G>A) or 50% (DPYD*2A, c.1679T>G). Data on treatment, toxicity, hospitalisation and other toxicity-related interventions were collected. The model compared prospective screening for these DPYD variants with no DPYD screening. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also performed. RESULTS: Expected total costs of the screening strategy were €2599 per patient compared with €2650 for non-screening, resulting in a net cost saving of €51 per patient. Results of the probabilistic sensitivity and one-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the screening strategy was very likely to be cost saving or worst case cost-neutral. CONCLUSIONS: Upfront DPYD-guided dose individualisation, improving patient safety, is cost saving or cost-neutral but is not expected to yield additional costs. These results endorse implementing DPYD screening before start of fluoropyrimidine treatment as standard of care.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without anthracyclines in the presence of dual HER2 blockade for HER2-positive breast cancer (TRAIN-2): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal chemotherapy backbone for dual HER2 blockade in the neoadjuvant setting for early breast cancer is unknown. We investigated whether the addition of anthracyclines would improve pathological complete response compared with a carboplatin-taxane regimen, when given in combination with the HER2-targeted agents trastuzumab and pertuzumab. METHODS: The TRAIN-2 study is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial being done in 37 hospitals in the Netherlands. We recruited patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated, histologically confirmed stage II-III HER2-positive breast cancer. Patients were randomly allocated using central randomisation software (1:1 ratio) with minimisation without a random component, stratified by tumour stage, nodal stage, oestrogen receptor status, and age, to receive 5-fluorouracil (500 mg/m2), epirubicin (90 mg/m2), and cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m2) every 3 weeks for three cycles followed by paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8) and carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve [AUC] 6 mg/mL per min on day 1 or optionally, as per hospital preference, AUC 3 mg/mL per min on days 1 and 8) every 3 weeks for six cycles, or to receive nine cycles of paclitaxel and carboplatin at the same dose and schedule as in the anthracycline group. Patients in both study groups received trastuzumab (6 mg/kg, loading dose 8 mg/kg) and pertuzumab (420 mg, loading dose 840 mg) concurrently with all chemotherapy cycles. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved a pathological complete response in breast and axilla (ypT0/is ypN0) in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was analysed in patients who received at least one treatment cycle according to actual treatment received. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01996267, and follow-up for long-term outcome is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Dec 9, 2013, and Jan 14, 2016, 438 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups (219 patients to each group), of whom 418 were evaluable for the primary endpoint (212 in the anthracycline group and 206 in the non-anthracycline group). The median follow-up for all patients was 19 months (IQR 16-23 months). A pathological complete response was recorded in 141 (67%, 95% CI 60-73) of 212 patients in the anthracycline group and in 140 (68%, 61-74) of 206 in the non-anthracycline group (p=0·95). One patient randomly allocated to the non-anthracycline group did receive anthracyclines and was thus included in the anthracycline group for safety analyses; therefore, for the safety analyses there were 220 patients in the anthracycline group and 218 in the non-anthracycline group. Serious adverse events were reported in 61 (28%) of 220 patients in the anthracycline group and in 49 (22%) of 218 in the non-anthracycline group. The most common adverse events of any cause were grade 3 or worse neutropenia (in 131 [60%] of 220 patients in the anthracycline group vs 118 [54%] of 218 in the non-anthracycline group), grade 3 or worse diarrhoea (26 [12%] vs 37 [18%]), and grade 2 or worse peripheral neuropathy (66 [30%] vs 68 [31%]), with no substantial differences between the groups. Grade 3 or worse febrile neutropenia was more common in the anthracycline group than in the non-anthracycline group (23 [10%] vs three [1%], p<0·0001). Symptomatic left ventricular systolic dysfunction was rare in both groups (two [1%] of 220 vs 0 of 218). One patient in the anthracycline group died because of a pulmonary embolism, which was possibly treatment related. INTERPRETATION: In view of the high proportion of pathological complete responses recorded in both groups and the fact that febrile neutropenia was more frequent in the anthracycline group, omitting anthracyclines from neoadjuvant treatment regimens might be a preferred approach in the presence of dual HER2 blockade in patients with early HER2-positive breast cancer. Long-term follow-up is required to confirm these results. FUNDING: Roche Netherlands.

DPYD genotype-guided dose individualisation of fluoropyrimidine therapy in patients with cancer: a prospective safety analysis.

BACKGROUND: Fluoropyrimidine treatment can result in severe toxicity in up to 30% of patients and is often the result of reduced activity of the key metabolic enzyme dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), mostly caused by genetic variants in the gene encoding DPD (DPYD). We assessed the effect of prospective screening for the four most relevant DPYD variants (DPYD*2A [rs3918290, c.1905+1G>A, IVS14+1G>A], c.2846A>T [rs67376798, D949V], c.1679T>G [rs55886062, DPYD*13, I560S], and c.1236G>A [rs56038477, E412E, in haplotype B3]) on patient safety and subsequent DPYD genotype-guided dose individualisation in daily clinical care. METHODS: In this prospective, multicentre, safety analysis in 17 hospitals in the Netherlands, the study population consisted of adult patients (≥18 years) with cancer who were intended to start on a fluoropyrimidine-based anticancer therapy (capecitabine or fluorouracil as single agent or in combination with other chemotherapeutic agents or radiotherapy). Patients with all tumour types for which fluoropyrimidine-based therapy was considered in their best interest were eligible. We did prospective genotyping for DPYD*2A, c.2846A>T, c.1679T>G, and c.1236G>A. Heterozygous DPYD variant allele carriers received an initial dose reduction of 25% (c.2846A>T and c.1236G>A) or 50% (DPYD*2A and c.1679T>G), and DPYD wild-type patients were treated according to the current standard of care. The primary endpoint of the study was the frequency of severe (National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03 grade ≥3) overall fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity across the entire treatment duration. We compared toxicity incidence between DPYD variant allele carriers and DPYD wild-type patients on an intention-to-treat basis, and relative risks (RRs) for severe toxicity were compared between the current study and a historical cohort of DPYD variant allele carriers treated with full dose fluoropyrimidine-based therapy (derived from a previously published meta-analysis). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02324452, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between April 30, 2015, and Dec 21, 2017, we enrolled 1181 patients. 78 patients were considered non-evaluable, because they were retrospectively identified as not meeting inclusion criteria, did not start fluoropyrimidine-based treatment, or were homozygous or compound heterozygous DPYD variant allele carriers. Of 1103 evaluable patients, 85 (8%) were heterozygous DPYD variant allele carriers, and 1018 (92%) were DPYD wild-type patients. Overall, fluoropyrimidine-related severe toxicity was higher in DPYD variant carriers (33 [39%] of 85 patients) than in wild-type patients (231 [23%] of 1018 patients; p=0·0013). The RR for severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity was 1·31 (95% CI 0·63-2·73) for genotype-guided dosing compared with 2·87 (2·14-3·86) in the historical cohort for DPYD*2A carriers, no toxicity compared with 4·30 (2·10-8·80) in c.1679T>G carriers, 2·00 (1·19-3·34) compared with 3·11 (2·25-4·28) for c.2846A>T carriers, and 1·69 (1·18-2·42) compared with 1·72 (1·22-2·42) for c.1236G>A carriers. INTERPRETATION: Prospective DPYD genotyping was feasible in routine clinical practice, and DPYD genotype-based dose reductions improved patient safety of fluoropyrimidine treatment. For DPYD*2A and c.1679T>G carriers, a 50% initial dose reduction was adequate. For c.1236G>A and c.2846A>T carriers, a larger dose reduction of 50% (instead of 25%) requires investigation. Since fluoropyrimidines are among the most commonly used anticancer agents, these findings suggest that implementation of DPYD genotype-guided individualised dosing should be a new standard of care. FUNDING: Dutch Cancer Society.

The effect of rs5758550 on CYP2D6*2 phenotype and formation of endoxifen in breast cancer patients using tamoxifen.

AIM: CYP2D6*2 is considered fully active, but it has been suggested that it only happens in the presence of rs5758550. This study aims to elucidate the impact of this enhancer. MATERIALS & METHODS: DNA and blood samples from women enrolled in the CYPTAM study (NTR1509) were analyzed. Fourteen CYP2D6*2 carriers without the enhancer were reclassified. The relationship of CYP2D6 phenotypes and drug levels was studied. RESULTS: After correction for the absence of the enhancer, the correlation between CYP2D6 phenotypes and endoxifen did not improve (R2: 0.290 vs 0.279). No difference was observed in mean concentrations between CYP2D6*2 individuals with and without the enhancer. CONCLUSION: The rs5758550 enhancer does not lead to improved prediction of endoxifen levels in breast cancer patients.

Toxicity of dual HER2-blockade with pertuzumab added to anthracycline versus non-anthracycline containing chemotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment in HER2-positive breast cancer: The TRAIN-2 study.

BACKGROUND: The addition of pertuzumab to neoadjuvant trastuzumab-based chemotherapy improves pathologic complete response rates in HER2-positive breast cancer. However, increased toxicity has been reported with the addition of pertuzumab, and this may differ between various chemotherapy backbone regimens. We evaluated toxicities of pertuzumab when added to either FEC-T (5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, trastuzumab) or weekly paclitaxel, trastuzumab, carboplatin (PTC). METHODS: The TRAIN-2 study is a neoadjuvant randomized controlled trial in stage II and III HER2-positive breast cancer (NCT01996267). Patients are randomly assigned to receive either three cycles of FEC-T plus pertuzumab or three cycles of PTC plus pertuzumab, followed by six cycles of PTC plus pertuzumab in both arms. Toxicities are described per treatment arm according to the Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03. RESULTS: This analysis includes 110 patients balanced over both treatment arms. Neutropenia was the most common hematologic toxicity, with grade 3-4 occurring in 53% in the FEC-T-arm and in 51% in the PTC-arm. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 9% in the FEC-T arm and did not occur in the PTC-arm. Secondary G-CSF prophylaxis was used in 35-40% of patients. Asymptomatic ejection fraction decrease grade 2 was observed in 24% in the FEC-T-arm and 11% in the PTC-arm. The most common grade 3-4 non-hematologic toxicity was diarrhea (5% in the FEC-T-arm and 18% in the PTC-arm). CONCLUSIONS: Pertuzumab in combination with FEC-T mostly causes neutropenia, and when added to PTC mostly causes diarrhea. Significant cardiac toxicity is rare with both regimens, and toxicity is overall well manageable.

The Effect of Tamoxifen Dose Increment in Patients With Impaired CYP2D6 Activity.

BACKGROUND: The effect of tamoxifen dose elevation on endoxifen serum concentration was investigated in patients with reduced CYP2D6 activity resulting from genetic variation and/or CYP2D6 inhibitor use. Additionally, baseline differences in endoxifen concentrations between the different CYP2D6 phenotypes were studied. METHODS: Patients, treated with tamoxifen 20 mg once daily (QD) for at least 4 weeks, were classified as phenotypic extensive (EM), intermediate (IM), or poor (PM) metabolizer based on their genotype and comedication. In patients with an IM or PM phenotype, the tamoxifen dose was increased to 40 mg QD for 4 weeks. Tamoxifen, 4-OH-tamoxifen, N-desmethyltamoxifen, and endoxifen serum concentrations were measured at baseline and 4 weeks after the dose increment. Side effects of tamoxifen were assessed using the validated Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Endocrine Symptom subscale (FACT-ESS-19). RESULTS: The median baseline endoxifen concentration differed between EMs (11.4 mcg/L: n = 19), IMs (8.3 mcg/L: n = 16), and PMs (4.0 mcg/L: n = 7), P = 0.040. Tamoxifen dose elevation significantly increased the median endoxifen concentrations in 12 IMs from 9.5 to 17.4 mcg/L (P < 0.001) and in 4 PMs from 3.8 to 7.8 mcg/L (P = 0.001), without influencing median FACT-ESS-19 scores. CONCLUSIONS: Raising the tamoxifen dose to 40 mg QD significantly increased endoxifen concentrations in IMs and PMs without increasing side effects. The tamoxifen dose increment in PMs was insufficient to reach endoxifen concentrations equal to those observed in EMs. Future studies will clarify the direct effect of endoxifen exposure on tamoxifen efficacy and may reveal a threshold endoxifen concentration that is critical for its efficacy.

Nuclear Eg5 (kinesin spindle protein) expression predicts docetaxel response and prostate cancer aggressiveness.

Novel biomarkers predicting prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness and docetaxel therapy response of PCa patients are needed. In this study the correlation between nuclear Eg5-expression, PCa docetaxel response and PCa aggressiveness was assessed. Immunohistochemical staining for nuclear Eg5 was performed on 117 archival specimens from 110 PCa patients treated with docetaxel between 2004 and 2012. Samples were histologically categorized as positive/negative. Median follow-up time from diagnosis was 11.6 years. Nuclear Eg5-expression was significantly related to docetaxel response (p=0.036) in tissues acquired within three years before docetaxel initiation. Nuclear Eg5-expression was not related to Gleason-score (p=0.994). Survival of patients after docetaxel initiation did not differ based on nuclear Eg5-expression (p=0.540). Analyzing samples taken before hormonal therapy, overall survival and time to docetaxel use were significantly decreased in patients with nuclear Eg5-expressing tumors (p<0.01). Eg5-positive nuclei were found more frequently in T4-staged tumors (p=0.04), Gleason 8-10 tumors (p=0.08), and in metastasized tumors (p<0.01). Multivariate analyses indicated that nuclear Eg5-expression may be an independent parameter for tumor aggressiveness. Limitations of a retrospective analysis apply. In conclusion, nuclear Eg5-expression may be a predictive biomarker for docetaxel response in metastatic castrate-resistant PCa patients and a prognostic biomarker for hormone-naive PCa patients. Prospective validation studies are needed.

CYP2D6 genotype in relation to hot flashes as tamoxifen side effect in a Dutch cohort of the tamoxifen exemestane adjuvant multinational (TEAM) trial.

In tamoxifen-treated breast cancer patients the occurrence of hot flashes may be associated with effective estrogen receptor antagonism dependent on genetic variations of metabolic enzymes and the estrogen receptor. Early breast cancer patients who were randomized to receive tamoxifen, followed by exemestane within the tamoxifen exemestane adjuvant multinational trial were genotyped for five CYP2D6 alleles. CYP2D6 genotypes and phenotypes were related to the occurrence of hot flashes as adverse event during the first year of tamoxifen use (primary aim) and the time to the occurrence of hot flashes as AE during the complete time on tamoxifen (secondary aim). In addition, exploratory analyses on 22 genetic variants of other metabolic enzymes and two common polymorphisms in the estrogen receptor-1 were performed. No association was found between the CYP2D6 genotype/phenotype or any other genetic variant and hot flashes during the first year. Only higher age was related to a lower incidence of hot flashes in the first year (adjusted odds ratio 0.94, 95 % CI 0.92-0.96; p < 0.001). The ESR1 PvuII XbaI CG haplotype was associated with the time to the occurrence of hot flashes during the complete time on tamoxifen (CG/CG vs. CG/other + other/other: adjusted hazard ratio 0.49, 95 % CI 0.25-0.97; p = 0.04). In conclusion, the CYP2D6 genotypes and phenotypes were not associated with the occurrence of hot flashes. Common polymorphisms in the estrogen receptor-1 might predict hot flashes as common tamoxifen side effect, although this finding needs replication.