Treatment-free survival outcomes from the phase II study of nivolumab and salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab in advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (HCRN GU16-260-Cohort A).

BACKGROUND: As part of a partitioned survival analysis, treatment-free survival (TFS) can characterize the overall survival time patients spend between the cessation of immunotherapy and the start of subsequent therapy; both with and without toxicity. Significant TFS was reported for the nivolumab/ipilimumab arms of the CheckMate 067 and 214 trials for patients with advanced melanoma or renal cell carcinoma (aRCC), respectively, where immunotherapy was often halted for toxicity rather than a predefined treatment endpoint. We therefore sought to assess TFS in the HCRN GU16-260 trial, which was designed to reduce toxicity and cap immunotherapy duration. METHODS: Data were analyzed from 128 patients with clear-cell aRCC treated with first-line nivolumab monotherapy for up to 2 years. Salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab for up to 1 year was provided to eligible patients with disease progression at any point or stable disease at 48 weeks (29% of patients). TFS was defined as the area between Kaplan-Meier curves for a time from registration to protocol therapy cessation and for a time from registration to subsequent systemic therapy initiation or death, estimated from 36-month mean times. The time on or off protocol treatment with grade 3+treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) was also captured. RESULTS: At 36 months from enrollment, 68.3% of patients were alive: 96.8% of International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) favorable-risk patients and 56.6% of those with intermediate/poor-risk, respectively. The 36-month mean time on protocol therapy was 11.5 months including 0.6 months with grade 3+TRAEs (16.0 months for favorable-risk patients and 9.6 months for intermediated/poor-risk patients). The 36-month mean TFS for the whole population was 9.4 months (12.9 months including 1.5 months with grade 3+TRAEs for favorable-risk and 8.0 months including 1.0 months with grade 3+TRAEs for intermediate/poor-risk). At 36 months, 65.6% of favorable-risk patients and 27.1% of intermediate/poor-risk patients were alive and subsequent systemic treatment-free. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab monotherapy with salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab in non-responders is an active treatment approach in treatment-naïve patients with aRCC and, similar to nivolumab/ipilimumab in CheckMate 214, results in substantial TFS and toxicity-free TFS. TFS was greatest in patients with favorable-risk disease, supporting the use of an immunotherapy-only regimen in this population.

Prognostic Impact of Prostate-Specific Antigen at 6 Months After Radiotherapy in Localized Prostate Cancer: An Individual Patient Data Analysis of Randomized Trials.

PURPOSE: We sought to evaluate the prognostic impact of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at 6 months after completion of radiotherapy (RT) in patients treated with RT alone, RT plus short-term (st; 3-6 months), and RT plus long-term (lt; 24-36 months) androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual patient data were obtained from 16 randomized trials evaluating RT ± ADT for localized prostate cancer (PCa) between 1987 and 2011. The lowest PSA recorded within 6 months after RT completion was identified and categorized as < or ≥0.1 ng/mL. The primary outcomes were metastasis-free survival (MFS), PCa-specific mortality (PCSM), and overall survival (OS), from 12 months after random assignment. RESULTS: Ninety-eight percent (n = 2,339/2,376) of patients allocated to RT alone, 84% (n = 4,756/5,658) allocated to RT + stADT, and 77% (n = 1,258/1,626) allocated to RT + ltADT had PSA ≥0.1 ng/mL within 6 months after completing RT. PSA ≥0.1 ng/mL was associated with lower MFS and OS and higher PCSM among patients allocated to RT ± ADT (RT - MFS: hazard ratio [HR], 2.24 [95% CI, 1.21 to 4.16]; PCSM: subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.82 [0.51 to 6.49]; OS: HR, 1.72 [0.97 to 3.05]; RT + stADT - MFS: HR, 1.27 [1.12 to 1.44]; PCSM: sHR, 2.10 [1.52 to 2.92]; OS: HR, 1.26 [1.11 to 1.44]; RT + ltADT - MFS: HR, 1.58 [1.27 to 1.96]; PCSM: sHR, 1.97 [1.11 to 3.49]; OS: HR, 1.59 [1.27 to 1.99]). Five-year MFS rates among patients allocated to RT, RT + stADT, and RT + ltADT were 91% versus 79%, 83% versus 76%, and 87% versus 74%, respectively, based on PSA < or ≥0.1 ng/mL. CONCLUSION: PSA ≥0.1 ng/mL within 6 months after RT completion was prognostic for lt outcomes in patients treated with RT ± ADT for localized PCa. This can be used to counsel patients treated with RT ± ADT and in guiding clinical trial design evaluating novel systemic therapies with RT + ADT as well as (de)intensification strategies.

PACE: A Randomized Phase II Study of Fulvestrant, Palbociclib, and Avelumab After Progression on Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4/6 Inhibitor and Aromatase Inhibitor for Hormone Receptor-Positive/Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6is) are an important component of treatment for hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC), but it is not known if patients might derive benefit from continuation of CDK4/6i with endocrine therapy beyond initial tumor progression or if the addition of checkpoint inhibitor therapy has value in this setting. METHODS: The randomized multicenter phase II PACE trial enrolled patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2- MBC whose disease had progressed on previous CDK4/6i and aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy. Patients were randomly assigned 1:2:1 to receive fulvestrant (F), fulvestrant plus palbociclib (F + P), or fulvestrant plus palbociclib and avelumab (F + P + A). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in patients treated with F versus F + P. RESULTS: Overall, 220 patients were randomly assigned between September 2017 and February 2022. The median age was 57 years (range, 25-83 years). Most patients were postmenopausal (80.9%), and 40% were originally diagnosed with de novo MBC. Palbociclib was the most common previous CDK4/6i (90.9%). The median PFS was 4.8 months on F and 4.6 months on F + P (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11 [90% CI, 0.79 to 1.55]; P = .62). The median PFS on F + P + A was 8.1 months (HR v F, 0.75 [90% CI, 0.50 to 1.12]; P = .23). The difference in PFS with F + P and F + P + A versus F was greater among patients with baseline ESR1 and PIK3CA alterations. CONCLUSION: The addition of palbociclib to fulvestrant did not improve PFS versus fulvestrant alone among patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2- MBC whose disease had progressed on a previous CDK4/6i plus AI. The increased PFS seen with the addition of avelumab warrants further investigation in this patient population.

A Pooled Analysis of Treatment-Free Survival in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: A clinically meaningful attribute of some immune-oncology (IO) regimens is potential durable clinical benefit during a treatment-free interval. We characterize treatment-free survival (TFS) with and without ongoing toxicity in trials of frontline IO-VEGF tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) combinations in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual patient data were pooled by treatment arm from randomized trials submitted to the FDA evaluating IO-TKI combination in treatment-naïve aRCC with at least 30 months of median follow-up. OS, TFS, TFS with and without toxicity, and time to all protocol therapy cessation were assessed. TFS was estimated by 30-month restricted mean times defined as area between Kaplan-Meier curves for two time-to-event endpoints originating at randomization: time to all protocol therapy cessation and time to subsequent systemic therapy initiation or death. RESULTS: Three trials met criteria for analysis; 1183 pts received IO-TKI versus 1184 on control arms received TKI alone (sunitinib [SUN]). IO-TKI and SUN groups spent 9% (2.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.8, 3.5]) and 10% (2.9 months [95% CI: 2.1, 3.8]) of the 30-mo period alive and treatment-free, respectively. Mean TFS without grade ≥3 toxicity was 1.7 and 2.3 months in IO-TKI and SUN groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this post hoc partitioned survival analysis, TFS and TFS without toxicity appeared similar in the IO-TKI group compared to the SUN group. These findings may reflect continuation of TKI until progression per protocol design in all trials and discontinuation of IO after 2 years in 2 trials.

Selection of appropriate biomarkers to monitor effectiveness of ovarian function suppression in pre-menopausal patients with ER+ breast cancer.

Use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists has been widely adopted to provide reversible ovarian function suppression for pre-menopausal breast cancer patients who are also receiving aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen therapy based on results of 25 randomized trials representing almost 15,000 women demonstrating a survival benefit with this approach. Past clinical trials designed to establish the efficacy of GnRH agonists have monitored testosterone in the prostate cancer setting and estradiol in the breast cancer setting. We explore the merits of various biomarkers including estradiol, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), and luteinizing hormone (LH) and their utility for informing GnRH agonist treatment decisions in breast cancer. Estradiol remains our biomarker of choice in ensuring adequate ovarian function suppression with GnRH agonist therapy among pre-menopausal women with breast cancer. We recommend future trials to continue to focus on estradiol levels as the primary endpoint, as they have in the past.

TBCRC 039: a phase II study of preoperative ruxolitinib with or without paclitaxel for triple-negative inflammatory breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) have overall poor clinical outcomes, with triple-negative IBC (TN-IBC) being associated with the worst survival, warranting the investigation of novel therapies. Preclinical studies implied that ruxolitinib (RUX), a JAK1/2 inhibitor, may be an effective therapy for TN-IBC. METHODS: We conducted a randomized phase II study with nested window-of-opportunity in TN-IBC. Treatment-naïve patients received a 7-day run-in of RUX alone or RUX plus paclitaxel (PAC). After the run-in, those who received RUX alone proceeded to neoadjuvant therapy with either RUX + PAC or PAC alone for 12 weeks; those who had received RUX + PAC continued treatment for 12 weeks. All patients subsequently received 4 cycles of doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide prior to surgery. Research tumor biopsies were performed at baseline (pre-run-in) and after run-in therapy. Tumors were evaluated for phosphorylated STAT3 (pSTAT3) by immunostaining, and a subset was also analyzed by RNA-seq. The primary endpoint was the percent of pSTAT3-positive pre-run-in tumors that became pSTAT3-negative. Secondary endpoints included pathologic complete response (pCR). RESULTS: Overall, 23 patients were enrolled, of whom 21 completed preoperative therapy. Two patients achieved pCR (8.7%). pSTAT3 and IL-6/JAK/STAT3 signaling decreased in post-run-in biopsies of RUX-treated samples, while sustained treatment with RUX + PAC upregulated IL-6/JAK/STAT3 signaling compared to RUX alone. Both treatments decreased GZMB+ T cells implying immune suppression. RUX alone effectively inhibited JAK/STAT3 signaling but its combination with PAC led to incomplete inhibition. The immune suppressive effects of RUX alone and in combination may negate its growth inhibitory effects on cancer cells. CONCLUSION: In summary, the use of RUX in TN-IBC was associated with a decrease in pSTAT3 levels despite lack of clinical benefit. Cancer cell-specific-targeting of JAK2/STAT3 or combinations with immunotherapy may be required for further evaluation of JAK2/STAT3 signaling as a cancer therapeutic target. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov , NCT02876302. Registered 23 August 2016.

Differential Benefit of Metronomic Chemotherapy Among Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Subtypes Treated in the IBCSG Trial 22-00.

PURPOSE: To explore whether specific triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) molecular subtypes are predictive for a benefit from maintenance low-dose cyclophosphamide and methotrexate (CM) in the adjuvant IBCSG 22-00 phase III clinical trial. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: RNA sequencing was performed on a selection of 347 TNBC formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor samples following a case-cohort-like sampling. TNBC subtypes were computed on gene expression data. The association between TNBC subtypes and treatment outcome was assessed using a Cox proportional-hazards interaction test. RESULTS: Immunomodulatory (IM) and basal-like/immune activated (BLIA) molecular subtypes showed a significant survival benefit when treated with low-dose CM [disease-free survival (DFS): HR, 0.5; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.28-0.89; Pinteraction = 0.018 and HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.27-0.9; Pinteraction = 0.021]. Moreover, a high expression of regulatory T-cell immune signature was associated with a better prognosis in the CM arm, in line with a potential immunomodulating role of cyclophosphamide. In contrast, a worse outcome was observed in tumors with a mesenchymal (M) subtype treated with low-dose CM (DFS: HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3; Pinteraction = 0.0044). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show a differential benefit of low-dose CM therapy across different TNBC subtypes. Low-dose CM therapy could be considered as a potential strategy for TNBC tumors with IM subtype in the early-disease setting.

Efficacy of Metronomic Oral Vinorelbine, Cyclophosphamide, and Capecitabine vs Weekly Intravenous Paclitaxel in Patients With Estrogen Receptor-Positive, ERBB2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: Final Results From the Phase 2 METEORA-II Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: In spite of the effectiveness of endocrine therapy plus cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors as the first-line treatment for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 (ERBB2 [formerly HER2/neu])-negative (ER+/ERBB2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC), patients eventually develop resistance, and eventually most will receive chemotherapy. The METEORA-II trial compared a metronomic all-oral treatment with intravenous (IV) chemotherapy. Objective: To compare the efficacy of the oral vinorelbine plus cyclophosphamide plus capecitabine (VEX) regimen vs weekly IV paclitaxel among patients with ER+/ERBB2- MBC who are candidates for chemotherapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 2 randomized clinical trial including 140 women 18 years and older (randomized 1:1) with ER+/ERBB2- MBC was carried out from September 13, 2017, to January 14, 2021 at 15 centers in Italy. Eligible patients could have received 1 prior line of chemotherapy for MBC and/or 2 lines of endocrine therapy (including CDK4/6 inhibitors). Interventions: In 4-week cycles, patients received either metronomic oral VEX or weekly IV paclitaxel. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was investigator-assessed time to treatment failure (TTF) defined as the interval between the date of randomization to the end of treatment (because of disease progression or lack of tolerability or because further trial treatment was declined). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and disease control rate (complete or partial response or stable disease lasting for at least 24 weeks). Results: In total, 133 patients received either VEX (n = 70) or paclitaxel (n = 63) in 4-weekly cycles. The median age was 61 (range, 30-80) years. The VEX treatment significantly prolonged TTF vs paclitaxel (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.42-0.88; P = .008), median TTF was 8.3 (95% CI, 5.6-11.1) months for VEX vs 5.7 (95% CI, 4.1-6.1) months for paclitaxel, and the 12-month TTF was 34.3% for VEX vs 8.6% for paclitaxel. The median PFS was 11.1 (95% CI, 8.3-13.8) months vs 6.9 (95% CI, 5.4-10.1) months favoring VEX (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.46-0.96, P = .03). The 12-month PFS was 43.5% for VEX vs 21.9% for paclitaxel. No difference in OS was found. The TF event for 55.6% of patients was progression of disease; for 23% it was AEs. More patients assigned to VEX had at least 1 grade 3 or 4 targeted adverse event (VEX, 42.9%; 95% CI, 31.1%-55.3% vs paclitaxel, 28.6%; 95% CI, 17.9%-41.3%), but essentially no alopecia. Conclusion and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found significantly prolonged TTF and PFS for oral VEX but no improvement in OS compared with intravenous paclitaxel, despite increased but still manageable toxic effects. The VEX regimen may provide more prolonged disease control than weekly paclitaxel for ER+/ERBB2- MBC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02954055.

Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points in Neoadjuvant Breast Cancer Clinical Trials: NeoSTEEP.

PURPOSE: The Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points (STEEP) criteria, established in 2007 and updated in 2021 (STEEP 2.0), provide standardized definitions of adjuvant breast cancer (BC) end points. STEEP 2.0 identified a need to separately address end points for neoadjuvant clinical trials. The multidisciplinary NeoSTEEP working group of experts was convened to critically evaluate and align neoadjuvant BC trial end points. METHODS: The NeoSTEEP working group concentrated on neoadjuvant systemic therapy end points in clinical trials with efficacy outcomes-both pathologic and time-to-event survival end points-particularly for registrational intent. Special considerations for subtypes and therapeutic approaches, imaging, nodal staging at surgery, bilateral and multifocal diseases, correlative tissue collection, and US Food and Drug Administration regulatory considerations were contemplated. RESULTS: The working group recommends a preferred definition of pathologic complete response (pCR) as the absence of residual invasive cancer in the complete resected breast specimen and all sampled regional lymph nodes (ypT0/Tis ypN0 per AJCC staging). Residual cancer burden should be a secondary end point to facilitate future assessment of its utility. Alternative end points are needed for hormone receptor-positive disease. Time-to-event survival end point definitions should pay particular attention to the measurement starting point. Trials should include end points originating at random assignment (event-free survival and overall survival) to capture presurgery progression and deaths as events. Secondary end points adapted from STEEP 2.0, which are defined from starting at curative-intent surgery, may also be appropriate. Specification and standardization of biopsy protocols, imaging, and pathologic nodal evaluation are also crucial. CONCLUSION: End points in addition to pCR should be selected on the basis of clinical and biologic aspects of the tumor and the therapeutic agent investigated. Consistent prespecified definitions and interventions are paramount for clinically meaningful trial results and cross-trial comparison.

Clinical outcomes of de novo metastatic HER2-positive inflammatory breast cancer.

Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is a rare, aggressive form of breast cancer that presents as de novo metastatic disease in 20-30% of cases, with one-third of cases demonstrating HER2-positivity. There has been limited investigation into locoregional therapy utilization following HER2-directed systemic therapy for these patients, and their locoregional progression or recurrence (LRPR) and survival outcomes. Patients with de novo HER2-positive metastatic IBC (mIBC) were identified from an IRB-approved IBC registry at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Clinical, pathology, and treatment data were abstracted. Rates of LRPR, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and pathologic complete response (pCR) were determined. Seventy-eight patients diagnosed between 1998 and 2019 were identified. First-line systemic therapy comprised chemotherapy for most patients (97.4%) and HER2-directed therapy for all patients (trastuzumab [47.4%]; trastuzumab+pertuzumab [51.3%]; or trastuzumab emtansine [1.3%]). At a median follow-up of 2.7 years, the median PFS was 1.0 year, and the median OS was 4.6 years. The 1- and 2-year cumulative incidence of LRPR was 20.7% and 29.0%, respectively. Mastectomy was performed after systemic therapy in 41/78 patients (52.6%); 10 had a pCR (24.4%) and all were alive at last follow-up (1.3-8.9 years after surgery). Among 56 patients who were alive and LRPR-free at one year, 10 developed LRPR (surgery group = 1; no-surgery group = 9). In conclusion, patients with de novo HER2-positive mIBC who undergo surgery have favorable outcomes. More than half of patients received systemic and local therapy with good locoregional control and prolonged survival, suggesting a potential role for local therapy.

Adjuvant Exemestane With Ovarian Suppression in Premenopausal Breast Cancer: Long-Term Follow-Up of the Combined TEXT and SOFT Trials.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.The combined analysis of SOFT-TEXT compared outcomes in 4,690 premenopausal women with estrogen/progesterone receptor-positive (ER/PgR+) early breast cancer randomly assigned to 5 years of exemestane + ovarian function suppression (OFS) versus tamoxifen + OFS. After a median follow-up of 9 years, exemestane + OFS significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS) and distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI), but not overall survival, compared with tamoxifen + OFS. We now report DFS, DRFI, and overall survival after a median follow-up of 13 years. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the 12-year DFS (4.6% absolute improvement, hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.90; P < .001) and DRFI (1.8% absolute improvement, HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.98; P = .03), but not overall survival (90.1% v 89.1%, HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.11), continued to be significantly improved for patients assigned exemestane + OFS over tamoxifen + OFS. Among patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative tumors (86.0% of the ITT population), the absolute improvement in 12-year overall survival with exemestane + OFS was 2.0% (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.04) and 3.3% in those who received chemotherapy (45.9% of the ITT population). Overall survival benefit was clinically significant in high-risk patients, eg, women age < 35 years (4.0%) and those with > 2 cm (4.5%) or grade 3 tumors (5.5%). These sustained reductions of the risk of recurrence with adjuvant exemestane + OFS, compared with tamoxifen + OFS, provide guidance for selecting patients for whom exemestane should be preferred over tamoxifen in the setting of OFS.[Media: see text].

Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy in Premenopausal Breast Cancer: 12-Year Results From SOFT.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.The Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial (SOFT; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00066690) randomly assigned premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer to 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen, tamoxifen plus ovarian function suppression (OFS), or exemestane plus OFS. The primary analysis compared disease-free survival (DFS) between tamoxifen plus OFS versus tamoxifen alone; exemestane plus OFS versus tamoxifen was a secondary objective. After 8 years, SOFT reported a significant reduction in recurrence and improved overall survival (OS) with adjuvant tamoxifen plus OFS versus tamoxifen alone. Here, we report outcomes after median follow-up of 12 years. DFS remained significantly improved with tamoxifen plus OFS versus tamoxifen (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.98) with a 12-year DFS of 71.9% with tamoxifen, 76.1% with tamoxifen plus OFS, and 79.0% with exemestane plus OFS. OS was improved with tamoxifen plus OFS versus tamoxifen (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.01) and was 86.8% with tamoxifen, 89.0% with tamoxifen plus OFS, and 89.4% with exemestane plus OFS at 12 years. Among those who received prior chemotherapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative tumors, OS was 78.8% with tamoxifen, 81.1% with tamoxifen plus OFS, and 84.4% with exemestane plus OFS. In conclusion, after 12 years, there remains a benefit from including OFS in adjuvant endocrine therapy, with an absolute improvement in OS more apparent with higher baseline risk of recurrence.[Media: see text].

Incidence, characteristics, and management of central nervous system metastases in patients with inflammatory breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) have a high risk of central nervous system metastasis (mCNS). The purpose of this study was to quantify the incidence of and identify risk factors for mCNS in patients with IBC. METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed patients diagnosed with IBC between 1997 and 2019. mCNS-free survival time was defined as the date from the diagnosis of IBC to the date of diagnosis of mCNS or the date of death, whichever occurred first. A competing risks hazard model was used to evaluate risk factors for mCNS. RESULTS: A total of 531 patients were identified; 372 patients with stage III and 159 patients with de novo stage IV disease. During the study, there were a total of 124 patients who had mCNS. The 1-, 2-, and 5-year incidence of mCNS was 5%, 9%, and 18% in stage III patients (median follow-up: 5.6 years) and 17%, 30%, and 42% in stage IV patients (1.8 years). Multivariate analysis identified triple-negative tumor subtype as a significant risk factor for mCNS for stage III patients. For patients diagnosed with metastatic disease, visceral metastasis as first metastatic site, triple-negative subtype, and younger age at diagnosis of metastases were risk factors for mCNS. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with IBC, particularly those with triple-negative IBC, visceral metastasis, and those at a younger age at diagnosis of metastatic disease, are at significant risk of developing mCNS. Further investigation into prevention of mCNS and whether early detection of mCNS is associated with improved IBC patient outcomes is warranted.

HER2-low inflammatory breast cancer: Clinicopathologic features and prognostic implications.

BACKGROUND: HER2)-low expression is a predictive biomarker for novel anti-HER2 antibody-drug conjugates. However, little is known about its clinical significance in inflammatory breast cancer (IBC). METHODS: Patients diagnosed with HER2-negative IBC between December 1999 and December 2020 were identified from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute IBC registry. Patients were divided into HER2-low (IHC 1+ or 2+/ISH-) and HER2-zero (IHC 0), comparing clinicopathologic features and disease outcomes between the two subgroups. RESULTS: The study included 276 patients. Among patients with stage III (n = 209) and stage IV (n = 67) IBC, 54% and 39% had HER2-low tumours, respectively. Oestrogen receptor (ER)-expressing tumours were more common in patients with HER2-low versus HER2-zero stage III IBC (65% versus 38%, p < 0.01). Among stage III patients undergoing surgery (n = 182), pathologic complete response (pCR) rates were higher for HER2-zero versus HER2-low IBC (11% versus 6%, OR: 1.8, 95%CI:0.6-5.3), but minimal differences persisted when separately analysing pCR by ER status. Similar invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) outcomes were observed among ER-positive HER2-zero versus HER2-low IBC (48-month iDFS: 63% versus 63%, HR: 1.10, 95%CI:0.57-2.13) and ER-negative HER2-zero versus HER2-low IBC (48-month iDFS: 28% versus 25%, HR: 1.19, 95%CI:0.69-2.04). Differences in overall survival (OS) were small, both among ER-positive HER2-zero versus HER2-low IBC (48-month OS: 80% versus 81%, HR: 0.82, 95%CI:0.39-1.73) and ER-negative HER2-zero versus HER2-low IBC (48-month OS: 34% versus 47%, HR: 1.34, 95%CI: 0.74-2.41). CONCLUSIONS: Marginal differences in clinicopathologic features and outcomes were observed in HER2-low versus HER2-zero IBC when controlling for ER status, not supporting the definition of HER2-low as a distinct subtype of IBC.

Maximizing the value of phase III trials in immuno-oncology: A checklist from the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC).

The broad activity of agents blocking the programmed cell death protein 1 and its ligand (the PD-(L)1 axis) revolutionized oncology, offering long-term benefit to patients and even curative responses for tumors that were once associated with dismal prognosis. However, only a minority of patients experience durable clinical benefit with immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy in most disease settings. Spurred by preclinical and correlative studies to understand mechanisms of non-response to the PD-(L)1 antagonists and by combination studies in animal tumor models, many drug development programs were designed to combine anti-PD-(L)1 with a variety of approved and investigational chemotherapies, tumor-targeted therapies, antiangiogenic therapies, and other immunotherapies. Several immunotherapy combinations improved survival outcomes in a variety of indications including melanoma, lung, kidney, and liver cancer, among others. This immunotherapy renaissance, however, has led to many combinations being advanced to late-stage development without definitive predictive biomarkers, limited phase I and phase II data, or clinical trial designs that are not optimized for demonstrating the unique attributes of immune-related antitumor activity-for example, landmark progression-free survival and overall survival. The decision to activate a study at an individual site is investigator-driven, and generalized frameworks to evaluate the potential for phase III trials in immuno-oncology to yield positive data, particularly to increase the number of curative responses or otherwise advance the field have thus far been lacking. To assist in evaluating the potential value to patients and the immunotherapy field of phase III trials, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) has developed a checklist for investigators, described in this manuscript. Although the checklist focuses on anti-PD-(L)1-based combinations, it may be applied to any regimen in which immune modulation is an important component of the antitumor effect.

Early on-treatment transcriptional profiling as a tool for improving pathological response prediction in HER2-positive inflammatory breast cancer.

Background: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is a rare and understudied disease, with 40% of cases presenting with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive subtype. The goals of this study were to (i) assess the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate of short-term neoadjuvant dual-HER2-blockade and paclitaxel, (ii) contrast baseline and on-treatment transcriptional profiles of IBC tumor biopsies associated with pCR, and (iii) identify biological pathways that may explain the effect of neoadjuvant therapy on tumor response. Patients and Methods: A single-arm phase II trial of neoadjuvant trastuzumab (H), pertuzumab (P), and paclitaxel for 16 weeks was completed among patients with newly diagnosed HER2-positive IBC. Fresh-frozen tumor biopsies were obtained pretreatment (D1) and 8 days later (D8), following a single dose of HP, prior to adding paclitaxel. We performed RNA-sequencing on D1 and D8 tumor biopsies, identified genes associated with pCR using differential gene expression analysis, identified pathways associated with pCR using gene set enrichment and gene expression deconvolution methods, and compared the pCR predictive value of principal components derived from gene expression profiles by calculating and area under the curve for D1 and D8 subsets. Results: Twenty-three participants were enrolled, of whom 21 completed surgery following neoadjuvant therapy. Paired longitudinal fresh-frozen tumor samples (D1 and D8) were obtained from all patients. Among the 21 patients who underwent surgery, the pCR and the 4-year disease-free survival were 48% (90% CI 0.29-0.67) and 90% (95% CI 66-97%), respectively. The transcriptional profile of D8 biopsies was found to be more predictive of pCR (AUC = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.7993-1) than the D1 biopsies (AUC = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.5905-0.9822). Conclusions: In patients with HER2-positive IBC treated with neoadjuvant HP and paclitaxel for 16 weeks, gene expression patterns of tumor biopsies measured 1 week after treatment initiation not only offered different biological information but importantly served as a better predictor of pCR than baseline transcriptional analysis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01796197 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01796197); registered on February 21, 2013.

A phase III trial of alpelisib + trastuzumab ± fulvestrant versus trastuzumab + chemotherapy in HER2+ PIK3CA-mutated breast cancer.

ALPHABET is a randomized phase III trial assessing alpelisib + trastuzumab with or without fulvestrant in previously treated HER2-positive PIK3CA-mutated advanced breast cancer. Patients will be included in two cohorts according to hormone receptor (HR) status. In the experimental arms, patients in the HR-negative cohort will receive trastuzumab + alpelisib, and patients in the HR-positive cohort will receive the same treatment plus fulvestrant. Patients in the control arms will receive trastuzumab + physician's choice chemotherapy (eribuline, capecitabine or vinorelbine). Key eligibility criteria include 1-4 previous lines of anti-HER2 therapy and prior trastuzumab emtansine. The primary end point is investigator-assessed progression-free survival. The study aims to recruit a total of 300 patients.

ALPHABET is a clinical study investigating the potential use of alpelisib for the treatment of certain subtypes of breast cancer. Alpelisib is a novel drug that is given orally. It specifically targets a protein called PI3K. PI3K is hyperactivated in some tumors, allowing uncontrolled growth. This study is enrolling patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer whose tumor tests positive for a mutation in the PIK3CA gene, which encodes PI3K. Patients are allocated at random to receive either a combination treatment of trastuzumab (an anti-HER2-targeted therapy) with alpelisib or standard chemotherapy and trastuzumab without alpelisib. The efficacy of each treatment will be determined by comparing how long patients in each group live for without further tumor growth. Additional analyses will also look at the side effects experienced by patients, as well as their quality of life.

Surrogacy Beyond Prognosis: The Importance of "Trial-Level" Surrogacy.

Many candidate surrogate endpoints are currently assessed using a 2-level statistical approach, which consists in checking whether (1) the potential surrogate is associated with the final endpoint in individual patients and (2) the effect of treatment on the surrogate can be used to reliably predict the effect of treatment on the final endpoint. In some situations, condition (1) is fulfilled but condition (2) is not. We use concepts of causal inference to explain this apparently paradoxical situation, illustrating this review with 2 contrasting examples in operable breast cancer: the example of pathological complete response (pCR) and that of disease-free survival (DFS). In a previous meta-analysis, pCR has been shown to be a strong and independent prognostic factor for event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) after neoadjuvant treatment of operable breast cancer. Yet, in randomized trials, the effects of experimental treatments on pCR have not translated into predictable effects on EFS or OS, making pCR an "individual-level" surrogate, but not a "trial-level" surrogate. In contrast, DFS has been shown to be an acceptable surrogate for OS at both the individual and trial levels in early, HER2-positive breast cancer. The distinction between the prognostic and predictive roles of a tentative surrogate, not always made in the literature, avoids unnecessary confusion and allows better understanding of what it takes to validate a surrogate endpoint that is truly able to replace a final endpoint.

Serum thymidine kinase activity in patients with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer treated with palbociclib and fulvestrant.

BACKGROUND: Biomarkers for cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors, such as palbociclib, for patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer are lacking. Thymidine kinase is a proliferation marker downstream of the cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 pathway. We prospectively investigated the prognostic role of serum thymidine kinase activity (sTKa), in patients treated with Palbociclib + fulvestrant. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PYTHIA was a phase II, single-arm, multicentre, trial that enrolled 124 post-menopausal women with endocrine-resistant hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. Serum samples were collected pre-treatment (pre-trt; n = 122), at day 15 of cycle 1 (D15; n = 108), during the one week-off palbociclib before initiating cycle 2 (D28; n = 108) and at end of treatment (n = 76). sTKa was determined centrally using Divitum®, a refined ELISA-based assay with a limit of detection of 20 Divitum Units (Du)/L. The primary study endpoint was progression-free survival, assessed for its association with pre- and on-treatment sTKa. RESULTS: Data from 122 women were analysed. Pre-treatment sTKa was not associated with clinical characteristics and moderately correlated with tissue Ki-67. Palbociclib + fulvestrant markedly suppressed sTKa levels at D15, with 83% of patients recording levels below limit of detection. At D28, sTKa showed a rebound in 60% of patients. At each timepoint, higher sTKa was associated with shorter progression-free survival (each p < 0.001), with the strongest effect at D15. CONCLUSIONS: STKa is an independent prognostic biomarker in patients treated with palbociclib. High pre-treatment sTKa and its incomplete suppression during treatment may identify patients with poorer prognosis and primary resistance. This warrants validation in prospective comparative trials. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02536742; EudraCT 2014-005387-15.