21-Gene Assay to Inform Chemotherapy Benefit in Node-Positive Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The recurrence score based on the 21-gene breast-cancer assay has been clinically useful in predicting a chemotherapy benefit in hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, axillary lymph-node-negative breast cancer. In women with positive lymph-node disease, the role of the recurrence score with respect to predicting a benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy is unclear. METHODS: In a prospective trial, we randomly assigned women with hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, one to three positive axillary lymph nodes, and a recurrence score of 25 or lower (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a worse prognosis) to endocrine therapy only or to chemotherapy plus endocrine (chemoendocrine) therapy. The primary objective was to determine the effect of chemotherapy on invasive disease-free survival and whether the effect was influenced by the recurrence score. Secondary end points included distant relapse-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 5083 women (33.2% premenopausal and 66.8% postmenopausal) underwent randomization, and 5018 participated in the trial. At the prespecified third interim analysis, the chemotherapy benefit with respect to increasing invasive disease-free survival differed according to menopausal status (P = 0.008 for the comparison of chemotherapy benefit in premenopausal and postmenopausal participants), and separate prespecified analyses were conducted. Among postmenopausal women, invasive disease-free survival at 5 years was 91.9% in the endocrine-only group and 91.3% in the chemoendocrine group, with no chemotherapy benefit (hazard ratio for invasive disease recurrence, new primary cancer [breast cancer or another type], or death, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.26; P = 0.89). Among premenopausal women, invasive disease-free survival at 5 years was 89.0% with endocrine-only therapy and 93.9% with chemoendocrine therapy (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.83; P = 0.002), with a similar increase in distant relapse-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.87; P = 0.009). The relative chemotherapy benefit did not increase as the recurrence score increased. CONCLUSIONS: Among premenopausal women with one to three positive lymph nodes and a recurrence score of 25 or lower, those who received chemoendocrine therapy had longer invasive disease-free survival and distant relapse-free survival than those who received endocrine-only therapy, whereas postmenopausal women with similar characteristics did not benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; RxPONDER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01272037.).

Cisplatin with veliparib or placebo in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer and BRCA mutation-associated breast cancer (S1416): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are effective in germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation-associated metastatic breast cancer. However, studies evaluating PARP inhibitors plus platinum-based chemotherapy in germline BRCA1/2-wildtype triple-negative breast cancer are scarce. A large proportion of germline BRCA1/2-wildtype triple-negative breast cancer shows homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), resulting in a BRCA-like phenotype that might render sensitivity to PARP inhibitors. The S1416 trial assessed the efficacy of cisplatin combined with the PARP inhibitor veliparib in three predefined groups of metastatic breast cancer: germline BRCA1/2-mutated, BRCA-like, and non-BRCA-like. METHODS: S1416 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial conducted at 154 community and academic clinical sites across the USA. Eligible patients aged 18 years or older had metastatic or recurrent triple-negative breast cancer or germline BRCA1/2-associated metastatic or recurrent breast cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and had received up to one line of chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via the National Clinical Trials Network open interactive system with dynamic balancing on number of previous cytotoxic regimens for metastatic disease to receive intravenous cisplatin (75 mg/m2, day 1) combined with either veliparib or matching placebo (300 mg orally twice a day, days 1-14) on a 21-day cycle. Investigators, patients, and the sponsors were masked to treatment assignment; the study statisticians were unmasked. Central testing after ran domisation classified patients as having mutated or wildtype germline BRCA1/2. A biomarker panel established a priori was used to classify patients with wildtype germline BRCA1/2 into BRCA-like and non-BRCA-like phenotype groups, with BRCA-like status based on at least one of the biomarkers: genomic instability score (≥42), somatic BRCA1/2 mutations, BRCA1 promoter methylation, or non-BRCA1/2 homologous recombination repair germline mutations. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, analysed separately for the three predefined biomarker groups with a prespecified α value for each analysis. Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat and included all eligible patients. Safety analyses of toxicities attributed to treatment included all patients who received at least one dose of veliparib or placebo. The study is ongoing and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02595905. FINDINGS: Between July 7, 2016, and June 15, 2019, 335 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned. 320 patients (n=162 to cisplatin plus veliparib, all women; and n=158 to cisplatin plus placebo, 157 women and one man) were eligible for efficacy evaluation. 247 patients were classified into the three biomarker groups: germline BRCA1/2-mutated (n=37), BRCA-like (n=101), and non-BRCA-like (n=109). 73 patients could not be classified due to missing biomarker information. Median follow-up was 11·1 months (IQR 5·6-20·8). In the germline BRCA1/2-mutated group, median progression-free survival was 6·2 months (95% CI 2·3-9·2) in the cisplatin plus veliparib group and 6·4 months (4·3-8·2) in the cisplatin plus placebo group (HR 0·79 [95% CI 0·38-1·67]; log-rank p=0·54). In the BRCA-like group, median progression-free survival was 5·9 months (95% CI 4·3-7·8) in the cisplatin plus veliparib group versus 4·2 months (2·3-5·0) in the cisplatin plus placebo group (HR 0·57 [95% CI 0·37-0·88]; p=0·010). In the non-BRCA-like group, median progression-free survival was 4·0 months (95% CI 2·5-4·7) in the cisplatin plus veliparib group versus 3·0 months (2·2-4·4) in the cisplatin plus placebo group (HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·60-1·33]; p=0·57). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events attributed to treatment were neutropenia (71 [46%] of 155 patients in the cisplatin plus veliparib group vs 29 [20%] of 147 in the cisplatin plus placebo group), leukopenia (42 [27%] vs 11 [7%]), anaemia (35 [23%] vs 12 [8%]), and thrombocytopenia (29 [19%] vs four [3%]). Serious adverse events attributed to treatment occurred in 48 (31%) patients in the cisplatin plus veliparib group and 53 (36%) patients in the cisplatin plus placebo group. Treatment-related adverse events led to death in one patient in the cisplatin plus veliparib group (sepsis) and one patient in the cisplatin plus placebo group (acute kidney injury due to cisplatin plus heart failure from previous doxorubicin exposure). INTERPRETATION: The addition of veliparib to cisplatin significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with BRCA-like metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, but not in patients with non-BRCA-like metastatic breast cancer. PARP inhibitors combined with platinum-based chemotherapy should be explored further in BRCA-like triple-negative breast cancer. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute and National Institute of General Medical Sciences (US National Institutes of Health); AbbVie; Myriad Genetics; the Biomarker, Imaging, and Quality of Life Studies Funding Program (awarded by the National Cancer Institute); and The University of Kansas Cancer Center.

Overall Survival with Fulvestrant plus Anastrozole in Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: We previously reported prolonged progression-free survival and marginally prolonged overall survival among postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer who had been randomly assigned to receive the aromatase inhibitor anastrozole plus the selective estrogen-receptor down-regulator fulvestrant, as compared with anastrozole alone, as first-line therapy. We now report final survival outcomes. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients to receive either anastrozole or fulvestrant plus anastrozole. Randomization was stratified according to adjuvant tamoxifen use. Analysis of survival was performed by means of two-sided stratified log-rank tests and Cox regression. Efficacy and safety were compared between the two groups, both overall and in subgroups. RESULTS: Of 707 patients who had undergone randomization, 694 had data available for analysis. The combination-therapy group had 247 deaths among 349 women (71%) and a median overall survival of 49.8 months, as compared with 261 deaths among 345 women (76%) and a median overall survival of 42.0 months in the anastrozole-alone group, a significant difference (hazard ratio for death, 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 0.98; P = 0.03 by the log-rank test). In a subgroup analysis of the two strata, overall survival among women who had not received tamoxifen previously was longer with the combination therapy than with anastrozole alone (median, 52.2 months and 40.3 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.92); among women who had received tamoxifen previously, overall survival was similar in the two groups (median, 48.2 months and 43.5 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.27) (P = 0.09 for interaction). The incidence of long-term toxic effects of grade 3 to 5 was similar in the two groups. Approximately 45% of the patients in the anastrozole-alone group crossed over to receive fulvestrant. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of fulvestrant to anastrozole was associated with increased long-term survival as compared with anastrozole alone, despite substantial crossover to fulvestrant after progression during therapy with anastrozole alone. The results suggest that the benefit was particularly notable in patients without previous exposure to adjuvant endocrine therapy. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00075764.).

Association between body mass index and response to duloxetine for aromatase inhibitor-associated musculoskeletal symptoms in SWOG S1202.

BACKGROUND: Aromatase inhibitor (AI)-associated musculoskeletal symptoms (AIMSS) negatively impact adherence to and persistence with therapy. In SWOG S1202, patients with AIMSS who were treated with duloxetine, a serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, reported improvement in pain by 12 weeks compared with placebo. Based on the authors' prior observation that responses to pain interventions differ between obese and nonobese patients, the current study examined whether response to duloxetine therapy differed by obesity status. METHODS: In SWOG S1202, a total of 299 AI-treated postmenopausal women with stage I to III (AJCC 7th Edition) breast cancer who developed new or worsening average pain were enrolled, randomized to duloxetine or placebo, and treated for 12 weeks. Patient-reported outcomes were obtained at baseline and through 12 weeks. Patients were categorized into nonobese (body mass index [BMI] <30 kg/m2 ) or obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2 ). The authors tested the interaction between intervention and obesity with respect to average pain at 12 weeks in the 289 eligible patients, using a P value of .05 to indicate statistical significance. RESULTS: In approximately 54% of evaluable patients with a BMI ≥30 kg/m2 , the reduction in the mean average pain score between baseline and 12 weeks was statistically significantly greater for patients treated with duloxetine compared with those receiving placebo (-2.73 vs -1.64 points; P = .003). Conversely, in the nonobese patients, the reduction in the mean average pain score was similar in the 2 cohorts (-2.46 vs -2.34 points; P = .75). The P value for interaction was .02, thereby meeting the threshold criteria of the current study. Similar findings were evident for other pain-related patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, obese patients with AIMSS obtained more analgesic benefit from duloxetine compared with nonobese patients. Additional studies are warranted to determine the biologic basis for these findings.

Effect of Acupuncture vs Sham Acupuncture or Waitlist Control on Joint Pain Related to Aromatase Inhibitors Among Women With Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Musculoskeletal symptoms are the most common adverse effects of aromatase inhibitors and often result in therapy discontinuation. Small studies suggest that acupuncture may decrease aromatase inhibitor-related joint symptoms. Objective: To determine the effect of acupuncture in reducing aromatase inhibitor-related joint pain. Design, Setting, and Patients: Randomized clinical trial conducted at 11 academic centers and clinical sites in the United States from March 2012 to February 2017 (final date of follow-up, September 5, 2017). Eligible patients were postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer who were taking an aromatase inhibitor and scored at least 3 on the Brief Pain Inventory Worst Pain (BPI-WP) item (score range, 0-10; higher scores indicate greater pain). Interventions: Patients were randomized 2:1:1 to the true acupuncture (n = 110), sham acupuncture (n = 59), or waitlist control (n = 57) group. True acupuncture and sham acupuncture protocols consisted of 12 acupuncture sessions over 6 weeks (2 sessions per week), followed by 1 session per week for 6 weeks. The waitlist control group did not receive any intervention. All participants were offered 10 acupuncture sessions to be used between weeks 24 and 52. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the 6-week BPI-WP score. Mean 6-week BPI-WP scores were compared by study group using linear regression, adjusted for baseline pain and stratification factors (clinically meaningful difference specified as 2 points). Results: Among 226 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 60.7 [8.6] years; 88% white; mean [SD] baseline BPI-WP score, 6.6 [1.5]), 206 (91.1%) completed the trial. From baseline to 6 weeks, the mean observed BPI-WP score decreased by 2.05 points (reduced pain) in the true acupuncture group, by 1.07 points in the sham acupuncture group, and by 0.99 points in the waitlist control group. The adjusted difference for true acupuncture vs sham acupuncture was 0.92 points (95% CI, 0.20-1.65; P = .01) and for true acupuncture vs waitlist control was 0.96 points (95% CI, 0.24-1.67; P = .01). Patients in the true acupuncture group experienced more grade 1 bruising compared with patients in the sham acupuncture group (47% vs 25%; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: Among postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer and aromatase inhibitor-related arthralgias, true acupuncture compared with sham acupuncture or with waitlist control resulted in a statistically significant reduction in joint pain at 6 weeks, although the observed improvement was of uncertain clinical importance. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01535066.

Phase II studies of two different schedules of dasatinib in bone metastasis predominant metastatic breast cancer: SWOG S0622.

Bone metastases from breast cancer are common, causing significant morbidity. Preclinical data of dasatinib, an oral small molecule inhibitor of multiple oncogenic tyrosine kinases, suggested efficacy in tumor control and palliation of bone metastases in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). This clinical trial aimed to determine whether treatment with either of 2 dose schedules of dasatinib results in a progression-free survival (PFS) >50 % at 24 weeks in bone metastasis predominant MBC, to evaluate the toxicity of the 2 dosing regimens, and explore whether treatment results in decreased serum bone turnover markers and patient-reported "worst pain." Subjects with bone metastasis predominant MBC were randomly assigned to either 100 mg of dasatinib once daily, or 70 mg twice daily, with treatment continued until time of disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Planned accrual was 40 patients in each arm. The primary trial endpoint was PFS, defined as time from registration to progression or death due to any cause. Median PFS for all eligible patients (79) was 12.6 weeks (95 % CI 9.1-16.7). Neither cohort met the threshold for further clinical interest. There were no significant differences in PFS by randomized treatment arm (p = 0.85). Toxicity was similar in both cohorts, with no clear trend in serum biomarkers of bone turnover or patient-reported pain. Dasatinib was ineffective in controlling bone-predominant MBC in a patient population, unselected by molecular markers. Further study of dasatinib in breast cancer should not be pursued unless performed in molecularly determined patient subsets, or rational combinations.

Combination anastrozole and fulvestrant in metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The aromatase inhibitor anastrozole inhibits estrogen synthesis. Fulvestrant binds and accelerates degradation of estrogen receptors. We hypothesized that these two agents in combination might be more effective than anastrozole alone in patients with hormone-receptor (HR)-positive metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: Postmenopausal women with previously untreated metastatic disease were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive either 1 mg of anastrozole orally every day (group 1), with crossover to fulvestrant alone strongly encouraged if the disease progressed, or anastrozole and fulvestrant in combination (group 2). Patients were stratified according to prior or no prior receipt of adjuvant tamoxifen therapy. Fulvestrant was administered intramuscularly at a dose of 500 mg on day 1 and 250 mg on days 14 and 28 and monthly thereafter. The primary end point was progression-free survival, with overall survival designated as a prespecified secondary outcome. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival was 13.5 months in group 1 and 15.0 months in group 2 (hazard ratio for progression or death with combination therapy, 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68 to 0.94; P=0.007 by the log-rank test). The combination therapy was generally more effective than anastrozole alone in all subgroups, with no significant interactions. Overall survival was also longer with combination therapy (median, 41.3 months in group 1 and 47.7 months in group 2; hazard ratio for death, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.00; P=0.05 by the log-rank test), despite the fact that 41% of the patients in group 1 crossed over to fulvestrant after progression. Three deaths that were possibly associated with treatment occurred in group 2. The rates of grade 3 to 5 toxic effects did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of anastrozole and fulvestrant was superior to anastrozole alone or sequential anastrozole and fulvestrant for the treatment of HR-positive metastatic breast cancer, despite the use of a dose of fulvestrant that was below the current standard. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca; SWOG ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00075764.).

A phase II study of docetaxel and vinorelbine plus filgrastim for HER-2 negative, stage IV breast cancer: SWOG S0102.

Docetaxel and vinorelbine have demonstrated Single-agent activity in breast cancer. Preclinical studies suggest potential synergy between these antitubulin chemotherapy agents. This study evaluates these drugs in combination in metastatic breast cancer. Taxane-naive patients with HER-2 negative, stage IV breast cancer without prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease, were eligible. Docetaxel (60 mg/m(2)) was given intravenously on Day 1, vinorelbine (27.5 mg/m(2)) intravenously on Days 8 and 15, and filgrastim on Days 2-21 of a 21-day cycle. The primary study outcome was one-year overall survival (OS), with secondary outcomes of progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), and toxicity. Of 95 patients registered, 92 were eligible and received treatment. One-year OS was 74 % (95 % CI 64-82 %) with a median OS of 22.3 months (95 % CI 18.8-31.4 months). One-year PFS was 34 % (95 % CI 24-43 %) with median of 7.2 months (95 % CI 6.4-10.3). OS at 2 and 3 years were 49 % (95 % CI 38-59 %) and 30 % (95 % CI 21-40 %), respectively. OS was poorer for women with estrogen-receptor negative disease (n = 32) compared to estrogen-receptor positive (n = 60) (log-rank p = 0.031), but PFS was not significantly different (p = 0.11). RR was 59 % among the 74 patients with measurable disease. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events were 48 and 16 %, respectively. Grade 4 neutropenia was 12 % and grade 3/4 febrile neutropenia was 3 %. Common grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities were fatigue (14 %), pneumonitis (10 %), and dyspnea (9 %). The combination of docetaxel and vinorelbine is an active first-line chemotherapy in HER-2 nonoverexpressing, metastatic breast cancer. This combination is associated with significant hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity. The safety profile and expense of the filgrastim limit recommendations for routine use.

Phase III Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Endocrine Therapy ± 1 Year of Everolimus in Patients With High-Risk, Hormone Receptor-Positive, Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT-serine threonine kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway abnormalities contribute to endocrine resistance. Everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, improved progression-free survival in hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer (BC) when combined with endocrine therapy (ET). In this phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed the efficacy of everolimus + ET as adjuvant therapy in high-risk, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative BC after adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to physician's choice ET and 1 year of everolimus (10 mg orally once daily) or placebo stratified by risk group. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) evaluated by a stratified log-rank test with the hazard ratio (HR) estimated by Cox regression. Subset analyses included preplanned evaluation by risk group and exploratory analyses by menopausal status and age. Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and safety. Everolimus did not improve IDFS/OS when added to ET in patients with early-stage high-risk, hormone receptor-positive BC. RESULTS: One thousand and nine hundred thirty-nine patients were randomly assigned with 1,792 eligible for analysis. Overall, no benefit of everolimus was seen for IDFS (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.14]) or OS (HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.26]). The assumption of proportional hazards was not met suggesting significant variability in the HR over time since the start of treatment. In an unplanned subgroup analysis among postmenopausal patients (N = 1,221), no difference in IDFS (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.86 to 1.36]) or OS (HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.60]) was seen. In premenopausal patients (N = 571), everolimus improved both IDFS (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.94]) and OS (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.28 to 0.86]). Treatment completion rates were lower in the everolimus arm compared with placebo (48% v 73%) with higher grade 3 and 4 adverse events (35% v 7%). CONCLUSION: One year of adjuvant everolimus + ET did not improve overall outcomes. Subset analysis suggests mTOR inhibition as a possible target for patients who remain premenopausal after chemotherapy.

Effects of vitamin D supplementation on a deep learning-based mammographic evaluation in SWOG S0812.

Deep learning-based mammographic evaluations could noninvasively assess response to breast cancer chemoprevention. We evaluated change in a convolutional neural network-based breast cancer risk model applied to mammograms among women enrolled in SWOG S0812, which randomly assigned 208 premenopausal high-risk women to receive oral vitamin D3 20 000 IU weekly or placebo for 12 months. We applied the convolutional neural network model to mammograms collected at baseline (n = 109), 12 months (n = 97), and 24 months (n = 67) and compared changes in convolutional neural network-based risk score between treatment groups. Change in convolutional neural network-based risk score was not statistically significantly different between vitamin D and placebo groups at 12 months (0.005 vs 0.002, P = .875) or at 24 months (0.020 vs 0.001, P = .563). The findings are consistent with the primary analysis of S0812, which did not demonstrate statistically significant changes in mammographic density with vitamin D supplementation compared with placebo. There is an ongoing need to evaluate biomarkers of response to novel breast cancer chemopreventive agents.

Phase II trial of simple oral therapy with capecitabine and cyclophosphamide in patients with metastatic breast cancer: SWOG S0430.

BACKGROUND: Interest in oral agents for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) has increased because many patients prefer oral to i.v. regimens. We evaluated a simple oral combination of capecitabine with cyclophosphamide (CPA) for MBC. METHODS: The trial was designed to determine whether or not combination therapy would achieve a 42% response rate (RR) using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) in MBC. Patients with two or fewer prior chemotherapy regimens for MBC were eligible. Those with estrogen receptor-positive MBC had to have progressed on endocrine therapy. Patients had measurable disease or elevated mucin (MUC)-1 antigen and received CPA, 100 mg daily on days 1-14, and capecitabine, 1,500 mg twice daily on days 8-21, in 21-day cycles. RESULTS: In 96 eligible patients, the median progression-free survival (PFS) interval was 5.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.7-8.0 months) and median overall survival (OS) time was 18.8 months (95% CI, 13.1-22.0 months). The RR was 36% (95% CI, 26%-48%) in 80 patients with measurable disease. The MUC-1 antigen RR was 33% (95% CI, 20%-48%), occurring in 15 of 46 patients with elevated MUC-1 antigen. Toxicity was mild, with no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: PFS, OS, and RR outcomes with capecitabine plus CPA compare favorably with those of capecitabine monotherapy and combination therapy with bevacizumab, sorafenib, or ixabepilone. The addition of these other agents to capecitabine does not improve OS time in MBC patients, and this single-arm study does not suggest that the addition of CPA to capecitabine has this potential in an unselected MBC population. When OS prolongation is the goal, clinicians should choose single-agent capecitabine.

Comparison of Acupuncture vs Sham Acupuncture or Waiting List Control in the Treatment of Aromatase Inhibitor-Related Joint Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have proven efficacy for the treatment of hormone-sensitive breast cancer; however, arthralgias (pain and stiffness) contribute to nonadherence with therapy for more than 50% of patients. Objective: To examine the effect of acupuncture in reducing AI-related joint pain through 52 weeks. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized clinical trial was conducted at 11 sites in the US from May 1, 2012, to February 29, 2016, with a scheduled final date of follow-up of September 5, 2017, to compare true acupuncture (TA) with sham acupuncture (SA) or waiting list control (WC). Women with early-stage breast cancer were eligible if they were taking an AI and scored 3 or higher on the Brief Pain Inventory Worst Pain (BPI-WP) item (score range, 0-10; higher scores indicate greater pain). Analysis was conducted for data received through May 3, 2021. Interventions: Participants were randomized 2:1:1 to the TA (n = 110), SA (n = 59), or WC (n = 57) group. The TA and SA protocols were composed of 6 weeks of intervention at 2 sessions per week (12 sessions overall), followed by 6 additional weeks of intervention with 1 session per week. Participants randomized to WC received no intervention. All participants were offered 10 acupuncture sessions to be used between weeks 24 and 52. Main Outcomes and Measures: In this long-term evaluation, the primary end point was the 52-week BPI-WP score, compared by study group using linear regression, adjusted for baseline pain and stratification factors. Results: Among 226 randomized women (mean [SD] age, 60.7 [8.6] years; 87.7% White; mean [SD] baseline BPI-WP score, 6.7 [1.5]), 191 (84.5%) completed the trial. In a linear regression, 52-week mean BPI-WP scores were 1.08 (95% CI, 0.24-1.91) points lower in the TA compared with the SA group (P = .01) and were 0.99 (95% CI, 0.12-1.86) points lower in the TA compared with the WC group (P = .03). In addition, 52-week BPI pain interference scores were statistically significantly lower in the TA compared with the SA group (difference, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.00-1.16; P = .05). Between 24 and 52 weeks, 12 (13.2%) of TA, 6 (11.3%) of SA, and 5 (10.6%) of WC patients reported receipt of acupuncture. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, women with AI-related joint pain receiving 12 weeks of TA had reduced pain at 52 weeks compared with controls, suggesting long-term benefits of this therapy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01535066.

A Randomized Trial of Fulvestrant, Everolimus, and Anastrozole for the Front-line Treatment of Patients with Advanced Hormone Receptor-positive Breast Cancer, SWOG S1222.

PURPOSE: Metastatic hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer is an important cause of cancer mortality. Endocrine treatment with or without additional targeted therapies has been the mainstay of treatment. This trial was designed to evaluate the combination of fulvestrant plus everolimus versus fulvestrant, everolimus, and anastrozole compared with fulvestrant alone in the first-line treatment of advanced HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized placebo-controlled trial included postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who had received no prior systemic therapy for metastatic disease. Participants were randomized to one of three treatment arms and the primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS), comparing combinations of fulvestrant and everolimus with or without anastrozole with fulvestrant alone. Circulating tumor cells (CTC), as measured with two different methods, and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) were evaluated serially prior to treatment and the beginning of the second cycle of therapy. RESULTS: Due in part to changes in clinical practice, the study was closed after accruing only 37 participants. There was no evidence that everolimus-containing combination treatment improved PFS or overall survival relative to fulvestrant alone. When modeled continuously, an association was observed of baseline CTC and ctDNA with poorer survival. CONCLUSIONS: Although power of the study was limited, the findings were unable to support the routine use of everolimus combination endocrine therapy in the first-line treatment of advanced hormone-sensitive breast cancer. Prognostic impact of baseline ctDNA and copy-number variations in CTC was demonstrated.

SWOG S0215: a phase II study of docetaxel and vinorelbine plus filgrastim with weekly trastuzumab for HER2-positive, stage IV breast cancer.

SWOG trial S0102 showed significant activity of the combination of docetaxel and vinorelbine in HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). For HER2-positive patients, additional benefit may occur with the addition of trastuzumab due to its synergy with docetaxel and vinorelbine. Patients with HER2-positive MBC, but without prior chemotherapy for MBC or adjuvant taxane, were eligible. Docetaxel (60 mg/m²) was given intravenously on Day 1, vinorelbine (27.5 mg/m²) intravenously on Days 8 and 15, and filgrastim (5 µg/kg) on Days 2-21 of a 21-day cycle. In addition, patients received weekly infusions of trastuzumab (2 mg/kg) after an initial bolus of 4 mg/kg. The primary outcome was 1 year overall survival (OS), with secondary outcomes of progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, and toxicity. Due to slow accrual (February 2003-December 2006), enrollment was stopped after 76 of 90 planned patients. There have been 32 deaths and 51 progressions among the 74 eligible patients who received treatment. The estimated 1 year OS was 93% (95% CI 84-97%) with a median of 48 months. One-year PFS was 70% (95% CI 58-79%) with a median of 20 months. Response rate for measurable disease was 84%. No deaths were attributed to treatment. Grade 4 toxicities were reported for 19% with neutropenia the most common (15%). The most common grade 3 toxicities (33%) were leucopenia (14%) and fatigue (10%). The combination of trastuzumab, docetaxel, and vinorelbine is effective as first-line chemotherapy in HER2-positive MBC with minimal toxicity. One-year survival estimates are among the highest reported in this population.

Association of Osteonecrosis of the Jaw With Zoledronic Acid Treatment for Bone Metastases in Patients With Cancer.

IMPORTANCE: Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) affects patients with cancer and metastatic bone disease (MBD) treated with bone-modifying agents (BMAs), yet the true incidence is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To define the cumulative incidence of ONJ at 3 years in patients receiving zoledronic acid for MBD from any malignant neoplasm. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This multicenter, prospective observational cohort study (SWOG Cancer Research Network S0702) included patients with MBD with either limited or no prior exposure to BMAs and a clinical care plan that included use of zoledronic acid within 30 days of registration. Medical, dental, and patient-reported outcome forms were submitted at baseline and every 6 months. Follow-up was 3 years. Osteonecrosis of the jaw was defined using established criteria. Data were collected from January 30, 2009, to December 13, 2013, and analyzed from August 24, 2018, to August 6, 2020. INTERVENTIONS/EXPOSURES: Cancer treatments, BMAs, and dental care were administered as clinically indicated. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Cumulative incidence of confirmed ONJ, defined as an area of exposed bone in the maxillofacial region present for more than 8 weeks with no concurrent radiotherapy to the craniofacial region. Risk factors for ONJ were also examined. RESULTS: The SWOG S0702 trial enrolled 3491 evaluable patients (1806 women [51.7%]; median age, 63.1 [range, 2.24-93.9] years), of whom 1120 had breast cancer; 580, myeloma; 702, prostate cancer; 666, lung cancer; and 423, other neoplasm. A baseline dental examination was performed in 2263 patients (64.8%). Overall, 90 patients developed confirmed ONJ, with cumulative incidence of 0.8% (95% CI, 0.5%-1.1%) at year 1, 2.0% (95% CI, 1.5%-2.5%) at year 2, and 2.8% (95% CI, 2.3%-3.5%) at year 3; 3-year cumulative incidence was highest in patients with myeloma (4.3%; 95% CI, 2.8%-6.4%). Patients with planned zoledronic acid dosing intervals of less than 5 weeks were more likely to experience ONJ than patients with planned dosing intervals of 5 weeks or more (hazard ratio [HR], 4.65; 95% CI, 1.46-14.81; P = .009). A higher rate of ONJ was associated with fewer total number of teeth (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31-0.83; P = .006), the presence of dentures (HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.10-3.03; P = .02), and current smoking (HR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.12-4.02; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: As the findings show, the cumulative incidence of ONJ after 3 years was 2.8% in patients receiving zoledronic acid for MBD. Cancer type, oral health, and frequency of dosing were associated with the risk of ONJ. These data provide information to guide stratification of risk for developing ONJ in patients with MBD receiving zoledronic acid.

Adjuvant chemotherapy and timing of tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive, node-positive breast cancer: a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Tamoxifen is standard adjuvant treatment for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. We assessed the benefit of adding chemotherapy to adjuvant tamoxifen and whether tamoxifen should be given concurrently or after chemotherapy. METHODS: We undertook a phase 3, parallel, randomised trial (SWOG-8814, INT-0100) in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive, node-positive breast cancer to test two major objectives: whether the primary outcome, disease-free survival, was longer with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil (CAF) given every 4 weeks for six cycles plus 5 years of daily tamoxifen than with tamoxifen alone; and whether disease-free survival was longer with CAF followed by tamoxifen (CAF-T) than with CAF plus concurrent tamoxifen (CAFT). Overall survival and toxicity were predefined, important secondary outcomes for each objective. Patients in this open-label trial were randomly assigned by a computer algorithm in a 2:3:3 ratio (tamoxifen:CAF-T:CAFT) and analysis was by intention to treat of eligible patients. Groups were compared by stratified log-rank tests, followed by Cox regression analyses adjusted for significant prognostic factors. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00929591. FINDINGS: Of 1558 randomised women, 1477 (95%) were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. After a maximum of 13 years of follow-up (median 8.94 years), 637 women had a disease-free survival event (tamoxifen, 179 events in 361 patients; CAF-T, 216 events in 566 patients; CAFT, 242 events in 550 patients). For the first objective, therapy with the CAF plus tamoxifen groups combined (CAFT or CAF-T) was superior to tamoxifen alone for the primary endpoint of disease-free survival (adjusted Cox regression hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.91; p=0.002) but only marginally for the secondary endpoint of overall survival (HR 0.83, 0.68-1.01; p=0.057). For the second objective, the adjusted HRs favoured CAF-T over CAFT but did not reach significance for disease-free survival (HR 0.84, 0.70-1.01; p=0.061) or overall survival (HR 0.90, 0.73-1.10; p=0.30). Neutropenia, stomatitis, thromboembolism, congestive heart failure, and leukaemia were more frequent in the combined CAF plus tamoxifen groups than in the tamoxifen-alone group. INTERPRETATION: Chemotherapy with CAF plus tamoxifen given sequentially is more effective adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive, node-positive breast cancer than is tamoxifen alone. However, it might be possible to identify some subgroups that do not benefit from anthracycline-based chemotherapy despite positive nodes. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute (US National Institutes of Health).

Screening for clonal hematopoiesis as a predictive marker for development of therapy-related myeloid neoplasia (t-MN) following neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer: a Southwest Oncology Group study (S0012).

A serious complication associated with breast cancer treatment is the increased risk for development of therapy-related myeloid neoplasms (t-MN). To determine whether dose-intensive adjuvant regimens for breast cancer induce genetic damage to hematopoietic stem cells, defined by the emergence of clonal hematopoiesis, and whether detection of clonal hematopoiesis could be used as an early marker for the subsequent development of t-MN, the Southwest Oncology Group designed a pilot clonality investigation to estimate the incidence of clonal hematopoiesis during and shortly after completion of the dose intensive neoadjuvant regimens for high-risk breast cancer patients. Peripheral blood samples from 274 patients obtained prior to treatment, at time of surgery, and at 6 and 12 months post-surgery were examined by two different clonality assays: the HUMARA (HUMan Androgen Receptor) assay to estimate the incidence of early genetic damage by clonal proliferation, and microsatellite instability (MSI) testing to screen for LOH or defective DNA mismatch repair mechanisms. Clonal hematopoiesis was negative in 93.5% of the samples analyzed. Five patients showed a HUMARA-positive/MSI-negative pattern, and no patients showed a HUMARA-negative/MSI-positive pattern. With a median follow-up of 3.1 years, one patient in our study developed t-AML at 3 years 5 months after randomization. Our results indicate that clonal hematopoiesis assays performed within the 2 years following dose-intensive neoadjuvant therapy failed to identify an emerging clonal hematopoietic stem cell population. Longer clinical follow-up will be necessary to define better the positive predictive value of detecting clonal hematopoiesis in the HUMARA+/MSI- cases.

Phase III Randomized Trial of Bisphosphonates as Adjuvant Therapy in Breast Cancer: S0307.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant bisphosphonates, when given in a low-estrogen environment, can decrease breast cancer recurrence and death. Treatment guidelines include recommendations for adjuvant bisphosphonates in postmenopausal patients. SWOG/Alliance/Canadian Cancer Trials Group/ECOG-ACRIN/NRG Oncology study S0307 compared the efficacy of three bisphosphonates in early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: Patients with stage I-III breast cancer were randomly assigned to 3 years of intravenous zoledronic acid, oral clodronate, or oral ibandronate. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS) with overall survival as a secondary outcome. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: A total of 6097 patients enrolled. Median age was 52.7 years. Prior to being randomly assigned, 73.2% patients indicated preference for oral vs intravenous formulation. DFS did not differ across arms in a log-rank test (P = .49); 5-year DFS was 88.3% (zoledronic acid: 95% confidence interval [CI] = 86.9% to 89.6%), 87.6% (clodronate: 95% CI = 86.1% to 88.9%), and 87.4% (ibandronate: 95% CI = 85.6% to 88.9%). Additionally, 5-year overall survival did not differ between arms (log rank P = .50) and was 92.6% (zoledronic acid: 95% CI = 91.4% to 93.6%), 92.4% (clodronate: 95% CI = 91.2% to 93.5%), and 92.9% (ibandronate: 95% CI = 91.5% to 94.1%). Bone as first site of recurrence did not differ between arms (P = .93). Analyses based on age and tumor subtypes showed no treatment differences. Grade 3/4 toxicity was 8.8% (zoledronic acid), 8.3% (clodronate), and 10.5% (ibandronate). Osteonecrosis of the jaw was highest for zoledronic acid (1.26%) compared with clodronate (0.36%) and ibandronate (0.77%). CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence of differences in efficacy by type of bisphosphonate, either in overall analysis or subgroups. Despite an increased rate of osteonecrosis of the jaw with zoledronic acid, overall toxicity grade differed little across arms. Given that patients expressed preference for oral formulation, efforts to make oral agents available in the United States should be considered.

Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Biomarker Modulation Study of Vitamin D Supplementation in Premenopausal Women at High Risk for Breast Cancer (SWOG S0812).

Observational studies have reported an inverse association between vitamin D intake and breast cancer risk. We examined whether vitamin D supplementation in high-risk premenopausal women reduces mammographic density (MD), an established breast cancer risk factor. We conducted a multicenter randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial in premenopausal women at high risk for breast cancer [5-year risk ≥ 1.67%, lifetime risk ≥ 20%, lobular carcinoma in situ, prior stage 0-II breast cancer, hereditary breast cancer syndrome, or high MD (heterogeneously/extremely dense)], with a baseline serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] ≤ 32 ng/mL. Participants were randomized to 12 months of vitamin D3 20,000 IU/week or matching placebo. The primary endpoint was change in MD from baseline to 12 months using the Cumulus technique. Secondary endpoints included serial blood biomarkers [25(OH)D, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)D), insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-1, IGF-binding protein-3] and MD change at 24 months. Among 208 women randomized, median age was 44.6 years, 84% were white, 33% had baseline 25(OH)D < 20 ng/mL, and 78% had high baseline MD. Comparing the active and placebo groups at 12 months, MD changes were small and did not significantly differ. Mean MD changes at 12 and 24 months were -0.3% and -1.2%, respectively, in the active arm and +1.5% and +1.6% with placebo (P > 0.05). We observed a mean change in serum 25(OH)D of +18.9 versus +2.8 ng/mL (P < 0.01) and IGF-1 of -9.8 versus -1.8 ng/mL (P = 0.28), respectively. At 12 months, MD was positively correlated with serum IGF-1 and IGF-1/IGFBP-3 (P < 0.01). This trial does not support the use of vitamin D supplementation for breast cancer risk reduction.

A phase II study of imatinib mesylate and capecitabine in metastatic breast cancer: Southwest Oncology Group Study 0338.

BACKGROUND: Imatinib mesylate is a potent inhibitor of the Bcr-Abl, c-Kit, and platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) tyrosine kinases. On the basis of variable expression of c-Kit and PDGFR in breast cancer and of in vitro data supporting synergy between imatinib and capecitabine, the Southwest Oncology Group conducted a phase II trial of the combination in metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had progressive, measurable metastatic breast cancer and received