Open-label randomized clinical trial of standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy with paclitaxel followed by FEC versus the combination of paclitaxel and everolimus followed by FEC in women with triple receptor-negative breast cancer†.

BACKGROUND: Everolimus synergistically enhances taxane-induced cytotoxicity in breast cancer cells in vitro and in vivo in addition to demonstrating a direct antiproliferative activity. We aim to determine pharmacodynamics changes and response of adding everolimus to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Phase II study in patients with primary TNBC randomized to T-FEC (paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2) i.v. weekly for 12 weeks, followed by 5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2), epirubicin 100 mg/m(2), and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for four cycles) versus TR-FEC (paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2) i.v. and everolimus 30 mg PO weekly for 12 weeks, followed by FEC). Tumor samples were collected to assess molecular changes in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway, at baseline, 48 h, 12 weeks, and at surgery by reverse phase protein arrays (RPPA). Clinical end points included 12-week clinical response rate (12-week RR), pathological complete response (pCR), and toxicity. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were registered, and 50 were randomized, 27 received T-FEC, and 23 received TR-FEC. Median age was 48 (range 31-75). There was downregulation of the mTOR pathway at 48 h in the TR-FEC arm. Twelve-week RR by ultrasound were 29.6% versus 47.8%, (P = 0.075), and pCR were 25.9% versus 30.4% (P = 0.76) for T-FEC and TR-FEC, respectively. mTOR downregulation at 48 h did not correlate with 12-week RR in the TR-FEC group (P = 0.58). Main NCI grade 3/4 toxicities included anemia, neutropenia, rash/desquamation, and vomiting in both arms. There was one case of grade 3 pneumonitis in the TR-FEC arm. No grade 3/4 stomatitis occurred. CONCLUSION: The addition of everolimus to paclitaxel was well tolerated. Everolimus downregulated mTOR signaling but downregulation of mTOR at 48 h did not correlate with 12-week RR in the TR-FEC group. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT00499603.

Neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer.

Neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer has become established as the safe and often effective therapeutic approach of choice for larger primary and for locally advanced breast cancer. The neoadjuvant approach offers the advantages of downstaging the disease, potentially reducing the extent of surgery and in an era of individualization of therapy, testing the efficacy of therapy administered to patients. The preoperative setting is also an effective way to study the activity of novel agents or therapeutic combinations in vivo against human breast cancer. For new therapies, preoperative trials avoid the issue of adaptive resistance and pretreatments that can be problematic in the advanced disease setting. For evidence of a drug targeting the cancer in vivo, comparisons of endocrine therapy, chemotherapy agents and/or targeted agents can provide data on activity and efficacy with a much shorter time frame and many fewer patients than for adjuvant trials; effects seen in neoadjuvant trials may even reflect what is found in the adjuvant setting. Patient benefits from the neoadjuvant approach may be greatest for those who experience complete pathologically documented response (and the consequent survival benefits) and women for whom breast conservation, rather than mastectomy, becomes possible.

Phase I combination study of trabectedin and capecitabine in patients with advanced malignancies.

BACKGROUND: To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety and pharmacokinetics of trabectedin with capecitabine in patients with advanced malignancies. DESIGN: In this Phase I, open-label, dose-finding study, patients refractory to standard therapy received trabectedin (3-h intravenous infusion, 0.4-1.3 mg/m(2), day 1) and capecitabine (2,000 or 1,600 mg/m(2)/day orally, days 2-15) every 3 weeks. Standard "3 + 3" dose escalation was used to define the MTD. Antitumor response was assessed every two cycles; adverse events (AEs) were recorded throughout. RESULTS: Forty patients received 149 cycles of treatment (median 2; range 1-11) at nine dose levels. Gastrointestinal dose-limiting toxicities in two patients at two dose levels with capecitabine at 2,000 mg/m(2)/day prompted dose reduction to 1,600 mg/m(2)/day and initiation of new trabectedin dose escalation at 0.6 mg/m(2). The MTD was capecitabine 1,600 mg/m(2)/day + trabectedin 1.1 mg/m(2). Common grade 3-4 drug-related AEs were neutropenia (20%), nausea (18%), diarrhea (15%) and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (15%). One patient with cholangiocarcinoma achieved a sustained partial response, and 18 patients maintained stable disease (six for ≥6 months). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of trabectedin and capecitabine is generally well tolerated, without pharmacokinetic interactions, and shows some activity in patients with advanced cancers.