Clinical behavior of recurrent hormone receptor-positive breast cancer by adjuvant endocrine therapy within the Breast International Group 1-98 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Endocrine therapy resistance is a major cause of distant recurrence (DR) in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. This study evaluated differences in survival after DR in patients treated with different adjuvant endocrine therapy regimens in the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 trial. METHODS: BIG 1-98 compared 5 years of adjuvant treatment among 4 arms: tamoxifen (T), letrozole (L), tamoxifen followed by letrozole (TL), and letrozole followed by tamoxifen (LT). After a median follow-up of 8.1 years, 911 of 8010 patients (T, 302; L, 285; TL, 170; and LT, 154) had DR as the site of first recurrence. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses were performed to determine features associated with post-DR survival. RESULTS: The median follow-up time after DR was 59 months (interquartile range, 29-88 months). Among all patients with DR, 38.1% were 65 years old or older at enrollment, 61.9% had tumors larger than 2 cm, and 69.7% were node positive. Neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 35.6% of the patients. There was no difference in post-DR survival by treatment arm (median survival, 20.8 months for T, 17.9 months for L, 17.3 months for TL, and 20.8 months for LT; P = .21). In multivariate analysis, older patients (hazard ratio [HR], 1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-1.59) and patients with tumors larger than 2 cm (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.00-1.41), 4 or more positive nodes (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.05-1.64), progesterone receptor (PR)-negative tumors (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.02-1.52), or shorter disease-free survival (DFS) had significantly worse post-DR survival. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with adjuvant T, L, or their sequences was not associated with differences in survival after DR. Significant differences in survival were observed by age, primary tumor size, nodal and PR status, and DFS, and this suggests that traditional baseline high-risk features remain prognostic in the metastatic setting.

Tailoring Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Premenopausal Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In the Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial (SOFT) and the Tamoxifen and Exemestane Trial (TEXT), the 5-year rates of recurrence of breast cancer were significantly lower among premenopausal women who received the aromatase inhibitor exemestane plus ovarian suppression than among those who received tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression. The addition of ovarian suppression to tamoxifen did not result in significantly lower recurrence rates than those with tamoxifen alone. Here, we report the updated results from the two trials. METHODS: Premenopausal women were randomly assigned to receive 5 years of tamoxifen, tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, or exemestane plus ovarian suppression in SOFT and to receive tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression or exemestane plus ovarian suppression in TEXT. Randomization was stratified according to the receipt of chemotherapy. RESULTS: In SOFT, the 8-year disease-free survival rate was 78.9% with tamoxifen alone, 83.2% with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, and 85.9% with exemestane plus ovarian suppression (P=0.009 for tamoxifen alone vs. tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression). The 8-year rate of overall survival was 91.5% with tamoxifen alone, 93.3% with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, and 92.1% with exemestane plus ovarian suppression (P=0.01 for tamoxifen alone vs. tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression); among the women who remained premenopausal after chemotherapy, the rates were 85.1%, 89.4%, and 87.2%, respectively. Among the women with cancers that were negative for HER2 who received chemotherapy, the 8-year rate of distant recurrence with exemestane plus ovarian suppression was lower than the rate with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression (by 7.0 percentage points in SOFT and by 5.0 percentage points in TEXT). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in 24.6% of the tamoxifen-alone group, 31.0% of the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group, and 32.3% of the exemestane-ovarian suppression group. CONCLUSIONS: Among premenopausal women with breast cancer, the addition of ovarian suppression to tamoxifen resulted in significantly higher 8-year rates of both disease-free and overall survival than tamoxifen alone. The use of exemestane plus ovarian suppression resulted in even higher rates of freedom from recurrence. The frequency of adverse events was higher in the two groups that received ovarian suppression than in the tamoxifen-alone group. (Funded by Pfizer and others; SOFT and TEXT ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00066690 and NCT00066703 , respectively.).

Cumulative incidence of cardiovascular events under tamoxifen and letrozole alone and in sequence: a report from the BIG 1-98 trial.

BACKGROUND: Compared to tamoxifen, adjuvant treatment with aromatase inhibitors improves disease outcomes of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. In the international, randomized, double-blind BIG 1-98 trial, 8010 women were randomized to receive tamoxifen, letrozole, or sequential use of the agents for 5 years. With a focus on switching between agents, we investigated cardiovascular events over the entire 5-year treatment period. METHODS: Of the 6182 patients enrolled, 6144 started trial treatment and were included in this analysis. Adverse events occurring during study treatment until 30 days after cessation were considered. Eight cardiovascular event types were defined. Cumulative incidence of events were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, without consideration for competing events. Multivariable Cox models estimated hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for pairwise comparisons of treatment arms. RESULTS: While on study treatment, 6.5% of patients (n = 397) had any cardiac events reported; for 2.4%, the event was grades 3-5, of which 11 (0.2%) were grade 5. Letrozole monotherapy was associated with higher risk of grade 1-5 ischemic heart disease (HR = 1.81; 95% CI, 1.06-3.08) compared with tamoxifen monotherapy. Patients assigned sequential tamoxifen →letrozole (HR = 1.59; 95% CI, 0.92-2.74) or sequential letrozole → tamoxifen (HR = 1.20; 95% CI, 0.68-2.14) showed a lesser degree of risk elevation. Patients assigned to tamoxifen-containing regimens had significantly higher risk of grade 1-5 thromboembolic events (tamoxifen monotherapy HR = 2.10; 95% CI, 1.42-3.12; tamoxifen → letrozole HR = 1.96; 95% CI, 1.32-2.92; letrozole → tamoxifen HR = 1.56; 95% CI 1.03-2.35) as compared with patients assigned letrozole alone. CONCLUSION: When initiating or switching between adjuvant endocrine treatments in postmenopausal patients, age and medical history, with special attention to prior cardiovascular events, should be balanced with expected benefit of the treatment.

Long-term cardiac outcomes of patients with HER2-positive breast cancer treated in the adjuvant lapatinib and/or trastuzumab Treatment Optimization Trial.

BACKGROUND: Cardiotoxicity is the most significant adverse event associated with trastuzumab (T), the main component of HER2-positive breast cancer (BC) treatment. Less is known about the cardiotoxicity of dual HER2 blockade with T plus lapatinib (L), although this regimen is used in the metastatic setting. METHODS: This is a sub-analysis of the ALTTO trial comparing adjuvant treatment options for patients with early HER2-positive BC. Patients randomised to either T or concomitant T + L were eligible. Cardiac events (CEs) rates were compared according to treatment arm. RESULTS: With 6.9 years of median follow-up (FU) and 4190 patients, CE were observed in 363 (8.6%): 166 (7.9%) of patient in T + L arm vs. 197 (9.3%) in T arm (OR = 0.85 [95% CI, 0.68-1.05]). During anti-HER2 treatment 270 CE (6.4%) occurred while 93 (2.2%) were during FU (median time to onset = 6.6 months [IQR = 3.4-11.7]). While 265 CEs were asymptomatic (73%), 94 were symptomatic (26%) and four were cardiac deaths (1%). Recovery was observed in 301 cases (83.8%). Identified cardiac risk factors were: baseline LVEF < 55% (vs > 64%, OR 3.1 [95% CI 1.54-6.25]), diabetes mellitus (OR 1.85 [95% CI 1.25-2.75]), BMI > 30 kg/m2 (vs < 25 mg/kg2, OR 2.21 [95% CI 1.40-3.49]), cumulative dose of doxorubicin ≥240 mg/m2 (OR 1.36 [95% CI 1.01-1.82]) and of epirubicin≥ 480 mg/m2 (OR 2.33 [95% CI 1.55-3.51]). CONCLUSIONS: Dual HER2 blockade with T + L is a safe regimen from a cardiac perspective, but cardiac-focused history for proper patient selection is crucial. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00490139 (registration date: 22/06/2007); EudraCT Number: 2006-000562-36 (registration date: 04/05/2007); Sponsor Protocol Number: BIG2-06 /EGF106708/N063D.

Adjuvant Pertuzumab and Trastuzumab in Early HER2-Positive Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pertuzumab increases the rate of pathological complete response in the preoperative context and increases overall survival among patients with metastatic disease when it is added to trastuzumab and chemotherapy for the treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer. In this trial, we investigated whether pertuzumab, when added to adjuvant trastuzumab and chemotherapy, improves outcomes among patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with node-positive or high-risk node-negative HER2-positive, operable breast cancer to receive either pertuzumab or placebo added to standard adjuvant chemotherapy plus 1 year of treatment with trastuzumab. We assumed a 3-year invasive-disease-free survival rate of 91.8% with pertuzumab and 89.2% with placebo. RESULTS: In the trial population, 63% of the patients who were randomly assigned to receive pertuzumab (2400 patients) or placebo (2405 patients) had node-positive disease and 36% had hormone-receptor-negative disease. Disease recurrence occurred in 171 patients (7.1%) in the pertuzumab group and 210 patients (8.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 1.00; P=0.045). The estimates of the 3-year rates of invasive-disease-free survival were 94.1% in the pertuzumab group and 93.2% in the placebo group. In the cohort of patients with node-positive disease, the 3-year rate of invasive-disease-free survival was 92.0% in the pertuzumab group, as compared with 90.2% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for an invasive-disease event, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.96; P=0.02). In the cohort of patients with node-negative disease, the 3-year rate of invasive-disease-free survival was 97.5% in the pertuzumab group and 98.4% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for an invasive-disease event, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.86; P=0.64). Heart failure, cardiac death, and cardiac dysfunction were infrequent in both treatment groups. Diarrhea of grade 3 or higher occurred almost exclusively during chemotherapy and was more frequent with pertuzumab than with placebo (9.8% vs. 3.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Pertuzumab significantly improved the rates of invasive-disease-free survival among patients with HER2-positive, operable breast cancer when it was added to trastuzumab and chemotherapy. Diarrhea was more common with pertuzumab than with placebo. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; APHINITY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01358877 .).

Evaluation of the effect of P-glycoprotein inhibition and induction on talazoparib disposition in patients with advanced solid tumours.

AIMS: In vitro data show that talazoparib is a substrate for P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and breast cancer resistance protein transporters. This open-label, 2-arm, drug-drug interaction Phase 1 study in patients with advanced solid tumours assessed the effect of a P-gp inhibitor (itraconazole) and a P-gp inducer (rifampicin) on the pharmacokinetics of a single dose of talazoparib. The safety and tolerability of a single dose of talazoparib with and without itraconazole or rifampicin were also assessed. METHODS: Thirty-six patients were enrolled (Arm A [itraconazole], n = 19; Arm B [rifampicin], n = 17). Patients in both arms received 2 single oral doses of talazoparib (0.5 mg, Arm A; 1 mg, Arm B) alone and with multiple daily oral doses of itraconazole (Arm A) or rifampicin (Arm B). RESULTS: Coadministration of itraconazole and talazoparib increased talazoparib area under the plasma concentration-time profile from time 0 extrapolated to infinity by ~56% and maximum observed plasma concentration by ~40% relative to talazoparib alone. Coadministration of rifampicin and talazoparib increased talazoparib maximum observed plasma concentration by approximately 37% (geometric mean ratio 136.6% [90% confidence interval 103.2-180.9]); area under the curve was not affected relative to talazoparib alone (geometric mean ratio 102.0% [90% confidence interval 94.0-110.7]). Talazoparib had an overall safety profile consistent with that observed in prior studies in which talazoparib was administered as a single dose. CONCLUSION: Coadministration of itraconazole increased talazoparib plasma exposure compared to talazoparib alone. A reduced talazoparib dose is recommended if coadministration of potent P-gp inhibitors cannot be avoided. Similar exposure was observed when talazoparib was administered alone and with rifampicin suggesting that the effect of rifampicin on talazoparib exposure is limited.

Randomized phase 3 efficacy and safety trial of proposed pegfilgrastim biosimilar MYL-1401H in the prophylactic treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.

Pegfilgrastim is indicated for reducing the duration of neutropenia and incidence of febrile neutropenia in patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy. Here, safety and efficacy of MYL-1401H, a proposed pegfilgrastim biosimilar, were investigated as prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. This was a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group equivalence trial of MYL-1401H vs European Union-sourced reference pegfilgrastim. Patients with newly diagnosed stage II/III breast cancer eligible to receive (neo) adjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide every 3 weeks for 6 cycles were enrolled and randomized 2:1 to 6 mg of MYL-1401H or reference pegfilgrastim 24 h (+ 2-h window after the first 24 h) after the end of chemotherapy. The primary efficacy endpoint was the duration of severe neutropenia in cycle 1 (i.e., days with absolute neutrophil count (ANC) < 0.5 × 109/L). Mean (standard deviation (SD)) duration of severe neutropenia in MYL-1401H and reference pegfilgrastim groups was 1.2 days (0.93) and 1.2 days (1.10), respectively. The 95% CI for least squares mean difference (- 0.285, 0.298) was within the predefined equivalence range of ± 1 day. Secondary endpoints, including grade ≥ 3 neutropenia (frequency, 91% and 82% for MYL-1401H and reference pegfilgrastim, respectively), time to ANC nadir (mean (SD), 6.2 (0.98) and 6.3 (1.57) days), and duration of post-nadir recovery (mean (SD), 1.9 (0.85) and 1.7 (0.91) days) were comparable. Overall safety profiles of the study drugs were comparable. MYL-1401H demonstrated equivalent efficacy and similar safety to reference pegfilgrastim and may be an equivalent option for reducing incidence of neutropenia. ( ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02467868; EudraCT, 2014-002324-27).

Adjuvant ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Suppression of ovarian estrogen production reduces the recurrence of hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer in premenopausal women, but its value when added to tamoxifen is uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 3066 premenopausal women, stratified according to prior receipt or nonreceipt of chemotherapy, to receive 5 years of tamoxifen, tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, or exemestane plus ovarian suppression. The primary analysis tested the hypothesis that tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression would improve disease-free survival, as compared with tamoxifen alone. In the primary analysis, 46.7% of the patients had not received chemotherapy previously, and 53.3% had received chemotherapy and remained premenopausal. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 67 months, the estimated disease-free survival rate at 5 years was 86.6% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group and 84.7% in the tamoxifen group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence, second invasive cancer, or death, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 1.04; P=0.10). Multivariable allowance for prognostic factors suggested a greater treatment effect with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression than with tamoxifen alone (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.98). Most recurrences occurred in patients who had received prior chemotherapy, among whom the rate of freedom from breast cancer at 5 years was 82.5% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group and 78.0% in the tamoxifen group (hazard ratio for recurrence, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.02). At 5 years, the rate of freedom from breast cancer was 85.7% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for recurrence vs. tamoxifen, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.87). CONCLUSIONS: Adding ovarian suppression to tamoxifen did not provide a significant benefit in the overall study population. However, for women who were at sufficient risk for recurrence to warrant adjuvant chemotherapy and who remained premenopausal, the addition of ovarian suppression improved disease outcomes. Further improvement was seen with the use of exemestane plus ovarian suppression. (Funded by Pfizer and others; SOFT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00066690.).

Mutational analysis of triple-negative breast cancers within the International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) Trial 22-00.

PURPOSE: We investigated the occurrence and the prognostic and predictive relationship of a selected number of somatic mutations in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients having known clinical outcomes treated within the IBCSG Trial 22-00. METHODS: A matched case-control sampling selected patients enrolled in the IBCSG Trial 22-00 who had TNBC tumors, based on local assessment. Cases had invasive breast cancer recurrence (at local, regional, or distant site) according to the protocol definition. Matched controls had not recurred. Mutational analysis was performed with OncoCarta panel v1.0 using Mass Array System. The panel includes 19 genes belonging to different functional pathways as PI3K pathway, receptor tyrosine kinase, and cell cycle-metabolic group. Conditional logistic regression assessed the association of mutation status with breast cancer recurrence. RESULTS: Mutation assessment was successful for 135 patients (49 cases, 86 controls). A total of 37 (27.4%) of the 135 patients had at least one mutation in the selected genes. PIK3CA was the most common mutated gene (18/135; 13.3%), followed by BRAF, KIT and PDGFRA (each 4/135, 3.0%) and AKT1 (3/135; 2.2%). TNBC patients with at least one mutation had increased odds of recurrence compared with those with wild-type tumors (odds ratio (OR) 2.28; 95% CI 0.88-5.92), though this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.09). We found no evidence that these mutations were predictive for the value of maintenance metronomic chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Mutations in the tested oncogenes were not associated with breast cancer recurrence in this TNBC subset of patients. The question of whether any of these mutated genes (e.g., PIK3CA) may represent a useful therapeutic target in TNBC may be answered by ongoing clinical trials and/or larger dataset analysis.

Adjuvant exemestane with ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant therapy with an aromatase inhibitor improves outcomes, as compared with tamoxifen, in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. METHODS: In two phase 3 trials, we randomly assigned premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer to the aromatase inhibitor exemestane plus ovarian suppression or tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression for a period of 5 years. Suppression of ovarian estrogen production was achieved with the use of the gonadotropin-releasing-hormone agonist triptorelin, oophorectomy, or ovarian irradiation. The primary analysis combined data from 4690 patients in the two trials. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 68 months, disease-free survival at 5 years was 91.1% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 87.3% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence, second invasive cancer, or death, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60 to 0.85; P<0.001). The rate of freedom from breast cancer at 5 years was 92.8% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, as compared with 88.8% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for recurrence, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.80; P<0.001). With 194 deaths (4.1% of the patients), overall survival did not differ significantly between the two groups (hazard ratio for death in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.51; P=0.37). Selected adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported for 30.6% of the patients in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 29.4% of those in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group, with profiles similar to those for postmenopausal women. CONCLUSIONS: In premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer, adjuvant treatment with exemestane plus ovarian suppression, as compared with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, significantly reduced recurrence. (Funded by Pfizer and others; TEXT and SOFT ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00066703 and NCT00066690, respectively.).

Poor Prognosis After Second Locoregional Recurrences in the CALOR Trial.

BACKGROUND: Isolated locoregional recurrences (ILRRs) of breast cancer confer a significant risk for the development of distant metastasis. Management practices and second ILRR events in the Chemotherapy as Adjuvant for LOcally Recurrent breast cancer (CALOR) trial were investigated. METHODS: In this study, 162 patients with ILRR were randomly assigned to receive postoperative chemotherapy or no chemotherapy. Descriptive statistics characterize outcomes according to local therapy and the influence of hormone receptor status on subsequent recurrences. Competing risk regression models, Kaplan-Meier estimates, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate associations between treatment, site of second recurrence, and outcome. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 4.9 years. Of the 98 patients who received breast-conserving primary surgery 89 had an ipsilateral-breast tumor recurrence. Salvage mastectomy was performed for 73 patients and repeat lumpectomy for 16 patients. Another eight patients had nodal ILRR, and one patient had chest wall ILRR. Among 64 patients whose primary surgery was mastectomy, 52 had chest wall/skin ILRR, and 12 had nodal ILRR. For 15 patients, a second ILRR developed a median of 1.6 years (range 0.08-4.8 years) after ILRR. All second ILRRs occurred for patients with progesterone receptor-negative ILRR. Death occurred for 7 (47 %) of 15 patients with a second ILRR and 19 (51 %) of 37 patients with a distant recurrence. As shown in the multivariable analysis, the significant predictors of survival after either a second ILRR or distant recurrence were chemotherapy for the primary cancer (hazard ratio [HR], 3.55; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.15-10.9; p = 0.03) and the interval (continuous) from the primary surgery (HR, 0.87; 95 % CI, 0.75-1.00; p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Second ILRRs represented about one third of all recurrence events after ILRR, and all were PR-negative. These second ILRRs and distant metastases portend an unfavorable outcome.

Bevacizumab plus paclitaxel versus bevacizumab plus capecitabine as first-line treatment for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (TURANDOT): primary endpoint results of a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The randomised phase 3 TURANDOT trial compared two approved bevacizumab-containing regimens for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer in terms of efficacy, safety, and quality of life. The interim analysis did not confirm non-inferior overall survival (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 1·04; 97·5% repeated CI [RCI] -∞ to 1·69). Here we report final results of our study aiming to show non-inferior overall survival with first-line bevacizumab plus capecitabine versus bevacizumab plus paclitaxel for locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: In this multinational, open-label, randomised phase 3 TURANDOT trial, patients aged 18 years or older who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2 and measurable or non-measurable HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer who had received no previous chemotherapy for locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer were stratified and randomly assigned (1:1) using permuted blocks of size six to either bevacizumab plus paclitaxel (bevacizumab 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 15 plus paclitaxel 90 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks) or bevacizumab plus capecitabine (bevacizumab 15 mg/kg on day 1 plus capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 every 3 weeks) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. Stratification factors were oestrogen or progesterone receptor status, country, and menopausal status. The primary objective was to show non-inferior overall survival with bevacizumab plus capecitabine versus bevacizumab plus paclitaxel in the per-protocol population by rejecting the null hypothesis of inferiority (HR ≥1·33) using a stratified Cox proportional hazard model. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00600340. FINDINGS: Between Sept 10, 2008, and Aug 30, 2010, 564 patients were randomised, representing the intent-to-treat population. The per-protocol population comprised 531 patients (266 in the bevacizumab plus paclitaxel group and 265 in the bevacizumab plus capecitabine group). At the final overall survival analysis after 183 deaths (69%) in 266 patients receiving bevacizumab plus paclitaxel and 201 (76%) in 265 receiving bevacizumab plus capecitabine in the per-protocol population, median overall survival was 30·2 months (95% CI 25·6-32·6 months) versus 26·1 months (22·3-29·0), respectively. The stratified HR was 1·02 (97·5% RCI -∞ to 1·26; repeated p=0·0070), indicating non-inferiority. The unstratified Cox model (HR 1·13 [97·5% RCI -∞ to 1·39]; repeated p=0·061) did not support the primary analysis. Intent-to-treat analyses were consistent with the per-protocol results. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (54 [19%] of 284 patients in the bevacizumab plus paclitaxel group vs 5 [2%] of 277 patients in the bevacizumab plus capecitabine group), hand-foot syndrome (1 [<1%] vs 43 [16%]), peripheral neuropathy (39 [14%] vs 1 [<1%]), leucopenia (20 [7%] vs 1 [<1%]), and hypertension (12 [4%] vs 16 [6%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 65 (23%) of 284 patients receiving bevacizumab plus paclitaxel and 68 (25%) of 277 receiving bevacizumab plus capecitabine. Deaths in two (1%) of 284 patients in the bevacizumab plus paclitaxel group were deemed by the investigator to be treatment-related. No treatment-related deaths occurred in the bevacizumab plus capecitabine group. INTERPRETATION: Bevacizumab plus capecitabine represents a valid first-line treatment option for HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer, offering good tolerability without compromising overall survival compared with bevacizumab plus paclitaxel. Although progression-free survival with the bevacizumab plus capecitabine combination is inferior to that noted with bevacizumab plus paclitaxel, we suggest that physicians should consider possible predictive risk factors for overall survival, individual's treatment priorities, and the differing safety profiles. FUNDING: Roche.

Efficacy and safety of palbociclib in combination with letrozole as first-line treatment of ER-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer: expanded analyses of subgroups from the randomized pivotal trial PALOMA-1/TRIO-18.

BACKGROUND: Palbociclib is an oral small-molecule inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6. In the randomized, open-label, phase II PALOMA-1/TRIO-18 trial, palbociclib in combination with letrozole improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with letrozole alone as first-line treatment of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, advanced breast cancer (20.2 months versus 10.2 months; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.488, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.319-0.748; one-sided p = 0.0004). Grade 3-4 neutropenia was the most common adverse event (AE) in the palbociclib + letrozole arm. We now present efficacy and safety analyses based on several specific patient and tumor characteristics, and present in detail the clinical patterns of neutropenia observed in the palbociclib + letrozole arm of the overall safety population. METHODS: Postmenopausal women (n = 165) with ER+, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer who had not received any systemic treatment for their advanced disease were randomized 1:1 to receive either palbociclib in combination with letrozole or letrozole alone. Treatment continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, consent withdrawal, or death. The primary endpoint was PFS. We now analyze the difference in PFS for the treatment populations by subgroups, including age, histological type, history of prior neoadjuvant/adjuvant systemic treatment, and sites of distant metastasis, using the Kaplan-Meier method. HR and 95 % CI are derived from a Cox proportional hazards regression model. RESULTS: A clinically meaningful improvement in median PFS and clinical benefit response (CBR) rate was seen with palbociclib + letrozole in every subgroup evaluated. Grade 3-4 neutropenia was the most common AE with palbociclib + letrozole in all subgroups. Analysis of the frequency of neutropenia by grade during the first six cycles of treatment showed that there was a downward trend in Grade 3-4 neutropenia over time. Among those who experienced Grade 3-4 neutropenia, 71.7 % had no overlapping infections of any grade and none had overlapping Grade 3-4 infections. CONCLUSION: The magnitude of clinical benefit seen with the addition of palbociclib to letrozole in improving both median PFS and CBR rate is consistent in nearly all subgroups analyzed, and consistent with that seen in the overall study population. The safety profile of the combination treatment in all subgroups was also comparable to that in the overall safety population of the study.

Predictive role of hand-foot syndrome in patients receiving first-line capecitabine plus bevacizumab for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Correlations between development of hand-foot syndrome (HFS) and efficacy in patients receiving capecitabine (CAP)-containing therapy are reported in the literature. We explored the relationship between HFS and efficacy in patients receiving CAP plus bevacizumab (BEV) in the TURANDOT randomised phase III trial. METHODS: Patients with HER2-negative locally recurrent/metastatic breast cancer (LR/mBC) who had received no prior chemotherapy for LR/mBC were randomised to BEV plus paclitaxel or BEV-CAP until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. This analysis included patients randomised to BEV-CAP who received ⩾1 CAP dose. Potential associations between HFS and both overall survival (OS; primary end point) and progression-free survival (PFS; secondary end point) were explored using Cox proportional hazards analyses with HFS as a time-dependent covariate (to avoid overestimating the effect of HFS on efficacy). Landmark analyses were also performed. RESULTS: Among 277 patients treated with BEV-CAP, 154 (56%) developed HFS. In multivariate analyses, risk of progression or death was reduced by 44% after the occurrence of HFS; risk of death was reduced by 56%. The magnitude of effect on OS increased with increasing HFS grade. In patients developing HFS within the first 3 months, median PFS from the 3-month landmark was 10.0 months vs 6.2 months in patients without HFS. Two-year OS rates were 63% and 44%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory analysis indicates that HFS occurrence is a strong predictor of prolonged PFS and OS in patients receiving BEV-CAP for LR/mBC. Early appearance of HFS may help motivate patients to continue therapy.

Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are a powerful prognostic marker in patients with triple-negative breast cancer enrolled in the IBCSG phase III randomized clinical trial 22-00.

The purpose of this study was to assess the prognostic and predictive value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in the triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) cohort of the phase III IBCSG trial 22-00, comparing low-dose oral 'metronomic' cyclophosphamide-methotrexate maintenance chemotherapy (CM-maintenance) to no-CM-maintenance in early breast cancer. TILs were evaluated in full-face hematoxylin-and-eosin-stained sections of tumor samples confirmed centrally as TNBC (< 1 % of ER and PgR immunoreactivity and absence of HER2 overexpression or amplification). Mononuclear cells were evaluated in the stromal area within the borders of the invasive tumor. The primary endpoint was breast cancer-free interval (BCFI). Cox proportional hazards regression model assessed the association of BCFI and secondary endpoints with TILs score. In the 647 tumor samples, the median percentage of TILs was 18 % (IQR = 8-40 %), with 18 % having TILs ≥ 50 % (lymphocyte-predominant breast cancer, LPBC). At a median follow-up of 6.9 years, TILs were associated with better prognosis. For every 10 % increase of TILs, BCFI risk reduction was 13 % (HR 0.87, 95 % CI 0.79-0.95,P = 0.003). DFS, DRFI, and OS risk reductions were 11 % (P = 0.005), 16 % (P = 0.003), and 17 % (P < 0.001), respectively. Multivariable analysis confirmed the independent prognostic value of TILs. No significant TILs-by-treatment interaction was observed (P = 0.39) for associations of TILs with BCFI, although patients with LPBC receiving CM-maintenance had a greater breast cancer risk reduction (HR 0.64,95 % CI 0.23-1.78) than those with non-LPBC (TILs < 50 %) (HR 0.96, 95 % CI 0.67-1.40). TILs score is a potent prognostic factor in patients with TNBC. Low-dose chemotherapy confers a greater (not statistically significant) clinical benefit in patients with LPBC.

Phase II study on the efficacy and safety of Lapatinib administered beyond disease progression and combined with vinorelbine in HER-2/neu- positive advanced breast cancer: results of the CECOG LaVie trial.

BACKGROUND: Vinorelbine constitutes effective chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and acts synergistically with trastuzumab in HER-2/neu positive disease. The present study was set out to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vinorelbine when combined with lapatinib, an anti-HER2 tyrosine-kinase inhibitor, as late-line regimen administered beyond previous disease progression on prior lapatinib in patients with HER-2/neu- positive MBC. METHODS: The CECOG LaVie study was designed as open-labeled, single-arm, multicenter phase II trial. Patients had to be pretreated with lapatinib plus chemotherapy, and received lapatinib at a daily dose of 1250 mg in combination with vinorelbine 20 mg/m(2) i.v. on days 1 and 8 of a three-week cycle until disease progression, intolerable toxicity or withdrawal of consent. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as primary study endpoint; secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), response rate according to RECIST 1.1, and safety. The study was terminated early due to poor accrual. RESULTS: A total number of nine patients were included; lapatinib administered beyond disease progression combined with vinorelbine resulted in a median PFS of 7.7 months (95% CI 0.56-14.91) and a median OS of 23.4 months (95% CI 16.61-30.13), respectively. Partial remission was seen in one of nine patients, three patients had stable disease of > six months, whereas the remaining five patients had primary disease progression. In two patients, modification of vinorelbine dose due to toxicity became necessary; no dose modification was needed for lapatinib. The majority of reported adverse events (AE) were grade 1 and 2 in severity with diarrhea being the most commonly observed AE CONCLUSION: In this heavily pretreated patient population, combination of vinorelbine plus lapatinib showed encouraging activity and was characterized by an acceptable safety profile. Despite the low patient number, lapatinib plus vinorelbine may constitute a potential treatment option in heavily pretreated patients with HER-2/neu-positive MBC previously exposed to lapatinib. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number 2009-016826-15, (15. 10.2009).

The cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor palbociclib in combination with letrozole versus letrozole alone as first-line treatment of oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer (PALOMA-1/TRIO-18): a randomised phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Palbociclib (PD-0332991) is an oral, small-molecule inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) 4 and 6 with preclinical evidence of growth-inhibitory activity in oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer cells and synergy with anti-oestrogens. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of palbociclib in combination with letrozole as first-line treatment of patients with advanced, oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised phase 2 study, postmenopausal women with advanced oestrogen receptor-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer who had not received any systemic treatment for their advanced disease were eligible to participate. Patients were enrolled in two separate cohorts that accrued sequentially: in cohort 1, patients were enrolled on the basis of their oestrogen receptor-positive and HER2-negative biomarker status alone, whereas in cohort 2 they were also required to have cancers with amplification of cyclin D1 (CCND1), loss of p16 (INK4A or CDKN2A), or both. In both cohorts, patients were randomly assigned 1:1 via an interactive web-based randomisation system, stratified by disease site and disease-free interval, to receive continuous oral letrozole 2.5 mg daily or continuous oral letrozole 2.5 mg daily plus oral palbociclib 125 mg, given once daily for 3 weeks followed by 1 week off over 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Accrual to cohort 2 was stopped after an unplanned interim analysis of cohort 1 and the statistical analysis plan for the primary endpoint was amended to a combined analysis of cohorts 1 and 2 (instead of cohort 2 alone). The study is ongoing but closed to accrual; these are the results of the final analysis of progression-free survival. The study is registered with the ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00721409. FINDINGS: Between Dec 22, 2009, and May 12, 2012, we randomly assigned 165 patients, 84 to palbociclib plus letrozole and 81 to letrozole alone. At the time of the final analysis for progression-free survival (median follow-up 29.6 months [95% CI 27.9-36.0] for the palbociclib plus letrozole group and 27.9 months [25.5-31.1] for the letrozole group), 41 progression-free survival events had occurred in the palbociclib plus letrozole group and 59 in the letrozole group. Median progression-free survival was 10.2 months (95% CI 5.7-12.6) for the letrozole group and 20.2 months (13.8-27.5) for the palbociclib plus letrozole group (HR 0.488, 95% CI 0.319-0.748; one-sided p=0.0004). In cohort 1 (n=66), median progression-free survival was 5.7 months (2.6-10.5) for the letrozole group and 26.1 months (11.2-not estimable) for the palbociclib plus letrozole group (HR 0.299, 0.156-0.572; one-sided p<0.0001); in cohort 2 (n=99), median progression-free survival was 11.1 months (7.1-16.4) for the letrozole group and 18.1 months (13.1-27.5) for the palbociclib plus letrozole group (HR 0.508, 0.303-0.853; one-sided p=0.0046). Grade 3-4 neutropenia was reported in 45 (54%) of 83 patients in the palbociclib plus letrozole group versus one (1%) of 77 patients in the letrozole group, leucopenia in 16 (19%) versus none, and fatigue in four (4%) versus one (1%). Serious adverse events that occurred in more than one patient in the palbociclib plus letrozole group were pulmonary embolism (three [4%] patients), back pain (two [2%]), and diarrhoea (two [2%]). No cases of febrile neutropenia or neutropenia-related infections were reported during the study. 11 (13%) patients in the palbociclib plus letrozole group and two (2%) in the letrozole group discontinued the study because of adverse events. INTERPRETATION: The addition of palbociclib to letrozole in this phase 2 study significantly improved progression-free survival in women with advanced oestrogen receptor-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer. A phase 3 trial is currently underway. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone as second-line treatment for patients with HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer after first-line treatment with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy (TANIA): an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Combining bevacizumab with first-line or second-line chemotherapy improves progression-free survival in HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. We assessed the efficacy and safety of further bevacizumab therapy in patients with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer whose disease had progressed after treatment with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients who had HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer that had progressed after receiving 12 weeks or more of first-line bevacizumab plus chemotherapy from 118 centres in 12 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by use of a central interactive voice response system using a block randomisation schedule (block size four) stratified by hormone receptor status, first-line progression-free survival, selected chemotherapy, and lactate dehydrogenase concentration, to receive second-line single-agent chemotherapy either alone or with bevacizumab (15 mg/kg every 3 weeks or 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks). Second-line therapy was continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. At progression, patients randomly assigned to chemotherapy alone received third-line chemotherapy without bevacizumab; those randomly assigned to bevacizumab continued bevacizumab with third-line chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival from randomisation to second-line progression or death in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is ongoing, and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01250379. FINDINGS: Between Feb 17, 2011, and April 3, 2013, 494 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (247 in each group). The median duration of follow-up at the time of this prespecified primary progression-free survival analysis was 15·9 months (IQR 9·1-21·7) in the chemotherapy-alone group and 16·1 months (10·6-22·7) in the combination group. Progression-free survival was significantly longer for those patients treated with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy than for those with chemotherapy alone (median: 6·3 months [95% CI 5·4-7·2] vs 4·2 months [3·9-4·7], respectively, stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·75 [95% CI 0·61-0·93], two-sided stratified log-rank p=0·0068). The most common grade 3 or more adverse events were hypertension (33 [13%] of 245 patients receiving bevacizumab plus chemotherapy vs 17 [7%] of 238 patients receiving chemotherapy alone), neutropenia (29 [12%] vs 20 [8%]), and hand-foot syndrome (27 [11%] vs 25 [11%]). Grade 3 proteinuria occurred in 17 (7%) of 245 patients receiving combination therapy and one (<1%) of 238 patients receiving chemotherapy alone. Serious adverse events were reported in 61 (25%) of 245 patients receiving bevacizumab plus chemotherapy versus 44 (18%) of 238 patients receiving chemotherapy alone. INTERPRETATION: These results suggest that continued VEGF inhibition with further bevacizumab is a valid treatment option for patients with locally recurrent or metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer whose disease was stabilised or responded to first-line bevacizumab with chemotherapy. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Everolimus for women with trastuzumab-resistant, HER2-positive, advanced breast cancer (BOLERO-3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Disease progression in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer receiving trastuzumab might be associated with activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR intracellular signalling pathway. We aimed to assess whether the addition of the mTOR inhibitor everolimus to trastuzumab might restore sensitivity to trastuzumab. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we recruited women with HER2-positive, trastuzumab-resistant, advanced breast carcinoma who had previously received taxane therapy. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a central patient screening and randomisation system to daily everolimus (5 mg/day) plus weekly trastuzumab (2 mg/kg) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m(2)) or to placebo plus trastuzumab plus vinorelbine, in 3-week cycles, stratified by previous lapatinib use. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by local assessment in the intention-to-treat population. We report the final analysis for PFS; overall survival follow-up is still in progress. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01007942. FINDINGS: Between Oct 26, 2009, and May 23, 2012, 569 patients were randomly assigned to everolimus (n=284) or placebo (n=285). Median follow-up at the time of analysis was 20.2 months (IQR 15.0-27.1). Median PFS was 7.00 months (95% CI 6.74-8.18) with everolimus and 5.78 months (5.49-6.90) with placebo (hazard ratio 0.78 [95% CI 0.65-0.95]; p=0.0067). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (204 [73%] of 280 patients in the everolimus group vs 175 [62%] of 282 patients in the placebo group), leucopenia (106 [38%] vs 82 [29%]), anaemia (53 [19%] vs 17 [6%]), febrile neutropenia (44 [16%] vs ten [4%]), stomatitis (37 [13%] vs four [1%]), and fatigue (34 [12%] vs 11 [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 117 (42%) patients in the everolimus group and 55 (20%) in the placebo group; two on-treatment deaths due to adverse events occurred in each group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of everolimus to trastuzumab plus vinorelbine significantly prolongs PFS in patients with trastuzumab-resistant and taxane-pretreated, HER2-positive, advanced breast cancer. The clinical benefit should be considered in the context of the adverse event profile in this population.

Lapatinib with trastuzumab for HER2-positive early breast cancer (NeoALTTO): survival outcomes of a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial and their association with pathological complete response.

BACKGROUND: Findings from the randomised phase 3 NeoALTTO trial in women with HER2-positive early breast cancer showed that the combination of lapatinib and trastuzumab significantly improved rates of pathological complete response compared with either drug alone. Here, we report data for the prespecified secondary endpoints of event-free and overall survival, and assess the association between these outcomes and pathological complete response. METHODS: We enrolled women with HER2-positive early breast cancer and randomly assigned them to receive oral lapatinib (1500 mg), intravenous trastuzumab (4 mg/kg loading dose followed by 2 mg/kg), or lapatinib (1000 mg) plus trastuzumab (same dose as for single agent) in combination for 6 weeks, followed by an additional 12 weeks of the assigned anti-HER2 therapy in combination with weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2)). Definitive surgery was done 4 weeks after the last dose of paclitaxel. After surgery, women received three cycles of FEC (fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2) plus epirubicin 100 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m(2)) given intravenously every 3 weeks, followed by 34 weeks of the same assigned neoadjuvant anti-HER2 therapy. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response. Secondary endpoints included event-free and overall survival (intention-to-treat analysis), and the association between pathological complete response and event-free or overall survival (analysed by landmark analysis at 30 weeks after randomisation). Follow-up is ongoing, and the trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00553358. FINDINGS: 455 patients were enrolled: 154 (34%) were assigned to the lapatinib group, 149 (33%) to the trastuzumab group, and 152 (33%) to the lapatinib plus trastuzumab group. At an event follow-up of 3·77 years (IQR 3·50-4·22), 3-year event-free survival was 78% (95% CI 70-84) in the lapatinib group, 76% (68-82) in the trastuzumab group, and 84% (77-89) in the combination group. Event-free survival did not differ between the lapatinib and trastuzumab groups (HR 1·06, 95% CI 0·66-1·69, p=0·81), nor between the combination and trastuzumab groups (0·78, 0·47-1·28, p=0·33). Median survival follow-up was 3·84 years (IQR 3·60-4·24), and 3-year overall survival was 93% (95% CI 87-96) for lapatinib, 90% (84-94) for trastuzumab, and 95% (90-98) for combination therapy. Overall survival did not significantly differ between the lapatinib and trastuzumab groups (HR 0·86, 95% CI 0·45-1·63, p=0·65), nor between the combination and trastuzumab groups (0·62, 0·30-1·25, p=0·19). Landmark analyses showed that 3-year event-free survival was significantly improved for women who achieved pathological complete response compared with those who did not (HR 0·38, 95% CI 0·22-0·63, p=0·0003), as was 3-year overall survival (0·35, 0·15-0·70, p=0·005). Adverse events occurred in 149 (99%) patients receiving lapatinib, 142 (96%) patients receiving trastuzumab, and 147 (99%) patients receiving combination therapy. The most common adverse events were diarrhoea, rash or erythema, hepatic adverse events, and neutropenia (not related to FEC administration), and were consistent with known safety profiles of lapatinib and trastuzumab. Three primary and eight secondary cardiac events occurred, with no significant difference in incidence between treatment groups for primary or any cardiac events. INTERPRETATION: Although event-free survival or overall survival did not differ between treatment groups, findings from our study confirm that patients who achieve pathological complete response after neoadjuvant anti-HER2 therapy have longer event-free and overall survival than do patients without pathological complete response. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.