Elevated serum levels of sialyl Lewis X (sLeX) and inflammatory mediators in patients with breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The carbohydrate sialyl LewisX (sLeX) mediates cell adhesion, is critical in the normal function of immune cells, and is frequently over-expressed on cancer cells. We assessed the association, differential levels, and prognostic value of sLeX and inflammatory cytokines/chemokines in breast cancer sera. METHODS: We retrospectively measured sLeX and a panel of cytokines/chemokines in the sera of 26 non-invasive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 154 invasive non-metastatic breast cancer (non-MBC), 63 metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients, and 43 healthy controls. Differences in sLeX and inflammatory cytokines among and between patient groups and healthy controls were assessed with nonparametric tests and we performed survival analysis for the prognostic potential of sLeX using a cut-off of 8 U/mL as previously defined. RESULTS: Median serum sLeX was significantly higher than controls for invasive breast cancer patients (MBC and non-MBC) but not DCIS. In univariate analysis, we confirmed patients with serum sLeX > 8 U/mL have a significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS) (P = 0.0074) and overall survival (OS (P = 0.0003). Similarly, patients with high serum MCP-1 and IP-10 had shorter OS (P = 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively) and PFS (P = 0.010 and P < 0.001, respectively). sLeX, MCP-1 and IP-10 remained significant in multivariate survival analysis. CONCLUSION: Elevated serum sLeX was associated with invasive cancer but not DCIS. High serum sLeX levels were associated with inflammatory mediators and may play a role in facilitating local invasion of breast tumor. Furthermore, serum MCP-1, IP-10 and sLeX may have prognostic value in breast cancer.

Development of CNS metastases and survival in patients with inflammatory breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is associated with a poor prognosis and high risk of central nervous system (CNS) metastases. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed stage III-IBC patients compared with noninflammatory invasive ductal carcinoma (NI-IDC) patients treated between January 1, 1984, and December 31, 2011, who began primary treatment within 1 year of diagnosis and had been followed up for at least 1 year before the development of CNS metastasis or death. Cumulative CNS metastasis incidence and post-CNS metastasis overall survival (OS) estimates were computed. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models explored factors for post-CNS metastasis survival. RESULTS: A total of 2323 patients were identified (589-IBC/1734-NI-IDC). Eighty-one IBC patients developed CNS metastasis, versus 154 NI-IDC patients. The 2-, 5-, and 10-year cumulative CNS metastasis incidence rates in IBC and NI-IDC were 9.8%, 15.8%, 17.4% and 6.5%, 10.1%, and 12.7%, respectively. This was significantly different between IBC and NI-IDC patients (P = .0037). Multicovariate competing risk regression models in IBC and NI-IDC patients showed no statistically significant associations with the risk of developing CNS metastasis, except neoadjuvant taxane use in NI-IDC patients (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.83; P = .011). The median follow-up was 7.2 years, and the median post-CNS metastasis OS was not significantly different between IBC (7.6 months) and NI-IDC (5.6 months) patients. One hundred ninety patients with CNS metastasis died. HER2-positive patients had better OS, with a median 14.1 versus 4.3 months (P < .0001). Age >50 years (P = .012) but not IBC status was a significant predictor of post-CNS metastasis survival. CONCLUSION: IBC patients demonstrated higher CNS metastasis incidence rates but OS following CNS metastases is similar in both groups. HER2 status and age may play prognostic roles. Cancer 2018;124:2299-305. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Emerging Perspectives on mTOR Inhibitor-Associated Pneumonitis in Breast Cancer.

Substantial improvements in the early detection and treatment of breast cancer have led to improvements in survival, but breast cancer remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in women. In 2012, the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor everolimus was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of advanced breast cancer in patients resistant to endocrine therapy. Although everolimus is generally well tolerated, mTOR inhibitor-associated pneumonitis is one of the most common adverse drug events leading to treatment discontinuation. To date, the underlying pathophysiology of this toxicity is unclear, and this uncertainty may hinder the optimization of management strategies. However, experiences from breast cancer and renal cell carcinoma clinical trials indicate that mTOR inhibitor-associated pneumonitis can be effectively managed by early detection, accurate diagnosis, and prompt intervention that generally involves everolimus dose reductions, interruptions, or discontinuation. Management can be achieved by a multidisciplinary approach that involves the collaborative efforts of nurses, oncologists, radiologists, infectious disease specialists, pulmonologists, clinical pharmacists, and pathologists. Comprehensive education must be provided to all health care professionals involved in managing patients receiving everolimus therapy. Although general recommendations on the management of mTOR inhibitor-associated pneumonitis have been published, there is a lack of consensus on the optimal management of this potentially serious complication. This article provides an overview of mTOR inhibitor-associated pneumonitis, with a focus on the detection, accurate diagnosis, and optimal management of this class-related complication of mTOR inhibitor therapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This article summarizes the pathogenesis, clinical presentation, incidence, detection, and optimal management of everolimus-related noninfectious pneumonitis in breast cancer. In particular, this article provides a detailed overview of the important aspects of the detection, accurate diagnosis, and appropriate management of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor-associated pneumonitis. In addition, this article emphasizes that effective management of this adverse drug event in patients with breast cancer will require a multidisciplinary approach and collaboration among various health care professionals.

Identification of frequent somatic mutations in inflammatory breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Inflammatory breast cancer is an aggressive form of breast cancer that shows distinct clinical features from non-inflammatory breast cancer. Genomic understanding of inflammatory breast cancer will shed light on biological targets for this disease. Our objective was to identify targeted hotspot mutations using multiplex genome sequencing in inflammatory breast cancer and compare the findings with those for patients with non-inflammatory breast cancer to further recognize novel targets. METHODS: We studied 400 patients with metastatic breast cancer who had somatic hotspot mutation testing using a 46- or 50-gene multiplex platform from March 2012 to December 2014. Among this population, 24 patients had inflammatory breast cancer and 376 patients had non-inflammatory breast cancer. We tested a total of 26 samples from 24 patients with inflammatory breast cancer. RESULTS: The average number of mutations per patient was higher in inflammatory breast cancer than in non-inflammatory breast cancer (1.23 vs. 0.65, respectively). Identified somatic mutations in inflammatory breast cancer were TP53 (n = 18, 75%), PIK3CA (n = 10, 41.7%), and ERBB2 (n = 4, 16.7%). TP53 and ERBB2 mutations were significantly more prevalent in inflammatory breast cancer than in non-inflammatory breast cancer (P < 0.01). All patients with ERBB2 mutations had hormone receptor (HR)+ primary tumors. CONCLUSIONS: TP53, PIK3CA, and ERBB2 were detected as three major somatic mutations in metastatic inflammatory breast cancer patients. While the inflammatory breast cancer TP53 and PIK3CA mutations mirrored previously reported data for metastatic non-inflammatory breast cancer, this is the first report of higher frequency of ERBB2 mutation in inflammatory breast cancer, especially in the HR+ subtype. Once validated in a larger cohort of inflammatory breast cancer patients, this novel finding could lead to development of treatments for HR+ inflammatory breast cancer.

Cancer pain: a review of epidemiology, clinical quality and value impact.

Cancer-related pain, reported by more than 70% of patients, is one of the most common and troublesome symptoms affecting patients with cancer. Despite the availability of effective treatments, cancer-related pain may be inadequately controlled in up to 50% of patients. With the growing focus on 'value' (healthcare outcomes achieved per dollar spent) in healthcare, the management of cancer-related pain has assumed novel significance in recent years. Data from initiatives that assess the quality of pain management in clinical practice have shown that effective management of cancer-related pain improves patient-perceived value of cancer treatment. As a result, assessment and effective management of cancer-related pain are now recognized as important measures of value in cancer care.

High HER2/Centromeric Probe for Chromosome 17 Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Ratio Predicts Pathologic Complete Response and Survival Outcome in Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy With Trastuzumab for HER2-Overexpressing Locally Advanced Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The present study was performed to determine whether the human epidermal growth factor receptor-related 2 (HER2)/centromeric probe for chromosome 17 fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) ratio is a predictor of a pathologic complete response (pCR), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and/or overall survival (OS) in patients receiving neoadjuvant systemic treatment (NST) with trastuzumab (NST-T) for HER2+ locally advanced breast cancer (LABC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The present retrospective study included 555 patients with HER2+ LABC who had undergone NST and definitive surgery (1999-2012); 373 had concurrently received trastuzumab. HER2-positivity was considered present with an immunohistochemical score of 3+ and/or HER2 FISH ratio of ≥2.0. We used logistic regression analysis and Cox proportional hazard modeling to determine whether a high HER2 FISH ratio, either as a continuous variable or with a cutoff of ≥7.0, would predict for pCR (no invasive disease in the breast and no tumor in the ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes), RFS, and/or OS. RESULTS: The pCR group's median HER2 FISH ratio was significantly higher than that of the non-pCR group (6.4 vs. 5.2; p = .003). The logistic regression model demonstrated that the independent predictors of pCR included a high HER2 FISH ratio as a continuous variable (p = .04). The multicovariate Cox proportional hazard model showed that a high HER2 FISH ratio (with a cutoff of ≥7.0 or as a continuous variable) was a significant prognostic indicator of longer RFS time (p = .047 and p = .04, respectively). Similarly, a high HER2 FISH ratio of ≥7.0 was associated with longer OS (p = .06). CONCLUSION: A high HER2 FISH ratio is a predictor of pCR in patients with HER2+ LABC who receive NST-T. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study demonstrated the optimal predictive and prognostic value of a HER2/centromeric probe for chromosome 17 FISH ratio for primary HER2+ breast cancer treated with trastuzumab combined with neoadjuvant systemic treatment (NST-T). This suggests that a high HER2 FISH ratio is a potential indicator for a high pathologic complete response rate and a better prognosis when patients are treated with NST-T.

MicroRNA expression profiling identifies decreased expression of miR-205 in inflammatory breast cancer.

Inflammatory breast cancer is the most aggressive form of breast cancer. Identifying new biomarkers to be used as therapeutic targets is in urgent need. Messenger RNA expression profiling studies have indicated that inflammatory breast cancer is a transcriptionally heterogeneous disease, and specific molecular targets for inflammatory breast cancer have not been well established. We performed microRNA expression profiling in inflammatory breast cancer in comparison with locally advanced noninflammatory breast cancer in this study. Although many microRNAs were differentially expressed between normal breast tissue and tumor tissue, most of them did not show differential expression between inflammatory and noninflammatory tumor samples. However, by microarray analysis, quantitative reverse transcription PCR, and in situ hybridization, we showed that microRNA-205 expression was decreased not only in tumor compared with normal breast tissue, but also in inflammatory breast cancer compared with noninflammatory breast cancer. Lower expression of microRNA-205 correlated with worse distant metastasis-free survival and overall survival in our cohort. A small-scale immunohistochemistry analysis showed coexistence of decreased microRNA-205 expression and decreased E-cadherin expression in some ductal tumors. MicroRNA-205 may serve as a therapeutic target in advanced breast cancer including inflammatory breast cancer.

Evaluating the Utility of a 'N-of-1' Precision Cancer Medicine Strategy: The Case for 'Time-to-Subsequent-Disease Progression'.

It is increasingly recognized that cancer is a highly heterogeneous group of illnesses even within a particular organ site (e.g., breast, lung, colon, etc.). This observation presents a serious challenge to the traditional concept of phase 3 randomized trials designed to define therapeutic efficacy of a novel treatment strategy. For while 10% of the patients with a common malignancy (e.g., non-small-cell lung cancer) may be sufficient to consider such an effort, enrolling a sufficient number of patients into a clinical trial in a timely manner to define clinical utility would be extremely difficult if the population in question represented only 1% of this population, and essentially impossible if one wished to explore the benefits of treatment in a rarer neoplasm (e.g. ovarian cancer). Therefore, in the new era of precision cancer medicine, alternative research designs are imperative. One option would be to compare the time-to-disease progression of an individual cancer patient following treatment with a novel therapeutic to the time-to-disease progression for that specific patient on her/his immediately preceding treatment. The rationale for this strategy and early experience with this innovative approach to evaluating the efficacy of anticancer therapy is highlighted in this report.

Circulating tumor cells in newly diagnosed inflammatory breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are an independent prognostic factor for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is one of the most aggressive forms of breast cancer. The prognostic value of a CTC count in newly diagnosed IBC has not been established. The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic value of a baseline CTC count in patients with newly diagnosed IBC. METHODS: This retrospective study included 147 patients with newly diagnosed IBC (77 with locally advanced and 70 with metastatic IBC) treated with neoadjuvant therapy or first-line chemotherapy during the period from January 2004 through December 2012 at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. CTCs were detected and enumerated by using the CellSearch system before patients were started with chemotherapy. RESULTS: The proportion of patients with ≥1 CTC was lower among patients with stage III than among patients with metastatic IBC (54.5% versus 84.3%; P=0.0002); the proportion of patients with ≥5 CTCs was also lower for stage III than for metastatic IBC (19.5% versus 47.1%; P=0.0004). Patients with fewer than five CTCs had significantly better progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio (HR)=0.60; P=0.02) and overall survival (HR=0.59; P=0.03) than patients with five or more CTCs. Among patients with stage III IBC, there was a nonsignificant difference in PFS (HR=0.66; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31 to 1.39; P=0.29) and OS (HR=0.54; 95% CI, 0.24 to 1.26; P=0.48) in patients with no CTCs compared with patients with one or more CTCs. In multivariate analysis, CTC was prognostic for PFS and OS independent of clinical stage. CONCLUSIONS: CTCs can be detected in a large proportion of patients with newly diagnosed IBC and are a strong predictor of worse prognosis in patients with newly diagnosed IBC.

Overall survival differences between patients with inflammatory and noninflammatory breast cancer presenting with distant metastasis at diagnosis.

Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is a rare and aggressive disease. Previous studies have shown that among patients with stage III breast cancer, IBC is associated with a worse prognosis than noninflammatory breast cancer (non-IBC). Whether this difference holds true among patients with stage IV breast cancer has not been studied. We tested the hypothesis that overall survival (OS) is worse in patients with IBC than in those with non-IBC among patients with distant metastasis at diagnosis (stage IV disease). We reviewed the records of 1504 consecutive patients with stage IV breast cancer (IBC: 206; non-IBC: 1298) treated at our institution from 1987 through 2012. Survival curves for IBC and non-IBC subcohorts were compared. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine predictors of OS. The median follow-up period was 4.7 years. IBC was associated with shorter median OS time than non-IBC (2.27 vs. 3.40 years; P = 0.0128, log-rank test). In a multicovariate Cox model that included 1389 patients, the diagnosis of IBC was a significant independent predictor of worse OS (hazard ratio = 1.431, P = 0.0011). Other significant predictors of worse OS included Black (vs. White) ethnicity, younger age at diagnosis, negative HER2 status, and visceral (vs. nonvisceral) site of metastasis. IBC is associated with shorter OS than non-IBC in patients with distant metastasis at diagnosis. The prognostic impact of IBC should be taken into consideration among patients with stage IV breast cancer.

Circulating tumor cells as early predictors of metastatic spread in breast cancer patients with limited metastatic dissemination.

INTRODUCTION: Traditional factors currently used for prognostic stratification do not always adequately predict treatment response and disease evolution in advanced breast cancer patients. Therefore, the use of blood-based markers, such as circulating tumor cells (CTCs), represents a promising complementary strategy for disease monitoring. In this retrospective study, we explored the role of CTC counts as predictors of disease evolution in breast cancer patients with limited metastatic dissemination. METHODS: A total of 492 advanced breast cancer patients who had a CTC count assessed by CellSearch prior to starting a new line of systemic therapy were eligible for this analysis. Using the threshold of 5 CTCs/7.5 ml of blood, pretreatment CTC counts were correlated in the overall population with metastatic site distribution, evaluated at baseline and at the time of treatment failure, using Fisher's exact test. Time to visceral progression and time to the development of new metastatic lesions and sites were estimated in patients with nonvisceral metastases and with single-site metastatic disease, respectively, by the Kaplan-Meier method. Survival times were compared between groups according to pretreatment CTC count by logrank test. RESULTS: In the overall population, a pretreatment level ≥5 CTCs/7.5 ml was associated with an increased baseline number of metastatic sites compared with <5 CTCs/7.5 ml (P = 0.0077). At the time of treatment failure, patients with ≥5 CTCs/7.5 ml more frequently developed new metastatic lesions and sites compared with those with <5 CTCs/7.5 ml (development of new lesions: P = 0.0002; development of new sites: P = 0.0031). Among patients with disease originally confined to nonvisceral sites, ≥5 CTCs/7.5 ml was associated with remarkably shorter time to visceral metastases (P = 0.0021) and overall survival (P = 0.0006) compared with <5 CTCs/7.5 ml. In patients with single-site metastatic disease, ≥5 CTCs/7.5 ml was associated with a significant reduction of the time to development of new metastatic sites (P = 0.0051) and new lesions (P = 0.0002) and with worse overall survival (P = 0.0101). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that baseline CTC counts can be used as an early predictor of metastatic potential in breast cancer patients with limited metastatic dissemination.

Primary tumor resection as a component of multimodality treatment may improve local control and survival in patients with stage IV inflammatory breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: To the authors' knowledge, the benefit of primary tumor resection among patients with metastatic inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is unknown. METHODS: The authors reviewed 172 cases of metastatic IBC. All patients received chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy and/or surgery. Patients were classified as responders or nonresponders to chemotherapy. The 5-year overall survival (OS) and distant progression-free survival (DPFS) and local control at the time of last follow-up were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 79 patients (46%) underwent surgery. OS and DPFS were better among patients treated with surgery versus no surgery (47% vs 10%, respectively [P<.0001] and 30% vs 3%, respectively [P<.0001]). Surgery plus radiotherapy was associated with better survival compared with treatment with surgery or radiotherapy alone (OS rate: 50% vs 25% vs 14%, respectively; DPFS rate: 32% vs 18% vs 15%, respectively [P<.0001 for both]). Surgery was associated with better survival for both responders (OS rate for surgery vs no surgery: 49% vs 23% [P<.0001] and DPFS rate for surgery vs no surgery: 31% vs 8% [P<.0001]) and nonresponders (OS rate for surgery vs no surgery: 40% vs 6% [P<.0001] and DPFS rate for surgery vs no surgery: 30% vs 0% [P<.0001]). On multivariate analysis, treatment with surgery plus radiotherapy and response to chemotherapy were found to be significant predictors of better OS and DPFS. Local control at the time of last follow-up was 4-fold more likely in patients who underwent surgery with or without radiotherapy compared with patients who received chemotherapy alone (81% vs 18%; P<.0001). Surgery and response to chemotherapy independently predicted local control on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current study demonstrate that for select patients with metastatic IBC, multimodality treatment including primary tumor resection may result in better local control and survival. However, a randomized trial is needed to validate these findings.

Locoregional interaction of ixabepilone (ixempra) after breast cancer radiation.

BACKGROUND: Radiation recall is an acute inflammatory reaction within a previously irradiated field triggered by chemotherapy administration. We observed a series of patients with unexpectedly severe reactions that included radiation recall and delayed healing when patients received the microtubule stabilizer ixabepilone (Ixempra; Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ) after radiation. We therefore decided to evaluate our experience in patients receiving ixabepilone following radiotherapy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients treated with curative intent in the Department of Radiation Oncology at the MD Anderson Cancer Center from 2008-2011 who received any ixabepilone after completion of external-beam radiation therapy. These patients received adjuvant ixabepilone on one of two protocols, either for locally advanced breast cancer or for metastatic breast cancer. In total, 19 patients were identified and their charts were subsequently reviewed for evidence of ixabepilone-related toxicity. RESULTS: Of the 19 patients identified who received ixabepilone following radiation therapy, three (15.8%) had unexpectedly serious reactions in the months following radiation therapy. Complications included delayed wound closure and drain placement into the seroma, intense erythema, and delayed wound closure and grade 4 chest wall necrosis requiring latissimus flap and skin grafting. The average number of days between the end of radiation therapy and documentation of reaction was 99. CONCLUSIONS: Ixabepilone chemotherapy may induce radiation recall and delayed wound healing when used shortly after the completion of external-beam radiotherapy. Significant clinical interactions have not been previously reported and merit further evaluation.

A randomized phase II study of lapatinib + pazopanib versus lapatinib in patients with HER2+ inflammatory breast cancer.

This multi-center Phase II study evaluated lapatinib, pazopanib, and the combination in patients with relapsed HER2+ inflammatory breast cancer. In Cohort 1, 76 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive lapatinib 1,500 mg + placebo or lapatinib 1,500 mg + pazopanib 800 mg (double-blind) once daily until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. Due to high-grade diarrhea observed with this dose combination in another study (VEG20007), Cohort 1 was closed. The protocol was amended such that an additional 88 patients (Cohort 2) were randomized in a 5:5:2 ratio to receive daily monotherapy lapatinib 1,500 mg, lapatinib 1,000 mg + pazopanib 400 mg, or monotherapy pazopanib 800 mg, respectively. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety. In Cohort 1, ORR for the lapatinib (n = 38) and combination (n = 38) arms was 29 and 45 %, respectively; median PFS was 16.1 and 14.3 weeks, respectively. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were more frequent in the combination arm (71 %) than in the lapatinib arm (24 %). Dose reductions and interruptions due to AEs were also more frequent in the combination arm (45 and 53 %, respectively) than in the lapatinib monotherapy arm (0 and 11 %, respectively). In Cohort 2, ORR for patients treated with lapatinib (n = 36), lapatinib + pazopanib (n = 38), and pazopanib (n = 13) was 47, 58, and 31 %, respectively; median PFS was 16.0, 16.0, and 11.4 weeks, respectively. In the lapatinib, combination, and pazopanib therapy arms, grade ≥3 AEs were reported for 17, 50, and 46 % of patients, respectively, and the incidence of discontinuations due to AEs was 0, 24, and 23 %, respectively. The lapatinib-pazopanib combination was associated with a numerically higher ORR but no increase in PFS compared to lapatinib alone. The combination also had increased toxicity resulting in more dose reductions, modifications, and treatment delays. Activity with single-agent lapatinib was confirmed in this population.

Phase I-II study of the farnesyl transferase inhibitor tipifarnib plus sequential weekly paclitaxel and doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide in HER2/neu-negative inflammatory carcinoma and non-inflammatory estrogen receptor-positive breast carcinoma.

Tipifarnib (T) is a farnesyl transferase inhibitor (FTI) that enhances the antineoplastic effects of cytotoxic therapy in vitro, has activity in metastatic breast cancer, and enhances the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate to neoadjuvant doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (AC) chemotherapy. We, therefore, performed a phase I-II trial of T plus neoadjuvant sequential weekly paclitaxel and 2-week AC chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer. Eligible patients with HER2-negative clinical stage IIB-IIIC breast cancer received 12 weekly doses of paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2)) followed by AC (60/600 mg/m(2) every 2 weeks and filgrastim), plus T (100 or 200 mg PO on days 1-3 of each P dose, and 200 mg PO on days 2-7 of each AC cycle). The trial was powered to detect an improvement in breast pCR rate from 15 to 35 % (α = 0.10, ß = 0.10) in two strata, including ER and/or PR-positive, non-inflammatory (stratum A) and inflammatory carcinoma (stratum B). Of the 60 patients accrued, there were no dose-limiting toxicities among the first six patients treated at the first T dose level (100 mg BID; N = 3) or second T dose level (200 mg BID; N = 3) plus paclitaxel. Breast pCR occurred in 6/33 patients (18 %, 95 % confidence intervals (CI) 7-36 %) and 1/22 patients (4 %, 95 % CI 0-8 %) in stratum B. Combination of the FTI T with weekly paclitaxel-AC is unlikely to be associated with a breast pCR rate of 35 % or higher in patients with locally advanced HER2/neu-negative inflammatory or non-inflammatory ER- and/or PR-positive breast carcinoma.

Patritumab Deruxtecan (HER3-DXd), a Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 3-Directed Antibody-Drug Conjugate, in Patients With Previously Treated Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 3-Expressing Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Multicenter, Phase I/II Trial.

PURPOSE: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) is broadly expressed in breast cancer; high expression is associated with an adverse prognosis. Patritumab deruxtecan (HER3-DXd) is an investigational HER3-targeted antibody-drug conjugate that is being evaluated as a novel treatment in HER3-expressing advanced breast cancer in the U31402-A-J101 study. METHODS: Adults with disease progression on previous therapies were eligible. Patients in the dose-escalation, dose-finding, and dose-expansion parts received HER3-DXd 1.6-8.0 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks or one of two alternative dosing regimens. In the dose-escalation part, the primary objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose and recommended dose for expansion (RDE). The safety and efficacy of the RDE were assessed during dose expansion. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-two enrolled patients received ≥1 dose of HER3-DXd. Patients had a median of five previous therapies for advanced disease. Efficacy results are reported across clinical subtypes: hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-negative) breast cancer (n = 113; objective response rate [ORR], 30.1%; median progression-free survival [mPFS], 7.4 months), triple-negative breast cancer (n = 53; ORR, 22.6%; mPFS, 5.5 months), and HER2-positive breast cancer (n = 14; ORR, 42.9%; mPFS, 11.0 months). Objective responses were observed in cancers with HER3-high and HER3-low membrane expression. Dose-limiting toxicities observed during dose selection were decreased platelet count and elevated aminotransferases. In dose expansion, GI and hematologic toxicities were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) observed. Grade ≥3 TEAEs were observed in 71.4% of patients, and 9.9% discontinued treatment because of TEAEs. Three grade 3 and one grade 5 treatment-related interstitial lung disease events occurred. CONCLUSION: HER3-DXd demonstrated a manageable safety profile and durable efficacy in heavily pretreated patients across clinical subtypes. These data warrant further evaluation of HER3-DXd in patients with HER3-expressing metastatic breast cancer.

Inflammatory breast cancer: what we know and what we need to learn.

PURPOSE: We review the current status of multidisciplinary care for patients with inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) and discuss what further research is needed to advance the care of patients with this disease. DESIGN: We performed a comprehensive review of the English-language literature on IBC through computerized literature searches. RESULTS: Significant advances in imaging, including digital mammography, high-resolution ultrasonography with Doppler capabilities, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography-computed tomography, have improved the diagnosis and staging of IBC. There are currently no established molecular criteria for distinguishing IBC from noninflammatory breast cancer. Such criteria would be helpful for the diagnosis and development of novel targeted therapies. Combinations of neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation therapy have led to an improved prognosis; however, the overall 5-year survival rate for patients with IBC remains very low (∼30%). Sentinel lymph node biopsy and skin-sparing mastectomy are not recommended for patients with IBC. CONCLUSION: Optimal management of IBC requires close coordination among medical, surgical, and radiation oncologists, as well as radiologists and pathologists. There is a need to identify molecular changes that define the pathogenesis of IBC to enable eradication of IBC with the use of IBC-specific targeted therapies.

Circulating tumor cells as prognostic and predictive markers in metastatic breast cancer patients receiving first-line systemic treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) represent an independent predictor of outcome in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We assessed the prognostic impact of CTCs according to different first-line systemic treatments, and explored their potential predictive value in MBC patients. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 235 newly diagnosed MBC patients, treated at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. All patients had a baseline CTC assessment performed with CellSearch(®). Progression-free survival and overall survival were compared with the log-rank test between groups, according to CTC count (< 5 vs. ≥ 5) and type of systemic therapy. We further explored the predictive value of baseline CTCs in patients receiving different treatments. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 18 months, the CTC count was confirmed to be a robust prognostic marker in the overall population (median progression-free survival 12.0 and 7.0 months for patients with CTC < 5 and ≥ 5, respectively; P < 0.001). Conversely, in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-overexpressed/amplified tumors receiving trastuzumab or lapatinib, the baseline CTC count was not prognostic (median progression-free survival 14.5 months for patients with CTC < 5 and 16.1 months for those with CTC ≥ 5; P = 0.947). Furthermore, in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 normal tumors, a baseline CTC count ≥ 5 identified subjects who derived benefit from more aggressive treatments, including combination chemotherapy and chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that the prognostic information provided by CTC count may be useful in patient stratifications and therapeutic selection, particularly in the group with positive CTCs, in which various therapeutic choices may procure differential palliative benefit.

Bevacizumab treatment for advanced breast cancer.

Significant advances in the treatment of patients with breast cancer have been made in the past 10 years. The current systemic treatment of breast cancer is characterized by the discovery of multiple cancer targets leading to treatments that are more sophisticated and specific than conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy. Two classes of compounds that have helped improve clinical outcomes are small molecules and monoclonal antibodies targeting specific tyrosine kinase receptors. Many novel targets have been discovered, and parallel multiple approaches to anticancer therapy have recently emerged from the literature. One promising strategy is targeting the proangiogenic vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGFs), either by ligand sequestration (preventing VEGF receptor binding) or inhibiting downstream receptor signaling. Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against VEGF, has been shown to improve the efficacy of taxanes in frontline treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer. This review outlines the most promising breast cancer studies using bevacizumab combined with traditional cytotoxic agents in advanced breast cancer. In addition, we discuss the current indications reviewed by the Oncologic Drug Advisory Committee and define our vision of how the benefit of patient clinical trials should be measured.

Present and future evolution of advanced breast cancer therapy.

Although the introduction of novel therapies and drug combinations has improved the prognosis of metastatic breast cancer, the disease remains incurable. Increased knowledge of the biology and the molecular alterations in breast cancer has facilitated the design of targeted therapies. These agents include receptor and nonreceptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (epidermal growth factor receptor family), intracellular signaling pathways (phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase, AKT, mammalian target of rapamycin) angiogenesis inhibitors and agents that interfere with DNA repair (poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors). In the present review, we present the most promising studies of these new targeted therapies and novel combinations of targeted therapies with cytotoxic agents.