TROPION-Breast02: Datopotamab deruxtecan for locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

Despite recent treatment advances, the prognosis for patients with locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) remains poor. The antibody-drug conjugate datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) is composed of a humanized anti-TROP2 IgG1 monoclonal antibody linked to a topoisomerase I inhibitor payload via a stable, cleavable linker. The phase III TROPION-Breast02 trial in patients previously untreated for locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic TNBC, who are not candidates for PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors is evaluating efficacy and safety of Dato-DXd versus investigator's choice of chemotherapy (ICC). Approximately 600 patients will be randomized 1:1 to Dato-DXd 6 mg/kg iv. every 3 weeks or ICC (paclitaxel, nab-paclitaxel, carboplatin, capecitabine or eribulin mesylate). Dual primary end points are progression-free survival by blinded independent central review and overall survival.

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a subtype of breast cancer that is hard to treat. Tumors lack receptors for estrogen and progesterone, which means that standard endocrine therapy is ineffective, and it does not express HER2, so HER2 therapies are also not appropriate. However, the majority of TNBC tumors do possess a cell surface protein called TROP2 which provides a way of directing treatment inside tumor cells that is more selective than traditional chemotherapy. Datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) is a drug that consists of two parts: datopotamab (an antibody) and DXd (the cancer-cell killing toxic component), which are joined via a stable linker. Datopotamab binds to the TROP2 protein found on TNBC tumors and is taken into the cell. The linker is then broken and releases DXd, which kills the tumor cell. By binding to cancer cells before releasing the payload, treatment is directed to the tumor, minimizing side effects in the rest of the body. The TROPION-Breast02 study aims to discover whether Dato-DXd is more effective than standard-of-care chemotherapy, allowing patients with TNBC to live longer without their breast cancer getting worse. This study is also looking at how Dato-DXd may affect patients' overall functioning and quality of life. TROPION-Breast02 will recruit approximately 600 patients who: Have cancer that has spread from the original site (metastatic), or cancer that returned to the same site (locally recurrent) that cannot be surgically removed Have not received any prior treatment for this stage of cancer Cannot receive an alternative type of anticancer treatment called PD-(L)1 inhibitors Had any length of time between their last treatment with the aim of cure and return of their disease Eligible patients will be randomly assigned to a treatment group in equal numbers to either Dato-DXd or an appropriate chemotherapy (one of five available options, chosen by the treating doctor). Each patient will generally continue to receive their designated treatments if the tumor is controlled by the drug, there are no unacceptable side effects, or the patient chooses to stop treatment. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05374512 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Ipatasertib plus paclitaxel for PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: primary results from cohort B of the IPATunity130 randomized phase 3 trial.

PURPOSE: PI3K/AKT pathway alterations are frequent in hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancers. IPATunity130 Cohort B investigated ipatasertib-paclitaxel in PI3K pathway-mutant HR+ unresectable locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer (aBC). METHODS: Cohort B of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 IPATunity130 trial enrolled patients with HR+ HER2-negative PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered measurable aBC who were considered inappropriate for endocrine-based therapy (demonstrated insensitivity to endocrine therapy or visceral crisis) and were candidates for taxane monotherapy. Patients with prior chemotherapy for aBC or relapse < 1 year since (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy were ineligible. Patients were randomized 2:1 to ipatasertib (400 mg, days 1-21) or placebo, plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m2, days 1, 8, 15), every 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Overall, 146 patients were randomized to ipatasertib-paclitaxel and 76 to placebo-paclitaxel. In both arms, median investigator-assessed PFS was 9.3 months (hazard ratio, 1.00, 95% CI 0.71-1.40) and the objective response rate was 47%. Median paclitaxel duration was 6.9 versus 8.8 months in the ipatasertib-paclitaxel versus placebo-paclitaxel arms, respectively; median ipatasertib/placebo duration was 8.0 versus 9.1 months, respectively. The most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were diarrhea (12% with ipatasertib-paclitaxel vs 1% with placebo-paclitaxel), neutrophil count decreased (9% vs 7%), neutropenia (8% vs 9%), peripheral neuropathy (7% vs 3%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (3% vs 5%) and hypertension (1% vs 5%). CONCLUSION: Adding ipatasertib to paclitaxel did not improve efficacy in PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered HR+ HER2-negative aBC. The ipatasertib-paclitaxel safety profile was consistent with each agent's known adverse effects. Trial registration NCT03337724.

Integrating immunotherapy in the (neo)adjuvant setting of early breast cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Breast cancer is a relative latecomer in the success story of immuno-oncology. In this review, we focus on the preclinical and clinical lines of evidence to justify the evaluation of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) for the curative-intent treatment of breast cancer, the latest and ongoing trials of (neo)adjuvant immunotherapy, and practical considerations in clinical practice associated with this new treatment paradigm. RECENT FINDINGS: Insights from the immunobiology of breast cancer have paved the way for the new frontier of immunotherapy in this malignancy, starting from advanced stages and moving onto curable cases. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte quantification and PD-L1 immunohistochemistry are forerunners of predictive biomarkers for sensitivity to ICI in breast cancers. Preliminary results from phase III trials of combinatorial immunochemotherapy to treat early high-risk or locally advanced triple-negative breast cancer are encouraging for pathological complete response. Additional efficacy and patient-reported outcomes of (neo)adjuvant immunochemotherapy trials are awaited. SUMMARY: The prospect of integrating ICI in the treatment of early-stage breast cancer is promising. Questions regarding patient selection, the choice of ICI agent and combination partner in escalation strategies, sequencing and duration of treatments, cost-effectiveness and mechanisms of resistance remain to be answered by future research.

Cost of Medical Care of Patients with Advanced Serious Illness in Singapore (COMPASS): prospective cohort study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Advanced cancer significantly impacts quality of life of patients and families as they cope with symptom burden, treatment decision-making, uncertainty and costs of treatment. In Singapore, information about the experiences of advanced cancer patients and families and the financial cost they incur for end-of-life care is lacking. Understanding of this information is needed to inform practice and policy to ensure continuity and affordability of care at the end of life. The primary objectives of the Cost of Medical Care of Patients with Advanced Serious Illness in Singapore (COMPASS) cohort study are to describe changes in quality of life and to quantify healthcare utilization and costs of patients with advanced cancer at the end of life. Secondary objectives are to investigate patient and caregiver preferences for diagnostic and prognostic information, preferences for end-of-life care, caregiver burden and perceived quality of care and to explore how these change as illness progresses and finally to measure bereavement adjustment. The purpose of this paper is to present the COMPASS protocol in order to promote scientific transparency. METHODS: This cohort study recruits advanced cancer patients (n = 600) from outpatient medical oncology clinics at two public tertiary healthcare institutions in Singapore. Patients and their primary informal caregiver are surveyed every 3 months until patients' death; caregivers are followed until 6 months post patient death. Patient medical and billing records are obtained and merged with patient survey data. The treating medical oncologists of participating patients are surveyed to obtain their beliefs regarding care delivery for the patient. DISCUSSION: The study will allow combination of self-report, medical, and cost data from various sources to present a comprehensive picture of the end-of-life experience of advanced cancer patients in a unique Asian setting. This study is responsive to Singapore's National Strategy for Palliative Care which aims to identify opportunities to meet the growing need for high quality care for Singapore's aging population. Results will also be of interest to policy makers and researchers beyond Singapore who are interested to understand and improve the end-of-life experience of cancer patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02850640 (Prospectively registered on June 9, 2016).

Is the Proportion of Patients Diagnosed with Synchronous Stage IV Breast Cancer Who Survive More than Two Years Increasing over Time?

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown a moderate increase in survival over time among patients with stage IV breast cancer. Median survival is approximately 2 years. The aim of this study was to evaluate trends over time in survival of >2 years of patients with synchronous stage IV disease. METHODS: Using the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results) registry, we identified patients with synchronous stage IV breast cancer diagnosed between 1990 and 2007. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to the year of diagnosis (1990-1995, 1996-2000, and 2001-2007). The probability of survival of >2 years was computed within each group of diagnosis years. A multivariate logistic regression model was then fit to determine the association between year of diagnosis and probability of surviving >2 years after adjusting for important prognostic factors. RESULTS: 22,601 patients were identified, of whom 9,435 (41.7%) had an overall survival of >2 years. The probability of breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) of >2 years was 40.1, 44, and 48.1% among patients diagnosed in the periods 1990-1995, 1996-2000, and 2001-2007, respectively (p < 0.001). In the multivariate model, the probability of BCSS of >2 years increased with the more recent year of diagnosis (OR 1.058, 95% CI 1.046-1.069, p < 0.001). Other factors significantly associated with an increased probability of surviving >2 years included surgery of the primary tumor, lower grade, younger age, hormone receptor-positive disease, and noninflammatory disease. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that among the patients with synchronous stage IV breast cancer, the probability of BCSS of >2 years in the US has increased over time. Attributable factors may be the increasing number of efficacious agents and improved palliative care services over time.

Ipatasertib plus Paclitaxel for Patients with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-Altered Locally Advanced Unresectable or Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in the IPATunity130 Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: In the randomized phase II LOTUS trial, combining ipatasertib with first-line paclitaxel for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) improved progression-free survival (PFS), particularly in patients with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered tumors. We aimed to validate these findings in a biomarker-selected TNBC population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In Cohort A of the randomized double-blind placebo-controlled phase III IPATunity130 trial, taxane-eligible patients with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered measurable advanced TNBC and no prior chemotherapy for advanced disease were randomized 2:1 to ipatasertib (400 mg, days 1-21) or placebo, both plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m2, days 1, 8, and 15), every 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. RESULTS: Between February 2018 and April 2020, 255 patients were randomized (168 to ipatasertib, 87 to placebo). At the primary analysis, there was no significant difference between treatment arms in PFS [hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.71-1.45; median 7.4 months with ipatasertib vs. 6.1 months with placebo]. The final analysis showed no difference in overall survival between treatment arms (hazard ratio 1.08, 95% CI, 0.73-1.58; median 24.4 vs. 24.9 months, respectively). Ipatasertib was associated with more grade ≥3 diarrhea (9% vs. 2%) and adverse events leading to dose reduction (39% vs. 14%) but similar incidences of grade ≥3 adverse events (51% vs. 46%). Exploratory subgroup analyses by PAM50 and Burstein gene expression showed inconsistent results. CONCLUSIONS: Adding ipatasertib to paclitaxel did not improve efficacy in PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered advanced TNBC. Biomarkers for benefit from PI3K/AKT pathway inhibition in TNBC remain poorly understood.

6th and 7th International consensus guidelines for the management of advanced breast cancer (ABC guidelines 6 and 7).

This manuscript describes the Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC) international consensus guidelines updated at the last two ABC international consensus conferences (ABC 6 in 2021, virtual, and ABC 7 in 2023, in Lisbon, Portugal), organized by the ABC Global Alliance. It provides the main recommendations on how to best manage patients with advanced breast cancer (inoperable locally advanced or metastatic), of all breast cancer subtypes, as well as palliative and supportive care. These guidelines are based on available evidence or on expert opinion when a higher level of evidence is lacking. Each guideline is accompanied by the level of evidence (LoE), grade of recommendation (GoR) and percentage of consensus reached at the consensus conferences. Updated diagnostic and treatment algorithms are also provided. The guidelines represent the best management options for patients living with ABC globally, assuming accessibility to all available therapies. Their adaptation (i.e. resource-stratified guidelines) is often needed in settings where access to care is limited.

Phase I trial of the oral PARP inhibitor olaparib in combination with paclitaxel for first- or second-line treatment of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: This Phase I study evaluated the safety, tolerability and efficacy of olaparib, a potent oral poly(ADPribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, in combination with paclitaxel in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). METHODS: Eligible patients who had received ≤1 prior cytotoxic regimen for mTNBC were treated with olaparib 200 mg bid continuously plus weekly paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 for three weeks per four-week cycle. Dose modifications in a large proportion of patients due to neutropenia resulted in enrollment of a second cohort of patients who, if they experienced grade ≥2 neutropenia in cycle 1, received granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, which was continued prophylactically in subsequent cycles. All patients had measurable disease; tumor responses were evaluated according to RECIST (version 1.0). RESULTS: Nineteen patients (cohort 1, n = 9; cohort 2, n = 10) received treatment; 15 had received prior taxane chemotherapy. The most frequent adverse events were diarrhea (n = 12, 63%), nausea (n = 11, 58%) and neutropenia (n = 11, 58%). Seven neutropenia events were reported in cohort 1 (four grade ≥3) and four in cohort 2 (two grade ≥3, including one event of febrile neutropenia). The median (range) dose intensity of paclitaxel was 57% (26 to 100%) in cohort 1 and 73% (29 to 100%) in cohort 2. Seven patients (37%) had a confirmed partial response; one patient remains on olaparib monotherapy without progression. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of olaparib and weekly paclitaxel was complicated by a significant clinical interaction, with higher-than-expected rates of neutropenia despite secondary prophylaxis. Given the encouraging response rate, alternative scheduling and dosing strategies should be considered (funded by AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00707707).

Early Outcomes of a National Cancer Center's Strategy Against COVID-19 Executed Through a Disease Outbreak Response Taskforce.

PURPOSE: We present the strategy of a comprehensive cancer center organized to make operations pandemic proof and achieve continuity of cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Disease Outbreak Response (DORS) measures implemented at our center and its satellite clinics included strict infection prevention, manpower preservation, prudent resource allocation, and adaptation of standard-of-care treatments. Critical day-to-day clinical operations, number of persons screened before entry, staff temperature monitoring, and personal protection equipment stockpile were reviewed as a dashboard at daily DORS taskforce huddles. Polymerase chain reaction swab tests performed for patients and staff who met defined criteria for testing of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection were tracked. Descriptive statistics of outpatient attendances and treatment caseloads from February 3 to May 23, 2020, were compared with the corresponding period in 2019. RESULTS: We performed COVID-19 swabs for 80 patients and 93 staff, detecting three cancer patients with community-acquired COVID-19 infections with no nosocomial transmission. Patients who required chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or surgery and patients who are on maintenance treatment continued to receive timely treatment without disruption. The number of intravenous chemotherapy treatments was maintained at 97.8% compared with 2019, whereas that of weekly radiotherapy treatments remained stable since December 2019. All cancer-related surgeries proceeded without delay, with a 0.3% increase in workload. Surveillance follow-ups were conducted via teleconsultation, accounting for a 30.7% decrease in total face-to-face clinic consultations. CONCLUSION: Through the coordinated efforts of a DORS taskforce, it is possible to avoid nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmissions among patients and staff without compromising on care delivery at a national cancer center.

Novel therapeutic avenues in triple-negative breast cancer: PI3K/AKT inhibition, androgen receptor blockade, and beyond.

Multiomic analyses have shed light upon the molecular heterogeneity and complexity of triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs). With increasing recognition that TNBC is not a single disease entity but encompasses different disease subtypes, a one-size-fits-all treatment paradigm has become obsolete. In this context, the inhibition of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/protein kinase B (PI3K/AKT) and androgen receptor (AR) signaling pathways have emerged as potential therapeutic strategies against selected tumors. In this paper, we reviewed the preclinical rationale, predictive biomarkers, efficacy, and safety data from early phase trials, and the future directions for these two biomarker-directed treatment approaches in TNBC.