Neoadjuvant endocrine treatment in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: Does it result in more breast-conserving surgery?

BACKGROUND: Patients with locally advanced endocrine positive tumors who will not benefit from chemotherapy can be treated by either primary surgery or neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET). How often does NET result in breast-conserving surgery (BCS)? METHODS: We conducted a literature search in PubMed and Embase, to identify articles on surgical treatment after NET. RESULTS: In 19 studies the pathological complete response (pCR) rate was reported after NET; an overall pCR rate of 1% was found. Compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT), the BCS rate was significantly higher after NET (OR 0.60; 95% CI, 0.51-0.69; P < 0.00001). The surgical conversion rate was reported in eight studies [4-75.9%], with a mean of 30.2%. CONCLUSION: This review found that one out of three patients becomes eligible for BCS after treatment with NET.

A comparison of treatment allocation and survival between younger and older patients with HER2-overexpressing de novo metastatic breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: There have been several developments in the treatment of HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer. However, pivotal trials mainly included younger and healthier patients, resulting in a lack of information about the benefits and harms of treatment for most older patients. The aim of this study was to provide an overview of the differences in treatment allocation and survival outcomes over time between younger and older patients with HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients from the Netherlands Cancer Registry with de novo metastatic breast cancer between 2005 and 2021 were included. Patients were divided into three age groups: <65, 65-74, and ≥ 75 years. Changes in treatment allocation were graphically depicted over time. Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate overall survival and Poisson models for relative survival. RESULTS: Overall, 2,722 patients were included. Between 2005 and 2021, the use of targeted therapy as first-line treatment increased for all age groups (<65 years from 33.8% to 90.6%, p < 0.001; 65-74 years from 29.2% to 86.5%, p = 0.001; ≥75 years from 4.3% to 55.8%, p < 0.001). Use of chemotherapy as first-line treatment also increased for all age groups (<65 years from 73.5% to 89.8%, p < 0.001; 65-74 years from 50.0% to 78.4%, p = 0.01; ≥75 years from 8.7% to 37.2%, p = 0.04). Although not statistically significant, the use of endocrine therapy, both as monotherapy and in combination with targeted therapy in the first line, decreased (<65 years 19.1% to 5.5%, p < 0.001; 65-74 years 25.0% to 13.5%, p = 0.03; ≥75 years 65.2% to 37.2%, p = 0.16). Changes in relative and overall survival were similar and improved in all age groups, but most in the youngest age group (relative excess risk [RER] 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91-0.94 per year, p < 0.001), and least in patients ≥75 (RER 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.98 per year, p = 0.001). DISCUSSION: The use of first-line chemotherapy and targeted therapy increased in all age groups, while the use of endocrine therapy decreased over time. Nevertheless, the uptake of chemotherapy and targeted therapies was substantially slower in the oldest age group. Overall survival and relative survival improved for all age groups, but these improvements were smaller in the older age groups.

DOSAGE study: protocol for a phase III non-inferiority randomised trial investigating dose-reduced chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer in older patients.

INTRODUCTION: Treating older adults with chemotherapy remains a challenge, given their under-representation in clinical trials and the lack of robust treatment guidelines for this population. Moreover, older patients, especially those with frailty, have an increased risk of developing chemotherapy-related toxicity, resulting in a decreased quality of life (QoL), increased hospitalisations and high healthcare costs. Phase II trials have suggested that upfront dose reduction of chemotherapy can reduce toxicity rates while maintaining efficacy, leading to fewer treatment discontinuations and an improved QoL. The DOSAGE aims to show that upfront dose-reduced chemotherapy in older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is non-inferior to full-dose treatment in terms of progression-free survival (PFS), with adaption of the treatment plan (monotherapy or doublet chemotherapy) based on expected risk of treatment toxicity. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The DOSAGE study is an investigator-initiated phase III, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial in patients aged≥70 years with metastatic colorectal cancer eligible for palliative chemotherapy. Based on toxicity risk, assessed using the Geriatric 8 (G8) tool, patients will be stratified to either doublet chemotherapy (fluoropyrimidine with oxaliplatin) or fluoropyrimidine monotherapy. Patients classified as low risk will be randomised between a fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin in either full-dose or with an upfront dose reduction of 25%. Patients classified as high risk will be randomised between fluoropyrimidine monotherapy in either full-dose or with an upfront dose reduction. In the dose-reduced arm, dose escalation after two cycles is allowed. The primary outcome is PFS. Secondary endpoints include grade≥3 toxicity, QoL, physical functioning, number of treatment cycles, dose reductions, hospital admissions, overall survival, cumulative received dosage and cost-effectiveness. Considering a median PFS of 8 months and non-inferiority margin of 8 weeks, we shall include 587 patients. The study will be enrolled in 36 Dutch Hospitals, with enrolment scheduled to start in July 2024. This study will provide new evidence regarding the effect of dose-reduced chemotherapy on survival and treatment outcomes, as well as the use of the G8 to choose between doublet chemotherapy or monotherapy. Results will contribute to a more individualised approach in older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, potentially leading to improved QoL while maintaining survival benefits. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial has received ethical approval by the ethical committee Leiden Den Haag Delft (P24.018) and will be approved by the Institutional Ethical Committee of the participating institutions. The results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06275958.