Long-term outcomes of dual vs single HER2-directed neoadjuvant therapy in NSABP B-41.

BACKGROUND: The primary aim of this randomized neoadjuvant trial in operable, HER2-positive breast cancer, was to determine the efficacy on pathologic complete response (pCR) of substituting lapatinib (L) for trastuzumab (T) or adding L to T, in combination with weekly paclitaxel (WP) following AC. Results on pCR were previously reported. Here, we report data on planned secondary endpoints, recurrence-free interval (RFI) post-surgery, and overall survival (OS). METHODS: All patients received standard AC q3 weeks × 4 cycles followed by WP (80 mg/m2) on days 1, 8, and 15, q28 days × 4 cycles. Concurrently with WP, patients received either T (4 mg/kg load, then 2 mg/kg) weekly until surgery, L (1250 mg) daily until surgery, or weekly T plus L (750 mg) daily until surgery. Following surgery, all patients received T to complete 52 weeks of HER2-targeted therapy. 522 of 529 randomized patients had follow-up. Median follow-up was 5.1 years. RESULTS: RFI at 4.5 years was 87.2%, 79.4% (p = 0.34; HR = 1.37; 95% CI 0.80, 2.34), and 89.4% (p = 0.37; HR = 0.70; 0.37, 1.32) for arms T, L, and TL, respectively. The corresponding five-year OS was 94.8%, 89.1% (p = 0.34; HR = 1.46; 0.68, 3.11), and 95.8% (p = 0.25; HR = 0.58; 0.22, 1.51), respectively. Patients with pCR had a much better prognosis, especially in the ER-negative cohort: RFI (HR = 0.23, p < 0.001) and OS (HR = 0.28, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although pCR, RFI, and OS were numerically better with the dual combination and less with L, the differences were not statistically significant. However, achievement of pCR again correlated with improved outcomes, especially remarkable in the ER-negative subset. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT00486668.

Trastuzumab Emtansine for Residual Invasive HER2-Positive Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients who have residual invasive breast cancer after receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted therapy have a worse prognosis than those who have no residual cancer. Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1), an antibody-drug conjugate of trastuzumab and the cytotoxic agent emtansine (DM1), a maytansine derivative and microtubule inhibitor, provides benefit in patients with metastatic breast cancer that was previously treated with chemotherapy plus HER2-targeted therapy. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, open-label trial involving patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer who were found to have residual invasive disease in the breast or axilla at surgery after receiving neoadjuvant therapy containing a taxane (with or without anthracycline) and trastuzumab. Patients were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant T-DM1 or trastuzumab for 14 cycles. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (defined as freedom from ipsilateral invasive breast tumor recurrence, ipsilateral locoregional invasive breast cancer recurrence, contralateral invasive breast cancer, distant recurrence, or death from any cause). RESULTS: At the interim analysis, among 1486 randomly assigned patients (743 in the T-DM1 group and 743 in the trastuzumab group), invasive disease or death had occurred in 91 patients in the T-DM1 group (12.2%) and 165 patients in the trastuzumab group (22.2%). The estimated percentage of patients who were free of invasive disease at 3 years was 88.3% in the T-DM1 group and 77.0% in the trastuzumab group. Invasive disease-free survival was significantly higher in the T-DM1 group than in the trastuzumab group (hazard ratio for invasive disease or death, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.39 to 0.64; P<0.001). Distant recurrence as the first invasive-disease event occurred in 10.5% of patients in the T-DM1 group and 15.9% of those in the trastuzumab group. The safety data were consistent with the known safety profile of T-DM1, with more adverse events associated with T-DM1 than with trastuzumab alone. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer who had residual invasive disease after completion of neoadjuvant therapy, the risk of recurrence of invasive breast cancer or death was 50% lower with adjuvant T-DM1 than with trastuzumab alone. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; KATHERINE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01772472 .).

Definitive results of a phase III adjuvant trial comparing six cycles of FEC-100 to four cycles of AC in women with operable node-negative breast cancer: the NSABP B-36 trial (NRG Oncology).

PURPOSE: Results from adjuvant trials evaluating 6 cycles of epirubicin-based chemotherapy regimens suggested these programs may be more effective than 4 cycles of doxorubicin-based chemotherapy. METHOD: NSABP B-36 was a phase III clinical trial originally designed as a 2 × 2 factorial study comparing 6 cycles of 5-FU, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC-100) to 4 cycles of conventional doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) with celecoxib or placebo. Shortly after activation, concerns regarding increased cardiovascular risks among selective COX-2 inhibitors resulted in a decision to remove the celecoxib/placebo from the trial. Women with histologically node-negative invasive breast cancer who had undergone primary surgery with a lumpectomy or total mastectomy were eligible. Primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Between May 2004 and July 2008, 2722 patients were enrolled. Administration of FEC-100 did not result in improvement in DFS compared to AC (HR 1.09; 95% CI 0.92-1.29, p value = 0.31). The effect of FEC-100 compared to AC on DFS was significantly different for receptor-positive (HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.05-1.66) compared to receptor-negative patients (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.66-1.11) (treatment-by-receptor status interaction p value = 0.02). There was no statistically significant difference in the effect of treatment on overall survival (OS) with FEC-100 compared to AC (HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.84-1.35, p value = 0.61). Overall, Grade 3 and 4 adverse events were more frequent in the FEC-100 group. CONCLUSION: The results of B-36 do not support use of six-cycle anthracycline-based regimens in node-negative breast cancer. Prolongation of anthracycline-based therapy with FEC-100 does not improve DFS or OS, relative to AC for 4 cycles, and was associated with expected increases in toxicity. A statistically significant interaction between treatment and hormone receptor status favoring AC in hormone-receptor-positive breast cancers is consistent with the hypothesis that optimal duration of chemotherapy may be four cycles in these patients. Late cardiac events and deaths prior to recurrence or second cancer were infrequent on both arms, but slightly higher with FEC-100. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00087178.

Palbociclib with adjuvant endocrine therapy in early breast cancer (PALLAS): interim analysis of a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Palbociclib added to endocrine therapy improves progression-free survival in hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative, metastatic breast cancer. The PALLAS trial aimed to investigate whether the addition of 2 years of palbociclib to adjuvant endocrine therapy improves invasive disease-free survival over endocrine therapy alone in patients with hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative, early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: PALLAS is an ongoing multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study that enrolled patients at 406 cancer centres in 21 countries worldwide with stage II-III histologically confirmed hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, within 12 months of initial diagnosis. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) in permuted blocks of random size (4 or 6), stratified by anatomic stage, previous chemotherapy, age, and geographical region, by use of central telephone-based and web-based interactive response technology, to receive either 2 years of palbociclib (125 mg orally once daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle) with ongoing standard provider or patient-choice adjuvant endocrine therapy (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor, with or without concurrent luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonist), or endocrine therapy alone, without masking. The primary endpoint of the study was invasive disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who started palbociclib or endocrine therapy. This report presents results from the second pre-planned interim analysis triggered on Jan 9, 2020, when 67% of the total number of expected invasive disease-free survival events had been observed. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02513394) and EudraCT (2014-005181-30). FINDINGS: Between Sept 1, 2015, and Nov 30, 2018, 5760 patients were randomly assigned to receive palbociclib plus endocrine therapy (n=2883) or endocrine therapy alone (n=2877). At the time of the planned second interim analysis, at a median follow-up of 23·7 months (IQR 16·9-29·2), 170 of 2883 patients assigned to palbociclib plus endocrine therapy and 181 of 2877 assigned to endocrine therapy alone had invasive disease-free survival events. 3-year invasive disease-free survival was 88·2% (95% CI 85·2-90·6) for palbociclib plus endocrine therapy and 88·5% (85·8-90·7) for endocrine therapy alone (hazard ratio 0·93 [95% CI 0·76-1·15]; log-rank p=0·51). As the test statistic comparing invasive disease-free survival between groups crossed the prespecified futility boundary, the independent data monitoring committee recommended discontinuation of palbociclib in patients still receiving palbociclib and endocrine therapy. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (1742 [61·3%] of 2840 patients on palbociclib and endocrine therapy vs 11 [0·3%] of 2903 on endocrine therapy alone), leucopenia (857 [30·2%] vs three [0·1%]), and fatigue (60 [2·1%] vs ten [0·3%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 351 (12·4%) of 2840 patients on palbociclib plus endocrine therapy versus 220 (7·6%) of 2903 patients on endocrine therapy alone. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: At the planned second interim analysis, addition of 2 years of adjuvant palbociclib to adjuvant endocrine therapy did not improve invasive disease-free survival compared with adjuvant endocrine therapy alone. On the basis of these findings, this regimen cannot be recommended in the adjuvant setting. Long-term follow-up of the PALLAS population and correlative studies are ongoing. FUNDING: Pfizer.

A qualitative study to evaluate physician attitudes regarding omission of surgery among exceptional responders to neoadjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer (NRG-CC006).

PURPOSE: Accrual to clinical trials that challenge well-established treatment paradigms represents a unique challenge. Physician opinions on investigation of a novel approach to breast cancer treatment, in which patients with complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy are offered omission of lumpectomy, are unknown. NRG-CC006 sought to describe physician attitudes toward a novel approach to breast cancer treatment. METHODS: We recruited 18 participants in the fields of surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology to participate in the semi-structured telephone interviews. Main outcomes are qualitative themes associated with omission of surgery. RESULTS: Of 18 interview participants, specialty and gender were evenly represented across surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology. Qualitative themes included general attitudes toward treatment de-escalation, stakeholder considerations, and trial/protocol considerations. The vast majority of participants expressed interest in investigation of omission of surgery, with all participants endorsing need for further investigation into treatment de-escalation. Stakeholder considerations in opening such a trial emphasized need for multidisciplinary involvement and, particularly, the unique role of surgeons as gatekeepers in breast cancer treatment. Finally, participants endorsed a need for further foundational studies to develop ways to predict complete pathologic response to chemotherapy without surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians expressed interest in investigating a novel approach to breast cancer treatment that would omit surgery in complete responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Multidisciplinary input, and specifically surgeon engagement, will be key to the success of future investigations. Ongoing work to develop approaches to predict pathologic complete response accurately is needed to achieve the promise of this idea. ClinTrials #: BR005: NCT03188393 June 13, 2017.

Patient-reported outcomes from KATHERINE: A phase 3 study of adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine versus trastuzumab in patients with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant therapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The phase 3 KATHERINE trial demonstrated significantly improved invasive disease-free survival with adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) versus trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer and residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus HER2-targeted therapy. METHODS: Patients who received taxane- and trastuzumab-containing neoadjuvant therapy (with/without anthracyclines) and had residual invasive disease (breast and/or axillary nodes) at surgery were randomly assigned to 14 cycles of adjuvant T-DM1 (3.6 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks) or trastuzumab (6 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks). The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and breast cancer module (QLQ-BR23) were completed at screening, at day 1 of cycles 5 and 11, within 30 days after study drug completion, and at 6- and 12-month follow-up visits. RESULTS: Of patients who were randomly assigned to T-DM1 (n = 743) and trastuzumab (n = 743), 612 (82%) and 640 (86%), respectively, had valid baseline and ≥1 postbaseline assessments. No clinically meaningful changes (≥10 points) from baseline in mean QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 scores occurred in either arm. More patients receiving T-DM1 reported clinically meaningful deterioration at any assessment point in role functioning (49% vs 41%), appetite loss (38% vs 28%), constipation (47% vs 38%), fatigue (66% vs 60%), nausea/vomiting (39% vs 30%), and systemic therapy side effects (49% vs 36%). These differences were no longer apparent at the 6-month follow-up assessment, except for role functioning (23% vs 16%). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that health-related quality of life was generally maintained in both study arms over the course of treatment.

Long-term primary results of accelerated partial breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for early-stage breast cancer: a randomised, phase 3, equivalence trial.

BACKGROUND: Whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for patients with early-stage breast cancer decreases ipsilateral breast-tumour recurrence (IBTR), yielding comparable results to mastectomy. It is unknown whether accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) to only the tumour-bearing quadrant, which shortens treatment duration, is equally effective. In our trial, we investigated whether APBI provides equivalent local tumour control after lumpectomy compared with whole-breast irradiation. METHODS: We did this randomised, phase 3, equivalence trial (NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413) in 154 clinical centres in the USA, Canada, Ireland, and Israel. Adult women (>18 years) with early-stage (0, I, or II; no evidence of distant metastases, but up to three axillary nodes could be positive) breast cancer (tumour size ≤3 cm; including all histologies and multifocal breast cancers), who had had lumpectomy with negative (ie, no detectable cancer cells) surgical margins, were randomly assigned (1:1) using a biased-coin-based minimisation algorithm to receive either whole-breast irradiation (whole-breast irradiation group) or APBI (APBI group). Whole-breast irradiation was delivered in 25 daily fractions of 50 Gy over 5 weeks, with or without a supplemental boost to the tumour bed, and APBI was delivered as 34 Gy of brachytherapy or 38·5 Gy of external bream radiation therapy in 10 fractions, over 5 treatment days within an 8-day period. Randomisation was stratified by disease stage, menopausal status, hormone-receptor status, and intention to receive chemotherapy. Patients, investigators, and statisticians could not be masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome of invasive and non-invasive IBTR as a first recurrence was analysed in the intention-to-treat population, excluding those patients who were lost to follow-up, with an equivalency test on the basis of a 50% margin increase in the hazard ratio (90% CI for the observed HR between 0·667 and 1·5 for equivalence) and a Cox proportional hazard model. Survival was assessed by intention to treat, and sensitivity analyses were done in the per-protocol population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00103181. FINDINGS: Between March 21, 2005, and April 16, 2013, 4216 women were enrolled. 2109 were assigned to the whole-breast irradiation group and 2107 were assigned to the APBI group. 70 patients from the whole-breast irradiation group and 14 from the APBI group withdrew consent or were lost to follow-up at this stage, so 2039 and 2093 patients respectively were available for survival analysis. Further, three and four patients respectively were lost to clinical follow-up (ie, survival status was assessed by phone but no physical examination was done), leaving 2036 patients in the whole-breast irradiation group and 2089 in the APBI group evaluable for the primary outcome. At a median follow-up of 10·2 years (IQR 7·5-11·5), 90 (4%) of 2089 women eligible for the primary outcome in the APBI group and 71 (3%) of 2036 women in the whole-breast irradiation group had an IBTR (HR 1·22, 90% CI 0·94-1·58). The 10-year cumulative incidence of IBTR was 4·6% (95% CI 3·7-5·7) in the APBI group versus 3·9% (3·1-5·0) in the whole-breast irradiation group. 44 (2%) of 2039 patients in the whole-breast irradiation group and 49 (2%) of 2093 patients in the APBI group died from recurring breast cancer. There were no treatment-related deaths. Second cancers and treatment-related toxicities were similar between the two groups. 2020 patients in the whole-breast irradiation group and 2089 in APBI group had available data on adverse events. The highest toxicity grade reported was: grade 1 in 845 (40%), grade 2 in 921 (44%), and grade 3 in 201 (10%) patients in the APBI group, compared with grade 1 in 626 (31%), grade 2 in 1193 (59%), and grade 3 in 143 (7%) in the whole-breast irradiation group. INTERPRETATION: APBI did not meet the criteria for equivalence to whole-breast irradiation in controlling IBTR for breast-conserving therapy. Our trial had broad eligibility criteria, leading to a large, heterogeneous pool of patients and sufficient power to detect treatment equivalence, but was not designed to test equivalence in patient subgroups or outcomes from different APBI techniques. For patients with early-stage breast cancer, our findings support whole-breast irradiation following lumpectomy; however, with an absolute difference of less than 1% in the 10-year cumulative incidence of IBTR, APBI might be an acceptable alternative for some women. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute, US Department of Health and Human Services.

Clinical Trials for the Surgical Oncologist: Opportunities and Hurdles.

Advancements in clinical practice usually require level one evidence from clinical trials that directly compare new approaches to standard of care. While clinical trials have provided data to guide advances in practices across surgical oncology, all too often accrual to clinical trials is slower than anticipated, and once results are presented and published, adoption in clinical practice is slow. Why and how can surgeons be successfully involved with clinical trials? An expert panel discusses the basic infrastructure of clinical trials, investigator-initiated trials, the National Clinical Trials Network, and opportunities for surgeon involvement. Two national clinical trials, NSABP B-51/RTOG 1304 and PROSPECT N1048, are discussed to highlight the role of the surgical oncologist.

Changing frameworks in treatment sequencing of triple-negative and HER2-positive, early-stage breast cancers.

Important results are emerging from clinical trials showing that surgery followed by chemotherapy might not be the optimal strategy to maximise a patient's chance of survival from triple-negative or HER2-positive breast cancers. Administering chemotherapy before surgery provides an opportunity to directly observe the efficacy of a particular chemotherapy regimen. Patients who have extensive residual invasive cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy are at a high risk of recurrence for metastatic disease, which, in turn, make these patients ideal candidates for clinical trials. Two important clinical trials, CREATE-X (UMIN000000843) and KATHERINE (NCT01772472), have shown improved disease-free survival with postoperative capecitabine and ado-trastuzumab emtansine in patients with either triple-negative or HER2-positive breast cancer who had residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The opportunity for residual-disease guided therapy, as observed in these trials, is lost when patients undergo surgery first. In this Personal View, we discuss the clinical implications of the CREATE-X and KATHERINE trials and place them into context with other developments in the adjuvant setting of early-stage breast cancer. We suggest that neoadjuvant systemic therapy should be considered as the new standard of care for HER2-positive and oestrogen receptor negative breast cancer, even for patients who present with operable (T1 or T2) disease.

Use of letrozole after aromatase inhibitor-based therapy in postmenopausal breast cancer (NRG Oncology/NSABP B-42): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of extended therapy with aromatase inhibitors in patients with postmenopausal breast cancer is unknown. In the NSABP B-42 study, we aimed to determine whether extended letrozole treatment improves disease-free survival after 5 years of aromatase inhibitor-based therapy in women with postmenopausal breast cancer. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial was done in 158 centres in the USA, Canada, and Ireland. Postmenopausal women with stage I-IIIA hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, who were disease-free after about 5 years of treatment with an aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen followed by an aromatase inhibitor, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 5 years of letrozole (2·5 mg orally per day) or placebo. Randomisation was stratified by pathological node status, previous tamoxifen use, and lowest bone mineral density T score in the lumbosacral spine, total hip, or femoral neck. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival, defined as time from randomisation to breast cancer recurrence, second primary malignancy, or death, and was analysed by intention to treat. To adjust for previous interim analyses, the two-sided statistical significance level for disease-free survival was set at 0·0418. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00382070, is active, and is no longer enrolling patients. FINDINGS: Between Sept 28, 2006, and Jan 6, 2010, 3966 patients were randomly assigned to receive letrozole (n=1983) or placebo (n=1983). Follow-up information was available for 3903 patients for the analyses of disease-free survival. Median follow-up was 6·9 years (IQR 6·1-7·5). Letrozole treatment did not significantly improve disease-free survival (339 disease-free survival events were reported in the placebo group and 292 disease-free survival events were reported in the letrozole group; hazard ratio 0·85, 95% CI 0·73-0·999; p=0·048). 7-year disease-free survival estimate was 81·3% (95% CI 79·3-83·1) in the placebo group and 84·7% (82·9-86·4) in the letrozole group. The most common grade 3 adverse events were arthralgia (47 [2%] of 1933 patients in the placebo group vs 50 [3%] of 1941 patients in the letrozole group) and back pain (44 [2%] vs 38 [2%]). The most common grade 4 adverse event in the placebo group was thromboembolic event (eight [<1%]) and the most common grade 4 adverse events in the letrozole group were urinary tract infection, hypokalaemia, and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (four [<1%] each). INTERPRETATION: After 5 years of aromatase inhibitor-based therapy, 5 years of letrozole therapy did not significantly prolong disease-free survival compared with placebo. Careful assessment of potential risks and benefits is required before recommending extended letrozole therapy to patients with early-stage breast cancer. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute, Korea Health Technology R&D Project, Novartis.

Pathologic complete response and outcomes by intrinsic subtypes in NSABP B-41, a randomized neoadjuvant trial of chemotherapy with trastuzumab, lapatinib, or the combination.

PURPOSE: NSABP B-41, a phase three randomized trial, evaluated neoadjuvant lapatinib, trastuzumab, or the combination with chemotherapy in patients with HER2-positive operable breast cancer. Though no significant difference in pathologic complete response (pCR) was found among the three arms, pCR was associated with prolonged survival. We analyzed tumor intrinsic subtypes with Prediction Analysis of Microarray 50 in a subset of B-41 patients to determine their value in predicting HER2-targeting benefit. METHODS: Pearson's Chi square test and logistic regression were used to compare pCR in the breast and nodes (ypT0/Tis ypN0). Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox models were used to compare event-free and overall survival among subtypes. RESULTS: Intrinsic subtypes were determined in 271 baseline core biopsy samples. The pCR rate among patients with HER2-enriched (HER2E) subtype was greater compared to other subtypes combined (120/197, 60.9% versus 19/74, 25.7%; p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis among patients receiving trastuzumab-containing regimens (with clinical factors and HER2E subtype as factors), HER2E subtype was most strongly associated with pCR [OR 8.41 (95% CI 2.52-28.1) p < 0.001]. Patients with HER2E tumors did not benefit more from dual HER2-targeted therapy versus trastuzumab. The pCR rate was higher among HER2E tumors versus other subtypes in both estrogen receptor-positive and -negative tumors (p ≤ 0.001). Higher ESR1 gene expression was associated with lower pCR rate. No association was observed between subtype and long-term outcomes. CONCLUSION: Patients with HER2E tumors were most likely to attain pCR versus other subtypes. HER2E subtype represents a favorable marker for predicting HER2-targeting benefit, particularly with trastuzumab-based therapies.

Metaplastic breast carcinoma: Current therapeutic approaches and novel targeted therapies.

Metaplastic breast carcinoma (MBC) is a rare subtype of invasive breast cancer consisting of various combinations of malignant epithelial and mesenchymal cells. Its aggressive growth pattern combined with its histological heterogeneity account for MBC's characteristic resistance to systemic therapies, which subsequently leads to increased risk of recurrence and breast cancer mortality compared with other invasive mammary carcinomas. The aim of this review is to discuss the current therapeutic approaches, both in loco-regional as well as in systemic management of MBC. With the accumulation of knowledge from histopathologic assessment and the increasing identification of underlying molecular aberrations, emerging, novel targeted therapies will enable physicians to implement a more individualized and efficacious therapeutic strategy, leading hopefully to an improvement in the poor prognosis of MBC.

Risk factors for locoregional disease recurrence after breast-conserving therapy in patients with breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: An international collaboration and individual patient meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have reported a high risk of local disease recurrence (LR) and locoregional disease recurrence (LRR) in patients with breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) and breast-conserving therapy (BCT). The objective of the current study was to identify potential risk factors for LR and LRR after NCT and BCT. METHODS: Individual patient data sets from 9 studies were pooled. The outcomes of interest were the occurrence of LR and/or LRR. A 1-stage meta-analytic approach was used. Cox proportional hazards regression models were applied to identify factors that were predictive of LR and LRR, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 9 studies (4125 patients) provided their data sets. The 10-year LR rate was 6.5%, whereas the 10-year LRR rate was 10.3%. Four factors were found to be associated with a higher risk of LR: 1) estrogen receptor-negative disease; 2) cN + disease; 3) a lack of pathologic complete response in axilla (pN0); and 4) pN2 to pN3 disease. The predictive score for LR determined 3 risk groups: a low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk group with 10-year LR rates of 4.0%, 7.9%, and 20.4%, respectively. Two additional factors were found to be associated with an increased risk of LRR: cT3 to cT4 disease and a lack of pathologic complete response in the breast. The predictive score for LRR determined 3 risk groups; a low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk group with 10-year LRR rates of 3.2%, 10.1%, and 24.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: BCT after NCT appears to be an oncologically safe procedure for a large percentage of patients with breast cancer. Two easy-to-use clinical scores were developed that can help clinicians to identify patients at higher risk of LR and LRR after NCT and BCT and individualize the postoperative treatment plan and follow-up. Cancer 2018;124:2923-30. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Current approach of the axilla in patients with early-stage breast cancer.

The surgical approach of the axilla in patients with early-stage breast cancer has witnessed considerable evolution during the past 25 years. The previously undisputed gold standard of axillary-lymph-node dissection for staging has now been replaced by sentinel-lymph-node biopsy for patients with clinically negative axilla. For selected patients with limited sentinel-lymph-node involvement, completion axillary-lymph-node dissection can be omitted or replaced by axillary radiotherapy, reducing morbidity. The clinical interest of axillary staging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is increasing and this approach might contribute to morbidity reduction, and to the further tailoring of future systemic and locoregional treatment decisions by response assessment. Refinement of the sentinel-lymph-node biopsy technique might overcome the slightly impaired success rates in this setting. New techniques for lymphatic mapping attempt to further simplify the procedure. In view of the declining influence of axillary nodal status on adjuvant therapy decision-making, ongoing clinical trials will evaluate whether sentinel-lymph-node biopsy can be avoided altogether in selected patients.

21-Gene Recurrence Score for prognosis and prediction of taxane benefit after adjuvant chemotherapy plus endocrine therapy: results from NSABP B-28/NRG Oncology.

BACKGROUND: The 21-gene recurrence score (RS) predicts outcome and benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy benefit in breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy. In the NSABP B-28 study, we evaluated the 21-gene RS for its prognostic impact and its ability to predict benefit from paclitaxel (P) in node-positive, estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy plus tamoxifen. METHODS: The B-28 trial compared doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) with AC followed by P in 3060 patients. Tamoxifen for 5 years was also given to patients > 50 years and those < 50 years with ER+ and/or progesterone receptor-positive (PR+) tumors. The present study includes 1065 ER-positive, tamoxifen-treated patients with RS assessment. Median follow-up time was 11.2 years. RESULTS: In univariate analyses, RS was a significant predictor of outcome. In multivariate analyses, RS remained a significant independent predictor of outcome beyond clinico-pathologic factors, age, and type of surgery (p < 0.001). In the study population (n = 1065), the disease-free survival (DFS) hazard ratio (HR) with adding P to AC was 0.87 (95% CI 0.72-1.05; p = 0.14). RS was not a significant predictor of P benefit: for DFS, HRs for adding P to AC in RS low, intermediate, and high subgroups were 1.01 (95% CI 0.69-1.47; p = 0.99), 0.84 (95% CI 0.62-1.14; p = 0.26), and 0.81 (95% CI 0.60-1.10; p = 0.21), respectively (interaction p = 0.64). Similar findings were observed for the other study endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: RS maintains significant prognostic impact in ER-positive, node-positive patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy plus tamoxifen. However, RS did not significantly predict benefit from adding paclitaxel to AC chemotherapy. (Trial Registration: PDQ: NSABP-B-28).

Anastrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing lumpectomy plus radiotherapy (NSABP B-35): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Ductal carcinoma in situ is currently managed with excision, radiotherapy, and adjuvant hormone therapy, usually tamoxifen. We postulated that an aromatase inhibitor would be safer and more effective. We therefore undertook this trial to compare anastrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing lumpectomy plus radiotherapy. METHODS: The double-blind, randomised, phase 3 National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-35 trial was done in 333 participating NSABP centres in the USA and Canada. Postmenopausal women with hormone-positive ductal carcinoma in situ treated by lumpectomy with clear resection margins and whole-breast irradiation were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either oral tamoxifen 20 mg per day (with matching placebo in place of anastrozole) or oral anastrozole 1 mg per day (with matching placebo in place of tamoxifen) for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by age (<60 vs ≥60 years) and patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was breast cancer-free interval, defined as time from randomisation to any breast cancer event (local, regional, or distant recurrence, or contralateral breast cancer, invasive disease, or ductal carcinoma in situ), analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00053898, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2003, and June 15, 2006, 3104 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups (1552 to tamoxifen and 1552 to anastrozole). As of Feb 28, 2015, follow-up information was available for 3083 patients for overall survival and 3077 for all other disease-free endpoints, with median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 8·2-10·0). In total, 212 breast cancer-free interval events occurred: 122 in the tamoxifen group and 90 in the anastrozole group (HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·56-0·96], p=0·0234). A significant time-by-treatment interaction (p=0·0410) became evident later in the study. There was also a significant interaction between treatment and age group (p=0·0379), showing that anastrozole is superior only in women younger than 60 years of age. Adverse events did not differ between the groups, except for thrombosis or embolism--a known side-effect of tamoxifen-for which there were 17 grade 4 or worse events in the tamoxifen group versus four in the anastrozole group. INTERPRETATION: Compared with tamoxifen, anastrozole treatment provided a significant improvement in breast cancer-free interval, mainly in women younger than 60 years of age. This finding means that women will benefit from having a choice of effective agents for ductal carcinoma in situ. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP.

Patient-reported outcomes with anastrozole versus tamoxifen for postmenopausal patients with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with lumpectomy plus radiotherapy (NSABP B-35): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The NSABP B-35 trial compared 5 years of treatment with anastrozole versus tamoxifen for reducing subsequent occurrence of breast cancer in postmenopausal patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. This report assesses the effect of these drugs on quality of life and symptoms. METHODS: The study was done at 333 hospitals in North America. Postmenopausal women with hormone-positive ductal carcinoma in situ treated by lumpectomy with clear resection margins and whole breast irradiation were randomly assigned to receive either tamoxifen (20 mg/day) or anastrazole (1 mg/day) for 5 years, stratified by age (<60 years vs ≥60 years). Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Patients completed questionnaires at baseline and every 6 months thereafter for 6 years. The primary outcomes were SF-12 physical and mental health component scale scores, and vasomotor symptoms (as per the BCPT symptom scale). Secondary outcomes were vaginal symptoms and sexual functioning. Exploratory outcomes were musculoskeletal pain, bladder symptoms, gynaecological symptoms, cognitive symptoms, weight problems, vitality, and depression. We did the analyses by intention to treat, including patients who completed questionnaires at baseline and at least once during follow-up. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00053898. FINDINGS: Between Jan 6, 2003, and June 15, 2006, 3104 patients were enrolled in the study, of whom 1193 were included in the quality-of-life substudy: 601 assigned to tamoxifen and 592 assigned to anastrozole. We detected no significant difference between treatment groups for: physical health scores (mean severity score 46·72 for tamoxifen vs 45·85 for anastrozole; p=0·20), mental health scores (52·38 vs 51·48; p=0·38), energy and fatigue (58·34 vs 57·54; p=0·86), or symptoms of depression (6·19 vs 6·39; p=0·46) over 5 years. Vasomotor symptoms (1·33 vs 1·17; p=0·011), difficulty with bladder control (0·96 vs 0·80; p=0·0002), and gynaecological symptoms (0·29 vs 0·18; p<0·0001) were significantly more severe in the tamoxifen group than in the anastrozole group. Musculoskeletal pain (1·50 vs 1·72; p=0·0006) and vaginal symptoms (0·76 vs 0·86; p=0·035) were significantly worse in the anastrozole group than in the tamoxifen group. Sexual functioning did not differ significantly between the two treatments (43·65 vs 45·29; p=0·56). Younger age was significantly associated with more severe vasomotor symptoms (mean severity score 1·45 for age <60 years vs 0·65 for age ≥60 years; p=0·0006), vaginal symptoms (0·98 vs 0·65; p<0·0001), weight problems (1·32 vs 1·02; p<0·0001), and gynaecological symptoms (0·26 vs 0·22; p=0·014). INTERPRETATION: Given the similar efficacy of tamoxifen and anastrozole for women older than age 60 years, decisions about treatment should be informed by the risk for serious adverse health effects and the symptoms associated with each drug. For women younger than 60 years old, treatment decisions might be driven by efficacy (favouring anastrozole); however, if the side-effects of anastrozole are intolerable, then switching to tamoxifen is a good alternative. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals.

Society of Surgical Oncology Breast Disease Working Group Statement on Prophylactic (Risk-Reducing) Mastectomy.

Over the past several years, there has been an increasing rate of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (BPM) and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) surgeries. Since publication of the 2007 SSO position statement on the use of risk-reducing mastectomy, there have been significant advances in the understanding of breast cancer biology and treatment. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the current literature as a resource to facilitate a shared and informed decision-making process regarding the use of risk-reducing mastectomy.