Search

Approximately 5–10% of unselected breast cancer (BC) patients retain a hereditary predisposition related to a germline mutation in BRCA1/2 genes. The poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP)-inhibitors olaparib and talazoparib have been granted marketing authorization by both FDA and EMA for adults with BRCA1/2 germline mutations and HER2-negative (HER2-) advanced BC based on the results from the phase III OlympiAd and EMBRACA trials. The panel of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) Clinical Practice Guidelines on Breast Cancer addressed two critical clinical questions, adopting the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and the Evidence to Decision framework (EtD), to develop recommendations on the use of PARP-inhibitors, with respect to single-agent chemotherapy, in patients with BRCA-related triple-negative (clinical question 1) and hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/HER2- (clinical question 2) advanced BC. Two studies were eligible (OlympiAd and EMBRACA). For both clinical questions, the Panel judged the benefit/harm balance probably in favor of the intervention, given the favorable impact in terms of PFS, ORR, and QoL at an acceptable cost in terms of toxicity; the overall certainty of the evidence was low. The panel's final recommendations were conditional in favor of PARP-inhibitors over single-agent chemotherapy in both HR+/HER2-and triple-negative BC. Finally, the Panel identified and discussed areas of uncertainty calling for further exploration. The Panel of AIOM BC Clinical Practice Guideline provided clinical recommendations on the use of PARP-inhibitors, with respect to single-agent chemotherapy, in patients with BRCA-related HER2-advanced BC by adopting the GRADE methodology. • Use of PARP-inhibitors in BRCA-related HER2-advanced BC has been addressed by the Italian Association of Medical Oncology. • The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach has been adopted. • HR+/HER2-and triple-negative BC subtypes have been addressed in two separate clinical questions. • Germline BRCA testing in HER2-advanced BC has a predictive value, being indicated independently from familial criteria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most premenopausal patients with early breast cancer (eBC) are diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive disease and therefore candidate for adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET). The Gruppo Italiano Mammella (GIM) 23-POSTER (GIM23) is a multicenter, prospective, observational study conducted in 26 Italian institutions, aiming to evaluate ET choices for premenopausal patients affected by hormone receptor-positive eBC in a real-world setting. Here we report also the results in terms of type of ET prescribed according to the definition of high-risk patients by monarchE and NATALEE trials. Between October 2019 and June 2022, 600 premenopausal patients were included, with a median age of 46 years. Almost half (271, 45.2 %) of the patients had stage I disease, while 254 (42.3 %) and 60 (10.0 %) patients had stage II and III, respectively. Overall, 149 (25.1 %) patients received tamoxifen alone, 83 (14.0 %) tamoxifen with ovarian function suppression (OFS), while 361 (60.9 %) received aromatase inhibitor (AI) with OFS. Patients treated with AI and OFS had higher number of metastatic axillary nodes, higher grade and more often received chemotherapy (all p < 0.001). According to the inclusion criteria of the monarchE and NATALEE trials, 81 patients (15.6 %) were considered high-risk for the monarchE and received AI with OFS in 88.9 % of the cases, while 231 patients (44.4 %) were considered high-risk for the NATALEE trial and received AI with OFS in 74.5 % of cases. AI with OFS is the most prescribed adjuvant ET among premenopausal patients, especially in the presence of high-risk features. • GIM23 is a prospective study including premenopausal patients with early breast cancer. • Main objective is to assess the choices of adjuvant endocrine therapy. • Aromatase inhibitor with ovarian function suppression is the most prescribed strategy. • Less prescribed strategy is tamoxifen with ovarian function suppression. • Almost half of premenopausal patients could be candidate to adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a growing understanding as science evolves that different cancer types require different approaches to treatment evaluation, especially in the metastatic stages. The introduction of new metastatic breast cancer (MBC) treatments may be hindered by several elements, including the availability of relevant evidence related to disease-specific outcomes, the benefit assessment process around the evaluation of the clinical benefit and the patients' need of new treatments. The Steering Committee (SC) found that not all issues relevant to MBC patients are consistently considered in the current benefit assessment process of new treatments. Among these are overall survival, time-to-event endpoints (e.g. progression-free survival), patients' priorities, burden of disease, MBC-specific quality of life, value in delaying chemotherapy, route of administration, side effects and toxicities, treatment adherence and the benefit of real-world evidence. This paper calls on decision makers to (1) Include MBC-specific patient priorities and outcomes in the overall benefit assessments of new MBC treatments; (2) Enhance multi-stakeholder collaboration in order to improve MBC patient outcomes. • Patient preferences should be considered in MBC treatment decision making. • The patient perspective should be integrated into treatment guidelines for MBC. • Patients should be involved in MBC policy decision making. • Multi-stakeholder collaboration could improve MBC patient outcomes and access to treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is an update of the requirements of a specialist breast centre, produced by EUSOMA and endorsed by ECCO as part of Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC) programme, and ESMO. To meet aspirations for comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations must consider the requirements in this article, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis, to treatment, to survivorship. • The centrepiece of this article is the requirements section, comprising definitions; multidisciplinary structure; minimum case, procedure and staffing volumes; and detailed descriptions of the skills of, and resources needed by, members and specialisms in the multidisciplinary team in a breast centre. • These requirements are positioned within narrative on European breast cancer epidemiology, the standard of care, challenges to delivering this standard, and supporting evidence, to enable a broad audience to appreciate the importance of establishing these requirements in specialist breast centres. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Data from recently published trials have provided practice-changing recommendations for the surgical approach to the axilla in breast cancer. Patients with T1-2 lesions, treated with breast conservation, who have not received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and have 1–2 positive sentinel nodes (Z0011-criteria) may avoid axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). We aim to describe the dissemination of this practice in Europe over an extended period of time. Our source of data was the eusomaDB, a central data warehouse of prospectively collected information of the European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists (EUSOMA). We identified cases fulfilling Z0011-criteria from 2005 to 2016 from 34 European breast centers and report trends in ALND. Data derived from Germany, Italy, Belgium, Switzerland, Austria, and Netherlands. 6671 patients fulfilled Z0011-criteria. Rates of ALND showed a statistically significant decrease from 2010 (89%) to 2011 (73%), reaching 46% in 2016 (p < 0.001). After multivariable analysis, factors associated with higher probability of ALND were earlier year of surgery, younger age, increasing tumor size and grade, and being operated in Italy (p < 0.001). The minimum and maximal rates of ALND in the most recent two-year period (2015–2016) were 0% and 83% in two centers located in different countries (p < 0.001). Our study demonstrates, a decrease in rates of ALND that started after year 2010 through the end of the study period. Wide differences were observed among centers and countries indicating the need to spread unified clinical guidelines in Europe to allow for homogeneous evidence-based practice patterns. • Indications for axillary dissection in breast cancer have changed based on trials. • Little evidence has been reported about change in practice in Europe. • Axillary dissection rates decreased from 89% to 46% in a European dataset. • Higher probability of axillary dissection was associated with: • Earlier year of surgery. • Younger age. • Increasing tumor size and grade. • Being operated in Italy. • Minimum and maximal rates of dissection recently reported: 0% and 83% in two centers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Evidence-based definitions of ‘poor-prognosis’ or ‘aggressive’ advanced breast cancer are lacking. Patients and methods We developed a prognostic factor index using data from 2203 patients treated with first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab for HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Results The risk factors most closely associated with worse OS were: disease-free interval ≤24 months; liver metastases or ≥3 involved organ sites; prior anthracycline and/or taxane therapy; triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC); and performance status 2 or prior analgesic/corticosteroid treatment. Risk of death was increased threefold in patients with ≥3 versus ≤1 risk factors (hazard ratio 3.0 [95% CI 2.6–3.4; p < 0.001]; median 16.0 vs 38.8 months, respectively). Conclusions This prognostic index may enable identification of patients with a poorer prognosis in whom more intensive systemic regimens may be appropriate. The index may also be considered in designing new trials, although it requires validation in other datasets before extrapolation to non-bevacizumab-containing therapy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00448591 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: There are no clinical tools to functionally assess degree of DNA damage in breast cancer. The comet assay is an accepted research tool for assessing DNA damage, however, most cancer studies have assessed lymphocytes as surrogate cells. The aim of this pilot study was to use the comet assay in early breast cancer directly in tumor tissue to compare DNA damage between and within traditionally defined subgroups, and to explore intra-tumoral heterogeneity. Scrapings of tumor and healthy breast tissue were obtained at primary surgery from 104 women. Comet assay was applied to quantitatively assess DNA damage, revealing substantial inter- and intra-subgroup variation. Marked intra-tumoral heterogeneity was evident across all subgroups. The degree of DNA damage for an individual could not be predicted by breast cancer subgroup. Comet assay warrants further study as a potential clinical tool for identification of tumoral DNA damage and ultimately, individualised use of DNA damaging therapy. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: It is largely known that clinical activity of a given cytotoxic agent may vary between different patients. This suggests that breast cancer sub-types can be identified within the endocrine-resistant cohort, each of them with a specific degree of sensitivity to different cytotoxic drugs. Pre-clinical and early clinical data suggest that in the future some molecular markers might have practical value in predicting cytotoxics activity in the clinical setting. The most relevant evidence is summarized below according to the type of cytotoxic agent: [(a)] Anthracyclines Topoisomerase II alpha (topo II) gene aberrations (amplification or deletion) and/or topo II protein overexpression seem to predict response to topo II inhibitors such as anthracyclines. Of note, HER-2 amplified tumors have a concomitant topo II gene aberration in approximately 50% of cases. Moreover, the majority of hyper-proliferating tumors carry topo II protein overexpression. Early clinical data suggest the existence of a direct correlation between anthracyclines activity and the presence of topo II gene aberration or topo II protein overexpression. [(b)] Taxanes Microtubule-associated parameters (MTAP) such as the TAU protein, HER-2 gene amplification, and p-53 gene mutations, have been suggested as potential predictive markers for taxanes. Although early clinical data support pre-clinical experiments, the lack of large prospectively designed clinical studies makes it difficult to draw conclusions on the predictive value of these molecular markers. [(c)] DNA-damaging agents The BRCA 1 protein seems to play a major role in activating DNA repair mechanisms. Loss-of-function BRCA 1 mutations might lead to a substantial deficit in DNA repair mechanisms. This could ultimately translate into increased tumor sensitivity to DNA-damaging agents such as alkylating compounds and platinum-derivates. Pre-clinical and early clinical data seem to suggest that some BRCA 1 gene mutations might render the tumor more sensitive to DNA-damaging agents and clinical studies have recently been activated to investigate properly this hypothesis. A new generation of ongoing clinical studies and a “focused” use of the gene micro-array technology will hopefully clarify the complex interaction existing between molecular targets and cytotoxic drug activity. This “targeted” approach to chemotherapy might ultimately lead to a more effective strategy in breast cancer medical treatment. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Luminal breast cancers demonstrate significant molecular and clinical heterogeneity, despite the commonality of shared expression of the estrogen receptor (ER). To date, no clinical trial has prospectively investigated the optimal chemotherapy regime according to luminal type, highlighting a paucity of data furthermore required to guide treatment decisions. Current methods of predicting advantage from adjuvant chemotherapy lack refinement and can over-estimate the risk of relapse, inevitably leading to a proportion of patients being unnecessarily exposed to chemotherapy. This paper will explore the evidence behind modalities which may add further value to existing known clinicopathological and molecular profiling techniques in predicting clinical benefit from chemotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy regime choice in the context of early luminal breast cancer types will be discussed, and areas for further research and debate identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The molecular subtypes of breast cancer have individual patterns of behaviour, prognosis and sensitivity to treatment, with subsequent implications for the choice of, or indeed role for adjuvant therapy. The luminal A and B subtypes make up the majority of breast cancers, but despite sharing expression of the oestrogen receptor (ER), they are molecularly distinct. It follows then that they would have different sensitivities to chemotherapy. Clinically, luminal A disease has a better prognosis than luminal B, and may not derive significant benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. However no prospective trials have specifically investigated the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in each subtype, nor do we know if certain agents are more or less effective. This paper will briefly summarise the role of molecular profiles in assessing the need for chemotherapy and predicting its effectiveness, followed by an assessment of the relative value of newer anthracycline- or taxane-containing regimes in the luminal-like subtypes, providing a review of retrospective analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The Oxford Overview process has provided us with extremely high-powered meta-analyses assessing the role of adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer. From the most recent publication, the proportional benefits from chemotherapy are relatively equivalent across all patient subgroups, a finding contradictory to our growing understanding of the role of tumour biology in dictating chemosensitivity. Several factors, including heterogeneity of patient groups and chemotherapy regimens, lack of data on underlying tumour biological subtypes, and confounding effect of chemotherapy-induced ovarian suppression in premenopausal women with hormone receptor positive breast cancer, impact on the applicability and clinical utility of the Overview in current and future oncological practice. With these considerations, the Overview has become less clinically relevant as a tool for guiding adjuvant chemotherapy treatment decisions, and a new direction is required. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: Chemotherapy is the only evidence based adjuvant systemic treatment option in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Despite emerging results for targeted biological therapies for this subpopulation, lack of robust results does not currently support their use beyond the confines of a clinical trial. Conventional systemic chemotherapy remains the standard of care and is curative in a minority of patients. There is no defined standard chemotherapy and there is currently no robust, prospective, randomized data to advise different use of specific chemotherapy agents in TNBC as compared to non-TNBC. Data suggest high sensitivity to chemotherapy, however it is yet to be determined whether this increased sensitivity is agent/regimen specific or whether it reflects general chemosensitivity. This review will focus on systemic chemotherapy in early TNBC, particularly anthracyclines and platinums, and potential predictive tools to guide chemotherapy use. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: Large adjuvant trials, over many years, have randomised thousands of women with early breast cancer to different regimens. They have been instrumental in defining our current approach in the adjuvant setting. However in clinical practice with each patient, we still have the difficulty of targeting their specific therapy, as results relating to the average trial population are often not transferable to the individual. This review of adjuvant chemotherapy trials focuses on the heterogeneity of disease, treatment, mechanisms of chemotherapy action and risk. These issues are of key importance in our interpretation and application of results from adjuvant trials. A critical issue in adjuvant chemotherapy is identification of patients at high risk of recurrence who have chemosensitive tumours. Risk of relapse does not always correlate with chemosensitivity, and cytotoxic therapy in patients with chemorefractory disease may be ineffective and associated only with toxicity. Rather than general sensitivity to cytotoxics, we need predictive biomarkers to guide which specific therapy will be effective in a particular patient. Assessment of specific biomarkers as predictive tools may individualise care and see chemotherapy implementation as targeted agents, with tumour heterogeneity reflected in heterogeneity of intervention. Already with trastuzumab, we have a subgroup predicted by Her-2 gene amplification. Anthracyclines and taxanes, whilst widely used, do not yet have prospectively proven biomarkers to predict response. Potential biomarkers for anthracyclines include topoisomerase II alpha and markers of DNA repair dysfunction, whilst for taxanes, microtubule-associated proteins may play a role. The basal phenotype may be predictive of benefit from DNA damaging agents. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]