Search

Background: In HER2-positive breast cancer, time elapsed between completion of (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab and diagnosis of metastatic disease ('trastuzumab-free interval', TFI) is crucial to choose the optimal first-line treatment. Nevertheless, there is no clear evidence to support its possible prognostic role., Methods: In the Adjuvant Lapatinib and/or Trastuzumab Treatment Optimisation (ALTTO) trial, patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer were randomised to 1 year of either trastuzumab alone, lapatinib alone, their sequence or their combination. This exploratory analysis included only patients in the trastuzumab alone or trastuzumab plus lapatinib arms who developed a distant disease-free survival (DDFS) event. Overall survival (OS) was defined as time between date of DDFS event and death; age at diagnosis, tumour size and hormone receptor status were the variables included in the multivariate models., Results: Out of 8381 patients included in ALTTO, 404 patients in the trastuzumab alone and trastuzumab plus lapatinib arms developed a DDFS event, of which 201 occurred < 12 months (group A) and 203 >12 months (group B) after completion of adjuvant trastuzumab. No significant difference in location of first DDFS event was observed (p=0.073); a numerically higher number of patients in group A than in group B developed brain metastasis (26% vs 15%). Choice of first-line therapy differed between the two groups (p=0.022): in group A, more patients received lapatinib (25% vs 11%) and less pertuzumab (8% vs 17%). Median OS was 29.3 and 18.4 months in groups B and A, respectively (adjusted HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.54-0.89; p=0.004). The longer OS for patients in group B was observed across the analysed subgroups without interaction according to hormone receptor status (p=0.814) nor type of administered adjuvant anti-HER2 treatment (p=0.233)., Conclusions: TFI has prognostic value in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer treated with adjuvant trastuzumab-based therapy. TFI is a valid tool to better individualise clinical recommendations and to design future first-line treatment trials for metastatic patients., Competing Interests: Competing interests: ML acted as a consultant for Roche and Novartis, and received speaker honoraria from Theramex, Roche, Takeda, Novartis, Pfizer and Lilly outside the submitted work. NFP acted as a consultant for Lilly; received speaker honoraria from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Lilly and Roche-Genentech, travel support from Novartis and research grants from Daiichi Sankyo, MSD and BMS outside the submitted work. OW reports employment at Novartis. LDM acted as a consultant for Roche, Novartis, MSD, Pfizer, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Genomic Health, Lilly, Seattle Genetics, Eisai, Pierre Fabre, Daiichi Sankyo; received speaker honoraria from Roche, Novartis, Lilly and MSD, and travel grants from Roche, Pfizer and Celgene outside the submitted work. RC received speaker fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, AstraZeneca and Janssen, and travel support from AstraZeneca and Pfizer, outside the submitted work. AM-A received research grants from GSK/Novartis (to the institution) outside the submitted work. MJP served as board member of Oncolytics; received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Camel-IDS, Crescendo Biologics, Debiopharm, G1 Therapeutics, Roche-Genentech, Huya, Immunomedics, Lilly, Menarini, MSD, Novartis, Odone, Periphagen, Pfizer, Roche, Seattle Genetics, research grants from AstraZeneca, Lilly, MEDSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Radius, Roche-Genentech, Servier and Synthon (to the institution) outside the submitted work. EdA received honoraria and/or advisory board from Roche/GNE, Novartis, Seattle Genetics and Zodiac, travel grants from Roche/GNE and GSK/Novartis, research grants to his institution from Roche/GNE, Astra-Zeneca, GSK/Novartis and Servier outside the submitted work; his institution has received research grants for the conduct of ALTTO., (© Author (s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

Background: In the prepertuzumab era, we evaluated the clinical outcomes of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer who underwent first-line trastuzumab-based or lapatinib-based therapy according to prior exposure to (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab., Materials and Methods: In this multicentre retrospective cohort study conducted in 14 Italian centres of the Gruppo Italiano Mammella, consecutive patients undergoing first-line trastuzumab or lapatinib-based therapy were included. Analyses were performed according to the type of first-line therapy for metastatic disease (trastuzumab or lapatinib). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were analysed using logistic regression and time-to-event outcomes using Cox proportional hazard models controlling for relevant demographic, clinicopathological and therapy characteristics., Results: Out of 450 patients included in the study, 416 (92%) received trastuzumab and 34 (7.5%) lapatinib. As compared with the trastuzumab cohort, more patients in the lapatinib cohort had a trastuzumab-free interval <1 month (37% vs 13.9%; p=0.017) and brain metastasis as first site of relapse (38.2% vs 9.4%; p<0.001). Among the 128 patients who relapsed after prior (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab, 101 (78.9%) received first-line trastuzumab and 27 (21.1%) first-line lapatinib. The following outcomes were observed with first-line lapatinib or trastuzumab, respectively: overall response rate 45.5% vs 61.3% (p=0.184), clinical benefit rate 68.2% vs 72.5% (p=0.691), median progression-free survival (PFS) 11.4 vs 12.0 months (p=0.814) and median overall survival (OS) 34.7 vs 48.2 months (p=0.722). In patients with brain metastasis as first site of relapse, median PFS was 12.2 vs 9.9 months (p=0.093) and median OS 33.7 vs 28.5 months (p=0.280), respectively., Conclusions: In patients with HER2-positive breast cancer relapsing after prior (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab, first-line treatment with trastuzumab or lapatinib was not associated with a significant difference in the clinical outcomes. A non-significant trend favouring the use of lapatinib was observed in patients with brain metastasis as the first site of relapse., Competing Interests: Competing interests: ARF received travel grant directed to his institution to participate in scientific meeting from Roche and Novartis outside of the submitted work. FP served as a consultant and received honoraria, outside the submitted work, from Amgen, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pierre-Fabre, Pfizer, Roche; received research funding from Astrazeneca, Eisai, Roche outside the submitted work and received travel grants from Celgene, Roche, Servier outside the submitted work. FM served as a consultant and/or received speaker’s honoraria from Novartis, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Pierre Fabre, Roche and Daiichi Sankyo. ML served as a consultant for Teva and received honoraria from Theramex and Takeda outside the submitted work. LDM served as a consultant and received honoraria, outside the submitted work, from Roche, Novartis, Astrazeneca, Eisai, Eli lilly, MSD, Genomic health, Takeda, Ipsen, Pfeizer, Seattle Genetics., (© Author (s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

Breast cancer is still the most frequent cancer diagnosed in women aged ≤40 years and the primary cause of death in this age group. The management of these patients needs a dedicated approach involving a multidisciplinary team that takes into account their treatment and survivorship issues. The present review aims to provide a perspective on the many challenges associated with treatment of young women with early breast cancer. We will focus on the standard (neo)adjuvant treatment, highlighting the paucity of age-specific results about the available genomic signatures, the groundbreaking landscape of adjuvant endocrine therapy and the relevant issue of the fertility preservation., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LDM received honoraria from Takeda and personal fees from Ipsen and Takeda outside the submitted work. ML served as a consultant for Teva and received honoraria from Theramex outside the submitted work.

Single-agent poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) have been approved as the first targeted therapy available for patients with BRCA -mutated HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. This meta-analysis aimed to better evaluate activity, efficacy and safety of single-agent PARPi in this population. A systematic search of Medline, Embase and conference proceedings up to 31 January 2018 was conducted to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating single-agent PARPi versus monochemotherapy in patients with BRCA -mutated HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. Using the random-effect model, we calculated summary risk estimates (pooled HR and OR with 95% CI) for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), any grade and grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs), treatment discontinuation rate and time to deterioration in quality of life (QoL). Two RCTs (n=733) were included. As compared with monochemotherapy, single-agent PARPi significantly improved PFS (HR 0.56(95% CI 0.45 to 0.70)) and ORR (OR 4.15 (95% CI 2.82 to 6.10)), with no difference in OS (HR 0.82 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.05)). Single-agent PARPi significantly increased risk of anaemia and any grade headache, but reduced risk of neutropenia and any grade palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome as compared with monochemotherapy. No significant differences in other AEs and treatment discontinuation rate were observed. Patients treated with PARPi experienced a significant delayed time to QoL deterioration (HR 0.40 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.54)). Single-agent PARPi showed to be an effective, well tolerated and useful treatment in maintaining QoL of patients with BRCA -mutated HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LDM received personal fees from Novartis Pharma AG, Roche-Genentech, Ipsen, Astrazeneca, Takeda, Eli Lilly outside the submitted work. EdA received honoraria from Roche-Genentech, research grant from Roche-Genentech (to the institution) and travel grants from Roche-Genentech and GlaxoSmithKline outside the submitted work. ML served as a consultant for Teva outside the submitted work.