Search

Background N-terminal pro–brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is a cardiac biomarker associated with the risk of heart failure and death in the general population, but it has not been explored in cancer survivors. Methods Using a US nationally representative sample of adults 20 years of age and older from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 1999 to 2004, this study compared NT-proBNP levels between adults without cancer (n = 12 574) and adult cancer survivors (n = 787). It examined the association of NT-proBNP with all-cause and cause-specific mortality among cancer survivors. Results Cancer survivors had higher NT-proBNP levels than adults without cancer (median [interquartile range] = 125.4 pg/mL [52.4-286.0] vs 43.2 pg/mL [20.3-95.0]). In particular, survivors of breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers had higher NT-proBNP levels than adults without cancer (multivariable-adjusted P  < .05). In total, 471 survivors died (141 from cancer; 95 from cardiac disease) during a median follow-up period of 13.4 years (9393 person-years). Among cancer survivors, higher NT-proBNP levels were statistically associated with increased risks of all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.18 to 1.46) and cardiac death (HR = 1.55, 95% CI = 1.21 to 2.00) but not with death from cancer (HR = 1.10, 95% CI = 0.92 to 1.32]). Higher NT-proBNP levels were associated with elevated overall mortality in survivors of prostate cancer (HR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.22 to 1.81) and colorectal cancer (HR = 1.78, 95% CI = 1.00 to 3.16) (P  = .169 for interaction). Nonlinear dose-response relationships were observed between NT-proBNP and mortality, with statistically significant relationships emerging above 125 pg/mL. Conclusions Cancer survivors had higher NT-proBNP levels than adults without cancer, and elevated NT-proBNP levels were associated with higher risks of all-cause and cardiac mortality in cancer survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a better tool for evaluating the experiences of patients who have symptomatic, treatment-associated adverse events (AEs) compared with clinician-rated AEs. The authors present PROs assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and treatment-related neurotoxicity for adjuvant capecitabine versus platinum on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG-ACRIN) EA1131 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02445391). Methods: Participants completed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale (platinum arm only) at baseline, cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), 6 months, and 15 months. Because of early termination, power was insufficient to test the hypothesis that HRQoL, as assessed by the NFBSI-16 treatment side-effect (TSE) subscale, would be better at 6 and 15 months in the capecitabine arm; all analyses were exploratory. Means were compared by using t-tests or the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and proportions were compared by using the χ2 test. Results: Two hundred ninety-six of 330 eligible patients provided PROs. The mean NFBSI-16 TSE subscale score was lower for the platinum arm at baseline (p = .02; absolute difference, 0.6 points) and for the capecitabine arm at C3D1 (p = .04; absolute difference, 0.5 points), but it did not differ at other times. The mean change in TSE subscale scores differed between the arms from baseline to C3D1 (platinum arm, 0.15; capecitabine arm, -0.72; p = .03), but not from baseline to later time points. The mean decline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale scores exceeded the minimal meaningful change (1.38 points) from baseline to each subsequent time point (all p < .05). Conclusions: Despite the similar frequency of clinician-rated AEs, PROs identified greater on-treatment symptom burden with capecitabine and complemented clinician-rated AEs by characterizing patients' experiences during chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PurposeWe compared nab-paclitaxel or ixabepilone once per week to paclitaxel with bevacizumab as first-line therapy for patients with advanced breast cancer (BC) to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) for nab-paclitaxel or ixabepilone versus paclitaxel.Patients and methodsEligible patients were age ≥ 18 years with chemotherapy-naive advanced BC. Patients were randomly assigned to bevacizumab with paclitaxel 90 mg/m(2) (arm A), nab-paclitaxel 150 mg/m(2) (arm B), or ixabepilone 16 mg/m(2) (arm C), once per week for 3 of 4 weeks. Planned enrollment was 900 patients, which would give 88% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.73.ResultsIn all, 799 patients were enrolled, and 783 received treatment (97% received bevacizumab). Arm C was closed for futility at the first interim analysis (n = 241), and arm A (n = 267) and arm B (n = 275) were closed for futility at the second interim analysis. Median PFS for paclitaxel was 11 months, ixabepilone was inferior to paclitaxel (PFS, 7.4 months; hazard ratio, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.31 to 1.93; P < .001), and nab-paclitaxel was not superior to paclitaxel (PFS, 9.3 months; hazard ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.45; P = .054). Results were concordant with overall survival; time to treatment failure was significantly shorter in both experimental arms v paclitaxel. Hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity, including peripheral neuropathy, was increased with nab-paclitaxel, with more frequent and earlier dose reductions.ConclusionIn patients with chemotherapy-naive advanced BC, ixabepilone once per week was inferior to paclitaxel, and nab-paclitaxel was not superior with a trend toward inferiority. Toxicity was increased in the experimental arms, particularly for nab-paclitaxel. Paclitaxel once per week remains the preferred palliative chemotherapy in this setting.

PurposeThe identification of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) who are expected to benefit from platinum-based chemotherapy is of interest. We conducted a single-arm phase II clinical trial of single-agent platinum for mTNBC with biomarker correlates.Patients and methodsPatients with mTNBC received first- or second-line cisplatin (75 mg/m(2)) or carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve 6) by physician's choice once every 3 weeks. Coprimary end points were objective response rate (RR) and response prediction by p63/p73 gene expression. Secondary and exploratory end points included toxicity assessment, RR in cisplatin versus carboplatin, and RR in molecularly defined subgroups, including BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.ResultsPatients (N = 86; 69 as first-line therapy) received cisplatin (n = 43) or carboplatin (n = 43). RR was 25.6% (95% CI, 16.8% to 36%) and was numerically higher with cisplatin (32.6%) than with carboplatin (18.7%). RR was 54.5% in patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations (n = 11). In patients without BRCA1/2 mutations (n = 66), exploratory analyses showed that a BRCA-like genomic instability signature (n = 32) discriminated responding and nonresponding tumors (mean homologous recombination deficiency-loss of heterozygosity/homologous recombination deficiency-large-scale state transitions [HRD-LOH/HRD-LST] scores were 12.68 and 5.11, respectively), whereas predefined analysis by p63/p73 expression status (n = 61), p53 and PIK3CA mutation status (n = 53), or PAM50 gene expression subtype (n = 55) did not. Five of the six long-term responders alive at a median of 4.5 years lacked germline BRCA1/2 mutations, and two of them had increased tumor HRD-LOH/HRD-LST scores.ConclusionPlatinum agents are active in mTNBC, especially in patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations. A measure of tumor DNA repair function may identify patients without mutations who could benefit from platinum therapy agents. Prospective controlled confirmatory trials are warranted.

Introduction The addition of taxanes to anthracycline-based chemotherapy is considered standard of care in the treatment of breast cancer. However, there are insufficient data regarding the safety of taxanes during pregnancy. The aim of this study was to describe the incidence of obstetric and neonatal adverse events associated with the use of taxane-containing chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of breast cancer during pregnancy. Methods This is a multicenter, international cohort study of breast cancer patients treated with taxanes during pregnancy. A descriptive analysis was undertaken to synthetize available data. Results A total of 103 patients were included, most of whom were treated with paclitaxel and anthracyclines given in sequence during gestation (90.1%). The median gestational age at taxane initiation was 28 weeks (range = 12-37 weeks). Grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in 7 of 103 (6.8%) patients. The most common reported obstetric complications were intrauterine growth restriction (n = 8 of 94, 8.5%) and preterm premature rupture of membranes (n = 5 of 94, 5.3%). The live birth rate was 92 of 94 (97.9%), and the median gestational age at delivery was 37 weeks (range = 32-40 weeks). Admission to an intensive care unit was reported in 14 of 88 (15.9%) neonates, and 17 of 70 (24.3%) live births resulted in small for gestational age neonates. Congenital malformations were reported in 2 of 93 (2.2%). Conclusion Obstetric and neonatal outcomes after taxane exposure during pregnancy were generally favorable and did not seem to differ from those reported in the literature with standard anthracycline-based regimens. This study supports the use of taxanes during gestation when clinically indicated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PurposeEpidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is a targetable receptor frequently overexpressed in basal-like breast cancer, which comprises most triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs), the only subtype without established targeted therapy.Patients and methodsIn this randomized phase II trial, patients with metastatic TNBC received anti-EGFR antibody cetuximab (400 mg/m(2) load then 250 mg/m(2) per week intravenously [IV]) alone, with carboplatin (area under the curve of 2, once per week IV) added after progression or as concomitant therapy from the beginning. Response rate (RR) was the primary end point; others included time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. Embedded correlative studies included molecular subtyping on archival tissue. Fresh tumor tissue before and after 7 to 14 days of therapy was used for microarray analyses exploring EGFR pathway activity and inhibition.ResultsIn 102 patients with TNBC, RRs were 6% (two of 31) to cetuximab and 16% (four of 25) to cetuximab plus carboplatin after progression. RR to those treated from the beginning with cetuximab plus carboplatin was 17% (12 of 71); 31% of patients responded or had prolonged disease stabilization. The cetuximab plus carboplatin regimen was well tolerated, but both TTP and OS were short at 2.1 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 5.5 months) and 10.4 months (95% CI, 7.7 to 13.1 months), respectively. Of 73 patients with archival tissue for analysis, 74% had basal-like molecular subtype. Sixteen patients had tumor biopsies before and 1 week after therapy; genomic patterns of the EGFR pathway showed activation in 13 and inhibition by therapy in five.ConclusionDespite strong preclinical data, combination cetuximab plus carboplatin in metastatic TNBC produced responses in fewer than 20% of patients. EGFR pathway analysis showed that most TNBCs involved activation. However, cetuximab blocked expression of the EGFR pathway in only a minority, suggesting that most had alternate mechanisms for pathway activation.

Background The expansion of hematopoietic stem cells carrying recurrent somatic mutations, termed clonal hematopoiesis (CH), is common in elderly individuals and is associated with increased risk of myeloid malignancy and all-cause mortality. Though chemotherapy is a known risk factor for developing CH, how myelosuppressive therapies affect the short-term dynamics of CH remains incompletely understood. Most studies have been limited by retrospective design, heterogeneous patient populations, varied techniques to identifying CH, and analysis of single timepoints. Methods We examined serial samples from 40 older women with triple-negative or hormone receptor–positive breast cancer treated on the prospective ADjuVANt Chemotherapy in the Elderly trial to evaluate the prevalence and dynamics of CH at baseline and throughout chemotherapy (6 and 12 weeks). Results CH was detected in 44% of patients at baseline and in 53% at any timepoint. Baseline patient characteristics were not associated with CH. Over the course of treatment, mutations exhibited a variety of dynamics, including emergence, expansion, contraction, and disappearance. All mutations in TP53 (n = 3) and PPM1D (n = 4), genes that regulate the DNA damage response, either became detectable or expanded over the course of treatment. Neutropenia was more common in patients with CH, particularly when the mutations became detectable during treatment, and CH was significantly associated with cyclophosphamide dose reductions and holds (P  = .02). Conclusions Our study shows that CH is common, dynamic, and of potential clinical significance in this population. Our results should stimulate larger efforts to understand the biological and clinical importance of CH in solid tumor malignancies. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03858322). Clinical trial registration number: NCT03858322. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ESR1 mutation (ESR1m) is a frequent cause of acquired resistance to aromatase inhibitor (AI) plus cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i), which is a first-line therapy for hormone-receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). Camizestrant is a next-generation oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD) that in a phase II study significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) over fulvestrant (also a SERD) in ER+/HER2- ABC. SERENA-6 (NCT04964934) is a randomized, double-blind, phase III study evaluating the efficacy and safety of switching from an AI to camizestrant, while maintaining the same CDK4/6i, upon detection of ESR1m in circulating tumor DNA before clinical disease progression on first-line therapy for HR+/HER2- ABC. The aim is to treat ESR1m clones and extend the duration of control of ER-driven tumor growth, delaying the need for chemotherapy. The primary end point is PFS; secondary end points include chemotherapy-free survival, time to second progression event (PFS2), overall survival, patient-reported outcomes and safety. Why will we perform this study? Patients with advanced breast cancer in which the cancer cells have the receptor for the hormone estrogen and/or progesterone are typically treated with an aromatase inhibitor, a hormone therapy that decreases estrogen being made in the body, together with an inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6), a drug that blocks the growth of cancer cells. Although cancers usually respond to treatment initially, the cancer cells eventually change, so the drug combination no longer works. For example, mutation of the estrogen receptor (referred to as ESR1m) can stop aromatase inhibitors from working. Camizestrant is an investigational drug that blocks estrogen receptors, including mutated receptors, reducing the growth and spread of cancer. Here we describe the SERENA-6 clinical trial, which is testing camizestrant as a treatment for patients with breast cancer with ESR1m. How will we perform this research? The phase III SERENA-6 trial will use blood tests to monitor if patients with breast cancer develop ESR1m while being treated with an aromatase inhibitor and a CDK4/6 inhibitor. If ESR1m is detected, yet the disease is stable, participants will be randomly assigned to either continue with the same aromatase inhibitor or switch to camizestrant while continuing with the same CDK4/6 inhibitor. The study will assess whether switching to camizestrant prolongs the time before the cancer grows, spreads or worsens. It will also assess the length of time that participants live for versus those who continue with an aromatase inhibitor. Clinical Trial Registration:NCT04964934 (ClinicalTrials.gov) SERENA-6 (NCT04964934) is an ongoing randomized, double-blind, phase III trial of camizestrant + CDK4/6i in ESR1-mutant HR+/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer during first-line treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical trials and real‐world evidence (RWE) present conflicting results on the benefit of cyclin‐dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors for patients with advanced hormone receptor–positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor‐2 overexpressing breast cancer. How can RWE be interpreted and used to help guide clinical decisions? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]