Search

Globally, breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer and one of the leading causes of cancer-related death among women. HER2-low breast cancer represents a recently identified molecular category within breast cancer characterized by tumors displaying only slight overexpression of HER2 or lacking gene amplification. To illustrate, HER2-low tumors typically have an IHC (immune histochemistry) score of 1+ or 2+ with negative amplification. Nonetheless, recent findings indicate that even a slight amplification of HER2 could notably influence both therapeutic responses and prognostic outcomes. Our study aims to unveil the impact of HER2-low expression on the response to anthracycline and taxane-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in comparison to the HER2-negative group in non-metastatic breast cancer. This is a retrospective cohort study. All patients’ profiles with non-metastatic, HER2-low, and HER2-negative breast cancers who were administered neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and had surgery performed within the period spanning from 1 January 2018 to 30 August 2022 were enrolled. HER2-positive breast cancer patients were excluded. The evaluation of patients’ responses was conducted through the examination of surgical pathology reports to compare the two study groups (HER2-low and HER2-negative). The primary objective was evaluating the response to NACT comparing the objective response rate (ORR) in each of the two groups of HER2-low and HER2-negative patients. The total number of patients included was 262 patients; the majority were HER2-low 89% (233/262) vs. 11% (29/262) HER2-negative. An ORR (complete and partial response) to NACT was shown in 71% (185/262) of all patients. The ORR was similar in both groups, 70% (164/233) in the HER2-low group vs. 73% (21/29) in the HER2-negative group, with a statistical difference, OR: 1 (95% CI: 0.8–1), p-value 0.8. Similarly, the pathological complete response (pCR) rate was the same in both study groups at 14%, OR: 0.7 (95% CI: 0.2–3), p-value: 0.6. Interestingly, patients with hormone-positive tumors across both study groups had a higher response rate compared to hormone-negative patients. In the HER2-low cohort, the ORR was higher in patients with hormone-positive tumors in comparison with those with hormone-negative tumors [73% vs. 27%, OR: 0.8 (95% CI:0.8–1), p-value: 0.001]. Comparatively, in the HER2-negative cohort, ORR was also higher in patients with hormone-positive tumors compared to hormone-negative tumors [52% vs. 48%, OR: 2 (95% CI: 1–5), p-value: 0.05]. Subsequently, the ORR of all hormone-positive tumors with a positive outcome (CR or PR) was assessed categorizing the patients based on their HER2 expression. Concerning patients who expressed partial response (N = 115), a statistically significant difference was observed in HER2- low hormone-positive tumors as opposed to HER2-negative hormone-positive tumors [90% vs. 10%, OR: 0.7 (95% CI: 0.5–0.9), p-value: 0.001]. Remarkably, all patients with complete responses were from the HER2-low cohort. Our findings demonstrated a significant influence of HER2-low expression on the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy among patients with hormone-positive HER2-low breast cancer within the studied cohort. Further studies are needed to evaluate the influence of hormonal expression on the response rate to NACT in the HER2-low patients in our population.

IntroductionCDK4/6 inhibitors are the first-line treatment for HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. Despite their clinical benefit, they can increase healthcare expenditure. To date, there is no thorough comparison among the three approved CDK4/6 inhibitors in terms of their cost-effectiveness.ObjectiveTo investigate and compare the cost-effectiveness of CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with letrozole as a first-line treatment for advanced breast cancer with hormonal-receptor-positivity and HER-2-negativity versus one another and versus letrozole monotherapy.MethodsA 10-year within-cycle-corrected Markov’s model was employed from the healthcare payer perspective. Costs were obtained from the National Center for Cancer Care and Research (NCCCR) in Qatar. Utilities and transition probabilities were calculated from published landmark trials of PALOMA-2, MONALEESA-2, MONARCH-3, PO25, and other relevant literature. Costs, measured in Qatari Riyal (QAR), and effectiveness, measured in quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs), were incremented and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was compared to a willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of 1.5 Qatari GDP (448,758 QAR). A deterministic sensitivity analysis was implemented to account for uncertainties.ResultsRibociclib was the most effective option, generating 4.420 QALYs, followed by palbociclib (4.406 QALYs), abemaciclib (4.220 QALYs), then letrozole monotherapy (2.093 QALYs). As for cost-effectiveness, ribociclib dominated palbociclib. However, it was not cost-effective compared to abemaciclib (ICER=1,588,545 QAR/QALY). Ribociclib remained dominant over palbociclib with all uncertainties. The base-case conclusion of ribociclib versus abemaciclib remained robust over all uncertainties.ConclusionFrom the healthcare payer perspective in Qatar, ribociclib is the most effective CDK4/6 inhibitor. It was dominant over palbociclib in terms of cost-effectiveness; however, it was not cost-effective compared to abemaciclib at current prices.

Abstract Pharmacogenetic (PGx)‐informed medication prescription is a cutting‐edge genomic application in contemporary medicine, offering the potential to overcome the conventional “trial‐and‐error” approach in drug prescription. The ability to use an individual's genetic profile to predict drug responses allows for personalized drug and dosage selection, thereby enhancing the safety and efficacy of treatments. However, despite significant scientific and clinical advancements in PGx, its integration into routine healthcare practices remains limited. To address this gap, the Qatar Genome Program (QGP) has embarked on an ambitious initiative known as QPGx‐CARES (Qatar Pharmacogenetics Clinical Applications and Research Enhancement Strategies), which aims to set a roadmap for optimizing PGx research and clinical implementation on a national scale. The goal of QPGx‐CARES initiative is to integrate PGx testing into clinical settings with the aim of improving patient health outcomes. In 2022, QGP initiated several implementation projects in various clinical settings. These projects aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of PGx testing, gather valuable insights into the effective dissemination of PGx data to healthcare professionals and patients, and identify the gaps and the challenges for wider adoption. QPGx‐CARES strategy aimed to integrate evidence‐based PGx findings into clinical practice, focusing on implementing PGx testing for cardiovascular medications, supported by robust scientific evidence. The current initiative sets a precedent for the nationwide implementation of precision medicine across diverse clinical domains.

Abstract Background In line with global trends, cancer incidence and mortality may have decreased for specific types of cancer in Qatar. However, the cancer-related burden on patients, healthcare systems, and the economy is expected to expand; thus, cancer remains a significant public healthcare issue in Qatar. Qatar’s free access to cancer care represents a considerable economic burden. Ensuring the best utilization of financial resources in the healthcare sector is important to provide unified and fair access to cancer care for all patients. Experts from the Qatar Oncology Health Economics Expert Panel (Q-OHEP) aimed to establish a consistent and robust base for evaluating oncology/hematology medications; involve patients’ insights to accelerate access to cutting-edge medications; increase the value of cancer care; and reach a consensus for using cost-effective strategies and efficient methodologies in cancer treatment. Methods The Q-OHEP convened on 30 November 2021 for a 3-hour meeting to discuss cancer management, therapeutics, and health economics in Qatar, focusing on four domains: (1) regulatory, (2) procurement, (3) treatment, and (4) patients. Discussions, guided by a moderator, focused on a list of suggested open-ended questions. Results Some of the salient recommendations included the development of a formal, fast-track, preliminary approval pathway for drugs needed by patients with severe disease or in critical condition; and encouraging and promoting the conduct of local clinical trials and real-world observational studies using existing registry data. The Q-OHEP also recommended implementing a forecast system using treatment center data based on the supply/demand of formulary oncology drugs to detect treatment patterns, estimate needs, expedite procurement, and prevent shortages/delays. Furthermore, the panel discussed the needs to define value concerning cancer treatment in Qatar, implement value-based models for reimbursement decision-making such as health technology assessment and multiple-criteria decision analysis, and promote patient education and involvement/feedback in developing and implementing cancer management guidelines. Conclusion Herein, we summarize the first Q-OHEP consensus recommendations, which aim to provide a solid basis for evaluating, registering, and approving new cancer medications to accelerate patient access to novel cancer treatments in Qatar; promote/facilitate the adoption and collection of patient-reported outcomes; and implement value-based cancer care in Qatar.

Abstract Background Advances in our understanding of the tumor microenvironment have radically changed the cancer field, highlighting the emerging need for biomarkers of an active, favorable tumor immune phenotype to aid treatment stratification and clinical prognostication. Numerous immune-related gene signatures have been defined; however, their prognostic value is often limited to one or few cancer types. Moreover, the area of non-coding RNA as biomarkers remains largely unexplored although their number and biological roles are rapidly expanding. Methods We developed a multi-step process to identify immune-related long non-coding RNA signatures with prognostic connotation in multiple TCGA solid cancer datasets. Results Using the breast cancer dataset as a discovery cohort we found 2988 differentially expressed lncRNAs between immune favorable and unfavorable tumors, as defined by the immunologic constant of rejection (ICR) gene signature. Mapping of the lncRNAs to a coding-non-coding network identified 127 proxy protein-coding genes that are enriched in immune-related diseases and functions. Next, we defined two distinct 20-lncRNA prognostic signatures that show a stronger effect on overall survival than the ICR signature in multiple solid cancers. Furthermore, we found a 3 lncRNA signature that demonstrated prognostic significance across 5 solid cancer types with a stronger association with clinical outcome than ICR. Moreover, this 3 lncRNA signature showed additional prognostic significance in uterine corpus endometrial carcinoma and cervical squamous cell carcinoma and endocervical adenocarcinoma as compared to ICR. Conclusion We identified an immune-related 3-lncRNA signature with prognostic connotation in multiple solid cancer types which performed equally well and in some cases better than the 20-gene ICR signature, indicating that it could be used as a minimal informative signature for clinical implementation.

Globally, breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer and one of the leading causes of cancer-related death among women. HER2-low breast cancer represents a recently identified molecular category within breast cancer characterized by tumors displaying only slight overexpression of HER2 or lacking gene amplification. To illustrate, HER2-low tumors typically have an IHC (immune histochemistry) score of 1+ or 2+ with negative amplification. Nonetheless, recent findings indicate that even a slight amplification of HER2 could notably influence both therapeutic responses and prognostic outcomes. Our study aims to unveil the impact of HER2-low expression on the response to anthracycline and taxane-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in comparison to the HER2-negative group in non-metastatic breast cancer. This is a retrospective cohort study. All patients’ profiles with non-metastatic, HER2- low, and HER2-negative breast cancers who were administered neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and had surgery performed within the period spanning from 1 January 2018 to 30 August 2022 were enrolled. HER2-positive breast cancer patients were excluded. The evaluation of patients’ responses was conducted through the examination of surgical pathology reports to compare the two study groups (HER2-low and HER2-negative). The primary objective was evaluating the response to NACT comparing the objective response rate (ORR) in each of the two groups of HER2-low and HER2-negative patients. The total number of patients included was 262 patients; the majority were HER2-low 89% (233/ 262) vs. 11% (29/262) HER2-negative. An ORR (complete and partial response) to NACT was shown in 71% (185/262) of all patients. The ORR was similar in both groups, 70% (164/233) in the HER2-low group vs. 73% (21/29) in the HER2- negative group, with a statistical difference, OR: 1 (95% CI: 0.8–1), p-value 0.8. Similarly, the pathological complete response (pCR) rate was the same in both study groups at 14%, OR: 0.7 (95% CI: 0.2–3), p-value: 0.6. Interestingly, patients with hormone-positive tumors across both study groups had a higher response rate compared to hormone-negative patients. In the HER2-low cohort, the ORR was higher in patients with hormone-positive tumors in comparison with those with hormone-negative tumors [73% vs. 27%, OR: 0.8 (95% CI:0.8–1), p-value: 0.001]. Comparatively, in the HER2-negative cohort, ORR was also higher in patients with hormone-positive tumors compared to hormone-negative tumors [52% vs. 48%, OR: 2 (95% CI: 1–5), p-value: 0.05]. Subsequently, the ORR of all hormone-positive tumors with a positive outcome (CR or PR) was assessed categorizing the patients based on their HER2 expression. Concerning patients who expressed partial response (N = 115), a statistically significant difference was observed in HER2- low hormone-positive tumors as opposed to HER2-negative hormone-positive tumors [90% vs. 10%, OR: 0.7 (95% CI: 0.5–0.9), p-value: 0.001]. Remarkably, all patients with complete responses were from the HER2- low cohort. Our findings demonstrated a significant influence of HER2-low expression on the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy among patients with hormone-positive HER2-low breast cancer within the studied cohort. Further studies are needed to evaluate the influence of hormonal expression on the response rate to NACT in the HER2-low patients in our population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]