Search

Background: Pembrolizumab showed durable antitumour activity and manageable safety in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in the single-arm KEYNOTE-012 and KEYNOTE-086 trials. In this study, we compared pembrolizumab with chemotherapy for second-line or third-line treatment of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.Methods: KEYNOTE-119 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at 150 medical centres (academic medical centres, community cancer centres, and community hospitals) in 31 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older, with centrally confirmed metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, who had received one or two previous systemic treatments for metastatic disease, had progression on their most recent therapy, and had previous treatment with an anthracycline or taxane were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a block method (block size of four) and an interactive voice-response system with integrated web-response to receive intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks for 35 cycles (pembrolizumab group), or to single-drug chemotherapy per investigator's choice of capecitabine, eribulin, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine (60% enrolment cap for each; chemotherapy group). Randomisation was stratified by PD-L1 tumour status (positive [combined positive score (CPS) ≥1] vs negative [CPS <1]) and history of previous neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment versus de-novo metastatic disease at initial diagnosis. Primary endpoints were overall survival in participants with a PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) of 10 or more, those with a CPS of 1 or more, and all participants; superiority of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy was tested in all participants only if shown in those with a CPS of one or more. The primary endpoint was analysed in the intention-to-treat population; safety was analysed in the all-subjects-as-treated population. This Article describes the final analysis of the trial, which is now completed. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02555657.Findings: From Nov 25, 2015, to April 11, 2017, 1098 participants were assessed for eligibility and 622 (57%) were randomly assigned to receive either pembrolizumab (312 [50%]) or chemotherapy (310 [50%]). Median study follow-up was 31·4 months (IQR 27·8-34·4) for the pembrolizumab group and 31·5 months (27·8-34·6) for the chemotherapy group. Median overall survival in patients with a PD-L1 CPS of 10 or more was 12·7 months (95% CI 9·9-16·3) for the pembrolizumab group and 11·6 months (8·3-13·7) for the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·78 [95% CI 0·57-1·06]; log-rank p=0·057). In participants with a CPS of 1 or more, median overall survival was 10·7 months (9·3-12·5) for the pembrolizumab group and 10·2 months (7·9-12·6) for the chemotherapy group (HR 0·86 [95% CI 0·69-1·06]; log-rank p=0·073). In the overall population, median overall survival was 9·9 months (95% CI 8·3-11·4) for the pembrolizumab group and 10·8 months (9·1-12·6) for the chemotherapy group (HR 0·97 [95% CI 0·82-1·15]). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (three [1%] patients in the pembrolizumab group vs ten [3%] in the chemotherapy group), decreased white blood cells (one [<1%] vs 14 [5%]), decreased neutrophil count (one [<1%] vs 29 [10%]), and neutropenia (0 vs 39 [13%]). 61 (20%) patients in the pembrolizumab group and 58 (20%) patients in the chemotherapy group had serious adverse events. Three (<1%) of 601 participants had treatment-related adverse events that led to death (one [<1%] in the pembrolizumab group due to circulatory collapse; two [1%] in the chemotherapy group, one [<1%] due to pancytopenia and sepsis and one [<1%] haemothorax).Interpretation: Pembrolizumab did not significantly improve overall survival in patients with previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer versus chemotherapy. These findings might inform future research of pembrolizumab monotherapy for selected subpopulations of patients, specifically those with PD-L1-enriched tumours, and inform a combinatorial approach for the treatment of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.Funding: Merck Sharp & Dohme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-directed therapy improves local control among women with HER2-positive breast cancer. This retrospective analysis evaluates the safety and efficacy of radiation therapy (RT) among patients receiving adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) or paclitaxel (T) plus trastuzumab (H) in the ATEMPT (Adjuvant Trastuzumab Emtansine Versus Paclitaxel in Combination With Trastuzumab) trial; Translational Breast Cancer Research Consortium (TBCRC) 033.Methods and Materials: Patients with stage I HER2-positive breast cancer were randomized 3:1 to receive adjuvant T-DM1 or TH after mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Breast RT was required after BCS and permitted after mastectomy. Patients receiving T-DM1 began RT after 12 weeks of therapy and received RT concurrently with T-DM1. Patients receiving TH began RT after paclitaxel, but concurrent with trastuzumab. RT records were retrospectively reviewed to determine details of radiation delivery and acute RT-related toxicity.Results: Protocol therapy was initiated by 497 patients. Among the 299 BCS patients, 289 received whole breast RT (WBRT) and 10 partial breast. Among WBRT patients, 40.2% in the T-DM1 arm and 41.5% of TH patients received hypofractionated (≥2.5 Gy/fraction) RT. Eight mastectomy patients received RT, all conventional fractionation. Skin toxicity (grade ≥2) was seen in 33.9% of patients in the T-DM1 arm and 23.2% in the TH arm (P = .11). In conventionally fractionated WBRT patients, 44.7% had a grade ≥2 skin toxicity compared with 17.9% of patients receiving hypofractionation (P < .001). Five patients experienced pneumonitis after RT (T-DM1: n = 4, 1.0%; TH: n = 1, 0.9%). Three-year invasive disease-free survival was 97.8% for T-DM1 (95% confidence interval, 96.3-99.3) and 93.4% for TH (95% confidence interval, 88.7-98.2). Among the 18 invasive disease-free survival events, 7 were isolated locoregional recurrences (2, T-DM1; 5, TH).Conclusions: RT was well-tolerated when given concurrently with either T-DM1 or TH. Among BCS patients, hypofractionation resulted in lower grade ≥2 acute skin toxicity even with concurrent anti-HER2 therapy. Although follow-up was short, local recurrences were uncommon, attesting to the efficacy of HER2-directed therapy combined with RT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP)-inhibitors and anti-angiogenics have activity in recurrent ovarian and breast cancer; however, the effect of combined therapy against PARP and angiogenesis in this population has not been reported. We investigated the toxicities and recommended phase 2 dosing (RP2D) of the combination of cediranib, a multitargeted inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-1/2/3 and olaparib, a PARP-inhibitor (NCT01116648). Methods: Cediranib tablets once daily and olaparib capsules twice daily were administered orally in a standard 3+3 dose escalation design. Patients with recurrent ovarian or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer were eligible. Patients had measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 or met Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) CA125 criteria. No prior PARP-inhibitors or anti-angiogenics in the recurrent setting were allowed. Results: 28 patients (20 ovarian, 8 breast) enrolled to 4 dose levels. 2 dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) (1 grade 4 neutropenia ⩾4days; 1 grade 4 thrombocytopenia) occurred at the highest dose level (cediranib 30mg daily; olaparib 400mg twice daily [BID]). The RP2D was cediranib 30mg daily and olaparib 200mg BID. Grade 3 or higher toxicities occurred in 75% of patients, and included grade 3 hypertension (25%) and grade 3 fatigue (18%). One grade 3 bowel obstruction occurred. The overall response rate (ORR) in the 18 RECIST-evaluable ovarian cancer patients was 44%, with a clinical benefit rate (ORR plus stable disease (SD) >24weeks) of 61%. None of the seven evaluable breast cancer patients achieved clinical response; two patients had stable disease for >24weeks. Interpretation: The combination of cediranib and olaparib has haematologic DLTs and anticipated class toxicities, with promising evidence of activity in ovarian cancer patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]