Search

Everolimus is an orally available inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), which has been approved in combination with exemestane for hormone receptor-positive (HR) breast cancer after failure of treatment with non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors. Everolimus is generally very well tolerated with most common side effects including stomatitis, rash, fatigue, hyperglycemia, hyperlipidemia, and myelosuppression. Most of these side effects are mild and resolve with dose interruptions or dose reductions. Symptomatic non-infectious pneumonitis is a relatively uncommon class effect of mTOR inhibitors, which can be life threatening. Given the efficacy of everolimus in HR-positive metastatic breast cancer, it is crucial for physicians to recognize toxicities related to everolimus and start timely interventions. This review will focus on the adverse events reported with everolimus in breast cancer trials and will provide practical guidelines for the management of these adverse events.

The safety and efficacy of skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) with immediate reconstruction (IR) in patients with locally advanced breast cancer are unclear. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of women with noninflammatory Stage III SSM with IR vs. non-SSM-treated women who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant radiation therapy (XRT).Between October 1997 and March 2010, 100 consecutive patients (40 SSM with IR vs. 60 non-SSM) with Stage III breast cancer received anthracycline- and/or taxane-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy, mastectomy, and adjuvant XRT. Clinical stage (SSM with IR vs. for non-SSM) was IIIA (75% vs. 67%), IIIB (8% vs. 18%), and IIIC (8% vs. 8%). Tumors greater than 5 cm were found in 74% vs. 69%; 97% of patients in both groups were clinically node positive; and 8% vs. 18% had T4b disease.The time from initial biopsy to XRT was prolonged for SSM-IR patients (274 vs. 254 days, p = 0.04), and there was a trend toward XRT delay of more than 8 weeks (52% vs. 31%, p = 0.07) after surgery. The rate of complications requiring surgical intervention was higher in the SSM-IR group (37.5% vs. 5%, p0.001). The 2-year actuarial locoregional control, breast cancer-specific survival, and overall survival rates for SSM with IR vs. non-SSM were 94.7% vs. 97.4%, 91.5% vs. 86.3%, and 87.4% vs. 84.8%, respectively (p = not significant).In our small study with limited follow-up, SSM with IR prolonged overall cancer treatment time and trended toward delaying XRT but did not impair oncologic outcomes. Complication rates were significantly higher in this group. Longer follow-up is needed.

With more and more breast cancer (BC) patients receiving taxanes and anthracyclines in the adjuvant setting, the number of patients resistant to these drugs is rising. Herein, we review cellular mechanisms (e.g., overexpression of drug efflux pumps) that are associated with clinical anthracycline and/or taxane-resistant BC. We also discuss therapeutic approaches that have received Food and Drug Administration approval in this setting or are in clinical development, including targeted agents that do not employ a cytotoxic mechanism, as well as novel chemotherapeutics such as the epothilones, a class of microtubule stabilizers less susceptible to common cellular resistance mechanisms.

Objectives: We compared outcomes in post-menopausal estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (NAHT) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT).Methods: We retrospectively identified post-menopausal women who received either NAHT or NACT for non-metastatic, non-inflammatory, ER+, Her2neu negative breast cancer from 2004 to 2011. We compared long-term rates of locoregional relapse free survival (LRFS), distant metastasis free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) using the Kaplan-Meier method. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify patient and disease factors significantly associated with these endpoints. Results: We identified 99 patients in our study, including 27 who received NAHT and 72 who received NACT. There were no differences in 4-year LRFS, DMFS, or OS between groups. On Cox proportional hazards modeling, the type of systemic therapy (NAHT vs. NACT) was not associated with OS. However, patients with progesterone receptor (PR) positive disease had a 92% lower risk of death compared to patients with PR negative disease.Conclusions: Our data suggest that outcomes are not adversely affected by NAHT in post-menopausal women with ER+ breast cancer. Therefore, NAHT is a viable and potentially less toxic option than NACT in appropriately selected patients. Furthermore, although PR negative disease appears to be associated with poor prognosis, intensification of systemic treatment with chemotherapy may not be associated with improvement of disease-related outcomes in this patient population.

The use of gene expression profiling has impacted our understanding of breast cancer biology and increasingly has played a role in guiding clinical decisions. We have used hormone receptor (HR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status for years to guide selection of therapy. More recently, gene expression analysis has facilitated the identification of at least five intrinsic subtypes of breast cancer. Potential therapeutic targets have also been identified using genomic profiling. Several tests, such as the 21-gene recurrence score assay (Oncotype DX) and the 70-gene prognosis signature (MammaPrint), have been well validated as prognostic tools for early-stage breast cancer, and have aided in adjuvant therapy decisions for early-stage, HR-positive breast cancer patients. Genomic profiling has the potential to provide additional insight into drug discovery and clinical trial design by identifying appropriate targeted therapies for subtypes of breast cancer.

Angiogenesis, the process of new blood vessel formation, is required for tumor growth and metastasis. There is substantial preclinical and clinical evidence supporting the central role of angiogenesis in tumor formation and metastasis. Thus, the inhibition of angiogenesis may provide more effective treatment for patients with advanced breast cancer. Several chemotherapeutic and hormonal agents routinely used in the treatment of advanced breast cancer have anti-angiogenic properties. Novel anti-angiogenic agents targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) ligand and receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors are being developed. Recently, a large phase III clinical trial demonstrated a significant benefit in progression-free survival with the addition of anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody bevacizumab to paclitaxel for first-line treatment of advanced breast cancer. This study established that antiangiogenic therapy is effective in breast cancer, and additional studies of bevacizumab and other antiangiogenic agents are underway. This article reviews the evidence for the role of angiogenesis in breast cancer pathogenesis, the challenges of developing antiangiogenic agents, and current agents in clinical trials.