Search

Purpose: BMI affects breast cancer risk and prognosis. In contrast to cytotoxic chemotherapy, CDK4/6 inhibitors are given at a fixed dose, irrespective of BMI or weight. This preplanned analysis of the global randomized PALLAS trial investigates the impact of BMI on the side-effect profile, treatment adherence, and efficacy of palbociclib., Methods: Patients were categorized at baseline according to WHO BMI categories. Neutropenia rates were assessed with univariable and multivariable logistic regression. Time to early discontinuation of palbociclib was analyzed with Fine and Gray competing risk models. Unstratified Cox models were used to investigate the association between BMI category and time to invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). 95% CIs were derived., Results: Of 5,698 patients included in this analysis, 68 (1.2%) were underweight, 2,082 (36.5%) normal weight, 1,818 (31.9%) overweight, and 1,730 (30.4%) obese at baseline. In the palbociclib arm, higher BMI was associated with a significant decrease in neutropenia (unadjusted odds ratio for 1-unit change, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.91 to 0.94; adjusted for age, race ethnicity, region, chemotherapy use, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group at baseline, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.92 to 0.95). This translated into a significant decrease in treatment discontinuation rate with higher BMI (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for 10-unit change, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.83). There was no significant improvement in iDFS with the addition of palbociclib to ET in any weight category (normal weight HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.12; overweight HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.49; and obese HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.30) in this analysis early in follow-up (31 months)., Conclusion: This preplanned analysis of the PALLAS trial demonstrates a significant impact of BMI on side effects, dose reductions, early treatment discontinuation, and relative dose intensity. Additional long-term follow-up will further evaluate whether BMI ultimately affects outcome.

The 18th St Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference held in March 2023, in Vienna, Austria, assessed significant new findings for local and systemic therapies for early breast cancer with a focus on the evaluation of multimodal treatment options. The emergence of more effective, innovative agents in both the preoperative (primary or neoadjuvant) and post-operative (adjuvant) settings has underscored the pivotal role of a multidisciplinary approach in treatment decision making, particularly when selecting systemic therapy for an individual patient. The importance of multidisciplinary discussions regarding the clinical benefits of interventions was explicitly emphasized by the consensus panel as an integral part of developing an optimal treatment plan with the 'right' degree of intensity and duration. The panelists focused on controversies surrounding the management of common ductal/no special type and lobular breast cancer histology, which account for the vast majority of breast tumors. The expert opinion of the panelists was based on interpretations of available data, as well as current practices in their professional environments, personal and socioeconomic factors affecting patients, and cognizant of varying reimbursement and accessibility constraints around the world. The panelists strongly advocated patient participation in well-designed clinical studies whenever feasible. With these considerations in mind, the St Gallen Consensus Conference aims to offer guidance to clinicians regarding appropriate treatments for early-stage breast cancer and assist in balancing the realistic trade-offs between treatment benefit and toxicity, enabling patients and clinicians to make well-informed choices through a shared decision-making process., (Copyright © 2023 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: We aimed to examine circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and its association with residual cancer burden (RCB) using an ultrasensitive assay in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy., Patients and Methods: We identified responders (RCB 0/1) and matched non-responders (RCB 2/3) from the phase II TBCRC 030 prospective study of neoadjuvant paclitaxel versus cisplatin in TNBC. We collected plasma samples at baseline, 3 weeks and 12 weeks (end of therapy). We created personalized ctDNA assays utilizing MAESTRO mutation enrichment sequencing. We explored associations between ctDNA and RCB status and disease recurrence., Results: Of 139 patients, 68 had complete samples and no additional neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Twenty-two were responders and 19 of those had sufficient tissue for whole-genome sequencing. We identified an additional 19 non-responders for a matched case-control analysis of 38 patients using a MAESTRO ctDNA assay tracking 319-1000 variants (median 1000 variants) to 114 plasma samples from 3 timepoints. Overall, ctDNA positivity was 100% at baseline, 79% at week 3 and 55% at week 12. Median tumor fraction (TFx) was 3.7 × 10 -4 (range 7.9 × 10 -7 -4.9 × 10 -1 ). TFx decreased 285-fold from baseline to week 3 in responders and 24-fold in non-responders. Week 12 ctDNA clearance correlated with RCB: clearance was observed in 10 of 11 patients with RCB 0, 3 of 8 with RCB 1, 4 of 15 with RCB 2 and 0 of 4 with RCB 3. Among six patients with known recurrence, five had persistent ctDNA at week 12., Conclusions: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for TNBC reduced ctDNA TFx by 285-fold in responders and 24-fold in non-responders. In 58% (22/38) of patients, ctDNA TFx dropped below the detection level of a commercially available test, emphasizing the need for sensitive tests. Additional studies will determine whether ctDNA-guided approaches can improve outcomes., (Copyright © 2023 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: In early trials, hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to paclitaxel were common, thus prompting the administration of antihistamines and corticosteroids before every paclitaxel dose. We tested the safety of omitting corticosteroids after cycle 2 during the paclitaxel portion of the dose-dense (DD) doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (AC)-paclitaxel regimen., Patients, Materials, and Methods: In this prospective, single-arm study, patients who completed four cycles of DD-AC for stage I-III breast cancer received paclitaxel 175 mg/m 2 every 2 weeks for four cycles. Patients received a standard premedication protocol containing dexamethasone, diphenhydramine, and a histamine H2 blocker prior to the first two paclitaxel cycles. Dexamethasone was omitted in cycles three and four if there were no HSRs in previous cycles. We estimated the rate of grade 3-4 HSRs., Results: Among 127 patients enrolled, 125 received more than one dose of protocol therapy and are included in the analysis. Fourteen (11.2%; 90% confidence interval, 6.9%-20.0%) patients had any-grade HSRs, for a total of 22 (4.5%; 3.1%-6.4%) HSRs over 486 paclitaxel cycles. Any-grade HSRs occurred in 1.6% (0.3%-5.0%), 6.5% (3.3%-11.3%), 7.4% (3.9%-12.5%), and 2.6% (0.7%-6.6%) of patients after paclitaxel cycles 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Dexamethasone use was decreased by 92.8% in cycles 3 and 4. Only one patient experienced grade 3 HSR in cycles 3 or 4, for a rate of grade 3/4 HSR 0.4% (0.02%-2.0%) (1/237 paclitaxel infusions). That patient had grade 2 HSR during cycle 2, and the subsequent grade 3 event occurred despite usual dexamethasone premedication. A sensitivity analysis restricted to patients not known to have received dexamethasone in cycles 3 and 4 found that any-grade HSRs occurred in 2.7% (3/111; 0.7%-6.8%) and 0.9% (1/109; 0.05%-4.3%) of patients in cycle 3 and 4, respectively., Conclusion: Corticosteroid premedication can be safely omitted in cycles 3 and 4 of dose-dense paclitaxel if HSRs are not observed during cycles 1 and 2., Implications for Practice: Because of the potential for hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to paclitaxel, corticosteroids are routinely prescribed prior to each dose, on an indefinite basis. This prospective study, including 125 patients treated with 486 paclitaxel cycles, demonstrates that corticosteroids can be safely omitted in future cycles if HSRs did not occur during cycles 1 and 2 of paclitaxel and that this strategy reduces the use of corticosteroids in cycles 3 and 4 by 92.8% relative to current standard of care., (© 2021 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of AlphaMed Press.)

Background: Late recurrences in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancers remain an important challenge. Avoidance or delayed development of resistance represents the main objective in extended endocrine therapy (ET). In animal models, resistance was reversed with restoration of circulating estrogen levels during interruption of letrozole treatment. This phase III, randomized, open-label Study of Letrozole Extension (SOLE) studied the effect of extended intermittent letrozole treatment in comparison with continuous letrozole. In parallel, the SOLE estrogen substudy (SOLE-EST) analyzed the levels of estrogen during the interruption of treatment., Patients and Methods: SOLE enrolled 4884 postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, lymph node-positive, operable breast cancer between December 2007 and October 2012 and among them, 104 patients were enrolled in SOLE-EST. They must have undergone local treatment and have completed 4-6 years of adjuvant ET. Patients were randomized between continuous letrozole (2.5 mg/day orally for 5 years) and intermittent letrozole treatment (2.5 mg/day for 9 months followed by a 3-month interruption in years 1-4 and then 2.5 mg/day during all of year 5)., Results: Intention-to-treat population included 4851 women in SOLE (n = 2425 in the intermittent and n = 2426 in the continuous letrozole groups) and 103 women in SOLE-EST (n = 78 in the intermittent and n = 25 in the continuous letrozole groups). After a median follow-up of 84 months, 7-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 81.4% in the intermittent group and 81.5% in the continuous group (hazard ratio: 1.03, 95% confidence interval: 0.91-1.17). Reported adverse events were similar in both groups. Circulating estrogen recovery was demonstrated within 6 weeks after the stop of letrozole treatment., Conclusions: Extended adjuvant ET by intermittent administration of letrozole did not improve DFS compared with continuous use, despite the recovery of circulating estrogen levels. The similar DFS coupled with previously reported quality-of-life advantages suggest intermittent extended treatment is a valid option for patients who require or prefer a treatment interruption., Competing Interests: Disclosure GJ reported receiving contracted research support from Novartis within the submitted work; personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo and Abbvie; non-financial support from Medimmune and Merck KGaA; personal fees and non-financial support from Lilly, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), AstraZeneca; and grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Novartis, Roche, and Pfizer from outside submitted work. PK reported receiving non-financial support from PFS Genomics; and honoraria from Prelude Dx and Roche (all outside the submitted work). PN reported receiving institutional payments or non-financial support from Novartis, Pfizer, Lilly, Amgen, and Roche. ES reported receiving advisory fees and a traveling grant from Pfizer, Genomic Health, Lilly, and Novartis. CK reported receiving consulting or advisory fees from Roche, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Daiichi-Sankyo. SL reported receiving salary from GBG Forschungs GmbH; consulting fees (to institution) from BMS, Roche, Puma, Seattle Genetics, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Lilly, Pfizer, Daiichi, EirGenix, and Samsung; contracted research support from Austrian Breast & Colorectal Study Group, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Celgene, Daiichi, Immunomedics, NSABP Foundation, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. KK reported receiving honoraria from Taiho Pharmaceutical, Eisai, and Chugai Pharmaceutical. CM reported receiving honoraria from Novartis. SOR reported receiving honoraria from Novartis. TR reported receiving consulting fees/honoraria from Roche–Genentech, Novartis, Lilly, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer. GV reported receiving consulting or advisory fees from Novartis, Roche-Genentech, MSD Oncology, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca. RDG reported receiving research funding (to institution) from Novartis, Pfizer, Ipsen, Merck, Celgene, Ferring, Roche, and AstraZeneca to partially support his salary. SL reported receiving research funding (to institution) from Novartis, BMS, Merck, Roche–Genentech, Puma Biotechnology, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Nektar Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, and Seattle Genetics; serving as a consultant (not compensated) for Seattle Genetics, Pfizer, Novartis, BMS, Merck, AstraZeneca, and Roche–Genentech; serving as a consultant (paid to institution) for Aduro Biotech, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche–Genentech, Puma Biotechnology, AstraZeneca, Silverback Therapeutics, and G1 Therapeutics; serving as a Scientific Advisory Board Member of Akamara Therapeutics; and receiving support from the National Breast Cancer Foundation of Australia Endowed Chair and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, New York. MMR reported receiving research funding (to institution) from Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Ipsen, TerSera, Pierre Fabre, Merck, Roche, BMS, and Bayer, consulting fees (to institution) from BMS, Ipsen; and consulting fees/honoraria from BMS, Tolmar Pharmaceuticals. MC reported receiving research funding (to institution) from Roche. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Breast cancer (BC) is a leading cause of morbidity, mortality, and disability for women worldwide. There is substantial variation in treatment outcomes, which is function of multiple variables, including access to treatment. Treatment standards can promote quality and improve survival; thus, their development should be a priority for the cancer-control planning., Methods: We extracted the guidelines for the treatment of BC from a systematic review of the literature. We evaluated the development process, the methodology, and the recommendations formulated and surveyed the country resource stratification. Metrics of health-system capacity were selected to study the guidelines context appropriateness., Results: We analyzed 49 distinct guidelines for BC, mostly in English language (n = 23), developed in upper-middle and high-income countries of the European and American regions (n = 39). A resource-stratified approach was identified in a quarter of the guidelines (n = 11), mostly from resource-constrained settings. Only one-half of the guidelines reached a gender balance of the authorship, and 10.2% were based on a multidisciplinary steering committee. A number of efforts and solutions of resource adaptations were recognized, mostly in low- and middle-income countries. Overall, the national guidelines appeared not sensitive enough of the local health-system capacity in formulating recommendations, with possible exception for the radiation therapy availability., Conclusion: This global landscape of treatment standards for BC demonstrates that the majority is not context appropriate. Research on the formulation of cancer treatment standards is highly warranted, along with novel platforms for developing and disseminating resource-appropriate guidance., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: The ATEMPT trial was designed to determine if treatment with trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) caused less toxicity than paclitaxel plus trastuzumab (TH) and yielded clinically acceptable invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) among patients with stage I human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer (BC)., Methods: Patients with stage I centrally confirmed HER2+ BC were randomly assigned 3:1 to T-DM1 or TH and received T-DM1 3.6 mg/kg IV every 3 weeks for 17 cycles or T 80 mg/m 2 IV with H once every week × 12 weeks (4 mg/kg load →2 mg/kg), followed by H × 39 weeks (6 mg/kg once every 3 weeks). The co-primary objectives were to compare the incidence of clinically relevant toxicities (CRTs) in patients treated with T-DM1 versus TH and to evaluate iDFS in patients receiving T-DM1., Results: The analysis population includes all 497 patients who initiated protocol therapy (383 T-DM1 and 114 TH). CRTs were experienced by 46% of patients on T-DM1 and 47% of patients on TH ( P = .83). The 3-year iDFS for T-DM1 was 97.8% (95% CI, 96.3 to 99.3), which rejected the null hypothesis ( P < .0001). Serially collected patient-reported outcomes indicated that patients treated with T-DM1 had less neuropathy and alopecia and better work productivity compared with patients on TH., Conclusion: Among patients with stage I HER2+ BC, one year of adjuvant T-DM1 was associated with excellent 3-year iDFS, but was not associated with fewer CRT compared with TH., Competing Interests: Sara TolaneyConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Pfizer, Merck, Lilly, Nektar, NanoString Technologies, AstraZeneca, Puma Biotechnology, Genentech, Eisai, Sanofi, Celldex, Bristol Myers Squibb, Paxman, Seattle Genetics, Odonate Therapeutics, AbbVie, Silverback Therapeutics, G1 Therapeutics, OncoPep, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Samsung Bioepis, CytomX Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, Athenex, Immunomedics/Gilead, Mersana, CertaraResearch Funding: Genentech/Roche, Merck, Exelixis, Pfizer, Lilly, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, AstraZeneca, NanoString Technologies, Cyclacel, Nektar, Immunomedics, Odonate Therapeutics, Sanofi, Seattle GeneticsTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca, Lilly, Merck, Nektar, Novartis, Pfizer, Genentech/Roche, Immunomedics, Eisai, NanoString Technologies, Puma Biotechnology, Celldex Chau DangHonoraria: Puma Biotechnology, eviCore healthcareConsulting or Advisory Role: Puma Biotechnology, eviCore healthcareResearch Funding: Genentech/Roche, Puma Biotechnology Denise YardleyConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Biotheranostics, Bristol Myers Squibb, G1 Therapeutics, Athenex, Immunomedics, Sanofi/Aventis, R-Pharm, LillySpeakers' Bureau: Novartis, Genentech/Roche, Genentech/RocheResearch Funding: Genentech/Roche, Novartis, MedImmune, Lilly, Medivation, Pfizer, Tesaro, Macrogenics, AbbVie, Merck, Clovis Oncology, Amgen, Biomarin, Biothera, Dana Farber Cancer Hospital, Incyte, Innocrin Pharma, Nektar, NSABP Foundation, Odonate Therapeutics, PolyphorTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Novartis, Genentech/Roche Steven IsakoffConsulting or Advisory Role: AbbVie, OncoPep, Puma Biotechnology, Seattle Genetics, NovartisResearch Funding: Genentech, PharmaMar, AbbVie, OncoPep, Merck, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Outcomes4Me Vicente ValeroHonoraria: Genentech/Roche, Merck, NovartisConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech/Roche, Novartis, MerckTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Genentech/Roche Therese MulveyConsulting or Advisory Role: Outcomes4Me Ron BoseConsulting or Advisory Role: GenentechResearch Funding: Puma Biotechnology Antonio WolffConsulting or Advisory Role: Ionis PharmaceuticalsResearch Funding: Biomarin, CelldexPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Antonio Wolff has been named as inventor on one or more issued patents or pending patent applications related to methylation in breast cancer and has assigned his rights to JHU and participates in a royalty sharing agreement with JHUOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/357301/summary Katherine Reeder-HayesResearch Funding: Pfizer Hope RugoHonoraria: Puma Biotechnology, MylanConsulting or Advisory Role: SamsungResearch Funding: Macrogenics, OBI Pharma, Eisai, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, Genentech, Merck, Immunomedics, Odonate Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, Seattle Genetics, Sermonix Pharmaceuticals, AstraZenecaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Pfizer, Novartis, Macrogenics, Mylan, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca Spain, MerckOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/summary Bhuvaneswari RamaswamyConsulting or Advisory Role: Eisai Lowell HartHonoraria: Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Seattle Genetics, G1 Therapeutics, Veracyte, Karyopharm TherapeuticsConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech/Roche, Amgen, G1 Therapeutics, Merck, Seattle GeneticsSpeakers' Bureau: Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, Pfizer, Genentech, AstraZeneca, NovartisResearch Funding: Novartis, Genentech/Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, G1 Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics Vijayakrishna GadiLeadership: SEngine Precision MedicineStock and Other Ownership Interests: Sengine precision medicine, Novilla, 3rdEyeBio, New Equilibrium BiosciencesConsulting or Advisory Role: Seattle Genetics, Puma Biotechnology, Novartis, SanofiSpeakers' Bureau: Seagen, bioTheranosticsResearch Funding: Genentech/Roche, SignalOne Bio, AgendiaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: NovartisOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/2511 Bryan SchneiderHonoraria: Lilly, Research to Practice Paul MarcomConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech/Roche, ImmunomedicsResearch Funding: Novartis, Genentech/Roche, AstraZeneca, Verily, Glycomimetics, MillenniumOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/237508/summary Kathy AlbainConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Pfizer, Myriad Genetics, Genomic Health, Agendia, Genentech/RocheResearch Funding: Seattle GeneticsOther Relationship: Puma Biotechnology Nadine TungResearch Funding: AstraZeneca Rita NandaConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck, Genentech/Roche, Pfizer, Macrogenics, Daiichi Sankyo, Athenex, Aduro Biotech, ION Pharma, Seattle Genetics, ImmunomedicsResearch Funding: Corcept Therapeutics, Celgene, Merck, Seattle Genetics, Genentech/Roche, Odonate Therapeutics, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, ImmunomedicsOther Relationship: G1 Therapeutics Rachel JankowitzHonoraria: EisaiConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck Mothaffar RimawiConsulting or Advisory Role: Macrogenics, Daiichi Sankyo, Seattle Genetics, GenentechResearch Funding: Pfizer Vandana AbramsonEmployment: HCA HealthcareConsulting or Advisory Role: Eisai, Daiichi Sankyo, AbbvieResearch Funding: Genentech/Roche, Lilly Paula PohlmannLeadership: Immunonet BioSciencesStock and Other Ownership Interests: Immunonet BioSciencesHonoraria: Dava Oncology, OncLive/MJH Life Sciences, Frontiers—PublisherConsulting or Advisory Role: Personalized Cancer Therapy, OncoPlex Diagnostics, Immunonet BioSciences, Pfizer, HERON, Puma Biotechnology, Sirtex Medical, Caris Life Sciences, Juniper Pharmaceuticals, Bolt BiotherapeuticsSpeakers' Bureau: Genentech/RocheResearch Funding: Genentech/Roche, Fabre-Kramer, Advanced Cancer Therapeutics, Caris Centers of Excellence, Pfizer, Pieris Pharmaceuticals, Cascadian Therapeutics, Bolt Biotherapeutics, Byondis, SeagenPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: United States Patent no. 8486413, United States Patent no. 8501417, United States Patent no. 9023362, United States Patent no. 9745377, Patent application Catherine Van PoznakResearch Funding: BayerPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: UpToDate Andres Forero-TorresEmployment: Seattle GeneticsStock and Other Ownership Interests: Seattle Genetics Minetta LiuResearch Funding: Eisai, Seattle Genetics, Novartis, Roche/Genentech, GRAIL, Merck, Tesaro, Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Genomic HealthTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: GRAIL, Merck, Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Pfizer, Genomic Health, AstraZeneca, Ionis Pharmaceuticals Kathryn RuddyPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: My husband is a co-inventor of technology licensed by Mayo Clinic to AliveCor (MountainView, CA), which makes a smartphone-enabled remote ECG monitoring system Richard GelberResearch Funding: AstraZeneca, Novartis, Roche, Merck, PfizerTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche, AstraZeneca, Novartis Bill BarryEmployment: Rho Ann PartridgePatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: I receive small royalty payments for co-authoring the breast cancer survivorship section of UpToDateTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Novartis Eric WinerHonoraria: Genentech/Roche, Genomic HealthConsulting or Advisory Role: Leap Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Jounce Therapeutics, GlaxoSmithKline, Carrick Therapeutics, Lilly, G1 Therapeutics, Syros Pharmaceuticals, Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, Zymeworks, AthenexResearch Funding: GenentechOther Relationship: InfiniteMD Ian KropEmployment: AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Freeline TherapeuticsLeadership: AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Freeline TherapeuticsStock and Other Ownership Interests: AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Freeline Therapeutics, VertexHonoraria: Genentech/Roche, AstraZeneca, CelltrionConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech/Roche, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo, Macrogenics, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Context Therapeutics, Novartis, Merck, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: Genentech, PfizerNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: Achieving a pathologic complete response (pCR) with neoadjuvant therapy for HER2-positive breast cancer is associated with less recurrence and improved clinical outcomes compared to having residual cancer at surgery. However, recent data have demonstrated favorable outcomes for patients with residual HER2-positive cancer who received adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (TDM-1). Therefore, we sought to determine the optimal chemotherapy/anti-HER2 treatment strategy., Methods: We created a decision-analytic model for patients with stage II-III HER2-positive cancer that incorporated utilities based on toxicity and recurrence. We separately modeled hormone receptor-negative (HR-) and positive (HR+) disease and calculated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs through 5 years. Simulated patients received one of the following neoadjuvant treatments: three 'intensive' regimens (TCHP: docetaxel, carboplatin, trastuzumab, pertuzumab; THP + AC: taxol, trastuzumab, pertuzumab then doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide; THP: taxol, trastuzumab, pertuzumab) and two 'de-escalated' regimens (TH: taxol, trastuzumab; TDM-1) followed by adjuvant treatment based on pathologic response., Results: Among 'intensive' neoadjuvant strategies, treatment with THP was more effective and less costly than TCHP or THP + AC. When 'de-escalated' strategies were included, TH became the most cost-effective. For HR-negative cancer, TH had 0.003 fewer quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) than THP but was less costly by $55,831, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of over $18M/QALY for THP, well above any threshold. For HR-positive cancer, neoadjuvant TH dominated the THP strategy., Conclusion: An adaptive-treatment strategy beginning with neoadjuvant THP or TH followed by tailoring post-operative therapy reduces treatment costs, and spares toxicity compared to more intensive chemotherapy regimens for women with HER2-positive breast cancer.

Background: The 16th St. Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference 2019 in Vienna, Austria reviewed substantial new evidence on loco-regional and systemic therapies for early breast cancer., Design: Treatments were assessed in light of their intensity, duration and side-effects, estimating the magnitude of clinical benefit according to stage and biology of the disease. The Panel acknowledged that for many patients, the impact of adjuvant therapy or the adherence to specific guidelines may have modest impact on the risk of breast cancer recurrence or overall survival. For that reason, the Panel explicitly encouraged clinicians and patients to routinely discuss the magnitude of benefit for interventions as part of the development of the treatment plan., Results: The guidelines focus on common ductal and lobular breast cancer histologies arising in generally healthy women. Special breast cancer histologies may need different considerations, as do individual patients with other substantial health considerations. The panelists' opinions reflect different interpretation of available data and expert opinion where is lack of evidence and sociocultural factors in their environment such as availability of and access to medical service, economic resources and reimbursement issues. Panelists encourage patient participation in well-designed clinical studies whenever available., Conclusions: With these caveats in mind, the St. Gallen Consensus Conference seeks to provide guidance to clinicians on appropriate treatments for early-stage breast cancer and guidance for weighing the realistic tradeoffs between treatment and toxicity so that patients and clinical teams can make well-informed decisions on the basis of an honest reckoning of the magnitude of clinical benefit., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib prolongs progression-free survival in hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer when combined with endocrine therapy. This phase II trial was designed to determine the feasibility of adjuvant palbociclib and endocrine therapy for early breast cancer., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients with HR+/HER2- stage II-III breast cancer received 2 years of palbociclib at 125 mg daily, 3 weeks on/1 week off, with endocrine therapy. The primary end point was discontinuation from palbociclib due to toxicity, non-adherence, or events related to tolerability. A discontinuation rate of 48% or higher would indicate the treatment duration of 2 years was not feasible, and was evaluated under a binomial test using a one-sided α = 0.025., Results: Overall, 162 patients initiated palbociclib; over half had stage III disease (52%) and most received prior chemotherapy (80%). A total of 102 patients (63%) completed 2 years of palbociclib; 50 patients discontinued early for protocol-related reasons (31%, 95% CI 24% to 39%, P = 0.001), and 10 discontinued due to protocol-unrelated reasons. The cumulative incidence of protocol-related discontinuation was 21% (95% CI 14% to 27%) at 12 months from start of treatment. Rates of palbociclib-related toxicity were congruent with the metastatic experience, and there were no cases of febrile neutropenia. Ninety-one patients (56%) required at least one dose reduction., Conclusion: Adjuvant palbociclib is feasible in early breast cancer, with a high proportion of patients able to complete 2 years of therapy. The safety profile in the adjuvant setting mirrors that observed in metastatic disease, with approximately half of the patients requiring dose-modification. As extended duration adjuvant palbociclib appears feasible and tolerable for most patients, randomized phase III trials are evaluating clinical benefit in this population., Clinicaltrials.gov Registration: NCT02040857., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: To analyze self-reported changes in physical function in older women with breast cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy., Design: Secondary analysis of the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 49907 prospective randomized clinical trial., Setting: CALGB institutions in the United States., Participants: Women aged 65 and older with Stage I to III breast cancer enrolled in CALGB 49907 who had physical function data from before and after receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy (N=256; mean age 71.5, range 65-85)., Measurements: Participants were administered the physical function subscale of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire before chemotherapy, at the end of chemotherapy, and 12 months after chemotherapy initiation. Functional decline was defined as a more than 10-point decrease from baseline at each time point. Resilience was defined as return to within 10 points of baseline. Multivariable regression was used to examine pretreatment characteristics associated with physical function changes., Results: Of 42% of participants who had physical function decline from before to the end of chemotherapy, 47% recovered by 12 months (were resilient). Almost one-third experienced functional decline from before chemotherapy to 12 months later. Pretreatment fatigue was a risk factor for functional decline from before to the end of chemotherapy (P=.02). Risk factors for functional decline at 12 months included pretreatment dyspnea (P=.007) and being unmarried (P=.01)., Conclusion: Functional decline was common in older women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer in a clinical trial. Although half recovered their physical function, one-third had a clinically meaningful decline at 12 months. Strategies are needed to prevent functional decline in older adults receiving chemotherapy. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:920-927, 2019., (© 2018, Copyright the Authors Journal compilation © 2018, The American Geriatrics Society.)

Background: In animal models of breast cancer, resistance to continuous use of letrozole can be reversed by withdrawal and reintroduction of letrozole. We therefore hypothesised that extended intermittent use of adjuvant letrozole would improve breast cancer outcome compared with continuous use of letrozole in postmenopausal women., Methods: We did the multicentre, open-label, randomised, parallel, phase 3 SOLE trial in 240 centres (academic, primary, secondary, and tertiary care centres) in 22 countries. We enrolled postmenopausal women of any age with hormone receptor-positive, lymph node-positive, and operable breast cancer for which they had undergone local treatment (surgery with or without radiotherapy) and had completed 4-6 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy. They had to be clinically free of breast cancer at enrolment and without evidence of recurrent disease at any time before randomisation. We randomly assigned women (1:1) to treatment groups of either continuous use of letrozole (2·5 mg/day orally for 5 years) or intermittent use of letrozole (2·5 mg/day orally for 9 months followed by a 3-month break in years 1-4 and then 2·5 mg/day during all 12 months of year 5). Randomisation was done by principal investigators or designee at respective centres through the internet-based system of the International Breast Cancer Study Group, was stratified by type of previous endocrine therapy (aromatase inhibitors only vs selective oestrogen receptor modulators only vs both therapies), and used permuted block sizes of four and institutional balancing. No one was masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival, analysed by the intention-to-treat principle using a stratified log-rank test. All patients in the intention-to-treat population who initiated protocol treatment during their period of trial participation were included in the safety analyses. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00553410, and EudraCT, number 2007-001370-88; and long-term follow-up of patients is ongoing., Findings: Between Dec 5, 2007, and Oct 8, 2012, 4884 women were enrolled and randomised after exclusion of patients at a non-adherent centre, found to have inadequate documentation of informed consent, immediately withdrew consent, or randomly assigned to intervention groups in error. 4851 women comprised the intention-to-treat population that compared extended intermittent letrozole use (n=2425) with continuous letrozole use (n=2426). After a median follow-up of 60 months (IQR 53-72), disease-free survival was 85·8% (95% CI 84·2-87·2) in the intermittent letrozole group compared with 87·5% (86·0-88·8) in the continuous letrozole group (hazard ratio 1·08, 95% CI 0·93-1·26; p=0·31). Adverse events were reported as expected and were similar between the two groups. The most common grade 3-5 adverse events were hypertension (584 [24%] of 2417 in the intermittent letrozole group vs 517 [21%] of 2411 in the continuous letrozole group) and arthralgia (136 [6%] vs 151 [6%]). 54 patients (24 [1%] in the intermittent letrozole group and 30 [1%] in the continuous letrozole group) had grade 3-5 CNS cerebrovascular ischaemia, 16 (nine [<1%] vs seven [<1%]) had grade 3-5 CNS haemorrhage, and 40 (19 [1%] vs 21 [1%]) had grade 3-5 cardiac ischaemia. In total, 23 (<1%) of 4851 patients died while on trial treatment (13 [<1%] of 2417 patients in the intermittent letrozole group vs ten [<1%] of 2411 in the continuous letrozole group)., Interpretation: In postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, extended use of intermittent letrozole did not improve disease-free survival compared with continuous use of letrozole. An alternative schedule of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy with letrozole, including intermittent administration, might be feasible and the results of the SOLE trial support the safety of temporary treatment breaks in selected patients who might require them., Funding: Novartis and the International Breast Cancer Study Group., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The 15th St. Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference 2017 in Vienna, Austria reviewed substantial new evidence on loco-regional and systemic therapies for early breast cancer. Treatments were assessed in light of their intensity, duration and side-effects, seeking where appropriate to escalate or de-escalate therapies based on likely benefits as predicted by tumor stage and tumor biology. The Panel favored several interventions that may reduce surgical morbidity, including acceptance of 2 mm margins for DCIS, the resection of residual cancer (but not baseline extent of cancer) in women undergoing neoadjuvant therapy, acceptance of sentinel node biopsy following neoadjuvant treatment of many patients, and the preference for neoadjuvant therapy in HER2 positive and triple-negative, stage II and III breast cancer. The Panel favored escalating radiation therapy with regional nodal irradiation in high-risk patients, while encouraging omission of boost in low-risk patients. The Panel endorsed gene expression signatures that permit avoidance of chemotherapy in many patients with ER positive breast cancer. For women with higher risk tumors, the Panel escalated recommendations for adjuvant endocrine treatment to include ovarian suppression in premenopausal women, and extended therapy for postmenopausal women. However, low-risk patients can avoid these treatments. Finally, the Panel recommended bisphosphonate use in postmenopausal women to prevent breast cancer recurrence. The Panel recognized that recommendations are not intended for all patients, but rather to address the clinical needs of the majority of common presentations. Individualization of adjuvant therapy means adjusting to the tumor characteristics, patient comorbidities and preferences, and managing constraints of treatment cost and access that may affect care in both the developed and developing world., Competing Interests: J. Baselga is on the Board of Directors for Varian Medical Systems, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and is a past board member of Grail. He has performed consulting and/or advisory work for Roche, Lilly, and Novartis., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The main rationale for neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer is to provide effective systemic treatment while surgically down-staging the cancer. This down-staging was initially to convert inoperable patients to operable and later to increase rates of breast conservation in patients initially deemed mastectomy only candidates. Unexpectedly, in recent neoadjuvant trials lower rates of breast conservation have been observed than in past decades, despite remarkable advances in systemic therapies, which have increased pathologic complete response rates. These results point to factors aside from response and eligibility for breast conservation that may lead surgeons and/or patients to recommend and choose mastectomy. Here, we aim to examine the surgical benefits offered by the modern era neoadjuvant therapy and explore factors that have contributed to this decrease in breast conservation rates. If the main benefit of neoadjuvant therapy is to increase the opportunity for breast conservation, then our review suggests that to optimize less invasive surgical approaches, we will need to address both surgeon and patient-level variables and biases that may be limiting our ability to identify patients appropriate for less aggressive options. As an oncology community, we must be aware of the surgical overtreatment of breast cancer, especially in a time where systemic therapies have remarkably improved outcomes and responses., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of combining trastuzumab/vinorelbine with bevacizumab in patients with first-or second-line HER2-positive, metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Eligible patients had HER2-positive measureable MBC, with no more than one prior line of chemotherapy, and were treated with trastuzumab (4 mg/kg × 2 mg/kg weekly thereafter), vinorelbine (25 mg/m(2) weekly), and bevacizumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks). Co-primary endpoints were (a) the proportion of patients alive and progression-free at 1 year and (b) safety profile/feasibility. Feasibility was defined as a rate of grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicity attributable to protocol-based therapy <20 %. Twenty-nine patients were enrolled (n = 22 first-line, n = 7 second-line). Median age was 48 years (range 37-68). The median number of cycles received was 8 (1-23) and median duration on treatment was 7.4 months (range 1-22). The study was closed early due to higher-than-expected rates of grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicities, with 50 events in 20 patients. A total of six patients (21 %) were taken off study for treatment-related toxicity. Most common treatment-related toxicities included fatigue (n = 7), febrile neutropenia (n = 4), and headache (n = 3). At 1 year, 8/22 first-line (36 %) and 2/7 second-line (29 %) patients were alive and progression-free. Median PFS was 9.9 months and 7.8 months in the first- and second-line cohorts, respectively. Objective responses were observed in 16/22 (73 %) and 5/7 (71 %) patients in the first- and second-line settings. Although the combination of vinorelbine, trastuzumab, and bevacizumab showed notable activity in HER2-positive MBC, the proportion of first-line patients alive and progression-free at 1 year was deemed unlikely to reach the pre-defined threshold for declaring success. Additionally, unacceptable toxicity was observed, at rates greater than previously reported with vinorelbine/trastuzumab or vinorelbine/bevacizumab doublet combinations.

Over the last 35 years, classical CMF (combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil) has been a milestone in the adjuvant treatment of women with breast cancer. However, after an early burst of success lasted just over 10 years, classical CMF has been supplanted by 'third-generation' regimens containing taxanes and anthracyclines. Questions have been raised in the past years concerning the true effectiveness of adjuvant CMF for specific subgroups of patients and particularly, recent retrospective data support the fact that the CMF might have a role in the treatment of patients with triple-negative breast cancer. One possible justification for supporting this role of CMF may be sought in the mechanism of action of drugs used in the regimen, as triple-negative cells may be sensitive to alkylating agents that cause double-strand breaks in DNA. The lesson learned from the CMF could lead us to identify new combinations of drugs that could include the optimal chemotherapy backbone for triple-negative breast cancer such as platinum compounds or alkylating agents or Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. In conclusion, although we have learned a lot from the use of CMF, many questions are still open and hopefully stimulate our thinking, as clinicians, leading us to find new and more effective ways to treat breast cancer.

Background: Women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) can respond to multiple lines of anti-HER2 therapy. It is unknown whether these patients will derive further clinical benefit following treatment with trastuzumab-MCC-DM1 (T-DM1)., Patients and Methods: We retrospectively identified HER2-positive MBC patients treated with T-DM1 and characterized outcomes during subsequent lines of anti-HER2 therapy. Response was determined by a blinded radiology review. Time-dependent analyses were carried out using Kaplan-Meier estimates., Results: We identified 23 patients treated with single-agent T-DM1 and report on the 20 patients who discontinued protocol therapy. All patients received trastuzumab-based metastatic therapy before initiation of T-DM1 [median 7 regimens (range 3-14)]. Of these 20 patients, 75% (15 of 20) received further therapy with or without anti-HER2 agents after discontinuing T-DM1. Partial response to either first- or second-subsequent line(s) of therapy was seen in 5 of 15 (33%) treated patients, including 33% (4 of 12) who received a regimen containing trastuzumab and/or lapatinib. Median durations of therapy to first- and second-subsequent regimens after T-DM1 were 5.5 and 6.4 months, respectively., Conclusions: In heavily pretreated HER2-positive MBC patients, prior exposure to T-DM1 does not exhaust the potential benefit of ongoing anti-HER2 therapy with trastuzumab- and/or lapatinib-based regimens.

Axillary node dissection (ALND) is the standard of care for patients who have a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) on sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). We sought to identify a low-risk patient population with positive SLN that may not need cALND. We analyzed SLNB for breast cancer at our institutions between 1999 and 2007. We identified 130 patients who had a positive SLN but did not undergo completion ALND. We evaluated clinical data, adjuvant treatment patterns and intermediate locoregional and distant events. The median patient age was 50; 19% had N0(i+) disease, 53% had micrometastatic (N1mi) disease, and 28% had macrometastasis. Eighty-eight percent of patients underwent radiation therapy; 66 patients (51%) had documented nodal radiation (of these 50 were treated with three fields and 14 with high tangents. Local recurrence in the breast occurred in two patients (2%) and nine patients (7%) developed distant metastases; there were no axillary/nodal recurrences. In this highly selected group of patients who had a positive SLNB but did not undergo cALND, we observed no axillary recurrences., (© 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly longer for the lapatinib plus trastuzumab (L+T) arm than for L alone in a phase III, randomized, open-label study of women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive metastatic breast cancer who had documented progression on at least one T-containing regimen in the metastatic setting. This analysis focused on impact of treatments on health-related quality of life (HRQOL)., Methods: HRQOL was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) questionnaire. Changes from baseline and time to deterioration were analyzed in the intent-to-treat population., Results: Differences between the treatment arms in adjusted mean change from baseline favored the L+T arm, ranging from 0.0 to 4.1 (FACT-B), 1.0-4.0 [Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G)], and 0.5-2.7 (Trial Outcome Index). Most differences were not statistically significant, except for FACT-G at week 12 (delta = 4.0, P = 0.037). Similar results were found in a sensitivity analysis that included HRQOL records up to patient withdrawal from original randomized treatment. The longer time to HRQOL deterioration in the L+T arm was not statistically significant (FACT-B hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval 0.56-1.20)., Conclusion: The addition of lapatinib to trastuzumab prolonged PFS while improving or maintaining near-term HRQOL, suggesting a meaningful clinical benefit to patients.

We sought to evaluate the survival of patients who received breast surgery prior to any other breast cancer therapy following a metastatic diagnosis. Standard treatment for stage IV breast cancer is systemic therapy without resection of the primary tumor. Registry-based studies suggest that resection of the primary tumor may improve survival in stage IV cancer. We performed a retrospective analysis using data from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Breast Cancer Outcomes Database. Patients were eligible if they had a metastatic breast cancer diagnosis at presentation with disease at a distant site and either received surgery prior to any systemic therapy or received systemic therapy only. Eligible patients who did not receive surgery were matched to those who received surgery based on age at diagnosis, ER, HER2, and number of metastatic sites. To determine whether estimates from the matched analysis were consistent with estimates that could be obtained without matching univariate and multivariable analyses of the unmatched sample were also conducted. There were 1,048 patients in the NCCN database diagnosed with stage IV breast cancer from 1997 to 2007. 609 metastatic breast cancer patients were identified as eligible for the study. Among the 551 patients who had data available for matching, 236 patients who did not receive surgery were matched to 54 patients who received surgery. Survival was similar between the groups with a median of 3.4 years in the nonsurgery group and 3.5 years in the surgery group. The groups were similar after adjusting for the presence of lung metastases and use of trastuzumab therapy (HR=0.94, CI 0.83-1.08, P=0.38). When matching for the variables associated with a survival benefit in previous studies, surgery was not shown to improve survival in the stage IV setting for this subset.

Background: The vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway can be targeted through VEGF neutralization or VEGF receptor (VEGFR) blockade using tyrosine kinase inhibition. Because laboratory models suggest that combining these approaches might be synergistic, we sought to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of combining sunitinib with paclitaxel + bevacizumab (PB)., Methods: Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, metastatic breast cancer receiving first-line chemotherapy were randomized to PB or PB with sunitinib (PBS), with planned escalation of the sunitinib dose., Results: Forty-six patients were randomized to PB or PBS with sunitinib dosed at 25 mg p.o. daily. Patients receiving PBS encountered substantial toxicity that precluded adequate treatment. The percentage of patients with grade ≥3 adverse events was greater in the PBS arm than the PB arm (83% versus 57%), and sunitinib dosing was modified in 78% of patients, most often due to neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and fatigue. In addition, 44% of patients had sunitinib dose reduction to 12.5 mg, and 39% required discontinuation. Patients receiving PBS had more bevacizumab treatment interruptions and discontinuations because of toxicity. Median treatment duration was longer in the PB arm compared with the PBS arm (14.1 versus 11.1 weeks), reflecting early treatment discontinuation of PBS. Because of poor tolerability of the addition of sunitinib to PB, the planned sunitinib dose escalation was halted and the study accrual was terminated., Conclusion: Adding sunitinib to standard doses of bevacizumab plus paclitaxel for metastatic breast cancer is not feasible. Different strategies will be required to evaluate whether there is additional clinical benefit to combining VEGF/VEGFR-targeted agents.

Background: Treatment options for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) include a rapidly expanding repertoire of medical, surgical and supportive care measures., Design: To provide timely and evidence-based recommendations for the diagnostic workup and treatment of patients with MBC, an international expert panel reviewed and discussed the evidence available from clinical trials regarding diagnostic, therapeutic and supportive measures with emphasis on their impact on the quality of life and overall survival of patients with MBC., Results: Evidence-based recommendations for the diagnostic workup, endocrine therapy, chemotherapy, use of targeted therapies and bisphosphonates, surgical treatment and supportive care measures in the management of patients with MBC were formulated., Conclusions: The present consensus manuscript updates evidence-based recommendations for state-of-the-art treatment of MBC depending on disease-associated and biological variables.

Purpose: This phase I study explored gefitinib (G) and capecitabine (C) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC)., Methods: Sequential cohorts (n = 3) received G and escalating C on a 14 day on/7 day off schedule, with a validation cohort (n = 10) at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Dose limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined in cycle 1. The primary endpoint was safety; secondary endpoints included response and adherence., Results: About 19 patients were treated for a median of 5 cycles. No patients in sequential cohorts experienced DLT; C MTD was 2,000 mg/m(2)/day when paired with daily G 250 mg. In the validation cohort, four experienced serious toxicities, including diarrhea, mucositis, and palmarplantar dysesthesia. At the MTD, 6 (46%) required a C dose reduction, and 3 (23%) came off study for toxicity. One partial response was observed (8%, 95% CI 0.2-38.5%); five had stable disease >24 weeks (26, 95% CI 9-51%). Patients missed few drug doses, with the suggestion of overadherence to therapy., Conclusions: In this phase I study of G and C in MBC, a C MTD was identified, and significant toxicity was observed. About 8% demonstrated a response, with 26% maintaining stable disease. The possibility of overadherence, as suggested in this study, may have implications for other trials of oral antineoplastic therapy.

Background: This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of lapatinib in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive advanced or metastatic breast cancer that progressed during prior trastuzumab therapy., Patients and Methods: Women with stage IIIB/IV HER2-overexpressing breast cancer were treated with single-agent lapatinib 1250 or 1500 mg once daily after protocol amendment. Tumor response according to RECIST was assessed every 8 weeks. HER2 expression was assessed in tumor tissue by immunohistochemistry and FISH., Results: Seventy-eight patients were enrolled in the study. Investigator and independent review response rates [complete response (CR) or partial response (PR)] were 7.7% and 5.1%, and clinical benefit rates (CR, PR, or stable disease for >or=24 weeks) were 14.1% and 9.0%, respectively. Median time to progression was 15.3 weeks by independent review, and median overall survival was 79 weeks. The most common treatment-related adverse events were rash (47%), diarrhea (46%), nausea (31%), and fatigue (18%)., Conclusions: Single-agent lapatinib has clinical activity with manageable toxic effects in HER2-overexpressing breast cancer that progressed on trastuzumab-containing therapy. Studies of lapatinib-based combination regimens with chemotherapy and other targeted therapies in metastatic and earlier stages of breast cancer are warranted.

The detection of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in peripheral blood may have important prognostic and predictive implications in breast cancer treatment. A limitation in this field has been the lack of a validated method of accurately measuring CTCs. While sensitivity has improved using RT-PCR, specificity remains a major challenge. The goal of this paper is to present a sensitive and specific methodology of detecting CTCs in women with HER-2 positive metastatic breast cancer, and to examine its role as a marker that tracks disease response during treatment with trastuzumab-containing regimens. The study included patients with HER-2-positive metastatic breast cancer enrolled on two different clinical protocols using a trastuzumab-containing regimen. Serial CTCs were measured at planned time points and clinical correlations were made. Immunomagnetic selection of circulating epithelial cells was used to address the specificity of tumor cell detection using cytokeratin 19 (CK19). In addition, the extracellular domain of the HER-2 protein (HER-2/ECD) was measured to determine if CTCs detected by CK19 accurately reflect tumor burden. The presence of CTCs at first restaging was associated with disease progression. We observed an association between CK19 and HER-2/ECD. The association of HER-2/ECD with clinical response followed a similar pattern to that seen with CK19. Finally, the absence of HER-2/ECD at best overall response and a change of HER-2/ECD from positive at baseline to negative at best overall response was associated with favorable treatment response. Our study supports the prognostic and predictive role of the detection of CTCs in treatment of HER-2-positive metastatic breast cancer patients. The association between CK19 and markers of disease burden is in line with the concept that CTCs may be a reliable measure of tumor cells in the peripheral blood of patients with metastatic breast cancer. The association of CTCs at first restaging with treatment failure indicates that CTCs may have a role as surrogate markers to monitor treatment response.

Background: The efficacy and tolerability of the epidermal growth factor receptor/human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2) tyrosine kinase inhibitor lapatinib in refractory metastatic breast cancer were assessed., Patients and Methods: In a phase II, open-label study, patients with previously treated HER2-positive (n = 140) or HER2-negative (n = 89) metastatic breast cancer received once-daily oral lapatinib 1500 mg/day., Results: Most (76%) patients had received four or more lines of prior therapy. The response rate in the HER2-positive cohort was 4.3% by investigator assessment and 1.4% by independent assessment. Both assessments established that approximately 6% of HER2-positive patients derived clinical benefit from lapatinib, being progression free for >/=6 months. No objective tumor responses occurred in the HER2-negative cohort. Independent review assessments of median time to progression and median progression-free survival were similar in the HER2-positive and HER2-negative cohorts (9.1 and 7.6 weeks, respectively). All responders exhibited HER2 overexpression (3+ by immunohistochemistry), and five of six responders were HER2 amplified by FISH. Lapatinib-related adverse events, including diarrhea (54%), rash (30%), and nausea (24%), were primarily mild to moderate in severity., Conclusions: Lapatinib monotherapy had modest clinical activity in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer that progressed on prior trastuzumab regimens. No apparent clinical activity was observed in chemotherapy-refractory, HER2-negative disease.

Purpose: Phase II trials suggested that weekly paclitaxel might be more effective and less toxic than every-3-weeks administration for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) protocol 9840 was initiated to address this question. Subsequently trastuzumab was demonstrated to improve outcomes of paclitaxel therapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2)-positive patients, and was therefore incorporated. Because inhibition of HER-family signaling had potential efficacy even without HER-2 overexpression, we randomly assigned for trastuzumab in this population., Patients and Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks or 80 mg/m(2) weekly. After the first 171 patients, all HER-2-positive patients received trastuzumab; HER-2 nonoverexpressors were randomly assigned for trastuzumab, in addition to paclitaxel schedule. A total of 577 patients were treated on 9840. An additional 158 patients were included in analyses, for combined sample of 735. The primary end point was response rate (RR); secondary end points were time to progression (TTP), overall survival, and toxicity. Primary comparisons were between weekly versus every-3-weeks paclitaxel, and trastuzumab versus no trastuzumab in HER-2 nonoverexpressors., Results: In the combined sample, weekly paclitaxel was superior to every-3-weeks administration: RR (42% v 29%, unadjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.75; P = .0004), TTP (median, 9 v 5 months; adjusted HR = 1.43; P < .0001), and survival (median, 24 v 12 months; adjusted HR = 1.28; P = .0092). For HER-2 nonoverexpressors, trastuzumab did not improve efficacy. Grade 3 neuropathy was more common with weekly dosing (24% v 12%; P = .0003)., Conclusion: Weekly paclitaxel is more effective than every-3-weeks administration for MBC. Trastuzumab did not improve efficacy for HER-2 nonoverexpressors. Neurotoxicity is a treatment-limiting toxicity for weekly paclitaxel.

The present consensus manuscript defines evidence-based recommendations for state-of-the-art treatment of metastatic breast cancer depending on disease-associated and biologic variables.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to characterize the prevalence and predictors of central nervous system (CNS) metastasis among women with HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer receiving trastuzumab-based therapy., Methods: The frequency and time course of isolated CNS progression were characterized among women with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, receiving chemotherapy with or without trastuzumab as first-line treatment for metastatic disease in two clinical trials. The first trial was a multicenter randomized phase III study of chemotherapy (doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide or paclitaxel) +/- trastuzumab, and the second was a multicenter phase II trial of vinorelbine + trastuzumab. All patients had measurable disease and were free of symptomatic CNS disease at initiation of study treatment., Results: Nearly 10% of patients receiving trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy developed isolated CNS metastases as first site of tumor progression. Progression in the CNS tended to be a later event than progression at other sites among women receiving trastuzumab-based therapy. Trastuzumab-based treatment did not substantially delay onset of CNS metastases as initial site of progression. Following diagnosis with primary breast cancer, tumors with HER2 gene amplification tend to be associated with greater risk of isolated CNS progression compared with those lacking gene amplification., Conclusions: Patients with HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer are at risk for isolated CNS progression, reflecting improved peripheral tumor control and patient survival through use of trastuzumab-based therapy, and a relative lack of CNS activity with trastuzumab. Clinicians should be aware of this association. Better treatments for CNS recurrences are needed.

Cytotoxic chemotherapy is important for treatment of women with hormone-insensitive or hormone-refractory advanced breast cancer. A variety of agents are effective, alone or in combination. The clinical activity and side effects of many agents, as well as principles for use of chemotherapy, are reviewed. Recent advances in chemotherapy for breast cancer include important studies on the role of dose-intensity, modifications of available agents to reduce side effects, and the availability of oral chemotherapeutics. Finally, the combination of chemotherapy with novel biological agents may improve outcomes for women with certain types of breast cancer. The growing availability of such biological therapies given in combination with chemotherapy may mean better survival in the future for women with advanced breast cancer.

Purpose: To determine the response rate and toxicity profile of trastuzumab administered concurrently with weekly vinorelbine in women with HER2-overexpressing advanced breast cancer., Patients and Methods: Forty women with HER2-positive (+3 by immunohistochemistry, n = 30; +2 or positive, n = 10) breast cancer were enrolled onto a study of trastuzumab (4 mg/kg x 1, 2 mg/kg weekly thereafter) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m2 weekly, with dose adjusted each week for neutrophil count). Eighty-two percent of women had received prior chemotherapy as part of adjuvant (30%), metastatic (25%), or both (28%) treatment, including substantial portions of patients who had previously received either anthracyclines (20%), taxanes (15%), or both types (38%) of chemotherapy., Results: Responses were observed in 30 of 40 patients (overall response rate, 75%, conditional corrected 95% confidence interval, 57% to 89%). The response rate was 84% in patients treated with trastuzumab and vinorelbine as first-line therapy for metastatic disease, and 80% among HER2 +3 positive patients. High response rates were also seen in women treated with second- or third-line therapy, and among patients previously treated with anthracyclines and/or taxanes. Combination therapy was feasible; patients received concurrent trastuzumab and vinorelbine in 93% of treatment weeks. Neutropenia was the only grade 4 toxicity. No patients had symptomatic heart failure. Grade 2 cardiac toxicity was observed in three patients. Prior cumulative doxorubicin dose in excess of 240 mg/m2 and borderline pre-existing cardiac function were associated with grade 2 cardiac toxicity., Conclusion: Trastuzumab in combination with vinorelbine is highly active in women with HER2-overexpressing advanced breast cancer and is well tolerated.

The decision to receive chemotherapy or chemohormonal therapy involves careful consideration of both the potential benefits and possible risks of therapy. There are substantial short- and long-term side effects from chemotherapy. By convention, short-term side effects include those toxic effects encountered during chemotherapy, while long-term side effects include later complications of treatment arising after the conclusion of adjuvant chemotherapy. These side effects vary, depending on the specific agents used in the adjuvant regimen as well as on the dose used and the duration of treatment. There is also considerable variability in side effect profile across individuals. This review will focus on the short- and long-term toxicity seen with the most commonly used adjuvant chemotherapy and chemohormonal therapy regimens.

Preclinical data indicate that trastuzumab (Herceptin) has the potential for synergistic or additive effects in combination with therapies including chemotherapy and hormonal agents, providing the rationale for a number of clinical trials in women with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. A recently reported phase II trial has demonstrated that trastuzumab plus vinorelbine is both effective (overall response rate 75%) and well tolerated, with the major side effects being typical of single-agent vinorelbine. Other combinations of trastuzumab with a variety of other chemotherapeutic and hormonal agents are also being assessed. In an effort to overcome the cardiotoxicity observed with trastuzumab plus doxorubicin in the pivotal phase III trial, combination regimens involving potentially less toxic anthracyclines such as epirubicin and liposomal formulations of doxorubicin are ongoing. In addition, trials are investigating whether trastuzumab can reverse the resistance to hormonal therapy that develops in most women with metastatic breast cancer. These and other studies will identify the regimens that produce the best outcomes with the fewest possible side effects in women with HER2-positive breast cancer., (Copyright 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel)

Purpose: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of weekly docetaxel in women with metastatic breast cancer., Patients and Methods: Twenty-nine women were enrolled onto a study of weekly docetaxel given at 40 mg/m(2)/wk. Each cycle consisted of 6 weeks of therapy followed by a 2-week treatment break, repeated until disease progression or removal from study for toxicity or patient preference. Fifty-two percent of patients had been previously treated with adjuvant chemotherapy; 21% had received prior chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer, and 31% had previously received anthracyclines. All patients were assessable for toxicity; two patients were not assessable for response but are included in an intent-to-treat analysis., Results: Patients received a median of 18 infusions, with a median cumulative docetaxel dose of 720 mg/m(2). There were no complete responses. Twelve patients had partial responses (overall response rate, 41%; 95% confidence interval, 24% to 61%), all occurring within the first two cycles. Similar response rates were observed among subgroups of patients previously treated either with any prior chemotherapy or with anthracyclines. An additional 17% of patients had stable disease for at least 6 months. The regimen was generally well tolerated. There was no grade 4 toxicity. Only 28% of patients had any grade 3 toxicity, most commonly neutropenia and fatigue. Acute toxicity, including myelosuppression, was mild. Fatigue, fluid retention, and eye tearing/conjunctivitis became more common with repetitive dosing, although these side effects rarely exceeded grade 2. Dose reductions were made for eight of 29 patients, most often because of fatigue (n = 5)., Conclusion: Weekly docetaxel is active in treating patients with metastatic breast cancer, with a side effect profile that differs from every-3-weeks therapy.

Background: Vinorelbine and Doxil (liposomal doxorubicin) are active chemotherapeutic agents in metastatic breast cancer. A phase I study was designed to evaluate combination therapy., Patients and Methods: Thirty women with metastatic breast cancer were enrolled. Dose-limiting toxicity was determined through a dose escalation scheme, and defined for the first treatment cycle, only. Pharmacokinetic studies were performed during the first cycle of treatment., Results: In the first cohort of Doxil 30 mg/m2 day 1 and vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 days 1 and 8, patients experienced severe neutropenia. Vinorelbine administration was changed thereafter to days 1 and 15 of each cycle. Dose limiting toxicity was observed at Doxil 50 mg/m2 and vinorelbine 25 mg/m2. Doxil 40 mg/m2 and vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 was defined as the maximally tolerated dose. Few toxicities (principally neutro penia) were seen at this dose level, with the notable absence of significant nausea, vomiting, or alopecia. Though 63% of patients had received prior anthracycline-based chemotherapy, only one patient developed grade 2 cardiac toxicity. Pharmacokinetic studies revealed prolonged exposure to high doxorubicin concentrations for several days following Doxil administration., Conclusions: Combination chemotherapy with Doxil and vinorelbine affords treatment with two active drugs in women with metastatic breast cancer, and appears to have a favorable toxicity profile. A schedule of Doxil 40 mg/m2 day 1 and vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 days 1 and 15 given every 28 days is recommended for phase II studies.

Background: We analyzed the use of alternative medicine by women who had received standard therapy for early-stage breast cancer diagnosed between September 1993 and September 1995., Methods: A cohort of 480 patients with newly diagnosed early-stage breast cancer was recruited from a Massachusetts statewide cohort of women participating in a study of how women choose treatment for cancer. Alternative medical treatments, conventional therapies, and health-related quality of life were examined., Results: New use of alternative medicine after surgery for breast cancer was common (reported by 28.1 percent of the women); such use was not associated with choices about standard medical therapies after we controlled for clinical and sociodemographic variables. A total of 10.6 percent of the women had used alternative medicine before they were given a diagnosis of breast cancer. Women who initiated the use of alternative medicine after surgery reported a worse quality of life than women who never used alternative medicine. Mental health scores were similar at base line among women who decided to use alternative medicine and those who did not, but three months after surgery the use of alternative medicine was independently associated with depression, fear of recurrence of cancer, lower scores for mental health and sexual satisfaction, and more physical symptoms as well as symptoms of greater intensity. All groups of women reported improving quality of life one year after surgery., Conclusions: Among women with newly diagnosed early-stage breast cancer who had been treated with standard therapies, new use of alternative medicine was a marker of greater psychosocial distress and worse quality of life.