Search

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. The APHINITY trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01358877) previously demonstrated that pertuzumab added to adjuvant trastuzumab and chemotherapy improved invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) for patients with early human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer (BC). Here, we report the preplanned third interim analysis of overall survival (OS) and a descriptive updated iDFS analysis with 8.4 years of median follow-up of 4,804 patients in the intent-to-treat population. The 8-year OS was 92.7% in the pertuzumab versus 92.0% in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.02]; P = .078, above the 0.006 significance threshold). The HR was 0.80 [95% CI 0.63 to 1.00] in the node-positive cohort and 0.99 [95% CI, 0.64 to 1.55] in the node-negative cohort. Updated results of 8-year iDFS in the node-positive cohort showed an absolute improvement of 4.9% favoring pertuzumab (86.1% v 81.2%; HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.87]). The node-negative cohort did well without adding pertuzumab (8-year iDFS and OS in the placebo group were 93.3% and 96.4%, respectively). The iDFS benefit was seen in the hormone receptor-negative (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.64 to 1.06]) and HR+ cohorts (HR of 0.75 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.92]). Despite improvement in overall iDFS, the addition of pertuzumab did not improve OS at this third interim analysis.

Background: CAPItello-291 is an ongoing phase 3 trial in which capivasertib-fulvestrant significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo-fulvestrant in patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who had relapse or disease progression during or after aromatase inhibitor treatment, in both the overall population and in patients with PIK3CA, AKT1, or PTEN-altered tumours. This study further explored patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL), functioning, symptoms, and symptom tolerability in CAPItello-291., Methods: This phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, which was conducted across 193 hospitals and cancer centres in 19 countries, enrolled women with any menopausal status or men, aged ≥18 years (≥20 years in Japan), with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who had relapse or disease progression during or after treatment with an aromatase inhibitor, with or without previous cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4 or 6 inhibitor therapy. Patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group/WHO performance score of 0 or 1 and could have received up to two previous lines of endocrine therapy and up to one previous line of chemotherapy for advanced disease. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using block randomisation (stratified according to the presence or absence of liver metastases, previous use of a CDK4/6 inhibitor [yes vs no], and geographical region) to receive oral capivasertib 400 mg (twice daily for 4 days, followed by 3 days off) plus intramuscular fulvestrant 500 mg (every 14 days for the first three injections, then every 28 days) or placebo with matching fulvestrant dosing. The dual primary endpoint of the trial was investigator-assessed progression-free survival assessed both in the overall population and among patients with PIK3CA, AKT1, or PTEN-altered tumours. The EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire 30-item core module (QLQ-C30) and breast module (QLQ-BR23), Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), and Patient Global Impression of Treatment Tolerability (PGI-TT) questionnaires were used to assess patient-reported outcomes. Evaluation of EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BR23 were secondary endpoints and evaluation of PRO-CTCAE and PGI-TT were pre-defined exploratory endpoints, and these endpoints are the subject of analysis in this Article. Data were collected at baseline and prespecified timepoints. Patient-reported outcomes were analysed in all randomly assigned patients with an evaluable baseline assessment and at least one evaluable post-baseline assessment. Change from baseline was assessed using mixed model with repeated measures for EORTC QLQ-C30 and summarised for QLQ-BR23. Time to deterioration was described using the Kaplan-Meier method. PGI-TT and PRO-CTCAE responses were summarised at each treatment cycle. Patient-reported outcomes were not prospectively powered for statistical comparison. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04305496., Findings: Between June 2, 2020, and Oct 13, 2021, 901 patients were enrolled, of whom 708 patients were randomly assigned to receive capivasertib-fulvestrant (n=355) or placebo-fulvestrant (n=353). The median age of the patients was 59 years (IQR 51-67) in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group and 58 years (IQR 49-66) in the placebo-fulvestrant group. At data cutoff (Aug 15, 2022), the median duration of follow-up for progression-free survival in censored patients was 13·0 months (IQR 9·1-16·7) for capivasertib-fulvestrant and 12·7 months (IQR 2·0-16·4) for placebo-fulvestrant in the overall population. EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status/quality of life (GHS/QOL) scores were maintained from baseline and were similar between treatment groups throughout the study period (difference in mean change from baseline of -2·5 [95% CI -4·5 to -0·6] with capivasertib-fulvestrant vs -5·6 [-7·9 to -3·4] with placebo-fulvestrant; treatment difference 3·1 [95% CI 0·2 to 6·0]). Median time to deterioration in EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QOL was 24·9 months (95% CI 13·8 to not reached) in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group and 12·0 months (10·2 to 15·7) in the placebo-fulvestrant group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·70, 95% CI 0·53 to 0·92). Time to deterioration HRs for all EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 subscale scores showed little difference between the treatment groups, except for diarrhoea, which was worse in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group than in the placebo-fulvestrant group (HR 2·75, 95% CI 2·01-3·81). In PRO-CTCAE symptom assessment, the proportion of patients reporting loose and watery stools "frequently" or "almost constantly" was 29% higher at cycle 1, day 15 in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group than in the placebo-fulvestrant group, decreasing at subsequent cycles. Other PRO-CTCAE-reported symptoms (rash, mouth or throat sores, itchy skin, and numbness or tingling in hands or feet) were absent or mild in most patients in both groups throughout treatment. According to the PGI-TT, most patients in both groups reported "not at all" or "a little bit" of bother from treatment side-effects., Interpretation: Patient-reported outcomes from CAPItello-291 demonstrated that capivasertib-fulvestrant delayed time to deterioration of GHS/QOL and maintained other dimensions of HRQOL (except symptoms of diarrhoea) similarly to fulvestrant. With the clinical efficacy and manageable safety profile, these exploratory results further support the positive benefit-risk profile of capivasertib-fulvestrant in this population., Funding: AstraZeneca., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MOl has received honoraria from Eisai, Gilead Sciences, Libbs, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Seagen, AstraZeneca Taiwan, and Merck Sharp & Dohme; has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche, Seagen, Zenith Epigenetics, Gilead Sciences, Ayala Pharmaceuticals, and Genentech; has received travel grants from Eisai and Gilead Sciences; has served as a consultant for AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead Sciences, ITeos Therapeutics, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Relay Therapeutics, Roche, Seagen, and Pierre Fabre; and serves as the head on the board of directors for the SOLTI Breast Cancer Research Group. HSR has served as a consultant or advisor for Napo Pharmaceuticals, Puma Biotechnology, Mylan, Eisai, and Daiichi Sankyo, and has received research funding from OBI Pharma, Pfizer, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Gilead Sciences, Astellas Pharma, Taiho Oncology, Veru, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech/Roche, and Stemline Therapeutics. SJH has received institutional grants from Eli Lilly; has served as a consultant for Pfizer; has received payments to their institution per patient from AstraZeneca (study sponsor); has participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Eli Lilly; has received honoraria from Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, and AstraZeneca; and has received support for attending meetings and travel from Novartis. FD has received honoraria from Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, and AstraZeneca and has received travel grants from Daiichi Sankyo, Novartis, Gilead Sciences, and Pfizer. JC has served as a consultant or advisor for Celgene, Cellestia Biotech, AstraZeneca, Roche, Seagen, Daiichi Sankyo, ERYTECH Pharma, Polyphor, Athenex Oncology, Eli Lilly, SERVIER, Merck Sharp & Dohme, GlaxoSmithKline, Leuko, Clovis Oncology, Bioasis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ellipses Pharma, HiberCell, Bioinvent, GEMoaB Monoclonals, Gilead Sciences, Menarini, Zymeworks, Reveal Genomics, Expres2ion Biotechnologies, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie, Bridgebio, and BioNTech; has received travel grants from Roche, Pfizer, Eisai, Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead Sciences, AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Stemline Therapeutics; holds stock in Leuko and MAJ3 Capital; holds two patents, WO 2014/199294 A and US 2019/ 0338368 A1; has received honoraria from Novartis, Eisai, Celgene, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Gilead Sciences, and Stemline Therapeutics; and has received research funding from ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Baxalta, Bayer, Eisai, Guardant Health, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Puma Biotechnology, Queen Mary University of London, Roche, and Piqur. HLG has served as a consultant or advisor for AstraZeneca; has received research funding from Merck Sharp & Dohme; and has served on speakers’ bureaus for Roche, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Technofarma, and Novartis. MT has served on advisory boards for Athenex Oncology, Bertis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Kansai Medical Net, and Terumo; has received compensation as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Bertis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai, Devicore Medical Japan, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Exact Science, Kyowa-Kirin, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Nippon-Kayaku, Novartis, Pfizer, Shimadzu, Sysmex, Taiho, Takeda, and Yakult; has received research funding from AFI Technology, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, GL Science, Kansai Medical Net, Luxonus, Pfizer, Sanwa Shurui, Shimadzu, Takeda, The Japan Breast Cancer Research Group association, The Kyoto Breast Cancer Research Network association, and Yakult; has served on steering committees for AstraZeneca, Chugai, and Daiichi Sankyo; and serves as a member of the board of directors for the Organisation for Oncology and Translational Research, The Japan Breast Cancer Research Group association, The Japanese Onco-Cardiology Society, The Kyoto Breast Cancer Research Network association, and The Japanese Breast Cancer Society. KJ has served on advisory boards for Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Jounce Therapeutics, Synthon, Intellisphere, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, BluePrint Medicines, Seagen, Daiichi Sankyo, Biotheranostics, Sun Pharma Advanced Research Company, Taiho Oncology, Sanofi, Gilead Sciences, and Scorpion Therapeutics; has received research funding from Novartis, Genentech, Debiopharm Group, ADC Therapeutics, Pfizer, Novita Pharmaceuticals, Clovis Oncology, Eli Lilly, Zymeworks, Immunomedics, Puma Biotechnology, VelosBio/Merck, AstraZeneca, Context Therapeutics, Scorpion Therapeutics, and Blueprint Medicines; and has received travel grants from Taiho Pharmaceutical, Jounce Therapeutics, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Intellisphere, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, and Genentech/Roche. SL has served as a consult or on advisory boards for AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, EirGenix, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Olema, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Relay Therapeutics, Roche, Sanofi, Seagen, and AGO (German Gynecological Oncology Group) Kommission Mamma; has served as an invited speaker at AstraZeneca, DSI, Gilead Sciences, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Seagen, Stemline-Menarini, and Medscape; is a full or part-time employee at GBG Forschungs GmbH; has received licensing or royalties from VMscope GmbH, and research funding from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Greenwich Life Sciences, Immunomedics/Gilead Sciences, Molecular Health, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche; and has served as a principal investigator at PI Aphinity. YHP has received research funding from MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Gencurix, and Genome Insight; has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, MSD, Roche, Daiichi Sankyo, Novartis, and Gilead Sciences; has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, MSD, Eisai, Roche, Daiichi Sankyo, Menarini, Everest, and Novartis; has received travel grants from Gilead Sciences, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca; has served on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche, Menarini, Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo; and has received equipment, materials, drugs, medical writing, gifts, or other services from Dong-A ST, Sanofi, Roche, and Pfizer. JHS has received research funding from MSD, Roche, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, Seagen, Qurient, Dragonfly Therapeutics, Eikon Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Celcuity, Bristol Myers Squibb, HLB Pharmaceutical, Sermonix Pharmaceuticals, Olema Oncology, Hanmi, Ildong Pharmaceutical, and Samyang Holdings. ET has received honoraria from Eli Lilly, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, and Chugai. NCT has served on the advisory board for AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Repare Therapeutics, Relay Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Inivata, Guardant Health, and Exact Sciences and received research funding from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, MSD, Invitae, Inivata, Personalis, and Natera. CD’C, HA, MF, and IW are employees of AstraZeneca, and may hold AstraZeneca stocks or shares. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Gene expression assays (GEAs) can guide treatment for early-stage breast cancer. Several large prospective randomized clinical trials, and numerous additional studies, now provide new information for selecting an appropriate GEA. This systematic review builds upon prior reviews, with a focus on five widely commercialized GEAs (Breast Cancer Index®, EndoPredict®, MammaPrint®, Oncotype DX®, and Prosigna®). The comprehensive dataset available provides a contemporary opportunity to assess each GEA's utility as a prognosticator and/or predictor of adjuvant therapy benefit., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Surgical Oncology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Evidence regarding differences in survival associated with the site of metastasis in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) remains limited. Our aim was to analyze the overall survival (OS), distant relapse free survival (DRFS), and survival since the diagnosis of the relapse (MS), according to the side of metastasis., Methods: This was a retrospective study of TNBC patients with distant metastases at the Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplasicas (Lima, Peru) from 2000 to 2014. Prognostic factors were determined by multivariate Cox regression analysis., Results: In total, 309 patients were included. Regarding the type of metastasis, visceral metastasis accounted for 41% and the lung was the most frequent first site of metastasis (33.3%). With a median follow-up of 10.2 years, the 5-year DRFS and OS were 10% and 26%, respectively. N staging (N2-N3 vs. N0, HR = 1.49, 95%CI: 1.04-2.14), metastasis in visceral sites (vs. bone; HR = 1.55, 95%CI: 0.94-2.56), the central nervous system (vs. bone; HR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.10-3.22), and multiple sites (vs. bone; HR = 2.55, 95%CI:1.53-4.25) were prognostic factors of OS whereas multiple metastasis (HR = 2.30, 95% CI: 1.42-3.72) was a predictor of MS. In terms of DRFS, there were no differences according to metastasis type or solid organ., Conclusion: TNBC patients with multiple metastasis and CNS metastasis have an increased risk of death compared to those with bone metastasis in terms of OS and MS., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Piedra-Delgado et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Dual anti-HER2-targeted therapy in breast cancer (BC) significantly increased the rate of pathological complete response (pCR) compared to single blockade when added to chemotherapy. However, limited data exist on the long-term impact on survival of the additional increase in pCR., Methods: Neoadjuvant lapatinib and/or trastuzumab treatment optimisation (NCT00553358) is an international, randomised, open-label, phase III study investigating the addition of lapatinib to chemotherapy plus trastuzumab in HER2-positive early BC. Ten-year event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS) and safety were assessed on intention-to-treat population. The association between pCR and EFS or OS was investigated in landmark population., Results: A total of 455 patients were randomised to receive lapatinib (154), trastuzumab (149) or the combination (152). Ten-year EFS estimates were 63% (95% confidence interval [CI], 54%-71%) in the lapatinib group, 64% (95% CI, 55%-72%) in the trastuzumab group and 67% (95% CI, 58%-74%) in the combination group. Ten-year OS rates were 76% (95% CI, 67%-83%), 75% (95% CI, 66%-82%) and 80% (95% CI, 73%-86%) in the lapatinib, trastuzumab and combination groups, respectively. Women who achieved a pCR had improved EFS (hazard ratio 0.48, 95% CI, 0.31-0.73) and OS (hazard ratio 0.37, 95% CI, 0.20-0.63) compared with those who did not. The numerical difference in survival according to pCR status was greater in women treated with the combination and those with hormone-receptor-negative tumours. There were no new or long-term safety concerns., Conclusions: Patients with HER2-positive BC showed a durable survival benefit of neoadjuvant anti-HER2, irrespective of treatment arm. Patients who achieve pCR have significantly better outcomes than patients without pCR., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. The combined analysis of SOFT-TEXT compared outcomes in 4,690 premenopausal women with estrogen/progesterone receptor-positive (ER/PgR+) early breast cancer randomly assigned to 5 years of exemestane + ovarian function suppression (OFS) versus tamoxifen + OFS. After a median follow-up of 9 years, exemestane + OFS significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS) and distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI), but not overall survival, compared with tamoxifen + OFS. We now report DFS, DRFI, and overall survival after a median follow-up of 13 years. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the 12-year DFS (4.6% absolute improvement, hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.90; P < .001) and DRFI (1.8% absolute improvement, HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.98; P = .03), but not overall survival (90.1% v 89.1%, HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.11), continued to be significantly improved for patients assigned exemestane + OFS over tamoxifen + OFS. Among patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative tumors (86.0% of the ITT population), the absolute improvement in 12-year overall survival with exemestane + OFS was 2.0% (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.04) and 3.3% in those who received chemotherapy (45.9% of the ITT population). Overall survival benefit was clinically significant in high-risk patients, eg, women age < 35 years (4.0%) and those with > 2 cm (4.5%) or grade 3 tumors (5.5%). These sustained reductions of the risk of recurrence with adjuvant exemestane + OFS, compared with tamoxifen + OFS, provide guidance for selecting patients for whom exemestane should be preferred over tamoxifen in the setting of OFS.[Media: see text].

The Breast Cancer Revealed initiative was designed and conducted to know the status of breast cancer at each point of breast cancer care, through i) prevention, ii) detection, iii) diagnosis, iv) treatment, and iv) the capacity of our health systems. The expert panel from 11 Latin American countries identified several strategies and proposed high impact priorities, including implementation of prevention policies, improve primary healthcare capacity for breast cancer screening, have adequate infrastructure to make effective and timely diagnoses, have a multidisciplinary team in the treatment process, access to a variety of treatments for all types of patients, have a coordinated and articulated system from primary care to specialized hospital. In a region with limited resources, prioritization in high-impact strategies for breast cancer control could lead to improved clinical outcomes and quality of life for our patients., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Statement JMC received grants from Roche and Genomic Health and payment for lectures from BRP Oncology Updates and Roche Bolivia. The other authors declare they have not potential conflict of interests with this research., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

In a multiday conference, a panel of Latin American experts in biological cancer therapies and health economics were provided with questions to address the barriers restricting access to biosimilars in Latin America, specifically for patients with breast cancer and colorectal cancer, for whom biosimilars can be a path forward to increasing access to care. During the conference, responses were discussed and edited until a consensus was achieved. The regulatory challenges identified in the conference included heterogenous regulations, non-adherence to regulatory pathways, scarcity of market opportunity, inadequate naming of biosimilars by only using international non-proprietary names, imprecise use of interchangeability and substitution, and insufficient traceability and pharmacovigilance. Recommendations were developed to improve the implementation of regulatory pathways and reliable procurement strategies that increase access to these therapies with adequate traceability and outcome measures; efforts from all involved stakeholders will be crucial. These recommendations can serve as a strategy for biosimilar adoption in other countries in a similar situation., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests ET reports honoraria from Abbott, Bayer, Janssen, Heel, Medicamenta, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi, outside of the submitted work. HG reports consulting fees and honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), MSD, Roche, and AstraZeneca, outside of the submitted work. DH reports honoraria from MSD, Roche, Tecnofarma, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work. WM reports grants from Pfizer and Amgen, and honoraria from Pfizer, Amgen, and Novartis, outside of the submitted work. MAE reports grants from Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico, Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo, Asociación Chilena para el Estudio del Dolor, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, LivaNova, AbbVie, GSK, Novartis, BMS, and Novo Nordisk, consulting fees from UN Office for Project Services, Inter-American Development Bank, WHO, Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, and UNDP, and honoraria from Merck, MSD, Grünenthal, Novartis, AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Roche, outside of the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate the frequency distribution of viral infections in Peruvian Breast Cancer (BC) lesions and its association with clinicopathological features. Additionally, a prospective evaluation of p16 and Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) levels were performed for developing a comprehensive analysis., Methods: Detection of high risk- human papillomavirus (HR- HPV) through qPCR was performed in 447 BC and 79 non-cancer frozen samples. Paired paraffin samples from 238 BC were stained with Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) and p16 immunohistochemistry. TIL was calculated in 397 BC cases., Results: HCMV was positive in 72.5%. HR- HPV was detected in 2.9% of BC and 1.3% of non-malignant samples. P16+ was found in 28.15% and median TIL percentage was 30. HR- HPV infection was associated with non-ductal histology (p=0.003) and p16+ (p=0.017). Positive P16+ was associated with higher T stage (p=0.022), grade (p=0.009), TIL level (p=0.002), and triple-negative phenotype (p=0.021)., Conclusion: HCMV is frequent, but HR- HPV infection is unusual in Peruvian BC. P16+ is associated with HR- PVH infection, high TIL and aggressive features.

Purpose: The companion diagnostic test for trastuzumab has not changed much in the last 25 years. We used high-plex digital spatial profiling to identify biomarkers besides HER2 that can help predict response to trastuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer., Experimental Design: Fifty-eight protein targets were measured in three different molecularly defined compartments by the NanoString GeoMx Digital Spatial Profiler (DSP) in a tissue microarray containing 151 patients with breast cancer that received adjuvant trastuzumab as part of the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group 10/05 clinical trial. Promising candidate biomarkers were orthogonally validated with quantitative immunofluorescence (QIF). RNA-sequencing data from the Neoadjuvant Lapatinib and/or Trastuzumab Treatment Optimisation Study (NeoALTTO) were accessed to provide independent cohort validation. Disease-free survival (DFS) was the main outcome assessed. Statistical analyses were performed using a two-sided test (α = 0.05) and multiple testing correction (Benjamini-Hochberg method, FDR < 0.1)., Results: By DSP, high expression of alpha-smooth muscle actin (α-SMA), both in the leukocyte and stromal compartments, was associated with shorter DFS in univariate analysis ( P = 0.002 and P = 0.023, respectively). High α-SMA expression in the stroma was validated by QIF after controlling for estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor status [HR, 3.12; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.12-8.68; P = 0.029] showing recurrence on trastuzumab in the same cohort. In the NeoALTTO cohort, elevated levels of ACTA2 were predictive for shorter DFS in the multivariate analysis (HR, 3.21; 95% CI, 1.14-9.05; P = 0.027)., Conclusions: This work identifies α-SMA as a novel, easy-to-implement biomarker of resistance to trastuzumab that may be valuable in settings where trastuzumab is combined with other therapies., (©2021 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: The heterogeneity of response to anti-HER2 agents represents a major challenge in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer. To better understand the sensitivity and resistance to trastuzumab and lapatinib, we investigated the role of copy number aberrations (CNA) in predicting pathologic complete response (pCR) and survival outcomes in the NeoALTTO trial., Experimental Design: The neoadjuvant phase III NeoALTTO trial enrolled 455 patients with HER2-positive early-stage breast cancer. DNA samples from 269 patients were assessed for genome-wide copy number profiling. Recurrent CNAs were found with GISTIC2.0., Results: CNA estimates were obtained for 184 patients included in NeoALTTO. Among those, matched transcriptome and whole-exome data were available for 154 and 181 patients, respectively. A significant association between gene copy number and pCR was demonstrated for ERBB2 amplification. Nevertheless, ERBB2 amplification ceased to be predictive once ERBB2 expression level was considered. GISTIC2.0 analysis revealed 159 recurrent CNA regions. Lower copy number levels of the 6q23-24 locus predicted absence of pCR in the whole cohort and in the estrogen receptor-positive subgroup. 6q23-24 deletion was significantly more frequent in TP53 wild-type (WT) compared with TP53 -mutated, resulting in copy number levels significantly associated with lack of pCR only in the TP53 WT subgroup. Interestingly, a gene-ontology analysis highlighted several immune processes correlated to 6q23-24 copy number., Conclusions: Our analysis identified ERBB2 copy number as well as 6q23-24 CNAs as predictors of response to anti-HER2-based treatment. ERBB2 expression outperformed ERBB2 amplification. The complexity of the 6q23-24 region warrants further investigation., (©2021 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: Immunotherapies targeting PD-1/L1 enhance pathologic complete response (pCR) rates when added to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) regimens in early-stage triple-negative, and possibly high-risk estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. However, immunotherapy has been associated with significant toxicity, and most patients treated with NAC do not require immunotherapy to achieve pCR. Biomarkers discerning patients benefitting from the addition of immunotherapy from those who would achieve pCR to NAC alone are clearly needed. In this study, we tested the ability of MHC-II expression on tumor cells, to predict immunotherapy-specific benefit in the neoadjuvant breast cancer setting., Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective tissue-based analysis of 3 cohorts of patients with breast cancer: (i) primary nonimmunotherapy-treated breast cancers (n = 381), (ii) triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC) treated with durvalumab and standard NAC (n = 48), and (iii) HER2-negative patients treated with standard NAC (n = 87) or NAC and pembrolizumab (n = 66)., Results: HLA-DR positivity on ≥5% of tumor cells, defined a priori, was observed in 10% and 15% of primary non-immunotherapy-treated hormone receptor-positive and triple-negative breast cancers, respectively. Quantitative assessment of MHC-II on tumor cells was predictive of durvalumab + NAC and pembrolizumab + NAC (ROC AUC, 0.71; P = 0.01 and AUC, 0.73; P = 0.001, respectively), but not NAC alone (AUC, 0.5; P = 0.99)., Conclusions: Tumor-specific MHC-II has a strong candidacy as a specific biomarker of anti-PD-1/L1 immunotherapy benefit when added to standard NAC in HER2-negative breast cancer. Combined with previous studies in melanoma, MHC-II has the potential to be a pan-cancer biomarker. Validation is warranted in existing and future phase II/III clinical trials in this setting., (©2021 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: We present a physician survey of the impact of 21-gene Breast Recurrence Score test results on treatment decisions in clinical practice in Latin America., Methods: This prospective survey enrolled consecutive patients at 14 sites in Argentina, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru who had routine 21-gene testing. Physician surveys captured patient and tumor characteristics and treatment decisions before and after 21-gene test results. The survey spanned the period before and after Trial Assigning Individualized Options for Treatment (TAILORx) results reported (June 2018). Overall net percent change in adjuvant chemotherapy recommendations was estimated, and asymptotic 95% CIs with continuity correction were calculated. The proportion with a change between pretest treatment recommendation and actual treatment received was calculated overall and by Recurrence Score groups per TAILORx., Results: Between March 2015 and December 2019, the survey was completed for 647 patients; 20% were node-positive. The mean patient age was 54 years (24-85 years); 55% were postmenopausal; 17%, 63%, and 20% had grade 1, 2, and 3 tumors, respectively; and 30% had tumors > 2 cm. Recurrence Score (RS) results were as follows: 20% RS 0-10, 56% RS 11-25, and 24% RS 26-100. Overall, chemotherapy recommendations fell by a relative proportion of 39% (95% CI, 33.4 to 44.3) after 21-gene testing (33% decrease in node-negative and 55% decrease in node-positive). Among node-negative patients, the relative decrease in chemotherapy recommendations was 28% (95% CI, 18.9 to 39.5) before TAILORx and 36% (95% CI, 28.4 to 43.7) after., Conclusion: To our knowledge, this large survey of 21-gene test practice patterns was the first conducted in Latin America and showed the relevance of 21-gene testing in low- and medium-resource countries to minimize chemotherapy overuse and underuse in breast cancer. The results showed substantial reductions in chemotherapy use overall-especially after TAILORx reported-indicating the practice-changing potential of that study., Competing Interests: Henry L. GomezConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZenecaSpeakers' Bureau: Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, LillyResearch Funding: MSD Oncology Aníbal R. Núñez De PierroHonoraria: Roche, Genomic Health IncConsulting or Advisory Role: Laboratorio Roche Argentina, Genomic HealthSpeakers' Bureau: Roche, Genomic Healh Inc, Omics SRLTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Labotorio Roche Argentina, Genomic Health, Omics SRL Lisandro L. B. GilStock and Other Ownership Interests: Centro de Mastologia (CEMA) Mauricio Lema-MedinaHonoraria: Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb/Medarex, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, LillySpeakers' Bureau: Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb/Medarex, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, AbbVie, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb/MedarexTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bristol Myers Squibb/Medarex, Roche Raquel G. CwilichEmployment: ABC Medical CenterLeadership: ABC Medical Center Sergio C. OliveiraEmployment: Exact SciencesTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Exact Sciences Debbie M. JakubowskiEmployment: Exact SciencesStock and Other Ownership Interests: Exact Sciences Calvin ChaoEmployment: Exact Sciences, TempusLeadership: Exact Sciences, TempusStock and Other Ownership Interests: Exact Sciences, TempusNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Background: Black race is associated with worse outcomes in early breast cancer. We evaluated clinicopathologic characteristics, the 21-gene recurrence score (RS), treatment delivered, and clinical outcomes by race and ethnicity among women who participated in the Trial Assigning Individualized Options for Treatment., Methods: The association between clinical outcomes and race (White, Black, Asian, other or unknown) and ethnicity (Hispanic vs non-Hispanic) was examined using proportional hazards models. All P values are 2-sided., Results: Of 9719 eligible women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-negative breast cancer, there were 8189 (84.3%) Whites, 693 (7.1%) Blacks, 405 (4.2%) Asians, and 432 (4.4%) with other or unknown race. Regarding ethnicity, 889 (9.1%) were Hispanic. There were no substantial differences in RS or ESR1, PGR, or HER2 RNA expression by race or ethnicity. After adjustment for other covariates, compared with White race, Black race was associated with higher distant recurrence rates (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.60, 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 1.07 to 2.41) and worse overall survival in the RS 11-25 cohort (HR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.06 to 2.15) and entire population (HR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.90). Hispanic ethnicity and Asian race were associated with better outcomes. There was no evidence of chemotherapy benefit for any racial or ethnic group in those with a RS of 11-25., Conclusions: Black women had worse clinical outcomes despite similar 21-gene assay RS results and comparable systemic therapy in the Trial Assigning Individualized Options for Treatment. Similar to Whites, Black women did not benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy if the 21-gene RS was 11-25. Further research is required to elucidate the basis for this racial disparity in prognosis., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Cardiotoxicity is the most significant adverse event associated with trastuzumab (T), the main component of HER2-positive breast cancer (BC) treatment. Less is known about the cardiotoxicity of dual HER2 blockade with T plus lapatinib (L), although this regimen is used in the metastatic setting., Methods: This is a sub-analysis of the ALTTO trial comparing adjuvant treatment options for patients with early HER2-positive BC. Patients randomised to either T or concomitant T + L were eligible. Cardiac events (CEs) rates were compared according to treatment arm., Results: With 6.9 years of median follow-up (FU) and 4190 patients, CE were observed in 363 (8.6%): 166 (7.9%) of patient in T + L arm vs. 197 (9.3%) in T arm (OR = 0.85 [95% CI, 0.68-1.05]). During anti-HER2 treatment 270 CE (6.4%) occurred while 93 (2.2%) were during FU (median time to onset = 6.6 months [IQR = 3.4-11.7]). While 265 CEs were asymptomatic (73%), 94 were symptomatic (26%) and four were cardiac deaths (1%). Recovery was observed in 301 cases (83.8%). Identified cardiac risk factors were: baseline LVEF < 55% (vs > 64%, OR 3.1 [95% CI 1.54-6.25]), diabetes mellitus (OR 1.85 [95% CI 1.25-2.75]), BMI > 30 kg/m 2 (vs < 25 mg/kg 2 , OR 2.21 [95% CI 1.40-3.49]), cumulative dose of doxorubicin ≥240 mg/m 2 (OR 1.36 [95% CI 1.01-1.82]) and of epirubicin≥ 480 mg/m 2 (OR 2.33 [95% CI 1.55-3.51])., Conclusions: Dual HER2 blockade with T + L is a safe regimen from a cardiac perspective, but cardiac-focused history for proper patient selection is crucial., Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00490139 (registration date: 22/06/2007); EudraCT Number: 2006-000562-36 (registration date: 04/05/2007); Sponsor Protocol Number: BIG2-06 /EGF106708/N063D.

Importance: A high 21-gene recurrence score (RS) by breast cancer assay is prognostic for distant recurrence of early breast cancer after local therapy and endocrine therapy alone, and for chemotherapy benefit., Objective: To describe clinical outcomes for women with a high RS who received adjuvant chemotherapy plus endocrine therapy in the TAILORx trial, a population expected to have a high distant recurrence rate with endocrine therapy alone., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this secondary analysis of data from a multicenter randomized clinical trial, 1389 women with hormone receptor-positive, ERBB2-negative, axillary node-negative breast cancer, and a high RS of 26 to 100 were prospectively assigned to receive adjuvant chemotherapy in addition to endocrine therapy. The analysis was conducted on May 12, 2019., Interventions: The adjuvant chemotherapy regimen was selected by the treating physician., Main Outcomes and Measures: Freedom from recurrence of breast cancer at a distant site, and freedom from recurrence, second primary cancer, and death (also known as invasive disease-free survival [IDFS])., Results: Among the 9719 eligible women, with a mean age of 56 years (range 23-75 years), 1389 (14%) had a recurrence score of 26 to 100, of whom 598 (42%) had an RS of 26 to 30 and 791 (58%) had an RS of 31 to 100. The most common chemotherapy regimens included docetaxel/cyclophosphamide in 589 (42%), an anthracycline without a taxane in 334 (24%), an anthracycline and taxane in 244 (18%), cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/5-fluorouracil in 52 (4%), other regimens in 81 (6%), and no chemotherapy in 89 (6%). At 5 years, the estimated rate of freedom from recurrence of breast cancer at a distant site was 93.0% (standard error [SE], 0.8%), freedom of recurrence of breast cancer at a distant and/or local regional site 91.0% (SE, 0.8%), IDFS 87.6% (SE, 1.0%), and overall survival 95.9% (SE, 0.6%)., Conclusions and Relevance: The estimated rate of freedom from recurrence of breast cancer at a distant site in women with an RS of 26 to 100 treated largely with taxane and/or anthracycline-containing adjuvant chemotherapy regimens plus endocrine therapy in the prospective TAILORx trial was 93% at 5 years, an outcome better than expected with endocrine therapy alone in this population., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00310180.

Background: In the phase III SOLE trial, the extended use of intermittent versus continuous letrozole for 5 years did not improve disease-free survival in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Intermittent therapy with 3-month breaks may be beneficial for patients' quality of life (QoL)., Methods: In the SOLE QoL sub-study, 956 patients completed the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) symptom and further QoL scales up to 24 months after randomisation. Differences in change of QoL from baseline between the two administration schedules were tested at 12 and 24 months using repeated measures mixed-models. The primary outcome was change in hot flushes at 12 months., Results: There was no difference in hot flushes at 12 months between the two schedules, but patients receiving intermittent letrozole reported significantly more improvement at 24 months. They also indicated less worsening in vaginal problems, musculoskeletal pain, sleep disturbance, physical well-being and mood at 12 months. Overall, 25-30% of patients reported a clinically relevant worsening in key symptoms and global QoL., Conclusion: Less symptom worsening was observed during the first year of extended treatment with the intermittent administration. For women experiencing an increased symptom burden of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy, an intermittent administration is a safe alternative., Clinical Trial Information: Clinical trial information: NCT00651456.

Premature menopause is a serious long-term side effect of chemotherapy. We evaluated long-term pregnancy and disease-related outcomes for patients in S0230/POEMS, a study in premenopausal women with stage I-IIIA estrogen receptor-negative, progesterone receptor-negative breast cancer to be treated with cyclophosphamide-containing chemotherapy. Women were randomly assigned to standard chemotherapy with or without goserelin, a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist, and were stratified by age and chemotherapy regimen. All statistical tests were two-sided. Of 257 patients, 218 were eligible and evaluable (105 in the chemotherapy + goserelin arm and 113 in the chemotherapy arm). More patients in the chemotherapy + goserelin arm reported at least one pregnancy vs the chemotherapy arm (5-year cumulative incidence = 23.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 15.3% to 31.9%; and 12.2%, 95% CI = 6.8% to 19.2%, respectively; odds ratio = 2.34; 95% CI = 1.07 to 5.11; P = .03). Randomization to goserelin + chemotherapy was associated with a nonstatistically significant improvement in disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.27 to 1.10; P = .09) and overall survival (HR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.19 to 1.04; P = .06). In this long-term analysis of POEMS/S0230, we found continued evidence that patients randomly assigned to receive goserelin + chemotherapy were not only more likely to avoid premature menopause, but were also more likely to become pregnant without adverse effect on disease-related outcomes., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Around 2% of early breast cancer cases treated with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) underwent axillary recurrence (AR) and it has a deleterious effect in prognosis. Different scenarios have incorporated Sentinel Lymph Node (SLN) Biopsy (SLNB) instead of ALND as part of the standard treatment and more effective systemic treatment has also been incorporated in routine management after first curative surgery and after regional recurrence. However, there is concern about the effect of SLNB alone over AR risk and how to predict and treat AR. SLN biopsy (SLNB) has been largely accepted as a valid option for SLN-negative cases, and recent prospective studies have demonstrated that it is also safe for some SLN-positive cases and both scenarios carry low AR rates. Different studies have identified clinicopathological factors related to aggressiveness as well as high-risk molecular signatures can predict the development of locoregional recurrence. Other publications have evaluated factors affecting prognosis after AR and find that time between initial treatment and AR as well as tumor aggressive behavior influence patient survival. Retrospective and prospective studies indicate that treatment of AR should include local and systemic treatment for a limited time., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

We sought to uncover genetic drivers of hormone receptor-positive (HR + ) breast cancer, using a targeted next-generation sequencing approach for detecting expressed gene rearrangements without prior knowledge of the fusion partners. We identified intergenic fusions involving driver genes, including PIK3CA, AKT3, RAF1 , and ESR1 , in 14% (24/173) of unselected patients with advanced HR + breast cancer. FISH confirmed the corresponding chromosomal rearrangements in both primary and metastatic tumors. Expression of novel kinase fusions in nontransformed cells deregulates phosphoprotein signaling, cell proliferation, and survival in three-dimensional culture, whereas expression in HR + breast cancer models modulates estrogen-dependent growth and confers hormonal therapy resistance in vitro and in vivo Strikingly, shorter overall survival was observed in patients with rearrangement-positive versus rearrangement-negative tumors. Correspondingly, fusions were uncommon (<5%) among 300 patients presenting with primary HR + breast cancer. Collectively, our findings identify expressed gene fusions as frequent and potentially actionable drivers in HR + breast cancer. Significance: By using a powerful clinical molecular diagnostic assay, we identified expressed intergenic fusions as frequent contributors to treatment resistance and poor survival in advanced HR + breast cancer. The prevalence and biological and prognostic significance of these alterations suggests that their detection may alter clinical management and bring to light new therapeutic opportunities. Cancer Discov; 8(3); 336-53. ©2017 AACR. See related commentary by Natrajan et al., p. 272 See related article by Liu et al., p. 354 This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 253 ., (©2017 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Risk stratification of patients with early stage breast cancer may support adjuvant chemotherapy decision-making. This review details the development and validation of six multi-gene classifiers, each of which claims to provide useful prognostic and possibly predictive information for early stage breast cancer patients. A careful assessment is presented of each test's analytical validity, clinical validity, and clinical utility, as well as the quality of evidence supporting its use., (© 2017 The Authors. Journal of Surgical Oncology Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Previously we have shown that early development of rash is associated with a higher chance of achieving pathological complete response to neoadjuvant lapatinib. In the current analysis, we investigate its impact on survival in the ALTTO phase III adjuvant trial., Methods: In ALTTO, patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer were randomly assigned to adjuvant trastuzumab, lapatinib, their sequence, or their combination for a total duration of one year. We evaluated whether the development of early lapatinib-related rash (ie, within 6 weeks) is associated with disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Landmark analysis at eight weeks and time-dependent analysis were tested in a multivariable model stratifying on trial's stratification factors. All statistical tests were two-sided., Results: Out of 6098 lapatinib-treated patients, 3973(65.2%) were included in the landmark analysis, of whom 1389 (35.0%) had developed early rash. After median follow-up of 4.5 years, the development of early rash was associated with a trend of improved DFS (multivariable: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.73 to 1.03,P= .10) and statistically significantly improved OS (multivariable: HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.48 to 0.82,P< .001) compared with subjects without early rash. Compared with patients randomly assigned to trastuzumab (n = 2051), patients who were randomly assigned to trastuzumab/lapatinib combination and developed early rash (n = 692) had superior DFS (multivariable: HR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.55 to 0.92,P= .01) and OS (multivariable: HR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.39 to 0.90,P= .01). Time-dependent analysis suggests that the occurrence of rash is predictive of lapatinib benefit, both when given in combination or sequential to trastuzumab., Conclusions: Our results indicate that early development of rash identifies patients who derive superior benefit from lapatinib-based therapy., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Lapatinib (L) plus trastuzumab (T) improves outcomes for metastatic human epidermal growth factor 2-positive breast cancer and increases the pathologic complete response in the neoadjuvant setting, but their role as adjuvant therapy remains uncertain., Methods: In the Adjuvant Lapatinib and/or Trastuzumab Treatment Optimization trial, patients with centrally confirmed human epidermal growth factor 2-positive early breast cancer were randomly assigned to 1 year of adjuvant therapy with T, L, their sequence (T→L), or their combination (L+T). The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS), with 850 events required for 80% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.8 for L+T versus T., Results: Between June 2007 and July 2011, 8,381 patients were enrolled. In 2011, due to futility to demonstrate noninferiority of L versus T, the L arm was closed, and patients free of disease were offered adjuvant T. A protocol modification required P ≤ .025 for the two remaining pairwise comparisons. At a protocol-specified analysis with a median follow-up of 4.5 years, a 16% reduction in the DFS hazard rate was observed with L+T compared with T (555 DFS events; HR, 0.84; 97.5% CI, 0.70 to 1.02; P = .048), and a 4% reduction was observed with T→L compared with T (HR, 0.96; 97.5% CI, 0.80 to 1.15; P = .61). L-treated patients experienced more diarrhea, cutaneous rash, and hepatic toxicity compared with T-treated patients. The incidence of cardiac toxicity was low in all treatment arms., Conclusion: Adjuvant treatment that includes L did not significantly improve DFS compared with T alone and added toxicity. One year of adjuvant T remains standard of care., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Background: Ovarian failure is a common toxic effect of chemotherapy. Studies of the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists to protect ovarian function have shown mixed results and lack data on pregnancy outcomes., Methods: We randomly assigned 257 premenopausal women with operable hormone-receptor-negative breast cancer to receive standard chemotherapy with the GnRH agonist goserelin (goserelin group) or standard chemotherapy without goserelin (chemotherapy-alone group). The primary study end point was the rate of ovarian failure at 2 years, with ovarian failure defined as the absence of menses in the preceding 6 months and levels of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) in the postmenopausal range. Rates were compared with the use of conditional logistic regression. Secondary end points included pregnancy outcomes and disease-free and overall survival., Results: At baseline, 218 patients were eligible and could be evaluated. Among 135 with complete primary end-point data, the ovarian failure rate was 8% in the goserelin group and 22% in the chemotherapy-alone group (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09 to 0.97; two-sided P=0.04). Owing to missing primary end-point data, sensitivity analyses were performed, and the results were consistent with the main findings. Missing data did not differ according to treatment group or according to the stratification factors of age and planned chemotherapy regimen. Among the 218 patients who could be evaluated, pregnancy occurred in more women in the goserelin group than in the chemotherapy-alone group (21% vs. 11%, P=0.03); women in the goserelin group also had improved disease-free survival (P=0.04) and overall survival (P=0.05)., Conclusions: Although missing data weaken interpretation of the findings, administration of goserelin with chemotherapy appeared to protect against ovarian failure, reducing the risk of early menopause and improving prospects for fertility. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; POEMS/S0230 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00068601.).

Aim: This retrospective study determined features associated with brain metastasis (BM) in women with breast cancer., Patients & Methods: A total of 215 initially early breast cancer cases were included. We reviewed files and CT scan images of BM., Results: Median age was 47 years and most of our cases were stage III (58.6%), grade III (62.8%), ER negative (62.3%) and nonluminal (59.1%). Median survival after BM was 4 months. Nonluminal, extracranial disease, time to CNS shorter than 15 months, >three brain lesions and poor breast-graded prognostic assessment and recursive partitioning analysis scores were associated with shorter survival. Adding extracranial disease to breast-graded prognostic assessment score also predicted survival after BM. Radiation response was assessed in 57 patients and response tended to be associated with nonluminal phenotype but not with survival., Conclusion: Factors associated with both initial tumor and clinical features at BM time are associated with shorter survival in our Latinas population.

Background: Controversy exists regarding the impact of CYP2D6 genotype on tamoxifen responsiveness. We examined loss of heterozygosity (LOH) at the CYP2D6 locus and determined its impact on genotyping error when tumor tissue is used as a DNA source., Methods: Genomic tumor data from the adjuvant and metastatic settings (The Cancer Genome Atlas [TCGA] and Foundation Medicine [FM]) were analyzed to characterize the impact of CYP2D6 copy number alterations (CNAs) and LOH on Hardy Weinberg equilibrium (HWE). Additionally, we analyzed CYP2D6 *4 genotype from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor blocks containing nonmalignant tissue and buccal (germline) samples from patients on the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) 89-30-52 tamoxifen trial. All statistical tests were two-sided., Results: In TCGA samples (n =627), the CYP2D6 LOH rate was similar in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive (41.2%) and ER-negative (35.2%) but lower in HER2-positive tumors (15.1%) (P < .001). In FM ER+ samples (n = 290), similar LOH rates were observed (40.8%). In 190 NCCTG samples, the agreement between CYP2D6 genotypes derived from FFPE tumors and FFPE tumors containing nonmalignant tissue was moderate (weighted Kappa = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.63 to 0.84). Comparing CYP2D6 genotypes derived from buccal cells to FFPE tumor DNA, CYP2D6*4 genotype was discordant in six of 31(19.4%). In contrast, there was no disagreement between CYP2D6 genotypes derived from buccal cells with FFPE tumors containing nonmalignant tissue., Conclusions: LOH at the CYP2D6 locus is common in breast cancer, resulting in potential misclassification of germline CYP2D6 genotypes. Tumor DNA should not be used to determine germline CYP2D6 genotype without sensitive techniques to detect low frequency alleles and quality control procedures appropriate for somatic DNA., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: To determine the frequency of PIK3CA mutations in a Peruvian cohort with HER2-amplified and triple negative breast cancers (TNBC)., Methods: We analyzed two cohorts of 134 primary non-metastatic breast cancer patients from Peru. Cohorts consisted of 51 hormone receptors (+)/HER2-amplified breast tumor patients surgically resected as first treatment included in the ALTTO trial (ALTTO cohort) and 81 TNBC patients with residual disease after neoadjuvant treatment (neoadjuvant cohort). Genomic DNA was extracted from paraffin-embedded tumor samples. Samples from the ALTTO and neoadjuvant cohorts were taken at biopsies and from residual tumors, respectively. PIK3CA mutations were detected by sequencing DNA fragments obtained by PCR amplification of exons and their flanking introns. All of the detected PIK3CA mutations were confirmed in a second independent run of sample testing., Results: PIK3CA mutations were present in 21/134 cases (15.7%). Mutations in exon 9 and 20 were present in 10/134 (7.5%) and 11/134 (8.2%), respectively. No cases had mutations in both exons. Mutations in exon 9 consisted of E545A (seven cases), E545K (two cases) and E545Q (one case); while in exon 20, mutations consisted of H1047R (10 cases) and H1047L (one case). Compared to TNBC patients, HER2-amplified patients were more likely to have PIK3CA mutated (23% vs 9.6%; P=0.034). There were no associations between mutational status of PIK3CA with estrogen receptor status (P=0.731), progesterone receptor status (P=0.921), age (P=0.646), nodal status (P=0.240) or histological grade (P=1.00). No significant associations were found between PIK3CA mutational status and clinicopathological features., Conclusions: We found a similar frequency of PIK3CA mutations to that reported in other series. Although we did not include HR+/HER2 patients, those with HER2-amplified tumors were more likely to present PIK3CA mutations compared to patients with triple negative tumors., (Copyright © 2014 King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Adjuvant therapy with an aromatase inhibitor improves outcomes, as compared with tamoxifen, in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer., Methods: In two phase 3 trials, we randomly assigned premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer to the aromatase inhibitor exemestane plus ovarian suppression or tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression for a period of 5 years. Suppression of ovarian estrogen production was achieved with the use of the gonadotropin-releasing-hormone agonist triptorelin, oophorectomy, or ovarian irradiation. The primary analysis combined data from 4690 patients in the two trials., Results: After a median follow-up of 68 months, disease-free survival at 5 years was 91.1% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 87.3% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence, second invasive cancer, or death, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60 to 0.85; P<0.001). The rate of freedom from breast cancer at 5 years was 92.8% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, as compared with 88.8% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for recurrence, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.80; P<0.001). With 194 deaths (4.1% of the patients), overall survival did not differ significantly between the two groups (hazard ratio for death in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.51; P=0.37). Selected adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported for 30.6% of the patients in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 29.4% of those in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group, with profiles similar to those for postmenopausal women., Conclusions: In premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer, adjuvant treatment with exemestane plus ovarian suppression, as compared with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, significantly reduced recurrence. (Funded by Pfizer and others; TEXT and SOFT ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00066703 and NCT00066690, respectively.).

Objective: Infertility due to anticancer treatments is a major source of distress for young patients with cancer. A survey was performed among breast cancer patients younger than 35 years, to evaluate the acceptance of chemotherapy in the context of infertility risk., Methods: After obtaining written informed consent, we asked 400 premenopausal, early stage breast cancer patients aged ≤35 years to complete a short, previously pilot-tested questionnaire. Three hundred and eighty-nine patients were evaluable. The association between the explanatory variables and the outcome variables was assessed using logistic regression., Results: Two hundred and twenty-eight (59%) participants wanted to have (more) children in the future, whereas 158 (41%) did not. Fifty-seven (36%) of the latter did not want additional children because of fear of cancer recurrence. Thirty-two women (8%) stated they would not accept chemotherapy should it reduce their fertility. This was dependent upon already having children, the wish to have (further) children, geographical area, disease stage, and already planned chemotherapy. One hundred and seventy-one women who would agree to chemotherapy (48%) would accept a risk of infertility of 76-100%. This acceptance was dependent on already having children and the wish to have (more) children. Of the 355 participants (91%) accepting chemotherapy, 48 would accept it only for ≥20% gain in cure., Conclusion: For the majority of young patients with breast cancer, cure remains their first priority; for this, they are willing to accept a considerable decrease in future fertility, and only less than 10% will forego chances of cure to preserve fertility., (Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: Sorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor with antiangiogenic/antiproliferative activity. A randomized phase 2b screening trial in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer demonstrated a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) when sorafenib was added to capecitabine versus placebo (median 6.4 versus 4.1 months; hazard ratio = 0.58; P = 0.001). Most drug-related adverse events were Grade 1/2 in severity with the exception of Grade 3 hand-foot skin reaction/syndrome (44% versus 14%, respectively). These results suggest a role for the combination of sorafenib and capecitabine in breast cancer and supported a phase 3 confirmatory trial. Here we describe RESILIENCE - a multinational, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial - assessing the addition of sorafenib to first- or second-line capecitabine in advanced HER2-negative breast cancer., Methods/design: Eligibility criteria include ≥18 years of age, ≤1 prior chemotherapy regimen for metastatic disease, and resistant to/failed taxane and anthracycline or no indication for further anthracycline. Prior treatment with a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor is not allowed. Patients with significant cardiovascular disease or active brain metastases are not eligible. Patients are stratified by hormone-receptor status, geographic region, and prior metastatic chemotherapy status and randomized (1:1) to capecitabine (1000 mg/m2 orally twice daily (BID), days 1 to 14 of 21) in combination with sorafenib (orally BID, days 1 to 21, total dose 600 mg/day) or matching placebo. Capecitabine and sorafenib/placebo doses can be escalated to 1250 mg/m2 BID and 400 mg BID, respectively, as tolerated, or reduced to manage toxicity. Dose re-escalation after a reduction is allowed for sorafenib/placebo but not for capecitabine. This dosing algorithm was designed to mitigate dermatologic and other toxicity, in addition to detailed guidelines for prophylactic and symptomatic treatment. Radiographic assessment is every 6 weeks for 36 weeks, and every 9 weeks thereafter. The primary endpoint is PFS by blinded independent central review (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 criteria). Secondary endpoints include overall survival, time to progression, overall response rate, duration of response, and safety. Enrollment began in November 2010 with a target of approximately 519 patients., Discussion: RESILIENCE will provide definitive PFS data for the combination of sorafenib and capecitabine in advanced HER2-negative breast cancer and better characterize the benefit-to-risk profile., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01234337.

Purpose: Lapatinib is an oral small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor of both epidermal growth factor receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). This study is designed to test whether the addition of lapatinib to paclitaxel improves overall survival (OS) compared with placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer (MBC)., Patients and Methods: This phase III, randomized, double-blind study assessed the efficacy and safety of lapatinib plus paclitaxel compared with placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with newly diagnosed HER2-positive MBC. The primary end point was OS. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate, and safety., Results: The addition of lapatinib to paclitaxel significantly improved OS versus paclitaxel (treatment hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.94; P = .0124); median OS was 27.8 versus 20.5 months, respectively. Median PFS was prolonged by 3.2 months, from 6.5 months with placebo plus paclitaxel to 9.7 months with lapatinib plus paclitaxel (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.64; stratified log-rank P < .001). ORR was significantly higher with lapatinib plus paclitaxel compared with placebo plus paclitaxel (69% v 50%, respectively; P < .001). The incidence of grades 3 and 4 diarrhea and neutropenia was higher in the lapatinib plus paclitaxel arm. Only 4% of patients in this group reported febrile neutropenia. Cardiac events were low grade, asymptomatic, and mostly reversible. The incidence of hepatic events was similar in both arms. There were no fatal adverse events in the lapatinib plus paclitaxel arm., Conclusion: This trial demonstrated that lapatinib combined with paclitaxel offers a significant and clinically meaningful survival advantage over paclitaxel alone in patients with HER2-positive MBC.

Background: Breast cancer (BC) is the leading cause of malignancy-related deaths among women aged ≤ 45 years. There are unexplored and uncertain issues for BC in this particular group in Latin America. The aim of this study is to evaluate BC incidence and mortality among young women and related clinicopathological and survivorship aspects in this region., Materials and Methods: Data were obtained from Globocan 2008 and the International Agency for Research on Cancer's Cancer Incidence in Five Continents series plus databases. We requested collaboration from the 12 different national cancer institutes in Latin America through SLACOM, the Latin American and Caribbean Society of Medical Oncology, and conducted a systematic literature review to obtain local data regarding the prevalence of BC among young women and their characteristics, outcomes, and survivorship-related issues., Results: BC incidence and mortality proportions for Latin American women aged <44 years were higher when compared with those of developed countries (20% vs. 12% and 14% vs. 7%, respectively). We found only a few Latin American series addressing this topic, and prevalence varied between 8% and 14%. Stage II and III disease, high histological grade, and triple-negative and HER2 BC were features frequently observed among young Latin American BC patients., Conclusion: The rising incidence and mortality of BC in young Latin American women is a call to action in the region. It is necessary to monitor the epidemiological and clinical data through reliable cancer registries and to consider the implementation of protocols for education of patients and health professionals. This unmet, growing burden must be considered as a top priority of the national programs in the fight against BC, and models of specialized units should be implemented for this particular group of patients to provide better care for this emergent challenge.

The mutation pattern of breast cancer molecular subtypes is incompletely understood. The purpose of this study was to identify mutations in genes that may be targeted with currently available investigational drugs in the three major breast cancer subtypes (ER+/HER2-, HER2+, and Triple Negative). We extracted DNA from fine needle aspirations of 267 stage I-III breast cancers. These tumor specimens typically consisted of >80% neoplastic cells. We examined 28 genes for 163 known cancer-related nucleic acid variations by Sequenom technology. We observed at least one mutation in 38 alleles corresponding to 15 genes in 108 (40%) samples, including PIK3CA (16.1% of all samples), FBXW7 (8%), BRAF (3.0%), EGFR (2.6%), AKT1 and CTNNB1 (1.9% each), KIT and KRAS (1.5% each), and PDGFR-α (1.1%). We also checked for the polymorphism in PHLPP2 that is known to activate AKT and it was found at 13.5% of the patient samples. PIK3CA mutations were more frequent in estrogen receptor-positive cancers compared to triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) (19 vs. 8%, p=0.001). High frequency of PIK3CA mutations (28%) were also found in HER2+ breast tumors. In TNBC, FBXW7 mutations were significantly more frequent compared to ER+ tumors (13 vs. 5%, p=0.037). We performed validation for all mutated alleles with allele-specific PCR or direct sequencing; alleles analyzed by two different sequencing techniques showed 95-100% concordance for mutation status. In conclusion, different breast cancer subtypes harbor different type of mutations and approximately 40 % of tumors contained individually rare mutations in signaling pathways that can be potentially targeted with drugs. Simultaneous testing of many different mutations in a single needle biopsy is feasible and allows the design of prospective clinical trials that could test the functional importance of these mutations in the future.

EGFR signalling pathways appear involved in endocrine therapy resistance in breast cancer. This trial estimates the antitumor efficacy and toxicity of the EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib in combination with anastrozole or fulvestrant in postmenopausal hormone receptor positive breast cancer. Subjects with estrogen receptor and/or PgR positive, metastatic breast cancer were randomized into this phase II study of gefitinib (initial dose was 500 mg orally daily, due to high rate of diarrhea, starting dose was reduced to 250 mg orally daily) with either anastrozole 1 mg daily or fulvestrant 250 mg every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit (complete responses plus partial responses plus stable disease for 6 months or longer). 141 eligible subjects were enrolled, 72 in the anastrozole plus gefitinib arm, and 69 in the fulvestrant plus gefitinib arm. Anastrozole plus gefitinib had a clinical benefit rate of 44% [95% confidence interval (CI) 33-57%] and fulvestrant plus gefitinib 41% (95% CI 29-53%). Median progression-free survival was 5.3 months (95% CI 3.1-10.4) versus 5.2 months (95% CI 2.9-8.2) for anastrozole plus gefitinib versus fulvestrant plus gefitinib, respectively. Median survival was 30.3 months (95% CI 21.2-38.9+) versus 23.9 months (95% CI 15.4-33.5) for anastrozole plus gefitinib versus fulvestrant plus gefitinib, respectively. In general, the toxicity is greater than expected for single agent endocrine therapy alone. Anastrozole plus gefitinib and fulvestrant plus gefitinib have similar clinical benefit rates in the treatment of estrogen and/or PgR positive metastatic breast cancer, and the rates of response are not clearly superior to gefitinib or endocrine therapy alone. Further studies of EGFR inhibition plus endocrine therapy do not appear warranted, but if performed should include attempts to identify biomarkers predictive of antitumor activity.

The objective of the study was to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of ispinesib, a kinesin spindle protein inhibitor. Patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who had received only prior neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy were treated with escalating doses of ispinesib administered as a 1-h infusion on days 1 and 15 every 28 days until toxicity or progression of disease. Doses were escalated until dose-limiting toxicity was observed in two out of six patients during cycle 1. A total of 16 patients were treated at three dose levels: 10 mg/m (n=3), 12 mg/m (n=6), and 14 mg/m (n=7). Forty-four percent of the patients had locally advanced disease and 56% had metastatic disease; 50% were estrogen receptor positive, 44% were progesterone receptor positive, 25% human epidermal growth factor 2 were positive, and 31% triple (estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor 2) negative. Sixty-nine percent of patients were chemo-naive. The maximum tolerated dose was 12 mg/m and dose-limiting toxicity was grade 3 increased aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase. The most common toxicities included neutropenia (88%; 38% grade 3 and 44% grade 4), increased alanine aminotransferase (56%), anemia (38%), increased aspartate aminotransferase (31%), and diarrhea (31%). No neuropathy, mucositis, or alopecia was reported. Among the 15 patients evaluable for antitumor activity, there were three partial responses, one confirmed by the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (7% response rate). Nine patients (60%) had stable disease lasting at least 42 days, with four (27%) lasting for at least 90 days. Disease stabilization (partial responses+stable disease) was observed in 11 (73.3%) patients. In conclusion, ispinesib was well tolerated when administered on days 1 and 15 every 28 days. Limited activity was observed with this schedule in patients with previously untreated advanced breast cancer.

Breast cancer (BC) comprises a group of different diseases characterized by changes in tissue structure and gene expression. Recent advances in molecular biology have shed new light on the participation of genes and their products in the biology of BC. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small noncoding endogenous RNA molecules that appear to modulate the expression of more than a third of human genes, and their implications in cancer have grasped the attention of the scientific community. Recently, several studies have described the association between miRNA expression profiles and pathological and clinical BC features. Moreover, these molecules represent a new type of molecular marker that can identify prognosis and guide the management of BC patients. With the increasing understanding of miRNA networks and their impact in the biology of BC, as well as the development of viable strategies to modulate specific miRNAs, we could improve the treatment of this disease.

Context: Prediction of high probability of survival from standard cancer treatments is fundamental for individualized cancer treatment strategies., Objective: To develop a predictor of response and survival from chemotherapy for newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer., Design, Setting, and Patients: Prospective multicenter study conducted from June 2000 to March 2010 at the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center to develop and test genomic predictors for neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients were those with newly diagnosed ERBB2 (HER2 or HER2/neu)-negative breast cancer treated with chemotherapy containing sequential taxane and anthracycline-based regimens (then endocrine therapy if estrogen receptor [ER]-positive). Different predictive signatures for resistance and response to preoperative (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy (stratified according to ER status) were developed from gene expression microarrays of newly diagnosed breast cancer (310 patients). Breast cancer treatment sensitivity was then predicted using the combination of signatures for (1) sensitivity to endocrine therapy, (2) chemoresistance, and (3) chemosensitivity, with independent validation (198 patients) and comparison with other reported genomic predictors of chemotherapy response., Main Outcome Measures: Distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) if predicted treatment sensitive and absolute risk reduction ([ARR], difference in DRFS between 2 predicted groups) at median follow-up (3 years)., Results: Patients in the independent validation cohort (99% clinical stage II-III) who were predicted to be treatment sensitive (28%) had 56% (95% CI, 31%-78%) probability of excellent pathologic response and DRFS of 92% (95% CI, 85%-100%), with an ARR of 18% (95% CI, 6%-28%). Survival was predicted in ER-positive (30% predicted sensitive; DRFS, 97% [95% CI, 91%-100%]; ARR, 11% [95% CI, 0.1%-21%]) and ER-negative (26% predicted sensitive; DRFS, 83% [95% CI, 68%-100%]; ARR, 26% [95% CI, 4%-48%]) subsets and was significant in multivariate analysis. Other genomic predictors showed paradoxically worse survival for patients predicted to be responsive to chemotherapy., Conclusion: A genomic predictor combining ER status, predicted chemoresistance, predicted chemosensitivity, and predicted endocrine sensitivity identified patients with high probability of survival following taxane and anthracycline chemotherapy.

Ixabepilone approval in a number of countries across the world as monotherapy and in combination with capecitabine has led to widespread uptake in the later-line breast cancer setting. However, individualized data for ixabepilone in different ethnic groups are limited. Overall, data from small numbers of ethnic subgroups including Hispanic, Japanese and Chinese patients have revealed no clinically significant variation in the disposition, efficacy or tolerability of ixabepilone from that established in pivotal trials. Global use of ixabepilone, while usually along the lines of standard practice, may vary because of local regulatory decisions, clinical practice guidelines and cost considerations. Further information on the global patterns of use of ixabepilone will assist in optimizing the use of this novel therapy.

The phosphatidyl inositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/Akt pathway mediates the effects of a variety of extracellular signals in a number of cellular processes including cell growth, proliferation, and survival. The alteration of integrants of this pathway through mutation of its coding genes increases the activation status of the signaling and can thus lead to cellular transformation. The frequent dysregulation of the PI3K/Akt pathway in breast cancer (BC) and the mediation of this pathway in different processes characteristically implicated in tumorigenesis have attracted the interest of this pathway in BC; however, a more comprehensive understanding of the signaling intricacies is necessary to develop clinical applications of the modulation of this pathway in this pathology. We review a series of experiments examining the contribution of alteration of integrants of this signaling network to human BC and we make an update of the information about the effect of the modulation of this pathway in this cancer.

Purpose: We examined in a prospective, randomized, international clinical trial the performance of a previously defined 30-gene predictor (DLDA-30) of pathologic complete response (pCR) to preoperative weekly paclitaxel and fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (T/FAC) chemotherapy, and assessed if DLDA-30 also predicts increased sensitivity to FAC-only chemotherapy. We compared the pCR rates after T/FAC versus FACx6 preoperative chemotherapy. We also did an exploratory analysis to identify novel candidate genes that differentially predict response in the two treatment arms., Experimental Design: Two hundred and seventy-three patients were randomly assigned to receive either weekly paclitaxel × 12 followed by FAC × 4 (T/FAC, n = 138), or FAC × 6 (n = 135) neoadjuvant chemotherapy. All patients underwent a pretreatment fine-needle aspiration biopsy of the tumor for gene expression profiling and treatment response prediction., Results: The pCR rates were 19% and 9% in the T/FAC and FAC arms, respectively (P < 0.05). In the T/FAC arm, the positive predictive value (PPV) of the genomic predictor was 38% [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 21-56%], the negative predictive value was 88% (95% CI, 77-95%), and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.711. In the FAC arm, the PPV was 9% (95% CI, 1-29%) and the AUC was 0.584. This suggests that the genomic predictor may have regimen specificity. Its performance was similar to a clinical variable-based predictor nomogram., Conclusions: Gene expression profiling for prospective response prediction was feasible in this international trial. The 30-gene predictor can identify patients with greater than average sensitivity to T/FAC chemotherapy. However, it captured molecular equivalents of clinical phenotype. Next-generation predictive markers will need to be developed separately for different molecular subsets of breast cancers., (©2010 AACR.)

Limited proven treatment options exist for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) resistant to anthracycline and taxane treatment. Ixabepilone, a novel semisynthetic analog of epothilone B, has demonstrated single-agent activity in MBC resistant to anthracyclines and taxanes. In combination with capecitabine in a phase III trial (CA163-046) in this setting, ixabepilone prolonged progression-free survival and increased objective response rate relative to capecitabine (Thomas et al. J Clin Oncol 25:5210-5217, 2007). Here, we report the results of overall survival (OS), a secondary efficacy endpoint from the CA163-046 trial. Seven hundred fifty-two patients with MBC resistant to anthracyclines and taxanes were randomized to ixabepilone (40 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle) plus capecitabine (2,000 mg/m(2) orally on days 1 through 14 of a 21-day cycle) or capecitabine alone (2,500 mg/m(2) on the same schedule). Patients receiving ixabepilone plus capecitabine treatment had a median survival of 12.9 months compared to 11.1 months for patients receiving capecitabine alone (HR = 0.9; 95%CI: 077-1.05; P = 0.19). This observed increase in median OS favored the combination; however, the difference was not statistically significant. Predefined subset analyses showed a clinically meaningful increase in OS in KPS 70-80 patients receiving ixabepilone plus capecitabine (HR = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.58-0.98). Ixabepilone plus capecitabine did not show a significant improvement in survival compared to capecitabine alone in patients with MBC resistant to anthracyclines and taxanes. The observed differences in survival favored the combination arm. A clinical benefit was also seen in patients in the KPS 70-80 subgroup.

Purpose: A subgroup of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-overexpressing breast tumors coexpresses p95HER2, a truncated HER2 receptor that retains a highly functional HER2 kinase domain but lacks the extracellular domain and results in intrinsic trastuzumab resistance. We hypothesized that lapatinib, a HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitor, would be active in these tumors. We have studied the correlation between p95HER2 expression and response to lapatinib, both in preclinical models and in the clinical setting., Experimental Design: Two different p95HER2 animal models were used for preclinical studies. Expression of p95HER2 was analyzed in HER2-overexpressing breast primary tumors from a first-line lapatinib monotherapy study (EGF20009) and a second-line lapatinib in combination with capecitabine study (EGF100151). p95HER2 expression was correlated with overall response rate (complete + partial response), clinical benefit rate (complete response + partial response + stable disease > or =24 wk), and progression-free survival using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models., Results: Lapatinib inhibited tumor growth and the HER2 downstream signaling of p95HER2-expressing tumors. A total of 68 and 156 tumors from studies EGF20009 and EGF100151 were evaluable, respectively, for p95HER2 detection. The percentage of p95HER2-positive patients was 20.5% in the EGF20009 study and 28.5% in the EGF100151 study. In both studies, there was no statistically significant difference in progression-free survival, clinical benefit rate, and overall response rate between p95HER2-positive and p95HER2-negative tumors., Conclusions: Lapatinib as a monotherapy or in combination with capecitabine seems to be equally effective in patients with p95HER2-positive and p95HER2-negative HER2-positive breast tumors., (Copyright 2010 AACR.)

Background: In a phase 3 randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, first-line therapy with lapatinib plus paclitaxel significantly improved clinical outcomes based on a pre-planned analysis of ErbB2+ metastatic breast cancer patients (GSK Study #EGF30001; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00075270). Patients with ErbB2- or untested did not significantly benefit. This article focuses on the quality of life (QOL) and quality-adjusted survival outcomes (Q-TWiST) in the study., Methods: QOL was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B). Changes from baseline were analyzed using ANCOVAs, repeated measures and pattern mixture modeling. The Q-TWiST method was used to examine the trade-off between toxicities and delayed progression., Results: The study included 579 subjects, of whom 86 were ErbB2+. In the ITT population, no significant differences in QOL or Q-TWiST scores were observed. In the ErbB2+ subgroup, the lapatinib plus paclitaxel (L + P) arm demonstrated stable FACT-B scores over the first year, while average scores for patients on P + placebo (P + pla) monotherapy decreased (change from baseline: L + P, p = 0.99; P + pla, p = 0.01). Clinically meaningful differences were observed between treatment arms on the FACT-B, Trial Outcome Index and breast cancer subscale scores. Pattern mixture models suggested more QOL differentiation between treatments among patients who progressed or withdrew early. Q-TWiST differences between the arms in the ErbB2+ subgroup ranged from 2 to 15 weeks with an L + P advantage across all utility weight combinations., Conclusions: In the ITT population, results provide no evidence of QOL differences between treatment groups. In a small, prospectively-defined subgroup of ErbB2+ patients, L + P resulted in more stable QOL and more quality-adjusted survival than paclitaxel monotherapy, representing clinically important differences between treatments.

Resistance to chemotherapy is a major obstacle to the effective treatment of many tumor types. Although many anticancer therapies can alter tumor growth, in most cases the effect is not long lasting. Consequently, there is a significant need for new agents with low susceptibility to common drug resistance mechanisms in order to improve response rates and potentially extend survival. Approximately 30% of the women diagnosed with early-stage disease in turn progress to metastatic breast cancer, for which therapeutic options are limited. Current recommendations for first-line chemotherapy include anthracycline-based regimens and taxanes (paclitaxel and docetaxel). They typically give response rates of 30 to 70% but the responses are often not durable, with a time to progression of 6 to 10 months. Patients with progression or resistance may be administered capecitabine, gemcitabine, vinorelbine, albumin-bound paclitaxel, or ixabepilone, while other drugs are being evaluated. Response rates in this setting tend to be low (20 to 30%); the median duration of responses is <6 months and the results do not always translate into improved long-term outcomes. The present article reviews treatment options in taxane-resistant metastatic breast cancer and the role of ixabepilone in this setting.

Purpose: Cross-talk between human epidermal growth factor receptors and hormone receptor pathways may cause endocrine resistance in breast cancer. This trial evaluated the effect of adding lapatinib, a dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor blocking epidermal growth factor receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), to the aromatase inhibitor letrozole as first-line treatment of hormone receptor (HR) -positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC)., Patients and Methods: Postmenopausal women with HR-positive MBC were randomly assigned to daily letrozole (2.5 mg orally) plus lapatinib (1,500 mg orally) or letrozole and placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the HER2-positive population. Results In HR-positive, HER2-positive patients (n = 219), addition of lapatinib to letrozole significantly reduced the risk of disease progression versus letrozole-placebo (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.96; P = .019); median PFS was 8.2 v 3.0 months, respectively. Clinical benefit (responsive or stable disease >or= 6 months) was significantly greater for lapatinib-letrozole versus letrozole-placebo (48% v 29%, respectively; odds ratio [OR] = 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2 to 0.8; P = .003). Patients with centrally confirmed HR-positive, HER2-negative tumors (n = 952) had no improvement in PFS. A preplanned Cox regression analysis identified prior antiestrogen therapy as a significant factor in the HER2-negative population; a nonsignificant trend toward prolonged PFS for lapatinib-letrozole was seen in patients who experienced relapse less than 6 months since prior tamoxifen discontinuation (HR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.07; P = .117). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were more common in the lapatinib-letrozole arm versus letrozole-placebo arm (diarrhea, 10% v 1%; rash, 1% v 0%, respectively), but they were manageable., Conclusion: This trial demonstrated that a combined targeted strategy with letrozole and lapatinib significantly enhances PFS and clinical benefit rates in patients with MBC that coexpresses HR and HER2.

A randomized phase III trial evaluated the effect of adding lapatinib to paclitaxel as first-line therapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer whose tumors were negative or untested for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) overexpression. Progression-free survival was prolonged significantly in patients with HER2-overexpressing tumors, which indicates that lapatinib exerts its main effects via the HER2 pathway.

Purpose: Lapatinib, a dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR/ErbB1) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2/ErbB2), is effective against HER-2-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC). This phase III trial evaluated the efficacy of lapatinib in HER-2-negative and HER-2-uncharacterized MBC., Patients and Methods: Women with MBC were randomly assigned to first-line therapy with paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks plus lapatinib 1,500 mg/d or placebo. A preplanned retrospective evaluation of HER-2 status was performed using fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP); secondary end points were objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS)., Results: In the intent-to-treat population (n = 579), there were no significant differences in TTP, EFS, or OS between treatment arms, although differences in ORR and CBR were noted. In 86 HER-2-positive patients (15%), treatment with paclitaxel-lapatinib resulted in statistically significant improvements in TTP, EFS, ORR, and CBR compared with paclitaxel-placebo. No differences between treatment groups were observed for any end point in HER-2-negative patients. The most common adverse events were alopecia, rash, and diarrhea. The incidence of diarrhea and rash was significantly higher in the paclitaxel-lapatinib arm. The rate of cardiac events was low, and no difference was observed between treatment arms., Conclusion: Patients with HER-2-negative or HER-2-untested MBC did not benefit from the addition of lapatinib to paclitaxel. However, first-line therapy with paclitaxel-lapatinib significantly improved clinical outcomes in HER-2-positive patients. Prospective evaluation of the efficacy and safety of this combination is ongoing in early and metastatic HER-2-positive breast cancer patients.

Purpose: This study (EGF20009) assessed the efficacy and tolerability of two lapatinib administration schedules as first-line monotherapy in women with ErbB2-amplified locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients with ErbB2-amplified, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer previously untreated in the metastatic setting were randomly assigned to one of two lapatinib dose cohorts and received either 1,500 mg once daily or 500 mg twice daily. Clinical response was assessed at weeks 8 and 12 and every 12 weeks thereafter., Results: A total of 138 patients were treated with lapatinib for a median of 17.6 weeks. The overall response rate (complete response [CR] plus partial response [PR]) was 24% in the intent-to-treat population, and 31% of patients derived clinical benefit (CR, PR, or stable disease for >or= 24 weeks). The median time to response was 7.9 weeks, and the progression-free survival rates at 4 and 6 months were 63% and 43%, respectively. The most common lapatinib-related adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea, rash, pruritus, and nausea, and these events were primarily grade 1 or 2. There were no significant differences in clinical activity or the AE profile between the dosing schedules., Conclusion: Lapatinib demonstrated clinical activity and was well tolerated as first-line therapy in ErbB2-amplified locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. This study supports further evaluation of lapatinib in first-line and early-stage ErbB2-overexpressing breast cancer.

Purpose: Preclinical data showed that the combination of exemestane and celecoxib has synergistic effects. Therefore, a study was undertaken to explore the efficacy and tolerability of this combination in postmenopausal patients with advanced, hormone-sensitive breast cancer., Patients and Methods: A randomized phase II study was conducted in postmenopausal patients with hormone-sensitive breast cancer and measurable disease who had progressive disease after treatment with tamoxifen. Patients were randomly assigned to either exemestane 25 mg daily or the combination of exemestane 25 mg daily with celecoxib 400 mg twice daily. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Group criteria were used to determine antitumor efficacy. Primary end point was the rate of clinical benefit. Secondary end points were tolerability, objective response rate, time to progression (TTP), and duration of clinical benefit. A pharmacodynamic and a pharmacokinetic study were conducted in parallel., Results: One hundred eleven patients (exemestane, n = 55; combination, n = 56) were enrolled in 2002. The demographic characteristics and prognostic factors were similar in both arms. In the assessable population, 24 of 51 patients in the combination arm and 24 of 49 patients in the exemestane arm achieved clinical benefit. TTP was similar in both groups. Duration of clinical benefit was longer in the combination group (median, 96.6 v 49.1 weeks). The addition of celecoxib did not change the tolerability profile of exemestane alone., Conclusion: Similar rates of clinical benefit were achieved in both groups.