Search

Introduction: The CLEOPATRA trial (NCT00567190) established a dual anti-HER2 blockade in combination with docetaxel as the first-line standard of care for patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer. While this treatment is overall associated with significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), not all patients respond equally. We hypothesized that a radiological complete response (CR) at week 9 (i.e., first disease re-evaluation) is associated with prolonged OS and PFS compared to radiological partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD)., Methods: We performed an exploratory analysis of the CLEOPATRA study to address this question., Results: Out of 362 patients treated with docetaxel, trastuzumab, and pertuzumab eligible for our analysis, 46 (12.7%) had radiological CR at week 9, 243 (67.1%) PR, and 73 (20.2%) SD per central RECIST v1.0. Radiological CR at first tumor re-evaluation was associated with a 60% risk reduction for death compared to SD (adjusted HR = 0.40 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23-0.70), whereas no significant impact on survival was observed for PR (adjusted HR = 0.85 95% CI 0.60-1.20). The same was observed for PFS with adjusted HR = 0.30 (95% CI 0.18-0.48) for the CR subgroup and adjusted HR = 0.81 (95% CI 0.60-1.09) for the PR subgroup. In multivariate analysis, no variables were associated with radiological CR., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that radiological CR at first disease re-evaluation is associated with more prolonged survival; this might result from stronger dependence on HER2 pathway addiction, supporting the need for further translational research., Competing Interests: Disclosure VD, MB, MC, FJ: none; EA: consultancy fee/honoraria from Eli Lilly, Sandoz, AstraZeneca. Research grant to my Institution from Gilead; Support to attend medical conferences (travel/accommodation/expenses) from Novartis, Roche, Eli Lilly, Genetic, IstitutoGentili, Daiichi Sankyo (all outside the submitted work); CM: honoraria from Novartis and Lilly; DMB: declares full-time employment from the European Society for Medical Oncology since September 1, 2023; speaker's engagement from AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo; meeting/travel grant from Novartis; institutional research funding from Eli Lilly, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Novartis; non-remunerated activity as a member of the board of directors for Associaҫão de Investigaҫão e Cuidados de Suporte em Oncologia; non-remunerated leadership role as prior Portuguese Young Oncologists; Committee Chair of Sociedade Portuguesa de Oncologia; GNM: support to attend medical conferences: Roche and Bayer (all outside the submitted work); ML: honoraria and/or advisory board from Roche, Novartis, Lilly, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead, Seagen, MSD, Exact Sciences, Takeda, Ipsen, Sandoz, Libbsand Knight, a travel grant from Gilead and research support (to the Institution) from Gilead (all outside the submitted work); EdA: honoraria and/or advisory board from Roche/GNE, Novartis, Seattle Genetics, Zodiac, Libbsand Pierre Fabre. Travel grants from Roche/GNE and GSK/Novartis. Research grant to his institution from Roche/GNE, Astra-Zeneca, GSK/Novartis, and Servier(all outside the submitted work)., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess whether erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) administration impacts the outcomes of patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC)., Methods: ALTTO (NCT00490139) patients were categorized by ESA use during adjuvant anti-HER2 treatment. Disease-free-survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and time-to-distant recurrence (TTDR) were analyzed by ESA administration, with subgroup analyses according to prognostic factors. Log-rank tests and Cox modeling were performed. Adverse events (AEs) of ESA-interest were compared., Results: Among 8381 patients recruited in ALTTO, 123 (1.5%) received ESA concomitantly with study treatment. The median age of patients receiving ESA was 54 years, 39.0% premenopausal, most had tumor size > 2 cm (56.9%), node-positive (58.5%), and positive estrogen receptor expression (61.8%). Median follow-up was shorter in the ESA group [6.1 years (IQR 5.3-7.0) vs. 6.9 years (6.0-7.1); p < 0.001]. There was no DFS difference by ESA administration (log-rank p = 0.70), with 3- and 7-year DFS of 89.2% (95% CI 81.8-93.8%) and 81.6% (71.4-88.5%) in ESA group vs. 88.3% (87.6-89.0%) and 80.0% (79.1-80.9%) in No-ESA group. In subgroup analyses, the interaction of ESA administration with menopausal status was statistically significant (unadjusted p = 0.024; stratified p = 0.033), favoring premenopausal women receiving ESA. We observed no significant association of ESA administration with OS (log-rank p = 0.57; 7-year OS in ESA 88.6% vs. 90.0% in non-ESA) or TTDR. ESA-interest AEs were experienced by eight (6.5%) patients receiving ESA and 417 (5.1%) in the No-ESA group (p = 0.41)., Conclusion: ESA administration to patients receiving adjuvant anti-HER2 treatment for HER2-positive EBC was safe and not associated with a negative impact on survival outcomes., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Currently three antibody-drug-conjugates (ADC) are approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for treatment of breast cancer (BC) patient: trastuzumab-emtansine, trastuzumab-deruxtecan and sacituzumab-govitecan. ADC are composed of a monoclonal antibody (mAb) targeting a specific antigen, a cytotoxic payload and a linker. Pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) distinguish ADC from conventional chemotherapy and must be understood by clinicians., Areas Covered: Our review delineates the PK/PD profiles of ADC approved for the treatment of BC with insight for future development. This is an expert opinion literature review based on the EMA's Assessment Reports, enriched by a comprehensive literature search performed on Medline in August 2023., Expert Opinion: All three ADC distributions are described by a two-compartment structure: tissue and serum. Payload concentration peak is immediate but remains at low concentration. The distribution varied for all ADC only with body weight. mAb will be metabolised firstly by the saturable complex formation of ADC/Tumour-Receptor and secondly by binding of FcgRs in immune cells. They are all excreted in the bile and faeces with minimal urine elimination. Dose adjustments, apart from weight, are not recommended. Novel ADC are composed of cleavable linkers with various targets/payloads with the same PK/PD properties, but novel structures of ADC are in development.

Purpose: We aimed to assess the impact of surgery of primary tumor in overall survival (OS) of women with de novo metastatic breast cancer., Methods: Nationwide, population-based retrospective cohort study of women diagnosed with de novo metastatic breast cancer in Belgium, between Jan/2010-Dec/2014. Data was obtained from the Belgian Cancer Registry and administrative databases. "Surgery" group was defined by surgery of primary tumor up to nine months after diagnosis. We excluded women who did not receive systemic treatment or did not complete nine months follow-up after diagnosis. All the subsequent analyses reporting on overall survival and the stratified outcome analyses were performed based on this nine-month landmark cohort. OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and compared using adjusted Cox proportional hazards models controlling for confounders with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We performed a stratified analysis according to surgery timing and a propensity score matching analysis., Results: 1985 patients, 534 (26.9%) in the "Surgery" and 1451 (73.1%) in the "No Surgery" group. Patients undergoing surgery were younger (p < 0.001), had better performance status (PS) (p < 0.001), and higher proportion of HER2-positive and triple-negative breast cancer (p = 0.012). Median follow-up was 86.0 months (82.6-88.5). Median OS was 60.1 months (57.1-68.2) in the "Surgery" vs. 41.9 months (39.8-44.2) in the "No Surgery" group (adjusted HR 0.56; 0.49-0.64). OS was similar when surgery was performed upfront or after systemic treatment. Propensity score matching analysis confirmed the same findings., Conclusion: Among patients receiving systemic treatment for de novo metastatic breast cancer and surviving nine months or more, those who received surgery of the primary tumor within nine months of diagnosis have longer subsequent survival than those who did not., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: In randomized clinical trials (RCTs), blinded independent central review (BICR) is used to minimize heterogeneity and bias associated with radiological response evaluation by local investigators. However, BICR adds costs and complexity to the trial management. We assessed the discrepancy index between progression-free survival (PFS) assessment by local investigators and by BICR in RCTs conducted in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC)., Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane databases and conference proceedings (ASCO, SABCS, ESMO) was performed up to January 4, 2023 (PROSPERO: CRD42021229865). All RCTs published from 2000 to 2022, including MBC patients treated in first- or second-line, and reporting PFS assessed by local investigators and BICR were included. A discrepancy index between BICR-assessed and investigator-assessed HR was calculated for each trial and an overall combined DI was obtained using a fixed-effects model. The agreement between hazard ratios (HR) of PFS assessed by local investigators and BICR was measured using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)., Results: We analyzed 24 studies including 13,168 patients. Among them, 19 (79%) were in first-line, 18 (75%) were phase III trials and 23 (96%) had PFS as primary endpoint. The overall combined discrepancy index was 0.97 (95%CI 0.85-1.10; ICC 0.831, p < 0.001) suggesting no statistically significant difference in PFS assessment between local investigators and BICR. This result was consistent across all analyzed subgroups., Conclusions: The good concordance between local investigator and BICR assessments supports the reliability of local investigator-assessed PFS as primary endpoint for RCTs in MBC and questions the practical utility of implementing BICR in all RCTs., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neoadjuvant treatment discriminates responders, but pathologic complete response is uncommon in oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive/HER2-negative early breast cancer. We aimed to assess the prognostic value of Ki-67 index after neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET)., Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and conference proceedings up to 22nd August 2023 to identify studies reporting the association of Ki-67 index after NET with recurrence-free survival (RFS) and/or overall survival (OS) in women with ER-positive/HER2-negative early breast cancer. We combined RFS and OS hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: Twelve studies including 7897 patients were analysed. Most studies were clinical trials (n = 7547) including only postmenopausal women (n = 3953) treated with aromatase inhibitor (n = 3359). Three studies evaluated Ki-67 in a preplanned core biopsy at 2-4 weeks of NET (n = 3348), while nine evaluated Ki-67 in the surgical specimen (n = 4549) after 2-24 weeks of NET. Median follow-up ranged between 37 and 95 months for RFS and 62-84 months for OS. High Ki-67 index after NET was significantly associated with worse RFS (HR 2.48, 95% CI 1.86-3.30) and OS (HR 2.66, 95% CI 1.65-4.28). A sensitivity analysis including three studies that measured Ki-67 in a preplanned core biopsy showed similar association with RFS (HR 2.41, 95% CI 1.77-3.30)., Conclusions: High Ki-67 after NET is associated with worse survival outcomes, even after a short course of NET, emphasising the prognostic value of this biomarker in women with ER-positive/HER2-negative early breast cancer., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests. Diogo Martins-Branco: Honoraria and advisory board fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Pfizer, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Angelini, AstraZeneca, and Novartis, meeting/travel grants from LEO Farmacêuticos, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Ipsen, Janssen, Roche, Laboratórios Vitória, and Novartis, and institutional research grants from F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and Novartis (all outside the submitted work); Guilherme Nader-Marta: Support to attend medical conferences: Roche, AstraZeneca, and Bayer (all outside the submitted work); Chiara Molinelli: Honoraria and advisory board fees from Lilly and Novartis; travel grant by Gilead (all outside the submitted work); Michail Ignatiadis: Honoraria from Novartis, Seattle Genetics; travel grants from Amgen, Roche, Gilead; research grant to my institution Roche/GNE, Pfizer, Natera Inc, Inivata Inc (all outside the submitted work); Philippe Aftimos: Honoraria and advisory board fees from Eli Lilly, Gilead, Menarini, Novartis, and Roche; travel grant from Daiichi Sankyo; and research funding from Roche (all outside the submitted work); Roberto Salgado: Honoraria from BMS, Exact Sciences, and Roche; intellectual property rights/patent from Merk; and research funding from Roche, Merk, and Puma Biotechnology (all outside the submitted work); Evandro de Azambuja: Honoraria and/or advisory board from Roche/GNE, Novartis, SeaGen, Zodiac, Libbs; Pierre Fabre, Lilly, Astra-Zeneca, MSD, and Gilead. Travel grants from Roche/GNE and Astra-Zeneca. Research grant to my institution from Roche/GNE, Astra-Zeneca, GSK/Novartis, and Servier (all outside the submitted work). Lieveke Ameye and Marianne Paesmans have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Genomic assays are useful tools for tailoring adjuvant treatment in early breast cancer. We aimed to analyse the role of an institutional protocol of a genomic assay for chemotherapy de-escalation., Material and Methods: Prospective cohort study of all consecutive women diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer, tested with the 21-gene Recurrence Score (RS) assay from August 2015 to July 2018 at a Portuguese cancer centre. For being tested, patients should meet at least one of the pre-defined inclusion criteria: i) luminal A-like, pT2pN0; ii) luminal A-like, 1 - 3 positive nodes and comorbidities with higher risk of chemotherapy-induced toxicity; iii) pT1-2pN0, progesterone receptor ≤ 20% and/or Ki67 14% - 40%. Adjuvant treatment was de-escalated to isolated endocrine therapy if RS was less than 18. We measured the reduction in chemotherapy prescribing and its clinical impact, the RS association with pathologic features, and the protocol feasibility., Results: We tested 154 women with a median age of 61 years old (range: 25 - 79), 69% postmenopausal. Tumours were mainly pT1 (55%), pN0 (82%), invasive ductal (73%), G2 (86%), luminal B-like (69%) and stage IA (85%). We obtained a RS less than 18 in 60% of women, with an overall adjuvant chemotherapy reduction of 65%. Seven (95% confidence interval: 5 - 10) patients needed to be screened with the 21-gene RS assay to prevent one clinically relevant adverse event during the first six months of adjuvant treatment. Considering the currently used RS cut-off, only 9% of node-negative and 11% of node-positive patients had RS over 25. We found no relevant associations between RS and pathologic features. The protocol was feasible and did not compromise the adequate timing for adjuvant treatment., Conclusion: These criteria allowed the de-escalation of adjuvant systemic treatment in at least six out of ten women.

Background: New drugs for locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer have led to clinical benefits, aside with increasing costs to healthcare systems. The current financing model for health technology assessment (HTA) privileges real-world data. As part of the ongoing HTA, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of palbociclib with aromatase inhibitors (AI) and compare it with the efficacy reported in PALOMA-2., Methods: A population-based retrospective exposure cohort study was conducted including all patients initiating treatment in Portugal with palbociclib under early access use and registered in the National Oncology Registry. The primary outcome was progression free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes considered included time to palbociclib failure (TPF), overall survival (OS), time to next treatment (TTNT), and proportion of patients discontinuing treatment due to  adverse events (AEs). The Kaplan-Meier method was used and median, 1- and 2-year survival rates were computed, with two-sided 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines for reporting observational studies were used., Results: There were 131 patients included. Median follow-up was 28.3 months (IQR: 22.7-35.2) and median duration of treatment was 17.5 months (IQR: 7.8-29.1). Median PFS was 19.5 months (95%CI 14.2-24.2), corresponding to a 1-year PFS rate of 67.9% (95%CI 59.2-75.2) and a 2-year PFS rate of 42.0% (95%CI 33.5-50.3). Sensitivity analysis showed median PFS would increase slightly when excluding those not initiating treatment with the recommended dose, raising to 19.8 months (95%CI 14.4-28.9). By considering only patients meeting PALOMA-2 criteria, we could observe a major difference in treatment outcomes, with a mean PFS of 28.8 months (95%CI 19.4-36.0). TPF was 19.8 months (95%CI 14.2-24.9). Median OS was not reached. Median TTNT was 22.5 months (95%CI 18.0-29.8). A total of 14 patients discontinued palbociclib because of AEs (10.7%)., Conclusions: Data suggest palbociclib with AI to have an effectiveness of 28.8 months, when used in patients with overlapping characteristics to those used in PALOMA-2. However, when used outside of these eligibility criteria, namely in patients with less favorable prognosis (e.g., presence of visceral disease), the benefits are inferior, even though still favorable., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Real-world (RW) data may provide valuable information on the effectiveness and safety of medicines, which is particularly relevant for clinicians, patients and third-party payers. Evidence on the effectiveness of palbociclib plus fulvestrant is scarce, which highlights the need of additional studies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of palbociclib plus fulvestrant in advanced breast cancer (ABC)., Materials and Methods: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study and cases of interest were identified through the Portuguese National Cancer Registry database and additional data sources. Patients aged≥18 years, diagnosed with ABC and exposed to palbociclib plus fulvestrant between May 31, 2017 and March 31, 2019 were included. Patients were followed-up until death or cut-off date (February 28, 2021). Primary outcome was rw-progression-free survival (rwPFS). Secondary outcomes were rw-overall survival (rwOS), rw-time to palbociclib failure (rwTPF) and rw-time to next treatment (rwTTNT)., Results: A total of 210 patients were included. Median age was 58 years (range 29-83) and 99.05% were female. Median follow-up time was 23.22 months and, at cut-off date, treatment had been discontinued in 189 patients, mainly due to disease progression (n = 152). Median rwPFS was 7.43 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.28-9.05) and 2-year rwPFS was 16.65% (95%CI 11.97-22.00). Median rwOS was 24.70 months (95%CI 21.58-29.27), median rwTPF was 7.5 months (95%CI 6.51-9.08) and median rwTTNT was 11.74 months (95%CI 10.33-14.08)., Conclusion: Palbociclib plus fulvestrant seems an effective treatment for ABC in real-world context. Compared to registrations studies, rwPFS and rwOS were shorter in real-life setting., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)