Search

Background: Several de-escalation neoadjuvant strategies have been investigated to reduce the use of chemotherapy in HER2-positive early breast cancer using pathological complete response as a surrogate endpoint; there are few survival data from these trials. Here, we report 5-year survival data in the WSG-ADAPT-HER2+/HR- trial and address the effect of pathological complete response, early therapy response, and molecular subtype., Methods: WSG-ASAPT-HER2+/HR-, a part of the ADAPT umbrella trial performed in patients with different subtypes of early breast cancer, was an investigator-initiated, multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial done at 40 Breast Cancer Centres in Germany. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed, unilateral, primary invasive, non-inflammatory early breast cancer, hormone receptor-negative and HER2-positive status, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 or a Karnofsky performance status of at least 80%. Patients were randomly assigned (5:2, block size 21, stratified by centre and clinical nodal status) to 12 weeks of either trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose, then 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) plus pertuzumab (840 mg loading dose, then 420 mg every 3 weeks) or trastuzumab plus pertuzumab plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m 2 weekly); all drugs were administered intravenously. The primary objective of the trial was to compare the number of patients with a pathological complete response at surgery (ie, no invasive tumour cells in breast and lymph nodes [ypT0/is ypN0], the primary endpoint) in early responders (ie, low cellularity or Ki67 decrease ≥30% after 3 weeks) in the trastuzumab plus pertuzumab group versus all patients (irrespective of an early response) in the trastuzumab plus pertuzumab plus paclitaxel group. Non-inferiority was defined as a pathological complete response no worse than 23% lower in the early-responder proportion of patients in the trastuzumab plus pertuzumab group than in the entire trastuzumab plus pertuzumab plus paclitaxel group. The primary endpoint has been reported previously. Additionally, the primary objective of the ADAPT umbrella trial was the evaluation of the effect of pathological complete response on invasive disease-free survival. At investigator's discretion, further chemotherapy could be omitted in patients with a pathological complete response. Secondary survival endpoints were 5-year invasive disease-free survival, relapse-free survival, locoregional relapse-free survival, distant disease-free survival, and overall survival. The effect of pathological complete response on survival was estimated by Cox regression analysis. All analyses are reported in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01817452, and is closed to recruitment., Findings: Between March 3, 2014, and Oct 6, 2015, 134 patients were recruited and randomly assigned to treatment, 92 to trastuzumab plus pertuzumab and 42 to trastuzumab plus pertuzumab plus paclitaxel. Median follow-up in survivors was 59·9 months (IQR 53·4-61·4). There were no significant differences between the treatment groups in invasive disease-free survival, relapse-free survival, locoregional relapse-free survival, distant disease-free survival, and overall survival. In the trastuzumab plus pertuzumab plus paclitaxel group and in the trastuzumab plus pertuzumab group, the proportions of patients achieving 5-year survival respectively were 98% (95% CI 84-100) and 87% (78-93) for invasive disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0·32, 95% CI 0·07-1·49; p=0·15); 98% (95% CI 84-100) and 89% (79-94) for relapse-free survival (HR 0·41, 95% CI 0·09-1·91; p=0·25); 100% (95% CI not estimable) and 95% (88-98) for locoregional relapse-free survival (HR 0·41, 95% CI 0·05-3·75; p=0·43); 98% (95% CI 84-100) and 92% (83-96) for distant disease-free survival (HR 0·35, 95% CI 0·04-3·12; p=0·36), and 98% (95% CI 84-100) and 94% (86-97) for overall survival (HR 0·41, 95% CI 0·05-3·63; p=0·43). Pathological complete response was associated with improved invasive disease-free survival (HR 0·14, 95% CI 0·03-0·64; p=0·011). Two invasive disease-free survival events occurred after a pathological complete response (one in each treatment group)., Interpretation: The WSG-ADAPT-HER2+/HR- trial showed good survival rates in patients with a pathological complete response after de-escalated 12-week trastuzumab plus pertuzumab with or without weekly paclitaxel. Omission of further chemotherapy did not affect invasive disease-free survival in patients with a pathological complete response. 12 weeks of weekly paclitaxel plus dual HER2 blockade could be an efficacious de-escalated neoadjuvant regimen in patients with hormone receptor-negative, HER2-positive early breast cancer with high pathological complete response rates and good 5-year outcomes. Further trials of this approach are ongoing., Funding: Roche, Bayer., Translation: For the German translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests UN reports research funding paid to their institution from Agendia, Amgen, Celgene, Genomic Health, NanoString Technologies, Roche, and Sanofi; consulting fees from Genomic Health and Roche; honoraria from Agendia, Amgen, Celgene, Genomic Health, NanoString Technologies, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, and Teva; payment for expert testimony from Genomic Health; travel support from Genomic Health, Pfizer, and Roche; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board at Roche, Seagen, and Exact Sciences (all outside the submitted work); and a co-director position at the West German Study Group. OG reports consulting fees from Celgene, Genomic Health/Exact Sciences, Lilly, Merck Sharpe & Dohme (MSD), Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Seagen, Pierre Fabre, Gilead, and Molecular Health; honoraria from Genomic Health/Exact Sciences, Roche, Celgene, Pfizer, Novartis, NanoString Technologies, and AstraZeneca; payment for expert testimony from Genomic Health; and travel support from Roche (all outside the submitted work); and a co-director position at the West German Study Group. MG reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca and travel support from Daiichi Sankyo, all outside of the submitted work. SK reports research funding from Roche and Novartis; consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Daiichi-Sankyo, Genomic Health/Exact Science, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Seagen, Pfizer, pfm Medical, Roche, Somatex, and Gilead; travel support from Roche and Daiichi Sankyo; and other financial or non-financial interests for non-continuing medical education services from Somatex, Roche, Novartis, and Lilly (all outside of the submitted work); and a co-director position at the West German Study Group. MB reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Exact Sciences, Novartis, Puma, and Roche; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Exact Sciences, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Teva, and MSD; and travel support from AstraZeneca, Celgene, Medac, Novartis, Roche, and Daiichi Sankyo (all outside the submitted work). KK reports honoraria from Roche, RG Gesellschaft für Information und Organisation, Reuter Medico Consulting, and bsh medical communications (all outside the submitted work). HF reports honoraria from Roche and iOMEDICO (lecture); and travel support from Celgene and Amgen (all outside of the submitted work). TR reports research funding from Else Kröner-Fresenius-Stiftung and German Cancer Aid; consulting fees from Pfizer; honoraria from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Lilly, and Roche; and other financial or non-financial interests from Pfizer (all outside the submitted work). HHF reports consulting fees and honoraria from Roche Pharma, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Genomic Health (all outside of the submitted work). RK reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Sandoz, and Seattle Genetics; and honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Genomic Health, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche/Genentech, and Zodiac Pharma (all paid to immediate family members and outside the submitted work); and a co-director position at the West German Study Group. RW reports consulting fees, honoraria, and travel support from Agendia, Amgen, Aristo, AstraZeneca, Boeringer Ingelheim, Carl Zeiss, Celgene, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Exact Sciences/Genomic Health, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Hexal, Lilly, Medstrom Medical, MSD, Mundipharma, Mylan, Nanostring, Novartis, Odonate, Paxman, Palleos, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, PumaBiotechnology, Riemser, Roche, Sandoz/Hexal, Sanofi Genzyme, Seattle Genetics/Seagen, Tesaro Bio, Teva, Veracyte and Viatris; and other financial or non-financial interests from FomF (Forum for medical education in Germany), Aurikamed, Clinsol, and Pomme Med (all outside the submitted work). HHK reports honoraria for lectures from Roche Pharma, Novartis, Genomic Health, AstraZeneca, Lilly, and Pfizer; and participation in a data safety monitoring board or advisory board at Roche Pharma, Genomic Health, and AstraZeneca (all outside the submitted work). NH reports research funding paid to institution from Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche/Genentech; honoraria for lectures or consulting from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Exact Sciences, Gilead, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Sandoz, and Seagen (all outside the submitted work). All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The association of early changes in the immune infiltrate during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with pathological complete response (pCR) in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) remains unexplored., Methods: Multiplexed immunohistochemistry was performed in matched tumor biopsies obtained at baseline and after 3 weeks of NACT from 66 patients from the West German Study Group Adjuvant Dynamic Marker-Adjusted Personalized Therapy Trial Optimizing Risk Assessment and Therapy Response Prediction in Early Breast Cancer - Triple Negative Breast Cancer (WSG-ADAPT-TN) trial. Association between CD4, CD8, CD73, T cells, PD1-positive CD4 and CD8 cells, and PDL1 levels in stroma and/or tumor at baseline, week 3 and 3-week change with pCR was evaluated with univariable logistic regression., Results: Compared with no change in immune cell composition and functional markers, transition from 'cold' to 'hot' (below-median and above-median marker level at baseline, respectively) suggested higher pCR rates for PD1-positive CD4 (tumor: OR=1.55, 95% CI 0.45 to 5.42; stroma: OR=2.65, 95% CI 0.65 to 10.71) and PD1-positive CD8 infiltrates (tumor: OR=1.77, 95% CI 0.60 to 5.20; stroma: OR=1.25, 95% CI 0.41 to 3.84; tumor+stroma: OR=1.62, 95% CI 0.51 to 5.12). No pCR was observed after 'hot-to-cold' transition in PD1-positive CD8 cells. pCR rates appeared lower after hot-to-cold transitions in T cells (tumor: OR=0.26, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.34; stroma: OR=0.35, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.25; tumor+stroma: OR=0.00, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.04) and PD1-positive CD4 cells (tumor: OR=0.60, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.35; stroma: OR=0.22, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.92; tumor+stroma: OR=0.32, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.94). Higher pCR rates collated with 'altered' distribution (levels below-median and above-median in tumor and stroma, respectively) of T cell (OR=3.50, 95% CI 0.84 to 14.56) and PD1-positive CD4 cells (OR=4.50, 95% CI 1.01 to 20.14)., Conclusion: Our exploratory findings indicate that comprehensive analysis of early immune infiltrate dynamics complements currently investigated predictive markers for pCR and may have a potential to improve guidance for individualized de-escalation/escalation strategies in TNBC., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

We assessed the value of breast ultrasound (US) performed at week 3 and 6 and at the end (EOT) of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for prediction of pathologic complete response (pCR, ypT0/is ypN0) in patients with HR+/HER2+, HR-/HER2-or HR-/HER2+ early breast cancer enrolled in the WSG-ADAPT subtrials. US was performed at week 3 and 6 of NAT and at EOT in 401, 517, and 553 patients, respectively. Tumors with complete or partial response by US (RECIST 1.1) were classified as responders and those with stable or progressive disease as non-responders. pCR rate was higher in US responders than in non-responders. US tended to yield the highest positive predictive value in HR-/HER2+ (69%) and HR-/HER2-tumors (65%) at week 3, and the highest negative predictive value in HR+/HER2+ tumors at week 6 and at EOT (88.9% and 86.9%, respectively) and in HR-/HER2-tumors at EOT (87.9%). Multivariable analysis of patients with US at week 3 and 6 identified tumor subtype (HR-/HER2+ vs HR+/HER2+; odds ratio (OR) 2.77, 95%CI 1.45–5.29, and OR 4.17, 95%CI 2.26–7.68, respectively) and each 10% change in lesion dimension on US from baseline (OR 1.15, 95%CI 1.08–1.24, and OR 1.25, 95%CI 1.16–1.35, respectively) as parameters associated with pCR. Our data support the use of week 3 and EOT US for prediction of pCR in response-guided NAT and in planning of breast-conserving surgery. Change in tumor diameter on US as a continuous variable could be a valuable alternative to categorical RECIST 1.1 criteria. • Timing of ultrasound may affect prediction of pathologic complete response (pCR). • Ultrasound predicts pCR in HR-tumors as early as at week 3 of neoadjuvant therapy. • Ultrasound predicts non-pCR in HR+/HER2+ tumors at week 6 of neoadjuvant therapy. • Early pCR prediction by ultrasound allows response-guided therapy in breast cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We evaluated the role of early response after 3 weeks of neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) assessed by ultrasound (US), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and Ki-67 dynamics for prediction of pathologic complete response (pCR) in different early breast cancer subtypes. Patients with HR+/HER2+, HR-/HER2- and HR-/HER2+ tumors enrolled into three neoadjuvant WSG ADAPT subtrials underwent US, MRI and Ki-67 assessment at diagnosis and after 3 weeks of NAT. Early response was defined as complete or partial response (US, MRI) and ≥30% proliferation decrease or <500 invasive tumor cells (Ki-67). Predictive values and area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curves for prediction of pCR (ypT0/is ypN0) after 12-week NAT were calculated. Two hundred twenty-six had MRI and 401 US; 107 underwent both MRI and US. All three methods yielded a similar AUC in HR+/ HER2+ (0.66-0.67) and HR-/HER2- tumors (0.53-0.63), while MRI and Ki-67 performed better than US in HR-/HER2+ tumors (0.83 and 0.79 vs 0.56). Adding MRI +/-Ki-67 increased AUC of US in HR-/HER2+ tumors to 0.64 to 0.75. MRI and Ki-67 demonstrated highest sensitivity in HR-/HER2- (0.8-1) and HR-/HER2+ tumors (1, both). Negative predictive value was similar for all methods in HR+/HER2+ (0.71-0.74) and HR-/HER2- tumors (0.85-1), while it was higher for MRI and Ki-67 compared to US in HR-/HER2+ subtype (1 vs 0.5). Early response assessed by US, MRI and Ki-67 is a strong predictor for pCR after 12-week NAT. Strength of pCR prediction varies according to tumor subtype. Adding MRI+/-Ki-67 to US did not improve pCR prediction in majority of our patients [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pathological complete response (pCR) is associated with improved prognosis in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). The optimal chemotherapy regimen is unclear. Weekly nab-paclitaxel vs conventional paclitaxel or addition of carboplatin to anthracycline-taxane results in higher pCR rates with uncertain survival impact. We evaluated carboplatin vs gemcitabine with a nab-paclitaxel backbone as a short 12-week A-free regimen with a focus on early response.Methods: Patients with TNBC (estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor < 1%, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, cT1c-cT4c, cN0/+) were randomly assigned to A: nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2/gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 d1,8 three times weekly (q3w); vs B: nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2/carboplatin AUC2 day 1,8 q3w. The trial was powered for a pCR (ypT0/is ypN0) comparison by therapy arm and early response (defined as Ki-67 decrease >30% or < 500 invasive tumor cells in the three-week serial biopsy). All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: A total of 336 patients were enrolled (48 centers, arms A/B: n = 182/154). The median age was 50 years. At baseline (A vs B), 62.6% and 62.9% had cT2-4c tumors; 86.8% and 90.9% completed therapy per protocol, respectively. pCR favored arm B (28.7%, 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.36, vs 45.9%, 95% CI = 0.38 to 0.54; 95% CI(dBA) = 6.2% to 27.9%, P = .002) and was lower in nonresponders than in early responders (19.5% vs 44.4%, P < .001) or in patients with unclassifiable early response (50.0%). The nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine was associated with more frequent dose reductions (20.6% vs 11.9%, P = .04), treatment-related serious adverse events (11.1% vs 5.3%, P = .07), grade 3-4 infections (7.2% vs 2.6%, P = .07), and grade 3-4 ALAT elevations (11.7 vs 3.3%, P = .01).Conclusions: This first large randomized trial suggests high efficacy and excellent tolerability of a neoadjuvant nab-paclitaxel/carboplatin regimen, superior to nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine in TNBC. De-escalation of further chemotherapy in patients with early pCR after a short anthracycline-free regimen is a promising field of future research. Early necrotic morphological changes and/or proliferation decrease after the first therapy cycle seem to be associated with subsequent pCR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]