Search

Background: Patients with inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) have overall poor clinical outcomes, with triple-negative IBC (TN-IBC) being associated with the worst survival, warranting the investigation of novel therapies. Preclinical studies implied that ruxolitinib (RUX), a JAK1/2 inhibitor, may be an effective therapy for TN-IBC., Methods: We conducted a randomized phase II study with nested window-of-opportunity in TN-IBC. Treatment-naïve patients received a 7-day run-in of RUX alone or RUX plus paclitaxel (PAC). After the run-in, those who received RUX alone proceeded to neoadjuvant therapy with either RUX + PAC or PAC alone for 12 weeks; those who had received RUX + PAC continued treatment for 12 weeks. All patients subsequently received 4 cycles of doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide prior to surgery. Research tumor biopsies were performed at baseline (pre-run-in) and after run-in therapy. Tumors were evaluated for phosphorylated STAT3 (pSTAT3) by immunostaining, and a subset was also analyzed by RNA-seq. The primary endpoint was the percent of pSTAT3-positive pre-run-in tumors that became pSTAT3-negative. Secondary endpoints included pathologic complete response (pCR)., Results: Overall, 23 patients were enrolled, of whom 21 completed preoperative therapy. Two patients achieved pCR (8.7%). pSTAT3 and IL-6/JAK/STAT3 signaling decreased in post-run-in biopsies of RUX-treated samples, while sustained treatment with RUX + PAC upregulated IL-6/JAK/STAT3 signaling compared to RUX alone. Both treatments decreased GZMB + T cells implying immune suppression. RUX alone effectively inhibited JAK/STAT3 signaling but its combination with PAC led to incomplete inhibition. The immune suppressive effects of RUX alone and in combination may negate its growth inhibitory effects on cancer cells., Conclusion: In summary, the use of RUX in TN-IBC was associated with a decrease in pSTAT3 levels despite lack of clinical benefit. Cancer cell-specific-targeting of JAK2/STAT3 or combinations with immunotherapy may be required for further evaluation of JAK2/STAT3 signaling as a cancer therapeutic target., Trial Registration: www., Clinicaltrials: gov , NCT02876302. Registered 23 August 2016., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

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

Purpose: Preclinical studies support the JAK2-STAT3 signaling pathway as a key driver in CD44+ CD24- "stem-cell-like" breast cancer cells. Ruxolitinib is an orally bioavailable JAK1/2 inhibitor. We aimed to identify the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of ruxolitinib in combination with paclitaxel in patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC)., Methods: Eligible patients had HER2-negative MBC and had received ≤ 3 chemotherapy regimens for advanced disease. Patients received oral ruxolitinib (10-25 mg bid) in a 3 + 3 dose escalation design in combination with weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m 2 in a 3-week cycle. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the RP2D., Results: Nineteen patients received protocol therapy (mean age 52 years). Eight (42%) had triple-negative breast cancer and 11 (58%) had hormone receptor-positive disease; 12 (63%) had visceral disease. Ten (53%) patients had not received prior treatment for advanced disease. Patients received a median number of 5 cycles of combination therapy (range 1-12) and five patients continued single-agent ruxolitinib. The MTD of ruxolitinib was 25 mg bid when combined with paclitaxel, and the RP2D for the combination was 15 mg bid. Thirteen (68%) patients required dose reductions or holds. Most frequent toxicities reported of any grade were neutropenia (50%) and anemia (33%). There were no grade 4/5 toxicities attributed to study drug. Four (21%) patients had PR, 12 (63%) had SD and three (16%) had PD as their best response., Conclusion: The combination of ruxolitinib and weekly paclitaxel was well tolerated with evidence of clinical activity. Further analysis of this combination is ongoing (NCT02041429)., Trial Registration: NCT02041429. Date of registration: January 22, 2014.

Purpose: The use of growth factors adds considerable expense and some toxicity to adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy. We tested the feasibility and safety of omitting routine peg-filgrastim use during the paclitaxel portion of the dose-dense doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide-paclitaxel regimen., Patients and Methods: This was a prospective, single-arm study in which patients 18 to 65 years of age who completed 4 cycles of dose-dense doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide for stage I-III breast cancer received paclitaxel 175 mg/m 2 every 2 weeks. Peg-filgrastim was administered after paclitaxel only if patients had had febrile neutropenia in a prior cycle or at investigator discretion if patients had infections or treatment delays of > 1 week. Once a patient received peg-filgrastim, it was administered in all future cycles. The primary end point was the rate of paclitaxel completion within 7 weeks from cycle 1 day 1 to cycle 4 day 1. If ≥ 100 out of 125 patients completed 4 cycles of paclitaxel without dose delay, the regimen would be considered feasible., Results: The enrollment goal of 125 patients was met. Median age was 46 years (range, 21-65 years), and 112 patients (90% [95% CI, 83% to 94%]) completed dose-dense paclitaxel within 7 weeks. Omission of peg-filgrastim was not causally related to noncompletion of paclitaxel in any patients. The most common reasons for dose reduction or delays were nonhematologic. One patient experienced febrile neutropenia but was able to complete paclitaxel on time. Eight patients (6.4%) received peg-filgrastim during the trial. Overall, peg-filgrastim was administered in only 4.3% of paclitaxel cycles., Conclusion: Omission of routine peg-filgrastim during dose-dense paclitaxel according to a prespecified algorithm seems to be safe and feasible and was associated with a 95.7% reduction in the use of peg-filgrastim relative to the current standard of care.

Purpose: The Adjuvant Paclitaxel and Trastuzumab trial was designed to address treatment of patients with small human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer. The primary analysis of the Adjuvant Paclitaxel and Trastuzumab trial demonstrated a 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) of 98.7%. In this planned secondary analysis, we report longer-term outcomes and exploratory results to characterize the biology of small HER2-positive tumors and genetic factors that may predispose to paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy (TIPN)., Patients and Methods: In this phase II study, patients with HER2-positive breast cancer with tumors 3 cm or smaller and negative nodes received paclitaxel (80 mg/m 2 ) with trastuzumab for 12 weeks, followed by trastuzumab for 9 months. The primary end point was DFS. Recurrence-free interval (RFI), breast cancer-specific survival, and overall survival (OS) were also analyzed. In an exploratory analysis, intrinsic subtyping by PAM50 (Prosigna) and calculation of the risk of recurrence score were performed on the nCounter analysis system on archival tissue. Genotyping was performed to investigate TIPN., Results: A total of 410 patients were enrolled from October 2007 to September 2010. After a median follow-up of 6.5 years, there were 23 DFS events. The 7-year DFS was 93% (95% CI, 90.4 to 96.2) with four (1.0%) distant recurrences, 7-year OS was 95% (95% CI, 92.4 to 97.7), and 7-year RFI was 97.5% (95% CI, 95.9 to 99.1). PAM50 analyses (n = 278) showed that most tumors were HER2-enriched (66%), followed by luminal B (14%), luminal A (13%), and basal-like (8%). Genotyping (n = 230) identified one single-nucleotide polymorphism, rs3012437 , associated with an increased risk of TIPN in patients with grade 2 or greater TIPN (10.4%)., Conclusion: With longer follow-up, adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab is associated with excellent long-term outcomes. Distribution of PAM50 intrinsic subtypes in small HER2-positive tumors is similar to that previously reported for larger tumors.

Purpose: Women with HER2-positive breast cancer treated prior to effective anti-HER2 therapy have higher rates of local-regional recurrence (LRR) than those with HER2-negative disease. Effective systemic therapy, however, has been shown to decrease LRR. This study examines LRR in women with HER2-positive breast cancer treated on a single-arm prospective multicenter trial of adjuvant trastuzumab (H) and paclitaxel (T)., Methods: Patients with HER2-positive tumors ≤ 3.0 cm with negative axillary nodes or micrometastatic disease were eligible. Systemic therapy included weekly T and H for 12 weeks followed by continuation of H to complete 1 year. Radiation therapy (RT) was required following breast-conserving surgery (BCS), but dose and fields were not specified. Disease-free survival (DFS) and LRR-free survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: Of the 410 patients enrolled from September 2007 to September 2010, 406 initiated protocol therapy and formed the basis of this analysis. A total of 272 (67%) had hormone receptor-positive tumors. Of 162 patients undergoing mastectomy, local therapy records were unavailable for two. None of the 160 for whom records were available received RT. Among 244 BCS patients, detailed RT records were available for 217 (89%). With a median follow-up of 6.5 years, 7-year DFS was 93.3% (95% CI 90.4-96.2), and LRR-free survival was 98.6% (95% CI 97.4-99.8)., Conclusion: LRR in this select group of early-stage patients with HER2-positive disease receiving effective anti-HER2 therapy is extremely low. If confirmed in additional studies, future investigational efforts should focus on de-escalating local therapy.

Background: Unresectable locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative (hormone-receptor-negative and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [HER2]-negative) breast cancer is an aggressive disease with poor outcomes. Nanoparticle albumin-bound (nab)-paclitaxel may enhance the anticancer activity of atezolizumab., Methods: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) patients with untreated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer to receive atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel or placebo plus nab-paclitaxel; patients continued the intervention until disease progression or an unacceptable level of toxic effects occurred. Stratification factors were the receipt or nonreceipt of neoadjuvant or adjuvant taxane therapy, the presence or absence of liver metastases at baseline, and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression at baseline (positive vs. negative). The two primary end points were progression-free survival (in the intention-to-treat population and PD-L1-positive subgroup) and overall survival (tested in the intention-to-treat population; if the finding was significant, then it would be tested in the PD-L1-positive subgroup)., Results: Each group included 451 patients (median follow-up, 12.9 months). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the median progression-free survival was 7.2 months with atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel, as compared with 5.5 months with placebo plus nab-paclitaxel (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 0.92; P=0.002); among patients with PD-L1-positive tumors, the median progression-free survival was 7.5 months and 5.0 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.78; P<0.001). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the median overall survival was 21.3 months with atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel and 17.6 months with placebo plus nab-paclitaxel (hazard ratio for death, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.02; P=0.08); among patients with PD-L1-positive tumors, the median overall survival was 25.0 months and 15.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.86). No new adverse effects were identified. Adverse events that led to the discontinuation of any agent occurred in 15.9% of the patients who received atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel and in 8.2% of those who received placebo plus nab-paclitaxel., Conclusions: Atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel prolonged progression-free survival among patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in both the intention-to-treat population and the PD-L1-positive subgroup. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profiles of each agent. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; IMpassion130 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02425891 .).

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a dose-limiting toxicity caused by several chemotherapeutic agents. Currently, CIPN is managed by empirical dose modifications at the discretion of the treating physician. The goal of this research is to quantitate the dose-CIPN relationship to inform the optimal strategies for dose modification. Data were obtained from the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 40502 trial, a randomized phase III trial of paclitaxel vs. nab-paclitaxel vs. ixabepilone as first-line chemotherapy for locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. CIPN was measured using a subset of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gynecologic Oncology Group Neurotoxicity (FACT-GOG-NTX) scale. A kinetic-pharmacodynamic (K-PD) model was utilized to quantitate the dose-CIPN relationship simultaneously for the three drugs. Indirect response models with linear and S max drug effects were evaluated. The model was evaluated by comparing the predicted proportion of patients with CIPN (score ≥8 or score ≥12) to the observed proportion. An indirect response model with linear drug effect was able to describe the longitudinal CIPN data reasonably well. The proportion of patients that were falsely predicted to have CIPN or were falsely predicted not to have CIPN was 20% or less at any cycle. The model will be utilized to identify an early time point that can predict CIPN at later time points. This strategy will be utilized to inform dose adjustments to prospectively manage CIPN. Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT00785291.

Introduction: The necessity of using granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) during dose-dense (DD) paclitaxel (T) after doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) is unclear., Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study including patients with stage I-III breast cancer treated at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute with adjuvant DD-ACT between January 2011 and December 2013. Descriptive analyses evaluating patterns of G-CSF utilization during T were performed., Results: Overall, 156 patients were treated with DD-ACT by 26 providers. The majority of patients (135, 87%) received at least one dose of G-CSF during T (group 1), 17% of these patients received it in only one cycle and 48% received it in all four cycles. Reasons for omitting G-CSF included high baseline absolute neutrophil count and pain. Twenty-one (13%) patients did not receive any G-CSF during T (group 2). Respectively, 94% and 90% of patients completed the treatment in groups 1 and 2. There were no cases of treatment cessation due to neutropenia. Six percent of patients in group 1 had at least one treatment delay. There were no treatment delays reported in group 2. Variation in the use of G-CSF by provider and by patient was found, with 11 providers choosing not to use G-CSF in at least one patient., Conclusions: We identified substantial variation in the use of G-CSF within the practice. However, omission of G-CSF was not associated with treatment delays or adverse events. Prospective studies are warranted to formally test whether routine G-CSF is necessary during dose-dense T therapy., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Trastuzumab is a life-saving therapy but is associated with symptomatic and asymptomatic left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) decline. We report the cardiac toxic effects of a nonanthracycline and trastuzumab-based treatment for patients with early-stage human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (ERBB2, formerly HER2 or HER2/neu)-positive breast cancer., Objective: To determine the cardiac safety of paclitaxel with trastuzumab and the utility of LVEF monitoring in patients with node-negative, ERBB2-positive breast cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this secondary analysis of an uncontrolled, single group study across 14 medical centers, enrollment of 406 patients with node-negative, ERBB2-positive breast cancer 3 cm, or smaller, and baseline LVEF of greater than or equal to 50% occurred from October 9, 2007, to September 3, 2010. Patients with a micrometastasis in a lymph node were later allowed with a study amendment. Median patient age was 55 years, 118 (29%) had hypertension, and 30 (7%) had diabetes. Patients received adjuvant paclitaxel for 12 weeks with trastuzumab, and trastuzumab was continued for 1 year. Median follow-up was 4 years., Interventions: Treatment consisted of weekly 80-mg/m2 doses of paclitaxel administered concurrently with trastuzumab intravenously for 12 weeks, followed by trastuzumab monotherapy for 39 weeks. During the monotherapy phase, trastuzumab could be administered weekly 2-mg/kg or every 3 weeks as 6-mg/kg. Radiation and hormone therapy were administered per standard guidelines after completion of the 12 weeks of chemotherapy. Patient LVEF was assessed at baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year., Main Outcomes and Measures: Cardiac safety data, including grade 3 to 4 left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and significant asymptomatic LVEF decline, as defined by our study, were reported., Results: Overall, 2 patients (0.5%) (95% CI, 0.1%-1.8%) developed grade 3 LVSD and came off study, and 13 (3.2%) (95% CI, 1.9%-5.4%) had significant asymptomatic LVEF decline, 11 of whom completed study treatment. Median LVEF at baseline was 65%; 12 weeks, 64%; 6 months, 64%; and 1 year, 64%., Conclusions and Relevance: Cardiac toxic effects from paclitaxel with trastuzumab, manifesting as grade 3 or 4 LVSD or asymptomatic LVEF decline, were low. Patient LVEF was assessed at baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year, and our findings suggest that LVEF monitoring during trastuzumab therapy without anthracyclines could be simplified for many individuals.

Purpose: We compared nab-paclitaxel or ixabepilone once per week to paclitaxel with bevacizumab as first-line therapy for patients with advanced breast cancer (BC) to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) for nab-paclitaxel or ixabepilone versus paclitaxel., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients were age ≥ 18 years with chemotherapy-naive advanced BC. Patients were randomly assigned to bevacizumab with paclitaxel 90 mg/m(2) (arm A), nab-paclitaxel 150 mg/m(2) (arm B), or ixabepilone 16 mg/m(2) (arm C), once per week for 3 of 4 weeks. Planned enrollment was 900 patients, which would give 88% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.73., Results: In all, 799 patients were enrolled, and 783 received treatment (97% received bevacizumab). Arm C was closed for futility at the first interim analysis (n = 241), and arm A (n = 267) and arm B (n = 275) were closed for futility at the second interim analysis. Median PFS for paclitaxel was 11 months, ixabepilone was inferior to paclitaxel (PFS, 7.4 months; hazard ratio, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.31 to 1.93; P < .001), and nab-paclitaxel was not superior to paclitaxel (PFS, 9.3 months; hazard ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.45; P = .054). Results were concordant with overall survival; time to treatment failure was significantly shorter in both experimental arms v paclitaxel. Hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity, including peripheral neuropathy, was increased with nab-paclitaxel, with more frequent and earlier dose reductions., Conclusion: In patients with chemotherapy-naive advanced BC, ixabepilone once per week was inferior to paclitaxel, and nab-paclitaxel was not superior with a trend toward inferiority. Toxicity was increased in the experimental arms, particularly for nab-paclitaxel. Paclitaxel once per week remains the preferred palliative chemotherapy in this setting., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Background: No single standard treatment exists for patients with small, node-negative, human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancers, because most of these patients have been ineligible for the pivotal trials of adjuvant trastuzumab., Methods: We performed an uncontrolled, single-group, multicenter, investigator-initiated study of adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab in 406 patients with tumors measuring up to 3 cm in greatest dimension. Patients received weekly treatment with paclitaxel and trastuzumab for 12 weeks, followed by 9 months of trastuzumab monotherapy. The primary end point was survival free from invasive disease., Results: The median follow-up period was 4.0 years. The 3-year rate of survival free from invasive disease was 98.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 97.6 to 99.8). Among the 12 relapses seen, 2 were due to distant metastatic breast cancer. Excluding contralateral HER2-negative breast cancers and nonbreast cancers, 7 disease-specific events were noted. A total of 13 patients (3.2%; 95% CI, 1.7 to 5.4) reported at least one episode of grade 3 neuropathy, and 2 had symptomatic congestive heart failure (0.5%; 95% CI, 0.1 to 1.8), both of whom had normalization of the left ventricular ejection fraction after discontinuation of trastuzumab. A total of 13 patients had significant asymptomatic declines in ejection fraction (3.2%; 95% CI, 1.7 to 5.4), as defined by the study, but 11 of these patients were able to resume trastuzumab therapy after a brief interruption., Conclusions: Among women with predominantly stage I HER2-positive breast cancer, treatment with adjuvant paclitaxel plus trastuzumab was associated with a risk of early recurrence of about 2%; 6% of patients withdrew from the study because of protocol-specified adverse events. (Funded by Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00542451.).

This phase I/II dose-escalation study investigated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of the pan-class I phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitor pilaralisib in combination with trastuzumab (Arm 1) or trastuzumab plus paclitaxel (Arm 2) in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Patients had progressed on prior trastuzumab (Arms 1 and 2) and received prior taxane (Arm 2). The MTD of pilaralisib was determined using a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design (starting dose 200 mg once daily). Forty-two patients were enrolled (21 in each arm). Five patients had a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT; three in Arm 1 and two in Arm 2). Dose-limiting toxicities were rash (three patients) and neutropenia (two patients). The MTD of pilaralisib was determined at 400 mg once daily in both arms. The most frequently reported treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (23.8 % in Arm 1 vs. 66.7 % in Arm 2), fatigue (14.3 vs. 42.9 %), and rash (33.3 vs. 38.1 %). The most frequently reported treatment-related grade ≥3 AEs were erythematous rash (9.5 %) in Arm 1 and diarrhea, peripheral neuropathy, and neutropenia (14.3 % each) in Arm 2. Steady-state pilaralisib exposure was similar to previous studies with pilaralisib monotherapy. No responses occurred in Arm 1; four of 20 evaluable patients (20 %) in Arm 2 had a partial response. Observed PIK3CA mutations in cell-free circulating DNA did not correlate with response. Pilaralisib in combination with trastuzumab with or without paclitaxel had an acceptable safety profile in metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer, with clinical activity in the paclitaxel arm.

Purpose: Optimal adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer balances efficacy and toxicity. We sought to determine whether single-agent paclitaxel (T) was inferior to doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC), when each was administered for four or six cycles of therapy, and whether it offered less toxicity., Patients and Methods: Patients with operable breast cancer with 0 to 3 positive nodes were enrolled onto the study to address the noninferiority of single-agent T to AC, defined as the one-sided 95% upper-bound CI (UCB) of hazard ratio (HR) of T versus AC less than 1.30 for the primary end point of relapse-free survival (RFS). As a 2 × 2 factorial design, duration of therapy was also addressed and was previously reported., Results: With 3,871 patients enrolled onto the trial, a median follow-up period of 6.1 years, and 437 RFS events, we achieved an HR of 1.26 (one sided 95% UCB, 1.48; favoring AC does not allow a conclusion of noninferiority of T with AC; UCB > 1.3). With 266 patient deaths, the HR for overall survival (OS) was 1.27 favoring AC (UCB, 1.56). The estimated absolute advantage of AC at 5 years is 3% for RFS (91 v 88%) and 1% for OS (95 v 94%). All nine treatment-related deaths were patients receiving AC and are included in the analyses of both RFS and OS. Hematologic toxicity was more common in patients treated with AC, and neuropathy was more common in patients treated with T., Conclusion: This trial did not show noninferiority of T to AC, a conclusion that is unlikely to change with additional events and follow-up. T was less toxic than AC., (© 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: We sought to show the relevance of a lymphoblastoid cell line (LCL) model in the discovery of clinically relevant genetic variants affecting chemotherapeutic response by comparing LCL genome-wide association study (GWAS) results to clinical GWAS results., Experimental Design: A GWAS of paclitaxel-induced cytotoxicity was conducted in 247 LCLs from the HapMap Project and compared with a GWAS of sensory peripheral neuropathy in patients with breast cancer (n = 855) treated with paclitaxel in the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 40101 trial. Significant enrichment was assessed by permutation resampling analysis., Results: We observed an enrichment of LCL cytotoxicity-associated single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in the sensory peripheral neuropathy-associated SNPs from the clinical trial with concordant allelic directions of effect (empirical P = 0.007). Of the 24 SNPs that overlap between the clinical trial (P < 0.05) and the preclinical cytotoxicity study (P < 0.001), 19 of them are expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL), which is a significant enrichment of this functional class (empirical P = 0.0447). One of these eQTLs is located in RFX2, which encodes a member of the DNA-binding regulatory factor X family. Decreased expression of this gene by siRNA resulted in increased sensitivity of Neuroscreen-1(NS-1; rat pheochromocytoma) cells to paclitaxel as measured by reduced neurite outgrowth and increased cytotoxicity, functionally validating the involvement of RFX2 in nerve cell response to paclitaxel., Conclusions: The enrichment results and functional example imply that cellular models of chemotherapeutic toxicity may capture components of the underlying polygenic architecture of related traits in patients., (©2012 AACR.)

Purpose: Sensory peripheral neuropathy is a common and sometimes debilitating toxicity associated with paclitaxel therapy. This study aims to identify genetic risk factors for the development of this toxicity., Experimental Design: A prospective pharmacogenetic analysis of patients with primary breast cancer, randomized to the paclitaxel arm of CALGB 40101, was used to identify genetic predictors of the onset and severity of sensory peripheral neuropathy. A genome-wide association study in 855 subjects of European ancestry was conducted and findings were replicated in additional European (n = 154) and African American (n = 117) subjects., Results: A single nucleotide polymorphism in FGD4 was associated with the onset of sensory peripheral neuropathy in the discovery cohort [rs10771973; HR, 1.57; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.30-1.91; P = 2.6 × 10(-6)] and in a European (HR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.06-2.80; P = 0.013) and African American (HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.13-3.28; P = 6.7 × 10(-3)) replication cohort. There is also evidence that markers in additional genes, including EPHA5 (rs7349683) and FZD3 (rs10771973), were associated with the onset or severity of paclitaxel-induced sensory peripheral neuropathy., Conclusions: A genome-wide association study has identified novel genetic markers of paclitaxel-induced sensory peripheral neuropathy, including a common polymorphism in FGD4, a congenital peripheral neuropathy gene. These findings suggest that genetic variation may contribute to variation in development of this toxicity. Validation of these findings may allow for the identification of patients at increased risk of peripheral neuropathy and inform the use of an alternative to paclitaxel and/or the clinical management of this toxicity., (©2012 AACR.)

Purpose: To assess the safety, tolerability, and clinical outcomes of an adjuvant chemotherapy regimen designed to incorporate a non-cross-resistant agent (paclitaxel, T) with a maximally dose-intensified regimen of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) in conjunction with hematopoietic growth factor support (recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor; G-CSF; Filgrastim). A secondary aim was to assess if a higher dose (10 mcg/kg/day) of G-CSF is more efficacious than the conventional dose (5 mcg/kg/day) in this setting., Patients and Methods: Female patients with early-stage, node-positive invasive breast cancer were eligible for this multicenter, cooperative group feasibility trial that was designed as the pilot study for a larger randomized clinical trial. The protocol treatment comprised five cycles of dose-intensified AC (75 and 2000 mg/m(2)/cycle, respectively, intravenously every three weeks) with G-CSF support, followed by an additional four cycles of T (175 mg/m(2) by 3h intravenous infusion, every three weeks). Patients were randomized to receive one of two dose levels of G-CSF (5 vs. 10 mcg/kg/day) during AC chemotherapy. Data on both short-term toxicity and long-term survival were collected., Results: One hundred and seventy two node-positive patients with operable primary breast cancer were accrued to this trial between February 1993 and April 1994. 130 of the 172 patients (76%) completed all protocol-specified therapy. Of the 42 early study withdrawals, 23 were due to unacceptable acute treatment-related toxicity. No differences in toxicities or clinical outcomes were noted between the two different dose levels of G-CSF support. At 6.8 years median follow-up, relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) rates for all patients are 70% and 78%, respectively. Ten patients developed second malignancies during follow-up, including three cases with a hematologic malignancy (2% incidence)., Conclusion: The delivery of dose-intensified AC followed by T was feasible in this large-scale pilot trial, although significant acute toxicities were commonly encountered. The data confirmed the acceptable tolerability of T after aggressive myelotoxic therapy in the adjuvant setting, leading to a larger randomized clinical trial comparing three dose levels of doxorubicin in AC with or without the addition of T (CALGB 9344). Supportive care using twice the conventional dose of G-CSF did not significantly improve the tolerability or change the toxicities of this regimen, and the occurrence of secondary malignancies is consistent with the emerging risk profile of dose-intensive regimens with growth factor support. With long-term follow-up, the clinical outcomes remain relatively favorable and correlate with such expected prognostic factors as the number of involved nodes and hormone receptor status.

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

Background: The status of human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2) in breast-cancer cells predicts clinical outcomes in women who receive adjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy. We hypothesized that HER2 positivity predicts a benefit from adjuvant doxorubicin doses above standard levels, from the addition of paclitaxel after adjuvant chemotherapy with doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide, or from both., Methods: We randomly selected 1500 women from 3121 women with node-positive breast cancer who had been randomly assigned to receive doxorubicin (60, 75, or 90 mg per square meter of body-surface area) plus cyclophosphamide (600 mg per square meter) for four cycles, followed by four cycles of paclitaxel (175 mg per square meter) or observation. Tissue blocks from 1322 of these 1500 women were available. Immunohistochemical analyses of these tissue specimens for HER2 with the CB11 monoclonal antibody against HER2 or with a polyclonal-antibody assay kit and fluorescence in situ hybridization for HER2 amplification were performed., Results: No interaction was observed between HER2 positivity and doxorubicin doses above 60 mg per square meter. HER2 positivity was, however, associated with a significant benefit from paclitaxel. The interaction between HER2 positivity and the addition of paclitaxel to the treatment was associated with a hazard ratio for recurrence of 0.59 (P=0.01). Patients with a HER2-positive breast cancer benefited from paclitaxel, regardless of estrogen-receptor status, but paclitaxel did not benefit patients with HER2-negative, estrogen-receptor-positive cancers., Conclusions: The expression or amplification, or both, of HER2 by a breast cancer is associated with a benefit from the addition of paclitaxel after adjuvant treatment with doxorubicin (<60 mg per square meter) plus cyclophosphamide in node-positive breast cancer, regardless of estrogen-receptor status. Patients with HER2-negative, estrogen-receptor-positive, node-positive breast cancer may gain little benefit from the administration of paclitaxel after adjuvant chemotherapy with doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide., (Copyright 2007 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: The optimal trastuzumab-based chemotherapy regimen for HER2-overexpressing, metastatic breast cancer is not known. The trastuzumab and vinorelbine or taxane (TRAVIOTA) study was a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial that was designed to compare these regimens., Methods: Eligible patients had HER2-overexpressing, metastatic breast cancer and had received no prior chemotherapy for advanced disease. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either trastuzumab with weekly vinorelbine therapy or weekly taxane therapy (paclitaxel or docetaxel at the investigator's choice). Originally planned for 250 patients, the study was closed because of poor accrual with 81 evaluable patients, including 41 patients who received vinorelbine and 40 patients who received taxane., Results: Response rates were 51% and 40% for the vinorelbine/trastuzumab arm and the taxane/trastuzumab arm, respectively (Fisher exact test; P = .37). The median time to disease progression was 8.5 months and 6.0 months for the vinorelbine- and taxane-based arms, respectively (log-rank test; P = .09). Treatment with either regimen generally was well tolerated, yielding comparable rates of neurologic and gastrointestinal toxicity. Vinorelbine-based treatment was associated with more anemia and neutropenia and with 2 episodes of cardiotoxicity. Taxane-based therapy was associated with more dermatologic toxicity, myalgias, and fluid retention., Conclusions: Both vinorelbine/trastuzumab and taxane/trastuzumab treatments were active as first-line therapy for HER2-positive, metastatic breast cancer and had comparable rates of efficacy and tolerability. The toxicities observed were the result of recognized side effects associated with each of the chemotherapy agents and schedules. These data can inform treatment decision making in this clinical setting.

Several reports have suggested that breast cancer patients with elevated serum levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6) have a worse prognosis than patients with lower levels. We have studied IL-6 in breast cancer cell lines and have shown that autocrine production of IL-6 can confer multi-drug resistance in vitro by inducing multidrug resistance gene-1 transcription with subsequent overexpression of P-glycoprotein (PGP). Both IL-6 and PGP expression can be measured in malignant cells using immunohistochemical (IHC) techniques. We hypothesized that patients whose tumors expressed higher amounts of IL-6 or PGP would be less likely to respond to paclitaxel, an agent affected by the PGP pathway. If so, then IL-6 could serve as a predictive factor for paclitaxel sensitivity. Both IL-6 and PGP expression were measured in patients treated in a randomized trial that compared three doses of single agent paclitaxel (175, 210, and 250 mg/m(2) over 3 h every 3 weeks) in 469 women with metastatic breast cancer (CALGB 9342). No difference in complete and partial response was found among the three treatment arms. Tissue blocks in this trial were analyzed for IL-6 (154 patients) and PGP (149 patients) in paraffin-embedded sections from tumor samples; clinical characteristics of these patients were similar to the total sample of 469 patients. There were no significant differences among IL-6 or PGP scores whether measured as continuous or dichotomous variables, or by other scoring, and response to paclitaxel. In multivariate analysis neither IL-6 nor PGP was a significant predictor of time to progression or overall survival. IHC expression of IL-6 and PGP levels in tumor cells is not a predictive marker for response to paclitaxel in women with metastatic breast cancer.

Purpose: To evaluate the safety and feasibility of concurrent radiation therapy and paclitaxel-based adjuvant chemotherapy, given either weekly or every 3 weeks, after adjuvant doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC)., Methods and Materials: After definitive breast surgery and AC chemotherapy, 40 patients with operable Stage II or III breast cancer received protocol-based treatment with concurrent paclitaxel and radiation therapy. Paclitaxel was evaluated on 2 schedules, with treatment given either weeklyx12 weeks (60 mg/m2), or every 3 weeksx4 cycles (135-175 mg/m2). Radiation fields and schedules were determined by the patient's surgery and pathology. The tolerability of concurrent therapy was evaluated in cohorts of 8 patients as a phase I study., Results: Weekly paclitaxel treatment at 60 mg/m2 per week with concurrent radiation led to dose-limiting toxicity in 4 of 16 patients (25%), including 3 who developed pneumonitis (either Grade 2 [1 patient] or Grade 3 [2 patients]) requiring steroids. Efforts to eliminate this toxicity in combination with weekly paclitaxel through treatment scheduling and CT-based radiotherapy simulation were not successful. By contrast, dose-limiting toxicity was not encountered among patients receiving concurrent radiation with paclitaxel given every 3 weeks at 135-175 mg/m2. However, Grade 2 radiation pneumonitis not requiring steroid therapy was seen in 2 of 24 patients (8%) treated in such a fashion. Excessive radiation dermatitis was not observed with either paclitaxel schedule., Conclusions: Concurrent treatment with weekly paclitaxel and radiation therapy is not feasible after adjuvant AC chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. Concurrent treatment using a less frequent paclitaxel dosing schedule may be possible, but caution is warranted in light of the apparent possibility of pulmonary injury.

Introduction: The response to paclitaxel varies widely in metastatic breast cancer. We analyzed data from CALGB 9342, which tested three doses of paclitaxel in women with advanced disease, to determine whether response and outcomes differed according to HER2, hormone receptor, and p53 status., Methods: Among 474 women randomly assigned to paclitaxel at a dose of 175, 210, or 250 mg/m2, adequate primary tumor tissue was available from 175. Immunohistochemistry with two antibodies and fluorescence in situ hybridization were performed to evaluate HER2 status; p53 status was determined by immunohistochemistry and sequencing. Hormone receptor status was obtained from pathology reports., Results: Objective response rate was not associated with HER2 or p53 status. There was a trend toward a shorter median time to treatment failure among women with HER2-positive tumors (2.3 versus 4.2 months; P = 0.067). HER2 status was not related to overall survival (OS). Hormone receptor expression was not associated with differences in response but was associated with longer OS (P = 0.003). In contrast, women with p53 over-expression had significantly shorter OS than those without p53 over-expression (11.5 versus 14.4 months; P = 0.002). In addition, triple negative tumors were more frequent in African-American than in Caucasian patients, and were associated with a significant reduction in OS (8.7 versus 12.9 months; P = 0.008)., Conclusion: None of the biomarkers was predictive of treatment response in women with metastatic breast cancer; however, survival differed according to hormone receptor and p53 status. Triple negative tumors were more frequent in African-American patients and were associated with a shorter survival.

Purpose: Cancer and Leukemia Group B Protocol 9342 was initiated to determine the optimal dose of paclitaxel administered as a 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks to women with metastatic breast cancer., Patients and Methods: Four hundred seventy-four women with metastatic breast cancer who had received one or no prior chemotherapy regimens were randomly assigned to one of three paclitaxel dosing regimens-175 mg/m(2), 210 mg/m(2), or 250 mg/m(2)-each administered as a 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks. Women completed self-administered quality of life and symptom assessment questionnaires at baseline and after three cycles of treatment., Results: No evidence of a significant dose-response relationship was demonstrated over the dose range assessed. Response rates were 23%, 26%, and 21% for the three regimens, respectively. A marginally significant association (P =.04) was seen between dose and time to progression; however, in a multivariate analysis, the difference was even less apparent. No statistically significant difference was seen in survival. Neurotoxicity and hematologic toxicity were more severe on the higher dose arms. There was no significant difference in quality of life on the three arms., Conclusion: Higher doses of paclitaxel administered as a 3-hour infusion to women with metastatic breast cancer did not improve response rate, survival, or quality of life. There was a slight improvement in time to progression with higher dose therapy, which was offset by greater toxicity. When a 3-hour infusion of paclitaxel is administered every 3 weeks, 175 mg/m(2) should be considered the optimal dose.

The past decade has seen many advances in the treatment of advanced breast cancer, including the development of both new chemotherapy drugs and novel targeted agents. Trastuzumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against the HER2/neu protein, has been shown to be an efficacious treatment for HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer, both as a single agent and when used in combination with chemotherapy. The US Food and Drug Administration has approved the use of trastuzumab and paclitaxel as first-line treatment of HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer, based on the results of a randomized phase III clinical trial showing that this combination produced higher response rates and longer survival duration than treatment with chemotherapy alone. Further trials are currently underway evaluating the use of trastuzumab in combination with other forms of chemotherapy, including vinorelbine, docetaxel, anthracyclines, and platinum agents. Hopefully, information from these trials will help resolve questions regarding the efficacy of various combinations and dosing schedules so that trastuzumab may be used most effectively in the treatment of HER2-overexpressing breast cancer in both the metastatic and the adjuvant settings., (Copyright 2002, Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.)

BackgroundUnderstanding the impact of the tumor immune microenvironment and BRCA1/2-related DNA repair deficiencies on the clinical activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors may help optimize both patient and treatment selection in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. In this substudy from the phase 3 IMpassion130 trial, immune biomarkers and BRCA1/2 alterations were evaluated for association with clinical benefit with atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel (A+nP) vs placebo and nP in unresectable (P+nP) locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.MethodsPatients were randomly assigned 1:1 to nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle) and atezolizumab 840 mg every 2 weeks or placebo until progression or toxicity. Progression-free survival and overall survival were evaluated based on programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression on immune cells (IC) and tumor cells, intratumoral CD8, stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, and BRCA1/2 mutations.ResultsPD-L1 IC+ in either primary or metastatic tumor tissue was linked to progression-free survival and overall survival benefit with A+nP. PD-L1 IC+ low (26.9%; 243 of 902 patients) and high (13.9%; 125 of 902 patients) populations had improved outcomes that were comparable. Intratumoral CD8 and stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes positivity (sTIL+) were associated with PD-L1 IC+ status; improved outcomes were observed with A+nP vs P+nP only in CD8+ and sTIL+ patients who were also PD-L1 IC+. BRCA1/2 mutations (occurring in 14.5% [89 of 612 patients]) were not associated with PD-L1 IC status, and PD-L1 IC+ patients benefited from A+nP regardless of BRCA1/2 mutation status.ConclusionsAlthough A+nP was more efficacious in patients with richer tumor immune microenvironment, clinical benefit was only observed in patients whose tumors were PD-L1 IC+.

Chemotherapy-related amenorrhea (CRA) is associated with infertility and menopausal symptoms. Learning how frequently paclitaxel and trastuzumab cause amenorrhea is important. Most other adjuvant breast cancer therapies induce CRA in approximately 50 % of all premenopausal recipients [1]. 410 patients enrolled on the APT Trial, a single-arm phase 2 adjuvant study of 12 weeks of paclitaxel and trastuzumab followed by nine months of trastuzumab monotherapy. Eligible patients had ≤3 cm node-negative HER2 + breast cancers. Premenopausal enrollees were asked to complete menstrual surveys every 3-12 months for 72 months. Women who responded to at least one survey at least 15 months after chemotherapy initiation (and who did not undergo hysterectomy and/or bilateral oophorectomy or receive ovarian suppressing medications prior to 15 months) were included in this analysis. A participant was defined as having amenorrhea in follow-up if her self-reported last menstrual period at last follow-up was greater than 12 months prior to the survey. Among the 64 women in the evaluable population (median age at study entry 44 years, range 27-52 years), the median time between chemotherapy initiation and last menstrual survey was 51 months (range 16-79). 18 of 64 women (28 %, 95 % CI 18-41 %) were amenorrheic at that time point. Amenorrhea rates among premenopausal women treated with adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab for early stage breast cancer appear lower than those seen historically with standard alkylator-based breast cancer regimens. Future studies are needed to understand the impact of this regimen on related issues of fertility and menopausal symptoms.

There is preclinical synergism between taxanes and MK-2206. We aim to determine the maximum tolerated dose, safety, and activity of combining MK-2206 and paclitaxel in metastatic cancer. Patients received weekly doses of paclitaxel at 80mg/m2 on day 1, followed by MK-2206 orally on day 2 escalated at 90mg, 135mg, and 200mg. Treatment continued until progression, excessive toxicity, or patient request. Blood and tissue were collected for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics markers. A cycle consisted of three weeks of therapy. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as unacceptable toxicity during the first cycle. All statistical tests were two-sided. Twenty-two patients were treated, nine in dose escalation and 13 in dose expansion. Median age was 55 years. Median number of cycles was four. Dose escalation was completed with no DLT. CTCAE Grade 3 or higher adverse events were fatigue (n = 2), rash (n = 2), hyperglycemia (n = 1), and neutropenia (n = 7). Four patients in the expansion phase required MK-2206 dose reduction. Phase II recommended dose was established as paclitaxel 80mg/m2 weekly on day 1, and MK-2206 135mg weekly on day 2. Paclitaxel systemic exposure was similar in the presence or absence of MK-2206. Plasma MK-2206 concentrations were similar to data from previous phase I monotherapy. There was a statistically significant decrease in expression of pAKT S473 (P = .01) and pAKT T308 (P = .002) after therapy. PI3K/AKT/mTOR downregulation in tumor tissues and circulating markers did not correlate with tumor response or clinical benefit. There were five objective responses, and nine patients had stable disease. MK-2206 was well tolerated with paclitaxel. Preliminary antitumor activity was documented.

Chemotherapy‐induced peripheral neuropathy (henceforth, neuropathy) is often dose limiting and is generally managed by empirical dose modifications. We aimed to (1) identify an early time point that is predictive of future neuropathy using a patient‐reported outcome and (2) propose a dose‐adjustment algorithm based on simulated data to manage neuropathy. In previous work, a dose‐neuropathy model was developed using dosing and patient‐reported outcome data from Cancer and Leukemia Group B 40502 (Alliance), a randomized phase III trial of paclitaxel, nanoparticle albumin–bound paclitaxel or ixabepilone as first‐line chemotherapy for locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. In the current work, an early time point that is predictive of the future severity of neuropathy was identified based on predictive accuracy of the model. Using the early data and model parameters, simulations were conducted to propose a dose‐adjustment algorithm for the prospective management of neuropathy in individual patients. The end of the first 3 cycles (12 weeks) was identified as the early time point based on a predictive accuracy of 75% for the neuropathy score after 6 cycles. For paclitaxel, nanoparticle albumin–bound paclitaxel, and ixabepilone, simulations with the proposed dose‐adjustment algorithm resulted in 61%, 48%, and 35% fewer patients, respectively, with neuropathy score ≥8 after 6 cycles compared to no dose adjustment. We conclude that early patient‐reported outcome data on neuropathy can be used to guide dose adjustments in individual patients that reduce the severity of future neuropathy. Prospective validation of this approach should be undertaken in future studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Published studies have suggested that most patients with early stage breast cancer are willing, for modest survival benefits, to receive 6 months of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil, an older regimen that is used infrequently today. We examined preferences regarding the survival benefit needed to justify 6 months of a contemporary chemotherapy regimen.Methods: The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Protocol 5103 was a phase 3 trial that randomized breast cancer patients to receive standard adjuvant doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel with either bevacizumab or placebo. Serial surveys to assess quality of life were administered to patients enrolled between January 1, 2010, and June 8, 2010. Survival benefit needed to justify 6 months of chemotherapy by patients was collected at the 18-month assessment. A parallel survey was sent to physicians who had enrolled patients in the study.Results: Of 519 patients who had not withdrawn at a time point earlier than 18 months, 87.8% responded to this survey. A total of 175 physicians participated. We found considerable variation in patient preferences, particularly for modest survival benefits: for 2 months of benefit, 57% would consider 6 months of chemotherapy, whereas 96% of patients would consider 6 months of chemotherapy for 24 months. Race and education were associated with the choices. Physicians who responded were less likely to accept chemotherapy for modest benefit.Conclusions: Among patients who received contemporary adjuvant chemotherapy in a randomized controlled trial, we found substantial variation in preferences regarding benefits that justified undergoing chemotherapy. Differences between patients' and physicians' choices were also apparent. Eliciting preferences regarding risks and benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy is critical. Cancer 2017;123:2821-28. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Obesity at diagnosis is associated with poor prognosis in women with breast cancer, but few reports have been adjusted for treatment factors.Methods: CALGB 9741 was a randomized trial of dose density and sequence of chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer. All patients received doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel, dosed by actual body weight. Height and weight at diagnosis were abstracted from patient records, and the PAM50 assay was performed from archived specimens using the NanoString platform. Relationships between body mass index (BMI), PAM50, and recurrence-free and overall survival (RFS and OS) were evaluated using proportional hazards regression, adjusting for number of involved nodes, estrogen receptor (ER) status, tumor size, menopausal status, drug sequence, and dose density. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: Baseline height and weight were available for 1909 of 2005 enrolled patients; 1272 additionally had subtype determination by PAM50. Median baseline BMI was 27.4kg/m(2). After 11 years of median follow-up, there were 619 RFS events and 543 deaths. Baseline BMI was a statistically significant predictor of RFS (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for each five-unit increase in BMI = 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02 to 1.14, P = .01) and OS (adjusted HR = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.14, P = .02) BMI and molecular phenotypes were independent prognostic factors for RFS, with no statistically significant interactions detected.Conclusions: BMI at diagnosis was a statistically significant prognostic factor in a group of patients receiving optimally dosed chemotherapy. Additional research is needed to determine the impact of weight loss on breast cancer outcomes and to evaluate whether this impact is maintained across tumor subtypes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is preclinical synergism between taxanes and MK-2206. We aim to determine the maximum tolerated dose, safety, and activity of combining MK-2206 and paclitaxel in metastatic cancer. Methods: Patients received weekly doses of paclitaxel at 80mg/m2 on day 1, followed by MK-2206 orally on day 2 escalated at 90mg, 135mg, and 200mg.Treatment continued until progression, excessive toxicity, or patient request. Blood and tissue were collected for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics markers. A cycle consisted of three weeks of therapy. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as unacceptable toxicity during the first cycle. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Twenty-two patients were treated, nine in dose escalation and 13 in dose expansion. Median age was 55 years. Median number of cycles was four. Dose escalation was completed with no DLT. CTCAE Grade 3 or higher adverse events were fatigue (n = 2), rash (n = 2), hyperglycemia (n = 1), and neutropenia (n = 7). Four patients in the expansion phase required MK-2206 dose reduction. Phase II recommended dose was established as paclitaxel 80mg/m2 weekly on day 1, and MK-2206 135 mg weekly on day 2. Paclitaxel systemic exposure was similar in the presence or absence of MK-2206. Plasma MK-2206 concentrations were similar to data from previous phase I monotherapy. There was a statistically significant decrease in expression of pAKT S473 (P = .01) and pAKT T308 (P = .002) after therapy. PI3K/AKT/mTOR downregulation in tumor tissues and circulating markers did not correlate with tumor response or clinical benefit. There were five objective responses, and nine patients had stable disease. Conclusion: MK-2206 was well tolerated with paclitaxel. Preliminary antitumor activity was documented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND The authors have previously reported 2 consecutive phase 2 trials in patients with early breast cancer that overexpresses human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 ( HER2) to assess the feasibility of incorporating anti-HER2 therapies into dose-dense (dd) chemotherapy regimens. The incidence of congestive heart failure (CHF) at a median follow-up of 2 years was 1.4% and 3.2%, respectively. METHODS In trial A, patients received dd doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC)→paclitaxel (T) (each given every 2 weeks) × 4 with trastuzumab (H) given × 1 year. In trial B, weekly T (weekly × 12) was substituted for ddT and lapatinib × 1 year was added. Herein, the authors report the longer-term incidence of CHF and distant disease-free survival (DDFS). RESULTS From January 2005 to May 2008, 165 patients enrolled (median age, 46 years, with a median left ventricular ejection fraction of 68% [range, 52%-81%]), 17%of whom had previous hypertension. With a median follow-up of 84 months (trial A) and 57 months (trial B), 1 additional patient developed CHF. Therefore, the cumulative incidence of CHF was 1.4% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.36%-7.7%) for trial A and 4.2% (95% CI, 4.2%-10.4%) for trial B. The 5-year DDFS for trials A and B was 92% (95% CI, 83%-97%) and 89% (95% CI, 81%-94%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Longer follow-up of these 2 studies has demonstrated that ddAC→TH only or with lapatinib is associated with a low risk of CHF and promising DDFS in patients with early breast cancer. Cancer 2013;119:3943-3951. © 2013 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peripheral neuropathy is a common dose-limiting toxicity for patients treated with paclitaxel. For most individuals there are no known risk factors that predispose patients to the adverse event, and pathogenesis for paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy is unknown. Determining whether there is a heritable component to paclitaxel induced peripheral neuropathy would be valuable in guiding clinical decisions and may provide insight into treatment of and mechanisms for the toxicity. Using genotype and patient information from the paclitaxel arm of CALGB 40101 (Alliance), a phase III clinical trial evaluating adjuvant therapies for breast cancer in women, we estimated the variance in maximum grade and dose at first instance of sensory peripheral neuropathy. Our results suggest that paclitaxel-induced neuropathy has a heritable component, driven in part by genes involved in axon outgrowth. Disruption of axon outgrowth may be one of the mechanisms by which paclitaxel treatment results in sensory peripheral neuropathy in susceptible patients.

Background: This phase Ib study (NCT00960960) evaluated pictilisib (GDC-0941; pan-phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor) plus paclitaxel, with and without bevacizumab or trastuzumab, or in combination with letrozole, in patients with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer.Methods: This was a three-part multischedule study. Patients in parts 1 and 2, which comprised 3 + 3 dose escalation and cohort expansion stages, received pictilisib (60-330 mg) plus paclitaxel (90 mg/m2) with and without bevacizumab (10 mg/kg) or trastuzumab (2-4 mg/kg). In part 3, patients received pictilisib (260 mg) plus letrozole (2.5 mg). Primary objectives were evaluation of safety and tolerability, identification of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of pictilisib, and recommendation of a phase II dosing regimen. Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetics and preliminary antitumor activity.Results: Sixty-nine patients were enrolled; all experienced at least one adverse event (AE). Grade ≥ 3 AEs, serious AEs, and AEs leading to death were reported in 50 (72.5%), 21 (30.4%), and 2 (2.9%) patients, respectively. Six (8.7%) patients reported a DLT, and the MTD and recommended phase II pictilisib doses were established where possible. There was no pictilisib-paclitaxel drug-drug interaction. Two (3.4%) patients experienced complete responses, and 17 (29.3%) patients had partial responses.Conclusions: Combining pictilisib with paclitaxel, with and without bevacizumab or trastuzumab, or letrozole, had a manageable safety profile in patients with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. The combination had antitumor activity, and the additive effect of pictilisib supported further investigation in a randomized study.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00960960 . Registered on August 13, 2009. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-directed therapy improves local control among women with HER2-positive breast cancer. This retrospective analysis evaluates the safety and efficacy of radiation therapy (RT) among patients receiving adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) or paclitaxel (T) plus trastuzumab (H) in the ATEMPT (Adjuvant Trastuzumab Emtansine Versus Paclitaxel in Combination With Trastuzumab) trial; Translational Breast Cancer Research Consortium (TBCRC) 033.Methods and Materials: Patients with stage I HER2-positive breast cancer were randomized 3:1 to receive adjuvant T-DM1 or TH after mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Breast RT was required after BCS and permitted after mastectomy. Patients receiving T-DM1 began RT after 12 weeks of therapy and received RT concurrently with T-DM1. Patients receiving TH began RT after paclitaxel, but concurrent with trastuzumab. RT records were retrospectively reviewed to determine details of radiation delivery and acute RT-related toxicity.Results: Protocol therapy was initiated by 497 patients. Among the 299 BCS patients, 289 received whole breast RT (WBRT) and 10 partial breast. Among WBRT patients, 40.2% in the T-DM1 arm and 41.5% of TH patients received hypofractionated (≥2.5 Gy/fraction) RT. Eight mastectomy patients received RT, all conventional fractionation. Skin toxicity (grade ≥2) was seen in 33.9% of patients in the T-DM1 arm and 23.2% in the TH arm (P = .11). In conventionally fractionated WBRT patients, 44.7% had a grade ≥2 skin toxicity compared with 17.9% of patients receiving hypofractionation (P < .001). Five patients experienced pneumonitis after RT (T-DM1: n = 4, 1.0%; TH: n = 1, 0.9%). Three-year invasive disease-free survival was 97.8% for T-DM1 (95% confidence interval, 96.3-99.3) and 93.4% for TH (95% confidence interval, 88.7-98.2). Among the 18 invasive disease-free survival events, 7 were isolated locoregional recurrences (2, T-DM1; 5, TH).Conclusions: RT was well-tolerated when given concurrently with either T-DM1 or TH. Among BCS patients, hypofractionation resulted in lower grade ≥2 acute skin toxicity even with concurrent anti-HER2 therapy. Although follow-up was short, local recurrences were uncommon, attesting to the efficacy of HER2-directed therapy combined with RT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Immunotherapy in combination with chemotherapy has shown promising efficacy across many different tumour types. We report the prespecified second interim overall survival analysis of the phase 3 IMpassion130 study assessing the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel in patients with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.Methods: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial, done in 246 academic centres and community oncology practices in 41 countries, patients aged 18 years or older, with previously untreated, histologically documented, locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a permuted block method (block size of four) and an interactive voice-web response system. Randomisation was stratified by previous taxane use, liver metastases, and PD-L1 expression on tumour-infiltrating immune cells. Patients received atezolizumab 840 mg or matching placebo intravenously on day 1 and day 15 of every 28-day cycle and nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 of body surface area intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Investigators, patients, and the funder were masked to treatment assignment. Coprimary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and overall survival, assessed in the intention-to-treat population and in patients with PD-L1 immune cell-positive tumours (tumours with ≥1% PD-L1 expression). The final progression-free survival results were previously reported at the first interim overall survival analysis. The prespecified statistical testing hierarchy meant that overall survival in the subgroup of PD-L1 immune cell-positive patients could only be formally tested if overall survival was significantly different between the treatment groups in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02425891.Findings: Between June 23, 2015, and May 24, 2017, 902 patients were enrolled, of whom 451 were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel and 451 were assigned to receive placebo plus nab-paclitaxel (the intention-to-treat population). Six patients from each group did not receive treatment. At the second interim analysis (data cutoff Jan 2, 2019), median follow-up was 18·5 months (IQR 9·6-22·8) in the atezolizumab group and 17·5 months (8·4-22·4) in the placebo group. Median overall survival in the intention-to-treat patients was 21·0 months (95% CI 19·0-22·6) with atezolizumab and 18·7 months (16·9-20·3) with placebo (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·86, 95% CI 0·72-1·02, p=0·078). In the exploratory overall survival analysis in patients with PD-L1 immune cell-positive tumours, median overall survival was 25·0 months (95% CI 19·6-30·7) with atezolizumab versus 18·0 months (13·6-20·1) with placebo (stratified HR 0·71, 0·54-0·94]). As of Sept 3, 2018 (the date up to which updated safety data were available), the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (38 [8%] of 453 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 36 [8%] of 437 patients in the placebo group), peripheral neuropathy (25 [6%] vs 12 [3%]), decreased neutrophil count (22 [5%] vs 16 [4%]), and fatigue (17 [4%] vs 15 [3%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in two (<1%) patients in the atezolizumab group (autoimmune hepatitis related to atezolizumab [n=1] and septic shock related to nab-paclitaxel [n=1]) and one (<1%) patient in the placebo group (hepatic failure). No new treatment-related deaths have been reported since the primary clinical data cutoff date (April 17, 2018).Interpretation: Consistent with the first interim analysis, this second interim overall survival analysis of IMpassion130 indicates no significant difference in overall survival between the treatment groups in the intention-to-treat population but suggests a clinically meaningful overall survival benefit with atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel in patients with PD-L1 immune cell-positive disease. However, this positive result could not be formally tested due to the prespecified statistical testing hierarchy. For patients with PD-L1 immune cell-positive metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel is an important therapeutic option in a disease with high unmet need.Funding: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]