Search

In monarchE, adjuvant abemaciclib significantly improved invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS), with sustained benefit beyond the 2-year treatment period. Abemaciclib dose reductions were allowed to proactively manage adverse events. Exploratory analyses to investigate the impact of dose reductions on efficacy were conducted. Across the three patient subgroups as defined by relative dose intensity (≤66%, 66-93%, ≥93%), the estimated 4-year IDFS rates were generally consistent (87.1%, 86.4%, and 83.7%, respectively). In the time-dependent Cox proportional hazard model, the effect of abemaciclib was consistent at the full dose compared to being reduced to a lower dose (IDFS hazard ratio: 0.905; 95% confidence interval: 0.727, 1.125; DRFS hazard ratio: 0.942; 95% confidence interval: 0.742, 1.195). These analyses showed that the efficacy of adjuvant abemaciclib was not compromised by protocol mandated dose reductions for patients with node positive, hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative, high-risk early breast cancer.

BackgroundFrom the perspective of health care professionals, coronavirus disease (COVID-19) brings many challenges as well as opportunities for digital health care. One challenge is that health care professionals are at high risk of infection themselves. Therefore, in-person visits need to be reduced to an absolute minimum. Connected care solutions, including telehealth, remote patient monitoring, and secure communications between clinicians and their patients, may rapidly become the first choice in such public health emergencies. ObjectiveThe aim of the COVID-19 Caregiver Cockpit (C19CC) was to implement a free-of-charge, web- and app-based tool for patient assessment to assist health care professionals working in the COVID-19 environment. MethodsPhysicians in Argentina, Germany, Iran, Italy, Portugal, Switzerland, and the United States explained their challenges with COVID-19 patient care through unstructured interviews. Based on the collected feedback, the first version of the C19CC was built. In the second round of interviews, the application was presented to physicians, and more feedback was obtained. ResultsPhysicians identified a number of different scenarios where telemedicine or connected care solutions could rapidly improve patient care. These scenarios included outpatient care, discharge management, remote tracking of patients with chronic diseases, as well as incorporating infected physicians under quarantine into telehealth services. ConclusionsThe C19CC is the result of an agile and iterative development process that complements the work of physicians. It aims to improve the care and safety of people who are infected by COVID-19.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned coprimary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical trial updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.PALOMA-2 demonstrated statistically and clinically significant improvement in progression-free survival with palbociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole in estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (ER+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). Here, we report results for the secondary end point overall survival (OS). Postmenopausal women (N = 666) with ER+/HER2- ABC without previous systemic therapy for ABC were randomly assigned 2:1 to palbociclib plus letrozole or placebo plus letrozole. After a median follow-up of 90.1 months, 405 deaths were observed and 155 patients were known to be alive. The median OS was 53.9 months (95% CI, 49.8 to 60.8) with palbociclib plus letrozole versus 51.2 months (95% CI, 43.7 to 58.9) with placebo plus letrozole (hazard ratio [HR], 0.96 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.18]; stratified one-sided P = .34). An imbalance in the number of patients with unknown survival outcome between the treatment arms (13.3% v 21.2%, respectively) limited interpretation of OS results. With recovered survival data, the median OS was 53.8 (95% CI, 49.8 to 59.2) versus 49.8 months (95% CI, 42.3 to 56.4), respectively (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.76 to 1.12]; one-sided P = .21). OS was not significantly improved with palbociclib plus letrozole compared with placebo plus letrozole.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical trial updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Two years of adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) resulted in a significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) that persisted beyond the 2-year treatment period in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer (EBC). Here, we report 5-year efficacy results from a prespecified overall survival (OS) interim analysis. In the intent-to-treat population, with a median follow-up of 54 months, the benefit of abemaciclib was sustained with hazard ratios of 0.680 (95% CI, 0.599 to 0.772) for IDFS and 0.675 (95% CI, 0.588 to 0.774) for DRFS. This persistence of abemaciclib benefit translated to continuous separation of the curves with a deepening in 5-year absolute improvement in IDFS and DRFS rates of 7.6% and 6.7%, respectively, compared with rates of 6% and 5.3% at 4 years and 4.8% and 4.1% at 3 years. With fewer deaths in the abemaciclib plus ET arm compared with the ET-alone arm (208 v 234), statistical significance was not reached for OS. No new safety signals were observed. In conclusion, abemaciclib plus ET continued to reduce the risk of developing invasive and distant disease recurrence beyond the completion of treatment. The increasing absolute improvement at 5 years is consistent with a carryover effect and further supports the use of abemaciclib in patients with high-risk EBC.

BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QOL) is a critical factor in decision-making for advanced breast cancer (ABC). There is a need to improve how QOL and treatment-related side effects (SEs) that impact it are clinically assessed. We examined healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients perspectives on the importance of QOL discussions and the impact of SEs on QOL in clinical settings. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted (7/2020-5/2021) among oncologists, nurses, and patients with HR+/HER2- ABC in 7 countries. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 502 HCPs and 467 patients. Overall, 88% of oncologists and 49% of patients recalled QOL discussions at follow-up. In the first- through fourth-line (1L, 2L, 3L, and 4L) settings, respectively, 48%, 57%, 79%, and 85% of oncologists reported QOL was very important; 73% and 45% of patients receiving 1L and 2L treatment and 40% receiving 3L+ treatment indicated QOL was important. Patients reported that insomnia, anxiety, back pain, fatigue, diarrhea, hot flashes, low sexual interest, and loss of appetite had a moderate/severe impact on QOL. Of patients experiencing certain SEs, ≥64% did not discuss them with HCPs until there was a moderate/severe impact on QOL. In patients receiving a CDK4/6 inhibitor, SEs, including insomnia, diarrhea, back pain, and fatigue, had a moderate/severe impact on QOL. CONCLUSIONS: This survey discovered disconnects between HCPs and patients with ABC on the importance of QOL discussions and the impact of SEs on QOL. These data support the use of ABC-specific QOL questionnaires that closely monitor SEs impacting QOL.

PURPOSE: The Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points (STEEP) criteria, established in 2007 and updated in 2021 (STEEP 2.0), provide standardized definitions of adjuvant breast cancer (BC) end points. STEEP 2.0 identified a need to separately address end points for neoadjuvant clinical trials. The multidisciplinary NeoSTEEP working group of experts was convened to critically evaluate and align neoadjuvant BC trial end points. METHODS: The NeoSTEEP working group concentrated on neoadjuvant systemic therapy end points in clinical trials with efficacy outcomes-both pathologic and time-to-event survival end points-particularly for registrational intent. Special considerations for subtypes and therapeutic approaches, imaging, nodal staging at surgery, bilateral and multifocal diseases, correlative tissue collection, and US Food and Drug Administration regulatory considerations were contemplated. RESULTS: The working group recommends a preferred definition of pathologic complete response (pCR) as the absence of residual invasive cancer in the complete resected breast specimen and all sampled regional lymph nodes (ypT0/Tis ypN0 per AJCC staging). Residual cancer burden should be a secondary end point to facilitate future assessment of its utility. Alternative end points are needed for hormone receptor-positive disease. Time-to-event survival end point definitions should pay particular attention to the measurement starting point. Trials should include end points originating at random assignment (event-free survival and overall survival) to capture presurgery progression and deaths as events. Secondary end points adapted from STEEP 2.0, which are defined from starting at curative-intent surgery, may also be appropriate. Specification and standardization of biopsy protocols, imaging, and pathologic nodal evaluation are also crucial. CONCLUSION: End points in addition to pCR should be selected on the basis of clinical and biologic aspects of the tumor and the therapeutic agent investigated. Consistent prespecified definitions and interventions are paramount for clinically meaningful trial results and cross-trial comparison.

PurposeTo conduct an updated exploratory analysis of overall survival (OS) with a longer median follow-up of 73.3 months and evaluate the prognostic value of molecular analysis by circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA).Patients and methodsPatients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) were randomized 2:1 to receive palbociclib (125 mg orally/day; 3/1 week schedule) and fulvestrant (500 mg intramuscularly) or placebo and fulvestrant. This OS analysis was performed when 75% of enrolled patients died (393 events in 521 randomized patients). ctDNA analysis was performed among patients who provided consent.ResultsAt the data cutoff (August 17, 2020), 258 and 135 deaths occurred in the palbociclib and placebo groups, respectively. The median OS [95% confidence interval (CI)] was 34.8 months (28.8-39.9) in the palbociclib group and 28.0 months (23.5-33.8) in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.65-0.99). The 6-year OS rate (95% CI) was 19.1% (14.9-23.7) and 12.9% (8.0-19.1) in the palbociclib and placebo groups, respectively. Favorable OS with palbociclib plus fulvestrant compared with placebo plus fulvestrant was observed in most subgroups, particularly in patients with endocrine-sensitive disease, no prior chemotherapy for ABC and low circulating tumor fraction and regardless of ESR1, PIK3CA, or TP53 mutation status. No new safety signals were identified.ConclusionsThe clinically meaningful improvement in OS associated with palbociclib plus fulvestrant was maintained with >6 years of follow-up in patients with HR+/HER2- ABC, supporting palbociclib plus fulvestrant as a standard of care in these patients.

PurposeRibociclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) demonstrated a statistically significant progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) benefit in the phase III MONALEESA-7 trial of pre-/perimenopausal patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive (HR+), HER2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). The median OS was not reached in the ribociclib arm in the protocol-specified final analysis; we hence performed an exploratory OS and additional outcomes analysis with an extended follow-up (median, 53.5 months).Patients and methodsPatients were randomized to receive ET [goserelin plus nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) or tamoxifen] with ribociclib or placebo. OS was evaluated with a stratified Cox proportional hazard model and summarized with Kaplan-Meier methods.ResultsThe intent-to-treat population included 672 patients. Median OS was 58.7 months with ribociclib versus 48.0 months with placebo [hazard ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.61-0.96]. Kaplan-Meier estimated OS at 48 months was 60% and 50% with ribociclib and placebo, respectively. Subgroup analyses were generally consistent with the OS benefit, including patients who received NSAI and patients aged less than 40 years. Subsequent antineoplastic therapies following discontinuation were balanced between the ribociclib (77%) and placebo (78%) groups. Use of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors after discontinuation was higher with placebo (26%) versus ribociclib (13%). Time to first chemotherapy was significantly delayed with ribociclib versus placebo. No drug-drug interactions were observed between ribociclib and either NSAI.ConclusionsRibociclib plus ET continued to show significantly longer OS than ET alone in pre-/perimenopausal patients, including patients aged less than 40 years, with HR+/HER2- ABC with 53.5 months of median follow-up (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02278120).

PurposeThis analysis evaluated the genomic landscape of premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer and the association of genetic alterations with response to ribociclib in the phase III MONALEESA-7 trial.MethodsPremenopausal patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive endocrine therapy plus ribociclib or placebo. Plasma collected at baseline was sequenced using targeted next-generation sequencing for approximately 600 relevant cancer genes. The association of circulating tumor DNA alterations with progression-free survival (PFS) was evaluated to identify biomarkers of response and resistance to ribociclib.ResultsBaseline circulating tumor DNA was sequenced in 565 patients; 489 had evidence of ≥ 1 alteration. The most frequent alterations included PIK3CA (28%), TP53 (19%), CCND1 (10%), MYC (8%), GATA3 (8%), receptor tyrosine kinases (17%), and the Chr8p11.23 locus (12%). A treatment benefit of ribociclib was seen with wild-type (hazard ratio [HR] 0.45 [95% CI, 0.33 to 0.62]) and altered (HR 0.57 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.9]) PIK3CA. Overall, patients with altered CCND1 had shorter PFS regardless of treatment, suggesting CCND1 as a potential prognostic biomarker. Benefit with ribociclib was seen in patients with altered (HR 0.21 [95% CI, 0.08 to 0.54]) or wild-type (HR 0.52 [95% CI, 0.39 to 0.68]) CCND1, but greater benefit was observed with altered, suggesting predictive potential of CCND1. Alterations in TP53, MYC, Chr8p11.23 locus, and receptor tyrosine kinases were associated with worse PFS, but ribociclib benefit was independent of alteration status.ConclusionIn this study-to our knowledge, the first large study of premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer-multiple genomic alterations were associated with poor outcome. A PFS benefit of ribociclib was observed regardless of gene alteration status, although in this exploratory analysis, a magnitude of benefits varied by alteration.

BackgroundThis analysis investigated whether baseline characteristics affect the survival benefit derived from palbociclib-fulvestrant and the optimal timing of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor therapy for advanced breast cancer (ABC) in patients from PALOMA-3.Patients and methodsIn total, 521 patients were randomized 2:1 to receive palbociclib (125 mg/day, 3/1 schedule)-fulvestrant (500 mg, intramuscular injection, on days 1 and 15 of cycle 1, and then day 1 of each subsequent cycle) or matching placebo-fulvestrant. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.ResultsMultivariable analysis identified endocrine sensitivity, nonvisceral disease, no prior chemotherapy for ABC, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0 as significant prognostic factors for OS. Patients without chemotherapy for ABC had fewer prior lines of treatment in any setting and in the ABC setting versus patients with prior chemotherapy for ABC (two or fewer prior systemic therapies: 69% vs. 42%; no more than one prior line for ABC: 82% vs. 33%, respectively). Median OS was prolonged with palbociclib-fulvestrant in patients without prior chemotherapy for ABC (39.7 vs. 29.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56-1.01) and was similar in patients with prior chemotherapy for ABC (25.6 vs. 26.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.91 [95% CI: 0.63-1.32]) versus placebo-fulvestrant.ConclusionPrognostic factors for OS included endocrine sensitivity, nonvisceral disease, ECOG PS of 0, and no prior chemotherapy for ABC. Exploratory analyses suggest improved OS with palbociclib-fulvestrant versus placebo-fulvestrant in patients with no prior chemotherapy for ABC, prior endocrine sensitivity, and fewer prior regimens of systemic therapy. (Clinical trial identification number: NCT01942135).Implications for practicePrognostic factors for overall survival in HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) include the absence of prior chemotherapy in the advanced setting, endocrine sensitivity, nonvisceral disease, and an ECOG performance status of 0. Improved overall survival benefit was observed with palbociclib-fulvestrant versus placebo-fulvestrant in patients (regardless of menopausal status or visceral involvement) with no prior chemotherapy for ABC, with prior endocrine sensitivity, and fewer prior regimens of systemic therapy. Progression-free survival was prolonged with palbociclib across subgroups (regardless of chemotherapy exposure in ABC). These exploratory findings suggest that patients may receive greater clinical benefit from palbociclib-fulvestrant if they receive the combination before chemotherapy in the advanced setting.

BackgroundCOVID-19 appeared in late 2019, causing a pandemic spread. This led to a reorganisation of oncology care in order to reduce the risk of spreading infection between patients and healthcare staff. Here we analysed measures taken in major oncological units in Europe and the USA.MethodsA 46-item survey was sent by email to representatives of 30 oncological centres in 12 of the most affected countries. The survey inquired about preventive measures established to reduce virus spread, patient education and processes employed for risk reduction in each oncological unit.ResultsInvestigators from 21 centres in 10 countries answered the survey between 10 April and 6 May 2020. A triage for patients with cancer before hospital or clinic visits was conducted by 90.5% of centres before consultations, 95.2% before day care admissions and in 100% of the cases before overnight hospitalisation by means of phone calls, interactive online platforms, swab test and/or chest CT scan. Permission for caregivers to attend clinic visits was limited in many centres, with some exceptions (ie, for non-autonomous patients, in the case of a new diagnosis, when bad news was expected and for terminally ill patients). With a variable delay period, the use of personal protective equipment was unanimously mandatory, and in many centres, only targeted clinical and instrumental examinations were performed. Telemedicine was implemented in 76.2% of the centres. Separated pathways for COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative patients were organised, with separate inpatient units and day care areas. Self-isolation was required for COVID-19-positive or symptomatic staff, while return to work policies required a negative swab test in 76.2% of the centres.ConclusionMany pragmatic measures have been quickly implemented to deal with the health emergency linked to COVID-19, although the relative efficacy of each intervention should be further analysed in large observational studies.

BackgroundPALOMA-2 confirmed that first-line palbociclib + letrozole improved progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.72) in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). This analysis evaluated palbociclib-associated hematologic adverse events (AEs) and provides insight on managing these AEs.Materials and methodsPostmenopausal women with ER+/HER2- ABC were randomly assigned 2:1 to letrozole (2.5 mg daily continuously) plus oral palbociclib (125 mg daily; 3 weeks on/1 week off) or placebo. Safety assessments were performed at baseline, days 1 and 15 (first two cycles) and day 1 of subsequent cycles, and included white blood cell, platelet, and absolute neutrophil count (ANC).ResultsPALOMA-2 randomized 666 women to palbociclib + letrozole (n = 444) or placebo + letrozole (n = 222). Neutropenia was the most common AE (95.3%) with palbociclib (grade 3, 55.6%; grade 4, 11.5%) and was managed by dose modifications; progression-free survival was similar between patients who experienced grade ≥ 3 neutropenia versus those who did not. Median (range) time to onset of neutropenia with palbociclib + letrozole was 15 (12-700) days (grade ≥ 3, 28.0 [12-854] days); median duration of each neutropenia episode grade ≥ 3 was 7.0 days. Asian ethnicity and low baseline ANC were associated with increased risk of grade 3/4 neutropenia with palbociclib (p < .001).ConclusionPalbociclib + letrozole was generally well tolerated. Neutropenia, the most frequently reported AE in women with ER+/HER2- ABC, was mostly transient and manageable by dose modifications in patients who experienced grade ≥ 3 neutropenia, without appearing to compromise efficacy. (Pfizer; NCT01740427) IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Palbociclib demonstrated an acceptable safety profile in PALOMA-2 in women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) receiving first-line palbociclib + letrozole. Although hematologic adverse events (AEs) are typically expected with anticancer therapies and are often clinically significant, palbociclib-related hematologic AEs, particularly neutropenia (most frequent AE), were transient/manageable by dose reduction, interruption, or cycle delay, which is in contrast to the more profound neutropenia associated with chemotherapy. Palbociclib dose adjustments decreased hematologic AE severity without appearing to compromise efficacy, supporting palbociclib + letrozole as a first-line treatment for ER+/HER2- ABC.