Search

Introduction The combination of a CDK4/6 inhibitor with an aromatase inhibitor (AI) has recently become the gold standard for AI-sensitive first line treatment of oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+) HER2-negative (HER2−) advanced breast cancer. However, most patients receiving this combination will ultimately progress and require further therapies.Several studies have demonstrated that the onset of a ESR1 gene mutation lead to AIs resistance in the advanced setting. ESR1 mutations can be detected in circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) using a digital PCR assay. Our study aims to prove the clinical efficacy of periodic monitoring for emerging or rise of ESR1 mutations in ctDNA to trigger an early change from AI plus palbociclib to fulvestrant plus palbociclib treatment while assessing global safety.Methods PADA-1 is a randomised, open-label, multicentric, phase III trial conducted in patients receiving AI and palbociclib as first line therapy for metastatic ER +HER2- breast cancer. 1000 patients will be included and treated with palbociclib in combination with an AI. Patients will be screened for circulating blood ESR1 mutation detection at regular intervals. Patients for whom a rising circulating ESR1 mutation is detected without tumour progression (up to N=200) will be randomised (1:1) between (1) Arm A: no modification of therapy; and (2) Arm B: palbociclib in combination with fulvestrant, a selective ER down-regulator. At tumour progression, an optional crossover will be offered to patients randomised in arm A. The coprimary endpoints are (1) Grade ≥3 haematological toxicities and their associations with baseline characteristics and (2) progression-free survival in randomised patients.Ethics and dissemination The study has been approved by the French medicines agency (ANSM) and by an ethics committee (ref 01/17_1 CPP Ouest-IV Nantes) in January 2017. The trial results will be published in academic conference presentations and international peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numbers EudraCT: 2016-004360-18; NCT03079011.

Objectives: The study was undertaken to assess the association between certification and volume of breast centres on the one hand and survival on the other in patients with invasive breast cancer (IBC)., Methods: The study comprises a cohort of 46,035 patients diagnosed with IBC between 2014 and 2018, selected from the nation-wide Belgian Cancer Registry (BCR) database, which was linked with health insurance, hospital discharge and vital status data. Overall and relative survival probabilities were obtained with Kaplan-Meier method and an actuarial approach based on Ederer II, respectively. The associations between centre certification/volume and relative survival were assessed using Poisson models, adjusted for potential confounders., Results: Five years after the diagnosis of IBC, the observed and relative survival probabilities for the cohort were 83.4 % (95 %CI: [83.1, 83.8]) and 93.3 % (95 %CI: [92.9, 93.7]), respectively. After adjustment for age and combined tumour stage, the risk to die from BC was 44 % higher (EHR: 1.44, 95 %CI: [1.24, 1.66]) for patients treated in a low-volume centre and 30 % higher (EHR: 1.30, 95 %CI: [1.14, 1.48]) for patients treated in a medium-volume centre, compared to high-volume centres. Likewise, the risk to die from BC was 30 % higher (EHR: 1.30, 95 %CI: [1.15, 1.48], p < 0.001) for patients treated in a non-certified centre (representing 23.8 % of the cohort), compared to patients treated in a coordinating breast clinic., Conclusion: This population-based study reveals that BC survival is higher when patients are treated in certified and high-volume breast clinics., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Circadian rhythms regulate cellular physiology and could influence the efficacy of endocrine therapy (ET) in breast cancer (BC). We prospectively tested this hypothesis within the UNIRAD adjuvant phase III trial (NCT01805271)., Methods: 1278 patients with high-risk hormonal receptor positive (HR+)/HER2 negative (HER2-) primary BC were randomly assigned to adjuvant ET with placebo or everolimus. Patients prospectively reported in a diary the daily timing of ET intake among four 6-h slots (06:00-11:59 (morning), 12:00-17:59 (afternoon), 18:00-23:59 (evening), or 24:00-05:59 (nighttime). The association between ET timing and disease-free survival (DFS) was a prespecified secondary endpoint of the trial and the results of this observational study are reported here., Findings: ET timing was recorded by 855 patients (67.2%). Patients declaring morning (n = 465, 54.4%) or afternoon (n = 45, 5.4%) ET intake were older than those declaring evening (n = 339, 39.6%) or nighttime (n = 5, 0.6%) intake. With a median follow-up of 46.7 months, 118 patients had a local (n = 30) or metastasis relapse (n = 84), and 41 patients died. ET intake timing was not associated with DFS in the whole population (HR = 0.77, 95% CI [0.53-1.12]). The association between ET intake timing and DFS according to the stratification factors revealed interactions with ET agent (tamoxifen versus Aromatase inhibitors (AI) with an increased DFS in the group of evening/nighttime versus morning/afternoon tamoxifen intake (HR = 0.43, 95% CI [0.22-0.85]), while no association was found for AI intake (HR = 1.07, 95% CI [0.68-1.69]). The interaction between ET intake timing and ET agent remained in multivariable analysis (HR = 0.38 [0.16-0.91])., Interpretation: Tamoxifen intake in the evening/nighttime could be recommended in patients with high-risk HR+/HER2- BC while awaiting for results from further ET timing studies., Funding: UNIRAD was Supported by a grant from the French Ministry of Health PHRC 2012 and received funding from La Ligue contre le Cancer, Cancer Research-UK, Myriad Genetics, and Novartis., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests The authors declared no competing interest with this study. Dr Giacchetti declared travel expenses from MSD and Novartis to SABCS 2022 meeting and ASCO 2023 meeting where these data were presented (SABCS 2022 Abstract 1,305,036; ASCO 2023 Abstract 412,092)., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of the multigene EndoPredict test in prospectively collected data of patients screened for the randomized, double-blind, phase III UNIRAD trial, which evaluated the addition of everolimus to adjuvant endocrine therapy in high-risk, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative early breast cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients were classified into low or high risk according to the EPclin score, consisting of a 12-gene molecular score combined with tumor size and nodal status. Association of the EPclin score with disease-free survival (DFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier estimates. The independent prognostic added value of EPclin score was tested in a multivariate Cox model after adjusting on tumor characteristics., Results: EndoPredict test results were available for 768 patients: 663 patients classified as EPclin high risk (EPCH) and 105 patients as EPclin low risk (EPCL). Median follow-up was 70 months (range 1-172 months). For the 429 EPCH randomized patients, there was no significant difference in DFS between treatment arms. The 60-month relapse rate for patients in the EPCL and EPCH groups was 0% and 7%, respectively. Hazard ratio (HR) supposing continuous EPclin score was 1.87 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4-2.5, P < 0.0001]. This prognostic effect remained significant when assessed in a Cox model adjusting on tumor size, number of positive nodes and tumor grade (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.09-2.13, P = 0.0141). The 60-month DMFS for patients in the EPCL and EPCH groups was 100% and 94%, respectively (adjusted HR 8.10, 95% CI 1.1-59.1, P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: The results confirm the value of EPclin score as an independent prognostic parameter in node-positive, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer patients receiving standard adjuvant treatment. EPclin score can be used to identify patients at higher risk of recurrence who may warrant additional systemic treatments., Competing Interests: Disclosure FPL: advisor for AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Genomic Health, GILEAD, GSK, Lilly, Menarini/Stemline, MSD, Myriad, Nanostring, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre-Fabre, Roche; funding: MSD, Myriad, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo; travel/expenses: AstraZeneca, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer. FD: advisor for Daichi, Seagen, Novartis, Gilead, Lilly, MSD; travel/expenses: Daichi, Novartis, Pfizer. PC: advisor for Pfizer, Lilly; travel/expenses: Roche, Pfizer, Lilly, Novartis, Sanofi, BMS. JG: advisor for Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead, Pfizer; travel/expenses: Eisai Europe. MC: advisor for Novartis, Sandoz, Accord, Sanofi, Lilly, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo; consulting fees: Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, Novartis, Servier, Daiichi Sankyo; travel//expenses: Novartis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche. ACHB: advisor for Novartis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, Clovis Onco, Seattle Genetics, Eisai, Daiichi Sankyo/Astra Zeneca, MSD. SG: advisor for Eisai, Lilly; funding: Merck, AstraZeneca; travel/expenses: Lilly. PB: advisor for Ipsen, BMS, MSD, Pfizer, Merck KGaA, Astellas, Novartis, Gilead, Bayer; travel/expenses: BMS, Pfizer, Janssen-Cilag, Astellas, MSD, Ipsen, Merck. AM: advisor for Pfizer; travel/expenses: AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, Lilly. MS: travel/expenses: Eisai Europe. MLT: consulting fees: Myriad Genetics. JB: funding: AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Puma Biotech, Pfizer, Roche, Lilly, Janssen-Cilag, Clovis Onco; travel/expenses: Pfizer. FA: stock and other ownership interests: PEGASCY; funding: AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pfizer, Lilly, Roche, Daiichi; travel/expenses: Novartis, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca. TB: advisor for Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, MSD; funding: Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Seattle Genetics, Pfizer; travel/expenses: Roche, Pfizer, AstraZeneca. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tucatinib and trastuzumab in patients with previously treated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) metastatic biliary tract cancer (mBTC)., Methods: SGNTUC-019 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04579380) is an open-label phase II basket study evaluating the efficacy and safety of tucatinib and trastuzumab in patients with HER2-altered solid tumors. In the biliary tract cancer cohort, patients had previously treated HER2 overexpressing or amplified (HER2+) tumors (identified with local testing) with no prior HER2-directed therapy. The primary end point was confirmed objective response rate (cORR) per investigator assessment. Patients were treated on a 21-day cycle with tucatinib (300 mg orally twice daily) and trastuzumab (8 mg/kg intravenously followed by 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks)., Results: Thirty patients were enrolled. As of data cutoff (January 30, 2023), the median duration of follow-up was 10.8 months. The cORR was 46.7% (90% CI, 30.8 to 63.0), with a disease control rate of 76.7% (90% CI, 60.6 to 88.5). The median duration of response and progression-free survival were 6.0 months (90% CI, 5.5 to 6.9) and 5.5 months (90% CI, 3.9 to 8.1), respectively. At data cutoff, 15 patients (50.0%) had died, and the estimated 12-month overall survival rate was 53.6% (90% CI, 36.8 to 67.8). The two most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were pyrexia (43.3%) and diarrhea (40.0%). Grade ≥3 TEAEs were reported in 18 patients (60.0%), with the most common being cholangitis, decreased appetite, and nausea (all 10.0%), which were generally not treatment related. TEAEs led to treatment regimen discontinuation in one patient, and there were no deaths due to TEAEs., Conclusion: Tucatinib combined with trastuzumab had clinically significant antitumor activity and was well tolerated in patients with previously treated HER2+ mBTC.

Background: The Belgian Precision initiative aims to maximize the implementation of tumor-agnostic next-generation sequencing in patients with advanced cancer and enhance access to molecularly guided treatment options. Academic tumor-agnostic basket phase II studies are part of this initiative. The current investigator-driven trial aimed to investigate the efficacy of olaparib in advanced cancers with a (likely) pathogenic mutation (germline or somatic) in a gene that plays a role in homologous recombination (HR)., Patients and Methods: This open-label, multi-cohort, phase II study examines the efficacy of olaparib in patients with an HR gene mutation in their tumor and disease progression on standard of care. Patients with a somatic or germline mutation in the same gene define a cohort. For each cohort, a Simon minimax two-stage design was used. If a response was observed in the first 13 patients, 14 additional patients were included. Here, we report the results on four completed cohorts: patients with a BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 or ATM mutation., Results: The overall objective response rate across different tumor types was 11% in the BRCA1-mutated (n = 27) and 21% in the BRCA2-mutated (n = 27) cohorts. Partial responses were seen in pancreatic cancer, gallbladder cancer, endocrine carcinoma of the pancreas and parathyroid cancer. One patient with a BRCA2 germline-mutated colon cancer has an ongoing complete response with 19+ months on treatment. Median progression-free survival in responding patients was 14+ months (5-34+ months). The clinical benefit rate was 63% in the BRCA1-mutated and 46% in the BRCA2-mutated cohorts. No clinical activity was observed in the ATM (n = 13) and CHEK2 (n = 14) cohorts., Conclusion: Olaparib showed efficacy in different cancer types harboring somatic or germline mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes but not in ATM and CHEK2. Patients with any cancer type harboring BRCA1/2 mutations should have access to olaparib., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Chemo-immunotherapy is the first-line standard of care for patients with PD-L1 positive metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). SYNERGY (NCT03616886) is a dose-finding phase I and a randomized phase II, open-label trial evaluating if targeting the immunosuppressive adenosine pathway can enhance the antitumor activity of chemo-immunotherapy. The phase I part included 6 patients with untreated locally-advanced or mTNBC to determine the safety and recommended phase II dose of the anti-CD73 antibody oleclumab in combination with the anti-PD-L1 durvalumab and 12 cycles of weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel. In the phase II part, 127 women were randomized 1:1 to receive chemo-immunotherapy, with (arm A) or without (arm B) oleclumab. The primary endpoint was the clinical benefit rate at week 24, defined as stable disease, partial or complete response per RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate, duration of response, survival outcomes (progression-free survival and overall survival), and safety. The trial did not meet its primary endpoint, as the 24-week clinical benefit rate was not significantly improved by adding oleclumab (43% vs. 44%, p = 0.61). Exploratory median progression-free survival was 5.9 months in arm A as compared to 7.0 months in arm B (p = 0.90). The safety profile was manageable in both arms., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Purpose: We aimed to determine the pattern of isolated local recurrences (ILR) in women with stage II-III hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 breast cancer (HR + /HER2-BC) after 10-year follow-up., Methods: UNICANCER-PACS 01 and PACS 04 trials included 5,008 women with T1-T3 and N1-N3 to evaluate the efficacy of different anthracycline ± taxanes-containing regimens after modified mastectomy or lumpectomy plus axillary lymph node dissection. We analyzed the data from 2,932 women with HR + /HER2- BC to evaluate the cumulative incidence of ILR and describe the factors associated with ILR., Results: After a median follow-up of 9.1 years (95% CI 9.0-9.2 years), the cumulative incidence of ILR increased steadily between 1 and 10 years from 0.2% to 2.5%. The multivariable analysis showed that older age (subhazard ratios [sHR] = 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.99) and mastectomy (sHR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.86) were associated with lower risk of ILR, and no adjuvant endocrine therapy (sHR = 2.73, 95% CI 1.32 7-5.67) with increased risk of ILR., Conclusion: In this population of high-risk patients with localized HR + /HER2- BC, the risk of ILR was low but remained constant over 10 years. Younger age at diagnosis, breast-conserving surgery, and adjuvant endocrine therapy were independent risk factors of ILR., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: Everolimus, an oral inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin, improves progression-free survival in combination with endocrine therapy (ET) in postmenopausal women with aromatase inhibitor-resistant metastatic breast cancer. However, the benefit of adding everolimus to ET in the adjuvant setting in early breast cancer is unknown., Patients and Methods: In this randomized double-blind phase III study, women with high-risk, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative primary breast cancer were randomly assigned to everolimus or placebo for 2 years combined with standard ET. Stratification factors included ET agent, receipt of neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy, progesterone receptor status, duration of ET before random assignment, and lymph node involvement. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT01805271)., Results: Between June 2013 and March 2020, 1,278 patients were randomly allocated to receive everolimus or placebo. At the first interim analysis, the trial was stopped for futility and a full analysis undertaken once data snapshot complete. One hundred forty-seven patients have had a DFS event reported and at 3 years, DFS did not differ between patients who received ET plus everolimus (88% [95% CI, 85 to 91]) or ET plus placebo (89% [95% CI, 86 to 91; hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.32; P = .77]). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events were reported in 22.9% of patients (29.9% with everolimus v 15.9% with placebo, P < .001). 53.4% everolimus-treated patients permanently discontinued experimental treatment early compared with placebo-treated 22.3%., Conclusion: Among high-risk patients, everolimus added to adjuvant ET did not improve DFS. Tolerability was a concern, with more than half of patients stopping everolimus before study completion. Everolimus cannot be recommended in the adjuvant setting.

Background: In advanced oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, acquired resistance to aromatase inhibitors frequently stems from ESR1-mutated subclones, which might be sensitive to fulvestrant. The PADA-1 trial aimed to show the efficacy of an early change in therapy on the basis of a rising ESR1 mutation in blood (bESR1 mut ), while assessing the global safety of combination fulvestrant and palbociclib., Methods: We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial in 83 hospitals in France. Women aged at least 18 years with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were recruited and monitored for rising bESR1 mut during first-line aromatase inhibitor (2·5 mg letrozole, 1 mg anastrozole, or 25 mg exemestane, orally once per day, taken continuously) and palbociclib (125 mg orally once per day on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle) therapy. Patients with newly present or increased bESR1 mut in circulating tumour DNA and no synchronous disease progression were randomly assigned (1:1) to continue with the same therapy or to switch to fulvestrant (500 mg intramuscularly on day 1 of each 28-day cycle and on day 15 of cycle 1) and palbociclib (dosing unchanged). The randomisation sequence was generated within an interactive web response system using a minimisation method (with an 80% random factor); patients were stratified according to visceral involvement (present or absent) and the time from inclusion to bESR1 mut detection (<12 months or ≥12 months). The co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival from random assignment, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all randomly assigned patients), and grade 3 or worse haematological adverse events in all patients. The trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03079011), and is now complete., Findings: From March 22, 2017, to Jan 31, 2019, 1017 patients were included, of whom 279 (27%) developed a rising bESR1 mut and 172 (17%) were randomly assigned to treatment: 88 to switching to fulvestrant and palbociclib and 84 patients to continuing aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib. At database lock on July 31, 2021, randomly assigned patients had a median follow-up of 35·3 months (IQR 29·2-41·4) from inclusion and 26·0 months (13·8-34·3) from random assignment. Median progression-free survival from random assignment was 11·9 months (95% CI 9·1-13·6) in the fulvestrant and palbociclib group versus 5·7 months (3·9-7·5) in the aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib group (stratified HR 0·61, 0·43-0·86; p=0·0040). The most frequent grade 3 or worse haematological adverse events were neutropenia (715 [70·3%] of 1017 patients), lymphopenia (66 [6·5%]), and thrombocytopenia (20 [2·0%]). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in step 2 were neutropenia (35 [41·7%] of 84 patients in the aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib group vs 39 [44·3%] of 88 patients in the fulvestrant and palbociclib group) and lymphopenia (three [3·6%] vs four [4·5%]). 31 (3·1%) patients had grade 3 or worse serious adverse events related to treatment in the overall population. Three (1·7%) of 172 patients randomly assigned had one serious adverse event in step 2: one (1·2%) grade 4 neutropenia and one (1·2%) grade 3 fatigue among 84 patients in the aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib group, and one (1·1%) grade 4 neutropenia among 88 patients in the fulvestrant and palbociclib group. One death by pulmonary embolism in step 1 was declared as being treatment related., Interpretation: PADA-1 is the first prospective randomised trial showing that the early therapeutic targeting of bESR1 mut results in significant clinical benefit. Additionally, the original design explored in PADA-1 might help with tackling acquired resistance with new drugs in future trials., Funding: Pfizer., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests F-CB reports, outside the submitted work, grants or contracts from Novartis, Lilly, Amgen, Sanofi, Radius, Seagen, AstraZeneca, General Electric, Menarini/Stemline, Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Merck, Pfizer, Prolynx, Rain Therapeutics, and Roche; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Exact Sciences, General Electric, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Menarini/Stemline, Novartis, Pfizer, Rain Therapeutics, and Sanofi; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AstraZeneca, Lilly, Menarini/Stemline, Pfizer, Rain Therapeutics, and Sanofi; support for attending meetings or travel from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, and Roche; and applied for an international patent (application number PCT/EP2019/056445), filed on March 14, 2019, named: method for identifying one or more mutations in a hotspot mutation sequence. A-CH-B reports, outside the submitted work, consulting fees from AstraZeneca and Merck Sharpe & Dohme; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from MSD, AstraZeneca, Daiichi, GSK, Seagen, and Gilead; support for attending meetings or travel from Novartis, Pfizer, and Daiichi; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for MSD, AstraZeneca, Daiichi, Pfizer, Novartis, GSK, Seagen, Gilead, and Eisai. TB reports, outside the submitted work, grants or contracts from Roche, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and SeaGen; and consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Daiichi, Lilly, SeaGen, Roche, Novartis, and Pfizer. J-YP reports, outside the submitted work, grants or contracts from Servier and Menarini; consulting fees from Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, and MSD; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead, MSD, Seagen, Novartis, Lilly, Pierre Fabre, and Amgen; support for attending meetings or travel from Roche and AstraZeneca; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Sanofi and Novartis. TdlMR reports, outside the submitted work, grants or contracts from Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, MSD, Roche, Pfizer, and Seagen; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Eisai, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Tesaro, GSK, and Seagen; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from GSK. RS reports, outside the submitted work, grants or contracts from AstraZeneca; consulting fees from GSK; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Novartis, GSK, Clovis, and AstraZeneca; and support for attending meetings or travel from Pfizer, Roche, GSK, and Bristol Myers Squibb. J-SF reports, outside the submitted work, consulting fees from Pfizer, Lilly, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, GSK, Gilead, Daiichi Sankyo, and Seagen; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Lilly, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Gilead, Daiichi Sankyo, and Seagen; and support for attending meetings or travel from Pfizer, Lilly, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, GSK, Gilead, Daiichi Sankyo, and Seagen. SL reports, outside the submitted work, grants or contracts from Novartis, Eisai, and BMS; consulting fees from Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Astellas, Janssen, Ipsen, Roche, BMS, Daiichi, Seagen, and Pierre Fabre; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Astellas, Janssen, Ipsen, Roche, BMS, Daiichi, Seagen, and Pierre Fabre; payment for expert testimony from Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Astellas, Janssen, Ipsen, Roche, BMS, Daiichi, and Seagen; support for attending meetings or travel from Pfizer, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Janssen, BMS, Daiichi, and Seagen; and receipt of equipment, materials, drugs, medical writing, gifts, or other services from BMS. CL reports, outside the submitted work, consulting fees from MSD, Daiichi, Roche, and AstraZeneca; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Lilly; support for attending meetings or travel from Roche, Pfizer, Sandoz, Lilly, and AstraZeneca; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Roche, AstraZeneca, and Lilly. AL reports, outside the submitted work, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AstraZeneca, MSD, and Clovis; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AstraZeneca, MSD, and Clovis; and leadership or fiduciary role in other board for GINECO group. JG reports, outside the submitted work, support for attending meetings or travel from Lilly and Daiichi; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Daiichi and Pfizer. HV reports, outside the submitted work, grants or contracts from Eisai, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Daiichi, and Pfizer; and support for attending meetings or travel from Eisai, GSK, MSD, and Novartis. CG-T reports, outside the submitted work, grants or contracts from Pfizer; consulting fees from Pfizer; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Astrazeneca, Pfizer and Novartis; and support for attending meetings or travel from MSD, Mylan, and Pfizer. BP reports, outside the submitted work, consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Myriad, Pierre Fabre, and Pfizer; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Daiichi Sankyo, Novartis, and Puma; support for attending meetings or travel from AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, and MSD; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Daiichi Sankyo. FA reports, outside the submitted work, reports grants or contracts from Roche, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, Novartis, and Lilly; and consulting fees from Gilead, Guardant Health, MedImmune, and Relay Therapeutics. LA reports, outside the submitted work, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Roche, MSD, AstraZeneca, and BMS; and support for attending meetings or travel from Roche. JL reports a Pfizer grant to his institution for carrying out this study. SD reports, outside the submitted work, grants or contracts from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, Roche Genentech, Lilly, Puma, Myriad, Orion, Amgen, Sanofi, MSD, BMS, Seagen, and Taiho; consulting fees from Isis/Servier, Cellectis, Pierre Fabre, and General Electric; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Seagen, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Exact Sciences, Daiichi, and Lilly; support for attending meetings or travel from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Roche Genentech; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Orion, and Rappta. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

PRECISION is an initiative from the Belgian Society of Medical Oncology (BSMO) in collaboration with several stakeholders, encompassing four programs that aim to boost genomic and clinical knowledge with the ultimate goal to offer patients with metastatic solid tumors molecularly guided treatments. The PRECISION 1 study has led to the creation of a clinico-genomic database. The Belgian Approach for Local Laboratory Extensive Tumor Testing (BALLETT) and GeNeo studies will increase the number of patients with advanced cancer that have comprehensive genotyping of their cancer. The PRECISION 2 project consists of investigator-initiated phase II studies aiming to provide access to a targeted drug for patients whose tumors harbor actionable mutations in case the matched drug is not available through reimbursement or clinical trials in Belgium., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is the most common histologic subtype of breast cancer after invasive ductal carcinoma (i.e., no special type [NST]). ILC differs from NST in clinical presentation, site-specific metastases and response to conventional therapies. Loss of E-cadherin protein expression, due to alterations in its encoding gene CDH1, is the most frequent oncogenic event in ILC. Synthetic lethality approaches have shown promising antitumor effects of ROS1 inhibitors in models of E-cadherin-defective breast cancer in in vivo studies and provide the rationale for testing their clinical activity in patients with ILC. Entrectinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting TRK, ROS1 and ALK tyrosine kinases. Here, the authors present ROSALINE (NCT04551495), a phase II study testing neoadjuvant entrectinib and endocrine therapy in women with estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative early ILC.

The clinical actionability of circulating tumor DNA requires sensitive detection methods with a short turnaround time. In the PADA-1 phase 3 trial (NCT03079011), metastatic breast cancer patients treated with an aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib were screened every 2 months for activating ESR1 mutations in blood ( bESR1 mut ). We report the feasibility of the droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) and cross-validation with next-generation sequencing (NGS). bESR1 mut testing was centralized in two platforms using the same ddPCR assay. Results were reported as copies/mL of plasma and mutant allele frequency (MAF). We analyzed 200 positive ddPCR samples with an NGS assay (0.5-1% sensitivity). Overall, 12,552 blood samples were collected from 1017 patients from 83 centers. Among the 12,525 available samples with ddPCR results, 11,533 (92%) were bESR1 mut -negative. A total of 267 patients newly displayed bESR1 mut (26% patients/2% samples) with a median copy number of 14/mL (range: 4-1225) and a median MAF of 0.83% (0.11-35), 648 samples (20% patients/5% samples) displayed persistent bESR1 mut , and 77 (<1%) samples encountered a technical failure. The median turnaround time from blood drawing to result notification was 13 days (Q1:9; Q3:21 days). Among 200 ddPCR-positive samples tested, NGS detected bESR1 mut in 168 (84%); 25 of the 32 cases missed by NGS had low MAF and/or low coverage. In these 200 samples, bESR1 mut MAF by both techniques had an excellent intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC = 0.93; 95% CI [0.85; 0.97]). These results from a large-scale trial support the feasibility and accuracy of real-time bESR1 mut tracking by ddPCR, opening new opportunities for therapeutic interventions.

Introduction: The combination of a CDK4/6 inhibitor with an aromatase inhibitor (AI) has recently become the gold standard for AI-sensitive first line treatment of oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+) HER2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer. However, most patients receiving this combination will ultimately progress and require further therapies.Several studies have demonstrated that the onset of a ESR1 gene mutation lead to AIs resistance in the advanced setting. ESR1 mutations can be detected in circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) using a digital PCR assay. Our study aims to prove the clinical efficacy of periodic monitoring for emerging or rise of ESR1 mutations in ctDNA to trigger an early change from AI plus palbociclib to fulvestrant plus palbociclib treatment while assessing global safety., Methods: PADA-1 is a randomised, open-label, multicentric, phase III trial conducted in patients receiving AI and palbociclib as first line therapy for metastatic ER +HER2- breast cancer. 1000 patients will be included and treated with palbociclib in combination with an AI. Patients will be screened for circulating blood ESR1 mutation detection at regular intervals. Patients for whom a rising circulating ESR1 mutation is detected without tumour progression (up to N=200) will be randomised (1:1) between (1) Arm A: no modification of therapy; and (2) Arm B: palbociclib in combination with fulvestrant, a selective ER down-regulator. At tumour progression, an optional crossover will be offered to patients randomised in arm A. The coprimary endpoints are (1) Grade ≥3 haematological toxicities and their associations with baseline characteristics and (2) progression-free survival in randomised patients., Ethics and Dissemination: The study has been approved by the French medicines agency (ANSM) and by an ethics committee (ref 01/17&#95;1 CPP Ouest-IV Nantes) in January 2017. The trial results will be published in academic conference presentations and international peer-reviewed journals., Trial Registration Numbers: EudraCT: 2016-004360-18; NCT03079011., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SD: reports grants and non-financial support from Pfizer, grants from Novartis, grants and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, grants and non-financial support from Roche Genentech, grants from Lilly, grants from Puma, grants from Myriad, grants from Orion, grants from Amgen, grants from Sanofi, grants from Genomic Health, grants from GE, grants from Servier, grants from MSD, grants from BMS, grants from Pierre Fabre, outside the submitted work. A-CH-B: reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Daiichi, personal fees from Clovis, personal fees from GSK, personal fees from MSD, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Roche outside the submitted work. TB: reports personal fees and non-financial support from Roche, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Novartis, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Pfizer, personal fees from Seagen, outside the submitted work. TDLMR: reports grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Pfizer, grants and non-financial support from Novartis, personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, personal fees and non-financial support from Roche Genentech, grants and non-financial support from MSD, personal fees and non-financial support from TESARO-GSK, personal fees from CLOVIS ONCOLOGY, personal fees from MYLAN, outside the submitted work. FA: reports grants from Roche, grants from AstraZeneca, grants from Daiichi Sankyo, grants from Pfizer, grants from Novartis, grants from Lilly, outside the submitted work. LA: report personal fees from Roche, personal fees from MSD, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees fromBMS, outside the submitted work. FC: reports grants from AstraZeneca, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Roche, personal fees from Lilly, personal fees and non-financial support from Merck Serono, personal fees and non-financial support from BMS, outside the submitted work. F-CB: reports grants from PFIZER, during the conduct of the study; grants, personal fees and non-financial support from PFIZER, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from NOVARTIS, personal fees from LILLY, personal fees and non-financial support from ROCHE, personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, personal fees from AMGEN, personal fees from SANOFI, personal fees from Radius, grants and personal fees from Seagen, granst from Prolynx outside the submitted work; In addition, F-CB has a patent ctDNA detection by ddPCR pending., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) is indicated as second-line treatment for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic or unresectable locally advanced breast cancer, after progression on trastuzumab and a taxane-based chemotherapy. We wished to determine if the line of treatment in which T-DM1 is administered has an impact on progression-free survival (PFS) and in particular, if prior treatment with capecitabine/lapatinib or pertuzumab modifies PFS of further treatment with T-DM1., Patients and Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective study in 3 Belgian institutions. We evaluated PFS with T-DM1 in patients treated for HER2 positive metastatic or locally advanced unresectable breast cancer between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2016., Results: We included 51 patients. The median PFS was 9.01 months. The line of treatment in which T-DM1 (1st line, 2nd line, 3rd line or 4+ lines) was administered had no influence on PFS (hazard ratio 0.979, CI95: 0.835-1.143). There was no significant difference in PFS whether or not patients had received prior treatment with capecitabine/lapatinib (9.17 vs 5.56 months, p-value 0.875). But, patients who received pertuzumab before T-DM1 tended to exhibit a shorter PFS (3.55 months for T-DM1 after pertuzumab vs 9.50 months for T-DM1 without pretreatment with pertuzumab), even if this difference was not statistically significant (p-value 0.144)., Conclusion: Unlike with conventional chemotherapy, the line of treatment in which T-DM1 is administered does not influence PFS in our cohort of patients with advanced HER2-positive breast cancer., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Monalizumab is a monoclonal antibody targeting the inhibitory natural killer group 2A (NKG2A) receptor localised on natural killer (NK) and T cells. Its ligand, the human leukocyte antigen E (HLA-E), is overexpressed in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). By targeting the HLA-E-NKG2A pathway, monalizumab may enhance NK and T cell activity., Experimental Design: The UPSTREAM trial is a biomarker-driven umbrella trial studying targeted therapies and immunotherapies in patients with recurrent/metastatic (R/M) SCCHN progressing after platinum therapy. The immunotherapy 1 (I1) cohort was a phase II, single-arm substudy evaluating monalizumab (10 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 of a 14-day cycle). The primary end-point was the objective response (OR) rate (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours 1.1) over the first 16 weeks. A two-stage Simon design was used (H1 15%, H0 3%, α 8%, power 90%) with pre-planned interruption of accrual if no OR was observed after the first 25 patients., Results: Twenty-six eligible patients were enrolled. Seventeen (65%) patients had received ≥2 previous lines of systemic treatment, and 15 (58%) patients were PD(-L)1 inhibitor pretreated. No OR was observed. Stable disease was observed in 6 patients (23%) with a median duration of 3.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.7-NE). The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 1.7 months (95% CI: 1.5-1.8) and 6.7 months (95% CI: 3.0-9.6), respectively. The most frequent treatment-related adverse event was grade I/II fatigue (19%)., Conclusions: Monalizumab monotherapy has limited activity in R/M SCCHN. The I1 cohort did not meet its primary objective. Monalizumab combined with durvalumab is under investigation within UPSTREAM., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: R.G. declares a role in an advisory board without compensation for Innate Pharma and travelling compensation from Amgen and Astellas. E.S-B. has received consulting fees for advisory boards and travelling from BMS and MSD. A.D. has received consulting fees or honorarium from MSD, BMS and Merck and accommodation and travelling expenses for meetings from BMS, Merck and AstraZeneca. C.E. has received consulting fees for advisory boards for BMS, MSD, Innate Pharma and Merck Serono. S.H. declares a consulting or advisory role for AstraZeneca, Merck, Novartis, MSD Oncology, BMS and Sanofi and travelling expenses for meetings from Roche and MSD Oncology. A.K. received fees for consulting, advisory, speaker's roles and/or research funding from PUMA BioTechnology, AstraZeneca, Merck, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Avvinity Therapeutics. J-P.M. declares a role as an advisory board member or speaker with honoraria (managed by his institution) in Pfizer, Roche, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Innate, Merck Serono, Boehringer, BMS, Novartis, Janssen, Incyte, Cue Biopharma, ALX Oncology, iTEOS and eTheRNA; travel expenses from Amgen, BMS, Pfizer and MSD; a role in the data safety monitoring board with honoraria in PsiOxus and an uncompensated advisory role in MSD. The other authors declare no potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: This open-label, multicenter, phase IB/II study evaluated sapanisertib, a dual inhibitor of mTOR kinase complexes 1/2, plus exemestane or fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR + )/HER2-negative (HER2 - ) advanced/metastatic breast cancer., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had previously progressed on everolimus with exemestane/fulvestrant and received ≤3 (phase IB) or ≤1 (phase II) prior chemotherapy regimens. Patients received sapanisertib 3 to 5 mg every day (phase IB), or 4 mg every day (phase II) with exemestane 25 mg every day or fulvestrant 500 mg monthly in 28-day cycles. Phase II enrolled parallel cohorts based on prior response to everolimus. The primary objective of phase II was to evaluate antitumor activity by clinical benefit rate at 16 weeks (CBR-16)., Results: Overall, 118 patients enrolled in phase IB ( n = 24) and II ( n = 94). Five patients in phase IB experienced dose-limiting toxicities, at sapanisertib doses of 5 mg every day ( n = 4) and 4 mg every day ( n = 1); sapanisertib 4 mg every day was the MTD in combination with exemestane or fulvestrant. In phase II, in everolimus-sensitive versus everolimus-resistant cohorts, CBR-16 was 45% versus 23%, and overall response rate was 8% versus 2%, respectively. The most common adverse events were nausea (52%), fatigue (47%), diarrhea (37%), and hyperglycemia (33%); rash occurred in 17% of patients. Molecular analysis suggested positive association between AKT1 mutation status and best treatment response (complete + partial response; P = 0.0262)., Conclusions: Sapanisertib plus exemestane or fulvestrant was well tolerated and exhibited clinical benefit in postmenopausal women with pretreated everolimus-sensitive or everolimus-resistant breast cancer., (©2021 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Treatment of patients with cancer in hospitals or clinics is resource-intensive and imposes a burden on patients. 'Flexible care' is a term that can be used to describe treatment administered outside the oncology ward, oncological outpatient clinic or office-based oncologist setting. Programmes that reduce travel burden by bringing cancer treatment to the patient's home, workplace or closer to the patient's home, in the form of satellite clinics or mobile cancer units, expand treatment capacity and are well received. Clinical trial data show that, compared with intravenous administration, subcutaneous (s.c.) administration of trastuzumab is preferred by patients with breast cancer (BC), saves healthcare professionals' (HCPs) time, reduces drug preparation and administration time and reduces direct and indirect costs. As such, s.c. trastuzumab is well suited to flexible care. The results of a Belgian study (BELIS) show that home administration of s.c. trastuzumab is feasible and preferred by patients with BC. Numerous programmes and pilot studies in Europe show that s.c. trastuzumab can be administered effectively in the patient's home, in primary care settings or local hospitals. Such programmes require planning, training, careful patient selection and technology to link patients, caregivers and specialists in oncology clinics. Once these elements are in place, flexible care offers patients with BC a choice of how treatment may be delivered and lead to improved quality of life, while reducing pressure on HCPs and hospitals. The concept of flexible care is particularly relevant amid the COVID-19 pandemic where guidelines have been developed encouraging remote care., Competing Interests: Disclosure All authors received support for third-party writing assistance for this manuscript from F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland. AW reports commercial contract research from G1 Therapeutics, Inc., during the conduct of the study; personal fees and contract research from Roche; personal fees, a joint working agreement and contract research from Novartis, personal fees, a joint working agreement and contract research from Pfizer; personal fees and contract research from Daiichi Sankyo; contract research from Seattle Genetics; personal fees and contract research from Eli Lilly; personal fees and travel assistance from MSD; personal fees from Athenex; personal fees and contract research from AstraZeneca; personal fees from Andrew Wardley Limited; is a director of the Manchester Cancer Academy; is a director of Outreach Research & Innovation Group Limited; has received personal fees from Gerson Lehman Group, Guidepoint Global, Coleman Expert Network, Helios, and Healthcare America, outside the submitted work; and is Medical Director of NIHR Manchester Clinical Research Facility at The Christie Hospital, Chair of the NCRI Breast Research Group, Strategy Director for Association of Cancer Physicians, a committee member of the UK Breast Cancer Group and is a committee member of the NHS England Chemotherapy Clinical Reference Group. J-LC reports acting as a consultant or advisor for Pfizer, Roche, Eli Lilly, Daiichi and Novartis; receiving research grants from Amgen and Roche; receiving reimbursement for travel and accommodation expenses from Pfizer and Roche; and acting as a member of a speaker's bureau for Roche. LE reports no other conflicts of interest. CPM reports employment by, and stocks in, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. TBC reports employment by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and is a patent holder for PHESGO. JF reports employment by, and stocks in, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. MP reports grants and personal fees from F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd/Genentech (honoraria), Inc., outside the submitted work., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Multigene panels are routinely used to assess for predisposing germline mutations in families at high breast cancer risk. The number of variants of unknown significance thereby identified increases with the number of sequenced genes. We aimed to determine whether tumor sequencing can help refine the analysis of germline variants based on second somatic genetic events in the same gene., Methods: Whole-exome sequencing (WES) was performed on whole blood DNA from 70 unrelated breast cancer patients referred for genetic testing and without a BRCA1, BRCA2, TP53, or CHEK2 mutation. Rare variants were retained in a list of 735 genes. WES was performed on matched tumor DNA to identify somatic second hits (copy number alterations (CNAs) or mutations) in the same genes. Distinct methods (among which immunohistochemistry, mutational signatures, homologous recombination deficiency, and tumor mutation burden analyses) were used to further study the role of the variants in tumor development, as appropriate., Results: Sixty-eight patients (97%) carried at least one germline variant (4.7 ± 2.0 variants per patient). Of the 329 variants, 55 (17%) presented a second hit in paired tumor tissue. Of these, 53 were CNAs, resulting in tumor enrichment (28 variants) or depletion (25 variants) of the germline variant. Eleven patients received variant disclosure, with clinical measures for five of them. Seven variants in breast cancer-predisposing genes were considered not implicated in oncogenesis. One patient presented significant tumor enrichment of a germline variant in the oncogene ERBB2, in vitro expression of which caused downstream signaling pathway activation., Conclusion: Tumor sequencing is a powerful approach to refine variant interpretation in cancer-predisposing genes in high-risk breast cancer patients. In this series, the strategy provided clinically relevant information for 11 out of 70 patients (16%), adapted to the considered gene and the familial clinical phenotype.

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a heterogeneous group of breast cancer and is characterized by aggressiveness and poor prognosis. MicroRNA represents a new class of biomarkers, and accumulating evidence indicates that microRNAs contribute to tumorigenesis and cancer metastasis. It has been described that miR-210 is highly expressed in TNBC, and its overexpression had been linked to poor prognosis. In a previous work, we showed that in TNBC miR-210 is expressed in tumor cells and also in the tumor microenvironment (TME), particularly in inflammatory CD45-LCA positive cells. However, the exact identity of these cells remained unknown. In this study, we performed in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry using validated antibodies for the different specific immune cell markers on adjacent sections of 23 TNBC infiltrated with immune cells. We found that miR-210 expressing cells in the TME were stained positive with CD79a, a B-cell lineage marker. These tumor-infiltrating cells were negative for CD20 and Ki-67 but positive for MUM1 and CD38 and also expressed immunoglobulins, indicating that they are immunoglobulin-producing plasma cells (PCs). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study demonstrating miR-210 expression in tumor-infiltrating PCs.

Purpose: Hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) early breast cancer (BC) is the most prevalent BC subtype with substantial biological heterogeneity. Although clinicopathological (CP) characteristics have a clear prognostic value, additional biomarkers could refine survival prediction and guide treatment decision., Methods: Copy number aberrations and somatic driver mutations were obtained with OncoScan CGH array and sequencing of 36 genes on HR+/HER2- node-positive early BC patients treated with chemotherapy from the PACS04 trial. We built a two-gene genomic score (GS) associated with distant disease-free survival (DDFS), whose prognostic value was assessed on the external METABRIC data (n = 1413) using overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS)., Results: In the PACS04 trial (n = 327), the median follow-up for DDFS (65 events) was 9.6 years. FGFR1 amplifications ([Formula: see text] = 2.44, 95% CI [1.25; 4.76], p = 0.009) and MAP3K1 mutations ([Formula: see text] = 0.10, [0.01; 0.78], p = 0.03) were associated with DDFS beyond CP characteristics. A prognostic GS combining FGFR1 amplifications and MAP3K1 mutations added more information to CP model ([Formula: see text] = 12.97, [Formula: see text] < 0.001 and [Formula: see text] = 11.52, [Formula: see text] < 0.001). In the METABRIC study (n = 1413), FGFR1 amplifications ([Formula: see text] = 2.00 [1.40; 2.87], p < 0.001) and MAP3K1 mutations ([Formula: see text] = 0.58 [0.41; 0.83], p = 0.003) were significantly associated with BCSS beyond CP characteristics. The prognostic GS added significant prognostic information to CP model ([Formula: see text] = 15.39, [Formula: see text] < 0.001 and [Formula: see text] = 5.62, [Formula: see text] = 0.02)., Conclusion: In axillary node-positive, HR+, and HER2- early BC, amplifications of FGFR1 gene were strongly associated with increased risk for distant disease, while mutations of MAP3K1 gene were significantly associated with decreased risk.

Purpose: We conducted a double-randomised phase III trial to evaluate a concomitant taxane-anthracycline regimen in node-positive breast cancer and the efficacy of trastuzumab in the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive subpopulation., Methods: A total of 3010 patients with node-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive 6 cycles of 500 mg/m 2 of fluorouracil, 100 mg/m 2 of epirubicin and 500 mg/m 2 of cyclophosphamide (FEC) or 75 mg/m 2 of epirubicin and 75 mg/m 2 of docetaxel (ED). Patients with HER2-positive tumours were secondary randomly assigned to either trastuzumab or observation. The primary end-point was disease-free survival (DFS) in the two chemotherapy arms., Results: After a 115-month median follow-up, DFS was not significantly better in the ED arm (DFS: 70%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 67-72) than in the FEC arm (DFS: 68%, 95% CI: 65-70; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.77-1.01; p = 0.064). The OS was not different between FEC (OS: 80%, 95% CI: 78-83) and ED (OS: 81%, 95% CI: 79-83); HR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.81-1.16; p = 0.729). ED appeared more toxic. In the 528 HER2-positive subset, there was trend for a higher DFS, in the intention-to-treat population, in the trastuzumab arm (DFS: 68%, 95% CI: 61-74) than in the observation arm (DFS: 60%, 95% CI: 54-66; HR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.57-1.03; p = 0.079). In the per-protocol population, DFS was significantly higher in the trastuzumab arm (DFS: 70%, 95% CI: 63-76) than in the observation arm (DFS: 59%, 95% CI: 53-65; HR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.51-0.94; p = 0.0156). The OS was not different between these 2 arms., Conclusion: This study did not show superiority of the concomitant anthracycline-taxane arm which was more toxic in high-risk node-positive breast cancer patients. Long-term results of the HER2-positive subpopulation are in line with those of the other adjuvant trastuzumab trials but quantitatively less pronounced mostly because of lack of power., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Chimeric antigen receptor-T cells (CAR-Ts) are an exciting new cancer treatment modality exemplified by the recent regulatory approval of two CD19-targeted CAR-T therapies for certain B cell malignancies. However, this success in the hematological setting has yet to translate to a significant level of objective clinical responses in the solid tumor setting. The reason for this lack of translation undoubtedly lies in the substantial challenges raised by solid tumors to all therapies, including CAR-T, that differ from B cell malignancies. For instance, intravenously infused CAR-Ts are likely to make rapid contact with cancerous B cells since both tend to reside in the same vascular compartments within the body. By contrast, solid cancers tend to form discrete tumor masses with an immune-suppressive tumor microenvironment composed of tumor cells and non-tumor stromal cells served by abnormal vasculature that restricts lymphocyte infiltration and suppresses immune function, expansion, and persistence. Moreover, the paucity of uniquely and homogeneously expressed tumor antigens and inherent plasticity of cancer cells provide major challenges to the specificity, potency, and overall effectiveness of CAR-T therapies. This review focuses on the major preclinical and clinical strategies currently being pursued to tackle these challenges in order to drive the success of CAR-T therapy against solid tumors.

Background: Heterogeneity and lack of targeted therapies represent the two main impediments to precision treatment of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), and therefore, molecular subtyping and identification of therapeutic pathways are required to optimize medical care. The aim of the present study was to define robust TNBC subtypes with clinical relevance., Methods: Gene expression profiling by means of DNA chips was conducted in an internal TNBC cohort composed of 238 patients. In addition, external data (n = 257), obtained by using the same DNA chip, were used for validation. Fuzzy clustering was followed by functional annotation of the clusters. Immunohistochemistry was used to confirm transcriptomics results: CD138 and CD20 were used to test for plasma cell and B lymphocyte infiltrations, respectively; MECA79 and CD31 for tertiary lymphoid structures; and UCHL1/PGP9.5 and S100 for neurogenesis., Results: We identified three molecular clusters within TNBC: one molecular apocrine (C1) and two basal-like-enriched (C2 and C3). C2 presented pro-tumorigenic immune response (immune suppressive), high neurogenesis (nerve infiltration), and high biological aggressiveness. In contrast, C3 exhibited adaptive immune response associated with complete B cell differentiation that occurs in tertiary lymphoid structures, and immune checkpoint upregulation. External cohort subtyping by means of the same approach proved the robustness of these results. Furthermore, plasma cell and B lymphocyte infiltrates, tertiary lymphoid structures, and neurogenesis were validated at the protein levels by means of histological evaluation and immunohistochemistry., Conclusion: Our work showed that TNBC can be subcategorized in three different subtypes characterized by marked biological features, some of which could be targeted by specific therapies.

Background: Palbociclib is a CDK4/6 inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy and safety in combination with endocrine therapy in advanced luminal breast cancer (LBC). We evaluated the respective efficacy and safety of chemotherapy and letrozole-palbociclib (LETPAL) combination as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with high-risk LBC., Patients and Methods: NeoPAL (UCBG10/4, NCT02400567) is a randomised, parallel, non-comparative phase II study. Patients with ER-positive, HER2-negative, Prosigna®-defined luminal B, or luminal A and node-positive, stage II-III breast cancer, not candidate for breast-conserving surgery, were randomly assigned to either letrozole (2.5 mg daily) and palbociclib (125 mg daily, 3 weeks/4) during 19 weeks, or to FEC100 (5FU 500 mg/m2, epirubicin 100 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2)×3 21-day courses followed by docetaxel 100 mg/m2×3 21-day courses. Primary end point was residual cancer burden (RCB 0-I rate). Secondary end points included clinical response, proliferation-based markers, and safety., Results: Overall, 106 patients were randomised [median Prosigna® ROR Score 71 (22-93)]. RCB 0-I was observed in four and eight patients in LETPAL [7.7% (95% CI 0.4-14.9)] and chemotherapy [15.7% (95% CI 5.7-25.7)] arms, respectively. Pathological complete response rates were 3.8% and 5.9%. Clinical response (75%) and breast-conserving surgery rates (69%) were similar in both arms. Preoperative Endocrine Prognostic Index 0 scores (breast cancer-specific survival) were observed in 17.6% and 8.0% of patients in LETPAL and chemotherapy arms, respectively. Safety profile was as expected, with 2 versus 17 serious adverse events (including 11 grade 4 serious AEs in the chemotherapy arm)., Conclusion: LETPAL combination was associated with poor pathological response but encouraging clinical and biomarker responses in Prosigna®-defined high-risk LBC. Contemporary chemotherapy regimen was associated with poor pathological and biomarker responses, with a much less favourable safety profile. LETPAL combination might represent an alternative to chemotherapy in early high-risk LBC., Clinical Trial Number: NCT02400567.

Purpose: UNICANCER-PACS08 compared adjuvant FEC (5-FU; epirubicin; cyclophosphamide) then docetaxel to FEC then ixabepilone in poor prognosis early breast cancer (BC). We evaluated whether replacing docetaxel with ixabepilone would increase 5-year disease-free survival (DFS)., Patients and Methods: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) or oestrogen receptor (ER)+/progesterone receptor (PR)-/HER2- BC patients were randomised to receive standard FEC (3 cycles) followed by 3 cycles of either docetaxel (100 mg/m 2 ) or ixabepilone (40 mg/m 2 ). Radiotherapy was mandatory after conservative surgery; ER+ patients received endocrine therapy., Results: Seven hundred sixty-two patients were enrolled between October 2007 and September 2010. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. Median follow-up was 66.7 months. Median DFS was not reached; 5-year DFS rate was 76% with docetaxel and 79% with ixabepilone (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.58-1.10; p = 0.175). Median overall survival (OS) was not reached; 5-year OS rate was 86% versus 84% (HR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.66-1.42; p = 0.897). TNBC patients treated with ixabepilone had a 23% lower risk of relapse compared to docetaxel (HR for DFS = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.53-1.11; p = 0.168). DFS was longer with ixabepilone than docetaxel in patients with grade II-III lymphocytic infiltration (HR = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.29-1.05; p = 0.063). All patients experienced ≥1 adverse events (AEs): 75% reported grade III-IV AEs and two (<1%) had grade V AEs (both with neutropenia and infection receiving ixabepilone)., Conclusion: After adjuvant FEC, ixabepilone was comparable to docetaxel for treating poor prognosis early BC patients. The benefit of ixabepilone in subgroups (patients with TNBC and grade II-III lymphocytic infiltration) requires further evaluation., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The selective MEK1/2 inhibitor pimasertib has shown anti-tumour activity in a pancreatic tumour model. This phase I/II, two-part trial was conducted in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPaCa) (NCT01016483). In the phase I part, oral pimasertib was given once daily discontinuously (5 days on/2 days off treatment) or twice daily continuously (n = 53) combined with weekly gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m 2 ) in 28-day cycles to identify the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of pimasertib. In the phase II part, patients were randomised to pimasertib (RP2D) or placebo plus weekly gemcitabine (n = 88) to investigate progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The RP2D was determined to be 60 mg BID. PFS and OS outcomes did not indicate any treatment benefit for pimasertib over placebo in combination with gemcitabine (median PFS 3.7 and 2.8 months, respectively, HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.58-1.42: median OS 7.3 vs. 7.6 months, respectively). KRAS status did not influence PFS or OS. The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events was 91.1% and 85.7% for pimasertib/gemcitabine and placebo/gemcitabine respectively, but there was a higher incidence of ocular events with pimasertib/gemcitabine (28.9% vs. 4.8% for placebo/gemcitabine). In conclusion, no clinical benefit was observed with first-line pimasertib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with mPaCa., (© 2018 UICC.)

Background: Data from two trials of panitumumab in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) were retrospectively analysed to investigate the effects of primary tumour location on early-tumour shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR), and identify factors predicting long-term survival., Methods: Patients with RAS wild-type mCRC from PRIME (NCT00364013) and PEAK (NCT00819780) were included. ETS was defined as a ≥30% reduction in the sum-of-the-longest-diameters of measurable target lesions at eight weeks. DpR was the maximum percentage change from baseline to nadir in patients with shrinkage. Univariate and multivariate logistic analyses of short- versus long-term survivor data were performed., Results: A total of 435/559 (78%) patients had left-sided disease. Of these, a higher proportion of patients treated with panitumumab versus comparator achieved ETS (PRIME: 62% vs. 36%; PEAK: 58% vs. 41%); median DpR was also higher with panitumumab (PRIME: 59% vs. 49%; PEAK: 70% vs. 48%). In pooled analyses of the studies, more patients with right-sided disease achieved ETS if treated with panitumumab than comparator (39% vs. 29%). Panitumumab treatment consistently predicted long-term survival., Conclusions: First-line panitumumab was associated with improved ETS and DpR vs. comparator in patients with left-sided mCRC. ETS may identify a subgroup of patients with right-sided disease who might respond to panitumumab.

The casein kinase 1 delta (CSNK1D) is a conserved serine/threonine protein kinase that regulates diverse cellular processes including cell cycle progression, circadian rhythm, and neurite outgrowth. Aberrant expression of CSNK1D is described in several cancer types including breast cancer, where it is amplified in about 30% of triple negative breast (TNBC). Here, we have investigated the function of CSNK1D in triple negative cancer cell migration and metastasis. By using immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization, we found that CNSK1D is highly expressed in primary tumor cells and in tumor cells invading lymphatic nodes compared to non-metastatic tumors. In vitro , knock-down of CSNK1D expression with specific shRNAs in the breast cancer cell line MDA-MB-231 markedly inhibited cancer cell proliferation, invasion and migration and affected the expression of the tight junction proteins claudin 1, occludin and the junction adhesion molecule A. In vivo , the inactivation of CSNK1D reduced lung metastasis in MDA-MB-231 breast cancer xenografts. Altogether, our results indicate that the downregulation of CSNK1D expression inhibits the proliferation and reduces the migration and the metastasis of breast cancer cells. As numerous inhibitors of CSNK1D are currently under development, this might represent an attractive therapeutic target for the treatment of TNBC., Competing Interests: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The authors declared they have no competing interests.

Celyad recently initiated several clinical trials with the CYAD-01 product, a natural killer group 2D (NKG2D)-based chimeric antigen receptor (CAR), in both solid and hematologic tumor types. This review discusses the unique properties of CYAD-01, expecting to provide a new paradigm to fight against solid tumors., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To report planned final overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) analyses from the phase II PEAK trial (NCT00819780)., Methods: Patients with previously untreated, KRAS exon 2 wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) were randomised to mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab or bevacizumab. The primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints included OS, objective response rate, duration of response (DoR), time to response, resection and safety. Treatment effect by tumour RAS status was a prespecified objective. Exploratory analyses included early tumour shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR)., Results: One hundred seventy patients had RAS WT and 156 had RAS WT/BRAF WT mCRC. Median PFS was longer for panitumumab versus bevacizumab in the RAS WT (12.8 vs 10.1 months; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 [95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.48-0.96]; p = 0.029) and RAS WT/BRAF WT (13.1 vs 10.1 months; HR = 0.61 [95% CI = 0.42-0.88]; p = 0.0075) populations. Median OS (68% OS events) for panitumumab versus bevacizumab was 36.9 versus 28.9 months (HR = 0.76 [95% CI = 0.53-1.11]; p = 0.15) and 41.3 versus 28.9 months (HR = 0.70 [95% CI = 0.48-1.04]; p = 0.08), in the RAS WT and RAS WT/BRAF WT populations, respectively. Median DoR (11.4 vs 9.0 months; HR = 0.59 [95% CI = 0.39-0.88]; p = 0.011) and DpR (65.0 vs 46.3%; p = 0.0018) were improved in the panitumumab group. More panitumumab patients experienced ≥30% ETS at week 8 (64 vs 45%; p = 0.052); ETS was associated with improved PFS/OS. No new safety signals occurred., Conclusions: First-line panitumumab + mFOLFOX6 increases PFS versus bevacizumab + mFOLFOX6 in patients with RAS WT mCRC.

The triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) subtype occurs in about 15% of breast cancer and is an aggressive subtype of breast cancer with poor outcome. Furthermore, treatment of patients with TNBC is more challenging due to the heterogeneity of the disease and the absence of well-defined molecular targets. Microribonucleic acid (RNA) represents a new class of biomarkers that are frequently dysregulated in cancer. It has been described that the microRNA miR-210 is highly expressed in TNBC, and its overexpression had been linked to poor prognosis. TNBC are often infiltrated by immune cells that play a key role in cancer progression. The techniques traditionally used to analyze miR-210 expression such as next generation sequencing or quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) do not allow the precise identification of the cellular subtype expressing the microRNA. In this study, we have analyzed miR-210 expression by in situ hybridization in TNBC. The miR-210 signal was detected in tumor cells, but also in the tumor microenvironment, in a region positive for the pan-leucocyte marker CD45-LCA. Taken together, our results demonstrate that miR-210 is expressed in tumor cells but also in the tumor microenvironment. Our results also highlight the utility of using complementary approaches to take into account the cellular context of microRNA expression.

Aim: MERiDiAN evaluated plasma vascular endothelial growth factor-A (pVEGF-A) prospectively as a predictive biomarker for bevacizumab efficacy in metastatic breast cancer (mBC)., Methods: In this double-blind placebo-controlled randomised phase III trial, eligible patients had HER2-negative mBC previously untreated with chemotherapy. pVEGF-A was measured before randomisation to paclitaxel 90 mg/m 2 on days 1, 8 and 15 with either placebo or bevacizumab 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 15, repeated every 4 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or consent withdrawal. Stratification factors were baseline pVEGF-A, prior adjuvant chemotherapy, hormone receptor status and geographic region. Co-primary end-points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat and pVEGF-A high populations., Results: Of 481 patients randomised (242 placebo-paclitaxel; 239 bevacizumab-paclitaxel), 471 received study treatment. The stratified PFS hazard ratio was 0.68 (99% confidence interval, 0.51-0.91; log-rank p = 0.0007) in the intent-to-treat population (median 8.8 months with placebo-paclitaxel versus 11.0 months with bevacizumab-paclitaxel) and 0.64 (96% confidence interval, 0.47-0.88; log-rank p = 0.0038) in the pVEGF-A high subgroup. The PFS treatment-by-VEGF-A interaction p value (secondary end-point) was 0.4619. Bevacizumab was associated with increased incidences of bleeding (all grades: 45% versus 27% with placebo), neutropenia (all grades: 39% versus 29%; grade ≥3: 25% versus 13%) and hypertension (all grades: 31% versus 13%; grade ≥3: 11% versus 4%)., Conclusion: The significant PFS improvement with bevacizumab is consistent with previous placebo-controlled first-line trials in mBC. Results do not support using baseline pVEGF-A to identify patients benefitting most from bevacizumab., Clinical Trials Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01663727., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Tumor lysis syndrome is a rare and potentially fatal complication of oncologic treatments, especially in solid tumors. To the best of our knowledge, tumor lysis syndrome has never been reported after trastuzumab and pertuzumab combination therapy. Knowledge of risk factors and active prevention proceedings is of utmost importance to avoid fatal outcomes., Case Presentation: We present the case of a chemo-naive 58-year-old Belgian woman developing hypovolemic shock and multiple organ failure due to tumor lysis syndrome after a single dose of trastuzumab and pertuzumab in the context of the treatment of a metastatic breast cancer and resulting in fatal outcome despite optimal management., Conclusions: Considering that targeted cancer therapies become increasingly effective, oncologists should be extremely cautious when treating patients at high risk of tumor lysis syndrome, even if they are not treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy, and determine appropriate prophylaxis.

This Phase I dose-escalation study (NCT00058526) assessed the safety and immunogenicity of an anti-cancer immunotherapeutic (recombinant HER2 protein (dHER2) combined with the immunostimulant AS15) in patients with early-stage HER2-overexpressing breast cancer (BC). Sixty-one trastuzumab-naive patients with stage II-III HER2-positive BC received the dHER2 immunotherapeutic after surgical resection and adjuvant therapy. They were allocated into four cohorts receiving different doses of dHER2 (20, 100, 500 µg) combined with a fixed AS15 dose. Safety and immunogenicity (dHER2-specific antibody responses) were assessed. After completing the immunization schedule (three or six doses over 14 weeks) and a six-month follow-up, the patients were followed for 5 years for late toxicity, long-term immunogenicity, and clinical status. The immunizations were well tolerated, and increasing doses of dHER2 had no impact on the frequency or severity of adverse events. Few late toxicities were reported, and after 5 years 45/54 patients (83.3 %) were still alive, while 28/45 (62 %) with known disease status were disease free. Regarding the immunogenicity of the compound, a positive association was found between the dHER2 dose, the immunization schedule, and the prevalence of dHER2-specific humoral responses. Among the patients receiving the most intense immunization schedule with the highest dHER2 dose, 6/8 maintained their dHER2-specific antibody response 5 years after immunization. The dHER2 immunotherapeutic had an acceptable safety profile in early HER2-positive BC patients. dHER2-specific antibody responses were induced, with the rate of responders increasing with the dHER2 dose and the number and frequency of immunizations.

The objectives of this phase I/II study (NCT00140738) were to evaluate the safety and clinical activity of a cancer immunotherapeutic agent (recombinant HER2 protein (dHER2) and the immunostimulant AS15) in patients with HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Forty HER2-positive MBC patients received up to 18 doses (12q2w, 6q3w) of dHER2 immunotherapeutic, as first- or second-line therapy following response to trastuzumab-based treatment as maintenance. Toxicity was graded by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) and clinical activity was evaluated by target lesion assessment according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Immunogenicity was assessed. The dHER2 immunotherapeutic was well tolerated: grade 1/2 adverse events (AEs) were most common. No cardiac events were observed and one patient experienced an asymptomatic decrease of left ventricular ejection fraction below the normal range (47 %). Both humoral and cellular immunogenicity to the dHER2 antigen was observed. No patient discontinued the immunizations because of AEs but 35/40 withdrew prematurely, 34 because of disease progression (24/34 before or at the tumor assessment after dose 6). One patient achieved a complete response lasting 11 months and one patient had a partial response lasting 3.5 months. Ten patients experienced stable disease ≥26 weeks with 4/10 still in stable disease at the last tumor assessment after 47 weeks. Immunization of MBC patients with the dHER2 immunotherapeutic was associated with minimal toxicity and no cardiac events. Clinical activity was observed with two objective responses and prolonged stable disease for 10/40 patients.

Introduction: Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibition is the preferred first-line treatment of advanced adenocarcinoma of the lung that harbors EGFR activating tyrosine kinase domain mutations. Most data available pertain to Asian populations in which such mutations are more prevalent. We report on the long-term results of first-line treatment with erlotinib in Caucasian patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the lung that have a somatic EGFR mutation in their tumor., Methods: Multicenter academic prospective phase II study with erlotinib in patients with an activating EGFR tyrosine kinase (TK) domain somatic mutation (any exon encoding the kinase domain) in the tumor and no prior treatment for their advanced disease., Results: Phenotypic preselecting of 229 patients led to a high EGFR mutation detection rate of 24% of which 46 patients were included in the phase II study. With a progression free survival (PFS) of 81% at three months the study met its primary endpoint for presumed superiority over chemotherapy. With an overall median PFS of 11 months and a median overall survival (OS) of 23 months, the results compare favorably with results obtained in randomized studies using TKI in first line in EGFR mutation positive adenocarcinoma of the lung., Conclusion: The present study reinforces the use of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibition (TKI) as a first line treatment of choice for advanced adenocarcinoma of the lung carrying an activating EGFR mutation. The mutation rate in preselected Caucasian patients is higher than previously reported. Issues relevant for clinical practice are discussed., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00339586.

Introduction: Metastatic colorectal cancer is rarely curable. Improving quality of life is therefore a key treatment goal. We report quality of life for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer in the PRIME study., Methods: A randomised phase 3 open-label study of first-line panitumumab+FOLFOX4 vs FOLFOX4 enrolled adults with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. This analysis includes patients with wild-type RAS tumours (n=505). Quality of life (prespecified end point) was assessed using the EuroQoL 5-domain health state index and overall health rating in all patients and by early tumour shrinkage status (≥30% reduction in size by week 8; exploratory end point). Differences in quality of life were assessed using analysis of covariance and a mixed-effect piecewise linear model, and were also analysed by skin toxicity severity., Results: There were no statistically significant differences between treatment arms from baseline to progression or to discontinuation. Grade 3+ skin toxicity was reported by 38% of patients receiving panitumumab+FOLFOX4 and 2% receiving FOLFOX4 alone. There were no significant differences in quality of life between patients with grade 0-2 skin toxicity and those with grade 3+ skin toxicity. More patients receiving panitumumab+FOLFOX4 vs FOLFOX4 had early tumour shrinkage (p<.001). In patients with tumour symptoms at baseline, there were statistically significant improvements in quality of life in those with early tumour shrinkage versus those without early tumour shrinkage., Conclusions: Addition of panitumumab to FOLFOX4 in first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer prolongs survival and has no negative effect on overall quality of life compared with FOLFOX4 alone. Specific quality of life assessments for skin toxicity should be included in study designs to better define the direct effect of these adverse events., Trial Registration Number: NCT00364013., Competing Interests: SS is a member of advisory boards or steering committees, or is a principal investigator, for Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Ignyta, Merck, Merrimack, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and Taiho. JT is a consultant or advisory board member for Amgen, Imclone, Lilly, Merck KGaA, Millennium, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Celgene, Chugai and Taiho. GB is a consultant, advisory board member or speaker's bureau member for Bayer, Roche, Lilly, Novartis, GSK and Taiho. DC has received research funding from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Celgene, Medimmune, Merck Serono, Merrimack, Roche and Sanofi. FR has received honoraria for advisory activities (including travel and accommodation expenses) and research funding from Amgen, Roche, Merck-Serono, Celgene, Sanofi-Aventis and Bayer. PR has received institutional funding and honoraria related to his work from Amgen, Roche and Sanofi, but has received no personal funding. JLC is a consultant/advisor for Roche and Amgen. RK is an employee and stockholder of Amgen Ltd, Uxbridge, UK. GD is an employee and stockholder of Amgen (Europe) GmbH. GH is an employee and stockholder of Amgen (Europe) GmbH. J-YD has received honoraria for consulting/advisory activities (including travel and accommodation expenses) from Amgen, Bayer, Roche and Merck, as well as research funding from Merck Serono.

Background: Optimal preoperative treatment before colorectal cancer metastases (CRCM) resection remains unclear. This study evaluated pathological responses (pR) in CRCM resected after chemotherapy alone or combined with angiogenesis or epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors., Methods: Pathological response was retrospectively evaluated on 264 resected metastases from 99 patients. The proportion of responding metastases after different preoperative treatments was reported and compared. Patient's progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared based on pR., Results: The combination of anti-angiogenics with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy resulted in more pR than when they were combined with irinotecan-based chemotherapy (80% vs 50%; P<0.001). Inversely, the combination of EGFR inhibitors with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy seemed to induce fewer pR than when they were combined with irinotecan-based treatment (53% vs 72%; P=0.049). Overall survival at 5 years was improved for patients with a pR in all resected metastases compared with those who did not achieve a pR (68.5% vs 32.6%; P=0.023) and this response was the only factor predicting OS in a multivariate analysis., Conclusion: The chemotherapy partner combined with angiogenesis or EGFR inhibitors influenced pR in resected CRCM. In our exploratory analysis anti-angiogenic/oxaliplatin-based regimens and anti-EGFR/irinotecan-based regimens were associated with the highest pR. Prospective randomised trials should be performed to validate these observations.

Introduction: The phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway promotes tumor growth and treatment resistance in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The aim of the open-label, two-stage, Phase II study BASALT-1 (NCT01820325) was to investigate the pan-PI3K inhibitor buparlisib (BKM120) in patients with PI3K pathway-activated, relapsed NSCLC., Methods: After prescreening for PI3K pathway activation, patients with PI3K pathway-activated, metastatic, squamous or nonsquamous NSCLC, who had relapsed after prior systemic antineoplastic therapy, were enrolled. In Stage 1, patients received single-agent buparlisib (100 mg/day). A futility analysis was performed independently in each histology group, based on the 12-week progression-free survival rate for the first 30 patients treated in each group being less than 50%. Exploratory biomarker analyses were performed in archival tissue samples and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)., Results: Of 1242 prescreened patients, 13.5% exhibited PI3K pathway activation. As of June 5, 2014, 63 patients (30 squamous and 33 nonsquamous) were treated in Stage 1. The 12-week progression-free survival rates were 23.3% (95% confidence interval: 9.9-42.3) and 20.0% (95% confidence interval: 7.7-38.6) in the squamous and nonsquamous groups, respectively. Stage 2 was therefore not initiated in either group. PI3K pathway mutations in ctDNA were more concordant with metastatic tissue than with primary biopsies., Conclusions: Despite preselecting patients for targeted treatment, BASALT-1 did not meet its primary objective during Stage 1. PI3K pathway activation can be detected using ctDNA, but may not be the main oncogenic driver in NSCLC. Combinations of PI3K inhibitors with other agents may demonstrate greater efficacy than monotherapy.