Search

Zusammenfassung Hintergrund Umfangreiche Daten aus prospektiven klinischen Studien liefern einen hohen Evidenzgrad für den Einsatz von CDK4/6-Hemmern in Kombination mit einer endokrinen Therapie (CDK4/6i + ET) als Standard bei der First-Line-Behandlung von metastatischem HER2-negativen hormonrezeptorpositiven (HER2−/HR+) Brustkrebs. Reale Daten von Patientinnengruppen, die damit in der Praxis behandelt wurden, liefern Erkenntnisse über Veränderungen von Patientenmerkmalen und Prognosen im Laufe der Zeit. Methoden Die Daten wurden dem prospektiven praxisbezogenen PRAEGNANT-Register (NCT02 338 167) entnommen. Die eingeschlossenen Patientinnen hatten fortgeschrittenen primären und metastasierten HER2−/HR+ Brustkrebs. Die gewählten Therapien, das progressionsfreie Überleben und das Gesamtüberleben der jeweiligen Therapie sowie die Zeitspanne, während der die Behandlung erfolgte, werden dargelegt. Ergebnisse Nachdem CDK4/6-Hemmer erstmals im November 2016 eingesetzt wurden, stieg die Häufigkeit ihres Einsatzes schnell an. In den letzten Jahren (2018–2022) wurden ca. 70–80 % aller Patientinnengruppen mit CDK4/6-Hemmern behandelt; eine endokrine Monotherapie wurde rund 10 % und eine Chemotherapie ungefähr 15 % aller Patientinnen verabreicht. Die schlechteste Prognose hatten Patientinnen, die eine Chemotherapie erhielten. Seit Kurzem erhalten hauptsächlich Patientinnen mit guter Prognose eine endokrine Monotherapie; Patientinnen, die eine Chemotherapie erhalten, haben eine ungünstigere Prognose. Das progressionsfreie Überleben und das Gesamtüberleben von mit CDK4/6i + ET behandelten Patientinnen blieb über einen längeren Zeitraum ähnlich, obwohl sich die Patientenmerkmale änderten. Schlussfolgerung Die Behandlung mit CDK4/6i + ET entwickelte sich rasch zum First-Line-Therapiestandard für Patienten mit fortgeschrittenem Mammakarzinom. Seit der Einführung von CDK4/6i + ET wird die endokrine Monotherapie nur bei Patientinnen mit einer sehr günstigen Prognose eingesetzt, während Chemotherapie meist nur an Patientinnen verabreicht wird, die eine eher ungünstige Prognose haben. Veränderungen der Patientenmerkmale scheinen die Prognose von mit CDK4/6i + ET behandelten Patientinnen nicht zu beeinflussen.

Background Comprehensive data from prospective clinical trials have led to a high level of evidence establishing CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with endocrine treatment (CDK4/6i + ET) as a standard for the treatment of HER2-negative, hormone receptor-positive (HER2− HR+) breast cancer patients in the first-line advanced therapy setting. Data on patient populations that have been treated in the real-world setting may provide an insight into changes of patient characteristics and prognosis over time. Methods The data were extracted from the prospective real-world registry PRAEGNANT (NCT02338167). Patients had to have HER2− HR+ advanced breast cancer in the first-line metastatic setting. The chosen therapies were described as well as progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in relation to the given therapies and time periods during which they were indicated. Results CDK4/6 inhibitors have been rapidly implemented since their introduction in November 2016. In recent years (2018 – 2022), about 70 – 80% of the patient population have been treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors, while endocrine monotherapy was given to about 10% and chemotherapy to about 15% of all patients. The prognosis was worst in patients treated with chemotherapy. Recently, mainly patients with a good prognosis are being treated with endocrine monotherapy, and patients who are treated with chemotherapy have an unfavorable prognosis. The PFS and OS of patients treated with CDK4/6i + ET have remained similar over time despite changes in patient characteristics. Conclusion A treatment with CDK4/6i + ET has rapidly become the therapy standard for patients in the first-line advanced breast cancer setting. After the implementation of CDK4/6i + ET, endocrine monotherapy is only given to patients with a very favorable prognosis, while chemotherapy is provided to patients with a rather unfavorable prognosis. These changes in patient characteristics did not seem to influence the prognosis of patients treated with CDK4/6i + ET.

Supplementary Data from Determinants of Response to Talazoparib in Patients with HER2-Negative, Germline BRCA1/2-Mutated Breast Cancer

Purpose:To assess talazoparib activity in germline BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with advanced breast cancer.Patients and Methods:ABRAZO (NCT02034916) was a two-cohort, two-stage, phase II study of talazoparib (1 mg/day) in germline BRCA mutation carriers with a response to prior platinum with no progression on or within 8 weeks of the last platinum dose (cohort 1) or ≥3 platinum-free cytotoxic regimens (cohort 2) for advanced breast cancer. Primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by independent radiological assessment.Results:We enrolled 84 patients (cohort 1, n = 49; cohort 2, n = 35) from May 2014 to February 2016. Median age was 50 (range, 31–75) years. Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) incidence was 59% (cohort 1) and 17% (cohort 2). Median number of prior cytotoxic regimens for advanced breast cancer was two and four, respectively. Confirmed ORR was 21% [95% confidence interval (CI), 10–35; cohort 1] and 37% [95% CI, 22–55; cohort 2]. Median duration of response was 5.8 and 3.8 months, respectively. Confirmed ORR was 23% (BRCA1), 33% (BRCA2), 26% (TNBC), and 29% (hormone receptor–positive). The most common all-grade adverse events (AE) included anemia (52%), fatigue (45%), and nausea (42%). Talazoparib-related AEs led to drug discontinuation in 3 (4%) patients. In an exploratory analysis, longer platinum-free interval was associated with higher response rate in cohort 1 (0% ORR with interval 6 months).Conclusions:Talazoparib exhibited promising antitumor activity in patients with advanced breast cancer and germline BRCA mutation.

Purpose:PARP inhibitors (PARPi) have demonstrated efficacy in tumors with germline breast cancer susceptibility genes (gBRCA) 1 and 2 mutations, but further factors influencing response to PARPi are poorly understood.Experimental Design:Breast cancer tumor tissue from patients with gBRCA1/2 mutations from the phase III EMBRACA trial of the PARPi talazoparib versus chemotherapy was sequenced using FoundationOne CDx.Results:In the evaluable intent-to-treat population, 96.1% (296/308) had ≥1 tumor BRCA (tBRCA) mutation and there was strong concordance (95.3%) between tBRCA and gBRCA mutational status. Genetic/genomic characteristics including BRCA loss of heterozygosity (LOH; identified in 82.6% of evaluable patients), DNA damage response (DDR) gene mutational burden, and tumor homologous recombination deficiency [assessed by genomic LOH (gLOH)] demonstrated no association with talazoparib efficacy.Conclusions:Overall, BRCA LOH status, DDR gene mutational burden, and gLOH were not associated with talazoparib efficacy; however, these conclusions are qualified by population heterogeneity and low patient numbers in some subgroups. Further investigation in larger patient populations is warranted.

This supplementary appendix contains a listing of all the investigators involved in the ABRAZO study. It also includes information regarding key eligibility criteria for the study. Finally, a figure showing progression-free survival and overall survival by cohort is given.

Supplementary Figure from Determinants of Response to Talazoparib in Patients with HER2-Negative, Germline BRCA1/2-Mutated Breast Cancer

Background: More than two thirds of patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC) have estrogen receptor-positive (ER+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2−) tumors. In most countries, current standard-of-care first-line treatments include an aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant, a selective ER degrader, combined with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors. Concurrent use of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists is recommended for men and premenopausal women with ABC. Nevertheless, almost all ABCs eventually become resistant to endocrine therapy and the disease is incurable in these cases. New therapies are needed to combat endocrine therapy resistance, maintain patient health-related quality-of-life, and delay the need for chemotherapy. AZD9833 (camizestrant) is a highly potent, next-generation selective ER degrader and pure ER antagonist that has demonstrated anticancer properties across a range of preclinical models, including those with ER-activating mutations (Scott et al, AACR 2020). A Phase I dose-escalation and expansion study (SERENA-1) has demonstrated that AZD9833 is well tolerated and has a promising antitumor activity when administered alone or in combination with the cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor palbociclib (Baird et al, SABCS 2020). SERENA-4 (NCT04711252) is a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, Phase III trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of AZD9833 in combination with palbociclib for patients with ER+/HER2− ABC who have not received systemic treatment in the advanced disease setting. Methods: SERENA-4 will enroll 1342 patients with de novo or recurrent ER+/HER2− ABC who have not previously received systemic treatment for their locoregionally recurrent or metastatic disease. Patients with recurrent disease must have received adjuvant aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen therapy for at least 24 months without relapse. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive oral treatment with either (a) AZD9833 75 mg once daily, palbociclib 125 mg once daily for 21 days followed by 7 days off treatment and a placebo for anastrozole 1 mg once daily or (b) anastrozole 1 mg once daily, palbociclib (same as active arm) and a placebo for AZD9833 75 mg once daily. Men and premenopausal women will also receive a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS; up to 5 years). Secondary endpoints include overall survival (up to 8 years), second PFS, time to chemotherapy, objective response rate, and changes in health-related quality-of-life measures. Enrollment began in January 2021. As of 02 July 2021, the number of open sites is 57 across 15 countries. Acknowledgments: We thank Julia Mawer, PhD, of Oxford PharmaGenesis, Oxford, UK, for providing medical writing support funded by AstraZeneca Funding: The SERENA-4 trial is funded and overseen by AstraZeneca. © 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology, Inc. Reused with permission. This abstract was accepted and previously presented at the 2021 ASCO Annual Meeting. All rights reserved. Citation Format: Fabrice André, Seock-Ah Im, Patrick Neven, Richard D Baird, Johannes Ettl, Matthew P Goetz, Erika Hamilton, Hiroji Iwata, Zefei Jiang, Anil Abraham Joy, Vincent Haddad, Andrew Walding, Manuel Selvi Miralles, Cynthia Huang Bartlett, Antonio Llombart-Cussac. SERENA-4: A Phase III comparison of AZD9833 (camizestrant) plus palbociclib, versus anastrozole plus palbociclib, for patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who have not previously received systemic treatment for advanced disease [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT2-11-06.

Background: Loss-of-function mutations in genes encoding components of the homologous recombination DNA damage response (DDR) machinery, notably BRCA1/2, are associated with tumor sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi). In EMBRACA, the PARPi TALA improved progression-free survival (PFS) (HR [95% CI] 0.54 [0.41-0.71], P Citation Format: Hope S. Rugo, Joanne L. Blum, A. Douglas Laird, Sara A. Hurvitz, Johannes Ettl, Lida A. Mina, Kyung-Hun Lee, Anthony Gonçalves, Rinat Yerushalmi, Young-Hyuck Im, Miguel Martin, Louis Fehrenbacher, Henri H. Roché, Ying Chen, Silvana Lanzalone, Jijumon Chelliserry, Wolfgang Eiermann, Jennifer K. Litton. Identification of PD-L1+ status as a candidate predictive biomarker of response to talazoparib (TALA) in the phase 3 EMBRACA study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-13-08.

Purpose Assessment of HER2 overexpression using immunohistochemistry (IHC) and/or in situ hybridisation (ISH) for the detection of HER2 amplifications is standard to identify patients for established HER2-directed treatments. Patients with lower HER2 expression levels have recently also become candidates for novel therapies targeting HER2. This study aimed to assess tumour and patient characteristics and prognosis in patients with advanced breast cancer (aBC), relative to low HER2 expression levels. Methods PRAEGNANT is a prospective aBC registry (NCT02338167), focusing on molecular biomarkers. Patients in all therapy lines receiving any kind of treatment are eligible. This analysis includes patients with conventionally HER2-negative aBC. Clinical outcome was compared in the groups with no (IHC score 0) or with low HER2 expression (IHC 1+, or IHC 2+/ISH negative). Results Low HER2 expression levels in triple-negative aBC patients did not influence progression-free survival. Overall survival appeared poorer in patients with IHC 2+ compared with patients with no HER2 expression in the unadjusted analysis (hazard ratio 2.24, 95% confidence interval 0.1.12–4.47). However, this effect was not maintained in the adjusted analysis. In HER2-negative, hormone receptor–positive patients, low HER2 expression appeared to have no effect on prognosis, neither progression-free survival nor overall survival. Conclusions We could not demonstrate that HER2 expression at a low level and assessed in clinical routine can differentiate patients into prognostic groups. However, the prevalence of patients with a low expression makes this population interesting for clinical trials with potentially active treatments using HER2 as a target.

Purpose The PRAEGNANT study is a registry study for metastatic breast cancer patients, focusing on biomarker detection. Recently, within this study, genetic alterations in 37 breast cancer predisposition genes were analyzed and genetic findings were detected for 396 participants. The aim of this project was to return genetic results to the physicians and to analyze actions taken (e.g., disclosure of results to patients, validation of results, clinical impact, and impact on the patient’s quality of life) using a questionnaire. Methods 235 questionnaires were sent out to the study centers, with each questionnaire representing one patient with a genetic finding. The questionnaire consisted of twelve questions in the German language, referring to the disclosure of results, validation of test results, and their impact on treatment decisions and on the patient’s quality of life. Results 135 (57.5%) questionnaires were completed. Of these, 46 (34.1%) stated that results were returned to the patients. In 80.0% (N = 36) of cases where results were returned, the patient had not been aware of the finding previously. For 27 patients (64.3%), genetic findings had not been validated beforehand. All validation procedures (N = 15) were covered by the patients’ health insurance. For 11 (25.0%) patients, physicians reported that the research results influenced current or future decision-making on treatment, and for 37.8% (N = 17) the results influenced whether family members will be genetically tested. Conclusion This study provides novel insights into the return of research results and into clinical and personal benefits of disclosure of genetic findings within a German registry.

ZusammenfassungDie Therapie von Patientinnen mit frühem Mammakarzinom war immer schon geprägt von Eskalation durch neue Therapien und Deeskalation durch Identifikation besserer Therapieschemata oder Einführung von besseren Werkzeugen zur Einschätzung der Prognose. Die Anstrengungen der letzten Jahre haben auf einigen dieser Gebiete zu einer soliden Datenlage geführt. Die Ergebnisse der großen Deeskalationsstudien durch Nutzung von Multi-Gen-Tests liegen ebenso vor wie die Ergebnisse einiger Studien, die die neuen Anti-HER2-Substanzen T-DM1 und Pertuzumab in der frühen Therapiesituation untersucht haben. Mehrere groß angelegte Studien zur Untersuchung der Rolle der CDK4/6-Inhibitoren stehen kurz vor dem Abschluss, sodass auch in dieser Therapiesituation mit Neuerungen zu rechnen ist. Diese Übersichtsarbeit soll die Ergebnisse der neuesten Publikationen zusammenfassen und einordnen.

ZusammenfassungNachdem in den letzten Jahren bei der Behandlung von Patientinnen mit fortgeschrittenem Mammakarzinom zunehmend Substanzen mit einer guten Effektivität zum Einsatz kommen, die spezifische Signalwege angreifen, sind nun neue Therapien und Ansätze hinzugekommen, die sich tatsächlich auf ganz spezifische Veränderungen beziehen wie die Behandlung von Patientinnen mit HR+/HER2−-Tumoren mit einer PIK3CA-Mutation. Ebenso ist die Behandlung von Patientinnen mit einer BRCA1- oder BRCA2-Mutation durch die Einführung der PARP-Inhibitoren verbessert worden. Nun wird zunehmend versucht, Therapieindikationen aufgrund molekularer Muster auszudehnen und weitere Patientinnen zu identifizieren, die von einer Therapie profitieren könnten, und die neu etablierten Therapiemethoden in bestehende Therapiesequenzen einzubinden. Diese Übersichtsarbeit fasst die neuesten Erkenntnisse in diesem Zusammenhang zusammen.

Background: The Endopredict test is used for estimating risk of distant recurrence for women presenting with early-stage breast cancer with a positive estrogen receptor (ER) and negative human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status. The current ASCO Guideline Update on biomarkers confirms the value of the Endopredict test to guide decisions of adjuvant endocrine and chemotherapy. This study shows prospective long-term outcome data of early breast cancer patients whose chemotherapy decision was guided by the Endopredict test result (EPclin). Methods: ER-positive and HER2-negative early breast cancer patients with 0-3 positive lymph nodes treated between March 2012 and March 2015 were included in this single institution study. The Endopredict® test was carried out on all tumour samples. Demographic, clinical and pathological data were assessed for each patient at baseline. Treatment compliance, local recurrence, distant metastases and survival was evaluated. Risk estimates were obtained by the Kaplan-Meier method and cumulative risk functions in case of competing risks. Group comparisons were performed by Cox proportional hazards regression models and quantified through hazard ratios. Median Follow-Up was estimated by the inverse Kaplan-Meier method. Exploratory hypothesis testing was conducted at two-sided 5% significance levels. Results: In a cohort of 368 consecutive cases the median follow-up time was 8.2 years. Endopredict allocated 238 pts (64%) in the EPclin low risk and 130 pts (34%) in the EPclin high risk group. The 5-year distant metastasis free survival (DMFS) in the EPclin low risk group was 96.6% (95% CI 0.943-0.989) and 85.5% (95% CI 0.796-0.920) in the EPclin high risk group. With a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.21 (95% CI: 1.27-3.88; p=0.005) the risk for distant metastasis in EPclin high risk patients was more than two-fold higher in comparison with EPclin low risk patients. 87 pts. (66.9%) of the EPclin high risk group underwent chemotherapy (compliant), whereas 43 pts (33.1 %) opposed the recommended chemotherapy (non-compliant). Kaplan-Meier plots in the EPclin high risk subgroups compliant vs non-compliant showed a significant disease-free survival (DFS) benefit towards the patients following the chemotherapy recommendation (HR 0.46; 95%CI 0.23-0.95; p=0.036). The 5-year DFS for the high risk compliant subgroup was 89.1% (95% CI: 0.827-0.961) vs. the high risk non-compliant subgroup with 68.9% (95% CI: 0.562-0.845). Regarding the subgroups pre- and postmenopausal, patients with a EPclin high risk test result were at significant higher risk of experiencing distant metastases than patients with a EPclin low risk test result in both subgroups (premenopausal: HR 3.55; 95%CI 1.17-12.32; p=0.025; postmenopausal: HR 1.19; 95%CI 0.99-3.7; p=0.054). We analyzed the EPclin categorization in context of the ki67 subtypes luminal A (low; 0-10%) and luminal B (high; 25-100%). The EPclin-based risk stratification was significantly associated with improved DFS in both ki67 subtypes (ki67 low: HR 4; 95%CI 1.25-12.04; p=0.021 and ki67 high: HR 3.77; 95%CI 1.19-18.93; p=0.022). 33.3% (21 pts) of all tumor samples classified as luminal B (63 pts), were reclassified towards the low risk group via Endopredict, sparing chemotherapy recommendation. Contrary 19.2% (14 pts) of all luminal A (73 pts) were categorized to high risk EPclin. Conclusion: These first long term prospective outcome data confirm, that Endopredict can guide decisions on adjuvant chemotherapy in early ER positive, HER2 negative breast cancer. Pts categorized as EPclin high risk benefitted from an adjuvant chemotherapy. Our results show that Endopredict risk stratification is also applicable in premenopausal women. Furthermore the Endopredict test showed a better classification accuracy in comparison to ki67 subtypes, resulting in a more precise estimation of prognosis. Citation Format: Evelyn Klein, Adriana Josipovic, Aurelia Noske, Sophie Anders, Carolin Mogler, Wilko Weichert, Alexander Hapfelmeier, Marion Kiechle, Johannes Ettl. Long-term outcome data using Endopredict® as risk stratification and chemotherapy decision biomarker in hormone receptor positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-01-24.

ABEMACARE: Abemaciclib in Combination with Endocrine Therapy as First Line Therapy in Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients with Symptomatic Visceral Metastases or High Tumor Burden – A prospective Multicenter Observational Study Sophia Ramsperger, Franziska Kotzur, Lothar Müller, Stephan Seitz, Peter A. Fasching, Stefanie Jilg, Dorothea Fischer, Silvia Egert-Schwender, Victoria Kehl, Ute Reuning, Lukas Rief, Romina Rösch, Holger Bronger, Christof Winter, Marion Kiechle, Johannes Ettl Background: Combined endocrine therapy with Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK 4/6) inhibitors and aromatase inhibitor (AI) or Fulvestrant has become standard of care in first line therapy of estrogen receptor (ER) positive, HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer. Numeral trials have shown excellent results regarding disease control and survival while maintaining quality of life for patients. In the MONARCH 2 and MONARCH 3 trials, patients with liver metastases derived a particularly large benefit from the use of Abemaciclib. Nevertheless, in real world many patients with endocrine sensitive metastatic breast cancer are still being treated with chemotherapy in first line. Symptomatic visceral disease and/or high tumor burden are often seen as reasons for upfront chemotherapy even in the absence of visceral crisis. In this specific patient population Abemacare aims at determining the efficacy of Abemaciclib in combination with endocrine therapy as first line treatment. Further, the question is addressed, whether circulating tumor DNA might serve as a predictive biomarker for early tumor response. Study Design: Abemacare is a prospective multicenter noninterventional, observational study. 96 patients in 10 German cancer centers who receive first line Abemaciclib in combination with AI or Fulvestrant are planned to be enrolled. Recruitment started in December 2020. As of July 1st 2022, 51 patients have been included in six study sites. Patients with documented ER-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer and measurable visceral disease are eligible if they fulfill one of the following inclusion criteria: Presence of clinical signs or symptoms of visceral disease (e.g. pleural effusion, ascites, abdominal pain from liver or peritoneal metastases, dyspnea from pleural effusion or lymphangiosis of the lung, elevated liver enzymes or bilirubin level (> 2x ULN)) or signs of high tumor burden (e.g. LDH > 399 U/l with K+ in normal range, abnormal CEA or CA 15-3 level (> 2x ULN), radiographic signs of lymphangiosis of the lung, cytologically proven bone marrow infiltration). Patients with prior therapy with a CDK 4/6 inhibitor in any setting or first line therapy for metastatic disease are excluded from the trial. Primary endpoint is best objective response rate (ORR) defined by the proportion of patients who are evaluated using RECIST V1.1 as having partial (PR) or complete response (CR) while being on study treatment. ORR will be analyzed using the one group χ2 test at the 5% significance level. The test hypotheses are as follows: H0: ORR = 0.43, HA: ORR ≠ 0.43. In addition, ORR will be reported with a 95% CI. Several additional endpoints regarding disease control and patient reported outcomes will also be evaluated. Plasma samples for ctDNA are being collected at d1 and d15 of cycle 1 and d1 of cycle 2 and 3. Contact information: For further information please contact the leading physician Dr. Johannes Ettl via johannes.ettl@tum.de This study is supported by Eli Lilly and Company. NCT04681768 a>Disclosure(s): Johannes Ettl, n/a: Amgen, Celgene, Eisai, Myriad, Teva.: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); Novartis: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Lilly, Roche, AstraZeneca, Daiichi, Gilead, Seagen: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing) Ramsperger Sophia, n/a: No financial relationships to disclose Franziska Kotzur, n/a: No financial relationships to disclose Lothar Müller, n/a: No financial relationships to disclose Stephan Seitz, n/a: AstraZeneca: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing), Fees for Non-CME Services Received Directly from Commercial Interest or their Agents (e.g., speakers’ bureaus) (Ongoing); GE; Gedeon-Richter; GSK; Lilly;: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing) Peter A. Fasching, MD: Agendia: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); AstraZeneca: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); Biontech: Contracted Research (Ongoing); Cepheid: Contracted Research (Ongoing); Daiichi Sankyo: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); Eisai: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); Genentech: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); Gilead: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); Lilly: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); Merck Sharp & Dohme: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); Novartis: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); Pfizer: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); Pierre Fabre: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); Roche: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); Sanofi Aventis: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing); SeaGen: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing) Stefanie Jilg, n/a: No financial relationships to disclose Dorothea Fischer, n/a: No financial relationships to disclose Silvia Egert-Schwender, n/a: No financial relationships to disclose Kehl Victora, n/a: No financial relationships to disclose Ute Reuning, n/a: No financial relationships to disclose Romina Rösch, n/a: No financial relationships to disclose Lukas Rief, n/a: No financial relationships to disclose Holger Bronger, n/a: No financial relationships to disclose Christof Winter, n/a: No financial relationships to disclose Marion Kiechle, n/a: Myriad Genetics, Bavarian KVB, DKMS Life, BLAEK, TEVA, Exeltis. Equity owner: Therawis Diagnostic GmbH, AIM GmbH.: Consulting Fees (e.g., advisory boards) (Ongoing), Contracted Research (Ongoing), Fees for Non-CME Services Received Directly from Commercial Interest or their Agents (e.g., speakers’ bureaus) (Ongoing) Citation Format: Johannes Ettl, Ramsperger Sophia, Franziska Kotzur, Lothar Müller, Stephan Seitz, Peter A. Fasching, Stefanie Jilg, Dorothea Fischer, Silvia Egert-Schwender, Kehl Victora, Ute Reuning, Romina Rösch, Lukas Rief, Holger Bronger, Christof Winter, Marion Kiechle. ABEMACARE: Abemaciclib in Combination with Endocrine Therapy as First Line Therapy in Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients with Symptomatic Visceral Metastases or High Tumor Burden – A prospective multicenter observational study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr OT2-01-09.

Substances with good effectiveness that intervene in specific signalling pathways have been used increasingly in recent years in the treatment of patients with advanced breast cancer, and new therapies and approaches have now been added, which actually relate to quite specific changes, such as the treatment of patients with HR+/HER2 tumours with a PIK3CA mutation. The treatment of patients with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation has also been improved by the introduction of PARP inhibitors. Attempts are now being made increasingly to extend treatment indications based on molecular patterns, to identify other patients who could benefit from a treatment and to integrate the newly established treatment methods in existing therapy sequences. This review articles summarises the latest information in this connection.

Background In EMBRACA, talazoparib prolonged progression-free survival versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.542 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.413-0.711]; P Patients and methods This randomized phase III trial enrolled patients with gBRCA1/2-mutated HER2-negative ABC. Patients received talazoparib or physician's choice of chemotherapy. OS was analyzed using stratified HR and log-rank test and prespecified rank-preserving structural failure time model to account for subsequent treatments. Results A total of 431 patients were entered in a randomized study (287 talazoparib/144 chemotherapy) with 412 patients treated (286 talazoparib/126 chemotherapy). By 30 September 2019, 216 deaths (75.3%) occurred for talazoparib and 108 (75.0%) chemotherapy; median follow-up was 44.9 and 36.8 months, respectively. HR for OS with talazoparib versus chemotherapy was 0.848 (95% CI 0.670-1.073; P = 0.17); median (95% CI) 19.3 months (16.6-22.5 months) versus 19.5 months (17.4-22.4 months). Kaplan–Meier survival percentages (95% CI) for talazoparib versus chemotherapy: month 12, 71% (66% to 76%)/74% (66% to 81%); month 24, 42% (36% to 47%)/38% (30% to 47%); month 36, 27% (22% to 33%)/21% (14% to 29%). Most patients received subsequent treatments: for talazoparib and chemotherapy, 46.3%/41.7% received platinum and 4.5%/32.6% received a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, respectively. Adjusting for subsequent PARP and/or platinum use, HR for OS was 0.756 (95% bootstrap CI 0.503-1.029). Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 69.6% (talazoparib) and 64.3% (chemotherapy) patients, consistent with previous reports. Extended follow-up showed significant overall improvement and delay in time to definitive clinically meaningful deterioration in global health status/quality of life and breast symptoms favoring talazoparib versus chemotherapy (P Conclusions In gBRCA1/2-mutated HER2-negative ABC, talazoparib did not significantly improve OS over chemotherapy; subsequent treatments may have impacted analysis. Safety was consistent with previous observations. PRO continued to favor talazoparib.

The treatment of patients with early breast cancer has always been characterised by escalation by new therapies and de-escalation through identification of better treatment regimens or introduction of better tools to estimate prognosis. Efforts in some of these areas in the last few years have led to solid data. The results of the large studies of de-escalation through use of multi-gene tests are available, as are the results of some studies that investigated the new anti-HER2 substances T-DM1 and pertuzumab in the early treatment situation. Several large-scale studies examining the role of CDK4/6 inhibitors will soon be concluded so innovations can be anticipated in this area also. This review article will summarise and classify the results of the latest publications.

Purpose: PARP inhibitors (PARPi) have demonstrated efficacy in tumors with germline breast cancer susceptibility genes (gBRCA) 1 and 2 mutations, but further factors influencing response to PARPi are poorly understood. Experimental Design: Breast cancer tumor tissue from patients with gBRCA1/2 mutations from the phase III EMBRACA trial of the PARPi talazoparib versus chemotherapy was sequenced using FoundationOne CDx. Results: In the evaluable intent-to-treat population, 96.1% (296/308) had ≥1 tumor BRCA (tBRCA) mutation and there was strong concordance (95.3%) between tBRCA and gBRCA mutational status. Genetic/genomic characteristics including BRCA loss of heterozygosity (LOH; identified in 82.6% of evaluable patients), DNA damage response (DDR) gene mutational burden, and tumor homologous recombination deficiency [assessed by genomic LOH (gLOH)] demonstrated no association with talazoparib efficacy. Conclusions: Overall, BRCA LOH status, DDR gene mutational burden, and gLOH were not associated with talazoparib efficacy; however, these conclusions are qualified by population heterogeneity and low patient numbers in some subgroups. Further investigation in larger patient populations is warranted.

ZusammenfassungVom 14. bis 16. November 2019 fand in Lissabon die fünfte internationale Konsensuskonferenz ABC5 (Advanced Breast Cancer Fifth Consensus) zu Diagnostik und Behandlung des fortgeschrittenen Mammakarzinoms statt. Ziel ist es, die Behandlung der Patientinnen mit fortgeschrittenem Mammakarzinom weltweit auf evidenzbasierter Grundlage zu standardisieren und sicherzustellen, dass Patientinnen überall auf der Welt adäquat behandelt werden und Zugang zu neuen Therapien erhalten. Ein inhaltlicher Schwerpunkt lag dieses Jahr auf neuen Entwicklungen und Studienergebnissen beim fortgeschrittenen Mammakarzinom sowie der Präzisionsmedizin. Zudem ist die Zusammenarbeit mit den Patientenvertreterinnen aus aller Welt ein wichtiges Anliegen der ABC-Konferenz, weshalb in dem international zusammengesetzten ABC-Panel auch Patientenvertreterinnen sind. Im vorliegenden Manuskript werden die Abstimmungsergebnisse der ABC5-Panelisten vor Ort durch eine Arbeitsgruppe deutscher Brustkrebsexperten für den Therapiealltag in Deutschland kommentiert. Der Kommentierung liegen die Empfehlungen der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO), Kommission „Mamma“, zugrunde. Sie erscheint sinnvoll, da in den ABC-Konsensus auch länderspezifische Besonderheiten einfließen.

ZusammenfassungFür Patientinnen mit einem lokal fortgeschrittenen bzw. metastasierten Mammakarzinom wurden in den letzten Jahren neue und effektive Therapien wie CDK4/6-Inhibitoren, PARP-Inhibitoren und ein PD‑L1-Inhibitor eingeführt. In dieser Übersichtsarbeit wird ein Update zu den vorhandenen Studien mit ihrer Datenlage gegeben. Ebenso werden 2 innovative Anti-HER2-Therapien dargestellt (Trastuzumab-Deruxtecan und Tucatinib), für die die Ergebnisse aus neuen Studien berichtet worden sind. Molekulare Tests bieten die Möglichkeit, Patientinnenpopulationen zu definieren oder auch Therapieverläufe zu monitorieren. Dieses kann helfen, Patientinnen mit spezifischen Eigenschaften zu identifizieren, um diesen eine individuelle zielgerichtete Therapie im Rahmen von Studien zukommen zu lassen. In einer großen Studie konnte der Nutzen einer solchen Biomarker-Studie zum ersten Mal beschrieben werden.

PurposePalbociclib is a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor, approved in combination with endocrine therapy for the treatment of women and men with hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative advanced breast cancer (HR+/HER2− ABC). In the phase 2, open-label, PALOMA-1 trial, palbociclib plus letrozole significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus letrozole alone (hazard ratio, 0.488; 95% CI 0.319‒0.748;P = 0.0004; median PFS, 20.2 vs 10.2 months, respectively) in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor–positive (ER+)/HER2− ABC. Here, we present the final overall survival (OS) and updated safety results.MethodsPostmenopausal women with ER+/HER2− ABC were randomized 1:1 to receive either palbociclib (125 mg/day, 3/1 schedule) plus letrozole (2.5 mg/day, continuous) or letrozole alone (2.5 mg/day, continuous). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS; secondary endpoints included OS and safety.ResultsA total of 165 patients were randomized. At the data cutoff date of December 30, 2016 (median duration of follow-up, 64.7 months), the stratified hazard ratio for OS was 0.897 (95% CI 0.623–1.294;P = 0.281); median OS in the palbociclib plus letrozole and letrozole alone arms was 37.5 and 34.5 months, respectively. The median time from randomization to first subsequent chemotherapy use was longer with palbociclib plus letrozole than letrozole alone (26.7 and 17.7 months, respectively). The most frequently reported adverse event in the palbociclib plus letrozole arm was neutropenia (any grade, 75%; grade 3 or 4, 59%).ConclusionsPalbociclib plus letrozole treatment led to a numerical but not statistically significant improvement in median OS.Pfizer Inc (NCT00721409)

ZusammenfassungIn dieser Übersichtsarbeit werden die neuesten Entwicklungen in der Prävention und in der Behandlung des frühen Mammakarzinoms dargestellt. Mit großen epidemiologischen Studien zu genetischen und nicht genetischen Risikofaktoren wird das Brustkrebsrisiko immer besser beschreibbar. Durch neue Analysen konnte sowohl die Evidenz für hoch penetrante Gene als auch für niedrig penetrante Gene verbessert werden. Neue Daten zu Denosumab und Atezolizumab liegen in der Neoadjuvanz vor, genauso wie eine gepoolte Auswertung zahlreicher Studien zu Capecitabin in der kurativen Situation. Ebenso gibt es eine Aktualisierung der Gesamtüberlebensdaten von Pertuzumab in der Adjuvanz mit einer längeren Nachbeobachtungszeit. Letztlich hält die digitale Medizin stetigen Einzug in die Wissenschaft. Eine kürzlich durchgeführte Studie zur automatisierten Brustkrebserkennung mittels künstlicher Intelligenz schafft die Grundlagen für eine künftige Überprüfung in klinischen Studien.

The Advanced Breast Cancer Fifth International Consensus Conference (ABC5) which focuses on the diagnosis and treatment of advanced breast cancer was held in Lisbon on November 14 – 16, 2019. The aim of the conference is to standardize the treatment of advanced breast cancer worldwide using evidence-based data and to ensure that patients with advanced breast disease anywhere in the world are treated appropriately and have access to the latest therapies. This year, the emphasis was on new developments and study results from patients with advanced breast cancer as well as precision medicine. The collaboration with patient advocates from all over the globe is also an important goal of the ABC Conference, which is why the international ABC panel also included a number of patient advocates. We present a commentary on the voting results of the ABC5 panelists in Lisbon by a working group of German breast cancer specialists together with the implications for routine clinical care in Germany. The commentary is based on the recommendations of the Breast Commission of the German Gynecological Oncology Working Group (AGO). This commentary is useful, it includes country-specific features for the ABC consensus.

Die individuellen Therapiemoglichkeiten der Patientin mit einem metastasierten Brustkrebs werden immer spezifischer. Fur Therapieentscheidungen in der metastasierten Situation liegt keine ausreichende Evidenz aus klinischen Studien fur alle Behandlungssituationen und Subgruppen vor. Dieses macht die Erhebung und systematische Auswertung von Real-World-Daten zur Erstellung von Real-World-Evidenz sinnvoll. Um bei der Behandlung von Patientinnen mit einem metastasierten Mammakarzinom eine stadien- und tumorspezifische Therapie identifizieren zu konnen, wurde das PRAEGNANT-Netzwerk (Prospective Academic Translational Research Network zur Optimierung der onkologischen Versorgungsqualitat im fortgeschrittenen therapeutischen Umfeld) etabliert. Ziel ist es, die medizinische Versorgung von Patientinnen mit metastasiertem Mammakarzinom in der realen Welt zu beleuchten, Wirkungen und Nebenwirkungen der Therapiekonzepte zu erfassen, die Veranderung der Lebensqualitat unter der Therapie mit zu verfolgen, Patientinnen zu identifizieren, die an einer klinischen Arzneimittelstudie teilnehmen konnen, und durch Untersuchung der molekularen Tumoreigenschaften des Mammakarzinoms Patientinnen eine zielgerichtete Therapie in klinischen Studien zu ermoglichen. Dieser Artikel fasst die bereits erhobenen Daten aus dem PRAEGNANT-Netzwerk zusammen und beleuchtet die Frage der Ubertragbarkeit der verschiedenen Endpunkte aus klinischen Studien in die reale Behandlungssituation.

ZusammenfassungIm Rahmen von derzeit laufenden Studien werden in naher Zukunft wichtige translationale Fragestellungen von klinischer Relevanz geklärt werden. Zum einen muss die Rolle der PD‑L1-Expression, nachdem sie für die Indikationsstellung für Atezolizumab in der 1. Therapielinie bei Patientinnen mit einem metastasierten triplenegativen Mammakarzinom (TNBC) von Relevanz ist, weiter geklärt werden. In einer neoadjuvanten Studie beim TNBC mit Pembrolizumab konnte kein Zusammenhang zwischen Wirksamkeit und PD‑L1-Expression gefunden werden. Sowohl mit als auch ohne Expression war die pCR höher, wenn Pembrolizumab zur Chemotherapie hinzugefügt wurde. Des Weiteren wird für die bei Keimbahnmutation von BRCA1/2 zugelassenen PARP-Inhibitoren nach weiteren Patientengruppen gesucht, in denen eine Wirksamkeit besteht. Dieses sind z. B. Patientinnen mit Mutationen in anderen Genen, die an der homologen Rekombination beteiligt sind, oder Patientinnen mit Tumoren, die bei globalen Tests zu homologen Rekombinationsdefizienzen (HRDTests) eine Auffälligkeit zeigen. Auch die Frage, ob und mit welchen Chemotherapie-Kombinationspartnern eine PARP-Inhibition zusammen gegeben werden kann, wird derzeit sowohl beim Mamma- als auch beim Ovarialkarzinom untersucht. Während sich die Daten zum verbesserten Gesamtüberleben bei den CDK4/6-Inhibitoren konsolidieren, wächst auch das Wissen um molekulare Veränderungen unter der Therapie und bei der Progression unter der Therapie. Sowohl die Anhäufung von PI3K-Mutationen als auch PTEN-Veränderungen könnten bei der Planung von Folgetherapien eine Rolle spielen. Diese Übersichtsarbeit fasst diese aktuellen Entwicklungen beim Mammakarzinom und teilweise auch beim Ovarialkarzinom zusammen.

ZusammenfassungBeim fortgeschrittenen Mammakarzinom sind in den letzten Jahren deutliche Fortschritte erzielt worden, fast alle auf dem Gebiet der zielgerichteten Therapie. Pertuzumab und Trastuzumab-Emtansin (T-DM1) konnten beim HER2-positiven Mammakarzinom eingeführt werden. Nun sind weitere Anti-HER2-Therapien in der Entwicklung (z. B. Margetuximab, DS-8201a, Pyrotinib), die weitere Resistenzmechanismen im HER2-Signalweg überwinden können. Auf dem Gebiet des hormonrezeptorpositiven Mammakarzinoms wurden in der Vergangenheit ein mTOR-Inhibitor und CDK4/6-Inhibitoren eingeführt. Nun steht die Einführung des ersten PI3K-Inhibitors bevor, die eine genetische Testung des Tumors auf eine Mutation im Gen PIK3CA mit sich bringen wird. Beim tripel-negativen Mammakarzinom gibt es ebenfalls deutliche Fortschritte: Durch Kombination von Chemo- mit Immuntherapie konnte ein Vorteil für das Gesamtüberleben in einer Subgruppe (Immunzellen PD-L1-positiv) gezeigt werden. Die PARP-Inhibitor-Therapie für HER2-negative Patientinnen mit einer Keimbahnmutation in BRCA1 oder BRCA2 war ebenfalls in einer Subgruppe mit einem verbesserten Gesamtüberleben assoziiert. Diese vielversprechenden, neuen Studienergebnisse werden in dieser Übersichtsarbeit zusammengefasst.

ZusammenfassungDie Weiterentwicklung der Therapien für Frauen mit einem frühen Mammakarzinom schreitet deutlich langsamer voran als bei Patientinnen mit fortgeschrittenem Mammakarzinom und ist zudem zeitlich versetzt zu Entwicklungen beim metastasierten Mammakarzinom. Trotzdem konnten in letzter Zeit deutliche Fortschritte verzeichnet werden. Diese Übersichtsarbeit fasst die jüngsten Entwicklungen vor dem Hintergrund der neuesten Publikationen und Fachkongresse zusammen. Für hormonrezeptorpositive Patientinnen sind neue Aspekte für die Dauer der Antihormontherapie und in Bezug auf den Nutzen von Multigentests veröffentlicht worden. Bei HER2-positiven Patientinnen werden der Stellenwert einer post-neoadjuvanten Therapie und eine Deeskalation der Therapie diskutiert. Bei Patientinnen mit tripel-negativem Mammakarzinom stellt sich die Frage, ob das Wissen um den biologischen Hintergrund einer Defizienz der homologen Rekombination (HRD) dabei hilft, neue Therapien für diesen Subtyp zu entwickeln. Insbesondere die „Nutzung“ einer BRCA1/2-Mutation oder des biologischen Merkmals HRD als potenzielles Therapiemotiv spielen eine Rolle dabei, den Stellenwert der Platintherapie und einer Therapie mit PARP-Inhibitoren zu spezifizieren.