Search

PurposeFatigue is recognized as one of the most burdensome and long-lasting adverse effects of cancer and cancer treatment. We aimed to characterize long-term fatigue trajectories among breast cancer survivors.MethodsWe performed a detailed longitudinal analysis of fatigue using a large ongoing national prospective clinical study (CANcer TOxicity, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01993498) of patients with stage I-III breast cancer treated from 2012 to 2015. Fatigue was assessed at diagnosis and year 1, 2, and 4 postdiagnosis. Baseline clinical, sociodemographic, behavioral, tumor-related, and treatment-related characteristics were available. Trajectories of fatigue and risk factors of trajectory-group membership were identified by iterative estimates of group-based trajectory models.ResultsThree trajectory groups were identified for severe global fatigue (n = 4,173). Twenty-one percent of patients were in the high-risk group, having risk estimates of severe global fatigue of 94.8% (95% CI, 86.6 to 100.0) at diagnosis and 64.6% (95% CI, 59.2 to 70.1) at year 4; 19% of patients clustered in the deteriorating group with risk estimates of severe global fatigue of 13.8% (95% CI, 6.7 to 20.9) at diagnosis and 64.5% (95% CI, 57.3 to 71.8) at year 4; 60% were in the low-risk group with risk estimates of 3.6% (95% CI, 2.5 to 4.7) at diagnosis and 9.6% (95% CI, 7.5 to 11.7) at year 4. The distinct dimensions of fatigue clustered in different trajectory groups than those identified by severe global fatigue, being differentially affected by sociodemographic, clinical, and treatment-related factors.ConclusionOur findings highlight the multidimensional nature of cancer-related fatigue and the complexity of its risk factors. This study helps to identify patients with increased risk of severe fatigue and to inform personalized interventions to ameliorate this problem.

PurposeFatigue is common and troublesome among breast cancer survivors; however, limited tools exist to predict its risk.Patients and methodsParticipants with stage I-III breast cancer were prospectively included from CANTO (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01993498), collecting longitudinal data at diagnosis (before the initiation of any cancer treatment) and 1 (T1), 2 (T2), and 4 (T3) years after diagnosis. The main outcome was severe global fatigue at T2 (score ≥ 40/100, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30). Analyses at T3 were exploratory. Secondary outcomes included physical, emotional, and cognitive fatigue (EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-FA12). Multivariable logistic regression models retained associations with severe fatigue by bootstrapped Augmented Backward Elimination. Validation methods included 10-fold internal cross-validation, overoptimism-corrected area under the receiver operating characteristic curves, and external validation.ResultsAmong 5,640, 5,000, and 3,400 patients at T1, T2, and T3, respectively, the prevalence of post-treatment severe global fatigue was 35.6%, 34.0%, and 31.5% in the development cohort. Retained risk factors for severe global fatigue at T2 were severe pretreatment fatigue (adjusted odds ratio v no 3.191 [95% CI, 2.704 to 3.767]); younger age (for 1-year decrement 1.015 [1.009 to 1.022]), higher body mass index (for unit increment 1.025 [1.012 to 1.038]), current smoking behavior (v never 1.552 [1.291 to 1.866]), worse anxiety (v noncase 1.265 [1.073 to 1.492]), insomnia (for unit increment 1.005 [1.003 to 1.007]), and pain at diagnosis (for unit increment 1.014 [1.010 to 1.017]), with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.75). Receipt of hormonal therapy was a risk factor for severe fatigue at T3 (v no 1.448 [1.165 to 1.799]). Dimension-specific risk factors included body mass index for physical fatigue and emotional distress for emotional and cognitive fatigue.ConclusionWe propose a predictive model to assess fatigue among breast cancer survivors, within a personalized survivorship care framework. This may help clinicians to provide early management interventions or to correct modifiable risk factors and offer more tailored monitoring and education to patients at risk of severe post-treatment fatigue.

PurposeConventional wisdom has rendered patients with brain metastases ineligible for clinical trials for fear that poor survival could mask the benefit of otherwise promising treatments. Our group previously published the diagnosis-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA). Updates with larger contemporary cohorts using molecular markers and newly identified prognostic factors have been published. The purposes of this work are to present all the updated indices in a single report to guide treatment choice, stratify research, and define an eligibility quotient to expand eligibility.MethodsA multi-institutional database of 6,984 patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases underwent multivariable analyses of prognostic factors and treatments associated with survival for each primary site. Significant factors were used to define the updated GPA. GPAs of 4.0 and 0.0 correlate with the best and worst prognoses, respectively.ResultsSignificant prognostic factors varied by diagnosis and new prognostic factors were identified. Those factors were incorporated into the updated GPA with robust separation (P < .01) between subgroups. Survival has improved, but varies widely by GPA for patients with non-small-cell lung, breast, melanoma, GI, and renal cancer with brain metastases from 7-47 months, 3-36 months, 5-34 months, 3-17 months, and 4-35 months, respectively.ConclusionMedian survival varies widely and our ability to estimate survival for patients with brain metastases has improved. The updated GPA (available free at brainmetgpa.com) provides an accurate tool with which to estimate survival, individualize treatment, and stratify clinical trials. Instead of excluding patients with brain metastases, enrollment should be encouraged and those trials should be stratified by the GPA to ensure those trials make appropriate comparisons. Furthermore, we recommend the expansion of eligibility to allow for the enrollment of patients with previously treated brain metastases who have a 50% or greater probability of an additional year of survival (eligibility quotient > 0.50).

BackgroundBreast cancer treatment is based on estrogen receptors (ERs), progesterone receptors (PRs), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). At the time of metastasis, receptor status can be discordant from that at initial diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of discordance and its effect on survival and subsequent treatment in patients with breast cancer brain metastases (BCBM).MethodsA retrospective database of 316 patients who underwent craniotomy for BCBM between 2006 and 2017 was created. Discordance was considered present if the ER, PR, or HER2 status differed between the primary tumor and the BCBM.ResultsThe overall receptor discordance rate was 132/316 (42%), and the subtype discordance rate was 100/316 (32%). Hormone receptors (HR, either ER or PR) were gained in 40/160 (25%) patients with HR-negative primary tumors. HER2 was gained in 22/173 (13%) patients with HER2-negative primary tumors. Subsequent treatment was not adjusted for most patients who gained receptors-nonetheless, median survival (MS) improved but did not reach statistical significance (HR, 17-28 mo, P = 0.12; HER2, 15-19 mo, P = 0.39). MS for patients who lost receptors was worse (HR, 27-18 mo, P = 0.02; HER2, 30-18 mo, P = 0.08).ConclusionsReceptor discordance between primary tumor and BCBM is common, adversely affects survival if receptors are lost, and represents a missed opportunity for use of effective treatments if receptors are gained. Receptor analysis of BCBM is indicated when clinically appropriate. Treatment should be adjusted accordingly.Key points1. Receptor discordance alters subtype in 32% of BCBM patients.2. The frequency of receptor gain for HR and HER2 was 25% and 13%, respectively.3. If receptors are lost, survival suffers. If receptors are gained, consider targeted treatment.

PurposeIn the HER2CLIMB study, patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer with brain metastases (BMs) showed statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) with tucatinib. We describe exploratory analyses of intracranial efficacy and survival in participants with BMs.Patients and methodsPatients were randomly assigned 2:1 to tucatinib or placebo, in combination with trastuzumab and capecitabine. All patients underwent baseline brain magnetic resonance imaging; those with BMs were classified as active or stable. Efficacy analyses were performed by applying RECIST 1.1 criteria to CNS target lesions by investigator assessment. CNS-PFS (intracranial progression or death) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated in all patients with BMs. Confirmed intracranial objective response rate (ORR-IC) was evaluated in patients with measurable intracranial disease.ResultsThere were 291 patients with BMs: 198 (48%) in the tucatinib arm and 93 (46%) in the control arm. The risk of intracranial progression or death was reduced by 68% in the tucatinib arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.32; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.48; P < .0001). Median CNS-PFS was 9.9 months in the tucatinib arm versus 4.2 months in the control arm. Risk of death was reduced by 42% in the tucatinib arm (OS HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.85; P = .005). Median OS was 18.1 versus 12.0 months. ORR-IC was higher in the tucatinib arm (47.3%; 95% CI, 33.7% to 61.2%) versus the control arm (20.0%; 95% CI, 5.7% to 43.7%; P = .03).ConclusionIn patients with HER2-positive breast cancer with BMs, the addition of tucatinib to trastuzumab and capecitabine doubled ORR-IC, reduced risk of intracranial progression or death by two thirds, and reduced risk of death by nearly half. To our knowledge, this is the first regimen to demonstrate improved antitumor activity against BMs in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer in a randomized, controlled trial.

A recent meeting was held on March 22, 2019, among the FDA, clinical scientists, pharmaceutical and biotech companies, clinical trials cooperative groups, and patient advocacy groups to discuss challenges and potential solutions for increasing development of therapeutics for central nervous system metastases. A key issue identified at this meeting was the need for consistent tumor measurement for reliable tumor response assessment, including the first step of standardized image acquisition with an MRI protocol that could be implemented in multicenter studies aimed at testing new therapeutics. This document builds upon previous consensus recommendations for a standardized brain tumor imaging protocol (BTIP) in high-grade gliomas and defines a protocol for brain metastases (BTIP-BM) that addresses unique challenges associated with assessment of CNS metastases. The "minimum standard" recommended pulse sequences include: (i) parameter matched pre- and post-contrast inversion recovery (IR)-prepared, isotropic 3D T1-weighted gradient echo (IR-GRE); (ii) axial 2D T2-weighted turbo spin echo acquired after injection of gadolinium-based contrast agent and before post-contrast 3D T1-weighted images; (iii) axial 2D or 3D T2-weighted fluid attenuated inversion recovery; (iv) axial 2D, 3-directional diffusion-weighted images; and (v) post-contrast 2D T1-weighted spin echo images for increased lesion conspicuity. Recommended sequence parameters are provided for both 1.5T and 3T MR systems. An "ideal" protocol is also provided, which replaces IR-GRE with 3D TSE T1-weighted imaging pre- and post-gadolinium, and is best performed at 3T, for which dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion is included. Recommended perfusion parameters are given.

PurposeBrain metastases are a common sequelae of breast cancer. Survival varies widely based on diagnosis-specific prognostic factors (PF). We previously published a prognostic index (Graded Prognostic Assessment [GPA]) for patients with breast cancer with brain metastases (BCBM), based on cohort A (1985-2007, n = 642), then updated it, reporting the effect of tumor subtype in cohort B (1993-2010, n = 400). The purpose of this study is to update the Breast GPA with a larger contemporary cohort (C) and compare treatment and survival across the 3 cohorts.Methods and materialsA multi-institutional (19), multinational (3), retrospective database of 2473 patients with breast cancer with newly diagnosed brain metastases (BCBM) diagnosed from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2017, was created and compared with prior cohorts. Associations of PF and treatment with survival were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were compared with log-rank tests. PF were weighted and the Breast GPA was updated such that a GPA of 0 and 4.0 correlate with the worst and best prognoses, respectively.ResultsMedian survival (MS) for cohorts A, B, and C improved over time (from 11, to 14 to 16 months, respectively; P < .01), despite the subtype distribution becoming less favorable. PF significant for survival were tumor subtype, Karnofsky Performance Status, age, number of BCBMs, and extracranial metastases (all P < .01). MS for GPA 0 to 1.0, 1.5-2.0, 2.5-3.0, and 3.5-4.0 was 6, 13, 24, and 36 months, respectively. Between cohorts B and C, the proportion of human epidermal receptor 2 + subtype decreased from 31% to 18% (P < .01) and MS in this subtype increased from 18 to 25 months (P < .01).ConclusionsMS has improved modestly but varies widely by diagnosis-specific PF. New PF are identified and incorporated into an updated Breast GPA (free online calculator available at brainmetgpa.com). The Breast GPA facilitates clinical decision-making and will be useful for stratification of future clinical trials. Furthermore, these data suggest human epidermal receptor 2-targeted therapies improve clinical outcomes in some patients with BCBM.

Many factors contribute to the poor survival of malignant brain tumor patients, some of which are not easily remedied. However, one contributor to the lack of progress that may be modifiable is poor clinical trial accrual. Surveys of brain tumor patients and neuro-oncology providers suggest that clinicians do a poor job of discussing clinical trials with patients and referring patients for clinical trials. Yet, data from the Cancer Action Network of the American Cancer Society suggest that most eligible oncology patients asked to enroll on a clinical trial will agree to do so. To this end, the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) in collaboration with the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) Working Group, patient advocacy groups, clinical trial cooperative groups, including the Adult Brain Tumor Consortium (ABTC), and other partners are working together with the intent to double clinical trial accrual over the next 5 years. Here we describe the factors contributing to poor clinical trial accrual in neuro-oncology and offer possible solutions.

Breast cancer remains a leading cause of brain metastases (BM), which carry a poor prognosis. The current approach to managing BMs in breast cancer patients involves a combination of local therapies (surgery, radiotherapy) and systemic treatments. Developing newer antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) has sparked a revolution in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) care. ADCs such as ado-trastuzumab emtansine, trastuzumab deruxtecan, and sacituzumab govitecan have demonstrated significant improvement in patient outcomes and are standard of care in the treatment of MBC. Most of the ADC registration studies included patients with stable BMs but excluded individuals with active BM, making intracranial (IC) response assessment a challenge. Promising data has recently emerged, suggesting relevant IC activity for certain ADCs and ongoing studies in patients with active BM that will expand our knowledge. This review aims to summarize the effectiveness of approved ADCs as well as promising new ADCs in development for breast cancer with BM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]