Search

Kara K Landry,1 Jessica L Lyon,2 Kitty E Victoria,1 P Nick Changizzadeh,3 Bernard F Cole,4 Bhargavi Pulluri,5 William M Sikov,6 Marie E Wood1 1Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Vermont Medical Center, Burlington, VT, USA; 2Larner College of Medicine at the University of Vermont, Burlington, VA, USA; 3Hematology and Oncology, Eastern Connecticut Hematology and Oncology, Norwich, CT, USA; 4College of Engineering and Mathematical Sciences, University of Vermont, Burlington, VA, USA; 5Division of Hematology and Oncology, Saint Agnes Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA; 6Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Program in Women’s Oncology, and Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USACorrespondence: Marie E Wood, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Vermont Medical Center, 111 Colchester Avenue, Burlington, VA, 05401, USA, Tel +1 802-847-8400, Email marie.wood@uvmhealth.orgBackground: Adding carboplatin to weekly paclitaxel as part of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for stage II–III triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) has been shown to significantly increase the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. Hematologic toxicities associated with every 3-week dosing of carboplatin have led some oncologists to explore weekly dosing as an alternative, but there are little published data comparing the two dosing schedules.Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients who received paclitaxel and carboplatin, usually followed by AC, as initial NACT for TNBC at two academic cancer centers between 2008 and 2018 for whom pathologic results and post-operative follow-up were available. We recorded pCR, defined as ypT0/isN0, treatment delivery and disease-free survival, censored as of the patient’s last follow-up visit.Results: A total of 76 patients were identified (median age 49 years). A total of 47 received weekly carboplatin, of whom 83% received at least 11 of 12 planned doses, and 29 received every 3-week carboplatin, of whom 90% received all 4 planned doses. pCR rates were similar, 53% with weekly and 55% with every 3-week carboplatin dosing. At median follow-up of 18 months (range < 1– 118), 93% of patients who achieved pCR were alive and free from recurrence, compared to 74% of those who did not.Conclusion: pCR rates were similar between patients receiving weekly or every 3-week carboplatin and were similar to those reported in prior trials with carboplatin. These data suggest that providers can choose either weekly or every 3-week carboplatin dosing without compromising the likelihood of achieving pCR.Keywords: triple negative breast cancer, neoadjuvant treatment, carboplatin dosing, chemotherapy

Priscilla Merriam, William M Sikov Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA Abstract: Breast cancers that overexpress human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2-positive [HER2+]) tend to be biologically aggressive and associated with a poor prognosis, even those that coexpress receptors for estrogen and/or progesterone (hormone receptor-positive [HR+]). Optimal therapy for patients with “double-positive” (HR+/HER2+) breast cancers is still being defined. In this subset of patients, the efficacy of targeted endocrine therapies appears to be diminished by cross-activation or “crosstalk” between estrogen receptor-mediated gene transcription and pathways activated by other growth factor receptors, including HER2. Lapatinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor which binds reversibly to the intracellular domains of the epidermal growth factor receptor and HER2, interfering with their ability to initiate signal transduction cascades that promote cancer cell proliferation, survival, and metastasis. In a recently published randomized, placebo-controlled Phase III study in postmenopausal HR+ metastatic breast cancer, the addition of lapatinib to the aromatase inhibitor letrozole significantly improved progression-free survival solely in women who were also HER2+. This article reviews the biology of “double-positive” breast cancers and the rationale underlying combining endocrine and HER2-targeted therapies, including the lapatinib/letrozole combination, for these tumors. Results from the Phase III trial are examined, as well as available data on other combinations of HR and HER2-targeted therapies. Ongoing trials and potential future applications of these combinations in both HR+/HER2+ and other subgroups of breast cancer patients are also discussed. Keywords: breast neoplasm, erbB2, estrogen receptor, letrozole, lapatinib

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a better tool for evaluating the experiences of patients who have symptomatic, treatment-associated adverse events (AEs) compared with clinician-rated AEs. The authors present PROs assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and treatment-related neurotoxicity for adjuvant capecitabine versus platinum on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG-ACRIN) EA1131 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02445391)., Methods: Participants completed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale (platinum arm only) at baseline, cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), 6 months, and 15 months. Because of early termination, power was insufficient to test the hypothesis that HRQoL, as assessed by the NFBSI-16 treatment side-effect (TSE) subscale, would be better at 6 and 15 months in the capecitabine arm; all analyses were exploratory. Means were compared by using t-tests or the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and proportions were compared by using the χ 2 test., Results: Two hundred ninety-six of 330 eligible patients provided PROs. The mean NFBSI-16 TSE subscale score was lower for the platinum arm at baseline (p = .02; absolute difference, 0.6 points) and for the capecitabine arm at C3D1 (p = .04; absolute difference, 0.5 points), but it did not differ at other times. The mean change in TSE subscale scores differed between the arms from baseline to C3D1 (platinum arm, 0.15; capecitabine arm, -0.72; p = .03), but not from baseline to later time points. The mean decline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale scores exceeded the minimal meaningful change (1.38 points) from baseline to each subsequent time point (all p < .05)., Conclusions: Despite the similar frequency of clinician-rated AEs, PROs identified greater on-treatment symptom burden with capecitabine and complemented clinician-rated AEs by characterizing patients' experiences during chemotherapy., (© 2024 American Cancer Society.)

Endocrine therapy (ET) in combination with CDK4/6 inhibition is routinely used as first-line treatment for HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. However, 30-40% of patients quickly develop disease progression. In this open-label multicenter clinical trial, we utilized a hypothesis-driven protein/phosphoprotein-based approach to identify predictive markers of response to ET plus CDK4/6 inhibition in pre-treatment tissue biopsies. Pathway-centered signaling profiles were generated from microdissected tumor epithelia and surrounding stroma/immune cells using the reverse phase protein microarray. Phosphorylation levels of the CDK4/6 downstream substrates Rb (S780) and FoxM1 (T600) were higher in patients with progressive disease (PD) compared to responders (p = 0.02). Systemic PI3K/AKT/mTOR activation in tumor epithelia and stroma/immune cells was detected in patients with PD. This activation was not explained by underpinning genomic alterations alone. As the number of FDA-approved targeted compounds increases, functional protein-based signaling analyses may become a critical component of response prediction and treatment selection for MBC patients., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is the most aggressive breast cancer subtype with low overall survival rates and high molecular heterogeneity; therefore, few targeted therapies are available. The luminal androgen receptor (LAR) is the most consistently identified TNBC subtype, but the clinical utility has yet to be established. Here, we constructed a novel genomic classifier, LAR-Sig, that distinguishes the LAR subtype from other TNBC subtypes and provide evidence that it is a clinically distinct disease. A meta-analysis of seven TNBC datasets ( n = 1086 samples) from neoadjuvant clinical trials demonstrated that LAR patients have significantly reduced response (pCR) rates than non-LAR TNBC patients (odds ratio = 2.11, 95% CI: 1.33, 2.89). Moreover, deconvolution of the tumor microenvironment confirmed an enrichment of luminal epithelium corresponding with a decrease in basal and myoepithelium in LAR TNBC tumors. Increased immunosuppression in LAR patients may lead to a decreased presence of cycling T-cells and plasma cells. While, an increased presence of myofibroblast-like cancer-associated cells may impede drug delivery and treatment. In summary, the lower levels of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), reduced immune activity in the micro-environment, and lower pCR rates after NAC, suggest that new therapeutic strategies for the LAR TNBC subtype need to be developed., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of NAR Cancer.)

Purpose: CALGB 40603 (NCT00861705), a 2 × 2 randomized phase II trial, demonstrated that adding carboplatin or bevacizumab to weekly paclitaxel (wP) followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide significantly increased the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate in stage II-III triple-negative breast cancer. We now report long-term outcomes (LTOs) and correlative science end points., Patients and Methods: The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate LTOs in 443 patients who initiated study treatment. Log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards models evaluated the impact of clinical characteristics, pathologic response, calculated residual cancer burden (RCB) in patients with residual disease (RD), treatment assignment, and dose delivery during wP on LTOs, including event-free survival (EFS). Genomic predictors of treatment response and outcomes were assessed on pretreatment tumor samples by mRNA sequencing., Results: Among baseline characteristics, only the clinical stage was associated with LTOs. At a median follow-up of 7.9 years, LTOs were not significantly improved with either carboplatin or bevacizumab, overall or in patients with basal-like subtype cancers by genomic analysis. Patients with pCR (n = 205, 46.3%) had significantly higher 5-year EFS (85.5% v 56.6%, log-rank P < .0001) and overall survival (87.9% v 63.4%, P < .0001) rates compared with patients with RD, even those with RCB class I. Among clinical and genomic features, evidence of immune activation, including tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and low B-cell receptor evenness, was associated with pCR and improved EFS., Conclusion: Despite higher pCR rates, neither carboplatin nor bevacizumab appeared to improve LTOs although the study was not powered to assess these secondary end points. pCR was associated with superior LTOs even when compared with minimal RD. Markers of immune activation in pretreatment tumor biopsies were independently associated with higher pCR rates and improved survival., Competing Interests: Karla BallmanConsulting or Advisory Role: Medtronic, Takeda, AgenusPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Prostate cancer signature patent (Inst)Expert Testimony: Janssen Oncology, Lilly, Sanofi Sara SelitskyEmployment: QuantBio, Sash BiosciencesConsulting or Advisory Role: GeneCentric, C4 Therapeutics, Select ImmunoGenomics, FORMA Therapeutics, Atlas Venture, CytomX Therapeutics (Inst), Actym Therapeutics (Inst), Capulus Therapeutics (Inst), Codagenix (Inst) Joel S. ParkerStock and Other Ownership Interests: GeneCentric, Reveal GenomicsConsulting or Advisory Role: Bristol Myers Squibb/CelgenePatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: J.S.P. has authored patents related to the PAM50 algorithm, which are licensed to NanoString Technologies Patricia A. SpearsConsulting or Advisory Role: Pfizer Sara M. TolaneyThis author is a member of the Journal of Clinical Oncology Editorial Board. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript.Consulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Pfizer, Merck, Lilly, Nektar, NanoString Technologies, AstraZeneca, Puma Biotechnology, Genentech, Eisai, Sanofi, Celldex, Bristol Myers Squibb, Paxman, Seattle Genetics, Odonate Therapeutics, AbbVie, Silverback Therapeutics, G1 Therapeutics, OncoPep, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Samsung Bioepis, CytomX Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, Athenex, Immunomedics/Gilead, Mersana, Certara, 4D Pharma, Ellipses Pharma, OncoSec, Chugai Pharma, BeyondSpring Pharmaceuticals, OncXerna TherapeuticsResearch Funding: Genentech/Roche (Inst), Merck (Inst), Exelixis (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Lilly (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Eisai (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), NanoString Technologies (Inst), Cyclacel (Inst), Nektar (Inst), Immunomedics (Inst), Odonate Therapeutics (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca, Lilly, Merck, Nektar, Novartis, Pfizer, Genentech/Roche, Immunomedics, Eisai, NanoString Technologies, Puma Biotechnology, Celldex Cynthia MaConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Seattle Genetics, Agendia, AstraZeneca, Athenex, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Biovica Inc, Eisai, Olaris, Philips Electronics, Puma Biotechnology, Sanofi Genzyme, Jacobio, Natera, InivataResearch Funding: Pfizer (Inst), Puma Biotechnology (Inst) Eleftherios MamounasHonoraria: Genentech/Roche, Genomic Health, PreciscaConsulting or Advisory Role: Genomic Health, BioTheranostics, Roche/Genentech, Merck, Puma Biotechnology, Precisca, AgendiaSpeakers' Bureau: Genomic Health, Genentech/Roche Mehra GolshanConsulting or Advisory Role: AbbVie, BertisResearch Funding: Breast Cancer Research Foundation Jennifer R. BellonThis author is a member of the Journal of Clinical Oncology Editorial Board. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript.Leadership: International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology PhysicsHonoraria: UpToDate, Accuray, Leidos Biomedical Research, Grupo OncoclinicasResearch Funding: NanoString Technologies (Inst)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Coeditor of breast cancer textbook (Radiation Therapy Techniques and Treatment Planning for Breast Cancer). Honorarium, SpringerOther Relationship: Varian Medical Systems Deborah CollyarHonoraria: PfizerConsulting or Advisory Role: Parexel, MaxisIT, Kinnate BiopharmaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Parexel Olwen M. HahnLeadership: Via OncologyStock and Other Ownership Interests: Teleflex MedicalHonoraria: Cardinal Health (I)Consulting or Advisory Role: Pfizer, hmpglobal.comTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Cardinal Health (I) Clifford A. HudisUncompensated Relationships: Alliance Foundation Trials, Columbia University, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/471974/summary Eric P. WinerHonoraria: Genentech/Roche, Genomic HealthConsulting or Advisory Role: Leap Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Jounce Therapeutics, GlaxoSmithKline, Carrick Therapeutics, Lilly, G1 Therapeutics, Syros Pharmaceuticals, Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, Zymeworks, AthenexResearch Funding: Genentech (Inst)Other Relationship: InfiniteMD Ann PartridgePatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: I receive small royalty payments for coauthoring the breast cancer survivorship section of UpToDateOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/835197 Terry HyslopConsulting or Advisory Role: AbbVieTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbVie Lisa A. CareyResearch Funding: Syndax (Inst), Novartis (Inst), NanoString Technologies (Inst), AbbVie (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst), Veracyte (Inst)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Royalty-sharing agreement, investorship interest in licensed IP to startup company, Falcon Therapeutics, that is designing neural stem-cell–based therapy for glioblastoma multiforme (I)Uncompensated Relationships: Sanofi (Inst), Novartis (Inst), G1 Therapeutics (Inst), Genentech/Roche (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), AstraZeneca/Daiichi Sankyo (Inst), Aptitude Health (Inst), Exact Sciences (Inst), EisaiOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/179671 Charles M. PerouLeadership: GeneCentricStock and Other Ownership Interests: Bioclassifier, GeneCentric, Reveal GenomicsConsulting or Advisory Role: Bioclassifier, GeneCentric, NanoString Technologies, Veracyte, Reveal GenomicsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Royalties from PAM50 breast cancer gene patent application and from lung gene signature patentTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Takeda, Chugai Pharma William M. SikovHonoraria: UpToDateSpeakers' Bureau: Lilly, Daiichi Sankyo, Seattle GeneticsNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Background: Primary analyses of the phase III BrighTNess trial showed addition of carboplatin with/without veliparib to neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved pathological complete response (pCR) rates with manageable acute toxicity in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Here, we report 4.5-year follow-up data from the trial., Patients and Methods: Women with untreated stage II-III TNBC were randomized (2 : 1 : 1) to paclitaxel (weekly for 12 doses) plus: (i) carboplatin (every 3 weeks for four cycles) plus veliparib (twice daily); (ii) carboplatin plus veliparib placebo; or (iii) carboplatin placebo plus veliparib placebo. All patients then received doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide every 2-3 weeks for four cycles. The primary endpoint was pCR. Secondary endpoints included event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Since the co-primary endpoint of increased pCR with carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus carboplatin with paclitaxel was not met, secondary analyses are descriptive., Results: Of 634 patients, 316 were randomized to carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel, 160 to carboplatin with paclitaxel, and 158 to paclitaxel. With median follow-up of 4.5 years, the hazard ratio for EFS for carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus paclitaxel was 0.63 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-0.92, P = 0.02], but 1.12 (95% CI 0.72-1.72, P = 0.62) for carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus carboplatin with paclitaxel. In post hoc analysis, the hazard ratio for EFS was 0.57 (95% CI 0.36-0.91, P = 0.02) for carboplatin with paclitaxel versus paclitaxel. OS did not differ significantly between treatment arms, nor did rates of myelodysplastic syndromes, acute myeloid leukemia, or other secondary malignancies., Conclusions: Improvement in pCR with the addition of carboplatin was associated with long-term EFS benefit with a manageable safety profile, and without increasing the risk of second malignancies, whereas adding veliparib did not impact EFS. These findings support the addition of carboplatin to weekly paclitaxel followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage TNBC., Competing Interests: Role of the funder AbbVie sponsored the study, contributed to its design, and participated in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data and in the writing, reviewing, and approval of the manuscript. All authors had access to all relevant data and participated in writing, review, and approval of this manuscript, with editorial assistance funded by the study funder. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Disclosure CEG received travel funding from Genentech, Roche, Daiichi Sankyo, and AstraZeneca; has received writing support from Roche and AbbVie; has been on uncompensated advisory boards for Genentech, Roche, Daiichi Sankyo, and Seattle Genetics; has been on compensated advisory boards for Exact Sciences; has an uncompensated consulting role for Daiichi Sankyo; and has a compensated consulting role for Athenex. WMS is an unpaid member of the Steering Committee for AbbVie. JH received research funding from Celgene, Hexal, and Novartis; received honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Eisai, Gilead, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Seagen; has a consulting and advisory role for AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Lilly, Hexal, MSD, Novartis, and Roche; reports travel expenses from Celgene, Daiichi, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. HSR received research support for clinical trials through the University of California from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi, Genentech, Immunomedics, Lilly, Macrogenics, Merck, Novartis, Odonate, Pfizer, Polyphor, Seattle Genetics, and Sermonix; received honoraria from Mylan, Puma, and Samsung. JO received honoraria for consulting and/or advisory boards from AbbVie, Agendia, and Amgen Biotechnology, Aptitude Health, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Celgene Corporation, Clovis Oncology, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, G1 Therapeutics, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, GRAIL, Halozyme Therapeutics, Heron Therapeutics, Immunomedics, Ipsen Biopharmaceuticals, Lilly, Merck, Myriad, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis, Pfizer, Pharmacyclics, Pierre Fabre Pharmaceuticals, Prime Oncology, Puma Biotechnology, Roche, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi, Seagen, Syndax Pharmaceuticals, Taiho Oncology, Takeda, and Synthon. DM and MD are AbbVie employees and may hold stock or options. MU is on lectures and advisory boards for AbbVie, Agendia, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BioNTech, BMS, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Jansen Cilag, Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Molecular Health, MSD, Mundipharma, Myriad, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, and Seagen; has a consulting role for AbbVie. MG is an unpaid member of the Steering Committee for AbbVie. JPL received honoraria for consulting and/or advisory boards from Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Lilly, and Roche. OM received consulting fee from AbbVie and G1 Therapeutics; received research funding from AbbVie, Genentech, Pfizer, and Roche; reports travel expenses from AbbVie and Grupo Oncoclinicas; is uncompensated co-chair of advisory board for Pfizer. WFS holds founder shares from Delphi Diagnostics; has intellectual property from Delphi Diagnostics; holds public company shares from Eiger Biopharmaceuticals and IONIS Pharmaceuticals; is on compensated advisory board for Merck; is on uncompensated advisory boards for Delphi Diagnostics and Roche. PR reports unpaid advisory boards, travel, and accommodations from Genentech/Roche; reports travel and accommodations from Lilly and AstraZeneca. JHS received research funding from MSD, Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Pfizer, GSK, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, and Boehringer Ingelheim. RY is on Speakers bureau for Genentech. GSW received grants or contracts from AbbVie, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Roche, Innocrine Pharm, H3BioMedicine Inc., G1 Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, Sermonix Pharm, Taiho Oncology, Seattle Genetics, Inc., Immunogen, Incyte, Genentech, Novartis, Lilly, Janssen, Celgene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medivation, Macrogenics, Merrimack, Tesaro, and Pfizer. DY has a consulting or advisory role for Novartis, Biotheranostics, Bristol Myers Squibb, G1 Therapeutics, Athenex, Immunomedics, Sanofi/Aventis, R-Pharm, Lilly; is on speakers bureau for Novartis and Genentech/Roche; received research funding from Genentech/Roche, Novartis, MedImmune, Lilly, Medivation, Pfizer, Tesaro, Macrogenics, AbbVie, Merck, Clovis Oncology, Amgen, Biomarin, Biothera, Dana Farber Cancer Hospital, Incyte, Innocrin Pharma, Nektar, NSABP Foundation, Odonate Therapeutics, Polyphor; reports travel expenses from Novartis and Genentech/Roche. SL reports grant paid to from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Immunomedics/Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Vifor; received honorarium for advisory boards paid to institute: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Eirgenix, GSK, Lilly, Merck KG, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Prime/Medscape, Puma, Roche, and Seagen; is on lectures paid to institute for Chugai (personal), Daiichi Sankyo, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, PriME/Medscape, Roche, and Samsung; has a medical writing role for AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest. Data sharing AbbVie is committed to responsible data sharing regarding the clinical trials we sponsor. This includes access to anonymized, individual, and trial-level data (analysis datasets), as well as other information (e.g. protocols and Clinical Study Reports), as long as the trials are not part of an ongoing or planned regulatory submission. This includes requests for clinical trial data for unlicensed products and indications. These clinical trial data can be requested by any qualified researchers who engage in rigorous, independent scientific research, and will be provided following review and approval of a research proposal and Statistical Analysis Plan and execution of a Data Sharing Agreement. Data requests can be submitted at any time and the data will be accessible for 12 months, with possible extensions considered. For more information on the process, or to submit a request, visit the following link: https://www.abbvie.com/our-science/clinical-trials/clinical-trials-data-and-information-sharing/data-and-information-sharing-with-qualified-researchers.html., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

In the BrighTNess trial, carboplatin added to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) was associated with increased pathologic complete response (pCR) rates in patients with stage II/III triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). In this matched cohort study, cases with a germline BRCA1/2 mutation (gBRCA; n = 75) were matched 1:2 with non-gBRCA controls (n = 150) by treatment arm, lymph node status, and age to evaluate pCR rates and association of benefit from platinum/PARP inhibitors with validated RNA expression-based immune, proliferation, and genomic instability scores among gBRCA with the addition of carboplatin ± veliparib to NAC. Among the well-matched cohorts, odds of pCR were not higher in gBRCA cancers who received standard NAC with carboplatin (OR 0.24, 95% CI [0.04-1.24], p = 0.09) or with carboplatin/veliparib (OR 0.44, 95% CI [0.10-1.84], p = 0.26) compared to non-gBRCA cancers. Higher PAM50 proliferation, GeparSixto immune, and CIN70 genomic instability scores were each associated with higher pCR rate in the overall cohort, but not specifically in gBRCA cases. In this study, gBRCA carriers did not have higher odds of pCR than non-gBRCA controls when carboplatin ± veliparib was added to NAC, and showed no significant differences in molecular, immune, chromosomal instability, or proliferation gene expression metrics., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: De-escalation of axillary surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) requires careful patient selection. We seek to determine predictors of nodal pathologic complete response (ypN0) among patients treated on CALGB 40601 or 40603, which tested NAC regimens in HER2+ and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), respectively., Patients and Methods: A total of 760 patients with stage II-III HER2+ or TNBC were analyzed. Those who had axillary surgery before NAC (N = 122), or who had missing pretreatment clinical nodal status (cN) (N = 58) or ypN status (N = 41) were excluded. The proportion of patients with ypN0 disease was estimated for those with and without breast pathologic complete response (pCR) according to pretreatment nodal status., Results: In 539 patients, the overall ypN0 rate was 76.3% (411/539) to 93.2% (245/263) in patients with breast pCR and 60.1% (166/276) with residual breast disease (RD) (P < 0.0001). For patients who were cN0 pretreatment, the ypN0 rate was 88.8% (214/241), 96.3% (104/108) with breast pCR, and 82.7% (110/133) with RD. For patients who were cN1, 66.2% (157/237) converted to ypN0, 91.7% (111/121) with breast pCR and 39.7% (46/116) with RD. For patients who were cN2/3, 65.6% (40/61) converted to ypN0, 88.2% (30/34) with breast pCR and 37.0% (10/27) with RD. On multivariable analysis, only pretreatment clinical nodal status and breast pCR/RD were associated with ypN0 status (both P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Breast pCR and pretreatment nodal status are predictive of ypN0 axillary nodal involvement, with < 5% residual nodal disease among cN0 patients who experience breast pCR. These findings support the incorporation of axillary surgery de-escalation strategies into NAC trials., (© 2021. Society of Surgical Oncology.)

Purpose: Patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and residual invasive disease (RD) after completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) have a high-risk for recurrence, which is reduced by adjuvant capecitabine. Preclinical models support the use of platinum agents in the TNBC basal subtype. The EA1131 trial hypothesized that invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) would not be inferior but improved in patients with basal subtype TNBC treated with adjuvant platinum compared with capecitabine., Patients and Methods: Patients with clinical stage II or III TNBC with ≥ 1 cm RD in the breast post-NAC were randomly assigned to receive platinum (carboplatin or cisplatin) once every 3 weeks for four cycles or capecitabine 14 out of 21 days every 3 weeks for six cycles. TNBC subtype (basal v nonbasal) was determined by PAM50 in the residual disease. A noninferiority design with superiority alternative was chosen, assuming a 4-year iDFS of 67% with capecitabine., Results: Four hundred ten of planned 775 participants were randomly assigned to platinum or capecitabine between 2015 and 2021. After median follow-up of 20 months and 120 iDFS events (61% of full information) in the 308 (78%) patients with basal subtype TNBC, the 3-year iDFS for platinum was 42% (95% CI, 30 to 53) versus 49% (95% CI, 39 to 59) for capecitabine. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were more common with platinum agents. The Data and Safety Monitoring Committee recommended stopping the trial as it was unlikely that further follow-up would show noninferiority or superiority of platinum., Conclusion: Platinum agents do not improve outcomes in patients with basal subtype TNBC RD post-NAC and are associated with more severe toxicity when compared with capecitabine. Participants had a lower than expected 3-year iDFS regardless of study treatment, highlighting the need for better therapies in this high-risk population., Competing Interests: Ingrid A. MayerConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Immunomedics, Macrogenics, Pfizer, AbbVie, Seattle Genetics, Puma Biotechnology, Cyclacel, Blueprint MedicinesResearch Funding: Novartis, Pfizer, Genentech Carlos L. ArteagaLeadership: American Association for Cancer ResearchStock and Other Ownership Interests: Provista Diagnostics, Y-Trap IncConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Lilly, Sanofi, Radius Health, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Puma Biotechnology, Merck, H3 Biomedicine, Symphogen, Origimed, Petra Pharma, Third Rock Ventures, Immunomedics, Daiichi Sankyo, Athenex, G1 Therapeutics, Clovis OncologyResearch Funding: Puma Biotechnology, Pfizer, Lilly, Radius Health, Takeda, BayerOther Relationship: Susan G. Komen for the Cure William F. SymmansStock and Other Ownership Interests: ISIS Pharmaceuticals, Nuvera Biosciences, Delphi Diagnostics, Eiger BioPharmaceuticalsConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck, Almac DiagnosticsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Intellectual Property, Intellectual Property (expired)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Luminex, MerckUncompensated Relationships: Delphi Diagnostics Ben H. ParkLeadership: LoxoStock and Other Ownership Interests: Loxo, CelcuityHonoraria: AstraZenecaConsulting or Advisory Role: Horizon Discovery, Foundation Medicine, Loxo, Casdin Capital, H3 Biomedicine, Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Lilly, Celcuity, Sermonix Pharmaceuticals, PathovaxResearch Funding: AbbVie, Pfizer, GE Healthcare, LillyPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Royalties paid through inventions at Johns Hopkins University by Horizon Discovery LtdTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Lilly, LoxoUncompensated Relationships: Tempus Amye J. TevaarwerkOther Relationship: Epic Systems Karen L. SmithStock and Other Ownership Interests: AbbVie, Abbott LaboratoriesHonoraria: ASiM CMEResearch Funding: Pfizer Margaret BlockConsulting or Advisory Role: Theranostics Health Bernard TawfikOther Relationship: Ipsen Lisa E. FlaumConsulting or Advisory Role: Seattle Genetics, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: Seattle Genetics, Novartis, AstraZeneca Erica L. MayerConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly, Novartis, Sanofi, Eisai, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: Pfizer William M. SikovHonoraria: UpToDateSpeakers' Bureau: Lilly, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Seagen Lynne I. WagnerStock and Other Ownership Interests: Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Gilead SciencesConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, AthenexTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Celgene Angela M. DeMicheleResearch Funding: Pfizer, Genentech, Calithera Biosciences, Novartis Joseph A. SparanoStock and Other Ownership Interests: MetastatConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech/Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Lilly, Celldex, Pfizer, Prescient Therapeutics, Juno Therapeutics, Merrimack, Adgero Biopharmaceuticals, Cardinal Health, GlaxoSmithKline, CStone Pharmaceuticals, Epic Sciences, Daiichi Sankyo, BMSiSpeakers' Bureau: Eisai, CertaraResearch Funding: Prescient Therapeutics, Deciphera, Genentech/Roche, Merck, Novartis, Merrimack, Radius Health, Olema PharmaceuticalsTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Roche/Genentech, Adgero Biopharmaceuticals, Myriad Genetics, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Rhenium Medical Antonio C. WolffConsulting or Advisory Role: Ionis PharmaceuticalsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Antonio Wolff has been named as inventor on one or more issued patents or pending patent applications relating to methylation in breast cancer, and has assigned his rights to JHU, and participates in a royalty sharing agreement with JHUOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/357301/summary Kathy D. MillerConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck, Genentech/Roche, Athenex, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb/CelgeneResearch Funding: Taiho Pharmaceutical, Novartis, Seattle Genetics, Pfizer, Astex Pharmaceuticals, British Biotech, CytomX TherapeuticsNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: In HER2-positive breast cancer (HER2+ BC), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with dual HER2-targeted therapy achieves high pathologic complete response (pCR) rates. Anthracycline-free NACT regimens avoid toxicities associated with anthracyclines, but every 3-week TCHP also has substantial side effects. We hypothesized that a weekly regimen might have equivalent efficacy with less toxicity; we also investigated whether poorly responding patients would benefit from switching to AC., Methods: Patients with clinical stage II-III HER2+ BC received weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m 2 and carboplatin AUC2 with every 3-week trastuzumab and pertuzumab (wPCbTP), with the option of splitting the pertuzumab loading dose. After 12 weeks, responding patients continued wPCbTP for another 6 weeks, while non-responders switched to AC. Dose modifications and post-op therapy were at investigator discretion., Results: In 30 evaluable patients, the pCR rate was 77% (95% CI 58-90%); 12/14 (86%) in ER-negative and 11/16 (69%) in ER-positive. Only two patients transitioned to AC for non-response, of which one achieved pCR. There were no episodes of febrile neutropenia or grade ≥ 3 peripheral neuropathy, though several patients who continued wPCbTP stopped before week 18. Split-dose pertuzumab was associated with less grade ≥ 2 diarrhea (40%) than the standard loading dose (60%)., Conclusion: pCR rates with our regimen were as high as reported with TCHP with fewer grade ≥ 3 toxicities, though diarrhea remains a concern. Too few patients had a suboptimal response to adequately test switching to AC. The wPCbTP regimen should be considered an alternative to TCHP as neoadjuvant therapy for HER2+ BC., Trail Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02789657., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Importance: Adding carboplatin to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) likely benefits a subset of patients; however, determinants of benefit are poorly understood., Objective: To define the association of molecular subtype, tumor proliferation, and immunophenotype with benefit of carboplatin added to NAC for patients with stages II to III TNBC., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a prespecified secondary analysis of a phase 3, double-blind, randomized clinical trial (BrighTNess) that enrolled 634 women across 145 centers in 15 countries. Women with clinical stages II to III TNBC who had undergone pretreatment biopsy were eligible to participate. Whole transcriptome RNA sequencing was performed on the biopsy specimens. The prespecified end point was association of pathologic complete response (pCR) with gene expression-based molecular subtype, with secondary end points investigating established signatures (proliferation, immune) and exploratory analyses of immunophenotype. Data were collected from April 2014 to March 2016. The study analyses were performed from January 2018 to March 2019., Interventions: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with paclitaxel followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide, or this same regimen with carboplatin or carboplatin plus veliparib., Main Outcomes and Measures: Association of gene expression-based molecular subtype (PAM50 and TNBC subtypes) with pCR., Results: Of the 634 women (median age, 51 [range, 22-78] years) enrolled in BrighTNess, 482 (76%) patients had evaluable RNA sequencing data, with similar baseline characteristics relative to the overall intention-to-treat population. Pathologic complete response was significantly more frequent in PAM50 basal-like vs nonbasal-like cancers overall (202 of 386 [52.3%] vs 34 of 96 [35.4%]; P = .003). Carboplatin benefit was not significantly different in basal-like vs nonbasal-like subgroups (P = .80 for interaction). In multivariable analysis, proliferation (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.21-0.61; P < .001) and immune (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49-0.79; P < .001) signatures were independently associated with pCR. Tumors above the median for proliferation and immune signatures had the highest pCR rate (84 of 125; 67%), while those below the median for both signatures had the lowest pCR rate (42 of 125; 34%). Exploratory gene expression immune analyses suggested that tumors with higher inferred CD8+ T-cell infiltration may receive greater benefit with addition of carboplatin., Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, triple-negative breast cancer subtyping revealed high pCR rates in basal-like and immunomodulatory subsets. Analysis of biological processes related to basal-like and immunomodulatory phenotypes identified tumor cell proliferation and immune scores as independent factors associated with achieving pCR; the benefit of carboplatin on pCR was seen across all molecular subtypes. Further validation of immunophenotype with existing biomarkers may help to escalate or de-escalate therapy for patients with TNBC., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02032277.

Cryoablation is a well-tolerated outpatient procedure that has been used to treat metastatic sites as well as small breast cancers in patients who are considered poor candidates for surgery. Recent studies suggest that cell disruption caused by cryoablation may increase the expression and immunogenicity of tumor neoantigens, which could enhance the ability of the immune system to recognize and attack cancer cells at both local and distant sites. Such an approach might broaden the role of immunotherapy for the treatment of breast cancer, which has previously demonstrated limited response to these agents, likely owing to the modest immunogenicity of most breast cancer subtypes. If cryoablation can induce a systemic tumor-specific response, it could enhance tumor susceptibility to immunotherapy agents. This review briefly summarizes the necessary components for generating an immune response against tumor cells, reviews the tumor microenvironment of breast cancer, describes the rationale for and limitations of immune checkpoint inhibition, highlights the potential for cryoablation to induce a systemic tumor-specific immune response, and describes the rationale for combining cryoablation and immune checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of breast cancer. Keywords: Ablation Techniques, Breast, Neoplasms-Primary, Percutaneous, Tumor Microenvironment, Tumor Response, Ultrasonography © RSNA, 2021., Competing Interests: Disclosures of Conflicts of Interest: H.R.T. disclosed no relevant relationships. R.C.W. Activities related to the present article: disclosed no relevant relationships. Activities not related to the present article: disclosed no relevant relationships. Other relationships: principal investigator in a clinical trial. W.M.S. Activities related to the present article: disclosed no relevant relationships. Activities not related to the present article: received payment for lecturing from Lilly Oncology, Eisai, Daiichi-Sankyo, and AstraZeneca. Other relationships: disclosed no relevant relationships. P.J.L. Activities related to the present article: disclosed no relevant relationships. Activities not related to the present article: consultant to Galil Medical and Endocare; issued patents with Endocare. Other relationships: disclosed no relevant relationships., (2021 by the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.)

Importance: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) is often administered to enable breast-conserving therapy (BCT) in stages II to III breast cancer., Objectives: To prospectively evaluate the role of NST in conversion from BCT ineligibility to BCT eligibility and to assess the association of response to NST, germline BRCA (gBRCA) status, and region of treatment with surgical choice in women with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC)., Design, Setting, and Participants: This prespecified secondary analysis of a multicentered, phase 3, double-blind, randomized clinical trial (BrighTNess) enrolled 634 eligible women across 145 centers in 15 countries in North America, Europe, and Asia. Women with operable, clinical stages II to III TNBC who underwent gBRCA mutation testing before initiating NST were eligible to participate. Data were collected from April 1, 2014, to December 8, 2016. This preplanned analysis was performed from January 5, 2018, to October 28, 2019., Interventions: Study participants were randomized to receive 12 weeks of weekly paclitaxel alone or with the addition of carboplatin and/or veliparib, followed by 4 cycles of doxorubicin hydrochloride and cyclophosphamide., Main Outcomes and Measures: Surgeons assessed BCT candidacy by clinical and radiographic criteria before and after NST. Surgical choices and whether BCT eligibility was associated with the likelihood of pathologic complete response were then analyzed., Results: Among the 634 randomized patients (median age, 51 [range, 22-78] years), pre- and post-NST assessments were available for 604 patients. Of 141 patients deemed BCT ineligible at baseline, 75 (53.2%) converted to BCT eligible. Overall, 342 (68.1%) of 502 patients deemed BCT eligible after NST underwent BCT, including 42 (56.0%) of the 75 who converted to BCT eligible. Patients treated in Europe and Asia were more likely to undergo BCT (odds ratio, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.84-3.84) compared with those treated in North America. Among patients without gBRCA mutation undergoing mastectomy, those treated in North America were more likely to undergo contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (57 of 81 [70.4%] vs 6 of 30 [20.0%]; P < .001). Rates of pathologic complete response were similar between patients deemed BCT eligible at baseline and those who were BCT ineligible but converted to BCT eligibility after NST (55.3 [235 of 425] vs 49.3% [37 of 75]; P = .38)., Conclusions and Relevance: This prospective analysis of NST and BCT eligibility in TNBC demonstrates a conversion from BCT ineligibility to BCT eligibility of 53.2%. Lower BCT rates among eligible patients and higher bilateral mastectomy rates among patients without gBRCA mutation in North America merit investigation., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02032277.

Introduction: The ability of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to predict pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) varies across biological subtypes. We sought to determine how well breast MRI findings following initial treatment on the phase III BrighTNess trial correlated with pCR in patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC)., Methods: Baseline and mid-treatment imaging and pathologic response data were available in 519 patients with stage II-III TNBC who underwent NST as per protocol. MRI complete response (mCR) was defined as disappearance of all target lesion(s) and MRI partial response (mPR) as a ≥50% reduction in the largest tumor diameter., Results: Overall, mCR was demonstrated in 116 patients (22%), whereas 166 (32%) had mPR and 237 (46%) had stable/progressive disease (SD/PD). The positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value, and overall accuracy of the mid-treatment MRI for pCR were 78%, 56%, and 61%, respectively; accuracy did not differ significantly between gBRCA mutation carriers and non-carriers (52% vs. 63%, p = 0.10). When compared to patients with SD/PD, those with mPR or mCR were 3.35-fold (95% CI 2.07-5.41) more likely to have pCR at surgery. MRI response during NST was significantly associated with eligibility for breast-conserving surgery following completion of treatment (93.1% for mCR vs. 81.6% for SD/PD, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Complete response on mid-treatment MRI in the BrighTNess trial had a PPV of 78% for demonstration of pCR after completion of NST in TNBC. However, a substantial proportion of patients with mPR or SD/PD also achieved a pCR., Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02032277., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The following co-authors received funding from AbbVie: Mehra Golshan, Sibylle Loibl, Jens Bodo Huober, Joyce O'Shaughnessy, Hope S. Rugo, Norman Wolmark (institution only), Peter Ansell, David Maag, Danielle M. Sullivan, Otto Metzger-Filho, Gunter Von Minckwitz, Charles E. Geyer, Jr., William M. Sikov, Michael Untch. Jens Bodo Huober reports honoraria and is on advisory boards for Celgene, Roche, Novartis, Hexal, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Amgen, Eisai, MSD, and Abbvie; research grants from Celgene and Novartis; and travel grants from Roche, Novartis, Celgene, Pfizer and Daiichi-Sankyo. William Sikov reports honoraria for promotional talks from Lilly Oncology and Eisai in the last 12 months (all not related to this submission)., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Importance: There has been significant recent interest in understanding the utility of quantitative imaging to delineate breast cancer intrinsic biological factors and therapeutic response. No clinically accepted biomarkers are as yet available for estimation of response to human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (currently known as ERBB2, but referred to as HER2 in this study)-targeted therapy in breast cancer., Objective: To determine whether imaging signatures on clinical breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could noninvasively characterize HER2-positive tumor biological factors and estimate response to HER2-targeted neoadjuvant therapy., Design, Setting, and Participants: In a retrospective diagnostic study encompassing 209 patients with breast cancer, textural imaging features extracted within the tumor and annular peritumoral tissue regions on MRI were examined as a means to identify increasingly granular breast cancer subgroups relevant to therapeutic approach and response. First, among a cohort of 117 patients who received an MRI prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) at a single institution from April 27, 2012, through September 4, 2015, imaging features that distinguished HER2+ tumors from other receptor subtypes were identified. Next, among a cohort of 42 patients with HER2+ breast cancers with available MRI and RNaseq data accumulated from a multicenter, preoperative clinical trial (BrUOG 211B), a signature of the response-associated HER2-enriched (HER2-E) molecular subtype within HER2+ tumors (n = 42) was identified. The association of this signature with pathologic complete response was explored in 2 patient cohorts from different institutions, where all patients received HER2-targeted NAC (n = 28, n = 50). Finally, the association between significant peritumoral features and lymphocyte distribution was explored in patients within the BrUOG 211B trial who had corresponding biopsy hematoxylin-eosin-stained slide images. Data analysis was conducted from January 15, 2017, to February 14, 2019., Main Outcomes and Measures: Evaluation of imaging signatures by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) in identifying HER2+ molecular subtypes and distinguishing pathologic complete response (ypT0/is) to NAC with HER2-targeting., Results: In the 209 patients included (mean [SD] age, 51.1 [11.7] years), features from the peritumoral regions better discriminated HER2-E tumors (maximum AUC, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.79-0.90; 9-12 mm from the tumor) compared with intratumoral features (AUC, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.69-0.84). A classifier combining peritumoral and intratumoral features identified the HER2-E subtype (AUC, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.84-0.93) and was significantly associated with response to HER2-targeted therapy in both validation cohorts (AUC, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.61-0.98 and AUC, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.84). Features from the 0- to 3-mm peritumoral region were significantly associated with the density of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (R2 = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.39-0.75; P = .002)., Conclusions and Relevance: A combination of peritumoral and intratumoral characteristics appears to identify intrinsic molecular subtypes of HER2+ breast cancers from imaging, offering insights into immune response within the peritumoral environment and suggesting potential benefit for treatment guidance.

Background: Although several randomised trials in patients with triple-negative breast cancer have shown that the addition of carboplatin, with or without poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, to neoadjuvant chemotherapy increases the likelihood of achieving a pathological complete response, the use of these therapies in this setting has remained controversial. The BrighTNess trial was designed to assess the addition of the PARP inhibitor veliparib plus carboplatin or carboplatin alone to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer., Methods: We did a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (BrighTNess) across 145 sites in 15 countries. Patients aged 18 years and older with previously untreated histologically or cytologically confirmed clinical stage II-III triple-negative breast cancer, who were candidates for potentially curative surgery and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, were randomly assigned (2:1:1) by an interactive response technology system via permuted blocks (block size of four) within strata to receive one of three segment 1 regimens: paclitaxel (80 mg/m 2 intravenously weekly for 12 doses) plus carboplatin (area under the curve 6 mg/mL per min, intravenously every 3 weeks, for four cycles) plus veliparib (50 mg orally, twice a day); paclitaxel plus carboplatin plus veliparib placebo (twice a day); or paclitaxel plus carboplatin placebo (every 3 weeks for four cycles) plus veliparib placebo. Following segment 1, all patients were assigned to segment 2 in which they received doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide every 2-3 weeks for four cycles. Randomisation for segment 1 was stratified by germline BRCA mutation status, nodal stage, and planned schedule of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide administration. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response in breast and lymph nodes as determined by site pathologists following completion of neoadjuvant therapy. Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat and safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. These are the first results of an ongoing clinical trial; the data cutoff for the analyses presented was Dec 8, 2016. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02032277., Findings: Between April 4, 2014, and March 18, 2016, 634 patients were randomly assigned: 316 to paclitaxel plus carboplatin plus veliparib, 160 to paclitaxel plus carboplatin, and 158 to paclitaxel alone. The proportion of patients who achieved a pathological complete response was higher in the paclitaxel, carboplatin, and veliparib group than in patients receiving paclitaxel alone (168 [53%] of 316 patients vs 49 [31%] of 158, p<0·0001), but not compared with patients receiving paclitaxel plus carboplatin (92 [58%] of 160 patients, p=0·36). Grade 3 or 4 toxicities, and serious adverse events were more common in patients receiving carboplatin, whereas veliparib did not substantially increase toxicity. The most common grade 3 or 4 events overall were neutropenia (352 [56%] of 628 patients), anaemia (180 [29%]), and thrombocytopenia (75 [12%]) through complete treatment, and febrile neutropenia (88 [15%] of 601 patients) during segment 2. The most common serious adverse events were febrile neutropenia (80 [13%] of 628 patients) and anaemia (20 [3%])., Interpretation: Although the addition of veliparib and carboplatin to paclitaxel followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide improved the proportion of patients with triple-negative breast cancer who achieved a pathological complete response, the addition of veliparib to carboplatin and paclitaxel did not. Increased toxicities with the addition of carboplatin (with or without veliparib) to paclitaxel were manageable and did not substantially affect treatment delivery of paclitaxel followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide. Given the consistent results with previous studies, the addition of carboplatin appears to have a favourable risk to benefit profile and might be considered as a potential component of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with high-risk, triple-negative breast cancer., Funding: AbbVie., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with cancer experience stress surrounding diagnosis and treatment. Many cancer centers employ a nurse-led education session to alleviate patient anxiety and confusion.
., Objectives: The goal was to evaluate the effect of a nurse-led chemotherapy teaching session on patients' knowledge, anxiety, and preparedness for 
cancer-directed therapy.
., Methods: After discussing treatment with their oncologist, participants completed a survey assessing their perceived understanding of various treatment topics. After, they underwent a teaching session with an oncology nurse. The survey was readministered when patients returned for their first and second treatment cycles.
., Findings: Significant increases were observed in patients' understanding of their treatment schedule, potential adverse effects, and antiemetic medication regimen by the first cycle of therapy and a reduction in treatment-related anxiety by the second cycle of therapy.

Purpose: Paclitaxel is associated with both an acute pain syndrome (P-APS) and chronic chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). Given that extensive animal data suggest that minocycline may prevent chemotherapy-induced neurotoxicity, the purpose of this pilot study was to investigate the efficacy of minocycline for the prevention of CIPN and the P-APS., Methods: Patients with breast cancer were enrolled prior to initiating neoadjuvant or adjuvant weekly paclitaxel for 12 weeks and were randomized to receive minocycline 200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg twice daily or a matching placebo. Patients completed (1) an acute pain syndrome questionnaire daily during chemotherapy to measure P-APS and (2) the EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 questionnaire at baseline, prior to each dose of paclitaxel, and monthly for 6 months post treatment, to measure CIPN., Results: Forty-seven patients were randomized. There were no remarkable differences noted between the minocycline and placebo groups for the overall sensory neuropathy score of the EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 or its individual components, which evaluate tingling, numbness and shooting/burning pain in hands and feet. However, patients taking minocycline had a significant reduction in the daily average pain score attributed to P-APS (p = 0.02). Not only were no increased toxicities reported with minocycline, but there was a significant reduction in fatigue (p = 0.02)., Conclusions: Results of this pilot study do not support the use of minocycline to prevent CIPN, but suggest that it may reduce P-APS and decrease fatigue; further study of the impact of this agent on those endpoints may be warranted.

Importance: In cancer clinical trials, symptomatic adverse events (AEs), such as nausea, are reported by investigators rather than by patients. There is increasing interest to collect symptomatic AE data via patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires, but it is unclear whether it is feasible to implement this approach in multicenter trials., Objective: To examine whether patients are willing and able to report their symptomatic AEs in multicenter trials., Design, Setting, and Participants: A total of 361 consecutive patients enrolled in any 1 of 9 US multicenter cancer treatment trials were invited to self-report 13 common symptomatic AEs using a PRO adaptation of the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) via tablet computers at 5 successive clinic visits. Patient adherence was tracked with reasons for missed self-reports. Agreement with clinician AE reports was analyzed with weighted κ statistics. Patient and investigator perspectives were elicited by survey. The study was conducted from March 15, 2007, to August 11, 2011. Data analysis was performed from August 9, 2013, to March 21, 2014., Results: Of the 361 patients invited to participate, 285 individuals enrolled, with a median age of 57 years (range, 24-88), 202 (74.3%) female, 241 (85.5%) white, 73 (26.8%) with a high school education or less, and 176 (64.7%) who reported regular internet use (denominators varied owing to missing data). Across all patients and trials, there were 1280 visits during which patients had an opportunity to self-report (ie, patients were alive and enrolled in a treatment trial at the time of the visit). Self-reports were completed at 1202 visits (93.9% overall adherence). Adherence was highest at baseline and declined over time (visit 1, 100%; visit 2, 96%; visit 3, 95%; visit 4, 91%; and visit 5, 85%). Reasons for missing PROs included institutional errors in 27 of 48 (56.3%) of the cases (eg, staff forgetting to bring computers to patients at visits), patients feeling "too ill" in 8 (16.7%), patient refusal in 8 (16.7%), and internet connectivity problems in 5 (10.4%). Patient-investigator CTCAE agreement was moderate or worse for most symptoms (most κ < 0.05), with investigators reporting fewer AEs than patients across symptoms. Most patients believed that the system was easy to use (234 [93.2%]) and useful (230 [93.1%]), and investigators thought that the patient-reported AEs were useful (133 [94.3%]) and accurate (119 [83.2%])., Conclusions and Relevance: Participants in multicenter cancer trials are willing and able to report their own symptomatic AEs at most clinic visits and report more AEs than investigators. This approach may improve the precision of AE reporting in cancer trials.

Background: Management of the axilla in stage II/III breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) is controversial. To understand current patterns of care, we collected axillary data from 2 NST trials: HER2-positive (Cancer and Leukemia Group B [CALGB] 40601) and triple-negative (CALGB 40603)., Study Design: Axillary evaluation pre- and post-NST was per the treating surgeon and could include sentinel node biopsy. Post-NST, node-positive patients were recommended to undergo axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). We report pre-NST histopathologic nodal evaluation and post-NST axillary surgical procedures with correlation to clinical and pathologic nodal status., Results: Seven hundred and forty-two patients were treated, 704 had complete nodal data pre-NST and post-NST. Pre-NST, 422 (60%) of 704 patients underwent at least 1 procedure for axillary node evaluation (total of 468 procedures): fine needle aspiration (n = 234; 74% positive), core needle biopsy (n = 138; 72% positive), and sentinel node biopsy (n = 96; 33% positive). Pre-NST, 304 patients were considered node-positive. Post-NST, 304 of 704 patients (43%) underwent sentinel node biopsy; 44 were positive and 259 were negative (29 and 36 patients, respectively, had subsequent ALND). Three hundred and ninety-one (56%) patients went directly to post-NST ALND and 9 (1%) pre-NST node-positive patients had no post-NST axillary procedure. Post-NST, 170 (24%) of the 704 patients had residual axillary disease. Agreement between post-NST clinical and radiologic staging and post-NST histologic staging was strongest for node-negative (81%) and weaker for node-positive (N1 31%, N2 29%), with more than half of the clinically node-positive patients found to be pathologic negative (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Our results suggest there is no widely accepted standard for axillary nodal evaluation pre-NST. Post-NST staging was highly concordant in patients with N0 disease, but poorly so in node-positive disease. Accurate methods are needed to identify post-NST patients without residual axillary disease to potentially spare ALND., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Informed consent forms (ICFs) for oncology clinical trials have grown increasingly longer and more complex. We evaluated objective understanding of critical components of informed consent among patients enrolling in contemporary trials of conventional or novel biologic/targeted therapies., Methods: We evaluated ICFs for cancer clinical trials for length and readability, and patients registered on those studies were asked to complete a validated 14-question survey assessing their understanding of key characteristics of the trial. Mean scores were compared in groups defined by trial and patient characteristics., Results: Fifty patients, of whom half participated in trials of immunotherapy or biologic/targeted agents and half in trials of conventional therapy, completed the survey. On average, ICFs for industry-originated trials (N = 9 trials) were significantly longer (P < .0001) and had lower Flesch ease-of-reading scores (P = .003) than investigator-initiated trials (N = 11). At least 80% of patients incorrectly responded to three key questions which addressed the experimental nature of their trial therapy, its purported efficacy and potential risks relative to alternative treatments. The mean objective understanding score was 76.9±8.8, but it was statistically significantly lower for patients who had not completed high school (P = .011). The scores did not differ significantly by type of cancer therapy (P = .12) or trial sponsor (P = .38)., Conclusions: Many participants enrolled on cancer trials had poor understanding of essential elements of their trial. In order to ensure true informed consent, innovative approaches, such as expanded in-person counseling adapted to the patient's education level or cultural characteristics should be evaluated across socio-demographic groups., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01772511.

Breast cancer is a heterogenous disease, comprised of at least 3 major subtypes: hormone receptor-positive/HER2-(HR+), HER2+, and HR-/HER2-(triple negative) breast cancers. The medical management of each subype is distinct. In this article, we review contemporary data supporting the use of chemotherapy, endocrine therapy and biologic therapies, especially HER2-directed agents, in the adjuvant and neoadjuvant setting in patients with newly diagnosed nonmetastatic (stage I-III) breast cancer.

Objective: It had been previously shown that patients who receive neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) are more likely to undergo breast-conserving therapy (BCT) than those who have primary surgery. However, the frequency with which patients who are not BCT-eligible prior to NST convert to BCT-eligible with treatment is unknown. To document this conversion rate in a subset of patients expected to have a high clinical response rate to NST, we studied surgical assessment and management of patients enrolled on a randomized neoadjuvant trial for stage II-III HER2-positive breast cancer (HER2 + BC)(CALGB 40601)., Methods: The treating surgeon assessed BCT candidacy based on clinico-radiographic criteria both before and after NST. Definitive breast surgical management was at surgeon and patient discretion. We sought to determine (1) the conversion rate from BCT-ineligible to BCT-eligible (2) the percentage of BCT-eligible patients who chose breast conservation, and (3) the rate of successful BCT. We also evaluated surgeon-determined factors for BCT-ineligibility and the correlation between BCT eligibility and pathologic complete response (pCR)., Results: Of 292 patients with pre- and post-NST surgical assessments, 59 % were non-BCT candidates at baseline. Of the 43 % of these patients who converted with NST, 67 % opted for BCT, with an 80 % success rate. NST increased the BCT-eligible rate from 41 to 64 %. Common factors cited for BCT-ineligibility prior to NST including tumor size (56 %) and probable poor cosmetic outcome (26 %) were reduced by 67 and 75 %, respectively, with treatment, while multicentricity, the second most common factor (33 %), fell by only 16 %. Since 23 % of the BCT-eligible patients chose mastectomy, BCT was the final surgical procedure in just 40 % of the patients. Patients considered BCT-eligible both at baseline and after NST had a pCR rate of 55 %, while patients who were BCT-ineligible prior to NST had the same pCR rate (44 %) whether they converted to BCT-eligible or not., Conclusions: Many patients with HER2 + BC deemed ineligible for BCT at baseline can be converted to BCT-eligible with NST; excluding patients with multicentric disease substantially increases that percentage. In converted patients who opt for BCT, the success rate is similar to that of patients considered BCT-eligible at baseline. Whether a BCT-ineligible patient converts to BCT eligibility or not does not appear to affect the likelihood of achieving a pCR. Despite the efficacy of NST in this patient cohort, only 40 % of patients had successful BCT; further research into why BCT-eligible patients often opt for mastectomy is needed., Competing Interests: All the authors declare no conflict of interest.

Previous studies demonstrated poor response to neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) for breast cancer among black women and women who are overweight or obese, but this may be due to chemotherapy underdosing. We assessed associations of race, ethnicity, and body mass index (BMI) with pathologic complete response (pCR) in clinical trial populations. 1797 women enrolled in four NST trials (CALGB 40601, 40603; ACOSOG Z1041, Z1071) were included. Tumor subtypes were defined by estrogen receptor (ER) and HER2 status. Logistic regression generated odds ratios (OR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for the associations of race, ethnicity, and BMI with in-breast pCR adjusting for subtype, study arm, lymph node status, tumor size, and tumor grade. 253 (14.1 %) were black, 199 (11.1 %) Hispanic, 520 (28.9 %) overweight, and 743 (41.4 %) obese. Compared to whites, Blacks and Hispanics were more likely to be obese and Blacks were more likely to have triple-negative cancer. pCR rates differed significantly by tumor subtype. In multivariate analyses, neither race (black vs white: OR 1.18, 95 % CI 0.85-1.62) nor ethnicity (Hispanic vs non-Hispanic; OR 1.30, 95 % CI 0.67-2.53) were significant predictors of pCR overall or by subtype. Overweight and obese women had lower pCR rates in ER+/HER2+, but higher pCR rates in ER-/HER2+ cancers. There was no difference in pCR according to race or ethnicity. Overall, there was no major difference in pCR rates by BMI. These findings suggest that pCR with optimally dosed NST is a function of tumor, rather than patient, biology., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interests The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

SWOG S0800, a randomized open-label Phase II clinical trial, compared the combination of weekly nab-paclitaxel and bevacizumab followed by dose-dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) with nab-paclitaxel followed or preceded by AC as neoadjuvant treatment for HER2-negative locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) or inflammatory breast cancer (IBC). Patients were randomly allocated (2:1:1) to three neoadjuvant chemotherapy arms: (1) nab-paclitaxel with concurrent bevacizumab followed by AC; (2) nab-paclitaxel followed by AC; or (3) AC followed by nab-paclitaxel. The primary endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR) with stratification by disease type (non-IBC LABC vs. IBC) and hormone receptor status (positive vs. negative). Overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS), and toxicity were secondary endpoints. Analyses were intent-to-treat comparing bevacizumab to the combined control arms. A total of 215 patients were accrued including 11 % with IBC and 32 % with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). The addition of bevacizumab significantly increased the pCR rate overall (36 vs. 21 %; p = 0.019) and in TNBC (59 vs. 29 %; p = 0.014), but not in hormone receptor-positive disease (24 vs. 18 %; p = 0.41). Sequence of administration of nab-paclitaxel and AC did not affect the pCR rate. While no significant differences in OS or EFS were seen, a trend favored the addition of bevacizumab for EFS (p = 0.06) in TNBC. Overall, Grade 3-4 adverse events did not differ substantially by treatment arm. The addition of bevacizumab to nab-paclitaxel prior to dose-dense AC neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved the pCR rate compared to chemotherapy alone in patients with triple-negative LABC/IBC and was accompanied by a trend for improved EFS. This suggests reconsideration of the role of bevacizumab in high-risk triple-negative locally advanced breast cancer.

Background: The influence of the tumor microenvironment and tumor-stromal interactions on the heterogeneity of response within breast cancer subtypes have just begun to be explored. This study focuses on patients with estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (ER+/HER2+) breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy and HER2-targeted therapy (NAC+H), and was designed to identify novel predictive biomarkers by combining gene expression analysis and immunohistochemistry with pathologic response., Methods: We performed gene expression profiling on pre-NAC+H tumor samples from responding (no or minimal residual disease at surgery) and non-responding patients. Gene set enrichment analysis identified potentially relevant pathways, and immunohistochemical staining of pre-treatment biopsies was used to measure protein levels of those pathways, which were correlated with pathologic response in both univariate and multivariate analysis., Results: Increased expression of genes encoding for stromal collagens, including Col10A1, and reduced expression of immune-associated genes, reflecting lower levels of total tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), were strongly associated with poor pathologic response. Lower TILs in tumor biopsies correlated with reduced likelihood of achieving an optimal pathologic response, but increased expression of the Col10A1 gene product, colXα1, had greater predictive value than stromal abundance for poor response (OR = 18.9, p = 0.003), and the combination of increased colXα1 expression and low TILs was significantly associated with poor response in multivariate analysis. ROC analysis suggests strong specificity and sensitivity for this combination in predicting treatment response., Conclusions: Increased expression of stromal colXα1 and low TILs correlate with poor pathologic response in ER+/HER2+ breast tumors. Further studies are needed to confirm their predictive value and impact on long-term outcomes, and to determine whether this collagen exerts a protective effect on the cancer cells or simply reflects other factors within the tumor microenvironment.

Standard management of early stage and advanced breast cancer has been improved over the past few years by knowledge gained about the biology of the disease, results from a number of eagerly anticipated clinical trials and the development of novel agents that offer our patients options for improved outcomes or reduced toxicity or both. This review highlights recent major developments affecting the systemic therapy of breast cancer, broken down by clinically relevant patient subgroups and disease stage, and briefly discusses some of the ongoing controversies in the treatment of breast cancer and promising therapies on the horizon., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) at increasing the rate of successful breast-conserving therapy (BCT) in triple negative breast cancer., Background: Inducing tumor regression to permit BCT is often cited to support administration of NST. To quantify this benefit, we conducted a surgical companion study to CALGB40603, a randomized phase II, 2×2 factorial trial of neoadjuvant paclitaxel ± carboplatin ± bevacizumab (B) followed by doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide ± B in stage II-III triple negative breast cancer., Methods: Before and after NST, treating surgeons evaluated BCT candidacy by clinico-radiographic criteria; surgery performed was at surgeon and patient discretion. We measured (1) conversion rates from BCT-ineligible to BCT-eligible, (2) surgical choices in BCT candidates, and (3) rates of successful BCT with tumor-free margins., Results: Four hundred four patients were assessable for surgical outcomes. Two hundred nineteen (54%) were BCT candidates before NST. One hundred ninety-seven (90%) remained BCT candidates after NST, of whom 138 (70%) chose BCT, which was successful in 130 (94%). Of 185 (46%) who were not BCT candidates before NST, 78 (42%) converted to candidates with NST. Of these, 53 (68%) chose BCT with a 91% (48/53) success rate. The overall BCT-eligibility rate rose from 54% to 68% (275/404) with NST. Addition of carboplatin, B, or both increased conversion rates., Conclusions: This is the first study to document prospectively a 42% conversion rate from BCT-ineligible to BCT-eligible, resulting in a 14% absolute increase in BCT eligibility. BCT was successful in 93% of patients who opted for it, but 31% of BCT-eligible patients still chose mastectomy.

Plasmablastic lymphoma (PBL) is a rare and aggressive CD20-negative lymphoma. Despite improvements of the biology behind PBL, it still represents a challenge from the diagnostic and therapeutic perspectives for pathologists and clinicians. PBL is characterized by high rates of relapse and short median survival with standard approaches. Here, we report the use of the combination of bortezomib and infusional etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide and doxorubicin (V-EPOCH) in three patients with PBL; two were HIV-positive and one was HIV-negative. All three patients obtained a durable complete response to V-EPOCH with survival times of 24, 18 and 12 months respectively., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

As anticipated by their structure and mechanism of action, platinum analogs exhibit clinically significant antitumor activity in the more aggressive forms of breast cancer, both alone and in combination with other cytotoxic agents and targeted therapies. In early-stage human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer, the administration of carboplatin together with a taxane (usually docetaxel) and trastuzumab (and pertuzumab in the neoadjuvant setting) is a standard of care regimen. In BRCA1 mutation carriers, neoadjuvant treatment with single-agent cisplatin results in a high pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. In both BRCA-mutated and sporadic triple-negative breast cancer, the addition of carboplatin to neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly increases pCR rates. Despite these encouraging results, many questions remain about the role of platinum analogs in these patient populations, including their optimal doses and schedules, and utility in patients with advanced stage disease. A number of these questions are addressed by ongoing trials.

Purpose: One third of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) achieve pathologic complete response (pCR) with standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). CALGB 40603 (Alliance), a 2 × 2 factorial, open-label, randomized phase II trial, evaluated the impact of adding carboplatin and/or bevacizumab., Patients and Methods: Patients (N = 443) with stage II to III TNBC received paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2) once per week (wP) for 12 weeks, followed by doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide once every 2 weeks (ddAC) for four cycles, and were randomly assigned to concurrent carboplatin (area under curve 6) once every 3 weeks for four cycles and/or bevacizumab 10 mg/kg once every 2 weeks for nine cycles. Effects of adding these agents on pCR breast (ypT0/is), pCR breast/axilla (ypT0/isN0), treatment delivery, and toxicities were analyzed., Results: Patients assigned to either carboplatin or bevacizumab were less likely to complete wP and ddAC without skipped doses, dose modification, or early discontinuation resulting from toxicity. Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were more common with carboplatin, as were hypertension, infection, thromboembolic events, bleeding, and postoperative complications with bevacizumab. Employing one-sided P values, addition of either carboplatin (60% v 44%; P = .0018) or bevacizumab (59% v 48%; P = .0089) significantly increased pCR breast, whereas only carboplatin (54% v 41%; P = .0029) significantly raised pCR breast/axilla. More-than-additive interactions between the two agents could not be demonstrated., Conclusion: In stage II to III TNBC, addition of either carboplatin or bevacizumab to NACT increased pCR rates, but whether this will improve relapse-free or overall survival is unknown. Given results from recently reported adjuvant trials, further investigation of bevacizumab in this setting is unlikely, but the role of carboplatin could be evaluated in definitive studies, ideally limited to biologically defined patient subsets most likely to benefit from this agent., (© 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Trastuzumab has had a major impact on outcomes in HER2-positive breast cancer, but innate or acquired resistance to it is recognized as a problem that can limit its effectiveness. Given its locus of action, the oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor lapatinib would be expected to counteract many of the proposed mechanisms of trastuzumab resistance. It has demonstrated activity in trastuzumab-resistant patients, and neoadjuvant studies in HER2+ patients have demonstrated higher pathologic complete response (pCR) rates with the addition of lapatinib to trastuzumab and chemotherapy. TBCRC006 was a phase II neoadjuvant trial that studied the efficacy of the lapatinib and trastuzumab combination without concurrent chemotherapy, but with estrogen deprivation therapy in ER+ patients. In 65 patients with T2-3 HER2+ cancers, the overall pCR rate was 27%, including 36% in ER-tumors. A total 54% of ER+/HER2+ patients had either a pCR or were downstaged to T <1 cm. Correlative studies on tissue obtained prior to and during neoadjuvant therapy are underway. These results suggest that a significant fraction of HER2+ patients will respond to dual HER2-targeted therapy without cytotoxic chemotherapy, and that antihormonal therapy to block ER/HER2 'crosstalk' may be necessary to achieve optimal responses in ER+/HER2+ patients.

We assessed practice patterns and the impact of systemic adjuvant therapy on human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive or triple-negative, node-negative breast cancers up to 10 mm in size. Records of 161 patients identified among 1415 cases diagnosed in our institutions between 2000 and 2010 were assessed for factors associated with recommendation for chemotherapy and survival outcomes. Adjuvant chemotherapy was recommended in 53% of patients, more commonly in patients with younger age, stage T1b, high grade, HER2+/ER- status and diagnosis after 2006. With a median follow-up of 54 months, the 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence was 5.3% and overall survival was 93.2%. Age less than 40 and presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI) were associated with higher risk of recurrence. In a univariate analysis administration of adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with a significantly better recurrence rate (P = 0.33)., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) attracts a disproportionate share of intensive research because of its poor prognosis. Standard anthracycline- and taxane-based regimens still yield an unsatisfactorily low rate of pathologic complete response (pCR). The pCR rate is a recognized surrogate marker for good long-term survival., Methods: A multicentric, retrospective study was conducted including all patients not willing to undergo or not suitable for an anthracycline-based regimen. Six cycles of docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC 6 q3w were administered. The primary endpoint was pCR (ypT0/ypTis + ypN0) and near-pCR (≤5 mm residual disease). The secondary endpoint was feasibility (CTCAE version 4.03 criteria) and adherence to treatment., Results: Six cycles of carboplatin AUC 6 and docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) resulted in a high pCR rate of 50% and a combined pCR/near-pCR rate of 70%. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were rare events and 28 of 30 (93%) patients completed all 6 cycles. No toxicity-related treatment discontinuation and no febrile neutropenia were registered., Conclusion: This chemotherapy regimen provides a highly effective and feasible strategy for patients not willing to receive or not suitable for an anthracycline-based treatment (cardiac ejection fraction <65% or age >65 years). Combinations of platinum compounds with taxanes and anthracyclines may be also desirable in TNBC.

Breast cancers that overexpress human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2-positive [HER2+]) tend to be biologically aggressive and associated with a poor prognosis, even those that coexpress receptors for estrogen and/or progesterone (hormone receptor-positive [HR+]). Optimal therapy for patients with "double-positive" (HR+/HER2+) breast cancers is still being defined. In this subset of patients, the efficacy of targeted endocrine therapies appears to be diminished by cross-activation or "crosstalk" between estrogen receptor-mediated gene transcription and pathways activated by other growth factor receptors, including HER2. Lapatinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor which binds reversibly to the intracellular domains of the epidermal growth factor receptor and HER2, interfering with their ability to initiate signal transduction cascades that promote cancer cell proliferation, survival, and metastasis. In a recently published randomized, placebo-controlled Phase III study in postmenopausal HR+ metastatic breast cancer, the addition of lapatinib to the aromatase inhibitor letrozole significantly improved progression-free survival solely in women who were also HER2+. This article reviews the biology of "double-positive" breast cancers and the rationale underlying combining endocrine and HER2-targeted therapies, including the lapatinib/letrozole combination, for these tumors. Results from the Phase III trial are examined, as well as available data on other combinations of HR and HER2-targeted therapies. Ongoing trials and potential future applications of these combinations in both HR+/HER2+ and other subgroups of breast cancer patients are also discussed.

Purpose: Gemcitabine induces a 20% response as single-agent therapy in patients with relapsed or refractory NHL. We report phase I findings of gemcitabine in combination with standard CHOP chemotherapy with G-CSF support for intermediate grade NHL. The protocol was modified during enrollment to include rituximab in CD 20+ lymphomas., Methods: Patients received CHOP plus gemcitabine at 500 mg/m(2) (Cohort 1) or 750 mg/m(2) (Cohort 2) on days 1 and 4 of each 21-day cycle. Accrual was suspended once each cohort was filled. Dose escalation occurred after all patients in the cohort were determined to not have a dose-limiting toxicity., Results: Between April 2002 and May 2004, 10 patients were enrolled and completed the study treatment (6 in Cohort 1, 4 in Cohort 2). In Cohort 1, grade 3 toxicities included neutropenia, anemia, neuropathy, and constipation. Grade 4 toxicities were febrile neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. In Cohort 2, grade 3 toxicities included neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, mucositis, anemia, and intestinal obstruction. Grade 4 toxicities included febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia. One patient developed MDS 36 months after chemotherapy. Three of four patients in Cohort 2 developed dose-limiting toxicities (mucositis and thrombocytopenia) requiring dose reduction in gemcitabine after cycle 1. Overall, the survival rate at 2.5 years was 71%., Conclusions: This Phase I trial concludes that gemcitabine 500 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 4 of each 21-day cycle is the maximum tolerated dose when combined with standard CHOP chemotherapy with G-CSF support for intermediate grade NHL.