Anita Giobbie-Hurder

Letrozole Therapy Alone or in Sequence with Tamoxifen in Women with Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND The aromatase inhibitor letrozole, as compared with tamoxifen, improves disease-free survival among postmenopausal women with receptor-positive early breast cancer. It is unknown whether sequential treatment with tamoxifen and letrozole is superior to letrozole therapy alone. METHODS In this randomized, phase 3, double-blind trial of the treatment of hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer in postmenopausal women, we randomly assigned women to receive 5 years of tamoxifen monotherapy, 5 years of letrozole monotherapy, or 2 years of treatment with one agent followed by 3 years of treatment with the other. We compared the sequential treatments with letrozole monotherapy among 6182 women and also report a protocol-specified updated analysis of letrozole versus tamoxifen monotherapy in 4922 women. RESULTS At a median follow-up of 71 months after randomization, disease-free survival was not significantly improved with either sequential treatment as compared with letrozole alone (hazard ratio for tamoxifen followed by letrozole, 1.05; 99% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.32; hazard ratio for letrozole followed by tamoxifen, 0.96; 99% CI, 0.76 to 1.21). There were more early relapses among women who were assigned to tamoxifen followed by letrozole than among those who were assigned to letrozole alone. The updated analysis of monotherapy showed that there was a nonsignificant difference in overall survival between women assigned to treatment with letrozole and those assigned to treatment with tamoxifen (hazard ratio for letrozole, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.02; P=0.08). The rate of adverse events was as expected on the basis of previous reports of letrozole and tamoxifen therapy. CONCLUSIONS Among postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer, sequential treatment with letrozole and tamoxifen, as compared with letrozole monotherapy, did not improve disease-free survival. The difference in overall survival with letrozole monotherapy and tamoxifen monotherapy was not statistically significant. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00004205.)

Adjuvant Exemestane with Ovarian Suppression in Premenopausal Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND Adjuvant therapy with an aromatase inhibitor improves outcomes, as compared with tamoxifen, in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. METHODS In two phase 3 trials, we randomly assigned premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer to the aromatase inhibitor exemestane plus ovarian suppression or tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression for a period of 5 years. Suppression of ovarian estrogen production was achieved with the use of the gonadotropin-releasing-hormone agonist triptorelin, oophorectomy, or ovarian irradiation. The primary analysis combined data from 4690 patients in the two trials. RESULTS After a median follow-up of 68 months, disease-free survival at 5 years was 91.1% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 87.3% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence, second invasive cancer, or death, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60 to 0.85; P<0.001). The rate of freedom from breast cancer at 5 years was 92.8% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, as compared with 88.8% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for recurrence, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.80; P<0.001). With 194 deaths (4.1% of the patients), overall survival did not differ significantly between the two groups (hazard ratio for death in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.51; P=0.37). Selected adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported for 30.6% of the patients in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 29.4% of those in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group, with profiles similar to those for postmenopausal women. CONCLUSIONS In premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer, adjuvant treatment with exemestane plus ovarian suppression, as compared with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, significantly reduced recurrence. (Funded by Pfizer and others; TEXT and SOFT ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00066703 and NCT00066690, respectively.).

Adjuvant ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer.

BACKGROUND Suppression of ovarian estrogen production reduces the recurrence of hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer in premenopausal women, but its value when added to tamoxifen is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 3066 premenopausal women, stratified according to prior receipt or nonreceipt of chemotherapy, to receive 5 years of tamoxifen, tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, or exemestane plus ovarian suppression. The primary analysis tested the hypothesis that tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression would improve disease-free survival, as compared with tamoxifen alone. In the primary analysis, 46.7% of the patients had not received chemotherapy previously, and 53.3% had received chemotherapy and remained premenopausal. RESULTS After a median follow-up of 67 months, the estimated disease-free survival rate at 5 years was 86.6% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group and 84.7% in the tamoxifen group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence, second invasive cancer, or death, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 1.04; P=0.10). Multivariable allowance for prognostic factors suggested a greater treatment effect with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression than with tamoxifen alone (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.98). Most recurrences occurred in patients who had received prior chemotherapy, among whom the rate of freedom from breast cancer at 5 years was 82.5% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group and 78.0% in the tamoxifen group (hazard ratio for recurrence, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.02). At 5 years, the rate of freedom from breast cancer was 85.7% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for recurrence vs. tamoxifen, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.87). CONCLUSIONS Adding ovarian suppression to tamoxifen did not provide a significant benefit in the overall study population. However, for women who were at sufficient risk for recurrence to warrant adjuvant chemotherapy and who remained premenopausal, the addition of ovarian suppression improved disease outcomes. Further improvement was seen with the use of exemestane plus ovarian suppression. (Funded by Pfizer and others; SOFT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00066690.).

Prognostic and Predictive Value of Centrally Reviewed Ki-67 Labeling Index in Postmenopausal Women With Endocrine-Responsive Breast Cancer: Results From Breast International Group Trial 1-98 Comparing Adjuvant Tamoxifen With Letrozole

PURPOSE To evaluate the prognostic and predictive value of Ki-67 labeling index (LI) in a trial comparing letrozole (Let) with tamoxifen (Tam) as adjuvant therapy in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Breast International Group (BIG) trial 1-98 randomly assigned 8,010 patients to four treatment arms comparing Let and Tam with sequences of each agent. Of 4,922 patients randomly assigned to receive 5 years of monotherapy with either agent, 2,685 had primary tumor material available for central pathology assessment of Ki-67 LI by immunohistochemistry and had tumors confirmed to express estrogen receptors after central review. The prognostic and predictive value of centrally measured Ki-67 LI on disease-free survival (DFS) were assessed among these patients using proportional hazards modeling, with Ki-67 LI values dichotomized at the median value of 11%. RESULTS Higher values of Ki-67 LI were associated with adverse prognostic factors and with worse DFS (hazard ratio [HR; high:low] = 1.8; 95% CI, 1.4 to 2.3). The magnitude of the treatment benefit for Let versus Tam was greater among patients with high tumor Ki-67 LI (HR [Let:Tam] = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.72) than among patients with low tumor Ki-67 LI (HR [Let:Tam] = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.15; interaction P = .09). CONCLUSION Ki-67 LI is confirmed as a prognostic factor in this study. High Ki-67 LI levels may identify a patient group that particularly benefits from initial Let adjuvant therapy.

Imatinib for Melanomas Harboring Mutationally Activated or Amplified KIT Arising on Mucosal, Acral, and Chronically Sun-Damaged Skin

PURPOSE Amplifications and mutations in the KIT proto-oncogene in subsets of melanomas provide therapeutic opportunities. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a multicenter phase II trial of imatinib in metastatic mucosal, acral, or chronically sun-damaged (CSD) melanoma with KIT amplifications and/or mutations. Patients received imatinib 400 mg once per day or 400 mg twice per day if there was no initial response. Dose reductions were permitted for treatment-related toxicities. Additional oncogene mutation screening was performed by mass spectroscopy. RESULTS Twenty-five patients were enrolled (24 evaluable). Eight patients (33%) had tumors with KIT mutations, 11 (46%) with KIT amplifications, and five (21%) with both. Median follow-up was 10.6 months (range, 3.7 to 27.1 months). Best overall response rate (BORR) was 29% (21% excluding nonconfirmed responses) with a two-stage 95% CI of 13% to 51%. BORR was significantly greater than the hypothesized null of 5% and statistically significantly different by mutation status (7 of 13 or 54% KIT mutated v 0% KIT amplified only). There were no statistical differences in rates of progression or survival by mutation status or by melanoma site. The overall disease control rate was 50% but varied significantly by KIT mutation status (77% mutated v 18% amplified). Four patients harbored pretreatment NRAS mutations, and one patient acquired increased KIT amplification after treatment. CONCLUSION Melanomas that arise on mucosal, acral, or CSD skin should be assessed for KIT mutations. Imatinib can be effective when tumors harbor KIT mutations, but not if KIT is amplified only. NRAS mutations and KIT copy number gain may be mechanisms of therapeutic resistance to imatinib.

An immunogenic personal neoantigen vaccine for patients with melanoma

Effective anti-tumour immunity in humans has been associated with the presence of T cells directed at cancer neoantigens, a class of HLA-bound peptides that arise from tumour-specific mutations. They are highly immunogenic because they are not present in normal tissues and hence bypass central thymic tolerance. Although neoantigens were long-envisioned as optimal targets for an anti-tumour immune response, their systematic discovery and evaluation only became feasible with the recent availability of massively parallel sequencing for detection of all coding mutations within tumours, and of machine learning approaches to reliably predict those mutated peptides with high-affinity binding of autologous human leukocyte antigen (HLA) molecules. We hypothesized that vaccination with neoantigens can both expand pre-existing neoantigen-specific T-cell populations and induce a broader repertoire of new T-cell specificities in cancer patients, tipping the intra-tumoural balance in favour of enhanced tumour control. Here we demonstrate the feasibility, safety, and immunogenicity of a vaccine that targets up to 20 predicted personal tumour neoantigens. Vaccine-induced polyfunctional CD4+ and CD8+ T cells targeted 58 (60%) and 15 (16%) of the 97 unique neoantigens used across patients, respectively. These T cells discriminated mutated from wild-type antigens, and in some cases directly recognized autologous tumour. Of six vaccinated patients, four had no recurrence at 25 months after vaccination, while two with recurrent disease were subsequently treated with anti-PD-1 (anti-programmed cell death-1) therapy and experienced complete tumour regression, with expansion of the repertoire of neoantigen-specific T cells. These data provide a strong rationale for further development of this approach, alone and in combination with checkpoint blockade or other immunotherapies.

Assessment of letrozole and tamoxifen alone and in sequence for postmenopausal women with steroid hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: the BIG 1-98 randomised clinical trial at 8.1 years median follow-up

BACKGROUND Postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer have persistent, long-term risk of breast-cancer recurrence and death. Therefore, trials assessing endocrine therapies for this patient population need extended follow-up. We present an update of efficacy outcomes in the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study at 8·1 years median follow-up. METHODS BIG 1-98 is a randomised, phase 3, double-blind trial of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer that compares 5 years of tamoxifen or letrozole monotherapy, or sequential treatment with 2 years of one of these drugs followed by 3 years of the other. Randomisation was done with permuted blocks, and stratified according to the two-arm or four-arm randomisation option, participating institution, and chemotherapy use. Patients, investigators, data managers, and medical reviewers were masked. The primary efficacy endpoint was disease-free survival (events were invasive breast cancer relapse, second primaries [contralateral breast and non-breast], or death without previous cancer event). Secondary endpoints were overall survival, distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI), and breast cancer-free interval (BCFI). The monotherapy comparison included patients randomly assigned to tamoxifen or letrozole for 5 years. In 2005, after a significant disease-free survival benefit was reported for letrozole as compared with tamoxifen, a protocol amendment facilitated the crossover to letrozole of patients who were still receiving tamoxifen alone; Cox models and Kaplan-Meier estimates with inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) are used to account for selective crossover to letrozole of patients (n=619) in the tamoxifen arm. Comparison of sequential treatments to letrozole monotherapy included patients enrolled and randomly assigned to letrozole for 5 years, letrozole for 2 years followed by tamoxifen for 3 years, or tamoxifen for 2 years followed by letrozole for 3 years. Treatment has ended for all patients and detailed safety results for adverse events that occurred during the 5 years of treatment have been reported elsewhere. Follow-up is continuing for those enrolled in the four-arm option. BIG 1-98 is registered at clinicaltrials.govNCT00004205. FINDINGS 8010 patients were included in the trial, with a median follow-up of 8·1 years (range 0-12·4). 2459 were randomly assigned to monotherapy with tamoxifen for 5 years and 2463 to monotherapy with letrozole for 5 years. In the four-arm option of the trial, 1546 were randomly assigned to letrozole for 5 years, 1548 to tamoxifen for 5 years, 1540 to letrozole for 2 years followed by tamoxifen for 3 years, and 1548 to tamoxifen for 2 years followed by letrozole for 3 years. At a median follow-up of 8·7 years from randomisation (range 0-12·4), letrozole monotherapy was significantly better than tamoxifen, whether by IPCW or intention-to-treat analysis (IPCW disease-free survival HR 0·82 [95% CI 0·74-0·92], overall survival HR 0·79 [0·69-0·90], DRFI HR 0·79 [0·68-0·92], BCFI HR 0·80 [0·70-0·92]; intention-to-treat disease-free survival HR 0·86 [0·78-0·96], overall survival HR 0·87 [0·77-0·999], DRFI HR 0·86 [0·74-0·998], BCFI HR 0·86 [0·76-0·98]). At a median follow-up of 8·0 years from randomisation (range 0-11·2) for the comparison of the sequential groups with letrozole monotherapy, there were no statistically significant differences in any of the four endpoints for either sequence. 8-year intention-to-treat estimates (each with SE ≤1·1%) for letrozole monotherapy, letrozole followed by tamoxifen, and tamoxifen followed by letrozole were 78·6%, 77·8%, 77·3% for disease-free survival; 87·5%, 87·7%, 85·9% for overall survival; 89·9%, 88·7%, 88·1% for DRFI; and 86·1%, 85·3%, 84·3% for BCFI. INTERPRETATION For postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer, a reduction in breast cancer recurrence and mortality is obtained by letrozole monotherapy when compared with tamoxifen montherapy. Sequential treatments involving tamoxifen and letrozole do not improve outcome compared with letrozole monotherapy, but might be useful strategies when considering an individual patients risk of recurrence and treatment tolerability. FUNDING Novartis, United States National Cancer Institute, International Breast Cancer Study Group.

Bevacizumab plus Ipilimumab in Patients with Metastatic Melanoma

Hodi and colleagues report the safety and efficacy of targeting angiogenesis and CTLA-4 in a phase I trial of 46 patients with metastatic melanoma, which revealed the influence of VEGF-A blockade on inflammation, lymphocyte trafficking, and immune regulation, and their synergistic therapeutic effects. Ipilimumab improves survival in advanced melanoma and can induce immune-mediated tumor vasculopathy. Besides promoting angiogenesis, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) suppresses dendritic cell maturation and modulates lymphocyte endothelial trafficking. This study investigated the combination of CTLA4 blockade with ipilimumab and VEGF inhibition with bevacizumab. Patients with metastatic melanoma were treated in four dosing cohorts of ipilimumab (3 or 10 mg/kg) with four doses at 3-week intervals and then every 12 weeks, and bevacizumab (7.5 or 15 mg/kg) every 3 weeks. Forty-six patients were treated. Inflammatory events included giant cell arteritis (n = 1), hepatitis (n = 2), and uveitis (n = 2). On-treatment tumor biopsies revealed activated vessel endothelium with extensive CD8+ and macrophage cell infiltration. Peripheral blood analyses demonstrated increases in CCR7+/−/CD45RO+ cells and anti-galectin antibodies. Best overall response included 8 partial responses, 22 instances of stable disease, and a disease-control rate of 67.4%. Median survival was 25.1 months. Bevacizumab influences changes in tumor vasculature and immune responses with ipilimumab administration. The combination of bevacizumab and ipilimumab can be safely administered and reveals VEGF-A blockade influences on inflammation, lymphocyte trafficking, and immune regulation. These findings provide a basis for further investigating the dual roles of angiogenic factors in blood vessel formation and immune regulation, as well as future combinations of antiangiogenesis agents and immune checkpoint blockade. Cancer Immunol Res; 2(7); 632–42. ©2014 AACR.

The Activation of MAPK in Melanoma Cells Resistant to BRAF Inhibition Promotes PD-L1 Expression That Is Reversible by MEK and PI3K Inhibition

Purpose: Selective BRAF inhibition (BRAFi) provides a paradigm shift for melanoma treatment. The duration of benefit is typically limited before resistance develops. Interest remains in combining targeted and immune therapies to overcome resistance and improve durability of clinical benefit. One mechanism of evading immune destruction is programmed death-1-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression by tumors that results in potent antitumor immune suppression. Experimental Design: BRAFi-resistant melanoma cells were examined for changes in PD-L1 expression by immunoblot and flow cytometry. Signaling pathways involved in altering PD-L1 expression were examined. Strategies to maximize the effect of the BRAFi therapy were studied including MEKi, MEKi combinations, and additional pathways including phosphoinositide-3 kinase (PI3K). Results: Melanoma cells resistant to BRAFi exhibit increased MAPK signaling and promotion of PD-L1 expression. PD-L1 expression is transcriptionally modulated by c-Jun and augmented by STAT3. MEK inhibition (MEKi) regains downregulation of MAPK signaling and suppresses the production of PD-L1. MEKi in melanoma cells shows dual therapeutic effects with simultaneous suppression of PD-L1 expression and induction of apoptosis. By combining MEKi with BRAFi, an additive effect on the inhibition of PD-L1 expression results. Conclusions: We report a novel mechanism that suppresses preexisting immune responses in patients with melanoma receiving BRAFi therapy. BRAFi resistance leads to increased expression of PD-L1 in melanoma cells, mediated by c-Jun and STAT3. MEKi may be feasible to counteract BRAFi resistance of MAPK reactivation and also for the additive effect of PD-L1 suppression. Potential therapeutic benefits of combining targeted inhibitors and immune modulation to improve patient outcomes should be investigated. Clin Cancer Res; 19(3); 598–609. ©2012 AACR.

Clinical trial of a farnesyltransferase inhibitor in children with Hutchinson–Gilford progeria syndrome

Hutchinson–Gilford progeria syndrome (HGPS) is an extremely rare, fatal, segmental premature aging syndrome caused by a mutation in LMNA that produces the farnesylated aberrant lamin A protein, progerin. This multisystem disorder causes failure to thrive and accelerated atherosclerosis leading to early death. Farnesyltransferase inhibitors have ameliorated disease phenotypes in preclinical studies. Twenty-five patients with HGPS received the farnesyltransferase inhibitor lonafarnib for a minimum of 2 y. Primary outcome success was predefined as a 50% increase over pretherapy in estimated annual rate of weight gain, or change from pretherapy weight loss to statistically significant on-study weight gain. Nine patients experienced a ≥50% increase, six experienced a ≥50% decrease, and 10 remained stable with respect to rate of weight gain. Secondary outcomes included decreases in arterial pulse wave velocity and carotid artery echodensity and increases in skeletal rigidity and sensorineural hearing within patient subgroups. All patients improved in one or more of these outcomes. Results from this clinical treatment trial for children with HGPS provide preliminary evidence that lonafarnib may improve vascular stiffness, bone structure, and audiological status.