Carla Strina

Increased pathological complete response rate after a long-term neoadjuvant letrozole treatment in postmenopausal oestrogen and/or progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer

Background:The objective of this study was to determine the optimal scheduling of 2.5 mg daily letrozole in neoadjuvant breast cancer patients to obtain pathological complete response (pathCR) and assess Ki-67 expression as an early predictor of response.Patients and methods:This single institution study comprised 120 oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive postmenopausal women with primary breast cancer (clinical stage ⩾T2, N0–1), from three sequential cohorts (cohort A of 40, cohort B of 40 and cohort C of 40 patients, respectively) based on different duration of the neoadjuvant letrozole. Biological markers such as ER, progesterone receptor, HER2 and Ki-67 expression were tested at diagnosis and at definitive surgery.Results:A total of 89 patients (75.4%) achieved an objective response with 44 (37.3%) clinical CRs and 45 (38.1%) partial responses. The clinical CRs were significantly observed in cohort C (23 out of 40 patients, 57.5%) and B (16 out of 38 patients, 42.1%) compared with cohort A (5 out of 40 patients, 12.5%) (P-value for trend <0.001). Letrozole induced a similar significant reduction in Ki-67 index after treatment in all cohorts. The pathCR rate was significantly more frequent in cohort C (7 out of 40 patients, 17.5%) than in cohort A (1 out of 40 patients, 2.5%) and B (2 out of 40 patients, 5.0%) (P-value for trend <0.04).Conclusion:One-year neoadjuvant letrozole therapy leads to a higher pathCR rate and may be the optimal length of drug exposure.

Combination of letrozole, metronomic cyclophosphamide and sorafenib is well-tolerated and shows activity in patients with primary breast cancer.

Purpose:To assess whether the combination of letrozole, metronomic cyclophosphamide and sorafenib (LCS) is well tolerated and shows activity in primary breast cancer (BC).Methods:Thirteen oestrogen receptor-positive, postmenopausal, T2-4, N0-1 BC patients received the LCS combination for 6 months. In these patients we examined the pharmacokinetics of sorafenib and cyclophosphamide, toxicity of the regimen, the clinical response to therapy and changes in the levels of biologically relevant biomarkers.Results:Adequate plasma concentrations of sorafenib were achieved in patients when it was dosed in combination with L+C. The mean plasma concentrations of C were consistently lower following administration of LCS, compared with administration of L+C only. The most common drug-related grade 3/4 adverse events were skin rash (69.3%), hand-foot skin reaction (69.3%) and diarrhoea (46.1%). According to RECIST Criteria, a clinical complete response was observed in 6 of 13 patients. A significant reduction in tumour size, evaluated with MRI, was also observed between baseline and 14 days of treatment in all 13 patients (P=0.005). A significant reduction in SUV uptake, measured by 18FDG-PET/CT, was observed in all patients between baseline and 30 days of treatment (P=0.015) and between baseline and definitive surgery (P=0.0002). Using modified CT Criteria, a response was demonstrated in 8 out of 10 evaluable patients at 30 days and in 11 out of 13 evaluable patients at the definitive surgery. A significant reduction in Ki67 expression was observed in all patients at day 14 compared with baseline (P<0.00001) and in 9 out of 13 patients at the definitive surgery compared with baseline (P<0.03). There was also a significant suppression of CD31 and VEGF-A expression in response to treatment (P=0.01 and P=0.007, respectively).Conclusions:The LCS combination is feasible and tolerable. The tumour response and target biomarker modulation indicate that the combination is clinically and biologically active.

Prospective neoadjuvant analysis of PET imaging and mechanisms of resistance to Trastuzumab shows role of HIF1 and autophagy.

Background:Although Trastuzumab has improved survival of HER2+ breast cancer patients, resistance to the agent pre-exists or develops through the course of therapy. Here we show that a specific metabolism and autophagy-related cancer cell phenotype relates to resistance of HER2+ breast cancer to Trastuzumab and chemotherapy.Methods:Twenty-eight patients with locally advanced primary breast cancer were prospectively scheduled to received one cycle of Trastuzumab followed by a new biopsy on day 21, followed by taxol/Trastuzumab chemotherapy for four cycles before surgery. FDG PET/CT scan was used to monitor tumour response. Tissue samples were immunohistochemically analysed for metabolism and autophagy markers.Results:In pre-Trastuzumab biopsies, the LC3A+/HER2+ cell population was correlated with HIF1α expression (P=0.01), while GLUT1 and LC3B expression were correlated with Ki67 proliferation index (P=0.01 and P=0.01, respectively). FDG PET tumour dimensions before therapy were correlated with LC3B expression (P=0.005). Administration of Trastuzumab significantly reduced clinical and PET-detected tumour dimensions (P<0.01). An inverse association of tumour response with the percentage of cells expressing HIF1α at baseline was documented (P=0.01). Administration of Trastuzumab resulted in a decrease of the proliferation index (P=0.004), GLUT1 (P=0.04) and HER2 (P=0.01) expression. In contrast, the percentage of LC3A+/HER2+ cells was increased (P=0.01). High baseline HIF1α expression was the only parameter associated with poorer pathological response to preoperative chemotherapy (P=0.001).Conclusions:As the HER2+/LC3A+ phenotype, which often overexpresses HIF1α, is a major subpopulation increasing after therapy with Trastuzumab, LC3A- and HIF1α-targeting therapies should be investigated for the augmentation of anti-HER2 therapy efficacy.

Neoadjuvant Treatment Approach: The Rosetta Stone for Breast Cancer?

Breast cancer represents a heterogeneous group of diseases with varied biological features, behavior, and response to therapy; thus, management of breast cancer relies on the availability of robust predictive and prognostic factors to support therapy decision-making. Traditionally, neoadjuvant treatment for breast cancer was preserved for locally advanced, converting an inoperable to a surgical resectable cancer. Neoadjuvant trials, additionally, offer: 1) the opportunity to evaluate new treatment options in a faster way and with fewer patients than large adjuvant trials; 2) to identify and validate the prognostic and predictive value of a marker with its association with clinical outcome in relation to the administered treatment. In this setting, thanks to new, affordable technologies which help to detail the molecular profiles of tumors, new trial designs based on new target therapies, like window-of-opportunity, are also suggested, as they represent the chance to identify tumor sensitivity or to overcome tumor resistance to the treatment used, based on its interaction with tumor biology in early tumor stages. However, clinicians and researchers should pay particular attention: In this setting, the safety of patients is paramount, given the exposure of potentially curable patients to investigational agents with limited safety experience, the definition of the study population and the study design, such as adaptive strategies, should limit patient exposure to ineffective agents, and intensify safety monitoring in the course of the treatment. Here, issues related to outcome determination in breast cancer, including some critical points of view, are presented.

Benefit of the addition of hormone therapy to neoadjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy for breast cancer: comparison of predicted and observed pCR

IntroductionNeoadjuvant hormonal therapy is generally considered a valid option for hormone receptor positive breast cancer (BC) patients who are unfit for chemotherapy or surgery.AimsWhilst numerous studies analyzed efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) or endocrine therapy (HT) alone in hormone receptor positive patients, there is a lack of research looking at the usefulness of a preoperative combinatorial approach of CT and HT in this patient subgroup.MethodsUsing a predictive model previously described in the literature, developed to analyze the probability of benefit from preoperative chemotherapy, we were able to compare pathological complete response (pCR) rates expected with the use of CT alone with the pCR rates reported in a population of 192 patients treated with the combination of tamoxifen plus anthracycline-based CT at Cremona Hospital between 2003 and 2006.ResultsEven with a relatively small patient population, this approach provided insightful information for the selection of hormone receptor positive BC patients most likely to benefit from the use of preoperative HT and CT in combination. Whilst no statistically significant benefit was obtained with the addition of tamoxifen to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the entire population, or in any of the molecular stratification subgroups, the analysis of the calibration curve showed that a combinatorial approach may improve pCR in patients with luminal B tumors. More specific trials should be designed to confirm our initial results.ConclusionTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first report investigating the efficacy of the combination of CT and HT in the neoadjuvant treatment of hormone receptor positive BC.

A Phase Ib Open-Label Study to Assess the Safety and Tolerability of Everolimus in Combination with Eribulin in Triple-Negative Breast Cancers

BACKGROUND The VERITAS (A Phase 1B open-label study to assess the safety and tolerability of everolimus in combination with eribulin in triple-negative breast cancers) trial (EudraCT number: 2014-000135-17) is a phase Ib, open label, multicenter, dose-escalation, safety, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic study based on the combination of everolimus with eribulin in sequential cohorts of metastatic triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS The primary objective of the study is to identify the recommended dose of everolimus in combination with eribulin. Secondary endpoints include the assessment of pharmacokinetics and antitumor activity of the experimental treatment. The sample size is based on the Bayesisan approach with regards to the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) observed. An average sample size of approximately 12 patients is deemed reasonable based on simulations. CONCLUSION The VERITAS trial is expected to determine the recommended dose of everolimus in combination with eribulin in TBNC. This study may open the way for further analysis of this combination in phase II studies in this orphan disease of active drug combination such as the TNBC subset.

Hypoxia-related biological markers as predictors of epirubicin-based treatment responsiveness and resistance in locally advanced breast cancer

Purpose To identify hypoxia-related biomarkers indicative of response and resistance to epirubicin treatment in patients with locally advanced breast cancer. Patients and Methods One hundred seventy-six women with T2-4 N0-1 breast tumours were randomly assigned to receive epirubicin 120 mg/m2/1-21 (EPI ARM), epirubicin 120 mg/m2/1-21 + erythropoietin 10.000 IU sc three times weekly (EPI-EPO ARM) and epirubicin 40 mg/m2/w-q21 (EPI-W ARM). Sixteen tumour proteins involved in cell survival, hypoxia, angiogenesis and growth factor, were assessed by immunohistochemistry in pre-treatment samples. A multivariate generalized linear regression approach was applied using a penalized least-square minimization to perform variable selection and regularization. Results VEGF and GLUT-1 expression were significantly positively associated with complete response (CR) to treatment in all leave-one-out iterations. Bcl-2 expression was inversely correlated with pCR, whilst EPO expression was positively correlated with pathological complete response (pCR). Haemaglobin and HIF-1a nuclear expression were inversely correlated with pCR. HB and HIF-1a expression were associated with a higher risk of relapse and overall survival. Conclusion Hypoxic biomarkers determines the epirubicin resistance in breast cancer. Assessment of such biomarkers, may be useful for predicting chemosensitivity and also anthracycline-based treatment outcome.

Could gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs be helpful in the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer?

AIM Treatment of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) imposes great challenges, due to a lack of molecular targets. While use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogs has been validated in ER-positive breast cancer, this option has not been investigated in TNBC, even though a significant portion of these tumors upregulate GnRH receptors. We performed a meta-analysis of the literature to evaluate the effect of GnRH analogs in TNBC. METHODS Four studies were included in this study. RESULTS We detected a non-significant improvement in overall survival with GnRH analogs, while progression-free survival was unchanged. DISCUSSION The majority of the trials evaluated in this analysis were designed to test efficacy of GnRH analogs in preventing premature ovarian failure. This may represent a limitation of our study as these trials were not specifically designed to detect differences in survival outcome measures. CONCLUSION Our results suggest that GnRH analogs may be useful as a targeted therapy in TNBC. Randomized prospective clinical trials are needed to investigate this hypothesis in the clinic.