Claire Snowdon

Survival and safety of exemestane versus tamoxifen after 2-3 years' tamoxifen treatment (Intergroup Exemestane Study): a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Early improvements in disease-free survival have been noted when an aromatase inhibitor is given either instead of or sequentially after tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with oestrogen-receptor-positive early breast cancer. However, little information exists on the long-term effects of aromatase inhibitors after treatment, and whether these early improvements lead to real gains in survival. METHODS 4724 postmenopausal patients with unilateral invasive, oestrogen-receptor-positive or oestrogen-receptor-unknown breast cancer who were disease-free on 2-3 years of tamoxifen, were randomly assigned to switch to exemestane (n=2352) or to continue tamoxifen (n=2372) for the remainder of a 5-year endocrine treatment period. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival; overall survival was a secondary endpoint. Efficacy analyses were intention-to-treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN11883920. RESULTS After a median follow-up of 55.7 months (range 0-89.7), 809 events contributing to the analysis of disease-free survival had been reported (354 exemestane, 455 tamoxifen); unadjusted hazard ratio 0.76 (95% CI 0.66-0.88, p=0.0001) in favour of exemestane, absolute benefit 3.3% (95% CI 1.6-4.9) by end of treatment (ie, 2.5 years after randomisation). 222 deaths occurred in the exemestane group compared with 261 deaths in the tamoxifen group; unadjusted hazard ratio 0.85 (95% CI 0.71-1.02, p=0.08), 0.83 (0.69-1.00, p=0.05) when 122 patients with oestrogen-receptor-negative disease were excluded. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that early improvements in disease-free survival noted in patients who switch to exemestane after 2-3 years on tamoxifen persist after treatment, and translate into a modest improvement in overall survival.

Skeletal effects of exemestane on bone-mineral density, bone biomarkers, and fracture incidence in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer participating in the Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES): a randomised controlled study

BACKGROUND Tamoxifen preserves bone in postmenopausal women, but non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors accelerate bone loss and increase fracture risk. We aimed to study the effect on bone health in a subgroup of women included in the Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES), a large randomised trial that compared the switch to the steroidal aromatase inhibitor exemestane with continuation of tamoxifen in the adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal breast cancer. METHODS Results were analysed from 206 evaluable patients from the IES, in which postmenopausal women with histologically confirmed and completely resected unilateral breast cancer (that was oestrogen-receptor positive or of unknown status), who were disease-free after 2-3 years of treatment with tamoxifen were randomised to continue oral tamoxifen 20 mg/day or switch to oral exemestane 25 mg/day to complete a total of 5 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy. The primary endpoint was change in bone-mineral density (BMD) assessed by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Changes in biochemical markers of bone turnover were also analysed in this substudy, and the incidence of fractures in the entire study reported. The IES is registered on the Current Controlled Trials website . FINDINGS Within 6 months of switching to exemestane, BMD was lowered by 0.051 g/cm(3) (2.7%; 95% CI 2.0-3.4; p<0.0001) at the lumbar spine and 0.025 g/cm(3) (1.4%; 0.8-1.9; p<0.0001) at the hip compared with baseline. BMD decreases were only 1.0% (0.4-1.7; p=0.002) and 0.8% (0.3-1.4; p=0.003) in year 2 at the lumbar spine and hip, respectively. No patient with BMD in the normal range at trial entry developed osteoporosis. Bone resorption and formation markers increased at all time points in women receiving exemestane (p<0.001). With a median follow-up in all IES participants (n=4274) of 58 months, 162 (7%) and 115 (5%) patients in the exemestane and tamoxifen groups, respectively, had fractures (odds ratio 1.45 [1.13-1.87]; p=0.003). INTERPRETATION These results indicate that the increase in survival shown previously with the IES switch strategy is achieved at the expense of some detriment to skeletal health, so the risk-benefit ratio to women needs to be individually assessed.

Quality of Life in the Intergroup Exemestane Study: A Randomized Trial of Exemestane Versus Continued Tamoxifen After 2 to 3 Years of Tamoxifen in Postmenopausal Women With Primary Breast Cancer

PURPOSE To compare and describe the quality of life (QOL) of women allocated to tamoxifen or exemestane within the Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES). PATIENTS AND METHODS Postmenopausal women with primary breast cancer who were disease free after 2 to 3 years were randomly assigned to switch from tamoxifen to exemestane or continue with tamoxifen until 5 years of treatment were completed. A subset of IES centers participated in a QOL substudy. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) and endocrine subscale (ES) were administered before random assignment and at predefined follow-up times. The primary end point was the FACT-B composite Trial Outcome Index (TOI). Secondary end points included total FACT-B+ES score, total ES score, and severity of individual endocrine symptoms. This analysis reports QOL up to 24 months. RESULTS Five hundred eighty-two patients from eight countries were enrolled onto the substudy. Completion and return of questionnaires was excellent, with 85% available for analysis. QOL was generally good and stable over 2 years, with no clinically meaningful differences found between groups in TOI or ES. Prevalence of severe endocrine symptoms at trial entry was high for vasomotor complaints and sexual problems, which persisted for both groups during the study. No significant differences between groups were seen for any endocrine symptoms apart from vaginal discharge, which was more pronounced with tamoxifen (P < .001). CONCLUSION The switch from tamoxifen to exemestane neither increased nor decreased endocrine symptoms present after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen; the switch also did not initiate significant reports of new symptoms. Results indicate that the clinical benefits of exemestane over tamoxifen are achieved without significant detrimental effect on QOL.

Long-term endometrial effects in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer participating in the Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES)—a randomised controlled trial of exemestane versus continued tamoxifen after 2–3 years tamoxifen

Background: The antiestrogen tamoxifen may have partial estrogen-like effects on the postmenopausal uterus. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are increasingly used after initial tamoxifen in the adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal early breast cancer due to their mechanism of action: a potential benefit being a reduction of uterine abnormalities caused by tamoxifen. Patients and methods: Sonographic uterine effects of the steroidal AI exemestane were studied in 219 women participating in the Intergroup Exemestane Study: a large trial in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive (or unknown) early breast cancer, disease free after 2–3 years of tamoxifen, randomly assigned to continue tamoxifen or switch to exemestane to complete 5 years adjuvant treatment. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with abnormal (≥5 mm) endometrial thickness (ET) on transvaginal ultrasound 24 months after randomisation. Results: The analysis included 183 patients. Two years after randomisation, the proportion of patients with abnormal ET was significantly lower in the exemestane compared with tamoxifen arm (36% versus 62%, respectively; P = 0.004). This difference emerged within 6 months of switching treatment (43.5% versus 65.2%, respectively; P = 0.01) and disappeared within 12 months of treatment completion (30.8% versus 34.7%, respectively; P = 0.67). Conclusion: Switching from tamoxifen to exemestane significantly reverses endometrial thickening associated with continued tamoxifen.

Long-term assessment of quality of life in the Intergroup Exemestane Study: 5 years post-randomisation

Background:The Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES) (ISRCTN11883920) demonstrated improved survival for postmenopausal women with ER-positive/unknown primary breast cancer who switched to exemestane after 2–3 years tamoxifen, compared with those continuing on tamoxifen to complete 5 years therapy. This was achieved without detriment to on-treatment quality-of-life (QoL). We report on- and post-treatment QoL impact in IES.Methods:A total of 582 patients from 8 countries participated in the QoL substudy. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Breast (FACT-B) and endocrine symptom subscale (ES) were completed at baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48 and 60 months. The primary endpoint was FACT-B Trial Outcome Index (TOI); secondary endpoints included severity of individual endocrine symptoms.Results:Both the groups showed gradual improvement in overall QoL and lessening of total endocrine symptoms post treatment compared with baseline (P<0.002). There was no evidence of any between-group differences in TOI. Vasomotor complaints remained high on treatment. Vaginal discharge was more frequent (P<0.01) with tamoxifen up to 24 months from baseline. In both the groups, post-treatment libido did not recover to baseline levels.Conclusion:Clinical benefits of switching to exemestane are accompanied by good overall QoL. Although some symptoms persist, the majority of endocrine symptoms improve after treatment completion.

Long-Term Follow-Up of the Intergroup Exemestane Study.

Purpose The Intergroup Exemestane Study, an investigator-led study of 4,724 postmenopausal patients with early breast cancer (clinical trial information: ISRCTN11883920), has previously demonstrated that a switch from adjuvant endocrine therapy after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen to exemestane was associated with clinically relevant improvements in efficacy. Here, we report the final efficacy analyses of this cohort. Patients and Methods Patients who remained disease free after 2 to 3 years of adjuvant tamoxifen were randomly assigned to continue tamoxifen or switch to exemestane to complete a total of 5 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy. Given the large number of non-breast cancer-related deaths now reported, breast cancer-free survival (BCFS), with censorship of intercurrent deaths, was the primary survival end point of interest. Analyses focus on patients with estrogen receptor-positive or unknown tumors (n = 4,599). Results At the time of the data snapshot, median follow-up was 120 months. In the population that was estrogen receptor positive or had unknown estrogen receptor status, 1,111 BCFS events were observed with 508 (22.1%) of 2,294 patients in the exemestane group and 603 (26.2%) of 2,305 patients in the tamoxifen group. The data corresponded to an absolute difference (between exemestane and tamoxifen) at 10 years of 4.0% (95% CI, 1.2% to 6.7%), and the hazard ratio (HR) of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.92) favored exemestane. This difference remained in multivariable analysis that was adjusted for nodal status, prior use of hormone replacement therapy, and prior chemotherapy (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.90; P < .001). A modest improvement in overall survival was seen with exemestane; the absolute difference (between exemestane and tamoxifen) at 10 years in the population that was estrogen receptor positive or had unknown estrogen receptor status was 2.1% (95% CI, -0.5% to 4.6%), and the HR was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.78 to 1.01; P = .08). For the intention-to-treat population, the absolute difference was 1.6% (95% CI, -0.9% to 4.1%); the HR was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.80 to 1.03, P = .15). No statistically significant difference was observed in the proportion of patients who reported a fracture event in the post-treatment period. Conclusion The Intergroup Exemestane Study and contemporaneous studies have established that a strategy of switching to an aromatase inhibitor after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen can lead to sustained benefits in terms of reduction of disease recurrence and breast cancer mortality.

Conducting non-commercial international clinical trials: the ICR-CTSU experience

BackgroundAcademic clinical trials play a fundamental role in the development of new treatments, the repurposing of existing treatments and in addressing areas of unmet clinical need. With cancer treatments increasingly targeted at molecular subtypes, and with priority placed on developing new treatments for rare tumour types, the need for international trial participation to access sufficient patient numbers for successful trial conduct is growing. However, lack of harmonisation of international legal, ethical and financial systems can make this challenging and the cost and effort of conducting trials internationally can be considered prohibitive, particularly where the sample size is comparatively small.MethodsThe Institute of Cancer Research – Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit (ICR-CTSU) is a UK-based academic clinical trials unit that specialises in the design, conduct and analysis of clinical trials of cancer treatments with an expanding portfolio of trials in molecular subtypes of breast and urological cancers and in other rare cancer types. Implementing appropriate mechanisms to enable international participation has therefore been imperative. In this article, we explain how we have approached the challenges involved and describe examples of successful international trial conduct, achieved through robust collaborations with academic and industry partners.ConclusionConducting academic trials internationally is challenging but can and should be achieved through appropriate governance mechanisms and strong collaborations.

Design considerations when transitioning from paper case report forms (CRFS) to electronic data capture (EDC)

Background ICR-CTSU introduced EDC in 2012; this necessitated a revision of the systems and processes implemented for paper CRFs. Traditionally sites manually completed, signed and posted CRFs to ICR-CTSU. Once received, CRFs were tracked and transcribed onto the study database by a member of the ICR-CTSU trial team. Databases contained multiple complex validations to aid central data management. Data queries were raised by ICR-CTSU and sent to the sites by post. These processes had to be revised when EDC was introduced and alteration of CRF and database design was integral to this.

Patient advocate involvement in the design and conduct of breast cancer clinical trials requiring the collection of multiple biopsies

Plain English summaryBreast cancer is a diverse and varied disease. Recent research has shown that the collection of multiple biopsies before surgery can help researchers determine how the cancer is responding to treatment and can predict for long-term outcomes. However biopsies can be uncomfortable, and sometimes clinicians and research teams in hospitals may be reluctant to offer clinical trials requiring several biopsies to patients who have been recently diagnosed with breast cancer. The Institute of Cancer Research Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit (ICR-CTSU) oversees a large number of breast cancer clinical trials where multiple biopsies are required. ICR-CTSU recognises that patient advocates (patients who have previously had, or cared for someone with, cancer) are key members of the trial design group and should be involved in the clinical trial throughout its lifespan. Patient advocates can provide reassurance regarding the acceptability of trial designs involving multiple biopsies from a patient perspective. This paper summarises patient advocate involvement in ICR-CTSU breast cancer trials activity and how this has benefited our research.AbstractThe importance of collecting tissue samples in breast cancer has become increasingly recognised, as the diversity of the disease has become better known. It has been documented in recent research that tumours may change in response to treatment prior to surgery (the neoadjuvant treatment setting). The collection of sequential biopsies over time can identify changes within tumours and potentially predict how the tumour may respond to certain treatments. However, the acceptability of multiple biopsies amongst patients, clinicians and other research staff in hospitals is variable and recruitment into clinical trials requiring multiple biopsies may be challenging.The Institute of Cancer Research Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit (ICR-CTSU) is responsible for a portfolio of breast cancer trials where multiple biopsies are key to the trial design. Patient advocate involvement has been essential in helping us to design and deliver complex and innovative cancer trials which require multiple invasive tissue biopsies, often without any direct benefit to the trial participants. The views expressed by patient advocates involved in ICR-CTSU trials supports the published evidence that patients are willing to donate additional tissue for research and that clinicians’ concerns about approaching patients for trials involving multiple biopsies are often unfounded.Patient advocate involvement in ICR-CTSU trials activity takes various forms, from membership on protocol development groups and trial management groups, attendance at focus groups and forums, and presentations at trial development and launch meetings. This involvement has provided reassurance to research teams within the NHS and research ethics committees of the importance and acceptability of our trials from a patient perspective. Patient advocate involvement throughout the lifetime of our trials ensures that the patient remains central to our research considerations.

PNFLBA-16 FIRST RESULTS OF A-PREDICT: A PHASE II STUDY OF AXITINIB IN PATIENTS WITH METASTATIC RENAL CELL CANCER (RCC) UNSUITABLE FOR NEPHRECTOMY

adjusted (20) cut-points both result in NPV 90, with sensitivity of 94% and 92%, respectively. The number of avoided biopsies is greater (30%) with the adjusted cut-point of 20 vs. the original validated cutpoint (21%); while missing only 1>/1⁄4ISUP 3 case. The original validated cut-point would have avoided biopsies in 30% of men with GS6 or benign disease while the adjusted cut-point would have avoided 43% of biopsies in this population. CONCLUSIONS: Interim results from a prospective adaptive trial of the EPI test demonstrate consistent performance as identified in the original validation study. The adjusted cut-point continues to provide added benefit without risk of missing significant disease.