Harold J. Burstein

American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline Recommendations for Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer

PURPOSE To develop a guideline for the use of sentinel node biopsy (SNB) in early stage breast cancer. METHODS An American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Expert Panel conducted a systematic review of the literature available through February 2004 on the use of SNB in early-stage breast cancer. The panel developed a guideline for clinicians and patients regarding the appropriate use of a sentinel lymph node identification and sampling procedure from hereon referred to as SNB. The guideline was reviewed by selected experts in the field and the ASCO Health Services Committee and was approved by the ASCO Board of Directors. RESULTS The literature review identified one published prospective randomized controlled trial in which SNB was compared with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), four limited meta-analyses, and 69 published single-institution and multicenter trials in which the test performance of SNB was evaluated with respect to the results of ALND (completion axillary dissection). There are currently no data on the effect of SLN biopsy on long-term survival of patients with breast cancer. However, a review of the available evidence demonstrates that, when performed by experienced clinicians, SNB appears to be a safe and acceptably accurate method for identifying early-stage breast cancer without involvement of the axillary lymph nodes. CONCLUSION SNB is an appropriate initial alternative to routine staging ALND for patients with early-stage breast cancer with clinically negative axillary nodes. Completion ALND remains standard treatment for patients with axillary metastases identified on SNB. Appropriately identified patients with negative results of SNB, when done under the direction of an experienced surgeon, need not have completion ALND. Isolated cancer cells detected by pathologic examination of the SLN with use of specialized techniques are currently of unknown clinical significance. Although such specialized techniques are often used, they are not a required part of SLN evaluation for breast cancer at this time. Data suggest that SNB is associated with less morbidity than ALND, but the comparative effects of these two approaches on tumor recurrence or patient survival are unknown.

Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013

The 13th St Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference (2013) Expert Panel reviewed and endorsed substantial new evidence on aspects of the local and regional therapies for early breast cancer, supporting less extensive surgery to the axilla and shorter durations of radiation therapy. It refined its earlier approach to the classification and management of luminal disease in the absence of amplification or overexpression of the Human Epidermal growth factor Receptor 2 (HER2) oncogene, while retaining essentially unchanged recommendations for the systemic adjuvant therapy of HER2-positive and ‘triple-negative’ disease. The Panel again accepted that conventional clinico-pathological factors provided a surrogate subtype classification, while noting that in those areas of the world where multi-gene molecular assays are readily available many clinicians prefer to base chemotherapy decisions for patients with luminal disease on these genomic results rather than the surrogate subtype definitions. Several multi-gene molecular assays were recognized as providing accurate and reproducible prognostic information, and in some cases prediction of response to chemotherapy. Cost and availability preclude their application in many environments at the present time. Broad treatment recommendations are presented. Such recommendations do not imply that each Panel member agrees: indeed, among more than 100 questions, only one (trastuzumab duration) commanded 100% agreement. The various recommendations in fact carried differing degrees of support, as reflected in the nuanced wording of the text below and in the votes recorded in supplementary Appendix S1, available at Annals of Oncology online. Detailed decisions on treatment will as always involve clinical consideration of disease extent, host factors, patient preferences and social and economic constraints.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Technology Assessment on the Use of Aromatase Inhibitors As Adjuvant Therapy for Postmenopausal Women With Hormone Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer: Status Report 2004

PURPOSE To update the 2003 American Society of Clinical Oncology technology assessment on adjuvant use of aromatase inhibitors. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on results from multiple large randomized trials, adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer should include an aromatase inhibitor in order to lower the risk of tumor recurrence. Neither the optimal timing nor duration of aromatase inhibitor therapy is established. Aromatase inhibitors are appropriate as initial treatment for women with contraindications to tamoxifen. For all other postmenopausal women, treatment options include 5 years of aromatase inhibitors treatment or sequential therapy consisting of tamoxifen (for either 2 to 3 years or 5 years) followed by aromatase inhibitors for 2 to 3, or 5 years. Patients intolerant of aromatase inhibitors should receive tamoxifen. There are no data on the use of tamoxifen after an aromatase inhibitor in the adjuvant setting. Women with hormone receptor-negative tumors should not receive adjuvant endocrine therapy. The role of other biomarkers such as progesterone receptor and HER2 status in selecting optimal endocrine therapy remains controversial. Aromatase inhibitors are contraindicated in premenopausal women; there are limited data concerning their role in women with treatment-related amenorrhea. The side effect profiles of tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors differ. The late consequences of aromatase inhibitor therapy, including osteoporosis, are not well characterized. CONCLUSION The Panel believes that optimal adjuvant hormonal therapy for a postmenopausal woman with receptor-positive breast cancer includes an aromatase inhibitor as initial therapy or after treatment with tamoxifen. Women with breast cancer and their physicians must weigh the risks and benefits of all therapeutic options.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline: Update on Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Women With Hormone Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer

PURPOSE To develop evidence-based guidelines, based on a systematic review, for endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. METHODS A literature search identified relevant randomized trials. Databases searched included MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE, the Cochrane Collaboration Library, and those for the Annual Meetings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS). The primary outcomes of interest were disease-free survival, overall survival, and time to contralateral breast cancer. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and quality of life. An expert panel reviewed the literature, especially 12 major trials, and developed updated recommendations. RESULTS An adjuvant treatment strategy incorporating an aromatase inhibitor (AI) as primary (initial endocrine therapy), sequential (using both tamoxifen and an AI in either order), or extended (AI after 5 years of tamoxifen) therapy reduces the risk of breast cancer recurrence compared with 5 years of tamoxifen alone. Data suggest that including an AI as primary monotherapy or as sequential treatment after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen yields similar outcomes. Tamoxifen and AIs differ in their adverse effect profiles, and these differences may inform treatment preferences. CONCLUSION The Update Committee recommends that postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer consider incorporating AI therapy at some point during adjuvant treatment, either as up-front therapy or as sequential treatment after tamoxifen. The optimal timing and duration of endocrine treatment remain unresolved. The Update Committee supports careful consideration of adverse effect profiles and patient preferences in deciding whether and when to incorporate AI therapy.

Randomized study of lapatinib alone or in combination with trastuzumab in women with ErbB2-positive, trastuzumab-refractory metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE Preclinical studies in ErbB2-positive cell lines demonstrated a synergistic interaction between lapatinib and trastuzumab, suggesting that dual blockade is more effective than a single agent alone. EGF104900 compared the activity of lapatinib alone or in combination with trastuzumab in patients with ErbB2-positive, trastuzumab-refractory metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with ErbB2-positive MBC who experienced progression on prior trastuzumab-containing regimens were randomly assigned to receive either lapatinib alone or in combination with trastuzumab. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary efficacy end points included overall response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR; complete response, partial response, and stable disease for >/= 24 weeks), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS In the intent-to-treat population (N = 296) who received a median of three prior trastuzumab-containing regimens, the combination of lapatinib with trastuzumab was superior to lapatinib alone for PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.93; P = .008) and CBR (24.7% in the combination arm v 12.4% in the monotherapy arm; P = .01). A trend for improved OS in the combination arm was observed (HR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.53 to 1.07; P = .106). There was no difference in ORR (10.3% in the combination arm v 6.9% in the monotherapy arm; P = .46). The most frequent adverse events were diarrhea, rash, nausea, and fatigue; diarrhea was higher in the combination arm (P = .03). The incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic cardiac events was low (combination therapy = 2% and 3.4%; monotherapy = 0.7% and 1.4%, respectively). CONCLUSION Despite disease progression on prior trastuzumab-based therapy, lapatinib in combination with trastuzumab significantly improved PFS and CBR versus lapatinib alone, thus offering a chemotherapy-free option with an acceptable safety profile to patients with ErbB2-positive MBC.

Use of alternative medicine by women with early-stage breast cancer.

BACKGROUND We analyzed the use of alternative medicine by women who had received standard therapy for early-stage breast cancer diagnosed between September 1993 and September 1995. METHODS A cohort of 480 patients with newly diagnosed early-stage breast cancer was recruited from a Massachusetts statewide cohort of women participating in a study of how women choose treatment for cancer. Alternative medical treatments, conventional therapies, and health-related quality of life were examined. RESULTS New use of alternative medicine after surgery for breast cancer was common (reported by 28.1 percent of the women); such use was not associated with choices about standard medical therapies after we controlled for clinical and sociodemographic variables. A total of 10.6 percent of the women had used alternative medicine before they were given a diagnosis of breast cancer. Women who initiated the use of alternative medicine after surgery reported a worse quality of life than women who never used alternative medicine. Mental health scores were similar at base line among women who decided to use alternative medicine and those who did not, but three months after surgery the use of alternative medicine was independently associated with depression, fear of recurrence of cancer, lower scores for mental health and sexual satisfaction, and more physical symptoms as well as symptoms of greater intensity. All groups of women reported improving quality of life one year after surgery. CONCLUSIONS Among women with newly diagnosed early-stage breast cancer who had been treated with standard therapies, new use of alternative medicine was a marker of greater psychosocial distress and worse quality of life.

Central Nervous System Metastases in Women who Receive Trastuzumab-Based Therapy for Metastatic Breast Carcinoma

Women with HER‐2 overexpressing metastatic breast carcinoma benefit from trastuzumab‐based therapy, but trastuzumab does not cross the blood‐brain barrier. The authors characterized central nervous system (CNS) disease in these women.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Weekly Compared With Every-3-Weeks Paclitaxel for Metastatic Breast Cancer, With Trastuzumab for all HER-2 Overexpressors and Random Assignment to Trastuzumab or Not in HER-2 Nonoverexpressors: Final Results of Cancer and Leukemia Group B Protocol 9840

PURPOSE Phase II trials suggested that weekly paclitaxel might be more effective and less toxic than every-3-weeks administration for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) protocol 9840 was initiated to address this question. Subsequently trastuzumab was demonstrated to improve outcomes of paclitaxel therapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2)-positive patients, and was therefore incorporated. Because inhibition of HER-family signaling had potential efficacy even without HER-2 overexpression, we randomly assigned for trastuzumab in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks or 80 mg/m(2) weekly. After the first 171 patients, all HER-2-positive patients received trastuzumab; HER-2 nonoverexpressors were randomly assigned for trastuzumab, in addition to paclitaxel schedule. A total of 577 patients were treated on 9840. An additional 158 patients were included in analyses, for combined sample of 735. The primary end point was response rate (RR); secondary end points were time to progression (TTP), overall survival, and toxicity. Primary comparisons were between weekly versus every-3-weeks paclitaxel, and trastuzumab versus no trastuzumab in HER-2 nonoverexpressors. RESULTS In the combined sample, weekly paclitaxel was superior to every-3-weeks administration: RR (42% v 29%, unadjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.75; P = .0004), TTP (median, 9 v 5 months; adjusted HR = 1.43; P < .0001), and survival (median, 24 v 12 months; adjusted HR = 1.28; P = .0092). For HER-2 nonoverexpressors, trastuzumab did not improve efficacy. Grade 3 neuropathy was more common with weekly dosing (24% v 12%; P = .0003). CONCLUSION Weekly paclitaxel is more effective than every-3-weeks administration for MBC. Trastuzumab did not improve efficacy for HER-2 nonoverexpressors. Neurotoxicity is a treatment-limiting toxicity for weekly paclitaxel.

Phase II Study of Sunitinib Malate, an Oral Multitargeted Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor, in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer Previously Treated With an Anthracycline and a Taxane

PURPOSE Sunitinib is an oral, multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor that inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), platelet-derived growth factor receptor, stem cell factor receptor (KIT), and colony-stimulating factor-1 receptor. This phase II, open-label, multicenter study evaluated sunitinib monotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Sixty-four patients previously treated with an anthracycline and a taxane received sunitinib 50 mg/d in 6-week cycles (4 weeks on, then 2 weeks off treatment). The primary end point was objective response rate. Plasma samples were obtained for pharmacokinetic and biomarker analysis. RESULTS Seven patients achieved a partial response (median duration, 19 weeks), giving an overall response rate of 11%. Three additional patients (5%) maintained stable disease for >or= 6 months. Median time to progression and overall survival were 10 and 38 weeks, respectively. Notably, responses occurred in triple negative tumors and HER2-positive, trastuzumab-treated patients. Thirty-three patients (52%) required dose interruption during >or= 1 cycle, and 25 patients required dose reduction (39%). Thirty-six patients (56%) had dose modifications due to adverse events (AEs). Treatment was associated with increases in plasma VEGF and decreases in soluble VEGFRs and KIT. The most common AEs were fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, mucosal inflammation, and anorexia. Most AEs were mild to moderate (grade 1 to 2) in severity and were effectively managed with dose delays or reductions. CONCLUSION Sunitinib is active in patients with heavily pretreated MBC. Most AEs were of mild-to-moderate severity and manageable with supportive treatment and/or dose modification. Further studies in breast cancer are warranted.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update

PURPOSE To provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing oncologists, surgeons, and radiation therapy clinicians to update the 2005 clinical practice guideline on the use of sentinel node biopsy (SNB) for patients with early-stage breast cancer. METHODS The American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Update Committee of experts in medical oncology, pathology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, guideline implementation, and advocacy. A systematic review of the literature was conducted from February 2004 to January 2013 in Medline. Guideline recommendations were based on the review of the evidence by Update Committee. RESULTS This guideline update reflects changes in practice since the 2005 guideline. Nine randomized clinical trials (RCTs) met systematic review criteria for clinical questions 1 and 2; 13 cohort studies informed clinical question 3. RECOMMENDATIONS Women without sentinel lymph node (SLN) metastases should not receive axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). Women with one to two metastatic SLNs planning to undergo breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast radiotherapy should not undergo ALND (in most cases). Women with SLN metastases who will undergo mastectomy should be offered ALND. These three recommendation are based on RCTs. Women with operable breast cancer and multicentric tumors, with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) who will undergo mastectomy, who previously underwent breast and/or axillary surgery, or who received preoperative/neoadjuvant systemic therapy may be offered SNB. Women who have large or locally advanced invasive breast cancer (tumor size T3/T4), inflammatory breast cancer, or DCIS (when breast-conserving surgery is planned) or are pregnant should not undergo SNB. These recommendations are based on cohort studies and/or informal consensus. In some cases, updated evidence was insufficient to update previous recommendations.