Lucy Kilburn

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.

Aromatase inhibitors versus tamoxifen in early breast cancer: patient-level meta-analysis of the randomised trials

BACKGROUND The optimal ways of using aromatase inhibitors or tamoxifen as endocrine treatment for early breast cancer remains uncertain. METHODS We undertook meta-analyses of individual data on 31,920 postmenopausal women with oestrogen-receptor-positive early breast cancer in the randomised trials of 5 years of aromatase inhibitor versus 5 years of tamoxifen; of 5 years of aromatase inhibitor versus 2-3 years of tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitor to year 5; and of 2-3 years of tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitor to year 5 versus 5 years of tamoxifen. Primary outcomes were any recurrence of breast cancer, breast cancer mortality, death without recurrence, and all-cause mortality. Intention-to-treat log-rank analyses, stratified by age, nodal status, and trial, yielded aromatase inhibitor versus tamoxifen first-event rate ratios (RRs). FINDINGS In the comparison of 5 years of aromatase inhibitor versus 5 years of tamoxifen, recurrence RRs favoured aromatase inhibitors significantly during years 0-1 (RR 0·64, 95% CI 0·52-0·78) and 2-4 (RR 0·80, 0·68-0·93), and non-significantly thereafter. 10-year breast cancer mortality was lower with aromatase inhibitors than tamoxifen (12·1% vs 14·2%; RR 0·85, 0·75-0·96; 2p=0·009). In the comparison of 5 years of aromatase inhibitor versus 2-3 years of tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitor to year 5, recurrence RRs favoured aromatase inhibitors significantly during years 0-1 (RR 0·74, 0·62-0·89) but not while both groups received aromatase inhibitors during years 2-4, or thereafter; overall in these trials, there were fewer recurrences with 5 years of aromatase inhibitors than with tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitors (RR 0·90, 0·81-0·99; 2p=0·045), though the breast cancer mortality reduction was not significant (RR 0·89, 0·78-1·03; 2p=0·11). In the comparison of 2-3 years of tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitor to year 5 versus 5 years of tamoxifen, recurrence RRs favoured aromatase inhibitors significantly during years 2-4 (RR 0·56, 0·46-0·67) but not subsequently, and 10-year breast cancer mortality was lower with switching to aromatase inhibitors than with remaining on tamoxifen (8·7% vs 10·1%; 2p=0·015). Aggregating all three types of comparison, recurrence RRs favoured aromatase inhibitors during periods when treatments differed (RR 0·70, 0·64-0·77), but not significantly thereafter (RR 0·93, 0·86-1·01; 2p=0·08). Breast cancer mortality was reduced both while treatments differed (RR 0·79, 0·67-0·92), and subsequently (RR 0·89, 0·81-0·99), and for all periods combined (RR 0·86, 0·80-0·94; 2p=0·0005). All-cause mortality was also reduced (RR 0·88, 0·82-0·94; 2p=0·0003). RRs differed little by age, body-mass index, stage, grade, progesterone receptor status, or HER2 status. There were fewer endometrial cancers with aromatase inhibitors than tamoxifen (10-year incidence 0·4% vs 1·2%; RR 0·33, 0·21-0·51) but more bone fractures (5-year risk 8·2% vs 5·5%; RR 1·42, 1·28-1·57); non-breast-cancer mortality was similar. INTERPRETATION Aromatase inhibitors reduce recurrence rates by about 30% (proportionately) compared with tamoxifen while treatments differ, but not thereafter. 5 years of an aromatase inhibitor reduces 10-year breast cancer mortality rates by about 15% compared with 5 years of tamoxifen, hence by about 40% (proportionately) compared with no endocrine treatment. FUNDING Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council.

Plasma ESR1 Mutations and the Treatment of Estrogen Receptor–Positive Advanced Breast Cancer

PURPOSE ESR1 mutations are selected by prior aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy in advanced breast cancer. We assessed the impact of ESR1 mutations on sensitivity to standard therapies in two phase III randomized trials that represent the development of the current standard therapy for estrogen receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS In a prospective-retrospective analysis, we assessed ESR1 mutations in available archived baseline plasma from the SoFEA (Study of Faslodex Versus Exemestane With or Without Arimidex) trial, which compared exemestane with fulvestrant-containing regimens in patients with prior sensitivity to nonsteroidal AI and in baseline plasma from the PALOMA3 (Palbociclib Combined With Fulvestrant in Hormone Receptor-Positive HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer After Endocrine Failure) trial, which compared fulvestrant plus placebo with fulvestrant plus palbociclib in patients with progression after receiving prior endocrine therapy. ESR1 mutations were analyzed by multiplex digital polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS In SoFEA, ESR1 mutations were found in 39.1% of patients (63 of 161), of whom 49.1% (27 of 55) were polyclonal, with rates of mutation detection unaffected by delays in processing of archival plasma. Patients with ESR1 mutations had improved progression-free survival (PFS) after taking fulvestrant (n = 45) compared with exemestane (n = 18; hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.92; P = .02), whereas patients with wild-type ESR1 had similar PFS after receiving either treatment (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.67; P = .77). In PALOMA3, ESR1 mutations were found in the plasma of 25.3% of patients (91 of 360), of whom 28.6% (26 of 91) were polyclonal, with mutations associated with acquired resistance to prior AI. Fulvestrant plus palbociclib improved PFS compared with fulvestrant plus placebo in both ESR1 mutant (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.74; P = .002) and ESR1 wild-type patients (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.70; P < .001). CONCLUSION ESR1 mutation analysis in plasma after progression after prior AI therapy may help direct choice of further endocrine-based therapy. Additional confirmatory studies are required.

Fulvestrant plus anastrozole or placebo versus exemestane alone after progression on non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal patients with hormone-receptor-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (SoFEA): a composite, multicentre, phase 3 randomised trial

BACKGROUND The optimum endocrine treatment for postmenopausal women with advanced hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer that has progressed on non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors (NSAIs) is unclear. The aim of the SoFEA trial was to assess a maximum double endocrine targeting approach with the steroidal anti-oestrogen fulvestrant in combination with continued oestrogen deprivation. METHODS In a composite, multicentre, phase 3 randomised controlled trial done in the UK and South Korea, postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer (oestrogen receptor [ER] positive, progesterone receptor [PR] positive, or both) were eligible if they had relapsed or progressed with locally advanced or metastatic disease on an NSAI (given as adjuvant for at least 12 months or as first-line treatment for at least 6 months). Additionally, patients had to have adequate organ function and a WHO performance status of 0-2. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive fulvestrant (500 mg intramuscular injection on day 1, followed by 250 mg doses on days 15 and 29, and then every 28 days) plus daily oral anastrozole (1 mg); fulvestrant plus anastrozole-matched placebo; or daily oral exemestane (25 mg). Randomisation was done with computer-generated permuted blocks, and stratification was by centre and previous use of an NSAI as adjuvant treatment or for locally advanced or metastatic disease. Participants and investigators were aware of assignment to fulvestrant or exemestane, but not of assignment to anastrozole or placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00253422 (UK) and NCT00944918 (South Korea). FINDINGS Between March 26, 2004, and Aug 6, 2010, 723 patients underwent randomisation: 243 were assigned to receive fulvestrant plus anastrozole, 231 to fulvestrant plus placebo, and 249 to exemestane. Median PFS was 4·4 months (95% CI 3·4-5·4) in patients assigned to fulvestrant plus anastrozole, 4·8 months (3·6-5·5) in those assigned to fulvestrant plus placebo, and 3·4 months (3·0-4·6) in those assigned to exemestane. No difference was recorded between the patients assigned to fulvestrant plus anastrozole and fulvestrant plus placebo (hazard ratio 1·00, 95% CI 0·83-1·21; log-rank p=0·98), or between those assigned to fulvestrant plus placebo and exemestane (0·95, 0·79-1·14; log-rank p=0·56). 87 serious adverse events were reported: 36 in patients assigned to fulvestrant plus anastrozole, 22 in those assigned to fulvestrant plus placebo, and 29 in those assigned to exemestane. Grade 3-4 adverse events were rare; the most frequent were arthralgia (three in the group assigned to fulvestrant plus anastrozole; seven in that assigned to fulvestrant plus placebo; eight in that assigned to exemestane), lethargy (three; 11; 11), and nausea or vomiting (five; two; eight). INTERPRETATION After loss of response to NSAIs in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer, maximum double endocrine treatment with 250 mg fulvestrant combined with oestrogen deprivation is no better than either fulvestrant alone or exemestane.

Abstract S3-01: The TNT trial: A randomized phase III trial of carboplatin (C) compared with docetaxel (D) for patients with metastatic or recurrent locally advanced triple negative or BRCA1/2 breast cancer (CRUK/07/012)

Introduction: Subgroups within sporadic triple negative breast cancers (TNBCs) appear to share impaired DNA damage response mechanisms with BRCA1/2 mutation-associated breast cancers. This has been hypothesised to confer particular sensitivity to DNA-damaging platinum chemotherapy. The TNT trial, a randomized phase III trial in women with metastatic or recurrent locally advanced TNBC or BRCA1/2 mutation-associated breast cancer, aimed to test this hypothesis and examine treatment effect in biological subgroups. Patients & Methods: Eligible patients had either ER-, PR-, HER2- breast cancer or were known BRCA1/2 carriers (any ER/PR/HER2). Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive either C (AUC 6 q3wk) or D (100mg/m2 q3wk) for 6-8 cycles or until disease progression if sooner and could cross over to the alternative treatment on confirmed progression. Ineligible patients included those who had ECOG performance status >2, received adjuvant taxane therapy in the last 12 mths, any previous treatment with a platinum chemotherapy, or previous non-anthracycline chemotherapy for metastatic disease. For consenting patients a blood sample and archived tissue samples were obtained for BRCA1/2 genotyping and central biomarker analysis (primary tumour, lymph nodes and recurrent tumour biopsy if available) of subtypes within TNBC and biomarkers of DNA repair deficiency. The primary endpoint was RECIST objective tumour response up to cycle 6 of randomised treatment. Secondary endpoints included toxicity, progression free survival (PFS), time to progression and overall survival. TNT aimed to detect a 15% improvement in ORR with C compared to D, with planned target sample size range of 370-450 depending on assumed ORR in D patients (2-sided α=0.05, power=90%). 376 (188 C, 188 D) were recruited from 74 UK centres between Apr 08 and Mar 14. Results: A snapshot of the data was taken on 30/5/14 at which point 336 (89.4%) patients had experienced a PFS event, with overall median PFS time of 4.4 mths. Median age of patients was 55 yrs (IQR 48-63). 366/376 (97%) patients had TNBC of whom 18 were also known BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, with the remaining 10 patients receptor +ve and BRCA1/2 carriers. 338/376 (90%) had metastatic and 38/376 (10%) recurrent locally advanced disease. 53% had liver or lung metastases affecting the parenchyma and 34% had received previous adjuvant taxane therapy. Median time from initial diagnosis to entering TNT was 2.2 yrs (IQR 1.5-3.5). Primary tumour tissue has currently been received for 277 patients, blood from 286 patients and recurrent tumour tissue from 85 patients. Discussion: TNT will report evidence on the activity of single agent platinum chemotherapy compared with single agent taxane in patients with TNBC and BRCA1/2 associated breast cancer. Correlative analyses of BRCA1/2 mutation status, subtypes and DNA repair biomarkers will also be reported. TNT will be the first randomised trial to report the activity of platinum compared with standard chemotherapy within TNBC subtypes and in relation to BRCA1/2 mutation status and DNA repair biomarkers. Safety, tolerability and response to crossover treatment will also be presented. Citation Format: Andrew Tutt, Paul Ellis, Lucy Kilburn, Cheryl Gilett, Sarah Pinder, Jacinta Abraham, Sophie Barrett, Peter Barrett-Lee, Stephen Chan, Maggie Cheang, Mitch Dowsett, Lisa Fox, Patrycja Gazinska, Anita Grigoriadis, Alexander Gutin, Catherine Harper-Wynne, Matthew Hatton, Sarah Kernaghan, Jerry Lanchbury, James Morden, Julie Owen, Jyoti Parikh, Peter Parker, Nazneen Rahman, Rebecca Roylance, Adam Shaw, Ian Smith, Rose Thompson, Kirsten Timms, Holly Tovey, Andrew Wardley, Gregory Wilson, Mark Harries, Judith Bliss. The TNT trial: A randomized phase III trial of carboplatin (C) compared with docetaxel (D) for patients with metastatic or recurrent locally advanced triple negative or BRCA1/2 breast cancer (CRUK/07/012) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr S3-01.

Disease-Related Outcomes With Long-Term Follow-Up: An Updated Analysis of the Intergroup Exemestane Study

PURPOSE Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES), an investigator-led study in 4,724 postmenopausal patients with early-stage breast cancer has demonstrated clinically important benefits from switching adjuvant endocrine therapy after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen to exemestane. Now, with longer follow-up, a large number of non-breast cancer-related events have been reported. Exploratory analyses describe breast cancer-free survival (BCFS) and explore incidence and patterns of the different competing events. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients who were disease-free after 2 to 3 years of adjuvant tamoxifen were randomly assigned to continue tamoxifen or switch to exemestane to complete 5 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy. At this planned analysis, the median follow-up was 91 months. Principal analysis focuses on 4,052 patients with estrogen receptor (ER) -positive and 547 with ER-unknown tumors. RESULTS In all, 930 BCFS events have been reported (exemestane, 423; tamoxifen, 507), giving an unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.92; P = .001) in favor of exemestane in the ER-positive/ER unknown group. Analysis partitioned at 2.5 years after random assignment showed that the on-treatment benefit of switching to exemestane (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.75; P < .001) was not lost post-treatment, but that there was no additional gain once treatment had ceased (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.10; P = .60). Improvement in overall survival was demonstrated, with 352 deaths in the exemestane group versus 405 deaths in the tamoxifen group (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P = .04). Of these, 222 were reported as intercurrent deaths (exemestane, 107; tamoxifen, 115). CONCLUSION The protective effect of switching to exemestane compared with continuing on tamoxifen on risk of relapse or death was maintained for at least 5 years post-treatment and was associated with a continuing beneficial impact on overall survival.

Adjuvant chemotherapy in older women (ACTION) study - what did we learn from the pilot phase?

Background:The ACTION trial was initiated to provide evidence from a randomised trial on the effects of chemotherapy in women aged over 70 years where evidence for risk and benefit are lacking.Methods:This was a randomised, phase III clinical trial for high risk, oestrogen receptor (ER) negative/ER weakly positive early breast cancer. The trial planned to recruit 1000 women aged 70 years and older, randomised to receive 4 cycles of anthracycline chemotherapy or observation. The primary endpoint was relapse-free interval. The trial included a pilot phase to assess the acceptability and feasibility of recruitment.Results:The trial opened at 43 UK centres. Information on number of patients approached was available from 38 centres. Of the 43 eligible patients that were approached, 39 were not randomised due to patients declining entry. After 10 months only 4 patients had been randomised and after discussion with the research funder, the trial was closed and funding terminated.Conclusion:Despite widespread support at several public meetings, input from patient groups including representation on the Trial Management Group, the trial failed to recruit due to the inability to convince patients to accept randomisation. It would therefore seem that randomising the patients to receive chemotherapy vs observation is not a viable design in the current era for this patient population.

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.

Randomized, Phase III Trial of Sequential Epirubicin and Docetaxel Versus Epirubicin Alone in Postmenopausal Patients With Node-Positive Breast Cancer

PURPOSE The Docetaxel Epirubicin Adjuvant (DEVA) trial evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of incorporating docetaxel after epirubicin to create a sequential anthracycline-taxane regimen in early breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS After complete tumor excision, postmenopausal women with node-positive early breast cancer were randomly assigned to either epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 4 weeks for six cycles (EPI × 6) or three cycles of epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 4 weeks followed by three cycles of docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 3 weeks (EPI-DOC). A subset of patients also participated in a quality of life (QOL) study. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS From 1997 to 2005, 803 patients entered DEVA (EPI × 6, n = 397; EPI-DOC, n = 406). At a median follow-up of 64.7 months (interquartile range, 45.2 to 84.4 months), 198 DFS events had been reported (EPI × 6, n = 114; EPI-DOC, n = 84). The 5-year DFS rates were 72.7% (95% CI, 68.0% to 77.3%) for epirubicin alone and 79.5% (95% CI, 75.2% to 83.8%) for epirubicin followed by docetaxel; evidence of improvement in DFS was observed with EPI-DOC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.91; P = .008). One hundred twenty-seven patients have died (EPI × 6, n = 75; EPI-DOC, n = 52); a reduction in deaths was observed with EPI-DOC (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.94; P = .02). The 5-year overall survival rates were 81.8% (95% CI, 77.7% to 85.9%) for epirubicin and 88.9% (95% CI, 85.5% to 92.2%) for epirubicin followed by docetaxel. Assessment of toxicity and QOL showed that EPI-DOC was associated with greater toxicity but with no difference in QOL between arms during follow-up. CONCLUSION These results suggest, within a relatively small trial, that substitution of docetaxel for epirubicin for the last three cycles of chemotherapy results in improved outcome in postmenopausal women with node-positive, early breast cancer compared with six cycles of epirubicin monotherapy.