Vered Stearns

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.

Recommendations From an International Expert Panel on the Use of Neoadjuvant (Primary) Systemic Treatment of Operable Breast Cancer: An Update

Neoadjuvant (primary systemic) treatment is the standard treatment for locally advanced breast cancer and a standard option for primary operable disease. Because of new treatments and new understandings of breast cancer, however, recommendations published in 2003 regarding neoadjuvant treatment for operable disease required updating. Therefore, a second international panel of representatives of a number of breast cancer clinical research groups was convened in September 2004 to update these recommendations. As part of this effort, data published to date were reviewed critically and indications for neoadjuvant treatment were newly defined.

Quantitative effect of CYP2D6 genotype and inhibitors on tamoxifen metabolism: Implication for optimization of breast cancer treatment

N‐Desmethyltamoxifen (NDM), a major primary metabolite of tamoxifen, is hydroxylated by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 to yield endoxifen. Because of its high antiestrogenic potency, endoxifen may play an important role in the clinical activity of tamoxifen. We conducted a prospective trial in 158 patients with breast cancer who were taking tamoxifen to further understand the effect of CYP2D6 genotype and concomitant medications on endoxifen plasma concentrations.

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

PURPOSE To update the ASCO clinical practice guideline on adjuvant endocrine therapy on the basis of emerging data on the optimal duration of treatment, particularly adjuvant tamoxifen. METHODS ASCO convened the Update Committee and conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials from January 2009 to June 2013 and analyzed three historical trials. Guideline recommendations were based on the Update Committees review of the evidence. Outcomes of interest included survival, disease recurrence, and adverse events. RESULTS This guideline update reflects emerging data on duration of tamoxifen treatment. There have been five studies of tamoxifen treatment beyond 5 years of therapy. The two largest studies with longest reported follow-up show a breast cancer survival advantage with 10-year durations of tamoxifen use. In addition to modest gains in survival, extended therapy with tamoxifen for 10 years compared with 5 years was associated with lower risks of breast cancer recurrence and contralateral breast cancer. RECOMMENDATIONS Previous ASCO guidelines recommended treatment of women who have hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and are premenopausal with 5 years of tamoxifen, and those who are postmenopausal a minimum of 5 years of adjuvant therapy with an aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen followed by an aromatase inhibitor (in sequence). If women are pre- or perimenopausal and have received 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen, they should be offered 10 years total duration of tamoxifen. If women are postmenopausal and have received 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen, they should be offered the choice of continuing tamoxifen or switching to an aromatase inhibitor for 10 years total adjuvant endocrine therapy.

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.).

When Is a Tumor Marker Ready for Prime Time? A Case Study of c-erbB-2 as a Predictive Factor in Breast Cancer

PURPOSE c-erbB-2 (HER-2, c-neu) might play a role as a predictive factor in breast cancer. However, the clinical utility of the marker in this disease is still not established. We conducted a critical analysis of the literature, in which we reviewed the factors that contribute to the lack of acceptance of c-erbB-2 for clinical use and attempted to determine the predictive role of c-erbB-2 for response to specific therapies. METHODS We conducted a MEDLINE literature search using the keywords c-erbB-2, HER2, neu, and breast cancer, reviewed the references included in each publication, and reviewed abstracts that have been reported in the 1997-2000 proceedings to the American Association of Cancer Research and American Society for Clinical Oncology annual meetings. RESULTS The preclinical and clinical data reported to date suggest that amplification or overexpression of c-erbB-2 is a weak to moderate negative pure prognostic factor. c-erbB-2 seems to be a weak to moderate negative predictive factor for response to endocrine therapy. The marker is also a moderate negative predictive factor for response to alkylating agents and a moderate positive predictive factor for response to anthracyclines. The data regarding response to taxanes or radiotherapy are not sufficient to make recommendations regarding treatment decision making. Finally, c-erbB-2 is a strong predictive factor for response to trastuzumab. CONCLUSION We conclude that, in the adjuvant setting, c-erbB-2 status should not be used to determine whether a woman should receive adjuvant systemic therapy (weak prognostic factor). In addition, c-erbB-2 status should not be used to determine whether a patient should receive endocrine therapy. When adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended, anthracycline-based therapy should be the preferred regimen for c-erbB-2-positive patients. However, when anthracyclines are contraindicated, alkylating agent-based therapy should not be withheld. To determine the true predictive role and strength of the marker for response to each therapy, prospective randomized clinical trials or formal meta-analyses are required.

A pilot trial assessing the efficacy of paroxetine hydrochloride (Paxil®) in controlling hot flashes in breast cancer survivors

BACKGROUND Many breast cancer survivors suffer debilitating hot flashes. Estrogen, the drug of choice in perimenopausal women, is generally not recommenced to breast cancer survivors. Nonhormonal treatments are mostly disappointing. Anecdotal reports in our institution suggested that the selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitor, paroxetine hydrochloride, might be efficacious in alleviating hot flashes. PATIENTS AND METHODS Thirty women with prior breast cancer who were suffering at least two hot flashes a day entered a single institution pilot trial to evaluate paroxetines efficacy in reducing the frequency and severity of hot flashes. After completing daily diaries for one week on no therapy, the women received open-label paroxetine, 10 mg daily for one week, followed by four weeks of paroxetine, 20 mg daily. The women completed hot-flash daily diaries throughout the study period, and a health-related symptom-assessment questionnaire and a quality-of-life rating scale in the first and sixth week of the study. RESULTS Twenty-seven women completed the six-week study period. The mean reduction of hot flash frequency was 67% (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 56%-79%). The mean reduction in hot flash severity score was 75% (95% CI: 66%-85%). There was a statistically significant improvement in depression, sleep, anxiety, and quality of life scores. Furthermore, 25 (83%) of the study participants chose to continue paroxetine therapy at the end of study. The most common adverse effect was somnolence, resulting in drug discontinuation in two women, and dose reduction in two women. One woman discontinued drug due to anxiety. CONCLUSIONS Paroxetine hydrochloride is a promising new treatment for hot flashes in breast cancer survivors, and warrants further evaluation in a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial.

Phase II trial of bicalutamide in patients with androgen receptor-positive, estrogen receptor-negative metastatic breast cancer

Purpose: Patients with hormone receptor–negative breast cancer generally do not benefit from endocrine-targeted therapies. However, a subset with androgen receptor (AR) expression is predicted to respond to antiandrogen therapies. This phase II study explored bicalutamide in AR-positive, estrogen receptor (ER), and progesterone receptor (PgR)-negative metastatic breast cancer. Experimental Design: Tumors from patients with ER/PgR-negative advanced breast cancer were tested centrally for AR [immunohistochemistry (IHC) > 10% nuclear staining considered positive]. If either the primary or a metastatic site was positive, patients were eligible to receive the AR antagonist bicalutamide at a dose of 150 mg daily. Clinical benefit rate (CBR), the primary endpoint, was defined as the total number of patients who show a complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD) > 6 months; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity. Correlative studies included measurement of circulating endocrine markers and IHC surrogates for basal-like breast cancer. Results: Of 424 patients with ER/PgR-negative breast cancer, 12% tested AR-positive. The 6-month CBR was 19% [95% confidence interval (CI), 7%–39%] for bicalutamide. The median PFS was 12 weeks (95% CI, 11–22 weeks). Bicalutamide was well-tolerated with no grade 4/5 treatment-related adverse events observed. Conclusion: AR was expressed in 12% of patients with ER/PgR-negative breast cancer screened for this trial. The CBR of 19% observed with bicalutamide shows proof of principle for the efficacy of minimally toxic androgen blockade in a select group of patients with ER/PgR-negative, AR-positive breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res; 19(19); 5505–12. ©2013 AACR.

Detection of Tumor PIK3CA Status in Metastatic Breast Cancer Using Peripheral Blood

Purpose: We sought to evaluate the feasibility of detecting PIK3CA mutations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from plasma of patients with metastatic breast cancer using a novel technique called BEAMing. Experimental Design: In a retrospective analysis, 49 tumor and temporally matched plasma samples from patients with breast cancer were screened for PIK3CA mutations by BEAMing. We then prospectively screened the ctDNA of 60 patients with metastatic breast cancer for PIK3CA mutations by BEAMing and compared the findings with results obtained by screening corresponding archival tumor tissue DNA using both sequencing and BEAMing. Results: The overall frequency of PIK3CA mutations by BEAMing was similar in both patient cohorts (29% and 28.3%, respectively). In the retrospective cohort, the concordance of PIK3CA mutation status by BEAMing between formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples and ctDNA from temporally matched plasma was 100% (34 of 34). In the prospective cohort, the concordance rate among 51 evaluable cases was 72.5% between BEAMing of ctDNA and sequencing of archival tumor tissue DNA. When the same archival tissue DNA was screened by both sequencing and BEAMing for PIK3CA mutations (n = 41 tissue samples), there was 100% concordance in the obtained results. Conclusions: Analysis of plasma-derived ctDNA for the detection of PIK3CA mutations in patients with metastatic breast cancer is feasible. Our results suggest that PIK3CA mutational status can change upon disease recurrence, emphasizing the importance of reassessing PIK3CA status on contemporary (not archival) biospecimens. These results have implications for the development of predictive biomarkers of response to targeted therapies. Clin Cancer Res; 18(12); 3462–9. ©2012 AACR.

CYP2D6 and UGT2B7 Genotype and Risk of Recurrence in Tamoxifen-Treated Breast Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND Adjuvant tamoxifen therapy substantially decreases the risk of recurrence and mortality in women with hormone (estrogen and/or progesterone) receptor-positive breast cancer. Previous studies have suggested that metabolic conversion of tamoxifen to endoxifen by cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) is required for patient benefit from tamoxifen therapy. METHODS Tumor specimens from a subset of postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive early-stage (stages I, II, and IIIA) breast cancer, who were enrolled in the randomized double-blind Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination (ATAC) clinical trial, were genotyped for variants in CYP2D6 (N = 1203 patients: anastrozole [trade name: Arimidex] group, n = 615 patients; tamoxifen group, n = 588 patients) and UDP-glucuronosyltransferase-2B7 (UGT2B7), whose gene product inactivates endoxifen (N = 1209 patients; anastrozole group, n = 606 patients; tamoxifen group, n = 603 patients). Genotyping was performed using polymerase chain reaction-based TaqMan assays. Based on the genotypes for CYP2D6, patients were classified as poor metabolizer (PM), intermediate metabolizer (IM), or extensive metabolizer (EM) phenotypes. We evaluated the association of CYP2D6 and UGT2B7 genotype with distant recurrence (primary endpoint) and any recurrence (secondary endpoint) by estimating the hazard ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using Cox proportional hazards models. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS After a median follow-up of 10 years, no statistically significant associations were observed between CYP2D6 genotype and recurrence in tamoxifen-treated patients (PM vs EM: HR for distant recurrence = 1.25, 95% CI = 0.55 to 3.15, P = .64; HR for any recurrence = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.48 to 2.08, P = .99). A near-null association was observed between UGT2B7 genotype and recurrence in tamoxifen-treated patients. No associations were observed between CYP2D6 and UGT2B7 genotypes and recurrence in anastrozole-treated patients. CONCLUSION The results do not support the hypothesis that CYP2D6 genotype predicts clinical benefit of adjuvant tamoxifen treatment among postmenopausal breast cancer patients.