Wolfgang Eiermann

Adjuvant Trastuzumab in HER2-Positive Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND Trastuzumab improves survival in the adjuvant treatment of HER-positive breast cancer, although combined therapy with anthracycline-based regimens has been associated with cardiac toxicity. We wanted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new nonanthracycline regimen with trastuzumab. METHODS We randomly assigned 3222 women with HER2-positive early-stage breast cancer to receive doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel every 3 weeks (AC-T), the same regimen plus 52 weeks of trastuzumab (AC-T plus trastuzumab), or docetaxel and carboplatin plus 52 weeks of trastuzumab (TCH). The primary study end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points were overall survival and safety. RESULTS At a median follow-up of 65 months, 656 events triggered this protocol-specified analysis. The estimated disease-free survival rates at 5 years were 75% among patients receiving AC-T, 84% among those receiving AC-T plus trastuzumab, and 81% among those receiving TCH. Estimated rates of overall survival were 87%, 92%, and 91%, respectively. No significant differences in efficacy (disease-free or overall survival) were found between the two trastuzumab regimens, whereas both were superior to AC-T. The rates of congestive heart failure and cardiac dysfunction were significantly higher in the group receiving AC-T plus trastuzumab than in the TCH group (P<0.001). Eight cases of acute leukemia were reported: seven in the groups receiving the anthracycline-based regimens and one in the TCH group subsequent to receiving an anthracycline outside the study. CONCLUSIONS The addition of 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab significantly improved disease-free and overall survival among women with HER2-positive breast cancer. The risk-benefit ratio favored the nonanthracycline TCH regimen over AC-T plus trastuzumab, given its similar efficacy, fewer acute toxic effects, and lower risks of cardiotoxicity and leukemia. (Funded by Sanofi-Aventis and Genentech; BCIRG-006 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00021255.).

Definition and Impact of Pathologic Complete Response on Prognosis After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Various Intrinsic Breast Cancer Subtypes

PURPOSE The exact definition of pathologic complete response (pCR) and its prognostic impact on survival in intrinsic breast cancer subtypes is uncertain. METHODS Tumor response at surgery and its association with long-term outcome of 6,377 patients with primary breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant anthracycline-taxane-based chemotherapy in seven randomized trials were analyzed. RESULTS Disease-free survival (DFS) was significantly superior in patients with no invasive and no in situ residuals in breast or nodes (n = 955) compared with patients with residual ductal carcinoma in situ only (n = 309), no invasive residuals in breast but involved nodes (n = 186), only focal-invasive disease in the breast (n = 478), and gross invasive residual disease (n = 4,449; P < .001). Hazard ratios for DFS comparing patients with or without pCR were lowest when defined as no invasive and no in situ residuals (0.446) and increased monotonously when in situ residuals (0.523), no invasive breast residuals but involved nodes (0.623), and focal-invasive disease (0.727) were included in the definition. pCR was associated with improved DFS in luminal B/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -negative (P = .005), HER2-positive/nonluminal (P < .001), and triple-negative (P < .001) tumors but not in luminal A (P = .39) or luminal B/HER2-positive (P = .45) breast cancer. pCR in HER2-positive (nonluminal) and triple-negative tumors was associated with excellent prognosis. CONCLUSION pCR defined as no invasive and no in situ residuals in breast and nodes can best discriminate between patients with favorable and unfavorable outcomes. Patients with noninvasive or focal-invasive residues or involved lymph nodes should not be considered as having achieved pCR. pCR is a suitable surrogate end point for patients with luminal B/HER2-negative, HER2-positive (nonluminal), and triple-negative disease but not for those with luminal B/HER2-positive or luminal A tumors.

Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis

BACKGROUND Pathological complete response has been proposed as a surrogate endpoint for prediction of long-term clinical benefit, such as disease-free survival, event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS). We had four key objectives: to establish the association between pathological complete response and EFS and OS, to establish the definition of pathological complete response that correlates best with long-term outcome, to identify the breast cancer subtypes in which pathological complete response is best correlated with long-term outcome, and to assess whether an increase in frequency of pathological complete response between treatment groups predicts improved EFS and OS. METHODS We searched PubMed, Embase, and Medline for clinical trials of neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer. To be eligible, studies had to meet three inclusion criteria: include at least 200 patients with primary breast cancer treated with preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgery; have available data for pathological complete response, EFS, and OS; and have a median follow-up of at least 3 years. We compared the three most commonly used definitions of pathological complete response--ypT0 ypN0, ypT0/is ypN0, and ypT0/is--for their association with EFS and OS in a responder analysis. We assessed the association between pathological complete response and EFS and OS in various subgroups. Finally, we did a trial-level analysis to assess whether pathological complete response could be used as a surrogate endpoint for EFS or OS. FINDINGS We obtained data from 12 identified international trials and 11 955 patients were included in our responder analysis. Eradication of tumour from both breast and lymph nodes (ypT0 ypN0 or ypT0/is ypN0) was better associated with improved EFS (ypT0 ypN0: hazard ratio [HR] 0·44, 95% CI 0·39-0·51; ypT0/is ypN0: 0·48, 0·43-0·54) and OS (0·36, 0·30-0·44; 0·36, 0·31-0·42) than was tumour eradication from the breast alone (ypT0/is; EFS: HR 0·60, 95% CI 0·55-0·66; OS 0·51, 0·45-0·58). We used the ypT0/is ypN0 definition for all subsequent analyses. The association between pathological complete response and long-term outcomes was strongest in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (EFS: HR 0·24, 95% CI 0·18-0·33; OS: 0·16, 0·11-0·25) and in those with HER2-positive, hormone-receptor-negative tumours who received trastuzumab (EFS: 0·15, 0·09-0·27; OS: 0·08, 0·03, 0·22). In the trial-level analysis, we recorded little association between increases in frequency of pathological complete response and EFS (R(2)=0·03, 95% CI 0·00-0·25) and OS (R(2)=0·24, 0·00-0·70). INTERPRETATION Patients who attain pathological complete response defined as ypT0 ypN0 or ypT0/is ypN0 have improved survival. The prognostic value is greatest in aggressive tumour subtypes. Our pooled analysis could not validate pathological complete response as a surrogate endpoint for improved EFS and OS. FUNDING US Food and Drug Administration.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with trastuzumab followed by adjuvant trastuzumab versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (the NOAH trial): a randomised controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort

BACKGROUND The monoclonal antibody trastuzumab has survival benefit when given with chemotherapy to patients with early, operable, and metastatic breast cancer that has HER2 (also known as ERBB2) overexpression or amplification. We aimed to assess event-free survival in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without 1 year of trastuzumab. METHODS We compared 1 year of treatment with trastuzumab (given as neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment; n=117) with no trastuzumab (118), in women with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer treated with a neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen consisting of doxorubicin, paclitaxel, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. Randomisation was done with a computer program and minimisation technique, taking account of geographical area, disease stage, and hormone receptor status. Investigators were informed of treatment allocation. A parallel cohort of 99 patients with HER2-negative disease was included and treated with the same chemotherapy regimen. Primary endpoint was event-free survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN86043495. FINDINGS Trastuzumab significantly improved event-free survival in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (3-year event-free survival, 71% [95% CI 61-78; n=36 events] with trastuzumab, vs 56% [46-65; n=51 events] without; hazard ratio 0.59 [95% CI 0.38-0.90]; p=0.013). Trastuzumab was well tolerated and, despite concurrent administration with doxorubicin, only two patients (2%) developed symptomatic cardiac failure. Both responded to cardiac drugs. INTERPRETATION The addition of neoadjuvant and adjuvant trastuzumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be considered for women with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer to improve event-free survival, survival, and clinical and pathological tumour responses. FUNDING F Hoffmann-La Roche.

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.

Targeted intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole breast radiotherapy for breast cancer (TARGIT-A trial): an international, prospective, randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND After breast-conserving surgery, 90% of local recurrences occur within the index quadrant despite the presence of multicentric cancers elsewhere in the breast. Thus, restriction of radiation therapy to the tumour bed during surgery might be adequate for selected patients. We compared targeted intraoperative radiotherapy with the conventional policy of whole breast external beam radiotherapy. METHODS Having safely piloted the new technique of single-dose targeted intraoperative radiotherapy with Intrabeam, we launched the TARGIT-A trial on March 24, 2000. In this prospective, randomised, non-inferiority trial, women aged 45 years or older with invasive ductal breast carcinoma undergoing breast-conserving surgery were enrolled from 28 centres in nine countries. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive targeted intraoperative radiotherapy or whole breast external beam radiotherapy, with blocks stratified by centre and by timing of delivery of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy. Neither patients nor investigators or their teams were masked to treatment assignment. Postoperative discovery of predefined factors (eg, lobular carcinoma) could trigger addition of external beam radiotherapy to targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (in an expected 15% of patients). The primary outcome was local recurrence in the conserved breast. The predefined non-inferiority margin was an absolute difference of 2.5% in the primary endpoint. All randomised patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00983684. FINDINGS 1113 patients were randomly allocated to targeted intraoperative radiotherapy and 1119 were allocated to external beam radiotherapy. Of 996 patients who received the allocated treatment in the targeted intraoperative radiotherapy group, 854 (86%) received targeted intraoperative radiotherapy only and 142 (14%) received targeted intraoperative radiotherapy plus external beam radiotherapy. 1025 (92%) patients in the external beam radiotherapy group received the allocated treatment. At 4 years, there were six local recurrences in the intraoperative radiotherapy group and five in the external beam radiotherapy group. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of local recurrence in the conserved breast at 4 years was 1.20% (95% CI 0.53-2.71) in the targeted intraoperative radiotherapy and 0.95% (0.39-2.31) in the external beam radiotherapy group (difference between groups 0.25%, -1.04 to 1.54; p=0.41). The frequency of any complications and major toxicity was similar in the two groups (for major toxicity, targeted intraoperative radiotherapy, 37 [3.3%] of 1113 vs external beam radiotherapy, 44 [3.9%] of 1119; p=0.44). Radiotherapy toxicity (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 3) was lower in the targeted intraoperative radiotherapy group (six patients [0.5%]) than in the external beam radiotherapy group (23 patients [2.1%]; p=0.002). INTERPRETATION For selected patients with early breast cancer, a single dose of radiotherapy delivered at the time of surgery by use of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy should be considered as an alternative to external beam radiotherapy delivered over several weeks. FUNDING University College London Hospitals (UCLH)/UCL Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre, UCLH Charities, National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme, Ninewells Cancer Campaign, National Health and Medical Research Council, and German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF).

Phase II Study of Temsirolimus (CCI-779), a Novel Inhibitor of mTOR, in Heavily Pretreated Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer

PURPOSE In this study, two doses of temsirolimus (CCI-779), a novel inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin, were evaluated for efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who had been heavily pretreated. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients (n = 109) were randomly assigned to receive 75 or 250 mg of temsirolimus weekly as a 30-minute intravenous infusion. Patients were evaluated for tumor response, time to tumor progression, adverse events, and pharmacokinetics of temsirolimus. RESULTS Temsirolimus produced an objective response rate of 9.2% (10 partial responses) in the intent-to-treat population. Median time to tumor progression was 12.0 weeks. Efficacy was similar for both dose levels but toxicity was more common with the higher dose level, especially grade 3 or 4 depression (10% of patients at the 250-mg dose level, 0% at the 75-mg dose level). The most common temsirolimus-related adverse events of all grades were mucositis (70%), maculopapular rash (51%), and nausea (43%). The most common, clinically important grade 3 or 4 adverse events were mucositis (9%), leukopenia (7%), hyperglycemia (7%), somnolence (6%), thrombocytopenia (5%), and depression (5%). CONCLUSION In heavily pretreated patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer, 75 and 250 mg temsirolimus showed antitumor activity and 75 mg temsirolimus showed a generally tolerable safety profile.

Risk-adapted targeted intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole-breast radiotherapy for breast cancer: 5-year results for local control and overall survival from the TARGIT-A randomised trial

BACKGROUND The TARGIT-A trial compared risk-adapted radiotherapy using single-dose targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT) versus fractionated external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for breast cancer. We report 5-year results for local recurrence and the first analysis of overall survival. METHODS TARGIT-A was a randomised, non-inferiority trial. Women aged 45 years and older with invasive ductal carcinoma were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive TARGIT or whole-breast EBRT, with blocks stratified by centre and by timing of delivery of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy: randomisation occurred either before lumpectomy (prepathology stratum, TARGIT concurrent with lumpectomy) or after lumpectomy (postpathology stratum, TARGIT given subsequently by reopening the wound). Patients in the TARGIT group received supplemental EBRT (excluding a boost) if unforeseen adverse features were detected on final pathology, thus radiotherapy was risk-adapted. The primary outcome was absolute difference in local recurrence in the conserved breast, with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 2·5% at 5 years; prespecified analyses included outcomes as per timing of randomisation in relation to lumpectomy. Secondary outcomes included complications and mortality. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00983684. FINDINGS Patients were enrolled at 33 centres in 11 countries, between March 24, 2000, and June 25, 2012. 1721 patients were randomised to TARGIT and 1730 to EBRT. Supplemental EBRT after TARGIT was necessary in 15·2% [239 of 1571] of patients who received TARGIT (21·6% prepathology, 3·6% postpathology). 3451 patients had a median follow-up of 2 years and 5 months (IQR 12-52 months), 2020 of 4 years, and 1222 of 5 years. The 5-year risk for local recurrence in the conserved breast was 3·3% (95% CI 2·1-5·1) for TARGIT versus 1·3% (0·7-2·5) for EBRT (p=0·042). TARGIT concurrently with lumpectomy (prepathology, n=2298) had much the same results as EBRT: 2·1% (1·1-4·2) versus 1·1% (0·5-2·5; p=0·31). With delayed TARGIT (postpathology, n=1153) the between-group difference was larger than 2·5% (TARGIT 5·4% [3·0-9·7] vs EBRT 1·7% [0·6-4·9]; p=0·069). Overall, breast cancer mortality was much the same between groups (2·6% [1·5-4·3] for TARGIT vs 1·9% [1·1-3·2] for EBRT; p=0·56) but there were significantly fewer non-breast-cancer deaths with TARGIT (1·4% [0·8-2·5] vs 3·5% [2·3-5·2]; p=0·0086), attributable to fewer deaths from cardiovascular causes and other cancers. Overall mortality was 3·9% (2·7-5·8) for TARGIT versus 5·3% (3·9-7·3) for EBRT (p=0·099). Wound-related complications were much the same between groups but grade 3 or 4 skin complications were significantly reduced with TARGIT (four of 1720 vs 13 of 1731, p=0·029). INTERPRETATION TARGIT concurrent with lumpectomy within a risk-adapted approach should be considered as an option for eligible patients with breast cancer carefully selected as per the TARGIT-A trial protocol, as an alternative to postoperative EBRT. FUNDING University College London Hospitals (UCLH)/UCL Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre, UCLH Charities, National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme, Ninewells Cancer Campaign, National Health and Medical Research Council, and German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

Anastrozole, a potent and selective aromatase inhibitor, versus megestrol acetate in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer: results of overview analysis of two phase III trials. Arimidex Study Group.

PURPOSE To compare the efficacy and tolerability of anastrozole (1 and 10 mg once daily), a selective, oral, nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor, and megestrol acetate (40 mg four times daily), in postmenopausal women who progressed following tamoxifen treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS Two randomized, double-blind for anastrozole, open-label for megestrol acetate, parallel-group, multicenter trials were conducted in 764 patients. Because both trials were identical in design, an analysis of the combined results was performed to strengthen interpretation of results from each trial. RESULTS The median follow-up duration was approximately 6 months. The estimated progression hazards ratios were 0.97 (97.5% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 1.24) for anastrozole 1 mg versus megestrol acetate and 0.92 (97.5% CI, 0.71 to 1.19) for anastrozole 10 mg versus megestrol acetate. The overall median time to progression was approximately 21 weeks. Approximately one third of patients in each group benefited from treatment. Twenty-seven patients (10.3%) in the anastrozole 1-mg group, 22 (8.9%) in the anastrozole 10-mg group, and 20 (7.9%) in the megestrol acetate group had a complete or partial response, and 66 (25.1%), 56 (22.6%), and 66 (26.1%) patients, respectively, had stable disease for > or = 24 weeks. For all end points, individual trial results were similar to the results of the combined analysis. Anastrozole and megestrol acetate were well tolerated. Gastrointestinal disturbance was more common among patients in the anastrozole groups than the megestrol acetate group; the difference between the anastrozole 10 mg and megestrol acetate groups was significant (P = .005). Significantly fewer patients in the anastrozole 1-mg (P < .0001) and 10-mg (P < .002) groups had weight gain than in the megestrol acetate group. More than 30% of megestrol acetate-treated patients had weight gain > or = 5%, and 10% of patients had weight gain > or = 10%. Patients who received megestrol acetate continued to gain weight over time. CONCLUSION Anastrozole, 1 and 10 mg once daily, is well tolerated and as effective as megestrol acetate in the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer who progressed following tamoxifen treatment. Moreover, anastrozole therapy avoids the weight gain associated with megestrol acetate treatment.

Outcome Prediction for Estrogen Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer Based on Postneoadjuvant Endocrine Therapy Tumor Characteristics

Background Understanding how tumor response is related to relapse risk would help clinicians make decisions about additional treatment options for patients who have received neoadjuvant endocrine treatment for estrogen receptor–positive (ER+) breast cancer. Methods Tumors from 228 postmenopausal women with confirmed ER+ stage 2 and 3 breast cancers in the P024 neoadjuvant endocrine therapy trial, which compared letrozole and tamoxifen for 4 months before surgery, were analyzed for posttreatment ER status, Ki67 proliferation index, histological grade, pathological tumor size, node status, and treatment response. Cox proportional hazards were used to identify factors associated with relapse-free survival (RFS) and breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS) in 158 women. A preoperative endocrine prognostic index (PEPI) for RFS was developed from these data and validated in an independent study of 203 postmenopausal women in the IMPACT trial, which compared treatment with anastrozole, tamoxifen, or the combination 3 months before surgery. Statistical tests were two-sided. Results Median follow-up in P024 was 61.2 months. Patients with confirmed baseline ER+ clinical stage 2 and 3 tumors that were downstaged to stage 1 or 0 at surgery had 100% RFS (compared with higher stages, P < .001). Multivariable testing of posttreatment tumor characteristics revealed that pathological tumor size, node status, Ki67 level, and ER status were independently associated with both RFS and BCSS. The PEPI model based on these factors predicted RFS in the IMPACT trial (P = .002). Conclusions Breast cancer patients with pathological stage 1 or 0 disease after neoadjuvant endocrine therapy and a low-risk biomarker profile in the surgical specimen (PEPI score 0) have an extremely low risk of relapse and are therefore unlikely to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy.