Combined tamoxifen and luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist versus LHRH agonist alone in premenopausal advanced breast cancer: a meta-analysis of four randomized trials

Navigating the Challenges of Endocrine Treatments in Premenopausal Women with ER-Positive Early Breast Cancer

Endocrine therapy is a key component of adjuvant treatment for premenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive tumors. It is commonly well tolerated, although side effects are a main concern in the selection of treatment options. Tamoxifen is still considered an adequate endocrine therapy in a large group of premenopausal patients (e.g. lower-risk patient, presence of co-morbidities, patient preference). Results of the SOFT and TEXT trials addressing new adjuvant endocrine treatment options in premenopausal patients were recently presented. Overall, in the SOFT study the premenopausal population did not benefit from the addition of ovarian function suppression (OFS). Nevertheless, for women at sufficient risk of recurrence to receive adjuvant chemotherapy and who maintained premenopausal estradiol, the addition of OFS to tamoxifen reduced the risk of recurrence. The magnitude of the effect was larger in younger patients. Moreover, in the SOFT and TEXT trials, adjuvant treatment with exemestane plus OFS, as compared with tamoxifen plus OFS, significantly improved disease-free survival, breast cancer-free interval and distant disease-free survival. However, premenopausal patients include heterogeneous subsets of women and tumors where costs and benefits of adjuvant endocrine therapy should be properly weighted. Issues specific for premenopausal patients, related to desire for pregnancy, family planning, safety, quality of life and subjective side effects, should be a priority in the therapeutic algorithm. Therefore, selecting the best-tolerated agent can enhance adherence to therapies and reduce the impact on quality of life and health status for these younger patients.

A randomized controlled study evaluating safety and efficacy of leuprorelin acetate every-3-months depot for 2 versus 3 or more years with tamoxifen for 5 years as adjuvant treatment in premenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) agonists provide effective adjuvant treatment for premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer. Here, we investigated appropriate treatment durations of an LH-RH agonist, leuprorelin.

METHODS

We conducted an open-label, randomized controlled pilot study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of leuprorelin subcutaneously administered every-3-months for 2 versus 3 or more, up to 5 years, together with daily tamoxifen for 5 years in premenopausal endocrine-responsive breast cancer patients. Primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and safety.

RESULTS

Eligible patients (N = 222) were randomly assigned to receive leuprorelin for either 2 years (N = 112) or 3 or more years (N = 110) with tamoxifen for 5 years after surgery. Leuprorelin treatment for 3 or more years provided no significant difference in DFS rate over 2 years: 94.1 versus 91.8 % at 144 weeks (3 years) after the second year (week 96) and 90.8 versus 90.4 % at the fifth year (week 240). The overall survival rate was 100 % for both groups during the third through fifth year study period. There were no significant differences in the incidence of adverse events (AEs) between the 2 groups: most AEs were rated grade 1 or 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant leuprorelin treatment for 3 or more years with tamoxifen showed a survival benefit and safety profile similar to that for 2 years in premenopausal endocrine-responsive breast cancer patients. No new safety signal was identified for long-term leuprorelin treatment. Longer follow-up observation is needed to determine the optimal duration of leuprorelin treatment.

Luteal versus follicular phase surgical oophorectomy plus tamoxifen in premenopausal women with metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer

PURPOSE

In premenopausal women with metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, hormonal therapy is the first-line therapy. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue + tamoxifen therapies have been found to be more effective. The pattern of recurrence risk over time after primary surgery suggests that peri-operative factors impact recurrence. Secondary analyses of an adjuvant trial suggested that the luteal phase timing of surgical oophorectomy in the menstrual cycle simultaneous with primary breast surgery favourably influenced long-term outcomes.

METHODS

Two hundred forty-nine premenopausal women with incurable or metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer entered a trial in which they were randomised to historical mid-luteal or mid-follicular phase surgical oophorectomy followed by oral tamoxifen treatment. Kaplan-Meier methods, the log-rank test, and multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess overall and progression-free survival (PFS) in the two randomised groups and by hormone-confirmed menstrual cycle phase.

RESULTS

Overall survival (OS) and PFS were not demonstrated to be different in the two randomised groups. In a secondary analysis, OS appeared worse in luteal phase surgery patients with progesterone levels <2 ng/ml (anovulatory patients; adjusted hazard ratio 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89-2.41, p = 0.14) compared with those in luteal phase with progesterone level of 2 ng/ml or higher. Median OS was 2 years (95% CI: 1.7-2.3) and OS at 4 years was 26%.

CONCLUSIONS

The history-based timing of surgical oophorectomy in the menstrual cycle did not influence outcomes in this trial of metastatic patients. ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00293540.

Efficacy and safety of leuprorelin acetate 6-month depot, TAP-144-SR (6M), in combination with tamoxifen in postoperative, premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: a phase III, randomized, open-label, parallel-group comparative study

Background

Leuprorelin acetate, a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist, is used worldwide in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. This study was conducted to assess the non-inferiority of the 6-month depot formulation, TAP-144-SR (6M) 22.5 mg to the 3-month depot formulation, TAP-144-SR (3M) 11.25 mg in postoperative, premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Methods

This was a 96-week phase III, randomized, open-label, parallel-group comparative study. All patients concomitantly received oral tamoxifen (20 mg daily). The primary endpoint was the suppression rate of serum estradiol (E₂) to the menopausal level (≤30 pg/mL) from Week 4 through Week 48.

Results

In total, 167 patients were randomized to receive TAP-144-SR (6M) (n = 83) or TAP-144-SR (3M) (n = 84) and the E₂ suppression rate was 97.6 and 96.4 %, respectively. The estimated between-group difference was 1.2 % (95 % confidence interval −5.2 to 7.8). The non-inferiority of TAP-144-SR (6M) to TAP-144-SR (3M) for E₂ suppression was confirmed. As for safety, common adverse events were hot flush and injection site reactions including induration, pain, and erythema in both treatment groups, which were of ≤Grade 2 in severity and not serious. No significant between-group differences in safety profiles and tolerability were observed.

Conclusions

TAP-144-SR (6M) was not inferior to TAP-144-SR (3M) for its suppressive effect on serum E₂. TAP-144-SR (6M) was also as well tolerated as TAP-144-SR (3M).

ABC3 Consensus Commented from the Perspective of the German Guidelines: Third International Consensus Conference for Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC3), Lisbon, 07. 11. 2015

The Third International Consensus Conference for Advanced Breast Cancer ABC3 on the diagnosis and treatment of advanced breast cancer was held in Lisbon from 5 to 7 November 2015. This year the focus was the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (stage IV) - including the patient perspectives. Important topics were questions relating to quality of life, the care for long-term survivors as well as the management of disease-related symptoms and treatment-based side effects. The use of standardised tools to assess individual treatment success and the benefits of new substances were important points for discussion. The diagnosis and treatment of inoperable locally advanced breast cancer were discussed two years ago during the ABC2 consensus 1. A working group of German breast cancer experts commented on the results of the ABC panellists, paying particular attention to the German guidelines (AGO, S3, DGHO) on the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer 2, 3, 4, 5 in Germany.

ABC3 Consensus: Assessment by a German Group of Experts

The Advanced Breast Cancer Third International Consensus Conference on the diagnosis and treatment of advanced breast cancer took place in Lisbon, Portugal, on November 5-7, 2015. This year's conference (ABC3) was focused on the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (stage IV), as it was 4 years ago at the first consensus meeting (ABC1). A matter of particular interest was the patients' perspective. Thus, patient-relevant issues were addressed by the consensus discussions, such as those on treatment goals, quality of life, care of long-term survivors ('survivorship issues'), and coping with disease-related symptoms and the side effects of treatment. Further important issues on the agenda were the use of standardized instruments for the assessment of individual treatment success ('patient-reported outcome measures') and the evaluation of the benefit of novel drugs (e.g. the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale). Diagnosis and treatment of inoperable locally advanced breast cancer had already been discussed 2 years earlier at the ABC2 Consensus and were not dealt with in the framework of this year's ABC3 Consensus. With regard to country-specific peculiarities, which unavoidably found their way into the ABC Consensus, a working group of German breast cancer experts commented on the voting results of the ABC panelists. As for the past consensus, the group specially considered the German guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer (AGO (Gyneco-Oncology Working Group), S3, DGHO (German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology)) in order to adapt the ABC3 consensus for everyday therapy in Germany.

Current Medical Treatment of Patients with Non-Colorectal Liver Metastases: Primary Tumor Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

(Metastatic) breast cancer is a heterogeneous entity in which every disease subtype requires an individualized systemic treatment approach.

METHODS

We reviewed the currently available data regarding systemic therapy of breast cancer and present a review of historical and current treatment approaches, with the publications cited covering a time span from 1896 to the last ASCO 2015.

RESULTS

Systemic therapy of metastatic breast cancer may include chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, and targeted therapies (e.g. antibody-based approaches). Based on the patient's breast cancer subtype, these agents may be employed alone or in combination. Therefore, characterization of the phenotype of the disease is necessary and may include biopsy of the metastatic site. Novel therapeutic approaches include immunologic therapies as well as PARP, PI3K and CDK 4/6 inhibitors, which are currently under investigation in clinical trials.

CONCLUSION

Systemic therapy of metastatic breast cancer requires complex and individualized treatment approaches that are best offered in an interdisciplinary setting.

Optimal management of hormone receptor positive metastatic breast cancer in 2016

Hormone receptor positive tumors represent the most common form of breast cancer and account for most of the deaths from the disease. Endocrine therapy represents the main initial therapeutic strategy for these patients and has been associated with significant clinical benefits in a majority of patients. While in early stages endocrine therapy is administered as part of a curative approach once clinical metastases develop, the disease is considered incurable and the main management objectives are tumor control and quality of life. The two major clinical paradigms of always indicating endocrine therapy in the absence of visceral crises and sequencing endocrine treatments have been guiding our therapeutic approach to these patients. However, for many decades, we have delivered endocrine therapy with a 'one size fits all' approach by applying agents that interfere with hormone receptor signaling equally in every clinical patient scenario. We have been unable to incorporate the well-known biologic principle of different degrees of hormone receptor dependency in our therapeutic recommendations. Recent developments in the understanding of molecular interactions of hormone signaling with other important growth factor, metabolic and cell division pathways have opened the possibility of improving results by modulating hormone signaling and interfering with resistance mechanisms yet to be fully understood. Unfortunately, limitations in the design of trials conducted in this area have made it difficult to develop predictive biomarkers and most of the new combinations with targeted agents, even though showing improvements in clinical endpoints, have been directed to an unselected population of patients. In this review we explore some of the current and most relevant literature in the management of hormone receptor positive advance breast cancer.

Phase 3, open-label, randomized study comparing 3-monthly with monthly goserelin in pre-menopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive advanced breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Monthly goserelin 3.6 mg dosing suppresses estradiol (E2) production and has proven efficacy in pre-menopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. This non-inferiority study evaluated the efficacy and safety of 3-monthly goserelin 10.8 mg compared with monthly goserelin 3.6 mg.

METHODS

This was a Phase 3, open-label, multicenter trial. Pre-menopausal women with ER-positive advanced breast cancer were randomized to 3-monthly goserelin 10.8 mg or monthly goserelin 3.6 mg; all patients received concomitant tamoxifen (20 mg daily). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 24 weeks; non-inferiority was to be confirmed if the entire 95 % confidence interval (CI) for the treatment difference was above -17.5 %. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), serum E2 levels, safety, and tolerability.

RESULTS

In total, 222 patients were randomized (goserelin 10.8 mg, n = 109; goserelin 3.6 mg, n = 113). PFS rate at week 24 was 61.5 % (goserelin 10.8 mg) and 60.2 % (goserelin 3.6 mg); treatment difference (95 % CI) was 1.3 % (-11.4, 13.9), confirming non-inferiority of goserelin 10.8 mg compared with goserelin 3.6 mg. ORR was 23.9 % (goserelin 10.8 mg) and 26.9 % (goserelin 3.6 mg); treatment difference (95 % CI) was -3.0 % (-15.5, 9.7). At week 24, mean serum E2 concentrations were similar in the goserelin 10.8 mg and goserelin 3.6 mg groups (20.3 pg/mL and 24.8 pg/mL, respectively).

CONCLUSION

A regimen of 3-monthly goserelin 10.8 mg demonstrated non-inferiority compared with monthly goserelin 3.6 mg for PFS rate at 24 weeks, with similar pharmacodynamic and safety profiles, in pre-menopausal women with ER-positive breast cancer.

Advances in Medical Management of Early Stage and Advanced Breast Cancer: 2015

Standard management of early stage and advanced breast cancer has been improved over the past few years by knowledge gained about the biology of the disease, results from a number of eagerly anticipated clinical trials and the development of novel agents that offer our patients options for improved outcomes or reduced toxicity or both. This review highlights recent major developments affecting the systemic therapy of breast cancer, broken down by clinically relevant patient subgroups and disease stage, and briefly discusses some of the ongoing controversies in the treatment of breast cancer and promising therapies on the horizon.

The combination of methylsulfonylmethane and tamoxifen inhibits the Jak2/STAT5b pathway and synergistically inhibits tumor growth and metastasis in ER-positive breast cancer xenografts

BACKGROUND

Combination therapy, which reduces the dosage intensity of the individual drugs while increasing their efficacy, is not a novel approach for the treatment of cancer. Methylsulfonylmethane (MSM) is an organic sulfur compound shown to act against tumor cells. Tamoxifen is a commercially available therapeutic agent for breast malignancies.

METHODS

In the current study, we analyzed the combinatorial effect of MSM and tamoxifen on the suppression of ER-positive breast cancer xenograft growth and metastasis. Additionally, we also validated the molecular targets by which the drug combination regulated tumor growth and metastasis.

RESULTS

We observed that the combination of MSM and tamoxifen regulated cell viability and migration in vitro. The intragastric administration of MSM and subcutaneous implantation of tamoxifen tablets led to tumor growth suppression and inhibition of the Janus kinase 2 (Jak2)/signal transducer and activator of transcription 5b (STAT5b) pathway. Our study also assessed the regulation of signaling molecules implicated in the growth, progression, differentiation, and migration of cancer cells, such as Jak2, STAT5b, insulin-like growth factor-1Rβ, and their phosphorylation status.

CONCLUSIONS

Study results indicated that this combination therapy inhibited tumor growth and metastasis. Therefore, this drug combination may have a synergistic and powerful anticancer effect against breast cancer.

Tamoxifen with ovarian function suppression versus tamoxifen alone as an adjuvant treatment for premenopausal breast cancer: a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials

Background

Ovarian function suppression (OFS) significantly downregulates the concentration of plasma estrogens. However, it is unclear whether it offers any survival benefits if combined with adjuvant tamoxifen treatment in premenopausal women. This meta-analysis was designed to assess data from previous studies involving adjuvant tamoxifen treatment plus OFS in premenopausal breast cancer.

Methods

Electronic literature databases (PubMed, Embase, the Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library) were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials published prior to February 1, 2015. Only randomized controlled trials that compared tamoxifen alone with tamoxifen plus OFS for premenopausal women with breast cancer were selected. The evaluated endpoints were disease-free survival and overall survival.

Results

Four randomized controlled trials comprising 6,279 patients (OFS combination, n=3,133; tamoxifen alone, n=3,146) were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant improvement in disease-free survival or overall survival with addition of OFS in either the whole population or the hormone receptor-positive subgroup. The risk of distant recurrence was not reduced with the addition of OFS in the whole population. A subgroup analysis showed that addition of OFS significantly improved overall survival in patients who were administered chemotherapy.

Conclusion

Based on the available studies, concurrent administration of OFS and adjuvant tamoxifen treatment for premenopausal women with breast cancer has no effect on prolonging disease-free survival and overall survival, excluding patients who were administered chemotherapy. It should not be widely recommended, except perhaps for women who were hormone-receptor positive and who were also administered adjuvant chemotherapy.

Adjuvant hormonal therapy and fertility preservation in premenopausal breast cancer: a survey among Italian oncologists

BACKGROUND

Increasing age of first pregnancy among Italian women with premenopausal breast cancer makes adjuvant hormonal therapy a hot topic, justifying a survey on the therapeutic approach of Italian oncologists.

MATERIALS & METHODS

From April to July 2012, an 11-item electronic questionnaire was submitted to Italian oncologists and 611 out of 974 invited filled questionnaires were collected from all over Italy.

RESULTS

In total, 97.7% of patients aged <40 years needing only hormonal therapy would receive both tamoxifen and luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists (LHRHa); 2.3% tamoxifen or LHRHa alone. For the majority of oncologists LHRHa was also the preferred choice to preserving fertility.

CONCLUSION

Results are rather consistent with major guidelines but with a greater use of LHRHa and aromatase inhibitor.

Breast cancer in young women: special considerations in multidisciplinary care

Breast cancer is one of the most prevalent cancers in females, and 5%-7% of breast cancer cases occur in women under 40 years of age. Breast cancer in the young has gained increased attention with an attempt to improve diagnosis and prognosis. Young patients tend to have different epidemiology, presenting with later stages and more aggressive phenotypes. Diagnostic imaging is also more difficult in this age group. Multidisciplinary care generally encompasses surgeons, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, radiologists, and social workers. Other special considerations include reconstruction options, fertility, genetics, and psychosocial issues. These concerns enlarge the already diverse multidisciplinary team to incorporate new expertise, such as reproductive specialists and genetic counselors. This review encompasses an overview of the current multimodal treatment regimens and the unique challenges in treating this special population. Integration of diagnosis, treatment, and quality of life issues should be addressed and understood by each member in the interdisciplinary team in order to optimize outcomes.

Breast cancer: current and future endocrine therapies

Endocrine therapy forms a central modality in the treatment of estrogen receptor positive breast cancer. The routine use of 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen has improved survival rates for early breast cancer, and more recently has evolved in the postmenopausal setting to include aromatase inhibitors. The optimal duration of adjuvant endocrine therapy remains an active area of clinical study with recent data supporting 10 years rather than 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen. However, endocrine therapy is limited by the development of resistance, this can occur by a number of possible mechanisms and numerous studies have been performed which combine endocrine therapy with agents that modulate these mechanisms with the aim of preventing or delaying the emergence of resistance. Recent trial data regarding the combination of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor, everolimus with endocrine therapy have resulted in a redefinition of the clinical treatment pathway in the metastatic setting. This review details the current endocrine therapy utilized in both early and advanced disease, as well as exploring potential new targets which modulate pathways of resistance, as well as agents which aim to modulate adrenal derived steroidogenic hormones.

Use of goserelin in the treatment of breast cancer

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs are, alongside tamoxifen, one of the most commonly used drugs in the treatment of pre-/perimenopausal endocrine-responsive breast cancer. Goserelin, as a principal agent of this class of drugs, is mainly investigated in clinical trials. The indirect comparison of goserelin with tamoxifen as a single drug in the adjuvant setting showed similar efficacy. Furthermore, goserelin is as effective as cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy, and total endocrine blockade as a combination of gonadotropin-releasing hormone analog and tamoxifen showed a comparable benefit with anthracycline-containing adjuvant chemotherapy. Goserelin administered after cessation of chemotherapy leads to a further improvement and may be equieffective as tamoxifen or a combination of both. Data concerning taxane-based and dose-dense chemotherapy as well as combination of gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs with third-generation aromatase inhibitors are still lacking (ongoing suppression of ovarian function, tamoxifen and exemestane, and premenopausal endocrine-responsive chemotherapy trials). Moreover, duration of therapy with gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs (2-3 years or longer) is still a matter of debate. Palliative endocrine treatment is standard in the first-line therapy of patients without life-threatening disease and endocrine-responsive breast cancer. Treatment decisions depend upon adjuvant endocrine pretreatment. Clinical data regarding ovarian protection by synchronous use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone in young breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy are incoherent.

Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist plus an aromatase inhibitor as second-line endocrine therapy in premenopausal females with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of the current study was to explore the efficacy and safety of combination therapy using a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist plus an aromatase inhibitor (AI) as second-line therapy in premenopausal females with hormone receptor (HR)-positive recurrent or metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted in patients registered in the breast cancer database of our institution between January 2001 and December 2012. The breast cancer database identified 14 premenopausal patients who had been treated with an LHRH agonist plus AI for HR-positive recurrent or MBC.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients with recurrent breast cancer (N = 10) or metastatic disease at primary diagnosis (N = 4) were included in the present study. All patients had previously been treated with an LHRH agonist plus tamoxifen. The clinical benefit rate was 71.4% and the median TTP was 11 months (95% confidence interval 1.7-20.3 months). One patient discontinued treatment because of liver dysfunction (grade 3).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of an LHRH agonist plus an AI is a treatment option for premenopausal females with HR-positive MBC that can prolong the chemotherapy-free interval and yield effective disease stabilization.

Targeted therapy for breast cancer

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous group of diseases that are clinically subdivided as hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2(+)), and triple-negative breast cancer, to guide therapeutic interventions. Agents that target estrogen receptor (ER) and HER2 are among the most successful cancer therapeutics. However, de novo or acquired resistance is common, despite the development of newer agents against these pathways. As our understanding of tumor biology improves, novel targets are being identified. Notably, inhibitors against several pathways [including, among others, the phosphoinositide 3-kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (PI3K/mTOR), cell-cycle regulation, heat shock protein, and epigenetic pathways] have demonstrated promising activity in clinical trials, and the mTOR-inhibitor everolimus has been approved for advanced or metastatic aromatase inhibitor-resistant ER(+) breast cancer. At present, there are no established targeted agents for triple-negative breast cancer (negative ER, progesterone receptor, and HER2). Although poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors have shown promising activity in BRCA-related cancers, its value in the treatment of triple-negative breast cancers remains to be demonstrated. In this Review, we present a basic understanding of the major targeted agents in current practice and under development for the treatment of breast cancer in the context of the three clinical subgroups.

Role of goserelin in combination with endocrine therapy for the treatment of advanced breast cancer in premenopausal women positive for hormone receptor: a retrospective matched case-control study

OBJECTIVE

This research was to investigate the role of goserelin in combination with endocrine therapy for the treatment of advanced breast cancer in premenopausal women positive for hormone receptors.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 40 patients as the treatment group with advanced breast cancer who, were positive for hormone receptors, received goserelin in combination with endocrine therapy and 40 patients as the control group received endocrine therapy alone, matched for age, gender, receptor status, and tumor stage.

RESULTS

The median period of follow-up was 38.9 months. The response status at 6 months, the overall clinical benefit rate was 87.5% and 70.0% in the treatment group and control group, respectively. The mean progression-free survival (PFS) in the treatment group and control group was 27.9 and 16.9 months, respectively. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year PFS rates were 87.5%, 66.2%, and 49.7%, respectively, in the treatment group and 59.2%, 38.8%, and 35.3%, respectively, in the control group (p=0.076). The 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival (OS) rates were 100%, 87.2%, and 76.6%, respectively, in the treatment group and 90.0%, 74.2%, and 55.8%, respectively, in the control group (p=0.048). For the treatment group with age <40 years, PFS (p=0.036) and OS (p=0.014) were significantly longer than the control group, but it was no effect on the prognosis with the patients aged ≥40 years. Continued use of goserelin after disease progress again in the median survival time was significantly longer than nonusers (28.2 months vs. 7.0 months), and there is the potential benefit of OS (p=0.070).

CONCLUSIONS

For premenopausal hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer, goserelin-combined endocrine therapy can be used for those <40 years, the standard endocrine treatment for patients, we recommend continued use of goserelin for patients with disease progress again.

The aromatase inhibitors (plus ovarian function suppression) in premenopausal breast cancer patients: ready for prime time?

Tamoxifen alone or the combination of ovarian function suppression (OFS) and tamoxifen are the mainstay of hormonal therapy in premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer. The results of large trials conducted with the third generation of aromatase inhibitors (AIs) in the metastatic, neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting, indicated better outcomes among postmenopausal breast cancer patients with endocrine responsive disease given AIs than among those given tamoxifen. These results supported the investigation of AIs in combination with OFS in premenopausal women with hormone receptor positive breast cancer. In this article we reviewed the efficacy and toxicity data on the use of AIs combined with OFS in premenopausal breast cancer patients in metastatic, neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting. Given the available evidence at the time in metastatic setting for premenopausal patients suitable of endocrine therapy the AI is a viable option, if tamoxifen resistance is proven, although mandates the use of OFS. In neoadjuvant setting the AIs in combination of OFS should not be used outside of a clinical trial. In the adjuvant setting, tamoxifen alone or OFS plus tamoxifen are reasonable options. Despite the lack of conclusive data favoring the combination of tamoxifen plus OFS, this treatment might be a reasonable option for subgroups of patients such as very young patients, OFS alone should nort be considered unless tamoxifen was contraindicated. Similarly, in cases where tamoxifen is contraindicated, AIs as an adjunct to OFS is a treatment option in premenopausal patients. New large randomized studies are required to confirm the role of OFS plus an AI in premenopausal women.

Male breast cancer according to tumor subtype and race: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer occurs rarely in men. To the authors' knowledge, no population-based estimates of the incidence of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer or of the distribution of breast cancer subtypes among male breast cancer patients have been published to date. Therefore, the objective of the current study was to explore breast tumor subtype distribution by race/ethnicity among men in the large, ethnically diverse population of California.

METHODS

This study included men who were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between 2005 and 2009 with known estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) (together, hormone receptor [HR]) status and HER2 status reported to the California Cancer Registry. Among the men with HR-positive tumors, survival probabilities between groups were compared using log-rank tests.

RESULTS

Six hundred six patients were included. The median age at diagnosis was 68 years. Four hundred ninety-four men (81.5%) had HR-positive tumors (defined as ER-positive and/or PR-positive and HER2-negative). Ninety men (14.9%) had HER2-positive tumors, and 22 (3.6%) had triple receptor-negative (TN) tumors. Among the patients with HR-positive tumors, non-Hispanic black men and Hispanic men were more likely to have PR-negative tumors than non-Hispanic white men. No statistically significant differences in survival were observed according to tumor subtype (P = .08). Differences in survival according to race/ethnicity were observed among all patients (P = .087) and among those with HR-positive tumors (P = .0170), and non-Hispanic black men had poorer outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large, representative cohort of men with breast cancer, the distribution of tumor subtypes was different from that reported for women and varied by patient race/ethnicity. Non-Hispanic black men were more likely to have TN tumors and ER-positive/PR-negative tumors than white men.

Preoperative endocrine therapy with goserelin acetate and tamoxifen in hormone receptor-positive premenopausal breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The use of preoperative endocrine therapy for breast cancer has increased during the last decade. Although several studies have reported favorable response rates in postmenopausal women, its effectiveness in premenopausal women remains unknown. This study therefore aimed to evaluate the potential benefits of preoperative endocrine therapy in premenopausal women.

METHODS

Fifty-three patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative invasive breast cancer were included in this study. Preoperative endocrine therapy with goserelin acetate and tamoxifen was administered for 3 months. Clinical evaluations were performed by ultrasonography before and after endocrine therapy. Pathological evaluations were performed using core biopsy and surgical specimens. Immunohistochemical evaluations of ER, progesterone receptor (PgR), HER2, and Ki-67 were performed before and after endocrine therapy.

RESULTS

Partial response (PR) was observed in 23 % (12/53) and progressive disease (PD) in 2 % (2/53) of patients. Significant suppression of Ki-67 was observed following endocrine therapy in 90 % (47/52) of patients (P < 0.0001). Significant downregulation of PgR was observed after endocrine therapy (P = 0.0002), which tended to be correlated with clinical response (P = 0.058).

CONCLUSIONS

Three months of preoperative endocrine therapy with goserelin acetate and tamoxifen was safe and effective in premenopausal patients with invasive breast cancer, with a 23 % PR rate. Changes in PgR and Ki-67 expression might be promising markers for endocrine responsiveness.

Poor-prognosis estrogen receptor- positive disease: present and future clinical solutions

Use of chemotherapy for patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer has been a conflicting issue. Recent studies have identified predictive markers allowing identification of poor-prognosis ER-positive breast cancers in need of more aggressive therapy. In general, tumours belonging to the so-called luminal B class, tumours expressing a high Ki67, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) overexpression or a high score on the Oncotype DX gene expression profile reveal a poor prognosis compared with ER-rich tumours of the luminal A class. In contrast, recent studies have shown these tumours, contrasting tumours of the luminal A class, to benefit from more aggressive anthracycline-containing chemotherapy including a taxane. In the case of metastatic disease, patients with HER-2-positive, ER-positive tumours may benefit from having endocrine therapy and an anti-HER-2 agent administered in combination.

Treating metastatic breast cancer with systemic chemotherapies: current trends and future perspectives

Treatment selection for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is guided by multiple factors, most importantly hormone receptor (HR) or HER2 expression, treatment history, and prognostic factors such as short disease-free interval, presence of visceral metastases, performance status, and degree of symptoms. Chemotherapy is indicated as initial therapy for patients with HR-negative disease and following failure of hormonal therapies in HR-positive disease. Patients treated with an anthracycline or a taxane in early-stage settings may no longer be candidates for those drugs in MBC, thus underscoring the need for alternative options. Sequential single-agent therapy or combination therapy are viable strategies. Trials have shown that ixabepilone plus capecitabine significantly improves progression-free survival compared with capecitabine alone in anthracycline- or taxane-pretreated or -resistant patients, and single-agent eribulin improves survival compared with the physician's choice of treatment in patients treated previously with at least two regimens for MBC. Regardless of the regimen, proactive management to detect treatment-related adverse events in a timely manner remains important for ensuring effective delivery of treatment. Many promising investigational agents are in development, including T-DM1 (trastuzumab emtansine) and pertuzumab for HER2-positive disease, as well as PARP-1 (poly[adenosine diphosphate ribose] polymerase-1) inhibitors and cetuximab for triple-negative disease. In addition, new options for the treatment of MBC following failure of an anthracycline and a taxane promise to improve patient outcomes. Nurses should remain vigilant for adverse events and remember that the goal of treatment remains control of the disease and palliation.

The sequential use of endocrine treatment for advanced breast cancer: where are we?

BACKGROUND

Hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer is an increasing health burden. Although endocrine therapies are recognised as the most beneficial treatments for patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer, the optimal sequence of these agents is currently undetermined.

METHODS

We reviewed the available data on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of endocrine therapies in this treatment setting with particular focus on RCTs reported over the last 15 years that were designed based on power calculations on primary end points.

RESULTS

In this paper, data are reviewed in postmenopausal patients for the use of tamoxifen, aromatase inhibitors and fulvestrant. We also consider the available data on endocrine crossover studies and endocrine therapy in combination with chemotherapy or growth factor therapies. Treatment options for premenopausal patients and those with estrogen receptor-/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive tumours are also evaluated.

CONCLUSION

We present the level of evidence available for each endocrine agent based on its efficacy in advanced breast cancer and a diagram of possible treatment pathways.

Current approaches to the management of Her2-negative metastatic breast cancer

While metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains incurable, a vast array of active therapeutic agents has provided the opportunity for long-term disease control while maintaining quality of life and physical function. Optimal management of MBC balances a multitude of factors, including a woman's performance status, social support, symptoms, disease burden, prior therapies, and surrogates for tumor biology. Choosing the most appropriate initial therapy and subsequent sequence of treatments demands flexibility as goals and patient preferences may change. Knowledge of the estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and Her2 receptor status of the metastatic tumor has become critical to determining the optimal treatment strategy in the metastatic setting as targeted therapeutic approaches are developed. Patients with ER⁺ or PR⁺ breast cancer or both have a wide array of hormonal therapy options that can forestall the use of cytotoxic therapies, although rapidly progressive phenotypes and the emergence of resistance may ultimately lead to the need for chemotherapy in this setting. So-called 'triple-negative' breast cancer - lacking ER, PR, and Her2 overexpression - remains a major challenge. These tumors have an aggressive phenotype, and clear targets for therapy have not yet been established. Chemotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment in this group, but biologically based clinical trials of new agents are critical to developing a more effective set of therapies for this patient population.

Ovarian function suppression and fulvestrant as endocrine therapy in premenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Endocrine therapy is the preferred treatment for hormone-receptor (HR) positive metastatic breast cancer. In premenopausal patients, ovarian function suppression with goserelin in combination with anastrozole yielded promising results in phase II studies. Fulvestrant, a pure antioestrogen, yields high rates of disease stabilisation in postmenopausal women. Therefore, we investigated the feasibility and safety of fulvestrant plus goserelin in premenopausal women with HR-positive metastatic breast cancer.

METHODS

Premenopausal patients with metastatic breast cancer eligible for endocrine treatment received fulvestrant 250 mg and goserelin 3.6 mg every four weeks as first- to fourth-line therapy. Clinical benefit rate (CBR; response rate plus disease stabilisation ≥ 6 months) was defined as the primary study end-point. Time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier product limit method.

FINDINGS

Twenty-six patients received treatment as scheduled. 81% were pre-treated with tamoxifen and 69% had received prior aromatase inhibitors in combination with goserelin. The majority of patients (69%) presented with visceral metastases. Complete response was observed in a single patient, partial response in three and disease stabilisation ≥ 6 months in eleven patients, resulting in a CBR of 58%. Median TTP was 6 months (95%confidence interval (CI), 2.4-9.6) and OS 32 months (95%CI, 14.28-49.72), respectively.

INTERPRETATION

Results suggest that the combination of fulvestrant and goserelin offers promising activity in premenopausal patients and further investigation is warranted.

Breast Cancer: State of the Art and New Findings

Advances in research have a highly influential role to play in the strategy of early detection, treatment and aftercare of breast cancer and therefore everyday clinical practice. Newly-defined prognosis factors and a new form of molecular subtype classification, for example, are intended to help identify patients who will actually benefit from chemotherapy. In the field of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the inclusion of the angiogenesis inhibitor Bevacizumab and dual antiHER2 therapy is being discussed. What's more, where defined criteria are met, even with positive sentinel lymph nodes, axillary dissection is not performed; besides bisphosphonates RANKL antibody Denosumab is now an option in the treatment of bone metastases.

Emerging drugs in metastatic breast cancer: an update

INTRODUCTION

The incidence of breast cancer at an advanced stage has decreased in the modern world due to screening programs and usage of novel chemotherapy agents at an adjuvant setting. Recurrence is the major problem seen in > 50% of breast cancer patients diagnosed at an early stage. Developing new drugs for metastatic breast cancer is a huge and challenging research area.

AREAS COVERED

Emerging drugs showed positive results in clinical studies and agents in routine clinical usage are updated. Current treatment strategies as a combination of biologic agents and overcoming drug resistance are discussed. Literature search is made from PubMed, ASCO and San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium Meeting abstracts.

EXPERT OPINION

A number of drugs caused survival benefit for advanced breast cancer. Hundreds of new studies with tens of agents are conducted for treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Tumor resistance and treatment related toxicities are unavoidable which are two main search areas for improving metastatic breast cancer management. Understanding the pathways of genesis and progression yielded many targets for treatment. However, cure in metastatic breast cancer is still a far aim and new agents and treatment strategies are needed.

Management of patients with metastatic breast cancer

Hormone treatment is one of the key strategies in the management of metastatic breast cancer. Hormone treatment is one of the key strategies in the management of metastatic breast cancer. Aromatase inhibitors (AI) have been extensively studied in this setting. This section summarizes the key data regarding the use of AI in advanced breast cancer. In postmenopausal women, AI are the first line of treatment for untreated patients, or those who had prior AI treatment and progress after 12 months of adjuvant therapy. A longer disease-free interval and absence of visceral disease is associated with a better response. If tumors recur in less than 12 months, it is recommended that tamoxifen (TAM) or the estrogen-receptor antagonist fulvestrant (FUL) treatment be initiated. In the second-line setting, the best option after progression is the administration of either FUL or TAM. In the third-line setting, reintroduction of AI is considered an acceptable option. In premenopausal women who have not received prior treatment or who have progressed after 12 months following adjuvant treatment, it is recommended to initiate therapy with a combination of TAM and a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) analog. If there is treatment failure with the use of this combination, megestrol acetate or an LHRH agonist plus an AI may be reasonable alternatives. Intensive research is ongoing to understand the mechanisms of resistance to hormone therapy. In human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive-patients, combinations with HER2 antagonists are associated with significant clinical activity.

Psychotropic medication during endocrine treatment for breast cancer

Purpose

Psychological problems are frequently mentioned in women treated for breast cancer in whom depression is mentioned as the most common disorder. The aim was to study the prescription of psychotropic medication in women with endocrine treatment for breast cancer in women in our prospective and consecutive pharmacy database.

Methods

Women (n = 2,172) with at least one prescription of tamoxifen, fulvestrant, anastrazole, letrozole or exemestane were considered as breast cancer patients treated with endocrine therapy. This group was compared with an age- and family physician-matched group of women without cancer (n = 8,129), and the incidence risk ratio (IRR) and the 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated. In addition, the prevalence of these psychotropic medication prescriptions and the 95% CI were calculated.

Results

There was an increased prescription of psychotropic medication in the female breast cancer patients on endocrine therapy: anxiolytics (IRR 2.07, 95% CI 1.87–2.29), hypnotics and sedatives (IRR 2.59, 95% CI 2.34–2.87) and anti-depressants (IRR 1.46, 95% CI 1.28–1.65). The prevalences of anxiolytics, hypnotics and sedatives were also increased in this group, indicating an increased use over time of these drugs. The prevalence of anti-depressant prescription was not increased, indicating short-term use only.

Conclusions

This study indicated increased psychological distress due to breast cancer diagnosis and/or treatment in women on endocrine therapy. Anti-depressants were only prescribed for a short time. These data can contribute to an improved awareness of the impact of breast cancer (treatment) and therefore potentially to the optimizing of support for these patients.

Laparoscopic salpingo-oophorectomy for ovarian ablation in women with hormone-sensitive breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate institutional experiences regarding laparoscopic salpingo-oophorectomy in breast cancer patients and to compare the technique with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogs among premenopausal women with hormone-sensitive breast cancer.

METHODS

Between 2004 and 2009, 103 women with breast cancer underwent laparoscopic salpingo-oophorectomy at Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK. All relevant medical records-including reasons for salpingo-oophorectomy, peri-operative events, and subsequent follow-up-were reviewed.

RESULTS

In the study period, 3 (2.9%) women experienced a recurrence of breast cancer but none had primary peritoneal/ovarian cancer within a median follow-up interval of 34 months (range, 0-70 months). No operative complications were noted among these women and all of them went home on the day of their operation.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic salpingo-oophorectomy seems to be a safe, permanent, and cost-effective method of ovarian ablation compared with the use of GnRH analogs. Salpingo-oophorectomy also considerably reduces the risk of subsequent ovarian/fallopian tube malignancy in this high-risk population.

SEOM clinical guidelines for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer

Patients with metastatic breast cancer have a wide number of treatment options, including medical, surgical, and supportive care measures. Treatment decisions are based in predictive and prognostic factors and the informed choice of the patients. SEOM has elaborated these guidelines with evidence-based recommendations for the diagnostic work-up, treatment (chemotherapy, endocrine therapy and targeted therapies) and supportive care for the management of these patients.

Treatment of metastatic breast cancer: state-of-the-art, subtypes and perspectives

Current treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) aims at achieving meaningful clinical responses, improved quality of life, long-term remissions, prolonged survival, and dares to hope for a cure in a small percentage of cases. This article will discuss both consensus and controversies in the management of MBC in the context of the new evolving breast cancer molecular classification. Hormonal therapy remains the mainstay of management of MBC Luminal A and B. Data is emerging on management of ErbB2-positive HR-positive MBC by combining hormonal manipulation and targeted anti-ErbB2 therapy and has recently received regulatory approval in Europe and USA. The optimal use and duration of single agent or combination chemotherapy is discussed. Data and controversies surrounding the use of newer agents such as nab-paclitaxel, ixabepilone, eribulin, and PARP inhibitors as well as trastuzumab is reviewed. Better understanding of pathophysiology has paved the way for the introduction of newer anti-ErbB2 agents such as lapatinib, pertuzumab, T-DM1 and neratinib. Controversies regarding bevacizumab and anti-angiogenesis are discussed. Bisphosphonates have significantly reduced skeletal related events and made significant improvements in the quality of life of patients with MBC. Newer anti-RANK Ligand antibodies show promising results. Significant advances in the understanding of molecular biology of breast cancer have been made and should lead to an improvement in the outcome of MBC. More possibilities of cure can become an attainable goal in the near future.

Monthly versus 3-monthly goserelin acetate treatment in pre-menopausal patients with estrogen receptor-positive early breast cancer

This study compared the efficacy and safety of a 3-monthly 10.8-mg depot goserelin (Zoladex(TM)) injection with the current 3.6 mg monthly dose in pre-menopausal Japanese women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) early breast cancer. This was a multicenter, open-label, randomized study. Primary endpoint was a non-inferiority analysis (10.8/3.6 mg) of the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) of estradiol (E(2)) over the first 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints included E(2) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) concentrations, menstruation, and safety and tolerability. In total, 170 patients were randomized to receive goserelin 10.8 mg every 3 months (n = 86) or 3.6 mg every month (n = 84). Mean AUCs for E(2) were similar between treatment groups (18.32 and 18.95 pg/ml·week for goserelin 10.8 and 3.6 mg, respectively). AUC ratio was 0.974 (95% confidence interval, 0.80, 1.19), indicating non-inferiority for goserelin 10.8 mg. Serum E(2) and FSH remained suppressed throughout the study and no patient experienced menses after week 16. No clinically important differences in safety and tolerability were observed between the two groups. In terms of E(2) suppression, 3-monthly goserelin 10.8 mg was non-inferior to monthly goserelin 3.6 mg in pre-menopausal women with ER+ breast cancer.

Algorithms for the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer and prior exposure to taxanes and anthracyclines

At present, metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains an incurable disease, with the goals of care aimed at maximizing the patient's duration and quality of life. Treatment options for a patient with MBC have become more efficacious and numerous. In addition to endocrine and chemotherapy agents, a number of targeted agents, including trastuzumab and bevacizumab, are available. The option to use novel agents combined with a multitude of standard chemotherapies has further enhanced the landscape of therapeutic options. As such, specific regimens must be evaluated within the framework of the individual patient, answering such questions as whether to treat with sequential single agents or combination regimens as well as which agents to use and in what sequence. The concept of personalized care is even more apparent in the setting of MBC, where the goal of palliation is intrinsically more nuanced than that of curative intent. This review will broadly assess the evidence for current treatment options with attention to varying clinical scenarios. Ultimately, delivering quality of care necessitates balancing an understanding of evidence-based data with sensitive attention to quality-of-life goals.