First-line bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: pooled and subgroup analyses of data from 2447 patients

Breast cancer

Breast cancer is one of the three most common cancers worldwide. Early breast cancer is considered potentially curable. Therapy has progressed substantially over the past years with a reduction in therapy intensity, both for locoregional and systemic therapy; avoiding overtreatment but also undertreatment has become a major focus. Therapy concepts follow a curative intent and need to be decided in a multidisciplinary setting, taking molecular subtype and locoregional tumour load into account. Primary conventional surgery is not the optimal choice for all patients any more. In triple-negative and HER2-positive early breast cancer, neoadjuvant therapy has become a commonly used option. Depending on clinical tumour subtype, therapeutic backbones include endocrine therapy, anti-HER2 targeting, and chemotherapy. In metastatic breast cancer, therapy goals are prolongation of survival and maintaining quality of life. Advances in endocrine therapies and combinations, as well as targeting of HER2, and the promise of newer targeted therapies make the prospect of long-term disease control in metastatic breast cancer an increasing reality.

Clinical results of randomized trials and 'real-world' data exploring the impact of Bevacizumab for breast cancer: opportunities for clinical practice and perspectives for research

INTRODUCTION

Angiogenesis plays a fundamental role in breast cancer (BC) growth, progression and metastatic spread. After the promising introduction of bevacizumab for the treatment of advanced BC, the initial enthusiasm decreased when the FDA withdrew its approval in 2011. Nevertheless, several clinical studies exploring the role of bevacizumab have been subsequently published. Areas covered: The aim of this study is to review the available clinical trials exploring the potential effectiveness of bevacizumab in BC, regardless of the disease setting. Expert opinion: Even if the evidence suggests that bevacizumab must be ruled out from the HER2-positive and adjuvant setting, bevacizumab's benefit remains uncertain in the neoadjuvant setting and in the advanced treatment of HER2-negative patients. In the first setting, the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy increased the pathological complete response (pCR) rate in most clinical trials. However, the current absence of evidence that pCR is a trial-level surrogate for survival requires waiting for long-term results. In the advanced setting, all trials showed a benefit in progression-free survival, but not in overall survival, highlighting an increase of adverse events. The lack of predictors of response represents the main unmet need in which future clinical research will undoubtedly invest.

Triple-negative breast cancer: is there a treatment on the horizon?

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), which accounts for 15-20% of all breast cancers, does not express estrogen receptor (ER) or progesterone receptor (PR) and lacks human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) overexpression or amplification. These tumors have a more aggressive phenotype and a poorer prognosis due to the high propensity for metastatic progression and absence of specific targeted treatments. Patients with TNBC do not benefit from hormonal or trastuzumab-based targeted therapies because of the loss of target receptors. Although these patients respond to chemotherapeutic agents such as taxanes and anthracyclines better than other subtypes of breast cancer, prognosis remains poor. A group of targeted therapies under investigation showed favorable results in TNBC, especially in cancers with BRCA mutation. The lipid-lowering statins (3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors), including lovastatin and simvastatin, have been shown to preferentially target TNBC compared with non-TNBC. These statins hold great promise for the management of TNBC. Only with the understanding of the molecular basis for the preference of statins for TNBC and more investigations in clinical trials can they be reformulated into a clinically approved drug against TNBC.

Phase II and Biomarker Study of Cabozantinib in Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Patients

Currently, no targeted therapies are available for metastatic triplenegative breast cancer (mTNBC). We evaluated the safety, efficacy, and biomarkers of response to cabozantinib, a multikinase inhibitor, in patients with mTNBC. We conducted a single arm phase II and biomarker study that enrolled patients with measurable mTNBC. Patients received cabozantinib (60 mg daily) on a 3-week cycle and were restaged after 6 weeks and then every 9 weeks. The primary endpoint was objective response rate. Predefined secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, and tissue and blood circulating cell and protein biomarkers. Of 35 patients who initiated protocol therapy, 3 (9% [95% confidence interval (CI): 2, 26]) achieved a partial response (PR). Nine patients achieved stable disease (SD) for at least 15 weeks, and thus the clinical benefit rate (PR+SD) was 34% [95% CI: 19, 52]. Median PFS was 2.0 months [95% CI: 1.3, 3.3]. The most common toxicities were fatigue, diarrhea, mucositis, and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia. There were no grade 4 toxicities, but 12 patients (34%) required dose reduction. Two patients had TNBCs with MET amplification. During cabozantinib therapy, there were significant and durable increases in plasma placental growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), VEGF-D, stromal cell-derived factor 1a, and carbonic anhydrase IX, and circulating CD3 + cells and CD8 + T lymphocytes, and decreases in plasma soluble VEGF receptor 2 and CD14+ monocytes (all p < .05). Higher baseline concentrations of soluble MET (sMET) associated with longer PFS (p = .03). In conclusion, cabozantinib showed encouraging safety and efficacy signals but did not meet the primary endpoint in pretreated mTNBC. Exploratory analyses of circulating biomarkers showed that cabozantinib induces systemic changes consistent with activation of the immune system and antiangiogenic activity, and that sMET should be further evaluated a potential biomarker of response.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC)-a disease with a dearth of effective therapies-often overexpress MET, which is associated with poor clinical outcomes. However, clinical studies of agents targeting MET and VEGF pathways-alone or in combination-have shown disappointing results. This study of cabozantinib (a dual VEGFR2/MET) in metastatic TNBC, while not meeting its prespecified endpoint, showed that treatment is associated with circulating biomarker changes, and is active in a subset of patients. Furthermore, this study demonstrates that cabozantinib therapy induces a systemic increase in cytotoxic lymphocyte populations and a decrease in immunosuppressive myeloid populations. This supports the testing of combinations of cabozantinib with immunotherapy in future studies in breast cancer patients.

Bevacizumab plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel as first-line therapy for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MERiDiAN): A double-blind placebo-controlled randomised phase III trial with prospective biomarker evaluation

AIM

MERiDiAN evaluated plasma vascular endothelial growth factor-A (pVEGF-A) prospectively as a predictive biomarker for bevacizumab efficacy in metastatic breast cancer (mBC).

METHODS

In this double-blind placebo-controlled randomised phase III trial, eligible patients had HER2-negative mBC previously untreated with chemotherapy. pVEGF-A was measured before randomisation to paclitaxel 90 mg/m² on days 1, 8 and 15 with either placebo or bevacizumab 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 15, repeated every 4 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or consent withdrawal. Stratification factors were baseline pVEGF-A, prior adjuvant chemotherapy, hormone receptor status and geographic region. Co-primary end-points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat and pVEGF-A_high populations.

RESULTS

Of 481 patients randomised (242 placebo-paclitaxel; 239 bevacizumab-paclitaxel), 471 received study treatment. The stratified PFS hazard ratio was 0.68 (99% confidence interval, 0.51-0.91; log-rank p = 0.0007) in the intent-to-treat population (median 8.8 months with placebo-paclitaxel versus 11.0 months with bevacizumab-paclitaxel) and 0.64 (96% confidence interval, 0.47-0.88; log-rank p = 0.0038) in the pVEGF-A_high subgroup. The PFS treatment-by-VEGF-A interaction p value (secondary end-point) was 0.4619. Bevacizumab was associated with increased incidences of bleeding (all grades: 45% versus 27% with placebo), neutropenia (all grades: 39% versus 29%; grade ≥3: 25% versus 13%) and hypertension (all grades: 31% versus 13%; grade ≥3: 11% versus 4%).

CONCLUSION

The significant PFS improvement with bevacizumab is consistent with previous placebo-controlled first-line trials in mBC. Results do not support using baseline pVEGF-A to identify patients benefitting most from bevacizumab.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01663727.

SAKK 24/09: safety and tolerability of bevacizumab plus paclitaxel vs. bevacizumab plus metronomic cyclophosphamide and capecitabine as first-line therapy in patients with HER2-negative advanced stage breast cancer - a multicenter, randomized phase III trial

Background

Adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy improves response rates and progression-free survival (PFS) in metastatic breast cancer (mBC). We aimed to demonstrate decreased toxicity with metronomic chemotherapy/bevacizumab compared with paclitaxel/bevacizumab.

Methods

This multicenter, randomized phase III trial compared bevacizumab with either paclitaxel (arm A) or daily oral capecitabine-cyclophosphamide (arm B) as first-line treatment in patients with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. The primary endpoint was the incidence of selected grade 3–5 adverse events (AE) including: febrile neutropenia, infection, sensory/motor neuropathy, and mucositis. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate, disease control rate, PFS, overall survival (OS), quality of life (QoL), and pharmacoeconomics. The study was registered prospectively with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01131195 on May 25, 2010.

Results

Between September 2010 and December 2012, 147 patients were included at 22 centers. The incidence of primary endpoint-defining AEs was similar in arm A (25 % [18/71]; 95 % CI 15–35 %) and arm B (24 % [16/68]; 95 % CI 13–34 %; P = 0.96). Objective response rates were 58 % (42/73; 95 % CI 0.46–0.69) and 50 % (37/74; 95 % CI 0.39–0.61) in arms A and B, respectively (P = 0.45). Median PFS was 10.3 months (95 % CI 8.7–11.3) in arm A and 8.5 months (95 % CI 6.5–11.9) in arm B (P = 0.90). Other secondary efficacy endpoints were not significantly different between study arms. The only statistically significant differences in QoL were less hair loss and less numbness in arm B. Treatment costs between the two arms were equivalent.

Conclusion

This trial failed to meet its primary endpoint of a reduced rate of prespecified grade 3–5 AEs with metronomic bevacizumab, cyclophosphamide and capecitabine.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2823-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Metastatic breast cancer: The Odyssey of personalization

Metastatic breast cancer is the most frequent cause of cancer death for women worldwide. In the last 15 years, a large number of new agents have entered clinical use, a result of the dramatic increase in our understanding of the molecular underpinnings of metastatic breast cancer. However, while these agents have led to better outcomes, they are also at the root cause of increasing financial pressure on healthcare systems. Moreover, decision making in an era where every year new agents are added to the therapeutic armamentarium has also become a significant challenge for medical oncologists. In the present article, we will provide an ample review on the most recent developments in the field of treatment of the different subtypes of metastatic breast cancer with a critical discussion on the slow progress made in identifying response biomarkers. New hopes in the form of ctDNA monitoring and functional imaging will be presented.

Targeted Therapies for Brain Metastases from Breast Cancer

The discovery of various driver pathways and targeted small molecule agents/antibodies have revolutionized the management of metastatic breast cancer. Currently, the major targets of clinical utility in breast cancer include the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor, mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway, and the cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK-4/6) pathway. Brain metastasis, however, remains a thorn in the flesh, leading to morbidity, neuro-cognitive decline, and interruptions in the management of systemic disease. Approximately 20%–30% of patients with metastatic breast cancer develop brain metastases. Surgery, whole brain radiation therapy, and stereotactic radiosurgery are the traditional treatment options for patients with brain metastases. The therapeutic paradigm is changing due to better understanding of the blood brain barrier and the advent of tyrosine kinase inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies. Several of these agents are in clinical practice and several others are in early stage clinical trials. In this article, we will review the common targetable pathways in the management of breast cancer patients with brain metastases, and the current state of the clinical development of drugs against these pathways.

Bevacizumab as first-line treatment in HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: pros and cons

PURPOSE

Bevacizumab, a humanized, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor-A monoclonal antibody, has shown efficacy in a number of cancers. However, its use in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains controversial.

METHODS

A literature review using the PubMed database was performed to update the currently available clinical trials evidence on bevacizumab in the first-line treatment of breast cancer. In addition, the proceedings of selected oncology annual meetings were searched for relevant presentations.

RESULTS

This article reviews the available evidence for bevacizumab as first-line therapy for MBC and discusses its current and future applicability in the management of MBC. Three phase III trials (ECOG-2100, AVADO, RIBBON-1) demonstrated that the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy is well-tolerated and improves progression-free survival and objective response rates in the first-line setting. These findings were supported by a large clinical practice-based study (ATHENA) and a recent clinical trial in which bevacizumab added to paclitaxel showed notable activity in triple-negative MBC. However, bevacizumab has thus far not demonstrated a significant benefit in overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy is well-tolerated and produces substantial improvements in overall response rate and progression-free survival, compared with chemotherapy alone, in advanced HER2-negative breast cancer. Nevertheless, it has thus far not demonstrated a significant benefit in overall survival. Whether prolongation of progression-free survival is enough to consider bevacizumab efficacious is unclear. Based on the available clinical trials results, bevacizumab is a part of the complex therapeutic strategy of advanced HER2-negative breast cancer.

A Phase I, Dose-Escalation Trial of Pazopanib in Combination with Cisplatin in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors: A UNICANCER Study

Introduction

To determine the feasibility, maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), and dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) of pazopanib in combination with cisplatin.

Methods

Patients with advanced malignancies were included in a 3 + 3 dose-escalation phase I study. Pazopanib administration started 8 days before the first infusion of cisplatin; some patients were treated according to a reverse sequence (cisplatin first). Five dose levels (DLs) were planned. MTD was based on DLT observed during cycles 1 and 2.

Results

Thirty-five patients were enrolled. The MTD was reached at the first DL, (pazopanib 400 mg daily + cisplatin 75 mg/m² every 21 days). Main DLTs were pulmonary embolism, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and elevation of liver enzymes. Overall, most common adverse events were anemia (83%), fatigue (80%), thrombocytopenia (80%), neutropenia (73%), hypertension (59%), neurotoxicity (56%), and anorexia (53%). Sixteen patients (46%) discontinued the study due to toxicity. One patient (sarcoma) had a complete response, and three patients (one with breast cancer and two with ovarian cancers) had a partial response. Pharmacokinetic (PK) analyses showed interactions with aprepitant, resulting in increased exposure to pazopanib, which might explain partly the poor tolerance of the combination.

Conclusion

Cisplatin and pazopanib could not be administered at their single agent full doses, partly due to a PK interaction between pazopanib and aprepitant.

Funding

This work was funded by GlaxoSmithKline and by the charity Ligue Nationale de Lutte Contre le Cancer.

Trial registered

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01165385.

[Not Available]

NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY IN HER2-POSITIVE AND TRIPLE-NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a standard option in the management of operable breast cancer, as effective as adjuvant chemotherapy in term of survival and with the potential to increase the rate of breast conservation. In HER2+ and triple-negative breast cancers, neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with a high probability of pathological complete response, which strongly predicts survival outcome. In HER2+ breast cancer, trastuzumab, in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, mostly anthracyclines and taxane-based, demonstrated a significant increase in pathological complete response rate. Recently, dual HER2 blockade strategies (lapatinib-trastuzumab or pertuzumab-trastuzumab) demonstrated a significant improvement in terms of pathological complete response over trastuzumab. In triple-negative breast cancer, recent data indicate that incorporating platinum compounds to neoadjuvant chemotherapy also significantly improves this parameter. Yet, in both subtypes, whether these substantial improvements may lead to significant benefits in terms of survival and breast conserving surgery remains to be demonstrated.

Cancer drug related cardiotoxicity during breast cancer treatment

INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer in women. Although therapeutic armamentarium like chemotherapy, endocrine and target agents have increased survival, cardiovascular side effects have been observed. A comprehensive risk assessment, early detection and management of cardiac adverse events is therefore needed.

AREAS COVERED

In this review we focus on cardiotoxicity data deriving from Phase III randomized trials, systematic reviews and meta-analysis in BC patients. We provide insight into advances that have been made in the molecular mechanisms, clinical presentation and management of such adverse event.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the large number of data from Phase III trials about cardiac events incidence, there are poor evidences for detection, monitoring and management of cardiotoxicity during BC treatment. Future cardiotoxicity-oriented clinical cancer research can help to predict the risk of cardiac adverse events and improve patients' outcome. Multidisciplinary approach as well as integration of blood biomarkers with imaging will be desirable.

Cell-specific biomarkers and targeted biopharmaceuticals for breast cancer treatment

Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death among women, and its related treatment has been attracting significant attention over the past decades. Among the various treatments, targeted therapy has shown great promise as a precision treatment, by binding to cancer cell-specific biomarkers. So far, great achievements have been made in targeted therapy of breast cancer. In this review, we first discuss cell-specific biomarkers, which are not only useful for classification of breast cancer subtyping but also can be utilized as goals for targeted therapy. Then, the innovative and generic-targeted biopharmaceuticals for breast cancer, including monoclonal antibodies, non-antibody proteins and small molecule drugs, are reviewed. Finally, we provide our outlook on future developments of biopharmaceuticals, and provide solutions to problems in this field.

[Non-metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in 2016: Definitions and management]

Triple-negative breast cancer (TN), as defined by the triple negativity in immunohistochemistry: the absence of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and the absence of overexpression or amplification of HER2, corresponds to 15 % of invasive breast cancers. This is a very heterogeneous group of tumors both at the genomic and transcriptomic level and at morphological, clinical and prognostic level. Although there are some good prognosis forms, the majority of TN tumors is characterized by a poor prognosis with a greater frequency of visceral metastases and a maximum risk of relapse in the first two years after diagnosis. Systemic adjuvant treatment with chemotherapy is almost always indicated. The surgical treatment and radiotherapy treatment should be comparable to the other subtypes and obey the same rules of oncologic surgery. TN tumors are not associated with a higher risk of locoregional relapse after conservative treatment and adjuvant radiotherapy. Optimization of systemic therapies is currently and for the last decade a challenge. A number of targeted therapies and efficiency biomarkers identification of these targeted therapies is essential to allow significant progress in optimizing systemic therapy for these tumors.

A Delphi consensus and open debate on the role of first-line bevacizumab for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer

To gain consensus on the role of bevacizumab plus paclitaxel as first-line treatment for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer, a panel of expert oncologists experienced in treating patients with metastatic breast cancer in Italy participated in a Delphi consensus study. The panel reached a full consensus on the efficacy of bevacizumab plus paclitaxel and the clinical meaningfulness of the progression-free survival benefit compared with paclitaxel alone, despite the lack of an overall survival effect in clinical trials. The participants agreed that real-world data support the effectiveness and well-defined safety profile of the regimen. Views on the use of bevacizumab plus paclitaxel in specific patient populations were not unanimous and clinical judgment remains important. Nevertheless, a high level of agreement was reached.

Over-treatment in metastatic breast cancer

Metastatic breast cancer is an incurable disease and the main goals of treatment are prolongation of survival and preservation/improvement of quality of life. Thus the main philosophy of treatment should be to use the least toxic methods, as long as they provide sufficient disease control. In ER-positive tumours this can be in many cases achieved by endocrine therapy; in HER2-positive cancers efficacy of backbone therapy can be enhanced by an anti-HER2 agent. In patients requiring chemotherapy, consecutive single agent regimen provide disease control of a duration at least comparable to multidrug regimen, at a cost of significantly lower toxicity and are a preferred strategy in the majority of cases. Available data demonstrate, however, that aggressive chemotherapy is still overused in many metastatic breast cancer patients. The objective of this manuscript is to critically review available data on treatment choices and sequence in metastatic breast cancer across all breast cancer subtypes in relation to possible overtreatment, including therapies which are not recommended by current guidelines or not even approved. Our aim is to provide guidance on applying these data to clinical practice, but also to describe various, often non-scientific factors influencing therapeutic decisions in an aim to identify areas requiring educational and possibly political actions.

New schedule of bevacizumab/paclitaxel as first-line therapy for metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer in a real-life setting

Angiogenesis plays an essential role in the growth and progression of breast cancer. This observational single center study evaluated the efficacy and safety of a new weekly schedule of bevacizumab/paclitaxel combination in the first-line treatment of unselected, HER2-negative, metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients, in a real-life setting. Thirty-five patients (median age 56 years, range 40-81) with HER2-negative MBC were treated with paclitaxel (70 mg/m(2) ) dd 1,8,15 q21 (60 mg/m(2) if ≥65 years or secondary Cumulative Illness Rating Scale) plus bevacizumab (10 mg/kg) every 2 weeks. Twenty-two patients (63%) had ≥2 metastatic sites and 15 (43%) visceral disease. Eleven patients (31%) had a triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). A clinical complete response (cCR) was observed in 6 (17%) cases after a median of seven cycles, a partial response (PR) in 22 (63%), and a stable disease (SD) in 6 (17%) cases; the overall clinical benefit rate was 97%. In TNBC subgroup, cCR occurred in 1 (9%) case, PR in 8 (73%), and SD in 2 (18%). At a median follow-up of 13 months (range 1-79 months), the median progression-free survival was 11 months and the median overall survival was 36 months. No grade 4 adverse events occurred. The main grade 3 toxicities observed were neutropenia (11.4%), hypertension (5.7%), stomatitis (2.8%), diarrhea (2.8%), and vomiting (2.8%). The administration of weekly paclitaxel plus bevacizumab in this real-life experience shows similar efficacy than previously reported schedules, with a comparable dose intensity and a good toxicity profile.

Safety, Effectiveness, and Costs of Bevacizumab-Based Therapy in Southern Spain: A Real World Experience

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of bevacizumab in a broader patient population with solid tumors in the context of general clinical practice. Moreover, we quantified the economic impact and characterized the off-label use (OLU) of this agent in real-life prescribing practices.This is an open, retrospective, observational, real world study carried out at a regional Spanish hospital attending a population of 665,000 inhabitants. All of the patients receiving bevacizumab-containing therapy between January 2006 and February 2012 at the study hospital were included: no exclusion criteria were specified. All study variables were collected from available hospital records.The analysis comprised 240 episodes from 226 patients (male 41%; median age 57 years, 25% ≥65 years). Eighty cases (33%) of bevacizumab treatment were administered as first-line therapy. The median duration of bevacizumab treatment was 5.8 months (95% CI 5.1-6.6), without difference by age, line of treatment, or type of tumor. Typically bevacizumab-related toxicities included bleeding (25%), hypertension (5%), wound-healing complications (4%), gastrointestinal perforation (2%), and arterial thromboembolism (1%). Median progression-free survival was 7.5 months (95% CI 6.3-8.7) and median OS reached 13.1 months (95% CI 11.4-14.9). Bevacizumab increased the chemotherapy cost to 207% (from &OV0556;3,115,615 to &OV0556;9,552,405). Bevacizumab was prescribed off-label in 43% of episodes, amounting to &OV0556;3,586,420 (56% of bevacizumab total cost).The efficacy and safety profile of bevacizumab in routine clinical practice is consistent with results observed in prospective randomized clinical trials. OLU of this drug should be closely monitored.

A Review of Systemic Treatment in Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Patients with breast cancer along with metastatic estrogen and progesterone receptor (ER/PR)- and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative tumors are referred to as having metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) disease. Although there have been many new treatment options approved by the Food and Drug Administration for ER/PR-positive and Her2/neu-amplified metastatic breast cancer, relatively few new agents have been approved for patients with mTNBC. There have been several head-to-head chemotherapy trials performed within the metastatic setting, and much of what is applied in clinical practice is extrapolated from chemotherapy trials in the adjuvant setting, with taxanes and anthracyclines incorporated early on in the patient's treatment course. Select synergistic combinations can produce faster and more significant response rates compared with monotherapy and are typically used in the setting of visceral threat or symptomatic disease. Preclinical studies have implicated other possible targets and mechanisms in mTNBC. Ongoing clinical trials are underway assessing new chemotherapeutic strategies and agents, including targeted therapy and immunotherapy. In this review, we evaluate the standard systemic and future treatment options in mTNBC.

Progression-free survival as surrogate end point for overall survival in clinical trials of HER2-targeted agents in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The gold standard end point in randomized clinical trials in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is overall survival (OS). Although therapeutics have been approved based on progression-free survival (PFS), its use as a primary end point is controversial. We aimed to assess to what extent PFS may be used as a surrogate for OS in randomized trials of anti-HER2 agents in HER2+ MBC.

METHODS

Eligible trials accrued HER2+ MBC patients in 1992-2008. A correlation approach was used: at the individual level, to estimate the association between investigator-assessed PFS and OS using a bivariate model and at the trial level, to estimate the association between treatment effects on PFS and OS. Correlation values close to 1.0 would indicate strong surrogacy.

RESULTS

We identified 2545 eligible patients in 13 randomized trials testing trastuzumab or lapatinib. We collected individual patient data from 1963 patients and retained 1839 patients from 9 trials for analysis (7 first-line trials). During follow-up, 1072 deaths and 1462 progression or deaths occurred. The median survival time was 22 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 21-23 months] and the median PFS was 5.7 months (95% CI 5.5-6.1 months). At the individual level, the Spearman correlation was equal to ρ = 0.67 (95% CI 0.66-0.67) corresponding to a squared correlation value of 0.45. At the trial level, the squared correlation between treatment effects (log hazard ratios) on PFS and OS was provided by R(2) = 0.51 (95% CI 0.22-0.81).

CONCLUSIONS

In trials of HER2-targeted agents in HER2+ MBC, PFS moderately correlates with OS at the individual level and treatment effects on PFS correlate moderately with those on overall mortality, providing only modest support for considering PFS as a surrogate. PFS does not completely substitute for OS in this setting.

Evidence for Oncolytic Virotherapy: Where Have We Got to and Where Are We Going?

The last few years have seen an increased interest in immunotherapy in the treatment of malignant disease. In particular, there has been significant enthusiasm for oncolytic virotherapy, with a large amount of pre-clinical data showing promise in animal models in a wide range of tumour types. How do we move forward into the clinical setting and translate something which has such potential into meaningful clinical outcomes? Here, we review how the field of oncolytic virotherapy has developed thus far and what the future may hold.

Does the addition of drugs targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor pathway to first-line chemotherapy increase complete response? A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Drugs targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and its receptor (VEGFR) signaling (anti-VEGF/VEGFR drugs) are the most validated anti-angiogenic strategies for cancer treatment. Complete response (CR) is a rare event in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. A meta-analysis was conducted to determine whether adding anti-VEGF/VEGFR drugs to chemotherapy can further increase the chance of CR in the first-line therapy. Relevant databases were systematically searched for the period 2000-2015. Eligible studies were selected according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The incidence, relative risk (RR), and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects or fixed-effects models based on the heterogeneity of selected studies. A total of 12,453 patients from 28 randomized controlled trials were included. The overall incidence of CR in patients treated with anti-VEGF/VEGFR drugs plus chemotherapy was 1.5 % (95 % CI, 1.0-2.0 %) compared to 1.1 % (95 % CI, 0.7-1.4 %) in the chemotherapy-alone arm. Adding anti-VEGF/VEGFR drugs was associated with significant improvement of CR (RR, 1.52, 95 % CI, 1.18-1.95, P = 0.001). When stratified by drug type, adding VEGFR tyrosin kinase inhibitors (TKIs) did not increase the chance of CR (RR, 0.87, 95 % CI, 0.51-1.49; P = 0.614). The addition of bevacizumab with 7.5 mg/kg every 3 weeks, but not 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks, significantly improves the CR (7.5 mg, RR, 2.43, 95 % CI, 1.64-3.60, P = 0.000; 15 mg, RR, 1.07, 95 % CI, 0.63-1.81, P = 0.799). In subgroup analysis, a significant improvement of CR by the addition of anti-VEGF/VEGFR drugs was observed in patients with colorectal cancer (RR, 2.10, 95 % CI 1.21-3.63, P = 0.008), ovarian cancer (RR, 3.07; 95 % CI, 1.68-5.62, P = 0.000), and patients who are treated with platinum-based regimens (RR, 1.78, 95 % CI, 1.23-2.59, P = 0.002). Low-dose bevacizumab, rather than VEGFR TKIs or high-dose bevacizumab, can increase the chance of CR in patients receiving chemotherapy.

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.

Liver Metastasis of a Triple-Negative Breast Cancer and Complete Remission for 5 Years After Treatment With Combined Bevacizumab/Paclitaxel/Carboplatin: Case Report and Review of the Literature

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is aggressive, with high risk of visceral metastasis and death. A substantial proportion of patients with TNBC is associated with BRCA mutations, implying that these tumors are sensitive to DNA-damaging agents. We report successful treatment of a metastatic TNBC in a woman with a BRCA2 germline mutation using combined bevacizumab/paclitaxel/carboplatin (BPC) therapy. The patient was pregnant and had liver metastases, and a complete clinical response was sustained for approximately 5 years. Mastectomy was performed during the 29th week of pregnancy, and the baby was later delivered by caesarean section. Subsequently, multiple metastases in both liver lobes were detected using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging and the patient was treated with a BPC regimen, which led to complete disappearance of metastatic lesions in the liver. No additional treatment was provided, and after 5 years the patient consented to direct sequencing of BRCA2 and a 6781delG mutation was identified. At the most recent (5-year) follow-up, the patient was alive with good quality of life and no evidence of metastases.This finding suggests that BPC therapy might be considered a good therapeutic option for the treatment of metastatic TNBC in a woman with a BRCA2 germline mutation.

Clinical and molecular complexity of breast cancer metastases

Clinical oncology is advancing toward a more personalized treatment orientation, making the need to understand the biology of metastasis increasingly acute. Dissecting the complex molecular, genetic and clinical phenotypes underlying the processes involved in the development of metastatic disease, which remains the principal cause of cancer-related deaths, could lead to the identification of more effective prognostication and targeted approaches to prevent and treat metastases. The past decade has witnessed significant progress in the field of cancer metastasis research. Clinical and technological milestones have been reached which have tremendously enriched our understanding of the complex pathways undertaken by primary tumors to progress into lethal metastases and how some of these processes might be amenable to therapy. The aim of this review article is to highlight the recent advances toward unraveling the clinical and molecular complexity of breast cancer metastases. We focus on genes mediating breast cancer metastases and organ-specific tropism, and discuss gene signatures for prediction of metastatic disease. The challenges of translating this information into clinically applicable tools for improving the prognostication of the metastatic potential of a primary breast tumor, as well as for therapeutic interventions against latent and active metastatic disease are addressed.

Randomized, phase II, placebo-controlled trial of onartuzumab and/or bevacizumab in combination with weekly paclitaxel in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Increased hepatocyte growth factor/MET signaling is associated with an aggressive phenotype and poor prognosis in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). We evaluated the benefit of adding onartuzumab, a monoclonal anti-MET antibody, to paclitaxel with/without bevacizumab in patients with TNBC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women with metastatic TNBC were randomized to receive onartuzumab plus placebo plus weekly paclitaxel (OP; n = 60) or onartuzumab plus bevacizumab plus paclitaxel (OBP; n = 63) or placebo plus bevacizumab plus paclitaxel (BP; n = 62). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS); additional end points included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. This trial was hypothesis generating and did not have power to detect minimum clinically meaningful differences between treatment arms.

RESULTS

There was no improvement in PFS with the addition of onartuzumab to BP [hazard ratio (HR), 1.08; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-1.70]; the risk of a PFS event was higher with OP than with BP (HR, 1.74; 95% CI 1.13-2.68). Most patients had MET-negative tumors (88%); PAM50 subtype analysis showed basal-like tumors in 68% of samples. ORR was higher in the bevacizumab arms (OBP: 42.2%; 95% CI 28.6-57.1; BP: 54.7%; 95% CI 41.0-68.4) compared with OP (27.5%; 95% CI 15.9-40.6). Median OS was shorter with OBP (HR, 1.36; 95% CI 0.75-2.46) and OP (HR, 1.92; 95% CI 1.03-3.59), than with BP. Peripheral edema was more frequent in the onartuzumab arms (OBP, 51.8%; OP, 58.6%) versus BP (17.7%).

CONCLUSION

This study did not show a clinical benefit of the addition of onartuzumab to paclitaxel with/without bevacizumab in patients with predominantly MET-negative TNBC.

CLINICALTRIALSGOV

NCT01186991.

The coming of ramucirumab in the landscape of anti-angiogenic drugs: potential clinical and translational perspectives

INTRODUCTION

Angiogenesis plays a pivotal role in the development and progression of tumors and it represents a crucial target for therapeutic strategies. Until now, regulatory agencies approved antiangiogenic agents targeting the VEGF and multi-target agents carrying antiangiogenic and anti-proliferative effects. They often provide only a modest survival benefit and their role in clinical practice is debated. The limited efficacy may be partially explained by the complexity of the molecular background of angiogenic processes, composed of several pathways interacting with both tumor cells and the microenvironment.

AREAS COVERED

Ramucirumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody selectively binding and inhibiting the VEGF receptor 2 (VEGFR-2), a crucial molecule involved in angiogenesis. A series of Phase I-II trials conducted in a wide spectrum of malignancies reported promising antitumor activity. In 2014, data from large Phase III clinical trials in gastrointestinal, lung and breast malignancies were released.

EXPERT OPINION

Considering the evidences of efficacy emerging from the available Phase III trials, the antiangiogenic approach emerged as a promising strategy particularly for the treatment of gastric cancer. Nevertheless, the identification and validation of potentially predictive biomarkers are necessary to improve the selection of patients and the globally awaited clinical benefit.

Association of IL-8 and eNOS polymorphisms with clinical outcomes in bevacizumab-treated breast cancer patients: an exploratory analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancer is controversial. Identification of predictive biomarkers could help to select patients who really benefit from it. We evaluated the association of angiogenesis-related gene polymorphisms with the treatment outcome of bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancer patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

eNOS-786T/C and -894G/T, IL-8-251T/A genomic polymorphisms were assessed in 31 metastatic breast cancer patients treated with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in the first-line setting. Testing for association between each polymorphism and treatment outcome was performed.

RESULTS

Patients with IL-8 251 AA genotype showed a significantly lower progression-free survival in each combination comparison: "TT" vs "AA" (13 vs 8 months; p = 0.008); TT vs TA vs AA (13 vs 11 vs 8 months; p = 0.02); TT vs TA +AA (13 vs 11 months; p = 0.01); TT + TA vs AA (12 vs 8 months; p = 0.01) and a lower overall survival when compared with TT +TA genotype (26 vs 51 months, p = 0.04). Patients carrying eNOS 894 TT genotype showed a statistically significant lower progression-free survival than patients with GG genotype (11.5 vs 26.5 months; p = 0.04) with no differences in the overall survival. No association with response rate was found with any of the polymorphisms analyzed.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that IL-8 251T/A and eNOS-894 G/T polymorphisms might have a role in predicting treatment outcome of bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancer. Our results are hypothesis generating and need to be confirmed in larger clinical trials.

Targeted Therapies in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a heterogeneous disease comprised of several biologically distinct subtypes. However, treatment is currently mainly relying on chemotherapy as there are no targeted therapies specifically approved for TNBC. Despite initial responses to chemotherapy, resistance frequently and rapidly develops and metastatic TNBC has a poor prognosis. New targeted approaches are, therefore, urgently needed. Currently, bevacizumab, a monoclonal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A antibody, is the only targeted agent with an approval for the therapy of metastatic breast cancer, but does not provide a specific benefit in the TNBC subtype. This review discusses the current clinical developments in targeted approaches for TNBC, including anti-angiogenic therapies, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted therapies, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and platinum salts, as well as novel strategies using immune-checkpoint inhibitors, which have recently demonstrated first promising results. Strategies focusing on specific subtypes of TNBC like anti-androgenic therapies for the luminal androgen receptor subtype (LAR) and others are also discussed.

Efficacy of neoadjuvant bevacizumab added to docetaxel followed by fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide, for women with HER2-negative early breast cancer (ARTemis): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The ARTemis trial was developed to assess the efficacy and safety of adding bevacizumab to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-negative early breast cancer.

METHODS

In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, we enrolled women (≥18 years) with newly diagnosed HER2-negative early invasive breast cancer (radiological tumour size >20 mm, with or without axillary involvement), at 66 centres in the UK. Patients were randomly assigned via a central computerised minimisation procedure to three cycles of docetaxel (100 mg/m(2) once every 21 days) followed by three cycles of fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2)), epirubicin (100 mg/m(2)), and cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m(2)) once every 21 days (D-FEC), without or with four cycles of bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) (Bev+D-FEC). The primary endpoint was pathological complete response, defined as the absence of invasive disease in the breast and axillary lymph nodes, analysed by intention to treat. The trial has completed and follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2008-002322-11), ISRCTN (68502941), and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01093235).

FINDINGS

Between May 7, 2009, and Jan 9, 2013, we randomly allocated 800 participants to D-FEC (n=401) and Bev+D-FEC (n=399). 781 patients were available for the primary endpoint analysis. Significantly more patients in the bevacizumab group achieved a pathological complete response compared with those treated with chemotherapy alone: 87 (22%, 95% CI 18-27) of 388 patients in the Bev+D-FEC group compared with 66 (17%, 13-21) of 393 patients in the D-FEC group (p=0·03). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were reported at expected levels in both groups, although more patients had grade 4 neutropenia in the Bev+D-FEC group than in the D-FEC group (85 [22%] vs 68 [17%]).

INTERPRETATION

Addition of four cycles of bevacizumab to D-FEC in HER2-negative early breast cancer significantly improved pathological complete response. However, whether the improvement in pathological complete response will lead to improved disease-free and overall survival outcomes is unknown and will be reported after longer follow-up. Meta-analysis of available neoadjuvant trials is likely to be the only way to define subgroups of early breast cancer that would have clinically significant long-term benefit from bevacizumab treatment.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis.

Effects of conventional neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer on tumor angiogenesis

The effects of breast cancer conventional chemotherapy on tumor angiogenesis need to be further characterized. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is an ideal model to evaluate the results of chemotherapy, allowing intra-patient direct comparison of antitumor and antiangiogenic effects. We sought to analyze the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on tumor angiogenesis and its clinical significance in breast cancer. Breast cancer patients (n = 108) treated with neoadjuvant sequential anthracyclines and taxanes were studied. Pre- and post-chemotherapy microvessel density (MVD) and mean vessel size (MVS) were analyzed after CD34 immunohistochemistry and correlated with tumor expression of pro- and antiangiogenic factors (VEGFA, THBS1, HIF1A, CTGF, and PDGFA) by qRT-PCR. Angiogenic measures at diagnosis varied among breast cancer subtypes. Pre-treatment higher MVS was associated with triple-negative subtype and more advanced disease. Higher MVS was correlated with higher VEGFA (p = 0.003), while higher MVD was correlated with lower antiangiogenic factors expression (THBS1, p < 0.0001; CTGF, p = 0.001). Increased angiogenesis at diagnosis (high MVS and glomeruloid microvascular proliferation) and higher VEGFA expression were associated with tumor recurrence (p = 0.048 and 0.009, respectively). Chemotherapy-induced angiogenic response (defined as decreased MVD) was present in 35.2 % of patients. This response correlated with an increase in antiangiogenic factors (THBS1) without changes in VEGFA expression, and it was associated with tumor downstaging, but not with clinical response, pathologic complete response, or prognosis. Global effects of chemotherapy mainly consisted in an increased expression of antiangiogenic factors (THBS1, CTGF), with significant changes neither of tumor VEGFA nor of MVS. Conventionally scheduled neoadjuvant chemotherapy exerts antiangiogenic effects, through an increase in antiangiogenic factors, THBS1 and CTGF, but the expression of VEGFA is maintained after treatment. Better markers of angiogenic response and a better understanding of the cooperation of chemotherapy and antiangiogenic therapy in the neoadjuvant clinical scenario are needed.

Therapies for triple negative breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a heterogeneous disease associated with a high risk of recurrence, and therapeutic options are currently limited to cytotoxic therapy. Germ-line mutations may occur in up to 20% of unselected patients with TNBC, which may serve as a biomarker identifying which patients may have tumors that are particularly sensitive to platinums and/or inhibitors of poly(ADP-ribose)polymerase. A substantial proportion of patients with TNBCs not associated with germ-line BRCA mutations may have tumors that are ‘BRCA-like’, rendering those individuals potential candidates for similar strategies.

AREAS COVERED

The purpose of this review is to highlight the current standard and experimental treatment strategies.

EXPERT OPINION

Recent research that has illuminated the molecular heterogeneity of the disease rationalizes its diverse biological behavior and differential response to chemotherapy. Modern technology platforms provide molecular signatures that can be mined for therapeatic interventions. Target pathways that are commonly dysregulated in cancer cells control cellular processes such as apoptosis, proliferation, angiogenesis, DNA repair, cell cycle progression, immune modulation and invasion, and metastasis. Novel trial design and re-defined endpoints as surrogates to clinical outcome have been introduced to expedite the development of breakthrough therapies to treat high-risk early-stage breast cancer.

Cisplatin plus gemcitabine versus paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as first-line therapy for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (CBCSG006): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Platinum chemotherapy has a role in the treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer but its full potential has probably not yet been reached. We assessed whether a cisplatin plus gemcitabine regimen was non-inferior to or superior to paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as first-line therapy for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

METHODS

For this open-label, randomised, phase 3, hybrid-designed trial undertaken at 12 institutions or hospitals in China, we included Chinese patients aged 18-70 years with previously untreated, histologically confirmed metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, and an ECOG performance status of 0-1. These patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either cisplatin plus gemcitabine (cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8) or paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8) given intravenously every 3 weeks for a maximum of eight cycles. Randomisation was done centrally via an interactive web response system using block randomisation with a size of eight, with no stratification factors. Patients and investigator were aware of group assignments. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival and analyses were based on all patients who received at least one dose of assigned treatment. The margin used to establish non-inferiority was 1·2. If non-inferiority of cisplatin plus gemcitabine compared with paclitaxel plus gemcitabine was achieved, we would then test for superiority. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01287624.

FINDINGS

From Jan 14, 2011, to Nov 14, 2013, 240 patients were assessed for eligibility and randomly assigned to treatment (120 in the cisplatin plus gemcitabine group and 120 in the paclitaxel plus gemcitabine group). 236 patients received at least one dose of assigned chemotherapy and were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (118 per group). After a median follow-up of 16·3 months (IQR 14·4-26·8) in the cisplatin plus gemcitabine group and 15·9 months (10·7-25·4) in the paclitaxel plus gemcitabine group, the hazard ratio for progression-free survival was 0·692 (95% CI 0·523-0·915; pnon-inferiority<0·0001, psuperiority=0·009, thus cisplatin plus gemcitabine was both non-inferior to and superior to paclitaxel plus gemcitabine. Median progression-free survival was 7·73 months (95% CI 6·16-9·30) in the cisplatin plus gemcitabine group and 6·47 months (5·76-7·18) in the paclitaxel plus gemcitabine group. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events that differed significantly between the two groups included nausea (eight [7%] vs one [<1%]), vomiting (13 [11%] vs one [<1%]), musculoskeletal pain (none vs ten [8%]), anaemia (39 [33%] vs six [5%]), and thrombocytopenia (38 [32%] vs three [3%]), for the cisplatin plus gemcitabine compared with the paclitaxel plus gemcitabine groups, respectively. In addition, patients in the cisplatin plus gemcitabine group had significantly fewer events of grade 1-4 alopecia (12 [10%] vs 42 [36%]) and peripheral neuropathy (27 [23%] vs 60 [51%]), but more grade 1-4 anorexia (33 [28%] vs 10 [8%]), constipation (29 [25%] vs 11 [9%]), hypomagnesaemia (27 [23%] vs five [4%]), and hypokalaemia (10 [8%] vs two [2%]). Serious drug-related adverse events were seen in three patients in the paclitaxel plus gemcitabine group (interstitial pneumonia, anaphylaxis, and severe neutropenia) and four in the cisplatin plus gemcitabine group (pathological bone fracture, thrombocytopenia with subcutaneous haemorrhage, severe anaemia, and cardiogenic syncope). There were no treatment-related deaths.

INTERPRETATION

Cisplatin plus gemcitabine could be an alternative or even the preferred first-line chemotherapy strategy for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

FUNDING

Shanghai Natural Science Foundation.

Phase III trial evaluating the addition of bevacizumab to endocrine therapy as first-line treatment for advanced breast cancer: the letrozole/fulvestrant and avastin (LEA) study

PURPOSE

To test whether combining bevacizumab, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment, with endocrine therapy (ET) could potentially delay the emergence of resistance to ET.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III, binational (Spain and Germany) study added bevacizumab (15 mg/kg every 3 weeks) to ET (ET-B; letrozole or fulvestrant) as first-line therapy in postmenopausal patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -negative and hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. We compared progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), response duration (RD), time to treatment failure (TTF), clinical benefit rate (CBR), and safety.

RESULTS

From 380 patients recruited (2007 to 2011), 374 were analyzed by intent to-treat (184 patients on ET and 190 patients on ET-B). Median age was 65 years, 270 patients (72%) had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 178 patients (48%) had visceral metastases, and 171 patients (46%) and 195 patients (52%) had received prior chemotherapy or ET, respectively. Median PFS was 14.4 months in the ET arm and 19.3 months in the ET-B arm (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.06; P = .126). ORR, CBR, and RD with ET versus ET-B were 22% versus 41% (P < .001), 67% versus 77% (P = .041), and 13.3 months versus 17.6 months (P = .434), respectively. TTF and OS were comparable in both arms. Grade 3 to 4 hypertension, aminotransferase elevation, and proteinuria were significantly higher in the ET-B arm. Eight patients (4.2%) receiving ET-B died during study or within 30 days of end of treatment.

CONCLUSION

The addition of bevacizumab to ET in first-line treatment failed to produce a statistically significant increase in PFS or OS in women with HER2-negative/hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer.

Paclitaxel and bevacizumab with or without capecitabine as first-line treatment for HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

The addition of bevacizumab to paclitaxel or capecitabine has demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) as compared with chemotherapy alone in patients with HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer (LR/MBC). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of first-line therapy of paclitaxel and bevacizumab with or without capecitabine in patients with HER2-negative LR/MBC.

METHODS

In this multicentre, open-label, randomised phase II trial, women with HER2-negative LR/MBC were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to paclitaxel (90 mg/m2 intravenously [IV] on days 1, 8, and 15) and bevacizumab (10 mg/kg IV on days 1 and 15) every 4 weeks for six cycles, followed by bevacizumab (15 mg/kg IV on day 1) every 3 weeks (AT) or to paclitaxel (90 mg/m2 IV on days 1 and 8), bevacizumab (15 mg/kg IV on day 1) and capecitabine (825 mg/m2 orally twice daily on days 1–14) every 3 weeks for eight cycles, followed by bevacizumab and capecitabine at the same doses every 3 weeks (ATX). The primary end-point was investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary end-points included ORR, duration of response, overall survival (OS) and safety. Exploratory analyses were conducted to evaluate the impact of capecitabine on OS and to validate a novel prognostic model. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2006-006058-83.

FINDINGS

Median PFS was significantly longer in ATX as compared with AT (11.2 months versus 8.4 months; stratified hazard ratio (HR), 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.41–0.67; p < 0.0001). The ORR in ATX patients with measurable disease (n = 268) was higher than that in AT (69% versus 51%; p = 0.01). The median duration of response was 6.8 versus 5.4 months for, respectively, ATX and AT (p < 0.0001). Median OS was 24.2 months for ATX and 23.1 months for AT (p = 0.53). The increased rate of grade 3–4 adverse events related to the addition of capecitabine, being hand-foot syndrome (34% versus 0% for AT) and neutropenia (20% versus 12% for AT), generally did not preclude continuation of treatment. Exploratory analyses indicated that (1) patients receiving capecitabine at some line for treatment have significantly improved OS and (2) a prognostic model can classify patients into three risk groups associated with OS.

INTERPRETATION

In patients with HER2-negative LR/MBC, addition of capecitabine to paclitaxel and bevacizumab significantly improved PFS, ORR and response duration. This combination was reasonably well tolerated and may be considered of use as first-line treatment in rapidly progressive disease.

FUNDING

F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, the Netherlands.

Novel antiangiogenic drugs for the management of breast cancer: new approaches for an old issue?

Since angiogenesis plays an important role in cancer growth, infiltration and metastasis, many agents targeting this pathway have been developed over the last decade. Antiangiogenic drugs interfere with this process and may inhibit neoplastic growth or induce tumor dormancy by blocking the expanding network of newly formed capillaries. Despite the initial promise, targeting angiogenesis in breast cancer has not reached major breakthroughs. Nevertheless, the immunologic role of VEGF deserves to be further explored. We aim to describe the biological mechanisms which underlie the role of angiogenesis in breast cancer carcinogenesis, to depict its contribution to the metastatic process and to review the most important clinical trials testing angiogenic inhibitors in breast cancer, including monoclonal antibodies and novel small molecules.

Preoperative carboplatin-paclitaxel-bevacizumab in triple-negative breast cancer: final results of the phase II Ca.Pa.Be study

PURPOSE

The phase II Ca.Pa.Be trial evaluated preoperative carboplatin-paclitaxel in combination with bevacizumab in triple-negative breast cancer patients with previously untreated stage II-III disease. The primary aim was the assessment of the rate of pathologic complete response (pCR). Secondary aims included safety, breast-conserving surgery rate, and early response assessment with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI).

METHODS

Patients with hormone receptor-negative, HER-2-negative stage II-III breast cancer were eligible. Treatment included paclitaxel 80 mg/mq + carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 2 on days 1, 8, and 15, combined with bevacizumab 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 15 each 28 days, for 5 courses. At baseline, patients underwent breast DCE-MRI, followed by a single dose of bevacizumab 5 mg/kg (day -6). DCE-MRI was repeated before the initiation of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients were enrolled. Forty-three patients underwent surgery, and 22 (50 %) received breast-conserving surgery (conversion rate from mastectomy indication at baseline, 34.4 %). A pCR in breast and axillary lymph nodes occurred in 22 patients (50 %). Bevacizumab-associated adverse events (AEs) were mild: G1-2 hypertension and bleeding occurred in 6 (13.6 %) and 12 (27 %) patients, respectively. No G4 nonhematologic AEs were recorded. More frequent G3 AEs were liver function test abnormalities (6.8 %), and diarrhea and fatigue (4.5 % each). The only G3-4 hematologic toxicity was neutropenia (G3, 25 %; G4, 9 %). Early assessed DCE-MRI response parameters failed to predict pCR.

CONCLUSIONS

The neoadjuvant anthracycline-free combination of weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin plus bevacizumab is active and safe in triple-negative breast cancer, and the rate of pCR is comparable to that observed with more intensive carboplatin- and bevacizumab-containing regimens. Further investigation is warranted.

Triple-negative breast cancer: molecular subtypes and new targets for therapy

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a molecularly diverse disease. This heterogeneity has limited the success of targeted therapy in unselected patients to date. Recent transcriptional analysis has divided TNBC into transcriptionally similar subtypes that may have different sensitivity to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and targeted therapy. At present, chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment for early-stage and advanced TNBC; however, several actionable targets show promise in preclinical studies. Novel therapeutic strategies are currently being tested in phase II and phase III trials and will likely require patient stratification before therapy. Examples of these tailored approaches include poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors for BRCA-mutated TNBC, antiandrogens for androgen receptor (AR)-positive TNBC, fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors for TNBC harboring FGFR amplifications, and gamma-secretase inhibitors for TNBC with mutations in the PEST domain of NOTCH proteins. Treatment of TNBC based on molecular subsets represents a potential algorithm for the future. Well-designed clinical trials with incorporation of integrated biomarkers are necessary to advance the development of molecularly targeted therapy for different subgroups of TNBC.

Outcomes and endpoints in cancer trials: bridging the divide

Cancer is not one disease. Outcomes and endpoints in trials should incorporate the therapeutic modality and cancer type because these factors affect clinician and patient expectations. In this Review, we discuss how to: define the importance of endpoints; make endpoints understandable to patients; improve the use of patient-reported outcomes; advance endpoints to parallel changes in trial design and therapeutic interventions; and integrate these improvements into trials and practice. Endpoints need to reflect benefit to patients, and show that changes in tumour size either in absolute terms (response and progression) or relative to control (progression) are clinically relevant. Improvements in trial design should be accompanied by improvements in available endpoints. Stakeholders need to come together to determine the best approach for research that ensures accountability and optimises the use of available resources.

Phase III study on efficacy of taxanes plus bevacizumab with or without capecitabine as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer

Taxanes (T) plus bevacizumab (B) and taxanes plus capecitabine (X) showed better progression-free survival (PFS) compared to taxanes alone. Since life-threatening or highly symptomatic situations require polychemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer (MBC), combination of taxanes, capecitabine plus bevacizumab appears reasonable. TABEA (NCT01200212), a prospectively randomized, open-label, phase III trial compares taxanes (paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2) i.v. d1,8,15 q22 or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) i.v. d1 q22) plus bevacizumab (15 mg/kg i.v. d1 q22) with (TBX) or without capecitabine (TB, 1800 mg/m(2) daily d1-14 q22) as first-line therapy in MBC. Histologically confirmed HER2-negative, locally advanced or MBC patients with a chemotherapy indication and measurable or non-measurable target lesions (RECIST criteria) were included. Primary objective was PFS. Secondary objectives were response rate and duration, clinical benefit rate (complete response, partial response, stable disease ≥24 weeks), 3-year overall survival, PFS in patients ≥65 years, toxicity, and compliance. We assumed 10 and 13.3 months PFS for TB and TBX, respectively (HR = 0.75), requiring 432 patients and 386 events. Preplanned interim futility and safety analyses after 100 events in 202 patients showed no efficacy benefit and higher toxicity for TBX. Recruitment and therapy were stopped following advice from the IDMC. Final analysis revealed a HR 1.13 [95 %CI 0.806-1.59], P = 0.474, for PFS. Overall grade 3-4 adverse event (77.3 vs. 62.1 %, P = 0.014) and serious adverse event (40.0 vs. 30.2 %, P = 0.127) rates were higher for TBX after 26.1 months median follow-up, with six deaths for TBX versus 1 for TB. Adding capecitabine to TB cannot be recommended as first-line therapy in MBC.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy in breast cancer

Neo-angiogenesis is a critical process for tumor growth and invasion and has become a promising target in cancer therapy. This manuscript reviews three currently relevant anti-angiogenic agents targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor system: bevacizumab, ramucirumab and sorafenib. The efficacy of anti-angiogenic drugs in adjuvant therapy or as neo-adjuvant treatment has been estimated in clinical trials of advanced breast cancer. To date, the overall observed clinical improvements are unconvincing, and further research is required to demonstrate the efficacy of anti-angiogenic drugs in breast cancer treatments. The outcomes of anti-angiogenic therapy have been highly variable in terms of tumor response. New methods are needed to identify patients who will benefit from this regimen. The development of biomarkers and molecular profiling are relevant research areas that may strengthen the ability to focus anti-angiogenic therapy towards suitable patients, thereby increase the cost-effectiveness, currently estimated to be inadequate.

Selecting first-line bevacizumab-containing therapy for advanced breast cancer: TURANDOT risk factor analyses

BACKGROUND

The randomised phase III TURANDOT trial compared first-line bevacizumab-paclitaxel (BEV-PAC) vs bevacizumab-capecitabine (BEV-CAP) in HER2-negative locally recurrent/metastatic breast cancer (LR/mBC). The interim analysis revealed no difference in overall survival (OS; primary end point) between treatment arms; however, progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate were significantly superior with BEV-PAC. We sought to identify patient populations that may be most appropriately treated with one or other regimen.

METHODS

Patients with HER2-negative LR/mBC who had received no prior chemotherapy for advanced disease were randomised to either BEV-PAC (bevacizumab 10 mg kg(-1) days 1 and 15 plus paclitaxel 90 mg m(-2) days 1, 8 and 15 q4w) or BEV-CAP (bevacizumab 15 mg kg(-1) day 1 plus capecitabine 1000 mg m(-2) bid days 1-14 q3w). The study population was categorised into three cohorts: triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), high-risk hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and low-risk HR+. High- and low-risk HR+ were defined, respectively, as having ⩾2 vs ⩽1 of the following four risk factors: disease-free interval ⩽24 months; visceral metastases; prior (neo)adjuvant anthracycline and/or taxane; and metastases in ⩾3 organs.

RESULTS

The treatment effect on OS differed between cohorts. Non-significant OS trends favoured BEV-PAC in the TNBC cohort and BEV-CAP in the low-risk HR+ cohort. In all three cohorts, there was a non-significant PFS trend favouring BEV-PAC. Grade ⩾3 adverse events were consistently less common with BEV-CAP.

CONCLUSIONS

A simple risk factor index may help in selecting bevacizumab-containing regimens, balancing outcome, safety profile and patient preference. Final OS results are expected in 2015 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00600340).

Use of [(18)F]-FDG PET to predict response to neoadjuvant trastuzumab and docetaxel in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer, and addition of bevacizumab to neoadjuvant trastuzumab and docetaxel in [(18)F]-FDG PET-predicted non-responders (AVATAXHER): an open-label, randomised phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

An effective and well tolerated treatment is needed for patients with early HER2-positive breast cancer who do not achieve a pathological complete response after neoadjuvant therapy. The AVATAXHER trial aimed to predict pathological complete response early with the use of PET and to investigate whether the addition of bevacizumab could improve the proportion of patients achieving a pathological complete response in patients unlikely to respond to treatment.

METHODS

AVATAXHER was a randomised, open-label, non-comparative, multicentre phase 2 study that enrolled women (≥18 years of age) with early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer from 26 oncology centres in France. Patients initially received two cycles of neoadjuvant docetaxel (100 mg/m(2) intravenously every 3 weeks) plus trastuzumab (8 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks then 6 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks for the second course). Before the first and second cycles, [(18)F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET was done and the change in standardised uptake value was used to predict pathological complete response in each patient. Patients who were predicted to be responders on PET continued to receive standard therapy. Predicted non-responders were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive four cycles of docetaxel (100 mg/m(2) intravenously every 3 weeks) and trastuzumab (6 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks) plus bevacizumab (15 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks; group A) or continue on docetaxel plus trastuzumab alone (group B). Randomisation was open label and was done by an adaptive minimisation method. Although investigators and patients were aware of group assignment, the anatomo-pathologist in charge of centralised review of surgical samples and lymph nodes was masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was centrally assessed pathological complete response according to the Chevallier classification. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses in this Article were done on all patients who received at least one dose of treatment starting from cycle 3. Survival outcomes are not yet mature. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01142778) and EUDRACT (2009-013410-26).

FINDINGS

Between May 19, 2010, and Oct 1, 2012, 152 patients were recruited for the study. Ten patients were subsequently excluded, leaving 142 patients in the intention-to-treat population. Of these 142 patients, 69 were predicted by [(18)F]-FDG PET to be treatment responders after two cycles of treatment. The 73 predicted non-responders were randomly assigned to group A (n=48) and group B (n=25). Pathological complete responses were noted in 37 (53·6%, 95% CI 41·2-65·7) of the PET responders, 21 (43·8%, 29·5-58·8) of those in group A, and six (24·0%, 9·4-45·1) of those in group B. Incidences of grade 3-4 adverse events were similar in all three groups. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (four in PET responders, five in group A, and three in group B), febrile neutropenia (one, three, and one, respectively), and myalgia (four, none, and one, respectively). Overall, 24 serious adverse events were reported in 15 patients (PET responders: nine events in four [6%] of 67 patients; group A: 14 events in ten [21%] of 47 patients; group B: one event in one [4%] of 25 patients). No deaths occurred during the study.

INTERPRETATION

In patients with HER2-positive breast cancer, early PET assessment can help to identify non-responders to neoadjuvant docetaxel plus trastuzumab therapy. In these patients, the addition of bevacizumab can increase the proportion of patients achieving a pathological complete response. This potential new role for PET and the activity of bevacizumab in this setting need to be confirmed in larger phase 3 trials.

FUNDING

Roche France.