1
|
Vliek S, Hilbers FS, van Werkhoven E, Mandjes I, Kessels R, Kleiterp S, Lips EH, Mulder L, Kayembe MT, Loo CE, Russell NS, Vrancken Peeters MJTFD, Holtkamp MJ, Schot M, Baars JW, Honkoop AH, Vulink AJE, Imholz ALT, Vrijaldenhoven S, van den Berkmortel FWPJ, Meerum Terwogt JM, Schrama JG, Kuijer P, Kroep JR, van der Padt-Pruijsten A, Wesseling J, Sonke GS, Gilhuijs KGA, Jager A, Nederlof P, Linn SC. High-dose alkylating chemotherapy in BRCA-altered triple-negative breast cancer: the randomized phase III NeoTN trial. NPJ Breast Cancer 2023; 9:75. [PMID: 37689749 PMCID: PMC10492793 DOI: 10.1038/s41523-023-00580-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2023] [Accepted: 08/30/2023] [Indexed: 09/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Exploratory analyses of high-dose alkylating chemotherapy trials have suggested that BRCA1 or BRCA2-pathway altered (BRCA-altered) breast cancer might be particularly sensitive to this type of treatment. In this study, patients with BRCA-altered tumors who had received three initial courses of dose-dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (ddAC), were randomized between a fourth ddAC course followed by high-dose carboplatin-thiotepa-cyclophosphamide or conventional chemotherapy (initially ddAC only or ddAC-capecitabine/decetaxel [CD] depending on MRI response, after amendment ddAC-carboplatin/paclitaxel [CP] for everyone). The primary endpoint was the neoadjuvant response index (NRI). Secondary endpoints included recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). In total, 122 patients were randomized. No difference in NRI-score distribution (p = 0.41) was found. A statistically non-significant RFS difference was found (HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.23-1.25; p = 0.15). Exploratory RFS analyses showed benefit in stage III (n = 35; HR 0.16; 95% CI 0.03-0.75), but not stage II (n = 86; HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.30-3.30) patients. For stage III, 4-year RFS was 46% (95% CI 24-87%), 71% (95% CI 48-100%) and 88% (95% CI 74-100%), for ddAC/ddAC-CD, ddAC-CP and high-dose chemotherapy, respectively. No significant differences were found between high-dose and conventional chemotherapy in stage II-III, triple-negative, BRCA-altered breast cancer patients. Further research is needed to establish if there are patients with stage III, triple negative BRCA-altered breast cancer for whom outcomes can be improved with high-dose alkylating chemotherapy or whether the current standard neoadjuvant therapy including carboplatin and an immune checkpoint inhibitor is sufficient. Trial Registration: NCT01057069.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sonja Vliek
- Department of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Florentine S Hilbers
- Department of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Erik van Werkhoven
- Department of Biometrics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- HOVON Data Center, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ingrid Mandjes
- Department of Biometrics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Rob Kessels
- Department of Biometrics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sieta Kleiterp
- Department of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Esther H Lips
- Department of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Lennart Mulder
- Department of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mutamba T Kayembe
- Department of Biometrics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Claudette E Loo
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Nicola S Russell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marie-Jeanne T F D Vrancken Peeters
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marjo J Holtkamp
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Margaret Schot
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joke W Baars
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Aafke H Honkoop
- Department of Internal Medicine, Isala Klinieken, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Annelie J E Vulink
- Division of Medical Oncology, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Alex L T Imholz
- Department of Internal Medicine, Deventer Ziekenhuis, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Jolanda G Schrama
- Department of Internal Medicine, Spaarne Gasthuis, Hoofddorp, The Netherlands
| | - Philomeen Kuijer
- Department of Internal Medicine, Spaarne Gasthuis, Hoofddorp, The Netherlands
| | - Judith R Kroep
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Jelle Wesseling
- Department of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Gabe S Sonke
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Kenneth G A Gilhuijs
- Image Sciences Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Agnes Jager
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Petra Nederlof
- Department of Molecular diagnostics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sabine C Linn
- Department of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Comprehensive characterization of pre- and post-treatment samples of breast cancer reveal potential mechanisms of chemotherapy resistance. NPJ Breast Cancer 2022; 8:60. [PMID: 35523804 PMCID: PMC9076915 DOI: 10.1038/s41523-022-00428-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2021] [Accepted: 04/12/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
When locally advanced breast cancer is treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the recurrence risk is significantly higher if no complete pathologic response is achieved. Identification of the underlying resistance mechanisms is essential to select treatments with maximal efficacy and minimal toxicity. Here we employed gene expression profiles derived from 317 HER2-negative treatment-naïve breast cancer biopsies of patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy, deep whole exome, and RNA-sequencing profiles of 22 matched pre- and post-treatment tumors, and treatment outcome data to identify biomarkers of response and resistance mechanisms. Molecular profiling of treatment-naïve breast cancer samples revealed that expression levels of proliferation, immune response, and extracellular matrix (ECM) organization combined predict response to chemotherapy. Triple negative patients with high proliferation, high immune response and low ECM expression had a significantly better treatment response and survival benefit (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.10–0.85; p = 0.02), while in ER+ patients the opposite was seen (HR 4.73, 95% CI 1.51–14.8; p = 0.008). The characterization of paired pre-and post-treatment samples revealed that aberrations of known cancer genes were either only present in the pre-treatment sample (CDKN1B) or in the post-treatment sample (TP53, APC, CTNNB1). Proliferation-associated genes were frequently down-regulated in post-treatment ER+ tumors, but not in triple negative tumors. Genes involved in ECM were upregulated in the majority of post-chemotherapy samples. Genomic and transcriptomic differences between pre- and post-chemotherapy samples are common and may reveal potential mechanisms of therapy resistance. Our results show a wide range of distinct, but related mechanisms, with a prominent role for proliferation- and ECM-related genes.
Collapse
|
3
|
Steenbruggen TG, van Seijen M, Janssen LM, van Ramshorst MS, van Werkhoven E, Vrancken Peeters MJTDF, Wesseling J, Lips EH, Sonke GS. Prognostic Value of Residual Disease after Neoadjuvant Therapy in HER2-Positive Breast Cancer Evaluated by Residual Cancer Burden, Neoadjuvant Response Index, and Neo-Bioscore. Clin Cancer Res 2019; 25:4985-4992. [PMID: 31076546 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-19-0560] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2019] [Revised: 03/29/2019] [Accepted: 05/06/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE In breast cancer, pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) is associated with favorable long-term outcome. Trastuzumab emtansine as additional adjuvant therapy improves recurrence-free survival of patients with HER2-positive breast cancer without pCR, but it is uncertain whether all patients without pCR need additional therapy. We evaluated the prognostic value of residual disease after trastuzumab-based NST in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer using Residual Cancer Burden (RCB), Neoadjuvant Response Index (NRI), and Neo-Bioscore. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN We included patients with stage II or III HER2-positive breast cancer treated with trastuzumab-based NST and surgery at The Netherlands Cancer Institute between 2004 and 2016. RCB, NRI, and Neo-Bioscore were determined. Primary endpoint was 5-year recurrence-free interval (RFI). A 3% difference compared with the pCR group was considered acceptable as noninferiority margin on the 5-year RFI estimate, based on a proportional hazards model, and its lower 95% confidence boundary. RESULTS A total of 283 women were included. Median follow-up was 67 months (interquartile range 44-100). A total of 157 patients (56%) with pCR (breast and axilla) had a 5-year RFI of 92% (95% CI, 88-97); patients without pCR had a 5-year RFI of 80% (95% CI, 72-88). Patients with an RCB = 1 (N = 40, 15%), an NRI score between 0.75 and 0.99 (N = 30, 11%), or a Neo-Bioscore of 0 to 1 (without pCR; N = 28, 11%) have a 5-year RFI that falls within a predefined noninferiority margin of 3% compared with patients with pCR. CONCLUSIONS The RCB, NRI, and Neo-Bioscore can identify patients with HER2-positive breast cancer with minimal residual disease (i.e., RCB = 1, NRI ≥ 0.75, or Neo-Bioscore = 0-1) after NST who have similar 5-year RFI compared with patients with pCR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tessa G Steenbruggen
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maartje van Seijen
- Department of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Liselore M Janssen
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mette S van Ramshorst
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Erik van Werkhoven
- Department of Biometrics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Jelle Wesseling
- Department of Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Esther H Lips
- Department of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Gabe S Sonke
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Cao L, Yao GY, Liu MF, Chen LJ, Hu XL, Ye CS. Neoadjuvant Bevacizumab plus Chemotherapy versus Chemotherapy Alone to Treat Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0145442. [PMID: 26717149 PMCID: PMC4699216 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145442] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/02/2015] [Accepted: 12/03/2015] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Results from previous randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating whether the addition of bevacizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) could statistically significantly increase the pathological complete response (pCR) and to identify which subgroup would benefit most from such regimens have produced conflicting results. This meta-analysis was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone in the neoadjuvant setting. Methods A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library was performed to identify eligible studies. The primary endpoint of interest was pCR. The secondary endpoints were clinical complete rate (cCR), surgery rate, breast-conserving surgery (BCS) rate, and toxicity. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software version 5.3. Results Nine RCTs matched the selection criteria, yielding a total of 4967 patients (bevacizumab plus chemotherapy: 50.1%, chemotherapy alone: 49.9%). The results of this meta-analysis demonstrated that the addition of bevacizumab to NAC significantly increased the pCR rate (odds ratio [OR] = 1.34 [1.18–1.54]; P < 0.0001) compared with chemotherapy alone. Subgroup analysis showed that the effect of bevacizumab was more pronounced in patients with HER2-negative cancer (OR = 1.34 [1.17–1.54]; P < 0.0001) compared with HER2-positive cancer (OR = 1.69 [0.90–3.20]; P = 0.11). Similarly, in patients with HER2-negative cancer, the effect of bevacizumab was also more pronounced in patients with HR-negative cancer (OR = 1.38 [1.09–1.74]; P = 0.007) compared with HR-positive cancer (OR = 1.36 [0.78–2.35]; P = 0.27). No significant differences were observed between the groups with respect to cCR, surgery rate, or BCS rate. Additionally bevacizumab was associated with a higher incidence of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and hand–foot syndrome. Conclusions Higher proportions of patients achieved pCR when bevacizumab was added to NAC compared with when they received chemotherapy alone; acceptable toxicities were also found. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that patients with histologically confirmed HER2-negative and HR-negative breast cancer benefited the most.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Li Cao
- Breast Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Guang-yu Yao
- Breast Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Min-feng Liu
- Breast Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Lu-jia Chen
- Breast Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Xiao-lei Hu
- Breast Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Chang-sheng Ye
- Breast Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|