Neoadjuvant Treatment in Patients with HER2-Positive Breast Cancer

Neoadjuvant Treatment with HER2-Targeted Therapies in HER2-Positive Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer causes more aggressive progression of disease and poorer outcomes for patients. HER2-targeted medicines used as neoadjuvant systemic therapy could improve clinical outcomes in early-stage or locally advanced breast cancer patients. The purpose of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to identify the neoadjuvant anti-HER2 therapy with the best balance between efficacy and safety. We found that trastuzumab emtansine + pertuzumab + chemotherapy had a high pathologic complete response with a low risk of adverse events compared to other neoadjuvant anti-HER2 regimens, while the pertuzumab + trastuzumab + chemotherapy regimen showed the highest disease-free survival. However, further trial data on neoadjuvant regimens with trastuzumab emtansine are needed to confirm these findings.

Abstract

This systematic review aimed to identify neoadjuvant anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) therapies with the best balance between efficacy and safety. Methods: A network meta-analysis was applied to estimate the risk ratios along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for pathological complete response (pCR) and serious adverse events (SAE). A mixed-effect parametric survival analysis was conducted to assess the disease-free survival (DFS) between treatments. Results: Twenty-one RCTs with eleven regimens of neoadjuvant anti-HER2 therapy (i.e., trastuzumab + chemotherapy (TC), lapatinib + chemotherapy (LC), pertuzumab + chemotherapy (PC), pertuzumab + trastuzumab (PT), trastuzumab emtansine + pertuzumab (T-DM1P), pertuzumab + trastuzumab + chemotherapy (PTC), lapatinib + trastuzumab + chemotherapy (LTC), trastuzumab emtansine + lapatinib + chemotherapy (T-DM1LC), trastuzumab emtansine + pertuzumab + chemotherapy(T-DM1PC), PTC followed by T-DM1P (PTC_T-DM1P), and trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1)) and chemotherapy alone were included. When compared to TC, only PTC had a significantly higher DFS with a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 0.54 (0.32–0.91). The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) suggested that T-DM1LC (91.9%) was ranked first in achieving pCR, followed by the PTC_T-DM1P (90.5%), PTC (74.8%), and T-DM1PC (73.5%) regimens. For SAEs, LTC, LC, and T-DM1LC presented with the highest risks (SUCRA = 10.7%, 16.8%, and 20.8%), while PT (99.2%), T-DM1P (88%), and T-DM1 (83.9%) were the safest regimens. The T-DM1PC (73.5% vs. 71.6%), T-DM1 (70.5% vs. 83.9%), and PTC_T-DM1P (90.5% vs. 47.3%) regimens offered the optimal balance between pCR and SAE. Conclusions: The T-DM1PC, T-DM1, and PTC_T-DM1P regimens had the optimal balance between efficacy and safety, while DFS was highest for the PTC regimen. However, these results were based on a small number of studies, and additional RCTs assessing the efficacy of regimens with T-DM1 are still needed to confirm these findings.

Development and Validation of a Risk Score Model for Predicting the Cardiovascular Outcomes After Breast Cancer Therapy: The CHEMO-RADIAT Score

Background Cardiovascular disease is an important cause of mortality among survivors of breast cancer (BC). We developed a prediction model for major adverse cardiovascular events after BC therapy, which is based on conventional and BC treatment-related cardiovascular risk factors. Methods and Results The cohort of the study consisted of 1256 Asian female patients with BC from 4 medical centers in Korea and was randomized in a 1:1 ratio into the derivation and validation cohorts. The outcome measures comprised cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and transient ischemic attack/stroke. To correct overfitting, a penalized Cox proportional hazards regression was performed with a cross-validation approach. Number of cardiovascular diseases (myocardial infarction, peripheral artery disease, heart failure, and transient ischemic attack/stroke), number of baseline cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, age ≥60, body mass index ≥30 kg/m², estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min per 1.73 m², dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus), radiation to the left breast, and anthracycline dose per 100 mg/m² were included in the risk prediction model. The time-dependent C-indices at 3 and 7 years after BC diagnosis were 0.876 and 0.842, respectively, in the validation cohort. Conclusions A prediction score model, including BC treatment-related risk factors and conventional risk factors, was developed and validated to predict major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with BC. The CHEMO-RADIAT (congestive heart failure, hypertension, elderly, myocardial infarction/peripheral artery occlusive disease, obesity, renal failure, abnormal lipid profile, diabetes mellitus, irradiation of the left breast, anthracycline dose, and transient ischemic attack/stroke) score may provide overall cardiovascular risk stratification in survivors of BC and can assist physicians in multidisciplinary decision-making regarding the BC treatment.

Cardiovascular Disease and Breast Cancer: Where These Entities Intersect: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of mortality in women, yet many people perceive breast cancer to be the number one threat to women's health. CVD and breast cancer have several overlapping risk factors, such as obesity and smoking. Additionally, current breast cancer treatments can have a negative impact on cardiovascular health (eg, left ventricular dysfunction, accelerated CVD), and for women with pre-existing CVD, this might influence cancer treatment decisions by both the patient and the provider. Improvements in early detection and treatment of breast cancer have led to an increasing number of breast cancer survivors who are at risk of long-term cardiac complications from cancer treatments. For older women, CVD poses a greater mortality threat than breast cancer itself. This is the first scientific statement from the American Heart Association on CVD and breast cancer. This document will provide a comprehensive overview of the prevalence of these diseases, shared risk factors, the cardiotoxic effects of therapy, and the prevention and treatment of CVD in breast cancer patients.

Neoadjuvant systemic therapy in breast cancer: use and trends in radiotherapy practice

BACKGROUND

The use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (nast) in the treatment of breast cancer is increasing, and the role of adjuvant radiation therapy (rt) in that setting is uncertain. We sought to review and report the use of nast, its trends over time, and its relationship with the prescribing patterns of locoregional rt in a provincial cancer system.

METHODS

Patients with stages i-iii breast cancer diagnosed during 2007-2012 were identified using a provincial database. Patient, tumour, and treatment characteristics were extracted. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to assess associations with the use of nast. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression were used for survival analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 11,658 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 602 (5%) had received nast. Use of nast was more frequent in stage iii patients (53%) than in stages i and ii patients (2%). In clinically lymph-node positive patients, a pathology assessment was made approximately 50% of the time. Higher clinical tumour stage and increasing clinical nodal stage predicted for increasing use of nast and of nodal rt after nast, but pathologic nodal status after nast was not associated with use of nodal rt. A statistically significant survival difference was observed between patients in the nast and no-nast groups, but that significance disappeared in a multivariable Cox regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This population-based study demonstrated 5% use of nast for breast cancer. Most patients received nodal rt after nast, and nodal rt was not associated with pathologic stage after nast. Findings likely reflect the realities of clinical practice and show that reliance on clinical nodal staging results in outcomes similar to those reported in the literature.