1
|
McIntosh SA, Mactier M, Fairhurst K, Gath J, Stobart H, Potter S. Understanding Patient Experiences to Inform Future Studies to Optimize Personalization of Treatment for Early Breast Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2024; 31:5870-5879. [PMID: 38773037 PMCID: PMC11300560 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-15459-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2024] [Accepted: 04/28/2024] [Indexed: 05/23/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breast cancer treatment is multimodal, but not all patients benefit from each treatment, and many experience morbidities significantly impacting quality of life. There is increasing interest in tailoring breast cancer treatments to optimize oncological outcomes and reduce treatment burden, but it is vital that future trials focus on treatments that most impact patients. This study was designed to explore patient experiences of treatment to inform future research. METHODS An online survey was co-developed with patient advocates to explore respondents' experiences of breast cancer treatment. Questions included simple demographics, treatments received, and views regarding omitting treatments if that is deemed safe. The survey was circulated via social media and patient advocacy groups. Responses were summarized by using simple statistics; free text was analyzed thematically. RESULTS Of the 235 participants completing the survey, 194 (82.6%) would choose to omit a specific treatment if safe to do so. The most commonly selected treatments were chemotherapy (n = 69, 35.6%) and endocrine therapy (n = 61, 31.4%) mainly due to side effects. Fewer respondents would choose to omit surgery (n = 40, 20.6%) or radiotherapy (n = 20, 10.3%). Several women commented that survival was their "absolute priority" and that high-quality evidence to support the safety of reducing treatment would be essential. CONCLUSIONS Patients with breast cancer are individuals who may wish to optimize different components of their treatment. A portfolio of studies co-designed with patients is needed to establish an evidence base for greater treatment personalization with studies focused on reducing avoidable chemotherapy and endocrine therapy a priority.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stuart A McIntosh
- Patrick G. Johnston Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Mhairi Mactier
- General Surgery Department, Golden Jubilee National Hospital, Glasgow, UK
| | - Katherine Fairhurst
- Centre for Surgical Research, Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Jacqui Gath
- Independent Cancer Patients' Voice, London, UK
| | | | - Shelley Potter
- Bristol Surgical and Perioperative Care Complex Intervention Collaboration, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK.
- Bristol Breast Care Centre, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Cao LM, Zhong NN, Chen Y, Li ZZ, Wang GR, Xiao Y, Liu XH, Jia J, Liu B, Bu LL. Less is more: Exploring neoadjuvant immunotherapy as a de-escalation strategy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma treatment. Cancer Lett 2024; 598:217095. [PMID: 38964728 DOI: 10.1016/j.canlet.2024.217095] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2024] [Revised: 06/15/2024] [Accepted: 06/28/2024] [Indexed: 07/06/2024]
Abstract
Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) constitutes a significant global cancer burden, given its high prevalence and associated mortality. Despite substantial progress in survival rates due to the enhanced multidisciplinary approach to treatment, these methods often lead to severe tissue damage, compromised function, and potential toxicity. Thus, there is an imperative need for novel, effective, and minimally damaging treatment modalities. Neoadjuvant treatment, an emerging therapeutic strategy, is designed to reduce tumor size and curtail distant metastasis prior to definitive intervention. Currently, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has optimized the treatment approach for a subset of HNSCC patients, yet it has not produced a noticeable enhancement in overall survival (OS). In the contemporary cancer therapeutics landscape, immunotherapy is gaining traction at an accelerated pace. Notably, neoadjuvant immunotherapy (NAIT) has shown promising radiological and pathological responses, coupled with encouraging efficacy in several clinical trials. This potentially paves the way for a myriad of possibilities in treatment de-escalation of HNSCC, which warrants further exploration. This paper reviews the existing strategies and efficacies of neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), along with potential de-escalation strategies. Furthermore, the challenges encountered in the context of the de-escalation strategies of NAIT are explored. The aim is to inform future research directions that strive to improve the quality of life (QoL) for patients battling HNSCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lei-Ming Cao
- State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Somatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China
| | - Nian-Nian Zhong
- State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Somatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China
| | - Yang Chen
- State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Somatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China
| | - Zi-Zhan Li
- State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Somatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China
| | - Guang-Rui Wang
- State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Somatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China
| | - Yao Xiao
- State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Somatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China
| | - Xuan-Hao Liu
- State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Somatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China
| | - Jun Jia
- State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Somatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China; Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Head Neck Oncology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China.
| | - Bing Liu
- State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Somatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China; Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Head Neck Oncology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China.
| | - Lin-Lin Bu
- State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Somatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China; Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Head Neck Oncology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079, China.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Caballero C, Lundon DJ, Vasileva-Slaveva M, Montagna G, Bonci EA, Brandl A, Smith H, Kok JHH, Holmberg CJ, Sayyed R, Santrac N, Suppan I, Kaul P, Vassos N, Lorenzon L, Murphy M, Ceelen W, de Azambuja E, McIntosh SA, Rubio IT. A multidisciplinary team and patient perspective on omission of surgery after neoadjuvant systemic therapy for early breast cancer: A European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO) Research Academy survey. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY 2024; 50:108585. [PMID: 39146663 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2024.108585] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2023] [Revised: 06/24/2024] [Accepted: 08/04/2024] [Indexed: 08/17/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Surgical de-escalation aims to reduce morbidity without compromising oncological outcomes. Trials to de-escalate breast cancer (BC) surgery among exceptional responders after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) are ongoing. Combined patient and clinician insights on this strategy are unknown. METHODS The European Society of Surgical Oncology Young Surgeons Alumni Club (EYSAC) performed an online survey to evaluate the perspective of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) on omission of surgery ("no surgery") following complete response to NST for early BC. The aim was to identify MDT considerations and perceived barriers to omission of BC surgery. Patient insights were obtained through a focused group discussion (FGD) with four members of the patient advocacy group, Guiding Researchers and Advocates to Scientific Partnerships (GRASP). RESULTS The MDT survey had 248 responses, with 229 included for analysis. Criteria for a "no surgery" approach included: patient's tumor and nodal status before (39.7 %) and after (45.9 %) NST and comorbidities (44.3 %). The majority chose standard surgery for hypothetical cases with a complete response to NST. Barriers for implementation were lack of definitive trials (55.9 %), "no surgery" not being discussed in MDTs (28.8 %) and lack of essential diagnostic or therapeutic options (24 %). Patients expressed communication gaps about BC surgery, lack of trust regarding accuracy of imaging, fear of regret and psychosocial burden of choosing less extensive surgery. CONCLUSIONS Before accepting "no surgery" after complete response to NST, MDTs and patients need level 1 evidence from clinical trials, access to standard diagnostic modalities and treatments. Patient's fear of regretting less surgery need to be acknowledged and addressed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Dara J Lundon
- Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospitals, New York, USA
| | | | - Giacomo Montagna
- Breast Surgery Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Eduard-Alexandru Bonci
- Breast Unit, Champalimaud Clinical Centre, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal; Surgical Oncology and Gynecologic Oncology Department, "Iuliu Hatieganu" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Andreas Brandl
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Henry Smith
- Abdominal Center K, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
| | | | - Carl-Jacob Holmberg
- Department of Surgery, Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Raza Sayyed
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Patel Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan
| | - Nada Santrac
- Surgical Oncology Clinic, Institute for Oncology and Radiology of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia
| | - Ina Suppan
- Breast Center, Department of Gynaecology, Rottal-Inn-Kliniken Eggenfelden, Germany
| | - Pallvi Kaul
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Shri Guru Ram Rai Institute of Medical and Health Sciences, Dehradun, India
| | - Nikolaos Vassos
- Division of Surgical Oncology and Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Laura Lorenzon
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Marlena Murphy
- Guiding Researchers and Advocates to Scientific Partnerships, USA
| | - Wim Ceelen
- Department of GI Surgery, Ghent University Hospital and Cancer Research Institute Ghent (CRIG), Belgium
| | - Evandro de Azambuja
- Institut Jules Bordet, l'Université Libre de Bruxelles (U.L.B), Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles (H.U.B), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Stuart A McIntosh
- Patrick G Johnston Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Isabel T Rubio
- Breast Surgical Oncology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Merrick S, Rush HL, Daniels S, Fielding A, Deveson Kell S, Pickering L, Langley RE, South A, Gilbert DC. Hit it hard: qualitative patient perspectives on the optimisation of immune checkpoint inhibition. Br J Cancer 2024; 131:515-523. [PMID: 38886555 PMCID: PMC7616340 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-024-02756-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2024] [Revised: 05/29/2024] [Accepted: 06/06/2024] [Indexed: 06/20/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Immune checkpoint inhibitors have transformed the treatment landscape of many cancers, including melanoma and renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Randomised trials are evaluating outcomes from reduced ICI treatment schedules with the aim of improving quality of life, tolerability, and cost-effectiveness. This study aims to provide insight into patient and carer's perspectives of these trials. METHODS Seven focus groups were conducted with 31 people with stage IV melanoma, RCC, or caregivers for people receiving ICI. Transcripts were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS Three themes were generated: 1) "Treatment and clinic visits provide reassurance": reducing hospital visits may not improve quality of life. 2) "Assessment of personal risk versus benefit": the decision to participate in an ICI optimisation trial is influenced by treatment response, experience of toxicity and perceived logistical benefits based on the individual's circumstances. 3) "Pre-existing experience and beliefs about how treatment and trials work", including the belief that more treatment is better, influence views around ICI optimisation trials. CONCLUSION This study provides insight into recruitment challenges and recommends strategies to enhance recruitment for ongoing ICI optimisation trials. These findings will influence the design of future ICI optimisation trials ensuring they are acceptable to patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie Merrick
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, 2nd Floor 90 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6LJ, UK
| | - Hannah L Rush
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, 2nd Floor 90 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6LJ, UK
- Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, Great Maze Pond, London, SE1 9RT, UK
| | - Susanna Daniels
- Melanoma Focus, Salisbury House, Station Road, Cambridge, CB1 2LA, UK
| | - Alison Fielding
- Action Kidney Cancer, 11th Floor, 3 Piccadilly Place, Manchester, M1 3BN, UK
| | - Sharon Deveson Kell
- Action Kidney Cancer, 11th Floor, 3 Piccadilly Place, Manchester, M1 3BN, UK
| | - Lisa Pickering
- Royal Marsden Hospital, 203 Fulham Rd, Chelsea, London, SW3 6JJ, UK
| | - Ruth E Langley
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, 2nd Floor 90 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6LJ, UK
| | - Annabelle South
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, 2nd Floor 90 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6LJ, UK.
| | - Duncan C Gilbert
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, 2nd Floor 90 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6LJ, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Pan K, Nelson RA, Chlebowski RT, Piela R, Mullooly M, Simon MS, Rohan TE, Wactawski-Wende J, Manson JE, Mortimer JE, Lane D, Kruper L. Ductal carcinoma in situ and cause-specific mortality among younger and older postmenopausal women: the Women's Health Initiative. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2024; 207:65-79. [PMID: 38730133 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-024-07327-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2023] [Accepted: 03/28/2024] [Indexed: 05/12/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Whether DCIS is associated with higher breast cancer-specific and all-cause mortality is unclear with few studies in older women. Therefore, we examined DCIS and breast cancer-specific, cardiovascular (CVD)-specific, and all-cause mortality among Women's Health Initiative (WHI) Clinical Trial participants overall and by age (< 70 versus ≥ 70 years). METHODS Of 68,132 WHI participants, included were 781 postmenopausal women with incident DCIS and 781 matched controls. Serial screening mammography was mandated with high adherence. DCIS cases were confirmed by central medical record review. Adjusted multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Kaplan Meier (KM) plots were used to assess 10-year and 20-year mortality rates. RESULTS After 20.3 years total, and 13.2 years median post-diagnosis follow-up, compared to controls, DCIS was associated with higher breast cancer-specific mortality (HR 3.29; CI = 1.32-8.22, P = 0.01). The absolute difference in 20-year breast cancer mortality was 1.2% without DCIS and 3.4% after DCIS, log-rank P = 0.026. Findings were similar by age (< 70 versus ≥ 70 years) with no interaction (P interaction = 0.80). Incident DCIS was not associated with CVD-specific mortality (HR 0.77; CI-0.54-1.09, P = 0.14) or with all-cause mortality (HR 0.96; CI = 0.80-1.16, P = 0.68) with similar findings by age. CONCLUSIONS In postmenopausal women, incident DCIS was associated with over three-fold higher breast cancer-specific mortality, with similar findings in younger and older postmenopausal women. These finding suggest caution in using age to adjust DCIS clinical management or research strategies.
Collapse
Grants
- N01WH22110, 24152, 32100-2, 32105-6, 32108-9, 32111-13, 32115, 32118-32119, 32122, 42107-26, 42129-32 NHLBI NIH HHS
- N01WH22110, 24152, 32100-2, 32105-6, 32108-9, 32111-13, 32115, 32118-32119, 32122, 42107-26, 42129-32 NHLBI NIH HHS
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathy Pan
- The Lundquist Institute, 1124 W. Carson St, Torrance, CA, USA
| | | | | | - Rita Piela
- The Lundquist Institute, 1124 W. Carson St, Torrance, CA, USA
| | - Maeve Mullooly
- The Lundquist Institute, 1124 W. Carson St, Torrance, CA, USA
| | - Michael S Simon
- The Lundquist Institute, 1124 W. Carson St, Torrance, CA, USA
| | - Thomas E Rohan
- The Lundquist Institute, 1124 W. Carson St, Torrance, CA, USA
| | | | - JoAnn E Manson
- The Lundquist Institute, 1124 W. Carson St, Torrance, CA, USA
| | | | - Dorothy Lane
- The Lundquist Institute, 1124 W. Carson St, Torrance, CA, USA
| | - Laura Kruper
- The Lundquist Institute, 1124 W. Carson St, Torrance, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Valenza C, Trapani D, Loibl S, Chia SKL, Burstein HJ, Curigliano G. Optimizing Postneoadjuvant Treatment in Patients With Early Breast Cancer Achieving Pathologic Complete Response. J Clin Oncol 2024; 42:2372-2376. [PMID: 38569132 DOI: 10.1200/jco.23.01935] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2023] [Revised: 12/03/2023] [Accepted: 01/22/2024] [Indexed: 04/05/2024] Open
Abstract
pCR should be integrated with other prognostic factors to optimize postneoadjuvant treatments in BC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carmine Valenza
- Division of New Drugs and Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Dario Trapani
- Division of New Drugs and Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Sibylle Loibl
- Center for Hematology and Oncology Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany
| | | | - Harold J Burstein
- Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
- Breast Oncology Program, Dana-Farber Brigham Cancer Center, Boston, MA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Giuseppe Curigliano
- Division of New Drugs and Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Loibl S, André F, Bachelot T, Barrios CH, Bergh J, Burstein HJ, Cardoso MJ, Carey LA, Dawood S, Del Mastro L, Denkert C, Fallenberg EM, Francis PA, Gamal-Eldin H, Gelmon K, Geyer CE, Gnant M, Guarneri V, Gupta S, Kim SB, Krug D, Martin M, Meattini I, Morrow M, Janni W, Paluch-Shimon S, Partridge A, Poortmans P, Pusztai L, Regan MM, Sparano J, Spanic T, Swain S, Tjulandin S, Toi M, Trapani D, Tutt A, Xu B, Curigliano G, Harbeck N. Early breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2024; 35:159-182. [PMID: 38101773 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2023.11.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 43.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2023] [Revised: 11/21/2023] [Accepted: 11/28/2023] [Indexed: 12/17/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- S Loibl
- GBG Forschungs GmbH, Neu-Isenburg; Centre for Haematology and Oncology, Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - F André
- Breast Cancer Unit, Medical Oncology Department, Gustave Roussy, Cancer Campus, Villejuif
| | - T Bachelot
- Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France
| | - C H Barrios
- Oncology Department, Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group and Oncoclínicas, Porto Alegre, Brazil
| | - J Bergh
- Department of Oncology-Pathology, Bioclinicum, Karolinska Institutet and Breast Cancer Centre, Karolinska Comprehensive Cancer Centre and University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - H J Burstein
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - M J Cardoso
- Breast Unit, Champalimaud Foundation, Champalimaud Cancer Centre, Lisbon; Faculty of Medicine, Lisbon University, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - L A Carey
- Division of Medical Oncology, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, USA
| | - S Dawood
- Department of Oncology, Mediclinic City Hospital, Dubai, UAE
| | - L Del Mastro
- Medical Oncology Clinic, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa; Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialities, School of Medicine, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy
| | - C Denkert
- Institute of Pathology, Philipps-University Marburg and University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Marburg
| | - E M Fallenberg
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine & Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - P A Francis
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
| | - H Gamal-Eldin
- Department of Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
| | - K Gelmon
- Department of Medical Oncology, British Columbia Cancer, Vancouver, Canada
| | - C E Geyer
- Department of Internal Medicine, Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA
| | - M Gnant
- Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - V Guarneri
- Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova, Padova; Oncology 2 Unit, Istituto Oncologico Veneto IOV IRCCS, Padova, Italy
| | - S Gupta
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - S B Kim
- Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - D Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - M Martin
- Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Maranon, Universidad Complutense, GEICAM, Madrid, Spain
| | - I Meattini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence; Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences 'M. Serio', University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - M Morrow
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - W Janni
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - S Paluch-Shimon
- Sharett Institute of Oncology Department, Hadassah University Hospital & Faculty of Medicine Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - A Partridge
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - P Poortmans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Netwerk, Antwerp; Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - L Pusztai
- Yale Cancer Center, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven
| | - M M Regan
- Division of Biostatistics, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - J Sparano
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA
| | - T Spanic
- Europa Donna Slovenia, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - S Swain
- Medicine Department, Georgetown University Medical Centre and MedStar Health, Washington, USA
| | - S Tjulandin
- N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Centre of Oncology, Moscow, Russia
| | - M Toi
- Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Disease Center, Komagome Hospital, Bunkyo-ku, Japan
| | - D Trapani
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - A Tutt
- Breast Cancer Research Division, The Institute of Cancer Research, London; Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Division of Cancer Studies, Kings College London, London, UK
| | - B Xu
- Department of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - G Curigliano
- Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies Division, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, IRCCS, Milan; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - N Harbeck
- Breast Centre, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology and Comprehensive Cancer Centre Munich, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Yang ZJ, Xin F, Chen ZJ, Yu Y, Wang X, Cao XC. Real-world data on neoadjuvant chemotherapy with dual-anti HER2 therapy in HER2 positive breast cancer. BMC Cancer 2024; 24:134. [PMID: 38273267 PMCID: PMC10811850 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-11871-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2023] [Accepted: 01/12/2024] [Indexed: 01/27/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with dual-targeted therapy is the standard treatment for human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer. Although the dual-targeted therapy has significantly improved the pathological complete response (pCR) rate, further investigation is needed to identify biomarkers that predict the response to neoadjuvant therapy. METHODS This retrospective study analyzed 353 patients with HER2-positive breast invasive ductal carcinoma. The correlation between clinicopathological factors and pCR rate was evaluated. A nomogram was constructed based on the results of the multivariate logistic regression analysis to predict the probability of pCR. RESULTS The breast pCR (b-pCR) rate was 56.1% (198/353) and the total pCR (t-pCR) rate was 52.7% (186/353). Multivariate analysis identified ER status, PR status, HER2 status, Ki-67 index, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens as independent indicators for both b-pCR and t-pCR. The nomogram had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.68-0.78). According to the nomogram, the t- pCR rate was highest in the ER-PR- HER2-positive patients (131/208) and lowest in the ER + PR + HER2-positive patients (19/73). The subgroup analyses showed that there was no significant difference in pCR rate among the neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens in ER positive, PR positive, HER2 IHC 2 + , Ki67 index < 30% population. However, for ER-PR-HER2-positive patients, the neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen has a great influence on the pCR rates. CONCLUSIONS Patients with ER-negative, PR-negative, HER2 3 + and high KI-67 index were more likely to achieve pCR. THP may be used as an alternative to AC-THP or TCbHP in selected HER2-positive patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zheng-Jun Yang
- The First Department of Breast Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Huan-Hu-Xi Road, He-Xi District, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University, Ministry of Education, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, 300060, China
| | - Fei Xin
- The First Department of Breast Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Huan-Hu-Xi Road, He-Xi District, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University, Ministry of Education, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, 300060, China
| | - Zu-Jin Chen
- The First Department of Breast Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Huan-Hu-Xi Road, He-Xi District, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University, Ministry of Education, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, 300060, China
| | - Yue Yu
- The First Department of Breast Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Huan-Hu-Xi Road, He-Xi District, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University, Ministry of Education, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, 300060, China
| | - Xin Wang
- The First Department of Breast Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Huan-Hu-Xi Road, He-Xi District, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University, Ministry of Education, Tianjin, 300060, China
- Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, 300060, China
| | - Xu-Chen Cao
- The First Department of Breast Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Huan-Hu-Xi Road, He-Xi District, Tianjin, 300060, China.
- Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, 300060, China.
- Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University, Ministry of Education, Tianjin, 300060, China.
- Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, 300060, China.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Cazzaniga ME, Ademuyiwa F, Petit T, Tio J, Generali D, Ciruelos EM, Califaretti N, Poirier B, Ardizzoia A, Hoenig A, Lex B, Mouret-Reynier MA, Giesecke D, Isambert N, Masetti R, Pitre L, Wrobel D, Augereau P, Milani M, Rask S, Solbach C, Pritzker L, Noubir S, Parissenti A, Trudeau ME. Low RNA disruption during neoadjuvant chemotherapy predicts pathologic complete response absence in patients with breast cancer. JNCI Cancer Spectr 2024; 8:pkad107. [PMID: 38113421 PMCID: PMC10765091 DOI: 10.1093/jncics/pkad107] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2023] [Revised: 11/20/2023] [Accepted: 12/11/2023] [Indexed: 12/21/2023] Open
Abstract
In previously reported retrospective studies, high tumor RNA disruption during neoadjuvant chemotherapy predicted for post-treatment pathologic complete response (pCR) and improved disease-free survival at definitive surgery for primary early breast cancer. The BREVITY (Breast Cancer Response Evaluation for Individualized Therapy) prospective clinical trial (NCT03524430) seeks to validate these prior findings. Here we report training set (Phase I) findings, including determination of RNA disruption index (RDI) cut points for outcome prediction in the subsequent validation set (Phase II; 454 patients). In 80 patients of the training set, maximum tumor RDI values for biopsies obtained during neoadjuvant chemotherapy were significantly higher in pCR responders than in patients without pCR post-treatment (P = .008). Moreover, maximum tumor RDI values ≤3.7 during treatment predicted for a lack of pCR at surgery (negative predictive value = 93.3%). These findings support the prospect that on-treatment tumor RNA disruption assessments may effectively predict post-surgery outcome, possibly permitting treatment optimization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marina Elena Cazzaniga
- Phase 1 Research Unit, IRCCS San Gerardo dei Tintori, Monza, MB, Italy
- School of Medicine and Surgery, Milano Bicocca University, Monza, MB, Italy
| | - Foluso Ademuyiwa
- Division of Medical Oncology, Washington University, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Thierry Petit
- Institut Cancérologie Strasbourg Europe, Strasbourg, France
| | - Joke Tio
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - Daniele Generali
- Breast Cancer Unit, ASST of Cremona and Department of Life Sciences, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy
| | - Eva M Ciruelos
- Medical Oncology Department, Breast Cancer Unit, University Hospital, 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | | | | | | | - Arnd Hoenig
- Breast Center, Women's Hospital, Marienhaus Hospital, Mainz, Germany
| | - Benno Lex
- Klinikum Kulmbach—Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Kulmbach, Germany
| | | | - Dagmar Giesecke
- Hochtaunus-Kliniken Bad Homburg, Women’s Hospital, Bad Homburg, Germany
| | - Nicolas Isambert
- Pôle Régional de Cancérologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Poitiers, Poitiers, France
| | | | | | - Denise Wrobel
- Sozialstiftung Bamberg Klinikum Frauenklinik, Bamberg, Germany
| | | | - Manuela Milani
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - Sara Rask
- Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, Barrie, ON, Canada
| | - Christine Solbach
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Frankfurt, Germany
| | | | | | - Amadeo Parissenti
- Policlinico Gemelli, Rome, Italy
- Rna Diagnostics, Inc, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Dayimu A, Gupta A, Matin RN, Nobes J, Board R, Payne M, Rao A, Fusi A, Danson S, Eccles B, Carser J, Brown CO, Steven N, Bhattacharyya M, Brown E, Gonzalez M, Highley M, Pickering L, Kumar S, Waterston A, Burghel G, Demain L, Baker E, Wulff J, Qian W, Twelves S, Middleton M, Corrie P. A randomised phase 2 study of intermittent versus continuous dosing of dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with BRAF V600 mutant advanced melanoma (INTERIM). Eur J Cancer 2024; 196:113455. [PMID: 38029480 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2023.113455] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2023] [Revised: 11/07/2023] [Accepted: 11/15/2023] [Indexed: 12/01/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND BRAF+MEK inhibitors extend life expectancy of patients with BRAFV600 mutant advanced melanoma. Acquired resistance limits duration of benefit, but preclinical and case studies suggest intermittent dosing could overcome this limitation. INTERIM was a phase 2 trial evaluating an intermittent dosing regimen. METHODS Patients with BRAFV600 mutant advanced melanoma due to start dabrafenib+trametinib were randomised to receive either continuous (CONT), or intermittent (INT; dabrafenib d1-21, trametinib d1-14 every 28 days) dosing. A composite primary endpoint included progression-free survival (PFS) and quality of life (QoL). Secondary endpoints included response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs). Mutant BRAFV600E ctDNA was measured by droplet digital PCR (ddPCR), using mutant allele frequency of > 1 % as the detection threshold. RESULTS 79 patients (39 INT, 40 CONT) were recruited; median age 67 years, 65 % AJCC (7th ed) stage IV M1c, 29 % had brain metastases. With 19 months median follow-up, INT was inferior in all efficacy measures: median PFS 8.5 vs 10.7mo (HR 1.39, 95 %CI 0.79-2.45, p = 0.255); median OS 18.1mo vs not reached (HR 1.69, 95 %CI 0.87-3.28, p = 0.121), ORR 57 % vs 77 %. INT patients experienced fewer treatment-related AEs (76 % vs 88 %), but more grade > 3 AEs (53 % vs 42 %). QoL favoured CONT. Detection of BRAFV600E ctDNA prior to treatment correlated with worse OS (HR 2.55, 95 %CI 1.25-5.21, p = 0.01) in both arms. A change to undetected during treatment did not significantly predict better OS. CONCLUSION INTERIM findings are consistent with other recent clinical trials reporting that intermittent dosing does not improve efficacy of BRAF+MEK inhibitors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alimu Dayimu
- Clinical Trials Unit, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Rubeta N Matin
- Department of Dermatology, Churchill Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - Jenny Nobes
- Department of Oncology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Norfolk, UK
| | - Ruth Board
- Department of Oncology, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Preston, UK
| | - Miranda Payne
- Oxford Cancer and Haematology Centre, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Ankit Rao
- Department of Oncology, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - Alberto Fusi
- Department of Medical Oncology, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Sarah Danson
- Division of Clinical Medicine, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK; Sheffield Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - Bryony Eccles
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospitals Dorset NHS Foundation Trust, Poole, UK
| | - Judith Carser
- Department of Oncology, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK
| | | | - Neil Steven
- Department of Oncology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
| | | | - Ewan Brown
- Western General Hospital, Lothian NHS Board, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Michael Gonzalez
- Department of Oncology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Martin Highley
- Oncology Centre, Derriford Hospital, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
| | - Lisa Pickering
- Skin and Renal Units, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Satish Kumar
- Velindre Cancer Centre, Velindre University NHS Trust, Cardiff, UK
| | | | - George Burghel
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Leigh Demain
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Eleanor Baker
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Jerome Wulff
- Cambridge Clinical Trials Unit, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Wendi Qian
- Clinical Trials Unit, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Cambridge Clinical Trials Unit, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Sophie Twelves
- Cambridge Clinical Trials Unit, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Mark Middleton
- Oxford Cancer and Haematology Centre, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK; Department of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Pippa Corrie
- Oncology Department, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Boonstra PS, Tabarrok A, Strohbehn GW. Targeted randomization dose optimization trials enable fractional dosing of scarce drugs. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0287511. [PMID: 37903093 PMCID: PMC10615276 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287511] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2022] [Accepted: 06/07/2023] [Indexed: 11/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Administering drug at a dose lower than that used in pivotal clinical trials, known as fractional dosing, can stretch scarce resources. Implementing fractional dosing with confidence requires understanding a drug's dose-response relationship. Clinical trials aimed at describing dose-response in scarce, efficacious drugs risk underdosing, leading dose-finding trials to not be pursued despite their obvious potential benefit. We developed a new set of response-adaptive randomized dose-finding trials and demonstrate, in a series of simulated trials across diverse dose-response curves, these designs' efficiency in identifying the minimum dose that achieves satisfactory efficacy. Compared to conventional designs, these trials have higher probabilities of identifying lower doses while reducing the risks of both population- and subject-level underdosing. We strongly recommend that, upon demonstration of a drug's efficacy, pandemic drug development swiftly proceeds with response-adaptive dose-finding trials. This unified strategy ensures that scarce effective drugs produce maximum social benefits.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philip S. Boonstra
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America
- Rogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America
| | - Alex Tabarrok
- Department of Economics, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, United States of America
| | - Garth W. Strohbehn
- Rogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America
- Veterans Affairs Center for Clinical Management and Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America
- Institute for Health Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America
- Division of Medical Oncology, LTC Charles S Kettles VA Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Carr DJ, Welch HG. Assessing the Clinical Utility of Liquid Biopsies Across 5 Potential Indications From Therapy Selection to Population Screening: A Review. JAMA Intern Med 2023; 183:1144-1151. [PMID: 37639262 DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2023.3603] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/29/2023]
Abstract
Importance There has been great enthusiasm for the emerging technology of molecular-based tests to detect and quantify tumor DNA circulating in the bloodstream, colloquially known as a liquid biopsy. However, less attention has been given to how their clinical utility depends on the indication for testing, which includes a range of clinical situations, each presenting unique challenges. Observations Five indications for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) blood testing were considered. (1) For therapy selection, ctDNA tests can identify genetic alterations in patients with cancer amenable to targeted therapy, but most patients do not have a targetable alteration. (2) For response to therapy, the absence of residual tumor DNA following cancer surgery could reduce the use of adjuvant chemotherapy, but it is unclear that this will happen in practice. (3) For disease surveillance following cancer treatment, ctDNA tests may well detect cancer recurrence before symptoms appear, yet earlier intervention may have no effect on mortality. (4) For diagnosis of suspected cancer, ctDNA tests are able to identify some symptomatic cancers, but how they add to the conventional diagnostic evaluation is unknown. (5) For screening for cancer, multicancer tests can detect many types of cancer, but their low sensitivity for early-stage tumors raises questions as to whether screening can help patients live longer or live better. Conclusions and Relevance Circulating tumor DNA tests are being promoted for multiple indications. Numerous studies are ongoing, but randomized clinical trials of their effect on patient-centered outcomes are rare. While these tests have the potential to improve care in selected indications, this must be proven, as they will add cost, complexity, and unintended adverse effects for patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David J Carr
- Department of Pathology, Detroit Medical Center University Laboratories, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan
| | - H Gilbert Welch
- Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Caruso G, Coleman RL, Aletti G, Multinu F, Botticelli A, Palaia I, Cliby W, Colombo N. Systemic therapy de-escalation in advanced ovarian cancer: a new era on the horizon? Int J Gynecol Cancer 2023; 33:1448-1457. [PMID: 37597852 DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2023-004740] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) have sculpted the current landscape of advanced ovarian cancer treatment. With the advent of targeted maintenance therapies, improved survival rates have led to a timely interest in exploring de-intensified strategies with the goal of improving quality of life without compromising oncologic outcomes. The emerging concept of systemic treatment de-escalation would represent a new frontier in personalizing therapy in ovarian cancer. PARPi are so effective that properly selected patients treated with these agents might require less chemotherapy to achieve the same oncologic outcomes. The fundamental key is to limit de-escalation to a narrow subpopulation with favorable prognostic factors, such as patients with BRCA-mutated and/or homologous recombination-deficient tumors without macroscopic residual disease after surgery or other high-risk clinical factors. Potential de-escalation strategies include shifting PARPi in the neoadjuvant setting, de-escalating adjuvant chemotherapy after primary debulking surgery, reducing PARPi maintenance therapy duration, starting PARPi directly after interval debulking surgery, omitting maintenance therapy, and continuing PARPi beyond oligoprogression (if combined with locoregional treatment). Several ongoing trials are currently investigating the feasibility and safety of de-escalating approaches in ovarian cancer and the results are eagerly awaited. This review aims to discuss the current trends, drawbacks, and future perspectives regarding systemic treatment de-escalation in advanced ovarian cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giuseppe Caruso
- Department of Maternal and Child Health and Urological Sciences, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome, Italy
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Robert L Coleman
- Gynecologic Oncology, Texas Oncology and Sarah Cannon Research Institute (SCRI), The Woodlands, Texas, USA
| | - Giovanni Aletti
- Gynecologic Oncology Program, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Multinu
- Gynecologic Oncology Program, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea Botticelli
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome, Italy
| | - Innocenza Palaia
- Department of Maternal and Child Health and Urological Sciences, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome, Italy
| | - William Cliby
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Nicoletta Colombo
- Gynecologic Oncology Program, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Giffoni de Mello Morais Mata D, Chehade R, Hannouf MB, Raphael J, Blanchette P, Al-Humiqani A, Ray M. Appraisal of Systemic Treatment Strategies in Early HER2-Positive Breast Cancer-A Literature Review. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:4336. [PMID: 37686612 PMCID: PMC10486709 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15174336] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2023] [Revised: 08/08/2023] [Accepted: 08/16/2023] [Indexed: 09/10/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The overexpression of the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2+) accounts for 15-20% of all breast cancer phenotypes. Even after the completion of the standard combination of chemotherapy and trastuzumab, relapse events occur in approximately 15% of cases. The neoadjuvant approach has multiple benefits that include the potential to downgrade staging and convert previously unresectable tumors to operable tumors. In addition, achieving a pathologic complete response (pCR) following preoperative systemic treatment is prognostic of enhanced survival outcomes. Thus, optimal evaluation among the suitable strategies is crucial in deciding which patients should be selected for the neoadjuvant approach. METHODS A literature search was conducted in the Embase, Medline, and Cochrane electronic libraries. CONCLUSION The evaluation of tumor and LN staging and, hence, stratifying BC recurrence risk are decisive factors in guiding clinicians to optimize treatment decisions between the neoadjuvant versus adjuvant approaches. For each individual case, it is important to consider the most likely postsurgical outcome, since, if the patient does not obtain pCR following neoadjuvant treatment, they are eligible for adjuvant T-DM1 in the case of residual disease. This review of HER2-positive female BC outlines suitable neoadjuvant and adjuvant systemic treatment strategies for guiding clinical decision making around the selection of an appropriate therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danilo Giffoni de Mello Morais Mata
- Division of Medical Oncology, London Regional Cancer Program, London Health Sciences Centre, Western University, London, ON N6A 5W9, Canada; (J.R.); (P.B.)
| | - Rania Chehade
- Division of Medical Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada; (R.C.); (A.A.-H.)
| | - Malek B. Hannouf
- Department of Internal Medicine, Western University, London, ON N6A 3K7, Canada;
| | - Jacques Raphael
- Division of Medical Oncology, London Regional Cancer Program, London Health Sciences Centre, Western University, London, ON N6A 5W9, Canada; (J.R.); (P.B.)
| | - Phillip Blanchette
- Division of Medical Oncology, London Regional Cancer Program, London Health Sciences Centre, Western University, London, ON N6A 5W9, Canada; (J.R.); (P.B.)
| | - Abdullah Al-Humiqani
- Division of Medical Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada; (R.C.); (A.A.-H.)
| | - Monali Ray
- Division of Medical Oncology, Markham Stouffville Hospital, Markham, ON L3P 7P3, Canada;
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Luyendijk M, Jager A, Buijs SM, Siesling S, Groot CAUD, Blommestein HM. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of MammaPrint ® to Guide the Use of Endocrine Therapy in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2023:10.1007/s40273-023-01277-4. [PMID: 37245167 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-023-01277-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/25/2023] [Indexed: 05/29/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Gene expression profiling tests can predict the risk of disease recurrence and select patients who are expected to benefit from therapy, while allowing other patients to forgo therapy. For breast cancers, these tests were initially designed to tailor chemotherapy decisions, but recent evidence suggests that they may also guide the use of endocrine therapy. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of a prognostic test, MammaPrint®, to guide the use of adjuvant endocrine therapy in patients eligible according to Dutch treatment guidelines. METHODS We constructed a Markov decision model to calculate the lifetime costs (in 2020 Euros) and effects (survival and quality-adjusted life-years) of MammaPrint® testing versus usual care (endocrine therapy for all patients) in a simulated cohort of patients. The population of interest includes patients for whom MammaPrint® testing is currently not indicated, but for whom it may be possible to safely omit endocrine therapy. We applied both a health care perspective and a societal perspective and discounted costs (4%) and effects (1.5%). Model inputs were obtained from published research (including randomized controlled trials), nationwide cancer registry data, cohort data and publicly available data sources. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of uncertainty around input parameters. Additionally, threshold analyses were performed to identify under which circumstances MammaPrint® testing would be cost effective. RESULTS Adjuvant endocrine therapy guided by MammaPrint® resulted in fewer side effects, more (quality-adjusted) life-years (0.10 and 0.07 incremental QALYS and LYs, respectively) and higher costs (€18,323 incremental costs) compared with the usual care strategy in which all patients receive endocrine therapy. While costs for hospital visits, medication costs and productivity costs were somewhat higher in the usual care strategy, these did not outweigh costs of testing in the MammaPrint® strategy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €185,644 per QALY gained from a healthcare perspective and €180,617 from a societal perspective. Sensitivity and scenario analyses showed that the conclusions remained the same under changed input parameters and assumptions. Our results show that MammaPrint® can become a cost-effective strategy when either the price of the test is reduced (> 50%), or the proportion of patients for which treatment is altered (i.e. those with ultra-low risk) increases to > 26%. CONCLUSION Standard MammaPrint® testing to guide the use of endocrine therapy in our simulated patient population appears not to be a cost-effective strategy compared with usual care. The cost effectiveness of the test can be improved by reducing the price or preselecting a population more likely to benefit from the test.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marianne Luyendijk
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, P.O. Box 19079, 3501 DB, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Postbus 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Agnes Jager
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sanne M Buijs
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, P.O. Box 19079, 3501 DB, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, P.O. BOX 217, 7500 AE, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Carin A Uyl-de Groot
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Postbus 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Hedwig M Blommestein
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Postbus 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Tannock IF, Bouche G, Goldstein DA, Goto Y, Lichter AS, Prabhash K, Ranganathan P, Saltz LB, Sonke GS, Strohbehn GW, von Moos R, Ratain MJ. Patient-centred, self-funding dose optimisation trials as a route to reduce toxicity, lower cost and improve access to cancer therapy. Ann Oncol 2023:S0923-7534(23)00687-7. [PMID: 37230253 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2023.05.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2023] [Revised: 05/05/2023] [Accepted: 05/09/2023] [Indexed: 05/27/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Ian F Tannock
- Division of Medical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Optimal Cancer Care Alliance, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
| | - Gauthier Bouche
- Anticancer Fund, Meise, Belgium; Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Daniel A Goldstein
- Optimal Cancer Care Alliance, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Yasushi Goto
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | | | - Kumar Prabhash
- Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | | | - Leonard B Saltz
- Optimal Cancer Care Alliance, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Gastrointestinal Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Gabe S Sonke
- Department of Medical Oncology, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek/Netherlands Cancer Institute, & University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Garth W Strohbehn
- Optimal Cancer Care Alliance, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Rogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan; Section of Hematology Oncology, Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System; Veterans Affairs Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Roger von Moos
- Department of Oncology/Hematology, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland & SAKK Competence Center, Bern
| | - Mark J Ratain
- Optimal Cancer Care Alliance, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Section of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Peterson JR, Cole JA, Pfeiffer JR, Norris GH, Zhang Y, Lopez-Ramos D, Pandey T, Biancalana M, Esslinger HR, Antony AK, Takiar V. Novel computational biology modeling system can accurately forecast response to neoadjuvant therapy in early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2023; 25:54. [PMID: 37165441 PMCID: PMC10170712 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-023-01654-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2022] [Accepted: 05/02/2023] [Indexed: 05/12/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Generalizable population-based studies are unable to account for individual tumor heterogeneity that contributes to variability in a patient's response to physician-chosen therapy. Although molecular characterization of tumors has advanced precision medicine, in early-stage and locally advanced breast cancer patients, predicting a patient's response to neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) remains a gap in current clinical practice. Here, we perform a study in an independent cohort of early-stage and locally advanced breast cancer patients to forecast tumor response to NAT and assess the stability of a previously validated biophysical simulation platform. METHODS A single-blinded study was performed using a retrospective database from a single institution (9/2014-12/2020). Patients included: ≥ 18 years with breast cancer who completed NAT, with pre-treatment dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Demographics, chemotherapy, baseline (pre-treatment) MRI and pathologic data were input into the TumorScope Predict (TS) biophysical simulation platform to generate predictions. Primary outcomes included predictions of pathological complete response (pCR) versus residual disease (RD) and final volume for each tumor. For validation, post-NAT predicted pCR and tumor volumes were compared to actual pathological assessment and MRI-assessed volumes. Predicted pCR was pre-defined as residual tumor volume ≤ 0.01 cm3 (≥ 99.9% reduction). RESULTS The cohort consisted of eighty patients; 36 Caucasian and 40 African American. Most tumors were high-grade (54.4% grade 3) invasive ductal carcinomas (90.0%). Receptor subtypes included hormone receptor positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive (HER2+, 30%), HR+/HER2- (35%), HR-/HER2+ (12.5%) and triple negative breast cancer (TNBC, 22.5%). Simulated tumor volume was significantly correlated with post-treatment radiographic MRI calculated volumes (r = 0.53, p = 1.3 × 10-7, mean absolute error of 6.57%). TS prediction of pCR compared favorably to pathological assessment (pCR: TS n = 28; Path n = 27; RD: TS n = 52; Path n = 53), for an overall accuracy of 91.2% (95% CI: 82.8% - 96.4%; Clopper-Pearson interval). Five-year risk of recurrence demonstrated similar prognostic performance between TS predictions (Hazard ratio (HR): - 1.99; 95% CI [- 3.96, - 0.02]; p = 0.043) and clinically assessed pCR (HR: - 1.76; 95% CI [- 3.75, 0.23]; p = 0.054). CONCLUSION We demonstrated TS ability to simulate and model tumor in vivo conditions in silico and forecast volume response to NAT across breast tumor subtypes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joseph R Peterson
- SimBioSys, Inc., 180 N La Salle St. Suite 3250, Chicago, IL, 60601, USA.
| | - John A Cole
- SimBioSys, Inc., 180 N La Salle St. Suite 3250, Chicago, IL, 60601, USA
| | - John R Pfeiffer
- SimBioSys, Inc., 180 N La Salle St. Suite 3250, Chicago, IL, 60601, USA
| | - Gregory H Norris
- SimBioSys, Inc., 180 N La Salle St. Suite 3250, Chicago, IL, 60601, USA
| | - Yuhan Zhang
- SimBioSys, Inc., 180 N La Salle St. Suite 3250, Chicago, IL, 60601, USA
| | - Dorys Lopez-Ramos
- SimBioSys, Inc., 180 N La Salle St. Suite 3250, Chicago, IL, 60601, USA
| | - Tushar Pandey
- SimBioSys, Inc., 180 N La Salle St. Suite 3250, Chicago, IL, 60601, USA
| | | | - Hope R Esslinger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Anuja K Antony
- SimBioSys, Inc., 180 N La Salle St. Suite 3250, Chicago, IL, 60601, USA
| | - Vinita Takiar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Korn EL, Moscow JA, Freidlin B. Dose optimization during drug development: whether and when to optimize. J Natl Cancer Inst 2023; 115:492-497. [PMID: 36534891 PMCID: PMC10165487 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djac232] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/16/2022] [Revised: 11/10/2022] [Accepted: 12/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
The goal of dose optimization during drug development is to identify a dose that preserves clinical benefit with optimal tolerability. Traditionally, the maximum tolerated dose in a small phase I dose escalation study is used in the phase II trial assessing clinical activity of the agent. Although it is possible that this dose level could be altered in the phase II trial if an unexpected level of toxicity is seen, no formal dose optimization has routinely been incorporated into later stages of drug development. Recently it has been suggested that formal dose optimization (involving randomly assigning patients between 2 or more dose levels) be routinely performed early in drug development, even before it is known that the experimental therapy has any clinical activity at any dose level. We consider the relative merits of performing dose optimization earlier vs later in the drug development process and demonstrate that a considerable number of patients may be exposed to ineffective therapies unless dose optimization is delayed until after clinical activity or benefit of the new agent has been established. We conclude that patient and public health interests may be better served by conducting dose optimization after (or during) phase III evaluation, with some exceptions when dose optimization should be performed after activity shown in phase II evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edward L Korn
- Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Jeffrey A Moscow
- Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Boris Freidlin
- Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Right Sizing Systemic Therapy for Patients with Breast Cancer. Where are we Today? CURRENT BREAST CANCER REPORTS 2022. [DOI: 10.1007/s12609-022-00463-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
|
20
|
Davidson NE. In It for the Long Haul: Long-Term Benefit With Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Premenopausal Women With Early-Stage Steroid Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40:4037-4039. [PMID: 36027481 PMCID: PMC9746723 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.01465] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Nancy E. Davidson
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center and University of Washington, Seattle, WA,Nancy E. Davidson, MD, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center and University of Washington, 1100 Fairview Ave North, Thomas Bldg, M/S D5-310, Seattle, WA 98109; e-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Cartun Z, Kunz WG, Heinzerling L, Tomsitz D, Guertler A, Westphalen CB, Ricke J, Weir W, Unterrainer M, Mehrens D. Cost-effectiveness of Response-Adapted De-escalation of Immunotherapy in Advanced Melanoma. JAMA Dermatol 2022; 158:1387-1393. [PMID: 36260321 PMCID: PMC9582967 DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.4556] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2022] [Accepted: 08/30/2022] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
Importance Combination immunotherapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab has markedly improved outcomes for patients with advanced melanoma. However, these therapies pose a considerable financial burden to both patients and the health care system. The ADAPT-IT trial demonstrated comparable progression-free and overall survival for patients with response-adapted ipilimumab discontinuation compared with standard of care (SOC). Objective To determine the cost-effectiveness of ipilimumab discontinuation for patients with interim imaging-confirmed tumor response in the treatment of advanced melanoma. Design, Setting, and Participants This cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using data from the ADAPT-IT (follow-up of 33 months) and CheckMate 067 (follow-up of 6.5 years) trials, as well as published literature over the ADAPT-IT trial duration of 33 months. The analysis was performed in a US setting from a US-payer perspective, and the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at $100 000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). A total of 355 patients with previously untreated melanoma (unresectable stage III or IV metastatic melanoma) were included. Exposure Response-adapted ipilimumab discontinuation compared with SOC therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcomes of the CheckMate trial were overall survival and progression-free survival, while that of ADAPT-IT was objective response. This informed a decision model to estimate lifetime costs and QALYs associated with both strategies. Incremental cost, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness ratio were assessed. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed to account for variability in trials and input parameters. Results Of the 355 patients included in the analysis, 41 patients were from the ADAPT-IT trial (median age, 65 years; 28 [68%] male) and 314 patients from the CheckMate 067 trial (median age, 61 years; 206 [66%] male). Response-adapted treatment was the cost-effective option in 94.0% of scenarios based on Monte Carlo simulations, with a dominant incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and an incremental net monetary benefit of $28 849 compared with SOC therapy. Cost savings were estimated at $19 891 per patient compared with SOC. In scenario analyses, current SOC was only considered as a cost-effective option under best survival assumptions and if the willingness-to-pay threshold exceeded $630 000/QALY. Conclusions and Relevance This economic evaluation demonstrated that response-adapted treatment de-escalation in patients with advanced melanoma may lead to considerable savings in health care costs and could represent the most cost-effective strategy across various resource settings. Future trials should aim to provide further evidence on noninferiority.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zachary Cartun
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
- Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester
| | - Wolfgang G. Kunz
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Lucie Heinzerling
- Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
- Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich Alexander Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Dirk Tomsitz
- Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Anne Guertler
- Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - C. Benedikt Westphalen
- Department of Medicine III and Comprehensive Cancer Center, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Jens Ricke
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - William Weir
- Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester
| | - Marcus Unterrainer
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Dirk Mehrens
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Patient-centered dosing: oncologists' perspectives about treatment-related side effects and individualized dosing for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Breast Cancer Res Treat 2022; 196:549-563. [PMID: 36198984 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-022-06755-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2022] [Accepted: 09/18/2022] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Although metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is treatable, it is not curable and most patients remain on treatment indefinitely. While oncologists commonly prescribe the recommended starting dose (RSD) from the FDA-approved label, patient tolerance may differ from that seen in clinical trials. We report on a survey of medical oncologists' perspectives about treatment-related toxicity and willingness to discuss flexible dosing with patients. METHODS We disseminated a confidential survey via social media/email in Spring 2021. Eligible respondents needed to be US-based medical oncologists with experience treating patients with MBC. RESULTS Of 131 responses, 119 were eligible. Physicians estimated that 47% of their patients reported distressing treatment-related side effects; of these, 15% visited the Emergency Room/hospital and 37% missed treatment. 74% (n = 87) of doctors reported improvement of patient symptoms after dose reduction. 87% (n = 104) indicated that they had ever, if appropriate, initiated treatment at lower doses. Most (85%, n = 101) respondents did not believe that the RSD is always more effective than a lower dose and 97% (n = 115) were willing to discuss individualized dosing with patients. CONCLUSION Treatment-related side effects are prevalent among patients with MBC, resulting in missed treatments and acute care visits. To help patients tolerate treatment, oncologists may decrease initial and/or subsequent doses. The majority of oncologists reject the premise that a higher dose is always superior and are willing to discuss individualized dosing with patients. Given potential improvements regarding quality of life and clinical care, dose modifications should be part of routine shared decision-making between patients and oncologists.
Collapse
|
23
|
Treatment discontinuation, patient-reported toxicities and quality-of-life by age following trastuzumab emtansine or paclitaxel/trastuzumab (ATEMPT). NPJ Breast Cancer 2022; 8:127. [PMID: 36450763 PMCID: PMC9712612 DOI: 10.1038/s41523-022-00495-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2022] [Accepted: 11/11/2022] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
In the ATEMPT trial, adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) compared to paclitaxel plus trastuzumab (TH) for stage I HER2-positive breast cancer improved patient-reported outcomes (PROs), while maintaining excellent disease outcomes. We report treatment discontinuation and use multivariable models to compare, patient-reported toxicity and quality-of-life (QOL) by age (≤50, >50) and treatment arm at 18 months post-enrollment among 366 eligible participants randomized in a 3:1 ratio to T-DM1 or TH. T-DM1 discontinuation was higher among women >50 vs. ≤50 (23% vs. 9%, p = 0.003, Fisher's Exact test) with 4%, 8%, and 17% of older patients discontinuing treatment by 3, 6, and 9 months, respectively. Superior QOL with T-DM1 vs. TH was observed among women ≤50 with estimated mean difference of 6.48 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-12.46) and driven by better social/family well-being and breast cancer-specific sub-scores. Among women >50, T-DM1 was associated with superior physical well-being and less activity impairment, with no differences in global QOL. Older women had decreased neuropathy with T-DM1 vs. TH. De-escalated treatment regimens for HER2 positive breast cancer may have age-varying impact on treatment tolerance, toxicities and subsequent QOL, which should be considered when selecting therapy options.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01853748.
Collapse
|
24
|
Olivier T, Prasad V. Molecular testing to deliver personalized chemotherapy recommendations: risking over and undertreatment. BMC Med 2022; 20:392. [PMID: 36348413 PMCID: PMC9644653 DOI: 10.1186/s12916-022-02589-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2022] [Accepted: 09/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the adjuvant setting of cancer treatment, de-escalation strategies have the goal of omitting or minimizing treatment in patients, without compromising outcomes. Historically, eligibility for adjuvant treatment solely relied on the patient's clinical and tumor's pathological characteristics. At the turn of the century, based on new biological understanding, molecular-based strategies were tested and sometimes implemented. MAIN BODY However, we illustrate how molecularly based de-escalation strategies may paradoxically lead to overtreatment. This may happen when the novel approach is tested in lieu of standard management and may not yield the same results when being implemented in addition to usual practice. In the DYNAMIC trial, adjuvant chemotherapy decision in stage II colon cancer was compared between a circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)-based approach and the standard care. We show this may result in more patients receiving oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy and may expose a similar proportion of patients to chemotherapy if the novel strategy is implemented in addition to usual practice. The other potential risk is undertreatment. We provide an illustration of early breast cancer, where the decision of adjuvant chemotherapy based on the gene expression signature MammaPrint may lead to inferior outcomes as compared with the clinico-pathologic strategy. This may also happen when non-inferiority designs have large margins. Among solutions, it should be acknowledged that clinico-pathological features, like T4 in colon cancer, may not be abandoned and replaced by novel strategies in real-life practice. Therefore, novel strategies should be tested in addition to standard of care, and not in lieu of. Second, de-escalation trials should focus on the settings where the standard of care has a widespread agreement. This would avoid the risk of testing non-inferiority against an ineffective therapy, which guarantees successes without providing informative data. CONCLUSION Simply because a molecular test is rational does not mean it can improve patient outcomes. Here, we highlight how molecular test-based strategies may result in either overtreatment or undertreatment. In the rapidly evolving field of medicine, where technological advances may be transformative, our piece highlights scientific pitfalls to be aware of when considering running such trials or before implementing novel strategies in daily practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothée Olivier
- Department of Oncology, Geneva University Hospital, 4 Gabrielle-Perret-Gentil Street, 1205, Geneva, Switzerland.
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, 550 16th St., 2nd Fl, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA.
| | - Vinay Prasad
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, 550 16th St., 2nd Fl, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
An SJ, Duchesneau ED, Strassle PD, Reeder-Hayes K, Gallagher KK, Ollila DW, Downs-Canner SM, Spanheimer PM. Pathologic complete response and survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in cT1-T2/N0 HER2+ breast cancer. NPJ Breast Cancer 2022; 8:65. [PMID: 35552411 PMCID: PMC9098414 DOI: 10.1038/s41523-022-00433-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2021] [Accepted: 04/14/2022] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Women with small HER2+ breast cancers may have excellent prognosis with adjuvant single-agent chemotherapy and HER2-targeted therapy. The role of de-escalated therapy in the neoadjuvant setting, however, remains uncertain. We conducted a cohort study of adult women with T1-2/cN0 HER2+ breast cancer diagnosed 2013–2016 in the National Cancer Database treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and HER2-targeted therapy. Factors associated with pathologic complete response (pCR) and overall survival were examined. In total, 6994 patients were included, 32% cT1 and 68% cT2. Multi-agent NAC was given to 90% of women while single-agent NAC was given to 10% of women. pCR was achieved in 46% of cT2 patients and 43% of cT1, and in 46% of patients treated with multi-agent versus 38% single agent. Patients receiving multi-agent chemotherapy were younger, had fewer comorbidities, and had higher cT stage and grade. In all patients, pCR was associated with improved survival (p < 0.01). Multi-agent chemotherapy (OR 1.3, p = 0.003), hormone receptor negative (OR 2.6, p < 0.001), higher grade (OR 2.2, p < 0.001), younger age (OR 1.4, p = 0.011), and later year of diagnosis (OR 1.3, p = 0.005) were associated with achieving pCR. Multi-agent chemotherapy was associated with higher likelihood of pCR, but this effect was modest compared to other factors. Single-agent NAC with HER2-directed therapy in selected patients may provide excellent outcome with reduced toxicity, while allowing escalated therapy in the adjuvant setting for patients with residual disease. Prospective studies are needed to determine effects of de-escalation in the neoadjuvant setting on survival and optimal selection strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Selena J An
- Department of Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Emilie D Duchesneau
- Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Paula D Strassle
- Division of Intramural Research, National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Katherine Reeder-Hayes
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.,Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Kristalyn K Gallagher
- Department of Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.,Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - David W Ollila
- Department of Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.,Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Stephanie M Downs-Canner
- Department of Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.,Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Philip M Spanheimer
- Department of Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. .,Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
A prospective trial of treatment de-escalation following neoadjuvant paclitaxel/trastuzumab/pertuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer. NPJ Breast Cancer 2022; 8:63. [PMID: 35538105 PMCID: PMC9091255 DOI: 10.1038/s41523-022-00429-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2021] [Accepted: 03/14/2022] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
De-escalating adjuvant therapy following pathologic complete response (pCR) to an abbreviated neoadjuvant regimen in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer is the focus of international research efforts. However, the feasibility of this approach and its appeal to patients and providers had not been formally investigated. We aimed to assess adherence to de-escalated adjuvant antibody doublet therapy (trastuzumab and pertuzumab [HP], without chemotherapy) among patients with pCR following neoadjuvant paclitaxel/HP (THP). In this single-arm prospective trial, patients with treatment-naïve stage II-III HER2+ breast cancer received neoadjuvant weekly paclitaxel ×12 and HP every 3 weeks ×4. The primary endpoint was receipt of adjuvant non-HER2-directed cytotoxic chemotherapy. Ninety-eight patients received ≥1 dose of THP on study. Patients had median age of 50 years, 86% had stage II tumors, and 34% were hormone receptor-negative. Five patients had incomplete clinical response following THP and received doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide before surgery; they were classified as non-pCR and censored from further analyses. The overall pCR rate was 56.7%. Among patients with pCR, the adherence rate to de-escalated antibody-only therapy (HP) was 98.2% (95% CI 90.3–100.0%), and the primary feasibility endpoint was reached. The majority of patients felt positive or neutral about their adjuvant treatment plans. With brief follow-up (median 19.1 months), there were no breast cancer recurrences. De-escalation of adjuvant chemotherapy among patients who experience pCR in early-stage HER2+ breast cancer is a practicable approach for both patients and physicians. Planned and ongoing prospective trials will determine the long-term efficacy of this approach. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03716180, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03716180.
Collapse
|
27
|
Trapani D, Franzoi MA, Burstein HJ, Carey LA, Delaloge S, Harbeck N, Hayes DF, Kalinsky K, Pusztai L, Regan MM, Sestak I, Spanic T, Sparano J, Jezdic S, Cherny N, Curigliano G, Andre F. Risk-adapted modulation through de-intensification of cancer treatments: an ESMO classification. Ann Oncol 2022; 33:702-712. [PMID: 35550723 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2022.03.273] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2022] [Revised: 03/14/2022] [Accepted: 03/28/2022] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The landscape of clinical trials testing risk-adapted modulations of cancer treatments is complex. Multiple trial designs, endpoints, and thresholds for non-inferiority have been used; however, no consensus or convention has ever been agreed to categorise biomarkers useful to inform the treatment intensity modulation of cancer treatments. METHODS An expert subgroup under the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Precision Medicine Working Group shaped an international collaborative project to develop a classification system for biomarkers used in the cancer treatment de-intensification, based on a tiered approach. A group of disease-oriented clinical, translational, methodology and public health experts, and patients' representatives provided an analysis of the status quo, and scanned the horizon of ongoing clinical trials. The classification was developed through multiple rounds of expert revisions and inputs. RESULTS The working group agreed on a univocal definition of treatment de-intensification. Evidence of reduction in the dose-density, intensity, or cumulative dose, including intermittent schedules or shorter treatment duration or deletion of segment(s) of the standard regimens, compound(s), or treatment modality must be demonstrated, to define a treatment de-intensification. De-intensified regimens must also portend a positive impact on toxicity, quality of life, health system burden, or financial toxicity. ESMO classification categorises the biomarkers for treatment modulation in three tiers, based on the level of evidence. Tier A includes biomarkers validated in prospective, randomised, non-inferiority clinical trials. The working group agreed that in non-inferiority clinical trials, boundaries are highly dependent upon the disease scenario and endpoint being studied and that the absolute differences in the outcomes are the most relevant measures, rather than relative differences. Biomarkers tested in single-arm studies with a threshold of non-inferiority are classified as Tier B. Tier C is when the validation occurs in prospective-retrospective quality cohort investigations. CONCLUSIONS ESMO classification for the risk-guided intensity modulation of cancer treatments provides a set of evidence-based criteria to categorise biomarkers deemed to inform de-intensification of cancer treatments, in risk-defined patients. The classification aims at harmonising definitions on this matter, therefore offering a common language for all the relevant stakeholders, including clinicians, patients, decision-makers, and for clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Trapani
- New Drugs Development for Innovative Therapies, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Center, Boston, USA
| | - M A Franzoi
- INSERM Unit 981 - Molecular Predictors and New Targets in Oncology, PRISM Center for Precision Medicine, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - H J Burstein
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Center, Boston, USA
| | - L A Carey
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, USA
| | - S Delaloge
- Breast Cancer Unit, Department of Medical Oncology, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - N Harbeck
- Breast Center, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Comprehensive Cancer Center Munich, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany
| | - D F Hayes
- University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, USA
| | - K Kalinsky
- Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute at Emory University, Atlanta, USA
| | - L Pusztai
- Yale Cancer Center Genetics and Genomics Program, Yale Cancer Center, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, USA
| | - M M Regan
- Division of Biostatistics, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - I Sestak
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine - Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - T Spanic
- ESMO Patient Advocates Working Group, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - J Sparano
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai, Tisch Cancer Institute, New York, USA
| | - S Jezdic
- Scientific and Medical Division, European Society for Medical Oncology, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - N Cherny
- Department of Medical Oncology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - G Curigliano
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
| | - F Andre
- INSERM Unit 981 - Molecular Predictors and New Targets in Oncology, PRISM Center for Precision Medicine, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Harbeck N. Neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment of patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. Breast 2022; 62 Suppl 1:S12-S16. [PMID: 35148934 PMCID: PMC9097807 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2022.01.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2021] [Revised: 01/04/2022] [Accepted: 01/11/2022] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
The availability of HER2-targeted therapy has dramatically improved patient outcome in HER2-positive (HER2+) early breast cancer (EBC) as recently demonstrated by the EBCTCTG metaanalysis on trastuzumab in HER2+ EBC: Adding trastuzumab to chemotherapy has reduced recurrence rates and breast-cancer related mortality by a third [1]. Today, neoadjuvant therapy has become standard of care for women with stage II or III tumors as pathological complete response (pCR) status after surgery can be used to individualize adjuvant systemic therapy. pCR is correlated with favorable patient outcome, particularly in hormone receptor (HR) negative HER2+ EBC, as demonstrated by the FDA meta-analysis. Moreover, for patients with non-pCR, 14 cycles of adjuvant T-DM1 have become a new adjuvant therapy standard based on the results of the KATHERINE trial. Primary surgery can be offered to patients with low tumor burden (cN0 cT1). For this low-risk subgroup, 12 weeks of adjuvant paclitaxel + trastuzumab for one year are correlated with excellent outcome based on the APT trial results. A multidisciplinary team is essential right from the beginning for optimal locoregional and systemic therapy in such a complex neoadjuvant - adjuvant continuum of care. Clinical trials in HER2+ EBC are currently evaluating further therapy de-escalation in low-risk disease or patients with pCR whereas for patients with non-pCR, escalation trials are also ongoing. Newly approved drugs for HER2+ MBC like tucatinib or trastuzumab-deruxtecan or even immunotherapy combinations are being evaluated to improve upon efficacy of T-DM1 alone in the non-pCR setting. Regarding de-escalation, the WSG ADAPT trial demonstrated feasibility of avoiding overtreatment and individualizing neoadjuvant therapy without compromising outcome. Further de-escalation trials (e.g. DECRESCENDO, COMPASS-HER2) are currently ongoing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nadia Harbeck
- Breast Center, Dept OB&GYN and CCCMunich, LMU University Hospital, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Lopes Cardozo JMN, Drukker CA, Rutgers EJT, Schmidt MK, Glas AM, Witteveen A, Cardoso F, Piccart M, Esserman LJ, Poncet C, van 't Veer LJ. Outcome of Patients With an Ultralow-Risk 70-Gene Signature in the MINDACT Trial. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40:1335-1345. [PMID: 35061525 DOI: 10.1200/jco.21.02019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Patients with 70-gene signature ultralow-risk breast cancers have shown excellent survival in historic cohorts, including randomized trials. The ultralow-risk subgroup was characterized to help avoid overtreatment. We evaluated outcomes of ultralow-risk patients in the largest cohort to date. METHODS Of the 6,693 patients enrolled in the EORTC-10041/BIG-3-04 randomized phase III MINDACT trial, profiling revealed an ultralow-risk 70-gene signature in 1,000 patients (15%). Distant metastasis-free interval (DMFI) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were assessed in patients stratified by 70-gene signature result (high, low, and ultralow) by Kaplan-Meier analysis and hazard ratios with 95% CI from Cox regression. RESULTS Median follow-up was 8.7 years. Of the ultralow-risk patients (n = 1,000), 67% were > 50 years, 81% had tumors ≤ 2 cm, 80% were lymph node-negative, 96% had grade 1 or 2 tumors, and 99% were estrogen receptor (ER)-positive. Systemic therapy was received by 84% of patients (69% endocrine therapy, 14% endocrine therapy plus chemotherapy, 1% other) and 16% received no adjuvant systemic treatment. The 8-year DMFI for ultralow-risk patients was 97.0% (95% CI, 95.8 to 98.1), which was 2.5% higher than for patients with low-risk tumors (n = 3,295, 94.5% [95% CI, 93.6 to 95.3]). The hazard ratio for DMFI was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.45 to 0.94) for ultralow versus low risk, after adjusting for clinical-pathologic and treatment characteristics. The 8-year BCSS for ultralow-risk patients was 99.6% (95% CI, 99.1 to 100). CONCLUSION Patients with an ultralow-risk 70-gene signature have the best prognosis, distinctive from low risk, with 8-year BCSS above 99%, and very few patients developed distant metastases with an 8-year DMFI rate of 97%. These patients could be candidates for further de-escalation of treatment, to avoid overtreatment and the risk of side effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Josephine M N Lopes Cardozo
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Caroline A Drukker
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Emiel J T Rutgers
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Fatima Cardoso
- Breast Unit, Champalimaud Clinical Center/Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Martine Piccart
- Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Laura J Esserman
- Department of Surgery, UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA
| | - Coralie Poncet
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Laura J van 't Veer
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Bueno Muiño C, Martín M, del Monte-Millán M, García-Saénz JÁ, López-Tarruella S. HER2+ Breast Cancer Escalation and De-Escalation Trial Design: Potential Role of Intrinsic Subtyping. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:512. [PMID: 35158778 PMCID: PMC8833556 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14030512] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2021] [Revised: 01/09/2022] [Accepted: 01/16/2022] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Long-term outcomes in breast cancer patients differ based on the molecular subtype, with HER2-E being the most aggressive one. Advances in clinical practice have dramatically shifted HER2+ breast cancer prognosis. Risk adapted strategies to individualize therapies are necessary. De-escalation approaches have been encouraged based on the risks of clinical-pathological factors. Molecular gene subtyping could further accurately define HER2 addicted tumours that are sensitive to anti-HER2 therapies, thus sparing unnecessary treatments. The transition from immunochemistry to molecular profiling in HER2+ breast cancer is discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Coralia Bueno Muiño
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Infanta Cristina (Parla), Fundación de Investigación Biomédica del H.U. Puerta de Hierro, Majadahonda, 28009 Madrid, Spain;
| | - Miguel Martín
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Instituto de Investigacion Sanitaria Gregorio Marañon (IiSGM), CIBERONC, Geicam, Universidad Complutense, 28007 Madrid, Spain;
| | - María del Monte-Millán
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Instituto de Investigacion Sanitaria Gregorio Marañon (IiSGM) CIBERONC, 28007 Madrid, Spain;
| | - José Ángel García-Saénz
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), CIBERONC, 28040 Madrid, Spain;
| | - Sara López-Tarruella
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Instituto de Investigacion Sanitaria Gregorio Marañon (IiSGM), CIBERONC, Geicam, Universidad Complutense, 28007 Madrid, Spain;
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Chlebowski RT, Aragaki AK, Pan K. Breast Cancer Prevention: Time for Change. JCO Oncol Pract 2021; 17:709-716. [PMID: 34319769 PMCID: PMC8677965 DOI: 10.1200/op.21.00343] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2021] [Revised: 06/24/2021] [Accepted: 07/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Agency breast cancer prevention guidelines for other than hereditary cancers have not materially changed in 20 years; endocrine-targeted agents (then, tamoxifen; now, adding raloxifene and aromatase inhibitors) reduce good prognosis estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, progesterone receptor (PR)-positive cancers without reducing deaths from breast cancer. Across three tamoxifen placebo-controlled prevention trials (N = 23,360) begun almost 30 years ago, although there were 226 fewer breast cancer cases, there were nine more deaths from breast cancer in the tamoxifen groups. Following clinical advances, currently more than half of breast cancer cases are solved problems with extremely low risk of death. As endocrine-targeted agents commonly prevent these cancers, widespread implementation of current prevention strategies may not reduce deaths from breast cancer. Compared with other breast cancers, ER-positive, PR-negative cancers and triple-negative cancers have inferior survival (90.6% v 83.8% v 78.1%, respectively; P < .001). Against this background, in the Women's Health Initiative Dietary Modification randomized trial (N = 48,835), ER-positive, PR-negative cancers were statistically significantly reduced in the intervention group (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.94) and deaths from breast cancer were reduced 21% (P = .02). In the Women's Health Initiative randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating conjugated equine estrogen (N = 10,739), ER-positive, PR-negative cancers were statistically significantly reduced in the intervention group (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.74) and deaths from breast cancer were reduced 40% (P = .04). These findings suggest that reexamination of breast cancer risk reduction strategies and clinical practice is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rowan T. Chlebowski
- Lundquist Institute for Biomedical Innovation at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA
| | | | - Kathy Pan
- Lundquist Institute for Biomedical Innovation at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Byng D, Retèl VP, Engelhardt EG, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CGM, van Til JA, Schmitz RSJM, van Duijnhoven F, Wesseling J, Bleiker E, van Harten WH. Preferences of Treatment Strategies among Women with Low-Risk DCIS and Oncologists. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:3962. [PMID: 34439126 PMCID: PMC8394332 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13163962] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2021] [Revised: 07/29/2021] [Accepted: 08/02/2021] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
As ongoing trials study the safety of an active surveillance strategy for low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), there is a need to explain why particular choices regarding treatment strategies are made by eligible women as well as their oncologists, what factors enter the decision process, and how much each factor affects their choice. To measure preferences for treatment and surveillance strategies, women with newly-diagnosed, primary low-risk DCIS enrolled in the Dutch CONTROL DCIS Registration and LORD trial, and oncologists participating in the Dutch Health Professionals Study were invited to complete a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The relative importance of treatment strategy-related attributes (locoregional intervention, 10-year risk of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer (iIBC), and follow-up interval) were discerned using conditional logit models. A total of n = 172 patients and n = 30 oncologists completed the DCE. Patient respondents had very strong preferences for an active surveillance strategy with no surgery, irrespective of the 10-year risk of iIBC. Extensiveness of the locoregional treatment was consistently shown to be an important factor for patients and oncologists in deciding upon treatment strategies. Risk of iIBC was least important to patients and most important to oncologists. There was a stronger inclination toward a twice-yearly follow-up for both groups compared to annual follow-up.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danalyn Byng
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (V.P.R.); (E.G.E.); (E.B.); (W.H.v.H.)
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, 7522 NB Enschede, The Netherlands; (C.G.M.G.-O.); (J.A.v.T.)
| | - Valesca P. Retèl
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (V.P.R.); (E.G.E.); (E.B.); (W.H.v.H.)
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, 7522 NB Enschede, The Netherlands; (C.G.M.G.-O.); (J.A.v.T.)
| | - Ellen G. Engelhardt
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (V.P.R.); (E.G.E.); (E.B.); (W.H.v.H.)
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (R.S.J.M.S.); (J.W.)
| | - Catharina G. M. Groothuis-Oudshoorn
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, 7522 NB Enschede, The Netherlands; (C.G.M.G.-O.); (J.A.v.T.)
| | - Janine A. van Til
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, 7522 NB Enschede, The Netherlands; (C.G.M.G.-O.); (J.A.v.T.)
| | - Renée S. J. M. Schmitz
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (R.S.J.M.S.); (J.W.)
| | - Frederieke van Duijnhoven
- Division of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Jelle Wesseling
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (R.S.J.M.S.); (J.W.)
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Eveline Bleiker
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (V.P.R.); (E.G.E.); (E.B.); (W.H.v.H.)
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Wim H. van Harten
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (V.P.R.); (E.G.E.); (E.B.); (W.H.v.H.)
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, 7522 NB Enschede, The Netherlands; (C.G.M.G.-O.); (J.A.v.T.)
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Methods and Designs of Modern Breast Cancer Confirmatory Trials. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13112757. [PMID: 34199352 PMCID: PMC8199547 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13112757] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2021] [Revised: 05/25/2021] [Accepted: 05/31/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary The benefit–risk assessments of new drugs for breast cancer (BC) face several challenges, as all stakeholders do not agree on the evidence bar required for market authorization, and by the fragmentation of breast cancer diagnosis. In this study, we describe the methods and designs of breast cancer confirmatory trials published between 2001 and 2020. We found that the quality of the evidence supporting new breast cancer drugs was improving over time, but that patient-relevant endpoints such as survival and quality of life remained unfrequently used as primary endpoints. Abstract Background: The benefit–risk assessments of new drugs for breast cancer (BC) face several challenges, as all stakeholders do not agree on the evidence bar required for market authorization, and by the fragmentation of breast cancer diagnosis. The aim of this study was to describe the changes in methods and designs of breast cancer confirmatory trials. Methods: All phase III randomized trials published between 2001 and 2020 and assessing systemic BC therapies were included. Trials’ main characteristics, endpoints, and statistical methods were collected using a standardized data extraction form. Results: A total of 347 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria. While most older trials (79%) included all subtypes of breast cancer, most recent trials populations were limited to one large intrinsic BC subgroup (69%). The use of gatekeeping testing strategies increased dramatically from 9% to 71%. The use of overall survival (OS) as an endpoint in the trials increased over time, but its use as a primary endpoint remained infrequent. The inclusion of OS testing in a hierarchical sequence in case of positive testing of a tumor-centered or composite endpoint appeared to have become the new standard. Conclusion: Our findings indicate some improvements in the quality of the evidence-base supporting new breast cancer drugs. The rigorous assessment of patient-relevant endpoints has increased over time, but this improvement is mainly related to the analysis of OS as a secondary endpoint analyzed in a hierarchical sequence.
Collapse
|
34
|
Gyawali B, de Vries EGE, Dafni U, Amaral T, Barriuso J, Bogaerts J, Calles A, Curigliano G, Gomez-Roca C, Kiesewetter B, Oosting S, Passaro A, Pentheroudakis G, Piccart M, Roitberg F, Tabernero J, Tarazona N, Trapani D, Wester R, Zarkavelis G, Zielinski C, Zygoura P, Cherny NI. Biases in study design, implementation, and data analysis that distort the appraisal of clinical benefit and ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) scoring. ESMO Open 2021; 6:100117. [PMID: 33887690 PMCID: PMC8086024 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100117] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2021] [Revised: 03/16/2021] [Accepted: 03/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The European Society for Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) is a validated, widely used tool developed to score the clinical benefit from cancer medicines reported in clinical trials. ESMO-MCBS scores assume valid research methodologies and quality trial implementation. Studies incorporating flawed design, implementation, or data analysis may generate outcomes that exaggerate true benefit and are not generalisable. Failure to either indicate or penalise studies with bias undermines the intention and diminishes the integrity of ESMO-MCBS scores. This review aimed to evaluate the adequacy of the ESMO-MCBS to address bias generated by flawed design, implementation, or data analysis and identify shortcomings in need of amendment. Methods As part of a refinement of the ESMO-MCBS, we reviewed trial design, implementation, and data analysis issues that could bias the results. For each issue of concern, we reviewed the ESMO-MCBS v1.1 approach against standards derived from Helsinki guidelines for ethical human research and guidelines from the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, the Food and Drugs Administration, the European Medicines Agency, and European Network for Health Technology Assessment. Results Six design, two implementation, and two data analysis and interpretation issues were evaluated and in three, the ESMO-MCBS provided adequate protections. Seven shortcomings in the ability of the ESMO-MCBS to identify and address bias were identified. These related to (i) evaluation of the control arm, (ii) crossover issues, (iii) criteria for non-inferiority, (iv) substandard post-progression treatment, (v) post hoc subgroup findings based on biomarkers, (vi) informative censoring, and (vii) publication bias against quality-of-life data. Conclusion Interpretation of the ESMO-MCBS scores requires critical appraisal of trials to understand caveats in trial design, implementation, and data analysis that may have biased results and conclusions. These will be addressed in future iterations of the ESMO-MCBS. We reviewed trial design, implementation, and data analysis issues that could bias the results of trials. These issues could skew the results of ESMO-MCBS scores. Six design, two implementation, and two analysis issues were reviewed, and seven shortcomings were identified. These issues will be addressed in future versions of the MCBS scale. Interpretation of MCBS scores requires critical appraisal of trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B Gyawali
- Department of Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
| | - E G E de Vries
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - U Dafni
- Laboratory of Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens; Frontier Science Foundation-Hellas, Athens, Greece
| | - T Amaral
- Skin Cancer Center, Department of Dermatology, Eberhard Karls University, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - J Barriuso
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust and Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - J Bogaerts
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels, Belgium
| | - A Calles
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañon, Madrid, Spain
| | - G Curigliano
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan; European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - C Gomez-Roca
- Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse (IUCT), Toulouse, France
| | - B Kiesewetter
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine I, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - S Oosting
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - A Passaro
- Division of Thoracic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | | | - M Piccart
- Jules Bordet Institute, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - F Roitberg
- WHO Cancer Management Consultant, Geneva, Switzerland; Instituto do Cancer do Estado de São Paulo (ICESP HCFMUSP), São Paulo, Brazil
| | - J Tabernero
- Vall d'Hebron Hospital Campus and Institute of Oncology (VHIO), UVic-UCC, IO-Quiron, Barcelona, Spain
| | - N Tarazona
- Department of Medical Oncology, Biomedical Research Institute INCLIVA, CIBERONC, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - D Trapani
- European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - R Wester
- Department of Hematology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G Zarkavelis
- University of Ioannina-Department of Medical Oncology, Ioannina, Greece
| | - C Zielinski
- Central European Cooperative Oncology Group and Central European Cancer Center, Wiener Privatklinik, Vienna, Austria
| | - P Zygoura
- Frontier Science Foundation-Hellas, Athens, Greece
| | - N I Cherny
- Cancer Pain and Palliative Medicine Service, Department of Medical Oncology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Goulioti T, Straehle C, Cameron D. Overcoming Barriers to Clinical Trials Cooperation: The Breast International Group Example. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2021; 41:1-9. [PMID: 33793310 DOI: 10.1200/edbk_321475] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
Clinical trials cooperation is not a luxury; it is a necessity, now more than ever, first in light of the segmentation of tumors according to their molecular targets-which are being matched to an increasing number of competitive drugs-and second because it is the only chance to maintain academic research centered on addressing patients' needs. In its 21 years of existence, the Breast International Group, an umbrella organization supporting the activities of 54 member groups across six continents, has been confronted with challenges that include (1) keeping trust and motivation within the network; (2) improving the interface between academia and industry; (3) improving patient involvement and trust in clinical trials; and (4) fundraising for noncommercial research. We describe how these challenges have been addressed so far, with the hope of empowering the next generation of clinical investigators.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - David Cameron
- Breast International Group (BIG), Brussels, Belgium.,Cancer Research UK Edinburgh Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Solinas C, Fumagalli D, Dieci MV. Immune Checkpoint Blockade in HER2-Positive Breast Cancer: What Role in Early Disease Setting? Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13071655. [PMID: 33916115 PMCID: PMC8036848 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13071655] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2021] [Accepted: 03/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary This work aims to discuss how an anti- or pro-tumor immune response could be manipulated through immune checkpoint blockade in patients with early stage HER2-positive breast cancer. By summarizing previously published evidence in the field, authors present their personal view on how immune checkpoint blockade could be implemented in the neoadjuvant setting in this patient population. The hypothesis being presented is that an appropriate and effective administration of immune checkpoint blockade could assure a lasting control of the disease, by preventing relapses. One of the research priorities should be the identification of the patients who could benefit more by this strategy. Abstract The present commentary synthesizes the current evidence on the role of the immune response in HER2-positive breast cancer. It points out the strengths and weaknesses of the findings observed so far, particularly in the early setting, including the clinical significance of scoring tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. A figure proposing research hypotheses for the implementation of immune checkpoint blockade use for patient candidates to neoadjuvant treatment is presented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cinzia Solinas
- Medical Oncology, Azienda Tutela della Salute Sardegna, San Francesco Hospital, 08100 Nuoro, Italy
- Correspondence: or
| | | | - Maria Vittoria Dieci
- Medical Oncology 2, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, 35128 Padova, Italy;
| |
Collapse
|