Presurgical Systemic Treatment of Nonmetastatic Breast Cancer: Facts and Open Questions

The efficacy of gefitinib supplementation for breast cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy of gefitinib supplementation for breast cancer remains controversial. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the influence of gefitinib supplementation vs placebo on the efficacy of breast cancer.

METHODS

We have searched PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases through February 2019 and included randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of gefitinib supplementation vs placebo on overall response for breast cancer patients. This meta-analysis was performed using the random-effect model.

RESULTS

Seven randomized controlled trials involving 927 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with control group for breast cancer, gefitinib supplementation revealed no obvious impact on complete response (risk ration [RR] = 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.58 to 2.44; P = .63), progressive disease (RR = 0.81; 95% CI = 0.59-1.11; P = .18), partial response (RR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.36-1.25; P = .21), stable disease (RR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.65-1.60; P = .92), nausea or vomiting (RR = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.73-1.33; P = .93), but was associated with increased incidence of diarrhea (RR = 2.80; 95% CI = 2.23-3.52; P < .00001), decreased incidence of hot flash (RR = 0.53; 95% CI = 0.37-0.78; P = .001), and improved incidence of adverse events (RR = 1.12; 95% CI = 1.05-1.19; P = .0006).

CONCLUSIONS

Gefitinib supplementation may provide no positive effect on complete response, progressive disease, partial response or stable disease for breast cancer patients, but with the increase in adverse events.

The treatment option of progressive disease in breast cancer during neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a single-center experience

Patients' responses to breast cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) differ because of heterogeneous tumor characteristics. Reports about NACT progression are sporadic. Here we enrolled 1187 patients who received NACT in our cancer center between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2016. We analyzed the characteristics and treatments of patients with progressive disease (PD) or non-PD or pathological complete response (pCR). In total, 45 (3.8%) patients had PD. PD patients were associated with a significantly worse disease-free survival (DFS) (hazard ratio (HR) = 3.77; 95% CI, 1.77 to 8.00; P =.001) and overall survival (OS) (HR = 3.85; 95% CI, 1.77 to 8.35; P =.001). For the PD patients, 28 (62.2%) patients received mastectomy immediately after PD, and 17 (37.8%) changed to chemotherapy. DFS and OS exhibited no significant differences between these two salvage therapies. After a change to second chemotherapy, 58.8% (10/17) patients had PD or SD. With the exception of tumor size, pretreatment T stage, and histology type, no other significant differences were noted between PD and pCR patients. Our results demonstrated that PD patients were associated with a significantly worse prognosis. Based on these results, we suggest to give the addition of trastuzumab to HER-2 positive patients instead of changing the chemotherapy regimen and proceeding to surgery instead of further chemotherapy once patients have PD during NACT. Given that some similar characteristics exist between PD and pCR patients, more studies to identify novel molecular markers to predict disease response to NACT should be performed.

Current decisions on neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer: Experts' experiences in the Netherlands

PURPOSE

To evaluate the opinion of surgical and medical oncologists on neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for early breast cancer.

METHODS

Surgical and medical oncologists (N = 292) participating in breast cancer care in the Netherlands were invited for a 20-question survey on the influence of patient, disease, and management related factors on their decisions towards NAC.

RESULTS

A total of 138 surgical and medical oncologists from 64 out of 89 different Dutch hospitals completed the survey. NAC was recommended for locally advanced breast cancer (94%) and for downstaging to enable breast conserving surgery (BCS) (75%). Despite willingness to downstage, 64% of clinicians routinely recommended NAC when systemic therapy was indicated preoperatively. Reported reasons to refrain from NAC are comorbidities (68%), age >70 years (52%), and WHO-performance status ≥2 (93%). Opinions on NAC and surgical management were inconclusive; while 75% recommends NAC to enable BCS, some stated that BCS after NAC increases the risk of a non-radical resection (21%), surgical complications (9%) and recurrence of disease (5%).

CONCLUSION

This article emphasizes the need for more consensus among specialists on the indications for NAC in early BC patients. Unambiguous and evidence-based treatment information could improve doctor-patient communication, supporting the patient in chemotherapy timing decision-making.

Pathological complete response as a surrogate for relapse-free survival in patients with triple negative breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy

We retrospective analyzed triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients who received either taxane-based or anthracycline-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy, evaluated whether pathological complete response (pCR) is a surrogate endpoint for relapse free survival (RFS) in TNBC and explored which subgroup of patients benefits more from superior treatment regimen. 186 patients received taxane-based (Group A) or anthracycline-based (Group B) neoadjuvant chemotherapy, median follow-up was 48.1 months. 42 patients received total pCR (ypT0/is ypN0), 34 in Group A and 8 in Group B, p < 0.001. Patients who achieved pCR had an increased RFS when compared with non-pCR patients, p = 0.043. Patients in Group A had a better RFS, p = 0.025, after adjusting for tumor size and clinical lymph node status before neoadjuvant therapy. Only patients sensitive to neoadjuvant chemotherapy exhibited RFS benefit from taxane-based treatment, and those who were treatment insensitive had similar RFS between both groups. Our analysis showed Taxane-based regimen had higher pCR rate and could predict improved RFS in TNBC, and the prognostic value was greater in treatment sensitive patients. This retrospective analysis supports the use of pCR as a surrogate endpoint for RFS in TNBC.

High expression of endoglin in primary breast cancer may predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is a widely-used treatment for breast cancer, as it may render unresectable breast tumors to become resectable. In addition, NAC provides the unique opportunity to assess response to treatments within months rather than years of follow-up. However, predictive markers of tumor response to NAC are lacking. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the expression of endoglin, a marker of angiogenesis, and its association with pathologic responses to NAC. Samples from 34 breast cancer patients were obtained prior to and following NAC treatment. Immunohistochemical staining for endoglin and the mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) was performed, and the correlation between the expression of these markers and pathologic response was examined. The overall response rate to NAC of these 34 patients was 67.6%. A mean microvascular density value of 14 served as a threshold score for the increased expression of endoglin. Increased expression of endoglin in primary tumors prior to NAC correlated with improved response in primary tumors (P=0.019) or in primary tumors and regional lymph nodes (P=0.014), when compared with reduced expression of endoglin. Increased expression of mTOR following NAC was additionally correlated with improved response to NAC. The results of the present study demonstrated that the expression of endoglin in breast tumor samples prior to NAC may be a predictor of treatment response. Long-term follow-up of clinical outcome is required to explain the elevation of mTOR expression levels following NAC treatment in responsive tumors.

An Acquired HER2T798I Gatekeeper Mutation Induces Resistance to Neratinib in a Patient with HER2 Mutant-Driven Breast Cancer

We report a HER2T798I gatekeeper mutation in a patient with HER2L869R-mutant breast cancer with acquired resistance to neratinib. Laboratory studies suggested that HER2L869R is a neratinib-sensitive, gain-of-function mutation that upon dimerization with mutant HER3E928G, also present in the breast cancer, amplifies HER2 signaling. The patient was treated with neratinib and exhibited a sustained partial response. Upon clinical progression, HER2T798I was detected in plasma tumor cell-free DNA. Structural modeling of this acquired mutation suggested that the increased bulk of isoleucine in HER2T798I reduces neratinib binding. Neratinib blocked HER2-mediated signaling and growth in cells expressing HER2L869R but not HER2L869R/T798I In contrast, afatinib and the osimertinib metabolite AZ5104 strongly suppressed HER2L869R/T798I-induced signaling and cell growth. Acquisition of HER2T798I upon development of resistance to neratinib in a breast cancer with an initial activating HER2 mutation suggests HER2L869R is a driver mutation. HER2T798I-mediated neratinib resistance may be overcome by other irreversible HER2 inhibitors like afatinib.Significance: We found an acquired HER2 gatekeeper mutation in a patient with HER2-mutant breast cancer upon clinical progression on neratinib. We speculate that HER2T798I may arise as a secondary mutation following response to effective HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) in other cancers with HER2-activating mutations. This resistance may be overcome by other irreversible HER2 TKIs, such as afatinib. Cancer Discov; 7(6); 575-85. ©2017 AACR.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 539.

Prognostic value of HMGB1 in early breast cancer patients under neoadjuvant chemotherapy

The response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients is usually assessed by pCR and RCB score. However, the prognostic value of these parameters is still in discussion. We showed recently that an epirubicin/docetaxel therapy is associated with an increase in the cell death marker high‐mobility group box 1 protein (HMGB1) in the circulation. Here, we investigate whether this increase correlates with the long‐term outcome. Thirty‐six early breast cancer patients under neoadjuvant epirubicin/docetaxel combination chemotherapy were included in this study. To determine the immediate effect of this treatment on HMGB1, we collected blood samples before and 24–96 h after the initial dose. This time course was then compared to the 5‐year follow‐up of the patients. HMGB1 levels varied before chemotherapy between 4.1 and 11.3 ng/mL and reacted differently in response to therapy. Some patients showed an increase while others did not show any changes. Therefore, we subdivided the patient collective into two groups: patients with an at least 1.1 ng/mL increase in HMGB1 and patients with smaller changes. The disease‐free survival was longer in the HMGB1 increase group (56.2 months vs. 46.6 months), but this difference did not reach significance. The overall survival (OS) was significantly better in patients with an increase in HMGB1 (log rank P = 0.021). These data suggest that an immediate increase in HMGB1 levels correlates with improved outcome in early breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and may be a valuable complementary biomarker for early estimation of prognosis.

Neoadjuvant Model for Testing Emerging Targeted Therapies in Breast Cancer

Neoadjuvant trials provide endpoints, such as pathological complete response (pCR) to treatment, that will potentially translate into meaningful improvements in overall survival and disease-free survival. Neoadjuvant trials need smaller sample sizes and are less expensive, and the endpoint of pCR is achieved in months, rather than years. For these reasons, the neoadjuvant setting is ideal for testing emerging targeted therapies in early breast cancer. Recently the US Food and Drug Administration has released a draft Guidance to Industry, outlining a pathway to accelerated approval for neoadjuvant breast cancer therapies using pCR. The association between pCR and outcome is clear for chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer and for HER2-targeted agents in HER2-positive disease, but might not hold true for other tumor subtypes such as luminal cancers. Since pCR is rarely achieved with either chemotherapy or endocrine therapy in hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer, in this setting we need to identify different intermediate endpoints, which might be translational endpoints within "window-of-opportunity," "residual disease," and "genome forward" trials. Prospective validation of effective noninvasive techniques for monitoring of residual disease burden could enhance the ability to identify promising targeted therapies in the neoadjuvant setting.

Neoadjuvant Treatment Approach: The Rosetta Stone for Breast Cancer?

Breast cancer represents a heterogeneous group of diseases with varied biological features, behavior, and response to therapy; thus, management of breast cancer relies on the availability of robust predictive and prognostic factors to support therapy decision-making. Traditionally, neoadjuvant treatment for breast cancer was preserved for locally advanced, converting an inoperable to a surgical resectable cancer. Neoadjuvant trials, additionally, offer: 1) the opportunity to evaluate new treatment options in a faster way and with fewer patients than large adjuvant trials; 2) to identify and validate the prognostic and predictive value of a marker with its association with clinical outcome in relation to the administered treatment. In this setting, thanks to new, affordable technologies which help to detail the molecular profiles of tumors, new trial designs based on new target therapies, like window-of-opportunity, are also suggested, as they represent the chance to identify tumor sensitivity or to overcome tumor resistance to the treatment used, based on its interaction with tumor biology in early tumor stages. However, clinicians and researchers should pay particular attention: In this setting, the safety of patients is paramount, given the exposure of potentially curable patients to investigational agents with limited safety experience, the definition of the study population and the study design, such as adaptive strategies, should limit patient exposure to ineffective agents, and intensify safety monitoring in the course of the treatment. Here, issues related to outcome determination in breast cancer, including some critical points of view, are presented.

Neoadjuvant Bevacizumab plus Chemotherapy versus Chemotherapy Alone to Treat Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Purpose

Results from previous randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating whether the addition of bevacizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) could statistically significantly increase the pathological complete response (pCR) and to identify which subgroup would benefit most from such regimens have produced conflicting results. This meta-analysis was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone in the neoadjuvant setting.

Methods

A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library was performed to identify eligible studies. The primary endpoint of interest was pCR. The secondary endpoints were clinical complete rate (cCR), surgery rate, breast-conserving surgery (BCS) rate, and toxicity. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software version 5.3.

Results

Nine RCTs matched the selection criteria, yielding a total of 4967 patients (bevacizumab plus chemotherapy: 50.1%, chemotherapy alone: 49.9%). The results of this meta-analysis demonstrated that the addition of bevacizumab to NAC significantly increased the pCR rate (odds ratio [OR] = 1.34 [1.18–1.54]; P < 0.0001) compared with chemotherapy alone. Subgroup analysis showed that the effect of bevacizumab was more pronounced in patients with HER2-negative cancer (OR = 1.34 [1.17–1.54]; P < 0.0001) compared with HER2-positive cancer (OR = 1.69 [0.90–3.20]; P = 0.11). Similarly, in patients with HER2-negative cancer, the effect of bevacizumab was also more pronounced in patients with HR-negative cancer (OR = 1.38 [1.09–1.74]; P = 0.007) compared with HR-positive cancer (OR = 1.36 [0.78–2.35]; P = 0.27). No significant differences were observed between the groups with respect to cCR, surgery rate, or BCS rate. Additionally bevacizumab was associated with a higher incidence of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and hand–foot syndrome.

Conclusions

Higher proportions of patients achieved pCR when bevacizumab was added to NAC compared with when they received chemotherapy alone; acceptable toxicities were also found. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that patients with histologically confirmed HER2-negative and HR-negative breast cancer benefited the most.

A multicenter prospective phase II trial of neoadjuvant epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and 5-fluorouracil (FEC100) followed by cisplatin-docetaxel with or without trastuzumab in locally advanced breast cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of the (FEC100) followed by cisplatin/docetaxel with and without trastuzumab as primary chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC).

METHODS

Eighty patients with LABC (T2-T4, N0-N2, M0) were enrolled to receive 24 weeks of neoadjuvant chemotherapy using epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and 5-fluorouracil (FEC100) followed by cisplatin and docetaxel, plus trastuzumab if HER2 positive. The primary endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR) in breast and axilla in separate HER2-negative and HER2-positive cohort.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were evaluable for analysis of which 51 were HER2 negative and 29 HER2 positive: median age: 43 years, premenopausal: 82%, median tumor size: 7.0 cm (4-10), stage IIB: 25% and IIIA/IIIB: 75%, both ER/PR positive: 56%, HER2 positive (3+) by IHC staining: 36%. Clinical complete response was seen in 48%, and clinical partial response was seen in 52%. Overall the pathologic complete response (pCR) was 36% in breast, 64 % in axilla, and 32% in both breast and axilla. Analysis of pCR in breast and axilla, as a function of the hormonal receptor (HR) and HER2, was as follows: HR(+)/HER2(-): 11%; HR(+)/HER(+): 56 %; HR(-)/HER2(-): 36%; HR(-)/HER2(+): 62%.

CONCLUSION

In this series of locally advanced breast cancer, the combination of (FEC100) followed by cisplatin/docetaxel with and without trastuzumab was very active obtaining an impressive rate of pCR, particularly in HER2-positive and triple negative disease, which merits further investigation.

RNA Disruption and Drug Response in Breast Cancer Primary Systemic Therapy

BACKGROUND

As there is now evidence that switching clinical nonresponders early in primary systemic therapy to alternate treatment regimens can enhance survival in some breast cancer patients, the need for a robust intermediate endpoint that can guide treatment response across all tumor subtypes is urgent. Recently, chemotherapy drugs have been shown to induce a decrease in RNA quality in tumor cells from breast cancer biopsies in some patients at midtherapy, and that this has been associated with subsequent achievement of pathological complete response (pCR). The decrease in RNA quality has been shown to be associated with RNA disruption; aberrant RNA bands visualized by RNA electrophoresis have been associated with subsequent tumor cell death. The objectives of these studies are to show that a new assay based on induction of RNA disruption in tumor cells by chemotherapy can stratify at midtherapy, pCR responders from non-pCR responders irrespective of clinical response and to present early evidence that clinically useful RNA disruption can be detected as early as 14 days after initiation of treatment.

METHODS

RNA disruption in tumor cells was quantified by analysis of the RNA electrophoresis banding pattern and expressed as an RNA disruption index (RDI). To develop the RNA disruption assay (RDA), RDI was correlated with clinical outcome (pCR) from the NCIC-CTG MA.22 breast cancer clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00066443). RDA Zones were established by stratifying patients using RDI values into Zone 1, Zone 2, and Zone 3. Zone 3 included seven out of eight pCR responders, whereas Zone 1 contained no pCR responders. An intermediate zone (Zone 2) was established which contained one pCR. Subsequently, to determine early drug response, RNA disruption was examined by RDI after 14 days exposure to trastuzumab, zoledronic acid, or letrozole + cyclophosphamide ± sorafenib therapy.

RESULTS

In MA.22, RDA stratified 23 of 85 patients in Zone 1 as pCR nonresponders, 24 patients in Zone 2, an intermediate zone, and 38 patients in Zone 3, pCR responders and non-pCR patients who share RDI comparable to those achieving pCR. In the early response studies, after 14 days exposure to chemotherapy, some RNA disruption as measured by RDI elevation could be detected in 3/12 trastuzumab, 7/15 zoledronic acid, 5/29 letrozole + cyclophosphamide, and 5/23 letrozole + cyclophosphamide + sorafenib patients.

CONCLUSIONS

RDA is a novel intermediate endpoint that has promise for clinical utility for breast cancers early in response-guided primary systemic therapy.

International Expert Consensus on Primary Systemic Therapy in the Management of Early Breast Cancer: Highlights of the Fifth Symposium on Primary Systemic Therapy in the Management of Operable Breast Cancer, Cremona, Italy (2013)

Expert consensus-based recommendations regarding key issues in the use of primary (or neoadjuvant) systemic treatment (PST) in patients with early breast cancer are a valuable resource for practising oncologists. PST remains a valuable therapeutic approach for the assessment of biological antitumor activity and clinical efficacy of new treatments in clinical trials. Neoadjuvant trials provide endpoints, such as pathological complete response (pCR) to treatment, that potentially translate into meaningful improvements in overall survival and disease-free survival. Neoadjuvant trials need fewer patients and are less expensive than adjuvant trial, and the endpoint of pCR is achieved in months, rather than years. For these reasons, the neoadjuvant setting is ideal for testing emerging targeted therapies in early breast cancer. Although pCR is an early clinical endpoint, its role as a surrogate for long-term outcomes is the key issue. New and better predictors of treatment efficacy are needed to improve treatment and outcomes. After PST, accurate management of post-treatment residual disease is mandatory. The surgery of the sentinel lymph-node could be an acceptable option to spare the axillary dissection in case of clinical negativity (N0) of the axilla at the diagnosis and/or after PST. No data exists yet to support the modulation of the extent of locoregional radiation therapy on the basis of the response attained after PST although trials are underway.

Pathologic complete response as a potential surrogate for the clinical outcome in patients with breast cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: a meta-regression of 29 randomized prospective studies

PURPOSE

To assess the role of pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant therapy as surrogate end point of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with breast cancer, we performed a trial-based meta-regression of randomized studies comparing different neoadjuvant systemic treatments.

METHODS

The systematic literature search included electronic databases and proceedings of oncologic meetings. Endocrine therapy trials were excluded. Treatment effects on DFS and OS were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs), and treatment effects on pCR were expressed as odds ratios (ORs). A weighted regression analysis was performed on log-transformed treatment effect estimates to test the association between treatment effects on the surrogate outcome and treatment effects on the clinical outcome.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine trials, 59 arms, and 30 comparisons, for a total of 14,641 patients, were included in the analysis. Using the complete set of data, the regression of either the log(HR) for DFS or the log(HR) for OS on the log(OR) for pCR demonstrated only weak associations (R(2) = 0.08; 95% CI, 0 to 0.47; and R(2) = 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.41, respectively). Better associations were found in an exploratory analysis assessing a subset of trials comparing intensified/dose-dense chemotherapy versus standard-dose regimens (DFS: R(2) = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.95; P = .003; and OS: R(2) = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.93; P = .03).

CONCLUSION

This meta-regression analysis of 29 heterogeneous neoadjuvant trials does not support the use of pCR as a surrogate end point for DFS and OS in patients with breast cancer. However, pCR may potentially meet the criteria of surrogacy with specific systemic therapies.

Increased pathological complete response rate after a long-term neoadjuvant letrozole treatment in postmenopausal oestrogen and/or progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer

Background:

The objective of this study was to determine the optimal scheduling of 2.5 mg daily letrozole in neoadjuvant breast cancer patients to obtain pathological complete response (pathCR) and assess Ki-67 expression as an early predictor of response.

Patients and methods:

This single institution study comprised 120 oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive postmenopausal women with primary breast cancer (clinical stage ⩾T2, N0–1), from three sequential cohorts (cohort A of 40, cohort B of 40 and cohort C of 40 patients, respectively) based on different duration of the neoadjuvant letrozole. Biological markers such as ER, progesterone receptor, HER2 and Ki-67 expression were tested at diagnosis and at definitive surgery.

Results:

A total of 89 patients (75.4%) achieved an objective response with 44 (37.3%) clinical CRs and 45 (38.1%) partial responses. The clinical CRs were significantly observed in cohort C (23 out of 40 patients, 57.5%) and B (16 out of 38 patients, 42.1%) compared with cohort A (5 out of 40 patients, 12.5%) (P-value for trend <0.001). Letrozole induced a similar significant reduction in Ki-67 index after treatment in all cohorts. The pathCR rate was significantly more frequent in cohort C (7 out of 40 patients, 17.5%) than in cohort A (1 out of 40 patients, 2.5%) and B (2 out of 40 patients, 5.0%) (P-value for trend <0.04).

Conclusion:

One-year neoadjuvant letrozole therapy leads to a higher pathCR rate and may be the optimal length of drug exposure.

Chemotherapy and dietary phytochemical agents

Chemotherapy has been used for cancer treatment already for almost 70 years by targeting the proliferation potential and metastasising ability of tumour cells. Despite the progress made in the development of potent chemotherapy drugs, their toxicity to normal tissues and adverse side effects in multiple organ systems as well as drug resistance have remained the major obstacles for the successful clinical use. Cytotoxic agents decrease considerably the quality of life of cancer patients manifesting as acute complaints and impacting the life of survivors also for years after the treatment. Toxicity often limits the usefulness of anticancer agents being also the reason why many patients discontinue the treatment. The nutritional approach may be the means of helping to raise cancer therapy to a new level of success as supplementing or supporting the body with natural phytochemicals cannot only reduce adverse side effects but improve also the effectiveness of chemotherapeutics. Various plant-derived compounds improve the efficiency of cytotoxic agents, decrease their resistance, lower and alleviate toxic side effects, reduce the risk of tumour lysis syndrome, and detoxify the body of chemotherapeutics. The personalised approach using various phytochemicals provides thus a new dimension to the standard cancer therapy for improving its outcome in a complex and complementary way.

Chemotherapy (CT) and hormonotherapy (HT) as neoadjuvant treatment in luminal breast cancer patients: results from the GEICAM/2006-03, a multicenter, randomized, phase-II study

BACKGROUND

Luminal breast cancer is a highly endocrine responsive disease. However, the therapeutic benefit of chemotherapy (CT) in this population is not fully characterized. This study investigates the value of CT and hormone therapy (HT) in luminal breast cancer patients in the neoadjuvant setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with operable breast cancer and immunophenotypically defined luminal disease (ER+/PR+/HER2-/cytokeratin 8/18+) were recruited. Patients were randomized to CT (epirubicin 90 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) 4 cycles followed by docetaxel 100 mg/m(2 )4 cycles [EC-T]) or HT (exemestane 25 mg daily 24 weeks [combined with goserelin in premenopausal patients]). The primary end point was the clinical response measured by magnetic resonance imaging.

RESULTS

Ninety-five patients were randomized (47 CT, 48 HT). The clinical response rate was 66% for CT and 48% for HT (P = 0.075). We performed an unplanned analysis based on Ki67 levels (cut-off of 10%). Similar clinical response was seen between arms in patients with low Ki67 (CT: 63%, HT: 58%; P = 0.74); patients with high Ki67 had a better response with CT (67 versus 42%; P = 0.075). Grade 3/4 toxicity was more frequent with CT.

CONCLUSIONS

Luminal immunophenotype is not enough to identify patients who do not benefit from neoadjuvant CT. Luminal patients with low proliferation index could potentially avoid CT.

Changes in 18F-FDG tumor metabolism after a first course of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: influence of tumor subtypes

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of the different breast cancer subtypes on the tumor (18)F-FDG uptake at baseline and on its changes after the first course of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred and fifteen women with newly diagnosed, large or locally advanced breast cancer undergoing NAC were included. Estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and HER2 status were used to define three major tumor subtypes: triple negative (TN) (ER-/PR-/HER2-), luminal (ER+ and/or PR+; HER2-) and HER2 positive (HER2+). Using Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, the tumoral standard uptake value (SUV) maximal index was measured at baseline and just before the second course of NAC.

RESULTS

TN tumors presented the highest baseline SUV (11.3 ± 8.5; P < 0.0001). The decrease of SUV after the first course of NAC (ΔSUV) was significantly higher in TN and HER2-positive subtypes (-45% ± 25% and -57% ± 30%, respectively) than in luminal one (-19% ± 35%; P < 0.0001). ΔSUV was a predictive factor of the pathological complete response only in HER2-positive tumors (cut-off = -75%; P < 0.03) with an accuracy of 76%.

CONCLUSION

The baseline (18)F-FDG tumoral uptake but also its early response to NAC is different according to the immunohistological subtypes of breast cancer.

Intermediate endpoints of primary systemic therapy in breast cancer patients

Primary systemic therapy (PST) in breast cancer offers the opportunity to explore interactions between tumor biology and administered treatment. Changes in clinical, tissue-based, or imaging markers can provide information on the mechanisms of PST activity (activity endpoints) or predict treatment efficacy (surrogate endpoints). The most frequently used intermediate endpoint for PST is pathological complete response, but its role as a surrogate parameter of efficacy has not yet been demonstrated. Changes in tumor biology after PST may occur already a few days after treatment start; this implies that new potential surrogates occurring much earlier than pathological complete response (ie, the proliferation marker Ki67) can be identified and that short-term preoperative trials (window-of-opportunity trials) can be designed using a biological parameter as a primary endpoint. From these small trials, crucial information can be gleaned about the activity of new drugs for the design of large clinical trials.