Multi-gene assays: effect on chemotherapy use, toxicity and cost in estrogen receptor-positive early stage breast cancer

Ki67 assessment protocol as an integral biomarker for avoiding radiotherapy in the LUMINA breast cancer trial

AIMS

The LUMINA trial demonstrated a very low local recurrence rate in women ≥55 years with low-risk luminal A breast cancer (defined as grade I-II, T1N0, hormone receptor positive, HER2 negative and Ki67 index ≤13.25%) treated with breast-conserving surgery and endocrine therapy (but no other systemic therapy), supporting the safe omission of radiation in these women. Here we describe the protocol for Ki67 assessment, the companion diagnostic used to guide omission of adjuvant radiotherapy.

METHODS

Ki67 immunohistochemistry was performed on full-face sections at one of three regional labs. Pathologists trained in the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group (IKWG) method demarcated tumour areas on scanned slides and scored 100 nuclei from each of at least five randomly selected 1-mm fields. For cases with high Ki67 heterogeneity, further virtual cores were selected and scored in order to confidently assign a case as luminal A (≤13.25%) or B (>13.25%). Interlaboratory variability was assessed through an annual quality assurance programme during the study period.

RESULTS

From the quality assurance programme, the mean Ki67 index across all cases/labs was 13%. The observed intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and kappa statistics were ≥0.9 and ≥0.7, respectively, indicating a substantial level of agreement. Median scoring time was 4 min per case. The IKWG-recommended scoring method, performed directly from slides, requiring up to four scored fields, is concordant with the LUMINA scoring method (ICC ≥ 0.9).

CONCLUSION

Ki67 is a practical, reproducible, and inexpensive biomarker that can identify low-risk luminal A breast cancers as potential candidates for radiation de-escalation.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01791829.

PROCURE European consensus on breast cancer multigene signatures in early breast cancer management

Breast cancer multigene signatures (BCMS) have changed how patients with early-stage breast cancer (eBC) are managed, as they provide prognostic information and can be used to select patients who may avoid adjuvant chemotherapy. Clinical guidelines make recommendations on the use of BCMS; however, little is known on the current use of BCMS in clinical practice. We conduct a two-round Delphi survey to enquire about current use and perceived utility for specific patient profiles, and unmet needs of BCMS. Overall, 133 panellists experienced in breast cancer across 11 European countries have participated, most using BCMS either routinely (66.2%) or in selected cases (27.1%). Our results show that BCMS are mainly used to assess the risk of recurrence and to select patients for adjuvant chemotherapy; notably, no consensus has been reached on the lack of utility of BCMS for selecting the type of chemotherapy to administer. Also, there are discrepancies between the recommended and current use of BCMS in clinical practice, with use in certain patient profiles for which there is no supporting evidence. Our study suggests that physician education initiatives are needed to ensure the correct use and interpretation of BCMS to, ultimately, improve management of patients with eBC.

The budget impact of utilizing the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test from a US healthcare payer perspective

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test is used to estimate distant recurrence risk of hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) early-stage breast cancer and inform decisions on the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. A model-based budget impact analysis compared the Oncotype DX test in combination with clinical-pathological risk against using clinical-pathological risk alone for HR+/HER2- node-negative (N0) and node-positive (N1; 1-3 axillary lymph nodes) early-stage breast cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Test and medical costs associated with treatment of breast cancer were assessed through a US healthcare payer perspective. Distributions of patients by Recurrence Score result and distant recurrence probabilities with chemo-endocrine and endocrine therapy were derived from the TAILORx (N0) and RxPONDER (N1) trials. Changes in budget impact were evaluated over a 5-year horizon for a 1,000,000-member hypothetical health plan.

RESULTS

With the Oncotype DX test, there was an incremental budget impact of $261,067 (per member per month (PMPM): $0.004), in the N0 population, and $56,143 (PMPM: $0.001) in the N1 population over the 5-year period. The largest budget impact reduction in the N0 population was attributed to reduced breast cancer recurrence costs (incremental: -$633,457, PMPM: -$0.011), while chemotherapy sparing reduced costs in the N1 population (incremental: -$94,884, PMPM: -$0.002).

CONCLUSION

The clinical benefit of using the Oncotype DX test to inform adjuvant chemotherapy decisions has been shown in multiple randomized controlled trials. This analysis demonstrated that while using the Oncotype DX test to inform adjuvant chemotherapy decisions may slightly increase US healthcare costs over an initial 5-year time horizon (driven by a cost increase in the first year with cost savings reflected in remaining 4 years), there is significant scope for cost savings when assessing beyond this period due to avoided downstream costs of distant recurrence and long-term chemotherapy adverse events. PMPM costs also remain low across all populations examined, demonstrating a close-to-neutral budget impact.

Practice-Changing Use of the 21-Gene Test for the Management of Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer in Latin America

PURPOSE

We present a physician survey of the impact of 21-gene Breast Recurrence Score test results on treatment decisions in clinical practice in Latin America.

METHODS

This prospective survey enrolled consecutive patients at 14 sites in Argentina, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru who had routine 21-gene testing. Physician surveys captured patient and tumor characteristics and treatment decisions before and after 21-gene test results. The survey spanned the period before and after Trial Assigning Individualized Options for Treatment (TAILORx) results reported (June 2018). Overall net percent change in adjuvant chemotherapy recommendations was estimated, and asymptotic 95% CIs with continuity correction were calculated. The proportion with a change between pretest treatment recommendation and actual treatment received was calculated overall and by Recurrence Score groups per TAILORx.

RESULTS

Between March 2015 and December 2019, the survey was completed for 647 patients; 20% were node-positive. The mean patient age was 54 years (24-85 years); 55% were postmenopausal; 17%, 63%, and 20% had grade 1, 2, and 3 tumors, respectively; and 30% had tumors > 2 cm. Recurrence Score (RS) results were as follows: 20% RS 0-10, 56% RS 11-25, and 24% RS 26-100. Overall, chemotherapy recommendations fell by a relative proportion of 39% (95% CI, 33.4 to 44.3) after 21-gene testing (33% decrease in node-negative and 55% decrease in node-positive). Among node-negative patients, the relative decrease in chemotherapy recommendations was 28% (95% CI, 18.9 to 39.5) before TAILORx and 36% (95% CI, 28.4 to 43.7) after.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this large survey of 21-gene test practice patterns was the first conducted in Latin America and showed the relevance of 21-gene testing in low- and medium-resource countries to minimize chemotherapy overuse and underuse in breast cancer. The results showed substantial reductions in chemotherapy use overall—especially after TAILORx reported—indicating the practice-changing potential of that study.

Substantial Reduction in Adjuvant Chemotherapy With the Use of the 21-Gene Test to Manage Early Breast Cancer in a Public Hospital in Brazil

We evaluated the impact of 21-gene test results on treatment decisions for patients with early-stage breast cancer treated under the public health care system in Brazil, Sistema Único de Saúde.