1
|
Piccart MJ, Kalinsky K, Gray R, Barlow WE, Poncet C, Cardoso F, Winer E, Sparano J. Erratum to "Gene expression signatures for tailoring adjuvant chemotherapy of luminal breast cancer: stronger evidence, greater trust": [Annals of Oncology 32 (2021) 1077-1082]. Ann Oncol 2022; 33:668. [PMID: 35487836 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2022.04.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- M J Piccart
- Institut Jules Bordet Brussels, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Belgium; Breast International Group(BIG)-aisbl, Brussels, Belgium.
| | - K Kalinsky
- Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta
| | - R Gray
- Department of Data Science, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston
| | - W E Barlow
- SWOG Statistics and Data Management Centre, Seattle, USA
| | - C Poncet
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium
| | - F Cardoso
- Breast Unit, Champalimaud Clinical Centre/Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - E Winer
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - J Sparano
- Albert Einstein Cancer Center, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Piccart MJ, Kalinsky K, Gray R, Barlow WE, Poncet C, Cardoso F, Winer E, Sparano J. Gene expression signatures for tailoring adjuvant chemotherapy of luminal breast cancer: stronger evidence, greater trust. Ann Oncol 2021; 32:1077-1082. [PMID: 34082017 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.05.804] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2021] [Accepted: 05/23/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- M J Piccart
- Institut Jules Bordet Brussels, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Brussels, Belgium; Breast International Group(BIG)-aisbl, Brussels, Belgium.
| | - K Kalinsky
- Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, USA
| | - R Gray
- Department of Data Science, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, USA
| | - W E Barlow
- SWOG Statistics and Data Management Centre, Seattle, USA
| | - C Poncet
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium
| | - F Cardoso
- Breast Unit, Champalimaud Clinical Centre/Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - E Winer
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - J Sparano
- Albert Einstein Cancer Center, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sharma P, Barlow WE, Godwin AK, Pathak H, Isakova K, Williams D, Timms KM, Hartman AR, Wenstrup RJ, Linden HM, Tripathy D, Hortobagyi GN, Hayes DF. Impact of homologous recombination deficiency biomarkers on outcomes in patients with triple-negative breast cancer treated with adjuvant doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (SWOG S9313). Ann Oncol 2019; 29:654-660. [PMID: 29293876 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdx821] [Citation(s) in RCA: 65] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-causing alterations have been reported in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). We hypothesized that TNBCs with HRD alterations might be more sensitive to anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy and report on HRD status and BRCA1 promoter methylation (PM) as prognostic markers in TNBC patients treated with adjuvant doxorubicin (A) and cyclophosphamide (C) in SWOG9313. Patients and methods In total, 425 TNBC patients were identified from S9313. HRD score, tumor BRCA1/2 sequencing, and BRCA1 PM were carried out on DNA isolated from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue. Positive HRD status was defined as either a deleterious tumor BRCA1/2 (tBRCA) mutation or a pre-defined HRD score ≥42. Markers were tested for prognostic value on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) using Cox regression models adjusted for treatment assignment and nodal status. Results HRD status was determined in 89% (379/425) of cases. Of these, 67% were HRD positive (27% with tBRCA mutation, 40% tBRCA-negative but HRD score ≥42). HRD-positive status was associated with a better DFS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-1.00; P = 0.049] and non-significant trend toward better OS (HR = 0.71; 95% CI 0.48-1.03; P = 0.073). High HRD score (≥42) in tBRCA-negative patients (n = 274) was also associated with better DFS (HR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.43-0.94; P = 0.023) and OS (HR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.42-1.00; P = 0.049). BRCA1 PM was evaluated successfully in 82% (348/425) and detected in 32% of cases. The DFS HR for BRCA1 PM was similar to that for HRD but did not reach statistical significance (HR = 0.79; 95% CI 0.54-1.17; P = 0.25). Conclusions HRD positivity was observed in two-thirds of TNBC patients receiving adjuvant AC and was associated with better DFS. HRD status may identify TNBC patients who receive greater benefit from AC-based chemotherapy and should be evaluated further in prospective studies. Clinical Trials Number Int0137 (The trial pre-dates Clinicaltrial.Gov website establishment).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P Sharma
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, USA.
| | - W E Barlow
- SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, USA; Cancer, Research and Biostatistics (CRAB), Seattle, USA
| | - A K Godwin
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, USA
| | - H Pathak
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, USA
| | - K Isakova
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, USA
| | - D Williams
- Myriad Genetics, Inc., Salt Lake City, USA
| | - K M Timms
- Myriad Genetics, Inc., Salt Lake City, USA
| | | | | | - H M Linden
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, USA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, USA
| | - D Tripathy
- Department of Breast Medical Onocolgy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - G N Hortobagyi
- Department of Breast Medical Onocolgy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - D F Hayes
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Mehta RS, Barlow WE, Albain KS, Vandenberg TA, Dakhil SR, Tirumali NL, Lew DL, Hayes DF, Gralow JR, Linden HM, Livingston RB, Hortobagyi GN. Abstract PD5-07: A phase III randomized trial of anastrozole and fulvestrant versus anastrozole or sequential anastrozole and fulvestrant as first-line therapy for postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer: Final survival outcomes of SWOG S0226. Cancer Res 2018. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs17-pd5-07] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background: Anastrozole depletes estrogen via aromatase inhibition and fulvestrant binds and degrades estrogen receptor. In a Phase III trial we compared the concurrent use of these agents to anastrozole alone or sequential anastrozole and fulvestrant in first-line therapy of hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women, and demonstrated improved progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS)-NEJM 2012. Now we report PFS and OS five years after the initial positive findings. Methods: A total of 707 patients were randomized to either 1 mg anastrozole P.O. daily (Arm 1) or to the combination of anastrozole and fulvestrant (Arm 2). Fulvestrant was administered as a loading dose of 500 mg on day 1, 250 mg on days 14, 28 and monthly thereafter. Randomization was stratified by adjuvant tamoxifen use. The primary endpoint was PFS with OS a secondary outcome. 40% patients not in visceral crisis crossed over to fulvestrant after progression on arm 1. Analysis of survival was by 2-sided stratified log-rank tests and Cox regression using intent-to-treat. Subset analyses include treatment effect by adjuvant tamoxifen exposure, initial sites of metastases and time from diagnosis. Results: There were 646 PFS events (328 and 318 for arms 1 and 2, respectively) among 694 eligible patients (345 and 349, respectively). Overall, median PFS was 13.5 months for arm 1 and 15.0 months for the arm 2 (log-rank p=0.007; HR=0.81 (95% CI 0.69-0.94)). This benefit extended similarly in visceral and non-visceral subgroups. In subset analysis for Arms 1 and 2, respectively, in tamoxifen-naive women (60%, n=414), median PFS was 12.7 vs. 16.7 months (log-rank p=0.002; HR=0.73 (95% CI 0.60-0.89) while in women exposed to tamoxifen, median PFS was 13.9 vs. 13.6 months (log-rank p=0.57; HR=0.93 (95% CI 0.73-1.19)). An improved OS in the combination arm was seen, median OS 42 and 50 months in arms 1 and 2, based on 261 and 247 deaths, respectively (log-rank p=0.028; HR=0.82 (95% CI 0.69-0.98)). In subset analysis in tamoxifen-naive women, median OS was 40.3 vs. 52.2 months for Arms 1 and 2, respectively (log-rank p=0.007; HR=0.73 (95% CI 0.58-0.92)) while in women exposed to tamoxifen, median OS was 43.5 vs. 48.2 months (log-rank p=0.85; HR=0.97 (95% CI 0.74-1.27). Patients with initial diagnosis >10 years benefitted most from the combination (HR=0.66 (95% CI 0.49-0.89)) regardless of tamoxifen exposure. Patients in Arm 1 who crossed over had post-progression survival similar to post-progression survival of Arm 2 patients. Conclusion: The addition of fulvestrant to anastrozole was associated with improved long-term PFS and OS compared to anastrozole alone, despite the use of fulvestrant at a dose lower than the approved, and despite the substantial cross over to fulvestrant after progression on anastrozole alone. The benefit was especially notable in those without recent exposure to adjuvant endocrine therapy. Ongoing translational medicine studies will further refine the need for up front fulvestrant. ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT00075764. Funding: NIH/NCI U10CA180888, U10CA180819 and AstraZeneca.
Citation Format: Mehta RS, Barlow WE, Albain KS, Vandenberg TA, Dakhil SR, Tirumali NL, Lew DL, Hayes DF, Gralow JR, Linden HM, Livingston RB, Hortobagyi GN. A phase III randomized trial of anastrozole and fulvestrant versus anastrozole or sequential anastrozole and fulvestrant as first-line therapy for postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer: Final survival outcomes of SWOG S0226 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD5-07.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- RS Mehta
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - WE Barlow
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - KS Albain
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - TA Vandenberg
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - SR Dakhil
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - NL Tirumali
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - DL Lew
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - DF Hayes
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - JR Gralow
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - HM Linden
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - RB Livingston
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| | - GN Hortobagyi
- UCIMC, Orange, CA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; London Health Sciences Center/, London, ON, Canada; Wichita Community Clinical Oncology, Wichita, KS; Northwest CCOP/Northwest, Portland, OR; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Puget Sound Cancer Consortium, Seattle, WA; University of Washingtons, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona/Arizona Cancer, Tuscon, AZ; MD Anderson, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Pusztai L, Barlow WE, Ganz PA, Henry NL, White J, Jagsi R, Mammen JMV, Lew D, Mejia J, Karantza V, Aktan G, Sharon E, Korde L, Hortobagyi GN, Mamounas E. Abstract OT1-02-04: SWOG S1418/NRG -BR006: A randomized, phase III trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MK-3475 as adjuvant therapy for triple receptor-negative breast cancer with > 1 cm residual invasive cancer or positive lymph nodes (>pN1mic) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer Res 2018. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs17-ot1-02-04] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background: Patients with residual cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, particularly triple negative cancers (TNBC), have poor prognosis.The SWOG S1418 / NRG BR-006 (NCT02954874) randomized, phase III trial tests the hypothesis that administration of pembrolizumab after surgery for 12 months will reduce invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) by 33% compared to observation in patients with TNBC and > 1 cm residual invasive cancer or positive lymph nodes (>pN1mic) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Methods: Eligible patients ≥18 years old with triple negative breast cancer defined by ASCO/CAP guidelines and >1 cm residual invasive cancer in the breast, or any macrometastases in the lymph nodes after completion of 16-24 weeks of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients may receive post-operative chemotherapy for up to 24 weeks but must be registered for screening within 35 days of completion of adjuvant chemo. Completion of radiation therapy prior to registration is allowed, but it is preferred that patients receive radiation after randomization; patients randomized to pembrolizumab will receive their XRT concomitant with pembrolizumab. Adequate organ functions: ANC > 1.5, PLT > 100, Hgb > 9, normal creatinine, Tbili < 1.5 IUNL, AST/ALT/AlkPhos < 2.5 IULN. HIV with good CD4 count is allowed. Active autoimmune disease, Hep B,C, prior immunotherapy, active immunosuppressive therapy, or live vaccines within 30 days of registration are not allowed. Five unstained slides for PDL1 staining are required for stratification. The study has a dual primary endpoint; comparison of IDFS between arms in (i) all randomized patients (1-sided a=0.01) and in PDL-1 positive patients (1-sided a=0.015). Secondary endpoints include toxicity, overall survival, distant recurrence free survival (DRFS) and quality of life measures. Patients will be randomized 1:1 with stratification for PDL1 status, T size, nodal status and adjuvant chemo (yes or no) to observation or 1 year of pembrolizumab 200mg IV q 3 weeks. The accrual goal is N=1000 patients with estimated trial duration of 8 years. Two interim analyses are planned for all randomized patients when 50% and 75% of IDFS events have occurred for early stopping for either futility or efficacy. The study was activated on 11/15/16 and 34 patients were registered as of June 9, 2017. Cancer Trials Support Unit (CTSU) sites can use “OPEN” (https://open.ctsu.org) to enroll patients to this trial.
Funding: NIH/NCI U10CA180888, U10CA180819, CA180868; and in part by Merck, Sharpe & Dohme, Corporation.
Citation Format: Pusztai L, Barlow WE, Ganz PA, Henry NL, White J, Jagsi R, Mammen JMV, Lew D, Mejia J, Karantza V, Aktan G, Sharon E, Korde L, Hortobagyi GN, Mamounas E. SWOG S1418/NRG -BR006: A randomized, phase III trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MK-3475 as adjuvant therapy for triple receptor-negative breast cancer with > 1 cm residual invasive cancer or positive lymph nodes (>pN1mic) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT1-02-04.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Pusztai
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - WE Barlow
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - PA Ganz
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - NL Henry
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - J White
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - R Jagsi
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - JMV Mammen
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - D Lew
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - J Mejia
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - V Karantza
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - G Aktan
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - E Sharon
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - L Korde
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - GN Hortobagyi
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| | - E Mamounas
- Yale Cancer Center; SWOG Statistical Center; University of California Los Angeles; Huntsman Cancer Institute; Ohio State University Medical Center; University of Michigan; Cansas University Medical Center; Merck and Company; National Cancer Institute; University of Texas MD Andrson Cancer Center; Orlando Health Cancer Center
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Hershman DL, Till C, Wright JD, Ramsey SD, Barlow WE, Unger JM. Abstract P6-12-09: Association between cardiovascular risk factors and cardiac events among breast cancer patients enrolled in SWOG clinical trials. Cancer Res 2018. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs17-p6-12-09] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background: Due to early detection and improved treatments, women with breast cancer are living longer. Breast cancer shares risk factors with cardiovascular disease (CVD), and its treatments have adverse cardiovascular effects. Less is known about the association between cardiac risk factors and long-term cardiac events among the patients enrolled in breast cancer trials, as most trials fail to collect this information.
Methods: We examined the SWOG database to identify phase II/III breast cancer trials from 1999-2011. Among patients over 65 years, we linked the SWOG clinical records to Medicare claims data according to social security number and date of birth. This analysis included patients with 6+ months of Medicare coverage prior to baseline and 12+ months of Medicare coverage at any point after baseline. The comorbidities investigated at baseline were diabetes, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, coronary artery/ischemic heart disease and obesity. A cardiac event was defined as an acute ischemic event or acute heart failure. Cox regression was used to calculate time-to-event, stratified by study ID and adjusted for baseline age, race, and prognostic risk score. Cox regression was performed separately for each CVD risk factor, and an additional analysis was performed to assess the impact of having multiple concurrent risk factors. Secondary analyses were performed separately by study type (Adjuvant, Advanced).
Results: Among patients linked to Medicare included in this cohort (N=742), the median age was 70, and median follow-up was 6 years. The majority of patients were non-Hispanic white. The most prevalent conditions were hypercholesterolemia (58%) and hypertension (73%). Only 13% had no baseline risk CVD factors. In a Cox regression, all baseline risk factors except hypercholesterolemia and obesity were statistically significantly or borderline statistically significantly associated with an increased risk of eventual cardiac event, and for ischemic heart disease the increased risk was more than two-fold (HR=2.27, 95% CI=1.46-3.54, p=0.0003) and for baseline diabetes nearly two-fold (HR=1.75, 95% CI=1.13-2.71, p=0.01). In addition, there was evidence of a linear association of number of concurrent risk factors and cardiac events (HR per additional risk factor = 1.35 (1.09-1.66), p=0.005). In the stratified analysis, the associations were statistically significant only for participants on adjuvant studies. No association between baseline cardiac risk factors and cardiovascular outcomes were seen among patients with advanced cancer.
Conclusions:In summary, we found that even among healthy breast cancer patients selected for clinical trials, baseline CVD risk factors are associated with an increased risk of cardiac events, however this association was not observed for patients with advanced disease, who are more likely to die from breast cancer before experiencing a cardiovascular event.
Citation Format: Hershman DL, Till C, Wright JD, Ramsey SD, Barlow WE, Unger JM. Association between cardiovascular risk factors and cardiac events among breast cancer patients enrolled in SWOG clinical trials [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-12-09.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- DL Hershman
- Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, NY; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - C Till
- Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, NY; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - JD Wright
- Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, NY; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - SD Ramsey
- Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, NY; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - WE Barlow
- Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, NY; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - JM Unger
- Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, NY; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Moore HCF, Unger JM, Phillips KA, Boyle F, Hitre E, Moseley A, Porter D, Francis PA, Goldstein LJ, Gomez HL, Vallejos CS, Partridge AH, Dakhil SR, Garcia AA, Gralow J, Lombard JM, Forbes JF, Martino S, Barlow WE, Fabian CJ, Minasian L, Meyskens FL, Gelber RD, Hortobagyi GN, Albain KS. Abstract P1-15-01: Final analysis of SWOG S0230/Prevention of early menopause study (POEMS). Cancer Res 2018. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs17-p1-15-01] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The SWOG S0230/POEMS study demonstrated a 70% reduction in ovarian failure (OF) with goserelin coadministration during chemotherapy (CT) for ER-negative early breast cancer (BC; Moore H et al, NEJM 2015). Goserelin use was also associated with more pregnancies as well as favorable disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Here we report the final analysis after 5 years of follow-up.
METHODS: Premenopausal women age <50 with stage I-IIIA ER/PR-negative BC to be treated with cyclophosphamide-containing CT were randomized to receive standard CT with or without monthly goserelin 3.6 mg SQ starting at least 1 week prior to the first CT dose. The primary endpoint was OF at 2-years, defined as amenorrhea for the prior 6 months and post-menopausal FSH. Secondary endpoints included pregnancies, disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). An unplanned analysis of rate of menses recovery at 2 years (presence of menses within 6 months of the 2 year time-point or pregnancy within the first 2 years) was also conducted. OF and pregnancy endpoints were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression adjusting for stratification factors (age and CT regimen); DFS and OS were examined using multivariable Cox regression, adjusting for stratification factors and stage. Two-sided p-values are reported unless otherwise specified in accordance with protocol design.
RESULTS: Among 257 randomized participants, 218 were eligible and evaluable. One hundred thirty-six eligible and evaluable patients had OF data and 186 had menstrual data. Median age was 37.7 years. Among the 136 patients with OF data, the odds ratio (OR) for OF at 2 years was 0.30 (95% CI 0.1-0.98; one-sided p=0.023) comparing CT with goserelin to standard CT alone. Among 186 patients with menstrual data, 80% recovered menses by 2 years in the goserelin arm compared with 70% in the standard arm (OR=1.74, 95% CI: 0.83-3.66, p=0.15). Pregnancies, DFS and OS are reported for all 218 eligible and evaluable patients. With a median follow-up of 5.1 years, 22% of patients in the goserelin group had at least one pregnancy compared with 12% in the standard group (OR 2.38, 95% CI 1.08-5.26, p=0.03). Cumulative incidence of pregnancy at 5 years is 23% in the goserelin arm compared with 12% in the standard group. Five-year Kaplan-Meier DFS estimates are 88% in the goserelin arm compared with 79% in the standard arm (HR=0.50, p=0.05). Five-year OS is 92% with goserelin versus 83% in the standard arm (HR=0.47, p=0.06). Including all 257 randomized patients, HR for DFS and OS are 0.67 and 0.48 (p=0.18 and p=0.05).
CONCLUSION: Ovarian suppression with goserelin during chemotherapy for hormone receptor-negative breast cancer reduces OF risk and, after 5 years of follow-up, continues to be associated with more pregnancies and improved survival compared with chemotherapy without goserelin.
SUPPORT: NIH/NCI grant awards CA189974, CA180888, CA180819, CA074362; AstraZeneca
Citation Format: Moore HCF, Unger JM, Phillips K-A, Boyle F, Hitre E, Moseley A, Porter D, Francis PA, Goldstein LJ, Gomez HL, Vallejos CS, Partridge AH, Dakhil SR, Garcia AA, Gralow J, Lombard JM, Forbes JF, Martino S, Barlow WE, Fabian CJ, Minasian L, Meyskens FL, Gelber RD, Hortobagyi GN, Albain KS. Final analysis of SWOG S0230/Prevention of early menopause study (POEMS) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-15-01.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- HCF Moore
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - JM Unger
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - K-A Phillips
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - F Boyle
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - E Hitre
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - A Moseley
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - D Porter
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - PA Francis
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - LJ Goldstein
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - HL Gomez
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - CS Vallejos
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - AH Partridge
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - SR Dakhil
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - AA Garcia
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - J Gralow
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - JM Lombard
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - JF Forbes
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - S Martino
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - WE Barlow
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - CJ Fabian
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - L Minasian
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - FL Meyskens
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - RD Gelber
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - GN Hortobagyi
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| | - KS Albain
- Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; SWOG Statiscial Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Sydney, Sidney, NSW, Australia; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Aukland Regional Cancer Center and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand; Fox Chace Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Instituto de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru; Oncosalud SAC, Lima, Peru; Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA; University of Kansas, Westwood, KS; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; University of California at Irvine, Orange, CA; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Albain KS, Crager MR, Barlow WE, Baehner FL, Bergamaschi A, Rae JM, Ravdin PM, Tripathy D, Gralow JR, Livingston RB, Osborne CK, Ingle JN, Pritchard KI, Davidson NE, Carey LA, Cherbavaz DB, Sing AP, Shak S, Hortobagyi GN, Hayes DF. Abstract PD7-07: Discovery of molecular predictors of late breast cancer specific events (BCSE) in ER+, node+ breast cancer – new transcriptome expression whole gene analysis of the phase III adjuvant trial SWOG S8814. Cancer Res 2017. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs16-pd7-07] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Unique genes and pathways were identified for prognosis on tamoxifen (T, 5 yrs) and prediction on CAF-T vs T in S8814 using whole transcriptome RNA-Seq from archival FFPE tissue. (Albain, et al; Cherbavaz, et al; SABCS 2015) Discovery was robust for early DFS events but sparse for late. The aims of this new analysis were to 1) utilize a new endpoint BCSE for gene discovery of late events, prognosis and prediction and 2) add intronic counts to the previous exonic results to define whole genes impacting on late BCSE.
METHODS: Charts of patients (pts) on CAF-T (212) vs T (142) were reviewed to define the BCSE endpoint (local/regional, contralateral, distant). Deaths without BC were treated as competing risks. BCSE models (including metagenes) of late prognosis and prediction used cumulative incidence functions. Consolidated intronic regions counts within genes were added to exonic regions counts. Using these “whole gene” (WG) counts, association of gene expression with time to BCSE was assessed by Cox regression. A multiple WG score (MWGS) for BCSE prognosis beyond 5 yrs (to 12.5 yrs) was constructed and evaluated for 1-3 and 4+ node (N) groups. False discovery rate was controlled at 10%.
RESULTS: More exons and WG were discovered for prognosis on T alone over 12.5 yrs with the BCSE endpoint than DFS. For prognosis of late BCSE after 5 yrs, more genes were discovered using WG (n=111) than by exons (n=9). There were significantly fewer genes for late BCSE on CAF-T (8, WG; 0, exons). The functions of WG prognostic for late BCSE were: cell cycle/proliferation-26 genes, chromosome segregation/mitotic spindle-22, DNA repair/maintenance-10, transcriptional/translational control-5, cell adhesion/migration-4, immune-3, diverse/unknown-32 and growth factor/hormone receptor signaling-9 (this group was only found by WGs, not exons). Of these 111 WG, a MWGS prognostic for late BCSE on T used 57 previously discovered genes pre-specified for this analysis. Probability of BCSE beyond 5 yrs for low vs high MWGS was 8% vs 21% in N1-3+ and 17% vs 42% in N4+. Late prognosis on T differed by low vs high risk defined in a metagene model: cumulative BCSE at year 10 was 0% vs 47% (low vs high risk, p=0.001). Prediction of 10-yr incidence of BCSE varied by risk level by treatment in a metagene model: low risk- CAF-T=47%, T=0% (p=0.045); high risk- CAF-T=35%, T=45% (p=0.027).
CONCLUSIONS: Gene discovery for prognosis of late BCSE is enhanced with a novel WG transcriptome expression approach. Use of chemotherapy (CT) before T significantly attenuated gene discovery, so that molecular tools for decisions on extending endocrine therapy (ET) may not be reliable in a setting of prior CT. Some pts on ET for 5 yrs may not require either longer ET or CT, given a N+ cohort was defined with no BCSE observed over 12.5 yrs. For prediction of CT benefit, CAF-T appeared to be inferior to T in a low risk metagene model for BCSE. In sum, these results add more evidence that ET alone may be sufficient (perhaps better) in select N+ settings. Validation in SWOG S1007 (RxPONDER) is planned.
SUPPORT: NCI CA180888, 180819, 180821, 180820, 180863; in part, Genomic Health, Inc.
Citation Format: Albain KS, Crager MR, Barlow WE, Baehner FL, Bergamaschi A, Rae JM, Ravdin PM, Tripathy D, Gralow JR, Livingston RB, Osborne CK, Ingle JN, Pritchard KI, Davidson NE, Carey LA, Cherbavaz DB, Sing AP, Shak S, Hortobagyi GN, Hayes DF. Discovery of molecular predictors of late breast cancer specific events (BCSE) in ER+, node+ breast cancer – new transcriptome expression whole gene analysis of the phase III adjuvant trial SWOG S8814 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD7-07.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- KS Albain
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - MR Crager
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - WE Barlow
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - FL Baehner
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - A Bergamaschi
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - JM Rae
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - PM Ravdin
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - D Tripathy
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - JR Gralow
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - RB Livingston
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - CK Osborne
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - JN Ingle
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - KI Pritchard
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - NE Davidson
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - LA Carey
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - DB Cherbavaz
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - AP Sing
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - S Shak
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - GN Hortobagyi
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - DF Hayes
- Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; NA, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Univeristy of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Univeristy of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Nahleh ZA, Barlow WE, Hayes DF, Schott AF, Gralow JR, Sikov WM, Perez EA, Chennuru S, Mirshahidi HR, Corso SW, Lew DL, Pusztai L, Livingston RB, Hortobagyi GN. SWOG S0800 (NCI CDR0000636131): addition of bevacizumab to neoadjuvant nab-paclitaxel with dose-dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide improves pathologic complete response (pCR) rates in inflammatory or locally advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2016; 158:485-95. [PMID: 27393622 PMCID: PMC4963434 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-016-3889-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 68] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2016] [Accepted: 06/25/2016] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
SWOG S0800, a randomized open-label Phase II clinical trial, compared the combination of weekly nab-paclitaxel and bevacizumab followed by dose-dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) with nab-paclitaxel followed or preceded by AC as neoadjuvant treatment for HER2-negative locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) or inflammatory breast cancer (IBC). Patients were randomly allocated (2:1:1) to three neoadjuvant chemotherapy arms: (1) nab-paclitaxel with concurrent bevacizumab followed by AC; (2) nab-paclitaxel followed by AC; or (3) AC followed by nab-paclitaxel. The primary endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR) with stratification by disease type (non-IBC LABC vs. IBC) and hormone receptor status (positive vs. negative). Overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS), and toxicity were secondary endpoints. Analyses were intent-to-treat comparing bevacizumab to the combined control arms. A total of 215 patients were accrued including 11 % with IBC and 32 % with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). The addition of bevacizumab significantly increased the pCR rate overall (36 vs. 21 %; p = 0.019) and in TNBC (59 vs. 29 %; p = 0.014), but not in hormone receptor-positive disease (24 vs. 18 %; p = 0.41). Sequence of administration of nab-paclitaxel and AC did not affect the pCR rate. While no significant differences in OS or EFS were seen, a trend favored the addition of bevacizumab for EFS (p = 0.06) in TNBC. Overall, Grade 3-4 adverse events did not differ substantially by treatment arm. The addition of bevacizumab to nab-paclitaxel prior to dose-dense AC neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved the pCR rate compared to chemotherapy alone in patients with triple-negative LABC/IBC and was accompanied by a trend for improved EFS. This suggests reconsideration of the role of bevacizumab in high-risk triple-negative locally advanced breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Z A Nahleh
- Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Paul L. Foster School of Medicine, El Paso, TX, USA.
| | - W E Barlow
- SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - D F Hayes
- University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - A F Schott
- University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - J R Gralow
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - W M Sikov
- Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island and Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - E A Perez
- Genentech, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA.,Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - S Chennuru
- Hematology Oncology Consultants, Inc., Westerville, OH, USA.,Columbus NCI Community Oncology Research Program, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - H R Mirshahidi
- Loma Linda University Cancer Center, Loma Linda, CA, USA
| | - S W Corso
- Gibbs Cancer Center and Research Institute/Southeast Clinical Oncology Research (SCOR) Consortium NCORP/Upstate Carolina CCOP (previous), Spartanburg, SC, USA
| | - D L Lew
- SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | | | - G N Hortobagyi
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Albain KS, Crager MR, Barlow WE, Baehner FL, Bergamaschi A, Rae JM, Ravdin PM, Tripathy D, Gralow JR, Livingston RB, Osborne CK, Ingle JN, Pritchard KI, Davidson NE, Carey LA, Cherbavaz DB, Sing AP, Shak S, Hortobagyi GN, Hayes DF. Abstract S3-02: Molecular predictors of outcome on adjuvant CAF plus tamoxifen (T) vs T in postmenopausal patients (pts) with ER+, node+ breast cancer – Transcriptome expression analysis of the phase III trial SWOG-8814. Cancer Res 2016. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs15-s3-02] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In SWOG-8814A, pts with ER+ node+ breast cancer and low 21 gene recurrence scores (RS) had good prognosis and no CAF benefit, but high RS predicted longer survival from CAF followed by T (CAF-T) vs T (Albain, Lancet Oncol 2010). The aims of SWOG-8814B were to identify novel genes and networks for 1) prognosis of early and late relapse and 2) prediction of CAF benefit, using whole transcriptome expression analysis with next generation RNA sequencing (NGS).
METHODS: Stored RNA previously extracted for SWOG-8814A (T, CAF-T arms; T, 5 yrs) was analyzed for RNA/library yield (see companion abstract Cherbavaz et al. for methods). Genes were sequenced and expression of mRNA species was related to disease-free survival (DFS) using Cox proportional hazards. Discovery analyses controlled false discovery rate (FDR) at 10%. Genes were identified for prognosis on T and prediction on CAF-T vs T. Networks of genes/pathways were explored. Early (0-5 yrs) and late (5-13+ yrs) time periods were studied. Gene Ontology, Cytoscape, pathway and hierarchical clustering were used for functional gene and metagene analyses.
RESULTS: Of 367 samples, 354 (96%; 142 T, 212 CAF-T; 141 DFS events) had sufficient RNA/library yield, with 20,101 genes sequenced. For prognosis on T, there were 2327 and 568 genes discovered in early and all-yrs follow-up, with only 9 genes prognostic after 5 yrs. Prognosis analyses for residual risk after CAF-T were uninformative. Functional mapping found that genes prognostic for worse DFS were enriched for proliferation (G2M, M-phase), cellular metabolism, DNA repair, stress response and EMT; whereas, those with better DFS involved transcription regulation/repression via zinc finger proteins. Hierarchical clustering (T arm) found significant DFS prognostic metagene signatures for ER-related genes, immune response, ECM/stroma, chromatin remodeling-transcription factor activity and TGFb pathway. All varied for early vs late DFS events. For example, low ER/high stroma expression signatures correlated with high proliferation gene expression and were strongly associated with early events (standardized [st] HR 2.94, p<0.001). Late recurrence was associated with high proliferation, both individually (stHR 1.51, p=.035) and in combination with higher ER expression (stHR 1.51, p=0.09). Fifteen genes predicted CAF benefit (9 better DFS, 6 worse), or 129 genes if FDR relaxed to 20%. Cluster analysis for CAF prediction is ongoing.
CONCLUSIONS: Unique genes, clusters and pathways were identified by NGS of archival material in ER+ N+ breast cancer, including previously unreported signatures. While ER, stroma and proliferation-related signatures were associated with early prognosis, proliferation best predicted worse DFS after 5 yrs. NGS of the primary tumor is most informative for early events in pts with only 5 years of T, with few genes selecting only for late relapse. If validated, these signatures may identify pts with excellent DFS despite positive nodes for endocrine therapy alone as well as others for whom chemotherapy and/or biologics are also required
.
SUPPORT: NCI CA 180888, 180819, 180821, 180820, 180863; in part, Genomic Health, Inc.
Citation Format: Albain KS, Crager MR, Barlow WE, Baehner FL, Bergamaschi A, Rae JM, Ravdin PM, Tripathy D, Gralow JR, Livingston RB, Osborne CK, Ingle JN, Pritchard KI, Davidson NE, Carey LA, Cherbavaz DB, Sing AP, Shak S, Hortobagyi GN, Hayes DF. Molecular predictors of outcome on adjuvant CAF plus tamoxifen (T) vs T in postmenopausal patients (pts) with ER+, node+ breast cancer – Transcriptome expression analysis of the phase III trial SWOG-8814. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr S3-02.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- KS Albain
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - MR Crager
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - WE Barlow
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - FL Baehner
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - A Bergamaschi
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - JM Rae
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - PM Ravdin
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - D Tripathy
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - JR Gralow
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - RB Livingston
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - CK Osborne
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - JN Ingle
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - KI Pritchard
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - NE Davidson
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - LA Carey
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - DB Cherbavaz
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - AP Sing
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - S Shak
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - GN Hortobagyi
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - DF Hayes
- Loyola Univ Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, IL; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Genomic Health, Inc. and Univ of California, San Francisco, Redwood City and San Francisco, CA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; University of Texas Health Science Center Cancer Therapy and Research Center, San Antonio, TX; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tuscon, AR; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Kadlubar SA, Barlow WE, Mehta RS, Daniels JR, Albain KS, Vandengerg TA, Dakhil SR, Tirumali NR, Lew DL, Gralow JR, Livingston RB, Hortobagiyi GN, Hayes DF, Rae JM. Abstract P3-07-64: Association between gene variants in SULT1A1 and UGT1A4 and disease outcomes in patients enrolled in SWOG S0226 and treated with anastrozole alone or in combination with fulvestrant for metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Res 2016. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs15-p3-07-64] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background: Anastrozole (A) blocks estrogen production by inhibiting the activity of CYP19 aromatase. Fulvestrant (F) blocks estrogen receptor (ER) signaling by competitive binding, leading to ER degradation by ubiquitination. SWOG S0226 ("Phase III Randomized Trial of Anastrozole versus Anastrozole and Fulvestrant (250mg LD) as First Line Therapy for Post Menopausal Women with Metastatic Breast Cancer," ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT00075764) demonstrated that combination of A+F is superior to A alone as first-line therapy for patients with ER positive metastatic breast cancer (Mehta et al, NEJM, 2012). Our functional preclinical studies have shown that single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in SULT1A1 and UGT1A4, drug conjugation enzymes that inactivate A and F, result in decreased enzyme activity toward these drugs (Edavana et al, DMD, 2013; Edavana et al Pharmgenomics Pers Med 2013). We therefore hypothesized that these SNPs will be associated with disease outcomes in S0226 patients due to altered drug levels.
Methods: Germline DNA was available for 295 (43.5%) patients enrolled in S0226 overall (157 on A and 138 on A+F). SNPs in SULT1A1 and UGT1A4 were determined either by direct sequencing or allele-specific PCR (TaqMan) assays.
Results: There was no difference in progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) comparing patients with or without available germline DNA (p = 0.86 and 0.36, respectively). The SULT1A1 G902A allele (rs6839), which confers decreased mRNA and enzymatic activity, was associated with improved PFS (GG/GA vs. AA; HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56-0.98, p=0.033) and OS (HR 0.70, 95% 0.50-0.98, p=0.039). In exploratory subset analyses of PFS, the SULT1A1 G902A association was similar across both treatment arms (A HR=0.75; 95% CI 0.51-1.10; A+F HR=0.73; 95% CI 0.48-1.11). For OS there was some evidence of a difference by treatment (A HR=0.60; 95% CI 0.38-0.96; A+F HR=0.82; 95% CI 0.50-1.32), though no significant interaction was evident (p=0.30).
The UGT1A4 G-163A promoter variant, which leads to decreased protein expression, was not associated with PFS (AA/AG vs. GG HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.68-1.14, p=0.33); however, this variant was associated with OS (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.52-0.96, p=0.027). In subset analyses with OS, the difference was marginally stronger in the A arm (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42-0.97, p=0.035) compared to the A+F arm (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.49-1.21, p=0.25), though the interaction was not significant (p=0.40).
Conclusion: SULT1A1 and UGT1A4 gene variants resulting in decreased enzyme activity were associated with better PFS, OS or both in patients enrolled in SWOG S0226. Planned validation studies correlating these SNPs with drug levels and disease outcomes in additional patient cohorts will establish their clinical utility in identifying patients who benefit from A and F alone or in combination.
Funding: Supported by NIH/NCI CA118981; NIH/NCI/NCTN grants CA180888, CA180819, and CA180863; and in part by AstraZeneca.
Citation Format: Kadlubar SA, Barlow WE, Mehta RS, Daniels JR, Albain KS, Vandengerg TA, Dakhil SR, Tirumali NR, Lew DL, Gralow JR, Livingston RB, Hortobagiyi GN, Hayes DF, Rae JM. Association between gene variants in SULT1A1 and UGT1A4 and disease outcomes in patients enrolled in SWOG S0226 and treated with anastrozole alone or in combination with fulvestrant for metastatic breast cancer. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-07-64.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- SA Kadlubar
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - WE Barlow
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - RS Mehta
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - JR Daniels
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - KS Albain
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - TA Vandengerg
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - SR Dakhil
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - NR Tirumali
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - DL Lew
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - JR Gralow
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - RB Livingston
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - GN Hortobagiyi
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - DF Hayes
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| | - JM Rae
- University of Arkansas Medical Sciences; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; LUMC; LHSC; U Michigan; CCk; KP
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Yao S, Sucheston LE, Zhao H, Barlow WE, Zirpoli G, Liu S, Moore HCF, Thomas Budd G, Hershman DL, Davis W, Ciupak GL, Stewart JA, Isaacs C, Hobday TJ, Salim M, Hortobagyi GN, Gralow JR, Livingston RB, Albain KS, Hayes DF, Ambrosone CB. Germline genetic variants in ABCB1, ABCC1 and ALDH1A1, and risk of hematological and gastrointestinal toxicities in a SWOG Phase III trial S0221 for breast cancer. Pharmacogenomics J 2013; 14:241-7. [PMID: 23999597 PMCID: PMC3940691 DOI: 10.1038/tpj.2013.32] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2013] [Revised: 07/25/2013] [Accepted: 07/31/2013] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
Hematological and gastrointestinal toxicities are common among patients treated with cyclophosphamide and doxorubicin for breast cancer. To examine whether single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in key pharmacokinetic genes were associated with risk of hematological or gastrointestinal toxicity, we analyzed 78 SNPs in ABCB1, ABCC1 and ALDH1A1 in 882 breast cancer patients enrolled in the SWOG trial S0221 and treated with cyclophosphamide and doxorubicin. A two-SNP haplotype in ALDH1A1 was associated with an increased risk of grade 3 and 4 hematological toxicity (odds ratio=1.44, 95% confidence interval=1.16-1.78), which remained significant after correction for multiple comparisons. In addition, four SNPs in ABCC1 were associated with gastrointestinal toxicity. Our findings provide evidence that SNPs in pharmacokinetic genes may have an impact on the development of chemotherapy-related toxicities. This is a necessary first step toward building a clinical tool that will help assess risk of adverse outcomes before undergoing chemotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Yao
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - L E Sucheston
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - H Zhao
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - W E Barlow
- SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - G Zirpoli
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - S Liu
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - H C F Moore
- Department of Solid Tumor Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - G Thomas Budd
- Department of Solid Tumor Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - D L Hershman
- Columbia University Medical Center, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
| | - W Davis
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - G L Ciupak
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - J A Stewart
- Department of medicine, Baystate Medical Center, Springfield, MA, USA
| | - C Isaacs
- Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | | | - M Salim
- Allan Blair Cancer Centre, Regina, SK, Canada
| | - G N Hortobagyi
- Department of Breast Medical Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - J R Gralow
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - R B Livingston
- College of Medicine, Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ, USA
| | - K S Albain
- Loyola University Chicago Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Maywood, IL, USA
| | - D F Hayes
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - C B Ambrosone
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Fenton JJ, Carney PA, Elmore JG, Barlow WE. Response: Re: Effectiveness of Computer-Aided Detection in Community Mammography Practice. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012. [DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djr496] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
|
14
|
Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Barlow WE, Gralow J, Meric-Bernstam F, Hayes DF, Moinpour C, Ramsey SD, Schott AF, Sparks DB, Albain KS, Hortobagyi GN. SWOG S1007: A phase III, randomized clinical trial of standard adjuvant endocrine therapy with or without chemotherapy in patients with one to three positive nodes, hormone receptor (HR)-positive, and HER2-negative breast cancer with recurrence score (RS) of 25 or less. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.tps104] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
15
|
Budd GT, Barlow WE, Moore HCF, Hobday TJ, Stewart JA, Isaacs C, Salim M, Cho JK, Rinn K, Albain KS, Chew HK, Burton GV, Moore TD, Srkalovic G, McGregor BA, Flaherty LE, Livingston RB, Lew D, Gralow J, Hortobagyi GN. First analysis of SWOG S0221: A phase III trial comparing chemotherapy schedules in high-risk early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.1004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
16
|
Ramsey SD, Barlow WE, Moinpour C, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Hortobagyi GN, Veenstra DL, Garrison LP, Tunis SR, Baker LH. Incorporating comparative effectiveness research study endpoints into the treatment for positive-node, endocrine-responsive breast cancer (RxPONDER) study. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.tps101] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
17
|
Taplin SH, Abraham L, Geller BM, Yankaskas BC, Buist DSM, Smith-Bindman R, Lehman C, Weaver D, Carney PA, Barlow WE. Effect of previous benign breast biopsy on the interpretive performance of subsequent screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010; 102:1040-51. [PMID: 20601590 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djq233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Most breast biopsies will be negative for cancer. Benign breast biopsy can cause changes in the breast tissue, but whether such changes affect the interpretive performance of future screening mammography is not known. METHODS We prospectively evaluated whether self-reported benign breast biopsy was associated with reduced subsequent screening mammography performance using examination data from the mammography registries of the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium from January 2, 1996, through December 31, 2005. A positive interpretation was defined as a recommendation for any additional evaluation. Cancer was defined as any invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed within 1 year of mammography screening. Measures of mammography performance (sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value 1 [PPV1]) were compared both at woman level and breast level in the presence and absence of self-reported benign biopsy history. Referral to biopsy was considered a positive interpretation to calculate positive predictive value 2 (PPV2). Multivariable analysis of a correct interpretation on each performance measure was conducted after adjusting for registry, year of examination, patient characteristics, months since last mammogram, and availability of comparison film. Accuracy of the mammogram interpretation was measured using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS A total of 2,007,381 screening mammograms were identified among 799,613 women, of which 14.6% mammograms were associated with self-reported previous breast biopsy. Multivariable adjusted models for mammography performance showed reduced specificity (odds ratio [OR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.73 to 0.75, P < .001), PPV2 (OR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.79 to 0.92, P < .001), and AUC (AUC 0.892 vs 0.925, P < .001) among women with self-reported benign biopsy. There was no difference in sensitivity or PPV1 in the same adjusted models, although unadjusted differences in both were found. Specificity was lowest among women with documented fine needle aspiration-the least invasive biopsy technique (OR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.55 to 0.61, P < .001). Repeating the analysis among women with documented biopsy history, unilateral biopsy history, or restricted to invasive cancers did not change the results. CONCLUSIONS Self-reported benign breast biopsy history was associated with statistically significantly reduced mammography performance. The difference in performance was likely because of tissue characteristics rather than the biopsy itself.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephen H Taplin
- Applied Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, Hortobagyi GN, Hayes DF. Potential biologic causes of the racial survival disparity in adjuvant trials of ER-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2010.28.15_suppl.511] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
19
|
Schott AF, Lew D, Barlow WE, Albain KS, Chew HK, Wade JL, Lanier KS, Linden HM, Hortobagyi GN, Livingston RB. Simple oral therapy with capecitabine (CAPE) and cyclophosphamide (CPA) for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). J Clin Oncol 2010. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2010.28.15_suppl.1006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
20
|
Lohsoonthorn V, Kungsadalpipob K, Chanchareonsook P, Limpongsanurak S, Vanichjakvong O, Sutdhibhisal S, Sookprome C, Wongkittikraiwan N, Kamolpornwijit W, Jantarasaengaram S, Manotaya S, Siwawej V, Barlow WE, Fitzpatrick AL, Williams MA. Maternal periodontal disease and risk of preeclampsia: a case-control study. Am J Hypertens 2009; 22:457-63. [PMID: 19308031 DOI: 10.1038/ajh.2008.365] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND We examined whether pregnant women with periodontal disease have an increased risk of preeclampsia, and we empirically evaluated the extent to which associations between periodontal disease and preeclampsia are dependent upon diagnostic criteria used to define periodontal disease operationally. METHODS One hundred and fifty preeclampsia cases and one-fifty normotensive controls who delivered a singleton infant at term were enrolled. Periodontal examinations were performed within 48 h after delivery. Participants' periodontal health status was classified, a priori, into four categories according to the extent and severity of periodontal disease. Putative risk factors for periodontal disease and preeclampsia were ascertained during in-person postpartum interviews using a structured questionnaire and by medical record abstraction. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). RESULTS No clinically meaningful differences were observed between cases and controls with regard to periodontal parameters. After controlling for known confounders, severe clinical periodontal disease was not associated with an increased risk of preeclampsia (OR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.26-3.28). In addition, there was no evidence of a linear increase in risk of preeclampsia with increasing severity of periodontal disease (P for trend = 0.65). When different diagnostic criteria previously used in other studies were used, the prevalence of periodontal disease varied substantially. However, the magnitude and direction of associations between periodontal disease and preeclampsia were largely similar regardless of the diagnostic criteria used to define periodontal disease. CONCLUSIONS This study provides no convincing evidence that periodontal disease is associated with preeclampsia risk among Thai women.
Collapse
|
21
|
Rimm DL, Barlow WE, Harigopal M, Tedeschi G, Peggy PL, Yeh I, Haskell C, Livingston R, Hortobagyi GN, Hayes DF. Multiplexed AQUA-based assessment of SWOG 9313 shows prognostic value of continuous ER, PR and HER2 assessment. Cancer Res 2009. [DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.sabcs-704] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Abstract #704
Introduction: HER2 is expressed at high levels due to gene amplification in about 15% of breast cancer cases and it has been shown to be a poor prognostic marker. However, HER2 is also expressed in normal breast duct tissue, albeit a much lower levels. We hypothesized that continuous analysis of expression using AQUA will provide prognostic information beyond that attainable with conventional methods.
 Methods: A tissue microarray was made from 2123 cases of the 3122 patients accrued to SWOG 9313, in which sequential doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (A-C) was compared to combination AC. A multiplexed assessment of HER2 and estrogen receptor (ER) was performed on the same slide using the immunofluoresence-based AQUA® method of automated quantitative analysis. Reproducibility and fidelity of multiplexing were determined for each marker by regression analysis.
 Results: As expected, both ER and PR were significantly predictive of disease-free survival (DFS) when both are tested as continuous variables, both adjusted for node status, tumor size, treatment and menopausal status (p-values 0.005 and <0.001, respectively). HER2, measured as a continuous variable showed a bi-phasic effect. It has been previously reported (Camp et al, Cancer Research 2003, 63;1445) that both the high and low expressers of HER2 have worse outcome (low levels are equivalent to that seen in normal breast ducts). Splitting the SWOG cohort by deciles shows that both the top and bottom decile have worse DFS than the middle 80% (log rank p=0.012). Also, modeling the hazard ratio as a function of concentration shows a U-shape relationship showing both high and low HER2 expression is associated with poorer DFS.
 Conclusions: The AQUA method provides a reproducible method of continuous measurement of ER, and HER2 on the same slide. In this cohort both ER and PR as continuous variable are highly prognostic, as expected, but multiplexing with HER2 did not affect outcome. Quantitative analysis demonstrated that both low and high levels of HER2 expression were associated with poor outcome. Studies are ongoing to determine the significance of this observation with respect to biological classifications of breast cancer and relationships with breast cancer therapies.
Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(2 Suppl):Abstract nr 704.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- DL Rimm
- 1 Pathology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT
| | - WE Barlow
- 5 Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA
| | - M Harigopal
- 1 Pathology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT
| | | | - PL Peggy
- 6 Pathology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - I Yeh
- 7 Pathology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX
| | - C Haskell
- 8 Medical Oncology, UCLA, Santa Monica, CA
| | | | - GN Hortobagyi
- 3 Breast Medical Oncology, University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - DF Hayes
- 4 Breast Oncology, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Kash J, Barlow WE, Albain KS, Gralow JR, Lew D, Flaherty LE, Royce ME, Hortobagyi GN, Livingston RB. Phase II Southwest Oncology Group study of docetaxel and vinorelbine plus filgrastim with weekly trastuzumab for HER2-positive, stage IV breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2008.26.15_suppl.1033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
23
|
Porter PL, Barlow WE, Yeh IT, Lin MG, Yuan X, Donato E, Sledge GW, Shapiro CL, Ingle JN, Haskell CM, Albain KS, Roberts JM, Livingston RB, Hayes DF. Re: p27(Kip1) and cyclin E expression and breast cancer survival after treatment with adjuvant chemotherapy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007; 99:738. [PMID: 17470742 PMCID: PMC7717107 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djk163] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- PL Porter
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle WA
- University of Washington, Seattle WA
- Address for editorial correspondence: Peggy L. Porter, M.D., Member, Human Biology and Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave. N, Seattle, WA 98109, PH: 206-667-3751; FAX: 206-667-5815,
| | - WE Barlow
- University of Washington, Seattle WA
- SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle WA
| | - I-T Yeh
- University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX
| | - M-G Lin
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle WA
| | - X Yuan
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle WA
| | - E Donato
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle WA
| | - GW Sledge
- Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN
| | | | | | - CM Haskell
- University of California, Los Angeles CA
| | | | - JM Roberts
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle WA
| | | | - DF Hayes
- University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Abstract
When interpreting screening mammograms radiologists decide whether suspicious abnormalities exist that warrant the recall of the patient for further testing. Previous work has found significant differences in interpretation among radiologists; their false-positive and false-negative rates have been shown to vary widely. Performance assessments of individual radiologists have been mandated by the U.S. government, but concern exists about the adequacy of current assessment techniques. We use hierarchical modelling techniques to infer about interpretive performance of individual radiologists in screening mammography. While doing this we account for differences due to patient mix and radiologist attributes (for instance, years of experience or interpretive volume). We model at the mammogram level, and then use these models to assess radiologist performance. Our approach is demonstrated with data from mammography registries and radiologist surveys. For each mammogram, the registries record whether or not the woman was found to have breast cancer within one year of the mammogram; this criterion is used to determine whether the recall decision was correct. We model the false-positive rate and the false-negative rate separately using logistic regression on patient risk factors and radiologist random effects. The radiologist random effects are, in turn, regressed on radiologist attributes such as the number of years in practice. Using these Bayesian hierarchical models we examine several radiologist performance metrics. The first is the difference between the false-positive or false-negative rate of a particular radiologist and that of a hypothetical 'standard' radiologist with the same attributes and the same patient mix. A second metric predicts the performance of each radiologist on hypothetical mammography exams with particular combinations of patient risk factors (which we characterize as 'typical', 'high-risk', or 'low-risk'). The second metric can be used to compare one radiologist to another, while the first metric addresses how the radiologist is performing compared to an appropriate standard. Interval estimates are given for the metrics, thereby addressing uncertainty. The particular novelty in our contribution is to estimate multiple performance rates (sensitivity and specificity). One can even estimate a continuum of performance rates such as a performance curve or ROC curve using our models and we describe how this may be done. In addition to assessing radiologists in the original data set, we also show how to infer about the performance of a new radiologist with new case mix, new outcome data, and new attributes without having to refit the model.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D B Woodard
- Institute of Statistics and Decision Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708-0251, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
Chew HK, Barlow WE, Albain KS, Lew D, Budd GT, Allen G, Gralow J, Livingston R. SWOG 0338: A phase II trial of imatinib mesylate in combination with capecitabine in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2006.24.18_suppl.10529] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
10529 Background: Imatinib mesylate targets c-kit and platelet derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) tyrosine kinases, and both are variably expressed in breast cancer. Inhibition of PDGFR by imatinib mesylate may decrease tumor interstitial pressure and improve delivery of chemotherapy. Based on preclinical synergy, SWOG conducted a phase II trial in metastatic breast cancer. Methods: Patients were eligible if they had adenocarcinoma of the breast that had progressed on at least 1 but ≤ 2 prior chemotherapy regimens for metastatic disease. No prior 5-FU or capecitabine for metastatic disease was allowed. Patients had to be > 18 years with a Zubrod performance status ≤ 2 and have adequate organ function. Patients with brain metastases were ineligible. Patients received imatinib mesylate 400 mg orally daily and capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 orally twice daily on days 1–14 of a 21-day cycle. If tolerated, the imatinib mesylate was increased to 600 mg daily in subsequent cycles. This was a 2-stage design with 25 patients with measurable disease accrued in the first stage. A total of 70 patients was planned, including those with nonmeasurable disease, if accrual proceeded to the second stage. The primary endpoint was to determine the confirmed response rate (RR) to the combination therapy. Secondary endpoints were to estimate the 6-month progression free survival, to determine the toxicities, and to explore c-kit and PDGFR in this population. Results: 27 patients were accrued; 6 were ineligible. 19 patients received therapy and were evaluable for toxicity. The median age was 59 years (36–78). Four responses were seen: 1 complete, 1 confirmed partial, and 2 unconfirmed partial (RR 21%). The 6-month progression free survival was 16%. There were no grade 4 toxicities. The most common grade 3 toxicities, seen in 7 patients, were diarrhea, fatigue, and hand-foot syndrome. As 2 of the 4 responses were unconfirmed, accrual did not proceed to the second stage. Conclusions: The combination of imatinib mesylate and capecitabine was well tolerated in patients with metastatic breast cancer, but the RR was not better than was seen in a prior study of single agent capecitabine. Correlative studies to explore c-kit, PDGFR, and estrogen receptor expression and response are in progress. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H. K. Chew
- University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Southwest Oncology Group, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; PhenoPath Laboratories, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA
| | - W. E. Barlow
- University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Southwest Oncology Group, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; PhenoPath Laboratories, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA
| | - K. S. Albain
- University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Southwest Oncology Group, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; PhenoPath Laboratories, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA
| | - D. Lew
- University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Southwest Oncology Group, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; PhenoPath Laboratories, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA
| | - G. T. Budd
- University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Southwest Oncology Group, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; PhenoPath Laboratories, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA
| | - G. Allen
- University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Southwest Oncology Group, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; PhenoPath Laboratories, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA
| | - J. Gralow
- University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Southwest Oncology Group, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; PhenoPath Laboratories, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA
| | - R. Livingston
- University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA; Southwest Oncology Group, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, IL; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; PhenoPath Laboratories, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Ellis GK, Barlow WE, Russell CA, Royce ME, Perez EA, Livingston RB. SWOG 0012, a randomized phase III comparison of standard doxorubicin (A) and cyclophosphamide (C) followed by weekly paclitaxel (T) versus weekly doxorubicin and daily oral cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF (G) followed by weekly paclitaxel as neoadjuvant therapy for inflammatory and locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2006.24.18_suppl.lba537] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
LBA537 Background: Between 10-1-02 and 12-01-05, SWOG 0012 accrued patients to a two-arm randomized trial, with formal participation from NCCTG and CTSU participation by other cooperative groups. Arm 1 gave A at 60 mg/m2 and C at 600 mg/m2 q 3 wk IV for 5 cycles, arm 2 A at 24 mg/m2/wk × 15 IV and C at 60 mg/m2/day PO for 15 wk with G at 5 mcg/kg/day × 6/7 weekly. Both groups then received T at 80 mg/m2/wk × 12, and proceeded to surgery with pCR by NSABP criteria at the primary site as the endpoint. A total of 372 were randomized, and we report here on 265 patients (pts) evaluable for outcome, including those who did not proceed to surgery. In arm 1, pCR was seen in 17% vs 27% in arm 2 (p = .06); when adjusted for hormone receptor status (ER-PR- in 49% on arm 1, 41% on arm 2) and disease type (locally advanced vs inflammatory), the odds ratio in favor of arm 2 is 1.98 (95% CI 1.05–3.74, p = .034). For ER- PR- pts, pCR rates for Arm 1 vs 2 were 26 vs 43%, while for those with ER or PR+, pCR rates were 9 vs 14%. Inflammatory pts showed a striking difference in pCR rates for arm 1 vs arm 2 (12 vs 33%, p = .033). HER 2 status (+ in 29%) did not predict response or interact with treatment. Grade 3/4 toxicities (arm 1 vs 2, %) were as follows: hand-foot syndrome (0 vs 13), neutropenia (47 vs 16), neutropenic infection (1.8 vs 0.6), stomatitis (2 vs 11), and nausea/vomiting (11 vs 5). Toxicity from T was grade 3 neuropathy in 10%, with grade 3 or 4 neutropenia in 12%. There were no treatment-related deaths. Continuous or “metronomic” chemotherapy with AC is superior to standard intermittent AC, and the pCR rate reported for the continuous arm is the highest reported in a cooperative group experience for this patient population. [Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G. K. Ellis
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Norris Cancer Hospital, Los Angeles, CA; UNM CTRC, Albuquerque, NM; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL
| | - W. E. Barlow
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Norris Cancer Hospital, Los Angeles, CA; UNM CTRC, Albuquerque, NM; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL
| | - C. A. Russell
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Norris Cancer Hospital, Los Angeles, CA; UNM CTRC, Albuquerque, NM; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL
| | - M. E. Royce
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Norris Cancer Hospital, Los Angeles, CA; UNM CTRC, Albuquerque, NM; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL
| | - E. A. Perez
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Norris Cancer Hospital, Los Angeles, CA; UNM CTRC, Albuquerque, NM; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL
| | - R. B. Livingston
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; Norris Cancer Hospital, Los Angeles, CA; UNM CTRC, Albuquerque, NM; Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Gown AM, Goldstein LC, Porter PL, Livingston RB, Tam S, Yeh I, Barlow WE, Gralow JR, Hayes DF. Multivariate analysis of expression of the microtubule-associated protein, tau, predicts improved progression free and overall survival in patients with metastatic HER-2-negative breast cancers treated with docetaxel and vinorelbine plus filgrastim. J Clin Oncol 2006. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2006.24.18_suppl.543] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
543 Background: Drugs that poison the mitotic spindle, including taxanes and vinca alkaloids, are active agents against breast cancer. Preliminary evidence showed that high expression levels of tau predicted improved PFS and OS in patients with metastatic HER-2-negative breast cancers treated with docetaxel and vinorelbine plus filgrastim. We now tested whether levels of tau and another microtubule associated protein, beta-tubulin, could predict PFS and OS in multivariate analysis using other prognostic marker studies, including ER, PR, p53 and Ki-67 on a tissue microarray (TMA) obtained from patients in the SWOG S0102 trial. Materials and Methods: Immunohistochemistry (IHC) using antibodies to tau, beta-tubulin, ER, PR, p53, and Ki-67 was performed on a TMA constructed from the S0102 paraffin blocks. All markers were scored semiquantitatively from 0 to 3. Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using multivariate analysis. Results: A total of 38 patients (41.3%) were evaluated. Tau was positively correlated with ER (r=0.36; p=0.0325) and PR (r=0.63; p<0.0001), but not with beta tubulin (p=0.34), Ki-67 (p=0.58), or age (p=0.73). Beta tubulin was not significantly correlated with any other markers. Adjusting for age, there was a significant effect of tau expression on OS (HR=0.667, p= 0.0193) and PFS (HR=0.653; p=0.0035), with higher tau associated with longer survival. When adjusted for both age and PR, there was a marginally significant effect of tau on OS (HR=0.582; p=0.056) and PFS (HR=0.604; p= 0.065). Beta tubulin was not associated with OS (HR=0.909; p=0.66) and PFS (HR=0.904; p=0.58) adjusted for age. Conclusions: In multivariate analysis, identification of breast cancer specimens showing high expression levels of tau predicts improved PFS and OS in patients with metastatic HER-2-negative breast cancers treated with docetaxel and vinorelbine plus filgrastim. High expression of tau also correlated with PR and ER expression. These results confirm and expand earlier studies of the predictive power of tau in a multivariate analysis using a panel of IHC markers for breast cancer. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A. M. Gown
- PhenoPath Laboratories and IMPRIS, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - L. C. Goldstein
- PhenoPath Laboratories and IMPRIS, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - P. L. Porter
- PhenoPath Laboratories and IMPRIS, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - R. B. Livingston
- PhenoPath Laboratories and IMPRIS, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - S. Tam
- PhenoPath Laboratories and IMPRIS, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - I. Yeh
- PhenoPath Laboratories and IMPRIS, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - W. E. Barlow
- PhenoPath Laboratories and IMPRIS, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - J. R. Gralow
- PhenoPath Laboratories and IMPRIS, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - D. F. Hayes
- PhenoPath Laboratories and IMPRIS, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Ballard-Barbash R, Barlow WE, Ernster VL. RESPONSE: Re: Detection of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in Women Undergoing Screening Mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003. [DOI: 10.1093/jnci/95.6.487-a] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
|
29
|
Barlow WE, Davis RL, Glasser JW, Rhodes PH, Thompson RS, Mullooly JP, Black SB, Shinefield HR, Ward JI, Marcy SM, DeStefano F, Chen RT, Immanuel V, Pearson JA, Vadheim CM, Rebolledo V, Christakis D, Benson PJ, Lewis N. The risk of seizures after receipt of whole-cell pertussis or measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine. N Engl J Med 2001; 345:656-61. [PMID: 11547719 DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa003077] [Citation(s) in RCA: 211] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The administration of the diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and whole-cell pertussis (DTP) vaccine and measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine has been associated with adverse neurologic events, including seizures. We studied the relation between these vaccinations and the risk of a first seizure, subsequent seizures, and neurodevelopmental disability in children. METHODS This cohort study was conducted at four large health maintenance organizations and included reviews of the medical records of children with seizures. We calculated the relative risks of febrile and nonfebrile seizures among 679,942 children after 340,386 vaccinations with DTP vaccine, 137,457 vaccinations with MMR vaccine, or no recent vaccination. Children who had febrile seizures after vaccination were followed to identify the risk of subsequent seizures and other neurologic disabilities. RESULTS Receipt of DTP vaccine was associated with an increased risk of febrile seizures only on the day of vaccination (adjusted relative risk, 5.70; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.98 to 16.42). Receipt of MMR vaccine was associated with an increased risk of febrile seizures 8 to 14 days after vaccination (relative risk, 2.83; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.44 to 5.55). Neither vaccination was associated with an increased risk of nonfebrile seizures. Analyses of automated data alone gave results similar to the analyses of the data from medical-record reviews. The number of febrile seizures attributable to the administration of DTP and MMR vaccines was estimated to be 6 to 9 and 25 to 34 per 100,000 children, respectively. As compared with other children with febrile seizures that were not associated with vaccination, the children who had febrile seizures after vaccination were not found to be at higher risk for subsequent seizures or neurodevelopmental disabilities. CONCLUSIONS There are significantly elevated risks of febrile seizures on the day of receipt of DTP vaccine and 8 to 14 days after the receipt of MMR vaccine, but these risks do not appear to be associated with any long-term, adverse consequences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W E Barlow
- Immunization Studies Program, Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, WA 98101-1448, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To summarise the scientific evidence on the relation between educational status and measures of the frequency and the consequences of back pain and of the outcomes of interventions among back pain patients, and to outline possible mechanisms that could explain such an association if found. DESIGN Sixty four articles published between 1966 and 2000 that documented the association of formal education with back pain were reviewed. MAIN RESULTS Overall, the current available evidence points indirectly to a stronger association of low education with longer duration and/or higher recurrence of back pain than to an association with onset. The many reports of an association of low education with adverse consequences of back pain also suggest that the course of a back pain episode is less favourable among persons with low educational attainment. Mechanisms that could explain these associations include variations in behavioural and environmental risk factors by educational status, differences in occupational factors, compromised "health stock" among people with low education, differences in access to and utilisation of health services, and adaptation to stress. Although lower education was not associated with the outcomes of interventions in major studies, it is difficult, in light of the current limited available evidence, to draw firm conclusions on this association. CONCLUSION Scientific evidence supports the hypothesis that less well educated people are more likely to be affected by disabling back pain. Further study of this association may help advance our understanding of back pain as well as understanding of the relation between socioeconomic status and disease as a general phenomenon.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C E Dionne
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
31
|
O'Meara ES, Rossing MA, Daling JR, Elmore JG, Barlow WE, Weiss NS. Hormone Replacement Therapy After a Diagnosis of Breast Cancer in Relation to Recurrence and Mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001; 93:754-62. [PMID: 11353785 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/93.10.754] [Citation(s) in RCA: 182] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is typically avoided for women with a history of breast cancer because of concerns that estrogen will stimulate recurrence. In this study, we sought to evaluate the impact of HRT on recurrence and mortality after a diagnosis of breast cancer. METHODS Data were assembled from 2755 women aged 35-74 years who were diagnosed with incident invasive breast cancer while they were enrolled in a large health maintenance organization from 1977 through 1994. Pharmacy data identified 174 users of HRT after diagnosis. Each HRT user was matched to four randomly selected nonusers of HRT with similar age, disease stage, and year of diagnosis. Women in the analysis were recurrence free at HRT initiation or the equivalent time since diagnosis. Rates of recurrence and death through 1996 were calculated. Adjusted relative risks were estimated by use of the Cox regression model. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS The rate of breast cancer recurrence was 17 per 1000 person-years in women who used HRT after diagnosis and 30 per 1000 person-years in nonusers (adjusted relative risk for users compared with nonusers = 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.30 to 0.85). Breast cancer mortality rates were five per 1000 person-years in HRT users and 15 per 1000 person-years in nonusers (adjusted relative risk = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.13 to 0.91). Total mortality rates were 16 per 1000 person-years in HRT users and 30 per 1000 person-years in nonusers (adjusted relative risk = 0.48; 95% CI = 0.29 to 0.78). The relatively low rates of recurrence and death were observed in women who used any type of HRT (oral only = 41% of HRT users; vaginal only = 43%; both oral and vaginal = 16%). No trend toward lower relative risks was observed with increased dose. CONCLUSION We observed lower risks of recurrence and mortality in women who used HRT after breast cancer diagnosis than in women who did not. Although residual confounding may exist, the results suggest that HRT after breast cancer has no adverse impact on recurrence and mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E S O'Meara
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Buist DS, LaCroix AZ, Barlow WE, White E, Cauley JA, Bauer DC, Weiss NS. Bone mineral density and endogenous hormones and risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women (United States). Cancer Causes Control 2001; 12:213-22. [PMID: 11405326 DOI: 10.1023/a:1011231106772] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This case-cohort study was designed to examine whether total hip bone mineral density (BMD) is independently associated with breast cancer over and above its association with other determinants, including levels of total and bioavailable estradiol and testosterone and sex-hormone binding globulin. METHODS Our study population was selected from a cohort of 8,203 postmenopausal women who were screened for the Fracture Intervention Trial in 1992, at which time BMD was assessed, and blood samples were obtained. A total of 109 women developed breast cancer during four years of follow-up; 173 other randomly selected women from the larger cohort were also selected. Cox proportional hazards with robust variance adjustment was used for these analyses. RESULTS Relative to women in the lower fourth of the BMD distribution, the risk associated with being in the upper fourth was 2.6 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-5.8). After adjusting for serum hormone levels, the corresponding relative risk was 2.5 (95% CI 0.9-5.2). With body mass index and number of years since menopause added to the multivariate analysis, the relative risk decreased to 1.4 (95% CI 0.5-4.0). CONCLUSIONS BMD may not influence breast cancer risk independent of its relationship with endogenous hormones and measured covariates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D S Buist
- Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, WA 98101, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Abstract
Two recent studies have shown a woman's bone mineral density (BMD) (a composite measure of exposure to many different factors throughout one's lifetime) predicts breast cancer. In a prospective cohort study, we examined whether hip BMD was associated with breast cancer risk among 8203 postmenopausal women. During an average follow-up of 3.7 years, 131 incident breast cancer cases (102 invasive) were identified. Cox proportional hazards models were used to obtain estimates of the relative risk of breast cancer. Our results demonstrate an increase in breast cancer risk among women with higher BMD. Independent of age, geographic area, and body mass index, relative to the lowest BMD quartile the risk of breast cancer (95% confidence interval) by increasing quartile was 1.9 (1.1, 3.2), 1.5 (0.8, 2.6), and 1.5 (0.8, 2.7), respectively. An examination of other factors important in determining BMD may help explain the positive association between BMD and breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D S Buist
- Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, Seattle, WA 98101, USA
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
34
|
Barlow WE, Taplin SH, Yoshida CK, Buist DS, Seger D, Brown M. Cost comparison of mastectomy versus breast-conserving therapy for early-stage breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001; 93:447-55. [PMID: 11259470 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/93.6.447] [Citation(s) in RCA: 79] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Choice of treatment for early-stage breast cancer depends on many factors, including the size and stage of the cancer, the woman's age, comorbid conditions, and perhaps the costs of treatment. We compared the costs of all medical care for women with early-stage breast cancer cases treated by breast-conserving therapy (BCT) or mastectomy. METHODS A total of 1675 women 35 years old or older with incident early-stage breast cancer were identified in a large regional nonprofit health maintenance organization in the period 1990 through 1997. The women were treated with mastectomy only (n = 183), mastectomy with adjuvant hormonal therapy or chemotherapy (n = 417), BCT with radiation therapy (n = 405), or BCT with radiation therapy and adjuvant hormonal therapy or chemotherapy (n = 670). The costs of all medical care for the period 1990 through 1998 were computed for each woman, and monthly costs were analyzed by treatment, adjusting for age and cancer stage. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS At 6 months after diagnosis, the mean total medical care costs for the four groups differed statistically significantly (P:<.001), with BCT being more expensive than mastectomy. The adjusted mean costs were $12 987, $14 309, $14 963, and $15 779 for mastectomy alone, mastectomy with adjuvant therapy, BCT plus radiation therapy, and BCT plus radiation therapy with adjuvant therapy, respectively. At 1 year, the difference in costs was still statistically significant (P:<.001), but costs were influenced more by the use of adjuvant therapy than by type of surgery. The 1-year adjusted mean costs were $16 704, $18 856, $17 344, and $19 081, respectively, for the four groups. By 5 years, BCT was less expensive than mastectomy (P:<.001), with 5-year adjusted mean costs of $41 930, $45 670, $35 787, and $39 926, respectively. Costs also varied by age, with women under 65 years having higher treatment costs than older women. CONCLUSIONS BCT may have higher short-term costs but lower long-term costs than mastectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W E Barlow
- Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, WA 98101-1448, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
35
|
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare biochemical markers of bone resorption and formation in young women using different hormonal contraceptive methods. Women aged 18-39 yr who were using depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) contraception were recruited for the study; comparison women were matched by age and clinic location. There were 116 women using DMPA, 39 using oral contraceptives containing estrogen and progestin, and 72 not currently using hormonal contraceptives. Biochemical measurements were serum calcium, PTH and osteocalcin, and urine N-telopeptide. Bone density was measured using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. The N-telopeptide levels, adjusted for age and other risk factors, were 42.4 +/- 2.3 nmol/mmol creatinine in the DMPA group, 26.2 +/- 3.3 nmol/mmol in the oral contraceptive group, and 35.4 +/- 2.9 nmol/mmol in the nonusers; significant differences were seen in all pairwise comparisons. Osteocalcin levels showed the same pattern, although the difference between the DMPA users and nonusers was not statistically significant. There were no differences among groups in the PTH levels. The bone density at the spine was 1.086 +/- 0.085 g/cm(2) in the DMPA group, 1.103 +/- 0.095 g/cm(2) in the oral contraceptive group, and 1.093 +/- 0.090 g/cm(2) in nonusers (P = 0.051). The results suggest that in women using DMPA bone resorption exceeded bone formation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S M Ott
- Departments of Medicine, University of Washington, and the Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, Seattle, Washington 98195-6426, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
36
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diagnosis of domestic violence (DV) in primary care is low compared to its prevalence. Care for patients is deficient. Over a 1-year period, we tested the effectiveness of an intensive intervention to improve asking about DV, case finding, and management in primary care. The intervention included skill training for providers, environmental orchestration (posters in clinical areas, DV questions on health questionnaires), and measurement and feedback. METHODS We conducted a group-randomized controlled trial in five primary care clinics of a large health maintenance organization (HMO). Outcomes were assessed at baseline and follow-up by survey, medical record review, and qualitative means. RESULTS Improved provider self-efficacy, decreased fear of offense and safety concerns, and increased perceived asking about DV were documented at 9 months, and also at 21 months (except for perceived asking) after intervention initiation. Documented asking about DV was increased by 14.3% with a 3.9-fold relative increase at 9 months in intervention clinics compared to controls. Case finding increased 1.3-fold (95%, confidence interval 0.67-2.7). CONCLUSIONS The intervention improved documented asking about DV in practice up to 9 months later. This was mainly because of the routine use of health questionnaires containing DV questions at physical examination visits and the placement of DV posters in clinical areas. A small increase in case finding also resulted. System changes appear to be a cost-effective method to increase DV asking and identification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R S Thompson
- Department of Preventive Care and the Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, Seattle, Washington, 98101-1448, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
37
|
LaCroix AZ, Ott SM, Ichikawa L, Scholes D, Barlow WE. Low-dose hydrochlorothiazide and preservation of bone mineral density in older adults. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 2000; 133:516-26. [PMID: 11015164 DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-133-7-200010030-00010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 154] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Thiazide may have beneficial effects on bone mineral density and may reduce risk for hip fracture. However, the existence of a causal role remains uncertain because experimental evidence is limited. OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of hydrochlorothiazide on rates of bone loss in older adults. DESIGN Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with 3-year follow-up. SETTING A large health maintenance organization in western Washington State. PARTICIPANTS 320 healthy, normotensive adults (205 women, 115 men) 60 to 79 years of age. INTERVENTION Random assignment to one of three study groups: 12.5 mg of hydrochlorothiazide per day, 25 mg of hydrochlorothiazide per day, or placebo. MEASUREMENTS Bone mineral density using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at the total hip, posterior-anterior spine, and total body; blood and urine markers of bone metabolism; incident falls, clinical fractures, and radiographic vertebral fractures. RESULTS 309 of 320 participants completed the 36-month visit (97%). Adherence to study medication throughout follow-up was high in all participants (81.6% to 89.7%) except men in the high-dose hydrochlorothiazide group (60.5%). According to intention-to-treat analysis, the 36-month differences in percentage change in total hip bone mineral density were 0.79 percentage point (95% CI, -0.12 to 1.71) for the 12.5-mg hydrochlorothiazide group and 0.92 percentage point (CI, -0.001 to 1.85) for the 25-mg group compared with placebo (P = 0.03). Percentage change at the posterior-anterior spine was significantly greater for the 25-mg hydrochlorothiazide group at 6 months (intergroup difference, 1.04 percentage points [CI, 0.22 to 1.86]) compared with placebo (P = 0.005); at 36 months, this difference was 0.82 percentage point (CI, -0.36 to 2.01; P = 0.12). No significant differences were seen in total-body bone mineral density between the treatment groups. Treatment effects were stronger in women than in men. CONCLUSIONS In healthy older adults, low-dose hydrochlorothiazide preserves bone mineral density at the hip and spine. The modest effects observed over 3 years, if accumulated over 10 to 20 years, may explain the one-third reduction in risk for hip fracture associated with thiazide in many epidemiologic studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Z LaCroix
- Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, 1730 Minor Avenue, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101-1448, USA
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
38
|
Carney PA, Geller BM, Moffett H, Ganger M, Sewell M, Barlow WE, Stalnaker N, Taplin SH, Sisk C, Ernster VL, Wilkie HA, Yankaskas B, Poplack SP, Urban N, West MM, Rosenberg RD, Michael S, Mercurio TD, Ballard-Barbash R. Current medicolegal and confidentiality issues in large, multicenter research programs. Am J Epidemiol 2000; 152:371-8. [PMID: 10968382 DOI: 10.1093/aje/152.4.371] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
The convenience of fast computers and the Internet have encouraged large collaborative research efforts by allowing transfers of data from multiple sites to a single data repository; however, standards for managing data security are needed to protect the confidentiality of participants. Through Dartmouth Medical School, in 1996-1998, the authors conducted a medicolegal analysis of federal laws, state statutes, and institutional policies in eight states and three different types of health care settings, which are part of a breast cancer surveillance consortium contributing data electronically to a centralized data repository. They learned that a variety of state and federal laws are available to protect confidentiality of professional and lay research participants. The strongest protection available is the Federal Certificate of Confidentiality, which supersedes state statutory protection, has been tested in court, and extends protection from forced disclosure (in litigation) to health care providers as well as patients. This paper describes the careful planning necessary to ensure adequate legal protection and data security, which must include a comprehensive understanding of state and federal protections applicable to medical research. Researchers must also develop rules or guidelines to ensure appropriate collection, use, and sharing of data. Finally, systems for the storage of both paper and electronic records must be as secure as possible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P A Carney
- Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Department of Community and Family Medicine, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover/Lebanon, NH, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
39
|
Abstract
To evaluate the possible effects of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) injectable contraception on depressive symptoms, we conducted a population-based prospective study with women aged 18-39 years old enrolled at a health maintenance organization. At baseline, 183 women used DMPA and 274 were non-users. Data on depressive symptoms and on factors potentially related to DMPA use and depression were collected by questionnaire at 6-month intervals for up to 3 years. In multivariate longitudinal analysis, we found an increased likelihood of reporting depressive symptoms among continuous DMPA users (OR = 1.44; 95% CI = 1.00-2.07) and discontinuers (OR = 1.60; 95% CI = 1.03-2.48) when compared to non-users. Women who discontinued DMPA use had elevated depressive symptoms prior to discontinuation (OR = 2.30; 95% CI = 1.42-3.70) and immediately following discontinuation (OR = 2.46; 95% CI = 1. 46-4.14), and depressive symptoms subsided at subsequent visits relative to non-users. Our prospective analyses found an association between DMPA use and depressive symptoms but further research is needed to determine whether the relationship is causal.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Civic
- Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, Seattle, Washington 98101, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
40
|
Taplin SH, Barlow WE, Lundman E, MacLehose R, Meyer DM, Seger D, Herta D, Chin C, Curry S. Erratum: Testing Reminder and Motivational Telephone Calls to Increase Screening Mammography: a Randomized Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000. [DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jnci.a024162] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
|
41
|
Taplin SH, Barlow WE, Ludman E, MacLehos R, Meyer DM, Seger D, Herta D, Chin C, Curry S. Testing reminder and motivational telephone calls to increase screening mammography: a randomized study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92:233-42. [PMID: 10655440 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/92.3.233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 83] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prospective randomized trials have demonstrated that motivational telephone calls increase adherence to screening mammography. To better understand the effects of motivational calls and to maximize adherence, we conducted a randomized trial among women aged 50-79 years. METHODS We created a stratified random sample of 5062 women due for mammograms within the Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, including 4099 women with prior mammography and 963 without it. We recruited and surveyed 3743 (74%) of the women before mailing a recommendation. After 2 months, 1765 (47%) of the 3743 women had not scheduled a mammogram and were randomly assigned to one of three intervention groups: a reminder post-card group (n = 590), a reminder telephone call group (n = 585), and a motivational telephone call addressing barriers group (n = 590). The telephone callers could schedule mammography. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for documented mammography use by 1 year. RESULTS Women who received reminder calls were more likely to get mammograms (HR = 1.9; 95% CI = 1.6-2.4) than women who were mailed postcards. The motivational and reminder calls (average length, 8.5 and 3.1 minutes, respectively) had equivalent effects (HR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.8-1.2). After we controlled for the intervention effect, women with prior mammography (n = 1277) were much more likely to get a mammogram (HR = 3.4; 95% CI = 2.7-4.3) than women without prior use (n = 488). Higher income, but not race or more education, was associated with higher adherence. CONCLUSIONS Reminding women to schedule an appointment was as efficacious as addressing barriers. Simple intervention groups should be included as comparison groups in randomized trials so that we better understand more complex intervention effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S H Taplin
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
42
|
Abstract
The case-cohort design is most useful in analyzing time to failure in a large cohort in which failure is rare. Covariate information is collected from all failures and a representative sample of censored observations. Sampling is done without respect to time or disease status, and, therefore, the design is more flexible than a nested case-control design. Despite the efficiency of the methods, case-cohort designs are not often used because of perceived analytic complexity. In this article, we illustrate computation of a simple variance estimator and discuss model fitting techniques in SAS. Three different weighting methods are considered. Model fitting is demonstrated in an occupational exposure study of nickel refinery workers. The design is compared to a nested case-control design with respect to analysis and efficiency in a small simulation. In this example, case-cohort sampling from the full cohort was more efficient than using a comparable nested case-control design.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W E Barlow
- Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Washington 98101-1448, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
Dionne CE, Von Korff M, Koepsell TD, Deyo RA, Barlow WE, Checkoway H. A comparison of pain, functional limitations, and work status indices as outcome measures in back pain research. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1999; 24:2339-45. [PMID: 10586458 DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199911150-00009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 68] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN We conducted a prospective study with a 2-year follow-up. OBJECTIVE To compare pain, functional limitations, and work status indices as measures of outcome among back pain patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Work status, pain, and functional limitations indices are often considered as interchangeable outcome measures in back pain research. This perspective has been criticized by several authors, who argue that each of these outcome measures reflects a different construct that may vary independently of the others. METHODS The study was conducted on 720 patients, who sought care for back pain in primary care settings of a large health maintenance organization in 1989-90, and were interviewed one month and two years later. X2 analyses and receiver operating characteristic curves were used to compare the accuracy of a pain rating and a modified 16-item Roland-Morris score in classifying patients on work status and on the change in work status over time. RESULTS Moderate agreement between the pain and functional limitations measures and work status was observed. Pain and functional limitations change scores agreed moderately with improvement in work status, but were poorly associated with decline in work status. CONCLUSIONS Although the pain, functional limitations, and work status indices examined in this study are related, they are not equivalent and should not be regarded as interchangeable. These results argue for a clearer distinction of outcome measures in back pain research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C E Dionne
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
44
|
Affiliation(s)
- S P Tu
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
45
|
Jacobs EJ, White E, Weiss NS, Heckbert SR, LaCroix A, Barlow WE. Hormone replacement therapy and colon cancer among members of a health maintenance organization. Epidemiology 1999; 10:445-51. [PMID: 10401882 DOI: 10.1097/00001648-199907000-00015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 53] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
We investigated the association between hormone replacement therapy (HRT), primarily conjugated estrogens with or without medroxyprogesterone acetate, and colon cancer risk in a nested case-control study among women ages 55-79 years enrolled in Group Health Cooperative, a health maintenance organization in Washington state. Cases were diagnosed between 1984 and 1993. We selected controls randomly from enrollment files. HRT use was ascertained from a computerized database containing virtually all prescriptions dispensed since 1977. Among subjects with at least 5 years of pharmacy database information before reference date (1 year before diagnosis date), there were 341 cases of incident colon cancer and 1,679 controls. Estrogen use during the 5 years before reference date was not associated with risk of colon cancer [odds ratio (OR) = 0.85 and 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.57-1.27 for 1-749 estrogen tablets; OR = 0.97 and 95% CI = 0.68-1.40 for > or =750 estrogen tablets]. An analysis including only women with at least 10 years of pharmacy database coverage found no association with use during the 10 years before reference date [OR = 1.07 (95% CI = 0.61-1.86) for 1-749 estrogen tablets; OR = 1.11 (95% CI = 0.69-1.80) for 750 or more estrogen tablets]. These results do not support the hypothesis that recent HRT use substantially reduces risk of colon cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E J Jacobs
- Public Health Sciences, Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Abstract
To investigate whether diuretic medication use increases risk of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), the authors conducted a case-control study of health maintenance organization members in western Washington State. Cases (n = 238) diagnosed between January 1980 and June 1995 were compared with controls (n = 616) selected from health maintenance organization membership files. The computerized health maintenance organization pharmacy database provided information on medications prescribed after March 1977. Additional exposure information was collected from medical records. For women, use of diuretics was associated with increased risk of RCC (odds ratio (OR) = 1.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0-3.1), but the association was not independent of a diagnosis of hypertension (adjusted for hypertension, OR = 1.1, 95% CI 0.5-2.1). Similarly, nondiuretic antihypertensive use was associated with increased risk, but only when unadjusted for hypertension. For men, neither diuretic nor nondiuretic antihypertensive use was associated with risk of RCC. A diagnosis of hypertension was clearly associated with RCC risk for women (OR = 2.5, 95% CI 1.2-5.1), but not men (OR = 1.3, 95% CI 0.7-2.5). High systolic and diastolic blood pressures were associated with increased risk in both sexes. These results do not support the hypothesis that use of diuretic medication increases RCC risk; they are more consistent with an association between RCC and high blood pressure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J A Shapiro
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the possible effects of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate injectable contraception on bone mineral density in reproductive-age women. METHODS We conducted a population-based cross-sectional comparison of bone mineral density levels in women using depot medroxyprogesterone acetate contraception and in women of similar age not using this method. The study recruited 457 nonpregnant women aged 18-39 years who were enrollees of a Washington state health maintenance organization. One hundred eighty-three women were receiving injections and 274 were not. Bone mineral density at several anatomic sites (spine, femoral neck, greater trochanter, and whole body) was measured using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Data on other factors potentially related to bone density were collected through questionnaire and examination. RESULTS Overall, age-adjusted mean bone density levels were lower for users of this method than for nonusers at all anatomic sites: The mean difference was 2.5% for the spine (P = .03) and 2.2% for the femoral neck (P = .12). Exposure to depot medroxyprogesterone acetate continued to be significantly (P < .01) associated with decreased bone density at the femoral neck, spine, and trochanter after multivariate adjustment for other risk factors related to bone density. Age-specific comparisons indicated that the major differences in bone density between users and nonusers occurred in the youngest age group (women 18-21 years); the mean femoral neck bone density was 10.5% lower (P < .01) for the exposed women, and differences were consistent (P < .01) across all anatomic sites. We also noted a significant dose-response relation between longer use of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate and decreased bone density levels in this age group (P < .01 for all sites). CONCLUSION These results provide evidence that contraception with depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, particularly long-term use, may adversely affect bone mineral density levels in young women aged 18-21 years. The implications for future bone health need further study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Scholes
- Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, Seattle, Washington 98101, USA.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
Teri L, McCurry SM, Buchner DM, Logsdon RG, LaCroix AZ, Kukull WA, Barlow WE, Larson EB. Exercise and activity level in Alzheimer's disease: a potential treatment focus. J Rehabil Res Dev 1998; 35:411-9. [PMID: 10220219] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/12/2023]
Abstract
This article provides information on the baseline health and physical function of 30 individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD); describes a community-based program designed to increase balance, flexibility, strength, and endurance in these persons by the training of caregivers to facilitate and supervise exercise activity; and documents the adherence of these subjects and their caregivers to this intervention. Subjects were recruited from an ongoing, community-based Alzheimer's Disease Patient Registry, and met NINCDS-ADRDA criteria for probable or possible AD. Caregivers were family members living with the demented individuals in the community. Physical performance was measured using walking speed, functional reach, and standing balance. Health status was measured with the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form, the Sickness Impact Profile, and caregiver reports of subject's restricted activity days, bed disability days, falls, and exercise participation. Baseline data indicated that persons with AD were impaired on measures of physical performance and function, compared to published data on nondemented older adults. During a 12-wk treatment period, caregivers were taught to guide their demented charges in an individualized program of endurance activities (primarily walking), strength training, and balance and flexibility exercises. Adherence data indicated that 100% of the subjects were compliant with some exercise recommendations, and one-third completed all assigned exercises during the training period. Caregivers were able to learn and direct subjects during scheduled exercise activities. These findings indicate that the integration of exercise training into the care of persons with AD is both needed and feasible. Further research is currently underway to determine the efficacy of this approach for reducing additional physical disability in these individuals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Teri
- Department of Psychosocial and Community Health, University of Washington, Seattle 98195-7263, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
49
|
Ballard-Barbash R, Taplin SH, Yankaskas BC, Ernster VL, Rosenberg RD, Carney PA, Barlow WE, Geller BM, Kerlikowske K, Edwards BK, Lynch CF, Urban N, Chrvala CA, Key CR, Poplack SP, Worden JK, Kessler LG. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: a national mammography screening and outcomes database. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169:1001-8. [PMID: 9308451 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.169.4.9308451] [Citation(s) in RCA: 301] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
|
50
|
Barlow WE. Global measures of local influence for proportional hazards regression models. Biometrics 1997; 53:1157-62. [PMID: 9290233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
Cox proportional hazards regression models have been extended to multiple failure times and other situations by using a robust covariance matrix instead of the usual inverse of the information matrix. We modify an existing measure of individual influence by substituting the robust covariance matrix for the inverse of the information matrix. This provides a scalar measure of influence with known mean and bounded range on the interval (0,1). The measure is applicable to marginal multiple failure time models. Two examples are presented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W E Barlow
- Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Washington 98101-1448, USA
| |
Collapse
|