Abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor as initial therapy for HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer: Final overall survival results of MONARCH 3

BACKGROUND

In MONARCH 2, the addition of abemaciclib to fulvestrant significantly improved both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) with disease progression on prior endocrine therapy (ET). In MONARCH 3, the addition of abemaciclib to a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) as initial therapy for HR+, HER2- ABC significantly improved PFS. Here, we present the prespecified final OS results for MONARCH 3.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

MONARCH 3 is a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study of abemaciclib plus NSAI (anastrozole or letrozole) versus placebo plus NSAI in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC without prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting. The primary objective was investigator-assessed PFS; OS was a gated secondary endpoint, and chemotherapy-free survival (CFS) was an exploratory endpoint.

RESULTS

A total of 493 women were randomized 2:1 to receive abemaciclib plus NSAI (n = 328) or placebo plus NSAI (n = 165). After a median follow-up of 8.1 years, there were 198 OS events (60.4%) in the abemaciclib arm and 116 (70.3%) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.804; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.637-1.015; P = 0.0664, non-significant). Median OS was 66.8 versus 53.7 months for abemaciclib versus placebo. In the subgroup with visceral disease (sVD), there were 113 OS events (65.3%) in the abemaciclib arm and 65 (72.2%) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.758; 95% CI, 0.558-1.030; P = 0.0757, non-significant). Median OS was 63.7 months versus 48.8 months for abemaciclib versus placebo. The previously demonstrated PFS benefit was sustained, and CFS numerically improved with the addition of abemaciclib. No new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSION

Abemaciclib combined with an NSAI resulted in clinically meaningful improvement in median OS (ITT: 13.1 months; sVD: 14.9 months) in patients with HR+ HER2- ABC; however, statistical significance was not reached.

Event-free survival by residual cancer burden with pembrolizumab in early-stage TNBC: exploratory analysis from KEYNOTE-522

BACKGROUND

KEYNOTE-522 demonstrated statistically significant improvements in pathological complete response (pCR) with neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy and event-free survival (EFS) with neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab in patients with high-risk, early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Prior studies have shown the prognostic value of the residual cancer burden (RCB) index to quantify the extent of residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In this preplanned exploratory analysis, we assessed RCB distribution and EFS within RCB categories by treatment group.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 1174 patients with stage T1c/N1-2 or T2-4/N0-2 TNBC were randomized 2 : 1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks given with four cycles of paclitaxel + carboplatin, followed by four cycles of doxorubicin or epirubicin + cyclophosphamide. After surgery, patients received pembrolizumab or placebo for nine cycles or until recurrence or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoints are pCR and EFS. RCB is a prespecified exploratory endpoint. The association between EFS and RCB was assessed using a Cox regression model.

RESULTS

Pembrolizumab shifted patients into lower RCB categories across the entire spectrum compared with placebo. There were more patients in the pembrolizumab group with RCB-0 (pCR), and fewer patients in the pembrolizumab group with RCB-1, RCB-2, and RCB-3. The corresponding hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for EFS were 0.70 (0.38-1.31), 0.92 (0.39-2.20), 0.52 (0.32-0.82), and 1.24 (0.69-2.23). The most common first EFS events were distant recurrences, with fewer in the pembrolizumab group across all RCB categories. Among patients with RCB-0/1, more than half [21/38 (55.3%)] of all events were central nervous system recurrences, with 13/22 (59.1%) in the pembrolizumab group and 8/16 (50.0%) in the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy resulted in fewer EFS events in the RCB-0, RCB-1, and RCB-2 categories, with the greatest benefit in RCB-2. These findings demonstrate that pembrolizumab not only increased pCR rates, but also improved EFS among most patients who do not have a pCR.

Assessment of inspiration and technical quality in anteroposterior thoracic radiographs using machine learning

INTRODUCTION

Chest radiographs are the most performed radiographic procedure, but suboptimal technical factors can impact clinical interpretation. A deep learning model was developed to assess technical and inspiratory adequacy of anteroposterior chest radiographs.

METHODS

Adult anteroposterior chest radiographs (n = 2375) were assessed for technical adequacy, and if otherwise technically adequate, for adequacy of inspiration. Images were labelled by an experienced radiologist with one of three ground truth labels: inadequate technique (n = 605, 25.5 %), adequate inspiration (n = 900, 37.9 %), and inadequate inspiration (n = 870, 36.6 %). A convolutional neural network was then iteratively trained to predict these labels and evaluated using recall, precision, F1 and micro-F1, and Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping analysis on a hold-out test set. Impact of kyphosis on model accuracy was assessed.

RESULTS

The model performed best for radiographs with adequate technique, and worst for images with inadequate technique. Recall was highest (89 %) for radiographs with both adequate technique and inspiration, with recall of 81 % for images with adequate technique and inadequate inspiration, and 60 % for images with inadequate technique, although precision was highest (85 %) for this category. Per-class F1 was 80 %, 81 % and 70 % for adequate inspiration, inadequate inspiration, and inadequate technique respectively. Weighted F1 and Micro F1 scores were 78 %. Presence or absence of kyphosis had no significant impact on model accuracy in images with adequate technique.

CONCLUSION

This study explores the promising performance of a machine learning algorithm for assessment of inspiratory adequacy and overall technical adequacy for anteroposterior chest radiograph acquisition.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

With further refinement, machine learning can contribute to education and quality improvement in radiology departments.

Adjuvant Abemaciclib Combined with Endocrine Therapy for High Risk Early Breast Cancer: Safety and Patient-Reported Outcomes From the monarchE Study

BACKGROUND

In monarchE, abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) as adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative, high risk, early breast cancer demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival versus ET alone. Detailed safety analyses conducted at a median follow-up of 27 months and key patient-reported outcomes (PRO) are presented.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment (n=5591). Safety analyses included incidence, management, and outcomes of common and clinically relevant adverse events (AEs). Patient-reported health-related quality-of-life, ET symptoms, fatigue, and side effect burden were assessed.

RESULTS

The addition of abemaciclib to ET resulted in higher incidence of Grade≥3 AEs (49.7% vs 16.3% with ET alone), predominantly laboratory cytopenias (e.g., neutropenia [19.6%]) without clinical complications. Abemaciclib-treated patients experienced more serious adverse events (SAEs; 13.3% vs 7.8%). Discontinuation of abemaciclib and/or ET due to AEs occurred in 18.5% of patients, mainly due to Grade1/2 AEs (66.8%). AEs were managed with comedications (e.g., antidiarrheals), abemaciclib dose holds (61.7%), and/or dose reductions (43.4%). Diarrhea was generally low grade (Grade1/2: 77%); Grade2/3 events were highest in the first month (20.5%), most short-lived (≤7 days) and did not recur. Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) were higher with abemaciclib+ET (2.5%) vs ET (0.6%); in the abemaciclib arm, increased VTE risk was observed with tamoxifen vs AIs (4.3% vs 1.8%). PROs were similar between arms, including being 'bothered by side effects of treatment', except for diarrhea. At ≥3 months, most patients reporting diarrhea reported "a little bit" or "somewhat".

CONCLUSION

In patients with high risk EBC, adjuvant abemaciclib+ET has an acceptable safety profile and tolerability is supported by PRO findings. Most AEs were reversible and manageable with comedications and/or dose modifications, consistent with the known abemaciclib toxicity profile.

Long-term efficacy and safety of addition of carboplatin with or without veliparib to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer: 4-year follow-up data from BrighTNess, a randomized phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Primary analyses of the phase 3 BrighTNess trial showed addition of carboplatin with/without veliparib to neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved pathological complete response (pCR) rates with manageable acute toxicity in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Here, we report 4.5-year follow-up data from the trial.

DESIGN

Women with untreated stage II-III TNBC were randomized (2:1:1) to paclitaxel (weekly for 12 doses) plus either: (a) carboplatin (every 3 weeks for four cycles) plus veliparib (twice daily); (b) carboplatin plus veliparib placebo; or (c) carboplatin placebo plus veliparib placebo. All patients then received doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) every 2‒3 weeks for four cycles. The primary endpoint was pCR. Secondary endpoints included event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Since the co-primary endpoint of increased pCR with carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus carboplatin with paclitaxel was not met, secondary analyses are descriptive.

RESULTS

Of 634 patients, 316 were randomized to carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel, 160 to carboplatin with paclitaxel, and 158 to paclitaxel. With median follow-up of 4.5 years, the hazard ratio [HR] for EFS for carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus paclitaxel was 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43‒0.92, P=0.02), but 1.12 (95% CI 0.72‒1.72, P=0.62) for carboplatin plus veliparib with paclitaxel versus carboplatin with paclitaxel. In post hoc analysis, HR for EFS was 0.57 (95% CI 0.36‒0.91, P=0.02) for carboplatin with paclitaxel versus paclitaxel. OS did not differ significantly between treatment arms, nor did rates of myelodysplastic syndromes, acute myeloid leukemia, or other secondary malignancies.

CONCLUSION

Improvement in pCR with addition of carboplatin was associated with long-term EFS benefit with a manageable safety profile, and without increasing the risk of second malignancies, while adding veliparib did not impact EFS. These findings support the addition of carboplatin to weekly paclitaxel followed by AC neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early stage TNBC.

Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: updated efficacy and Ki-67 analysis from the monarchE study

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) previously demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer at the second interim analysis, however follow-up was limited. Here, we present results of the prespecified primary outcome analysis and an additional follow-up analysis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This global, phase III, open-label trial randomized (1 : 1) 5637 patients to adjuvant ET for ≥5 years ± abemaciclib for 2 years. Cohort 1 enrolled patients with ≥4 positive axillary lymph nodes (ALNs), or 1-3 positive ALNs and either grade 3 disease or tumor ≥5 cm. Cohort 2 enrolled patients with 1-3 positive ALNs and centrally determined high Ki-67 index (≥20%). The primary endpoint was IDFS in the intent-to-treat population (cohorts 1 and 2). Secondary endpoints were IDFS in patients with high Ki-67, DRFS, overall survival, and safety.

RESULTS

At the primary outcome analysis, with 19 months median follow-up time, abemaciclib + ET resulted in a 29% reduction in the risk of developing an IDFS event [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-0.87; nominal P = 0.0009]. At the additional follow-up analysis, with 27 months median follow-up and 90% of patients off treatment, IDFS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.82; nominal P < 0.0001) and DRFS (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.83; nominal P < 0.0001) benefit was maintained. The absolute improvements in 3-year IDFS and DRFS rates were 5.4% and 4.2%, respectively. Whereas Ki-67 index was prognostic, abemaciclib benefit was consistent regardless of Ki-67 index. Safety data were consistent with the known abemaciclib risk profile.

CONCLUSION

Abemaciclib + ET significantly improved IDFS in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer, with an acceptable safety profile. Ki-67 index was prognostic, but abemaciclib benefit was observed regardless of Ki-67 index. Overall, the robust treatment benefit of abemaciclib extended beyond the 2-year treatment period.

Primary results from IMpassion131, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised phase III trial of first-line paclitaxel with or without atezolizumab for unresectable locally advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer

BACKGROUND

In the phase III IMpassion130 trial, combining atezolizumab with first-line nanoparticle albumin-bound-paclitaxel for advanced triple-negative breast cancer (aTNBC) showed a statistically significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive populations, and a clinically meaningful overall survival (OS) effect in PD-L1-positive aTNBC. The phase III KEYNOTE-355 trial adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy for aTNBC showed similar PFS effects. IMpassion131 evaluated first-line atezolizumab-paclitaxel in aTNBC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients [no prior systemic therapy or ≥12 months since (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy] were randomised 2:1 to atezolizumab 840 mg or placebo (days 1, 15), both with paclitaxel 90 mg/m² (days 1, 8, 15), every 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were tumour PD-L1 status, prior taxane, liver metastases and geographical region. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS, tested hierarchically first in the PD-L1-positive [immune cell expression ≥1%, VENTANA PD-L1 (SP142) assay] population, and then in the ITT population. OS was a secondary endpoint.

RESULTS

Of 651 randomised patients, 45% had PD-L1-positive aTNBC. At the primary PFS analysis, adding atezolizumab to paclitaxel did not improve investigator-assessed PFS in the PD-L1-positive population [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-1.12; P = 0.20; median PFS 6.0 months with atezolizumab-paclitaxel versus 5.7 months with placebo-paclitaxel]. In the PD-L1-positive population, atezolizumab-paclitaxel was associated with more favourable unconfirmed best overall response rate (63% versus 55% with placebo-paclitaxel) and median duration of response (7.2 versus 5.5 months, respectively). Final OS results showed no difference between arms (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.76-1.64; median 22.1 months with atezolizumab-paclitaxel versus 28.3 months with placebo-paclitaxel in the PD-L1-positive population). Results in the ITT population were consistent with the PD-L1-positive population. The safety profile was consistent with known effects of each study drug.

CONCLUSION

Combining atezolizumab with paclitaxel did not improve PFS or OS versus paclitaxel alone. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT03125902.

Sacituzumab govitecan, a Trop-2-directed antibody-drug conjugate, for patients with epithelial cancer: final safety and efficacy results from the phase I/II IMMU-132-01 basket trial

BACKGROUND

Sacituzumab govitecan (SG), a trophoblast cell surface antigen-2 (Trop-2)-directed antibody-drug conjugate, has demonstrated antitumor efficacy and acceptable tolerability in a phase I/II multicenter trial (NCT01631552) in patients with advanced epithelial cancers. This report summarizes the safety data from the overall safety population (OSP) and efficacy data, including additional disease cohorts not published previously.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with refractory metastatic epithelial cancers received intravenous SG (8, 10, 12, or 18 mg/kg) on days 1 and 8 of 21-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Endpoints for the OSP included safety and pharmacokinetic parameters with investigator-evaluated objective response rate (ORR per RECIST 1.1), duration of response, clinical benefit rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival evaluated for cohorts (n > 10 patients) of small-cell lung, colorectal, esophageal, endometrial, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and castrate-resistant prostate cancer.

RESULTS

In the OSP (n = 495, median age 61 years, 68% female; UGT1A1∗28 homozygous, n = 46; 9.3%), 41 (8.3%) permanently discontinued treatment due to adverse events (AEs). Most common treatment-related AEs were nausea (62.6%), diarrhea (56.2%), fatigue (48.3%), alopecia (40.4%), and neutropenia (57.8%). Most common treatment-related serious AEs (n = 75; 15.2%) were febrile neutropenia (4.0%) and diarrhea (2.8%). Grade ≥3 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia occurred in 42.4% and 5.3% of patients, respectively. Neutropenia (all grades) was numerically more frequent in UGT1A1∗28 homozygotes (28/46; 60.9%) than heterozygotes (69/180; 38.3%) or UGT1A1∗1 wild type (59/177; 33.3%). There was one treatment-related death due to an AE of aspiration pneumonia. Partial responses were seen in endometrial cancer (4/18, 22.2% ORR) and small-cell lung cancer (11/62, 17.7% ORR), and one castrate-resistant prostate cancer patient had a complete response (n = 1/11; 9.1% ORR).

CONCLUSIONS

SG demonstrated a toxicity profile consistent with previous published reports. Efficacy was seen in several cancer cohorts, which validates Trop-2 as a broad target in solid tumors.

Sacituzumab govitecan in previously treated hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: final results from a phase I/II, single-arm, basket trial

BACKGROUND

Trophoblast cell-surface antigen-2 (Trop-2) is expressed in epithelial cancers, including hormone receptor-positive (HR+) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). Sacituzumab govitecan (SG; Trodelvy®) is an antibody-drug conjugate composed of a humanized anti-Trop-2 monoclonal antibody coupled to SN-38 at a high drug-to-antibody ratio via a unique hydrolyzable linker that delivers SN-38 intracellularly and in the tumor microenvironment. SG was granted accelerated FDA approval for metastatic triple-negative BC treatment in April 2020.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We analyzed a prespecified subpopulation of patients with HR+/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) HR+/HER2- mBC from the phase I/II, single-arm trial (NCT01631552), who received intravenous SG (10 mg/kg) and whose disease progressed on endocrine-based therapy and at least one prior chemotherapy for mBC. End points included objective response rate (ORR; RECIST version 1.1) assessed locally, duration of response (DOR), clinical benefit rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.

RESULTS

Fifty-four women were enrolled between 13 February 2015 and 1 June 2017. Median (range) age was 54 (33-79) years and all received at least two prior lines of therapy for mBC. At data cut-off (1 March 2019), 12 patients were still alive. Key grade ≥3 treatment-related toxicities included neutropenia (50.0%), anemia (11.1%), and diarrhea (7.4%). Two patients discontinued treatment due to treatment-related adverse events. No treatment-related deaths occurred. At a median follow-up of 11.5 months, the ORR was 31.5% [95% confidence interval (CI), 19.5%-45.6%; 17 partial responses]; median DOR was 8.7 months (95% CI 3.7-12.7), median PFS was 5.5 months (95% CI 3.6-7.6), and median OS was 12 months (95% CI 9.0-18.2).

CONCLUSIONS

SG shows encouraging activity in patients with pretreated HR+/HER2- mBC and a predictable, manageable safety profile. Further evaluation in a randomized phase III trial (TROPiCS-02) is ongoing (NCT03901339).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01631552; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01631552.

Pembrolizumab monotherapy for previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: cohort A of the phase II KEYNOTE-086 study

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) are limited. In cohort A of the phase II KEYNOTE-086 study, we evaluated pembrolizumab as second or later line of treatment for patients with mTNBC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients had centrally confirmed mTNBC, ≥1 systemic therapy for metastatic disease, prior treatment with anthracycline and taxane in any disease setting, and progression on or after the most recent therapy. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 2 years. Primary end points were objective response rate in the total and PD-L1-positive populations, and safety. Secondary end points included duration of response, disease control rate (percentage of patients with complete or partial response or stable disease for ≥24 weeks), progression-free survival, and overall survival.

RESULTS

All enrolled patients (N = 170) were women, 61.8% had PD-L1-positive tumors, and 43.5% had received ≥3 previous lines of therapy for metastatic disease. ORR (95% CI) was 5.3% (2.7-9.9) in the total and 5.7% (2.4-12.2) in the PD-L1-positive populations. Disease control rate (95% CI) was 7.6% (4.4-12.7) and 9.5% (5.1-16.8), respectively. Median duration of response was not reached in the total (range, 1.2+-21.5+) and in the PD-L1-positive (range, 6.3-21.5+) populations. Median PFS was 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.9-2.0), and the 6-month rate was 14.9%. Median OS was 9.0 months (95% CI, 7.6-11.2), and the 6-month rate was 69.1%. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 103 (60.6%) patients, including 22 (12.9%) with grade 3 or 4 AEs. There were no deaths due to AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Pembrolizumab monotherapy demonstrated durable antitumor activity in a subset of patients with previously treated mTNBC and had a manageable safety profile.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02447003.

nab-Paclitaxel plus carboplatin or gemcitabine versus gemcitabine plus carboplatin as first-line treatment of patients with triple-negative metastatic breast cancer: results from the tnAcity trial

Background

Metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) has a poor prognosis and aggressive clinical course. tnAcity evaluated the efficacy and safety of first-line nab-paclitaxel plus carboplatin (nab-P/C), nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nab-P/G), and gemcitabine plus carboplatin (G/C) in patients with mTNBC.

Patients and methods

Patients with pathologically confirmed mTNBC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic BC received (1 : 1 : 1) nab-P 125 mg/m2 plus C AUC 2, nab-P 125 mg/m2 plus G 1000 mg/m2, or G 1000 mg/m2 plus C AUC 2, all on days 1, 8 q3w. Phase II primary end point: investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), percentage of patients initiating cycle 6 with doublet therapy, and safety.

Results

In total, 191 patients were enrolled (nab-P/C, n = 64; nab-P/G, n = 61; G/C, n = 66). PFS was significantly longer with nab-P/C versus nab-P/G [median, 8.3 versus 5.5 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.59 [95% CI, 0.38-0.92]; P = 0.02] or G/C (median, 8.3 versus 6.0 months; HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.37-0.90]; P = 0.02). OS was numerically longer with nab-P/C versus nab-P/G (median, 16.8 versus 12.1 months; HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.47-1.13]; P = 0.16) or G/C (median, 16.8 versus 12.6 months; HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.52-1.22]; P = 0.29). ORR was 73%, 39%, and 44%, respectively. In the nab-P/C, nab-P/G, and G/C groups, 64%, 56%, and 50% of patients initiated cycle 6 with a doublet. Grade ≥3 adverse events were mainly hematologic.

Conclusions

First-line nab-P/C was active in mTNBC and resulted in a significantly longer PFS and improved risk/benefit profile versus nab-P/G or G/C.

Abstract P6-18-39: Abemaciclib after prior palbociclib exposure in patients with metastatic hormone-receptor positive (HR+)/HER2- breast cancer

Introduction: The advent of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) has transformed the clinical practice of HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer. Palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib have been approved in conjunction with anti-estrogens, while abemaciclib has also been approved as monotherapy based on single agent activity in the MONARCH-1 trial (objective response rate/ORR: 19.7% and median progression-free-survival/PFS = 6.0 months; Dickler M et al CCR 2017). However, there is limited insight into the mechanisms governing resistance to CDK 4/6i and the potential utility of continued CDK4/6i after progression on a prior CDK 4/6i-based therapy.

Methods: We evaluated the clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer who had received abemaciclib following an initial course of palbociclib-based therapy at our institution. In addition, we conducted genomic analysis utilizing next-generation sequencing of tissue samples and blood (cell-free DNA/cfDNA analysis) where available.

Results: From June, 2014 through July, 2018, a total of 49 patients received abemaciclib, and 14 patients had prior palbociclib exposure. One patient was deceased shortly after initiating abemaciclib and one patient was lost to follow-up. Among the 12 remaining patients, eight had sequential courses of CDK4/6-based therapy, while four patients had at least one intervening non-CDK 4/6i based regimen. At data-cutoff of 8/15/2018, five patients (41.7%) had early progression on abemaciclib (PFS equal to or less than 120 days) while three (25%) patients had ongoing benefit (PFS greater than 120 days, two of three actively on therapy). Three additional patients had recently initiated abemaciclib therapy (less than 120 days prior to current analysis). Preliminary analysis of baseline cfDNA results in patients with early progression on abemaciclib therapy after prior CDK4/6i revealed the presence of RB1 mutation, FGFR1 amplification, and TP53 mutation, among others. Additional analyses with mature clinical data (including updated PFS and ORR), toxicity assessment during secondary CDK4/6i exposure, and further analysis of genomic sequencing results will be provided at the meeting.

Conclusions: The majority of patients had early disease progression on abemaciclib after prior exposure to CDK4/6i suggesting potential cross-resistance to CDK4/6i mediated by common drivers. However, a subset of patients derived clinical benefit with continued exposure to CDK4/6i, highlighting the need for additional research to evaluate potential predictive biomarkers and guide rational utilization of continued CDK4/6 blockade in metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer.

Citation Format: Wander SA, Spring LM, Stein CR, Yuen M, Zangardi M, O'Shaughnessy J, Bardia A. Abemaciclib after prior palbociclib exposure in patients with metastatic hormone-receptor positive (HR+)/HER2- breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-18-39.

Abstract PD1-01: Trilaciclib (T), a CDK4/6 inhibitor, dosed with gemcitabine (G), carboplatin (C) in metastatic triple negative breast cancer (mTNBC) patients: Preliminary phase 2 results

Background: Cytotoxic chemotherapy-induced damage of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) results in acute toxicities consisting of multi-lineage myelosuppression, and late onset toxicities consisting of progressive bone marrow suppression with increased incidence of therapy-related myeloid neoplasms. T is an IV CDK4/6 inhibitor in development to preserve HSPC and immune system function during cytotoxic chemotherapy (myelopreservation). Proof of concept for myelopreservation with T was observed in a randomized, placebo-controlled Phase 2 trial in small-cell lung cancer patients receiving 1st-line chemotherapy. This trial in mTNBC patients (NCT02978716) was designed to explore the utility of T in combination with GC.

Methods: This Phase 2, randomized, open-label study enrolled patients in the US and EU with mTNBC who had received 0-2 prior systemic cytotoxic therapies in the locally recurrent or metastatic setting and had no symptomatic brain metastases. Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to GC alone (Group 1) or T plus GC (Group 2) using a standard schedule (D1, 8 every 21 days) or to an alternative schedule (T on D1, 2, 8 and 9 with GC on D2 and 9 every 21 days; Group 3). On those days when both T and GC were scheduled, T was administered iv prior to GC infusion. Prophylactic growth factors were not administered in cycle 1; otherwise supportive care was allowed as needed. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability; tumor response was evaluated using RECIST v1.1 and PFS and OS were assessed. Myelopreservation endpoints reflecting the potential effects of T on multiple cellular lineages include occurrence of Grade 4 neutropenia (primary), RBC and platelet transfusions (primary), and lymphocyte counts with immune profiling (secondary and exploratory). A signature of CDK4/6 independence developed from preclinical data will be used to evaluate archival tumor tissue samples and data analysis is ongoing.

Results: 95 patients were dosed; median age 57 years (range 32,86), ECOG PS 0 (53%) or 1 (47%), 25% had liver metastases at baseline, and approximately 50% had received no systemic therapy in the recurrent/metastatic setting. Fifty-five patients remain on treatment. Disease progression was the most common reason for drug discontinuation (22/40; 55%). Overall the most common (≥ 25%) TEAEs were anemia (47%), nausea (35%), fatigue (34%), neutropenia (32%), platelet count decreased (25%), and vomiting (25%). The most frequent (≥ 15%) Grade 3 or 4 TEAEs were hematologic toxicities, i.e. neutropenia (28%), anemia (21%), neutrophil count decreased (21%) and thrombocytopenia (16%). These were also the most frequent drug-related TEAEs observed. Tumor efficacy data are being evaluated.

Conclusions: This trial, assessing the myelopreservation effects of T when combined with GC in patients with mTNBC, has completed enrollment. Myelopreservation data, immune profiling, as well as ORR and preliminary PFS results will be presented by study arm at the meeting.

Citation Format: O'Shaughnessy J, Wright GS, Thummala AR, Danso MA, Popovic L, Pluard TJ, Cheung E, Han HS, Daniel BR, Vojnovic Z, Vasev N, Ling M, Richards DA, Wilks ST, Milenkovic D, Sorrentino JA, Roberts PJ, Bomar M, Yang Z, Antal JM, Malik RK, Morris SR, Tan A. Trilaciclib (T), a CDK4/6 inhibitor, dosed with gemcitabine (G), carboplatin (C) in metastatic triple negative breast cancer (mTNBC) patients: Preliminary phase 2 results [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD1-01.

Abstract P6-17-36: Consensus and disagreement among experts for treatment of patients with HER2+ early-stage breast cancer suggests unmet need for online decision support tool

Treatment (tx) choices for HER2+ early stage breast cancer (EBC) have become increasingly complex. Clinicians and patients must decide 1) which chemotherapy and HER2-targeted agents to use, 2) the sequence of surgery and chemotherapy: either neoadjuvant (neoadj) or adjuvant (adj) tx, and 3) whether to shorten or extend maintenance HER2-targeted tx.

As tx options expand, so does the need for online decision aids. One online decision support tool was developed in 2015 to provide specific tx recommendations for pts with EBC and showed that community healthcare providers (HCPs) did not consistently align with experts for neoadj or adj tx of many pts with EBC (SABCS 2015 Abs P5-09-04).

This study includes analysis of neoadj and adj tx practice patterns of 5 breast cancer experts based on their tx recommendations for 270 unique HER2+ EBC case scenarios made for development of a 2018 online decision tool. We aim to compare these recommendations with the intended treatment of clinicians using the tool.

Results

Experts agree on neoadj tx approaches: initial surgery, no neoadj tx for pts with cT1a/b N0 tumors; neoadj tx before surgery for pts with ≥cT2 or N+ tumors. There was disparity among experts for pts with cT1c N0 disease: 3 experts recommend neoadj TCH±P and 2 recommend proceeding directly to surgery.

Experts generally recommend adj TCHP for pts with stage II N+ or higher HER2+ EBC who did not receive neoadj tx. In addition, 5/5 experts would consider extended adj tx with neratinib for these pts if HR+ and 2/5 experts would also consider neratinib if HR–.

In pts who received neoadj chemo+HER2 tx, post-surgery management depends on response to neoadj tx. For pts with pCR, 5/5 experts generally agree on continuing H+P if both were given as neoadj tx or H alone if only H given as neoadj tx for a total of 1 yr of anti-HER2 Ab tx and 2/5 experts would consider extended adj tx with neratinib for HR+ disease. For pts with residual disease, experts would recommend continuing H+P if both were given as neoadj tx and most would add P for subsequent adj tx if H alone was given to complete a total of 1 yr of anti-HER2 Ab tx (Table1). All experts would consider extended adj tx with neratinib for HR+ disease and 3/5 experts would also consider neratinib for HR– disease. None of the experts recommended less than 12 mos of adj HER2-targeted tx.

We will present analyses of cases entered into our online tool and detailed comparisons of expert and the intended treatment of clinicians using the tool.

Conclusions

Practice patterns are changing rapidly and are more complex in response to the evolving treatment landscape for HER2+ EBC. This analysis highlights several areas of expert consensus; however, disparities remain for select cases. The current tool addresses an unmet medical need for expert-led evaluation of HER2+ EBC tx choices and warrants further investigation.

Expert Recommendations: Initial Adj HER2 Ab Tx After Neodj Tx With H Alone ExpertsResponse12345pCR (HR-)HHHHHpCR (HR+)HHHHHypT1a-c N0 (HR-)H + PHH + PH + PH + PypT1a-c N0 (HR+)H + PHHH + PHypT2 N0 (HR-)H + PH + PH + PH + PH + PypT2 N0 (HR+)H + PH + PHH + PH + PypTany N+ (HR+ or HR-)H + PH + PH + PH + PH + P

Citation Format: Holmes FA, Rosenthal KM, Hurvitz S, Pegram MD, Yardley DA, Obholz KL, O'Shaughnessy J. Consensus and disagreement among experts for treatment of patients with HER2+ early-stage breast cancer suggests unmet need for online decision support tool [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-17-36.

Abstract P2-11-01: Safety and efficacy of sacituzumab govitecan (anti-Trop-2-SN-38 antibody-drug conjugate) as ≥3rd-line therapeutic option for treatment-refractory HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (HER2Neg mBC)

Background: Sacituzumab govitecan is an antibody-drug conjugate consisting of SN-38, the active metabolite of irinotecan, conjugated to a humanized mAb targeting Trop-2 (trophoblastic antigen-2), which is highly expressed in many epithelial cancers. A phase I/II basket trial (NCT01631552) investigated its activity in patients (pts) with advanced epithelial cancers. Herein, we summarize pooled safety and efficacy findings in 162 pts with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC) accrued between 7/2013 and 6/2017 who received at least 2 prior therapies for metastatic disease and were treated with sacituzumab govitecan at the 10 mg/kg dose level.

Methods: Patients with triple-negative (N=108) and patients with hormone-receptor positive (N=54) mBC received 10 mg/kg sacituzumab govitecan on days 1 & 8 of a 21-day cycle continued until progression or unacceptable toxicity. All pts had measurable disease by CT or MRI. Efficacy was assessed locally by RECIST 1.1 including overall response rate (ORR) and Kaplan-Meier estimates of duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Adverse events (AE) were evaluated according to CTCAE v4.0

Results: The patient cohort (161 female /1 male; median age 55 yrs, range 31-80) received a median of 4 prior therapies for metastatic disease (range 2-17), with prior chemotherapy agents in the metastatic setting including taxane (68%), capecitabine (60%), platinum (59%), gemcitabine (44%), eribulin (41%), and anthracycline (38%). 77 pts have died, with 57 in long-term follow-up and 28 still on treatment at data cutoff. The median number of administered sacituzumab govitecan doses was 14 (range 1-88). Treatment was generally well tolerated. 29% of pts had dose reductions, 3% discontinued treatment due to drug-related AEs, and there were no treatment-related deaths. Based on currently available AE data, grade ≥ 3 toxicity included neutropenia (43%), anemia (9.5%), diarrhea (7.0%) and febrile neutropenia (6.3%). For the TNBC subgroup, with a median follow-up of 9.3 months, the ORR was 33% (3 CRs + 33 PRs /108) with a median DOR of 8.3 months (95% CI: 4.8 – 11.6). For the ER+ subgroup, with a median follow-up of 10.0 months, the ORR was 31% (17 PRs/54) with a median DOR of 7.4 months (95% CI: 4.4 – 18.3). The combined HER2Neg ORR was 33% (3 CRs+50 PRs/162), with a median DOR of 8.3 months (95% CI: 4.9 - 10.8), PFS of 5.6 months (95% CI: 5.1 – 6.9) and OS of 13.0 months (95% CI: 11.5 - 15.0). The ORR was comparable for pts ≤ 50 yrs. old [32.2% (19/59)] vs. &gt; 50 yrs old [33.0% (34/103)] and little different for pts with 2 prior therapies [35.4% (17/48)] vs. &gt;2 prior therapies [31.6% (36/114)].

Conclusions: Monotherapy with sacituzumab govitecan was well tolerated with a manageable safety profile, and achieved a 30+% objective response rate among heavily pre-treated patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer regardless of ER status.

Citation Format: Kalinsky K, Isakoff SJ, Tolaney SM, Juric D, Mayer IA, Vahdat LT, Diamond JR, O'Shaughnessy J, Moroose RL, Santin AD, Shah NC, Abramson V, Goldenberg DM, Sharkey RM, Washkowitz SA, Wegener WA, Iannone R, Bardia A. Safety and efficacy of sacituzumab govitecan (anti-Trop-2-SN-38 antibody-drug conjugate) as ≥3rd-line therapeutic option for treatment-refractory HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (HER2Neg mBC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-11-01.

Abstract P6-18-19: Real-world survival of heavily pretreated patients with refractory HR+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer receiving single-agent chemotherapy - A comparison with MONARCH 1

Background

In MONARCH 1 (NCT02102490), abemaciclib demonstrated promising single-agent activity and tolerability in a population of heavily pretreated women with refractory HR+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer (MBC).1 Confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was 19.7% (95% CI: 13.3, 27.5) and at 18 months minimum follow-up median overall survival (OS) was 22.3 months. Due to the single-arm trial design of MONARCH 1, there is a need to view these results in clinical context relative to available treatment options. This study compared the OS results of abemaciclib in MONARCH 1 vs that in a real-world single-agent chemotherapy cohort with similar patient and disease characteristics.

Methods

MONARCH 1 study design and key eligibility criteria were previously described.1 The real-world cohort was based on Flatiron Health electronic health records-derived, nationally representative (USA-based) database comprising patient-level structured and unstructured data, curated via technology-enabled abstraction, for patients with MBC between January 1, 2011 through February 28, 2018. A real-world single-agent chemotherapy cohort was created based on the key eligibility criteria of MONARCH 1 and included patients diagnosed with HR+, HER2- MBC who received single-agent chemotherapy (eribulin, capecitabine, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine) following 1-2 prior chemotherapy regimens in the metastatic setting, had an ECOG PS of 0-1, and no prior CDK4 & 6 therapy. The index date was the start of the eligible single-agent chemotherapy, and patients were followed from the index date until date of death, loss to follow-up, or end of the database, whichever occurred earlier. OS results were adjusted using 2 methods (Mahalanobis distance matching and entropy balancing with bootstrapping) to account for baseline demographic and clinical differences between the real-world and trial cohorts.

Results

A real-world cohort (n=281) with eligibility criteria similar to the MONARCH 1 population (n=132) was identified. A subsequent matching based on Mahalanobis distance was performed to match MONARCH 1 population (n=108) with the real-world cohort (n=108). The matched cohorts demonstrated similar patient and disease characteristics. Median OS was 22.3 months in the abemaciclib arm vs 13.6 months in the matched cohort with an estimated hazard ratio (HR) of 0.54 (95% CI: 0.37, 0.77). Results of a sensitivity analysis performed using entropy balancing were consistent with an adjusted median OS of 12.7 months in the real-world cohort (n=281)with HR of 0.57 (95% CI from bootstrapping: 0.44, 0.78).

Conclusion

Methodological advances to adjust for potential biases, and improvements in data quality, have evolved enabling the ability to leverage a real-world cohort as an external comparator arm. This study demonstrates the ability to create a real-world chemotherapy cohort suitable to serve as a comparator for MONARCH 1. These exploratory results suggest a survival advantage and adequately place the clinical benefit of abemaciclib monotherapy in clinical context.

References

Dickler et al, CCR 2017

Citation Format: Rugo H, Dieras V, Cortes J, Patt D, Wildiers H, O'Shaughnessy J, Zamora E, Yardley DY, Carter GC, Sheffield KM, Li L, Andre VA, Derbyshire RE, Li XI, Frenzel M, Huang Y-J, Dickler MN, Tolaney SM. Real-world survival of heavily pretreated patients with refractory HR+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer receiving single-agent chemotherapy - A comparison with MONARCH 1 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-18-19.

Abstract P6-18-14: Patient-reported outcomes with ribociclib-based therapy in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: results from the phase III MONALEESA-2, -3, and -7 trials

Background: In the Phase III MONALEESA (ML) trials, ribociclib (RIB; cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor) + endocrine therapy (ET) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) vs placebo (PBO) + ET in patients (pts) with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative (HER2–) advanced breast cancer (ABC). Here we report key patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for pts treated with RIB-based regimens of interest (i.e. with a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor [NSAI] or fulvestrant [FUL]) in the ML-2, -3, and -7 trials.

Methods: Postmenopausal pts with HR+, HER2– ABC and no prior ET for advanced disease received RIB (600 mg/day; 3-weeks-on/1-week-off) + letrozole (2.5 mg/day; ML-2 [NCT01958021]), or FUL (500 mg every 28 days, with an additional dose on Day 15 of Cycle [C] 1; ML-3 [no prior ET for ABC subgroup only; NCT02422615]). Premenopausal pts with no prior ET and ≤1 line of chemotherapy for advanced disease received RIB + NSAI (anastrozole [1 mg/day]/letrozole [2.5 mg/day]) + goserelin (3.6 mg every 28 days; ML-7 [NCT02278120]). The primary endpoint for all trials was PFS. PROs were a secondary endpoint of all trials and were evaluated using EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-BR23 (ML-2 and ML-7), EQ-5D-5L, WPAI-GH (ML-7 only), and BPI-SF (ML-3 only) questionnaires. Changes from baseline and time to 10% deterioration (TTD) in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were analyzed using linear mixed-effect and stratified Cox regression models, respectively.

Results: A total of 1530 pts were included in this analysis. Questionnaire compliance was high across trials (ML-2/ML-3: &gt;90%; ML-7: &gt;80%). On-treatment HRQoL (EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status/quality of life [QoL] score) was maintained from baseline up to C34, C28, and C17 in both treatment arms for ML-2, ML-3, and ML-7, respectively. In ML-7, mean overall HRQoL scores continued to improve in the RIB arm from C18 to C28, but scores decreased in the PBO arm. At end of treatment, mean overall HRQoL scores decreased in both arms across trials. Median TTD (RIB vs PBO) was similar between arms, favoring the RIB arms (ML-2: 27.7 vs 27.6 months; hazard ratio 0.944; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.720–1.237; ML-3: not reached [NR] vs 22.4 months; hazard ratio 0.721; 95% CI 0.484–1.074; ML-7: 24.0 vs 19.4 months; hazard ratio 0.759; 95% CI 0.561–1.028). Clinically meaningful reductions in EORTC QLQ-C30 pain score (&gt;5 points from baseline) were observed in the RIB arm of ML-2 from as early as C3 and were sustained vs only at C7 and C13 in the PBO arm. Clinically meaningful reductions in pain were observed from C22 to C28 in the RIB arm of ML-7 vs only at C28 in the PBO arm. In ML-3, clinically meaningful reductions in pain were observed from C3 to C5, C11–17, and at C22 and C28 in the RIB arm vs C17–C25 in the PBO arm. Furthermore, median TTD of the BPI-SF pain severity index score was NR in either arm of ML-3 (hazard ratio 0.858; 95% CI 0.554–1.330).

Conclusions: In addition to significantly prolonging PFS, RIB consistently maintains QoL regardless of ET combination partner. RIB + ET is also associated with clinically meaningful reductions in pain vs PBO + ET across a broad population of pts with HR+, HER2– ABC.

Citation Format: Beck JT, Neven P, Esteva FJ, Bardia A, Harbeck N, Hurvitz S, O'Shaughnessy J, Verma S, Lanoue B, Alam J, Kong O, Chandiwana D, Chia S. Patient-reported outcomes with ribociclib-based therapy in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: results from the phase III MONALEESA-2, -3, and -7 trials [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-18-14.

Abstract P6-18-38: Treatment patterns and sequences among pre-menopausal women with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer: A chart review study

Background: Recently, a novel class of treatments, CDK4/6 inhibitors, has been approved, and is now recommended for pre-menopausal women with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (mBC). This study examined prevailing treatment patterns and sequencing among premenopausal women with mBC treated in clinical practice.

Methods: Patient-level data were collected from patient charts in May 2018 from 30 oncologists, mostly from community practice, in the US. Treatment sequences and patterns were assessed for pre-menopausal women diagnosed with HR+/HER2- mBC between January 2015 and January 2017 (with a minimum of 1 year of follow-up).

Results: Data were collected on 201 pre-menopausal women with HR+/HER2- mBC. In first-line therapy for mBC, 52.7% of the patients received a CDK4/6 inhibitor-based regimen, 23.4% received endocrine monotherapy, 20.9% received a chemotherapy-based regimen, and the remaining 3.0% received an everolimus-based regimen. The majority of patients who received a CDK4/6 inhibitor received it in combination with an AI (73.6%), fulvestrant (11.3%), or tamoxifen (6.6%). Approximately half of all patients (51.2%) received an ovarian suppression agent during first-line therapy. Overall, median time on treatment from Kaplan Meier (KM) analysis for first-line therapy was 16.1 months. Most common reason for discontinuing first line was disease progression or suboptimal response (79.0% of patients who discontinued); another common reason was the completion of the planned duration of therapy (12.6%).

Among the 106 patients who received a CDK4/6 inhibitor in the first line, median time on treatment from KM analysis was 26.8 months. Main reason for CDK4/6 inhibitor discontinuation was disease progression or suboptimal response (90.2% of patients who discontinued).

For the 109 patients for whom we observed a second-line therapy, treatment sequences are presented in Table 1. Median time on treatment for second and third line therapy was 9.6 and 7.8 months, respectively.

Conclusion: Following the introduction of novel CDK4/6 inhibitor treatments in the mBC setting, we observed that approximately half of pre-menopausal patients received a CDK4/6-based regimen in the first line of therapy.

Top 5 treatment sequences in pre-menopausal HR+/HER2- mBC patients (n=109)Treatment SequenceN(%)CDK4/6 - ET -&gt; Everolimus - ET21(19.3%)Chemo -&gt; Chemo16(14.7%)CDK4/6 - ET -&gt; Chemo13(11.9%)ET -&gt; CDK4/6 - ET13(11.9%)Chemo -&gt; CDK4/6 - ET10(9.2%)ET: endocrine therapy; Chemo: chemotherapy; -&gt; indicates a change to the next line of therapy. Percentages calculated among patients with at least 2 lines of therapy

Citation Format: Dalal AA, Goldschmidt D, Romdhani H, Kelkar S, Guerin A, Wang H, Caria N, Sawhney A, O'Shaughnessy J. Treatment patterns and sequences among pre-menopausal women with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer: A chart review study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-18-38.

Abstract OT1-01-01: IMpassion131: A phase III study comparing 1L atezolizumab with paclitaxel vs placebo with paclitaxel in treatment-naive patients with inoperable locally advanced or metastatic triple negative breast cancer (TNBC)

Background: Chemotherapy (including paclitaxel) remains the predominant treatment for metastatic TNBC but clinical outcomes remain poor. Therefore, new therapeutic approaches are needed. Atezolizumab blocks the binding of PD-L1 to its receptors PD-1 and B7.1, thus restoring tumor-specific T cell immunity. TNBC is a rational target for atezolizumab therapy due to high PD-L1 expression on tumor-infiltrating immune cells (IC) and elevated T cell tumor infiltration. Furthermore, combining chemotherapy with atezolizumab is hypothesized to enhance anti-tumor immune response via neoantigen release. Atezolizumab alone and in combination with nab-paclitaxel has demonstrated promising clinical benefit in metastatic TNBC and was well tolerated, with no exacerbation of chemotherapy-associated adverse events. Atezolizumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel is being further investigated as 1L TNBC treatment in IMpassion130. IMpassion131 is a global, multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study comparing the efficacy and safety of 1L atezolizumab + paclitaxel vs placebo + paclitaxel in patients with untreated, inoperable, locally advanced or metastatic TNBC. (NCT03125902)

Methods: Eligibility criteria include patients with inoperable, locally advanced or metastatic TNBC, histologically confirmed; de novo or recurrent disease after early breast cancer treated with chemotherapy ≥ 12 months prior; eligible for taxane monotherapy; no prior chemotherapy or targeted systemic therapy for inoperable locally advanced or metastatic disease; ECOG PS 0-1 and measurable disease by RECIST v1.1. Exclusion criteria include known symptomatic CNS disease, prior immunotherapy and a history of autoimmune disease. Approximately 495 patients will be randomized 2:1 to receive atezolizumab (840 mg) or placebo (q2w; days 1 and 15 of 28-day cycle) plus paclitaxel (90 mg/m2; days 1, 8, 15 of 28-day cycle) until disease progression. Stratification factors are PD-L1 expression on tumor-infiltrating IC (IC0 &lt; 1% vs IC1/2/3 ≥ 1% with VENTANA SP142 IHC assay), prior taxane therapy, presence of liver metastases and geographical region. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) measured by RECIST v1.1. Key secondary endpoints include overall survival (OS), 12- and 18-month OS rates, 12-month PFS rate, objective response rate, duration of response, and safety. Tumor biopsies will be collected at baseline, on treatment and at disease progression to assess for biomarkers of treatment response and immune escape.

Citation Format: Miles D, André F, Gligorov J, Verma S, Xu B, Cameron D, Barrios CH, Schneeweiss A, Easton V, Ghazi Y, O'Shaughnessy J. IMpassion131: A phase III study comparing 1L atezolizumab with paclitaxel vs placebo with paclitaxel in treatment-naive patients with inoperable locally advanced or metastatic triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) [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 OT1-01-01.

Abstract P6-14-05: Phase 2 study evaluating the efficacy and safety of eribulin mesylate administered biweekly for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer

Background: Eribulin mesylate, a microtubule inhibitor, is approved in the US for the treatment of patients (pts) with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who have previously received at least 2 chemotherapeutic regimens for the treatment of metastatic disease, including an anthracycline and a taxane. The recommended dose is 1.4 mg/m2 (equivalent to 1.23 mg/m2 eribulin [expressed as free base]) on day (D) 1 and D8 of a 21-D cycle. However, this schedule can result in dose delays and reductions due to myelosuppression. A dosing regimen of eribulin (1.4 mg/m2) administered intravenously (IV) biweekly (Q2W; on D1 and D15) in 28-D cycles was evaluated with the intent of improving eribulin's safety profile without compromising efficacy.

Methods: Female pts with human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)2-negative MBC, who had received 2-5 prior chemotherapy regimens and had ECOG PS ≤2 were enrolled in 12 sites in the US. Prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) was not allowed. If neutropenia occurred, growth factors were used during eribulin treatment at the physician's discretion. Primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR). Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), dose intensity (measured by feasibility rate), safety and tolerability.

Results: Median age of the 58 enrolled pts was 64 yrs (range: 38-85). The majority of pts (93%) had ECOG PS ≤1, and 12% of pts had triple-negative MBC. Number of prior chemotherapeutic regimens: 2 (17% of patients), 3 (24%), 4 (27%), and 5 (31%). 76% Of pts had visceral disease and 86% had previous taxane therapy. ORR (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 12% (5-24), DCR (CR+PR+SD) was 65% (95% CI: 51-77), and CBR (CR+PR+SD ≥23 weeks) was 30% (95% CI: 18-43) [n=57]. Median PFS (95% CI) was 3.6 mo (2.9-4.1). Median OS (95% CI) was 13.2 mo (10.6-not estimable). 6-Month and 12-month OS rates were 84% and 54%, respectively. Dose intensity measured by the feasibility rate (defined as the percentage of pts completing the first 2 and 4 cycles without a dose delay &gt;5 days or dose reduction due to an adverse event [AE]) was 70% and 46%, respectively.

The most frequent AEs (all grades) were neutropenia (69%), fatigue (48%), alopecia (45%), and constipation (36%). 22% Of pts had grade (G) 1 alopecia and 22% of pts had G2 alopecia. 72% Of pts had G3/4 AEs: neutropenia, 57%, and peripheral neuropathy, 12%. G3 peripheral sensory neuropathy occurred in 9% of pts, with no G4 incidence. There were 2 deaths (1 sepsis, 1 acute respiratory failure), which were considered not related to treatment. 50% (29/58) Of all patients received at least 1 dose of growth factor and 70% (28/40) of patients with neutropenia received growth-factor support.

Conclusions: Tumor response rates and OS of this treatment schedule in a heavily pretreated patient population were similar compared to previously reported phase 3 studies of eribulin. The toxicities associated with biweekly eribulin were manageable.

Citation Format: Smith II J, Irwin A, Jensen L, Tedesco K, Misir S, Zhu W, Almonte A, He Y, Olivo M, O'Shaughnessy J. Phase 2 study evaluating the efficacy and safety of eribulin mesylate administered biweekly for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer [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 P6-14-05.

Abstract OT2-07-05: A phase III, randomized trial of sacituzumab govitecan (IMMU-132) vs treatment of physician choice (TPC) for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC)

Background: Metastatic TNBC has an aggressive course with limited therapy options and poor survival. Sacituzumab govitecan (IMMU-132) is a novel antibody drug conjugate consisting of SN-38, the active metabolite of the topoisomerase I inhibitor, irinotecan, conjugated to a humanized mAb targeting Trop-2, which is highly expressed in most epithelial cancers, including TNBC. We previously reported that patients (pts) with mTNBC treated with IMMU-132 after a median of 5 prior therapies from initial diagnosis achieved a 30% objective response rate (ORR), 8.9 mo median duration of response (DOR), and an acceptable safety profile with nausea, neutropenia, and diarrhea the most common toxicities (Bardia et al., JCO, 2017). IMMU-132 was awarded Breakthrough Designation by the FDA based on this data. Accordingly, we are enrolling additional patients with relapsed/refractory mTNBC with intention of seeking regulatory approval as a ≥3rd-line therapeutic option.

Trial design: An international, open-label, Phase III study in pts with refractory/relapsed mTNBC after ≥2 prior chemotherapies for advanced disease or &gt;1 therapy for pts who progress within 12 months of adjuvant therapy (NCT02574455). Pts are randomized 1:1 to receive either IMMU-132 (10 mg/kg IV, days 1 and 8 every 21 days) or TPC from one of 4 prespecified single-agent regimens (capecitabine, eribulin, vinorelbine or gemcitabine). Pts continue treatment until progression requiring discontinuation or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) and additional endpoints include overall survival (OS), ORR, DOR, safety and quality of life. Independent, blinded reads of scans will be performed.

Eligibility criteria: Adults &gt;18 yrs old, with metastatic breast cancer, triple-negative by most recent biopsy, measurable disease by CT or MRI as per RECIST1.1, ECOG performance score 0 or 1, adequate safety laboratories. Refractory/relapsed after ≥2 prior standard chemotherapy regimens for advanced disease, or &gt;1 therapy for pts who progress within 12 months of adjuvant therapy. Pts must have received taxane and be eligible by investigator to receive at least one of the TPC agents. Pts with treated, non-progressive brain metastases are eligible.

Specific aims: To compare IMMU-132 to TPC as measured by PFS, OS, ORR, DOR,QOL, adverse events, safety laboratories, incidence of dose delays and reductions, and treatment discontinuations due to toxicity.

Statistical methods: Assuming a median PFS of 3 mo. and OS of 10 mo. with TPC vs. 5 and 15 mo. with IMMU-132, respectively, a study size of 328 patients has &gt;95% and &gt;80% power to detect a statistically significant difference in PFS and OS, respectively, between the two treatment arms.

Present accrual and target accrual: Trial enrollment will begin prior to SABCS 2017 with approximately 328 patients expected to be enrolled over 18 months at approximately 100 institutions in North America, Europe and potentially elsewhere.

Contact: Immu132@Immunomedics.com

Citation Format: Bardia A, Rugo HS, Horne H, Wegener WA, Goldenberg DM, O'Shaughnessy J. A phase III, randomized trial of sacituzumab govitecan (IMMU-132) vs treatment of physician choice (TPC) for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) [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 OT2-07-05.

Abstract P1-13-05: Timing of initiation of neratinib after completion of trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy in early-stage HER2+ breast cancer: Exploratory analyses from the phase III ExteNET trial

Background: The international, randomized, placebo-controlled phase III ExteNET trial showed that 1 year of neratinib after trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy significantly improved 2-year invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) in early-stage HER2+ breast cancer (HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.50–0.91; p=0.009) [Chan et al. Lancet Oncol 2016]. The significant iDFS benefit with neratinib was maintained after a median of 5 years' follow-up (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.57-0.92; p=0.008) [Martin et al. ESMO 2017]. We present exploratory analyses from the ExteNET trial examining the effects of the interval between completion of trastuzumab and randomization to commence neratinib on iDFS.

Methods: Women with early-stage HER2+ breast cancer were randomly assigned to oral neratinib 240 mg/day or placebo for 1 year after standard primary therapy and trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy. Under the original study protocol, (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab was to be completed ≤24 months before randomization; this was revised to ≤12 months before randomization after the NCCTG-N9831/NSABP B-31 4-year analysis showed that the risk of relapse is greatest during the first 12 months after completing trastuzumab. Disease recurrences were collected prospectively during 1 and 2 years post-randomization, and from medical records during 3–5 years post-randomization. Patients randomized ≤12 months after completion of adjuvant trastuzumab were further separated to look at those who initiated neratinib ≤6 months of completing adjuvant trastuzumab. Primary endpoint: iDFS. HR (95% CI) estimated using Cox proportional-hazards models. Data cut-off: March 1, 2017. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00878709.

Results:The intention-to-treat population comprised 2840 patients (neratinib, n=1420; placebo, n=1420). Median time from last trastuzumab dose to randomization was 4.4 and 4.6 months in the neratinib and placebo groups, respectively. 81% of patients were randomized ≤12 months of completing trastuzumab. The effects of the interval between the last dose of trastuzumab and randomization/initiation of neratinib on iDFS after a median follow-up of 5.2 years are shown in the table.

  Estimated 5-year iDFS rate, % P-valueInterval from last dose of trastuzumab to randomizationnNeratinibPlaceboHR (95% CI)a(2-sided)≤6 months164190.085.40.62 (0.46–0.84)0.002≤12 monthsb229789.786.50.70 (0.54–0.90)0.006&gt;12 monthsb54392.392.61.00 (0.51–1.94)0.992a. Neratinib vs placebo; b. Protocol-defined subgroups

Conclusions: In ExteNET, patients who initiated neratinib within 12 months of completing trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy appeared to derive greater benefit from treatment than those who started neratinib later. Further, exploratory analyses suggest that the magnitude of benefit with neratinib is greater if initiated sooner (i.e. within 6 months of completing trastuzumab). Given the benefits of neratinib overall in those initiating treatment ≤12 months from the end of adjuvant trastuzumab, extended adjuvant treatment with neratinib should be initiated early following completion of trastuzumab.

Citation Format: Ejlertsen B, Chan A, Gnant M, von Minckwitz G, Delaloge S, Buyse M, O'Shaughnessy J, Mansi J, Moy B, Iwata H, Wong A, Ye Y, Means-Powell J, Hui R, Ruiz-Borrego M, Ruiz Simon A, Shen Z-Z, Holmes FA, Lesniewski-Kmak K, Martin M. Timing of initiation of neratinib after completion of trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy in early-stage HER2+ breast cancer: Exploratory analyses from the phase III ExteNET trial [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 P1-13-05.

Abstract OT3-05-06: EarLEE-2: A phase 3 study of ribociclib + endocrine therapy (ET) for adjuvant treatment of patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2–), intermediate-risk, early breast cancer (EBC)

Background: Adjuvant ET with or without chemotherapy reduces the risk for recurrence of HR+, HER2– EBC. However, recurrence is still common, especially in patients with adverse clinical and pathologic features. In the phase 3 MONALEESA-2 trial, the cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor ribociclib (LEE011), in combination with letrozole, prolonged progression-free survival versus letrozole plus placebo in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2– advanced breast cancer and no prior therapy for advanced disease (HR = 0.56, 95% CI, 0.43-0.72; P = 3.29×10−6; Hortobagyi et al. N Engl J Med. 2016). EarLEE-2 is investigating the efficacy and safety of ribociclib with ET versus placebo with ET as adjuvant treatment in patients with intermediate-risk EBC.

Trial design: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 adjuvant trial, ˜4,000 women and men with fully resected, intermediate-risk, HR+, HER2– EBC (defined as AJCC 8th ed. Prognostic Stage Group II) are being randomized 1:1 to oral ribociclib (600 mg/day, 3 weeks on/1 week off for ˜24 months) plus ET or to placebo plus ET. Adjuvant ET may include tamoxifen, letrozole, anastrozole, or exemestane for ≥ 60 months with ovarian suppression for premenopausal women at the discretion of the investigator. Adjuvant ET in men will be tamoxifen only. Neoadjuvant therapy is not permitted. Randomization is stratified by menopausal status (men and premenopausal women vs postmenopausal women), prior adjuvant chemotherapy (yes vs no), Prognostic Stage Group (IIA vs IIB), and geographic region (North America/Europe/Australia vs rest of the world). Eligible patients must have tumor tissue from the surgical specimen, adequate bone marrow and organ functions, normal serum electrolytes, QTc interval &lt; 450 msec, and completed and recovered from acute toxicities of adjuvant radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy. The primary endpoint is invasive disease-free survival (per STEEP system; Hudis et al. J Clin Oncol. 2007). Secondary endpoints include recurrence-free survival, distant disease-free survival, overall survival, quality of life, and safety. Global recruitment to EarLEE-2 is ongoing. NCT03081234

Citation Format: O'Shaughnessy J, Alba E, Bardia A, Dent S, Dieras V, Hortobagyi G, Im S-A, Montemurro F, Untch M, Yardley DA, Chakravartty A, Germa C, Miller M, Slamon D. EarLEE-2: A phase 3 study of ribociclib + endocrine therapy (ET) for adjuvant treatment of patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2–), intermediate-risk, early breast cancer (EBC) [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 OT3-05-06.