Ovarian Function Suppression In Premenopausal Women Research Articles

A randomized phase 2 non-inferiority trial of (Z)-endoxifen and exemestane + goserelin as neoadjuvant treatment for premenopausal women with ER+/HER2- breast cancer (EVANGELINE).

TPS633 Background: Ovarian function suppression (OFS) when combined with tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor is the standard of care for premenopausal estrogen receptor positive (ER+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer (BC) based on SOFT (Francis 2022) and TEXT (Pagani 2022) clinical trials and confirmed in a metanalysis (EBCTCG 2022). However, estrogen deprivation in premenopausal women is associated with significant morbidity and up to 40% of premenopausal women with ER+/HER2- BC are intolerant of OFS. For these women, tamoxifen monotherapy is the only FDA approved option. Therefore, there is substantial room to improve endocrine therapy for premenopausal women with ER+/HER2- BC. (Z)-endoxifen is one of the most active anti-estrogen tamoxifen metabolites, with preclinical data demonstrating superiority to tamoxifen and letrozole in aromatase expressing xenograft models and evidence for antitumor activity in early phase clinical trials in patients with prior progression on endocrine therapy including tamoxifen. In addition to its ability to potently block ERa, (Z)-endoxifen at clinically achievable concentrations inhibits protein kinase C beta 1 (PKCβ1), resulting in downstream AKT inhibition and apoptosis. It is hypothesized that (Z)-endoxifen, when delivered as monotherapy at doses that dually target both ERα and PKCβ1, will potently inhibit BC proliferation while obviating the need for OFS in premenopausal women. If successful, this innovative approach could spare women with endocrine sensitive BC from the side effects of OFS. Methods: To further study (Z)-endoxifen in premenopausal women, a multicenter study in the United States, with possible expansion to other countries was designed (EVANGELINE; NCT05607004). This is a Phase 2, open-label, randomized, neoadjuvant study in premenopausal women with Stage IIA or IIB ER+/HER2- BC. Subjects are randomized 1:1 to either exemestane plus goserelin or (Z)-endoxifen. The primary objective is to determine whether the endocrine sensitive disease (ESD) rate (defined as Ki-67 ≤ 10% after 4 weeks of neoadjuvant therapy) with (Z)-endoxifen is non-inferior to exemestane plus goserelin. Subjects will be enrolled with the intent of surgical treatment in the involved breast(s) after completing 6 months of neoadjuvant treatment. Safety, tolerability, response rates and surgical outcomes will be assessed. Disease progression will be monitored throughout study participation. Paired tumor biopsies and blood sampling will allow for a robust biomarker evaluation. Prior to initiating the Treatment Cohort (162 subjects), up to 12 subjects will be enrolled in a pharmacokinetic (PK) Run-in Cohort to identify the optimal dose for the Treatment Cohort. Enrolment in the PK Run-in cohort began in February 2023. Clinical trial information: NCT05607004 .

Abstract P2-03-24: Predictors of Incomplete Ovarian Function Suppression (OFS) in Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Women with Hormone Receptor Positive (HR+) Breast Cancer

Abstract Authors: Apoorva Anandan, MD (1,2), Trinetri Ghosh (3), Jiwei Zhao (3), Kari Wisinski, MD (1,2) (1) Department of Medicine, Section of Hematology/Oncology, University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI (2) University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI (3) University of Wisconsin Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics Madison, WI Background: A combined analysis of the SOFT/TEXT trials demonstrated an overall survival (OS) benefit to endocrine therapy in addition to OFS compared to endocrine therapy alone, further establishing the importance of adequate OFS in premenopausal women with HR+ breast cancers. Factors associated with inadequate OFS are ambiguous, but younger age, type of chemotherapy, high body mass index (BMI), and time from treatment completion seem to be important. Additionally, data remains limited regarding whether monitoring of OFS should be routinely performed and optimal timing of hormone levels. We sought to identify predictors of inadequate OFS among an AYA population of hormone receptor positive breast cancer receiving OFS at our institution. Methods: A retrospective, descriptive study was conducted looking at AYA patients (pts) aged 18-39 with a diagnosis of HR+ breast cancer who previously and/or currently received oncologic care for management of their breast cancer at the institution. Data was collected from pts diagnosed between 2000-2022. Patients who had previously received or are currently receiving OFS in the adjuvant and/or metastatic setting were included in the study. Data was collected regarding age, BMI, chemotherapy regimen received in the neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant setting, type, dose, and frequency of ovarian suppression, number of times estradiol was monitored, and frequency of estradiol levels >20. This was used as the cut off based on a comprehensive review of data consistently categorizing levels >20 as not to be postmenopausal. Results: 74 AYA patients who received OFS were included with median age of 28 (range 20-39) and average BMI 27.7 (range 15-45). 70% of the population was Caucasian, 10% African American, and 20% Hispanic. Estradiol levels were monitored in 46 of the 74 pts (62%). The frequency of estradiol monitored ranged from 1-22 times. 16 out of the 46 (35%) pts had estradiol checked only once, 10 (22%) twice, and 16 (35%) four or more times. 22 out of 46 pts (48%) had estradiol levels >20 when checked at least once. 9 out of 22 (41%) had estradiol >20 when checked more than four times. Out of 74 pts, 36 received OFS every month (49%), 32 received OFS every three months (43%). Only 4 out of 74 pts (5%) switched from monthly to every three months, meanwhile only 1 (1%) switched from every three months to monthly. 18 out of the 36 pts (50%) receiving monthly OFS had estradiol levels checked with 9 (50%) having estradiol >20. Meanwhile, 20 out of the 32 pts who received OFS every 3 months (63%) had estradiol levels checked with 10 (50%) having estradiol >20. The average age of pts with estradiol >20 was 33.6 while the average BMI of those with estradiol >20 was 29.2. Finally, 64 out of 74 pts (86%) received chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant setting. 41 out of 64 (64%) had estradiol levels checked. 18 out of 41 (44%) had estradiol >20. Discussion: Our data indicates a high degree of clinician variability in monitoring estradiol levels in AYA pts treated with OFS. Lack of adequate OFS was seen in nearly half of pts in this cohort. Higher BMI and young age may be predictors of lack of adequate ovarian suppression, supporting the findings of other studies. An algorithm for routine monitoring of estradiol may improve outcomes with OFS especially in young pts or those with a high BMI. Citation Format: Apoorva Anandan, Trinetri Ghosh, Jiwei Zhao, Kari B. Wisinski. Predictors of Incomplete Ovarian Function Suppression (OFS) in Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Women with Hormone Receptor Positive (HR+) Breast Cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-03-24.

Abstract P1-02-01: Comparing the efficacy of aromatase inhibitors vs tamoxifen in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer: a systematic review and trial-level meta-analysis

Abstract Background: Five years of adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) including aromatase inhibitors (AIs) and tamoxifen (TAM) is considered the standard of care in hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor–negative (HR+/HER2−) early breast cancer (eBC). Clinical practice guidelines recommend the use of an AI or TAM depending on menopausal status and clinical risk stratification. Although TAM is generally recommended and more commonly used in premenopausal women, there is mixed evidence for different clinical outcomes. Patient-level meta-analyses conducted by the Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) showed significantly lower rates of BC recurrence with AIs vs TAM. However, this was not specific to patients with HR+/HER2− eBC. This trial-level meta-analysis was conducted to compare AIs ± ovarian function suppression (OFS) vs TAM ± OFS in HR+/HER2−, pre- and postmenopausal patients with eBC. Methods: A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted using key literature databases, ie, Embase, PubMed, and MEDLINE In-Process (from database inception to March 2022) and key conferences (2019-2021). Studies selected for the SLR were those that included either ≥80% of patients with HR+/HER2− eBC in the mixed patient population or subgroup data provided specifically for patients with HR+/HER2− eBC. Of these, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating AI ± OFS vs TAM ± OFS and assessing disease-free survival (DFS) were included in the trial-level meta-analysis. This meta-analysis was conducted using the generic invariance method to obtain a pooled effect estimate (hazard ratio [HR]) together with its CI for DFS. This pooled estimate was calculated as a weighted average of the intervention effects estimated in the individual trials. Both fixed- and random-effect models (FEM, REM) were used to estimate the effect size. A base-case analysis was performed including all eligible trials. Three other scenario analyses were conducted: trials investigating only nonsteroidal AIs (NSAIs), assessing only premenopausal women, and assessing only postmenopausal women. Heterogeneity across the trials was assessed using I2 statistic. Results: A total of 5 RCTs comparing AI ± OFS vs TAM ± OFS were eligible for the meta-analysis (SOFT, HOBOE, BIG 1-98, N-SAS BC 03, Li 2019; additional information on rationale for exclusion of specific trials will be reported). Two studies assessing NSAI vs TAM included postmenopausal women, while 3 studies assessing AIs + OFS vs TAM ± OFS included premenopausal women. A total of 6623 patients were followed up for 34-97.2 months across these five trials. Heterogeneity was found to be low (I2 < 40%) across all scenarios. The base-case results (including all studies) using FEM significantly favored AIs ± OFS over TAM ± OFS, with a 29% reduction in risk of recurrence or death (pooled HR, 0.71 [95%CI, 0.64-0.80]). Similar results were observed with NSAIs ± OFS vs TAM ± OFS (HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.64-0.83]). Among premenopausal patients, the pooled HR for AIs + OFS vs TAM ± OFS was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.54-0.79). For postmenopausal women, the HR was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.65-0.87), favoring AIs over TAM. The findings for the base-case and different scenarios remained consistent when REM was used. Conclusions: This trial-level meta-analysis suggests significantly greater benefit with AIs than with TAM for HR+/HER2− eBC. Notably, AIs in combination with OFS are associated with a 34% reduction in risk of recurrence or death vs TAM ± OFS in premenopausal women; these results are aligned with the patient-level data findings of the EBCTCG. The findings indicate that AIs ± OFS are associated with a better DFS in the HR+/HER2− population, especially premenopausal women, than TAM ± OFS. Citation Format: Wolfgang Janni, Michael Untch, Nadia Harbeck, Joseph Gilgorov, William Jacot, Stephen K. Chia, Jean-Francois Boileau, Sina Haftchenary, Rhea Gupta, Namita Mishra, Purnima Pathak, Giuseppe Curigliano. Comparing the efficacy of aromatase inhibitors vs tamoxifen in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer: a systematic review and trial-level meta-analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-02-01.

Abstract GS2-05: Randomized comparison of adjuvant aromatase inhibitor exemestane (E) plus ovarian function suppression (OFS) vs tamoxifen (T) plus OFS in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) early breast cancer (BC): update of the combined TEXT and SOFT trials

Abstract Background The updated combined SOFT+TEXT analysis, after 9 years median follow-up (MFU), revealed that adjuvant E+OFS vs T+OFS significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS) and distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) but not overall survival (OS) in premenopausal women with HR+ early BC (Francis et al NEJM 2018). Given the high rate of OS in both arms and the long-term risk of relapse in HR+ BC, continued follow-up is key to assessing treatment benefit. We report a planned update analysis including OS with database lock of May 2021, after 13 years MFU.. Methods TEXT and SOFT enrolled premenopausal women with HR+ early BC from November 2003 to April 2011 (2660 in TEXT, 3047 in SOFT intention-to-treat (ITT) populations). TEXT randomized women within 12 weeks of surgery to 5 years E+OFS vs T+OFS; chemotherapy (CT) was optional and concurrent with OFS. SOFT randomized women to 5 years E+OFS vs T+OFS vs T alone, within 12 weeks of surgery if no CT planned, or within 8 months of completing (neo)adjuvant CT. Both trials were stratified by CT use. For the combined analysis of E+OFS vs T+OFS, the primary endpoint was DFS defined as invasive local, regional, distant recurrence, contralateral BC, second malignancy, death. Secondary endpoints included invasive breast cancer-free interval (BCFI), DRFI and OS.. Results: At database lock there were 953 DFS events and 473 deaths among 4690 pts assigned to T+OFS or E+OFS. In the ITT population, DFS, BCFI and DRFI outcomes for pts assigned E+OFS (n=2346) continued to be significantly improved over T+OFS (n=2344). 12-yr DFS was 80.5% vs. 75.9% (4.6% absolute improvement; HR 0.79 95% CI 0.70-0.90), 12-yr BCFI was improved by 4.1% and 12-yr DRFI by 1.8%. At 12 years OS was excellent in both groups, 90.1% in pts assigned E+OFS vs 89.1% in pts assigned T+OFS (HR 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78-1.11). There was heterogeneity of relative treatment effect according to HER2 status. When enrollment commenced, anti-HER2 adjuvant therapy was not standard; 53% of 583 pts with HER2+ tumors received HER2-targeted therapy. Below are Kaplan-Meier 12-yr estimates for patients with HER2 negative tumors by trial and chemotherapy stratum and for those with high-grade tumours, as an example of high-risk feature (Table). There is an emerging OS benefit for E+OFS vs T+OFS in pts with HER2 negative tumors who received chemotherapy in both trials.In pts with HER2-negative tumors, clinically-relevant outcome benefits were also seen in other high-risk subgroups: 12-yr DFS and OS were improved by 7.4% and 2.7%, respectively, in pts with pN1a disease, and by 10.6% and 4.5%, respectively, in those with tumors >2cm. Conclusions After 13 years MFU, adjuvant E+OFS, as compared with T+OFS, shows a sustained reduction in the risk of recurrence, more consistent in HER2 negative patients and in those with high-risk disease features, e.g., indication for adjuvant chemotherapy and G3 tumors. Oncologists may use this information to discuss potential benefits of E+OFS with individual patients. Follow-up continues for 5 additional years. Chemotherapy HER2-negativeSOFTT+OFS (n=424)E+OFS (n=411)Absolute difference12-yr DFS67.4%74.1%6.7%12-yr OS81.1%84.4%3.3%TEXTT+OFS (n=656)E+OFS (n=661)Absolute difference12-yr DFS71.0%78.4%7.4%12-yr OS83.5%86.8%3.3%No chemotherapy HER2-negativeSOFTT+OFS (n=445)E+OFS (n=447)Absolute difference12-yr DFS82.9%88.2%5.3%12-yr OS96.1%96.9%0.9%TEXTT+OFS (n=499)E+OFS (n=492)Absolute difference12-yr DFS80.2%86.7%6.5%12-yr OS95.9%96.2%0.2%G3 HER2-negativeT+OFS (n=423)E+OFS (n=405)Absolute difference12-yr DFS62.7%73.0%10.3%12-yr OS78.1%83.6%5.5% Citation Format: Meredith M Regan, Barbara A Walley, Gini F Fleming, Prudence A Francis, Marco A Colleoni, István Láng, Henry L Gómez, Carlo A Tondini, Harold J Burstein, Matthew P Goetz, Eva M Ciruelos, Vered Stearns, Hervé R Bonnefoi, Silvana Martino, Charles E Geyer, Jr, Claudio Chini, Alessandro M Minisini, Simon Spazzapan, Thomas Ruhstaller, Eric P Winer, Barbara Ruepp, Sherene Loi, Alan S Coates, Aron Goldhirsch, Richard D Gelber, Olivia Pagani. Randomized comparison of adjuvant aromatase inhibitor exemestane (E) plus ovarian function suppression (OFS) vs tamoxifen (T) plus OFS in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) early breast cancer (BC): update of the combined TEXT and SOFT trials [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS2-05.

Abstract GS4-02: Randomized comparison of adjuvant aromatase inhibitor exemestane (E) plus ovarian function suppression (OFS) vs tamoxifen (T) plus OFS in premenopausal women with hormone receptor positive (HR+) early breast cancer (BC): Update of the combined TEXT and SOFT trials

Abstract Background: The combined results of TEXT and SOFT, after 5.7 years median follow-up, found adjuvant E+OFS significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS) vs T+OFS in premenopausal women with HR+ BC (Pagani et al, NEJM 2014). Follow-up was immature for overall survival (OS). We report a planned update with visit cut-off of 31Dec16 after 9 years median follow-up. Methods: TEXT and SOFT enrolled premenopausal women with HR+ early BC from Nov 2003 to Apr 2011 (2660 TEXT, 3047 SOFT in the intention-to-treat populations). TEXT randomized women within 12wk of surgery to 5 yrs E+OFS vs T+OFS; chemotherapy (CT) was optional and concurrent with OFS. SOFT randomized women to 5 yrs E+OFS vs T+OFS vs T alone, within 12wk of surgery if no CT planned, or within 8mo of completing (neo)adjuvant CT after premenopausal status was (re-)established. OFS was by choice of 5yr GnRH agonist triptorelin, oophorectomy or ovarian irradiation. Both trials were stratified by CT use. The primary endpoint was DFS: randomization until invasive local, regional, distant recurrence or contralateral breast; invasive second malignancy; death. Secondary endpoints included invasive breast cancer-free interval (BCFI), distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) and OS. Stratified Cox models estimated hazard ratios; Kaplan-Meier method estimated 8yr endpoint rates. NCT00066703/NCT00066690. Results: DFS for patients assigned E+OFS (n=2346) continued to be significantly improved over T+OFS (n=2344): 8yr DFS was 86.8% vs. 82.8%. The 8yr BCFI was improved by 4.1% (89.3% vs 85.2%) and 8yr DRFI by 2.1% (91.8% vs 89.7%). There was no difference in OS in patients assigned E+OFS vs T+OFS: 93.4% vs 93.3% OS at 8yrs. For 1996 women without CT there have been 45 deaths, with 98% OS at 8yrs with both treatments. EndpointN. EventsHazard Ratio (95% CI) E+OFS vs T+OFSDFS7200.77 (0.67-0.90); P<0.001BCFI6000.74 (0.63-0.87)DRFI4330.80 (0.65-0.96)OS3200.98 (0.79-1.22) Overall toxicity was not significantly worse with E+OFS than with T+OFS (32% vs 31% grade 3-4 targeted AEs). Hot flashes, musculoskeletal symptoms and hypertension were the most frequent targeted grade 3-4 AEs. Overall, 15% of patients stopped all protocol-assigned treatment early. Patients assigned E+OFS had increased risk of assigned oral endocrine therapy cessation (25% vs 19% for patients assigned T+OFS by 4yrs) but not of triptorelin cessation (18% vs 19% by 4yrs, respectively). Conclusions: After 9 yrs median follow-up, adjuvant E+OFS, as compared with T+OFS, shows a sustained reduction of the risk of recurrence but did not improve overall survival. As in postmenopausal women, oncologists need to consider potential absolute benefits and properly select patients at sufficient risk for recurrence for whom E+OFS seems indicated. Follow-up continues, which will further clarify the effect of E+OFS for safety, late recurrence and overall survival. Citation Format: Pagani O, Regan MM, Fleming GF, Walley BA, Colleoni M, Láng I, Gomez HL, Tondini C, Burstein HJ, Goetz MP, Ciruelos EM, Stearns V, Debled M, Martino S, Geyer Jr CE, Pinotti G, Coates AS, Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Francis PA. Randomized comparison of adjuvant aromatase inhibitor exemestane (E) plus ovarian function suppression (OFS) vs tamoxifen (T) plus OFS in premenopausal women with hormone receptor positive (HR+) early breast cancer (BC): Update of the combined TEXT and SOFT 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 GS4-02.

Tamoxifen with ovarian function suppression versus tamoxifen alone as an adjuvant treatment for premenopausal breast cancer: a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials.

BackgroundOvarian function suppression (OFS) significantly downregulates the concentration of plasma estrogens. However, it is unclear whether it offers any survival benefits if combined with adjuvant tamoxifen treatment in premenopausal women. This meta-analysis was designed to assess data from previous studies involving adjuvant tamoxifen treatment plus OFS in premenopausal breast cancer.MethodsElectronic literature databases (PubMed, Embase, the Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library) were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials published prior to February 1, 2015. Only randomized controlled trials that compared tamoxifen alone with tamoxifen plus OFS for premenopausal women with breast cancer were selected. The evaluated endpoints were disease-free survival and overall survival.ResultsFour randomized controlled trials comprising 6,279 patients (OFS combination, n=3,133; tamoxifen alone, n=3,146) were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant improvement in disease-free survival or overall survival with addition of OFS in either the whole population or the hormone receptor-positive subgroup. The risk of distant recurrence was not reduced with the addition of OFS in the whole population. A subgroup analysis showed that addition of OFS significantly improved overall survival in patients who were administered chemotherapy.ConclusionBased on the available studies, concurrent administration of OFS and adjuvant tamoxifen treatment for premenopausal women with breast cancer has no effect on prolonging disease-free survival and overall survival, excluding patients who were administered chemotherapy. It should not be widely recommended, except perhaps for women who were hormone-receptor positive and who were also administered adjuvant chemotherapy.

Randomized comparison of adjuvant aromatase inhibitor (AI) exemestane (E) plus ovarian function suppression (OFS) vs tamoxifen (T) plus OFS in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) early breast cancer (BC): Joint analysis of IBCSG TEXT and SOFT trials.

LBA1 Background: Adjuvant endocrine therapy with AI vs T improves outcomes in postmenopausal HR+ BC. TEXT and SOFT were designed to test whether adjuvant AI improves outcomes in premenopausal women with HR+ BC treated with OFS (AI question) and to determine the value of OFS in women who remain premenopausal and are suitable for adjuvant T (OFS question). Methods: TEXT and SOFT, randomized phase 3 trials, enrolled 5,738 premenopausal women with HR+ early BC from Nov03 to Apr11 (2672 TEXT; 3066 SOFT). TEXT randomized women within 12wk of surgery to 5y E+OFS vs T+OFS; chemotherapy (CT) was optional and concurrent with OFS. SOFT randomized women to 5y E+OFS vs T+OFS vs T alone, either within 12wk of surgery if no CT planned, or within 8mo of completing (neo)adjuvant CT. OFS was by choice of 5y triptorelin, oophorectomy, or ovarian irradiation. The primary endpoint is disease-free survival (DFS: randomization until invasive local, regional, distant recurrence, or contralateral breast; 2nd malignancy; death). Due to low event rates, protocol amendments in 2011 changed the analysis plans to answer the AI question (E+OFS vs T+OFS) by joint analysis of TEXT and SOFT. By Q3’2013 with >5y median follow-up, 436 DFS events were projected, providing 84% power for HR=0.75 with E+OFS vs T+OFS (stratified logrank 2-sided α=0.05). Results: At 5.7y median follow-up, 514 (11%) DFS events were reported in the ITT population comparing E+OFS (n=2346) vs T+OFS (n=2344). Patients assigned E+OFS had significantly reduced DFS hazard (HR=0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.86; P=0.0002) vs T+OFS; 5y DFS was 91.1% vs 87.3%. Reductions were similar for secondary endpoints of BC-free interval (HR=0.66 (0.55-0.80) 5y BCFI 92.8% vs 88.8%) and distant recurrence-free interval (HR=0.78 (0.62-0.97)), though not overall survival (HR=1.14 (0.86-1.51)) at this early follow-up (194 (4%) deaths). Grade 3-4 targeted AEs were reported in 31% E+OFS vs 29% T+OFS patients. Conclusion: In premenopausal women with HR+ BC, adjuvant treatment with E+OFS significantly reduced the risk of recurrence compared to T+OFS. Clinical trial information: NCT00066703 / NCT00066690 .

Randomized comparison of adjuvant aromatase inhibitor (AI) exemestane (E) plus ovarian function suppression (OFS) vs tamoxifen (T) plus OFS in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) early breast cancer (BC): Joint analysis of IBCSG TEXT and SOFT trials.

LBA1 Background: Adjuvant endocrine therapy with AI vs T improves outcomes in postmenopausal HR+ BC. TEXT and SOFT were designed to test whether adjuvant AI improves outcomes in premenopausal women with HR+ BC treated with OFS (AI question) and to determine the value of OFS in women who remain premenopausal and are suitable for adjuvant T (OFS question). Methods: TEXT and SOFT, randomized phase 3 trials, enrolled 5,738 premenopausal women with HR+ early BC from Nov03 to Apr11 (2672 TEXT; 3066 SOFT). TEXT randomized women within 12wk of surgery to 5y E+OFS vs T+OFS; chemotherapy (CT) was optional and concurrent with OFS. SOFT randomized women to 5y E+OFS vs T+OFS vs T alone, either within 12wk of surgery if no CT planned, or within 8mo of completing (neo)adjuvant CT. OFS was by choice of 5y triptorelin, oophorectomy, or ovarian irradiation. The primary endpoint is disease-free survival (DFS: randomization until invasive local, regional, distant recurrence, or contralateral breast; 2nd malignancy; death). D...

Patient-reported endocrine symptoms, sexual functioning, and quality of life (QoL) in the IBCSG TEXT and SOFT trials: Adjuvant treatment with exemestane (E) plus ovarian function suppression (OFS) versus tamoxifen (T) plus OFS in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) early breast cancer (BC).

557 Background: Little is known about endocrine symptoms, QoL and sexual function in premenopausal women with BC receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy. TEXT and SOFT are the first trials providing p...