Therapy For High-risk Breast Cancer Research Articles

Abstract PD11-01: PD11-01 Evaluation of the PD-1 Inhibitor Cemiplimab in early-stage, high-risk HER2-negative breast cancer: Results from the neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 TRIAL

Abstract Background: I-SPY2 is a multicenter, phase 2 trial using response-adaptive randomization within biomarker subtypes defined by hormone-receptor (HR), HER2, and MammaPrint (MP) status to evaluate novel agents as neoadjuvant therapy for high-risk breast cancer. The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR). Cemiplimab (Cemi) is a PD-1 inhibitor approved for the treatment of NSCLC, cutaneous basal, and squamous cell cancer. Here, we report current efficacy rates of Cemi in combination with paclitaxel followed by AC. Methods: Women with tumors ≥ 2.5cm were eligible for screening. Only HER2 negative (HER2-) patients were eligible for this treatment; HR positive (HR+) patients had to be MP high risk. Treatment included paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 IV weekly x 12 and Cemi 350 mg IV given q3weeks x 4, followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) every 2 weeks x 4. The control arm was weekly paclitaxel x 12 followed by AC every 2-3 weeks x 4. All patients undergo serial MRI imaging; and imaging response (at 3 weeks, 12 weeks and prior to surgery) were used along with accumulating pCR data to continuously update and estimate pCR rates for trial arms. Analysis was modified intent to treat. Patients who switched to non-protocol therapy count as non-pCR. The goal is to identify (graduate) regimens with ≥85% Bayesian predictive probability of success (i.e. demonstrating superiority to control) in a future 300-patient phase 3 neoadjuvant trial with a pCR endpoint within responsive signatures. Cemi was eligible to graduate in 3 pre-defined signatures: HER2-, HR-HER2-, and HR+HER2-. To adapt to changing standard of care, we constructed “dynamic controls” comprising ‘best’ alternative therapies using I-SPY 2 and external data and estimated the probability of Cemi being superior to the dynamic control. Results: 60 HER2- patients (28 HR+ and 32 HR-) received Cemi arm treatment. The control group included 357 patients with HER2- tumors (201 HR+ and 156 HR-) enrolled since March 2010. Cemi graduated in HR-/HER2- signature. Estimated pCR rates (as of June 2022) are summarized in the table. Immune-related endocrine disorders include: hypothyroid (14.5%), adrenal insufficiency (10%), hyperthyroid (4.8%),) and thyroiditis (3.2%). Only one grade 3 adrenal insufficiency was observed. All immune related AE’s were manageable. Additional biomarker analyses are ongoing and will be presented at the meeting. Response predictive subtypes (Immune+ vs Immune-) and additional predictive biomarkers were assessed. Associations with pCR will be presented at SABCS. Conclusion: The I-SPY 2 study aims to assess the probability that investigational regimens will be successful in a phase 3 neoadjuvant trial. Anti-PD-1 therapy with Cemi resulted in a higher predicted pCR rate in HR-/HER2- 55 rate% disease compared to control at 29%. Immune-mediated AE’s were observed. This data is consistent with previously published data using check point inhibitors in early-stage HR-/HER2- breast cancer. Estimated pCR rates Citation Format: Erica Stringer-Reasor, Rebecca A. Shatsky, Jo Chien, Anne Wallace, Judy C. Boughey, Kathy S. Albain, Hyo S. Han, Rita Nanda, Claudine Isaacs, Kevin Kalinsky, Zahi Mitri, Amy S. Clark, Christos Vaklavas, Alexandra Thomas, Meghna S. Trivedi, Janice Lu, Smita Asare, Ruixiao Lu, Maria Pitsouni, Amy Wilson, Jane Perlmutter, Hope Rugo, Richard Schwab, W. Fraser Symmans, Nola M. Hylton, Laura Van ’t Veer, Douglas Yee, Angela DeMichele, Donald Berry, Laura J. Esserman, I-SPY Investigators. PD11-01 Evaluation of the PD-1 Inhibitor Cemiplimab in early-stage, high-risk HER2-negative breast cancer: Results from the neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 TRIAL [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 PD11-01.

Abstract GS5-03: Evaluation of anti-PD-1 Cemiplimab plus anti-LAG-3 REGN3767 in early-stage, high-risk HER2-negative breast cancer: Results from the neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 TRIAL

Abstract Background: I-SPY2 is a multicenter, phase 2 trial using response-adaptive randomization within biomarker subtypes defined by hormone-receptor (HR), HER2, and MammaPrint (MP) status to evaluate novel agents as neoadjuvant therapy for high-risk breast cancer. The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR). Cemiplimab is an anti-PD-1 inhibitor approved for the treatment of NSCLC and cutaneous basal and squamous cell CA. Lymphocyte activation gene 3 (LAG-3) binds MHC class II leading to inhibition of T-cell proliferation and activation and is often co-expressed with PD-1. REGN3767 is a fully humanized mAb that binds to LAG-3 and blocks inhibitory T-cell signaling. Concurrent blockade of LAG-3 with an anti-PD-1 may enhance efficacy of an anti-PD-1. Methods: Women with tumors ≥ 2.5cm were eligible for screening. Only HER2 negative (HER2-) patients were eligible for this treatment; HR positive (HR+) patients had to be MP high risk. Treatment included Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 IV weekly x 12 and Cemiplimab 350 mg and REGN3767 1600 mg both given q3weeks x 4, followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) every 2 weeks x 4. The control arm was weekly paclitaxel x 12 followed by AC every 2-3 weeks x 4. Cemiplimab/REGN3767 was eligible to graduate in 3 of 10 pre-defined signatures: HER2-, HR-HER2-, and HR+HER2-. The statistical methods for evaluating I-SPY 2 agents has been previously described. To adapt to changing standard of care, we constructed “dynamic controls” comprising ‘best’ alternative therapies using I-SPY 2 and external data and estimated the probability of Cemiplimab/REGN3767 being superior to the dynamic control. Response predictive subtypes (Immune+ vs Immune-) were assessed using pre-treatment gene expression data and the ImPrint signature. Results: 73 HER2- patients (40 HR+ and 33 HR-) received Cemiplimab/REGN3767 treatment. The control group included [357 patients with HER2- tumors (201 HR+ and 156 HR-) enrolled since March 2010. Cemiplimab/REGN3767 graduated in both HR-/HER2- and HR+/HER2- groups; estimated pCR rates (as of June 2022) are summarized in the table. Safety events of note for Cemiplimab/REGN3767 include hypothyroidism 30.8%, adrenal insufficiency (AI) 19.2%, hyperthyroidism 14.1%, pneumonitis 1.3%, and hepatitis 3.8%. All were G1/2 except for 6 (7.7%) G3 AI and 3 (3.8%) G3 colitis. Rash occurred in 62.8%, 9% G3 and 2 pts (2.6%) had pulmonary embolism. X% of adrenal insufficiency cases required replacement therapy. 40 patients (11 HR+ and 29 HR-) in Cemiplimab/REGN3767 were predicted Immune+; 32 (29 HR+ and 3 HR-) were predicted Immune-. In the HR+ group pCR was achieved in 10/11 (91%) patients with Immune+ subtype compared with 8/29 (28%) with Immune- subtype. Additional biomarker analyses are ongoing and will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion: The I-SPY 2 study aims to assess the probability that investigational regimens will be successful in a phase 3 neoadjuvant trial. Dual immune blockade with a LAG-3 inhibitor and anti-PD1 therapy resulted in a high predicted pCR rate both in HR-/HER2- (60%) and HR+/HER2- (37%) disease. The novel Imprint signature identified a group of HR+ patients most likely to benefit from this active regimen. Table 1: Estimated pCR rates Citation Format: Claudine Isaacs, Rita Nanda, Jo Chien, Meghna S. Trivedi, Erica Stringer-Reasor, Christos Vaklavas, Judy C. Boughey, Amy Sanford, Anne Wallace, Amy S. Clark, Alexandra Thomas, Kathy S. Albain, Laura C. Kennedy, Tara B. Sanft, Kevin Kalinsky, Hyo S. Han, Nicole Williams, Mili Arora, Anthony Elias, Carla Falkson, Smita Asare, Ruixiao Lu, Maria Pitsouni, Amy Wilson, Jane Perlmutter, Hope Rugo, Richard Schwab, W. Fraser Symmans, Nola M. Hylton, Laura Van’t Veer, Douglas Yee, Angela DeMichele, Donald Berry, Laura J. Esserman, I-SPY Investigators. Evaluation of anti-PD-1 Cemiplimab plus anti-LAG-3 REGN3767 in early-stage, high-risk HER2-negative breast cancer: Results from the neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 TRIAL [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 GS5-03.

Cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy vs conventional fractionated radiation therapy for high-risk breast cancer

BackgroundThe phase 3 NCT00793962 trial demonstrated that postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT) was noninferior to conventional fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT) in patients with high-risk breast cancer. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy HFRT vs CFRT based on the NCT00793962 trial. MethodsA Markov model was adopted to synthesize the medical costs and health benefits of patients with high-risk breast cancer based on data from the NCT00793962 trial. Main outcomes were discounted lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). We employed a time-dependent horizon from Chinese, French and USA payer perspectives. Model robustness was evaluated with one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. ResultsPatients receiving CFRT versus HFRT gained an incremental 0.0163 QALYs, 0.0118 QALYs and 0.0028 QALYs; meanwhile an incremental cost of $2351.92, $4978.34 and $8812.70 from Chinese, French and USA payer perspectives, respectively. Thus CFRT versus HFRT yielded an ICER of $144,281.47, $420,636.10 and $3,187,955.76 per QALY from Chinese, French and USA payer perspectives, respectively. HFRT could maintain a trend of >50% probabilities of cost-effectiveness below a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $178,882.00 in China, while HFRT was dominant relative to CFRT, regardless of the WTP values in France and the USA. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the ICERs were most sensitive to the parameters of overall survival after radiotherapy. ConclusionsPostmastectomy HFRT could be used as a cost-effective substitute for CFRT in patients with high-risk breast cancer and should be considered in appropriately selected patients.

Abstract P3-11-02: Evaluation of patritumab/paclitaxel/trastuzumab over standard paclitaxel/trastuzumab in early stage, high-risk HER2 positive breast cancer: Results from the neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 trial

Abstract Background: I-SPY2 is a multicenter, phase 2 trial using response-adaptive randomization within biomarker subtypes to evaluate novel agents as neoadjuvant therapy for high-risk breast cancer. The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR) at surgery. The goal is to identify (graduate) regimens with ≥ 85% Bayesian predictive probability of success (i.e., demonstrating superiority to control) in a future 300-patient phase 3 1:1 randomized neoadjuvant trial with pCR endpoint within signatures defined by hormone-receptor (HR), HER2, and MammaPrint (MP) status. Regimens may leave the trial for futility (< 10% probability of success), maximum sample size accrual (with probability of success ≥ 10% and < 85%), or safety concerns as recommended by the independent DSMB. For HER2+ patients, the I-SPY2 control arm was 12 weekly cycles of paclitaxel+trastuzumab (TH, control) followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) q2-3 weeks x4 and surgery. Patritumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that inhibits HER3. In this experimental arm for HER2+ patients, patritumab was given q3w x 4 cycles (18mg/kg loading dose followed by 9mg/kg/dose) concurrent with paclitaxel and trastuzumab q1w x 12 weeks (PTH, treatment), followed by AC q2-3w. Methods: Women with tumors ≥ 2.5cm were eligible for screening. MP low/HR+ tumors were ineligible. MRI scans (baseline, 3 weeks after start of therapy, prior to AC, and prior to surgery) were used in a longitudinal statistical model to predict pCR for individual patients. Analysis was intention to treat. Patients who switched to non-protocol therapy count as non-pCR. Patients on treatment arm therapy at the time of arm closure are non-evaluable. Graduation potential was in 3 of 10 pre-defined signatures: all HER2+, HR-/HER2+, and HR+/HER2+. Results: The PTH regimen was stopped at the recommendation of the Safety Working Group and DSMB based on a safety event (bilateral sensorineural hearing loss, Gr 3) observed in one patient. At the time of arm closure, N=31 patients had received PTH treatment; 4 patients receiving PTH were changed to non-protocol therapy and removed from the analysis. The final estimated pCR report will consider 27 PTH and 31 TH as evaluable patients. Accrual was insufficient to assess graduation, however, there appears to be good signal in the HER2+HR- but not HER2+HR+ signatures. I-SPY 2 TRIAL Est. pCR at time of arm closureSignaturesPTH (Treatment)N= 31TH (Control)N = 31All (HER2+)0.40 (0.22 - 0.59), n=310.23 (0.09 - 0.37), n=31HR-/HER2+0.64 (0.36 - 0.91), n=110.30 (0.12 - 0.47), n=12HR+/HER2+0.28 (0.08 - 0.48), n=200.20 (0.06 - 0.34), n=19 HR+/HER2+0.28 (0.08 - 0.48), n=200.20 (0.06 - 0.34), n=19The patient who developed Gr3 sensorineural hearing loss 6 days after the 2nd patritumab (and 4th paclitaxel/trastuzumab) treatment, did not recover her hearing after patritumab was stopped, and also reported Gr3 vulvovaginal pain, vulvitis, and vaginal inflammation. Other gynecological symptoms in the PTH arm include: 1 pt with Gr1 vaginal hemorrhage, and 1 pt with Gr2 dyspareunia. There was a higher frequency of Gr3 hypokalaemia (12.5% vs. 3.2%). One pt in the PTH arm reported Gr3 small intestinal obstruction which resolved with conservative management. Conclusion: The I-SPY 2 study aims to assess the probability that investigational regimens will be successful in a phase 3 neoadjuvant trial; PTH was stopped due to safety concerns, although there was activity in the HER2+ HR- signature. This is the first report of Gr3 hearing loss associated with patritumab/paclitaxel/trastuzumab, and thus attribution is uncertain. Citation Format: Teresa L Helsten, Shelly S Lo, Christina Yau, Kevin Kalinsky, Anthony D Elias, Anne M Wallace, A. Jo Chien, Janice Lu, Julie E Lang, Kathy S Albain, Erica Stringer-Reasor, Amy S Clark, Judy C Boughey, Erin D Ellis, Douglas Yee, Angela DeMichele, Claudine Isaacs, Jane Perlmutter, Hope S Rugo, Richard Schwab, Nola M. Hylton, W. Fraser Symmans, Michelle E Melisko, Laura J van't Veer, Amy Wilson, Ruby Singhrao, Smita M Asare, Ashish Sanil, Donald A Berry, Laura J Esserman. Evaluation of patritumab/paclitaxel/trastuzumab over standard paclitaxel/trastuzumab in early stage, high-risk HER2 positive breast cancer: Results from the neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-11-02.

Abstract IA24: Setting the stage for immunotherapy in breast cancer: where are we and where are we going in the clinic?

Abstract IA24: Setting the stage for immunotherapy in breast cancer: where are we and where are we going in the clinic?

Pembrolizumab plus standard neoadjuvant therapy for high-risk breast cancer (BC): Results from I-SPY 2.

506 Background: Pembro is an anti-PD-1 antibody with single agent activity in HER2– metastatic BC. I-SPY 2 is a multicenter, phase 2 platform trial which evaluates novel neoadjuvant therapies; the primary endpoint is pathological complete response (pCR, ypT0/Tis ypN0). We report current efficacy results, with final results at ASCO. Methods: Patients (pts) with invasive BC ≥2.5 cm by exam or ≥2 cm by imaging are assigned weekly paclitaxel x 12 (control) +/- an experimental agent, followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide x 4. Combinations of hormone-receptor (HR), HER2, & MammaPrint (MP) status define the 8 signatures studied. MP low HR+ BC is excluded. Adaptive randomization is based on each arm’s Bayesian probability of superiority over control. Graduation by signature is based on an arm’s Bayesian predictive probability of a successful 1:1 randomized phase 3 trial with a pCR endpoint. We provide raw & Bayesian estimated pCR rates adjusted for covariates, time effects over the course of the trial, & serial MRI modeling for pts not yet assessed for pCR surgically. Results: 69 pts were randomized to pembro (HER2- subsets only) from Dec 2015 until it graduated in Nov 2016. 46 pts have undergone surgery (table); the other 23 have on-therapy MRI assessments. In 29 HR–/HER2– (TNBC) pts, pembro increased raw & estimated pCR rates by >50% & 40%, respectively; in 40 HR+/HER– pts, it did so by 13% and 21%. 5 pts had immune-related grade 3 adverse events (AEs); 1 hypophysitis & 4 adrenal insufficiency. 4 pts presented after completion of AC (149-179 d after starting pembro); 1 presented prior to AC (37 d after starting pembro). 7 pts had grade 1-2 thyroid abnormalities. Conclusion: Pembro added to standard therapy improved pCR rates in all HER2- BCs that meet I-SPY 2 eligibility, especially in TNBC. Immune-mediated AEs were observed; pt follow up is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT01042379. [Table: see text]

Abstract P6-11-02: Efficacy of Hsp90 inhibitor ganetespib plus standard neoadjuvant therapy in high-risk breast cancer: Results from the I-SPY 2 trial

Abstract Background:Pathologic complete response(pCR) after neoadjuvant therapy is an established prognostic biomarker for high-risk breast cancer(BC). Improving pCR rates may identify new therapies that improve survival. I-SPY 2 uses response-adaptive randomization within biomarker subtypes to evaluate novel agents when added to standard neoadjuvant therapy for women with high-risk stage II/III breast cancer; the goal is to identify regimens that have ≥85% Bayesian predictive probability of success (statistical significance) in a 300-patient phase 3 neoadjuvant trial defined by hormone-receptor (HR), HER2 status and MammaPrint (MP). We report the results for Ganetespib, a selective inhibitor of Hsp90 that induces the degradation/deactivation of key drivers of tumor initiation, progression, angiogenesis, and metastasis.Ganetespib + taxanes previously have resulted in a superior therapeutic response compared to monotherapy in multiple solid tumor models including BC. Methods:Women with tumors ≥2.5cm were eligible for screening and participation. MP low/HR+ tumors were ineligible for randomization. QTcF >470msec and HbA1C >8.0% were ineligible. MRI scans (baseline, +3 cycles, following weekly paclitaxel, T, and pre-surgery) were used in a longitudinal statistical model to improve the efficiency of adaptive randomization. Ganetespib was given with weekly T at 150 mg/m2 IV weekly (3 weeks on, 1 off). Patients were premedicated (dexamethasone 10mg and diphenhydramine HCl 25-50 mg, or therapeutic equivalents). Analysis was intention to treat with patients who switched to non-protocol therapy counted as non-pCRs. The Ganetespib regimen was open only to HER2- patients, and eligible for graduation in 3 of 10 pre-defined signatures: HER2-, HR+/HER2- and HR-/HER2-. Results:Ganetespib did not meet the criteria for graduation in the 3 signatures tested. When the maximum sample size was reached, accrual stopped. Ganetespib was assigned to 93 patients; there were 140 controls. We report probabilities of superiority for Ganetespib over control and Bayesian predictive probabilities of success in a neoadjuvant phase 3 trial equally randomized between Ganetespib and control, for the 3 biomarker signatures, using the final pCR data from all patients. Safety data will be presented. SignatureEstimated pCR Rate (95% probability interval)Probability Ganetespib Is Superior to ControlPredictive Probability of Ganetespib Success in a Phase 3 Trial Ganetespib N = 93Control N = 140 All HER2-26% (16%-37%)18% (8%-28%)91%47%HR+/HER2-15% (4%-27%)14% (4%-24%)60%19%HR-/HER2-38% (23%-53%)22% (9%-35%)96%72% Conclusion:The I-SPY 2 adaptive randomization model efficiently evaluates investigational agents in the setting of neoadjuvant BC. The value of I-SPY 2 is that it provides insight as to the regimen's likelihood of success in a phase 3 neoadjuvant study. Although no signature reached the efficacy threshold of 85% likelihood of success in phase 3, we observed the most impact in HR-/HER2- patients, with a 16% improvement in pCR rate. While our data do not support the continued development of Ganetespib alone for neoadjuvant BC, combinations with Ganetespib, which could potentiate its effect, may be worth pursuing in I-SPY 2 or similar trials. Citation Format: Forero A, Yee D, Buxton MB, Symmans WF, Chien AJ, Boughey JC, Elias AD, DeMichele A, Moulder S, Minton S, Kaplan HG, Albain KS, Wallace AM, Haley BB, Isaacs C, Korde LA, Nanda R, Lang JE, Kemmer KA, Hylton NM, Paoloni M, van't Veer L, Lyandres J, Perlmutter J, Hogarth M, Yau C, Sanil A, Berry DA, Esserman LJ. Efficacy of Hsp90 inhibitor ganetespib plus standard neoadjuvant therapy in high-risk breast cancer: Results from the I-SPY 2 trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-11-02.

Abstract P6-11-04: The evaluation of ganitumab/metformin plus standard neoadjuvant therapy in high-risk breast cancer: Results from the I-SPY 2 trial

Abstract Background: I-SPY 2 is a multicenter, phase 2 trial using response-adaptive randomization within biomarker subtypes to evaluate novel agents when added to standard neoadjuvant therapy for women with high-risk stage II/III breast cancer - investigational agent(I) +paclitaxel(T) qwk, doxorubicin & cyclophosphamide(AC) q2-3 wk x 4 vs. T/AC (control arm). The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR) at surgery. The goal is to identify/graduate regimens that have ≥85% Bayesian predictive probability of success (statistical significance) in a 300-patient phase 3 neoadjuvant trial defined by hormone-receptor (HR) & HER2 status & MammaPrint (MP). Regimens may also leave the trial for futility (< 10% probability of success) or following accrual of maximum sample size (10%< probability of success <85%). We report the results for experimental arm Ganitumab, a type I insulin-like growth factor receptor (IGF1R) inhibitor. IGF1R inhibitors are known to induce insulin resistance and all patients assigned to Ganitumab received metformin. Methods: Women with tumors ≥2.5cm were eligible for screening. MP low/HR+ and HER2+ tumors were ineligible for randomization. Hemoglobin A1C≥ 8.0% were ineligible. MRI scans (baseline, 3 cycles after start of therapy, at completion of weekly T and prior to surgery) were used in a longitudinal statistical model to improve the efficiency of adaptive randomization. Ganitumab was given at 12mg/kg q2 weeks and metformin at 850mg PO BID, while receiving ganitumab. Analysis was intention to treat with patients who switched to non-protocol therapy counted as non-pCRs. Ganitumab/metformin was open only to HER2- patients, and eligible for graduation in 3 of 10 pre-defined signatures: HER2-, HR+HER2- and HR-HER2-. Results: Ganitumab/metformin did not meet the criteria for graduation in the 3 signatures tested. When the maximum sample size was reached, accrual to this arm stopped. Ganitumab/metformin was assigned to 106 patients; there were 128 controls. We report probabilities of superiority for Ganitumab/metformin over control and Bayesian predictive probabilities of success in a neoadjuvant phase 3 trial equally randomized between Ganitumab/metformin and control, for each of the 3 biomarker signatures, using the final pathological response data from all patients. Safety data will be presented. SignatureEstimated pCR Rate (95% probability interval)Probability Ganitumab/ Metformin Is Superior to ControlPredictive Probability of Success in Phase 3 Ganitumab/ Metformin N = 106Control N = 128 All HER2-22% (13%-31%)16% (10%-23%)89%33%HR+/HER2-14% (4%-24%)12% (4%-19%)66%21%HR-/HER2-32% (17%-46%)21% (11%-32%)91%51% Conclusion: The I-SPY 2 adaptive randomization study estimates the probability that investigational regimens will be successful in a phase 3 neoadjuvant trial. The value of I-SPY 2 is to give insight about the performance of an investigational agent's likelihood of achieving pCR. For Ganitumab/metformin, no subtype came close to the efficacy threshold of 85% likelihood of success in phase 3, and this regimen does not appear to impact upfront reduction of tumor burden. Our data do not support its continued development for the neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer. Citation Format: Yee D, Paoloni M, van't Veer L, Sanil A, Yau C, Forero A, Chien AJ, Wallace AM, Moulder S, Albain KS, Kaplan HG, Elias AD, Haley BB, Boughey JC, Kemmer KA, Korde LA, Isaacs C, Minton S, Nanda R, DeMichele A, Lang JE, Buxton MB, Hylton NM, Symmans WF, Lyandres J, Hogarth M, Perlmutter J, Esserman LJ, Berry DA. The evaluation of ganitumab/metformin plus standard neoadjuvant therapy in high-risk breast cancer: Results from the I-SPY 2 trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-11-04.

Abstract P1-14-03: The evaluation of trebananib plus standard neoadjuvant therapy in high-risk breast cancer: Results from the I-SPY 2 TRIAL

Abstract Background: I-SPY 2 is a multicenter phase 2 trial using response-adaptive randomization within biomarker subtypes to evaluate a series of novel agents when added to standard neoadjuvant therapy for women with high-risk stage II/III breast cancer. The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR). The goal is to identify/graduate regimens with ≥85% Bayesian predictive probability of success (statistical significance) in a 300-patient phase 3 neoadjuvant trial defined by hormone-receptor (HR), HER2 status & MammaPrint (MP). Regimens may also leave the trial for futility (< 10% probability of success) or following accrual of maximum sample size (10%< probability of success <85%). We report the results for trebananib, an angiopoietin-1/2-neutralizing peptibody that inhibits interaction with the Tie2 receptor. Methods: Women with tumors ≥2.5cm were eligible for screening. MP low/HR+/HER2- tumors were ineligible for randomization. Serial MRI scans (baseline, 2 during treatment and pre-surgery) were used in a longitudinal model to improve the efficiency of adaptive randomization. Participants are categorized into 8 subtypes based on: HR status, HER2 status and MP High 1 (MP1) or High 2 (MP2). MP1 and MP2 are determined by a predefined median cut-point of I-SPY 1 participants who fit the eligibility criteria for I-SPY 2. Trebananib was initially assigned to HER2- patients only; once safety data with trastuzumab (H) were obtained, it was also assigned to HER2+ patients. Analysis was intent to treat -- patients who switched to non-protocol therapy were designated non-pCRs. Results: Trebananib +/-H did not meet the criteria for graduation in any of the 10 signatures tested. When the maximum sample size was reached, accrual ceased. We report probabilities of trebananib +/-H being superior to control and Bayesian predictive probabilities of success in a 1:1 randomized neoadjuvant phase 3 trial for the 10 biomarker signatures, using the final pCR data from all patients. SignatureEstimated pCR Rate (95% probability interval)Probability Trebananib Is Superior to ControlPredictive Probability of Success in Phase 3Trebananib (n=134)Control (n=133)ALL0.259(0.16 -0.36)0.158(0.09-0.23)0.9860.564HR+0.157(0.05-0.26)0.115(0.03- 0.20)0.8050.281HR-0.378(0.22-0.53)0.207(0.11- 0.31)0.9910.784HER2+0.279(0.07-0.49)0.17(0.04-0.30)0.8790.553HER2-0.254(0.15-0.36)0.155(0.08-0.23)0.9810.555MP20.342 (0.19-0.49)0.177(0.07-0.28)0.9910.786HR-/HER2-0.368 (0.21-0.53)0.201(0.10-0.30)0.9880.771HR-/HER2+0.444(0.15-0.74)0.244(0.07-0.42)0.9260.739HR+/HER2+0.201(0.01-0.39)0.135(0.01-0.26)0.7750.41HR+/HER2-0.143(0.04-0.24)0.11(0.03-0.19)0.7580.248 Citation Format: Albain KS, Leyland-Jones B, Symmans F, Paoloni M, van 't Veer L, DeMichele A, Buxton M, Hylton N, Yee D, Lyandres Clennell J, Yau C, Sanil A, I-SPY 2 Trial Investigators, Berry D, Esserman L. The evaluation of trebananib plus standard neoadjuvant therapy in high-risk breast cancer: Results from the I-SPY 2 TRIAL. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-14-03.

Abstract P3-06-05: Evaluation of an in vitro derived signature of olaparib response (PARPi-7) as a predictive biomarker of response to veliparib/carboplatin plus standard neoadjuvant therapy in high-risk breast cancer: Results from the I-SPY 2 TRIAL

Abstract Background: We developed a 7-gene DNA-repair deficiency signature (PARPi-7) that predicts breast cancer cell line sensitivity to the PARP inhibitor olaparib [PMID: 22875744]. We hypothesized that this signature would also predict response to other PARP inhibitors including veliparib. In the I-SPY 2 TRIAL, HER2- patients were randomized to receive standard chemotherapy or the oral PARP inhibitor veliparib in combination with carboplatin (V/C) and chemotherapy. V/C graduated in the triple-negative (TN) signature. Here we assess the PARPi-7 as a specific biomarker of V/C response. Methods: 115 HER2- patients (V/C: 71 and concurrent controls: 44) were considered in this analysis. The PARPi-7 signature score is computed from Agilent 44K array data as published using expression levels of BRCA1, CHEK2, MAPKAPK2, MRE11A, NBN, TDG, and XPA. We assess association between PARPi-7 and response in the V/C and control arms alone (Wald p < 0.05), and relative performance between arms (biomarker x treatment interaction, likelihood ratio p < 0.05) using a logistic model. In an exploratory analysis, we dichotomized patients by the PARPi-7 score using the published in vitro derived cutpoint (0.037). To assess PARPi-7 in the context of the graduating signature, we added the PARPi-7 High patients to the graduating TN subset and evaluated the treatment effect in this ‘biomarker-positive’ group. Our study is exploratory with no claims for generalizability of the data. Statistical calculations are descriptive (e.g. p-values are measures of distance with no inferential content). Our analyses do not adjust for multiplicities of other biomarkers in the trial but outside this study. Results: The PARPi-7 signature associates with patient response in the V/C arm (OR = 3.9, p=0.00056) but not in the control arm (OR = 0.87, p=0.68). There is a significant biomarker x treatment interaction (OR in V/C arm relative to control arm = 4.48, p=0.0028), which remains significant upon adjusting for HR status (p=0.0018). In an exploratory analysis, PARPi-7 dichotomized using the published in vitro derived cutpoint yields 62 PARPi-7 Low and 53 PARPi-7 High patients. 26% of PARPi-7 High patients are not TN. The distribution of pCR rates among PARPi-7 dichotomized groups are in Table 1. V/C (n=71)Control (n=44)PARPi-7 Low (n=38)PARPi-7 High (n=33)PARPi-7 Low (n=24)PARPi-7 High (n=20)TN (n=59)5 / 1317 / 251 / 74 / 14HR+HER2- (n=56)2 / 253 / 84 / 170 / 6 When the PARPi-7 High patients are added to the graduating TN subset, the OR associated with V/C is 5.12, which is comparable to that of the TN signature (OR: 4.29), while increasing the prevalence of biomarker-positive patients by ∼12%. Evaluation of PARPi-7 in the context of the graduating signature under the I-SPY 2 Bayesian model is pending. Conclusion: Our sample size is small. Our pre-specified analysis suggests the PARPi-7 signature shows promise for predicting response to veliparib/carboplatin combination therapy relative to control. If verified in a larger trial, this cell-line derived signature may contribute to the selection criteria of PARP inhibitor trials in the future. Citation Format: Denise M Wolf, Christina Yau, Ashish Sanil, Anneleen Daemen, Laura Heiser, Joe Gray, Lamorna Brown-Swigart, Susan Flynn, Gillian Hirst, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Investigators, Meredith Buxton, Angela DeMichele, Nola Hylton, Fraser Symmans, Doug Yee, Melissa Paoloni, Laura Esserman, Don Berry, Hope Rugo, Olufunmilayo Olopade, Laura van 't Veer. Evaluation of an in vitro derived signature of olaparib response (PARPi-7) as a predictive biomarker of response to veliparib/carboplatin plus standard neoadjuvant therapy in high-risk breast cancer: Results from the I-SPY 2 TRIAL [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-06-05.

Adjuvant dose-dense chemotherapy in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Dose-dense (DD) chemotherapy (CT) aimed at achieving a higher rate of cancer cell destruction has been adopted as an adjuvant therapy in high-risk breast cancer (BC), with the goal being to improve outcomes. We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing data from randomized phase III trials regarding the efficacy and toxicity of this adjuvant DD-CT strategy in early BC. Randomized-controlled trials that compared a DD with a standard adjuvant CT schedule in adult women with resected BC were identified by searching the databases of Pubmed, the Cochrane Cancer Register of Controlled Trials, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and the Web of Science up to March 2015. Hazard ratios (HRs) of death and recurrence, and the relative risks of adverse events, were estimated and pooled. A total of 8 phase III trials encompassing 17,188 randomized patients met the inclusion criteria. The patients who received DD-CT had better overall survival (OS: HR 0.86, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.93, P = 0.0001) and disease-free survival (DFS: HR 0.84, 95 % CI 0.77-0.91, P < 0.0001) than those on the conventional schedule. A statistically significant OS benefit was observed in patients with hormone receptor-negative (ER-) tumors (HR 0.8, P = 0.002), but not in those with ER-positive BC (HR 0.93, 95 % CI 0.82-1.05; P = 0.25). DD-CT leads to better OS and DFS, particularly in women with ER- early BC. These results suggest that the DD strategy should be the standard care offered to high-risk ER- BC patients.

532 Evaluation of a BRCAness signature as a predictive biomarker of response to veliparib/carboplatin plus standard neoadjuvant therapy in high-risk breast cancer: results from the I-SPY 2 trial

sensitivity rate (GI50<1mM), leukemia with 47% (8/17) and CRC with 41% (11/27). Furthermore, 56% (23 out of 41) of cell lines with PIK3CA/R1 mutations from Oncopanel analysis are sensitive to ARQ 092 (GI50<1mM). In comparison, only 24% (46 out of 190) of the cell lines with wildtype PIK3CA/R1 are sensitive. Interestingly, 21% of mutant PTEN cell lines (4 out of 19 cell lines) and 25% of wild-type PTEN cell lines (42 out of 171 cell lines) among cell lines with wild-type PIK3CA/R1 exhibited a similar sensitivity to ARQ 092. In breast cancer cell lines with PIK3CA mutations, 88% (7 out of 8) are sensitive to ARQ 092. Three dimensional clonogenic assays using patient-derived tumor also showed 33% (3/9) sensitivity rate for breast cancer models, 100% (4/4) for female gynecologic cancers and 100% (3/3) for head and neck cancer, but only 9% (1/11) for CRC. In vivo efficacy studies with two breast cancer cell lines showed that ARQ 092 inhibited tumor growth in a dose-dependent manner. Conclusions: ARQ 092 has exhibited potent anti-proliferative effects on a subset of a large panel of cancer cell lines with particular potency inbreast cancer cells. This enriched activity in breast cancers was also demonstrated in the clonogenic assay using patient-derived tumors. Mutational analysis indicates that gain-of-function mutations of PIK3CA but not PTEN deficiency predict greater ARQ 092 sensitivity and represent potential predictive biomarkers for patient stratification. Our analysis suggests that leukemia, female gynecologic cancer and particularly breast cancer patients may represent a targeted indication for ARQ 092.

Abstract CT227: Neratinib plus standard neoadjuvant therapy for high-risk breast cancer: Efficacy results from the I-SPY 2 TRIAL

Abstract Background: I-SPY 2 is a multicenter, phase II neoadjuvant trial in women with high-risk stage II/III breast cancer using adaptive randomization within biomarker subtypes to evaluate novel agents added to standard chemotherapy. Primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR). Goal is to identify regimens that meet a high Bayesian predictive probability of statistical significance in a neoadjuvant 300-patient phase III trial defined by hormone-receptor (HR), HER2 status, and MammaPrint (MP). Experimental regimens may “graduate” in 1 of 10 signatures, with a maximum of 120 patients. We report efficacy results for neratinib (N). Methods: Tumors ≥2.5cm by clinical exam &amp; ≥2cm by imaging are eligible for screening. MP low risk/HR+/HER2- tumors are ineligible for randomization. Patients receive chemotherapy (paclitaxel qwk x 12, doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide q2-3 wk x 4, T-&amp;gt;AC). HER2- pts were randomized to N+T-&amp;gt;AC vs. T-&amp;gt;AC and HER2+ pts to N+T-&amp;gt;AC vs. trastuzumab+T-&amp;gt;AC. Analysis is intent-to-treat with pts who switch to non-protocol therapy regarded as non-pCRs. We provide estimated pCR rates (95% Bayesian probability intervals), probabilities of superiority of neratinib over control, and Bayesian predictive probabilities of success in an equally randomized phase III trial. Results: Neratinib met the predictive probability criterion in HR-/HER2+, “graduated”, and accrual ceased [115 N patients (65 HER2+), 78 concurrently randomized controls (22 HER2+)]. The table shows results for all 10 signatures. Two patients (1 N and 1 control) withdrew consent and are not included. Conclusion: I-SPY 2's standing trial mechanism efficiently evaluates agents in biomarker-defined patient subsets. In a modest number of patients, adaptive randomization successfully identified a biomarker signature (HR-/HER2+) for neratinib's further development. All HER2+ and MP+ tumors may also benefit from this regimen, consistent with preclinical data. Evaluation in I-SPY 3, a phase III registration trial, is planned. SignatureEstimated pCR Rate (95% probability interval)Probability NeratinibIs Superior to ControlPredictive Probability of Success in Phase IIINeratinibControlALL32% (28-36%)23% (19%-28%)92%44%HR+23% (18%-28%)17% (11%-22%)81%40%HR-43% (37%-49%)31% (24%-38%)89%53%HER2+39% (33%-45%)23% (15%-30%)95%73%HER2-26% (21%-32%)24% (18%-29%)63%20%MP+*45% (38%-53%)29% (20%-39%)91%66%HR-/HER2-36% (29%-43%)30% (23%-38%)72%34%HR-/HER2+55% (46%-64%)32% (22%-43%)94%78%HR+/HER2+31% (24%-37%)17% (10%-24%)91%65%HR+/HER2-14% (8%-19%)16% (10%-21%)39%12%* MammaPrint 44K Array Low/High score was adjusted to MammaPrint High1 (MP-) or High2 (MP+), using a pre-defined median cut-point of I-SPY 1 participants, who fit the eligibility criteria of I-SPY 2. Citation Format: John W. Park, Minetta C. Liu, Douglas Yee, Angela DeMichele, Laura van 't Veer, Nola Hylton, Fraser Symmans, Meredith B. Buxton, A. Jo Chien, Amy Wallace, Michelle Melisko, Richard Schwab, Judy Boughey, Debashish Tripathy, Hank Kaplan, Rita Nanda, Stephen Chui, Kathy S. Albain, Stacy Moulder, Anthony Elias, Julie E. Lang, Kirsten Edminston, Donald Northfelt, David Euhus, Qamar Khan, Julia Lyandres, Sarah E. Davis, Christina Yau, Ashish Sanil, Laura J. Esserman, Donald A. Berry. Neratinib plus standard neoadjuvant therapy for high-risk breast cancer: Efficacy results from the I-SPY 2 TRIAL. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2014 Apr 5-9; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2014;74(19 Suppl):Abstract nr CT227. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2014-CT227

Abstract S5-02: Veliparib/carboplatin plus standard neoadjuvant therapy for high-risk breast cancer: First efficacy results from the I-SPY 2 TRIAL

Abstract Background: I-SPY 2 is a multicenter, phase 2 screening trial using adaptive randomization within biomarker subtypes to evaluate a series of novel agents/combinations when added to standard neoadjuvant therapy (paclitaxel q wk x 12, doxorubicin &amp; cyclophosphamide q 2-3 wk x 4, T/AC) vs. T/AC (control arm) for women with high-risk stage II/III breast cancer. The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR) at surgery. Our goal is to identify/graduate regimens that have ≥85% Bayesian predictive probability of success (statistical significance) in a 300-patient biomarker-linked Phase 3 neoadjuvant trial. Experimental regimens can “graduate” in at least 1 of 10 possible signatures defined by hormone-receptor (HR) &amp; HER2 status &amp; MammaPrint (MP), with a maximum number of 120 total patients enrolled. We report final efficacy results of the oral PARP inhibitor veliparib (V, ABT-888) in combination with carboplatin (carbo), 1 of 7 experimental regimens evaluated in the trial to date. Methods: Women with tumors ≥2.5 cm by clinical exam and ≥2 cm by imaging are eligible for screening. Tumors that are MP low/HR+/HER2- are ineligible for randomization. MRI scans (baseline, 3 weeks after start of therapy, at completion of weekly T, and prior to surgery) were used in a longitudinal statistical model to improve the efficiency of adaptive randomization. V+carbo was assigned to HER2- tumors only, which limits its possible signatures to: all HER2-, HR+/HER2-, HR-/HER2-. For these 3 signatures we provide estimated pCR rates with associated 95% Bayesian probability intervals for V+carbo and concurrently randomized controls. Analysis is intent to treat with patients who switched to non-protocol therapy regarded as non-pCRs. For each signature we provide probabilities of superiority for V+carbo over control and Bayesian predictive probabilities of success in a neoadjuvant Phase 3 trial equally randomized between V+carbo and control. Results: When V+carbo met the 85% predictive probability criterion in HR-/HER2- and all HER2-, this regimen graduated and accrual to V+carbo was stopped. V+carbo was assigned to 72 patients, and there were 62 concurrently randomized controls (44 HER2- controls). The following table shows final results based on available pCR information. Two patients assigned to V+carbo withdrew consent during treatment and are not included in the table. SignatureEstimated pCR Rate (95% probability interval)Probability V+Carbo is Superior to ControlPredictive Probability of Success in Phase 3 V+CarboControl All HER2-35% (25-45%)20% (9-33%)97%71%HR+/HER2-14% (5-27%)15% (5-30%)44%16%HR-/HER2-52 (38-67%)24% (9-43%)99%92% Conclusion: Adaptive randomization successfully identified a biomarker signature for V+carbo on the basis of a modest number of patients. V+carbo has graduated with a triple-negative (TN) breast cancer signature, and is the subset recommended for this regimen's subsequent development. There is a suggestion that HR+/HER2- tumors benefit little from this regimen and inclusion of tumors in this subset would therefore dilute its effect in a subsequent trial. Analyses are currently underway to define additional biomarkers that may be predictive of response. The I-SPY 2 standing trial mechanism efficiently evaluates agents/combinations in biomarker-defined patient subsets, with future agents/combinations reported as available. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr S5-02.

Phase III Multicenter Trial of Doxorubicin Plus Cyclophosphamide Followed by Paclitaxel Compared With Doxorubicin Plus Paclitaxel Followed by Weekly Paclitaxel As Adjuvant Therapy for Women With High-Risk Breast Cancer

This study compared disease-free survival (DFS) obtained with two different regimens of adjuvant therapy in high-risk breast cancer. Women (who had performance status [PS] of 0 to 1) with operable, histologically confirmed, stage I to III adenocarcinoma of the breast were eligible. Patients had undergone primary surgery with no residual tumor. Treatments were as follows: arm 1 was doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for four cycles followed by paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for four cycles (ie, AC-P); and arm 2 was doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2) plus paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for four cycles followed by paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2) weekly for 12 weeks. Overall, 1,830 patients were enrolled and 1,801 were treated: arm 1 (n = 906; AC-->P) and arm 2 (n = 895; AP-WP). Overall, patients had a PS of 0 (88%), had estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor-positive disease (52%), had one to three positive nodes (46%), and were postmenopausal (57%); the median age was 52 years. Currently, 1,640 patients (90%) are alive. The 6-year DFS was 79% to 80% in both groups. Disease relapse was the cause of death for 83 patients in arm 1 and in 66 patients of arm 2. Overall 6-year survival rates were 82% and 87% in arms 1 and 2, respectively. Reasons for patients being taken off study treatment included toxicity (13% in arm 1 v 20% in arm 2), progressive disease or recurrence (7% v 5%), and consent withdrawn (9% v 8%), respectively. The most frequent toxicities were hematologic, including neutropenia and leukopenia followed by neuropathy, myalgia, nausea, fatigue, headache, arthralgia, and vomiting. The results indicate that the AP-WP regimen is an equally effective and tolerable option for the adjuvant treatment of patients with high-risk breast cancer. The substitution of paclitaxel for cyclophosphamide results in comparable effectiveness of the regimen.

A randomized, multicenter phase III trial comparing doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel or doxorubicin + paclitaxel followed by weekly paclitaxel as adjuvant therapy for high-risk breast cancer

517 Background: This study compared the disease-free survival (DFS) obtained with 2 regimens of adjuvant therapy for patients (pts) with high-risk breast cancer Methods: Women PS 0–1 with local, operable, confirmed stage I-III adenocarcinoma were eligible. Pts may have had primary surgery, with no residual tumor. Therapy was as follows:Arm 1 (AC→T) - doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 repeated every 3 weeks for 4 cycles → paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 repeated every 3 weeks for 4 cycles; Arm 2 (AT→T) - doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 plus paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 repeated every 3 weeks for 4 cycles → paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 weekly ×12. Results: 1,830 pts were enrolled and treated; n=915 Arm 1 (AC→T) and n=915 Arm 2 (AT→T). Pts were: PS=0 (70%/Arm), ER+/PR+ (54% and 50%, Arms 1 and 2 respectively), ER-/PR- (35% and 34%) with 0 positive nodes (N+) (28% and 27%), 1–3 (N+) (44% and 46%), 4–9 (N+) (21% and 18%) and 10+ (N+) (7% and 8.5%). Most were postmenopausal (57%/Arm); median age was 52 years/Arm. To date 1,655 pts (90%) are alive. 5-year DFS was 80% vs 81% for Arms 1 and 2 Overall 5-year survival was 86% vs 89%, in Arms 1 and 2. Cause of death was recurrence for 76 pts in Arm 1 and 56 pts in Arm 2. The main reasons for pts being taken off study treatment were toxicity (85 pts Arm 1 vs 128 pts Arm 2), recurrence (79 pts Arm 1 vs 52 pts Arm 2), and consent withdrawal (18 pts Arm 1 vs 30 pts Arm 2). The most frequent toxicities were neutropenia, leukopenia, neuropathy, febrile neutropenia, nausea, vomiting, arthralgia, and myalgia. GI toxicities were more frequent in Arm 1. Alopecia occurred in both Arms (77%). Conclusions: At 5-years, the AT→T produced significantly better OS (p=0.054) and improved DFS (p=0.19). Clinically important toxicities were more frequent with AC→T. Given this, AT→T in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer is well tolerated and warranted in place of AC→T in these pts. Research support provided by Bristol-Myers Squibb (Princeton, NJ). No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Stage III and oestrogen receptor negativity are associated with poor prognosis after adjuvant high-dose therapy in high-risk breast cancer.

We report on the efficacy and toxicity of a sequential high-dose therapy with peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) support in 85 patients with high-risk stage II/III breast cancer. There were 71 patients with more than nine tumour-positive axillary lymph nodes. An induction therapy of two cycles of ifosfamide (total dose, 7.5 g m−2) and epirubicin (120 mg m−2) was given, and PBSC were harvested during G-CSF-supported leucocyte recovery following the second cycle. The PBSC-supported high-dose chemotherapy consisted of two cycles of ifosfamide (total dose, 12 000 mg m−2), carboplatin (900 mg m−2) and epirubicin (180 mg m−2). Patients were autografted with a median number of 3.7 × 106 CD34+ cells kg−1 (range, 1.9–26.5 × 106) resulting in haematological reconstitution within approximately 2 weeks following high-dose therapy. The toxicity was moderate in general, and there was no treatment-related toxic death. Twenty-one patients relapsed between 3 and 30 months following the last cycle of high-dose therapy (median, 11 months). The probability of disease-free and overall survival at 4 years were 60% and 83%, respectively. According to a multivariate analysis, patients with stage II disease had a significantly better probability of disease-free survival (74%) in comparison to patients with stage III disease (36%). The probability of disease-free survival was also significantly better for patients with oestrogen receptor-positive tumours (70%) compared to patients with receptor-negative ones (40%). Bone marrow samples collected from 52 patients after high-dose therapy were examined to evaluate the prognostic relevance of isolated tumour cells. The proportion of patients presenting with tumour cell-positive samples did not change in comparison to that observed before high-dose therapy (65% vs 71%), but a decrease in the incidence and concentration of tumour cells was observed over time after high-dose therapy. This finding was true for patients with relapse and for those in remission, which argues against a prognostic significance of isolated tumour cells in bone marrow. In conclusion, sequential high-dose chemotherapy with PBSC support can be safely administered to patients with high-risk stage II/III breast cancer. Further intensification of the therapy, including the addition of non-cross resistant drugs or immunological approaches such as the use of antibodies against HER-2/NEU, may be envisaged for patients with stage III disease and hormone receptor-negative tumours. © 1999 Cancer Research Campaign

Future developments in adjuvant systemic therapy for high-risk breast cancer.

In an article written by B. Fisher (1984), the following statement can be found: “Competing forces have continuously played a role in determining the management of breast cancer.” This statement should remind research physicians that innovative treatment programs will meet with numerous obstacles at all levels before their achievements can be considered as establishing new paradigms. In fact, most clinicians dealing with research are mainly interested in expanding routine science which flourishes as long as the old paradigms remain the standard that governs clinical activity (Fisher 1992).KeywordsBreast CancerAdjuvant Systemic TherapyPrimary ChemotherapyHigh Risk Breast CancerEarly Breast Cancer TrialistThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Systemic Therapy in Resectable Breast Cancer

There is now convincing evidence that adjuvant systemic therapy for high-risk breast cancer can significantly reduce tumor mortality at 5 years. The overall treatment benefit for women with node-positive tumors may be considered moderate but clinically important. The most frequent choices of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy are discussed. In patients with node-negative receptor-negative tumors there is preliminary evidence of benefit from adjuvant combination chemotherapy. Primary (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy can allow conservative surgery in most tumors suitable for mastectomy, but this form of treatment remains, at present, experimental. Potential long-term toxicity from systemic adjuvant therapy should be continuously monitored.