Weekly paclitaxel is more effective than every-3-weeks administration for MBC. Trastuzumab did not improve efficacy for HER-2 nonoverexpressors. Neurotoxicity is a treatment-limiting toxicity for weekly paclitaxel.

In what we believe to be a first-in-human study, we evaluated the safety and dosimetry of Zr-pertuzumab PET/CT for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted imaging in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer. Patients with HER2-positive breast cancer and evidence of distant metastases were enrolled in an institutional review board-approved prospective clinical trial. Pertuzumab was conjugated with deferoxamine and radiolabeled with Zr. Patients underwent PET/CT with 74 MBq ofZr-pertuzumab in a total antibody mass of 20-50 mg of pertuzumab. PET/CT, whole-body probe counts, and blood drawing were performed over 8 d to assess pharmacokinetics, biodistribution, and dosimetry. PET/CT images were evaluated for the ability to visualize HER2-positive metastases. Six patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer were enrolled and administeredZr-pertuzumab. No toxicities occurred. Dosimetry estimates from OLINDA demonstrated that the organs receiving the highest doses (mean ± SD) were the liver (1.75 ± 0.21 mGy/MBq), the kidneys (1.27 ± 0.28 mGy/MBq), and the heart wall (1.22 ± 0.16 mGy/MBq), with an average effective dose of 0.54 ± 0.07 mSv/MBq. PET/CT demonstrated optimal imaging 5-8 d after administration. Zr-pertuzumab was able to image multiple sites of malignancy and suggested that they were HER2-positive. In 2 patients with both known HER2-positive and HER2-negative primary breast cancers and brain metastases,Zr-pertuzumab PET/CT suggested that the brain metastases were HER2-positive. In 1 of the 2 patients, subsequent resection of a brain metastasis proved HER2-positive disease, confirming that the Zr-pertuzumab avidity was a true-positive result for HER2-positive malignancy. This first-in-human study demonstrated safety, dosimetry, biodistribution, and successful HER2-targeted imaging with Zr-pertuzumab PET/CT. Potential clinical applications include assessment of the HER2 status of lesions that may not be accessible to biopsy and assessment of HER2 heterogeneity.

IMPORTANCE In cancer clinical trials, symptomatic adverse events (AEs), such as nausea, are reported by investigators rather than by patients. There is increasing interest to collect symptomatic AE data via patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires, but it is unclear whether it is feasible to implement this approach in multicenter trials. OBJECTIVE To examine whether patients are willing and able to report their symptomatic AEs in multicenter trials. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A total of 361 consecutive patients enrolled in any 1 of 9 US multicenter cancer treatment trials were invited to self-report 13 common symptomatic AEs using a PRO adaptation of the National Cancer Institute’s Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) via tablet computers at 5 successive clinic visits. Patient adherence was tracked with reasons for missed self-reports. Agreement with clinician AE reports was analyzed with weighted κ statistics. Patient and investigator perspectives were elicited by survey. The study was conducted from March 15, 2007, to August 11, 2011. Data analysis was performed from August 9, 2013, to March 21, 2014. RESULTS Of the 361 patients invited to participate, 285 individuals enrolled, with a median age of 57 years (range, 24–88), 202 (74.3%) female, 241 (85.5%) white, 73 (26.8%) with a high school education or less, and 176 (64.7%) who reported regular internet use (denominators varied owing to missing data). Across all patients and trials, there were 1280 visits during which patients had an opportunity to self-report (ie, patients were alive and enrolled in a treatment trial at the time of the visit). Self-reports were completed at 1202 visits (93.9% overall adherence). Adherence was highest at baseline and declined over time (visit 1, 100%; visit 2, 96%; visit 3, 95%; visit 4, 91%; and visit 5, 85%). Reasons for missing PROs included institutional errors in 27 of 48 (56.3%) of the cases (eg, staff forgetting to bring computers to patients at visits), patients feeling “too ill” in 8 (16.7%), patient refusal in 8 (16.7%), and internet connectivity problems in 5 (10.4%). Patient-investigator CTCAE agreement was moderate or worse for most symptoms (most κ < 0.05), with investigators reporting fewer AEs than patients across symptoms. Most patients believed that the system was easy to use (234 [93.2%]) and useful (230 [93.1%]), and investigators thought that the patient-reported AEs were useful (133 [94.3%]) and accurate (119 [83.2%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Participants in multicenter cancer trials are willing and able to report their own symptomatic AEs at most clinic visits and report more AEs than investigators. This approach may improve the precision of AE reporting in cancer trials.

No abstract