Germline mutations in BRCA1/2 predispose individuals to breast cancer (termed germline-mutated BRCA1/2 breast cancer, gBRCA-BC) by impairing homologous recombination (HR) and causing genomic instability. HR also repairs DNA lesions caused by platinum agents and PARP inhibitors. Triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs) harbor subpopulations with BRCA1/2 mutations, hypothesized to be especially platinum-sensitive. Cancers in putative 'BRCAness' subgroups-tumors with BRCA1 methylation; low levels of BRCA1 mRNA (BRCA1 mRNA-low); or mutational signatures for HR deficiency and those with basal phenotypes-may also be sensitive to platinum. We assessed the efficacy of carboplatin and another mechanistically distinct therapy, docetaxel, in a phase 3 trial in subjects with unselected advanced TNBC. A prespecified protocol enabled biomarker-treatment interaction analyses in gBRCA-BC and BRCAness subgroups. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). In the unselected population (376 subjects; 188 carboplatin, 188 docetaxel), carboplatin was not more active than docetaxel (ORR, 31.4% versus 34.0%, respectively; P = 0.66). In contrast, in subjects with gBRCA-BC, carboplatin had double the ORR of docetaxel (68% versus 33%, respectively; biomarker, treatment interaction P = 0.01). Such benefit was not observed for subjects with BRCA1 methylation, BRCA1 mRNA-low tumors or a high score in a Myriad HRD assay. Significant interaction between treatment and the basal-like subtype was driven by high docetaxel response in the nonbasal subgroup. We conclude that patients with advanced TNBC benefit from characterization of BRCA1/2 mutations, but not BRCA1 methylation or Myriad HRD analyses, to inform choices on platinum-based chemotherapy. Additionally, gene expression analysis of basal-like cancers may also influence treatment selection.

Introduction: Subgroups within sporadic triple negative breast cancers (TNBCs) appear to share impaired DNA damage response mechanisms with BRCA1/2 mutation-associated breast cancers. This has been hypothesised to confer particular sensitivity to DNA-damaging platinum chemotherapy. The TNT trial, a randomized phase III trial in women with metastatic or recurrent locally advanced TNBC or BRCA1/2 mutation-associated breast cancer, aimed to test this hypothesis and examine treatment effect in biological subgroups. Patients & Methods: Eligible patients had either ER-, PR-, HER2- breast cancer or were known BRCA1/2 carriers (any ER/PR/HER2). Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive either C (AUC 6 q3wk) or D (100mg/m2 q3wk) for 6-8 cycles or until disease progression if sooner and could cross over to the alternative treatment on confirmed progression. Ineligible patients included those who had ECOG performance status >2, received adjuvant taxane therapy in the last 12 mths, any previous treatment with a platinum chemotherapy, or previous non-anthracycline chemotherapy for metastatic disease. For consenting patients a blood sample and archived tissue samples were obtained for BRCA1/2 genotyping and central biomarker analysis (primary tumour, lymph nodes and recurrent tumour biopsy if available) of subtypes within TNBC and biomarkers of DNA repair deficiency. The primary endpoint was RECIST objective tumour response up to cycle 6 of randomised treatment. Secondary endpoints included toxicity, progression free survival (PFS), time to progression and overall survival. TNT aimed to detect a 15% improvement in ORR with C compared to D, with planned target sample size range of 370-450 depending on assumed ORR in D patients (2-sided α=0.05, power=90%). 376 (188 C, 188 D) were recruited from 74 UK centres between Apr 08 and Mar 14. Results: A snapshot of the data was taken on 30/5/14 at which point 336 (89.4%) patients had experienced a PFS event, with overall median PFS time of 4.4 mths. Median age of patients was 55 yrs (IQR 48-63). 366/376 (97%) patients had TNBC of whom 18 were also known BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, with the remaining 10 patients receptor +ve and BRCA1/2 carriers. 338/376 (90%) had metastatic and 38/376 (10%) recurrent locally advanced disease. 53% had liver or lung metastases affecting the parenchyma and 34% had received previous adjuvant taxane therapy. Median time from initial diagnosis to entering TNT was 2.2 yrs (IQR 1.5-3.5). Primary tumour tissue has currently been received for 277 patients, blood from 286 patients and recurrent tumour tissue from 85 patients. Discussion: TNT will report evidence on the activity of single agent platinum chemotherapy compared with single agent taxane in patients with TNBC and BRCA1/2 associated breast cancer. Correlative analyses of BRCA1/2 mutation status, subtypes and DNA repair biomarkers will also be reported. TNT will be the first randomised trial to report the activity of platinum compared with standard chemotherapy within TNBC subtypes and in relation to BRCA1/2 mutation status and DNA repair biomarkers. Safety, tolerability and response to crossover treatment will also be presented. Citation Format: Andrew Tutt, Paul Ellis, Lucy Kilburn, Cheryl Gilett, Sarah Pinder, Jacinta Abraham, Sophie Barrett, Peter Barrett-Lee, Stephen Chan, Maggie Cheang, Mitch Dowsett, Lisa Fox, Patrycja Gazinska, Anita Grigoriadis, Alexander Gutin, Catherine Harper-Wynne, Matthew Hatton, Sarah Kernaghan, Jerry Lanchbury, James Morden, Julie Owen, Jyoti Parikh, Peter Parker, Nazneen Rahman, Rebecca Roylance, Adam Shaw, Ian Smith, Rose Thompson, Kirsten Timms, Holly Tovey, Andrew Wardley, Gregory Wilson, Mark Harries, Judith Bliss. The TNT trial: A randomized phase III trial of carboplatin (C) compared with docetaxel (D) for patients with metastatic or recurrent locally advanced triple negative or BRCA1/2 breast cancer (CRUK/07/012) [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 S3-01.

Summary Background Alveolar soft-part sarcoma (ASPS) is a rare soft-tissue sarcoma that is unresponsive to chemotherapy. Cediranib, a tyrosine-kinase inhibitor, has shown substantial activity in ASPS in non-randomised studies. The Cediranib in Alveolar Soft Part Sarcoma (CASPS) study was designed to discriminate the effect of cediranib from the intrinsically indolent nature of ASPS. Methods In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 2 trial, we recruited participants from 12 hospitals in the UK (n=7), Spain (n=3), and Australia (n=2). Patients were eligible if they were aged 16 years or older; metastatic ASPS that had progressed in the previous 6 months; had an ECOG performance status of 0–1; life expectancy of more than 12 weeks; and adequate bone marrow, hepatic, and renal function. Participants had to have no anti-cancer treatment within 4 weeks before trial entry, with exception of palliative radiotherapy. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1), with allocation by use of computer-generated random permuted blocks of six, to either cediranib (30 mg orally, once daily) or matching placebo tablets for 24 weeks. Treatment was supplied in number-coded bottles, masking participants and clinicians to assignment. Participants were unblinded at week 24 or sooner if they had progression defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1); those on placebo crossed over to cediranib and all participants continued on treatment until progression or death. The primary endpoint was percentage change in sum of target marker lesion diameters between baseline and week 24 or progression if sooner, assessed in the evaluable population (all randomly assigned participants who had a scan at week 24 [or sooner if they progressed] with target marker lesions measured). Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01337401 ; the European Clinical Trials database, number EudraCT2010-021163-33; and the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN63733470 recruitment is complete and follow-up is ongoing. Findings Between July 15, 2011, and July 29, 2016, of 48 participants recruited, all were randomly assigned to cediranib (n=32) or placebo (n=16). 23 (48%) were female and the median age was 31 years (IQR 27–45). Median follow-up was 34·3 months (IQR 23·7–55·6) at the time of data cutoff for these analyses (April 11, 2018). Four participants in the cediranib group were not evaluable for the primary endpoint (one did not start treatment, and three did not have their scan at 24 weeks). Median percentage change in sum of target marker lesion diameters for the evaluable population was −8·3% (IQR −26·5 to 5·9) with cediranib versus 13·4% (IQR 1·1 to 21·3) with placebo (one-sided p=0·0010). The most common grade 3 adverse events on (blinded) cediranib were hypertension (six [19%] of ...

This study suggests that pain relief from both types of braces is identical but use of a CF-AFO does not alter gait patterns.

No abstract

Background Detection of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) in patients (pts) who have completed treatment for early-stage triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is associated with a very high risk of future relapse. Identifiying those at high risk of subsequent relapse may allow tailoring of further therapy to delay or prevent recurrence. The c-TRAK TN trial assessed the utility of prospective ctDNA surveillance in pts treated for TNBC and the activity of pembrolizumab (P) in pts with ctDNA detected.. Methods c-TRAK TN, a multi-centre phase II trial with integrated prospective screening component, enrolled pts with early-stage TNBC and either residual disease following neoadjuvant chemotherapy, or tumour size >20mm and/or axillary lymph node involvement if adjuvant chemotherapy was given. Tumour tissue was sequenced to identify somatic mutations suitable for tracking using personalised digital PCR ctDNA assays (BioRad QX200). Pts had “active” ctDNA surveillance via blood sample testing every 3 months to 12 months (potential up to 18 months if samples missed due to COVID) during which time if ctDNA was detected (ctDNA+) pts could be randomised 2:1 to P (200mg i.v. q 3 weeks for 1 year) or observation (Obs). Pts and clinicians were blinded to ctDNA+ results unless they were allocated P, when staging scans were done and those free of clinical recurrence started treatment. Following advice from the Independent Data Monitoring Committee, the Obs arm closed on 16/06/2020 with all subsequent ctDNA+ pts allocated P. Following the completion of active ctDNA surveillance, 3-monthly visits continued to 24 months to be analysed retrospectively. The aim was to recruit 150 pts to ctDNA surveillance, assuming 30% would be ctDNA+ within 12 months, allowing ctDNA+ rate to be estimated with a 2-sided 95%CI of +/- 7.3%. Co-primary endpoints are i) rates of ctDNA detection by 12 and 24 months from start of ctDNA surveillance; ii) rates of sustained ctDNA clearance on P defined as absence of detectable ctDNA, or disease recurrence 6 months after starting P.. Results 208 pts were registered between 30/01/18 and 06/12/19, 185 had tumour sequenced, 171 (92.4%) had trackable mutations, and 161 entered ctDNA surveillance. The rate of ctDNA detection by 12 months after start of surveillance was 27.3% (44/161, 95% CI 20.6-34.9). ctDNA+ rates from baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 month ctDNA samples were 23/161 (14.3%), 6/115 (5.2%), 6/99 (5.1%), 7/84 (8.3%), and 2/84 (2.4%) respectively. An additional 2 pts were ctDNA+ on COVID extended active surveillance at 15 (1/51, 2%) or 18 months (1/11, 9%). 7 pts relapsed without prior ctDNA detection. 45 pts entered the therapeutic component of the trial (initially 31 to P and 14 to Obs). 1 Obs pt was re-allocated to P. Of pts allocated to P, 72% (23/32) had metastatic disease at time of ctDNA detection on staging scans (75% (12/16) who were ctDNA+ at baseline and 69% (11/16) at other timepoints). 4 pts declined to start P, largely due to COVID concerns. Of the 5 pts who commenced P, at the time of analysis none achieved sustained ctDNA clearance and 4 had recurred. In pts allocated to Obs, median time to recurrence was 4.1 months (95% CI: 3.2-not-defined).. Conclusion The c-TRAK TN trial is to our knowledge the first study to assess the proof-of-principle of whether ctDNA assays have clinical utility in guiding further therapy in TNBC. Relatively few pts commenced P treatment precluding assessment of potential activity. At enrollment, patients had a relatively high of rate of undiagnosed metastatic disease when imaged. Our findings have implications for future trial design, emphasizing the importance of early start of ctDNA testing, and more sensitive and/or more frequent ctDNA testing regimes. Citation Format: Nicholas Turner, Claire Swift, Ben Jenkins, Lucy Kilburn, Maria Coakley, Matthew Beaney, Lisa Fox, Katie Goddard, Isaac Garcia-Murillas, Peter Hall, Catherine Harper-Wynne, Tamas Hickish, Sarah Kernaghan, Iain Macpherson, Alicia Okines, Carlo Palmieri, Sophie Perry, Katrina Randle, Claire Snowdon, Hilary Stobart, Andrew Wardley, Duncan Wheatley, Simon Waters, Matthew Winter, Judith Bliss. Primary results of the cTRAK TN trial: A clinical trial utilising ctDNA mutation tracking to detect minimal residual disease and trigger intervention in patients with moderate and high risk early stage triple negative breast cancer [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 GS3-06.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected how clinical trials are managed, both within existing portfolios and for the rapidly developed COVID-19 trials. Sponsors or delegated organisations responsible for monitoring trials have needed to consider and implement alternative ways of working due to the national infection risk necessitating restricted movement of staff and public, reduced clinical staff resource as research staff moved to clinical areas, and amended working arrangements for sponsor and sponsor delegates as staff moved to working from home.Organisations have often worked in isolation to fast track mitigations required for the conduct of clinical trials during the pandemic; this paper describes many of the learnings from a group of monitoring leads based in United Kingdom Clinical Research Collaboration (UKCRC) Clinical Trials Unit (CTUs) within the UK.The UKCRC Monitoring Task and Finish Group, comprising monitoring leads from 9 CTUs, met repeatedly to identify how COVID-19 had affected clinical trial monitoring. Informed consent is included as a specific issue within this paper, as review of completed consent documentation is often required within trial monitoring plans (TMPs). Monitoring is defined as involving on-site monitoring, central monitoring or/and remote monitoring.Monitoring, required to protect the safety of the patients and the integrity of the trial and ensure the protocol is followed, is often best done by a combination of central, remote and on-site monitoring. However, if on-site monitoring is not possible, workable solutions can be found using only central or central and remote monitoring. eConsent, consent by a third person, or via remote means is plausible. Minimising datasets to the critical data reduces workload for sites and CTU staff. Home working caused by COVID-19 has made electronic trial master files (TMFs) more inviting. Allowing sites to book and attend protocol training at a time convenient to them has been successful and worth pursuing for trials with many sites in the future.The arrival of COVID-19 in the UK has forced consideration of and changes to how clinical trials are conducted in relation to monitoring. Some developed practices will be useful in other pandemics and others should be incorporated into regular use.

BackgroundAcademic clinical trials play a fundamental role in the development of new treatments, the repurposing of existing treatments and in addressing areas of unmet clinical need. With cancer treatments increasingly targeted at molecular subtypes, and with priority placed on developing new treatments for rare tumour types, the need for international trial participation to access sufficient patient numbers for successful trial conduct is growing. However, lack of harmonisation of international legal, ethical and financial systems can make this challenging and the cost and effort of conducting trials internationally can be considered prohibitive, particularly where the sample size is comparatively small.MethodsThe Institute of Cancer Research – Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit (ICR-CTSU) is a UK-based academic clinical trials unit that specialises in the design, conduct and analysis of clinical trials of cancer treatments with an expanding portfolio of trials in molecular subtypes of breast and urological cancers and in other rare cancer types. Implementing appropriate mechanisms to enable international participation has therefore been imperative. In this article, we explain how we have approached the challenges involved and describe examples of successful international trial conduct, achieved through robust collaborations with academic and industry partners.ConclusionConducting academic trials internationally is challenging but can and should be achieved through appropriate governance mechanisms and strong collaborations.