No abstract

SummaryBackgroundNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for early breast cancer can make breast-conserving surgery more feasible and might be more likely to eradicate micrometastatic disease than might the same chemotherapy given after surgery. We investigated the long-term benefits and risks of NACT and the influence of tumour characteristics on outcome with a collaborative meta-analysis of individual patient data from relevant randomised trials.MethodsWe obtained information about prerandomisation tumour characteristics, clinical tumour response, surgery, recurrence, and mortality for 4756 women in ten randomised trials in early breast cancer that began before 2005 and compared NACT with the same chemotherapy given postoperatively. Primary outcomes were tumour response, extent of local therapy, local and distant recurrence, breast cancer death, and overall mortality. Analyses by intention-to-treat used standard regression (for response and frequency of breast-conserving therapy) and log-rank methods (for recurrence and mortality).FindingsPatients entered the trials from 1983 to 2002 and median follow-up was 9 years (IQR 5–14), with the last follow-up in 2013. Most chemotherapy was anthracycline based (3838 [81%] of 4756 women). More than two thirds (1349 [69%] of 1947) of women allocated NACT had a complete or partial clinical response. Patients allocated NACT had an increased frequency of breast-conserving therapy (1504 [65%] of 2320 treated with NACT vs 1135 [49%] of 2318 treated with adjuvant chemotherapy). NACT was associated with more frequent local recurrence than was adjuvant chemotherapy: the 15 year local recurrence was 21·4% for NACT versus 15·9% for adjuvant chemotherapy (5·5% increase [95% CI 2·4–8·6]; rate ratio 1·37 [95% CI 1·17–1·61]; p=0·0001). No significant difference between NACT and adjuvant chemotherapy was noted for distant recurrence (15 year risk 38·2% for NACT vs 38·0% for adjuvant chemotherapy; rate ratio 1·02 [95% CI 0·92–1·14]; p=0·66), breast cancer mortality (34·4% vs 33·7%; 1·06 [0·95–1·18]; p=0·31), or death from any cause (40·9% vs 41·2%; 1·04 [0·94–1·15]; p=0·45).InterpretationTumours downsized by NACT might have higher local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy than might tumours of the same dimensions in women who have not received NACT. Strategies to mitigate the increased local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy in tumours downsized by NACT should be considered—eg, careful tumour localisation, detailed pathological assessment, and appropriate radiotherapy.FundingCancer Research UK, British Heart Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, and UK Department of Health.

The disposition of paclitaxel in humans is nonlinear. Paclitaxel metabolism to 6 alpha-hydroxylpaclitaxel is likely an important detoxification pathway. Myelosuppression is related to the duration that plasma paclitaxel concentrations are > or = 0.05 mumol/L. Trials of new doses and schedules of paclitaxel should take into account its nonlinear disposition to rule out adverse clinical consequences, especially if the drug is administered by short infusion. Our pharmacokinetic model should prove to be a powerful tool in predicting paclitaxel disposition, regardless of dose and schedule, and should facilitate further pharmacodynamic investigations.

Background: In the phase III IMpassion130 trial, combining atezolizumab with first-line nanoparticle albumin-boundpaclitaxel for advanced triple-negative breast cancer (aTNBC) showed a statistically significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive populations, and a clinically meaningful overall survival (OS) effect in PD-L1-positive aTNBC. The phase III KEYNOTE-355 trial adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy for aTNBC showed similar PFS effects. IMpassion131 evaluated first-line atezolizumabepaclitaxel in aTNBC. Patients and methods: Eligible patients [no prior systemic therapy or 12 months since (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy] were randomised 2:1 to atezolizumab 840 mg or placebo (days 1, 15), both with paclitaxel 90 mg/m 2 (days 1, 8, 15), every 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were tumour PD-L1 status, prior taxane, liver metastases and geographical region. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS, tested hierarchically first in the PD-L1-positive [immune cell expression 1%, VENTANA PD-L1 (SP142) assay] population, and then in the ITT population. OS was a secondary endpoint. Results: Of 651 randomised patients, 45% had PD-L1-positive aTNBC. At the primary PFS analysis, adding atezolizumab to paclitaxel did not improve investigator-assessed PFS in the PD-L1-positive population [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-1.12; P ¼ 0.20; median PFS 6.0 months with atezolizumabepaclitaxel versus 5.7 months with placeboepaclitaxel]. In the PD-L1-positive population, atezolizumabepaclitaxel was associated with more favourable unconfirmed best overall response rate (63% versus 55% with placeboepaclitaxel) and median duration of response (7.2 versus 5.5 months, respectively). Final OS results showed no difference between arms (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.76-1.64; median 22.1 months with atezolizumabepaclitaxel versus 28.3 months with placeboe paclitaxel in the PD-L1-positive population). Results in the ITT population were consistent with the PD-L1-positive population. The safety profile was consistent with known effects of each study drug. Conclusion: Combining atezolizumab with paclitaxel did not improve PFS or OS versus paclitaxel alone. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03125902.

No abstract

Background: Triple negative breast cancers of high proliferation or grade are a subgroup characterized by very poor prognosis, rapid progression to metastatic stage and rapid onset of resistance to chemotherapy after initial response. As a whole, triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) represents a specific area of medical need, in which new therapeutic approaches deserve appropriate test. Retrospective data showed that a subset of patients have an ongoing immune response within the tumor microenvironment, and that PD-L1 expression is an adaptive method of tumor resistance to tumor infiltrating lymphocytes, which in turn are needed for response to chemotherapy. Overall, the data suggests a role for immune regulation of response to chemotherapy, and support the concept that blockade of immune check-points may favor the achievement of durable response by immune mechanisms themselves, and in combination with classical chemotherapy. Methods: In this multicenter open label study (NCT002620280), a total of 280 patients with TNBC were randomized to neoadjuvant carboplatin AUC 2 and abraxane 125 mg/m2 iv on days 1 and 8, with or without atezolizumab 1200 mg iv on day 1. Both regimens were given every 3 weeks for 8 cycles and were followed by surgery and by 4 cycles of an anthracycline regimen as per investigator choice. The primary aim of the study is to compare event-free survival 5 years after randomization of the last patient. Important secondary aim is the rate of pCR (defined as absence of invasive in breast and lymph nodes). The comparison among treatments will be carried out by a two-sided Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, controlling for disease stage (early high-risk vs locally advanced) and PD-L1 expression (positive vs negative). The primary population for all efficacy endpoints will be the ITT (intent-to-treat) population, the safety population is defined as all randomized patients who received at least one dose of either regimen. pCR and safety data will be presented at the meeting. Patients will continue to be followed up to allow for assessing comparative long-term event-free and overall survival analyses. Supported in part by unrestricted grants from Hoffman-La Roche, Ltd, Switzerland and Celgene International Sarl, Switzerland Citation Format: Luca Gianni, Chiun-Sheng Huang, Daniel Egle, Begona Bermejo, Claudio Zamagni, Marc Thill, Antonio Anton, Stefania Zambelli, Giampaolo Bianchini, Stefania Russo, Eva Ciruelos, Richrad Greil, Vladimir Semiglazov, Marco Colleoni, Catherine Kelly, Gabriella Mariani, Lucia Del Mastro, Ilaria Maffeis, Pinuccia Valagussa, Giuseppe Viale. Pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant treatment with or without atezolizumab in triple negative, early high-risk and locally advanced breast cancer. NeoTRIPaPDL1 Michelangelo randomized study [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 GS3-04.

Objective To assess the long term effectiveness of adjuvant treatment with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) in patients with operable breast cancer at risk of relapse, on the basis of three successive randomised trials and one observational study conducted from June 1973 to December 1980. Design Cohort study. Setting Istituto Nazionale Tumori in Milan, Italy. Main outcome measures Relapse free and overall survival, measured by univariate and multivariate analyses. Results After a median follow up of 28.5 years for the initial study, adjuvant CMF was found to reduce the relative risk of relapse significantly (hazard ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.56 to 0.91, P = 0.005) and death (0.79, 0.63 to 0.98, P = 0.04). Administration of CMF for 12 cycles does not seem superior to a shorter administration of six cycles. In the node negative and oestrogen receptor negative trial, intravenous CMF significantly reduced the relative risk of relapse of disease (0.65, 0.47 to 0.90, P = 0.009) and death (0.65, 0.47 to 0.92, P = 0.01) at a median follow up of 20 years. Conclusions When delivered optimally, CMF benefits patients at risk of relapse of distant disease without evidence of detrimental effects in any of the examined subgroups.

No abstract