No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

557 Background: The ABCSG 28 Posytive trial compared primary surgery versus primary systemic therapy without surgery in stage IV breast cancer patients. The primary aim was to investigate whether immediate resection of the primary tumor followed by standard systemic therapy improves median survival compared with no surgical resection (NCT01015625). The trial had to be stopped early due insufficient recruitment. Methods: Untreated stage IV breast cancer patients with the primary in situ were randomly assigned to either surgery of the primary versus no surgery followed by systemic therapy between 2011 and 2015 in 15 breast health centers in Austria. Systemic therapy included endocrine therapy or chemotherapy. Patients were routinely followed every 3-6 months. Primary endpoint was median survival. Results: 90 patients (45 with surgery, 45 with primary systemic therapy without surgery) were randomized. Stratification criteria were age, endocrine responsiveness, her2 expression, planned first line therapy and bone only versus other metastases. Patients in the surgery arm had more cT3 breast cancer (22% versus 7%) and more cN2 staging (16% versus 4%) as well as more her2 positive breast cancer cases (27% versus 18%). The median follow up was 37.5 months and immunohistochemical subtype analysis showed 9% basal like, 22% her2 positive, 51% luminal A and 13% luminal B cancers. Both groups were well balanced regarding first line treatment (endocrine versus chemotherapy) however, there were more taxane treated patients in the no surgery group (24.4 versus 15.6%). The median survival in the surgery arm was 34.6 months versus 54.8 months in the no surgery arm without statistical significance (HR 0.691 CI 0.358 – 1.333; p=0.267). Time to distant progression was insignificantly longer in the no surgery arm (surgery arm 13.9 versus no surgery arm 29.0 months). Conclusions: This first analysis of the prospective randomized phase III trial POSYTIVE-ABCSG-28 demonstrated no benefit in overall survival for immediate surgery of the primary in de novo stage IV breast cancer patients. Clinical trial information: NCT01015625.

Purpose: To assess the prognostic value of the PAM50 risk-of-recurrence (ROR) score on late distant recurrence (beyond 5 years after diagnosis and treatment) in a large cohort of postmenopausal, endocrineresponsive breast cancer patients.Experimental Design: The PAM50 assay was performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded wholetumor sections of patients who had been enrolled in the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group Trial 8 (ABCSG-8). RNA expression levels of the PAM50 genes were determined centrally using the nCounter Dx Analysis System. Late distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) was analyzed using Cox models adjusted for clinical and pathologic parameters.Results: PAM50 analysis was successfully performed in 1,246 ABCSG-8 patients. PAM50 ROR score and ROR-based risk groups provided significant additional prognostic information with respect to late DRFS compared with a combined score of clinical factors alone (ROR score: DLRc 2 15.32, P < 0.001; ROR-based risk groups: DLRc 2 14.83, P < 0.001). Between years 5 and 15, we observed an absolute risk of distant recurrence of 2.4% in the low ROR-based risk group, as compared with 17.5% in the high ROR-based risk group. The DRFS differences according to the PAM50 ROR score were observed for both node-positive and node-negative disease. Conclusion: PAM50 ROR score and ROR-based risk groups can differentiate patients with breast cancer with respect to their risk for late distant recurrence beyond what can be achieved with established clinicopathologic risk factors. Clin Cancer Res; 20(5); 1298-305. Ó2014 AACR.

The prospective phase III trial ABCSG-28 (POSYTIVE) could not demonstrate an OS benefit for surgical resection of the primary in breast cancer patients presenting with de novo stage IV disease.

Triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs) are defined as tumors that are negative for estrogen, progesterone and HER-2 receptor. At a percentage of 10-20% TNBCs represent a minority in all breast cancers. However, because of the poor prognosis this particular subtype, triple negative disease accounts for a disproportionate number of metastatic cases and breast cancer deaths. Identification of its subtypes is essential for understanding the biological characteristics and clinical behavior of TNBC, as well as for developing personalized treatments. This review will focus on the great progress that has been made in the past few years on identifying new targets in TNBC subtypes and a variety of new treatment options that are on the verge of routine clinical application.

Background About 50% of all primary breast cancers show a low-level expression of HER2 (HER2-low), defined as immunohistochemically 1+ or 2+ and lack of HER2 gene amplification measured by in situ hybridization. This low HER2 expression is a promising new target for antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) currently under investigation. Until now, little is known about the frequency and the prognostic value of low HER2-expression in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients and methods The MBC-Registry of the Austrian Study Group of Medical Tumor Therapy (AGMT) is a multicenter nationwide ongoing registry for MBC patients in Austria. Unadjusted, univariate survival probabilities of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by the log-rank test. Multivariable adjusted hazard ratios were estimated by Cox regression models. In this analysis, only patients with known HER2 status and available survival data were included. Results As of 11/15/2020, 1,973 patients were included in the AGMT-MBC-Registry. Out of 1,729 evaluable patients, 351 (20.3%) were HER2-positive, 608 (35.2%) were HER2-low and 770 (44.5%) were completely HER2-negative (HER2-0). Low HER2-expression was markedly more frequent in the hormone-receptor(HR)+ subgroup compared to the triple-negative subgroup (40% vs. 23%). In multivariable analysis, low HER2 expression did not significantly influence OS neither in the HR+ (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.74–1.05; P = 0.171) nor in the triple-negative subgroup (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.68–1.25; P = 0.585), when compared to completely HER2-negative disease. Similar results were observed when HER2 IHC 2+ patients were compared to IHC 1+ or 0 patients. Conclusion Low-HER2 expression did not have any impact on prognosis of metastatic breast cancer in this real-world population.