CRD42018080042.

The prognosis of patients with early stage breast cancer has greatly improved in the past three decades. Following the first adjuvant endocrine therapy and chemotherapy trials, continuous improvements of clinical outcomes have been achieved through intense therapeutic escalation, albeit with increased health-care costs and treatment-related toxicities. In contrast to the advances achieved in surgery or radiotherapy, the identification of the patient subgroups that will derive clinical benefit from therapeutic escalation has proved to be a daunting process hindered by a lack of collaboration between scientific groups and by the pace of drug development. In the past few decades, initiatives towards de-escalation of systemic adjuvant treatment have achieved success. Herein, we summarize attempts to escalate and de-escalate adjuvant systemic treatment for patients with breast cancer and argue that new, creative trial designs focused on patients' actual needs rather than on maximizing drug market size are needed. Ultimately, the adoption of effective treatments that do not needlessly expose patients and health-care systems to harm demands extensive international collaboration between academic groups, governments, and pharmaceutical companies.

No abstract

Over the past 20 years, the prognosis of HER2-positive breast cancer has been transformed by the development of anti-HER2 targeted therapies. In early clinical trials of trastuzumab (ie, the first anti-HER2 agent to be developed) cardiotoxicity became a major concern. In the first published phase 3 trial of trastuzumab, 27% of patients receiving anthracyclines and trastuzumab experienced cardiac events and 16% suffered from severe congestive heart failure. In subsequent trials conducted in advanced and early settings, the incidence of cardiac events was reduced through changes in chemotherapy regimens, more strict patient selection and close cardiac assessment. However, cardiotoxicity remains a significant problem in clinical practice that is likely to increase as new agents are approved and exposure times increase through improved patients' survival. Though numerous trials have led to improved understanding of many aspects of anti-HER2 therapy-related cardiotoxicity, its underlying physiopathology mechanisms are not well understood. The purpose of this article is to provide an in-depth review on anti-HER2 therapy-related cardiotoxicity, including data on both trastuzumab and the recently developed anti-HER2 targeted agents.

No abstract

Recently, phase I studies with novel antibody drug conjugates targeting HER2 suggested benefit in HER2-low patients -defined as immunohistochemistry(IHC) +1 or +2 FISH/ISH non-amplified, with advanced breast cancer(BC). Data on the prognostic value of HER2-low in early stage disease is scarce. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of HER2-low status on response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy(NACT) and survival outcomes in early stage HER2negative BC. MethodsRecords from all BC patients treated with NACT from January 2007 to December 2018 in a single cancer center were retrospectively reviewed. Primary objective was to compare differences between pathologic complete response(pCR) and relapse free survival(RFS) in luminal HER2-low/HER2-0 and triple negative(TNBC) HER2-low/HER2-0. Results855 non-HER2-positive patients were identified. Median follow-up was 59 months. 542 had luminal BC (63.4%) and 313 TNBC (36.6%). 285 (33.3%) were HER2-low. Among luminal tumors, 145 had HER2 IHC+1 (26.8%) and 91 IHC+2/ISH non-amplified (16.8%). In TNBC, only 36 had HER2 IHC+1 (11.5%) and 13 IHC+2/ISH non-amplified (4.2%). Among luminal/HER2-low and luminal/HER2-0 population, there was a high proportion of clinical T3/4 (61.5% vs 69.2%, p=0.053), node positive (74.2% vs 66.3%, p=0.27) and stage III tumors (63.1% vs 65%, p=0.51). The same was true TNBC/HER-low as compared to TNBC/HER2-0, despite a non-statistically significant higher cT4 among TNBC/HER-low (32.7% vs. 19.3%, p=0.17). pCR was 13% in luminal/HER2-low versus 9.5% in luminal/HER2-0 (p=0.27), and 51% in TNBC/HER2-low versus 47% in TNBC/HER2-0 (p=0.64). 5y RFS was 72.1% in luminal/HER2-low and 71.7% in luminal/HER2-0 (p=0.47), and 75.6% in TNBC/HER2-low versus 70.8% in TNBC/HER2-0 (p=0.23). HER2-low status was not associated with RFS in multivariate analysis (HR 0.83, 95%CI 0.6-1.11, p=0.21). ConclusionOur data does not support HER2-low as a biologically distinct BC subtype, with no predictive effect on pCR after NACT nor prognostic value on survival outcomes.

No abstract

No abstract