ABSTRACT:Introduction: Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) has been reported in patients treated with bisphosphonates. The incidence and risk factors associated with this disorder have not been clearly defined. Materials and Methods:We conducted a retrospective analysis of 4019 patients treated with intravenous bisphosphonates between 1996 and 2004. Our goals were to estimate the frequency, understand the clinical presentation, and identify risk factors associated with ONJ development. Results: Sixteen of 1338 patients with breast cancer (1.2%) and 13 of 548 patients with multiple myeloma (2.4%) developed ONJ. The median dose and duration of treatment with pamidronate or zoledronic acid were significantly higher in patients with ONJ (p < 0.0001). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis identified treatment with zoledronic acid (hazards ratio [HR], 15.01; 95% CI: 2.41-93.48; p ‫ס‬ 0.0037), treatment with pamidronate followed by zoledronic acid (HR, 4.00; 95% CI: 0.86-18.70; p = 0.078), and dental extractions (HR, 53.19; 95% CI: 18.20-155.46; p < 0.0001) as significant risks for ONJ in breast cancer. In multiple myeloma, dental extractions (HR, 9.78; 95% CI: 3.07-31.14; p ‫ס‬ 0.0001) and osteoporosis (HR, 6.11; 95% CI: 1.56-23.98; p ‫ס‬ 0.0095) were significant risk factors while controlling for bisphosphonate therapy. Thirteen of 29 patients were followed for a median of 17.1 mo (range, 7-67 mo); lesions healed in 3 patients during this period. Conclusions: ONJ is an uncommon but long-lasting disorder that occurs mainly in breast cancer and multiple myeloma patients treated with intravenous bisphosphonates. High cumulative doses of bisphosphonates, poor oral health, and dental extractions may be significant risk factors for ONJ development. ONJ resolved in 23% of patients with conservative therapy.

PURPOSE Many patients with HR+, HER2− early breast cancer (EBC) will not experience recurrence or have distant recurrence with currently available standard therapies. However, up to 30% of patients with high-risk clinical and/or pathologic features may experience distant recurrence, many in the first few years. Superior treatment options are needed to prevent early recurrence and development of metastases for this group of patients. Abemaciclib is an oral, continuously dosed, CDK4/6 inhibitor approved for HR+, HER2− advanced breast cancer (ABC). Efficacy and safety of abemaciclib in ABC supported evaluation in the adjuvant setting. METHODS This open-label, phase III study included patients with HR+, HER2−, high-risk EBC, who had surgery and, as indicated, radiotherapy and/or adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with four or more positive nodes, or one to three nodes and either tumor size ≥ 5 cm, histologic grade 3, or central Ki-67 ≥ 20%, were eligible and randomly assigned (1:1) to standard-of-care adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) with or without abemaciclib (150 mg twice daily for 2 years). The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS), and secondary end points included distant relapse–free survival, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS At a preplanned efficacy interim analysis, among 5,637 randomly assigned patients, 323 IDFS events were observed in the intent-to-treat population. Abemaciclib plus ET demonstrated superior IDFS versus ET alone ( P = .01; hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.93), with 2-year IDFS rates of 92.2% versus 88.7%, respectively. Safety data were consistent with the known safety profile of abemaciclib. CONCLUSION Abemaciclib when combined with ET is the first CDK4/6 inhibitor to demonstrate a significant improvement in IDFS in patients with HR+, HER2− node-positive EBC at high risk of early recurrence.

pCR is associated with better outcome regardless of HR status in breast cancer patients who receive PC.

Background Approximately one-fi h of women who develop early breast cancer have HER2-positive tumours, which if untreated, have a worse prognosis than HER2-negative tumours. Trastuzumab is a selective treatment targeting the HER2 pathway. Although the results on e icacy seem to support its use, there are potential cardiac toxicities which need to be considered, especially for women at lower risk of recurrence, or those at increased cardiovascular risk. Objectives To assess the evidence on the e icacy and safety of therapy with trastuzumab, overall and in relation to its duration, concurrent or sequential administration with the standard chemotherapy regimen in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's (CBCGs) Specialised Trials Register, and used the search strategy developed by the CBCG to search for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, TOXNET, and the WHO ICTRP search portal (up to February 2010). Selection criteria RCTs comparing the e icacy and safety of trastuzumab alone, or in combination with chemotherapy, or no treatment, or standard chemotherapy alone, in women with HER2-positive early breast cancer including women with locally advanced breast cancer. Data collection and analysis We collected data from published and unpublished trials. We used hazard ratios (HRs) for time-to-event outcomes and risk ratio (RRs) for binary outcomes. Subgroup analyses included duration (less or greater than six months) and concurrent or sequential trastuzumab administration. Main results We included eight studies involving 11,991 patients. The combined HRs for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) significantly favoured the trastuzumab-containing regimens

The primary end point of the study was met, with a relative increase of 80% in the pCR rate achieved with chemotherapy plus trastuzumab and lapatinib compared with chemotherapy plus either trastuzumab or lapatinib. These data add further evidence supporting the superiority of a dual-HER2 inhibition for the treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer.

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.

The risk of cardiac toxicity of long-term trastuzumab-based therapy is acceptable in this population, and this toxicity is reversible in the majority of the patients. In patients who have experienced a CE, additional treatment with trastuzumab can be considered after recovery of cardiac function.

Ixabepilone (40 mg/m(2) as a 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks) demonstrates promising antitumor activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with taxane-resistant MBC.