Chemotherapy for isolated locoregional recurrence of breast cancer (CALOR): a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND Patients with isolated locoregional recurrences (ILRR) of breast cancer have a high risk of distant metastasis and death from breast cancer. We aimed to establish whether adjuvant chemotherapy improves the outcome of such patients. METHODS The CALOR trial was a pragmatic, open-label, randomised trial that accrued patients with histologically proven and completely excised ILRR after unilateral breast cancer who had undergone a mastectomy or lumpectomy with clear surgical margins. Eligible patients were enrolled from hospitals worldwide and were centrally randomised (1:1) to chemotherapy (type selected by the investigator; multidrug for at least four courses recommended) or no chemotherapy, using permuted blocks, and stratified by previous chemotherapy, oestrogen-receptor and progesterone-receptor status, and location of ILRR. Patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive ILRR received adjuvant endocrine therapy, radiation therapy was mandated for patients with microscopically involved surgical margins, and anti-HER2 therapy was optional. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. All analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00074152. FINDINGS From Aug 22, 2003, to Jan 31, 2010, 85 patients were randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy and 77 were assigned to no chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 4·9 years (IQR 3·6-6 ·0), 24 (28%) patients had disease-free survival events in the chemotherapy group compared with 34 (44%) in the no chemotherapy group. 5-year disease-free survival was 69% (95% CI 56-79) with chemotherapy versus 57% (44-67) without chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0·59 [95% CI 0·35-0·99]; p=0·046). Adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly more effective for women with oestrogen-receptor-negative ILRR (pinteraction=0·046), but analyses of disease-free survival according to the oestrogen-receptor status of the primary tumour were not statistically significant (pinteraction=0·43). Of the 81 patients who received chemotherapy, 12 (15%) had serious adverse events. The most common adverse events were neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and intestinal infection. INTERPRETATION Adjuvant chemotherapy should be recommended for patients with completely resected ILRR of breast cancer, especially if the recurrence is oestrogen-receptor negative. FUNDING US Department of Health and Human Services, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK), Frontier Science and Technology Research Foundation, Australian and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Swedish Cancer Society, Oncosuisse, Cancer Association of South Africa, Foundation for Clinical Research of Eastern Switzerland (OSKK), Grupo Español de Investigación en Cáncer de Mama (GEICAM), and the Dutch Breast Cancer Trialists' Group (BOOG).

Accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial brachytherapy as second conservative treatment for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence: multicentric study of the GEC-ESTRO Breast Cancer Working Group

PURPOSE To analyse the clinical outcome after salvage lumpectomy and multi-catheter brachytherapy (MCB) for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR). MATERIAL AND METHODS Between 09/00 and 09/10, 217 patients presenting an IBTR underwent lumpectomy and MCB (low, pulsed, or high-dose rate). Survival rates without second local recurrence (2nd LR), distant metastasis (DM), and overall survival (OS) were analysed as well as late effects and cosmetic results. Univariate and multivariate analyses (MVA) based on IBTR data were performed to find prognostic factors for 2nd LR, DM, and OS. RESULTS Median follow-up after the IBTR was 3.9 years [range: 1.1-10.3]. Five and 10-year actuarial 2nd LR rates were 5.6% [range: 1.5-9.5] and 7.2% [range: 2.1-12.1], respectively. Five and 10-year actuarial DM rates were 9.6% [range: 5.7-15.2] and 19.1% [range: 7.8-28.3], respectively. Five and 10-year actuarial OS rates were 88.7% [range: 83.1-94.8] and 76.4% [range: 66.9-87.3], respectively. In MVA, histological grade was prognostic factor for 2nd LR (p=0.008) and OS (p=0.02); while tumour size was prognostic factor for DM (p=0.03). G3-4 complication rate was 11%. Excellent/good cosmetic result was achieved in 85%. CONCLUSION This study suggests that in case of IBTR, lumpectomy plus MCB is feasible and effective in preventing 2nd LR with an OS rate at least equivalent to those achieved with salvage mastectomy.

Adjuvant treatment of premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer: design of the TEXT and SOFT trials

OBJECTIVES In 2003 the International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) initiated the TEXT and SOFT randomized phase III trials to answer two questions concerning adjuvant treatment for premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer: 1-What is the role of aromatase inhibitors (AI) for women treated with ovarian function suppression (OFS)? 2-What is the role of OFS for women who remain premenopausal and are treated with tamoxifen? METHODS TEXT randomized patients to receive exemestane or tamoxifen with OFS. SOFT randomized patients to receive exemestane with OFS, tamoxifen with OFS, or tamoxifen alone. Treatment was for 5 years from randomization. RESULTS TEXT and SOFT successfully met their enrollment goals in 2011. The 5738 enrolled women had lower-risk disease and lower observed disease-free survival (DFS) event rates than anticipated. Consequently, 7 and 13 additional years of follow-up for TEXT and SOFT, respectively, were required to reach the targeted DFS events (median follow-up about 10.5 and 15 years). To provide timely answers, protocol amendments in 2011 specified analyses based on chronological time and median follow-up. To assess the AI question, exemestane + OFS versus tamoxifen + OFS, a combined analysis of TEXT and SOFT became the primary analysis (n = 4717). The OFS question became the primary analysis from SOFT, assessing the unique comparison of tamoxifen + OFS versus tamoxifen alone (n = 2045). The first reports are anticipated in mid- and late-2014. CONCLUSIONS We present the original designs of TEXT and SOFT and adaptations to ensure timely answers to two questions concerning optimal adjuvant endocrine treatment for premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer. Trial Registration TEXT: Clinicaltrials.govNCT00066703 SOFT: Clinicaltrials.govNCT00066690.

Adjuvant pegylated liposomal doxorubicin for older women with endocrine nonresponsive breast cancer who are NOT suitable for a "standard chemotherapy regimen": the CASA randomized trial

There is no optimal treatment for breast cancers lacking estrogen (ER) and progesterone (PgR) receptors in elderly women with co-morbidities that prevent use of "standard chemotherapy regimens" such as AC or CMF. The CASA trial studied pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) and low dose, metronomic cyclophosphamide + methotrexate (CM) for older (>65), vulnerable women with operable, ER and PgR-negative breast cancer. After two years the trial closed early, due to slow and inadequate accrual, with 77 patients (38:PLD, 36:CM, 3:nil). Sixty-eight percent completed PLD; 83% completed CM (both 16 weeks). Patients on PLD reported worse quality of life, cognitive and physical functioning than non-PLD regimens (primarily CM). At a median follow-up of 42 months, 81% of randomized patients remained free of any breast cancer recurrence. Based on our limited experience, PLD and CM may be reasonable options for further study for elderly vulnerable patients with endocrine nonresponsive breast cancer.

Exemestane Versus Anastrozole in Postmenopausal Women With Early Breast Cancer: NCIC CTG MA.27—A Randomized Controlled Phase III Trial

PURPOSE In patients with hormone-dependent postmenopausal breast cancer, standard adjuvant therapy involves 5 years of the nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors anastrozole and letrozole. The steroidal inhibitor exemestane is partially non-cross-resistant with nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors and is a mild androgen and could prove superior to anastrozole regarding efficacy and toxicity, specifically with less bone loss. PATIENTS AND METHODS We designed an open-label, randomized, phase III trial of 5 years of exemestane versus anastrozole with a two-sided test of superiority to detect a 2.4% improvement with exemestane in 5-year event-free survival (EFS). Secondary objectives included assessment of overall survival, distant disease-free survival, incidence of contralateral new primary breast cancer, and safety. RESULTS In the study, 7,576 women (median age, 64.1 years) were enrolled. At median follow-up of 4.1 years, 4-year EFS was 91% for exemestane and 91.2% for anastrozole (stratified hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.18; P = .85). Overall, distant disease-free survival and disease-specific survival were also similar. In all, 31.6% of patients discontinued treatment as a result of adverse effects, concomitant disease, or study refusal. Osteoporosis/osteopenia, hypertriglyceridemia, vaginal bleeding, and hypercholesterolemia were less frequent on exemestane, whereas mild liver function abnormalities and rare episodes of atrial fibrillation were less frequent on anastrozole. Vasomotor and musculoskeletal symptoms were similar between arms. CONCLUSION This first comparison of steroidal and nonsteroidal classes of aromatase inhibitors showed neither to be superior in terms of breast cancer outcomes as 5-year initial adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal breast cancer by two-way test. Less toxicity on bone is compatible with one hypothesis behind MA.27 but requires confirmation. Exemestane should be considered another option as up-front adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Trastuzumab treatment beyond progression in advanced breast cancer: patterns of care in six Swiss breast cancer centers.

BACKGROUND Trastuzumab is an established treatment for HER2-positive breast cancer (BC). We analyzed Swiss patterns of care in patients with HER2-positive BC after disease progression on trastuzumab-containing therapy for metastatic BC (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS A retrospective analysis was performed in six Swiss BC centers. Patients with HER2-positive MBC treated with at least one infusion of trastuzumab for advanced disease between January 2006 and December 2007 were identified. Treatment patterns in first and further lines were analyzed. RESULTS All of the 72 identified patients received trastuzumab as their first palliative anti-HER2 therapy, either as monotherapy (n = 23) or in combination with chemotherapy (typically taxane or vinorelbine; n = 49). Median time to progression was 8.1, 8.0 and 7.9 months in the monotherapy, trastuzumab-taxane and trastuzumab-vinorelbine cohorts, respectively. After progression on first-line anti-HER2 therapy, trastuzumab was continued in 67 of 68 patients who received further therapy. One patient received second-line lapatinib plus capecitabine. The median duration of anti-HER2 therapy was 20 months. Patients received a median of 4 lines of anti-HER2 therapy. CONCLUSIONS Durable responses were achieved with repeated exposure to anti-HER2 therapy. In a selected patient population, trastuzumab monotherapy appears to be a reasonable first-line treatment option.

2 years versus 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer (HERA): an open-label, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Trastuzumab has established efficacy against breast cancer with overexpression or amplification of the HER2 oncogene. The standard of care is 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab, but the optimum duration of treatment is unknown. We compared 2 years of treatment with trastuzumab with 1 year of treatment, and updated the comparison of 1 year of trastuzumab versus observation at a median follow-up of 8 years, for patients enrolled in the HERceptin Adjuvant (HERA) trial. METHODS The HERA trial is an international, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial comparing treatment with trastuzumab for 1 and 2 years with observation after standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy, or both in 5102 patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. The comparison of 2 years versus 1 year of trastuzumab treatment involved a landmark analysis of 3105 patients who were disease-free 12 months after randomisation to one of the trastuzumab groups, and was planned after observing at least 725 disease-free survival events. The updated intention-to-treat comparison of 1 year trastuzumab treatment versus observation alone in 3399 patients at a median follow-up of 8 years (range 0-10) is also reported. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00045032. FINDINGS We recorded 367 events of disease-free survival in 1552 patients in the 1 year group and 367 events in 1553 patients in the 2 year group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·99, 95% CI 0·85-1·14, p=0·86). Grade 3-4 adverse events and decreases in left ventricular ejection fraction during treatment were reported more frequently in the 2 year treatment group than in the 1 year group (342 [20·4%] vs 275 [16·3%] grade 3-4 adverse events, and 120 [7·2%] vs 69 [4·1%] decreases in left ventricular ejection fraction, respectively). HRs for a comparison of 1 year of trastuzumab treatment versus observation were 0·76 (95% CI 0·67-0·86, p<0·0001) for disease-free survival and 0·76 (0·65-0·88, p=0·0005) for overall survival, despite crossover of 884 (52%) patients from the observation group to trastuzumab therapy. INTERPRETATION 2 years of adjuvant trastuzumab is not more effective than is 1 year of treatment for patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. 1 year of treatment provides a significant disease-free and overall survival benefit compared with observation and remains the standard of care. FUNDING F Hoffmann-La Roche (Roche).

Adjuvant bevacizumab-containing therapy in triple-negative breast cancer (BEATRICE): primary results of a randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy improves progression-free survival in metastatic breast cancer and pathological complete response rates in the neoadjuvant setting. Micrometastases are dependent on angiogenesis, suggesting that patients might benefit from anti-angiogenic strategies in the adjuvant setting. We therefore assessed the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting for women with triple-negative breast cancer. METHODS For this open-label, randomised phase 3 trial we recruited patients with centrally confirmed triple-negative operable primary invasive breast cancer from 360 sites in 37 countries. We randomly allocated patients aged 18 years or older (1:1 with block randomisation; stratified by nodal status, chemotherapy [with an anthracycline, taxane, or both], hormone receptor status [negative vs low], and type of surgery) to receive a minimum of four cycles of chemotherapy either alone or with bevacizumab (equivalent of 5 mg/kg every week for 1 year). The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). Efficacy analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population, safety analyses were done on all patients who received at least one dose of study drug, and plasma biomarker analyses were done on all treated patients consenting to biomarker analyses and providing a measurable baseline plasma sample. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00528567. FINDINGS Between Dec 3, 2007, and March 8, 2010, we randomly assigned 1290 patients to receive chemotherapy alone and 1301 to receive bevacizumab plus chemotherapy. Most patients received anthracycline-containing therapy; 1638 (63%) of the 2591 patients had node-negative disease. At the time of analysis of IDFS, median follow-up was 31·5 months (IQR 25·6-36·8) in the chemotherapy-alone group and 32·0 months (27·5-36·9) in the bevacizumab group. At the time of the primary analysis, IDFS events had been reported in 205 patients (16%) in the chemotherapy-alone group and in 188 patients (14%) in the bevacizumab group (hazard ratio [HR] in stratified log-rank analysis 0·87, 95% CI 0·72-1·07; p=0·18). 3-year IDFS was 82·7% (95% CI 80·5-85·0) with chemotherapy alone and 83·7% (81·4-86·0) with bevacizumab and chemotherapy. After 200 deaths, no difference in overall survival was noted between the groups (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·64-1·12; p=0·23). Exploratory biomarker assessment suggests that patients with high pre-treatment plasma VEGFR-2 might benefit from the addition of bevacizumab (Cox interaction test p=0·029). Use of bevacizumab versus chemotherapy alone was associated with increased incidences of grade 3 or worse hypertension (154 patients [12%] vs eight patients [1%]), severe cardiac events occurring at any point during the 18-month safety reporting period (19 [1%] vs two [<0·5%]), and treatment discontinuation (bevacizumab, chemotherapy, or both; 256 [20%] vs 30 [2%]); we recorded no increase in fatal adverse events with bevacizumab (four [<0·5%] vs three [<0·5%]). INTERPRETATION Bevacizumab cannot be recommended as adjuvant treatment in unselected patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Further follow-up is needed to assess the potential effect of bevacizumab on overall survival.

Lung cancer screening with CT: evaluation of radiologists and different computer assisted detection software (CAD) as first and second readers for lung nodule detection at different dose levels

OBJECTIVES To find the best pairing of first and second reader at highest sensitivity for detecting lung nodules with CT at various dose levels. MATERIALS AND METHODS An anthropomorphic lung phantom and artificial lung nodules were used to simulate screening CT-examination at standard dose (100 mAs, 120 kVp) and 8 different low dose levels, using 120, 100 and 80 kVp combined with 100, 50 and 25 mAs. At each dose level 40 phantoms were randomly filled with 75 solid and 25 ground glass nodules (5-12 mm). Two radiologists and 3 different computer aided detection softwares (CAD) were paired to find the highest sensitivity. RESULTS Sensitivities at standard dose were 92%, 90%, 84%, 79% and 73% for reader 1, 2, CAD1, CAD2, CAD3, respectively. Combined sensitivity for human readers 1 and 2 improved to 97%, (p1=0.063, p2=0.016). Highest sensitivities--between 97% and 99.0%--were achieved by combining any radiologist with any CAD at any dose level. Combining any two CADs, sensitivities between 85% and 88% were significantly lower than for radiologists combined with CAD (p<0.03). CONCLUSIONS Combination of a human observer with any of the tested CAD systems provide optimal sensitivity for lung nodule detection even at reduced dose at 25 mAs/80 kVp.

A critical evaluation of secondary cancer risk models applied to Monte Carlo dose distributions of 2-dimensional, 3-dimensional conformal and hybrid intensity-modulated radiation therapy for breast cancer

The comparison of radiotherapy techniques regarding secondary cancer risk has yielded contradictory results possibly stemming from the many different approaches used to estimate risk. The purpose of this study was to make a comprehensive evaluation of different available risk models applied to detailed whole-body dose distributions computed by Monte Carlo for various breast radiotherapy techniques including conventional open tangents, 3D conformal wedged tangents and hybrid intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). First, organ-specific linear risk models developed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) and the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) VII committee were applied to mean doses for remote organs only and all solid organs. Then, different general non-linear risk models were applied to the whole body dose distribution. Finally, organ-specific non-linear risk models for the lung and breast were used to assess the secondary cancer risk for these two specific organs. A total of 32 different calculated absolute risks resulted in a broad range of values (between 0.1% and 48.5%) underlying the large uncertainties in absolute risk calculation. The ratio of risk between two techniques has often been proposed as a more robust assessment of risk than the absolute risk. We found that the ratio of risk between two techniques could also vary substantially considering the different approaches to risk estimation. Sometimes the ratio of risk between two techniques would range between values smaller and larger than one, which then translates into inconsistent results on the potential higher risk of one technique compared to another. We found however that the hybrid IMRT technique resulted in a systematic reduction of risk compared to the other techniques investigated even though the magnitude of this reduction varied substantially with the different approaches investigated. Based on the epidemiological data available, a reasonable approach to risk estimation would be to use organ-specific non-linear risk models applied to the dose distributions of organs within or near the treatment fields (lungs and contralateral breast in the case of breast radiotherapy) as the majority of radiation-induced secondary cancers are found in the beam-bordering regions.