Summary Background In the primary analysis of the NeoSphere trial, patients given neoadjuvant pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel showed a significantly improved pathological complete response ...compared with those given trastuzumab and docetaxel after surgery. Here, we report 5-year progression-free survival, disease-free survival, and safety. Methods In this multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised trial in hospitals and medical clinics, treatment-naive adults with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive four neoadjuvant cycles of trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose, followed by 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) plus docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks, increasing to 100 mg/m2 from cycle 2 if tolerated; group A), pertuzumab (840 mg loading dose, followed by 420 mg every 3 weeks) and trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group B), pertuzumab and trastuzumab (group C), or pertuzumab and docetaxel (group D). After surgery, patients received three cycles of FEC (fluorouracil 600 mg/m2 , epirubicin 90 mg/m2 , and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 ) every 3 weeks (patients in group C received four cycles of docetaxel prior to FEC), and trastuzumab 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks to complete 1 year's treatment (17 cycles in total). Randomisation was done by a central centre using dynamic allocation, stratified by operable, locally advanced, and inflammatory breast cancer, and by oestrogen and/or progesterone receptor positivity. Safety analyses were done according to treatment received. The primary endpoint (pathological complete response) was previously reported; secondary endpoints reported here are 5-year progression-free survival (analysed in the intention-to-treat population) and disease-free survival (analysed in patients who had surgery). Secondary and exploratory analyses were not powered for formal statistical hypothesis testing, and therefore results are for descriptive purposes only. The study ended on Sept 22, 2014 (last patient, last visit). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00545688. Findings Between Dec 17, 2007, and Dec 22, 2009, 417 eligible patients were randomly assigned to group A (107 patients), group B (107 patients), group C (107 patients), or group D (96 patients). One patient in group A withdrew before treatment. One patient assigned to group D received group A treatment, one patient assigned to group D received group B treatment, and one patient assigned to group B received group C treatment. At clinical cutoff, 87 patients had progressed or died. 5-year progression-free survival rates were 81% (95% CI 71–87) for group A, 86% (77–91) for group B, 73% (64–81) for group C, and 73% (63–81) for group D (hazard ratios 0·69 95% CI 0·34–1·40 group B vs group A, 1·25 0·68–2·30 group C vs group A, and 2·05 1·07–3·93 group D vs group B). Disease-free survival results were consistent with progression-free survival results and were 81% (95% CI 72–88) for group A, 84% (72–91) for group B, 80% (70–86) for group C, and 75% (64–83) for group D. Patients who achieved total pathological complete response (all groups combined) had longer progression-free survival compared with patients who did not (85% 76–91 in patients who achieved total pathological response vs 76% 71–81 in patients who did not achieve total pathological response; hazard ratio 0·54 95% CI 0·29–1·00). There were no new or long-term safety concerns and tolerability was similar across groups (neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment periods combined). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (group A: 71 66% of 107 patients; group B: 59 55% of 107; group C: 40 37% of 108; group D: 60 64% of 94), febrile neutropenia (group A: 10 9%; group B: 12 11%; group C: 5 5%; group D: 15 16%), and leucopenia (group A: 13 12%; group B: 6 6%; group C: 4 4%; group D: 8 9%). The number of patients with one or more serious adverse event was similar across groups (19–22 serious adverse events per group in 18–22% of patients). Interpretation Progression-free survival and disease-free survival at 5-year follow-up show large and overlapping CIs, but support the primary endpoint (pathological complete response) and suggest that neoadjuvant pertuzumab is beneficial when combined with trastuzumab and docetaxel. Additionally, they suggest that total pathological complete response could be an early indicator of long-term outcome in early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche.
Summary Background Studies with pertuzumab, a novel anti-HER2 antibody, show improved efficacy when combined with the established HER2-directed antibody trastuzumab in breast cancer therapy. We ...investigated the combination of pertuzumab or trastuzumab, or both, with docetaxel and the combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab without chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting. Methods In this multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study, treatment-naive women with HER2-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) centrally and stratified by operable, locally advanced, and inflammatory breast cancer, and by hormone receptor expression to receive four neoadjuvant cycles of: trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose, followed by 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) plus docetaxel (75 mg/m2 , escalating, if tolerated, to 100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks; group A) or pertuzumab (loading dose 840 mg, followed by 420 mg every 3 weeks) and trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group B) or pertuzumab and trastuzumab (group C) or pertuzumab plus docetaxel (group D). The primary endpoint, examined in the intention-to-treat population, was pathological complete response in the breast. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00545688. Findings Of 417 eligible patients, 107 were randomly assigned to group A, 107 to group B, 107 to group C, and 96 to group D. Patients given pertuzumab and trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group B) had a significantly improved pathological complete response rate (49 of 107 patients; 45·8% 95% CI 36·1–55·7) compared with those given trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group A; 31 of 107; 29·0% 20·6–38·5; p=0·0141). 23 of 96 (24·0% 15·8–33·7) women given pertuzumab plus docetaxel (group D) had a pathological complete response, as did 18 of 107 (16·8% 10·3–25·3) given pertuzumab and trastuzumab (group C). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or higher were neutropenia (61 of 107 women in group A, 48 of 107 in group B, one of 108 in group C, and 52 of 94 in group D), febrile neutropenia (eight, nine, none, and seven, respectively), and leucopenia (13, five, none, and seven, respectively). The number of serious adverse events was similar in groups A, B, and D (15–20 serious adverse events per group in 10–17% of patients) but lower in group C (four serious adverse events in 4% of patients). Interpretation Patients given pertuzumab and trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group B) had a significantly improved pathological complete response rate compared with those given trastuzumab plus docetaxel, without substantial differences in tolerability. Pertuzumab and trastuzumab without chemotherapy eradicated tumours in a proportion of women and showed a favourable safety profile. These findings justify further exploration in adjuvant trials and support the neoadjuvant approach for accelerating drug assessment in early breast cancer. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche.
Summary 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. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche.
Summary Background Bevacizumab improves the efficacy of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer. Our aim was to assess the use of bevacizumab in combination with ...oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in the adjuvant treatment of patients with resected stage III or high-risk stage II colon carcinoma. Methods Patients from 330 centres in 34 countries were enrolled into this phase 3, open-label randomised trial. Patients with curatively resected stage III or high-risk stage II colon carcinoma were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive FOLFOX4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 , leucovorin 200 mg/m2 , and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus plus 600 mg/m2 22-h continuous infusion on day 1; leucovorin 200 mg/m2 plus fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus plus 600 mg/m2 22-h continuous infusion on day 2) every 2 weeks for 12 cycles; bevacizumab 5 mg/kg plus FOLFOX4 (every 2 weeks for 12 cycles) followed by bevacizumab monotherapy 7·5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (eight cycles over 24 weeks); or bevacizumab 7·5 mg/kg plus XELOX (oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1 every 2 weeks plus oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1–15) every 3 weeks for eight cycles followed by bevacizumab monotherapy 7·5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (eight cycles over 24 weeks). Block randomisation was done with a central interactive computerised system, stratified by geographic region and disease stage. Surgery with curative intent occurred 4–8 weeks before randomisation. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival, analysed for all randomised patients with stage III disease. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00112918. Findings Of the total intention-to-treat population (n=3451), 2867 patients had stage III disease, of whom 955 were randomly assigned to receive FOLFOX4, 960 to receive bevacizumab–FOLFOX4, and 952 to receive bevacizumab–XELOX. After a median follow-up of 48 months (range 0–66 months), 237 patients (25%) in the FOLFOX4 group, 280 (29%) in the bevacizumab–FOLFOX4 group, and 253 (27%) in the bevacizumab–XELOX group had relapsed, developed a new colon cancer, or died. The disease-free survival hazard ratio for bevacizumab–FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 was 1·17 (95% CI 0·98–1·39; p=0·07), and for bevacizumab–XELOX versus FOLFOX4 was 1·07 (0·90–1·28; p=0·44). After a minimum follow-up of 60 months, the overall survival hazard ratio for bevacizumab–FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 was 1·27 (1·03–1·57; p=0·02), and for bevacizumab–XELOX versus FOLFOX4 was 1·15 (0·93–1·42; p=0·21). The 573 patients with high-risk stage II cancer were included in the safety analysis. The most common grade 3–5 adverse events were neutropenia (FOLFOX4: 477 42% of 1126 patients, bevacizumab-FOLFOX4: 416 36% of 1145 patients, and bevacizumab–XELOX: 74 7% of 1135 patients), diarrhoea (110 10%, 135 12%, and 181 16%, respectively), and hypertension (12 1%, 122 11%, and 116 10%, respectively). Serious adverse events were more common in the bevacizumab groups (bevacizumab–FOLFOX4: 297 26%; bevacizumab–XELOX: 284 25%) than in the FOLFOX4 group (226 20%). Treatment-related deaths were reported in one patient receiving FOLFOX4, two receiving bevacizumab–FOLFOX4, and five receiving bevacizumab–XELOX. Interpretation Bevacizumab does not prolong disease-free survival when added to adjuvant chemotherapy in resected stage III colon cancer. Overall survival data suggest a potential detrimental effect with bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based adjuvant therapy in these patients. On the basis of these and other data, we do not recommend the use of bevacizumab in the adjuvant treatment of patients with curatively resected stage III colon cancer. Funding Genentech, Roche, and Chugai.
Summary Background In the PALOMA-3 study, the combination of the CDK4 and CDK6 inhibitor palbociclib and fulvestrant was associated with significant improvements in progression-free survival compared ...with fulvestrant plus placebo in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Identification of patients most suitable for the addition of palbociclib to endocrine therapy after tumour recurrence is crucial for treatment optimisation in metastatic breast cancer. We aimed to confirm our earlier findings with this extended follow-up and show our results for subgroup and biomarker analyses. Methods In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 study, women aged 18 years or older with hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer that had progressed on previous endocrine therapy were stratified by sensitivity to previous hormonal therapy, menopausal status, and presence of visceral metastasis at 144 centres in 17 countries. Eligible patients—ie, any menopausal status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0–1, measurable disease or bone disease only, and disease relapse or progression after previous endocrine therapy for advanced disease during treatment or within 12 months of completion of adjuvant therapy—were randomly assigned (2:1) via a centralised interactive web-based and voice-based randomisation system to receive oral palbociclib (125 mg daily for 3 weeks followed by a week off over 28-day cycles) plus 500 mg fulvestrant (intramuscular injection on days 1 and 15 of cycle 1; then on day 1 of subsequent 28-day cycles) or placebo plus fulvestrant. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. We also assessed endocrine therapy resistance by clinical parameters, quantitative hormone-receptor expression, and tumour PIK3CA mutational status in circulating DNA at baseline. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01942135. Findings Between Oct 7, 2013, and Aug 26, 2014, 521 patients were randomly assigned, 347 to fulvestrant plus palbociclib and 174 to fulvestrant plus placebo. Study enrolment is closed and overall survival follow-up is in progress. By March 16, 2015, 259 progression-free-survival events had occurred (145 in the fulvestrant plus palbociclib group and 114 in the fulvestrant plus placebo group); median follow-up was 8·9 months (IQR 8·7–9·2). Median progression-free survival was 9·5 months (95% CI 9·2–11·0) in the fulvestrant plus palbociclib group and 4·6 months (3·5–5·6) in the fulvestrant plus placebo group (hazard ratio 0·46, 95% CI 0·36–0·59, p<0·0001). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 251 (73%) of 345 patients in the fulvestrant plus palbociclib group and 38 (22%) of 172 patients in the fulvestrant plus placebo group. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (223 65% in the fulvestrant plus palbociclib group and one 1% in the fulvestrant plus placebo group), anaemia (ten 3% and three 2%), and leucopenia (95 28% and two 1%). Serious adverse events (all causalities) occurred in 44 patients (13%) of 345 in the fulvestrant plus palbociclib group and 30 (17%) of 172 patients in the fulvestrant plus placebo group. PIK3CA mutation was detected in the plasma DNA of 129 (33%) of 395 patients for whom these data were available. Neither PIK3CA status nor hormone-receptor expression level significantly affected treatment response. Interpretation Fulvestrant plus palbociclib was associated with significant and consistent improvement in progression-free survival compared with fulvestrant plus placebo, irrespective of the degree of endocrine resistance, hormone-receptor expression level, and PIK3CA mutational status. The combination could be considered as a therapeutic option for patients with recurrent hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer that has progressed on previous endocrine therapy. Funding Pfizer.
Summary Background Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway activation is a hallmark of endocrine therapy-resistant, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. This phase 3 study assessed the ...efficacy of the pan-PI3K inhibitor buparlisib plus fulvestrant in patients with advanced breast cancer, including an evaluation of the PI3K pathway activation status as a biomarker for clinical benefit. Methods The BELLE-2 trial was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study. Postmenopausal women aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed, hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor (HER2)-negative inoperable locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer whose disease had progressed on or after aromatase inhibitor treatment and had received up to one previous line of chemotherapy for advanced disease were included. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using interactive voice response technology (block size of 6) on day 15 of cycle 1 to receive oral buparlisib (100 mg/day) or matching placebo, starting on day 15 of cycle 1, plus intramuscular fulvestrant (500 mg) on days 1 and 15 of cycle 1, and on day 1 of subsequent 28-day cycles. Patients were assigned randomisation numbers with a validated interactive response technology; these numbers were linked to different treatment groups which in turn were linked to treatment numbers. PI3K status in tumour tissue was determined via central laboratory during a 14-day run-in phase. Randomisation was stratified by PI3K pathway activation status (activated vs non-activated vs and unknown) and visceral disease status (present vs absent). Patients, investigators, local radiologists, study team, and anyone involved in the study were masked to the identity of the treatment until unblinding. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival by local investigator assessment per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (version 1.1) in the total population, in patients with known (activated or non-activated) PI3K pathway status, and in PI3K pathway-activated patients. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment according to the treatment they received. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01610284 , and is currently ongoing but not recruiting participants. Findings Between Sept 7, 2012, and Sept 10, 2014, 1147 patients from 267 centres in 29 countries were randomly assigned to receive buparlisib (n=576) or placebo plus fulvestrant (n=571). In the total patient population (n=1147), median progression-free survival was 6·9 months (95% CI 6·8–7·8) in the buparlisib group versus 5·0 months (4·0–5·2) in the placebo group (hazard ratio HR 0·78 95% CI 0·67–0·89; one-sided p=0·00021). In patients with known PI3K status (n=851), median progression-free survival was 6·8 months (95% CI 5·0–7·0) in the buparlisib group vs 4·5 months (3·3–5·0) in the placebo group (HR 0·80 95% CI 0·68–0·94; one-sided p=0·0033). In PI3K pathway-activated patients (n=372), median progression-free survival was 6·8 months (95% CI 4·9–7·1) in the buparlisib group versus 4·0 months (3·1–5·2) in the placebo group (HR 0·76 0·60–0·97, one-sided p=0·014). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events in the buparlisib group versus the placebo group were increased alanine aminotransferase (146 25% of 573 patients vs six 1% of 570), increased aspartate aminotransferase (103 18% vs 16 3%), hyperglycaemia (88 15% vs one <1%), and rash (45 8% vs none). Serious adverse events were reported in 134 (23%) of 573 patients in the buparlisib group compared with 90 16% of 570 patients in the placebo group; the most common serious adverse events (affecting ≥2% of patients) were increased alanine aminotransferase (17 3% of 573 vs one <1% of 570) and increased aspartate aminotransferase (14 2% vs one <1%). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Interpretation The results from this study show that PI3K inhibition combined with endocrine therapy is effective in postmenopausal women with endocrine-resistant, hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Use of more selective PI3K inhibitors, such as α-specific PI3K inhibitor, is warranted to further improve safety and benefit in this setting. No further studies are being pursued because of the toxicity associated with this combination. Funding Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.
Summary Background Trastuzumab resistance is a key therapeutic challenge in metastatic breast cancer. We postulated that broader inhibition of ErbB receptors with afatinib would improve clinical ...outcomes compared with HER2 inhibition alone in patients who had progressed on previous trastuzumab treatment. LUX-Breast 1 compared afatinib plus vinorelbine with trastuzumab plus vinorelbine for such patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Methods We did this open-label trial at 350 hospitals in 41 countries worldwide. We enrolled female patients with HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer who had progressed on or following adjuvant trastuzumab or first-line treatment of metastatic disease with trastuzumab. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive oral afatinib (40 mg/day) plus intravenous vinorelbine (25 mg/m2 per week) or intravenous trastuzumab (2 mg/kg per week after 4 mg/kg loading dose) plus vinorelbine. Randomisation was done centrally and stratified by previous trastuzumab treatment (adjuvant vs first-line treatment), hormone receptor status (oestrogen receptor and progesterone receptor positive vs others), and region. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is closed to enrolment and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01125566. Findings Between Aug 26, 2010, and April 26, 2013, we enrolled 508 patients: 339 assigned to the afatinib group and 169 assigned to the trastuzumab group. Recruitment was stopped on April 26, 2013, after a benefit–risk assessment by the independent data monitoring committee was unfavourable for the afatinib group. Patients on afatinib plus vinorelbine had to switch to trastuzumab plus vinorelbine, afatinib monotherapy, vinorelbine monotherapy, or receive treatment outside of the trial. Median follow-up was 9·3 months (IQR 3·7–16·0). Median progression-free survival was 5·5 months (95% CI 5·4–5·6) in the afatinib group and 5·6 months (5·3–7·3) in the trastuzumab group (hazard ratio 1·10 95% CI 0·86–1·41; p=0·43). The most common drug-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher were neutropenia (190 56% of 337 patients in the afatinib group vs 102 60% of 169 patients in the trastuzumab group), leucopenia (64 19% vs 34 20%), and diarrhoea (60 18% vs none). Interpretation Trastuzumab-based therapy remains the treatment of choice for patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer who had progressed on trastuzumab. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim.
PDF