Search

Introduction: SB3 is a trastuzumab biosimilar approved in Australia, Brazil, Canada, the European Union, the Republic of Korea, Switzerland, and the USA. This real-world study evaluated safety and effectiveness of SB3 as part of the Korean post approval safety management system. Methods: This post-marketing surveillance in Korea included patients in line with approved indications, i.e., patients with early or metastatic breast cancer or metastatic gastric cancer. Safety outcomes were adverse events (AEs) and adverse drug reactions. Effectiveness outcomes were tumor response and event-free survival. Results: 424 patients were evaluated: 366 patients (86%) with early breast cancer, 53 patients (13%) with metastatic breast cancer, and 5 patients (1%) with metastatic gastric cancer. Among patients with breast cancer, AEs (mostly mild) and adverse drug reactions were reported by 158 (37.7%) and 57 (13.6%) patients, respectively. Most patients with an AE (141, 89.2%) had no change in treatment schedule. Treatment was temporarily suspended in 14 (8.9%) patients with an AE and completely discontinued in 7 (4.4%). Among patients with early and metastatic breast cancer who were evaluated for efficacy, objective response rates were 82.7% and 38.3%, respectively. Pathological complete response was 64.6% in patients with early breast cancer. Discussion/Conclusion: Safety and efficacy of SB3 demonstrated in this real-world study were comparable with previous studies of reference trastuzumab. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study was conducted to compare the reported adverse event (AE) profiles and unexpected use of medical services during chemotherapy between before and after the healthcare reimbursement of AE evaluation in patients with cancer. Patients and Methods: Using the electronic medical record database system, extracted patients with breast, lung, gastric, and colorectal cancers receiving neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy between September 2013 and December 2016 at four centers in Korea were matched using the 1:1 greedy method: pre‐reimbursement group (n = 1084) and post‐reimbursement group (n = 1084). Unexpected outpatient department (OPD), emergency room (ER) visit, hospitalization rates, and chemotherapy completion rates were compared between the groups. Results: The baseline characteristics were well‐balanced between the groups. By chemotherapy cycle, hospitalization (1.8% vs. 2.3%; p = 0.039), and ER visit rates (3.3% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.064) were lower in the post‐reimbursement group than that in the pre‐reimbursement group. In particular, since cycle 2, ER visit and hospitalization rates were significantly lower in the post‐reimbursement group than those in the pre‐reimbursement group (2.6% vs. 3.3%; p = 0.020 and 1.4% vs. 2.0%; p = 0.007, respectively), although no significant differences were observed during cycle 1. The OPD visit rates were similar between both groups, regardless of cycles. The post‐reimbursement group had a higher proportion of patients who completed chemotherapy as planned than the pre‐reimbursement group (93.5% vs. 90.1%; p = 0.006). Post‐reimbursement group had more AEs reported, including alopecia, fatigue, diarrhea, anorexia, and peripheral neuropathy, during cycle 1 than the pre‐reimbursement group, which significantly decreased after cycle 2. Conclusion: The introduction of healthcare reimbursement for AE evaluation may help physicians capture and appropriately manage AEs, consequently, decreasing hospital utilization and increasing chemotherapy completion rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Although immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have emerged as therapeutic options for recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M-HNSCC), concerns have been raised on exceptional acceleration of tumor growth during treatment with ICIs, a condition described as hyperprogressive disease (HPD). This study examined the incidence, potential predictors, and clinical impact of HPD in R/M-HNSCC. Methods: We retrospectively collected data of patients with R/M-HNSCC treated with ICIs between January 2013 and June 2018 from 11 medical centers in Korea. HPD was defined as tumor growth kinetics ratio (TGKr) > 2, which was calculated by comparing TGK on ICIs with that before treatment with ICIs. Results: Of 125 patients, 68 (54.4%) obtained progressive disease as their best responses (progressors). HPD was identified in 18 (26.5% of progressors, 14.4% of total) patients. Relatively younger age, primary tumor of oral cavity, and previous locoregional irradiation were significant predictors of HPD according to multivariable analysis (p = 0.040, 0.027, and 0.015, respectively). Compared to patients without HPD, patients with HPD had significantly shorter median progression-free survival (PFS) (1.2 vs. 3.4 months, p < 0.001) and overall survival (OS) (3.4 vs. 10.7 months, p = 0.047). However, interestingly, HPD did not significantly affect the therapeutic benefit of post-ICIs chemotherapy. Conclusions: Younger patients with oral cavity cancer or prior treatment with locoregional radiotherapy could be regarded potential risk groups for HPD in patients with R/M-HNSCC treated with ICIs. Although HPD could consistently predict poorer survival outcomes, patients who experienced HPD with ICIs should not be excluded from the subsequent salvage chemotherapy treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Aim To compare the efficacy and safety of intermittent every other days 5-dose filgrastim with single pegfilgrastim in patients with breast cancer receiving adjuvant docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (TAC) chemotherapy. Methods In this pilot study, Korean patients who had undergone complete resection for breast cancer and scheduled for adjuvant TAC chemotherapy were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive either intermittent 5 doses of filgrastim (5 mcg/kg/day) or once-a-cycle pegfilgrastim (6 mg) as primary prophylaxis during the first three cycles of the TAC chemotherapy. Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) was analyzed as well. Results A total of 22 patients were randomly and equally divided into filgrastim or pegfilgrastim arms. Febrile neutropenia (FN) occurred in 1 patient in the pegfilgrastim arm (1 of 33 cycles) and none in the filgrastim arm. G3 neutropenia occurred in 1 patient (1 of 33 cycles) in the filgrastim arm and 2 patients (4 of 33 cycles) in the pegfilgrastim arm (P = 0.476). G4 neutropenia occurred in 11 patients (28 of 33 cycles) in the filgrastim arm and 9 patients (18 of 33 cycles) in the pegfilgrastim arm (P = 0.476). Except for on day 9 in cycle 3, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of ANC. Conclusion We observed no significant differences between the two methods of prophylaxis in terms of FN and G3/4 neutropenia incidence in patients receiving adjuvant TAC chemotherapy. Intermittent every other days 5-dose filgrastim may be available alternative to pegfilgrastim. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article the author talks out Breast cancer (BC) is the most prevalent cancers in women, and women were diagnosed with BC in 2012, and survival rate has improved although survival rate is improving, there is still a risk of recurrence, thus, the follow‐up and surveillance of patients after surgery for primary BC are important. It mentions that surveillance method varied widely, emphasize the role of asymptomatic surveillance of regional nodal evaluation including breast ultrasound.

Conclusions: CCRT is a potential treatment option for locally advanced sinonasal SCC in terms of organ preservation. Objectives: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is increasingly used for patients with advanced head and neck cancer to preserve organ function and improve survival. In the present study, treatment outcomes were compared between surgery and post-operative radiotherapy (PORT) and CCRT in patients with locally advanced sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). Methods: The records of 30 patients with non-metastatic stage III and IV sinonasal SCC were retrospectively reviewed. Fifteen patients were treated with CCRT and 15 patients underwent PORT. Results: The locoregional recurrence-free, distant metastasis-free, disease-free, disease-specific, and overall survival rates did not differ between PORT and CCRT groups. In addition, there were no significant differences in incidence rates of acute and chronic toxicities between the two groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. This study aimed to investigate the effect of metformin on progression of head and neck cancers, occurrence of second primary cancers, and cause-specific survival. Methods. This study analyzed a retrospective cohort of 1,151 consecutive patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma who were treated at our hospital. Patients were divided into three groups: nondiabetic, nonmetformin, and metformin. Clinical characteristics, recurrence of index head and neck cancer, occurrence of second primary cancer, and survival were compared among the different groups. Results. Of 1,151 patients, 99 (8.6%) were included in the metformin group, 79 (6.8%) were in the nonmetformin group, and 973 (84.5%) were in the nondiabetic group. Diabetic status and metformin exposure had no significant impact on index head and neck cancer recurrence or second primary cancer development (p > .2). The nonmetformin group showed relatively lower overall (p = .017) and cancer-specific (p = .054) survival rates than the other groups in univariate analyses, but these results were not confirmed in multivariate analyses. Conclusion. Metformin use did not show beneficial effects on index tumor progression, second primary cancer occurrence, and cause-specific survival in patients with head and neck cancer compared with nonmetformin users and nondiabetic patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The novel oral antiangiogenic agent TSU-68 was investigated in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Patients with anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive either TSU-68 400 mg twice daily on days 1-21 plus docetaxel 60 mg/m on day 1 every 3 weeks, or docetaxel 60 mg/m on day 1 every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Between November 2006 and December 2007, 81 patients were included in this study (41 for TSU-68 plus docetaxel and 40 for docetaxel alone). Median progression-free survival was 6.8 months (95 % confidence interval [CI] = 5.4-12.5 months) in the TSU-68 plus docetaxel group and 8.1 months (95 % CI = 4.0-13.7 months) in the docetaxel-alone group (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.0; 95 % CI = 0.6-1.8; p = 0.95). There were no significant differences in the overall response rates and overall survival between groups ( p = 0.29 and p = 0.42, respectively). In subgroup analysis, TSU-68 plus docetaxel was associated with better overall survival than docetaxel alone in anthracycline-resistant patients (HR = 0.3; 95 % CI = 0.1-0.8; p = 0.02). The most frequent adverse events were neutropenia and anorexia in both arms. Although both regimens were well tolerated, grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicity was more frequently observed in the TSU-68 plus docetaxel group. Combination of TSU-68 and docetaxel is well tolerated but failed to demonstrate superior efficacy over docetaxel alone in anthracycline-pretreated breast cancer patients. As TSU-68 was associated with better survival in the anthracycline-resistant subgroup, it should be further explored in this subgroup. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A biopsy of first recurrence or metastatic disease is recommended to re-evaluate oestrogen receptor status in patients with breast cancer and to select appropriate treatment. However, retesting for oestrogen receptor status with rebiopsy is not always feasible, depending on lesion location and the risk associated with biopsy, and in these cases clinicians continue to treat patients according to the oestrogen receptor status of the primary tumour. Consequently suboptimal therapy might be offered to these patients. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy and safety of 16α-[18F]fluoro-17β-oestradiol (18F-FES) PET-CT to assess oestrogen receptor status in patients with recurrent or metastatic breast cancer.Methods: We did a prospective cohort study at the Asan Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea. Eligible patients had breast cancer, with first recurrence or metastatic disease at presentation, were 19 years or older, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. The primary objective was to show the agreement between qualitative 18F-FES PET-CT interpretation and the results of oestrogen receptor expression by immunohistochemical assay, a non-reference standard test. Whole-body 18F-FES PET-CT imaging was done after intravenous injection of 111-222 MBq of 18F-FES, with dosing primarily determined by radiation dosimetry analysis. 18F-FES uptake above background intensity was interpreted as positive. Efficacy was assessed in all patients with histologically confirmed recurrent or metastatic breast cancer who received 18F-FES and had PET-CT images available (intention-to-diagnose analysis), and safety was assessed in all patients who received 18F-FES. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01986569.Findings: Between Nov 27, 2013, and Nov 10, 2016, 93 patients were enrolled. Of the 85 patients included in the efficacy analysis, 47 (55%) were oestrogen receptor-positive and 38 (45%) were oestrogen receptor-negative. Positive status percent agreement between the 18F-FES PET-CT results and oestrogen receptor status by immunohistochemical assay was 76·6% (95% CI 62·0-87·7) and the negative status percent agreement was 100·0% (90·8-100·0). Patients who were oestrogen receptor-positive and had a positive 18F-FES PET-CT result had a significantly higher progesterone receptor expression than those who were oestrogen receptor-positive and had a negative 18F-FES PET-CT result (23 [68%] of 34 patients vs 0 of 11 patients; p<0·0001). The most common adverse event was procedural pain in nine (10%) of 90 patients injected with 18F-FES. No adverse events were related to the study drug except injection site pain in one (1%) patient. No serious adverse events were recorded.Interpretation: The high negative percent agreement between 18F-FES PET-CT and oestrogen receptor status by immunohistochemical assay in this cohort suggests that positive 18F-FES uptake by recurrent or metastatic oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer lesions could be an alternative to oestrogen receptor assays in this setting. Staging assessment should include 18F-FES PET-CT when retesting oestrogen receptor status is not feasible.Funding: Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Ministry of Health and Welfare, South Korea. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with HER2-positive breast cancer who have received two or more previous therapies for advanced disease have few effective treatment options. The monarcHER trial aimed to compare the efficacy of abemaciclib plus trastuzumab with or without fulvestrant with standard-of-care chemotherapy of physician's choice plus trastuzumab in women with advanced breast cancer.Methods: This phase 2, three-group, open-label trial was done across 75 hospitals, clinics, and medical centres in 14 countries. Eligible patients were women aged 18 years or older, who had hormone receptor-positive, HER2-positive advanced breast cancer with unresectable, locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and who had previously received at least two HER2-targeted therapies for advanced disease. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to the abemaciclib, trastuzumab, and fulvestrant (group A), abemaciclib and trastuzumab (group B), or standard-of-care chemotherapy and trastuzumab (group C). Oral abemaciclib 150 mg 12 hourly was administered on days 1-21 of a 21-day cycle, intravenous trastuzumab 8 mg/kg on cycle 1 day 1, followed by 6 mg/kg on day 1 of each subsequent 21-day cycle, and intramuscular fulvestrant 500 mg on days 1, 15, and 29 and once every 4 weeks thereafter. Standard-of-care chemotherapy was administered as specified by the product label. Randomisation was by a computer-generated random sequence by means of an interactive web-response system and stratified by number of previous systemic therapies for advanced breast cancer and measurable versus non-measurable disease. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, first testing group A versus group C and, if this result was significant, then group B versus group C. Safety was assessed in all patients who had received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02675231) and is ongoing for long-term survival follow-up.Findings: Between May 31, 2016, and Feb 28, 2018, 325 patients were screened, of whom 237 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to groups A (n=79), B (n=79), and C (n=79). Median follow-up was 19·0 months (IQR 14·7-25·1). The study met its primary endpoint, showing a significant difference at the prespecified two-sided α of 0·2 in median progression-free survival between group A (8·3 months, 95% CI 5·9-12·6) and group C (5·7 months, 5·4-7·0; HR 0·67 [95% CI 0·45-1·00]; p=0·051). No difference was observed between median progression-free survival in group B (5·7 months, 95% CI 4·2-7·2) and group C (HR 0·94 [0·64-1·38]; p=0·77). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse event in groups A, B, and C was neutropenia (21 [27%] of 78 patients, 17 [22%] of 77, and 19 [26%] of 72). The most common serious adverse events were: in group A, pyrexia (three [4%]), diarrhoea (two [3%]), urinary tract infection (two [3%]), and acute kidney injury (two [3%]); in group B, diarrhoea (two [3%]) and pneumonitis (two [3%]); and in group C, neutropenia (four [6%]) and pleural effusion (two [3%]). Two deaths were attributed to treatment: one due to pulmonary fibrosis in group B and one due to febrile neutropenia in group C.Interpretation: The combination of abemaciclib, fulvestrant, and trastuzumab significantly improved progression-free survival versus standard-of-care chemotherapy plus trastuzumab while showing a tolerable safety profile. Our results suggest that a chemotherapy-free regimen might potentially be an alternative treatment option for patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-positive advanced breast cancer.Funding: Eli Lilly and Company. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Endocrine treatment is recommended by clinical guidelines as the preferred treatment option for premenopausal as well as postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. In real-world clinical practice, however, a substantial number of patients are treated with chemotherapy. We aimed to compare the clinical antitumour activity and safety of palbociclib plus endocrine therapy with that of capecitabine chemotherapy in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.Methods: This multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 study was done in 14 academic institutions in South Korea. Premenopausal women aged 19 years or older with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer that had relapsed or progressed during previous tamoxifen therapy and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were included. One line of previous chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer was allowed. Patients were randomly assigned, using a random permuted block design (with a block size of two), to receive palbociclib plus combination endocrine therapy (oral exemestane 25 mg per day for 28 days and oral palbociclib 125 mg per day for 21 days every 4 weeks plus leuprolide 3·75 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks) or chemotherapy (oral capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 twice daily for 2 weeks every 3 weeks). Randomisation was stratified by previous chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer and visceral metastasis. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. All analyses were done in a modified intention-to-treat population that excluded patients who did not receive study medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02592746, and is ongoing for follow-up of overall survival.Findings: Between June 15, 2016, and Dec 10, 2018, 189 patients were enrolled, of whom 184 were randomly assigned to the palbociclib plus endocrine therapy group (n=92) or the capecitabine group (n=92). Six patients in the capecitabine group withdrew from the study before drug administration; therefore, 92 patients in the palbociclib plus endocrine therapy group and 86 patients in the capecitabine group were included in the modified intention-to-treat analyses. 46 (50%) of 92 patients in the palbociclib plus endocrine therapy group and 45 (51%) of 92 in the capecitabine group were treatment naive for metastatic breast cancer. During a median follow-up of 17 months (IQR 9-22), median progression-free survival was 20·1 months (95% CI 14·2-21·8) in the palbociclib plus endocrine therapy group versus 14·4 months (12·1-17·0) in the capecitabine group (hazard ratio 0·659 [95% CI 0·437-0·994], one-sided log-rank p=0·0235). Treatment-related grade 3 or worse neutropenia was more common in the palbociclib plus endocrine therapy group than in the capecitabine group (69 [75%] of 92 vs 14 [16%] of 86 patients). 2 (2%) patients in the palbociclib plus endocrine therapy group and 15 (17%) patients in the capecitabine group had treatment-related serious adverse events. No treatment-related deaths occurred.Interpretation: Exemestane plus palbociclib with ovarian function suppression showed clinical benefit compared with capecitabine in terms of improved progression-free survival in premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. Palbociclib plus exemestane with ovarian suppression is an active treatment option in premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer who have been pretreated with tamoxifen.Funding: Pfizer, Shinpoong, and Daewoong Korea and Takeda. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]