Search

Background: Most premenopausal patients with early breast cancer (eBC) are diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive disease and therefore candidate for adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET). Patients and methods: The Gruppo Italiano Mammella (GIM) 23-POSTER (GIM23) is a multicenter, prospective, observational study conducted in 26 Italian institutions, aiming to evaluate ET choices for premenopausal patients affected by hormone receptor-positive eBC in a real-world setting. Here we report also the results in terms of type of ET prescribed according to the definition of high-risk patients by monarchE and NATALEE trials. Results: Between October 2019 and June 2022, 600 premenopausal patients were included, with a median age of 46 years. Almost half (271, 45.2 %) of the patients had stage I disease, while 254 (42.3 %) and 60 (10.0 %) patients had stage II and III, respectively. Overall, 149 (25.1 %) patients received tamoxifen alone, 83 (14.0 %) tamoxifen with ovarian function suppression (OFS), while 361 (60.9 %) received aromatase inhibitor (AI) with OFS. Patients treated with AI and OFS had higher number of metastatic axillary nodes, higher grade and more often received chemotherapy (all p

Abstract Chemo-immunotherapy is the first-line standard of care for patients with PD-L1 positive metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). SYNERGY (NCT03616886) is a dose-finding phase I and a randomized phase II, open-label trial evaluating if targeting the immunosuppressive adenosine pathway can enhance the antitumor activity of chemo-immunotherapy. The phase I part included 6 patients with untreated locally-advanced or mTNBC to determine the safety and recommended phase II dose of the anti-CD73 antibody oleclumab in combination with the anti-PD-L1 durvalumab and 12 cycles of weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel. In the phase II part, 127 women were randomized 1:1 to receive chemo-immunotherapy, with (arm A) or without (arm B) oleclumab. The primary endpoint was the clinical benefit rate at week 24, defined as stable disease, partial or complete response per RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate, duration of response, survival outcomes (progression-free survival and overall survival), and safety. The trial did not meet its primary endpoint, as the 24-week clinical benefit rate was not significantly improved by adding oleclumab (43% vs. 44%, p = 0.61). Exploratory median progression-free survival was 5.9 months in arm A as compared to 7.0 months in arm B (p = 0.90). The safety profile was manageable in both arms.

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are a class of antineoplastic agents whose structure is composed of three main components: a monoclonal antibody (mAB) targeting a specific target antigen, a cytotoxic payload, and a linker binding the antibody to the payload. By combining the specificity of mABs with the high potency of the payloads, ADCs constitute a smart drug delivery system with improved therapeutic index. After recognition and binding of the mAB to its target surface antigen, ADCs are internalized by endocytosis by the tumor cell, releasing the payloads into the cytoplasm, where they exert their cytotoxic activity, eventually leading to cell death. The composition of some of the new ADCs confers additional functional properties that allow expanding their activity to neighboring cells not expressing the target antigen, constituting a valuable strategy to overcome tumor heterogeneity. Some of these ‘off-target effects’, such as the bystander effect, are possibly the mechanism underlying the antitumor activity demonstrated in patients with low expression of the target antigens, which represents an important paradigm shift in anticancer targeted therapy. Three ADCs are currently approved for the treatment of breast cancer (BC); two anti-HER2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) ADCs (trastuzumab emtansine and trastuzumab deruxtecan); and one Trop-2-targeted ADC (sacituzumab govitecan). Based on the unprecedented efficacy data demonstrated by these agents, ADCs have been incorporated as part of standard regimens for all subtypes of advanced BC, as well as for high-risk early HER2-positive BC. Despite the remarkable advances, several hurdles still remain to overcome, including the development of reliable biomarkers for patient selection, prevention, and management of potentially severe toxicities, ADC resistance mechanisms, post-ADC resistance patterns, and optimal treatment sequencing and combinations. In this review, we will summarize the currently available evidence related to the use of these agents, as well as explore the current landscape of ADC development for BC treatment.

Abstract The prognostic performance of PREDICT in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC) treated in the modern era with effective chemotherapy and anti-HER2 targeted therapies is unclear. Therefore, we investigated its prognostic performance using data extracted from ALTTO, a phase III trial evaluating adjuvant lapatinib ± trastuzumab vs. trastuzumab alone in patients with HER2-positive EBC. Our analysis included 2794 patients. After a median follow-up of 6.0 years (IQR, 5.8–6.7), 182 deaths were observed. Overall, PREDICT underestimated 5-year OS by 6.7% (95% CI, 5.8–7.6): observed 5-year OS was 94.7% vs. predicted 88.0%. The underestimation was consistent across all subgroups, including those according to the type of anti HER2-therapy. The highest absolute differences were observed for patients with hormone receptor negative-disease, nodal involvement, and large tumor size (13.0%, 15.8%, and 15.3%, respectively). AUC under the ROC curve was 73.7% (95% CI 69.7–77.8) in the overall population, ranging between 61.7% and 77.7% across the analyzed subgroups. In conclusion, our analysis showed that PREDICT highly underestimated OS in HER2-positive EBC. Hence, it should be used with caution to give prognostic estimation to HER2-positive EBC patients treated in the modern era with effective chemotherapy and anti-HER2 targeted therapies.

The speed and spread of the COVID-19 pandemic has been affecting the entire world for the past several months. OncoAlert is a social media network made up of more than 140 oncology stakeholders: oncologists (medical, radiation, and surgical), oncology nurses, and patient advocates who share the mission of fighting cancer by means of education and dissemination of information. As a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, OncoAlert hosted The Round Table Discussions. We have documented this effort along with further discussion about the COVID-19 pandemic and the consequences on patients living with cancer to disseminate this information to our colleagues worldwide.

Patients with breast cancer undergoing systemic therapies can have mixed response to treatment, with some lesions reducing their dimensions or also, in some cases, disappearing, and others progressing. Of note, breast cancer is an example of tumor heterogeneity, and this reflects the ability of the tumor to adapt to changing conditions and to overcome constraints to growth and dissemination. Hence, a mixed response to treatment may indicate that some clones have become resistant to the treatment and are triggering a disease progression. Nevertheless, a differential diagnosis should always be implemented when new lesions are detected, to rule out potential different etiologies. Too often subjects who received a prior diagnosis of cancer may face stigma of “cancer patients” although they have been successfully cured and have no evidence of residual disease. The systematic implementation of a sensible, appropriate differential diagnosis can help reduce the time to diagnosis and to treatment, with positive impact in patients’ outcomes and quality of life. Our case report describes the incidental finding of lung lesions in a woman treated for early breast cancer and highlights the importance of differential diagnosis in the specific subset of subjects who received a prior diagnosis of cancer.

Background: The role of tumour infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) as a biomarker in non-invasive breast cancer is unclear. This meta-analysis assessed the prognostic impact of TIL levels in patients with non-invasive breast cancer. Methods: Systematic literature search was performed to identify studies assessing local recurrence in patients with non-invasive breast cancer according to TIL levels (high vs. low). Subgroup analyses per local recurrence (invasive and non-invasive) were performed. Secondary objectives were the association between TIL levels and non-invasive breast cancer subtypes, age, grade and necrosis. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were extracted from each study and a pooled analysis was conducted with random-effect model. Results: Seven studies (N = 3437) were included in the present meta-analysis. High-TILs were associated with a higher likelihood of local recurrence (invasive or non-invasive, N = 2941; OR 2.05; 95%CI, 1.03–4.08; p = 0.042), although with a lower likelihood of invasive local recurrence (N = 1722; OR 0.69; 95%CI, 0.49–0.99; p = 0.042). High-TIL levels were associated with triple-negative (OR 3.84; 95%CI, 2.23–6.61; p

Background/methods: Although the prognosis of metastatic breast cancer (BC) has improved, some patients still develop high burden metastases or visceral crisis (VC) and polychemotherapy is commonly used in these cases. Data reporting the real effectiveness of this strategy are scanty. Therefore, the outcomes of patients with metastatic BC treated with platinum-based chemotherapy (P-ChT) at the Jules Bordet Institute during the period of January 2008 and December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. The presence of VC was defined according to ABC 4 criteria. Results: 441 patients were identified: visceral metastases were observed in 430 (97.5%) while 261 (59.2%) presented VC. As for metastatic BC subtype, 255 (57.8%) had ER-positive/HER2-negative, 41 (9.3%) ER-positive/HER2-positive, 34 (7.7%) ER-negative/HER2-positive and 111 (25.1%) triple-negative BC. Median number of prior treatment lines was 3.8 (0–12). Median OS with P-ChT in the entire cohort was 6.13 months. Patients with VC had lower OS than patients without VC (8.6 vs 3.7 months; p 3 previous treatment lines (HR 2.27; 95% CI 1.53–3.21). Of the 261 patients with VC, 106 (40.5%) presented a resolution of the VC which correlated with better OS (9.3 vs 2.0 months, HR 0.27; 95% CI 0.21–0.36). Conclusion: Patients who overcome VC benefit from P-ChT with OS similar to patients without VC. In this analysis, hyperbilirubinemia, poor ECOG and >3 previous treatment lines were significant prognostic factors in the overall study population.

Abstract Heparanase promotes tumor growth in breast tumors. We now evaluated heparanase protein and gene-expression status and investigated its impact on disease-free survival in order to gain better insight into the role of heparanase in ER-positive (ER+) breast cancer prognosis and to clarify its role in cell survival following chemotherapy. Using pooled analysis of gene-expression data, we found that heparanase was associated with a worse prognosis in estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) tumors (log-rank p

Abstract Background Obesity is a risk factor for breast cancer (BC) development, recurrence, and death. In view of this, we aimed to investigate the clinical value of obesity in BC patients treated with anti-HER2 therapies in the NeoALTTO trial, which randomized 455 patients to neo-adjuvant lapatinib, trastuzumab, or their combination plus paclitaxel. Methods Patients were classified according to their basal body mass index (BMI) into underweight (

Abstract The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on patients with underlying malignancy. In this article, we summarize emerging data related to patients with cancer and COVID-19. Among patients with COVID-19, a higher proportion have an underlying diagnosis of cancer than seen in the general population. Also, patients with malignancy are likely to be more vulnerable than the general population to contracting COVID-19. Mortality is significantly higher in patients with both cancer and COVID-19 compared with the overall COVID-19-positive population. The early months of the pandemic saw a decrease in cancer screening and diagnosis, as well as postponement of standard treatments, which could lead to excess deaths from cancer in the future.

Pre-surgical treatments in patients with early breast cancer allows a direct estimation of treatment efficacy, by comparing the tumor and the treatment. Patients who achieve a pathological complete response at surgery have a better prognosis, with lower risk of disease recurrence and death. Hence, clinical research efforts have been focusing on high-risk patients with residual disease at surgery, who may be “salvaged” through additional treatments administered in the post-neoadjuvant setting. In the present review, we aim to illustrate the development and advantages of the post-neoadjuvant setting, and to discuss the available strategies for patients with early breast cancer, either approved or under investigation. This review was written after literature search on main scientific databases (e.g., PubMed) and conference proceedings from major oncology conferences up to 1 August 2022. T-DM1 and capecitabine are currently approved as post-neoadjuvant treatments for patients with HER2-positive and triple-negative breast cancer, respectively, with residual disease at surgery. More recently, other treatment strategies have been approved for patients with high-risk early breast cancer, including the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab, the PARP inhibitor olaparib and the CDK 4/6 inhibitor abemaciclib. Novel agents and treatment combinations are currently under investigation as promising post-neoadjuvant treatment strategies.

Background Several endocrine therapy (ET)-based treatments are available for patients with advanced breast cancer. We assessed the efficacy of different ET-based treatments in patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer with endocrine-sensitive or endocrine-resistant disease.Methods We searched Medline and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to 15 October 2019 and abstracts from major conferences from 2016 to October 2019. We included phase II/III randomised trials, comparing ≥2 ET-based treatments. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analysed by network meta-analyses using MTC Bayesian models based on both fixed-effect and random-effect models; relative treatment effects were measured as HRs and 95% credibility intervals (CrI). All statistical tests were two-sided. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed and this systematic review is registered in the PROSPERO database.Results 55 publications reporting on 32 trials (n=12 293 patients) were included. Regarding PFS in the endocrine sensitive setting (n=5200; 12 trials), the combination of cyclin-dependent kinases (CDK)4/6-inhibitors (CDK4/6i)+fulvestrant 500 mg (F500) was likely the most effective treatment (surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA)=97.3%), followed by CDK4/6i+aromatase inhibitor ±goserelin; there was no significant difference between them (HR 0.82; 95% CrI 0.54–1.25). Regarding OS (n=2157; five trials), the most effective treatment was probably CDK4/6i+F500 (SUCRA=97.3%); comparing CDK4/6i+F500 versus F500 held a HR of 0.77 (95% CrI 0.63–0.95). Regarding PFS in the endocrine-resistant setting (n=6635; 20 trials), CDK4/6i+F500 was likely the most effective treatment (SUCRA=95.7%), followed by capivasertib+F500, without significant difference between them (HR 0.91; 95% CrI 0.60–1.36). For OS (n=4377; 11 trials), the most effective treatments were capivasertib+F500 (SUCRA=84.7%) and CDK4/6i+F500 (SUCRA=69.9%). Comparing CDK4/6i+F500 versus F500 held a HR of 0.77 (95% CrI 0.67–0.89).Conclusions CDK4/6i+F500 is likely the best treatment option in both endocrine-sensitive and endocrine-resistant diseases for PFS, and in endocrine-sensitive patients for OS. Concerning OS in endocrine-resistant patients, capivasertib+F500 and CDK4/6i+F500 are likely the best treatments.PROSPERO registration number CRD42018104628.

Background Cancer seems to have an independent adverse prognostic effect on COVID-19-related mortality, but uncertainty exists regarding its effect across different patient subgroups. We report a population-based analysis of patients hospitalised with COVID-19 with prior or current solid cancer versus those without cancer.Methods We analysed data of adult patients registered until 24 May 2020 in the Belgian nationwide database of Sciensano. The primary objective was in-hospital mortality within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis among patients with solid cancer versus patients without cancer. Severe event occurrence, a composite of intensive care unit admission, invasive ventilation and/or death, was a secondary objective. These endpoints were analysed across different patient subgroups. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to analyse the association between cancer and clinical characteristics (baseline analysis) and the effect of cancer on in-hospital mortality and on severe event occurrence, adjusting for clinical characteristics (in-hospital analysis).Results A total of 13 594 patients (of whom 1187 with solid cancer (8.7%)) were evaluable for the baseline analysis and 10 486 (892 with solid cancer (8.5%)) for the in-hospital analysis. Patients with cancer were older and presented with less symptoms/signs and lung imaging alterations. The 30-day in-hospital mortality was higher in patients with solid cancer compared with patients without cancer (31.7% vs 20.0%, respectively; adjusted OR (aOR) 1.34; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.58). The aOR was 3.84 (95% CI 1.94 to 7.59) among younger patients (

Background: We aimed to determine the distribution of intrinsic subtypes within HER2-low breast cancer (BC), and to describe the prognostic impact of HER2-low status on survival outcomes. Methods: This is a retrospective, observational study of primary BC extracted from The Cancer Genome Atlas dataset. We described the distribution of PAM50 intrinsic subtypes within HER2-low BC subtype according to hormonal receptor status (positive (HR+) and negative (HR−)). Secondly, we assessed the impact of HER2-low on survival outcomes (progression-free interval (PFI), disease-free interval (DFI), and overall survival (OS)). Results: We analyzed 804 primary BCs, including 410 (51%) HER2-low BCs (336 HR+ and 74 HR−). The proportion of HER2-enriched tumors was higher in the HER2-low/HR− group compared to HER2-low/HR+ (13.7% versus 1.2%, respectively). HER2-enriched tumors were more frequent in HER2-low/HR− and HER2-low/HR+ subtypes, compared to HER2-negative/HR− and HER2-negative/HR+ subtypes, respectively (13.7% versus 1.6% and 1.2% versus 0.5%, respectively). We observed no significant differences in PFI, DFI, and OS between HER2-low subtypes and each non-HER2-low subtype paired by HR status. Conclusions: Our characterization of PAM50 intrinsic subtypes within HER2-low breast cancer may explain the different clinical behaviors and responses to treatment, and ultimately support further investigation of new treatment strategies in the HER2-low category. Moreover, it highlights the importance of considering HR status in the HER2-low category.

Achieving a pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant treatment is associated with improved prognosis in breast cancer. The CREATE-X trial demonstrated a significant survival improvement with capecitabine in patients with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and the KATHERINE trial showed a significant benefit of trastuzumab-emtansine (TDM1) in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive patients who did not achieve a pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant treatment, creating interesting alternatives of post-neoadjuvant treatments for high-risk patients. New agents are arising as therapeutic options for metastatic breast cancer such as the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors and the immune-checkpoint inhibitors, but none has been incorporated into the post-neoadjuvant setting so far. Evolving techniques such as next-generation sequencing and gene expression profiles have improved our knowledge regarding the biology of residual disease, and also on the mechanisms involved in treatment resistance. The present manuscript reviews the current available strategies, the ongoing trials, the potential biomarker-guided approaches and the perspectives for the post-neoadjuvant treatment and the management of residual disease after neoadjuvant treatment in breast cancer.

Since human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) characterization, going through clinical research and regulatory approval of HER2-targeted therapies, much has elapsed and is still unfolding. Hitherto, only breast cancer (BC) patients with HER2 immunohistochemistry 3+ or with HER2 gene fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) amplification (a.k.a., HER2-positive BC) have benefited from anti-HER2 agents. In recent years, however, much of the research effort has been expanded, with positive outcomes being reached for formerly known HER2-negative BC that yet express HER2 to some degree (HER2 immunohistochemistry 1+ or 2+, but FISH negative) and are currently being classified as HER2-low BC for the purpose of trial enrollment. In this sense, our aim is to review the body of evidence of HER2-low BC that led to the study of first-generation anti-HER2 agents, like trastuzumab, and how they have failed to achieve any clinical applicability in this setting. In addition, we review new data that is leading to the growing success of the new generation of drugs, especially the promising HER2-directed antibody–drug conjugates. A narrative review is also performed regarding the rationale behind the consolidated and ongoing clinical trials studying anti-HER2 agents in combination with unrelated agents, such as immunotherapy, endocrine therapy, and CDK4/6 inhibitors. Hopefully, all this ongoing research effort will be able to extend the survival benefits seen with anti-HER2 agents in HER2-positive disease, at least to some degree, to the greater proportion of patients with HER2-low BC.

Circulating microRNA (ct-miRNAs) are able to identify patients with differential response to HER2-targeted therapy. However, their dynamics are largely unknown. We assessed 752 miRNAs from 52 NeoALTTO patients with plasma pairs prior and two weeks after trastuzumab. Increased levels of ct-miR-148a-3p and ct-miR-374a-5p were significantly associated with pathological complete response (pCR) (p = 0.008 and 0.048, respectively). At a threshold ≥ the upper limit of the 95%CI of the mean difference, pCR resulted 45% (95%CI 24%−68%), and 44% (95%CI 22%−69%) for ct-miR-148a-3p and ct-miR-374a-5p, respectively. Notably, ct-miR-148a-3p retained its predictive value (OR 3.42, 95%CI 1.23−9.46, p = 0.018) in bivariate analysis along with estrogen receptor status. Combined information from ct-miR-148a-3p and ct-miR140-5p, which we previously reported to identify trastuzumab-responsive patients, resulted in greater predictive capability over each other, with pCR of 54% (95%CI 25%−81%) and 0% (95%CI 0%−31%) in ct-miR-148a/ct-miR-140-5p high/present and low/absent, respectively. GO and KEGG analyses showed common enriched terms between the targets of these ct-miRNAs, including cell metabolism regulation, AMPK and MAPK signaling, and HCC progression. In conclusion, early modulated ct-miR-148-3p may inform on the functional processes underlying treatment response, integrate the information from already available predictive biomarkers, and identify patients likely to respond to single agent trastuzumab-based neoadjuvant therapy.

BackgroundSeveral (neo)adjuvant treatments for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer have been compared in different randomized clinical trials. Since it is not feasible to conduct adequate pairwise comparative trials of all these therapeutic options, network meta-analysis offers an opportunity for more detailed inference for evidence-based therapy.MethodsPhase II/III randomized clinical trials comparing two or more different (neo)adjuvant treatments for HER2-positive breast cancer patients were included. Relative treatment effects were pooled in two separate network meta-analyses for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).Results17 clinical trials met our eligibility criteria. Two different networks of trials were created based on the availability of the outcomes: OS network (15 trials: 37,837 patients); and DFS network (17 trials: 40,992 patients). Two studies—the ExteNET and the NeoSphere trials—were included only in this DFS network because OS data have not yet been reported. The concept of the dual anti-HER2 blockade proved to be the best option in terms of OS and DFS. Chemotherapy (CT) plus trastuzumab (T) and lapatinib (L) and CT + T + Pertuzumab (P) are probably the best treatment options in terms of OS, with 62.47% and 22.06%, respectively. In the DFS network, CT + T + Neratinib (N) was the best treatment option with 50.55%, followed by CT + T + P (26.59%) and CT + T + L (20.62%).ConclusionThis network meta-analysis suggests that dual anti-HER2 blockade with trastuzumab plus either lapatinib or pertuzumab are probably the best treatment options in the (neo)adjuvant setting for HER2-positive breast cancer patients in terms of OS gain. Mature OS results are still expected for the Aphinity trial and for the sequential use of trastuzumab followed by neratinib, the treatment that showed the best performance in terms of DFS in our analysis.

BACKGROUND:The development of trastuzumab is considered to be one of the greatest improvements in breast cancer treatment in recent years. This study aims to evaluate changes in the uptake of trastuzumab over the last 12 years and to determine whether its use is proportional to patient needs in the European Union and the USA. METHODS:Using national registry data, the number of new cases of HER2-positive breast cancer patients per year was estimated. The number of likely trastuzumab treatments per year was estimated using trastuzumab procurement data for each country. RESULTS:Western Europe and the USA show increasing procurement level of trastuzumab over the years studied, reaching proportional of use of trastuzumab few years after its marketing authorization in the early 2000's. After the approval in the adjuvant setting, in the year 2006, it was observed underuse of trastuzumab given the increase of the number of patients in need of treatment. Proportional use was shortly met after a couple of years. Few countries in Eastern Europe acquired the needed quantity of trastuzumab, with procurement levels starting to increase only after approval in the adjuvant setting in 2006. CONCLUSION:Significant differences in trastuzumab procurement are observed between Western Europe, the USA and Eastern Europe, with the latter geographic region acquiring insufficient amounts of the drug required to treat all patients in need.

EndoTAG-1, a tumor endothelial targeting agent has shown activity in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (BC) in combination with paclitaxel.HER2-negative BC patients candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy were scheduled to receive 12 cycles of weekly EndoTAG-1 22mg/m2 plus paclitaxel 70mg/m2 followed by 3 cycles of FEC (Fluorouracil 500mg/m2, Epirubicin 100mg/m2, Cyclophosphamide 500mg/m2) every 3 weeks followed by surgery. Primary endpoint was percent (%) reduction in Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) estimated Gadolinium (Gd) enhancing tumor volume at the end of EndoTAG-1 plus paclitaxel administration as compared to baseline. Safety, pathological complete response (pCR) defined as no residual tumor in breast and axillary nodes at surgery and correlation between % reduction in MRI estimated tumor volume and pCR were also evaluated.Fifteen out of 20 scheduled patients were included: Six patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative/HER2-negative and 9 with ER-positive/HER2-negative BC. Nine patients completed treatment as per protocol. Despite premedication and slow infusion rates, grade 3 hypersensitivity reactions to EndoTAG-1 were observed during the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 6th weekly infusion in 4 patients, respectively, and required permanent discontinuation of the EndoTAG-1. Moreover, two additional patients stopped EndoTAG-1 plus paclitaxel after 8 and 9 weeks due to clinical disease progression. Two patients had grade 3 increases in transaminases and 1 patient grade 4 neutropenia. pCR was achieved in 5 of the 6 ER-/HER2- and in none of the 9 ER+/HER2- BC patients. The mean % reduction in MRI estimated tumor volume at the end of EndoTAG-1 plus paclitaxel treatment was 81% (95% CI, 66% to 96%, p

Genomic Grade Index (GGI) is a 97-gene signature that improves histologic grade (HG) classification in invasive breast carcinoma. In this prospective study we sought to evaluate the feasibility of performing GGI in routine clinical practice and its impact on treatment recommendations.Patients with pT1pT2 or operable pT3, N0-3 invasive breast carcinoma were recruited from 8 centers in Belgium. Fresh surgical samples were sent at room temperature in the MapQuant Dx™ PathKit for centralized genomic analysis. Genomic profiles were determined using Affymetrix U133 Plus 2.0 and GGI calculated using the MapQuant Dx® protocol, which defines tumors as low or high Genomic Grade (GG-1 and GG-3 respectively).180 pts were recruited and 155 were eligible. The MapQuant test was performed in 142 cases and GGI was obtained in 78% of cases (n=111). Reasons for failures were 15 samples with