Search

Background: The incidence of brain metastases (BrM) has steadily increased over time as women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) live longer and survive to experience spread of cancer to the central nervous system (CNS). Women with triple negative and HER2+ MBC, which represent 30-40% of the MBC population, are at particularly high risk of BrM. At present, MBC patients are not screened for BrM; rather, they undergo imaging of the brain only after symptoms suggestive of CNS involvement develop. Unfortunately, by the time that patients experience potentially debilitating symptoms of BrM, they often have a significant burden of disease with limited treatment options and a poor prognosis. We hypothesize that early detection of BrM via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based screening may allow for early intervention and, ultimately, improved outcomes for MBC patients. Methods: A multi-centre, open-label prospective phase II study, randomizing 50 women with triple negative or HER2+ MBC to either MRI-based BrM screening or symptom-directed surveillance. Randomization is stratified for tumor subtype. Intervention arm: Contrast-enhanced MRI of the brain at baseline, 4-, 8- and 12-months with concurrent chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) imaging, a new metabolic MRI sequence that may detect BrM even earlier than standard MRI. Control arm: Symptom-directed surveillance (brain imaging only if patients develop symptoms suggestive of BrM). All participants complete questionnaires at baseline, 6- and 15-months to assess overall (EORTC QLQ BN20) and neurologic-specific (FACT-BR tools) quality of life (QoL) as well as cancer-related anxiety (NCI PRO-CTCAE). A blood sample is collected for ctDNA analysis at baseline in all patients at diagnosis of BrM, if applicable. Key inclusion criteria: 1) Age ≥18; 2) Triple negative MBC, with metastatic disease diagnosed ≤12 weeks prior to study entry OR HER2+ MBC with no restrictions regarding timeline of diagnosis; 3) No symptoms of BrM or known asymptomatic BrM at study entry. Key exclusion criteria: 1) ECOG>2; 2) Inability to complete an MRI (e.g., claustrophobia). Analyses: The primary goal of this study is to determine the feasibility of a randomized trial of BrM screening versus symptom-directed surveillance in the proposed patient population. The pilot study will be considered “not feasible” if 50% of patients allocated to the control arm are screened for BrM with CT or MRI. Overall survival will be assessed as a secondary endpoint. We will also investigate how screening for BrM influences the detection rate of BrM and explore how subsequent intervention affects both overall and neurologic-specific QoL. Our data will enable a power calculation to determine a sample size for a future, larger trial. 28 of 50 planned patients have enrolled in the study to-date. Citation Format: Katarzyna J Jerzak, Arjun Sahgal, Gregory Pond, Priscilla K Brastianos, Orit Freedman, Gregory Stanisz, Ellen Warner. MRI screening versus symptom-directed surveillance for brain metastases among patients with triple negative or HER2+ metastatic breast cancer: A pilot study (nct03881605) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT1-07-01.

Advanced Breast Cancer; Efficacy; Margetuximab Cáncer de mama avanzado; Eficacia; Margetuximab Càncer de mama avançat; Eficàcia; Margetuximab Importance ERRB2 (formerly HER2)–positive advanced breast cancer (ABC) remains typically incurable with optimal treatment undefined in later lines of therapy. The chimeric antibody margetuximab shares ERBB2 specificity with trastuzumab but incorporates an engineered Fc region to increase immune activation. Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of margetuximab vs trastuzumab, each with chemotherapy, in patients with pretreated ERBB2-positive ABC. Design, Setting, and Participants The SOPHIA phase 3 randomized open-label trial of margetuximab plus chemotherapy vs trastuzumab plus chemotherapy enrolled 536 patients from August 26, 2015, to October 10, 2018, at 166 sites in 17 countries. Eligible patients had disease progression on 2 or more prior anti-ERBB2 therapies and 1 to 3 lines of therapy for metastatic disease. Data were analyzed from February 2019 to October 2019. Interventions Investigators selected chemotherapy before 1:1 randomization to margetuximab, 15 mg/kg, or trastuzumab, 6 mg/kg (loading dose, 8 mg/kg), each in 3-week cycles. Stratification factors were metastatic sites (≤2, >2), lines of therapy (≤2, >2), and chemotherapy choice. Main Outcomes and Measures Sequential primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) by central blinded analysis and overall survival (OS). All α was allocated to PFS, followed by OS. Secondary end points were investigator-assessed PFS and objective response rate by central blinded analysis. Results A total of 536 patients were randomized to receive margetuximab (n = 266) or trastuzumab (n = 270). The median age was 56 (27-86) years; 266 (100%) women were in the margetuximab group, while 267 (98.9%) women were in the trastuzumab group. Groups were balanced. All but 1 patient had received prior pertuzumab, and 489 (91.2%) had received prior ado-trastuzumab emtansine. Margetuximab improved primary PFS over trastuzumab with 24% relative risk reduction (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.98; P = .03; median, 5.8 [95% CI, 5.5-7.0] months vs 4.9 [95% CI, 4.2-5.6] months; October 10, 2018). After the second planned interim analysis of 270 deaths, median OS was 21.6 months with margetuximab vs 19.8 months with trastuzumab (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.69-1.13; P = .33; September 10, 2019), and investigator-assessed PFS showed 29% relative risk reduction favoring margetuximab (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58-0.86; P

Purpose Despite triple antiemetic therapy use for breast cancer patients receiving emetogenic chemotherapy, nausea remains a clinical challenge. We evaluated adding olanzapine (5 mg) to triple therapy on nausea control in patients at high personal risk of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Methods This multi-centre, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial randomized breast cancer patients scheduled to receive neo/adjuvant chemotherapy with anthracycline-cyclophosphamide or platinum-based chemotherapy to olanzapine (5 mg, days 1–4) or placebo. Primary endpoint was frequency of self-reported significant nausea, repeated for all cycles of chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints included: duration of nausea, overall total control of CINV, Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) using FLIE questionnaire, use of rescue mediation and treatment-related adverse events. Results 218 eligible patients were randomised to placebo (105) or olanzapine (113). From days 0–5 following each cycle of chemotherapy, 41.3% (95%CI: 36.1–46.7%) of patients in the placebo group reported significant nausea compared to 27.7% (95%CI: 23.2–32.4%) in the olanzapine group (p = 0.001). Across all cycles of chemotherapy, patients receiving olanzapine experienced a statistically significant improvement in HRQoL (p, Highlights • Double-blind trial evaluated the addition of olanzapine to triple therapy in patients at high personal risk of CINV. • Adding 5 mg olanzapine was associated with significantly improved nausea control with no unexpected toxicities. • Olanzapine plus triple therapy should be considered standard of care for breast cancer patients at high risk of CINV.

The optimal timing of commencing adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) relative to adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) (i.e. concurrent with or sequential to radiotherapy) remains unknown. A systematic review performed by our team was unable to answer this question due to a lack of high quality, randomized data on concurrent versus sequential ET and RT. Surveys of physicians confirmed this uncertainty and highlighted theoretical concerns for increased side effects with concurrent treatment. Respondents showed keen interest in obtaining real world, randomized data to guide clinical practice. REaCT-RETT is a pragmatic, randomized, non-inferiority trial comparing concurrent and sequential ET and RT in early breast cancer (EBC). The primary endpoint will assess the change in ET side effects at baseline and 3 months post radiation, using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Endocrine Subscale (FACT-ES), with primary analysis based on an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). With a sample size of 176 patients (88 per arm), an ANCOVA would have 80% power (α=0.05) to detect effect sizes as small as 0.25 regardless of the correlation with covariates. It is hypothesized that concurrent therapy will be non-inferior to sequential therapy in terms of ET side effects. Secondary endpoints will examine RT toxicity, ET compliance, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Patients with HR positive EBC planned to receive both adjuvant ET and RT were eligible. Patients who previously received ET for invasive breast cancer, or RT in the same breast, were excluded. The trial is conducted by The Ottawa Hospital’s (TOH) innovative Rethinking Clinical Trials (REaCT) program (https://react.ohri.ca/) which strives to improve access to patient-centered, pragmatic clinical trials by removing barriers for patients and researchers. Integral features of the program include broad eligibility criteria, a verbal consent model, and pragmatic data collection and assessment procedures. REaCT is the largest pragmatic cancer clinical trials program in Canada, with over 3,200 patients randomized in 18 clinical trials at 15 sites across Canada. REaCT-RETT accrued patients from September 2019 to January 2021. Data collection is ongoing, with final patient follow up expected April 2022. The timing of accrual provided a unique opportunity to adapt in response to restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which began to impact trial sites in March 2020. The target sample size was met with 262 patients randomized (1:1) across 3 sites in Ontario, 98% from TOH. A mean of 19 patients/month were accrued prior to the pandemic, compared to a mean of 13 patients/month after March 2020. Twenty-two patients were removed due to withdrawal of consent, ineligibility, or physician choice, and the pandemic was not a significant contributing factor. Since March 2020 there have been 772 patient follow ups, of which 47% (364/772) have been virtual. Only 10% (102/1028) of trial mandated appointments have been missed to date. Compliance with baseline and 3-month FACT-ES questionnaires for the primary endpoint in evaluable patients was 90% (215/240) and 83% (198/240), respectively. The pandemic posed several challenges to the REaCT-RETT study including a decline in patient accrual, poor accrual at peripheral sites due to delayed opening, and a rapid switch to virtual patient care. However, the nimble REaCT methodology enabled virtual patient consent and data collection during the pandemic, allowing the trial to continue successfully, with final data expected for presentation summer 2022. Finally, despite the challenges of COVID-19 we have seen that patients and physicians remain interested in research, and we are applying valuable lessons learned to forthcoming REaCT trials to strengthen their performance during and beyond the ongoing pandemic. Citation Format: Sharon F Mc Gee, Mark Clemons, Michelle Liu, Mashari Jemaan Alzahrani, Terry Ng, Arif Awan, Sandeep Sehdev, John Hilton, Jean Michel Caudrelier, Marie France Savard, Lesley Fallowfield, Vikaash Kumar, Orit Freedman, Dean Fergusson, Gregory Pond, Brian Hutton, Jean Marc Bourque. A randomized, pragmatic trial investigating the timing of radiotherapy and endocrine in patients with early stage breast cancer (REaCT-RETT trial) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT1-01-01.

Background: CTX + dual HER2-targeting monoclonal antibodies (mAb) remains a standard of care for treatment (Tx) of both HER2+ early-stage and MBC. However, when the SOPHIA trial was launched, limited Tx options existed after progression on T, pertuzumab (P), and ado-trastuzumab emtansine. M, an Fc-engineered anti-HER2 mAb, targets the same epitope as T and exerts similar antiproliferative effects. M enhances CD16A-mediated ADCC compared to T. Furthermore, M treatment is associated with increased HER2-specific T- and B-cell responses and increased T-cell clonality compared to baseline. The phase 3 SOPHIA (NCT02492711) study demonstrated PFS benefit of M vs T, both + CTX, in HER2+ MBC pts. M improved PFS over T, with a 24% relative risk reduction (HR .76; 95% CI .59-.98; P=.033; median, 5.8 [95% CI 5.5-7.0] months (mo) vs 4.9 [95% CI 4.2-5.6] mo (Rugo HS, et al. JAMA Oncol 2021), resulting in FDA approval. Median OS after 270 mortality events (2nd interim analysis) was 21.6 mo with M vs 19.8 mo with T (HR .89; 95% CI .69-1.13; P=.33). Here we report final OS after 385 events, as well as updated safety.Methods: Pts with disease progression after ≥2 lines of anti-HER2 Tx, including P, and 1-3 lines of Tx for HER2+ MBC were randomized 1:1 to CTX + either M (15 mg/kg) or T (8 mg/kg loading dose, then 6 mg/kg), both given IV every 3 weeks. Randomization was stratified by number of metastatic sites (≤2, >2), lines of Tx for MBC (≤2, >2), and CTX choice (capecitabine, eribulin, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine). Sequential primary end points were central-blinded review of PFS and OS.Results: The intent-to-treat (ITT) population comprised 536 pts (M, 266; T, 270). At the median follow-up of 20.2 mo among all ITT pts, pts received a median of 7 cycles of M + CTX vs 6 cycles of T + CTX. Median OS after 385 events in the ITT population was 21.6 mo with M vs 21.9 mo with T (HR .95; 95% CI .77-1.17; P=.62; Table). Based on a prespecified, non-α-allocated exploratory analysis, a numerical OS advantage in favor of the M arm was observed in the subgroup of pts homozygous for the CD16A-158F low-affinity allele (median OS, 23.6 vs 19.2 mo; HR .72; 95% CI .52-1.00; nominal P=.05). In contrast, in the small subgroup of CD16A-158V homozygotes, median OS was longer for T vs M (31.1 mo vs 22.0 mo; HR 1.77; 95% CI 1.01-3.12; nominal P=.04). Grade ≥3 adverse events (AE) occurred in 146 pts (55.3%) receiving M vs 141 pts (53.0%) receiving T. Serious AEs were seen in 47 pts (17.8%) receiving M vs 51 pts (19.2%) receiving T. Incidence of infusion-related reactions was higher with M (36 [13.6%]) vs T (9 [3.4%]). Left ventricular dysfunction requiring delay or cessation of M/T administration occurred in 4 pts (1.5%) receiving M and in 7 pts (2.6%) receiving T. Conclusions: The median OS in the ITT population was not statistically different between the 2 arms. An exploratory analysis of CD16A genotyping indicates a numerical OS advantage in favor of M in F homozygous pts, along with a numerical OS advantage in favor of T in V homozygous pts. Safety of M + CTX was similar to previous reports and consistent with M FDA-approved label. Studies of M in HER2+ breast cancer pts with different CD16A allelic variants are warranted, including MARGOT, the neoadjuvant investigator-initiated study on the efficacy of M vs T in pts carrying F-allelic variants of CD16A. Median OSITT analysisPrespecified, non-α-allocated exploratory analysis (n=506)N=536CD16A-158F carriers (F/F and F/V)(n=437)CD16A-158F homozygotes (F/F)(n=192)CD16A-158F/V heterozygotes(n=245)CD16A-158V homozygotes (V/V)(n=69)aM + CTX, mo21.6 (n=266)23.3 (n=221)23.6 (n=102)21.3 (n=119)22.0 (n=37)T + CTX, mo21.9 (n=270)20.8 (n=216)19.2 (n=90)22.0 (n=126)31.1 (n=32)HR (95% CI)0.95 (0.77-1.17)0.86 (0.69-1.08)0.72 (0.52-1.00)0.96 (0.71-1.30)1.77 (1.01-3.12)P value0.620.19b0.05b0.78b0.04bAbbreviations: CTX, chemotherapy; HR, hazard ratio; ITT, intent to treat; M, margetuximab; mo, months; OS, overall survival; T, trastuzumab. Cutoff date: June 14, 2021. aThis subgroup was characterized by an imbalance in poor prognostic features. bNominal P value. Citation Format: Hope Rugo, Seock-Ah Im, Fatima Cardoso, Javier Cortes, Giuseppe Curigliano, Antonino Musolino, Mark D. Pegram, Thomas Bachelot, Gail S. Wright, Cristina Saura, Santiago Escrivá-de-Romaní, Michelino De Laurentiis, Gary N. Schwartz, Timothy Pluard, Francesco Ricci, William Gwin, III, Christelle Levy, Ursa Brown-Glaberman, Jean-Marc Ferrero, Maaike de Boer, Sung-Bae Kim, Katarína Petráková, Denise A. Yardley, Orit Freedman, Erik H. Jakobsen, Einav Nili Gal-Yam, Rinat Yerushalmi, Peter A. Fasching, Emily Ashley, Shengyan Hong, Minori Rosales, William J. Gradishar. Phase 3 SOPHIA study of margetuximab (M) + chemotherapy (CTX) vs trastuzumab (T) + CTX in patients (pts) with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC) after prior anti-HER2 therapies: Final overall survival (OS) analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD8-01.

Purpose Abemaciclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor, demonstrated efficacy as monotherapy and in combination with fulvestrant in women with hormone receptor (HR)–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative advanced breast cancer previously treated with endocrine therapy. Methods MONARCH 3 is a double-blind, randomized phase III study of abemaciclib or placebo plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor in 493 postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who had no prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting. Patients received abemaciclib or placebo (150 mg twice daily continuous schedule) plus either 1 mg anastrozole or 2.5 mg letrozole, daily. The primary objective was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary objectives included response evaluation and safety. A planned interim analysis occurred after 189 events. Results Median progression-free survival was significantly prolonged in the abemaciclib arm (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.72; P = .000021; median: not reached in the abemaciclib arm, 14.7 months in the placebo arm). In patients with measurable disease, the objective response rate was 59% in the abemaciclib arm and 44% in the placebo arm ( P = .004). In the abemaciclib arm, diarrhea was the most frequent adverse effect (81.3%) but was mainly grade 1 (44.6%). Comparing abemaciclib and placebo, the most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (21.1% v 1.2%), diarrhea (9.5% v 1.2%), and leukopenia (7.6% v 0.6%). Conclusion Abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor was effective as initial therapy, significantly improving progression-free survival and objective response rate and demonstrating a tolerable safety profile in women with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer.

The optimal chemotherapy regimen for patients with early stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) remains unknown. The purpose of the study is to survey physicians and breast cancer patients about preferred chemotherapy regimens for early stage TNBC and clinical trial strategies. A standardised online questionnaire was developed and circulated to medical oncologists known to treat breast cancer. A separate questionnaire was given to patients who had received chemotherapy for breast cancer. The questionnaire was completed by 41/84 medical oncologists (48.8% response rate) and 74 patients. The most commonly used neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy regimens for TNBC were dose-dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC)–paclitaxel (P), dose-dense AC followed by weekly P and fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide–docetaxel (FEC-D). The majority of medical oncologists (80%) would be willing to enrol patients in trials evaluating the most effective chemotherapy regimen for TNBC. Oncologists favoured a three arm trial design comparing currently available standard of care treatments (36%) and trials of novel or non-standard of care agents 22% (9/41). Sixty percent (41/74) of patients indicated that they would be willing to be enrolled in trials evaluating various adjuvant regimens for TNBC. Both oncologists and patients were interested in novel consent approaches such as using the integrated consent model. Optimisation of chemotherapy for TNBC is an important and unmet clinical need. It is apparent that various chemotherapy regimens are used for patients with early stage TNBC. The majority of medical oncologists and patients are interested in entering trials to optimise chemotherapy choices.

Gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma is an uncommon aggressive type of endocervical adenocarcinoma that is not associated with human papillomavirus (HPV). At present, this tumor is classified under the spectrum of mucinous carcinoma of the uterine cervix. The clinical stage of gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma at the time of diagnosis is usually more advanced compared to the HPV-associated endocervical adenocarcinoma. Widespread dissemination to unusual sites, such as omentum, peritoneum, and distant organs, can be present. Owing to its rare incidence, diagnostic dilemmas, and aggressive behavior, clinical management can be challenging. In this study, we aimed to elucidate the molecular characteristics of these tumors by using next-generation sequencing (NGS) to assess 161 unique cancer-driver genes for single-nucleotide and copy-number variations, gene fusions, and insertions/deletions within gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma tumors. In total, 92 variants were detected across the 14 samples tested (7 variants on average per tumor). TP53 was the most recurrently mutated gene followed by MSH6, CDKN2A/B, POLE, SLX4, ARID1A, STK11, BRCA2, and MSH2. Abnormal p53 expression was observed in nine cases by immunohistochemistry, of which TP53 variants were present in four cases. MDM2 gene amplification in 12q15 (69202190-69233452) locus was seen in two cases that express normal p53 levels by immunohistochemistry. Four cases had STK11 null (frameshift/nonsense) variants, three of which were previously reported in Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. Overall, genes that are implicated in DNA damage, repair, cell cycle, Fanconi anemia pathway, and the PI3K-AKT signaling pathways were found to be mutated. Of note, genes known to have acquired and/or inherited variants in endometrial tumors were enriched within our cohort. In conclusion, our study shows the genetic heterogeneity of gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma with some potentially actionable molecular alterations, which highlights the importance of further molecular characterization for better identification of this rare entity, and hence better clinical management.

It is recommended to use comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in clinical oncology practice to improve care for geriatric cancer patients and to identify medical and social issues that may need further intervention. The purpose of this pragmatic pilot study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Hurria et al. CGA in cancer patients 70 years of age or older undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy, as well as the feasibility of integrating it into a busy clinic practice and the psychosocial impact on these patients. Twenty-five patients were recruited. Descriptive analysis was performed via a geriatric assessment questionnaire completed by the participants prior to their first adjuvant chemotherapy treatment and during follow-up, 2 to 6 weeks after last treatment. Additionally, study staff performed a geriatric healthcare assessment at both time points. The results of this pilot study show that administration is feasible despite some challenges. Administration of a CGA in a clinic setting presented some logistical issues with regard to time and space available in clinic. Analysis of patient data indicated only minor variations in patient domains from pre-chemo to post-chemo confirming previous research. Participants expressed gratitude for the extra time spent with them at a stressful time in their lives. Further information regarding the usefulness of a comprehensive geriatric assessment with regard to improving treatment selection, identifying undetected medical problems, and avoiding toxicity will be obtained if the administration of comprehensive geriatric questionnaires is incorporated into the clinic setting and considered into the allocated time for staff workload.

Despite substantial variability in individual risk of skeletal complications, patients with metastatic bone disease are treated with bisphosphonates at the same dose and dosing interval. This study assessed the feasibility of conducting a randomized trial of less frequent bisphosphonate administration in women with breast cancer and low-risk bone metastases.A randomized feasibility study was conducted. Patients receiving intravenous bisphosphonates for ≥3 months and with low-risk baseline serum C-telopeptide (CTx) levels (600 ng/L) were assigned to pamidronate 90 mg intravenously every 3 to 4 weeks (control) or every 12 weeks (de-escalated). CTx, bone alkaline phosphatase, and pain scores (Brief Pain Inventory and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Pain) were collected every 12 weeks for 48 weeks.Fifty-four patients were approached, 44 consented, and 38 were randomized. Median age was 55 (range, 29 to 77) and median baseline CTx was 163 ng/L (range, 10 to 526). Fourteen control group participants (73.7%) and 13 de-escalated group participants (68.4%) maintained CTx in the low-risk range (P=0.64). All patients changing to higher-risk range had progressive extraskeletal disease. Compared with the control group, there was a time-dependent increase in CTx in the de-escalated group. There were no significant differences in bone alkaline phosphatase, Brief Pain Inventory, or Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Pain.It is feasible to conduct randomized trials of de-escalated pamidronate in low-risk women treated with ≥3 months of prior bisphosphonate therapy. De-escalated scheduling satisfied our predefined definition of noninferiority compared with 3- to 4-weekly treatment. Larger trials should assess whether increasing CTx levels with de-escalated therapy lead to higher rates of skeletal complications.

Background: Bone-targeted agent such as bisphosphonates (BPs) can reduce skeletal complications from bone metastases but have no effect on either disease progression or survival. Despite substantial variability in the frequency and severity of skeletal complications, patients are empirically treated with BPs at the same dose and schedule irrespective of their individual risk. Materials and Methods: A pilot, randomized, non-inferiority trial was conducted. Patients with low-risk bone metastases (serum C-telopeptide [CTx] Results: Fifty-four patients were approached, 44 provided consent and 38 were eligible for randomization. Median age was 55 (range 29–77) and mean baseline CTx was 319ng/L (range 10–526). Thirty-five participants (92%) completed the trial, 2 withdrew consent and one participant died. Fourteen control group participants (73.7%) and 13 experimental group participants (68.4%) maintained CTx in the low risk range (test for two proportions p=0.64). All patients not maintaining CTx in the low risk range showed evidence of both visceral and bone progression. Compared to the control group, there was a trend towards increasing CTx with time in the experimental group (p=0.10). There was no significant difference in BAP (p=0.37), BPI (p=0.21) or FACT-BP scores (p=0.59) between the two groups. Over the 48 week follow-up, two skeletal events were observed in each group. Conclusions: Randomized trials of de-escalated BP therapy in women with low-risk bone metastases are feasible. Twelve-weekly pamidronate appears non-inferior to 3–4 weekly treatment. Larger trials are required to assess whether; 1) increasing CTx levels with de-escalated therapy will lead to higher rates of skeletal complications and 2) whether BP should be given every 3–4 weeks in patients with progressive visceral and bone disease. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2011;71(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-16-08.

Supportive care interventions can have a substantial impact on side effects of chemotherapy. Consequently, accurate reporting of such interventions is essential when interpreting clinical trial results. This study determined the prevalence and quality of reporting of supportive care treatment for common chemotherapy-induced toxicities in phase III, breast cancer chemotherapy trials.A systematic review of phase III trials of breast cancer trials incorporating chemotherapy published in the last 5 years was undertaken. Trials were identified through MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, and the Cochrane Library. Supportive treatments evaluated were use of antiemetics, colony-stimulating growth factors, and antibiotics. Reporting quality was rated as "good", "fair", "poor", or "absent" using predetermined criteria.Sixty-two trials met inclusion criteria. In 41 studies (66%), details regarding prophylactic antiemetic treatment were not provided. Growth factor use was not reported in 20 trials (32%). Instructions for the use of prophylactic antibiotics were absent in 45 trials (72%).There are significant deficiencies in reporting of use of prophylactic supportive care agents in breast cancer trials. Omission of supportive care instructions may impact substantially on patient management and health care system expenditure. Recommendations for the type, dose, and frequency of supportive care drugs should be provided and reported on in trials.

At present, there is no gold standard test for the investigation of ovarian function in pre-menopausal breast cancer patients who develop amenorrhea after chemotherapy. Clinical, biochemical and biophysical investigations continue to be utilized in clinical practice, despite concerns regarding their predictive value for menopause. The resulting uncertainty about a woman's actual menopausal status has important consequences for patient management. These include choice of appropriate endocrine therapy, assessment of residual ovarian function and its effect on breast cancer recurrence, fertility issues and the prediction of the likelihood of conception. It is hoped that the development of novel surrogates may allow clinicians to more accurately assess menopausal status and thereby facilitate tailored and individualised therapy for this common group of patients.

Background: Approximately 1/3 of patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and bone disease will sustain a skeletal related event (SRE) despite use of a bisphosphonate; there is therefore an urgent unmet need in this large population to better assess individual SRE risk and develop more effective bone protective agents. Using novel tools to assess bone quality may help guide individual patient treatment choices as well as future trial design. Materials and Methods: Women with MBC and bone metastases were recruited. Baseline bone assessments were performed using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) [areal bone mineral density (BMD) and vertebral fracture assessment (VFA)], high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT), and serum markers of bone turnover [serum CTX and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BAP)]. Risk factors for osteoporosis and fractures were then recorded. Results: 49 baseline assessments were completed. Mean age and body mass index were 53.6 (range 30-80) and 27 (range 17-45) respectively. One in four women had an ECOG 2-3, and 24% had a clinical fracture since the diagnosis of MBC. 94% had estrogen positive disease, 11% were HER2+. 53% had prior radiation therapy to bone; 90% received bisphosphonate therapy. Bone assessments are outlined in the Table. Vertebral compression deformity (VCD) using the novel technique of VFA was most strongly associated with clinical fracture (p = 0.003). Discussion: Prospective evaluation of individual SRE risk will enable improved patient-centred care and allow more rational use of bone targeted therapies. VFA is a novel tool that may better inform treatment decisions and choice of agents in women with MBC. Future follow-up of these patients will help determine the optimal assessment modality. Bone quantity and quality assessments Citation Information: Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-13-08.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D deficiency has potential roles in breast cancer etiology and progression. Vitamin D deficiency has also been associated with increased toxicity from bisphosphonate therapy. The optimal dose of vitamin D supplementation is unknown, but daily sunlight exposure can generate the equivalent of a 10,000-IU oral dose of vitamin D3. This study therefore aimed to assess the effect of this dose of vitamin D3 in patients with bone metastases from breast cancer. METHODS: Patients with bone metastases treated with bisphosphonates were enrolled into this single-arm phase 2 study. Patients received 10,000 IU of vitamin D3 and 1000 mg of calcium supplementation each day for 4 months. The effect of this treatment on palliation, bone resorption markers, calcium metabolism, and toxicity were evaluated at baseline and monthly thereafter. RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled. No significant changes in bone resorption markers were seen. Despite no change in global pain scales, there was a significant reduction in the number of sites of pain. A small but statistically significant increase in serum calcium was seen, as was a significant decrease in serum parathyroid hormone. Treatment unmasked 2 cases of primary hyperparathyroidism, but was not associated with direct toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Daily doses of 10,000 IU vitamin D3 for 4 months appear safe in patients without comorbid conditions causing hypersensitivity to vitamin D. Treatment reduced inappropriately elevated parathyroid hormone levels, presumably caused by long-term bisphosphonate use. There did not appear to be a significant palliative benefit nor any significant change in bone resorption. Cancer 2010. © 2010 American Cancer Society.

Fulvestrant use in pretreated metastatic breast cancer patients is associated with variable response rates. This study aimed to characterize these responses and to develop a prediction model to identify those patients who could potentially derive the most clinical benefit. A nationwide review of patients enrolled in a Canadian compassionate use program from 1999 to 2006 was performed. Prior therapy with tamoxifen, steroidal, and nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors was mandatory. The dependent variable in the analysis was the proportion of patients requiring chemotherapy at 3 months following the start of fulvestrant. General Linear Mixed modeling was used to identify factors significantly associated with this dependant variable and to subsequently develop the prediction model. Three hundred and five women received at least one dose of fulvestrant; 207 went on to receive chemotherapy (68%). Median duration of fulvestrant treatment was 4.1 months (range 0.8-63.1). Factors predictive of being chemotherapy free at 3 months included older age, no prior adjuvant hormonal therapy, and the absence of lung or brain metastases at the start of therapy. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis had an area under the curve of 0.70 (95% CI 0.60-0.80). This model was able to identify risk information that could be helpful in assessing which patients would most likely benefit from fulvestrant as an intervention with the objective being a delay in chemotherapy.

Endocrine therapy is probably the most important systemic therapy for hormone receptor positive breast cancer. Hormonal manipulation was the first targeted treatment employed in breast cancer therapy even before the role of the estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptors (PR) had been elucidated. Unfortunately, a substantial proportion of patients, despite being ER and/or PR positive, are either primarily resistant to hormone therapies or will develop hormone resistance during the course of their disease. Signaling through complex growth factor receptor pathways, which activate the ER are emerging as important causes of endocrine resistance. Targeted therapies, such as signal transduction inhibitors (STIs), are being explored as agents to be able to potentially overcome this crosstalk and thus, resistance to hormone treatment. This article reviews the biology of the ER, the proposed mechanisms of endocrine resistance, and ongoing clinical trials with STIs in combination with hormonal manipulation as a means to overcome endocrine resistance.

The potential for synergistic interactions between anticancer drugs has been used to justify combinations of agents in clinical trials. However, most combinations of targeted agents and chemotherapies have been tested in the clinic without previous systematic evaluation of their potential benefit. Preclinical studies may help in the identification of synergistic or antagonistic interactions. For antineoplastic therapies, these studies may reveal synergy or antagonism of the drug combinations. Synergy occurs when two agents given together produce higher antitumoral activity than the sum of each individual drug. This represents the ideal setting for the development of combinations of targeted agents and chemotherapies. On the other side, certain drug combinations have shown adverse results, indicative of an antagonistic effect. In this article, we review the preclinical molecular bases that justify approved combinations of targeted agents with chemotherapy including examples of synergistic and antagonistic combinations. We also discuss scenarios for rational associations of targeted agents based on biological data and propose strategies that may improve the success of combinations of anticancer agents.

Sir d The urogenital side-effects of aromatase inhibitors are well recognised, and can have a significant negative effect on quality of life. Safety issues around the use of oestrogen-based therapies in this patient population remain unanswered [1,2]. Our group has conducted a trial examining the effectiveness and safety of Vagifem versus Estring in the treatment of significant urogenital symptoms in women on aromatase inhibitors with significant urogenital symptoms despite the use of a local nonoestrogen-based moisturising therapy [3]. Patients with significant and persistent urogenital symptoms despite a 1 month run-in period of topical nonhormonal moisturiser (Replens) were randomised to treatment with either Estring or Vagifem for 12 weeks. Validated quality of life (FACT-ES) and sexual health questionnaires, maturation index, vaginal pH and serum oestradiol were administered to assess the efficacy and safety of local oestrogen-containing treatment at weeks 2, 4, 8 and 12. Because of extremely low accrual of patients the study was closed prematurely. Here we report data on seven patients who received the treatment. Of these, three patients were treated with Estring and four with Vagifem. For all seven patients who completed the trial, the mean FACT-ES score improved from 133 at baseline to 147 at week 12 (P ¼ 0.056). The maturation index improved in all patients except one. Serum oestradiol levels rose from an undetectable level at baseline in all patients by week 2, but returned to undetectable or near undetectable levels by week 12 (Figure 1). As accrual would not have enabled the primary study objective to be answered, the study was stopped early. In this small population of women with significant symptoms of urogenital atrophy despite topical nonhormonal therapy, both Estring and Vagifem effectively improved both quality of life and vaginal mucosal maturation index. The clinical impact of the transient elevation in serum oestradiol levels and a comparison of the two agents cannot be answered by the current study and warrants further investigation.

Purpose Decisions about treatment for women with metastatic breast cancer are usually based on the estrogen (ER), progesterone (PgR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status of the primary tumor. Retrospective data suggest that discordance between primary and metastatic lesions leads to detrimental outcome. This prospective study investigated receptor status of primary tumors and metastases in the same patient and assessed the impact of discordance on patient management and survival. Patients and Methods Biopsies of suspected metastases were analyzed for ER, PgR, and HER2. Primary tumors and metastases were analyzed using similar methodology. The treating oncologist indicated a treatment plan before and after biopsy to determine whether the result influenced management. Patients were followed up for progression or death. Results Of 121 women undergoing biopsy, 80% could be analyzed for receptor status. Discordance in ER, PgR, and HER2 between the primary and the metastasis was 16%, 40%, and 10%, respectively. Biopsy led to a reported change of management in 14% of women (95% CI, 8.4% to 21.5%). Fine-needle aspiration and biopsy of bone led to reduced ability to analyze receptors. After a median follow-up of 12 months, there were no trends for an association between receptor discordance and either time to treatment failure or overall survival. Conclusion Biopsy of metastases is technically feasible. Clinicians alter immediate management in one of seven patients on the basis of results of the biopsy, and discordance is not then associated with detrimental effects on outcome. Tissue confirmation should be considered in women with breast cancer and suspected metastatic recurrence.

Treatment decisions in recurrent breast cancer are usually based on the estrogen (ER), progesterone (PgR) and HER2 receptor status of the primary tumour. Retrospective studies suggest that discordance between receptor expression of primary and recurrent breast cancer exists.A pooled analysis of individual patient data from two large prospective studies comprising biopsy of recurrent lesions obtained from consenting patients was undertaken. Tissue was analyzed for ER, PgR by immunohistochemistry and HER2 by FISH. Receptor status of recurrent disease was compared with that of the primary tumour. Recruiting clinicians assessed whether or not receptor discordance affected subsequent systemic treatment.Two hundred and eighty-nine patients underwent biopsy. Recurrent biopsy specimens were obtained from locoregional recurrence in 48.1% and from distant metastases in 51.9%. Distant sites included skin/soft tissue (25.0%), bone/bone marrow (19.2%) and liver (15.8%). Benign disease or second primary cancer was observed in 7.6% of biopsies. Discordance in ER, PgR or HER2 between confirmed primary and recurrent breast cancer was 12.6%, 31.2% and 5.5%, respectively (all p0.001). Biopsy results altered management in 14.2% of patients undergoing biopsy (95% confidence intervals 10.4-18.8%, p≤0.0001). The duration between primary and recurrent disease, the site of recurrence and the receptor profile of the primary tumour did not affect discordance rates.There is substantial discordance in receptor status between primary and recurrent breast cancer. The number needed to biopsy in order to alter treatment was 7.1. Patients with recurrent breast cancer should have tissue confirmation of receptor status of recurrent disease.

Summary Background In vitro studies have shown that lapatinib is most active in HER2 over-expressing tumors, but also has activity in cell lines over-expressing HER1. Consequently, clinical testing of lapatinib has been carried out in both HER2-positive and HER2-negative patients. Here we evaluate the clinical efficacy of lapatinib in HER2-positive and HER2-negative patients. Methods A published data meta-analysis of randomized trials that evaluated the efficacy of combining lapatinib with chemo- or endocrine therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer was undertaken. Hazard ratios (HR) were extracted for progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival, while odds ratios were extracted for disease stabilization, serious adverse events (SAEs) and need for discontinuation. Pooled estimates were computed using inverse-variance and random-effect modeling. Results Three randomized controlled trials with a total of 2264 patients met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis demonstrated the HR for PFS with lapatinib was 0.69 in patients with HER2-positive disease, while there was no improvement in PFS (HR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.80–1.19) for treatment of HER2-negative breast cancer. Similarly, overall survival was improved in HER2-positive patients (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60–0.96), but not in HER2-negative patients (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.65–1.21). Patients on lapatinib were 64% more likely to develop a SAE and 2.3 times more likely to discontinue therapy due to toxicity. Conclusion Clinical benefit from treatment with lapatinib is limited to patients with HER2-positive breast cancer. Outside of the clinical trial setting, lapatinib should not be administered to women with HER2-negative disease because it causes increased toxicity without improving disease outcome.

Several adjuvant endocrine strategies exist for postmenopausal women with breast cancer. This study compared the effect of two sequences of aromatase inhibitor use [steroidal (exemestane) and non-steroidal (anastrozole)] on serological and pathological biomarkers when given in the neoadjuvant setting to postmenopausal women with breast cancer. Thirty women were assigned to receive exemestane 25 mg or anastrozole 1 mg each given for 8 weeks in a randomized sequence. The effect of this treatment on serum estrone sulfate and estradiol levels, as well as tumor changes in the proliferation biomarker Ki67 were evaluated at baseline, 8 weeks and 16 weeks. WHO clinical response criteria, patient preference, and quality of life were also assessed. Assessable data was available from 28 patients. There were no differences in concentration changes of serum estradiol or Ki67 between patients in the two arms. Overall clinical response rate was 68% (19/28 assessable patients) and clinical benefit was 93% (26/28 assessable patients). There was no significant difference in toxicity or quality of life scores. The majority of patients expressed a personal preference for anastrozole over exemestane. Results suggest that the order of steroidal and non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors has little effect on outcome. The majority of patients express clear preferences for drug treatments.

Despite many large randomised trials assessing adjuvant endocrine treatment for postmenopausal breast cancer patients, the optimal endocrine strategy remains unknown. Neoadjuvant endocrine studies provide the opportunity to model an appropriate study design in a more expeditious manner. Several large adjuvant trials are exploring sequential aromatase inhibitor (AI) strategies. The present study compared the effect of two sequences of AI use – steroidal (exemestane (E)) and nonsteroidal (anastrozole (A)) – on serological and pathological biomarkers, when given in the neoadjuvant setting to patients with locally advanced breast cancer.

Fulvestrant use in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer is associated with highly variable responses. The present study aimed to characterize the benefit of fulvestrant therapy and to develop a prediction model for clinical benefit in this setting.

The molecular mechanisms underlying the development of bone metastases in breast cancer remain unclear. Disseminated tumour cells (DTCs) in the bone marrow of breast cancer patients are commonly identified, even in early stage disease, but their potential to initiate metastases is not known. The mechanism whereby DTCs become overt metastatic tumour cells (MTCs) is therefore, an area of considerable interest. This study explored the analysable yield of genetic material from human biopsy samples in order to describe differences in gene expression between DTCs and bone MTCs. Thirteen breast cancer patients with bone metastases underwent a CT-guided bone metastasis biopsy and a bone marrow biopsy. Tumour cells were enriched and gene expression profiling was conducted to identify differentially expressed genes. The analysable yield of sufficient RNA for microarray analysis was 60% from bone metastasis biopsies and 80% from bone marrow biopsies. A signature of 133 candidate genes differentially expressed between DTCs and MTCs was identified. Several genes relevant to breast cancer metastasis to bone (osteopontin, CTGF, parathyroid hormone receptor, EGFR) were significantly overexpressed in MTCs as compared to DTCs. Biopsies of bone metastases and bone marrow rarely yield enough tissue for robust molecular biology studies using clinical samples. The findings obtained however are interesting and seem to overlap with the bone metastasis gene expression signature described in murine xenograft models. Larger biopsy specimens or improved RNA extraction techniques may improve analysable yield and feasibility of these techniques.

Purpose of review Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide, and is diagnosed in the advanced stage in 70% of patients. This study will summarize the most up-to-date strategies in supportive care for patients with metastatic lung cancer. Recent findings Two recent systematic reviews concluded that longer-course radiation treatment offers a survival and symptom benefit over short-course treatment in patients with good performance status. Whereas several meta-analyses have demonstrated the benefit of palliative chemotherapy for quality of life and survival, the optimal drug combination and number of courses remain under study, and proper stratification of patients is essential. Clinical practice guidelines are available for evidence-based management of symptoms common in patients with lung cancer. Early integration of specialized palliative care shows promise as a means of improving patient care and limiting unnecessary treatment. Summary Supportive care for the patient with advanced lung cancer should involve consideration and discussion of all therapeutic options that could provide benefit. Depending on the clinical situation, these could include chemotherapy or radiation, and should always include appropriate symptom management and family support. Research incorporating symptom and quality-of-life measures is challenging, but is also essential to inform excellent supportive care.

Bone is the most common site of metastasis in cancer patients. Bone metastases are associated with increased morbidity as reflected through pain, reduced quality of life and so called skeletal related events (SREs) as well as worsening patient mortality reflected through decreased survival. This chapter will review the most up-to-date knowledge regarding the assessment of therapeutic response in patients with bone metastases. This includes clinical evaluation, pain and quality of life parameters, biochemical methods of monitoring and radiological measurement of response. Finally, limitations of clinical trial design will be discussed, and future options for trial design are presented.

Initiation of bisphosphonate therapy in bisphosphonate-naive patients is known to be associated with radiological changes such as increased bone density in both osteolytic and osteoblastic metastases. It is not known, however, whether switching from a second-generation bisphosphonate to a more potent agent is associated with similar changes. This study aimed to prospectively explore radiological changes, as assessed by thoracolumbar CT scanning, in patients switching from an early generation bisphosphonate (i.e., oral clodronate or intravenous pamidronate) to intravenous zoledronic acid. Patients with progressive bone metastases despite use of an earlier generation bisphosphonate were switched to zoledronic acid as part of a study to evaluate the palliative benefit of this intervention. Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) scanning of the thoracolumbar spine was carried out at baseline, and repeated 4 months after commencing zoledronic acid. The effect of this change of therapy was explored in terms of bone density, as well as volume of osteolytic and osteoblastic disease. Fifteen patients were assessed. Switching of bisphosphonate therapy was associated with a significant increase in bone density, and an increase in osteoblastic volume. There was an insignificant trend towards reduced osteolytic volume. In conclusion, switching from early generation bisphosphonates to a more potent agent is associated with radiological changes similar to those seen when commencing a bisphosphonate in treatment-naive patients. This is consistent with the observed palliative benefit. The use of QCT may be of benefit in the monitoring of bone metastases.

Bone is the most common site of metastatic spread in breast cancer patients. The use of bisphosphonates (BPs) in women with bone metastases from breast cancer has been shown to reduce the incidence, and delay the onset of, skeletal-related events. Indeed, BPs are now an established standard of care in treating patients with bone metastases. As with many new therapies, once efficacy in the metastatic setting is demonstrated, therapies are tested in the adjuvant setting. There are a number of trials that have tested the hypothesis that BP therapy in women with early breast cancer may not only reduce the development of skeletal metastases but also improve both disease-free and overall survival; recent randomized trials have demonstrated intriguing results regarding the possible anticancer effects of adjuvant BP therapy. Furthermore, interesting signals are filtering through from trials evaluating the role of BPs to prevent cancer-treatment induced bone loss. Many of these trials will be reported in the near future. In this article we review possible subgroups that may benefit from adjuvant treatment with BPs, and ongoing trials that may offer more definitive answers.

The spinal column is the most frequent site of bone metastasis in patients with breast cancer. It is important to understand how the pattern of vertebral lesions may be affected by the introduction of modern cancer therapies. The purpose of this study was to characterize changes in the radiological appearance of spinal column metastases over the past decade using highly automated Computed Tomography (CT) based computational analysis methods. Two case series studies were performed using CT scans of patients with confirmed spinal metastases secondary to breast cancer: Cohort A with CT scans acquired between 1998 and 2001 and Cohort B with CT scans acquired between 2004 and 2007. Diseased vertebrae were classified as lytic, blastic, or mixed based on CT scan intensity through an automated 3D computer algorithm. The relative incidence of lytic vertebral metastases decreased in comparing Cohort B to Cohort A (12% vs. 49%) with a corresponding increase in mixed lesions (51% vs. 18%) Significant associations were found between the percentage of lytic lesions in number of diseased vertebrae measured per patient and lack of bisphosphonate use (RR = 2.6) and for membership in Cohort A vs. Cohort B (RR = 5.9). This work highlights a change in the CT appearance of vertebral metastases from breast cancer during the past decade toward a lower proportion of lytic disease. Observation of patient therapies suggests that differences in radiological assessment may be linked, at least in part, to bisphosphonate use. These findings have important implications for both clinical practice and research strategies involving vertebral metastases.

Aromatase inhibitors have revolutionized the treatment of post-menopausal women with hormone receptor positive breast cancer. However, approximately 22% of all cases of breast cancer in North America are diagnosed in women below the age of 50 and a substantial proportion of these women are pre-menopausal. In the pre-menopausal population with hormone receptor positive disease, research on the use of aromatase inhibitors is only beginning to emerge. In this review, the mechanism of action of aromatase inhibitors and the history of endocrine treatment for pre-menopausal breast cancer is briefly presented. Available research to date regarding efficacy and toxicity of aromatase inhibitors in the treatment of pre-menopausal breast cancer and future research directions are also discussed.

Despite improvements in the management of patients with early breast cancer, the prognosis for women with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) remains poor. The potential goals of neoadjuvant treatment for this disease include down-sizing tumours to allow breast conservation as well as the possibility of improving survival rates. Neoadjuvant treatment was initially dominated by chemotherapy, which increased rates of breast conserving surgery, but to date has demonstrated no survival benefit over standard adjuvant chemotherapy. With recent advances in endocrine therapy, and rapid and routine assessment of predictive factors of response such as estrogen (ER), progesterone (PR) and Her2 nu receptor status, endocrine therapy has come to the forefront of research investigating a neoadjuvant alternative to chemotherapy. Early studies of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy mainly evaluated the role of tamoxifen in the treatment of elderly postmenopausal women with LABC who were unselected for ER/PR status and were unsuitable for either surgery or chemotherapy. Response rates in these patients were found to be inferior to those traditionally obtained from trials with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Paralleling the superiority that third-generation aromatase inhibitors have shown over tamoxifen in the metastatic and adjuvant settings however, AIs have also demonstrated superiority in the neoadjuvant setting. Recent studies have shown response rates for neoadjuvant treatment with aromatase inhibitors in carefully selected hormone receptor positive patients to be comparable to those seen with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. This is particularly important as hormone receptor positive tumours have repeatedly been shown to have lower response rates to neoadjuvant chemotherapy than hormone receptor negative tumours. Neoadjuvant endocrine treatment with aromatase inhibitors has therefore evolved from being an experimental effort to palliate women with LABC unsuitable for surgery or chemotherapy, to representing a viable and possibly preferred alternative for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor positive large tumours or LABC. Further benefits of neoadjuvant trials include allowing the study of predictive biomarkers of disease in order to provide insight into therapy resistance and sensitivity, and identifying promising systemic therapies for additional testing in larger adjuvant trials.

Dose-dense chemotherapy has been proposed to improve breast cancer outcome due to its ability to prevent cancer cell repopulation; however, little is known about which patients benefit most from such scheduling. A pooled analysis of studies assessing dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy has shown that most of the therapeutic benefit derived from dose-dense scheduling arises in patients with node-positive, triple-negative disease.

Bacteriophage D3112 is a Mu-like temperate transposable phage of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Genetic mapping and DNA sequence analysis have identified the left end of the phage genome as encoding the transposase enzyme (A) and the lysogenic (c) repressor. The c open reading frame (ORF), located at the leftmost end of the phage genome and transcribed from right to left, has four possible GTG initiation codons. Using site-directed mutagenesis, each of the four GTG codons was modified to GTA, which cannot serve as an initiation codon. Plasmids were constructed expressing either the wild-type repressor ORF or the ORFs containing the mutated GTA codons. When introduced into Pseudomonas aeruginosa, no immunity to superinfection by D3112 was observed when the second GTG had been mutated. Northern blotting analysis demonstrated that the D3112 c repressor is transcribed as a 900-nt mRNA. The promoter region was defined by transcriptional lacZ fusions and primer extension analyses to bp 972–940 from the left end of the phage genome. When the D3112 c repressor was overexpressed and purified as a fusion protein with a C-terminal six-histidine extension (cts15-His6), it showed high affinity for a 261-bp PvuII fragment localized directly upstream of the c repressor ORF. Our results indicate that although D3112 c shows higher amino acid similarity to the λ family of repressors than it does to those of Mu and D108, it appears that its structure and function more accurately reflect an evolutionary ancestry with those from transposable coliphages Mu and D108.

TPS242 Background: Metastatic bone disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality for breast cancer patients (pts). Bisphosphonates (BP) have been shown to significantly delay the onset and frequency of skeletal related events (SREs), improve pain control and overall quality of life. Most pts receive intravenous BP every 3-4 weeks regardless of their individual risk for a SRE. This “one size fits all” strategy exposes those pts at a relatively low risk of SREs to the financial and quality of life burden of multiple visits to the cancer centre for treatments as well as an increased risk of drug toxicity. This study aimed to assess whether IV BP can be safely given at reduced frequency. Methods: The primary objective of this study is to demonstrate in women with biochemically defined low-risk bone metastases that the administration of IV BP every 12 weeks is sufficient to maintain biochemical stability for one year. Eligibility criteria include; bone metastases from breast cancer, have received at leas...

1007 Background: Decisions about systemic treatment of recurrent breast cancer are usually based on the estrogen (ER), progesterone (PgR), and HER2 receptor status of the primary tumor. Two recent prospective studies have investigated discordance in receptor status between the primary tumor and recurrent disease and assessed the impact of this on patient management. Methods: Individual patient data from the UK BRITS and Canadian DESTINY studies were pooled. In both these studies, biopsies of recurrent lesions were prospectively obtained from consenting patients and analyzed for ER, PgR by immunohistochemistry and HER2 by immunhistochemistry and FISH. Receptor status of recurrent disease was compared to the primary tumor. Recruiting clinicians assessed whether or not receptor discordance affected subsequent systemic treatment. Results: 258 patients underwent biopsy. The mean age was 60.1 years (range 27-87). Recurrent biopsy specimens were obtained from locoregional recurrence in 54% and from distant metas...

1041 Background: Fulvestrant use in heavily pretreated patients with MBC is associated with highly variable responses. This study aimed to characterize the benefit of fulvestrant therapy and develop a prediction model for clinical benefit in this setting. Methods: A nationwide, retrospective chart review of patients enrolled in a Canadian compassionate use program was performed. This program mandated prior therapy with tamoxifen and both steroidal and non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors. Charts from the seven highest accruing centers were reviewed. Sample size was based on the derivation of a model to predict the probability of a patient remaining on fulvestrant and free from chemotherapy for at least 3 months. Results: 305 women received at least one dose of fulvestrant; 207 went on to receive chemotherapy (68%). Of these, 48 (23%) required chemotherapy at 3 months, 113 (55%) at 6 months, and 170 (82%) by 12 months. Median duration of fulvestrant treatment was 126 days (range 23–1920). Median overall survival from start of fulvestrant was 698 days (25th percentile 316 days-75th percentile 1,359 days). The preliminary prediction model showed that older age (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93–0.99) and having received no adjuvant hormonal therapy (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.2–1.25) predicted a greater chance of remaining chemotherapy-free at 3 months. Presence of lung (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.1–5.9) or brain metastases (OR12.8, 95% CI 4.1–55.4) predicted a lower chance of remaining chemotherapy-free at 3 months. Conclusions: Older age and having received no prior adjuvant hormonal therapy predicted a greater chance of remaining chemotherapy free at 3 months, while lung and brain metastases predicted a lower chance. These factors will be validated in an international data set, and may be considered when prescribing fulvestrant. A 6-month prediction model is currently under development. [Table: see text]

1040 Background: Despite extensive work evaluating molecular differences between primary tumors, circulating tumor cells, disseminated tumor cells (DTCs) and established metastases, it is not apparent which genetic alterations are required to form viable, independent bone metastases (BM). A major limitation in exploring the genetic differences between DTCs and established BM is the paucity of fresh BM tissue available. Methods: Ten breast cancer patients with BM underwent a CT-guided BM biopsy and a bone marrow aspiration (for DTCs). Tumor cells were enriched by immunomagnetic separation and RNA was extracted from each sample. Gene expression profiling was conducted using Illumina Human Ref-8 bead arrays. Microarray data was analyzed using BeadStudio software to identify differentially expressed genes. Ingenuity Pathway Analysis software was used to identify genes integral to specific pathways involved in tumor dissemination. Results: The yield of analyzable malignant cells from BM and bone marrow aspirates was 60% and 80%, respectively. A signature of 133 genes was identified that was differentially expressed between the two sample types. Paired analysis of samples from the same patients identified a subset of 161 genes, of which 52 overlapped with the initial unmatched signature. Several genes relevant to breast cancer metastasis to bone (i.e., osteopontin, CTGF, parathyroid hormone receptor, EGFR) were significantly over-expressed in the BM compared to the DTCs. Conclusions: Results suggest that there are specific subsets of genes, which are required for DTCs in the bone marrow to form overt BM. A number of genes identified are already known to participate in osteolytic BM formation. This signature may allow identification of patients at increased risk for developing BM. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

5511 Background: NAC has been increasingly utilized in clinical practice yet no standard diagnostic strategy has been defined for EOC prior to the administration of NAC. We reviewed the diagnostic process for patients receiving NAC at our centre to determine if an optimal diagnostic strategy could be determined. Methods: A retrospective chart review of all patients known to receive NAC followed by cytoreductive surgery for presumed EOC between 1994 and 2007 was performed. Diagnostic strategies were defined as histology, cytology, and clinical. Performance of these strategies in predicting final pathology, based on expert pathology review of surgery specimens, was compared using Fisher's exact test. Results: 152 patients were included. Initial diagnosis was made on the basis of: cytology (paracentesis/thoracentesis)- 89 (59%); percutaneous biopsy- 40 (26%), radiology and CA-125–18 (12%), surgical biopsy -5 (3%). The final diagnosis was consistent with invasive EOC in 145 patients (95%). The remaining 7 were ovarian LMP (4), ovarian carcinosarcoma (1), endometrial serous cancer (1), and GI tumor (1). The diagnostic accuracies of the 3 strategies differed: histology (43/45), cytology (87/89), and clinical (15/18), p = 0.039. 17% of patients had an alternate final diagnosis when clinical parameters were the only basis for the diagnosis of EOC prior to NAC. A specific EOC subtype was identified pre-op in 82 patients (histology-31 cases, cytology-51 cases). Subtype differed between pre- and post-treatment samples in 13% of histology and 8% of cytology cases. Conclusions: Diagnosis of EOC based on cytology or histology-based strategies are superior to clinical factors alone. Even in a centre with trained gynecologic cytopathologists, cytology and biopsy strategies preclude accurate subtype diagnosis in a significant number of patients. These data are important for clinical practice and the design of future clinical trials. No significant financial relationships to disclose.