Strong impact of MammaPrint and BluePrint on treatment decisions in luminal early breast cancer: results of the WSG-PRIMe study

Real-world use of multigene signatures in early breast cancer: differences to clinical trials

PURPOSE

In Italy, Lombardy was the first region to reimburse multigene assays (MGAs) for patients otherwise candidates for chemotherapy. This is a real-world experience of MGAs usage in six referral cancer centers in Lombardy.

METHODS

Among MGAs, Oncotype DX (RS) was used in 97% of cases. Consecutive patients tested with Oncotype DX from July 2020 to July 2022 were selected. The distribution of clinicopathologic features by RS groups (low RS: 0-25, high RS: 26-100) was assessed using chi-square and compared with those of the TAILORx and RxPONDER trials.

RESULTS

Out of 1,098 patients identified, 73% had low RS. Grade and Ki67 were associated with RS (p < 0.001). In patients with both G3 and Ki67 > 30%, 39% had low RS, while in patients with both G1 and Ki67 < 20%, 7% had high RS. The proportion of low RS in node-positive patients was similar to that in RxPONDER (82% vs 83%), while node-negative patients with low RS were significantly less than in TAILORx (66% vs 86%, p < 0.001). The distribution of Grade was different from registration trials, with more G3 and fewer G1 (38% and 3%) than in TAILORx (18% and 27%) and RxPONDER (10% and 24%) (p < 0.001). Patients ≤ 50 years were overrepresented in this series (41%) than in TAILORx and RxPONDER (31% and 24%, respectively) (p < 0.001) and, among them, 42% were node positive.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world series, Oncotype DX was the test almost exclusively used. Despite reimbursement being linked to pre-test chemotherapy recommendation, almost 3/4 patients resulted in the low-RS group. The significant proportion of node-positive patients ≤ 50 years tested indicates that oncologists considered Oncotype DX informative also in this population.

Agreement on risk assessment and chemotherapy recommendations among breast cancer specialists: A survey within the MINDACT cohort

PURPOSE

Tailored recommendation for adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients is of great importance. This survey assessed agreement among oncologists on risk assessment and chemotherapy recommendation, the impact of adding the 70-gene signature to clinical-pathological characteristics, and changes over time.

METHODS

A survey consisting of 37 discordant patient cases from the MINDACT trial (T1-3N0-1M0) was sent to European breast cancer specialists for assessment of risk (high or low) and chemotherapy administration (yes or no). In 2015 the survey was sent twice (survey 1 and 2), several weeks apart, and in 2021 a third time (survey 3). Only the second and third surveys included the 70-gene signature result.

RESULTS

41 breast cancer specialists participated in all three surveys. Overall agreement between respondents decreased slightly between survey 1 and 2, but increased again in survey 3. Over time there was an increase in agreement with the 70-gene signature result on risk assessment, 23% in survey 2 versus 1 and 11% in survey 3 versus 2. With information available indicating a low risk 70-gene signature (n = 25 cases), 20% of risk assessments changed from high to low and 19% of recommendations changed from yes to no chemotherapy in survey 2 versus 1, further increasing with 18% and 21%, respectively, in survey 3 versus 2.

CONCLUSION

There is a variability in risk assessment of early breast cancer patients among breast cancer specialists. The 70-gene signature provided valuable information, resulting in fewer patients being assessed as high risk and fewer recommendations for chemotherapy, increasing over time.

Oncotype DX results increase concordance in adjuvant chemotherapy recommendations for early-stage breast cancer

Adjuvant chemotherapy recommendations for ER+/HER2- early-stage breast cancers (eBC) involve integrating prognostic and predictive information which rely on physician judgment; this can lead to discordant recommendations. In this study we aim to evaluate whether Oncotype DX improves confidence and agreement among oncologists in adjuvant chemotherapy recommendations. We randomly select 30 patients with ER+/HER2- eBC and recurrence score (RS) available from an institutional database. We ask 16 breast oncologists with varying years of clinical practice in Italy and the US to provide recommendation for the addition of chemotherapy to endocrine therapy and their degree of confidence in the recommendation twice; first, based on clinicopathologic features only (pre-RS), and then with RS result (post-RS). Pre-RS, the average rate of chemotherapy recommendation is 50.8% and is higher among junior (62% vs 44%; p < 0.001), but similar by country. Oncologists are uncertain in 39% of cases and recommendations are discordant in 27% of cases (interobserver agreement K 0.47). Post-RS, 30% of physicians change recommendation, uncertainty in recommendation decreases to 5.6%, and discordance decreases to 7% (interobserver agreement K 0.85). Interpretation of clinicopathologic features alone to recommend adjuvant chemotherapy results in 1 out of 4 discordant recommendations and relatively high physician uncertainty. Oncotype DX results decrease discordancy to 1 out of 15, and reduce physician uncertainty. Genomic assay results reduce subjectivity in adjuvant chemotherapy recommendations for ER +/HER2- eBC.

Decision impact studies, evidence of clinical utility for genomic assays in cancer: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Decision impact studies have become increasingly prevalent in cancer prognostic research in recent years. These studies aim to evaluate the impact of a genomic test on decision-making and appear to be a new form of evidence of clinical utility. The objectives of this review were to identify and characterize decision impact studies in genomic medicine in cancer care and categorize the types of clinical utility outcomes reported.

METHODS

We conducted a search of four databases, Medline, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science, from inception to June 2022. Empirical studies that reported a "decision impact" assessment of a genomic assay on treatment decisions or recommendations for cancer patients were included. We followed scoping review methodology and adapted the Fryback and Thornbury Model to collect and analyze data on clinical utility. The database searches identified 1803 unique articles for title/abstract screening; 269 articles moved to full-text review.

RESULTS

87 studies met inclusion criteria. All studies were published in the last 12 years with the majority for breast cancer (72%); followed by other cancers (28%) (lung, prostate, colon). Studies reported on the impact of 19 different proprietary (18) and generic (1) assays. Across all four levels of clinical utility, outcomes were reported for 22 discrete measures, including the impact on provider/team decision-making (100%), provider confidence (31%); change in treatment received (46%); patient psychological impacts (17%); and costing or savings impacts (21%). Based on the data synthesis, we created a comprehensive table of outcomes reported for clinical utility.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review is a first step in understanding the evolution and uses of decision impact studies and their influence on the integration of emerging genomic technologies in cancer care. The results imply that DIS are positioned to provide evidence of clinical utility and impact clinical practice and reimbursement decision-making in cancer care. Systematic review registration: Open Science Framework osf.io/hm3jr.

Starring Role of Biomarkers and Anticancer Agents as a Major Driver in Precision Medicine of Cancer Therapy

Precision medicine is the most modern contemporary medicine approach today, based on great amount of data on people's health, individual characteristics, and life circumstances, and employs the most effective ways to prevent and cure diseases. Precision medicine in cancer is the most precise and viable treatment for every cancer patient based on the disease's genetic profile. Precision medicine changes the standard one size fits all medication model, which focuses on average responses to care. Consolidating modern methodologies for streamlining and checking anticancer drugs can have long-term effects on understanding the results. Precision medicine can help explicit anticancer treatments using various drugs and even in discovery, thus becoming the paradigm of future cancer medicine. Cancer biomarkers are significant in precision medicine, and findings of different biomarkers make this field more promising and challenging. Naturally, genetic instability and the collection of extra changes in malignant growth cells are ways cancer cells adapt and survive in a hostile environment, for example, one made by these treatment modalities. Precision medicine centers on recognizing the best treatment for individual patients, dependent on their malignant growth and genetic characterization. This new era of genomics progressively referred to as precision medicine, has ignited a new episode in the relationship between genomics and anticancer drug development.

Multigene signatures for early breast cancer in clinical practice: A report of the Lombardy genomic assays for breast cancer working group

The increasing understanding of breast cancer biology has provided the basis for the development of multigene signatures aimed to improve the capability of clinicians to assess patients' prognostication and risk stratification. Incorporating these tools in clinical practice has profoundly impacted on the decision-making process for the adjuvant therapy of patients with ER+/HER2- early breast cancer and the results from prospective adjuvant trials have strengthened the clinical utility of multigene signatures in this setting. In July 2019, Lombardy was the first Region in Italy to reimburse genomic testing for patients with ER+/HER2- early breast cancer. Three years later, a group of investigators from six referral Cancer Centers in Lombardy convened to debate the use of multigene signatures in clinical practice and share their own experience with the tests after reimbursement. Here, we reviewed relevant data on the role of multigene signatures in tailoring adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with ER+/HER2- early breast cancer and discussed about the optimal use of these assays in current clinical practice. As the treatment landscape of early breast cancer evolves and novel questions about the possible additional applications of multigene assays arise, we also provide our viewpoint on the potential implementation of the assays in the evolving scenario ER+/HER2- early breast cancer treatment.

Clinico-pathologic factors associated with the occurrence of early and late metastatic spread in a cohort of breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Distant metastatic spread in breast cancer patients is a complex phenomenon involving several prognostic factors. We focused our analysis on early metastatic breast cancer (EMBC) (occurring during the first 36 months) versus late metastatic breast cancer (LMBC) (occurring beyond 3 years) in order to ascertain their possible differential predictive factors.

METHODS

diagnostic, surgical, and follow-up data were assessed for consecutive patients with breast cancer undergoing surgery between 1997 and 2019. We analysed the predictive factors for distant metastasis using both univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

The median follow-up for this cohort of 2708 patients was 89 months. The median metastasis-free interval (FMI) for metastasis patients was 38 months (17 months for EMBC group and 76 months for LMBC group). Distant metastases developed in 12.9% (350/2708); 48% (168/350) of them as EMBC and 52% (182/350) as LMBC. Loco-regional recurrence and nodal extracapsular extension were the only common predictors for both.

CONCLUSIONS

EMBC and LMBC appeared as two separate conditions, with a different outcome. In the EMBC group, tumour proliferation related factors were significant (histological grade, tumour size, body mass index), whereas for LMBC, other slow-acting factors seemed to be involved (screening program, tumour burden, bilateral tumour).

The clinical impacts of molecular subtyping by multigene assay on hormone receptor-positive breast cancers

BACKGROUND

Multigene assays, such as MammaPrint and BluePrint, provide additional information other than conventional immunohistochemistry (IHC) to help making decision of treatment. This study aims to compare the clinical correlation between molecular subtyping (MS) versus surrogate pathological subtyping (PS).

METHODS

A database from patients receiving MS evaluation in Taipei Veterans General Hospital from 2013 to 2018 was reviewed retrospectively. Patients were categorized as luminal A, luminal B, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and basal type from MS results and also centrally assessed according to PS (estrogen receptor [ER], progesterone receptor [PgR], HER2, and Ki-67). The clinical correlation between two different subtyping methodologies was analyzed, and the application of chemotherapy was compared.

RESULTS

From 2013 to 2018, a total of 130 patients received MS testing in our institute, and 132 tumor samples were sent for analysis. From MammaPrint, 64 (48.5%) and 55 (41.7%) samples were defined as low and high risks, respectively. The other 13 (9.8%) tumor samples were identified as late recurrence low risk. MS restratified 44 tumors as subtype shifting including 20 tumors from A to B in intrinsic subtypes and 24 tumors from B to A after MS evaluation. Chemotherapy was conducted in only one (1.3%) patient with MS-luminal A but in 87.8% (n = 43) of MS-luminal B subtypes.

CONCLUSION

The MS results restratify the subtypes of hormone receptor positive breast cancer and dominate decision-making of adjuvant therapy. The role of surrogate biomarkers as an alternative tool needs further elucidation. The treatment outcome in different subtypes categorized by MS or PS will be the interesting focus of research.

Clinical and Molecular Characteristics of ER-Positive Ultralow Risk Breast Cancer Tumors Identified by the 70-Gene Signature

The metastatic potential of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancers is heterogenous and distant recurrences occur months to decades after primary diagnosis. We have previously shown that patients with tumors classified as ultralow risk by the 70-gene signature have a minimal long-term risk of fatal breast cancer. Here, we evaluate the previously unexplored underlying clinical and molecular characteristics of ultralow risk tumors in 538 ER-positive patients from the Stockholm tamoxifen randomized trial (STO-3). Out of the 98 ultralow risk tumors, 89% were luminal A molecular subtype, whereas 26% of luminal A tumors were of ultralow risk. Compared with other ER-positive tumors, ultralow risk tumors were significantly (Fisher's test, P<0.05) more likely to be of smaller tumor size, lower grade, progesterone receptor (PR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)-negative and have low Ki-67 levels (proliferation-marker). Moreover, ultralow risk tumors showed significantly lower expression scores of multi-gene modules associated with the AKT/mTOR-pathway, proliferation (AURKA), HER2/ERBB2-signaling, IGF1-pathway, PTEN-loss, and immune response (IMMUNE1 and IMMUNE2), and higher expression scores of the PIK3CA-mutation-associated module. Furthermore, 706 genes were significantly (FDR<0.001) differentially expressed in ultralow risk tumors, including lower expression of genes involved in immune response, PI3K/Akt/mTOR-pathway, histones, cell cycle, DNA repair, apoptosis, and higher expression of genes coding for epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, and homeobox proteins, among others. In conclusion, ultralow risk tumors, associated with minimal long-term risk of fatal disease, differ from other ER-positive tumors, including luminal A molecular subtype tumors. Identification of these characteristics is important to improve our prediction of non-fatal versus fatal breast cancer. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Precision Medicine: Technological Impact into Breast Cancer Diagnosis, Treatment and Decision Making

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women, impacting 2.1 million women each year. The number of publications on BC is much higher than for any other type of tumor, as well as the number of clinical trials. One of the consequences of all this information is reflected in the number of approved drugs. This review aims to discuss the impact of technological advances in the diagnosis, treatment and decision making of breast cancer and the prospects for the next 10 years. Currently, the literature has described personalized medicine, but what will the treatment be called for in the coming years?

Prediction of Breast Cancer Recurrence Using a Deep Convolutional Neural Network Without Region-of-Interest Labeling

Purpose

The present study aimed to assign a risk score for breast cancer recurrence based on pathological whole slide images (WSIs) using a deep learning model.

Methods

A total of 233 WSIs from 138 breast cancer patients were assigned either a low-risk or a high-risk score based on a 70-gene signature. These images were processed into patches of 512x512 pixels by the PyHIST tool and underwent color normalization using the Macenko method. Afterward, out of focus and pixelated patches were removed using the Laplacian algorithm. Finally, the remaining patches (n=294,562) were split into 3 parts for model training (50%), validation (7%) and testing (43%). We used 6 pretrained models for transfer learning and evaluated their performance using accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, confusion matrix, and AUC. Additionally, to demonstrate the robustness of the final model and its generalization capacity, the testing set was used for model evaluation. Finally, the GRAD-CAM algorithm was used for model visualization.

Results

Six models, namely VGG16, ResNet50, ResNet101, Inception_ResNet, EfficientB5, and Xception, achieved high performance in the validation set with an overall accuracy of 0.84, 0.85, 0.83, 0.84, 0.87, and 0.91, respectively. We selected Xception for assessment of the testing set, and this model achieved an overall accuracy of 0.87 with a patch-wise approach and 0.90 and 1.00 with a patient-wise approach for high-risk and low-risk groups, respectively.

Conclusions

Our study demonstrated the feasibility and high performance of artificial intelligence models trained without region-of-interest labeling for predicting cancer recurrence based on a 70-gene signature risk score.

Using Breast Cancer Gene Expression Signatures in Clinical Practice: Unsolved Issues, Ongoing Trials and Future Perspectives

The development of gene expression signatures since the early 2000's has offered standardized assays to evaluate the prognosis of early breast cancer. Five signatures are currently commercially available and recommended by several international guidelines to individualize adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in hormone receptors-positive/HER2-negative early breast cancer. However, many questions remain unanswered about their predictive ability, reproducibility and external validity in specific populations. They also represent a new hope to tailor (neo)adjuvant systemic treatment, adjuvant radiation therapy, hormone therapy duration and to identify a subset of patients who might benefit from CDK4/6 inhibitor adjuvant treatment. This review will highlight these particular issues, address the remaining questions and discuss the ongoing and future trials.

Targeted Inhibition of Anti-Inflammatory Regulator Nrf2 Results in Breast Cancer Retardation In Vitro and In Vivo

Nuclear factor erythroid-2 related factor-2 (Nrf2) is an oxidative stress-response transcriptional activator that promotes carcinogenesis through metabolic reprogramming, tumor promoting inflammation, and therapeutic resistance. However, the extension of Nrf2 expression and its involvement in regulation of breast cancer (BC) responses to chemotherapy remain largely unclear. This study determined the expression of Nrf2 in BC tissues (n = 46) and cell lines (MDA-MB-453, MCF-7, MDA-MB-231, MDA-MB-468) with diverse phenotypes. Immunohistochemical (IHC)analysis indicated lower Nrf2 expression in normal breast tissues, compared to BC samples, although the difference was not found to be significant. However, pharmacological inhibition and siRNA-induced downregulation of Nrf2 were marked by decreased activity of NADPH quinone oxidoreductase 1 (NQO1), a direct target of Nrf2. Silenced or inhibited Nrf2 signaling resulted in reduced BC proliferation and migration, cell cycle arrest, activation of apoptosis, and sensitization of BC cells to cisplatin in vitro. Ehrlich Ascites Carcinoma (EAC) cells demonstrated elevated levels of Nrf2 and were further tested in experimental mouse models in vivo. Intraperitoneal administration of pharmacological Nrf2 inhibitor brusatol slowed tumor cell growth. Brusatol increased lymphocyte trafficking towards engrafted tumor tissue in vivo, suggesting activation of anti-cancer effects in tumor microenvironment. Further large-scale BC testing is needed to confirm Nrf2 marker and therapeutic capacities for chemo sensitization in drug resistant and advanced tumors.

Circulating Tumour DNA as a Potential Cost-Effective Biomarker to Reduce Adjuvant Chemotherapy Overtreatment in Stage II Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Substantial adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) overtreatment for stage II colorectal cancer results in a health and financial burden. Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) can improve patient selection for AC by detecting micro-metastatic disease. We estimated the health economic potential of ctDNA-guided AC for stage II colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A cost-utility analysis was performed to compare ctDNA-guided AC to standard of care, where 22.6% of standard of care patients and all ctDNA-positive patients (8.7% of tested patients) received AC and all ctDNA-negative patients (91.3%) did not. A third preference-sensitive ctDNA strategy was included where 6.8% of ctDNA-negative patients would receive AC. A state-transition model was populated using data from a prospective cohort study and clinical registries. Health and economic outcomes were discounted at 5% over a lifetime horizon from a 2019 Australian payer perspective. Extensive scenario and probabilistic analyses quantified model uncertainty.

RESULTS

Compared to standard of care, the ctDNA and preference-sensitive ctDNA strategies increased quality-adjusted life-years by 0.20 (95% confidence interval - 0.40 to 0.81) and 0.19 (- 0.40 to 0.78), and resulted in incremental costs of AUD - 4055 (- 16,853 to 8472) and AUD - 2284 (- 14,685 to 10,116), respectively. Circulating tumour DNA remained cost effective at a willingness to pay of AUD 20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained throughout most scenario analyses in which the proportion of ctDNA-positive patients cured by AC and compliance to a ctDNA-negative test results were decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

Circulating tumour-guided AC is a potentially cost-effective strategy towards reducing overtreatment in stage II colorectal cancer. Results from ongoing randomised clinical studies will be important to reduce uncertainty in the estimates.

Low Overall Survival in Women With De Novo Metastatic Breast Cancer: Does This Reflect Tumor Biology or a Lack of Access to Health Care?

PURPOSE

As a result of its epidemiologic and therapeutic aspects, metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is a highly relevant clinical condition. This study aimed to estimate overall survival (OS) in women with de novo MBC in a Brazilian population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were identified in the Goiânia population-based cancer registry between 1995 and 2011. All women with metastatic disease at diagnosis were included in the study. OS was analyzed at 5 and 10 years of follow-up. We used the Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox regression for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Over the 16-year period covered by the study, 5,289 women were diagnosed with breast cancer in Goiânia. Of these, 277 women (5.2%) had MBC. OS rates at 5 and 10 years were 19.9% and 7.3%, respectively. The mean OS time of women treated in the public health system was 7.5 months shorter than in women who had private health care (19.7 v 27.2 months, respectively). In the univariable analysis, the following factors were statistically significant for OS: T3/4 staging, histologic grade 3, progesterone receptor status, tumor phenotype, breast surgery, CNS metastasis at initial presentation, and surgery for resection of metastasis. In multivariable analysis, initial CNS metastasis (hazard ratio, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.16 to 8.19) and breast surgery (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.78) remained independent prognostic factors.

CONCLUSION

OS was lower than rates found in specialist centers in Brazil and in developed countries. Several intrinsic and extrinsic factors were significant in predicting OS. Despite the difference in the 5-year survival rate, the type of access to health care was not significant in the multivariable analysis of the entire period.

PONDx: real-life utilization and decision impact of the 21-gene assay on clinical practice in Italy

Clinicopathological prognostic features have limited value to identify with precision newly diagnosed patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer (BC), who would benefit from chemotherapy (CT) in addition to adjuvant hormonal therapy (HT). The 21-gene Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® (RS) assay has been demonstrated to predict CT benefit, hence supporting personalized decisions on adjuvant CT. The multicenter, prospective, observational study PONDx investigated the real-life use of RS® results in Italy and its impact on treatment decisions. Physicians' treatment recommendations (HT ± CT) were documented before and after availability of RS results, and changes in recommendations were determined. In the HR+ HER2- early BC population studied (N = 1738), physicians recommended CT + HT in 49% of patients pre-RS. RS-guided treatment decisions resulted in 36% reduction of CT recommendations. PONDx confirms that RS results provide clinically relevant information for CT recommendation in early-stage BC, resulting in a reduction of more than a third of CT use.

Identification and Complete Validation of Prognostic Gene Signatures for Human Papillomavirus-Associated Cancers: Integrated Approach Covering Different Anatomical Locations

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infects squamous epithelium and is a major cause of cervical cancer (CC) and a subset of head and neck cancers (HNC). Virus-induced tumorigenesis, molecular alterations, and related prognostic markers are expected to be similar between the two cancers, but they remain poorly understood. We present integrated molecular analysis of HPV-associated tumors from TCGA and GEO databases and identify prognostic biomarkers. Analysis of gene expression profiles identified common upregulated genes and pathways of DNA replication and repair in the HPV-associated tumors. We established 34 prognostic gene signatures with a universal cutoff value in TCGA-CC using Elastic Net Cox regression analysis. We were able to externally validate our results in the TCGA-HNC and several GEO data sets, and demonstrated prognostic power in HPV-associated HNC, but not in HPV-negative cancers. The HPV-related prognostic and predictive indicator did not discriminate other cancers, except bladder urothelial carcinoma. These results identify and completely validate a highly selective prognostic system and its cross-usefulness in HPV-associated cancers, regardless of the tumor's anatomical subsite.IMPORTANCE Persistent infection with high-risk HPV interferes with cell function regulation and causes cell mutations, which accumulate over the long term and eventually develop into cancer. Results of pathway enrichment analysis presumably showed this accumulation of intracellular damage during the chronic HPV-infected state. We used highly advanced statistical methods to identify the most appropriate genes and coefficients and developed the HPV-related prognostic and predictive indicator (HPPI) risk scoring system. We applied the same cutoff value to training and validation sets and demonstrated good prognostic performance in both data sets, and confirmed a consistent trend in external validation. Moreover, HPPI presented significant validation results for bladder cancer suspected to be related to HPV. This suggested that our risk scoring system based on the prognostic gene signature could play an important role in the development of treatment strategies for patients with HPV-related cancer.

Genomic Assays in Node Positive Breast Cancer Patients: A Review

In recent years, developments in breast cancer have allowed yet another realization of individualized medicine in the field of oncology. One of these advances is genomic assays, which are considered elements of standard clinical practice in the management of breast cancer. These assays are widely used today not only to measure recurrence risk in breast cancer patients at an early stage but also to tailor treatment as well and minimize avoidable treatment side effects. At present, genomic tests are applied extensively in node negative disease. In this article, we review the use of these tests in node positive disease, explore their ramifications on neoadjuvant chemotherapy decisions, highlight sufficiently powered recent studies emphasizing their use and review the most recent guidelines.

Genomic Signatures in Luminal Breast Cancer

Background

Breast cancer is a very heterogeneous disease and luminal breast carcinomas represent the hormone receptor-positive tumors among all breast cancer subtypes. In this context, multigene signatures were developed to gain further prognostic and predictive information beyond clinical parameters and traditional immunohistochemical markers.

Summary

For early breast cancer patients these molecular tools can guide clinicians to decide on the extension of endocrine therapy to avoid over- and undertreatment by adjuvant chemotherapy. Beside the predictive and prognostic value, a few genomic tests are also able to provide intrinsic subtype classification. In this review, we compare the most frequently used and commercially available molecular tests (OncotypeDX®, MammaPrint®, Prosigna®, EndoPredict®, and Breast Cancer Index^SM). Moreover, we discuss the clinical utility of molecular profiling for advanced breast cancer of the luminal subtype.

Key Messages

Multigene assays can help to de-escalate systemic therapy in early-stage breast cancer. Only the Oncotype DX® and MammaPrint®test are validated by entirely prospective and randomized phase 3 trials. More clinical evidence is needed to support the use of genomic tests in node-positive disease. Recent developments in high-throughput sequencing technology will provide further insights to understand the heterogeneity of luminal breast cancers in early-stage and metastatic disease.

Breast Cancer: A Molecularly Heterogenous Disease Needing Subtype-Specific Treatments

Breast cancer is the most commonly occurring cancer in women. There were over two-million new cases in world in 2018. It is the second leading cause of death from cancer in western countries. At the molecular level, breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease, which is characterized by high genomic instability evidenced by somatic gene mutations, copy number alterations, and chromosome structural rearrangements. The genomic instability is caused by defects in DNA damage repair, transcription, DNA replication, telomere maintenance and mitotic chromosome segregation. According to molecular features, breast cancers are subdivided in subtypes, according to activation of hormone receptors (estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor), of human epidermal growth factors receptor 2 (HER2), and or BRCA mutations. In-depth analyses of the molecular features of primary and metastatic breast cancer have shown the great heterogeneity of genetic alterations and their clonal evolution during disease development. These studies have contributed to identify a repertoire of numerous disease-causing genes that are altered through different mutational processes. While early-stage breast cancer is a curable disease in about 70% of patients, advanced breast cancer is largely incurable. However, molecular studies have contributed to develop new therapeutic approaches targeting HER2, CDK4/6, PI3K, or involving poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors for BRCA mutation carriers and immunotherapy.

Gene Expression Profiling Tests for Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer: A Health Technology Assessment

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is a disease in which cells in the breast grow out of control. They often form a tumour that may be seen on an x-ray or felt as a lump.Gene expression profiling (GEP) tests are intended to help predict the risk of metastasis (spread of the cancer to other parts of the body) and to identify people who will most likely benefit from chemotherapy. We conducted a health technology assessment of four GEP tests (EndoPredict, MammaPrint, Oncotype DX, and Prosigna) for people with early-stage invasive breast cancer, which included an evaluation of effectiveness, safety, cost effectiveness, the budget impact of publicly funding GEP tests, and patient preferences and values.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search of the clinical evidence. We assessed the risk of bias of each included study using either the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST), or Risk of Bias Assessment tool for Non-randomized Studies (RoBANS), depending on the type of study and outcome of interest, and the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We also performed a literature survey of the quantitative evidence of preferences and values of patients and providers for GEP tests.We performed an economic evidence review to identify published studies assessing the cost-effectiveness of each of the four GEP tests compared with usual care or with one another for people with early-stage invasive breast cancer. We adapted a decision-analytic model to compare the costs and outcomes of care that includes a GEP test with usual care without a GEP test over a lifetime horizon. We also estimated the budget impact of publicly funding GEP tests to be conducted in Ontario, compared with funding tests conducted through the out-of-country program and compared with no funding of tests in any location.To contextualize the potential value of GEP tests, we spoke with people who have been diagnosed with early-stage invasive breast cancer.

RESULTS

We included 68 studies in the clinical evidence review. Within the lymph-node-negative (LN-) population, GEP tests can prognosticate the risk of distant recurrence (GRADE: Moderate) and may predict chemotherapy benefit (GRADE: Low). The evidence for prognostic and predictive ability (ability to indicate the risk of an outcome and ability to predict who will benefit from chemotherapy, respectively) was lower for the lymph-node-positive (LN+) population (GRADE: Very Low to Low). GEP tests may also lead to changes in treatment (GRADE: Low) and generally may increase physician confidence in treatment recommendations (GRADE: Low).Our economic evidence review showed that GEP tests are generally cost-effective compared with usual care.Our primary economic evaluation showed that all GEP test strategies were more effective (led to more quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) than usual care and can be considered cost-effective below a willingness-to-pay of $20,000 per QALY gained. There was some uncertainty in our results. At a willingness-to-pay of $50,000 per QALY gained, the probability of each test being cost-effective compared to usual care was 63.0%, 89.2%, 89.2%, and 100% for EndoPredict, MammaPrint, Oncotype DX, and Prosigna, respectively.Sensitivity analyses showed our results were robust to variation in subgroups considered (i.e., LN+ and premenopausal), discount rates, age, and utilities. However, cost parameter assumptions did influence our results. Our scenario analysis comparing tests showed Oncotype DX was likely cost-effective compared with MammaPrint, and Prosigna was likely cost-effective compared with EndoPredict. When the GEP tests were compared with a clinical tool, the cost-effectiveness of the tests varied. Assuming a higher uptake of GEP tests, we estimated the budget impact to publicly fund GEP tests in Ontario would be between $1.29 million (Year 1) and $2.22 million (Year 5) compared to the current scenario of publicly funded GEP tests through the out-of-country program.Gene expression profiling tests are valued by patients and physicians for the additional information they provide for treatment decision-making. Patients are satisfied with what they learn from GEP tests and feel GEP tests can help reduce decisional uncertainty and anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

Gene expression profiling tests can likely prognosticate the risk of distant recurrence and some tests may also predict chemotherapy benefit. In people with breast cancer that is ER+, LN-, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, GEP tests are likely cost-effective compared with no testing. The GEP tests are also likely cost-effective in LN+ and premenopausal people. Compared with funding GEP tests through the out-of-country program, publicly funding GEP tests in Ontario would cost an additional $1 million to $2 million annually, assuming a higher uptake of tests. GEP tests are valued by both patients and physicians for chemotherapy treatment decision-making.

MammaPrint guides treatment decisions in breast Cancer: results of the IMPACt trial

Background

Increased usage of genomic risk assessment assays suggests increased reliance on data provided by these assays to guide therapy decisions. The current study aimed to assess the change in treatment decision and physician confidence based on the 70-gene risk of recurrence signature (70-GS, MammaPrint) and the 80-gene molecular subtype signature (80-GS, BluePrint) in early stage breast cancer patients.

Methods

IMPACt, a prospective, case-only study, enrolled 452 patients between November 2015 and August 2017. The primary objective population included 358 patients with stage I-II, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. The recommended treatment plan and physician confidence were captured before and after receiving results for 70-GS and 80-GS. Treatment was started after obtaining results. The distribution of 70-GS High Risk (HR) and Low Risk (LR) patients was evaluated, in addition to the distribution of 80-GS compared to IHC status.

Results

The 70-GS classified 62.5% (n = 224/358) of patients as LR and 37.5% (n = 134/358) as HR. Treatment decisions were changed for 24.0% (n = 86/358) of patients after receiving 70-GS and 80-GS results. Of the LR patients initially prescribed CT, 71.0% (44/62) had CT removed from their treatment recommendation. Of the HR patients not initially prescribed CT, 65.1% (41/63) had CT added. After receiving 70-GS results, CT was included in 83.6% (n = 112/134) of 70-GS HR patient treatment plans, and 91.5% (n = 205/224) of 70-GS LR patient treatment plans did not include CT. For patients who disagreed with the treatment recommended by their physicians, most (94.1%, n = 16/17) elected not to receive CT when it was recommended. For patients whose physician-recommended treatment plan was discordant with 70-GS results, discordance was significantly associated with age and lymph node status.

Conclusions

The IMPACt trial showed that treatment plans were 88.5% (n = 317/358) in agreement with 70-GS results, indicating that physicians make treatment decisions in clinical practice based on the 70-GS result. In clinically high risk, 70-GS Low Risk patients, there was a 60.0% reduction in treatment recommendations that include CT. Additionally, physicians reported having greater confidence in treatment decisions for their patients in 72% (n = 258/358) of cases after receiving 70-GS results.

Trial registration

“Measuring the Impact of MammaPrint on Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Treatment in Breast Cancer Patients: A Prospective Registry” (NCT02670577) retrospectively registered on Jan 27, 2016.

The Effect of the New Eighth Edition Breast Cancer Staging System on 100 Consecutive Patients

Background

In October 2016 the American Joint Committee on Cancer published the early eighth edition breast cancer prognostic staging system, incorporating biomarkers into previously accepted staging. The updated and current eighth edition became effective nationwide in January 2018 after a large update to its staging guidelines. This study's aim was to compare patients' anatomic seventh edition (anatomic), early eighth (pre-update, prognostic), and current eighth (post-update, prognostic) pathological stages and to assess the utility of recent inclusions to staging criteria. Additionally, we observed how the aforementioned stage changes aligned with breast cancer histologic subtypes.

Methods

An Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved retrospective chart review was performed. Inclusion criteria included female patients between the ages of 35 to 95 years with a diagnosis of invasive ductal or lobular carcinoma of the breast (n = 100) at three Hackensack Meridian Health hospitals. The study evaluated any trends in patients' stage changes between the seventh edition, early eighth edition, and current eighth edition breast cancer staging guidelines. Breast cancer restaging was performed using a novel staging tool on Microsoft Excel.

Results

Only 26% of patients' stages changed when comparing the seventh edition stage vs. current eighth edition prognostic staging, most of which were downstaged. When comparing the seventh with early eighth edition prognostic staging, 38% of the patients' stages changed, with a majority of them being upstaged. Lastly, 95% of total stage changes were downstages between the early eighth and current eighth edition staging guidelines.

Conclusions

When comparing the seventh edition vs. current eighth edition staging, few patients (especially those with early stage cancer) underwent a stage change. However, there were significant changes in stage when comparing early eighth vs. current eighth stages. Considering these changes were mostly downstages and many patients reverted to their original seventh edition stage, the current eighth edition is based on a personalized, less radical staging approach, one that is more synonymous with original seventh edition staging.