1
|
Mittal A, Tamimi F, Molto C, Di Iorio M, Amir E. Benefit of adjuvant bisphosphonates in early breast cancer treated with contemporary systemic therapy: A meta-analysis of randomized control trials. Heliyon 2024; 10:e24793. [PMID: 38312616 PMCID: PMC10835314 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24793] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2023] [Revised: 01/11/2024] [Accepted: 01/15/2024] [Indexed: 02/06/2024] Open
Abstract
Background The absolute and relative benefits of adjuvant bisphosphonates on disease-free survival and overall survival in patients receiving contemporary systemic therapy for early breast cancer is uncertain. Methods Data from randomized trials of adjuvant bisphosphonates that recruited patients exclusively after 2000 and reported disease free survival and overall survival was utilized. Five-year disease-free survival and overall survival in bisphosphonates and control group along with associated hazard ratios were extracted. Absolute data were weighted by sample size and hazard ratios were pooled using inverse variance and random effects modelling. Meta-regression comprising linear regression weighted by sample size (mixed effects) was performed to explore association between disease and treatment related factors and absolute differences in benefit from bisphosphonates. Results Eleven trials comprising 24023 patients were included in the analysis. For disease free survival, pooled hazard ratio was 0.89 (0.81-0.97, p = 0.008) with a 1.5 % weighted mean difference favoring bisphosphonates over control. There was no significant overall survival benefit (0.92, 0.82-1.03, p = 0.16). Among patients receiving anthracycline and taxane based chemotherapy, there were no differences in either disease free survival (0.95, 0.80-1.12) or overall survival (1.04, 0.81-1.32). Meta-regression showed lower benefits in higher risk patients (node-positive, larger tumor size, estrogen receptor-, grade 3 or those receiving chemotherapy). Overall, 1 % (95 % CI 0.75-1.15) of patients experienced osteonecrosis of jaw related to zoledronic acid. Conclusions Compared to the Early Breast Cancer Trialist's Collaborative Group meta-analysis, benefit from adjuvant bisphosphonates is lower in recent trials especially in higher risk patients receiving contemporary chemotherapy. The balance between benefits and risks of adjuvant bisphosphonates should be considered in individual patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abhenil Mittal
- North East Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Northern Ontario School of Medicine (NOSM U), Sudbury, ON, Canada
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Division of Medical Oncology, Toronto, ON, Canada
- University of Toronto, Department of Medicine, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Faris Tamimi
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Division of Medical Oncology, Toronto, ON, Canada
- University of Toronto, Department of Medicine, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Consolacion Molto
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Division of Medical Oncology, Toronto, ON, Canada
- University of Toronto, Department of Medicine, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Massimo Di Iorio
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Division of Medical Oncology, Toronto, ON, Canada
- University of Toronto, Department of Medicine, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Eitan Amir
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Division of Medical Oncology, Toronto, ON, Canada
- University of Toronto, Department of Medicine, Toronto, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Conte B, Boni L, Bisagni G, Durando A, Sanna G, Gori S, Garrone O, Tamberi S, De Placido S, Schettini F, Pazzola A, Ponzone R, Montemurro F, Lunardi G, Notaro R, De Angioletti M, Turletti A, Mansutti M, Puglisi F, Frassoldati A, Porpiglia M, Fabi A, Generali D, Scognamiglio G, Rossi M, Brasó-Maristany F, Prat A, Cardinali B, Piccioli P, Serra M, Lastraioli S, Bighin C, Poggio F, Lambertini M, Del Mastro L. SNP of Aromatase Predict Long-term Survival and Aromatase Inhibitor Toxicity in Patients with Early Breast Cancer: A Biomarker Analysis of the GIM4 and GIM5 Trials. Clin Cancer Res 2023; 29:5217-5226. [PMID: 37888299 PMCID: PMC10722129 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-23-1568] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2023] [Revised: 08/12/2023] [Accepted: 10/09/2023] [Indexed: 10/28/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE In estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer, single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in the aromatase gene might affect aromatase inhibitors (AI) metabolism and efficacy. Here, we assessed the impact of SNP on prognosis and toxicity of patients receiving adjuvant letrozole. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN We enrolled 886 postmenopausal patients in the study. They were treated with letrozole for 2 to 5 years after taking tamoxifen for 2 to 6 years, continuing until they completed 5 to 10 years of therapy. Germline DNA was genotyped for SNP rs4646, rs10046, rs749292, and rs727479. Log-rank test and Cox model were used for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Cumulative incidence (CI) of breast cancer metastasis was assessed through competing risk analysis, with contralateral breast cancer, second malignancies and non-breast cancer death as competing events. CI of skeletal and cardiovascular events were assessed using DFS events as competing events. Subdistribution HR (sHR) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated through Fine-Gray method. RESULTS No SNP was associated with DFS. Variants rs10046 [sHR 2.03, (1.04-2.94)], rs749292 [sHR 2.11, (1.12-3.94)], and rs727479 [sHR 2.62, (1.17-5.83)] were associated with breast cancer metastasis. Three groups were identified on the basis of the number of these variants (0, 1, >1). Variant-based groups were associated with breast cancer metastasis (10-year CI 2.5%, 7.6%, 10.7%, P = 0.035) and OS (10-year estimates 96.5%, 93.0%, 89.6%, P = 0.030). Co-occurrence of rs10046 and rs749292 was negatively associated with 10-year CI of skeletal events (3.2% vs. 10%, P = 0.033). A similar association emerged between rs727479 and cardiovascular events (0.3% vs. 2.1%, P = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS SNP of aromatase gene predict risk of metastasis and AI-related toxicity in ER+ early breast cancer, opening an opportunity for better treatment individualization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benedetta Conte
- Translational Genomics and Targeted Therapies in Solid Tumors, August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Luca Boni
- S.C. Epidemiologia Clinica, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
| | - Giancarlo Bisagni
- Azienda unità Sanitaria Locale – IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Antonio Durando
- Breast Unit Ospedale S Anna, Citta' della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - Giovanni Sanna
- Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria – Sassari, Sassari, Italy
| | - Stefania Gori
- UOC Oncologia Medica, IRCCS Ospedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria, Negrar, Verona, Italy
| | - Ornella Garrone
- Breast Unit, AO S. Croce e Carle Ospedale di insegnamento, Cuneo, Italy
- Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milano, Milano
| | | | - Sabino De Placido
- Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy
| | - Francesco Schettini
- Translational Genomics and Targeted Therapies in Solid Tumors, August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Departament de Medicina, Facultat de Medicina i Ciències de la Salut, Universitat de Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Riccardo Ponzone
- Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO-IRCCS, Gynecologic Oncology and Multidisciplinary Outpatient Oncology Clinic, Candiolo, Italy
| | - Filippo Montemurro
- Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO-IRCCS, Gynecologic Oncology and Multidisciplinary Outpatient Oncology Clinic, Candiolo, Italy
| | - Gianluigi Lunardi
- Laboratorio Analisi Chimico-Cliniche, IRCCS-Ospedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria, Negrar, Verona, Italy
| | | | - Maria De Angioletti
- Core Research Laboratory-ISPRO, Firenze, Italy
- National Research Council (CNR) - ICCOM, Firenze, Italy
| | | | - Mauro Mansutti
- Department of Oncology, ASUFC Santa Maria della Misericordia, Udine, Italy
| | - Fabio Puglisi
- Department of Medicine, University of Udine, Udine, Italy
- Depatment of Medical Oncology, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
| | - Antonio Frassoldati
- Department of Morphology, Surgery and Experimental medicine, Clinical Oncology, St. Anna University Hospital, Ferrara, Italy
| | - Mauro Porpiglia
- Breast Unit Ospedale S. Anna, AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - Alessandra Fabi
- Medical Oncology, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Roma, Italy
| | - Daniele Generali
- Medical Oncology, Azienda Istituti Ospitalieri di Cremona, Cremona, Italy
- Department of Medicine, Surgery and Health Sciences, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy
| | | | - Maura Rossi
- SOC Oncologia, ASO SS.Antonio e Biagio, Alessandria, Italy
| | - Fara Brasó-Maristany
- Translational Genomics and Targeted Therapies in Solid Tumors, August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Aleix Prat
- Translational Genomics and Targeted Therapies in Solid Tumors, August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy
- Reveal Genomics, Barcelona, Spain
- Institute of Oncology (IOB)-Hospital Quirónsalud, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Barbara Cardinali
- Medical Oncology Department, U.O. Clinica di Oncologia Medica, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
| | - Patrizia Piccioli
- Medical Oncology Department, U.O. Clinica di Oncologia Medica, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
| | - Martina Serra
- Laboratory of Clinical and Experimental Immunology, IRCCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini, Genoa, Italy
| | - Sonia Lastraioli
- Molecular Diagnostic Unit, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy
| | - Claudia Bighin
- Medical Oncology Department 2, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
| | - Francesca Poggio
- Medical Oncology Department 2, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
| | - Matteo Lambertini
- Medical Oncology Department, U.O. Clinica di Oncologia Medica, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
- Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties (DiMI), School of Medicine, University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Lucia Del Mastro
- Medical Oncology Department, U.O. Clinica di Oncologia Medica, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
- Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties (DiMI), School of Medicine, University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Walia A, Tuia J, Prasad V. Progression-free survival, disease-free survival and other composite end points in oncology: improved reporting is needed. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2023; 20:885-895. [PMID: 37828154 DOI: 10.1038/s41571-023-00823-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/18/2023] [Indexed: 10/14/2023]
Abstract
Composite outcome measures such as progression-free survival and disease-free survival are increasingly used as surrogate end points in oncology research, frequently serving as the primary end point of pivotal trials that form the basis for FDA and EMA approvals. Such outcome measures combine two or more distinct events (for example, tumour (re)growth, new lesions and/or death) into a single, time-to-event end point. The use of a composite end point can increase the statistical power of a clinical trial and decrease the follow-up period required to demonstrate efficacy, thus lowering costs; however, these end points have a number of limitations. Composite outcomes are often vaguely defined, with definitions that vary greatly between studies, complicating comparisons of results across trials. Altering the makeup of events included in a composite outcome can alter study conclusions, including whether treatment effects are statistically significant. Moreover, the events included in a composite outcome often vary in clinical significance, reflect distinct biological pathways and/or are affected differently by treatment. Therefore, knowing the precise breakdown of the component events is essential to accurately interpret trial results and gauge the true benefit of an intervention. In oncology clinical trials, however, such information is rarely provided. In this Perspective, we emphasize this deficiency through a review of 50 studies with progression-free survival as an outcome published in five top oncology journals, discuss the advantages and challenges of using composite end points, and highlight the need for transparent reporting of the component events.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anushka Walia
- School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
| | - Jordan Tuia
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Vinay Prasad
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|