High-dose chemotherapy with peripheral blood stem cell support for stage IIIB inflammatory carcinoma of the breast

Pathological complete response of adding targeted therapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for inflammatory breast cancer: A systematic review

Background

The current use of targeted therapy plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is based on data extrapolated from studies in non-IBC. We conducted a systematic review to determine whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus targeted therapy results in a higher pathologic complete response (pCR) rate than neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone in patients with IBC.

Method and findings

This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO register with registration number CRD42018089465. We searched MEDLINE & PubMed, EMBASE, and EBSCO from December 1998 through July 2020. All English-language clinical studies, both randomized and non-randomized, that evaluated neoadjuvant systemic treatment with or without targeted therapy before definitive surgery and reported the pCR results of IBC patients. First reviewer extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool. Second reviewer confirmed the accuracy. Studies were divided into 3 groups according to systemic treatment: chemotherapy with targeted therapy, chemotherapy alone, and high-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic stem cell support (HSCS). Of 995 screened studies, 23 with 1,269 IBC patients met the inclusion criteria. For each of the 3 groups of studies, we computed a weighted average of the pCR rates across all studies with confidence interval (CI). The weighted averages (95% CIs) were as follows: chemotherapy with targeted therapy, 31.6% (26.4%-37.3%), chemotherapy alone, 13.0% (10.3%-16.2%), and high-dose chemotherapy with HSCS, 23.0% (18.7%-27.7%). The high pCR by targeted therapy group came from anti-HER2 therapy, 54.4% (44.3%-64.0%). Key limitations of this study included no randomized clinical studies that included only IBC patients.

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus targeted therapy is more effective than neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone for IBC patients. These findings support current IBC standard practice in particular the use of anti-HER2 targeted therapy.

Update on systemic treatment for newly diagnosed inflammatory breast cancer

Background

Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is a rare and aggressive disease, accounting for 2-4% of new cases of breast cancer. Owing to its aggressive nature, IBC represent approximately 8-10% of breast cancer deaths. Management of IBC requires a multidisciplinary team for decision-making involving a composite of systemic treatment, surgery, and radiation, or "Trimodality Treatment." Because of the rarity of the disease, systemic therapy of IBC traditionally has been extrapolated from non-IBC clinical trials.

Aim of Review

The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the development of systemic treatment of IBC from the past to the present by focusing on IBC clinical trials, including chemotherapy and targeted therapies.

Key Scientific Concepts of Review

We discuss their effects on pathologic complete response (pCR) and survival outcomes, the predictive markers, and the adverse events of these therapies. Further, we summarized the current standard treatment stratified by molecular subtypes based on clinical data. Finally, we discuss the future trend of systemic therapy, including immunotherapy and ongoing IBC clinical trials.

Long-Term Outcome of Inflammatory Breast Cancer Compared to Non-Inflammatory Breast Cancer in the Setting of High-Dose Chemotherapy with Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation

Introduction: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is a rare aggressive form of breast cancer. It is well known that the long-term survival and progression-free survival of IBC are worse than that of non-IBC. We report the long term outcomes of patients with IBC and non-IBC who had undergone high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) with autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT).

Methods: All 3387 patients with IBC or non-IBC who underwent HDC with AHCT between1990-2002 and registered with CIBMTR were included in this analysis. Transplant-related mortality (TRM), disease relapse/progression, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the two cohorts. Multivariate Cox regression model was used to determine the independent impact of stage on outcomes.

Results: 527 patients with IBC and 2,860 patients with non-IBC were included; the median age at transplantation (47 vs 46 years old) and median follow-up period in the 2 groups (167 vs 168 months) were similar. The most common conditioning regimen was cyclophosphamide and carboplatin based in both groups (54% in IBC and 50% in non-IBC). AHCT was well tolerated in both groups. TRM was similar in both groups (one year TRM was 2% for IBC and 3% for non-IBC, p=0.16). The most common cause of death was disease progression or relapse (81% in IBC and 75% in non-IBC). The median survival for both IBC and non-IBC was the same at 40 months. The PFS at 10 years was 27% (95% CI: 23-31%) for IBC and 24% (95% CI: 22-26%) for non-IBC (p=0.21), and the OS at 10 years was 31% (95% CI: 27-35%) for IBC and 28% (95% CI: 26-30%) for non-IBC (p=0.16). In univariate analysis, patients with stage III IBC and no active diseases at transplantation had lower PFS and OS than that in non-IBC. In multivariate analysis, controlling for age, disease status at AHCT, hormonal receptor status, time from diagnosis to AHCT, and performance status at AHCT, patients with stage III IBC had higher mortality (HR 1.16, 95% CI: 1-1.34, p= 0.0459), worse PFS (HR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.01-1.36, p= 0.0339) and higher risk of disease relapse/progression (HR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.06-1.45, p= 0.0082) as compared to stage III non-IBC. Amongst all patients a higher stage disease was associated with worse PFS, OS and disease relapse/progression.

Conclusions: Long-term outcomes of stage III IBC patients who underwent AHCT were poorer than that in non-IBC patients confirming that the poor prognosis of IBC even in the setting of HDC with AHCT.

[Systemic treatments of inflammatory breast cancer: an overview]

The poor prognosis of inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is due to its strong metastatic potential. During the last three decades, the introduction of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT), and its improvement with successive additions of anthracyclines and then taxanes, allowed to double the survival. However, the 5-year survival still remains lower than 50%, with the pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant CT being a major prognostic factor. Since 1995, several innovative approaches have been evaluated. Initially, the trials of high-dose CT with hematopoietic stem cell transplantation have generated promising results, but ultimately failed to change standards of treatment, in particular because of its toxicity. More recently, a few targeted therapies, combined to conventional CT, have been assessed, due to the frequent overexpression of HER2 and EGFR and the important vascularization of IBC. Trastuzumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting HER2, has shown a clear advantage in terms of pCR and survival in studies dedicated to, HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancers, including IBC. Lapatinib, a dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor anti-HER2 and EGFR, has shown significant activity in two phase II studies dedicated to HER2-positive IBC. The interest of HER2-double blockade by the combination of trastuzumab-pertuzumab combined to docetaxel has been demonstrated in term of pCR in the NEOSPHERE study which also included HER2-positive IBC. Among the anti-angiogenic drugs tested in studies dedicated to IBC, bevacizumab has given the most interesting results in term of efficacy/toxicity ratio. In the Beverly 2 study HER2-positive IBC patients were treated by the combination chemotherapy, trastuzumab and bevacizumab: the rate of pCR was 64%, and the 3-year disease-free and overall survivals were 68% and 90%, respectively; the increase of endothelial cells circulating was inversely correlated to the probability of pCR. All those treatments have been extrapolated from standard breast cancers. Thus, a deep molecular knowledge of IBC appears to be critical in order to develop specific treatments effectively targeting its particular aggressiveness.

Systemic therapy of inflammatory breast cancer from high-dose chemotherapy to targeted therapies: the French experience

BACKGROUND

Aggressiveness of inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is related to its metastatic potential. The introduction of primary chemotherapy in the multimodality treatment has dramatically changed the prognosis. However, survival remains poor. Since 1995, innovative systemic therapies have been assessed in France in multicentric clinical trials, initially centered on high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) with hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), and, more recently, on targeted therapies.

METHODS

The authors present the rationale and first results of these French studies specifically dedicated to nonmetastastic IBC.

RESULTS

More than 380 patients have been included in 5 trials. The first 3 trials enrolled 329 women and concerned HDC (PEGASE 02, 05, 07). PEGASE 02 and PEGASE 05 showed a high pathological complete response rate (30%) after primary sequential HDC, and suggested that more than 4 cycles does not seem to provide any benefit. PEGASE 07 tested adjuvant maintenance chemotherapy after neoadjuvant HDC. Analysis is ongoing. The 2 other trials currently underway combine targeted therapies with conventional-dose chemotherapy in ERBB2-negative (Beverly 1 trial; bevacizumab) and ERBB2-positive (Beverly 2; bevacizumab and trastuzumab) IBC.

CONCLUSIONS

HDC with HSCT remains experimental with high pCR rates and which likely benefits to subgroups of patients that remain to be identified. Targeted therapies, such as anti-ERBB2 and antiangiogenic drugs, are being tested, and should improve survival as demonstrated in non-IBC. With emerging targeted drugs, there is hope that a cure becomes an achievable goal for more patients. Because of the rarity and the heterogeneity of disease, well-designed large-scale collaborative studies are mandatory.

Inflammatory breast cancer: what are the treatment options?

An otherwise healthy, 68-year-old woman presents to her primary-care physician complaining of right breast enlargement, warmth, and progressive pink to dark red skin changes over the past month. She denies fever, pain, or breast discharge. Physical examination reveals erythema of the whole right breast, warmth, swelling, induration, and nipple retraction. Palpable axillary lymphadenopathy is appreciated on the right only. The left breast is uninvolved. The physician is concerned that she may have inflammatory breast cancer.

Strategies to improve long-term outcome in stage IIIB inflammatory breast cancer: multimodality treatment including dose-intensive induction and high-dose chemotherapy

Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is a rare clinicopathologic entity with a poor prognosis, lagging far behind any other form of nonmetastatic breast cancer. Since the advent of systemic chemotherapy over 35 years ago, only minimal progress has been made in long-term outcome. Although multiple randomized trials of high-dose chemotherapy and autologous progenitor cell transplantation (ASCT) for the treatment of breast cancer have yielded disappointing results, these data are not necessarily relevant to IBC, a distinct clinical and pathologic entity. Therefore, the optimal multimodality therapy for IBC is not well established, and remains unsatisfactory. We treated 21 women with nonmetastatic IBC with a multimodality strategy including high-dose melphalan (Mel)/etoposide and ASCT. The treatment was overall tolerated with acceptable morbidity, and no post-ASCT 100-day mortality. With a median potential follow-up of approximately 8 years, the estimated progression-free survival (PFS), event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS) at 6 years from on-study date are: 67%, 55%, and 69%, respectively. These results from a small phase II study are among the most promising of mature outcome data for IBC. They strongly suggest, along with results of several already published phase II trials, that ASCT could play a significant role in the first line treatment of IBC.

Lack of uniform diagnostic criteria for inflammatory breast cancer limits interpretation of treatment outcomes: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is the most aggressive type of breast cancer. No randomized controlled trial or systematic review with an IBC-only cohort that evaluates interventions has been published. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to characterize the reporting of clinical criteria and response to neoadjuvant therapy for IBC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and other sources for the following: previously untreated patients with IBC without metastasis in cohort studies; utilized chemotherapy; and reported clinical outcomes. The following 4 groups were analyzed: no anthracycline induction, low-dose anthracycline induction, moderate-dose anthracycline induction, and high-dose chemotherapy requiring stem cell support. Weighted averages for the overall response rates were calculated using a random effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies met all criteria, totaling 1232 patients. Clinical description of IBC eligibility criteria and reported response assessments varied significantly among studies. The response rates and 3- and 5-year overall survival for all 27 studies ranged from 14% to 100%, 22% to 84%, and 32% to 75%, respectively. Pathologic complete response rates after no anthracycline induction, low-dose anthracycline induction, moderate-dose anthracycline induction, and neoadjuvant high-dose chemotherapy subgroups were 4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1%-18%), 11% (95% CI, 7%-17%), 14% (95% CI, 8%-22%), and 32% (95% CI, 24%-41%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The criteria and reporting of IBC and treatment response was notably variable, with significant potential for subject heterogeneity. Pathologic complete response rates appear to be related to intensity of neoadjuvant treatment; however, this analysis is not based on randomized data. Future clinical trials should define and report the criteria for IBC diagnosis and response assessment to enhance interstudy comparisons.

High-dose chemotherapy and autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation for primary breast cancer refractory to neoadjuvant chemotherapy

The role of high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) in patients with refractory breast cancer is not well established. Forty-two female patients (median age of 46 years) with breast cancer refractory to neoadjuvant chemotherapy received HDCT (cyclophosphamide, carmustine and thiotepa) supported by an autologous peripheral blood stem cells transplant. Their disease had been refractory (defined as less than partial response) to one (18 patients) or two (24 patients) regimens of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Twenty-nine patients had surgery before HDCT. The best response after surgery, HDCT, and radiation therapy was assessed 60 days after transplantation. Thirty patients had complete remission, eight had a PR, one had a minor response, and three had progressive disease. In seven of 13 patients whose disease was inoperable before HDCT, it became operable. After a median follow-up of 42 months, 21 patients were alive, and 15 remained disease free. Five-year overall survival (OS) was 57% (CI, 50-64%), and the estimated 5-year progression-free survival was 40% (CI, 32-48%). Both OS and PFS were better in patients whose disease became operable after chemotherapy than in those whose disease remained inoperable. A randomized study is warranted in this patient population.

Multivariate analysis of survival in inflammatory breast cancer: impact of intensity of chemotherapy in multimodality treatment

The prognosis of inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is poor. We evaluated clinical and biopathological characteristics that could affect survival in 74 women with nonmetastatic IBC consecutively treated in our institution between 1976 and 2000. Patients received primary anthracycline-based chemotherapy at conventional doses (n=20) or high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) with haematopoietic stem cell support (HSCS) (n=54). After chemotherapy, 84% of patients underwent mastectomy, 95% were given radiotherapy and 55% tamoxifen. Immunohistochemistry data (ER, PR, ERBB2, P53) on pre-chemotherapy specimens suggested strong differences between IBC and non-IBC. The rate of pathological complete response to chemotherapy was 26% (27% with HDC and 17% with conventional doses, not significant). No single factor was found predictive of response. With a median follow-up of 48 months after diagnosis, the 5-year projected disease-free survival (DFS) was 24% and overall survival (OS) 41%. In multivariate analysis, the strongest independent prognostic factor was the delivery of HDC. The 5-year DFS and OS of patients were respectively 28 and 50% with HDC and 15 and 18% with conventional chemotherapy. These results and comparisons with other series of patients suggest a role for HDC with HSCS as part of the therapeutic approach in IBC. Further prospective studies are required to confirm it.

Clinical outcome and prognosis of patients with inflammatory breast cancer

This report analyzes clinical factors affecting outcome in 26 patients with inflammatory breast cancer. Peau d'orange was the most common clinical finding at diagnosis (65%). A palpable breast mass (PBM) was noted in 65% with axillary lymph node involvement in 81% of patients. Eighteen patients were staged as stage IIIB and eight as stage IV. Initial metastases included supraclavicular nodes (five of eight), bones (one of eight), skin (one of eight), and liver (one of eight). All patients were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil, 18 patients; other, 8 patients). Partial response was the best clinical response attained in 38% of patients. Only one patient was treated with total mastectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 19 patients received radiotherapy followed (2 patients) or not (17 patients) by mastectomy. The progression rate in stage IIIB patients was 78%, with distant sites of progression in 93% of patients and only 7% with local progression. Mean time-to-progression was 13 months (Kaplan-Meier estimates of 45% and 11% at 24 and 48 months, respectively). The median overall survival (OS) value of the entire population was 13.2 months (Kaplan-Meier estimates at 24 and 48 months of 21% and 12.5%). By Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test, a better OS was correlated with stage IIIB (p = 0.002), a PBM at diagnosis (p = 0.01), and a favorable response to initial chemotherapy (p = 0.03). Our results confirm the better clinical outcome of patients with stage IIIB and PBM at diagnosis. They also support the role for combined treatment as the best modality approach for this disease. However, overall prognosis remained poor, with recurrence and death resulting from the disease.

High-dose chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer

Based on in vitro and animals studies which assess dose effect relationship specially for alkylating agent, and on the importance on dose intensity in human protocols, high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell support has been widely evaluated in various tumours, particularly in breast cancer. Moreover, in the last few years, the utilization of hematopoietic growth factors and peripheral stem cells has permitted a large diffusion of this approach. However, there is not yet clear data on the place of such a treatment in breast cancer. Few randomized trials are available, with mature data. Only one shows an advantage for high-dose therapy in metastatic disease. In adjuvant setting, sample sizes are too small or follow-up not long enough to draw any definitive conclusion on the place of high-dose consolidation chemotherapy in breast cancer. In inflammatory breast cancer, which is a much more less frequent disease, encouraging results have been published in phase two studies, looking at pathological response, or in pilot studies. The next few years will give a mature date of randomized trials which evaluate high-dose chemotherapy given after conventional treatment in metastatic or high risk disease. Effort should be done to better evaluate this strategy in terms of cost and quality of life and to design new studies aimed to evaluate front line multiple intensification.

High-Dose Chemotherapy with Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Support for Operable Locally Advanced Noninflammatory Carcinoma of the Breast

The purpose of this study was to determine outcomes for patients with operable noninflammatory stage IIIA/B locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) with positive axillary lymph nodes receiving high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) with peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) support. One hundred fifteen patients with LABC who were no evidence of disease (NED) after initial surgery received standard dose induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy for mobilization of PBSC, and high-dose cyclophosphamide, thiotepa, and carboplatin with PBSC support for adjuvant therapy. Following hematopoietic recovery, all patients were scheduled to receive radiation therapy and tamoxifen was administered if the primary tumor was estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor (ER/PR) positive. Eighty-eight percent of patients were admitted to the hospital following HDC for a median of 11 days (range 3-26) and 12% were treated entirely as outpatients. There was one treatment-related death (0.9%) from infection occurring on day 8 after HDC. Forty-four (38%) have relapsed at a median of 20 months (range 10-55) from diagnosis, 11 (10%) with local-regional and 33 (28%) with metastatic disease. The probabilities of overall (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) for all 115 patients at 3 years were 0.73 and 0.61, respectively, with a median follow-up of 42 months (range 10-89) from diagnosis. In univariate and multivariate analyses, no factors could be identified that were statistically predictive for OS or EFS. However, there were trends for patients with ER/PR-negative primary tumors to have worse OS (p = 0.16) and EFS (p = 0.10) than patients with ER/PR-positive tumors. This adjuvant combined modality strategy incorporating HDC is safe and compares favorably to historical studies of neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment for LABC. Further attempts to improve outcomes of patients with LABC receiving HDC are warranted.