Health-related quality-of-life assessment in CLEOPATRA, a phase III study combining pertuzumab with trastuzumab and docetaxel in metastatic breast cancer

Molecular heterogeneity and MYC dysregulation in triple-negative breast cancer: genomic advances and therapeutic implications

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is characterized by a diverse range of molecular features that have been extensively studied. MYC plays a critical role in regulating metabolism, differentiation, proliferation, cell growth, and apoptosis. Dysregulation of MYC is associated with poor prognosis and contributes to the development and progression of breast cancer. A particularly intriguing aspect of TNBC is its association with tumors in BRCA1 mutation carriers, especially in younger women. MYC may also contribute to resistance to adjuvant treatments. For TNBC, targeting MYC-regulated pathways in combination with inhibitors of other carcinogenic pathways offers a promising therapeutic approach. Several signaling pathways regulate TNBC, and targeting these pathways could lead to effective therapeutic strategies for breast cancer. Advances in genomic tools, such as CRISPR-Cas9, next-generation sequencing, and whole-exome sequencing, are revolutionizing breast cancer diagnoses. These technologies have significantly enhanced our understanding of MYC oncogenesis, particularly through CRISPR-Cas9 and NGS. Targeting MYC and its partner MAX could provide valuable insights into TNBC. Moreover, the therapeutic potential of targeting MYC-driven signaling mechanisms and their interactions with other oncogenic pathways, including PI3K/AKT/mTOR and Wnt/β-catenin, is increasingly recognized. Next-generation sequencing and CRISPR-Cas9 represent significant breakthroughs in genomic tools that open new opportunities to explore MYC's role in TNBC and facilitate the development of personalized treatment plans. This review discusses the future clinical applications of personalized treatment strategies for patients with TNBC.

Real-world Outcomes of Dual HER2 Blockade Therapy in Metastatic HER2-Positive Breast Cancer: from Induction to Maintenance

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Dual human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) blockade with trastuzumab and pertuzumab combined with taxane-based chemotherapy (Cht) has been the standard first-line treatment for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (mBC) for years, due to the impressive results of the CLEOPATRA study. Real-world (RW) studies have become critical for assessing treatment effectiveness and safety in real-life circumstances. The aim of this study was to analyze the treatment outcomes of first-line therapy for HER2-positive mBC in RW clinical practice, specifically focusing on the use of maintenance endocrine therapy (ET) in hormone receptor positive (HR-positive) patients.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis included 106 HER2-positive mBC patients treated with trastuzumab and pertuzumab combined with taxane-based Cht from October 2015 to December 2020 at the University Hospital Centre Zagreb.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 30 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 25 months for the total population (95% confidence interval [CI] 16 - not analyzed). Patients with de novo mBC had longer median PFS than patients with recurrent disease (not reached vs. 18 months; hazard ratio 1.99; 95% CI 0.69-3.64, p<0.022). Age, hormone receptor positivity, visceral involvement, number of Cht cycles and previous adjuvant trastuzumab did not impact PFS. Most HR-positive patients (N=55, 88.7%) received maintenance ET after induction Cht.

CONCLUSION

This retrospective study provides additional data on patient characteristics, treatment and outcomes of RW HER2-positive mBC patients treated with pertuzumab and trastuzumab as first-line therapy. In our institution, maintenance ET after induction Cht has become standard clinical practice.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Pertuzumab for the Treatment of Metastatic HER2+ Breast Cancer in Czechia: A Semi-Markov Model Using Cost States

OBJECTIVES

This article estimates the cost-effectiveness of adding pertuzumab to the combination of trastuzumab and docetaxel within the first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer with the amplification of HER2+.

METHODS

Data from Czech clinical practice recorded in the BREAST register are used. A semi-Markov model with states derived based on the treatment phases (first-line medication, no medication, next-line medication, death) is defined to estimate costs from the healthcare payers' perspective. The benefits are estimated as patient survival until death. The Kaplan-Meier estimates are supplemented by the Cox proportional hazard and the accelerated failure time models to control for patient characteristics. Health-related quality-of-life indicators are derived from relevant literature.

RESULTS

Based on the used data, adding pertuzumab does not result in statistically significantly longer survival while inducing higher treatment costs (€163 360 compared with €90 112 per patient in 2018 prices). Statistically longer survival was not supported by the log-rank test (P = .97), the Cox proportional hazard model, or the accelerated failure time model using the Gompertz distribution. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (€87 200) substantially exceeds the willingness to pay for 1 quality-adjusted life-year (€46 500).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis indicates that adding pertuzumab cannot be considered cost-effective in Czechia. However, the observed phenomenon may be attributed to the limited duration of patient follow-up periods at the time of the study's execution (mean of 20-21 months). Importantly, we find that using states connected to specific treatment phases is appropriate for a retrospective analysis of patient-level clinical data.

HER2-Directed Therapy in Advanced Breast Cancer: Benefits and Risks

Around 20% of breast cancers are associated with amplification or overexpression of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). In this setting, anti-HER2-targeted agents are the cornerstone of cancer therapeutic strategies. This includes monoclonal antibodies, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and, recently, antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs). With the advent of these new alternatives, the decision-making process has become more complex, especially with regard to the treatment sequence possibilities. In spite of the fact that overall survival has significantly improved accordingly, resistance to treatment remains a challenge in HER2-positive breast cancer. The introduction of new agents has created awareness regarding new potential specific adverse events, and consequently, their increasing application pose major challenges in daily patient care. This review describes the therapeutic landscape for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (ABC) and evaluates its benefits and risks in the clinical setting.

Effectiveness of Adjuvant Pembrolizumab vs High-Dose Interferon or Ipilimumab for Quality-of-Life Outcomes in Patients With Resected Melanoma: A Secondary Analysis of the SWOG S1404 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

A key issue for the adjuvant treatment of patients with melanoma is the assessment of the effect of treatment on relapse, survival, and quality of life (QOL).

Objective

To compare QOL in patients with resected melanoma at high risk for relapse who were treated with adjuvant pembrolizumab vs standard of care with either ipilimumab or high-dose interferon α 2b (HDI).

Design, Setting, and Participants

The S1404 phase 3 randomized clinical trial was conducted by the SWOG Cancer Research Network at 211 community/academic sites in the US, Canada, and Ireland. Patients were enrolled from December 2015 to October 2017. Data analysis for this QOL substudy was completed in March 2022. Overall, 832 patients were evaluable for the primary QOL end point.

Interventions

Patients were randomized (1:1) to treatment with adjuvant pembrolizumab vs standard of care with ipilimumab/HDI.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Quality of life was assessed for patients at baseline and cycles 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 after randomization using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Biological Response Modifiers (FACT-BRM), FACT-General, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Diarrhea, and European QOL 5-Dimension 3-Level scales. The primary end point was the comparison by arm of cycle 3 FACT-BRM trial outcome index (TOI) scores using linear regression. Linear-mixed models were used to evaluate QOL scores over time. Regression analyses included adjustments for the baseline score, disease stage, and programmed cell death ligand 1 status. A clinically meaningful difference of 5 points was targeted.

Results

Among 1303 eligible patients (median [range] age, 56.7 [18.3-86.0] years; 524 women [40.2%]; 779 men [59.8%]; 10 Asian [0.8%], 7 Black [0.5%], 44 Hispanic [3.4%], and 1243 White [95.4%] individuals), 1188 (91.1%) had baseline FACT-BRM TOI scores, and 832 were evaluable at cycle 3 (ipilimumab/HDI = 267 [32.1%]; pembrolizumab = 565 [67.9%]). Evaluable patients were predominantly younger than 65 years (623 [74.9%]) and male (779 [58.9%]). Estimates of FACT-BRM TOI cycle 3 compliance did not differ by arm (ipilimumab/HDI, 96.0% vs pembrolizumab, 98.3%; P = .25). The adjusted cycle 3 FACT-BRM TOI score was 9.6 points (95% CI, 7.9-11.3; P < .001) higher (better QOL) for pembrolizumab compared with ipilimumab/HDI, exceeding the prespecified clinically meaningful difference. In linear-mixed models, differences by arm exceeded 5 points in favor of pembrolizumab through cycle 7. In post hoc analyses, FACT-BRM TOI scores favored the pembrolizumab arm compared with the subset of patients receiving ipilimumab (difference, 6.0 points; 95% CI, 4.1-7.8; P < .001) or HDI (difference, 17.0 points; 95% CI, 14.6-19.4; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

This secondary analysis of a phase 3 randomized clinical trial found that adjuvant pembrolizumab improved QOL vs treatment with adjuvant ipilimumab or HDI in patients with high-risk resected melanoma.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02506153.

Pertuzumab retreatment for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer: a randomized, open-label phase III study (PRECIOUS)

No standard options existed for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)‐positive advanced breast cancer that progresses after second‐line trastuzumab emtansine therapy before 2020. The purpose of this study was to examine the efficacy of pertuzumab retreatment after disease progression following pertuzumab‐containing therapy for HER2‐positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer for the first time. This randomized, open‐label, multicenter phase III trial was undertaken in 93 sites in Japan. Eligible patients with HER2‐positive breast cancer who had received pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and chemotherapy as first‐ and/or second‐line therapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to: (i) pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and physician's choice chemotherapy (PTC), or (ii) trastuzumab and physician's choice chemotherapy (TC). The primary end‐point was investigator‐assessed progression‐free survival (PFS). Between August 1, 2015 and December 31, 2018, 219 patients were randomized to PTC (n = 110) or TC (n = 109). Median follow‐up was 14.2 months (interquartile range, 9.0–22.2), and median PFS was 5.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.0–6.6) with PTC and 4.2 months (95% CI, 3.2–4.8) with TC (stratified hazard ratio 0.76 [95% CI upper limit 0.967]; p = 0.022). Progression‐free survival was improved by adding pertuzumab in all prespecified subgroups. The PTC arm showed a trend towards better overall survival and duration of response, but similar objective response and health‐related quality of life. The incidence of treatment‐related adverse events was similar between groups except for diarrhea. Pertuzumab retreatment contributes to disease control for HER2‐positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer previously treated with pertuzumab‐containing regimens.

Patient-reported outcomes predict survival and adverse events following anticancer treatment initiation in advanced HER2-positive breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The prognostic value of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) has been minimally explored in advanced breast cancer (BC), and their comparative prognostic performance against Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) is largely unknown.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study pooled individual participant data from clinical trials CLEOPATRA, EMILIA, and MARIANNE. Pre-treatment PRO associations with overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and grade ≥3 adverse events were evaluated via Cox proportional hazards regression. Prognostic performance was assessed with the C-statistic (c). PRO values were collected via the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) questionnaire. All analyses were stratified by study and treatment arms. Analyses adjusted for known prognostic variables were conducted. Exploratory analysis of the prognostic performance of PROs compared to ECOG PS was undertaken.

RESULTS

The study included data from 2894 patients initiated on contemporary therapies including pertuzumab (n = 765), trastuzumab (n = 1173), trastuzumab emtansine (n = 1225), taxanes (n = 1173), lapatinib (n = 496), and capecitabine (n = 496). On univariable and adjusted analysis, patient-reported physical well-being, functional well-being, and BC subscale were all identified to be associated with OS, PFS, and grade ≥3 adverse events (P < 0.05). Patient-reported physical well-being was the most prognostic PRO for all assessed outcomes. The OS prognostic performance of physical well-being (c = 0.58) was superior to ECOG PS (c = 0.56) (P < 0.05), with multivariable analysis indicating that both provide independent information (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

PROs were identified as independent prognostic factors for OS, PFS, and grade ≥3 adverse events in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive advanced BC initiating contemporary treatment options. Further, patient-reported physical well-being was more prognostic of OS than ECOG PS and contained independent information. PROs have value as prognostic and stratification factors for clinical use and research trials of anticancer treatment in HER2-positive ABC.

Implementation of an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome App for Health-Related Quality of Life in Breast Cancer Patients: Evaluation and Acceptability Analysis in a Two-Center Prospective Trial

Background

One in eight women is diagnosed with breast cancer in the course of their life. As systematic palliative treatment has only a limited effect on survival rates, the concept of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was developed for measurement of patient-centered outcomes. Various studies have already demonstrated the reliability of paper-based patient-reported outcome (pPRO) and electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) surveys and that the 2 means of assessment are equally valid.

Objective

The aim of this study was to analyze the acceptance and evaluation of a tablet-based ePRO app for breast cancer patients and to examine its suitability, effort, and difficulty in the context of HRQoL and sociodemographic factors.

Methods

Overall, 106 women with adjuvant or advanced breast cancer were included in a 2-center study at 2 major university hospitals in Germany. Patients were asked to answer HRQoL and PRO questionnaires both on a tablet on-site using a specific eHealth assessment website and on paper. The suitability, effort, and difficulty of the app and self-reported technical skills were also assessed. Only the results of the electronically acquired data are presented here. The results of the reliability of the pPRO data have already been published elsewhere.

Results

Patients regarded the ePRO assessment as more suitable (80/106, 75.5%), less stressful (73/106, 68.9%), and less difficult (69/106, 65.1%) than pPRO. The majority of patients stated that ePRO assessment improves health care in hospitals (87/106, 82.1%). However, evaluation of ePROs depended on the level of education (P=.003) in the dimensions of effort and difficulty (regression analysis). The app was rated highly in all categories. HRQoL data and therapy setting did not show significant correlations with the app’s evaluation parameters.

Conclusions

The results indicate that ePRO surveys are feasible for measuring HRQoL in breast cancer patients and that those patients prefer ePRO assessment to pPRO assessment. It can also be seen that patients consider ePRO assessment to improve hospital health care. However, studies with larger numbers of patients are needed to develop apps that address the needs of patients with lower levels of education and technical skills.

Prioritising systemic cancer therapies applying ESMO’s tools and other resources to assist in improving cancer care globally: the Kazakh experience

Background

In Kazakhstan, cancer is the second leading cause of death with a major public health and economic burden. In the last decade, cancer care and cancer medicine costs have significantly increased. To improve the efficiency and efficacy of cancer care expenditure and planning, the Kazakhstan Ministry of Health requested assistance from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) to review its systemic cancer treatment protocols and essential medicines list and identify high-impact, effective regimens.

Materials and methods

ESMO developed a four-phase approach to review Kazakhstan cancer treatment protocols: (i) perform a systematic analysis of the country’s cancer medicines and treatment protocols; (ii) cross-reference the country’s cancer protocols with the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines, the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale and the European Medicines Agency’s medicine availability and indications database; (iii) extract treatment recommendations from the ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines; (iv) expert review for all cancer medicines not on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines and the country treatment protocols.

Results

This ESMO four-phase approach led to the update of the Kazakhstan national essential cancer medicines list and the list of cancer treatment protocols. This review has led to the withdrawal of several low-value or non-evidence-based medicines and a budget increase for cancer care to include all essential and highly effective medicines and treatment options.

Conclusion

When applied effectively, this four-phase approach can improve access to medicines, efficiency of expenditure and sustainability of cancer systems. The WHO–ESMO collaboration illustrated how, by sharing best practices, tools and resources, we can address access to cancer medicines and positively impact patient care.

•

In Kazakhstan, from 2009 to 2019, there was a significant increase in costs of cancer care and cancer medicines.

•

ESMO, under the guidance of WHO, reviewed the Kazakh cancer treatment protocols and national essential medicines list.

•

The ESMO four-phase approach helped Kazakhstan in prioritising the most effective and high-impact cancer medicines.

•

This approach can be applied in the evaluation of any national formulary as it uses open-access, evidence-based references.

•

This collaboration is an example of how we can improve access to cancer medicines and positively impact patient care.

Targeting HER2 in Breast Cancer: Latest Developments on Treatment Sequencing and the Introduction of Biosimilars

Approximately 20% of all breast cancers overexpress the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). Targeting breast cancer through this vital oncogenic protein has been a major step towards improved patient outcomes. Today, several anti-HER2 agents are in clinical use including: the monoclonal antibodies trastuzumab and pertuzumab; the small molecule inhibitors lapatinib, neratinib, and tucatinib; and the antibody-drug conjugates ado-trastuzumab emtansine and trastuzumab deruxtecan, in some jurisdictions. In addition, several trastuzumab biosimilars have recently been granted regulatory approval in North America and the EU, and are enhancing patient access to HER2-directed therapy. The various agents differ greatly in their side-effect profiles and approved indications, from neoadjuvant and adjuvant use in early disease, to first- and later-line use in metastatic disease. This review discusses the current treatment recommendations for the use of anti-HER2 agents alone and in combination, examines the latest advances in HER2-targeted drugs and how they may be best applied in clinical practice, and provides guidance on optimal sequencing of the growing array of therapeutic options for HER2-positive breast cancer.

Neratinib + capecitabine sustains health-related quality of life in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer and ≥ 2 prior HER2-directed regimens

PURPOSE

To characterize health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) from the NALA phase 3 study.

METHODS

In NALA (NCT01808573), patients were randomized 1:1 to neratinib + capecitabine (N + C) or lapatinib + capecitabine (L + C). HRQoL was assessed using seven prespecified scores from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality Of Life Questionnaire core module (QLQ-C30) and breast cancer-specific questionnaire (QLQ-BR23) at baseline and every 6 weeks. Descriptive statistics summarized scores over time, mixed models evaluated differences between treatment arms, and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to assess time to deterioration in HRQoL scores of ≥ 10 points.

RESULTS

Of the 621 patients randomized in NALA, patients were included in the HRQoL analysis if they completed baseline and at least one follow-up questionnaire. The summary, global health status, physical functioning, fatigue, constipation, and systemic therapy side effects scores were stable over time with no persistent differences between treatment groups. There were no differences in time to deterioration (TTD) for the QLQ-C30 summary score between treatment arms; the hazard ratio (HR) for N + C vs. L + C was 0.94 (95% CI 0.63-1.40). Only the diarrhea score worsened significantly more in the N + C arm as compared to the L + C arm, and this remained over time (HR for TTD for N + C vs. L + C was 1.71 [95% CI 1.32-2.23]).

CONCLUSION

In NALA, patients treated with N + C maintained their global HRQoL over time, despite a worsening of the diarrhea-related scores. These results may help guide optimal treatment selection for HER2-positive MBC.

Patient-reported function, health-related quality of life, and symptoms in APHINITY: pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and chemotherapy in HER2-positive early breast cancer

BACKGROUND

We assessed health-related quality of life (symptoms of therapy/patient functioning/global health status), in APHINITY (pertuzumab/placebo, trastuzumab, and chemotherapy as adjuvant HER2-positive early breast cancer therapy).

METHODS

Patients received 1 year/18 cycles of pertuzumab/placebo with trastuzumab and chemotherapy and completed EORTC QLQ-C30 and BR23 questionnaires until 36 months post-randomisation/disease recurrence. Changes ≥10 points from baseline were considered clinically meaningful.

RESULTS

87-97% of patients completed questionnaires. In the pertuzumab versus placebo arms, mean decrease in physical function scores (baseline → end of taxane) was -10.7 (95% CI -11.4, -10.0) versus -10.6 (-11.4, -9.9), mean decrease in global health status was -11.2 (-12.2, -10.2) versus -10.2 (-11.1, -9.2), and mean increase in diarrhoea scores (baseline → end of taxane) was +22.3 (21.0, 23.6) versus +9.2 (8.2, 10.2). Diarrhoea scores remained elevated versus baseline in the pertuzumab arm throughout HER2-targeted treatment (week 25: +13.2; end of treatment: +12.2). Role functioning was maintained in both arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Improved invasive disease-free survival achieved by adding pertuzumab to trastuzumab and chemotherapy did not adversely affect the ability to conduct activities of daily living versus trastuzumab and chemotherapy alone. Patient-reported diarrhoea worsened during taxane therapy in both arms, persisting during HER2-targeted treatment in the pertuzumab arm. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT01358877.

The efficacy and safety of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and docetaxel as a first-line therapy in Japanese patients with inoperable or recurrent HER2-positive breast cancer: the COMACHI study

PURPOSE

In the CLEOPATRA study of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive recurrent or metastatic breast cancer, the Japanese patient subgroup did not demonstrate the improved progression-free survival (PFS) of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and docetaxel vs. placebo that was seen in the overall population. Therefore, COMACHI was conducted to confirm the efficacy and safety of this treatment regimen in this patient subgroup.

METHODS

This was a phase IV study of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and docetaxel in Japanese patients with histologically/cytologically confirmed inoperable or recurrent HER2-positive breast cancer. All patients received pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel intravenously every 3 weeks until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), investigator-assessed objective response rate, and duration of response (DoR). Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

At final analysis, median investigator-assessed PFS was 22.8 months (95% CI 16.9-37.5). From first dose, OS rate at 1 year was 97.7%; and at 2 and 3 years were 88.5% and 79.1%, respectively. Of the 118 patients with measurable disease at baseline, response rate was 83.9% (95% CI 77.3-90.5) and median investigator-assessed DoR was 26.3 months (95% CI 17.1-not evaluable). Treatment was well tolerated, with no new safety signals detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest similar efficacy and safety for pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and docetaxel in Japanese patients compared with the overall population of CLEOPATRA, providing further support for this combination therapy as standard of care for Japanese patients with inoperable or recurrent HER2-positive breast cancer.

The role of chemotherapy in treatment of advanced breast cancer: an overview for clinical practice

This review aims to evaluate the role of chemotherapy-containing regimens in the treatment of advanced breast cancer (ABC), with the purpose to optimize selection, sequencing and duration of treatment with the currently available agents for clinical practice. Data from observational as well as randomized phase II and III studies were included. Chemotherapy yielded a median overall survival (OS) of 2 years in registration studies, with comparable efficacy of different agents. Combining chemotherapy agents did not yield OS improvement and caused greater toxicity compared with single-agent chemotherapy. Continuing chemotherapy till progression or unacceptable toxicity generated greater efficacy without detrimental impact on quality of life compared with a limited amount of cycles. In real-world studies, benefits after third-line chemotherapy were modest compared with first- and second-line. Furthermore, effects of previous chemotherapy predicted effects of next-line therapy in real-world. Physicians increasingly prescribed capecitabine or taxanes as first- or second-line chemotherapy over time.

Trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and eribulin mesylate versus trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and a taxane as a first-line or second-line treatment for HER2-positive, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer: study protocol for a randomized controlled, non-inferiority, phase III trial in Japan (JBCRG-M06/EMERALD)

Background

Trastuzumab (Tmab), pertuzumab (Pmab), and taxane has been a standard first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic human epidermal growth factor (HER2)-positive breast cancer (HER2⁺ mBC) but has some safety issues due to taxane-induced toxicities. This has led to ongoing efforts to seek less toxic alternatives to taxanes that are equally effective when used in combination with Tmab plus Pmab. This study aims to show the non-inferiority of eribulin, a non-taxane microtubule inhibitor, against taxane, as a partner for dual HER2 blockade.

Methods/design

This multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, phase III study will involve a total of 480 Japanese women with HER2⁺ mBC who meet the following requirements: (1) age 20–70 years; (2) no prior cytotoxic chemotherapy (excluding trastuzumab-emtansine) for mBC; (3) ≥ 6 months after prior neoadjuvant or adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy; (4) presence of any radiologically evaluable lesion; (5) left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 50%; (6) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1; (7) adequate organ function; and (8) life expectancy of at least 6 months. They will be randomized 1:1 to receive eribulin (1.4 mg/m² on days 1 and 8) or taxane (docetaxel 75 mg/m² on day 1 or paclitaxel 80 mg/m² on days 1, 8, and 15) in combination with Tmab (8 mg/kg then 6 mg/kg) plus Pmab (840 mg then 420 mg) on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. The treatment will be continued until disease progression or unmanageable toxicity. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival as per investigator according to RECIST v1.1 criteria. Key secondary endpoints include objective response rate, overall survival, quality of life and safety. Non-inferiority will be tested with two margins of 1.33 and 1.25 in a stepwise manner. If non-inferiority is shown with a margin of 1.25, superiority will then be tested.

Discussion

If this study shows the non-inferiority, or even superiority, of Tmab, Pmab, and eribulin against the existing taxane-containing regimen, this new regimen may become a standard first- or second-line treatment option for HER2⁺ mBC in Japan.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03264547. Registered on 28 June 2017.

Health-related quality of life in patients receiving first-line eribulin mesylate with or without trastuzumab for locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer

Background

Eribulin mesylate is a nontaxane microtubule dynamics inhibitor approved for second-line (European Union) or third-line (United States) treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Two phase 2 single trials, evaluating first-line eribulin as monotherapy (Study 206; NCT01268150) or in combination with trastuzumab (Study 208; NCT01269346) in locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer, demonstrated objective response rates of 28.6 and 71.2%, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 6.8 and 11.6 months, respectively. Tolerability profiles were similar to those from previous studies. This secondary analysis was conducted to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in both phase 2 trials.

Methods

Patients received eribulin mesylate 1.4 mg/m² intravenously on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle. Patients in Study 208 also received intravenous trastuzumab on day 1 of each cycle (8 mg/kg in cycle 1, then 6 mg/kg). HRQoL was assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life (QLQ-C30) assessment tool and the Quality-of-Life Questionnaire for Breast Cancer (QLQ-BR23) at baseline and cycles 2, 4, and 6. Results for clinically meaningful changes were based on previously published minimum important differences.

Results

Of the 108 patients (56 in Study 206 and 52 in Study 208) treated, 57 and 87%, respectively, completed 6 cycles. Completion rates for both questionnaires were 94 and 98%, respectively, at cycle 6. Most patients had stable/improved HRQoL scores with some exceptions; for example, more patients experienced a worsening in cognitive functioning and systemic therapy side effects than experienced improvement. Mean QLQ-C30 symptom scores correlated with corresponding adverse event rates for nausea/vomiting, dyspnea, appetite loss, constipation, and diarrhea in Study 206 and for fatigue, nausea/vomiting, pain, dyspnea, insomnia, constipation, and diarrhea in Study 208.

Conclusions

First-line eribulin ± trastuzumab therapy did not lead to deterioration of overall HRQoL in most patients, with more than 60% of patients having stable/improved global health status/quality-of-life scores. Eribulin has been demonstrated to be comparable with other chemotherapy agents with an acceptable safety profile. Therefore, further evaluation is warranted to determine whether eribulin ± trastuzumab therapy may be a potential option for first-line treatment in some patients with metastatic breast cancer who were recently treated in the neoadjuvant setting.

Trial registration

NCT01268150 (December 29, 2010), NCT01269346 (January 4, 2011)

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-019-5674-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Statistical analysis of patient-reported outcome data in randomised controlled trials of locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review

Although patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as health-related quality of life, are important endpoints in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), there is little consensus about the analysis, interpretation, and reporting of these data. We did a systematic review to assess the variability, quality, and standards of PRO data analyses in advanced breast cancer RCTs. We searched PubMed for English language articles published in peer-reviewed journals between Jan 1, 2001, and Oct 30, 2017. Eligible articles were those that reported PRO results from RCTs of adult patients with advanced breast cancer receiving anti-cancer treatments with reported sample sizes of at least 50 patients-66 RCTs met the selection criteria. Only eight (12%) RCTs reported a specific PRO research hypothesis. Heterogeneity in the statistical methods used to assess PRO data was observed, with a mixture of longitudinal and cross-sectional techniques. Not all articles addressed the problem of multiple testing. Fewer than half of RCTs (28 [42%]) reported the clinical significance of their findings. 48 (73%) did not report how missing data were handled. Our systematic review shows a need to improve standards in the analysis, interpretation, and reporting of PRO data in cancer RCTs. Lack of standardisation makes it difficult to draw robust conclusions and compare findings across trials. The Setting International Standards in the Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Data Consortium was set up to address this need and develop recommendations on the analysis of PRO data in RCTs.

An Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Tool for the FACT-B (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast) Questionnaire for Measuring the Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Breast Cancer: Reliability Study

Background

The most frequent malignant disease in women is breast cancer. In the metastatic setting, quality of life is the primary therapeutic goal, and systematic treatment has only a limited effect on survival rates; therefore, the concept of the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and measurement of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are gaining more and more importance in the therapy setting of diseases such as breast cancer. One of the frequently used questionnaires for measuring the HRQoL in patients with breast cancer is the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B). Currently, paper-based surveys still predominate, as only a few reliable and validated electronic-based questionnaires are available. ePRO tools for the FACT-B questionnaire with proven reliability are missing so far.

Objective

The aim of this study was to analyze the reliability of tablet-based measurement of FACT-B in the German language in adjuvant (curative) and metastatic breast cancer patients.

Methods

Paper- and tablet-based questionnaires were completed by a total of 106 female adjuvant and metastatic breast cancer patients. All patients were required to complete the electronically based (ePRO) and paper-based version of the FACT-B. A frequency analysis was performed to determine descriptive sociodemographic characteristics. Both dimensions of reliability (parallel forms reliability using Wilcoxon test and test of internal consistency using Spearman ρ) and agreement rates for single items, Kendall tau for each subscale, and total score were analyzed.

Results

High correlations were shown for both dimensions of reliability (parallel forms reliability and internal consistency) in the patients’ response behavior between paper-based and electronically based questionnaires. Regarding the reliability test of parallel forms, no significant differences were found in 35 of 37 single items, while significant correlations in the test for consistency were found in all 37 single items, in all 5 sum individual item subscale scores, as well as in total FACT-B score.

Conclusions

The ePRO version of the FACT-B questionnaire is reliable for patients with breast cancer in both adjuvant and metastatic settings, showing highly significant correlations with the paper-based version in almost all questions all subscales and the total score.

A randomized, open-label, Phase III trial of pertuzumab retreatment in HER2-positive locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer patients previously treated with pertuzumab, trastuzumab and chemotherapy: the Japan Breast Cancer Research Group-M05 PRECIOUS study

The PRECIOUS study (UMIN000018202) is being conducted as a multicenter, randomized, open-label Phase III study to determine if retreatment with pertuzumab is more effective than conventional treatment in HER2-positive locally advanced (LA)/metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients previously treated with pertuzumab, trastuzumab and chemotherapy. Patients are randomized 1:1 into chemotherapy plus trastuzumab with or without pertuzumab groups. The latest regimen before enrollment did not include pertuzumab, and the number of previous chemotherapy regimens for LA/MBC did not exceed three. The primary endpoint is investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints include independent reviewer-assessed progression-free survival, progression-free survival in patients treated with trastuzumab emtansine as the latest regimen, response rate, response duration, overall survival, safety and health-related quality of life. Target accrual is 370 patients, allowing the observation of 325 events, yielding an 80% power for detection of a hazard ratio of 0.739 with a one-sided 5% level of significance.

Metastatic and triple-negative breast cancer: challenges and treatment options

The major current conventional types of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) treatments include surgery, radiation, hormonal therapy, chemotherapy, or immunotherapy. Introducing biological drugs, targeted treatment and gene therapy can potentially reduce the mortality and improve the quality of life in patients with MBC. However, combination of several types of treatment is usually recommended. Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) accounts for 10-20% of all cases of breast carcinoma and is characterized by the low expression of progesterone receptor (PR), estrogen receptor (ER), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). Consequently, convenient treatments used for MBC that target these receptors are not effective for TNBC which therefore requires special treatment approaches. This review discusses the occurrence of MBC, the prognosis and predictive biomarkers of MBC, and focuses on the novel advanced tactics for treatment of MBC and TNBC. Nanotechnology-based combinatorial approach for the suppression of EGFR by siRNA and gifitinib is described.

Value assessment in oncology drugs: funding of drugs for metastatic breast cancer in Canada

Background

Life expectancy for women with metastatic breast cancer has improved since the early 2000s, in part because of the introduction of novel therapies, including chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, and targeted agents. However, those treatments can come at a cost for the patient (short- and long-term toxicities from treatment) and at a financial cost for the health care system. Given the increase in the number of costly anticancer agents being introduced into the clinical setting, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (asco) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (esmo) have developed a system to quantify the value of new cancer treatments in terms of benefit, toxicities, and costs.

Methods

In our value-assessment analysis, we included drugs that were funded in Canada between 2012 and 2017 for metastatic breast cancer. We reviewed the clinical benefit of those agents (survival, progression, quality of life), their costs, their value according to the asco and esmo value frameworks, and their assessments from the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review [pcodr (in Canada, except Quebec)] and the Institut national d'excellence en santé et en services sociaux [iness (in Quebec)].

Results

Drugs funded in Canada showed variation in their asco net health benefit scores and esmo magnitude of clinical benefit scores, but all had a cost-effectiveness ratio greater than $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. The strength and magnitude of the clinical benefit (for example, overall survival benefit vs. progression-free survival benefit) was not necessarily associated with a higher value score.

Conclusions

Although great progress has been made in developing value frameworks, use of those frameworks has to be refined to help patients and health care providers make informed decisions about the benefit of novel cancer therapies and to help policymakers make decisions about the societal benefit of funding those therapies.

ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale version 1.1

Background

The ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) version 1.0 (v1.0) was published in May 2015 and was the first version of a validated and reproducible tool to assess the magnitude of clinical benefit from new cancer therapies. The ESMO-MCBS was designed to be a dynamic tool with planned revisions and updates based upon recognition of expanding needs and shortcomings identified since the last review.

Methods

The revision process for the ESMO-MCBS incorporates a nine-step process: Careful review of critiques and suggestions, and identification of problems in the application of v1.0; Identification of shortcomings for revision in the upcoming version; Proposal and evaluation of solutions to address identified shortcomings; Field testing of solutions; Preparation of a near-final revised version for peer review for reasonableness by members of the ESMO Faculty and Guidelines Committee; Amendments based on peer review for reasonableness; Near-final review by members of the ESMO-MCBS Working Group and the ESMO Executive Board; Final amendments; Final review and approval by members of the ESMO-MCBS Working Group and the ESMO Executive Board.

Results

Twelve issues for revision or amendment were proposed for consideration; proposed amendments were formulated for eight identified shortcomings. The proposed amendments are classified as either structural, technical, immunotherapy triggered or nuanced. All amendments were field tested in a wide range of studies comparing scores generated with ESMO-MCBS v1.0 and version 1.1 (v1.1).

Conclusions

ESMO-MCBS v1.1 incorporates 10 revisions and will allow for scoring of single-arm studies. Scoring remains very stable; revisions in v1.1 alter the scores of only 12 out of 118 comparative studies and facilitate scoring for single-arm studies.

Combination therapies for the treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer: current and future prospects

INTRODUCTION

HER2-positive disease is an aggressive subtype of breast cancer that has been revolutionized by anti-HER2 directed therapies. Multiple drugs have been developed and are currently in clinical use, including trastuzumab, lapatinib, pertuzumab, T-DM1, and neratinib, alone or combined in 'dual HER2-blockade' regimens. Areas covered: A comprehensive literature review was performed regarding the current state and the future of combination regimens containing anti-HER2 agents, focusing on their efficacy, toxicity, and cost-effectiveness. Expert commentary: The combination of trastuzumab/pertuzumab is approved in all disease settings, while trastuzumab/neratinib is approved in the adjuvant setting and trastuzumab/lapatinib in metastatic disease. Meanwhile, as breast cancer biology and resistance mechanisms become clearer, combinations with drugs like PI3K/Akt/mTOR inhibitors, CDK4/6 inhibitors, anti-PD(L)1 antibodies, endocrine therapy, and new anti-HER2 agents (panHER and HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitors, bispecific antibodies, anti-HER3 antibodies, and antibody-drug conjugates) are being extensively tested in clinical trials. More specific strategies for the 'triple-positive' (estrogen receptor-positive/HER2-positive) disease are also being explored. However, there is an urgent need for the development of predictive biomarkers for a better tailoring of anti-HER2 directed therapy. This is the only way to further improve clinical outcomes and quality of life and to decrease costs and toxicities of unnecessary treatments.

Real-World Data on Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment in Patients With Breast Cancer Receiving Subcutaneous Trastuzumab

Purpose

Trastuzumab, a humanized anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (anti-HER2) antibody delivered intravenously, has revolutionized the treatment of patients with breast cancer overexpressing HER2 protein. Recently, a newer subcutaneous formulation was shown to have comparable efficacy to the initial intravenous trastuzumab. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the impact of subcutaneous trastuzumab on the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients diagnosed with early or metastatic HER2-overexpressing breast cancer.

Methods

Patients were provided with the EORTC QLQ-C30 (European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30) and the BR-23 questionnaires. The scoring of questionnaires and patient's sociodemographic and clinicopathologic characteristics were recorded and analyzed by descriptive and correlation statistics employing t test and 2-way analysis of variance.

Results

A total of 163 patients agreed to participate in the study. About 90 of 163 patients (55.21%) received subcutaneous trastuzumab and 21 patients intravenous trastuzumab (12.88%). A control group of 52 HER2+ patients received chemotherapy without trastuzumab (31.90%). Patients receiving subcutaneous trastuzumab were older and of more advanced disease stage compared with those receiving chemotherapy (58.5 vs 51 years, 39.8% vs 28.8% advanced disease). In univariate analysis, subcutaneous trastuzumab was associated with less nausea and vomiting (P = .002) but worse cognitive function (P = .013) and dyspnea (P = .042). Patients who have received >8 cycles of subcutaneous trastuzumab reported less diarrhea (P = .049) and systemic therapy side effects (P = .015). Multivariate analysis showed that patients without comorbidity receiving subcutaneous trastuzumab had less treatment side effects, less upset by hair loss, and higher emotional functioning. Of note, mastectomy and subcutaneous trastuzumab were associated with improved role functioning (P = .021). In metastatic disease, no negative impact of subcutaneous trastuzumab on HRQoL was found.

Conclusions

The administration of subcutaneous trastuzumab improved certain symptoms and did not adversely affect most of the assessed functional scales. Particularly, in the metastatic setting, subcutaneous trastuzumab had no negative impact on HRQoL.

Development and clinical application of anti-HER2 monoclonal and bispecific antibodies for cancer treatment

HER2-targeted immunotherapy consists of monoclonal antibodies (e.g. trastuzumab, pertuzumab), bispecific antibodies (e.g. MM-111, ertumaxomab) and activated T cells armed with anti-HER2 bispecific antibody (HER2Bi-aATC). Trastuzumab is a classic drug for the treatment of HER2 positive metastatic breast cancer. The combined application of pertuzumab, trastuzumab and paclitaxel has been suggested as a standard therapy for HER2 positive advanced breast cancer. The resistance to anti-HER2 antibody has resulted in disease progression. HER2-directed bispecific antibody may be a promising therapeutic approach for these patients. Ertumaxomab enhanced the interaction of immune effector cells and tumor cells. MM-111 simultaneously binds to HER2 and HER3 and blocks downstream signaling. Besides, HER2Bi-aATC is also an alternative therapeutic approach for HER2 positive cancers. In this review, we summarized the recent advancement of HER2-targeted monoclonal antibodies (trastuzumab, pertuzumab and T-DM1) and bispecific antibodies (MM-111, ertumaxomab and HER2Bi-aATC), especially focus on clinical trial results.

Reliability of an e-PRO Tool of EORTC QLQ-C30 for Measurement of Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Breast Cancer: Prospective Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer represents the most common malignant disease in women worldwide. As currently systematic palliative treatment only has a limited effect on survival rates, the concept of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is gaining more and more importance in the therapy setting of metastatic breast cancer. One of the major patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for measuring HRQoL in patients with breast cancer is provided by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). Currently, paper-based surveys still predominate, as only a few reliable and validated electronic-based questionnaires are available. Facing the possibilities associated with evolving digitalization in medicine, validation of electronic versions of well-established PRO is essential in order to contribute to comprehensive and holistic oncological care and to ensure high quality in cancer research.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to analyze the reliability of a tablet-based measuring application for EORTC QLQ-C30 in German language in patients with adjuvant and (curative) metastatic breast cancer.

METHODS

Paper- and tablet-based questionnaires were completed by a total of 106 female patients with adjuvant and metastatic breast cancer recruited as part of the e-PROCOM study. All patients were required to complete the electronic- (e-PRO) and paper-based versions of the HRQoL EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire. A frequency analysis was performed to determine descriptive sociodemographic characteristics. Both dimensions of reliability (parallel forms reliability [Wilcoxon test] and test of internal consistency [Spearman rho and agreement rates for single items, Pearson correlation and Kendall tau for each scale]) were analyzed.

RESULTS

High correlations were shown for both dimensions of reliability (parallel forms reliability and internal consistency) in the patient's response behavior between paper- and electronic-based questionnaires. Regarding the test of parallel forms reliability, no significant differences were found in 27 of 30 single items and in 14 of 15 scales, whereas a statistically significant correlation in the test of consistency was found in all 30 single items and all 15 scales.

CONCLUSIONS

The evaluated e-PRO version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 is reliable for patients with both adjuvant and metastatic breast cancer, showing a high correlation in almost all questions (and in many scales). Thus, we conclude that the validated paper-based PRO assessment and the e-PRO tool are equally valid. However, the reliability should also be analyzed in other prospective trials to ensure that usability is reliable in all patient groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03132506; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03132506 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6tRcgQuou).

Evolution of anti-HER2 therapies for cancer treatment

The development of HER2-directed monoclonal antibodies and tyrosine kinase inhibitors have provided benefits to cancer patients, as well as produced many insights into the biology of the ErbB receptor family. Current therapies based on ErbB family members have resulted in improved overall survival with associated improvements in quality of life for the cancer patients that respond to treatment. Compared to monotherapy using either two antibodies to block the HER2 receptor blockade or combinatorial approaches with HER2 antibodies and standard therapies has provided additional benefits. Despite the therapeutic success of existing HER2 therapies, personalising treatment and overcoming resistance to these therapies remains a significant challenge. The heterogeneous intra-tumoural HER2 expression and lack of fully predictive and prognostic biomarkers remain significant barriers to improving the use of HER2 antibodies. Imaging modalities using radiolabelled pertuzumab and trastuzumab allow quantitative assessment of intra-tumoural HER2 expression, HER2 antibody saturation and the success of different drug delivery systems to be assessed. Molecular imaging with HER2 antibodies has the potential to be a non-invasive, predictive and prognostic technique capable of influencing therapeutic decisions, predicting response and failure of treatments as well as providing insights into receptor recycling and signalling. Similarly, conjugating HER2 antibodies with novel toxic payloads or combining HER2 antibodies with cellular immunotherapy provide exciting new opportunities for the management of tumours overexpressing HER2. Future research will lead to higher therapeutic responses, lower toxicities and providing insight into the mechanisms of resistance to HER2-targeted treatments.

Measuring the Value of New Drugs: Validity and Reliability of 4 Value Assessment Frameworks in the Oncology Setting

BACKGROUND

Several organizations have developed frameworks to systematically assess the value of new drugs.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the convergent validity and interrater reliability of 4 value frameworks to understand the extent to which these tools can facilitate value-based treatment decisions in oncology.

METHODS

Eight panelists used the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) frameworks to conduct value assessments of 15 drugs for advanced lung and breast cancers and castration-refractory prostate cancer. Panelists received instructions and published clinical data required to complete the assessments, assigning each drug a numeric or letter score. Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance for Ranks (Kendall's W) was used to measure convergent validity by cancer type among the 4 frameworks. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to measure interrater reliability for each framework across cancers. Panelists were surveyed on their experiences.

RESULTS

Kendall's W across all 4 frameworks for breast, lung, and prostate cancer drugs was 0.560 (P= 0.010), 0.562 (P = 0.010), and 0.920 (P < 0.001), respectively. Pairwise, Kendall's W for breast cancer drugs was highest for ESMO-ICER and ICER-NCCN (W = 0.950, P = 0.019 for both pairs) and lowest for ASCO-NCCN (W = 0.300, P = 0.748). For lung cancer drugs, W was highest pairwise for ESMO-ICER (W = 0.974, P = 0.007) and lowest for ASCO-NCCN (W = 0.218, P = 0.839); for prostate cancer drugs, pairwise W was highest for ICER-NCCN (W = 1.000, P < 0.001) and lowest for ESMO-ICER and ESMO-NCCN (W = 0.900, P = 0.052 for both pairs). When ranking drugs on distinct framework subdomains, Kendall's W among breast cancer drugs was highest for certainty (ICER, NCCN: W = 0.908, P = 0.046) and lowest for clinical benefit (ASCO, ESMO, NCCN: W = 0.345, P = 0.436). Among lung cancer drugs, W was highest for toxicity (ASCO, ESMO, NCCN: W = 0. 944, P < 0.001) and lowest for certainty (ICER, NCCN: W = 0.230, P = 0.827); and among prostate cancer drugs, it was highest for quality of life (ASCO, ESMO: W = 0.986, P = 0.003) and lowest for toxicity (ASCO, ESMO, NCCN: W = 0.200, P = 0.711). ICC (95% CI) for ASCO, ESMO, ICER, and NCCN were 0.800 (0.660-0.913), 0.818 (0.686-0.921), 0.652 (0.466-0.834), and 0.153 (0.045-0.371), respectively. When scores were rescaled to 0-100, NCCN provided the narrowest band of scores. When asked about their experiences using the ASCO, ESMO, ICER, and NCCN frameworks, panelists generally agreed that the frameworks were logically organized and reasonably easy to use, with NCCN rated somewhat easier.

CONCLUSIONS

Convergent validity among the ASCO, ESMO, ICER, and NCCN frameworks was fair to excellent, increasing with clinical benefit subdomain concordance and simplicity of drug trial data. Interrater reliability, highest for ASCO and ESMO, improved with clarity of instructions and specificity of score definitions. Continued use, analyses, and refinements of these frameworks will bring us closer to the ultimate goal of using value-based treatment decisions to improve patient care and outcomes.

DISCLOSURES

This work was funded by Eisai Inc. Copher and Knoth are employees of Eisai Inc. Bentley, Lee, Zambrano, and Broder are employees of Partnership for Health Analytic Research, a health services research company paid by Eisai Inc. to conduct this research. For this study, Cohen, Huynh, and Neville report fees from Partnership for Health Analytic Research. Outside of this study, Cohen receives grants and direct consulting fees from various companies that manufacture and market pharmaceuticals. Mei reports a grant from Eisai Inc. during this study. The other authors have no disclosures to report. Study concept and design were contributed by Bentley and Broder, with assistance from Elkin and Cohen. Bentley took the lead in data collection, along with Elkin, Huynh, Mukherjea, Neville, Mei, Popescu, Lee, and Zambrano. Data interpretation was performed by Bentley and Broder, along with Elkin, Cohen, Copher, and Knoth. The manuscript was written primarily by Bentley, along with Elkin and Broder, and revised by Bentley, Broder, Elkin, Cohen, Copher, and Knoth. Select components of this work's methods were presented at ISPOR 19th Annual European Congress held in Vienna, Austria, October 29-November 2, 2016, and Society for Medical Decision Making 38th Annual North American Meeting held in Vancouver, Canada, October 23-26, 2016.

Health-related Quality of Life in Metastatic and Adjuvant Breast Cancer Patients

Introduction: When cancer patients have advanced disease and a primary cure is no longer possible, the focus is on maintaining the patient's quality of life. Recent therapeutic advances in breast cancer treatment mean that even patients with metastatic disease can remain stable for long periods of time. The aim of this study was to look at the health-related quality of life (HRQL) of these patients and compare it with data for the general population and to show the differences in outcomes for different survey instruments used to measure quality of life. Material and Methods: A total of 96 breast cancer patients with metastatic disesae or receiving adjuvant therapy were questioned about their quality of life. Patients were investigated using the established survey instruments EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-BR23, EQ-5D-5L and EQ VAS. All patients filled out questionnaires. Statistical analysis was done using MS Excel and SPSS. Results: Although the questionnaires were completed at the same time, the different questionnaires showed significant differences with regard to the level of stress experienced by the patient. When the EQ VAS questionnaire was used, the patient's current state of health was assessed as significantly better than with the EORTC QLQ-C30. Overall, all aspects of patients' quality of life were found to be in need of optimization and HRQL of patients was significantly poorer in all areas compared to the reference population. Conclusion: To improve the quality of life of patients with metastatic disease, it is necessary to continuously monitor the success of therapy. The choice of survey tools is highly relevant as assessments differ considerably depending on the choice of questionnaire.

The use of patient-reported outcomes in advanced breast cancer clinical trials: a review of the published literature

OBJECTIVE

As a means to measure quantifiable signs, symptoms, and impacts of a disease or its treatment, patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments can be applied to numerous settings, including use in drug development to support labeling claims. This research summarizes the use of PROs in trials for 16 commonly used regulatory approved treatments for advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

METHODS

For each treatment (n = 16), a literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO. The primary criterion for selection was the report of studies that used PROs to evaluate treatment benefit and/or toxicity in advanced or metastatic breast cancer. From this, a sub-set of articles for each treatment were selected for full-text review where PRO-related information was extracted and summarized.

RESULTS

The searches yielded 1727 publications. Following abstract review, 1702 were excluded because they failed to meet criteria, or were duplicates or less relevant for PRO information reported. Thus, 25 articles were reviewed in detail for this evaluation. Eleven PRO instruments were identified from these publications. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire - Core (EORTC QLQ-C30) was utilized the most frequently (n = 13, 52.0%). Most publications reported PROs positioned as secondary endpoints (n = 20, 80.0%); described some of the statistical analyses applied to PRO data (n = 21, 84.0%); and specified PRO results (n = 23, 92.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

While several of the publications provided some information on how PROs were utilized, many did not describe details for PRO administration, scoring, analyses, and results interpretation. While it is encouraging that PROs are often used in clinical trials for patients with metastatic breast cancer, they are not commonly used to support endpoints that establish the basis for label claims. Because they yield direct insight into the patient experience of a condition, PROs may be used to provide a more comprehensive perspective of the benefits and risks from treatment.

Long-term health status as measured by EQ-5D among patients with metastatic breast cancer: comparison of first-line oral S-1 and taxane therapies in the randomized phase III SELECT BC trial

Purpose

The goal of chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is to prolong survival and maintain health-related quality of life. This study aimed to evaluate long-term health status of patients with MBC who participated in the phase III randomized SELECT BC trial.

Methods

In the SELECT BC trial, patients were randomly allocated to the S-1 or taxane (paclitaxel or docetaxel) arm. Health status was assessed by EQ-5D at pre-treatment, 3 and 6 months after randomization, and every 6 months thereafter to the extent possible. Least square mean scores were assessed to compare EQ-5D index values between groups. Time to deterioration analysis was also performed by defining the minimally important difference of EQ-5D as 0.05 or 0.1.

Results

The number of patients for EQ-5D analysis was 175 and 208 in the taxane and S-1 arms, respectively. Least square mean EQ-5D index values up to 60 months were 0.741 (95 % CI [0.713–0.769]) in the taxane arm and 0.748 [0.722–0.775] in the S-1 arm. The EQ-5D index value during PFS up to 12 months in the S-1 was superior to the corresponding index value in the taxane (0.812 [0.789–0.834] vs. 0.772 [0.751–0.792], P = 0.009). Time to deterioration analysis also revealed that S-1 significantly delayed the deterioration of EQ-5D index value during the period before progression (P = 0.002 and 0.003).

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that the EQ-5D index value was higher in patients treated with S-1 during first-line chemotherapy. Considering non-inferiority of S-1 in terms of OS, obtained quality-adjusted life years may be greater in the S-1 arm.

Surrogate end points for overall survival in breast cancer trials: A review

Our aim was to review the studies which assessed potential surrogate endpoints for overall survival (OS) in breast cancer trials. A Literature search in PubMed database of studies which assessed potential surrogate endpoints for OS in breast cancer trials was conducted. The surrogacy was assessed with the German institute of Quality and efficiency in Health Care's (IWQiG) framework and the Fleming hierarchy. Thirteen studies were identified. At the neoadjuvant setting, two individual patient data (IPD) meta-analyses and one aggregate data meta-analysis assessing surrogacy of pathological complete response (PCR) were identified. Trial-level association was calculated in one study and the squared correlation was 0.24. Therefore PCR was not judged to be valid surrogate for OS at the neoadjuvant setting according to the IWQiG framework and Fleming hierarchy. At the adjuvant setting, one meta-analysis on aggregate data was identified. 2-year DFS was not judged to be valid surrogate for OS at the neoadjuvant setting according to the IWQiG framework and Fleming hierarchy. At the metastatic setting, six meta-analyses based on aggregate data, three IPD meta-analyses and one retrospective study were identified. Within the IPD meta-analyses, at the trial-level association the squared correlation between the potential surrogates and OS ranged from 0.10 to 0.57 and no endpoint was judged to be valid surrogate for OS at the metastatic setting. The level of evidence available supporting a relationship between OS and potential surrogate endpoints in breast cancer trials is low.

Pertuzumab for the treatment of breast cancer: a safety review

INTRODUCTION

Approximately twenty to thirty percent of newly diagnosed breast cancers are human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive. The use of trastuzumab, and more recently pertuzumab, has significantly improved the progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in this patient population. However, pertuzumab has side effects that can impact treatment tolerability and quality of life.

AREAS COVERED

This review describes the safety and tolerability of pertuzumab, a monoclonal antibody targeted at HER2 approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in the neoadjuvant and first line metastatic settings.

EXPERT OPINION

The combination of trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and chemotherapy is approved in the neoadjuvant and first line metastatic settings and should be strongly considered by providers. Further studies are needed to look at side effect prevention, novel pertuzumab containing regimens, and re-treating patients with pertuzumab.

A review of HER2-targeted therapy in breast and ovarian cancer: lessons from antiquity - CLEOPATRA and PENELOPE

Although breast and ovarian cancer have notable distinctions, there may exist parallel pathways that can be exploited for therapeutic gain. For example, the therapeutic arena in breast cancer has benefited greatly from available endocrine therapies as well as novel drugs designed to target the HER2 receptor, including trastuzumab, lapatinib, T-DM1 and pertuzumab. CLEOPATRA, a Phase III randomized clinical trial studying pertuzumab in women with HER2-amplified metastatic breast cancer, was practice-changing in 2014. Its counterpart, the Phase III randomized PENELOPE trial, was activated following promising Phase II data and studied pertuzumab in an enriched ovarian cancer patient population with low HER3 mRNA. This review will trace the development of anti-HER2 therapies in breast and ovarian cancer.

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer: how the latest results are improving therapeutic options

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains an incurable disease, and approximately 25% of patients with HER2+ early breast cancer still relapse after adjuvant trastuzumab-based treatment. HER2 is a validated therapeutic target that remains relevant throughout the disease process. Recently, a number of novel HER2 targeted agents have become available, including lapatinib (a small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor of both HER2 and the epidermal growth factor receptor), pertuzumab (a new anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody) and ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1, a novel antibody-drug conjugate), which provide additional treatment options for patients with HER2+ MBC. The latest clinical trials have demonstrated improved outcome with treatment including pertuzumab or T-DM1 compared with standard HER2 targeted therapy. Here we review the clinical development of approved and investigational targeted agents for the treatment of HER2+ MBC, summarize the latest results of important clinical trials supporting use of these agents in the treatment of HER2+ MBC, and discuss how these results impact therapeutic options in clinical practice.

The use of combinations of monoclonal antibodies in clinical oncology

Treatment with monoclonal antibodies is becoming increasingly important in clinical oncology. These antibodies specifically inhibit signaling pathways in tumor growth and/or induce immunological responses against tumor cells. By combining monoclonal antibodies several pathways may be targeted simultaneously, potentially leading to additive or synergistic effects. Theoretically, antibodies are very suitable for use in combination therapy, because of limited overlapping toxicity and lack of pharmacokinetic interactions. In this article an overview is given of preclinical and clinical data on twenty-five different combinations of antibodies in oncology. Some of these combinations have proven clinical benefit, for example the combination of trastuzumab and pertuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer, which exemplifies an additive or synergistic effect on antitumor activity in clinical studies and the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab, which results in significant increases in progression-free and overall survival in patients with advanced melanoma. However, other combinations may lead to unfavorable results, such as bevacizumab with cetuximab or panitumumab in advanced colorectal cancer. These combinations result in shorter progression-free survival and increased toxicity compared to therapy with a single antibody. In summary, the different published studies showed widely varying results, depending on the combination of antibodies, indication and patient population. More preclinical and clinical studies are necessary to unravel the mechanisms behind synergistic or antagonistic effects of combining monoclonal antibodies. Most research on combination therapies is still in an early stage, but it is expected that for several tumor types the use of combination therapy of antibodies will become standard of care in the near future.

Cost-Effectiveness of Pertuzumab in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

The Clinical Evaluation of Pertuzumab and Trastuzumab (CLEOPATRA) study showed a 15.7-month survival benefit with the addition of pertuzumab to docetaxel and trastuzumab (THP) as first-line treatment for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -overexpressing metastatic breast cancer. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis to assess the value of adding pertuzumab.

PATIENT AND METHODS

We developed a decision-analytic Markov model to evaluate the cost effectiveness of docetaxel plus trastuzumab (TH) with or without pertuzumab in US patients with metastatic breast cancer. The model followed patients weekly over their remaining lifetimes. Health states included stable disease, progressing disease, hospice, and death. Transition probabilities were based on the CLEOPATRA study. Costs reflected the 2014 Medicare rates. Health state utilities were the same as those used in other recent cost-effectiveness studies of trastuzumab and pertuzumab. Outcomes included health benefits expressed as discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs in US dollars, and cost effectiveness expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. One- and multiway deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses explored the effects of specific assumptions.

RESULTS

Modeled median survival was 39.4 months for TH and 56.9 months for THP. The addition of pertuzumab resulted in an additional 1.81 life-years gained, or 0.62 QALYs, at a cost of $472,668 per QALY gained. Deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that THP is unlikely to be cost effective even under the most favorable assumptions, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis predicted 0% chance of cost effectiveness at a willingness to pay of $100,000 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

THP in patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer is unlikely to be cost effective in the United States.

A standardised, generic, validated approach to stratify the magnitude of clinical benefit that can be anticipated from anti-cancer therapies: the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS)

The value of any new therapeutic strategy or treatment is determined by the magnitude of its clinical benefit balanced against its cost. Evidence for clinical benefit from new treatment options is derived from clinical research, in particular phase III randomised trials, which generate unbiased data regarding the efficacy, benefit and safety of new therapeutic approaches. To date, there is no standard tool for grading the magnitude of clinical benefit of cancer therapies, which may range from trivial (median progression-free survival advantage of only a few weeks) to substantial (improved long-term survival). Indeed, in the absence of a standardised approach for grading the magnitude of clinical benefit, conclusions and recommendations derived from studies are often hotly disputed and very modest incremental advances have often been presented, discussed and promoted as major advances or 'breakthroughs'. Recognising the importance of presenting clear and unbiased statements regarding the magnitude of the clinical benefit from new therapeutic approaches derived from high-quality clinical trials, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) has developed a validated and reproducible tool to assess the magnitude of clinical benefit for cancer medicines, the ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). This tool uses a rational, structured and consistent approach to derive a relative ranking of the magnitude of clinically meaningful benefit that can be expected from a new anti-cancer treatment. The ESMO-MCBS is an important first step to the critical public policy issue of value in cancer care, helping to frame the appropriate use of limited public and personal resources to deliver cost-effective and affordable cancer care. The ESMO-MCBS will be a dynamic tool and its criteria will be revised on a regular basis.

Sequential FOLFIRI.3 + Gemcitabine Improves Health-Related Quality of Life Deterioration-Free Survival of Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Randomized Phase II Trial

BACKGROUND

A randomized multicenter phase II trial was conducted to assess the sequential treatment strategy using FOLFIRI.3 and gemcitabine alternately (Arm 2) compared to gemcitabine alone (Arm 1) in patients with metastatic non pre-treated pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. It concludes that the sequential treatment strategy appears to be feasible and effective with a PFS rate of 43.5% in Arm 2 at 6 months (26.1% in Arm 1). This paper reports the results of the longitudinal analysis of the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) as a secondary endpoint of this study.

METHODS

HRQoL was evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline and every two months until the end of the study or death. HRQoL deterioration-free survival (QFS) was defined as the time from randomization to a first significant deterioration as compared to the baseline score with no further significant improvement, or death. A propensity score was estimated comparing characteristics of partial and complete responders. Analyses were repeated with inverse probability weighting method using the propensity score. Multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify independent factors influencing QFS.

RESULTS

98 patients were included between 2007 and 2011. Adjusting on the propensity score, patients of Arm 2 presented a longer QFS of Global Health Status (Hazard Ratio: 0.52 [0.31-0.85]), emotional functioning (0.35 [0.21-0.59]) and pain (0.50 [0.31-0.81]) than those of Arm 1.

CONCLUSION

Patients of Arm 2 presented a better HRQoL with a longer QFS than those of Arm 1. Moreover, the propensity score method allows to take into account the missing data depending on patients' characteristics.

TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

Eudract N° 2006-005703-34. (Name of the Trial: FIRGEM).

The expanding role of pertuzumab in the treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer

Breast cancer tumors that demonstrate gene amplification or overexpression of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) are classified as HER2-positive. They account for approximately 15% of all breast cancers and represent an adverse prognostic factor. Over the past years, many new therapies have become available for the treatment of breast cancer. Particularly, the treatment of patients with HER2-positive breast cancer has developed with the arrival of anti-HER2 targeted therapies that have been proven to increase survival in both the metastatic and early-stage settings of the disease. Trastuzumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting HER2, significantly improves survival in HER2-positive breast cancer. Nevertheless, it is still a challenge to evolve anti-HER2 therapies, as the disease may progress. Pertuzumab inhibits HER2 by binding to a different HER2 epitope than trastuzumab and represents a complementary mechanism of action to trastuzumab. The efficacy and safety of pertuzumab in combination with trastuzumab with or without chemotherapy have been demonstrated in both advanced and early stages of HER2-positive breast cancer. Herein, we review the available data on the use of pertuzumab for the treatment of patients with HER2-positive breast cancer.

Pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

In patients with metastatic breast cancer that is positive for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), progression-free survival was significantly improved after first-line therapy with pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel, as compared with placebo, trastuzumab, and docetaxel. Overall survival was significantly improved with pertuzumab in an interim analysis without the median being reached. We report final prespecified overall survival results with a median follow-up of 50 months.

METHODS

We randomly assigned patients with metastatic breast cancer who had not received previous chemotherapy or anti-HER2 therapy for their metastatic disease to receive the pertuzumab combination or the placebo combination. The secondary end points of overall survival, investigator-assessed progression-free survival, independently assessed duration of response, and safety are reported. Sensitivity analyses were adjusted for patients who crossed over from placebo to pertuzumab after the interim analysis.

RESULTS

The median overall survival was 56.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 49.3 to not reached) in the group receiving the pertuzumab combination, as compared with 40.8 months (95% CI, 35.8 to 48.3) in the group receiving the placebo combination (hazard ratio favoring the pertuzumab group, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.84; P<0.001), a difference of 15.7 months. This analysis was not adjusted for crossover to the pertuzumab group and is therefore conservative. Results of sensitivity analyses after adjustment for crossover were consistent. Median progression-free survival as assessed by investigators improved by 6.3 months in the pertuzumab group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.80). Pertuzumab extended the median duration of response by 7.7 months, as independently assessed. Most adverse events occurred during the administration of docetaxel in the two groups, with long-term cardiac safety maintained.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, the addition of pertuzumab to trastuzumab and docetaxel, as compared with the addition of placebo, significantly improved the median overall survival to 56.5 months and extended the results of previous analyses showing the efficacy of this drug combination. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech; CLEOPATRA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00567190.).

Efficacy and Safety of HER2-Targeted Agents for Breast Cancer with HER2-Overexpression: A Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted agents added to standard treatment have been efficacious for HER2-positive (HER2+) advanced breast cancer. To our knowledge, no meta-analysis has evaluated HER2-targeted therapy including trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) and pertuzumab for HER2-positive breast caner and ranked the targeted treatments. We performed a network meta-analysis of both direct and indirect comparisons to evaluate the effect of adding HER2-targeted agents to standard treatment and examined side effects.

METHODS

We performed a Bayesian-framework network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare 6 HER2-targeted treatment regimens and 1 naïve standard treatment (NST, without any-targeted drugs) in targeted treatment of HER2+ breast cancer in adults. These treatment regimens were T-DM1, LC (lapatinib), HC (trastuzumab), PEC (pertuzumab), LHC (lapatinib and trastuzumab), and PEHC (pertuzumab and trastuzumab). The main outcomes were overall survival and response rates. We also examined side effects of rash, LVEF (left ventricular ejection fraction), fatigue, and gastrointestinal disorders, and performed subgroup analysis for the different treatment regimens in metastatic or advanced breast cancer.

RESULTS

We identified 25 articles of 21 trials, with data for 11,276 participants. T-DM1 and PEHC were more efficient drug regimens with regard to overall survival as compared with LHC, LC, HC and PEC. The incidence of treatment-related rash occurs more frequently in the patients who received LC treatment regimen than PEHC and T-DM1 and HC. In subgroup analysis, T-DM1 was associated with increased overall survival as compared with LC and HC. PEHC was associated with increased overall response as compared with LC, HC, and NST.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the regimen of T-DM1 as well as pertuzumab in combination with trastuzumab and docetaxel is efficacious with fewer side effects as compared with other regimens, especially for advanced HER2+ breast cancer.

IMPACT

This study suggests that both T-DM1 and PEHC therapy are potentially and equally useful treatments for HER2+ breast cancer.

Pertuzumab in combination with trastuzumab and docetaxel for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer

Overexpression of HER2 - found in approximately 15-20% of all breast cancers - is a negative prognostic factor. Although trastuzumab significantly improves the prognosis of HER2-positive breast cancer, half of the patients with metastatic breast cancer experience disease progression within 1 year. Pertuzumab is a novel HER2-targeted humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to the dimerization domain of HER2 and acts synergically with trastuzumab in inhibiting tumor progression. The CLEOPATRA trial demonstrated that adding pertuzumab to trastuzumab plus docetaxel significantly prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival without increasing severe adverse events. Conclusively, pertuzumab was approved by the US FDA in June 2012 for use in combination with trastuzumab and docetaxel for the treatment of patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Furthermore, various clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pertuzumab combined with other cytotoxic agents are ongoing at present. Thus, pertuzumab has been becoming important for the treatment of patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.