1
|
Gebhart G, Keyaerts M, Guiot T, Flamen P, Ruiz-Borrego M, Stradella A, Bermejo B, Escriva-de-Romani S, Calvo Martínez L, Ribelles N, Fernandez-Abad M, Albacar C, Colleoni M, Garrigos L, Atienza de Frutos M, Dalenc F, Prat A, Marmé F, Schmid P, Kerrou K, Braga S, Gener P, Sampayo-Cordero M, Cortés J, Pérez-García JM, Llombart-Cussac A. Optimal [ 18F]FDG PET/CT Cutoff for Pathologic Complete Response in HER2-Positive Early Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Trastuzumab and Pertuzumab in the PHERGain Trial. J Nucl Med 2024; 65:708-713. [PMID: 38575192 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.123.266384] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2023] [Revised: 02/16/2024] [Indexed: 04/06/2024] Open
Abstract
The PHERGain trial investigated the potential of metabolic imaging to identify candidates for chemotherapy deescalation in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive, invasive, operable breast cancer with at least 1 breast lesion evaluable by [18F]FDG PET/CT. [18F]FDG PET/CT responders were defined as patients with an SUVmax reduction (ΔSUVmax) of at least 40% in all of their target lesions after 2 cycles of trastuzumab and pertuzumab (HP) (with or without endocrine therapy). In total, 227 of 285 patients (80%) included in the HP arm showed a predefined metabolic response and received a total of 8 cycles of HP (with or without endocrine therapy). Pathologic complete response (pCR), defined as ypT0/isN0, was achieved in 37.9% of the patients. Here, we describe the secondary preplanned analysis of the best cutoff of ΔSUVmax for pCR prediction. Methods: Receiver-operating-characteristic analysis was applied to look for the most appropriate ΔSUVmax cutoff in HER2-positive early breast cancer patients treated exclusively with neoadjuvant HP (with or without endocrine therapy). Results: The ΔSUVmax capability of predicting pCR in terms of the area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve was 72.1% (95% CI, 65.1-79.2%). The optimal ΔSUVmax cutoff was found to be 77.0%, with a 51.2% sensitivity and a 78.7% specificity. With this cutoff, 74 of 285 patients (26%) would be classified as metabolic responders, increasing the pCR rate from 37.9% (cutoff ≥ 40%) to 59.5% (44/74 patients) (P < 0.01). With this optimized cutoff, 44 of 285 patients (15.4%) would avoid chemotherapy in either the neoadjuvant or the adjuvant setting compared with 86 of 285 patients (30.2%) using the original cutoff (P < 0.001). Conclusion: In the PHERGain trial, an increased SUVmax cutoff (≥77%) after 2 cycles of exclusive HP (with or without endocrine therapy) achieves a pCR in the range of the control arm with chemotherapy plus HP (59.5% vs. 57.7%, respectively), further identifying a subgroup of patients with HER2-addicted tumors. However, the original cutoff (≥40%) maximizes the number of patients who could avoid chemotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Geraldine Gebhart
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | | | - Thomas Guiot
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Patrick Flamen
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | | | - Agostina Stradella
- Medical Oncology Department, Institut Català D'Oncologia, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Begoña Bermejo
- Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Santiago Escriva-de-Romani
- Breast Cancer Group, Medical Oncology Department, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Lourdes Calvo Martínez
- Medical Oncology Department, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain
| | - Nuria Ribelles
- UGC Oncología Intercentros, Hospitales Universitarios Regional y Virgen de la Victoria de Málaga, Instituto de Investigaciones Biomédicas de Málaga, Málaga, Spain
| | - María Fernandez-Abad
- Medical Oncology Department, Ramón y Cajal Hospital, Madrid, Spain
- Alcala de Henares Medical University, Alcala de Henares, Madrid
| | - Cinta Albacar
- Hospital Universitari Sant Joan de Reus, Reus, Spain
| | | | | | - Manuel Atienza de Frutos
- Faculty of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Department of Medicine, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - Florence Dalenc
- Institut Claudius Regaud, IUCT-Oncopole, Toulouse Cancer Research Centre, INSERM, Toulouse, France
| | - Aleix Prat
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Translational Genomics and Targeted Therapies Group, IDIBAPS, Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Frederik Marmé
- Medical Faculty Mannheim Heidelberg University, University Hospital Mannheim, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Peter Schmid
- Barts Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
- Barts Hospital NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Khaldoun Kerrou
- Nuclear Medicine and PET Center Department, Tenon Hospital IUC-UPMC, APHP, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Sofia Braga
- Hospital Vila Franca de Xira and Hospitals CUF Institute José de Mello Saúde, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Petra Gener
- Medica Scientia Innovation Research, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Javier Cortés
- Medica Scientia Innovation Research, Barcelona, Spain
- International Breast Cancer Center, Quiron Group, Pangaea Oncology, Barcelona, Spain
- Faculty of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Department of Medicine, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - José Manuel Pérez-García
- Medica Scientia Innovation Research, Barcelona, Spain
- International Breast Cancer Center, Quiron Group, Pangaea Oncology, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Antonio Llombart-Cussac
- Medica Scientia Innovation Research, Barcelona, Spain;
- Hospital Universitario Arnau de Vilanova, Universidad Católica de Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Heater NK, Somayaji K, Gradishar W. Treatment of residual disease following neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer. J Surg Oncol 2024; 129:18-25. [PMID: 37990834 DOI: 10.1002/jso.27523] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2023] [Accepted: 11/04/2023] [Indexed: 11/23/2023]
Abstract
Substantial advances have been made in the systemic treatment of breast cancer with residual disease following neoadjuvant therapy. We reviewed recent and ongoing studies informing the standard clinical management of residual disease by subtype: HER2+, TNBC, and HR+/HER2-, as well as strategies for BRCA+ disease. We conclude with a discussion of ongoing clinical trials and current controversies regarding the treatment of residual disease in breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalie K Heater
- Department of Medicine, McGaw Medical Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Khyati Somayaji
- Department of Medicine, McGaw Medical Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - William Gradishar
- Department of Medicine, McGaw Medical Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| |
Collapse
|