Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points in Neoadjuvant Breast Cancer Clinical Trials: NeoSTEEP

Comparison of the efficacy of taxanes with carboplatin and anthracyclines with taxanes in neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage II-III triple negative breast cancer: a retrospective analysis

PURPOSE

The neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) regimen for triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) primarily consists of anthracyclines and taxanes, and the addition of platinum-based drugs can further enhance the efficacy. However, it is also accompanied by more adverse events, and considering the potential severe and irreversible toxicity of anthracyclines, an increasing number of studies are exploring nonanthracycline regimens that combine taxanes and platinum-based drugs.

METHODS

The retrospective study included 273 stage II-III TNBC patients who received NACT. The AT group, consisting of 195 (71.4%) patients, received a combination of anthracyclines and taxanes, while the TCb group, consisting of 78 (28.6%) patients, received a combination of taxanes and carboplatin. Logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the factors influencing pathological complete response (pCR) and residual cancer burden (RCB). The log-rank test was used to assess the differences in event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) among the different treatment groups. Cox regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the factors influencing EFS and OS.

RESULTS

After NACT and surgery, the TCb group had a higher rate of pCR at 44.9%, as compared to the AT group at 31.3%. The difference between the two groups was 13.6% (OR = 0.559, 95% CI 0.326-0.959, P = 0.035). The TCb group had a 57.7% rate of RCB 0-1, which was higher than the AT group's rate of 42.6%. The difference between the two groups was 15.1% (OR = 0.543, 95% CI 0.319-0.925, P = 0.024), With a median follow-up time of 40 months, the TCb group had better EFS (log-rank, P = 0.014) and OS (log-rank, P = 0.040) as compared to the AT group. Clinical TNM stage and RCB grade were identified as independent factors influencing EFS and OS, while treatment group was identified as an independent factor influencing EFS, with a close-to-significant impact on OS.

CONCLUSION

In stage II-III triple TNBC patients, the NACT regimen combining taxanes and carboplatin yields higher rates of pCR and significant improvements in EFS and OS as compared to the regimen combining anthracyclines and taxanes.

Omission of Breast Surgery in Exceptional Responders

Breast cancer management has transformed significantly over the last decades, primarily through the integration of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) and the evolving understanding of tumor biology, enabling more tailored treatment strategies. The aim of this review is to critically present the historical context and contemporary evidence surrounding the potential of omission of surgery post-NST, focusing on exceptional responders who have achieved a pathologic complete response (pCR). Identifying these exceptional responders before surgery remains a challenge, however standardized image-guided biopsy may allow optimized patient selection. The safety and feasibility of omitting breast and axillary surgeries in these exceptional responders are explored in ongoing clinical trials and the reported preliminary results appear promising. Moreover, understanding patient and physician perspectives regarding the potential elimination of surgery post-NST is integral. While some patients express a preference to omit or minimize surgery, the majority of healthcare providers are intrigued by the prospect of avoiding surgical interventions and endorse further research in this field.

Oncologic safety of breast conserving surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with multiple ipsilateral breast cancer: A retrospective multi-institutional cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The recent ACOSOG Z11102 trial demonstrated low recurrence rates with breast conserving surgery (BCS) in women with multiple ipsilateral breast cancers (MIBC). Questions remain regarding the oncologic safety of BCS in women with MIBC receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients who underwent BCS following NAC for stage I-III breast cancer from 2012 to 2021 at two academic centers. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data and the Kaplan-Meier method was used to provide estimates for recurrence and survival outcomes. MIBC was defined as ≥2 foci of malignancy.

RESULTS

A total of 544 patients were included; 29.4% (n = 160) ER+/HER2-, 17.7% (n = 96) ER+/HER2+, 18.2% (n = 99) ER-/HER2+, and 34.7% (n = 189) with ER-/HER2-disease. Overall, 80.5% (n = 438) had unifocal breast cancer while 19.5% (n = 106) had MIBC. Of patients with MIBC, 90.6% (n = 96) had multifocal and 9.4% (n = 10) had multicentric disease. Pathologic complete response was achieved in 41.1% of patients with MIBC versus 41.5% of patients with unifocal disease (p = 0.94). At a median follow-up of 55 months (IQR 32-83); 4.8% of patients in the unifocal group and 4.7% of patients in the MIBC group had had a local recurrence (p = 0.97). There was no difference in 5-year local recurrence-free survival (p = 0.92), recurrence-free survival (p = 0.06), or overall survival (p = 0.07) between the groups.

CONCLUSION

In this large cohort of women undergoing BCS post-NAC, there was no significant difference in in breast tumor recurrence or survival outcomes between patients with unifocal disease and those with MIBC.

The predictive value of systemic immune-inflammatory markers before and after treatment for pathological complete response in patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer: a retrospective study of 1994 patients

PURPOSE

Systemic immune-inflammatory markers have a certain predictive role in pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) in breast cancer. However, there is a lack of research exploring the predictive value of markers after treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective study collected data from 1994 breast cancer patients who underwent NAT. Relevant clinical and pathological characteristics were included, and pre- and post-treatment complete blood cell counts were evaluated to calculate four systemic immune-inflammatory markers: neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), and systemic immune-inflammation index (SII). The optimal cutoff values for these markers were determined using ROC curves, and patients were classified into high-value and low-value groups based on these cutoff values. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to analyze factors influencing pCR. The factors with independent predictive value were used to construct a nomogram.

RESULTS

After NAT, 383 (19.2%) patients achieved pCR. The area under the ROC curve is generally larger for post-treatment markers compared to pre-treatment markers. Pre-treatment NLR and PLR, as well as post-treatment LMR and SII, were identified as independent predictive factors for pCR, along with Ki-67, clinical tumor stage, clinical lymph node stage, molecular subtype, and clinical response. Higher pre-NLR (OR = 1.320; 95% CI 1.016-1.716; P = 0.038), pre-PLR (OR = 1.474; 95% CI 1.058-2.052; P = 0.022), post-LMR (OR = 1.532; 95% CI 1.175-1.996; P = 0.002), and lower post-SII (OR = 0.596; 95% CI 0.429-0.827; P = 0.002) are associated with a higher likelihood of achieving pCR. The established nomogram had a good predictive performance with an area under the ROC curve of 0.754 (95% CI 0.674-0.835).

CONCLUSION

Both pre- and post-treatment systemic immune-inflammatory markers have a significant predictive role in achieving pCR after NAT in breast cancer patients. Indeed, it is possible that post-treatment markers have stronger predictive ability compared to pre-treatment markers.

Event-free survival by residual cancer burden with pembrolizumab in early-stage TNBC: exploratory analysis from KEYNOTE-522

BACKGROUND

KEYNOTE-522 demonstrated statistically significant improvements in pathological complete response (pCR) with neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy and event-free survival (EFS) with neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab in patients with high-risk, early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Prior studies have shown the prognostic value of the residual cancer burden (RCB) index to quantify the extent of residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In this preplanned exploratory analysis, we assessed RCB distribution and EFS within RCB categories by treatment group.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 1174 patients with stage T1c/N1-2 or T2-4/N0-2 TNBC were randomized 2 : 1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks given with four cycles of paclitaxel + carboplatin, followed by four cycles of doxorubicin or epirubicin + cyclophosphamide. After surgery, patients received pembrolizumab or placebo for nine cycles or until recurrence or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoints are pCR and EFS. RCB is a prespecified exploratory endpoint. The association between EFS and RCB was assessed using a Cox regression model.

RESULTS

Pembrolizumab shifted patients into lower RCB categories across the entire spectrum compared with placebo. There were more patients in the pembrolizumab group with RCB-0 (pCR), and fewer patients in the pembrolizumab group with RCB-1, RCB-2, and RCB-3. The corresponding hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for EFS were 0.70 (0.38-1.31), 0.92 (0.39-2.20), 0.52 (0.32-0.82), and 1.24 (0.69-2.23). The most common first EFS events were distant recurrences, with fewer in the pembrolizumab group across all RCB categories. Among patients with RCB-0/1, more than half [21/38 (55.3%)] of all events were central nervous system recurrences, with 13/22 (59.1%) in the pembrolizumab group and 8/16 (50.0%) in the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy resulted in fewer EFS events in the RCB-0, RCB-1, and RCB-2 categories, with the greatest benefit in RCB-2. These findings demonstrate that pembrolizumab not only increased pCR rates, but also improved EFS among most patients who do not have a pCR.

The PARTNER trial of neoadjuvant olaparib with chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer

PARTNER is a prospective, phase II-III, randomized controlled clinical trial that recruited patients with triple-negative breast cancer1,2, who were germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 wild type3. Here we report the results of the trial. Patients (n = 559) were randomized on a 1:1 basis to receive neoadjuvant carboplatin-paclitaxel with or without 150 mg olaparib twice daily, on days 3 to 14, of each of four cycles (gap schedule olaparib, research arm) followed by three cycles of anthracycline-based chemotherapy before surgery. The primary end point was pathologic complete response (pCR)4, and secondary end points included event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS)5. pCR was achieved in 51% of patients in the research arm and 52% in the control arm (P = 0.753). Estimated EFS at 36 months in the research and control arms was 80% and 79% (log-rank P > 0.9), respectively; OS was 90% and 87.2% (log-rank P = 0.8), respectively. In patients with pCR, estimated EFS at 36 months was 90%, and in those with non-pCR it was 70% (log-rank P < 0.001), and OS was 96% and 83% (log-rank P < 0.001), respectively. Neoadjuvant olaparib did not improve pCR rates, EFS or OS when added to carboplatin-paclitaxel and anthracycline-based chemotherapy in patients with triple-negative breast cancer who were germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 wild type. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03150576 .

Protocol for the development of a core outcome set and reporting guidelines for locoregional treatment in neoadjuvant systemic breast cancer treatment trials: the PRECEDENT project

INTRODUCTION

Neoadjuvant systemic anticancer therapy (neoSACT) is increasingly used in the treatment of early breast cancer. Response to therapy is prognostic and allows locoregional and adjuvant systemic treatments to be tailored to minimise morbidity and optimise oncological outcomes and quality of life. Accurate information about locoregional treatments following neoSACT is vital to allow the translation of downstaging benefits into practice and facilitate meaningful interpretation of oncological outcomes, particularly locoregional recurrence. Reporting of locoregional treatments in neoSACT studies, however, is currently poor. The development of a core outcome set (COS) and reporting guidelines is one strategy by which this may be improved.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A COS for reporting locoregional treatment (surgery and radiotherapy) in neoSACT trials will be developed in accordance with Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) and Core Outcome Set-Standards for Development guidelines. Reporting guidance will be developed concurrently.The project will have three phases: (1) generation of a long list of relevant outcome domains and reporting items from a systematic review of published neoSACT studies and interviews with key stakeholders. Identified items and domains will be categorised and formatted into Delphi consensus questionnaire items. (2) At least two rounds of an international online Delphi survey in which at least 250 key stakeholders (surgeons/oncologists/radiologists/pathologists/trialists/methodologists) will score the importance of reporting each outcome. (3) A consensus meeting with key stakeholders to discuss and agree the final COS and reporting guidance.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval for the consensus process will be obtained from the Queen's University Belfast Faculty Ethics Committee. The COS/reporting guidelines will be presented at international meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals. Dissemination materials will be produced in collaboration with our steering group and patient advocates so the results can be shared widely.

REGISTRATION

The study has been prospectively registered on the COMET website (https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/2854).

Survival outcomes seen with neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the management of locally advanced inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) versus matched controls

Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) poses an ongoing challenge as rates of disease recurrence and mortality remain high compared to stage-matched controls. However, frontline therapy has evolved through the years, including the widespread use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) given the prognostic importance of pathologic complete response (pCR). Due to these sweeping changes, we need new data to assess current recurrence and survival outcomes for locally advanced IBC in the context of matched non-inflammatory controls. We conducted a retrospective analysis of institutional IBC data from 2010 to 2016 with the primary objective of comparing overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS), and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS). We matched IBC patients to non-inflammatory controls based on age, receptor status, tumor grade, clinical stage, and receipt of prior NAC. Secondary objectives included assessing pCR rates and identifying prognostic factors. Among NAC recipients, we observed similar pCR rates (47.6 % vs. 49.4 %, p = 0.88) between IBC (n = 84) and matched non-IBC (n = 81) cohorts. However, we noted a significant worsening of OS (p = 0.0001), RFS (p = 0.0001), and DRFS (p = 0.001) in the IBC group. Specifically, 5-year OS in the IBC cohort was 58.9 % vs. 86.7 % for matched controls (p = 0.0003). Older age was a weak negative predictor for OS (HR 1.03, p = 0.001) and RFS (HR 1.02, p = 0.01). For DRFS, older age was also a weak negative predictor (HR 1.02, p = 0.02), whereas the use of NAC was a positive predictor (HR 0.47, p = 0.02). Despite no clear difference in pCR, survival outcomes remain poor for IBC compared to matched non-inflammatory controls.