Adjuvant Abemaciclib Combined with Endocrine Therapy for High Risk Early Breast Cancer: Safety and Patient-Reported Outcomes From the monarchE Study

Impact of dose reductions on adjuvant abemaciclib efficacy for patients with high-risk early breast cancer: analyses from the monarchE study

In monarchE, adjuvant abemaciclib significantly improved invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS), with sustained benefit beyond the 2-year treatment period. Abemaciclib dose reductions were allowed to proactively manage adverse events. Exploratory analyses to investigate the impact of dose reductions on efficacy were conducted. Across the three patient subgroups as defined by relative dose intensity (≤66%, 66-93%, ≥93%), the estimated 4-year IDFS rates were generally consistent (87.1%, 86.4%, and 83.7%, respectively). In the time-dependent Cox proportional hazard model, the effect of abemaciclib was consistent at the full dose compared to being reduced to a lower dose (IDFS hazard ratio: 0.905; 95% confidence interval: 0.727, 1.125; DRFS hazard ratio: 0.942; 95% confidence interval: 0.742, 1.195). These analyses showed that the efficacy of adjuvant abemaciclib was not compromised by protocol mandated dose reductions for patients with node positive, hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative, high-risk early breast cancer.

Ocular side effects of oncological therapies: Review

With the advance of cancer therapy in recent years, the knowledge of the mechanisms involved in this disease has increased, which has meant an increase in the quality of life and survival of patients with tumor pathologies previously considered incurable or refractory to treatment. The number of drugs used has increased exponentially in number, and although the implicit toxicity is lower than that of conventional antineoplastic therapy, they lead to the appearance of new associated adverse effects that the ophthalmologist must recognize and manage.

Long-term patient-reported outcomes from monarchE: Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy as adjuvant therapy for HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk, early breast cancer

BACKGROUND

In monarchE, abemaciclib demonstrated a sustained benefit in invasive disease-free survival and a tolerable safety profile at 42-months median follow-up. With no expected disease-related symptoms, therapies in the adjuvant setting should preserve quality of life (QoL). With all patients off abemaciclib, we report updated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for the full 2-year treatment period and follow-up.

METHODS

Patients completed PROs including FACT-B, FACT-ES, and FACIT-Fatigue at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months during treatment, and 1, 6, and 12 months after treatment discontinuation. Mixed effects repeated measures model estimated changes from baseline within and between arms for QoL scales and individual items. Meaningful changes were prespecified and no statistical testing was performed. Frequencies of responses to items associated with relevant adverse events and treatment bother were summarized.

RESULTS

At baseline, completion rates for PRO instruments were >96 %. Mean changes from baseline for all QoL scales were numerically similar within and between arms (ie, less than prespecified thresholds). The same was observed for all individual items, except diarrhea. Within abemaciclib arm, meaningful differences for diarrhea were observed at 3 and 6 months (mean increases of 1.19 and 1.03 points on 5-point scale, respectively). During treatment, most patients in both arms (69-78 %) reported being bothered "a little bit" or "not at all" by side effects. Overall, patterns for fatigue were similar between arms. During post-treatment follow-up, PROs in both arms were similar to baseline.

CONCLUSION

PRO findings confirm a tolerable and reversible toxicity profile for abemaciclib. QoL was preserved with the addition of adjuvant abemaciclib to endocrine therapy, supporting its use in patients with HR+, HER2-, high-risk early breast cancer.

Antibody-Drug Conjugates in Breast Cancer: A Comprehensive Review of How to Selectively Deliver Payloads

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) have surfaced as a promising group of anticancer agents employing the precise targeting capacity of monoclonal antibodies to transport highly effective cytotoxic payloads. Compared to conventional chemotherapy, they aim to selectively eradicate cancer cells while minimizing off-target toxicity on healthy tissues. An increasing body of evidence has provided support for the efficacy of ADCs in treating breast cancer across various contexts and tumor subtypes, resulting in significant changes in clinical practice. Nevertheless, unlocking the full potential of these therapeutic agents demands innovative molecular designs to address complex clinical challenges, including drug resistance, tumor heterogeneity, and treatment-related adverse events. This thorough review provides an in-depth analysis of the clinical data on ADCs, offering crucial insights from pivotal clinical trials that assess the efficacy of ADCs in diverse breast cancer settings. This aids in providing a comprehensive understanding of the current state of ADCs in breast cancer therapy, while also providing valuable perspectives for the future.

The CDK4/6 inhibitor revolution - a game-changing era for breast cancer treatment

Cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibition in combination with endocrine therapy is the standard-of-care treatment for patients with advanced-stage hormone receptor-positive, HER2 non-amplified (HR+HER2-) breast cancer. These agents can also be administered as adjuvant therapy to patients with higher-risk early stage disease. Nonetheless, the clinical success of these agents has created several challenges, such as how to address acquired resistance, identifying which patients are most likely to benefit from therapy prior to treatment, and understanding the optimal timing of administration and sequencing of these agents. In this Review, we describe the rationale for targeting CDK4/6 in patients with breast cancer, including a summary of updated clinical evidence and how this should inform clinical practice. We also discuss ongoing research efforts that are attempting to address the various challenges created by the widespread implementation of these agents.

International multidisciplinary consensus on the integration of radiotherapy with new systemic treatments for breast cancer: European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-endorsed recommendations

Novel systemic therapies for breast cancer are being rapidly implemented into clinical practice. These drugs often have different mechanisms of action and side-effect profiles compared with traditional chemotherapy. Underpinning practice-changing clinical trials focused on the systemic therapies under investigation, thus there are sparse data available on radiotherapy. Integration of these new systemic therapies with radiotherapy is therefore challenging. Given this rapid, transformative change in breast cancer multimodal management, the multidisciplinary community must unite to ensure optimal, safe, and equitable treatment for all patients. The aim of this collaborative group of radiation, clinical, and medical oncologists, basic and translational scientists, and patient advocates was to: scope, synthesise, and summarise the literature on integrating novel drugs with radiotherapy for breast cancer; produce consensus statements on drug-radiotherapy integration, where specific evidence is lacking; and make best-practice recommendations for recording of radiotherapy data and quality assurance for subsequent studies testing novel drugs.

Efficacy of CDK4/6 inhibitors combined with endocrine therapy in HR+/HER2- breast cancer: an umbrella review

BACKGROUND

The use of Cyclin-Dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors has profoundly changed the challenge of endocrine therapy (ET) resistance in hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/HER2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer. However, there is currently no comprehensive evaluation of the evidence for the efficacy of CDK4/6 inhibitors. We conducted an umbrella review to explore the impact of CDK4/6 inhibitor combined with ET on breast cancer by summarizing and assessing the meta-analysis (MA) and systematic review (SR) evidence.

METHODS

Cochrane, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to August 1st, 2022. Eligible studies were assessed for methodological quality, report quality, and evidence quality using the AMSTAR-2 scale, PRISMA 2020, and GRADE grading systems, respectively. We summarized all efficacy outcomes of CDK4/6 inhibitors for breast cancer and reported them in narrative form.

RESULTS

Our study included 24 MAs and SRs. The strongest evidence demonstrated that CDK4/6 inhibitor combined with ET significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) in advanced breast cancer (ABC). A large body of moderate to high evidence showed a significant association between combination therapy and objective response rate (ORR), and clinical benefit response (CBR) benefit in ABC. Low evidence suggested some degree of benefit from combination therapy in second progression-free survival (PFS2) and time to subsequent chemotherapy (TTC) outcomes in ABC and invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) outcomes in early breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on current evidence, CDK4/6 inhibitors combined with ET have great confidence in improving PFS, OS, ORR, and CBR outcomes in patients with ABC, which provides more rational and valid evidence-based medicine for CDK4/6 inhibitor promotion and clinical decision support.

ER-positive and BRCA2-mutated breast cancer: a literature review

BRCA2-mutated carriers have a high lifetime risk of breast cancer (BC), an early age of onset, and an increased risk of other cancers (including ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer). Almost 70-80% of BRCA2-mutated BC are estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, which is a particular type of ER-positive BC that differs from sporadic ER-positive BC. This article reviews the clinicopathological features, treatment, and prognosis of ER-positive and BRCA2-mutated BC to provide a reference for clinical decision-making.

Cardiotoxicity of Agents Used in Patients With Breast Cancer

Cancer and cardiovascular diseases are the two major causes of mortality, morbidity, and disability worldwide. The improvement in effective therapeutic options for the management of breast cancer (BC) has led to an increased number of BC survivors, who can experience long-term toxicities from cancer treatments. Adverse events including cardiovascular toxicities must be considered in light of effectiveness of recently approved drugs for BC treatment, including elacestrant, tucatinib, neratinib, olaparib, the immune checkpoint inhibitors, trastuzumab deruxtecan, or sacituzumab govitecan. Many cancer drugs affect the cardiovascular system with a range of clinical manifestations. Prompt diagnosis and treatment as well as a multidisciplinary approach involving a cardio-oncologist is optimal for management of these cardiovascular events.

Thromboembolism and Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy (AET) in Hormone Receptor-Positive Early Breast Cancer (EBC): Did Treatment Evolution Change Incidence of the Adverse Event? A Meta-Analysis

The adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) of HR+ EBC has been changing in recent years. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) as an upfront strategy (or as part of a switch strategy) have been added to the choice of Tamoxifen (T) alone. Increased TE risk is well known in T-treated patients, while AIs have shown a reduced TE rate. By adding the cyclin dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6) to AIs, an increase in TE rate has been shown. We conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of the AETs on TE incidence. Twelve randomized phase III trials were included. Four trials evaluated the upfront strategy, 6 assessed the switch and 2 the combination with a CDK4/6 inhibitor. The new AETs did not significantly modify or affect the rate of TE events (OR 0.847, 95% CI, 0.528-1.366, P = .489). The OR for CDK4/6 inhibitor plus ET vs. ET was 3.635 (P = .002). Excluding the CDK4/6 inhibitors, the overall OR for AIs vs. T was 0.628 (P < .001), while it was 0.781 (P = .151) for switching T vs. continuing T for 5 years, and 0.52 (P < .0001) for the upfront strategies with AIs. The AIs alone or plus CDK4/6 inhibitors did not affect the rate of TE events. AIs as an upfront strategy is the safest AET, associated with the lowest TE incidence. The switch strategy increases TE rate, whereas the addition of CDK4/6 to the standard AET was shown to significantly increase TE events. The results of the currently ongoing trials with CDK4/6 inhibitors will help obtain additional data to evaluate any differences among the different CDK4/6 inhibitors and clarify the weight of TE adverse events in the benefit/risk balance of this new adjuvant strategy.

Estrogen deprivation effects of endocrine therapy in breast cancer patients: Incidence, management and outcome

Endocrine therapy is one of the standard adjuvant treatments to reduce the risk of recurrence and mortality in patients with hormone receptor positive early breast cancer. Despite its proven efficacy, ET side effects, which persist over time even if low grade, may deteriorate quality of life. During follow-up visits, emphasis is generally placed on the risk of disease recurrence, while the topic of ET side effects is commonly neglected and discussed only briefly. This could lead to poor adherence to therapy and early treatment discontinuation, resulting in worse survival outcomes. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the available evidence on the incidence and reporting of ET-related side effects (including vasomotor symptoms, musculoskeletal disorders and genitourinary syndrome of menopause, as well as fatigue, psychological and ocular disorders, dysmetabolic effects and loss of bone density) and of the pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies available to mitigate symptom burden.

Quality of Life and Treatment-Related Side Effects in Patients With HR+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer: Findings From a Multicountry Survey

BACKGROUND

Quality of life (QOL) is a critical factor in decision-making for advanced breast cancer (ABC). There is a need to improve how QOL and treatment-related side effects (SEs) that impact it are clinically assessed. We examined healthcare professionals' (HCPs') and patients' perspectives on the importance of QOL discussions and the impact of SEs on QOL in clinical settings.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was conducted (7/2020-5/2021) among oncologists, nurses, and patients with HR+/HER2- ABC in 7 countries.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 502 HCPs and 467 patients. Overall, 88% of oncologists and 49% of patients recalled QOL discussions at follow-up. In the first- through fourth-line (1L, 2L, 3L, and 4L) settings, respectively, 48%, 57%, 79%, and 85% of oncologists reported QOL was very important; 73% and 45% of patients receiving 1L and 2L treatment and 40% receiving 3L+ treatment indicated QOL was important. Patients reported that insomnia, anxiety, back pain, fatigue, diarrhea, hot flashes, low sexual interest, and loss of appetite had a moderate/severe impact on QOL. Of patients experiencing certain SEs, ≥64% did not discuss them with HCPs until there was a moderate/severe impact on QOL. In patients receiving a CDK4/6 inhibitor, SEs, including insomnia, diarrhea, back pain, and fatigue, had a moderate/severe impact on QOL.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey discovered disconnects between HCPs and patients with ABC on the importance of QOL discussions and the impact of SEs on QOL. These data support the use of ABC-specific QOL questionnaires that closely monitor SEs impacting QOL.

Safety profile of cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors with concurrent radiation therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) have become the standard of care for hormone receptor-positive (HR + ) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer, improving survival outcomes compared to endocrine therapy alone. Abemaciclib and ribociclib, in combination with endocrine therapy, have demonstrated significant benefits in invasive disease-free survival for high-risk HR+/HER2- early breast cancer patients. Each CDK4/6i-palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib-exhibits distinct toxicity profiles. Radiation therapy (RT) can be delivered with a palliative or ablative intent, particularly using stereotactic body radiation therapy for oligometastatic or oligoprogressive disease. However, pivotal randomized trials lack information on concomitant CDK4/6i and RT, and existing preclinical and clinical data on the potential combined toxicities are limited and conflicting. As part of a broader effort to establish international consensus recommendations for integrating RT and targeted agents in breast cancer treatment, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety profile of combining CDK4/6i with palliative and ablative RT in both metastatic and early breast cancer settings.

Ambulatory cancer patients: who should definitely receive antithrombotic prophylaxis and who should never receive

Up to 15-20% of cancer patients experience one or more episodes of venous thromboembolism during cancer disease. Approximately 80% of all cancer-associated venous thromboembolic events occur in non-hospitalized patients. Routine thromboprophylaxis for outpatients with cancer who start new anticancer treatment is currently not recommended by the international guidelines due to the high heterogeneity of these patients in terms of VTE or bleeding risks, the difficulties in selecting patients at high risk, and the uncertainty of duration of prophylaxis. Although the international guidelines endorsed the Khorana score for estimating the thrombotic risk in ambulatory cancer patients, the discriminatory performance of this score is not completely convincing and varies according to the cancer type. Consequently, a minority of ambulatory patients with cancer receive an accurate screening for primary prophylaxis of VTE. The aim of this review is to provide support to physicians in identifying those ambulatory patients with cancer for whom thromboprophylaxis should be prescribed and those that should not be candidate to thromboprophylaxis. In absence of high bleeding risk, primary thromboprophylaxis should be recommended in patients with pancreatic cancer and, probably, in patients with lung cancer harboring ALK/ROS1 translocations. Patients with upper gastrointestinal cancers are at high risk of VTE, but a careful assessment of bleeding risk should be made before deciding on antithrombotic prophylaxis. Primary prevention of VTE is not recommended in cancer patients at increased risk of bleeding as patients with brain cancer, with moderate-to-severe thrombocytopenia or severe renal impairment.

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors: existing and emerging differences

The cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib are standard-of-care therapy for hormone receptor-positive advanced or metastatic breast cancer, based on randomized trials showing improved progression-free survival for all 3 drugs and overall survival for ribociclib and abemaciclib. Results in early breast cancer are discordant, with sustained improvement in invasive disease-free survival demonstrated for abemaciclib but not other CDK4/6 inhibitors to date. We review nonclinical studies exploring mechanistic differences between the drugs, the impact of continuous dosing on treatment effect, and translational research into potential resistance mechanisms and prognostic and predictive markers. We focus particularly on how emerging findings may help us understand similarities and differences between the available CDK4/6 inhibitors. Even at late-stage clinical development, there remains much to learn about how agents in this class exert their varying effects.

Interstitial lung disease and CDK4/6 inhibitors in the treatment of breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

CDK4/6 inhibitors have changed the treatment paradigm of many patients living with metastatic and early-stage high-risk hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer. Even though patients and clinicians are aware and learning how to manage common adverse events, such as bone marrow suppression and gastrointestinal toxicities, there are less common and potentially severe adverse events, such as interstitial lung disease (ILD), that require special consideration.

AREAS COVERED

In this narrative review, we discuss the incidence, mechanism, and treatment of CDK4/6 inhibitor associated ILD.

EXPERT OPINION

CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with endocrine therapy (ET) are standard treatment for HR-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer and for selected patients with early stage HR-positive breast cancer. Common toxicities of these medications are often controlled with dose reductions, dose interruptions, and/or prophylactic medications, such as antidiarrheals. However, there are a small subset of patients at risk for less common and potentially severe toxicities, such as ILD. Individualized risk should be considered, including underlying lung disease, thrombosis risk and drug-drug interactions, in order to counsel patients about the risk of ILD.

Rationale and trial design of NATALEE: a Phase III trial of adjuvant ribociclib + endocrine therapy versus endocrine therapy alone in patients with HR+/HER2- early breast cancer

Background

Ribociclib has demonstrated a statistically significant overall survival benefit in pre- and postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer. New Adjuvant Trial with Ribociclib [LEE011] (NATALEE) is a trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of adjuvant ribociclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) versus ET alone in patients with HR+/HER2- early nonmetastatic breast cancer (EBC).

Methods/design

NATALEE is a multicenter, randomized, open-label, Phase III trial in patients with HR+/HER2- EBC. Eligible patients include women, regardless of menopausal status, and men aged ⩾18 years. Select patients with stage IIA, stage IIB, or stage III disease (per the anatomic classification in the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 8th edition) with an initial diagnosis ⩽18 months prior to randomization are eligible. Patients receiving standard (neo)adjuvant ET are eligible if treatment was initiated ⩽12 months before randomization. Patients undergo 1:1 randomization to ribociclib 400 mg/day (3 weeks on/1 week off) +ET (letrozole 2.5 mg/day or anastrozole 1 mg/day [investigator's discretion] plus goserelin [men or premenopausal women]) or ET alone. Ribociclib treatment duration is 36 months; ET treatment duration is ⩾60 months. The primary end point is invasive disease-free survival.

Discussion

The 36-month treatment duration of ribociclib in NATALEE is extended compared with that in other adjuvant cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor trials and is intended to maximize efficacy due to longer duration of CDK4/6 inhibition. Compared with the 600-mg/day dose used in advanced breast cancer, the reduced ribociclib dose used in NATALEE may improve tolerability while maintaining efficacy. NATALEE includes the broadest population of patients with HR+/HER2- EBC of any Phase III trial currently evaluating adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03701334 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03701334).

New Developments in Systemic Management for High-Risk Early-Stage Hormone-Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Breast Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

For high-risk early-stage hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer (HR + /HER2 - EBC), short- and long-term recurrence risks remain substantial despite local control with surgery and radiation and systemic treatment with chemotherapy and endocrine therapy (ET). Recent trials have provided new strategies for reducing recurrence. The monarchE trial demonstrated that adding 2 years of adjuvant abemaciclib to ET improves invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) and distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS). In the OlympiA trial for high-risk disease in patients with germline BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations, adding 1 year of olaparib to ET improved iDFS, DRFS, and overall survival (OS). In addition, for premenopausal women with high-risk tumors, long-term follow-up of the SOFT, ASTRRA, TEXT, ABCSG-12, and HOBOE trials supports the role of ovarian function suppression (OFS), in combination with adjuvant tamoxifen or aromatase inhibition (AI). For postmenopausal women with high-risk tumors, extended-duration AI for at least 7 years should be used with zoledronic acid. Given the remaining recurrence risk even with these interventions and with the ongoing development of new strategies for HR + disease, patients with high-risk EBC should be encouraged to participate in clinical trials, such as trials of immunotherapy, novel oral estrogen receptor alpha (ERα)-targeting agents, antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), and trials guided by measurements of minimal residual disease (MRD).

The Future of Breast Cancer Research in the Survivorship Field

Prevalence of survivors of breast cancer has been steadily increasing in the last 20 years. Currently, more than 90% of women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer are expected to be alive at 5 years from diagnosis thanks to early detection and breakthrough innovations in multimodal treatment strategies. Alongside this advancement in clinical outcomes, survivors of breast cancer might experience several specific challenges and present with unique needs. Survivorship trajectories after diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer can be significantly impacted by long-lasting and severe treatment-related side effects, including physical problems, psychological distress, fertility issues in young women, and impaired social and work reintegration, which add up to patients' individual risk of cancer recurrence and second primary malignancies. Alongside cancer-specific sequelae, survivors still present with general health needs, including management of chronic preexisting or ensuing conditions. Survivorship care should implement high-quality, evidence-based strategies to promptly screen, identify, and address survivors' needs in a comprehensive way and minimize the impact of severe treatment sequelae, preexisting comorbidities, unhealthy lifestyles, and risk of recurrence on quality of life. This narrative review focuses on core areas of survivorship care and discuss the state of the art and future research perspectives in key domains including selected long-term side effects, surveillance for recurrences and second cancers, well-being promotion, and specific survivors' needs.

Position paper on CDK4/6 inhibitors in early breast cancer

Inhibitors of the cyclin-dependent kinases 4/6 (CDK4/6i) have been practice-changing and are now considered the standard of care in combination with endocrine therapy for the first- or second-line treatment in advanced hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2‑negative breast cancer. Recently, CDK4/6i have also emerged as an appealing targeted cancer therapy in early breast cancer, however results of large clinical trials are controversial. This position paper summarizes the evidence, and provides guidance for clinical practice.

CDK4/6 Inhibitors—Overcoming Endocrine Resistance Is the Standard in Patients with Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer

Purpose of review: Tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors can be considered as some of the first targeted therapies. For the past 30 years, they were the endocrine treatment standard in the advanced and early breast cancer setting. CDK4/6 inhibitors, however, are the first substances in almost two decades to broadly improve the therapeutic landscape of hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients for the upcoming years. This review is designed to discuss the recent history, current role, future directions and opportunities of this substance class. Recent findings: The CDK4/6 inhibitors abemaciclib, dalpiciclib, palbociclib and ribociclib have all demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival in advanced disease. However, to date, abemaciclib and ribociclib are the only CDK4/6 inhibitors to have shown an improvement in overall survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Moreover, abemaciclib is the first CDK4/6 inhibitor to also reduce the risk of recurrence in those with early-stage disease. Further CDK inhibitors, treatment combinations with other drugs and different therapy sequences are in development. Summary: Achieving significant improvements in survival rates in the advanced and early breast cancer treatment setting, CDK4/6 inhibitors have set a new standard of care for patients with advanced breast cancer. It remains important to better understand resistance mechanisms to be able to develop novel substances and treatment sequences.

Abemaciclib: A Review in Early Breast Cancer with a High Risk of Recurrence

Abemaciclib [Verzenio^® (USA) or Verzenios^® (EU)] is a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor approved in combination with adjuvant endocrine therapy for patients with hormone receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-), node-positive, early breast cancer with a high risk of recurrence. In a phase III trial, abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy reduced the risk of recurrence of breast cancer compared with endocrine therapy alone, including in patients who had previously received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, in patients with high- and low-scoring Ki-67 tumours, and in both premenopausal and postmenopausal patients. The tolerability profile of abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy was acceptable and manageable, with diarrhoea, infections and neutropenia being the most common adverse events. Thus, abemaciclib in combination with standard endocrine therapy is a valuable additional treatment option for patients with HR+, HER2-, node-positive early breast cancer with a high risk of recurrence.

Sticking to the Rules: Outcome and Success Rate of Guideline-Based Diarrhea Management in Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Abemaciclib

In clinical trials testing abemaciclib in patients with hormone-receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer, diarrhea is a very common adverse event (occurring in approximately 85% of patients, any grade). Nonetheless, this toxicity leads to abemaciclib discontinuation in a small proportion of patients (approximately 2%) thanks to the use of effective loperamide-based supportive therapy. We aimed to determine whether the incidence of abemaciclib-induced diarrhea in real-world trials was higher than the one reported in clinical trials, where patients are highly selected, and to evaluate the success rate of standard supportive care in this setting. We conducted a retrospective, observational, monocentric study including 39 consecutive patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer treated with abemaciclib and endocrine therapy at our institution from July 2019 to May 2021. Overall, diarrhea of any grade occurred in 36 patients (92%), of whom 6 (17%) had diarrhea of grade ≥3. In 30 patients (77%), diarrhea was associated with other adverse events, including fatigue (33%), neutropenia (33%), emesis (28%), abdominal pain (20%), and hepatotoxicity (13%). Loperamide-based supportive therapy was administered to 26 patients (72%). Abemaciclib dose was reduced in 12 patients (31%) due to diarrhea, and treatment was permanently discontinued in 4 patients (10%). In 58% of patients (15/26), diarrhea was effectively managed with supportive care and did not require abemaciclib dose reduction and/or discontinuation. In our real-world analysis, we observed a higher incidence of diarrhea related to abemaciclib compared to data from clinical trials, and a higher rate of permanent treatment discontinuation due to gastrointestinal toxicity. Better implementation of guideline-based supportive care could help to manage this toxicity.

[2022: New therapeutic practices in breast oncology]

In women, breast cancer is both the most common and the deadliest. In 2018, an estimated 58,459 new cases were diagnosed in France, and 12,146 patients died. While these figures are impressive, it should be borne in mind that patient survival after treatment for breast cancer has improved significantly and is now 87 % at five years (nearly nine out of ten women), up from 80 % in 1993. This progress is due to the different weapons available to patients and the development of new therapies such as immunotherapy or drug-conjugated antibodies. The classification of breast cancers is also evolving, in particular through the identification of biomarkers that enable the therapeutic strategy to be refined (PD-L1, BRCA…). New anti-HER2 molecules, such trastuzumab deruxtecan, have shown very promising therapeutic activity in patients with breast cancer with low HER2 expression. The search for the BRCA constitutional mutation helps to optimise management. The use of pembrolizumab in the metastatic setting is now possible in tumours expressing PD-L1 with a threshold expression of the PD-L1marker of CPS ≥ 10. In addition, late 2021/early 2022 has provided evidence that collaboration between physicians and patient networks facilitates better access to treatment. This review presents advances in adjuvant and metastatic breast cancer presented at ASCO and ESMO in 2022.

Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer (monarchE): results from a preplanned interim analysis of a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy previously showed a significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival and distant relapse-free survival in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2; also known as ERBB2)-negative, node-positive, high-risk, early breast cancer. Here, we report updated results from an interim analysis to assess overall survival as well as invasive disease-free survival and distant relapse-free survival with additional follow-up.

METHODS

In monarchE, an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who had hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-positive, early breast cancer at a high risk of recurrence with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were recruited from 603 sites including hospitals and academic and community centres in 38 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by means of an interactive web-based response system (block size of 4), stratified by previous chemotherapy, menopausal status, and region, to receive standard-of-care endocrine therapy of physician's choice for up to 10 years with or without abemaciclib 150 mg orally twice a day for 2 years (treatment period). All therapies were administered in an open-label manner without masking. High-risk disease was defined as either four or more positive axillary lymph nodes, or between one and three positive axillary lymph nodes and either grade 3 disease or tumour size of 5 cm or larger (cohort 1). A smaller group of patients were enrolled with between one and three positive axillary lymph nodes and Ki-67 of at least 20% as an additional risk feature (cohort 2). This was a prespecified overall survival interim analysis planned to occur 2 years after the primary outcome analysis for invasive disease-free survival. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all treated patients. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03155997, and is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between July 17, 2017, and Aug 12, 2019, 5637 patients were randomly assigned (5601 [99·4%] were women and 36 [0·6%] were men). 2808 were assigned to receive abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy and 2829 were assigned to receive endocrine therapy alone. At a median follow-up of 42 months (IQR 37-47), median invasive disease-free survival was not reached in either group and the invasive disease-free survival benefit previously reported was sustained: HR 0·664 (95% CI 0·578-0·762, nominal p<0·0001). At 4 years, the absolute difference in invasive disease-free survival between the groups was 6·4% (85·8% [95% CI 84·2-87·3] in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group vs 79·4% [77·5-81·1] in the endocrine therapy alone group). 157 (5·6%) of 2808 patients in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group died compared with 173 (6·1%) of 2829 patients in the endocrine therapy alone group (HR 0·929, 95% CI 0·748-1·153; p=0·50). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (in 548 [19·6%] of 2791 patients receiving abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy vs 24 [0·9%] of 2800 patients in the endocrine therapy alone group), leukopenia (318 [11·4%] vs 11 [0·4%]), and diarrhoea (218 [7·8%] vs six [0·2%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 433 (15·5%) of 2791 patients receiving abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy versus 256 (9·1%) of 2800 receiving endocrine therapy. There were two treatment-related deaths in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group (diarrhoea and pneumonitis) and none in the endocrine therapy alone group.

INTERPRETATION

Adjuvant abemaciclib reduces the risk of recurrence. The benefit is sustained beyond the completion of treatment with an absolute increase at 4 years, further supporting the use of abemaciclib in patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. Further follow-up is needed to establish whether overall survival can be improved with abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy in these patients.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly.

Adjuvant Abemaciclib Combined with Endocrine Therapy: Efficacy Results in monarchE Cohort 1

The monarchE Cohort 1 patient population was enrolled based on high-risk clinicopathological features that can easily be identified as part of routine clinical breast cancer evaluation. Efficacy data from Cohort 1 demonstrate substantial evidence of benefit for adjuvant abemaciclib+ET in patients with HR+, HER2- early breast cancer at high risk of recurrence (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03155997 [monarchE]).

Emerging Targeted Therapies for Early Breast Cancer

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy and the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States (US). Most patients are diagnosed with early-stage disease; however, there is still a need to prevent recurrences that often present as incurable metastatic disease. The treatment landscape of early-stage breast cancer is evolving rapidly. The immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab is approved in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of high-risk triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). The cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4 and 6 inhibitor abemaciclib is approved for adjuvant treatment of patients with high-risk hormone receptor (HR)-positive disease. While adjuvant olaparib has shown significant improvement in outcomes for patients with pathogenic/likely pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutations and high-risk human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer, and is approved in this setting. For the HER2-positive subtype, the post-neoadjuvant therapy can be tailored based on the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and HER2-targeted agents. In this narrative review, we summarize the most recent approvals for early-stage breast cancer as well as frequently encountered clinical challenges utilizing these medications.

Pre-operative ribociclib plus letrozole versus chemotherapy: Health-related quality of life outcomes from the SOLTI CORALLEEN trial

INTRODUCTION

In the phase II CORALLEEN trial, patients with PAM50 luminal B early breast cancer (EBC) were randomised to neoadjuvant ribociclib plus letrozole (R + L) or chemotherapy based on anthracyclines and taxanes. Results from the primary efficacy analysis showed a similar proportion of patients with response at surgery in both groups. How health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes with R + L compare with chemotherapy in EBC setting is still unknown. Here, we report the results of the HRQoL analysis from the CORALLEEN study.

METHODS

A total of 106 women were randomised 1:1 to receive neoadjuvant R + L (n = 52) or chemotherapy (n = 54). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using two questionnaires: EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BR23. Change from baseline in the global health status, functional, and symptom scales was analysed using linear mixed-effect models, and between-treatment differences were estimated along with 95% confidence interval (95% CI).

RESULTS

At baseline, the overall questionnaire available rate was 94.3%, and patient-reported outcomes were similar between treatment groups. At the end of the study treatment (24 weeks), patients receiving R + L showed better global health status scores with a between-treatment difference of 17.7 points (95% CI 9.2-26.2; p-value <0.001). The R + L group also presented numerically better outcomes in all functional and symptom scales. The larger between-treatment differences in symptom severity were found in fatigue (-28.9; 95% CI -38.5 to -19.3), appetite loss (-23; 95% CI -34.9 to -11.2) and systematic therapy side-effects (-11.4; 95% CI -18.3 to -4.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant R + L was associated with better HRQoL outcomes compared with chemotherapy in patients with luminal B EBC.

REGISTRATION IDENTIFICATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03248427.

Ways to improve breast cancer patients' management and clinical outcome: The 2020 Assisi Think Tank Meeting

We report on the third Assisi Think Tank Meeting (ATTM) on breast cancer, a brainstorming project which involved European radiation and clinical oncologists who were dedicated to breast cancer research and treatment. Held on February 2020, the ATTM aimed at identifying key clinical questions in current clinical practice and "grey" areas requiring research to improve management and outcomes. Before the meeting, three key topics were selected: 1) managing patients with frailty due to either age and/or multi-morbidity; 2) stereotactic radiation therapy and systemic therapy in the management of oligometastatic disease; 3) contralateral breast tumour prevention in BCRA-mutated patients. Clinical practice in these areas was investigated by means of an online questionnaire. In the lapse period between the survey and the meeting, the working groups reviewed data, on-going studies and the clinical challenges which were then discussed in-depth and subjected to intense brainstorming during the meeting; research protocols were also proposed. Methodology, outcome of discussions, conclusions and study proposals are summarized in the present paper. In conclusion, this report presents an in-depth analysis of the state of the art, grey areas and controversies in breast cancer radiation therapy and discusses how to confront them in the absence of evidence-based data to guide clinical decision-making.

Update Breast Cancer 2022 Part 1 – Early Stage Breast Cancer

Evidence relating to the treatment of breast cancer patients with early-stage disease has increased significantly in the past year. Abemaciclib, olaparib, and pembrolizumab are new drugs with good efficacy in the relevant patient groups. However, some questions remain unanswered. In particular, it remains unclear which premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer should be spared unnecessary treatment. The question of the degree to which chemotherapy exerts a direct cytotoxic effect on the tumor or reduces ovarian function through chemotherapy could be of key importance. This group of patients could potentially be spared chemotherapy. New, previously experimental biomarker analysis methods, such as spatial analysis of gene expression (spatial transcriptomics) are gradually finding their way into large randomized phase III trials, such as the NeoTRIP trial. This in turn leads to a better understanding of the predictive factors of new therapies, for example immunotherapy. This review summarizes the scientific innovations from recent congresses such as the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2021 but also from recent publications.

Interview forBreast Cancer Managementwith Dr David Montgomery: marketing authorization for Pfizer’s metastatic breast cancer treatment, palbociclib (Ibrance®) in combination with endocrine therapy

David Montgomery* speaks to Roshaine Wijayatunga, Commissioning Editor: David Montgomery is UK medical director for Pfizer Oncology. In that role, he has overseen the launch of four medicines in the UK, with associated The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and Scottish Medicines Consortium submissions. In addition to his role in Pfizer, he chairs the oncology medical directors’ forum at the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry. He previously sat as the industry representative on the national Cancer Drugs Fund panel and as the industry representative on the National Cancer Research Initiative annual meeting scientific committee. He qualified from the University of Glasgow Medical School before going on to surgical training in the UK, obtaining MRCS from the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow. He then undertook a period of research in the field of breast cancer, specifically looking at innovative methods of follow-up of patients treated with curative intent. More recently, he has obtained the Fellowship of the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Medicine and is on the General Medical Council specialty register.