Abstract OT2-01-11: Phase II of POSEIDON: A phase Ib / randomized phase II trial of tamoxifen plus taselisib or placebo in hormone receptor positive, HER2 negative, metastatic breast cancer patients with prior exposure to endocrine treatment

Background: The combination of PI3K-AKT-mTOR pathway inhibitors with endocrine therapy can improve clinical outcomes of hormone receptor positive (HR+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. Taselisib is a potent and selective PI3K inhibitor, with greater selectivity against mutant (MUT) PI3Kα isoforms than wild-type (WT) via a unique mechanism. Phase Ib data of POSEIDON with Taselisib + tamoxifen (TAM) demonstrated encouraging activity in patients with heavily pre-treated MBC, with an acceptable toxicity profile (Baird et al, ASCO 2016). The recommended phase II dose (RP2D) was Taselisib 4mg plus TAM 20mg, both administered on a daily continuous schedule. ctDNA monitoring may have value in drug development by (1) assessing predictive biomarkers to therapy, (2) providing an early indication of treatment response, and (3) shedding light on potential mechanisms of acquired drug resistance. In some patients included in phase Ib of POSEIDON, tumor response was preceded by a corresponding early change in plasma PIK3CA ctDNA levels. Methods: The phase II portion of the POSEIDON trial is a two-arm, randomized, double blind study of Taselisib plus TAM versus placebo (PLA) plus TAM in pre- and postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- MBC. In the first part of the Phase II, 180 patients will be randomized (1:1) to receive continuous TAM with either Taselisib at the RP2D or PLA until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or patient / physician decision. Crossover is allowed upon progressive disease in those patients receiving PLA plus TAM, after collection of tumor and blood samples for exploratory biomarker analysis. Stratification is based on menopausal status, histology [lobular breast cancer (LBC) vs. ductal/others], PIK3CA mutation (WT vs. exon 9 vs. exon 20), prior everolimus, timing of recurrence/progression after prior endocrine therapy, number of prior chemotherapy (CT) lines, and treatment center. After recruiting the initial 180 patients, trial will focus in LBC, until a total number of 110 patients with LBC are enrolled. Other key eligibility criteria include presence of measurable or evaluable disease (RECIST 1.1), prior progression to endocrine treatment, maximum of 5 prior CT lines in the metastatic setting, absence of diabetes under medical treatment, and absence of chronic inflammatory bowel disease. Primary endpoint is investigator-assessed PFS. Key secondary endpoints are PFS in LBC, objective response rate, clinical benefit rate, safety, and exploratory biomarker analysis (including ctDNA). The study has a 90% power at a two-sided log-rank test significance level of 0.2 to detect an HR of 0.64, which corresponds to an increase in median PFS from 4.5 months in the PLA plus TAM arm to 7 months in the Taselisib plus TAM arm. Enrollment to POSEIDON Phase II started in June 2016 (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02285179).

Citation Format: Oliveira M, Baird RD, van Rossum AGJ, Beelen K, Garcia-Corbacho J, Mandjes IAM, Vallier AL, van Werkhoven E, Garrigós L, Kumar S, van Tinteren H, Muñoz S, Linossi C, Rosing H, Miquel JM, Schrier M, de Vries Schultink A, Saura C, Gallagher WM, Bernards R, Tabernero J, Cortés J, Caldas C, Linn SC. Phase II of POSEIDON: A phase Ib / randomized phase II trial of tamoxifen plus taselisib or placebo in hormone receptor positive, HER2 negative, metastatic breast cancer patients with prior exposure to endocrine treatment [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT2-01-11.

Abstract S6-02: The efficacy and safety of the addition of ibandronate to adjuvant hormonal therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor positive early breast cancer. First results of the TEAM IIB trial (BOOG 2006-04)

Background:

Results of clinical trials concerning adjuvant bisphosphonates for the prevention of (bone) metastases in patients with early breast cancer are conflicting. A recent large meta-analysis, however, suggests that bisphosphonates reduce the incidence of (bone) metastases and improve skeletal-related events in early breast cancer patients. Subgroup analyses show that postmenopausal women seem to benefit the most. In this subgroup a modest overall survival benefit was observed with the addition of adjuvant bisphosphonates to standard adjuvant systemic therapy (EBCTCG, Lancet, 2015). TEAM IIB, a randomized phase III study (ISRCTN17633610), prospectively investigates the value of the addition of ibandronate to adjuvant hormonal therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Methods:

Postmenopausal women with stage I-III breast cancer and an indication for adjuvant hormonal treatment were randomized to receive at least 5 years of hormonal therapy (tamoxifen followed by at least 2-3 years exemestane, or in case of high risk at least 5 years of exemestane) with or without ibandronate 50mg orally, once daily for three years. Primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary endpoints included time to and rate of bone metastases, other sites of recurrence, overall survival and safety. The study was amended because of slower than anticipated accrual and the sample size calculations were amended accordingly in June 2009. To detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.615 with a 2-sided alpha of 0.05 and a power of 0.8, 139 DFS-events were required in the intention-to-treat population.

Results: Between February 2007 and May 2014, 1116 patients were enrolled in 37 hospitals in the Netherlands of whom 40% had positive axillary lymph nodes and 56% of all patients received (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy (>95% anthracyclines, 69% taxanes). Baseline characteristics were well balanced. At September 9, 2016, 143 DFS events had been reported. Median follow-up was 4.6 years and 80 patients were still on ibandronate treatment. Adherence to 3 years ibandronate was 67%, 21 patients randomized to receive ibandronate never started. 19 patients, of whom 9 in the control group were excluded because of major ineligibility.

In the ibandronate treated group 3-year DFS was 94.4% versus 90.8% in the control group (HR 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60-1.17). In total, 48 patients in the ibandronate versus 45 in the control group died, of whom 18 (37,5%) versus 28 (62,2%) of breast cancer. 3 years after randomization 1.6% of ibandronate treated patients developed bone metastases versus 4.6% in patients who were treated with adjuvant hormonal therapy only (HR 0.76; [CI] 0.43-1.32). 14 (29,2%) versus 9 (20%) of patients died because of secondary malignancies respectively.

There was no significant difference in creatinine clearance during the first three years after randomization. 36 Serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported in the ibandronate group versus 51 in the control group. Of patients randomized to ibandronate 4 developed osteonecrosis, but without residual complaints.

Conclusion: So far, at a median follow-up of 4.6 years there is no statistically significant benefit from adding ibandronate to adjuvant hormonal treatment in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor positive early breast cancer. However, since hazard rates are in favor of ibandronate longer follow-up is warranted before final conclusions can be drawn.

Citation Format: Vliek SB, Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg E, van Rossum AGJ, Tanis BC, Putter H, van der Velden AWG, Hendriks MP, van Bochove A, van Riet Y, van Leeuwen-Stok AE, Tjan-Heijnen VCG, Kroep JR, Nortier JWR, van de Velde CJH, Linn SC. The efficacy and safety of the addition of ibandronate to adjuvant hormonal therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor positive early breast cancer. First results of the TEAM IIB trial (BOOG 2006-04) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr S6-02.

Abstract P3-07-28: BRCA1-like profile as predictive biomarker in non myeloablative chemotherapy (GAIN study)

Background: The BRCA1-like copy number (CN) profile can be used as a biomarker to predict which stage III breast cancer patients benefit from myeloablative, DNA double-strand-break (DSB)-inducing chemotherapy. In addition, a BRCA1-like gene expression classifier, derived from the BRCA1-like CN profile, can predict which patient group will achieve an increased pathological complete remission rate on a standard neoadjuvant regimen complemented with carboplatin/veliparib. A non-myeloablative, dose-dense schedule of epirubicin, paclitaxel and cyclophosphamide (ETC) is used in the clinic to treat stage III patients. Since ETC contains an intensified dose of DNA DSB-inducing cyclophosphamide, we tested the BRCA1-like CN profile as a predictive biomarker for ETC benefit in the GAIN trial.

Methods: The GAIN trial was a prospective, multi-center, non-blinded, randomized phase III trial. Eligibility comprised histologically confirmed invasive breast cancer with at least one positive axillary or internal mammary lymph node and no signs of distant metastases. The allocated adjuvant treatment was intensified chemotherapy with sequential E (150 mg/m2), T (225 mg/m2) and C (2500, after amendment 2000 mg/m2) each 3 cycles every 2 weeks (ETC) or concurrent E (112.5 mg/m2) and C (600 mg/m2) for 4 cycles every 2 weeks followed by 10 cycles of weekly T (67.5 mg/m2) combined with 4 cycles of capecitabine (2000mg/m2) on day 1-14 in a 3-weekly cycle (EC-TX). Only the triple negative patients were used for these analyses.

For samples with good quality DNA extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor tissue, a library was prepared and sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq2000 platform. Copy number estimates were extracted from the sequence data by normalizing GC-content and mappability corrected read counts to the average read count. These CN profiles were classified as either BRCA1-like or non-BRCA1-like using a previously established shrunken centroid classifier with an established cut-off.

Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, the difference in survival was analysed using log-rank tests. Multivariate analyses were done by generating Cox regression models with important prognostic factors.

Results: Out of 424 triple negative patients, 166 patients with available tissue and a tumour cell content of at least 60% were analysed for BRCA1-like status and included in the analyses (classified as BRCA1-like: n=122). Based on clinicopathological characteristics, these patients were similar to the total group of triple negative participants. In the BRCA1-like patients, there was no significant difference in DFS or OS between ETC and EC-TX (log-rank tests n.s.). In accordance, Cox regression models confirmed these findings.

Conclusion: In contrast to the predictive value of the BRCA1-like profile in myeloablative chemotherapy, it could not predict survival benefit for a non-myeloablative, non-platinum-/veliparib-containing regimen in this study population. An intensified dose of cyclophosphamide resulted in similar outcomes in BRCA1-like patients as addition of capecitabine to standard chemotherapy. These results help to define the appropriate application of the BRCA1-like profile as a predictive biomarker.

Citation Format: van Rossum AGJ, Schouten PC, Weber KE, Nekljudova V, Denkert C, von Minckwitz G, Karn T, Möbus VJ, Linn SC, Loibl S, Marmé F. BRCA1-like profile as predictive biomarker in non myeloablative chemotherapy (GAIN study). [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-07-28.