[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: IntroductionTriple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a heterogeneous collection of biologically diverse cancers, which contributes to variable clinical outcomes. Previously, we identified a TNBC subtype that has a luminal phenotype and expresses the androgen receptor (AR+). TNBC cells derived from these luminal AR¿+¿tumors have high frequency phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha (PIK3CA) mutations. The purpose of this study was to determine if targeting phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) alone or in combination with an AR antagonist is effective in AR¿+¿TNBC.Methods
We determined the frequency of activating PIK3CA mutations in AR¿+¿and AR- TNBC clinical cases. Using AR¿+¿TNBC cell line and xenograft models we evaluated the effectiveness of PI3K inhibitors, used alone or in combination with an AR antagonist, on tumor cell growth and viability.ResultsPIK3CA kinase mutations were highly clonal, more frequent in AR¿+¿vs. AR- TNBC (40% vs. 4%), and often associated with concurrent amplification of the PIK3CA locus. PI3K/mTOR inhibitors had an additive growth inhibitory effect when combined with genetic or pharmacological AR targeting in AR¿+¿TNBC cells. We also analyzed the combination of bicalutamide +/- the pan-PI3K inhibitor GDC-0941 or the dual PI3K/mTOR inhibitor GDC-0980 in xenograft tumor studies and observed additive effects.Conclusions
While approximately one third of TNBC patients respond to neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy, recent studies have shown that patients with androgen receptor positive (AR+) TNBC are far less likely to benefit from the current standard of care chemotherapy regimens and novel targeted approaches need to be investigated. In this study, we show that activating PIK3CA mutations are enriched in AR¿+¿TNBC; and, we show that the growth and viability of AR¿+¿TNBC cell line models is significantly reduced after treatment with PI3K inhibitors used in combination with an AR antagonist. These results provide rationale for pre-selection of TNBC patients with a biomarker (AR expression) to investigate the use of AR antagonists in combination with PI3K/mTOR inhibitors.
Breast cancer research: BCR 08/2014; 16(4):406. · 5.88 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background Adjuvant therapy with an aromatase inhibitor improves outcomes, as compared with tamoxifen, in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. Methods In two phase 3 trials, we randomly assigned premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer to the aromatase inhibitor exemestane plus ovarian suppression or tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression for a period of 5 years. Suppression of ovarian estrogen production was achieved with the use of the gonadotropin-releasing-hormone agonist triptorelin, oophorectomy, or ovarian irradiation. The primary analysis combined data from 4690 patients in the two trials. Results After a median follow-up of 68 months, disease-free survival at 5 years was 91.1% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 87.3% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence, second invasive cancer, or death, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60 to 0.85; P<0.001). The rate of freedom from breast cancer at 5 years was 92.8% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, as compared with 88.8% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for recurrence, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.80; P<0.001). With 194 deaths (4.1% of the patients), overall survival did not differ significantly between the two groups (hazard ratio for death in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.51; P=0.37). Selected adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported for 30.6% of the patients in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 29.4% of those in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group, with profiles similar to those for postmenopausal women. Conclusions In premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer, adjuvant treatment with exemestane plus ovarian suppression, as compared with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, significantly reduced recurrence. (Funded by Pfizer and others; TEXT and SOFT ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00066703 and NCT00066690 , respectively.).
New England Journal of Medicine 06/2014; · 54.42 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Objectives
Data on chemotherapy regimens in elderly patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are limited. The aim of this retrospective pooled analysis was to determine efficacy and safety of ixabepilone plus capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in patients with MBC aged ≥ 65 years.
Materials and Methods
A total of 1973 patients with MBC previously treated with or resistant to anthracyclines and taxanes were randomized in two open-label, multinational, phase 3 studies (study 046 and study 048). Patients received ixabepilone (40 mg/m2 as a 3-hour intravenous infusion every 3 weeks) plus oral capecitabine (1000 mg/m2 administered twice each day), or capecitabine alone (1250 mg/m2 twice each day).
In total, 251 randomized patients were aged ≥ 65 years (ixabepilone plus capecitabine, n = 116; capecitabine monotherapy, n = 135). Efficacy results were consistent in patients aged < 65 and ≥ 65 years with respect to the observed improvement in progression-free survival and objective response rate with ixabepilone plus capecitabine compared with capecitabine alone. No significant differences in overall survival between arms were observed for either subgroup. In the ixabepilone plus capecitabine arm, grade 3/4 hematologic adverse events (AEs) were similar in both subgroups except leukopenia and febrile neutropenia, which had a higher incidence in patients aged ≥ 65 years. The majority of grade 3/4 nonhematologic AEs were similar in the two subgroups, including fatigue, peripheral sensory neuropathy, and hand–foot syndrome.
The combination of ixabepilone plus capecitabine maintains its efficacy in elderly patients with anthracycline and taxane pretreated MBC, with a similar safety profile to patients aged < 65 years.
Journal of Geriatric Oncology 10/2013; 4(4):346–352. · 1.12 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Sorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor with antiangiogenic/antiproliferative activity. A randomized phase 2b screening trial in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer demonstrated a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) when sorafenib was added to capecitabine versus placebo (median 6.4 versus 4.1 months; hazard ratio = 0.58; P = 0.001). Most drug-related adverse events were Grade 1/2 in severity with the exception of Grade 3 hand-foot skin reaction/syndrome (44% versus 14%, respectively). These results suggest a role for the combination of sorafenib and capecitabine in breast cancer and supported a phase 3 confirmatory trial. Here we describe RESILIENCE - a multinational, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial - assessing the addition of sorafenib to first- or second-line capecitabine in advanced HER2-negative breast cancer.Methods/design: Eligibility criteria include >=18 years of age, <=1 prior chemotherapy regimen for metastatic disease, and resistant to/failed taxane and anthracycline or no indication for further anthracycline. Prior treatment with a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor is not allowed. Patients with significant cardiovascular disease or active brain metastases are not eligible. Patients are stratified by hormone receptor status, geographic region, and prior metastatic chemotherapy status and randomized (1:1) to capecitabine (1000 mg/m2 orally twice daily (BID), days 1 to 14 of 21) in combination with sorafenib (orally BID, days 1 to 21, total dose 600 mg/day) or matching placebo. Capecitabine and sorafenib/placebo doses can be escalated to 1250 mg/m2 BID and 400 mg BID, respectively, as tolerated, or reduced to manage toxicity. Dose re-escalation after a reduction is allowed for sorafenib/placebo but not for capecitabine. This dosing algorithm was designed to mitigate dermatologic and other toxicity, in addition to detailed guidelines for prophylactic and symptomatic treatment. Radiographic assessment is every 6 weeks for 36 weeks, and every 9 weeks thereafter. The primary endpoint is PFS by blinded independent central review (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 criteria). Secondary endpoints include overall survival, time to progression, overall response rate, duration of response, and safety. Enrollment began in November 2010 with a target of approximately 519 patients.
RESILIENCE will provide definitive PFS data for the combination of sorafenib and capecitabine in advanced HER2-negative breast cancer and better characterize the benefit-to-risk profile.Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01234337.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Although breast cancers are known to be molecularly heterogeneous, their metabolic phenotype is less well understood and may predict response to chemotherapy. This study aimed to evaluate metabolic genes as individual predictive biomarkers in breast cancer. Methods: mRNA microarray data from breast cancer cell lines were used to identify bimodal genes - those with highest potential for robust high/low classification in clinical assays. Metabolic function was evaluated in vitro for the highest scoring metabolic gene, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB). Its expression was associated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy response and relapse within clinical and PAM50-derived subtypes. RESULTS: LDHB was highly expressed in cell lines with glycolytic, basal-like phenotypes. Stable knockdown of LDHB in cell lines reduced glycolytic dependence, linking LDHB expression directly to metabolic function. Using patient datasets, LDHB was highly expressed in basal-like cancers and could predict basal-like subtype within clinical groups (odds ratio = 21 for hormone-receptor (HR)-positive/HER2-negative; odds ratio = 10 for triple-negative). Furthermore, high LDHB predicted pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for both HR-positive/HER2-negative (odds ratio = 4.1, P < .001) and triple-negative (odds ratio = 3.0, P = .003) cancers. For triple-negative tumors without pCR, high LDHB post-treatment also identified proliferative tumors with increased risk of recurrence (hazard ratio = 2.2, P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: Expression of LDHB predicted response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy within clinical subtypes independently of standard prognostic markers and PAM50-subtyping. These observations support prospective clinical evaluation of LDHB as a predictive marker of response for breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Clinical Cancer Research 05/2013; · 8.19 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The Publisher regrets that this article is an accidental duplication of an article that has already been published, http://dx.doi.org/10.5144/1658-3876.2012.152. The duplicate article has therefore been withdrawn.
Hematology/ Oncology and Stem Cell Therapy 03/2013;
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: PURPOSELapatinib is an oral small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor of both epidermal growth factor receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). This study is designed to test whether the addition of lapatinib to paclitaxel improves overall survival (OS) compared with placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer (MBC).Patients And methodsThis phase III, randomized, double-blind study assessed the efficacy and safety of lapatinib plus paclitaxel compared with placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with newly diagnosed HER2-positive MBC. The primary end point was OS. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate, and safety.ResultsThe addition of lapatinib to paclitaxel significantly improved OS versus paclitaxel (treatment hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.94; P = .0124); median OS was 27.8 versus 20.5 months, respectively. Median PFS was prolonged by 3.2 months, from 6.5 months with placebo plus paclitaxel to 9.7 months with lapatinib plus paclitaxel (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.64; stratified log-rank P < .001). ORR was significantly higher with lapatinib plus paclitaxel compared with placebo plus paclitaxel (69% v 50%, respectively; P < .001). The incidence of grades 3 and 4 diarrhea and neutropenia was higher in the lapatinib plus paclitaxel arm. Only 4% of patients in this group reported febrile neutropenia. Cardiac events were low grade, asymptomatic, and mostly reversible. The incidence of hepatic events was similar in both arms. There were no fatal adverse events in the lapatinib plus paclitaxel arm. CONCLUSION
This trial demonstrated that lapatinib combined with paclitaxel offers a significant and clinically meaningful survival advantage over paclitaxel alone in patients with HER2-positive MBC.
Journal of Clinical Oncology 03/2013; · 17.88 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This phase II study (VEG20007; NCT00347919) with randomized and open-label components evaluated first-line lapatinib plus pazopanib therapy and/or lapatinib monotherapy in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2)-positive advanced/metastatic breast cancer. Patients were enrolled sequentially into two cohorts: Cohort 1, patients were randomly assigned to lapatinib 1,000 mg plus pazopanib 400 mg or lapatinib 1,500 mg monotherapy; Cohort 2, patients received lapatinib 1,500 mg plus pazopanib 800 mg. The primary endpoint was week-12 progressive disease rate (PDR) for Cohort 1. The principal secondary endpoint was week-12 response rate (RR) for Cohort 2. Efficacy was assessed in patients with centrally confirmed HER2 positivity (modified intent-to-treat population [MITT]). The study enrolled 190 patients (Cohort 1, combination n = 77, lapatinib n = 73; Cohort 2, n = 40). The MITT population comprised n = 141 (Cohort 1) and n = 36 (Cohort 2). In Cohort 1, week-12 PDRs were 36.2 % (combination) versus 38.9 % (lapatinib; P = 0.37 for the difference). Week-12 RRs were 36.2 % (combination) versus 22.2 % (lapatinib). In Cohort 2, week-12 RR was 33.3 %. In Cohort 1, grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) included diarrhea (combination, 9 %; lapatinib, 5 %) and hypertension (combination, 5 %; lapatinib, 0 %). Grades 3/4 AEs in Cohort 2 included diarrhea (40 %), hypertension (5 %), and fatigue (5 %). Alanine aminotransferase elevations >5 times the upper limit of normal occurred in Cohort 1 (combination, 18 %; lapatinib, 5 %) and Cohort 2 (20 %). Upon conclusion, the combination of lapatinib plus pazopanib did not improve PDR compared with lapatinib monotherapy, although RR was increased. Toxicity was higher with the combination, including increased diarrhea and liver enzyme elevations.
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 01/2013; · 4.47 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This multi-center Phase II study evaluated lapatinib, pazopanib, and the combination in patients with relapsed HER2+ inflammatory breast cancer. In Cohort 1, 76 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive lapatinib 1,500 mg + placebo or lapatinib 1,500 mg + pazopanib 800 mg (double-blind) once daily until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. Due to high-grade diarrhea observed with this dose combination in another study (VEG20007), Cohort 1 was closed. The protocol was amended such that an additional 88 patients (Cohort 2) were randomized in a 5:5:2 ratio to receive daily monotherapy lapatinib 1,500 mg, lapatinib 1,000 mg + pazopanib 400 mg, or monotherapy pazopanib 800 mg, respectively. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety. In Cohort 1, ORR for the lapatinib (n = 38) and combination (n = 38) arms was 29 and 45 %, respectively; median PFS was 16.1 and 14.3 weeks, respectively. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were more frequent in the combination arm (71 %) than in the lapatinib arm (24 %). Dose reductions and interruptions due to AEs were also more frequent in the combination arm (45 and 53 %, respectively) than in the lapatinib monotherapy arm (0 and 11 %, respectively). In Cohort 2, ORR for patients treated with lapatinib (n = 36), lapatinib + pazopanib (n = 38), and pazopanib (n = 13) was 47, 58, and 31 %, respectively; median PFS was 16.0, 16.0, and 11.4 weeks, respectively. In the lapatinib, combination, and pazopanib therapy arms, grade ≥3 AEs were reported for 17, 50, and 46 % of patients, respectively, and the incidence of discontinuations due to AEs was 0, 24, and 23 %, respectively. The lapatinib-pazopanib combination was associated with a numerically higher ORR but no increase in PFS compared to lapatinib alone. The combination also had increased toxicity resulting in more dose reductions, modifications, and treatment delays. Activity with single-agent lapatinib was confirmed in this population.
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 12/2012; · 4.47 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: We report the 8-year follow-up of 34 patients aged >=69 years old with NHL included in a phase IIb open-label randomized parallel groups study to evaluate the effectiveness of amifostine in preventing the toxicity of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (CHOP regime) .
Patients were randomized to receive classical CHOP (cyclophosphamide 750 mg/ m2, doxorubicin 50 mg/m2, vincristine 1.4 mg/m2 [maximum 2 mg] on day 1 and prednisone 100 mg/day for 5 days) or CHOP plus amifostine (6 cycles of amifostine 910 mg/m2 on day 1). Efficacy (time to progression, TTP; disease-free survival, DFS; overall survival, OS) and toxicity endpoints were evaluated.
Thirty-four patients were randomized to A-CHOP (n=18) or CHOP (n=16). Patients with A-CHOP vs CHOP had significantly lower toxicity; neutropenia grade 4 ocurred in 13/92 (13%) vs 23/85 (27%, P=0.007) cycles, febrile neutropenia in 3/92 A-CHOP (3%) vs 8/85 (10%, P=.056) CHOP cycles, hospitalization for toxicity in 4/92 (4%) A-CHOP vs 11/85 (13%, P=.05) CHOP cycles. Median hospitalization stay for toxicity was 5 days with A-CHOP vs 8 days with CHOP (P=.05). There were no significant differences at 8 years in TTP (A-CHOP, 48.9% vs CHOP, 36.3%; P=.65), DFS (A-CHOP, 72.9% vs CHOP 55.6%; P=.50) and OS (A-CHOP, 44.3% vs CHOP, 54.4%). There was no long-term toxicity of clinical interest. The only prognostic factor identified to 8 years was the International Prognostic Index (IPI low/low intermediate risk vs high intermediate/high risk; HR=2.98; CI 95%:1.01-8.77; P=.048).
These results show that amifostine can be added to the standard CHOP treatment schedule with less acute toxicity and without influencing the outcome.
Hematology/ Oncology and Stem Cell Therapy 07/2012; 5(3):152-7.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This retrospective analysis aimed to determine whether early dose reduction impacts the efficacy of ixabepilone plus capecitabine in women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC).
In 2 phase III trials, patients (N = 1973) with anthracycline/taxane-pretreated MBC were randomized to receive ixabepilone 40 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily (BID) on days 1 to 14 or single-agent capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) BID on days 1 to 14 of a 3-week course. Because of the similar design and populations, data from trials were pooled to evaluate efficacy of the combination regimen among women who did or did not undergo ixabepilone dose reduction during the first 4 courses. To adjust for bias resulting from selecting patients with inherently better outcome based on longer treatment durations, these analyses were restricted to patients who received ≥ 4 courses of ixabepilone.
The pooled cohort included 566 patients with measurable disease who were evaluable for efficacy. Patients who had early dose reduction showed similar objective response rates (ORRs) and progression-free survival (PFS) as did those with no/late dose reduction. ORRs were 62.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 55.8%-69.0%) and 55.3% (95% CI, 49.9%-60.6%), respectively; median PFS was 7.2 months (95% CI, 6.6-8.0) and 7.0 months (95% CI, 6.5-7.5), respectively (hazard ratio = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.83-1.17).
These data suggest that early ixabepilone dose reduction did not affect the overall efficacy of ixabepilone plus capecitabine in patients with MBC who received ≥ 4 courses of treatment. By making appropriate dose reductions, ixabepilone-related toxicities can be minimized while maintaining clinical efficacy.
Clinical Breast Cancer 06/2012; 12(4):240-6. · 2.42 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Pixantrone dimaleate (pixantrone)--a novel aza-anthracenedione--was synthesised to reduce anthracycline-related cardiotoxicity without compromising antitumour efficacy. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of pixantrone versus an investigator's choice of a single-agent therapy in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
In this phase 3, multicentre, open-label, randomised trial at 66 hospitals in Europe, India, Russia, South America, the UK, and the USA, patients with histologically confirmed aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma who had relapsed after two or more previous chemotherapy regimens were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive voice response system to treatment with pixantrone dimaleate (85 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle, for up to six cycles) or to a comparator (vinorelbine, oxaliplatin, ifosfamide, etoposide, mitoxantrone, or gemcitabine) given at prespecified standard doses and schedules. Patients were stratified by region, International Prognostic Index score, and previous stem-cell transplantation. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment; however, an independent assessment panel was masked. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a complete or unconfirmed complete response in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population at the end of treatment. Primary analyses of efficacy were based on the independent assessment panel's data review. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00088530.
The ITT population comprised 70 patients randomly assigned to the pixantrone group and 70 to the comparator. Five patients (two in the pixantrone group and three in the comparator group) dropped out before receiving their study drug. 14 patients (20·0% [95% CI 11·4-31·3]) who received pixantrone achieved a complete or unconfirmed complete response at end of treatment compared with four patients (5·7% [1·6-14·0]) in the comparator group (p = 0·021). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events in patients given pixantrone were uncomplicated, non-cumulative neutropenia (28 [41·2%] of 68 patients vs 13 [19·4%] of 67 patients in the comparator group), leucopenia (16 [23·5%] vs five [7·5%]), and thrombocytopenia (eight [11·8%] vs seven [10·4%]).
Pixantrone, given as a single-agent salvage therapy in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma, is efficacious and tolerable. It could be a treatment option for patients whose aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma has failed to respond to at least two previous chemotherapy regimens.
Cell Therapeutics, Inc.
The Lancet Oncology 05/2012; 13(7):696-706. · 25.12 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The mutation pattern of breast cancer molecular subtypes is incompletely understood. The purpose of this study was to identify mutations in genes that may be targeted with currently available investigational drugs in the three major breast cancer subtypes (ER+/HER2-, HER2+, and Triple Negative). We extracted DNA from fine needle aspirations of 267 stage I-III breast cancers. These tumor specimens typically consisted of >80% neoplastic cells. We examined 28 genes for 163 known cancer-related nucleic acid variations by Sequenom technology. We observed at least one mutation in 38 alleles corresponding to 15 genes in 108 (40%) samples, including PIK3CA (16.1% of all samples), FBXW7 (8%), BRAF (3.0%), EGFR (2.6%), AKT1 and CTNNB1 (1.9% each), KIT and KRAS (1.5% each), and PDGFR-α (1.1%). We also checked for the polymorphism in PHLPP2 that is known to activate AKT and it was found at 13.5% of the patient samples. PIK3CA mutations were more frequent in estrogen receptor-positive cancers compared to triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) (19 vs. 8%, p=0.001). High frequency of PIK3CA mutations (28%) were also found in HER2+ breast tumors. In TNBC, FBXW7 mutations were significantly more frequent compared to ER+ tumors (13 vs. 5%, p=0.037). We performed validation for all mutated alleles with allele-specific PCR or direct sequencing; alleles analyzed by two different sequencing techniques showed 95-100% concordance for mutation status. In conclusion, different breast cancer subtypes harbor different type of mutations and approximately 40 % of tumors contained individually rare mutations in signaling pathways that can be potentially targeted with drugs. Simultaneous testing of many different mutations in a single needle biopsy is feasible and allows the design of prospective clinical trials that could test the functional importance of these mutations in the future.
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 04/2012; 134(1):333-43. · 4.47 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody trastuzumab and the tyrosine kinase inhibitor lapatinib have complementary mechanisms of action and synergistic antitumour activity in models of HER2-overexpressing breast cancer. We argue that the two anti-HER2 agents given together would be better than single-agent therapy.
In this parallel groups, randomised, open-label, phase 3 study undertaken between Jan 5, 2008, and May 27, 2010, women from 23 countries with HER2-positive primary breast cancer with tumours greater than 2 cm in diameter were randomly assigned to oral lapatinib (1500 mg), intravenous trastuzumab (loading dose 4 mg/kg [DOSAGE ERROR CORRECTED], subsequent doses 2 mg/kg), or lapatinib (1000 mg) plus trastuzumab. Treatment allocation was by stratified, permuted blocks randomisation, with four stratification factors. Anti-HER2 therapy alone was given for the first 6 weeks; weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2)) was then added to the regimen for a further 12 weeks, before definitive surgery was undertaken. After surgery, patients received adjuvant chemotherapy followed by the same targeted therapy as in the neoadjuvant phase to 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was the rate of pathological complete response (pCR), analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00553358.
154 patients received lapatinib, 149 trastuzumab, and 152 the combination. pCR rate was significantly higher in the group given lapatinib and trastuzumab (78 of 152 patients [51·3%; 95% CI 43·1-59·5]) than in the group given trastuzumab alone (44 of 149 patients [29·5%; 22·4-37·5]; difference 21·1%, 9·1-34·2, p=0·0001). We recorded no significant difference in pCR between the lapatinib (38 of 154 patients [24·7%, 18·1-32·3]) and the trastuzumab (difference -4·8%, -17·6 to 8·2, p=0·34) groups. No major cardiac dysfunctions occurred. Frequency of grade 3 diarrhoea was higher with lapatinib (36 patients [23·4%]) and lapatinib plus trastuzumab (32 [21·1%]) than with trastuzumab (three [2·0%]). Similarly, grade 3 liver-enzyme alterations were more frequent with lapatinib (27 [17·5%]) and lapatinib plus trastuzumab (15 [9·9%]) than with trastuzumab (11 [7·4%]).
Dual inhibition of HER2 might be a valid approach to treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer in the neoadjuvant setting.
The Lancet 02/2012; 379(9816):633-40. · 39.21 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Cancers with specific genetic mutations are susceptible to selective kinase inhibitors. However, there is a wide spectrum of benefit among cancers harboring the same sensitizing genetic mutations. Herein, we measured apoptotic rates among cell lines sharing the same driver oncogene following treatment with the corresponding kinase inhibitor. There was a wide range of kinase inhibitor-induced apoptosis despite comparable inhibition of the target and associated downstream signaling pathways. Surprisingly, pretreatment RNA levels of the BH3-only pro-apoptotic BIM strongly predicted the capacity of EGFR, HER2, and PI3K inhibitors to induce apoptosis in EGFR-mutant, HER2-amplified, and PIK3CA-mutant cancers, respectively, but BIM levels did not predict responsiveness to standard chemotherapies. Furthermore, BIM RNA levels in EGFR-mutant lung cancer specimens predicted response and duration of clinical benefit from EGFR inhibitors. These findings suggest assessment of BIM levels in treatment-naïve tumor biopsies may indicate the degree of benefit from single-agent kinase inhibitors in multiple oncogene-addiction paradigms.
Cancer Discovery 07/2011; 1(4):352-65. · 15.93 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Prediction of high probability of survival from standard cancer treatments is fundamental for individualized cancer treatment strategies.
To develop a predictor of response and survival from chemotherapy for newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer.
Prospective multicenter study conducted from June 2000 to March 2010 at the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center to develop and test genomic predictors for neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients were those with newly diagnosed ERBB2 (HER2 or HER2/neu)-negative breast cancer treated with chemotherapy containing sequential taxane and anthracycline-based regimens (then endocrine therapy if estrogen receptor [ER]-positive). Different predictive signatures for resistance and response to preoperative (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy (stratified according to ER status) were developed from gene expression microarrays of newly diagnosed breast cancer (310 patients). Breast cancer treatment sensitivity was then predicted using the combination of signatures for (1) sensitivity to endocrine therapy, (2) chemoresistance, and (3) chemosensitivity, with independent validation (198 patients) and comparison with other reported genomic predictors of chemotherapy response.
Distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) if predicted treatment sensitive and absolute risk reduction ([ARR], difference in DRFS between 2 predicted groups) at median follow-up (3 years).
Patients in the independent validation cohort (99% clinical stage II-III) who were predicted to be treatment sensitive (28%) had 56% (95% CI, 31%-78%) probability of excellent pathologic response and DRFS of 92% (95% CI, 85%-100%), with an ARR of 18% (95% CI, 6%-28%). Survival was predicted in ER-positive (30% predicted sensitive; DRFS, 97% [95% CI, 91%-100%]; ARR, 11% [95% CI, 0.1%-21%]) and ER-negative (26% predicted sensitive; DRFS, 83% [95% CI, 68%-100%]; ARR, 26% [95% CI, 4%-48%]) subsets and was significant in multivariate analysis. Other genomic predictors showed paradoxically worse survival for patients predicted to be responsive to chemotherapy.
A genomic predictor combining ER status, predicted chemoresistance, predicted chemosensitivity, and predicted endocrine sensitivity identified patients with high probability of survival following taxane and anthracycline chemotherapy.
JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 05/2011; 305(18):1873-81. · 29.98 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: We examined in a prospective, randomized, international clinical trial the performance of a previously defined 30-gene predictor (DLDA-30) of pathologic complete response (pCR) to preoperative weekly paclitaxel and fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (T/FAC) chemotherapy, and assessed if DLDA-30 also predicts increased sensitivity to FAC-only chemotherapy. We compared the pCR rates after T/FAC versus FACx6 preoperative chemotherapy. We also did an exploratory analysis to identify novel candidate genes that differentially predict response in the two treatment arms.
Two hundred and seventy-three patients were randomly assigned to receive either weekly paclitaxel × 12 followed by FAC × 4 (T/FAC, n = 138), or FAC × 6 (n = 135) neoadjuvant chemotherapy. All patients underwent a pretreatment fine-needle aspiration biopsy of the tumor for gene expression profiling and treatment response prediction.
The pCR rates were 19% and 9% in the T/FAC and FAC arms, respectively (P < 0.05). In the T/FAC arm, the positive predictive value (PPV) of the genomic predictor was 38% [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 21-56%], the negative predictive value was 88% (95% CI, 77-95%), and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.711. In the FAC arm, the PPV was 9% (95% CI, 1-29%) and the AUC was 0.584. This suggests that the genomic predictor may have regimen specificity. Its performance was similar to a clinical variable-based predictor nomogram.
Gene expression profiling for prospective response prediction was feasible in this international trial. The 30-gene predictor can identify patients with greater than average sensitivity to T/FAC chemotherapy. However, it captured molecular equivalents of clinical phenotype. Next-generation predictive markers will need to be developed separately for different molecular subsets of breast cancers.
Clinical Cancer Research 11/2010; 16(21):5351-61. · 8.19 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: A subgroup of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-overexpressing breast tumors coexpresses p95HER2, a truncated HER2 receptor that retains a highly functional HER2 kinase domain but lacks the extracellular domain and results in intrinsic trastuzumab resistance. We hypothesized that lapatinib, a HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitor, would be active in these tumors. We have studied the correlation between p95HER2 expression and response to lapatinib, both in preclinical models and in the clinical setting.
Two different p95HER2 animal models were used for preclinical studies. Expression of p95HER2 was analyzed in HER2-overexpressing breast primary tumors from a first-line lapatinib monotherapy study (EGF20009) and a second-line lapatinib in combination with capecitabine study (EGF100151). p95HER2 expression was correlated with overall response rate (complete + partial response), clinical benefit rate (complete response + partial response + stable disease > or =24 wk), and progression-free survival using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models.
Lapatinib inhibited tumor growth and the HER2 downstream signaling of p95HER2-expressing tumors. A total of 68 and 156 tumors from studies EGF20009 and EGF100151 were evaluable, respectively, for p95HER2 detection. The percentage of p95HER2-positive patients was 20.5% in the EGF20009 study and 28.5% in the EGF100151 study. In both studies, there was no statistically significant difference in progression-free survival, clinical benefit rate, and overall response rate between p95HER2-positive and p95HER2-negative tumors.
Lapatinib as a monotherapy or in combination with capecitabine seems to be equally effective in patients with p95HER2-positive and p95HER2-negative HER2-positive breast tumors.
Clinical Cancer Research 05/2010; 16(9):2688-95. · 8.19 Impact Factor