Paik, Soonmyung

Abstract Background NRG Oncology NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413 compared whole-breast irradiation (WBI) to accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI). APBI was not equivalent to WBI in local tumor control. Secondary outcome was quality of life (QOL). Methods The QOL sub-study used validated self-report questionnaires, including the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS) and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) vitality scale. Assessments occurred before random assignment, at treatment completion (chemotherapy or radiotherapy), 4 weeks later, at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. Primary aims: cosmesis change equivalency (baseline to 3 years; a priori margin of equivalence 0.4 standard deviations) and fatigue change superiority (baseline to end of treatment [EOT]) for APBI vs WBI, by patient groups treated with or without chemotherapy when appropriate. Results From March 21, 2005 to May 25, 2009, 975 patients enrolled in this sub-study; 950 had follow-up data. APBI had 3-year cosmesis equivalent to WBI (95% CI = -0.0001 to -0.16; equivalence margin -0.22 to -0.22) in all patients. The APBI group without chemotherapy had less EOT fatigue (P = .011; mean score APBI 63 vs WBI 59); the APBI group receiving chemotherapy had worse EOT fatigue (P = .011; APBI 43 vs WBI 49). The APBI group reported less pain (BCTOS) at EOT (WBI 2.29 vs APBI 1.97) but worse pain at 3 years (WBI 1.62 vs APBI 1.71). APBI patients reported greater convenience of care than with WBI and reported less symptom severity at EOT and 4 weeks later. Conclusion Cosmetic outcomes were similar for the APBI and WBI groups, with small statistically significant differences in other outcomes that varied over time. Differences in fatigue and other symptoms appeared to resolve by ≥6 months. APBI may be preferred by some patients, for whom extended treatment is burdensome. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00103181.

Background: The Clinical Treatment Score post-5 years (CTS5) is a risk stratification tool used to determine the risk of late recurrence in hormone receptor–positive (HR+), HER2-negative breast cancer (BC). Limited data exist on its use in HR+, HER2-positive (HER2+) BC. Patients and Methods: CTS5 was evaluated in HR+, HER2+ BC in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) N9831 (Alliance) and NSABP B-31 (NRG) trials. Results: A total of 1,862 patients with HR+, HER2+ BC without recurrence 5 years after enrollment were included. Overall, the CTS5 score was significantly associated with recurrence-free survival (RFS), with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.35 (95% CI, 1.12–1.63; P=.002), but did not reach statistical significance in patients who received trastuzumab (n=829; HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.98–1.71; P=.07). CTS5 risk category was not significantly associated with RFS. In patients who received trastuzumab, other variables used in CTS5, including patient age and tumor size, were not significantly associated with RFS. N3 was significantly associated with worse outcomes (HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.09–3.17; P=.02) compared with N0–N1. Paradoxically, higher tumor grade was associated with better outcomes after 5 years in the multivariate analysis (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.50–1.00; P=.05). The incidence of recurrences or deaths between years 5 to 10 was 10.6% in the CTS5 low-risk category, 5.6% in the intermediate-risk category, and 9.8% in the high-risk category. Conclusions: The CTS5 model does not accurately predict the risk of late recurrence in HR+, HER2+ BC treated with adjuvant trastuzumab in the N9831 and B-31 trials. This study underlines the need to develop a new prognostic model to better delineate the risk of late recurrence in patients with HR+, HER2+ BC receiving adjuvant trastuzumab. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00005970 (NCCTG N9831) and NCT00004067 (NRG/NSABP B-31).

PURPOSE Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT-serine threonine kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway abnormalities contribute to endocrine resistance. Everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, improved progression-free survival in hormone receptor–positive metastatic breast cancer (BC) when combined with endocrine therapy (ET). In this phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed the efficacy of everolimus + ET as adjuvant therapy in high-risk, hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative BC after adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to physician's choice ET and 1 year of everolimus (10 mg orally once daily) or placebo stratified by risk group. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) evaluated by a stratified log-rank test with the hazard ratio (HR) estimated by Cox regression. Subset analyses included preplanned evaluation by risk group and exploratory analyses by menopausal status and age. Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and safety. Everolimus did not improve IDFS/OS when added to ET in patients with early-stage high-risk, hormone receptor–positive BC. RESULTS One thousand and nine hundred thirty-nine patients were randomly assigned with 1,792 eligible for analysis. Overall, no benefit of everolimus was seen for IDFS (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.14]) or OS (HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.26]). The assumption of proportional hazards was not met suggesting significant variability in the HR over time since the start of treatment. In an unplanned subgroup analysis among postmenopausal patients (N = 1,221), no difference in IDFS (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.86 to 1.36]) or OS (HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.60]) was seen. In premenopausal patients (N = 571), everolimus improved both IDFS (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.94]) and OS (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.28 to 0.86]). Treatment completion rates were lower in the everolimus arm compared with placebo (48% v 73%) with higher grade 3 and 4 adverse events (35% v 7%). CONCLUSION One year of adjuvant everolimus + ET did not improve overall outcomes. Subset analysis suggests mTOR inhibition as a possible target for patients who remain premenopausal after chemotherapy.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Abnormalities of the PI3kinase/AKT/mTOR signaling network are common in breast cancer (BC) and are associated with endocrine resistance. Everolimus, an mTOR-inhibitor increased PFS when combined with endocrine therapy (ET) in the metastatic setting and is thought to revert endocrine resistance. S1207 is a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the role of everolimus in combination with ET in the adjuvant setting among patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative BC (NCT01674140). METHODS: Eligible patients were >18 years of age with histologically confirmed invasive hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative high-risk BC. Four risk groups were defined as: 1) > 2cm node-negative disease (or pN1mi), and either an Oncotype DX® Recurrence Score (RS) > 25 or MammaPrint® high-risk category (MP high); 2) 1-3 positive nodes and either RS >25, MP high or a pathological grade 3 tumor; 3) >4 positive lymph nodes. Patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were eligible if: 4) after surgery had >1 lymph node involvement. Patients were randomized 1:1 to physician’s choice adjuvant ET in combination with one year of everolimus (10 mg PO daily) or ET plus placebo stratified by risk group. The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) evaluated by a stratified log-rank test. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. The hazard ratio (HR) for treatment efficacy was estimated using Cox regression with stratification by risk groups. Subset analyses included preplanned evaluation within risk group and exploratory analyses of menopausal status and age. RESULTS: 1,939 patients were randomized between September 2013 and May 2019, of them 1,792 were eligible and included in the analysis (896 per arm). Primary reason for ineligibility was timing after chemotherapy/radiation or not high risk. Median age was 54 years (22-85) and 32% were premenopausal. With a median follow-up of 50.5 months, there were 389 IDFS events as of May 2022 (data cutoff). 5-year IDFS was 74.8% among patients treated with everolimus and 73.9% among patients treated with placebo, HR=0.93 (95% CI 0.76-1.14). However, the proportional hazards assumption was violated (p=0.02) suggesting differential treatment effect over time. The HR during the one year of treatment was 0.72 (95% CI 0.47-1.10) while after one year it was 1.00 (95% CI 0.80-1.26). The 5-year OS was 87.6% in the everolimus arm and 85.5% in the placebo arm, HR=0.98 (95% CI 0.75-1.28). Analysis by risk group did not show higher everolimus benefit as risk increased. No difference in IDFS or OS was seen among postmenopausal patients (IDFS HR=1.08 [95% CI 0.85-1.36], OS HR=1.19 [95% CI 0.87-1.61]). Among premenopausal patients, everolimus was associated with improved IDFS (HR=0.63 [95% CI 0.43-0.93]) and OS (HR=0.48 [95% CI 0.26-0.88]). Treatment completion of randomized therapy was lower in the everolimus arm compared to placebo (47.9% v 72.7%). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were noted in 6.5% and 0.5% of patients in the placebo arm and in 31.2% and 3.7% in the everolimus arm respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of one year of adjuvant everolimus to standard adjuvant ET did not improve IDFS or OS and was associated with low completion rate and increased AEs. Among premenopausal patients there was a benefit in IDFS and OS that is hypothesis generating. Future translational studies will evaluate potential predictors of everolimus benefit and drug toxicity. Citation Format: Marianna Chavez, Jieling Miao, Lajos Pusztai, Matthew P. Goetz, Priya Rastogi, Patricia A. Ganz, Eleftherios (Terry) Mamounas, Soonmyung Paik, Hanna Bandos, Wajeeha Razaq, Anne O’Dea, Virginia Kaklamani, Andrea L.M. Silber, Lisa E. Flaum, Eleni Andreopolu, Joseph Baar, Albert G. Wendt, Jennifer F. Carney, Priyanka Sharma, Julie R. Gralow, Danika L. Lew, William E. Barlow, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi. Results from a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating adjuvant endocrine therapy +/- 1 year of everolimus in patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer: SWOG S1207 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-07.

Abstract Our objective was to validate the NSABP 8-gene trastuzumab-benefit signature, developed and initially validated in NRG Oncology/NSABP B-31 in Alliance/NCCTG N9831. The B-31 and N9831 trials demonstrated the benefit of adding trastuzumab to chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting for HER2+ breast cancer patients. NSABP investigators utilized gene expression profiles of N9831 patients (N = 892) to blindly assign patients to large-, moderate-, or no-trastuzumab benefit groups and then NCCTG investigators assessed the degree of trastuzumab benefit using Cox models adjusted for age, nodes, estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor status, tumor size, and grade. Hazard ratios and 2-sided P values for recurrence-free survival of the predicted large- (n = 387), moderate- (n = 401), and no-benefit (n = 104) groups, based on the 8-gene signature were 0.47 (95% CI = 0.31 to 0.73, P < .001), 0.60 (95% CI = 0.39 to 0.92, P = .02), and 1.54 (95% CI = 0.59 to 4.02, P = .38), respectively (Pinteraction = .02), providing validation of the 8-gene signature in an independent study.

LBA1000 The full, final text of this abstract will be available at abstract.asco.org at 12:01 AM (EDT) on Monday, June 4, 2012, and in the Annual Meeting Proceedings online supplement to the June 20, 2012, issue of Journal of Clinical Oncology. Onsite at the Meeting, this abstract will be printed in the Monday edition of ASCO Daily News.

PURPOSE Recent trials have shown potential benefit of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy and relatively high risk of recurrence (RoR) after 5 years in hormone receptor-positive (HR+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2−) breast cancer. Although risk of late relapse in HR+ HER2− breast cancer is fairly well defined, the risk in HER2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer treated with adjuvant trastuzumab-based chemotherapy remains largely unknown. METHODS We included 3,177 patients with HER2+ breast cancer treated with adjuvant chemotherapy alone or with trastuzumab from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00005970 ) and National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-31 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00004067 ) trials. RESULTS Overall, HR+ breast cancer was significantly associated with improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) during the first 5 years (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.77; P < .001). Among patients treated with trastuzumab, cumulative hazard for RFS was lower in patients with HR+ HER2+ breast cancer during the first 5 years (10.96% v 17.48%; hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.79; P < .001). However, there was no significant difference in RFS based on HR status during years 5 to 10 (hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.88; P = .12). A comparable degree of trastuzumab benefit was observed in HR+ and HR− breast cancers ( P for interaction = .87). Furthermore, we observed low RoR in years 5 to 10 among patients with HR+ HER2+ breast cancer: 3.23% in patients without lymph node involvement (N0) and 6.39% in patients with involvement of one to three lymph nodes (N1). CONCLUSION The benefit of adjuvant trastuzumab persists for a long time. A distinct pattern of recurrence was observed between HR+ and HR− HER2+ disease but with similar degree of benefit from adjuvant trastuzumab. RoR in years 5 to 10 in HR+ HER2+ breast cancer is low, particularly in patients with N0 or N1 disease.

508 Background: PBI is an alternative to WBI, with potentially greater therapy (tx) compliance, and better integration with chemotherapy (CTX). NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413 clinical outcome results from 2018 did not show equivalence of PBI to WBI in local tumor control; PBI was statistically inferior, but with clinically small differences. PBI may be an acceptable alternative to WBI for some women. Understanding cosmesis and quality of life (QOL) treatment outcomes is important. Methods: B-39/0413 included a prospective QOL substudy with PRO evaluation of breast cancer treatment outcomes (cosmesis, function, pain) and fatigue using BCTOS and SF-36 vitality scales. Secondary QOL parameters included treatment related symptoms, perceived convenience of care, and the BPI pain scale. The study sample was stratified by CTX or not, as CTX is given before WBI but after PBI. PRO assessments occurred before randomization, the last day of adjuvant tx [CTX or radiation], 4 wks later, and 6, 12, 24, and 36 mo later. Primary aims included comparisons of change in fatigue from baseline to end of tx and equivalency of change in cosmesis from baseline to 36 mo for PBI v WBI. Separate analyses were done for CTX and non-CTX pts, controlling for axillary dissection. Each comparison used α=0.0125. Planned sample size was 964. Results: From 3-23-05 to 5-27-09, 975 pts were enrolled in the PRO study; 950 had follow-up data. 504 did not receive CTX and 446 received CTX. In non-CTX pts, PBI had less fatigue (p=0.011) and did not meet criteria for cosmesis equivalence (97.5% CI, -0.02 to 0.22; ∆=0.20). In CTX pts, PBI had worse fatigue (p=0.011) and equivalent cosmesis to WBI (97.5% CI, -0.09 to 0.21; ∆=0.24). In both groups, PBI pts reported less pain at end of tx. In non-CTX pts, PBI had more pain at 36 mo but in CTX pts, there was no difference. Convenience of care and treatment related symptom outcomes will be presented. Conclusions: In non-CTX pts, PBI is more convenient with less fatigue and slightly poorer cosmesis at 36 mo. Cosmesis was equivalent at 36 mo in CTX pts. Support: U10CA180868, -180822, UG1CA189867. Clinical trial information: NCT00103181.

Abstract Background: Conventional WBI after lumpectomy for early-stage breast cancer decreases ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), yielding comparable results to mastectomy. Accelerated PBI appears effective in reducing IBTR by treating only the tumor bed area. As the majority of IBTR occur at or in the vicinity of the tumor bed, we hypothesized that PBI would be as effective as WBI in controlling IBTR. The primary aim of NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413 was to determine if PBI provides equivalent local tumor control post lumpectomy compared to WBI in pts with early-stage breast cancer. The equivalency test was based on a 50% margin of increase in the hazard ratio (HR=1.5). Secondary endpoints included: overall survival (OS), recurrence-free interval (RFI), distant disease-free interval (DDFI), and toxicity. Methods: Eligible pts had lumpectomy with histologically-free margins and 0-3 positive axillary nodes. Pts were stratified by stage, menopausal status, hormone receptor status, and intent to receive chemotherapy and then randomized to PBI or WBI. PBI was 10 fractions of 3.4-3.85 Gy, given twice daily with either brachytherapy or 3D external beam radiation. WBI was 50 Gy in 2 Gy fractions given daily with a sequential boost to the surgical cavity. Follow-up was every 6 mos for 5 yrs and then annually. All analyses were by intent-to-treat. Results: From 3-21-05 to 4-16-13, 4216 pts were randomized: 2107 PBI; 2109 WBI. 61% were postmenopausal; 81% were hormone receptor-positive; 29% intended to receive chemotherapy. Stage distribution was: DCIS, 24%; invasive pN0, 65%; invasive pN1, 10%. As of 7-31-18, median follow-up was 10.2 yrs. There were 161 IBTRs as first events: 90 PBI v 71 WBI (HR 1.22; 90%CI 0.94-1.58). Per protocol-defined margin, to declare PBI and WBI equivalent regarding IBTR risk, the 90% CI for the observed HR had to lie entirely between 0.667 and 1.5. The percent of pts IBTR-free at 10 yrs was 95.2% PBI v 95.9% WBI. A statistically significant difference in the 10-yr RFI rate favored WBI (91.9% PBI v 93.4% WBI; HR 1.32; 95%CI 1.04-1.68; p=0.02). No statistically significant differences existed between PBI and WBI in DDFI (HR 1.31; 95%CI 0.91-1.91; p=0.15), OS (HR 1.10; 95%CI 0.90-1.35; p=0.35), or DFS (HR 1.12; 95%CI 0.98-1.29; p=0.11). Grade 3 toxicity was 9.6% PBI v 7.1% WBI, and grade 4-5 toxicity was 0.5% v 0.3%, respectively. Discussion: PBI did not meet the criteria for equivalence to WBI in controlling IBTR based on the upper limit of the hazard ratio confidence interval. However, the absolute difference in 10-yr rate of IBTR was &lt;1% (4.8% PBI v 4.1% WBI). The risk of an RFI event was statistically significantly higher for PBI compared to WBI, but the absolute difference in 10-yr RFI rate was also small (8.1% PBI v 6.6% WBI). DDFI, OS, and DFS were not statistically different for PBI v WBI. Grade 3-5 toxicities, although low, were more common for PBI than WBI. The trial population was heterogeneous, ranging from Stage 0-2 breast cancer, and outcome by risk categories are being analyzed. Support: U10CA180868, -180822, UG1CA189867. Citation Format: Vicini FA, Cecchini RS, White JR, Julian TB, Arthur DW, Rabinovitch RA, Kuske RR, Parda DS, Ganz PA, Scheier MF, Winter KA, Paik S, Kuerer HM, Vallow LA, Pierce LJ, Mamounas EP, Costantino JP, Bear HD, Germaine I, Gustafson G, Grossheim L, Petersen IA, Hudes RS, Curran, Jr. WJ, Wolmark N. Primary results of NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413 (NRG Oncology): A randomized phase III study of conventional whole breast irradiation (WBI) versus partial breast irradiation (PBI) for women with stage 0, I, or II breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS4-04.