Shepherd, LE

PURPOSE ASCO/College of American Pathologists guidelines recommend reporting estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) as positive with (1%-100%) staining. Statistically standardized quantitated positivity could indicate differential associations of positivity with breast cancer outcomes. METHODS MA.27 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00066573 ) was a phase III adjuvant trial of exemestane versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. Immunochemistry ER and PgR HSCORE and % positivity (%+) were centrally assessed by machine image quantitation and statistically standardized to mean 0 and standard deviation (SD) 1 after Box-Cox variance stabilization transformations of square for ER; for PgR, (1) natural logarithm (0.1 added to 0 HSCOREs and 0%+) and (2) square root. Our primary end point was MA.27 distant disease-free survival (DDFS) at a median 4.1-year follow-up, and secondary end point was event-free survival (EFS). Univariate survival with cut points at SDs about a mean of 0 (≤–1; (–1, 0]; (0, 1]; >1) was described with Kaplan-Meier plots and examined with Wilcoxon (Peto-Prentice) test statistic. Adjusted Cox multivariable regressions had two-sided Wald tests and nominal significance P < .05. RESULTS Of 7,576 women accrued, 3,048 women's tumors had machine-quantitated image analysis results: 2,900 (95%) for ER, 2,726 (89%) for PgR, and 2,582 (85% of 3,048) with both ER and PgR. Higher statistically standardized ER and PgR HSCORE and %+ were associated with better univariate DDFS and EFS ( P < .001). In multivariable assessments, ER HSCORE and %+ were not significantly associated ( P = .52-.88) with DDFS in models with PgR, whereas higher PgR HSCORE and %+ were significantly associated with better DDFS ( P = .001) in models with ER. CONCLUSION Adjunctive statistical standardization differentiated quantitated levels of ER and PgR. Patients with higher ER- and PgR-standardized units had superior DDFS compared with those with HSCOREs and %+ ≤–1.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned coprimary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical trial updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. Metformin has been associated with lower cancer risk in epidemiologic and preclinical research. In the MA.32 randomized adjuvant breast cancer trial, metformin ( v placebo) did not affect invasive disease-free or overall survival. Here, we report metformin effects on the risk of new cancer. Between 2010 and 2013, 3,649 patients with breast cancer younger than 75 years without diabetes with high-risk T1-3, N0-3 M0 breast cancer (any estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) were randomly assigned to metformin 850 mg orally twice a day or placebo twice a day for 5 years. New primary invasive cancers (outside the ipsilateral breast) developing as a first event were identified. Time to events was described by the competing risks method; two-sided likelihood ratio tests adjusting for age, BMI, smoking, and alcohol intake were used to compare metformin versus placebo arms. A total of 184 patients developed new invasive cancers: 102 metformin and 82 placebo, hazard ratio (HR), 1.25; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.68; P = .13. These included 48 contralateral invasive breast cancers (27 metformin v 21 placebo), HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.72 to 2.27; P = .40 and 136 new nonbreast primary cancers (75 metformin v 61 placebo), HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.74; P = .21. Metformin did not reduce the risk of new cancer development in these nondiabetic patients with breast cancer.

PURPOSE BMI affects breast cancer risk and prognosis. In contrast to cytotoxic chemotherapy, CDK4/6 inhibitors are given at a fixed dose, irrespective of BMI or weight. This preplanned analysis of the global randomized PALLAS trial investigates the impact of BMI on the side-effect profile, treatment adherence, and efficacy of palbociclib. METHODS Patients were categorized at baseline according to WHO BMI categories. Neutropenia rates were assessed with univariable and multivariable logistic regression. Time to early discontinuation of palbociclib was analyzed with Fine and Gray competing risk models. Unstratified Cox models were used to investigate the association between BMI category and time to invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). 95% CIs were derived. RESULTS Of 5,698 patients included in this analysis, 68 (1.2%) were underweight, 2,082 (36.5%) normal weight, 1,818 (31.9%) overweight, and 1,730 (30.4%) obese at baseline. In the palbociclib arm, higher BMI was associated with a significant decrease in neutropenia (unadjusted odds ratio for 1-unit change, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.91 to 0.94; adjusted for age, race ethnicity, region, chemotherapy use, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group at baseline, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.92 to 0.95). This translated into a significant decrease in treatment discontinuation rate with higher BMI (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for 10-unit change, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.83). There was no significant improvement in iDFS with the addition of palbociclib to ET in any weight category (normal weight HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.12; overweight HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.49; and obese HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.30) in this analysis early in follow-up (31 months). CONCLUSION This preplanned analysis of the PALLAS trial demonstrates a significant impact of BMI on side effects, dose reductions, early treatment discontinuation, and relative dose intensity. Additional long-term follow-up will further evaluate whether BMI ultimately affects outcome.

Abstract Basket, umbrella, and platform trial designs (master protocols) have emerged over the last decade to study precision medicine approaches in oncology. First-generation trials like NCI-MATCH (Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice) have proven the principle that studying targeted therapies on a large scale is feasible both from the laboratory and clinical perspectives. However, single-agent targeted therapies have shown limited ability to control metastatic disease, despite careful matching of drug to target. As such, newer approaches employing combinations of targeted therapy, or targeted therapy with standard therapies, need to be considered. The NCI has recently embarked on three second-generation precision medicine trials to address this need: ComboMATCH, iMATCH, and myeloMATCH. The design of these trials and necessary infrastructure are discussed in the following perspective.

Abstract BACKGROUND: A GWAS for the MA.27 aromatase inhibitors (AIs) adjuvant trial (4,406 controls and 252 cases) identified variant (V) SNPs in a long noncoding (lnc) RNA, MIR2052HG, that were associated with longer breast cancer free interval (HR= 0.37, P= 2.15E-07). V SNPs (MAF= 0.32 to 0.42) were associated with lower MIR2052HG and ERα expression in the presence of AIs. MIR2052HG maintained ERα both by promoting AKT/FOXO3-mediated ESR1 transcription and by limiting ubiquitin-mediated ERα degradation. (Cancer Res 76:7012-23, 2016). Our goal was to further elucidate MIR2052HG's mechanism of action. METHODS: RNA-Binding Protein Immunoprecipitation (RBPI) assays were performed to demonstrate that the transcription factor, early growth response protein 1 (EGR1), worked together with MIR2052HG to regulate lemur tyrosine kinase-3 (LMTK3) transcription in MCF7/AC1 and CAMA-1 cells. The location of EGR1 on the LMTK3 gene locus was mapped using chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assays. The co-localization of MIR2052HG RNA and the LMTK3 gene locus was determined using RNA-DNA dual fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). SNP effects were evaluated using a panel of human lymphoblastoid cell lines. RESULTS: TCGA analysis revealed LMTK3 and MIR2052HG expression were highly correlated in ERα-positive breast cancer patients. We found that the MIR2052HG transcript was located in the LMTK3 gene locus by RNA-DNA FISH. Among all of the 12 potential LMTK3 transcription factors identified in the Encode database that were examined by RBPI, only EGR1 showed an interaction with MIR2052HG. CHIP assays confirmed EGR1 binding to the two putative EGR1 binding sites in LMTK3 gene.Depletion of MIR2052HG reduced the binding of EGR1 to the LMTK3 promoter and decreased LMTK3 expression, suggesting that it might function as a scaffold. Mechanistically, decreased LMTK3 levels further increased protein kinase C (PKC) activity and downstream AKT activity, leading to reduced ESR1 mRNA levels via increased pFOXO3. At the protein level, in MIR2052HG depleted cells, increased PKC activity increased the phosphorylation of MEK, ERK, and RSK1, leading to increased ERα phosphorylation at Ser167 and increased ERα degradation. Conversely, overexpression of LMTK3 in MIR2052HG depleted cells reversed these phenotypes. MIR2052HG regulated LMTK3 and ERα expression in a SNP- dependent fashion: the MIR2052HG V SNP, relative to wild-type (WT) genotype, increased LMTK3/ERα expression in response to androstenedione due to increased binding between EGR1 and the LMTK3 promoter in LCLs. However, AI treatment reduced this binding in MIR2052HG variant cells but increased binding in WT cells, resulting in decreased LMTK3/ERα in V cells and increased expression in WT cells. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support a model in which the protective MIR2052HG variant genotype regulates LMTK3 via MIR2052HG/EGR1, and LMTK3 regulates ERα stability via the PKC/MEK/ERK/RSK1 axis. This regulation may explain the effect of the MIR2052HG variant genotype on cell proliferation and response to AIs in MA.27. These findings provide new insight into the mechanism of action of MIR2052HG and suggest that LMTK3 may be a new therapeutic target in ERα-positive breast cancer patients treated with AIs. Citation Format: Cairns J, Ingle JN, Shepherd LE, Kubo M, Goetz MP, Weinshilboum RM, Kalari KR, Wang L. LncRNA MIR2052HG regulates ERα level and endocrine resistance through LMTK3 by recruiting early growth response protein 1 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-07-01.

Abstract Background: ASP is hypothesized to decrease the risk of breast cancer (BRCA) and BRCA recurrences. Thus we performed an exploratory analysis of ASP and CC use within the NCIC CTG MA.27 adjuvant trial comparing exemestane (E;N=3789) to anastrozole (A; N=3787) with a factorial second randomization to CC or placebo (P). Neither A or E was superior in breast cancer outcomes. Baseline low-dose ASP use is an accepted surrogate of cardiovascular risk factors and was used as a stratification factor across all 4 arms. Randomization to CC-P was discontinued after 18 months (n = 1622) due to concerns of cardiac toxicity. Methods: Patients taking &gt;81mg of ASP daily at baseline were ineligible for randomization and use of &gt;81mg of ASP daily was not allowed. Women enrolled during CC randomization were included in the comparison of E and A, stratified by whether they had been randomized to CC [yes, no;N=1622] and concomitant low-dose ASP [≤81 mg/day (yes, no); N=2209]. Other stratification factors included: lymph-nodes (negative, positive, or unknown); prior adjuvant chemotherapy (yes, no). The primary endpoint, event-free-survival (EFS), was defined as time from randomization to time of locoregional or distant disease recurrence, new primary breast cancer, or death from any cause. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) defined as time from randomization to time of death from any cause and distant disease-free-survival (DDFS), defined as time from randomization to time of distant disease recurrence. Univariate (uni) assessment of CC and ASP use was assessed with stratified log-rank test, adjusting for lymph-node status and adjuvant chemotherapy and applied by intention-to-treat. Exploratory multivariate (multi) analyses (N = 1622) had forced inclusion of treatment and used step-wise forward stratified Cox modeling to examine the effects of CC, ASP use and baseline patient characteristics on outcomes; a factor was added with Wald test statistic p ≤ 0.05. Results: At median follow-up of 4.1 years, 186/1622 (11%) patients had an EFS event; 125 (8%) had died from any cause, and 80 (5%) had distant BRCA relapse. CC did not have significant uni association with outcomes: EFS p-value=0.92; OS p-value p = 0.56; DDFS p-value=0.55. ASP use was associated with worse EFS [p = 0.006, HR 1.48 (95% CI 1.12–1.96)], worse OS [p = 0.0002, HR 1.87 (95% CI (1.35–2.61)], and non-significant difference in DDFS (p = 0.72). CC had no multi association with EFS, OS or DDFS. ASP use had no multi association with EFS and DDFS (p &gt; 0.05). However, ASP use had multi prognostic association with worse OS [p = 0.01; HR 1.67 (95% CI 1.13–2.49)]. Conclusions: Users of either CC or low dose ASP had similar DDFS to non-users in MA.27. As expected, low-dose ASP users (with presumptive cardiovascular risk factors) had worse OS than non-users. Inadequate numbers of patients randomized to CC and lack of randomization to aspirin leaves inadequate evidence from MA.27 to determine whether anti-inflammatories influence breast cancer outcomes. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-13-02.

Abstract Background: Based on recent breast cancer literature, we hypothesized that there could be substantive differences in apparent efficacy estimates using a log-normal (LN) survival model rather than with standard Kaplan-Meier (K-M) or Cox model methods. While both Cox and LN survival analyses offer greater specification by individual patient characteristics, the LN model may more robustly estimate survival under model misspecification. Methods: We recently pooled data for 5 NCIC CTG primary breast cancer trials: MA.5, MA.12, MA.14, MA.21, and MA.27. The total patient count for patients who received at least 1 dose of trial therapy is 11,253. Compilation included definition of STEEP endpoints (C Hudis, JCO, 2008) and standardized factor categorizations. The primary endpoint is Breast Cancer Free Interval (BCFI) defined as the time from randomization until recurrence: first local invasive or DCIS; regional, or distant; contralateral invasive or DCIS; or death from breast cancer. We found substantive evidence of non-proportionality for 7 factors compiled for the meta-analyses. In this work, we fit multivariate Cox and LN models with these 7 factors, lymph node status and pathologic T status. We then compare BCFI efficacy estimates for patient and tumour characteristics at 1-, 3-, and 5-years obtained with K-M, Cox, and LN models. Results: There was evidence that the Cox assumption of proportional hazards was violated for 7 factors: age, menopausal status, hormone receptor status, anthracycline use, chemotherapy use, race, and ECOG performance status. Differences between models were intrinsically affected by timing and extent of non-proportionality; there was no consistent pattern. In particular, investigations to date indicate efficacy estimates with absolute differences between K-M, Cox and LN estimates which varied by time of assessment: at 1-year 0.0 to 6.7%, at 3-years 0.4 to 18.6%, and at 5-years 0.2 to 17.0%. BCFI estimates with the K-M were inconsistently closer to those with the LN or Cox model: for K-M to Cox at 1-year 0.4 to 5.2%, at 3-years 0.4 to 15%, at 5-years 0.4 to 14.3%; for K-M to LN at 1-year 0.0 to 6.7%, at 3-years 0.5 to 18.6%, at 5-years 0.2 to 17.0%; for Cox to LN at 1-year 0.8 to 1.8%, at 3-years 1.9 to 6.0%, at 5-years 0.6 to 5.7%. K-M and Cox models have step-wise adjustments at events for K-M and Cox, rather than smooth modeling with the LN. Discussion: Even with reasonably large population subgroups, there were substantive differences in apparent survival (0.0 to 18.6%) between K-M, Cox and LN model types. The magnitude of differences in survival estimates was large enough to be clinically relevant and warrant further consideration as we evaluate new therapies and prognostic/predictive factors. We will be statistically investigating framework robustness under differing levels of model misspecification. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2011;71(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-14-01.

Abstract Background Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are standard adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. We previously reported that racial/ethnic minority women receiving an AI in NCIC CTG MA.17 experienced fewer hot flashes, fatigue, and arthralgias than Caucasians (Moy B et al. Ann Oncol 2006;17:1637). Here we examined whether race affected clinical outcomes in the MA.27 AI trial comparing exemestane (E) with anastrozole (A). Methods: Fisher's exact test was used to compare observed side effects (0 vs grades 1–5) between minority and Caucasian women. Adverse events (AE), including menopausal symptoms, were assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria of the National Cancer Institute (version 3.0). ITT univariate test of race effects on overall survival (OS) was determined with a stratified log-rank test, while multivariate testing was with stratified Cox regression. Results: Among 7312 for whom race was known, distribution was: Caucasian (n=6939; 95%); black (n=235; 3%); Asian/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (n=93); 1%; American Indian (n=39; 1%); and mixed race (n=6). Among women treated with E, minorities reported a significantly lower incidence of hot flashes (45% vs. 56%; p=0.003) and fatigue (34% vs. 46%; p=0.001) compared to Caucasians. Similarly with A, minority women reported significantly fewer hot flashes (47% vs. 58%; p=0.002) and lower cholesterol (12% vs. 18%; p=0.01); however, they reported more headaches than Caucasians (16% vs. 10%; p=0.01). Caucasian women were more likely to discontinue therapy due to AE or side effects (32% vs. 24%). There was a significant OS interaction (p=0.02) between race and treatment with minority women on E having fewer deaths than those on A. Caucasian women had HR of E to A of 0.98 (95% CI 0.81−1.20), p=0.85, while minorities had HR of E to A of 0.72 (95% CI 0.33−1.58), p=0.41. Conclusions: Minority women tolerated AIs better and were also more compliant than Caucasians, supporting our previous findings. A significant interaction between race and type of AI therapy for OS was seen, favoring exemestane in minority women. Replication of these findings in larger cohorts is necessary. Since race/ethnicity may serve as a surrogate for genetic differences, our findings suggest pharmacogenomic differences which require further research. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2011;71(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-14-02.

Abstract Background: The MA.17 study showed that extended adjuvant endocrine therapy with letrozole (LET) after completing 5 years of tamoxifen (TAM) markedly reduced the risk of recurrence in women with ER+ early stage breast cancer and improved overall survival in women presenting with node +ve disease. The HOXB 13:IL17BR gene expression ratio (signature) has been shown to predict outcome in breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant tamoxifen monotherapy and provides additional information beyond that from known positive (ER and PR) and negative (Her-1 and Her-2) predictors of responsiveness to tamoxifen in node-ve women. We report a case control evaluation of the Breast Cancer Index (BCI; bioTheranostics, Inc.), which combines the HOXB13 and IL17BR twogene and the molecular grade index (MGI) gene expression signatures, with respect to distinguishing which patients are at risk of late recurrences and who would respond to extended endocrine therapy with LET. The prognostic and predictive utility of quantitative immunofluorescence of ER, PR, Her-2, tumor aromatase, COX-2, GATA3 and Nat1 in the TAM-PLACEBO and the TAM-LET cohorts will also be evaluated and compared to results derived by standard immunohistochemistry. Methods: FFPE tumor blocks were collected from patients who experienced a breast cancer recurrence up to unblinding of MA.17. Controls were matched 2:1 for age, tumor size, lymph node status, and prior chemotherapy, and were all disease free for longer than cases. All cases were reviewed for standard histopathology by two independent pathologists. RNA was extracted, amplified, converted to cDNA and subjected to RT-PCR with primers and probes to HOXB13, IL17BR, BUB1A, CENPA, NEK2, RACGAP1 and RRM2. ER, PR HER1, HER2, COX2, Aromatase, GATA3 and NAT1 will be analyzed by routine IHC techniques and by immunoflourescent Automated Quantitative Analysis (AQuA). Results: 105 cases and 210 matched controls are available for evaluation. All sections are under review and tissue microarrays have been performed on all cases and controls. Detailed results on the BCI and ER, PR, Her-2 will be available at the SABCS. Discussion: MA.17 has shown that extended adjuvant endocrine therapy after tamoxifen is effective at preventing disease recurrence given for an additional 5 years. Numerous clinical trials are exploring whether extending AIs will show this benefit, and there is an increasing need to improve the therapeutic index by distinguishing those at risk from those who are not. It is also important to determine which patients will benefit from the therapy and which will recur without benefit. The latter patients could be triaged to clinical trials of novel therapies to overcome endocrine resistance. This study will help to define these issues and pave the way for more effective selection of specific patients for adjuvant endocrine strategies. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-10-26.

Abstract Background: Mammographic density, the variation in fat, epithelial and stromal tissues seen on screening mammography, is a strong risk factor for breast cancer and can be modified by hormonal agents. Changes in density from tamoxifen or postmenopausal hormone (PMH) use are associated with risk, suggesting that density may be a surrogate marker of therapeutic efficacy. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are given as adjuvant therapy in hormone receptor positive postmenopausal breast cancer and are known to decrease levels of estrone and estradiol in both serum and breast tissue. Our goal here was to examine the influence of AIs on mammographic density in women with early breast cancer. Methods: We conducted a case-control study of postmenopausal breast cancer patients initiating adjuvant AI therapy (anastrozole or exemestane) on protocols NCIC CTG MA27, NCCTG N063I and MC (Mayo Clinic) 0532. Eligibility included; an intact contralateral breast with no prior surgery; a screening mammogram within twelve months before AI initiation and at 9-15 months on therapy; no prior endocrine therapy and informed consent. Controls were sampled from the Mayo Mammography Health Study, a cohort of 19,924 receiving screening mammography at the Mayo Clinic, and matched to cases on age, prior PMH use, baseline body mass index (BMI) and interval between mammograms. Pre-treatment and on-study mammograms for cases (corresponding mammograms for controls) were digitized. Change in percent density was estimated on the craniocaudal view of the non-cancerous breast using two methods: a subjective assessment of change by an expert radiologist (within 5%; 5-10% increase, 10-25% increase, 25%+ increase, 5-10% decrease, 10-25% decrease and 25%+ decrease) and a quantitative assessment of absolute change using a computer-assisted thresholding program (Cumulus). Analyses compared magnitude of change in density by both the subjective and quantitative methods between cases and matched controls. Results: 574 pairs were eligible for analyses (MA27-505 cases; N063I-12 cases; MC0532-57 cases). Characteristics of the two groups are shown in the table below. Using either density estimation method, there was a greater decrease in density among women on AI therapy vs. matched controls. In 33% (95% CI: 29-37%) of pairs, there was at least a one greater category decrease for the case relative to her control by subjective estimation. In 14% (95% CI: 11-18%) of the pairs, there was at least a 5% greater decrease for the case relative to her control by quantitative estimation. Data will be available according to AI class (non-steroidal versus steroidal) in November. Conclusions: In the largest report to date to examine the influence of AI therapy on mammographic density, we provide evidence that AI is associated with decreases in density in a small subgroup of women. We are currently examining factors that influence these AI-associated decreases in density and whether these differences are unique to one class of AI. (Supported in part by NIH grants P50CA116201, U01GM61388, U10CA77202, U10CA25224) Citation Information: Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-09-03.