Sledge, George W.

6025 Background: Blinding patients to treatment regimen is an important component of high quality randomized clinical trials although concern exists about how receipt of a placebo will impact participants’ views. In ECOG5103, patients were randomized to receive adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer with either placebo (arm A) or bevacizumab (arms B and C) and treatment assignment was unblinded by 24 weeks. We sought to determine if unblinding was associated with differential changes in participants’ views. Methods: The Decision-Making/Quality of Life component (DM-QOL) included all patients enrolling on E5103 between 1/5- 6/8/10. Women were surveyed pretreatment and after unblinding. Wilcoxon rank sum testing was used to examine differences. Results: 572 patients on DM-QOL started protocol therapy; 118 on arm A, 454 on arm B/C; the two groups (arm A vs. B/C) were well balanced. 516 patients participated in pretreatment, 514 in unblinding survey. Pretreatment, 32% reported >moderate chance of recurrence in 5 years, 27% >moderate chance of serious problem from treatment, 99% feeling at least somewhat informed, 98% at least somewhat confident in study participation, most “extremely” confident. Overall, median response scores did not change over time, with no statistically significant differences between the groups in changes in perceptions of: recurrence risk (p=0.45); chances of a serious problem (p=0.12), feeling informed (p=0.99). However, they differed in confidence about study participation (p=0.04): after unblinding, a higher % of placebo-treated patients had increased confidence (38% vs. 25%), and a higher % of bevacizumab-treated patients had decreased confidence (29% vs. 22%), although 44% across all arms had no change. Conclusions: In a placebo-controlled, double-blinded RCT, unblinding did not significantly affect most participants’ views, regardless of receipt of placebo or experimental drug. However, confidence in study participation may have been affected by knowledge of receipt of bevacizumab; publicity surrounding this experimental therapy may have affected results.

1005 Background: We previously reported that in the E5194 clinical trial patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) treated with wide local excision (WLE) without radiation (RT), the DCIS Score was significantly associated with 10 year risk of an ipsilateral breast event (IBE - recurrence of in situ or invasive carcinoma), whether evaluated as a continuous or categorical variable (P=0.02 for both). Here we evaluate correlation between DCIS Score and clinicopathologic (CP) features and if DCIS Score provides independent recurrence risk information. Methods: The study population included 327 women with DCIS prospectively selected for treatment with WLE without RT, including low-intermediate grade tumors ≤2.5 cm or high-grade ≤1 cm. CP variables included age, menopausal status, tamoxifen treatment (used in 29%) and expert centrally determined tumor size, grade, comedo necrosis, tumor type, and margin status. The association between DCIS Score and CP variables was examined by spearman rank correlation, and proportional hazards regression models were used to determine variables significantly associated with IBE. Results: Lesion size (p=0.009) and menopausal status (p=0.03) were significantly associated with IBE, while grade (p=0.69) and comedo necrosis (p=0.47) were not. DCIS Score was significantly associated with IBE after adjustment for CP features and tamoxifen use (p=0.02). DCIS Score was moderately correlated with grade (rs=0.46; 95% CI 0.37,0.54), percentage comedo necrosis (rs=0.49; CI 0.41,0.57), and lesion size (rs=0.18; CI 0.08,0.29) but not other features. Exploratory analyses in all CP subgroups, including the multicomponent Van Nuys Prognostic Index, showed a wide range of DCIS Scores in each subgroup. Concordance of the grades among readers was low: local vs parent central, 68%; local vs central nuclear grade, 45%; parent central vs central nuclear grade, 37%. Conclusions: DCIS Score is moderately correlated with grade, comedo necrosis, and tumor size. DCIS Score provides recurrence risk information independent of these features and identifies subjects with DCIS who are at high risk for local invasive and in-situ local recurrence after WLE alone.

605 Background: Pre-clinical and nonrandomized clinical data support synergy of the combination of bevacizumab and trastuzumab. We conducted a randomized double-blinded phase III trial of chemotherapy/trastuzumab ± bevacizumab to evaluate efficacy (PFS after treatment initiation) of the addition of bevacizumab in first-line treatment of HER2+ MBC. Methods: Days 1, 8 and 15 paclitaxel ± carboplatin were administered with trastuzumab and either placebo or bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks for a total of 6 months. Antibody therapy was then continued without chemo every 3 weeks, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Disease assessments were performed every 3 months. Results: Ninety-six of the planned 489 analyzable patients (pts) were accrued between 2007 and 2009, at which time the study terminated due to poor accrual. Seventy % of pts were post-menopausal, 60% had ER+/HER2+ BC. Median age was 55 years (28-80). Outcomes and toxicities are summarized on the tables below. Median follow-up was 30 months. Conclusions: The combination of chemotherapy, trastuzumab, and bevacizumab did not significantly increased toxicity, and was overall safe and well tolerated. No significant differences in clinical benefit were observed between both treatment arms. Data on CTCs and Quality of Life will be presented at the meeting. This study was conducted by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (Robert L. Comis, MD, Chair) and supported in part by Public Health Service Grants CA23318, CA66636, CA21115, CA32291, CA31946, CA49957, CA27525, CA14548, CA17145, CA32102, CA25224, CA49. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

6527 Background: Biomarker information can risk stratify patients based on potential for benefits/toxicity from therapy. Ideally, a biomarker will identify those who benefit with limited toxicity. However, the impact of biomarkers is unclear when indicting individuals with greatest benefit are also at increased risk for toxicity. Methods: We surveyed participants at 18 month follow-up in the Decision-Making/Quality of Life (DM-QOL) component of ECOG5103, a RCT where patients were randomized to receive adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer with either placebo or bevacizumab (in 2 schedules). We asked patients for the preferred treatment in two hypothetical scenarios: 1) preference for chemo A or chemo A + B without biomarker information; 2) preference for chemo A or chemo A+B when participants tested positive for a “B-receptor” which increased both the benefit and toxicity of chemo A+B. McNemar’s test was used to examine changes in preferences. Results: 439 patients completed both scenarios on 18-month survey. The Table shows the treatment preferences in each scenario. The positive biomarker information in scenario 2 led 60/439 (14%) participants to switch their preference. The main reason for treatment preference in scenario 2 was greater benefits of chemo A+B (64%), the lower risks with chemo A (20%) and positive biomarker (10%). Among participants who changed preference, those randomized to receive bevacizumab were more likely to switch to chemo A in scenario 2. Conclusions: Information about a positive biomarker, indicating increased benefit and increased risk from additional chemo, did not significantly change participants’ preferred treatment. All participants were involved in a large placebo controlled double blind trial and the majority (70%) preferred the most aggressive course of treatment in both scenarios. Whether patients not enrolled in the trial would be more sensitive to the increased risk information is unclear. [Table: see text]

503 Background: TAILORx established that endocrine therapy (ET) alone is non-inferior to adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) plus ET in EBC and a 21-gene RS of 11-25, with some benefit if ≤50 years (y) with RS 16-25 (PMID: 29860917). We evaluated whether clinical risk (tumor size & histologic grade) provides additional prognostic information to RS, a secondary trial objective. Methods: Clinical risk by was assessed by Adjuvant! (version 8.0) using MINDACT criteria (PMID 27557300), defined as low clinical risk (LCR - tumor ≤3 cm and low grade, <2 cm and intermediate grade, or ≤1 cm and high grade) or high clinical risk (HCR -not meeting LCR criteria). Results: Of 9427 women with RS and clinical risk information, 70% were LCR and 30% HCR, with comparable distribution by age ( ≤50 vs. >50). The RS was 26-100 in 9% of LCR and 27% of HCR patients, with similar distributions by age. Although LCR/HCR provided additional prognostic information in each RS category for iDFS, including RS 0-10 (9-year rates 86.7% vs. 75.7% LCR vs. HCR), 11-25 (85.4% vs. 78.9%), and 26-100 (82.0% vs. 70.4%), iDFS rates were similar irrespective of CT (no vs. yes) in the entire RS 11-25 cohort whether LCR (85.8% vs. 85.1%) or HCR (79.8% vs. 77.9%). DRFI rates were also similar irrespective of CT in the RS 11-25 cohort or > 50y group whether LCR (96.0% vs. 96.1% overall; 96.5% vs. 96.0% > 50y) or HCR (92.3% vs. 89.9% overall; 91.7% vs. 90.7% >50y). For women ≤50y, the absolute reduction in distant recurrence from CT with a RS of 16-20 (N=923) was -0.2% (standard error [SE]±2.1%) for LCR vs. 6.5%(SE±4.9%) for HCR (vs. 1.6%[SE±1.9%] overall), whereas for a RS 21-25 (N=492) it was 6.4% (SE±4.9%) for LCR vs. 8.6% (SE±6.2%) for HCR (vs. 6.5%[SE±3.7%] overall). Conclusions: Clinical risk stratification provides additional prognostic information to the 21-gene RS, but not prediction of CT benefit in the overall TAILORx population or those > 50y, and facilitates more refined estimates of absolute CT benefit for women ≤50y with a RS 16-25. (Funded by National Cancer Institute, Komen Foundation, Breast Cancer Research Foundation). Clinical trial information: NCT00310180.