Spielmann, M.

Abstract Background: Ixabepilone, an epothilone B analog, has demonstrated single-agent activity in metastatic and neoadjuvant settings. The PACS08 trial aimed to compare adjuvant FEC100-Docetaxel regimen to FEC100-Ixabepilone in poor prognosis early breast cancer (BC) composed of patients presenting with triple-negative (TN) [i.e. estrogen receptor (ER)-/progesterone receptor (PR)-/HER2-] or ER+/PR-/HER2- tumor, which are subgroups significantly associated with worse prognosis. Patients and methods: Between 2007 and 2010, 762 patients with unilateral TNBC (n=592, 78%) or node-positive ER+/PR-/HER2- BC (n=170, 22%) were enrolled. Recruitment was interrupted due to BMS decision to stop ixabepilone development in adjuvant setting. Main inclusion criteria were: age<70 years, normal cardiac, hepatic, haematological and renal functions. Arm A: pts received 3 cycles of FEC100 (F and C, each at 500 mg/m2, E 100 mg/m2, every 3 weeks) followed by 3 cycles of Docetaxel (100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks); Arm B, Ixabepilone 40 mg/m2 replaced Docetaxel. Radiotherapy was mandatory after conservative surgery and endocrine therapy was given to ER+ pts. ER, PR and HER2 status were validated by a central pathology review on 754 cases and Immunohistochemical detection of Ki67, EGFR, cytokeratins (CK) 5/6 and 14, was performed on tissue microarray (TMA). Results: Main pts characteristics were well balanced between the 2 arms. As of September 2014, the median follow-up was 36 months. The safety profile indicates that Docetaxel is more often associated to significant haematological toxicities whereas both neurotoxicities and haematological toxicities are reported in Ixabepilone arm. Log-Rank tests indicate no difference between two arms in terms of both DFS and OS (HR=1.2, 95%CI (0.864-1.728), p=0.256 and HR=1.8, 95%CI (0.751-1.855), p=0.473, respectively). Pathological analysis of the PACS08 collection showed that TNBC displayed significantly higher proliferative activity as shown by mitotic count and Ki67 index (p<0.001). As compared to ER+/PR-/HER2- subgroup, TNBC showed distinct characteristics, and displayed a so-called basal-like phenotype in 80%. Further efficacy analyses are ongoing in order to study whether chemotherapy may have better prognosis according to pathological characteristics including tumor lymphocytic infiltrate. These additional data will be available for the SABCS2015 meeting. Conclusions: Our results indicate that Ixabepilone doesn't show higher efficiency compared to Docetaxel in adjuvant setting in poor prognosis early breast cancer. We have an unusual biological collection associated to our clinical data which will allow us to correlate efficacy data to breast cancer subgroups. Other several translational researches are still ongoing. Citation Format: Campone M, Lacroix-Triki M, Roca L, Spielmann M, Wildiers H, Cottu P, Kerbrat P, Levy C, Mayer F, Bachelot T, Wiston T, Eymard J-C, Uwer L, Machiels J-P, Verhoeven D, Jaubert D, Facchini T, Orfeuvre H, Canon J-L, Asselain B, Lemonnier J, Roché H. UCBG intergroup: 3-years efficacy results of the Unicancer-PACS08 trial including poor prognosis patients treated with docetaxel or ixabepilone in adjuvant setting. [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 P1-12-06.

Purpose We compared efficacy of trastuzumab versus no trastuzumab in patients with small (≤ 2 cm) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) –positive breast cancer treated in randomized trials. Methods A meta-analysis was conducted using data from five of the six adjuvant trastuzumab trials. Efficacy end points were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Separate analyses were prospectively planned for hormone receptor (HR) –positive and HR-negative cohorts. Random effect models and Yusuf-Peto fixed effects models assessed the impact of heterogeneity on baseline hazards and treatment effects across studies. Peto-Pike cumulative incidence estimates were stratified by study and nodal status. Results Median follow-up time was 8 years. For 2,263 patients with HR-positive disease, 8-year cumulative incidence rates comparing trastuzumab versus no trastuzumab were 17.3% versus 24.3% (P < .001) for DFS and 7.8% versus 11.6% (P = .005) for OS, respectively; for 1,092 HR-positive patients with zero or one positive lymph nodes, results were 12.7% versus 19.4% (P = .005) for DFS and 5.3% versus 7.4% (P = .12) for OS, respectively. For 1,957 patients with HR-negative disease, 8-year cumulative incidence rates were 24.0% versus 33.4% (P < .001) for DFS and 12.4% versus 21.2% (P < .001) for OS, respectively; for 1,040 HR-negative patients with zero or one positive lymph nodes, results were 20.4% versus 26.3% (P = .05) for DFS and 8.2% versus 12.2% (P = .084) for OS, respectively. Conclusion Women with HER2-positive tumors ≤ 2 cm in the randomized trastuzumab trials derived substantial DFS and OS benefit from adjuvant trastuzumab. Trastuzumab-treated patients with HR-positive disease and ≤ one positive lymph node may be candidates for trials assessing less aggressive treatment approaches.

Abstract Background Trastuzumab (T) combined with chemotherapy improves survival of women with HER2-positive breast cancer. Dual therapy with T and other HER-2 targeted agents (lapatinib/pertuzumab) has demonstrated improved efficacy compared to T alone in advanced breast cancer, and is in clinical trials in early stage disease. We hypothesize that subgroups of patients with HER2-positive tumors and limited tumor burden (tumor size and no or few positive lymph nodes) have a favorable outcome and would not be candidates for dual therapy. This study will analyze the disease-free survival (DFS)and overall survival (OS) of patients with early stage breast cancer treated with chemotherapy and T in the seminal randomized studies (RCTs). Methods RCTs were identified by a Medline search from 2004-2013. Trial groups from five phase III RCTs agreed to provide data. TrialNumberEligibilityRegimenNSABP B312130T1-3; pN1, pN2a, or pN3a; M0ACx4 then Tx4 VSACx4 then THx4 then Hx40wkNCCTG N98313505T1-3; pN1-2; M0ACx4 then Tx12wk VS ACTx4 then Hx52wk VS ACx4 then Tx12wk then Hx40wkHERA5102T1-3; pN1-2; M0Any (neo)adjuvant regimen, then H q3wk x1yr VS H q3wk x 2yr VS observationFinHER232T1-4; N0-3; M0Vx3 or T*x3 then FECx3 VS Vx3 or T*x3 with Hx9wk then FECx3PACS043010(528 HER2+)T1-3; pN1-2; M0FE(100)Cx6 VSFE(100)Cx6 then Hx1yr VS T*E(75) x6 VS T*E(75) x6 then Hx1yrA, adriamycin; C, cyclophosphamide; T, paclitaxel; T*, docetaxel; H, trastuzumab; P, carboplatin; F, 5-fluorouracil; E, epirubicin; Treatment regimen also included 5 years of hormonal therapy for ER positive patients. The ER+/HER2+ and the ER-/HER2+ cohorts will be analyzed separately. Patients with tumors 3 cm or smaller (T1a, T1b, T1c and &gt;2 cm- 3cm) and 0, 1, 2 and 3 positive lymph nodes will be included. Initially a log rank test will be used to determine if the survival results are different by study. If there is no difference across studies, Kaplan-Meier survival curves with confidence intervals will be estimated. If there is a difference between studies, individual Kaplan-Meier curves will be estimated and the mean of the curves will be estimated along with confidence intervals using the adjusted standard deviation. Estimates at 3, 5 and 8 years will be presented as well as estimates of the event rates within each subpopulation defined by tumor size, number of positive lymph nodes, and ER status. Survival endpoints of DFS, and OS as defined in the original studies will be analyzed. Results and Conclusion Data from the five trials will be analyzed and an abstract provided prior to the meeting. Subgroups of patients with a very favorable outcome when treated with adjuvant chemotherapy and T will be identified. Our survival estimates might serve as benchmarks for future trials evaluating therapy reduction. Our results will complement those of the Dana Farber single arm multicenter trial in patients with “low risk” HER2-positive disease (APT trial; NCT00542451), being submitted to SABCS 2013. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr S6-03.

Abstract Purpose: PACS 01 trial demonstrated that the sequential adjuvant chemotherapy with FEC100 followed by docetaxel (D) significantly improves disease-free and overall survival in node-positive(N+) early breast cancer (BC). However, Triple negative (TN) and ER+/ PR-/HER2− subgroups are significantly associated to a worse prognosis even after adjunction of D. As Ixabepilone (Ixa) has notable preclinical and clinical activity in these subgroups, the PACS 08 trial aims to compare standard FEC100-D regimen to 3 cycles of FEC100 followed by 3 cycles of Ixa. We report the preliminary results of the toxicity profile. Patients and methods: Patients (pts) had localized resectable unilateral ER-/PR-/HER2− or ER+/PR-/HER2− BC. Main inclusion criteria were: age&lt;70 years, normal cardiac, hepatic, haematological and renal functions. Arm A: pts received 3 cycles of FEC100 (F and C, each at 500 mg/m2, E 100 mg/m2, every 3 weeks) followed by 3 cycles of D (100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks); Arm B, Ixa 40 mg/m2 replaced D. Radiotherapy was mandatory after conservative surgery and endocrine therapy was given to ER+ pts. A 5% absolute difference in disease-free survival at 5 years is the main statistical end-point. Results: Between October 2007 and September 2010, 762 pts with TNBC or ER+/PR-/HER2− BC were enrolled. Recruitment was interrupted due to BMS decision to stop Ixa development in adjuvant setting. Main pts characteristics were well balanced between the 2 arms: median age 53 years, postmenopausal 57.8%, conservative surgery 68.4%, node positive 59.5%. A total of 755 pts were evaluable for safety. Treatment was completed for 93.4% and 86.1% of pts in arms A and B, respectively. During FEC100 sequence, toxicities were well balanced between the two arms. From cycle 4, whereas Gr3/4 sensory neurotoxicity (12pts; 3.5%) and thrombopenia (7pts; 2%) were reported in Ixa arm, none of these toxicities was reported in the D arm (p0.001). There were significantly more Gr3/4 neutropenia on day 21 in Ixa arm (13pts, 6.6% vs 4pts, 1.9%; p&lt;10.005). No significant difference was observed for febrile neutropenia. Fewer cutaneous toxicities were observed in Ixa arm (2pts, 0.6% vs 10pts, 2.6%; p&lt;0.05). No significant difference was observed neither for motor neurotoxicity or hepatic function between two arms. More pts discontinued treatment in Ixa arm compared to D arm (49pts (13%) vs 26pts (7%), p&lt;0.05). Main reasons were Gr3/4 haematological adverse events (AE) and Gr3/4 neurotoxicities for Ixa arm and due to GR3/4 haematological AE for D arm. One non expected Gr4 bullous dermatitis was reported during the first Ixa cycle. 2 deaths due to septic shock occured in Ixa arm (both at cycle 4 for a 56- and a 66-year-old woman). However, according to the IDMC no obvious precipitating factor questioning the Ixa arm was identified. Conclusion: Our results indicate that D arm is more often associated to significant haematological toxicities, whereas both neurotoxicities and haematological toxicities are reported in the Ixa arm. Although significantly more pts discontinued treatment due to adverse events in Ixa arm compared to D arm, Ixa may still represent a promising therapeutic option for pts in the adjuvant setting especially for poor prognosis BC. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2011;71(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-18-04.