Hudis, Clifford A.

LBA1 Background: Five years of aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy either as up-front treatment or after 2-5 years of tamoxifen has become the standard of care for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor positive early breast cancer. Extending treatment with an AI to 10 years may further reduce the risk of breast cancer recurrence. Methods: We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (Canadian Cancer Trials Group MA.17R) to test the efficacy of extending AI treatment for an additional five years using letrozole. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. Results: A total of 1,918 women with early stage breast cancer were enrolled (median follow-up 75 months, 6.3 years). A total of 165 disease-free survival (DFS) events (67 on letrozole and 98 on placebo) occurred, of which 42 versus 53 were distant recurrences on letrozole and placebo, respectively. There were 200 deaths (100 in each treatment group). The 5 year DFS was respectively 95% for patients receiving letrozole versus 91% for those on placebo (HR 0.66; P = 0.01) from a two-sided log-rank test stratified by nodal status, prior adjuvant chemotherapy, interval between last dose of AI therapy and randomization, and duration of prior tamoxifen at randomization. The 5 year overall survival was respectively 93% for subjects on letrozole and 94% on placebo with a HR of 0.97 (P = 0.83). The annual incidence rate of contralateral breast cancer was 0.21% for subjects on letrozole versus 0.49% on placebo (P = 0.007). Conclusions: Compared to 5 years of AI treatment as initial therapy or preceded by 2-5 years of tamoxifen, extending AI treatment to 10 years significantly improves disease-free survival. Further analyses will provide a comprehensive picture of toxicities and QOL. Clinical trial information: NCT00754845.

ASCO believes that high-quality observational studies can advance evidence-based practice for cancer care and are complementary to randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Observational studies can generate hypotheses by evaluating novel exposures or biomarkers and by revealing patterns of care and relationships that might not otherwise be discovered. Researchers can then test these hypotheses in RCTs. Observational studies can also answer or inform questions that either have not been or cannot be answered by RCTs. In addition, observational studies can be used for postmarketing surveillance of new cancer treatments, particularly in vulnerable populations. The incorporation of observational research as part of clinical decision making is consistent with the position of many leading institutions. ASCO identified five overarching recommendations to enhance the role of observational research in clinical decision making: (1) improve the quality of electronic health data available for research, (2) improve interoperability and the exchange of electronic health information, (3) ensure the use of rigorous observational research methodologies, (4) promote transparent reporting of observational research studies, and (5) protect patient privacy.

CRA1002 Background: Weekly P is superior to q 3 week (wk) dosing, and adding B improves progression free survival (PFS) (E2100). Ix is a potent epothilone that can be effective after microtubule inhibitor resistance. NP is a novel albumin-bound formulation of P with promising activity in the first-line MBC setting. In this phase III trial, the efficacy of weekly Ix or NP is compared to P, in combination with B in patients (pts) with chemotherapy (CTX) naïve MBC. Toxicity including >Grade 2 sensory neuropathy (SN) is compared to P. Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to receive P (90 mg/m2), Ix (16 mg/m2) or NP (150 mg/m2) on a 3 wk on, 1 wk off schedule, stratified by prior adjuvant taxane use and hormone receptor status. B was initially given to all pts, but became optional in 3/2011 and was added to stratification. The primary end point of PFS is defined as time from randomization to progression or all-cause death. With a target N=900 pts, the study was powered to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.36 (median PFS 10 vs 13.6 mos). Eligibility included no prior CTX for MBC, >12 mos from adjuvant P and measurable disease. Results: 799 pts were enrolled between 11/08-11/11 (283 to P, 271 to NP, 245 to Ix); 98% received B. 72% had ER+ disease, 44% received adjuvant P. At the 1st interim analysis (165 events) the comparison of Ix to P crossed the futility boundary (FB) and accrual to Ix was closed. At the 2nd interim analysis (236 events), NP to P crossed the FB and the study was closed on 11/30/11. Median PFS was 10.4, 9.6 and 7.6 mos for P, NP and Ix, with HRs (95% CIs) of 0.94 (0.73-1.22) and 0.66 (0.51-0.84) for P to NP and Ix respectively. Grade 2+ SN was 48% for NP, 44% for Ix and 37% for P; Grade 3+ hematologic toxicity was 49% for NP, 20% for Ix, and 12% for P. Conclusions: In pts with CTX naive MBC, both NP and Ix are highly unlikely to be superior to P for PFS (when all are combined with B), and in combination with B, weekly P is the better tolerated drug. Toxicity including SN was greater in each experimental arm compared to P. Updated data will be presented, and correlative studies will be reported at a future date.

Purpose Despite increasing awareness of accrual challenges, it is unknown if accrual of older patients to breast cancer treatment trials is improving. Methods We examined accrual of older patients to Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology systemic therapy breast cancer trials during 1985-2012 and compared disease characteristics and reasons for therapy cessation for older (age ≥ 65 years and ≥ 70 years) versus younger (age < 65 years and < 70 years) participants. To examine accrual trends, we modeled age as a function of time, using logistic regression. Results Overall, 17% of study participants were ≥ 65 years of age. Approximately 15%, 24%, and 24% of participants in adjuvant, neoadjuvant, and metastatic trials were age ≥ 65 years, and 7%, 15%, and 13% were age ≥ 70 years, respectively. The odds of a patient age ≥ 65 years enrolling significantly increased over time for adjuvant trials (odds ratio [OR] per year, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.05) but decreased significantly for neoadjuvant and metastatic trials (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.67 and OR, 0.98, 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.00). Similar trends were seen for those age ≥ 70 years but these were statistically significant for adjuvant and neoadjuvant trials only (OR, 1.05, 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.07; and OR, 0.57, 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.62). In general, those age ≥ 65 years ( v those < 65 years) in adjuvant studies had a higher mean number of lymph nodes involved and more hormone receptor-negative tumors, although tumor sizes were similar. Early protocol treatment cessation was also more frequent in those age ≥ 65 years (50%) versus < 65 years (35.9%) across trials. Conclusion Older patients with breast cancer remain largely underrepresented in cooperative group therapeutic trials. We observed some improvement in accrual to adjuvant trials but worsening of accrual for neoadjuvant/metastatic trials. Novel strategies to increase accrual of older patients are critical to meaningfully change the evidence base for this growing patient population.

Abstract Background:Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) is used frequently to downstage locally advanced tumors and facilitate breast conservation. However, we have previously reported that achievement of radiographic complete response (rCR) or pathologic complete response (pCR) does not impact choice of surgery for many patients. This secondary analysis reports treatment outcomes across 9 NCI comprehensive cancer centers in women receiving both NCT and breast MR imaging to assess whether treatment outcomes among women receiving NCT differs according to choice of locoregional treatment. Methods:1077 women from 9 institutions were retrospectively identified as having undergone NCT with MR imaging obtained both before and after systemic treatment. Systemic treatment regimen was not prespecified, but receipt of at least 80% of all planned cycles was required prior to final MR imaging. We performed a univariate analysis as well as a multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression to identify covariates associated with overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and time to recurrence (TTR). rCR was defined as no residual enhancement on post-treatment breast MRI. Results:1077 patients diagnosed and treated with NCT for stage I-III invasive breast cancer from January 1, 2002 to June 16, 2014 were analyzed for all endpoints. Median follow-up was 4.2 years, (range 0.1 to 13 years). Median age of the cohort was 50 years, (range 19-87 years). 473 (43.9%) had ER(+) and/or PR(+)/HER2(-) disease, 348 (32.3%) had HER2(+) disease, and 256 (23.8%) had ER(-)/PR(-)/HER2(-) (triple negative) disease. Mastectomy or breast conserving therapy (BCT) was recorded as the definitive surgery in 675 (62.7%) and 402 (37.3%) of patients, respectively. Radiation receipt was confirmed in 84.1% of BCT and 68.3% of mastectomy patients. Overall there were 134 recurrences, 168 disease events and 89 deaths. Among patients with pCR, there were 7/161 (7.2%) recurrences in those undergoing mastectomy and 6/143 (5.1%) in those undergoing lumpectomy (p=0.81). Among patients who achieved an rCR, there were recurrences in 5% of those undergoing mastectomy and 2.9% in those undergoing lumpectomy (p=0.53). In multivariable analysis of the entire cohort, only clinical stage, ER status and pCR remained independently associated with DFS. Notably, subset analysis showed that lumpectomy was independently associated with improved TTR (HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.17-0.97) in the triple negative group only, but this did not translate into improved DFS with lumpectomy in this group. Radiographic CR as determined by breast MRI accurately predicted presence or absence of pCR in 74% of cases, but was not independently associated with DFS, OS or TTP. Conclusions:Among a contemporary cohort of women receiving neoadjuvant systemic therapy and breast MR imaging at 9 NCI designated cancer centers, type of surgery did not impact DFS, OS or TTP. The only exception was found in the triple negative group in which the lumpectomy group had a more favorable TTP compared to the mastectomy group. These findings provide additional evidence that in women who are appropriate candidates for lumpectomy after NCT, BCT does not compromise long-term cancer outcomes. Citation Format: De Los Santos J, Hyslop T, Alvarado M, Forero A, Golshan M, Hieken T, Horton J, Hudis C, McGuire K, Meric-Bernstam F, Nanda R, Zagar T, Hwang S. Treatment outcomes in patients with invasive breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant systemic therapy and breast MR imaging: Results of a secondary analysis of TBCRC 017. [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 S3-06.

Abstract Background: Older adults represent 50% or more of all newly diagnosed cancer patients annually; these patients have multiple morbidities, complicating treatment decision-making.. Discussions about the risks and benefits of cancer treatments might be improved by having data on estimated all-cause survival. ePrognosis (http://eprognosis.ucsf.edu/carey2.php) is an online tool validated in older adults without cancer. We compared survival estimates using ePrognosis to observed survival in a population of women with early stage breast cancer who volunteered for cooperative group studies. Methods: Participants in CALGB 49907 (n=194) and 369901 (n=809) who were age 70+ were included (total n=1003). Both studies had comparable eligibility: primary, newly diagnosed, invasive, non-metastatic breast cancer. In 49907, eligibly also included PS 0-2; in 369901 there were no PS restrictions, but women who failed a screening cognitive exam were excluded. The Carey 2-year Index from ePrognosis was used to estimate all-cause 2-year survival, based on age, sex, and daily function. Function (needing help from another person to bath and shop for groceries, difficulty walking several blocks and pushing or pulling a heavy object) was derived from the EORTC QLC-30. The Carey index from ePrognosis generates scores from 1-10, with higher scores indicating higher probability of death. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to obtain point estimates and confidence intervals for the observed 2-yr survival. A two sided z-test was used to test the hypothesis that the observed survival rate is equivalent to the predicted survival rate. Results: At two years from study entry, 921 women were alive; 56 had died, and 26 were lost to follow-up/withdrawn. The population was, on average, 76 years old (SD 4.8), primarily white (89.3%), and the majority had hormone receptor positive tumors (79.4%). In our population, the Carey 2-years index predicated survival was not significantly different than observed rates in the 0-2 points and underestimated the survival rates for patients who had 3-6 points and 7-10 points. ePrognosis Prediction49907 & 369901 PatientsPointsPredicted Probability of SurvivalNNumber of DeathsObserved Probability of Overall Survival at 2 years (%, 95% CI)p-value0-295%5332595% (93-97%)0.7433-688%4272394% (92-96%)&lt;0.0017-1064%43881% (65-90%)0.017 Conclusions: In this population of older women with breast cancer, using a few readily available data items, ePrognosis provided accurate survival estimates for women with a low probability of death (0-2 points) and underestimated all-cause survival in women with an increased probability of death (3-10 points). Further studies are needed to assess the validity of this tool in samples of cancer patients with higher risks of 2-year mortality. Extended follow-up to validate the tools in predicting 5- and 10-year all-cause and non-cancer mortality risk will further contribute to decision making in older patients. Citation Format: Kimmick G, Pitcher B, Mandelblatt J, Clapp J, Ballman K, Barginear M, Freedman R, Artz A, Klepin H, Lafky J, Hopkins J, Winer E, Hudis C, Muss H, Cohen H, Jatoi A, Hurria A. All-cause survival estimates compared to observed survival in older women with breast cancer in CALGB 49907 and 369901 (Alliance A151503). [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 P6-09-10.

Purpose There is growing interest to enhance symptom monitoring during routine cancer care using patient-reported outcomes, but evidence of impact on clinical outcomes is limited. Methods We randomly assigned patients receiving routine outpatient chemotherapy for advanced solid tumors at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center to report 12 common symptoms via tablet computers or to receive usual care consisting of symptom monitoring at the discretion of clinicians. Those with home computers received weekly e-mail prompts to report between visits. Treating physicians received symptom printouts at visits, and nurses received e-mail alerts when participants reported severe or worsening symptoms. The primary outcome was change in health-related quality of life (HRQL) at 6 months compared with baseline, measured by the EuroQol EQ-5D Index. Secondary endpoints included emergency room (ER) visits, hospitalizations, and survival. Results Among 766 patients allocated, HRQL improved among more participants in the intervention group than usual care (34% v 18%) and worsened among fewer (38% v 53%; P < .001). Overall, mean HRQL declined by less in the intervention group than usual care (1.4- v 7.1-point drop; P < .001). Patients receiving intervention were less frequently admitted to the ER (34% v 41%; P = .02) or hospitalized (45% v 49%; P = .08) and remained on chemotherapy longer (mean, 8.2 v 6.3 months; P = .002). Although 75% of the intervention group was alive at 1 year, 69% with usual care survived the year (P = .05), with differences also seen in quality-adjusted survival (mean of 8.7 v. 8.0 months; P = .004). Benefits were greater for participants lacking prior computer experience. Most patients receiving intervention (63%) reported severe symptoms during the study. Nurses frequently initiated clinical actions in response to e-mail alerts. Conclusion Clinical benefits were associated with symptom self-reporting during cancer care.

PurposeWe compared nab-paclitaxel or ixabepilone once per week to paclitaxel with bevacizumab as first-line therapy for patients with advanced breast cancer (BC) to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) for nab-paclitaxel or ixabepilone versus paclitaxel.Patients and MethodsEligible patients were age ≥ 18 years with chemotherapy-naive advanced BC. Patients were randomly assigned to bevacizumab with paclitaxel 90 mg/m2(arm A), nab-paclitaxel 150 mg/m2(arm B), or ixabepilone 16 mg/m2(arm C), once per week for 3 of 4 weeks. Planned enrollment was 900 patients, which would give 88% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.73.ResultsIn all, 799 patients were enrolled, and 783 received treatment (97% received bevacizumab). Arm C was closed for futility at the first interim analysis (n = 241), and arm A (n = 267) and arm B (n = 275) were closed for futility at the second interim analysis. Median PFS for paclitaxel was 11 months, ixabepilone was inferior to paclitaxel (PFS, 7.4 months; hazard ratio, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.31 to 1.93; P < .001), and nab-paclitaxel was not superior to paclitaxel (PFS, 9.3 months; hazard ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.45; P = .054). Results were concordant with overall survival; time to treatment failure was significantly shorter in both experimental arms v paclitaxel. Hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity, including peripheral neuropathy, was increased with nab-paclitaxel, with more frequent and earlier dose reductions.ConclusionIn patients with chemotherapy-naive advanced BC, ixabepilone once per week was inferior to paclitaxel, and nab-paclitaxel was not superior with a trend toward inferiority. Toxicity was increased in the experimental arms, particularly for nab-paclitaxel. Paclitaxel once per week remains the preferred palliative chemotherapy in this setting.

Abstract Intro: Male BC is a rare disease (&lt;1% male tumors); knowledge is limited and management extrapolated from female BC. An international consortium, coordinated by EORTC and TBCRC, was created to better characterize and manage this disease, with 3 parts: 1) retrospective joint analysis 2) prospective registry 3) clinical trial(s). We report 1st results of part 1. Methods: Joint analysis of male BC pts with available FU & FFPE samples, treated in 1990-2010, in 23 centers from 9 countries. Clinical data, long term outcomes, local pathology were centrally analyzed at EORTC. FFPE samples were analyzed at 3 central labs (UK, NL, US) for histology, grade, ER, PR, AR, HER-2, Ki67. Cut-off for positivity: Allred score ≥ 3 for ER/ AR/PR; 20% for Ki67; ASCO-CAP for HER2. Outcome data (OS & RFS) analyzed per Kaplan Meier, p-values correspond to logrank test, CI’s by Brookmeyer & Crowley. Reported % use number of non-missing values as denominator. Results: 1822 pts enrolled; 349 (19%) ineligible (no valid central lab assessment); of 1473 eligible pts (1384 from EU, 89 from US) 63% diagnosed in 2001-2010. Median age at diagnosis (Dx) was 68.5 ys. Of pts with known M status at Dx, 56 (5.1%) were M1; of 1046 M0 cases, 60% were N0 and 51% had T1 tumors at Dx; 4% of pts had BCS and 18% had SLNB; half received adjuvant RT. (Neo)adjuvant CT was used in 30% of M0 pts, most (44%) anthracycline-only; 77% of M0 pts received adjuvant ET, most tamoxifen (88.4%). Central pathology: 697 cases with central histology & grade (full series ongoing): 87% ductal, 53% grade 2. In 1473 pts, at least 1 biomarker centrally assessed; 92% ER highly+ (Allred 7-8), PR had wider variation (35% highly+); 87% AR highly+; 25% Ki67 high; 5% HER2pos. Using IHC surrogates: 58% Luminal A-like, 35% LuminalB-like/HER2neg, 6% LuminalB-like/HER2pos; 0.1% HER2pos/non-Luminal; 1% TNBC (16% not classified). Outcome: For 1046 M0 pts, median FU was 5.7 yrs (0-19.2); 63% alive at analysis; in 88% cause of death was reported, mainly 33% non-cancer and 28% progression(PD)/toxicity. Significant OS improvement over time is seen. 75% (42/56) M1 pts died, mainly due PD. In M0 pts, median OS (yrs) was significantly correlated with ER+ p=0.001 [Allred 0-2: 3.9 (0.1, 6.0); 3-6: 7.1 (4.7, 11.7); 7-8: 8.8 (8.3, 10.0)] & with PR+ p=0.022 [Allred 0-2: 7.3 (6.1, 10.3), 3-6: 8.0 (7.0, 9.3), 7-8: 9.5 (8.4, 12.8)]; less correlation for AR; no major differences for HER2 or Ki67. Median OS & grade (394 cases; full series ongoing): Grade1: 12.8 yrs (6.1-15.6); Grade2: 7.9 (6.5-10.7); Grade3: 9.3 (4.9-21.1). Median OS for IHC surrogates: 8.7 (7.8-9.7) for Luminal A; 8.3 (6.9-9.4) for Luminal B/HER-2neg; 9.3 years (5.9-21.1) for Luminal B/HER-2+. Similar results were seen for RFS. ER/PR/AR using histoscores will be presented. Conclusions: a) 56% pts had T1 tumors at Dx but only 4% had BCS; b) ER was highly + in &gt;90% but adjuvant ET given in only 77% pts; c) Male BC is usually ER+, PR+ & AR+ and of Luminal A-like subtype (5% HER2pos & 1% TNBC); d) Significant improvement in OS over time; e) ER and PR (Allred) are prognostic (high expression/better prognosis), less for AR, not for Ki67 nor IHC surrogates; f) In-depth characterization of samples is ongoing. Funding: BCRF, EBCC Council, Pink Ribbon NL, BRO. Citation Format: Fatima Cardoso, John Bartlett, Leen Slaets, Carolien van Deurzen, Elise van Leewen-Stok, Peggy Porter, Barbro Linderholm, Ingrid Hedenfalk, Carolien Schroder, John Martens, Jane Bayani, Christi van Asperen, Melissa Murray, Clifford Hudis, Lavinia Middleton, Joanna Vermeij, Stephanie Peeters, Judith Fraser, Monica Nowaczyk, Isabel Rubio, Stefan Aebi, Catherine Kelly, Kathryn Ruddy, Eric Winer, Cecilia Nilsson, Lissandra Dal Lago, Larissa Korde, Kim Benstead, Danielle Van Den Weyngaert, Oliver Bogler, Theodora Goulioti, Nicolas Dif, Carlo Messina, Konstantinos Tryfonidis, Jan Bogaerts, Sharon Giordano. Characterization of male breast cancer: First results of the EORTC10085/TBCRC/BIG/NABCG International Male BC Program [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr S6-05.