Perez, Edith A.

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.

TPS1140^ Background: NKTR-102 is a topoisomerase I inhibitor-polymer conjugate that hydrolyzes to provide continuous exposure to SN-38. A phase 2 trial of single-agent NKTR-102 was conducted in pts with 3rd-line MBC; 2 schedules (q14d; q21d) investigated a dose of 145 mg/m2. ORR was 29% (including 3% CR) with the prior ATC subset demonstrating an ORR of 31%. Dosing q21d was better tolerated; in this arm, median PFS and OS equaled 5.3m and 13.1m, respectively. Trial Design: Pts will be randomized 1:1 to receive single-agent NKTR-102 or TPC in an open-label, randomized, multicenter phase 3 study in pts with advanced breast cancer. Key Entry Criteria: Adult females, with ECOG 0 or 1 with adequate liver, kidney and marrow function. All pts must have received prior therapy with ATC (these drugs can be administered in the neo/adjuvant or locally advanced/metastatic setting). Prior A is not mandated if contraindicated. Prior toxicities must have resolved to ≤ Grade 1 (except sensory neuropathy ≤ Grade 2; complete resolution of prior diarrhea). Pts with brain metastases may be eligible, if lesions are stable for prior 3 weeks without steroids. Methods: Primary efficacy endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include: ORR by RECIST v1.1, clinical benefit rate (ORR+SD > 6 months), PFS and QoL. NKTR-102 is given IV at 145 mg/m2 over 90-min every 21 days without premedications. Pts randomized to TPC receive 1 of the following: eribulin, ixabepilone, vinorelbine, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, docetaxel or nab-paclitaxel (the agent must be available at the treating institution). Pts are stratified by region, prior eribulin and receptor status (TNBC, Her2+ or Other). Target Accrual: ~840 pts will be required for sufficient events to occur in the planned follow-up time; OS will be compared using a two-sided log-rank test; 1 interim analysis will occur when 50% of the deaths are reported. PK sampling is performed in a subset of pts. CTCs (isolated by Apocell ApoStream technology) are serially assessed for potential predictive markers of response and toxicity. Enrollment is expected to remain open until late 2013.

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.

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]

e22093 Background: Biomarkers are an integral part of cancer care. A variety of testing methods exist, allowing institutional selection of which technologies to use and in what order to run them. This descriptive study provides a benchmark on methods used in practice for biomarker testing in breast (BC), gastric/esophageal (GC), and non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). Methods: We conducted an IRB-approved web survey of the 58 NCI designated cancer centers (pathologists and oncologists) providing adult care in BC, GC, and NSCLC. We developed a survey instrument with 14 BC, 5 GC, and 10 NSCLC items asking about methods used, order of testing, turn around time (TAT) and if tests are internally developed (ID). Results: For BC, 32% (18/57) of sites run concurrent rather than reflex HER2 FISH and IHC testing, citing quality assurance reasons. Average TAT for concurrent vs reflex testing is 6.5 and 9.5 days. Rates of ID tests are 14% (8/57) for PgR, 12% (7/57) for ER and 7% (4/57) for HER2. For GC, 39% (21/54) of sites run concurrent HER2 FISH and IHC tests, citing reasons of quality assurance and evolving guidelines. TAT for concurrent vs reflex testing is 6.3 and 9.5 days. 19% (10/54) of sites use ID HER2 tests. All reporting sites use EGFR and ALK testing in NSCLC and 96% use KRAS. 24% (13/55) of sites run them concurrently with an average TAT of 7.6 days, while the average TAT for sites with sequential testing is 22.8 days. CAP recommends a 10 day TAT for NSCLC tests, and 92% (12/13) of sites with concurrent testing meet this guideline vs only 11% (4/38) of sites with sequential testing (p<.0001). Rates of ID tests are 57% (30/53) for KRAS, 47% (26/55) for EGFR and 35% (19/55) for ALK, for which a kit is listed on the FDA drug label. There is a difference in the use of ID tests between BC and NSCLC, p<.0148. Conclusions: Concurrent testing for BC and GC HER2, and for NSCLC markers is a common practice at NCI cancer centers; and it improves TAT. Concurrent NSCLC testing allows meeting CAP TAT guideline, but sequential testing does not. New markers (GC HER2, EGFR, KRAS and ALK) are commonly adopted, with a higher rate of internally developed tests than for BC HER2. [Table: see text]

1059 Background: Relapsed TNBC is characterized by its poor prognosis. B is a synthetic DNA minor groove binding non-cross resistant agent that is fully active against DNA-mismatch repair deficient tumor cells. C increases GSH/GST in which enhances the efficacy of B. Methods: Phase II study in pts with mTNBC. C Day 1 followed by B Day 2, repeated every 21 days. Aim: Efficacy of C + B in mTNBC. Primary endpoint: PFS at 3 mo. Secondary endpoints include ORR, duration of response (DOR), 6-mo PFS, OS and AE profile. Tertiary endpoints include assessment of baseline GSH levels, prevalence of BCRA1 mutation and pERK, and correlations with outcome. Results: Closed 3/2012. 48 pts accrued (1 ineligible pt). Median f/u 11.4 mo (6.6-14.8); 2 pts still on treatment. 47 pts evaluable for the PFS endpoint and AEs. 49% received therapy as 3rd-5th line. Median number of cycles = 4 (range 1-15). There are currently 9 confirmed responses (8 PR and 1 CR); DOR = 2.6-14.5 mo. The 3-mo PFS = 51%; 6-mo PFS = 28%; the median TTP is 3.2 mo. AE data: 75% G3/4 hematologic AE: febrile neutropenia 19%. Non-hematologic AEs included G3 (47%) and G4 (15%): G3 fatigue 17%; and no G5 non-heme AE. No correlation of GSH/GST levels with outcome was found. Among 35 pts with evaluable data, no association between BRCA1 expression and outcomes was found. pERK expression was negatively associated with 3-mo PFS, but not 6-mo PFS. Cytoplasmic pERK expression was negatively associated with tumor response (p=0.03). No significant effect of BRCA-1 or pERK expression was found on OS. Conclusions: This trial showed B + C is an active regimen, especially in heavily pretreated mTNBC pts. Correlative data demonstrated a negative association between pERK expression and outcomes. A randomized phase II trial is in development. Clinical trial information: NCT01091454.

1050^ Background: In a phase III trial comparing eribulin (E) vs. capecitabine (C) in pts with locally advanced or MBC, a trend for improved OS was observed but a statistically significant superiority was not demonstrated with E vs. C for OS or PFS. The AE profiles were consistent with known side effects. We now report QoL results from this trial. Methods: Pts received eribulin mesylate 1.4 mg/m2 on Days 1 and 8, or C 1.25 g/m2 BID orally on Days 1-14, of a 21-day cycle. Eligible pts had received prior therapy including an anthracycline and taxane, and were receiving study drug as 1st-, 2nd-, or 3rd-line therapy for advanced disease. QoL, a secondary objective, was assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 questionnaires at baseline, 6 weeks, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after starting treatment (or until progressive disease or treatment change), and at unscheduled visits. Longitudinal analyses were carried out using weighted generalized estimating equations adjusted for non-random attrition due to death within 12 months. Model covariates were time (visit), region, and baseline QoL. The primary endpoint was change from baseline for Global Health Status (GHS)/overall QoL; exploratory endpoints were change from baseline for each functional domain, and signs/symptoms. Results: 1,102 pts were randomized (E 554; C 548). GHS/QoL scores were low at baseline for E (56.3) and C (54.7) on a scale of 0 (worse) to 100 (best). GHS/QoL and cognitive functioning improved significantly more in pts receiving E vs. C, (6.5 [p=0.048] and 15.3 [p<0.001], respectively). Emotional functioning improved significantly for pts receiving C vs. E (3.3; p=0.033). Pain was comparable at baseline, and was lower at subsequent visits with both treatments. Patient-reported signs/symptoms in favor of E included nausea and vomiting (E1.9; p=0.043) and diarrhea (-3.7; p=0.001); systemic side effects (5.2; p<0.001) and upset by hair loss (9.3; p=0.023) favored C. Conclusions: GHS/QoL scores improved more in pts receiving E than C. E showed advantages in terms of gastrointestinal effects while C had advantages in relation to hair loss. Clinical trial information: NCT00337103.

1049^ Background: This phase III study, comparing eribulin versus capecitabine, showed a non-significant trend for superior overall survival (OS; hazard ratio [HR] 0.88 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77, 1.00]; p = 0.056) but not progression-free survival (PFS; HR 1.08 [95% CI 0.93, 1.25]; p = 0.31). Pre-specified exploratory subgroup analyses previously presented showed that patients with triple-negative, ER-negative or HER2-negative disease may have a greater benefit in OS with eribulin compared with capecitabine. Here we present further pre-specified exploratory analyses of OS and PFS. Methods: Patients (eribulin n=554; capecitabine n=548) with locally advanced or MBC had received ≤3 prior chemotherapy regimens (≤2 for advanced disease), including an anthracycline and a taxane. Patients were randomized (stratified for geographic region and HER2 status) 1:1 to 21-day cycles of eribulin mesylate 1.4 mg/m2 i.v. on days 1 and 8 or capecitabine 1.25 g/m2BID orally on days 1-14. Further pre-specified exploratory subgroups included: age; receptor status; number and setting of prior chemotherapy regimen(s); sites of disease; number of organs involved; and time to progression after last chemotherapy. Results: From analyses for OS, patients with only non-visceral disease (HR 0.51; 95% CI 0.33, 0.80), with >2 organs involved (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.62, 0.90), who had progressed >6 months after last chemotherapy (HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.52, 0.95), or who had received an anthracycline and/or a taxane in the metastatic setting (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.72, 0.98), appeared to benefit more from treatment with eribulin compared with capecitabine. For OS, in no subgroup was a trend favoring capecitabine seen. Data for other pre-specified subgroups for both OS and PFS will be presented. Conclusions: In addition to patients with triple-, ER-, or HER2-negative disease, further pre-specified exploratory analyses suggest that other patient subgroups may particularly benefit from treatment with eribulin; further studies are warranted to address these hypotheses. Clinical trial information: NCT00337103.

521 Background: The addition of trastuzumab to chemotherapy improves responses to therapy and extends survival among patients with metastatic HER2 breast cancer. Several mechanisms have been proposed for the activity of this combination therapy. Trastuzumab, specifically, is thought to activate NK cells and blunt HER2 signaling. Prior work from us has shown that combination trastuzumab and chemotherapy induces HER2-specific antibodies which correlate with response to therapy. Despite that, it remains unclear whether the immunity that was induced was due to complexing of non-tumor derived HER2 or antigen derived from the tumor site. In the present work, we addressed this question by assessing if combination therapy induced epitope spreading to tumor antigens other than HER2. Methods: Pre-and post-treatment sera were obtained from 56 women enrolled in 2 NCCTG clinical trials, N0337 and 98-32-52. IgG antibodies to HER2 intracellular domain (HER2), p53, IGFBP2, CEA and tetanus toxoid (TT) were examined using ELISAs. Sera from an age-matched group (N=56) of controls and 12 patients treated in the adjuvant setting were also examined. Results: Prior to therapy, metastatic patients had higher IgG levels (≥ 2-fold) to p53 and HER2 but not CEA, IGFBP2 and TT, relative to the controls. Similarly, adjuvant patients had elevated IgGs to multiple tumor antigens prior to therapy, relative to controls. Following therapy, levels of IgG to IGFBP2, HER2, and p53 increased in 81% of metastatic patients, with mean increases of 3.2 (±0.6 sem), 6.2 (±2.7) and 2.7 (±0.7) fold, respectively (p<0.05). Levels of antibodies to TT and CEA were not elevated by treatment. In contrast, IgGs were not increased in adjuvant patients; consistent with the idea that immunity depends on the presence of threshold levels of antigens. Conclusions: These results show that combination treatment induces adaptive immunity to antigens released by tumor and that metastatic patients remain capable of responding immunologically to their cancer. Thus, in metastatic breast cancer patients, combination trastuzumab and chemotherapy may behave as a vaccine.

2015 Background: A prior study of intra-CSF topotecan (TOPO) for unselected pts w/ NM reported PFS 6 mo of 19%, and OS of 15 wks (Groves, NeuroOncol 2008;10:208). We postulated that greater activity might occur in pts w/ malignancies considered sensitive to topoisomerase inhibitors. Methods: We reviewed outcome of women with NM and adenocarcinoma of the breast, ovary or lung receiving IVe TOPO (0.4 mg 2x/wk x 4wk, Q wk x 4, Q 2wk x 2, Q mo x 3, Q 2mo x 3, and Q 3mo x 4) until progression (PROG) or adverse events (AE). All had baseline CSF cytology, and MRI of brain and spine. CSF cytology was obtained at each treatment (Rx), and brain/spine MRI Q 3mo. Neuro-specific PROG was defined as recurrent + CSF cytology; PROG of NM on MRI; all-cause neurologic worsening; pt refusal; or death. PFS/OS were measured from 1st TOPO Rx. All pts signed consent; the study was IRB approved. Results: 17 women (breast -12; lung-3; ovary - 2) were treated via Ommaya reservoirs; 7 (41%) had VP shunts w/ valves, adjusted for Rx. Median (med) age was 53 (41-79), and KPS 70 (50-90). At presentation, 11(65%) had + CSF cytology and 14 (82%) had NM on MRI [brain-11 (65%); spine-10 (59%)]. 15 (88%) had no prior intrathecal Rx. 13 pts (76%) received focal RT for CNS disease, and 8 (47%), chemotherapy for extracranial disease. Med.number of Rx were 13/pt (range, 3-50); med. duration of TOPO Rx was 14 wks (range, 1-109). Med. neuro-specific PFS was 13 wks; PFS6 was 41%, and PFS12, 29 %. Med. OS was 33 wks (range, 5-180), w/ 4 alive at 13+, 30+, 33+, and 180+ wks. 4 pts (24%) lived > 95 wks. Of 11 w/ baseline + CSF cytology, 7 (64%) cleared CSF of malignant cells (med. duration clear = 47 wk (range, 9-104). AE included arachnoiditis (18%), leukoencephalopathy (18%), and Ommaya infections (12%). Rx was stopped for neuro PROG (29%); systemic PROG (23%); refusal (18%); AE (12%); or persistent negative CSF (6%); 12% are still on Rx. Conclusions: Promising activity of IVe TOPO was observed in women with NM from breast, lung and ovarian cancer. PFS 6 and 12, OS and cytologic response were twice that noted in prior studies of NM pts w/ unselected malignancies. This data supports our plan for a phase II study targeting this select cohort.