Poznak, CH Van

Abstract Background: 1/3 of women with metastatic HER2+ breast cancer will develop central nervous system (CNS) metastases yet evidence-based treatments for women with progressive CNS disease are limited. Neratinib is an irreversible inhibitor of erbB1, HER2, and erbB4 which has promising activity in HER2+ breast cancer. Preclinical evidence suggests it may cross the blood brain barrier. Trial Design: This is a multicenter, phase II, open-label study of neratinib for patients with HER2+ breast cancer and brain metastases. Neratinib is administered at 240 mg orally daily during a 28 day cycle. Two cohorts will be enrolled: Cohort 1 will enroll 40 patients with progressive CNS disease; cohort 2 will enroll ≤5 patients who are candidates for surgical excision of intracranial disease. Surgical candidates receive neratinib 7–21 days preoperatively and resume postoperatively. All patients are re-staged every 2 cycles. Those who develop non-CNS progression have an option to extend therapy with trastuzumab+neratinib. Circulating tumor cells (CTC) are collected at baseline and progression; neurocognitive testing, HADS and EORTC QLQ30/BN20 measures are administered at baseline, cycle 2, cycle 3, and progression (cohort 1). Intracranial tumor, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and plasma are collected at surgery (cohort 2). Specific Aims: The primary endpoint is CNS objective response rate (ORR) by composite criteria. Additional endpoints include: non-CNS ORR, progression-free survival, overall survival (OS), site of 1st progression, and toxicity. Correlative and exploratory endpoints include association of CTC count and OS and longitudinal neurocognitive function and quality of life. In an exploratory analysis (cohort 2), we will quantify neratinib concentrations in CSF, intracranial tissue, and plasma and examine associations with response. Eligibility: Patients must have confirmed HER2+ metastatic disease with ≥1 parenchymal brain lesion measuring ≥10 mm that is new or progressed after completing ≥1 line of standard CNS-directed treatment (cohort 1) or CNS disease that is amenable for surgery, including those without prior CNS treatments (cohort 2). Additional eligibility criteria (cohorts 1,2) include: adequate performance status and end organ/marrow function, and ejection fraction ≥50%. Any number of prior lines of therapy is allowed, including prior lapatinib. Statistical Methods: Cohort 1 has a 2-stage design with up to 40 patients. CNS ORR is defined as ≥50% reduction in sum volume of CNS target lesions, without evidence of new lesions, progression of non-target CNS lesions, non-CNS disease progression, worsening neurological symptoms, or increase in corticosteroids. CNS lesion measurements are performed centrally by the Harvard Tumor Imaging Metrics Core. If 1/18 patients have a CNS response in the 1st stage, another 22 patients will enroll. With this design, if ≥5 of 40 patients achieve a CNS response, the drug will be deemed worthy of future study. This 2-stage design has 92% power to distinguish between a true CNS ORR of 20% and a null of 6% (one-sided type I error rate=9%). Accrual: Accrual has begun. Target=45 (cohort 1=40, cohort 2=5) Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr OT1-1-11.

Abstract Background: Retrospective studies suggest that primary breast surgery is associated with improved overall survival (OS) in Stage IV breast cancer. TBCRC 013 is a multi-center prospective registry study evaluating the role of surgery for the primary tumor in Stage IV disease. Methods: From 7/09 - 4/12, 128 eligible pts from 14 sites were enrolled in two cohorts (A: Stage IV with intact primary tumor (n = 112); B: metastases (mets) within 3 months of primary surgery (n = 16)). Baseline patient and tumor characteristics, and surgery of the primary were correlated with 2yr overall survival (OS) using log rank, Kaplan Meier and Cox regression for all patients. Comparisons were also made between cohorts A and B and within cohort A stratified by response to systemic therapy. Responders included those with any response (partial,complete) or stable disease at distant sites. Results: Median pt age was 52yrs(21-79) and median primary tumor size 3.2cm(0.7-15). Phenotypes were ER+ 106 (83%), HER2neg 91(71%), and triple neg 10(8%). 60(47%) had bone-only mets. The only significant baseline difference between cohorts A and B was the presence of palpable nodes (A:62% vs B:0%, p<0.001). There were no differences in age, tumor size, ECOG scores, ER or HER2 status, number or sites of mets between cohorts A and B. At a median follow-up of 25 mo (95%CI, 23-31), 2yr OS for all pts is 86% (80-92) and is superior in cohort B as compared to A, (100% vs 84%, p = 0.03). On multivariate analysis (MVA) including all pts, only surgery, ER and HER2 positivity were associated with improved OS (table). Among 112 pts with an intact primary (Arm A), 17(15%) were non-responsive (NR) to systemic therapy, 3(18%) of whom required palliative surgery at a median time of 10.4mos. 2yr OS among NR was 33% (15-69) as compared to 94% (88-99) in Arm A responders (R) (p<0.001). ER positivity was the only baseline difference between NR (65%) and R (88%) within Arm A (p = 0.02). Among 94(85%) Arm A responders, 39(41%) had elective surgery (median 8.4 mos, 95%CI:6.9-10.3) and only 1 of the remaining 47(2%) required palliation. When limited to Arm A responders, elective surgery was not associated with improved 2yr OS (surgery vs not: 94% vs 92%, p = 0.5). Median time to progression following elective surgery was 12 mos (95%CI,8-19mos). When cohort B (n = 16) and cohort A surgery groups (n = 39) are combined, surgery of the primary tumor is associated with improved 2yr OS (96% vs 74%, p = 0.002). Conclusions: In this prospective registry study, patients diagnosed with mets within 3 months of primary breast surgery have an improved 2yr OS. When all pts having surgery (A + B) are examined, surgery is associated with improved OS on MVA, but when limited to Arm A responders, elective surgery does not improve OS. Given that the number of Arm A responders is small, results from the prospective randomized trial will be needed to address this question. These data also demonstrate that the need for surgical palliation of the primary tumor is uncommon in the modern era. Multivariate Analysis for OSN = 128HR Death (95%CI)pvalueSurgery0.28 (0.10-0.74)0.01ER positivity0.28 (0.10-0.72)0.01HER2 positivity0.21 (0.06-0.74)0.01MVA included: age, tumor size, ECOG, ER, PR, HER2, met sites, and surgery Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr P2-18-09.

Abstract Background: Circulating Tumor cells (CTCs) are prognostic at baseline and first follow-up in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Using the most commonly used assay (CellSearch®), we have previously reported the ability to detect apoptotic vs. non-apoptotic CTCs in patients with MBC. However, there has been concern regarding the performance of the CellSearch® assay in patients with triple negative (TN) MBC. We hypothesized that CellSearch® is an effective assay in patients with TN MBC, and that CTC-apoptosis might further separate prognosis. Therefore, we studied CTCs in patients with TN MBC who participated in a prospective randomized phase II trial testing for activity of tigatuzumab (TIG) in combination with nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-PAC) conducted by the Translational Breast Cancer Research Consortium (overall results reported by Forero A., et al, ASCO 2013). Methods: Whole blood (WB) was drawn into a CellSave tube at baseline, day 15, and day 29 and CTC counts were determined using the CXC CellSearch® kit. Apoptosis was characterized by staining with a monoclonal antibody that detects a neo-epitope on fragmented cytokeratin (M-30) and independently by visual inspection (nucleic condensation and/or fragmentation, as well as granular cytokeratin). Association between levels of CTCs and CTC-apoptosis with the overall response rate (ORR) and progression free survival (PFS) at baseline, day 15, and day 29 was assessed using logistic regression, Kaplan Meier curves, and Cox proportional hazards modeling. Results: Of the 60 patients entered into the trial, 52 were evaluable for CTCs. Of these, 19/52 (36.5%), 14/52 (26.9%), and 13/49 (26.5%) had elevated CTCs (≥5CTC/7.5 ml WB) at baseline, day 15, and day 29, respectively. Patients with elevated CTCs at each time point had worse PFS than patients with low or no CTCs. Hazard rates (HR) at baseline, day 15, and day 29 were 2.38 (95% CI: 1.27-4.45, p = 0.007), 2.87 (95% CI: 1.46-5.66, p = 0.002), and 3.40 (95% CI: 1.68-6.89, p = 0.001), respectively. The odds of overall response for those who had elevated CTCs compared to those who did not at baseline, day 15, and day 29, were 0.25 (95% CI: 0.073-0.81, p = 0.024), 0.18 (95% CI: 0.04-0.67, p = 0.014), and 0.06 (95% CI: 0.01-0.28, p = 0.001), respectively. There was no apparent prognostic effect comparing the degree of CTC-apoptosis vs. non-apoptosis. Conclusions: Similar to observations in other intrinsic subgroups, CTCs were detected in a large fraction of TN MBC patients at baseline using CellSearch® assay, and reductions in CTC levels reflected response. In these homogenously prospectively enrolled TN MBC patients, regardless of treatment, CTCs are prognostic at baseline, day 15, and day 29. It does not appear that analysis of CTC-apoptosis is prognostic. Supported by Susan G. Komen for the Cure, Veridex, LLC, Fashion Footwear Charitable Foundation of New York/QVC Presents Shoes on Sale™ (DFH), Associazione Sandro Pitigliani and by a studentship from FIRC (CP), Triple Negative Breast Cancer Foundation, The AVON Foundation, and The Breast Cancer Research Foundation. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr P1-04-01.