Viscusi, Rebecca K.

Abstract Background: Pathological complete response (pCR) is accepted by FDA as a surrogate endpoint for accelerated approval of targeted agents in combination with chemotherapy based on better long-term outcomes compared to residual disease (Cortazar 2014). Methods: The multi-center, adaptively-randomized I-SPY2 platform trial uses pCR as the primary endpoint to identify investigational agents that will improve outcomes in women with stage 2/3 breast cancer with high risk of early recurrence, across all signatures, based on hormone receptor (HR), HER2, and 70-gene (MammaPrint) status. For patients with HR+ HER2- tumors, only 70-gene (Mammaprint) high-risk patients are enrolled. To date, 1200+ patients have been randomized to one of 14 arms: control (paclitaxel followed by AC); veliparib/carboplatin; neratinib; MK2206; trebananib; trastuzumab/pertuzumab; ado-trastuzumab emtansine/pertuzumab; pembrolizumabx4; ganitumab/metformin; ganetespib; PLX-3397. 7 agents graduated in at least one signature (> 85% probability of success in a 300-patient phase III confirmatory trial); 2 did not graduate; 1 stopped for toxicity, and 3 are enrolling (patritumab/trastuzumab, talazoparib/irinotecan, pembrolizumabx8). Local pathologists were centrally trained using the Residual Cancer Burden (RCB) assessment to ensure uniform evaluation and response classification; RCB 0 = pCR. Results: We evaluated the relationship between pCR and event free (EFS) and distant disease free survival (DDFS) in the first 522 pts (median follow-up:2.5 years). 180 pts achieved pCR (36%) while 338 did not (RCB=1-3). There were 82 EFS and 65 DRFS events. Over the entire group (including all arms), pCR was highly associated with 3-year EFS (p<0.001 for both). Pts achieving pCR had a 3% recurrence risk (RR) at 3 years; those with non-pCR had 24% RR over this time period. For distant recurrence, the 3-year RR with pCR was 2%, compared to 20% in pts with non-pCR. As expected, pCR rates varied by breast cancer subtype (HR+/HER2: 18% (35/196), HR+/HER2+: 40% (33/82), HR-/HER2+:68% (34/50), HR-/HER2-:41% (76/188)). The relationship between pCR and EFS was significant and clinically impactful within each subtype. 3-year survival (pCR group)Hazard Ratio OverallOverallHR+/HER2-HER2+TNBCEFS97%0.08 (0.03-0.23)0.14 (0.02-1.04)0 (NA)0.11 (0.03-0.37)DDFS98%0.08 (0.03-0.26)0.17 (0.01-1.23)0 (NA)0.09 (0.02-0.40) Conclusions: The first long-term efficacy results from the I-SPY2 TRIAL demonstrate that achieving pCR is a very strong surrogate endpoint for improved EFS and DDFS in a high-risk population, across all treatment arms, regardless of subtype. I-SPY2 shows substantially lower estimated EFS hazards for patients achieving pCR, compared to the 5 yr EFS hazard ratio for pCR vs not in Cortazar (hazard ratio 0.49), demonstrating important differences between a metaanalysis compared to a platform trial with uniform high-risk eligibility, standardized pathology assessment, and multiple targeted therapies. Our data support the use of pCR as a primary endpoint for accelerated approval of new drugs if EFS is evaluated in the same population. Based on these findings, the I-SPY2 TRIAL will test whether therapy can be deescalated or escalated for individual patients with the goal of achieving pCR for all. Citation Format: Yee D, DeMichele A, Isaacs C, Symmans F, Yau C, Albain KS, Hylton NM, Forero-Torres A, van't Veer LJ, Perlmutter J, Rugo HS, Melisko M, Chen Y-Y, Balassanian R, Krings G, Datnow B, Hasteh F, Tipps A, Weidner N, Zhang H, Tickman R, Thornton S, Ritter J, Amin K, Klein M, Chen B, Keeney G, Ocal T, Feldman M, Klipfel N, Sattar H, Mueller J, Gwin K, Baker G, Kallakury B, Zeck J, Duan X, Ersahin C, Gamez R, Troxell M, Mansoor A, Grasso LeBeau L, Sams S, Wisell J, Wei S, Harada S, Vinh T, Stamatakos MD, Tawfik O, Fan F, Adams A, Rendi M, Minton S, Magliocco A, Sahoo S, Fang Y, Hirst G, Singhrao R, Asare SM, Wallace AM, Chien AJ, Ellis ED, Han HS, Clark AS, Boughey JC, Elias AD, Nanda R, Korde L, Murthy R, Lang J, Northfelt D, Khan Q, Edmiston KK, Viscusi R, Haley B, Kemmer K, Zelnak A, Berry DA, Esserman LJ. Pathological complete response predicts event-free and distant disease-free survival in the I-SPY2 TRIAL [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS3-08.

Abstract Background: Further stratification of the 70-gene MammaPrintTM signature into ‘high’ and ‘ultra-high’ risk groups may help predict chemo-sensitivity. In I-SPY 2, patients were classified as MammaPrint High1 (MP1) or MammaPrint (ultra) High2 (MP2), with MP2 defined as MP_score <-0.154. MP1/MP2 classification was added to HR and HER2 to define the cancer subtypes used in the I-SPY 2 adaptive randomization engine. Neratinib (N), one of the experimental agents evaluated in I-SPY 2, graduated in the HR-HER2+ signature. All patients received at least standard chemotherapy (paclitaxel followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide; T->AC). HER2- patients were randomized to receive N+T- >AC vs. T->AC. For HER2+ patients, neratinib was administered in place of trastuzumab (N+T->AC vs. H+T->AC). Here, we assess the performance of MP1/MP2 class as a specific biomarker of neratinib response. Methods: 115 patients in the neratinib arm and 76 concurrently randomized controls had Agilent 44K microarrays and pCR data available for analysis. We assess association between MP1/MP2 and response in the neratinib and control arms alone using Fisher’s exact test, and relative performance between arms (biomarker x treatment interaction, likelihood ratio p < 0.05) using a logistic model. This analysis is also performed adjusting for HR status as a covariate, and in receptor subsets. Our study is exploratory with no claims for generalizability of the data. Statistical calculations are descriptive (e.g. p-values are measures of distance with no inferential content). Our analyses do not adjust for multiplicities of other biomarkers in the trial but outside this study. Results: There are 133 MP1 patients (neratinib: 74, Control: 59) and 58 MP2 patients (neratinib: 41, Control: 17), 84% (49) of which are Her2-. The distribution of pCR rates among MP1/MP2 dichotomized groups are summarized in Table 1. Neratinib (n=115)Control (n=76)MP1 (n=74)MP2 (n=41)MP1 (n=59)MP2 (n=17)HER2- (n=105)0 / 1715 / 337 / 395 / 16HER2+ (n=86)22 / 574 / 85 / 200 / 1 MP2, one of the 10 eligible signatures, did not meet the graduation threshold; and MP1/MP2 did not show a significant biomarker x treatment interaction (OR in neratinib relative to control arm = 1.25). The MP1/MP2 x treatment interaction remains non-significant after adjustment for HR and HER2 status (p=0.54). In HER2- patients receiving neratinib, 45% (15/33) of MP2 patients achieved a pCR, compared to 0% (0/17) of MP1 patients. In the HER2- controls, there is a 31% pCR rate in MP2 (5/16) vs. 18% in MP1 (7/39) patients (OR=2.14). This difference in performance between treatment arms appears significant (p=0.041). 90% of HER2+ patients are MP1, thus MP1/MP2 status x treatment interaction within the HER2+ subtype cannot be evaluated. Conclusion: Within the I-SPY 2 population as a whole, MP1/MP2 stratification does not appear to be a specific biomarker of response to neratinib relative to the control arm. The number of HER2- patients is small and precludes any definitive conclusion, but these data motivate further investigation of the biological mechanisms distinguishing MP1 from MP2 to better understand chemotherapy and/or neratanib responsiveness. Citation Format: Christina Yau, Denise M Wolf, Ashish Sanil, Jo Chien, Anne Wallace, Judy Boughey, Doug Yee, Debu Tripathy, Angela DeMichele, Rita Nanda, Steven Chiu, Claudine Isaacs, Kathy Albain, Hank Kaplan, Stacey Moulder, Rebecca Viscusi, Donald Northfelt, Kirsten Edmiston, Anthony Elias, Toncred Styblo, Barbara Haley, Lamorna Brown-Swigart, Susan Flynn, Gillian L Hirst, Meredith Buxton, Nola Hylton, Melissa Paoloni, W Fraser Symmans, Laura Esserman, Don Berry, Minetta C Liu, John W Park, Laura van 't Veer. MammaPrint High1/High2 risk class as a biomarker of response to neratinib plus standard neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer in the I-SPY 2 TRIAL [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 P3-06-29.

AbstractThe many improvements in breast cancer therapy in recent years have so lowered rates of recurrence that it is now difficult or impossible to conduct adequately powered adjuvant clinical trials. Given the many new drugs and potential synergistic combinations, the neoadjuvant approach has been used to test benefit of drug combinations in clinical trials of primary breast cancer. A recent FDA-led meta-analysis showed that pathologic complete response (pCR) predicts disease-free survival (DFS) within patients who have specific breast cancer subtypes. This meta-analysis motivated the FDA's draft guidance for using pCR as a surrogate endpoint in accelerated drug approval. Using pCR as a registration endpoint was challenged at ASCO 2014 Annual Meeting with the presentation of ALTTO, an adjuvant trial in HER2-positive breast cancer that showed a nonsignificant reduction in DFS hazard rate for adding lapatinib, a HER-family tyrosine kinase inhibitor, to trastuzumab and chemotherapy. This conclusion seemed to be inconsistent with the results of NeoALTTO, a neoadjuvant trial that found a statistical improvement in pCR rate for the identical lapatinib-containing regimen. We address differences in the two trials that may account for discordant conclusions. However, we use the FDA meta-analysis to show that there is no discordance at all between the observed pCR difference in NeoALTTO and the observed HR in ALTTO. This underscores the importance of appropriately modeling the two endpoints when designing clinical trials. The I-SPY 2/3 neoadjuvant trials exemplify this approach. Clin Cancer Res; 21(13); 2911–5. ©2015 AACR.