Bandos, Hanna

Abstract Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are often collected in cancer clinical trials. Data obtained from trials with PROs are essential in evaluating participant experiences relating to symptoms, financial toxicity, or health-related quality of life. Although most features of clinical trial design, implementation, and analyses apply to trials with PROs, several considerations are unique. In this paper, we focus on specific issues such as selection of the tool, timing and frequency of assessments, and data collection methods. We discuss how the estimand framework can be used in connection with PROs, properties of common estimation methods, and handling of missing outcomes. With a plethora of literature available, we aim to summarize best practices and pragmatic approaches to the design and analysis of the studies incorporating PROs.

PURPOSE Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT-serine threonine kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway abnormalities contribute to endocrine resistance. Everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, improved progression-free survival in hormone receptor–positive metastatic breast cancer (BC) when combined with endocrine therapy (ET). In this phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed the efficacy of everolimus + ET as adjuvant therapy in high-risk, hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative BC after adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to physician's choice ET and 1 year of everolimus (10 mg orally once daily) or placebo stratified by risk group. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) evaluated by a stratified log-rank test with the hazard ratio (HR) estimated by Cox regression. Subset analyses included preplanned evaluation by risk group and exploratory analyses by menopausal status and age. Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and safety. Everolimus did not improve IDFS/OS when added to ET in patients with early-stage high-risk, hormone receptor–positive BC. RESULTS One thousand and nine hundred thirty-nine patients were randomly assigned with 1,792 eligible for analysis. Overall, no benefit of everolimus was seen for IDFS (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.14]) or OS (HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.26]). The assumption of proportional hazards was not met suggesting significant variability in the HR over time since the start of treatment. In an unplanned subgroup analysis among postmenopausal patients (N = 1,221), no difference in IDFS (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.86 to 1.36]) or OS (HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.60]) was seen. In premenopausal patients (N = 571), everolimus improved both IDFS (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.94]) and OS (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.28 to 0.86]). Treatment completion rates were lower in the everolimus arm compared with placebo (48% v 73%) with higher grade 3 and 4 adverse events (35% v 7%). CONCLUSION One year of adjuvant everolimus + ET did not improve overall outcomes. Subset analysis suggests mTOR inhibition as a possible target for patients who remain premenopausal after chemotherapy.

Abstract Background: The benefit of adjuvant regional nodal irradiation including the chest wall after mastectomy (CWI+RNI) and with whole breast irradiation (WBI+RNI) after breast conserving surgery (BCS) is well established in pts with pathologically positive axillary nodes (pN+). Pts who present with axillary node involvement (cN+), receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC), and are found to be pathologically node-negative at surgery (ypN0), have lower loco-regional recurrence (LRR) rates compared to those who remain pathologically node-positive (ypN+). This phase III, randomized trial aimed to evaluate whether CWI+RNI after mastectomy or addition of RNI to WBI after BCS significantly improves invasive breast cancer recurrence-free interval (IBC-RFI) in cN+ pts found to be ypN0 after NC. Methods: Eligible pts had clinical cT1-3, N1, M0 invasive breast cancer (biopsy-proven N+ by FNA/core needle bx), completed ≥8 wks of NC (and anti-HER2 therapy if HER2+), and were ypN0 after mastectomy or BCS and sentinel node biopsy (SLNB, ≥2 nodes), axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), or both. Pts were randomized to “No RNI” (i.e., observation after mastectomy or WBI after BCS) vs. “RNI” (i.e., CWI+RNI after mastectomy or WBI+RNI after BCS). Primary endpoint was IBC-RFI. Secondary endpoints reported here: LRR-free interval (LRRFI), distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). Study was designed to have 80% power to detect 35% reduction in annual rate of IBC-RFI for an absolute risk reduction of 4.6% (5-yr cumulative rate). Per protocol, final analysis was to occur after 172 events or 10 yrs after study initiation.Here we report the time-driven analysis prespecified in the protocol. Results: From 9/13-12/20, 1,641 pts were enrolled; 1,556 pts were available for primary event analysis; median f/u time 59.5 mos (IQR 40.7-74.1). Pt/tumor characteristics were well balanced between groups. Median age 52 yrs (range 21-84); 31% non-white; 21% cT1, 60% cT2, 19% cT3; 23% triple-negative, 21% HR+/HER2-, 56% HER2+; 58% BCS; 55% SLNB, 45% ALND+/-SLNB; and 78% had breast pathologic complete response. At the time of the analysis, 109 IBC-RFI events (63% of the planned 172) were confirmed (“No RNI”: 59, “RNI”: 50). There was no statistically significant difference between groups for IBC-RFI (HR=0.88, 95%CI 0.60-1.29; p=0.51), 5-yr point estimates: 91.8% for “No RNI” and 92.7% for “RNI.” There were no statistically significant differences between the treatment groups for secondary endpoints. There were no study-related deaths and no unexpected toxicities.Grade 4 toxicity was rare (0.1% with “No RNI”, 0.5% with “RNI”); 6.5% of pts developed grade 3 toxicity in “No RNI” and 10% in “RNI” group. Most common grade 3 toxicity was radiation dermatitis (3.3% in “No RNI,” 5.7% in “RNI”). Conclusion: In pts who present with biopsy-proven axillary node involvement and convert their axillary nodes to ypN0 after NC, CWI+RNI after mastectomy, or WBI+RNI after BCS, did not significantly improve IBC-RFI, LRRFI, DRFI, DFS, or OS. These findings suggest that downstaging involved axillary nodes with NC can result in optimization of adjuvant radiotherapy without adversely affecting oncologic outcomes. Follow-up of pts for long-term outcomes continues. NCT01872975 *EPM and JW are co-first authors. Table 1 Citation Format: Eleftherios Mamounas, Hanna Bandos, Julia White, Thomas Julian, Atif Khan, Simona Shaitelman, Mylin Torres, Frank Vicini, Patricia Ganz, Susan McCloskey, Nilendu Gupta, X. Allen Li, Peter Lucas, Nadeem Abu-Rustum, Saumil Gandhi, Rahul Tendulkar, Robert Coleman, Keiichi Fujiwara, Samantha Seaward, William Irvin, Kristin Higgins, Robert Mutter, Jean-Francois Boileau, Andrew Muskovitz, Reshma Jagsi, Anna Weiss, Curran Walter Jr., Norman Wolmark. Loco-Regional Irradiation in Patients with Biopsy-proven Axillary Node Involvement at Presentation Who Become Pathologically Node-negative After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Primary Outcomes of NRG Oncology/NSABP B-51/RTOG 1304 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr GS02-07.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Abnormalities of the PI3kinase/AKT/mTOR signaling network are common in breast cancer (BC) and are associated with endocrine resistance. Everolimus, an mTOR-inhibitor increased PFS when combined with endocrine therapy (ET) in the metastatic setting and is thought to revert endocrine resistance. S1207 is a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the role of everolimus in combination with ET in the adjuvant setting among patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative BC (NCT01674140). METHODS: Eligible patients were >18 years of age with histologically confirmed invasive hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative high-risk BC. Four risk groups were defined as: 1) > 2cm node-negative disease (or pN1mi), and either an Oncotype DX® Recurrence Score (RS) > 25 or MammaPrint® high-risk category (MP high); 2) 1-3 positive nodes and either RS >25, MP high or a pathological grade 3 tumor; 3) >4 positive lymph nodes. Patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were eligible if: 4) after surgery had >1 lymph node involvement. Patients were randomized 1:1 to physician’s choice adjuvant ET in combination with one year of everolimus (10 mg PO daily) or ET plus placebo stratified by risk group. The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) evaluated by a stratified log-rank test. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. The hazard ratio (HR) for treatment efficacy was estimated using Cox regression with stratification by risk groups. Subset analyses included preplanned evaluation within risk group and exploratory analyses of menopausal status and age. RESULTS: 1,939 patients were randomized between September 2013 and May 2019, of them 1,792 were eligible and included in the analysis (896 per arm). Primary reason for ineligibility was timing after chemotherapy/radiation or not high risk. Median age was 54 years (22-85) and 32% were premenopausal. With a median follow-up of 50.5 months, there were 389 IDFS events as of May 2022 (data cutoff). 5-year IDFS was 74.8% among patients treated with everolimus and 73.9% among patients treated with placebo, HR=0.93 (95% CI 0.76-1.14). However, the proportional hazards assumption was violated (p=0.02) suggesting differential treatment effect over time. The HR during the one year of treatment was 0.72 (95% CI 0.47-1.10) while after one year it was 1.00 (95% CI 0.80-1.26). The 5-year OS was 87.6% in the everolimus arm and 85.5% in the placebo arm, HR=0.98 (95% CI 0.75-1.28). Analysis by risk group did not show higher everolimus benefit as risk increased. No difference in IDFS or OS was seen among postmenopausal patients (IDFS HR=1.08 [95% CI 0.85-1.36], OS HR=1.19 [95% CI 0.87-1.61]). Among premenopausal patients, everolimus was associated with improved IDFS (HR=0.63 [95% CI 0.43-0.93]) and OS (HR=0.48 [95% CI 0.26-0.88]). Treatment completion of randomized therapy was lower in the everolimus arm compared to placebo (47.9% v 72.7%). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were noted in 6.5% and 0.5% of patients in the placebo arm and in 31.2% and 3.7% in the everolimus arm respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of one year of adjuvant everolimus to standard adjuvant ET did not improve IDFS or OS and was associated with low completion rate and increased AEs. Among premenopausal patients there was a benefit in IDFS and OS that is hypothesis generating. Future translational studies will evaluate potential predictors of everolimus benefit and drug toxicity. Citation Format: Marianna Chavez, Jieling Miao, Lajos Pusztai, Matthew P. Goetz, Priya Rastogi, Patricia A. Ganz, Eleftherios (Terry) Mamounas, Soonmyung Paik, Hanna Bandos, Wajeeha Razaq, Anne O’Dea, Virginia Kaklamani, Andrea L.M. Silber, Lisa E. Flaum, Eleni Andreopolu, Joseph Baar, Albert G. Wendt, Jennifer F. Carney, Priyanka Sharma, Julie R. Gralow, Danika L. Lew, William E. Barlow, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi. Results from a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating adjuvant endocrine therapy +/- 1 year of everolimus in patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer: SWOG S1207 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-07.

Abstract Background: Abnormalities of the PI3kinase/AKT/mTOR signaling network are common in BC. This pathway is associated with resistance to endocrine therapies among HR+ tumors. Everolimus, an mTOR-inhibitor, increases the biological activity of endocrine therapy. S1207 evaluates the role of everolimus in combination with endocrine therapy in the adjuvant setting. Methods: Specific aims/ design: Randomized phase III double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Primary objective is to assess whether the addition of everolimus to standard adjuvant endocrine therapy improves invasive disease-free survival (DFS) among patients with high risk, HR+ BC. Secondary objectives include overall survival, distant recurrence-free survival, safety, adherence and QoL. Patients are randomized to receive standard adjuvant endocrine therapy in combination with one year of everolimus (10 mg PO daily) or placebo. Submission of tissue specimens/blood samples is required for translational studies Eligibility criteria: Patients with histologically confirmed HER2-negative and HR+ invasive BC treated with surgery, adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy (if indicated) are eligible if they have: node-negative disease and tumors >2cm and a recurrence score (RS) >25; 1-3 positive nodes and RS >25 or grade 3 in the absence of RS; >4 positive lymph nodes regardless of RS. Patients >1 positive lymph node after completing neoadjuvant chemotherapy are eligible. Statistics/Target accrual:Parallel randomization design with equal allocation to the two treatment groups, the study will randomize 3,500 patients. All analyses are intent-to-treat with the primary analysis conducted 3 years after the last patient is randomized. The study has 90% power (with 2-sided α=0.05) to detect an effective hazard ratio of 0.75 for everolimus versus placebo, corresponding to a gain in DFS of approximately 4.3% at 5 years. All patients will be followed for 10 years. Support: NIH/NCI NCTN Grants CA180888, 180819, 180868, 180821,180822 189867, and in part by Novartis Clinical trial information: NCT01674140. Citation Format: Chavez-MacGregor M, Barlow WE, Pusztai L, Goetz MP, Rastogi P, Ganz PA, Mamounas EP, Paik S, Bandos H, Gralow J, Lew DL, Hortobagyi GN. Phase III randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating the use of adjuvant endocrine therapy +/- one year of everolimus in patients with high-risk, hormone receptor (HR) positive and HER2-negative breast cancer (BC): SWOG/NRG/Alliance S1207 (NCT01674140). [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 OT1-03-11.

Abstract Background NSABP B-36 compares 6 cycles of FEC-100 with 4 cycles of standard AC in pts with node-negative breast cancer. As reported separately, no significant differences between the two treatment arms were observed in the primary endpoint of disease-free survival or in the secondary endpoints of overall survival, recurrence-free, or distant recurrence-free intervals. Greater toxicity was reported in pts who received FEC compared to AC. We present here the results of the QOL and MH studies obtained prospectively in conjunction with the treatment study. We hypothesized that pts on FEC would experience greater treatment toxicity in the first 12 months of the study, and would have greater rates of amenorrhea at 18 months compared to pts on AC. Methods Among the 1,357 pts enrolled in the QOL study, 1,332 (675 AC, 657 FEC) submitted the baseline form and had QOL follow-up (fup) information. Pts completed: 1) the FACT-B instrument; 2) a symptom checklist; and 3) the SF-36 Vitality Scale, all at baseline, day 1 of cycle 4, and at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months after random assignment. FACT-B Trial Outcome Index (TOI), symptom severity, and vitality scores were compared between the two treatment arms using a mixed model for repeated measures analysis with adjustment for the baseline scores, type of surgery, and hormone receptor status, examining the first 12 months and the later time points separately. Menstrual status was collected at baseline for all enrolled pts, with subsequent assessments on day 1 of cycle 4, and at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months for pts with menstrual bleeding within 12 months prior to random assignment and not having had a hysterectomy and/or bilateral oophorectomy (1, 096 pts). Post-chemotherapy amenorrhea was defined as the lack of menstrual periods during the 12 months preceding the 18-month fup evaluation. Data from 921 pts (475 AC, 446 FEC) were available for analysis. Logistic regression, adjusted for type of surgery and hormone receptor status, was used to test for association of amenorrhea status and treatment. Results Both TOI and vitality scores were worse for pts on FEC compared to those on AC at 6 months (p<0.01) with no significant difference at 12 months and beyond. No significant differences in symptom severity between the two treatment arms were observed. The rates of post-chemotherapy amenorrhea were significantly different between FEC and AC (66.8% vs. 58.7%, p=0.01) with positive hormone receptor status as an independent risk factor (p=0.03). Conclusions Women receiving FEC had diminished QOL at 6 months after random assignment, but no difference at 12 months or later. Premenopausal women receiving FEC experienced a higher rate of post-chemotherapy amenorrhea than women receiving AC. Support NCI grants U10-CA-12027, -37377, -69974, -69651 and -44066-26, and Pharmacia & Upjohn Company, a subsidiary of Pfizer, Inc. Citation Format: Patricia A Ganz, John W Wilson, Hanna Bandos, André Robidoux, Alexander HG Paterson, Johnathan Polikoff, Luis Baez-Diaz, Adam M Brufsky, Louis Fehrenbacher, Aroop Mangalik, Patrick J Ward, Louise Provencher, John T Hamm, Philip J Stella, Robert L Carolla, Richard G Margolese, Henry R Shibata, Edith A Perez, Norman Wolmark. Impact of treatment on quality of life (QOL) and menstrual history (MH) in the NSABP B-36: A randomized phase III trial comparing six cycles of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) to four cycles of adriamycin and cyclophosphamide [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 P3-12-01.