Back to Authors

Schwartz, Gary N.

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2537-9531

Mayo Clinic

Dartmouth College

Citations 2

Alternating 17β-Estradiol and Aromatase Inhibitor Therapies Is Efficacious in Postmenopausal Women with Advanced Endocrine-Resistant ER+ Breast Cancer
Schwartz, Gary N. , Kaufman, Peter A. , Marotti, Jonathan D. , Chamberlin, Mary D. , Arrick, Bradley A. , Makari‐Judson, Grace , Goetz, Matthew P. , Soucy, Shannon M. , Kolling, Fred , Demidenko, Eugene , Miller, Todd W. , Giridhar, Karthik V , Marotti, Jonathan D , Chamberlin, Mary D , Arrick, Bradley A , Makari-Judson, Grace , Goetz, Matthew P , Soucy, Shannon M , Kolling, Fred , Demidenko, Eugene , Miller, Todd W , Giridhar, Karthik V.

Clinical Cancer Research | May 15, 2023 | Volume: 29 | Issue: 15 | Pages: 2767-2773

10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-23-0112 Get It

Abstract Purpose: Strategies to implement estrogen therapy for advanced estrogen receptor–positive (ER+) breast cancer are underdeveloped. Preclinical data suggest that cycling treatment with 17β-estradiol followed by estrogen deprivation can control tumor growth long-term. Patients and Methods: Postmenopausal women with advanced ER+/HER2− breast cancer with recurrence or progression on ≥ 1 antiestrogen or aromatase inhibitor (AI)-based therapy were eligible. Patients received 17β-estradiol (2 mg orally, three times a day) for 8 weeks followed by AI (physician's choice) for 16 weeks, alternating treatments on an 8-week/16-week schedule until disease progression. Patients then optionally received continuous single-agent treatment until a second instance of disease progression. Endpoints included 24-week clinical benefit and objective response per RECIST, and tumor genetic alterations. Results: Of 19 evaluable patients, clinical benefit rate was 42.1% [95% confidence interval (CI), 23.1%–63.9%] and objective response rate (ORR) was 15.8% (95% CI, 5.7%–37.9%). One patient experienced a grade 3 adverse event related to 17β-estradiol. Among patients who received continuous single-agent treatment until a second instance of disease progression, clinical benefit was observed in 5 of 12 (41.7%) cases. Tumor ER (ESR1) mutations were found by whole-exome profiling in 4 of 7 (57.1%) versus 2 of 9 (22.2%) patients who did versus did not experience clinical benefit from alternating 17β-estradiol/AI therapy. The only two patients to experience objective responses to initial 17β-estradiol had tumor ESR1 mutations. Conclusions: Alternating 17β-estradiol/AI therapy may be a promising treatment for endocrine-refractory ER+ breast cancer, including following progression on CDK4/6 inhibitors or everolimus. Further study is warranted to determine whether the antitumor activity of 17β-estradiol differs according to ESR1 mutation status.
Clinical and Translational Results of a Phase II, Randomized Trial of an Anti–IGF-1R (Cixutumumab) in Women with Breast Cancer That Progressed on Endocrine Therapy
Gradishar, William J. , Sparano, Joseph A. , Chuang, Ellen, Northfelt, Donald W. , Schwartz, Gary N. , Youssoufian, Hagop , Tang, Shande, Novosiadly, Ruslan D., Forest, Amélie, Nguyen, Tuan S., Cosaert, Jan , Grebennik, Dmitri, Haluska, Paul , Yardley, Denise Aysel , Layman, Rachel M. , Sparano, Joseph A

Clinical Cancer Research | August 31, 2015 | Volume: 22 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 301-309

10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-15-0588 Get It

Abstract Purpose: This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of cixutumumab, a human anti–insulin-like growth factor receptor 1 (IGF-1R) monoclonal IgG1 antibody, and explored potential biomarkers in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer. Experimental Design: Patients with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer that progressed on antiestrogen therapy received (2:1 randomization) cixutumumab 10 mg/kg and the same antiestrogen (arm A) or cixutumumab alone (arm B) every 2 weeks (q2w). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. Correlative analyses of IGF-1R, total insulin receptor (IR), and IR isoforms A (IR-A) and B (IR-B) expression in tumor tissue were explored. Results: Ninety-three patients were randomized (arm A, n = 62; arm B, n = 31). Median PFS was 2.0 and 3.1 months for arm A and arm B, respectively. Secondary efficacy measures were similar between the arms. Overall, cixutumumab was well tolerated. IGF-1R expression was not associated with clinical outcomes. Regardless of the treatment, lower IR-A, IR-B, and total IR mRNA expression in tumor tissue was significantly associated with longer PFS [IR-A: HR, 2.62 (P = 0.0062); IR-B: HR, 2.21 (P = 0.0202); and total IR: HR, 2.18 (P = 0.0230)] and OS [IR-A: HR, 2.94 (P = 0.0156); IR-B: HR, 2.69 (P = 0.0245); and total IR: HR, 2.72 (P = 0.0231)]. Conclusions: Cixutumumab (10 mg/kg) with or without antiestrogen q2w had an acceptable safety profile, but no significant clinical efficacy. Patients with low total IR, IR-A, and IR-B mRNA expression levels had significantly longer PFS and OS, independent of the treatment. The prognostic or predictive value of IR as a biomarker for IGF-1R–targeted therapies requires further validation. Clin Cancer Res; 22(2); 301–9. ©2015 AACR.