Chen, Bingshu E.

PURPOSE ASCO/College of American Pathologists guidelines recommend reporting estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) as positive with (1%-100%) staining. Statistically standardized quantitated positivity could indicate differential associations of positivity with breast cancer outcomes. METHODS MA.27 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00066573 ) was a phase III adjuvant trial of exemestane versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. Immunochemistry ER and PgR HSCORE and % positivity (%+) were centrally assessed by machine image quantitation and statistically standardized to mean 0 and standard deviation (SD) 1 after Box-Cox variance stabilization transformations of square for ER; for PgR, (1) natural logarithm (0.1 added to 0 HSCOREs and 0%+) and (2) square root. Our primary end point was MA.27 distant disease-free survival (DDFS) at a median 4.1-year follow-up, and secondary end point was event-free survival (EFS). Univariate survival with cut points at SDs about a mean of 0 (≤–1; (–1, 0]; (0, 1]; >1) was described with Kaplan-Meier plots and examined with Wilcoxon (Peto-Prentice) test statistic. Adjusted Cox multivariable regressions had two-sided Wald tests and nominal significance P < .05. RESULTS Of 7,576 women accrued, 3,048 women's tumors had machine-quantitated image analysis results: 2,900 (95%) for ER, 2,726 (89%) for PgR, and 2,582 (85% of 3,048) with both ER and PgR. Higher statistically standardized ER and PgR HSCORE and %+ were associated with better univariate DDFS and EFS ( P < .001). In multivariable assessments, ER HSCORE and %+ were not significantly associated ( P = .52-.88) with DDFS in models with PgR, whereas higher PgR HSCORE and %+ were significantly associated with better DDFS ( P = .001) in models with ER. CONCLUSION Adjunctive statistical standardization differentiated quantitated levels of ER and PgR. Patients with higher ER- and PgR-standardized units had superior DDFS compared with those with HSCOREs and %+ ≤–1.

567 Background: We proposed adjunctive statistical standardization of quantitated ER and PgR to improve inter-laboratory comparability of biomarker results and therapeutic management of breast cancer. Methods: We utilized CCTG MA.27 (NCT00066573), an adjuvant phase III trial of exemestane versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with ER+ and/or PgR+ tumours. IHC ER and PgR HSCORE and % positivity (%+) were centrally assessed by machine image quantitation, and each statistically standardized to mean of 0, standard deviation of 1 following Box-Cox variance stabilization transformations of square for ER; for PgR, 1.) natural logarithm (0.1 added to 0 HSCOREs and 0 %+), 2.) square root. The primary endpoint was STEEP distant disease-free survival (DDFS) at the longest trial follow-up of median 4.1 years; a secondary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS). Survival was described with Kaplan-Meier plots and tested with the univariate Wilcoxon (Peto-Prentice) test statistic. We examined cut-points at standard deviations about mean of 0 (<-1; (-1,0]; (0,1]; >1) and explored single cut-points. Cox multivariate regressions were adjusted for age, T and N stage, grade, lymphovascular invasion, treatment, and baseline patient demographics; 2-sided Wald tests had nominal significance if p<0.05. Results: Of the 7576 women accrued, 3048 women had machine-quantitated image analysis results: 2900 (95%) for ER; 2726 (89%) for PgR. Statistically standardized HSCORE and %+ units differentiated both univariate DDFS and EFS; DDFS was significantly different by ER levels (p<0.001) and PgR levels (p<0.001). In multivariable assessments, ER HSCORE and %+ were not significantly associated (p=0.52-0.88) with the DDFS primary endpoint in models with PgR, while higher PgR HSCORE and %+ had significantly better DDFS (p=.001, in all instances) in models with ER. Conclusions: DDFS was superior for patients with higher ER and PgR standardized units compared with those with HSCOREs and %+ <-1. The adjunctive statistical standardization of ER and PgR performed here is similar to that mandated for clinical practice by the World Health Organization for BMD. [Table: see text]

Abstract Background: Adjuvant breast cancer therapy is informed by whether a tumour is positive or negative for the biomarkers ER, PgR, and HER2, often without regard to level of positivity. Quantitation has been proposed to improve therapeutic management. Adjunctive statistical standardization has been proposed to improve inter-laboratory comparability of biomarkers results. Methods: This primary report utilized adjunctive statistical standardization of machine-quantitated image analysis biomarker assessments. CCTG MA.27 (NCT00066573) is an adjuvant phase III trial of exemestane versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with ER+ and/or PgR+ tumours. IHC ER, PgR, and HER2 were centrally assessed, with FISH (HER2;HER2/CEP17) determinations for equivocal IHC HER2. HSCOREs were statistically standardized to a mean of 0, standard deviation of 1 following Box-Cox variance stabilization transformations of square for ER and natural logarithm for PgR (0.1 was added to 0 HSCOREs). The primary endpoint was STEEP distant disease-free survival (DDFS) at the longest trial follow-up of median 4.1 years. Survival was described with Kaplan-Meier plots. The univariate Wilcoxon (Peto-Prentice) test statistic was used with usual designation of negative/positive (0; &gt;0), and standardized cut-points at standard deviations about mean of 0(&lt;-1; (-1,0]; (0,1]; &gt;1). Cox multivariate regressions adjusted for age, T and N stage, grade, lymphovascular invasion, treatment, and baseline patient demographics, utilized likelihood ratio tests. Nominal significance was p=0.05. Results: Of the 7576 women accrued, 3048 had machine-quantitated image analysis results: 2900 (95%) for ER; 2726 (89%) for PgR. Only 8 women were ASCO/CAP ER- (HSCORE 0); PgR HSCORE was 0 for 533. Statistically standardized units differentiated DDFS ER levels (p&lt; 0.001) and PgR levels (p&lt; 0.001). In adjusted multivariate analyses, higher ER HSCORE was associated with better DDFS (p=0.05) with weak evidence of an association (p=0.11) for standardized HSCORE, and no significant association (respectively, p=0.28, p=0.54) in models with PgR. Higher PgR was associated with better DDFS (p=0.001) in all multivariate assessments, including those with ER. Conclusions: DDFS was superior for patients with higher ER and PgR standardized units compared with those with HSCOREs &lt;-1. Adjunctive statistical standardization, similar to that mandated for clinical practice by the World Health Organization for BMD, should improve inter-laboratory comparability of biomarker results for similar patient populations. Biomarker N DDFS DDFS 5-year (%) 95% CI ER total 2900 ER &lt;-1 506 86 (82, 91) ER (-1, 0] 934 94 (92, 96) ER ( 0, 1] 919 94 (92, 96) ER &gt;1 541 96 (93, 98) PgR total 2726 PgR &lt;-1 734 89 (86, 92) PgR (-1, 0] 439 92 (89, 95) PgR ( 0, 1] 967 95 (93, 96) PgR &gt;1.0 586 98 (97,100) Citation Format: Judy-Anne Chapman, Jane Bayani, Sandip SenGupta, John MS Bartlett, Tammy Piper, Mary Anne Quintayo, Shakeel Virk, Paul Goss, James Ingle, Matthew Ellis, George Sledge Jr, George Budd, Manuela Rabaglio, Rafat Ansari, Richard Tozer, David D'Souza, Haji Chalchal, Silvana Spadafora, Vered Stearns, Edith A. Perez, Karen Gelmon, Timothy Whelan, Catherine Elliott, Lois Shepherd, Bingshu Chen, Karen Taylor. Adjunctive statistical standardization of quantitated machine image analysis of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptors: CCTG MA.27 trial [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 PO1-27-10.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned coprimary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical trial updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. Metformin has been associated with lower cancer risk in epidemiologic and preclinical research. In the MA.32 randomized adjuvant breast cancer trial, metformin ( v placebo) did not affect invasive disease-free or overall survival. Here, we report metformin effects on the risk of new cancer. Between 2010 and 2013, 3,649 patients with breast cancer younger than 75 years without diabetes with high-risk T1-3, N0-3 M0 breast cancer (any estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) were randomly assigned to metformin 850 mg orally twice a day or placebo twice a day for 5 years. New primary invasive cancers (outside the ipsilateral breast) developing as a first event were identified. Time to events was described by the competing risks method; two-sided likelihood ratio tests adjusting for age, BMI, smoking, and alcohol intake were used to compare metformin versus placebo arms. A total of 184 patients developed new invasive cancers: 102 metformin and 82 placebo, hazard ratio (HR), 1.25; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.68; P = .13. These included 48 contralateral invasive breast cancers (27 metformin v 21 placebo), HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.72 to 2.27; P = .40 and 136 new nonbreast primary cancers (75 metformin v 61 placebo), HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.74; P = .21. Metformin did not reduce the risk of new cancer development in these nondiabetic patients with breast cancer.

Abstract Background: MET has been associated with beneficial anti-cancer effects in epidemiologic and preclinical research. It may act indirectly by reversing obesity associated physiologic changes or directly via mitochondrial mediated effects on LKB1/AMPK/mTOR and other mechanisms. MA.32 investigated the effect of MET vs PLAC (in addition to standard therapy) on adjuvant BC outcomes. Design: Randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind Phase III clinical trial conducted within the NCI US National Clinical Trials Network, NCRI (UK) BG, IBCSG. Methods: Between 2010-2013 BC patients &lt; 75 yo without diabetes (DM) with high risk T1-3, N0-3 M0 BC regardless of ER, PgR, HER2 and with adequate cardiac, renal and hepatic function were randomized (stratified for ER/PgR + vs -, BMI &lt; vs &gt; 30 kg/m2, HER2 +ve vs -ve, any vs no chemo) within 1 year of BC diagnosis to MET 850 mg po bid or PLAC bid for 5 years. Dose was reduced for toxicity with re-escalation when possible. Subjects were followed for Invasive Disease-Free Survival (IDFS primary outcome; events included invasive local/regional recurrences, distant recurrences, new ipsilateral/contralateral invasive BCs, new non-breast primary cancers, any death), Overall Survival (OS), Distant Relapse Free Survival (DRFS), BC Specific Survival (BCSS), BC Free Interval (BCFI), contralateral BC and cardiovascular (CV) events/new DM. 3582 subjects were required for 80% power to detect HR 0.76 (431 events). In 2011, entry was restricted to higher risk BC, leading to 80% power to detect HR 0.785 (544 events). In 2016, after the 2nd interim analysis at 29.5 months median F/U, the DSMB recommended (i) the intervention be continued with primary analysis triggered at 544 events be conducted in ER/PgR +ve (any HER2) subjects only and (ii) ER/PgR -ve subjects stop study drug for futility but blinding and follow-up continue. In 2021, a time driven analysis in ER/PgR +ve BC was approved (465 events providing 80% power to detect the original HR 0.76). Time to event survival described by the Kaplan-Meier method. Two-sided log-rank tests adjusting for stratification factors were primarily used to compare IDFS between arms. Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify and adjust for factors significantly related to IDFS. Results: 3649 subjects were enrolled. In the 2533 ER/PgR +ve subjects included in the primary analysis, baseline mean (± SD) age was 52.7 (±9.9 yrs); mean BMI 28.8 (±6.4) kg/m2. Baseline tumor characteristics were balanced: T stage 1/2/3/4 = 832/1351/349/1; N stage 0/1/2/3 = 964/1097/449/23; HER2+ 429. 1901 (75%) received XRT. 2150 (84.9%) received (neo)adj chemo, 2223 (87.8%) (neo)adj hormones and 434 (17.1%) HER2 targeted therapy. Any Grade ≥ 3 toxicity was similar in MET and PLAC arms (21.7% and 18.7%, P = 0.06). Median follow-up was 96.2 (range 0.2-121.0) months with 465 IDFS events (234 MET, 231 PLAC, 76% due to BC). Efficacy results are shown below. MET vs PLACMET vs PLACIDFSOSPopulation Included# subjectsHR (95% CI)HR (95% CI)PRIMARY ANALYSISER/PgR +ve (any HER2)*25331.01 (0.84-1.21). P=0.920.89 (0.64-1.23). P=0.46ER/PgR -ve (any HER211161.01 (0.79-1.30. P=0.92)0.89 (0.64-1.23). P=0.46Exploratory. AnalysisHER2 +ve (any ER/PgR)6200.64 (0.43-0.95. P=0.0260.53 (0.30-0.98. P=0.0398**in ER/PgR pos BC HRs were similar for BCFI, DRFS, BCSS (ranging from 0.98-1.09)Conclusions: MET did not improve IDFS or other BC outcomes in ER/PgR positive or ER/PgR negative BC and should not be used as adjuvant treatment. Exploratory findings suggesting benefit in HER2+ve BC should be further investigated. Funded by: CCSRI, NCI (US), CBCF, BCRF, CRUK, Hold’Em for Life Charity, Apotex (Canada) Citation Format: Pamela J. Goodwin, Bingshu E Chen, Karen A Gelmon, Timothy J Whelan, Marguerite Ennis, Julie Lemieux, Jennifer A Ligibel, Dawn L Hershman, Ingrid A Mayer, Timothy J Hobday, Judith M Bliss, Priya Rastogi, Manuela Rabaglio-Poretti, Som D. Mukherjee, Robert R Mackey, Vandana G Abramson, Conrad Oja, Robert Wesolowski, Alastair M Thompson, Daniel W Rea, Paul M Stos, Lois E Shepherd, Vuk Stambolic, Wendy R Parulekar. CCTGMA.32, a phase III randomized double-blind placebo controlled adjuvant trial of metformin (MET) vs placebo (PLAC) in early breast cancer (BC): Results of the primary efficacy analysis (clinical trials.gov NCT01101438) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-08.

Abstract Background Circulating levels of cancer antigen (CA) 15–3, a tumor marker and regulator of cellular metabolism, were reduced by metformin in a nonrandomized neoadjuvant study. We examined the effects of metformin (vs placebo) on CA 15–3 in participants of MA.32, a phase III randomized trial in early-stage breast cancer. Methods A total of 3649 patients with T1-3, N0-3, M0 breast cancer were randomly assigned; pretreatment and 6-month on-treatment fasting plasma were centrally assayed for CA 15–3. Genomic DNA was analyzed for the rs11212617 single nucleotide polymorphism. Absolute and relative change of CA 15–3 (metformin vs placebo) were compared using Wilcoxon rank and t tests. Regression models adjusted for baseline differences and assessed key interactions. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Mean (SD) age was 52.4 (10.0) years. The majority of patients had T2/3, node-positive, hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative breast cancer treated with (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and hormone therapy. Mean (SD) baseline CA 15–3 was 17.7 (7.6) and 18.0 (8.1 U/mL). At 6 months, CA 15–3 was statistically significantly reduced in metformin vs placebo arms (absolute geometric mean reduction in CA 15–3 = 7.7% vs 2.0%, P &lt; .001; relative metformin: placebo level of CA 15–3 [adjusted for age, baseline body mass index, and baseline CA 15–3] = 0.94, 95% confidence interval = 0.92 to 0.96). This reduction was independent of tumor characteristics, perioperative systemic therapy, baseline body mass index, insulin, and the single nucleotide polymorphism status (all Ps &gt; .11). Conclusions Our observation that metformin reduces CA 15–3 by approximately 6% was corroborated in a large placebo-controlled randomized trial. The clinical implications of this reduction in CA 15–3 will be explored in upcoming efficacy analyses of breast cancer outcomes in MA.32.

CCTG CLC.2/Alliance A041202 demonstrated superior progression-free survival at 2 years with ibrutinib alone (87%; HR 0.39) or ibrutinib-rituximab (IR 88%; HR 0.38) compared to chemo-immunotherapy with bendamustine-rituximab (BR 74%) in treatment-naïve patients (pts) with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who were 65 or older (Woyach NEJM 2018). We hypothesized that ibrutinib-based therapies would be more costly than BR but that costs would be offset by less toxicity and improved quality of life (QOL). We completed a prospective trial-based economic analysis to study the direct medical costs and quality-adjusted benefit associated with ibrutinib-based therapies compared to BR in the Canadian (CDN) subset of patients enrolled in CLC.2/Alliance 041202. All CDN pts were invited to participate in the companion analysis. Health utilities were collected using the EuroQOL EQ-5D and calculated using CDN population valuations (Bansback PLOS One 2012). Resource utilization forms were administered to collect off-protocol health care encounters. The planned analysis was a cost-utility analysis from the perspective of a public healthcare system, examining the costs and outcomes (quality-adjusted life years or QALYs) of ibrutinib-based therapy compared to BR. Unit costs were applied to resource data based on publicly available provincial/national databases; all costs were expressed in 2019 US dollars (1 CDN = 0.75 US dollar). Total and disaggregated direct medical costs are presented descriptively. Mean survival was calculated using the restricted mean survival method from randomization to the study time-horizon of 24 months; derived utilities were used to calculate QALYs. A discount rate for costs and benefits (r=0.05) was applied. The analysis was based on estimation (with bootstrapping) of an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and/or direct medical costs. A total of 55 pts were enrolled; two pts who did not receive any treatment were censored at day 1 and 3 after randomization and excluded from analysis. Of the 53 analysed, pt demographics were well balanced between treatments and were reflective of the entire population: mean age was 71.6 (SD 6.34) in pts receiving ibrutinib alone (n=17), 72.2 (SD 3.85) in pts receiving IR (n=18), and 71.7 (SD 4.1) in pts receiving BR (n=18). A total of 3 pts, one in each arm, had 17p deletion. Progression-free survival at 2 years for CDN pts was 94% (95% CI 65-99%) for ibrutinib, 100% (95% CI 100-100%) for IR, and 72% (95% CI 45-87%) for BR (Figure 1). At 24 months, 1 pt on the BR arm had crossed over to ibrutinib (as per protocol); there was no overall survival difference between the three arms. On-protocol costs (including protocol treatment, ambulatory care, and imaging) and off-protocol costs (including hospitalizations, concomitant medications, and ambulatory care) are highlighted in Figure 2. On-protocol costs were higher for pts receiving ibrutinib (mean $142,001 USD; SD 48,417) and IR ($164,931; SD 46,208) compared to BR ($38,509; SD 10,351), driven by higher drug acquisition costs associated with ibrutinib (list price $6422 for 420mg/30 days). In contrast, off-protocol costs were modestly higher for pts on BR (mean $3050; SD 3812) compared to the ibrutinib ($2460; SD 3863) or IR ($2890; SD 4206); hospitalizations were the key off-protocol cost drivers and were highest for pts on IR and BR. Overall mean costs over the 2-year time horizon were $144,461 (SD 47,910) for pts on ibrutinib, $167,820 (SD 46,830) for pts on IR, and $41,560 (SD 11,849) for pts on BR. Discounted QALYs were similar between the three treatment arms: 1.66 (0.16) for ibrutinib alone, 1.65 (0.24) for IR, and 1.66 (0.17) for BR. Given the similar quality-adjusted survival between arms at the time of this analysis, a formal ICER was not calculated. Direct medical costs are substantially higher for pts receiving continuous ibrutinib-based therapies, compared to chemo-immunotherapy of fixed duration, in frontline CLL management; the key cost driver is the cost of ibrutinib. The PFS benefit with ibrutinib-based therapy has not translated into an advantage in quality-adjusted survival to date; further follow-up may be required to demonstrate any cost or QOL benefits associated with fewer progression events for those on ibrutinib. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; U10CA180863 and #704970 CCTG. https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01886872 Figure Disclosures Owen: AbbVie, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Astrazeneca, Merck, Servier, Novartis, Teva: Honoraria. Lam:Roche: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Crump:Servier: Consultancy; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Sperlich:Lundbeck Canada: Honoraria. Woyach:Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Morphosys, Karyopharm, Verastem, Abbvie, Lox: Research Funding; Janssen, Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca, Abbvie, Arqule: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company, AbbVie, Janssen, AstraZeneca, ArQule: Honoraria. Prica:astra zeneca: Honoraria; seattle genetics: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria. Hay:Roche: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding.

Abstract Background Metformin has been associated with lower breast cancer (BC) risk and improved outcomes in observational studies. Multiple biologic mechanisms have been proposed, including a recent report of altered sex hormones. We evaluated the effect of metformin on sex hormones in MA.32, a phase III trial of nondiabetic BC subjects who were randomly assigned to metformin or placebo. Methods We studied the subgroup of postmenopausal hormone receptor-negative BC subjects not receiving endocrine treatment who provided fasting blood at baseline and at 6 months after being randomly assigned. Sex hormone-binding globulin, bioavailable testosterone, and estradiol levels were assayed using electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. Change from baseline to 6 months between study arms was compared using Wilcoxon sum rank tests and regression models. Results 312 women were eligible (141 metformin vs 171 placebo); the majority of subjects in each arm had T1/2, N0, HER2-negative BC and had received (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. Mean age was 58.1 (SD=6.9) vs 57.5 (SD=7.9) years, mean body mass index (BMI) was 27.3 (SD=5.5) vs 28.9 (SD=6.4) kg/m2 for metformin vs placebo, respectively. Median estradiol decreased between baseline and 6 months on metformin vs placebo (−5.7 vs 0 pmol/L; P &lt; .001) in univariable analysis and after controlling for baseline BMI and BMI change (P &lt; .001). There was no change in sex hormone-binding globulin or bioavailable testosterone. Conclusion Metformin lowered estradiol levels, independent of BMI. This observation suggests a new metformin effect that has potential relevance to estrogen sensitive cancers.

1033 Background: MA.32 investigates effects of Metformin vs. Placebo, in addition to standard care, on invasive disease free survival and other outcomes. Metformin may improve obesity and metabolic factors [insulin, glucose, leptin, C-reactive protein (CRP)] that have been associated with poor BC outcomes. Maintaining blinding of investigators to outcomes, we conducted a planned, DSMB approved, analysis of the effect of Metformin vs. Placebo on weight and metabolic factors at 6 months, including examination of interactions with baseline body mass index (BMI), in the first 498 subjects with paired fasting plasma samples. Methods: 498 non-diabetic subjects with T1-3, N0-3, M0 BC meeting defined entry criteria who had completed surgery and adjuvant chemo (if given) provided fasting blood samples at randomization and 6 months (while on study drug). Glucose was measured locally; blood was aliquoted, frozen and stored at -80°C then shipped to NCIC CTG (Kingston, Canada). Paired plasma aliquots were shipped to Mount Sinai Hospital (Toronto, Canada) for analysis of Insulin (Dako), hsCRP (Roche Elecsys) and leptin (Luminex). Statistical analysis used the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: Mean age was 52.4 ±9.2 years. Arms were balanced for ER/PgR (63% pos), BMI, prior adjuvant chemo (89%), T and N status, grade, mastectomy/lumpectomy and radiation. Conclusions: Metformin significantly improved weight, insulin, glucose, leptin and CRP at 6 months. Effects did not vary by baseline BMI. Funded by: NIH, CCSRI, CBCF, BCRF, Apotex Canada (drug & placebo - in kind). Clinical trial information: NCT01101438. [Table: see text]