Citations

Abstract Background: Pathologic complete response (pCR) is an established prognostic biomarker for aggressive HER2+ breast cancer (BC). Improving pCR rates may identify new therapies that improve survival. Pertuzumab (P) has established survival benefit in the metastatic setting, and received accelerated approval in the neoadjuvant setting when combined with trastuzumab (H) and docetaxel(D) as part of a complete treatment regimen for early breast cancer. We tested its ability, when combined with standard therapy (paclitaxel, T, and H) to improve pCR (ypT0ypN0) over TH in the adaptively randomized, phase II, I-SPY 2 neoadjuvant trial. Methods: Enrolled patients (pts) had invasive BC ?2.5 cm in HER2-positive subsets. Pts were adaptively randomized to control (TH, qwk x 12) or THP (P, q3wk x 4) followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) x 4 and surgery. To compare THP to TH we utilized all control pts accrued over the course of the trial, adjusting for potential differences due to time period treated, which were informed by the several other treatment arms that have been in the trial. Adaptive assignment to the experimental arms was based on current Bayesian probabilities of superiority over control. “Graduation” by signature and futility stopping were based upon Bayesian predictive probability of success in a 2-arm, N = 300 phase III randomized 1:1 trial of THP vs. TH with pCR endpoint. Results: THP met the predictive probability criterion and graduated in 3 signatures: all HER2+, HER2+/HR+, and HER2+/HR- (See Table 1). Final accrual: 44 THP and 31 TH. Safety data will be shown. Conclusions: I-SPY 2's standing platform trial efficiently evaluates agents in biomarker-defined pt subsets. THP -> AC substantially improves pCR rates over standard TH -> AC in all 3 HER2+ signatures, including HR+ and HR- subsets. APHINITY, a trial of adjuvant pertuzumab with a primary outcome of invasive disease-free survival, is ongoing. Table 1Signature*Estimated pCR Rate (95% probability interval)Signature*THPControl (TH)Probability THP Is Superior to ControlPredictive Probability of Success in Phase IIIHER2+54% (38%-70%)22% (5%-39%)99.8%96%HER2+/HR+44% (24%-63%)17% (0%-34%)99%91%HER2+/HR-74% (53%-95%)33% (6%-59%)99.8%98%*HR = Hormone Receptor Citation Format: Meredith Buxton, Angela M. DeMichele, Stephen Chia, Laura van't Veer, Jo Chien, Anne Wallace, Henry Kaplan, Julie Lang, Douglas Yee, Claudine Isaacs, Stacy Moulder, Kathy Albain, Judy Boughey, Kathleen Kemmer, Barbara Haley, Susan Minton, Andres Forero, Rita Nanda, Anthony Elias, Larissa Korde, Rebecca Viscuzi, Hope Rugo, Richard Schwab, Fraser Symmans, Melissa Paoloni, Nola Hylton, Michael Hogarth, Julia Lyandres, Jane Perlmutter, Ashish Sanil, Christina Yau, Laura Esserman, Don Berry, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Investigators. Efficacy of pertuzumab/trastuzumab/paclitaxel over standard trastuzumab/paclitaxel therapy for HER2+ breast cancer: Results from the neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 TRIAL. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr CT106.

PurposeWe compared nab-paclitaxel or ixabepilone once per week to paclitaxel with bevacizumab as first-line therapy for patients with advanced breast cancer (BC) to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) for nab-paclitaxel or ixabepilone versus paclitaxel.Patients and MethodsEligible patients were age ≥ 18 years with chemotherapy-naive advanced BC. Patients were randomly assigned to bevacizumab with paclitaxel 90 mg/m2(arm A), nab-paclitaxel 150 mg/m2(arm B), or ixabepilone 16 mg/m2(arm C), once per week for 3 of 4 weeks. Planned enrollment was 900 patients, which would give 88% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.73.ResultsIn all, 799 patients were enrolled, and 783 received treatment (97% received bevacizumab). Arm C was closed for futility at the first interim analysis (n = 241), and arm A (n = 267) and arm B (n = 275) were closed for futility at the second interim analysis. Median PFS for paclitaxel was 11 months, ixabepilone was inferior to paclitaxel (PFS, 7.4 months; hazard ratio, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.31 to 1.93; P < .001), and nab-paclitaxel was not superior to paclitaxel (PFS, 9.3 months; hazard ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.45; P = .054). Results were concordant with overall survival; time to treatment failure was significantly shorter in both experimental arms v paclitaxel. Hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity, including peripheral neuropathy, was increased with nab-paclitaxel, with more frequent and earlier dose reductions.ConclusionIn patients with chemotherapy-naive advanced BC, ixabepilone once per week was inferior to paclitaxel, and nab-paclitaxel was not superior with a trend toward inferiority. Toxicity was increased in the experimental arms, particularly for nab-paclitaxel. Paclitaxel once per week remains the preferred palliative chemotherapy in this setting.

Abstract Background: Etirinotecan pegol (EP) is the first long-acting topoisomerase 1-inhibitor providing sustained level of active metabolite that concentrate in the tumor for an entire chemotherapy cycle. In a Phase 2 study (Lancet Oncology 2013), EP demonstrated a 29% overall response rate in patients with metastatic breast cancer, leading to the Phase 3 global BEACON study in this population. Detection of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) using immunomagnetic EpCAM-based methods have been conceptually accepted as a "liquid tumor biopsy". To circumvent the limited recovery of CTCs these methods provide for molecular profiling applications, we isolated CTCs based on an antibody-independent, continuous flow dielectrophoresis (DEP) technology (ApoStream®). We developed quantitative multiplex immunofluorescent assays for target-specific pharmacodynamics (PD) biomarkers for EP in CTCs isolated pre- and post-treatment. Here we present the distribution of the PD biomarkers in CTC samples collected from BEACON patients. Methods: Donation of blood samples for CTC analysis was voluntary. BEACON patients participating in the substudy had serial (pre-dose, Cycle 2 Day 1, Cycle 4 Day 1, End of Treatment) 7.5-mL whole blood samples drawn in EDTA tubes and shipped ambient to ApoCell (Houston, TX) within 96 hrs for processing. PBMCs were separated by Ficoll® gradient, and CTCs were isolated using ApoStream® technology. Isolated cells were deposited on three slides and stained for DAPI, CD45, and cytokeratin markers, as well as 2-3 of the seven PD markers, and analyzed by iCys® laser scanning cytometer equipped with image analysis software. CTC count, mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) of PD biomarkers, and % marker-positive cells were analyzed for their distribution. Results: 75% of the 852 BEACON patients participated in the CTC substudy, yielding 649 pre-treatment CTC samples. As of Mar14, 538 Cycle 2 Day 1, 281 Cycle 4 Day 1, and 394 End of Treatment samples were collected. 98% of pre-treatment blood samples were successfully processed. 97% had detectable CTCs, with a median of 504 CTCs (interquartile range: 128-1432). PD markers could be analyzed in 83-92% of samples after implementing a minimum requirement of 10 CTCs analyzed. Staining was positive for Top1, Top2, μH2Ax, Rad51, ABCG2, Ki67, and TUNEL in 82%, 71%, 14%, 30%, 20%, 56%, and 94% of samples, respectively. Percent of marker-positive cells varied from 0.2-69%, with 6- to 37-fold interquartile ranges. Median MFI in these cells varied between 25x103 and 100x103, with 1.2- to 1.6-fold interquartile ranges. Conclusions: CTC collection was successfully incorporated into the BEACON study, with 75% patient participation. CTC detection rate using ApoStream® was high, permitting evaluation of biomarkers at baseline and over time. EP target-specific PD biomarkers can be measured in CTCs isolated from patients participating in BEACON and will be assessed for their potential to predict clinical response. Final BEACON efficacy and safety results are expected in early 2015, which will allow further analysis of CTCs with patient outcome (response, PFS, OS) and change in CTCs at time of progression. Citation Format: Edith A Perez, Katie Caygill, Alison L Hannah, Javier Cortes, Ahmad Awada, Joyce O'Shaughnessy, Christopher Twelves, Hope Rugo, Seock-Ah Im, Kenna Anderes, Darren W Davis, Ute Hoch. Etirinotecan pegol target-specific pharmacodynamic biomarkers in circulating tumor cells from patients with metastatic breast cancer in the phase 3 BEACON study [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 P3-10-03.

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 &lt;-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. HER2- patients were randomized to receive standard chemotherapy or the oral PARP inhibitor veliparib in combination with carboplatin (V/C) and chemotherapy. V/C graduated in the triple-negative (TN) signature, where MP2 was not an eligible signature for graduation. Here, we assess the performance of MP1/MP2 class as a specific biomarker of response to V/C. Methods:115 HER2- patients (V/C: 71 and concurrent controls: 44) were considered in this analysis. We assess association between MP1/MP2 and response in the V/C and control arms alone using Fisher’s exact test, and relative performance between arms (biomarker x treatment interaction, likelihood ratio p &lt; 0.05) using a logistic model. This analysis is also performed adjusting for HR status as a covariate. To assess MP1/MP2 in the context of the graduating signature, we added the MP2 patients to the graduating TN subset and evaluated the treatment effect in this ‘biomarker-positive’ group. 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). This analysis does not adjust for multiplicities of other biomarkers in the trial but outside this study. Results: In the V/C arm vs. concurrent controls, there were 66 MP1 (V/C: 32, Control: 34) and 49 MP2 patients (V/C: 39, Control: 10), 78% of which are TN. The distribution of pCR rates among MP1/MP2 dichotomized groups are summarized in Table 1. V/C (n=71)Control (n=44)MP1 (n=32)MP2 (n=39)MP1 (n=34)MP2 (n=10)TN (n=59)3 / 819 / 303 / 132 / 8HR+HER2- (n=56)1 / 244 / 94 / 210 / 2 The OR between MP1/MP2 risk groups for predicting pCR is 9.71 in the V/C arm (p=6.63E-05), in comparison to an OR of 0.97 in the control arm (p=1). There is a significant biomarker x treatment interaction (p=0.023), which remains upon adjusting for HR status (p= 0.028). Based on the I-SPY 2 Bayesian model, a Phase III trial with 300 MP2 patients has a 95% predictive probability of success. When the MP2 patients are added to the graduating TN subset, the OR associated with V/C is 4.36, which is comparable to that of the TN signature (OR: 4.29), while increasing the prevalence of biomarker-positive patients by ∼10%. Conclusion: In our exploratory analysis, MP2 suggests higher sensitivity to V/C combination therapy relative to controls. This observation has prompted an investigation into the biological mechanisms distinguishing the MP1/MP2 subtype that may account for this specificity. Citation Format: Denise M Wolf, Christina Yau, Ashish Sanil, Jo Chien, Anne Wallace, Angela DeMichele, Hank Kaplan, Doug Yee, Claudine Isaacs, Kathy Albain, Rebecca Viscuzi, Judy Boughey, Stacey Moulder, Steven Chui, Qamar Khan, Toncred Styblo, Kirsten Edmiston, Donald Northfelt, Anthony Elias, Barbara Haley, Debu Tripathy, Lamorna Brown-Swigart, Susan Flynn, Gillian Hirst, Meredith Buxton, Nola Hylton, Melissa Paoloni, Fraser Symmans, Laura Esserman, Don Berry, Hope Rugo, Olufunmilayo I. Olopade, Laura van 't Veer. MammaPrint High1/High2 risk class as a biomarker of response to veliparib/carboplatin 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 P3-06-25.

Abstract Purpose: Tigatuzumab (TIG), an agonistic anti-DR5 antibody, triggers apoptosis in DR5+ human tumor cells without crosslinking. TIG has strong in vitro/in vivo activity against basal-like breast cancer cells enhanced by chemotherapy agents. This study evaluates activity of TIG and chemotherapy in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Experimental Design: Randomized 2:1 phase II trial of albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-PAC) ± TIG in patients with TNBC stratified by prior chemotherapy. Patients received nab-PAC weekly × 3 ± TIG every other week, every 28 days. Primary objective was within-arm objective response rate (ORR). Secondary objectives were safety, progression-free survival (PFS), clinical benefit, and TIG immunogenicity. Metastatic research biopsies were required. Results: Among 64 patients (60 treated; TIG/nab-PAC n = 39 and nab-PAC n = 21), there were 3 complete remissions (CR), 8 partial remissions (PR; 1 almost CR), 11 stable diseases (SD), and 17 progressive diseases (PD) in the TIG/nab-PAC arm (ORR, 28%), and no CRs, 8 PRs, 4 SDs, and 9 PDs in the nab-PAC arm (ORR, 38%). There was a numerical increase in CRs and several patients had prolonged PFS (1,025+, 781, 672, 460, 334) in the TIG/nab-PAC arm. Grade 3 toxicities were 28% and 29%, respectively, with no grade 4–5. Exploratory analysis suggests an association of ROCK1 gene pathway activation with efficacy in the TIG/nab-PAC arm. Conclusions: ORR and PFS were similar in both. Preclinical activity of TIG in basal-like breast cancer and prolonged PFS in few patients in the combination arm support further investigation of anti-DR5 agents. ROCK pathway activation merits further evaluation. Clin Cancer Res; 21(12); 2722–9. ©2015 AACR. See related article by Paoletti et al., p. 2771

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.

Abstract Background: Our group and others have identified a subset of ER/PR(−) breast cancers characterized by expression of the androgen receptor (AR) and androgen-dependent growth (Doane 2006). We conducted a proof-of-concept multicenter phase II study to test the efficacy of the AR-antagonist, bicalutamide for the treatment of AR(+) ER/PR(−) MBC (NCT00468715). Results of the primary endpoint, clinical benefit rate (CBR), were presented at ASCO (Gucalp 2012). Data for the impact of bicalutamide on circulating hormone levels in women are limited. Elevations in serum testosterone (T) and estradiol (E) have been observed for men treated with bicalutamide. We hypothesized comparable patterns of change in circulating endocrine markers in response to bicalutamide for women with MBC. Methods: Patients (pts) with AR(+) (IHC ≥10%), ER/PR(−) (IHC &lt;10%) MBC were eligible for treatment (tx) if ECOG performance status ≤2 and normal organ function regardless of menopausal status. There was no limit to prior tx except prior trastuzumab required if HER2(+). Tx consisted of bicalutamide 150mg orally daily in 28-day cycles (C). Toxicity assessed q4 weeks, response q12wks. Primary endpoint was CBR. Peripheral blood was collected for total and free T, E and sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) at baseline, start of C2 (C2) and at end of study (EOS). Standard institutional assays were used. A Wilcoxon signed-rank test was done to compare baseline to C2 and EOS values. Results: 26 patients with AR(+) ER/PR(−) MBC were treated on study. Evaluable number (n) of pts at baseline, C2 and EOS are 26, 26 and 19 respectively. Two pts remain on study. Menopausal status: pre=2, post=24. Baseline median total and free T and estradiol were consistent with expected norms, however a wide range was observed (Table). There were no significant differences observed for median free T, total T, E or SHBG between baseline and C2 or baseline and EOS. Changes in hormone levels could not be stratified by menopausal status or response to bicalutamide given small sample size. Given the wide range of baseline values, we examined the percent change for each endocrine biomarker from baseline to C2 and EOS. As shown in the Table, there was no difference in median percent change observed across time points for each biomarker. Conclusions: No discernible patterns of change in T, E or SHBG were observed in response to bicalutamide therapy when given to women for the treatment of AR(+), ER/PR(−) MBC. These circulating hormones require further evaluation for use as a pharmacodynamic marker. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-05-02.

Abstract Purpose: Patients with hormone receptor–negative breast cancer generally do not benefit from endocrine-targeted therapies. However, a subset with androgen receptor (AR) expression is predicted to respond to antiandrogen therapies. This phase II study explored bicalutamide in AR-positive, estrogen receptor (ER), and progesterone receptor (PgR)-negative metastatic breast cancer. Experimental Design: Tumors from patients with ER/PgR-negative advanced breast cancer were tested centrally for AR [immunohistochemistry (IHC) &gt; 10% nuclear staining considered positive]. If either the primary or a metastatic site was positive, patients were eligible to receive the AR antagonist bicalutamide at a dose of 150 mg daily. Clinical benefit rate (CBR), the primary endpoint, was defined as the total number of patients who show a complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD) &gt; 6 months; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity. Correlative studies included measurement of circulating endocrine markers and IHC surrogates for basal-like breast cancer. Results: Of 424 patients with ER/PgR-negative breast cancer, 12% tested AR-positive. The 6-month CBR was 19% [95% confidence interval (CI), 7%–39%] for bicalutamide. The median PFS was 12 weeks (95% CI, 11–22 weeks). Bicalutamide was well-tolerated with no grade 4/5 treatment-related adverse events observed. Conclusion: AR was expressed in 12% of patients with ER/PgR-negative breast cancer screened for this trial. The CBR of 19% observed with bicalutamide shows proof of principle for the efficacy of minimally toxic androgen blockade in a select group of patients with ER/PgR-negative, AR-positive breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res; 19(19); 5505–12. ©2013 AACR.

Abstract New approaches to drug development are critically needed to lessen the time, cost, and resources necessary to identify and optimize active agents. Strategies to accelerate drug development include testing drugs earlier in the disease process, such as the neoadjuvant setting. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued guidance designed to accelerate drug approval through the use of neoadjuvant studies in which the surrogate short-term endpoint, pathologic response, can be used to identify active agents and shorten the time to approval of both efficacious drugs and biomarkers identifying patients most likely to respond. However, this approach has unique challenges. In particular, issues of patient safety are paramount, given the exposure of potentially curable patients to investigational agents with limited safety experience. Key components to safe drug development in the neoadjuvant setting include defining a study population at sufficiently poor prognosis with standard therapy to justify exposure to investigational agents, defining the extent and adequacy of safety data from phase I, detecting potentially harmful interactions between investigational and standard therapies, improving study designs, such as adaptive strategies, that limit patient exposure to ineffective agents, and intensifying safety monitoring in the course of the trial. The I-SPY2 trial is an example of a phase II neoadjuvant trial of novel agents for breast cancer in which these issues have been addressed, both in the design and conduct of the trial. These adaptations of phase II design enable acceleration of drug development by reducing time and cost to screen novel therapies for activity without compromising safety. Clin Cancer Res; 19(11); 2817–23. ©2013 AACR.