Citations

Context.— Neoadjuvant systemic therapy refers to the use of systemic agent(s) for malignancy prior to surgical treatment and has recently emerged as an option for most breast cancer patients eligible for adjuvant systemic therapy. Consequently, treated breast carcinomas have become routine specimens in pathology practices. A standard protocol has not yet been universally adopted for the evaluation and reporting of these specimens. The American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system recognizes the challenges in staging breast carcinomas after neoadjuvant treatment and provides important data points but does not currently provide detailed guidance in estimating the residual tumor burden in the breast and lymph nodes. The Residual Cancer Burden system is the only Web-based system that quantifies treatment response as a continuous variable using residual tumor burden in the breast and the lymph nodes. Objective.— To provide clarifications and guidance for evaluation and reporting of postneoadjuvant breast specimens, discuss issues with the current staging and reporting systems, and provide specific suggestions for future modifications to the American Joint Committee on Cancer system and the Residual Cancer Burden calculator. Data Sources.— English-language literature on the subject and the data from the I-SPY 2, a multicenter, adaptive randomization phase 2 neoadjuvant platform trial for early-stage, high-risk breast cancer patients. Conclusions.— This article highlights challenges in the pathologic evaluation and reporting of treated breast carcinomas and provides recommendations and clarifications for pathologists and clinicians. It also provides specific recommendations for staging and discusses future directions.

Background Atogepant is an oral, small-molecule, calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonist for the preventive treatment of migraine. Methods In the double-blind, phase 3 ADVANCE trial, participants with 4–14 migraine days/month were randomized to atogepant 10 mg, 30 mg, 60 mg, or placebo once daily for 12 weeks. We evaluated the time course of efficacy of atogepant for the preventive treatment of migraine. Analyses included change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days during each of the three 4-week treatment periods, change in weekly migraine days during weeks 1–4, and proportion of participants with a migraine on each day during the first week. Results We analyzed 873 participants (n = 214 atogepant 10 mg, n = 223 atogepant 30 mg, n = 222 atogepant 60 mg, n = 214 placebo). For weeks 1–4, mean change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days ranged from −3.1 to −3.9 across atogepant doses vs −1.6 for placebo ( p < 0.0001). For weeks 5–8 and 9–12, reductions in mean monthly migraine days ranged from −3.7 to −4.2 for atogepant vs −2.9 for placebo ( p ≤ 0.012) and −4.2 to −4.4 for atogepant vs −3.0 for placebo ( p < 0.0002), respectively. Mean change from baseline in weekly migraine days in week 1 ranged from −0.77 to −1.03 for atogepant vs −0.29 with placebo ( p < 0.0001). Percentages of participants reporting a migraine on post-dose day 1 ranged from 10.8% to 14.1% for atogepant vs 25.2% with placebo ( p ≤ 0.0071). Conclusion Atogepant demonstrated treatment benefits as early as the first full day after treatment initiation, and sustained efficacy across each 4-week interval during the 12-week treatment period. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03777059