Ligibel, Jennifer A.

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 < 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 < vs > 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 < .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 > .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.

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 < .001) in univariable analysis and after controlling for baseline BMI and BMI change (P < .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.

This article presents a clinical screening and referral framework to enable health care professionals to guide individuals with cancer to safe and effective exercise programs.

11574 Background: Weight gain after cancer diagnosis is common in cancer survivors and has been linked to increased treatment toxicity, poor quality of life, and increased risk of second cancers and overall mortality. Young breast cancer (BC) survivors may be especially susceptible to weight changes given the impact of treatments such as chemotherapy and hormonal therapy on menopausal status. Methods: We identified women with Stage 0-III breast cancer diagnosed at ≤40 years (y) between 2006-2016 from a multi-center prospective cohort study. Clinical data including self-reported pre-diagnosis and follow-up weights were obtained using baseline and follow-up patient surveys. Participants missing baseline weight, pregnant at diagnosis/within 1y of diagnosis or with BC recurrence within 1y were excluded; those pregnant or with BC recurrence between 1-3y from diagnosis were excluded from the 3y analysis. Menopausal status at baseline and treatment-related amenorrhea (TRA) in follow-up were defined by self-reported last menstrual period. Factors associated with weight gain (>5%) were evaluated using univariate two-sided Fisher's exact test. Results: At baseline, 1y and 3y post diagnosis, 956, 899 and 687 women were eligible for analysis respectively. Median age at diagnosis was 37y (17 - 40), 65% received endocrine therapy and 74% chemotherapy. Premenopausal status was verified in 94% at baseline. Mean BMI at baseline was 24.4 (SD 5.3) kg/m2; 20% (187/956) were overweight and 12% (116/956) obese. At 1y and 3y, mean BMI increased modestly to 24.7 (SD 5.6) and 24.9 (SD 5.2), respectively with weight gain (>5%) observed in 18% (164/899) and 13% (87/687) respectively. 37% (300/804) and 32% (196/615) of eligible premenopausal subjects experienced TRA at 1y and 3y, respectively. Receipt of chemotherapy, receipt of endocrine therapy and TRA were not associated with weight gain at any timepoint. Conclusions: In this large prospective cohort of young BC survivors, mean BMI increased only modestly over time. Self-reported weight gain was not associated with treatment and not exacerbated by TRA. Further analysis to understand the effects of physical activity and other predictors of weight gain in this population are ongoing.

TPS1608 Background: Metformin may have growth inhibitory effects on many cancer types including breast cancer. NCIC MA.32 is a randomized placebo-controlled trial examining the effects of 5 years of metformin in women with breast cancer ( http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01101438 ). This trial offers us the opportunity to explore the effects of metformin on breast cancer biomarkers to gain an understanding of the potential chemo preventive effects of this drug. The primary aim of this companion to MA.32 (Alliance trial # A211201) is to examine the effects of 1 year of metformin vs placebo on breast density for women with Estrogen Receptor negative (ER-) breast cancer. Secondary aims of this study include: evaluation of breast density following 2 years of metformin use, and correlation of density with fasting insulin, glucose and Homeostasis Model Assessment (HOMA). Exploratory aims include examination of the effects of metformin on second cancer rates. Methods: Eligible women must have been enrolled on MA.32 (North America accrual completed January 23, 2013), have hormone receptor-negative breast cancer, and breast composition on mammography >25% glandular density, have a digital mammogram within 12 months of registration on MA.32 and have an intact, unaffected contralateral breast. Women enrolled on this study must provide menstrual cycle data (if premenopausal) and digital mammograms. All other study related information is gathered through participation in MA.32. Mammographic density will be calculated using Cumulus software (the Boyd method). Our accrual goal is 458 patients (229 per arm) and with an assumption of 20% drop out due to drug intolerance and another 20% due to ineligibility. Therefore, with a sample size of 274 (137 per arm) we will have at least 85% power to detect a 4% difference between study arms, i.e., 5% change from baseline to one year of treatment for metformin vs. 1% for placebo, using the two-sided two-sample t-test at a significance level of 5%. This study was activated in the United States on 8/22/2012 and 15 patients have been accrued to date. This study is sponsored by the NCI and the Alliance for clinical trials. Clinical trial information: NCT01666171.

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]

1032 Background: Obesity is a predictor of poor outcomes in women with early-stage breast cancer (BC). Some reports suggest that obesity is associated with aggressive tumor histology. We examined the relationship between BMI at diagnosis and PAM50 subtype, and explored the interaction between BMI and subtype on prognosis in early BC. Methods: CALGB 9741 evaluated dose-density and sequence in node-positive BC. All patients received doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide and paclitaxel dosed by actual body weight without cap or dose adjustment. The primary endpoint was RFS. Height and weight at diagnosis were abstracted from patient records; the PAM50 assay was performed using the Nanostring platform. Association between PAM50 and BMI was assessed by a chi-squared test. The prognostic value of BMI conditional on PAM50 was tested as a continuous variable using Cox models for RFS adjusted for number of involved nodes, tumor size, menopausal status, drug sequence, and dose density. Results: Baseline height and weight were available for 1909 of 2005 enrolled patients; 1272 also had subtype determination by PAM50. Distribution of subtypes differed significantly by BMI (p=0.03), with all weight groups having similar proportions of Basal and HER-2 Enriched subtypes and with obese patients having lower rates of Luminal A (30 vs 35%) and higher rates of Luminal B (39 vs 26%) tumors as compared to normal-weight individuals. In multivariate analyses, BMI and subtype were independent predictors of RFS (p=0.011 and p<0.001, respectively). Exploratory analyses did not show a significant interaction between subtype and the relationship between increased BMI and RFS (p=0.15), although largest differences were seen among Luminal cancers (Table). Conclusions: Biologic subtypes were distributed differently in obese and non-obese individuals. The association between BMI and RFS did not differ significantly by subtype in this study. More work is needed to further explore the interaction of BMI and subtype, especially in a larger cohort of Luminal tumors. [Table: see text]

Multiple organizations around the world have issued evidence‐based exercise guidance for patients with cancer and cancer survivors. Recently, the American College of Sports Medicine has updated its exercise guidance for cancer prevention as well as for the prevention and treatment of a variety of cancer health‐related outcomes (eg, fatigue, anxiety, depression, function, and quality of life). Despite these guidelines, the majority of people living with and beyond cancer are not regularly physically active. Among the reasons for this is a lack of clarity on the part of those who work in oncology clinical settings of their role in assessing, advising, and referring patients to exercise. The authors propose using the American College of Sports Medicine's Exercise Is Medicine initiative to address this practice gap. The simple proposal is for clinicians to assess, advise, and refer patients to either home‐based or community‐based exercise or for further evaluation and intervention in outpatient rehabilitation. To do this will require care coordination with appropriate professionals as well as change in the behaviors of clinicians, patients, and those who deliver the rehabilitation and exercise programming. Behavior change is one of many challenges to enacting the proposed practice changes. Other implementation challenges include capacity for triage and referral, the need for a program registry, costs and compensation, and workforce development. In conclusion, there is a call to action for key stakeholders to create the infrastructure and cultural adaptations needed so that all people living with and beyond cancer can be as active as is possible for them.