Lemieux, Julie

526 Background: The PALLAS trial (NCT02513394) investigated the efficacy of the addition of palbociclib (palbo) to standard adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) to reduce breast cancer recurrence. Previous analyses of this trial have not shown significant benefit of combination palbo+ET over ET alone. Given prior data showing that extent of neutropenia is associated with response to palbo and other cell cycle-specific therapies, we evaluated whether extent of neutropenia could identify responders to palbo in the adjuvant setting. Methods: PALLAS is a global, open-label, phase III trial that randomized patients (pts) with stage II-III hormone-receptor positive, HER2-negative breast cancer to receive ET for ≥5 years with or without standard-dose palbo for 2 years in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint is invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). For this exploratory analysis, the palbo population was classified into pts with treatment-emergent high-grade neutropenia (HGN) with maximum grade ≥3 (absolute neutrophil count <1000), or low-grade/no neutropenia (LGN) with maximum grade <2; these groups were compared to each other and to the ET alone group for 5-year iDFS outcomes. Logistic regression examined individual baseline characteristics associated with HGN during the first 3 cycles within the palbo group. Impact of HGN during the first 3, 6, and 12 cycles on iDFS was tested using univariate and multivariable landmark Cox regression. Results: The safety population included 5736 pts, 2840 allocated to palbo+ET, 2896 to ET alone. Prior publications reported no new safety signals, low rates of serious infection, and no grade 5 treatment-related events. The palbo+ET group consisted of 1006 (35.4%) LGN and 1834 (64.6%) HGN. 5-year iDFS results are shown in the table. Pts who received palbo+ET and developed HGN by the end of cycle 6 had significantly improved 5-year iDFS compared to those who received ET alone (p=0.04), which remained statistically significant when adjusting for body mass index (BMI), prior chemotherapy, and race. Multivariable logistic regression showed lower BMI, prior chemotherapy, Asian race, and prior mastectomy were significantly associated with HGN (all p<0.05). Conclusions: In this exploratory analysis of the phase III PALLAS adjuvant trial, addition of palbo to ET appeared to be superior to ET alone in pts who developed HGN in the first 6 cycles of treatment but not in those who had LGN. These findings are consistent with observations in the metastatic setting suggesting that neutropenia could be a useful biomarker for palbo concentration and efficacy. Clinical trial information: NCT02513394 . Maximum grade neutropenia measured at end of cycle: 5-year iDFS Palbo+ET HGN (%) Palbo+ET LGN (%) ET alone (%) Hazard Ratio p-value 3 84.9 84.4 1.06 0.54 84.9 82.9 1.17 0.06 6 85.6 84.9 1.08 0.44 85.6 83.4 1.19 0.04 12 86.3 85.9 1.06 0.57 86.3 85.0 1.12 0.20

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: As the development and use of oral anticancer agents increases, it is critical to understand patient adherence to both standard and investigational agents. The open label, phase 3 multicenter PALLAS trial investigates whether adding 2 years of the CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib (P) to adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) improves invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) over adjuvant ET alone in patients (pts) with HR- positive, HR2-negative, stage II-III breast cancer. Pts were randomly assigned to either Palbociclib (125 mg/day, 3 weeks on, 1 week off, in a 28-day cycle) plus ongoing provider/patient-choice adjuvant ET (P+ET) versus ET alone. We examined patient-reported adherence to ET +/- P during the first two years of study treatment. Methods: Adherence outcomes were measured in English-speaking pts in the U.S., UK, Ireland and Australia, Spanish-speaking pts in Spain and Mexico, and German-speaking pts in Germany and Austria. Adherence measures included drug diaries completed at each cycle, pill counts (for P only) collected at each study visit, and the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale-4 item and the McHorney Adherence Estimator questionnaires completed at cycles 2, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 (22 months). Mean adherence for each cycle was defined as the average proportion of prescribed pills taken (via drug diary) across all patients who initiated that cycle. Persistence was defined as the duration of drug initiation to treatment cessation (via drug diary). Generalized estimating equations were used to model the “most adherent” pts on the Morisky (score = 5 vs score &lt;5) and “low risk” for adherence problems on the McHorney (score=0 vs score &gt;0) to compare the average difference between arms over time for ET, adjusting for baseline demographic and clinical variables. Results: 81% (N=4688) of PALLAS pts were included in this analysis. Median persistence to ET was 23.6 months in P + ET (n=2169), 23.7 months in ET alone (2136) and 20.4 months for P (n=2194). The number of pts who initiated each cycle for ET declined over time and was similar between arms; the decline was more marked for P (Table 1). Mean adherence range as measured by drug diary was 98.2-99.3% for ET in P+ET and 98.0 - 99.4% in ET alone; and for P, ranged from 93.4 - 98.8%. The adherence and persistence results were nearly identical whether measured by drug diary or pill count for P. The observed percent “most adherent” for P measured by the Morisky scale ranged from 71.9% - 79.6% and the percent “low risk” for adherence problems measured by the McHorney scale, 64.0% - 73.4%. The percent of pts “most adherent” and “low risk” for adherence problems to ET was higher, on average over time, in the P+ET group compared to ET alone (75% vs 68%, p&lt;0.01; 75% vs 72%, p=.05, respectively). Conclusions: Self-reported mean adherence for both P + ET and ET alone was strikingly high for pts who remained on therapy; persistence was also high with ET during the 2-year treatment period. Current analyses suggest that nonadherence to either P or ET was likely not a major contributor to the iDFS results seen in the overall PALLAS trial. These results illustrate the importance of measuring and monitoring patient adherence to oral study agents. Support: AFT, Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02513394) and EudraCT (2014-005181-30). https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org Table 1.Adherence and persistence in PALLAS over the 24 month treatment periodPalbocicilb + ETETPalbociclibETETTreatment cycleMean Adherence (SD)N*Mean Adherence (SD)NMean Adherence (SD)N193.4 (13.8)229098.7 (6.1)230999.0 (5.2)2343294.7 (13.3)218198.8 (6.4)220398.4 (7.1)2206397.4 (10.1)211298.7 (7.3)214298.8 (6.3)2168497.6 (10.2)203598.6 (7.8)211099.0 (5.7)2154597.6 (11.1)197598.3 (7.9)209398.1 (8.3)2148698.1 (8.7)189998.7 (6.6)203798.5 (8.2)2116798.1 (9.3)185599.0 (6.3)201298.6 (7.3)2102898.0 (9.1)181098.2 (8.2)199798.1 (8.2)2092998.4 (7.4)173399.0 (6.4)196298.8 (6.8)20511098.3 (8.6)171499.2 (4.9)194699.0 (5.5)20381198.3 (8.0)169198.5 (7.3)193798.2 (8.2)20311298.7 (6.2)161299.1 (5.3)191098.7 (7.5)19861398.5 (7.7)159698.9 (6.4)189398.8 (7.1)19691497.9 (9.3)157698.4 (7.3)188298.0 (9.1)19611598.5 (6.9)151499.2 (4.6)185499.0 (6.0)19281698.2 (8.7)148699.1 (4.6)183599.1 (5.7)19131798.1 (9.8)147998.3 (7.8)182698.5 (6.4)19031898.7 (6.8)141699.3 (4.1)176899.2 (5.3)18601998.7 (7.3)140899.3 (3.8)175699.4 (3.1)18482098.4 (8.9)139798.9 (5.3)174298.7 (5.8)18382198.5 (7.5)130199.0 (6.1)167698.8 (7.1)17842297.8 (9.7)124698.8 (6.2)164799.2 (5.7)17692398.1 (8.8)118098.2 (8.5)161998.4 (8.0)17552498.8 (7.2)108699.0 (6.3)146898.9 (7.1)16192598.8 (6.7)99699.2 (5.2)143298.8 (7.1)15892697.9 (11.2)84599.1 (5.7)140998.6 (8.8)1578ET=Endocrine therapy * Number of pts who initiated the treatment cycle. Citation Format: Eileen Shinn, David Zahrieh, Angela DeMichele, Nick Zdenkowski, Julie Lemieux, Jun Mao, Vesna Bjelic-Radisic, Michelle Naughton, Georg Pfeiler, Karen Gelmon, Ingrid Mayer, Daniel Egle, Gabriele Zoppoli, Tiffany Traina, Miguel Martin Jiménez, Silvia Antolin Novoa, Tufia Haddad, Arlene Chan, Alistair Edward Ring, Antonio Wolff, Jose JuanPonce Lorenzo, Dhanusha Sabanathan, Hal Burstein, Zbigniew Ireneusz Nowecki, Gunda Pristauz-Telsnigg, Adam Brufsky, Meritxell Bellet-Ezquerra, Theodoros Foukakis, Yelena Novik, Gabor Rubovszky, Karoline Muehlbacher, Otto Metzger, Theodora Goulioti, Ernest Law, Ann Partridge, Lisa Carey, Alex Zoroufy, Dominik Hlauschek, Christian Fesl, Erica Mayer, Michael Gnant. Adherence with adjuvant endocrine therapy with or without Palbociclib in the PALLAS trial [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 P4-12-01.

Abstract Background: Quality of life (QOL) in breast cancer patients (pts) can be greatly impacted by initial treatment and ongoing therapy, particularly if side effects and symptoms are not well tolerated. The PALLAS trial investigated whether the addition of 2 years of palbociclib (palbo) to adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) improved invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) over adjuvant ET alone. We report on the main patient-reported outcome (PRO) quality of life (QOL) and symptom severity results of this trial by treatment arm. Methods: PALLAS is an ongoing multicenter, open label phase 3 trial that enrolled hormone receptor positive, HER2-negative, stage II-III breast cancer patients at 406 cancer centers across 21 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either 2 years of palbo (125mg/day, 3 weeks on 1 week off) plus ongoing provider or patient-choice adjuvant ET (palbo+ET) versus ongoing ET alone. The primary study endpoint was iDFS. Treatment with palbo in all pts stopped at the time of the second interim analysis (5/2020) due to futility; all pts then moved to follow up. The PRO analyses were triggered for completion after awareness of the pre-specified 469 iDFS cases in November 2020. Eight PRO endpoints were measured serially (i.e., day 1 of each monthly cycle for the first 3 months, then every 3 months for the first 2 years, and once at year 3). The endpoints were the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status/QOL score, the Brief Fatigue Inventory score, the modified Brief Pain Inventory severity and pain interference scores, the EORTC QLQ-BR23 alopecia score, and the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial hot flash symptoms, vaginal problems, and musculoskeletal pain scores. Linear mixed models compared the average difference between arms across time points during the initial 2-year treatment period adjusting for cycle 1 day 1 (C1D1) PRO scores, demographic and clinical variables. The average differences between arms (palbo+ET vs ET alone) and the two-sided (1-[0.05/8]) x 100% confidence intervals, adjusted for multiple comparisons, were calculated. Analysis of covariance compared the average between-arm differences by endpoint at 3 years. Results: The PRO intention to collect population included 4688 (81%) of the overall trial pts, and was clinically and demographically representative of the remaining 1073 pts. Each analysis population, with measures at C1D1 and at least 1 post-C1D1 assessment for each PRO endpoint, comprised ≥ 89% of the 4688 pts and the proportions were similar between arms. After adjustment for baseline covariates, on average, no clinically important differences between arms were observed for any of the eight endpoints over the 2 year treatment period (Table 1). All effect sizes were below the pre-specified 0.2 threshold. These PRO results were similar at the 3 year time point. Conclusions: No clinically significant differences in either patient-reported QOL or symptom severity were found, on average, between participants in the two PALLAS treatment arms while either taking palbo+ET or ET alone, or after study-wide termination of palbo. In general, the addition of palbociclib in the adjuvant breast cancer setting did not contribute to increased symptom burden within this survivorship population. Further analyses will examine the relationship between PROs and treatment discontinuation by arm and study time point. Support: AFT, Pfizer, https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org Table 1.Results of the Patient-Reported QOL and Symptom Severity Analyses Between the Two Treatment Arms During the First 2 Years of PALLASPRO Endpoint *Palbo + ET Adjusted average score (95% CI)ET alone Adjusted average score (95% CI)Average Difference + (Palbo + ET vs ET alone)[99.38% CI] Clinically ++ Important DifferenceEORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QOL71.7 (71.2, 72.2)74.0 (73.5, 74.5)-2.3 (-3.3, -1.4)**NoBrief Fatigue Inventory Score2.3 (2.2, 2.3)2.1 (2.0, 2.1)0.2 (0.1, 0.3)NoModified Brief Pain Inventory - Severity Score2.3 (2.2, 2.3)2.4 (2.4, 2.5)-0.2 (-0.3, -0.1)NoModified Brief Pain Inventory - Interference Score1.7 (1.6, 1.7)1.7 (1.6, 1.7)0.0 (-0.1, 0.1)NoEORTC QLQ-BR23 Alopecia1.4 (1.4, 1.4)1.3 (1.3, 1.3)0.1 (0.1, 0.1)NoBreast Cancer Prevention Trial - Hot Flash Symptoms1.2 (1.2, 1.3)1.2 (1.2, 1.3)0.0 (-0.1, 0.1)NoBreast Cancer Prevention Trial - Vaginal Problems0.8 (0.8, 0.8)0.8 (0.7, 0.8)0.0 (0.0, 0.1)NoBreast Cancer Prevention Trial - Musculoskeletal Pain1.2 (1.2, 1.2)1.3 (1.3, 1.3)-0.1 (-0.2, 0.0)No* For the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QOL subscale, higher scores indicate better QOL. For all other PRO endpoints, higher scores indicate worse symptom levels. ** The lower bound of the one-sided CI (adjusted for multiple comparisons) was -3.3. Because the lower limit is greater than the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of -3.44, non-inferiority of palbo+ET relative to ET-alone was concluded. The non-inferiority margin corresponds to a 0.2 SD in the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health/QOL score. +The average difference was adjusted for the following baseline covariates: Cycle 1 day 1 score, region (if applicable), age category, first adjuvant ET, race, ethnicity, N-stage, T-stage, histological grade, PgR, prior chemotherapy, ECOG Performance Status. ++Based on each instrument’s published clinically relevant cut-offs, if available. After calculating Cohen’s d treatment effect sizes, (i.e. by dividing the average difference by the ET-alone arm standard deviation from cycle 1 day 1), all effect sizes were below the pre-specified 0.2 threshold, and would not be considered clinically important. Citation Format: Michelle Joy Naughton, David Zahrieh, Michael Gnant, Nicholas Zdenkowski, Julie Lemieux, Jun J Mao, Vesna Bjelic-Radisic, Eileen Shinn, Marija Balic, Christoph Thomssen, Jane Neisel, Manuel Ruiz-Echarri, Sibylle Loibl, Claudine Isaacs, David Cameron, Fernando Manuel Henao Carrasco, Matthew Goetz, Viktor Wette, Gustavo Werutsky, Hope Rugo, Marcus Vetter, Ling-Ming Tseng, Kathy Miller, Florian Fitzal, Juan Miguel Gil Gil, Haeseong Park, Barbro Linderholm, Emilio Bajetta, Zoneddy Dayao, Aleix Prat, Karin Ehrhardt, Otto Metzger, Amal Arahmani, Ernest Law, Ann Partridge, Lisa Carey, Alex Zoroufy, Amylou Dueck, Dominik Hlauschek, Angela DeMichele, Erica Mayer. Quality of life and symptom severity in the PALLAS randomized trial of palbociclib with adjuvant endocrine therapy in early breast cancer (AFT-05) [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 P4-10-01.

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.

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]

529 Background: The effect of metformin on sex hormones (SHs) levels that may impact breast cancer (BC) outcome, is unclear. We evaluated the effect of metformin on SHs in a subgroup of women enrolled in the placebo-controlled MA.32 trial, a phase III randomized study of nondiabetic subjects with T1-3, N0-3 BC randomized to receive metformin 850 mg po bid or placebo for 5 years. Methods: Our substudy was conducted on the group of post-menopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) negative BC and not receiving endocrine treatment enrolled in the trial. Post-menopausal was defined as prior bilateral oophorectomy or > 12 months since last menses without prior hysterectomy. Fasting blood and adherence to study drug at baseline and 6 months was required. Sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG), free testosterone and estradiol serum levels were evaluated using Roche Modular competitive ECLIA (electrochemiluminescense immunoassay). We compared change from baseline to 6 months in estradiol, SHBG and free testosterone between study arms using Wilcoxon sum rank tests and regression models to adjust for baseline BMI and weight change. Results: 304 women were eligible, 135 metformin vs 169 placebo; tumor stage and prior (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy (98% in both arms) and HER2 targeted treatment were well balanced between arms. At baseline mean age was 58.2±6.9 vs 57.6±7.9 years, mean BMI 26.9±4.9 vs 28.6±6.2 Kg/m2, median estradiol 29.82 vs 31.01 pmol/L, SHBG 80.6 vs 73.7 nmol/L and free testosterone 0.02 vs 0.03 nmol/L in metformin vs placebo patients, respectively. In univariable analysis, median estradiol decreased significantly between baseline and 6 months on the metformin vs placebo arm (-4.81 vs 0 pmol/L, p = < 0.0001); this difference remained significant after controlling for baseline BMI (p = 0.0001) and weight change (mean weight change -1.8±3.5 vs 0.4±3.5 Kg, p = < 0.0001 for metformin vs placebo respectively) between baseline and 6 months (p = 0.0007). In contrast, there was no significant change in SHBG or free testosterone (median change SHBG -5.5 vs -5.9 nmol/L, p = 0.33; median change free testosterone 0 vs 0 nmol/L, p = 0.33 for metformin vs placebo respectively). Conclusions: Metformin lowered estradiol levels, independent of weight change in non-diabetic post-menopausal women with ER and PR negative BC enrolled onto MA.32 trial. This observation suggests a new metformin action that has potential relevance to BC management.