Citations

ImportancePathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer strongly correlates with overall survival and has become the standard end point in neoadjuvant trials. However, there is controversy regarding whether the definition of pCR should exclude or permit the presence of residual ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).ObjectiveTo examine the association of residual DCIS in surgical specimens after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer with survival end points to inform standards for the assessment of pathologic complete response.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThe study team analyzed the association of residual DCIS after NAC with 3-year event-free survival (EFS), distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS), and local-regional recurrence (LRR) in the I-SPY2 trial, an adaptive neoadjuvant platform trial for patients with breast cancer at high risk of recurrence. This is a retrospective analysis of clinical specimens and data from the ongoing I-SPY2 adaptive platform trial of novel therapeutics on a background of standard of care for early breast cancer. I-SPY2 participants are adult women diagnosed with stage II/III breast cancer at high risk of recurrence.InterventionsParticipants were randomized to receive taxane and anthracycline-based neoadjuvant therapy with or without 1 of 10 investigational agents, followed by definitive surgery.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe presence of DCIS and EFS, DRFS, and LRR.ResultsThe study team identified 933 I-SPY2 participants (aged 24 to 77 years) with complete pathology and follow-up data. Median follow-up time was 3.9 years; 337 participants (36%) had no residual invasive disease (residual cancer burden 0, or pCR). Of the 337 participants with pCR, 70 (21%) had residual DCIS, which varied significantly by tumor-receptor subtype; residual DCIS was present in 8.5% of triple negative tumors, 15.6% of hormone-receptor positive tumors, and 36.6% of ERBB2-positive tumors. Among those participants with pCR, there was no significant difference in EFS, DRFS, or LRR based on presence or absence of residual DCIS.Conclusions and RelevanceThe analysis supports the definition of pCR as the absence of invasive disease after NAC regardless of the presence or absence of DCIS.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01042379.

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.

Abstract Background Anthracycline use in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is hindered by cumulative exposure limits and risk of cardiotoxicity. Pixantrone, a novel aza-anthracenedione with structural similarities to mitoxantrone and anthracyclines, is theorized to exhibit less cardiotoxicity, mainly due to lack of iron binding. We conducted a randomized phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2 dosing schedules of pixantrone in patients with refractory HER2-negative MBC. Methods Intravenous pixantrone was administered at 180 mg/m2 every 3 weeks (group A) versus 85 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle (group B). Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), median 6-month PFS, overall survival (OS), safety, quality of life, and serial assessment of circulating tumor cells. A 20% ORR was targeted as sufficient for further testing of pixantrone in this patient population. Results Forty-five patients were evaluable, with 2 confirmed partial responses in group A and 1 in group B. The trial was terminated due to insufficient activity. Overall median PFS and OS were 2.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.0-4.1) and 16.8 (95% CI: 8.9-21.6) months, respectively. Notable overall grade 3-4 adverse events were the following: neutrophil count decrease (62%), fatigue (16%), and decrease in ejection fraction (EF) (4%). Conclusion Pixantrone has insufficient activity in the second- and third-line MBC setting. It appears, however, to have limited cardiotoxicity. (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01086605).

Abstract Objectives We investigated the impact of our laboratory’s reflex testing process for resolving ERBB2 (HER2) status on breast cancer samples that require additional workup after fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), per guideline recommendations published in 2018 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the College of American Pathologists (CAP). Methods In total, 500 breast cancer specimens with ERBB2 FISH results in groups 2 through 4 (all reported as immunohistochemistry [IHC] equivocal [2+] at external laboratories) were resubmitted for IHC testing in our laboratory. Per the ASCO/CAP guideline, FISH was rescored when internal IHC was also equivocal (2+), targeted to tumor areas demonstrating more intense IHC staining, if observed. Results Reflex IHC/FISH testing changed the final reported ERBB2 status in 185 of 500 (37.0%) samples. Result changes included discordant IHC (n = 4 score 0, n = 132 score 1+, and n = 16 score 3+) and discordant FISH (n = 33). Numerical differences in FISH scores were comparable for targeted vs nontargeted FISH rescoring (P = .086 for ERBB2 copy number; P = .49 for ERBB2 ratio). Two cases showed larger differences in FISH scores, suggesting heterogeneity. Conclusions Retesting of breast cancer samples with equivocal IHC frequently changes IHC results, but targeted reanalysis of borderline FISH results rarely identifies significant differences in ERBB2 copy number or ratio.

Context.— Guidelines for HER2 testing in breast cancer have changed over time, from the US Food and Drug Administration guideline to the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guidelines published in 2007, 2013, and 2018. Objective.— To investigate the change in assignment of HER2 status in breast cancers with equivocal (2+) immunohistochemistry (IHC) results by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) following implementation of the ASCO/CAP 2018 guideline. Design.— The study included 3556 invasive breast cancers that were HER2 equivocal (2+) by IHC and were submitted to our FISH laboratory after July 2018. Reflex testing (with repeat IHC staining) was performed on certain categories of FISH results known as groups 2, 3, and 4. Concomitant review of IHC and FISH was performed on these reflex cases per 2018 guideline recommendations. The FISH data were analyzed to compare US Food and Drug Administration and ASCO/CAP 2007, 2013, and 2018 interpretations. Results.— Of 3548 invasive breast cancers with complete data available, the percentage agreement for FISH according to different guidelines was highest for ASCO/CAP 2018 versus US Food and Drug Administration (96.5%), followed by ASCO/CAP 2018 versus 2007 (93.8%), and lowest with ASCO/CAP 2018 versus 2013 (83.7%). Per the 2018 guideline, reflex IHC testing was performed on 633 breast cancers (17.8%); the majority of reflex testing results were negative (541 of 633; 85.5%). The overall distribution of HER2 FISH results (per the 2018 guideline) was 88.5% negative and 11.5% positive. Conclusions.— By eliminating the equivocal FISH category, the 2018 ASCO/CAP guideline significantly reduced the HER2 FISH–positive rate in tumors with equivocal (2+) IHC results.

BackgroundThe goal of this study was to assess the impact of trastuzumab on locoregional failure.METHODSThe analysis included 2763 patients with HER2‐positive (HER2+) breast cancer who were randomly assigned to adjuvant doxorubicin (A), cyclophosphamide (C), paclitaxel (T) and trastuzumab (H) (arm A, AC→T [n = 922]; arm B, AC→T→H [n = 988]; arm C, AC→T+H→H [n = 853]). Radiotherapy was given after AC→T concurrently with H. Radiotherapy was given after lumpectomy (L) or after mastectomy (M) with ≥4 positive lymph nodes but was optional for 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes. Locoregional failures at 10 years (LFR10) as first events were compared using competing risk analysis.ResultsThe median follow‐up was 13.0 years. The first site of failure was local‐only in 96 cases, locoregional in 16 cases, regional in 32 cases, and not specified in 2 cases; LFR10 was 4.8% (95% CI 4.1%‐5.7%). LFR10 was 5.5% (95% CI 4.3%‐7.2%), 4.9% (95% CI 3.7%‐6.4%), and 2.8% (95% CI 1.9%‐4.1%) in arms A, B, and C (B vs A: hazard ratio [HR] 0.91, P = .62; C vs A: HR 0.72, P = .12). For estrogen receptor–positive patients, LFR10 was 3.7% (95% CI 2.8%‐4.8%) and for estrogen receptor–negative patients, it was 6.1% (95% CI 5.0%‐7.4%; HR 0.61, P = .004). Local treatment included L+RT (n = 1044 [38%]), M+RT (n = 1025 [37%]), and M (n = 694 [25%]). LFR10 was 6.% (95% CI 5.0%‐7.8%), 3.0% (95% CI 2.1%‐4.3%), and 5.5% (95% CI 4.0%‐7.4%) for L+RT, M+RT, and M, respectively (M+RT vs L+RT: HR 0.43, P < .001; M vs L+RT: HR 0.88, P = .57). For 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes, LFR10 was 6.5% (95% CI 4.8%‐8.9%), 4.1% (95% CI 2.4%‐7.0%), and 4.3% (95% CI 2.9%‐6.5%) in L+RT, M+RT, and M, respectively (M vs L+RT: HR 0.68, P = .14; M vs M+RT: HR 1.2, P = .6).ConclusionLow 10‐year LFRs were seen regardless of trastuzumab use. Differences in local therapy in patients with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes did not appear to improve local control. Local therapy studies for HER2+ and other tumor characteristics are important as the role of local therapies continues to evolve.

For patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), sentinel lymph node (SLN) surgery is generally reserved for patients at high risk of being upstaged to invasive disease. The use of frozen section (FS) pathologic analysis of the primary tumor may allow for selective surgical nodal staging within one procedure. We sought to define the reliability of FS for detection of upstaging. Eight hundred and twenty-seven patients were identified with DCIS on core needle biopsy that underwent 834 operations at our institution between January 2004 and October 2014. We calculated the rate of upstage from DCIS to invasive cancer on both intraoperative FS and final pathology to determine the performance of FS. Upstage rate on final pathology was 118/834 (14.1%) 95 per cent confidence interval 11.8 to 16.7 per cent. FS identified 88/118 (74.6%) of the upstages. Specificity was 99.3 per cent (711/716). Overall accuracy was 95.8 per cent (799/834) and the positive predictive value was 96.0 per cent (711/741 patients). Mean size of invasive cancers identifiedon FS was 5.6 mm, versus 3.5 mm for those identified only on permanent section, P = 0.11. Intraoperative FS analysis of DCIS is useful for identification of upstage to invasive disease. This may facilitate a selective approach to SLN surgery that both decreases unnecessary SLN surgery and the need for a second operation.

1083 Background: Pixantrone (Pix) is a novel aza-anthracenedione with structural similarities to mitoxantrone and promising activity against non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Due to the lack of iron binding it is theorized to exhibit less cardiotoxicity than the anthracyclines. Methods: N1031 is a phase II RCT of 2 schedules of Pix, in pts with MBC. Group A pts received 180mg/m2 IV q3 wks, and group B pts 85mg/m2 IV on days 1, 8, 15 q4 wks. Eligibility included prior exposure to anthracyclines and/or taxanes, and 1 to 3 regiments in the metastatic setting (minimum of 2 if no prior adjuvant therapy given). Due to lack of long term cardiac safety data no more than 12 cycles were allowed. Frequent cardiac imaging was performed per protocol. Primary endpoint was RR and secondary endpoints included PFS, OS, safety, and QOL. Planned sample size was 25 pts per group. Results: In total 46 pts were evaluable (23 per group), mean age 55.5 yrs (range 38-79), 37% PS 0, 52% PS 1, and 11% PS 2. 80% of pts had prior exposure to doxorubicin, 72% had prior (neo)-adjuvant therapy, 76% were ER+ and 57% received prior HT. Number of prior metastatic regiments was: 1 (28%), 2 (61%) and 3 (11%). Most common adverse events (%) of any grade were: alopecia (74), anemia (74), fatigue (85), nausea (67), ANC decrease (87), and skin disorder (41). Grade 3-4 adverse events (%) at least possibly attributed to Pix and occurring in at least 2 pts were: ANC decrease (57), fatigue (9), increased AST (4%). One pt from each group (4%) had a grade 3 decrease in EF. There were no major differences between the two groups except for more oral mucositis in group A (35% vs 4%). Median number of cycles was 3 in group A (range 1-12) and 2 in group B (range 1-8). There was only 1 confirmed tumor response per group (4%,95% CI: 0.1-22%) prompting early termination of the trial. The median PFS was 2.7 mo (95% CI: 1.8-3.8), and the median OS was 8.9 mo (95% CI: 7.5-N/A). Conclusions: Pixantrone has insufficient activity in patients with MBC exposed to prior anthracyclines and/or taxanes. Adverse events were similar to prior experience with Pix. There were no major differences between the 2 schedules of administration. There was no significant cardiac toxicity seen in this trial. Correlative studies are underway.