Long-Term Follow-Up of the Anthracyclines in Early Breast Cancer Trials (USOR 06-090, NSABP B-46-I/USOR 07132, and NSABP B-49 [NRG Oncology]).

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 co-primary 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.The primary joint efficacy analysis of the Anthracyclines in Early Breast Cancer (ABC) trials reported in 2017 failed to demonstrate nonanthracycline adjuvant therapy was noninferior to anthracycline-based regimens in high-risk, early breast cancer. Full analyses of the studies had proceeded when the prespecified futility boundary was crossed at a planned futility analysis for the ability to demonstrate noninferiority of a nonanthracycline regimen with continued follow-up. These results were presented with 3.3 years of median follow-up. This manuscript reports results of the final analyses of the study efficacy end points conducted with 6.9 years of median follow-up. Long-term analysis of invasive disease-free survival (IDFS), the primary end point of the ABC trials, remains consistent with the original results, as noninferiority of the nonanthracycline regimens could not be declared on the basis of the original criteria. The secondary end point of recurrence-free interval, which excluded deaths not due to breast cancer as events, favored anthracycline-based regimens, and tests for heterogeneity were significant for hormone receptor status (P = .02) favoring anthracycline regimens for the hormone receptor-negative cohorts. There was no difference in overall survival, and review of the type of IDFS events in the groups suggested reductions in cancer recurrences achieved with anthracycline regimens were offset by late leukemias and deaths unrelated to breast cancer.

Systemic Treatment of Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer: ASCO Resource-Stratified Guideline.

PURPOSE: To guide clinicians and policymakers in three global resource-constrained settings on treating patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) when Maximal setting-guideline recommended treatment is unavailable. METHODS: A multidisciplinary, multinational panel reviewed existing ASCO guidelines and conducted modified ADAPTE and formal consensus processes. RESULTS: Four published resource-agnostic guidelines were adapted for resource-constrained settings; informing two rounds of formal consensus; recommendations received ≥75% agreement. RECOMMENDATIONS: Clinicians should recommend treatment according to menopausal status, pathological and biomarker features when quality results are available. In first-line, for hormone receptor (HR)-positive MBC, when a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor and CDK 4/6 inhibitor combination is unavailable, use hormonal therapy alone. For life-threatening disease, use single-agent chemotherapy or surgery for local control. For premenopausal patients, use ovarian suppression or ablation plus hormone therapy in Basic settings. For human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive MBC, if trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and chemotherapy are unavailable, use trastuzumab and chemotherapy; if unavailable, use chemotherapy. For HER2-positive, HR-positive MBC, use standard first-line therapy, or endocrine therapy if contraindications. For triple-negative MBC with unknown PD-L1 status, or if PD-L1-positive and immunotherapy unavailable, use single-agent chemotherapy. For germline BRCA1/2 mutation-positive MBC, if poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor is unavailable, use hormonal therapy (HR-positive MBC) and chemotherapy (HR-negative MBC). In second-line, for HR-positive MBC, Enhanced setting recommendations depend on prior treatment; for Limited, use tamoxifen or chemotherapy. For HER2-positive MBC, if trastuzumab deruxtecan is unavailable, use trastuzumab emtansine; if unavailable, capecitabine and lapatinib; if unavailable, trastuzumab and/or chemotherapy (hormonal therapy alone for HR-positive MBC).Additional information is available at www.asco.org/resource-stratified-guidelines. It is ASCO's view that healthcare providers and system decision-makers should be guided by the recommendations for the highest stratum of resources available. The guideline is intended to complement but not replace local guidelines.

Anthracyclines in Early Breast Cancer: The ABC Trials-USOR 06-090, NSABP B-46-I/USOR 07132, and NSABP B-49 (NRG Oncology).

Purpose Docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (TC) was superior to doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) in a trial in early breast cancer. However, activity of TC relative to AC regimens with a taxane (TaxAC) is unknown. Methods In a series of three adjuvant trials, women were randomly assigned to TC for six cycles (TC6) or to a standard TaxAC regimen. US Oncology Research (USOR) 06-090 compared TC6 with docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (TAC6). National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-46-I/USOR 07132 compared TC6, TAC6, or TC6 plus bevacizumab. NSABP B-49 compared TC6 with several standard AC and taxane combination regimens. Before any analysis of individual trials, a joint efficacy analysis of TC versus the TaxAC regimens was planned, with invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) as the primary end point. Patients who received TC6 plus bevacizumab on NSABP B-46-I/USOR 07132 were not included. A hazard ratio (HR) from a stratified Cox model that exceeded 1.18 for TC6 versus TaxAC was predefined as inferiority for TC6. The prespecified interim monitoring plan was to report for futility if the HR was > 1.18 when 334 IDFS events were observed (50% of 668 events required for definitive analysis). Results A total of 2,125 patients were randomly assigned to receive TC6 regimens and 2,117 patients were randomly assigned to receive TaxAC regimens. The median follow-up time was 3.3 years. There were 334 IDFS events, and the HR for TC6 versus TaxAC was 1.202 (95% CI, 0.97 to 1.49), which triggered early reporting for futility. The 4-year IDFS was 88.2% for TC6 and was 90.7% for TaxAC ( P = .04). Tests for treatment interaction by protocol, hormone receptor status, and nodal status were negative. Conclusion The TaxAC regimens improved IDFS in patients with high-risk human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer compared with the TC6 regimen.

Lapatinib combined with letrozole versus letrozole and placebo as first-line therapy for postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Cross-talk between human epidermal growth factor receptors and hormone receptor pathways may cause endocrine resistance in breast cancer. This trial evaluated the effect of adding lapatinib, a dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor blocking epidermal growth factor receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), to the aromatase inhibitor letrozole as first-line treatment of hormone receptor (HR) -positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Postmenopausal women with HR-positive MBC were randomly assigned to daily letrozole (2.5 mg orally) plus lapatinib (1,500 mg orally) or letrozole and placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the HER2-positive population. Results In HR-positive, HER2-positive patients (n = 219), addition of lapatinib to letrozole significantly reduced the risk of disease progression versus letrozole-placebo (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.96; P = .019); median PFS was 8.2 v 3.0 months, respectively. Clinical benefit (responsive or stable disease >or= 6 months) was significantly greater for lapatinib-letrozole versus letrozole-placebo (48% v 29%, respectively; odds ratio [OR] = 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2 to 0.8; P = .003). Patients with centrally confirmed HR-positive, HER2-negative tumors (n = 952) had no improvement in PFS. A preplanned Cox regression analysis identified prior antiestrogen therapy as a significant factor in the HER2-negative population; a nonsignificant trend toward prolonged PFS for lapatinib-letrozole was seen in patients who experienced relapse less than 6 months since prior tamoxifen discontinuation (HR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.07; P = .117). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were more common in the lapatinib-letrozole arm versus letrozole-placebo arm (diarrhea, 10% v 1%; rash, 1% v 0%, respectively), but they were manageable. CONCLUSION: This trial demonstrated that a combined targeted strategy with letrozole and lapatinib significantly enhances PFS and clinical benefit rates in patients with MBC that coexpresses HR and HER2.