'The Reports of My Death Are Greatly Exaggerated'-Evaluating the Effect of Necrosis on MGMT Promoter Methylation Testing in High-Grade Glioma.

(1) Background: MGMT (O-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase) promoter methylation remains an important predictive biomarker in high-grade gliomas (HGGs). The influence of necrosis on the fidelity of MGMT promoter (MGMTp) hypermethylation testing is currently unknown. Therefore, our study aims to evaluate the effect of varying degrees of necrosis on MGMTp status, as determined by pyrosequencing, in a series of primary and recurrent HGGs; (2) Methods: Within each case, the most viable blocks (assigned as 'true' MGMTp status) and the most necrotic block were determined by histopathology review. MGMTp status was determined by pyrosequencing. Comparisons of MGMTp status were made between the most viable and most necrotic blocks. (3) Results: 163 samples from 64 patients with HGGs were analyzed. MGMTp status was maintained in 84.6% of primary and 78.3% of recurrent HGGs between the most viable and necrotic blocks. A threshold of ≥60% tumor cellularity was established at which MGMTp status was unaltered, irrespective of the degree of necrosis. (4) Conclusions: MGMTp methylation status, as determined by pyrosequencing, does not appear to be influenced by necrosis in the majority of cases at a cellularity of at least 60%. Further investigation into the role of intratumoral heterogeneity on MGMTp status will increase our understanding of this predictive marker.

Platinum chemotherapy for early triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is an aggressive subtype of breast cancer associated with shorter survival and a higher likelihood of recurrence. In early TNBC, platinum chemotherapy has been shown to improve pathological complete response (pCR); however, its effect on long-term survival outcomes has not been fully elucidated. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials examining neoadjuvant or adjuvant platinum chemotherapy for early TNBC were included. Primary outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were pCR, treatment adherence, grade III or IV toxicity related to chemotherapy, and quality of life. RESULTS: From 3972 records, we included 20 published studies. All studies reporting DFS and OS used carboplatin. Inclusion of platinum chemotherapy improved DFS (neoadjuvant: hazard ratio (HR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.75; adjuvant: HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.88) and OS (neoadjuvant: HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.86; adjuvant: 0.70, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.96). Our analysis confirmed platinum chemotherapy increased pCR rates (risk ratio (RR) 1.44, 95% CI 1.31 to 1.59). There were no differences seen in examined subgroups. Platinum chemotherapy was associated with reduced dose intensity and increased haematological toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Platinum-based chemotherapy using carboplatin in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting improves long-term outcomes of DFS and OS in early TNBC, with no evidence of differences by subgroup. This was at the cost of more frequent chemotherapy delays and dose reductions, and greater haematological toxicity. These findings support the use of platinum-based chemotherapy for people with early TNBC.

Platinum-based chemotherapy for early triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is an aggressive subtype of breast cancer associated with shorter survival and a higher likelihood of the cancer returning. In early TNBC, platinum-based chemotherapy has been shown to improve pathological complete response (pCR); however, its effect on long-term survival outcomes has not been fully elucidated and recommendations to include platinum chemotherapy are not consistent in international guidelines. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of platinum-based chemotherapy as adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment in people with early triple-negative breast cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 4 April 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials examining neoadjuvant or adjuvant platinum chemotherapy for early TNBC. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Our secondary outcomes were pCR, treatment adherence, grade III or IV toxicity related to chemotherapy, and quality of life. Prespecified subgroups included BRCA mutation status, homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status, frequency of chemotherapy, type of platinum agent used, and the presence or absence of anthracycline chemotherapy. We assessed risk of bias using Cochrane's RoB 1 tool and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: From 3972 records, we included 20 published studies involving 21 treatment comparisons, and 25 ongoing studies. For most domains, risk of bias was low across studies. There were 16 neoadjuvant chemotherapy studies (one of which combined neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy) and four adjuvant chemotherapy trials. Most studies used carboplatin (17 studies) followed by cisplatin (two), and lobaplatin (one). Eight studies had an anthracycline-free intervention arm, five of which had a carboplatin-taxane intervention compared to an anthracycline-taxane control. All studies reporting DFS and OS used carboplatin. Inclusion of platinum chemotherapy improved DFS in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings (neoadjuvant: hazard ratio (HR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.75; 7 studies, 8 treatment comparisons, 1966 participants; high-certainty evidence; adjuvant: HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.88; 4 studies, 1256 participants; high-certainty evidence). Platinum chemotherapy in the regimen improved OS (neoadjuvant: HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.86; 7 studies, 8 treatment comparisons, 1973 participants; high-certainty evidence; adjuvant: 0.70, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.96; 4 studies, 1256 participants; high-certainty evidence). Median follow-up for survival outcomes ranged from 36 to 97.6 months. Our analysis confirmed platinum chemotherapy increased pCR rates (risk ratio (RR) 1.44, 95% CI 1.31 to 1.59; 15 studies, 16 treatment comparisons, 3083 participants; high-certainty evidence). Subgroup analyses showed no evidence of differences in DFS according to BRCA mutation status, HRD status, lymph node status, or whether the intervention arm contained anthracycline chemotherapy or not. Platinum chemotherapy was associated with reduced dose intensity, with participants more likely to require chemotherapy delays (RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.70 to 2.94; 4 studies, 5 treatment comparisons, 1053 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), dose reductions (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.02; 7 studies, 8 treatment comparisons, 2055 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and early cessation of treatment (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.38; 16 studies, 17 treatment comparisons, 4178 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Increased haematological toxicity occurred in the platinum group who were more likely to experience grade III/IV neutropenia (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.43 to 1.63; 19 studies, 20 treatment comparisons, 4849 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), anaemia (RR 8.20, 95% CI 5.66 to 11.89; 18 studies, 19 treatment comparisons, 4757 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and thrombocytopenia (RR 7.59, 95% CI 5.10 to 11.29; 18 studies, 19 treatment comparisons, 4731 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between chemotherapy groups in febrile neutropenia (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.49; 11 studies, 3771 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Renal impairment was very rare (0.4%, 2 events in 463 participants; note 3 studies reported 0 events in both arms; 4 studies; high-certainty evidence). Treatment-related death was very rare (0.2%, 7 events in 3176 participants and similar across treatment groups; RR 0.58, 95% 0.14 to 2.33; 10 studies, 11 treatment comparisons; note 8 studies reported treatment-related deaths but recorded 0 events in both groups. Thus, the RR and CIs were calculated from 3 studies rather than 11; 3176 participants; high-certainty evidence). Five studies collected quality of life data but did not report them. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Platinum-based chemotherapy using carboplatin in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting improves long-term outcomes of DFS and OS in early TNBC, with no evidence of differences by subgroup. This was at the cost of more frequent chemotherapy delays and dose reductions, and greater haematological toxicity, though serious adverse events including neuropathy, febrile neutropenia or treatment-related death were not increased. These findings support the use of platinum-based chemotherapy for people with early TNBC. The optimal dose and regimen are not defined by this analysis, but there is a suggestion that similar relative benefits result from the addition of carboplatin to either anthracycline-free regimens or those containing anthracycline agents.

MGMT testing for glioma in clinical laboratories: discordance with methylation analyses prevents the implementation of routine immunohistochemistry.

PURPOSE: Glioblastoma is a universally fatal cancer of the central nervous system which responds poorly to treatment. MGMT has potential as a predictive biomarker in glioblastoma patients to determine treatment response. However, methods of measuring MGMT are currently unsatisfactory, and as such, use of this marker has not translated well into the clinic. This paper aims to review current methodology of MGMT measurement, with a focus on immunohistochemistry as a potential way forward. TOPICS AND METHODS: Studies of glioma patients where MGMT immunohistochemistry was undertaken, as well as the literature surrounding methylation analyses and the regulation of MGMT, were reviewed. RESULTS: All methods of measuring MGMT were disputed in some way in the literature. A trend of discordance between methylation analyses and protein analyses was present. There is a lack of standardisation in the measurement of MGMT, and as a result, it seems that there are highly variable results. CONCLUSIONS: No single method of MGMT analysis has emerged as a clear choice for routine clinical testing of MGMT in glioma patients. Although methylation analyses are favoured, their expense and inaccessibility are barriers to their use in routine clinical practice. More research into immunohistochemistry is needed to determine whether it can serve as a reliable and cost-effective alternative to methylation analyses.