A retrospective, multicenter study of the efficacy of lapatinib plus trastuzumab in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer patients previously treated with trastuzumab, lapatinib, or both: the Trastyvere study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lapatinib (L) and trastuzumab (T) combination in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients previously treated with T and/or L. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, post-authorized, multicenter study including patients with HER2-positive MBC or locally advanced breast cancer (ABC) treated with the combination of L-T. Concomitant endocrine therapy, as well as brain metastasis and/or prior exposure to L, were allowed. RESULTS: One hundred and fifteen patients from 14 institutions were included. The median age was 59.8 years. The median number of prior T regimens in the advanced setting was 3 and 73 patients had received a prior L regimen. The clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 34.8% (95% CI 26.1-43.5). Among other efficacy endpoints, the overall response rate was 21.7%, and median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 3.9 and 21.6 months, respectively. Heavily pretreated and ≥ 3 metastatic organ patients showed lower CBR and PFS than patients with a low number of previous regimens and < 3 metastatic organs. Moreover, CBR did not significantly change in L-pretreated compared with L-naïve patients (31.5% versus 40.5% for L-pretreated versus L-naïve). Grade 3/4 adverse events were reported in 19 patients (16.5%). CONCLUSION: The combination of L-T is an effective and well-tolerated regimen in heavily pretreated patients and remains active among patients progressing on prior L-based therapy. Our study suggests that the L-T regimen is a safe and active chemotherapy-free option for MBC patients previously treated with T and/or L.

Correction to: Efficacy of fulvestrant in the treatment of postmenopausal women with endocrine-resistant advanced breast cancer in routine clinical practice.

A sentence under 'Results' heading in the Abstract section was published incorrectly. The correct sentence should read as follows.

Prognostic role for the derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in early breast cancer: a GEICAM/9906 substudy.

PURPOSE: Elevated markers of host inflammation, a hallmark of cancer, have been associated with worse outcomes in several solid tumors. Here, we explore the prognostic role of the derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (dNLR), across different tumor subtypes, in patients with early breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 1246 patients with lymph node-positive, operable early breast cancer enrolled in the GEICAM/9906 trial, a multicenter randomized phase 3 study evaluating adjuvant chemotherapy. dNLR was calculated as the ratio of neutrophils and the difference between total leukocytes and neutrophils in peripheral blood before chemotherapy. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival were explored using a Cox proportional hazard analysis. RESULTS: The analysis comprised 1243 (99.8%) patients with dNLR data, with a median follow-up of 10 years. Data on intrinsic subtypes were available from 818 (66%) patients (luminal A 34%, luminal B 32%, HER2-enriched 21% and basal-like 9%). Median dNLR was 1.35 [interquartile range (IQR) 1.08-1.71]. In the whole population, dNLR was not prognostic after adjustment for clinico-pathological factors. However, dNLR ≥ 1.35 was independently associated with worse DFS in the hormone receptor-negative/HER2+ population (HR 2.86; p = 0.038) and in patients with one to three lymph node metastases (HR 1.32, p = 0.032). There was a non-significant association with worse DFS in non-luminal and in HER2-enriched tumors (HR 1.40, p = 0.085 and HR 1.53, p = 0.067). No significant interaction was observed between the treatment arm and dNLR. CONCLUSION: Elevated dNLR appears to be an adverse prognostic factor in hormone receptor-negative early breast cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT: 2005-003108-12 (retrospectively registered 28/06/2005). ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00129922 (retrospectively registered 10/08/2005). Results of this study were presented in part at the 2016 ESMO conference October 7-11, 2016, Copenhagen, Denmark (oral presentation).

Efficacy of fulvestrant in the treatment of postmenopausal women with endocrine-resistant advanced breast cancer in routine clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to describe the efficacy of fulvestrant 500 mg in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive advanced/metastatic breast cancer who had disease progression after receiving anti-estrogen therapy in clinical practice, getting real-world data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective, observational study conducted in Spain. Postmenopausal women with locally advanced/metastatic ER-positive breast cancer who received treatment with fulvestrant 500 mg after progression with a previous anti-estrogen therapy were eligible. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), clinical benefit rate (CBR), duration of clinical benefit (DoCB), and safety profile. RESULTS: A total of 263 women were evaluated (median age, 65.8 years). At a median follow-up of 21.5 months, median PFS and OS were 10.6 and 43.2 months, respectively. PFS according to 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and ≥ 4th lines were 11.5, 10.6, 9.9, and 8.5 months, respectively (p = 0.0245). PFS in patients with visceral involvement was 10 months vs 10.6 months in patients without visceral involvement (p = 0.6604), 9.6 months in patients with high Ki67 vs 10 months in patients with low Ki67 (p = 0.7224), and 10.2 months in HER2+ patients vs 10.3 months in HER2- patients (p = 0.6809). The CBR was 56.5% and the DoCB was 18.4 months. The most frequently adverse events were injection site pain (10.3%) and musculoskeletal disorders (7.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Fulvestrant 500 mg administered in clinical practice was shown to be effective (PFS, 10.6 months; CBR, 56.5%) and well tolerated, in accordance with previous trials.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of docetaxel (Taxotere) vs. 5-fluorouracil in combined therapy in the initial phases of breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The randomised controlled trial BCIRG001 has recently demonstrated that docetaxel in combination with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (TAC) has better efficacy than the standard treatment (FAC, i.e., 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide) in the adjuvant treatment of patients with node-positive breast cancer. The cost-effectiveness of TAC vs. FAC in the Spanish setting is analysed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical outcomes from trial BCIRG001 were combined with Spanish costs and longterm efficacy of FAC and TAC extrapolated up to 5 years by means of a Markov model. Results are shown as cost per life year gained (C/LYG) and cost per quality-adjusted life year (C/QALY). Costs and effects were discounted at a rate of 3%. RESULTS: Mean survival was 17.8 and 16.5 years for TAC and FAC, with total costs of euro14,611 and euro11,586, respectively. The results of the cost-effectiveness analysis showed that TAC achieves a C/LYG and a C/QALY of only euro2345 and euro2631, respectively. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the results. CONCLUSIONS: Combined therapy based on docetaxel (TAC) is not only an effective option, but also presents a favourable cost-effectiveness ratio, clearly below the Spanish efficiency threshold in all the scenarios considered.