Evaluating Elacestrant in the Management of ER-Positive, HER2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer: Evidence to Date.

Breast cancer remains the second leading cause of cancer mortality in women. Endocrine therapy is the backbone treatment for hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer, the most common subtype. Although several endocrine therapy agents are available, essentially all HR-positive metastatic breast cancers will become resistant to these drugs. ESR1 mutations represent an important mechanism of resistance to aromatase inhibitors. Elacestrant is a novel oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD) that selectively binds to the estrogen receptor in breast cancer cells, inhibiting tumor growth. Preclinical data suggested greater efficacy of elacestrant in combination with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) or everolimus. In a Phase III clinical trial, elacestrant demonstrated a significant although modest improvement in median progression-free survival (PFS) compared to standard of care endocrine therapy in patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Importantly, there was also a significant benefit in patients with ESR1 mutations, which led to the FDA approval of elacestrant in this patient group. Elacestrant was generally well tolerated, with main side effects being upper gastrointestinal symptoms. There are several ongoing clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of elacestrant in the early setting as well as in combination with other targeted agents in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Other novel oral SERDs are also currently being evaluated in the treatment of HR-positive breast cancer. Results of ongoing clinical trials with these drugs will help clinicians decide the best sequence and combination of endocrine therapy agents.

Benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in node-negative T1a versus T1b and T1c triple-negative breast cancer.

PURPOSE: National comprehensive cancer network guidelines recommend delivery of adjuvant chemotherapy in node-negative triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) if the tumor is > 1 cm and consideration of adjuvant chemotherapy for T1b but not T1a disease. These recommendations are based upon sparse data on the role of adjuvant chemotherapy in T1a and T1b node-negative TNBC. Our objective was to clarify the benefits of chemotherapy for patients with T1N0 TNBC, stratified by tumor size. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of survival outcomes of TNBC patients at two academic institutions in the United States from 1999 to 2018. Primary tumor size, histology, and nodal status were based upon surgical pathology. The Kaplan-Meier plot and 5-year unadjusted survival probability were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 282 T1N0 TNBC cases, the status of adjuvant chemotherapy was known for 258. Mean follow-up was 5.3 years. Adjuvant chemotherapy was delivered to 30.5% of T1a, 64.7% T1b, and 83.9% T1c (p < 0.0001). On multivariable analysis, factors associated with delivery of adjuvant chemotherapy were tumor size and grade 3 disease. Improved overall survival was associated with use of chemotherapy in patients with T1c disease (93.2% vs. 75.2% p = 0.008) but not T1a (100% vs. 100% p = 0.3778) or T1b (100% vs. 95.8% p = 0.2362) disease. CONCLUSION: Our data support current guidelines indicating benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in node-negative TNBC associated with T1c tumors but excellent outcomes were observed in the cases of T1a and T1b disease, regardless of whether adjuvant chemotherapy was delivered.

Real-world Outcomes of Cyclin-dependent Kinase Inhibitors Continued Beyond First Disease Progression in Hormone Receptor-positive Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i), in combination with aromatase inhibitors, are United States Food and Drug Administration-approved for the treatment of hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The effectiveness of continuing them beyond first disease progression (PD) is currently unknown. This retrospective study evaluated the impact of the continuation of CDK4/6i beyond first PD in HR+/HER2- MBC using real-world experience. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A single-institution retrospective review of patients with HR+ MBC who received CDK4/6is from 2015 to 2018 and where CDK4/6is were continued beyond first PD. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) after initial PD on CDK4/6i therapy. RESULTS: Thirty women with HR+/HER2- MBC met eligibility criteria. Patients were identified from a prospective database of patients at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation who were prescribed CDK4/6is. The median age and follow-up duration were 47.5 years and 27 months, respectively. Most patients received palbociclib (PA)/letrozole as initial therapy (67%), followed by PA/fulvestrant (23%), and PA/other aromatase inhibitor (20%), and abemaciclib with either fulvestrant or letrozole (6%). As of January 31, 2019, 25 (83.3%) patients were still alive, and 19 (63%) patients had progressed. The estimated median PFS for continued CDK4/6i use beyond the first PD was 11.8 months (95% confidence interval, 5.34-13.13 months). CONCLUSIONS: Among a small cohort of patients with HR+ MBC in a non-clinical trial setting, continuation of CDK4/6i-endocrine treatment post initial PD was associated with a median PFS of about 12 months. Formal randomized clinical trials evaluating the continuation of CDK4/6is beyond the first PD are currently ongoing and will provide more answers to this important clinical question.

Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Guideline Update.

PURPOSE.­: To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline. METHODS.­: A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature. RECOMMENDATIONS.­: The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .

Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer: ASCO/CAP Guideline Update.

PURPOSE: To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline. METHODS: A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Real-world clinical outcomes and toxicity in metastatic breast cancer patients treated with palbociclib and endocrine therapy.

PURPOSE: Real-world data are critical to demonstrate the reproducibility of evidence and external generalizability of randomized clinical trials. Palbociclib is an oral small-molecule inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 that has been shown to improve progression-free survival (PFS) when combined with letrozole or fulvestrant in phase 3 clinical trials. We evaluated real-world outcomes in metastatic breast cancer patients who received palbociclib in combination with endocrine therapy in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Records of patients with advanced hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer treated with palbociclib at the Cleveland Clinic health system from February, 2015 to December, 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. The primary end point was PFS. RESULTS: In this cohort, 411 women were included. The median age and follow-up times were 53.5 years and 10.2 months, respectively. The median PFS for palbociclib plus letrozole was 15.1 months for patients treated in first line, 10.5 months in second line, and 4.2 months in third line and beyond. For patients who received fulvestrant plus palbociclib, the median PFS in first, second, and third line and beyond were 11.6, 12.3, and 6.4 months, respectively. The most common adverse events were hematologic, with grade 3-4 neutropenia occurring in 58% of patients. Thirty-one (8%) patients permanently discontinued palbociclib due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with HR-positive advanced breast cancer, the estimated PFS in patients treated with fulvestrant and palbociclib was comparable to a previously reported phase 3 trial. However, the median PFS with letrozole and palbociclib was shorter than previously reported data from phase 2 and 3 trials. Palbociclib toxicity was very manageable, with a low drug discontinuation rate.

Analysis of Origins of Admission for Solid Tumor Oncology Inpatients: Disease Severity and Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Hospital transfers may affect clinical outcomes. Evaluation of admission by source of transfer, time of admission, and provider type may identify opportunities to improve inpatient outcomes. METHODS: We reviewed charts of patients admitted to the solid tumor oncology service between July and December 2014 from the Cleveland Clinic Foundation (CCF) Main Campus emergency department (ED), CCF Regional EDs, outside hospital (OSH) ED, OSH inpatient services, and CCF outpatient clinics. Data collected included time of admission, mortality and severity risk scores, and provider type. Risk factors were assessed for clinical outcomes, including activations of the Adult Medical Emergency Team, intensive care unit transfers, in-hospital mortality, and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: Five hundred admissions were included. OSH inpatient transfers had significantly higher disease severity compared with all other origins of admission. OSH inpatient transfers demonstrated significantly longer LOS compared with all other origins of admission, and higher mortality rates compared with the outpatient direct admits and CCF Main Campus ED admits. After adjusting for disease severity and risk of mortality, OSH ED patients remained at higher risk for Adult Medical Emergency Team activation, OSH inpatient transfers had the longest LOS, and CCF Main Campus ED patients had the lowest risk of mortality. Time of admission and provider type were not associated with any of the outcomes. CONCLUSION: Oncology inpatients transferred from an outside health care facility are at higher risk for adverse outcomes. The magnitude of difference is lessened, but still significant, after adjustment for disease severity and risk of mortality.

Revisiting the Role of Bevacizumab in the Treatment of Breast Cancer.

Bevacizumab is a monoclonal antibody directed against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) that interferes with VEGF binding to its receptor on vascular endothelium. Bevacizumab has been approved for the treatment of various malignant tumors, and has been studied in combination with several cytotoxic agents in the treatment of breast cancer. In 2008, the US Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval for the use of bevacizumab in combination with weekly paclitaxel for first-line treatment of HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. However, this approval was later reversed in 2010 because of concerns for safety and lack of improvement in overall survival in randomized clinical trials. In this review, we summarize relevant clinical studies conducted to investigate the role of bevacizumab in the management of breast cancer, both in the early stage and in the metastatic disease settings. We also provide commentary regarding the future of this agent in breast cancer treatment.

Occurrence of renal cell carcinoma and hematologic malignancies (predominantly lymphoid) in individuals and in families.

The relationship between renal cell cancer (RCC) and hematologic malignancy (HM) in the same individual has been reported for more than 20 years, and is noted in SEER database studies. Family histories suggest a familial association as well. This study evaluates the occurrence of renal cell cancer and hematologic malignancies in individual patients and families, and the occurrence of age-of-onset anticipation among generations. Family history data from our familial patient registry, including more than 700 pedigrees of familial hematologic malignancies, and 700 patients with renal cell cancer, were reviewed. Twenty-six patients with a personal history of both RCC and HM are reported. Seventy four patients with RCC are noted to have 95 family members with HM. Consistent with past reports, there was male predominance among the patients with both diseases (71 %), and among the RCC patients' relatives with HM (57 %). Also consistent was a predominance of lymphoid malignancies in those with both diseases (92 %) and in the HMs among family members of RCC patients (79 %). The majority (95 %) of HM relatives were first or second degree relatives of the patient with RCC. Thirty of 34 parent/child pairs demonstrated age of onset anticipation in which the child developed either disease at a younger age than the parent. The co-occurrence of RCC and HM in the same patient has been shown to be significantly greater than expected. Families also appear to have an increased association. The appearance of anticipation suggests that genetic factors may be significant in this association of RCC and HM.

Metastasectomy after targeted therapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Metastasectomy is often incorporated in overall treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. While this approach was studied in the immunotherapy era, only a few cases have been described in the targeted therapy era. Thus, we evaluated the role of metastasectomy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who received prior targeted therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the records of patients who underwent consolidative metastasectomy after targeted therapy at 3 institutions from 2004 to 2009. All patients received at least 1 cycle of targeted therapy before surgical resection of all visible disease. RESULTS: We identified 22 patients. Metastasectomy sites included the retroperitoneum in 12 patients, lung in 6, adrenal gland in 2, bowel in 2, and mediastinum, bone, brain and inferior venal caval thrombus in 1 each. A total of 6 postoperative complications were observed in 4 patients within 12 weeks after surgery, which resolved with appropriate management. Postoperatively 9 patients received at least 1 targeted therapy. In 11 patients recurrence developed a median of 42 weeks after metastasectomy and another 11 experienced no recurrence at a median of 43 weeks. At a median followup of 109 weeks 21 patients were alive and 1 died of renal cell carcinoma 105 weeks after metastasectomy. CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of select patients with a limited tumor burden after treatment with targeted agents consolidative metastasectomy is feasible with acceptable morbidity. Significant time off targeted therapy and long-term tumor-free status are possible with this approach.

Emerging drugs for renal cell carcinoma.

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD: The treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has evolved significantly over the past 5 years and targeted therapy has become the standard of care. However, complete and lasting responses to these drugs are still uncommon. Currently, novel agents are being tested in clinical trials. AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW: We discuss approved targeted agents in RCC and emphasize on emerging therapies. We searched the US National Library of Medicine (PubMed) using the terms 'renal cell carcinoma', 'targeted therapy' and 'novel agents', from 1990 to the present. We also searched for abstracts from the meetings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and Genitourinary Cancers Symposium from 2007 to the present. WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN: This paper provides understanding of the approved treatments for advanced RCC as well as the novel agents and their targeted biological pathways. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: Despite dynamic and recent advances in the management of metastatic RCC much about the molecular biology of this tumor has yet to be delineated. Even more so, strategies of sequential treatment, combination of targeted drugs, mechanisms of resistance, optimal dosages and scheduling remain areas of potential development interest.