Long-term outcomes of a randomized, open-label, phase II study comparing cabazitaxel versus paclitaxel as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with triple-negative or luminal B/HER2-negative breast cancer (GENEVIEVE).

BACKGROUND: The GENEVIEVE study, comparing neoadjuvant cabazitaxel versus paclitaxel in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and luminal B/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer (BC), previously reported significant differences in pathological complete response (pCR) rates. Effects on long-term outcome are unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: GENEVIEVE randomized patients with cT2-3, any cN or cT1, cN+/pNSLN+, centrally confirmed TNBC or luminal B/HER2-negative BC (latter defined as estrogen/progesterone receptor-positive and >14% Ki-67-stained cells) to receive either cabazitaxel 25 mg/m2 q3w for four cycles or paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 weekly for 12 weeks. Anthracycline-containing chemotherapy was allowed in case of histologically proven invasive residuals as neoadjuvant treatment or after surgery as adjuvant treatment. Here we report the secondary endpoints invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of the 333 patients randomized, 74.7% and 83.2% completed treatment in the cabazitaxel and paclitaxel arms, respectively. After a median follow-up of 89.3 months (interquartile range 68.8-97.3 months), 80 iDFS events (43 after cabazitaxel and 37 after paclitaxel) and 47 deaths (23 after cabazitaxel and 24 after paclitaxel) were reported. IDFS rates were not significantly different between the cabazitaxel and paclitaxel arms after a 3-year (83.6% versus 85.0%) and 5-year follow-up (76.2% versus 78.3%) [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.27, 95% confidence interval 0.82-1.96, P = 0.294], respectively. DDFS rates at 3 years (88.6% versus 87.8%) and 5 years (82.1% versus 82.8%) for cabazitaxel and paclitaxel were comparable (HR = 1.15, P = 0.573). Similarly, OS rates at 3 years (91.6% versus 91.8%) and 5 years (89.2% versus 86.8%) showed no significant differences (HR = 1.05, P = 0.872). Subgroup analysis for TNBC and luminal B/HER2-negative BCs indicated no significant variations in 3- or 5-year iDFS, DDFS, or OS. CONCLUSIONS: The significant differences in pCR rates observed in both treatment arms did not significantly impact long-term outcomes for patients treated with cabazitaxel versus paclitaxel in the GENEVIEVE trial.

Significantly longer time to deterioration of quality of life due to CANKADO PRO-React eHealth support in HR+ HER2- metastatic breast cancer patients receiving palbociclib and endocrine therapy: primary outcome analysis of the multicenter randomized AGO-B WSG PreCycle trial.

BACKGROUND: The multicenter, randomized, phase IV, intergroup AGO-B WSG PreCycle trial (NCT03220178) evaluated the impact of CANKADO-based electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) assessment on quality of life (QoL) in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients receiving palbociclib and an aromatase inhibitor or palbociclib + fulvestrant. CANKADO PRO-React, a European Union-registered medical device, is an interactive autonomous application reacting to patient self-reported observations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2017 and 2021, 499 patients (median age 59 years) from 71 centers were randomized (2 : 1, stratified by therapy line) between an active version of CANKADO PRO-React (CANKADO-active arm) and a version with limited functionality (CANKADO-inform arm). A total of 412 patients (271 CANKADO-active; 141 CANKADO-inform) were available for analysis of the primary endpoint, time to deterioration (TTD) of QoL [10-point drop on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) score], using an Aalen-Johansen estimator for cumulative incidence function of TTD DQoL (QoL deterioration) with 95% pointwise confidence intervals (CIs). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and DQoL. RESULTS: In all patients [intention-to-treat (ITT)-ePRO], cumulative incidence of DQoL was significantly more favorable (lower) in the CANKADO-active arm (hazard ratio 0.698, 95% CI 0.506-0.963). Among first-line patients (n = 295), the corresponding hazard ratio was 0.716 (0.484-1.060; P = 0.09), and in second-line patients (n = 117) it was 0.661 (0.374-1.168; P = 0.2). Absolute patient numbers declined in later visits; FACT-G completion rates were 80% and higher until about visit 30. Mean FACT-G scores showed a steady decline from baseline and an offset in favor of CANKADO-active. No significant differences in clinical outcome were observed between arms: median PFS (ITT population) was 21.4 (95% CI 19.4-23.7) (CANKADO-active) and 18.7 (15.1-23.5) months (CANKADO-inform); median OS was not reached (CANKADO-active) and 42.6 months (CANKADO-inform). CONCLUSIONS: PreCycle is the first multicenter randomized eHealth trial demonstrating a significant benefit for MBC patients receiving oral tumor therapy when using an interactive autonomous patient empowerment application.

A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase II study to evaluate the tolerability of an induction dose escalation of everolimus in patients with metastatic breast cancer (DESIREE).

BACKGROUND: Stomatitis is one of the main reasons to discontinue everolimus in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). To decrease stomatitis and subsequently early treatment discontinuations or dose reductions, the DESIREE trial investigated the use of a stepwise dose-escalation schedule of everolimus (EVE esc). PATIENTS AND METHODS: DESIREE is a phase II, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with HR+/HER2- mBC and progression/relapse after nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor treatment. Patients were randomised to EVE esc (2.5 mg/day, week 1; 5 mg/day, week 2; 7.5 mg/day, week 3; 10 mg/day, weeks 4-24) or everolimus 10 mg/day (EVE 10mg) for 24 weeks plus exemestane. The primary endpoint was the incidence of stomatitis episodes grade ≥2 within 12 weeks of treatment. The secondary endpoints included toxicity, relative total dose intensity (RTDI) and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS: A total of 160 patients were randomised and 156 started treatment (EVE esc: 80; EVE 10mg: 76). The median age of patients was 64 years (range 33-85), 56.3% patients in the EVE esc arm versus 42.1% in the EVE 10mg arm had liver metastasis (P = 0.081) and 62.5% versus 51.3% received over one metastatic therapy line (P = 0.196). Within 12 weeks, the incidence of stomatitis episodes grade ≥2 was significantly lower in the EVE esc arm compared with the EVE 10mg arm (28.8% versus 46.1%; odds ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.24-0.92; P = 0.026). Toxicity was in line with the known safety profile without new safety concerns. The median RTDI was 91.1% in the EVE esc arm versus 80.0% in the EVE 10mg arm (P = 0.329). Discontinuation rate in the first 3 weeks was 6.3% versus 15.8%, respectively (P = 0.073). QoL was comparable between the two treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: A dose-escalation schema of everolimus over 3 weeks can be successfully used to reduce the incidence of high-grade stomatitis in the first 12 weeks of treatment in patients with HR+/HER2- mBC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT02387099; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02387099.

Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: safety and patient-reported outcomes from the monarchE study.

BACKGROUND: In monarchE, abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) as adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative, high-risk, early breast cancer (EBC) demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival versus ET alone. Detailed safety analyses conducted at a median follow-up of 27 months and key patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment (n = 5591). Safety analyses included incidence, management, and outcomes of common and clinically relevant adverse events (AEs). Patient-reported health-related quality of life, ET symptoms, fatigue, and side-effect burden were assessed. RESULTS: The addition of abemaciclib to ET resulted in higher incidence of grade ≥3 AEs (49.7% versus 16.3% with ET alone), predominantly laboratory cytopenias [e.g. neutropenia (19.6%)] without clinical complications. Abemaciclib-treated patients experienced more serious AEs (15.2% versus 8.8%). Discontinuation of abemaciclib and/or ET due to AEs occurred in 18.5% of patients, mainly due to grade 1/2 AEs (66.8%). AEs were managed with comedications (e.g. antidiarrheals), abemaciclib dose holds (61.7%), and/or dose reductions (43.4%). Diarrhea was generally low grade (grade 1/2: 76%); grade 2/3 events were highest in the first month (20.5%), most were short-lived (≤7 days) and did not recur. Venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) were higher with abemaciclib + ET (2.5%) versus ET (0.6%); in the abemaciclib arm, increased VTE risk was observed with tamoxifen versus aromatase inhibitors (4.3% versus 1.8%). PROs were similar between arms, including being 'bothered by side-effects of treatment', except for diarrhea. At ≥3 months, most patients reporting diarrhea reported 'a little bit' or 'somewhat'. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high-risk EBC, adjuvant abemaciclib + ET has an acceptable safety profile and tolerability is supported by PRO findings. Most AEs were reversible and manageable with comedications and/or dose modifications, consistent with the known abemaciclib toxicity profile.

Primary results from IMpassion131, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised phase III trial of first-line paclitaxel with or without atezolizumab for unresectable locally advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: In the phase III IMpassion130 trial, combining atezolizumab with first-line nanoparticle albumin-bound-paclitaxel for advanced triple-negative breast cancer (aTNBC) showed a statistically significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive populations, and a clinically meaningful overall survival (OS) effect in PD-L1-positive aTNBC. The phase III KEYNOTE-355 trial adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy for aTNBC showed similar PFS effects. IMpassion131 evaluated first-line atezolizumab-paclitaxel in aTNBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients [no prior systemic therapy or ≥12 months since (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy] were randomised 2:1 to atezolizumab 840 mg or placebo (days 1, 15), both with paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, 15), every 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were tumour PD-L1 status, prior taxane, liver metastases and geographical region. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS, tested hierarchically first in the PD-L1-positive [immune cell expression ≥1%, VENTANA PD-L1 (SP142) assay] population, and then in the ITT population. OS was a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Of 651 randomised patients, 45% had PD-L1-positive aTNBC. At the primary PFS analysis, adding atezolizumab to paclitaxel did not improve investigator-assessed PFS in the PD-L1-positive population [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-1.12; P = 0.20; median PFS 6.0 months with atezolizumab-paclitaxel versus 5.7 months with placebo-paclitaxel]. In the PD-L1-positive population, atezolizumab-paclitaxel was associated with more favourable unconfirmed best overall response rate (63% versus 55% with placebo-paclitaxel) and median duration of response (7.2 versus 5.5 months, respectively). Final OS results showed no difference between arms (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.76-1.64; median 22.1 months with atezolizumab-paclitaxel versus 28.3 months with placebo-paclitaxel in the PD-L1-positive population). Results in the ITT population were consistent with the PD-L1-positive population. The safety profile was consistent with known effects of each study drug. CONCLUSION: Combining atezolizumab with paclitaxel did not improve PFS or OS versus paclitaxel alone. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT03125902.

Higher rate of severe toxicities in obese patients receiving dose-dense (dd) chemotherapy according to unadjusted body surface area: results of the prospectively randomized GAIN study.

BACKGROUND: In routine clinical practice, chemotherapy doses are frequently capped at a body surface area (BSA) of 2.0 m2 or adjusted to an ideal weight for obese patients due to safety reasons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between August 2004 and July 2008, a total of 3023 patients were enrolled in the GAIN study, a randomized phase III adjuvant trial, comparing two types of dose-dense (dd) regimen [epirubicin, docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (iddETC) versus epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (EC) followed by docetaxel (T) plus capecitabine (X)]. We retrospectively evaluated a total of 555 patients with a BMI of ≥30 for safety and outcome. RESULTS: Eighteen percent of all patients were obese: 31% of those received chemotherapy according to an unadjusted BSA. For the remaining patients, BSA was adjusted to ideal weight or was capped at 2.0 m2. A total of 15% of obese patients receiving full (unadjusted) dose of chemotherapy versus 6% of obese patients with an adjusted BSA experienced febrile neutropenia (P = 0.003) and 9% versus 3% high-grade thrombopenia (P = 0.002). Overall, 17% versus 10% had a thromboembolic event (P = 0.017), which was high grade in 13% versus 6%, respectively (P = 0.019), and 3% versus 0.3% high-grade hot flushes (P = 0.013). Dizziness (5% versus 11%; P = 0.016), diarrhea (19% versus 27%; P = 0.033) and an increase in serum creatinine (7% versus 14%; P = 0.019) were higher in the adjusted group. However, no differences in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were observed between non-obese patients, obese patients receiving full-dose chemotherapy or according to an adjusted BSA [5-year DFS 81% (confidence interval 79% to 83%) versus 82% (75% to 87%) versus 81% (76% to 84%); P = 0.761; 5-year OS 90% (88% to 91%) versus 86% (80% to 91%) versus 88% (84% to 91%); P = 0.143]. CONCLUSION: Obese patients receiving dd chemotherapy according to their real BSA have a higher risk of developing severe toxicities without influencing survival. Therefore, a dose adjustment of intense dd chemotherapy should be carried out to avoid life-threatening complications.

0.2-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging of internal lesions of the knee joint: a prospective arthroscopically controlled clinical study.

The results of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were compared with those of arthroscopy in a prospective series of 244 patients. A dedicated system for MRI of limbs and peripheral joints--the 0.2-T Artoscan (Esaote, Italy)--was used for imaging knee joint lesions. T1-weighted spin-echo sagittal images, T2-weighted gradient-echo coronal images, and axial views for lesions of the femoropatellar joint were acquired. Paraxial sagittal and oblique coronal views were obtained for imaging of the cruciate ligaments. This protocol allowed excellent visualization of the cruciate ligaments and medial and lateral meniscus in almost all patients. Compared with arthroscopy performed within 48 h after imaging, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were respectively 93%, 97%, and 95% for tears of the medial meniscus; 82%, 96%, and 93% for tears of the lateral meniscus; 100%, 100%, and 100% for tears of the posterior cruciate ligament; 98%, 98%, and 97% for tears of the anterior cruciate ligament; and 72%, 100%, and 92% for full-thickness articular cartilage lesions. The examination can be performed within 30-45 min at lower cost than diagnostic arthroscopy. MRI with a 0.2-T magnet is a safe and valuable adjunct to the clinical examination of the knee and an aid to efficient preoperative planning.

[Thoracic intervertebral disk displacement: a rare differential diagnosis of segmental irritation--guidelines for use of chiropractic therapy]. / Der thorakale Bandscheibenvorfall: eine seltene Differentialdiagnose der segmentalen Irritation--Richtlinien zur Anwendung von Chirotherapie.

Thoracic disc herniations rarely occur; they vary with respect to the clinical symptomatic and do not always lead to neurological deficit. A patient is being reported on with first symptoms of unspecific back pain. The patient has been frequently treated within 12 months (at regular intervals) exclusively by chiropractic manipulation without a considerable success. It is the objective of this case report that in persistent and therapy resistant back pain without obvious neurological deficite beside native radiographs further diagnostic investigation (MRI) is indicated. Concerning chiropractic manipulations (mobilisation techniques with impulse) this paper recommends testing maneuvers, the consideration of contraindications (structural lesions, neurological deficite) and emphasizes the use of atraumatic manipulation techniques.

[Prospective comparison of ARTOSCAN-MRI and arthroscopy in knee injuries]. / Prospektiver Vergleich von ARTOSCAN-MRT und Arthroskopie bei Kniegelenkverletzungen.

The results of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were compared with those of arthroscopy in a prospective series of 276 patients. A "dedicated system" for MRI of limbs and peripheral joints--the 0,2 Tesla ARTOSCAN (ESAOTE, Italy)--was used for imaging knee joint lesions. T1-weighted spin echo sagittal images, T2-weighted gradient-echo coronal images, and axial views for lesions of bone and the femoropatellar joint were acquired. If necessary paraxial sagittal and oblique coronal views were obtained for imaging of the cruciate ligaments. This protocol allowed excellent visualization of the cruciate ligaments, medial and lateral meniscus in almost all patients. Compared with arthroscopy performed within 48 hours after imaging, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were respectively, 91, 92 and 91 per cent for tears of the medial meniscus; 80, 96, and 92 per cent for tears of the posterior meniscus; 100, 100, and 100 per cent for tears of the posterior cruciate ligament; 93, 98, and 99 per cent for tears of the anterior cruciate ligament; and 73, 100, and 92 per cent for full-thickness articular cartilage lesions. The examination can be performed within 30 to 45 minutes at a cost that is lower than that of diagnostic arthroscopy. ARTOSCAN imaging is a safe and valuable adjunct to the clinical examination of the knee and an aid to efficient preoperative planning.

[Treadmill versus field trial. Movement analysis and pressure distribution in the athletic shoe]. / Laufband versus Feldversuch. Bewegungsanalyse und Druckverteilungsmessung im Sportschuh.

Our current knowledge on interactions between runner and runningshoe is mainly based on treadmill measurements. In order to reveal stress load and adaptation on playing surfaces it was necessary to develop a combined measuring device out of 3-D video motion analysis and portable pressure measurement system. By means of a motor driven cart moving parallel to the subject with comparable position of cameras to the treadmill test it was possible to set up an identical trial for track and field. 12 subjects (male, age 24-32, size 9) were tested at a speed of 2.8 m/s. The varying conditions were treadmill and grass and two different constructed running shoes. 200 cycles and over 1000 steps were analyzed. The quantitative analysis of 37 parameters describing the contact phase was performed using the wilcoxon test for paired samples.-A qualitative comparison of running styles was introduced by using angle-angle-diagrams (knee and ankle by 3-D data) similar to those first described for 2-D by P.R. Cavanagh in 1973. It showed a huge interindividual variability under same conditions. Comparing the angle-angle-diagrams for the four different running conditions it was possible to classify them into three characteristic groups: non-adaptors, surface-adaptors and shoe-adaptors. Comparing track and field to treadmill measurements significant differences were found for the knee at impact: On treadmill the initial knee angle was 4.6 degrees more extended at a 13% higher angle velocity and a 30% higher angle deceleration (sig. p less than 0.05). A 7.3% higher impulse was found on grass at a 5.9% higher step length. No difference in maximum pressure was found. These results show that adaptation is performed mainly by the knee. Changing the motion pattern the knee seems to be capable of homogenizing the different stress loads to the foot. Comparing the running shoes significant differences were found in the motion of the ankle: a controversial behaviour was found to be on treadmill and grass. The pressure data revealed significant differences for the treadmill test to be in the heel area, for grass in the arch area. This points to an--up to now--unknown importance of the arch on unplain surfaces that are obviously influenced by the construction of the shoe and are not accessible by treadmill tests. The described different behaviour of shoes in treadmill and track and field tests points out the reduced validity of single treadmill tests.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)