Vinorelbine alternating oral and intravenous plus epirubicin in first-line therapy of metastatic breast cancer: results of a multicentre phase II study

The combination of intravenous (i.v.) vinorelbine and epirubicin is highly active in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). In an effort to improve patient convenience, we investigated a regimen alternating i.v. and oral vinorelbine in combination with epirubicin as first-line chemotherapy of patients with MBC. In all, 49 patients with MBC received, as first-line treatment, a combination regimen consisting of i.v. vinorelbine 25 mg m−2 plus epirubicin 90 mg m−2 given on day 1, and oral vinorelbine 60 mg m−2 on day 8 (or day 15 if neutrophils <1500 mm−3) every 3 weeks, in an open-label, multicentre phase II study. Treatment was to be repeated for a maximum of six cycles. The study population had a median age of 55 years, half of the patients had received prior adjuvant chemotherapy and 86% presented a visceral involvement. In all, 25 responses were documented and validated by an independent panel review, yielding response rates of 51% (95% CI: 36–66) in the 49 enrolled patients and 54.5% (95% CI: 39–70) in the 44 evaluable patients. Median durations of progression-free survival and survival were 8 and 20 months, respectively. Neutropenia was the main dose-limiting toxicity, but complications were uncommon, four patients having experienced febrile neutropenia and six having developed neutropenic infection. Other frequently reported adverse events included stomatitis, nausea and vomiting, which were rarely severe. No toxic death was reported. Among patients who received six cycles, global score of quality of life remained stable. This regimen alternating oral and i.v. vinorelbine in combination with epirubicin is effective and safe. Oral vinorelbine on day 8 offers greater convenience to the patient, and decreases the need for i.v. injection and reduces time spent in hospital. Therefore, oral vinorelbine is a convenient alternative to the i.v. form in combination regimens commonly used to treat MBC

Comparison of the Population Excess Fraction of <i>Chlamydia trachomatis</i> Infection on Pelvic Inflammatory Disease at 12-months in the Presence and Absence of Chlamydia Testing and Treatment:Systematic Review and Retrospective Cohort Analysis

Background: The impact of Chlamydia trachomatis (chlamydia) control on the incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) is theoretically limited by the proportion of PID caused by chlamydia. We estimate the population excess fraction (PEF) of treated chlamydia infection on PID at 12-months in settings with widespread chlamydia control (testing and treatment) and compare this to the estimated PEF of untreated chlamydia. Methods: We used two large retrospective population-based cohorts of women of reproductive age from settings with widespread chlamydia control to calculate the PEF of treated chlamydia on PID at 12-months. We undertook a systematic review to identify further studies that reported the risk of PID in women who were tested for chlamydia (infected and uninfected). We used the same method to calculate the PEF in eligible studies then compared all estimates of PEF. Results: The systematic review identified a single study, a randomised control led trial of chlamydia screening (POPI-RCT). In the presence of testing and treatment <10% of PID at 12-months was attributable to treated (baseline) chlamydia infections (Manitoba: 8.86%(95%CI 7.15-10.75); Denmark: 3.84%(3.26-4.45); screened-arm POPI-RCT: 0.99%(0.00-29.06)). In the absence of active chlamydia treatment 26.44% (11.57-46.32) of PID at 12-months was attributable to untreated (baseline) chlamydia infections (deferred-arm POPI-RCT). The PEFs suggest that eradicating baseline chlamydia infections could prevent 484 cases of PID at 12-months per 100,000 women in the untreated setting and 13- 184 cases of PID per 100,000 tested women in the presence of testing and treatment. Conclusion: Testing and treating chlamydia reduced the PEF of chlamydia on PID by 65% compared to the untreated setting. But in the presence of testing and treatment over 90% of PID could not be attributed to a baseline chlamydia infection. More information is needed about the aetiology of PID to develop effective strategies for improving the reproductive health of women

Outcomes of special histotypes of breast cancer after adjuvant endocrine therapy with letrozole or tamoxifen in the monotherapy cohort of the BIG 1-98 trial

In the BIG 1-98 clinical trial of 4922 postmenopausal women treated with 5 years of letrozole or tamoxifen for endocrine-responsive breast cancer, 183 had the rare histotypes mucinous or tubular/cribriform. These women had better outcomes than those with other histotypes. The magnitude of the letrozole advantage compared with tamoxifen may not be as large in patients with these rare histotype

Associations of common breast cancer susceptibility alleles with risk of breast cancer subtypes in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

ESR1 amplification is rare in breast cancer and is associated with high grade and high proliferation: a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification study

Background: Expression of estrogen receptor alpha (ERα) is predictive for endocrine therapy response and an important prognostic factor in breast cancer. Overexpression of ERα can be caused by estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) gene amplification and was originally reported to be a frequent event associated with a significantly longer survival for ER-positive women treated with adjuvant tamoxifen monotherapy, which was however questioned by subsequent studies

Symptoms of endocrine treatment and outcome in the BIG 1-98 study

There may be a relationship between the incidence of vasomotor and arthralgia/myalgia symptoms and treatment outcomes for postmenopausal breast cancer patients with endocrine-responsive disease who received adjuvant letrozole or tamoxifen. Data on patients randomized into the monotherapy arms of the BIG 1-98 clinical trial who did not have either vasomotor or arthralgia/myalgia/carpal tunnel (AMC) symptoms reported at baseline, started protocol treatment and were alive and disease-free at the 3-month landmark (n=4,798) and at the 12-month landmark (n=4,682) were used for this report. Cohorts of patients with vasomotor symptoms, AMC symptoms, neither, or both were defined at both 3 and 12months from randomization. Landmark analyses were performed for disease-free survival (DFS) and for breast cancer free interval (BCFI), using regression analysis to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI). Median follow-up was 7.0years. Reporting of AMC symptoms was associated with better outcome for both the 3- and 12-month landmark analyses [e.g., 12-month landmark, HR (95% CI) for DFS=0.65 (0.49-0.87), and for BCFI=0.70 (0.49-0.99)]. By contrast, reporting of vasomotor symptoms was less clearly associated with DFS [12-month DFS HR (95% CI)=0.82 (0.70-0.96)] and BCFI (12-month DFS HR (95% CI)=0.97 (0.80-1.18). Interaction tests indicated no effect of treatment group on associations between symptoms and outcomes. While reporting of AMC symptoms was clearly associated with better DFS and BCFI, the association between vasomotor symptoms and outcome was less clear, especially with respect to breast cancer-related events

Evaluation of polygenic risk scores for breast and ovarian cancer risk prediction in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Background: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified 94 common single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with breast cancer (BC) risk and 18 associated with ovarian cancer (OC) risk. Several of these are also associated with risk of BC or OC for women who carry a pathogenic mutation in the high-risk BC and OC genes BRCA1 or BRCA2. The combined effects of these variants on BC or OC risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have not yet been assessed while their clinical management could benefit from improved personalized risk estimates. Methods: We constructed polygenic risk scores (PRS) using BC and OC susceptibility SNPs identified through population-based GWAS: for BC (overall, estrogen receptor [ER]-positive, and ER-negative) and for OC. Using data from 15 252 female BRCA1 and 8211 BRCA2 carriers, the association of each PRS with BC or OC risk was evaluated using a weighted cohort approach, with time to diagnosis as the outcome and estimation of the hazard ratios (HRs) per standard deviation increase in the PRS. Results: The PRS for ER-negative BC displayed the strongest association with BC risk in BRCA1 carriers (HR = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.23 to 1.31, P = 8.2 x 10(53)). In BRCA2 carriers, the strongest association with BC risk was seen for the overall BC PRS (HR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.28, P = 7.2 x 10(-20)). The OC PRS was strongly associated with OC risk for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. These translate to differences in absolute risks (more than 10% in each case) between the top and bottom deciles of the PRS distribution; for example, the OC risk was 6% by age 80 years for BRCA2 carriers at the 10th percentile of the OC PRS compared with 19% risk for those at the 90th percentile of PRS. Conclusions: BC and OC PRS are predictive of cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Incorporation of the PRS into risk prediction models has promise to better inform decisions on cancer risk management

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Adjuvant Letrozole Versus Anastrozole in Postmenopausal Patients With Hormone Receptor-Positive, Node-Positive Early Breast Cancer: Final Results of the Randomized Phase III Femara Versus Anastrozole Clinical Evaluation (FACE) Trial.

Purpose The Letrozole (Femara) Versus Anastrozole Clinical Evaluation (FACE) study compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant letrozole versus anastrozole in postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor (HR) -positive and node-positive early breast cancer (eBC). Methods Postmenopausal women with HR-positive and node-positive eBC were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant therapy with either letrozole (2.5 mg) or anastrozole (1 mg) once per day for 5 years or until recurrence of disease. Patients were stratified on the basis of the number of lymph nodes and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status. The primary end point was 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), and the key secondary end points were overall survival and safety. Results A total of 4,136 patients were randomly assigned to receive either letrozole (n = 2,061) or anastrozole (n = 2,075). The final analysis was done at 709 DFS events (letrozole, 341 [16.5%]; anastrozole, 368 [17.7%]). The 5-year estimated DFS rate was 84.9% for letrozole versus 82.9% for anastrozole arm (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.07; P = .3150). Exploratory analysis showed similar DFS with letrozole and anastrozole in all evaluated subgroups. The 5-year estimated overall survival rate was 89.9% for letrozole versus 89.2% for anastrozole arm (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.17; P = .7916). Most common grade 3 to 4 adverse events (> 5% of patients) reported for letrozole versus anastrozole were arthralgia (3.9% v 3.3%, and 48.2% v 47.9% for all adverse events), hypertension (1.2% v 1.0%), hot flushes (0.8% v 0.4%), myalgia (0.8% v 0.7%), dyspnea (0.8% v 0.5%), and depression (0.8% v 0.6%). Conclusion Letrozole did not demonstrate significantly superior efficacy or safety compared with anastrozole in postmenopausal patients with HR-positive, node-positive eBC