Positive predictive value of ERBB2 copy number gain by tissue or circulating tumor DNA next-generation sequencing across advanced cancers

BACKGROUND: The correlation of ERBB2 copy number gain (CNG) from tissue or circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) by next-generation sequencing (NGS) with standard HER2 tissue evaluation is not well understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients with ERBB2 CNG on commercial NGS. We described their clinical-pathologic features and calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) of ERBB2 CNG by NGS for HER2-positivity by IHC and FISH testing. RESULTS: 176 patients had NGS revealing an ERBB2 CNG (112 by tumor tissue and 91 by ctDNA). The cancer subtypes with the most cases with ERBB2 CNG by NGS were breast ( CONCLUSIONS: ERBB2 CNG by NGS is detected in numerous malignancies for which HER2 testing is not standard. Detection of ERBB2 CNG by tissue NGS and ctDNA has a high PPV for true HER2-positivity by standard IHC and/or FISH testing in breast cancer

Double-Blind Phase III Trial of Adjuvant Chemotherapy With and Without Bevacizumab in Patients With Lymph Node-Positive and High-Risk Lymph Node-Negative Breast Cancer (E5103)

Purpose Bevacizumab improves progression-free survival but not overall survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer. E5103 tested the effect of bevacizumab in the adjuvant setting in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative disease. Patients and Methods Patients were assigned 1:2:2 to receive placebo with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by weekly paclitaxel (arm A), bevacizumab only during AC and paclitaxel (arm B), or bevacizumab during AC and paclitaxel followed by bevacizumab monotherapy for 10 cycles (arm C). Random assignment was stratified and bevacizumab dose adjusted for choice of AC schedule. Radiation and hormonal therapy were administered concurrently with bevacizumab in arm C. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). Results Four thousand nine hundred ninety-four patients were enrolled. Median age was 52 years; 64% of patients were estrogen receptor positive, 27% were lymph node negative, and 78% received dose-dense AC. Chemotherapy-associated adverse events including myelosuppression and neuropathy were similar across all arms. Grade ≥ 3 hypertension was more common in bevacizumab-treated patients, but thrombosis, proteinuria, and hemorrhage were not. The cumulative incidence of clinical congestive heart failure at 15 months was 1.0%, 1.9%, and 3.0% in arms A, B, and C, respectively. Bevacizumab exposure was less than anticipated, with approximately 24% of patients in arm B and approximately 55% of patients in arm C discontinuing bevacizumab before completing planned therapy. Five-year IDFS was 77% (95% CI, 71% to 81%) in arm A, 76% (95% CI, 72% to 80%) in arm B, and 80% (95% CI, 77% to 83%) in arm C. Conclusion Incorporation of bevacizumab into sequential anthracycline- and taxane-containing adjuvant therapy does not improve IDFS or overall survival in patients with high-risk human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer. Longer duration bevacizumab therapy is unlikely to be feasible given the high rate of early discontinuation

Oncology Fellows' Career Plans, Expectations, and Well-Being: Do Fellows Know What They Are Getting Into?

To evaluate the career plans, professional expectations, and well-being of oncology fellows compared with actual experiences of practicing oncologists

Expedition Inspiration Fund for Breast Cancer Research Meeting 2003

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/44216/1/10549_2004_Article_5139058.pd

Effects of high dose raloxifene in selected patients with advanced breast carcinoma

BACKGROUND An earlier trial of raloxifene, conducted in women with metastatic breast carcinoma who initially had responded to tamoxifen and subsequently developed disease progression, suggested no antitumor activity for raloxifene in tamoxifen‐refractory disease. However, preclinical studies and preliminary clinical data in healthy women suggest that raloxifene antagonizes growth of estrogen‐dependent neoplasia. METHODS Raloxifene HCl 150 mg twice daily was given to 22 postmenopausal women with metastatic (American Joint Committee on Cancer Stage IV) or locoregionally recurrent, initially estrogen receptor positive breast carcinoma. Prior systemic treatment of metastatic disease was not allowed. Prior adjuvant chemotherapy or hormonal therapy was required to have been completed at least 1 year before study entry. Tumor response was evaluated every other month either radiographically or by physical examination. Evaluable disease was defined as bidimensionally measurable lesions. RESULTS Twenty‐one patients were eligible for efficacy analysis; 6 had been treated previously with tamoxifen. There were no complete tumor responses. Four patients (19%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.2%, 36%) had partial tumor responses lasting 6.3, 17.5, 23.9, and 28.1 months, respectively. Prolonged stable disease (i.e., tumor size stable for ≥ 6 months) was observed in 3 patients (14%; 95% CI, 0.0%, 29%) and lasted 7.9, 12.2, and 25.1 months, respectively. Combining partial responses and prolonged stable disease yielded an overall clinical benefit rate of 33% (95% CI, 13%, 53%). Adverse events generally were consistent with the disease state; there were no serious adverse events or laboratory changes believed to be therapy‐related. CONCLUSIONS Raloxifene HCl, 150 mg, administered twice daily was safe, well tolerated, and modestly effective in highly selected postmenopausal women with advanced breast carcinoma. Further study of high dose raloxifene as monotherapy for advanced breast carcinoma most likely is unwarranted. Cancer 2000;88:2047–53. © 2000 American Cancer Society. Raloxifene HCl (150 mg administered twice daily) demonstrated low toxicity and modest antitumor activity in postmenopausal women with metastatic or locoregionally recurrent, originally estrogen receptor positive breast carcinoma who had not received prior systemic treatment of metastatic disease

Are Biosimilars the Future of Oncology and Haematology?

Biological drugs are vital but often high-cost components of cancer treatment. Several biosimilar versions of these drugs have been approved in Europe and/or the USA, with many more in development. However, there is some disconnect between the biosimilars that are approved for use and those accessible in clinical practice, with availability impacted by factors including patent litigation and complex healthcare insurance policies, particularly in the USA. Provided the barriers to widespread uptake can be overcome, biosimilars offer potential benefits including cost savings and improved patient access versus the reference product (RP). This article provides an up-to-date and focused perspective on the development and use of biosimilars in the haemato-oncology setting. European and US regulatory pathways governing biosimilar licensing demand that there are no clinically meaningful differences between a biosimilar and its RP. Pathways are rigorously enforced and involve comprehensive non-clinical evaluations and clinical trials in selected indications to establish the equivalence or non-inferiority of efficacy, and the comparability of safety, of the biosimilar versus its RP. 'Indication extrapolation' is only permitted if scientifically justifiable considering mechanism(s) of action, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity and safety in relevant patient populations. Switching treatment from RP to biosimilar is supported by most available data, predominantly from indications other than cancer, and post-marketing pharmacovigilance programmes are warranted. Notably, the potential benefits of biosimilar cancer treatment may extend beyond direct cost savings: for example, the availability of biosimilars of common regimen components may help incentivise the evaluation and/or clinical use of new treatment approaches and novel drugs