Palbociclib with Letrozole in Postmenopausal Women with ER+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer: Hematologic Safety Analysis of the Randomized PALOMA-2 Trial.

BackgroundPALOMA-2 confirmed that first-line palbociclib + letrozole improved progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.72) in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). This analysis evaluated palbociclib-associated hematologic adverse events (AEs) and provides insight on managing these AEs.Materials and methodsPostmenopausal women with ER+/HER2- ABC were randomly assigned 2:1 to letrozole (2.5 mg daily continuously) plus oral palbociclib (125 mg daily; 3 weeks on/1 week off) or placebo. Safety assessments were performed at baseline, days 1 and 15 (first two cycles) and day 1 of subsequent cycles, and included white blood cell, platelet, and absolute neutrophil count (ANC).ResultsPALOMA-2 randomized 666 women to palbociclib + letrozole (n = 444) or placebo + letrozole (n = 222). Neutropenia was the most common AE (95.3%) with palbociclib (grade 3, 55.6%; grade 4, 11.5%) and was managed by dose modifications; progression-free survival was similar between patients who experienced grade ≥ 3 neutropenia versus those who did not. Median (range) time to onset of neutropenia with palbociclib + letrozole was 15 (12-700) days (grade ≥ 3, 28.0 [12-854] days); median duration of each neutropenia episode grade ≥ 3 was 7.0 days. Asian ethnicity and low baseline ANC were associated with increased risk of grade 3/4 neutropenia with palbociclib (p < .001).ConclusionPalbociclib + letrozole was generally well tolerated. Neutropenia, the most frequently reported AE in women with ER+/HER2- ABC, was mostly transient and manageable by dose modifications in patients who experienced grade ≥ 3 neutropenia, without appearing to compromise efficacy. (Pfizer; NCT01740427) IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Palbociclib demonstrated an acceptable safety profile in PALOMA-2 in women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) receiving first-line palbociclib + letrozole. Although hematologic adverse events (AEs) are typically expected with anticancer therapies and are often clinically significant, palbociclib-related hematologic AEs, particularly neutropenia (most frequent AE), were transient/manageable by dose reduction, interruption, or cycle delay, which is in contrast to the more profound neutropenia associated with chemotherapy. Palbociclib dose adjustments decreased hematologic AE severity without appearing to compromise efficacy, supporting palbociclib + letrozole as a first-line treatment for ER+/HER2- ABC

Community Engagement in Academic Health Centers: A Model for Capturing and Advancing Our Successes

Academic health centers (AHCs) are under increased pressure to demonstrate the effectiveness of their community-engaged activities, but there are no common metrics for evaluating community engagement in AHCs. Eight AHCs piloted the Institutional Community Engagement Self-Assessment (ICESA), a two-phase project to assess community-engagement efforts. The first phase uses a framework developed by the University of Rochester Medical Center, which utilizes structure, process, and outcome criteria to map CE activities. The second phase uses the Community-Campus Partnerships for Health (CCPH) Self-Assessment to identify institutional resources for community engagement, and potential gaps, to inform community engagement goal-setting. The authors conducted a structured, directed content analysis to determine the effectiveness of using the two-phase process at the participating AHCs. The findings suggest that the ICESA project assisted AHCs in three key areas, and may provide a strategy for assessing community engagement in AHCs

Understanding breast cancer patients' preference for two types of exercise training during chemotherapy in an unblinded randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patient preference for group assignment may affect outcomes in unblinded trials but few studies have attempted to understand such preferences. The purpose of the present study was to examine factors associated with breast cancer patients' preference for two types of exercise training during chemotherapy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Breast cancer patients (N = 242) completed a battery of tests including a questionnaire that assessed patient preference and the theory of planned behavior (TPB) prior to being randomized to usual care, resistance exercise training (RET), or aerobic exercise training (AET).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>99 (40.9%) participants preferred RET, 88 (36.4%) preferred AET, and 55 (22.7%) reported no preference. Past exercisers (p = 0.023), smokers (p = 0.004), and aerobically fitter participants (p = 0.005) were more likely to prefer RET. As hypothesized, participants that preferred AET had more favorable TPB beliefs about AET whereas participants that preferred RET had more favorable TPB beliefs about RET. In multivariate modeling, patient preference for RET versus AET was explained (R²= .46; p < 0.001) by the difference in motivation for RET versus AET (β = .56; p < 0.001), smoking status (β = .13; p = 0.007), and aerobic fitness (β = .12; p = 0.018). Motivational difference between RET versus AET, in turn, was explained (R²= .48; p < 0.001) by differences in instrumental attitude (β = .27; p < 0.001), affective attitude (β = .25; p < 0.001), and perceived behavioral control (β = .24; p < 0.001).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Breast cancer patients' preference for RET versus AET during chemotherapy was predicted largely by a difference in motivation for each type of exercise which, in turn, was based on differences in their beliefs about the anticipated benefits, enjoyment, and difficulty of performing each type of exercise during chemotherapy. These findings may help explain patient preference effects in unblinded behavioral trials.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00115713.</p

Competing risks of death in women treated with adjuvant aromatase inhibitors for early breast cancer on NCIC CTG MA.27

Baseline patient and tumor characteristics differentially affected type of death in the MA.17 placebo-controlled letrozole trial where cardiovascular death was not separately identified. The MA.27 trial allowed competing risks analysis of breast cancer (BC), cardiovascular, and other type (OT) of death. MA.27 was a phase III adjuvant breast cancer trial of exemestane versus anastrozole. Effects of baseline patient and tumor characteristics were tested for whether factors were associated with (1) all cause mortality and (2) cause-specific mortality. We also fit step-wise forward cause-specific-adjusted models. 7576 women (median age 64 years; 5417 (72 %) < 70 years and 2159 (28 %) ≥ 70 years) were enrolled and followed for median 4.1 years. The 432 deaths comprised 187 (43 %) BC, 66 (15 %) cardiovascular, and 179 (41 %) OT. Five baseline factors were differentially associated with type of death. Older patients had greater BC (p = 0.03), cardiovascular (p < 0.001), and other types (p < 0.001) of mortality. Patients with pre-existing cardiovascular history had worse cardiovascular mortality (p < 0.001); those with worse ECOG performance status had worse OT mortality (p < 0.001). Patients with T1 tumors (p < 0.001) and progesterone receptor positive had less BC mortality (p < 0.001). Fewer BC deaths occurred with node-negative disease (p < 0.001), estrogen receptor-positive tumors (p = 0.001), and without adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.005); worse cardiovascular mortality (p = 0.01), with trastuzumab; worse OT mortality, for non-whites (p = 0.03) and without adjuvant radiotherapy (p = 0.003). Overall, 57 % of deaths in MA.27 AI-treated patients were non-breast cancer related. Baseline patient and tumor characteristics differentially affected type of death with women 70 or older experiencing more non-breast cancer death

The combination of gefitinib and RAD001 inhibits growth of HER2 overexpressing breast cancer cells and tumors irrespective of trastuzumab sensitivity

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>HER2-positive breast cancers exhibit high rates of innate and acquired resistance to trastuzumab (TZ), a HER2-directed antibody used as a first line treatment for this disease. TZ resistance may in part be mediated by frequent co-expression of EGFR and by sustained activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway. Here, we assessed feasibility of combining the EGFR inhibitor gefitinib and the mTOR inhibitor everolimus (RAD001) for treating HER2 overexpressing breast cancers with different sensitivity to TZ.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The gefitinib and RAD001 combination was broadly evaluated in TZ sensitive (SKBR3 and MCF7-HER2) and TZ resistant (JIMT-1) breast cancer models. The effects on cell growth were measured in cell based assays using the fixed molar ratio design and the median effect principle. <it>In vivo </it>studies were performed in Rag2M mice bearing established tumors. Analysis of cell cycle, changes in targeted signaling pathways and tumor characteristics were conducted to assess gefitinib and RAD001 interactions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The gefitinib and RAD001 combination inhibited cell growth <it>in vitro </it>in a synergistic fashion as defined by the Chou and Talalay median effect principle and increased tumor xenograft growth delay. The improvement in therapeutic efficacy by the combination was associated <it>in vitro </it>with cell line dependent increases in cytotoxicity and cytostasis while treatment <it>in vivo </it>promoted cytostasis. The most striking and consistent therapeutic effect of the combination was increased inhibition of the mTOR pathway (<it>in vitro </it>and <it>in vivo</it>) and EGFR signaling <it>in vivo </it>relative to the single drugs.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The gefitinib and RAD001 combination provides effective control over growth of HER2 overexpressing cells and tumors irrespective of the TZ sensitivity status.</p

Community Engagement in Academic Health Centers: A Model for Capturing and Advancing Our Successes

Academic health centers (AHCs) are under increased pressure to demonstrate the effectiveness of their community-engaged activities, but there are no common metrics for evaluating community engagement in AHCs. Eight AHCs piloted the Institutional Community Engagement Self-Assessment (ICESA), a two-phase project to assess community-engagement efforts. The first phase uses a framework developed by the University of Rochester Medical Center, which utilizes structure, process, and outcome criteria to map CE activities. The second phase uses the Community-Campus Partnerships for Health (CCPH) Self-Assessment to identify institutional resources for community engagement, and potential gaps, to inform community engagement goal-setting. The authors conducted a structured, directed content analysis to determine the effectiveness of using the two-phase process at the participating AHCs. The findings suggest that the ICESA project assisted AHCs in three key areas, and may provide a strategy for assessing community engagement in AHCs

Exemestane for breast-cancer prevention in postmenopausal women

Background: tamoxifen and raloxifene have limited patient acceptance for primary prevention of breast cancer. Aromatase inhibitors prevent more contralateral breast cancers and cause fewer side effects than tamoxifen in patients with early-stage breast cancer. Methods: in a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of exemestane designed to detect a 65% relative reduction in invasive breast cancer, eligible postmenopausal women 35 years of age or older had at least one of the following risk factors: 60 years of age or older; Gail 5-year risk score greater than 1.66% (chances in 100 of invasive breast cancer developing within 5 years); prior atypical ductal or lobular hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ; or ductal carcinoma in situ with mastectomy. Toxic effects and health-related and menopause-specific qualities of life were measured. Results: a total of 4560 women for whom the median age was 62.5 years and the median Gail risk score was 2.3% were randomly assigned to either exemestane or placebo. At a median follow-up of 35 months, 11 invasive breast cancers were detected in those given exemestane and in 32 of those given placebo, with a 65% relative reduction in the annual incidence of invasive breast cancer (0.19% vs. 0.55%; hazard ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 0.70; P=0.002). The annual incidence of invasive plus noninvasive (ductal carcinoma in situ) breast cancers was 0.35% on exemestane and 0.77% on placebo (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.79; P=0.004). Adverse events occurred in 88% of the exemestane group and 85% of the placebo group (P=0.003), with no significant differences between the two groups in terms of skeletal fractures, cardiovascular events, other cancers, or treatment-related deaths. Minimal quality-of-life differences were observed. Conclusions: exemestane significantly reduced invasive breast cancers in postmenopausal women who were at moderately increased risk for breast cancer. During a median follow-up period of 3 years, exemestane was associated with no serious toxic effects and only minimal changes in health-related quality of life

Efficacy and Safety of Trastuzumab Emtansine Plus Capecitabine vs Trastuzumab Emtansine Alone in Patients With Previously Treated ERBB2 (HER2)-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer A Phase 1 and Randomized Phase 2 Trial

Importance: ERBB2 (HER2)-targeted therapy provides benefits in metastatic breast cancer (mBC) and gastric cancer, but additional treatments are needed to maximize efficacy and quality of life. Objective: To determine maximum tolerated doses (MTDs) of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) plus capecitabine in patients with previously treated ERBB2-positive mBC and locally advanced/metastatic gastric cancer (LA/mGC) (phase 1) and the efficacy and safety of this combination vs T-DM1 alone in patients with mBC (phase 2). Design, setting, and participants: The MTD in phase 1 was assessed using a 3 + 3 design with capecitabine dose modification. Phase 2 was an open-label, randomized, international multicenter study of patients with mBC treated with T-DM1 plus capecitabine or T-DM1 alone. Eligible patients had previously treated ERBB2-positive mBC or LA/mGC with no prior chemotherapy treatment for advanced disease. Interventions: Patients in the phase 1 mBC cohort received capecitabine (750 mg/m2, 700 mg/m2, or 650 mg/m2 twice daily, days 1-14 of a 3-week cycle) plus T-DM1 3.6 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Patients with LA/mGC received capecitabine at the mBC phase 1 MTD, de-escalating as needed, plus T-DM1 2.4 mg/kg weekly. In phase 2, patients with mBC were randomized (1:1) to receive capecitabine (at the phase 1 MTD) plus T-DM1 or T-DM1 alone. Main outcomes and measures: The phase 1 primary objective was to identify the MTD of capecitabine plus T-DM1. The phase 2 primary outcome was investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR). Results: In phase 1, the median (range) age was 54.0 (37-71) and 57.5 (53-70) years for patients with mBC and patients with LA/mGC, respectively. The capecitabine MTD was identified as 700 mg/m2 in 11 patients with mBC and 6 patients with LA/mGC evaluable for dose-limiting toxic effects. In phase 2, between October 2014 and April 2016, patients with mBC (median [range] age, 52.0 [28-80] years) were randomized to receive combination therapy (n = 81) or T-DM1 (n = 80). The ORR was 44% (36 of 81 patients) and 36% (29 of 80 patients) in the combination and T-DM1 groups, respectively (difference, 8.2%; 90% CI, -4.5 to 20.9; P = .34; clinical cutoff, May 31, 2017). Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 78 of 82 patients (95%) in the combination group, with 36 (44%) experiencing grade 3-4 AEs, and 69 of 78 patients (88%) in the T-DM1 group, with 32 (41%) experiencing grade 3-4 AEs. No grade 5 AEs were reported. Conclusions and relevance: Adding capecitabine to T-DM1 did not statistically increase ORR associated with T-DM1 in patients with previously treated ERBB2-positive mBC. The combination group reported more AEs, but with no unexpected toxic effects