Switching between intravenous and subcutaneous trastuzumab: safety results from the PrefHer trial

Aim: To assess the safety and tolerability of switching between subcutaneous (SC) and intravenous (IV) trastuzumab in the PrefHer study (NCT01401166). Patients and methods: Patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer completed (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and were randomised to receive four cycles of SC trastuzumab, via single-use injection device (SID; Cohort 1) or hand-held syringe (Cohort 2), followed by four cycles of IV, or vice versa (the crossover period presented here) as part of their 18 standard cycles of adjuvant trastuzumab treatment. Adverse events (AEs) were reported using standard criteria. Results: Overall, fewer AEs were reported during the IV treatment periods, regardless of administration sequence (IV→SC or SC→IV). Differences in AEs between the SC and IV periods were partly due to variances in grade 1 and 2 local injection site reactions (ISRs) and systemic administration-related reactions (ARRs) and these occurred mainly during SC treatment, as expected. When ISRs and ARRs were excluded, rates of AEs were higher during the first treatment period, compared with the second, in both treatment sequences; otherwise there was no clear pattern in the type of AEs reported. Rates of clinically important events, including grade ≥3 AEs, serious AEs, AEs leading to study drug discontinuation and cardiac AEs, were low and similar between treatment arms (<5%). There were no grade 4 or 5 AEs. No new safety signals for trastuzumab were observed. Conclusions: PrefHer revealed that switching from IV to SC trastuzumab (hand-held syringe or SID) or vice versa did not impact the known safety profile of trastuzumab

Preference for the fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer (PHranceSCa): a randomized, open-label phase II study

Aim The aim of the study was to assess patient preference for the fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection (PH FDC SC) in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer in PHranceSCa (NCT03674112). Materials and methods Patients who completed neoadjuvant P + H + chemotherapy + surgery were randomised 1:1 to three intravenous (IV) P + H cycles followed by three cycles of PH FDC SC or vice versa (crossover) and then chose subcutaneous (SC) injection or IV infusion to continue up to 18 cycles (continuation). Assessments were via patient and healthcare professional (HCP) questionnaires. Results One hundred and sixty patients were randomised (cut-off: 24 February 2020); 136 (85.0%, 95% confidence interval: 78.5–90.2%) preferred SC; 22 (13.8%) preferred IV; 2 (1.3%) had no preference. The main reasons for SC preference were reduced clinic time (n = 119) and comfort during administration (n = 73). One hundred and forty-one patients (88.1%) were very satisfied/satisfied with SC injection versus 108 (67.5%) with IV infusion; 86.9% chose PH FDC SC continuation. HCP perceptions of median patient treatment room time ranged from 33.0–50.0 min with SC and 130.0–300.0 min with IV. Most adverse events (AEs) were grade 1/2 (no 4/5s); serious AE rates were low. AE rates before and after switching were similar (cycles 1–3 IV → cycles 4–6 SC: 77.5% → 72.5%; cycles 1–3 SC → cycles 4–6 IV: 77.5% → 63.8%). Conclusion Most patients strongly preferred PH FDC SC over P + H IV. PH FDC SC was generally well tolerated, with no new safety signals (even when switching), and offers a quicker alternative to IV infusion

Risk-based decision-making in the treatment of HER2-positive early breast cancer: Recommendations based on the current state of knowledge

Treatment of HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC) continues to evolve with neoadjuvant (pre-operative) and adjuvant (post-operative) HER2-targeted therapies as standard of care. There are two important decision points. The first involves deciding between neoadjuvant therapy or proceeding directly to surgery. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) plus pertuzumab–trastuzumab is appropriate for patients with high-risk HER2-positive EBC (tumour diameter ≥2 cm, and/or node-positive disease). Patients with node-negative disease and tumour diameter <2 cm are candidates for upfront surgery followed by paclitaxel for 12 weeks plus 18 cycles of trastuzumab, with the option to add pertuzumab (if pN+). The second decision point involves the pathohistological result at surgery after neoadjuvant therapy. Total pathological complete response (tpCR: ypT0/is, ypN0) is associated with improved survival endpoints. Patients with tumours ≥2 cm and/or node-positive disease at diagnosis who have a tpCR after dual blockade should continue pertuzumab–trastuzumab in the adjuvant setting to complete 1 year (18 cycles) of treatment. For patients with invasive residual disease, 14 cycles of post-neoadjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) therapy significantly increases invasive-DFS compared with trastuzumab. Extended adjuvant therapy with neratinib is an option in selected patients (HER2-positive and oestrogen receptor [ER]-positive) who have completed adjuvant trastuzumab-based therapy. Less aggressive chemotherapy regimens are recommended in populations with a lower risk of recurrence (patients with small tumours without axillary involvement; patients unlikely to tolerate anthracycline-taxane or taxane-carboplatin regimens). Ultimately, treatment recommendations should be consistent with local and international guidelines. Further studies will guide optimisation of treatment for patients with HER2-positive EBC according to the risk of disease recurrence.SCOPUS: re.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Multigene Panel Germline Testing of 1333 Czech Patients with Ovarian Cancer

Ovarian cancer (OC) is the deadliest gynecologic malignancy with a substantial proportion of hereditary cases and a frequent association with breast cancer (BC). Genetic testing facilitates treatment and preventive strategies reducing OC mortality in mutation carriers. However, the prevalence of germline mutations varies among populations and many rarely mutated OC predisposition genes remain to be identified. We aimed to analyze 219 genes in 1333 Czech OC patients and 2278 population-matched controls using next-generation sequencing. We revealed germline mutations in 18 OC/BC predisposition genes in 32.0% of patients and in 2.5% of controls. Mutations in BRCA1/BRCA2, RAD51C/RAD51D, BARD1, and mismatch repair genes conferred high OC risk (OR &gt; 5). Mutations in BRIP1 and NBN were associated with moderate risk (both OR = 3.5). BRCA1/2 mutations dominated in almost all clinicopathological subgroups including sporadic borderline tumors of ovary (BTO). Analysis of remaining 201 genes revealed somatic mosaics in PPM1D and germline mutations in SHPRH and NAT1 associating with a high/moderate OC risk significantly; however, further studies are warranted to delineate their contribution to OC development in other populations. Our findings demonstrate the high proportion of patients with hereditary OC in Slavic population justifying genetic testing in all patients with OC, including BTO