Analysis of PIK3CA mutations and activation pathways in <i>triple negative</i> breast cancer

Background: Triple Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC) accounts for 12–24% of all breast carcinomas, and shows worse prognosis compared to other breast cancer subtypes. Molecular studies demonstrated that TNBCs are a heterogeneous group of tumors with different clinical and pathologic features, prognosis, genetic-molecular alterations and treatment responsivity. The PI3K/AKT is a major pathway involved in the regulation of cell survival and proliferation, and is the most frequently altered pathway in breast cancer, apparently with different biologic impact on specific cancer subtypes. The most common genetic abnormality is represented by PIK3CA gene activating mutations, with an overall frequency of 20–40%. The aims of our study were to investigate PIK3CA gene mutations on a large series of TNBC, to perform a wider analysis on genetic alterations involving PI3K/AKT and BRAF/RAS/MAPK pathways and to correlate the results with clinical-pathologic data. Materials and Methods: PIK3CA mutation analysis was performed by using cobas® PIK3CA Mutation Test. EGFR, AKT1, BRAF, and KRAS genes were analyzed by sequencing. Immunohistochemistry was carried out to identify PTEN loss and to investigate for PI3K/AKT pathways components. Results: PIK3CA mutations were detected in 23.7% of TNBC, whereas no mutations were identified in EGFR, AKT1, BRAF, and KRAS genes. Moreover, we observed PTEN loss in 11.3% of tumors. Deregulation of PI3K/AKT pathways was revealed by consistent activation of pAKT and p-p44/42 MAPK in all PIK3CA mutated TNBC. Conclusions: Our data shows that PIK3CA mutations and PI3K/AKT pathway activation are common events in TNBC. A deeper investigation on specific TNBC genomic abnormalities might be helpful in order to select patients who would benefit from current targeted therapy strategies

Successful outcome after combined chemotherapeutic and surgical management in a case of esophageal cancer with breast and brain relapse

Esophageal cancer (EC) is a highly lethal disease. Approximately 50% of patients present with metastatic EC and most patients with localized EC will have local recurrence or develop metastases, despite potentially curative local therapy. The most common sites of distant recurrence are represented by lung, liver and bone while brain and breast metastases are rare. Usually patients with advanced disease are not treated aggressively and their median survival is six months. We report a woman patient who developed breast and brain metastases after curative surgery. We treated her with a highly aggressive chemotherapeutic and surgical combination resulting in a complete remission of the disease even after 11-year follow-up. We think that in super selected patients with more than one metastasis, when functional status is good and metastases are technically resectable, a surgical excision may be considered as a salvage option and chemotherapy should be delivered to allow a systemic control

Small cell lung cancer in a young patient with osteopetrosis

BACKGROUND: Osteopetrosis or Albers-Schönberg's disease is a heterogeneous group of rare hereditary troubles of the bone characterized by bone sclerosis due to an alteration of the bone reabsorption mediated by osteoclasts. The defect in the osteoclastic activity is responsible for complete or partial medullary cavities occlusion, with consequent reduced hemopoiesis, and for the excessive fragility of the affected bone segments. CASE REPORT: We reported the case of a young man of 31 years affected by osteopetrosis in which a small cell lung cancer developed. RESULTS: Small cell lung cancer is a particularly rare neoplasm in the young, and even though it is highly sensitive to chemotherapeutic treatment its prognosis remains poor. The greatest clinical problem connected with chemotherapeutic treatment of patients affected by osteopetrosis is the variability of the reduction of their bone marrow reserve, which could expose them to an excessive hematological toxicity caused by the therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The adoption of suitable prophylactic measures, such as the use of growth factors and drugs selected in relation to their toxicity or given in reduced doses, should be appropriately considered in these subjects.</br

Adjuvant anastrozole versus exemestane versus letrozole, upfront or after 2 years of tamoxifen, in endocrine-sensitive breast cancer (FATA-GIM3): a randomised, phase 3 trial

Background: Uncertainty exists about the optimal schedule of adjuvant treatment of breast cancer with aromatase inhibitors and, to our knowledge, no trial has directly compared the three aromatase inhibitors anastrozole, exemestane, and letrozole. We investigated the schedule and type of aromatase inhibitors to be used as adjuvant treatment for hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Methods: FATA-GIM3 is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial of six different treatments in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed invasive hormone receptor-positive breast cancer that had been completely removed by surgery, any pathological tumour size, and axillary nodal status. Key exclusion criteria were hormone replacement therapy, recurrent or metastatic disease, previous treatment with tamoxifen, and another malignancy in the previous 10 years. Patients were randomly assigned in an equal ratio to one of six treatment groups: oral anastrozole (1 mg per day), exemestane (25 mg per day), or letrozole (2·5 mg per day) tablets upfront for 5 years (upfront strategy) or oral tamoxifen (20 mg per day) for 2 years followed by oral administration of one of the three aromatase inhibitors for 3 years (switch strategy). Randomisation was done by a computerised minimisation procedure stratified for oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 status; previous chemotherapy; and pathological nodal status. Neither the patients nor the physicians were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. The minimum cutoff to declare superiority of the upfront strategy over the switch strategy was assumed to be a 2% difference in disease-free survival at 5 years. Primary efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat; safety analyses included all patients for whom at least one safety case report form had been completed. Follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, number 2006-004018-42, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00541086. Findings: Between March 9, 2007, and July 31, 2012, 3697 patients were enrolled into the study. After a median follow-up of 60 months (IQR 46–72), 401 disease-free survival events were reported, including 211 (11%) of 1850 patients allocated to the switch strategy and 190 (10%) of 1847 patients allocated to upfront treatment. 5-year disease-free survival was 88·5% (95% CI 86·7–90·0) with the switch strategy and 89·8% (88·2–91·2) with upfront treatment (hazard ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·73–1·08; p=0·23). 5-year disease-free survival was 90·0% (95% CI 87·9–91·7) with anastrozole (124 events), 88·0% (85·8–89·9) with exemestane (148 events), and 89·4% (87·3 to 91·1) with letrozole (129 events; p=0·24). No unexpected serious adverse reactions or treatment-related deaths occurred. Musculoskeletal side-effects were the most frequent grade 3–4 events, reported in 130 (7%) of 1761 patients who received the switch strategy and 128 (7%) of 1766 patients who received upfront treatment. Grade 1 musculoskeletal events were more frequent with the upfront schedule than with the switch schedule (924 [52%] of 1766 patients vs 745 [42%] of 1761 patients). All other grade 3–4 adverse events occurred in less than 2% of patients in either group. Interpretation: 5 years of treatment with aromatase inhibitors was not superior to 2 years of tamoxifen followed by 3 years of aromatase inhibitors. None of the three aromatase inhibitors was superior to the others in terms of efficacy. Therefore, patient preference, tolerability, and financial constraints should be considered when deciding the optimal treatment approach in this setting. Funding: Italian Drug Agency