Overall survival in the OlympiA phase III trial of adjuvant olaparib in patients with germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 and high risk, early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The randomized, double-blind OlympiA trial compared one year of the oral poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase) inhibitor, olaparib, to matching placebo as adjuvant therapy for patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 (gBRCA1/2pv) and high-risk, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, early breast cancer (EBC). The first pre-specified interim analysis (IA) previously demonstrated statistically significant improvement in invasive-disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant-disease-free survival (DDFS). The olaparib-group had fewer deaths than the placebo-group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance for overall survival (OS). We now report the pre-specified second IA of OS with updates of IDFS, DDFS, and safety. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 1,836 patients were randomly assigned to olaparib or placebo following (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy (N)ACT, surgery, and radiation therapy if indicated. Endocrine therapy was given concurrently with study medication for hormone-receptor-positive-cancers. Statistical significance for OS at this IA required P<0.015. RESULTS: With median follow-up of 3.5 years, the second IA of OS demonstrated significant improvement in the olaparib-group relative to the placebo-group (HR, 0.68; 98.5% CI 0.47 to 0.97; P=0.009). Four-year OS was 89.8% in the olaparib-group and 86.4% in the placebo-group (Δ 3.4%, 95% CI -0.1% to 6.8%). Four-year IDFS for olaparib-group versus placebo-group was 82.7% versus 75.4% (Δ 7.3%, 95% CI 3.0% to 11.5%) and 4-year DDFS was 86.5% versus 79.1% (Δ 7.4%, 95% CI 3.6% to 11.3%), respectively. Subset analyses for OS, IDFS, and DDFS demonstrated benefit across major subgroups. No new safety signals were identified including no new cases of acute myelogenous leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome (AML/MDS). CONCLUSION: With 3.5 years of median follow-up, OlympiA demonstrates statistically significant improvement in OS with adjuvant olaparib compared with placebo for gBRCA1/2pv-associated EBC and maintained improvements in the previously reported, statistically significant endpoints of IDFS and DDFS with no new safety signals

The Lancet Breast Cancer Commission: tackling a global health, gender, and equity challenge

Breast cancer is an increasing global health, gender, socioeconomic, and equity challenge. In 2020, 2·3 million women were diagnosed with breast cancer and there were 685 000 deaths worldwide.1 Not only is breast cancer the highest incident cancer globally, but it is also the most prevalent, causing more disability-adjusted life-years lost than any other malignancy. Tackling breast cancer is a formidable task for health-care systems, policy makers, and other stakeholders. The numbers of people with metastatic breast cancer who go uncounted are concerning. Cancer registries record patients initially presenting with de-novo metastatic breast cancer, but data on those who develop metastases after a diagnosis of early breast cancer are scarce. In a world focused on breast cancer cure, these uncounted people living with metastatic disease face abandonment and stigma

Trastuzumab for HER2-positive early stage breast cancer : a meta-analysis of individual patient data from 13,864 women from seven randomised trials

Background: Trastuzumab targets the extracellular domain of the HER2 protein. Adding trastuzumab to chemotherapy for patients with early-stage, HER2-positive breast cancer reduces the risk of recurrence and death, but is associated with cardiac toxicity. We investigated the long-term benefits and risks of adjuvant trastuzumab on breast cancer recurrence and cause-specific mortality. Methods: We did a collaborative meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials assessing chemotherapy plus trastuzumab versus the same chemotherapy alone. Randomised trials that enrolled women with node-negative or node-positive, operable breast cancer were included. We collected individual patient-level data on baseline characteristics, dates and sites of first distant breast cancer recurrence and any previous local recurrence or second primary cancer, and the date and underlying cause of death. Primary outcomes were breast cancer recurrence, breast cancer mortality, death without recurrence, and all-cause mortality. Standard intention-to-treat log-rank analyses, stratified by age, nodal status, oestrogen receptor (ER) status, and trial yielded first-event rate ratios (RRs). Findings: Seven randomised trials met the inclusion criteria, and included 13 864 patients enrolled between February, 2000, and December, 2005. Mean scheduled treatment duration was 14·4 months and median follow-up was 10·7 years (IQR 9·5 to 11·9). The risks of breast cancer recurrence (RR 0·66, 95% CI 0·62 to 0·71; p<0·0001) and death from breast cancer (0·67, 0·61 to 0·73; p<0·0001) were lower with trastuzumab plus chemotherapy than with chemotherapy alone. Absolute 10-year recurrence risk was reduced by 9·0% (95% CI 7·4 to 10·7; p<0·0001) and 10-year breast cancer mortality was reduced by 6·4% (4·9 to 7·8; p<0·0001), with a 6·5% reduction (5·0 to 8·0; p<0·0001) in all-cause mortality, and no increase in death without recurrence (0·4%, –0·3 to 1·1; p=0·35). The proportional reduction in recurrence was largest in years 0–1 after randomisation (0·53, 99% CI 0·46 to 0·61), with benefits persisting through years 2–4 (0·73, 0·62 to 0·85) and 5–9 (0·80, 0·64 to 1·01), and little follow-up beyond year 10. Proportional recurrence reductions were similar irrespective of recorded patient and tumour characteristics, including ER status. The more high risk the tumour, the larger the absolute reductions in 5-year recurrence (eg, 5·7% [95% CI 3·1 to 8·3], 6·8% [4·7 to 9·0], and 10·7% [7·7 to 13·6] in N0, N1–3, and N4+ disease). Interpretation: Adding trastuzumab to chemotherapy for early-stage, HER2-positive breast cancer reduces recurrence of, and mortality from, breast cancer by a third, with worthwhile proportional reductions irrespective of recorded patient and tumour characteristics. Funding: Cancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council

EUSOMA quality indicators for non-metastatic breast cancer: An update

Introduction Quality care in breast cancer is higher if patients are treated in a Breast Center with a dedicated and specialized multidisciplinary team. Quality control is an essential activity to ensure quality care, which has to be based on the monitoring of specific quality indicators. Eusoma has proceeded with the up-dating of the 2017 Quality indicators for non-metastatic breast cancer based on the new diagnostic, locoregional and systemic treatment modalities. Methods To proceed with the updating, EUSOMA setup a multidisciplinary working group of BC experts and patients’ representatives. It is a comprehensive set of QIs for early breast cancer care, which are classified as mandatory, recommended, or observational. For the first time patient reported outcomes (PROMs) have been included. As used in the 2017 EUSOMA QIs, evidence levels were based on the short version of the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Results This is a set of quality indicators representative for the different steps of the patient pathway in non-metastatic setting, which allow Breast Centres to monitor their performance with referring standards, i.e minimum standard and target. Conclusions Monitoring these Quality Indicators, within the Eusoma datacentre will allow to have a state of the art picture at European Breast Centres level and the development of challenging research projects

EUSOMA quality indicators for non-metastatic breast cancer: An update

INTRODUCTION: Quality care in breast cancer is higher if patients are treated in a Breast Center with a dedicated and specialized multidisciplinary team. Quality control is an essential activity to ensure quality care, which has to be based on the monitoring of specific quality indicators. Eusoma has proceeded with the up-dating of the 2017 Quality indicators for non-metastatic breast cancer based on the new diagnostic, locoregional and systemic treatment modalities. METHODS: To proceed with the updating, EUSOMA setup a multidisciplinary working group of BC experts and patients' representatives. It is a comprehensive set of QIs for early breast cancer care, which are classified as mandatory, recommended, or observational. For the first time patient reported outcomes (PROMs) have been included. As used in the 2017 EUSOMA QIs, evidence levels were based on the short version of the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. RESULTS: This is a set of quality indicators representative for the different steps of the patient pathway in non-metastatic setting, which allow Breast Centres to monitor their performance with referring standards, i.e minimum standard and target. CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring these Quality Indicators, within the Eusoma datacentre will allow to have a state of the art picture at European Breast Centres level and the development of challenging research projects

EUSOMA quality indicators for non-metastatic breast cancer: An update.

INTRODUCTION: Quality care in breast cancer is higher if patients are treated in a Breast Center with a dedicated and specialized multidisciplinary team. Quality control is an essential activity to ensure quality care, which has to be based on the monitoring of specific quality indicators. Eusoma has proceeded with the up-dating of the 2017 Quality indicators for non-metastatic breast cancer based on the new diagnostic, locoregional and systemic treatment modalities. METHODS: To proceed with the updating, EUSOMA setup a multidisciplinary working group of BC experts and patients' representatives. It is a comprehensive set of QIs for early breast cancer care, which are classified as mandatory, recommended, or observational. For the first time patient reported outcomes (PROMs) have been included. As used in the 2017 EUSOMA QIs, evidence levels were based on the short version of the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. RESULTS: This is a set of quality indicators representative for the different steps of the patient pathway in non-metastatic setting, which allow Breast Centres to monitor their performance with referring standards, i.e minimum standard and target. CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring these Quality Indicators, within the Eusoma datacentre will allow to have a state of the art picture at European Breast Centres level and the development of challenging research projects

EUSOMA quality indicators for non-metastatic breast cancer: An update.

Quality care in breast cancer is higher if patients are treated in a Breast Center with a dedicated and specialized multidisciplinary team. Quality control is an essential activity to ensure quality care, which has to be based on the monitoring of specific quality indicators. Eusoma has proceeded with the up-dating of the 2017 Quality indicators for non-metastatic breast cancer based on the new diagnostic, locoregional and systemic treatment modalities. To proceed with the updating, EUSOMA setup a multidisciplinary working group of BC experts and patients' representatives. It is a comprehensive set of QIs for early breast cancer care, which are classified as mandatory, recommended, or observational. For the first time patient reported outcomes (PROMs) have been included. As used in the 2017 EUSOMA QIs, evidence levels were based on the short version of the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. This is a set of quality indicators representative for the different steps of the patient pathway in non-metastatic setting, which allow Breast Centres to monitor their performance with referring standards, i.e minimum standard and target. Monitoring these Quality Indicators, within the Eusoma datacentre will allow to have a state of the art picture at European Breast Centres level and the development of challenging research projects