Impact of the number of prior chemotherapy regimens on outcomes for patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with eribulin: A post hoc pooled analysis

In a pivotal phase 3 study (Study 305), eribulin mesylate improved overall survival (OS) in patients with previously treated metastatic breast cancer (MBC) compared with treatment of physician's choice (TPC). This post hoc, pooled subgroup analysis of two phase 3 studies (Study 305 and Study 301) reports the influence of the number of prior chemotherapy regimens (0‐6) on OS in patients with locally advanced/MBC randomized to eribulin versus TPC/capecitabine. Patients with ≤ 3 prior chemotherapies for locally advanced/MBC had longer median OS with eribulin (15.3 months) versus control (13.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.858; P = .01)

Ras/Raf-1/MAPK pathway mediates response to tamoxifen but not chemotherapy in breast cancer patients

<b>Purpose</b>: The expression and activation of the Ras/Raf-1/mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway plays an important role in the development and progression of cancer, and may influence response to treatments such as tamoxifen and chemotherapy. In this study we investigated whether the expression and activation of the key components of this pathway influenced clinical outcome, to test the hypothesis that activation of the MAPK pathway drives resistance to tamoxifen and chemotherapy in women with breast cancer. <b>Experimental Design</b>: Breast tumors from patients at the Glasgow Royal Infirmary and others treated within the BR9601 trial were analyzed for expression of the three Ras isoforms, total Raf-1, active and inactive forms of Raf-1 [pRaf(ser338) and pRaf(ser259), respectively], MAPK, and phospho-MAPK using an immunohistochemical approach. Analyses were done with respect to disease free-survival and overall survival. <b>Results</b>: Expression and activation of the Ras pathway was associated with loss of benefit from treatment with tamoxifen but not chemotherapy. Overexpression of pRaf(ser338) was associated with shortened disease-free and overall survival time in univariate analyses. Multivariate analysis suggested pRaf(ser338) was independent of known prognostic markers in predicting outcome following tamoxifen treatment (<i>P</i>=0.03). <b>Conclusion</b>: This study suggests that activation of the Ras pathway predicts for poor outcome on tamoxifen but not chemotherapy, and identifies pRaf(ser338) as a potential marker of resistance to estrogen receptor–targeted therapy. In addition, it suggests that expression of pRaf(ser338) could identify patients for whom tamoxifen alone is insufficient adjuvant systemic therapy, but for whom the addition of chemotherapy may be of benefit

Cytotoxic chemotherapy: Still the mainstay of clinical practice for all subtypes metastatic breast cancer

Cytotoxic chemotherapy remains central to the treatment of all subtypes of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We review evidence-based chemotherapy options for women with MBC after an anthracycline and a taxane including re-challenge with anthracycline or taxane, capecitabine, eribulin and ixabepilone as a single agent or combination with capecitabine (not approved in the EU); and the vinca alkaloid vinflunine as single agent or combined with either capecitabine/gemcitabine (also not approved EU or USA). Etirinotecan pegol, comprising irinotecan bound to polyethylene glycol by a biodegradable linker, is a new cytotoxic agent for patients with MBC that has achieved encouraging response rates in phase II studies; it has been further evaluated in the phase III BEACON trial. New cytotoxics should address novel targets or modes of delivery, achieve meaningful improvements in outcomes and seek to identify predictive biomarker(s)

Precision pharmacology: Mass spectrometry imaging and pharmacokinetic drug resistance

Failure of systemic cancer treatment can be, at least in part, due to the drug not being delivered to the tumour at sufficiently high concentration and/or sufficiently homogeneous distribution; this is termed as “pharmacokinetic drug resistance”. To understand whether a drug is being adequately delivered to the tumour, “precision pharmacology” techniques are needed. Mass spectrometry imaging (MSI) is a relatively new and complex technique that allows imaging of drug distribution within tissues. In this review we address the applicability of MSI to the study of cancer drug distribution from the bench to the bedside. We address: (i) the role of MSI in pre-clinical studies to characterize anti-cancer drug distribution within the body and the tumour, (ii) the application of MSI in pre-clinical studies to define optimal drug dose or schedule, combinations or new drug delivery systems, and finally (iii) the emerging role of MSI in clinical research

Determining lines of therapy in patients with solid cancers: a proposed new systematic and comprehensive framework

The complexity of neoplasia and its treatment are a challenge to the formulation of general criteria that are applicable across solid cancers. Determining the number of prior lines of therapy (LoT) is critically important for optimising future treatment, conducting medication audits, and assessing eligibility for clinical trial enrolment. Currently, however, no accepted set of criteria or definitions exists to enumerate LoT. In this article, we seek to open a dialogue to address this challenge by proposing a systematic and comprehensive framework to determine LoT uniformly across solid malignancies. First, key terms, including LoT and ‘clinical progression of disease’ are defined. Next, we clarify which therapies should be assigned a LoT, and why. Finally, we propose reporting LoT in a novel and standardised format as LoT N (CLoT + PLoT), where CLoT is the number of systemic anti-cancer therapies (SACT) administered with curative intent and/or in the early setting, PLoT is the number of SACT given with palliative intent and/or in the advanced setting, and N is the sum of CLoT and PLoT. As a next step, the cancer research community should develop and adopt standardised guidelines for enumerating LoT in a uniform manner

Pharmacoeconomic analysis of adjuvant oral capecitabine vs intravenous 5-FU/LV in Dukes' C colon cancer: the X-ACT trial

Oral capecitabine (Xeloda<sup>®</sup>) is an effective drug with favourable safety in adjuvant and metastatic colorectal cancer. Oxaliplatin-based therapy is becoming standard for Dukes' C colon cancer in patients suitable for combination therapy, but is not yet approved by the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the adjuvant setting. Adjuvant capecitabine is at least as effective as 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV), with significant superiority in relapse-free survival and a trend towards improved disease-free and overall survival. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant capecitabine from payer (UK National Health Service (NHS)) and societal perspectives. We used clinical trial data and published sources to estimate incremental direct and societal costs and gains in quality-adjusted life months (QALMs). Acquisition costs were higher for capecitabine than 5-FU/LV, but higher 5-FU/LV administration costs resulted in 57% lower chemotherapy costs for capecitabine. Capecitabine vs 5-FU/LV-associated adverse events required fewer medications and hospitalisations (cost savings £3653). Societal costs, including patient travel/time costs, were reduced by >75% with capecitabine vs 5-FU/LV (cost savings £1318), with lifetime gain in QALMs of 9 months. Medical resource utilisation is significantly decreased with capecitabine vs 5-FU/LV, with cost savings to the NHS and society. Capecitabine is also projected to increase life expectancy vs 5-FU/LV. Cost savings and better outcomes make capecitabine a preferred adjuvant therapy for Dukes' C colon cancer. This pharmacoeconomic analysis strongly supports replacing 5-FU/LV with capecitabine in the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer in the UK