Erratum to: Analysis of in vitro ADCC and clinical response to trastuzumab: possible relevance of Fc\u3b3RIIIA/Fc\u3b3RIIA gene polymorphisms and HER-2 expression levels on breast cancer cell lines

BACKGROUND: Trastuzumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody (mAb) currently used for the treatment of breast cancer (BC) patients with HER-2 overexpressing tumor subtype. Previous data reported the involvement of FcγRIIIA/IIA gene polymorphisms and/or antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) in the therapeutic efficacy of trastuzumab, although results on these issues are still controversial. This study was aimed to evaluate in vitro the functional relationships among FcγRIIIA/IIA polymorphisms, ADCC intensity and HER-2 expression on tumor target cells and to correlate them with response to trastuzumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients with HER-2 overexpressing BC, receiving trastuzumab in a neoadjuvant (NEO) or metastatic (MTS) setting, were genotyped for the FcγRIIIA 158V>F and FcγRIIA 131H>R polymorphisms by a newly developed pyrosequencing assay and by multiplex Tetra-primer-ARMS PCR, respectively. Trastuzumab-mediated ADCC of patients’ peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) was evaluated prior to therapy and measured by (51)Chromium release using as targets three human BC cell lines showing different levels of reactivity with trastuzumab. RESULTS: We found that the FcγRIIIA 158F and/or the FcγRIIA 131R variants, commonly reported as unfavorable in BC, may actually behave as ADCC favorable genotypes, in both the NEO (P ranging from 0.009 to 0.039 and from 0.007 to 0.047, respectively) and MTS (P ranging from 0.009 to 0.032 and P = 0.034, respectively) patients. The ADCC intensity was affected by different levels of trastuzumab reactivity with BC target cells. In this context, the MCF-7 cell line, showing the lowest reactivity with trastuzumab, resulted the most suitable cell line for evaluating ADCC and response to trastuzumab. Indeed, we found a statistically significant correlation between an increased frequency of patients showing ADCC of MCF-7 and complete response to trastuzumab in the NEO setting (P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Although this study was performed in a limited number of patients, it would indicate a correlation of FcγR gene polymorphisms to the ADCC extent in combination with the HER-2 expression levels on tumor target cells in BC patients. However, to confirm our findings further experimental evidences obtained from a larger cohort of BC patients are mandatory. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12967-015-0680-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Role of denosumab in the management of skeletal complications in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors

Ursa Brown-Glaberman, Alison T StopeckUniversity of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ, USAAbstract: Skeletal-related events (SREs) including pain, fractures, and hypercalcemia are a major source of morbidity for cancer patients with bone metastases. The receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (RANKL) is a key mediator of osteoclast formation and activity in normal bone physiology as well as cancer-induced bone resorption. The first commercially available drug that specifically targets and inhibits the RANKL pathway is denosumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that binds and neutralizes RANKL, thereby inhibiting osteoclast function. In this review, we summarize the major studies leading to the US Food and Drug Administration-approval of denosumab for the prevention of SREs in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors. Further, we discuss the role of denosumab in the prevention and treatment of SREs and bone loss in cancer patients. As a monoclonal antibody, denosumab has several advantages over bisphosphonates, including improved efficacy, better tolerability, and the convenience of administration by subcutaneous injection. In addition, as denosumab has no known renal toxicity, it may be the preferred choice over bisphosphonates in patients with baseline renal insufficiency or receiving nephrotoxic therapies. However, other toxicities, including osteonecrosis of the jaw and hypocalcemia, appear to be class effects of agents that potently inhibit osteoclast activity and are associated with both denosumab and bisphosphonate use. The data presented highlight the differences associated with intravenous bisphosphonate and denosumab use as well as confirm the essential role bone-modifying agents play in maintaining the quality of life for patients with bone metastases.Keywords: denosumab, bone metastases, solid tumor, breast cancer, prostate cancer, skeletal related events, skeletal complications&nbsp

Impact of denosumab on bone mass in cancer patients

Ursa Brown-Glaberman, Alison T StopeckUniversity of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ, USAAbstract: Cancer therapy-induced bone loss (CTIBL) is a form of secondary osteoporosis associated with systemic chemotherapy and hormonal ablation therapy. The monitoring and treatment of CTIBL is an important component of comprehensive cancer care, especially for patients with curable disease and long life expectancies. Whereas oral bisphosphonates remain the most commonly used therapeutic option for CTIBL, additional treatment options may be required for patients who do not respond adequately or are intolerant to bisphosphonates, have renal insufficiency, or are receiving treatment with nephrotoxic medications. For these patients, denosumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB ligand (RANKL), offers an effective and well-tolerated alternative. Several recent randomized trials have examined the use of denosumab as treatment for CTIBL associated with hormone ablation therapy for breast and prostate cancer. Recent data suggest a possible role for RANKL inhibitors in both chemoprevention and the prevention of cancer recurrence through direct effects on breast tissue and breast cancer stem cells. The outcomes of several international Phase III clinical trials currently underway will help clarify the role of denosumab in patients undergoing cancer therapy.Keywords: denosumab, osteoporosis, osteopenia, hormone ablation therapy, cancer therapy-induced bone loss, chemotherap

Ribociclib plus letrozole in male patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer: subgroup analysis of the phase IIIb CompLEEment-1 trial

Purpose: CompLEEment-1 (NCT02941926) is a single-arm, open-label, multicentre phase IIIb study investigating the safety and efficacy of ribociclib plus letrozole (RIB + LET) in a large, diverse cohort who have not received prior endocrine therapy (ET) for advanced disease. We present an exploratory analysis of male patients. Methods: Eligible patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC), who had no prior ET and ≤ 1 line of prior chemotherapy for advanced disease, received RIB + LET. Male patients also received goserelin or leuprolide. Primary endpoint was safety and tolerability; efficacy was a secondary endpoint. Results: In total, 39/3246 patients were male. Baseline characteristics were similar to the overall population. Male patients experienced fewer treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and treatment-related serious AEs compared with the overall population; fewer male patients had treatment-related AEs leading to discontinuation, adjustment/interruption, or additional therapy. One male patient died as a result of a serious AE that was not considered to be treatment-related. The most common AE was neutropenia; the incidence of grade ≥ 3 neutropenia in males (41.0%) was lower than in the overall population (57.2%). Median follow-up was 25.4 months; median time to progression was not reached in males versus 27.1 months for the overall population. Conclusion: The clinical benefit and overall response rates in males were consistent with the overall population. This analysis demonstrates the safety and efficacy of ribociclib in a close-to-real-world setting, supporting the use of RIB + LET in male patients with HR+, HER2- ABC. Trial registration number: NCT02941926 (Registered 2016)

Efficacy of Margetuximab vs Trastuzumab in Patients With Pretreated ERBB2-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer:A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE ERRB2 (formerly HER2)-positive advanced breast cancer (ABC) remains typically incurable with optimal treatment undefined in later lines of therapy. The chimeric antibody margetuximab shares ERBB2 specificity with trastuzumab but incorporates an engineered Fc region to increase immune activation. OBJECTIVE To compare the clinical efficacy of margetuximab vs trastuzumab, each with chemotherapy, in patients with pretreated ERBB2-positive ABC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The SOPHIA phase 3 randomized open-label trial of margetuximab plus chemotherapy vs trastuzumab plus chemotherapy enrolled 536 patients from August 26, 2015, to October 10, 2018, at 166 sites in 17 countries. Eligible patients had disease progression on 2 or more prior anti-ERBB2 therapies and 1 to 3 lines of therapy for metastatic disease. Data were analyzed from February 2019 to October 2019. INTERVENTIONS Investigators selected chemotherapy before 1:1 randomization to margetuximab, 15 mg/kg, or trastuzumab, 6 mg/kg (loading dose, 8 mg/kg), each in 3-week cycles. Stratification factors were metastatic sites (2), lines of therapy (2), and chemotherapy choice. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Sequential primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) by central blinded analysis and overall survival (OS). All alpha was allocated to PFS, followed by OS. Secondary end points were investigator-assessed PFS and objective response rate by central blinded analysis. RESULTS A total of 536 patients were randomized to receive margetuximab (n = 266) or trastuzumab (n = 270). The median age was 56 (27-86) years; 266 (100%) women were in the margetuximab group, while 267 (98.9%) women were in the trastuzumab group. Groups were balanced. All but 1 patient had received prior pertuzumab, and 489 (91.2%) had received prior ado-trastuzumab emtansine. Margetuximab improved primary PFS over trastuzumab with 24% relative risk reduction (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.98; P = .03; median, 5.8 [95% CI, 5.5-7.0] months vs 4.9 [95% CI, 4.2-5.6] months; October 10, 2018). After the second planned interim analysis of 270 deaths, median OS was 21.6 months with margetuximab vs 19.8 months with trastuzumab (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.69-1.13; P = .33; September 10, 2019), and investigator-assessed PFS showed 29% relative risk reduction favoring margetuximab (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58-0.86; P < .001; median, 5.7 vs 4.4 months; September 10, 2019). Margetuximab improved objective response rate over trastuzumab: 22% vs 16% (P = .06; October 10, 2018), and 25% vs 14% (P < .001; September 10, 2019). Incidence of infusion-related reactions, mostly in cycle 1, was higher with margetuximab (35 [13.3%] vs 9 [3.4%]); otherwise, safety was comparable. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, margetuximab plus chemotherapy had acceptable safety and a statistically significant improvement in PFS compared with trastuzumab plus chemotherapy in ERBB2-positive ABC after progression on 2 or more prior anti-ERBB2 therapies. Final OS analysis is expected in 2021

Efficacy of Margetuximab vs Trastuzumab in Patients with Pretreated ERBB2-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: ERRB2 (formerly HER2)-positive advanced breast cancer (ABC) remains typically incurable with optimal treatment undefined in later lines of therapy. The chimeric antibody margetuximab shares ERBB2 specificity with trastuzumab but incorporates an engineered Fc region to increase immune activation. Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of margetuximab vs trastuzumab, each with chemotherapy, in patients with pretreated ERBB2-positive ABC. Design, Setting, and Participants: The SOPHIA phase 3 randomized open-label trial of margetuximab plus chemotherapy vs trastuzumab plus chemotherapy enrolled 536 patients from August 26, 2015, to October 10, 2018, at 166 sites in 17 countries. Eligible patients had disease progression on 2 or more prior anti-ERBB2 therapies and 1 to 3 lines of therapy for metastatic disease. Data were analyzed from February 2019 to October 2019. Interventions: Investigators selected chemotherapy before 1:1 randomization to margetuximab, 15 mg/kg, or trastuzumab, 6 mg/kg (loading dose, 8 mg/kg), each in 3-week cycles. Stratification factors were metastatic sites (≤2, >2), lines of therapy (≤2, >2), and chemotherapy choice. Main Outcomes and Measures: Sequential primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) by central blinded analysis and overall survival (OS). All α was allocated to PFS, followed by OS. Secondary end points were investigator-assessed PFS and objective response rate by central blinded analysis. Results: A total of 536 patients were randomized to receive margetuximab (n = 266) or trastuzumab (n = 270). The median age was 56 (27-86) years; 266 (100%) women were in the margetuximab group, while 267 (98.9%) women were in the trastuzumab group. Groups were balanced. All but 1 patient had received prior pertuzumab, and 489 (91.2%) had received prior ado-trastuzumab emtansine. Margetuximab improved primary PFS over trastuzumab with 24% relative risk reduction (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.98; P =.03; median, 5.8 [95% CI, 5.5-7.0] months vs 4.9 [95% CI, 4.2-5.6] months; October 10, 2018). After the second planned interim analysis of 270 deaths, median OS was 21.6 months with margetuximab vs 19.8 months with trastuzumab (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.69-1.13; P =.33; September 10, 2019), and investigator-assessed PFS showed 29% relative risk reduction favoring margetuximab (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58-0.86; P <.001; median, 5.7 vs 4.4 months; September 10, 2019). Margetuximab improved objective response rate over trastuzumab: 22% vs 16% (P =.06; October 10, 2018), and 25% vs 14% (P <.001; September 10, 2019). Incidence of infusion-related reactions, mostly in cycle 1, was higher with margetuximab (35 [13.3%] vs 9 [3.4%]); otherwise, safety was comparable. Conclusions and Relevance: In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, margetuximab plus chemotherapy had acceptable safety and a statistically significant improvement in PFS compared with trastuzumab plus chemotherapy in ERBB2-positive ABC after progression on 2 or more prior anti-ERBB2 therapies. Final OS analysis is expected in 2021. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02492711