Preliminary safety and efficacy of first-line pertuzumab combined with trastuzumab and taxane therapy for HER2-positive locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer (PERUSE).

BACKGROUND: Pertuzumab combined with trastuzumab and docetaxel is the standard first-line therapy for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, based on results from the phase III CLEOPATRA trial. PERUSE was designed to assess the safety and efficacy of investigator-selected taxane with pertuzumab and trastuzumab in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the ongoing multicentre single-arm phase IIIb PERUSE study, patients with inoperable HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (locally recurrent/metastatic) (LR/MBC) and no prior systemic therapy for LR/MBC (except endocrine therapy) received docetaxel, paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel with trastuzumab [8\u2009mg/kg loading dose, then 6\u2009mg/kg every 3\u2009weeks (q3w)] and pertuzumab (840\u2009mg loading dose, then 420\u2009mg q3w) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was safety. Secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Overall, 1436 patients received at least one treatment dose (initially docetaxel in 775 patients, paclitaxel in 589, nab-paclitaxel in 65; 7 discontinued before starting taxane). Median age was 54\u2009years; 29% had received prior trastuzumab. Median treatment duration was 16\u2009months for pertuzumab and trastuzumab and 4\u2009months for taxane. Compared with docetaxel-containing therapy, paclitaxel-containing therapy was associated with more neuropathy (all-grade peripheral neuropathy 31% versus 16%) but less febrile neutropenia (1% versus 11%) and mucositis (14% versus 25%). At this preliminary analysis (52 months' median follow-up), median PFS was 20.6 [95% confidence interval (CI) 18.9-22.7] months overall (19.6, 23.0 and 18.1\u2009months with docetaxel, paclitaxel and nab-paclitaxel, respectively). ORR was 80% (95% CI 78%-82%) overall (docetaxel 79%, paclitaxel 83%, nab-paclitaxel 77%). CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary findings from PERUSE suggest that the safety and efficacy of first-line pertuzumab, trastuzumab and taxane for HER2-positive LR/MBC are consistent with results from CLEOPATRA. Paclitaxel appears to be a valid alternative taxane backbone to docetaxel, offering similar PFS and ORR with a predictable safety profile. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT01572038

Erratum to "Worldwide comparison of ovarian cancer survival: Histological group and stage at diagnosis (CONCORD-2)" [Gynecol. Oncol. 144 (2017) 396-404]

Objective. Ovarian cancer comprises several histological groups with widely differing levels of survival. We aimed to explore international variation in survival for each group to help interpret international differences in survival from all ovarian cancers combined. We also examined differences in stage-specific survival. Methods. The CONCORD programme is the largest population-based study of global trends in cancer survival, including data from 60 countries for 695,932 women (aged 15\u201399 years) diagnosed with ovarian cancer during 1995\u20132009. We defined six histological groups: type I epithelial, type II epithelial, germ cell, sex cord-stromal, other specific non-epithelial and non-specific morphology, and estimated age-standardised 5-year net survival for each country by histological group. We also analysed data from67 cancer registries for 233,659 women diagnosed from 2001 to 2009, for whom information on stage at diagnosis was available. We estimated agestandardised 5-year net survival by stage at diagnosis (localised or advanced). Results. Survival fromtype I epithelial ovarian tumours for women diagnosed during 2005\u201309 ranged from40 to 70%. Survival from type II epithelial tumours was much lower (20\u201345%). Survival fromgermcell tumours was higher than that of type II epithelial tumours, but also varied widely between countries. Survival for sex-cord stromal tumours was higher than for the five other groups. Survival from localised tumours was much higher than for advanced disease (80% vs. 30%). Conclusions. There is wide variation in survival between histological groups, and stage at diagnosis remains an important factor in ovarian cancer survival. International comparisons of ovarian cancer survival should incorporate histology

Erratum to "The histology of ovarian cancer: Worldwide distribution and implications for international survival comparisons (CONCORD-2)" [Gynecol. Oncol. 144 (2017) 405-413]

Objective. Ovarian cancers comprise several histologically distinct tumour groups with widely different prognosis. We aimed to describe the worldwide distribution of ovarian cancer histology and to understand what role this may play in international variation in survival. Methods. The CONCORD programme is the largest population-based study of global trends in cancer survival. Data on 681,759 women diagnosed during 1995\u20132009 with cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, peritoneum and retroperitonum in 51 countries were included.We categorised ovarian tumours into six histological groups, and explored the worldwide distribution of histology. Results. During 2005\u20132009, type II epithelial tumours were the most common. The proportion was much higher in Oceania (73.1%), North America (73.0%) and Europe (72.6%) than in Central and South America (65.7%) and Asia (56.1%). By contrast, type I epithelial tumours were more common in Asia (32.5%), compared with only 19.4% in North America. From 1995 to 2009, the proportion of type II epithelial tumours increased from 68.6% to 71.1%, while the proportion of type I epithelial tumours fell from 23.8% to 21.2%. The proportions of germ cell tumours, sex cord-stromal tumours, other specific non-epithelial tumours and tumours of non-specific morphology all remained stable over time. Conclusions. The distribution of ovarian cancer histology varieswidely worldwide. Type I epithelial, germcell and sex cord-stromal tumours are generally associated with higher survival than type II tumours, so the proportion of these tumours may influence survival estimates for all ovarian cancers combined. The distribution of histological groups should be considered when comparing survival between countries and regions