The effect of trastuzumab on cardiac function in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer and reduced baseline left ventricular ejection fraction

We investigated the effect of trastuzumab on cardiac function in a real‐world historic cohort of patients with HER2‐positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with reduced baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Thirty‐seven patients with HER2‐positive MBC and baseline LVEF of 40% to 49% were included. Median LVEF was 46% (interquartile range [IQR] 44%‐48%) and median follow‐up was 18 months (IQR 9‐34 months). During this period, the LVEF did not worsen in 24/37 (65%) patients, while 13/37 (35%) patients developed severe cardiotoxicity defined as LVEF 5%‐points below baseline) in 3/13 (23%) patients and irreversible (defined as absolute LVEF increase 5%‐points below baseline) in 3/13 (23%) patients. Likelihood of reversibility was numerically higher in patients who received cardio‐protective medications (CPM), including ACE‐inhibitors, beta‐blockers and angiotensine‐2 inhibitors, compared to those who did not receive any CPM (71% vs 13%, P = .091). Sixty‐five percent of patients who received trastuzumab for HER2‐positive MBC did not develop severe cardiotoxicity during a median follow‐up of 18 months, despite having a compromised baseline LVEF. If severe cardiotoxicity occurred, it was at least partly reversible in more than two‐thirds of the cases. Risks and benefits of trastuzumab use should be balanced carefully in this vulnerable population

Cardiotoxicity during long-term trastuzumab use in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: who needs cardiac monitoring?

Purpose: Patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) usually receive many years of trastuzumab treatment. It is unknown whether these patients require continuous left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) monitoring. We studied a real-world cohort to identify risk factors for cardiotoxicity to select patients in whom LVEF monitoring could be omitted. Methods: We included patients with HER2-positive MBC who received > 1 cycle of trastuzumab-based therapy in eight Dutch hospitals between 2000 and 2014. Cardiotoxicity was defined as LVEF 10%-points and was categorized into non-severe cardiotoxicity (LVEF 40–50%) and severe cardiotoxicity (LVEF 60% and no cardiotoxicity during prior neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatment, the cumulative incidence of severe cardiotoxicity was 3.1% after 4 years of trastuzumab. Despite continuing trastuzumab, LVEF decline was reversible in 56% of patients with non-severe cardiotoxicity and in 33% with severe cardiotoxicity. Conclusions: Serial cardiac monitoring can be safely omitted in non-smoking patients with baseline LVEF > 60% and without cardiotoxicity during prior neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatment

Impact of gene-expression profiling in patients with early breast cancer when applied outside the guideline directed indication area

Purpose In Dutch guidelines, gene expression profiles (GEP) are indicated in estrogen receptor positive early breast cancer patients in whom benefit of chemotherapy (CT) is uncertain based on traditional prognostic factors alone. Aim of the present study is to assess the use and impact of GEP on administration of adjuvant CT in breast cancer patients who have according to national guidelines a clear indication to either use or withhold adjuvant chemotherapy (clinical high or low risk). Methods Clinical low- and high-risk patients, according to Dutch breast cancer guidelines, diagnosed between 2011 and 2014 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Influence of GEP use and GEP test result on CT administration was assessed with logistic regression. Results Overall, 26,425 patients were identified; 4.8% of patients with clinical low risk (444/9354), 7.5% of the patients with a clinical high risk (1281/17,071) received a GEP. GEP use was associated with significantly increased odds of CT administration in clinical low-risk patients (OR = 2.12 95% CI: 1.44–3.11). In clinical high-risk patients, GEP use was associated with a decreased frequency of CT administration (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.48–0.63). Adherence to the GEP result was higher in clinical high-risk patients with a discordant GEP result as compared to clinical low-risk patients with a discordant GEP result: 71.7% vs. 52.2%, respectively. Conclusion GEP is frequently used outside the indicated area and significantly influenced the administration of adjuvant CT, although adherence to the test result was limited

Variation in use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage III breast cancer: Results of the Dutch national breast cancer audit

Objectives Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is important in the optimal treatment of patients with locally advanced (stage III) breast cancer (BC). The objective of this study was to examine the clinical practice of NAC for stage III BC patients in all Dutch hospitals participating in BC care. Materials and methods All patients aged 18–70 years who received surgery for stage III BC from January 2011 to September 2015 were selected from the national multidisciplinary NABON Breast Cancer Audit. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess independent predictors of NAC use, focussing on hospital factors. Results A total of 1230 out of 1556 patients with stage III BC (79%) received NAC prior to surgery. The use of NAC did not change over time. We observed a large variation of NAC use between hospitals (0–100%). Age <50 years, breast MRI, large tumour size, advanced nodal disease, negative hormone receptor status and hospital participation in neoadjuvant clinical studies were significant independent predictors of NAC use (all P < 0.001). NAC use in stage III BC was not influenced by hospital type and hospital surgical volume. After adjustment for all independent predictors, variation in NAC use between hospitals remained (0% to 97%). Conclusion NAC was used in 79% of patients with stage III BC, which represent a high quality of care in the NL. Patient, tumour, clinical management and hospital factors could not explain considerable variation in its use between hospitals. Hospital participation in neoadjuvant studies did show to improve the use of NAC in daily practice

The Value of Geriatric Assessments in Predicting Treatment Tolerance and All-Cause Mortality in Older Patients With Cancer

Background. Awareness of the use of geriatric assessments for older patients with cancer is increasing. The aim of this review is to summarize all available evidence on the association between geriatric assessments and relevant oncologic outcomes. Method. A systematic search was conducted in Medline and Embase of studies on geriatric assessment in oncology, focusing on the association between baseline assessment and outcome. Results. The literature search identified 2008 reports; 51 publications from 37 studies were selected for inclusion in the review. The quality of studies was heterogeneous and generally poor. A median of five geriatric conditions were assessed per study (interquartile range: 4 - 8). Little consistency was found in the results of the studies. Furthermore, different tools appear to be predictive depending on the outcome measure: frailty, nutritional status, and comorbidity assessed by the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics were predictive for all-cause mortality; frailty was predictive for toxicity of chemotherapy; cognitive impairment and activities of daily living impairment were predictive for chemotherapy completion; and instrumental activities of daily living impairment was predictive for perioperative complications. Conclusion. Although various geriatric conditions appear to be of some value in predicting outcome in elderly patients with cancer, the results are too inconsistent to guide treatment decisions. Further research is needed to elucidate the role of geriatric assessments in the oncologic decision-making process for these patients. The Oncologist 2012; 17: 1439-144

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Breast Cancer : Established Concepts and Emerging Strategies

In the last decade, the systemic treatment approach for patients with early breast cancer has partly shifted from adjuvant treatment to neoadjuvant treatment. Systemic treatment administration started as a ‘one size fits all’ approach but is currently customized according to each breast cancer subtype. Systemic treatment in a neoadjuvant setting is at least as effective as in an adjuvant setting and has several additional advantages. First, it enables response monitoring and provides prognostic information; second, it downstages the tumor, allowing for less extensive surgery, improved cosmetic outcomes, and reduced postoperative complications such as lymphedema; and third, it enables early development of new treatment strategies by using pathological complete remission as a surrogate outcome of event-free and overall survival. In this review we give an overview of the current standard of neoadjuvant systemic treatment strategies for the three main subtypes of breast cancer: hormone receptor-positive, triple-negative, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive. Additionally, we summarize drugs that are under investigation for use in the neoadjuvant setting

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Breast Cancer : Established Concepts and Emerging Strategies

In the last decade, the systemic treatment approach for patients with early breast cancer has partly shifted from adjuvant treatment to neoadjuvant treatment. Systemic treatment administration started as a ‘one size fits all’ approach but is currently customized according to each breast cancer subtype. Systemic treatment in a neoadjuvant setting is at least as effective as in an adjuvant setting and has several additional advantages. First, it enables response monitoring and provides prognostic information; second, it downstages the tumor, allowing for less extensive surgery, improved cosmetic outcomes, and reduced postoperative complications such as lymphedema; and third, it enables early development of new treatment strategies by using pathological complete remission as a surrogate outcome of event-free and overall survival. In this review we give an overview of the current standard of neoadjuvant systemic treatment strategies for the three main subtypes of breast cancer: hormone receptor-positive, triple-negative, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive. Additionally, we summarize drugs that are under investigation for use in the neoadjuvant setting

Current palliative chemotherapy trials in the elderly neglect patient-centred outcome measures

The elderly comprise the majority of patients newly diagnosed with cancer. Despite this, little evidence-based data are available on the care of the growing number of older patients with cancer. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the characteristics and outcome measures of current clinical trials on palliative chemotherapy in elderly patients. Fourteen international clinical trials registries were searched using the terms "cancer" and "elderly" to identify clinical palliative chemotherapy trials designed specifically for patients aged 70+ years. From the trial protocol, data were extracted on trial characteristics and outcome measures. Of 127 trials, 81% formulated one or more stringent criteria with respect to organ function; 32% excluded patients with WHO performance status (PS) 2 and 83% with PS3. Functional outcomes, health care utilisation, cognitive function after treatment, and quality of life were reported in 6%, 3%, 6%, and 31% of trials, respectively. In only 16% of trials on palliative cancer treatment, a geriatric assessment was performed at baseline. Although recent years have seen a growing evidence base regarding fit older patients, our study suggests a lack of representative cohorts of older patients and patient-centred outcome measures in current palliative treatment trials for the elderly. Research addressing alternative outcome measures, including quality of life and impact of therapy on general functioning, cognition, and preservation of independence, and incorporation of a geriatric assessment are needed to provide elderly patients with cancer and their treating physicians with realistic information about palliative chemotherap

Breast conserving therapy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy; data from the Dutch Breast Cancer Audit

Introduction: NAC has led to an increase in breast conserving surgery (BCS) worldwide. This study aims to analyse trends in the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and the impact on surgical outcomes. Methods: We reviewed all records of cT1-4N0-3M0 breast cancer patients diagnosed between July 2011 and June 2016 who have been registered in the Dutch National Breast Cancer Audit (NBCA) (N = 57.177). The surgical outcomes of ‘BCS after NAC′ were compared with ‘primary BCS′ using a multivariable logistic regression model. Results: Between 2011 and 2016, the use of NAC increased from 9% to 18% and ‘BCS after NAC’ (N = 4170) increased from 43% to 57%. We observed an involved invasive margin rate (IMR) of 6,7% and a re-excision rate of 6,6%. As compared to ‘primary BCS′ the IMR of ‘BCS after NAC′ is higher for cT1 (12,3% versus 8,3%; p < 0.005), equal for cT2 (14% versus 14%; p = 0.046) and lower for cT3 breast cancer (28,3% versus 31%; p < 0.005). Prognostic factors associated with IMR for both ‘primary BCS′ as for ‘BCS after NAC′ are: lobular invasive breast cancer and a hormone receptor positive receptor status (all p < 0,005). Conclusion: The use of NAC and the incidence of ‘BCS after NAC′ increased exponentially in time for all stages of invasive breast cancer in the Netherlands. This nationwide data confirms that ‘BCS after NAC′ compared to ‘primary BCS′ leads to equal surgical outcomes for cT2 and improved surgical outcomes for cT3 breast cancer. These promising results encourage current developments towards de-escalation of surgical treatment