Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (23)
Language
- English (23) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (23)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (23)
Keywords
- breast cancer (10)
- Mammakarzinom (6)
- Behandlung (4)
- Breast cancer (4)
- Metastasen (4)
- CDK4/6 (3)
- PD1/PDL1 (3)
- Prävention (3)
- Studien (3)
- brain metastases (3)
Institute
- Medizin (23)
Background: Remodeling of extracellular matrix through collagen degradation is a crucial step in the metastatic cascade. The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential clinical relevance of the serum collagen degradation markers (CDM) C3M and C4M during neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.
Methods: Patients from the GeparQuinto phase 3 trial with untreated HER2-positive operable or locally advanced breast cancer were enrolled between 7 November 2007, and 9 July 2010, and randomly assigned to receive neoadjuvant treatment with EC/docetaxel with either trastuzumab or lapatinib. Blood samples were collected at baseline, after four cycles of chemotherapy and at surgery. Cutoff values were determined using validated cutoff finder software (C3M: Low ≤9.00 ng/mL, high >9.00 ng/mL, C4M: Low ≤40.91 ng/mL, high >40.91 ng/mL).
Results: 157 patients were included in this analysis. At baseline, 11.7% and 14.8% of patients had high C3M and C4M serum levels, respectively. No correlation was observed between CDM and classical clinical-pathological factors. Patients with high levels of CDM were significantly more likely to achieve a pathological complete response (pCR, defined as ypT0 ypN0) than patients with low levels (C3M: 66.7% vs. 25.7%, p = 0.002; C4M: 52.7% vs. 26.6%, p = 0.031). Median levels of both markers were lower at the time of surgery than at baseline. In the multivariate analysis including clinical-pathological factors and C3M levels at baseline and changes in C3M levels between baseline and after four cycles of therapy, only C3M levels at baseline (p = 0.035, OR 4.469, 95%-CI 1.115–17.919) independently predicted pCR. In a similar model including clinical-pathological factors and C4M, only C4M levels at baseline (p = 0.028, OR 6.203, 95%-CI 1.220–31.546) and tumor size (p = 0.035, OR 4.900, 95%-CI 1.122–21.393) were independent predictors of pCR. High C3M levels at baseline did not correlate with survival in the entire cohort but were associated with worse disease-free survival (DFS; p = 0.029, 5-year DFS 40.0% vs. 74.9%) and overall survival (OS; p = 0.020, 5-year OS 60.0% vs. 88.3%) in the subgroup of patients randomized to lapatinib. In the trastuzumab arm, C3M did not correlate with survival. In the entire patient cohort, high levels of C4M at baseline were significantly associated with shorter DFS (p = 0.001, 5-year DFS 53.1% vs. 81.6%) but not with OS. When treatment arms were considered separately, the association with DFS was still significant (p = 0.014, 5-year DFS 44.4% vs. 77.0% in the lapatinib arm; p = 0.023, 5-year DFS 62.5% vs. 86.2% in the trastuzumab arm).
Conclusions: Collagen degradation markers are associated with response to neoadjuvant therapy and seem to play a role in breast cancer.
Introduction: We examined if a combination of proliferation markers and estrogen receptor (ER) activity could predict early versus late relapses in ER-positive breast cancer and inform the choice and length of adjuvant endocrine therapy.
Methods: Baseline affymetrix gene-expression profiles from ER-positive patients who received no systemic therapy (n = 559), adjuvant tamoxifen for 5 years (cohort-1: n = 683, cohort-2: n = 282) and from 58 patients treated with neoadjuvant letrozole for 3 months (gene-expression available at baseline, 14 and 90 days) were analyzed. A proliferation score based on the expression of mitotic kinases (MKS) and an ER-related score (ERS) adopted from Oncotype DX® were calculated. The same analysis was performed using the Genomic Grade Index as proliferation marker and the luminal gene score from the PAM50 classifier as measure of estrogen-related genes. Median values were used to define low and high marker groups and four combinations were created. Relapses were grouped into time cohorts of 0-2.5, 0-5, 5-10 years.
Results: In the overall 10 years period, the proportional hazards assumption was violated for several biomarker groups indicating time-dependent effects. In tamoxifen-treated patients Low-MKS/Low-ERS cancers had continuously increasing risk of relapse that was higher after 5 years than Low-MKS/High-ERS cancers [0 to 10 year, HR 3.36; p = 0.013]. High-MKS/High-ERS cancers had low risk of early relapse [0-2.5 years HR 0.13; p = 0.0006], but high risk of late relapse which was higher than in the High-MKS/Low-ERS group [after 5 years HR 3.86; p = 0.007]. The High-MKS/Low-ERS subset had most of the early relapses [0 to 2.5 years, HR 6.53; p < 0.0001] especially in node negative tumors and showed minimal response to neoadjuvant letrozole. These findings were qualitatively confirmed in a smaller independent cohort of tamoxifen-treated patients. Using different biomarkers provided similar results.
Conclusions: Early relapses are highest in highly proliferative/low-ERS cancers, in particular in node negative tumors. Relapses occurring after 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen are highest among the highly-proliferative/high-ERS tumors although their risk of recurrence is modest in the first 5 years on tamoxifen. These tumors could be the best candidates for extended endocrine therapy.
For many years, small but significant advancements have been made time and again in the prevention and treatment of early breast cancer. The so-called panel gene analyses are becoming more and more important in prevention, since the risk due to the tested genes is better understood and as a result, concepts for integration in health care can be developed. In the adjuvant situation, the first study in the so-called post-neoadjuvant situation was able to demonstrate a clear improvement in the prognosis with an absent pathological complete remission following trastuzumab or pertuzumab + trastuzumab. Additional studies with this post-neoadjuvant therapeutic concept are still being conducted at present. The CDK4/6 inhibitors which had shown a significant improvement in progression-free survival in a metastatic situation are currently being tested in the adjuvant situation in large therapeutic studies. These and other new data for the treatment or prevention of primary breast cancer are presented in this review against the backdrop of current studies.
Background: Eligibility criteria are a critical part of clinical trials, as they define the patient population under investigation. Besides certain patient characteristics, clinical trials often include biomarker testing for eligibility. However, patient-identification mostly relies on the trial site itself and is often a time-consuming procedure, which could result in missing out on potentially eligible patients. Pre-selection of those patients using a registry could facilitate the process of eligibility testing and increase the number of identified patients. One aim with the PRAEGNANT registry (NCT02338167) is to identify patients for therapies based on clinical and molecular data. Here, we report eligibility testing for the SHERBOC trial using the German PRAEGNANT registry.
Methods:Heregulin (HRG) has been reported to identify patients with better responses to therapy with the anti-HER3 monoclonal antibody seribantumab (MM-121). The SHERBOC trial investigated adding seribantumab (MM-121) to standard therapy in patients with advanced HER2-negative, hormone receptor–positive (HR-positive) breast cancer and HRG overexpression. The PRAEGNANT registry was used for identification and tumor testing, helping to link potential HRG positive patients to the trial. Patients enrolled in PRAEGNANT have invasive and metastatic or locally advanced, inoperable breast cancer. Patients eligible for SHERBOC were identified by using the registry. Study aims were to describe the HRG positivity rate, screening procedures, and patient characteristics associated with inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Results: Among 2769 unselected advanced breast cancer patients, 650 were HER2-negative, HR-positive and currently receiving first- or second-line treatment, thus potentially eligible for SHERBOC at the end of current treatment; 125 patients also met further clinical eligibility criteria (e.g. menopausal status, ECOG). In the first/second treatment lines, patients selected for SHERBOC based on further eligibility criteria had a more favorable prognosis than those not selected. HRG status was tested in 38 patients, 14 of whom (36.8%) proved to be HRG-positive.
Conclusion: Using a real-world breast cancer registry allowed identification of potentially eligible patients for SHERBOC focusing on patients with HER3 overexpressing, HR-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. This approach may provide insights into differences between patients eligible or non-eligible for clinical trials.
Trial registration: Clinicaltrials, NCT02338167, Registered 14 January 2015 - retrospectively registered.
The treatment of patients with advanced breast cancer has developed further in recent years. In addition to therapeutic progress in the established subgroups (hormone receptor and HER2 status), there are now therapies which are geared to individual molecular characteristics, such as PARP inhibitor therapy in BRCA-mutated patients. In addition to this, tests are being developed which are intended to establish additional markers within subgroups in order to predict the efficacy of a therapy. PI3K mutation testing in HER2-negative, hormone-receptor-positive tumours and PD-L1 testing of immune cells in triple-negative tumours are expected to become established in clinical practice in order to select patients for the respective therapies. With new therapeutic approaches, new adverse effects also appear. The management of these adverse effects, just as those of classical therapy (supportive therapy), is essential with the introduction of new treatments in order to preserve patientsʼ quality of life. Knowledge regarding measures to preserve and improve quality of life has significantly increased in recent years. Lifestyle factors should be taken into account, as should modern therapeutic methods. This review summarises the latest studies and publications and evaluates them in regard to the relevance for clinical practice.
Background: Current prognostic gene signatures for breast cancer mainly reflect proliferation status and have limited value in triple-negative (TNBC) cancers. The identification of prognostic signatures from TNBC cohorts was limited in the past due to small sample sizes.
Methodology/Principal Findings: We assembled all currently publically available TNBC gene expression datasets generated on Affymetrix gene chips. Inter-laboratory variation was minimized by filtering methods for both samples and genes. Supervised analysis was performed to identify prognostic signatures from 394 cases which were subsequently tested on an independent validation cohort (n = 261 cases).
Conclusions/Significance: Using two distinct false discovery rate thresholds, 25% and <3.5%, a larger (n = 264 probesets) and a smaller (n = 26 probesets) prognostic gene sets were identified and used as prognostic predictors. Most of these genes were positively associated with poor prognosis and correlated to metagenes for inflammation and angiogenesis. No correlation to other previously published prognostic signatures (recurrence score, genomic grade index, 70-gene signature, wound response signature, 7-gene immune response module, stroma derived prognostic predictor, and a medullary like signature) was observed. In multivariate analyses in the validation cohort the two signatures showed hazard ratios of 4.03 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.71–9.48; P = 0.001) and 4.08 (95% CI 1.79–9.28; P = 0.001), respectively. The 10-year event-free survival was 70% for the good risk and 20% for the high risk group. The 26-gene signatures had modest predictive value (AUC = 0.588) to predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, however, the combination of a B-cell metagene with the prognostic signatures increased its response predictive value. We identified a 264-gene prognostic signature for TNBC which is unrelated to previously known prognostic signatures.
Heterogenous subtypes of breast cancer need to be analyzed separately. Pooling of datasets can provide reasonable sample sizes but dataset bias is an important concern. We assembled a combined dataset of 579 Affymetrix microarrays from triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) in Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) series GSE31519. We developed a method for selecting comparable datasets and to control for the amount of dataset bias of individual probesets.
Background: The incidence of central nervous system (CNS) metastases in breast cancer patients is rising and has become a major clinical challenge. Only few data are published concerning risk factors for the development of CNS metastases as a first site of metastatic disease in breast cancer patients. Moreover, the incidence of CNS metastases after modern neoadjuvant treatment is not clear.
Methods: We analyzed clinical factors associated with the occurrence of CNS metastases as the first site of metastatic disease in breast cancer patients after neoadjuvant treatment in the trials GeparQuinto and GeparSixto (n = 3160) where patients received targeted treatment in addition to taxane and anthracycline-based chemotherapy.
Results: After a median follow-up of 61 months, 108 (3%) of a total of 3160 patients developed CNS metastases as the first site of recurrence and 411 (13%) patients had metastatic disease outside the CNS. Thirty-six patients (1%) developed both CNS metastases and other distant metastases as the first site of metastatic disease. Regarding subtypes of the primary tumor, 1% of luminal A-like (11/954), 2% of luminal B-like (7/381), 4% of HER2-positive (34/809), and 6% of triple-negative patients (56/1008) developed CNS metastases as the first site of metastatic disease.
In multivariate analysis, risk factors for the development of CNS metastases were larger tumor size (cT3–4; HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.08–2.46, p = 0.021), node-positive disease (HR 2.57, 95% CI 1.64–4.04, p < 0.001), no pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (HR 2.29, 95% CI 1.32–3.97, p = 0.003), and HER2-positive (HR 3.80, 95% CI 1.89–7.64, p < 0.001) or triple-negative subtype (HR 6.38, 95% CI 3.28–12.44, p < 0.001).
Conclusions: Especially patients with HER2-positive and triple-negative tumors are at risk of developing CNS metastases despite effective systemic treatment. A better understanding of the underlying mechanisms is required in order to develop potential preventive strategies.
Characteristics and clinical outcome of breast cancer patients with asymptomatic brain metastases
(2020)
Simple Summary: The prognosis for patients with breast cancer that has spread to the brain is poor, and survival for these women hasn’t improved over the last few decades. We do not currently test for asymptomatic brain metastases in breast cancer patients, although this does happen in some other types of cancer. In this study we wanted to find out more about breast cancer that has spread to the brain and in particular to see whether there might be any advantage to spotting brain metastases before the development of neurological symptoms. Overall, our results suggest that women could be better off if their brain metastases are diagnosed before they begin to cause symptoms. We now need to carry out a clinical trial to see what happens if we screen high-risk breast cancer patients for brain metastases. This will verify whether doing so could increase survival, symptom control or quality of life.
Abstract: Background: Brain metastases (BM) have become a major challenge in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Methods: The aim of this analysis was to characterize patients with asymptomatic BM (n = 580) in the overall cohort of 2589 patients with BM from our Brain Metastases in Breast Cancer Network Germany (BMBC) registry. Results: Compared to symptomatic patients, asymptomatic patients were slightly younger at diagnosis (median age: 55.5 vs. 57.0 years, p = 0.01), had a better performance status at diagnosis (Karnofsky index 80–100%: 68.4% vs. 57%, p < 0.001), a lower number of BM (>1 BM: 56% vs. 70%, p = 0.027), and a slightly smaller diameter of BM (median: 1.5 vs. 2.2 cm, p < 0.001). Asymptomatic patients were more likely to have extracranial metastases (86.7% vs. 81.5%, p = 0.003) but were less likely to have leptomeningeal metastasis (6.3% vs. 10.9%, p < 0.001). Asymptomatic patients underwent less intensive BM therapy but had a longer median overall survival (statistically significant for a cohort of HER2-positive patients) compared to symptomatic patients (10.4 vs. 6.9 months, p < 0.001). Conclusions: These analyses show a trend that asymptomatic patients have less severe metastatic brain disease and despite less intensive local BM therapy still have a better outcome (statistically significant for a cohort of HER2-positive patients) than patients who present with symptomatic BM, although a lead time bias of the earlier diagnosis cannot be ruled out. Our analysis is of clinical relevance in the context of potential trials examining the benefit of early detection and treatment of BM.
Evidence about distribution patterns of brain metastases with regard to breast cancer subtypes and its influence on the prognosis of patients is insufficient. Clinical data, cranial computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of 300 breast cancer patients with brain metastases (BMs) were collected retrospectively in four centers participating in the Brain Metastases in Breast Cancer Registry (BMBC) in Germany. Patients with positive estrogen (ER), progesterone (PR), or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) statuses, had a significantly lower number of BMs at diagnosis. Concerning the treatment mode, HER2-positive patients treated with trastuzumab before the diagnosis of BMs showed a lower number of intracranial metastases (p < 0.001). Patients with a HER2-positive tumor-subtype developed cerebellar metastases more often compared with HER2-negative patients (59.8% vs. 44.5%, p = 0.021), whereas patients with triple-negative primary tumors had leptomeningeal disease more often (31.4% vs. 18.3%, p = 0.038). The localization of Brain metastases (BMs) was associated with prognosis: patients with leptomeningeal disease had shorter survival compared with patients without signs of leptomeningeal disease (median survival 3 vs. 5 months, p = 0.025). A shorter survival could also be observed in the patients with metastases in the occipital lobe (median survival 3 vs. 5 months, p = 0.012). Our findings suggest a different tumor cell homing to different brain regions depending on subtype and treatment. View Full-Text