Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Adjuvant chemotherapy of breast cancer

5,782 views

Published on

Adjuvant chemotherapy of breast cancer

Published in: Health & Medicine
  • Comparing VigRX Plus to ED Prescription Drugs ♥♥♥ https://bit.ly/30G1ZO1
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Boost your brainpower with brain pill! find out more... ♣♣♣ https://tinyurl.com/brainpill101
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • How I Cured My Acne? Ex Sufferer reveals secret system For Lasting Acne Free Skin ★★★ https://bit.ly/2xJfKi2
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • How can I lose my weight in 7 days? ■■■ https://tinyurl.com/bkfitness4u
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

Adjuvant chemotherapy of breast cancer

  1. 1. Adjuvant chemotherapy of breast cancer Presenter: Dr. Gita Bhat Moderator: Dr. Linu Jacob
  2. 2. • Why adjuvant CT? (Rationale) • What is the evidence for the benefit of adjuvant CT? • Do all patients require adjuvant CT? • How to select adjuvant systemic treatment? • What adjuvant CT? • When to start adjuvant CT? • How many cycles of adjuvant CT? • Toxicity of adjuvant CT? • Special clinical situations
  3. 3. Why adjuvant CT? • Fisher hypothesis • Gompertzian model
  4. 4. • William S. Halsted • Halsted radical mastectomy • Breast cancer arose in one location and spread to nearby lymph nodes and then throughout the body • So, removal of breast, chest wall muscle, and lymph nodes was the logical treatment.
  5. 5. • Bernard Fisher - alternative hypothesis • “Breast cancer is a systemic disease in that, tumor cells were likely to have been disseminated throughout the body by the time of diagnosis and that more expansive locoregional therapy was unlikely to improve survival” • In 1967, chairman of NSABP – multicentre RCT
  6. 6. Fisher hypothesis : “Breast cancer is considered a systemic disease at time of diagnosis, a condition requiring treatment of the entire patient rather than just the source organ”
  7. 7. Gompertzian model • Benjamin Gompertz • 18th century mathematician “Law of mortality” • Growth rate of populations are exponential at early stages of development and slower at later stages
  8. 8. 150 years later…. Dr. Larry Norton
  9. 9. Norton and Simon hypothesis • Tumors follow Gompertzian growth functions • Smaller tumors grow faster than larger ones • Rate of cell-killing by many drugs is proportional to tumor growth rates • Tumors given less time to regrow between treatments are more likely to be destroyed • Shorten the interval between chemotherapy treatments from 3 weeks to 2 • High-density dosing – Improved survival
  10. 10. Dose dense chemotherapy
  11. 11. What is the evidence for benefit of adjuvant CT? EBCTCG meta-analysis
  12. 12. EBCTCG Meta-analysis EBCTCG 2011 • Is there a benefit to adjuvant chemotherapy compared with no treatment? • Is there a benefit to anthracycline-based regimens compared with CMF? EBCTCG 2012 • Role of taxanes in adjuvant chemotherapy of early breast cancer
  13. 13. EBCTCG 2011 Compared with no treatment, the use of anthracycline-containing regimen was associated with the following outcomes at 10 years: Risk of recurrence Significant improvement RR 0.73 Absolute gain of 8% Breast cancer mortality Significant reduction RR 0.79 Absolute gain of 6.5% Overall mortality Significant reduction RR 0.84 Absolute gain of 5% Compared with no treatment, the use of CMF was associated with these outcomes at 10 years: Risk of recurrence Significant improvement RR 0.7 Absolute gain of 10.2% Breast cancer mortality Significant reduction RR 0.76 Absolute gain of 6.2% Overall mortality Significant reduction RR 0.84 Absolute gain of 4.7%
  14. 14. Anthracycline-based therapy vs. CMF The use of “standard” doses of anthracyclines was associated with the following outcomes at 10 years compared with CMF (n=5122 women) The use of higher cumulative doses of anthracyclines (> 4 cycles, to cumulative dose of >240 mg/m2) compared with CMF was associated with the following outcomes at 10 years (n=9572) No improvement in the risk of recurrence (RR 0.99) No improvement in breast cancer mortality (RR 0.98) No improvement in overall mortality (RR 0.97) Reduction in risk of recurrence RR 0.89 Absolute gain of 2.6% Reduction in breast cancer mortality RR 0.80 Absolute gain of 4.1% Reduction of overall mortality RR 0.84 Absolute gain of 3.9%
  15. 15. • Preference of anthracycline-containing regimen as adjuvant chemotherapy • Standard dosing of anthracycline-based therapy is equivalent to CMF, though less effective than more anthracycline-intensive regimens • However, the data did not take into account the use of taxanes.
  16. 16. EBCTCG 2012 meta-analysis Trials where the same control regimen was used in both arms (n=11,167 women) (8 year outcome): Trials where the number of cycles in the control anthracycline regimen was doubled to mirror the addition of cycles of taxanes to anthracyclines (n=33,084) (5 year outcome): Reduction in risk of recurrence RR 0.84 Absolute gain of 4.6% in RFS Reduction in breast cancer mortality RR 0.86 2.8% improvement in breast cancer-specific OS Reduction in overall mortality RR 0.86 3.2% improvement in OS Reduction in risk of recurrence RR 0.86 Absolute gain of 2.9% Reduction in breast cancer mortality RR 0.88 Absolute improvement of 1.4% Reduction in overall mortality RR 0.9 Absolute improvement of 1.2%
  17. 17. • Affirms the benefit of taxanes when incorporated into the adjuvant setting for women with newly-diagnosed breast cancer • The benefits were seen independent of age, nodal status, tumor size, tumor grade and ER status
  18. 18. How to select adjuvant systemic treatment? Do all patients require adjuvant CT?
  19. 19. St. Gallen Consensus Conference 2013 National Comprehensive Cancer Network 2013 HER2 positive tumors Adjuvant chemotherapy (no specific size threshold) and trastuzumab Adjuvant chemotherapy and trastuzumab for tumors >0.5 cm and/or node-positive HER2 negative tumors ER negative: Adjuvant chemotherapy (no specific size threshold) ER negative: Adjuvant chemotherapy for tumors ≥ 1.0 cm and/or node positive Consider for tumors 0.5 to 1.0 cm if adverse prognostic factors are present (lymphovascular invasion, high-grade features) HER2 negative tumors ER positive: Adjuvant chemotherapy if 4 or ore lymph nodes are positive Consider if tumor >2 cm, or grade 2-3, or age <35, or lymphovascular invasion is present. Risk stratify by ER/PR/Ki67/Oncotype Dx/ Intrinsic subtype ER positive: Adjuvant chemotherapy if node- positive Risk stratify by Oncotype Dx if node negative (and in select patients with 1-3 involved ipsilateral axillary LN – NCCN 2015) Consider if tumor >1 cm, or if tumor 0.6 to 1.0 cm and lymphovascular invasion or grade 2-3 features are present.
  20. 20. Systemic treatment for early breast cancer subtypes Subtype Recommended therapy Luminal A-like ET alone in the majority of cases Consider CT if i) High tumor burden (four or more positive lymph nodes, T3, or higher) ii) Grade III Luminal B-like (HER 2-negative) ET+CT for the majority of the cases Luminal B-like (HER2-positive) CT+ anti-HER2+ ET for all the patients HER2-positive (non-luminal) CT+ anti-HER2 Triple-negative (ductal) CT
  21. 21. • * For special histological subtypes: • St. Gallen 2013 recommendations ET for endocrine responsive CT for endocrine non-responsive Cribriform Apocrine Tubular Medullary Mucinous Adenoid cystic Metaplastic
  22. 22. Do all patients require adjuvant chemotherapy? • Previously: Based on T size and N status • Now: Tumor biology (Prognosis and variable response to chemotherapy) • IBCSG and CALGB: • Some HR+ breast cancers do not benefit from adjuvant CT and are relatively chemo resistant. They have excellent prognosis with endocrine treatment alone. • * Post menopausal ER+, LN- • Therefore, role of genomics to help us select patients for CT
  23. 23. Tools to select patients • Oncotype Dx • Mammaprint • Adjuvant! Online • NPI • Predict score
  24. 24. Oncotype Dx or RS assay for patients with ER+, LN- disease: • 16 cancer and 5 reference genes from 3 studies: Category RS 0-100 Low risk RS <18 Intermediate risk RS ≥18 to ≤31 High risk RS ≥ 31
  25. 25. • Clinical validation – B14 results • Patients with tumors that have low RS derive minimal if any benefit from CT • Patients with tumors that have high RS have a large absolute benefit from CT
  26. 26. NCI Cooperative Groups TAILORx Node-Negative, ER-Positive Breast Cancer Recurrence Score <10 Hormone Therapy Registry RS 11-25 Randomize Hormone Rx vs Chemotherapy + Hormone Rx RS >25 Chemotherapy + Hormone Rx 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay Register Specimen banking Primary study group
  27. 27. • Primary study group: Those with RS between 11 and 25 will be randomized to either hormonal therapy alone or hormonal therapy + chemotherapy. • This corresponds approximately to a risk of recurrence at 10 years of 10%-20%. • Dealer’s choice–type design: Individual investigators can select the type of hormonal therapy and chemotherapy from a list included in the protocol. • The groups do not correspond to the low-, intermediate and high- risk cutoffs found on the Oncotype DX™ report. • The cutoffs in the study were selected to correspond with specific risk levels. • It was felt that it was not ethical to deprive a women of chemotherapy if she had a risk level above 20%.
  28. 28. RxPONDER • Rx for Positive node, Endocrine Responsive Breast Cancer trial • Use of 21-gene RS in node positive population
  29. 29. Other molecular tools for deciding chemotherapy in node negative patients: • 70-gene signature (Mammaprint):  It uses fresh tissue for microarray analysis  US FDA approval in February 2007  LN negative patients of all ages, ER negative or positive, with tumor size <5 cm  MINDACT trial: phase III RCT  Mammaprint vs. Adjuvant!Online  Selecting patients who are LN negative or 1-3 LN+ for adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer • PAM50 intrinsic subtype classifier • GGI- Gene Expression Grade Index ( 97-gene measure of histologic grade. High GGI is associated with a lower relapse-free survival)
  30. 30. • NPI: Nottingham Prognostic Index • Prognostic scoring system for EBC • Divides patients into 6 prognostic groups based on tumor size, grade and lymph node status • PREDICT: UK prognostic model that predicts survival following surgery for invasive breast cancer
  31. 31. • Adjuvant! Online: Web based tool to estimate the net benefit of adjuvant treatment for an individual patient • Estimates prognosis based on tumor size, number of involved LN, grading, ER status • Source: SEER database • Assessment of treatment effect is mainly based on: EBCTCG overview meta-analysis
  32. 32. What adjuvant CT?
  33. 33. • EBCTCG meta-analysis: benefit of polychemotherapy, anthracyclines and taxanes • Evolution through CMF, AC, FAC and FEC-D • Concurrent anthracycline-taxane vs sequential • Weekly vs 3 weekly taxane • Role of dose dense CT • Role of HDCT
  34. 34. History (NSABP trials) • B-01 (1958-61) – Thiotepa vs placebo. Short course perioperative. Advantage in premenopausal, >4 nodes positive • B-05 (1972-75) – L-PAM (L-phenylalanine mustard, Melphalan) for node-positive orally for 2 year. 8% DFS and 5% OS advantage in < 50 years at 10 year follow up • B-10 (1977-81)- immunotherapy – Combination chemotherapy (L-PAM + 5FU) +/- C.parvum and hydrocortisone: no adv • B-11 (1981-84) – {L-PAM + 5-FU} +/- Adriamycin for node-positive and ER-negative tumors • B-13 (1981-88) – chemotherapy (sequential MTX and 5-FU) for node-negative, ER-negative tumors – Benefit at 8 yr in overall DFS (74% v 59%; P < .001) was seen
  35. 35. Adjuvant treatment and survival improvement over the past 40 years
  36. 36. CMF • Cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-FU • 1st regimen to show improved DFS and OS in adjuvant treatment of breast cancer • Well tolerated ADR: Fatigue, nausea and diarrhea • Use has diminished with data showing benefit of anthracyclines
  37. 37. CMF PO (Classic CMF) Cyclophosphamide 100mg/m2 po d1-d14 Methotrexate 40 mg/m2 iv d1 and d8 5-FU 600mg/m2 iv d1 and d8 CMF iv C 600mg/m2 iv d1 M 40mg/m2 iv d1 and d8 F 600mg/m2 iv d1 Epirubicin---CMF Epirubicin 100 mg/m2 iv q3w* 4 cycles Followed by CMF* 4 cycles N=2391, N+ and N- RFS of ECMF 83% vs 77% OS 88% vs 82%
  38. 38. AC • NSABP-B-15 (1984-88) • AC*4=CMF*6 • Findings from 2,194 patients indicate no significant difference in disease-free survival (DFS, P = .5), distant disease-free survival (DDFS, P = .5) or survival (S, P = .8) among the three groups • AC seems preferable since: AC was completed on day 63 versus day 154 for conventional CMF • patients visited health professionals three times as often for conventional CMF as for AC • nausea-control medication was given for about 84 days to conventional CMF patients versus for about 12 days to patients on AC.
  39. 39. FAC SECSG Trial in Node-Positive Breast Cancer: Median follow-up of 5 years (n = 528): • No significant difference in overall survival rates (74% vs 68%, P = .415) between CAF and CMF • Major toxicities similar SWOG BREAST INTERGROUP INT0102 TRIAL: CMF vs FAC, in node negative EBC • 10-year estimates indicated that CAF was not significantly better than CMF for DFS (77% v 75%; HR 1.09; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.27). • CAF had slightly better OS than CMF (85% v 82%, HR 1.19 for CMF v CAF; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.43) • Toxicity was greater with CAF
  40. 40. Role of anthracyclines (contd…) • EBCTCG 2011 meta-analysis • What is the optimal dose? • CALGB 9344: compared 60/75/90 mg/m2 of Adriamycin – no benefit of dose escalation • CALGB 8541: Evaluated 3 doses of anthracyclines – low (30mg/m2), moderate (40 mg/m2) and high (60 mg/m2). Benefit with high dose in OS and RFS in HER2 positive patients.
  41. 41. Epirubicin – What is the optimal dose? • 1996: ICCG • Showed that FEC 50 and CMF had similar efficacy in pre- menopausal, node-positive patients • 1998: Dose of Epirubicin (FASG) • FEC-100 vs FEC-50 as adjuvant treatment for patients with Node-positive breast cancer • 5-yr RFS 65% vs 52% (Relative risk reduction 32% P= 0.007) • 5-yr OS 76% vs 65% (Relative risk reduction 31% P=0.007) • CHF/AML/ALL – (1.1%, 0.4%, 0) vs (0.4%, 0, 0.4%)
  42. 42. Role of taxanes CALGB 9344 N >3,000 patients A: 60=75=90 mg/m2 P 175 mg/m2 C:600 mg/m2 EBCTCG 2012 5-year DFS 65% vs 70% P= 0.0023 5-year OS 77% vs 80% P= 0.0064
  43. 43. PACS 01 trial: FEC-D S U R G E R Y R 6 * FEC100: Arm A 5-FU 500mg/m2 on day 1 Epirubicin 100mg/m2 on day 1 Cyclophosphamide 500mg/m2 on day 1 6 cycles (q3w) FEC-D: Arm B 3 cycles of FEC 100 q21 days followed by 3 cycles of Docetaxel 100 mg/m2 on day 1 Every 21 days Stratified on: Centre Age: < or ≥ 50y Nodes: 1-3; ≥4
  44. 44. Key outcomes of PACS-01 • FEC-D • Superior DFS and OS irrespective of number of nodes or hormonal status • 18% reduction in risk of relapse • 23% reduction in risk of death • Significant DFS benefit with FEC-D in ≥ 50 years age group (P= 0.001) • Incidence of FN with FEC-D: 11.2% (vs 24.7% with TAC) • Reduced risks of acute and delayed cardiac events because of 50% less exposure to anthracyclines • FEC-D is a reasonable alternative in patients ≥ 50 years of age.
  45. 45. Role of Taxane-based combinations as adjuvant chemotherapy of early breast cancer Concurrent vs sequential BCIRG 005 NSABP-B-30
  46. 46. BCIRG 005 • Phase III RCT • TAC (6) vs. AC (4) ---T (4) • EBC – HER2 normal and axillary LN positive
  47. 47. BCIRG 005 study design Major eligibility criteria: •HER2 normal by central FISH •Histologically proven node-positive •Stage T1-3, N1, M0 •Age ≤ 70 years, KPS ≥ 80% Primary EP: DFS Secondary EP: OS, safety
  48. 48. BCIRG 005
  49. 49. BCIRG 005 Non-hematological adverse events (Grade 3 or 4 with incidence >1%) TAC N= 1635 AC-T N= 1634 % % P-value Arthralgia 0.9 2.4 0.001 Sensory neuropathy 0.3 1.5 0.0004 Fluid retention 1.3 2.8 0.011 HFS 0 1.8 <0.0001 Myalgia 0.9 4.9 <0.0001
  50. 50. Key findings of BCIRG 005 • For the primary endpoint, DFS, adjuvant TAC is equivalent to AC-T in patients with HER2 normal, node positive breast cancer • Despite AC-T delivering higher dose intensity for each of the three agents and requiring 8 cycles, AC-T was not more effective than TAC • Compared to AC-T, TAC is associated with:  More febrile neutropenia and GCSF use.  Less sensory neuropathy, nail change, myalgia and shorter duration of therapy
  51. 51. NSABP-B-30 • 1999-2004 • Role of sequential vs concurrent taxanes • 3 arms (AC*4—T*4) vs (AT*4) vs (TAC*4) “Sequential better than concurrent and AT non- inferior to TAC” AC-T AT TAC 8 yr DFS 74% 68% 69% 8 yr OS 83% 79% 79%
  52. 52. BCIRG 001 • TAC vs FAC • 1491 patients, Node+ • Median follow up: 124 months • DFS: 62% (TAC) vs 55% (FAC) (P=0.0043) • 10Y OS: 76% (TAC) vs 69% (FAC) (p=0.0002)
  53. 53. CALGB-9741 (contd..)
  54. 54. Key findings of CALGB 9741 • At 4 yr: 26% reduction in risk of recurrence and 31% improvement in OS with dose-dense administration. • There was a significant improvement in DFS for dose dense regimen 82 vs 75% • OS also improved(92 vs 90) • Dose density improved DFS and OS, no difference was seen between sequential or concurrent schedule
  55. 55. 10-year follow up of Intense Dose-dense chemotherapy vs. Conventional chemotherapy in high-risk patients with ≥4 positive LNs (SABCS 2012) • Rationale: There are no published reports of long- term survival and toxicity data with dose-sense regimens. • Objective: Confirm the Norton Simon hypothesis of dose density and evaluate the safety of epoietin alfa as primary prophylaxis • Study population: High-risk patients having atleast 4 positive LN • All patients in the dose-dense arm received G-CSF
  56. 56. R A N D O M I Z E N=1284 Cyclophosphamide 2500 mg/m2 q2w*3 Paclitaxel 225 mg/m2 q2w*3 Epirubicin 150mg/m2 q2w*3 Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 q3w*4 EC 90/600 mg/m2 q3w*4 +TAM +TAM Primary EP: RFS Secondary EP: OS, QOL, toxicity G-CSF ± epoietin alfa
  57. 57. • Efficacy results: • No therapy-related death or long-term toxicity was observed with iddETC • Transfusion results: • Negative impacts of epoietin alfa on RFS and OS were not observed • ; Outcome IDD-ETC EC→T HR (95% CI) P-value 10-yr RFS 56% 47% 0.74 (0.63-0.87) .00014 10-yr OS 4-9 positive LNs 10+ positive LNs 69% 74% 62% 59% 66% 48% 0.72 (0.60-0.87) 0.77 (0.59-1.01) 0.66 (0.51-0.86) .0007 .06 .0016 Transfusion-related outcomes IDD-ETC (n=324) IDD-ETC + EPO (n=319) P-value Median hemoglobin (g/dL) -- -- < .001 (favoring +EPO arm) Need for ≥1 transfusion 28% 13% < .0001 Patients with venous thrombotic event 7% 13% .029
  58. 58. Node-negative breast cancer • GEICAM 9805 (FAC vs. TAC) significant toxicity • GEICAM/2003-02 (FAC vs. FAC—wP)
  59. 59. GEICAM 9805 (FAC vs TAC) • High-risk, node-negative breast cancer defined according to St. Gallen criteria •18-70 years •Post primary surgery for unilateral operable breast cancer (T1-T3, N0) •≥1 of St. Gallen 1998 high risk criteria: T size > 2cm ER and PR negative Tumor Grade II or III Age <35 y Randomized TAC q3w*6 cycles FAC q3w*6 cycles Primary EP: DFS Sec EP: OS
  60. 60. Results of GEICAM 9805 • At a median follow-up of 77 months: • TAC group had 32% reduction in the risk of having an event • Fewer local and distant relapses • Estimated DFS at 5 years: 90.1% in TAC group vs. 85.3% in FAC group • 24% reduction in the risk of death among those who received TAC • Safety: Grade 3 or 4 ADR (TAC> FAC) – asthenia, neutropenia and leucopenia • All grades (TAC> FAC) – Peripheral motor neuropathy, sensory neuropathy, one pain, pyrexia, skin changes, peripheral edema, arthralgia, amenorrhea and myalgia
  61. 61. Key findings of GEICAM 9805 • In women with high risk, node negative breast cancer: • TAC significantly improved DFS (32% reduction in risk of recurrence at 77 months) • Benefit from TAC maybe due to hormonal effect in pre-menopausal women (Chemotherapy induced amenorrhea: TAC> FAC) • Post menopausal women also derived benefit from TAC
  62. 62. GEICAM/2003-02 study • Node negative breast cancer with high risk of recurrence as per St. Gallen criteria • FAC (6) vs. FAC (4)---wP(8) • Primary EP: DFS • Secondary P: OS
  63. 63. GEICAM/2003-02 (contd…) • Results: • At a median follow-up of 63.3 months: • 5Y-DFS: 93% in FAC-wP vs 90.3% in FAC • FAC-wP reduces the risk of relapse by 26.7% compared with FAC (statistically sig.) FAC-wP FAC Grade 3-4 neutropenia 21.8% 25.4% Febrile neutropenia 2.7% 3.6% Fatigue 7.9% 3.4% Sensory neuropathy 5.5% 0 Vomiting 4.3% 4.1% Persistent amenorrhea 15.9% 10.6% Higher incidence of thrombosis with FAC-wP (due to use of steroids)
  64. 64. AC vs AC--P • CALGB 9344: 5y DFS 65% vs 70% • OS: 77% vs 80% • NSABP-B-28: 5y DFS:72% vs 76% • OS: 85% vs 85%
  65. 65. Which regimen?
  66. 66. • As of today, there are no recommendations for choosing the regimen based on Histopathology or Intrinsic subtypes. • Choice of chemotherapy is based on comorbidities, side effects and patient preference.
  67. 67. • Endocrine-responsive breast cancer • HER2 positive breast cancer • TNBC * Adjuvant chemotherapy: Which patient? What regimen? (ASCO 2013 Educational book)
  68. 68. Endocrine-responsive breast cancer • Luminal A: Node negative- no benefit from adjuvant CT • Node positive: • ? Absolute benefit of CT • Addition of CT to be discussed with the patient
  69. 69. • Luminal B: High Ki67 index, aggressive, risk of relapse • Hence, chemotherapy and endocrine therapy are indicated • Choice of CT is based on risk of relapse Luminal B with additional risk factors: pT>1 &/or pN>0 Luminal B without additional high risk factors Sequential anthracyclines- Taxanes Docetaxel/cyclophosphamide Adriamycin/cyclophosphamide CMF Spares toxicity Does not compromise efficacy
  70. 70. HER-2 positive breast cancer: • Trastuzumab + Chemotherapy • Major consideration: Whether or not to add an anthracycline • Observed increased sensitivity of HER2+ tumors to anthracyclines is due to TOP2A amplification
  71. 71. BCIRG 006 • Phase III trial comparing AC → T with AC → TH and with TCH in the adjuvant treatment of HER2-amplified early breast cancer patients: Third planned efficacy analysis • (Slamon et al, SABCS 2009)
  72. 72. BCIRG 006 (contd..) • Trastuzumab provides a similar and significant advantage for both DFS and OS when used with either ACTH or TCH. • The acute and chronic toxicity profiles of TCH are better than those of ACTH • No statistically significant advantage of ACTH over TCH • CHF was 5* more in ACTH than in TCH
  73. 73. • Plan treatment based on risk of relapse: HER2 positive EBC with high risk features (pT >1 and/or pN>0) HER2 positive EBC with low risk features AC-TH TCH
  74. 74. TNBC • TNBC with good prognosis: • Adenoid cystic and medullary N- N+ Avoid adjuvant CT Give adjuvant CT even with good prognosis subtype
  75. 75. • Other TNBC: • Eg: Metaplastic • Adjuvant CT: Sequential anthracyclines – taxane regimen • TNBC and BRCA-associated breast cancer: • Use of platinum
  76. 76. When to start adjuvant CT? • Preferably within 2 to 6 weeks • Significant decrease in the efficacy of chemotherapy is observed when administered more than 12 weeks from surgery How many cycles of adjuvant CT? • 6-8 cycles
  77. 77. Early and late long-term effects of adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer *Breast cancer - ASCO 2013 educational book
  78. 78. • Adjuvant CT can lead to early and late long-term side effects for breast cancer survivors. • Effects of CT can vary in severity, but can often negatively affect the QOL and overall health status. • Screening for symptoms, use of supportive medication, referral for specialty consultation as needed • Ongoing research: Evaluate the etiology of toxicity as well as effective interventions
  79. 79. Ovarian failure: premature menopause, infertility, sexual dysfunction Hot flashes Atrophic vaginitis Loss of pelvic muscle tone Loss of libido Pretherapy referral to a fertility specialist Assisted reproduction (Ovarian stimulation with AI in the setting of HR+ cancer) Weight gain Reasons: changes in activity level, menopausal status, endocrine manipulation, diet, metabolism and mood Nurses’ Health Study: Weight gain may increase the risk of recurrence Diet Exercise Active lifestyle Bone loss Premature menopause Effect of AI WHI study: increased risk of fracture in post menopausal breast cancer survivors Screen at risk individuals: DEXA q1-2y Timely initiation of bisphosphonates Adequate calcium and Vitamin D Weight bearing exercise
  80. 80. Neuropathy: • Peripheral sensory and motor neuropathy – affect QOL • Microtubule inhibitors: Taxanes • Rate and severity of taxane-related neuropathy: agent selection, dose, schedule, comorbidities
  81. 81. • Supportive management: • Dose modification and treatment delay • Glutathione, acetyl-l-carnitine, alpha-lipoic acid • Gabapentin, venlafaxine • CALGB 170601: Duloxetine for painful chemotherapy-induced neuropathy • Best management: Avoid toxicity by identification of individuals at highest risk  Higher P-APS scores with first dose of CT may correlate with peripheral neuropathy  Identification of SNPs associated with development of moderate to severe peripheral neuropathy after paclitaxel exposure
  82. 82. • * Taxol package insert • Severity is dose dependent • Those with pre-existing neuropathy should be carefully monitored • In severe cases, all subsequent doses of paclitaxel should be reduced by 20%
  83. 83. • Cardiac dysfunction: • Left ventricular dysfunction (Anthracyclines and trastuzumab > cyclophosphamide and taxanes) • Prechemotherapy identification of individuals at high risk of toxicity: Older age, pre-existing hypertension, low baseline LVEF, elevated BMI • Cardiac risk score (Age and LVEF) to predict the risk of a cardiac event (NSABP-B-31) • ECHO
  84. 84. • Anthracycline mediated cardiotoxicity: • Late-onset (atleast I year after completion of CT) > acute or sub-acute • Permanent cardiomyocyte apoptosis and necrosis • Late onset: irreversible, related to cumulative anthracycline dose, due to free radical formation
  85. 85. • Rates of symptomatic or severe cardiac dysfunction in the major trials of adjuvant trastuzumab + anthracycline: maximum of 4.1% • Trastuzumab without chemotherapy/ T without anthracyclines: 0.6% to 1.87% • Rates of asymptomatic drop in cardiac function after anthracycline exposure: 17% to 19%
  86. 86. • Neurocognitive dysfunction: • “Chemo brain” • 75% of women: change in cognitive function 2y after treatment (attention, memory and concentration) • Multifactorial: exposure to CT, other modalities of treatment, supportive care medications, menopausal symptoms, anxiety, depression, fatigue, comorbidities • Role of genetic polymorphisms: APOE and COMT • ? Prophylactic or therapeutic modafinil, fluoxetine, CBT
  87. 87. • Secondary malignancy: • Rare yet most feared complication – MDS or AML • <1% ( reflect increased cumulative dose) • Concurrent use of growth factors, RT Alkylators Topoisomerase-II targeted agents Examples Cyclophosphamide Anthracyclines Induction period 5-8 y after start of therapy 2-3 y Preceded by MDS yes No Type of translocation Unbalanced Balanced Chromosomes involved Long arm del or monosomy of chr 5 and 7 MLL, RARA, RUNX1 loci of 11q23, 17q21, 21q22
  88. 88. Special situations • Very young patient (< 35 years) • Older patients (≥ 65 years) • Isolated local and regional recurrence
  89. 89. Very young patient (<35 years) • Young age is an independent risk factor for poor prognosis • Aggressive disease: high incidence of  Hormone insensitive  Undifferentiated  HER2+ tumors • Combination chemotherapy with anthracyclines and taxanes: Luminal B, HER2+, TNBC; even for N- • Gonadal toxicity • Early referral to reproductive specialist
  90. 90. Chemotherapy in older patients (≥ 65 years) • Comprehensive geriatric assessment • Balance against: • Risk of toxicity • Poor QOL • Functional decline • Combination CT preferred in  Node+, HR- EBC  HR+, Luminal B  HR-, Node-
  91. 91. Polychemotherapy in older patient? CALGB 49907 Age > 65y 60% ≥ 70 R A N D O M I Z E Oral CMF * 6 AC * 4 Capecitabine (X) * 6 cycles Both arms were tolerated well but more toxicity in AC/CMF Median follow-up: 2-4 years CMF/AC vs single agent Capecitabine: Better RFS (p=0.00009) Difference particularly marked in ER negative Polychemotherapy is relevant in the elderly population RFS
  92. 92. CALOR: Adjuvant CT for ILRR (SABCS 2012) • Rationale: isolated local or regional recurrence (ILRR) of breast cancer has poor prognosis • No randomized studies of adjuvant chemotherapy for ILRR have been published in the last 30 years • Objective: Evaluate the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on patients with ILRR • Sample size: Original 977 • Due to slow accrual, only 162 patients were randomized
  93. 93. • Chemotherapy chosen by investigators • At least 2 drugs, 3-6 months of therapy R A N D O M I Z E +Endocrine therapy for HR-positive disease + HER2-directed therapy (optional) + RT (mandatory for those with positive margins) Adjuvant chemotherapy No chemotherapy Eligibility criteria: •First ILRR •Complete gross excision of recurrence •No evidence of positive SCLN •No evidence of distant metastasis CALOR trial (contd..)
  94. 94. CALOR trial (contd..) • Results: Site of first failure (after ILRR) Chemotherap y* (n=85) No chemotherapy* (n=77) Total failures 24 34 Local/regional 6 (25%) 9 (26%) Distant Soft tissue Bone Viscera 15 (63%) 0 8 7 22 (65%) 2 5 15 Contralateral breast 1 (4%) 1 (3%) Secondary non-breast malignancy 1 (4%) 0 Deaths without failure 1 (4%) 2 (6%)
  95. 95. CALOR trial (contd…) • Efficacy results: • Multivariate analysis showed treatment (chemo/ no chemo) to have significant impact on both DFS and OS Survival Chemotherapy No chemotherapy HR (95% CI) P-value 5-yr DFS ER-positive ER-negative 69% 70% 67% 57% 69% 35% 0.59 (0.35-0.99) 0.94 (0.47-1.89) 0.32 (0.14-0.73) .046 .87 .007 5-yr OS ER-positive ER-negative 88% 94% 79% 76% 80% 69% 0.41 (0.19-0.89) 0.40 (0.12-1.28) 0.43 (0.15-1.24) .02 .12 .12
  96. 96. Considerations for the future • These need further validation in large cohorts: Disseminated tumor cells (DTC) on BMA assessment •Prognostic in EBC •Marker of recurrence Circulating tumor cells (CTC) Poor survival after NACT or primary breast cancer surgery cf-DNA (cell free-DNA) Plasma miRNA Markers of relapse in EBC
  97. 97. Debate about anthracyclines in HER2 + Does HER2 over-expression confer a unique and/or inherent sensitivity to anthracyclines? • The Topoisomerase IIα Protein 1s a major target of the anthracyclines • Current data indicate that it is the TOP2A gene amplification and not HER2 that is responsible for improved anthracycline sensitivity • TOP2A amplification occurs ONLY in 35% of the 25% of breast cancer patients with HER2 amplification “only 8% of breast cancer patients” • Moreover, for HER2-positive breast cancers, trastuzumab appears to replace the gained efficacy of anthracyclines in the one third of patients with co-amplification of HER2 and TOP2A
  98. 98. Predicting anthracycline benefit: TOP2A and CEP17 • Meta-analysis of adjuvant trials that compared anthracycline-based regimen with CMF – HER2 amplification and combined TOP2A amplification or deletion may have some value in the prediction of response to anthracycline- based CT, findings do not support the use of anthracyclines only in patients with HER2- amplified or TOP2A aberrated tumors.
  99. 99. questions • Concept of adjuvant CT in ca breast? • Which subtype of pt as per ebctcg do not require CT? • Subgroup analysis of dose dense CT??
  100. 100. Thank you

×