Valentina Guarneri

•The phase III IMpassion131 trial evaluated atezolizumab combined with paclitaxel as first-line therapy for aTNBC.•The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS, tested hierarchically in the PD-L1+ and then ITT populations.•Neither PFS nor OS was improved with the combination of atezolizumab plus paclitaxel in either population.•These findings may result from imbalances in prognostic features or chance findings in a relatively small trial.•IMpassion131 results highlight the need for further research into immunotherapy for TNBC. BackgroundIn the phase III IMpassion130 trial, combining atezolizumab with first-line nanoparticle albumin-bound-paclitaxel for advanced triple-negative breast cancer (aTNBC) showed a statistically significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive populations, and a clinically meaningful overall survival (OS) effect in PD-L1-positive aTNBC. The phase III KEYNOTE-355 trial adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy for aTNBC showed similar PFS effects. IMpassion131 evaluated first-line atezolizumab–paclitaxel in aTNBC.Patients and methodsEligible patients [no prior systemic therapy or ≥12 months since (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy] were randomised 2:1 to atezolizumab 840 mg or placebo (days 1, 15), both with paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, 15), every 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were tumour PD-L1 status, prior taxane, liver metastases and geographical region. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS, tested hierarchically first in the PD-L1-positive [immune cell expression ≥1%, VENTANA PD-L1 (SP142) assay] population, and then in the ITT population. OS was a secondary endpoint.ResultsOf 651 randomised patients, 45% had PD-L1-positive aTNBC. At the primary PFS analysis, adding atezolizumab to paclitaxel did not improve investigator-assessed PFS in the PD-L1-positive population [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-1.12; P = 0.20; median PFS 6.0 months with atezolizumab–paclitaxel versus 5.7 months with placebo–paclitaxel]. In the PD-L1-positive population, atezolizumab–paclitaxel was associated with more favourable unconfirmed best overall response rate (63% versus 55% with placebo–paclitaxel) and median duration of response (7.2 versus 5.5 months, respectively). Final OS results showed no difference between arms (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.76-1.64; median 22.1 months with atezolizumab–paclitaxel versus 28.3 months with placebo–paclitaxel in the PD-L1-positive population). Results in the ITT population were consistent with the PD-L1-positive population. The safety profile was consistent with known effects of each study drug.ConclusionCombining atezolizumab with paclitaxel did not improve PFS or OS versus paclitaxel alone.ClinicalTrials.govNCT03125902. In the phase III IMpassion130 trial, combining atezolizumab with first-line nanoparticle albumin-bound-paclitaxel for advanced triple-negative breast cancer (aTNBC) showed a statistically significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive populations, and a clinically meaningful overall survival (OS) effect in PD-L1-positive aTNBC. The phase III KEYNOTE-355 trial adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy for aTNBC showed similar PFS effects. IMpassion131 evaluated first-line atezolizumab–paclitaxel in aTNBC. Eligible patients [no prior systemic therapy or ≥12 months since (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy] were randomised 2:1 to atezolizumab 840 mg or placebo (days 1, 15), both with paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, 15), every 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were tumour PD-L1 status, prior taxane, liver metastases and geographical region. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS, tested hierarchically first in the PD-L1-positive [immune cell expression ≥1%, VENTANA PD-L1 (SP142) assay] population, and then in the ITT population. OS was a secondary endpoint. Of 651 randomised patients, 45% had PD-L1-positive aTNBC. At the primary PFS analysis, adding atezolizumab to paclitaxel did not improve investigator-assessed PFS in the PD-L1-positive population [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-1.12; P = 0.20; median PFS 6.0 months with atezolizumab–paclitaxel versus 5.7 months with placebo–paclitaxel]. In the PD-L1-positive population, atezolizumab–paclitaxel was associated with more favourable unconfirmed best overall response rate (63% versus 55% with placebo–paclitaxel) and median duration of response (7.2 versus 5.5 months, respectively). Final OS results showed no difference between arms (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.76-1.64; median 22.1 months with atezolizumab–paclitaxel versus 28.3 months with placebo–paclitaxel in the PD-L1-positive population). Results in the ITT population were consistent with the PD-L1-positive population. The safety profile was consistent with known effects of each study drug. Combining atezolizumab with paclitaxel did not improve PFS or OS versus paclitaxel alone.

INTRODUCTION: Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) has been reported in patients treated with bisphosphonates. The incidence and risk factors associated with this disorder have not been clearly defined. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 4019 patients treated with intravenous bisphosphonates between 1996 and 2004. Our goals were to estimate the frequency, understand the clinical presentation, and identify risk factors associated with ONJ development. RESULTS: Sixteen of 1338 patients with breast cancer (1.2%) and 13 of 548 patients with multiple myeloma (2.4%) developed ONJ. The median dose and duration of treatment with pamidronate or zoledronic acid were significantly higher in patients with ONJ (p < 0.0001). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis identified treatment with zoledronic acid (hazards ratio [HR], 15.01; 95% CI: 2.41-93.48; p = 0.0037), treatment with pamidronate followed by zoledronic acid (HR, 4.00; 95% CI: 0.86-18.70; p = 0.078), and dental extractions (HR, 53.19; 95% CI: 18.20-155.46; p < 0.0001) as significant risks for ONJ in breast cancer. In multiple myeloma, dental extractions (HR, 9.78; 95% CI: 3.07-31.14; p = 0.0001) and osteoporosis (HR, 6.11; 95% CI: 1.56-23.98; p = 0.0095) were significant risk factors while controlling for bisphosphonate therapy. Thirteen of 29 patients were followed for a median of 17.1 mo (range, 7-67 mo); lesions healed in 3 patients during this period. CONCLUSIONS: ONJ is an uncommon but long-lasting disorder that occurs mainly in breast cancer and multiple myeloma patients treated with intravenous bisphosphonates. High cumulative doses of bisphosphonates, poor oral health, and dental extractions may be significant risk factors for ONJ development. ONJ resolved in 23% of patients with conservative therapy.

BACKGROUND: Approximately one-fifth of women who develop early breast cancer have HER2-positive tumours, which if untreated, have a worse prognosis than HER2-negative tumours. Trastuzumab is a selective treatment targeting the HER2 pathway. Although the results on efficacy seem to support its use, there are potential cardiac toxicities which need to be considered, especially for women at lower risk of recurrence, or those at increased cardiovascular risk. OBJECTIVES: To assess the evidence on the efficacy and safety of therapy with trastuzumab, overall and in relation to its duration, concurrent or sequential administration with the standard chemotherapy regimen in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's (CBCGs) Specialised Trials Register, and used the search strategy developed by the CBCG to search for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, TOXNET, and the WHO ICTRP search portal (up to February 2010). SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs comparing the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab alone, or in combination with chemotherapy, or no treatment, or standard chemotherapy alone, in women with HER2-positive early breast cancer including women with locally advanced breast cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We collected data from published and unpublished trials. We used hazard ratios (HRs) for time-to-event outcomes and risk ratio (RRs) for binary outcomes. Subgroup analyses included duration (less or greater than six months) and concurrent or sequential trastuzumab administration. MAIN RESULTS: We included eight studies involving 11,991 patients. The combined HRs for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) significantly favoured the trastuzumab-containing regimens (HR 0.66; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.77, P < 0.00001; and HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.71, P < 0.00001, respectively). Trastuzumab significantly increased the risk of congestive heart failure (CHF: RR 5.11; 90% CI 3.00 to 8.72, P < 0.00001); and left ventricular ejection fraction decline (LVEF: RR 1.83; 90% CI 1.36 to 2.47, P = 0.0008). For haematological toxicities, risks did not differ. The two small trials that administered trastuzumab for less than six months did not differ in efficacy from longer studies, but found fewer cardiac toxicities. Studies with concurrent administration gave similar efficacy and toxicity results to sequential studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Trastuzumab significantly improves OS and DFS in HER2-positive women with early and locally advanced breast cancer, although it also significantly increases the risk of CHF and LVEF decline. The available subgroup analyses are limited by the small number of studies. Studies that administered trastuzumab concurrently or sequentially did not differ significantly in efficacy. Shorter duration of therapy may reduce cardiotoxicity and maintain efficacy, however there is insufficient evidence at present to conclude this due to small numbers of patients in these trials.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether hormonal receptor (HR) status can influence the prognostic significance of pathologic complete response (pCR). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective analysis included 1,731 patients with stage I to III noninflammatory breast cancer treated between 1988 and 2005 with primary chemotherapy (PC). Ninety-one percent of patients received anthracycline-based PC, and 66% received additional taxane therapy. pCR was defined as no evidence of invasive tumor in the breast and axillary lymph nodes. RESULTS: Median age was 49 years (range, 19 to 83 years). Sixty-seven percent of patients (n = 1,163) had HR-positive tumors. A pCR was observed in 225 (13%) of 1,731 patients; pCR rates were 24% in HR-negative tumors and 8% in HR-positive tumors (P < .001). A significant survival benefit for patients who achieved pCR compared with no pCR was observed regardless of HR status. In the HR-positive group, 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 96.4% v 84.5% (P = .04) and 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 91.1% v 65.3% (P < .0001) for patients with and without pCR, respectively. For the HR-negative group, 5-year OS rates were 83.9% v 67.4% (P = .003) and 5-year PFS rates were 83.4% v 50.0% (P < .0001) for patients with and without pCR, respectively. After adjustment for adjuvant hormonal treatment, HR status, clinical stage, and nuclear grade, patients who achieved a pCR had 0.36 times the risk of death. CONCLUSION: pCR is associated with better outcome regardless of HR status in breast cancer patients who receive PC.