Outcome of BRCA1- compared with BRCA2-associated ovarian cancer: a nationwide study in the Netherlands

BackgroundRecent studies suggested an improved overall survival (OS) for BRCA2- versus BRCA1-associated epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), whereas the impact of chemotherapy is not yet clear. In a nationwide cohort, we examined the results of primary treatment, progression-free survival (PFS), treatment-free interval (TFI), and OS of BRCA1 versus BRCA2 EOC patients.MethodsTwo hundred and forty-five BRCA1- and 99 BRCA2-associated EOC patients were identified through all Dutch university hospitals. Analyses were carried out with the Pearson's Chi-square test, Kaplan–Meier, and Cox regression methods.ResultsBRCA1 patients were younger at EOC diagnosis than BRCA2 patients (51 versus 55 years; P < 0.001), without differences regarding histology, tumor grade, and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage. Complete response rates after primary treatment, including chemotherapy, did not differ between BRCA1 (86%) and BRCA2 patients (90%). BRCA1 versus BRCA2 patients had a shorter PFS (median 2.2 versus 3.9 years, respectively; P = 0.006), TFI (median 1.7 versus 2.8 years; P = 0.009), and OS (median 6.0 versus 9.7 years; P = 0.04). Differences could not be explained by age at diagnosis, FIGO stage or type of treatment.ConclusionsPFS and OS were substantially longer in BRCA2- than in BRCA1-associated EOC patients. While response rates after primary treatment were similarly high in both groups, TFI, as surrogate for chemosensitivity, was significantly longer in BRCA2 patients.     

Outcome of ovarian cancer after breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Background:

It is unknown whether a history of breast cancer (BC) affects the outcome of BRCA1/2-associated epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). This was investigated in the current analysis.

Methods:

We included 386 BRCA1/2-associated EOC patients diagnosed between 1980 and 2015. Progression-free survival (PFS), progression-free interval (PFI), overall survival (OS) and ovarian cancer-specific survival (OCSS) were compared between EOC patients with and without previous BC.

Results:

BRCA-associated EOC patients with, vs without, a BC history had a significantly worse PFS and PFI (multivariate hazard ratio (HR_mult) 1.47; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03–2.08 and HR_mult 1.43; 95% CI 1.01–2.03), and a non-significantly worse OS (HR_mult 1.15; 95% CI 0.84–1.57) and OCSS (HR_mult 1.18; 95% CI 0.85–1.62). Ovarian cancer-specific survival was significantly worse for the subgroup treated with adjuvant chemotherapy for BC (HR_mult 1.99; 95% CI 1.21–3.31).

Conclusions:

Our results suggest that BRCA1/2-associated EOC patients with a previous BC have a worse outcome than EOC patients without BC, especially when treated with adjuvant chemotherapy.     

Veliparib with temozolomide or carboplatin/paclitaxel versus placebo with carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with BRCA1/2 locally recurrent/metastatic breast cancer: randomized phase II study

BackgroundHomologous recombination defects in BRCA1/2-mutated tumors result in sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, which interfere with DNA damage repair. Veliparib, a potent poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, enhanced the antitumor activity of platinum agents and temozolomide in early phase clinical trials. This phase II study examined the safety and efficacy of intermittent veliparib with carboplatin/paclitaxel (VCP) or temozolomide (VT) in patients with BRCA1/2-mutated breast cancer.Patients and methodsEligible patients ≥18 years with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer and a deleterious BRCA1/2 germline mutation were randomized 1:1:1 to VCP, VT, or placebo plus carboplatin/paclitaxel (PCP). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR).ResultsOf 290 randomized patients, 284 were BRCA+, confirmed by central laboratory. For VCP versus PCP, median PFS was 14.1 and 12.3 months, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) 0.789; 95% CI 0.536–1.162; P = 0.227], interim median OS 28.3 and 25.9 months (HR 0.750; 95% CI 0.503–1.117; P = 0.156), and ORR 77.8% and 61.3% (P = 0.027). For VT (versus PCP), median PFS was 7.4 months (HR 1.858; 95% CI 1.278–2.702; P = 0.001), interim median OS 19.1 months (HR 1.483; 95% CI 1.032–2.131; P = 0.032), and ORR 28.6% (P < 0.001). Safety profile was comparable between carboplatin/paclitaxel arms. Adverse events (all grades) of neutropenia, anemia, alopecia, and neuropathy were less frequent with VT versus PCP.ConclusionNumerical but not statistically significant increases in both PFS and OS were observed in patients with BRCA1/2-mutated recurrent/metastatic breast cancer receiving VCP compared with PCP. The addition of veliparib to carboplatin/paclitaxel significantly improved ORR. There was no clinically meaningful increase in toxicity with VCP versus PCP. VT was inferior to PCP. An ongoing phase III trial is evaluating VCP versus PCP, with optional continuation single-agent therapy with veliparib/placebo if chemotherapy is discontinued without progression, in this patient population.Clinical trial informationNCT01506609     

BRCA1 expression and improved survival in ovarian cancer patients treated with intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study

Background:

Breast cancer 1, early onset (BRCA1) is a tumour-suppressor gene associated with familial epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Reduced BRCA1 expression is associated with enhanced sensitivity to platinum-based chemotherapy. We sought to examine the prognostic relevance of BRCA1 expression in EOC patients treated with intraperitoneal platinum/taxane.

Methods:

The GOG-172 was a phase III, multi-institutional randomised trial of intravenous paclitaxel and cisplatin (IV therapy) vs intravenous paclitaxel, intraperitoneal cisplatin plus paclitaxel (IP therapy) in patients with optimally resected stage III EOC. The BRCA1 expression was assessed with immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining blinded to clinical outcome in archival tumour specimens. Slides with ⩽10% staining were defined as aberrant and >10% as normal. Correlations between BRCA1 expression and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analysed using Kaplan–Meier method and Cox regression analysis.

Results:

Of the 393 patients, 189 tumours had aberrant expression, and 204 had normal BRCA1 expression. There was an interaction between BRCA1 expression and route of administration on OS (P=0.014) but not PFS (P=0.054). In tumours with normal BRCA1 expression, the median OS was 58 months for IP group vs 50 months for IV group (P=0.818). In tumours with aberrant BRCA1 expression, the median OS was 84 vs 47 months in the IP vs IV group, respectively (P=0.0002). Aberrant BRCA1 expression was an independent prognostic factor for better survival in women randomised to IP therapy (hazard ratio (HR)=0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.47–0.97, P=0.032). Similar survival was observed in the IV and IP patients with normal BRCA1 expression. Multivariate but not univariate modelling demonstrated that IV patients with aberrant vs normal BRCA1 expression had worse survival.

Conclusion:

Decreased BRCA1 expression is associated with a 36-month survival improvement in patients with EOC treated with IP chemotherapy. Although these results merit validation in future studies, the results suggest that decreased BRCA1 expression predicts for improved response to cisplatin-based IP chemotherapy with cisplatin and paclitaxel.     

Breast cancer 1 (BRCA1) protein expression as a prognostic marker in sporadic epithelial ovarian carcinoma: an NCIC CTG OV.16 correlative study

BackgroundBreast cancer 1 (BRCA1) protein inactivation in sporadic ovarian carcinoma (OC) is common and low BRCA1 expression is linked with platinum sensitivity. The clinical validation of BRCA1 as a prognostic marker in OC remains unresolved.Patients and methodsIn 251 patient samples from the NCIC CTG clinical trial, OV.16, BRCA1 protein expression was determined by immunohistochemistry.ResultsFor all patients, when BRCA1 score was analyzed as a continuous variable, there was no significant correlation between BRCA1 protein expression and progression-free survival (PFS) [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 1.15 (0.96–1.37), P = 0.12] or response rate [HR = 0.89 (0.70–1.12), P = 0.32]. In the 116 patients with minimal residual disease (RD), higher BRCA1 expression correlated significantly with worse PFS [HR = 1.40 (1.04–1.89), P = 0.03]. Subgroup analysis divided patients with minimal RD into low (BRCA1 ≤2.5) and high (BRCA1 >2.5) expression groups. Patients with low BRCA1 expression had a more favorable outcome [median PFS was 24.7 and 16.6 months in patients with low and high BRCA1, respectively; HR = 0.56 (0.35–0.89), P = 0.01].ConclusionsThis study suggests that BRCA1 protein is a prognostic marker in sporadic OC patients with minimal RD. Further research is needed to evaluate BRCA1 as a predictive biomarker and to target BRCA1 expression to enhance chemotherapeutic sensitivity.     

Effect of BRCA1 and XPG mutations on treatment response to trabectedin and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in patients with advanced ovarian cancer: exploratory analysis of the phase 3 OVA-301 study

In this exploratory analysis, patients with recurrent ovarian cancer carrying BRCA1^mut gene had improved outcomes with trabectedin + PLD treatment compared with PLD alone. Prospective evaluation of BRCA status is likely an important evaluation for DNA-damaging agents and may significantly impact interpretation of clinical studies. XPG may be a biomarker of poor outcome in these patients.BackgroundWe investigated the association of BRCA1 and XPG mutations with response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in a subset of patients from a phase 3 clinical trial comparing the efficacy and safety of trabectedin + pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) versus PLD alone in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer.Patients and methodsA candidate array was designed based on the Breast Cancer Information Core database for BRCA mutation analyses. An exploratory analysis of BRCA1/XPG mutation status was conducted using a two-sided log-rank test and 0.05 significance in germline DNA samples from 264 women with failed first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, randomized (1 : 1) to trabectedin + PLD or PLD alone.ResultsOverall, 41 (16%) of the 264 women had BRCA1^mut (trabectedin + PLD: n = 24/135, 18%; PLD: n = 17/129; 13%) and 17 (6%) had XPG^mut (trabectedin + PLD: n = 8/135, 6%; PLD: n = 9/129, 7%). A higher RR was observed in BRCA1^mut patients (20/41; 49%) versus BRCA1^wt patients (62/223; 28%). Within the BRCA1^mut group, trabectedin + PLD-treated patients had longer PFS and longer OS than PLD-treated patients (median PFS 13.5 versus 5.5 months, P = 0.0002; median OS 23.8 versus 12.5 months, P = 0.0086), whereas in BRCA1^wt patients, OS was not significantly different (median OS: 19.1 versus 19.3 months; P = 0.9377). There were no differences in OS or PFS of patients with XPG^mut between the two treatment arms. However, trabectedin + PLD-treated patients with XPG^mut had a trend toward shorter PFS (median PFS: 1.9 versus 7.5 months; P = 0.1666) and OS (median OS: 14.5 versus 20.7 months; P = 0.1774) than those with XPG^wt.ConclusionsIn this exploratory analysis, patients with recurrent ovarian cancer carrying the BRCA1^mut had improved outcomes with trabectedin + PLD treatment compared with PLD alone. Prospective evaluation of BRCA status is likely an important evaluation for DNA-damaging agents and may significantly impact interpretation of clinical studies. XPG may be a biomarker of poor outcome in these patients.     

The performance of BRCA1 immunohistochemistry for detecting germline,somatic, and epigenetic BRCA1 loss in high-grade serous ovarian cancer

BackgroundBRCA1 expression can be lost by a variety of mechanisms including germline or somatic mutation and promotor hypermethylation. Given the potential importance of BRCA1 loss as a predictive and prognostic biomarker in high-grade serous ovarian cancer, we sought to evaluate the utility of BRCA1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) in screening for BRCA1 loss by germline, somatic, and epigenetic mechanisms.Patients and methodsPatients with advanced high-grade serous ovarian cancer who had previously undergone germline BRCA1 testing were identified. Samples from each tumor were stained for BRCA1 and reviewed independently by two pathologists blinded to BRCA status. Tumors with abnormal BRCA1 IHC and wild-type germline testing underwent further evaluation for somatic BRCA1 mutations and promoter hypermethylation. McNemar's test was used to determine the association of BRCA1 IHC with germline BRCA1 mutations and BRCA1 loss through any mechanism. Kaplan–Meier methods were used to estimate overall survival (OS), and the log-rank test was used to assess differences between groups.ResultsInter-rater reliability between the two pathologists on BRCA IHC interpretation was very good (kappa coefficient 0.865, P = 0.16; McNemar's test). BRCA1 IHC was abnormal in 36% (48/135) of cases. When compared with germline BRCA1 status, BRCA1 IHC had a high negative predictive value (95.4%) but a low positive predictive value (PPV, 52.1%). When accounting for promoter hypermethylation and somatic mutations as alternative methods of BRCA1 loss, the PPV rose to 87.5%. Five-year OS rate was 49.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 26.3% to 69.3%] for patients with germline BRCA1 mutations, 50.4% (95% CI 27.5% to 69.5%) for germline wild-type BRCA1 and abnormal IHC, and 52.1% (95% CI 38.4% to 64.2%) for germline wild-type BRCA1 and normal IHC (P = 0.92).ConclusionsBRCA1 IHC interpretation was a highly reproducible and accurate modality for detecting germline, somatic, or epigenetic mechanisms of BRCA1 loss. These results support further development of BRCA1 IHC as a potential biomarker for BRCA1 loss in high-grade serous ovarian cancer.     

OV21/PETROC: a randomized Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup phase II study of intraperitoneal versus intravenous chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and optimal debulking surgery in epithelial ovarian cancer

BackgroundThe purpose of this multistage, adaptively, designed randomized phase II study was to evaluate the role of intraperitoneal (i.p.) chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and optimal debulking surgery in women with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).Patients and methodsWe carried out a multicenter, two-stage, phase II trial. Eligible patients with stage IIB–IVA EOC treated with platinum-based intravenous (i.v.) NACT followed by optimal (<1 cm) debulking surgery were randomized to one of the three treatment arms: (i) i.v. carboplatin/paclitaxel, (ii) i.p. cisplatin plus i.v./i.p. paclitaxel, or (iii) i.p. carboplatin plus i.v./i.p. paclitaxel. The primary end point was 9-month progressive disease rate (PD9). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity, and quality of life (QOL).ResultsBetween 2009 and 2015, 275 patients were randomized; i.p. cisplatin containing arm did not progress beyond the first stage of the study after failing to meet the pre-set superiority rule. The final analysis compared i.v. carboplatin/paclitaxel (n = 101) with i.p. carboplatin, i.v./i.p. paclitaxel (n = 102). The intention to treat PD9 was lower in the i.p. carboplatin arm compared with the i.v. carboplatin arm: 24.5% (95% CI 16.2% to 32.9%) versus 38.6% (95% CI 29.1% to 48.1%) P = 0.065. The study was underpowered to detect differences in PFS: HR PFS 0.82 (95% CI 0.57–1.17); P = 0.27 and OS HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.47–1.35) P = 0.40. The i.p. carboplatin-based regimen was well tolerated with no reduction in QOL or increase in toxicity compared with i.v. administration alone.ConclusionIn women with stage IIIC or IVA EOC treated with NACT and optimal debulking surgery, i.p. carboplatin-based chemotherapy is well tolerated and associated with an improved PD9 compared with i.v. carboplatin-based chemotherapy.Clinical trial numberclinicaltrials.gov, NCT01622543.     

The efficacy of taxane chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

BACKGROUND:

We assessed the efficacy of taxane chemotherapy in BRCA1‐ and BRCA2‐associated patients compared with sporadic metastatic breast cancer patients.

METHODS:

Response rates (RRs) to and progression‐free survival (PFS) after taxane chemotherapy of 35 BRCA1‐associated and 13 BRCA2‐associated metastatic breast cancer patients were compared with those outcomes in 95 matched (1:2) sporadic patients. Matching was performed for age at and year of diagnosis of primary breast cancer, year of metastatic disease, and line of therapy (first vs second or third).

RESULTS:

Among BRCA1‐associated patients, the RR was worse (objective response [OR], 23% vs 38%; progressive disease [PD], 60% vs 19%; P < 0.001); and the median PFS shorter (2.2 vs 4.9 months; P = 0.04) compared with sporadic patients. In the subgroup of hormone receptor (HRec)‐negative patients, BRCA1‐associated patients (n = 20) had a worse RR (OR, 20% vs 42%, respectively; PD, 70% vs 26%, respectively; P = 0.03) and a shorter PFS (1.8 vs 3.8 months; P = 0.004) compared with sporadic patients (n = 19). These outcomes in HRec‐positive patients were similar in BRCA1‐associated (n = 11) and sporadic (n = 61) patients (OR, 36% vs 38%; PD, 28% vs 20%; median PFS, both 5.7 months). In BRCA2‐associated patients, who were mainly HRec‐positive, the OR was higher than in sporadic patients (89% vs 38%, respectively; P = 0.02), whereas the median PFS was not significantly different (7.1 vs 5.7 months, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS:

BRCA1‐associated, HRec‐negative metastatic breast cancer patients were less sensitive to taxane chemotherapy than sporadic HRec‐negative patients. HRec‐positive BRCA1‐ and BRCA2‐associated patients had a sensitivity to taxane chemotherapy similar to that of sporadic patients. Cancer 2012;. © 2011 American Cancer Society.     

ERCC1 and BRCA1 mRNA expressions are associated with clinical outcome of non-small cell lung cancer treated with platinum-based chemotherapy

We conducted a perspective study to investigate whether the expression of excision repair cross-complementing 1 (ERCC1), xeroderma pigmentosum group G (XPG), breast cancer 1 (BRCA1), and ribonucleotide reductase M1 (RRM1) is correlated with clinical outcome of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with histologically confirmed inoperable stages IIIB and IV NSCLC were collected and followed up until January 2012. Relative cDNA quantification for ERCC1, XPG, BRCA1, and RRM1 was performed using a fluorescence-based, real-time detection method. Cox regression analysis indicated that a high level of ERCC1 was associated with shorter overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) times when compared with low expression, with adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) (95 % confidence interval (CI)) of 2.25 (1.18–4.39) and 2.63 (1.33–5.25), respectively. High expression of BRCA1 was correlated with shorter OS and PFS times when compared with low expression, and the adjusted HRs (95 % CI) were 3.29 (1.72–6.39) and 5.94 (2.80–13.06), respectively. Moreover, we found a significant correlation between BRCA1 expression and age (χ ²?=?4.14, P?=?0.04) and stage (χ ²?=?5.26, P?=?0.02). Our results suggest that ERCC1 and BRCA1 mRNA expressions are associated with PFS and OS in advanced NSCLC patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy.     

Cisplatin and gemcitabine for advanced biliary tract cancer: a meta-analysis of two randomised trials

BackgroundTwo recent studies (ABC-02 [UK] and BT22 [Japan]) have demonstrated the superiority of cisplatin and gemcitabine (CisGem) chemotherapy over gemcitabine (Gem) alone for patients with pathologically proven advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC: cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder and ampullary cancers). This pre-planned analysis evaluates the efficacy of CisGem with increased statistical power.Patients and methodsWe carried out a meta-analysis of individual patient-level data of these studies to establish the effect of CisGem versus Gem on progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and carried out exploratory subgroup analyses.ResultsCisGem demonstrates a significant improvement in PFS [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53–0.76, P < 0.001] and OS (HR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.54–0.78, P < 0.001) over Gem. This effect is most marked among patients with good performance status (PS 0–1): HR for PFS is 0.61 (95% CI 0.51–0.74), P < 0.001 and OS HR = 0.64 (95% CI 0.53–0.77), P < 0.001. CisGem resulted in improved PFS and OS for intra- and extra-hepatic cholangiocarcinomas and gallbladder cancer. The treatment effect between UK and Japanese patients was consistent with respect to OS (HR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.53–0.79 and 0.65, 95% CI 0.42–1.03, respectively); with similar OS in the combination arms (median 11.7 and 11.1 months, respectively). Subgroups least likely to benefit included patients with ampullary tumours and poor performance status (PS2).ConclusionsCisGem is the standard of care for the first-line treatment of good-PS patients with advanced BTC regardless of ethnicity. Future studies should aim to enhance the effectiveness of this regimen in the first-line setting, establish the role of subsequent (second-line) therapy and assess the role of rationally developed molecular-targeted therapies.     

Survival in epithelial ovarian cancer: a multivariate analysis incorporating BRCA mutation status and platinum sensitivity

BackgroundPatients with BRCA-associated ovarian cancer (OC) have a survival advantage over those with sporadic OC. To further explore this, we examined the impact of prognostic factors on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with known BRCA mutation status.Patients and methodsWe reviewed stage III–IV OC patients treated at our institution between 1 December 1996 and 30 September 2006 and also tested on protocol for BRCA mutations. Impact on DFS and OS was determined by Kaplan–Meier analysis and a Cox proportional hazards model.ResultsOf the 110 patients, 36 had deleterious BRCA mutations [BRCA (+)] and 74 were BRCA wild type [BRCA(-)]. Thirty-one of 36 (86%) BRCA (+) and 60 of 74 (81%) BRCA (-) patients were platinum sensitive (P = 0.60). Median OS was longer for BRCA (+) patients (not reached versus 67.8 months; P = 0.02), but DFS was similar (26.9 versus 24.0, P = 0.3). On multivariate analysis, OS correlated with primary platinum sensitivity [HR = 0.15; 95% CI (confidence interval) 0.06–0.34] and BRCA (+) mutation status (HR = 0.33; 95% CI 0.12–0.86).ConclusionsBRCA mutation status predicted OS independent of primary platinum sensitivity, suggesting that underlying tumor biology contributes to disease outcome and may be worthy of consideration in future clinical trial design.     

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and surgery with and without cetuximab in patients with resectable esophageal cancer: a randomized,open-label,phase III trial (SAKK 75/08)

BackgroundThis open-label, phase III trial compared chemoradiation followed by surgery with or without neoadjuvant and adjuvant cetuximab in patients with resectable esophageal carcinoma.Patients and methodsPatients were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to two cycles of chemotherapy (docetaxel 75 mg/m², cisplatin 75 mg/m²) followed by chemoradiation (45 Gy, docetaxel 20 mg/m² and cisplatin 25 mg/m², weekly for 5 weeks) and surgery, with or without neoadjuvant cetuximab 250 mg/m² weekly and adjuvant cetuximab 500 mg/m² fortnightly for 3 months. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsIn total, 300 patients (median age, 61 years; 88% male; 63% adenocarcinoma; 85% cT3/4a, 90% cN+) were assigned to cetuximab (n = 149) or control (n = 151). The R0-resection rate was 95% for cetuximab versus 97% for control. Postoperative treatment-related mortality was 6% in both arms. Median PFS was 2.9 years [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.0 to not reached] with cetuximab and 2.0 years (95% CI, 1.5–2.8) with control [hazard ratio (HR), 0.79; 95% CI, 0.58–1.07; P = 0.13]. Median overall survival (OS) time was 5.1 years (95% CI, 3.7 to not reached) versus 3.0 years (95% CI, 2.2–4.2) for cetuximab and control, respectively (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52–1.01; P = 0.055). Time to loco-regional failure after R0-resection was significantly longer for cetuximab (HR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.31–0.90; P = 0.017); time to distant failure did not differ between arms (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.64–1.59, P = 0.97). Cetuximab did not increase adverse events in neoadjuvant or postoperative settings.ConclusionAdding cetuximab to multimodal therapy significantly improved loco-regional control, and led to clinically relevant, but not-significant improvements in PFS and OS in resectable esophageal carcinoma.Clinical trial informationNCT01107639     

Promoter methylation of BRCA1 in triple-negative breast cancer predicts sensitivity to adjuvant chemotherapy

BackgroundBRCA1 function is inactivated through BRCA1 promoter methylation in a substantial number of triple-negative breast cancers. We investigated the impact of BRCA1-methylation status on the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with triple-negative breast cancer or with non-triple-negative breast cancer.MethodsBRCA1 promoter methylation was assessed in 1163 unselected breast cancer patients. Methylation was evaluated using a methylation-specific PCR (MSP) assay.ResultsIn the subgroup of 167 triple-negative breast cancer patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy, patients with BRCA1-methylated tumors had a superior 10-year disease-free survival (DFS)(78% versus 55%, P = 0.009) and 10-year disease-specific survival (DSS) (85% versus 69%, P = 0.024) than those with BRCA1-unmethylated tumors, and BRCA1 methylation was an independent favorable predictor of DFS and DSS in a multivariate analysis in this subgroup [DFS: hazard ratio (HR) = 0.45; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24–0.84; P = 0.019; DSS: HR = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.19–0.95; P = 0.044]. In contrast, in 675 non-triple-negative breast cancer patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy, BRCA1 methylation was an unfavorable predictor of DFS and DSS in univariate analysis (DFS: HR = 1.56; 95% CI 1.16–2.12; P = 0.003; DSS: HR = 1.53; 95% CI = 1.05–2.21; P = 0.026).ConclusionsTriple-negative breast cancer patients with BRCA1-methylated tumors are sensitive to adjuvant chemotherapy and have a favorable survival compared with patients with BRCA1-unmethylated triple-negative tumors.     

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of BRCA-associated ovarian cancer: genotype and survival

Previous studies have suggested that BRCA-related epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) conveys improved survival compared with that of sporadic EOC, but few studies have evaluated differences between BRCA genotypes. We compared characteristics and outcome by genotype in BRCA-associated EOC. Patients with BRCA-associated EOC who were diagnosed between January 30,1981, and December 30, 2008, were retrospectively identified through institutional review board-approved registry studies. We examined clinical characteristics, including event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS), for BRCA1 versus BRCA2 patients. We identified 197 cases (148 BRCA1 cases; 49 BRCA2 cases); the median follow-up period was 63 months. BRCA2 patients were older (55.4 vs. 51.1 y; P < 0.01) and had fewer poorly differentiated tumors (67% vs. 82%; P < 0.05). No difference in EFS was observed. OS at 5 years was 75% in BRCA2 patients versus 61% in BRCA1 patients; this was not statistically significant. A non-significant trend toward improved OS was observed in BRCA2 patients with advanced-stage disease (hazard ratio = 0.59; 95% confidence interval 0.32-1.08). Age and grade differed significantly between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers in our study population. Whereas no overall differences in EFS or OS were observed, there was a trend toward improved OS in BRCA2 carriers with advanced-stage disease. This may reflect important differences between BRCA genotypes and should be validated in larger studies.     

Long-term results of a randomised phase III trial of weekly versus three-weekly paclitaxel/platinum induction therapy followed by standard or extended three-weekly paclitaxel/platinum in European patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

BackgroundWeekly paclitaxel/carboplatin might improve survival in platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). We compared efficacy of first-line weekly to three-weekly paclitaxel/cis- or carboplatin (PCw and PC3w) induction therapy, followed by either three or six PC3w cycles.Patients and methodsIn this multicentre, randomised phase III trial with 2×2 design, patients with FIGO stage IIb–IV EOC were randomised to six cycles PCw (paclitaxel 90 mg/m², cisplatin 70 mg/m² or carboplatin AUC 4) or three cycles PC3w (paclitaxel 175 mg/m², cisplatin 75 mg/m² or carboplatin AUC 6), followed by either three or six cycles PC3w. Primary endpoints were progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were response rate (RR) and toxicity.ResultsOf 267 eligible patients, 133 received PCw and 134 PC3w. The first 105 patients received cisplatin, after protocol amendment the subsequent 162 patients received carboplatin. Weekly cisplatin was less well tolerated than weekly carboplatin. All PC3w cycles were well tolerated. At the end of all treatments, RR was 90.8% with no differences between the treatment arms. After a follow-up of median 10.3 years (range 7.1–14.8), median PFS was 18.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 15.9–21.0) months for PCw and 16.4 (95% CI 13.5–19.2) months for PC3w (p = 0.78). Median OS was 44.8 (95% CI 33.1–56.5) months for PCw and 41.1 (95% CI 34.4–47.7) months for PC3w (p = 0.98).ConclusionsThere was no benefit in terms of OS, PFS or RR for a weekly regimen nor for extended chemotherapy as first-line treatment for EOC in European patients.     

A randomized phase II study of the telomerase inhibitor imetelstat as maintenance therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

Imetelstat, a novel telomerase inhibitor, failed to improve significantly median PFS and OS as maintenance therapy (±bevacizumab) in advanced NSCLC. Telomere length (TL) biomarker results were consistent with the hypothesis that telomerase inhibition is of greater benefit to patients with tumors possessing shorter telomeres; the patients with shorter TL had a trend toward longer median PFS and OS.BackgroundContinuation or ‘switch’ maintenance therapy is commonly used in patients with advancd non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we evaluated the efficacy of the telomerase inhibitor, imetelstat, as switch maintenance therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC.Patients and methodsThe primary end point of this open-label, randomized phase II study was progression-free survival (PFS). Patients with non-progressive, advanced NSCLC after platinum-based doublet (first-line) chemotherapy (with or without bevacizumab), any histology, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0–1 were eligible. Randomization was 2 : 1 in favor of imetelstat, administered at 9.4 mg/kg on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle, or observation. Telomere length (TL) biomarker exploratory analysis was carried out in tumor tissue by quantitative PCR (qPCR) and telomerase fluorescence in situ hybridization.ResultsOf 116 patients enrolled, 114 were evaluable. Grade 3/4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were more frequent with imetelstat. Median PFS was 2.8 and 2.6 months for imetelstat-treated versus control [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.844; 95% CI 0.54–1.31; P = 0.446]. Median survival time favored imetelstat (14.3 versus 11.5 months), although not significantly (HR = 0.68; 95% CI 0.41–1.12; P = 0.129). Exploratory analysis demonstrated a trend toward longer median PFS (HR = 0.43; 95% CI 0.14–1.3; P = 0.124) and overall survival (OS; HR = 0.41; 95% CI 0.11–1.46; P = 0.155) in imetelstat-treated patients with short TL, but no improvement in median PFS and OS in patients with long TL (HR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.39–1.88; and HR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.2–1.28; P = 0.145).ConclusionsMaintenance imetelstat failed to improve PFS in advanced NSCLC patients responding to first-line therapy. There was a trend toward a improvement in median PFS and OS in patients with short TL. Short TL as a predictive biomarker will require further investigation for the clinical development of imetelstat.     

Circulating tumor cells predict progression-free and overall survival in Chinese patients with metastatic breast cancer,HER2-positive or triple-negative (CBCSG004): a multicenter,double-blind,prospective trial

BackgroundThe aim of this multicenter, double-blind, prospective study was to evaluate the potential utility of circulating tumor cell (CTC) measurements in predicting responses to anticancer therapies, including response to human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2)-targeted agents, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in Chinese women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC).Patients and methodsThree hundred MBC patients planned to complete three CTC blood draws and two imaging studies.ResultsA total of 294 of the 300 MBC patients enrolled from six leading Chinese cancer centers were assessable. In multivariate Cox regression analyses, the baseline CTC number remained an independent prognostic factor for PFS [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.93; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.39–2.69; P < 0.001) and OS (HR = 3.76; 95% CI = 2.35–6.01; P < 0.001). Similar results were observed for CTC counts at the first follow-up visit for both PFS (P = 0.049) and OS (P < 0.001).ConclusionsEnumeration of CTCs in Chinese MBC patients provides substantial prognostic information and is an independent factor associated with PFS and OS. Moreover, we demonstrated the prognostic value in the various disease subtypes, including HER-2-positive disease irrespective of therapy.     

Prognostic and predictive effects of primary versus secondary platinum resistance for bevacizumab treatment for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer in the AURELIA trial

BackgroundProgression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were significantly improved by adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) in the phase III AURELIA trial. We explored treatment outcomes according to primary platinum resistance (PPR) versus secondary platinum resistance (SPR).Patients and methodsPatients were categorized as PPR (disease progression <6 months after completing first-line platinum therapy) or SPR (progression ≥6 months after first platinum but <6 months after second). The exploratory Cox and logistic regression analyses correlated PFS, ORR, overall survival (OS), and PROs with the time to development of platinum resistance.ResultsBaseline characteristics were similar in patients with PPR (n = 262; 73%) and SPR (n = 99; 27%), although ascites were more common in the PPR subgroup. In bevacizumab-treated patients (n = 179), SPR was associated with improved PFS (median 10.2 versus 5.6 months in PPR patients; P < 0.001) and OS (median 22.2 versus 13.7 months, respectively; P < 0.001) but not PROs (22% versus 22% with improved abdominal/gastrointestinal symptoms at week 8/9). In multivariate analyses, SPR remained an independent prognostic factor for better PFS [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25–0.67; P < 0.001] and OS (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30–0.80; P = 0.005) in bevacizumab-treated patients, but was not statistically significant for either end point in the chemotherapy-alone subgroup. The magnitude of PFS benefit from bevacizumab appeared greater in SPR than PPR patients (HR 0.30 versus 0.55, respectively; interaction P = 0.07) with a similar direction of effect for OS (interaction P = 0.18).ConclusionsIn bevacizumab-treated patients, PFS and OS were more favorable in SPR than PPR patients with equally improved PROs. The PFS and OS benefit from combining bevacizumab with chemotherapy was more pronounced in SPR than PPR PROC. PPR versus SPR should be a stratification factor in future trials evaluating anti-angiogenic therapy for PROC.     

Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and breast cancer risk in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AimBRCA mutation carriers have a high lifetime risk of developing breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC). Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) has been shown to reduce OC risk. This meta-analysis was aim to analyze the effect of RRSO on the BC risk among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.MethodsEmbase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched for all studies investigating the effect of RRSO on BC risk. The pooled results were used to evaluate the association between RRSO and BC risk.ResultsThis meta-analysis included 13,965 BRCA1 and 7,057 BRCA2 mutation carriers from 14 observational studies. The pooled results showed that RRSO lowered BC risk among BRCA1 mutation carriers [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.49–0.81, P < 0.01] and BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.34–0.75, P < 0.01). RRSO reduced BC risk in younger women with BRCA1 mutation (HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.30–0.77, P < 0.01) and BRCA2 mutation (HR = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.08–0.65, P < 0.01). Analysis of the efficacy of RRSO at different time intervals after surgery showed a reduction of BC risk at <5 years after surgery in BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.40–0.89, P = 0.01) and BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.20–0.86, P = 0.02).ConclusionsRRSO is an effective way to reduce BC risk among women with BRCA1/2 mutation, especially in younger women. BRCA1/2 mutation carriers could benefit from RRSO in the immediate 5 years after surgery.