No abstract

No abstract

No gold standard treatment exists for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Clinical decision making is based on knowledge of prognostic and predictive factors that are extrapolated from clinical trials and, sometimes, are not reliably transferable to a real-world scenario. Moreover, misalignment between endpoints used in drug development and measures of outcome in clinical practice has been noted.The roles of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) as primary endpoints in the context of clinical trials are the subjects of lively debate. Information about these parameters in routine clinical practice is potentially useful to design new studies and/or to interpret the results of clinical research. This study analyzed the impact of patient and tumor characteristics on the major measures of outcome across different lines of treatment in a cohort of 472 patients treated for MBC. OS, PFS, and postprogression survival (PPS) were analyzed. The study showed how biological and clinical characteristics may have different prognostic value across different lines of therapy for MBC. After first-line treatment, the median PPS of luminal A, luminal B, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive groups was longer than 12 months. The choice of OS as a primary endpoint for clinical trials could not be appropriate with these subtypes. In contrast, OS could be an appropriate endpoint when PPS is expected to be low (e.g., triple-negative subtype after the first line; other subtypes after the third line). The potential implications of these findings are clinical and methodological. The Oncologist 2014;19:608-615 Implications for Practice: Although randomized clinical trials are recognized as the highest level of scientific evidence to demonstrate the efficacy of a treatment, sometimes they do not reflect the clinical circumstances faced in a real-world scenario. The present study provides data about outcomes of consecutive metastatic breast cancer patients treated at an academic hospital. The findings support the importance of considering breast cancer in distinct subgroups with the aim of obtaining more precise information about prognosis and expected benefit from treatment. The study also provides insights for future clinical trial design.

PURPOSE The AVEREL trial [A Study of Avastin (Bevacizumab) in Combination With Herceptin (Trastuzumab)/Docetaxel in Patients With HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer] evaluated first-line bevacizumab-containing therapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -positive locally recurrent/metastatic breast cancer (LR/MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with measurable/evaluable HER2-positive LR/MBC who had not received trastuzumab or chemotherapy for LR/MBC were stratified by prior adjuvant trastuzumab, prior (neo)adjuvant taxane, hormone receptor status, and measurable disease and were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) plus trastuzumab 8 mg/kg loading dose followed by 6 mg/kg either with bevacizumab 15 mg/kg or without bevacizumab, all administered every 3 weeks. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Additional end points included overall survival, response rate (RR), safety, quality of life, and translational research. Results Baseline characteristics of the 424 patients were balanced between treatment arms. Most patients had visceral metastases, 43% had a disease-free interval less than 12 months, and 85% had measurable disease. Median follow-up was 26 months. The hazard ratio for investigator-assessed PFS was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.02; P = .0775; median PFS, 13.7 v 16.5 months in the non-bevacizumab and bevacizumab arms, respectively; PFS events in 72%). The Independent Review Committee-assessed PFS hazard ratio was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.54 to 0.94; P = .0162; median PFS, 13.9 v 16.8 months, respectively; PFS events in 53%). The RR was 70% versus 74%, respectively (P = .3492). Grade ≥ 3 febrile neutropenia and hypertension were more common with bevacizumab-containing therapy. High baseline plasma vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) concentrations were associated with greater bevacizumab benefit (not statistically significant). CONCLUSION Combining bevacizumab with docetaxel and trastuzumab did not significantly improve investigator-assessed PFS. The potential predictive value of plasma VEGF-A is consistent with findings in HER2-negative LR/MBC, warranting prospective evaluation.

Incorporating paclitaxel into anthracycline-based adjuvant therapy resulted in a significant improvement in RFS and distant RFS. When given as primary systemic therapy, the paclitaxel-containing regimen allowed breast-sparing surgery in a significant percentage of patients.