Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Raloxifene is a second-generation selective estrogen receptor modulator that reduces the incidence of breast cancer in postmenopausal women. Exemestane, a steroidal aromatase inhibitor, decreases contralateral new breast cancers in postmenopausal women when taken in the adjuvant setting. Preclinical evidence suggests a rationale for coadministration of these agents to achieve complete estrogen blockade. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN/METHODS:We tested the safety and tolerability of combination exemestane and raloxifene in 11 postmenopausal women with a history of hormone receptor-negative breast cancer. Patients were randomized to either raloxifene (60 mg PO daily) or exemestane (25 mg PO daily) for 2 weeks. Patients then initiated combination therapy at the same dose levels for a minimum of 1 year. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data for plasma estrogens, raloxifene, exemestane, and their metabolites were collected at the end of single-agent therapy and during combination therapy. RESULTS:Plasma concentration-time profiles for each drug were unchanged with monotherapy versus combination therapy. Raloxifene did not affect plasma estrogen levels. Plasma estrogen concentrations were suppressed below the lower limit of detection by exemestane as monotherapy and when administered in combination with raloxifene. The most common adverse events of any grade included arthralgias, hot flashes, vaginal dryness and myalgias. CONCLUSIONS:In this small study, coadministration of raloxifene and exemestane did not affect the pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics of either agent to a significant degree in postmenopausal women. The combination of estrogen receptor blockade and suppression of estrogen synthesis is well tolerated and warrants further investigation.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Dose-dense (dd) doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by paclitaxel (P) is superior to every 3-weekly AC followed by P. Given the demonstrated cardiac safety for trastuzumab (T) with conventionally scheduled AC followed by P, we tested the safety of dd AC followed by P with T. The primary end point was cardiac safety, and the secondary end points were time to recurrence and overall survival. METHODS:Patients with HER-2/neu immunohistochemistry (IHC) 3+ or fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH)-amplified breast cancer and baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of >or= 55% were enrolled, regardless of tumor size or nodal status. Treatment consisted of AC (60/600 mg/m(2)) x 4 followed by P (175 mg/m(2)) x 4 every 2-weekly with pegfilgrastim (6 mg on day 2) + T x1 year. LVEF by radionuclide scan was obtained at baseline, at months 2, 6, 9, and 18. RESULTS:From January 2005 to November 2005, 70 patients were enrolled. The median age was 49 years (range, 27 to 72 years); median LVEF at baseline was 68% (range, 55% to 81%). At month 2 in 70 of 70 patients, the median LVEF was 67% (range, 58% to 79%); at month 6 in 67 of 70 patients, it was 66% (range, 52% to 75%); at month 9 in 68 of 70 patients, it was 65% (range, 50% to 75%); and at month 18 in 48 of 70 patients, it was 66% (range, 57% to 75%). As of December 1, 2007, the median follow-up was 28 months (range, 25 to 35 months). One patient (1%) experienced congestive heart failure (CHF). There were no cardiac deaths. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Dose-dense AC followed by P/T followed by T is feasible and is not likely to increase the incidence of cardiac events compared to established regimens.

BACKGROUND:In an open-label, randomized, phase 3 trial, we compared the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel with that of paclitaxel plus bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor, as initial treatment for metastatic breast cancer. METHODS:We randomly assigned patients to receive 90 mg of paclitaxel per square meter of body-surface area on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks, either alone or with 10 mg of bevacizumab per kilogram of body weight on days 1 and 15. The primary end point was progression-free survival; overall survival was a secondary end point. RESULTS:From December 2001 through May 2004, a total of 722 patients were enrolled. Paclitaxel plus bevacizumab significantly prolonged progression-free survival as compared with paclitaxel alone (median, 11.8 vs. 5.9 months; hazard ratio for progression, 0.60; P<0.001) and increased the objective response rate (36.9% vs. 21.2%, P<0.001). The overall survival rate, however, was similar in the two groups (median, 26.7 vs. 25.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.88; P=0.16). Grade 3 or 4 hypertension (14.8% vs. 0.0%, P<0.001), proteinuria (3.6% vs. 0.0%, P<0.001), headache (2.2% vs. 0.0%, P=0.008), and cerebrovascular ischemia (1.9% vs. 0.0%, P=0.02) were more frequent in patients receiving paclitaxel plus bevacizumab. Infection was more common in patients receiving paclitaxel plus bevacizumab (9.3% vs. 2.9%, P<0.001), but febrile neutropenia was uncommon (<1% overall). CONCLUSIONS:Initial therapy of metastatic breast cancer with paclitaxel plus bevacizumab prolongs progression-free survival, but not overall survival, as compared with paclitaxel alone. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00028990 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To determine the clinical toxicities and antibody response against sTn and tumor cells expressing sTn following immunization of high-risk breast cancer patients with clustered sTn-KLH [sTn(c)-KLH] conjugate plus QS-21. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN/METHODS:Twenty-seven patients with no evidence of disease and with a history of either stage IV no evidence of disease, rising tumor markers, stage II (>or=4 positive axillary nodes), or stage III disease received a total of five injections each during weeks 1, 2, 3, 7, and 19. Immunizations consisted of sTn(c)-KLH conjugate containing 30, 10, 3, or 1 microg sTn(c) plus 100 microg QS-21. Induction of IgM and IgG antibodies against synthetic sTn(c) and natural sTn on ovine submaxillary mucin were measured before and after therapy. Fluorescence-activated cell sorting analyses assessed reactivity of antibodies to LSC and MCF-7 tumor cells. RESULTS:The most common toxicities were transient local skin reactions at the injection site and mild flu-like symptoms. All patients developed significant IgM and IgG antibody titers against sTn(c). Antibody titers against ovine submaxillary mucin were usually of lower titers. IgM reactivity with LSC tumor cells was observed in 21 patients and with MCF-7 cells in 13 patients. There was minimal IgG reactivity with LSC cells. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Immunization with sTn(c)-KLH conjugate plus QS-21 is well tolerated and immunogenic in high-risk breast cancer patients. Future trials will incorporate sTn(c) as a component of a multiple antigen vaccine.

Tumor angiogenesis is essential for the growth and metastasis of solid tumors. In breast cancer, increased levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) have been associated with poor prognosis in lymph node-positive and lymph node-negative patients. In addition to its prognostic significance, VEGF is now a validated target in the treatment of breast cancer. Bevacizumab, an anti-VEGF antibody, has demonstrated significant clinical benefit in several solid tumors. In this article the authors discuss the data pertaining to bevacizumab and other antiangiogenic agents for the treatment of patients who have advanced breast cancer.

Progression-free survival (PFS) is increasingly used as an endpoint for cancer clinical trials. Disease progression is typically assessed on the basis of radiologic testing at scheduled time points or after a fixed number of treatment cycles. The date of the radiologic evaluation at which progression is first evident is used as a proxy for the true progression time. The true progression time actually lies somewhere within the time interval between two assessments, a situation that results in interval-censored data. An analysis that ignores this interval censoring and uses the detection date as the date of progression unavoidably results in an overestimation of median PFS. This overestimation can erroneously result in a result being described as clinically significant when in fact a longer median PFS may just be a consequence of the length of the surveillance interval. Furthermore, if surveillance intervals are heterogenous within a disease group, comparisons of median PFS across studies may not be meaningful. The decision to use PFS as a primary endpoint should be made carefully when designing clinical trials, and investigators focused on a particular disease should develop consensus standards and strive for consistent surveillance intervals.

Hand-foot syndrome commonly results from treatment with capecitabine and is associated with pain, dysesthesias, paresthesias, and temperature intolerance. The cause of these symptoms in hand-foot syndrome has not been determined. We present the clinical, electrophysiologic, and biopsy data from a patient with capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome as supporting evidence implicating small-fiber neuropathy as the cause of these neuropathic symptoms. A patient with stage 4 breast cancer who develops capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome is referred for clinical and electrophysiologic testing. Intraepidermal nerve fiber density is assessed. Clinical evaluation demonstrates markedly decreased pain and temperature sensation with preserved strength, proprioception, and light touch. Standard electrodiagnostic testing is normal. The assessment of epidermal nerve fiber density demonstrates marked small-fiber loss both proximally and distally. In conclusion, small-fiber neuropathy is a likely cause of the neuropathic symptoms encountered in capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome. Similar clinical, electrophysiologic, and pathologic assessments are needed to confirm this finding in larger populations.

BACKGROUND:Imatinib mesylate is a potent inhibitor of Abl, KIT, and PDGFR tyrosine kinases. Breast cancer has variable expression of KIT and PDGFR therefore we conducted a phase II trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of imatinib in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:Eligible patients had measurable and progressive MBC, with no limits on prior chemo- or hormonal therapy. Imatinib was initially administered at a dose of 400 mg orally twice a day with provisions for dose reductions based on toxicities. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit based on RECIST criteria. Tumor specimens were tested for expression of KIT and PDGFR tyrosine kinases. RESULTS:Sixteen patients were enrolled and treated. Median age was 55 years (range: 35-73); median number of prior chemotherapy regimens for MBC was 4 (range 1-8). The main non-hematologic toxicities were (Grades 1/2; Grade 3): fatigue (56%; 6%), edema (38%; 19%), nausea (31%; 19%), vomiting (38%; 0%), anorexia (38%; 0%), diarrhea (19%; 6%), and rash (25%; 6%). Grade 3/4 hematologic and biochemical abnormalities were minimal. There was no evidence of clinical benefit. The median duration of therapy on trial was 28 days (range 2-71). Of the 13 testable cases: 1 was KIT positive and 4 were PDGFR positive. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Imatinib therapy at doses of 800 mg/day was associated with significant toxicity in patients with heavily pre-treated MBC. Our results do not indicate activity for imatinib monotherapy in these unselected patients.