FCS hematologist and medical oncologist James Reeves, Jr., MD co-authored a recently published study evaluating the monarchE randomized clinical trial. Findings of the study demonstrated benefits from treatment with adjuvant abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for patients with hormone receptor–positive, ERBB2−, node-positive, and high-risk early breast cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy before trial enrollment.
Patients selected to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) are usually those at higher risk of relapse, and there is a need to find better therapeutic options for these patients.
To determine the efficacy and safety outcomes for patients with hormone receptor (HR)–positive, ERBB2 (formerly HER2)–, high-risk early breast cancer enrolled in the randomized clinical trial monarchE who received NAC.
The monarchE randomized clinical trial was a multicenter, phase 3, open-label study that evaluated adjuvant treatment with abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) compared with ET alone in patients with HR+, ERBB2–, and node-positive early breast cancer who were at high risk of recurrence. Patients were recruited between July 2017 and August 2019 from 603 sites in 38 countries. This subgroup analysis was performed with primary outcome data, with a cutoff date of July 8, 2020.
Enrolled patients were randomized (1:1) to receive standard of care ET for at least 5 years with or without treatment with abemaciclib (150 mg, twice daily) for 2 years (treatment period) or until criteria were met for discontinuation.
Prior chemotherapy (NAC vs adjuvant vs none) was a stratification factor in monarchE, and and a prespecified exploratory analysis included outcomes in patients who received NAC. The data presented in this article are from the primary outcome analysis (395 invasive disease-free survival [IDFS] events; cutoff date, July 8, 2020; median follow-up 19 months [IQR, 15.6-23.9 months]). Invasive disease-free survival (the primary end point of monarchE) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) were evaluated using the Cox proportional hazard model and Kaplan-Meier method.
Of the 5637 patients (mean [SD] age, 49.9 [10.6] years; 2046 women [99.5%]; 462 Asian [22.8%], 54 Black [2.7%], and 1473 White participants [70.8%]) enrolled in monarchE, 2056 (37%) received treatment with NAC. In this subgroup, treatment with abemaciclib and ET demonstrated clinically meaningful benefit in IDFS (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47-0.80) and DRFS (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46-0.81), which corresponded with an absolute improvement of 6.6% in 2-year IDFS rates and 6.7% in 2-year DRFS rates. A consistent treatment benefit was observed across subgroups of pathological breast tumor size or number of positive lymph nodes at surgery.
In the randomized clinical trial monarchE, treatment with adjuvant abemaciclib combined with ET demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in IDFS and DRFS for patients with HR+, ERBB2−, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer who received NAC before trial enrollment.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03155997
MammaPrint did not predict distant recurrence, but it did predict patients who may benefit from extended hormonal therapy. We do have breast index, so now we have options. Breast index can predict the possibility of recurrence though by helping to determine the level of risk.
This study confirms what we saw in initial reports showing the addition of pembro increasing the rate of ypathological complete response (ypCR’s) in the neoadjuvant setting for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). New data shows a 5% improvement (87 vs 82%) in overall survival (OS) with the quadruplet. Higher gains but at higher cost of toxicity. The fact that adjuvant intraosseous (IO) does not seem to improve outcomes, but neoadjuvant chemo+IO does show intact tumor-immune interactions to create maximum treatment effectiveness is most likely real. Of note, this seems mostly independent of programmed death-ligand 1 (PDL1) status.
Adding Inavolisib to CKD4/6 inhibitor and AI improved progression-free survival (almost doubled 15 vs 7m) but toxicity was higher still in the single digits (hyperglycemia, diarrhea, stomatitis… all less than 6% G3/4).
Well done study showing a 20% decrease in recurrence risk when using dose dense therapy [EC]/D compared to conventional dose [FEC]/D. Sometimes it is worth it to push.
Myth busted. In aggressive breast cancer, no need to start chemotherapy now, ET and CKD4/6 inhibitors are better tolerated with significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit and same response rate.
FCS Hematology Oncology Review creates a platform for our physician network to observe the most recent articles and studies available in the oncology and hematology world. By sharing these articles we are building our wealth of knowledge of new observations and treatments as they come available.
