Benefit of locoregional control seems limited probably to situations in which surgery could clearly help recurrent breast inflammatory/infectious issues. This study is helpful to quote to patients who are anxious about not having breast surgery accomplished in this setting.
Distant metastases are present in 6% or more of patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. In this context, locoregional therapy for the intact primary tumor has been hypothesized to improve overall survival (OS), but clinical trials have reported conflicting results.
Women presenting with metastatic breast cancer and an intact primary tumor received systemic therapy for 4-8 months; if no disease progression occurred, they were randomly assigned to locoregional therapy for the primary site (surgery and radiotherapy per standards for nonmetastatic disease) or continuing sysmetic therapy. The primary end point was OS; locoregional control and quality of life were secondary end points. The trial design provided 85% power to detect a 19.3% absolute difference in the 3-year OS rate in randomly assigned patients. The stratified log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model were used to compare OS between arms. Cumulative incidence of locoregional progression was compared using Gray’s test. Quality-of-life assessment used standard instruments.
Of 390 participants enrolled, 256 were randomly assigned: 131 to continued systemic therapy and 125 to early locoregional therapy. The 3-year OS was 67.9% without and 68.4% with early locoregional therapy (hazard ratio = 1.11; 90% CI, 0.82 to 1.52; P = .57). The median OS was 53.1 months (95% CI, 47.9 to not estimable) in the systemic therapy arm and 54.9 months (95% CI, 46.7 to not estimable) in the locoregional therapy arm. Locoregional progression was less frequent in those randomly assigned to locoregional therapy (3-year rate: 16.3% v 39.8%; P < .001). Quality-of-life measures were largely similar between arms.
Early locoregional therapy for the primary site did not improve survival in patients presenting with metastatic breast cancer. Although it was associated with improved locoregional control, this had no overall impact on quality of life.
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.
1 thought on “Early Local Therapy for the Primary Site in De Novo Stage IV Breast Cancer: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial (EA2108)”
This should be interpreted with caution. It definitely makes sense for uncomplicated breast tumors, however, if there is evidence of local progression before, during or after systemic therapy such as tumor eroding through skin, bleeding, pain, infections, etc, local therapy with either surgery or radiation should be seriously considered as it significantly improves quality of life. By avoiding locoregional complications the patient will be able to continue systemic therapy without interruptions.