Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up

PurposeThe 21-gene Recurrence Score (RS) assay is a validated prognostic/predictive tool in early hormone receptor–positive breast cancer (BC); however, only a few prospective outcome results have been available so far. In the phase III PlanB trial, RS was prospectively used to define a subset of patients who received only endocrine therapy. We present 3-year outcome data and concordance analysis (among biomarkers/RS).Patients and MethodsCentral tumor bank was established prospectively from PlanB (intermediate and high-risk, locally human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative BC). After an early amendment, HR-positive, pN0-1 patients with RS ≤ 11 were recommended to omit chemotherapy.ResultsFrom 2009 to 2011, PlanB enrolled 3,198 patients with a median age of 56 years; 41.1% had node-positive and 32.5% grade 3 disease. In 348 patients (15.3%), chemotherapy was omitted based on RS ≤ 11. After 35 months median follow-up, 3-year disease-free survival in patients with RS ≤ 11 and endocrine therapy alone...

https://ascopubs.org/doi/pdf/10.1200/jco.2015.63.5383

West German Study Group Phase III PlanB Trial: First Prospective Outcome Data for the 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay and Concordance of Prognostic Markers by Central and Local Pathology Assessment

Sequential Adjuvant Epirubicin-Based and Docetaxel Chemotherapy for Node-Positive Breast Cancer Patients:The FNCLCC PACS 01 Trial

The prospective phase 3 PlanB trial used the Oncotype DX® Recurrence Score® (RS) to define a genomically low-risk subset of clinically high-risk pN0-1 early breast cancer (EBC) patients for treatment with adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) alone. Here, we report five-year data evaluating the prognostic value of RS, Ki-67, and other traditional clinicopathological parameters. A central tumour bank was prospectively established within PlanB. Following an early amendment, hormone receptor (HR)+ , pN0-1 RS ≤ 11 patients were recommended to omit chemotherapy. Patients with RS ≥ 12, pN2-3, or HR-negative/HER2-negative disease were randomised to anthracycline-containing or anthracycline-free chemotherapy. Primary endpoint: disease-free survival (DFS). PlanB Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01049425. From 2009 to 2011, PlanB enrolled 3198 patients (central tumour bank, n = 3073) with the median age of 56 years, 41.1% pN+, and 32.5% grade 3 EBC. Chemotherapy was omitted in 348/404 (86.1%) eligible RS ≤ 11 patients. After 55 months of median follow-up, five-year DFS in ET-treated RS ≤ 11 patients was 94% (in both pN0 and pN1) versus 94% (RS 12–25) and 84% (RS > 25) in chemotherapy-treated patients (p  2 cm, and RS, but not IHC4 or Ki-67 were independent adverse factors. If RS was excluded, IHC4 or both Ki-67 and PR entered the model. The impact of RS was particularly pronounced in patients with intermediate Ki-67 (>10%, <40%) tumours. The excellent five-year outcomes in clinically high-risk, genomically low-risk (RS ≤ 11) pN0-1 patients without adjuvant chemotherapy support using RS with standardised pathology for treatment decisions in HR+ HER2-negative EBC. Ki-67 has the potential to support patient selection for genomic testing.

/pdf/reducing-chemotherapy-use-in-clinically-high-risk-jzcfj8hoo3.pdf

Reducing chemotherapy use in clinically high-risk, genomically low-risk pN0 and pN1 early breast cancer patients: five-year data from the prospective, randomised phase 3 West German Study Group (WSG) PlanB trial

Background



Breast cancer and its treatment can have an impact on health-related quality of life and survival. Tumour profiling tests aim to identify whether or not women need chemotherapy owing to their risk of relapse.

Objectives



To conduct a systematic review of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the tumour profiling tests oncotype DX® (Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA, USA), MammaPrint® (Agendia, Inc., Amsterdam, the Netherlands), Prosigna® (NanoString Technologies, Inc., Seattle, WA, USA), EndoPredict® (Myriad Genetics Ltd, London, UK) and immunohistochemistry 4 (IHC4). To develop a health economic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of these tests compared with clinical tools to guide the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage breast cancer from the perspective of the NHS and Personal Social Services.

Design



A systematic review and health economic analysis were conducted.

Review methods



The systematic review was partially an update of a 2013 review. Nine databases were searched in February 2017. The review included studies assessing clinical effectiveness in people with oestrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, stage I or II cancer with zero to three positive lymph nodes. The economic analysis included a review of existing analyses and the development of a de novo model.

Results



A total of 153 studies were identified. Only one completed randomised controlled trial (RCT) using a tumour profiling test in clinical practice was identified: Microarray In Node-negative Disease may Avoid ChemoTherapy (MINDACT) for MammaPrint. Other studies suggest that all the tests can provide information on the risk of relapse; however, results were more varied in lymph node-positive (LN+) patients than in lymph node-negative (LN0) patients. There is limited and varying evidence that oncotype DX and MammaPrint can predict benefit from chemotherapy. The net change in the percentage of patients with a chemotherapy recommendation or decision pre/post test ranged from an increase of 1% to a decrease of 23% among UK studies and a decrease of 0% to 64% across European studies. The health economic analysis suggests that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the tests versus current practice are broadly favourable for the following scenarios: (1) oncotype DX, for the LN0 subgroup with a Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI) of > 3.4 and the one to three positive lymph nodes (LN1–3) subgroup (if a predictive benefit is assumed); (2) IHC4 plus clinical factors (IHC4+C), for all patient subgroups; (3) Prosigna, for the LN0 subgroup with a NPI of > 3.4 and the LN1–3 subgroup; (4) EndoPredict Clinical, for the LN1–3 subgroup only; and (5) MammaPrint, for no subgroups.

Limitations



There was only one completed RCT using a tumour profiling test in clinical practice. Except for oncotype DX in the LN0 group with a NPI score of > 3.4 (clinical intermediate risk), evidence surrounding pre- and post-test chemotherapy probabilities is subject to considerable uncertainty. There is uncertainty regarding whether or not oncotype DX and MammaPrint are predictive of chemotherapy benefit. The MammaPrint analysis uses a different data source to the other four tests. The Translational substudy of the Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination (TransATAC) study (used in the economic modelling) has a number of limitations.

Conclusions



The review suggests that all the tests can provide prognostic information on the risk of relapse; results were more varied in LN+ patients than in LN0 patients. There is limited and varying evidence that oncotype DX and MammaPrint are predictive of chemotherapy benefit. Health economic analyses indicate that some tests may have a favourable cost-effectiveness profile for certain patient subgroups; all estimates are subject to uncertainty. More evidence is needed on the prediction of chemotherapy benefit, long-term impacts and changes in UK pre-/post-chemotherapy decisions.

Study registration



This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017059561.

Funding



The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

https://njl-admin.nihr.ac.uk/document/download/2029559

Tumour profiling tests to guide adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in early breast cancer: a systematic review and economic analysis

Final analysis of the prospective WSG-AGO EC-Doc versus FEC phase III trial in intermediate-risk (pN1) early breast cancer: efficacy and predictive value of Ki67 expression

Comparison of prognostic and predictive impact of genomic or central grade and immunohistochemical subtypes or IHC4 in HR+/HER2− early breast cancer: WSG-AGO EC-Doc Trial

G. Hoffmann

Papers

Final analysis of the prospective WSG-AGO EC-Doc versus FEC phase III trial in intermediate-risk (pN1) early breast cancer: efficacy and predictive value of Ki67 expression

Comparison of prognostic and predictive impact of genomic or central grade and immunohistochemical subtypes or IHC4 in HR+/HER2− early breast cancer: WSG-AGO EC-Doc Trial