No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Different dosage forms of GnRHa with endocrine therapy in premenopausal hormone Receptor-Positive breast cancer
Abstract
Background
Despite the wide use of a 3-month gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist for ovarian function suppression in premenopausal breast cancer patients, it remains unclear whether it is as effective and safe as a 1-month GnRH agonist regimen when combined with selective estrogen receptor modulators or aromatase inhibitors, especially in younger patients.
Methods
This retrospective cohort study included 1109 premenopausal hormone receptor–positive breast cancer patients treated with GnRH agonist plus selective estrogen receptor modulator or aromatase inhibitor. The estradiol (E2) inhibition rate within 1-24 months after treatment with 1-month or 3-month GnRH agonist in cohorts and different subgroups was analyzed.
Results
Following 1:1 propensity score matching, 950 patients with a mean age of 39 years and a median follow-up of 46 months were included. Both the 1-month and 3-month groups achieved more than 90% E2 inhibition within 24 months (94.53% vs 92.84%, with a 95% confidence interval for the difference ranging from −4.78% to 1.41%), confirming the noninferiority of 3-month GnRH agonist. Both 1-month and 3-month GnRH agonist rapidly and consistently reduced E2 levels. Of the patients, 60 (6.3%) experienced incomplete ovarian function suppression, with similar rates in the 1-month and 3-month groups (5.5% vs 7.2%). Incomplete ovarian function suppression mainly occurred within the first 12 months, with age younger than 40 years and no prior chemotherapy being the risk factors. Similar disease-free survival and overall survival were found in the 1-month and 3-month groups and in patients with complete and incomplete ovarian function suppression (P > .05).
Conclusions
The ovarian function suppression with 3-month GnRH agonist was not inferior to that with 1-month GnRH agonist, regardless of age or combination with a selective estrogen receptor modulator or an aromatase inhibitor.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
The 5th International Consensus Symposium for Breast Cancer in Young Women (BCY5) took place virtually in October 2020, organized by the European School of Oncology (ESO) and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO). Consensus recommendations for the management of breast cancer in young women were updated from BCY4 with incorporation of new evidence to inform the guidelines. Areas of research priorities, as well as specificities in different geographic and minority populations were identified. This manuscript summarizes the ESO-ESMO international consensus recommendations, which are also endorsed by the European Society of Breast Specialists (EUSOMA).
PurposeAdjuvant ovarian function suppression (OFS) in premenopausal hormone receptor (HR) positive breast cancer (BC) improves survival. Adherence to adjuvant gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs (GnRHa) remains a challenge and is associated with toxicities and inconvenient parenteral administration. The goal of this study was to describe real-world adherence patterns and patient preferences surrounding adjuvant GnRHa.Methods
We analyzed the medical records of premenopausal women with non-metastatic HR positive BC from January 2000 to December 2017; participants received adjuvant monthly goserelin or leuprolide at The Ohio State University. Data collected included demographics, clinicopathologic characteristics, and OFS adherence/side effects. We defined non-adherence as discontinuation of GnRHa within 3 years for a reason other than switching to an alternate OFS, delay > 7 days from a dose, or a missed dose. Chi-square tests assessed associations between clinical characteristics and outcomes.ResultsA total of 325 patients met eligibility. Of these, 119 (37%) patients were non-adherent to GnRHa; 137 (42%) underwent elective bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy after initial GnRHa. Those opting for surgery reported significantly more hot flashes (74% vs 48%, p < 0.001), arthralgias (46% vs 30%, p = 0.003), and vaginal dryness (37% vs 21%, p = 0.001) compared with patients remaining on GnRHa.Conclusion
Non-adherence to adjuvant GnRHa occurred in over a third of patients and almost half the patients initiating GnRHa underwent subsequent surgical ablation. These high frequencies highlight real-world patterns of OFS. Additionally, treatment toxicities may impact personal preference of OFS modality. Personalized practices to target predictors of adjuvant GnRHa non-adherence are critical to optimize symptoms, adherence, and survivorship.
The 4th International Consensus Conference for Breast Cancer in Young Women (BCY4) took place in October 2018, in Lugano, Switzerland, organized by the European School of Oncology (ESO) and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO). Consensus recommendations for the management of breast cancer in young women were updated from BCY3 with incorporation of new evidence to inform the guidelines. Areas of research priorities were identified as well. This manuscript summarizes the ESO-ESMO international consensus recommendations, which are also endorsed by the European Society of Breast Specialists (EUSOMA).
Breast cancer is the most frequent malignancy in women worldwide and is curable in ~70-80% of patients with early-stage, non-metastatic disease. Advanced breast cancer with distant organ metastases is considered incurable with currently available therapies. On the molecular level, breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease; molecular features include activation of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2, encoded by ERBB2), activation of hormone receptors (oestrogen receptor and progesterone receptor) and/or BRCA mutations. Treatment strategies differ according to molecular subtype. Management of breast cancer is multidisciplinary; it includes locoregional (surgery and radiation therapy) and systemic therapy approaches. Systemic therapies include endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive disease, chemotherapy, anti-HER2 therapy for HER2-positive disease, bone stabilizing agents, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors for BRCA mutation carriers and, quite recently, immunotherapy. Future therapeutic concepts in breast cancer aim at individualization of therapy as well as at treatment de-escalation and escalation based on tumour biology and early therapy response. Next to further treatment innovations, equal worldwide access to therapeutic advances remains the global challenge in breast cancer care for the future.
Purpose
Breast cancer in young Asian women has distinctive clinicopathological characteristics; hence, we question the universal generalizability of treatment recommendations based on data from predominantly non-Asian postmenopausal women.
Methods
The Asian Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (ABCCG) reviewed current ESO-ESMO and St. Gallen recommendations for treating hormone receptor positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HR+/HER2−) breast cancer in premenopausal women. Points disputed by ≥ 3/12 members were discussed, and statements on contentious issues formulated for anonymous voting; consensus required a ≥ 75% majority.
Results
The ABCCG contends that: (1) Trials in premenopausal women are not only necessary, but also worthwhile if performed separately from others that also enroll postmenopausal participants. (2) Not all premenopausal women with HR+ early breast cancer need adjuvant ovarian function suppression (OFS). (3) Certain clinical factors might influence decision-making about prescribing OFS. (4) For early HR+/HER2− breast cancer in premenopausal patients with OFS, tamoxifen is preferred for intermediate-risk cases; for high risk, near-consensus supported aromatase inhibitor, despite no clear overall survival benefit versus tamoxifen. (5) Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® has different treatment implications in patients aged ≤ 50 versus > 50 years. (6) High-risk patients (if premenopausal after chemotherapy) should receive adjuvant chemotherapy and OFS plus aromatase inhibitor. (7) For patients with advanced disease receiving OFS on a backbone of tamoxifen, gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists may be given 12-weekly. (8) For premenopausal women who decline OFS or oophorectomy, tamoxifen alone is still an option but is considered less effective; other monotherapies are also less effective than OFS plus such treatments.
Conclusion
Premenopausal Asian women with breast cancer have unique disease characteristics and may benefit from treatment that differs somewhat from international guidelines. Given the great diversity of patients and clinical settings worldwide, the ABCCG advocates evidence-based yet flexible and individualized use of all potential options to improve breast cancer outcomes.
The 3rd International Consensus Conference for Breast Cancer in Young Women (BCY3) took place in November 2016, in Lugano, Switzerland organized by the European School of Oncology (ESO) and the European Society of Medical Oncologists (ESMO). Consensus recommendations for the management of breast cancer in young women were updated from BCY2 with incorporation of new evidence to inform the guidelines, and areas of research priorities were identified. This manuscript summarizes the ESO-ESMO international consensus recommendations, which are also endorsed by the European Society of Breast Specialists (EUSOMA).
Background:
Leuprorelin acetate, a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist, is used worldwide in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. This study was conducted to assess the non-inferiority of the 6-month depot formulation, TAP-144-SR (6M) 22.5 mg to the 3-month depot formulation, TAP-144-SR (3M) 11.25 mg in postoperative, premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.
Methods:
This was a 96-week phase III, randomized, open-label, parallel-group comparative study. All patients concomitantly received oral tamoxifen (20 mg daily). The primary endpoint was the suppression rate of serum estradiol (E2) to the menopausal level (≤30 pg/mL) from Week 4 through Week 48.
Results:
In total, 167 patients were randomized to receive TAP-144-SR (6M) (n = 83) or TAP-144-SR (3M) (n = 84) and the E2 suppression rate was 97.6 and 96.4 %, respectively. The estimated between-group difference was 1.2 % (95 % confidence interval -5.2 to 7.8). The non-inferiority of TAP-144-SR (6M) to TAP-144-SR (3M) for E2 suppression was confirmed. As for safety, common adverse events were hot flush and injection site reactions including induration, pain, and erythema in both treatment groups, which were of ≤Grade 2 in severity and not serious. No significant between-group differences in safety profiles and tolerability were observed.
Conclusions:
TAP-144-SR (6M) was not inferior to TAP-144-SR (3M) for its suppressive effect on serum E2. TAP-144-SR (6M) was also as well tolerated as TAP-144-SR (3M).
Background:
Monthly goserelin 3.6 mg dosing suppresses estradiol (E2) production and has proven efficacy in pre-menopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. This non-inferiority study evaluated the efficacy and safety of 3-monthly goserelin 10.8 mg compared with monthly goserelin 3.6 mg.
Methods:
This was a Phase 3, open-label, multicenter trial. Pre-menopausal women with ER-positive advanced breast cancer were randomized to 3-monthly goserelin 10.8 mg or monthly goserelin 3.6 mg; all patients received concomitant tamoxifen (20 mg daily). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 24 weeks; non-inferiority was to be confirmed if the entire 95 % confidence interval (CI) for the treatment difference was above -17.5 %. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), serum E2 levels, safety, and tolerability.
Results:
In total, 222 patients were randomized (goserelin 10.8 mg, n = 109; goserelin 3.6 mg, n = 113). PFS rate at week 24 was 61.5 % (goserelin 10.8 mg) and 60.2 % (goserelin 3.6 mg); treatment difference (95 % CI) was 1.3 % (-11.4, 13.9), confirming non-inferiority of goserelin 10.8 mg compared with goserelin 3.6 mg. ORR was 23.9 % (goserelin 10.8 mg) and 26.9 % (goserelin 3.6 mg); treatment difference (95 % CI) was -3.0 % (-15.5, 9.7). At week 24, mean serum E2 concentrations were similar in the goserelin 10.8 mg and goserelin 3.6 mg groups (20.3 pg/mL and 24.8 pg/mL, respectively).
Conclusion:
A regimen of 3-monthly goserelin 10.8 mg demonstrated non-inferiority compared with monthly goserelin 3.6 mg for PFS rate at 24 weeks, with similar pharmacodynamic and safety profiles, in pre-menopausal women with ER-positive breast cancer.
Background:
Suppression of ovarian estrogen production reduces the recurrence of hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer in premenopausal women, but its value when added to tamoxifen is uncertain.
Methods:
We randomly assigned 3066 premenopausal women, stratified according to prior receipt or nonreceipt of chemotherapy, to receive 5 years of tamoxifen, tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, or exemestane plus ovarian suppression. The primary analysis tested the hypothesis that tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression would improve disease-free survival, as compared with tamoxifen alone. In the primary analysis, 46.7% of the patients had not received chemotherapy previously, and 53.3% had received chemotherapy and remained premenopausal.
Results:
After a median follow-up of 67 months, the estimated disease-free survival rate at 5 years was 86.6% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group and 84.7% in the tamoxifen group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence, second invasive cancer, or death, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 1.04; P=0.10). Multivariable allowance for prognostic factors suggested a greater treatment effect with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression than with tamoxifen alone (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.98). Most recurrences occurred in patients who had received prior chemotherapy, among whom the rate of freedom from breast cancer at 5 years was 82.5% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group and 78.0% in the tamoxifen group (hazard ratio for recurrence, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.02). At 5 years, the rate of freedom from breast cancer was 85.7% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for recurrence vs. tamoxifen, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.87).
Conclusions:
Adding ovarian suppression to tamoxifen did not provide a significant benefit in the overall study population. However, for women who were at sufficient risk for recurrence to warrant adjuvant chemotherapy and who remained premenopausal, the addition of ovarian suppression improved disease outcomes. Further improvement was seen with the use of exemestane plus ovarian suppression. (Funded by Pfizer and others; SOFT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00066690.).
Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) agonists provide effective adjuvant treatment for premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer. Here, we investigated appropriate treatment durations of an LH-RH agonist, leuprorelin.
We conducted an open-label, randomized controlled pilot study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of leuprorelin subcutaneously administered every-3-months for 2 versus 3 or more, up to 5 years, together with daily tamoxifen for 5 years in premenopausal endocrine-responsive breast cancer patients. Primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and safety.
Eligible patients (N = 222) were randomly assigned to receive leuprorelin for either 2 years (N = 112) or 3 or more years (N = 110) with tamoxifen for 5 years after surgery. Leuprorelin treatment for 3 or more years provided no significant difference in DFS rate over 2 years: 94.1 versus 91.8 % at 144 weeks (3 years) after the second year (week 96) and 90.8 versus 90.4 % at the fifth year (week 240). The overall survival rate was 100 % for both groups during the third through fifth year study period. There were no significant differences in the incidence of adverse events (AEs) between the 2 groups: most AEs were rated grade 1 or 2.
Adjuvant leuprorelin treatment for 3 or more years with tamoxifen showed a survival benefit and safety profile similar to that for 2 years in premenopausal endocrine-responsive breast cancer patients. No new safety signal was identified for long-term leuprorelin treatment. Longer follow-up observation is needed to determine the optimal duration of leuprorelin treatment.
Background:
Adjuvant therapy with an aromatase inhibitor improves outcomes, as compared with tamoxifen, in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer.
Methods:
In two phase 3 trials, we randomly assigned premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer to the aromatase inhibitor exemestane plus ovarian suppression or tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression for a period of 5 years. Suppression of ovarian estrogen production was achieved with the use of the gonadotropin-releasing-hormone agonist triptorelin, oophorectomy, or ovarian irradiation. The primary analysis combined data from 4690 patients in the two trials.
Results:
After a median follow-up of 68 months, disease-free survival at 5 years was 91.1% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 87.3% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence, second invasive cancer, or death, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60 to 0.85; P<0.001). The rate of freedom from breast cancer at 5 years was 92.8% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, as compared with 88.8% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for recurrence, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.80; P<0.001). With 194 deaths (4.1% of the patients), overall survival did not differ significantly between the two groups (hazard ratio for death in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.51; P=0.37). Selected adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported for 30.6% of the patients in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 29.4% of those in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group, with profiles similar to those for postmenopausal women.
Conclusions:
In premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer, adjuvant treatment with exemestane plus ovarian suppression, as compared with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, significantly reduced recurrence. (Funded by Pfizer and others; TEXT and SOFT ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00066703 and NCT00066690, respectively.).
Optimal care for breast cancer patients undergoing aromatase inhibitor (AI) treatment is ensured when estradiol (E2) levels are adequately suppressed. To assess treatment efficacy accurately, it is important to measure the serum E2 levels using a well validated assay method with high sensitivity and specificity. This translates into the urgent need to evaluate various E2 immunoassay kits, which are frequently used in hospital settings to measure E2 serum levels in patients undergoing AI treatment, so clinicians obtain accurate and reliable measurements allowing appropriate clinical decision making. Our objective was to evaluate the performance of different commercially available and commonly used E2 immunoassay kits regarding measurement of E2 levels in the serum of postmenopausal breast cancer patients treated with AIs, in comparison to a highly accurate and reliable mass spectrometry assay. Clinical and demographic data were obtained from 77 postmenopausal breast cancer patients who were treated with an AI. Serum E2 levels were measured by 6 immunoassay methods and by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), which served as the standard for comparison. Analysis of E2 by LC-MS/MS showed that 70% of the samples had levels that were <5 pg/ml. Three of the assays carried out with commercial E2 immunoassay kits had poor sensitivities and were not able to detect E2 levels <10 or <20 pg/ml. Although two of the E2 assays using commercial kits demonstrated a better sensitivity (5 pg/ml), the measured E2 values were substantially higher than those obtained by LC-MS/MS. The assay with the sixth commercial E2 kit grossly underestimated the true E2 values. E2 assays carried out with commercial E2 immunoassay kits lack the accuracy to measure the very low serum E2 levels found in patients being treated with AIs. Serum samples from such patients should be sent to laboratories that use a mass spectrometry assay.
According to the very limited cancer registry, incidence and mortality rates for female breast cancer in China are regarded to be increasing especially in the metropolitan areas. Representative data on the breast cancer profile of Chinese women and its time trend over years are relatively rare. The aims of the current study are to illustrate the breast cancer profile of Chinese women in time span and to explore the current treatment approaches to female breast cancer.
This was a hospital-based nation-wide and multi-center retrospective study of female primary breast cancer cases. China was divided into 7 regions according to the geographic distribution; from each region, one tertiary hospital was selected. With the exception of January and February, one month was randomly selected to represent each year from year 1999 to 2008 at every hospital. All inpatient cases within the selected month were reviewed and related information was collected based on the designed case report form (CRF). The Cancer Hospital/Institute, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CICAMS) was the leading hospital in this study.
Four-thousand two-hundred and eleven cases were randomly selected from the total pool of 45,200 patients and were included in the analysis. The mean age at diagnosis was 48.7 years (s.d. = 10.5 yrs) and breast cancer peaked in age group 40-49 yrs (38.6%). The most common subtype was infiltrating ductal carcinoma (86.5%). Clinical stage I & II accounted for 60.6% of 4,211 patients. Three-thousand five-hundred and thirty-four cases had estrogen receptor (ER) and progestin receptor (PR) tests, among them, 47.9% were positive for both. Two-thousand eight-hundred and forty-nine cases had human epidermal growth factor receptor 2(HER-2) tests, 25.8% of them were HER-2 positive. Among all treatment options, surgery (96.9% (4,078/4,211)) was predominant, followed by chemotherapy (81.4% (3,428/4,211). Much less patients underwent radiotherapy (22.6% (952/4,211)) and endocrine therapy (38.0% (1,599/4,211)).
The younger age of breast cancer onset among Chinese women and more advanced tumor stages pose a great challenge. Adjuvant therapy, especially radiotherapy and endocrine therapy are of great unmet needs.
Objective: Since the first publication in 2017, the Chinese society of clinical oncology breast cancer guidelines have been updated in four editions, and nearly 300 000 volumes have been published, which has been widely recognized by scholars at home and abroad. The important updates from pathological diagnosis to therapies in the newest guideline has been updated in accordance with evidence, drug accessibility and expert opinions. Meanwhile, more chapters, like drug adverse reaction management, real-world research, biosimilar drugs, have been added, making a comprehensive guideline in guiding breast cancer standardized diagnosis and treatment.
Recent epidemiologic data show an increasing incidence of breast cancer among premenopausal women in many higher-income countries. Among premenopausal women, those diagnosed under age 40 years experience inferior long-term outcomes, particularly in the setting of hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative disease. In addition to more advanced disease presentation and/or less favorable disease biology, suboptimal adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) has emerged as an important driver of this age-related disparity. Historically, young women have been excluded from treatment with aromatase inhibitors (AIs), attained low rates of chemotherapy-related amenorrhea, and exhibited low adherence to ET. Recently, several studies have demonstrated treatment with ovarian function suppression (OFS) during the first 5 years postdiagnosis to be associated with improvements in breast cancer recurrence and mortality, with additional benefits achieved from pairing OFS with an AI. As the first 5 years of ET for premenopausal women has been transformed, extended ET, administered in years 5-10 postdiagnosis, has also become more common. However, the only studies of extending ET in premenopausal women have tested an additional 5 years of tamoxifen following an initial 5 years of tamoxifen and studies of AIs in the second 5 years have been limited to postmenopausal women. Herein, we review available data concerning potential benefits and risks to be considered when counseling premenopausal women on extended ET, including the continuation of OFS. We offer a pragmatic framework to support decision making given the current body of knowledge and call out the need for additional research into this issue.
The 17th St Gallen International Breast Cancer Consensus Conference in 2021 was held virtually, owing to the global COVID19 pandemic. More than 3,300 participants took part in this important bi-annual critical review of the "state of the art" in the multidisciplinary care of early-stage breast cancer. Seventy-four expert panelists (see Appendix) from all continents discussed and commented on the previously elaborated consensus questions as well as many key questions on early breast cancer diagnosis and treatment asked by the audience. The theme of this year's Conference was "Customizing local and systemic therapies." A well-organized program of pre-recorded symposia, live panel discussions, and real-time panel voting results drew a worldwide audience of thousands, reflecting the far-reaching impact of breast cancer on every continent. The interactive technology platform allowed, for the first time, audience members to ask direct questions to panelists, and to weigh in with their own vote on several key panel questions.
A hallmark of this meeting was to focus on customized recommendations for treatment of early stage breast cancer. There is increasing recognition that the care of a breast cancer patient depends on highly individualized clinical features, including the stage at presentation, the biological subset of breast cancer, the genetic factors that may underlie breast cancer risk, the genomic signatures that inform treatment recommendations, the extent of response prior to surgery in patients who receive neoadjuvant therapy, and patient preferences. This customized approach to treatment requires integration of clinical care between patients and radiology, pathology, genetics, and surgical, medical, and radiation oncology providers. It also requires a dynamic response from clinicians as they encounter accumulating clinical information at the time of diagnosis and then serially with each step in the treatment plan and follow-up, reflecting patient experiences and treatment response.
More than 90% of women with newly diagnosed breast cancer present with stage I to III disease and, with optimal multidisciplinary therapy, are likely to survive their disease. Of these patients, 70% are hormone receptor–positive and candidates for adjuvant endocrine therapy. The adoption of cumulatively better adjuvant treatments contributed to improved outcomes in patients with hormone receptor–positive, early-stage breast cancer. Premenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer often present with complex disease and have inferior survival outcomes compared with their postmenopausal counterparts. Risk stratification strategies, including classic clinicopathologic features and newer gene expression assays, can assist in treatment decisions, including adjuvant chemotherapy use and type or duration of endocrine therapy. Gene expression assays may help identify patients who can safely forgo chemotherapy, although to a lesser extent among premenopausal patients, in whom they may play a role only in node-negative disease. Patients at lower risk of recurrence can be adequately treated with tamoxifen alone, whereas higher-risk patients benefit from ovarian function suppression with tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor. The role of adding newer therapies such as CDK4/6 inhibitors to adjuvant endocrine therapy is not yet clear. Breast cancer treatments are associated with several side effects, with major impact on patients’ quality of life and treatment adherence, particularly in premenopausal women for whom these side effects may be more prominent as the result of the abrupt decrease in estrogen concentrations. Personalized management of treatment side effects, addressing patients' concerns, and health promotion should be an integral part of the care of premenopausal women diagnosed with luminal breast cancers.
Purpose:
To evaluate the proportion of premenopausal women who experience persistent ovarian escape (OE) while receiving ovarian suppression (OS) therapy for estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer treatment. The study also examines clinical factors that may predispose to higher risk of persistent OE.
Methods/materials:
This was a retrospective, "real-world" study to evaluate premenopausal women receiving adjuvant endocrine OS therapy. The primary objective was to measure the percentage of persistent OE within the first 3 months of OS injections (using either leuprolide or goserelin). The secondary objective was to associate baseline clinical data (age, body mass index (BMI), and previous chemotherapy) with the probability of OE.
Results:
Of the 46 patients included in this analysis, 11 (23.9%) women did not achieve OS within 3months. Three women (6.5%) remained in OE at 12 months. Older age (Odds Ratio 0.86 (0.76-0.98), p=0.024) was associated with lower chance of developing OE. BMI, previous chemotherapy, and drug used (tamoxifen versus aromatase inhibitor) did not correlate with the likelihood of OE in this patient cohort.
Conclusion:
Among the premenopausal women who did not attain complete ovarian suppression, young age was a significant risk factor for likelihood of OE. Although the clinical relevance of this finding is not yet known, it should prompt further studies to determine whether inadequate OS is associated with higher recurrence risk for ER+ breast cancer patients.
Implications for practice:
Because up to a quarter of premenopausal women do not attain adequate ovarian suppression within the first three months of GnRH agonist therapy, bloodwork should be checked to ascertain hormone levels prior to starting aromatase inhibitor therapy, and at regular intervals, for these women.
Aim:
The aim of the study is to analyse whether letrozole (L) and zoledronic acid plus L (ZL) are more effective than tamoxifen (T) as adjuvant endocrine treatment of premenopausal patients with breast cancer with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) tumours.
Patients and methods:
In a phase 3 trial, 1065 premenopausal patients with HR + early breast cancer received triptorelin to suppress ovarian function and were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to adjuvant T, L or ZL for 5 years. Cancer recurrence, second breast or non-breast cancer and death were considered events for the intention-to-treat disease-free survival (DFS) analysis.
Results:
With a 64-month median follow-up and 134 reported events, the disease-free rate at 5 years was 85.4%, 93.2% and 93.3% with T, L and ZL, respectively (overall P = 0.008). The hazard ratio for a DFS event was 0.52 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.34 to 0.80; P = 0.003) with ZL vs T, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.48 to 1.07; P = 0.06) with L vs T and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.44 to 1.12; P = 0.22) with ZL vs L. With 36 deaths, there was no significant difference in overall survival (P = 0.14). Treatment was stopped for toxicity or refusal in 7.3%, 7.3% and 16.6% patients, and in the safety population, grade 3-4 side-effects were reported in 4.2%, 6.9% and 9.1% patients treated with T, L or ZL, respectively.
Conclusion:
HOBOE study shows that in premenopausal patients with early breast cancer undergoing ovarian function suppression with triptorelin, ZL significantly improves DFS, while worsening compliance and toxicity, as compared with T. (NCT00412022).
Advances in molecular testing have ushered in the new era of precision medicine. The 2018 publication of the TAILORx trial helped refine the use of genetic expression assays, specifically the 21-gene recurrence score, in assigning patients to endocrine therapy alone or with chemotherapy. The NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer explore the clinical applications of this study. The algorithm for managing the axilla in early breast cancer has been further refined, based on the presence or absence of clinical evidence of lymph node involvement. Ovarian suppression has been validated as the optimal approach in higher risk premenopausal women, based on updated analysis of the SOFT and TEXT pivotal trials. In the metastatic setting, the NCCN Guidelines further reinforce the benefit of the CDK4/6 inhibitors, extending the "preferred" recommendation to all the available agents in metastatic disease. Options in triple-negative breast cancer now include, for the first time, an immunotherapeutic agent.
Purpose
Leuprolide is a safe and effective treatment of estrogen receptor positive, premenopausal breast cancer. Data from the SOFT/TEXT trials solidified leuprolide, in combination with an aromatase inhibitor, as an effective hormonal treatment for premenopausal breast cancer. However, the efficacy of monthly leuprolide depot compared to every three-month leuprolide depot in combination with an aromatase inhibitor in premenopausal women with estrogen receptor positive breast cancer is unclear.
Patients and Methods
In this single center retrospective study, 201 patients were enrolled between Jan 1st, 2015, and Oct 1st, 2016; 100 were included in the leuprolide 7.5mg monthly injection plus aromatase inhibitor group and 101 in the leuprolide 22.5mg every 3-month injection plus aromatase inhibitor group. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved ovarian ablation, defined as an estradiol concentration less than 40 pg/mL and an FSH concentration of 23-116 mU/mL after 3 months of treatment. Significance threshold was a P<0.05 (two-sided). Secondary endpoints included disease free survival and overall survival at one year follow-up, and adverse events reported during treatment.
Results
All patients in the leuprolide monthly arm achieved ovarian ablation compared to 100 (99%) of the 101 patients in the every 3-month arm (P=1). The disease free survival rate at 1 year was 95% in the monthly leuprolide arm and 97% in the every 3-month arm (P=0.75). The overall survival rate at 1 year was 100% in the leuprolide monthly arm and 99% in the every 3-month arm (P=1). The most common treatment-related adverse events between the two groups were musculo-skeletal pain, hot flashes, fatigue, and insomnia.
Conclusion
Leuprolide acetate depot administered every 3 months is as efficacious and tolerable as monthly injection, in combination with an aromatase inhibitor for patients with premenopausal, hormone receptor positive breast cancer.
The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manual has become the benchmark for classifying patients with cancer, defining prognosis, and determining the best treatment approaches. Many view the primary role of the tumor, lymph node, metastasis (TNM) system as that of a standardized classification system for evaluating cancer at a population level in terms of the extent of disease, both at initial presentation and after surgical treatment, and the overall impact of improvements in cancer treatment. The rapid evolution of knowledge in cancer biology and the discovery and validation of biologic factors that predict cancer outcome and response to treatment with better accuracy have led some cancer experts to question the utility of a TNM-based approach in clinical care at an individualized patient level. In the Eighth Edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, the goal of including relevant, nonanatomic (including molecular) factors has been foremost, although changes are made only when there is strong evidence for inclusion. The editorial board viewed this iteration as a proactive effort to continue to build the important bridge from a "population-based" to a more "personalized" approach to patient classification, one that forms the conceptual framework and foundation of cancer staging in the era of precision molecular oncology. The AJCC promulgates best staging practices through each new edition in an effort to provide cancer care providers with a powerful, knowledge-based resource for the battle against cancer. In this commentary, the authors highlight the overall organizational and structural changes as well as "what's new" in the Eighth Edition. It is hoped that this information will provide the reader with a better understanding of the rationale behind the aggregate proposed changes and the exciting developments in the upcoming edition. CA Cancer J Clin 2017. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
17 β-Estradiol (E2) plays an important role in sexual development and serves as an important diagnostic biomarker of various clinical conditions. Particularly, the serum E2 concentration is very low (< 10 pg/mL) in prepubertal girls. Accordingly, many efforts to develop a sensitive method of detection and quantification of E2 in human serum have been made. Nonetheless, current clinical detection methods are insufficient for accurate assessment of E2 at low concentrations (< 10 pg/mL). Thus, there is an urgent need for new technologies with efficient and sensitive detection of E2 for use in routine clinical diagnostics. In this study, we introduce a new E2 assay technique using a surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS)-based detection method. The SERS-based assay was performed with 30 blood samples to assess its clinical feasibility, and the results were compared with data obtained using the ARCHITECT chemi-luminescence immunoassay. Whereas the commercial assay system was unable to quantify serum levels of E2 lower than 10 pg/mL, the limit of detection of E2 using the novel SERS-based assay described in this study was 0.65 pg/mL. Thus, the proposed SERS-based assay has a strong potential to be a valuable tool in the early diagnosis of precocious puberty due to its excellent analytical sensitivity.
Data comparing the efficacy of monthly and trimonthly formulations of LHRH agonists are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of monthly goserelin and trimonthly leuprolide on estradiol levels. A total of 79 early breast cancer patients receiving LHRH agonists for at least 6 months were enrolled in the study. Serum estradiol, FSH and LH levels were measured before drug injection and at the one-month follow-up visit. Thirty-eight patients were treated with goserelin, and 41 patients were treated with leuprolide. Patient characteristics and histopathological variables did not differ between the groups. A comparison of the mean hormone levels between the two groups revealed no significant differences in FSH or estradiol levels (p = 0.143 and p = 0.683, respectively), but the median LH level was higher in the leuprolide group (p = 0.025). Among the patients who did not receive chemotherapy, LH levels were higher in the leuprolide arm (p = 0.028). Additionally, FSH levels were significantly higher in the patients over 40 years old (p = 0.02) and in those with tumours harbouring cERB-B2 receptor (p = 0.05) in the leuprolide group. Three patients (7.9 %) in the goserelin and five patients (12.2 %) in the leuprolide group failed to achieve postmenopausal estradiol levels (p = 0.707). The effects of monthly goserelin and trimonthly leuprolide on estradiol levels did not differ significantly. Further research is required to interpret the variable effects on gonadotropins in each subgroup and the relationship between LHRH agonists and survival.
This study compared the efficacy and safety of a 3-monthly 10.8-mg depot goserelin (Zoladex(TM)) injection with the current 3.6 mg monthly dose in pre-menopausal Japanese women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) early breast cancer. This was a multicenter, open-label, randomized study. Primary endpoint was a non-inferiority analysis (10.8/3.6 mg) of the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) of estradiol (E(2)) over the first 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints included E(2) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) concentrations, menstruation, and safety and tolerability. In total, 170 patients were randomized to receive goserelin 10.8 mg every 3 months (n = 86) or 3.6 mg every month (n = 84). Mean AUCs for E(2) were similar between treatment groups (18.32 and 18.95 pg/ml·week for goserelin 10.8 and 3.6 mg, respectively). AUC ratio was 0.974 (95% confidence interval, 0.80, 1.19), indicating non-inferiority for goserelin 10.8 mg. Serum E(2) and FSH remained suppressed throughout the study and no patient experienced menses after week 16. No clinically important differences in safety and tolerability were observed between the two groups. In terms of E(2) suppression, 3-monthly goserelin 10.8 mg was non-inferior to monthly goserelin 3.6 mg in pre-menopausal women with ER+ breast cancer.
To evaluate the endocrinological and clinical activity of a new slow-release formulation of leuprolide acetate in breast cancer patients.
A total of 50 pre- or perimenopausal patients with early- or late-stage breast cancer who were candidates for endocrine treatment were included in the study and randomly allocated to receive either 3.75 mg of leuprolide acetate every month or 11.25 mg of leuprolide acetate every 3 months. Patients were treated until disease recurrence or progression or for a maximum of 24 months. Treatment outcome, side effects, and serum levels of gonadotrophins, estradiol, progesterone, and delta4-androstenedione were analyzed at different time points.
In all, 23 patients were allocated to the monthly formulation and 27, to the 3-monthly formulation. The median time on treatment was comparable. There was no evidence of any difference in clinical outcome or drug-induced side effects, hot flushes being recorded in about 50% of patients in both groups. Altogether, 35 patients were actively menstruating at the beginning of treatment; all of them became amenorrhoic after 3 months and remained so until treatment with leuprolide was continued, irrespective of the allocated treatment. All endocrine parameters, particularly estradiol levels, were suppressed to a similar extent.
The present results indicate that the two formulations exert a comparable estrogen-suppressive effect and warrant further study of the 3-monthly formulation of leuprolide acetate in breast cancer patients.
Expert consensus on clinical applications of ovarian function suppression for Chinese women with early breast cancer 2021 CACA-CBCS
- Association CAC, Society C of BC
NCCN guidelines® insights: breast cancer, version 4.2023
- Gradishar
Adding ovarian suppression to tamoxifen for premenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer after chemotherapy: an 8-year follow-up of the ASTRRA trial
- Baek
Adding ovarian suppression to tamoxifen for premenopausal breast cancer: a randomized phase III trial
- Kim
Ovarian suppression in adjuvant endocrine therapy for premenopausal breast cancer
- Pan
Adjuvant exemestane with ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer: long-term follow-up of the combined TEXT and SOFT trials
- Pagani
Analysis on minimum cost of adjuvant endocrine therapy in premenopausal hormone receptorpositive breast cancer in China
- Lei
Adjuvant endocrine therapy for women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: American society of clinical oncology clinical practice guideline update on ovarian suppression
- Burstein
Chinese society of clinical oncology (CSCO) Breast Cancer Guidelines 2021
- Jiang
[Expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of young breast cancer in China (2022 Edition)]
- Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology, Experts Committee on Breast Cancer, China Anti-Cancer Association, the Society of Breast Cancer, Chinese Medical Association, Chinese Society of Breast Surgery
Absolute benefit of adjuvant endocrine therapies for premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer: TEXT and SOFT trials
- Regan
Twelve-month estrogen levels in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer receiving adjuvant triptorelin plus exemestane or tamoxifen in the Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial (SOFT): the SOFT-EST substudy
- Bellet