Miguel Martín, MD, PhD, on Metastatic Breast Cancer: PEARL Trial on Palbociclib Plus Endocrine Therapy vs Capecitabine
2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium
Miguel Martín, MD, PhD, of the Gregorio Marañón Institute and GEICAM, discusses phase III study findings that showed no improvement in progression-free survival with palbociclib plus endocrine therapy vs capecitabine in patients with hormone receptor–positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer whose disease progressed on aromatase inhibitors—although the drug combination was generally better tolerated than capecitabine (Abstract GS2-07).
Hope S. Rugo, MD, of the University of California San Francisco Comprehensive Cancer Center, discusses a retrospective analysis on the effectiveness of the VENTANA PD-L1 SP142 assay, the Dako 22C3 assay, and the VENTANA SP263 assay as predictors of response to atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (Abstract PD1-07).
Marie-Jeanne T.F.D. Vrancken Peeters, MD, PhD, of the Netherlands Cancer Institute, discusses an interim study analysis showing that ultrasound-guided core biopsies of the breast in patients with excellent response on MRI after neoadjuvant systemic therapy may not be accurate enough to safely select patients with pathologic complete response for omission of surgery (Abstract GS5-06).
Javier Cortes, MD, PhD, of the IOB Institute of Oncology, discusses study findings that suggested pembrolizumab offered a prolonged survival benefit compared to chemotherapy for a subset of patients with previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. In the trial, high tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes were significantly associated with better clinical outcomes with the checkpoint inhibitor.
Priyanka Sharma, MD, of the University of Kansas Medical Center, reviews new phase III data on adding oral fluoropyrimidine to adjuvant endocrine therapy, the current standard of care, in the setting of hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative primary breast cancer (Abstract GS1-09).
Ivana Sestak, PhD, of Queen Mary University of London and the Centre for Cancer Prevention, discusses study findings that confirm the prognostic ability of the Clinical Treatment Score at 5 years (CTS5) for late distant recurrence, specifically for patients older than 50 years and/or for those deemed to have intermediate- or high-risk hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative, node-negative breast cancer. The CTS5 is less prognostic in women younger than 50 who received 5 years of endocrine therapy alone (Abstract GS4-03).
