Advertisement


Etienne Brain, MD, PhD, on Breast Cancer: Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy With or Without Chemotherapy in Older Patients

2022 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Etienne Brain, MD, PhD, of the Institut Curie, discusses phase III findings from the Unicancer ASTER 70s trial, in which patients aged 70 or older with estrogen receptor–positive, HER2-negative breast cancer and a high genomic grade index received adjuvant endocrine therapy with or without chemotherapy. The data did not find a statistically significant overall survival benefit with this treatment after surgery (Abstract 500).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
ASTER 70s study is a landmark study, which has been conducted in older women with luminal breast cancer in adjuvant setting questioning the addition of chemotherapy to endocrine treatment. The rationale behind is that the literature is very limited in terms of data published for the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in this situation in older ones. Multimorbidity competes with cancer on outcome and therapeutic ratio is also more narrow because there are higher risk of side effects in this population. This trial screened near 2000 patients with the genomic grade index, the GGI, to assess the aggressivity of the disease and to spare the burden of chemotherapy in those patients with low-GGI tumor, while those with a high-GGI tumor were randomized between endocrine treatment alone as a standard arm versus chemotherapy followed by endocrine treatment. Near 2000 patients enrolled, 1,100 randomized between the two arms. This trial shows, on the primary endpoint, which was overall survival by intent-to-treat analysis, that chemotherapy doesn't add a significant benefit in addition to endocrine treatment. That's the first message of caution from this study. Second one is that we can look at different subgroups and perform also the analysis according to the per protocol concept. This modifies or brings a nuance in the results, but I would say that the final potential benefit on overall survival in this case remains marginal. And in this population of older women, it is a key point and a double cautious message. The next step for this study will be to try to improve the discriminative capacity of this kind of signature to identify those who could benefit still from chemotherapy, despite these global message and results on overall survival. This will be certainly possible with the use of the mass and the volume of data which has been collected in the randomized groups in this study, because there was a longitudinal collection of geriatric data, quality of life data, and treatment acceptability socioeconomic data, which will be very helpful to modelize differently, the prognosis of these ladies. That's in the near future, and I think what brings the most in terms of information ASTER 70s, is that on the provisor that you change a bit of rules for inclusion criteria, because in this study we had very flexible inclusion criteria, we made a focus on quality of life and we use a single informed consent for screening and randomization, on the provisor that you facilitate or you simplify the processes, you can run large studies in a vast population, which is very often not considered for clinical trials left behind.

Related Videos

Breast Cancer

Lisa A. Carey, MD, and Hope S. Rugo, MD, on Advanced Breast Cancer: New Data on Sacituzumab Govitecan-hziy vs Treatment of Physician’s Choice

Lisa A. Carey, MD, of the University of North Carolina Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, and Hope S. Rugo, MD, of the University of California, San Francisco, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, discuss phase III results from the TROPiCS-02 trial. This study showed that sacituzumab govitecan-hziy was more beneficial than single-agent chemotherapy in terms of progression-free survival in heavily pretreated patients with hormone receptor–positive/HER2-negative and unresectable advanced breast cancer (LBA1001).

Leukemia

Courtney D. DiNardo, MD, MSCE, and Jorge E. Cortes, MD, on CML: New Efficacy and Safety Results for Asciminib

Courtney D. DiNardo, MD, MSCE, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, and Jorge E. Cortes, MD, of Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, discuss phase III results from the ASCEMBL trial, which showed that after more than 2 years of follow-up, asciminib continued to yield superior efficacy and better safety and tolerability vs bosutinib in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in chronic phase. These results continue to support the use of this kinase inhibitor as a new CML therapy, says Dr. Cortes, with the potential to transform the standard of care (Abstract 7004).

Breast Cancer

Nancy Davidson, MD: In It for the Long Haul: Outcomes in Hormone Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer

Nancy Davidson, MD, of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, reviews results from four abstracts about the importance of long-term follow-up in studies of adjuvant endocrine therapy for hormone receptor–positive breast cancer. Because the natural history of hormone receptor–positive breast cancer is long, an effort is underway to improve selection of patients by clinical parameters or biomarkers, refine the endocrine therapy background, and administer more effective combinations of endocrine therapy with other agents.

Skin Cancer

Georgina V. Long, MD, PhD, on Melanoma: New Data on Pembrolizumab, Dabrafenib, and Trametinib

Georgina V. Long, MD, PhD, of the Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, discusses findings from the NeoTrio trial on neoadjuvant pembrolizumab alone, in sequence with, or concurrent with dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with resectable BRAF-mutant stage III melanoma. The study may help clinicians determine the optimal combination of therapy (Abstract 9503).

Prostate Cancer
Genomics/Genetics

Neal D. Shore, MD, on Germline Genetic Testing and Its Impact on Prostate Cancer Clinical Decision-Making

Neal D. Shore, MD, of the Carolina Urologic Research Center, discusses his study findings, showing that germline genetic testing influenced care for patients with prostate cancer. Men whose genetic test was positive for a pathogenic germline variant received more recommendations for changes to follow-up and treatment, and for testing and counseling of relatives, than did patients with negative or uncertain test results (Abstract 10500).

 

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement