BACKGROUND: We assessed the efficacy of taxane chemotherapy in BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated patients compared with sporadic metastatic breast cancer patients. METHODS: Response rates (RRs) to and progression-free survival (PFS) after taxane chemotherapy of 35 BRCA1-associated and 13 BRCA2-associated metastatic breast cancer patients were compared with those outcomes in 95 matched (1:2) sporadic patients. Matching was performed for age at and year of diagnosis of primary breast cancer, year of metastatic disease, and line of therapy (first vs second or third). RESULTS: Among BRCA1-associated patients, the RR was worse (objective response [OR], 23% vs 38%; progressive disease [PD], 60% vs 19%; P < 0.001); and the median PFS shorter (2.2 vs 4.9 months; P = 0.04) compared with sporadic patients. In the subgroup of hormone receptor (HRec)-negative patients, BRCA1-associated patients (n = 20) had a worse RR (OR, 20% vs 42%, respectively; PD, 70% vs 26%, respectively; P = 0.03) and a shorter PFS (1.8 vs 3.8 months; P = 0.004) compared with sporadic patients (n = 19). These outcomes in HRec-positive patients were similar in BRCA1-associated (n = 11) and sporadic (n = 61) patients (OR, 36% vs 38%; PD, 28% vs 20%; median PFS, both 5.7 months). In BRCA2-associated patients, who were mainly HRec-positive, the OR was higher than in sporadic patients (89% vs 38%, respectively; P = 0.02), whereas the median PFS was not significantly different (7.1 vs 5.7 months, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: BRCA1-associated, HRec-negative metastatic breast cancer patients were less sensitive to taxane chemotherapy than sporadic HRec-negative patients. HRec-positive BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated patients had a sensitivity to taxane chemotherapy similar to that of sporadic patients.
BACKGROUND: We assessed the efficacy of taxane chemotherapy in BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated patients compared with sporadic metastatic breast cancerpatients. METHODS: Response rates (RRs) to and progression-free survival (PFS) after taxane chemotherapy of 35 BRCA1-associated and 13 BRCA2-associated metastatic breast cancerpatients were compared with those outcomes in 95 matched (1:2) sporadic patients. Matching was performed for age at and year of diagnosis of primary breast cancer, year of metastatic disease, and line of therapy (first vs second or third). RESULTS: Among BRCA1-associated patients, the RR was worse (objective response [OR], 23% vs 38%; progressive disease [PD], 60% vs 19%; P < 0.001); and the median PFS shorter (2.2 vs 4.9 months; P = 0.04) compared with sporadic patients. In the subgroup of hormone receptor (HRec)-negative patients, BRCA1-associated patients (n = 20) had a worse RR (OR, 20% vs 42%, respectively; PD, 70% vs 26%, respectively; P = 0.03) and a shorter PFS (1.8 vs 3.8 months; P = 0.004) compared with sporadic patients (n = 19). These outcomes in HRec-positive patients were similar in BRCA1-associated (n = 11) and sporadic (n = 61) patients (OR, 36% vs 38%; PD, 28% vs 20%; median PFS, both 5.7 months). In BRCA2-associated patients, who were mainly HRec-positive, the OR was higher than in sporadic patients (89% vs 38%, respectively; P = 0.02), whereas the median PFS was not significantly different (7.1 vs 5.7 months, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:BRCA1-associated, HRec-negative metastatic breast cancerpatients were less sensitive to taxane chemotherapy than sporadic HRec-negative patients. HRec-positive BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated patients had a sensitivity to taxane chemotherapy similar to that of sporadic patients.
Authors: Melinda L Telli; Kristin C Jensen; Shaveta Vinayak; Allison W Kurian; Jafi A Lipson; Patrick J Flaherty; Kirsten Timms; Victor Abkevich; Elizabeth A Schackmann; Irene L Wapnir; Robert W Carlson; Pei-Jen Chang; Joseph A Sparano; Bobbie Head; Lori J Goldstein; Barbara Haley; Shaker R Dakhil; Julia E Reid; Anne-Renee Hartman; Judith Manola; James M Ford Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-04-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Sean P Pitroda; Riyue Bao; Jorge Andrade; Ralph R Weichselbaum; Philip P Connell Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2017-03-24 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Zhigang C Wang; Nicolai Juul Birkbak; Aedín C Culhane; Ronny Drapkin; Aquila Fatima; Ruiyang Tian; Matthew Schwede; Kathryn Alsop; Kathryn E Daniels; Huiying Piao; Joyce Liu; Dariush Etemadmoghadam; Alexander Miron; Helga B Salvesen; Gillian Mitchell; Anna DeFazio; John Quackenbush; Ross S Berkowitz; J Dirk Iglehart; David D L Bowtell; Ursula A Matulonis Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2012-08-21 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: L Boudin; A Gonçalves; R Sabatier; J Moretta; P Sfumato; P Asseeva; D Livon; F Bertucci; J-M Extra; C Tarpin; G Houvenaeghel; E Lambaudie; A Tallet; M Resbeut; H Sobol; E Charafe-Jauffret; B Calmels; C Lemarie; J-M Boher; P Viens; F Eisinger; C Chabannon Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2016-04-04 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: E H Lips; L Mulder; A Oonk; L E van der Kolk; F B L Hogervorst; A L T Imholz; J Wesseling; S Rodenhuis; P M Nederlof Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-04-04 Impact factor: 7.640