PURPOSE: Predictive biomarkers to identify patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer who may benefit from targeted therapy alone are required. We hypothesized that early measurements of tumor maximum standardized uptake values corrected for lean body mass (SULmax) on [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography would predict pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab (PT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage II/III, estrogen receptor-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer received four cycles of neoadjuvant PT. [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography was performed at baseline and 15 days after PT initiation (C1D15). Eighty evaluable patients were required to test the null hypothesis that the area under the curve of percentage of change in SULmax by C1D15 predicting pCR is less than or equal to 0.65, with a one-sided type I error rate of 10%. RESULTS: Eighty-eight women were enrolled (83 evaluable), and 85% (75 of 88) completed all four cycles of PT. pCR after PT alone was 34%. Receiver operating characteristic analysis yielded an area under the curve of 0.76 (90% CI, 0.67 to 0.85), which rejected the null hypothesis. Between patients who obtained pCR versus not, a significant difference in median percent reduction in SULmax by C1D15 was observed (63.8% v 33.5%; P < .001), an SULmax reduction greater than or equal to 40% was more prevalent (86% v 46%; P < .001; negative predictive value, 88%; positive predictive value, 49%), and a significant difference in median C1D15 SULmax (1.6 v 3.9; P < .001) and higher proportion of C1D15 SULmax less than or equal to 3 (93% v 38%; P < .001; negative predictive value, 94%; positive predictive value, 55%) were observed. CONCLUSION: Early changes in SULmax predict response to four cycles of PT in estrogen receptor-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer. Once optimized, this quantitative imaging strategy may facilitate a more tailored approach to therapy in this setting.
PURPOSE: Predictive biomarkers to identify patients with humanepidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer who may benefit from targeted therapy alone are required. We hypothesized that early measurements of tumor maximum standardized uptake values corrected for lean body mass (SULmax) on [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography would predict pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab (PT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage II/III, estrogen receptor-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer received four cycles of neoadjuvant PT. [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography was performed at baseline and 15 days after PT initiation (C1D15). Eighty evaluable patients were required to test the null hypothesis that the area under the curve of percentage of change in SULmax by C1D15 predicting pCR is less than or equal to 0.65, with a one-sided type I error rate of 10%. RESULTS: Eighty-eight women were enrolled (83 evaluable), and 85% (75 of 88) completed all four cycles of PT. pCR after PT alone was 34%. Receiver operating characteristic analysis yielded an area under the curve of 0.76 (90% CI, 0.67 to 0.85), which rejected the null hypothesis. Between patients who obtained pCR versus not, a significant difference in median percent reduction in SULmax by C1D15 was observed (63.8% v 33.5%; P < .001), an SULmax reduction greater than or equal to 40% was more prevalent (86% v 46%; P < .001; negative predictive value, 88%; positive predictive value, 49%), and a significant difference in median C1D15 SULmax (1.6 v 3.9; P < .001) and higher proportion of C1D15 SULmax less than or equal to 3 (93% v 38%; P < .001; negative predictive value, 94%; positive predictive value, 55%) were observed. CONCLUSION: Early changes in SULmax predict response to four cycles of PT in estrogen receptor-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer. Once optimized, this quantitative imaging strategy may facilitate a more tailored approach to therapy in this setting.
Authors: José Baselga; Javier Cortés; Sung-Bae Kim; Seock-Ah Im; Roberto Hegg; Young-Hyuck Im; Laslo Roman; José Luiz Pedrini; Tadeusz Pienkowski; Adam Knott; Emma Clark; Mark C Benyunes; Graham Ross; Sandra M Swain Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael M Graham; Richard L Wahl; John M Hoffman; Jeffrey T Yap; John J Sunderland; Ronald Boellaard; Eric S Perlman; Paul E Kinahan; Paul E Christian; Otto S Hoekstra; Gary S Dorfman Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-04-16 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Andreas Engert; Heinz Haverkamp; Carsten Kobe; Jana Markova; Christoph Renner; Antony Ho; Josée Zijlstra; Zdenek Král; Michael Fuchs; Michael Hallek; Lothar Kanz; Hartmut Döhner; Bernd Dörken; Nicole Engel; Max Topp; Susanne Klutmann; Holger Amthauer; Andreas Bockisch; Regine Kluge; Clemens Kratochwil; Otmar Schober; Richard Greil; Reinhard Andreesen; Michael Kneba; Michael Pfreundschuh; Harald Stein; Hans Theodor Eich; Rolf-Peter Müller; Markus Dietlein; Peter Borchmann; Volker Diehl Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-04-04 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Antonio Llombart-Cussac; Javier Cortés; Laia Paré; Patricia Galván; Begoña Bermejo; Noelia Martínez; Maria Vidal; Sònia Pernas; Rafael López; Montserrat Muñoz; Paolo Nuciforo; Serafín Morales; Mafalda Oliveira; Lorena de la Peña; Alexandra Peláez; Aleix Prat Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-02-24 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: U A Nitz; O Gluz; M Christgen; E-M Grischke; D Augustin; S Kuemmel; M Braun; J Potenberg; A Kohls; K Krauss; A Stefek; C Schumacher; H Forstbauer; T Reimer; H Fischer; C Liedtke; R Wuerstlein; J Schumacher; R Kates; H Kreipe; N Harbeck Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Antonio C Wolff; M Elizabeth H Hammond; David G Hicks; Mitch Dowsett; Lisa M McShane; Kimberly H Allison; Donald C Allred; John M S Bartlett; Michael Bilous; Patrick Fitzgibbons; Wedad Hanna; Robert B Jenkins; Pamela B Mangu; Soonmyung Paik; Edith A Perez; Michael F Press; Patricia A Spears; Gail H Vance; Giuseppe Viale; Daniel F Hayes Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-10-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Paul E Kinahan; Eric S Perlman; John J Sunderland; Rathan Subramaniam; Scott D Wollenweber; Timothy G Turkington; Martin A Lodge; Ronald Boellaard; Nancy A Obuchowski; Richard L Wahl Journal: Radiology Date: 2020-01-07 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Roisin M Connolly; Jeffrey P Leal; Lilja Solnes; Chiung-Yu Huang; Ashley Carpenter; Katy Gaffney; Vandana Abramson; Lisa A Carey; Minetta C Liu; Mothaffar Rimawi; Jennifer Specht; Anna Maria Storniolo; Vicente Valero; Christos Vaklavas; Ian E Krop; Eric P Winer; Melissa Camp; Robert S Miller; Antonio C Wolff; Ashley Cimino-Mathews; Ben H Park; Richard L Wahl; Vered Stearns Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2021-05-17 Impact factor: 50.717