Yi-Zhou Jiang1,2,3,4,5, Li-Ping Ge1,2,3,4, Xi Jin1,2,3,4, Lei Fan1,2,3,4, Min He1,2,3,4, Yin Liu1,2,3,4, Li Chen1,2,3,4, Wen-Jia Zuo1,2,3,4, Jiong Wu1,2,3,4,5, Guang-Yu Liu1,2,3,4,5, Gen-Hong Di1,2,3,4,5, Zhong-Hua Wang6,7,8,9,10, Ke-Da Yu11,12,13,14,15, Zhi-Ming Shao16,17,18,19,20. 1. Department of Breast Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. 2. Cancer Institute, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. 3. Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer in Shanghai, Department of Breast Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. 4. Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. 5. Precision Cancer Medicine Center, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. 6. Department of Breast Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. zhonghuawang95@hotmail.com. 7. Cancer Institute, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. zhonghuawang95@hotmail.com. 8. Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer in Shanghai, Department of Breast Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. zhonghuawang95@hotmail.com. 9. Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. zhonghuawang95@hotmail.com. 10. Precision Cancer Medicine Center, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. zhonghuawang95@hotmail.com. 11. Department of Breast Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. yukeda@163.com. 12. Cancer Institute, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. yukeda@163.com. 13. Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer in Shanghai, Department of Breast Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. yukeda@163.com. 14. Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. yukeda@163.com. 15. Precision Cancer Medicine Center, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. yukeda@163.com. 16. Department of Breast Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. zhimingshao@yahoo.com. 17. Cancer Institute, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. zhimingshao@yahoo.com. 18. Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer in Shanghai, Department of Breast Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. zhimingshao@yahoo.com. 19. Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. zhimingshao@yahoo.com. 20. Precision Cancer Medicine Center, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, 270 Dong-An Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. zhimingshao@yahoo.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Resistance to paclitaxel remains a major challenge in treating breast cancer. Our preclinical study suggested that TEKT4 germline variations in breast cancer are associated with paclitaxel resistance and increase vinorelbine sensitivity. This clinical trial compared the efficacy of paclitaxel and vinorelbine in breast cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: In this open-label, single-center, phase II trial, female patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, stage IIB-IIIC breast cancer harboring TEKT4 germline variations were randomly assigned to the paclitaxel plus epirubicin (PE) or vinorelbine plus epirubicin (NE). The primary endpoint was the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, and the secondary endpoints were the objective response rate (ORR) and safety. Targeted sequencing of a panel comprising 484 breast-related genes was performed to identify pCR-associated somatic mutations in each group. RESULTS:91 Patients were assigned to PE (46 patients) or NE (45 patients). NE numerically increased the pCR rate (22.2% versus 8.7%, P = 0.074). The ORRs for NE and PE were 82.2% and 76.1%, respectively. Interestingly, NE (15.4%) showed a significantly higher pCR rate than PE (0%) in the hormone receptor (HR)-positive subgroup (P = 0.044). Both regimens were well tolerated, with grade 3 and 4 toxicities reported at the expected levels. The biomarker analysis showed that UNC13D mutation predicted the pCR rate in NE (P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Although the primary endpoint was not met, NE might bring clinical benefit to HR-positive patients or patients simultaneously carrying UNC13D mutations.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Resistance to paclitaxel remains a major challenge in treating breast cancer. Our preclinical study suggested that TEKT4 germline variations in breast cancer are associated with paclitaxel resistance and increase vinorelbine sensitivity. This clinical trial compared the efficacy of paclitaxel and vinorelbine in breast cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: In this open-label, single-center, phase II trial, female patients with humanepidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, stage IIB-IIIC breast cancer harboring TEKT4 germline variations were randomly assigned to the paclitaxel plus epirubicin (PE) or vinorelbine plus epirubicin (NE). The primary endpoint was the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, and the secondary endpoints were the objective response rate (ORR) and safety. Targeted sequencing of a panel comprising 484 breast-related genes was performed to identify pCR-associated somatic mutations in each group. RESULTS: 91 Patients were assigned to PE (46 patients) or NE (45 patients). NE numerically increased the pCR rate (22.2% versus 8.7%, P = 0.074). The ORRs for NE and PE were 82.2% and 76.1%, respectively. Interestingly, NE (15.4%) showed a significantly higher pCR rate than PE (0%) in the hormone receptor (HR)-positive subgroup (P = 0.044). Both regimens were well tolerated, with grade 3 and 4 toxicities reported at the expected levels. The biomarker analysis showed that UNC13D mutation predicted the pCR rate in NE (P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Although the primary endpoint was not met, NE might bring clinical benefit to HR-positive patients or patients simultaneously carrying UNC13D mutations.
Authors: M Elizabeth H Hammond; Daniel F Hayes; Antonio C Wolff; Pamela B Mangu; Sarah Temin Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2010-06-23 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Sarah S Mougalian; Mike Hernandez; Xiudong Lei; Siobhan Lynch; Henry M Kuerer; William F Symmans; Richard L Theriault; Bruno D Fornage; Limin Hsu; Thomas A Buchholz; Aysegul A Sahin; Kelly K Hunt; Wei Tse Yang; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Vicente Valero Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Justin M Balko; Rebecca S Cook; David B Vaught; María G Kuba; Todd W Miller; Neil E Bhola; Melinda E Sanders; Nara M Granja-Ingram; J Joshua Smith; Ingrid M Meszoely; Janine Salter; Mitch Dowsett; Katherine Stemke-Hale; Ana M González-Angulo; Gordon B Mills; Joseph A Pinto; Henry L Gómez; Carlos L Arteaga Journal: Nat Med Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 53.440