big 1-98 a study to evaluate letrozole as adjuvant endocrine … · 2019. 11. 15. · sabcs 2005...

22
SABCS 2005 Central review of ER, PgR and HER-2 in BIG 1-98 evaluating letrozole vs. tamoxifen as adjuvant endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with receptor- positive breast cancer IBCSG 18-98/BIG 1-98 Giuseppe Viale and Meredith Regan for the BIG 1-98 Collaborative Coordinated by the International Breast Cancer Study Group

Upload: others

Post on 09-Feb-2021

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • SABCS 2005

    Central review of ER, PgR and HER-2 in BIG 1-98 evaluating letrozole vs. tamoxifen

    as adjuvant endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with receptor-

    positive breast cancer

    IBCSG 18-98/BIG 1-98

    Giuseppe Viale and Meredith Reganfor the BIG 1-98 Collaborative

    Coordinated by the International Breast Cancer Study

    Group

  • SABCS 2005

    BIG 1-98TamoxifenLetrozole

    Letrozole

    Letrozole Tamoxifen

    RANDOMIZE

    0 2 5

    ABCD

    Tamoxifen

    YEARS

    • Compares Letrozole versus Tamoxifen• Letrozole: Arms B and D (n=4003)• Tamoxifen: Arms A and C (n=4007)• Excludes events and FU beyond switch for C & D

  • SABCS 2005

    Disease-Free Survival25.8 mos. median follow-up

    100

    T

    L

    0

    20

    40

    60

    80

    0 1 2 3 4 5

    Perc

    ent A

    live

    and

    Dis

    ease

    -Fre

    e

    EventsN HR (95% CI) p

    7798010 0.81 (.70-.93) 0.003

    Years from RandomizationNo. at Risk

    40034007

    38923896

    892866

    567544

    29642926

    12611238

  • SABCS 2005

    BIG 1-98 DFS by Local Pathological Assessment

    0.81 All patients (n=8010)

    0.84 ER+ / PgR+ (n=5055)

    0.83 ER+ / PgR- (n=1631)

    0.72 ER+ / PgR unk (n=1154)

    0.5 0.75 1.0 1.25 1.5

    Favors L Favors T

    Hazard Ratio (L:T)

  • SABCS 2005

    BIG 1-98 Central Review Project

    • ER and PgR by IHC– ER (1D5 monoclonal antibody; Dako) – PgR (636 monoclonal antibody; Dako)– Positive is ≥10% stained cells

    • HER2 – IHC for all cases (HercepTest; Dako)– FISH for all IHC 2+, 3+; also for IHC 1+ with ≥50% stained cells (Pathvision kit; Vysis)

    – Positive is a positive result by FISH, or in a few cases IHC=3+ with unevaluable FISH

  • SABCS 2005

    BIG 1-98 Central Review Project

    • Assessable material for 4,399 patients• Compared to patients without centrally

    reviewed material, the analysis cohort of 4399 patients had:– Slightly better prognostic features– Shorter follow-up (25.4 months)– Fewer events

  • SABCS 2005

    ER / PgR by Type of AssessmentLocal CentralN %

    3124 71.021.9

    5.01.80.1

    0

  • SABCS 2005

    0 1 2 3 4

    020

    4060

    8010

    0

    Years

    Per

    cent

    Aliv

    e an

    d D

    isea

    se-F

    ree

    DFS according to Treatment

    ER+ (n=4089)

    TamoxifenLetrozole

    ER- / PgR- (n=103)

  • SABCS 2005

    Research Questions: PgR

    • Is there evidence of tamoxifen resistance in ER+ / PgR- tumors?

    • Is the benefit of letrozole vs. tamoxifen greater in patients with ER+ / PgR-tumors than with ER+ / PgR+ tumors?

  • SABCS 2005

    0 1 2 3 4

    020

    4060

    8010

    0

    Years

    Per

    cent

    Aliv

    e an

    d D

    isea

    se-F

    ree

    0 1 2 3 4

    020

    4060

    8010

    0

    Years

    DFS: ER+ / PgR by TreatmentTamoxifen Letrozole

    ER+/PgR- (N=415)ER+/PgR+ (N=1682)

    ER+/PgR- (N=417)ER+/PgR+ (N=1648)

  • SABCS 2005

    0 1 2 3 4

    020

    4060

    8010

    0

    Years

    Per

    cent

    Aliv

    e an

    d D

    isea

    se-F

    ree

    0 1 2 3 4

    020

    4060

    8010

    0

    Years

    Interaction p-value=0.32

    DFS: ER+ according to PgRER+ / PgR+ ER+ / PgR-

    TamoxifenLetrozole

    N HR (95% CI)

    3330 0.67 (.51-.88)

    Events

    215

    N HR (95% CI)

    832 0.88 (.55-1.41)

    Events

    70

  • SABCS 2005

    BIG 1-98 DFS by Central Pathological Assessment

    0.71 All patients (n=4399)

    0.67 ER+ / PgR+ (n=3330)

    0.88 ER+ / PgR- (n=832)

    0.5 0.75 1.0 1.25 1.5

    Favors L Favors T

    Hazard Ratio (L:T)

  • SABCS 2005

    0 10 30 40 50 65 75 90 99

    020

    4060

    8010

    0

    LT

    4-yr

    DFS

    (%)

    PgR% [pars=450,400]

    DFS by level of PgR expressionin ER+ patients

    Subpopulation Median PgR (%)

    Letrozole Tamoxifen

  • SABCS 2005

    Research Questions: HER2

    • Is there evidence of tamoxifen resistance in ER+/HER2+ tumors?

    • Is the benefit of letrozole vs. tamoxifen greater for patients with ER+ / HER2+ tumors than with ER+ / HER2- tumors?

  • SABCS 2005

    HER2 Positivity by ER/PgR Status

    HER2+Subgroup N % of subgroup

    5%10%32%

    Other 14 10%All patients 279 6%

    ER+ / PgR- 79ER- / PgR- 33

    ER+ / PgR+ 153

  • SABCS 2005

    0 1 2 3 4

    020

    4060

    8010

    0

    Years

    Per

    cent

    Aliv

    e an

    d D

    isea

    se-F

    ree

    0 1 2 3 4

    020

    4060

    8010

    0

    Years

    DFS: ER+ / HER2 by TreatmentTamoxifen Letrozole

    ER+/HER2- (N=1986)ER+/HER2+ (N=107)

    ER+/HER2- (N=1985)ER+/HER2+ (N=127)

    HR=0.52 (0.31, 0.88) HR=0.56 (0.31, 0.98)

  • SABCS 2005

    0 1 2 3 4

    020

    4060

    8010

    0

    Years

    Per

    cent

    Aliv

    e an

    d D

    isea

    se-F

    ree

    0 1 2 3 4

    020

    4060

    8010

    0

    Years

    DFS: ER+ according to HER2ER+ / HER2- ER+ / HER2+

    Interaction p-value=0.90

    TamoxifenLetrozole

    N HR (95% CI)

    3971 0.72 (.56-.91)

    Events

    263

    N HR (95% CI)

    234 0.68 (.33-1.41)

    Events

    29

  • SABCS 2005

    BIG 1-98 DFSby Central Pathological Assessment

    0.71 All patients (n=4399)

    Favors L Favors T

    1.00.5 0.75 1.25 1.5

    Hazard Ratio (L:T)

    ER+ / HER2+ (n=234)

    ER+ / HER2- (n=3971)

    0.68

    0.72

  • SABCS 2005

    Conclusions

    • Benefit of letrozole vs. tamoxifen is maintained irrespective of PgR status in patients with ER+ tumors

    • Tamoxifen resistance for ER+ / PgR-tumors was not observed

    • Resistance to endocrine treatments for ER+/HER2+ tumors requires further evaluation

  • SABCS 2005

    The IBCSG Central Pathology Team

    Bern Milano Buffalo

    Rosita KammlerAdriana AeschbacherHans-Rudolf PauliStephan OelhafenRegula StuderAnita Hiltbrunner

    Tara ScoleseSusan FischerDanita HarrisonLois UhtegJohn GouldLynette Blacher

    Giulia PeruzzottiRaffaella GhisiniEloise ScaranoPatrizia Dell’OrtoBarbara Del CurtoMauro MastropasquaStefania Andrighetto

  • SABCS 2005

    BIG 1-98 Contributing Pathologists

    W P Olszewski I Peter Z Orosz F Knox

    D Larsimont E Mery M Lacroix A ParmaM Lazzarotto-Rumpler T Perin A Gloghini HJ AltermattC Oehlschlegel JF Mosnier C Metcalf G SingerJM Picquenot S Laberge I Bulucheva P RinaldiE Bajetta P Grigolato I Tan-Go OF ChepikG MacGrogan A Nerurkar P Tricomi L LuciniJ Sanchez Lihon CA Purdie S Cordovi R BrayeR Brown P Figueiredo K Jaskiewicz C WrightM Fiche J Kiesler B Coudert L Arnould

    …and another 300…

  • SABCS 2005

    Thanks to…

    • The patients participating in the trial• The pathologists who submitted material• The IBCSG Pathology Office• The IBCSG Data Management Center• The principal investigators• The co-investigators, data managers, nurses,

    study coordinators• BIG 1-98 Steering Committee• Novartis

    Central review of ER, PgR and HER-2 in BIG 1-98 evaluating letrozole vs. tamoxifen as adjuvant endocrine therapy for postmenopBIG 1-98BIG 1-98 DFS by Local Pathological AssessmentBIG 1-98 Central Review ProjectBIG 1-98 Central Review ProjectER / PgR by Type of AssessmentResearch Questions: PgRBIG 1-98 DFS by Central Pathological AssessmentResearch Questions: HER2HER2 Positivity by ER/PgR StatusBIG 1-98 DFS by Central Pathological AssessmentConclusionsThe IBCSG Central Pathology TeamBIG 1-98 Contributing PathologistsThanks to…