Article

Key clinical point: Radiotherapy (RT) plus monoclonal antibody against programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD1) has a better efficacy and safety profile than transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus sorafenib for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Major finding: Patients receiving RT+anti-PD1 vs TACE+sorafenib showed significantly higher objective response (54.05% vs 12.20%; P < .001), disease control (70.27% vs 46.34%; P  =  .041), and 9-month overall survival (75.50% vs 60.60%; P < .001) rates. They also had a longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.51; P  =  .017); and a lower grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse event rate (29.70% vs 75.60%; P < .001).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective real-world study that included 78 adult patients with advanced HCC who received RT+anti-PD1 (n = 37) or TACE+sorafenib (n = 41).

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by the Development and Application Project for the Appropriate Technology of Health of Guangxi Province, China, among others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Li JX et al. Efficacy and safety of radiotherapy plus anti-PD1 versus transcatheter arterial chemoembolization plus sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a real-world study. Radiat Oncol. 2022;17:106 (Jun 11. Doi: 10.1186/s13014-022-02075-6

Key clinical point: Radiotherapy (RT) plus monoclonal antibody against programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD1) has a better efficacy and safety profile than transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus sorafenib for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Major finding: Patients receiving RT+anti-PD1 vs TACE+sorafenib showed significantly higher objective response (54.05% vs 12.20%; P < .001), disease control (70.27% vs 46.34%; P  =  .041), and 9-month overall survival (75.50% vs 60.60%; P < .001) rates. They also had a longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.51; P  =  .017); and a lower grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse event rate (29.70% vs 75.60%; P < .001).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective real-world study that included 78 adult patients with advanced HCC who received RT+anti-PD1 (n = 37) or TACE+sorafenib (n = 41).

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by the Development and Application Project for the Appropriate Technology of Health of Guangxi Province, China, among others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Li JX et al. Efficacy and safety of radiotherapy plus anti-PD1 versus transcatheter arterial chemoembolization plus sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a real-world study. Radiat Oncol. 2022;17:106 (Jun 11. Doi: 10.1186/s13014-022-02075-6

Key clinical point: Radiotherapy (RT) plus monoclonal antibody against programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD1) has a better efficacy and safety profile than transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus sorafenib for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Major finding: Patients receiving RT+anti-PD1 vs TACE+sorafenib showed significantly higher objective response (54.05% vs 12.20%; P < .001), disease control (70.27% vs 46.34%; P  =  .041), and 9-month overall survival (75.50% vs 60.60%; P < .001) rates. They also had a longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.51; P  =  .017); and a lower grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse event rate (29.70% vs 75.60%; P < .001).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective real-world study that included 78 adult patients with advanced HCC who received RT+anti-PD1 (n = 37) or TACE+sorafenib (n = 41).

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by the Development and Application Project for the Appropriate Technology of Health of Guangxi Province, China, among others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Li JX et al. Efficacy and safety of radiotherapy plus anti-PD1 versus transcatheter arterial chemoembolization plus sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a real-world study. Radiat Oncol. 2022;17:106 (Jun 11. Doi: 10.1186/s13014-022-02075-6

Key clinical point: Sustained virologic response (SVR) decreases the risk for hepatic decompensation in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receiving nonsurgical treatment.

Major finding: Patients with SVR vs viremia had a significantly lower likelihood of hepatic decompensation (adjusted odds ratio 0.18; 95% CI 0.06-0.59).

Study details: Findings are from a multicenter, retrospective cohort study including adult patients with HCV cirrhosis and treatment-naive HCC who had active viremia (n = 431) or SVR before HCC diagnosis (n = 135).

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by the US National Institutes of Health. Some authors reported serving as consultants, advisory board members, speakers for, or receiving research funding or consulting fees from various sources.

Source: Parikh ND et al. Association between sustained virological response and clinical outcomes in patients with hepatitis C infection and hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer. 2022 (Jul 7). Doi:  10.1002/cncr.34378

Key clinical point: Sustained virologic response (SVR) decreases the risk for hepatic decompensation in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receiving nonsurgical treatment.

Major finding: Patients with SVR vs viremia had a significantly lower likelihood of hepatic decompensation (adjusted odds ratio 0.18; 95% CI 0.06-0.59).

Study details: Findings are from a multicenter, retrospective cohort study including adult patients with HCV cirrhosis and treatment-naive HCC who had active viremia (n = 431) or SVR before HCC diagnosis (n = 135).

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by the US National Institutes of Health. Some authors reported serving as consultants, advisory board members, speakers for, or receiving research funding or consulting fees from various sources.

Source: Parikh ND et al. Association between sustained virological response and clinical outcomes in patients with hepatitis C infection and hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer. 2022 (Jul 7). Doi:  10.1002/cncr.34378

Key clinical point: Sustained virologic response (SVR) decreases the risk for hepatic decompensation in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receiving nonsurgical treatment.

Major finding: Patients with SVR vs viremia had a significantly lower likelihood of hepatic decompensation (adjusted odds ratio 0.18; 95% CI 0.06-0.59).

Study details: Findings are from a multicenter, retrospective cohort study including adult patients with HCV cirrhosis and treatment-naive HCC who had active viremia (n = 431) or SVR before HCC diagnosis (n = 135).

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by the US National Institutes of Health. Some authors reported serving as consultants, advisory board members, speakers for, or receiving research funding or consulting fees from various sources.

Source: Parikh ND et al. Association between sustained virological response and clinical outcomes in patients with hepatitis C infection and hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer. 2022 (Jul 7). Doi:  10.1002/cncr.34378

Key clinical point: Transplant waitlist mortality and dropout rates were not significantly different between patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who received transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and those who received radiofrequency ablation (RFA).

Major finding: TACE and RFA were associated with a comparable 5-year cumulative incidence of mortality or dropout in patients both within (13.4% and 12.9%, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.91; 95% CI 0.79-1.03) and outside (19.2% and 19.0%, respectively; aHR 1.29; 95% CI 0.79-2.09) the Milan criteria.

Study details: This retrospective study analyzed the data of 11,824 patients with HCC (within and outside the Milan criteria) from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients who underwent RFA (n = 2449) or TACE (n = 9375).

Disclosures: This study was funded by the US National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Kolarich AR et al. Radiofrequency ablation versus trans-arterial chemoembolization in patients with HCC awaiting liver transplant: An analysis of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2022 Jun 28. Doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2022.06.016

Key clinical point: Transplant waitlist mortality and dropout rates were not significantly different between patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who received transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and those who received radiofrequency ablation (RFA).

Major finding: TACE and RFA were associated with a comparable 5-year cumulative incidence of mortality or dropout in patients both within (13.4% and 12.9%, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.91; 95% CI 0.79-1.03) and outside (19.2% and 19.0%, respectively; aHR 1.29; 95% CI 0.79-2.09) the Milan criteria.

Study details: This retrospective study analyzed the data of 11,824 patients with HCC (within and outside the Milan criteria) from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients who underwent RFA (n = 2449) or TACE (n = 9375).

Disclosures: This study was funded by the US National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Kolarich AR et al. Radiofrequency ablation versus trans-arterial chemoembolization in patients with HCC awaiting liver transplant: An analysis of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2022 Jun 28. Doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2022.06.016

Key clinical point: Transplant waitlist mortality and dropout rates were not significantly different between patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who received transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and those who received radiofrequency ablation (RFA).

Major finding: TACE and RFA were associated with a comparable 5-year cumulative incidence of mortality or dropout in patients both within (13.4% and 12.9%, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.91; 95% CI 0.79-1.03) and outside (19.2% and 19.0%, respectively; aHR 1.29; 95% CI 0.79-2.09) the Milan criteria.

Study details: This retrospective study analyzed the data of 11,824 patients with HCC (within and outside the Milan criteria) from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients who underwent RFA (n = 2449) or TACE (n = 9375).

Disclosures: This study was funded by the US National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Kolarich AR et al. Radiofrequency ablation versus trans-arterial chemoembolization in patients with HCC awaiting liver transplant: An analysis of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2022 Jun 28. Doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2022.06.016

Key clinical point: In systemic therapy-naive patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), pembrolizumab monotherapy demonstrates promising antitumor efficacy and survival outcomes, with a safety profile similar to that of second-line pembrolizumab in advanced HCC.

Major finding: After a 27-month median follow-up, the objective response rate was 16% (95% CI 7%-29%). The median progression-free and overall survival were 4 (95% CI 2-8) and 17 (95% CI 8-23) months, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events of  grade ≥ 3 were observed in 16% of patients.

Study details: The data are derived from cohort 2 of the multicenter, phase 2 KEYNOTE-224 trial that included 51 systemic therapy-naive adult patients with advanced HCC who received 200 mg pembrolizumab every 3 weeks for ≤2 years.

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. (MSD), a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., NJ. Some authors declared receiving grants, personal fees, or other support from various sources, including MSD.

Source: Verset G et al. Pembrolizumab monotherapy for previously untreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Data from the open-label, phase II KEYNOTE-224 trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2022;28(12):2547–2554 (Jun 13). Doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-3807

Key clinical point: In systemic therapy-naive patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), pembrolizumab monotherapy demonstrates promising antitumor efficacy and survival outcomes, with a safety profile similar to that of second-line pembrolizumab in advanced HCC.

Major finding: After a 27-month median follow-up, the objective response rate was 16% (95% CI 7%-29%). The median progression-free and overall survival were 4 (95% CI 2-8) and 17 (95% CI 8-23) months, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events of  grade ≥ 3 were observed in 16% of patients.

Study details: The data are derived from cohort 2 of the multicenter, phase 2 KEYNOTE-224 trial that included 51 systemic therapy-naive adult patients with advanced HCC who received 200 mg pembrolizumab every 3 weeks for ≤2 years.

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. (MSD), a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., NJ. Some authors declared receiving grants, personal fees, or other support from various sources, including MSD.

Source: Verset G et al. Pembrolizumab monotherapy for previously untreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Data from the open-label, phase II KEYNOTE-224 trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2022;28(12):2547–2554 (Jun 13). Doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-3807

Key clinical point: In systemic therapy-naive patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), pembrolizumab monotherapy demonstrates promising antitumor efficacy and survival outcomes, with a safety profile similar to that of second-line pembrolizumab in advanced HCC.

Major finding: After a 27-month median follow-up, the objective response rate was 16% (95% CI 7%-29%). The median progression-free and overall survival were 4 (95% CI 2-8) and 17 (95% CI 8-23) months, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events of  grade ≥ 3 were observed in 16% of patients.

Study details: The data are derived from cohort 2 of the multicenter, phase 2 KEYNOTE-224 trial that included 51 systemic therapy-naive adult patients with advanced HCC who received 200 mg pembrolizumab every 3 weeks for ≤2 years.

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. (MSD), a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., NJ. Some authors declared receiving grants, personal fees, or other support from various sources, including MSD.

Source: Verset G et al. Pembrolizumab monotherapy for previously untreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Data from the open-label, phase II KEYNOTE-224 trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2022;28(12):2547–2554 (Jun 13). Doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-3807

Key clinical point: Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) but not overall survival (OS) in systemic therapy-naive patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) unresponsive to curative or locoregional therapy.

Major finding: Patients receiving cabozantinib plus atezolizumab vs sorafenib had a significantly longer median PFS (6.8 vs 4.2 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.63; P  =  .001) but a comparable median OS (15.4 vs 15.5 months; HR 0.90; P  =  .44).

Study details: Findings are from a multicenter, phase 3 trial, COSMIC-312, that included 837 systemic therapy-naive adult patients with HCC unresponsive to curative or locoregional therapy who were randomly assigned 2:1:1 to receive cabozantinib plus atezolizumab (n = 432), sorafenib (n = 217), or single-agent cabozantinib (n = 188).

Disclosures: This study was funded by Exelixis, USA, and Ipsen, France. Some authors reported being consultants, advisors, or speakers for or receiving research funding, personal fees, travel and accommodations, or other expenses from various sources, including Exelixis and Ipsen. Four authors reported employment (current or former), stock, and other ownership interests in Exelixis or Ipsen.

Source: Kelley RK et al. Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab versus sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (COSMIC-312): A multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2022 (Jul 4). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00326-6

Key clinical point: Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) but not overall survival (OS) in systemic therapy-naive patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) unresponsive to curative or locoregional therapy.

Major finding: Patients receiving cabozantinib plus atezolizumab vs sorafenib had a significantly longer median PFS (6.8 vs 4.2 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.63; P  =  .001) but a comparable median OS (15.4 vs 15.5 months; HR 0.90; P  =  .44).

Study details: Findings are from a multicenter, phase 3 trial, COSMIC-312, that included 837 systemic therapy-naive adult patients with HCC unresponsive to curative or locoregional therapy who were randomly assigned 2:1:1 to receive cabozantinib plus atezolizumab (n = 432), sorafenib (n = 217), or single-agent cabozantinib (n = 188).

Disclosures: This study was funded by Exelixis, USA, and Ipsen, France. Some authors reported being consultants, advisors, or speakers for or receiving research funding, personal fees, travel and accommodations, or other expenses from various sources, including Exelixis and Ipsen. Four authors reported employment (current or former), stock, and other ownership interests in Exelixis or Ipsen.

Source: Kelley RK et al. Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab versus sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (COSMIC-312): A multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2022 (Jul 4). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00326-6

Key clinical point: Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) but not overall survival (OS) in systemic therapy-naive patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) unresponsive to curative or locoregional therapy.

Major finding: Patients receiving cabozantinib plus atezolizumab vs sorafenib had a significantly longer median PFS (6.8 vs 4.2 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.63; P  =  .001) but a comparable median OS (15.4 vs 15.5 months; HR 0.90; P  =  .44).

Study details: Findings are from a multicenter, phase 3 trial, COSMIC-312, that included 837 systemic therapy-naive adult patients with HCC unresponsive to curative or locoregional therapy who were randomly assigned 2:1:1 to receive cabozantinib plus atezolizumab (n = 432), sorafenib (n = 217), or single-agent cabozantinib (n = 188).

Disclosures: This study was funded by Exelixis, USA, and Ipsen, France. Some authors reported being consultants, advisors, or speakers for or receiving research funding, personal fees, travel and accommodations, or other expenses from various sources, including Exelixis and Ipsen. Four authors reported employment (current or former), stock, and other ownership interests in Exelixis or Ipsen.

Source: Kelley RK et al. Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab versus sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (COSMIC-312): A multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2022 (Jul 4). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00326-6

Key clinical point: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (ERBB2)-low breast cancer (BC) cannot be considered a distinct biologic subtype of BC because most of its clinicopathologic and prognostic differences are associated with hormone receptor (HR) expression.

Major finding: HR expression was a significant factor associated with the ERBB2 status (adjusted odds ratio for HR-positive vs HR-negative tumors 2.1; P < .001). The pathologic complete response rate was similar in ERBB2-low and ERBB2-0 tumors among patients with HR-positive (P  =  .08) or triple-negative (P  =  .40) BC.

Study details: Findings are from a large cohort study including 5235 patients with ERBB2-negative invasive, stage I-III BC, of which 55.7% and 44.3% of patients had ERBB2-low and ERBB2-0 tumors, respectively.

Disclosures: Dr. Tarantino was supported by an American-Italian Cancer Foundation postdoctoral research fellowship. The authors declared serving on advisory boards of or receiving personal fees, research grants, consulting fees, or honoraria from several sources.

Source: Tarantino P et al. Prognostic and biologic significance of ERBB2-low expression in early-stage breast cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2022 (Jun 23). Doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.2286

Key clinical point: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (ERBB2)-low breast cancer (BC) cannot be considered a distinct biologic subtype of BC because most of its clinicopathologic and prognostic differences are associated with hormone receptor (HR) expression.

Major finding: HR expression was a significant factor associated with the ERBB2 status (adjusted odds ratio for HR-positive vs HR-negative tumors 2.1; P < .001). The pathologic complete response rate was similar in ERBB2-low and ERBB2-0 tumors among patients with HR-positive (P  =  .08) or triple-negative (P  =  .40) BC.

Study details: Findings are from a large cohort study including 5235 patients with ERBB2-negative invasive, stage I-III BC, of which 55.7% and 44.3% of patients had ERBB2-low and ERBB2-0 tumors, respectively.

Disclosures: Dr. Tarantino was supported by an American-Italian Cancer Foundation postdoctoral research fellowship. The authors declared serving on advisory boards of or receiving personal fees, research grants, consulting fees, or honoraria from several sources.

Source: Tarantino P et al. Prognostic and biologic significance of ERBB2-low expression in early-stage breast cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2022 (Jun 23). Doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.2286

Key clinical point: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (ERBB2)-low breast cancer (BC) cannot be considered a distinct biologic subtype of BC because most of its clinicopathologic and prognostic differences are associated with hormone receptor (HR) expression.

Major finding: HR expression was a significant factor associated with the ERBB2 status (adjusted odds ratio for HR-positive vs HR-negative tumors 2.1; P < .001). The pathologic complete response rate was similar in ERBB2-low and ERBB2-0 tumors among patients with HR-positive (P  =  .08) or triple-negative (P  =  .40) BC.

Study details: Findings are from a large cohort study including 5235 patients with ERBB2-negative invasive, stage I-III BC, of which 55.7% and 44.3% of patients had ERBB2-low and ERBB2-0 tumors, respectively.

Disclosures: Dr. Tarantino was supported by an American-Italian Cancer Foundation postdoctoral research fellowship. The authors declared serving on advisory boards of or receiving personal fees, research grants, consulting fees, or honoraria from several sources.

Source: Tarantino P et al. Prognostic and biologic significance of ERBB2-low expression in early-stage breast cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2022 (Jun 23). Doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.2286

Key clinical point: The use of β-blocker at the time of breast cancer (BC) diagnosis reduced mortality in patients with triple-negative BC (TNBC).

Major finding: Although β-blocker use vs no use was not associated with BC-specific survival in the overall population, β-blockers reduced BC mortality by 34% in patients with TNBC (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66; 95% CI 0.47-0.91). The meta-analysis further confirmed that β-blocker use was associated with progression/recurrence-free survival (HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.38-0.89) in the TNBC population.

Study details: Findings are from a large population-based cohort study including 30,060 women aged ≥ 50 years with primary invasive BC, of which 15% used β-blockers at the time of BC diagnosis, and from a meta-analysis of 8 observational studies.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Norwegian Research Council and other sources. EK Sloan declared serving as a scientific advisory board member for Cygnal Therapeutics.

Source: Løfling LL et al. β-blockers and breast cancer survival by molecular subtypes: A population-based cohort study and meta-analysis. Br J Cancer. 2022 (Jun 20). Doi: 10.1038/s41416-022-01891-7

Key clinical point: The use of β-blocker at the time of breast cancer (BC) diagnosis reduced mortality in patients with triple-negative BC (TNBC).

Major finding: Although β-blocker use vs no use was not associated with BC-specific survival in the overall population, β-blockers reduced BC mortality by 34% in patients with TNBC (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66; 95% CI 0.47-0.91). The meta-analysis further confirmed that β-blocker use was associated with progression/recurrence-free survival (HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.38-0.89) in the TNBC population.

Study details: Findings are from a large population-based cohort study including 30,060 women aged ≥ 50 years with primary invasive BC, of which 15% used β-blockers at the time of BC diagnosis, and from a meta-analysis of 8 observational studies.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Norwegian Research Council and other sources. EK Sloan declared serving as a scientific advisory board member for Cygnal Therapeutics.

Source: Løfling LL et al. β-blockers and breast cancer survival by molecular subtypes: A population-based cohort study and meta-analysis. Br J Cancer. 2022 (Jun 20). Doi: 10.1038/s41416-022-01891-7

Key clinical point: The use of β-blocker at the time of breast cancer (BC) diagnosis reduced mortality in patients with triple-negative BC (TNBC).

Major finding: Although β-blocker use vs no use was not associated with BC-specific survival in the overall population, β-blockers reduced BC mortality by 34% in patients with TNBC (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66; 95% CI 0.47-0.91). The meta-analysis further confirmed that β-blocker use was associated with progression/recurrence-free survival (HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.38-0.89) in the TNBC population.

Study details: Findings are from a large population-based cohort study including 30,060 women aged ≥ 50 years with primary invasive BC, of which 15% used β-blockers at the time of BC diagnosis, and from a meta-analysis of 8 observational studies.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Norwegian Research Council and other sources. EK Sloan declared serving as a scientific advisory board member for Cygnal Therapeutics.

Source: Løfling LL et al. β-blockers and breast cancer survival by molecular subtypes: A population-based cohort study and meta-analysis. Br J Cancer. 2022 (Jun 20). Doi: 10.1038/s41416-022-01891-7

Key clinical point: In patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), capecitabine improved survival and demonstrated a tolerable safety profile, with lower dosage, higher frequency, and adjuvant setting being related with better survival outcomes.

Major finding: Capecitabine vs chemotherapy without capecitabine improved disease-free survival (DFS; hazard ratio [HR] 0.77; P < .001) and overall survival (HR 0.73; P < .0001). A lower dose (<1000 mg; HR 0.69; P  =  .002), a higher dosage frequency (≥6 cycles; HR 0.72; P < .0001) and an adjuvant setting (HR 0.74; P < .0001) were associated with a higher DFS. Capecitabine was associated with higher risk for diarrhea (P < .0001), hand-foot syndrome (P < .0001), and leukopenia (P < .01).

Study details: Findings are from a meta-analysis of 11 phase 3 randomized controlled trials including 5175 female patients with early-stage TNBC who received neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy with or without capecitabine.

Disclosures: This study did not report any source of funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Xun X et al. Efficacy and safety of capecitabine for triple-negative breast cancer: A meta-analysis. Front Oncol. 2022;12:899423 (Jul 7). Doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.899423

Key clinical point: In patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), capecitabine improved survival and demonstrated a tolerable safety profile, with lower dosage, higher frequency, and adjuvant setting being related with better survival outcomes.

Major finding: Capecitabine vs chemotherapy without capecitabine improved disease-free survival (DFS; hazard ratio [HR] 0.77; P < .001) and overall survival (HR 0.73; P < .0001). A lower dose (<1000 mg; HR 0.69; P  =  .002), a higher dosage frequency (≥6 cycles; HR 0.72; P < .0001) and an adjuvant setting (HR 0.74; P < .0001) were associated with a higher DFS. Capecitabine was associated with higher risk for diarrhea (P < .0001), hand-foot syndrome (P < .0001), and leukopenia (P < .01).

Study details: Findings are from a meta-analysis of 11 phase 3 randomized controlled trials including 5175 female patients with early-stage TNBC who received neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy with or without capecitabine.

Disclosures: This study did not report any source of funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Xun X et al. Efficacy and safety of capecitabine for triple-negative breast cancer: A meta-analysis. Front Oncol. 2022;12:899423 (Jul 7). Doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.899423

Key clinical point: In patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), capecitabine improved survival and demonstrated a tolerable safety profile, with lower dosage, higher frequency, and adjuvant setting being related with better survival outcomes.

Major finding: Capecitabine vs chemotherapy without capecitabine improved disease-free survival (DFS; hazard ratio [HR] 0.77; P < .001) and overall survival (HR 0.73; P < .0001). A lower dose (<1000 mg; HR 0.69; P  =  .002), a higher dosage frequency (≥6 cycles; HR 0.72; P < .0001) and an adjuvant setting (HR 0.74; P < .0001) were associated with a higher DFS. Capecitabine was associated with higher risk for diarrhea (P < .0001), hand-foot syndrome (P < .0001), and leukopenia (P < .01).

Study details: Findings are from a meta-analysis of 11 phase 3 randomized controlled trials including 5175 female patients with early-stage TNBC who received neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy with or without capecitabine.

Disclosures: This study did not report any source of funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Xun X et al. Efficacy and safety of capecitabine for triple-negative breast cancer: A meta-analysis. Front Oncol. 2022;12:899423 (Jul 7). Doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.899423

Key clinical point: Postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) did not influence locoregional recurrence (LRR) in patients with pT1-2 and 1-3 node-positive breast cancer (BC).

Major finding: Rate of LRR at 5 years was similar in patients receiving PMRT and no PMRT (P  =  .61), and PMRT was not significantly associated with LRR in the overall population (P  =  .305).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective, cohort study including 8914 patients with pT1-2 BC tumors and 1-3 lymph node metastases who received PMRT (n = 492) or no PMRT (n = 8422) after undergoing mastectomy and axillary lymph node dissection.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Japanese Breast Cancer Society. Some authors declared receiving speaker’s fees, consulting fees, research funds, or honoraria from several sources.

Source: Yamada A et al. Prognostic impact of postoperative radiotherapy in patients with breast cancer and with pT1-2 and 1–3 lymph node metastases: A retrospective cohort study based on the Japanese Breast Cancer Registry. Eur J Cancer. 2022;172:32-40 (Jun 22). Doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.05.017

Key clinical point: Postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) did not influence locoregional recurrence (LRR) in patients with pT1-2 and 1-3 node-positive breast cancer (BC).

Major finding: Rate of LRR at 5 years was similar in patients receiving PMRT and no PMRT (P  =  .61), and PMRT was not significantly associated with LRR in the overall population (P  =  .305).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective, cohort study including 8914 patients with pT1-2 BC tumors and 1-3 lymph node metastases who received PMRT (n = 492) or no PMRT (n = 8422) after undergoing mastectomy and axillary lymph node dissection.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Japanese Breast Cancer Society. Some authors declared receiving speaker’s fees, consulting fees, research funds, or honoraria from several sources.

Source: Yamada A et al. Prognostic impact of postoperative radiotherapy in patients with breast cancer and with pT1-2 and 1–3 lymph node metastases: A retrospective cohort study based on the Japanese Breast Cancer Registry. Eur J Cancer. 2022;172:32-40 (Jun 22). Doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.05.017

Key clinical point: Postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) did not influence locoregional recurrence (LRR) in patients with pT1-2 and 1-3 node-positive breast cancer (BC).

Major finding: Rate of LRR at 5 years was similar in patients receiving PMRT and no PMRT (P  =  .61), and PMRT was not significantly associated with LRR in the overall population (P  =  .305).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective, cohort study including 8914 patients with pT1-2 BC tumors and 1-3 lymph node metastases who received PMRT (n = 492) or no PMRT (n = 8422) after undergoing mastectomy and axillary lymph node dissection.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Japanese Breast Cancer Society. Some authors declared receiving speaker’s fees, consulting fees, research funds, or honoraria from several sources.

Source: Yamada A et al. Prognostic impact of postoperative radiotherapy in patients with breast cancer and with pT1-2 and 1–3 lymph node metastases: A retrospective cohort study based on the Japanese Breast Cancer Registry. Eur J Cancer. 2022;172:32-40 (Jun 22). Doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.05.017

Key clinical point: Addition of atezolizumab vs placebo to pertuzumab-trastuzumab (PH)+chemotherapy did not improve pathological complete response (pCR) rates in patients with high-risk, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) early breast cancer (BC).

Major finding: The rate of pCR was similar with atezolizumab and placebo in the intention-to-treat (62.4% and 62.7%, respectively; P  =  .9551) and programmed cell death-ligand 1-positive (64.2% and 72.5%, respectively; P  =  .1846) populations. The atezolizumab vs placebo group reported 5 vs 0 grade 5 adverse events, respectively.

Study details: Findings are from the phase 3 IMpassion050 study including 454 patients with high-risk, HER2+ early BC who were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab or placebo with PH+chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting and continued atezolizumab or placebo with PH in the adjuvant phase.

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Six authors declared being employees or stockowners at Roche, and the other authors reported ties with various sources, including Roche.

Source: Huober J et al. Atezolizumab With Neoadjuvant anti–human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 therapy and chemotherapy in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive early breast cancer: Primary results of the randomized phase III IMpassion050 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (Jun 28). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02772

Key clinical point: Addition of atezolizumab vs placebo to pertuzumab-trastuzumab (PH)+chemotherapy did not improve pathological complete response (pCR) rates in patients with high-risk, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) early breast cancer (BC).

Major finding: The rate of pCR was similar with atezolizumab and placebo in the intention-to-treat (62.4% and 62.7%, respectively; P  =  .9551) and programmed cell death-ligand 1-positive (64.2% and 72.5%, respectively; P  =  .1846) populations. The atezolizumab vs placebo group reported 5 vs 0 grade 5 adverse events, respectively.

Study details: Findings are from the phase 3 IMpassion050 study including 454 patients with high-risk, HER2+ early BC who were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab or placebo with PH+chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting and continued atezolizumab or placebo with PH in the adjuvant phase.

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Six authors declared being employees or stockowners at Roche, and the other authors reported ties with various sources, including Roche.

Source: Huober J et al. Atezolizumab With Neoadjuvant anti–human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 therapy and chemotherapy in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive early breast cancer: Primary results of the randomized phase III IMpassion050 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (Jun 28). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02772

Key clinical point: Addition of atezolizumab vs placebo to pertuzumab-trastuzumab (PH)+chemotherapy did not improve pathological complete response (pCR) rates in patients with high-risk, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) early breast cancer (BC).

Major finding: The rate of pCR was similar with atezolizumab and placebo in the intention-to-treat (62.4% and 62.7%, respectively; P  =  .9551) and programmed cell death-ligand 1-positive (64.2% and 72.5%, respectively; P  =  .1846) populations. The atezolizumab vs placebo group reported 5 vs 0 grade 5 adverse events, respectively.

Study details: Findings are from the phase 3 IMpassion050 study including 454 patients with high-risk, HER2+ early BC who were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab or placebo with PH+chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting and continued atezolizumab or placebo with PH in the adjuvant phase.

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Six authors declared being employees or stockowners at Roche, and the other authors reported ties with various sources, including Roche.

Source: Huober J et al. Atezolizumab With Neoadjuvant anti–human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 therapy and chemotherapy in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive early breast cancer: Primary results of the randomized phase III IMpassion050 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2022 (Jun 28). Doi:  10.1200/JCO.21.02772