2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Trastuzumab Deruxtecan in HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients with Brain Metastases: A DESTINY-Breast01 Subgroup Analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This subgroup analysis of patients with HER2-positive breast cancer with a history of brain metastases from DESTINY-Breast01 demonstrated the strong clinical activity of trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) in this patient population, warranting continued investigation.

          Abstract

          DESTINY-Breast01 (NCT03248492) evaluated trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd; DS-8201) in patients with heavily pretreated HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (mBC). We present a subgroup of 24 patients with a history of treated brain metastases (BM), a population with limited treatment options. In patients with BMs, the confirmed objective response rate (cORR) was 58.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 36.6%–77.9%], and the median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 18.1 months (95% CI, 6.7–18.1 months). In patients without BMs ( n = 160), cORR was 61.3% and mPFS was 16.4 months. Eight patients (47.1%) experienced a best overall intracranial response of partial response or complete response. Seven patients (41.2%) had a best percentage change in brain lesion diameter from baseline consistent with stable disease. Two patients (8.3%) with BMs and two (1.3%) without BMs experienced progression in the brain. The safety profile of T-DXd was consistent with previous studies. The durable clinical activity of T-DXd in this population warrants further investigation.

          Significance:

          Advances in treating HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer have greatly improved patient outcomes, but intracranial progression remains an important risk for which few therapeutic options are currently available. T-DXd demonstrated durable efficacy in patients with stable, treated BMs.

          This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 2711

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

          Assessment of the change in tumour burden is an important feature of the clinical evaluation of cancer therapeutics: both tumour shrinkage (objective response) and disease progression are useful endpoints in clinical trials. Since RECIST was published in 2000, many investigators, cooperative groups, industry and government authorities have adopted these criteria in the assessment of treatment outcomes. However, a number of questions and issues have arisen which have led to the development of a revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Evidence for changes, summarised in separate papers in this special issue, has come from assessment of a large data warehouse (>6500 patients), simulation studies and literature reviews. HIGHLIGHTS OF REVISED RECIST 1.1: Major changes include: Number of lesions to be assessed: based on evidence from numerous trial databases merged into a data warehouse for analysis purposes, the number of lesions required to assess tumour burden for response determination has been reduced from a maximum of 10 to a maximum of five total (and from five to two per organ, maximum). Assessment of pathological lymph nodes is now incorporated: nodes with a short axis of 15 mm are considered measurable and assessable as target lesions. The short axis measurement should be included in the sum of lesions in calculation of tumour response. Nodes that shrink to <10mm short axis are considered normal. Confirmation of response is required for trials with response primary endpoint but is no longer required in randomised studies since the control arm serves as appropriate means of interpretation of data. Disease progression is clarified in several aspects: in addition to the previous definition of progression in target disease of 20% increase in sum, a 5mm absolute increase is now required as well to guard against over calling PD when the total sum is very small. Furthermore, there is guidance offered on what constitutes 'unequivocal progression' of non-measurable/non-target disease, a source of confusion in the original RECIST guideline. Finally, a section on detection of new lesions, including the interpretation of FDG-PET scan assessment is included. Imaging guidance: the revised RECIST includes a new imaging appendix with updated recommendations on the optimal anatomical assessment of lesions. A key question considered by the RECIST Working Group in developing RECIST 1.1 was whether it was appropriate to move from anatomic unidimensional assessment of tumour burden to either volumetric anatomical assessment or to functional assessment with PET or MRI. It was concluded that, at present, there is not sufficient standardisation or evidence to abandon anatomical assessment of tumour burden. The only exception to this is in the use of FDG-PET imaging as an adjunct to determination of progression. As is detailed in the final paper in this special issue, the use of these promising newer approaches requires appropriate clinical validation studies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Trastuzumab Deruxtecan in Previously Treated HER2-Positive Breast Cancer

            Trastuzumab deruxtecan (DS-8201) is an antibody-drug conjugate composed of an anti-HER2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) antibody, a cleavable tetrapeptide-based linker, and a cytotoxic topoisomerase I inhibitor. In a phase 1 dose-finding study, a majority of the patients with advanced HER2-positive breast cancer had a response to trastuzumab deruxtecan (median response duration, 20.7 months). The efficacy of trastuzumab deruxtecan in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer previously treated with trastuzumab emtansine requires confirmation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Trastuzumab Deruxtecan in Previously Treated HER2-Low Advanced Breast Cancer

              Among breast cancers without human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) amplification, overexpression, or both, a large proportion express low levels of HER2 that may be targetable. Currently available HER2-directed therapies have been ineffective in patients with these "HER2-low" cancers.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cancer Discov
                Cancer Discov
                Cancer Discovery
                American Association for Cancer Research
                2159-8274
                2159-8290
                02 December 2022
                18 October 2022
                : 12
                : 12
                : 2754-2762
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Centre Hospitalier Universitaire du Sart Tilman Liège and Liège University, Department of Medical Oncology, Breast Clinic, Liège, Belgium.
                [2 ]Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
                [3 ]Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama, Japan.
                [4 ]University of California, Los Angeles, Division of Hematology-Oncology, UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, California.
                [5 ]Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
                [6 ]Gustave Roussy, Department of Immunology, Université Paris-Sud, Villejuif, France.
                [7 ]Department of Medical Oncology, Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, Connecticut.
                [8 ]Instituto Oncológico Dr Rosell, Hospital General De Catalunya, SOLTI, Institut Oncològic, Barcelona, Spain.
                [9 ]Medical Oncology Department, Institut de Cancérologie des Hospices Civils de Lyon, CITOHL, Department of Medical Oncology, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Lyon, France.
                [10 ]Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Breast Cancer Unit, Medical Oncology Service and Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona, Spain.
                [11 ]Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
                [12 ]US Oncology Research, McKesson Specialty Health, The Woodlands, Texas.
                [13 ]Texas Oncology, Baylor-Sammons Cancer Center, Medical Services, Dallas, Texas.
                [14 ]Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
                [15 ]Department of Oncology, Infermi Hospital, AUSL della Romagna, Rimini, Italy.
                [16 ]Breast Medical Oncology Department, The Cancer Institute Hospital of JFCR, Tokyo, Japan.
                [17 ]Daiichi Sankyo, Basking Ridge, New Jersey.
                [18 ]Department of Oncology, Centre Eugène Marquis, Rennes, France.
                Author notes
                [* ] Corresponding Author: Guy Jerusalem, Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire du Sart Tilman, Avenue de l'Hôpital, 1, 4000 Liège, Belgium. Phone: 324-366-8414; Fax: 324-366-7688; E-mail: g.jerusalem@ 123456chu.ulg.ac.be

                Cancer Discov 2022;12:2754–62

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8845-0043
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4156-9212
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8845-0043
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7808-7191
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6427-7373
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5795-8357
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6380-5944
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5797-7037
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3177-8857
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8296-5065
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5588-8332
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8040-4985
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0103-4718
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2618-0180
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8417-5291
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2125-3755
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6630-4221
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8230-2544
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2989-5296
                Article
                CD-22-0837
                10.1158/2159-8290.CD-22-0837
                9716244
                36255231
                21a9b639-63a3-4424-b482-80ad4b1d2783
                ©2022 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research

                This open access article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license.

                History
                : 28 July 2022
                : 30 September 2022
                : 13 October 2022
                Page count
                Pages: 9
                Funding
                Funded by: AstraZeneca (AstraZeneca PLC), https://doi.org/10.13039/100004325;
                Award ID: NA
                Funded by: American Regent (American Regent, Inc.), https://doi.org/10.13039/100016473;
                Award ID: NA
                Categories
                Research Briefs

                Comments

                Comment on this article