Poly-ADP-ribose polymerase 1 (PARP-1) and PARP-2 are DNA damage sensors that are most active during S-phase of the cell cycle and that have wider-reaching roles in DNA repair than originally described. BRCA1 and BRCA2 (Breast Cancer) proteins are involved in homologous recombination repair (HRR), which requires a homologous chromosome or sister chromatid as a template to faithfully repair DNA double-strand breaks. The small-molecule NAD+ mimetics, olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib, veliparib, and talazoparib, inhibit the catalytic activity of PARP-1 and PARP-2 and are currently being studied in later-stage clinical trials. PARP inhibitor clinical trials have predominantly focused on patients with breast and ovarian cancer with deleterious germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations (gBRCA1/2+) but are now expanding to include cancers with known, suspected, or more-likely-than-not defects in homologous recombination repair. In ovarian cancer, this group also includes women whose cancers are responsive to platinum therapy. Olaparib was FDA-approved in January 2018 for the treatment of gBRCA1/2+ metastatic breast cancers. gBRCA1+ predisposes women to develop triple-negative breast cancers, while women with gBRCA2+ tend to develop hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative breast cancers. Although PARP inhibitor monotherapy strategies seem most effective in cancers with homologous recombination repair defects, combination strategies may allow expansion into a wider range of cancers. By interfering with DNA repair, PARP inhibitors essentially sensitize cells to DNA-damaging chemotherapies and radiation therapy. Certainly, one could also consider expanding the utility of PARP inhibitors beyond gBRCA1/2+ cancers by causing DNA damage with cytotoxic agents in the presence of a DNA repair inhibitor. Unfortunately, in numerous phase I clinical trials utilizing a combination of cytotoxic chemotherapy at standard doses with dose-escalation of PARP inhibitors, there has generally been failure to reach monotherapy dosages of PARP inhibitors due to myelosuppressive toxicities. Strategies utilizing angiogenesis inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors are generally not hindered by additive toxicities, though the utility of combining PARP inhibitors with treatments that have not been particularly effective in breast cancers somewhat tempers enthusiasm. Finally, there are combination strategies that may serve to mitigate resistance to PARP inhibitors, namely, upregulation of the intracellular PhosphoInositide-3-kinase, AK thymoma (protein kinase B), mechanistic target of rapamycin (PI3K-AKT-mTOR) pathway, or perhaps are more simply meant to interfere with a cell growth pathway heavily implicated in breast cancers while administering relatively well-tolerated PARP inhibitor therapy.

Systemic therapy for both early-stage and metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer has seen significant evolution over the last 20 or more years. Innovative trials leveraging the prognostic and predictive information that neoadjuvant chemotherapy provides has led to preoperative systemic therapy becoming the overwhelmingly favored sequencing in the early-stage setting. However, deintensification of therapy is important to consider for patients with good-risk disease or significant comorbidities. Finally, with the abundance of newly approved agents, drug sequencing in the second-line setting has become an important and individualized decision for patients with metastatic disease.

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted therapies have revolutionized the treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer, both in the metastatic and early stage settings. While trastuzumab and lapatinib had been the mainstays of treatment in combination with chemotherapy, innate and acquired resistance to these therapies occur. More recently, two additional HER2-directed therapies have been approved for HER2-positive breast cancer. Pertuzumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to the extracellular portion of the receptor on a domain distinct from the binding site of trastuzumab. The addition of pertuzumab to trastuzumab results in synergistic tumor cell inhibition and has been shown to significantly improve clinical outcomes for patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) compared to trastuzumab plus chemotherapy alone. In addition, ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1), a novel antibody-drug conjugate linking trastuzumab with the cytotoxic maytansinoid, DM1, is an effective treatment for HER2-positive breast cancer that has progressed on other HER2-directed therapies. Both pertuzumab and T-DM1 are relatively well tolerated. This review presents the mechanisms of action as well as phase I, II and III clinical data describing the safety and efficacy of pertuzumab and T-DM1 for HER2-positive breast cancer.

In February 2013, ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1, Kadcyla®) received regulatory approval in the United States for treatment-refractory human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer based on results from EMILIA, a large phase III trial that compared standard of care lapatinib plus capecitabine to T-DM1. Several other studies have been reported in the metastatic setting and multiple trials are ongoing or planned in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant and advanced disease settings. Here we provide an updated and comprehensive review of clinical trials evaluating T-DM1, discuss management of toxicity associated with this drug, propose potential mechanisms of resistance and offer practical considerations for the treating oncologist.

The incidence of breast cancer brain metastases has increased in recent years, largely due to improved control of systemic disease with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted agents and the inability of most of these agents to efficiently cross the blood-blood barrier (BBB) and control central nervous system disease. There is, therefore, an urgent unmet need for treatments to prevent and treat HER2+ breast cancer brain metastases (BCBMs). Aberrant activation of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling pathway is frequently observed in many cancers, including primary breast tumors and BCBMs. Agents targeting key components of this pathway have demonstrated antitumor activity in diverse cancers, and may represent a new treatment strategy for BCBMs. In preclinical studies, several inhibitors of PI3K and mTOR have demonstrated an ability to penetrate the BBB and down-regulate PI3K signaling, indicating that these agents may be potential therapies for brain metastatic disease. The PI3K inhibitor buparlisib (BKM120) and the mTOR inhibitor everolimus (RAD001) are currently under evaluation in combination with trastuzumab in patients with HER2+ BCBMs.

Purpose

This article reviews the mechanism of action of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1), existing clinical data relating to its use for human growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer, potential pathways of resistance, and ongoing studies evaluating this novel agent.

Background

The development of HER2-targeted therapies has dramatically improved clinical outcomes for patients with any stage of HER2-positive breast cancer. Although the positive effect of these treatments cannot be overstated, treatment resistance develops in the vast majority of those diagnosed with stage IV HER2-positive breast cancer. Moreover, HER2-directed therapies are most effective when combined with cytotoxic chemotherapy. The need for chemotherapy leads to significant adverse effects and a clear decrease in quality of life for those dealing with a chronic incurable disease. T-DM1 is a recently developed, novel antibody-drug conjugate in which highly potent maytanisinoid chemotherapy is stably linked to the HER2-targeted monoclonal antibody, trastuzumab.

Results

Preclinical and phase 1-3 clinical data support the significant antitumor activity of T-DM1. Importantly, several randomized studies also now demonstrate its clear superiority in terms of tolerability compared with standard chemotherapy-containing regimens. Its role in the treatment of trastuzumab-resistant metastatic breast cancer has now been established on the basis of the results of two phase 3 randomized studies, EMILIA (An Open-label Study of Trastuzumab Emtansine (T-DM1) vs Capecitabine + Lapatinib in Patients With HER2-positive Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer) and TH3RESA (A Study of Trastuzumab Emtansine in Comparison With Treatment of Physician's Choice in Patients With HER2-positive Breast Cancer Who Have Received at Least Two Prior Regimens of HER2-directed Therapy). The most common toxicities seen with T-DM1 are thrombocytopenia and an elevation in liver transaminases. Significant cardiac toxicity has not been demonstrated. Both in vitro cell line-based studies as well as exploratory analyses of archived tumor samples from the clinical trials are seeking to understand potential mechanisms of resistance to T-DM1. Ongoing studies are also evaluating the use of T-DM1 in the first-line metastatic, neoadjuvant, and adjuvant settings, as well as in combination with other targeted therapies.

Conclusion

T-DM1 represents the first successfully developed antibody drug conjugate for the treatment of HER2-positive advanced breast cancer.

In the past 20 years, clinicians have shifted away from relying solely on clinicopathologic indicators toward increasing use of multigene expression assays in guiding treatment decisions regarding adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. Oncotype DX Recurrence Score (RS) is one of the most widely used multigene assays when considering indications for adjuvant chemotherapy, and guidelines have recently incorporated its use in women with early HR-positive HER2-negative breast cancer and up to three positive lymph nodes. While multiple retrospective and prospective clinical studies have demonstrated that most women with a low- to mid-range RS (0-25) can safely forgo chemotherapy, premenopausal women remain an important subgroup for which recommendations based on RS are ill-defined. The majority of patients included in clinical trials and retrospective analyses validating the use of RS have been postmenopausal women. In the subgroup of premenopausal women with HR-positive HER2-negative breast cancer, studies indicate that traditional clinicopathologic methods for assessing risk continue to be powerful tools when combined with RS to predict benefit from chemotherapy. This suggests that there is an element of uncaptured risk inherent to the premenopausal state that evades characterization by RS alone. This review describes the evidence that has supported the recommendation of RS in clinical guidelines, specifically focusing on data for its current use in premenopausal women. We review available data regarding the impact of the menstrual cycle on hormonally regulated gene expression, which may drive variations in the RS. Further research on the reliability and interpretation of the RS in the premenopausal subgroup is necessary and represents a gap in knowledge of how the RS should be applied in premenopausal women.

While overall survival (OS) has historically been the primary endpoint for clinical trials in oncology, progression-free survival (PFS) has gained acceptance as a valuable surrogate endpoint. However, there are no known published reports about the value of PFS from the patient's perspective. We developed a questionnaire that included items regarding quality of life (QoL) and the importance of different treatment outcomes and presented hypothetical scenarios for which respondents were asked to indicate their preferences concerning treatments as they relate to PFS. 282 women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), ranging in age from 21 to 80 years completed an online version of this questionnaire. The majority of women (66 %) had been diagnosed with MBC within the previous 3 years and 56 % had been told their MBC had progressed. When asked to rank five treatment characteristics from most important to least important, respondents ranked "extending PFS" as the second most important treatment outcome after OS. When presented with a hypothetical scenario of two women receiving different treatments, respondents preferred the treatment that resulted in longer PFS (16 vs. 12 months), even when OS and side effects were assumed to be equal. Specifically, when asked to consider which woman within the hypothetical scenario had better QoL, physical functioning, and emotional well-being, respondents more often chose the woman who experienced longer PFS (QoL: 40 vs. 6 %; physical functioning: 32 vs. 8 %; emotional well-being: 58 vs. 6 %) compared to the woman within the hypothetical scenario who had a shorter time of progression. Respondents rated their own QoL highest after being told their MBC was responding to treatment (mean score 76.6) versus after the initial diagnosis of breast cancer and MBC (68.5 and 60.3). These findings suggest that extending PFS is an important treatment outcome and, from a patient perspective, improves overall QoL, physical functioning, and emotional well-being.

Breast cancer is the most prevalent malignancy in women and the second most common cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Despite major innovations in early detection and advanced therapeutics, up to 30% of women with node-negative breast cancer and 70% of women with node-positive breast cancer will develop recurrence. The recognition that breast tumors are infiltrated by a complex array of immune cells that influence their development, progression, and metastasis, as well as their responsiveness to systemic therapies has sparked major interest in the development of immunotherapies. In fact, not only the native host immune system can be altered to promote potent antitumor response, but also its components can be manipulated to generate effective therapeutic strategies. We present here a review of the major approaches to immunotherapy in breast cancers, both successes and failures, as well as new therapies on the horizon.

Trastuzumab, a key treatment for HER2-positive breast cancer, is available in weight-based IV and fixed-dose (600 mg) SC formulations. While the Phase 3 HannaH trial indicated non-inferiority of the SC formulation, there is some concern that the target plasma concentration may not be reached in overweight/obese patients whereas low-body-weight patients may be at risk of toxicity. This scoping review evaluated whether overweight/obese patients are at risk of below-target exposure with fixed-dose SC trastuzumab, whether low-body-weight patients are at risk of increased toxicity, especially cardiotoxicity, and whether IV and SC trastuzumab are equivalent in terms of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (e.g. infections). Thirty-seven publications that met the eligibility criteria were included. Body weight is not an important determinant of exposure to trastuzumab at steady state (i.e. pre-dose cycle 8); however, real-world evidence suggests that the target concentration (20 μg/mL) may not be reached with the first SC dose in overweight/obese patients. There is no evidence that low-body-weight patients are at increased risk of cardiotoxicity with SC trastuzumab, although this may be confounded by the higher rate of cardiovascular comorbidities in overweight patients. In Phase 3 trials, SC trastuzumab was associated with higher rates of ISRs, ADAs and SAEs, the latter often requiring hospitalization and occurring during adjuvant treatment when patients are not burdened by chemotherapy. The route of administration of trastuzumab (IV vs SC) in different treatment settings should be discussed with the patient, taking into account the risks and benefits associated with each route.