Abstract P1-19-11: Results from plasmaMATCH trial treatment cohort C: A phase II trial of capivasertib plus fulvestrant in ER positive breast cancer patients with anAKT1mutation identified via ctDNA screening (CRUK/15/010)

Author(s):  
Rebecca Roylance ◽  
Lucy Kilburn ◽  
Sarah Kernaghan ◽  
Andrew M Wardley ◽  
Iain Macpherson ◽  
...  
2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 627-627
Author(s):  
M. S. Barsoum ◽  
R. M. Gafar ◽  
M. M. Nazmy ◽  
A. Niazy

627 Background: Adjuvant sequential half body irradiation (SHBI) is both interesting as well as scientifically sound approach with proven efficacy in many tumors. Methods: Patients with node positive (≥10) breast cancer were randomized in this phase II trial to receive either 6 cycles of adjuvant cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2, 5FU 500 mg/m2 and epirubicin 100 mg/m2 followed by postoperative local irradiation (Arm A) versus the same adjuvant treatment plus consolidation SHBI staring 3 weeks after end of adjuvant treatment with upper half 750cGy /5 fractions /1week then one month gap followed by the lower half for the same dose (Arm B) Results: Between November 1999 and November 2000 a total of 70 patients who met the eligibility criteria were enrolled. Arm A (n=35) and arm B (n=35) were almost comparable with the respect to different prognostic factors. There was significant improvement in the disease free survival (DFS) at 5 years in arm B. The DFS was 65±8% in arm B while it was 33±8% in arm A (log-rank test: P =0.0036). In subset analysis the difference is apparent in subgroups of patients with less potential metastatic burden, which are T2 cases and ER positive cases. The DFS at 5 years was 83% in arm B and it was 35% in arm A (P=0.0008) in T2 cases. In the subgroup of patients with ER positive tumors (n=51), the DFS at 4 years was 58% in arm B and it was 25% in arm A (P=0.0072). The complications of the addition of SHBI were mild (grades 2 and 3) and mainly gastrointestinal (vomiting, diarrhea and colic). In both arms of the study there were no life-threatening complications or treatment-related mortality. Conclusions: SHBI was found to be a well-tolerated consolidation regimen with acceptable side effects and it showed significant improvement of the DFS in breast cancer patients with ≥ 10 positive lymph nodes especially in the relative cases with good prognosis (T2-ER positive). This makes it worthy of testing in a phase III trial. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2014 ◽  
Vol 50 (13) ◽  
pp. 2190-2200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duveken B.Y. Fontein ◽  
Ayoub Charehbili ◽  
Johan W.R. Nortier ◽  
Elma Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg ◽  
Judith R. Kroep ◽  
...  

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 771
Author(s):  
Tessa A. M. Mulder ◽  
Mirjam de With ◽  
Marzia del Re ◽  
Romano Danesi ◽  
Ron H. J. Mathijssen ◽  
...  

Tamoxifen is a major option for adjuvant endocrine treatment in estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer patients. The conversion of the prodrug tamoxifen into the most active metabolite endoxifen is mainly catalyzed by the enzyme cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6). Genetic variation in the CYP2D6 gene leads to altered enzyme activity, which influences endoxifen formation and thereby potentially therapy outcome. The association between genetically compromised CYP2D6 activity and low endoxifen plasma concentrations is generally accepted, and it was shown that tamoxifen dose increments in compromised patients resulted in higher endoxifen concentrations. However, the correlation between CYP2D6 genotype and clinical outcome is still under debate. This has led to genotype-based tamoxifen dosing recommendations by the Clinical Pharmacogenetic Implementation Consortium (CPIC) in 2018, whereas in 2019, the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) discouraged the use of CYP2D6 genotyping in clinical practice for tamoxifen therapy. This paper describes the latest developments on CYP2D6 genotyping in relation to endoxifen plasma concentrations and tamoxifen-related clinical outcome. Therefore, we focused on Pharmacogenetic publications from 2018 (CPIC publication) to 2021 in order to shed a light on the current status of this debate.


Oncotarget ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (32) ◽  
pp. 52142-52155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takashi Takeshita ◽  
Yutaka Yamamoto ◽  
Mutsuko Yamamoto-Ibusuki ◽  
Mai Tomiguchi ◽  
Aiko Sueta ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document