Secondary Invasive Breast Events among Patients with Hormone-Positive Breast Cancer and High-Risk Oncotype DX Recurrence Scores 26–30 and ≥31

<b><i>Background:</i></b> The Oncotype DX Recurrence Score (ODx RS) is the most widely adopted genomic assay used to guide treatment for patients with early-stage, hormone-positive (HR+) breast cancer (BC), with higher scores predicting greater risk of recurrence and benefit from chemotherapy. Patients with ODx RS &#x3e;25 typically recieve adjuvant chemotherapy; however, data regarding efficacy of chemotherapy for reducing recurrence in this population have been mixed. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> This study aimed to evaluate outcomes of patients with early-stage HR+ BC with high-risk ODx RS (26–30 and ≥31) in order to assess treatment patterns and outcomes. We hypothesized that the benefit of chemotherapy in these groups may be minimal and that select patients may forgo chemotherapy in favor of more aggressive endocrine therapy and ovarian suppression. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We performed a retrospective analysis of 515 patients with early-stage, HR+ BC with high-risk ODx RS 26–30 and ≥31 treated between 2006 and 2018. Patients were stratified by RS: low-risk (≤10), intermediate-risk (11–25), and high-risk (≥26). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the time to secondary invasive breast events (SIBE) or distributions overall and among different RS groups with the log rank test used to compare distributions between groups. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Rates of chemotherapy administration were 7% among the low-risk group, 18% among the intermediate-risk group, and 83% among high-risk patients with 41 SIBE (8%) reported. When stratified by ODx RS, 5-year rates of SIBE were 4%, 6%, and 16% for low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk RS, respectively. Among the 27 lymph node (LN)-negative patients with ODx RS 26–30, 74% received chemotherapy. The 5-year rate of SIBE was 25% among patients who received chemotherapy and 33% among those who did not (<i>p</i> = 0.5489). Among the 23 LN-negative patients with ODx RS ≥31, 91% of patients received chemotherapy. The 5-year rate of SIBE was 0% both with and without chemotherapy. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> There was no statistically significant difference in SIBE for patients with high-risk ODx RS based on chemotherapy treatment. More aggressive endocrine therapy with ovarian suppression has become an alternative to chemotherapy among patients with intermediate-risk ODx RS (16–25). This approach may be useful among patients with high-risk ODx RS, with additional studies needed in this patient population.

Patients With Deep Ovarian Suppression Following GnRH Agonist Long Protocol May Benefit From a Modified GnRH Antagonist Protocol: A Retrospective Cohort Study

ObjectiveTo verify if patients with deep ovarian suppression following gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist long protocol may benefit from a modified GnRH antagonist protocol based on luteinizing hormone (LH) levels.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingUniversity-based hospital.Patients110 patients exhibited ultra-low LH levels during ovarian stimulation using GnRH agonist long protocol.Intervention(s)As all the embryos in the first cycle were exhausted without being pregnant, these patients proposed to undergo a second cycle of ovarian stimulation. 74 of them were treated with a modified GnRH antagonist protocol based on LH levels. Other 36 patients were still stimulated following GnRH agonist long protocol.Main Outcome MeasureThe primary outcome was live birth rate (LBR). The second outcomes were biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) and cancellation rate.ResultsReproductive outcomes were much better in the modified GnRH antagonist protocol. The OPR and LBR were much higher in the GnRH antagonist protocol group than in the GnRH agonist long protocol group [odds ratio (OR) 3.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.47, 10.61, P=0.018; OR 4.33, 95% CI 1.38, 13.60, P=0.008; respectively]. Meanwhile, the cancellation rate was much lower in the GnRH antagonist protocol group (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02, 0.72; P=0.014). Mean LH level during stimulation did not have a predictive value on live birth. However, it was independently associated with the occurrence of ongoing pregnancy (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.25, 5.85; P=0.01). The results of sensitivity analyses were consistent with the data mentioned above. The patients got completely different and excellent clinical outcomes in their second cycles stimulated with the modified GnRH antagonist protocol.ConclusionPatients with deep ovarian suppression following GnRH agonist long protocol may benefit from a modified GnRH antagonist protocol based on LH levels.

Ovarian function suppression in premenopausal patients with concurrent endocrine therapy use.

6574 Background: The addition of ovarian function suppression (OFS) to endocrine therapy (ET) for premenopausal women with high risk, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer improves disease outcomes. However, in the SOFT-EST study, up to 17% of patients receiving gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) did not have appropriate ovarian suppression within the first year of treatment. Few studies have explored the long-term effectiveness of OFS to maintain estrogen suppression. Guidelines for estradiol monitoring during OFS therapy are not clearly defined. Methods: We performed a retrospective, single institution review of all patients who received concurrent GnRHa injections and ET since 2010. Only estradiol concentrations that were assessed during OFS treatment were abstracted from the medical record and included in the analysis. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with a non-suppressed estradiol concentration (defined as standard estradiol or high-sensitivity estradiol ≥ 10 pg/ml) identified during OFS cycle 2 ( > 35 days after OFS initiation) and/or later cycles. The secondary endpoint, which included only those patients with estradiol assessment within 35 days of OFS initiation, was the percentage of patients with a non-suppressed estradiol level when measured within the first 35 days after OFS initiation. For both cohorts, differences in age, body mass index (BMI), and previous chemotherapy use were summarized via multivariable logistic regression. Results: 148 patients received concurrent OFS and ET. Patients were excluded because of lack of estradiol assessment during OFS therapy (n = 13) and non-compliance with GnRHa injections (n = 4). The average age and BMI were 43.1 years and 29.1 kg/m2, respectively. 35 of 131 patients (26.7%) had at least one non-suppressed estradiol level during OFS cycle 2 and/or later cycles. The median time to detection of non-suppression was 250 days (range: 53 – 2573 days). Patients whose estradiol concentration remained suppressed throughout treatment with OFS and ET were more likely to be older (OR 1.12 [95% CI 1.05-1.22], p =.02), have a lower BMI (OR 0.88 [95% CI 0.82-0.94], p <.001), and have received chemotherapy (OR 6.30 [95% CI 2.06-20.8], p =.002). For the secondary endpoint, 20 of 83 patients (24.1%) had a non-suppressed estradiol level within 35 days of OFS initiation. Lower BMI was associated with achieving ovarian suppression by 35 days (OR 0.85 [95% CI 0.77-0.93], p <.001); no association was noted for age or chemotherapy. Conclusions: More than one-fourth of patients in this “real world” population had at least one non-suppressed estradiol level during treatment, both the month after the initial OFS dose and at later time points. Patients on OFS, especially those on aromatase inhibitor therapy and those at increased risk of non-suppression, may require frequent and long-term estradiol monitoring during treatment.

The role of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists in female fertility preservation

Advances in anticancer treatments have resulted in increasing survival rates among cancer patients. Accordingly, the quality of life after treatment, particularly the preservation of fertility, has gradually emerged as an essential consideration. Cryopreservation of embryos or unfertilized oocytes has been considered as the standard method of fertility preservation among young women facing gonadotoxic chemotherapy. Other methods, including ovarian suppression and ovarian tissue cryopreservation, have been considered experimental. Recent large-scale randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that temporary ovarian suppression using gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) during chemotherapy is beneficial for preventing chemotherapy-induced premature ovarian insufficiency in breast cancer patients. It should also be emphasized that GnRHa use during chemotherapy does not replace established fertility preservation methods. All young women facing gonadotoxic chemotherapy should be counseled about and offered various options for fertility preservation, including both GnRHa use and cryopreservation of embryos, oocytes, and/or ovarian tissue.