Abstract PD2-07: 10-year follow-up and biomarker discovery for adjuvant endocrine therapy; results of the TEAM trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Optimal endocrine therapy for postmenopausal, hormone-receptor positive (HR+) early breast cancer remains a point of discussion. The Tamoxifen Exemestane Adjuvant Multinational (TEAM) phase III trial showed no significant differences for disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) at 5 years between exemestane monotherapy and sequential treatment (tamoxifen followed by exemestane). We now report disease related outcomes at 10 years of follow-up (FU), and an explorative analysis to assess the predictive value of clinicopathological and immune-related biomarkers. In the TEAM trial, postmenopausal women with HR+ positive early breast cancer were randomly assigned to exemestane alone or sequential therapy. For this analysis, TEAM patients from countries that completed 10 years of FU were included. The primary endpoint was DFS at ten years, analyzed by intention to treat. Secondary outcomes were OS and cumulative incidence of relapse. An explorative per protocol analysis for relapse free survival (RFS) was performed to identify predictive pathological and immunological biomarkers, including centrally determined ER (ER-poor 0-6 vs ER-rich 7-8) and PR (0-4 vs 5-8) Allred scores, and the immunological markers CD8, FoxP3, classical HLA class 1 and HLA-G which were described earlier (Engels et al, Breast Cancer Treat Res, 2015). In total, 6120 patients were eligible for the current analysis, 3075 patients with exemestane monotherapy and 3045 patients randomized to sequential treatment. Median follow up was 9.83 years. DFS was 66.8% in the exemestane group and 66.8% in the sequential group (hazard ratio (HR) 0.96, 95% CI 0.88-1.05, p=0.389). OS was 74% in the exemestane, and 73% in the sequential group, respectively (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89-1.09, p=0.737). The cumulative incidence of relapse was 20% and 22% in the exemestane and sequential groups, respectively (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.99, p=0.031). In the explorative per protocol analysis (n=4041), Allred score were available for 2996 patients; immunological markers for 1754 patients. Patients with above median numbers of FoxP3-positive T-cells showed a benefit of exemestane monotherapy for RFS (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42-0.75, p<0.001) in contrast to patients with low numbers of FoxP3-positive cells (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.77-1.32, p=0.97, p-value for interaction 0.004). A high tumor differentiation grade was associated with more benefit for exemestane monotherapy (grade 1/2 HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-0.94, p=0.01, grade 3/4 HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49-0.75, p<0.001), with a borderline significant interaction (p=0.07). ER Allred score showed a borderline significant treatment by marker effect interaction (ER-rich HR 0.69 (95% CI 0.58-0.81, p<0.001); ER-poor HR 0.94 (95% CI 0.65-1.34, p=0.71, p for interaction 0.12). After ten years of follow up, both exemestane monotherapy and sequential therapy remain appropriate options for postmenopausal HR+ early breast cancer patients. Interestingly, the number of regulatory T-cells was a predictive factor for the benefit of exemestane monotherapy, which implies a role of the local immune system in endocrine therapy. Furthermore, data suggested that patients with a higher differentiation grade or ER-rich tumor derive more benefit from exemestane monotherapy. Citation Format: Blok EJ, Derks MGM, Kuppen PJK, Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg EM, Engels CC, Liefers G-J, Putter H, Seynaeve CM, Kroep JR, Nortier JWR, Rea DW, Hasenburg A, Markopoulos CJ, Paridaens R, Bartlett JMS, van de Velde CJH. 10-year follow-up and biomarker discovery for adjuvant endocrine therapy; results of the TEAM trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD2-07.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».