Update Mammakarzinom 2020 Teil 1 – frühes Mammakarzinom: Konsolidierung des Wissens über bekannte Therapien

Zusammenfassung

In dieser Übersichtsarbeit werden die neuesten Entwicklungen in der Prävention und in der Behandlung des frühen Mammakarzinoms dargestellt. Mit großen epidemiologischen Studien zu genetischen und nicht genetischen Risikofaktoren wird das Brustkrebsrisiko immer besser beschreibbar. Durch neue Analysen konnte sowohl die Evidenz für hoch-penetrante Gene als auch für niedrig-penetrante Gene verbessert werden. Neue Daten zu Denosumab und Atezolizumab liegen in der Neoadjuvanz vor, genauso wie eine gepoolte Auswertung zahlreicher Studien zu Capecitabin in der kurativen Situation. Ebenso gibt es eine Aktualisierung der Gesamtüberlebensdaten von Pertuzumab in der Adjuvanz mit einer längeren Nachbeobachtungszeit. Letztendlich hält die digitale Medizin stetigen Einzug in die Wissenschaft. Eine kürzlich durchgeführte Studie zur automatisierten Brustkrebserkennung mittels künstlicher Intelligenz schafft die Grundlagen für eine künftige Überprüfung in klinischen Studien.

Schlüsselwörter

frühes Mammakarzinom - Prävention - Therapie - Prognose - Immuntherapie - digitale Medizin

• References/Literatur

• 1 Ditsch N, Untch M, Thill M. et al. AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2019. Breast Care (Basel) 2019; 14: 224-245
• 2 Thill M, Jackisch C, Janni W. et al. AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Locally Advanced and Metastatic Breast Cancer: Update 2019. Breast Care (Basel) 2019; 14: 247-255
• 3 Welslau M, Hartkopf AD, Muller V. et al. Update Breast Cancer 2019 Part 5 – Diagnostic and Therapeutic Challenges of New, Personalised Therapies in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2019; 79: 1090-1099
• 4 Schutz F, Fasching PA, Welslau M. et al. Update Breast Cancer 2019 Part 4 – Diagnostic and Therapeutic Challenges of New, Personalised Therapies for Patients with Early Breast Cancer. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2019; 79: 1079-1089
• 5 Kolberg HC, Schneeweiss A, Fehm TN. et al. Update Breast Cancer 2019 Part 3 – Current Developments in Early Breast Cancer: Review and Critical Assessment by an International Expert Panel. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2019; 79: 470-482
• 6 Wunderle M, Olmes G, Nabieva N. et al. Risk, Prediction and Prevention of Hereditary Breast Cancer – Large-Scale Genomic Studies in Times of Big and Smart Data. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2018; 78: 481-492
• 7 Turner NC, Telli ML, Rugo HS. et al. A Phase II Study of Talazoparib after Platinum or Cytotoxic Nonplatinum Regimens in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer and Germline BRCA1/2 Mutations (ABRAZO). Clin Cancer Res 2019; 25: 2717-2724
• 8 Robson M, Im S-A, Senkus E. et al. Olaparib for Metastatic Breast Cancer in Patients with a Germline BRCA Mutation. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 523-533
• 9 Litton JK, Rugo HS, Ettl J. et al. Talazoparib in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer and a Germline BRCA Mutation. N Engl J Med 2018; 379: 753-763
• 10 Robson ME, Tung N, Conte P. et al. OlympiAD final overall survival and tolerability results: Olaparib versus chemotherapy treatment of physicianʼs choice in patients with a germline BRCA mutation and HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2019; 30: 558-566
• 11 Fasching PA, Loibl S, Hu C. et al. BRCA1/2 Mutations and Bevacizumab in the Neoadjuvant Treatment of Breast Cancer: Response and Prognosis Results in Patients With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer From the GeparQuinto Study. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36: 2281-2287
• 12 Hahnen E, Lederer B, Hauke J. et al. Germline Mutation Status, Pathological Complete Response, and Disease-Free Survival in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Secondary Analysis of the GeparSixto Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol 2017; 3: 1378-1385
• 13 Loibl S, Weber KE, Timms KM. et al. Survival analysis of carboplatin added to an anthracycline/taxane-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy and HRD score as predictor of response – final results from GeparSixto. Ann Oncol 2018; DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdy460.
• 14 Wunderle M, Gass P, Haberle L. et al. BRCA mutations and their influence on pathological complete response and prognosis in a clinical cohort of neoadjuvantly treated breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2018; 171: 85-94
• 15 Shimelis H, LaDuca H, Hu C. et al. Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Risk Genes Identified by Multigene Hereditary Cancer Panel Testing. J Natl Cancer Inst 2018; DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djy106.
• 16 Couch FJ, Shimelis H, Hu C. et al. Associations Between Cancer Predisposition Testing Panel Genes and Breast Cancer. JAMA Oncol 2017; 3: 1190-1196
• 17 Fachal L, Aschard H, Beesley J. et al. Fine-mapping of 150 breast cancer risk regions identifies 191 likely target genes. Nat Genet 2020; DOI: 10.1038/s41588-019-0537-1.
• 18 Wu L, Shi W, Long J. et al. A transcriptome-wide association study of 229,000 women identifies new candidate susceptibility genes for breast cancer. Nat Genet 2018; DOI: 10.1038/s41588-018-0132-x.
• 19 Milne RL, Kuchenbaecker KB, Michailidou K. et al. Identification of ten variants associated with risk of estrogen-receptor-negative breast cancer. Nat Genet 2017; 49: 1767-1778
• 20 Michailidou K, Lindstrom S, Dennis J. et al. Association analysis identifies 65 new breast cancer risk loci. Nature 2017; 551: 92-94
• 21 Day FR, Thompson DJ, Helgason H. et al. Genomic analyses identify hundreds of variants associated with age at menarche and support a role for puberty timing in cancer risk. Nat Genet 2017; 49: 834-841
• 22 Michailidou K, Beesley J, Lindstrom S. et al. Genome-wide association analysis of more than 120,000 individuals identifies 15 new susceptibility loci for breast cancer. Nat Genet 2015; 47: 373-380
• 23 Day FR, Ruth KS, Thompson DJ. et al. Large-scale genomic analyses link reproductive aging to hypothalamic signaling, breast cancer susceptibility and BRCA1-mediated DNA repair. Nat Genet 2015; 47: 1294-1303
• 24 Pharoah PD, Tsai YY, Ramus SJ. et al. GWAS meta-analysis and replication identifies three new susceptibility loci for ovarian cancer. Nat Genet 2013; 45: 362-370 370e1–370e2
• 25 Michailidou K, Hall P, Gonzalez-Neira A. et al. Large-scale genotyping identifies 41 new loci associated with breast cancer risk. Nat Genet 2013; 45: 353-361 361e1–361e2
• 26 Garcia-Closas M, Couch FJ, Lindstrom S. et al. Genome-wide association studies identify four ER negative-specific breast cancer risk loci. Nat Genet 2013; 45: 392-398 398e1–398e2
• 27 Bojesen SE, Pooley KA, Johnatty SE. et al. Multiple independent variants at the TERT locus are associated with telomere length and risks of breast and ovarian cancer. Nat Genet 2013; 45: 371-384 384e1–384e2
• 28 Ghoussaini M, Fletcher O, Michailidou K. et al. Genome-wide association analysis identifies three new breast cancer susceptibility loci. Nat Genet 2012; 44: 312-318
• 29 Haiman CA, Chen GK, Vachon CM. et al. A common variant at the TERT-CLPTM1L locus is associated with estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer. Nat Genet 2011; 43: 1210-1214
• 30 Antoniou AC, Wang X, Fredericksen ZS. et al. A locus on 19p13 modifies risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers and is associated with hormone receptor-negative breast cancer in the general population. Nat Genet 2010; 42: 885-892
• 31 Ghoussaini M, French JD, Michailidou K. et al. Evidence that the 5p12 Variant rs10941679 Confers Susceptibility to Estrogen-Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer through FGF10 and MRPS30 Regulation. Am J Hum Genet 2016; 99: 903-911
• 32 Couch FJ, Kuchenbaecker KB, Michailidou K. et al. Identification of four novel susceptibility loci for oestrogen receptor negative breast cancer. Nat Commun 2016; 7: 11375
• 33 Purrington KS, Slager S, Eccles D. et al. Genome-wide association study identifies 25 known breast cancer susceptibility loci as risk factors for triple-negative breast cancer. Carcinogenesis 2014; 35: 1012-1019
• 34 Stevens KN, Fredericksen Z, Vachon CM. et al. 19p13.1 is a triple-negative-specific breast cancer susceptibility locus. Cancer Res 2012; 72: 1795-1803
• 35 Mavaddat N, Michailidou K, Dennis J. et al. Polygenic Risk Scores for Prediction of Breast Cancer and Breast Cancer Subtypes. Am J Hum Genet 2018; DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.11.002.
• 36 Mavaddat N, Pharoah PD, Michailidou K. et al. Prediction of breast cancer risk based on profiling with common genetic variants. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015; 107: pii:djv036
• 37 Vachon CM, Scott CG, Tamimi RM. et al. Joint association of mammographic density adjusted for age and body mass index and polygenic risk score with breast cancer risk. Breast Cancer Res 2019; 21: 68
• 38 Vachon CM, Pankratz VS, Scott CG. et al. The contributions of breast density and common genetic variation to breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015; 107: pii:dju397
• 39 Rudolph A, Fasching PA, Behrens S. et al. A comprehensive evaluation of interaction between genetic variants and use of menopausal hormone therapy on mammographic density. Breast Cancer Res 2015; 17: 110
• 40 Vachon CM, Scott CG, Fasching PA. et al. Common breast cancer susceptibility variants in LSP1 and RAD51L1 are associated with mammographic density measures that predict breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2012; 21: 1156-1166
• 41 von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer JU. et al. Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30: 1796-1804
• 42 Cortazar P, Geyer jr. CE. Pathological complete response in neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2015; 22: 1441-1446
• 43 Fasching PA, Heusinger K, Haeberle L. et al. Ki67, chemotherapy response, and prognosis in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment. BMC Cancer 2011; 11: 486
• 44 Untch M, Jackisch C, Schneeweiss A. et al. Nab-paclitaxel versus solvent-based paclitaxel in neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer (GeparSepto-GBG 69): a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17: 345-356
• 45 Untch M, Jackisch C, Schneeweiss A. et al. NAB-Paclitaxel Improves Disease-Free Survival in Early Breast Cancer: GBG 69-GeparSepto. J Clin Oncol 2019; 37: 2226-2234
• 46 Blohmer J, Link T, Kümmel S. et al. Investigating denosumab as an add-on treatment to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and two different nab-paclitaxel schedules in a 2x2 design in primary breast cancer – First results of the GeparX study. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS3-01
• 47 Gnant M, Pfeiler G, Steger GG. et al. Adjuvant denosumab in postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (ABCSG-18): disease-free survival results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: 339-351
• 48 Schmid P, Adams S, Rugo HS. et al. Atezolizumab and Nab-Paclitaxel in Advanced Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2018; 379: 2108-2121
• 49 Schmid P, Park YH, Ferreira M. et al. KEYNOTE-522 study of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs. placebo + chemotherapy, followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab vs. placebo for early triple-negative breast cancer: pathologic complete response in key subgroups and by treatment exposure, residual cancer burden, and breast-conserving surgery. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS3-03
• 50 Gianni L, Huang C-S, Egle D. et al. Pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant treatment with or without atezolizumab in triple negative, early high-risk and locally advanced breast cancer. NeoTRIPaPDL1 Michelangelo randomized study. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS3-04
• 51 Heil J, Pfob A, Sinn H. et al. Diagnosing residual disease and pathologic complete response after neoadjuvantchemotherapy in breast cancer patients by image-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy : results of a prospective multicenter trial. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS5-03
• 52 Tasoulis M, Lee H, Yang W. et al. Accuracy of post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy image-guided breast biopsy to predict the presence of residual cancer: A multi-institutional pooled analysis. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS5-04
• 53 Vrancken Peeters MTFD, van Loevezijn A, van der Noordaa MEM. et al. Toward omitting breast surgery in patients with a pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant systemic treatment: interim analysis of the MICRA trial (Minimally Invasive Complete Response Assessment). San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS5-06
• 54 Basik M, Cecchini RS, De Los Santos JF. et al. Primary analysis of NRG-BR005, a phase II trial assessing accuracy of tumor bed biopsies in predicting pathologic complete response (pCR) in patients with clinical/radiological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) to explore the feasibility of breast-conserving treatment without surgery. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS5-05
• 55 Correa C, Harris EE, Leonardi MC. et al. Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation: Executive summary for the update of an ASTRO Evidence-Based Consensus Statement. Pract Radiat Oncol 2017; 7: 73-79
• 56 Veronesi U, Orecchia R, Maisonneuve P. et al. Intraoperative radiotherapy versus external radiotherapy for early breast cancer (ELIOT): a randomised controlled equivalence trial. Lancet Oncol 2013; 14: 1269-1277
• 57 Strnad V, Ott OJ, Hildebrandt G. et al. 5-year results of accelerated partial breast irradiation using sole interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy versus whole-breast irradiation with boost after breast-conserving surgery for low-risk invasive and in-situ carcinoma of the female breast: a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2016; 387: 229-238
• 58 Vaidya JS, Wenz F, Bulsara M. et al. Risk-adapted targeted intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole-breast radiotherapy for breast cancer: 5-year results for local control and overall survival from the TARGIT-A randomised trial. Lancet 2014; 383: 603-613
• 59 Meattini I, Saieva C, Lucidi S. et al. Accelerated partial breast or whole breast irradiation after breast conservation surgery for patients with early breast cancer: 10-year follow up results of the APBI IMRT Florence randomized phase 3 trial. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS4-06
• 60 van Mackelenberg M, Seither F, Möbus V. et al. Effects of capecitabine as part of neo-/adjuvant chemotherapy. A meta-analysis of individual patient data from 12 randomized trials including 15,457 patients. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: S1-07
• 61 Li J, Yu K, Pang D. et al. Adjuvant capecitabine in combination with docetaxel and cyclophosphamide plus epirubicin for triple-negative breast cancer (cbcsg010): An open-label, randomised, multicentre, phase 3 trial. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS1-08
• 62 Toi M, Imoto S, Ishida T. et al. Addition of S-1 to endocrine therapy in the post-operative adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative primary breast cancer: A multicenter, open-label, phase 3 randomized trial (POTENT trial). San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS1-09
• 63 von Minckwitz G, Procter M, de Azambuja E. et al. Adjuvant Pertuzumab and Trastuzumab in Early HER2-Positive Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 122-131
• 64 Piccart M, Procter M, Fumagalli D. et al. Interim overall survival analysis of APHINITY (BIG 4–11): A randomized multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial comparing chemotherapy plus trastuzumab plus pertuzumab versus chemotherapy plus trastuzumab plus placebo as adjuvant therapy in patients with operable HER2-positive early breast cancer. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS1-04
• 65 Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Procter M, Leyland-Jones B. et al. Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005; 353: 1659-1672
• 66 Romond EH, Perez EA, Bryant J. et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005; 353: 1673-1684
• 67 Slamon D, Eiermann W, Robert N. et al. Adjuvant trastuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 1273-1283
• 68 von Minckwitz G, Huang CS, Mano MS. et al. Trastuzumab Emtansine for Residual Invasive HER2-Positive Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2018; DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814017.
• 69 Pan H, Braybrooke J, Gray R. et al. Improvements in long-term outcome for women with estrogen receptor positive (ER+) early stage breast cancer treated with 5 years of endocrine therapy: Analyses of 82,598 women in the Early Breast Cancer Trialistsʼ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) database. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS2-04
• 70 Mamounas EP, Bandos H, Lembersky BC. et al. Ten-year results from NRG Oncology/NSABP B-42: A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy with letrozole (L) in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor+ breast cancer (BC) who have completed previous adjuvant therapy with an aromatase inhibitor (AI). San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS4-01
• 71 Gavilá J, Saura C, Pascual T. et al. Primary results of SOLTI-1402/CORALLEEN phase 2 trial of neoadjuvant ribociclib plus letrozole versus chemotherapy in PAM50 Luminal B early breast cancer: An open-label, multicenter, two-arm, randomized study. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2019; 2019: GS2-06
• 72 clinicaltrials.gov. NCT02513394. PALbociclib CoLlaborative Adjuvant Study: A Randomized Phase III Trial of Palbociclib With Standard Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy Versus Standard Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy Alone for Hormone Receptor Positive (HR+)/Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2)-Negative Early Breast Cancer (PALLAS). NIH US National Library of Medicine; 2015 Online: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02513394 last access: 17.11.2018
• 73 clinicaltrials.gov. NCT03155997. Endocrine Therapy With or Without Abemaciclib (LY2835219) Following Surgery in Participants With Breast Cancer (monarchE). NIH US National Library of Medicine; 2017 Online: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03155997 last access: 17.11.2018
• 74 Slamon DJ, Fasching PA, Patel R. et al. NATALEE: Phase III study of ribociclib (RIBO) + endocrine therapy (ET) as adjuvant treatment in hormone receptor–positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2–) early breast cancer (EBC). J Clin Oncol 2019; 37: TPS597-TPS597
• 75 Luchini C, Bibeau F, Ligtenberg MJL. et al. ESMO recommendations on microsatellite instability testing for immunotherapy in cancer, and its relationship with PD-1/PD-L1 expression and tumour mutational burden: a systematic review-based approach. Ann Oncol 2019; DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdz116.
• 76 Pisano ED. AI shows promise for breast cancer screening. Nature 2020; 577: 35-36
• 77 Ellmann S, Wenkel E, Dietzel M. et al. Implementation of machine learning into clinical breast MRI: Potential for objective and accurate decision-making in suspicious breast masses. PLoS One 2020; DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228446.
• 78 McKinney SM, Sieniek M, Godbole V. et al. International evaluation of an AI system for breast cancer screening. Nature 2020; 577: 89-94
• 79 Künstliche Intelligenz erkennt Tumore besser als Mediziner. BILD; 2020 Online: https://www.bild.de/ratgeber/2020/ratgeber/brustkrebs-frueherkennung-kuenstliche-intelligenz-erkennt-tumore-67043612.bild.html last access: 10.01.2020
• 80 Grady D. A.I. Is Learning to Read Mammograms. The New York Times; 2020 Online: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/01/health/breast-cancer-mammogram-artificial-intelligence.html last access: 01.01.2020