Emilio Alba

Dr. Emilio Alba

1 Unidad de Gestión Clínica Intercentros de Oncología Médica, Hospitales Universitarios Regional y Virgen de la Victoria. Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Málaga (IBIMA)-CIMES-UMA, 29010 Málaga, Spain

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

40Years (1987-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
3 November 2016 in New England Journal of Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
GHGabriel N. Hortobagyi
Gabriel N. Hortobagyi
SSSalomon M. Stemmer
Salomon M. Stemmer
HBHoward A. Burris
Howard A. Burris
YYYoon-Sim Yap
Yoon-Sim Yap
GSGabe S. Sonke
Gabe S. Sonke
JOJoyce O’sHaughnessy
Joyce O’sHaughnessy
The inhibition of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) could potentially overcome or delay resistance to endocrine therapy in advanced breast cancer that is positive for hormone receptor (HR) and negative for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). In this randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of the selective CDK4/6 inhibitor ribociclib combined with letrozole for first-line treatment in 668 postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative recurrent or metastatic breast cancer who had not received previous systemic therapy for advanced disease. We randomly assigned the patients to receive either ribociclib (600 mg per day on a 3-weeks-on, 1-week-off schedule) plus letrozole (2.5 mg per day) or placebo plus letrozole. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, overall response rate, and safety. A preplanned interim analysis was performed on January 29, 2016, after 243 patients had disease progression or died. Prespecified criteria for superiority required a hazard ratio of 0.56 or less with P<1.29×10−5. The duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer in the ribociclib group than in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.72; P=3.29×10−6 for superiority). The median duration of follow-up was 15.3 months. After 18 months, the progression-free survival rate was 63.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 54.6 to 70.3) in the ribociclib group and 42.2% (95% CI, 34.8 to 49.5) in the placebo group. In patients with measurable disease at baseline, the overall response rate was 52.7% and 37.1%, respectively (P<0.001). Common grade 3 or 4 adverse events that were reported in more than 10% of the patients in either group were neutropenia (59.3% in the ribociclib group vs. 0.9% in the placebo group) and leukopenia (21.0% vs. 0.6%); the rates of discontinuation because of adverse events were 7.5% and 2.1%, respectively. Among patients receiving initial systemic treatment for HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer, the duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer among those receiving ribociclib plus letrozole than among those receiving placebo plus letrozole, with a higher rate of myelosuppression in the ribociclib group. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01958021.)

1 October 2010 in Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JJJosé M. Jerez
José M. Jerez
IMIgnacio Molina
Ignacio Molina
PGPedro J. García-Laencina
Pedro J. García-Laencina
EAEmilio Alba
Emilio Alba
NRNuria Ribelles
Nuria Ribelles
Leonardo FrancoLeonardo Franco
Leonardo Franco

4 October 2012 in BMC Medical Genomics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RBRoy Rl Bastien
Roy Rl Bastien
ÁRÁlvaro Rodríguez-Lescure
Álvaro Rodríguez-Lescure
MEMark T. W. Ebbert
Mark T. W. Ebbert
APAleix Prat
Aleix Prat
BMBlanca Munárriz
Blanca Munárriz
MMMiguel Martin
Miguel Martin
Background: Many methodologies have been used in research to identify the “intrinsic” subtypes of breast cancer commonly known as Luminal A, Luminal B, HER2-Enriched (HER2-E) and Basal-like. The PAM50 gene set is often used for gene expression-based subtyping; however, surrogate subtyping using panels of immunohistochemical (IHC) markers are still widely used clinically. Discrepancies between these methods may lead to different treatment decisions. Methods: We used the PAM50 RT-qPCR assay to expression profile 814 tumors from the GEICAM/9906 phase III clinical trial that enrolled women with locally advanced primary invasive breast cancer. All samples were scored at a single site by IHC for estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and Her2/neu (HER2) protein expression. Equivocal HER2 cases were confirmed by chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH). Single gene scores by IHC/CISH were compared with RT-qPCR continuous gene expression values and “intrinsic” subtype assignment by the PAM50. High, medium, and low expression for ESR1, PGR, ERBB2, and proliferation were selected using quartile cut-points from the continuous RT-qPCR data across the PAM50 subtype assignments. Results: ESR1, PGR, and ERBB2 gene expression had high agreement with established binary IHC cut-points (area under the curve (AUC) ≥ 0.9). Estrogen receptor positivity by IHC was strongly associated with Luminal (A and B) subtypes (92%), but only 75% of ER negative tumors were classified into the HER2-E and Basal-like subtypes. Luminal A tumors more frequently expressed PR than Luminal B (94% vs 74%) and Luminal A tumors were less likely to have high proliferation (11% vs 77%). Seventy-seven percent (30/39) of ER-/HER2+ tumors by IHC were classified as the HER2-E subtype. Triple negative tumors were mainly comprised of Basal-like (57%) and HER2-E (30%) subtypes. Single gene scoring for ESR1, PGR, and ERBB2 was more prognostic than the corresponding IHC markers as shown in a multivariate analysis. Conclusions: The standard immunohistochemical panel for breast cancer (ER, PR, and HER2) does not adequately identify the PAM50 gene expression subtypes. Although there is high agreement between biomarker scoring by protein immunohistochemistry and gene expression, the gene expression determinations for ESR1 and ERBB2 status was more prognostic.

31 August 2020 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ALAurora Laborda-Illanes
Aurora Laborda-Illanes
LSLidia Sanchez-Alcoholado
Lidia Sanchez-Alcoholado
MDMaría Emilia Domínguez-Recio
María Emilia Domínguez-Recio
BJBegoña Jimenez-Rodriguez
Begoña Jimenez-Rodriguez
RLRocío Lavado-Valenzuela
Rocío Lavado-Valenzuela
MQMaría Isabel Queipo-Ortuño
María Isabel Queipo-Ortuño
In breast cancer (BC) the employment of sequencing technologies for metagenomic analyses has allowed not only the description of the overall metagenomic landscape but also the specific microbial changes and their functional implications. Most of the available data suggest that BC is related to bacterial dysbiosis in both the gut microenvironment and breast tissue. It is hypothesized that changes in the composition and functions of several breast and gut bacterial taxa may contribute to BC development and progression through several pathways. One of the most prominent roles of gut microbiota is the regulation of steroid-hormone metabolism, such as estrogens, a component playing an important role as risk factor in BC development, especially in postmenopausal women. On the other hand, breast and gut resident microbiota are the link in the reciprocal interactions between cancer cells and their local environment, since microbiota are capable of modulating mucosal and systemic immune responses. Several in vivo and in vitro studies show remarkable evidence that diet, probiotics and prebiotics could exert important anticarcinogenic effects in BC. Moreover, gut microbiota have an important role in the metabolism of chemotherapeutic drugs and in the activity of immunogenic chemotherapies since they are a potential dominant mediator in the response to cancer therapy. Then, the microbiome impact in BC is multi-factorial, and the gut and breast tissue bacteria population could be important in regulating the local immune system, in tumor formation and progression and in therapy response and/or resistance.

27 May 2015 in Annals of Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
VBV. Bossuyt
V. Bossuyt
EPE. Provenzano
E. Provenzano
WSW. F. Symmans
W. F. Symmans
JBJ. C. Boughey
J. C. Boughey
CCC. Coles
C. Coles
JWJelle Wesseling
Jelle Wesseling
Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) provides the unique opportunity to assess response to treatment after months rather than years of follow-up. However, significant variability exists in methods of pathologic assessment of response to NAST, and thus its interpretation for subsequent clinical decisions. Our international multidisciplinary working group was convened by the Breast International Group-North American Breast Cancer Group (BIG-NABCG) collaboration and tasked to recommend practical methods for standardized evaluation of the post-NAST surgical breast cancer specimen for clinical trials that promote accurate and reliable designation of pathologic complete response (pCR) and meaningful characterization of residual disease. Recommendations include multidisciplinary communication; clinical marking of the tumor site (clips); and radiologic, photographic, or pictorial imaging of the sliced specimen, to map the tissue sections and reconcile macroscopic and microscopic findings. The information required to define pCR (ypT0/is ypN0 or ypT0 yp N0), residual ypT and ypN stage using the current AJCC/UICC system, and the Residual Cancer Burden system were recommended for quantification of residual disease in clinical trials.

27 May 2008 in JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MMMiguel Martin
Miguel Martin
ÁRÁlvaro Rodríguez-Lescure
Álvaro Rodríguez-Lescure
ARAmparo Ruiz
Amparo Ruiz
EAEmilio Alba
Emilio Alba
LCLourdes Calvo
Lourdes Calvo
JLJosé Manuel López-Vega
José Manuel López-Vega
Taxanes are among the most active drugs for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer, and, as a consequence, they have also been studied in the adjuvant setting. After breast cancer surgery, women with lymph node–positive disease were randomly assigned to treatment with fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) or with FEC followed by weekly paclitaxel (FEC-P). The primary endpoint of study—5-year disease-free survival (DFS)—was assessed by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Secondary endpoints included overall survival and analysis of the prognostic and predictive value of clinical and molecular (hormone receptors by immunohistochemistry and HER2 by fluorescence in situ hybridization) markers. Associations and interactions were assessed with a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model for DFS for the following covariates: age, menopausal status, tumor size, lymph node status, type of chemotherapy, tumor size, positive lymph nodes, HER2 status, and hormone receptor status. All statistical tests were two-sided. Among the 1246 eligible patients, estimated rates of DFS at 5 years were 78.5% in the FEC-P arm and 72.1% in the FEC arm (difference = 6.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.6% to 11.2%; P = .006). FEC-P treatment was associated with a 23% reduction in the risk of relapse compared with FEC treatment (146 relapses in the 614 patients in the FEC-P arm vs 193 relapses in the 632 patients in the FEC arm, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.62 to 0.95; P = .022) and a 22% reduction in the risk of death (73 and 95 deaths, respectively, HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.57 to 1.06; P = .110). Among the 928 patients for whom tumor samples were centrally analyzed, type of chemotherapy (FEC vs FEC-P) ( P = .017), number of involved axillary lymph nodes ( P < .001), tumor size ( P = .020), hormone receptor status ( P = .004), and HER2 status ( P = .006) were all associated with DFS. We found no statistically significant interaction between HER2 status and paclitaxel treatment or between hormone receptor status and paclitaxel treatment. Among patients with operable breast cancer, FEC-P treatment statistically significantly reduced the risk of relapse compared with FEC as adjuvant therapy.