Purpose This phase II study investigated the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of trastuzumab monotherapy given as first-line treatment once every 3 weeks (3-weekly) in women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients and Methods Patients with previously untreated HER2-positive MBC received a loading dose of trastuzumab, 8 mg/kg intravenously (IV) and then 6 mg/kg IV at 3-week intervals until disease progression or patient withdrawal. Results In total, 105 patients received a median of five cycles of therapy (range, 1 to 35+). The overall response rate was 19% (23% in patients with measurable centrally confirmed immunohistochemistry [IHC] 3+ and/or fluorescence in situ hybridization [FISH] -positive disease) and clinical benefit rate (complete and partial responses plus stable disease for at least 6 months) was 33% (36% in patients with measurable centrally confirmed IHC 3+ and/or FISH-positive disease). Median time to progression was 3.4 months (range, 0.6 to 23.6 months). The most common treatment-related adverse events were rigors, pyrexia, headache, nausea, and fatigue. Median baseline left ventricular ejection fraction was 63%; this did not significantly change over the course of the study. The average exposure to trastuzumab observed in this study was similar to that in previous studies of the weekly regimen. However, as expected, mean trough trastuzumab concentrations were lower and peak levels were higher with 3-weekly trastuzumab compared with weekly treatments. Conclusion Administering higher doses on a 3-weekly schedule did not compromise the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab in women with HER2-positive MBC, and average exposure was similar to that observed with weekly therapy. Three-weekly trastuzumab may represent a convenient alternative to weekly administration.

Identification of HER2-positive breast cancers with high anti-HER2 sensitivity could help de-escalate chemotherapy. Here, we tested a clinically applicable RNA-based assay that combines ERBB2 and the HER2-enriched (HER2-E) intrinsic subtype in HER2-positive disease treated with dual HER2-blockade without chemotherapy. A research-based PAM50 assay was applied in 422 HER2-positive tumors from five II–III clinical trials (SOLTI-PAMELA, TBCRC023, TBCRC006, PER-ELISA, EGF104090). In SOLTI-PAMELA, TBCRC023, TBCRC006, and PER-ELISA, all patients had early disease and were treated with neoadjuvant lapatinib or pertuzumab plus trastuzumab for 12–24 weeks. Primary outcome was pathological complete response (pCR). In EGF104900, 296 women with advanced disease were randomized to receive either lapatinib alone or lapatinib plus trastuzumab. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. A total of 305 patients with early and 117 patients with advanced HER2-positive disease were analyzed. In early disease, HER2-E represented 83.8% and 44.7% of ERBB2-high and ERBB2-low tumors, respectively. Following lapatinib and trastuzumab, the HER2-E and ERBB2 (HER2-E/ERBB2)-high group showed a higher pCR rate compared to the rest (44.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 35.4% to 53.9% vs 11.6%, 95% CI = 6.9% to 18.0%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 6.05, 95% CI = 3.10 to 11.80, P < .001). Similar findings were observed with neoadjuvant trastuzumab and pertuzumab (pCR rate of 66.7% in HER2-E/ERBB2-high, 95% CI = 22.3% to 95.7% vs 14.7% in others, 95% CI = 4.9% to 31.1%; adjusted OR = 11.60, 95% CI = 1.66 to 81.10, P = .01). In the advanced setting, the HER2-E/ERBB2-high group was independently associated with longer PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.79, P < .001); higher ORR (16.3%, 95% CI = 8.9% to 26.2% vs 3.7%, 95% CI = 0.8% to 10.3%, P = .02); and longer OS (HR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.44 to 0.97, P = .01). Combining HER2-E subtype and ERBB2 mRNA into a single assay identifies tumors with high responsiveness to HER2-targeted therapy. This biomarker could help de-escalate chemotherapy in approximately 40% of patients with HER2-positive breast cancer.

Purpose: To compare the survival benefit obtained with cisplatin plus gemcitabine, a cisplatin-based triplet, and nonplatinum sequential doublets in advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods: Stage IIIB to IV NSCLC patients were randomly assigned to receive cisplatin 100 mg/m² day 1 plus gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m² days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks for six cycles (CG); cisplatin 100 mg/m² day 1 plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m² and vinorelbine 25 mg/m² days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks for six cycles (CGV); or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m² plus vinorelbine 30 mg/m² days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks for three cycles, followed by vinorelbine 30 mg/m² days 1 and 8 plus ifosfamide 3 g/m² day 1, every 3 weeks for three cycles (GV–VI). Results: Five hundred fifty-seven patients were assigned to treatment (182 CG, 188 CGV, 187 GV–VI). Response rates were significantly inferior for the nonplatinum sequential doublet (CG, 42%; CGV, 41%; GV–VI, 27%; CG v GV–VI, P = .003). No differences in median survival or time to progression were observed. Toxicity was higher for the triplet: grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (GC, 32%; CGV, 57%; GV–VI, 27%; P < .05); neutropenic fever (CG, 4%; CGV, 19%; GV–VI, 5%; P < .0001); grade 3 to 4 thrombocytopenia (CG, 19%; CGV, 23%; GV–VI, 3%; P = .0001); and grade 3 to 4 emesis (GC, 22%; GCV, 32%; GV–VI, 6%; P < .0001). Conclusion: On the basis of these results, CG remains a standard regimen for first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC.