Purpose National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) Protocol B-18 was designed to determine whether four cycles of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) administered preoperatively improved breast cancer disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with AC administered postoperatively. Protocol B-27 was designed to determine the effect of adding docetaxel (T) to preoperative AC on tumor response rates, DFS, and OS. Patients and Methods Analyses were limited to eligible patients. In B-18, 751 patients were assigned to receive preoperative AC, and 742 patients were assigned to receive postoperative AC. In B-27, 784 patients were assigned to receive preoperative AC followed by surgery, 783 patients were assigned to AC followed by T and surgery, and 777 patients were assigned to AC followed by surgery and then T. Results Results from B-18 show no statistically significant differences in DFS and OS between the two groups. However, there were trends in favor of preoperative chemotherapy for DFS and OS in women less than 50 years old (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.85, P = .09 for DFS; HR = 0.81, P = .06 for OS). DFS conditional on being event free for 5 years also demonstrated a strong trend in favor of the preoperative group (HR = 0.81, P = .053). Protocol B-27 results demonstrated that the addition of T to AC did not significantly impact DFS or OS. Preoperative T added to AC significantly increased the proportion of patients having pathologic complete responses (pCRs) compared with preoperative AC alone (26% v 13%, respectively; P < .0001). In both studies, patients who achieved a pCR continue to have significantly superior DFS and OS outcomes compared with patients who did not. Conclusion B-18 and B-27 demonstrate that preoperative therapy is equivalent to adjuvant therapy. B-27 also showed that the addition of preoperative taxanes to AC improves response.

Purpose: This study was designed to determine the effect of adding docetaxel (T) to preoperative doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) on breast cancer response rates and disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients and Methods: Women with operable breast cancer (N = 2,411) were randomly assigned to receive preoperative AC followed by surgery, AC followed by T and surgery, or AC followed by surgery and then T. Tamoxifen was initiated concurrently with chemotherapy. Median time on study for 2,404 patients with follow-up was 77.9 months. Results: Addition of T to AC did not significantly impact DFS or OS. There were trends toward improved DFS with addition of T. The addition of T reduced the incidence of local recurrences as first events (P = .0034). Preoperative T, but not postoperative T, significantly improved DFS in patients who had a clinical partial response after AC (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.91; P = .007). Pathologic complete response, which was doubled by addition of preoperative T, was a significant predictor of OS regardless of treatment (HR = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.47; P < .0001). Pathologic nodal status after chemotherapy was a significant predictor of OS (P < .0001). Conclusion: The addition of preoperative or postoperative T after preoperative AC did not significantly affect OS, slightly improved DFS, and decreased the incidence of local recurrences. The sample size of this study was not sufficient to yield significance for the moderate DFS improvement. Concurrent use of tamoxifen may have limited the impact of adding T.

Bevacizumab and the antimetabolites capecitabine and gemcitabine have been shown to improve outcomes when added to taxanes in patients with metastatic breast cancer. The primary aims of this trial were to determine whether the addition of capecitabine or gemcitabine to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel, followed by doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide, would increase the rates of pathological complete response in the breast in women with operable, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative breast cancer and whether adding bevacizumab to these chemotherapy regimens would increase the rates of pathological complete response. We randomly assigned 1206 patients to receive neoadjuvant therapy consisting of docetaxel (100 mg per square meter of body-surface area on day 1), docetaxel (75 mg per square meter on day 1) plus capecitabine (825 mg per square meter twice a day on days 1 to 14), or docetaxel (75 mg per square meter on day 1) plus gemcitabine (1000 mg per square meter on days 1 and 8) for four cycles, with all regimens followed by treatment with doxorubicin–cyclophosphamide for four cycles. Patients were also randomly assigned to receive or not to receive bevacizumab (15 mg per kilogram of body weight) for the first six cycles of chemotherapy. The addition of capecitabine or gemcitabine to docetaxel therapy, as compared with docetaxel therapy alone, did not significantly increase the rate of pathological complete response (29.7% and 31.8%, respectively, vs. 32.7%; P=0.69). Both capecitabine and gemcitabine were associated with increased toxic effects — specifically, the hand–foot syndrome, mucositis, and neutropenia. The addition of bevacizumab significantly increased the rate of pathological complete response (28.2% without bevacizumab vs. 34.5% with bevacizumab, P=0.02). The effect of bevacizumab on the rate of pathological complete response was not the same in the hormone-receptor–positive and hormone-receptor–negative subgroups. The addition of bevacizumab increased the rates of hypertension, left ventricular systolic dysfunction, the hand–foot syndrome, and mucositis. The addition of bevacizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly increased the rate of pathological complete response, which was the primary end point of this study. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00408408.)

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), characterized by the absence or low expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2), is the most aggressive subtype of breast cancer. TNBC accounts for about 15% of breast cancer cases in the U.S., and is known for high relapse rates and poor overall survival (OS). Chemo-resistant TNBC is a genetically diverse, highly heterogeneous, and rapidly evolving disease that challenges our ability to individualize treatment for incomplete responders and relapsed patients. Currently, the frontline standard chemotherapy, composed of anthracyclines, alkylating agents, and taxanes, is commonly used to treat high-risk and locally advanced TNBC. Several FDA-approved drugs that target programmed cell death protein-1 (Keytruda) and programmed death ligand-1 (Tecentriq), poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP), and/or antibody drug conjugates (Trodelvy) have shown promise in improving clinical outcomes for a subset of TNBC. These inhibitors that target key genetic mutations and specific molecular signaling pathways that drive malignant tumor growth have been used as single agents and/or in combination with standard chemotherapy regimens. Here, we review the current TNBC treatment options, unmet clinical needs, and actionable drug targets, including epidermal growth factor (EGFR), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), androgen receptor (AR), estrogen receptor beta (ERβ), phosphoinositide-3 kinase (PI3K), mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), and protein kinase B (PKB or AKT) activation in TNBC. Supported by strong evidence in developmental, evolutionary, and cancer biology, we propose that the K-RAS/SIAH pathway activation is a major tumor driver, and SIAH is a new drug target, a therapy-responsive prognostic biomarker, and a major tumor vulnerability in TNBC. Since persistent K-RAS/SIAH/EGFR pathway activation endows TNBC tumor cells with chemo-resistance, aggressive dissemination, and early relapse, we hope to design an anti-SIAH-centered anti-K-RAS/EGFR targeted therapy as a novel therapeutic strategy to control and eradicate incurable TNBC in the future.

Background: Foxp3 has been suggested to be a standard marker for murine Tregs whereas its role as marker for human Tregs is controversial. While some reports have shown that human Foxp3+ T cells had no regulatory function others have shown their role in the inhibition of T cell proliferation.Methods: T cell activation was performed by means of brayostatin-1/ionomycin (B/I), mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR), and CD3/CD28 activation. T cell proliferation was performed using BrdU and CFSE staining. Flow cytometry was performed to determine Foxp3 expression, cell proliferation, viabilities and phenotype analyses of T cells.Results: Both CD4+ and CD8+ T cells expressed Foxp3 upon activationin vitro. Expression of Foxp3 remained more stable in CD4+CD25+ T cells compared to that in CD8+CD25+ T cells. The CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ T cells expressed CD44 and CD62L, showing their effector and memory phenotypes. Both FoxP3- responder T cells and CD4+FoxP3+ T cells underwent proliferation upon CD3/CD28 activation.Conclusion: Expression of Foxp3 does not necessarily convey regulatory function in human CD4+CD25+ T cells. Increased FoxP3 on CD44+ effector and CD44+CD62L+ memory T cells upon stimulation suggest the activation-induced regulation of FoxP3 expression.