split-banner-image

BRCA-P: TAKING CHARGE OF YOUR BREAST CANCER RISK

Samantha was 21 years old when she found out she had the BRCA1 gene mutation. She speaks with us about her decision to be proactive in managing her risk by joining the BRCA-P Clinical Trial.

Sam’s Experience With The BRCA1 Gene Mutation

Samantha was 21 years old when she found out she had the BRCA1 gene mutation. This means she has a 70% risk of developing breast cancer and a 40% risk of developing ovarian cancer.

She inherited this genetic mutation from her mother, who was diagnosed with breast cancer when Samantha was 12 years old.

“I watched her go through treatment, but because I was so young, I didn’t really understand what was going on,” said Samantha.

“I was about 18 when I found out about the genetic mutation and it was when I was about 20 that I fully understood what was going on and started the process of finding out that I had the BRCA1 mutation.”

At 27 years of age, Samantha decided she wanted to be proactive in reducing her risk of developing the disease. As she was getting older, she had become more concerned about her risk.

“At the start, I was okay with it, knowing that there were options for me,” she said when asked about her reaction to discovering she had the BRCA1 gene mutation.

“But a bit into the future, I started to get a bit anxious about every little pain, thinking it could be something a lot worse than it actually was.”

The options for women with a BRCA1 gene mutation are limited, with the most effective being a mastectomy which involves the surgical removal of both healthy breasts.

“It’s quite an invasive surgery,” said Samantha. “And at 27, it’s not something that I wanted to be doing.”

“I don’t feel that, personally, I was mature enough to have such an invasive thing happen to me.”

Listen to the podcast

Listen to our conversation with Sam about her experience on the BRCA-P clinical trial.

The BRCA-P Clinical Trial

Samantha’s genetic counsellor knew she didn’t want to have a surgery while still in her 20’s and instead encouraged her to engage in yearly screening to monitor her breast health.

“I had just gotten a phone call saying that my last MRI screening was clear, and from there she explained, that because surgery was off the cards for me, there was a trial I could go on.”

This was when Samantha was introduced to the BRCA-P clinical trial.

BRCA-P is a world-first prevention clinical trial which has the potential to be a game-changer in the way we manage breast cancer risk, by preventing the disease from developing in women with the BRCA1 gene mutation. It’s testing the effectiveness of a drug called Denosumab which has been shown to switch off the culprit cell that gives rise to breast cancer in women with the BRCA1 gene mutation.

Eligibility is carefully assessed for those interested in participating in the BRCA-P clinical trial and includes the following criteria:

  • Women who carry a BRCA1 gene mutation and are aged 25-55 years and unaffected by breast or ovarian cancer – meaning they have never personally been diagnosed with either cancer
  • May either be pre- or post-menopausal
  • Are not pregnant
  • Have not had preventative breast surgery (mastectomy)
  • Not taking any breast cancer prevention agents such as Tamoxifen or an Aromatase Inhibitor

After a physical examination and some blood tests, Samantha was told she met this eligibility criteria. After being taken through the consent forms, and a lengthy discussion with her doctor and support system, she decided she would participate.

Participating in the BRCA-P Clinical Trial

The BRCA-P clinical trial is a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, which means participants and their study doctor, do not know if they are receiving the trial drug Denosumab or a placebo. A placebo is a treatment that looks just like the active medication but has no effect.

Though Samantha had a 50/50 chance of receiving the placebo drug, she said the benefits of participating far outweighed the possibility she may not receive the trial drug.

“I’m not fazed if I’m on the placebo or the actual medication because I am getting that six-monthly check-up, and that is way more than I would be doing if I was not on the trial.”

“You’re getting the screening, you’re getting the support, you’re getting your questions answered, and that was something truly less invasive than a double mastectomy.”

Samantha is now a year into her participation on the trial.

She said her six-month appointments are very easy and her clinical trial team is very supportive of her, answering any question she may have about the clinical trial.

“So, every six months, I get routine blood tests, just to make sure everything’s all clear.”

“I also get a physical exam and a few little (quality of life) questions that they ask, just to make sure everything’s going okay.”

Samantha also receives her injection of the trial drug at this appointment.

“It’s not painful. It’s kind of a non-event,” she said.

“The injection goes into the tummy, which at first was daunting, but you cannot feel it whatsoever.”

“It’s pretty easy, much less painful than a very big surgery, and it’s also less painful than a routine blood test.”

Trial participants are asked to commit to these six-monthly injections for five years, which Samantha was happy to do.

“Five years is pretty minimal compared to life of being BRCA1 positive.”

Why Samantha is Participating in the BRCA-P Clinical Trial

Samantha said she is very open about her participation with her family, friends, and colleagues. She believes that the more people are aware of BRCA gene mutations and their effect on breast and ovarian cancer risk, the better.

“I feel that the more awareness out there that breast cancer is not an older persons disease and younger people are at risk as well, the better.”

“So I do have an open conversation with friends and definitely colleagues about having the BRCA1 gene mutation and how that affects my risk of developing breast cancer in the future.”

Samantha hopes her participation in the BRCA-P clinical trial, and her openness in discussing this participation, will benefit women now and in the future.

“Whether you have breast cancer now or a have an increased risk of getting breast cancer, the more treatments and preventions that are out there give women more options and control over their life, the better.”

Samantha strongly encourages those who are eligible to consider participating in a clinical trial, and for those who cannot, to support research undertaken by Breast Cancer Trials in other ways.

“The more people backing it up and supporting the research and donating, the more women we can help.”

If you are interested in participating in this clinical trial, head to Breastolution or call 1800 777 253 to find out more.

Support Us

Help us to change lives through breast cancer clinical trials research

Latest Articles

asco 2025: breast cancer research summary

ASCO 2025: Breast Cancer Research Summary

virtual reality meets radiation: a new era in patient coaching
split-banner-image

WHAT IS PARTIAL BREAST IRRADIATION?

We spoke with Professor Julia White about partial breast irradiation and explore the different types of this treatment, who it is best suited for and the continuing research in this area.

What Is Partial Breast Irradiation?

Radiation therapy, also called radiotherapy, is a common breast cancer treatment used to kill cancer cells and shrink tumours.

However, for some women with breast cancer, studies have shown there is no increased benefit of whole breast irradiation. Instead, they could be eligible to have partial breast irradiation.

Professor Julia White, a tenured Professor of Radiation Oncology and Koltz Sisters Chair for Cancer

Research at The Ohio State University, said partial breast irradiation helps safely reduce treatment for some breast cancer patients.

“Partial breast irradiation is a de-escalation strategy.”

“Historically when breast conservation treatment started, the whole breast was treated.”

“So, instead of surgically removing the entire breast, you remove the cancer from the breast (a lumpectomy), and then irradiate the entire breast and that’s what made the treatment equivalent to breast removal or mastectomy.”

“But we learned over time that women who undergo a lumpectomy alone or lumpectomy plus breast radiotherapy, that the most common place for them to have an in-breast recurrence is around where the original tumour was in the breast,” said Professor White.

“So that really raises the question: do you need to treat the whole breast or can we just treat where most of the recurrence happens and that’s what partial breast irradiation is.”

Listen to the podcast

We spoke with Professor Julia White, a tenured Professor of Radiation Oncology and Koltz Sisters Chair for Cancer Research at the Ohio State University, about partial breast irradiation.

What Are The Different Types Of Partial Breast Irradiation?

Professor White said there are several different types of partial breast irradiation.

“Accelerated partial breast irradiation is where treatments, usually between five and ten treatments, are delivered in five to eight treatment days, either twice a day or once a day.”

“There’s inter-operative partial breast irradiation that’s done while the lumpectomy cavity is still open prior to closure.”

“And then there’s partial breast irradiation that’s done in a protracted (longer) fashion over three weeks, almost the same time scale as whole breast irradiation,” said Professor White.

“But our focus has really been on accelerated partial breast irradiation that reduces the course of treatment down to five to eight treatment days to reduce burden of care on patients.”

Who Is Best Suited For Partial Breast Irradiation?

Partial breast irradiation is not suitable for all breast cancer patients according to Professor White.

“Like all de-escalation, it’s really focused on luminal type breast cancers.”

“So those breast cancers that are hormone sensitive, lymph node negative, HER2 negative in women who are committed to taking their endocrine treatment for at least five years,” said Professor White.

According to Professor White, partial breast irradiation isn’t considered a ‘better’ treatment option for those patients. But a ‘non-inferior’ treatment option.

“Studies have shown that it’s non-inferior, meaning it will give comparable event rates,” said Professor White.

She said in her clinic at Ohio State University, around 20% of patients are undergoing accelerated partial breast irradiation.

“Particularity women who are still working, taking the time off daily for three to four weeks of radiation is burdensome.”

“They would rather come in and get it done in five days,” she said.

“It helps for women who live far away, they only need to find housing or lodging for about three days if we put the weekend in between and they can travel home on the weekend.”

“We really are catering to a niche group of women who want to keep their breasts, who want a low cancer event rate and who have hormone sensitive HER2 negative stage one breast cancer.”

Partial Breast Irradiation Clinical Trials Research?

Professor White advises that research is still ongoing into this de-escalated treatment.

“There have been several randomised clinical trials looking at the efficacy of accelerated partial breast irradiation, meaning the cancer recurrence rate is the same as with whole breast irradiation.”

“Those trials have all shown that a short course of radiation, in a population of women that are on average about 60 to 62 years old, post-menopausal and arepredominantly stage one hormone sensitive breast cancer, the likelihood of recurrence is very similar to whole breast irradiation. So, non-inferior.”

Professor White said a clinical trial ran at her institution studied partial breast irradiation for women in their mid-50s and younger who had grade three disease.

“We asked the question: can it replace whole breast irradiation and what we found is that partial breast irradiation was not equivalent to whole breast irradiation for that entire group of women undergoing breast conservation therapy.”

“So if you put those two studies together you come up with, I believe, a picture that tells you that partial breast irradiation is a good alternative to whole beast irradiation and will give you similar cancer recurrence rates in women who have hormone sensitive HER2 negative anatomic stage one breast cancer. So their lymph nodes are negative, and the tumour is less than 2cms and women are dedicated to taking their endocrine therapy for at least five years.”

“But that’s a large group of women. That’s probably 25-30% of women undergoing breast conservation.”

QUICK ACCESS

Support Us

Help us to change lives through breast cancer clinical trials research

profile image

Professor Julia White

Professor Julia White is a tenured Professor of Radiation Oncology and Koltz Sisters Chair for Cancer Research at The Ohio State University.

Latest Articles

asco 2025: breast cancer research summary

ASCO 2025: Breast Cancer Research Summary

virtual reality meets radiation: a new era in patient coaching
split-banner-image

THE CAPTURE CLINICAL TRIAL

The CAPTURE clinical trial aims to improve survival rates for women and men with ER+, HER2- breast cancer. We spoke with the CAPTURE study chair, Professor Sarah-Jane Dawson, about this important clinical trial.

What Is The Aim Of The Capture Clinical Trial?

Around 70% of all breast cancers are oestrogen receptor positive.

Endocrine or hormone treatments for these cancers have been effective, but when the cancer advances, the treatment is no longer effective. Therefore, other ways of treating these resistant cancers are needed.

The Breast Cancer Trials CAPTURE clinical trial is attempting to help find a new treatment for these patients.

CAPTURE is open to women and men with oestrogen (ER) positive, HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer with a PIK3CA mutation, that has returned after treatment with a CDK4/6 inhibitor such as ribociclib, palbociclib or abemaciclib.

CAPTURE is investigating if treatment with a PI3K inhibitor (alpelisib), in combination with fulvestrant, will improve outcomes for patients with metastatic breast cancer when compared with standard treatment.

Medical Oncologist and Breast Cancer Trials researcher Professor Sarah Jane Dawson, is leading this clinical trial in Australia.

She said the study could potentially offer a new treatment option for a significant portion of ER positive breast cancer patients whose cancer has progressed after standard treatment.

“We know that when patients progress on those therapies, their breast cancer is showing resistance to endocrine therapies, and the mainstay of treatment for patients in that situation is often chemotherapy.”

“We’re comparing patients that are going to be treated with alpelisib and fulvestrant, to a group of patients treated with a standard chemotherapy drug called capecitabine.”

“We’re expecting and hoping to see that patients that are treated with the targeted therapy alpelisib will have improved survival compared to patients that are treated with the standard chemotherapy alone,” said Professor Dawson.

However, this clinical trial is only open to patients who carry a specific genetic mutation called PIK3CA.

“So, the CAPTURE clinical trial is looking at trying to identify a group of patients that harbour this genetic alteration, PIK3CA, and make a new therapeutic option available to them in the form of a drug called alpelisib, which is a very specific inhibitor of the PI3K signalling pathway,” said Professor Dawson.

She said potentially eligible patients will be required to undergo a blood test to see if they are carriers of the PIK3CA mutation.

“A novel aspect of the CAPTURE trial is that we’re assessing that information through a blood test. We’re utilising a technology called circulating tumour DNA.”

“Currently, this test is not routine. So, the CAPTURE clinical trial really involves testing to identify the presence of this alteration and to match that with a targeted therapy that hopefully will lead to improved outcomes for patients with this type of breast cancer.”

Though 140 patients will be enrolled onto this clinical trial, many more will be screened to find those with a PIK3CA mutation.

“Oestrogen receptor positive breast cancer is the most common type of breast cancer,” said Professor Dawson.

“Around 40% of patients with ER positive HER2 negative breast cancer would carry a PIK3CA gene mutation in their breast cancer.”

“It’s a large patient group, and we’re hoping this trial will really offer a new therapeutic alternative for those individuals.”

Listen to the podcast

Listen to our conversation with Professor Sarah-Jane Dawson about the CAPTURE Clinical Trial.

How Can I Get Involved In The CAPTURE Clinical Trial?

Professor Dawson advises patients who are interested in participating in the CAPTURE clinical trial should discuss their eligibility with their oncologist and/or treatment team.

Alternatively, if you have any further questions about this clinical trial, you can reach out to us at Breast Cancer Trials.

Or, if you would like to help support this important clinical trial, you can donate to our life-saving research here.

SUPPORT RESEARCH LIKE CAPTURE

Help to save and improve lives through breast cancer clinical trials research

profile image

Professor Sarah-Jane Dawson

Professor Sarah-Jane Dawson is a Medical Oncologist and Breast Cancer Trials researcher.

Latest Articles

asco 2025: breast cancer research summary

ASCO 2025: Breast Cancer Research Summary

virtual reality meets radiation: a new era in patient coaching
split-banner-image

SUPPORT SERVICES THROUGH A BREAST CANCER DIAGNOSIS

Being able to access support services after a breast cancer diagnosis is an importance part of the recovery process for some patients.

Why Support Services & Groups Matter For Breast Cancer Patients

Being able to access support services after a breast cancer diagnosis is an important part of the recovery process for some patients, as having access meet and relate with others in a similar situation can aid in alleviating some feelings of anxiety and isolation.

Breast Cancer Network Australia (BCNA) helps to connect those with breast cancer with support services in-person and online.

BCNA Chief Executive Officer Kirsten Pilatti said those who have been diagnosed seek the reassurance and warmth a support group or support person offers.

“I think support is something that everyone needs in very different ways and we know that for many people in Australia, they want to join support group.”

“Women say that they want to connect with someone else who’s made it through treatment, and who’s made it twenty years past their diagnosis.”

Listen to the podcast

Listen to our conversation with BCNA’s CEO Kirsten Pillatti about the importance of support groups and services.

While BCNA helps to connect those recently diagnosed with in-person or online support groups and services, they also provide an online tool to help those recently diagnosed.

Ms Pillatti notes this is especially helpful for those who may not feel up to a group support setting.

“The My Journey online tool helps people to navigate a really complex system” said Ms Pilatti.

“What I hope is that we can continue to build the resources that we have to help people in the way that’s right for them.”

“The way we helped and supported people ten years ago is very different to how we support people now.”

“Everyone’s breast cancer treatment options are so different, so we need to provide a really tailored support program for people and it’s tricky” said Ms Pilatti.

“But we want to be there for every Australian and we want to make sure that we really are the voice for the people who find it hard to be connected and supported in their local communities.”

You can learn more about connecting with a support group in your area, or the online My Journey tool at bcna.org.au

 

Support Us

Help us to change lives through breast cancer clinical trials research

profile image

Ms Kirsten Pillatti

Ms Kirsten Pillatti is the Breast Cancer Network Australia (BCNA) Chief Executive Officer.

Latest Articles

asco 2025: breast cancer research summary

ASCO 2025: Breast Cancer Research Summary

virtual reality meets radiation: a new era in patient coaching
split-banner-image

ESMO 2021: BREAST CANCER RESEARCH SUMMARY

The latest research and advancements in cancer treatment, prevention and care are presented at the ESMO Congress.

European Society of Medical Oncology Congress (ESMO) 2021

For the second year in a row, the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) has held its annual Congress online, allowing researchers and clinicians worldwide to connect despite travel restrictions in place due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The ESMO Congress is one of the largest and most important cancer conferences worldwide, and brings together around 30,000 clinicians, researchers, patient advocates and healthcare industry representatives from approximately 140 countries.

The latest research and advancements in cancer treatment, prevention and care are presented at the ESMO Congress, which allows medical professionals to work together and translate these results into better patient care worldwide.

We have collated some of the important breast cancer research presented at ESMO 2021 and provided a summary below:

DESTINY – Breast03 – A Phase III Clinical Trial For Metastatic HER2 Positive Breast Cancer

Results from the DESTINY – Breast03 clinical trial showed a statistically significant improvement in survival without worsening of cancer, for patients with metastatic HER2 positive breast cancer. These promising initial results are expected to lead to a new standard treatment for patients with HER2 positive metastatic breast cancer.

Currently the first-line standard treatment for patients with metastatic HER2 positive breast cancer is HER2 antibody therapy with pertuzumab/trastuzumab, plus chemotherapy. If the cancer worsens, the treatment will often switch to trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) which is an antibody-drug combination comprised of trastuzumab and a chemotherapy drug.

DESTINY-Breast03 is a global clinical phase III clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of a drug called trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) compared to the current standard treatment of T-DM1 in patients with HER2 positive metastatic breast cancer who have received two or more prior anti-HER2 based treatments. TDX is a HER2-targeted antibody that delivers high concentrations of chemotherapy directly to cancer cells that have excess HER2 receptors on their surface.

Results from DESTINY-Breast03 showed treatment with T-DXd led to a 72% reduction in the risk of disease progression in comparison with treatment with T-DM1. 12-months after starting treatment, 76% of patients who received the trial drug T-DXd had no evidence of cancer worsening, compared with 34% of patients in the control group who were receiving T-DM1. As well as improved progression-free survival, 80% of those receiving the new T-DXd treatment saw their tumours shrink compared with 34% on the control group being treated with T-DM1. Additionally, 16% of patients treated with T-DXs had their disease completely disappear on scans. Side effects were generally mild and manageable, with no substantial differences between groups.

These results show that treatment with T-DXd is significantly better than T-DM1 for patients whose cancer has progressed after treatment with trastuzumab and chemotherapy. Overall survival results will be reported in the near future.

Researchers conducting this clinical trial have suggested that this positive result will likely change the standard treatments for patients with metastatic HER2 breast cancer whose disease has progressed after first line treatment. Next, researchers will investigate the benefit of treatment with T-DXd in the first-line metastatic setting, and for those with early-stage disease.

MONALEESA-2 Clinical Trial: Improved Survival for HR Positive, HER2 Negative Advanced Breast Cancer

In late breaking results presented at ESMO 2021, the MONALEESA-2 trial showed adding a CDK 4/6 inhibitor to first-line hormonal treatment prolongs survival by one year for post-menopausal women with HR positive, HER2 negative advanced breast cancer.

The MONALEESA-2 clinical trial allocated 668 patients to take either ribociclib, a CDK 4/6 inhibitor, plus the aromatase inhibitor letrozole or to take placebo plus letrozole. Patients who had previously received a CDK 4/6 inhibitor, chemotherapy or endocrine therapy for their advanced breast cancer were NOT included in this study.

Patients on the trial drug combination had a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in median survival at 63.9 months survival compared with 51.4 months on the standard care arm. Follow-up at six and a half years, the longest for any CDK 4/6 inhibitor trial to date, showed that patients who took the new treatment lived for one year longer than those who took letrozole alone. MONALEESA-2 also showed that after five years, patients treated with ribociclib plus letrozole had more than a 50% chance of remaining alive. This drug combination maintains quality of life, without major side effects.

This treatment combination is currently in use in Australia in this patient population based on earlier results of this and other trials. These results give greater promise for patients diagnosed with advanced HR-positive breast cancer.

Research and analysis are continuing to determine if there were any specific groups of patients in the study that benefitted more or less from this treatment. The study researchers have told the ESMO 2021 audience that this is the first CD4/6 inhibitor to demonstrate an overall survival benefit in this first-line patient population so far, but they are still awaiting results for clinical trials investigating other CDK 4/6 inhibitors palbociclib and abemaciclib (such as the BCT PATINA clinical trial).

Triple Negative Breast Cancer Research

The BARBICAN Clinical Trial for Women with Triple Negative Breast Cancer

The BARBICAN clinical trial is a randomised phase II study which is aiming to determine the contribution of the drug ipatasertib to neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus atezolizumab in women with early stage triple negative breast cancer.

144 patients took part in this clinical trial, with an equal number receiving the trial treatment of ipatasertib with atezolizumab and chemotherapy, and atezolizumab and chemotherapy alone. Unfortunately, there was no difference in pathological complete response (pCR) between the two groups.

While this result isn’t what the researchers were hoping for, ipatasertib is being used in other clinical trials for different types of breast cancer. Further analysis of this and other trials using this drug will look at blood and cancer samples to find if there is a marker to indicate a group of patients more likely to benefit from it. Not every treatment is suitable for different types of breast cancer, and researchers often trial drugs across several different breast cancer types and stages to find where it can work best. So, while there was no clinically significant result found in the BARBICAN clinical trial, this does not mean ipatasertib will not benefit other breast cancer patients.

For example, the Breast Cancer Trials FINER clinical trial, due to open to patients in 2021, is looking at using a combination of ipatasertib and fulvestrant for patients with metastatic or advanced ER positive, HER2 negative breast cancer which has grown or spread despite treatment with a CDK4/6 inhibitor and an aromatase inhibitor. Our researchers are hoping this combination will help to keep the cancer under control for longer.

BrighTNess Clinical Trial: A Triple Negative Breast Cancer Trial

Long term follow-up of the phase III randomised BrighTNess clinical trial has shed light on what works, and what doesn’t, when treating early stage triple negative breast cancer.

Initial results from the trial showed that the pathological complete response rate (the disappearance of all invasive cancer in the breast) was significantly higher among participants who were assigned to receive veliparib (a PARP inhibitor) plus carboplatin (a chemotherapy drug) alongside paclitaxel (another chemotherapy drug) compared with those given paclitaxel alone. However, the rates did not differ significantly between patients who received all three treatments, to those who received the combination of the two chemotherapy drugs. In other words, the improvement appeared mostly due to carboplatin chemotherapy at that early time point.

Results presented at the ESMO Congress 2021 were from a median follow-up of 4.5 years and backed up these initial findings. The likelihood of remaining alive and cancer-free at four years was 78.2% for those who received all three drugs, 79.3% for those who received the carboplatin and paclitaxel, and 68.5% for those who received only the paclitaxel.

The study researchers concluded that their findings support the inclusion of carboplatin in neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage II-III triple negative breast cancer. This is a topic that doctors have been debating for some time, and should help resolve that debate.

Results for the KEYNOTE-355 Clinical Trial for Metastatic or Inoperable Triple Negative Breast Cancer

The final results of the KEYNOTE -355 clinical trial show that there is a significant overall survival benefit to adding pembrolizumab (an immunotherapy drug) to chemotherapy for advanced triple negative breast cancer.

These final results show that the patients who received pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy had a median overall survival of 23 months, versus 16.1 months for those patients on placebo plus chemotherapy. The combination of pembrolizumab and chemotherapy reduced the risk of death by 27%. The benefit appeared restricted to patients whose tumours had higher levels of the PD-L1 tumour marker. The researchers involved in this study said this is an important result as it’s the first study showing overall survival benefit in the metastatic setting for this poor prognosis type of breast cancer. Immunotherapy has yet to become incorporated into routine practice in breast cancer in Australia, however that may well change after these results.

COVID-19 & Cancer Research

OnCOVID Study: 15% of Patients with Cancer Experience ‘Long Haul’ COVID-19

A study which drew patient data from 35 different institutions across six European countries from February 2020 to February 2021, found that one in six cancer patients who recovered from COVID-19 experience long-term effects, or ‘long-COVID’. It has been increasingly recognised that people who contract COVID and then recover from the acute effects may experience ill effects for months or longer afterward. Cancer patients are more likely to contract COVID, and also more likely to become sicker or die as a result.

The OnCOVID study results presented at ESMO 2021 found that 234 cancer patients (15%) had at least one post-COVID-19 complication. The most commonly reported problems included respiratory problems (49.6%), fatigue (41%), neurological or cognitive issues (7.3%) and weight loss (5.6%). Factors associated with an increased risk of ‘long COVID’ included being 65 years of age or older, two or more other health problems, a history of smoking, increased rates of prior complicated COVID-19 and requiring therapy and/or hospitalisation for COVID-19.

Patients with cancer (or a history of cancer), are recommended to receive their COVID vaccine after a discussion with their doctor(s). Cancer Australia has up-to-date information about COVID-19 for those affected by breast cancer, and a comprehensive list of FAQs about the COVID-19 Vaccine for those with cancer, noting that all adults in Australia and New Zealand are now eligible to receive a COVID-19 vaccine.

Latest Articles

asco 2025: breast cancer research summary

ASCO 2025: Breast Cancer Research Summary

virtual reality meets radiation: a new era in patient coaching
split-banner-image

ASCO 2021: BREAST CANCER RESEARCH SUMMARY

A summary of the key breast cancer research presented at the 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting.

American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO 2021)

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) annual meeting is the world’s largest and most renowned cancer conference. In years past, it has brought together the worlds most respected and innovative cancer researchers, including those from Breast Cancer Trials, under one roof to discuss the latest advancements in treatments, clinical trials research and cancer care.

However, due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic worldwide, the conference went virtual for its second year, allowing delegates to log in all over the world, at all hours of the day and night.

We have provided a summary of the key breast cancer clinical trials research presented, including the exciting Breast Cancer Trials OlympiA study results.

OlympiA Trial Results: New Treatment Reduces Breast Cancer Recurrence By 42% In Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer With An Inherited BRCA1 or BRCA2 Gene Abnormality

Results from the OlympiA clinical trial show that olaparib reduces breast cancer recurrence by 42% in patients with early-stage breast cancer who have a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation.

The OlympiA clinical trial was coordinated internationally by the Breast International Group and recruited 1,836 patients worldwide, including 60 women from Australia.

OlympiA found that giving olaparib tablets twice daily for a year to patients with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, after they have completed chemotherapy, increases the chances that they will remain free of invasive or metastatic cancer. This was a phase III clinical trial, which tested the efficacy and safety of olaparib tablets versus placebo as adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer at high risk of recurrence.

Participants could have either hormone receptor positive or negative cancer but had to be HER2 negative. The tablet was well tolerated, with manageable side effects including anaemia, low white blood cell count and mild nausea.

Professor Kelly-Anne Phillips is the Breast Cancer Trials Study Chair of the OlympiA clinical trial and says the results provide a new treatment option for patients with early-stage breast cancer.

“One of the biggest fears that patients have is that their breast cancer will come back. The OlympiA clinical trial has identified a new treatment for patients with early-stage breast cancer that have a genetic mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes, which may help prevent their breast cancer returning and cancer spreading, after their initial treatment has been completed,” said Professor Phillips.

“Approximately 5% of all breast cancer patients have a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation, which equates to roughly 1,000 women diagnosed with breast cancer in Australia each year. These women are typically diagnosed with breast cancer at a younger age and often have a particularly aggressive form of breast cancer.

“Our study findings are a significant step forward in the precision treatment of breast cancer and provides a new treatment option.”

“The findings also mean that genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 will likely become more routine for all women with newly diagnosed breast cancer. This will have the downstream effect of helping us to identify their relatives who also have the gene abnormality and who can therefore undertake evidence-based treatments that can prevent them getting cancer. So this is not only a step forward in breast cancer treatment, but also in helping us to prevent cancer.”

CDK4/6 Inhibitors Boost Overall Survival In HR-Positive, HER2 Negative Advanced Breast Cancer

Updated results from two clinical trials PALOMA-3 and MONALEESA-3, support the use of fulvestrant plus a CDK4/6 inhibitor as standard of care for patients with HR positive, HER2 negative advanced breast cancer. Long-term follow-up of these studies showed this treatment combination could prolong the overall survival of patients with this type of advanced breast cancer.

In the PALOMA-3 study, 521 women with HR-positive, HER2 negative advanced breast cancer were randomised 2:1 to receive palbociclib (a CDK4/6 inhibitor) plus fulvestrant or fulvestrant plus placebo. Patients enrolled on the study had breast cancer that had progressed on or after endocrine therapy and had up to one prior chemotherapy treatment. In a follow-up taken at 73.3 months, the median overall survival was 34.8 months for those on the palbociclib arm compared with 28 months for those on the placebo. Five-year overall survival was 23.3% for those on palbociclib compared with 16.8% for those on the placebo.

Updated results from the MONALEESA-3 study showed that the median overall survival was 53.7 months for those on the ribociclib (CDK4/6 inhibitor) arm, compared with 41.5 months for those on the placebo. The five-year overall survival was 46% for the ribociclib arm compared with 31.1% for the placebo arm. This study enrolled 726 postmenopausal patient with HR-positive, HER2-negative patients. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive ribociclib plus fulvestrant or fulvestrant plus placebo. Because these two studies enrolled patients at different time-points in their treatment, with slightly different characteristics, the results cannot be compared to each other directly.

According to the researchers who worked on the studies, these combined results show that CDK4/6 inhibitors could help to prolong the overall survival of patients with advanced breast cancer.

De-Escalating Treatment For HR Negative HER2 Positive Breast Cancer

The overall survival analysis of the WSG-ADAPT HR-/HER+ study, has shown that treatment with targeted therapies pertuzumab (Perjeta) and trastuzumab (Herceptin), can be just as effective without adding 12 weeks of paclitaxel (a chemotherapy drug).

This clinical trial aimed to find out how to reduce the intensity of neoadjuvant (pre-surgical) treatment, safely and effectively, in patients with HR negative, HER2 positive early-stage breast cancer. A five-year follow-up showed that overall survival with chemotherapy was 98% and 94% without chemotherapy. Invasive disease-free survival was 98% on the added chemotherapy arm, compared with 87% without. None of these outcomes were statistically different. Further analyses showed that patients whose tumour was eradicated prior to breast surgery had excellent outcomes, irrespective of whether they received chemotherapy or not.

The researchers involved in this study looked to the tumour biomarkers to see if they could determine which patients could benefit from this de-escalated treatment. They concluded that future investigations of chemotherapy-free treatment regimens may need to be focused on select patients with sensitive tumors, such as those with HER2-positive, non-basal like tumours, early responders, and those with predictive RNA (gene) signatures. Trials such as ADAPT, COMPASS and a future Breast Cancer Trials clinical trial DECRESCENDO will continue to explore similar de-escalation strategies in patients with breast cancer.

Learn more.

Nearly Three-Quarters Of Breast Cancer Patients Are Undertaking Complementary Medical Treatments

A survey report, released in conjunction with ASCO 2021, has found that nearly three-quarters of breast cancer patients (73%) report using at least one type of complementary therapy after their cancer diagnosis. Meanwhile, less than half of oncologists (43%) believe their patients are engaging in this practice.

The survey polled 115 oncologists and 164 breast cancer patients. It found that 66% of oncologists and 65% of patients believe using complementary therapies improved patients’ quality of life. However, there was a difference in the type of therapies each group saw as useful. The oncologists believe nutrition consultation, support groups, psycho-oncology support and exercise consultation were the most important complementary health services. However, the medical professionals gave low marks to spiritual services and meditation or mindfulness, two approaches patients considered important.

Learn more.

Other Breast Cancer Trials Research Presented At ASCO

  • PENELOPE-B did not show a benefit from the addition of one-year palbociclib to endocrine therapy compared to the placebo in the patient population of the trial – HR+, HER2 negative early breast cancer.
  • APHINITY found that dual HER2 blockade with pertuzumab plus trastuzumab does not increase the risk of cardiac events compared with a placebo and trastuzumab alone.
  • ALTTO found that in HER2+ early breast cancer patients enrolled on the trial, the PREDICT+ score greatly underestimated overall survival. The low performance of this prognosis tool was consistent across all patient subgroups, and therefore PREDICT+ should be used with caution to give prognostic estimation in HER2+ early breast cancer patients treated with effective chemotherapy and anti-HER2 targeted therapies.

Latest Articles

asco 2025: breast cancer research summary

ASCO 2025: Breast Cancer Research Summary

virtual reality meets radiation: a new era in patient coaching
split-banner-image

A DATA-POWERED ROADMAP THROUGH CHEMOTHERAPY’S CHALLENGES

Breast Cancer Trials Chief Statistician Professor Val Gebski and colleagues have developed a new technique to quantify the toxicity of chemotherapy over time, creating a detailed roadmap to predict and compare the side effects of chemotherapy.

The Importance Of Data for Chemotherapy Treatment

Knowledge is power. With access to precise information about the impact of breast cancer treatment, patients can take back some measure of control in their fight against the disease.

Restoring power to cancer patients is highlighted in a new article by biostatistician Professor Val Gebski and colleagues, which was recently published in Pharmaceutical Statistics. These researchers have developed a technique to quantify the toxicity of chemotherapy over time, creating a detailed roadmap to predict and compare the side effects of chemotherapy.

The research, the result of dense statistical analysis and complex modelling, has a most human aim: to provide a more patient-centric way for clinicians to explain treatment options.

“Consider a patient whose breast cancer has come back,” Professor Gebski explains. “They feel depressed, are trying to cope and are offered a different set of treatments. They don’t know what to take! The clinician might say ‘we find patients tolerate this better’. But that’s a nebulous term: what does that actually mean for them?”

As the chief statistician with Breast Cancer Trials, Professor Gebski’s publication focuses on clinical trial data for two therapies used in breast cancer: the powerful but toxic combination therapy CMFP, and mitoxantrone, a single agent with lower toxicity. Clinical trials gather a wealth of data, but Professor Gebski says that details about AEs – adverse events, or side effects – tends to offer big picture information, like the basic incidence of hospitalisation.

The researchers zeroed in on three common side effects: nausea and vomiting, stomatitis (mouth ulcers) and neutropaenia (low white blood cell count), extracting rich detail about the incidence, timing and severity of side effects. “Our challenge was to do better than simply summarising the data – those who need hospitalisation versus those who don’t.”

The team created a “toxicity profile” for each therapy, to tell a more nuanced story. Professor Gebski and his co-authors then modelled the impact of toxicity over time, and devised a more patient-friendly way of expressing information and comparing options. Will the impact of this treatment be twice as bad? Half as bad? Much the same? Deliver a 20% lower risk of experiencing a serious toxicity episode?

Or, when does a side effect happen? Is it most severe at the start? How long does it take to reach peak impact? More detailed information is vital intelligence for patients planning for a life on long-term protective drug regimes.

“This data helps a patient or their clinician understand what the risk is and trade that off clinical benefits of one drug against another,” Professor Gebski explains.

“A patient who is fit but worried about the disease coming back, might say ‘I think I can handle the stomatitis, give me the more powerful therapy.’ A patient who is more sensitive might say, ‘I would hate that,

I’ve got my daughter’s wedding coming up and it is important to me that I’m feeling well’, and they make a choice to suit them.”

Publication:

Using recurrent time-to-event models with multinominal outcomes to generate toxicity profiles.
Gebski V, Marschner I, Asher R, Blyth K. Pharmaceutical Statistics. 2021;1-10. https://doi.org/10.1002/pst.2113

 

Support Us

Help us to change lives through breast cancer clinical trials research

Professor Val Gebsk

Professor Val Gebsk is a biostatistician and chief statistician with Breast Cancer Trials.

Latest Articles

asco 2025: breast cancer research summary

ASCO 2025: Breast Cancer Research Summary

virtual reality meets radiation: a new era in patient coaching
split-banner-image

THE CHEK2 GENE MUTATION

The CHEK2 gene mutation is a genetic abnormality that can increase your risk of developing breast cancer.

What Is The CHEK2 Gene Mutation?

Around 5-10% of breast cancers are thought to be hereditary, caused by abnormal or mutated genes passed from parent to child.

Though the BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations are the most well-known of these genetic abnormalities, there are numerous other genetic factors that can contribute to a higher-than-average risk of breast cancer.

One of these factors is the CHEK2 gene mutation.

The CHEK2 gene provides instructions for making a protein that stops tumour growth. An abnormal CHEK2 gene can, at least, double the lifetime risk of breast cancer. It can also increase colorectal and prostate cancer risk.

For women with CHEK2 mutations and a family history of breast cancer, the lifetime risk of breast cancer is estimated to range from 28% to 37%. However, the risk may be higher depending on the number of family members affected by breast cancer.

chek2 gene mutation inforgraphics 1 | 1

Cancer Geneticist Associate Professor Judy Kirk from the Familiar Cancer Service at Westmead Hospital said despite the lack of awareness of this genetic abnormality, it is more common that you would think.

“Mutations in CHEK2 are more common than BRCA1 or BRCA2, but they cause a more moderate risk of breast cancer.”

“They’re not associated with the high risk, they’re not associated with ovarian cancer, and in a way, looking at the family history might give you just as much information as finding a mutation in CHEK2,” she said.

Listen to the podcast

Understand Your Breast Cancer Risk: Listen to our expert interview on the CHEK2 Gene Mutation.

Professor Judy Kirk also said testing for the CHEK2 gene mutation is also not common.

“Some centres will test a lot of gene; some centres test only for the genes that are most relevant and going to make the most difference to the patient if we find something.”

“But remember for many families, in fact about 85% of our families, we can test an affected family member and find nothing and that doesn’t mean there’s no genetic problem.”

“All it means is that we haven’t found it.”

Centres are more likely to test for ‘high risk’ gene mutations, like BRCA1 and BRCA2, as they carry a higher risk of developing breast cancer.

As the CHEK2 gene mutation only carries a moderate risk, many who test positive decide to participate in less invasive preventative options.

“It’s probably about a three-fold increased risk in breast cancer and that’s something that would generally be approached by careful screening rather than a double mastectomy,” said Professor Kirk.

Risk management decisions are very personal and should be discussed with a medical professional. For those with a CHEK2 gene mutation, breast screening is typically recommended to begin earlier than the general population.

“It’s probably about a three-fold increased risk in breast cancer and that’s something that would generally be approached by careful screening rather than a double mastectomy.”

Risk management decisions are very personal and should be discussed with a medical professional. For those with a CHEK2 gene mutation, breast screening is typically recommended to begin earlier than the general population.

Sign up to receive our latest Research Newsletter

Name(Required)

BUY THE DIARY THAT
SAVES LIVES

profile image

Associate Professor Judy Kirk

Associate Professor Judy Kirk is a Cancer Geneticist from the Familiar Cancer Service at Westmead Hospital.

Latest Articles

asco 2025: breast cancer research summary

ASCO 2025: Breast Cancer Research Summary

virtual reality meets radiation: a new era in patient coaching
split-banner-image

SUPPORT THROUGH A
CANCER DIAGNOSIS

It can be hard to know what to say or do when a loved one is diagnosed with cancer.

Supporting Yourself and Your Loved Ones

Having somebody close to you diagnosed with breast cancer can be traumatic and difficult.

It can be hard to know what to do or say to help support that person after they have received their diagnosis and as they go through treatment.

Clinical psychologist and Cancer Council SA Senior Research Fellow Dr Lisa Beatty said it’s  common to feel overwhelmed when someone close to you has received a diagnosis.

“We know from the research literature, the rates of distress for the loved ones of people with cancer are actually just as high, if not higher, than the patients themselves.”

“They can also be stuck in the position of not really feeling like they can voice that concern to the person with cancer, because they’re the ones that are going through it, but also to the family around them, because the focus, understandably, is on the patient at the time.”

Treating Breast Cancer As A Family Illness

Dr Beatty said when speaking with her patients, she emphasises that cancer is a ‘family illness’.

“It might be housed in one person’s body, but it affects everyone under the roof.”

“It is really important for the patient to actually be looking out for their loved one and keeping a bit of an eye on their mental health too and making sure there is the opportunity for the loved ones to have support around them, to speak to someone.”

Dr Beatty emphasised that this support does not have to be the patient, but it can help.

“Often the metaphor we use is two people leaning on each other is actually much stronger than each person trying to stand in isolation.”

“So, leaning on each other and de-briefing with each other as you go through is a really important thing to be doing during treatment.”

Listen to the podcast

Listen to our conversation with Dr Lisa Beatty

What Is The ‘Right Thing’ To Say To Someone Diagnosed With Breast Cancer?

The important thing to note is that you do not go silent on your loved one. It can be difficult to know what ‘the right thing to say’ is, but according to Dr Beatty, the only ‘wrong thing’ to say is to say nothing at all.

“That is probably the most hurtful thing that people will tell me.”

“It does often come out of that fear of ‘I don’t want to say the wrong thing’ that they end up finding that they lose support because people are so fearful of saying the wrong thing that they say nothing and back away.”

“So, I am sure that most people would agree with me that they would have much preferred people to be coming and approaching them and risking saying the wrong thing, that could be gently corrected, rather than saying nothing at all and not being present.”

If finding the right thing to say is difficult, actions can often speak louder than words.

“Some people like to do up lists of practicalities that can be helped; in terms of going and doing grocery shopping or picking up kids from schools or coming in and doing some of the actual housework or people chipping in and paying for a cleaner,” said Dr Beatty.

Taking Care Of Yourself When Taking Care Of A Loved One

Dr Beatty said that while your energy may be focused on ensuring that your recently diagnosed loved one is coping, it’s very important to ensure you are also coping.

“I think the important thing is to make sure that you’ve got someone that you can talk to and you feel comfortable telling how you’re feeling.”

Dr Beatty said it is important to know that it is OK to not feel OK when someone close to you has been diagnosed.

“Whether it’s your GP, whether it’s a friend, go and speak to someone.”

“Quite often the services that are available to the patient are also available to the loved ones too.”

Latest Articles

asco 2025: breast cancer research summary

ASCO 2025: Breast Cancer Research Summary

virtual reality meets radiation: a new era in patient coaching
split-banner-image

BREAST RECONSTRUCTION

If you have had a mastectomy, either because you’ve been diagnosed with breast cancer or are at high risk of developing breast cancer, you may decide to have a breast reconstruction. This is a very personal decision to make and it’s best to know all your options before choosing what is best for you.

Understanding Your Breast Reconstruction Options

If you have had a mastectomy, either because you’ve been diagnosed with breast cancer or are at high risk of developing breast cancer, you may decide to have a breast reconstruction.

This is a very personal decision to make and it’s best to know all your options before choosing what is best for you.

If you have been diagnosed with breast cancer and need to undergo surgery as part of your treatment, you will be referred to a breast surgeon.

Dr Stuart McIntosh is a specialist breast surgeon at Belfast City Hospital, Ireland.

He said every person who has undergone or will undergo a mastectomy, should understand their reconstruction options.

“I think all women who are having a mastectomy are entitled to have a conversation about breast reconstruction and whether it’s something they want to peruse.”

Dr McIntosh emphasised there is no one-size-fits-all approach to breast reconstruction and patients should discuss the best option for their individual circumstance with their surgeon.

He said when talking to patients, he ensures they understand what the outcome of the surgery will be.

“I do stress to patients that breast reconstruction is not about putting back the breast that we’re removing in the mastectomy. It’s about trying to mimic the appearance as much as possible and trying to maintain the natural symmetry, at the very least in clothing; swimming costumes, a bra, without having to wear an external prosthesis.”

He said there are a variety of options available for those seeking a reconstruction.

“There are a variety of different types of implants and different ways of using those implants, such as putting them under the muscle of the chest wall or putting them on top of the muscle.”

“There is also the option to reconstruct the breast using the patient’s own tissue, whether taken from places like the back or the tummy, or sometimes even the buttock or the thigh.”

Do I Need To Have A Reconstruction After My Breast Cancer Surgery?

You can choose to not undergo a reconstruction if you do not want to.

While a lot of your treatment after a breast cancer diagnosis is determined by the expertise of your treatment team, you have more choice and control in regard to your reconstruction options.

This includes whether to have a reconstruction or not.

Dr McIntosh said that each patient will have differing priorities when it comes to their reconstruction options.

“I think for some people, treating the cancer and putting it behind them is very important. So, they may choose to have the simplest option so they can get the treatment behind them and get on with their life.”

“I think for some patients there is a need to have control over the procedure.”

“They’re being told they have to have a mastectomy; they have to have other treatments…being able to have a reconstruction is their way of maintaining some input or some control into the treatment process.”

“And for some women it’s an integral part of their self-image or their self-esteem.”

Listen to the podcast

We spoke with specialist breast surgeon at Belfast City Hospital, Ireland, Dr Stuart McIntosh, about breast reconstruction options, what you need to consider before making a decision and what are the best questions to ask your doctor during your decision making process.

He emphasised that there is no correct answer and each patient will have different considerations that will influence their decision.

“Interestingly the uptake in immediate reconstruction, that’s a reconstruction at the same time as a mastectomy, has always hovered around the 25% mark and I think it’s important to make women aware that it is their choice.”

“They have the freedom to choose in this setting and not having a reconstruction is a legitimate choice, as is having a reconstruction,” he said.

“Some women feel that they must have it done and it’s important to make them recognise that this part of the treatment is their decision.”

What Else Do I Need To Consider If I Have Chosen To Get A Reconstruction?

Dr McIntosh said that your surgeon will consider your treatment regime and overall health and wellbeing when they are planning your reconstruction.

“There are factors around your cancer treatment we need to take into account when planning a reconstruction.”

“So, perhaps the patient is going to need radiotherapy after a mastectomy, we might want to consider that when making choices.

“We always also want to consider the general health and fitness of the patient, because having an immediate reconstruction is, without doubt, a bigger operation than having a mastectomy on its own.”

“So, it is important to take into account the general health, fitness, ability to withstand a longer operation and the increased risk of complications.”

Dr McIntosh said each surgical option will take a varying amount to undertake and recover from which may be an important consideration for a patient and their surgeon.

“A simple mastectomy without reconstruction may take 45 minutes to an hour.”

“An implant-based reconstruction may take a couple of hours, whereas reconstruction using patients own tissue may take four, five, six hours depending on where the tissue is coming from and how complex the procedure is.”

“And, obviously, the length of recovery is variable dependent on those features as well.”

What Questions Should I Ask Before I Make My Decision?

Dr McIntosh said that when you meet with your surgeon, ask as many questions as you need and don’t be afraid to express any concerns you may have.

He said to consider asking about how your options may affect your cancer treatment pathway or the timing of treatments.

He also said it was important to learn about the pros and cons of each option.

“Usually when I’m having this type of consultation with a patient, we’ll go through photographs so they can see examples of how the different reconstruction types look and perhaps some examples of ones that have worked well, and perhaps examples of ones that have not worked so well.”

“I think it’s increasingly important for patients, if they’re having implant-based reconstruction, to be able to know what type of implant are likely to be used, whether the surgeon is planning to use any mesh to assist with the reconstruction and if it were me, I’d want to know that these are devices that had good scientific evidence or data underlying them, so we know that they’re safe to be in use.”

And probably it’s always worth asking your surgeon how many times he or she has done that particular operation.”

While Dr McIntosh encourages patients doing their own research into their options, he strongly emphasises the importance of only reading reputable sources.

“While there is great information available online, you have to be careful as it’s not always applicable to everybody and some of it is better quality than others.”

“I would encourage people to do their own research, but then I would ask them to take that research back to your surgeon and ask them the questions that have occurred to you as a result of that research.”

Dr McIntosh also emphasised that when he guides patients through this process, he will often see patients as many times as they need. He stresses that there is no need to rush into making this decision.

“Maybe we can reach a decision after two consultations.”

“It may take three, it may take four, it may take some time with the breast care nurses, sometimes it’s useful to be able to talk to another patient whose gone through the process and if somebody wants to do that, then we try very hard to put them in touch with another patient.”

QUICK ACCESS

profile image

Dr Stuart McIntosh

Dr Stuart McIntosh is a specialist breast surgeon at Belfast City Hospital, Ireland.

Support Us

Help us to change lives through breast cancer clinical trials research

Latest Articles

asco 2025: breast cancer research summary

ASCO 2025: Breast Cancer Research Summary

virtual reality meets radiation: a new era in patient coaching
split-banner-image

PALLAS: A PATH FOR FURTHER STUDY INTO EARLY-STAGE BREAST CANCER

Results from the stage three breast cancer clinical trial, PALLAS, has provided insight for future trials into early stage breast cancer.

The PALLAS Clinical Trial

The PALLAS clinical trial has provided a wealth of material for future research into early-stage breast cancer.

The PALLAS trial studied the effects of adding a two-year course of palbociclib, a cell cycle inhibitor, to standard hormone-blocking treatment for patients with hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer.

PALLAS was an international clinical trial that recruited 5,795 patients worldwide, including more than 430 patients from Australia.

Researchers had hoped that palbociclib, currently used in patients with metastatic breast cancer to prolong the duration of cancer control and delay the need for chemotherapy, might reduce the risk of metastatic recurrence in patients with earlier stages of breast cancer.

“We were aiming to find patients who stood to gain the most from the study drug, based on their higher risk of recurrence,” says Dr Nicholas Zdenkowski, the Breast Cancer Trials Study Chair of the PALLAS clinical trial.

“All patients received standard hormone-blocking treatment and half received the additional palbociclib.

They had also received chemotherapy and radiotherapy if their treating doctor considered those treatments appropriate.”

However, interim results showed palbociclib wasn’t working in this setting, he says. “Over time, it was seen there was no difference between the groups, so the study drug was stopped in those who were still taking it as part of their planned two-year course.”

He’s not disheartened, though. “You read the headline, and you think it’s disappointing,” says Dr Zdenkowski. “But these large trials are always designed so we learn things, and we’ll continue to learn as we follow these patients up. We know recurrences can occur years down the track, and a difference may emerge over time between the two study groups.”

During the trial, researchers gathered a bio-bank of tissue samples from patients’ surgeries for analysis, along with blood samples over the course of their participation.

“That will provide some powerful information about the potential for some patients to benefit from palbociclib, about possible resistance mechanisms, and a range of other useful data,” says Dr Zdenkowski.

Data from ongoing patient questionnaires is also expected to provide insights into the patients’ perspectives on endocrine therapy and palbociclib, as well as their experience with breast cancer.

So, although this particular use of palbociclib has not been proven effective, its current use in patients with metastatic breast cancer will continue, and so will the research, says Dr Zdenkowski. “We’re not able to rest until all people have been cured of their cancer.” [ends]

Publication:

Palbociclib with adjuvant endocrine therapy in early breast cancer (PALLAS): interim analysis of a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study.

Mayer EL, Dueck AC, Martin M, Rubovsky G, Burstein HJ, Bellet-Ezquerra M, Miller KD, Zdenkowski N, Winer EP, PFeiler G, Goetz M, Ruiz-Borrego M, Anderson D, Nowecki Z, Loibl S, Moulder S, Ring A, Fitzal F, Traina T, Chan A, Rugo HS, Lemieux J, Henao F, Lyss A, Antolin Novoa S, Wolff AC, Vetter M, Egle D, Morris PG, Mamounas EP, Gil-Gil MJ, Prat A, Fohler H, Metzger Filho O, Schwarz M, DuFrane C, Fumagalli D, Puyana Theall K, Ray Lu D, Huang Bartlett C, Koehler M, Fesl C, DeMichele A, Gnant M. Lancet Oncology. 2021; epub 15 January 2021; https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30642-2.

 

Support Us

Help us to change lives through breast cancer clinical trials research

profile image

Dr Nicholas Zdenkowski

Dr Nicholas Zdenkowski is the Medical Advisor at Breast Cancer Trials, a BCT researcher and medical oncologist.

Latest Articles

asco 2025: breast cancer research summary

ASCO 2025: Breast Cancer Research Summary

virtual reality meets radiation: a new era in patient coaching
split-banner-image

IBIS-II RESULTS: BONE DENSITY LOSS STABILISED FOR PATIENTS

A summary of results from an IBIS-II sub-study looking into bone density of postmenopausal women in Australia and New Zealand, who took anastrozole for five years.

IBIS II Clinical Trial Sub-Study

Doctors can now partly allay women’s concerns about bone density loss when taking breast cancer prevention drugs.

Women at high risk of developing breast cancer may benefit from the hormone therapy anastrozole, which has been shown by the International Breast Cancer Intervention Study (IBIS-II) to help prevent the disease.

However, one of anastrozole’s side effects is reduced bone density – which can have serious consequences.

“Bone density loss puts people at risk of breaking bones,” says Dr Nicholas Zdenkowski, Medical Advisor at Breast Cancer Trials, which co-led the study. “It might be 10 or 20 years’ time before they break their hip or have a compression fracture in their spine.” Such injuries can lead to chronic pain or kickstart a decline in health.

Because of this, the IBIS-II clinical trial included a sub-study on bone density in 1,410 postmenopausal women in Australia and New Zealand, who are more at risk of developing osteopenia and osteoporosis.

Patients were given anastrozole for five years, then the study tracked bone density between years five and seven. By year seven, bone density had improved by 1.25% in the lumbar spine.

This means when women stop taking anastrozole, bone density loss caused by the drug can be partially reversed. (It did not, however, improve at the hip.)

It’s a positive result, says Dr Zdenkowski. “This means we can reassure women that even if bone density does decline, it is expected to improve again after they stop anastrozole.”

Doctors now have more information to help patients weigh up the benefits and risks of taking anastrozole. As a safe medication that reduces the chance of breast cancer in high-risk women, it has some advantages over tamoxifen, as an alternative. But women can be reluctant to take it due to a potential reduction in bone density, particularly if they have low bone density, previous fractures or a family history of osteoporosis.

This research, says Dr Zdenkowski, “may mean there are more women willing to take anastrozole, because we now know their bone density does stabilise after they stop taking it.”

The study also showed risedronate, a bone-strengthening drug, can increase bone density after patients stop anastrozole.

The next step, says Dr Zdenkowski, is to study who is most likely to benefit from being on anastrozole in this setting. Anastrozole is not yet registered or covered by the PBS in Australia as a prevention medication. It is widely used for the treatment of early stage and metastatic breast cancer.

 

Publication:

Sestak I, Blake G, Patel R, Cuzick J, Howell A, Coleman R, Eastell R. Off-treatment bone mineral density changes in postmenopausal women receiving anastrozole for 5 years: 7-year results from the IBIS-II prevention trial. British Journal of Cancer 2021; epub 22 January 2021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-020-01228-2.

Support Us

Help us to change lives through breast cancer clinical trials research

profile image

Dr Nicholas Zdenkowski

Dr Nicholas Zdenkowski is the Medical Advisor at Breast Cancer Trials, a BCT researcher, IBIS II Co-Study Chair and medical oncologist.
See More

Latest Articles

asco 2025: breast cancer research summary

ASCO 2025: Breast Cancer Research Summary

virtual reality meets radiation: a new era in patient coaching