Reporting on invasive lobular breast cancer in clinical trials: a systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Van Baelen K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10954721 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Reporting on invasive lobular breast cancer in clinical trials: a systematic review.
Van Baelen Karen K Van Cauwenberge Josephine J Maetens Marion M Beck Gabriela G Camden Ann A Chase Megan-Claire MC Fraser Valerie V Freeney Siobhan S Hutcheson Laurie L Levine Julia K JK Lien Tone T Terveer Rian R Turner Claire C Senkus Elzbieta E Jankowitz Rachel C RC Vandecaveye Vincent V Floris Giuseppe G Neven Patrick P Wildiers Hans H Sawyer Elinor E Vincent-Salomon Anne A Derksen Patrick W B PWB Desmedt Christine C
NPJ breast cancer 20240320 1
Invasive lobular breast cancer (ILC) differs from invasive breast cancer of no special type in many ways. Evidence on treatment efficacy for ILC is, however, lacking. We studied the degree of documentation and representation of ILC in phase III/IV clinical trials for novel breast cancer treatments. Trials were identified on Pubmed and clinicaltrials.gov. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were reviewed for requirements on histological subtype and tumor measurability. Documentation of ILC was assessed ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background:Invasive lobular breast cancer (ILC) is the second most common histological subtype of breast cancer after invasive ductal cancer (IDC). Here, we aimed at evaluating the prevalence, levels, and composition of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and their association with clinico-pathological and outcome variables in ILC, and to compare them with IDC. Methods:We considered two patient series with TIL data: a multicentric retrospective series (n?=?614) and the BIG 02-98 study (n?=?149 ILC and 807 IDC). We compared immune subsets identified by immuno-histochemistry in the ILC (n?=?159) and IDC (n?=?468) patients from the Nottingham series, as well as the CIBERSORT immune profiling of the ILC (n?=?98) and IDC (n?=?388) METABRIC and The Cancer Genome Atlas patients. All ILC/IDC comparisons were done in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative tumors. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results:TIL levels were statistically significantly lower in ILC compared with IDC (fold-change = 0.79, 95% confidence interval = 0.70 to 0.88, P < .001). In ILC, high TIL levels were associated with young age, lymph node involvement, and high proliferative tumors. In the univariate analysis, high TIL levels were associated with worse prognosis in the retrospective and BIG 02-98 lobular series, although they did not reach statistical significance in the latter. The Nottingham series revealed that the levels of intratumoral but not total CD8+ were statistically significantly lower in ILC compared with IDC. Comparison of the CIBERSORT profiles highlighted statistically significant differences in terms of immune composition. Conclusions:This study shows differences between the immune infiltrates of ER-positive/HER2-negative ILC and IDC in terms of prevalence, levels, localization, composition, and clinical associations.
| S-EPMC6037125 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Invasive lobular carcinoma accounts for 5%-15% of all invasive breast cancers, with a marked increase in incidence rates over the past two decades. Distinctive biological hallmarks of invasive lobular carcinoma include the loss of cell adhesion molecule E-cadherin leading to cells with a discohesive morphology, proliferating into single-file strands and estrogen receptor positivity. These key molecular features can make diagnosis difficult, as invasive lobular carcinoma is challenging to detect both physically and with current standard imaging. Treatment of invasive lobular carcinoma strongly favors endocrine therapy due to low chemosensitivity and lower rates of pathological response as a result. This review will summarize the distinct biological and molecular features of invasive lobular carcinoma, focusing on the diagnostic challenges faced and the subsequent surgical and medical management strategies. Prospective therapeutic options will also be explored, highlighting how furthering our understanding of the unique biology of lobular breast carcinoma is essential in guiding and informing the treatment of patients in the future.
| S-EPMC7844138 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The development of clinical guidelines for the surgical management of gastric cancer should be based on robust evidence from well-designed trials. Being able to reliably compare and combine the outcomes of these trials is a key factor in this process. OBJECTIVES:To examine variation in outcome reporting by surgical trials for gastric cancer and to identify outcomes for prioritisation in an international consensus study to develop a core outcome set in this field. DATA SOURCES:Systematic literature searches (Evidence Based Medicine, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP) and a review of study protocols of randomised controlled trials, published between 1996 and 2016. INTERVENTION:Therapeutic surgical interventions for gastric cancer. Outcomes were listed verbatim, categorised into groups (outcome themes) and examined for definitions and measurement instruments. RESULTS:Of 1919 abstracts screened, 32 trials (9073 participants) were identified. A total of 749 outcomes were reported of which 96 (13%) were accompanied by an attempted definition. No single outcome was reported by all trials. 'Adverse events' was the most frequently reported 'outcome theme' in which 240 unique terms were described. 12 trials (38%) classified complications according to severity, with 5 (16%) using a formal classification system (Clavien-Dindo or Accordion scale). Of 27 trials which described 'short-term' mortality, 15 (47%) used one of five different definitions. 6 out of the 32 trials (19%) described 'patient-reported outcomes'. CONCLUSION:Reporting of outcomes in gastric cancer surgery trials is inconsistent. A consensus approach to develop a minimum set of well-defined, standardised outcomes to be used by all future trials examining therapeutic surgical interventions for gastric cancer is needed. This should consider the views of all key stakeholders, including patients.
| S-EPMC6196805 | biostudies-other
Project description:Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) accounts for 10% to 15% of breast cancers in the United States, 80% of which are estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, with an unusual metastatic pattern of spread to sites such as the serosa, meninges, and ovaries, among others. Lobular cancer presents significant challenges in detection and clinical management given its multifocality and multicentricity at presentation. Despite the unique features of ILC, it is often lumped with hormone receptor-positive invasive ductal cancers (IDC); consequently, ILC screening, treatment, and follow-up strategies are largely based on data from IDC. Despite both being treated as ER-positive breast cancer, querying the Cancer Genome Atlas database shows distinctive molecular aberrations in ILC compared with IDC, such as E-cadherin loss (66% vs. 3%), FOXA1 mutations (7% vs. 2%), and GATA3 mutations (5% vs. 20%). Moreover, compared with patients with IDC, patients with ILC are less likely to undergo breast-conserving surgery, with lower rates of complete response following therapy as these tumors are less chemosensitive. Taken together, this suggests that ILC is biologically distinct, which may influence tumorigenesis and therapeutic strategies. Long-term survival and clinical outcomes in patients with ILC are worse than in stage- and grade-matched patients with IDC; therefore, nuanced criteria are needed to better define treatment goals and protocols tailored to ILC's unique biology. This comprehensive review highlights the histologic and clinicopathologic features that distinguish ILC from IDC, with an in-depth discussion of ILC's molecular alterations and biomarkers, clinical trials and treatment strategies, and future targets for therapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The majority of invasive lobular breast cancers (ILCs) are hormone receptor (HR)-positive and low grade. Clinically, ILC is treated similar to HR-positive invasive ductal cancer (IDC). However, ILC differs distinctly from IDC in its clinicopathologic characteristics and molecular alterations. ILC also differs in response to systemic therapy, with studies showing ILC as less sensitive to chemotherapy. Patients with ILC have worse clinical outcomes with late recurrences. Despite these differences, clinical trials treat HR-positive breast cancers as a single disease, and there is an unmet need for studies addressing the unique challenges faced by patients diagnosed with ILC.
| S-EPMC8176983 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is the second most prevalent histologic subtype of invasive breast cancer. Here, we comprehensively profiled 817 breast tumors, including 127 ILC, 490 ductal (IDC), and 88 mixed IDC/ILC. Besides E-cadherin loss, the best known ILC genetic hallmark, we identified mutations targeting PTEN, TBX3, and FOXA1 as ILC enriched features. PTEN loss associated with increased AKT phosphorylation, which was highest in ILC among all breast cancer subtypes. Spatially clustered FOXA1 mutations correlated with increased FOXA1 expression and activity. Conversely, GATA3 mutations and high expression characterized luminal A IDC, suggesting differential modulation of ER activity in ILC and IDC. Proliferation and immune-related signatures determined three ILC transcriptional subtypes associated with survival differences. Mixed IDC/ILC cases were molecularly classified as ILC-like and IDC-like revealing no true hybrid features. This multidimensional molecular atlas sheds new light on the genetic bases of ILC and provides potential clinical options.
| S-EPMC4603750 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Genome sequencing of relapsed, invasive lobular breast cancer identified actionable mutations in 86% of the cases. HER2 alterations occur in 27% of the cases, including 4 cases with activating HER2 mutations and 1 with a novel HER2-GRB7 gene fusion. This fusion links the HER2 tyrosine kinase domain to the GRB7 src homology 2 (SH2) domain.
| S-EPMC3700640 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Simple Summary The initial tumour burden is a strong and well-known prognostic factor in oncology. A systematic review was performed to examine if and how the initial tumour burden is reported in phase III clinical trials in the most frequent and deadly cancers. Seventy trials were selected, which mostly included biologic agents. The identification of low-burden metastatic disease was performed in 28.6% of studies; it was a stratification factor for randomisation in only 25.7% of studies. In two studies, a significant imbalance between arms in patients with low-burden disease was revealed. Our findings emphasise the need for the better assessment of tumour burden in clinical trials. Abstract Background: Randomised phase III clinical trials represent a methodological milestone to select effective drugs against metastatic cancers. In this context, and particularly in the efficacy assessment of biologic drugs, the initial metastatic tumour burden is a strong prognostic factor. Methods: A systematic literature review of randomised, phase III, first-line, clinical trials in metastatic breast, colorectal, and lung cancers, published from 2016 to 2021, was performed. Three groups of variables were collected: identity-, method- (including tumour burden assessment) and outcome-related. Results: Seventy trials were selected. A large portion of studies (41.4%) focused on the effects of biologic agents (signal inhibitors and immuno-therapies). A definition of low-burden disease based predominantly on the number of involved organs was reported in 28.6% of studies. No explicit reference to oligo-metastatic disease was found either in inclusion/exclusion criteria or in final descriptive data analyses. Disease extent, heterogeneously defined, was a stratification factor for randomisation in only 25.7% of studies. In two studies, a significant imbalance between arms in patients with low-burden disease was revealed. Conclusions: Attention to initial tumour burden in designing future clinical trials (including the harmonisation of definitions and the reporting of eventual oligo-metastatic disease, complete estimates of tumour volume, and its consideration as a stratification factor) should be increased.
| S-EPMC9264965 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImmunotherapy has become one of the most important breakthroughs in cancer treatment. Consequently, there have been more immuno-oncology (IO) clinical trials for various cancers in recent decades. However, the quality of such trials in reporting adverse events (AE), especially immune-related AE (irAE), has not been comprehensively evaluated.MethodsWe evaluated the harm reporting quality of IO trials. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify all head-to-head phase II and III clinical trials assessing cancer immunotherapy published between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2021. Publications were assessed using a 16-point harm reporting quality score (HRQS) derived from the 2004 Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) extension. The characteristics associated with improved reporting quality were identified with linear regression.ResultsA total of 123 publications were included. The mean HRQS was 11.1 (range, 5-14). The most common poorly reported items were harms addressed in the title (2%), AE collection methodology (3%), the statistical approach for analyzing harms (11%), and the irAE onset patterns and management (adequately reported in 14% and 33% of publications, respectively). The harm information was well described in the publications' Results and Discussion sections (89-99%). The multivariable regression model revealed that higher impact factor (IF) (30<IF<60 vs. IF<30, P=0.021) and phase III clinical trial (phase III vs. phase II, P=0.023) were independent predictors of higher quality score.ConclusionOur findings show that AE reporting in IO randomized trials is suboptimal. Efforts should be made to improve harm reporting and to standardize reporting practices. Improvements in AE reporting would permit more balanced assessment of interventions and would enhance evidence-based IO practice.
| S-EPMC9301013 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the literature on the frequency of reporting of sociodemographic data (gender, race, ethnicity, education status, health insurance status, geographic location of residence, and socioeconomic status) among interventional clinical trials involving cochlear implant patients.Databases reviewedA systematic search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, and SCOPUS to identify peer reviewed research.MethodsA systematic review was performed, which included original prospective clinical trial research studies involving cochlear implantation and/or interventional trials involving cochlear implant patients. Collected data included funding type, level of evidence, race reporting, ethnicity reporting, socioeconomic status reporting, education level reporting, type of insurance, geographic location, and gender of patients.ResultsA total of 644 articles were included for review. Gender was the most reported sociodemographic factor (70% of included studies). Reporting of other data among included studies was low: educational level (6%), socioeconomic status (2%), race (1%), ethnicity (1%), insurance status (0.3%), and geography (1%). The odds of reporting gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.51), education (OR = 1.81), and geography (OR = 2.72) increased with each subsequent publication date decade; however, this trend was not seen for reporting of race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or insurance. The reporting of gender was less likely to be reported in studies with the pediatric participants (OR = 0.62), level II evidence (OR = 0.14), and device programming interventional studies (OR = 0.26).ConclusionReporting of sociodemographic data, other than gender, is low among prospective clinical trials involving cochlear implant patients. The lack of reporting of this key data may limit research rigor and generalizability. Clinical researchers are advised to prospectively collect these data to promote equity in cochlear implant research and clinical care.
| S-EPMC9835009 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo study how composite outcomes, which have combined several components into a single measure, are defined, reported, and interpreted.DesignSystematic review of parallel group randomised clinical trials published in 2008 reporting a binary composite outcome. Two independent observers extracted the data using a standardised data sheet, and two other observers, blinded to the results, selected the most important component.ResultsOf 40 included trials, 29 (73%) were about cardiovascular topics and 24 (60%) were entirely or partly industry funded. Composite outcomes had a median of three components (range 2-9). Death or cardiovascular death was the most important component in 33 trials (83%). Only one trial provided a good rationale for the choice of components. We judged that the components were not of similar importance in 28 trials (70%); in 20 of these, death was combined with hospital admission. Other major problems were change in the definition of the composite outcome between the abstract, methods, and results sections (13 trials); missing, ambiguous, or uninterpretable data (9 trials); and post hoc construction of composite outcomes (4 trials). Only 24 trials (60%) provided reliable estimates for both the composite and its components, and only six trials (15%) had components of similar, or possibly similar, clinical importance and provided reliable estimates. In 11 of 16 trials with a statistically significant composite, the abstract conclusion falsely implied that the effect applied also to the most important component.ConclusionsThe use of composite outcomes in trials is problematic. Components are often unreasonably combined, inconsistently defined, and inadequately reported. These problems will leave many readers confused, often with an exaggerated perception of how well interventions work.
| S-EPMC2923692 | biostudies-literature