Tag Archive for: breast cancer metastasis

Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Sharon’s Clinical Trial Profile

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Sharon’s Clinical Trial Profile from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Breast cancer patient Sharon was diagnosed with triple-negative invasive lobular carcinoma after she found a lump after working out. Watch as she shares her breast cancer journey through two stages along with treatment – and what she learned and experienced with clinical trials and her advice to other patients. In Sharon’s words, “I do think that patients should be given all of their options upfront. I don’t think that clinical trials should be the last resort.”

See More from Patient-to-Patient Diverse Breast Cancer Clinical Trial Profiles

Transcript:

Sharon: 

I found a lump after I had been working out. I kind of blew it off, I thought it was a muscle strain. I kind of went about two to three weeks just icing it. I asked my mom a couple of questions like, “Hey, have you ever had this type of pain?” She’s not an avid exercise individual, so she had no clue what I was talking about. It had become unbearable. My right breast, it became swollen. It was extremely swollen, red, very, very firm, and I knew that I needed to go into the doctor to see what was happening. So I visited my PCP, from there, I was told to get a mammogram, it was authorized. After that, I needed to have the tissue sampled to determine what the problem was. So, I received the phone call at work, and it was very disturbing, very distraught, I had found out that I was triple-negative breast cancer stage III at the time. From there, I immediately went into chemotherapy that included 16 sessions of chemotherapy followed by a right mastectomy. I opted for reconstruction. At the time of reconstruction, we went in and decided that we would do an expander, and that lasted about six weeks. Then I developed a staph infection, so the expander needed to be removed, so that was before I had a chance to receive my post-mastectomy scans. 

 So there was a large time frame which I was not having chemotherapy, and I had not received my scans. I was diagnosed in May of 2020 with stage IV. The cancer had metastasized to my liver, spine, and bones. Then the new care plan was to be placed back on chemotherapy, a different regimen, something a little bit stronger, since triple-negative is one of the strongest types of breast cancer.  

I felt like I did not have any additional options. I had tried what my oncologist deemed to be the most effective chemotherapy at the time. I was doing research in terms of holistic healing, different I guess, vitamins, fruits and vegetables, or changing my eating habits, removing sugar. So all of the life hacks that you kind of Google yourself which is something people should not do, so I tried that approach. And my oncologist said, “We might need to look into clinical trials.” It was definitely something that I did not hear throughout the initial process, which was kind of a bummer that that information wasn’t provided. I definitely think that my decision-making process would have been a little different had I known about them. So, we had tried all of the chemo therapies that we could, all the targeted therapies, and I am triple-negative, so none of my receptors allowed me to do the oral chemo or any of the hormone therapy. So I couldn’t do that. And so the option they tried for chemotherapy that was being tested was given, was provided, and I did a little bit of research on my own. I asked around in different support groups that I attend to see if anyone had heard of this trial drug. And from there, I decided that since the other options were not going to work with the type of cancer that I had then the clinical trial might have been the next best option. 

 I just recently celebrated one full year of living with stage IV… And I guess that’s a big to-do, because the scary stats online, they say that once your cancer has metastasized, you typically have 12 to 18 months of life expectancy. So, I’m passing that mark, I’m doing well. I am currently on a new chemotherapy regimen, and I have chemotherapy two to three times a month with a couple of breaks in between. I’m definitely a breast cancer advocate. I like to share my story to encourage others. I know it can be very overwhelming to kind of live with this disease every day, along with the anxieties that come with it. 

I was not familiar with clinical trials, I have had three oncologists, and I did not hear about them until my third oncologist, which is very scary. I do think that patients should be given all of their options up front. I don’t think that clinical trials should be the last resort. I think that patients should have…kind of be empowered to make the decision as for them, and the option for clinical trials should be shared. They should be a part of the care plan if the patient decides that it’s the best thing for them. I decided that it was best for me because there were not many…there were limited options available for me. And I think that had I been given the information earlier, I would have done some additional research to see what other people have been doing and are doing in terms of research, especially as it relates to clinical trials. One of the questions that I asked during the initial process was, “Were there other women of color on this particular trial, and have they seen success?” And unfortunately, I was the first person in my area on the clinical trial that was a person of color, so I had not known about them previously.  

It was beneficial for me to be a part of the trial. The trial was not a success for me, but I did read research where the trial drug actually worked for others. 

I would advise for patients to ask doctors for the information and do additional research on their own, it’s okay to seek guidance. It is also okay for patients to search for support groups, ask within the support groups if these clinical trials have been done in other areas. If the clinical trial has seen success, if there are women of color on those clinical trials, it is important to know as much as you can about the drug. Patients should ask, “What are the side effects? What is the efficacy of the drug? How is the data from the drug used? Is your information going to remain anonymous?” There are a number of reasons patients should advocate for themselves as well as doing their own research, although your nurse practitioner or oncologist may go through the documentation with you, that it’s a lot to process at the time, you should ask for time to review the documents with your family or whoever helps you make decisions, I would also advise patients not to feel pressure to sign the waiver or the information packet the same day. Definitely take some time to read it, do your own research, ask other people who have been on the trial or ask other patients who have been in your shoes previously. I spoke with a number of women who hadn’t completed the clinical trial that I completed, but they had worked on clinical trials in the past.  

They shared with me the side effects that they experienced as well as some of the remedies that they use to counteract those side effects. They also share with me their experience with their oncologist or with their care team. So I had a very, very helpful care team. They walked through the release waiver with me. I also spent some time with my family, spent some time with my religious leader, as well as some of my breast cancer buddies, is what I like to call them, to make sure that I was making decisions for me, opposed to being pressured to sign on the same day that you received the release. And then lastly, I would just say really meditate and ask yourself, “Is this something that needs to be done, or is this something that needs to be added to my care plan to make sure that I have the best quality of life?” 

I would just like to let everyone know that clinical trials are not approved drugs, but with the help of other women of color who have been left out previously, we can… Or we can ensure that other women of color who are battling cancer and have a better chance. So I joined a clinical trial to make sure that I can help someone who will experience the same exact situation, and hopefully there will be additional drugs created or approved within the next 10 years to help someone else. Being stage IV is more than a notion, but I’m excited that I’m a part of history. So that clinical trial that I participated in did not work for me, but the information that was gathered would hopefully help them improve the drug. 

Metastatic BC Research: How Can You Advocate for the Latest Treatment?

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Metastatic BC Research: How Can You Advocate for the Latest Treatment? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What do metastatic breast cancer patients need to know about the latest research news? Dr. Megan Kruse shares highlights from the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS), along with her advice for advocating for the right testing to help guide treatment options.

Dr. Megan Kruse is a Breast Medical Oncologist at the Cleveland Clinic. More about this expert here.

See More From INSIST! Metastatic Breast Cancer

Related Resources:

 

What Could Advances in Breast Cancer Research Mean for You?

How Can You Advocate for the Best Breast Cancer Care?

Factors That Guide a Metastatic Breast Cancer Treatment Decision

 

Transcript:

Dr. Kruse:                   

At this year’s San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, there were a few interesting presentations about the treatment of first-line metastatic triple-negative breast cancer that I think patients should be aware of.

Two of the presentations centered around trials that were presented in the past. Those reporting, patients reported outcomes from the IMpassion 130 study, which looked at chemotherapy for metastatic triple-negative disease plus the immunotherapy atezolizumab. And then, there was also an update on the results from the KEYNOTE-355 study, which was a study again of chemotherapy for metastatic triple-negative patients in combination with pembrolizumab, a different immunotherapy. And both of these studies showed that there was benefit for women in certain sub-groups of triple-negative breast cancer when looking at addition of immunotherapy.

And so, what I’d like to draw patients’ attention to with these presentations is that you have to be aware of if you fall into one of these categories so you know if you’re a candidate for the particular type of immunotherapy that can be added to chemotherapy. There are two different ways to test for if a patient is a candidate for immunotherapy and they are both tests that can be done on biopsies of metastatic or cancer recurrent sites in the body.

They can also be sent off of original breast cancer tumors. And what we now know is that for patients who do not have markers that suggest immune activation or where the immune system would be responsive to immunotherapy the addition of that extra therapy really does not help to improve cancer control over chemotherapy alone. And I think that’s a really important topic because everyone is very interested in immunotherapy, but it does have side effects of its own and it can actually be lasting side effects in terms of inflammation in organs like the liver, the colon, and the lungs.

And then, the third presentation that I’d like to bring up is the IPATunity study, which looked at the addition of a targeted therapy called ipatasertib to, again, chemotherapy for the first treatment of metastatic triple-negative disease.

And so, this is getting into an area of targeted therapy for metastatic triple-negative disease. And again, only looks at patients that have a particular marker that suggests sensitivity to this drug. And those are certain genetic markers, predominately changes in a DNA marker called PIK3CA. In this study, we actually found that there was no benefit for the targeted therapy added to chemotherapy for patients that had that genetic mutation, which was different than what was seen in earlier studies of the same combination. So, I think there’s more work to be done and it’s probably too early to say that this targeted therapy will not be used in treatment of metastatic breast cancer.

But what all of these research studies show together is that metastatic triple-negative cancer is not really just one disease. It’s very clear that within that one name, there are multiple different patient types and tumor types that need to be cared for differently.

And so, again, I think the theme from these abstracts and these research presentations is that we have to look into the right therapy for the right patient at the right time, which largely involved DNA-based testing.

So, when patients are thinking about their treatment options and how to best help with their providers about what treatment options exist for them, I think it’s important to recognize the type of testing that may be advantageous in your cancer type.

And so, for all metastatic breast cancer patients, we really recommend that they’ve had genetic testing to look for DNA changes like BRCA mutations that will lead to treatment options. For metastatic triple-negative disease, it’s important to make sure that you’re providers are testing for PDL1, which would make you a candidate for immunotherapy. And then, the more we learn about clinical trials, the more we have options for patients that have had drug-based DNA or genome-based testing. So, that’s an important term for patients to become familiar with is genomic testing.

And I think when you bring that up with your providers, they’ll know what you’re talking about and they’ll know that what you’re potentially interested in is new targeted therapy for the cancer that may either come in combination with chemotherapy or as a standalone treatment option. If you don’t have those options that are available, and FDA approved basis for regular routine patient care, there is always the option of clinical trials.

And so, if that is something that you’re interested in, genomic testing will often open the way. So, I think as you’re writing notes when you’re talking to your providers, you might wanna jot down whether or not you’ve had genetic testing and whether or not you’ve had genomic testing in the past, as both of those things will help potentially address all of your treatment options.

I’ve very hopeful about the research that is going to lead to new developments for breast cancer treatment in the next few years.

I think what we’ve seen both at this San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium as well as other conferences in the recent past has been a lot of focus on finding the right treatment for the right patient at the right time. And so, patients seem to be very interested in finding out this information. They often come to clinic armed with the most recent data, which allows their providers to have really informed discussions about what the best treatment might be. And to talk about if the new treatments are not great right now, what treatments might look like in the future.

I think the other thing that’s encouraging about the research that we’ve seen presented at this conference is that some of these trials are very, very large. For example, the RxPONDER trial was a trial of over 9,000 patients. And I really think that’s amazing to get that many patients interested in research that may not directly impact their patient care but will impact the care of others moving forward.

It’s just a sign that our breast cancer patients are empowered, and they want to make a difference in the scientific community as a whole.

 

Breast Cancer Research News: SABCS Conference Highlights

/in , , , , , , , /by

Breast Cancer Research News: SABCS Conference Highlights from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo. 

Expert Dr. Megan Kruse shares highlights from the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS). Dr. Kruse provides an overview of what this news means for early stage breast cancer patients, along with her optimism about the future of breast cancer research and treatment.

Dr. Megan Kruse is a Breast Medical Oncologist at the Cleveland Clinic. More about this expert here.

See More From The Pro-Active Breast Cancer Patient Toolkit

Related Resources:

Are You Prepared for Your Breast Cancer Appointment? Expert Tips

 

Transcript:

Dr. Kruse:                   

The San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium is a national meeting with international presence that combines all of the latest data from research on breast cancer topics. It involves clinical research, basic science research, a lot of patient, and patient advocate support.

And the idea here is to bring together all the different disciplines that are involved in breast cancer patient care and do the best information and knowledge sharing that we can each year.

This year’s San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium brought us a lot of interesting research focusing on early-stage breast cancer patients. I think the most important presentations that were given had to do with the treatment of high-risk lymph node-positive hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients. And these were really across three abstracts. The first abstract of interest was the Monarch E study, which looked at high-risk women with hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative breast cancer and optimizing their medical therapy.

So, these patients are typically treated with anti-estrogen therapy and the idea of the research that was presented was if the addition of a targeted medication called abemaciclib or Verzenio could help to improve outcomes for women in this population. And what the trial found was that for women who took their anti-estrogen therapy for the usual length of time but added the abemaciclib for the first two years of that anti-estrogen therapy that there is actually an improvement in cancer-free survival time or an improvement in cure rates. And this was important because these women may not benefit from chemotherapy, as we’ll talk about in another abstract.

An addition research presentation that was given that goes alongside of the monarch E study was that of the Penelope B study. And the Penelope B took a similar population to what was studied in Monarch E. So, again high-risk women with lymph node-positive, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer; however, in Penelope B, all of these patients had received pre-surgery chemotherapy.

And in order to qualify for the trial, the patients had to have some cancer that remained in the breast or the lymph nodes that was taken out at the time of their surgery. So, these are patients clearly in which chemotherapy did not do the whole job in terms of getting rid of the cancer. And again, the idea here was to add a second targeted therapy to the endocrine therapy to see if that would improve cancer-free time for patients in this population. The difference in this study was that the partner targeted therapy that was used was a drug called palbociclib or Ibrance.

And the drug was actually only used for one year in combination with endocrine therapy rather than two years as was used in the Monarch E study with abemaciclib. Interestingly enough, the Penelope B study was a negative study, meaning that it did not improve the cancer-free survival time for women who took the endocrine therapy plus targeted therapy compared to women who took the endocrine therapy alone.

So, I think that these are two interesting studies that one should look at together. And clearly, may impact what we do for the treatment of high-risk hormone receptor-positive women moving forward. The third abstract that I’d like to touch on that I think was important for women with early-stage breast cancer is the RxPONDER study, also known as SWOG 1007. And this study again was looking at lymph node-positive, hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative breast cancer patients and seeing if the addition of chemotherapy helped to improve their cancer-free survival compared to anti-estrogen therapy alone.

And so, in this study, while the study population was all women with early-stage breast cancer, meeting the one to three lymph node-positive criteria, you really have to break the results down into the results for pre-menopausal women and the results for post-menopausal women.

Because overall the study really showed no significant benefit to chemotherapy on top of endocrine therapy for women in this population; however, we did see that there was a clear benefit for women who were pre-menopausal. So, the women who had no benefit from chemotherapy were largely those who were post-menopausal, while those who were pre-menopausal derived extra benefit from chemo on top of anti-estrogen therapy. And that benefit depended on what the Oncotype recurrent score was.

With women that had the lowest of the recurrent scores having a chemo benefit of about three percent going up to over five percent for women who had Oncotype recurrent scores in the mid-teens to 25 range. In both of these groups, women who had Oncotype scores of 26 or above would have chemotherapy as per our standard of care.

So, I think that this abstract is important because in the past women who had lymph node-positive breast cancer generally received chemotherapy no matter what. More recently we’ve understood that not all of these cancers are created equal and that some cancers may not actually have benefit from chemotherapy in terms of improving cure rate. So, this study is a big step forward to help individualize and specify the treatment for women with lymph node-positive, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer.

I’ve very hopeful about the research that is going to lead to new developments for breast cancer treatment in the next few years.

I think what we’ve seen both at this San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium as well as other conferences in the recent past has been a lot of focus on finding the right treatment for the right patient at the right time. And so, patients seem to be very interested in finding out this information. They often come to clinic armed with the most recent data, which allows their providers to have really informed discussions about what the best treatment might be. And to talk about if the new treatments are not great right now, what treatments might look like in the future.

I think the other thing that’s encouraging about the research that we’ve seen presented at this conference is that some of these trials are very, very large. For example, the RxPONDER trial was a trial of over 9,000 patients. And I really think that’s amazing to get that many patients interested in research that may not directly impact their patient care but will impact the care of others moving forward.                                   

It’s just a sign that our breast cancer patients are empowered, and they want to make a difference in the scientific community as a whole.

 

Metastatic Breast Cancer Staging: What Patients Should Know

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Metastatic Breast Cancer Staging: What Patients Should Know from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Breast cancer expert Dr. Julie Gralow discusses metastatic breast cancer staging, including prognostic staging, breast cancer subtypes, and the meaning of metastasis.

Dr. Julie Gralow is the Jill Bennett Endowed Professor of Breast Medical Oncology at the University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance. More about this expert here.

See More From INSIST! Metastatic Breast Cancer

Related Resources:

 

What Are Essential Genetic Tests for Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients?

Metastatic Breast Cancer: Debunking Common Misconceptions

What Could Metastatic Breast Cancer Genetic Testing Advances Mean for You?

 

Transcript:

Dr. Gralow:                

The staging of breast cancer has traditionally been by something we call anatomic staging, which has the tumor size, the number of local lymph nodes involved, and whether it has metastasized beyond the lymph nodes. So, that’s TNM – tumor, nodes, metastases. And so, that’s the classic staging, and based on combinations of those things, you can be a Stage 0 through Stage 4. Stage 0 is reserved for ductal carcinoma in situ, which is a noninvasive breast cancer that can’t generally spread beyond the breast, so that’s Stage 0, and then we go up for invasive cancer.

Interestingly, just a couple years ago, the big group that oversees the staging of cancers decided that in breast cancer, that TNM – the size, the lymph nodes, and the location beyond the lymph nodes – is not good enough anymore, so they came up with a proposal for what we call a clinical prognostic stage, which is a companion to the traditional TNM staging.

What they were getting at here was it’s not just how big your cancer is, how many lymph nodes, or whatever, it’s also at the biology of your cancer. So, this new clinical prognostic stage takes into account the estrogen and progesterone receptor of your cancer, the HER2 receptor at the grade, which is a degree of aggressiveness, and then, if your tumor qualifies, one of the newer genomic testing profiles that we use in earlier-stage breast cancer, such as the Oncotype DX 21-gene recurrence score or the MammaPrint 70-gene assay.

So, all of that goes into account now, and the whole point here is that the estrogen receptor, the HER2, the grade, and some of these genomics may actually make more difference than how many lymph nodes you have, where the cancer is, and how big it is, so it’s not just the size, but also the biology of the cancer that we’re trying to include in the new staging systems.

Katherine:                  

In this program, Dr. Gralow, we’re focusing on metastatic breast cancer. Would you explain when breast cancer is considered to have metastasized?

Dr. Gralow:                

That’s a great question because technically, if the lymph nodes in the armpit – the axillary area – are involved, that does represent spread beyond the breast, but if it stays in the local lymph node areas, it’s not technically called a metastatic or Stage 4 breast cancer. So, metastatic breast cancer would have traveled beyond the breast and those local lymph nodes, and some common sites would be to the bone, to the lungs, to the liver, less commonly – at least, up front – to the brain, and it could also travel to other lymph node groups beyond those just in the armpit and the local chest wall area as well.

Katherine:                  

What about subtypes? How are they determined?

Dr. Gralow:                

The main way that we subtype breast cancer right now is based on the expression of estrogen and progesterone receptor, the two hormone receptors, and the HER2 receptor, the human epidermal growth factor receptor. So, to date, those are the most important features when we subtype, and so, a tumor can either express estrogen and progesterone receptor or not, and it can overexpress or amplify HER2 or not, and if you think that through, you can come up with four different major subtypes, in a way, based on estrogen receptor positive or negative and HER2 positive or negative.

When all three of those are negative, we call that triple negative breast cancer, and that’s about 18-20% of all breast cancers as diagnosed in the U.S. And then, when all three are positive, we sometimes call it triple positive, and the reason that we subtype is because we know that those different subsets act differently and that we have different drugs to treat them with, and we’ve got great drugs in the categories of hormone receptor positive and HER2 positive, and increasingly, some recently hope in a new drug approval or two in triple negative breast cancer as well.