ILC Clinical Trials

Options

August 2015 update: Scroll to 2nd post to read about the first ever ILC trial focused on "just diagnosed" ILC.
October 2015 update: Scroll further down to read about the first ever ILC clinical trial focused on Stage 4 ILC.

My 45 year old pre-menopausal wife was recently diagnosed with Lobular breast cancer (ILC). After BMX surgery, the final pathology was: Stage 2A ILC, Grade 2, ER+ (95%), PR+ (95%), HER2-, Lymph Node negative (0/3), Ki67 5-10%. Her OncotypeDx score is 11. Due to a childhood Lymphoblastic Lymphoma in her leg 30 years ago at age ~15, she did genetic testing. Those test results were Negative. (it looked at the following genes: ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CHEK2, EPCAM, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, NBN, PALB2, PMS2, PTEN, RAD51C, STK11, TP53). Actually, she had two "variants of unknown significance" in the ATM gene, which are assumed benign, at the moment.
Those variants are:
1. ATM gene variant: c.1744T>C (p.Phe582Leu) rs2235006
2. ATM gene variant: c.146C>G (p.Ser49Cys) [On Pubmed, also known as: S49C, p.S49C, Ser49Cys, rs1800054].

She is taking Tamoxifen, despite growing evidence of hormonal resistance for an ILC subset (per Magee Womens Hospital at University of Pittsburgh, among others).

As science continues to drill down at the genetic level, it's clear that Lobular is fundamentally different than Ductal breast cancer. It's also very clear that Lobular is understudied compared to other breast cancer subtypes and frustrating to know that ILC patients get the same protocols as IDC. I'm afraid the wait for a ILC targeted therapy is years away and the potential for progression is a possibility. I'm told her cancer is treatable and has a favorable prognosis, but feel it's wise to stay educated on the latest research.

Since Lobular is a minority, I thought I'd dig around for clinical trials for ILC. I'm not finding anything.

Can someone point me to ILC clinical trials?

If it matters, we live in Northern California, near the Silicon Valley, but open to all US based trials.

Thanks!

Comments

  • mary625
    mary625 Member Posts: 1,056
    edited May 2014

    Hi, JohnSmith.  I had ILC also, and I've never seen a clinical trial devoted to it, or even a different treatment plan.  I was confused by that initially.  I thought it would be treated differently, but it's not.  The only place I've ever seen publish a study on ILC was University of Pittsburgh.  I'll add that I have seen the results of a trial lately that showed that ILC responds better to aromatase inhibitors than tamoxifen.

    You might want to come over to the ILC forum as well.  This forum usually reports on the results of the clinical trials, not ones that are open and available.  

    ILC is usually found later than IDC because of its growth pattern between the normal cells.  We are almost always hormone positive.  ILC is considered slower growing and less aggressive.

    While I don't know if Seattle Cancer Care Alliance is studying ILC, I would highly recommend it if you wish to travel out of your area for treatment.  In fact, I am going across country for much of my follow-up care there.  They are affiliated with the University of Washington and part of a number of institutions that make up the Southwestern Cancer Alliance (not sure of exact name) which does a lot of research.  

    Hope this helps.  

  • JohnSmith
    JohnSmith Member Posts: 651
    edited April 2016

    Update | August 2015: The first ever ILC clinical trial has started!
    This is a trial focused on women who were "just diagnosed" and have not had surgery yet.

    Oct 2015 Press Release: "Magee-Womens Hospital of UPMC (Pittsburgh): Clinical Trial Opens to Examine Therapies on Invasive Lobular Breast Cancer"

    The University of Pittsburgh,Magee-Womens Breast Cancer Program has launched a pre-surgical "window" Trial to identify Biomarkers of endocrine response in ILC. They will be treating patients during the ~3 week period between initial diagnosis and surgery, using 1 of 3 standard endocrine therapies [Tamoxifen or Arimidex or Faslodex], and then comparing Biomarkers at pre-therapy (diagnosis) against post-therapy (surgery).
    The goal is to assess how ILC tumors are responding to the different endocrine therapies.
    ** The clinical trial is called: "A Trial of Endocrine Response in Women With Invasive Lobular Breast Cancer" and enrolling ~150 patients. Press Release is here.

    In addition to the primary site of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, other locations where you can participate in this Trial include:

    1. MD Anderson in Houston, Texas
    2. Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota
    3. University of Washington in Seattle, Washington
    4. University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa, Alabama
    5. Dana Farber in Boston, Massachusetts
    6. University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, North Carolina

    * Note: As of Nov 2015, these sites have not officially opened, but will within the next 6 months.

    I'm honestly unsure about how others feel, but I think this is a critically important trial.
    If anyone with ILC expects progress, it's crucial that new ILC patients (who have NOT had surgery yet) know about this trial. Only new patients who are Stage 1 through Stage 3 are eligible to participate.

    There's so little research being done on ILC (compared to other subtypes). I've identified small groups in Belgium, Netherlands, New Zealand and tiny pockets of the U.S. and I hope that the silos of data each group generates is shared among each other. At the current pace, it will take a decade before ILC pathway targets are clinically available, unless projects like these are executed efficiently. The sooner patients enroll, the sooner the data is generated, the sooner new therapies arrive.
    Until then, little will change. ILC patients will continue to receive treatments that were not designed for them and the game of "roll the dice" continues. That's why a trial like this is important.
    It's not much, but a baby step in the right direction is worth more than a mile down the wrong path. It would be a shame if this trial was cancelled due to lack of participation.

    Who else shares this sense of urgency?

  • fizzdon52
    fizzdon52 Member Posts: 568
    edited April 2015

    John I have had to come off Femara because of it's nasty side effects, not so much how it made me feel (which I could have put up with) but what is was doing to my heart and blood pressure. My Oncologist wants me to go on Tamoxifen and I am just so worried because I have heard that AI's are better for Lobular than Tamoxifen. I am meeting with then Oncologists tomorrow, does anyone have any suggestions as to what I should ask them??? I do share your sense of urgency. I feel like we are just lumped together with IDC patients and no-one really gives a stuff about us???

  • toomuch
    toomuch Member Posts: 901
    edited April 2015

    John - Yes. I share that sense of urgency with you. I'm grateful to see that there is some current day interest in looking at ILC. When I was diagnosed almost 5 years ago, I was incredibly frustrated at the paucity of information out available specific to ILC. In addition to looking at these biomarkers, I wish that Genomic Health would try to look at the subpopulation of patient's with ILC that were included in their studies to identify if the oncotype study results are reproducible when evaluating this sub-population. I have a general sense that women with ILC seem to test in the low range but wonder if it is predictive for ILC.

    Thank you for all of your research and posts. They are much appreciated.

  • mary625
    mary625 Member Posts: 1,056
    edited April 2015

    I think this would be a good study to help support or refute neoadjuvant AI or Tamoxifen treatment for all ER+/PR+ breast cancers.

  • JohnSmith
    JohnSmith Member Posts: 651
    edited April 2016

    Were Stage IV ILC patients aware of this Lobular trial?

    LGK974 for Metastatic Lobular Breast Cancer
    A Phase I, Open-label, Dose Escalation Study of Oral LGK974 in Patients With Melanoma and Lobular Breast Cancer (NCT01351103) Source: www.breastcancertrials.org

    Here's the trial on clinicaltrials.gov: A Study of LGK974 in Patients With Malignancies Dependent on Wnt Ligands.

    The drug "LGK974" is a Porcupine inhibitor developed by Novartis Oncology. Porcupine is tied to WNT signaling.
    Source 1 and Source 2 [must copy & paste] http://www.novartisoncology.com/ct/pipelineDetails...
    Researchers suspect that the "WNT" pathway is partially responsible for controlling ILC growth.

    Here's deeper info on LGK974, the Small molecule inhibitor of Porcupine from the Novartis website.

    Here's some related 2013 Novartis research: "Targeting Wnt-driven cancer through the inhibition of Porcupine by LGK974".

    I'm surprised no one here brought up this clinical trial before, especially since it's been around for a number of years.
    Perhaps it fell through the cracks since the clinicaltrials.gov page lacks reference to Lobular, ILC, or anything else that would allow a Stage 4 ILC patient to find it.
    Interestingly, BreastCancerTrials.org listed this trial on their site as: "LGK974 for Metastatic Lobular Breast Cancer".
    [must copy & paste] https://www.breastcancertrials.org/bct_nation/brow...

    Trial sites include:
    US, Maryland - Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins
    US, Massachusetts - Dana Farber
    US, Michigan - University of Michigan
    US, Texas - MD Anderson
    Netherlands... Rotterdam
    Spain... Madrid & Barcelona

    Perhaps, this warrants a thread in the Stage 4 section, including a post to this thread "Stage IV ILC: Tests, Treatments, News--Let's pool our knowledge". Feel free to copy and paste.

    2016 update: The Porcupine inhibitor, "LGK974" is now known as "WNT974".

  • ShetlandPony
    ShetlandPony Member Posts: 4,924
    edited September 2015

    It seems like the only researchers who care about ILC are at the University of Pittsburgh! It looks like they suspect that fulvestrant/Faslodex will be a good treatment for early stage ILC. (I think right now it is only used for stage iv ILC or IDC.) I will be watching their new endocrine therapy trial comparing tamoxifen, the aromatase inhibitor Arimidex, and fulvestrant/Faslodex (link above, JohnSmith April 20, 2015) with interest because ILC needs research, and because I'd like to have more information to decide if fulvestrant is a good possible future treatment for me. (Letrozole + Ibrance is working so far and I have hope that it will work for a very long time.) All three medical oncologists I consulted in 2011 and 2012 thought tamoxifen was fine for me, but I really think we will eventually know for sure that at least a subset of ILC does need something else. That is, we will know if they bother to look at IDC and ILC separately.

    JohnSmith I started the Stage IV ILC thread you mention above, and as far as I'm concerned you, as a very dedicated ILC advocate and researcher, are very welcome to post stage iv ILC trial or research information there.

  • JohnSmith
    JohnSmith Member Posts: 651
    edited May 2016

    Big news!! A clinical trial called POSEIDON focused solely on Lobular!
    plus
    A second clinical trial called SANDPIPER that may benefit Stage 4 Lobular.

    "Ground-breaking European clinical trial testing new investigational drug for the treatment of ILC breast cancer"

    05 October 2015

    Cancer researchers, oncologists and international pharmaceutical company join forces to test a new investigational drug for ILC breast cancer

    The progress of a large pan-European clinical trial, called "POSEIDON" into a novel targeted study drug (called Taselisib or GDC-0032) for breast cancer was announced today by the collaborative RATHER project funded by the European Commission. The POSEIDON clinical trial centres, based in the Netherlands Cancer Institute (Amsterdam), Cambridge Cancer Centre (UK), and the Vall d'Hebron Hospital (Barcelona, Spain), began to study patients treated with this investigational drug in December 2014.

    The RATHER project focuses on finding new drug targets for two types of breast cancer - invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), an aggressive cancer that does not respond well to current treatments, and triple negative which lacks the ER, PR and HER2 receptors - common and effective drug targets in other types of breast cancer. These cancers account for one quarter of all breast cancers, and have a very poor prognosis.

    There has been considerable success in targeting gene mutations with specific drugs in other cancers, and so the RATHER project team are aiming to find other possible drug targets, by focusing on protein kinases such as PI3K, the protein inhibited by the novel investigational drug. Taselisib (a PI3K inhibitor) has been developed by Genentech (a member of the Roche Group), and is an isoform-specific inhibitor of the protein PI3K. Genes encoding PI3K are often mutated in breast cancer, particularly in ILC, suggesting that targeting these genes could effectively halt the growth of cancers that are 'driven' by kinases.

    Now that the dose escalation part of the POSEIDON trial has been completed, we look forward to opening the randomized Phase II part of the trial later this year to assess its effectiveness at treating hormone receptor-positive (HER2-negative) breast cancer patients. It is expected that phase II will be completed by the end of 2017, with nearly 300 patients from several European countries including the Netherlands, UK, Spain and France participating in the trial.

    The joint leaders of the POSEIDON clinical trial, and members of the RATHER program, Prof. Sabine Linn (Netherlands Cancer Institute) and Dr. Richard Baird (University of Cambridge, UK), said "we are delighted that recruitment to the POSEIDON trial is going so well; the combination of taselisib with endocrine therapy is an important new therapeutic approach to test for patients with hormone-driven advanced breast cancer".

    The Coordinator of the RATHER project, Prof. William Gallagher (University College Dublin, Ireland), emphasized the importance of this clinical trial and ongoing research into breast cancer, saying "This investigator-led clinical trial provides an exciting opportunity to further extend the arsenal of therapeutic weapons against breast cancer and, importantly, in a highly targeted way. Indeed, this ground-breaking clinical trial is a prime example of the prevalence and power of personalized cancer medicine".

    The POSEIDON clinical trial is funded by RATHER, EurocanPlatform (another EU-funded collaborative project), the Netherlands Cancer Institute, and by Genentech.

    About the RATHER Project: The main aim of RATHER (www.ratherproject.com) is to find new drug targets for two aggressive types of breast cancer, for which there are currently a lack of effective therapies. RATHER is a collaboration between 8 European partners - 6 academic institutions, in Ireland (University College Dublin), the UK (Cambridge University), The Netherlands (Netherlands Cancer Institute), France (Institut Curie), Sweden (Lund University) and Spain (Vall d'Hebron Hospital), and 2 SMEs, based in Ireland (OncoMark) and The Netherlands (Agendia). Funding: The RATHER project is funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement n° 258967.

    Contact info: Prof. Sabine Linn, POSEIDON trial chief investigator, Netherlands Cancer Institute (NKI), Amsterdam, {s.linn AT nki.nl}; Dr. Richard Baird, POSEIDON trial co-investigator, University of Cambridge, UK, {richard.baird AT medschl.cam.ac.uk}; Prof. William Gallagher, RATHER coordinator, University College Dublin, Ireland, {william.gallagher AT ucd.ie}

    End of Press Release.
    --------------

    POSEIDON trial: Click here for POSEIDON trial info from clinicaltrials.gov

    Title: "Phase I/Prospective Randomized Phase II Trial of the Safety and Efficacy of Tamoxifen in Combination With GDC-0032 Compared With Tamoxifen alone."
    Estimated Enrollment: 32
    Study Start Date: November 2014
    Estimated Study Completion Date: July 2019
    Estimated Primary Completion Date: July 2018 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)

    Note: Poseidon is a small trial of 32 ILC patients and only available in Europe.

    However, the PI3K inhibitor: Taselisib (also known as: GDC-0032) is also being used in a different clinical trial, called the SANDPIPER trial. This larger 600 patient trial includes a number of US-based trial sites.
    Stage 4 ILC women in the U.S. have an opportunity to participate in this Sandpiper trial using a targeted therapy (that in theory) works against ILC.
    Here's the Sandpiper info:

    SANDPIPER trial: Click here for SANDPIPER trial info from clinicaltrials.gov

    Title: "A Study of Taselisib + Fulvestrant versus Placebo + Fulvestrant In Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer Who Have Disease Recurrence or Progression During or After Aromatase Inhibitor Therapy"
    Estimated Enrollment: 600
    Study Start Date: April 2015
    Estimated Study Completion Date: June 2018
    Estimated Primary Completion Date: June 2018 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)

    * Finally, neither of these two trials mentions the word "Lobular" anywhere in the clinicaltrials.gov trial page, which defies all logic.
    Unless your Oncologist knows about this European consortium called "RATHER" and their ILC research, chances are they don't have a clue that these trials exist. Be your own advocate!

  • ShetlandPony
    ShetlandPony Member Posts: 4,924
    edited October 2015

    SANDPIPER looks interesting; I will show it to my onc. I wonder if PIK3CA on the trial site is the same as, or close enough, to PIK3C2B on my Foundation One report. I wish I had some ILC-specific data on Ibrance, which is a CDK 4/6 inhibitor. Right now I know I'm getting that with endocrine therapy. On the SANDPIPER trial I could get a placebo with endocrine therapy.

  • mary625
    mary625 Member Posts: 1,056
    edited October 2015
    That's a pretty strong statement about there being few effective treatments for ILC and a very poor prognosis. I don't know what to think about that.
  • artistatheart
    artistatheart Member Posts: 2,176
    edited October 2015

    Mary, i found that statement very disturbing myself but do believe I have read other reports that contradict that ....

  • Kathy044
    Kathy044 Member Posts: 433
    edited October 2015

    I mentioned the better survivability with ILC compared to IDC earlier this month in another thread regarding the Netherlands study, the data is buried under the 'related content' tab by the article in the BMJ. It is not the focus of the study, but worth a look, you can get the gist of the findings by listening to the video abstract. Among other things better hormonal systemic therapies are improving survivability - even for those with large tumours and positive nodes. Whoo Hoo

    http://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h4901

    Kathy


  • ShetlandPony
    ShetlandPony Member Posts: 4,924
    edited October 2015

    Are you two commenting on this from the press release in John's October 17 post above?

    "The RATHER project focuses on finding new drug targets for two types of breast cancer - invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), an aggressive cancer that does not respond well to current treatments, and triple negative which lacks the ER, PR and HER2 receptors - common and effective drug targets in other types of breast cancer. These cancers account for one quarter of all breast cancers, and have a very poor prognosis."

    That sounds off to me, too. I wonder how knowledgeable the person who wrote the press release is. First, I have never seen ILC described as aggressive. Second, from what I have learned, it responds well to letrozole, though it is suspected that a subset of ILC does not respond well to tamoxifen. Third, I think there may be a writing problem here, and that the last sentence is meant to describe only triple negative.

    My research (and I am not an expert) indicated that long-term DFS survival, say after ten years, was somewhat poorer for ILC than IDC with the same receptors. (I'm sorry I am too tired to hunt for the source.)

  • JohnSmith
    JohnSmith Member Posts: 651
    edited December 2015

    I found this statement to be a surprise as well. It could be a journalistic error, as they were describing ILC and TN in the same paragraph.
    Most agree that ILC tends to be indolent, but if this organization feels it's aggressive, then so be it.
    Historically, there has never been a sense of urgency to understand ILC. Perhaps this group will pave the way to better therapies and threads like "ILC - The Odd One Out" or Lehmann's sobering editorial, among others, won't have to be written.

    I'm thankful that we're at the point where the needle of progress is finally moving forward, as evident by these recent developments:

    - The TCGA ILC working group announced results from the ILC molecular analysis revealing three subtypes.
    [reactive-like; proliferative; immune-related]
    - This European based "RATHER" consortium may be a good source of potential ILC targeted therapies.
    - RATHER has their Phase 2 ILC trial evaluating a PI3K inhibitor (~50% of ILC has PI3K pathway activation) by using Genetech's (Roche) PI3K inhibitor called Taselisib (GDC-0032). I just realized there are 8 clinical trials utilizing the PI3K inhibitor, Taselisib (GDC-0032). Click here to see them all. The Stage 4 SANDPIPER trial is included.
    - The University of Pittsburgh has launched the ILC Biomarker trial. We need "newly diagnosed" patients for this.
    - The Derkson lab, an ILC research lab in the Netherlands, developed the first working ILC mouse model, which will be useful to ILC scientists.
    - The first international ILC Symposium will be happening next year (September 2016) in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

  • artistatheart
    artistatheart Member Posts: 2,176
    edited October 2015

    Thanks Shetland, Kathy and John. I so appreciate the efforts of others posting research and articles on here. It is so nice to have a central spot to get updates and opinions!

  • Katarina
    Katarina Member Posts: 386
    edited November 2015

    It seems Europe has been a hub of activity on ILC and the US has slept. I don't say that sarcastically as much as simply what I read and see. I can't figure out why this is so. Whenever I speak to an ONC here in the US they always say that "ILC is not really different from IDC". It's always couched with "don't worry, we are on top of this and you have nothing to worry about."

    Has anyone found a good ILC focused study or clinical trial done in the US? Is there an ONC, or cancer center with anyone who specializes in ILC? I say this because I feel like the subject matter experts are really outside the US and maybe I should be in Europe if I progress and need further treatment. I have seriously contemplated this.

    Just noticing.

    Hugs,

    Katarina

  • Katarina
    Katarina Member Posts: 386
    edited November 2015

    Shetland Pony,

    I couldn't find your Stage IV ILC thread. Can you forward a link?

    Hugs,

    Katarina

  • ShetlandPony
    ShetlandPony Member Posts: 4,924
    edited November 2015

    Forum: Stage IV and Metastatic Breast Cancer ONLY → Topic: Stage IV ILC: Tests, Treatments, News--Let's pool our knowledge.

    https://community.breastcancer.org/forum/8/topics/...

    It seems that University of Pittsburgh researchers are interested in ILC. I don't know if that means they have medical oncologists who are as well. I would hope they would work with each other.

  • sueinfl
    sueinfl Member Posts: 258
    edited March 2016

    Bumping for newcomers.

Categories