PurposeThis study aims to determine the incidence of nausea and vomiting (CINV) after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC), under medical practice conditions and the accuracy with which physicians perceive CINV.MethodsChemotherapy-naive patients receiving MEC between April 2012 and May 2013 were included. Patients completed a diary of the intensity of nausea and number of vomiting episodes. Complete response and complete protection were assessed as secondary endpoints.ResultsOf 261 patients included, 240 were evaluated. Median age was 64 years, 44.2 % were female and 11.2 % were aged less than 50 years; 95.3 % of patients received a combination of 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (5-HT3) antagonist + corticosteroid as antiemetic treatment. Vomiting within 5 days of chemotherapy administration occurred in 20.8 %, nausea in 42 % and significant nausea in 23.8 % of patients. An increase in the percentage of patients with significant nausea (from 9.4 to 21.7 %) and vomiting (from 9.2 to 16.5 %) was observed from the acute to the delayed phase. Complete response was 84.2 % in the acute phase, 77 % in the late phase and 68.9 % in overall period. Complete protection was 79.5 % in the acute phase, 68.8 % in the late phase and 62.4 % throughout the study period. Physicians estimated prophylaxis would be effective for 75 % of patients receiving MEC, compared with 54.1 % obtained from patients’ diary.ConclusionDespite receiving prophylactic treatment, 31 % of patients did not achieve a complete response and 38 % complete protection. In general, nausea was worse controlled than vomiting. The results also showed the late phase was worse controlled than the acute phase in all variables. Healthcare providers overestimated the effectiveness of antiemetic prophylaxis.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00520-015-2809-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

IMPORTANCEThe cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor palbociclib in combination with letrozole has become a standard first-line treatment for patients with endocrine-sensitive, hormone receptor-positive, ERBB2-negative advanced breast cancer. Meanwhile, the antiestrogen fulvestrant was shown to be superior to anastrozole in the absence of cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibition for this patient population. OBJECTIVE To assess whether fulvestrant is superior to letrozole when combined with palbociclib in the first-line scenario. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSIn this international, randomized, open-label, phase 2 clinical study conducted from July 30, 2015, to January 8, 2018, patients with hormone receptor-positive, ERBB2-negative advanced breast cancer with no prior therapy in the metastatic setting and endocrine-sensitive criteria were recruited from 47 centers in 7 countries. Data were analyzed from February 11 to May 15, 2020.INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive palbociclib with either fulvestrant or letrozole. Stratification factors were type of disease presentation (de novo vs recurrent) and the presence of visceral involvement (yes vs no). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1.RESULTS A total of 486 women (median age, 63 years [range, 25-90 years]; 3 Asian women [0.6%]; 4 Black women [0.8%]; 461 White women [94.9%]; 18 women of unknown race [3.7%]) were randomized (243 to fulvestrant-palbociclib and 243 to letrozole-palbociclib). Median investigator-assessed progression-free survival was 27.9 months (95% CI, 24.2-33.1 months) in the fulvestrant-palbociclib group vs 32.8 months (95% CI, 25.8-35.9 months) in the letrozole-palbociclib group (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.89-1.45; P = .32). This result was consistent across the stratification factors. No significant differences were observed in objective response rate (46.5% vs 50.2%) and 3-year overall survival rate (79.4% vs 77.1%) for fulvestrant-palbociclib and letrozole-palbociclib, respectively. Grade 3-4 adverse events were comparable among treatment groups, and no new safety signals were identified. No treatment-related deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEAlthough fulvestrant-palbociclib demonstrated significant antitumor activity, this randomized clinical trial failed to identify an improvement in progression-free survival with this regimen over letrozole-palbociclib in patients with endocrine-sensitive, hormone receptor-positive, ERBB2-negative advanced breast cancer.

No abstract

The debate about surgical resection of primary tumor (PT) in de novo metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients persists. We explored this approach’s outcomes in patients included in a retrospective registry, named El Álamo, of breast cancer patients diagnosed in Spain (1990–2001). In this analysis we only included de novo MBC patients, 1415 of whom met the study’s criteria. Descriptive, Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were carried out. Median age was 63.1 years, 49.2% of patients had single-organ metastasis (skin/soft tissue [16.3%], bone [33.8%], or viscera [48.3%]). PT surgery (S) was performed in 44.5% of the cases. S-group patients were younger, had smaller tumors, higher prevalence of bone and oligometastatic disease, and lower prevalence of visceral involvement. With a median follow-up of 23.3 months, overall survival (OS) was 39.6 versus 22.4 months (HR = 0.59, p < 0.0001) in the S- and non-S groups, respectively. The S-group OS benefit remained statistically and clinically significant regardless of metastatic location, histological type, histological grade, hormone receptor status and tumor size. PT surgery (versus no surgery) was associated with an OS benefit suggesting that loco-regional PT control may be considered in selected MBC patients. Data from randomized controlled trials are of utmost importance to confirm these results.

No abstract