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.
For patients with high-risk node-negative BC, the adjuvant FAC-wP regimen was associated with a small but significant improvement in DFS compared with FAC therapy, in addition to manageable toxicity, especially regarding long-term cardiac effects.
The question of whether screen detection confers an additional survival benefit in breast cancer is unclear and subject to several biases. Our aim was to examine the role of the diagnostic method (screen-detected, symptom-detected, and true interval cancers) and the clinical-pathological features in relapse-free survival and overall survival in breast cancer patients. We included 228 invasive breast cancers diagnosed in Barcelona from 1996 to 2008 among women aged 50-69 years. Ninety-seven patients were screen detected within the screening, 34 truly arose between 2-year screening mammograms (true interval cancers), and 97 were symptom detected outside the screening. The clinical-pathological features at diagnosis were compared. The overall and disease-free survival probabilities were computed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazard models were applied, with adjustment by clinical-pathological variables. At diagnosis, symptom-detected and true interval cancers were in more advanced stages and were less differentiated. The highest proportion of triple-negative cancers was detected among true interval cancers (P=0.002). At 5 years of follow-up, the disease-free survival rates for screen-detected, true interval, and symptom-detected cancers were 87.5% (95% confidence interval, 80.5-95.2%), 64.1% (46.4-88.5%), and 79.4% (71.0-88.8%), respectively, and the overall survival rates were 94.5% (89.3-99.9%), 65.5% (47.1-91.2%), and 85.6% (78.3-93.6%), respectively. True interval cancers had the highest hazard ratio for relapse prediction (1.89; 0.67-5.31) and a hazard ratio of death of 5.55 (1.61-19.15) after adjustment for tumor-node-metastasis stage and phenotype. Clinically detected tumors, especially true interval cancers, more frequently showed biological features related to worse prognosis and were associated with poorer survival even after adjustment for clinical-pathological characteristics.
The objective of this phase I/II study was to establish the recommended dose of biweekly vinorelbine and oxaliplatin in patients with metastatic breast cancer and to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of this schedule as first-line treatment. Four different dose levels of vinorelbine and oxaliplatin were selected for the phase I study: (i) 25 and 80 mg/m²; (ii) 25 and 90 mg/m²; (iii) 25 and 100 mg/m²; and (iv) 30 and 90 mg/m²; respectively. At least three patients were treated at each dose level. Overall, 12 patients were included in the phase I trial. No dose-limiting toxicities occurred at any dose level. Therefore, the fourth dose level (30 mg/m² of vinorelbine and 90 mg/m² of oxaliplatin) every 2 weeks was selected for the phase II trial. In this part, 44 patients were included and 61% completed the eight 2-week cycles of study treatment. On an intention-to-treat basis, overall response rate was 59%, and median progression-free survival and overall survival were 9.2 months (95% confidence interval: 7.6-10.9) and 18.6 months (95% confidence interval: 14.4-22.9), respectively. The main severe toxicities were neutropenia (46%) and fatigue (14%). We conclude that the biweekly combination of vinorelbine and oxaliplatin at doses of 30 mg/m² and 90 mg/m², respectively, is highly active and well tolerated as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic breast cancer.
Introduction. The incorporation of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors 4 and 6 (CDK4/6 inhibitors) with endocrine therapy in patients with advanced hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer and without overexpression of the HER2 (HER2-) oncogene has demonstrated its efficacy improving progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and, more recently, overall survival (OS). However, patients eventually progress due to resistance to treatment. To date, no clinical or molecular markers defining the HR +/HER2- patient population that obtains the greatest benefit from these drugs have been found, apart from estrogen receptor positivity. However, there are data from multiple retrospective analysis suggesting that within HR+/ HER2- disease, the non-luminal intrinsic subtypes (20-30% of these patients) have a worse prognosis and may not benefit from CDK4/6 inhibitors. Furthermore, the prognostic impact of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and gene expression related to the immune response in the context of HR + / HER2- advanced breast cancer have not been deeply investigated. Design. CDK-PREDICT is an observational, non-interventional, multicenter study that will include 114 patients with advanced breast cancer who have received, are receiving or are going to receive endocrine therapy plus a CDK4/6 inhibitor for, at least, 8 weeks as first-line treatment. The primary objective is to correlate the intrinsic subtypes (defined by PAM50) with the efficacy (measured as PFS) of CDK4/6 inhibitors + hormone therapy. As secondary objectives, the correlation of the intrinsic subtypes with ORR and with the histopathological characteristics of the tumor will be analyzed. In addition, the expression of immune response and cell cycle genes, as well as the presence of TILs, will be correlated with the intrinsic subtypes and with PFS and ORR. Overall, we aim to develop a predictive score combining clinical, genomic and immune expression data integrating tumor biology and microenvironment. For inclusion in the study, a metastatic sample taken within 90 days prior to CDK4/6 inhibitors treatment will be required. Once this sample has been collected, registered and assessed for quality, patients will be followed up every 6 months until disease progression, death or withdrawal from the study. This project has received a research grant from “Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad” (Spain) awarded within the National Research Program with reference PI 18/01408, co-funded with European Union ERDF funds (European Regional Development Fund). This study is included within the Biomarker program of SOLTI. Recruitment of this study started in June 2020. Citation Format: Pablo Tolosa, Tomás Pascual, Cristina Hernando, Sonia Servitja, María Fernández Abad, Rafael Villanueva, Fernando Henao, Javier Benítez, Laura Lema, Mario Martínez, Yolanda Ruano, Lucía Parrilla, Alejandra Bernardini, Ana María Roncero, Laia Paré, Jordi Canes, Fernando Salvador, Patricia Villagrasa, Aleix Prat, Eva Ciruelos. Solti-1801. Analysis of the efficacy of CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with hormonal treatment in luminal breast cancer in relation to the intrinsic subtype and markers of immunity (CDK-PREDICT) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT-26-04.
BACKGROUND: Currently available therapeutic armamentarium for locally advanced and/or metastatic breast cancer (LA/MBC) allows an increasing tailored approach for each of the major tumor immunophenotypes. Nevertheless, there is scarce information about how these subgroups fare and how the alternative therapeutic approaches are actually being used during the disease course. CASCADE is an epidemiological, retrospective, and multicenter study aimed to retrieve demographic and clinical information from a representative cohort of LA/MBC patients treated within the Spanish National Healthcare System. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Several strategies were used to identify patients diagnosed with LA/MBC for the first time between 01/2007 and 12/2008 in 13 Spanish public hospitals covering nearly 5'000'000 inhabitants (>10% of the national population) and followed throughout their metastatic lifetime until death, lost to follow-up, or until December 2013. Data collected included demographical and clinical information for each line of treatment. Descriptive statistics were applied to analyze the information. RESULTS: We identified 443 LA/MBC patients. Median age at diagnosis was 59 years (CI95%: 49.5 - 71.6). Significant differences in dropout rates per line of treatment were found according to the tumor intrinsic immunophenotype. Patients reaching a 4th line were: whole study population 38.4%, HER2-/HR+ 42.8%, HER2+/HR- 41.5%, HER2+/HR+ 39.5%, and Triple-negative 31.9%. Median Overall survival (OS) and per line Progression Free Survival (PFS) for each line of treatment by tumor subtype were: Median OS and per line PFS by tumor subtype Subtype (%)OS (months)PFS (months)PFS (months)PFS (months)PFS (months)PFS (months)Treatment line--1L2L3L4L5LWhole PopulationAll33.57.25.94.33.73.0HER2-/HR+43.838.68.85.84.43.33.0HER2+/HR-12.036.37.46.74.34.03.0HER2+/HR+17.234.411.27.94.95.83.5Triple-negative16.319.04.03.52.43.32.9 Percent use of the four major pharmacological families per line of LA/MBC treatment was: Pharmacological families used per line of LA/MBC treatmentTreatment line1L2L3L4L5L6L7LChemotherapy75.463.075.979.487.976.178.6Anti-HER219.721.919.420.618.720.921.4Hormone therapy37.939.225.318.811.217.916.7Other targeted therapy13.09.612.212.47.511.914.3 CONCLUSION: Our study identifies differences in OS and PFS among BC immunophenotypes, with Triple-negatives faring the poorest. Among therapeutic families, chemotherapy clearly prevails along the disease lifetime, with hormone therapy being primarily used during the initial lines of treatment. Citation Format: Zamora P, Servitja S, Santaballa A, García J, de Paz L, Plata Y, Garau I, Florian J, Chacón I, de la Haba J, García P, Artime E, Rodríguez-Villanueva J, Velasco A, Martínez E, Segui MA. CASCADE study: Treatment and clinical outcomes of metastatic breast cancer by tumor immunophenotypes. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-07-39.
Introduction: The role of bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy in metastatic BC is controversial, and no biomarker exists as of today that predicts benefit to this agent. In the LEA clinical trial, a numerical, statistically non-significant benefit from the addition of bevacizumab to endocrine therapy (ET) was observed in the first-line metastatic setting (18.4 vs. 13.8 months of Progression-Free Survival (PFS), p=0.14). Here, we explored various gene expression-based predictors of outcome and benefit to bevacizumab. Methods and materials: LEA trial randomized 380 patients with HR+/HER2- advanced disease to bevacizumab in combination with ET (ET+B) vs. ET alone. Primary endpoint was PFS. Expression of BC selected genes was evaluated in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) primary tumors using the nCounter platform from patients randomized in Spain that consent for biomarker analyses. The following variables were evaluated: 1) research-based PAM50 intrinsic subtypes (categorical variable; Luminal A, Luminal B, HER2-enriched, Basal-like and Normal-like); 2) research-based PAM50 signatures (continuous variable; scores showing the distant of the gene expression values of an individual sample compared to the centroid gene values for each PAM50 intrinsic subtype); 3) risk of recurrence (ROR) groups (low, medium and high); 4) the 13-gene hypoxia/VEGF signature (continuous); and 5) Ki67 by immunohistochemistry (continuous). Uni- and multivariable Cox models for PFS were used to test the prognostic significance of each variable. To determine whether each variable is predictive of bevacizumab benefit, we tested the interaction term of each variable by treatment arm in a Cox model. Results: Tumor samples from 103 patients were analyzed: 55 (53%) in ET+B arm and 49 (47%) in ET arm. Subtype distribution was as follows: 57 (55.3%) Luminal A, 32 (31.1%) Luminal B, 5 (4.9%) HER2-enriched, 1 (1.0%) Basal-like, and 8 (7.8%) normal-like. In a univariate analysis, Luminal B tumors had a poorer outcome using Luminal A as reference (13.8 vs. 21.3 months, respectively; (hazard ratio, HR=1.80, 95% CI 1.10-2.95, p=0.019). Concordant with this finding, Luminal A signature was associated with a better outcome. Similarly, ROR-P high group showed a poorer outcome than ROR-P low group (8.5 vs. 19.4 months; HR=2.88, 95% CI 1.30-6.35, p=0.009). Neither VEGF-13 signature nor Ki67 were found to be associated with PFS. Similar findings were obtained after adjustment for treatment, age, previous ET, ECOG, visceral disease and number of metastatic sites. In terms of treatment benefit, the HER2-enriched signature was the only variable found predictive of bevacizumab PFS benefit in univariate (p=0.010) and multivariate (p=0.015) analyses. Conclusions: In advanced HR+/HER2- disease, intrinsic subtype (i.e. Luminal A vs. B) independently predicts PFS following first-line ET. In addition, HR+/HER2-negative tumors with high expression of the HER2-enriched signature, a biomarker of estrogen-independence, benefit the most from bevacizumab. Further validation of these prognostic and predictive biomarkers is warranted. Citation Format: Prat A, de la Haba-Rodriguez J, Guerrero Á, García-Sáenz JA, Morales S, Antón A, Muñoz M, Ramos M, Martínez-Jáñez N, Margelí M, Servitja S, Rojo F, Galván P, González S, Cruz J, Sánchez-Rovira P, Perelló A, Rodríguez-Martin C, Casas M, Carrasco E, Caballero R, Martín M. Predicting outcome and benefit to first-line bevacizumab in advanced/metastatic hormone receptor (HR)+/HER2-negative breast cancer (BC) treated with endocrine therapy: A correlative science study from the LEA phase III clinical trial (GEICAM/2006-11_GBG 051). [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-07-42.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.