Real-world Outcomes of Cyclin-dependent Kinase Inhibitors Continued Beyond First Disease Progression in Hormone Receptor-positive Metastatic Breast Cancer

BackgroundCDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i), in combination with aromatase inhibitors, are United States Food and Drug Administration-approved for the treatment of hormone receptor-positive (HR⁺)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2^?) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The effectiveness of continuing them beyond first disease progression (PD) is currently unknown. This retrospective study evaluated the impact of the continuation of CDK4/6i beyond first PD in HR⁺/HER2^? MBC using real-world experience.Patients and MethodsA single-institution retrospective review of patients with HR⁺ MBC who received CDK4/6is from 2015 to 2018 and where CDK4/6is were continued beyond first PD. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) after initial PD on CDK4/6i therapy.ResultsThirty women with HR⁺/HER2^? MBC met eligibility criteria. Patients were identified from a prospective database of patients at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation who were prescribed CDK4/6is. The median age and follow-up duration were 47.5 years and 27 months, respectively. Most patients received palbociclib (PA)/letrozole as initial therapy (67%), followed by PA/fulvestrant (23%), and PA/other aromatase inhibitor (20%), and abemaciclib with either fulvestrant or letrozole (6%). As of January 31, 2019, 25 (83.3%) patients were still alive, and 19 (63%) patients had progressed. The estimated median PFS for continued CDK4/6i use beyond the first PD was 11.8 months (95% confidence interval, 5.34-13.13 months).ConclusionsAmong a small cohort of patients with HR⁺ MBC in a non-clinical trial setting, continuation of CDK4/6i-endocrine treatment post initial PD was associated with a median PFS of about 12 months. Formal randomized clinical trials evaluating the continuation of CDK4/6is beyond the first PD are currently ongoing and will provide more answers to this important clinical question.     

Clinical development of CDK4/6 inhibitor for breast cancer

Endocrine therapy is the mainstay of treatment for patients with estrogen receptor positive (ER+)/HER2-negative (HER2?) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Many clinicians consider the sequential endocrine therapy is gold standard strategy because of better outcome and the maintenance of a better quality of life (QOL) for MBC patients. However, clinical practice shall be changed according to development of CDK4/6 inhibitor in current. CDK4/6 is key kinase which promote the cell cycle, and especially the expression of cyclin D1 and the activation of CDK4/6 to drive breast cancer proliferation. Currently positive data of several clinical trials using three CDK4/6 inhibitors (palbocilcib, ribociclib, abemaciclib) were published and primary endpoint were met in all phase III studies. Therefore, practice change of endocrine therapy has been achieved in ER positive MBC. This review will present clinical trial data, including both the efficacy and safety of CDK4/6 inhibitors for MBC, and describe the designs of the mainly ongoing clinical trials examining CDK4/6 inhibitors for the treatment of MBC and EBC.     

Comparison of treatment-related adverse events of different Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors in metastatic breast cancer: A network meta-analysis

BackgroundPalbociclib, ribociclib and abemaciclib have all been approved in combination with endocrine therapy in hormone-receptor positive, HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer. While the efficacy of these drugs appears similar, differences in safety and tolerability are apparent.MethodsWe searched PubMed and ASCO, ESMO and SABCS proceedings to identify randomized trials of palbociclib, ribociclib and abemaciclib. Data on common and serious adverse events (AE) were extracted for each approved drug. The odds ratio for each AE and the hazard ratio for progression-free survival were calculated relative to endocrine therapy alone. A network meta-analysis was then performed for each endocrine therapy backbone (aromatase inhibitor (AI) or fulvestrant) to compare ribociclib and abemaciclib to palbociclib.Results8 trials were included in the analysis and comprised 2799 patients receiving cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors palbociclib: 873 patients; ribociclib: 1153 patients; abemaciclib: 773 patients. In 5 trials (1524 patients), the endocrine therapy backbone was an AI and in 3 trials (1275 patients) it was fulvestrant. Compared to palbociclib, ribociclib and abemaciclib showed significantly lower grade 3–4 neutropenia, but significantly higher GI toxicity. Treatment discontinuation was higher with abemaciclib than other drugs. Efficacy of the 3 drugs was similar. Compared to palbociclib, for AI backbone, the HR for PFS for ribociclib was 0.98 and for abemaciclib 1.02. For fulvestrant backbone, the HR were 0.88 and 0.93 respectively.ConclusionsPalbociclib, ribociclib and abemaciclib have comparable efficacy, but differences in safety and tolerability. Abemaciclib has worse tolerability with significantly higher treatment discontinuation likely due to GI toxicity.     

Ribociclib for the treatment of hormone receptor-positive,human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer

Introduction: The emergence of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors marked a significant advancement in the treatment of advanced breast cancer. Ribociclib is an orally bioavailable, highly selective inhibitor of CDK4/6. In combination with various endocrine therapies, ribociclib has demonstrated clinical activity as a first-line therapy for patients with HR+, HER2? advanced breast cancer, without compromising the favorable toxicity profile associated with endocrine therapy. Thus, ribociclib is now considered a new standard of care for HR+, HER2? advanced breast cancer.

Areas covered: This review provides a concise overview of the preclinical and clinical development of ribociclib, including evidence of its clinical activity and safety profile when combined with endocrine therapy in HR+, HER2? advanced breast cancer.

Expert commentary: CDK4/6 inhibition represents a promising treatment option for patients with HR+ metastatic breast cancer. Ribociclib significantly improved progression-free survival in patients receiving first-line endocrine therapy for HR+, HER2? advanced breast cancer. Planned and ongoing trials investigating ribociclib in combination with other endocrine therapies and in various clinical settings will help to determine the optimal treatment sequence for different patient populations.     

Fulvestrant 500 mg Versus Exemestane in Postmenopausal Women With Metastatic Breast Cancer Resistant to Adjuvant Nonsteroidal Aromatase Inhibitors in Clinical Practice: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

BackgroundFulvestrant 500 mg and exemestane are widely used agents in first-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive (ER⁺) postmenopausal MBC after failure of adjuvant nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) treatment. Although fulvestrant 250 mg had similar efficacy compared with exemestane (Evaluation of Faslodex versus Exemestane Clinical Trial study) and fulvestrant 500 mg was superior to fulvestrant 250 mg (Comparison of FASLODEX In Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer study), no direct comparison between fulvestrant 500 mg and exemestane has been conducted. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of fulvestrant 500 mg and exemestane in daily practice.Patients and MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated the medical records of all patients with ER⁺ HER2⁻ MBC who received fulvestrant 500 mg or exemestane 25 mg as first-line therapy for MBC from 2015 to 2017 in 4 institutions. A total of 120 patients were available for analysis. Both agents accounted for 50% (60) patients.ResultsThe median progression-free survival (PFS) of the fulvestrant group was significantly longer than that in the exemestane group (6.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 5.0-7.4] versus 4.8 months [95% CI, 3.0-6.7], P = .024). In subgroup analysis, for patients with visceral metastasis or primary endocrine resistance, no significant difference considering PFS was observed in the 2 groups (P = .563 and .769). No significant difference of Grade 3/4 adverse events was observed in the 2 groups (3 patients, 5% versus 2 patients, 3.3%; P = .648).ConclusionFulvestrant 500 mg showed better efficacy than exemestane in first-line therapy for MBC of ER⁺ postmenopausal women after failure of adjuvant NSAI treatment. For patients with visceral metastasis or primary endocrine resistance, both treatments showed poor outcomes, indicating a need for further alternatives (targeted therapy or chemotherapy). Both agents were well tolerated in terms of toxicities.     

Real-World Experience with CDK4/6 Inhibitors for Metastatic HR+/HER2− Breast Cancer at a Single Cancer Center

BackgroundA study was initiated at Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center to capture the real-world experience related to the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors (Ciclibs) for the treatment of metastatic hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer (HR+/HER2-).Patients and MethodsA total of 222 patients were evaluated who received CDK4/6 inhibitors in the period from 2015 to 2021. Detailed clinical and demographic information was obtained on each patient and used to define clinical and demographic features associated with progression-free survival on CDK4/6 inhibitor-based therapies.ResultsIn this real-world analysis, the majority of patients received palbociclib as the CDK4/6 inhibitor with letrozole or fulvestrant as the predominant endocrine therapies. The median progression-free survival (PFS) in the letrozole (27.6 months) and fulvestrant (17.2 months) groups were comparable to that observed in clinical trials. As expected, age at start of the treatment and menopausal status influenced endocrine therapy utilization but were not associated with PFS. Patients with recurrent disease had shorter PFS (P = .0024) than those presenting with de novo metastasis. The presence of visceral metastasis trended toward shorter PFS (P = .051). Similarly, prior endocrine therapy (P = .003) or chemotherapy (P = .036) was associated with shorter PFS. Body mass index was not associated with PFS or with dose interruption and/or modification. While the number of minorities in this analysis is limited (n = 26), these patients as a group had statistically shorter PFS on treatment (P = .002).ConclusionsThe real-world progression-free survival with CDK4/6 inhibitors mimics that observed in the clinical trial. A number of clinical and demographic features were associated with PFS on CDK4/6 inhibitor-based therapy. Further studies are ongoing to validate these findings incorporating additional cancer centers.

This article reports a real-world experience related to the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors for the treatment of metastatic hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer, focusing on clinical and demographic features associated with progression-free survival.

Implications for PracticeThis study provides the real-world experience with the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors in the treatment of metastatic HR+/HER2− breast cancer. The work defines clinical and demographic features that impact the response to these agents and could offer guidance in preferred strategies for select manifestations of the disease. The study also suggests the need for more study of under-represented minority populations.     

Preclinical and clinical development of palbociclib and future perspectives

Cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) play a key role in cell cycle regulation, which makes them a clear therapeutic target to interfere with cell division and proliferation in cancer patients. Palbociclib, a specific inhibitor of CDK4/6 with outstanding clinical efficacy data and limited toxicity, has been recently approved for the treatment of hormone receptor (HR)-positive human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer, either in combination with an aromatase inhibitor or in combination with fulvestrant in women who have received prior endocrine therapy. This review describes the mechanism of action, preclinical experiences and clinical data of palbociclib, with a special focus on integrating this data with the positioning of palbociclib in the current clinical guidelines for advanced HR-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer. Aspects of the ongoing major studies are also presented, as well as future prospects in the development of palbociclib.     

Real-World Palbociclib Use in HR+/HER2− Advanced Breast Cancer in Canada: The IRIS Study

Background: Palbociclib is a selective cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitor used in combination with aromatase inhibitors or fulvestrant for patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced/metastatic breast cancer (ABC/MBC). Palbociclib was the first CDK 4/6 inhibitor approved for HR+/HER2− ABC/MBC treatment in Canada in combination with letrozole (P+L) as an initial endocrine-based therapy (approved March 2016), or with fulvestrant (P+F) following disease progression after prior endocrine therapy (approved May 2017). The Ibrance Real World Insights (IRIS) study ({"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT03159195","term_id":"NCT03159195"}}NCT03159195) collected real-world outcomes data for palbociclib-treated patients in several countries, including Canada. Methods: This retrospective chart review included women with HR+/HER2− ABC/MBC receiving P+L or P+F in Canada. Physicians reviewed medical records for up to 14 patients, abstracting demographic and clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes. Progression-free rates (PFRs) and survival rates (SRs) at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months were estimated via Kaplan–Meier analysis. Results: Thirty-three physicians examined medical records for 247 patients (P+L, n = 214; P+F, n = 33). Median follow-up was 8.8 months for P+L and 7.0 months for P+F. Most patients were initiated on palbociclib 125 mg/d (P+L, 90.2%; P+F, 84.8%). Doses were reduced in 16.6% of P+L and 14.3% of P+F patients initiating palbociclib at 125 mg/d. The PFR for P+L was 90.3% at 12 months and 78.2% at 18 months; corresponding SRs were 95.6% and 93.0%. For P+F, 6-month PFR was 91.0%; 12-month SR was 100.0%. Conclusions: Dose reduction rates were low and PFR and SR were high in this Canadian real-world assessment of P+L and P+F treatments, suggesting that palbociclib combinations are well tolerated and effective.     

CDK4/6 inhibitor plus endocrine therapy for hormone receptor‐positive,HER2‐negative metastatic breast cancer: The new standard of care

Patients presenting with hormone receptor‐positive (HR⁺), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2‐negative (HER2^–) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are usually treated with endocrine therapy (ET), except if there is a concern about endocrine resistance or a need to achieve rapid disease control due to visceral crisis. The combination of CDK4/6 inhibitor + ET has now replaced single‐agent ET as the standard first‐line treatment; and it can also be considered a standard option in the second‐line setting. This review briefly summarizes recently reported efficacy findings from the key phase III clinical trials of CDK4/6 inhibitor + ET in patients with HR⁺/HER2^– MBC, including evidence that adding a CDK4/6 inhibitor to ET improves overall survival and does so without reducing patients’ quality of life. There is still much to learn regarding the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors and how they may be optimally integrated into clinical practice. In particular, there is a need for specific biomarkers that help predict the likelihood of response or resistance to CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy; and for data to guide treatment decisions when a patient's disease progresses on a CDK4/6 inhibitor.     

Ribociclib Plus Letrozole in Patients with Hormone Receptor-positive,HER2-negative Advanced Breast Cancer with No Prior Endocrine Therapy: Subgroup Safety Analysis from The Phase 3b CompLEEment-1 Trial

BackgroundThe CDK4/6 inhibitor, ribociclib in combination with endocrine therapy significantly improved progression-free survival in the first line setting in post-menopausal patients with HR+/HER2− advanced breast cancer (ABC) in a pivotal phase 3, placebo-controlled trial (MONALEESA-2) and demonstrated superior overall survival in premenopausal patients with HR+/HER2− ABC (MONALEESA-7). The multinational, phase 3b, CompLEEment-1 trial, which assessed the safety and efficacy of ribociclib plus letrozole in a broader population of patients who have not received prior endocrine therapy for advanced disease, is the largest phase 3 clinical trial to date to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a CDK4/6 inhibitor. We report a subanalysis of data from patients (N = 339) enrolled in the central and south European countries of the SERCE (Southern Europe, RUC, Central Europe) cluster of CompLEEment-1.Patients and methodsMen and women of any menopausal status with HR+/HER2− ABC received once-daily oral ribociclib 600 mg (3-weeks on/1-week-off), plus letrozole 2.5 mg continuously. Men/premenopausal women also received a GnRH-agonist. The primary outcome was the number of patients with adverse events (AEs) over a timeframe of approximately 36 months. Time-to-progression, overall response rate, and clinical benefit rate were also measured.ResultsSafety results in the SERCE subgroup were consistent with those in the pivotal clinical trials of ribociclib in combination with endocrine therapy. Treatment-related AEs leading to dose adjustments/interruption occurred in 63.1% of patients but led to treatment discontinuation in only 10.6%. The most common treatment-related AEs of grade ≥ 3 were neutropenia and transaminase elevations. There were no fatal treatment-related events.ConclusionsThese findings from the SERCE subgroup support the safety and manageable tolerability of ribociclib in a broad range of patients with HR+/HER2− ABC more representative of patients in real-world clinical practice.Key words: CDK4/6 inhibitor, ribociclib, HR+, HER2−, advanced breast cancer, CompLEEment-1 trial     

Practical Treatment Strategies and Future Directions After Progression While Receiving CDK4/6 Inhibition and Endocrine Therapy in Advanced HR+/HER2− Breast Cancer

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) in combination with backbone endocrine therapy have markedly improved progression-free survival and overall survival over endocrine therapy alone in advanced hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative (HR⁺/HER2⁻) breast cancer and are the standard of care in the first- or second-line setting. There are few data to drive decision making for subsequent treatment strategies after inevitable disease progression after CDK4/6i. Information about the genomic landscape of CDK4/6i-resistant disease is emerging. Resistance mechanisms appear to be varied, but mutations in PIK3CA and ESR1, which can be acquired while receiving treatment, are frequent. Activating PIK3CA mutations are present in up to 35% of patients and are now the most actionable genomic alteration in HR⁺/HER2⁻ advanced breast cancer with the recent approval of alpelisib and fulvestrant. Everolimus-based combinations and chemotherapy appear to have continued efficacy after progression while receiving CDK4/6i, although historical data on benefit include CDK4/6i-naive patients. Use of selective estrogen down-regulators over aromatase inhibitors is best once the patient has an acquired ESR1 mutation. Tumor biopsy with genomic sequencing and repeat biomarker analysis in patients with CDK4/6i- and endocrine-resistant disease will be integral to guide subsequent treatment strategies and to inform clinical trial eligibility. Promising novel therapeutics in CDK4/6i-resistant disease including oral selective estrogen down-regulators, fibroblast growth factor receptor antagonists, and immunotherapy will be discussed.     

The Impact of Real-World Alternative Dosing Strategies of Palbociclib on Progression-Free Survival in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer

Background: Palbociclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK 4/6) inhibitor, in combination with letrozole or fulvestrant has been demonstrated to prolong the progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer. In efforts to mitigate neutropenic toxicities, oncologists in real-world practice have prescribed alternative dosing strategies with palbociclib, yet the implication on PFS is unknown. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, observational chart review of all female patients at our clinics with HR+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer receiving palbociclib in combination with either letrozole or fulvestrant with a first dose initiated between June 2016 and December 2018 and followed their disease course until 30 April 2020. Results: The median PFS for all clinic patients receiving palbociclib and letrozole (n = 63) was 40.8 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 25.6–not estimable) and 16.97 months (95% CI 8.57–not estimable) for patients receiving palbociclib and fulvestrant (n = 11). We identified seven alternative dosing strategies prescribed by oncologists, the most prevalent being prescribing palbociclib for three weeks on and two weeks off (n = 8). The Kaplan–Meier curves for PFS in patients receiving letrozole and palbociclib prescribed alternative dosing strategies appear to diverge from monograph dosing early in the treatment. Many patients prescribed palbociclib using alternative dosing strategies continued to be observed even by the 18-month timepoint. The prevalence of grade 4 neutropenia was lower for patients on palbociclib with letrozole, suggesting a possible mitigation of severe neutropenia with alternative dosing strategies. Conclusions: We conclude that alternative dosing strategies used by oncologists such as prescribing palbociclib for three weeks on, two weeks off may achieve comparable disease control while mitigating neutropenic toxicities when compared to standard monograph dosing recommendations, prolonging treatment tolerability and adherence. Further large-scale studies are needed to confirm these results for future clinical adoption.     

Letrozole and palbociclib versus chemotherapy as neoadjuvant therapy of high-risk luminal breast cancer

BackgroundPalbociclib is a CDK4/6 inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy and safety in combination with endocrine therapy in advanced luminal breast cancer (LBC). We evaluated the respective efficacy and safety of chemotherapy and letrozole–palbociclib (LETPAL) combination as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with high-risk LBC.Patients and methodsNeoPAL (UCBG10/4, NCT02400567) is a randomised, parallel, non-comparative phase II study. Patients with ER-positive, HER2-negative, Prosigna®-defined luminal B, or luminal A and node-positive, stage II–III breast cancer, not candidate for breast-conserving surgery, were randomly assigned to either letrozole (2.5 mg daily) and palbociclib (125 mg daily, 3 weeks/4) during 19 weeks, or to FEC100 (5FU 500 mg/m², epirubicin 100 mg/m², cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m²)×3 21-day courses followed by docetaxel 100 mg/m²×3 21-day courses. Primary end point was residual cancer burden (RCB 0–I rate). Secondary end points included clinical response, proliferation-based markers, and safety.ResultsOverall, 106 patients were randomised [median Prosigna® ROR Score 71 (22–93)]. RCB 0–I was observed in four and eight patients in LETPAL [7.7% (95% CI 0.4–14.9)] and chemotherapy [15.7% (95% CI 5.7–25.7)] arms, respectively. Pathological complete response rates were 3.8% and 5.9%. Clinical response (75%) and breast-conserving surgery rates (69%) were similar in both arms. Preoperative Endocrine Prognostic Index 0 scores (breast cancer-specific survival) were observed in 17.6% and 8.0% of patients in LETPAL and chemotherapy arms, respectively. Safety profile was as expected, with 2 versus 17 serious adverse events (including 11 grade 4 serious AEs in the chemotherapy arm).ConclusionLETPAL combination was associated with poor pathological response but encouraging clinical and biomarker responses in Prosigna®-defined high-risk LBC. Contemporary chemotherapy regimen was associated with poor pathological and biomarker responses, with a much less favourable safety profile. LETPAL combination might represent an alternative to chemotherapy in early high-risk LBC.Clinical Trial NumberNCT02400567.     

Real-World Outcomes of Ribociclib and Aromatase Inhibitor Use in First Line Hormone Receptor Positive,HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer

BackgroundInternational guidelines recommend combining a CDK4/6 inhibitor and endocrine therapy (ET) as first line treatment for hormone receptor (HR) positive, HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Results from MONALEESA-2 demonstrate superior progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with ribociclib (CDK4/6 inhibitor) and ET compared to ET alone. Real world outcomes have yet to be reported.Materials and MethodsKARMA is a non-interventional registry of Australian patients receiving first-line treatment with ribociclib and aromatase inhibitor (AI), obtained via a Medicine Access Program (MAP) for HR+, HER2- MBC. Outcomes were compared with the ribociclib/letrozole cohort in MONALEESA-2.ResultsData from 160 patients at 17 sites was analysed. Median follow-up is 36.5 months. Compared to MONALEESA-2, patients were numerically younger (54.3 vs. 62 years), with higher rates of bone-only metastases (31% vs. 21%). A total of 63 of 160 (39%) patients remain on treatment. A total of 56% of patients had at least 1 dose reduction, with neutropenia (68%) and abnormal liver enzymes (17%) the most common reasons. A total of 17 of 160 (11%) discontinued treatment due to toxicity, with no treatment related deaths. Median PFS was not reached (95% CI 29.9- NR), with PFS at 12 months and 18 months being 76% and 67% respectively versus 25.3 months, 73% and 63% in MONALEESA-2.ConclusionThe ribociclib and AI combination was well tolerated in this real-world setting. The KARMA registry cohort achieved a superior PFS (>36.5 months) to MONALEESA-2, potentially due to more favourable baseline disease characteristics. Less frequent assessment scheduling in this non trial setting may also contribute.     

Fulvestrant for the treatment of advanced breast cancer

Introduction: The current issues with endocrine therapy for treatment of advanced breast cancer include balance of efficacy of therapy versus tolerability as well as hormone resistance. The efficacy of fulvestrant, a selective oestrogen receptor degrader (SERD), has been demonstrated in hormone receptor positive patients previously untreated or treated with hormonal therapy.

Areas covered: This article discusses the journey of fulvestrant licensing, its efficacy in combination with other endocrine therapies and the future role it may have within breast cancer treatment.

Expert commentary: Within phase III trials, fulvestrant has demonstrated equivalent or improved clinical efficacy when compared with established endocrine agents. In the recent decade, fulvestrant has achieved licensing as a second line agent in non-operative advanced breast cancer at initially 250mg, increasing to 500mg. Presently, fulvestrant is licensed globally as first line endocrine management for advanced breast cancer in post-menopausal women. Early combination trials of fulvestrant and cyclin dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors have demonstrated good clinical efficacy with improved progression free survival when compared to fulvestrant alone.     

Comparative efficacy and safety of CDK4/6 and PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors in women with hormone receptor-positive,HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BackgroundCDK4/6 inhibitors and PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors are both emerging agents for hormonal receptor (HR) positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) negative metastatic breast cancer. Evidence for the comparisons from head-to-head comparative trials is currently insufficient. This meta-analysis assessed the comparative efficacy and safety of these two groups of agents for HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer.MethodsSystematic searches of PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, SciSearch between January 2010 to December 2019 were conducted. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which evaluated clinical benefits and toxicities of CDK4/6 inhibitors or PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors plus endocrine therapy were adopted. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoint was treatment-related adverse event (TRAE). Pooled hazard ratio (HR) and risk rate (RR) were used to assess the differences between CDK4/6 and PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors.ResultsA total of twenty RCTs including 9771 participants were identified in this study. Pooled results showed that PFS was considerably prolonged by targeted therapy plus endocrine therapy. PFS was relatively better in CDK4/6 inhibitors than that of PI3K inhibitor group (HR, 1.43; 95%CrI, 1.12-1.61). Similar results were demonstrated in results after balancing lines of therapy or metastatic sites, both in viscera and bone-only. Coalesced outcomes revealed that CDK4/6 inhibitors plus endocrine therapy could significantly improve OS (HR, 0.78; 95%CrI, 0.65-0.94) than PI3K/mTOR inhibitors. Safety profiles of diarrhea and rash were consistent between CDK4/6 inhibitors and PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors with no difference of estimated RR. Several TRAEs signified specificity, for instance, myelosuppression in CDK4/6 inhibitors or hyperglycemia in PI3K/mTOR inhibitors.ConclusionsClinical efficacy is in favor of CDK4/6 inhibitors, and safety profiles are comparable between CDK4/6 inhibitors or PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors plus endocrine therapy.     

Palbociclib in highly pretreated metastatic ER-positive HER2-negative breast cancer

Purpose

We aimed to investigate the role of palbociclib, a first-in-class cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor, in postmenopausal women with highly pretreated endocrine therapy-resistant metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

Methods

Between 28 September 2015 and 14 March 2017, a compassionate use program was established in the University Hospitals Leuven in which 82 postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative MBC were included after at least four lines of systemic treatment. The efficacy and safety analysis was performed in 82 patients who had received at least one dose of palbociclib and who had at least 6-month follow-up at the data cut-off point. The primary objective was the evaluation of efficacy of the combination of palbociclib and endocrine therapy with clinical benefit as primary endpoint, defined as the absence of progressive disease and being on treatment for at least 6 months. Secondary objectives were the evaluation of toxicity and the identification of potential predictors for clinical benefit.

Results

The median age of the patients was 67.1 years (range 34.8–85.9) at the time of inclusion. The average duration of treatment was 5.6 months (range 1–19), with a median progression-free survival of 3.17 (95% CI 2.76–4.70) months. At the data cut-off point, 10 patients were still on treatment with palbociclib. In this highly pretreated setting, 34 patients experienced no progressive disease within 6 months, resulting in an overall clinical benefit rate (CBR) of 41.5%. 20.7% (17/82) showed stable disease for ≥?9 months and 13.4% for ≥?12 months. None of the investigated predicting factors were significantly associated with clinical benefit at 6 months. For 43.9% of the patients, treatment delay or dose reduction was indicated.

Conclusions

Palbociclib in combination with endocrine therapy shows an unexpectedly high CBR and favorable safety profile in heavily pretreated endocrine-resistant estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative MBC patients.

     

Clinical considerations of the role of palbociclib in the management of advanced breast cancer patients with and without visceral metastases

BackgroundThis report assesses the efficacy and safety of palbociclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) in women with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC) with or without visceral metastases.Patients and methodsPre- and postmenopausal women with disease progression following prior ET (PALOMA-3; N = 521) and postmenopausal women untreated for ABC (PALOMA-2; N = 666) were randomized 2 : 1 to ET (fulvestrant or letrozole, respectively) plus palbociclib or placebo. Progression-free survival (PFS), safety, and patient-reported quality of life (QoL) were evaluated by prior treatment and visceral involvement.ResultsVisceral metastases incidence was higher in patients with prior resistance to ET (58.3%, PALOMA-3) than in patients naive to ET in the ABC setting (48.6%, PALOMA-2). In patients with prior resistance to ET and visceral metastases, median PFS (mPFS) was 9.2 months with palbociclib plus fulvestrant versus 3.4 months with placebo plus fulvestrant [hazard ratio (HR), 0.47; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.35–0.61], and objective response rate (ORR) was 28.0% versus 6.7%, respectively. In patients with nonvisceral metastases, mPFS was 16.6 versus 7.3 months, HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36–0.77. In patients with visceral disease and naive to ET in the advanced disease setting, mPFS was 19.3 months with palbociclib plus letrozole versus 12.9 months with placebo plus letrozole (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.47–0.85); ORR was 55.1% versus 40.0%; in patients with nonvisceral disease, mPFS was not reached with palbociclib plus letrozole versus 16.8 months with placebo plus letrozole (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.36–0.70). In patients with prior resistance to ET with visceral metastases, palbociclib plus fulvestrant significantly delayed deterioration of QoL versus placebo plus fulvestrant, whereas patient-reported QoL was maintained with palbociclib plus letrozole in patients naive to endocrine-based therapy for ABC.ConclusionsPalbociclib plus ET prolonged mPFS in patients with visceral metastases, increased ORRs, and in patients previously treated for ABC, delayed QoL deterioration, presenting a standard treatment option among patients with visceral metastases amenable to endocrine-based therapy.Clinical trial registrationNCT01942135, NCT01740427     

Results of the Belgian expanded access program of eribulin in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer closely mirror those of the pivotal phase III trial

BackgroundEribulin is a non-taxane microtubule dynamics inhibitor that showed a survival benefit versus treatment of physician's choice in a phase III trial enrolling patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC).MethodsThe E7389-G000-398 trial was designed to provide eribulin to MBC patients pre-treated with anthracylines, taxanes and capecitabine. Patient characteristics, efficacy and safety data were collected prospectively. Efficacy and survival analyses were performed using retrospectively collected data of patients treated at a single institution.ResultsOne hundred fifty-four patients were enrolled and the median number of previous lines of chemotherapy was 4. The most frequent adverse events were fatigue/asthenia (74%), alopecia (55%), peripheral neuropathy (46%) and neutropenia (43%). Objective response rate (ORR) was 24% in the evaluable population and 14% in patients pre-treated with both taxanes and vinorelbine. In patients with oestrogen receptor (ER)+/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)– MBC, response rate was 29% and 21% with triple-negative disease. Activity was minimal in HER2+ MBC treated with eribulin monotherapy (14% ORR). Median progression-free survival was 3.2 months. Median overall survival was 11.3 months; 77% of patients were alive at 6 months and 43% at 12 months.ConclusionEribulin was active in MBC patients with a high tumour burden and predominant visceral disease. Safety profile was similar to what was reported in the phase III trials. Prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor administration allowed optimal dose intensity and could have contributed to the recorded response rate. Activity is sustained after treatment with taxanes and vinorelbine. The recently investigated combination of eribulin and trastuzumab should lead to higher activity in HER2-positive MBC.     

Cost-effectiveness of palbociclib in hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer

BackgroundPalbociclib (PAL), a novel small-molecule inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 for the treatment of advanced breast cancer, has demonstrated significant efficacy in prolonging progression-free survival when added to existing therapies. Considering the high cost of PAL, we assessed cost-effectiveness of adding PAL to usual care in treatment of advanced breast cancer.MethodsWe developed a discrete event simulation model to simulate time to cancer progression and to compare life time clinical benefit and cost of alternative treatment strategies for patients with metastatic disease from societal perspective. Per approved indication, endocrine treatment naive patients were assigned to PAL plus letrozole (PAL + LET) or letrozole alone (LET). Patients with prior endocrine therapy were assigned to PAL plus fulvestrant (FUL) (PAL + FUL) or FUL alone. The model assumptions were informed based on published clinical trial data and other peer reviewed studies. We carried out one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of our results to the changes in model assumptions.ResultsIn treatment-naive patients, the addition of PAL to LET cost an estimated $768 498 per additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The addition of PAL to FUL in patients with prior endocrine therapy cost an estimated $918 166 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated adding PAL has a 0% chance of being cost-effectiveness in either patient groups at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY.ConclusionFrom a societal perspective, PAL treatment of both patient groups (with and without prior endocrine therapy) is highly unlikely to be cost-effective compared with the usual care in the USA.