Current status of hormone therapy in patients with hormone receptor positive (HR+) advanced breast cancer

The Breast ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 710-720 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elsa Dalmau ◽  
Alejandra Armengol-Alonso ◽  
Montserrat Muñoz ◽  
Miguel Ángel Seguí-Palmer
2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e13035-e13035
Author(s):  
Tamara Diaz Redondo ◽  
Rocío Lavado-Valenzuela ◽  
Maria Emilia Dominguez-Recio ◽  
Sofía Ruíz ◽  
Encarnación González Flores ◽  
...  

e13035 Background: CDK 4/6 inhibitors plus hormone therapy(HT) has been approved by FDA and EMA for the treatment of hormone receptor positive HER2 negative advanced breast cancer (HR+/HER2-BC) with improvement in PFS consistently demonstrated in several clinical trials. Benefit in OS has also been demonstrated in Monaleesa3 and Monarch2 clinical trials. To date we don`t have real-world data and no single biomarker has been validated to identify subgroups that would benefit most from this new drugs. Methods: This is a multicenter, real life, observational study. From January 2015 to December 2019 we recruited 98 patients with immunohistochemical(IHC) HR+/HER2-BC treated with CDK4-6 inhibitor plus HT. All patients were classified into intrinsic molecular subtypes based on PAM50 signature done centrally in diagnostic/metastatic biopsies. Results: The clinical and treatment characteristic are in table. In IHC studies all population were classified as luminalA (40%) and LuminalB (60%) but we found HER2 enriched patients (6%) defined by PAM50. The median PFS for all population was 14 months and median PFS for Luminal A subtype was 12 months and 15 months for Luminal B with no statistically significant differences between them. Conclusions: Based on the results obtained, the intrinsic molecular subtype defined by PAM50 does not appear to be associated with differences in PFS in our study group. However, a study with a larger number of patients would be necessary. Inhibitors of CDK4/6, have established a central role in the management of HR+/HER2-BC. There is a clear benefit in PFS and OS but we still don’t know which patients will benefit from this therapy and who will not while the side effects such chronic neutropenia, QTC prolongation and diarrhea could have a negative impact on their quality of life. Its mandatory to explore a good biomarker to direct therapy. [Table: see text]


2018 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-203
Author(s):  
Keith A. Hecht ◽  
Christopher Selby

Objective: To evaluate the existing literature regarding the use of cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors in the treatment of hormone receptor–positive advanced breast cancer (ABC). Data Sources: A search of the medical literature was performed using PubMed (2014 to June 2018). Search terms included cyclin-dependent kinase, CDK, breast cancer, palbociclib, ribociclib, abemaciclib, PD0332991, LEE011, and LY2835219. Clinicaltrials.gov was also searched. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Trials with clinical efficacy outcomes evaluating CDK 4/6 inhibitors in the treatment of advanced hormone-positive breast cancer were considered. Data Synthesis: Palbociclib, abemaciclib, and ribociclib each demonstrated significant benefit when combined with an aromatase inhibitor, the benefit to patients was similar for each, with an improvement of 42% to 51% in median progression-free survival (PFS). In combination with fulvestrant, CDK 4/6 inhibitors used for the treatment of hormone receptor–positive ABC resulted in a 43% to 58% improvement in median PFS versus fulvestrant alone. CDK inhibitors are relatively well tolerated; however, discontinuation as a result of adverse effects was highest with abemaciclib. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: This review considers the use of the 3 commercially available CDK 4/6 inhibitors for treatment of hormone receptor–positive breast cancer, including data on each of the 3 agents in newly advanced and treatment refractory disease. Conclusions: The CDK inhibitors should be used in combination with endocrine therapies for the treatment of ABC. Efficacy of the 3 agents is similar. Selection within the class should include consideration of adverse effects and drug interactions.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e13017-e13017
Author(s):  
Inês Moreira ◽  
Marta Ferreira ◽  
Ana Afonso ◽  
Ana Ferreira ◽  
Ana Rodrigues ◽  
...  

e13017 Background: Activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin intracellular signaling pathway is one of the mechanisms of endocrine resistance in breast cancer. The addition of everolimus to exemestane improves progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with hormone receptor positive (HR+) advanced breast cancer (ABC) previously treated with nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors (NSAIs). The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of everolimus plus exemestane in patients with HR+ ABC. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated patients with HR+, HER2 negative ABC treated with everolimus/exemestane that recurred or progressed during/after treatment with NSAIs in a portuguese comprehensive cancer center. Study endpoints were PFS, overall survival (OS), overall response rate and adverse events. Results: Between April 2014 and September 2020, 63 female patients were treated with everolimus/exemestane. Median age was 59 years (36-79), and all had performance status ECOG ≤2. Seventeen (27.0%) patients had bone metastasis alone, 39 (61.9%) had bone and visceral metastasis, 25 (39.7%) had metastasis in 3 or more sites and 87.3% had previous hormone-sensitive disease. Before everolimus/exemestane, 61 (96.8%) patients were being treated with palliative endocrine therapy (alone or in combination with CDK4/6 inhibitors) or chemotherapy (ChT) and 2 (3.2%) patients were under adjuvant endocrine therapy. Median follow-up time was 12.8 months (1.4-74.6), with 39 patients alive. Overall response rate was 14.3% (1 complete response and 8 partial responses) and 45 patients had stable disease. Median PFS was 5.6 months (CI95% 2.4-8.8) and median OS was 25.4 months (CI95% 10.3-40.5). Subgroup analysis regarding PFS was statistically significant for previous treatment with CDK4/6 inhibitors (p = 0.026) and for site of metastasis (p = 0.025). In the subgroup of patients that previously underwent palliative ChT, median PFS was 4.0 months (CI95% 0.2-9.6) and median OS was 18.6 months (CI95% 8.2-29.0). For patients that did not receive previous palliative ChT, median PFS was 5.8 months (CI95% 3.8-7.8) and median OS was 43.5 months (CI95% 2.0-85.0). Grade 3 and 4 adverse events occurred in 21 (33.3%) patients, and were: nausea, anorexia, rash, headache, haematologic toxicity, hepatic cytolysis, hyperglycaemia, pneumonitis, oral mucositis and acute kidney failure with need for haemodialysis. Fifty-five (87.3%) patients suspended everolimus, 34 (54.0%) due to disease progression and 21 (33.3%) due to toxicity. Conclusions: Our results confirm the effectiveness and safety of everolimus/exemestane in real-world setting and support its use mainly before palliative ChT. Everolimus/exemestane in HR+ ABC is feasible in the clinic, with toxicity manageable under close surveillance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document