scholarly journals Real-world data of fulvestrant as first-line treatment of postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Blancas ◽  
C. Olier ◽  
V. Conde ◽  
J. L. Bayo ◽  
C. Herrero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Estrogen Receptor ◽  
Postmenopausal Women ◽  
Real World ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
First Line ◽  
Clinical Benefit Rate ◽  
Er Positive

AbstractGoals of endocrine therapy for advanced breast cancer (ABC) include prolonging survival rates, maintaining the quality of life, and delaying the initiation of chemotherapy. We evaluated the effectiveness of fulvestrant as first-line in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive ABC with relapse during or after adjuvant anti-estrogenic therapy in real-world settings. Retrospective, observational study involving 171 postmenopausal women with ER-positive ABC who received fulvestrant as first-line between January 2011 and May 2018 in Spanish hospitals. With a median follow-up of 31.4 months, the progression-free survival (PFS) with fulvestrant was 14.6 months. No differences were seen in the visceral metastatic (14.3 months) versus non-visceral (14.6 months) metastatic subgroup for PFS. Overall response rate and clinical benefit rate were 35.2% and 82.8%. Overall survival was 43.1 months. The duration of the clinical benefit was 19.2 months. Patients with ECOG performance status 0 at the start of treatment showed a significant greater clinical benefit rate and overall survival than with ECOG 1–2. Results in real-world settings are in concordance with randomized clinical trials. Fulvestrant continues to demonstrate clinical benefits in real-world settings and appears be well tolerated as first-line for the treatment of postmenopausal women with ER-positive ABC.

Comparative efficacy with endocrine-based combination versus monotherapy among postmenopausal women with HR+/ HER2- metastatic breast cancer: A network meta-analysis.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e12535-e12535
Author(s):  
Derek Tang ◽  
Rajeev Ayyagari ◽  
Oscar Patterson-Lomba ◽  
Zhou Zhou ◽  
Jipan Xie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Postmenopausal Women ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Mixed Treatment Comparison ◽  
First Line ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Treatment Comparison

e12535 Background: Endocrine-based therapies (ETs) are used to treat postmenopausal women with hormone receptor positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). This study synthesizes the available evidence on progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and clinical benefit rate (CBR) with ETs, as monotherapy and in combination with targeted therapy (TT), in postmenopausal HR+/HER2- ABC using a mixed treatment comparison (MTC). Methods: A systematic literature review of Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and key conferences (2013-2016) was performed to identify randomized clinical trials satisfying the following criteria: 1) included women with HR+/HER2- ABC, 2) included ET monotherapy and ET+TT combination arms, 3) reported PFS, ORR or CBR, and 4) was published in 2007 or later (when HER2 testing was standardized). Pairwise hazard ratios (HRs), relative risks (RR) and their corresponding 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were obtained via a Bayesian MTC. Efficacy was studied in first-line and aromatase inhibitor (AI)-failure (included patients who previously failed an AI or chemotherapy as first-line therapy) settings separately. ETs included letrozole, fulvestrant and exemestane, while ribociclib, palbociclib and everolimus were the TTs identified. Results: Three trials were eligible in the first setting for all three outcomes. TT+ET had significantly longer PFS vs. ET (HR = 0.56, 95% CrI 0.48-0.65), and also had significantly higher ORR (RR = 1.34, 1.17-1.51) and CBR vs. ET (RR = 1.17, 1.12-1.23). In the AI-failure setting, three trials were eligible for PFS, two for ORR, and none for CBR. TT+ET significantly improved PFS vs. ET (HR = 0.47, 0.41-0.53) and had significantly higher ORR vs. ET (RR = 3.52, 2.26-5.39). Conclusions: These results consistently indicate that the hazard of progression or death was approximately halved and that overall response and clinical benefit rates were significantly improved across patient settings for patients receiving TT+ET relative to ET monotherapy among postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- ABC women.

scholarly journals Relationship Between Plasma Estradiol Levels and Estrogen-Responsive Gene Expression in Estrogen Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer in Postmenopausal Women

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 1161-1167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anita K. Dunbier ◽  
Helen Anderson ◽  
Zara Ghazoui ◽  
Elizabeth J. Folkerd ◽  
Roger A'Hern ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Gene Expression ◽  
Estrogen Receptor ◽  
Postmenopausal Women ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Independent Set ◽  
Breast Cancers ◽  
Plasma Estradiol ◽  
Er Positive ◽  
Positive Breast Cancer

Purpose To determine whether plasma estradiol (E2) levels are related to gene expression in estrogen receptor (ER)–positive breast cancers in postmenopausal women. Materials and Methods Genome-wide RNA profiles were obtained from pretreatment core-cut tumor biopsies from 104 postmenopausal patients with primary ER-positive breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant anastrozole. Pretreatment plasma E2 levels were determined by highly sensitive radioimmunoassay. Genes were identified for which expression was correlated with pretreatment plasma E2 levels. Validation was performed in an independent set of 73 ER-positive breast cancers. Results The expression of many known estrogen-responsive genes and gene sets was highly significantly associated with plasma E2 levels (eg, TFF1/pS2, GREB1, PDZK1 and PGR; P < .005). Plasma E2 explained 27% of the average expression of these four average estrogen-responsive genes (ie, AvERG; r = 0.51; P < .0001), and a standardized mean of plasma E2 levels and ER transcript levels explained 37% (r, 0.61). These observations were validated in an independent set of 73 ER-positive tumors. Exploratory analysis suggested that addition of the nuclear coregulators in a multivariable analysis with ER and E2 levels might additionally improve the relationship with the AvERG. Plasma E2 and the standardized mean of E2 and ER were both significantly correlated with 2-week Ki67, a surrogate marker of clinical outcome (r = −0.179; P = .05; and r = −0.389; P = .0005, respectively). Conclusion Plasma E2 levels are significantly associated with gene expression of ER-positive breast cancers and should be considered in future genomic studies of ER-positive breast cancer. The AvERG is a new experimental tool for the study of putative estrogenic stimuli of breast cancer.

scholarly journals Economic evaluation of hormonal therapies for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor–positive early breast cancer in Canada

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 84 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Djalalov ◽  
J. Beca ◽  
E. Amir ◽  
M. Krahn ◽  
M.E. Trudeau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Estrogen Receptor ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Postmenopausal Women ◽  
Early Breast Cancer ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Parameter Uncertainties ◽  
System Perspective ◽  
Er Positive ◽  
The Cost

BackgroundAromatase inhibitor (ai) therapy has been subjected to numerous cost-effectiveness analyses. However, with most ais having reached the end of patent protection and with maturation of the clinical trials data, a re-analysis of ai cost-effectiveness and a consideration of ai use as part of sequential therapy is desirable. Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of the 5-year upfront and sequential tamoxifen (tam) and ai hormonal strategies currently used for treating patients with estrogen receptor (er)–positive early breast cancer.Methods The cost-effectiveness analysis used a Markov model that took a Canadian health system perspective with a lifetime time horizon. The base case involved 65-year-old women with er-positive early breast cancer. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to incorporate parameter uncertainties. An expected-value-of-perfect-information test was performed to identify future research directions. Outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (qalys) and costs.Results The sequential tam–ai strategy was less costly than the other strategies, but less effective than upfront ai and more effective than upfront tam. Upfront ai was more effective and less costly than upfront tam because of less breast cancer recurrence and differences in adverse events. In an exploratory analysis that included a sequential ai–tam strategy, ai–tam dominated based on small numerical differences unlikely to be clinically significant; that strategy was thus not used in the base-case analysis.ConclusionsIn postmenopausal women with er-positive early breast cancer, strategies using ais appear to provide more benefit than strategies using tam alone. Among the ai-containing strategies, sequential strategies using tam and an ai appear to provide benefits similar to those provided by upfront ai, but at a lower cost.

Adjuvant CMFVP versus tamoxifen versus concurrent CMFVP and tamoxifen for postmenopausal, node-positive, and estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients: a Southwest Oncology Group study.

1994 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 2078-2085 ◽  
Author(s):  
S E Rivkin ◽  
S Green ◽  
B Metch ◽  
A B Cruz ◽  
M D Abeloff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Estrogen Receptor ◽  
Postmenopausal Women ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Operable Breast Cancer ◽  
Oncology Group ◽  
Southwest Oncology Group ◽  
Node Positive ◽  
Er Positive ◽  
Positive Breast Cancer

PURPOSE To compare chemohormonal therapy, chemotherapy alone, and hormonal therapy alone in postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive operable breast cancer and positive axillary nodes with respect to survival and disease-free survival (DFS). PATIENTS AND METHODS Eight hundred ninety-two postmenopausal women with ER-positive, node-positive breast cancer were enrolled by the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) from July 1979 to March 1989 and 74 by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) between June 1987 and March 1989. Patients were stratified according to number of involved nodes and type of primary surgery and randomized to receive the following: (1) tamoxifen 10 mg twice daily by mouth for 1 year; (2) cyclophosphamide 60 mg/m2/d by mouth for 1 year, methotrexate 15 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) weekly for 1 year, fluorouracil (5-FU) 400 mg/m2 IV weekly for 1 year, vincristine .625 mg/m2 IV weekly for the first 10 weeks, and prednisone during weeks 1 to 10 with doses decreasing from 30 mg/m2 to 2.5 mg/m2 (CMFVP); or (3) the combination of tamoxifen and CMFVP. RESULTS The median follow-up duration is 6.5 years, with a maximum of 12.8 years. Treatment arms are not significantly different with respect to either survival or DFS (log-rank, 2 df, P = .82 and .23, respectively). The 5-year survival rate is 77% for the tamoxifen arm, 78% for CMFVP, and 75% for the combination. No significant differences were observed in node or receptor level subsets. Severe or worse toxicity was experienced by 56% of patients on CMFVP and 61% on CMFVP plus tamoxifen, compared with 5% on tamoxifen alone. CONCLUSION CMFVP chemotherapy, either alone or in combination with tamoxifen, has not been shown to be superior to tamoxifen alone in the treatment of postmenopausal women with node-positive, ER-positive, operable breast cancer.

scholarly journals Randomized Phase II Neoadjuvant Comparison Between Letrozole, Anastrozole, and Exemestane for Postmenopausal Women With Estrogen Receptor–Rich Stage 2 to 3 Breast Cancer: Clinical and Biomarker Outcomes and Predictive Value of the Baseline PAM50-Based Intrinsic Subtype—ACOSOG Z1031

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (17) ◽  
pp. 2342-2349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Ellis ◽  
Vera J. Suman ◽  
Jeremy Hoog ◽  
Li Lin ◽  
Jacqueline Snider ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Estrogen Receptor ◽  
Clinical Response ◽  
Postmenopausal Women ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Surgical Outcomes ◽  
Intrinsic Subtype ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Er Positive

Purpose Preoperative aromatase inhibitor (AI) treatment promotes breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for estrogen receptor (ER) –positive breast cancer. To study this treatment option, responses to three AIs were compared in a randomized phase II neoadjuvant trial designed to select agents for phase III investigations. Patients and Methods Three hundred seventy-seven postmenopausal women with clinical stage II to III ER-positive (Allred score 6-8) breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive neoadjuvant exemestane, letrozole, or anastrozole. The primary end point was clinical response. Secondary end points included BCS, Ki67 proliferation marker changes, the Preoperative Endocrine Prognostic Index (PEPI), and PAM50-based intrinsic subtype analysis. Results On the basis of clinical response rates, letrozole and anastrozole were selected for further investigation; however, no other differences in surgical outcome, PEPI score, or Ki67 suppression were detected. The BCS rate for mastectomy-only patients at presentation was 51%. PAM50 analysis identified AI-unresponsive nonluminal subtypes (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 enriched or basal-like) in 3.3% of patients. Clinical response and surgical outcomes were similar in luminal A (LumA) versus luminal B tumors; however, a PEPI of 0 (best prognostic group) was highest in the LumA subset (27.1% v 10.7%; P = .004). Conclusion Neoadjuvant AI treatment markedly improved surgical outcomes. Ki67 and PEPI data demonstrated that the three agents tested are biologically equivalent and therefore likely to have similar adjuvant activities. LumA tumors were more likely to have favorable biomarker characteristics after treatment; however, occasional paradoxical increases in Ki67 (12% of tumors with > 5% increase after therapy) suggest treatment-resistant cells, present in some LumA tumors, can be detected by post-treatment profiling.

Chemotherapy versus tamoxifen versus chemotherapy plus tamoxifen in node-positive, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients: results of a multicentric Italian study. Breast Cancer Adjuvant Chemo-Hormone Therapy Cooperative Group.

1990 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 1310-1320 ◽  
Author(s):  
F Boccardo ◽  
A Rubagotti ◽  
P Bruzzi ◽  
M Cappellini ◽  
G Isola ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Estrogen Receptor ◽  
Postmenopausal Women ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Combined Treatment ◽  
Tamoxifen Treatment ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Node Positive ◽  
Er Positive ◽  
Positive Breast Cancer

Between November 1, 1983 and June 30, 1987, 510 node-positive, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer patients have been randomly allocated to receive either chemotherapy (six intravenous [IV] cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil [CMF] courses followed by four IV epirubicin courses) or 5 years of tamoxifen treatment or a combination of both therapies. After a median follow-up of 40 months, patients receiving the combined treatment achieved the best results, and those treated with chemotherapy alone achieved the worst, the difference being particularly evident in postmenopausal women. However, while the concurrent use of chemotherapy and tamoxifen did improve the results achieved by chemotherapy alone, particularly in postmenopausal women and in those with four or more involved nodes, it did not significantly improve the results achieved by tamoxifen alone, particularly in patients with higher ER tumor concentrations. Side effects were more numerous and more severe in patients receiving chemotherapy (with or without tamoxifen). Our findings, although still preliminary, confirm that tamoxifen should be the treatment of choice for postmenopausal breast cancer patients with node-positive, ER-positive tumors. In addition, the findings suggest that tamoxifen may represent a safe alternative to chemotherapy (at least to the cytotoxic regimen we used) for younger women, provided they have ER-positive tumors. In patients with ER-positive tumors, the addition of chemotherapy to tamoxifen does not seem to improve significantly the effectiveness of tamoxifen alone.

Superior Efficacy of Letrozole Versus Tamoxifen as First-Line Therapy for Postmenopausal Women With Advanced Breast Cancer: Results of a Phase III Study of the International Letrozole Breast Cancer Group

2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (10) ◽  
pp. 2596-2606 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henning Mouridsen ◽  
Mikhail Gershanovich ◽  
Yan Sun ◽  
Ramón Pérez-Carrión ◽  
Corrado Boni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Postmenopausal Women ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Advanced Breast ◽  
First Line ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Antiestrogen Therapy

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of tamoxifen with that of letrozole, an oral aromatase inhibitor, with tamoxifen as first-line therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Nine hundred seven patients were randomly assigned letrozole 2.5 mg once daily (453 patients) or tamoxifen 20 mg once daily (454 patients). Patients had estrogen receptor– and/or progesterone receptor–positive tumors, or both receptors were unknown. Recurrence during adjuvant antiestrogen therapy or within the following 12 months or prior endocrine therapy for advanced disease precluded enrollment. One prior chemotherapy regimen for metastatic disease was allowed. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP). Secondary end points included overall objective response rate (ORR), its duration, rate and duration of clinical benefit, time to treatment failure (TTF), overall survival, and tolerability. RESULTS: TTP was significantly longer for letrozole than for tamoxifen (median, 41 v 26 weeks). Treatment with letrozole reduced the risk of progression by 30% (hazards ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.60 to 0.82, P = .0001). TTP was significantly longer for letrozole irrespective of dominant site of disease, receptor status, or prior adjuvant antiestrogen therapy. Similarly, TTF was significantly longer for letrozole (median, 40 v 25 weeks). ORR was higher for letrozole (30% v 20%; P = .0006), as was the rate of clinical benefit (49% v 38%; P = .001). Survival data are currently immature and not reported here. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Letrozole was significantly superior to tamoxifen in TTP, TTF, ORR, and clinical benefit rate. Our results support its use as first-line endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document