Efficacy of palbociclib after everolimus in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e13030-e13030
Author(s):  
Anja Kovac ◽  
Cvetka Grasic Kuhar ◽  
Tanja Ovcaricek ◽  
Erika Matos ◽  
Marina Mencinger ◽  
...  

e13030 Background: Palbociclib and other selective cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitors in combination with endocrine therapy (ET) have become the standard of care in the treatment of patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC). Their role in the first and second line of therapy is well established, whereas their use in subsequent lines and after treatment with everolimus remains unclear. Methods: We performed retrospective observational study of all patients who initiated treatment with palbociclib at the Institute of Oncology Ljubljana between March 8, 2018 and March 8, 2019 and received at least two prior lines of treatment for ABC. We collected individual patient data from electronic medical records. Patients were divided in two groups – everolimus-pretreated (group A) and everolimus-naïve (group B). The primary study outcomes were clinical benefit rate (CBR), time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS). Results: Overall, 65 patients´ data was evaluated. The majority of patients (n = 50, 76.9%) received palbociclib in combination with fulvestrant, others (n = 15, 23.1%) with aromatase inhibitors. There were 25 (38.5%) patients in group A and 40 (61.5%) in group B. Patients´ and previous treatment characteristics are shown in table. CBR was the same, 40%, in both groups. The median follow-up time was 14.9 months. The median TTF was 5.28 months for the whole group, 5.0 months for everolimus-pretreated and 5.5 months for everolimus-naïve group (p = 0.7). The median OS was 18.1 months for the whole group, 14 months for everolimus-pretreated and 18.1 months for everolimus- naïve group (p = 0.7). Conclusions: Patients with HR+, HER-2-negative ABC benefit from addition of palbociclib to ET after two lines of prior systemic therapy. The benefit remained unchanged if the patients were previously treated with everolimus. [Table: see text]

The Breast ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 710-720 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elsa Dalmau ◽  
Alejandra Armengol-Alonso ◽  
Montserrat Muñoz ◽  
Miguel Ángel Seguí-Palmer

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