scholarly journals A Meta-Analysis Study of Polychemotherapy versus Monochemotherapy in Patients of Metastatic Breast Cancer

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (03) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amal Kumar ◽  
Bhaswat Chakraborty
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Tumor Control ◽  
Randomized Controlled Studies ◽  
Significant Difference

Polychemotherapy and intermittent monochemotherapy regimens in metastatic breast cancer were examined in a meta analysis that included both tumor response rate and toxicities. Randomized controlled studies (conducted during 1990-2008) comparing monochemotherapy and poly-chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer patients were selected from electronic databases. Meta-analysis for response rate and toxicities [nausea and vomiting, toxic death, alopecia and reduced white cell count (WCC)] was performed using the MantelHaenszel method. The heterogeneity among the trials was assessed through a χ2 statistic, I2 and visual inspection of the forest plots. Analysis of eligible studies reveals statistical significant difference in response rate (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.65-0.79), nausea and vomiting (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67-0.59), Alopecia (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.640.88) and reduced WCC (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.48-0.62) which favours polychemotherapy except toxic death (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.58-1.29). There was marked evidence of heterogeneity in all end points except toxic death. This meta analysis shows the superiority of efficacy but not of safety of polychemotherapy over that of a single agent. However, the choice of treatment should be based on the response to the therapy, toxicity, patient preference, presence of metastases or imminent complications requiring aggressive and rapid tumor control.

scholarly journals Effect and Safety of Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 Monotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer: A meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yihang Qi ◽  
Xiangyi Kong ◽  
Xiangyu Wang ◽  
Jie Zhai ◽  
Yi Fang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Severe Grade

Abstract Background. Given that no approved targeted agents for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) and no opportunity of surgery for metastatic breast cancer (MBC), new treatment options are urgently to be discovered. The anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy may be effective, and what we should be aware of is the response rate and adverse events. Methods. The PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane and www.clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched to find potential studies using the following strategies: anti-PD-1/PD-L1; metastatic; breast cancer. R© package Meta was used to pool incidence. Results. Six studies including 586 advanced breast cancer patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents were included in this meta-analysis. The anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents include pembrolizumab, atezolizumab and avelumab. Among these patients, CR was 1.26%, PR was 7.65%, ORR was 9.85% and DCR was 18.33%. We also found that the response rate was closely associated with the expression of PD-L1 biomarker (PD-L1+ vs PD-L1-): the CR was 2.71% vs 0.00%; the PR was 9.93% vs 2.69%; the ORR was 10.62% vs 3.07%; the DCR was 17.95% vs 4.71%. 1-year overall survival rate and 6-months progression-free survival rate were 43.34% and 17.24%. Respectively, the overall incidence of AEs was 64.18% in any grade and 12.94% in severe grade. The incidence of irAEs was 14.75%. Besides, the incidence of discontinue and death due to treatment-related AEs was about 3.06% and 0.31% respectively. When the detailed AEs were analyzed, most treatment-related AEs of any grade were arthraigia, asthenia, decreased appetite; most common treatment-related AEs of severe grade were anemia, autoimmune hepatitis, diarrhea; the most common irAEs were hypothyroidism , followed by hyperthyroidism, pneumonitis and infusion-related reaction. Conclusions. Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy showed a manageable safety profile and had a durable anti-tumor clinical activity in a subset of patients with mTNBC or MBC. PD-L1 expression may be correlated to a higher probability of clinical response.

Efficacy and Safety of Capecitabine Alone or in Combination in Advanced Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients Previously Treated with Anthracycline and Taxane: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (12) ◽  
pp. 694-702
Author(s):  
Louai Alsaloumi ◽  
Shaima Shawagfeh ◽  
Abdikarim Abdi ◽  
Bilgen Basgut
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Hand Foot Syndrome

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Capecitabine is frequently used alone or combined with other chemotherapy agents for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer in relapsed patients. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> The objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of capecitabine monotherapy versus combination in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer patients pretreated with anthracycline and taxane. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Eligible randomized controlled trials examining the efficacy and safety of capecitabine alone compared to capecitabine combination were systematically searched. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and grades 3–4 drug-related adverse events were the outcomes assessed. <b><i>Results:</i></b> A total of 6,714 patients of 9 trials were involved in the pooled analysis. Our findings demonstrated that capecitabine combination is significantly superior to capecitabine monotherapy in improving PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.32, 95% CI 1.13–1.54, <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.0001) and ORR (risk ratio [RR] 0.67, 95% CI 0.54–0.83, <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001), but it was insignificant in OS (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.98–1.22, <i>p</i> = 0.12). On the other hand, the incidence of non-hematological adverse events such as hand-foot syndrome and diarrhea was lower in capecitabine combination compared to capecitabine monotherapy. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy showed superiority over capecitabine monotherapy in terms of PFS and ORR, with no significant difference in OS. Non-hematological adverse effects such as hand-foot syndrome were fewer with a combination regimen. However, hematological adverse events were fewer with capecitabine monotherapy regimen.

Paclitaxel plus carboplatin versus paclitaxel plus epirubicin as first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer: Efficacy and safety results of a randomized, phase III trial.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1087-1087
Author(s):  
Zhongsheng Tong ◽  
Shufen Li ◽  
Yehui Shi ◽  
Xu Wang ◽  
Chen Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Significant Difference

1087 Background: Paclitaxel/carboplatin combinations are highly active in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We conducted a randomized, phase III, non-inferiority trial comparing paclitaxel/carboplatin (TP) with paclitaxel/epirubicin (TE) as first-line therapy for MBC. Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary efficacy endpoint. Secondary endpoints included response rate, overall survival, tolerability, and quality of life (QoL). Methods: From June 2009 to January 2015, 231 patients were randomly assigned, 115 of whom were randomized to TP and 116 to TE. Baseline characteristics were relatively well-balanced in the two treatments. Results: After a median follow-up of 29 months, no significant difference was observed between the two treatments in objective response rate (ORR) (38.3% vs. 39.7%, respectively). Both the progression-free survival (p=0.158) and overall survival (p=0.369) were very similar between the two treatments. Both regimens were well tolerated. The main toxicities were myelosuppression, gastrointestinal reactions, and alopecia. TP showed higher grades 3–4 alopecia and higher nausea (p<0.05). TE showed higher incidence of myelosuppression than TP (p<0.05) (Table). Those patients whose epirubicin cumulative dose was more than 1000 mg/m2 did not suffer worse cardiotoxicity. Conclusions: Our study suggests that TP arm is an effective therapeutic alternative for patients with MBC, especially in those previously exposed to epirubicin in the adjuvant setting. TP has some advantages, such as less cost and less side effects (myelosuppression and fatigue). Clinical trial information: NCT02207361. [Table: see text]

Indirect treatment comparison of the efficacy and safety of olaparib 300 mg tablets BID and talazoparib 1 mg once daily in the treatment of patients with germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCA) HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e12570-e12570 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles McCrea ◽  
Robert Hettle
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Indirect Treatment Comparison ◽  
Treatment Comparison ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Indirect Treatment

e12570 Background: PARP inhibitor treatment with olaparib or talazoparib has been shown to improve progression-free survival (PFS) versus chemotherapy treatment of physician’s choice in patients with germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCA) HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. In the absence of head-to-head evidence, an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) analysis was performed to simulate the comparative efficacy and safety of alternative PARP treatment in this setting. Methods: Bayesian fixed effects ITCs of data published for OlympiAD (NCT02000622) and EMBRACA (NCT01945775) was conducted using the gemtc package in R. Efficacy analyses were performed on the primary endpoint of PFS by blinded independent central review. Safety analyses included the odds ratio (OR) of adverse event (AE)-related discontinuations, and common AEs of any grade reported in each study. All analyses compared olaparib with talazoparib. Results: Efficacy analyses show no significant difference in PFS across treatments (PFS hazard ratio of 1.09, 95% credible interval [0.72; 1.65]). Safety analyses predict differences in AEs across PARP treatment, including hematological events, alopecia, nausea and vomiting (Table). No difference in AE-related discontinuations was observed (0.93 [0.25–3.42]). Conclusions: Results of the ITC suggest that olaparib and talazoparib are equally efficacious on PFS, and differ in AE risk profile, with olaparib predicted to have fewer common hematological and alopecia events, but an increased risk of nausea and vomiting versus talazoparib. Observed differences require confirmation in comparative studies. Limitations of the analysis include heterogeneity in study design, reporting of AEs, and mix of chemotherapies used in the control arm of the studies. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Pyrotinib Versus T-DM1 in HER2+ Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients Pre-Treated With Trastuzumab and a Taxane: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hao Liao ◽  
Wenfa Huang ◽  
Yaxin Liu ◽  
Wendi Pei ◽  
Huiping Li
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Probability Curve ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Grade 3

PurposeTo compare the efficacy and safety between pyrotinib (Pyr) and trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in pre-treated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients.MethodsA comprehensive literature search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science was performed in August 2020. Randomized clinical trials comparing the efficacy and safety between different anti-HER2 regimens in patients pre-treated with trastuzumab (Tra) and a taxane in metastatic settings (≤second-line treatment) were included. A fixed effects network meta-analysis based on the Bayesian inferential framework was conducted for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs). Values of surface under cumulative ranking probability curve (SUCRA) were calculated to offer a ranking of all regimens.ResultsTwelve studies with 4,353 subjects were identified. Nine regimens were included into the network: T-DM1, lapatinib-capecitabine (Lap-Cap), Tra-Cap, Cap, neratinib (Ner), pertuzumab (Per)-Tra-Cap, Pyr-Cap, atezolizumab (Ate)-T-DM1, and Ner-Cap. For PFS, Pyr-Cap was more favorable than T-DM1 (hazard ratio, 95% confidence interval: 0.77, 0.70–0.86), Lap-Cap (0.64, 0.59–0.69), Tra-Cap (0.63, 0.56–0.70), Cap (0.50, 0.45–0.56), Ner (0.59, 0.51–0.69), Per-Tra-Cap (0.68, 0.59–0.79), and Ner-Cap (0.72, 0.64–0.81). For OS, Pyr-Cap showed further improvement than Lap-Cap (hazard ratio, 95% confidence interval: 0.71, 0.52–0.99), Cap (0.68, 0.49–0.96), and Ner (0.65, 0.45–0.94). For ORR, Pyr-Cap was significantly superior than Cap (odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 7.87, 1.22–56.51). No significant difference was observed in grade ≥3 AEs among all the regimens. Pyr-Cap ranked in the highest in PFS, OS, ORR, and grade ≥3 AEs (SUCRA = 99.4, 89.7, 86.4, and 89.3%).ConclusionsThese results indicate that Pyr may be more effective than T-DM1 in HER2+ MBC patients pre-treated with Tra and a taxane. However, it may be associated with more grade ≥3 AEs.

scholarly journals Phase II Trial of a Novel Paclitaxel Schedule As Single-Agent, First-Line Therapy for HER-2/neu–Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Community-Based Study

2006 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
pp. 268-273
Author(s):  
David Loesch ◽  
Nicholas Robert ◽  
Stephen Jones ◽  
Maha Elkordy ◽  
Des Ilegbodu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Her 2

Purpose To determine the response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), and toxicity in patients with HER-2/neu–negative metastatic breast cancer treated with first-line paclitaxel in a de-escalating dosing schedule. Patients and Methods Between August 1999 and December 2000, 73 patients were enrolled. Paclitaxel was administered on day 1 (175 mg/m2) and on days 8 and 15 (80 mg/m2 each) in each 4-week cycle (1 week of rest). Doses were de-escalated with the aim of reducing toxicity. An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 1, or 2 was found in 55%, 41%, and 4% of patients, respectively. Median age was 59 years (range, 38 to 84 years), and 86% of patients had received prior surgery; 60%, adjuvant chemotherapy; and 59%, radiation therapy. Results Based on an intention-to-treat analysis (N = 73), there were five patients with a complete response (6.8%), 16 with a partial response (21.9%), 17 with stable disease (23.3%), and 23 with progressive disease (31.5%) for an RR of 28.7%. Twelve patients (16.4%) were not assessable for response due to toxicity (seven patients, mainly neuropathy), withdrawal of consent (two patients), early death (two patients), or noncompliance (one patient). Median PFS was 6.5 months (range, < 1 to 36.1 months), median survival was 22.8 months (range, < 1 to 36.1 months), and median duration of response was 8.8 months (range, 3.0 to 31.8 months). Patients (n = 72) were evaluated for toxicity. Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related toxicities occurring in more than 5% of patients included neutropenia (22.2%), neuropathy (18.1%), fatigue (6.9%), and leukopenia (5.6%). Conclusion In a unique de-escalating schedule, this study of single-agent paclitaxel produced a response rate similar to other single-agent paclitaxel schedules, in first-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer, published in the literature. However, this schedule is not recommended for the therapy of metastatic breast cancer because of the higher rate of toxicity.

Phase II Trial of N,N-Diethyl-2-[4-(phenylmethyl)phenoxy]ethanamine.HCl and Doxorubicin Chemotherapy in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Study

1999 ◽  
Vol 17 (11) ◽  
pp. 3431-3437 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Khoo ◽  
L. Brandes ◽  
L. Reyno ◽  
A. Arnold ◽  
S. Dent ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
National Cancer Institute ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Phase Iii

PURPOSE: This multicenter phase II trial investigated the efficacy and toxicity of a combination of the novel intracellular histamine antagonist, N,N-diethyl-2-[4-(phenylmethyl)phenoxy]ethanamine.HCl (DPPE), and doxorubicin in patients with anthracycline-naïve metastatic breast cancer. Preclinical models and early single institutional studies suggested DPPE could potentiate the cytotoxicity of doxorubicin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-two women, 32 to 77 years old (median, 59 years), with anthracycline-naïve metastatic breast cancer were treated. Patients may have had one previous regimen of nonanthracycline chemotherapy, either in the adjuvant or metastatic disease treatment setting. DPPE (6 mg/kg) was administered as an 80 minute intravenous infusion with doxorubicin (60 mg/m2) given intravenously over the last 20 minutes of the DPPE infusion. Patients were premedicated with an antiemetic and sedating regimen. The DPPE/doxorubicin treatment was given every 21 days for a maximum of seven cycles. RESULTS: All 42 patients were assessable. Overall, toxicity was comparable to that expected with doxorubicin alone, with the exception of DPPE-related motion sickness, mild hallucinations, and cerebellar signs at the time of the infusion. These CNS side effects were manageable in an ambulatory care setting, improved with subsequent cycles of treatment, and did not usually require hospitalization. Four patients developed febrile neutropenia. Thirty-five patients received four or more cycles of chemotherapy. The overall response rate was 52.5% (95% confidence interval, 36% to 68%), with 9.5% complete responses (n = 4), 43% partial responses (n = 18), and 38% of patients with stable disease (n = 16). CONCLUSION: The antitumour effects of DPPE/doxorubicin the 52.5% response rate seems encouraging, particularly in consideration of the fact that a recently reported randomized National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group trial using single-agent doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 in one of the treatment arms achieved a 31% response rate. Thus, a randomized phase III trial of doxorubicin versus doxorubicin plus DPPE is being conducted in this clinical setting.

Safety and antitumor activity of 3-weekly anti-EpCAM antibody adecatumumab (MT201) in combination with docetaxel for patients with metastatic breast cancer: Results of a multicenter phase Ib trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1009-1009
Author(s):  
M. Sebastian ◽  
C. Hanusch ◽  
M. Schmidt ◽  
N. Marschner ◽  
D. Oruzio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Breast Cancers ◽  
Epcam Expression ◽  
Secondary Objective ◽  
Grade 3

1009 Background: The fully human IgG1 antibody adecatumumab (MT201) binds to the epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM), which is expressed in over 90% of breast cancers and has been associated with poor prognosis. Data from a previous phase II study in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) indicated that single agent MT201 could prolong progression-free survival in a subset of patients with high EpCAM expression. This study tested safety and tolerability of MT201 treatment in combination with standard docetaxel. Methods: Relapsed or primary refractory, EpCAM-positive MBC patients were treated with docetaxel (100 mg/m2 q21d) in combination with MT201 (dose levels 180 mg/m2, and 550 mg/m2 q21d). A loading dose of 100 mg/m2 and 300 mg/m2, respectively, was administered on day 1 and 7. Patients were grouped into high- and low-level EpCAM expression. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability; anti-tumor activity according to RECIST was a secondary objective. Results: A total of 22 patients with a median of 3 prior chemotherapy lines were enrolled. Most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events (AE) in all patients were leucopenia (90%), neutropenia (77%), lymphopenia (68%), and diarrhea (23%). No evidence for aggravation of grade 3/4 toxicities typically associated with docetaxel was found. The dose level 550 mg/m2 q21d has been determined as MTD in combination with 100 mg/m2 q21d docetaxel. The overall response rate (CR/PR; RECIST) and clinical benefit rate (CR/PR and SD>24wks) in all evaluable patients was 24% and 41%, respectively. Patients with high EpCAM expression showed a response rate of 43%, whereas patients with low EpCAM expression had a response rate of 10%. Median time-to-progression (TTP) in all evaluable patients was 165 days. Conclusions: Combining MT201 with docetaxel for the treatment of MBC appears to be safe and feasible. The DLT of this combination were short and manageable episodes of grade 3 diarrhea. The response rate and TTP observed in this heavily pre-treated population is encouraging and warrant further development of MT201/chemotherapy combinations in patients with tumors of high EpCAM target level. [Table: see text]

Gemcitabine in Combination With Doxorubicin in Advanced Breast Cancer: Final Results of a Phase II Pharmacokinetic Trial

2000 ◽  
Vol 18 (13) ◽  
pp. 2545-2552 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Pérez-Manga ◽  
A. Lluch ◽  
E. Alba ◽  
J.A. Moreno-Nogueira ◽  
M. Palomero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Breast Disease ◽  
Advanced Breast ◽  
Weekly Schedule

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine has promising single-agent activity in advanced breast disease. The aim of this phase II study was to determine the efficacy, toxicity, and pharmacokinetic profile of gemcitabine administered with doxorubicin as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of the 42 women with metastatic breast cancer (age 33 to 74 years; mean age, 55 years), 13 were chemotherapy-naive and 29 had received adjuvant chemotherapy. Gemcitabine (800 or 1,000 mg/m2) and doxorubicin (25 mg/m2) were administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle. Blood samples were drawn on day 8 of cycles 1, 2, and 3 and of subsequent odd cycles for gemcitabine pharmacokinetic determinations and before and after the first dose of cycle 1 or 2 for doxorubicin determinations. RESULTS: There were three complete and 20 partial responses, for an overall response rate of 55% (95% confidence interval [CI], 40% to 70%) and a complete response rate of 7%. The median survival time for all 42 patients was 27 months (95% CI, 13.4 to 30.0 months) and the 1-year survival rate was 80%. Toxicity was mainly hematologic. The disposition of both drugs was unchanged when they were administered on the same day compared with when they were given singly. CONCLUSION: The combination of gemcitabine (800 mg/m2) and doxorubicin (25 mg/m2) can be safely administered using a weekly schedule. The disposition of both drugs is unchanged when they are administered on the same day. This combination shows promising activity with acceptable toxicity compared with other combination therapies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document