scholarly journals Patterns and Predictors of First-Line Taxane Use in Patients with Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in US Clinical Practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 2741-2752
Author(s):  
Joyce O’Shaughnessy ◽  
Leisha A. Emens ◽  
Stephen Y. Chui ◽  
Wei Wang ◽  
Kenneth Russell ◽  
...  

We investigated first-line (1L) treatment patterns and predictors of taxane use to better understand the evolving metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) treatment landscape. This retrospective analysis of the Truven Health MarketScan® (Somers, NY, USA) Database included women with mTNBC who received 1L therapy within six months of diagnosis (January 2005–June 2015). Multivariate logistic regression models identified predictors of taxane use, adjusting for prognostic factors. A total of 2,271 women with newly diagnosed mTNBC received 1L treatment during the study period. Half received a 1L taxane (53%), more often in combination than as monotherapy (58% versus 42%), though this varied by specific taxane. Nab-Paclitaxel monotherapy increased substantially after 2010. More recent treatment year (odds ratio, 2.16 (95% CI 1.69–2.76]) and number of metastases (≥3 versus 1: 1.73 (1.25–2.40)) predicted taxane monotherapy versus combination. Having a health maintenance organization versus a preferred provider organization plan predicted less nab-paclitaxel versus paclitaxel (0.32 (0.13–0.80)) or docetaxel (0.30 (0.10–0.89)) use. More recent index year (2011–2015 vs 2005–2010) was the only predictor favoring nab-paclitaxel versus paclitaxel (2.01 (1.26–3.21)) or docetaxel (3.63 (2.11–6.26)). Taxane-containing regimens remained the most common 1L mTNBC treatments. Paclitaxel and nab-paclitaxel use changed substantially over time, with nab-paclitaxel use associated with insurance coverage.

2020 ◽  
pp. 75-80
Author(s):  
S.A. Lyalkin ◽  
◽  
L.A. Syvak ◽  
N.O. Verevkina ◽  
◽  
...  

The objective: was to evaluate the efficacy of the first line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Materials and methods. Open randomized study was performed including 122 patients with metastatic TNBC. The efficacy and safety of the first line chemotherapy of regimens АТ (n=59) – group 1, patients received doxorubicine 60 мг/м2 and paclitaxel 175 мг/м2 and ТР (n=63) – group 2, patients received paclitaxel 175 мг/м2 and carboplatin AUC 5 were evaluated. Results. The median duration of response was 9.5 months (4.5–13.25 months) in patients received AT regimen and 8.5 months (4.7–12.25 months), in TP regimen; no statistically significant differences were observed, р=0.836. The median progression free survival was 7 months (95% CI 5–26 months) in group 1 and 7.5 months (95% CI 6–35 months) in group 2, p=0.85. Both chemotherapy regimens (AT and TP) had mild or moderate toxicity profiles (grade 1 or 2 in most patients). No significant difference in gastrointestinal toxicity was observed. The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was higher in patients of group 2 (TP regimen): 42.8% versus 27% (р<0.05). Conclusions. Both regimens of chemotherapy (AT and TP) are appropriate to use in the first line setting in patients with metastatic TNBC. Key words: metastatic triple negative breast cancer, chemotherapy, progression free survival, chemotherapy toxicity.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (Suppl 3) ◽  
pp. A24-A24
Author(s):  
Georges Azzi ◽  
Shifra Krinshpun ◽  
Antony Tin ◽  
Allyson Malashevich ◽  
Meenakshi Malhotra ◽  
...  

BackgroundTriple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is an aggressive form of breast cancer that is most difficult to treat due to the absence of hormone/growth factor receptors.1 2 Metastatic TNBC (mTNBC) is particularly challenging, given the limited efficacy and duration of response to chemotherapy.3 The repertoire of therapeutic options for mTNBC patients continues to increase with chemotherapeutic and immuno oncology based treatments and now includes sacituzumab govitecan, a novel antibody-chemotherapy conjugate.4MethodsHere we present a case study of a 40-year-old female who on biopsy of her left breast mass was diagnosed with TNBC. The patient underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy with weekly administration of paclitaxel and carboplatin followed by dose-dense doxorubicin with cyclophosphamide. Following one-month, the patient underwent bilateral mastectomy, showing pathological staging ypT2 pN0. The patient underwent periodic radiological imaging along with the assessment of circulating tumor DNA in blood using a personalized and tumor-informed multiplex PCR, next-generation sequencing assay (Signatera bespoke, mPCR NGS assay) to identify the minimal residual disease (MRD) and treatment response.ResultsAfter surgery, MRD assessment revealed ctDNA positive status (0.41 MTM/mL) prompting PET/CT scan that revealed liver metastasis. Continued ctDNA monitoring showed continuous increase in ctDNA concentration (287.09 MTM/mL). Separate analyses indicated MSI-high and PD-L1 positive tumor status, leading to the initiation of the first line of therapy (nab-paclitaxel and Atezolizumab), which resulted in ctDNA decline (39.62 MTM/ml). Weekly ctDNA monitoring noted a rapid increase a month later (178 MTM/ml to 833.69 MTM/ml) within a 2-week interval, which corresponded to disease progression on imaging. Given non-responsiveness with the first-line therapy, the patient was initiated with sacituzumab govitecan. Following this, a rapid decline in the ctDNA level was observed within a week (364.07 MTM/mL) with a downward trend to 73.03 MTM/ml by two weeks. An interval PET/CT scan showed a mixed response. Continued monitoring of ctDNA demonstrated ctDNA levels <5MTM/mL for a period of two months before serially rising again (to 89.27 MTM/ml). PET-CT ordered in response to increasing ctDNA levels confirmed progression involving hepatic and lung lesions. A new line of therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab was subsequently initiated.ConclusionsSerial monitoring of ctDNA enables early detection of therapy resistance and provides a rationale for treatment change/optimization/discontinuation as compared to periodic imaging that is currently the standard of care. The ease and convenience of using ctDNA-based testing as frequently as every week clearly identified earlier non-responsiveness to IO and also identified earlier acquired resistance to antibody-drug conjugate, enabling a prompt switch to alternative therapy.Ethics ApprovalN/AConsentN/AReferencesAnders C, Carey LA. Understanding and treating triple-negative breast cancer. Oncology (Williston Park). 2008;22(11):1233–1243.Mehanna J, Haddad FG, Eid R, Lambertini M, Kourie HR. Triple-negative breast cancer: current perspective on the evolving therapeutic landscape. Int J Womens Health2019;11:431–437. Published 2019 Jul 31. doi:10.2147/IJWH.S178349Treatment of Triple-negative Breast Cancer. American Cancer Society Website. Updated 2020. Accessed August 10, 2020. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/breast-cancer/treatment/treatment-of-triple-negative.htmlBardia A, Mayer IA, Vahdat LT, et al. Sacituzumab govitecan-hziy in refractory metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2019;380(8):741–751. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1814213


2019 ◽  
Vol Volume 11 ◽  
pp. 10427-10433 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minetta C Liu ◽  
Wolfgang Janni ◽  
Vassilis Georgoulias ◽  
Denise A Yardley ◽  
Nadia Harbeck ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document