Background

In this study, we observe the patterns initial palliative treatment for premenopausal patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative MBC and determine if non-adherence to clinical guidelines are associated with worse clinical outcomes in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the South Korean population.

Methods

A retrospective review was performed for premenopausal patients diagnosed with HR-positive MBC between October 1997 and May 2016 who received palliative systemic treatments at a large tertiary medical center. Survival outcomes were analyzed according to the palliative treatment received prior to disease progression.

Results

The review identified a total of 272 premenopausal patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative MBC. The patients were young (median age, 39 years), as per the premenopausal criteria. Chemotherapy alone was first-line palliative treatment in 78 patients, with endocrine therapy as the initial treatment in 133 patients. In 57 patients, the first line treatment was switched from chemotherapy to endocrine treatment prior to any disease progression. Both progression free survival and overall survival were significantly longer for chemotherapy-endocrine therapy (median PFS 18.2 months and OS 85.2 months) than for chemotherapy-alone (median PFS 12.6 months and OS 45.5 months) or endocrine therapy-alone (median PFS 7.0 months and OS 57.3 months) (all P values < 0.01). In multivariate analysis, chemotherapy-endocrine therapy was an independent predictive value for improved PFS and OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.33, 95% CI 0.20-0.52, P < 0.001; HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19-0.73, P = 0.004).

Conclusions

In our study population, chemotherapy alone was not objectively inferior to endocrine therapy as the initial palliative treatment. In addition, chemotherapy followed by endocrine therapy was associated with objective higher response rate than endocrine therapy alone. Further studies should explore the relationship between non-adherent treatment patterns and patient outcomes across the largely premenopausal breast cancer populations across Asian countries.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Prof. Yeon Hee Park

Funding

None

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background

Results from the primary analysis of the open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study BOLERO-4 demonstrated that first-line (1L) EVE + LET was an effective combination with a manageable safety profile in postmenopausal patients with ER+ HER2− ABC. Here, we present results from a predefined subgroup analysis of 1L progression-free survival (PFS) and safety by race (Asian versus non-Asian).

Methods

Patients received EVE 10 mg/day + LET 2.5 mg/day until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. 1L PFS per local investigator assessment was analyzed overall on the full analysis set (FAS; primary endpoint) and by patient subgroup. This study was not designed to use the SWISH protocol for prevention for stomatitis.

Results

At the data cutoff (December 17, 2016), 44 Asian and 158 non-Asian (Caucasian 72%; Black 4%; Pacific Islander <1%; other 2%) patients had a median PFS and 18- and 24-month KM estimated PFS rates similar to the FAS (Table). In general, all grade adverse events (AEs), regardless of causality or severity, were more common among Asian patients versus non-Asians and the overall population, particularly for stomatitis, weight decreased, anemia, hyperglycemia, decreased appetite, rash and nasopharyngitis. AEs were mostly grade 1–2 in severity and anemia was the most common grade 3–4 AE among both Asian (20%) and non-Asian (8%) patients.Table: 92O

Conclusions

Results from this predefined subgroup analysis were consistent with previously reported BOLERO-4 data, showing that 1L EVE + LET offers clinical benefits irrespective of patient race, with no new safety signals reported. Although some AEs were more common among Asian patients versus non-Asians and the overall population, they were mostly grade 1–2 in severity.

Clinical trial identification

NCT01698918 EudraCT Number (EU number) 2012-003065-17

Legal entity responsible for the study

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation

Funding

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation

Disclosure

T. Toyama: Research funding from Eisai, Chugai, Novartis, Nippon Kayaku, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Daiichi-Sankyo, Takeda, J. Jeong: Research funding from Dong-A, Boryung, LG Life Sciences, Antigen; Honoraria from Roche, Alvogen, Novartis, Pfizer, Covidien, V. Sriuranpong: Honoraria from Novartis, Roche, MSD, Sanofi, Eisai, AstraZeneca, H. Iwase: Research funding from AstraZeneca, Chugai-Roche, Taiho, Daiichi-Sankyo, Novartis, Pfizer, Kyowa Hakko-Kirin, Eisai; Honoraria from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Takeda, Chugai-Roche. C. Arce: Novartis employee, A. Ridolfi: Novartis Pharma SAS employee, C. Lin: Novartis employee and stocks, M. Royce: Research funding from Novartis; Consultant for Celltrion, BCI; Honoraria from Novartis, Syndax, F. Cardoso: Research funding for clinical trials by institution; consultant for Astellas/Medivation, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, GE Oncology, Genentech, GSK, MacroGenics, Merck, Merus BV, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre-Fabre, Roche, Sanofi, Teva

All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background

Breast cancer has become the most common cancer in Thai women since 2005. Unfortunately two thirds of the patients were diagnosed at advanced breast cancer (ABC) stage. Furthermore, most of these women were under the Universal Coverage by the government which does not provide sufficient coverage for certain critical medical treatments for ABC patients. The cost of treatments is even more of a pressing issue in Thailand. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of exemestane (EXE), a steroidal aromatase inhibitor (SAI), as treatment therapy following adjuvant non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) for hormonal responsive ABC in Thailand.

Methods

A Markov model was used to estimate the relevant costs and health outcomes over the patients' lifetimes using a social cost and benefit perspective. All future costs and outcomes were discounted at a rate of 3% per annum. The efficacy and cost of EXE and chemotherapy were based on a clinical trial that included a total of 18 post-menopausal hormonal responsive ABC patients. Utility values were derived directly from all patients using EQ-5D. Primary outcomes of interest were lifetime costs, quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in US ($) per QALY gained. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted to investigate the effect of parameter uncertainty.

Results

In base case analysis, the EXE group had better clinical outcomes and lower lifetime costs. The incremental cost per QALY gained was US $-2,747 per QALY. The acceptability curve showed that the probability of EXE being cost-effective was 97% at the willingness to pay of 1 time of Thai Gross National Income per capita (GNI per capita), approximately US $4,673 per QALY gained.

Conclusions

At a social cost of paying 1 GNI per capita, EXE is highly effective and cost-saving regimen for the first-line treatment of post-menopausal ABC with hormone positive receptor in Thailand. This study provides key relevant information aiding policy makers to make informed decision making regarding resource allocation to include EXE into reimbursement plan.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University

Funding

None

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background

Varlitinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor of the ErbB family (EGFR, HER2 and HER4), showed anti-tumor activity in trastuzumab-resistant models and in patients with trastuzumab-resistant, chemotherapy-refractory MBC in a phase 1 study. This study compared the efficacy and safety of varlitinib plus capecitabine (VC) versus lapatinib plus capecitabine (LC) in HER2⁺ MBC patients who failed prior trastuzumab therapy.

Methods

The primary objective was to assess percentage change in tumor size at week 12. Objective response rate (ORR), safety and drug exposure were also assessed. Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in primary analysis. Sensitivity analysis for primary objective and ORR were performed in patients who remained on study for more than 30 days.

Results

From Dec 2014 to Aug 2016, 24 patients were randomized to the VC arm (400mg BID) and 26 to the LC arm (1250mg QD) in 16 sites in 6 countries. Percentage of tumor size reduction was numerically higher in VC than LC (-31.00% vs. -19.37%, one-sided p = 0.132). ORR in the VC arm (40.9%) was similar to LC arm (45.5%), p = 1.000. Sensitivity analysis showed numerically superior ORR and statistically significant higher reduction of tumor size in VC compared to LC (60% vs. 45.5%, p = 0.508; mean, -34.6% vs.-19.4%, one-sided p = 0.075) All patients had at least 1 AE. Severe AE(s) were observed in 13 patients (54.2%) in the VC arm and 11(42.3%) in the LC arm. The most common AE was diarrhea (66.7%) in the VC arm and were diarrhea and palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (both 50%) in the LC arm. Median intended exposure and percentage of intended dose were lower in the VC arm (115.5 days, 74.6%) indicating more frequent dose interruption, dose reduction and treatment discontinuation than the LC arm (135.0 days, 99.05%).

Conclusions

Sensitivity analysis showed greater tumor size reduction and improved ORR for VC arm when the combination was administrated for more than 30 days. Reduced intended exposure and dose intensity for the VC arm suggests a dose reduction of varlitinib may be considered when combined with capecitabine for the 2nd line treatment of HER2⁺ MBC.

Clinical trial identification

NCT02338245.

Legal entity responsible for the study

ASLAN pharmaceuticals

Funding

ASLAN pharmaceuticals

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background

MONARCH 2 demonstrated that the addition of abemaciclib, a CDK4 & 6 inhibitor dosed on a continuous schedule, to fulvestrant (F) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) compared to placebo (P) plus F (PFS hazard ratio [HR], 0.553, P<.0000001; ORR in measurable disease 48.1% vs 21.3%, P<.001) in women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer who had progressed on endocrine therapy (ET).

Methods

MONARCH 2 is a Phase 3 double-blind trial of abemaciclib + F vs P + F in women with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer. Women who progressed on (neo)adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET), ≤12 m from end of adjuvant ET, or on first line ET for MBC and who had not received chemotherapy for metastatic disease were eligible; pre/perimenopausal pts received a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive abemaciclib at 150 mg Q12H (or 200 mg prior to amendment) or P plus F (500 mg, per label) and stratified by metastatic site (visceral, bone only, or other) and resistance to prior ET (primary vs secondary). We present the primary objective of investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary efficacy and safety endpoints in Asian pts.

Results

214 Asian pts were randomized to abemaciclib plus F (N = 149) and to P plus F (N = 65). In the ITT population, 122 PFS events were observed with a median PFS of 22.8 m for abemaciclib plus F and 11.6 m for P + F (HR: 0.515; 95% CI: 0.359, 0.740, P<.001 by log-rank test). In pts with measurable disease (n = 170, 79.4%), the ORR was significantly higher in abemaciclib plus F 48% (2.4% complete response [CR]) vs 23.4% (0% CR) for P plus F, P=.004. The most frequent adverse events for abemaciclib plus F vs P plus F were diarrhea (90.5% vs 20.0%), neutropenia (68.2% vs 4.6%), nausea (37.8% vs 16.9%), and fatigue (53.8% vs 30.9%).

Conclusions

Abemaciclib + F was an effective treatment in Asian pts with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer who progressed on endocrine therapy with significantly improved PFS and ORR. These findings were consistent with the intent-to-treat population in MONARCH 2.

Clinical trial identification

NCT02107703.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Eli Lilly and Company

Funding

Eli Lilly and Company

Disclosure

H. Iwata: Honoraria: Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eisai, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo, Taiho Pharmaceutical. Research funding: GSK, Daiichi Sankyo, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Nippon Kayaku, Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Eisai, Eli Lilly, and MSD. J.H. Sohn: Research Funding: AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Genentech, Pfizer, MSD Oncology, N. Masuda: Honoraria: Chugai Pharma, AstraZeneca Research Funding: Chugai Pharma (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Kyowa-Kirin (Inst), MSD Oncology (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Eli Lilly (Inst), Y. Lin, S. Sakaguchi, N. Bourayou: Employee of Eli Lilly and Company, A. Llombart: Honoraria: Roche, Novartis, Pfizer Consulting or Advisory Role: Roche, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly Research Funding: Pfizer, Roche, G. Sledge: Leadership: Syndax Stock or Other Ownership: Syndax Honoraria: Symphogen Consulting or Advisory Role: Symphogen, Coherus Biosciences, Radius Health, Peregrine Pharmaceuticals, Taiho Pharmaceutical Research Funding: Roche (Inst)

All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background

The subanalysis of prospective randomized trials of E suggested E suppressed development of new lesion [NL] and it led to improvement of overall survival (Twelves, BCRT, 2015), however, behaviors of disease in real-world patients (pts) have not been well discussed.

Methods

Outcomes of HER2-MBC pts who received E at our institute from November 2011 to present were reviewed. Statistical analyses were performed using the chi-square test, the Kaplan-Meyer method.

Results

We identified total 128 (90 ER+, 38 ER-) HER2-MBC who received E at least 2 cycles in our institute. Median age at the initiation of E were as follows; overall, 58 (range 30-77); ER+, 60 (30-77); ER- 55.5 (32-71). Median number of regimens prior to E were as follows; overall, 1 (range 0-8); ER+, 1 (0-6); ER-, 2 (0-8). While all pts had a history of anthracycline and/or taxane in ER- subset, Number of involved organ were 2 (1-5) in overall and both subsets and no significant difference was seen in the pattern of visceral involvement. Most of (122/128, 95.5%) the pts was discontinued E therapy, and median time-to-treatment failure (TTF) were as follows; overall, 125.0 days (95% confidence interval [CI] 43.0-328.0); ER+, 134.0 days (95%CI 62.0-314.0); ER-, 104.0 (95%CI 42.0-230.0). Reasons for the discontinuation of E were as follows; progression of known lesion(s), 77 (63.1%); development of NL, 27 (22.1%), decrease of performance status, 11 (9.0%); intolerable toxicity, 6 (4.9%); other, 1 (0.9%). In ER- subset, development of NL was more frequently seen compared to ER+ subset, however, it was not statistically significant. (7/20 vs 10/67, P = 0.12, chi-square). Multivariate cox regression analyses disclosed some risk factors for TTF as follows; liver metastasis, hazard ratio [HR] 0.39, P < 0.05; soft tissue metastasis, HR 0.53, P < 0.05; ≥3 involved organs, HR 2.99, P < 0.05; taxane for early breast cancer, HR 2.50, P < 0.05. When limited to ER+ pts who received E as 2nd-line therapy (N = 40), only one (2.5%) pt developed NL and there was a positive relationship between TTF and OS after E (Spearman's roh=0.64, p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Our single institutional review with some limitations disclosed eribulin monotherapy revealed equivalent effect shown in prospective studies.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Junichiro Watanabe

Funding

None

Disclosure

J. Watanabe: Advisory board member of Eisai Co., Ltd. Honoraria from Eisai Co., Ltd.

Background

Differential efficacy of newly registered therapies in subgroups of metastatic breast cancer (mBC) is an important consideration for their subsequent use in clinical practice. In a systematic literature review, we evaluated differences in outcome regarding progression free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS) and visceral versus non-visceral disease. The impact of HER2- and hormone receptor-status was also considered.

Methods

A systematic literature search (6362 hits) in the meta-Database PubMed was performed for the last 20 years. 257 studies (n = 126,291) were included for further analysis. 69 studies had published data for visceral vs non visceral disease including phase III trials. Out of these 69 studies we selected n = 16 studies (n = 13,083) which looked at the endpoints mentioned above. In order to achieve comparability, we extracted the information of hazard ratios (HR), confidence intervals (CI) and times in weeks (if available) for PFS, TTP, OS of the entire study population, which was divided into three groups: HER2-positive, HER2-negative, unknown HER2 status.

Results

No statistically significant difference in treatment response was found in mBC patients looking at HRs and CIs. Relevant, yet not statistically significant differences were found in the specific response of visceral metastases to modern combination therapies, especially in HER2-positive breast cancer: There was a benefit regarding OS using lapatinib combined with trastuzumab or trastuzumab and docetaxel combined with pertuzumab. Additionally, in two chemotherapy trials, there was a numerical difference between therapy response in visceral vs. non-visceral metastases regarding PFS in the unknown HER2 group, and regarding OS in the HER2 negative group.

Conclusions

In the subgroup analyses, we did not find any significant differences in response rates for visceral vs. non-visceral metastasis. There seems to be a beneficial effect of combination therapies regarding OS in visceral disease. At the present time, metastasis localization should not be used as a predictive marker for choice of systemic therapy in mBC.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Tahir Mehmood

Funding

None

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background

Eribulin is a non-taxane microtubule dynamics inhibitor that has been proven to prolong overall survival in patients with breast cancer. S-1, an oral anticancer drug, has demonstrated non-inferiority in overall survival (OS) to taxane as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We previouly reported phase I trial results for the combination of these drugs with an overall response rate of 41.7% and median progression free survival (PFS) of 7.6 months. George W et.al (J Clin Oncol 2003) suggested that estrogen receptor negativity, the presence of three or more sites of disease, a short disease-free interval (1 to 24 months), and prior systemic therapy all predicted for impaired overall survival in their multivariate analysis. Considering these factors, we conducted a multicenter phase II study of this combination to further evaluate its safety and efficacy.

Background

Eribulin is a non-taxane microtubule dynamics inhibitor that has been proven to prolong overall survival in patients with advanced and recurrent breast cancer .S-1, an oral anticancer drug, composed of tegafur, gimestat and otastat potassium, has demonstrated non-inferiority in overall survival (OS) to taxane as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC).We previouly reported phase I trial results for the combination of these drugs with an overall response rate of 41.7% and median progression free survival (PFS) of 7.6 months. George W et.al (J Clin Oncol 2003) suggested that estrogen receptor negativity, the presence of three or more sites of disease, a short disease-free interval (1 to 24 months), and prior systemic therapy all predicted for impaired overall survival in their multivariate analysis. Considering these factors, we conducted a multicenter phase II study of this combination to further evaluate its safety and efficacy.

Methods

Recurrent or advanced breast cancer patients previously treated with anthracycline or taxanes were enrolled from September 2014 to May 2016. Patients received Eribulin 1.4 mg/m² day1 and day8 intravenously and S-1 50 mg/m² from day1 to day14 orally. Primary objective was to investigate safety and efficacy. Secondary objectives were to evaluate PFS, OS and clinical benefit rate (CBR) using Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST).

Results

Thirty-two patients were enrolled this trial and 30 patients were evaluable. Objective response rate was 36.7%. There were 3 [10%] complete responses, 8 [26.7%] partial responses and 11 [36.7%] stable diseases. This combination therapy had a manageable safety profiles consistent with the known adverse effects of both drugs. The most common grade3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (22 [73.3%] of 32 patients), leukopenia (13 [43.3%] of 32 patients), febrile neutropenia (3 [9.4%] of 32 patients) and peripheral neuropathy (4 [12.5%] of 32 patients). CBR was 46.7%. The median overall survival and the median PFS was not reached.

Conclusions

We showed tolerability and clinical activity in this combination therapy in a subset of patients with poor prognosis. Eribulin in combination with S-1 may represent a promising treatment option for advanced or recurrent breast cancer patients.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Eisai

Funding

Eisai

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background

Recently several new chemotherapeutic agents have been developed and indicated for treatment of recurrent breast cancer. One of them, eribulin have improved overall survival (OS) in EMBRACE trials. On the other hand, bevacizumab has improved progression-free survival (PFS) in several clinical studies, but not extended OS in them. And there are few reports estimating these agents’ effects on OS and PFS of advanced or recurrent breast cancer patients in a real world setting.

Methods

Recurrent breast cancer patients who received chemotherapies in Toyama Breast Cancer Research Group (TBCRG) group institutes from January 2013 to March 2015 were reviewed. Kaplan-Meier method was utilized to estimate OS or PFS, and log-rank test was used to compare OS or PFS. Univariate and multivariate analyses were preformed to find significant factor(s) concerning OS.

Results

Of 208 patients who received chemotherapies in the period mentioned, there were 157 patients who received chemotherapies using both or either of eribulin (Eri), and bevacizumab (Bev). Median age of each group using Eri/Bev were 52.4/54.6. Disease status of Eri/Bev were as follows; 68.8%/79.0% ER positive, 18.8%/11.3% HER2 positive. Metastasis of each group using Eri/Bev were observed at; 51.0%/55.2% bones, 7.3%/8.1% CNS, 56.3%/47.2% lung, and 33.3%/49.6% liver. Response rates and PFS from the starting period of Eri/Bev were 21%/75%, and 387days/297days. Multivariate COX regression analysis disclosed negative HER2 status in Eri group, and liver involvement in Bev group influenced the response rates significantly. Earlier administration of Eri shows better survival durations from primary chemotherapies (1470 days), comparison with those of Bev (1076 days). Response rate/disease control rate of pre-line chemotherapies in Eri group were 32%/57%, and not significantly diffierent from 29%/65% in Bev group, but those of post-line chemotherapies were 21%/63% in Eri group and 6%/28% in Bev group.

Conclusions

According to our retrospective observation analyses of group data, eribulin did not reduce the effects of subsequent chemotherapies, and improved OS of advanced or recurrent breast cancer patients. We have to reassess the value of new chemotherapeutic agents continuously.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background

In Asia, efficient metastatic breast cancer (mBC) diagnosis, treatment and care is hindered by cultural beliefs and the stigmatization of breast cancer (BC). Despite increasing recognition and efforts from policymakers, advocacy groups and the wider healthcare community, there is urgent need for targeted action and stakeholder collaboration to improve patient outcomes.

Methods

A comprehensive analysis of National Cancer Control Plans (NCCPs), policies and programs was conducted in Japan and South Korea, two developed Asian healthcare systems. Policy components were aligned to the BC/mBC patient journey, and evaluated using standardized criteria on adoption of NCCP goals, and BC/mBC policies and programs. Advocacy initiatives were identified in the policy analysis in Japan and South Korea and through an advocacy promising practice implemented in China.

Results

There has been considerable BC/mBC policy development in Asia but gaps persist across all areas of the patient journey. The analysis finds that cultural beliefs act as barriers to diagnosis and treatment, and deter policy development. For instance, BC/mBC stigmatization is not efficiently tackled due to low levels of trained primary care healthcare professionals (HCPs). This deficiency is also reflected in limited patient awareness and disease prevention, inefficient care coordination, disproportionate emphasis on surgery versus treatment, and use of complementary and alternative medicines. Similarly, access to palliative care and rehabilitative support remain important prevalent needs. Advocacy efforts identified in Japan, South Korea and China sought to fill policy gaps. In China, a model aimed at strengthening primary HCPs through a culturally-adapted BC education toolkit showed promising results for replication in other settings.

Conclusions

Engaging with stakeholders across the patient journey is critical to address cultural barriers and unmet needs of BC/mBC patients. Policy initiatives and promising practices in this research exemplify successful multi-stakeholder engagement to inform further advocacy and policy development.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Susan G. Komen; Pfizer, Inc.

Funding

Pfizer, Inc.

Disclosure

F. Cardoso: Consultant: Astellas/Medivation AstraZeneca Celgene Daiichi-Sankyo Eisai GE Oncology Genentech GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Macrogenics Merck-Sharp Merus BV Mylan Novartis Pfizer Pierre-Fabre Roche Sanofi Teva. M. Thrift-Perry, K. Faircloth: Pfizer, Inc. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background

Palbociclib has been approved by the US FDA since 2015 yet safety and efficacy data among Asian patients is limited. This study reports the use of this drug in ER-positive HER2-negative MBC in Hong Kong as real world practice.

Methods

The demographic data, treatment response, and toxicity profile of patients received palbociclib were collected in a prospectively maintained database. Patients were from both the public and private sectors. The study is supported by the Hong Kong Breast Cancer Foundation.

Results

Fifty-four patients who have received palbociclib for the first time were recruited in the database. The median age was 51 year (range 34-81) and all patients were ethnic Chinese. All were post-menopausal by natural state (67%) or by ovarian suppression. Over half (55%) obtained palbociclib from the name-patient program prior to the launch of the drug in Hong Kong in Jan 2017. The proportion of first line use was 30% prior to- and 36% after the official launch of palbociclib. The partner endocrine therapy (ET) was aromatase inhibitor (39% letrozole, 11% exemestane) or fulvestrant (50%). Except for 4 patients, the majority (93%) were started on the standard dose of 125 mg/day. Of those started on 125 mg/day, 43% developed Gd 3 neutropenia, and 7% had Gd 4 neutropenia during the first cycle; 31% had dose reduction to 100 mg/day on second cycle. Other adverse events (AEs) included anemia (4%), thrombocytopenia (9%), stomatitis (5%), hand-foot syndrome (4%), fatigue (4%), and low appetite (4%). All these were Gd 1-2. No patient had neutropenic fever. Response assessment was available in 37 cases. The disease control rate was 70%. Many responded patients had visceral disease (54%) and were heavily pretreated (chemotherapy 1 line 15%, > =2 lines 35%; ET > =2 lines 27%; mTOR inhibitor 12%).

Conclusions

This is the first real world data reporting the preliminary efficacy and AEs of palbociclib among ER-positive HER2-negative MBC patients from Hong Kong. Palbociclib was well tolerated. The experience is consistent with published literature of Palbociclib. The use of palbociclib in Hong Kong is often in the second or later line setting and the cause remains to be elucidated.

Clinical trial identification

Not applicable

Legal entity responsible for the study

N/A

Funding

Pfizer

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background

Postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) has been strongly considered for patients with 1-3 positive axillary nodes (ALNs). In addition, the indications for PMRT are expanding to patients with negative ALNs but have multiple high-risk recurrence factors. However, For patients with isolated tumor cells. We aimed to determine the effects of PMRT on survival of patients with ITCs or ALNs micrometastases of breast cancer.

Methods

We identified patients with ITCs or ALNs micrometastases after mastectomy from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 2004 to 2014. Overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific mortality (BCSM) were compared among patients received PMRT or not, using propensity score-matched analyses. Cox proportional hazards models and competing-risk models were performed in OS and BCSM analyses, respectively.

Results

We identified 11,622 eligible cases. PMRT was administered to 1,728 patients. Treatment was less frequent among patients who were older, patients with high-income, and patients with right-side tumor. OS at 5 years and 10 years were 88.1% and 74.2% in PMRT group, and were 87.8% and 77.3% in non-PMRT group, respectively. Five-year and 10-year cumulative BCSM rate were 6.4% and 12.3% in PMRT group, and were 6.6% and 14.1% in non-PMRT group, respectively. OS and BCSM were unaffected by PMRT after adjusting for multiple confounders (OS, hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.16; BCSM, subhazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.67-1.18).

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the largest study to date of the effect of radiotherapy on survival in breast cancer with ITCs or ALN micrometastases. In this population-based study, we do not find survival benefit of PMRT on patients with ITCs or ALN micrometastases.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center

Funding

None

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.