Purpose This phase III study evaluated ribociclib plus fulvestrant in patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer who were ...treatment naïve or had received up to one line of prior endocrine therapy in the advanced setting. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to ribociclib plus fulvestrant or placebo plus fulvestrant. The primary end point was locally assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, overall response rate, and safety. Results A total of 484 postmenopausal women were randomly assigned to ribociclib plus fulvestrant, and 242 were assigned to placebo plus fulvestrant. Median progression-free survival was significantly improved with ribociclib plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant: 20.5 months (95% CI, 18.5 to 23.5 months) versus 12.8 months (95% CI, 10.9 to 16.3 months), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.593; 95% CI, 0.480 to 0.732; P < .001). Consistent treatment effects were observed in patients who were treatment naïve in the advanced setting (hazard ratio, 0.577; 95% CI, 0.415 to 0.802), as well as in patients who had received up to one line of prior endocrine therapy for advanced disease (hazard ratio, 0.565; 95% CI, 0.428 to 0.744). Among patients with measurable disease, the overall response rate was 40.9% for the ribociclib plus fulvestrant arm and 28.7% for placebo plus fulvestrant. Grade 3 adverse events reported in ≥ 10% of patients in either arm (ribociclib plus fulvestrant v placebo plus fulvestrant) were neutropenia (46.6% v 0%) and leukopenia (13.5% v 0%); the only grade 4 event reported in ≥ 5% of patients was neutropenia (6.8% v 0%). Conclusion Ribociclib plus fulvestrant might represent a new first- or second-line treatment option in hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer.
Among women with advanced ovarian cancer with a
BRCA
mutation who had a response after platinum-based therapy, the median progression-free survival was approximately 3 years longer with the use of ...olaparib maintenance therapy for 2 years than with placebo.
We evaluated the effectiveness of a low-intensity, home-based physical activity program (Onco-Move) and a moderate- to high-intensity, combined supervised resistance and aerobic exercise program ...(OnTrack) versus usual care (UC) in maintaining or enhancing physical fitness, minimizing fatigue, enhancing health-related quality of life, and optimizing chemotherapy completion rates in patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.
We randomly assigned patients who were scheduled to undergo adjuvant chemotherapy (N = 230) to Onco-Move, OnTrack, or UC. Performance-based and self-reported outcomes were assessed before random assignment, at the end of chemotherapy, and at the 6-month follow-up. We used generalized estimating equations to compare the groups over time.
Onco-Move and OnTrack resulted in less decline in cardiorespiratory fitness (P < .001), better physical functioning (P ≤ .001), less nausea and vomiting (P = .029 and .031, respectively) and less pain (P = .003 and .011, respectively) compared with UC. OnTrack also resulted in better outcomes for muscle strength (P = .002) and physical fatigue (P < .001). At the 6-month follow-up, most outcomes returned to baseline levels for all three groups. A smaller percentage of participants in OnTrack required chemotherapy dose adjustments than those in the UC or Onco-Move groups (P = .002). Both intervention groups returned earlier (P = .012), as well as for more hours per week (P = .014), to work than the control group.
A supervised, moderate- to high-intensity, combined resistance and aerobic exercise program is most effective for patients with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy. A home-based, low-intensity physical activity program represents a viable alternative for women who are unable or unwilling to follow the higher intensity program.
Summary Background The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib has shown antitumour activity in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent, high-grade serous ovarian cancer with or without ...BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of olaparib in combination with chemotherapy, followed by olaparib maintenance monotherapy, versus chemotherapy alone in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent, high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Methods In this randomised, open-label, phase 2 study, adult patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent, high-grade serous ovarian cancer who had received up to three previous courses of platinum-based chemotherapy and who were progression free for at least 6 months before randomisation received either olaparib (200 mg capsules twice daily, administered orally on days 1–10 of each 21-day cycle) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 , administered intravenously on day 1) and carboplatin (area under the curve AUC 4 mg/mL per min, according to the Calvert formula, administered intravenously on day 1), then olaparib monotherapy (400 mg capsules twice daily, given continuously) until progression (the olaparib plus chemotherapy group), or paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 on day 1) and carboplatin (AUC 6 mg/mL per min on day 1) then no further treatment (the chemotherapy alone group). Randomisation was done by an interactive voice response system, stratified by number of previous platinum-containing regimens received and time to disease progression after the previous platinum regimen. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1, analysed by intention to treat. Prespecified exploratory analyses included efficacy by BRCA mutation status, assessed retrospectively. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01081951 , and has been completed. Findings Between Feb 12 and July 30, 2010, 173 patients at 43 investigational sites in 12 countries were enrolled into the study, of whom 162 were eligible and were randomly assigned to the two treatment groups (81 to the olaparib plus chemotherapy group and 81 to the chemotherapy alone group). Of these randomised patients, 156 were treated in the combination phase (81 in the olaparib plus chemotherapy group and 75 in the chemotherapy alone group) and 121 continued to the maintenance or no further treatment phase (66 in the olaparib plus chemotherapy group and 55 in the chemotherapy alone group). BRCA mutation status was known for 107 patients (either at baseline or determined retrospectively): 41 (38%) of 107 had a BRCA mutation (20 in the olaparib plus chemotherapy group and 21 in the chemotherapy alone group). Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the olaparib plus chemotherapy group (median 12·2 months 95% CI 9·7–15·0) than in the chemotherapy alone group (median 9·6 months 95% CI 9·1–9·7) (HR 0·51 95% CI 0·34–0·77; p=0·0012), especially in patients with BRCA mutations (HR 0·21 0·08–0·55; p=0·0015). In the combination phase, adverse events that were reported at least 10% more frequently with olaparib plus chemotherapy than with chemotherapy alone were alopecia (60 74% of 81 vs 44 59% of 75), nausea (56 69% vs 43 57%), neutropenia (40 49% vs 29 39%), diarrhoea (34 42% vs 20 27%), headache (27 33% vs seven 9%), peripheral neuropathy (25 31% vs 14 19%), and dyspepsia (21 26% vs 9 12%); most were of mild-to-moderate intensity. The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events during the combination phase were neutropenia (in 35 43% of 81 patients in the olaparib plus chemotherapy group vs 26 35% of 75 in the chemotherapy alone group) and anaemia (seven 9% vs five 7%). Serious adverse events were reported in 12 (15%) of 81 patients in the olaparib plus chemotherapy group and 16 of 75 (21%) patients in the chemotherapy alone group. Interpretation Olaparib plus paclitaxel and carboplatin followed by maintenance monotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin alone, with the greatest clinical benefit in BRCA -mutated patients, and had an acceptable and manageable tolerability profile. Funding AstraZeneca.
There is a high unmet need for treatment regimens that increase the chance of long-term remission and possibly cure for women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. In the primary analysis of ...SOLO1/GOG 3004, the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo in patients with a BRCA mutation; median progression-free survival was not reached. Here, we report an updated, post-hoc analysis of progression-free survival from SOLO1, after 5 years of follow-up.
SOLO1 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, done across 118 centres in 15 countries, that enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1 and with BRCA-mutated, newly diagnosed, advanced, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer with a complete or partial clinical response after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) via a web-based or interactive voice-response system to receive olaparib (300 mg twice daily) or placebo tablets orally as maintenance monotherapy for up to 2 years; randomisation was by blocks and was stratified according to clinical response after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients, treatment providers, and data assessors were masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Efficacy is reported in the intention-to-treat population and safety in patients who received at least one dose of treatment. The data cutoff for this updated, post-hoc analysis was March 5, 2020. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01844986) and is ongoing but closed to new participants.
Between Sept 3, 2013, and March 6, 2015, 260 patients were randomly assigned to olaparib and 131 to placebo. The median treatment duration was 24·6 months (IQR 11·2–24·9) in the olaparib group and 13·9 months (8·0–24·8) in the placebo group; median follow-up was 4·8 years (2·8–5·3) in the olaparib group and 5·0 years (2·6–5·3) in the placebo group. In this post-hoc analysis, median progression-free survival was 56·0 months (95% CI 41·9–not reached) with olaparib versus 13·8 months (11·1–18·2) with placebo (hazard ratio 0·33 95% CI 0·25–0·43). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were anaemia (57 22% of 260 patients receiving olaparib vs two 2% of 130 receiving placebo) and neutropenia (22 8% vs six 5%), and serious adverse events occurred in 55 (21%) of 260 patients in the olaparib group and 17 (13%) of 130 in the placebo group. No treatment-related adverse events that occurred during study treatment or up to 30 days after discontinuation were reported as leading to death. No additional cases of myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukaemia were reported since the primary data cutoff, including after the 30-day safety follow-up period.
For patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation, after, to our knowledge, the longest follow-up for any randomised controlled trial of a PARP inhibitor in this setting, the benefit derived from 2 years' maintenance therapy with olaparib was sustained beyond the end of treatment, extending median progression-free survival past 4·5 years. These results support the use of maintenance olaparib as a standard of care in this setting.
AstraZeneca; Merck Sharpe & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.
An earlier report documented significant improvement in progression-free survival among patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with fulvestrant and a cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, ...ribociclib. With longer follow-up, it is clear that fulvestrant and ribociclib also prolong overall survival.
The addition of ribociclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, to the aromatase inhibitor letrozole in women with metastatic hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative breast cancer improved median ...overall survival by more than a year as compared with letrozole alone (63.9 months vs. 51.4 months). No new toxic effects were recognized.
In SOLO1/GOG 3004 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01844986), maintenance therapy with the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib provided a sustained progression-free survival benefit in ...patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a
and/or
(BRCA) mutation. We report overall survival (OS) after a 7-year follow-up, a clinically relevant time point and the longest follow-up for any poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor in the first-line setting.
This double-blind phase III trial randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation in clinical response to platinum-based chemotherapy to maintenance olaparib (n = 260) or placebo (n = 131) for up to 2 years. A prespecified descriptive analysis of OS, a secondary end point, was conducted after a 7-year follow-up.
The median duration of treatment was 24.6 months with olaparib and 13.9 months with placebo, and the median follow-up was 88.9 and 87.4 months, respectively. The hazard ratio for OS was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.40 to 0.76;
= .0004
< .0001 required to declare statistical significance). At 7 years, 67.0% of olaparib patients versus 46.5% of placebo patients were alive, and 45.3% versus 20.6%, respectively, were alive and had not received a first subsequent treatment (Kaplan-Meier estimates). The incidence of myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia remained low, and new primary malignancies remained balanced between treatment groups.
Results indicate a clinically meaningful, albeit not statistically significant according to prespecified criteria, improvement in OS with maintenance olaparib in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation and support the use of maintenance olaparib to achieve long-term remission in this setting; the potential for cure may also be enhanced. No new safety signals were observed during long-term follow-up.
Summary Background The best-known cause of intolerance to fluoropyrimidines is dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency, which can result from deleterious polymorphisms in the gene encoding ...DPD ( DPYD ), including DPYD *2A and c.2846A>T. Three other variants— DPYD c.1679T>G, c.1236G>A/HapB3, and c.1601G>A—have been associated with DPD deficiency, but no definitive evidence for the clinical validity of these variants is available. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the clinical validity of c.1679T>G, c.1236G>A/HapB3, and c.1601G>A as predictors of severe fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity. Methods We did a systematic review of the literature published before Dec 17, 2014, to identify cohort studies investigating associations between DPYD c.1679T>G, c.1236G>A/HapB3, and c.1601G>A and severe (grade ≥3) fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity in patients treated with fluoropyrimidines (fluorouracil, capecitabine, or tegafur-uracil as single agents, in combination with other anticancer drugs, or with radiotherapy). Individual patient data were retrieved and analysed in a multivariable analysis to obtain an adjusted relative risk (RR). Effect estimates were pooled by use of a random-effects meta-analysis. The threshold for significance was set at a p value of less than 0·0167 (Bonferroni correction). Findings 7365 patients from eight studies were included in the meta-analysis. DPYD c.1679T>G was significantly associated with fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity (adjusted RR 4·40, 95% CI 2·08–9·30, p<0·0001), as was c.1236G>A/HapB3 (1·59, 1·29–1·97, p<0·0001). The association between c.1601G>A and fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity was not significant (adjusted RR 1·52, 95% CI 0·86–2·70, p=0·15). Analysis of individual types of toxicity showed consistent associations of c.1679T>G and c.1236G>A/HapB3 with gastrointestinal toxicity (adjusted RR 5·72, 95% CI 1·40–23·33, p=0·015; and 2·04, 1·49–2·78, p<0·0001, respectively) and haematological toxicity (adjusted RR 9·76, 95% CI 3·03–31·48, p=0·00014; and 2·07, 1·17–3·68, p=0·013, respectively), but not with hand-foot syndrome. DPYD *2A and c.2846A>T were also significantly associated with severe fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity (adjusted RR 2·85, 95% CI 1·75–4·62, p<0·0001; and 3·02, 2·22–4·10, p<0·0001, respectively). Interpretation DPYD variants c.1679T>G and c.1236G>A/HapB3 are clinically relevant predictors of fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity. Upfront screening for these variants, in addition to the established variants DPYD *2A and c.2846A>T, is recommended to improve the safety of patients with cancer treated with fluoropyrimidines. Funding None.
PDF
