Standard first-line treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) is chemotherapy. However, outcomes are poor, and new treatment options are needed. In cohort B of the phase II ...KEYNOTE-086 study, we evaluated pembrolizumab as first-line therapy for patients with PD-L1-positive mTNBC.
Eligible patients had centrally confirmed mTNBC, no prior systemic anticancer therapy for metastatic disease, measurable disease at baseline per RECIST v1.1 by central review, no radiographic evidence of central nervous system metastases, and a tumor PD-L1 combined positive score ≥1. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 2 years. The primary end point was safety. Secondary end points included objective response rate, disease control rate (percentage of patients with complete or partial response or stable disease for ≥24 weeks), duration of response, progression-free survival and overall survival.
All 84 patients enrolled were women, and 73 (86.9%) received prior (neo)adjuvant therapy. Fifty-three (63.1%) patients had treatment-related adverse events (AEs), including 8 patients (9.5%) with grade 3 severity; no patients experienced grade 4 AEs or died because of treatment-related AEs. Four patients had a complete response and 14 had a partial response, for an objective response rate of 21.4% (95% CI 13.9–31.4). Of the 13 patients with stable disease, 2 had stable disease lasting ≥24 weeks, for a disease control rate of 23.8% (95% CI 15.9–34.0). At data cut-off, 8 of 18 (44.4%) responses were ongoing, and median duration of response was 10.4 months (range 4.2 to 19.2+). Median progression-free survival was 2.1 months (95% CI 2.0–2.2), and median overall survival was 18.0 months (95% CI 12.9–23.0).
Pembrolizumab monotherapy had a manageable safety profile and showed durable antitumor activity as first-line therapy for patients with PD-L1-positive mTNBC.
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02447003.
Treatment options for previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) are limited. In cohort A of the phase II KEYNOTE-086 study, we evaluated pembrolizumab as second or later ...line of treatment for patients with mTNBC.
Eligible patients had centrally confirmed mTNBC, ≥1 systemic therapy for metastatic disease, prior treatment with anthracycline and taxane in any disease setting, and progression on or after the most recent therapy. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 2 years. Primary end points were objective response rate in the total and PD-L1–positive populations, and safety. Secondary end points included duration of response, disease control rate (percentage of patients with complete or partial response or stable disease for ≥24 weeks), progression-free survival, and overall survival.
All enrolled patients (N = 170) were women, 61.8% had PD-L1–positive tumors, and 43.5% had received ≥3 previous lines of therapy for metastatic disease. ORR (95% CI) was 5.3% (2.7–9.9) in the total and 5.7% (2.4–12.2) in the PD-L1–positive populations. Disease control rate (95% CI) was 7.6% (4.4–12.7) and 9.5% (5.1–16.8), respectively. Median duration of response was not reached in the total (range, 1.2+–21.5+) and in the PD-L1–positive (range, 6.3–21.5+) populations. Median PFS was 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.9–2.0), and the 6-month rate was 14.9%. Median OS was 9.0 months (95% CI, 7.6–11.2), and the 6-month rate was 69.1%. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 103 (60.6%) patients, including 22 (12.9%) with grade 3 or 4 AEs. There were no deaths due to AEs.
Pembrolizumab monotherapy demonstrated durable antitumor activity in a subset of patients with previously treated mTNBC and had a manageable safety profile.
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02447003
Activation of the phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K) pathway via PIK3CA mutations occurs in 28%-46% of hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative (HER2−) ...advanced breast cancers (ABCs) and is associated with poor prognosis. The SOLAR-1 trial showed that the addition of alpelisib to fulvestrant treatment provided statistically significant and clinically meaningful progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in PIK3CA-mutated, HR+, HER2− ABC.
Men and postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2− ABC whose disease progressed on or after aromatase inhibitor (AI) were randomized 1 : 1 to receive alpelisib (300 mg/day) plus fulvestrant (500 mg every 28 days and once on day 15) or placebo plus fulvestrant. Overall survival (OS) in the PIK3CA-mutant cohort was evaluated by Kaplan–Meier methodology and a one-sided stratified log-rank test was carried out with an O'Brien–Fleming efficacy boundary of P ≤ 0.0161.
In the PIK3CA-mutated cohort (n = 341), median OS 95% confidence interval (CI) was 39.3 months (34.1-44.9) for alpelisib-fulvestrant and 31.4 months (26.8-41.3) for placebo-fulvestrant hazard ratio (HR) = 0.86 (95% CI, 0.64-1.15; P = 0.15). OS results did not cross the prespecified efficacy boundary. Median OS (95% CI) in patients with lung and/or liver metastases was 37.2 months (28.7-43.6) and 22.8 months (19.0-26.8) in the alpelisib-fulvestrant and placebo-fulvestrant arms, respectively HR = 0.68 (0.46-1.00). Median times to chemotherapy (95% CI) for the alpelisib-fulvestrant and placebo-fulvestrant arms were 23.3 months (15.2-28.4) and 14.8 months (10.5-22.6), respectively HR = 0.72 (0.54-0.95). No new safety signals were observed with longer follow-up.
Although the analysis did not cross the prespecified boundary for statistical significance, there was a 7.9-month numeric improvement in median OS when alpelisib was added to fulvestrant treatment of patients with PIK3CA-mutated, HR+, HER2− ABC. Overall, these results further support the statistically significant prolongation of PFS observed with alpelisib plus fulvestrant in this population, which has a poor prognosis due to a PIK3CA mutation.
NCT02437318.
•In SOLAR-1, the key secondary endpoint of OS was evaluated in patients with HR+, HER2−, PIK3CA-mutated ABC.•Adding alpelisib to fulvestrant numerically improved mOS by 7.9 months, though the result was not statistically significant.•OS was numerically improved in hard-to-treat disease, including a 14-month median improvement in those with lung/liver metastases.•Median time to first chemotherapy was delayed by 8.5 months with the addition of alpelisib to fulvestrant.•With longer follow-up the alpelisib plus fulvestrant safety profile was similar to prior reports with no new safety signals.
The BOLERO-2 study previously demonstrated that adding everolimus (EVE) to exemestane (EXE) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) by more than twofold in patients with ...hormone-receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative advanced breast cancer that recurred or progressed during/after treatment with nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors (NSAIs). The overall survival (OS) analysis is presented here.
BOLERO-2 is a phase III, double-blind, randomized international trial comparing EVE 10 mg/day plus EXE 25 mg/day versus placebo (PBO) + EXE 25 mg/day in postmenopausal women with HR+ advanced breast cancer with prior exposure to NSAIs. The primary end point was PFS by local investigator assessment; OS was a key secondary end point.
At the time of data cutoff (3 October 2013), 410 deaths had occurred and 13 patients remained on treatment. Median OS in patients receiving EVE + EXE was 31.0 months 95% confidence interval (CI) 28.0–34.6 months compared with 26.6 months (95% CI 22.6–33.1 months) in patients receiving PBO + EXE (hazard ratio = 0.89; 95% CI 0.73–1.10; log-rank P = 0.14). Poststudy treatments were received by 84% of patients in the EVE + EXE arm versus 90% of patients in the PBO + EXE arm. Types of poststudy therapies were balanced across arms, except for chemotherapy (53% EVE + EXE versus 63% PBO + EXE). No new safety concerns were identified.
In BOLERO-2, adding EVE to EXE did not confer a statistically significant improvement in the secondary end point OS despite producing a clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement in the primary end point, PFS (4.6-months prolongation in median PFS; P < 0.0001). Ongoing translational research should further refine the benefit of mTOR inhibition and related pathways in this treatment setting.
NCT00863655.
Patient-reported outcomes are integral in benefit–risk assessments of new treatment regimens. The PALOMA-2 study provides the largest body of evidence for patient-reported health-related quality of ...life (QOL) for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) receiving first-line endocrine-based therapy (palbociclib plus letrozole and letrozole alone).
Treatment-naïve postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2−) MBC were randomized 2 : 1 to palbociclib plus letrozole (n=444) or placebo plus letrozole (n=222). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed at baseline, day 1 of cycles 2 and 3, and day 1 of every other cycle from cycle 5 using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Breast and EuroQOL 5 dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaires.
As of 26 February 2016, the median duration of follow-up was 23months. Baseline scores were comparable between the two treatment arms. No significant between-arm differences were observed in change from baseline in FACT-Breast Total, FACT-General Total, or EQ-5D scores. Significantly greater improvement in pain scores was observed in the palbociclib plus letrozole arm (−0.256 versus −0.098; P=0.0183). In both arms, deterioration of FACT-Breast Total score was significantly delayed in patients without progression versus those with progression and patients with partial or complete response versus those without. No significant difference was observed in FACT-Breast and EQ-5D index scores in patients with and without neutropenia.
Overall, women with MBC receiving first-line endocrine therapy have a good QOL. The addition of palbociclib to letrozole maintains health-related QOL and improves pain scores in treatment-naïve postmenopausal patients with ER+/HER2− MBC compared with letrozole alone. Significantly greater delay in deterioration of health-related QOL was observed in patients without progression versus those who progressed and in patients with an objective response versus non-responders.
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01740427 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01740427)
The widespread adoption of immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of various cancer types, including metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), which has long been associated with poor ...prognostic outcomes. In particular, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) that target and inhibit programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1), have shown promising results in the treatment of patients with metastatic TNBC. However, while manipulating the immune system to induce antitumor response, ICIs can also lead to a unique set of immune-related adverse events (IRAEs), which differ from standard chemotherapy toxicities due to their immune-based origin. These toxicities require highly specific management, including guidance from multidisciplinary specialists. The primary treatment strategy against IRAEs is systemic corticosteroid use, but additional treatment approaches may also involve supportive care, additional immunosuppression, and concurrent treatment delay or discontinuation. Given the rising prevalence of ICI therapy, it is essential to educate clinicians on the presentation and management of these potentially life-threatening events so that they are identified early and treated appropriately. Using data from recent clinical trials, this review will focus on known IRAEs, particularly those seen in patients with breast cancer, and will summarize their prevalence, severity, and outcomes. We will discuss optimal strategies for early recognition and management, as well as approaches toward cautious retreatment following resolution of IRAEs.
•This ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline provides key recommendations and algorithms for managing metastatic breast cancer.•It covers diagnosis, staging, risk assessment, treatment, disease monitoring, ...palliative care and the patient perspective.•ESMO-MCBS and ESCAT scores are given to describe the levels of evidence for treatment choices.•The authors comprise an international expert group, with recommendations based on available evidence and expert opinion.•In clinical practice, all recommendations provided need to be discussed with patients in a shared decision-making approach.
Guidelines recommend atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel (A + nP) for first-line treatment of unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer expressing programmed ...death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) on tumor-infiltrating immune cells (IC), based on IMpassion130. We report the final overall survival (OS) and safety of that study as per the prespecified analysis plan.
Patients were randomized to nP 100 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle) with atezolizumab 840 mg (A + nP) or placebo (P + nP; days 1 and 15), until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival intention-to-treat (ITT) and PD-L1 IC-positive populations and OS (tested hierarchically in the ITT population and, if significant, in the PD-L1 IC-positive population).
Each arm comprised 451 patients; 666 (73.8%) had died by the final OS analysis cut-off (median follow-up, 18.8 months; interquartile range, 8.9-34.7 months). Median OS in the ITT population was 21.0 months 95% confidence interval (CI), 19.0-23.4 months with A + nP, and 18.7 months (95% CI, 16.9-20.8 months) with P + nP stratified hazard ratio (HR), 0.87; 95% CI, 0.75-1.02; P = 0.077. Exploratory analysis in the PD-L1 IC-positive population showed a median OS of 25.4 months (95% CI, 19.6-30.7 months) with A + nP (n = 185) and 17.9 months (95% CI, 13.6-20.3 months) with P + nP (n = 184; stratified HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.53-0.86). Safety outcomes were consistent with previous analyses and the known toxicity profiles of each agent. Immune-mediated adverse events of special interest were reported in 58.7% and 41.6% of patients treated with A + nP and P + nP, respectively.
Although the OS benefit in the ITT population was not statistically significant, precluding formal testing, clinically meaningful OS benefit was observed with A + nP in PD-L1 IC-positive patients, consistent with prior interim analyses. This combination remained safe and tolerable with longer follow-up.
•Final OS data from IMpassion130 (A + nP in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer) agree with prior interim analyses.•OS benefit with A + nP versus P + nP in the ITT population was not statistically significant, precluding further testing.•Exploratory data not formally tested showed clinically meaningful OS benefit for A + nP in the PD-L1 IC-positive population.•Three-year OS rates in the PD-L1 IC-positive population were 35.8% with A + nP versus 22.2% with P + nP.•No new safety signals were seen with longer follow-up; adverse events were consistent with those known for each drug.
In EMBRACA, talazoparib prolonged progression-free survival versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio HR 0.542 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.413-0.711; P < 0.0001) and improved patient-reported outcomes ...(PRO) in germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA1/2)-mutated advanced breast cancer (ABC). We report final overall survival (OS).
This randomized phase III trial enrolled patients with gBRCA1/2-mutated HER2-negative ABC. Patients received talazoparib or physician's choice of chemotherapy. OS was analyzed using stratified HR and log-rank test and prespecified rank-preserving structural failure time model to account for subsequent treatments.
A total of 431 patients were entered in a randomized study (287 talazoparib/144 chemotherapy) with 412 patients treated (286 talazoparib/126 chemotherapy). By 30 September 2019, 216 deaths (75.3%) occurred for talazoparib and 108 (75.0%) chemotherapy; median follow-up was 44.9 and 36.8 months, respectively. HR for OS with talazoparib versus chemotherapy was 0.848 (95% CI 0.670-1.073; P = 0.17); median (95% CI) 19.3 months (16.6-22.5 months) versus 19.5 months (17.4-22.4 months). Kaplan–Meier survival percentages (95% CI) for talazoparib versus chemotherapy: month 12, 71% (66% to 76%)/74% (66% to 81%); month 24, 42% (36% to 47%)/38% (30% to 47%); month 36, 27% (22% to 33%)/21% (14% to 29%). Most patients received subsequent treatments: for talazoparib and chemotherapy, 46.3%/41.7% received platinum and 4.5%/32.6% received a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, respectively. Adjusting for subsequent PARP and/or platinum use, HR for OS was 0.756 (95% bootstrap CI 0.503-1.029). Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 69.6% (talazoparib) and 64.3% (chemotherapy) patients, consistent with previous reports. Extended follow-up showed significant overall improvement and delay in time to definitive clinically meaningful deterioration in global health status/quality of life and breast symptoms favoring talazoparib versus chemotherapy (P < 0.01 for all), consistent with initial analyses.
In gBRCA1/2-mutated HER2-negative ABC, talazoparib did not significantly improve OS over chemotherapy; subsequent treatments may have impacted analysis. Safety was consistent with previous observations. PRO continued to favor talazoparib.
•In BRCA1/2-mutated advanced breast cancer, talazoparib did not significantly improve overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy.•OS was generally consistent across subgroups including by prior platinum, hormone-receptor status, or line of treatment.•Most patients received subsequent systemic treatments, which may have confounded the survival outcome.•Toxicities were managed by supportive care medication/dose modifications; safety was consistent with previous observations.•Extended follow-up of patient-reported outcomes continued to favor talazoparib over chemotherapy.
Purpose
In the initial PALOMA-2 (NCT01740427) analysis with median follow-up of 23 months, palbociclib plus letrozole significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in women with estrogen ...receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2−) advanced breast cancer (ABC) hazard ratio (HR) 0.58;
P
< 0.001. Herein, we report results overall and by subgroups with extended follow-up.
Methods
In this double-blind, phase 3 study, post-menopausal women with ER+/HER2− ABC who had not received prior systemic therapy for their advanced disease were randomized 2:1 to palbociclib-letrozole or placebo-letrozole. Endpoints include investigator-assessed PFS (primary), safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs).
Results
After a median follow-up of approximately 38 months, median PFS was 27.6 months for palbociclib–letrozole (
n
= 444) and 14.5 months for placebo-letrozole (
n
= 222) (HR 0.563; 1-sided
P
< 0.0001). All subgroups benefited from palbociclib treatment. The improvement of PFS with palbociclib-letrozole was maintained in the next 2 subsequent lines of therapy and delayed the use of chemotherapy (40.4 vs. 29.9 months for palbociclib–letrozole vs. placebo-letrozole). Safety data were consistent with the known profile. Patients’ quality of life was maintained.
Conclusions
With approximately 15 months of additional follow-up, palbociclib plus letrozole continued to demonstrate improved PFS compared with placebo plus letrozole in the overall population and across all patient subgroups, while the safety profile remained favorable and quality of life was maintained. These data confirm that palbociclib-letrozole should be considered the standard of care for first-line therapy in patients with ER+/HER2− ABC, including those with low disease burden or long disease-free interval. Sponsored by Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01740427.
PDF
