Trastuzumab combined with doublet or single-agent chemotherapy as first-line therapy for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer

Efficacy and safety of utidelone plus capecitabine in advanced first-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer: A multicenter real-world study

Background

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of utidelone plus capecitabine for advanced first-line versus second-line or above therapy in metastatic breast cancer patients who had previously received anthracycline and taxane. At the same time, we compared the efficacy of utidelone plus capecitabine and vinorelbine plus cisplatin in advanced first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer.

Patients and methods

A retrospective cohort of 11 patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracycline and taxane (including neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies) for advanced first-line with utidelone plus capecitabine, 32 patients treated with second-line or above, and 60 patients with vinorelbine plus cisplatin between October 2011 and August 2022 was collected. The first and second groups were treated with utidelone plus capecitabine, and the third group was treated with vinorelbine plus cisplatin. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and treatment safety.

Results

By 03/31/2023, median PFS reached 11.70 months (95 % CI 0.093-0.141) in utidelone plus capecitabine group in the advanced first-line therapy, compared to 5.60 months (95 % CI 0.025-0.079) in the second-line or above therapy [HR 0.42, (95 % CI 0.226-0.787), P = 0.0077]. In utidelone plus capecitabine, the median OS was not reached in the advanced first-line therapy, with a mean overall survival of 23.16 months (95 % CI 0.198-0.265); whereas the median OS in the second-line or above therapy was 19.50 months (95 % CI 0.083-0.307), with a mean overall survival of 16.89 months (95 % CI 0.136-0.202) [HR 0.26, (95 % CI 0.098-0.678), P = 0.0495]. The ORR for advanced first-line therapy was 27.27 % (95%CI 0.060, 0.610) compared with 15.63 % (95%CI 0.053, 0.328) for second-line or above. In advanced first-line therapy, utidelone plus capecitabine was superior to vinorelbine plus cisplatin with a median PFS of 6.12 months (95 % CI 0.051-0.072) [HR 0.49, (95 % CI 0.286-0.839), P = 0.0291]. Compared with utidelone plus capecitabine, the median OS in vinorelbine plus cisplatin advanced first-line therapy group was 35.37 months (95 % CI 0.258-0.449), and the mean overall survival was 40.79 months (95 % CI 0.315-0.501) [HR 0.54, (95 % CI 0.188-1.568), P = 0.2587]. The ORR for vinorelbine plus cisplatin was 18.33 % (95 % CI 0.095, 0.304). The most common adverse events in our study were neurological toxicity, hand-foot syndrome, hematological toxicity, gastrointestinal toxicity, and hepatic and renal function abnormalities. There were no deaths due to adverse effects during the utidelone plus capecitabine treatment period.

Conclusions

In MBC, advanced first-line therapy with utidelone plus capecitabine resulted in more favorable PFS, OS, and ORR than second-line or above therapy. In advanced first-line therapy, utidelone plus capecitabine had superior PFS, and ORR compared with vinorelbine plus cisplatin. This study concludes that utidelone plus capecitabine is a more valuable chemotherapy option in advanced first-line MBC.

Analysis of the metastatic mechanism and progress in the treatment of breast cancer liver metastasis: a narrative review

Background and Objective

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women, and metastasis to other target organs is one of the main causes of death. Breast cancer liver metastasis (BCLM) has long been a research focus. Enhancing therapeutic effects, optimizing treatment plans and improving the prognosis of patients are major clinical challenges at present.

Methods

We performed a comprehensive, nonsystematic review of the latest literature to define the current metastatic mechanism and related treatment advances of BCLM.

Key Content and Findings

Due to the lack of research on the mechanism of BCLM, present treatment programs still have limited benefits, and the prognosis of patients is generally poor. New research directions and treatment ideas for BCLM are urgently needed. In this article, we indicated the specific procedures of the BCLM mechanism from the microenvironment to metastasis formation and progress in treatment, including drug therapies such as targeted therapy, surgery, intervention therapy and radiotherapy. Research on the molecular mechanism plays a crucial role in the development of BCLM-related therapies. Based on the metastasis process, we are able to propel new findings and further progression of antineoplastic drugs.

Conclusions

The process of BCLM is multistep, and various factors are involved in it, which provides a powerful theoretical basis for the development of therapeutic methods for treatment of this disease. Further understanding of the mechanism of BCLM is essential to guide clinical management.

Pathologic complete response and survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in cT1-T2/N0 HER2+ breast cancer

Women with small HER2+ breast cancers may have excellent prognosis with adjuvant single-agent chemotherapy and HER2-targeted therapy. The role of de-escalated therapy in the neoadjuvant setting, however, remains uncertain. We conducted a cohort study of adult women with T1-2/cN0 HER2+ breast cancer diagnosed 2013–2016 in the National Cancer Database treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and HER2-targeted therapy. Factors associated with pathologic complete response (pCR) and overall survival were examined. In total, 6994 patients were included, 32% cT1 and 68% cT2. Multi-agent NAC was given to 90% of women while single-agent NAC was given to 10% of women. pCR was achieved in 46% of cT2 patients and 43% of cT1, and in 46% of patients treated with multi-agent versus 38% single agent. Patients receiving multi-agent chemotherapy were younger, had fewer comorbidities, and had higher cT stage and grade. In all patients, pCR was associated with improved survival (p < 0.01). Multi-agent chemotherapy (OR 1.3, p = 0.003), hormone receptor negative (OR 2.6, p < 0.001), higher grade (OR 2.2, p < 0.001), younger age (OR 1.4, p = 0.011), and later year of diagnosis (OR 1.3, p = 0.005) were associated with achieving pCR. Multi-agent chemotherapy was associated with higher likelihood of pCR, but this effect was modest compared to other factors. Single-agent NAC with HER2-directed therapy in selected patients may provide excellent outcome with reduced toxicity, while allowing escalated therapy in the adjuvant setting for patients with residual disease. Prospective studies are needed to determine effects of de-escalation in the neoadjuvant setting on survival and optimal selection strategies.

Comparative review of pharmacological therapies in individuals with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer with focus on hormone receptor subgroups

Breast cancer is the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of targeted therapies in human epidermal receptor 2 (HER2)-positive advanced breast cancer (ABC) have provided an evidence base for regulatory and reimbursement agencies to appraise the use of cancer therapies in clinical practice. However, a subset of these patients harbor additional biomarkers, for example, a positive hormone receptor status that may be more amenable to therapy and improve overall survival (OS). This review seeks to explore the reporting of evidence for treatment effects by the hormone receptor status using the RCT evidence of targeted therapies for HER2-positive ABC patients. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to identify published RCTs. Extracted data were synthesized using network meta-analysis to obtain the relative effects of HER2-positive-targeted therapies. We identified a gap in the reporting of the effectiveness of therapies by the hormone receptor status as only 15 out of 42 identified RCTs reported hormone receptor subgroup analyses; the majority of which reported progression-free survival but not OS or the overall response rate. In conclusion, we recommend that future trials in ABC should report the effect of cancer therapies in hormone receptor subgroups for all outcomes.