Phase II study of vinorelbine monotherapy in anthracycline and taxane pre-treated metastatic breast cancer

Chemotherapy Options beyond the First Line in HER-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer

Despite the recent advances in the biological understanding of breast cancer (BC), chemotherapy still represents a key component in the armamentarium for this disease. Different agents are available as mono-chemotherapy options in patients with locally advanced or metastatic BC (MBC) who progress after a first- and second-line treatment with anthracyclines and taxanes. However, no clear indication exists on what the best option is in some populations, such as heavily pretreated, elderly patients, triple-negative BC (TNBC), and those who do not respond to the first-line therapy. In this article, we summarize available literature evidence on different chemotherapy agents used beyond the first-line, in locally advanced or MBC patients, including rechallenge with anthracyclines and taxanes, antimetabolite and antimicrotubule agents, such as vinorelbine, capecitabine, eribulin, ixabepilone, and the newest developed agents, such as vinflunine, irinotecan, and etirinotecan.

Outcome of eribulin as a late treatment line for Thai metastatic breast cancer patients

Background

We report the safety and efficacy of eribulin as a late treatment line in Thai metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients.

Patients and methods

A total of 30 MBC patients treated with eribulin between January 2014 and January 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were scheduled to receive 1.4 mg/m² of eribulin on day 1, day 8 and subsequently every 21 days. All patients had previously received at least three chemotherapy regimens including anthracycline and taxane. Response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed.

Results

The median age was 56 years (range, 40–74 years), with a median follow-up time of 5.7 months (range, 0.2–25 months). The overall response rate was 30% (nine patients): four patients had triple-negative breast cancer, three patients had luminal B breast cancer and two patients had luminal A breast cancer. The median PFS was 2.9 months (range, 0.2–14 months). The median number of previous chemotherapy regimens was 4 (range, 3–9). Univariate analysis showed that the number of regimens (four or fewer) prior to eribulin was statistically associated with superior PFS (P = 0.009). Multivariate analysis also showed similar statistical association between number of prior regimens (four or fewer) and better PFS adjusted by age group (≥50 years; hazard ratio = 1.29; 95% CI: 1.0–1.65; P = 0.046). There were no toxic deaths or grade 4 toxicities. Nine (30%) patients had grade 3 anemia toxicities, and the other common toxicities were leukopenia and neutropenia. Four (13%) patients required dose reduction and 16 (53%) patients required dose delay because of toxicities.

Conclusion

Eribulin is an effective drug for heavily pretreated MBC patients with tolerable toxicities. The benefit was superior in patients who received fewer than four previous chemotherapy regimens.

A meta-analysis of combination therapy versus single-agent therapy in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer: results from nine randomized Phase III trials

Nowadays, the philosophy of treating metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is slowly evolving. Especially for the anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated MBC patients, no standard therapy exists in this setting. Whether to choose doublet agents or single agent as salvage treatment remains fiercely debated. Thus, we conducted a meta-analysis to resolve this problem. Databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library were searched for Phase III randomized clinical trials (published before August 2015) comparing the efficacy and adverse effects between the combination therapy and single-agent therapy in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated MBC patients. The primary end point was the overall survival (OS), and the secondary end points were the progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), and grade 3 or 4 toxicities. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) and pooled risk ratio (RR) were used to evaluate the efficacy. Analyses were also performed to estimate the side effects and safety of both groups. In all, nine eligible randomized clinical trials were included in this meta-analysis. Improvements were proven in the doublet agents group on OS (HR 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–0.96, P=0.002), PFS (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.76–0.88, P<0.001), and ORR (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.34–2.21, P<0.001). Notably, subgroup analysis failed to favor the targeted agent-based combination in terms of OS (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89–1.31, P=0.365), PFS (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.88–1.35, P=0.433), and ORR (RR 1.60, 95% CI 0.69–3.71, P=0.278) compared with single agent. In addition, although more hematological and gastrointestinal toxicities were observed in the doublet agents group, they were acceptable and manageable. Taken together, when compared with single-agent therapy, doublet agents should be considered a treatment option because of the superior efficacy and the manageable safety profile for the prior anthracycline- and taxane-treated MBC patients.

Chemotherapy options for patients suffering from heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer

The identification of additional chemotherapy agents for anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated advanced breast cancer (ABC) is an urgent medical need. Single agent chemotherapy is most times administered because combined therapy is only associated with modest, if any, improvement in median progression-free survival. Randomized trials failed to show overall survival benefit compared with single agent chemotherapy. We hope to modify the natural history of ABC by the consecutive use of treatments with documented activity in heavily pretreated patients. Quality of life remains an important end point as cure is in general not possible. We first review the activity of the approved and the most frequently used agents in heavily pretreated ABC. Thereafter, the potential role and safety profile of etirinotecan pegol is discussed given the results recently released of a Phase III trial comparing this agent to Treatment of Physician's Choice.

Capecitabine and bevacizumab with or without vinorelbine in first-line treatment of HER2/neu-negative metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer: final efficacy and safety data of the randomised, open-label superiority phase 3 CARIN trial

The study was designed to evaluate efficacy and superiority of capecitabine/bevacizumab + vinorelbine (CAP/BEV/VIN) compared to CAP/BEV alone. Main purpose was to introduce a taxane-/anthracycline-free first-line treatment in advanced breast cancer (ABC), in order to avoid long-term toxicities. In this open-label, superiority, phase 3 trial, patients with HER2-negative ABC were randomized 1:1 to receive either oral CAP at 1000 mg/m² [twice daily, days 1–14, q3w] plus intravenous BEV at 15 mg/kg [day 1, q3w] (arm A) or in addition to this protocol intravenous VIN at 25 mg/m² [days 1 + 8, q3w] (arm B) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal of consent. Between 26 February 2009 and 26 October 2012, we randomised 600 patients (arm A N = 300; arm B N = 300) from 57 German outpatient-centres and 2 university hospitals. Median progression-free survival (PFS) (primary endpoint) was not improved with VIN (CAP/BEV, 8.8 months; CAP/BEV/VIN, 9.6 months; HR 0.84 [95 % CI 0.70–1.01], P = 0.058). Median overall survival (OS) (secondary endpoint) was 25.1 and 27.2 months for CAP/BEV and CAP/BEV/VIN, respectively, average HR 0.85 [95 % CI 0.70–1.03], P = 0.104). The 1- and 2-year OS rates appeared to be similar (78.0 and 77.0 %; 53.0 and 54.0 %). Toxicity profiles were generally mild and manageable. Adverse events occurred more frequently in arm B. Regarding the balance between clinical efficacy (PFS, OS) and toxicity, the CAP/BEV combination provides a favourable treatment option in first-line ABC avoiding taxane- and/or anthracycline-induced long-term toxicity. Superiority of CAP/BEV/VIN was not met, and side effects were even enhanced. Nevertheless, no safety issues occurred.

Bevacizumab in Combination with Modified FOLFOX6 in Heavily Pretreated Patients with HER2/Neu-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Phase II Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Bevacizumab combined with modified FOLFOX6 is a standard regimen for colorectal cancer. The present study was to determine the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab-modified FOLFOX6 regimen in heavily pretreated patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2/neu)-negative MBC.

METHODS

Bevacizumab, 5 mg/kg every two weeks or 7.5 mg/kg every three weeks, was administered with modified FOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, 5-FU 400 mg/m2 on day 1, followed by 5-FU 2400 mg/m2 intravenous infusion over 46 hours every 2 weeks) to patients who failed at least 1 chemotherapy regimen in the metastatic setting. The primary objective was progression free survival (PFS). Secondary objectives included objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), overall survival (OS), safety, and the change of tumor size and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status.

RESULTS

69 patients were enrolled. The median PFS was 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.0 to 8.5 months), ORR was 50.0% and median OS was 10.5 months (95% CI, 7.9 to 13.1 months). Patients showing objective responses had a 4.2-month median PFS gain and 5.7-month median OS gain compared with those who did not (P < 0.05). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurring in more than one patient were neutropenia (53/69, 76.8%), leukopenia (36/69, 52.2%), thrombocytopenia (13/69, 18.8%), anemia (3/69, 4.3%) and hypertension (3/69, 4.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Adding bevacizumab to modified FOLFOX6 does have significant anti-tumor activity and good safety profile in heavily pretreated HER2/neu-negative MBC patients. Further trials are required to confirm whether the high ORR can translate into a long-term PFS and even OS benefit.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01658033.

Vinorelbine with or without Trastuzumab in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Single Institution Series

Background. We report our experience with vinorelbine, a widely used chemotherapeutic, in unselected metastatic breast cancer patients treated in clinical routine. Patients and Methods. The data of all patients with metastatic breast cancer receiving vinorelbine with or without trastuzumab during a six year period were reviewed. Patients received vinorelbine intravenous 25–30 mg/m² or 60–80 mg/m² orally in days 1 and 8 of a 21 day cycle. Results. Eighty-seven women were included. Sixty-two patients received vinorelbine alone and 25 patients received vinorelbine in combination with trastuzumab. In 67 patients this was the first line treatment for metastatic disease and in 20 patients it was 2nd or later line of treatment. The median TTP was six months (range: 1–45). The median overall survival was 11.5 months (range: 1–83). Seventy patients were evaluable for response. In patients receiving first line treatment 44.4% had a response while in the second and subsequent lines setting 12.5% of patients responded (P = 0.001). Objective response was obtained in 63.6% of patients receiving concomitant trastuzumab and in 25% of patients receiving vinorelbine alone (P = 0.0002). Conclusion. This study confirms a high disease control rate. Response rate and TTP were superior in first line treatment compared to subsequent lines.

A randomized feasibility study of docetaxel versus vinorelbine in advanced breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Docetaxel and vinorelbine have demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). This prospective feasibility study compared the efficacy of these two treatments in MBC.

METHODS

Patients with MBC progressing following anthracycline treatment were randomly assigned to either docetaxel (100 mg/m(2)day 1 q3W) or vinorelbine (25mg/m(2) day 1 q2W). Patients were eligible to cross over at progression. Objective response rates (ORR), time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were measured.

RESULTS

37 patients were randomised. 2 patients were excluded due to protocol violations. Of 35 remaining patients 17 received docetaxel and 18 received vinorelbine per protocol. ORR was 12.5% and 6.0% respectively for docetaxel and vinorelbine. The median time to progression was 10.4 weeks (range 6-14 weeks) in docetaxel arm and 7.6 weeks (range 4-11 weeks) in vinorelbine arm (p = .82). The clinical benefit rate (defined as complete response, partial response plus stable disease) was 44% in the docetaxel arm and 12% in the vinorelbine arm. Based on intent to treat the median OS in the docetaxel arm was 34 weeks (95% CI, 20.7-48) and 21.2 weeks (95% CI, 17-25.4) in vinorelbine arm (p = .388). 16 patients crossed over, 5 from docetaxel to vinorelbine and 11 from vinorelbine to docetaxel. At cross over the ORR was 0% and 18% on cross over to vinorelbine and docetaxel respectively with a median TTP of 17.3 weeks (95% CI, 16.3-18.1) and 18.7 weeks (95% CI, 13.9-23.4) for those receiving vinorebine and docetaxel at cross over respectively. Vinorelbine however was much better tolerated with fewer grade 3-4 toxicity events (n = 4) than docetaxel (n = 27).

DISCUSSION

While docetaxel resulted in a longer TTP and OS in this study it did not reach statistical significance. TTP duration for those patients who crossed over was similar, but overwhelmingly vinorelbine had fewer significant grade 3-4 toxicities than docetaxel. Only two previous randomized studies have compared the efficacy of single agent docetaxel and vinorelbine following prior anthracycline exposure, one in an unselected population [16], and the other, HERNATA, in HER2 positive disease with trastuzumab used in both arms [17]. The patients randomized in this study were relatively heavily pretreated with the majority having received 2-3 lines of prior treatment for their metastatic disease. The lower response rates with vinorelbine as compared to docetaxel in this study concur with results reported in other studies [16]. However, the numbers in both this study and the other unselected study [16] are small and need to be interpreted with caution. With regard to toxicity, in the present study, grade 3-4 hematological adverse events and infection were tenfold greater with docetaxel as compared with vinorelbine, consistent with results in HERNATA [17]. While others have reported a significantly higher number of overall grade 3-4 toxicities with vinorelbine [16], the fact that, as in HERNATA, discontinuations due to toxicities in that study [16] were significantly greater with docetaxel as compared to vinorelbine suggests either the toxicity data collected did not reflect the true toxicities on treatment or that docetaxel toxicities were in some way more severe or protracted leading to more numerous discontinuations [16]. Larger randomized studies are needed to determine (1) the efficacy of docetaxel versus vinorelbine in anthracycline pretreated disease and (2) the efficacy of vinorelbine after prior taxane exposure, and particularly how it may compares both with regard to efficacy and tolerability with other possible regimens that may utilized such as carboplatin-gemcitabine [20] or eribulin [21]. The longer as well as comparable TTP at cross over for both agents compared to that upfront suggests there may be enrichment at cross over of a group of patients who are not only fit for further treatment but are more likely to a derive continued benefit from additional treatment.

Gemcitabine in combination with vinorelbine in elderly patients with anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine in combination with vinorelbine in elderly patients with anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Elderly patients with MBC received gemcitabine 1,000 mg m(-2) and vinorelbine 25 mg m(-2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for a maximum of 6 cycles. The primary end points were objective response and toxicity. The secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and prognostic factors associated with disease control, PFS, and OS.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients with a median age of 73 years (range, 65-84 years) were included. The response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors was 33.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 20.4 to 46.2%). At a median follow-up of 16.2 months, median PFS and OS were 6.2 (95% CI, 4.6 to 7.8) and 17.0 months (95% CI, 14.5 to 19.5), respectively. Grade 3 to 4 adverse events included neutropenia (25.5%), anemia (13.7%), thrombocytopenia (9.8%), fatigue (5.9%), constipation (3.9%), neuropathy (3.9%), and hepatotoxicity (3.9%). Neutropenic fever occurred in 2 patients. There was one toxic death due to massive gastrointestinal hemorrhage. The study of prognostic factors did not reveal any predictive factor of disease control, while response to treatment and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status was the main factor conditioning PFS and OS, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Gemcitabine in combination with vinorelbine is active and safe in elderly patients with anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer.

Eribulin (Halaven): a new, effective treatment for women with heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer

Although metastatic breast cancer remains essentially incurable, many patients previously treated with an anthracycline, taxane, and capecitabine are relatively fit and keen to receive further therapy. Several drugs are used in this setting, but with little evidence of clinically relevant benefit, and none have previously shown improved survival. Eribulin (Halaven®) is a nontaxane tubulin-binding agent with a novel mode of action, and was recently approved by the European Medicines Agency and US Food and Drug Agency as a single agent for patients with heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer. This review provides an overview of the discovery, and preclinical and clinical development of eribulin, culminating in the recently published EMBRACE metastatic breast cancer study.

Efficacy and safety of palliative chemotherapy for patients with advanced breast cancer pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes: a systematic review

No standard monotherapy or combination palliative chemotherapy currently exists for patients with advanced breast cancer pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes. In this systematic review we assess the current knowledge on the efficacy and safety of palliative single-agent chemotherapy drugs--capecitabine, vinorelbine, gemcitabine, and liposomal doxorubicin--commonly used in daily clinical practice. We identified 22 studies, of which ten investigated capecitabine, nine investigated vinorelbine, three investigated gemcitabine, and one investigated liposomal doxorubicin. The greatest amount of information was available for capecitabine and vinorelbine. These two drugs showed good efficacy. The disease control rate differed significantly between the four drugs, which is relevant in terms of how well tumour symptoms can be improved and whether quality of life can be maintained or even improved. To obtain more evidence of the efficacy and safety of chemotherapeutic agents used in this pretreated population of advanced breast cancer patients, randomised comparisons of the various drugs, as monotherapy and in combination with targeted agents, are needed.