A Randomized Phase II Study of Paclitaxel and Bevacizumab With and Without Gemcitabine as First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Breast Cancer

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Bevacizumab in First-Line Metastatic Breast Cancer: Lessons for Research and Regulatory Enterprises

BACKGROUND

The US Food and Drug Administration's accelerated approval and later withdrawal of bevacizumab in patients with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) is a seminal case for ongoing debates about the validity of using progression-free survival (PFS) as a surrogate measure for overall survival (OS) in cancer drug approvals. We systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed the evidence around bevacizumab's regulatory approval and withdrawal in mBC.

METHODS

We searched for all published phase II or III clinical trials testing bevacizumab as a first-line therapy for patients with mBC. Data were extracted on trial demographics, interventions, and outcomes. Descriptive analysis was stratified by whether the trial was initiated before, during, or after the accelerated approval. We used a cumulative random-effects meta-analysis to assess the evolution of evidence of the effect of bevacizumab on PFS and OS. We estimated the association between the trial-level PFS and OS effect using a nonlinear mixed-regression model.

RESULTS

Fifty-two studies were included. Trial activity dramatically dropped after the accelerated approval was withdrawn. Eight clinical trials reported hazard ratios (hazard ratios) and were meta-analyzed. The cumulative hazard ratio for PFS was 0.72 (95% CI = 0.65 to 0.79), and the cumulative hazard ratio for OS was 0.90 (95% CI = 0.80 to 1.01). The regression model showed a statistically nonsignificant association between PFS benefit and OS benefit (β = 0.43, SE = 0.81).

CONCLUSION

The US Food and Drug Administration's decision-making in this case was consistent with the evolving state of evidence. However, the fact that seven clinical trials are insufficient to conclude validity (or lack thereof) for a trial-level surrogate suggests that it would be more efficient to conduct trials using the more clinically meaningful endpoints.

Statistical analysis of patient-reported outcome data in randomised controlled trials of locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review

Although patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as health-related quality of life, are important endpoints in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), there is little consensus about the analysis, interpretation, and reporting of these data. We did a systematic review to assess the variability, quality, and standards of PRO data analyses in advanced breast cancer RCTs. We searched PubMed for English language articles published in peer-reviewed journals between Jan 1, 2001, and Oct 30, 2017. Eligible articles were those that reported PRO results from RCTs of adult patients with advanced breast cancer receiving anti-cancer treatments with reported sample sizes of at least 50 patients-66 RCTs met the selection criteria. Only eight (12%) RCTs reported a specific PRO research hypothesis. Heterogeneity in the statistical methods used to assess PRO data was observed, with a mixture of longitudinal and cross-sectional techniques. Not all articles addressed the problem of multiple testing. Fewer than half of RCTs (28 [42%]) reported the clinical significance of their findings. 48 (73%) did not report how missing data were handled. Our systematic review shows a need to improve standards in the analysis, interpretation, and reporting of PRO data in cancer RCTs. Lack of standardisation makes it difficult to draw robust conclusions and compare findings across trials. The Setting International Standards in the Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Data Consortium was set up to address this need and develop recommendations on the analysis of PRO data in RCTs.

Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy as a viable option for treatment of advanced breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis and literature review

This meta-analysis was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-based regimens for the treatment advanced breast cancer (ABC). Altogether 15 studies involving 8195 ABC patients were retrieved for analysis. Compared with non-gemcitabine-based chemotherapies, patients receiving gemcitabine-based therapy exhibited better overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) (HR = 1.12, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.19; HR = 1.16, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.30; HR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.24). Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was significantly high but manageable in gemcitabine-based groups. Subgroup analysis revealed that patients with first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy had better OS (HR = 1.19, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.32), PFS (HR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.27), and ORR (RR = 1.16, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.32). In addition, additional gemcitabine chemotherapy also showed better OS (HR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.30), PFS (HR = 1.20, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.30) and ORR (RR = 1.23, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.42) than gemcitabine replacement therapy. Furthermore, patients receiving gemcitabine-taxanes-based regimens had better OS (HR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.28), PFS (HR = 1.12, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.20) and ORR (RR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.35) than patients with non-gemcitabine-taxanes-based chemotherapy. These findings indicate that gemcitabine combination regimens could serve as a promising regimen for ABC patients, though increased hematologic toxicity should be considered with caution.

Clinical results of randomized trials and 'real-world' data exploring the impact of Bevacizumab for breast cancer: opportunities for clinical practice and perspectives for research

INTRODUCTION

Angiogenesis plays a fundamental role in breast cancer (BC) growth, progression and metastatic spread. After the promising introduction of bevacizumab for the treatment of advanced BC, the initial enthusiasm decreased when the FDA withdrew its approval in 2011. Nevertheless, several clinical studies exploring the role of bevacizumab have been subsequently published. Areas covered: The aim of this study is to review the available clinical trials exploring the potential effectiveness of bevacizumab in BC, regardless of the disease setting. Expert opinion: Even if the evidence suggests that bevacizumab must be ruled out from the HER2-positive and adjuvant setting, bevacizumab's benefit remains uncertain in the neoadjuvant setting and in the advanced treatment of HER2-negative patients. In the first setting, the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy increased the pathological complete response (pCR) rate in most clinical trials. However, the current absence of evidence that pCR is a trial-level surrogate for survival requires waiting for long-term results. In the advanced setting, all trials showed a benefit in progression-free survival, but not in overall survival, highlighting an increase of adverse events. The lack of predictors of response represents the main unmet need in which future clinical research will undoubtedly invest.

Efficacy and safety of adding an agent to bevacizumab/taxane regimens for the first-line treatment of Her2-negative patients with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer: results from seven randomized controlled trials

Background

The combined therapy of bevacizumab (BEV) with taxane (paclitaxel or docetaxel) has shown an improvement on progression-free survival (PFS) and objective remission in Her2-negative patients with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer (LR/MBC). However, there was no benefit in overall survival (OS). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding an agent to the BEV/taxane regimens for the treatment of Her2-negative patients with LR/MBC in a first-line setting.

Materials and methods

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, EBSCO, and the Cochrane Library databases for eligible trials. A meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.0 freeware package. We calculated the hazard ratio (HR) for PFS and OS. The odds ratio (OR) was used to calculate objective response rate (ORR) and grade 3/4 drug-related adverse events. The heterogeneity of study outcomes was calculated by the χ² test or I² statistics.

Results

A total of 1,124 patients from seven randomized controlled trials were analyzed. Our meta-analysis showed that the ORR was significantly improved in the BEV/taxane-based triplet group when compared with the BEV/taxane-based doublet group (OR =1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03–1.67, P=0.03). A subset analysis showed that a similar result was achieved in the triplet group in which a cytotoxic agent was added (OR =1.46, 95% CI: 1.09–1.95, P=0.01). However, the PFS and OS had no statistically significant differences between the two groups (HR =0.87, 95% CI: 0.68–1.13, P=0.31; HR =0.98, 95% CI: 0.82–1.16, P=0.78, respectively). Regarding safety, thromboembolic events, fatigue, and diarrhea (all $grade 3) were more frequently observed in the BEV/taxane-based triplet group (OR =3.8, 95% CI: 1.86–7.79, P=0.0003; OR =1.55, 95% CI: 1.05–2.27, P=0.03; OR =2.1, 95% CI: 1.29–3.41, P=0.003, respectively). Other toxic effects had no statistically significant differences between the two groups.

Conclusion

Our results showed that adding an agent to BEV/taxane treatment regimens did not significantly improve PFS and prolong OS, except for conferring a significant advantage toward improved ORR in the first-line therapy for Her2-negative patients with LR/MBC. However, its side effects are predictable and manageable.

Effect of Modification Protocols on the Effectiveness of Gold Nanoparticles as Drug Delivery Vehicles for Killing of Breast Cancer Cells

The current study evaluated the potential of gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) for the delivery of Taxol to breast cancer cells (T47D) using an in vitro cell culture model. For this study, new loading approaches and novel chemical attachments were investigated. Five different gold nanoparticle-based complexes were used to determine their cytotoxicity towards T47D cells using the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) viability assay. There was no significant decrease (P > 0.05) in cell viability when T47D cells were treated with AuNPs that did not contain Taxol. However, cells were significantly killed by gold nanoparticles chemically conjugated to Taxol using three different approaches and one novel hybrid AuNP-Taxol nanoparticle, wherein no chemical bonds were involved. These Taxol-loaded AuNPs were more effective at inducing cell death in vitro than a solution of free Taxol used to treat cells. This result demonstrated that Taxol could be released from the particles in the cell culture media for subsequent therapeutic action. Additionally, the experiments proved that the Taxol-loaded AuNPs were more toxic in a dose dependent manner than Taxol as a formulation for the treatment of breast cancer cells. The results of this study suggest that gold nanoparticles have potential for the efficient delivery of Taxol to breast cancer cells. This could provide a future solution as an alternative application method to overcome adverse side effects resulting from current high-dose treatment regimes.

A network meta-analysis of everolimus plus exemestane versus chemotherapy in the first- and second-line treatment of estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer

The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy and toxicity of chemotherapy to exemestane plus everolimus (EXE/EVE) through a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials. NMA methods extend standard pairwise meta-analysis to allow simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments while maintaining randomization of individual studies. The method enables "direct" evidence (i.e., evidence from studies directly comparing two interventions) and "indirect" evidence (i.e., evidence from studies that do not compare the two interventions directly) to be pooled under the assumption of evidence consistency. We used NMA to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) and time to progression (TTP) curves in 34 studies, and response rate (RR) and the hazard ratios (HRs) of the PFS/TTP in 36 studies. A number needed to treat (NNT) analysis was also performed as well as descriptive comparison of reported toxicities. The NMA for PFS/TTP curves and for HR shows EXE/EVE is more efficacious than capecitabine plus sunitinib, CMF, megestrol acetate and tamoxifen, with an average of related-PFS/TTP difference ranging from about 10 months for capecitabine plus sunitinib to more than 6 months for tamoxifen. The NMA for overall RR shows that EXE/EVE provides a better RR than bevacizumab plus capecitabine, capecitabine, capecitabine plus sorafenib, capecitabine plus sunitinib, CMF, gemcitabine plus epirubicin plus paclitaxel, EVE plus tamoxifen, EXE, FEC, megestrol acetate, mitoxantrone, and tamoxifen. Finally, the NMA for NNT shows that EXE/EVE is more beneficial as compared to BMF, capecitabine, capecitabine plus sunitinib, CMF, FEC, megestrol acetate, mitoxantrone, and tamoxifen. The combination of EXE/EVE as first- or second-line therapy for ER+ve/HER2-ve metastatic breast cancer is more efficacious than several chemotherapy regimens that were reported in the literature. Toxicities also favored EXE/EVE in most instances.

Trebananib (AMG 386) plus weekly paclitaxel with or without bevacizumab as first-line therapy for HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer: A phase 2 randomized study

INTRODUCTION

This phase 2 randomized study evaluated trebananib (AMG 386), a peptide-Fc fusion protein that inhibits angiogenesis by neutralizing the interaction of angiopoietin-1 and -2 with Tie2, in combination with paclitaxel with or without bevacizumab in previously untreated patients with HER2-negative locally recurrent/metastatic breast cancer.

METHODS

Patients received paclitaxel 90 mg/m(2) once weekly (3-weeks-on/1-week-off) and were randomly assigned 1:1:1:1 to also receive blinded bevacizumab 10 mg/kg once every 2 weeks plus either trebananib 10 mg/kg once weekly (Arm A) or 3 mg/kg once weekly (Arm B), or placebo (Arm C); or open-label trebananib 10 mg/kg once a week (Arm D). Progression-free survival was the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

In total, 228 patients were randomized. Median estimated progression-free survival for Arms A, B, C, and D was 11.3, 9.2, 12.2, and 10 months, respectively. Hazard ratios (95% CI) for Arms A, B, and D versus Arm C were 0.98 (0.61-1.59), 1.12 (0.70-1.80), and 1.28 (0.79-2.09), respectively. The objective response rate was 71% in Arm A, 51% in Arm B, 60% in Arm C, and 46% in Arm D. The incidence of grade 3/4/5 adverse events was 71/9/4%, 61/14/5%, 62/16/3%, and 52/4/7% in Arms A/B/C/D. In Arm D, median progression-free survival was 12.8 and 7.4 months for those with high and low trebananib exposure (AUCss ≥ 8.4 versus < 8.4 mg·h/mL), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no apparent prolongation of estimated progression-free survival with the addition of trebananib to paclitaxel and bevacizumab at the doses tested. Toxicity was manageable. Exposure-response analyses support evaluation of combinations incorporating trebananib at doses > 10 mg/kg in this setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00511459.

Chemotherapy and targeted therapy for women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (or unknown) advanced breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

To identify optimal chemo- and targeted therapy for women with human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)- negative (or unknown) advanced breast cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomized evidence (including systematic reviews and meta-analyses) from 1993 through to current was completed. Outcomes of interest included survival, progression-free survival, response, quality of life, and adverse effects. Guideline recommendations were evidence based and were agreed on by the Expert Panel via consensus.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 20 systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses, 30 trials on first-line treatment, and 29 trials on second-line and subsequent treatment. These trials form the evidence base for the guideline recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Endocrine therapy is preferable to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer unless improvement is medically necessary (eg, immediately life-threatening disease). Single agent is preferable to combination chemotherapy, and longer planned duration improves outcome but must be balanced against toxicity. There is no single optimal first-line or subsequent line chemotherapy, and choice of treatment will be determined by multiple factors including prior therapy, toxicity, performance status, comorbid conditions, and patient preference. The role of bevacizumab remains controversial. Other targeted therapies have not so far been shown to enhance chemotherapy outcome in HER2-negative breast cancer.

Final results of a phase II study of paclitaxel, bevacizumab, and gemcitabine as first-line therapy for patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Efficacy and safety data for combining bevacizumab, gemcitabine, and paclitaxel for locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer are limited.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

AVALUZ trial evaluates the combination of bevacizumab 10 mg/kg, gemcitabine 2,000 mg/m(2) plus paclitaxel 150 mg/m(2), on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day course in previously untreated HER-2 negative patients.

RESULTS

Median progression-free survival (PES): 12.3 months. The overall response and clinical benefit rate (CR + PR + SD) were 72 % (95 % CI 60.9-82.0 %) and 89 % (95 % CI 80.3-95.3 %), respectively. Median overall survival: 27.4 mo. Baseline circulating tumor cell (CTCs) ≥2 versus CTCs <2 was associated with lower PFS, p = 0.046. Overall response was significantly greater in patients with intense angiotensin type 1 receptor (AGTR1) expression (99 vs. 60 % [p = 0.021]). The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events were: neutropenia (10 %); febrile neutropenia (1 %); sensory neuropathy (13 %); and asthenia (6 %). Grade 3 adverse events of interest with bevacizumab included bleeding (1 %) and hypertension (4 %). One patient developed cardiac ischemia (1 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy appeared feasible and well tolerated, producing toxicity comparable to other effective combined first-line regimens. Baseline circulating endothelial cells and AGTR1 expression are predictive of PFS and response.

A systematic review of gemcitabine and taxanes combination therapy randomized trials for metastatic breast cancer

Purpose

Gemcitabine/taxanes-based combination shows anti-tumor activity for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer, but there is a debate regarding the advantages of gemcitabine and taxanes regimens as a first-line or second-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer. Here we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and toxicity for patients receiving chemotherapy with or without GT-based regimens.

Methods

The randomized controlled trials were performed by searching Pubmed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and conference proceedings. We identified eight randomized controlled trials and then extracted and combined the data using to calculate hazard ratios (HR). The primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and time to progression (TTP). The secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and acute toxicity. A meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager Version 4.2.

Results

Eight eligible trails were identified. These studies involved 2234 patients with metastatic breast cancer, (1122 patients received GT-based combination regimen and 1112 patients received a regimen without the combination). A fixed-effects model meta-analysis showed that ORR and TTP are superior for GT-treated patients ORR (OR = 1.28, 95% CI 1.07-1.53), TTP (HR = 0.80; 95% CI 0.71-0.89). And GT-based combination significantly improved OS in the first-line subgroup (HR = 0.84; 95% CI 0.71-0.99). However, there were significant differences regarding acute hematological toxicity, particularly thrombocytopenia.

Conclusion

Gemcitabine/taxanes-treated patients with metastatic breast cancer showed a significant improvement in the ORR, TTP and OS (first-line background) compared to patients not treated with the combination regimen.

A systematic review of bevacizumab efficacy in breast cancer

Angiogenesis is a key component of cancer growth, invasion and metastasis. Therefore, inhibition of angiogenesis is an attractive strategy for the treatment of cancer. We systematically describe phase II and III clinical trials of bevacizumab for the treatment of breast cancer.

METHODS

A computer-based literature search was carried out using PUBMED and conference databases. Original phase II and III studies reporting ≥15 patients who received bevacizumab were included.

RESULTS

41 phase II trials were identified in the metastatic setting. Most trials found bevacizumab treatment feasible. Response rates (RR) varied from 0% to 76.5%, time to progression (TTP)/progression free survival (PFS) from 2.4 to 25.3 months and overall survival from 11.5 to more than 38 months. 14 phase III trials including more than 4400 patients with MBC unanimously showed increased RR and PFS, however, no trials demonstrated an OS benefit. In the neoadjuvant setting 23 phase II and III trials were identified. All studies found increased pCR/tpCR but no benefit in terms of OS could be demonstrated. The only study conducted in the adjuvant setting failed to show any survival benefit of bevacizumab.

CONCLUSION

Despite increased response rates in both the metastatic and neoadjuvant setting, bevacizumab has failed to show any OS benefit. Future trials should include identification of robust predictive biomarkers in order to improve our understanding of molecular biomarkers and mechanisms.

Risk of venous and arterial thromboembolic events in cancer patients treated with gemcitabine: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Gemcitabine has been associated with an increased risk of arterial and venous thromboembolic events (ATEs and VTEs), although the overall risk remains unclear. As indications for its use in oncology are expanding, a comprehensive characterization of these complications becomes imperative.

METHODS

Pubmed was searched for articles published from 1 January 1990 to 31 December 2012. Eligible studies included prospective randomized controlled phase II and III trials evaluating gemcitabine based vs. non-gemcitabine based chemotherapy in patients with solid tumours. Data on VTEs and ATEs were extracted. Overall incidence rates, odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated employing fixed or random effects models depending on the heterogeneity of included trials.

RESULTS

A total of 4845 patients from 19 trials were included. Among patients treated with gemcitabine based chemotherapy, the overall incidence of VTEs (13 studies comprising 3823 patients) and ATEs (eight studies consisting of 2431 patients) was 2.1% (95% CI 1.2%, 3.8%) and 2.2% (95% CI 1.4%, 3.2%). The associated ORs of VTEs and ATEs were 1.56 (95% CI 0.86, 2.83, P = 0.15) and 1.82 (95% CI 0.89, 3.75, P = 0.10) compared with non-gemcitabine based therapy. A tendency to increase the risk of ATE and VTEs was also detected in any prespecified subgroup.

CONCLUSION

The use of gemcitabine does not significantly increase the risk of VTEs and ATEs in patients with solid tumours when compared with non-gemcitabine based chemotherapy.

The efficacy of bevacizumab plus paclitaxel as first-line treatment for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Although both bevacizumab and paclitaxel significantly improve the efficacy of chemotherapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), little have changed with overall survival rates when they have been used alone or combined with other chemotherapy. Thus, a meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of bevacizumab combined with paclitaxel in HER2-negative MBC patients. Pubmed and Embase were systematically reviewed for studies published up to September 2013 in which bevacizumab plus paclitaxel were compared with other chemotherapy. Primary outcomes comprised overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR). Eight phase II/III clinical trials met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 3,758 patients. The pooled results showed that combination of bevacizumab and paclitaxel significantly improved the PFS (HR = 0.63, 95% CI, 0.55-0.73, P = 0.011), ORR (RR = 1.28, 95% CI, 0.96-1.70, P = 0.0), but had no effect on OS (HR = 0.91, 95% CI, 0.81-1.01, P = 0.855). The meta-analysis confirms the benefits of bevacizumab-paclitaxel combination therapy in HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer, with an improvement in both progression free survival and objective response rate. However, no significant OS benefit was observed.

Dysphonia induced by anti-angiogenic compounds

The number of studies reporting the benefit of angiogenesis inhibition is steadily increasing. Anti-angiogenic drugs, used as monotherapy or in association with chemotherapy, have been shown to benefit patients with several different malignancies. Despite the benefits of these therapies, however, each drug has different side effects. This review is specifically focused on analyzing the frequency of one of the complications the most frequently overlooked by physicians, dysphonia. Perhaps this side effect is overlooked because it is not life-threatening, but dysphonia may nevertheless affect quality of life considerably. We reviewed 88 studies concerning treatment with anti-angiogenics (bevacizumab, aflibercept, sunitinib, sorafenib, pazopanib, axitinib and regorafenib) presently approved for clinical use, to review the incidence of dysphonia or voice changes in phase I, II and III closed clinical studies reported in ClinicalTrials.gov until March 2013. We found that almost all studies reported certain degree of dysphonia in the trial arms associated with anti-angiogenic treatment. We discuss these findings in light of the fact that it is not an uncommon side effect in patients exposed to these kinds of drugs. Particularly for treatments with axitinib, aflibercept and regorafenib, the angiogenesis inhibition possibly plays a role by altering the larynx in some way and modifying vocal fold vibrations, leading to dysphonia.

Efficacy of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and gemcitabine-free regimens, a meta-analysis of all relevant randomized controlled trials was performed to investigate the improvement in overall response rate (ORR), time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). A subgroup of gemcitabine-based doublet compared with single agent was also analyzed.

METHODS

The PubMed and Embase databases were searched for relevant publications reporting randomized controlled trials comparing gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and gemcitabine-free regimens between January 1990 and December 2012. Hazard ratios (HRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), or data for calculating HRs with 95% CI were derived.

RESULTS

Nine trials with a total of 2651 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with gemcitabine-free chemotherapy, gemcitabine-based therapy demonstrated no improvement in terms of ORR (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.73-1.62; P = 0.67), TTP (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.72-1.15; P = 0.44) and OS (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88-1.25; P = 0.60). In a subgroup including patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy containing anthracyclines or taxanes, sub-analysis assessment revealed that gemcitabine-based doublets were superior to monotherapy in ORR (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.26-2.12; P = 0.0002) and TTP (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.81; P < 0.00001), but no benefit was observed for OS (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79-1.03; P = 0.14). The rates of grade 3 and 4 anemia (HR 2.02, 95% CI 1.35-3.02; P = 0.006), neutropenia (HR 2.33, 95% CI 1.37-3.63; P = 0.01), and thrombocytopenia (HR 8.31, 95% CI 5.00-13.82; P < 0.0001) were significantly higher in the gemcitabine-based arm.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggests that gemcitabine-based chemotherapy was as effective as gemcitabine-free chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer with increased hematological toxicity. Subgroup analysis indicated that adding gemcitabine to monotherapy might be more effective.

Nab-paclitaxel/bevacizumab/carboplatin chemotherapy in first-line triple negative metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Triple negative metastatic breast cancer can be difficult to treat with primarily cytotoxic options. Nab-paclitaxel has demonstrated improved PFS and tolerability compared with standard cremophor-solubilized paclitaxel; based on this, we examined the efficacy and safety of combining weekly nab-paclitaxel with carboplatin and bevacizumab in TNMBC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this phase II, multicenter trial, patients with first-line TNMBC received nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (area under the curve = 2) on days 1, 8, 15, and bevacizumab (10 mg/kg) on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The primary end point was safety and tolerability and secondary end points included PFS, ORR, and CBR. PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Between July 16, 2007, and October 3, 2011, 34 patients were enrolled at 4 centers. Median age was 50.0 (range, 30-76) years and 77% (n = 26) of patients received previous adjuvant therapy. Median PFS was 9.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.8-25.1 months). The CBR was 94% (95% CI, 80%-99%), and ORR was 85% (95% CI, 69%-95%) for the combination. The regimen was well tolerated with the most common grade 3/4 adverse events being neutropenia (n = 18; 53%) and thrombocytopenia (n = 6; 18%), with other serous events including 1 grade 3 and 1 grade 4 thrombotic event and 1 febrile neutropenia.

CONCLUSION

The combination of nab-paclitaxel, bevacizumab, and carboplatin as first-line treatment for TNMBC was efficacious and well tolerated. The PFS, CBR, and ORR, and tolerability of the regimen, compares favorably with other standard first-line therapies.

Increased risk of high-grade hemorrhage in cancer patients treated with gemcitabine: a meta-analysis of 20 randomized controlled trials

Purpose

Gemcitabine, a third-generation anticancer agent, has been shown to be active in several solid tumors. High-grade hemorrhage (grade≥3) has been reported with this drug, although the overall risk remains unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating the incidence and risk of high-grade hemorrhage associated with gemcitabine.

Methods

Pubmed was searched for articles published from January 1, 1990 to December 31, 2012. Eligible studies included prospective randomized controlled phase II and III trials evaluating gemcitabine-based vs non-gemcitabine-based therapy in patients with solid tumors. Data on high-grade hemorrhage were extracted. Overall incidence rates, relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated employing fixed- or random-effects models depending on the heterogeneity of included trials.

Results

A total of 6433 patients from 20 trials were included. Among patients treated with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy, the overall incidence of high-grade hemorrhage was 1.7% (95%CI: 0.9–3.1%), and the RR of high-grade hemorrhage was 2.727 (95%CI: 1.581–4.702, p<0.001). Exploratory subgroup analysis revealed the highest RR of hemorrhage in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients (RR: 3.234; 95%CI, 1.678–6.233; p<0.001), phase II trials (RR 7.053, 95%CI: 1.591–31.27; p = 0.01), trials reported during 2006–2012 (RR: 3.750; 95%CI: 1.735–8.108, p<0.001) and gemcitabine used as single agent (RR 7.48; 95%CI: 0.78–71.92, p = 0.081).

Conclusion

Gemcitabine is associated with a significant increase risk of high-grade hemorrhage in patients with solid tumors when compared with non-gemcitabine-based therapy.

A phase I study of hepatic arterial infusion of nab-paclitaxel in combination with intravenous gemcitabine and bevacizumab for patients with advanced cancers and predominant liver metastases

PURPOSE

We conducted a phase I clinical trial for patients with advanced cancer and predominant liver disease.

METHODS

Patients were treated with HAI nab-paclitaxel (120-210 mg/m(2); day 1); intravenous bevacizumab (10 mg/kg; day 1); and intravenous gemcitabine (600-800 mg/m(2); days 1 and 8). A conventional "3 + 3" study design was used.

RESULTS

Fifty patients with advanced cancer and predominant liver metastases were treated (median age, 58 years; 27 women, 23 men; median number of prior therapies, 3 [range 0-12]). The most common cancers were breast (n = 9) and pancreatic (n = 9). Overall, 264 cycles were administered (median/patient, 4; range 1-17). No dose-limiting toxicities were noted during the escalation phase. On dose level 4, 3 patients were unable to receive gemcitabine on day 8 because of severe thrombocytopenia. Dose level 3 was selected as the maximum-tolerated dose (HAI nab-paclitaxel 180 mg/m(2) and intravenous gemcitabine 800 mg/m(2) and bevacizumab 10 mg/kg); 32 patients were treated in the expansion phase. The most common treatment-related toxicities were thrombocytopenia (n = 17), neutropenia (n = 10), and fatigue (n = 12). Of 46 patients evaluable for response, 9 (20 %) had a partial response (PR) and 9 (20 %) had stable disease for ≥6 months. The median overall survival duration was 7.0 months (95 % CI: 4, 22 months), and the median progression-free survival duration was 4.2 months (95 % CI: 2.7, 8.6 months).

CONCLUSIONS

HAI nab-paclitaxel in combination with gemcitabine and bevacizumab was well tolerated and had antitumor activity in selected patients with advanced cancer and liver metastases.