Daily oral etoposide in patients with heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer

What Is Known about Breast Cancer in Young Women?

Breast cancer (BC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in women under the age of 40 years worldwide. In addition, the incidence of breast cancer in young women (BCYW) has been rising. Young women are not the focus of screening programs and BC in younger women tends to be diagnosed in more advanced stages. Such patients have worse clinical outcomes and treatment complications compared to older patients. BCYW has been associated with distinct tumour biology that confers a worse prognosis, including poor tumour differentiation, increased Ki-67 expression, and more hormone-receptor negative tumours compared to women >50 years of age. Pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes such as BRCA1/2 are more common in early-onset BC compared to late-onset BC. Despite all these differences, BCYW remains poorly understood with a gap in research regarding the risk factors, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. Age-specific clinical characteristics or outcomes data for young women are lacking, and most of the standard treatments used in this subpopulation currently are derived from older patients. More age-specific clinical data and treatment options are required. In this review, we discuss the epidemiology, clinicopathologic characteristics, outcomes, treatments, and special considerations of breast cancer in young women. We also underline future directions and highlight areas that require more attention in future studies.

Oral etoposide in heavily pre-treated metastatic breast cancer: results from the ESME cohort and comparison with other chemotherapy regimens

INTRODUCTION

HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is a common setting in which chemotherapy could be effective even in later lines of treatment. Oral etoposide has demonstrated clinical activity in this setting in small-scale studies, but its efficacy has not been compared to that of other chemotherapy regimens.

METHODS

We used the ESME database (Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics), a real-life national French multicentre cohort of MBC patients initiating therapy between 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2014. HER2-negative MBC patients who received oral etoposide as > 3rd chemotherapy line and for more than 14 days were included. Primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary objectives were overall survival (OS), and propensity-score matched Cox models including comparison with other therapies in the same setting.

RESULTS

Three hundred forty-five out of 16,702 patients received oral etoposide and 222 were eligible. Median PFS was 3.2 months [95% CI 2.8-4] and median OS 7.3 months [95% CI 5.7-10.3]. Median PFS did not significantly differ according to the therapeutic line. The only prognostic factor for both PFS and OS was the MBC phenotype (hormone receptor-positive versus triple-negative, HR = 0.71 [95% CI 0.52-0.97], p = 0.028 for PFS and HR = 0.65 [0.46-0.92], p = 0.014 for OS). After matching for the propensity score, no differential effect on PFS or OS was observed between oral etoposide and other chemotherapy regimens administered in the same setting (HR = 0.94 [95% CI 0.77-1.15], p = 0.55 for PFS and HR = 1.10 [95% CI 0.88-1.37], p = 0.40 for OS).

CONCLUSION

Oral etoposide retains some efficacy in selected heavily pre-treated patients with HER2-negative MBC, with the advantages of oral administration.

A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Studies of Oral Etoposide in Metastatic Breast Cancer

Objective

Oral etoposide has been used as a later line therapy for metastatic breast cancer for more than twenty years. Its efficacy and clinical usefulness has been suggested in small phase II studies in the metastatic breast cancer population and the drug has also the added advantage of convenient oral administration. Despite these advantages, the place of oral etoposide in treatment of metastatic breast cancer has been challenged in the last decade due to introduction of several other chemotherapeutics, including options available orally, as well as novel targeted therapies. This report pools the data on response rates and survival from all available oral etoposide studies in order to reach a more precise estimate of the clinical benefit of the drug.

Materials and methods

A review of the literature was performed for studies of oral etoposide in metastatic breast cancer. Data were extracted from eligible studies and summary statistics derived. Calculations of pooled response rates and survival estimates were performed according to a random or fixed effect model as appropriate.

Results

The pooled estimate of Response Rate derived from twelve studies found in the English literature was 18.5% (95% CI 11.5-25.5%). The pooled estimate of Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR) was 45.8% (95% CI 38.6-53.0%) and median Overall Survival (OS) approached 1 year. Summarized adverse effects profile data show an overall manageable toxicity.

Conclusion

This pooled analysis provides evidence of a moderate clinical effectiveness of oral etoposide in metastatic breast cancer that could be useful in situations that options are limited but active treatment still appropriate.

Palliative systemic therapy for young women with metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Breast cancer in young women age less than 40 years remains a relatively rare disease. Emerging data suggest that the biology of breast cancer in younger women may differ from that of older women. Although metastatic breast cancer remains incurable, it is definitely treatable; especially in this era of emerging novel therapeutics.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most women have hormone receptor-positive disease and strategies that interfere with proliferation and the PI3 kinase pathway are reporting exciting results. The prognosis of the metastatic HER2 subtype has been extended to a median survival of 56 months with dual HER2 targeting agents in the first-line setting. Finally, triple negative breast cancer has an enlarging range of therapeutic options including immunotherapy, antiangiogenesis therapy, and targeted therapies including agents that interfere with androgen receptor signaling.

SUMMARY

Combined palliative and holistic approaches are essential to help young women navigate the marathon of treatment for metastatic breast cancer.

A Review of Systemic Treatment in Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Patients with breast cancer along with metastatic estrogen and progesterone receptor (ER/PR)- and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative tumors are referred to as having metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) disease. Although there have been many new treatment options approved by the Food and Drug Administration for ER/PR-positive and Her2/neu-amplified metastatic breast cancer, relatively few new agents have been approved for patients with mTNBC. There have been several head-to-head chemotherapy trials performed within the metastatic setting, and much of what is applied in clinical practice is extrapolated from chemotherapy trials in the adjuvant setting, with taxanes and anthracyclines incorporated early on in the patient's treatment course. Select synergistic combinations can produce faster and more significant response rates compared with monotherapy and are typically used in the setting of visceral threat or symptomatic disease. Preclinical studies have implicated other possible targets and mechanisms in mTNBC. Ongoing clinical trials are underway assessing new chemotherapeutic strategies and agents, including targeted therapy and immunotherapy. In this review, we evaluate the standard systemic and future treatment options in mTNBC.

Efficacy of oral Etoposide in pretreated metastatic breast cancer: a multicenter phase 2 study

No standard chemotherapy has been defined for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes. A multicenter phase 2 study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of oral etoposide in patients with MBC.Eligible patients were treated with repeated cycles of oral etoposide (60 mg/m/d on days 1-10, followed by 11 days of rest). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints were objective response rate, clinical benefit rate (CBR), and toxicity profiles.Seventy-five women with MBC were enrolled at 10 centers in China. Seven (9.3%) patients achieved partial response (PR) and 29 (38.7%) had stable disease (SD). Nine patients (12%) had SD for >24 weeks and the CBR was 21.3% (16/75). The median PFS was 4.5 (range, 1.3-7.7) months. Of the 38 patients who received ≥3 regimens prior to this study, 2 (5.3%) had PR and 3 (7.9%) had SD for >24 weeks, with a CBR of 13.2%. The reported grade 3/4 adverse events included leukopenia (13.3%, n = 10), neutropenia (17.9%, n = 14), anemia (2.7%, n = 2), vomiting (2.6%, n = 2), and alopecia (1.3%, n = 1).Oral etoposide was effective and well tolerated in Chinese women with pretreated MBC.

A retrospective analysis of the activity and safety of oral Etoposide in heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer patients

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients derive benefit from chemotherapy, but options become limited after several prior chemotherapeutic regimens. Oral etoposide (VP-16) has previously been found to be clinically active in MBC patients in phase II trials. However, with increasing availability of other drugs, etoposide use has declined in spite of its unfavorable toxicity profile probably being overestimated. We therefore evaluated the clinical benefit and safety of oral etoposide in a population of MBC patients who had failed multiple regimens of currently used therapies. Sixty-six patients with MBC previously treated with a median of eight (range 2-13) regimens of therapy were eligible for the study. Patients received 50 mg/day oral etoposide in 20-day cycles with 1-week of rest. All patients were evaluated for clinical benefit (clinical benefit rate [CBR], complete response, partial response, and disease stabilization >24 weeks), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicities. Median PFS was 4 months, CBR was 18% (overall response rate 4%), and median OS from the start of treatment was 11 months. Little clinically significant or high-grade toxicity were observed. No patients withdrew from treatment due to etoposide-induced toxicity. The favorable clinical response, low toxicity, and low cost of the drug suggest that etoposide is a viable option for patients with heavily pretreated MBC.

Evolving approaches to metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines and taxanes

Despite major advances in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer, many women will develop metastatic disease, either de novo or following optimal adjuvant therapy. Further effective therapeutic options are needed for women who progress following anthracycline- and taxane-containing regimens. Capecitabine is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration as monotherapy in this setting. Other agents such as gemcitabine or vinorelbine might be considered based on multiple phase II studies. Combination therapies generally increase response rates but with a concomitant increase in toxicity. Other agents that have been studied in this setting include etoposide, irinotecan, and pemetrexed. Novel agents undergoing testing include the fluorinated vinca alkaloid vinflunine and the halichondrin B analogue eribulin. Responses have been seen in taxane-pretreated patients with the use of another conventional taxane, novel formulations, or alternative schedules. Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin might be considered in some patients for whom there is a concern regarding cardiac toxicity with the conventional preparation. The epothilones are a novel group of microtubule-stabilizing agents. Ixabepilone is a member of this class that has been approved as monotherapy in patients whose tumors are resistant or refractory to anthracyclines, taxanes, and capecitabine. It is also approved with capecitabine in patients whose cancer is resistant to treatment with anthracyclines and taxanes. Decision-making regarding treatment selection must take into account multiple patient and tumor factors. The therapeutic indices of the available treatments should be considered in the context of the individual patient.

Effective oral chemotherapy for breast cancer: pillars of strength

Traditionally, anticancer therapy has been dominated by intravenous drug therapy. However, oral agents provide an attractive approach to chemotherapy and use of oral treatments is increasing. We discuss the benefits and challenges of oral chemotherapy from the perspectives of patients, healthcare providers and healthcare funders. Important issues include patient preference, efficacy, compliance, bioavailability, reimbursement, use in special patient populations, financial and staff time savings and flexibility of dosing. We review data for traditional oral agents (e.g. cyclophosphamide, methotrexate), newer oral chemotherapies (e.g. capecitabine), oral formulations of traditionally intravenous agents (e.g. vinorelbine, idarubicin) and new biologic agents under evaluation in breast cancer (e.g. tyrosine kinase inhibitors). Lastly, we review studies of all-oral combination regimens. The wealth of data available and the increasing use of oral agents in breast cancer suggest that many of the concerns and perceptions about oral therapy, including efficacy and bioavailability, have been overcome, and that oral therapy will play a major role in breast cancer management in the future in both the metastatic and adjuvant settings.

Factors determining outcome after third line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer

Patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are increasingly offered third line chemotherapy. We have reviewed the response rate (RR), time to progression (TTP) and survival of 149 patients in this setting and have investigated factors that influence their outcome. The RR, TTP and survival were 30%, 4 and 8 months, respectively, and should serve as a benchmark for future studies. Response to previous chemotherapy was the only independent variable predicting RR, TTP and survival, p=0.025, 0.04 and 0.004, respectively. Thirty-two percent of patients did not respond to the first two lines of chemotherapy and had a lower RR and a significantly shorter TTP and survival. In conclusion, third line chemotherapy for MBC is sometimes effective in patients who have responded to previous chemotherapy. Patients who do not respond to the first two lines of chemotherapy should be considered for clinical trials or supportive care.

Treatment of MCF-7 cells with taxol and etoposide induces distinct alterations in the expression of apoptosis-related genes BCL2, BCL2L12, BAX, CASPASE-9 and FAS

We studied alterations in the mRNA expression levels of BCL2 (Bcl-2), BCL2L12, BAX, FAS and CASPASE-9 genes in the MCF-7 breast cancer cell line in response to treatment with two anticancer drugs. Cell toxicity was evaluated by the MTT method, trypan blue staining and DNA laddering, whereas the expression levels of the apoptosis-related genes were analysed by RT-PCR using gene-specific primers. In the case of etoposide, down-regulation of the BCL2L12-A gene variant and of CASPASE-9, as well as upregulation of BAX, was observed, whereas treatment of MCF-7 cells with taxol led to down-regulation of the mRNA levels of all genes examined. Our results support the idea that after long-term clinical studies, mRNA expression analysis of BCL2L12 and other members of the BCL2 gene family may serve as useful molecular markers predicting chemotherapy response in breast cancer.

Treatment with oral etoposide for childhood recurrent ependymomas

In this study the authors retrospectively evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of prolonged oral etoposide therapy in children with recurrent ependymoma. Twelve ependymoma patients with documented recurrent or persistent disease were treated between May 1998 and October 2003. All patients were treated monthly with oral VP-16 administered at a dose of 50 mg/m2/d for 21 days, with a 7-day interval between cycles, for a planned minimum number of six cycles. Response (complete plus partial) after two cycles occurred in 5 of the 12 patients (41.6%). Response plus stable disease occurred in 10 of the 12 (83.3%), with a median duration of response or stable disease of 7 months (range 4-30). The median survival was 7 months; the 2-year progression-free survival was 16.7%. These results emphasize that oral etoposide is an attractive option for childhood recurrent ependymomas in terms of administration, tolerability, and neuroradiologic response.

Phase I Trial of Uracil–Ftorafur, Leucovorin, and Etoposide: An Active All-oral Regimen for Metastatic Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

To determine the maximum tolerated doses, toxicities, and therapeutic effect of an oral chemotherapy regimen consisting of uracil-ftorafur, etoposide, and leucovorin for metastatic breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The regimen consists of 28-day cycles of uracil-ftorafur, etoposide, and leucovorin administered orally on days 1-14. The dose of etoposide was fixed at 50 mg/m2/day, and uracil-ftorafur was escalated in 50 mg/m2/day increments from 200 to 350 mg/m2. Leucovorin, was used at a dose of 90 mg/day. Eligibility criteria required prior treatment with a taxane or anthracycline.

RESULTS

A total of 23 patients were enrolled. Twenty patients are assessable for toxicity and 16 patients are assessable for response. All non-hematologic toxicities were grade 1 or 2. Three hematologic dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed. Partial responses were seen in 6 of 16 (37.5%, 95% confidence interval 15%, 85%) of assessable patients with durations ranging from 4 to 20 months. Stable disease was observed in 4 of 16 (25%) of patients with durations from 4 to 12 months. Median time to progression was 10.5 months. An intent to treat analysis revealed a response of 26%.

CONCLUSION

The recommended dose and schedule of this combination is uracil-ftorafur 350 mg/m2, leucovorin 90 mg/day, and etoposide 50 mg/m2 for two consecutive weeks in a 4-week cycle. This all-oral regimen is well tolerated and demonstrates encouraging efficacy in a cohort of heavily pretreated patient with metastatic breast cancer.