Efficacy and safety of endocrine monotherapy as first-line treatment for hormone-sensitive advanced breast cancer: A network meta-analysis

Real-world effectiveness of aromatase inhibitors and fulvestrant in HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer: a snapshot of the last two years before conventional use of CDK 4/6 inhibitors in a Portuguese institution

Background

Monotherapy with aromatase inhibitors and fulvestrant were the standard-of-care for hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor-type2 negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer, before integration of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors. Effectiveness data is essential for regulatory action, but little is known about real-world use of aromatase inhibitors and fulvestrant.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted resorting to data from a cancer registry to identify adult women with HR+/HER- advanced breast cancer exposed to aromatase inhibitors or fulvestrant (31 May 2017-31 March 2019) at the main oncology hospital in Portugal. Cases were updated with follow-up until death or cut-off (31 March 2021) and pseudoanonymized data extracted. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS) and secondary time to treatment failure (TTF), estimated using survival analysis and compared with published trials.

Results

192 patients were distributed by subgroups according to the medicine. Letrozole: OS 30.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) 20.6-41.4); TTF 11.2 (95%CI 8.7-13.7). Exemestane: OS 22.1 (95%CI 9.7-34.6); TTF 6.0 (95%CI 4.1-7.8). Fulvestrant: OS 21.6 (95%CI 16.5-26.7); TTF 5.6 (95%CI 4.5-6.6).

Conclusions

Estimated effectiveness (OS) of letrozole and fulvestrant was, respectively, 3.2-3.5 months lower than reported. The clinical meaning seems uncertain and may be explained a higher proportion of worse prognostic characteristics in patients treated in the real-world.

The value of oral selective estrogen receptor degraders in patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer after progression on ≥ 1 line of endocrine therapy: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Currently, the value of oral selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs) for hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (aBC) after progression on ≥ 1 line of endocrine therapy (ET) remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) and safety benefits in several clinical trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and conference proceedings (SABCS, ASCO, ESMO, and ESMO Breast) were searched systematically and comprehensively. Random effects models or fixed effects models were used to assess pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for treatment with oral SERDs versus standard of care.

RESULTS

A total of four studies involving 1,290 patients were included in our analysis. The hazard ratio (HR) of PFS showed that the oral SERD regimen was better than standard of care in patients with HR+/HER2- aBC after progression on ≥ 1 line of ET (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.62-0.91, p = 0.004). In patients with ESR1 mutations, the oral SERD regimen provided better PFS than standard of care (HR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.47-0.71, p < 0.00001). Regarding patients with disease progression following previous use of CDK4/6 inhibitors, PFS benefit was observed in oral SERD-treatment arms compared to standard of care (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.64-0.87, p = 0.0002).

CONCLUSIONS

The oral SERD regimen provides a significant PFS benefit compared to standard-of-care ET in patients with HR+/HER2- aBC after progression on ≥ 1 line of ET. In particular, we recommend oral SERDs as a preferred choice for those patients with ESR1m, and it could be a potential replacement for fulvestrant. The oral SERD regimen is also beneficial after progression on CDK4/6 inhibitors combined with endocrine therapy.

AMEERA-3: Randomized Phase II Study of Amcenestrant (Oral Selective Estrogen Receptor Degrader) Versus Standard Endocrine Monotherapy in Estrogen Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Amcenestrant (oral selective estrogen receptor degrader) demonstrated promising safety and efficacy in earlier clinical studies for endocrine-resistant, estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (ER+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (aBC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In AMEERA-3 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04059484), an open-label, worldwide phase II trial, patients with ER+/HER2- aBC who progressed in the (neo)adjuvant or advanced settings after not more than two previous lines of endocrine therapy (ET) were randomly assigned 1:1 to amcenestrant or single-agent endocrine treatment of physician's choice (TPC), stratified by the presence/absence of visceral metastases, previous/no treatment with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0/1). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent central review, compared using a stratified log-rank test (one-sided type I error rate of 2.5%).

RESULTS

Between October 22, 2019, and February 15, 2021, 290 patients were randomly assigned to amcenestrant (n = 143) or TPC (n = 147). PFS was numerically similar between amcenestrant and TPC (median PFS [mPFS], 3.6 v 3.7 months; stratified hazard ratio [HR], 1.051 [95% CI, 0.789 to 1.4]; one-sided P = .643). Among patients with baseline mutated ESR1; (n = 120 of 280), amcenestrant numerically prolonged PFS versus TPC (mPFS, 3.7 v 2.0 months; stratified HR, 0.9 [95% CI, 0.565 to 1.435]). Overall survival data were immature but numerically similar between groups (HR, 0.913; 95% CI, 0.595 to 1.403). In amcenestrant versus TPC groups, treatment-emergent adverse events (any grade) occurred in 82.5% versus 76.2% of patients and grade ≥3 events occurred in 21.7% versus 15.6%.

CONCLUSION

AMEERA-3 did not meet its primary objective of improved PFS with amcenestrant versus TPC although a numerical improvement in PFS was observed in patients with baseline ESR1 mutation. Efficacy and safety with amcenestrant were consistent with the standard of care for second-/third-line ET for ER+/HER2- aBC.

The 5-Year Disease-Free Survival of Third Generation Aromatase Inhibitor for Postmenopausal Women with HR-Positive HER2-Negative Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer

Background: Several studies showed the superiority of aromatase inhibitor (AI) as first-line therapy for patients with hormone-receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer (BC). For the clinician, studies in the real world are warranted to determine treatment based on the efficacy of each drug. We compared a 5-y disease-free survival (DFS) of each AI in terms of survival benefit. Materials and Methods: We evaluated 450 medical records of postmenopausal women who were diagnosed with HR-positive HER2-negative BC (stage I - III) at Dr. Sardjito General Hospital from January to December 2019. All patients had undergone surgery and chemotherapy or radiation therapy. Moreover, study participants received anastrozole, letrozole, or exemestane for at least one year. Kaplan Meier estimation survival curve was used to analyze the survival rate. Result: Of 79 patients meeting inclusion criteria, there were 21.52% distant metastases documented. Time to disease progression of anastrozole, letrozole, and exemestane was 49 months, 58 months, and 53 months, respectively. Letrozole was found better than anastrozole (hazard ratio (HR)=4.342, 95% CI 0.95-19.95; p=0.038). Letrozole versus exemestane (HR=2.757, 95% CI 0.53-14.33; p=0,206) and anastrozole versus exemestane (HR=1.652, 95% CI 0.56-4.84; p=0.351) were found not significantly different. 5-y DFS rate of letrozole was better found (87.5%) than exemestane (73.7%) and anastrozole (61.4%). Conclusion: 5-year letrozole administration could be proposed as first-line therapy for postmenopausal women with HR-positive HER2-negative BC. A considerable subject and long-term follow-up are needed for validation.

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.

Endocrine therapy-based treatments in hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several endocrine therapy (ET)-based treatments are available for patients with advanced breast cancer. We assessed the efficacy of different ET-based treatments in patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer with endocrine-sensitive or endocrine-resistant disease.

METHODS

We searched Medline and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to 15 October 2019 and abstracts from major conferences from 2016 to October 2019. We included phase II/III randomised trials, comparing ≥2 ET-based treatments. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analysed by network meta-analyses using MTC Bayesian models based on both fixed-effect and random-effect models; relative treatment effects were measured as HRs and 95% credibility intervals (CrI). All statistical tests were two-sided. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed and this systematic review is registered in the PROSPERO database.

RESULTS

55 publications reporting on 32 trials (n=12 293 patients) were included. Regarding PFS in the endocrine sensitive setting (n=5200; 12 trials), the combination of cyclin-dependent kinases (CDK)4/6-inhibitors (CDK4/6i)+fulvestrant 500 mg (F500) was likely the most effective treatment (surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA)=97.3%), followed by CDK4/6i+aromatase inhibitor ±goserelin; there was no significant difference between them (HR 0.82; 95% CrI 0.54-1.25). Regarding OS (n=2157; five trials), the most effective treatment was probably CDK4/6i+F500 (SUCRA=97.3%); comparing CDK4/6i+F500 versus F500 held a HR of 0.77 (95% CrI 0.63-0.95). Regarding PFS in the endocrine-resistant setting (n=6635; 20 trials), CDK4/6i+F500 was likely the most effective treatment (SUCRA=95.7%), followed by capivasertib+F500, without significant difference between them (HR 0.91; 95% CrI 0.60-1.36). For OS (n=4377; 11 trials), the most effective treatments were capivasertib+F500 (SUCRA=84.7%) and CDK4/6i+F500 (SUCRA=69.9%). Comparing CDK4/6i+F500 versus F500 held a HR of 0.77 (95% CrI 0.67-0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

CDK4/6i+F500 is likely the best treatment option in both endocrine-sensitive and endocrine-resistant diseases for PFS, and in endocrine-sensitive patients for OS. Concerning OS in endocrine-resistant patients, capivasertib+F500 and CDK4/6i+F500 are likely the best treatments.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018104628.

Effect of first-line endocrine therapy in patients with hormone-sensitive advanced breast cancer: a network meta-analysis

Background

Endocrine therapy is the cornerstone treatment for patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of various first-line endocrine monotherapies or combinations to determine the optimal sequence in a network meta-analysis.

Materials and methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception up to November 21, 2017. We included only RCTs that assessed the effectiveness of the following treatments as a monotherapy or in combination as the first-line treatment: tamoxifen, anastrozole, letrozole, exemestane, fulvestrant, palbociclib, and ribociclib. The results were presented with pooled odds ratio or hazard ratio (HR), and 95% credible interval (CrI). The primary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival/time to progression.

Results

A total of 16 eligible articles (14 RCTs) involving 6,602 patients treated with 10 different first-line endocrine therapies were assessed in our network meta-analysis. Palbociclib plus letrozole was superior to anastrozole, letrozole, exemestane, fulvestrant 500 mg, and anastrozole plus fulvestrant (loading dose) (HR=0.44, 95% CrI: 0.33–0.58; HR=0.56, 95% CrI: 0.45–0.68; HR=0.45, 95% CrI: 0.32–0.61; HR=0.58, 95% CrI: 0.42–0.81; HR=0.50, 95% CrI: 0.37–0.68; respectively). However, there is no significant advantage compared with ribociclib plus letrozole (HR=1.00, 95% CrI: 0.72–1.39). In terms of ORR, ribociclib plus letrozole is more effective than palbociclib plus letrozole (odds ratio=1.30, 95% CrI: 0.83–2.02).

Conclusion

Palbociclib plus letrozole and ribociclib plus letrozole might be the optimal first-line endocrine therapeutic choices for hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer due to a longer progression-free survival/time to progression and a more efficacious ORR.

Thyroid Hormone in the Clinic and Breast Cancer

There is preclinical and recent epidemiological evidence that thyroid hormone supports breast cancer. These observations raise the issue of whether management of breast cancer in certain settings should include consideration of reducing the possible contribution of thyroid hormone to the advancement of the disease. In a preliminary experience, elimination of the clinical action of endogenous L-thyroxine (T₄) in patients with advanced solid tumors, including breast cancer, has favorably affected the course of the cancer, particularly when coupled with administration of exogenous 3,5,3′-triiodo-L-thyronine (T₃) (euthyroid hypothyroxinemia). We discuss in the current brief review the possible clinical settings in which to consider whether endogenous thyroid hormone—or exogenous thyroid hormone in the patient with hypothyroidism and coincident breast cancer—is significantly contributing to breast cancer outcome.

Ultrasound combined with fine needle aspiration cytology for the assessment of axillary lymph nodes in patients with early stage breast cancer

This study aimed to explore the clinical usefulness of ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology (USG-FNAC) for the evaluation of axillary lymph nodes in patients with early stage breast cancer (BC) among the Chinese Han female population.Around 124 patients with early stage BC were included in this retrospective study. All patients underwent USG-FNAC (group A). Patients with proven metastasis also underwent axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) (group B). In addition, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) was performed 2 to 5 hours prior to the surgery.The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive predictive value (PPV) of axillary ultrasound were 75.0%, 75.0%, 75.0%, and 82.6%, respectively, while for USG-FNAC, they were 80.8%, 100.0%, 88.7%, and 100.0%, respectively. Significant differences were found in specificity, accuracy, and PPV between the 2 procedures (P < .05).The results of this study demonstrated that USG-FNAC was effective for selecting patients with early stage BC using ALND or SLNB among the Chinese Han female population.

Ultrasound for postoperative surveillance after mastectomy in patients with breast cancer: A retrospective study

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical usefulness of postoperative surveillance by ultrasound (PSU) in patients after breast cancer surgery.In this retrospective study, 324 patients with breast cancer after mastectomy were included between January 2006 and December 2008. The final-positive lesions (FPL) were diagnosed according to the results of cytopathology, clinical and imaging examinations. The outcome evaluations included the sensitivity (SS), specificity (SC), ultrasound accuracy for FPL (UAFPL), and positive predictive value (PPV) after the mastectomy.A total of 5117 ultrasound examinations were conducted for all those patients to the December 2016. After mastectomy, the SS, SC, UAFPL, and PPV were as follows: mastectomy bed (SS, 100.0%; SC, 99.7%; UAFPL, 99.7%; and PPV, 36.0%), contralateral breast (SS, 100.0%; SC, 99.0%; UAFPL, 99.0%; and PPV, 25.4%), ipsilateral axillary or supraclavicular (SS, 91.7%; SC, 99.4%; UAFPL, 99.4%; and PPV, 25.6%), and contralateral axilla or supraclavicular lymph nodes (SS, 100.0%; SC, 99.9%; UAFPL, 99.9%; and PPV, 33.3%).In summary, we demonstrated that applied PSU can detect the malignant lesions in the breast regional area with high sensitivity, specificity and accuracy.