Endocrine therapies in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, pretreated, advanced breast cancer: A network meta-analysis

Beyond the median: Estimating survival times for patients starting endocrine therapy for estrogen receptor-positive, metastatic breast cancer from recent randomized trials

AIM

To estimate scenarios for survival for patients with estrogen receptor (ER) positive, metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and to help communicate prognosis to patients starting endocrine therapy (ET) METHODS: We searched for randomized trials of ET for ER-positive MBC and extracted the following percentiles (representative survival scenarios) from each overall survival (OS) curve: 90th (worst-case), 75th (lower-typical), 50th (median), 25th (upper-typical), and 10th (best-case). We then assessed the accuracy of estimating these percentiles for each OS curve by multiplying the median OS by four simple multiples: 0.25 (to estimate the 90th percentile), 0.5 (75th), 2 (25th), and 3 (10th). Estimates were deemed accurate if it fell within 0.75-1.33 times the actual value.

RESULTS

We identified 25 trials with 10,566 patients. The median OS (interquartile range) was: 61.3 months (53.4-64.8) for first-line ET with cyclin-dependant kinase 4/6 inhibitors (four treatment groups); 42.6 months (40.9-50.4) for first-line ET alone (21 treatment groups) and 29.2 months (24.8-33.4) for subsequent line ET (19 treatment groups). Simple multiples of the median OS accurately estimated the 90th percentile in 80%; 75th percentile in 93%; and 25th percentile in 76% of curves. The 10th percentile was only available for four OS curves and could not be evaluated.

CONCLUSION

Simple multiples of the median OS are a helpful and accurate method to assist in estimating and discussing scenarios for survival for MBC patients starting ET. Longer follow-up of trials is required to help clinicians estimate the best-case scenario.

A network meta-analysis of efficacy and safety for first-line and second/further-line therapies in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR + /HER2 -) advanced breast cancer is a prevalent subtype among postmenopausal women. Despite the growing number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) exploring this topic, the efficacy and safety of first-line and second/further-line treatments remain uncertain. Accordingly, our aim was to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the efficacy and safety of these therapies through network meta-analysis.

METHODS

RCTs were identified by searching Pubmed, Embase, and major cancer conferences. The efficacy of interventions was assessed using the hazard ratios (HRs) of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), while safety was indicated by the incidence of any grade adverse events (AEs), grade 3-5 AEs, AEs leading to treatment discontinuation, and AEs leading to death. Both time-variant HRs fractional polynomial models and time-invariant HRs Cox-proportional hazards models were considered for handling time-to-event data. Safety indicators were analyzed using Bayesian network meta-analysis. Additionally, subgroup analyses were conducted based on patient characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 41 RCTs (first-line 17, second/further-lines 27) were included in the analysis. For first-line treatment, the addition of Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors to endocrine therapy significantly improved therapeutic efficacy in terms of both PFS and OS, demonstrating the best performance across all mechanisms. Specifically, the combination of Abemaciclib and Letrozole demonstrated the most favorable performance in terms of PFS, while Ribociclib plus Fulvestrant yielded the best outcomes in OS. Incorporating the immune checkpoint inhibitor Avelumab into the regimen with CDK4/6 inhibitors and selective estrogen receptor degraders significantly enhanced both PFS and OS in second-line or later treatments. Regarding safety, endocrine monotherapy performed well. Regarding safety, endocrine monotherapy performed well. There is mounting evidence suggesting that most CDK4/6 inhibitors may demonstrate poorer performance with respect to hematologic AEs. However, additional evidence is required to further substantiate these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

CDK4/6 inhibitors, combined with endocrine therapy, are pivotal in first-line treatment due to their superior efficacy and manageable AEs. For second/further-line treatment, adding immune checkpoint inhibitors to CDK4/6 inhibitors plus endocrine therapy may produce promising results. However, to reduce the results' uncertainty, further trials comparing these novel treatments are warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registration number: PROSPERO (CRD42022377431).

From clinical trials to clinical practice: the use of everolimus and exemestane in the treatment of hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: real-world data

Everolimus combined with exemestane can modulate endocrine resistance. The combination showed significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) in phase III clinical trials for hormone receptor positive metastatic breast cancer patients. It also showed serious adverse events. We evaluate the efficacy and prevalence of serious adverse events in a real-world setting. We retrospectively examined 91 breast cancer patients; all were previously treated with chemotherapy and fulvestrant (84% and 59%, respectively). After a 13-month median follow-up, 29% had a partial response, and 32% had stable disease. The PFS was 7.8 months. Due to adverse events, 19% of patients stopped the treatment, while 31% required a dose reduction. Despite enrolling heavier-pretreated patients, our real-world outcome for the efficacy and safety of the exemestane and everolimus match those of the clinical trials. Such results should assure clinicians and lead to wider adoption of this oral, chemotherapy-sparing regimen.