Oral vinorelbine versus intravenous vinorelbine, in combination with epirubicin as first-line chemotherapy in Chinese patients with metastatic breast cancer

Oral VRL offers easier administration, better quality of life, and cost saving. This study aimed to evaluate the treatment efficacy in terms of tumor response of the two formulations of vinorelbine (VRL, oral and IV) in combination with epirubicin (EPI); and the effect of EPI co-administration on VRL pharmacokinetics (PK) in Chinese patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) using a phase 2, open label, randomized trial. Patients were aged 18–70 years, had histologically confirmed MBC, Karnofsky Performance Status ≥ 70%, and life expectancy ≥ 12 weeks. The treatment consisted of 6 cycles of 3 weeks each. VRL dose was: (Oral-VRL) 60 mg/m² for cycle 1, 80 mg/m² for cycles 2–6, and (IV-VRL) 25 mg/m² for cycle 1 and 30 mg/m² for cycles 2–6. EPI dose of 75 mg/m² was given on day 1 in both arms for all cycles. 133 patients were enrolled: 66 in Oral-VRL and 67 in IV-VRL arms. The median age for Oral-VRL and IV-VRL arms was 48.4 and 50.0 years, respectively. Objective response rates were 50.0% (95% CI 37.4–62.6%) for Oral-VRL and 53.7% (95% CI 41.1–66.0%) for IV-VRL. Both treatment arms met the efficacy objective target of at least 31 responses, demonstrating efficacy as first-line treatment for MBC. Similar blood PK profiles, exposures, and VRL clearance were observed between VRL + EPI vs VRL-only modalities for both arms. Oral VRL is comparable to IV VRL and an effective first-line treatment for Chinese patients with MBC. The activity of VRL + EPI combination is unaltered when VRL is given orally at recommended doses.

Hormonal therapy might be a better choice as maintenance treatment than capecitabine after response to first-line capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy for patients with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative, metastatic breast cancer

Background

Both hormonal therapy (HT) and maintenance capecitabine monotherapy (MCT) have been shown to extend time to progression (TTP) in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) after failure of taxanes and anthracycline-containing regimens. However, no clinical trials have directly compared the efficacy of MCT and HT after response to first-line capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy (FCCT) in patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the charts of 138 HR-positive and HER2-negative MBC patients who were in non-progression status after FCCT and who were treated between 2003 and 2012 at the Cancer Institute and Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, in Beijing, China. The median number of first-line chemotherapy cycles was 6 (range, 4–8); combined agents included taxanes, vinorelbine, or gemcitabine. Of these 138 patients, 79 received MCT, and 59 received HT. Single-agent capecitabine was administered at a dose of 1250 mg/m² twice daily for 14 days, followed by a 7-day rest period, repeated every 3 weeks. Of the 59 patients who received HT, 37 received aromatase inhibitors (AIs), 8 received selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), and 14 received goserelin plus either AIs or SERMs. We then compared the MCT group and HT group in terms of treatment efficacy.

Results

With a median follow-up of 43 months, patients in the HT group had a much longer TTP than patients in the MCT group (13 vs. 8 months, P = 0.011). When TTP was adjusted for age, menopausal status, Karnofsky performance status score, disease-free survival, site of metastasis, number of metastatic sites, and response status after FCCT, extended TTP was still observed for patients in the HT group (hazard ratio: 0.63; 95% confidence interval: 0.44–0.93; P = 0.020). We also observed a trend of overall survival advantage for patients in the HT group vs. patients in the MCT group, but the difference was not significant (43 vs. 37 months, P = 0.400). In addition, patients in the HT group generally tolerated the treatment well, whereas patients in the MCT group experienced grades 3–4 adverse events, the most frequent of which were hand-foot syndrome (15.8%) and hematologic abnormalities (7.6%).

Conclusion

For HR-positive and HER2-negative MBC patients, HT might be considered a treatment after response to FCCT but prior to MCT as a long-term administration.

Capecitabine maintenance therapy in patients with recurrent or metastatic breast cancer

Our objective was to investigate the efficacy and safety of capecitabine maintenance therapy (CMT) after capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. The clinical data of 139 metastatic breast cancer patients treated from March 2008 to May 2012 with capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy were retrospectively analyzed. When initial disease control was achieved by the combination chemotherapy, we used CMT for 50 patients, while 37 patients were treated with a different (non-CMT) maintenance therapy. We compared time to progression (TTP), objective response rate, disease control rate, clinical benefit rate, and safety of the two groups, and a sub-group analysis was performed according to pathological characteristics. Sixty-four percent of the patients received a median of six cycles of a docetaxel+capecitabine combination chemotherapy regimen (range 1-45); the median TTP (MTTP) for the complete treatment was 9.43 months (95%CI=8.38-10.48 months) for the CMT group and 4.5 months (95%CI=4.22-4.78 months; P=0.004) for the non-CMT group. The MTTPs for the maintenance therapies administered after the initial capecitabine combined chemotherapy were 4.11 months (95%CI=3.34-4.87 months) for the CMT group and 2.0 months (95%CI=1.63-2.38 months) for the non-CMT group. Gastrointestinal side effects, decreased white blood cells and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia were the main adverse reactions experienced with the combination chemotherapies, CMT and non-CMT treatments. No significant differences in the incidence of adverse reactions were detected in the CMT and non-CMT patients. After initial disease control was achieved with the capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy, CMT can significantly prolong TTP rates with a favorable safety profile.