Updated overall survival from the MONALEESA-3 trial in postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer receiving first-line ribociclib plus fulvestrant

BACKGROUND

The phase III MONALEESA-3 trial included first- (1L) and second-line (2L) patients and demonstrated a significant overall survival (OS) benefit for ribociclib + fulvestrant in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) in the final protocol-specified and exploratory (longer follow-up) OS analyses. At the time of these analyses, the full OS benefit of 1L ribociclib was not completely characterized because the median OS (mOS) was not reached. As CDK4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) + endocrine therapy (ET) is now a preferred option for 1L HR+/HER2- ABC, we report an exploratory analysis (median follow-up, 70.8 months; 14.5 months longer than the prior analysis) to fully elucidate the OS benefit in the MONALEESA-3 1L population.

METHODS

Postmenopausal patients with HR+/HER2- ABC were randomized 2:1 to 1L/2L fulvestrant + ribociclib or placebo. OS in 1L patients (de novo disease or relapse > 12 months from completion of [neo]adjuvant ET) was assessed by Cox proportional hazards model and Kaplan-Meier methods. Progression-free survival 2 (PFS2) and chemotherapy-free survival (CFS) were analyzed. MONALEESA-3 is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02422615).

RESULTS

At data cutoff (January 12, 2022; median follow-up time, 70.8 months), mOS was 67.6 versus 51.8 months with 1L ribociclib versus placebo (hazard ratio (HR) 0.67; 95% CI 0.50-0.90); 16.5% and 8.6% of ribociclib and placebo patients, respectively, were still receiving treatment. PFS2 (HR 0.64) and CFS (HR 0.62) favored ribociclib versus placebo. Among those who discontinued treatment, 16.7% and 35.0% on ribociclib or placebo, respectively, received a subsequent CDK4/6i. No new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis of MONALEESA-3 reports the longest mOS thus far (67.6 months) for 1L patients in a phase III ABC trial. These results in a 1L population show that the OS benefit of ribociclib was maintained through extended follow-up, further supporting its use in HR+/HER2- ABC.

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.

nextMONARCH Phase 2 randomized clinical trial: overall survival analysis of abemaciclib monotherapy or in combination with tamoxifen in patients with endocrine-refractory HR + , HER2- metastatic breast cancer

Purpose

Resistance to endocrine therapy poses a major clinical challenge for patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR +), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2–) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We present the preplanned 24-month final overall survival (OS) results, alongside updated progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) results.

Methods

nextMONARCH is an open-label, controlled, randomized, Phase 2 study of abemaciclib alone or in combination with tamoxifen in women with endocrine-refractory HR + , HER2– MBC previously treated with chemotherapy. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to: abemaciclib 150 mg and tamoxifen 20 mg (A + T), abemaciclib 150 mg (A-150), or abemaciclib 200 mg and prophylactic loperamide (A-200). OS was the main prespecified secondary endpoint. PFS, ORR, and safety at 24 months were compared to previously reported primary analysis results.

Results

Of the 234 patients enrolled, 12 were receiving study treatment at data cutoff (28Jun2019). Median follow-up was 27.2 months. Median OS was 24.2 months in the A + T arm, 20.8 months in A-150, and 17.0 months in A-200 (A + T versus A-200: HR 0.62; 95%CI [0.40, 0.97], P = 0.03 and A-150 versus A-200: HR 0.96; 95%CI [0.64, 1.44], P = 0.83). PFS and ORR results at 24 months were consistent with the primary analysis. The safety profile corresponded with previous reports.

Conclusion

The addition of tamoxifen to abemaciclib demonstrated greater OS benefit than monotherapy. This study confirmed the single-agent activity of abemaciclib in heavily pretreated women with endocrine-refractory HR + , HER2– MBC, as well as the previously reported primary PFS and ORR results, with no new safety signals observed.

Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02747004.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10549-022-06662-9.

Management Strategies for Hyperglycemia Associated with the α-Selective PI3K Inhibitor Alpelisib for the Treatment of Breast Cancer

Alpelisib is an α-selective phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor used for treating hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth receptor 2-negative (HER2-), PIK3CA-mutated locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer following disease progression on or after endocrine therapy. Hyperglycemia is an on-target effect of alpelisib affecting approximately 60% of treated patients, and sometimes necessitating dose reductions, treatment interruptions, or discontinuation of alpelisib. Early detection of hyperglycemia and timely intervention have a key role in achieving optimal glycemic control and maintaining alpelisib dose intensity to optimize the benefit of this drug. A glycemic support program implemented by an endocrinology-oncology collaborative team may be very useful in this regard. Lifestyle modifications, mainly comprising a reduced-carbohydrate diet, and a designated stepwise, personalized antihyperglycemic regimen, based on metformin, sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors, and pioglitazone, are the main tools required to address the insulin-resistant hyperglycemia induced by alpelisib. In this report, based on the consensus of 14 oncologists and seven endocrinologists, we provide guidance for hyperglycemia management strategies before, during, and after alpelisib therapy for HR+, HER2-, PIK3CA-mutated breast cancer, with a focus on a proactive, multidisciplinary approach.

Overall Survival with Ribociclib plus Letrozole in Advanced Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

In a previous analysis of this phase 3 trial, first-line ribociclib plus letrozole resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than letrozole alone among postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer. Whether overall survival would also be longer with ribociclib was not known.

METHODS

Here we report the results of the protocol-specified final analysis of overall survival, a key secondary end point. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either ribociclib or placebo in combination with letrozole. Overall survival was assessed with the use of a stratified log-rank test and summarized with the use of Kaplan-Meier methods after 400 deaths had occurred. A hierarchical testing strategy was used for the analysis of progression-free survival and overall survival to ensure the validity of the findings.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 6.6 years, 181 deaths had occurred among 334 patients (54.2%) in the ribociclib group and 219 among 334 (65.6%) in the placebo group. Ribociclib plus letrozole showed a significant overall survival benefit as compared with placebo plus letrozole. Median overall survival was 63.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 52.4 to 71.0) with ribociclib plus letrozole and 51.4 months (95% CI, 47.2 to 59.7) with placebo plus letrozole (hazard ratio for death, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.93; two-sided P = 0.008). No new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

First-line therapy with ribociclib plus letrozole showed a significant overall survival benefit as compared with placebo plus letrozole in patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Median overall survival was more than 12 months longer with ribociclib than with placebo. (Funded by Novartis; MONALEESA-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01958021.).

Abstract OT2-11-04: Ameera-1 Arm 5: Phase 1/2 study of amcenestrant (SAR439859), an oral selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader (SERD), with abemaciclib in postmenopausal women with ER+/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer

Background Endocrine therapy in combination with a targeted cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitor is the clinical standard for treatment of ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. Amcenestrant (SAR439859) is an optimized oral SERD with potent dual activity that antagonizes and degrades the ER, resulting in inhibition of the ER signaling pathway. In previous arms of the AMEERA-1 study, amcenestrant, as monotherapy or in combination with the CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib, demonstrated antitumor activity and a favorable safety profile in postmenopausal women with heavily pretreated ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. The objective of Arm 5 of the AMEERA-1 study is to evaluate safety and antitumor activity of amcenestrant in combination with the CDK4/6 inhibitor abemaciclib for patients with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. Methods AMEERA-1 (NCT03284957) is an open-label, non-comparative, dose escalation and dose expansion Phase 1/2 study of amcenestrant as monotherapy, then in combination with other anti-cancer targeted therapies. Arm 5 investigates dose escalation (Part J) and dose expansion (Part K), of amcenestrant in combination with abemaciclib. Postmenopausal women with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer, ECOG performance status 0-1, and ≥ 6 months prior endocrine therapy are eligible. In Arm 5 (Parts J and K), ≤ 1 prior line of a single endocrine therapy for advanced disease is allowed. Prior treatment with fulvestrant or any other SERD is not allowed; in addition, prior therapy with CDK4/6 inhibitors for advanced disease is not allowed. Part J allows ≤ 1 prior chemotherapy for advanced disease, while prior chemotherapy for advanced disease is not allowed in Part K. Additional exclusion criteria in Arm 5 are prior drugs targeting the phosphoinositide 3-kinase axis; history of or concurrent pneumonitis; and history of or concurrent venous thromboembolism (i.e., deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or cerebral venous sinus thrombosis). Part J evaluates the selected amcenestrant dose for combination therapy plus abemaciclib 150 mg twice daily (BID) (the approved standard dose) or abemaciclib 100 mg BID, taken in 28-day cycles. Additional dose levels of amcenestrant may be explored based on safety and pharmacokinetics (PK). The objective of Part J is to determine the recommended dose (RD) of abemaciclib in combination with the selected amcenestrant dose for combination therapy, based on preliminary safety, PK, and antitumor activity data. The primary endpoint in Part J is the incidence of treatment-related dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) at Cycle 1. Approximately up to 12 DLT-evaluable patients will be needed to establish the RD of abemaciclib in combination with amcenestrant in Part J. In Part K, approximately 20 patients will be treated at the RD of abemaciclib for combination therapy with amcenestrant, the primary endpoint being safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoints include PK and antitumor activity. Funding: Sanofi.

Citation Format: Mario Campone, Sarat Chandarlapaty, Aditya Bardia, Patrick Neven, Katarina Petrakova, Peter Kabos, Valentina Boni, Sofia Braga, Marina Celanovic, Patrick Cohen, Alice Gosselin, Sylvaine Cartot-Cotton, Vasiliki Pelekanou, Hannah Linden. Ameera-1 Arm 5: Phase 1/2 study of amcenestrant (SAR439859), an oral selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader (SERD), with abemaciclib in postmenopausal women with ER+/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT2-11-04.

Abstract P1-17-11: Updated data from AMEERA-1: Phase 1/2 study of amcenestrant (SAR439859), an oral selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader (SERD), combined with palbociclib in postmenopausal women with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer

Background: In Arm 2 of the ongoing AMEERA-1 trial (NCT03284957), amcenestrant, an optimized oral SERD combined with the CDK4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) palbociclib demonstrated favorable safety and encouraging antitumor activity among patients with endocrine-resistant ER+/HER2− advanced breast cancer in dose escalation (Part C) and dose expansion (Part D) (Chandarlapaty et al., ASCO 2021; abstract 1058). Here we report an update of safety, antitumor activity data, and progression-free survival (PFS), of amcenestrant 200 mg in combination with palbociclib. Analysis of genomic data, including modulation over time and correlation with clinical outcome, will also be presented. Methods: The trial enrolled postmenopausal women with ER+/HER2- locally-advanced or metastatic breast cancer with disease progression while on ≥ 6 months of prior endocrine therapy (ET) in the advanced setting, or who relapsed on adjuvant ET after the first 2 years of treatment or within 12 months of completing adjuvant ET. Prior chemotherapy (≤ 1) was allowed as well as prior CDK4/6i-based therapy (≤ 1, in Part C only). In this pooled analysis (N = 39), patients in Parts C + D received amcenestrant 200 mg once daily + palbociclib 125 mg (21 days on/7 days off), administered in 28-day cycles. Safety in the pooled analysis was reported using methods previously described (Chandarlapaty et al., ASCO 2021; abstract 1058). Data from investigator-assessed, response-evaluable patients in the pooled analysis without prior exposure to targeted therapies (N = 34) were used to evaluate antitumor activity per RECIST v1.1, including the objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), and PFS. Results: At a data cutoff of May 30, 2021, in the pooled analysis (N = 39), the median (range) duration of treatment exposure was 44.3 weeks (1-80). Of 39 patients, 24 (61.5%) had initiated at least 10 cycles (40 weeks) of treatment, with 20/39 (51.3%) still receiving ongoing treatment. Among the 34/39 (87.2%) patients in the response-evaluable population, median follow-up was 48.3 weeks with a PFS probability of being event free at 24 weeks of 78.2% (95% CI: 59.6%; 89.0%). Median PFS is not yet mature, with 14/34 (41.2%) patients having had a PFS event (all were progression events and no deaths occurred). The ORR was 11/34 (32.4%; all partial responses). Clinical benefit at 24 weeks was seen in 25/34 (CBR = 73.5%) patients. Median (range) time to first response was 16.3 weeks (8-32). Amcenestrant treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and palbociclib TRAEs, respectively, occurred in 27/39 (69.2%) and 35/39 (89.7%) patients for all grade events and in 5/39 (12.8%) and 18/39 (46.2%) patients for Grade ≥ 3 events. Non-hematological amcenestrant and palbociclib TRAEs are reported in Table 1. Neutrophil count decrease based on hematological laboratory abnormalities was observed in the majority of patients (94.9%; with Grade ≥ 3 in 56.4%).

Conclusions: Among postmenopausal women with endocrine-resistant ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer, amcenestrant 200 mg in combination with the approved dose of palbociclib continues to demonstrate encouraging long-term antitumor activity, sustained clinical benefit, and a favorable safety profile consistent with previous results. Funding: Sanofi.

Table 1.Non-hematological amcenestrant and palbociclib TRAEs occurring in > 10% of patientsPooled Analysis. Amcenestrant 200 mg + Palbociclib. (Parts C + D; N = 39)Amcenestrant Non-hematological TRAEs, n (%)All GradesGrade ≥ 3–Fatigue7 (17.9)0–Nausea7 (17.9)0–Arthralgia4 (10.3)0–Asthenia4 (10.3)0–Hot flush4 (10.3)0Palbociclib Non-hematological TRAEs, n (%)All GradesGrade ≥ 3–Fatigue12 (30.8)0–Nausea10 (25.6)0–Asthenia4 (10.3)0–Dysgeusia4 (10.3)0–Stomatitis4 (10.3)0

Citation Format: Sarat Chandarlapaty, Hannah M Linden, Patrick Neven, Katarina Petrakova, Aditya Bardia, Peter Kabos, Sofia Braga, Valentina Boni, Alice Gosselin, Marina Celanovic, Patrick Cohen, Gautier Paux, Vasiliki Pelekanou, Nils Ternès, Joon Sang Lee, Mario Campone. Updated data from AMEERA-1: Phase 1/2 study of amcenestrant (SAR439859), an oral selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader (SERD), combined with palbociclib in postmenopausal women with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-17-11.

Abstract GS2-01: Overall survival subgroup analysis by metastatic site from the phase 3 MONALEESA-2 study of first-line ribociclib + letrozole in postmenopausal patients with advanced HR+/HER2− breast cancer

Background: MONALEESA-2 (ML-2) recently reported a statistically significant overall survival (OS) benefit with first-line ribociclib (RIB) + letrozole (LET) over placebo (PBO) + LET in postmenopausal patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) (median, 63.9 vs 51.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63-0.93; P = .004). Understanding OS outcomes in clinically relevant subgroups of patients is important for improving personalized care and prognosis. Here, we report the results of a prespecified exploratory OS analysis in select patient subgroups by baseline location and number of metastatic sites.. Methods: Postmenopausal patients with HR+/HER2− ABC were randomized 1:1 to receive first-line RIB or PBO with LET. Prespecified exploratory OS analyses were performed for subgroups of special interest by baseline location (bone only [yes or no], liver involvement [yes or no], liver or lung involvement [yes or no]) and number of metastatic sites (< 3 or ≥ 3). The data are hypothesis generating since this analysis was exploratory and not powered for statistical significance.. Results: A total of 668 patients were included in the analysis. A consistent improvement in OS was observed with RIB + LET vs PBO + LET in all subgroups regardless of baseline metastatic site (Table). RIB + LET demonstrated an OS benefit over PBO + LET in clinically relevant subgroups by baseline location and number of metastatic sites, including subgroups of patients with liver metastases, liver or lung metastases, and ≥ 3 metastatic sites, who generally have a worse prognosis.. Conclusion: Consistent with the intent-to-treat population of ML-2, the results of this prespecified exploratory analysis demonstrated an OS benefit with RIB + LET independent of the site and number of metastatic lesions.

TableTreatment Arm (n)HR (95% CI)Bone-only metastasisYesRIB + LET (69)0.78 (0.50-1.21)PBO + LET (79)NoRIB + LET (265)0.77(0.61-0.96)PBO + LET (255)Liver involvementYesRIB + LET (59)0.81 (0.54-1.24)PBO + LET (72)NoRIB + LET (275)0.77 (0.62-0.97)PBO + LET (262)Liver or lung involvementYesRIB + LET (182)0.81(0.62-1.05)PBO + LET (190)NoRIB + LET (152)0.71 (0.53-0.96)PBO + LET (144)No. of metastatic sites< 3RIB + LET (220)0.78(0.61-1.00)PBO + LET (222)≥ 3RIB + LET (114)0.71(0.51-0.98)PBO + LET (112)

Citation Format: Joyce O'Shaughnessy, Salomon M Stemmer, Howard A Burris, Yoon-Sim Yap, Gabe Sonke, Lowell Hart, Mario Campone, Katarina Petrakova, Eric P Winer, Wolfgang Janni, Pierfranco Conte, David A Cameron, Fabrice André, Carlos Arteaga, Juan Pablo Zarate, Arunava Chakravartty, Tetiana Taran, Fabienne Le Gac, Paolo Serra, Gabriel N Hortobagyi. Overall survival subgroup analysis by metastatic site from the phase 3 MONALEESA-2 study of first-line ribociclib + letrozole in postmenopausal patients with advanced HR+/HER2− breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS2-01.

Abstract OT2-11-02: Ameera-1 Arm 4: Phase 1/2 study of amcenestrant (SAR439859), an oral selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader (SERD), with everolimus in postmenopausal women with ER+/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer

Background Amcenestrant (SAR439859) is an optimized oral SERD with potent dual activity that antagonizes and degrades the ER, resulting in inhibition of the ER signaling pathway. Amcenestrant, as monotherapy or in combination with palbociclib, has shown antitumor activity and a favorable safety profile in postmenopausal women with heavily pretreated ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. Published data support the addition of targeted therapy to endocrine therapy for patients with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. The objective of Arm 4 of the AMEERA-1 study is to evaluate safety and antitumor activity of amcenestrant in combination with the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor everolimus for patients with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. Methods AMEERA-1 (NCT03284957) is an open-label, non-comparative, dose escalation and dose expansion Phase 1/2 study of amcenestrant as monotherapy, then in combination with other anti-cancer targeted therapies. Arm 4 investigates dose escalation (Part H) and dose expansion (Part I), of amcenestrant in combination with everolimus. Postmenopausal women with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer, ECOG performance status 0-1, and ≥ 6 months prior endocrine therapy are eligible. In Arm 4 (Parts H and I), ≤ 1 prior line of a single endocrine therapy for advanced disease is allowed. Patients must have progressed on a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor plus cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor as first-line therapy for advanced disease. Prior treatment with fulvestrant or any other SERD is not allowed. Part H allows ≤ 1 prior chemotherapy for advanced disease; no prior chemotherapy for advanced disease is allowed in Part I. Exclusion criteria in Arm 4 include prior drugs targeting the phosphoinositide 3-kinase axis; history of or concurrent pneumonitis; history of severe cutaneous reactions; type 1 diabetes; uncontrolled type 2 diabetes; uncontrolled hypercholesterolemia, hypertriglyceridemia, and hyperglycemia; any uncontrolled infection; uncontrolled stomatitis, angioedema due to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and impaired wounds. Part H evaluates the selected amcenestrant dose for combination therapy plus everolimus 10 mg once daily (QD) (the approved standard dose) or everolimus 5 mg QD, taken in 28-day cycles. Additional amcenestrant doses may be explored based on safety and pharmacokinetics (PK). The objective of Part H is to determine the recommended dose (RD) of everolimus in combination with the selected amcenestrant dose for combination therapy, based on preliminary safety, PK, and antitumor activity data. The primary endpoint in Part H is the incidence of treatment-related dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) at Cycle 1. Approximately up to 12 DLT-evaluable patients will be needed to establish the RD of everolimus in combination with amcenestrant in Part H. In Part I, approximately 12 patients will be treated at the RD of everolimus for combination therapy with amcenestrant, the primary endpoint being safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoints include PK and antitumor activity. Funding: Sanofi.

Citation Format: Mario Campone, Patrick Neven, Katarina Petrakova, Sofia Braga, Marina Celanovic, Patrick Cohen, Alice Gosselin, Sylvaine Cartot-Cotton, Vasiliki Pelekanou, Valentina Boni. Ameera-1 Arm 4: Phase 1/2 study of amcenestrant (SAR439859), an oral selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader (SERD), with everolimus in postmenopausal women with ER+/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT2-11-02.

Abstract P1-18-11: Analysis of first-line (1L) patients (pts) with de novo disease vs late relapse and all pts with vs without prior chemotherapy (CT) in the MONALEESA-3 (ML-3) trial

Background: The phase 3 ML-3 trial demonstrated significant OS benefit for ribociclib (RIB) + fulvestrant (FUL) over placebo (PBO) + FUL as first- or second- line therapy in postmenopausal pts with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC). Prior treatment ([neo]adjuvant or advanced setting) may impact subsequent therapy outcomes, including OS; therefore, understanding the potential effect of prior treatment is of high clinical interest. Here, we present PFS and OS data from 2 subgroup analyses in ML-3: 1L pts with de novo disease vs late relapse and all pts with vs without prior CT. Methods: ML-3 (NCT02422615) enrolled postmenopausal pts who were randomized 2:1 to receive RIB + FUL or PBO + FUL. Pts with prior ET ([neo]adjuvant or ≤1 prior ET for ABC) and no CT for ABC were included. Pts with de novo disease were defined as initially diagnosed as ABC with no prior treatment for ABC. Pts with late relapse were defined as those who relapsed >12 months from completion of (neo)adjuvant ET with no prior treatment for ABC. Since prior CT for ABC was not allowed in ML-3, the prior CT analysis compares pts with prior (neo)adjuvant CT vs those without prior (neo)adjuvant CT. Results: The data cutoff was October 30, 2020. Within the 1L population, in the de novo vs late relapse analysis, 132 pts (RIB: n = 91; PBO: n = 41) had de novo disease, and 153 had late relapse (RIB: n = 98; PBO: n = 55). Baseline characteristics were generally balanced between the de novo and late relapse groups, with some notable exceptions: a higher proportion of pts with de novo disease were aged <65 years (52.3% vs 41.8%) and a lower proportion had visceral disease (53.0% vs 63.4%). In the late relapse group, 70.6% had prior (neo)adjuvant CT. De novo disease or late relapse did not appear to be prognostic as both PFS and OS were generally comparable between those 2 groups among pts treated with RIB or those treated with PBO (Table). Treatment with RIB + FUL demonstrated consistent PFS and OS benefits over PBO + FUL in both pts with de novo disease and those with late relapse. In the prior CT analysis, 391 pts (RIB: n = 265; PBO: n = 126) had prior CT (41.4% in 1L and 55.5% in 2L/early relapse [3.1% data missing]) and 334 (RIB: n = 219; PBO: n = 115) had no prior CT (60.8% in 1L, 38.9% in 2L/early relapse [0.3% data missing]). Baseline characteristics were generally balanced between pts with and without prior CT, with some exceptions: a higher proportion of pts with prior CT were aged <65 years (62.1% vs 42.8%) and had prior ET in any setting (86.4% vs 53.0%). Pts without prior CT had longer median PFS and OS compared with those who had prior CT in both the RIB and PBO arms (OS without vs with prior CT treated with RIB: HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.52-0.89]; PBO: HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.52-1.00]). Treatment with RIB + FUL demonstrated consistent PFS and OS benefits over PBO + FUL in both pts with prior CT and those without (OS for RIB vs PBO with prior CT: HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.58-1.01]; without prior CT: HR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.50-0.97]). Conclusions: This exploratory analysis demonstrated that metastatic presentation (de novo vs late relapse) was not prognostic for disease outcomes; however, prior CT exposure, even in (neo)adjuvant, was associated with poorer PFS and OS. The addition of RIB showed consistent PFS and OS benefit across all subgroups in this analysis. Particularly, the addition of RIB resulted in a consistent and clinically meaningful PFS and OS benefit with a decrease in relative risk of death by 24% in pts with prior exposure to CT.

RIB + FULPBO + FULHR (RIB vs PBO)De novo/late relapseMedian PFS (95% CI), monthsDe novo35.6. (27.1-42.0)22.1. (14.6-33.1)0.55. (0.35-0.86)Late relapse35.8. (20.0-44.4)22.0. (16.5-27.7)0.60. (0.40-0.89)HR (de novo vs late elapse)0.93. (0.64-1.36)0.996. (0.63-1.57)Median OS (95% CI), monthsDe novo59.9. (52.7-NE)52.9. (39.6-NE)0.67. (0.38-1.19)Late relapseNE. (54.9-NE)52.3. (40.4-NE)0.69. (0.42-1.13)HR (de novo vs late relapse)0.899. (0.552-1.465)0.91. (0.51-1.62)Prior (neo)adjuvant CTMedian PFS (95% CI), monthsWithout prior CT28.3. (23.3-35.6)17.5. (13.6-21.9)0.60. (0.46-0.78)With prior CTa17.9. (14.3-19.9)10.8. (7.2-12.3)0.61. (0.48-0.78)HR (without vs with prior CT)0.76. (0.60-0.94)0.72. (0.55-0.95)Median OS (95% CI), monthsWithout prior CTNE (54.9-NE)44.9 (38.5-58.1)0.70. (0.50-0.97)With prior CTa43.0 (39.1-51.2)40.1 (30.3-48.6)0.76. (0.58-1.01)HR (without vs with prior CT)0.68 (0.52-0.89)0.72 (0.52-1.00)NE, not estimable a Includes 4 patients who received prior CT for ABC (protocol violation).

Citation Format: Michelino De Laurentiis, Matteo Lambertini, Stephen Chia, Hope S Rugo, Katarina Petrakova, Cristian Villanueva, Sara Hurvitz, J. Thaddeus Beck, Agnes Lteif, Sina Haftchenary, Uday Deore, Jiwen Wu, Nagi El-Saghir. Analysis of first-line (1L) patients (pts) with de novo disease vs late relapse and all pts with vs without prior chemotherapy (CT) in the MONALEESA-3 (ML-3) trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-18-11.

Ribociclib plus fulvestrant for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer in the phase III randomized MONALEESA-3 trial: updated overall survival

BACKGROUND

Ribociclib plus fulvestrant demonstrated significant progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) benefits in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). Here we present a new landmark in survival follow-up for a phase III cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitor clinical trial in patients with ABC (median, 56.3 months).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted at 174 sites (30 countries). Patients were men and postmenopausal women (age ≥18 years) with histologically/cytologically confirmed HR+/HER2- ABC. Patients could have received ≤1 line of endocrine therapy (ET) but no chemotherapy for ABC. Patients, assigned 2:1, were stratified by the presence/absence of liver/lung metastases and previous ET. Patients received intramuscular fulvestrant (500 mg, day 1 of each 28-day cycle plus day 15 of cycle 1) with oral ribociclib (600 mg/day, 3 weeks on, 1 week off) or placebo. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat. Safety was assessed in patients receiving ≥1 dose study treatment. OS was a secondary endpoint. MONALEESA-3 is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02422615; no longer enrolling).

RESULTS

Between 18 June 2015 and 10 June 2016, 726 patients were randomly assigned (484, ribociclib; 242, placebo). At data cut-off (30 October 2020), median OS (mOS) was 53.7 months (ribociclib) versus 41.5 months (placebo) [hazard ratio (HR), 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59-0.90]. Subgroup analyses were consistent with overall population. In the first-line setting, most patients in the ribociclib arm (∼60%) lived longer than median follow-up; mOS was 51.8 months in the placebo arm (HR, 0.64; 95% CI 0.46-0.88). In the second-line setting, mOS was 39.7 months (ribociclib) versus 33.7 months (placebo) (HR, 0.78; 95% CI 0.59-1.04). No apparent drug-drug interaction between ribociclib and fulvestrant or new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis reported extended OS follow-up in MONALEESA-3. mOS was ∼12 months longer in patients with HR+/HER2- ABC treated with ribociclib plus fulvestrant compared with fulvestrant monotherapy.

Updated overall survival (OS) results from the phase III MONALEESA-3 trial of postmenopausal patients (pts) with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) treated with fulvestrant (FUL) ± ribociclib (RIB)

1001

Background: The Phase III MONALEESA-3 trial (NCT02422615) previously demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in OS with RIB, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i), plus FUL compared with placebo (PBO) plus FUL as first-line (1L) or second-line (2L) treatment in postmenopausal pts with HR+/HER2− ABC (median, not reached vs 40.0 mo; hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.57-0.92, P =.00455). This analysis was final per the protocol; following the unblinding of the study, pts still on study treatment in the PBO arm were allowed to cross over to the RIB arm. We report an exploratory analysis of OS after an additional median 16.9 mo of follow-up, allowing for further characterization of long-term survival benefits of RIB. Methods: Postmenopausal pts with HR+/HER2− ABC were randomized 2:1 to receive RIB + FUL or PBO + FUL in 1L and 2L settings. Updated OS was evaluated by Cox proportional hazards model and summarized using Kaplan-Meier methods. Additional postprogression endpoints such as progression-free survival 2 (PFS2), time to chemotherapy (CT), and CT-free survival were also evaluated and summarized. Results: At the data cutoff (Oct 30, 2020), the median follow-up was 56.3 mo (min, 52.7 mo) and 68 (14.0%) and 21 (8.7%) patients were still on treatment in the RIB vs PBO arms, respectively. With this extended follow-up, RIB + FUL continued to demonstrate an OS benefit vs PBO + FUL (median, 53.7 vs 41.5 mo; HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.90). RIB + FUL had prolonged OS vs PBO + FUL in the 1L (median, not reached vs 51.8 mo; HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46-0.88) and 2L subgroups (median, 39.7 vs 33.7 mo; HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.59-1.04). Subgroup analyses also showed a consistent OS benefit compared with the intent-to-treat (ITT) population for most subgroups. PFS2, time to CT, and CT-free survival for the ITT population favored RIB + FUL (Table). Among pts who discontinued study treatment, 81.9% and 86.4% received a next-line subsequent antineoplastic therapy, while 14.0% and 30.0% received a CDK4/6i as any subsequent line in the RIB vs PBO arms, respectively. No new safety signals were observed. Conclusions: The previously demonstrated robust and clinically meaningful OS benefit with RIB + FUL compared with PBO + FUL was maintained after almost 5 years of follow-up in postmenopausal pts with HR+/HER2− ABC. The OS benefit of RIB was observed in the 1L and 2L subgroups, which further supports the use of RIB in these populations. The results also demonstrated a significant delay in the use of subsequent CT with RIB vs PBO. Clinical trial information: NCT02422615 .[Table: see text]

AMEERA-1: Phase 1/2 study of amcenestrant (SAR439859), an oral selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader (SERD), with palbociclib (palbo) in postmenopausal women with ER+/ human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC)

1058

Background: AMEERA-1 (NCT03284957) investigates amcenestrant, an oral SERD, as monotherapy and combined with targeted therapies in ER+/HER2– mBC. Here we report data from dose escalation (Part C) and dose expansion (Part D) of amcenestrant + palbo. Methods: Patients (pts) were postmenopausal women with ER+/HER2– mBC and ≥ 6 mos prior advanced endocrine therapy (ET) or adjuvant (adj) ET resistance (relapse on adj ET started ≥ 24 mos ago or < 12 mos after completing adj ET). Prior chemotherapy (≤ 1) for advanced disease was allowed; targeted therapies were not except ≤ 1 CDK4/6i in Part C. Part C assessed dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and aimed to establish the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) for amcenestrant (200 or 400 mg once daily [QD], in 28-day cycles) in combination with palbo (125 mg QD for 21 days on/ 7 days off). Safety (treatment-emergent adverse events [TEAEs] and lab abnormalities per CTCAE v4.03) and pharmacokinetics (PK) were evaluated. Antitumor activity at the RP2D for amcenestrant + palbo was evaluated in a subset of Part C pts and Part D, according to RECIST v1.1, determined locally by investigators. Results: Feb 8, 2021 data cutoff. In Part C (n = 15; 200 mg: 9; 400 mg: 6), no DLTs occurred and amcenestrant 200 mg QD was selected as the RP2D with palbo, based on PK and safety data. In the pooled safety population at the RP2D (n = 39; Part C: 9; Part D: 30), median (range) age was 59 y (33–86) with ECOG PS 0 (74.4%) or 1 (25.6%) and 2 (1–6) organs involved. Immediate prior therapy was neo/adj (41.0%, all ET resistant) or advanced (59.0%, range 1–4 lines). Median (range) exposure was 32 wks (1–66) with 59.0% pts on ongoing therapy. No amcenestrant dose reductions occurred; 25.6% had ≥ 1 palbo dose reduction. Most common non-hematological TEAEs related to amcenestrant were Grade 1–2 nausea and fatigue (17.9% each), asthenia and hot flush (10.3% each); to palbo were fatigue (30.8%), nausea (25.6%), asthenia and dysgeusia (10.3% each). Two pts discontinued due to AEs. The majority (94.9%) had neutrophil count decrease (53.8% Grade ≥ 3). Preliminary antitumor activity after at least 6 cycles of therapy (unless early treatment discontinuation) is reported in the table below. Conclusions: In pts with ER+/HER2– mBC, safety at the RP2D of amcenestrant + palbo was favorable, with no safety signals of bradycardia or eye disorders. Preliminary antitumor activity was observed (ORR: 31.4% and CBR: 74.3%). Clinical trial information: NCT03284957 .[Table: see text]

Impact of Hormone Receptor Status on the Behaviour of HER2+ Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

The study aimed to evaluate differences in the overall survival of HER2+ breast cancer patients treated with regard to their hormone receptors negativity or positivity. We evaluated a cohort of patients treated with trastuzumab in the Czech Republic.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The present study is a retrospective analysis of patients whose data were recorded in a nationwide non-interventional, post-authorisation database BREAST. After propensity score matching of data, the cohort included 4,532 patients.

RESULTS

A significant difference in overall survival (OS) of the entire cohort was found between patients with and without hormone dependence. The OS was significantly higher in the group of patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) tumours in the following cohorts: patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy, patients with advanced disease, G2 tumours, stage III and IV and in patients with stage II and III of G2 tumours.

CONCLUSION

Increased OS rates were found in several subgroups of patients with HR+/HER2+ tumours compared to those with HR-/HER2+ tumours. Better outcomes of HR+/HER2+ patients were only observed in the first four/five years of follow-up, and the differences disappeared over time.

Association of triple positivity with prognostic parameters and overall survival in a population-based study of 6,122 HER2-positive breast cancer patients: analysis of real-world clinical practice based on a research database

Triple-positive breast cancer (TPBC), i.e. HER2-positive (HER2+) and hormone receptors-positive breast cancer, is a specific subgroup of breast cancers. TPBC biology is characterized by strong mutual interactions between signaling pathways stimulated by estrogens and HER2 amplification. The present study aims to carry out a population-based analysis of treatment outcomes in a cohort of hormone receptor (HR) positive and negative breast cancer patients who were treated with anti-HER2 therapy in the Czech Republic. The BREAST research database was used as the data source for this retrospective analysis. The database covers approximately 95% of breast cancer patients treated with targeted therapies in the Czech Republic. The analysis included 6,122 HER2-positive patients. The patients were divided into two groups, based on estrogen receptor (ER) or progesterone receptor (PR) positivity: hormone receptor negative (HR-) patients had both ER- and PR-negative tumors (n=2,518), unlike positive (HR+) patients (n=3,604). HR+ patients were more often diagnosed premenopausal at the time of diagnosis, presented more often at stage I or II and their tumors were less commonly poorly differentiated. The overall survival (OS) was significantly higher in subgroups of HR+ patients according to treatment setting. When evaluated by stages, significantly higher OS was observed in HR+ patients diagnosed at stages II, III, and IV and regardless of tumor grade.

Overall Survival with Ribociclib plus Fulvestrant in Advanced Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

In an earlier analysis of this phase 3 trial, ribociclib plus fulvestrant showed a greater benefit with regard to progression-free survival than fulvestrant alone in postmenopausal patients with hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer. Here we report the results of a protocol-specified second interim analysis of overall survival.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either ribociclib or placebo in addition to fulvestrant as first-line or second-line treatment. Survival was evaluated by means of a stratified log-rank test and summarized with the use of Kaplan-Meier methods.

RESULTS

This analysis was based on 275 deaths: 167 among 484 patients (34.5%) receiving ribociclib and 108 among 242 (44.6%) receiving placebo. Ribociclib plus fulvestrant showed a significant overall survival benefit over placebo plus fulvestrant. The estimated overall survival at 42 months was 57.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52.0 to 63.2) in the ribociclib group and 45.9% (95% CI, 36.9 to 54.5) in the placebo group, for a 28% difference in the relative risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.92; P = 0.00455). The benefit was consistent across most subgroups. In a descriptive update, median progression-free survival among patients receiving first-line treatment was 33.6 months (95% CI, 27.1 to 41.3) in the ribociclib group and 19.2 months (95% CI, 14.9 to 23.6) in the placebo group. No new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Ribociclib plus fulvestrant showed a significant overall survival benefit over placebo plus fulvestrant in patients with hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. (Funded by Novartis; MONALEESA-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02422615.).

Efficacy and Safety Analysis of Nelipepimut-S Vaccine to Prevent Breast Cancer Recurrence: A Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

In phase I/II studies, nelipepimut-S (NP-S) plus GM-CSF vaccine was well tolerated and effectively raised HER2-specific immunity in patients with breast cancer. Results from a prespecified interim analysis of a phase III trial assessing NP-S + GM-CSF are reported.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind phase III study enrolled females ≥18 years with T1-T3, HER2 low-expressing (IHC 1+/2+), node-positive breast cancer in the adjuvant setting. Patients received 1,000 μg NP-S + 250 μg GM-CSF or placebo + GM-CSF monthly for 6 months, then every 6 months through 36 months. The primary objective was disease-free survival (DFS). Protocol-specified imaging occurred annually. New abnormalities were categorized as recurrence events; biopsy confirmation was not mandated. The interim analysis was conducted as specified in the protocol after 73 DFS events.

RESULTS

A total of 758 patients (mean age 51.8 years) were randomized. Adverse events were similar between groups; most common were injection-associated: erythema (84.3%), induration (55.8%), and pruritus (54.9%). There was no significant between-arms difference in DFS events at interim analysis at median follow-up (16.8 months). In the NP-S arm, imaging detected 54.1% of recurrence events in asymptomatic patients versus 29.2% in the placebo arm (P = 0.069).

CONCLUSIONS

NP-S was well tolerated. There was no significant difference in DFS events between NP-S and placebo. Use of mandated annual scans and image-detected recurrence events hastened the interim analysis contributing to early trial termination.

Abstract PD1-11: nextMONARCH 1: Phase 2 study of abemaciclib plus tamoxifen or abemaciclib alone in HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer

Background

Abemaciclib is a selective CDK4 & 6 inhibitor approved on a continuous dosing schedule for HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) as monotherapy (MONARCH 1) and in combination with endocrine therapy (ET). A previous Phase 1b (NCT01394016) cohort of HR+ ABC patients (pts) demonstrated efficacy of abemaciclib monotherapy (150mg and 200mg Q12H starting dose); given the small sample size and nonrandomized design the impact of the starting dose was unclear. nextMONARCH 1 (NCT02747004) evaluated abemaciclib in 2 monotherapy arms, in a randomized setting. Abemaciclib has been associated with dose-dependent early onset diarrhea that is well managed with antidiarrheal therapy. nextMONARCH 1 also explored the 200mg Q12H abemaciclib dose in combination with prophylactic loperamide to reduce incidence/severity of diarrhea and dose adjustments. A third arm evaluated abemaciclib + tamoxifen as a strategy to overcome endocrine resistance.

Methods

nextMONARCH 1 is a multicenter, randomized, open-label, Phase 2 study of abemaciclib or abemaciclib + tamoxifen in women with HR+, HER2- ABC who have progressed on or after prior ET and previously received chemotherapy. Pts were stratified by presence of liver metastases and prior use of tamoxifen in the advanced setting. Randomization was 1:1:1 to abemaciclib 150mg Q12H + daily tamoxifen 20mg (Arm A) or abemaciclib 150mg Q12H (Arm B); or abemaciclib 200mg Q12H + prophylactic loperamide (Arm C). Key eligibilities were ≥2 chemotherapy regimens (1-2 administered in metastatic setting), measurable disease and no prior treatment with CDK4 & 6 inhibitors. Primary objective was progression free survival (PFS). Key secondary objectives included objective response rate (ORR), dclinical benefit rate (CBR), and safety. PFS analysis tested superiority of Arm A to C at ∼110 events across the 2 arms assuming a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.667 to achieve ∼80% power. Arm B would be considered non-inferior to Arm C if the observed PFS HR is &lt;1.2.

Results

234 pts were randomized to Arms A (n=78), B (n=79) and C (n=77). 166 PFS events have been observed (A: 57; B: 54; C: 55). Median PFS was 9.1 months in Arm A, 6.5 in Arm B and 7.4 in Arm C (A vs C: HR=.815, 95% CI, .556-1.193, p=.293; B vs C: HR=1.045, 95% CI, .711-1.535 p=.811). Investigator-assessed ORR was 34.6%, 24.1% and 32.5% (confirmed ORR: 25.6%, 19.0%, 28.6%) and CBR was 61.5%, 49.4% and 51.9% in Arms A, B and C, respectively. Prophylactic loperamide reduced the incidence and severity of diarrhea (C: 62.3%, Gr 3: 7.8%) compared to MONARCH 1 (90.2%, Gr 3: 19.7%, Dickler et al. 2017) resulting in similar rates of diarrhea with 150mg abemaciclib without prophylaxis (A: 53.8%, Gr 3: 1.3%; B: 67.1%, Gr 3: 3.8%). The adverse event profile across arms was generally consistent with other breast studies of abemaciclib.

Conclusions

nextMONARCH 1 confirmed single-agent activity of abemaciclib in heavily pretreated pts with HR+, HER2- ABC. Efficacy of abemaciclib monotherapy at 150mg was similar to 200mg. Combining tamoxifen with abemaciclib did not demonstrate a statistically significant improvement in PFS compared to abemaciclib monotherapy. Addition of prophylactic loperamide to abemaciclib 200mg resulted in diarrhea similar to 150mg without prophylaxis.

Citation Format: Hamilton E, Cortes J, Dieras V, Ozyilkan O, Chen S-C, Petrakova K, Manikhas A, Jerusalem G, Hegg R, Lu Y, Bear MM, Johnston EL, Martin M. nextMONARCH 1: Phase 2 study of abemaciclib plus tamoxifen or abemaciclib alone in HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD1-11.

Phase III Randomized Study of Ribociclib and Fulvestrant in Hormone Receptor–Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–Negative Advanced Breast Cancer: MONALEESA-3

Purpose

This phase III study evaluated ribociclib plus fulvestrant in patients with hormone receptor–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative advanced breast cancer who were treatment naïve or had received up to one line of prior endocrine therapy in the advanced setting.

Patients and Methods

Patients were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to ribociclib plus fulvestrant or placebo plus fulvestrant. The primary end point was locally assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, overall response rate, and safety.

Results

A total of 484 postmenopausal women were randomly assigned to ribociclib plus fulvestrant, and 242 were assigned to placebo plus fulvestrant. Median progression-free survival was significantly improved with ribociclib plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant: 20.5 months (95% CI, 18.5 to 23.5 months) versus 12.8 months (95% CI, 10.9 to 16.3 months), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.593; 95% CI, 0.480 to 0.732; P < .001). Consistent treatment effects were observed in patients who were treatment naïve in the advanced setting (hazard ratio, 0.577; 95% CI, 0.415 to 0.802), as well as in patients who had received up to one line of prior endocrine therapy for advanced disease (hazard ratio, 0.565; 95% CI, 0.428 to 0.744). Among patients with measurable disease, the overall response rate was 40.9% for the ribociclib plus fulvestrant arm and 28.7% for placebo plus fulvestrant. Grade 3 adverse events reported in ≥ 10% of patients in either arm (ribociclib plus fulvestrant v placebo plus fulvestrant) were neutropenia (46.6% v 0%) and leukopenia (13.5% v 0%); the only grade 4 event reported in ≥ 5% of patients was neutropenia (6.8% v 0%).

Conclusion

Ribociclib plus fulvestrant might represent a new first- or second-line treatment option in hormone receptor–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative advanced breast cancer.

Second cancers in Hodgkin's lymphoma long-term survivals: A 60-year single institutional experience with real-life cohort of 871 patients

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Appropriate surveillance guidelines for patients after successful treatment of Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) are needed to reduce mortality of iatrogenic secondary cancers (SC). This large single institutional retrospective study analyses the risk of SC in HL patients treated outside of clinical trials over past decades.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Consecutive series of HL patients were analysed with median follow-up 12 years. Standardised incidence ratio (SIR) and absolute excess risk (AER) were calculated for site-specific risk of SC.

RESULTS

In total of 871 patients (491 men; median age 34 years), chemotherapy alone, radiotherapy alone, and combined treatment underwent 36%, 40%, and 24% patients. 154 SC were found with significantly increased SIR = 2.9 and AER = 80.8 for all cancers except of nonmelanoma-skin cancer. SC-related death occurred in 71 patients (15% of those who died, 8% of whole cohort). The most common SC were lung (17.5% of all malignancies, SIR = 3.2), breast carcinoma (15.6%, SIR = 4.4), and haematological malignancy (non-Hodgkin's lymphoma SIR = 13.1; leukaemia SIR = 5.8). For SC within radiation field, the highest AER was in breast (AER = 46.9), colorectal (AER = 22.8), and lung cancer (AER = 17).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HL are generally at great risk of developing SC, which is significantly increased especially by the use of radiotherapy. We suggested special follow-up schema for patients after initial HL treatment suitable for daily real-world clinical practice. The system depends on gender, form of HL treatment and especially the form of radiation therapy in terms of location of radiation fields.

Abstract P5-21-18: Subsequent treatment for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who received ribociclib + letrozole vs placebo + letrozole in the phase III MONALEESA-2 study

Background: In the Phase III MONALEESA-2 study (NCT01958021), ribociclib (RIB; cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor [CDK4/6i]) + letrozole (LET) significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) vs placebo (PBO) + LET in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2–) advanced breast cancer (ABC). The optimal treatment sequence following first-line CDK4/6i-based therapy is not yet known. Here we report the subsequent therapies received following discontinuation from MONALEESA-2.

Methods: The MONALEESA-2 study enrolled 668 patients (pts) with HR+, HER2– ABC. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive RIB (600 mg/day; 3-weeks-on/1-week-off) + LET (2.5 mg/day; continuous) or PBO + LET. Following discontinuation of MONALEESA-2 study treatment, pts were followed for information regarding post-study treatment, including type and duration of therapy.

Results: At data cut-off (January 2, 2017), the median duration of follow-up was 26.4 months. Median PFS was 25.3 vs 16.0 months in the RIB + LET vs PBO + LET arms (hazard ratio=0.568; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.457–0.704; p=9.63x10–8). 203 (60.8%) vs 246 (73.7%) pts had discontinued RIB + LET vs PBO + LET. The median time to end of treatment was 20.3 months in the RIB + LET arm vs 13.7 months in the PBO + LET arm. First subsequent antineoplastic treatment was reported for 172/203 (84.7%) vs 212/246 (86.2%) pts who received RIB + LET vs PBO + LET; second subsequent therapy was reported for 45/203 (22.2%) vs 68/246 (27.6%) pts. The median time to first subsequent therapy (from randomization to the first post-study dose of therapy) was 24.2 (95% CI: 20.9–27.6) vs 16.7 (95% CI: 14.8–19.3) months in pts who received RIB + LET vs PBO + LET; median time to initiation of second subsequent therapy was not reached in either arm. The most common type of first subsequent therapy was single-agent hormonal therapy in 90 (44.3%) vs 87 (35.4%) pts who discontinued RIB + LET vs PBO + LET; chemotherapy was the most common second subsequent therapy in 20 (9.9%) vs 36 (14.6%) pts. Chemotherapy alone was the first subsequent treatment after MONALEESA-2 discontinuation in 32 (15.8%) vs 55 (22.4%) pts treated with RIB + LET vs PBO + LET.

Conclusions: RIB + LET significantly prolongs PFS and delays the start of subsequent lines of therapy vs PBO + LET in pts with HR+, HER2– ABC. The most common first subsequent therapy following discontinuation of RIB + LET or PBO + LET was single-agent hormonal therapy, and fewer pts treated with RIB + LET received subsequent chemotherapy compared with those who received PBO + LET.

Citation Format: Blackwell KL, Paluch-Shimon S, Campone M, Conte P, Petrakova K, Favret A, Blau S, Beck JT, Miller M, Sutradhar S, Monaco M, Burris HA. Subsequent treatment for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who received ribociclib + letrozole vs placebo + letrozole in the phase III MONALEESA-2 study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-21-18.

Abstract PD4-06: First-line ribociclib + letrozole in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: Efficacy by baseline circulating tumor DNA alterations in MONALEESA-2

Background: The addition of first-line ribociclib (RIB; cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor) to letrozole (LET) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo (PBO) + LET in patients (pts) with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2–) advanced breast cancer (ABC) in the Phase III MONALEESA-2 study. Identifying biomarkers that predict response to treatment remains a key challenge in pts with HR+ ABC. Here we analyze results from MONALEESA-2 by molecular alterations detected in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) at baseline, including PIK3CA mutations and other alterations considered to be important in HR+ ABC.

Methods: Postmenopausal women (N=668) with HR+, HER2– ABC who had not received any prior therapy for ABC were randomized 1:1 to RIB (600 mg/day; 3-weeks-on/1-week-off) + LET (2.5 mg/day; continuous) or PBO + LET. The primary endpoint was PFS. Biomarker analysis of the ctDNA mutation profile was an exploratory endpoint. Plasma samples for ctDNA analysis were collected at baseline and end of treatment. ctDNA was analyzed using next-generation sequencing with a targeted panel of ˜550 genes.

Results: Baseline ctDNA was successfully sequenced in 494 pts (RIB + LET: n=212; PBO + LET: n=215); 67 (14%) of 494 pts were removed from the analysis due to limited tumor DNA in circulation. 427 (86%) pts had ≥1 alteration, including 1,573 mutations, 513 short insertions/deletions, 166 amplifications, and 8 translocations. Alterations (frequency) were commonly observed in the following genes: PIK3CA (33%), TP53 (12%), ZNF703/FGFR1 (5%), and ESR1 (4%), and in genes involved in receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) signaling (12%). RIB + LET treatment benefit was consistent in pts with wild-type (WT) and altered PIK3CA, and in pts with WT and altered TP53 (Table). RIB + LET improved PFS regardless of RTK or ZNF703/FGFR1 alterations. However, there was a weak trend for increased benefit in pts with WT vs altered RTK genes and in pts with WT vs altered ZNF703/FGFR1 genes. These results should be interpreted with caution due to the small number of pts with these alterations. There were too few ESR1 alterations for firm conclusions to be drawn.

 Events, n/NMedian PFS, months Gene(s)RIB + LETPBO + LETRIB + LETPBO + LETHazard ratio (95% confidence interval)PIK3CAWT54/14393/14229.614.70.44 (0.31–0.62)Altered40/6955/7319.212.70.53 (0.35–0.81)TP53WT72/180129/19427.614.70.44 (0.33–0.59)Altered22/3219/2110.25.50.43 (0.23–0.83)ZNF703/FGFR1WT88/202139/20524.814.60.47 (0.36–0.62)Altered6/109/1010.611.40.73 (0.23–2.29)RTKWT81/189128/18724.814.40.46 (0.35–0.61)Altered13/2320/2821.311.40.72 (0.34–1.53)

Conclusions: Consistent RIB + LET treatment benefit was observed compared with PBO + LET, irrespective of the status of baseline ctDNA biomarkers.

Citation Format: Hortobagyi GN, Stemmer S, Campone M, Sonke GS, Arteaga CL, Paluch-Shimon S, Petrakova K, Villanueva C, Nusch A, Grischke E-M, Chan A, Jakobsen E, Marschner N, Hart LL, Alba E, Ohnstand HO, Blau S, Yardley DA, Solovieff N, Su F, Germa C, Yap Y-S. First-line ribociclib + letrozole in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: Efficacy by baseline circulating tumor DNA alterations in MONALEESA-2 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD4-06.

Abstract P5-21-31: Treatment patterns and outcomes of pertuzumab in combination with trastuzumab and docetaxel as first-line treatment of metastatic HER-2 positive breast cancer : Comparison of Czech clinical registry and CLEOPATRA trial data

Key words: pertuzumab, HER-2 positive, breast cancer

Background: The present retrospective analysis was conducted to evaluate efficacy of pertuzumab, a monoclonal antibody, used in combination with trastuzumab and docetaxel as first-line therapy for metastatic HER-2 positive breast cancer in real-world clinical practice. The database of the Czech Clinical Registry of cancer patients treated with pertuzumab was used.

Materials and methods: Data of patients included in the national registry were analyzed and the outcomes were compared with the results of the Phase III CLEOPATRA trial (Baselga et al 2012). The registry is estimated to cover at least 95% of patients treated with the regimen outside of clinical trials.

Results: : A total of 182 patients (mean age 56.5 years) were included in the present analysis. Patients had performance status of 0 (61.0%) or 1 (39%), 64.6% were postmenopausal, 62,6% had visceral disease and 36.8% received neo/adjuvant trastuzumab. The median progression-free survival of 21.2 months (95% CI 12.2–NR [not reached]) for patients included in the registry was longer, compared to 18.5 months reported in the CLEOPATRA trial, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.13). Best response was evaluable in 79.7% of patients. The overall response and disease control rates were 57.2% and 98.6%, respectively. Median overall survival has not been reached; the survival at 18 months was 86.6% (95% CI 75.7%-92.9%). Pertuzumab with trastuzumab and docetaxel was well tolerated with adverse events (AEs) attributed to pertuzumab reported in 8 patients. No AEs were life- threatening.

Conclusion: Pertuzumab in combination with trastuzumab and docetaxel is an effective and well-tolerated first-line therapy for patients with metastatic HER-2 positive breast cancer in real-world clinical practice setting. The PFS observed was consistent with data of CLEOPATRA trial.

Citation Format: Studentova H, Petrakova K, Tesarova P, Buchler T, Chloupkova R, Hejduk K, Melichar B. Treatment patterns and outcomes of pertuzumab in combination with trastuzumab and docetaxel as first-line treatment of metastatic HER-2 positive breast cancer : Comparison of Czech clinical registry and CLEOPATRA trial data [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-21-31.

Pazopanib for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Registry-based Analysis of 426 Patients

BACKGROUND

Pazopanib is approved for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The present study was a retrospective registry-based analysis of 426 patients with mRCC treated with pazopanib as first-line targeted therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The data were obtained from the Renal Cell Carcinoma Information system registry. Patient baseline parameters, treatment course and outcomes, and toxicity were analysed.

RESULTS

Median progression-free and overall survival were 12.9 (95% confidence interval(CI)=11.0-14.8) months and 33.2 (95% CI=29.9-36.4) months, respectively. Overall response rate and disease control rate were 25.1% and 57.4%, respectively. Adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment in 37 (12.1%) patients.

CONCLUSION

The results confirm that pazopanib is an effective and safe first-line targeted treatment in patients with mRCC. Both the International mRCC Database Consortium and the Memorial Sloan Kettering models were valid predictors of prognosis and nephrectomy was associated with improved survival.

Ribociclib plus letrozole versus letrozole alone in patients with de novo HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer in the randomized MONALEESA-2 trial

PURPOSE

Determine the efficacy and safety of first-line ribociclib plus letrozole in patients with de novo advanced breast cancer.

METHODS

Postmenopausal women with HR+ , HER2- advanced breast cancer and no prior systemic therapy for advanced disease were enrolled in the Phase III MONALEESA-2 trial (NCT01958021). Patients were randomized to ribociclib (600 mg/day; 3 weeks-on/1 week-off) plus letrozole (2.5 mg/day; continuous) or placebo plus letrozole until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or treatment discontinuation. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival; predefined subgroup analysis evaluated progression-free survival in patients with de novo advanced breast cancer. Secondary endpoints included safety and overall response rate.

RESULTS

Six hundred and sixty-eight patients were enrolled, of whom 227 patients (34%; ribociclib plus letrozole vs placebo plus letrozole arm: n = 114 vs. n = 113) presented with de novo advanced breast cancer. Median progression-free survival was not reached in the ribociclib plus letrozole arm versus 16.4 months in the placebo plus letrozole arm in patients with de novo advanced breast cancer (hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.75). The most common Grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia and leukopenia; incidence rates were similar to those observed in the full MONALEESA-2 population. Ribociclib dose interruptions and reductions in patients with de novo disease occurred at similar frequencies to the overall study population.

CONCLUSIONS

Ribociclib plus letrozole improved progression-free survival vs placebo plus letrozole and was well tolerated in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- de novo advanced breast cancer.

Updated results from MONALEESA-2, a phase 3 trial of first-line ribociclib + letrozole in hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative (HER2–), advanced breast cancer (ABC)

1038

Background: Endocrine therapy (ET) is the basis of first-line (1L) treatment for HR+ ABC. However, ET resistance are almost universal. At the first interim analysis (IA) of MONALEESA-2 (NCT01958021), ribociclib (RIB; cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor) + letrozole (LET) significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) vs placebo (PBO) + LET in patients (pts) with HR+, HER2– ABC.1 Here we report updated efficacy and safety data from MONALEESA-2 with a further ~11 months of follow-up. Methods: Postmenopausal women with no prior therapy for ABC were randomized 1:1 toRIB (600 mg/day, 3-weeks-on/1-week-off) + LET(2.5 mg/day, continuous) vs PBO + LET. The primary endpoint was locally assessed PFS. Secondary endpoints include overall survival (OS; key) and safety. OS significance was defined by a p-value threshold of 3.15 x 10-5. Tumor assessments were performed every 8 weeks for the first 18 months, and every 12 weeks, thereafter. Results: 668 pts were enrolled (334 in each arm). At the second IA for OS (data cut-off Jan 2, 2017), the median duration of follow-up was 26.4 months; 116 deaths and 345 PFS events had occurred. OS data remain immature, with 15.0% vs 19.8% of pt deaths in the RIB + LET vs PBO + LET arm (HR = 0.746; 95% CI: 0.517–1.078; p= 0.059). Updated PFS analyses confirmed continued treatment benefit in the RIB + LET vs PBO + LET arm. The 24-month PFS rates (RIB + LET vs PBO + LET) were 54.7% vs 35.9%. Treatment benefit was consistent across pt subgroups. The most common Grade 3/4 laboratory abnormalities (≥10% of pts; RIB + LET vs PBO + LET) were decreased neutrophils (62.6% vs 1.5%), decreased leukocytes (36.8% vs 1.5%), decreased lymphocytes (16.2% vs 3.9%), and elevated alanine aminotransferase (11.4% vs 1.2%). Conclusion: After 26+ months of follow-up, treatment benefit with 1LRIB + LET persists in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2– ABC. The study remains immature for OS analysis. The safety profile of RIB + LET remains manageable. 1. Hortobagyi G, et al. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1738–48. Clinical trial information: NCT01958021.

Abstract P4-22-05: First-line ribociclib plus letrozole in patients with de novo HR+, HER2– advanced breast cancer (ABC): A subgroup analysis of the MONALEESA-2 trial

Background: Around 15,000 US patients per year are diagnosed with de novo ABC. Due to the absence of prior systemic treatment for breast cancer, tumors of patients with de novo ABC may exhibit a different disease biology, which could result in different tumor responses compared with patients who have relapsed breast cancer. Ribociclib is an orally bioavailable cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitor. Results from MONALEESA-2, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized Phase 3 trial (NCT01958021), demonstrated that first-line therapy with ribociclib + letrozole significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) vs placebo + letrozole in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2–) ABC. Many patients with de novo ABC receive endocrine therapy in the first line and in subsequent lines; here we present results from the MONALEESA-2 study in a subpopulation of patients with de novo ABC.

Methods: Postmenopausal women (N=668) with HR+, HER2– ABC who had no prior systemic therapy for ABC were randomized 1:1 (stratified by liver and/or lung metastases) to receive ribociclib (600 mg/day; 3-weeks-on/1-week-off) + letrozole (2.5 mg/day; continuous) or placebo + letrozole. Patients with de novo ABC were eligible. Additional eligibility criteria included measurable disease or ≥1 predominantly lytic bone lesion, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1, and adequate bone marrow/organ function. Prior CDK4/6 inhibitors or systemic therapy for ABC were prohibited. Patients may have received ≤14 days of letrozole or anastrozole for ABC. The primary endpoint was locally assessed PFS; a predefined subgroup analysis evaluated PFS in patients with de novo ABC.

Results: In total, 227 patients with de novo ABC were enrolled. Patients with de novo ABC were equally distributed with 114 (34%) and 113 (34%) in the ribociclib + letrozole and placebo + letrozole arms, respectively. Median duration of exposure to study treatment in the ribociclib + letrozole vs placebo + letrozole arms was 14.1 vs 12.8 months. Treatment was discontinued in 84 (37%) patients with de novo ABC (ribociclib + letrozole vs placebo + letrozole, n [%]; 34 [30%] vs 50 [44%]). Reasons for treatment discontinuation (ribociclib + letrozole vs placebo + letrozole, n [%]) included disease progression (21 [18%] vs 41 [36%]), patient/physician decision (5 [4%] vs 6 [5%]), and adverse events (6 [5%] vs 3 [3%]). PFS was increased in patients with de novo ABC who received ribociclib + letrozole vs placebo + letrozole (hazard ratio=0.448 [95% confidence interval: 0.267–0.750]). The 12-month PFS event-free probability in patients with de novo ABC was 82% in the ribociclib + letrozole arm vs 66% in the placebo + letrozole arm.

Conclusions: The combination of ribociclib + letrozole significantly improved PFS compared with placebo + letrozole in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2– de novo ABC at diagnosis and therefore may become an important treatment option in the de novo ABC setting.

Keywords: Advanced breast cancer; CDK4/6 inhibitor; Letrozole; Ribociclib

Citation Format: O'Shaughnessy J, Petrakova K, Sonke GS, André F, Conte P, Arteaga CL, Cameron DA, Hart LL, Villanueva C, Jakobsen EH, Lindquist D, Souami F, Li X, Germa C, Hirawat S, Hortobagyi GN. First-line ribociclib plus letrozole in patients with de novo HR+, HER2– advanced breast cancer (ABC): A subgroup analysis of the MONALEESA-2 trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-22-05.

Abstract P4-21-12: Preference of trastuzumab administration route (intravenous or subcutaneous) in patients in the Czech Republic. Cross-sectional study on 429 patients

Background: Trastuzumab is the treatment for HER2-positive breast cancer in the metastatic, adjuvant, and neoadjuvant settings. Trastuzumab is available in intravenous (i.v.) and subcutaneous (s.c.) application form. PrefHer study published in 2013 described patients' preference for use of subcutaneous trastuzumab. Our aim was to find out and describe if any preference exists in real clinical practice in the Czech Republic.

Objectives: To analyse reasons for preference of s.c. or i.v. application of trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer in real clinical setting in the Czech Republic.

Methods: A questionnaire based data collection from patients treated in Comprehensive Cancer Centres between January 2015 and July 2015.

Results: We received 429 questionnaires from patients. Data analysis has been conducted in 301 (70.2%) patients' questionnaires after quality control for questionnaires completeness. Out of the 301 patients there were 151 who had ≥ 11 i.v. applications, 137 patients with 3-10 i.v. applications and 13 patients with only 2 i.v. applications. Majority of patients were treated in adjuvant setting (62.8%, n=189), 21.9% (n=66) received neoadjuvant treatment and 15.3% (n=46) patients were treated for advanced disease. Only 33 patients had experience with ≥ 11 s.c. applications, 222 patients with 3-10 s.c. applications and 46 patients with 2 s.c. applications. Subcutaneous form was given in 74.8% (n=225) in adjuvant setting, in 20.3% (n=61) in advanced setting and in 5.0% (n=15) in neoadjuvant setting. Pain related to trastuzumab application was assessed – 52.2% (n=157) patients stated that s.c. application is less painful, 34.2% (n=103) did not see difference and 13.6% (n=41) patients felt that i.v. form is less painful. When assessing site reactions majority (62.4%, n=184) of patients did not see difference between application forms, 20.0% (n=59) patients preferred s.c. form and 17.6% (n=52) preferred i.v. form. Lower anxiety related to trastuzumab application was reported with s.c. form (46.0%, n=137). Only 6.0% (n=18) patients reported lower anxiety with i.v. application and 48.0% (n=143) did not see any difference. Vast majority (92.7%, n=279) patients described s.c. form as more comfortable, 4.7% (n=14) patients did not see difference and only 2.7% (n=8) described i.v. form as more comfortable. Overall 95.0% (n=286) patients preferred s.c. application form of trastuzumab. The main reasons are time savings (86.7%, n=261) and better comfort (71.8%, n=216). Only 10 patients (3.3%) favoured i.v. application form. The main reason for i.v. preference is lower pain and lower incidence of complications (2.0%, n=6). The remaining 5 patients (1.7%) had no preference of any application form.

Conclusion: Patients treated in Comprehensive Cancer Centres in the Czech Republic prefer subcutaneous application form of trastuzumab. The main reasons for their preference are time savings and better application comfort.

Citation Format: Petrakova K, Melichar B, Bortlicek Z, Hejduk K. Preference of trastuzumab administration route (intravenous or subcutaneous) in patients in the Czech Republic. Cross-sectional study on 429 patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-21-12.

Ribociclib as First-Line Therapy for HR-Positive, Advanced Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

The inhibition of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) could potentially overcome or delay resistance to endocrine therapy in advanced breast cancer that is positive for hormone receptor (HR) and negative for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2).

METHODS

In this randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of the selective CDK4/6 inhibitor ribociclib combined with letrozole for first-line treatment in 668 postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative recurrent or metastatic breast cancer who had not received previous systemic therapy for advanced disease. We randomly assigned the patients to receive either ribociclib (600 mg per day on a 3-weeks-on, 1-week-off schedule) plus letrozole (2.5 mg per day) or placebo plus letrozole. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, overall response rate, and safety. A preplanned interim analysis was performed on January 29, 2016, after 243 patients had disease progression or died. Prespecified criteria for superiority required a hazard ratio of 0.56 or less with P<1.29×10^-5.

RESULTS

The duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer in the ribociclib group than in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.72; P=3.29×10^-6 for superiority). The median duration of follow-up was 15.3 months. After 18 months, the progression-free survival rate was 63.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 54.6 to 70.3) in the ribociclib group and 42.2% (95% CI, 34.8 to 49.5) in the placebo group. In patients with measurable disease at baseline, the overall response rate was 52.7% and 37.1%, respectively (P<0.001). Common grade 3 or 4 adverse events that were reported in more than 10% of the patients in either group were neutropenia (59.3% in the ribociclib group vs. 0.9% in the placebo group) and leukopenia (21.0% vs. 0.6%); the rates of discontinuation because of adverse events were 7.5% and 2.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients receiving initial systemic treatment for HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer, the duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer among those receiving ribociclib plus letrozole than among those receiving placebo plus letrozole, with a higher rate of myelosuppression in the ribociclib group. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01958021 .).

Pictilisib for oestrogen receptor-positive, aromatase inhibitor-resistant, advanced or metastatic breast cancer (FERGI): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Inhibition of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) is a promising approach to overcome resistance to endocrine therapy in breast cancer. Pictilisib is an oral inhibitor of multiple PI3K isoforms. The aim of this study is to establish if addition of pictilisib to fulvestrant can improve progression-free survival in oestrogen receptor-positive, endocrine-resistant breast cancer.

METHODS

In this two-part, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, we recruited postmenopausal women aged 18 years or older with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer resistant to treatment with an aromatase inhibitor in the adjuvant or metastatic setting, from 123 medical centres across 21 countries. Part 1 included patients with or without PIK3CA mutations, whereas part 2 included only patients with PIK3CA mutations. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1 in part 1 and 2:1 in part 2) via a computer-generated hierarchical randomisation algorithm to daily oral pictilisib (340 mg in part 1 and 260 mg in part 2) or placebo starting on day 15 of cycle 1, plus intramuscular fulvestrant 500 mg on day 1 and day 15 of cycle 1 and day 1 of subsequent cycles in both groups. In part 1, we stratified patients by presence or absence of PIK3CA mutation, primary or secondary aromatase inhibitor resistance, and measurable or non-measurable disease. In part 2, we stratified patients by previous aromatase inhibitor treatment for advanced or metastatic disease or relapse during or within 6 months of an aromatase inhibitor treatment in the adjuvant setting and measurable or non-measurable disease. All patients and those administering treatment and assessing outcomes were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population for both parts 1 and 2 and also separately in patients with PIK3CA-mutated tumours in part 1. Tumour assessment (physical examination and imaging scans) was investigator-assessed and done at screening and after 8 weeks, 16 weeks, 24 weeks, and 32 weeks of treatment from day 1 of cycle 1 and every 12 weeks thereafter. We assessed safety in as-treated patients who received at least one dose of study medication. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01437566.

FINDINGS

In part 1, between Sept 27, 2011, and Jan 11, 2013, we randomly allocated 168 patients to the pictilisib (89 [53%]) or placebo (79 [47%]) group. In part 2, between March 18, 2013, and Jan 2, 2014, we randomly allocated 61 patients to the pictilisib (41 [67%]) or placebo (20 [33%]) group. In part 1, we found no difference in median progression-free survival between the pictilisib (6·6 months [95% CI 3·9-9·8]) and placebo (5·1 months [3·6-7·3]) group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·74 [95% CI 0·52-1·06]; p=0·096). We also found no difference when patients were analysed according to presence (pictilisib 6·5 months [95% CI 3·7-9·8] vs placebo 5·1 months [2·6-10·4]; HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·42-1·28]; p=0·268) or absence (5·8 months [3·6-11·1] vs 3·6 months [2·8-7·3]; HR 0·72 [0·42-1·23]; p=0·23) of PIK3CA mutation. In part 2, we also found no difference in progression-free survival between groups (5·4 months [95% CI 3·8-8·3] vs 10·0 months [3·6-13·0]; HR 1·07 [95% CI 0·53-2·18]; p=0·84). In part 1, grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 54 (61%) of 89 patients in the pictilisib group and 22 (28%) of 79 in the placebo group. 19 serious adverse events related to pictilisib treatment were reported in 14 (16%) of 89 patients. Only one (1%) of 79 patients reported treatment-related serious adverse events in the placebo group. In part 2, grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 15 (36%) of 42 patients in the pictilisib group and seven (37%) of 19 patients in the placebo group. Four serious adverse events related to pictilisib treatment were reported in two (5%) of 42 patients. One treatment-related serious adverse event occurred in one (5%) of 19 patients in the placebo group.

INTERPRETATION

Although addition of pictilisib to fulvestrant did not significantly improve progression-free survival, dosing of pictilisib was limited by toxicity, potentially limiting its efficacy. For future assessment of PI3K inhibition as an approach to overcome resistance to hormonal therapy, inhibitors with greater selectivity than that of pictilisib might be needed to improve tolerability and potentially increase efficacy. No further investigation of pictilisib in this setting is ongoing.

FUNDING

F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Neratinib after trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (ExteNET): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Neratinib, an irreversible tyrosine-kinase inhibitor of HER1, HER2, and HER4, has clinical activity in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of 12 months of neratinib after trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy in patients with early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer.

METHODS

We did this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial at 495 centres in Europe, Asia, Australia, New Zealand, and North and South America. Eligible women (aged ≥18 years, or ≥20 years in Japan) had stage 1-3 HER2-positive breast cancer and had completed neoadjuvant and adjuvant trastuzumab therapy up to 2 years before randomisation. Inclusion criteria were amended on Feb 25, 2010, to include patients with stage 2-3 HER2-positive breast cancer who had completed trastuzumab therapy up to 1 year previously. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral neratinib 240 mg per day or matching placebo. The randomisation sequence was generated with permuted blocks stratified by hormone receptor status (hormone receptor-positive [oestrogen or progesterone receptor-positive or both] vs hormone receptor-negative [oestrogen and progesterone receptor-negative]), nodal status (0, 1-3, or ≥4), and trastuzumab adjuvant regimen (sequentially vs concurrently with chemotherapy), then implemented centrally via an interactive voice and web-response system. Patients, investigators, and trial sponsors were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was invasive disease-free survival, as defined in the original protocol, at 2 years after randomisation. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00878709.

FINDINGS

Between July 9, 2009, and Oct 24, 2011, we randomly assigned 2840 women to receive neratinib (n=1420) or placebo (n=1420). Median follow-up time was 24 months (IQR 20-25) in the neratinib group and 24 months (22-25) in the placebo group. At 2 year follow-up, 70 invasive disease-free survival events had occurred in patients in the neratinib group versus 109 events in those in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio 0·67, 95% CI 0·50-0·91; p=0·0091). The 2-year invasive disease-free survival rate was 93·9% (95% CI 92·4-95·2) in the neratinib group and 91·6% (90·0-93·0) in the placebo group. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in patients in the neratinib group were diarrhoea (grade 3, n=561 [40%] and grade 4, n=1 [<1%] vs grade 3, n=23 [2%] in the placebo group), vomiting (grade 3, n=47 [3%] vs n=5 [<1%]), and nausea (grade 3, n=26 [2%] vs n=2 [<1%]). QT prolongation occurred in 49 (3%) patients given neratinib and 93 (7%) patients given placebo, and decreases in left ventricular ejection fraction (≥grade 2) in 19 (1%) and 15 (1%) patients, respectively. We recorded serious adverse events in 103 (7%) patients in the neratinib group and 85 (6%) patients in the placebo group. Seven (<1%) deaths (four patients in the neratinib group and three patients in the placebo group) unrelated to disease progression occurred after study drug discontinuation. The causes of death in the neratinib group were unknown (n=2), a second primary brain tumour (n=1), and acute myeloid leukaemia (n=1), and in the placebo group were a brain haemorrhage (n=1), myocardial infarction (n=1), and gastric cancer (n=1). None of the deaths were attributed to study treatment in either group.

INTERPRETATION

Neratinib for 12 months significantly improved 2-year invasive disease-free survival when given after chemotherapy and trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy to women with HER2-positive breast cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to ensure that the improvement in breast cancer outcome is maintained.

FUNDING

Wyeth, Pfizer, Puma Biotechnology.

Abstract S2-02: The FERGI phase II study of the PI3K inhibitor pictilisib (GDC-0941) plus fulvestrant vs fulvestrant plus placebo in patients with ER+, aromatase inhibitor (AI)-resistant advanced or metastatic breast cancer – Part I results

Background: Preclinical and clinical data indicate a key role for the PI3-kinase (PI3K) pathway in the pathogenesis of resistance to endocrine therapies in hormone receptor-positive (HR) breast cancer (BC) and suggest that combining PI3K inhibitors with endocrine therapy may partially overcome this resistance. FERGI is the first randomized Phase II study testing pictilisib (GDC-0941), a PI3K inhibitor, in combination with fulvestrant to evaluate this hypothesis in MBC patients with and without PIK3CA-mutant tumors.

Methods: 168 post-menopausal pts with ER-positive, HER2-negative MBC were randomized (1:1) to receive fulvestrant with either pictilisib 340 mg QD (n=89, "combination" arm) or matching placebo (n=79, "control" arm). To be eligible, pts had to have relapsed during or within 6 mos of completing adjuvant AI treatment or have progressed on an AI for MBC. Pts were stratified based on tumor PIK3CA mutation status, resistance to prior AI therapy and presence of measurable disease. The primary endpoint was PFS by investigator assessment in the intent-to-treat (ITT) group and in pts with centrally confirmed PIK3CA-mutant tumors. The primary analysis was based on a 6 mo median duration follow up.

Results: Baseline disease and prior treatment characteristics were similar between study arms. Observed treatment-emergent AEs were consistent with those previously described for single agent pictilisib and fulvestrant (primary toxicities were rash and GI disorders). In the ITT population (84 events) the median PFS (mPFS) was 6.2 mo in the combination arm vs 3.8 months for the control arm (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.50-1.19). For pts with PIK3CA-mutant tumors (37 events), mPFS was 6.2 mo in the combination arm vs 5.1 mo in the control arm (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.48-1.76). For pts without a detectable PIK3CA mutant tumor (43 events), mPFS was 5.8 months in the combination arm vs 3.6 months in the control arm (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.35-1.17). Exploratory post-hoc subgroup analysis suggested improvement in PFS in pts with ER+ and PR+ tumors (centrally confirmed) treated with pictilisib plus fulvestrant. In the ER+/PR+ subgroup (57 events) mPFS was 7.2 mo in the combination arm vs 3.7 mo in the control arm (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.78). This improvement was independent of tumor PIK3CA mutation status. Multivariate analysis suggests that this treatment effect in pts with ER+/PR+ tumors is maintained after adjusting for possible baseline imbalances. A similar analysis on pts with luminal A tumors (per PAM50 analysis) was also consistent with the findings in pts ER+/PR+ disease.

Conclusions: This is the first report of a blinded, randomized clinical study evaluating a PI3K inhibitor in pts with MBC. In the ITT population, the addition of pictilisib to fulvestrant was associated with a mPFS improvement of 3.8 mo to 6.2 mo. Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested in pts with ER+/PR+ tumors are more likely to derive benefit from the addition of pictilisib to fulvestrant irrespective of PIK3CA mutation status, though the subgroup analyses are limited by the sample size. Additional biomarker analyses will be reported.

Citation Format: Ian Krop, Stephen Johnston, Ingrid A Mayer, Maura Dickler, Vinod Ganju, Andres Forero-Torres, Bohuslav Melichar, Serafin Morales, Richard de Boer, Steven Gendreau, Mika Derynck, Mark Lackner, Jill Spoerke, Ru-Fang Yeh, Gallia Levy, Vivian Ng, Carol O'Brien, Heidi Savage, Yuanyuan Xiao, Timothy Wilson, Soo Chin Lee, Katarina Petrakova, Susanne Vallentin, Denise Yardley, Matthew Ellis, Martine Piccart, Edith A Perez, Eric Winer, Peter Schmid. The FERGI phase II study of the PI3K inhibitor pictilisib (GDC-0941) plus fulvestrant vs fulvestrant plus placebo in patients with ER+, aromatase inhibitor (AI)-resistant advanced or metastatic breast cancer – Part I results [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr S2-02.