Dataset Information

Current treatment landscape for patients with locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a systematic literature review.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC), an aggressive histological subtype, has poor prognosis. Chemotherapy remains standard of care for mTNBC, although no agent has been specifically approved for this breast cancer subtype. Instead, chemotherapies approved for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are used for mTNBC (National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines [NCCN] v1.2019). Atezolizumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel was recently approved for programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive locally advanced or metastatic TNBC. Published historical data were reviewed to characterize the efficacy of NCCN-recommended (v1.2016) agents as first-line (1L) and second-line or later (2L+) treatment for patients with locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic TNBC (collectively termed mTNBC herein). METHODS:A systematic literature review was performed, examining clinical efficacy of therapies for mTNBC based on NCCN v1.2016 guideline recommendations. Data from 13 studies, either published retrospective mTNBC subgroup analyses based on phase III trials in MBC or phase II trials in mTNBC, were included. RESULTS:A meta-analysis of mTNBC subgroups from three phase III trials in 1L MBC reported pooled objective response rate (ORR) of 23%, median overall survival (OS) of 17.5?months, and median progression-free survival (PFS) of 5.4?months with single-agent chemotherapy. In two subgroup analyses from a phase III study and a phase II trial (n?=?40 each), median duration of response (DOR) to 1L chemotherapy for mTNBC was 4.4-6.6?months; therefore, responses were not durable. A meta-analysis of seven cohorts showed the pooled ORR for 2L+ chemotherapy was 11% (95% CI, 9-14%). Median DOR to 2L+ chemotherapy in mTNBC was also limited (4.2-5.9?months) per two subgroup analyses from a phase III study. No combination chemotherapy regimens recommended by NCCN v1.2016 for treatment of MBC showed superior OS to single agents. CONCLUSIONS:Chemotherapies have limited effectiveness and are associated with unfavorable toxicity profiles, highlighting a considerable unmet medical need for improved therapeutic options in mTNBC. In addition to the recently approved combination of atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel for PD-L1-positive mTNBC, new treatments resulting in durable clinical responses, prolonged survival, and manageable safety profile would greatly benefit patients with mTNBC.

SUBMITTER: Li CH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6916124 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Current treatment landscape for patients with locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a systematic literature review.

Li Claire H CH Karantza Vassiliki V Aktan Gursel G Lala Mallika M

Breast cancer research : BCR 20191216 1

<h4>Background</h4>Metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC), an aggressive histological subtype, has poor prognosis. Chemotherapy remains standard of care for mTNBC, although no agent has been specifically approved for this breast cancer subtype. Instead, chemotherapies approved for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are used for mTNBC (National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines [NCCN] v1.2019). Atezolizumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel was recently approved for programmed death- ...[more]

PMID: 31842957

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundToliparibizumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel (T+N) has excellent efficacy inmetastatic or recurrent triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), but the optimal choice of sequence of therapy is unclear given the trade-offs between quality of life and cost. Cost-effectiveness analyses can quantify these tradeoffs, leading to more informed decisions. Our objective was to assess the societal cost-effectiveness of the T+N regimen for metastatic or recurrent TNBC.MethodsClinical data were extracted from a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, TORCHLIGHT (NCT04085276). Patients were randomized into the T+N group or placebo plus nab-paclitaxel (P+N) group. 531 patients from 53 study locations were randomly assigned (T+N, n=353; P+N, n=178) into intend to treat (ITT) population; 200 and 100 patients, respectively had programmed death protein 1 (PD-L1) positive TNBC. A Markov model was established with a 21-day cycle length. Costs were acquired from local hospitals, effect parameters included quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).ResultsThe cost differences were 47,538.3 CNY in ITT population (T+N, 143,725.67 CNY; P+N group, 96,187.37 CNY) and 29,258.84 CNY in PD-L1+ subgroup (T+N, 100,128.28 CNY; P+N group, 70,869.45 CNY). Meanwhile, the IEs were 0.03409 in the ITT population (T+N, 0.55323 QALY; P+N, 0.51914 QALY) and 0.03409 in the PD-L1+ subgroup (T+N, 0.42327 QALY; P+N, 0.37628 QALY). The ICERs between T+N and P+N groups were 1,394,548.41 CNY/QALY in the ITT population and 622,663.98 CNY/QALY in the PD-L1+ subgroup. We also analyzed the cost-effectiveness of toripalimab could be received in the Chinese medical insurance catalog. If toripalimab could be reimbursed at an 80% rate, the cost differences were changed to 16,598.99 CNY in ITT population (T+N, 112,786.36 CNY; P+N group, 96,187.37 CNY) and 7,704.58 CNY in PD-L1+ subgroup (T+N, 78,574.03 CNY; P+N group, 70,869.45 CNY). Meanwhile, the IEs remained unchanged. The ICERs between T+N and P+N groups were changed to 486,935.82 CNY/QALY in the ITT population and 163,962.96 CNY/QALY in the PD-L1+ subgroup. Sensitivity analyses indicated the stability of the model and the impact of utility.ConclusionAt current drug prices, the T+N group is not more cost-effective than the P+N group, but after incorporating toripalimab into medical insurance, the T+N group will be more cost-effective for patients with PD-L1+ metastatic or recurrent triple-negative breast cancer.

Project description:IntroductionSince treatment modalities for metastatic recurrent triple-negative breast cancer (mrTNBC) are limited, a novel treatment approach including immunotherapy is required. We have developed a novel regimen of personalized peptide vaccination (PPV), in which vaccine antigens are individually selected from a pool of different peptide candidates based on the pre-existing host immunity. Herein we conducted a phase II study of PPV for metastatic recurrent breast cancer patients to investigate the feasibility of PPV for mrTNBC.MethodsSeventy-nine patients with metastatic recurrent breast cancer who had metastases and had failed standard chemotherapy and/or hormonal therapy were enrolled. They were subgrouped as the mrTNBC group (n = 18), the luminal/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative group (n = 41) and the HER2-positive group (n = 18), while the remaining two patients had not been investigated. A maximum of four human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched peptides showing higher peptide-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) responses in pre-vaccination plasma were selected from 31 pooled peptide candidates applicable for the four HLA-IA phenotypes (HLA-A2, -A24, or -A26 types, or HLA-A3 supertypes), and were subcutaneously administered weekly for 6 weeks and bi-weekly thereafter. Measurement of peptide-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) and IgG responses along with other laboratory analyses were conducted before and after vaccination.ResultsNo severe adverse events associated with PPV were observed in any of the enrolled patients. Boosting of CTL and/or IgG responses was observed in most of the patients after vaccination, irrespective of the breast cancer subtypes. There were three complete response cases (1 mrTNBC and 2 luminal/HER2-negative types) and six partial response cases (1 mrTNBC and 5 luminal/HER2-negative types). The median progression-free survival time and median overall survival time of mrTNBC patients were 7.5 and 11.1 months, while those of luminal/HER2-negative patients were 12.2 and 26.5 months, and those of HER2-positive patients were 4.5 and 14.9 months, respectively.ConclusionsPPV could be feasible for mrTNBC patients because of the safety, immune responses, and possible clinical benefits.Clinical trial registration numberUMIN000001844 (Registration Date: April 5, 2009).

Dataset Information

Current treatment landscape for patients with locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a systematic literature review.

Publications

Current treatment landscape for patients with locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a systematic literature review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets