Dataset Information

Comparative Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Fulvestrant versus Everolimus Plus Exemestane for Postmenopausal Metastatic Breast Cancer Resistant to Aromatase Inhibitors in Real-World Experience.

ABSTRACT: Background:Fulvestrant (FUL) and the combination of everolimus and exemestane (EVE-EXE) were the options to treat hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients who were refractory to aromatase inhibitors (AIs). The practical knowledge of treatment patterns and outcomes between the two regimens is essential for improving treatment decisions. Methods:HR+/HER2- MBC patients, who were refractory to AI, were treated with FUL or EVE-EXE from June 2013 to June 2016 were included. Treatment patterns, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity were reported. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize potential confounders. Results:A total of 168 patients were enrolled. Of 168 patients, 124 patients were treated with FUL and 44 patients received EVE-EXE. Patients who were treated with EVE-EXE were younger, more likely to have visceral, liver, multiple sites of metastases, and had received more prior chemotherapy. After adjusting for propensity score matching (PSM), no significant difference in PFS was found between two groups (P=0.419). However, in the subgroup of multiple metastatic sites, the median PFS was significantly improved in the EVE-EXE arm compared with FUL arm (6.1 vs 3.2 months, respectively, P=0.012). More patients in EVE-EXE arm discontinued treatment due to adverse events than in the FUL arm. Conclusion:A substantial difference in treatment patterns was observed between the two arms. Clinical outcomes were comparable after PSM. Clinicaltrialsgov Identifier:NCT03695341 (May 14, 2018).

SUBMITTER: Li Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7335268 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Fulvestrant versus Everolimus Plus Exemestane for Postmenopausal Metastatic Breast Cancer Resistant to Aromatase Inhibitors in Real-World Experience.

Li Yi Y Xie Yizhao Y Gong Chengcheng C Zhao Yannan Y Zhang Jian J Zhang Sheng S Wang Leiping L Chen She S Hu Xichun X Wang Biyun B

Therapeutics and clinical risk management 20200630

<h4>Background</h4>Fulvestrant (FUL) and the combination of everolimus and exemestane (EVE-EXE) were the options to treat hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients who were refractory to aromatase inhibitors (AIs). The practical knowledge of treatment patterns and outcomes between the two regimens is essential for improving treatment decisions.<h4>Methods</h4>HR+/HER2- MBC patients, who were refractory to AI, ...[more]

PMID: 32636632

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceRandomized clinical trials have demonstrated a substantial benefit of adding everolimus to endocrine therapy. Everolimus inhibits the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) complex but not mTORC2, which can set off an activating feedback loop via mTORC2. Vistusertib, a dual inhibitor of mTORC1 and mTORC2, has demonstrated broad activity in preclinical breast cancer models, showing superior activity to everolimus.ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of vistusertib in combination with fulvestrant compared with fulvestrant alone or fulvestrant plus everolimus in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive advanced or metastatic breast cancer.Design, setting, and participantsThe MANTA trial is an open-label, phase 2 randomized clinical trial in which 333 patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer progressing after prior aromatase inhibitor treatment underwent randomization (2:3:3:2) between April 1, 2014, and October 24, 2016, at 88 sites in 9 countries: 67 patients were assigned to receive fulvestrant, 103 fulvestrant plus vistusertib daily, 98 fulvestrant plus vistusertib intermittently, and 65 fulvestrant plus everolimus. Treatment was continued until disease progression, development of unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis.InterventionsFulvestrant alone or in combination with vistusertib (continuous or intermittent dosing schedules) or everolimus.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsAmong the 333 women in the study (median age, 63 years [range, 56-70 years]), median PFS was 5.4 months (95% CI, 3.5-9.2 months) with fulvestrant, 7.6 months (95% CI, 5.9-9.4 months) with fulvestrant plus daily vistusertib, 8.0 months (95% CI, 5.6-9.9 months) with fulvestrant plus intermittent vistusertib, and 12.3 months (95% CI, 7.7-15.7 months) with fulvestrant plus everolimus. There was no significant difference in PFS between those receiving fulvestrant plus daily or intermittent vistusertib and fulvestrant alone (hazard ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.63-1.24]; P = .46; and hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.55-1.12]; P = .16).Conclusions and relevanceThe combination of fulvestrant plus everolimus demonstrated significantly longer PFS compared with fulvestrant plus vistusertib or fulvestrant alone. The trial failed to demonstrate a benefit of adding the dual mTORC1 and mTORC2 inhibitor vistusertib to fulvestrant.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02216786 and EudraCT number: 2013-002403-34.

Project description:Purpose The mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus targets aberrant signaling through the PI3K/AKT/mammalian target of rapamycin pathway, a mechanism of resistance to anti-estrogen therapy in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. We hypothesized that everolimus plus the selective ER downregulator fulvestrant would be more efficacious than fulvestrant alone in ER-positive metastatic breast cancer resistant to aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy. Patients and Methods This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II study included 131 postmenopausal women with ER-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, AI-resistant metastatic breast cancer randomly assigned to fulvestrant (500 mg days 1 and 15 of cycle 1, then day 1 of cycles 2 and beyond) plus everolimus or placebo. The study was designed to have 90% power to detect a 70% improvement in median progression-free survival from 5.4 months to 9.2 months. Secondary end points included objective response and clinical benefit rate (response or stable disease for at least 24 weeks). Prophylactic corticosteroid mouth rinses were not used. Results The addition of everolimus to fulvestrant improved the median progression-free survival from 5.1 to 10.3 months (hazard ratio, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.40 to 0.92]; stratified log-rank P = .02), indicating that the primary trial end point was met. Objective response rates were similar (18.2% v 12.3%; P = .47), but the clinical benefit rate was significantly higher in the everolimus arm (63.6% v 41.5%; P = .01). Adverse events of all grades occurred more often in the everolimus arm, including oral mucositis (53% v 12%), fatigue (42% v 22%), rash (38% v 5%), anemia (31% v. 6%), diarrhea (23% v 8%), hyperglycemia (19% v 5%), hypertriglyceridemia (17% v 3%), and pneumonitis (17% v 0%), although grade 3 to 4 events were uncommon. Conclusion Everolimus enhances the efficacy of fulvestrant in AI-resistant, ER-positive metastatic breast cancer.

Project description:BackgroundThere is limited literature on patterns of everolimus use and subsequent hospitalizations and emergency room (ER) visits in real-world clinical practice. In this study, we describe patterns of everolimus use and hospitalizations and ER visits in a large cohort of patients with breast cancer (BC).Materials and methodsPatients with BC treated with everolimus were identified in the MarketScan database from 2009 to 2016. The pattern of everolimus use and frequency of associated ER visits and hospitalizations during treatment (between the first claim and 30 days after the last claim for everolimus) were identified. Descriptive statistics and regression models were used.ResultsA total of 3,556 everolimus users were identified (median age of 60 years; median days of use, 112). The initial prescribed dose was 10 mg in 74.8% of the patients. Compared with the initial dose, 23.5% of patients had a dose change. Forty-six percent of patients were hospitalized or had an ER visit during the treatment with everolimus. Age greater than 71, higher comorbidity score, treatment year prior to 2012, and lower initial dose were found to be significantly associated with ER visit/hospitalization in the regression models.ConclusionsA significant proportion of patients receiving everolimus had an ER visit or hospitalization during the use of everolimus. These results provide data regarding risks and benefits of treatment with everolimus. These results will be helpful in identifying patients at higher risk of hospitalizations or ER visits and facilitate evidence-based decision making to avoid serious complications.Implications for practiceEverolimus, a mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor, is approved in combination with exemestane in patients with hormone receptor-positive tumors previously treated with anastrozole or letrozole. As new drugs become available, it is crucial to understand the adverse events and potential complications associated with the use of such drugs in the general population, outside of the controlled clinical trial setting. This study describes the patterns of everolimus use and adverse events, including hospitalization and emergency room visits, in a large cohort of patients with metastatic breast cancer in routine practice.

Project description:BackgroundElderly patients are generally underrepresented in oncology clinical trials; therefore, real-world data are needed to inform clinical management of elderly patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). This subanalysis of the P-REALITY X study (NCT05361655) evaluated palbociclib treatment patterns and comparative effectiveness of palbociclib plus an aromatase inhibitor (AI) versus an AI alone among patients with HR+/HER2- mBC aged ≥ 75 years treated in routine clinical practice in the United States.MethodsThis retrospective observational cohort study used electronic health records from the Flatiron Health Analytic Database. Palbociclib treatment patterns, overall survival (OS), real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS), and time to chemotherapy (TTC) were evaluated. Three methods were used for comparative analyses: (1) an unadjusted analysis, (2) stabilized inverse probability treatment weighting (sIPTW; primary analysis), and (3) propensity score matching (PSM; sensitivity analysis).ResultsA total of 961 patients aged ≥ 75 years with HR+/HER2- mBC were identified who started palbociclib plus an AI (n = 313) or an AI alone (n = 648) as first-line (1L) therapy between February 2015 and March 2020 (data cut-off: September 30, 2020). Among patients in the palbociclib plus an AI group with a documented palbociclib starting dose (n = 306), approximately 75% started palbociclib at 125 mg/day, and approximately 40% experienced dose adjustment. After sIPTW, patients treated with palbociclib plus an AI versus an AI alone had significantly improved OS (median of 43.0 vs. 32.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.66 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.51-0.84]; P = 0.0007), rwPFS (median of 20.0 vs. 15.0 months; HR, 0.72 (0.59-0.89); P = 0.0021), and TTC (median of 40.2 vs. 27.4 months; HR, 0.69 [0.55-0.87]; P = 0.0014). These significant improvements in OS, rwPFS, and TTC remained consistent in the unadjusted analysis and after PSM.ConclusionThis real-world comparative analysis demonstrated that 1L palbociclib plus an AI is associated with improved effectiveness compared with an AI alone among patients with HR+/HER2- mBC aged ≥ 75 years. These findings support palbociclib plus an AI as a standard-of-care 1L treatment for elderly patients with HR+/HER2- mBC.

Dataset Information

Comparative Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Fulvestrant versus Everolimus Plus Exemestane for Postmenopausal Metastatic Breast Cancer Resistant to Aromatase Inhibitors in Real-World Experience.

Publications

Comparative Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Fulvestrant versus Everolimus Plus Exemestane for Postmenopausal Metastatic Breast Cancer Resistant to Aromatase Inhibitors in Real-World Experience.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets