Dataset Information

Real-World Tumor Response of Palbociclib Plus Letrozole Versus Letrozole for Metastatic Breast Cancer in US Clinical Practice.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Limited information exists regarding tumor response to palbociclib plus an aromatase inhibitor (AI) versus AI alone in real-world practice.

Objective

To evaluate the real-world tumor response of palbociclib plus letrozole (PAL+LET) versus LET alone as first-line treatment for patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer (HR+/HER2‒ MBC) in routine US clinical practice.

Patients and methods

This retrospective analysis included HR+/HER2‒ MBC patients who initiated PAL+LET or LET as first-line treatment between February 2015 and September 2018 in the Flatiron Health Analytics database. Patients were followed until December 2018. Real-world best tumor response (rwBTR) was determined based on physicians' assessment of radiologic evidence for change in burden of disease.

Results

Of the 1383 eligible patients who initiated PAL+LET or LET as first-line therapy in the Flatiron database, 968 patients had ≥ 1 tumor response assessment (662 received PAL+LET and 306 received LET). The rwBTR rate (complete response+partial response) in the first-line setting was 59.8% in the PAL+LET group and 39.2% in the LET group (odds ratio 2.31 (95% CI 1.75‒3.04), P < 0.0001). After 1:1 propensity-score matching, the rwBTR rate was 58.6% in the PAL+LET group versus 39.1% in the LET group (odds ratio 2.21 (95% CI 1.50‒3.25), P < 0.0001).

Conclusions

This real-world analysis demonstrated that HR+/HER2‒ MBC patients were more likely to respond to PAL+LET compared to LET. These findings further showed the effectiveness of PAL+LET therapy in the real-world setting and support the combination as a standard of care for MBC.

Study registration

Pfizer; NCT04176354; registered November 25, 2019.

SUBMITTER: Brufsky A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8484164 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe global burden of breast cancer (BC) is high, especially in advanced stages. CDK 4/6 inhibitors represent a paradigm shift in the treatment of advanced BC HR+/HER2-, given the clinically and statistically significant gain in overall survival associated with this new class of medications. Nevertheless, as an innovation, the incorporation of these drugs impacts healthcare budgets, requiring cost-effectiveness analyses for decision-making. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ribociclib plus letrozole compared with palbociclib plus letrozole or letrozole as monotherapy for first-line treatment of postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- locally advanced or metastatic BC (aBC) from a Brazilian private healthcare system perspective.MethodsA model including progression-free survival (PFS), progressed disease, and death health states was used to simulate lifetime costs and outcomes. PFS and overall survival were derived from the MONALEESA-2 trial (lifetime horizon). Healthcare costs included drug acquisition and monitoring, subsequent therapies, adverse events, and end-of-life costs. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.ResultsThe total cost of treatment with ribociclib plus letrozole was USD 72,091.82 versus USD 92,749.64 for palbociclib plus letrozole. Total QALYs were 3.30 and 3.16, respectively. Base-case analysis showed ribociclib as dominant over palbociclib in first-line treatment of women with HR+/HER2- aBC, associated with cost savings and QALY gains. The total cost of treatment with ribociclib plus letrozole was USD 83,058.73 versus USD 29,215.10 for letrozole. Total QALYs were 3.84 and 2.61, respectively. Compared with letrozole, ribociclib plus letrozole was associated with an incremental cost of USD 53,843.64 and an incremental QALY gain of 1.23, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of USD 43,826.91 per QALY gained.ConclusionsAs demonstrated by the cost-effectiveness dominance over palbociclib, ribociclib results in savings when used as first-line treatment in postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- aBC, warranting incorporation in the private healthcare system.

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.

Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the real-world effectiveness and tolerability of palbociclib combined with endocrine therapy for the treatment of hormone receptor positive (HR-positive), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-negative), advanced/metastatic breast cancer that progressed on previous endocrine therapy, and to compare these results with the outcomes of the PALOMA-3 clinical trial.MethodsThis study was a retrospective observational cohort study including all patients who started with palbociclib in the St. Antonius Hospital between September 1, 2016 and April 1, 2018 for the treatment of HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced/metastatic breast cancer that progressed on previous endocrine therapy. Individual patient data were collected from electronic medical records. Primary study outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and the number of permanent treatment discontinuations before disease progression due to adverse events (AEs). Secondary outcomes were the frequency of all (serious) AEs and the frequency of and reasons for dose reductions, -interruptions and cycle delays.ResultsA total of 46 patients were studied with a median follow-up of 13.0?months. Overall, the median PFS in real-world clinical practice was 10.0?months (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.9-15.1), compared with 9.5?months in PALOMA-3 (95% CI 9.2-11.0). Two patients discontinued treatment because of AEs. Neutropenia was the most frequent grade 3-4 AE, but with no febrile neutropenia events. Most AEs were managed with palbociclib dose modifications. Regarding these modifications, more cycle delays, less dose reductions, and less dose interruptions occurred in clinical practice compared with PALOMA-3 (59 vs 36%, 22 vs 34%, and 9 vs 54%, respectively). Patients who did not meet the PALOMA-3 study eligibility criteria (n?=?16) showed a lower median PFS of 5.5?months (95% CI 4.7-6.4).ConclusionsThe effectiveness and tolerability of palbociclib in real-world clinical practice corresponded well with the results obtained in the PALOMA-3 clinical trial. Despite the differences in dose modifications, this study suggests that there is no efficacy-effectiveness gap in this patient population.

Project description:BackgroundWe analyzed real-world practice of second-line treatment in hormone receptor (HR)+ human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)- metastatic breast cancer (MBC) following the first-line CDK4/6 inhibitor with letrozole. In addition, we evaluated the relationship between second-line treatment strategies and survival outcome.MethodsUsing the clinical data warehouse, clinical information including MBC diagnosis, treatment and survival outcomes were collected.ResultsIn total, 305 patients were treated with the first-line palbociclib plus letrozole, and we evaluated 166 patients who were treated with second-line treatment. Of the 166 patients, 28.5% were treated with capecitabine (C), followed by exemestane with everolimus (EE) (27.3%) or cytotoxic chemotherapy other than capecitabine (T) (18.8%) and fulvestrant-based treatment or endocrine monotherapy (F) (12.7%). Eighteen patients (10.9%) were enrolled in clinical trials (CT). With regard to treatment strategies, and the median progression-free survival of second-line treatment in a metastatic setting (PFS2) was 7.4 months with C, 5.2 months with EE, 4.8 months with T, 3.6 months with F, and 3.6 months with CT (p = 0.066). In patients with visceral organ disease progression, C (31.3%) or T(31.3%) was the most common second-line treatment followed by EE (21.9%). Most of the 47 patients with bone metastasis alone were treated with EE (38.2%), followed by C (23.4%) and F (21.3%) (p = 0.008). The median overall survival of second-line treatment in a metastatic setting (OS2) was 42.3 months with C, 35.7 months with F, 30.7 months with EE, and 23.1 months with T. The median OS2 for those in CT was not reached (p = 0.064). ER driven BC, disease progression site and PFS2 were associated with OS and OS2 in HR+HER2- MBC (ps < 0.05).ConclusionsWe suggested the second line treatment strategy was important to improve prognosis in patients with HR+/HER2- MBC, especially given the recent standardization of first-line treatment and the many available second-line options.