Dataset Information

Alpelisib Efficacy in Hormone Receptor-Positive HER2-Negative PIK3CA-Mutant Advanced Breast Cancer Post-Everolimus Treatment.

ABSTRACT: This real-world cohort analysis assessed the efficacy of alpelisib and endocrine treatment (ET) combinations in a post-everolimus setting. Thirteen women who started alpelisib and ET at standard doses between 2018 and 2022 for advanced breast cancer (ABC), after undergoing CDK4/6i and everolimus treatment, were eligible for the study entry. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints were the objective response rate (ORR) and clinical benefit rate (CBR), with different molecular profiling. The patients had previously received a median of four (range 3-8) systemic treatments, including CDK4/6i and everolimus. The median PFS on alpelisib was 5.5 months (range 0.5-10), and four women each had an ORR and three (23%) had a stable disease. The 6-month CBR was 46.1%, similar to the BYLeive study cohort C (47.8%). Notably, our cohort included patients with a long CBR under everolimus treatment (median 6 months, range 1-18); however, the responses to alpelisib and everolimus were not correlated (Pearson r = -0.23, p = 0.44). The PIK3CA, P53, ARID, GATA3, and ESR1 mutations were not associated with the 6-month CBR. Despite heavy pre-treatments, including everolimus, alpelisib was clinically relevant in our cohort, even among patients with an ESR1 mutation. The best treatment sequence for PIK3CA/mTOR inhibitors warrants examination in future trials on PIK3CA-mutant inpatients with luminal ABC.

SUBMITTER: Raphael A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9601363 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Alpelisib Efficacy in Hormone Receptor-Positive HER2-Negative PIK3CA-Mutant Advanced Breast Cancer Post-Everolimus Treatment.

Raphael Ari A Salmon-Divon Mali M Epstein Jessica J Zahavi Tamar T Sonnenblick Amir A Shachar Shlomit S SS

Genes 20220929 10

This real-world cohort analysis assessed the efficacy of alpelisib and endocrine treatment (ET) combinations in a post-everolimus setting. Thirteen women who started alpelisib and ET at standard doses between 2018 and 2022 for advanced breast cancer (ABC), after undergoing CDK4/6i and everolimus treatment, were eligible for the study entry. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints were the objective response rate (ORR) and clinical benefit rate (CBR), ...[more]

PMID: 36292649

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The PI3K/AKT/mTORC1 axis is implicated in hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (HR+ HER2- mBC) resistance to anti-estrogen treatments. Based on results of the BOLERO-2 trial, the mTORC1 inhibitor everolimus in combination with the steroidal aromatase inhibitor (AI) exemestane has become a standard treatment for patients with HR+ HER2- mBC resistant to prior non-steroidal AI therapy. In the recent SOLAR-1 trial, the inhibitor of the PI3K alpha subunit (p110α) alpelisib in combination with fulvestrant prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) when compared to fulvestrant alone in patients with PIK3CA-mutated HR+ HER2- mBC that progressed after/on previous AI treatment. Therefore, two different molecules targeting the PI3K/AKT/mTORC1 axis, namely everolimus and alpelisib, are available for patients progressing on/after previous AI treatment, but it is unclear how to optimize their use in the clinical practice. Here, we reviewed the available clinical evidence deriving from the BOLERO-2 and SOLAR-1 trials to compare efficacy and safety profiles of everolimus and alpelisib in advanced HR+ HER2- BC treatment. Adding either compound to standard endocrine therapy provided similar absolute and relative PFS advantage. In the SOLAR-1 trial, a 76% incidence of grade (G) 3 or 4 (G3/G4) adverse events was reported, while G3/G4 toxicities occurred in 42% of patients in the BOLERO-2 trial. While alpelisib was only effective in patients with PIK3CA-mutated neoplasms, retrospective analyses indicate that everolimus improves exemestane efficacy independently of PIK3CA mutational status. CONCLUSIONS:Based on the available efficacy and safety data, the "new" alpelisib may be burdened by higher incidence of severe adverse events, higher costs, and anticancer efficacy that is limited to PIK3CA-mutated tumors when compared to the "old" everolimus. Therefore, the everolimus-exemestane combination remains an effective and reasonably well-tolerated therapeutic option for HR+ HER2- mBC patients progressing after/on previous AI treatment, independently of PIK3CA mutational status.

Project description:BackgroundHER2 is amplified or overexpressed in around 20% of breast cancers (BC). HER2-targeted therapies have significantly improved the prognosis of patients with HER2+ BC, however, de novo and acquired resistance to anti-HER2 treatment is common. Activating mutations in the PIK3CA gene are reported in ∼30% of HER2+ BC and are associated with resistance to anti-HER2 therapies and a poor prognosis. Here, we investigated the in vitro and in vivo antitumor efficacy of the alpha-specific PI3K inhibitor alpelisib alone or in combination with anti-HER2 therapy using a panel of HER2+ BC cell lines. We also generated models of acquired resistance to alpelisib to investigate the mechanisms underlying resistance to alpha-specific PI3K inhibition.Materials and methodsPIK3CA mutant (HCC1954, KPL4 and JMT1) and wild-type (BT474 and SKBR3) HER2+ BC cell lines were used. The HCC1954 and KPL4 cells were chronically exposed to increasing concentrations of alpelisib or to alpelisib + trastuzumab in order to generate derivatives with acquired resistance to alpelisib (AR) and to alpelisib + trastuzumab (ATR). The transcriptomic profiles of HCC1954, KPL4 and their AR and ATR derivatives were determined by RNA sequencing. Cell growth was assessed by MTT assay. Changes in the protein levels of key PI3K pathway components were assessed by Western blotting. Gene expression, cellular and patients' data from the Cancer Dependency Map (DepMap) and KMPlot datasets were interrogated.ResultsHER2+ BC cell lines harboring activating mutations in PIK3CA were less sensitive to single or dual anti-HER2 blockade compared to PIK3CA wild-type cells. Alpelisib treatment resulted in dose-dependent inhibition of the growth of cells with or without PIK3CA mutations and enhanced the antitumor efficacy of anti-HER2 therapies in vitro. In addition, alpelisib greatly delayed tumor growth of HCC1954 xenografts in vivo. Functional annotation of the significantly differentially expressed genes suggested the common activation of biological processes associated with oxidation reduction, cell proliferation, immune response and RNA synthesis in alpelisib-resistant models compared with native cells. Eight commonly upregulated genes (log2 fold-change >1, False Discovery Rate [FDR] <0.05) in models with acquired resistance to alpelisib or alpelisib + trastuzumab were identified. Among these, AKR1C1 was associated with alpelisib-resistance in vitro and with a poor prognosis in patients with HER2+ BC.ConclusionsOur findings support the use of an alpha-selective PI3K inhibitor to overcome the therapeutic limitations associated with single or dual HER2 blockade in PIK3CA-mutant HER2+ breast cancer. Future studies are warranted to confirm the potential role of candidate genes/pathways in resistance to alpelisib.

Project description:BackgroundThe phase III SANDPIPER study assessed taselisib (GDC-0032), a potent, selective PI3K inhibitor, plus fulvestrant in estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, PIK3CA-mutant locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.Patients and methodsPostmenopausal women with disease recurrence/progression during/after an aromatase inhibitor were randomized 2 : 1 to receive taselisib (4 mg; taselisib arm) or placebo (placebo arm) plus fulvestrant (500 mg). Stratification factors were visceral disease, endocrine sensitivity, and geographic region. Patients with PIK3CA-mutant tumors (central cobas® PIK3CA Mutation Test) were randomized separately from those without detectable mutations. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (INV-PFS) in patients with PIK3CA-mutant tumors. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate, overall survival, clinical benefit rate, duration of objective response, PFS by blinded independent central review (BICR-PFS), safety, and time to deterioration in health-related quality of life.ResultsThe PIK3CA-mutant intention-to-treat population comprised 516 patients (placebo arm: n = 176; taselisib arm: n = 340). INV-PFS was significantly improved in the taselisib {7.4 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.26-9.07]} versus placebo arm (5.4 months [95% CI, 3.68-7.29]) (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0.70; 95% CI, 0.56-0.89; P = 0.0037) and confirmed by BICR-PFS (HR 0.66). Secondary endpoints, including objective response rate, clinical benefit rate, and duration of objective response, showed consistent improvements in the taselisib arm. Safety was assessed in all randomized patients who received at least one dose of taselisib/placebo or fulvestrant regardless of PIK3CA-mutation status (n = 629). Serious adverse events were lower in the placebo versus taselisib arm (8.9% versus 32.0%). There were more discontinuations (placebo arm: 2.3%; taselisib arm: 16.8%) and dose reductions (placebo arm: 2.3%; taselisib arm: 36.5%) in the taselisib arm.ConclusionSANDPIPER met its primary endpoint; however, the combination of taselisib plus fulvestrant has no clinical utility given its safety profile and modest clinical benefit.

Project description:BackgroundResistance to endocrine therapy in breast cancer is associated with activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) intracellular signaling pathway. In early studies, the mTOR inhibitor everolimus added to endocrine therapy showed antitumor activity.MethodsIn this phase 3, randomized trial, we compared everolimus and exemestane versus exemestane and placebo (randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio) in 724 patients with hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer who had recurrence or progression while receiving previous therapy with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor in the adjuvant setting or to treat advanced disease (or both). The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included survival, response rate, and safety. A preplanned interim analysis was performed by an independent data and safety monitoring committee after 359 progression-free survival events were observed.ResultsBaseline characteristics were well balanced between the two study groups. The median age was 62 years, 56% had visceral involvement, and 84% had hormone-sensitive disease. Previous therapy included letrozole or anastrozole (100%), tamoxifen (48%), fulvestrant (16%), and chemotherapy (68%). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were stomatitis (8% in the everolimus-plus-exemestane group vs. 1% in the placebo-plus-exemestane group), anemia (6% vs. <1%), dyspnea (4% vs. 1%), hyperglycemia (4% vs. <1%), fatigue (4% vs. 1%), and pneumonitis (3% vs. 0%). At the interim analysis, median progression-free survival was 6.9 months with everolimus plus exemestane and 2.8 months with placebo plus exemestane, according to assessments by local investigators (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.54; P<0.001). Median progression-free survival was 10.6 months and 4.1 months, respectively, according to central assessment (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.47; P<0.001).ConclusionsEverolimus combined with an aromatase inhibitor improved progression-free survival in patients with hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer previously treated with nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors. (Funded by Novartis; BOLERO-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00863655.).

Project description:ImportanceThe phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway is frequently activated in patients with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+), endocrine therapy-resistant breast cancers.ObjectiveTo assess the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and activity of alpelisib, an oral, PI3Kα-specific inhibitor, plus fulvestrant in patients with ER+ advanced breast cancer (ABC).Design, setting, and participantsAn open-label, single-arm, phase 1b study of alpelisib plus fulvestrant was conducted at 10 centers in 5 countries. Participants were 87 postmenopausal women with PIK3CA-altered or PIK3CA-wild-type ER+ ABC, whose cancer progressed during or after antiestrogen therapy. The study began enrolling patients October 5, 2010, and the data cutoff was March 22, 2017.InterventionsEscalating doses of alpelisib were administered once daily, starting at 300 mg, plus fixed-dose fulvestrant, 500 mg, in the dose-escalation phase; alpelisib at the recommended phase 2 dose plus fulvestrant in the dose-expansion phase.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was determination of the MTD of once-daily alpelisib plus fulvestrant. Secondary end points included safety and preliminary activity.ResultsFrom October 5, 2010, to March 22, 2017, 87 women (median age: 58 years [range, 37-79 years]; median of 5 prior lines of antineoplastic therapy) received escalating once-daily doses of alpelisib (300 mg, n = 9; 350 mg, n = 8; 400 mg, n = 70) plus fixed-dose fulvestrant (500 mg). During dose escalation, dose-limiting toxic effects were reported in 1 patient (alpelisib, 400 mg): diarrhea (grade 2), vomiting, fatigue, and decreased appetite (all grade 3). The MTD of alpelisib when combined with fulvestrant was 400 mg once daily, and the recommended phase 2 dose was 300 mg once daily. Overall, the most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events with alpelisib, 400 mg, once daily (≥10% of patients), regardless of causality, were hyperglycemia (19 [22%]) and maculopapular rash (11 [13%]); 9 patients permanently discontinued therapy owing to adverse events. Median progression-free survival at the MTD was 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.6-9.0 months). Median progression-free survival with alpelisib, 300 to 400 mg, once daily plus fulvestrant was longer in patients with PIK3CA-altered tumors (9.1 months; 95% CI, 6.6-14.6 months) vs wild-type tumors (4.7 months; 95% CI, 1.9-5.6 months). Overall response rate in the PIK3CA-altered group was 29% (95% CI, 17%-43%), with no objective tumor responses in the wild-type group.Conclusions and relevanceAlpelisib plus fulvestrant has a manageable safety profile in patients with ER+ ABC, and data suggest that this combination may have greater clinical activity in PIK3CA-altered vs wild-type tumors.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01219699.

Project description:ImportanceEverolimus plus exemestane and capecitabine are approved second-line therapies for advanced breast cancer.ObjectiveA postapproval commitment to health authorities to estimate the clinical benefit of everolimus plus exemestane vs everolimus or capecitabine monotherapy for estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer.DesignOpen-label, randomized, phase 2 trial of treatment effects in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer that had progressed during treatment with nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors.InterventionsPatients were randomized to 3 treatment regimens: (1) everolimus (10 mg/d) plus exemestane (25 mg/d); (2) everolimus alone (10 mg/d); and (3) capecitabine alone (1250 mg/m2 twice daily).Main outcomes and measuresEstimated hazard ratios (HRs) of progression-free survival (PFS) for everolimus plus exemestane vs everolimus alone (primary objective) or capecitabine alone (key secondary objective). Safety was a secondary objective. No formal statistical comparisons were planned.ResultsA total of 309 postmenopausal women were enrolled, median age, 61 years (range, 32-88 years). Of these, 104 received everolimus plus exemestane; 103, everolimus alone; and 102, capecitabine alone. Median follow-up from randomization to the analysis cutoff (June 1, 2017) was 37.6 months. Estimated HR of PFS was 0.74 (90% CI, 0.57-0.97) for the primary objective of everolimus plus exemestane vs everolimus alone and 1.26 (90% CI, 0.96-1.66) for everolimus plus exemestane vs capecitabine alone. Between treatment arms, potential informative censoring was noted, and a stratified multivariate Cox regression model was used to account for imbalances in baseline characteristics; a consistent HR was observed for everolimus plus exemestane vs everolimus (0.73; 90% CI, 0.56-0.97), but the HR was closer to 1 for everolimus plus exemestane vs capecitabine (1.15; 90% CI, 0.86-1.52). Grade 3 to 4 adverse events were more frequent with capecitabine (74%; n = 75) vs everolimus plus exemestane (70%; n = 73) or everolimus alone (59%; n = 61). Serious adverse events were more frequent with everolimus plus exemestane (36%; n = 37) vs everolimus alone (29%; n = 30) or capecitabine (29%; n = 30).Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that everolimus plus exemestane combination therapy offers a PFS benefit vs everolimus alone, and they support continued use of this therapy in this setting. A numerical PFS difference with capecitabine vs everolimus plus exemestane should be interpreted cautiously owing to imbalances among baseline characteristics and potential informative censoring.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01783444.

Dataset Information

Alpelisib Efficacy in Hormone Receptor-Positive HER2-Negative PIK3CA-Mutant Advanced Breast Cancer Post-Everolimus Treatment.

Publications

Alpelisib Efficacy in Hormone Receptor-Positive HER2-Negative PIK3CA-Mutant Advanced Breast Cancer Post-Everolimus Treatment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets