Fulvestrant and the sequential endocrine cascade for advanced breast cancer.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Johnston S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2750772 | biostudies-other | 2004 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe efficacy and safety of palbociclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor, combined with fulvestrant and goserelin was assessed in premenopausal women with advanced breast cancer (ABC) who had progressed on prior endocrine therapy (ET).Patients and methodsOne hundred eight premenopausal endocrine-refractory women ≥18 years with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) ABC were among 521 women randomized 2:1 (347:174) to fulvestrant (500 mg) ± goserelin with either palbociclib (125 mg/day orally, 3 weeks on, 1 week off) or placebo. This analysis assessed whether the overall tolerable safety profile and significant progression-free survival (PFS) improvement extended to premenopausal women. Potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and ovarian suppression with goserelin were assessed via plasma pharmacokinetics and biochemical analyses, respectively. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01942135) RESULTS: Median PFS for premenopausal women in the palbociclib (n = 72) versus placebo arm (n = 36) was 9.5 versus 5.6 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.50, 95% confidence interval: 0.29-0.87), and consistent with the significant PFS improvement in the same arms for postmenopausal women. Any-grade and grade ≤3 neutropenia, leukopenia, and infections were among the most frequent adverse events reported in the palbociclib arm with concurrent goserelin administration. Hormone concentrations were similar between treatment arms and confirmed sustained ovarian suppression. Clinically relevant DDIs were not observed.ConclusionPalbociclib combined with fulvestrant and goserelin was an effective and well-tolerated treatment for premenopausal women with prior endocrine-resistant HR+/HER2- ABC. Inclusion of both premenopausal and postmenopausal women in pivotal combination ET trials facilitates access to novel drugs for young women and should be considered as a new standard for clinical trial design.Implications for practicePALOMA-3, the first registrational study to include premenopausal women in a trial investigating a CDK4/6 inhibitor combined with endocrine therapy, has the largest premenopausal cohort reported in an endocrine-resistant setting. In pretreated premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer, palbociclib plus fulvestrant and goserelin (luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone [LHRH] agonist) treatment almost doubled median progression-free survival (PFS) and significantly increased the objective response rate versus endocrine monotherapy, achieving results comparable to those reported for chemotherapy without apparently interfering with LHRH agonist-induced ovarian suppression. The significant PFS gain and tolerable safety profile strongly support use of this regimen in premenopausal women with endocrine-resistant disease who could possibly delay chemotherapy.
| S-EPMC5599195 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Fulvestrant ('Faslodex') is a new type of endocrine treatment--an oestrogen receptor (ER) antagonist that downregulates the ER and has no agonist effects. Early efficacy data from phase I/II trials have demonstrated fulvestrant to be effective and well tolerated. Two randomised phase III trials have compared the efficacy of fulvestrant and the aromatase inhibitor, anastrozole, in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer progressing on prior endocrine therapy. Fulvestrant (intramuscular injection 250 mg month(-1)) was found to be at least as effective as anastrozole (orally 1 mg day(-1)) for time to progression (5.5 vs 4.1 months, respectively (hazard ratio (HR): 0.95; 95.14% confidence interval (CI), 0.82-1.10; P=0.48)) and objective response 19.2 vs 16.5%, respectively; treatment difference 2.75%; 95.14% CI, -2.27 to 9.05%; P=0.31). More recently, fulvestrant has also been shown to be noninferior to anastrozole in terms of overall survival, with median time to death being 26.4 months in fulvestrant-treated patients and 24.2 months in those treated with anastrozole (HR: 0.97; 95% CI, 0.78-1.21; P=0.82). In a further randomised phase III trial, fulvestrant was compared with tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced disease in postmenopausal women. In the overall population, efficacy differences favoured tamoxifen and noninferiority of fulvestrant could not be ruled out. In the prospectively defined subset of patients with ER-positive and/or progesterone receptor-positive disease, there was no statistically significant difference between fulvestrant and tamoxifen. This paper reviews the efficacy and tolerability results from these trials.
| S-EPMC2750769 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundFulvestrant, a selective estrogen receptor degrader, is approved for first- and second-line treatment of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer (ABC).MethodsMeta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating fulvestrant 500 mg in postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive ABC, to evaluate differences in clinical benefit rate (CBR; proportion of patients experiencing best overall response of complete response, partial response, or stable disease for ≥ 24 weeks) between fulvestrant 500 mg and comparator endocrine therapies. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for CBR were calculated; fixed effects (FE) models were constructed (first- and second-line data, alone and combined).ResultsSix RCTs were included. Four studies evaluated fulvestrant 500 mg vs. fulvestrant 250 mg; two evaluated fulvestrant 500 mg vs. anastrozole 1 mg. In total, 1054 and 534 patients were included (first- and second-line treatment, respectively). Analysis of OR and 95% CI of CBR by therapy line favored fulvestrant 500 mg vs. comparator therapy. Assessing all results combined in the FE model indicated significant improvement in CBR with fulvestrant 500 mg vs. comparator treatments (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.13-1.57; p = 0.001). Restricting the FE model to therapy line demonstrated significant improvement in CBR vs. comparator treatments (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.02-1.73; p = 0.035) for first-line, and a trend to improvement vs. comparator treatments (OR 1.27; 95% CI 0.90-1.79; p = 0.174) for second-line.ConclusionsIn postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive ABC, fulvestrant 500 mg first-line was associated with significantly greater CBR (more patients benefiting from treatment) vs. comparator endocrine therapy.
| S-EPMC6821663 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe selective estrogen receptor degrader fulvestrant is approved for the first-line treatment of postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who have not received prior endocrine therapy. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of fulvestrant versus comparator treatments in endocrine therapy-naïve patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.MethodsA three-health-state (progression free, progressed disease, and death) partitioned survival model from the UK National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective was developed to extrapolate study data for the cumulative probability of progression-free survival and overall survival to a lifetime (30-year) horizon. Relative comparator data were derived from a systematic literature review-informed network meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses were applied to assess the impact of uncertainty in the parameter input values on the results.ResultsOver a lifetime horizon (30 years), the incremental cost (British pounds sterling) per patient associated with fulvestrant treatment was £18,867 versus anastrozole, £23,097 versus letrozole, and £17,131 versus tamoxifen, with incremental quality-adjusted life-years of 0.55, 0.77, and 0.76, respectively, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £34,109, £29,827, and £22,532, respectively. The largest difference in costs between fulvestrant and the comparators was related to treatment costs.ConclusionsResults suggest that fulvestrant could potentially be a cost-effective option compared with other endocrine monotherapies (anastrozole, letrozole, and tamoxifen) for treating endocrine therapy-naïve, postmenopausal women with HR+, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.
| S-EPMC6861400 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:In the phase III MONARCH 2 study (NCT02107703), abemaciclib plus fulvestrant significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo plus fulvestrant in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC). This study assessed patient-reported pain, global health-related quality of life (HRQoL), functioning, and symptoms. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Abemaciclib or placebo (150 p.o. mg twice daily) plus fulvestrant (500 mg, per label) were randomly assigned (2:1). The modified Brief Pain Inventory, Short Form (mBPI-sf); European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Core 30 (QLQ-C30); and Breast Cancer Questionnaire (QLQ-BR23) assessed outcomes. Data were collected at baseline, cycle 2, every two cycles 3-13, thereafter at every three cycles, and 30?days postdiscontinuation. Longitudinal mixed regression and Cox proportional hazards models assessed postbaseline change and time to sustained deterioration (TTSD) by study arm. RESULTS:On-treatment HRQoL scores were consistently maintained from baseline and similar between arms. Patients in the abemaciclib arm (n =?446) experienced a 4.9-month delay in pain deterioration (mBPI-sf), compared with the control arm (n =?223), and significantly greater TTSD on the mBPI-sf and analgesic use (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.98) and QLQ-C30 pain item (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48-0.79). TTSD for functioning and most symptoms significantly favored the abemaciclib arm, including fatigue, nausea and vomiting, and cognitive and social functioning. Only diarrhea significantly favored the control arm (hazard ratio, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.20-2.10). CONCLUSION:HRQoL was maintained on abemaciclib plus fulvestrant. Alongside superior PFS and manageable safety profile, results support treatment with abemaciclib plus fulvestrant in a population of patients with endocrine-resistant HR+, HER2-negative ABC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE:In MONARCH 2, abemaciclib plus fulvestrant demonstrated superior efficacy and a manageable safety profile for patients with in hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative (-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). Impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is important to consider, given the palliative nature of ABC treatment. In this study, abemaciclib plus fulvestrant, compared with placebo plus fulvestrant, significantly delayed sustained deterioration of pain and other patient-reported symptoms (including fatigue, nausea, vomiting), and social and cognitive functioning. Combined with demonstrated clinical benefit and tolerability, the stabilization of patient-reported symptoms and HRQoL further supports abemaciclib plus fulvestrant as a desirable treatment option in endocrine resistant, HR+, HER2- ABC.
| S-EPMC7011625 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor palbociclib in combination with letrozole has become a standard first-line treatment for patients with endocrine-sensitive, hormone receptor-positive, ERBB2-negative advanced breast cancer. Meanwhile, the antiestrogen fulvestrant was shown to be superior to anastrozole in the absence of cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibition for this patient population.ObjectiveTo assess whether fulvestrant is superior to letrozole when combined with palbociclib in the first-line scenario.Design, setting, and participantsIn this international, randomized, open-label, phase 2 clinical study conducted from July 30, 2015, to January 8, 2018, patients with hormone receptor-positive, ERBB2-negative advanced breast cancer with no prior therapy in the metastatic setting and endocrine-sensitive criteria were recruited from 47 centers in 7 countries. Data were analyzed from February 11 to May 15, 2020.InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive palbociclib with either fulvestrant or letrozole. Stratification factors were type of disease presentation (de novo vs recurrent) and the presence of visceral involvement (yes vs no).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1.ResultsA total of 486 women (median age, 63 years [range, 25-90 years]; 3 Asian women [0.6%]; 4 Black women [0.8%]; 461 White women [94.9%]; 18 women of unknown race [3.7%]) were randomized (243 to fulvestrant-palbociclib and 243 to letrozole-palbociclib). Median investigator-assessed progression-free survival was 27.9 months (95% CI, 24.2-33.1 months) in the fulvestrant-palbociclib group vs 32.8 months (95% CI, 25.8-35.9 months) in the letrozole-palbociclib group (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.89-1.45; P = .32). This result was consistent across the stratification factors. No significant differences were observed in objective response rate (46.5% vs 50.2%) and 3-year overall survival rate (79.4% vs 77.1%) for fulvestrant-palbociclib and letrozole-palbociclib, respectively. Grade 3-4 adverse events were comparable among treatment groups, and no new safety signals were identified. No treatment-related deaths were reported.Conclusions and relevanceAlthough fulvestrant-palbociclib demonstrated significant antitumor activity, this randomized clinical trial failed to identify an improvement in progression-free survival with this regimen over letrozole-palbociclib in patients with endocrine-sensitive, hormone receptor-positive, ERBB2-negative advanced breast cancer.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02491983.
| S-EPMC8498933 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND/AIMS:We conducted a retrospective analysis of the clinical activity of fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC) previously treated with endocrine therapy and/or chemotherapy. METHODS:We reviewed the medical records of all patients with MBC treated at Samsung Medical Center between January 2009 and August 2016. Patients received fulvestrant 250 mg intramuscularly every 28 days (from January 2009 to November 2010) or 500 mg intramuscularly every 28 days (from December 2010 to August 2016). Tumor responses were assessed every 8 weeks and at the end of treatment, as well as when disease progression was suspected. RESULTS:A total of 84 patients were included in this study. A median of two previous endocrine treatments had been performed; 79% of the patients had received two or more endocrine treatments. Forty-five patients (54%) had been treated with chemotherapy for MBC before the fulvestrant treatment course. Visceral metastasis was found in 49 patients (58%). The estimated median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.4 to 5.5) and 32.5 months (95% CI, 17.6 to 47.4), respectively. The disease control rate was 40.5% (95% CI, 30.5 to 51.5); partial response was observed in 16% of the patients and stable disease was observed in 25% of the patients. The most frequently reported adverse reactions were mild-to-moderate grade myalgia (10.5% of the patients), injection site pain (7%), and fatigue (7%). Fulvestrant was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION:Fulvestrant showed encouraging clinical activity and favorable feasibility in postmenopausal women with MBC who had been treated with multiple endocrine therapies and/or cytotoxic chemotherapies.
| S-EPMC6718770 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lessons learnedFulvestrant is a selective estrogen receptor (ER)-downregulating antiestrogen that blocks ER transcriptional activity and is approved for ER-positive breast cancer. Fulvestrant also induces accumulation of insoluble ER and activates an unfolded protein response; proteasome inhibitors have been shown to enhance these effects in preclinical models.BackgroundFulvestrant is a selective estrogen receptor (ER)-downregulating antiestrogen that blocks ER transcriptional activity and is approved for ER-positive (+) breast cancer. Fulvestrant also induces accumulation of insoluble ER and activates an unfolded protein response; proteasome inhibitors have been shown to enhance these effects in preclinical models.MethodsThis is a single-center phase Ib study with a 3+3 design of fulvestrant and the proteasome inhibitor ixazomib (MLN9708) in patients with advanced ER+ breast cancer that was progressing on fulvestrant. A dose-escalation design allowed establishment of the ixazomib maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Secondary objectives included progression-free survival, pharmacokinetics, and tumor molecular analyses.ResultsAmong nine evaluable subjects, treatment was well-tolerated without dose-limiting toxicities The MTD of ixazomib was 4 mg in combination with fulvestrant. Plasma concentrations of the active form of ixazomib (MLN2238) in the 4-mg dose cohort had a median (range) maximal concentration (Cmax ) of 155 (122-171) ng/mL, time of maximal concentration (Tmax ) of 1 (1-1.5) hour, terminal elimination half-life of 66.6 (57.3-102.6) hour after initial dose, and area under the curve (AUC) of 5,025 (4,160-5,345) ng*h/mL. One partial response was observed, and median progression-free survival was 51 days (range, 47-137).ConclusionThis drug combination has a favorable safety profile and antitumor activity in patients with fulvestrant-resistant advanced ER+ breast cancer that justifies future testing.
| S-EPMC8176977 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPalbociclib has gained a central role in the treatment of hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). Despite its manageable toxicity profile, venous thromboembolism (VTE) or interstitial lung disease (ILD)/pneumonitis may infrequently occur. Therefore, we provide a comprehensive summary of the safety and tolerability of the combination of endocrine therapy and palbociclib among patients included in the randomized phase 2 PARSIFAL study.Materials and methodsPatients with endocrine-sensitive HR+/HER2- ABC and no prior therapy in an advanced setting (n = 486) were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive fulvestrant-palbociclib (FP) or letrozole-palbociclib (LP). Laboratory tests and the incidence of adverse events (AEs) were recorded at baseline and day 1 of each cycle. Progression-free survival (PFS) was estimated for patients with and without VTE.ResultsA total of 483 patients were analyzed. Neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, asthenia, arthralgia, fatigue, and diarrhea were the most frequent AEs in both groups. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 3 (1.2%) patients of the FP group and in 1 (0.4%) patient in the LP group. Six (2.5%; 0.4% grade 3) patients in the FP group and 6 patients (2.5%; 0.4% grade 3) in the LP group experienced ILD/pneumonitis. Pulmonary embolism was reported in 12 (5.0%) patients in the FP group and 6 (2.5%) patients in the LP group. Advanced age at baseline was the only factor significantly associated with an increased risk of pulmonary embolism (P < .01).ConclusionThe PARSIFAL data confirmed the favorable safety profile of both palbociclib regimens. VTE and ILD/pneumonitis were occasionally reported, and their early detection allowed patients to continue treatment effectively without detriment to efficacy.Clinicaltrials.gov identifierNCT02491983; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02491983).
| S-EPMC9847524 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn the FLIPPER trial, palbociclib/fulvestrant significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo/fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC).ObjectiveWe assessed health-related quality of life (QoL) using patient-reported outcomes (PROs).Design and methodsIn this phase II double-blinded study, PROs were assessed at baseline after every three cycles and at the end of the treatment using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23. Time to deterioration (TTD) in global health status (GHS)/QoL was defined as a decrease of ⩾10 points. Changes from baseline (CFB) and TTD were analysed using linear mixed-effect and Cox regression models, respectively.ResultsOf the 189 randomised (1:1) patients, 178 (94%) completed ⩾1 post-baseline assessment; 50% received ⩾22 cycles of study treatment, with a questionnaire compliance >90%. Mean baseline scores were comparable between arms. GHS/QoL scores were maintained throughout the palbociclib/fulvestrant treatment. CFB showed significant differences for GHS/QoL, appetite loss, constipation and systemic therapy side effect scores favouring placebo/fulvestrant. TTD in GHS/QoL was delayed in placebo/fulvestrant versus palbociclib/fulvestrant [30.3 versus 11.1 months; adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 1.57, 95% CI: 1.03-2.39, p = 0.036]; this difference was not significant in patients with progressive disease (aHR: 1.2, 95% CI: 0.6-2.2, p = 0.658). No statistically significant differences in TTD were found for the other QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 scales.ConclusionsAlthough TTD in GHS/QoL was prolonged with placebo/fulvestrant, no differences were observed on other functional or symptom scales. This finding and the improvement in PFS support the combination of palbociclib/fulvestrant as a beneficial therapeutic option for HR+/HER2- ABC.Trial registration numberSponsor Study Code: GEICAM/2014-12EudraCT Number: 2015-002437-21ClinTrials.gov reference: NCT02690480.
| S-EPMC9893357 | biostudies-literature