51 research outputs found

    Comparative biomarker analysis of PALOMA-2/3 trials for palbociclib.

    Get PDF
    While cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors, including palbociclib, combined with endocrine therapy (ET), are becoming the standard-of-care for hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2‒negative metastatic breast cancer, further mechanistic insights are needed to maximize benefit from the treatment regimen. Herein, we conducted a systematic comparative analysis of gene expression/progression-free survival relationship from two phase 3 trials (PALOMA-2 [first-line] and PALOMA-3 [≥second-line]). In the ET-only arm, there was no inter-therapy line correlation. However, adding palbociclib resulted in concordant biomarkers independent of initial ET responsiveness, with shared sensitivity genes enriched in estrogen response and resistance genes over-represented by mTORC1 signaling and G2/M checkpoint. Biomarker patterns from the combination arm resembled patterns observed in ET in advanced treatment-naive patients, especially patients likely to be endocrine-responsive. Our findings suggest palbociclib may recondition endocrine-resistant tumors to ET, and may guide optimal therapeutic sequencing by partnering CDK4/6 inhibitors with different ETs. Pfizer (NCT01740427; NCT01942135)

    Clinical considerations of the role of palbociclib in the management of advanced breast cancer patients with and without visceral metastases.

    Get PDF
    Background:This report assesses the efficacy and safety of palbociclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) in women with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC) with or without visceral metastases. Patients and methods:Pre- and postmenopausal women with disease progression following prior ET (PALOMA-3; N = 521) and postmenopausal women untreated for ABC (PALOMA-2; N = 666) were randomized 2 : 1 to ET (fulvestrant or letrozole, respectively) plus palbociclib or placebo. Progression-free survival (PFS), safety, and patient-reported quality of life (QoL) were evaluated by prior treatment and visceral involvement. Results:Visceral metastases incidence was higher in patients with prior resistance to ET (58.3%, PALOMA-3) than in patients naive to ET in the ABC setting (48.6%, PALOMA-2). In patients with prior resistance to ET and visceral metastases, median PFS (mPFS) was 9.2 months with palbociclib plus fulvestrant versus 3.4 months with placebo plus fulvestrant [hazard ratio (HR), 0.47; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.35-0.61], and objective response rate (ORR) was 28.0% versus 6.7%, respectively. In patients with nonvisceral metastases, mPFS was 16.6 versus 7.3 months, HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36-0.77. In patients with visceral disease and naive to ET in the advanced disease setting, mPFS was 19.3 months with palbociclib plus letrozole versus 12.9 months with placebo plus letrozole (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.47-0.85); ORR was 55.1% versus 40.0%; in patients with nonvisceral disease, mPFS was not reached with palbociclib plus letrozole versus 16.8 months with placebo plus letrozole (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.36-0.70). In patients with prior resistance to ET with visceral metastases, palbociclib plus fulvestrant significantly delayed deterioration of QoL versus placebo plus fulvestrant, whereas patient-reported QoL was maintained with palbociclib plus letrozole in patients naive to endocrine-based therapy for ABC. Conclusions:Palbociclib plus ET prolonged mPFS in patients with visceral metastases, increased ORRs, and in patients previously treated for ABC, delayed QoL deterioration, presenting a standard treatment option among patients with visceral metastases amenable to endocrine-based therapy. Clinical trial registration:NCT01942135, NCT01740427

    The taxanes: toxicity and quality of life considerations in advanced ovarian cancer

    Get PDF
    The taxanes paclitaxel and docetaxel show good activity in the management of advanced ovarian cancer when used in conjunction with platinum agents. Accumulating evidence from clinical studies, particularly the latest results from the phase III comparative SCOTROC study, indicates that the two drugs confer similar rates of tumour response and survival in women with this condition. However, it is clear that paclitaxel and docetaxel differ in their tolerability profiles and in other respects, and cannot be regarded as directly equivalent drugs. In particular, paclitaxel is associated with significant neurotoxicity; peripheral neuropathy has also been reported with docetaxel, but to a lesser extent. Neutropenia appears more prevalent with docetaxel than with paclitaxel, although clinical trial data show that this adverse effect is manageable and need not compromise dose delivery. Docetaxel is also associated with potential benefits accruing from shorter infusion times and lack of need for premedication with intravenous histamine H1 and H2 antagonists. Emerging quality of life data are expected to shed further light on the overall benefit of chemotherapy in women with advanced ovarian cancer in general, and on taxane−platinum combinations in particular

    A dose-escalation study of indisulam in combination with capecitabine (Xeloda) in patients with solid tumours

    Get PDF
    This dose escalation study was designed to determine the recommended dose of the multi-targeted cell cycle inhibitor indisulam in combination with capecitabine in patients with solid tumours and to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of the combination. Thirty-five patients were treated with indisulam on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Capecitabine was administered two times daily (BID) on days 1–14. Plasma concentrations of indisulam, capecitabine and its three metabolites were determined for pharmacokinetic analysis. The main dose-limiting toxicity was myelosuppression. Hand/foot syndrome and stomatitis were the major non-haematological toxicities. The recommended dose was initially established at indisulam 700 mg m−2 and capecitabine 1250 mg m−2 BID. However, during cycle 2 the recommended dose was poorly tolerated in three patients. A dose of indisulam 500 mg m−2 and capecitabine 1250 mg m−2 BID proved to be safe at cycle 1 and 2 in nine additional patients. Indisulam pharmacokinetics during cycle 1 were consistent with pharmacokinetic data from phase I mono-therapy studies. However, exposure to indisulam was remarkably increased at cycle 2 due to a drug–drug interaction between capecitabine and indisulam. Partial response was confirmed in two patients, one with colon carcinoma and the other with pancreatic carcinoma. Seventeen patients had stable disease. Indisulam (700 mg m−2) in combination with capecitabine (1250 mg m−2 BID) was well tolerated during the first cycle. A dose of indisulam 500 mg m−2 and capecitabine 1250 mg m−2 BID was considered safe in multiple treatment cycles. The higher incidence of toxicities observed during cycle 2 can be explained by a time-dependent pharmacokinetic drug–drug interaction
    corecore