Efficacy of subsequent treatments in patients with hormone-positive advanced breast cancer who had disease progression under CDK 4/6 inhibitor therapy

Background: There is no standard treatment recommended at category 1 level in international guidelines for subsequent therapy after cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6) based therapy. We aimed to evaluate which subsequent treatment oncologists prefer in patients with disease progression under CDKi. In addition, we aimed to show the effectiveness of systemic treatments after CDKi and whether there is a survival difference between hormonal treatments (monotherapy vs. mTOR-based). Methods: A total of 609 patients from 53 centers were included in the study. Progression-free-survivals (PFS) of subsequent treatments (chemotherapy (CT, n:434) or endocrine therapy (ET, n:175)) after CDKi were calculated. Patients were evaluated in three groups as those who received CDKi in first-line (group A, n:202), second-line (group B, n: 153) and ≥ 3rd-line (group C, n: 254). PFS was compared according to the use of ET and CT. In addition, ET was compared as monotherapy versus everolimus-based combination therapy. Results: The median duration of CDKi in the ET arms of Group A, B, and C was 17.0, 11.0, and 8.5 months in respectively; it was 9.0, 7.0, and 5.0 months in the CT arm. Median PFS after CDKi was 9.5 (5.0–14.0) months in the ET arm of group A, and 5.3 (3.9–6.8) months in the CT arm (p = 0.073). It was 6.7 (5.8–7.7) months in the ET arm of group B, and 5.7 (4.6–6.7) months in the CT arm (p = 0.311). It was 5.3 (2.5–8.0) months in the ET arm of group C and 4.0 (3.5–4.6) months in the CT arm (p = 0.434). Patients who received ET after CDKi were compared as those who received everolimus-based combination therapy versus those who received monotherapy ET: the median PFS in group A, B, and C was 11.0 vs. 5.9 (p = 0.047), 6.7 vs. 5.0 (p = 0.164), 6.7 vs. 3.9 (p = 0.763) months. Conclusion: Physicians preferred CT rather than ET in patients with early progression under CDKi. It has been shown that subsequent ET after CDKi can be as effective as CT. It was also observed that better PFS could be achieved with the subsequent everolimus-based treatments after first-line CDKi compared to monotherapy ET.Breast Cancer Consortiu

First-line treatment of patients with HER2-positive metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer

Fluoropyrimidine+cisplatin/oxaliplatin+trastuzumab therapy is recommended for the first-line treatment of HER2-positive metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma. However, there is no comprehensive study on which platinum-based treatment should be preferred. This study aimed to compare the treatment response and survival characteristics of patients with HER2-positive metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer who received fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and leucovorin (mFOLFOX)+trastuzumab or cisplatin and fluorouracil (CF)+trastuzumab as first-line therapy. It was a multicenter, retrospective study of the Turkish Oncology Group, which included 243 patients from 21 oncology centers. There were 113 patients in the mFOLFOX+trastuzumab arm and 130 patients in the CF+trastuzumab arm. The median age was 62 years in the mFOLFOX+trastuzumab arm and 61 years in the CF+trastuzumab arm (P = 0.495). 81.4% of patients in the mFOLFOX+trastuzumab arm and 83.1% in the CF+trastuzumab arm had gastric tumor localization (P = 0.735). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly higher in the mFOLFOX+trastuzumab arm (9.4 months vs. 7.3 months, P = 0.024). The median overall survival (OS) was similar in both groups (18.4 months vs. 15.1 months, P = 0.640). Maintenance trastuzumab was continued after chemotherapy in 101 patients. In this subgroup, the median OS was 23.3 months and the median PFS was 13.3 months. In conclusion, mFOLFOX+trastuzumab is similar to CF+trastuzumab in terms of the median OS, but it is more effective in terms of the median PFS in the first-line treatment of HER2-positive metastatic gastric and GEJ cancer. The choice of treatment should be made by considering the prominent toxicity findings of the chemotherapy regimens

Efficacy of subsequent treatments in patients with hormone-positive advanced breast cancer who had disease progression under CDK 4/6 inhibitor therapy

Background: There is no standard treatment recommended at category 1 level in international guidelines for subsequent therapy after cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6) based therapy. We aimed to evaluate which subsequent treatment oncologists prefer in patients with disease progression under CDKi. In addition, we aimed to show the effectiveness of systemic treatments after CDKi and whether there is a survival difference between hormonal treatments (monotherapy vs. mTOR-based). Methods: A total of 609 patients from 53 centers were included in the study. Progression-free-survivals (PFS) of subsequent treatments (chemotherapy (CT, n:434) or endocrine therapy (ET, n:175)) after CDKi were calculated. Patients were evaluated in three groups as those who received CDKi in first-line (group A, n:202), second-line (group B, n: 153) and ≥ 3rd-line (group C, n: 254). PFS was compared according to the use of ET and CT. In addition, ET was compared as monotherapy versus everolimus-based combination therapy. Results: The median duration of CDKi in the ET arms of Group A, B, and C was 17.0, 11.0, and 8.5 months in respectively; it was 9.0, 7.0, and 5.0 months in the CT arm. Median PFS after CDKi was 9.5 (5.0–14.0) months in the ET arm of group A, and 5.3 (3.9–6.8) months in the CT arm (p = 0.073). It was 6.7 (5.8–7.7) months in the ET arm of group B, and 5.7 (4.6–6.7) months in the CT arm (p = 0.311). It was 5.3 (2.5–8.0) months in the ET arm of group C and 4.0 (3.5–4.6) months in the CT arm (p = 0.434). Patients who received ET after CDKi were compared as those who received everolimus-based combination therapy versus those who received monotherapy ET: the median PFS in group A, B, and C was 11.0 vs. 5.9 (p = 0.047), 6.7 vs. 5.0 (p = 0.164), 6.7 vs. 3.9 (p = 0.763) months. Conclusion: Physicians preferred CT rather than ET in patients with early progression under CDKi. It has been shown that subsequent ET after CDKi can be as effective as CT. It was also observed that better PFS could be achieved with the subsequent everolimus-based treatments after first-line CDKi compared to monotherapy ET. © 2023, The Author(s).Special thanks to Turkish Oncology Group (TOG) - Breast Cancer Consortium

Correction: Efficacy of subsequent treatments in patients with hormone-positive advanced breast cancer who had disease progression under CDK 4/6 inhibitor therapy (BMC Cancer, (2023), 23, 1, (136), 10.1186/s12885-023-10609-8)

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported an error in the author name of Enes Erul

Erratum: Correction: Efficacy of subsequent treatments in patients with hormone-positive advanced breast cancer who had disease progression under CDK 4/6 inhibitor therapy (BMC cancer (2023) 23 1 (136))

..

Atezolizumab combined with chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: A real-life data of the Turkish Oncology Group

Purpose Atezolizumab has been shown to be effective and safe in randomized trial in the first-line treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC). However, there are limited real-life data on atezolizumab. In this study, we aimed to determine the real-life efficacy and safety of atezolizumab combined with chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of extensive-stage SCLC. Methods This trial is a retrospective multicenter study of the Turkish Oncology Group, which included extensive-stage SCLC patients who received atezolizumab combined with chemotherapy in a first-line treatment. The characteristics of the patients, treatment and response rates, and PFS and OS are presented. Factors associated with PFS and OS were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analysis. Results A total of 213 patients at the 30 oncology centers were included. The median number of chemotherapy cycle was 5 (1-8) and atezolizumab cycle was 7 (1-32). After median 11.9 months of follow-up, median PFS and OS was 6.8 months (95%CI 5.7-7.8), and 11.9 months (95%CI 11-12.7), respectively. The ORR was 61.9%. ECOG-PS (p = 0.002) and number of metastatic sites (p = 0.001) were associated with PFS and pack-year of smoking (p = 0.05), while ECOG-PS (p = 0.03) and number of metastatic sites (p = 0.001) were associated with OS. Hematological side effects were common and toxicities were manageable. Conclusion This real-life data confirm the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab in combination with chemotherapy in first-line treatment of extensive-stage SCLC

Real-world data on efficacy and safety of first-line alectinib treatment in advanced-stage, ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer patients: A Turkish Oncology Group study

Aims: In this multicenter study, the authors aimed to determine the real-life efficacy and safety of first-line alectinib. Materials & methods: This retrospective trial included advanced-stage, ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer patients who were treated with first-line alectinib in terms of ALK-tyrosine kinase inhibitors, regardless of previous chemotherapy. The co-primary end points were progression-free survival both for all patients and for the treatment-naive population. The secondary end points were overall response rate, overall survival, rate of CNS progression and safety. Results & conclusion: A total of 274 patients (n = 177 for treatment-naive patients) were enrolled in the study. The median progression-free survival was 26 and 28.8 months for all patients and the treatment-naive group, respectively. The overall response rate, CNS progression rate and 1-year overall survival ratio were 77.9, 12.4 and 77%. Alectinib is a highly effective therapy with a favorable safety profile

Efficacy of subsequent treatments in patients with hormone-positive advanced breast cancer who had disease progression under CDK 4/6 inhibitor therapy.

Background There is no standard treatment recommended at category 1 level in international guidelines for subsequent therapy after cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6) based therapy. We aimed to evaluate which subsequent treatment oncologists prefer in patients with disease progression under CDKi. In addition, we aimed to show the effectiveness of systemic treatments after CDKi and whether there is a survival difference between hormonal treatments (monotherapy vs. mTOR-based). Methods A total of 609 patients from 53 centers were included in the study. Progression-free-survivals (PFS) of subsequent treatments (chemotherapy (CT, n:434) or endocrine therapy (ET, n:175)) after CDKi were calculated. Patients were evaluated in three groups as those who received CDKi in first-line (group A, n:202), second-line (group B, n: 153) and >= 3rd-line (group C, n: 254). PFS was compared according to the use of ET and CT. In addition, ET was compared as monotherapy versus everolimus-based combination therapy. Results The median duration of CDKi in the ET arms of Group A, B, and C was 17.0, 11.0, and 8.5 months in respectively; it was 9.0, 7.0, and 5.0 months in the CT arm. Median PFS after CDKi was 9.5 (5.0-14.0) months in the ET arm of group A, and 5.3 (3.9-6.8) months in the CT arm (p = 0.073). It was 6.7 (5.8-7.7) months in the ET arm of group B, and 5.7 (4.6-6.7) months in the CT arm (p = 0.311). It was 5.3 (2.5-8.0) months in the ET arm of group C and 4.0 (3.5-4.6) months in the CT arm (p = 0.434). Patients who received ET after CDKi were compared as those who received everolimus-based combination therapy versus those who received monotherapy ET: the median PFS in group A, B, and C was 11.0 vs. 5.9 (p = 0.047), 6.7 vs. 5.0 (p = 0.164), 6.7 vs. 3.9 (p = 0.763) months. Conclusion Physicians preferred CT rather than ET in patients with early progression under CDKi. It has been shown that subsequent ET after CDKi can be as effective as CT. It was also observed that better PFS could be achieved with the subsequent everolimus-based treatments after first-line CDKi compared to monotherapy ET