10 research outputs found
Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial
Background
Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS.
Methods
In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358.
Results
Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6â8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·64â1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95% CI <1·25), but its superiority to tamoxifen was not (p=0·49). A total of 69 deaths were recorded (33 for anastrozole vs 36 for tamoxifen; HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·58â1·50], p=0·78), and no specific cause was more common in one group than the other. The number of women reporting any adverse event was similar between anastrozole (1323 women, 91%) and tamoxifen (1379 women, 93%); the side-effect profiles of the two drugs differed, with more fractures, musculoskeletal events, hypercholesterolaemia, and strokes with anastrozole and more muscle spasm, gynaecological cancers and symptoms, vasomotor symptoms, and deep vein thromboses with tamoxifen.
Conclusions
No clear efficacy differences were seen between the two treatments. Anastrozole offers another treatment option for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS, which may be be more appropriate for some women with contraindications for tamoxifen. Longer follow-up will be necessary to fully evaluate treatment differences
Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): A double-blind, randomised controlled trial
INOVATYON/ ENGOT-ov5 study : Randomized phase III international study comparing trabectedin/pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) followed by platinum at progression vs carboplatin/PLD in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer progressing within 6-12 months after last platinum line
BACKGROUND: This trial investigated the hypothesis that the treatment with trabectedin/PLD (TP) to extend the platinum-free interval (TFIp) can improve overall survival (OS) in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer (OC). METHODS: Patients with OC (up to two previous platinum-based lines), with a TFIp of 6-12 months, were randomised to receive carboplatin/PLD (CP) or TP followed by platinum therapy at relapse. The primary endpoint was OS (HR: 0.75). RESULTS: The study enrolled 617 patients. The median TFIp was 8.3 months and 30.3% of patients had received two previous platinum lines. 74% and 73.9% of patients, respectively, received a subsequent therapy (ST) in the CP and TP arm; in the latter TP arm 87.2% of ST was platinum-based, as per protocol. The median OS was 21.4 for CP and 21.9 months for TP (HR 1.13; 95% CI: 0.94-1.35; pâ=â0.197). Grade 3-5 adverse reactions occurred in 37.1% of patients in the CP arm and 69.7% of patients in the TP arm, and the most frequent were neutropenia (22.8% CP, 39.5% TP), gastrointestinal (7.1% CP, 17.4% TP), hepatic (0.7% CP, 19.1% TP). CONCLUSIONS: This study did not meet the primary endpoint. CP combination remains the standard for patients with recurrent OC and a 6-12 months TFIp; TP is an effective treatment in patients suffering from persistent platinum toxicities. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01379989.publishedVersionPeer reviewe
INOVATYON/ ENGOT-ov5 study: Randomized phase III international study comparing trabectedin/pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) followed by platinum at progression vs carboplatin/PLD in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer progressing within 6-12 months after last platinum line.
BACKGROUND: This trial investigated the hypothesis that the treatment with trabectedin/PLD (TP) to extend the platinum-free interval (TFIp) can improve overall survival (OS) in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer (OC). METHODS: Patients with OC (up to two previous platinum-based lines), with a TFIp of 6-12 months, were randomised to receive carboplatin/PLD (CP) or TP followed by platinum therapy at relapse. The primary endpoint was OS (HR: 0.75). RESULTS: The study enrolled 617 patients. The median TFIp was 8.3 months and 30.3% of patients had received two previous platinum lines. 74% and 73.9% of patients, respectively, received a subsequent therapy (ST) in the CP and TP arm; in the latter TP arm 87.2% of ST was platinum-based, as per protocol. The median OS was 21.4 for CP and 21.9 months for TP (HR 1.13; 95% CI: 0.94-1.35; pâ=â0.197). Grade 3-5 adverse reactions occurred in 37.1% of patients in the CP arm and 69.7% of patients in the TP arm, and the most frequent were neutropenia (22.8% CP, 39.5% TP), gastrointestinal (7.1% CP, 17.4% TP), hepatic (0.7% CP, 19.1% TP). CONCLUSIONS: This study did not meet the primary endpoint. CP combination remains the standard for patients with recurrent OC and a 6-12 months TFIp; TP is an effective treatment in patients suffering from persistent platinum toxicities. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01379989
West German Study PlanB Trial: Adjuvant Four Cycles of Epirubicin and Cyclophosphamide Plus Docetaxel Versus Six Cycles of Docetaxel and Cyclophosphamide in HER2-Negative Early Breast Cancer
PURPOSE The West German Study Group PlanB trial evaluated an anthracycline-free chemotherapy standard (six cycles of docetaxel and cyclophosphamide [TC]) in the routine treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer (EBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with pT1 to pT4c, all pN+, and pN0/high-risk EBC were eligible. High-risk pN0 was defined by one or more of the following: pT greater than 2, grade 2 to 3, high urokinase-type plasminogen activator/plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, hormone receptor (HR) negativity, and less than 35 years of age. After an early amendment, all HR-positive tumors underwent recurrence score (RS) testing, with chemotherapy omission recommended in RS less than or equal to 11 pN0 to pN1 disease. Patients were randomly assigned to four cycles of epirubicin (E)(90)/cyclophoshamide (C)(600) followed by four cycles of docetaxel (T)(100) or six cycles of T75C600 (administered once every 3 weeks). The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS); secondary end points were overall survival (OS) and safety. The protocol specified P = .05 for a noninferiority margin of 4.4% for all patients combined. RESULT Of the 3,198 registered patients, 348 (RS <= 11) omitted chemotherapy, and 401 were not randomly assigned. The intention-to-treat population included 2,449 patients (1,227 EC-T v 1,222 TC: postmenopausal, 62.2% v60.8%; pNO, 58.2% v59.5%; pT1, 57.6% v52.3%; HR positive, 81.4% v82.2%; RS greater than 25 [in H.R-positive patients], 26.2% v 27.5%). Within the safety population (1,167 v 1,178 patients), 87.5% v 93.0% completed therapy. After a 60-month median follow-up, 5-year outcomes were similar in the EC-T and TC arms (DFS, 89.6% [95% CI, 87.9% to 91.5%] v89.9% [95% CI, 88.1% to 91.8%]; OS, 94.5% [95% CI, 93.1% to 95.9%] v94.7% [95% CI, 93.3% to 96.1%]). The DFS difference was within the noninferiority margin of the original trial design. Five treatment-related deaths were reported for TC (one for EC-T), despite a trend toward more-severe adverse events in the latter. Interaction analysis revealed no predictive trends with respect to key factors, including triple-negative, luminal A/B-like, pN, age, and RS status. CONCLUSION In the West German Study Group PlanB trial, 5-year outcomes for TC and EC-T were equally excellent. Six cycles of TC is an effective/safe option in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative EBC with pN0 high genomic risk or pN1 EBC with genomically intermediate- to high-risk disease. (C) 2019 by American Society of Clinical Oncolog
Overall survival in the OlympiA phase III trial of adjuvant olaparib in patients with germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 and high-risk, early breast cancer
Background: The randomized, double-blind OlympiA trial compared 1 year of the oral poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, olaparib, to matching placebo as adjuvant therapy for patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 (gBRCA1/2pv) and high-risk, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, early breast cancer (EBC). The first pre-specified interim analysis (IA) previously demonstrated statistically significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant disease-free survival (DDFS). The olaparib group had fewer deaths than the placebo group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance for overall survival (OS). We now report the pre-specified second IA of OS with updates of IDFS, DDFS, and safety. Patients and methods: One thousand eight hundred and thirty-six patients were randomly assigned to olaparib or placebo following (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation therapy if indicated. Endocrine therapy was given concurrently with study medication for hormone receptor-positive cancers. Statistical significance for OS at this IA required P < 0.015. Results: With a median follow-up of 3.5 years, the second IA of OS demonstrated significant improvement in the olaparib group relative to the placebo group [hazard ratio 0.68; 98.5% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.97; PÂ = 0.009]. Four-year OS was 89.8% in the olaparib group and 86.4% in the placebo group (Î 3.4%, 95% CIÂ -0.1% to 6.8%). Four-year IDFS for the olaparib group versus placebo group was 82.7% versus 75.4% (Î 7.3%, 95% CI 3.0% to 11.5%) and 4-year DDFS was 86.5% versus 79.1% (Î 7.4%, 95% CI 3.6% to 11.3%), respectively. Subset analyses for OS, IDFS, and DDFS demonstrated benefit across major subgroups. No new safety signals were identified including no new cases of acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. Conclusion: With 3.5 years of median follow-up, OlympiA demonstrates statistically significant improvement in OS with adjuvant olaparib compared with placebo for gBRCA1/2pv-associated EBC and maintained improvements in the previously reported, statistically significant endpoints of IDFS and DDFS with no new safety signals
Safety and tolerability of subcutaneous trastuzumab for the adjuvant treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive early breast cancer: SafeHer phase III study's primary analysis of 2573 patients
Aim To assess the safety and tolerability of adjuvant subcutaneous trastuzumab (HerceptinÂź SC, H SC), delivered from an H SC Vial via hand-held syringe (Cohort A) or single-use injection device (Cohort B), with or without chemotherapy, for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive stage I to IIIC early breast cancer (EBC) in the phase III SafeHer study (NCT01566721). Methods Patients received 600 mg fixed-dose H SC every 3 weeks for 18 cycles. The chemotherapy partner was at the investigators' discretion (H SC monotherapy was limited to â€10% of the population). Data from the first H SC dose until 28 days (plus a 5-day window) after the last dose are presented. Results are descriptive. Results In the overall population, 2282/2573 patients (88.7%) experienced adverse events (AEs). Of the above, 128 (5.0%) patients experienced AEs leading to study drug discontinuation; 596 (23.2%) experienced grade â„ 3 AEs and 326 (12.7%) experienced serious AEs. Grade â„ 3 cardiac disorders were reported in 24 patients (0.9%), including congestive heart failure in eight (0.3%). As expected, the AE rates varied according to the timing of chemotherapy in both cohorts, with higher rates in concurrent versus sequential chemotherapy subgroups. In the concurrent chemotherapy subgroup, AEs were more common during the actual period of concurrent chemotherapy compared with the period when patients did not receive concurrent chemotherapy. Conclusion SafeHer confirms the safety and tolerability of the H SC 600 mg fixed dose for 1 year (every 3 weeks for 18 cycles) as adjuvant therapy with concurrent or sequential chemotherapy for HER2-positive EBC. These primary analysis results are consistent with the known safety profile for intravenous H and H SC
Bevacizumab and platinum-based combinations for recurrent ovarian cancer: a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial
International audienceState-of-the art therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer suitable for platinum-based re-treatment includes bevacizumab-containing combinations (eg, bevacizumab combined with carboplatin-paclitaxel or carboplatin-gemcitabine) or the most active non-bevacizumab regimen: carboplatin-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin. The aim of this head-to-head trial was to compare a standard bevacizumab-containing regimen versus carboplatin-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin combined with bevacizumab