| Literature DB >> 19672422 |
S Dent1, Sh Verma, J Latreille, D Rayson, M Clemons, J Mackey, Su Verma, J Lemieux, L Provencher, S Chia, B Wang, K Pritchard.
Abstract
The role of targeted therapies in the treatment of women with breast cancer has been rapidly evolving. Trastuzumab, a monoclonal antibody against the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), was the first HER2-targeted therapy that clearly demonstrated a significant clinical benefit for women with HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer (mbc). However, in recent years it has become increasingly apparent that, when trastuzumab is used in the first-line setting in combination with chemotherapy, most women eventually develop progressive disease. Determining the treatment options available to women who have progressed while on trastuzumab therapy has been hampered by a paucity of high-quality published data. In addition, with the standard use of trastuzumab in the adjuvant setting (for eligible HER2-positive patients), the role of anti-HER2 agents for patients who experience a breast cancer relapse has become a clinically relevant question. This manuscript reviews current available data and outlines suggestions from a panel of Canadian oncologists about the use of trastuzumab and other HER2-targeted agents in two key mbc indications:Treatment for women with HER2-positive mbc progressing on trastuzumab (that is, treatment beyond progression)Treatment for women with HER2-positive mbc recurring following adjuvant trastuzumab (that is, re-treatment)The suggestions set out here will continue to evolve as data and future trials with trastuzumab and other HER2-targeted agents emerge.Entities:
Keywords: Metastatic breast cancer; her2-targeted therapy; re-treatment; trastuzumab; treatment beyond progression
Year: 2009 PMID: 19672422 PMCID: PMC2722050 DOI: 10.3747/co.v16i4.469
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Curr Oncol ISSN: 1198-0052 Impact factor: 3.677
Efficacy results from pivotal first-line metastatic breast cancer
| Clinical endpoint | Trial arms Slamon | Trial arms Marty et al., 2005 and 2006 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trastuzumab AND [paclitaxel OR (anthracycline AND cyclophosphamide)] | Paclitaxel OR (anthracycline AND cyclophosphamide) | Trastuzumab AND docetaxel | Docetaxel alone | |
| Median | 50 | 32 | 61 | 34 |
| Median | 9.1 | 6.1 | 11.7 | 5.7 |
| Median | 4.7 | 4.6 | 11.7 | 6.1 |
| Median | 25.1 | 20.3 | 31.2 | 22.7 |
Trial survival results were updated at the 2006 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. The superior survival benefit for trastuzumab docetaxel over docetaxel alone was maintained (31.2 months vs. 22.7 months); however, the survival difference was no longer significant (p = 0.0876), perhaps because most of the patients randomized to docetaxel alone (57%) subsequently crossed over to receive trastuzumab.
orr = objective response rate; dr = duration of response; ttp = time to progression; os = overall survival.
Response rates of trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy in women with metastatic breast cancer progressing on trastuzumab: retrospective and case–cohort studies
| Reference | Patients | Therapy line | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Second | Third | Fourth | Fifth | ||||||
| Tokajuk | 14 | 50 | 5.1 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| (docetaxel, vinorelbine, cisplatin, capecitabine, etoposide, gemcitabine, and trastuzumab) | |||||||||
| Stemmler | 23 | 39.1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| (taxane, vinorelbine, or other chemotherapy, and trastuzumab) | |||||||||
| Gelmon | 65 | 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| (taxane, or vinorelbine and trastuzumab, or trastuzumab alone) | |||||||||
| García-Saénz | 47 (2nd line) | 29.8 | 4 | 38.1 | 4 | 20 | 4 | 0 | |
| 21 (3rd line) | |||||||||
| 10 (4th line) | |||||||||
| (chemotherapy and trastuzumab) | |||||||||
| Metro | 37 (2nd line) | 29 | 6.7 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 4.5 | — | — |
| 16 (3rd line) | |||||||||
| 9 (4th line) | |||||||||
| (chemotherapy and trastuzumab) | |||||||||
| Fountzilas | 80 (2nd line) | 23.8 | 5.2 | 14.3 | 3.5 | 19.2 | 4.9 | 8.3 | 3.9 |
| 49 (3rd line) | |||||||||
| 26 (4th line) | |||||||||
| 12 (5th line) | |||||||||
| (vinorelbine or gemcitabine and trastuzumab) | |||||||||
| Adamo | 26 (2nd line) | 23 | 9 | 22 | 9 | — | — | — | — |
| 9 (3rd line) | |||||||||
| (vinorelbine, taxane, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, or gemcitabine and trastuzumab) | |||||||||
| Montemurro | 40 | 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| (vinorelbine, taxanes, liposomal doxorubicin, capecitabine, letrozole, or tamoxifen and trastuzumab) | |||||||||
| Fabi | 59 | 27 | 6.7 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| (chemotherapy and trastuzumab) | |||||||||
Those who received trastuzumab treatment beyond progression (in the second line, unless otherwise stated).
Stable disease 60%.
Reported for third-line treatment and beyond.
orr = overall response rate; ttp = time to progression; nr = not reported.
Response rates for trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy in women with metastatic breast cancer progressing on trastuzumab, prospective phase ii trials
| Reference | Patients | Therapy line | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Second | Third | ||||
| Tripathy | 93 | 11 | — | — | — |
| (chemotherapy and trastuzumab) | |||||
| Morabito | 7 | 29 | — | — | — |
| (vinorelbine, gemcitabine, and trastuzumab) | |||||
| Orlando | 11 | 18 | 6 | — | — |
| (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and trastuzumab) | |||||
| Del Bianco | 8 (2nd line) | 50 | 8 | 62.5 | 9 |
| 8 (3rd line) | |||||
| (chemotherapy and trastuzumab) | |||||
| Bartsch | 40 | 20 | 8 | — | — |
| (capecitabine and trastuzumab) | |||||
| Bachelot | 17 | 29 | — | — | — |
| (vinorelbine and trastuzumab) | |||||
| Modi | 20 | 25 | — | — | — |
| (tanespimycin and trastuzumab) | |||||
Those who received trastuzumab treatment beyond progression (in the second line, unless otherwise stated).
Reported for second-line treatment and beyond.
orr = overall response rate; ttp = time to progression.
Summary of efficacy data from French Hermine cohort study38
| Efficacy endpoint | Therapy line | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First ( | Second ( | ||||
| Continued trastuzumab ( | Discontinued trastuzumab ( | Continued trastuzumab ( | Discontinued trastuzumab ( | ||
| Median | From initiation of trastuzumab | Not reached | 16.8 | 27.2 | 15.6 |
| From date of progression | 21.3 | 4.6 | 15.5 | 11 | |
| From initiation of trastuzumab | 73.7 | 24.7 | 55.7 | 41.8 | |
Follow-up data are available for only 177 of the 221 patients who received first-line trastuzumab-based
After a median follow-up of 27.8 months.
os = overall survival.
Summary of efficacy data from the German Breast Group 26 trial
| Clinical endpoint | Trial arms von Minckwitz | |
|---|---|---|
| Trastuzumab AND capecitabine | Capecitabine alone | |
| 8.2 | 5.6 | |
| 48.1 | 27.0 | |
| 75.3 | 54.0 | |
| 25.5 | 20.4 | |
ttp = time to progression; orr = overall response rate; cbr = clinical benefit rate; os = overall survival.
Summary of efficacy data from trials by Geyer et al.
| Clinical endpoint | Trial arms Geyer | |
|---|---|---|
| Lapatinib AND capecitabine | Capecitabine alone | |
| 27 | 19 | |
| 8.4 | 4.1 | |
| 24 | 14 | |
| 44 | 29 | |
Based on updated data presented in 2007.
ttp = time to progression; pfs = progression-free survival; orr = objective response rate; cbr = clinical benefit rate; nr = not reported; os = overall survival.