UNLABELLED: Treatments for women with recurrent brain metastases from breast cancer are limited. In this phase II study,we administered sagopilone to patients with breast cancer and brain metastases. We observed modest activity with a central nervous system objective response rate of 13.3%; however, median PFS was disappointing. Further studies should focus on other agents to treat this challenging clinical problem. BACKGROUND: Patients with progressive metastatic breast cancer to the central nervous system (CNS) have limited treatment options. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a phase II study of sagopilone, an epothilone B analogue that crosses the blood-brain barrier, in patients with breast cancer brain metastases. Women were treated with 16 mg/m(2) or 22 mg/m(2) intravenously every 21 days. The primary endpoint was CNS objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Using modified, high-resolution magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), we also evaluated changes in vessel tortuosity with treatment. RESULTS: Fifteen women were enrolled; all had progressive CNS disease despite whole-brain radiotherapy. Two patients achieved a partial response (ORR, 13.3%) and remained in the study for 6 cycles. Responses were not associated with normalization of tumor-associated vessels on correlative imaging studies. Median PFS and OS were 1.4 months and 5.3 months, respectively. The most common grade 3 toxicities were lymphopenia and fatigue. Enrollment was stopped prematurely because of limited observed activity and slow accrual. CONCLUSIONS: Sagopilone was associated with modest CNS activity in patients with breast cancer; however median PFS was disappointing. Further studies should examine other potentially active agents and/or combinations for this challenging clinical problem.
UNLABELLED: Treatments for women with recurrent brain metastases from breast cancer are limited. In this phase II study,we administered sagopilone to patients with breast cancer and brain metastases. We observed modest activity with a central nervous system objective response rate of 13.3%; however, median PFS was disappointing. Further studies should focus on other agents to treat this challenging clinical problem. BACKGROUND:Patients with progressive metastatic breast cancer to the central nervous system (CNS) have limited treatment options. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a phase II study of sagopilone, an epothilone B analogue that crosses the blood-brain barrier, in patients with breast cancer brain metastases. Women were treated with 16 mg/m(2) or 22 mg/m(2) intravenously every 21 days. The primary endpoint was CNS objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Using modified, high-resolution magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), we also evaluated changes in vessel tortuosity with treatment. RESULTS: Fifteen women were enrolled; all had progressive CNS disease despite whole-brain radiotherapy. Two patients achieved a partial response (ORR, 13.3%) and remained in the study for 6 cycles. Responses were not associated with normalization of tumor-associated vessels on correlative imaging studies. Median PFS and OS were 1.4 months and 5.3 months, respectively. The most common grade 3 toxicities were lymphopenia and fatigue. Enrollment was stopped prematurely because of limited observed activity and slow accrual. CONCLUSIONS:Sagopilone was associated with modest CNS activity in patients with breast cancer; however median PFS was disappointing. Further studies should examine other potentially active agents and/or combinations for this challenging clinical problem.
Authors: Charles E Geyer; John Forster; Deborah Lindquist; Stephen Chan; C Gilles Romieu; Tadeusz Pienkowski; Agnieszka Jagiello-Gruszfeld; John Crown; Arlene Chan; Bella Kaufman; Dimosthenis Skarlos; Mario Campone; Neville Davidson; Mark Berger; Cristina Oliva; Stephen D Rubin; Steven Stein; David Cameron Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-12-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Elizabeth Bullitt; Nancy U Lin; J Keith Smith; Donglin Zeng; Eric P Winer; Lisa A Carey; Weili Lin; Matthew G Ewend Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-10-22 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Nancy U Lin; Lisa A Carey; Minetta C Liu; Jerry Younger; Steven E Come; Matthew Ewend; Gordon J Harris; Elizabeth Bullitt; Annick D Van den Abbeele; John W Henson; Xiaochun Li; Rebecca Gelman; Harold J Burstein; Elizabeth Kasparian; David G Kirsch; Ann Crawford; Fred Hochberg; Eric P Winer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-04-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jens Hoffmann; Ilio Vitale; Bernd Buchmann; Lorenzo Galluzzi; Wolfgang Schwede; Laura Senovilla; Werner Skuballa; Sonia Vivet; Rosemarie B Lichtner; José M Vicencio; Theocharis Panaretakis; Gerhard Siemeister; Hermann Lage; Lisa Nanty; Stefanie Hammer; Kevin Mittelstaedt; Sebastian Winsel; Julia Eschenbrenner; Maria Castedo; Carine Demarche; Ulrich Klar; Guido Kroemer Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2008-07-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Eva Thomas; Josep Tabernero; Monica Fornier; Pierfranco Conté; Pierre Fumoleau; Ana Lluch; Linda T Vahdat; Craig A Bunnell; Howard A Burris; Patrice Viens; José Baselga; Edgardo Rivera; Valentina Guarneri; Valerie Poulart; Judith Klimovsky; David Lebwohl; Miguel Martin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-07-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Daniel P Fitzgerald; David L Emerson; Yongzhen Qian; Talha Anwar; David J Liewehr; Seth M Steinberg; Sandra Silberman; Diane Palmieri; Patricia S Steeg Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2012-05-23 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Michelle E Melisko; Michael Assefa; Jimmy Hwang; Amy DeLuca; John W Park; Hope S Rugo Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2019-06-06 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: L Tiffany Lyle; Paul R Lockman; Chris E Adkins; Afroz Shareef Mohammad; Emily Sechrest; Emily Hua; Diane Palmieri; David J Liewehr; Seth M Steinberg; Wojciech Kloc; Ewa Izycka-Swieszewska; Renata Duchnowska; Naema Nayyar; Priscilla K Brastianos; Patricia S Steeg; Brunilde Gril Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2016-05-31 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Debu Tripathy; Sara M Tolaney; Andrew D Seidman; Carey K Anders; Nuhad Ibrahim; Hope S Rugo; Chris Twelves; Veronique Dieras; Volkmar Müller; Mary Tagliaferri; Alison L Hannah; Javier Cortés Journal: Future Oncol Date: 2019-05-10 Impact factor: 3.404
Authors: Marc C Chamberlain; Christina S Baik; Vijayakrishna K Gadi; Shailender Bhatia; Laura Q M Chow Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Nancy U Lin; Laleh Amiri-Kordestani; Diane Palmieri; David J Liewehr; Patricia S Steeg Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-12-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Erin M Olson; Julie S Najita; Jessica Sohl; Amal Arnaout; Harold J Burstein; Eric P Winer; Nancy U Lin Journal: Breast Date: 2013-01-23 Impact factor: 4.380
Authors: David M Peereboom; Conleth Murphy; Manmeet S Ahluwalia; Alison Conlin; April Eichler; Catherine Van Poznak; Joseph Baar; Paul Elson; Andrew D Seidman Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2014-01-26 Impact factor: 12.300