| Literature DB >> 28183140 |
Mary Ellen Moynahan1, David Chen2, Wei He2, Patricia Sung1, Aliaksandra Samoila1, Daoqi You1, Trusha Bhatt1, Parul Patel2, Francois Ringeisen3, Gabriel N Hortobagyi4, Jose Baselga1, Sarat Chandarlapaty1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The current analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of PIK3CA hotspot mutations on everolimus efficacy in BOLERO-2 participants, using cell-free DNA (cfDNA) from plasma samples collected at the time of patient randomisation.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28183140 PMCID: PMC5355930 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2017.25
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Cancer ISSN: 0007-0920 Impact factor: 7.640
PIK3CA mutation prevalence – overall and by treatment arm
| WT | 312 | 56.7% | 124 | 64.2% | 188 | 52.7% |
| MT | 238 | 43.3% | 69 | 35.8% | 169 | 47.3% |
| | 138 | 25.1% | 43 | 22.3% | 95 | 26.6% |
| | 61 | 11.1% | 26 | 13.5% | 74 | 20.7% |
| | 39 | 7.1% | ||||
| Multiple | (4) | 0.7% | ||||
Abbreviations: EVE=everolimus; EXE=exemestane; MT=mutant; PBO=placebo; WT=wild type.
Samples with multiple mutations were categorised by allele with highest mutant fraction.
PFS benefit in patient subgroups defined by overall and domain-specific mutation status of PIK3CA
| WT | EVE+EXE | 188 | 132 | 7.36 (6.77–9.69) | 0.43 (0.34–0.56) |
| PBO+EXE | 124 | 111 | 2.96 (2.76–4.17) | ||
| MT | EVE+EXE | 169 | 123 | 6.90 (5.55–8.31) | 0.37 (0.27–0.51) |
| PBO+EXE | 69 | 60 | 2.69 (1.51–4.11) | ||
| EVE+EXE | 95 | 65 | 7.59 (5.59–9.76) | 0.37 (0.24–0.56) | |
| PBO+EXE | 43 | 38 | 4.04 (1.51–4.70) | ||
| EVE+EXE PBO+EXE | 74 26 | 58 22 | 5.59 (4.14–7.82) 2.22 (1.38–2.76) | 0.30 (0.18–0.51) |
Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; EVE=everolimus; EXE=exemestane; MT=mutant; PBO=placebo; PFS=progression-free survival; WT=wild type.
Figure 1Kaplan-Meier Plot of Progression-free Survival by PIK3CA mutation status. (A) PIK3CA wild-type vs hotspot mutations. (B) PIK3CA wild-type vs domain-specific hotspot mutations.