| Literature DB >> 28938684 |
Chengcheng Gong1, Yannan Zhao1, Biyun Wang1, Xichun Hu1, Zhonghua Wang1, Jian Zhang1, Sheng Zhang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Everolimus combined with endocrine therapy has been proved to be effective among postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of everolimus plus endocrine therapy in Chinese real-world practice for the first time, and investigate factors associated with efficacy.Entities:
Keywords: endocrine therapy; everolimus; metastatic breast cancer; real-world study
Year: 2017 PMID: 28938684 PMCID: PMC5601780 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.16336
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Patients and tumor characteristics (N = 75)
| Characteristics | Everolimus plus endocrine therapy | |
|---|---|---|
| No. | % | |
| Median | 53 | |
| Range | 24-73 | |
| Postmenopausal | 60 | 80.0 |
| Premenopausal | 13 | 17.3 |
| Unknown | 2 | 2.7 |
| HR positive | 75 | 100 |
| HER-2 negative* | 70 | 93.3 |
| <12 | 9 | 12 |
| 12-24 | 14 | 18.7 |
| >24 | 47 | 62.7 |
| 1 | 9 | 12 |
| 2 | 21 | 28 |
| ≥3 | 45 | 60 |
| Lung | 43 | 57.3 |
| Liver | 35 | 46.7 |
| Bone | 52 | 69.3 |
| 62 | 82.7 | |
| First line | 8 | 10.7 |
| Second line | 31 | 41.3 |
| Third or more line | 36 | 48 |
| Letrozole or anastrozole | 68 | 90.7 |
| Tamoxifen | 50 | 66.7 |
| Exemestane | 31 | 41.3 |
| Fulvestrant | 29 | 38.7 |
| Letrozole or anastrozole | 38 | 50.6 |
| Fluvestrant | 19 | 25.3 |
| Exemestane | 13 | 17.3 |
| Tamoxifen | 5 | 6.7 |
| Primary endocrine resistance | 18 | 24 |
| Secondary endocrine resistance | 55 | 73.3 |
| Unable to determine | 2 | 2.7 |
| (Neo)adjuvant therapy only | 17 | 22.7 |
| Metastatic disease | 58 | 77.3 |
| 1 | 16 | 21.3 |
| 2 | 17 | 22.7 |
| ≥3 | 25 | 33.3 |
5 patients’ HER-2 data were not available.
Figure 1Kaplan–Meier estimates of progression-free survival of patients treated with everolimus and endocrine therapy
Tumor responses (N = 67)
| Responses | No. of patients | % |
|---|---|---|
| CR | 0 | 0 |
| PR | 6 | 9.0 |
| SD | 44 | 65.7 |
| PD | 17 | 25.4 |
| ORR(%) | 9.0 (95%CI, 2.0-16.0) | |
| CBR(%) | 38.8 (95%CI 26.8-50.8) |
Abbreviations: CR, complete response; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; PD, progression disease; ORR, objective response rate; CBR, clinical benefit rate
Exploratory analysis of factors to predict PFS of everolimus
| Factors | PFS(months) | HRs | 95%CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ≥45 | 6.83 | 0.53 | 0.30-0.93 | 0.027* |
| <45 | 5.57 | |||
| Postmenopausal | 6.30 | 0.64 | 0.34-1.21 | 0.171 |
| Premenopausal + OFS | 5.83 | |||
| >24 | 5.90 | 0.87 | 0.50-1.51 | 0.872 |
| <24 | 5.77 | |||
| 1-2 | 6.30 | 0.94 | 0.57-1.57 | 0.820 |
| ≥3 | 5.83 | |||
| Yes | 6.10 | 1.27 | 0.64-2.51 | 0.495 |
| No | 5.90 | |||
| Yes | 5.10 | 2.06 | 1.24-3.44 | 0.006* |
| No | 7.70 | |||
| Yes | 6.83 | 0.82 | 0.50-1.35 | 0.430 |
| No | 5.63 | |||
| Yes | 5.57 | 1.65 | 0.94-2.89 | 0.082 |
| No | 9.07 | |||
| ≥2 | 5.57 | 1.55 | 0.92-2.62 | 0.098 |
| 0-1 | 7.70 | |||
| ≥2 | 5.90 | 1.03 | 0.62-1.69 | 0.921 |
| 0-1 | 5.77 | |||
| Primary Resistant | 5.13 | 1.21 | 0.66-2.23 | 0.532 |
| Secondary Resistant | 6.10 | |||
| Yes | 7.80 | 0.57 | 0.34-0.98 | 0.042* |
| No | 4.77 | |||
| Exemestane | 6.77 | NA | NA | NA |
| Tamoxifen | 5.77 | |||
| Anatozole | 4.77 | |||
| Letrozole | 3.23 | |||
| Fulvestrant | 3.0 | |||
Abbreviations: HR, hazard ratio, CI, confidence interval, OFS, ovarian function suppression, DFI, disease-free interval.
*p < 0.05 is considered significant.
# factors included in Cox multivariate models.
+ Missing data were not included in the analysis.
Figure 2Kaplan–Meier curves for progression-free survival
For patients stratified by potential factors related with PFS. A. Age, B. Symptomatic stomatitis. C. Liver metastasis. Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; PFS, progression-free survival.
Adverse events (N = 70)
| Adverse Events | All grades | ≥ Grade 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Non hematological events | Stomatitis | 57.1 | 9.3 |
| Fatigue | 25.7 | 1.4 | |
| Infection | 24.3 | 2.9 | |
| Rash | 18.6 | 0 | |
| Edema | 14.3 | 0 | |
| Cough | 12.9 | 0 | |
| Diarrhea | 12.9 | 1.4 | |
| Noninfectious pneumonitis | 10.0 | 0 | |
| Pyrexia | 10.0 | 0 | |
| Anorexia | 7.1 | 0 | |
| Hypertension | 7.1 | 2.9 | |
| Weight loss | 5.7 | 0 | |
| Biological events | Hyperglycemia | 21.4 | 1.4 |
| ALT increased | 18.6 | 1.4 | |
| AST increased | 18.6 | 1.4 | |
| Hyperlipidemia* | 10.0 | 0 | |
| Hematological events | Anemia | 14.3 | 4.3 |
| Thrombocytopenia | 10.0 | 5.7 | |
| Leukopenia | 5.7 | 0 |
Abbreviations: ALT, alanine aminotransferase, AST, aspartate aminotransferase. *Includes hypercholesterolemia (5.7%) and hypertriglyceridemia (4.3%).
Figure 3Cumulative risk estimates for initial onset of adverse events of clinical interest
A. Stomatitis. B. Noninfectious pneumonitis. C. Hyperglycemia.
Figure 4Dose pattern of everolimus
Comparison with previous studies
| Parameters | FUSCC | BOLERO-2a | BOLERO-2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asian subgroupb | ||||
| Number of patients | Total | 75 | 485 | 98 |
| Safety Population | 70 | 482 | 98 | |
| Age (years) | Median | 53 | 62 | 59.5 |
| Range | 24-73 | 34-93 | 40-79 | |
| Exposure duration to everolimus (weeks) | Median | 15.1 | 23.9 | 27.6 |
| Range | 1-131.6 | 1-123.3 | 2-123.3 | |
| PFS (months) | Local review | 5.9 | 7.8 | 8.5 |
| Central review | NA | 11.0 | NA | |
| Stomatitis(%) | All grades | 57.1 | 67 | 80 |
| ≥grade 3 | 9.3 | 8 | 8 | |
| Noninfectious pneumonitis (%) | All grades | 10 | 20 | 13 |
| ≥grade 3 | 0 | 4 | 1 | |
| Hyperglycemia(%) | All grades | 21.4 | 16 | 9 |
| ≥grade 3 | 1.4 | 6 | 4 | |
| Hyperlipidemia(%) | All grades | 10 | 14 | NA |
| ≥grade 3 | 0 | 1 | NA | |
Abbreviations: PFS, progression-free survival, NA, Not available.
a Survival data from Yardley et al [17]. Safety data from Rugo et al [32].
b Data from Noguchi et al [31].