J Gavilá1, J De La Haba2, B Bermejo3, Á Rodríguez-Lescure4, A Antón5, E Ciruelos6, J Brunet7, E Muñoz-Couselo8, M Santisteban9, C A Rodríguez Sánchez10, A Santaballa11, P Sánchez Rovira12, J Á García Sáenz13, M Ruiz-Borrego14, A L Guerrero-Zotano1, M Huerta3, A Cotes-Sanchís4, J Lao Romera5, E Aguirre15, J Cortés16,17,18, A Llombart-Cussac19,20. 1. Medical Oncology Department, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain. 2. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain. 3. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Clínico Valencia, Valencia, Spain. 4. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital General Elche, Elche, Spain. 5. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Miguel Servet, Zaragoza, Spain. 6. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain. 7. Medical Oncology Department, Institut Català D'Oncologia, Girona, Spain. 8. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain. 9. Medical Oncology Department, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain. 10. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario de Salamanca - IBSAL, Salamanca, Spain. 11. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain. 12. Medical Oncology Department, Complejo Hospitalario de Jaén, Jaén, Spain. 13. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain. 14. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Sevilla, Spain. 15. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital de Día QuirónSalud, Zaragoza, Spain. 16. Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona, Spain. 17. IOB, Institute of Oncology, QuirónSalud Group, Madrid and Barcelona, Spain. 18. Medica Scientia Innovation Research (MedSIR), Barcelona, Spain. 19. Medica Scientia Innovation Research (MedSIR), Barcelona, Spain. antonio.llombart@medsir.org. 20. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Arnau de Vilanova - FISABIO, Valencia, Spain. antonio.llombart@medsir.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lapatinib (L) and trastuzumab (T) combination in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients previously treated with T and/or L. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, post-authorized, multicenter study including patients with HER2-positive MBC or locally advanced breast cancer (ABC) treated with the combination of L-T. Concomitant endocrine therapy, as well as brain metastasis and/or prior exposure to L, were allowed. RESULTS: One hundred and fifteen patients from 14 institutions were included. The median age was 59.8 years. The median number of prior T regimens in the advanced setting was 3 and 73 patients had received a prior L regimen. The clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 34.8% (95% CI 26.1-43.5). Among other efficacy endpoints, the overall response rate was 21.7%, and median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 3.9 and 21.6 months, respectively. Heavily pretreated and ≥ 3 metastatic organ patients showed lower CBR and PFS than patients with a low number of previous regimens and < 3 metastatic organs. Moreover, CBR did not significantly change in L-pretreated compared with L-naïve patients (31.5% versus 40.5% for L-pretreated versus L-naïve). Grade 3/4 adverse events were reported in 19 patients (16.5%). CONCLUSION: The combination of L-T is an effective and well-tolerated regimen in heavily pretreated patients and remains active among patients progressing on prior L-based therapy. Our study suggests that the L-T regimen is a safe and active chemotherapy-free option for MBC patients previously treated with T and/or L.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lapatinib (L) and trastuzumab (T) combination in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients previously treated with T and/or L. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, post-authorized, multicenter study including patients with HER2-positive MBC or locally advanced breast cancer (ABC) treated with the combination of L-T. Concomitant endocrine therapy, as well as brain metastasis and/or prior exposure to L, were allowed. RESULTS: One hundred and fifteen patients from 14 institutions were included. The median age was 59.8 years. The median number of prior T regimens in the advanced setting was 3 and 73 patients had received a prior L regimen. The clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 34.8% (95% CI 26.1-43.5). Among other efficacy endpoints, the overall response rate was 21.7%, and median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 3.9 and 21.6 months, respectively. Heavily pretreated and ≥ 3 metastatic organ patients showed lower CBR and PFS than patients with a low number of previous regimens and < 3 metastatic organs. Moreover, CBR did not significantly change in L-pretreated compared with L-naïve patients (31.5% versus 40.5% for L-pretreated versus L-naïve). Grade 3/4 adverse events were reported in 19 patients (16.5%). CONCLUSION: The combination of L-T is an effective and well-tolerated regimen in heavily pretreated patients and remains active among patients progressing on prior L-based therapy. Our study suggests that the L-T regimen is a safe and active chemotherapy-free option for MBCpatients previously treated with T and/or L.
Entities:
Keywords:
Dual HER2 blockade; Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive; Lapatinib; Metastatic breast cancer; Trastuzumab; Tyrosine kinase inhibitor
Authors: Anders W Erickson; Farinaz Ghodrati; Steven Habbous; Katarzyna J Jerzak; Arjun Sahgal; Manmeet S Ahluwalia; Sunit Das Journal: Neurooncol Adv Date: 2020-10-14