Breast cancer drugs: FDA approval, development time, efficacy, clinical benefits, innovation, trials, endpoints, quality of life, value, and price.

OBJECTIVE: This study analyzes the development, benefits, trial evidence, and price of new breast cancer drugs with US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. METHODS: We identified 26 drugs with 42 FDA-approved indications for early and metastatic breast cancer (2000-2023). Data were collected from FDA labels, clinicaltrials.gov, and Medicare and Medicaid. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) hazard ratios (HRs) and tumor response's relative risk (RR) alongside objective response rate (ORR) were meta-analyzed. RESULTS: The median development time for breast cancer drugs was 7.8 years (95% CI 6.2-10.8). 26% of treatments were considered innovative ("first-in-indication") with 88% acting via a targeted mechanism. 64% were small molecules, 19% antibodies, and 18% antibody-drug conjugates. 38% were approved for HR + and 31% for HER2 + breast cancer. 6 indications were for early and 36 for metastatic breast cancer. Indications utilized FDA's special programs: orphan (2%), fast track (24%), accelerated approval (19%), priority review (74%), breakthrough therapy (44%). Approval was predominantly supported by phase 3 trials (88%) of randomized controlled design (66%), enrolling a median of 585 patients (IQR 417-752) at 181 centers (IQR 142-223) across 19 countries (IQR 17-20). New drugs' HR were 0.78 for OS (95% CI 0.74-0.82) and 0.59 for PFS (95% CI 0.54-0.64) with a RR for tumor response of 1.61 (95% CI 1.46-1.76). Median improvements of OS were 2.8 months (IQR 1.8-5.8) and PFS were 4.4 months (IQR 2.2-7.1). In single-arm trials, the average ORR was 31% (95% CI 10-53). In meta-regressions, the correlation between OS/PFS was 0.34 (p = 0.031) and OS/response was 0.01 (p = 0.435). 60% of treatments had a 'high-value' ESMO-MCBS score with 14% demonstrating improvements in quality of life. The median price was $16,013 per month (95% CI 13,097-17,617). There was no association between prices and patient benefit. The median value per life year gained was $62,419 (IQR 25,840-86,062). CONCLUSIONS: Over the past two decades, the development of innovative and effective drugs transformed the treatment landscape for breast cancer patients. Yet, investigators and regulators must safeguard that highly-priced new drugs demonstrate improvements in patient-centered clinical endpoints: overall survival and quality of life.

Efficacy and safety of PARPis combined with an ICIs for advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a single-arm meta-analysis.

Although the intervention for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients has improved and survival time has increased, the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors(ICIs) and PARP inhibitors (Poly ADP-Ribose Polymerase inhibitors, PARPis) is still controversial. Previous studies revealed that the combined use of ICIs and PARPis led to increased antitumor activity. However, most of these combined regimens are nonrandomized controlled trials with small sample sizes. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ICIs combined with PARPis in patients with advanced or metastatic TNBC. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were systematically searched. The results including the objective remission rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events (AEs), were subjected to further analysis. Four studies involving 110 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. The combined ORR and DCR were 23.6% and 53.6%, respectively; while the ORR and DCR of BRCAmut patients were 38.1% and 71.4%, respectively. The median PFS of the patients was 4.29 months. As for safety, the most common AEs were nausea (49.0%), anemia (44.3%) and fatigue (40.6%). Most of them were grade 1 or 2, and the incidence of adverse events ≥ III was obviously low. Except for anemia, the incidence of AEs ≥ III was < 10%. This meta-analysis revealed that the combination of ICIs and PARPis has good efficacy and safety for advanced or metastatic TNBC patients.

Efficacy and safety of PD-1/L1 inhibitors as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of PD-1/L1 inhibitors as first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer(mCRC). Method: Articles evaluating first-line PD-1/L1 inhibitors for mCRC were sought in four databases (Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library) from the inception of the databases until 11 November 2023. Meta-analyses were conducted to assess the rates of progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (trAEs). Results: Totally nine studies were included for meta-analysis. A subgroup analysis was performed based on mismatch repair(MMR) status and regimens. In patients diagnosed with mismatch repair-deficient(dMMR) mCRC who received PD-1/L1 inhibitors as their first-line treatment, the ORR was 0.54 (95% CI, 0.39 to 0.68), the median PFS was 53.2 months, the Grade≥ 3 TRAEs rate was 0.33(95% CI, 0.12 to 0.60) and the median OS was not determined. For patients with proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) mCRC who underwent a combined treatment of PD-1/L1 inhibitors, anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody and chemotherapy as their first-line therapy, the ORR was 0.62 (95% CI, 0.56 to 0.68), the median PFS was 10.1 months, the median OS was 26.7 months, and the Grade≥ 3 TRAEs rate was 0.59(95% CI, 0.39 to 0.77). Conclusion: Our results revealed that the utilization of PD-1/L1 inhibitors as first-line therapy for dMMR mCRC yielded highly favorable outcomes, while maintaining an acceptable level of safety. Administering a combination of PD-1/L1 inhibitors, anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody, and chemotherapy as first-line treatment in patients with pMMR mCRC led to an improved ORR. However, there was no significant improvement in the long-term prognosis of the tumor. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024506196, identifier CRD42024506196.

Efficacy and safety of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy combined with donafenib in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at ascertaining the efficacy and safety of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) combined with donafenib versus HAIC alone in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Seventy HCC patients were enrolled for our study, and they were randomized by simple randomization using computer-generated random numbers into two groups: control group and observation group. Regular follow-up reviews were conducted to assess the efficacy of treatments. The levels of apoptotic factors, the levels of hepatic fibrosis indices, the levels of serum tumor vascular factors and tumor markers, and the occurrence of adverse reactions in the two groups were recorded and compared. RESULTS: Disease control rate, objective response rate, and progression-free survival (PFS) of patients in the observation group were higher in contrast to the control group. After 12 weeks of treatment, lower mRNA expression of c-mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor, telomerase, and Fas Ligand and higher mRNA expression of Fas and Caspase-3 were observed in HCC tissues of the observation group versus the control group (p < 0.05); lower detection values of serum laminin, hyaluronic acid, collage type IV, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2, and alpha-fetal protein (AFP) were noted in HCC patients of the observation group in comparison to the control group (p < 0.05); there was no difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Donafenib combined with HAIC in the treatment of unresectable HCC patients can notably reduce serum AFP levels, improve hepatic fibrosis, enhance short-term efficacy, prolong PFS, and have a favorable safety profile.

Nab-paclitaxel plus capecitabine as first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancers: An open-label, non-randomized, phase II clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) are a heterogeneous group of tumors with high malignancy, poor prognosis, and limited treatment options. AIM: To explore the efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel plus capecitabine as first-line treatment for advanced and metastatic BTCs. METHODS: This open-label, non-randomized, double-center, phase II clinical trial recruited systemic therapy-naive patients with unresectable or metastatic BTCs between April 2019 and June 2022 at Beijing Cancer Hospital and the First Hospital of China Medical University. Eligible patients were administered nab-paclitaxel (150 mg/m2, day 1) and capecitabine (2000 mg/m2, twice daily, days 1-7) in 14-day cycles until experiencing intolerable toxicity or disease progression. The primary outcome was the objective response rate (ORR). The secondary outcomes included the disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. RESULTS: A total of 44 patients successfully completed the trial, with a median age of 64.00 years (interquartile range, 35.00-76.00), and 26 (59.09%) were females. Tumor response assessment was impeded for one patient due to premature demise from tumor hemorrhage. Among the remaining 43 patients undergoing at least one imaging assessment, the ORR was 23.26% [95% confidence interval (CI): 11.80%-38.60%], and the DCR was 69.77% (95%CI: 53.90%-82.80%). The median OS was 14.1 months (95%CI: 8.3-19.9), and the median PFS was 4.4 months (95%CI: 2.5-6.3). A total of 41 patients (93.18%) experienced at least one adverse event (AE), with 10 patients (22.73%) encountering grade ≥ 3 AEs, and the most frequent AEs of any grade were alopecia (79.50%), leukopenia (54.55%), neutropenia (52.27%), and liver dysfunction (40.91%), and no treatment-related deaths were documented. CONCLUSION: Nab-paclitaxel plus capecitabine may be an effective and safe first-line treatment strategy for patients with advanced or metastatic BTCs.

[Comparison of Short-term Efficacy of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy Combined with Chemotherapy and Surgery Alone for Locally Advanced Resectable 
Non-small Cell Lung Cancer].

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the cancer with the highest incidence and mortality rates in China, and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for 80%-85% of all malignant lung tumors. Currently, surgical treatment remains the primary treatment modality for lung cancer. In recent years, the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors for NSCLC has become a consensus, and neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) has shown promising efficacy and safety in early to intermediate stage NSCLC. However, there are fewer studies related to nICT for locally advanced NSCLC. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nICT therapy in locally advanced resectable NSCLC. METHODS: 85 confirmed resectable stage IIIA and IIIB patients treated in the Department of Thoracic Surgery, Second Hospital of Lanzhou University, from January 2021 to April 2024, were divided into the nICT group (n=32) and the surgery alone group (n=53). Clinical baseline data, perioperative indicators, postoperative complications, imaging response rate, pathological response rate, incidence of adverse events, and quality of life were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in clinical baseline data between the two groups (P>0.05). Incidence of choosing thoracotomy was higher in the nICT group than in the surgery alone group (P=0.002). There were no significant differences in surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, number of dissected lymph nodes, duration of chest tube placement, postoperative hospital stay, and R0 resection rate between the two groups (P>0.05). The overall incidence of postoperative complications was 31.25% in the nICT group and 22.64% in the surgery alone group, with no statistically significant difference (P=0.380). In the nICT group, the objective response rate (ORR) was 84.38%, with 5 cases of complete response (CR)(15.63%), 22 cases of partial response (PR)(68.75%), 15 cases of pathological response rate (pCR)(46.88%), and 11 cases of major pathological reaponse (MPR) (34.38%). During nICT treatment, 12 cases (37.50%) experienced grade 3 treatment-related adverse events, no death induced by adverse events or immune related adverse events. Moreover, the symptoms of the patients were improved after nICT treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy shows promising efficacy in locally advanced resectable NSCLC, with manageable treatment-related adverse events. It is a safe and feasible neoadjuvant treatment modality for locally advanced resectable NSCLC.

Exploring the Role of Target Expression in Treatment Efficacy of Antibody-Drug Conjugates (ADCs) in Solid Cancers: A Comprehensive Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) offer a promising path for cancer therapy, leveraging the specificity of monoclonal antibodies and the cytotoxicity of linked drugs. The success of ADCs hinges on precise targeting of cancer cells based on protein expression levels. This review explores the relationship between target protein expression and ADC efficacy in solid tumours, focusing on results of clinical trials conducted between January 2019 and May 2023. RECENT FINDINGS: We hereby highlight approved ADCs, revealing their effectiveness even in low-expressing target populations. Assessing target expression poses challenges, owing to variations in scoring systems and biopsy types. Emerging methods, like digital image analysis, aim to standardize assessment. The complexity of ADC pharmacokinetics, tumour dynamics, and off-target effects emphasises the need for a balanced approach. This review underscores the importance of understanding target protein dynamics and promoting standardized evaluation methods in shaping the future of ADC-based cancer therapies.

CT-guided iodine-125 brachytherapy is an effective palliative treatment for the right lower paratracheal lymph nodes metastasis previously treatment failure.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of iodine-125 brachytherapy as a treatment for right lower paratracheal lymph node metastasis following unsuccessful prior therapies. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent iodine-125 brachytherapy for right lower paratracheal lymph node metastasis was conducted. The study included 24 patients who met the predefined criteria. Iodine-125 seeds were implanted under CT guidance, and treatment planning was performed using a treatment planning system. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR), while overall survival (OS) and complications were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: The ORR was 87.5%, with 4 patients achieving complete response (CR) and 17 patients achieving partial response (PR). The mean diameter of metastatic lymph nodes significantly reduced from 40.21 ± 6.66 mm before treatment to 12.25 ± 9.27 mm at the last follow-up (p < 0.001). The median OS was 14.70 months, with 1-year and 2-year survival rates of 78.9% and 20.9%, respectively. Clinical symptoms significantly improved, as indicated by increased Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS) scores. Complications were manageable, with no procedure-related deaths. CONCLUSION: Iodine-125 brachytherapy demonstrated promising efficacy and safety as an alternative treatment for right lower paratracheal lymph node metastasis after unsuccessful prior therapies.

Evaluation of oxaliplatin and tigio combination therapy in locally advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) is a common malignant tumor. In recent years, neoadjuvant chemotherapy has gradually become popular for the treatment of LAGC. AIM: To investigate the efficacy of oxaliplatin combined with a tigio neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen vs a conventional chemotherapy regimen for LAGC. METHODS: Ninety patients with LAGC were selected and randomly divided into control and study groups with 45 patients in each group, according to the numerical table method. The control group was treated with conventional chemotherapy, and the study group was treated with oxaliplatin combined with tigio-neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The primary outcome measures were the clinical objective response rate (ORR) and surgical resection rate (SRR), whereas the secondary outcome measures were safety and Karnofsky Performance Status score. RESULTS: The ORR in the study group was 80.00%, which was significantly higher than that of the control group (57.78%). In the study group, SRR was 75.56%, which was significantly higher than that of the control group (57.78%). There were 15.56% adverse reactions in the study group and 35.56% in the control group. These differences were statistically significant between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The combination of oxaliplatin and tigio before surgery as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with LAGC can effectively improve the ORR and SRR and is safe.

Predict progression free survival and overall survival using objective response rate for anti-PD1/PDL1 therapy development.

In oncology anti-PD1 / PDL1 therapy development for solid tumors, objective response rate (ORR) is commonly used clinical endpoint for early phase study decision making, while progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) are widely used for late phase study decision making. Developing predictive models to late phase outcomes such as median PFS (mPFS) and median OS (mOS) based on early phase clinical outcome ORR could inform late phase study design optimization and probability of success (POS) evaluation. In existing literature, there are ORR / mPFS / mOS association and surrogacy investigations with limited number of included clinical trials. In this paper, without establishing surrogacy, we attempt to predict late phase survival (mPFS and mOS) based on early efficacy ORR and optimize late phase trial design for anti-PD1 / PDL1 therapy development. In order to include adequate number of eligible clinical trials, we built a comprehensive quantitative clinical trial landscape database (QLD) by combining information from different sources such as clinicaltrial.gov, publications, company press releases for relevant indications and therapies. We developed a generalizable algorithm to systematically extract structured data for scientific accuracy and completeness. Finally, more than 150 late phase clinical trials were identified for ORR / mPFS (ORR / mOS) predictive model development while existing literature included at most 50 trials. A tree-based machine learning regression model has been derived to account for ORR / mPFS (ORR / mOS) relationship heterogeneity across tumor type, stage, line of therapy, treatment class and borrow strength simultaneously when homogeneity persists. The proposed method ensures that the predictive model is robust and have explicit structure for clinical interpretation. Through cross validation, the average predictive mean square error of the proposed model is competitive to random forest and extreme gradient boosting methods and outperforms commonly used additive or interaction linear regression models. An example application of the proposed ORR / mPFS (ORR / mOS) predictive model on late phase trial POS evaluation for anti-PD1 / PDL1 combination therapy was illustrated.