RESUMEN
LESSONS LEARNED: Treatment with BEZ235 has not been shown to demonstrate increased efficacy compared with everolimus and may be associated with a poorer tolerability profile.The hypothesis of dual targeting of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase and mammalian target of rapamycin pathways in patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors may warrant further study using other agents. BACKGROUND: This phase II study investigated whether targeting the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway via PI3K, mTOR complex 1 (mTORC1) and mTOR complex 2 (mTORC2) inhibition using BEZ235 may be more effective than mTORC1 inhibition with everolimus in patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET) who are naïve to mTOR inhibitor therapy. METHODS: Patients with advanced pNET were randomized (1:1) to oral BEZ235 400 mg twice daily or oral everolimus 10 mg once daily on a continuous dosing schedule. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included safety, overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and time to treatment failure. RESULTS: Enrollment in this study was terminated early (62 enrolled of the 140 planned). The median PFS was 8.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.3 to not evaluable [NE]) with BEZ235 versus 10.8 months (95% CI: 8.1-NE) with everolimus (hazard ratio 1.53; 95% CI: 0.72-3.25). The most commonly reported all-grade adverse events (>50% of patients regardless of study treatment relationship) with BEZ235 were diarrhea (90.3%), stomatitis (74.2%), and nausea (54.8%). CONCLUSION: BEZ235 treatment in mTOR inhibitor-naïve patients with advanced pNET did not demonstrate increased efficacy compared with everolimus and may be associated with a poorer tolerability profile.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Everolimus/uso terapéutico , Imidazoles/uso terapéutico , Tumores Neuroendocrinos/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Quinolinas/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Diana Mecanicista del Complejo 1 de la Rapamicina/antagonistas & inhibidores , Diana Mecanicista del Complejo 1 de la Rapamicina/metabolismo , Diana Mecanicista del Complejo 2 de la Rapamicina/antagonistas & inhibidores , Diana Mecanicista del Complejo 2 de la Rapamicina/metabolismo , Persona de Mediana Edad , Tumores Neuroendocrinos/metabolismo , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/metabolismo , Fosfatidilinositol 3-Quinasas/metabolismo , Inhibidores de las Quinasa Fosfoinosítidos-3 , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Serina-Treonina Quinasas TOR/antagonistas & inhibidores , Serina-Treonina Quinasas TOR/metabolismoRESUMEN
Purpose The Letrozole (Femara) Versus Anastrozole Clinical Evaluation (FACE) study compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant letrozole versus anastrozole in postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor (HR) -positive and node-positive early breast cancer (eBC). Methods Postmenopausal women with HR-positive and node-positive eBC were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant therapy with either letrozole (2.5 mg) or anastrozole (1 mg) once per day for 5 years or until recurrence of disease. Patients were stratified on the basis of the number of lymph nodes and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status. The primary end point was 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), and the key secondary end points were overall survival and safety. Results A total of 4,136 patients were randomly assigned to receive either letrozole (n = 2,061) or anastrozole (n = 2,075). The final analysis was done at 709 DFS events (letrozole, 341 [16.5%]; anastrozole, 368 [17.7%]). The 5-year estimated DFS rate was 84.9% for letrozole versus 82.9% for anastrozole arm (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.07; P = .3150). Exploratory analysis showed similar DFS with letrozole and anastrozole in all evaluated subgroups. The 5-year estimated overall survival rate was 89.9% for letrozole versus 89.2% for anastrozole arm (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.17; P = .7916). Most common grade 3 to 4 adverse events (> 5% of patients) reported for letrozole versus anastrozole were arthralgia (3.9% v 3.3%, and 48.2% v 47.9% for all adverse events), hypertension (1.2% v 1.0%), hot flushes (0.8% v 0.4%), myalgia (0.8% v 0.7%), dyspnea (0.8% v 0.5%), and depression (0.8% v 0.6%). Conclusion Letrozole did not demonstrate significantly superior efficacy or safety compared with anastrozole in postmenopausal patients with HR-positive, node-positive eBC.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos Hormonales/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias de la Mama/terapia , Nitrilos/uso terapéutico , Triazoles/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Anastrozol , Antineoplásicos Hormonales/efectos adversos , Artralgia/inducido químicamente , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Depresión/inducido químicamente , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Disnea/inducido químicamente , Femenino , Sofocos/inducido químicamente , Humanos , Hipertensión/inducido químicamente , Letrozol , Metástasis Linfática , Mastectomía , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mialgia/inducido químicamente , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Nitrilos/efectos adversos , Posmenopausia , Receptor ErbB-2/análisis , Receptores de Estrógenos/análisis , Receptores de Progesterona/análisis , Tasa de Supervivencia , Triazoles/efectos adversosRESUMEN
Micronized fenofibrate lowers total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol to a similar extent as statins but raises high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and lowers triglycerides to a greater extent. The comparative lipid-modifying efficacy of micronized fenofibrate and pravastatin has not been evaluated in dyslipidemic patients. This prospective, multicenter, randomized trial compared the efficacy of 3 months' treatment with micronized fenofibrate (200 mg once daily) or pravastatin (20 mg once daily) in hypercholesterolemic type IIa and mixed dyslipidemic type IIb patients. Two hundred sixty-five male and female patients (18-75 years) were recruited from 28 European centers, and 151 were analyzed. Micronized fenofibrate was at least as effective as pravastatin in reducing levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and total cholesterol in primary dyslipidemia but was significantly more effective than pravastatin in raising high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (respectively, 13.2% vs. 5.6%; p = 0.0084) and lowering triglycerides (-38.7% vs. -11.8%; p = 0.0001). In type IIa dyslipidemia, micronized fenofibrate was as effective as pravastatin in raising high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (+8.6% vs. +8.0%) but was fivefold more effective in lowering triglycerides (-34.3% vs. -7.2%; p = 0.0001). In type IIb dyslipidemic patients with low baseline high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, micronized fenofibrate was 10-fold and nearly 3-fold superior to pravastatin in raising high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and lowering triglycerides, respectively. Micronized fenofibrate may be considered an effective first-line therapy for patients with primary hyperlipidemia, particularly those with type IIb mixed dyslipidemia or type 2 diabetes.
Asunto(s)
Fenofibrato/uso terapéutico , Hiperlipidemias/tratamiento farmacológico , Pravastatina/uso terapéutico , Adulto , Anciano , Colesterol/sangre , Femenino , Fenofibrato/efectos adversos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pravastatina/efectos adversos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Apolipoprotein (apo) CIII plays an important role in the catabolism of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins as it is a potent inhibitor of lipoprotein lipase (LPL). A low LPL activity has been simultaneously associated with hypertriglyceridemia, low HDL cholesterol and with small LDL particles. AIM: To compare the effects of a 12-week treatment with micronized fenofibrate (200 mg) versus atorvastatin (10 mg) on apo CIII and lipoprotein-lipid levels including LDL size. METHOD: After a 4-week washout period, dyslipidemic patients were randomized to either micronized fenofibrate (n = 64) or atorvastatin (n = 72). RESULTS: Both fenofibrate and atorvastatin significantly decreased apo CIII levels by -0.03 +/- 0.03 versus -0.01 +/- 0.03 g/l respectively, and increased LDL size by 4.9 +/- 3.3 versus 1.8 +/- 2.9 A. Improvements in these parameters were significantly greater with fenofibrate (P < 0.0001). Significant relationships were found between changes in triglycerides and changes in apo CIII (r = 0.81 and r = 0.59, P < 0.0001) as well as between changes in LDL size and changes in apo CIII (r = -0.41 and r = -0.45, P < 0.001), in both fenofibrate and atorvastatin groups. respectively. CONCLUSION: The substantial reduction in apo CIII induced by micronized fenofibrate plays an important role in the greater effect of micronized fenofibrate than atorvastatin on plasma triglycerides and LDL size.