Abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor as initial therapy for HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer: final overall survival results of MONARCH 3.

BACKGROUND: In MONARCH 2, the addition of abemaciclib to fulvestrant significantly improved both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) with disease progression on prior endocrine therapy. In MONARCH 3, the addition of abemaciclib to a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) as initial therapy for HR+, HER2- ABC significantly improved PFS. Here, we present the prespecified final OS results for MONARCH 3. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MONARCH 3 is a randomized, double-blind, phase III study of abemaciclib plus NSAI (anastrozole or letrozole) versus placebo plus NSAI in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC without prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting. The primary objective was investigator-assessed PFS; OS was a gated secondary endpoint, and chemotherapy-free survival was an exploratory endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 493 women were randomized 2 : 1 to receive abemaciclib plus NSAI (n = 328) or placebo plus NSAI (n = 165). After a median follow-up of 8.1 years, there were 198 OS events (60.4%) in the abemaciclib arm and 116 (70.3%) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.804; 95% confidence interval 0.637-1.015; P = 0.0664, non-significant). Median OS was 66.8 versus 53.7 months for abemaciclib versus placebo. In the subgroup with visceral disease, there were 113 OS events (65.3%) in the abemaciclib arm and 65 (72.2%) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.758; 95% confidence interval 0.558-1.030; P = 0.0757, non-significant). Median OS was 63.7 months versus 48.8 months for abemaciclib versus placebo. The previously demonstrated PFS benefit was sustained, and chemotherapy-free survival numerically improved with the addition of abemaciclib. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Abemaciclib combined with an NSAI resulted in clinically meaningful improvement in median OS (intent-to-treat population: 13.1 months; subgroup with visceral disease: 14.9 months) in patients with HR+ HER2- ABC; however, statistical significance was not reached.

Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: safety and patient-reported outcomes from the monarchE study.

BACKGROUND: In monarchE, abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) as adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative, high-risk, early breast cancer (EBC) demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival versus ET alone. Detailed safety analyses conducted at a median follow-up of 27 months and key patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment (n = 5591). Safety analyses included incidence, management, and outcomes of common and clinically relevant adverse events (AEs). Patient-reported health-related quality of life, ET symptoms, fatigue, and side-effect burden were assessed. RESULTS: The addition of abemaciclib to ET resulted in higher incidence of grade ≥3 AEs (49.7% versus 16.3% with ET alone), predominantly laboratory cytopenias [e.g. neutropenia (19.6%)] without clinical complications. Abemaciclib-treated patients experienced more serious AEs (15.2% versus 8.8%). Discontinuation of abemaciclib and/or ET due to AEs occurred in 18.5% of patients, mainly due to grade 1/2 AEs (66.8%). AEs were managed with comedications (e.g. antidiarrheals), abemaciclib dose holds (61.7%), and/or dose reductions (43.4%). Diarrhea was generally low grade (grade 1/2: 76%); grade 2/3 events were highest in the first month (20.5%), most were short-lived (≤7 days) and did not recur. Venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) were higher with abemaciclib + ET (2.5%) versus ET (0.6%); in the abemaciclib arm, increased VTE risk was observed with tamoxifen versus aromatase inhibitors (4.3% versus 1.8%). PROs were similar between arms, including being 'bothered by side-effects of treatment', except for diarrhea. At ≥3 months, most patients reporting diarrhea reported 'a little bit' or 'somewhat'. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high-risk EBC, adjuvant abemaciclib + ET has an acceptable safety profile and tolerability is supported by PRO findings. Most AEs were reversible and manageable with comedications and/or dose modifications, consistent with the known abemaciclib toxicity profile.

Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: updated efficacy and Ki-67 analysis from the monarchE study.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) previously demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer at the second interim analysis, however follow-up was limited. Here, we present results of the prespecified primary outcome analysis and an additional follow-up analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This global, phase III, open-label trial randomized (1 : 1) 5637 patients to adjuvant ET for ≥5 years ± abemaciclib for 2 years. Cohort 1 enrolled patients with ≥4 positive axillary lymph nodes (ALNs), or 1-3 positive ALNs and either grade 3 disease or tumor ≥5 cm. Cohort 2 enrolled patients with 1-3 positive ALNs and centrally determined high Ki-67 index (≥20%). The primary endpoint was IDFS in the intent-to-treat population (cohorts 1 and 2). Secondary endpoints were IDFS in patients with high Ki-67, DRFS, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: At the primary outcome analysis, with 19 months median follow-up time, abemaciclib + ET resulted in a 29% reduction in the risk of developing an IDFS event [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-0.87; nominal P = 0.0009]. At the additional follow-up analysis, with 27 months median follow-up and 90% of patients off treatment, IDFS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.82; nominal P < 0.0001) and DRFS (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.83; nominal P < 0.0001) benefit was maintained. The absolute improvements in 3-year IDFS and DRFS rates were 5.4% and 4.2%, respectively. Whereas Ki-67 index was prognostic, abemaciclib benefit was consistent regardless of Ki-67 index. Safety data were consistent with the known abemaciclib risk profile. CONCLUSION: Abemaciclib + ET significantly improved IDFS in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer, with an acceptable safety profile. Ki-67 index was prognostic, but abemaciclib benefit was observed regardless of Ki-67 index. Overall, the robust treatment benefit of abemaciclib extended beyond the 2-year treatment period.

The impact of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery on postoperative renal function.

OBJECTIVES: A number of risk factors have been recognised for postoperative renal dysfunction following on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). There are, however, few studies that have evaluated the potential reno-protective effects of off-pump CABG in the presence of other confounding risk factors. The aim of this study was to determine if off-pump CABG reduces the risk of renal injury. METHODS: Serum creatinine values (preoperatively and day 1, 2 and 4 postoperatively) and other clinical data were prospectively collected on 1580 consecutive patients who underwent first-time CABG from 2002 to 2005. Creatinine clearance was calculated using the Cockcroft and Gault equation. The effect of on-pump vs. off-pump CABG on renal function was analysed, adjusting for age, gender, diabetes mellitus, left ventricular (LV) function and preoperative creatinine clearance, using multiple regression analysis. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred and forty-five (73%) patients underwent on-pump CABG and 435 (27%) underwent off-pump CABG. The two groups were similar with respect to age, gender and diabetes. Two hundred and seventy-four (17%) patients were females and 274 (17%) patients had diabetes. Multivariate analysis demonstrated significantly lower creatinine clearance postoperatively in patients with diabetes (P<0.001) and advanced age (P<0.001). The on-pump group had significantly lower postoperative creatinine clearance in comparison to the off-pump group (P= 0.01). The effect remained consistent after adjusting for potential risk factors (age, diabetes, gender, LV function and preoperative creatinine clearance) in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Off-pump surgery is associated with a reduction in postoperative renal injury.