Single-agent metronomic versus weekly oral vinorelbine as first-line chemotherapy in patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: The randomized Tempo Breast study.

INTRODUCTION: Single-agent oral vinorelbine is a standard of care for hormone receptor (HR)-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC) that has progressed on endocrine therapy. Metronomic administration may offer a better balance of efficacy and safety than standard regimens, but data from previous trials are scarce. METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter, phase II trial, patients were randomized to oral vinorelbine administered on a metronomic (50 mg three times weekly) or weekly (60 mg/m2 in cycle 1, increasing to 80 mg/m2 if well tolerated) schedule. Treatment was continued until disease progression or intolerance. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR, the proportion of patients with a best overall confirmed response of CR, PR, or stable disease lasting 6 months or more). RESULTS: One-hundred sixty-three patients were randomized and treated. The DCR was 63.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 52.0-73.8) with metronomic vinorelbine and 72.8% (95% CI: 61.8-82.1) with weekly vinorelbine. Weekly vinorelbine was also associated with longer progression-free survival (5.6 vs 4.0 months) and overall survival (26.7 vs 22.3 months) than metronomic vinorelbine, but was associated with more adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized phase II trial, single-agent metronomic oral vinorelbine was effective and well tolerated as first-line chemotherapy for patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative ABC. Formal comparisons are not done in this phase II study and one can simply observe that confidence intervals of all endpoints overlap. When deciding for a chemotherapy after failure of endocrine therapy and CDK 4/6 inhibitors, oral vinorelbine might be an option to be given with either schedule. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT 2014-003860-19.

Comparison of Ugandan and North American Pediatric Surgery Fellows' Operative Experience: Opportunities for Global Training Exchange.

OBJECTIVE: North American pediatric surgery training programs vary in exposure to index cases, while controversy exists regarding fellow participation in global surgery rotations. We aimed to compare the case logs of graduating North American pediatric surgery fellows with graduating Ugandan pediatric surgery fellows. DESIGN: The pediatric surgery training program at a regional Ugandan hospital hosts a collaboration between Ugandan and North American attending pediatric surgeons. Fellow case logs were compared to the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Pediatric Surgery Case Log 2018 to 19 National Data Report. SETTING: Mulago National Referral Hospital in Kampala, Uganda; and pediatric surgery training programs in the United States and Canada. RESULTS: Three Ugandan fellows completed training and submitted case logs between 2011 and 2019 with a mean of 782.3 index cases, compared to the mean 753 cases in North America. Ugandan fellows performed more procedures for biliary atresia (6.7 versus 4), Wilm's tumor (23.7 versus 5.7), anorectal malformation (45 versus 15.7), and inguinal hernia (158.7 versus 76.8). North American fellows performed more central line procedures (73.7 versus 30.7), cholecystectomies (27.3 versus 3), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cannulations (16 versus 1), and congenital diaphragmatic hernia repairs (16.5 versus 5.3). All cases in Uganda were performed without laparoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Ugandan fellows have access to many index cases. In contrast, North American trainees have more training in laparoscopy and cases requiring critical care. Properly orchestrated exchange rotations may improve education for all trainees, and subsequently improve patient care.

Randomized phase II study evaluating weekly oral vinorelbine versus weekly paclitaxel in estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative patients with advanced breast cancer (NorBreast-231 trial).

BACKGROUND: Single-agent paclitaxel and vinorelbine are recommended treatments for advanced breast cancer (ABC) non-responsive to hormone therapy and without visceral crisis. This phase II trial compared first-line oral vinorelbine versus weekly paclitaxel for ABC. METHODS: Eligible female patients had measurable locally recurrent/metastatic estrogen receptor-positive HER2-negative breast cancer and had received prior endocrine therapy (any setting) but no chemotherapy for ABC. Patients were stratified by prior taxane and visceral metastases and randomized to either oral vinorelbine 80 mg/m2 (first cycle at 60 mg/m2, escalated to 80 mg/m2 in the absence of grade 3/4 toxicity) or intravenous paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR; confirmed complete or partial response, or stable disease for ≥6 weeks). RESULTS: The 131 randomized patients had received a median of 2 prior endocrine therapies; >70% had prior (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and 79% visceral metastases. DCR was 75.8% (95% confidence interval: 63.6-85.5%) with vinorelbine and 75.4% (63.1-85.2%) with paclitaxel. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (52%), fatigue (11%), and vomiting (5%) with vinorelbine, and neutropenia (17%), dyspnea (6%), hypertension (6%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (5%) with paclitaxel. Grade 2 alopecia occurred in 2% of vinorelbine-treated and 34% of paclitaxel-treated patients. Neither arm showed relevant global health status changes. CONCLUSION: Oral vinorelbine and paclitaxel demonstrated similar DCRs (∼75%). Safety profiles differed and, together with administration route and convenience, may influence treatment choice (EudraCT number, 2012-003530-16).

Single-Agent Oral Vinorelbine as First-Line Chemotherapy for Endocrine-Pretreated Breast Cancer With Bone Metastases and No Visceral Involvement: NORBREAST-228 Phase II Study.

PURPOSE: Single-agent oral chemotherapy is widely used in patients with bone metastases without visceral involvement, especially in hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer (mBC). However, this option has been poorly evaluated in clinical trials. METHODS: Eligible patients had mBC with predominantly bone but not visceral metastases, were receiving bisphosphonate therapy, and had previously received endocrine therapy (any setting) but not chemotherapy for mBC. Patients received oral vinorelbine 60 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 every 4 weeks (escalating to 80 mg/m2 from cycle 2 in the absence of grade 3/4 toxicity) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included clinical benefit rate (complete/partial response or ≥24 weeks' stable disease), overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Seventy patients were treated for a median of 6 cycles (range 1-18). Most (73%) continued treatment until disease progression. After 43 months' median follow-up, median PFS was 8.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.5-9.8). The clinical benefit rate was 56% (95% CI, 43%-68%). Median overall survival was 35.2 months (95% CI, 26.8-47.1). The most common grade 3/4 adverse event was neutropenia (38% of patients); febrile neutropenia was absent. The most common grade 1/2 adverse events were bone pain, fatigue, and gastrointestinal toxicities. Alopecia was infrequent. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with hormone receptor-positive mBC, bone disease, and prior endocrine therapy, first-line oral vinorelbine chemotherapy demonstrated long PFS and good tolerability. In this setting, it could be considered as an active oral alternative to intravenous chemotherapy.

Final Results of the Randomized Phase II NorCap-CA223 Trial Comparing First-Line All-Oral Versus Taxane-Based Chemotherapy for HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of 3 first-line chemotherapy combination regimens for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label, 3-arm, randomized phase II trial, patients were randomized to all-oral NORCAP (vinorelbine/capecitabine), GEMPAC (gemcitabine/paclitaxel), or GEMDOC (gemcitabine/docetaxel) as first-line chemotherapy for HER2-negative mBC. Stratification factors were center, previous (neo)adjuvant anthracycline, and age. The primary end point was disease control rate (DCR; complete or partial response, or stable disease for ≥3 months). RESULTS: The DCR was 73% (95% confidence interval [CI], 59-85) with NORCAP (36 of 49 patients), 78% (95% CI, 64-88) with GEMPAC (39 of 50 patients), and 80% (95% CI, 66-90) with GEMDOC (40 of 50 patients). Objective response rates were 33% (16 of 49 patients), 24% (12 of 50 patients), and 50% (25 of 50 patients), respectively; median progression-free survival was 7.6, 9.0, and 11.4 months, respectively. Median overall survival was 30 to 31 months with all regimens. The most common Grade ≥3 adverse event with each regimen was neutropenia (24 patients [50%], 23 patients [46%], and 43 patients [86%], respectively). The most common nonhematological Grade ≥3 adverse event was fatigue. Grade 2 alopecia occurred in 36 patients (72%) who received GEMPAC and 38 patients (76%) who received GEMDOC, but only 4 patients (8%) who received NORCAP. There was no evidence of a detrimental effect of NORCAP on quality of life. CONCLUSION: All-oral NORCAP is an active first-line chemotherapy regimen and might be offered as an alternative to first-line taxane-based therapy for HER2-negative mBC, particularly if patients wish to avoid alopecia or frequent intravenous administrations.

Phase II study of a triple combination of oral vinorelbine, capecitabine and trastuzumab as first-line treatment in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

UNLABELLED: Chemotherapy plus trastuzumab is the standard first-line treatment for Human Epidermal Receptor 2-positive (HER2-positive) metastatic breast cancer. The aim of this international phase II trial was to determine the efficacy and safety profile of an oral chemotherapy doublet, oral vinorelbine plus capecitabine, and trastuzumab in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this single-arm, multicenter, open-label phase II study, in the first-line metastatic setting, patients received 3-weekly cycles of oral vinorelbine at 80 mg/m(2) (first cycle dose 60 mg/m(2)) day 1 and day 8, plus capecitabine at 1000 (750 if ≥ 65 years) mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14, plus trastuzumab at 4 mg/kg intravenously (i.v.) on day 1 (loading dose) then 2 mg/kg i.v. weekly thereafter. Treatment was continued until progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Fifty patients with a median age of 53.5 years were enrolled. Most (82%) had visceral involvement and 34% had more than two metastatic sites. The objective response rate (RECIST 1.0) in 44 evaluable patients was 77% [95% Confidence Interval (CI)=62-89%], including complete response in 21%. The clinical benefit rate (response or stable disease for ≥ 6 months) was 93% [95% CI=81-99%]. Median duration of response was 13.3 [95% CI=9.8-15.7] months, median progression-free survival was 12.8 [95% CI=10.8-16.9] months and median overall survival was 47.0 [95% CI=30.5-64.3] months. Median number of cycles was 10 (range 1-81). The majority of patients (72%) received more than 18 weeks and 32% more than 48 weeks of treatment. The most frequent treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (71%), hand-foot syndrome (20%) and diarrhea (16%). A low-rate of grade 2 alopecia was observed (14%). CONCLUSION: The triple combination of oral vinorelbine, capecitabine and trastuzumab is highly active in terms of response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival, with a manageable toxicity profile.