Randomized trial of preoperative docetaxel with or without capecitabine after 4 cycles of 5-fluorouracil­ epirubicin­cyclophosphamide (FEC) in early-stage breast cancer: exploratory analyses identify Ki67 as a predictive biomarker for response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

This randomized, multicenter study compared the efficacy of docetaxel with or without capecitabine following fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide (FEC) therapy in operable breast cancer and investigated the role of Ki67 as a predictive biomarker. Patients were randomized to 4 cycles of docetaxel/capecitabine (docetaxel: 75 mg/m2 on day 1; capecitabine: 1,650 mg/m2 on days 1­14 every 3 weeks) or docetaxel alone (75 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks) after completion of 4 cycles of FEC (5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m2, epirubicin 100 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks). The primary endpoint was the pathological complete response (pCR) rate. Predictive factor analysis was conducted using clinicopathological markers, including hormone receptors and Ki67 labeling index (Ki67LI). A total of 477 patients were randomized; the overall response in the docetaxel/capecitabine and docetaxel groups was 88.3 and 87.4 %, respectively. There were no significant differences in the pCR rate (docetaxel/capecitabine: 23 %; docetaxel: 24 %; p = 0.748), disease-free survival, or overall survival. However, patients with mid-range Ki67LI (10­20 %) showed a trend towards improved pCR rate with docetaxel/capecitabine compared to docetaxel alone. Furthermore, multivariate logistic regression analysis showed pre-treatment Ki67LI (odds ratio 1.031; 95 % CI 1.014­1.048; p = 0.0004) to be a significant predictor of pCR in this neoadjuvant treatment setting. Docetaxel/capecitabine (after 4 cycles of FEC) did not generate significant improvement in pCR compared to docetaxel alone. However, exploratory analyses suggested that assessment of pre-treatment Ki67LI may be a useful tool in the identification of responders to preoperative docetaxel/capecitabine in early-stage breast cancer.

Three dose regimens of fulvestrant in postmenopausal Japanese women with advanced breast cancer: results from a double-blind, phase II comparative study (FINDER1).

BACKGROUND: FINDER1 compared efficacy, tolerability and pharmacokinetics (PK) of three fulvestrant dose regimens in postmenopausal Japanese women with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer recurring or progressing after prior endocrine therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The primary end point of this randomised, multicentre, phase II study was objective response rate (ORR) and the secondary end points included time to progression (TTP), clinical benefit rate (CBR), PK profiles and tolerability. Postmenopausal women with ER-positive advanced breast cancer were randomised to 28-day cycles of fulvestrant approved dose (AD), loading dose (LD) or high dose (HD) until disease progression. RESULTS: Hundred and forty-three patients (median age 61 years) received fulvestrant AD (n = 45), LD (n = 51) or HD (n = 47). ORR was similar across dose regimens: 11.1%, 17.6% and 10.6% for AD, LD and HD, respectively, with overlapping confidence intervals. TTP and CBR were also similar between groups (median TTP: 6.0, 7.5 and 6.0 months, respectively; CBR: 42.2%, 54.9% and 46.8% for AD, LD and HD, respectively). C(max) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve were dose proportional and PK steady state was reached earlier with LD and HD than with AD. All three doses were well tolerated, with a similar adverse-event profile and no emerging safety concerns. CONCLUSION: Fulvestrant AD, LD and HD had similar efficacy and tolerability profiles in postmenopausal Japanese women with ER-positive advanced breast cancer.