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.

Palbociclib combined with endocrine treatment in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer patients with high relapse risk after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: subgroup analyses of premenopausal patients in PENELOPE-B.

BACKGROUND: The PENELOPE-B study demonstrated that the addition of 1-year post-neoadjuvant palbociclib to endocrine therapy (ET) in patients with high-risk early breast cancer (BC) did not improve invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) compared to placebo. Here, we report results for premenopausal women. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative BC at high risk of relapse [defined as no pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and a clinical, pathological stage, estrogen receptor, grading (CPS-EG) score ≥3 or 2/ypN+] were randomized to receive 13 cycles of palbociclib or placebo + standard ET. Ovarian function (OF) was evaluated by centrally assessed estradiol, follicle-stimulating hormone and anti-Müllerian hormone serum levels. RESULTS: Overall, 616 of 1250 randomized patients were premenopausal; of these, 30.0% were <40 years of age, 47.4% had four or more metastatic lymph nodes, and 58.2% had a CPS-EG score ≥3. 66.1% of patients were treated with tamoxifen alone, and 32.9% received ovarian function suppression (OFS) in addition to either tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor (AI). After a median follow-up of 42.8 months (97.2% completeness) no difference in iDFS between palbociclib and placebo was observed [hazard ratio = 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-1.30, P = 0.737]. The estimated 3-year iDFS rate was marginally higher in the palbociclib arm (80.6% versus 78.3%). Three year iDFS was higher in patients receiving AI than tamoxifen plus OFS or tamoxifen alone (86.0% versus 78.6% versus 78.0%). Patients receiving tamoxifen plus OFS showed a favorable iDFS with palbociclib (83.0% versus 74.1%, hazard ratio = 0.52, 95% CI 0.27-1.02, P = 0.057). Hematologic adverse events were more frequent with palbociclib (76.1% versus 1.9% grade 3-4, P < 0.001). Palbociclib seems not to negatively impact the OF throughout the treatment period. CONCLUSIONS: In premenopausal women, who received tamoxifen plus OFS as ET, the addition of palbociclib to ET results in a favorable iDFS. The safety profile seems favorable and in contrast to chemotherapy palbociclib does not impact OF throughout the treatment period.