RESUMEN
(1) Background: Abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy is a standard first- or later-line of treatment for HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to describe the outcomes of patients treated in a real-world setting, with particular focus on elderly patients. (2) Patients and methods: Patients treated with abemaciclib between November 2019 and February 2022 were included in the study. Data were collected from electronic medical records. The primary objective was to determine real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS), and secondary objectives included median overall survival (mOS) and safety. (3) Results: Analysis included 134 patients, with a median follow-up of 42 months. Median age was 62 years, with 29.9% aged 70+ years. A total of 51.5% of patients received abemaciclib in first-line, predominantly with aromatase inhibitor (68.1%). Median rwPFS was 21 in first-line and 20 months in the second-line, with no significant difference between treatment lines (HR 0.96; p = 0.88). Patients treated in the third- or later-line had a significantly shorter rwPFS, at 7 months (HR 1.48, p = 0.003). mOS was not reached in the first-line setting. For second- and third- or later-lines, mOS was 29 and 19 months, respectively. There was no significant difference in mOS between first- or second-line (HR 1.37, p = 0.36). In the 70+ group, median rwPFS was 15 months and mOS was 25 months with no significant difference compared to younger patients (rwPFS HR 1.1; p = 0.65; OS HR 1.4; p = 0.21). Most common adverse events (AEs) were diarrhoea (68.7%), anaemia (64.9%), and increased serum creatinine (63.4%). Grade 3/4 AEs were reported in 21.6% of patients. Dose reductions occurred in 30.6% of patients and were more frequent in patients 70+ (40%) compared to younger patients (28%); the difference was not significant (p = 0.22). At study cut-off, 64.9% of patients discontinued abemaciclib, primarily due to disease progression (73.5%). (4) Conclusions: Our study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness and safety of abemaciclib for the treatment of MBC. We observed comparable outcomes in terms of rwPFS and OS between the first two lines, suggesting consistent effectiveness across treatment lines. In addition, our findings suggest that older age (70+) does not significantly impact the effectiveness and tolerability of abemaciclib, although the careful monitoring and management of AEs are warranted.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Intraoperative touch imprint cytology (ITIC) is used for intraoperative detection of sentinel lymph node (SLN) metastases with intention to spare the patients another surgery. However, ITIC prolongs surgery, and ads costs. It is less likely positive in breast cancer (BC) patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) due to low axillary tumor burden. We aimed to evaluate ITIC in patients after NAC and assess how often it changes the ongoing surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: BC patients treated with NAC followed by surgery at the Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Slovenia, from January 2008 to July 2020 with ITIC performed were selected for analysis. Sensitivity, specificity, and the proportion of positive ITIC were calculated for different subgroups. RESULTS: Overall, 144 patients were identified. 73 of 144 (50.7%) patients were N0 before NAC and 71 of 144 (49.3%) were initially N1 and downstaged to N0 after NAC. ITIC was positive in 30 of 144 (20.8%) of patients, 7 of 73 (9.6%) in N0 group and 23 of 71 (32.4%) in N1 group. In N0 group, ITIC was positive in 1 of 20 (5%) if the tumor size was ≤ 20 mm after NAC, and 2 of 39 (5.1%) if the tumor was triple negative (TN) or Her-2+. In the N1 group ITIC was positive in > 20% in all subgroups. The sensitivity and specificity of ITIC was 50.8% and 100%, respectively and did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: ITIC after NAC is accurate with comparable sensitivity to ITIC in upfront surgery. We suggest omission of ITIC after NAC in initially N0 patients, particularly for tumors ≤ 20 mm after NAC, and in TN or Her-2+ subtypes.
