Efficacy, Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Immunogenicity of DRL-Trastuzumab Versus Herceptin in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Dr Reddy's Laboratories Trastuzumab (DRL_TZ) is a biosimilar to Herceptin under development. The present study was conducted to evaluate efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics (PKs), and immunogenicity of DRL_TZ in comparison with the reference medicinal product (RMP) along with concomitant weekly paclitaxel in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind study in female patients with HER2-positive MBC, randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either DRL_TZ or the RMP, that is, an innovator product sourced from the European region, along with additional chemotherapy, as first-line treatment for up to 24 weeks. The primary end point was the best overall response rate (ORR) as per RECIST 1.1 criteria. Progression-free survival rate at 6 months (PFS6), safety, immunogenicity, and PK parameters were assessed as secondary end points. RESULTS: A total of 164 patients were randomly assigned to receive either DRL_TZ or the RMP. Best ORR in the per-protocol population was comparable, 91.9% (93.3% CI, 83.2 to 96.3) versus 82.1% (93.3% CI, 72.0 to 89.1) in DRL_TZ and RMP arms, respectively; the difference between the arms was 9.8% with a 93.3% CI of -1.3 to 20.8. The PFS6 rate, safety, PK profile, and antidrug antibody incidence were comparable. An additional 44 patients were recruited in the postrandomization phase, in an open-label manner, and started on DRL_TZ to generate more data on efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity. The additional data with DRL_TZ, when pooled, were similar to the RMP data. CONCLUSION: DRL_TZ was found to have similar efficacy and comparable safety, PK, and immunogenicity profiles as the RMP.

Six-Year Survival Outcomes for Patients with HER2-Positive Early Breast Cancer Treated with CT-P6 or Reference Trastuzumab: Observational Follow-Up Study of a Phase 3 Randomised Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The Phase 3 CT-P6 3.2 study demonstrated equivalent efficacy and comparable safety between CT-P6 and reference trastuzumab in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer after up to 3 years' follow-up. OBJECTIVE: To investigate long-term survival with CT-P6 and reference trastuzumab. METHODS: In the CT-P6 3.2 study, patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer were randomised to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with CT-P6 or reference trastuzumab, surgery, and adjuvant CT-P6 or reference trastuzumab before a 3-year post-treatment follow-up. Patients who completed the study could enter a 3-year extension (CT-P6 4.2 study). Data were collected every 6 months to assess overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Of 549 patients enrolled in the CT-P6 3.2 study, 216 (39.3%) patients continued in the CT-P6 4.2 study (CT-P6, 107; reference trastuzumab, 109) (intention-to-treat extension set). Median follow-up was 76.4 months for both groups. Medians were not reached for time-to-event parameters; estimated hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for CT-P6 versus reference trastuzumab were 0.59 (0.17-2.02) for OS, 1.07 (0.50-2.32) for DFS, and 1.08 (0.50-2.34) for PFS. Corresponding 6-year survival rates in the CT-P6 and reference trastuzumab groups, respectively, were 0.96 (0.90-0.99) and 0.94 (0.87-0.97), 0.87 (0.78-0.92) and 0.89 (0.81-0.94), and 0.87 (0.78-0.92) and 0.89 (0.82-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Data from this extended follow-up of the CT-P6 3.2 study demonstrate the comparable long-term efficacy of CT-P6 and reference trastuzumab up to 6 years. EUDRACT NUMBER: 2019-003518-15 (retrospectively registered 10 March 2020).

Final analysis of the phase 3 randomized clinical trial comparing HD201 vs. referent trastuzumab in patients with ERBB2-positive breast cancer treated in the neoadjuvant setting.

BACKGROUND: The TROIKA trial established that HD201 and trastuzumab were equivalent in terms of primary endpoints (total pathological complete response) following neoadjuvant treatment. The objective of the present analysis was to compare survival outcomes and final safety. METHODS: In the TROIKA trial, patients with ERBB2-positive early breast cancer were randomized and treated with either HD201 or the referent trastuzumab. Eligible patients received 8 cycles of either HD201 or referent trastuzumab (loading dose, 8 mg/kg; maintenance dose, 6 mg/kg) every 3 weeks in combination with 8 cycles of chemotherapy (4 cycles of docetaxel, 75 mg/m2, followed by 4 cycles of epirubicin, 75 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide, 500 mg/m2) in the neoadjuvant setting. The patients then underwent surgery followed by 10 cycles of adjuvant HD201 or referent trastuzumab according to their initial randomization to complete one year of trastuzumab-directed therapy. Event-free and overall survival rates were calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. The hazard ratio for event-free survival was estimated by Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: The final analysis was performed after all patients completed the study at a median follow-up of 37.7 months (Q1-Q3, 37.3-38.1 months). A total of 502 randomized patients received either HD201 or the referent trastuzumab, and 474 (94.2%) were eligible for inclusion in the per-protocol set. In this population, the 3-year event-free survival rates were 85.6% (95% CI: 80.28-89.52) and 84.9% (95% CI: 79.54-88.88) in the HD201 and referent trastuzumab groups, respectively (log rank p = 0.938) (HR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.63-1.63; p = 0.945). The 3-year overall survival rates were comparable between the HD201 (95.6%; 95% CI: 91.90-97.59) and referent trastuzumab treatment groups (96.0%, 95% CI: 92.45-97.90) (log rank p = 0.606). During the posttreatment follow-up period, adverse events were reported for 64 (27.4%) and 72 (29.8%) patients in the HD201 and the reference trastuzumab groups, respectively. Serious adverse events were rare and none of which were related to the study treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This final analysis of the TROIKA trial further confirms the comparable efficacy and safety of HD201 and trastuzumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03013504.

Safety and efficacy of adjuvant subcutaneous trastuzumab in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive early breast cancer: Final results of the SafeHER study.

AIM: To report the final results of the 5-year follow-up of the non-randomized SafeHER Phase III study (NCT01566721) describing the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of subcutaneous (SC) trastuzumab alone and in combination with concurrent or sequential chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer (EBC) with no prior anti-HER2 therapy were included. SC trastuzumab was administered every 3 weeks for 18 cycles as adjuvant therapy with or without chemotherapy (concurrent or sequential). The primary objective was overall safety and tolerability of SC trastuzumab; efficacy was a secondary objective. RESULTS: No new safety signals were observed during the final evaluation. The majority of adverse events (AEs) were grade 1 or 2 across the chemotherapy subgroups. Treatment discontinuation due to AEs was 5.1% for the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and similar for all chemotherapy subgroups. The overall disease-free survival (DFS) 5-year event-free rate in the ITT population (n = 2573) was 86.6% (95% CI, 85.2%-87.9%) with a median follow-up of 72 months. Based on chemotherapy timing, the no (n = 235), concurrent (n = 1533), and sequential (n = 805) chemotherapy subgroups had DFS 5-year event-free rates (95% CI) of 88.5% (83.4%-92.2%), 88.4% (86.6%-89.9%), and 82.6 (79.7%-85.2%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The 5-year follow-up analysis of the SafeHER trial demonstrating that SC trastuzumab has an acceptable safety profile, including cardiac toxicity, and efficacy for the treatment of HER2-positive EBC with and without chemotherapy, corresponding with historical data with trastuzumab.

Final overall survival analysis of the phase 3 HERITAGE study demonstrates equivalence of trastuzumab-dkst to trastuzumab in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The phase 3 HERITAGE trial demonstrated that the biosimilar trastuzumab-dkst is well tolerated with similar efficacy (measured by overall response rate [ORR] and progression-free survival [PFS]) compared with originator trastuzumab combined with taxane followed by monotherapy in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Herein, we present final overall survival (OS) from HERITAGE. METHODS: HERITAGE is a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive trastuzumab-dkst or trastuzumab plus taxane followed by continued monotherapy until disease progression. Overall survival was to be assessed at 36 months or after 240 deaths, whichever occurred first, as observed from time of randomization of last patient. RESULTS: At the final analysis (36 months), 242 patients in the intention-to-treat population had died during the study: 116 and 124 in the trastuzumab-dkst and trastuzumab groups, respectively, and 1 untreated patient from each treatment group. Median OS by Kaplan-Meier analysis was 35.0 months with trastuzumab-dkst and 30.2 months with trastuzumab. Evaluation of PFS showed a median of 11.1 months in both treatment groups. No new safety concerns were reported from week 48 until the end of the survival follow-up. CONCLUSION: This is the first phase 3 trial of a trastuzumab biosimilar to report long-term survival data similar to originator trastuzumab in patients with MBC. The comparable long-term OS between the trastuzumab-dkst and originator trastuzumab groups further supports the similarity of trastuzumab-dkst with originator trastuzumab and establishes trastuzumab-dkst as a safe and effective treatment option for patients with HER2-positive MBC. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02472964; 6/16/2015.

Long-term efficacy and safety of CT-P6 versus trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer: final results from a randomized phase III trial.

PURPOSE: Equivalent efficacy was demonstrated for the biosimilar CT-P6 and trastuzumab following neoadjuvant therapy for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer. Following adjuvant treatment, efficacy and safety were comparable between treatments. We report updated safety and efficacy data after up to 3 years' follow-up. METHODS: Following neoadjuvant chemotherapy with CT-P6/trastuzumab, patients underwent surgery and continued receiving adjuvant CT-P6/trastuzumab. The primary endpoint (previously reported) was pathological complete response. Time-to-event analyses (disease-free survival [DFS], progression-free survival [PFS], and overall survival [OS]), study drug-related and cardiac adverse events, and immunogenicity were assessed during post-treatment follow-up. RESULTS: Most patients entered the follow-up period (CT-P6: 259 [95.6%]; trastuzumab: 269 [96.8%]). After a median follow-up of 38.7 (CT-P6) and 39.6 (trastuzumab) months, medians were not reached for time-to-event parameters; estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 3-year survival rates were similar between groups. Estimated HRs (95% confidence intervals) for CT-P6 versus trastuzumab were 1.23 (0.78-1.93) for DFS, 1.31 (0.86-2.01) for PFS, and 1.10 (0.57-2.13) for OS (intention-to-treat population). Safety findings were comparable between groups for the overall study and follow-up period, including study drug-related cardiac disorders (CT-P6: 22 [8.1%] patients; trastuzumab: 24 [8.6%] patients [overall]) and decreases in left ventricular ejection fraction. Immunogenicity was similar between groups. CONCLUSION: The similarity of the time-to-event analyses between CT-P6 and trastuzumab supports the equivalence in terms of efficacy established for the primary endpoint. CT-P6 was well tolerated, with comparable safety and immunogenicity to trastuzumab. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02162667 (registered June 13, 2014).

Correlation between week 24 trastuzumab-dkst response and week 48 progression-free survival: the HERITAGE trial.

BACKGROUND: Trastuzumab-dkst is a biosimilar of trastuzumab. The phase 3 HERITAGE trial demonstrated equivalent overall response rate (ORR) with trastuzumab-dkst or originator trastuzumab at 24 weeks in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer receiving chemotherapy. We now present the correlation of ORR with progression-free survival (PFS) for maintenance monotherapy with trastuzumab-dkst vs trastuzumab at 48 weeks of treatment, and the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity. METHODS: HERITAGE is a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, phase 3 study. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive trastuzumab-dkst or trastuzumab in combination with taxane followed by continued monotherapy until disease progression. The analysis included PFS at 48 weeks to support the primary efficacy endpoint of ORR and safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of trastuzumab-dkst vs trastuzumab as maintenance monotherapy. RESULTS: Of 500 randomized patients, 342 entered the monotherapy phase; 214 patients received ≥48 weeks of treatment. There were no statistically significant differences between PFS, ORR, or interim overall survival at week 48 between trastuzumab-dkst and trastuzumab. Week 24 ORR was highly correlated with week 48 PFS (rb = 0.75). Cumulative treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and serious AEs were similar in both groups, with few grade ≥3 TEAEs. Immunogenicity was low and similar in both groups at 48 weeks. CONCLUSION: The correlation between ORR and PFS supports the design of first-line metastatic trials assessing biosimilar trastuzumab. Overall, trastuzumab-dkst and trastuzumab were well tolerated with similar efficacy, including ORR and PFS, in combination with a taxane followed by monotherapy.

Total pathological complete response versus breast pathological complete response in clinical trials of reference and biosimilar trastuzumab in the neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Trastuzumab is a key drug in the neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancers that overexpress the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). Pathological complete response (pCR) is commonly used as an endpoint in neoadjuvant clinical trials of trastuzumab as evidence suggests it may be a surrogate for long-term survival. Several biosimilar candidates of originator or 'reference' trastuzumab are in development and have used pCR as a primary endpoint to assess therapeutic equivalence between treatments. The exact definition of pCR has varied across studies. Areas covered: Here we look at the clinical relevance of pCR and compare rates of total pCR (defined as ypT0/is ypN0) and breast pCR (defined as ypT0/is) in clinical trials of reference and biosimilar trastuzumab. Expert commentary: In order to evaluate the efficacy of neoadjuvant systemic therapies in a uniform way, standardization of trial endpoints is necessary. Future studies in HER2-positive breast cancer should include full assessment of the breast and lymph node basin before and after neoadjuvant systemic therapy, and the use of total pCR as the primary outcome.

CT-P6 compared with reference trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer: a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3 equivalence trial.

BACKGROUND: CT-P6 is a proposed biosimilar to reference trastuzumab. In this study, we aimed to establish equivalence of CT-P6 to reference trastuzumab in neoadjuvant treatment of HER2-positive early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3 equivalence trial, we recruited women aged 18 years or older with stage I-IIIa operable HER2-positive breast cancer from 112 centres in 23 countries. Inclusion criteria were an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1; a normal left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 55%; adequate bone marrow, hepatic, and renal function; at least one measureable lesion; and known oestrogen and progesterone receptor status. Exclusion criteria included bilateral breast cancer, previous breast cancer treatment, previous anthracycline treatment, and pregnancy or lactation. We randomly allocated patients 1:1 to receive neoadjuvant CT-P6 or reference trastuzumab intravenously (eight cycles, each lasting 3 weeks, for 24 weeks; 8 mg/kg on day 1 of cycle 1 and 6 mg/kg on day 1 of cycles 2-8) in conjunction with neoadjuvant docetaxel (75 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycles 1-4) and FEC (fluorouracil [500 mg/m2], epirubicin [75 mg/m2], and cyclophosphamide [500 mg/m2]; day 1 of cycles 5-8) therapy. We stratified randomisation by clinical stage, receptor status, and country and used permuted blocks. We did surgery within 3-6 weeks of the final neoadjuvant study drug dose, followed by an adjuvant treatment period of up to 1 year. We monitored long-term safety and efficacy for 3 years after the last patient was enrolled. Participants and investigators were masked to treatment until study completion. The primary efficacy endpoint, analysed in the per-protocol population, was pathological complete response, assessed via specimens obtained during surgery, analysed by masked central review of local histopathology reports. The equivalence margin was -0·15 to 0·15. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02162667, and is ongoing, but no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Aug 7, 2014, and May 6, 2016, we randomly allocated 549 patients (271 [49%] to CT-P6 vs 278 [51%] to reference trastuzumab). A similar proportion of patients achieved pathological complete response with CT-P6 (116 [46·8%; 95% CI 40·4-53·2] of 248 patients) and reference trastuzumab (129 [50·4%; 44·1-56·7] of 256 patients). The 95% CI of the estimated treatment outcome difference (-0·04% [95% CI -0·12 to 0·05]) was within the equivalence margin. 19 (7%) of 271 patients in the CT-P6 group reported serious treatment-emergent adverse events versus 22 (8%) of 278 in the reference trastuzumab group; frequent (occurring in more than one patient) serious adverse events were febrile neutropenia (four [1%] vs one [<1%]) and neutropenia (one [<1%] vs two [1%]). Grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events occurred in 17 (6%) of 271 patients in the CT-P6 group versus 23 (8%) of 278 in the reference trastuzumab group; the most frequently reported adverse event was neutropenia in ten (4%) versus 14 (5%). INTERPRETATION: CT-P6 showed equivalent efficacy to reference trastuzumab and adverse events were similar. Availability of trastuzumab biosimilars could increase access to this targeted therapy for HER2-positive early-stage cancer. FUNDING: Celltrion Inc.

Effect of a Proposed Trastuzumab Biosimilar Compared With Trastuzumab on Overall Response Rate in Patients With ERBB2 (HER2)-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Treatment with the anti-ERBB2 humanized monoclonal antibody trastuzumab and chemotherapy significantly improves outcome in patients with ERBB2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer; a clinically effective biosimilar may help increase access to this therapy. Objective: To compare the overall response rate and assess the safety of a proposed trastuzumab biosimilar plus a taxane or trastuzumab plus a taxane in patients without prior treatment for ERBB2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, phase 3 equivalence study in patients with metastatic breast cancer. From December 2012 to August 2015, 500 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive a proposed biosimilar or trastuzumab plus a taxane. Chemotherapy was administered for at least 24 weeks followed by antibody alone until unacceptable toxic effects or disease progression occurred. Interventions: Proposed biosimilar (n = 230) or trastuzumab (n = 228) with a taxane. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was week 24 overall response rate (ORR) defined as complete or partial response. Equivalence boundaries were 0.81 to 1.24 with a 90% CI for ORR ratio (proposed biosimilar/trastuzumab) and -15% to 15% with a 95% CI for ORR difference. Secondary outcome measures included time to tumor progression, progression-free and overall survival at week 48, and adverse events. Results: Among 500 women randomized, the intention-to-treat population included 458 women (mean [SD] age, 53.6 [11.11] years) and the safety population included 493 women. The ORR was 69.6% (95% CI, 63.62%-75.51%) for the proposed biosimilar vs 64.0% (95% CI, 57.81%-70.26%) for trastuzumab. The ORR ratio (1.09; 90% CI, 0.974-1.211) and ORR difference (5.53; 95% CI, -3.08 to 14.04) were within the equivalence boundaries. At week 48, there was no statistically significant difference with the proposed biosimilar vs trastuzumab for time to tumor progression (41.3% vs 43.0%; -1.7%; 95% CI, -11.1% to 6.9%), progression-free survival (44.3% vs 44.7%; -0.4%; 95% CI, -9.4% to 8.7%), or overall survival (89.1% vs 85.1%; 4.0%; 95% CI, -2.1% to 10.3%). In the proposed biosimilar and trastuzumab groups, 239 (98.6%) and 233 (94.7%) had at least 1 adverse event, the most common including neutropenia (57.5% vs 53.3%), peripheral neuropathy (23.1% vs 24.8%), and diarrhea (20.6% vs 20.7%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among women with ERBB2-positive metastatic breast cancer receiving taxanes, the use of a proposed trastuzumab biosimilar compared with trastuzumab resulted in an equivalent overall response rate at 24 weeks. Further study is needed to assess safety and long-term clinical outcome. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02472964; EudraCT Identifier: 2011-001965-42.

Fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg for hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer (FALCON): an international, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Aromatase inhibitors are a standard of care for hormone receptor-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. We investigated whether the selective oestrogen receptor degrader fulvestrant could improve progression-free survival compared with anastrozole in postmenopausal patients who had not received previous endocrine therapy. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomised, double-blind trial, we recruited eligible patients with histologically confirmed oestrogen receptor-positive or progesterone receptor-positive, or both, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer from 113 academic hospitals and community centres in 20 countries. Eligible patients were endocrine therapy-naive, with WHO performance status 0-2, and at least one measurable or non-measurable lesion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to fulvestrant (500 mg intramuscular injection; on days 0, 14, 28, then every 28 days thereafter) or anastrozole (1 mg orally daily) using a computer-generated randomisation scheme. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1·1, intervention by surgery or radiotherapy because of disease deterioration, or death from any cause, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety outcomes were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of randomised treatment (including placebo). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01602380. FINDINGS: Between Oct 17, 2012, and July 11, 2014, 524 patients were enrolled to this study. Of these, 462 patients were randomised (230 to receive fulvestrant and 232 to receive anastrozole). Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the fulvestrant group than in the anastrozole group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·797, 95% CI 0·637-0·999, p=0·0486). Median progression-free survival was 16·6 months (95% CI 13·83-20·99) in the fulvestrant group versus 13·8 months (11·99-16·59) in the anastrozole group. The most common adverse events were arthralgia (38 [17%] in the fulvestrant group vs 24 [10%] in the anastrozole group) and hot flushes (26 [11%] in the fulvestrant group vs 24 [10%] in the anastrozole group). 16 (7%) of 228 patients in in the fulvestrant group and 11 (5%) of 232 patients in the anastrozole group discontinued because of adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Fulvestrant has superior efficacy and is a preferred treatment option for patients with hormone receptor-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who have not received previous endocrine therapy compared with a third-generation aromatase inhibitor, a standard of care for first-line treatment of these patients. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Lapatinib or Trastuzumab Plus Taxane Therapy for Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer: Final Results of NCIC CTG MA.31.

PURPOSE: The efficacy of lapatinib versus trastuzumab combined with taxanes in the first-line setting of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -positive metastatic breast cancer (BC) is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The MA.31 trial compared a combination of first-line anti-HER2 therapy (lapatinib or trastuzumab) and taxane therapy for 24 weeks, followed by the same anti-HER2 monotherapy until progression. Stratification was by prior (neo)adjuvant anti-HER2 therapy, prior (neo)adjuvant taxane, planned taxane, and liver metastases. The primary end point was intention-to-treat (ITT) progression-free survival (PFS), defined as time from random assignment to progression by RECIST (version 1.0) criteria, or death for patients with locally assessed HER2-positive tumors. The primary test statistic was a stratified log-rank test for noninferiority. PFS was also assessed for patients with centrally confirmed HER2-positive tumors. RESULTS: From July 17, 2008, to December 1, 2011, 652 patients were accrued from 21 countries, resulting in 537 patients with centrally confirmed HER2-positive tumors. Median follow-up was 21.5 months. Median ITT PFS was 9.0 months with lapatinib and 11.3 months with trastuzumab. By ITT analysis, PFS was inferior for lapatinib compared with trastuzumab, with a stratified hazard ratio (HR) of 1.37 (95% CI, 1.13 to 1.65; P = .001). In patients with centrally confirmed HER2-positive tumors, median PFS was 9.1 months with lapatinib and 13.6 months with trastuzumab (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.20 to 1.83; P < .001). More grade 3 or 4 diarrhea and rash were observed with lapatinib (P < .001). PFS results were supported by the secondary end point of overall survival, with an ITT HR of 1.28 (95% CI, 0.95 to 1.72; P = .11); in patients with centrally confirmed HER2-positive tumors, the HR was 1.47 (95% CI, 1.03 to 2.09; P = .03). CONCLUSION: As first-line therapy for HER2-positive metastatic BC, lapatinib combined with taxane was associated with shorter PFS and more toxicity compared with trastuzumab combined with taxane.

CEREBEL (EGF111438): A Phase III, Randomized, Open-Label Study of Lapatinib Plus Capecitabine Versus Trastuzumab Plus Capecitabine in Patients With Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: CEREBEL compared the incidence of CNS metastases as first site of relapse in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer receiving lapatinib-capecitabine or trastuzumab-capecitabine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients without baseline CNS metastases were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive lapatinib-capecitabine (lapatinib 1,250 mg per day; capecitabine 2,000 mg/m(2) per day on days 1 to 14 every 21 days) or trastuzumab-capecitabine (trastuzumab loading dose of 8 mg/kg followed by an infusion of 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks; capecitabine 2,500 mg/m(2) per day on days 1 to 14 every 21 days). The primary end point was incidence of CNS metastases as first site of relapse. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The study was terminated early with 540 enrolled patients (271 received lapatinib-capecitabine, and 269 received trastuzumab-capecitabine). Incidence of CNS metastases as first site of relapse was 3% (eight of 251 patients) for lapatinib-capecitabine and 5% (12 of 250 patients) for trastuzumab-capecitabine (treatment differences, -1.6%; 95% CI, -2% to 5%; P = .360). PFS and OS were longer with trastuzumab-capecitabine versus lapatinib-capecitabine (hazard ratio [HR] for PFS, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.64; HR for OS, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.64). Serious adverse events were reported in 13% (34 of 269 patients) and 17% (45 of 267 patients) of patients in the lapatinib-capecitabine and trastuzumab-capecitabine arms, respectively. CONCLUSION: CEREBEL is inconclusive for the primary end point, and no difference was detected between lapatinb-capecitabine and trastuzumab-capecitabine for the incidence of CNS metastases. A better outcome was observed with trastuzumab-capecitabine in the overall population. However, lapatinib-capecitabine efficacy may have been affected by previous exposure to a trastuzumab regimen and/or when treatment was given as first- or second-line therapy in the metastatic setting.

Primary results of ROSE/TRIO-12, a randomized placebo-controlled phase III trial evaluating the addition of ramucirumab to first-line docetaxel chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Currently, antiangiogenic strategies in metastatic breast cancer have demonstrated modest improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) but not improved quality or duration of survival, warranting evaluation of new agents in a placebo-controlled setting. Ramucirumab is a human immunoglobulin G1 antibody that binds vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 and blocks ligand-stimulated activation. The ROSE/TRIO-012 trial evaluated ramucirumab with docetaxel in unresectable, locally recurrent, or metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multinational phase III trial, 1,144 patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -negative breast cancer who had not received cytotoxic chemotherapy in the advanced setting were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to receive docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) plus ramucirumab 10 mg/kg or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) plus placebo once every 3 weeks. Treatment continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other withdrawal criteria. Patients were stratified by previous taxane therapy, visceral metastasis, hormone receptor status, and geographic region. An independent data monitoring committee oversaw the trial. The primary end point was investigator-assessed PFS. RESULTS: Median PFS in patients treated with ramucirumab plus docetaxel was 9.5 months, compared with 8.2 months in patients who received placebo plus docetaxel (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; P = .077). Median overall survival was 27.3 months in patients who received ramucirumab plus docetaxel, compared with 27.2 months in patients who received placebo plus docetaxel (HR, 1.01; P = .915). Toxicities seen at significantly higher rates in patients receiving ramucirumab included fatigue, hypertension, febrile neutropenia, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, and stomatitis. CONCLUSION: Addition of ramucirumab to docetaxel in HER2-negative advanced breast cancer did not meaningfully improve important clinical outcomes.

BP-C1 in the treatment of patients with stage IV breast cancer: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter study and an additional open-label treatment phase.

UNLABELLED: The aims were to compare the efficacy and tolerability of a new benzene-poly-carboxylic acids complex with cis-diammineplatinum (II) dichloride (BP-C1) versus placebo and to investigate the long-term tolerability of BP-C1 in the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter study was performed with a semi-crossover design. Patients allocated to placebo switched to BP-C1 after 32 days of treatment. Patients who completed 32 days of BP-C1 treatment were offered the opportunity to continue on BP-C1 for an additional 32 days in an open-label extension. Patients were then followed up for another 28 days. Thirty patients were given daily intramuscular injections of 0.035 mg/kg of body weight BP-C1 or placebo for 32 days. Biochemistry, hematology, National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTC-NCI), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire (QOL-C30 and the breast-cancer-specific BR23) data were recorded at screening and after every 16 days of treatment. Computed tomography was performed at screening and every 32 days. RESULTS: The sum of target lesions increased 2.4% in the BP-C1 group and 14.3% in the placebo group. Only the increase in the placebo group was significant (P=0.013). The difference between the groups was significant in favor of BP-C1 (P=0.04). There was a significant difference (P=0.026) in favor of BP-C1 regarding Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) classification. The sum of lesions increased slightly in the patients receiving 64 days of continuous BP-C1 treatment, of whom 68.4% were classified as responders. The sum CTC-NCI toxicity score increased nonsignificantly in the BP-C1 group but significantly in the placebo group (P=0.05). The difference in increase between groups did not meet the level of significance (P=0.12). The sum toxicity score was reduced in the patients receiving 64 days of BP-C1 from 9.2 at screening to 8.9 at Day 48, but it increased again to 10.1 by Day 64 and 10.6 during the 28-day follow-up. "Breast cancer-related pain and discomfort" and "Breast cancer treatment problem last week" were significantly reduced (P=0.02) in the BP-C1 group but increased slightly in the placebo group; between-group differences were significant in favor of BP-C1 (P=0.05). "Breast cancer related pain and discomfort", "Breast cancer treatment problem last week," and "Physical activity problem" were significantly reduced during the 64 days of BP-C1 treatment (P≤0.05). CONCLUSION: For patients suffering from stage IV metastatic breast cancer, treatment with BP-C1 reduces cancer growth, is well tolerated, improves quality of life, and produces few adverse events, which were mainly mild and manageable.

A randomized phase II study of lapatinib + pazopanib versus lapatinib in patients with HER2+ inflammatory breast cancer.

This multi-center Phase II study evaluated lapatinib, pazopanib, and the combination in patients with relapsed HER2+ inflammatory breast cancer. In Cohort 1, 76 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive lapatinib 1,500 mg + placebo or lapatinib 1,500 mg + pazopanib 800 mg (double-blind) once daily until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. Due to high-grade diarrhea observed with this dose combination in another study (VEG20007), Cohort 1 was closed. The protocol was amended such that an additional 88 patients (Cohort 2) were randomized in a 5:5:2 ratio to receive daily monotherapy lapatinib 1,500 mg, lapatinib 1,000 mg + pazopanib 400 mg, or monotherapy pazopanib 800 mg, respectively. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety. In Cohort 1, ORR for the lapatinib (n = 38) and combination (n = 38) arms was 29 and 45 %, respectively; median PFS was 16.1 and 14.3 weeks, respectively. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were more frequent in the combination arm (71 %) than in the lapatinib arm (24 %). Dose reductions and interruptions due to AEs were also more frequent in the combination arm (45 and 53 %, respectively) than in the lapatinib monotherapy arm (0 and 11 %, respectively). In Cohort 2, ORR for patients treated with lapatinib (n = 36), lapatinib + pazopanib (n = 38), and pazopanib (n = 13) was 47, 58, and 31 %, respectively; median PFS was 16.0, 16.0, and 11.4 weeks, respectively. In the lapatinib, combination, and pazopanib therapy arms, grade ≥3 AEs were reported for 17, 50, and 46 % of patients, respectively, and the incidence of discontinuations due to AEs was 0, 24, and 23 %, respectively. The lapatinib-pazopanib combination was associated with a numerically higher ORR but no increase in PFS compared to lapatinib alone. The combination also had increased toxicity resulting in more dose reductions, modifications, and treatment delays. Activity with single-agent lapatinib was confirmed in this population.

Maintenance of clinical efficacy after dose reduction of ixabepilone plus capecitabine in patients with anthracycline- and taxane-resistant metastatic breast cancer: a retrospective analysis of pooled data from 2 phase III randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: This retrospective analysis aimed to determine whether early dose reduction impacts the efficacy of ixabepilone plus capecitabine in women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 2 phase III trials, patients (N = 1973) with anthracycline/taxane-pretreated MBC were randomized to receive ixabepilone 40 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily (BID) on days 1 to 14 or single-agent capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) BID on days 1 to 14 of a 3-week course. Because of the similar design and populations, data from trials were pooled to evaluate efficacy of the combination regimen among women who did or did not undergo ixabepilone dose reduction during the first 4 courses. To adjust for bias resulting from selecting patients with inherently better outcome based on longer treatment durations, these analyses were restricted to patients who received ≥ 4 courses of ixabepilone. RESULTS: The pooled cohort included 566 patients with measurable disease who were evaluable for efficacy. Patients who had early dose reduction showed similar objective response rates (ORRs) and progression-free survival (PFS) as did those with no/late dose reduction. ORRs were 62.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 55.8%-69.0%) and 55.3% (95% CI, 49.9%-60.6%), respectively; median PFS was 7.2 months (95% CI, 6.6-8.0) and 7.0 months (95% CI, 6.5-7.5), respectively (hazard ratio = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.83-1.17). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that early ixabepilone dose reduction did not affect the overall efficacy of ixabepilone plus capecitabine in patients with MBC who received ≥ 4 courses of treatment. By making appropriate dose reductions, ixabepilone-related toxicities can be minimized while maintaining clinical efficacy.

A phase II multicenter study of two different dosages of pemetrexed given in combination with cyclophosphamide as first-line treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

Pemetrexed/cyclophosphamide was evaluated as first-line treatment for patients with locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer. In this randomized phase II study (NCT00190671), therapy consisted of either 600 mg/m(2) (P600) or 1,800 mg/m(2) (P1800) pemetrexed, followed by 600 mg/m(2) cyclophosphamide, every 21 days; 103 females (42 P600; 61 P1800) were enrolled. P600 was discontinued, as response rate (19.1%) was lower than targeted. In the P1800 arm, 20 patients had partial response (32.8%; 95% CI: 21.0-44.6) and 26 (42.6%) had stable disease. Median progression-free survival was 6.3 months (range: 0.3-31.1). P1800 plus cyclophosphamide 600 represents a regimen of reasonable efficacy and acceptable tolerability.

A single-arm phase II trial of first-line paclitaxel in combination with lapatinib in HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Lapatinib, an orally active tyrosine kinase inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor ErbB1 (EGFR) and ErbB2 (HER2), has activity as monotherapy and in combination with chemotherapy in HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: This phase II single-arm trial assessed the safety and efficacy of first-line lapatinib in combination with paclitaxel in previously untreated patients with HER2-overexpressing MBC. The primary endpoint was the overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints were the duration of response (DoR), time to response, time to progression, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and the incidence and severity of adverse events. All endpoints were investigator- and independent review committee (IRC)-assessed. RESULTS: The IRC-assessed ORR was 51% (29/57 patients with complete or partial response) while the investigator-assessed ORR was 77% (44/57). As per the IRC, the median DoR was 39.7 weeks, and the median PFS was 47.9 weeks. The most common toxicities were diarrhea (56%), neutropenia (44%), rash (40%), fatigue (25%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (25%). CONCLUSIONS: First-line lapatinib plus paclitaxel for HER2-overexpressing MBC produced an encouraging ORR with manageable toxicities. This combination may be useful in first-line treatment for patients with HER2-overexpressing MBC and supports the ongoing evaluation of this combination as first-line therapy in HER2-overexpressing MBC.

Randomized phase III trial of ixabepilone plus capecitabine versus capecitabine in patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with an anthracycline and a taxane.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine whether the combination of ixabepilone plus capecitabine improved overall survival (OS) compared with capecitabine alone in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) previously treated with anthracyclines and taxanes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1,221 patients with MBC previously treated with anthracycline and taxanes were randomly assigned to ixabepilone (40 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1) plus capecitabine (2,000 mg/m(2) orally on days 1 through 14) or capecitabine alone (2,500 mg/m(2) on the same schedule) given every 21 days. The trial was powered to detect a 20% reduction in the hazard ratio (HR) for death. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in OS between the combination and capecitabine monotherapy arm, the primary end point (median, 16.4 v 15.6 months; HR = 0.9; 95% CI, 078 to 1.03; P = .1162). The arms were well balanced with the exception of a higher prevalence of impaired performance status (Karnofsky performance status 70% to 80%) in the combination arm (32% v 25%). In a secondary Cox regression analysis adjusted for performance status and other prognostic factors, OS was improved for the combination (HR = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.98; P = .0231). In 79% of patients with measurable disease, the combination significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS; median, 6.2 v 4.2 months; HR = 0.79; P = .0005) and response rate (43% v 29%; P < .0001). Grade 3 to 4 neuropathy occurred in 24% treated with the combination, but was reversible. CONCLUSION: This study confirmed a previous trial demonstrating improved PFS and response for the ixabepilone-capecitabine combination compared with capecitabine alone, although this did not result in improved survival.