Chemotherapy combined with endocrine neoadjuvant therapy for hormone receptor-positive local advanced breast cancer: a case report and literature review.

Background: Early studies have revealed antagonistic effects associated with stacking chemotherapy (CT) and endocrine therapy (ET), thereby conventional wisdom does not advocate the simultaneous combination of these two treatment modalities. Limited clinical studies exist on the combined use of neoadjuvant CT (NACT) and neoadjuvant ET (NET), and there are no reported instances of concurrent neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) using capecitabine and fulvestrant (FUL). Case presentation: We reported a 54-year-old woman who was diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) LABC at our hospital. After neoadjuvant treatment involving two distinct CT regimens did not lead to tumor regression. Consequently, the patient was transitioned to concurrent capecitabine and FUL therapy. This change resulted in favorable pathological remission without any significant adverse events during treatment. Conclusions: A novel approach involving concurrent neoadjuvant therapy with CT and endocrine therapy may offer a potentially effective treatment avenue for some cases with HR+ LABC.

Endocrine and Targeted Therapy for Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer-Capivasertib-Fulvestrant: ASCO Rapid Recommendation Update.

ASCO Rapid Recommendation Updates highlight revisions to select ASCO guideline recommendations as a response to the emergence of new and practice-changing data. The rapid updates are supported by an evidence review and follow the guideline development processes outlined in the ASCO Guideline Methodology Manual. The goal of these articles is to disseminate updated recommendations, in a timely manner, to better inform health practitioners and the public on the best available cancer care options. Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating provider and do not account for individual variation among patients. See appendix for disclaimers and other important information (Appendix 1 and Appendix 2, online only).

Application of fluorocarbon nanoparticles of 131I-fulvestrant as a targeted radiation drug for endocrine therapy on human breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most prevalent malignant tumor among women, with hormone receptor-positive cases constituting 70%. Fulvestrant, an antagonist for these receptors, is utilized for advanced metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Yet, its inhibitory effect on tumor cells is not strong, and it lacks direct cytotoxicity. Consequently, there's a significant challenge in preventing recurrence and metastasis once cancer cells develop resistance to fulvestrant. METHOD: To address these challenges, we engineered tumor-targeting nanoparticles termed 131I-fulvestrant-ALA-PFP-FA-NPs. This involved labeling fulvestrant with 131I to create 131I-fulvestrant. Subsequently, we incorporated the 131I-fulvestrant and 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) into fluorocarbon nanoparticles with folate as the targeting agent. This design facilitates a tri-modal therapeutic approach-endocrine therapy, radiotherapy, and PDT for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. RESULTS: Our in vivo and in vitro tests showed that the drug-laden nanoparticles effectively zeroed in on tumors. This targeting efficiency was corroborated using SPECT-CT imaging, confocal microscopy, and small animal fluorescence imaging. The 131I-fulvestrant-ALA-PFP-FA-NPs maintained stability and showcased potent antitumor capabilities due to the synergism of endocrine therapy, radiotherapy, and CR-PDT. Throughout the treatment duration, we detected no notable irregularities in hematological, biochemical, or histological evaluations. CONCLUSION: We've pioneered a nanoparticle system loaded with radioactive isotope 131I, endocrine therapeutic agents, and a photosensitizer precursor. This system offers a combined modality of radiotherapy, endocrine treatment, and PDT for breast cancer.

Fulvestrant and everolimus efficacy after CDK4/6 inhibitor: a prospective study with circulating tumor DNA analysis.

In a prospective study (NCT02866149), we assessed the efficacy of fulvestrant and everolimus in CDK4/6i pre-treated mBC patients and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) changes throughout therapy. Patients treated with fulvestrant and everolimus had their ctDNA assessed at baseline, after 3-5 weeks and at disease progression. Somatic mutations were identified in archived tumor tissues by targeted NGS and tracked in cell-free DNA by droplet digital PCR. ctDNA detection was then associated with clinicopathological characteristics and patients' progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and best overall response (BOR). In the 57 included patients, median PFS and OS were 6.8 (95%CI [5.03-11.5]) and 38.2 (95%CI [30.0-not reached]) months, respectively. In 47 response-evaluable patients, BOR was a partial response or stable disease in 15 (31.9%) and 11 (23.4%) patients, respectively. Among patients with trackable somatic mutation and available plasma sample, N = 33/47 (70.2%) and N = 19/36 (52.8%) had ctDNA detected at baseline and at 3 weeks, respectively. ctDNA detection at baseline and PIK3CA mutation had an adverse prognostic impact on PFS and OS in multivariate analysis. This prospective cohort study documents the efficacy of fulvestrant and everolimus in CDK4/6i-pretreated ER + /HER2- mBC and highlights the clinical validity of early ctDNA changes as pharmacodynamic biomarker.

Simultaneous quantification of four hormone therapy drugs by LC-MS/MS: Clinical applications in breast cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Aromatase inhibitors such as anastrozole, letrozole, exemestane and selective estrogen down-regulator (SERD) fulvestrant are used mostly to treat breast cancer estrogen receptor positive in post-menopausal women. These drugs are given either through the oral route or by intramuscular injection. They have shown great inter-individual variability with a risk of cardiometabolic disorders. Hence the importance of their therapeutic drug monitoring not only for exposure-efficacy but also exposure-toxicity. We describe here a LC-MS/MS method for the simultaneous quantification of anastrozole, letrozole, exemestane and fulvestrant in human plasma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Plasma samples were prepared by a single-step protein precipitation. The liquid chromatography system was paired with a triple quadrupole mass spectrometer. Quantification were achieved in Multiple Reactions Monitoring mode and the electrospray ionization was in positive mode. RESULTS: The method demonstrated consistent analytical performance across various parameters, including linearity, specificity, sensitivity, matrix effect, upper and lower limits of quantification, extraction recovery, precision, accuracy, hemolysis effect, dilution integrity, and stability under different storage conditions, in accordance with established guidelines. The analysis time for each run was 4 min. Calibration curves exhibited linearity within the 1-100 ng/mL range, with correlation coefficients > 0.99 for the four analytes. Plasma concentrations from 42 patients were integrated into the selected calibration. Stability assessments indicated that the four drugs remained stable at - 20 °C for three months, 15 days under refrigeration, up to 7 days at room temperature, and after three freeze-thaw cycles. CONCLUSION: We have developed and validated this quantitative method for therapeutic drug monitoring of those four hormone therapy drugs:anastrozole, letrozole, fulvestrant and exemestane. This method can be also used for future clinical pharmacokinetics /pharmacodynamics studies.

Anticancer effect of zoledronic acid in endocrine-resistant breast cancer cells via HER-2 signaling.

HER-2 overexpression is a major mechanism involved in endocrine-resistant breast cancer, which has very limited treatment options. Zoledronic acid (ZA) is a drug in the bisphosphonate group used to treat osteoporosis. ZA was reported to exhibit activity in various cancers, with higher efficacy associated with estrogen-deprivation states. ZA inhibits cell proliferation in lung cancer through the epidermal growth factor receptor signaling pathway. Because endocrine-resistant breast cancer cells overexpress HER-2 and grow independently without estrogen, ZA may exert anticancer effects in these cell types. The inhibitory effects and mechanisms of ZA in endocrine-resistant cells through HER-2 signaling were investigated. The efficacy of ZA was higher in the endocrine-resistant breast cancer cells when compared with the wild-type cells. ZA also exhibited a synergistic effect with fulvestrant and may circumvent fulvestrant resistance. ZA decreased phosphorylated ERK (pERK) levels in resistant cell lines and attenuated HER-2 signaling in tamoxifen- and fulvestrant-resistant cells. ZA significantly decreased HER-2 levels and its downstream signaling molecules, including pAKT and pNF-κB in fulvestrant-resistant breast cancer cells. This inhibitory effect may explain the lower IC50 values of ZA in fulvestrant-resistant cells compared with tamoxifen-resistant cells. Moreover, ZA inhibited the migration and invasion in the resistant cell lines, suggesting an ability to inhibit tumor metastasis. The results indicate that ZA has potential for repurposing as an adjuvant treatment for patients with endocrine-resistant breast cancer.

The value of oral selective estrogen receptor degraders in patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer after progression on ≥ 1 line of endocrine therapy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Currently, the value of oral selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs) for hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (aBC) after progression on ≥ 1 line of endocrine therapy (ET) remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) and safety benefits in several clinical trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and conference proceedings (SABCS, ASCO, ESMO, and ESMO Breast) were searched systematically and comprehensively. Random effects models or fixed effects models were used to assess pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for treatment with oral SERDs versus standard of care. RESULTS: A total of four studies involving 1,290 patients were included in our analysis. The hazard ratio (HR) of PFS showed that the oral SERD regimen was better than standard of care in patients with HR+/HER2- aBC after progression on ≥ 1 line of ET (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.62-0.91, p = 0.004). In patients with ESR1 mutations, the oral SERD regimen provided better PFS than standard of care (HR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.47-0.71, p < 0.00001). Regarding patients with disease progression following previous use of CDK4/6 inhibitors, PFS benefit was observed in oral SERD-treatment arms compared to standard of care (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.64-0.87, p = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: The oral SERD regimen provides a significant PFS benefit compared to standard-of-care ET in patients with HR+/HER2- aBC after progression on ≥ 1 line of ET. In particular, we recommend oral SERDs as a preferred choice for those patients with ESR1m, and it could be a potential replacement for fulvestrant. The oral SERD regimen is also beneficial after progression on CDK4/6 inhibitors combined with endocrine therapy.

Overall Survival and Exploratory Biomarker Analyses of Abemaciclib plus Trastuzumab with or without Fulvestrant versus Trastuzumab plus Chemotherapy in HR+, HER2+ Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE: The monarcHER trial has shown that abemaciclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor, combined with fulvestrant and trastuzumab, improves progression-free survival (PFS) in hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-positive (HER2+) advanced breast cancer (ABC) compared with standard-of-care (SOC) chemotherapy combined with trastuzumab. We report the final overall survival (OS) analysis, updated safety and efficacy data, and exploratory biomarker results from monarcHER. PATIENTS AND METHODS: monarcHER (NCT02675231), a randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase II trial, enrolled 237 patients across Arm A (abemaciclib, trastuzumab, fulvestrant), Arm B (abemaciclib, trastuzumab), and Arm C (SOC chemotherapy, trastuzumab). Following the statistical plan, OS and PFS were estimated in all arms. RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) was performed on archival tissue. RESULTS: Median OS was 31.1 months in Arm A, 29.2 months in Arm B, and 20.7 months in Arm C [A vs. C: HR, 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.48-1.05; nominal two-sided P value 0.086; B vs. C: HR 0.83 (95% CI, 0.57-1.23); nominal two-sided P value 0.365]. Updated PFS and safety findings were consistent with previous results. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events included diarrhea, fatigue, nausea, neutrophil count decrease, and anemia. In exploratory RNA-seq analyses, Luminal subtypes were associated with longer PFS [8.6 vs. 5.4 months (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.38-0.79)] and OS [31.7 vs. 19.7 months (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.46-1.00)] compared with non-Luminal. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase II trial, abemaciclib + trastuzumab ± fulvestrant numerically improved median OS in women with HR+, HER2+ ABC compared with SOC chemotherapy + trastuzumab.

Association of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio and Absolute Lymphocyte Count With Clinical Outcomes in Advanced Breast Cancer in the MONARCH 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Established prognostic factors for treatment response to cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitors are currently lacking. We aimed to investigate the relationship of pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) to abemaciclib outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of data from MONARCH 2, a phase III study of abemaciclib or placebo plus fulvestrant in hormone-receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer that progressed on endocrine therapy. Patients were divided into high and low categories based on baseline NLR (cutoff: 2.5) and ALC (cutoff: 1.5 × 109/L). The association of baseline NLR and ALC with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was explored using Cox models and Kaplan-Meier estimates. Tumor response and safety were also examined. RESULTS: NLR and ALC data were available for 645 patients (abemaciclib: N = 426; placebo: N = 219). Low-baseline NLR or high-baseline ALC was consistently associated with positive PFS and OS trends; low-baseline NLR subgroups also showed trends for better response. The abemaciclib treatment effect against placebo was observed regardless of baseline NLR or ALC. Univariate analyses showed baseline NLR and ALC were prognostic of PFS and OS. Baseline NLR remained significant in the multivariate model (P < .0001). No unexpected differences in safety were observed by baseline NLR or ALC. CONCLUSION: Baseline NLR was independently prognostic of PFS and OS. Low-baseline NLR was associated with numerically better efficacy outcomes, but the benefit of adding abemaciclib to fulvestrant was similar irrespective of baseline NLR status.

Palbociclib sensitizes ER-positive breast cancer cells to fulvestrant by promoting the ubiquitin-mediated degradation of ER-α via SNHG17/Hippo-YAP axis.

PURPOSE: Endocrine therapy is the anti-tumor therapy for human breast cancer but endocrine resistance was a major burden. It has been reported that Palbociclib and fulvestrant can be used in combination for the treatment of patients who are experiencing endocrine resistance. However, the underlying mechanism is unclear. In this study, we aimed to investigate the mechanism by which Palbocicilib affected ER-positive breast cancer, combined with fulvestrant. METHODS: We first detected the effect of palbociclib on cell survival, growth and cycle distribution separately by MTT, colony formation and flow cytometry. Then SNHG17 was screened as palbociclib-targeted LncRNA by LncRNA-seq, and the SNHG17-targeted mRNAs were selected by mRNA-seq for further determination. Subsequently, the underlying mechanism by which palbociclib promoted the cytotoxicity of fulvestrant was confirmed by qRT-PCR, western blot, and immunoprecipitation. Eventually, the xenograft model and immunohistochemistry experiments were used to validate the sensitization effect of palbociclib on fulvestrant and its mechanism in vivo. RESULTS: Palbociclib significantly enhanced the cytotoxicity of fulvestrant in fulvestrant-resistant breast cancer cell lines. Interestingly, this might be related to the lncRNA SNHG17 and the Hippo signaling pathway. And our subsequent western blotting experiments confirmed that overexpressing SNHG17 induced the down-regulation of LATS1 and up-regulated YAP expression. Furthermore, we found that the increased sensitivity of breast cancer cells was closely associated with the LATS1-mediated degradation of ER-α. The following animal experiments also indicated that overexpressing SNHG17 obviously impaired the anti-cancer effect of co-treatment of palbociclib and fulvestrant accompanied by decreased LATS1 and increased ER-α levels. CONCLUSION: Palbociclib might sensitize the cytotoxicity of fulvestrant in ER-positive breast cancer cells by down-regulating SNHG17 expression, and then resulted in the LATS1-inactivated oncogene YAP and LATS1-mediated degradation of ER-α.

ESR1 F404 Mutations and Acquired Resistance to Fulvestrant in ESR1-Mutant Breast Cancer.

Fulvestrant is used to treat patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer, but acquired resistance is poorly understood. PlasmaMATCH Cohort A (NCT03182634) investigated the activity of fulvestrant in patients with activating ESR1 mutations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). Baseline ESR1 mutations Y537S are associated with poor outcomes and Y537C with good outcomes. Sequencing of baseline and EOT ctDNA samples (n = 69) revealed 3/69 (4%) patients acquired novel ESR1 F404 mutations (F404L, F404I, and F404V), in cis with activating mutations. In silico modeling revealed that ESR1 F404 contributes to fulvestrant binding to estrogen receptor-alpha (ERα) through a pi-stacking bond, with mutations disrupting this bond. In vitro analysis demonstrated that single F404L, E380Q, and D538G models were less sensitive to fulvestrant, whereas compound mutations D538G + F404L and E380Q + F404L were resistant. Several oral ERα degraders were active against compound mutant models. We have identified a resistance mechanism specific to fulvestrant that can be targeted by treatments in clinical development. SIGNIFICANCE: Novel F404 ESR1 mutations may be acquired to cause overt resistance to fulvestrant when combined with preexisting activating ESR1 mutations. Novel combinations of mutations in the ER ligand binding domain may cause drug-specific resistance, emphasizing the potential of similar drug-specific mutations to impact the efficacy of oral ER degraders in development. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 201.

First-line CDK4/6 inhibitor-based combinations for HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i)-based first-line therapy for hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). However, direct drug comparisons are lacking. We aimed to identify the most effective and safe therapy through network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and OpenGrey up to September 30, 2023. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing endocrine therapy alone or in combination with CDK4/6i as first-line endocrine treatment for HR+/HER2- ABC patients. The hazard ratios for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) and relative risks for objective response rate and adverse events (AEs) were available in selected trials. We performed a Bayesian NMA following PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs, involving 10 treatments, were included. Most studies were at low risk of bias. Regarding PFS, ribociclib+fulvestrant ranked first with a surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) of 85.0%, followed by dalpiciclib+nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) (SUCRA = 78.9%). Considering OS, the top three ranked treatments were ribociclib+fulvestrant (SUCRA = 94.1%), abemaciclib+NSAI (SUCRA = 69.9%), and ribociclib+NSAI (SUCRA = 68.5%). Out of four CDK4/6is, ribociclib minimized the grade 3/4 AEs, while dalpiciclib demonstrated the worst safety. Publication bias could not be ignored in our analyses, and the certainty of evidence was downgraded primarily due to imprecision. CONCLUSIONS: Ribociclib+fulvestrant probably represents the best option in a first-line setting. When combined with NSAI, dalpiciclib likely showed the best efficacy but the worst safety. Abemaciclib+NSAI and ribociclib+NSAI could also be promising treatments, while palbociclib presented inferiority. (PROSPERO Registration No. CRD42022370271).

Palazestrant (OP-1250), A Complete Estrogen Receptor Antagonist, Inhibits Wild-type and Mutant ER-positive Breast Cancer Models as Monotherapy and in Combination.

The estrogen receptor (ER) is a well-established target for the treatment of breast cancer, with the majority of patients presenting as ER-positive (ER+). Endocrine therapy is a mainstay of breast cancer treatment but the development of resistance mutations in response to aromatase inhibitors, poor pharmacokinetic properties of fulvestrant, agonist activity of tamoxifen, and limited benefit for elacestrant leave unmet needs for patients with or without resistance mutations in ESR1, the gene that encodes the ER protein. Here we describe palazestrant (OP-1250), a novel, orally bioavailable complete ER antagonist and selective ER degrader. OP-1250, like fulvestrant, has no agonist activity on the ER and completely blocks estrogen-induced transcriptional activity. In addition, OP-1250 demonstrates favorable biochemical binding affinity, ER degradation, and antiproliferative activity in ER+ breast cancer models that is comparable or superior to other agents of interest. OP-1250 has superior pharmacokinetic properties relative to fulvestrant, including oral bioavailability and brain penetrance, as well as superior performance in wild-type and ESR1-mutant breast cancer xenograft studies. OP-1250 combines well with cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors in xenograft studies of ER+ breast cancer models and effectively shrinks intracranially implanted tumors, resulting in prolonged animal survival. With demonstrated preclinical efficacy exceeding fulvestrant in wild-type models, elacestrant in ESR1-mutant models, and tamoxifen in intracranial xenografts, OP-1250 has the potential to benefit patients with ER+ breast cancer.

Doublet and Triplet Combinations of Eribulin, Fulvestrant, and Palbociclib in Preclinical Breast Cancer Models.

BACKGROUND/AIM: This study investigated in vivo synergism between eribulin and palbociclib in a breast cancer patient-derived xenograft (PDX) model, with expanded scope to include fulvestrant as a third drug. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eribulin plus palbociclib combinations were tested in vitro in six cell lines each of estrogen receptor positive and triple-negative breast cancer, and in vivo in the OD-BRE-0192 PDX model using weekly eribulin plus 5×/week or 7×/week palbociclib (holiday or no-holiday schedules, respectively). When included as a third drug, fulvestrant was dosed weekly. RESULTS: In vitro, combining palbociclib with eribulin led to increased eribulin IC50s in 11 of 12 cell lines, suggesting that the drugs antagonized each other due to mutual exclusion of the mitotic and G1/S cell cycle block points for eribulin and palbociclib. An in vivo study in the OD-BRE-0192 PDX model compared weekly eribulin plus either palbociclib holiday or no-holiday schedules to gauge the importance of post-palbociclib cell cycle synchronization. Results showed no advantage of holiday over no-holiday schedules, arguing that differing pharmacokinetics of the drugs were sufficient to overcome cell cycle-based mechanistic antagonism. In vivo comparisons of doublet and triplet combinations of eribulin, palbociclib, and fulvestrant showed that all three doublets were superior to individual monotherapies, and that the triplet combination was markedly superior to all three doublets, being the only group to show tumor regression in 100% of the mice. CONCLUSION: Results show complex synergistic interactions between eribulin, fulvestrant, and palbociclib, and point to a particularly robust synergy when combining all three drugs.

Unraveling Vulnerabilities in Endocrine Therapy-Resistant HER2+/ER+ Breast Cancer.

Breast tumors overexpressing human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2) confer intrinsic resistance to endocrine therapy (ET), and patients with HER2/estrogen receptor-positive (HER2+/ER+) breast cancer (BCa) are less responsive to ET than HER2-/ER+. However, real-world evidence reveals that a large subset of patients with HER2+/ER+ receive ET as monotherapy, positioning this treatment pattern as a clinical challenge. In the present study, we developed and characterized 2 in vitro models of ET-resistant (ETR) HER2+/ER+ BCa to identify possible therapeutic vulnerabilities. To mimic ETR to aromatase inhibitors (AIs), we developed 2 long-term estrogen deprivation (LTED) cell lines from BT-474 (BT474) and MDA-MB-361 (MM361). Growth assays, PAM50 subtyping, and genomic and transcriptomic analyses, followed by validation and functional studies, were used to identify targetable differences between ET-responsive parental and ETR-LTED HER2+/ER+ cells. Compared to their parental cells, MM361 LTEDs grew faster, lost ER, and increased HER2 expression, whereas BT474 LTEDs grew slower and maintained ER and HER2 expression. Both LTED variants had reduced responsiveness to fulvestrant. Whole-genome sequencing of aggressive MM361 LTEDs identified mutations in genes encoding transcription factors and chromatin modifiers. Single-cell RNA sequencing demonstrated a shift towards non-luminal phenotypes, and revealed metabolic remodeling of MM361 LTEDs, with upregulated lipid metabolism and ferroptosis-associated antioxidant genes, including GPX4. Combining a GPX4 inhibitor with anti-HER2 agents induced significant cell death in both MM361 and BT474 LTEDs. The BT474 and MM361 AI-resistant models capture distinct phenotypes of HER2+/ER+ BCa and identify altered lipid metabolism and ferroptosis remodeling as vulnerabilities of this type of ETR BCa.

Abemaciclib plus trastuzumab with or without fulvestrant versus trastuzumab plus standard-of-care chemotherapy in women with HR+, HER2+ advanced breast cancer: plain language summary of the monarcHER study.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This article summarizes the results of a study called monarcHER. The study included participants with a certain type of aggressive breast cancer called HR+, HER2+ advanced breast cancer (ABC) that had their disease worsen or return after multiple previous therapies. This summary intends to help you understand the impact of a non-chemotherapy treatment called abemaciclib in people with HR+, HER2+ ABC. When the study was planned, HER2-targeted therapy (ie trastuzumab) was standard treatment and was typically combined with chemotherapy and endocrine therapy (ie fulvestrant). However drug resistance can develop when HER2+ targeted therapy is used for a long time, making it less effective and allowing cancer to grow or spread to other parts of the body. When this happens, few chemotherapy-free options are available. Because of the chemotherapy side effects, this is not desirable. There is an urgent need to develop new, effective, safe, and tolerable treatment options for patients with HR+, HER2+ ABC. The monarcHER study compared the effects of abemaciclib plus trastuzumab with or without fulvestrant compared to the standard of care treatment. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: Group A (abemaciclib, trastuzumab and fulvestrant), Group B (abemaciclib and trastuzumab), or Group C (trastuzumab and standard of care chemotherapy). The study compared the length of time patients took study treatments without worsening or dying from their breast cancer. This is called the progression free survival (PFS). Participants in Group A had a longer median PFS than those in groups B and C (8.3 months, 5.7 months and 5.7 months respectively). There was no notable difference in PFS between participants in Groups B and C. Additionally, the study looked at the side effects with each treatment group. The most common side effect which is considered severe or lifethreatening was neutropenia, defined as decreased white blood cell levels. Neutropenia may lead to an increased risk of getting infections. However, the percentage of patients experiencing neutropenia was similar in all groups A, B and C (27%, 22% and 26%, respectively). Patients in groups A (79%) and B (78%) who received abemaciclib experienced similar rates of diarrhea. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: The data from the monarcHER study suggest that the combination of abemaciclib, trastuzumab, and fulvestrant may offer a chemotherapy-free option for patients with HR+, HER2+ ABC who have experienced worsening of disease despite multiple prior therapies.

Is Palbociclib a cost-effective strategy in the second-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer in Iran?

BACKGROUND & AIMS: This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of Palbociclib in the second-line treatment of hormone receptor-positive (HR+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in Iran. METHODS: The present economic evaluation used a partitioned survival model (PSM). This model compares lifetime costs and disease outcomes among groups receiving different medication combinations containing Palbociclib, Fulvestrant, Everolimus, Ribociclib, and Abemaciclib as the second-line therapy for HR+/HER2- MBC. The model was conducted from Iran's healthcare perspective, structured with 1-month cycles, and the evaluation time horizon in the base analysis was set to 180 cycles (15 years). Transition probabilities were extracted using the survival curves. The cost information was extracted based on the year 2020. The Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY) was considered the final outcome unit, and the cost-effectiveness of different combinations is calculated as cost per QALY. The annual discount rate of 5% was considered for costs and QALYs. Two times Iran's GDP per capita (800,000,000 IRR = US$5934) was used as the threshold. Finally, due to the uncertainty of some parameters, deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were carried out. RESULTS: The base case results showed that the highest cost was for the 'Ribociclib+ Fulvestrant' combination (US$89,629.56), and the lowest price was for the 'Iranian Everolimus + Fulvestrant' combination (US$10,740.09). 'Palbociclib + Fulvestrant' brings about the highest value of 1.456 incremental QALYs compared to other strategies. Finally, the 'Iranian Palbociclib + Fulvestrant' was the cost-effective combination, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$4,201 compared to other strategies. The base case results were supported by the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that the cost of Iranian Palbociclib has a threshold of US$582.99. CONCLUSIONS: The 'Iranian Palbociclib + Fulvestrant' combination was cost-effective in second-line therapy for HR+ HER2- MBC in Iran.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4/6 Inhibitor Palbociclib for Inoperable or Recurrent Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Palbociclib and endocrine therapy has been approved to treat hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative inoperable or recurrent breast cancer in Japan. However, this cotherapy imposes an economic burden on both patients and society because of its high cost. In this study, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of cotherapy with palbociclib and fulvestrant compared to fulvestrant monotherapy for inoperable or recurrent breast cancer. METHODS: The three-state Markov model was built by taking into count health stats in inoperable or recurrent breast cancer. The clinical outcomes of the therapies were drawn from published randomized controlled trials. Total regimen cost was calculated from medical receipts of patients at the Yamagata University Hospital. The cost-effectiveness was evaluated by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio(ICER), in case that it was below 400,000 Yen per month. Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation was performed to assess probability. RESULTS: Acquisition cost of palbociclib and fulvestrant and fulvestrant monotherapy was 6,209,554 JPY and 780,870 JPY, and 25.7 and 22.8 months were achieved, respectively. ICER for the cotherapy was 1,847,721 JPY/quality adjusted life month(QALM)gained. CONCLUSIONS: The palbociclib and fulvestrant therapy provided better health outcomes than conventional fulvestrant monotherapy, but were costly and suggested to be less cost-effective.

CDK4/6 inhibitors, PI3K/mTOR inhibitors, and HDAC inhibitors as second-line treatments for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to compare the benefits and safety of agents including Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors, phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors, and histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors as second-line treatments for these patients by conducting a comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis. METHODS: The Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomized trials comparing CDK4/6 inhibitors, PI3K/mTOR inhibitors, or HDAC inhibitors vs. placebo with the addition of exemestane or fulvestrant as second-line treatments in patients with HR + advanced breast cancer up to December 16, 2021. Outcomes of interest were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), clinical benefit rate (CBR), and grade 3-4 adverse drug events (ADEs). The present study was conducted according to the Cochrane Collaboration and PRISMA statements. The overall effect was pooled using the random effects model. RESULTS: Seventeen studies with a total of 9,100 participants were included in the current study. Compared with placebo plus fulvestrant, PFS was significantly improved by CDK4/6 inhibitor plus fulvestrant, mTOR inhibitor plus fulvestrant, mTOR inhibitor plus exemestane, and PI3K inhibitor plus fulvestrant, but not HDAC inhibitor plus exemestane. While mTOR inhibitor plus exemestane was the best regimen (SUCRA value 89.5%), the mTOR inhibitor plus exemestane regimen induced more severe adverse events (SAEs) than the HDAC inhibitor plus exemestane regimen [OR, 95% CI: 2.40 (1.40-4.10)]. CONCLUSION: mTOR inhibitor and CDK4/6 inhibitor-based regimens demonstrated superior clinical efficacy and comparable safety profiles as second-line treatment in patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer.

FDA Approval Summary: Ribociclib Indicated for Male Patients with Hormone Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer.

On December 10, 2021, the FDA expanded the indications for ribociclib to include male patients for the treatment of hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Ribociclib is now indicated in combination with an aromatase inhibitor (AI) as initial endocrine-based therapy in adult patients, or with fulvestrant as initial endocrine-based therapy or following disease progression on endocrine therapy (ET), in postmenopausal women or in men. The efficacy of ribociclib + AI for male patients was primarily based on previous favorable benefit-risk assessments of ribociclib from MONALEESA-2 and MONALEESA-7 trials, and supported by COMPLEEMENT-1, an open-label, single-arm, multicenter clinical trial, in which 39 male patients (n = 3,246 total patients) received ribociclib + letrozole + goserelin/leuprolide. The overall response rate (ORR) based on confirmed responses in male patients with measurable disease at baseline was 46.9% [95% confidence interval (CI), 29.1-65.3], consistent with an ORR of 43.6% (95% CI, 41.5-45.8) in the overall population. Overall, adverse reactions occurring in male patients were similar to those occurring in female patients treated with ribociclib + ET. The efficacy of ribociclib + fulvestrant for male patients was primarily based on the previous findings of a favorable benefit-risk assessment from the MONALEESA-3 trial, supported by FDA review of clinical data of a limited number of male patients treated in clinical practice receiving ribociclib + fulvestrant. The known mechanism of action, biologic rationale, and clinical information available adequately demonstrate that the efficacy and safety of ribociclib + AI/fulvestrant are similar in male and female patients. This article summarizes the FDA's decision-making and data supporting the approval of ribociclib in male patients with breast cancer, and discusses regulatory insights.