A risk analysis of alpelisib-induced hyperglycemia in patients with advanced solid tumors and breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Hyperglycemia is an on-target effect of PI3Kα inhibitors. Early identification and intervention of treatment-induced hyperglycemia is important for improving management of patients receiving a PI3Kα inhibitor like alpelisib. Here, we characterize incidence of grade 3/4 alpelisib-related hyperglycemia, along with time to event, management, and outcomes using a machine learning model. METHODS: Data for the risk model were pooled from patients receiving alpelisib ± fulvestrant in the open-label, phase 1 X2101 trial and the randomized, double-blind, phase 3 SOLAR-1 trial. The pooled population (n = 505) included patients with advanced solid tumors (X2101, n = 221) or HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (SOLAR-1, n = 284). External validation was performed using BYLieve trial patient data (n = 340). Hyperglycemia incidence and management were analyzed for SOLAR-1. RESULTS: A random forest model identified 5 baseline characteristics most associated with risk of developing grade 3/4 hyperglycemia (fasting plasma glucose, body mass index, HbA1c, monocytes, age). This model was used to derive a score to classify patients as high or low risk for developing grade 3/4 hyperglycemia. Applying the model to patients treated with alpelisib and fulvestrant in SOLAR-1 showed higher incidence of hyperglycemia (all grade and grade 3/4), increased use of antihyperglycemic medications, and more discontinuations due to hyperglycemia (16.7% vs. 2.6% of discontinuations) in the high- versus low-risk group. Among patients in SOLAR-1 (alpelisib + fulvestrant arm) with PIK3CA mutations, median progression-free survival was similar between the high- and low-risk groups (11.0 vs. 10.9 months). For external validation, the model was applied to the BYLieve trial, for which successful classification into high- and low-risk groups with shorter time to grade 3/4 hyperglycemia in the high-risk group was observed. CONCLUSIONS: A risk model using 5 clinically relevant baseline characteristics was able to identify patients at higher or lower probability for developing alpelisib-induced hyperglycemia. Early identification of patients who may be at higher risk for hyperglycemia may improve management (including monitoring and early intervention) and potentially lead to improved outcomes. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01219699 (registration date: October 13, 2010; retrospectively registered), ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02437318 (registration date: May 7, 2015); ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03056755 (registration date: February 17, 2017).

Real-world treatment patterns for palbociclib plus an aromatase inhibitor, or an aromatase inhibitor alone, for patients with metastatic breast cancer in the Flatiron Database.

There are limited real-world comparative effectiveness data for palbociclib plus an aromatase inhibitor (AI) as a first-line (1L) treatment examining endpoints that require long term follow-up and post 1L progression. The Flatiron Health Analytic Database was used to characterize treatment and dosing patterns in patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC) receiving palbociclib plus an AI vs an AI alone in routine US clinical practice. In addition, time to chemotherapy (TTC) and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) when combining 1L and second-line of therapy (rwPFS2) were assessed. Of 1324 patients who received palbociclib plus an AI between February 3, 2015 and March 31, 2020, 1110 (83.8%) started palbociclib at the recommended 125 mg/day dose. After stabilized inverse probability treatment-weighting (sIPTW), median TTC in patients treated with palbociclib plus an AI and AI alone was 37.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 33.7-40.7) and 29.2 months (95% CI, 26.8-33.5), respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.77 [95% CI, 0.69-0.86], P < .0001); median rwPFS2 was 32.6 months (95% CI, 29.4-35.2) and 20.7 months (95% CI, 18.9-22.6), respectively (HR = 0.62 [95% CI, 0.54-0.70], P < .0001). Sensitivity analyses with propensity score matching showed similar results to sIPTW analyses. Results from this large real-world study examining additional effectiveness outcomes beyond 1L rwPFS and overall survival support the use of palbociclib plus an AI as a 1L treatment for patients with HR+/HER2- mBC.

Health-related quality of life with sacituzumab govitecan in HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer in the phase III TROPiCS-02 trial.

BACKGROUND: The TROPiCS-02 study (NCT03901339) demonstrated that sacituzumab govitecan (SG) has superior clinical outcomes over treatment of physician's choice (TPC) chemotherapy in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2 receptor-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). Here, we present health-related quality of life (HRQoL) patient-reported outcome (PRO) findings from this study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible adults with HR+/HER2- mBC who previously received a taxane, endocrine-based therapy, a CDK4/6 inhibitor, and 2-4 lines of chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to receive SG or TPC until progression or unacceptable toxicity. PROs were assessed at baseline and on day 1 of each cycle, using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), EQ-5D-5L, and PRO Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). RESULTS: Compared to TPC, overall least square mean change from baseline was significantly better for SG for physical functioning and dyspnea, but worse for diarrhea. Time to first clinically meaningful worsening or death was significantly longer for SG in global health status/quality of life, physical functioning, fatigue, emotional functioning, dyspnea, insomnia, and financial difficulties of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EQ-VAS, but longer for TPC in diarrhea. Few patients in both arms reported experiencing any worsening to level 3 or 4 treatment-related symptomatic events during treatment, as assessed by 16 PRO-CTCAE items, except for diarrhea frequency and amount of hair loss, which favored TPC. CONCLUSIONS: SG was associated with an HRQoL benefit in most symptoms and functioning, compared with TPC. This supports the favorable profile of SG as a treatment option for patients with pretreated HR+/HER2- mBC.

Comprehensive genomic profiling of ESR1, PIK3CA, AKT1, and PTEN in HR(+)HER2(-) metastatic breast cancer: prevalence along treatment course and predictive value for endocrine therapy resistance in real-world practice.

BACKGROUND: The treatment landscape for HR(+)HER2(-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is evolving for patients with ESR1 mutations (mut) and PI3K/AKT pathway genomic alterations (GA). We sought to inform clinical utility for comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) using tissue (TBx) and liquid biopsies (LBx) in HR(+)HER2(-) MBC. METHODS: Records from a de-identified breast cancer clinicogenomic database for patients who underwent TBx/LBx testing at Foundation Medicine during routine clinical care at ~ 280 US cancer clinics between 01/2011 and 09/2023 were assessed. GA prevalence [ESR1mut, PIK3CAmut, AKT1mut, PTENmut, and PTEN homozygous copy loss (PTENloss)] were calculated in TBx and LBx [stratified by ctDNA tumor fraction (TF)] during the first three lines of therapy. Real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) and overall survival (rwOS) were compared between groups by Cox models adjusted for prognostic factors. RESULTS: ~ 60% of cases harbored 1 + GA in 1st-line TBx (1266/2154) or LBx TF ≥ 1% (80/126) and 26.5% (43/162) in LBx TF < 1%. ESR1mut was found in 8.1% TBx, 17.5% LBx TF ≥ 1%, and 4.9% LBx TF < 1% in 1st line, increasing to 59% in 3rd line (LBx TF ≥ 1%). PTENloss was detected at higher rates in TBx (4.3%) than LBx (1% in TF ≥ 1%). Patients receiving 1st-line aromatase inhibitor + CDK4/6 inhibitor (n = 573) with ESR1mut had less favorable rwPFS and rwOS versus ESR1 wild-type; no differences were observed for fulvestrant + CDK4/6 inhibitor (n = 348). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests obtaining TBx for CGP at time of de novo/recurrent diagnosis, followed by LBx for detecting acquired GA in 2nd + lines. Reflex TBx should be considered when ctDNA TF < 1%.

First-line therapy with palbociclib in patients with advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer: The real-life study PALBOSPAIN.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of first-line therapy with palbociclib in a Spanish cohort treated after palbociclib approval. METHODS: PALBOSPAIN is an observational, retrospective, multicenter study evaluating real-world patterns and outcomes with 1 L palbociclib in men and women (any menopausal status) with advanced HR+/HER2- BC diagnosed between November 2017 and November 2019. The primary endpoint was real-world progression-free survival (rw-PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), the real-world response rate (rw-RR), the clinical benefit rate, palbociclib dose reduction, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 762 patients were included. The median rw-PFS and OS were 24 months (95% CI 21-27) and 42 months (40-not estimable [NE]) in the whole population, respectively. By cohort, the median rw-PFS and OS were as follows: 28 (95% CI 23-39) and 44 (95% CI 38-NE) months in patients with de novo metastatic disease, 13 (95% CI 11-17) and 36 months (95% CI 31-41) in patients who experienced relapse < 12 months after the end of ET, and 31 months (95% CI 26-37) and not reached (NR) in patients who experienced relapse > 12 months after the end of ET. rw-PFS and OS were longer in patients with oligometastasis and only one metastatic site and those with non-visceral disease. The most frequent hematologic toxicity was neutropenia (72%; grade ≥ 3: 52.5%), and the most common non-hematologic adverse event was asthenia (38%). CONCLUSION: These findings, consistent with those from clinical trials, support use of palbociclib plus ET as 1 L for advanced BC in the real-world setting, including pre-menopausal women and men. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04874025 (PALBOSPAIN). Date of registration: 04/30/2021 retrospectively registered.

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.

Systematic literature review of real-world evidence for treatments in HR+/HER2- second-line LABC/mBC after first-line treatment with CDK4/6i.

BACKGROUND: Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) combined with endocrine therapy (ET) are currently recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) guidelines as the first-line (1 L) treatment for patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer (HR+/HER2- LABC/mBC). Although there are many treatment options, there is no clear standard of care for patients following 1 L CDK4/6i. Understanding the real-world effectiveness of subsequent therapies may help to identify an unmet need in this patient population. This systematic literature review qualitatively synthesized effectiveness and safety outcomes for treatments received in the real-world setting after 1 L CDK4/6i therapy in patients with HR+/ HER2- LABC/mBC. METHODS: MEDLINE®, Embase, and Cochrane were searched using the Ovid® platform for real-world evidence studies published between 2015 and 2022. Grey literature was searched to identify relevant conference abstracts published from 2019 to 2022. The review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO registration: CRD42023383914). Data were qualitatively synthesized and weighted average median real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) was calculated for NCCN/ESMO-recommended post-1 L CDK4/6i treatment regimens. RESULTS: Twenty records (9 full-text articles and 11 conference abstracts) encompassing 18 unique studies met the eligibility criteria and reported outcomes for second-line (2 L) treatments after 1 L CDK4/6i; no studies reported disaggregated outcomes in the third-line setting or beyond. Sixteen studies included NCCN/ESMO guideline-recommended treatments with the majority evaluating endocrine-based therapy; five studies on single-agent ET, six studies on mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (mTORi) ± ET, and three studies with a mix of ET and/or mTORi. Chemotherapy outcomes were reported in 11 studies. The most assessed outcome was median rwPFS; the weighted average median rwPFS was calculated as 3.9 months (3.3-6.0 months) for single-agent ET, 3.6 months (2.5-4.9 months) for mTORi ± ET, 3.7 months for a mix of ET and/or mTORi (3.0-4.0 months), and 6.1 months (3.7-9.7 months) for chemotherapy. Very few studies reported other effectiveness outcomes and only two studies reported safety outcomes. Most studies had heterogeneity in patient- and disease-related characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The real-world effectiveness of current 2 L treatments post-1 L CDK4/6i are suboptimal, highlighting an unmet need for this patient population.

The effects of adding palbociclib to endocrine therapy to treat advanced breast cancer: a plain language summary of a study using the PALOMA-2 and PALOMA-3 trial results.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of an article that reported results of a study using data from two phase 3 clinical trials called "PALOMA-2" and "PALOMA-3." Both PALOMA-2 and PALOMA-3 trials included women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. HR+/HER2- breast cancer means the breast cancer cells of these women have receptors for female sex hormones and little or no HER2 receptors. Both PALOMA trials tested the effect of adding a medication called palbociclib (brand name, Ibrance®) to a hormone therapy. Hormone therapy, also known as endocrine therapy, is a treatment that blocks or removes hormones that cause cancer cells to grow and divide. In both trials, women took endocrine therapy with either palbociclib or a placebo. WHAT WAS THE AIM OF THIS STUDY?: The researchers aimed to see if the results from the PALOMA trials were similar for subgroups of women in the 2 trials. The subgroups in the study included women who shared certain features about their cancer or treatment history, for example, women whose cancer had spread to the liver. For each subgroup, the study compared the results from the 2 treatment groups: (1) women who took palbociclib plus endocrine therapy, and (2) women who took placebo plus endocrine therapy. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS & WHAT DO THEY MEAN?: The same effect was found in all subgroups. Compared with those who took placebo, women who took palbociclib lived longer without their cancer getting worse (growing or spreading). Also, among women who had chemotherapy after stopping the trial treatment, those who took palbociclib started chemotherapy later than those who took placebo. Because palbociclib slows cancer growth and leads to tumor shrinkage, this may have played a part in starting chemotherapy later. These results show that palbociclib plus endocrine therapy is better at slowing the progression of advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer than endocrine therapy alone. This can be said for women with different advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer features and treatment history. Overall, the results support women taking palbociclib with an endocrine therapy if they have advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer.

Abemaciclib for treating patients with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer: a real-world study in France, Italy and Spain.

Aim: This real-world study aimed to describe patient and clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and outcomes for patients with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer receiving abemaciclib in France, Italy and Spain. Materials & methods: A multicenter chart review was conducted for adult females with HR+/HER2- advanced/metastatic breast cancer who received abemaciclib in routine care. Real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) was estimated via Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: This study included 151, 173 and 175 patients from France, Italy and Spain, respectively. Abemaciclib was mostly prescribed as first-line therapy concomitantly with hormone therapy. Median rwPFS was >20 months and the 1-year rwPFS rate was >70%. Conclusion: Effectiveness was similar across the three countries and aligns with pivotal studies.

Abemaciclib use in the clinic in France, Italy & SpainThis study describes patients, the treatments they have received and the results of those treatments for patients with the most common type of advanced breast cancer. These patients were taking abemaciclib plus hormonal therapy in routine breast cancer care in France, Italy and Spain. The information used to conduct this study was taken from patients' medical charts. In this real-world study, abemaciclib was mostly used as the initial treatment for advanced breast cancer. Abemaciclib effectiveness was similar across the three countries confirming findings from previous studies. Our study supports the use of abemaciclib for patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer.

Identifying drivers of first-line HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer treatment choices.

Aim: Assess factors associated with first-line (1L) treatment for HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer. Materials & methods: A cross-sectional survey of 250 US oncologists was conducted. Correlations were calculated between treatment class and demographics, treatment perceptions and other clinical/nonclinical characteristics. Results: Efficacy and safety/tolerability were critical in oncologists' 1L decision-making. CDK4/6i use positively correlated with proportion of Medicare and postmenopausal patients (r = 0.54-0.67). Chemotherapy use demonstrated positive correlations with perimenopausal and premenopausal patients and symptom burden (r = 0.31-0.42). Aromatase inhibitor (AI) monotherapy correlated positively with anticipated treatment compliance (r = 0.42). Conclusion: Efficacy and safety/tolerability were most important to 1L decision-making. Clinical characteristics corresponded with CDK4/6i and chemotherapy use. Anticipated compliance was associated with AI monotherapy use.

Patients in the USA with a certain type of metastatic breast cancer (mBC, i.e., HR+/HER2−) might get chemotherapy or hormone therapy alone instead of new and potentially better medicines called cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) as their first treatment.Researchers wanted to understand how US cancer specialists decided the first treatment for this type of mBC. In a survey of 250 cancer specialists, researchers looked at different factors that might influence decision-making, including patient characteristics, doctors' opinions about the treatments and other medical and non-medical features. This study also examined the connections between these factors and the cancer specialists' choice of first treatment.Researchers found that cancer specialists care most about how well a treatment works and how safe it is when choosing the first treatment for HR+/HER2− mBC. They are more likely to use CDK4/6i if their patients have Medicare coverage or are older (i.e., women who have been through menopause). Chemotherapy is chosen if their patients are younger (i.e., women who are near and before menopause) or have more symptoms. Cancer specialists tend to choose first treatment with hormone therapy alone if they think their patients have a hard time following their treatment plan. The results showed that patient characteristics, doctors' opinions of treatments and other medical and non-medical factors play a role in choosing treatment for HR+/HER2− mBC. By understanding these factors, researchers can work toward improving treatment choices for patients with this type of mBC.