Health-related quality of life of patients with advanced breast cancer treated with everolimus plus exemestane versus placebo plus exemestane in the phase 3, randomized, controlled, BOLERO-2 trial

Efficacy and safety of everolimus plus exemestane in patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER-2-negative advanced breast cancer: Results from the open-label, multicentre, non-interventional BRAWO study

BRAWO, a real-world study, assessed the efficacy, quality of life (QoL) and safety of EVE + EXE in postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) in routine clinical practice. Postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2-ABC with recurrence or progression after a NSAI were included. Primary Observation parameters included the evaluation of the effectiveness of EVE + EXE. A multivariate-analysis using Cox proportional hazard model was built to identify predictors of progression. Overall, 2100 patients were enrolled (August 2012-December 2017); 2074 were evaluable for efficacy and safety analyses. Majority of patients (60.6%) received EVE + EXE as first (28.7%) or second-line (31.9%) therapy. Visceral metastases were present in 54.1% patients. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) reported as 6.6 months (95%CI: 6.3-7.0). Multivariate-analysis in a subset of patients (n = 1837) found higher body mass index (BMI) and non-visceral metastases to be independent predictors of favorable PFS. Patients with a BMI of 20 to <25 had a mPFS of 6.0 (95%CI: 5.4-6.4) and those with a BMI ≥30 had mPFS of 8.5 (95%CI: 6.9-9.9). 41.2% patients achieved stable disease and 7.3% partial response. No major changes were observed QoL; 86.4% patients received stomatitis prophylaxis and 41.4% experienced EVE related AEs of stomatitis, mainly low grade. AEs occurred in 91.2% of patients, of which stomatitis (42.6%) and fatigue (19.8%) were most frequent. The BRAWO study provides real-world evidence of efficacy and safety of EVE + EXE in patients with HR+, HER2- ABC. A high BMI and the absence of visceral metastases were independent predictors of PFS in this cohort of patients.

Different doses and courses of omalizumab for patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Background

The stability, efficacy, and safety of omalizumab at different doses and regimens for chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) are yet to be studied.

Objective

A systematic review (SR) with meta-analysis (MA) and trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in CSU.

Methods

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of administering omalizumab versus placebo for CSU were searched. Random-effects MAs were performed using planned subgroup analyses. TSA was performed to control for the risk of random errors and assess the stability of our MA results. Publication bias was visually assessed using a contour-enhanced funnel plot and the trim-and-fill method. The quality of RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.

Results

Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. Omalizumab had remarkable effects on the patient percentage of the weekly urticaria activity score is zero (UAS = 0) [RR 4.64, 95% CI (3.38, 6.37)], percentage of no angioedema-burdened days [MD 3.15, 95% CI (0.10, 6.19], patient percentage of UAS ≤6 [RR 3.05, 95% CI (2.46, 3.78)], and patient percentage of the weekly itch severity score minimally important difference (ISS7 MID) [RR 1.50, 95% CI (1.36, 1.66)]. Omalizumab was well tolerated across studies [RR 0.98, 95% CI (0.90, 1.08)]. TSA confirmed the above results, except for "the percentage of no angioedema-burdened day".

Conclusion

Among the different doses and courses assessed, omalizumab (300 mg, 12 weeks) can be recommended as an effective treatment for patients with CSU. However, whether omalizumab improves angioedema requires further investigation. The clinical management of angioedema accompanying CSU requires further attention.

Health-related quality of life and estimation of the minimally important difference in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Endocrine Symptom score in postmenopausal ER+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer with low sensitivity to endocrine therapy

BACKGROUND

The HORSE-BC study previously demonstrated that second-line endocrine therapy (ET) for patients with acquired endocrine-resistant metastatic breast cancer (MBC) still provided a clinically meaningful benefit. Herein, we investigated the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in the HORSE-BC study.

METHODS

Patients with acquired endocrine-resistant MBC who were scheduled for second-line ET were recruited. The HRQOL was assessed at baseline, and 1 and 3 months after second-line ET initiation. To investigate the minimally important difference (MID) in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Endocrine Symptoms (FACT-ES), we evaluated the means and standard deviations for the distribution-based method, and differences in the change in HRQOL for the anchor-based method. We also investigated the association between FACT-ES total scores and clinical benefit.

RESULTS

Overall, 56 patients were enrolled. Of these, 47 were analyzed. When defined as 1/3 standard deviation estimates based on the distribution method, the calculated MID was 5.9. The MIDs of the FACT-ES total scores based on the anchor method were 7.7 for decline and 4.1 for improvement. The MID decline proportions were 6.1% and 14.7% lower in patients who experienced clinical benefits than in those who did not at 1 and 3 months, respectively. The ratios of MID improvement in patients who experienced clinical benefits were 18.3% and 3.2% higher, respectively; the mean change in the FACT-ES total score from baseline improved in patients who experienced clinical benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintaining the HRQOL as determined by FACT-ES may be associated with clinical benefits in patients with acquired endocrine-resistant MBC treated with ET.

A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase II study to evaluate the tolerability of an induction dose escalation of everolimus in patients with metastatic breast cancer (DESIREE)

BACKGROUND

Stomatitis is one of the main reasons to discontinue everolimus in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). To decrease stomatitis and subsequently early treatment discontinuations or dose reductions, the DESIREE trial investigated the use of a stepwise dose-escalation schedule of everolimus (EVE esc).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

DESIREE is a phase II, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with HR+/HER2- mBC and progression/relapse after nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor treatment. Patients were randomised to EVE esc (2.5 mg/day, week 1; 5 mg/day, week 2; 7.5 mg/day, week 3; 10 mg/day, weeks 4-24) or everolimus 10 mg/day (EVE 10mg) for 24 weeks plus exemestane. The primary endpoint was the incidence of stomatitis episodes grade ≥2 within 12 weeks of treatment. The secondary endpoints included toxicity, relative total dose intensity (RTDI) and quality of life (QoL).

RESULTS

A total of 160 patients were randomised and 156 started treatment (EVE esc: 80; EVE 10mg: 76). The median age of patients was 64 years (range 33-85), 56.3% patients in the EVE esc arm versus 42.1% in the EVE 10mg arm had liver metastasis (P = 0.081) and 62.5% versus 51.3% received over one metastatic therapy line (P = 0.196). Within 12 weeks, the incidence of stomatitis episodes grade ≥2 was significantly lower in the EVE esc arm compared with the EVE 10mg arm (28.8% versus 46.1%; odds ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.24-0.92; P = 0.026). Toxicity was in line with the known safety profile without new safety concerns. The median RTDI was 91.1% in the EVE esc arm versus 80.0% in the EVE 10mg arm (P = 0.329). Discontinuation rate in the first 3 weeks was 6.3% versus 15.8%, respectively (P = 0.073). QoL was comparable between the two treatment arms.

CONCLUSIONS

A dose-escalation schema of everolimus over 3 weeks can be successfully used to reduce the incidence of high-grade stomatitis in the first 12 weeks of treatment in patients with HR+/HER2- mBC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.govNCT02387099; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02387099.

Real-Life Analysis of Efficacy and Safety of Everolimus Plus Exemestane in Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients: A Turkish Oncology Group (TOG) Study

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of everolimus (EVE) plus exemestane (EXE) in hormone-receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients in real-life settings.

METHODS

Overall, 204 HR+, HER2- MBC patients treated with EVE + EXE after progressing following prior endocrine treatment were included. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) and safety data were analyzed.

RESULTS

The objective response rate, median PFS, and median OS were 33.4%, 8.9 months, and 23.4 months, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that negative progesterone receptor status was a significant determinant of poor treatment response (p = 0.035) and PFS (p = 0.024). The presence of bone-only metastasis was associated with better treatment response (p = 0.002), PFS (p < 0.001), and OS (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

We confirmed the favorable efficacy and safety profile of EVE + EXE for HR+, HER - MBC patients.

Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies

In the era of rapid development of new, expensive cancer therapies, value frameworks have been developed to quantify clinical benefit (CB). We assessed the evolution of CB since the 2015 introduction of The American Society of Clinical Oncology and The European Society of Medical Oncology value frameworks. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing systemic therapies for solid malignancies from 2010 to 2020 were evaluated and CB (Δ) in 2010–2014 (pre-value frameworks (PRE)) were compared to 2015–2020 (POST) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), and quality of life (QoL). In the 485 studies analyzed (12% PRE and 88% POST), the most common primary endpoint was PFS (49%), followed by OS (20%), RR (12%), and QoL (6%), with a significant increase in OS and decrease in RR as primary endpoints in the POST era (p = 0.011). Multivariable analyses revealed significant improvement in ΔOS POST (OR 2.86, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.26, p = 0.02) while controlling for other variables. After the development of value frameworks, median ΔOS improved minimally. The impact of value frameworks has yet to be fully realized in RCTs. Efforts to include endpoints shown to impact value, such as QoL, into clinical trials are warranted.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With PIK3CA-Mutated Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer From SOLAR-1

PURPOSE

In the phase III SOLAR-1 trial (NCT02437318), the PI3Kα-selective inhibitor and degrader alpelisib significantly improved median progression-free survival when added to fulvestrant in patients with phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha (PIK3CA)-mutated, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer. We assessed health-related quality of life using patient-reported outcome measures in these patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the PIK3CA-mutant cohort, 341 patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive alpelisib 300 mg daily or placebo plus fulvestrant 500 mg on days 1 and 15 of cycle 1 and on day 1 of subsequent 28-day cycles. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL of Cancer Patients and Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form questionnaires. Changes from baseline and time to 10% deterioration were analyzed using repeated measurement models and Cox models, respectively.

RESULTS

Global Health Status/QoL and functional status were maintained from baseline (mean changes < 10 points) in the alpelisib (overall change from baseline [95% CI], -3.50 [-8.02 to 1.02]) and placebo arms (overall change from baseline [95% CI], 0.27 [-4.48 to 5.02]). Overall treatment effect in Global Health Status/QoL was not significantly different between arms (-3.77; 95% CI, -8.35 to 0.80; P = .101). Time to 10% deterioration for Global Health Status/QoL was similar between arms (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.48). Compared with placebo, deterioration in social functioning and in diarrhea, appetite loss, nausea or vomiting, and fatigue symptom subscales occurred with alpelisib. Numerical improvement in Worst Pain was observed with alpelisib versus placebo (42% v 32%, week 24; P = .090).

CONCLUSION

In SOLAR-1, there was no statistical difference in deterioration of Global Health Status/QoL between arms, whereas symptom subscales favored placebo for diarrhea, appetite loss, nausea or vomiting, and fatigue, known side effects of alpelisib. Treatment decisions must consider efficacy and tolerability; taken with clinical efficacy, these results support the benefit-risk profile of alpelisib in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative PIK3CA-mutated advanced breast cancer.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trials Leading to Cancer Immunotherapy Drug Approvals From 2011 to 2018: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) promote patient centeredness in clinical trials; however, in the field of rapidly emerging and clinically impressive immunotherapy, data on PROs are limited.

METHODS

We systematically identified all immunotherapy approvals from 2011 through 2018 and assessed the analytic tools and reporting quality of associated PRO reports. For randomized clinical trials (RCTs), we developed a novel 24-point scoring scale: the PRO Endpoints Analysis Score based on 24 criteria derived from the recommendations of the Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data Consortium.

RESULTS

We assessed 44 trial publications supporting 42 immunotherapy approvals. PROs were published for 21 of the 44 (47.7%) trial publications. Twenty-three trials (52.3%) were RCTs and 21 (47.7%) pertained to single-arm trials. The median time between primary clinical outcomes publications and their corresponding secondary PRO publications was 19 months (interquartile range = 9-29 months). Of the 21 PRO reports, 4 (19.0%) reported a specific hypothesis, and most (85.7%) used descriptive statistics. Three (3 of 21 [14.3%]) studies performed a control for type I error. As for RCTs, 14 of 23 (60.9%) published PRO data, including 13 (56.5%) that published a secondary dedicated manuscript. One-half of these 14 trials scored less than 13 points on the 24-point PRO Endpoints Analysis Score. The mean score was 12.71 (range = 5-17, SD = 3.71), and none met all the recommendations of the Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data Consortium.

CONCLUSIONS

Suboptimal reporting of PROs occurs regularly in cancer immunotherapy trials. Increased efforts are needed to maximize the value of these data in cancer immunotherapy development and approval.

Design and methods of a national, multicenter, randomized and controlled trial to assess the efficacy of a physical activity program to improve health-related quality of life and reduce fatigue in women with metastatic breast cancer: ABLE02 trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with a metastatic breast cancer suffer from a deteriorated health-related quality of life and numerous symptoms such as pain, severe fatigue and a decrease of their physical fitness. As the feasibility of a physical activity program has been demonstrated in this population, ABLE02 aims to assess the efficacy of a 6 month-physical activity program using connected devices to improve health-related quality of life and to reduce fatigue in women with metastatic breast cancer.

METHODS

ABLE02 is a prospective, national, multicenter, randomized, controlled and open-label study. A total of 244 patients with a metastatic breast cancer, with at least one positive hormone receptor and a first-line chemotherapy planned, will be randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to: (i) the intervention arm to receive physical activity recommendations, an activity tracker to wear 24 h a day during the whole intervention (6 months) with at least three weekly walking sessions and quizzes each week on physical activity and nutrition (ii) the control arm to receive physical activity recommendations only. Health-related quality of life will be assessed every 6 weeks and main assessments will be conducted at baseline, M3, M6, M12 and M18 to evaluate the clinical, physical, biological and psychological parameters and survival of participants. All questionnaires will be completed on a dedicated application.

DISCUSSION

An activity program based on a smartphone application linked to an activity tracker may help to improve quality of life and reduce fatigue of patients with a metastatic breast cancer. The growth of e-health offers the opportunity to get real-time data as well as improving patient empowerment in order to change long-term behaviors.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT number: NCT04354233 .

Evaluating the credibility of anchor based estimates of minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes: instrument development and reliability study

OBJECTIVE

To develop an instrument to evaluate the credibility of anchor based minimal important differences (MIDs) for outcome measures reported by patients, and to assess the reliability of the instrument.

DESIGN

Instrument development and reliability study.

DATA SOURCES

Initial criteria were developed for evaluating the credibility of anchor based MIDs based on a literature review (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycInfo databases) and the experience of the authors in the methodology for estimation of MIDs. Iterative discussions by the team and pilot testing with experts and potential users facilitated the development of the final instrument.

PARTICIPANTS

With the newly developed instrument, pairs of masters, doctoral, or postdoctoral students with a background in health research methodology independently evaluated the credibility of a sample of MID estimates.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Core credibility criteria applicable to all anchor types, additional criteria for transition rating anchors, and inter-rater reliability coefficients were determined.

RESULTS

The credibility instrument has five core criteria: the anchor is rated by the patient; the anchor is interpretable and relevant to the patient; the MID estimate is precise; the correlation between the anchor and the outcome measure reported by the patient is satisfactory; and the authors select a threshold on the anchor that reflects a small but important difference. The additional criteria for transition rating anchors are: the time elapsed between baseline and follow-up measurement for estimation of the MID is optimal; and the correlations of the transition rating with the baseline, follow-up, and change score in the patient reported outcome measures are satisfactory. Inter-rater reliability coefficients (ĸ) for the core criteria and for one item from the additional criteria ranged from 0.70 to 0.94. Reporting issues prevented the evaluation of the reliability of the three other additional criteria for the transition rating anchors.

CONCLUSIONS

Researchers, clinicians, and healthcare policy decision makers can consider using this instrument to evaluate the design, conduct, and analysis of studies estimating anchor based minimal important differences.

Everolimus plus exemestane in hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer: incidence and time course of adverse events in the phase IIIb BALLET population

BACKGROUND

The addition of everolimus to exemestane therapy significantly improves progression-free survival in postmenopausal patients with hormone-receptor (HR)-positive HER2-negative endocrine-resistant breast cancer. However, the safety profile of this schedule still might be optimized.

METHODS

Patients included in the BALLET trial were assessed. The objectives of this analysis were to provide additional information on the safety profile of this schedule depending on prior anticancer therapies and to characterize the time course of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) of clinical interest throughout the study period. Non-infectious pneumonitis (NIP), stomatitis, asthenia and weight loss were selected as AEs of clinical interest.

RESULTS

The safety population of this analysis comprised 2131 patients. There were similar incidences of AEs and SAEs of clinical interest regardless of previous anticancer therapies. Most stomatitis and asthenia events occurred within the first three months. Incidence of weight loss appeared to plateau except in the case of grade 3-4 events, which occurred rarely. The incidence of any grade NIP (between 2 to 6%) and grade 3-4 NIP (between 0 to 1%) was low across the study, but steady.

CONCLUSIONS

Everolimus plus exemestane is a well-known therapeutic option for aromatase inhibitor pretreated advanced breast cancer patients, and its toxicity profile is similar to that described in previous studies. Close monitoring, especially within the first three months, early intervention with preventive measures and patient education to help recognize the first signs and symptoms of AEs, will help to reduce their incidence and severity.

Content validity of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network - Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function Short Form with advanced breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the content validity of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network - Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16) and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function Short Form 10b among patients with hormone receptor positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer.

METHODS

Cognitive debriefing interviews sought to evaluate patients' ability to read, understand, and meaningfully respond to the questionnaires, as well as to evaluate the questionnaires' relevance in the target patient population. Interviews were conducted by telephone and lasted approximately 90 min. Audio recordings were transcribed, anonymized, and analyzed using qualitative data analysis software.

RESULTS

Fifteen cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with women (mean age 66.0 years [standard deviation = 12.4]). Patients reported metastases in the bone (86.7%), liver (20.0%), lung (13.3%), skin (6.7%), and lymph node (6.7%) (not mutually exclusive). All patients for whom data were available demonstrated understanding of the instructions and the recall period of the NFBSI-16 (n = 14/14, 100.0%) and the PROMIS (n = 14/14, 100.0%). Greater than 90% of patients demonstrated understanding of each of the items in the NFBSI-16 and the PROMIS. Greater than 70% of patients demonstrated understanding of the response options of the NFBSI-16, > 90% understood response options of PROMIS Items 1-6, and ≥ 50% understood response options of PROMIS Items 7-10. Conceptual relevance was supported for most items in both questionnaires based on patients' reports of experiencing the concepts as part of their breast cancer experience.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the cognitive debriefing interviews provide evidence that the NFBSI-16 and PROMIS Physical Function Short Form 10b have content validity in the HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer patient population. Patients may benefit from additional instructions at the point the response options reverse direction in the PROMIS.

mTOR Signaling Pathway in Cancer Targets Photodynamic Therapy In Vitro

The Mechanistic or Mammalian Target of Rapamycin (mTOR) is a major signaling pathway in eukaryotic cells belonging to the P13K-related kinase family of the serine/threonine protein kinase. It has been established that mTOR plays a central role in cellular processes and implicated in various cancers, diabetes, and in the aging process with very poor prognosis. Inhibition of the mTOR pathway in the cells may improve the therapeutic index in cancer treatment. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has been established to selectively eradicate neoplasia at clearly delineated malignant lesions. This review highlights recent advances in understanding the role or regulation of mTOR in cancer therapy. It also discusses how mTOR currently contributes to cancer as well as future perspectives on targeting mTOR therapeutically in cancer in vitro.

Statistical analysis of patient-reported outcome data in randomised controlled trials of locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review

Although patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as health-related quality of life, are important endpoints in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), there is little consensus about the analysis, interpretation, and reporting of these data. We did a systematic review to assess the variability, quality, and standards of PRO data analyses in advanced breast cancer RCTs. We searched PubMed for English language articles published in peer-reviewed journals between Jan 1, 2001, and Oct 30, 2017. Eligible articles were those that reported PRO results from RCTs of adult patients with advanced breast cancer receiving anti-cancer treatments with reported sample sizes of at least 50 patients-66 RCTs met the selection criteria. Only eight (12%) RCTs reported a specific PRO research hypothesis. Heterogeneity in the statistical methods used to assess PRO data was observed, with a mixture of longitudinal and cross-sectional techniques. Not all articles addressed the problem of multiple testing. Fewer than half of RCTs (28 [42%]) reported the clinical significance of their findings. 48 (73%) did not report how missing data were handled. Our systematic review shows a need to improve standards in the analysis, interpretation, and reporting of PRO data in cancer RCTs. Lack of standardisation makes it difficult to draw robust conclusions and compare findings across trials. The Setting International Standards in the Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Data Consortium was set up to address this need and develop recommendations on the analysis of PRO data in RCTs.

Health-related quality of life of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer treated with ribociclib + letrozole: results from MONALEESA-2

PURPOSE

Evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer treated with first-line ribociclib plus letrozole.

METHODS

In the phase III MONALEESA-2 study (NCT01958021), 668 patients were randomized 1:1 to ribociclib (600 mg/day; 3-weeks-on/1-week-off) plus letrozole (2.5 mg/day) or placebo plus letrozole. PROs were assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer core quality-of-life (EORTC QLQ-C30) and breast cancer-specific (EORTC QLQ-BR23) questionnaires. Changes from baseline and time to deterioration in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were analyzed using linear mixed-effect and stratified Cox regression models, respectively. Exploratory analysis of area-under-the-curve for change from baseline in pain score (AUC-pain) was performed.

RESULTS

On-treatment HRQoL scores were consistently maintained from baseline and were similar between arms. A clinically meaningful (> 5 points) reduction in pain score was observed as early as Week 8 and was maintained up to Cycle 15 in the ribociclib arm. A statistically significant increase in mean AUC-pain was also observed in the ribociclib arm. Scores for all other EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BR23 domains were maintained from baseline and were similar between arms.

CONCLUSIONS

HRQoL was consistently maintained from baseline in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer receiving ribociclib plus letrozole and was similar to that observed in the placebo plus letrozole arm. Together with the improved clinical efficacy and manageable safety profile, these PRO results provide additional support for the benefit of ribociclib plus letrozole in this patient population.

Everolimus-based combination therapies for HR+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is the leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality among women worldwide. Endocrine therapy is the standard of care for the most common subtype of MBC, hormone-receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) disease. Advances in treating this type of MBC have focused on improving the efficacy of endocrine therapy by adding agents that target specific molecular pathways of breast cancer cell growth and survival. The combination of the aromatase inhibitor exemestane and the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor, everolimus, more than doubled median progression-free survival compared with exemestane alone (7.8 vs 3.2 months, respectively; hazard ratio 0.45 [95% confidence interval 0.38-0.54]; log rank P < 0.0001) in the BOLERO-2 study in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer that had recurred or progressed on prior non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy. In addition, everolimus plus exemestane was associated with a manageable safety profile. The results of BOLERO-2 led to regulatory approval of everolimus plus exemestane. Additional everolimus-based combinations have been or are under investigation in the HR+, HER2- MBC setting, including combinations with letrozole, fulvestrant, ribociclib, tamoxifen, and chemotherapy. This review summarizes key data on everolimus-based combinations focusing on efficacy, safety, biomarkers, quality of life, and health economic outcomes. These data are discussed in the context of the changing MBC treatment algorithm to provide insights into the clinical relevance of everolimus-based combinations.

Exemestane and Everolimus combination treatment of hormone receptor positive, HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer: A retrospective study of 9 cancer centers in the Campania Region (Southern Italy) focused on activity, efficacy and safety

Exemestane (Exe) in combination with Everolimus (Eve) represents an important treatment option for patients diagnosed with hormone receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC), which was previously treated with non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors (NSAI). Data from unselected populations may be useful for defining the optimal therapeutic algorithm within a clinical setting. Data from 264 HR+, HER2-MBC patients who received Exe-Eve treatment in combination, following the failure of NSAIs was retrospectively analyzed. Different lines of endocrine treatment (ET) were investigated to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the treatment within the ‘everyday clinical practice’ population. The disease control rate (DCR) was 73.1%, with no statistically significant difference among the different settings. At a median follow-up of 42 months, the median progression free survival (PFS) was 11.6, 9.7 and 7.5 months for patients treated with Exe-Eve as first, second or third line therapy, respectively. There was a statistically significant correlation with younger age, no previous adjuvant chemotherapy (CT), no previous adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET), HT duration ≥36 months, involvement of liver and/or lung, no prior CT for metastatic disease and PS=0 at the start of treatment. The median overall survival (OS) was 33.0 months; at a median follow-up of 67 months, the median OS was 43.1, 31.7 and 27.9 months in patients treated with Exe-Eve in first, second or third line therapy, respectively. On multivariate analysis, diabetes and previous CT for metastatic disease were revealed to correlate with a worse outcome. Conversely, the presence of mucositis was significantly associated with long-term survival. Overall, Exe-Eve was typically well tolerated and the majority toxicities were G1 or 2, while treatment discontinuation due to unacceptable toxicity was only required in 5.7% of patients. Despite the limitations due to the observational nature of this study, the findings suggest that treatment with Exe-Eve is an active and safe therapeutic option for endocrine-sensitive MBC patients in a real-world clinical setting, regardless of treatment lines.

Optimising endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer

Hormone receptor-positive breast cancer is commonly treated with endocrine therapy (ET); however, over time, cancer cells can develop endocrine resistance. This review aims to document combination therapy and sequential therapy in the use of endocrine agents and targeted agents, by conducting two systematic searches using four databases: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science. A total of 26 studies that covered combination therapy were obtained and included for the review. Fourteen were phase III documenting combinations of mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR), phosphoinositide-3-kinase (PI3K), vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 and cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors. The remaining studies were of phase II nature that reported combinations involving inhibitors in mTOR, endothelial growth factor receptor, CDK4/6 and TKI. Interesting findings in inhibitor combinations involving CDK4/6, mTOR and PI3K suggest clinical activity that can overcome endocrine resistance. On the other hand, there were 0 studies that covered sequential therapy. Overall findings showed that combination therapy improved treatment efficacy over monotherapy in postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. Inevitably, the benefits are accompanied with increased toxicity. To optimise ET, further research into combinations and effective patient selection will need to be defined. Additionally, this review warrants future studies to explore sequential therapy.

Value assessment in oncology drugs: funding of drugs for metastatic breast cancer in Canada

Background

Life expectancy for women with metastatic breast cancer has improved since the early 2000s, in part because of the introduction of novel therapies, including chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, and targeted agents. However, those treatments can come at a cost for the patient (short- and long-term toxicities from treatment) and at a financial cost for the health care system. Given the increase in the number of costly anticancer agents being introduced into the clinical setting, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (asco) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (esmo) have developed a system to quantify the value of new cancer treatments in terms of benefit, toxicities, and costs.

Methods

In our value-assessment analysis, we included drugs that were funded in Canada between 2012 and 2017 for metastatic breast cancer. We reviewed the clinical benefit of those agents (survival, progression, quality of life), their costs, their value according to the asco and esmo value frameworks, and their assessments from the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review [pcodr (in Canada, except Quebec)] and the Institut national d'excellence en santé et en services sociaux [iness (in Quebec)].

Results

Drugs funded in Canada showed variation in their asco net health benefit scores and esmo magnitude of clinical benefit scores, but all had a cost-effectiveness ratio greater than $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. The strength and magnitude of the clinical benefit (for example, overall survival benefit vs. progression-free survival benefit) was not necessarily associated with a higher value score.

Conclusions

Although great progress has been made in developing value frameworks, use of those frameworks has to be refined to help patients and health care providers make informed decisions about the benefit of novel cancer therapies and to help policymakers make decisions about the societal benefit of funding those therapies.

An update on treatment for post-menopausal metastatic breast cancer in elderly patients

INTRODUCTION

Elderly patients make up a significant proportion of patients with metastatic breast cancer. With several options available in the metastatic setting for hormone positive breast cancer, these patients require an individualized approach to decision-making that considers multiple factors beyond performance status and chronologic age.

AREAS COVERED

The authors review the literature on endocrine monotherapy and combinations for hormone positive metastatic breast cancer, with specific commentary on the efficacy and toxicity for elderly patients. The authors describe the role of comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) and highlight the considerations for the use of bone modifying agents, and HER2-targeted therapy for hormone positive/HER2+ patients.

EXPERT OPINION

Evidence for elderly patients is largely based on subgroup analyses, which should be interpreted with caution. Nonetheless, elderly patients with metastatic hormone receptor positive breast cancer appear to derive similar benefit from treatments as younger patients. Similarly, for most drugs, these patients have no significant worsening of toxicity compared to younger patients. In addition to tumor biology, patient values and information from the CGA should be used to guide treatment decisions.

Systematic Literature Review of the Impact of Endocrine Monotherapy and in Combination with Targeted Therapy on Quality of Life of Postmenopausal Women with HR+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer

INTRODUCTION

A major treatment goal for advanced breast cancer (ABC) is to maintain or ideally improve patient quality of life (QoL). Given the changing disease landscape, this systematic literature review (SLR) aims to assess the impact of endocrine therapies (ET), including ET monotherapy (ET mono) and ET combined with targeted therapy (ET + TT), on QoL of women with HR+/HER2- ABC.

METHODS

A SLR was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) meeting the following criteria: (1) included ET mono or ET + TT, (2) reported QoL outcomes, (3) focused on women with HR+/HER2- ABC, and (4) published after 2007 (when standardized HER2 testing became available). The databases searched included MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and key conference proceedings from 2013 to 2016. QoL outcomes for ET mono, ET + TT, and comparisons between the two were summarized from the identified trials.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies (representing 6 RCTs) were identified. The study populations included first-line (5 studies) and ET-failure settings (6 studies). Across settings, global health status (GHS) maintained or deteriorated slightly on these treatments during the trial period. Time to deterioration (TTD) in QoL measured by GHS was analyzed in 6 studies and 4 RCTs. In the first-line setting, reported median TTD in GHS was similar between ET mono and ET + TT (7.2-13.8 months in ET mono; 11.1 months in ET + TT). In the ET-failure setting, ET + TT showed significantly longer TTD vs. ET mono in GHS (median 5.6-8.4 months in ET mono and 8.3-11.7 months in ET + TT) and some additional domains.

CONCLUSIONS

ET + TT users experienced similar QoL in the first-line and ET-failure setting relative to patients on ET mono. Moreover, ET + TT users experienced better QoL outcomes in some domains in the ET-failure setting relative to ET mono users.

FUNDING

Novartis.

Emerging use of everolimus in the treatment of neuroendocrine tumors

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) consist of a diverse family of malignancies, which are derived from neuroendocrine cells, most commonly originating from the gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) tract or the bronchopulmonary system. In general, NETs are more indolent than epithelial tumors, with median survival rates of longer than 30 months. The upregulation of mTOR pathway has been shown to play a pivotal role in NET pathogenesis. Inhibition of mTOR protein with everolimus represents a progress in the treatment of advanced NETs. Everolimus has shown a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with pancreatic NETs (pNETs) and nonfunctional GEP and lung NETs in the Phase III RAD001 in Advanced Neuroendocrine Tumors (RADIANT)-3 and RADIANT-4 studies, respectively. In addition, the combination of everolimus with octreotide showed a clinically significant improvement versus octreotide alone in functional NETs in the RADIANT-2 trial. These studies led to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medical Agency (EMA) approval of everolimus. Safety profile of everolimus is generally acceptable. The most common adverse events are stomatitis, diarrhea, rash and fatigue. There is a growing range of novel treatment options in the setting of NETs, but there are no data comparing the activity of different treatment strategies. Thus, treatment decisions are based on different aspects, such as clinical course, patient symptomatology, primary tumor site, tumor functionality, rate of progression and burden of disease. Further research is required to clarify the treatment sequencing to achieve the maximum prolongation in survival and maintenance of quality of life. Future research should concentrate on identification of predictive biomarkers for benefit from different therapies, and studies should also include quality of life as an important measurement in this disease.

Measuring the Value of New Drugs: Validity and Reliability of 4 Value Assessment Frameworks in the Oncology Setting

BACKGROUND

Several organizations have developed frameworks to systematically assess the value of new drugs.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the convergent validity and interrater reliability of 4 value frameworks to understand the extent to which these tools can facilitate value-based treatment decisions in oncology.

METHODS

Eight panelists used the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) frameworks to conduct value assessments of 15 drugs for advanced lung and breast cancers and castration-refractory prostate cancer. Panelists received instructions and published clinical data required to complete the assessments, assigning each drug a numeric or letter score. Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance for Ranks (Kendall's W) was used to measure convergent validity by cancer type among the 4 frameworks. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to measure interrater reliability for each framework across cancers. Panelists were surveyed on their experiences.

RESULTS

Kendall's W across all 4 frameworks for breast, lung, and prostate cancer drugs was 0.560 (P= 0.010), 0.562 (P = 0.010), and 0.920 (P < 0.001), respectively. Pairwise, Kendall's W for breast cancer drugs was highest for ESMO-ICER and ICER-NCCN (W = 0.950, P = 0.019 for both pairs) and lowest for ASCO-NCCN (W = 0.300, P = 0.748). For lung cancer drugs, W was highest pairwise for ESMO-ICER (W = 0.974, P = 0.007) and lowest for ASCO-NCCN (W = 0.218, P = 0.839); for prostate cancer drugs, pairwise W was highest for ICER-NCCN (W = 1.000, P < 0.001) and lowest for ESMO-ICER and ESMO-NCCN (W = 0.900, P = 0.052 for both pairs). When ranking drugs on distinct framework subdomains, Kendall's W among breast cancer drugs was highest for certainty (ICER, NCCN: W = 0.908, P = 0.046) and lowest for clinical benefit (ASCO, ESMO, NCCN: W = 0.345, P = 0.436). Among lung cancer drugs, W was highest for toxicity (ASCO, ESMO, NCCN: W = 0. 944, P < 0.001) and lowest for certainty (ICER, NCCN: W = 0.230, P = 0.827); and among prostate cancer drugs, it was highest for quality of life (ASCO, ESMO: W = 0.986, P = 0.003) and lowest for toxicity (ASCO, ESMO, NCCN: W = 0.200, P = 0.711). ICC (95% CI) for ASCO, ESMO, ICER, and NCCN were 0.800 (0.660-0.913), 0.818 (0.686-0.921), 0.652 (0.466-0.834), and 0.153 (0.045-0.371), respectively. When scores were rescaled to 0-100, NCCN provided the narrowest band of scores. When asked about their experiences using the ASCO, ESMO, ICER, and NCCN frameworks, panelists generally agreed that the frameworks were logically organized and reasonably easy to use, with NCCN rated somewhat easier.

CONCLUSIONS

Convergent validity among the ASCO, ESMO, ICER, and NCCN frameworks was fair to excellent, increasing with clinical benefit subdomain concordance and simplicity of drug trial data. Interrater reliability, highest for ASCO and ESMO, improved with clarity of instructions and specificity of score definitions. Continued use, analyses, and refinements of these frameworks will bring us closer to the ultimate goal of using value-based treatment decisions to improve patient care and outcomes.

DISCLOSURES

This work was funded by Eisai Inc. Copher and Knoth are employees of Eisai Inc. Bentley, Lee, Zambrano, and Broder are employees of Partnership for Health Analytic Research, a health services research company paid by Eisai Inc. to conduct this research. For this study, Cohen, Huynh, and Neville report fees from Partnership for Health Analytic Research. Outside of this study, Cohen receives grants and direct consulting fees from various companies that manufacture and market pharmaceuticals. Mei reports a grant from Eisai Inc. during this study. The other authors have no disclosures to report. Study concept and design were contributed by Bentley and Broder, with assistance from Elkin and Cohen. Bentley took the lead in data collection, along with Elkin, Huynh, Mukherjea, Neville, Mei, Popescu, Lee, and Zambrano. Data interpretation was performed by Bentley and Broder, along with Elkin, Cohen, Copher, and Knoth. The manuscript was written primarily by Bentley, along with Elkin and Broder, and revised by Bentley, Broder, Elkin, Cohen, Copher, and Knoth. Select components of this work's methods were presented at ISPOR 19th Annual European Congress held in Vienna, Austria, October 29-November 2, 2016, and Society for Medical Decision Making 38th Annual North American Meeting held in Vancouver, Canada, October 23-26, 2016.

Role of everolimus in the treatment of metastatic HER2-negative/HR-positive breast cancer

Metastatic breast cancer (mBC) is a leading cause of mortality for women around the world. The response to hormonotherapy of the patients with HER2-negative/HR-positive mBC is usually limited, and many strategies are in place to contrast the hormonotherapy resistance. Since efficacy and effectiveness of everolimus have been established by many trials, this review is aimed to give a structured synthesis to define the everolimus clinical role among the treatment options for mBC. Key aspects of everolimus dosing and safety profile, drawn up by relevant findings, are included, as well as the role of biomarkers to identify subgroups of mBC patients who may best benefit from everolimus treatment.

Safety, Efficacy, and Patient Acceptability of Everolimus in the Treatment of Breast Cancer

Everolimus combined with exemestane is an important treatment option for patients suffering from estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, advanced breast cancer (ABC) who have been previously treated with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI). After presentation of phase III registration trial BOLERO-2, several phase IIIb trials have been started to evaluate this regimen in a more real-world setting. Here, we review the efficacy and safety data published or presented at selected international meetings. These studies confirmed the outcome observed in the BOLERO-2 trial. Patient acceptance rate is also discussed by focusing on the permanent everolimus discontinuation rate in these trials. Factors influencing the safety profile are also reported, including the impact of age. The optimal sequence of combined therapy approaches associating targeted and endocrine therapy (ET) has yet to be determined as new treatment options such as cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors become available. However, everolimus-exemestane remains an important treatment option with a major impact on progression-free survival (PFS) and an acceptable safety profile.

Enhancing Endocrine Therapy Combination Strategies for the Treatment of Postmenopausal HR+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common malignancy in women worldwide, with approximately two-thirds having hormone receptor-positive (HR+) tumors. New endocrine therapy (ET) strategies include combining ET agents as well as adding inhibitors targeting growth factors, angiogenesis, the mechanistic target of rapamycin, phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K), or cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 to ET. Level 1 evidence supports use of fulvestrant plus anastrozole or palbociclib plus letrozole as first-line therapy for HR+/HER- advanced BC with special consideration for the former in ET-naïve patients, as well as everolimus plus exemestane or palbociclib plus fulvestrant as second-line therapy with special consideration in select first-line patients. Although the safety profiles of these combinations are generally predictable and manageable, both everolimus and palbociclib are associated with an increased risk of potentially serious or early-onset toxicities requiring individualized a priori adverse event risk stratification, earlier and more rigorous agent-specific monitoring, and patient education. Although each of these combinations improves progression-free survival, none with the exception of anastrazole plus fulvestrant have demonstrated improved overall survival. PI3K catalytic-α mutations assessed from circulating tumor DNA represent the first potentially viable serum biomarker for the selection of ET combinations, and new data demonstrate the feasibility of this minimally invasive technique as an alternative to traditional tissue analysis. Therapeutic ratios of select ET combinations support their use in first- and second-line settings, but optimal sequencing has yet to be determined.

THE ONCOLOGIST

2017;22:12-24 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Emerging data show that new endocrine therapy (ET) combinations can improve progression-free and overall survival outcomes in patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative (HR+/HER-) advanced breast cancer. Level 1 evidence supports consideration of dual ET regimens, particularly in ET-naïve patients, or palbociclib plus letrozole as first-line therapy, as well as the addition of mTOR or CDK4/6 inhibitors to established ET in the second-line setting and in select first-line patients. Some combinations are associated with increased risk of class-specific toxicities that will require individualized risk stratification, earlier and more rigorous agent-specific monitoring, and patient education. Recent data on a noninvasive biomarker assay that predicts response to a phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitor demonstrates the feasibility of this minimally invasive technique as an alternative to traditional tissue analysis.

Analysing data from patient-reported outcome and quality of life endpoints for cancer clinical trials: a start in setting international standards

Measures of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and other patient-reported outcomes generate important data in cancer randomised trials to assist in assessing the risks and benefits of cancer therapies and fostering patient-centred cancer care. However, the various ways these measures are analysed and interpreted make it difficult to compare results across trials, and hinders the application of research findings to inform publications, product labelling, clinical guidelines, and health policy. To address these problems, the Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data (SISAQOL) initiative has been established. This consortium, directed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), was convened to provide recommendations on how to standardise the analysis of HRQOL and other patient-reported outcomes data in cancer randomised trials. This Personal View discusses the reasons why this project was initiated, the rationale for the planned work, and the expected benefits to cancer research, patient and provider decision making, care delivery, and policy making.

Long-term health status as measured by EQ-5D among patients with metastatic breast cancer: comparison of first-line oral S-1 and taxane therapies in the randomized phase III SELECT BC trial

Purpose

The goal of chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is to prolong survival and maintain health-related quality of life. This study aimed to evaluate long-term health status of patients with MBC who participated in the phase III randomized SELECT BC trial.

Methods

In the SELECT BC trial, patients were randomly allocated to the S-1 or taxane (paclitaxel or docetaxel) arm. Health status was assessed by EQ-5D at pre-treatment, 3 and 6 months after randomization, and every 6 months thereafter to the extent possible. Least square mean scores were assessed to compare EQ-5D index values between groups. Time to deterioration analysis was also performed by defining the minimally important difference of EQ-5D as 0.05 or 0.1.

Results

The number of patients for EQ-5D analysis was 175 and 208 in the taxane and S-1 arms, respectively. Least square mean EQ-5D index values up to 60 months were 0.741 (95 % CI [0.713–0.769]) in the taxane arm and 0.748 [0.722–0.775] in the S-1 arm. The EQ-5D index value during PFS up to 12 months in the S-1 was superior to the corresponding index value in the taxane (0.812 [0.789–0.834] vs. 0.772 [0.751–0.792], P = 0.009). Time to deterioration analysis also revealed that S-1 significantly delayed the deterioration of EQ-5D index value during the period before progression (P = 0.002 and 0.003).

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that the EQ-5D index value was higher in patients treated with S-1 during first-line chemotherapy. Considering non-inferiority of S-1 in terms of OS, obtained quality-adjusted life years may be greater in the S-1 arm.

Surrogate end points for overall survival in breast cancer trials: A review

Our aim was to review the studies which assessed potential surrogate endpoints for overall survival (OS) in breast cancer trials. A Literature search in PubMed database of studies which assessed potential surrogate endpoints for OS in breast cancer trials was conducted. The surrogacy was assessed with the German institute of Quality and efficiency in Health Care's (IWQiG) framework and the Fleming hierarchy. Thirteen studies were identified. At the neoadjuvant setting, two individual patient data (IPD) meta-analyses and one aggregate data meta-analysis assessing surrogacy of pathological complete response (PCR) were identified. Trial-level association was calculated in one study and the squared correlation was 0.24. Therefore PCR was not judged to be valid surrogate for OS at the neoadjuvant setting according to the IWQiG framework and Fleming hierarchy. At the adjuvant setting, one meta-analysis on aggregate data was identified. 2-year DFS was not judged to be valid surrogate for OS at the neoadjuvant setting according to the IWQiG framework and Fleming hierarchy. At the metastatic setting, six meta-analyses based on aggregate data, three IPD meta-analyses and one retrospective study were identified. Within the IPD meta-analyses, at the trial-level association the squared correlation between the potential surrogates and OS ranged from 0.10 to 0.57 and no endpoint was judged to be valid surrogate for OS at the metastatic setting. The level of evidence available supporting a relationship between OS and potential surrogate endpoints in breast cancer trials is low.

Health-related quality of life in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer comparing carboplatin and weekly paclitaxel doublet chemotherapy with monotherapy

In the Intergroupe Francophone de Cancérologie Thoracique 0501 trial the carboplatin-paclitaxel chemotherapy increased toxicity (most frequent, decreased neutrophil count, asthenia). We longitudinally compared health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of the two treatment arms.

In total, 451 patients aged 70–89 years with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin plus paclitaxel or vinorelbine or gemcitabine. HRQoL was assessed by means of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire at baseline, week 6 and week 18.

Using a five-point decrease as the minimal clinically important difference, patients treated with the chemotherapy doublet exhibited a significant longer time until definitive deterioration (TUDD) for two HRQoL dimensions: physical functioning (median TUDD: 2.04 for the doublet versus 1.71 months for monotherapy; log-rank p=0.01) and nausea and vomiting (median: not reached versus 4.83, respectively; log-rank p=0.046). Cox multivariate analysis revealed the carboplatin and paclitaxel arm to be independently associated with longer TUDD for these two HRQoL dimensions. In addition, TUDD didn't significantly differ between the two arms for all the other HRQoL dimensions.

The chemotherapy doublet did not reduce TUDD in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. Moreover, TUDD was prolonged for two HRQoL dimensions, namely physical functioning and nausea and vomiting.

Clinical Implications of the Progression-Free Survival Endpoint for Treatment of Hormone Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer

: Hormonal therapy for advanced breast cancer (ABC) has evolved significantly since the introduction of tamoxifen more than 40 years ago. The availability of selective antiestrogen therapies has further improved treatment options for women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) ABC. However, with the development of resistance to hormonal therapies, a new treatment paradigm has emerged based on our understanding of biological pathways involved in HR+ breast cancer and mechanisms of resistance to hormonal therapy. Recent drug development efforts have focused on combining hormonal treatment with agents that target mammalian target of rapamycin serine-threonine kinases and cyclin-dependent kinases. In parallel with the evolution of hormonal and targeted therapies, our understanding of the utility of clinical endpoints has deepened. Progression-free survival (PFS) is a primary endpoint well-understood by clinicians and is increasingly accepted as a surrogate for overall survival (OS) by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Yet the perceived clinical benefit of PFS to patients is less well understood. Patients may not grasp the implications of prolonged PFS, highlighting the reality that patient preference in treatment selection encompasses factors that extend beyond drug activity. This presents an opportunity for clinicians to discuss PFS with patients in the context of their treatment plans, clinical outcomes, and quality-of-life measures. The objective of this review is to explore the clinical validity of the PFS and OS endpoints and the clinical relevance of PFS and OS to patients, especially in light of drivers that led to a range of treatment options for patients with HR+ ABC.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Advances in drug development during the past two decades have provided numerous options for treatment of advanced breast cancer that include monotherapy with endocrine modulating agents and dual therapy that combines endocrine therapy with an inhibitor targeting the mammalian target of rapamycin serine-threonine kinase or cyclin-dependent kinase pathways known to be involved with resistance. Clinical trial endpoints for breast cancer have evolved as well. Communication of progression-free survival, overall survival, and other outcomes with patients should incorporate the context of the individual's treatment plan and include discussion of response rate, side effects, and quality of life.

Comparison of medical costs and healthcare resource utilization of post-menopausal women with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer receiving everolimus-based therapy or chemotherapy: a retrospective claims database analysis

OBJECTIVE

To analyze medical costs and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) associated with everolimus-based therapy or chemotherapy among post-menopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive, human-epidermal-growth-factor-receptor-2-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC).

METHODS

Patients with HR+/HER2- mBC who discontinued a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor and began a new line of treatment with everolimus-based therapy or chemotherapy (index therapy/index date) between July 20, 2012 and April 30, 2014 were identified from two large claims databases. All-cause, BC-related, and adverse event (AE)-related medical costs (in 2014 USD) and all-cause HRU per patient per month (PPPM) were analyzed for both treatment groups across patients' first four lines of therapies for mBC. Adjusted differences in costs and HRU between the everolimus and chemotherapy treatment group were estimated pooling all lines and using multivariable generalized linear models, accounting for difference in patient characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 3298 patients were included: 902 everolimus-treated patients and 2636 chemotherapy-treated patients. Compared to chemotherapy, everolimus was associated with significantly lower all-cause (adjusted mean difference = $3455, p < 0.01) and BC-related ($2510, p < 0.01) total medical costs, with inpatient ($1344, p < 0.01) and outpatient costs ($1048, p < 0.01) as the main drivers for cost differences. Everolimus was also associated with significantly lower AE-related medical costs ($1730, p < 0.01), as well as significantly lower HRU (emergency room incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.83; inpatient IRR = 0.74; inpatient days IRR = 0.65; outpatient IRR = 0.71; BC-related outpatient IRR = 0.57; all p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective claims database analysis of commercially-insured patients with HR+/HER2- mBC in the US showed that everolimus was associated with substantial all-cause, BC-related, and AE-related medical cost savings and less utilization of healthcare resources relative to chemotherapy.

Applying the Longitudinal Model from Item Response Theory to Assess Health-Related Quality of Life in the PRODIGE 4/ACCORD 11 Randomized Trial

INTRODUCTION

A new longitudinal statistical approach was compared to the classical methods currently used to analyze health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) data. The comparison was made using data in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Three hundred forty-two patients from the PRODIGE4/ACCORD 11 study were randomly assigned to FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine regimens. HRQoL was evaluated using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30. The classical analysis uses a linear mixed model (LMM), considering an HRQoL score as a good representation of the true value of the HRQoL, following EORTC recommendations. In contrast, built on the item response theory (IRT), our approach considered HRQoL as a latent variable directly estimated from the raw data. For polytomous items, we extended the partial credit model to a longitudinal analysis (longitudinal partial credit model [LPCM]), thereby modeling the latent trait as a function of time and other covariates.

RESULTS

Both models gave the same conclusions on 11 of 15 HRQoL dimensions. HRQoL evolution was similar between the 2 treatment arms, except for the symptoms of pain. Indeed, regarding the LPCM, pain perception was significantly less important in the FOLFIRINOX arm than in the gemcitabine arm. For most of the scales, HRQoL changes over time, and no difference was found between treatments in terms of HRQoL.

DISCUSSION

The use of LMM to study the HRQoL score does not seem appropriate. It is an easy-to-use model, but the basic statistical assumptions do not check. Our IRT model may be more complex but shows the same qualities and gives similar results. It has the additional advantage of being more precise and suitable because of its direct use of raw data.

Everolimus in the Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer

The discovery of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) molecular pathway has brought insight into its vital role in breast cancer pathogenesis. Several clinical trials have shown that the mTOR inhibitor everolimus could improve patient outcomes in several subtypes of breast cancer, including hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor–negative metastatic disease that has progressed after prior endocrine therapy. This review summarizes findings from clinical trials that have demonstrated the benefit of everolimus in metastatic breast cancer and highlights some new research directions utilizing everolimus.

A network meta-analysis of everolimus plus exemestane versus chemotherapy in the first- and second-line treatment of estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer

The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy and toxicity of chemotherapy to exemestane plus everolimus (EXE/EVE) through a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials. NMA methods extend standard pairwise meta-analysis to allow simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments while maintaining randomization of individual studies. The method enables "direct" evidence (i.e., evidence from studies directly comparing two interventions) and "indirect" evidence (i.e., evidence from studies that do not compare the two interventions directly) to be pooled under the assumption of evidence consistency. We used NMA to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) and time to progression (TTP) curves in 34 studies, and response rate (RR) and the hazard ratios (HRs) of the PFS/TTP in 36 studies. A number needed to treat (NNT) analysis was also performed as well as descriptive comparison of reported toxicities. The NMA for PFS/TTP curves and for HR shows EXE/EVE is more efficacious than capecitabine plus sunitinib, CMF, megestrol acetate and tamoxifen, with an average of related-PFS/TTP difference ranging from about 10 months for capecitabine plus sunitinib to more than 6 months for tamoxifen. The NMA for overall RR shows that EXE/EVE provides a better RR than bevacizumab plus capecitabine, capecitabine, capecitabine plus sorafenib, capecitabine plus sunitinib, CMF, gemcitabine plus epirubicin plus paclitaxel, EVE plus tamoxifen, EXE, FEC, megestrol acetate, mitoxantrone, and tamoxifen. Finally, the NMA for NNT shows that EXE/EVE is more beneficial as compared to BMF, capecitabine, capecitabine plus sunitinib, CMF, FEC, megestrol acetate, mitoxantrone, and tamoxifen. The combination of EXE/EVE as first- or second-line therapy for ER+ve/HER2-ve metastatic breast cancer is more efficacious than several chemotherapy regimens that were reported in the literature. Toxicities also favored EXE/EVE in most instances.

Sequential FOLFIRI.3 + Gemcitabine Improves Health-Related Quality of Life Deterioration-Free Survival of Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Randomized Phase II Trial

BACKGROUND

A randomized multicenter phase II trial was conducted to assess the sequential treatment strategy using FOLFIRI.3 and gemcitabine alternately (Arm 2) compared to gemcitabine alone (Arm 1) in patients with metastatic non pre-treated pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. It concludes that the sequential treatment strategy appears to be feasible and effective with a PFS rate of 43.5% in Arm 2 at 6 months (26.1% in Arm 1). This paper reports the results of the longitudinal analysis of the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) as a secondary endpoint of this study.

METHODS

HRQoL was evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline and every two months until the end of the study or death. HRQoL deterioration-free survival (QFS) was defined as the time from randomization to a first significant deterioration as compared to the baseline score with no further significant improvement, or death. A propensity score was estimated comparing characteristics of partial and complete responders. Analyses were repeated with inverse probability weighting method using the propensity score. Multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify independent factors influencing QFS.

RESULTS

98 patients were included between 2007 and 2011. Adjusting on the propensity score, patients of Arm 2 presented a longer QFS of Global Health Status (Hazard Ratio: 0.52 [0.31-0.85]), emotional functioning (0.35 [0.21-0.59]) and pain (0.50 [0.31-0.81]) than those of Arm 1.

CONCLUSION

Patients of Arm 2 presented a better HRQoL with a longer QFS than those of Arm 1. Moreover, the propensity score method allows to take into account the missing data depending on patients' characteristics.

TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

Eudract N° 2006-005703-34. (Name of the Trial: FIRGEM).

Everolimus plus exemestane for the treatment of advanced breast cancer: a review of subanalyses from BOLERO-2

Hormone receptor-positive breast cancer is typically managed with endocrine therapies. However, resistance to endocrine therapy results in disease progression in a large proportion of breast cancers. Through the understanding of the mechanisms of endocrine resistance, identification of implicated pathways and targets has led to the development of novel agents targeting these pathways. Phosphoinositide 3-kinase/protein kinase B/mammalian target of rapamycin (PI3K/AKT/mTOR) pathway aberrations are common in breast cancer, with increased PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling associated with resistance to endocrine and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted therapies. The mTOR inhibitor everolimus, in combination with exemestane, has been approved for patients with advanced hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer who progress on prior nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy based on results reported in the Breast Cancer Trials of Oral Everolimus-2 (BOLERO-2) study. This review will summarize the overall findings from BOLERO-2 and will consider available subanalyses by age, Asian origin, visceral or bone metastases, and prior therapy, with the aim of identifying populations most likely to benefit from everolimus therapy. The review will also summarize safety findings and their management and the effects of everolimus on quality of life.