The efficacy and safety of paclitaxel plus bevacizumab therapy in breast cancer patients with visceral crisis

Cisplatin Monotherapy as a Treatment Option for Patients with HER-2 Negative Breast Cancer Experiencing Hepatic Visceral Crisis or Impending Visceral Crisis

INTRODUCTION

Hepatic visceral crisis (VC), characterized by a rapid total bilirubin increase with disease progression, poses a life-threatening risk in advanced breast cancer (ABC). International consensus guidelines define VC and touch on impending VC (IVC). Limited data exist on systemic treatments for hepatic VC/IVC. This study explores the safety and efficacy of cisplatin monotherapy in patients with Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2- negative breast cancer (BC) and hepatic IVC/VC.

METHODS

In this retrospective single-center cohort study data of patients treated with cisplatin monotherapy (60-80 mg/m2, every 3-4 weeks) between 2016 and 2023 at a reference Cancer Centre in Southern Poland were analyzed.

RESULTS

33 female patients (24/33 hormonal-positive) with the mean age 53.84 years were included. Participants progressed on median 2 prior palliative systemic treatment lines. In 10/23 patients hepatic VC and in 23/33 IVC (rapid, symptomatic liver progression; extensive liver involvement; alanine or aspartate aminotransferase > 2 × normal limit; significant increases in lactate dehydrogenase, alkaline phosphatase, or gamma-glutamyl transferase) were identified. Median progression-free survival was 1.87 months and median overall survival 2.67 months. 33% of the patients presented stable disease or partial response. Eight patients experienced adverse events grade ≥ 3: in five the dose of cisplatin was reduced; two stopped the treatment.

CONCLUSION

Due to the hepatotoxicity of BC-active drugs, specific recommendations for systemic treatment are scarce. Our study explored cisplatin's potential use, finding it to be a viable option in patients with performance status 0 or 1 experiencing hepatic IVC/VC, irrespective of liver function parameters and other factors.

Visceral crisis in metastatic breast cancer: an old concept with new perspectives

Visceral Crisis (VC) in breast cancer is a critical scenario when the burden of metastatic disease results in rapid deterioration of organ functions. There are no widely accepted objective clinical criteria for the definition of VC, and different studies have reported diverse clinical conditions such as visceral crises. Diagnosis of VC is associated with a dismal prognosis and the management of this condition is currently based on limited retrospective evidence and expert opinions. International guidelines have recommended cytotoxic polychemotherapy in the management of VC, to achieve rapid symptomatic control and preserve organ function. Nevertheless, in the case of hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, the role of chemotherapy as the treatment of choice for VC has been recently questioned, since endocrine therapy plus CDK4/6 inhibitors yielded similar response rates, with better quality of life. For HER2-positive and triple-negative breast cancer, combined chemotherapy (plus HER2-directed therapy for HER2-positive) remains a standard option for VC, but novel effective drugs such as antibody-drug conjugates are emerging and their role in the VC context shall soon be elucidated. This review aims to critically discuss the definition, prognosis, management, and future directions regarding the visceral crisis in metastatic breast cancer.

Estrogen receptor positive breast cancer: contemporary nuances to sequencing therapy

The treatment landscape of hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer has evolved dramatically in recent years. While the combination of endocrine therapy and a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor is accepted as standard first-line treatment in most settings without visceral crisis, newer therapies have challenged traditional treatment models where cytotoxic chemotherapy was previously felt to be the only second-line option at time of progression. The incorporation of next-generation sequencing has led to the identification of molecular targets for therapeutic agents, including phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase and ESR1, though similar pathways can be targeted even in the absence of a mutation, such as with use of inhibitors of mammalian target of rapamycin. Current data also supports the use of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors beyond progression, even prior to the patient's first introduction to chemotherapy. The abundance of therapeutic options not only delay time to cytotoxic chemotherapy and antibody-drug conjugate initiation, but has resulted in improvement in breast cancer survivorship. Many unanswered questions remain, however, as to the most efficacious way to sequence these novel agents. To assist in this decision-making, we will review the existing data on systemic therapy and propose a treatment paradigm.

CDK4/6 inhibitors versus weekly paclitaxel for treatment of ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer with impending or established visceral crisis

PURPOSE

ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) with visceral crisis (VC) or impending VC (IVC) is commonly treated with chemotherapy instead of CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i). However, there is little evidence to confirm which treatment is superior. This study compared outcomes of patients with ER+/HER2- ABC and IVC/VC treated with CDK4/6i or weekly paclitaxel.

METHODS

Patients with ER+/HER2- ABC receiving first line treatment at a large tertiary UK cancer centre from 1-Mar-2017 to 30-Jun-2021 were retrospectively identified. Hospital records were screened for IVC/VC affecting the liver, lungs/mediastinum, gastrointestinal tract and/or bone marrow. Baseline demographics, clinical data and survival outcomes were recorded up to 30-Jul-2022.

RESULTS

27/396 (6.8%) patients with ABC who received CDK4/6i and 32/86 (37.2%) who received paclitaxel had IVC/VC. Median time to treatment failure (TTF), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly longer in the CDK4/6i compared to paclitaxel cohort: TTF 17.3 vs. 3.5 months (HR 0.33, 95%CI 0.17-0.61, p = 0.0002), PFS 17.8 vs. 4.5 months (HR 0.38, 95%CI 0.21-0.67, p = 0.002), OS 24.6 vs. 6.7 months (HR 0.37, 95%CI 0.20-0.68, p = 0.002). The median time to first improvement in IVC/VC was similar in patients receiving CDK4/6i compared to paclitaxel (3.9 vs. 3.6 weeks, p = 0.773). Disease control at 4 months was not significantly different in the CDK4/6i and paclitaxel cohorts (77.8% vs. 59.4%, p = 0.168). In multivariate analysis, treatment with CDK4/6i was independently associated with a longer PFS compared to paclitaxel (HR 0.31, 95%CI 0.12-0.78, p = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective study, patients with ER+/HER2- ABC and IVC/VC treated with CDK4/6i had a significantly better survival compared to those treated with weekly paclitaxel. Further prospective studies that minimise possible selection bias are recommended.

Clinical Review on the Management of Breast Cancer Visceral Crisis

Visceral crisis is a life-threatening clinical condition requiring urgent treatment and accounts for 10-15% of new advanced breast cancer diagnoses, mainly hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor 2 negative. As its clinical definition is an open topic with nebulous criteria and much room for subjective interpretation, it poses a challenge for daily clinical practice. International guidelines recommend combined chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with visceral crisis, but with modest results and a very poor prognosis. Visceral crisis has always been a common exclusion criterion in breast cancer trials, and the available evidence mainly comes from limited retrospective studies which are not sufficient to draw solid conclusions. The outstanding efficacy of innovative drugs, such as CDK4/6 inhibitors, questions the role of chemotherapy in this setting. In the lack of clinical reviews, we aim to critically discuss the management of visceral crisis, advocating future treatment perspectives for this challenging condition.

Different treatment regimens in breast cancer visceral crisis: A retrospective cohort study

Objective

Breast cancer visceral crisis (VC) is caused by excessive tumor burden leading to severe organ dysfunction with poor prognosis. Traditional chemotherapy reduces the quality of life of patients without significantly improving survival. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical characteristics of patients with VC and the prognosis by using different treatment options.

Methods

According to the 5th European School of Oncology (ESO)–European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer guidelines (ABC 5), patients who were treated in the First Hospital of Jilin University from 2018 to 2022 and diagnosed with breast cancer VC were retrospectively analyzed. The analysis focused on the characteristics of the patients, the treatment regimens, and prognosis.

Results

A total of 133 patients were included in this study. As for metastasis breast cancer subtype, 92 (69.18%) were hormone receptor (HR) positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) negative, 20 (15.04%) had HER-2 overexpression, and 21 (15.78%) were triple negative. All patients had an mOS of 11.2 months (range, 1.1–107.8 months). In different types of VC, the median overall survival (mOS) of bone marrow metastasis (BMM) was 18.0 months (range, 2.0–107.8 months), that of diffuse liver metastasis (DLM) was 8.1 months (range, 1.3–30.2 months), and that of meningeal metastasis (MM) was 9.0 months (range, 1.2–53.8 months). In 92 HR+, Her-2− patients using different treatment regimens, mOS was 6.2 months (range, 1.2–29.8 months) in the chemotherapy group while it was 24.3 months (range, 3.1–107.8 months) in the endocrine therapy (ET) group. Multivariate Cox regression analysis suggested that Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scores and type of VC were associated with survival.

Conclusion

Prognosis varied in different types of VC. Patients with BMM had the best prognosis, and DLM had the worst. As treatment options continue to progress, our retrospective study showed a significant prolongation of overall survival (OS) in patients with VC compared to previous studies.