Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
PLoS One ; 16(7): e0253722, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34292933

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is scant data from India on efficacy and safety of palbociclib and ribociclib in routine clinical practice. METHODS: This retrospective, observational, single institution study included patients with estrogen and/or progesterone receptor positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) negative metastatic breast cancers, who received palbociclib or ribociclib with any partner endocrine therapy in any line of treatment between January 2016 and June 2019. Data were analyzed for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. RESULTS: The study included 101 female patients with median age of 57 (IQR 48-62) years, of whom 80 (79.2%) were postmenopausal, 79 (78.2%) received palbociclib or ribociclib in second- or later-line treatment, 59 (58.4%) received fulvestrant and 41 (40.6%) received an aromatase inhibitor. In first-line treatment, at a median follow-up of 21.7 (0.5-41.9) months, median PFS and OS were 21.1 (95%CI 16.36-not estimable) months and not reached, respectively. In second- or later-line setting, at a median follow-up of 17.2 (0.5-43.7) months, median PFS and OS were 5.98 (95%CI 4.96-7.89) months and 20.2 (95%CI 14.1-not estimable) months, respectively. Grade 3-4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were seen in 45 (45.0%) and 9 (9.0%) patients, respectively while dose reduction was required in 32 (31.7%) patients. In multivariable Cox regression analysis, first-line setting (HR 0.49, 95%CI 0.25-0.97, p = 0.043) and ECOG performance status 1 (HR 0.43, 95%CI 0.20-0.91, p = 0.028) were significantly associated with PFS while only ECOG PS 1 was significantly associated (HR 0.04, 95%CI 0.008-0.206, p = 0.000) with OS. CONCLUSION: Palbociclib and ribociclib, when used in routine clinical practice in first or subsequent lines of treatment, resulted in efficacy and toxicity outcomes in concordance with those expected from pivotal trials.


Subject(s)
Aminopyridines/administration & dosage , Breast Neoplasms , Piperazines/administration & dosage , Purines/administration & dosage , Pyridines/administration & dosage , Receptor, ErbB-2/metabolism , Receptors, Estrogen/metabolism , Receptors, Progesterone/metabolism , Aged , Aminopyridines/adverse effects , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Breast Neoplasms/metabolism , Breast Neoplasms/mortality , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Databases, Factual , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Metastasis , Piperazines/adverse effects , Purines/adverse effects , Pyridines/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Survival Rate
2.
Lancet Glob Health ; 8(9): e1213-e1222, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32827483

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Regimens for palliation in patients with head and neck cancer recommended by the US National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) have low applicability (less than 1-3%) in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) because of their cost. In a previous phase 2 study, patients with head and neck cancer who received metronomic chemotherapy had better outcomes when compared with those who received intravenous cisplatin, which is commonly used as the standard of care in LMICs. We aimed to do a phase 3 study to substantiate these findings. METHODS: We did an open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority, randomised, phase 3 trial at the Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Center, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India. We enrolled adult patients (aged 18-70 years) who planned to receive palliative systemic treatment for relapsed, recurrent, or newly diagnosed squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-1 and measurable disease, as defined by the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors. We randomly assigned (1:1) participants to receive either oral metronomic chemotherapy, consisting of 15 mg/m2 methotrexate once per week plus 200 mg celecoxib twice per day until disease progression or until the development of intolerable side-effects, or 75 mg/m2 intravenous cisplatin once every 3 weeks for six cycles. Randomisation was done by use of a computer-generated randomisation sequence, with a block size of four, and patients were stratified by primary tumour site and previous cancer-directed treatment. The primary endpoint was median overall survival. Assuming that 6-month overall survival in the intravenous cisplatin group would be 40%, a non-inferiority margin of 13% was defined. Both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were done. All patients who completed at least one cycle of the assigned treatment were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with the Clinical Trials Registry-India, CTRI/2015/11/006388, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between May 16, 2016, and Jan 17, 2020, 422 patients were randomly assigned: 213 to the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 209 to the intravenous cisplatin group. All 422 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, and 418 patients (211 in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 207 in the intravenous cisplatin group) were included in the per-protocol analysis. At a median follow-up of 15·73 months, median overall survival in the intention-to-treat analysis population was 7·5 months (IQR 4·6-12·6) in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group compared with 6·1 months (3·2-9·6) in the intravenous cisplatin group (unadjusted HR for death 0·773 [95% CI 0·615-0·97, p=0·026]). In the per-protocol analysis population, median overall survival was 7·5 months (4·7-12·8) in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 6·1 months (3·4-9·6) in the intravenous cisplatin group (unadjusted HR for death 0·775 [95% CI 0·616-0·974, p=0·029]). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were observed in 37 (19%) of 196 patients in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group versus 61 (30%) of 202 patients in the intravenous cisplatin group (p=0·01). INTERPRETATION: Oral metronomic chemotherapy is non-inferior to intravenous cisplatin with respect to overall survival in head and neck cancer in the palliative setting, and is associated with fewer adverse events. It therefore represents a new alternative standard of care if current NCCN-approved options for palliative therapy are not feasible. FUNDING: Tata Memorial Center Research Administration Council. TRANSLATIONS: For the Hindi, Marathi, Gujarati, Kannada, Malayalam, Telugu, Oriya, Bengali, and Punjabi translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.


Subject(s)
Cisplatin/administration & dosage , Cisplatin/economics , Head and Neck Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasm Metastasis/drug therapy , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/drug therapy , Administration, Intravenous , Administration, Metronomic , Administration, Oral , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Costs and Cost Analysis , Female , Humans , India , Male , Middle Aged , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...