Talazoparib versus chemotherapy in patients with germline BRCA1/2-mutated HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: final overall survival results from the EMBRACA trial.

BACKGROUND: In EMBRACA, talazoparib prolonged progression-free survival versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.542 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.413-0.711]; P < 0.0001) and improved patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA1/2)-mutated advanced breast cancer (ABC). We report final overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized phase III trial enrolled patients with gBRCA1/2-mutated HER2-negative ABC. Patients received talazoparib or physician's choice of chemotherapy. OS was analyzed using stratified HR and log-rank test and prespecified rank-preserving structural failure time model to account for subsequent treatments. RESULTS: A total of 431 patients were entered in a randomized study (287 talazoparib/144 chemotherapy) with 412 patients treated (286 talazoparib/126 chemotherapy). By 30 September 2019, 216 deaths (75.3%) occurred for talazoparib and 108 (75.0%) chemotherapy; median follow-up was 44.9 and 36.8 months, respectively. HR for OS with talazoparib versus chemotherapy was 0.848 (95% CI 0.670-1.073; P = 0.17); median (95% CI) 19.3 months (16.6-22.5 months) versus 19.5 months (17.4-22.4 months). Kaplan-Meier survival percentages (95% CI) for talazoparib versus chemotherapy: month 12, 71% (66% to 76%)/74% (66% to 81%); month 24, 42% (36% to 47%)/38% (30% to 47%); month 36, 27% (22% to 33%)/21% (14% to 29%). Most patients received subsequent treatments: for talazoparib and chemotherapy, 46.3%/41.7% received platinum and 4.5%/32.6% received a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, respectively. Adjusting for subsequent PARP and/or platinum use, HR for OS was 0.756 (95% bootstrap CI 0.503-1.029). Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 69.6% (talazoparib) and 64.3% (chemotherapy) patients, consistent with previous reports. Extended follow-up showed significant overall improvement and delay in time to definitive clinically meaningful deterioration in global health status/quality of life and breast symptoms favoring talazoparib versus chemotherapy (P < 0.01 for all), consistent with initial analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In gBRCA1/2-mutated HER2-negative ABC, talazoparib did not significantly improve OS over chemotherapy; subsequent treatments may have impacted analysis. Safety was consistent with previous observations. PRO continued to favor talazoparib.

Palbociclib plus letrozole as first-line therapy in estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer with extended follow-up.

PURPOSE: In the initial PALOMA-2 (NCT01740427) analysis with median follow-up of 23 months, palbociclib plus letrozole significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) [hazard ratio (HR) 0.58; P < 0.001]. Herein, we report results overall and by subgroups with extended follow-up. METHODS: In this double-blind, phase 3 study, post-menopausal women with ER+/HER2- ABC who had not received prior systemic therapy for their advanced disease were randomized 2:1 to palbociclib-letrozole or placebo-letrozole. Endpoints include investigator-assessed PFS (primary), safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of approximately 38 months, median PFS was 27.6 months for palbociclib-letrozole (n = 444) and 14.5 months for placebo-letrozole (n = 222) (HR 0.563; 1-sided P < 0.0001). All subgroups benefited from palbociclib treatment. The improvement of PFS with palbociclib-letrozole was maintained in the next 2 subsequent lines of therapy and delayed the use of chemotherapy (40.4 vs. 29.9 months for palbociclib-letrozole vs. placebo-letrozole). Safety data were consistent with the known profile. Patients' quality of life was maintained. CONCLUSIONS: With approximately 15 months of additional follow-up, palbociclib plus letrozole continued to demonstrate improved PFS compared with placebo plus letrozole in the overall population and across all patient subgroups, while the safety profile remained favorable and quality of life was maintained. These data confirm that palbociclib-letrozole should be considered the standard of care for first-line therapy in patients with ER+/HER2- ABC, including those with low disease burden or long disease-free interval. Sponsored by Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01740427.

Quality of life with talazoparib after platinum or multiple cytotoxic non-platinum regimens in patients with advanced breast cancer and germline BRCA1/2 mutations: patient-reported outcomes from the ABRAZO phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Talazoparib (1 mg/day) exhibited promising efficacy and safety in patients with advanced breast cancer during ABRAZO (NCT02034916); this study evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: ABRAZO is a two-cohort, two-stage, phase 2 study of talazoparib in patients with advanced breast cancer after a response to prior platinum-based therapy (cohort 1 [C1], n = 49) or ≥3 platinum-free cytotoxic-based regimens (cohort 2 [C2], n = 35). PROs were assessed on day 1 (baseline), every 6 weeks for an initial 24 weeks, and every 12 weeks thereafter until progression, using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and its breast cancer module, QLQ-BR23. RESULTS: Global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL) was maintained from baseline across all time points for both C1 and C2. For C1 and C2, median time to deterioration (TTD) of GHS/QoL (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 2.8 (2.1, 3.0) and 5.5 (4.2, 5.7) months, respectively. Median TTD for all QLQ-C30 functional scales for C1 and C2 ranged 2.1-3.1 months and 4.2-5.6 months, respectively; median TTD for all QLQ-BR23 symptom scales ranged 2.6-4.0 months and 4.2-5.6 months, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in estimated overall change from baseline in the GHS/QoL scale for both cohorts (C1: -2.6 [95% CI, -7.8, 2.5]; C2: 1.2 [95% CI, -5.5, 8.0]). Significant overall improvements in the breast symptoms and arm symptoms and the future perspective of patients in C1 and C2 were observed, despite the statistically significant and clinically meaningful overall deterioration among patients regarding their role functioning (in C1) and dyspnoea symptoms (in C2). CONCLUSION: Despite the statistically significant and clinically meaningful overall deterioration among patients regarding their role functioning (in C1) and dyspnoea symptoms (in C2), patients in both C1 and C2 reported significant overall improvements in their breast symptoms, arm symptoms and future perspective, and their GHS/QoL was maintained from baseline.

Quality of life with talazoparib versus physician's choice of chemotherapy in patients with advanced breast cancer and germline BRCA1/2 mutation: patient-reported outcomes from the EMBRACA phase III trial.

Background: In the EMBRACA phase III trial, talazoparib (1 mg daily, orally) demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in PFS versus physician's choice of chemotherapy (PCT; capecitabine, eribulin, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine) in patients with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer carrying a germline BRCA1/2 mutation; we evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Patients and methods: Patients were randomized 2 : 1 to receive talazoparib or PCT. PROs were assessed at day 1 (baseline), the start of each treatment cycle (every 3 weeks), and at the end of treatment, using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-30) and its breast cancer module, QLQ-BR23. Prespecified exploratory analyses included a longitudinal mixed-effect model comparing treatment arms and a time to definitive clinically meaningful deterioration (TTD) analysis carried out in the global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL), and all functional and symptom scales from the EORTC QLQ-C30 and -BR23 questionnaires. Between-arm TTD comparisons were made using a stratified log-rank test and a Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Baseline scores were similar between arms. Statistically significant estimated overall improvement from baseline in GHS/QoL was seen for talazoparib compared with statistically significant deterioration for PCT {3.0 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2, 4.8] versus -5.4 [95% CI -8.8, -2.0]; between arms, P < 0.0001}. A statistically significant greater delay was observed in TTD in GHS/QoL, favoring talazoparib over PCT [hazard ratio, 0.38 (95% CI 0.26, 0.55; median, 24.3 versus 6.3 months, respectively; P < 0.0001)]. A statistically significant overall change and a statistically significant delay in TTD, all favoring talazoparib, were also observed in multiple functions and symptoms. Conclusion: Patients who received talazoparib had significant overall improvements and significant delay in TTD in multiple cancer-related and breast cancer-specific symptoms, functions, and GHS/QoL. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01945775.

Impact of palbociclib plus letrozole on patient-reported health-related quality of life: results from the PALOMA-2 trial.

Background: Patient-reported outcomes are integral in benefit-risk assessments of new treatment regimens. The PALOMA-2 study provides the largest body of evidence for patient-reported health-related quality of life (QOL) for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) receiving first-line endocrine-based therapy (palbociclib plus letrozole and letrozole alone). Patients and methods: Treatment-naïve postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) MBC were randomized 2 : 1 to palbociclib plus letrozole (n = 444) or placebo plus letrozole (n = 222). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed at baseline, day 1 of cycles 2 and 3, and day 1 of every other cycle from cycle 5 using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Breast and EuroQOL 5 dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaires. Results: As of 26 February 2016, the median duration of follow-up was 23 months. Baseline scores were comparable between the two treatment arms. No significant between-arm differences were observed in change from baseline in FACT-Breast Total, FACT-General Total, or EQ-5D scores. Significantly greater improvement in pain scores was observed in the palbociclib plus letrozole arm (-0.256 versus -0.098; P = 0.0183). In both arms, deterioration of FACT-Breast Total score was significantly delayed in patients without progression versus those with progression and patients with partial or complete response versus those without. No significant difference was observed in FACT-Breast and EQ-5D index scores in patients with and without neutropenia. Conclusions: Overall, women with MBC receiving first-line endocrine therapy have a good QOL. The addition of palbociclib to letrozole maintains health-related QOL and improves pain scores in treatment-naïve postmenopausal patients with ER+/HER2- MBC compared with letrozole alone. Significantly greater delay in deterioration of health-related QOL was observed in patients without progression versus those who progressed and in patients with an objective response versus non-responders. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01740427 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01740427).

Clinical considerations of the role of palbociclib in the management of advanced breast cancer patients with and without visceral metastases.

Background: This report assesses the efficacy and safety of palbociclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) in women with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC) with or without visceral metastases. Patients and methods: Pre- and postmenopausal women with disease progression following prior ET (PALOMA-3; N = 521) and postmenopausal women untreated for ABC (PALOMA-2; N = 666) were randomized 2 : 1 to ET (fulvestrant or letrozole, respectively) plus palbociclib or placebo. Progression-free survival (PFS), safety, and patient-reported quality of life (QoL) were evaluated by prior treatment and visceral involvement. Results: Visceral metastases incidence was higher in patients with prior resistance to ET (58.3%, PALOMA-3) than in patients naive to ET in the ABC setting (48.6%, PALOMA-2). In patients with prior resistance to ET and visceral metastases, median PFS (mPFS) was 9.2 months with palbociclib plus fulvestrant versus 3.4 months with placebo plus fulvestrant [hazard ratio (HR), 0.47; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.35-0.61], and objective response rate (ORR) was 28.0% versus 6.7%, respectively. In patients with nonvisceral metastases, mPFS was 16.6 versus 7.3 months, HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36-0.77. In patients with visceral disease and naive to ET in the advanced disease setting, mPFS was 19.3 months with palbociclib plus letrozole versus 12.9 months with placebo plus letrozole (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.47-0.85); ORR was 55.1% versus 40.0%; in patients with nonvisceral disease, mPFS was not reached with palbociclib plus letrozole versus 16.8 months with placebo plus letrozole (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.36-0.70). In patients with prior resistance to ET with visceral metastases, palbociclib plus fulvestrant significantly delayed deterioration of QoL versus placebo plus fulvestrant, whereas patient-reported QoL was maintained with palbociclib plus letrozole in patients naive to endocrine-based therapy for ABC. Conclusions: Palbociclib plus ET prolonged mPFS in patients with visceral metastases, increased ORRs, and in patients previously treated for ABC, delayed QoL deterioration, presenting a standard treatment option among patients with visceral metastases amenable to endocrine-based therapy. Clinical trial registration: NCT01942135, NCT01740427.

ABC3 Consensus Commented from the Perspective of the German Guidelines: Third International Consensus Conference for Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC3), Lisbon, 07. 11. 2015.

The Third International Consensus Conference for Advanced Breast Cancer ABC3 on the diagnosis and treatment of advanced breast cancer was held in Lisbon from 5 to 7 November 2015. This year the focus was the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (stage IV) - including the patient perspectives. Important topics were questions relating to quality of life, the care for long-term survivors as well as the management of disease-related symptoms and treatment-based side effects. The use of standardised tools to assess individual treatment success and the benefits of new substances were important points for discussion. The diagnosis and treatment of inoperable locally advanced breast cancer were discussed two years ago during the ABC2 consensus 1. A working group of German breast cancer experts commented on the results of the ABC panellists, paying particular attention to the German guidelines (AGO, S3, DGHO) on the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer 2, 3, 4, 5 in Germany.

Biomarkers in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer and the PRAEGNANT Study Network.

Progress has been made in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer in recent decades, but very few therapies use patient or tumor-specific characteristics to tailor individualized treatment. More than ten years after the publication of the reference human genome sequence, analysis methods have improved enormously, fostering the hope that biomarkers can be used to individualize therapies and offer precise treatment based on tumor and patient characteristics. Biomarkers at every level of the system (genetics, epigenetics, gene expression, micro-RNA, proteomics and others) can be used for this. This has led to changes in clinical study designs, with drug developments often only focusing on small or very small subgroups of patients and tumors. The screening and registration of patients and their molecular tumor data has therefore become very important for the successful completion of clinical studies. This new form of medicine presents particular challenges for patients and physicians. Even in this new age of genome-wide analysis, the focus should still be on the patients' quality of life. This review summarizes recent developments and describes how the PRAEGNANT study network manages the aforementioned medical challenges and changes to create a professional infrastructure for patients and physicians.