Nicely done study comparing Ribociclib + ET vs chemotherapy in premenopausal high-risk HR+, HER2-neg patients felt to be high risk. Results showed better efficacy (PFS), tolerability and similar response rates. Of note, >80% of patients had visceral disease or were felt to be rapid progressors. Anti-hormone-based therapy remains king in the HR+ setting.
A head-to-head comparison of efficacy between a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor plus endocrine therapy (ET) versus combination chemotherapy (CT) has never been reported in patients with clinically aggressive hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2−) advanced breast cancer (ABC).
In this open-label, multi-center, randomized phase 2 trial, pre/perimenopausal women with clinically aggressive HR+/HER2− ABC were randomized 1:1 to first-line ribociclib (600 mg daily; 3-weeks-on, 1-week-off) plus letrozole/anastrozole and goserelin or investigator’s choice of combination CT (docetaxel plus capecitabine, paclitaxel plus gemcitabine, or capecitabine plus vinorelbine). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).
Among 222 patients randomized to ribociclib plus ET (n=112) or combination CT (n=110), 150 (67.6%) had symptomatic visceral metastases, 41 (18.5%) had rapid disease progression per investigator’s judgment, and 31 (14.0%) had symptomatic non-visceral disease. Overall, 106 (47.7%) patients had investigator-assessed visceral crisis. Median follow-up time was 37.0 months. At data cutoff, 31.3% (ribociclib arm) and 15.5% (CT arm) of patients had completed study treatment and transitioned to post-trial access. The median PFS was 21.8 months (ribociclib plus ET; 95% CI, 17.4-26.7 months) and 12.8 months (combination CT; 95% CI, 10.1-18.4 months); hazard ratio [HR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43-0.87; P=.003. The overall response rates and the median time to response in the ribociclib versus CT arms, respectively, were 66.1% and 61.8% and 4.9 months and 3.2 months (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.55-1.06). Lower rates of symptomatic adverse events were observed in the ribociclib versus CT arm
First-line ribociclib plus ET showed a significant PFS benefit, similar response rates, and better tolerability over combination CT in patients with clinically aggressive HR+/HER2− ABC.
Our site participated in this study, where patients were tested for ESR1 mutations via circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). Those who tested positive were switched to camizestrant (Cami), which demonstrated improved progression-free survival.
Vepdegestrant is an oral proteolysis-targeting chimera (PROTAC) estrogen receptor (ER) degrader that directly utilizes the ubiquitin–proteasome system. It was compared to fulvestrant in patients who had received one prior line of hormonal therapy with a CDK4/6 inhibitor. Among patients with ESR1 mutations, Vepdegestrant demonstrated a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 5.0 months versus 2.1 months with fulvestrant. In the overall population, the median PFS was 3.8 months for Vepdegestrant and 3.6 months for fulvestrant, indicating that the drug showed particular efficacy in tumors harboring ESR1 mutations.
Elinzanitant, a neurokinin-targeted therapy, has been shown to reduce vasomotor symptoms compared to placebo. These symptoms are one of the reasons some of my patients discontinue aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy, so Elinzanitant presents a promising alternative to help manage these side effects. Additionally, Fezolinetant is already approved and available on the market.
The INAVO120 trial evaluated inavolisib + palbociclib–fulvestrant vs placebo + palbociclib–fulvestrant in patients with PIK3CA-mutated, HR+/HER2– advanced breast cancer progressing on or shortly after adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET). Inavolisib significantly improved overall survival (OS) (34.0 vs 27.0 mo) and progression-free survival (PFS) (17.2 vs 7.3 mo), with a higher objective response rate (ORR) (62.7% vs 28.0%) and longer DoR (19.2 vs 11.1 mo). Toxicities were manageable but included more hyperglycemia (63.4%), stomatitis (55.3%), GI, and ocular AEs. Bottom line: this triplet sets a new bar for first-line PIK3CA-mutant HR+ MBC, but we’ll need to stay vigilant about metabolic and mucosal side effects as we bring it into practice.
Adding Palbociclib did not help, revealing that there is no need to continue with different hormonal therapy than the one used in first line. It also added more toxicity.