Search

Background: The Oral Care BC-trial reported that professional oral care (POC) reduces the incidence and severity of oral mucositis in patients receiving everolimus (EVE) and exemestane (EXE). However, the effect of POC on clinical response among patients receiving EVE and EXE was not established. We compared outcomes for estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer patients who received POC to those who had not, and evaluated clinical prognostic factors. All patients simultaneously received EVE and EXE.Methods: Between May 2015 and Dec 2017, 174 eligible patients were enrolled in the Oral Care-BC trial. The primary endpoint was the comparative incidence of grade 1 or worse oral mucositis, as evaluated for both the groups over 8 weeks by an oncologist. The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Data were collected after a follow-up period of 13.9 months.Results: There were no significant differences in PFS between the POC and Control Groups (P = 0.801). A BMI <  25 mg/m2 and non-visceral metastasis were associated with longer PFS (P = 0.018 and P = 0.003, respectively) and the use of bone modifying agents (BMA) was associated with shorter PFS (P = 0.028). The PFS and OS between the POC and control groups were not significantly different in the Oral-Care BC trial.Conclusions: POC did not influence the prognosis of estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer patients. Patients with non-visceral metastasis, a BMI <  25 mg/m2, and who did not receive BMA while receiving EVE and EXE may have better prognoses.Trial Registration: The study protocol was registered online at the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN), Japan (protocol ID 000016109), on January 5, 2015 and at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02376985 ). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE: In PALOMA-2, palbociclib plus letrozole significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) as initial treatment of estrogen receptor–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative advanced breast cancer. We assessed the benefit of palbociclib plus letrozole in Asians. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of 666 enrolled postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative advanced breast cancer (no prior treatment of advanced disease), 95 were Asian. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive palbociclib plus letrozole or placebo plus letrozole. The primary end point was investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary end points were overall survival, objective response, patient-reported outcomes, pharmacokinetics, and safety. RESULTS: Median PFS was significantly longer in Asian patients who received palbociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole (25.7 months [95% CI, 19.2 months to not estimable] v 13.9 months [95% CI, 7.4 to 22.0 months]; hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.87; P =.007). The most common toxicities with palbociclib were hematologic and more frequent among Asians versus non-Asians: neutropenia (any grade, 95.4% v 76.8%; grade 3/4, 89.2% v 62.5%), leukopenia (43.1% v 38.3%; 32.3% v 23.5%), and thrombocytopenia (27.7% v 13.5%; 4.6% v 1.1%). No Asians had febrile neutropenia. Discontinuation rates as a result of adverse events were similar among Asian and non-Asian patients who received palbociclib plus letrozole (10.8% and 9.5%). In Asians, quality of life (QOL) was maintained with no significant differences observed between treatments from baseline in breast cancer–specific QOL and general health status scores. Change from baseline in EuroQol five dimensions index scores was significantly higher with palbociclib plus letrozole (0.013 v –0.069; P =.0132). Geometric mean palbociclib trough concentration values were higher in Asians versus non-Asians (93.8 v 61.7 ng/mL). CONCLUSION: Consistent with the overall study population, the addition of palbociclib to letrozole significantly improved PFS in Asians. Hematologic toxicities were more frequent in Asians versus non-Asians but manageable with early dose modifications while maintaining QOL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Two global phase 3 trials (301 trial of first- or second-line eribulin, EMBRACE of third- or later-line eribulin) were carried out during development of eribulin for breast cancer treatment. In this post marketing observation study in Japan, efficacy and safety of eribulin in metastatic breast cancer patients were examined. Additionally, the results were compared with that of phase 3 trials. Method We conducted a prospective study in patients with inoperable or recurrent HER2-negative breast cancer. We enrolled a similar number of patients receiving eribulin as first- or second-line therapy (early line) and those receiving eribulin as third- or later line therapy (later line), and followed the patients for two years (ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT02371174). For the overall survival and time to treatment failure, the estimated value of them were calculated by the Kaplan Meier method. The severity of adverse drug events was determined by CTCAE v 4.0. Results During September 2014 to February 2016, 651cases were registered at 182 facilities. In analysis set, 637 patients (319 patients of early line/317 patients of late line/1 patient of unknown) was median age of 62.7 (30 - 85) years. Performance status 0/1/2/3/4 was seen in 360/234/38/5/0 patients, respectively. Dose reduction were required in 33% of patients. The median overall survival (early line/late line) was 18.8 months/12.6 months, respectively, and median time to treatment failure was 4.4 months/3.8 months, respectively. Major side effects (early line/late line) were neutropenia (51%/56%), leucopenia (55%/57%), peripheral neuropathy (32%/22%). Grade 3≤ peripheral neuropathy was 2%. Conclusion The results of overall survival (18.8 months in early line, 12.6 months in later line) in this study is comparable to those of large phase 3 study (15.9 months in 301 trial, 13.1 months in EMBRACE). The incidence of Grade 3≤ peripheral neuropathy was lower than that of phase 3 trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Eribulin demonstrated longer overall survival for pretreated metastatic breast cancer. Several factors are reported to be associated with their survival outcomes of breast cancer patients, and scarce of predictors are determined for each agent. Previous reports have demonstrated that high neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is related to poor survival outcomes of cancer. We hypothesized that low NLR is predictor of longer survival of breast cancer patients. We investigated whether baseline NLR before chemotherapy is associated with overall survival, and explored possible mechanism of better survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Methods We extracted female patients with metastatic breast cancer who received Eribulin for metastatic disease at NCCHE. We included HER2-negative disease, and those treated with standard chemotherapy including eribulin. We retrieved patient and disease characteristics; age, disease location, de novo stage IV or recurrent disease, hormone receptor status. Result We identified 135 patients between July 2012 and December 2018 with a median age of 57.9 (34-77), of which 106 (78.5%) had HR positive disease, 104 (77.0%) had recurrent disease, and 114 (84.4%) had visceral disease. Log rank test showed hormone receptor status and visceral disease were significant variable for candidate for multivariate analysis. COX regression model demonstrated that decreasing of NLR was associated with better OS [HR = 1.145, 95% confidence interval (95% CI)=1.073-1.223]. We showed low NLR at the administration of eribulin was independent predictor of OS [HR = 1.048, 95% confidence interval (95% CI)=1.004-1.093]. Conclusion We showed low NLR is better prognostic factor of any chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Our exploratory research also showed low NLR at eribulin administraton was suspected to be better OS indicator regardless of pretreated chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]