Back to Search Start Over

Final results from IMPROVE: a randomized, controlled, open-label, two-arm, cross-over phase IV study to determine patients' preference for everolimus in combination with exemestane or capecitabine in combination with bevacizumab in advanced HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.

Authors :
Decker, Thomas
Söling, Ulrike
Hahn, Antje
Maintz, Christoph
Kurbacher, Christian Martin
Vehling-Kaiser, Ursula
Sent, Dagmar
Klare, Peter
Hagen, Volker
Chiabudini, Marco
Falkenstein, Julia
Indorf, Martin
Runkel, Eva
Potthoff, Karin
Source :
BMC Cancer; 4/6/2020, Vol. 20 Issue 1, p1-12, 12p, 2 Diagrams, 6 Charts, 3 Graphs
Publication Year :
2020

Abstract

<bold>Background: </bold>The objective of the IMPROVE study was patients' preference for either endocrine-based therapy or combined chemo- and anti-angiogenic therapy in advanced HR-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer.<bold>Methods: </bold>In this randomized, cross-over phase IV study, 77 patients were recruited in 26 sites in Germany. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either capecitabine plus bevacizumab (Cap+Bev) as first-line therapy followed by cross-over to everolimus plus exemestane (Eve+Exe) as second-line therapy (Arm A) or the reverse sequence (Arm B). The primary endpoint was patients' preference for either regimen, assessed by the Patient Preference Questionnaire 12 weeks after cross-over. Key secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life (QoL).<bold>Results: </bold>61.5% of patients preferred Cap+Bev (p = 0.1653), whereas 15.4% preferred Eve+Exe and 23.1% were indecisive. Physicians showed a similar tendency towards Cap+Bev (58.1%) as the preferred regimen versus Eve+Exe (32.3%). Median first-line PFS was longer for Cap+Bev than for Eve+Exe (11.1 months versus 3.5 months). Median second-line PFS was similar between Cap+Bev and Eve+Exe (3.6 months versus 3.7 months). Median OS was comparable between Arm A (28.8 months) and Arm B (24.7 months). 73.0% and 52.6% (first-/second-line, Cap+Bev) and 54.1% and 52.9% (first-/second-line, Eve+Exe) of patients experienced grade 3/4 TEAEs. No treatment-related deaths occurred. QoL and treatment satisfaction were not significantly different between arms or treatment lines.<bold>Conclusions: </bold>Patients tended to favor Cap+Bev over Eve+Exe, which was in line with physicians' preference. Cap+Bev showed superior first-line PFS, while QoL was similar in both arms. No new safety signals were reported.<bold>Trial Registration: </bold>EudraCT No: 2013-005329-22. Registered on 19 August 20. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
14712407
Volume :
20
Issue :
1
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
BMC Cancer
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
142593731
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-06747-y