Overall survival with palbociclib plus endocrine therapy versus capecitabine in postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer in the PEARL study

Background An earlier analysis of the PEARL phase III study showed that palbociclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) does not improve progression-free survival (PFS) over capecitabine in aromatase inhibitor-resistant, hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: Martín, Miguel, Zielinski, Christoph, Ruiz-Borrego, Manuel, Carrasco, Eva, Ciruelos, Eva M., Muñoz, Montserrat, Bermejo, Begoña, Margelí, Mireia, Csöszi, Tibor, Antón, Antonio, Turner, Nicholas, Casas, María I., Morales, Serafín, Alba, Emilio, Calvo, Lourdes, de la Haba-Rodríguez, Juan, Ramos, Manuel, Murillo, Laura, Santaballa, Ana, Alonso-Romero, José L., Sánchez-Rovira, Pedro, Corsaro, Massimo, Huang, Xin, Thallinger, Christiane, Kahan, Zsuzsanna, Gil-Gil, Miguel
Tipo de documento: artigo
Estado:Versão publicada
Data de publicação:2022
País:España
Recursos:Universidad de Zaragoza
Repositório:Zaguán. Repositorio Digital de la Universidad de Zaragoza
OAI Identifier:oai:zaguan.unizar.es:150342
Acesso em linha:http://zaguan.unizar.es/record/150342
Access Level:Acceso aberto
Descrição
Resumo:Background An earlier analysis of the PEARL phase III study showed that palbociclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) does not improve progression-free survival (PFS) over capecitabine in aromatase inhibitor-resistant, hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. Here, we report the final overall survival (OS) analysis. Methods Postmenopausal patients (N = 601) were randomized 1:1 to capecitabine or palbociclib plus ET (exemestane, Cohort 1; fulvestrant, Cohort 2). OS was analysed in Cohort 2, the wild-type ESR1 population and the overall population. Additionally, we analysed subsequent systemic therapies and explored PFS2 (time from randomization to the end of the first subsequent therapy/death). Results OS was 31.1 months for palbociclib plus fulvestrant and 32.8 months for capecitabine (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81–1.50, P = 0.550). In the wild-type ESR1 population, OS was 37.2 months for palbociclib plus ET and 34.8 months for capecitabine (aHR 1.06, 95% CI 0.81–1.37, P = 0.683). In OS analyses, no subgroup showed superiority for palbociclib plus ET over capecitabine. OS in the overall population was 32.6 months for palbociclib plus ET and 30.9 months for capecitabine (P = 0.995). Subsequent systemic therapy was given to 79.8% and 82.9% of patients with palbociclib plus ET and capecitabine, respectively. Median PFS2 was similar between study arms (Cohort 2, P = 0.941; wild-type ESR1 population, P = 0.827). No new safety findings were observed. Conclusions Palbociclib plus ET did not show a statistically superior OS compared to capecitabine in MBC patients progressing on aromatase inhibitors. Trial registration NCT02028507 (ClinTrials.gov), 2013-003170-27 (EudraCT).