Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Monthly Zoledronic Acid, Zoledronic Acid Every 3 Months, and Monthly Denosumab in Women With Breast Cancer and Skeletal Metastases: CALGB 70604 (Alliance).
Purpose Skeletal-related events (SREs) such as pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, or the necessity for radiation or surgery to bone metastasis cause considerable morbidity, decrements in quality of life, and costs to the health care system. The results of a recent large randomized trial (Cancer and Leukemia Group B/Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology [CALGB/Alliance 70604]) showed that zoledronic acid (ZA) every 3 months was noninferior to monthly ZA in reducing the risks of SREs. We sought to determine the cost-effectiveness (CE) of monthly ZA, ZA every 3 months, and monthly denosumab in women with breast cancer and skeletal metastases. ⋯ Conclusion ZA every 3 months was more CE in reducing the risks of SRE than monthly denosumab. This analysis was one of the first to incorporate the costs of generic ZA and one of the first independent CE analyses not sponsored by either Novartis or Amgen, the makers of ZA and denosumab, respectively. ZA every 3 months is the more CE option and more reasonable alternative to monthly denosumab.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Randomized Phase III and Extension Studies of Naldemedine in Patients With Opioid-Induced Constipation and Cancer.
Purpose Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is a frequent and debilitating adverse effect (AE) of opioids-common analgesics for cancer pain. We investigated the efficacy and safety of a peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist, naldemedine (S-297995), for OIC, specifically in patients with cancer. Patients and Methods This phase III trial consisted of a 2-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (COMPOSE-4) and an open-label, 12-week extension study (COMPOSE-5). ⋯ Diarrhea was the most frequently reported TEAE in COMPOSE-4 (19.6% [19 of 97 patients] v 7.3% [seven of 96 patients] with naldemedine v placebo) and COMPOSE-5 (18.3% [24 of 131 patients] with naldemedine). Naldemedine was not associated with signs or symptoms of opioid withdrawal and had no notable impact on opioid-mediated analgesia. Conclusion Once-daily oral naldemedine 0.2 mg effectively treated OIC and was generally well tolerated in patients with OIC and cancer.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Activity of Eribulin in Patients With Advanced Liposarcoma Demonstrated in a Subgroup Analysis From a Randomized Phase III Study of Eribulin Versus Dacarbazine.
Purpose A phase III study comparing eribulin with dacarbazine in patients with advanced liposarcoma (LPS) or leiomyosarcoma showed a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) for the eribulin arm, with a manageable toxicity profile. We now report the histology-specific subgroup analysis of the efficacy and safety of eribulin compared with dacarbazine in patients with LPS, an independently randomized stratified subgroup of this phase III trial. Methods Patients ≥ 18 years with advanced or metastatic dedifferentiated, myxoid/round cell, or pleomorphic LPS incurable by surgery or radiotherapy were included. ⋯ Conclusion In patients with previously treated LPS, eribulin was associated with significantly superior OS and PFS compared with dacarbazine. Eribulin represents an important treatment option for patients with LPS, a sarcoma subtype for which limited effective systemic treatments are available. Further studies are justified to explore the role of eribulin in earlier lines of therapy as well as in combination with other agents.
-
Purpose Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive/hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer is a distinct subgroup associated with lower chemotherapy sensitivity and slightly better outcome than HER2-positive/HR-negative disease. Little is known about the efficacy of the combination of endocrine therapy (ET) with trastuzumab or with the potent antibody-cytotoxic, anti-HER2 compound trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) with or without ET for this subgroup. The West German Study Group trial, ADAPT (Adjuvant Dynamic Marker-Adjusted Personalized Therapy Trial Optimizing Risk Assessment and Therapy Response Prediction in Early Breast Cancer) compares pathologic complete response (pCR) rates of T-DM1 versus trastuzumab with ET in early HER2-positive/HR-positive breast cancer. ⋯ Overall toxicity was low; seventeen therapy-related severe adverse events (T-DM1 arms v trastuzumab plus ET; 5.3% v 3.1%, respectively) were reported. Conclusion The ADAPT HER2-positive/HR-positive trial demonstrates that neoadjuvant T-DM1 (with or without ET) given for only 12 weeks results in a clinically meaningful pCR rate. Thus, a substantial number of patients are spared the adverse effects of systemic chemotherapy.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
MONARCH 2: Abemaciclib in Combination With Fulvestrant in Women With HR+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer Who Had Progressed While Receiving Endocrine Therapy.
Purpose MONARCH 2 ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02107703) compared the efficacy and safety of abemaciclib, a selective cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor, plus fulvestrant with fulvestrant alone in patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC). Patients and Methods MONARCH 2 was a global, double-blind, phase III study of women with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative ABC who had progressed while receiving neoadjuvant or adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET), ≤ 12 months from the end of adjuvant ET, or while receiving first-line ET for metastatic disease. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive abemaciclib or placebo (150 mg twice daily) on a continuous schedule and fulvestrant (500 mg, per label). ⋯ In patients with measurable disease, abemaciclib plus fulvestrant achieved an ORR of 48.1% (95% CI, 42.6% to 53.6%) compared with 21.3% (95% CI, 15.1% to 27.6%) in the control arm. The most common adverse events in the abemaciclib versus placebo arms were diarrhea (86.4% v 24.7%), neutropenia (46.0% v 4.0%), nausea (45.1% v 22.9%), and fatigue (39.9% v 26.9%). Conclusions Abemaciclib at 150 mg twice daily plus fulvestrant was effective, significantly improving PFS and ORR and demonstrating a tolerable safety profile in women with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative ABC who progressed while receiving ET.