Litcius/Paper detail

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

Miguel Martín, Christoph Zielinski, Manuel Ruíz‐Borrego, Eva Carrasco, Eva Ciruelos, Montserrat Muñoz-Mateu, Begoña Bermejo, Mireia Margelí Vila, Tibor Csőszi, Antonio Antón, Nicholas C. Turner, María Isabel Casas, Serafín Morales, Emilio Alba, Lourdes Calvo, Juan de la Haba-Rodríguez, Manuel Ramos, Laura Murillo, Ana Santaballa, José Luis Alonso-Romero, Pedro Sánchez‐Rovira, Massimo Corsaro, Xin Huang, Christiane Thallinger, Zsuzsanna Kahán, Miguel Gil‐Gil

2022European Journal of Cancer31 citationsDOIOpen Access PDF

Abstract

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).

Topics & Concepts

PalbociclibCapecitabineFulvestrantMedicineInternal medicineHazard ratioOncologyExemestaneMetastatic breast cancerPopulationBreast cancerCohortCancerGynecologyTamoxifenConfidence intervalColorectal cancerEnvironmental healthAdvanced Breast Cancer TherapiesBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesCancer-related Molecular Pathways
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 | Litcius