TY - JOUR
T1 - 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
AU - Martín, Miguel
AU - Zielinski, Christoph
AU - Ruiz-Borrego, Manuel
AU - Carrasco, Eva
AU - Ciruelos, Eva M
AU - Muñoz, Montserrat
AU - Bermejo, Begoña
AU - Margelí, Mireia
AU - Csöszi, Tibor
AU - Antón, Antonio
AU - Turner, Nicholas
AU - Casas, María I
AU - Morales, Serafín
AU - Alba, Emilio
AU - Calvo, Lourdes
AU - de la Haba-Rodríguez, Juan
AU - Ramos, Manuel
AU - Murillo, Laura
AU - Santaballa, Ana
AU - Alonso-Romero, José L
AU - Sánchez-Rovira, Pedro
AU - Corsaro, Massimo
AU - Huang, Xin
AU - Thallinger, Christiane
AU - Kahan, Zsuzsanna
AU - Gil-Gil, Miguel
N1 - Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022/6
Y1 - 2022/6
N2 - 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).
AB - 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).
KW - Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/pharmacology
KW - Aromatase Inhibitors/therapeutic use
KW - Breast Neoplasms/pathology
KW - Capecitabine/therapeutic use
KW - Female
KW - Fulvestrant/therapeutic use
KW - Humans
KW - Piperazines
KW - Postmenopause
KW - Pyridines
KW - Receptor, ErbB-2/metabolism
KW - Receptors, Estrogen/metabolism
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.03.006
DO - 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.03.006
M3 - Article
C2 - 35429901
SN - 0959-8049
VL - 168
SP - 12
EP - 24
JO - European Journal of Cancer
JF - European Journal of Cancer
ER -