38
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Phase II Trial of Goserelin and Exemestane Combination Therapy in Premenopausal Women With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer

      research-article
      , MD, , MD, , MD, , MD, , MD, , MD, , MD, , MD, , MD, , MD
      Medicine
      Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          A promising option as the treatment of choice for premenopausal patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) could be the combination of a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analog and an aromatase inhibitor. However, no prospective studies on the efficacy of goserelin with exemestane in locally advanced or MBC premenopausal breast cancer patients have been reported.

          We present the phase II trial of goserelin plus exemestane in a total of 44 premenopausal women with locally advanced or MBC. All patients received a subcutaneous injection of 3.6 mg goserelin every 4 weeks along with 25 mg exemestane daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). The second end point included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), and clinical benefit rate (CBR) based on complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD) for ≥6 months.

          The median PFS was 13 months (range: 2–42 months). The median DOR was 8 months (range: 2–40 months). Two patients achieved CR (4.5%), and 15 patients experienced PR (34.1%). Fifteen patients (34.1%) had SD ≥6 months. The ORR was 38.6%, and the CBR was 65.9%. Primary progressive disease occurred in 15 patients (34.1%). Five patients (11.4%) died during the study period. Because a few patients have died, the median OS has not been reached. Drug therapy was well tolerated. The most frequent grade-3 adverse events were arthralgia (18.2%), skin rash (6.8%), and myalgia (4.5%). No participants withdrew from the study due to drug toxicity.

          This study suggested that goserelin and exemestane might be highly effective and well-tolerated regimens in premenopausal women with hormone-responsive, locally advanced or MBC.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A comparison of letrozole and tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer.

          The aromatase inhibitor letrozole is a more effective treatment for metastatic breast cancer and more effective in the neoadjuvant setting than tamoxifen. We compared letrozole with tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for steroid-hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer in postmenopausal women. The Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study is a randomized, phase 3, double-blind trial that compared five years of treatment with various adjuvant endocrine therapy regimens in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer: letrozole, letrozole followed by tamoxifen, tamoxifen, and tamoxifen followed by letrozole. This analysis compares the two groups assigned to receive letrozole initially with the two groups assigned to receive tamoxifen initially; events and follow-up in the sequential-treatment groups were included up to the time that treatments were switched. A total of 8010 women with data that could be assessed were enrolled, 4003 in the letrozole group and 4007 in the tamoxifen group. After a median follow-up of 25.8 months, 351 events had occurred in the letrozole group and 428 events in the tamoxifen group, with five-year disease-free survival estimates of 84.0 percent and 81.4 percent, respectively. As compared with tamoxifen, letrozole significantly reduced the risk of an event ending a period of disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.70 to 0.93; P=0.003), especially the risk of distant recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.60 to 0.88; P=0.001). Thromboembolism, endometrial cancer, and vaginal bleeding were more common in the tamoxifen group. Women given letrozole had a higher incidence of skeletal and cardiac events and of hypercholesterolemia. In postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer, adjuvant treatment with letrozole, as compared with tamoxifen, reduced the risk of recurrent disease, especially at distant sites. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00004205.) Copyright 2005 Massachusetts Medical Society.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Endocrine therapy plus zoledronic acid in premenopausal breast cancer.

            Ovarian suppression plus tamoxifen is a standard adjuvant treatment in premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer. Aromatase inhibitors are superior to tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients, and preclinical data suggest that zoledronic acid has antitumor properties. We examined the effect of adding zoledronic acid to a combination of either goserelin and tamoxifen or goserelin and anastrozole in premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer. We randomly assigned 1803 patients to receive goserelin (3.6 mg given subcutaneously every 28 days) plus tamoxifen (20 mg per day given orally) or anastrozole (1 mg per day given orally) with or without zoledronic acid (4 mg given intravenously every 6 months) for 3 years. The primary end point was disease-free survival; recurrence-free survival and overall survival were secondary end points. After a median follow-up of 47.8 months, 137 events had occurred, with disease-free survival rates of 92.8% in the tamoxifen group, 92.0% in the anastrozole group, 90.8% in the group that received endocrine therapy alone, and 94.0% in the group that received endocrine therapy with zoledronic acid. There was no significant difference in disease-free survival between the anastrozole and tamoxifen groups (hazard ratio for disease progression in the anastrozole group, 1.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 1.53; P=0.59). The addition of zoledronic acid to endocrine therapy, as compared with endocrine therapy without zoledronic acid, resulted in an absolute reduction of 3.2 percentage points and a relative reduction of 36% in the risk of disease progression (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.91; P=0.01); the addition of zoledronic acid did not significantly reduce the risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.32 to 1.11; P=0.11). Adverse events were consistent with known drug-safety profiles. The addition of zoledronic acid to adjuvant endocrine therapy improves disease-free survival in premenopausal patients with estrogen-responsive early breast cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00295646.) 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Randomized phase II trial of everolimus in combination with tamoxifen in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer with prior exposure to aromatase inhibitors: a GINECO study.

              Cross-talk between signal transduction pathways likely contributes to hormone resistance in metastatic breast cancer (mBC). Everolimus, an oral inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin, has restored sensitivity in endocrine-resistance models and shown anticancer activity in early-phase mBC clinical trials. This analysis evaluated efficacy and safety of everolimus in combination with tamoxifen in patients with mBC resistant to aromatase inhibitors (AIs). This open-label, phase II study randomly assigned postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, AI-resistant mBC to tamoxifen 20 mg/d plus everolimus 10 mg/d (n = 54) or tamoxifen 20 mg/d alone (n = 57). Randomization was stratified by primary and secondary hormone resistance. Primary end point was clinical benefit rate (CBR), defined as the percentage of all patients with a complete or partial response or stable disease at 6 months. No formal statistical comparison between groups was planned. The 6-month CBR was 61% (95% CI, 47 to 74) with tamoxifen plus everolimus and 42% (95% CI, 29 to 56) with tamoxifen alone. Time to progression (TTP) increased from 4.5 months with tamoxifen alone to 8.6 months with tamoxifen plus everolimus, corresponding to a 46% reduction in risk of progression with the combination (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.81). Risk of death was reduced by 55% with tamoxifen plus everolimus versus tamoxifen alone (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.81). The main toxicities associated with tamoxifen plus everolimus were fatigue (72% v 53% with tamoxifen alone), stomatitis (56% v 7%), rash (44% v 7%), anorexia (43% v 18%), and diarrhea (39% v 11%). This study suggests that tamoxifen plus everolimus increased CBR, TTP, and overall survival compared with tamoxifen alone in postmenopausal women with AI-resistant mBC.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Medicine (Baltimore)
                Medicine (Baltimore)
                MEDI
                Medicine
                Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
                0025-7974
                1536-5964
                July 2015
                02 July 2015
                : 94
                : 26
                : e1006
                Affiliations
                From the Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, No. 17 Panjiayuannanli, Chaoyang District, Beijing, China.
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Binghe Xu, Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Hospital and Institute, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, No. 17 Panjiayuan Nanli, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100021, China (e-mail: xubingheBM@ 123456163.com ).
                Article
                01006
                10.1097/MD.0000000000001006
                4504532
                26131799
                25973643-299b-448a-89f7-1346907afc57
                Copyright © 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0, where it is permissible to download, share and reproduce the work in any medium, provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0

                History
                : 16 February 2015
                : 3 May 2015
                : 18 May 2015
                Categories
                5600
                Research Article
                Observational Study
                Custom metadata
                TRUE

                Comments

                Comment on this article