2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      AMEERA-3: Randomized Phase II Study of Amcenestrant (Oral Selective Estrogen Receptor Degrader) Versus Standard Endocrine Monotherapy in Estrogen Receptor–Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–Negative Advanced Breast Cancer

      research-article

      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

          PURPOSE

          Amcenestrant (oral selective estrogen receptor degrader) demonstrated promising safety and efficacy in earlier clinical studies for endocrine-resistant, estrogen receptor–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (ER+/HER2–) advanced breast cancer (aBC).

          PATIENTS AND METHODS

          In AMEERA-3 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04059484), an open-label, worldwide phase II trial, patients with ER+/HER2– aBC who progressed in the (neo)adjuvant or advanced settings after not more than two previous lines of endocrine therapy (ET) were randomly assigned 1:1 to amcenestrant or single-agent endocrine treatment of physician's choice (TPC), stratified by the presence/absence of visceral metastases, previous/no treatment with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0/1). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent central review, compared using a stratified log-rank test (one-sided type I error rate of 2.5%).

          RESULTS

          Between October 22, 2019, and February 15, 2021, 290 patients were randomly assigned to amcenestrant (n = 143) or TPC (n = 147). PFS was numerically similar between amcenestrant and TPC (median PFS [mPFS], 3.6 v 3.7 months; stratified hazard ratio [HR], 1.051 [95% CI, 0.789 to 1.4]; one-sided P = .643). Among patients with baseline mutated ESR1; (n = 120 of 280), amcenestrant numerically prolonged PFS versus TPC (mPFS, 3.7 v 2.0 months; stratified HR, 0.9 [95% CI, 0.565 to 1.435]). Overall survival data were immature but numerically similar between groups (HR, 0.913; 95% CI, 0.595 to 1.403). In amcenestrant versus TPC groups, treatment-emergent adverse events (any grade) occurred in 82.5% versus 76.2% of patients and grade ≥3 events occurred in 21.7% versus 15.6%.

          CONCLUSION

          AMEERA-3 did not meet its primary objective of improved PFS with amcenestrant versus TPC although a numerical improvement in PFS was observed in patients with baseline ESR1 mutation. Efficacy and safety with amcenestrant were consistent with the standard of care for second-/third-line ET for ER+/HER2– aBC.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

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

          Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries

          This article provides an update on the global cancer burden using the GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Worldwide, an estimated 19.3 million new cancer cases (18.1 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and almost 10.0 million cancer deaths (9.9 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) occurred in 2020. Female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung (11.4%), colorectal (10.0 %), prostate (7.3%), and stomach (5.6%) cancers. Lung cancer remained the leading cause of cancer death, with an estimated 1.8 million deaths (18%), followed by colorectal (9.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%), and female breast (6.9%) cancers. Overall incidence was from 2-fold to 3-fold higher in transitioned versus transitioning countries for both sexes, whereas mortality varied <2-fold for men and little for women. Death rates for female breast and cervical cancers, however, were considerably higher in transitioning versus transitioned countries (15.0 vs 12.8 per 100,000 and 12.4 vs 5.2 per 100,000, respectively). The global cancer burden is expected to be 28.4 million cases in 2040, a 47% rise from 2020, with a larger increase in transitioning (64% to 95%) versus transitioned (32% to 56%) countries due to demographic changes, although this may be further exacerbated by increasing risk factors associated with globalization and a growing economy. Efforts to build a sustainable infrastructure for the dissemination of cancer prevention measures and provision of cancer care in transitioning countries is critical for global cancer control.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

            Assessment of the change in tumour burden is an important feature of the clinical evaluation of cancer therapeutics: both tumour shrinkage (objective response) and disease progression are useful endpoints in clinical trials. Since RECIST was published in 2000, many investigators, cooperative groups, industry and government authorities have adopted these criteria in the assessment of treatment outcomes. However, a number of questions and issues have arisen which have led to the development of a revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Evidence for changes, summarised in separate papers in this special issue, has come from assessment of a large data warehouse (>6500 patients), simulation studies and literature reviews. HIGHLIGHTS OF REVISED RECIST 1.1: Major changes include: Number of lesions to be assessed: based on evidence from numerous trial databases merged into a data warehouse for analysis purposes, the number of lesions required to assess tumour burden for response determination has been reduced from a maximum of 10 to a maximum of five total (and from five to two per organ, maximum). Assessment of pathological lymph nodes is now incorporated: nodes with a short axis of 15 mm are considered measurable and assessable as target lesions. The short axis measurement should be included in the sum of lesions in calculation of tumour response. Nodes that shrink to <10mm short axis are considered normal. Confirmation of response is required for trials with response primary endpoint but is no longer required in randomised studies since the control arm serves as appropriate means of interpretation of data. Disease progression is clarified in several aspects: in addition to the previous definition of progression in target disease of 20% increase in sum, a 5mm absolute increase is now required as well to guard against over calling PD when the total sum is very small. Furthermore, there is guidance offered on what constitutes 'unequivocal progression' of non-measurable/non-target disease, a source of confusion in the original RECIST guideline. Finally, a section on detection of new lesions, including the interpretation of FDG-PET scan assessment is included. Imaging guidance: the revised RECIST includes a new imaging appendix with updated recommendations on the optimal anatomical assessment of lesions. A key question considered by the RECIST Working Group in developing RECIST 1.1 was whether it was appropriate to move from anatomic unidimensional assessment of tumour burden to either volumetric anatomical assessment or to functional assessment with PET or MRI. It was concluded that, at present, there is not sufficient standardisation or evidence to abandon anatomical assessment of tumour burden. The only exception to this is in the use of FDG-PET imaging as an adjunct to determination of progression. As is detailed in the final paper in this special issue, the use of these promising newer approaches requires appropriate clinical validation studies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Alpelisib for PIK3CA-Mutated, Hormone Receptor–Positive Advanced Breast Cancer

              PIK3CA mutations occur in approximately 40% of patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer. The PI3Kα-specific inhibitor alpelisib has shown antitumor activity in early studies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Clin Oncol
                J Clin Oncol
                jco
                JCO
                Journal of Clinical Oncology
                Wolters Kluwer Health
                0732-183X
                1527-7755
                20 August 2023
                22 June 2023
                22 June 2023
                : 41
                : 24
                : 4014-4024
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ]Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
                [ 2 ]Curtin University, Perth, Australia
                [ 3 ]Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute, Brno, Czech Republic
                [ 4 ]Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
                [ 5 ]Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest, René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
                [ 6 ]Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Nagoya, Japan
                [ 7 ]Providence Saint John's Cancer Institute, Santa Monica, CA
                [ 8 ]University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington, VT
                [ 9 ]Sanofi, Cambridge, MA
                [ 10 ]Moderna, Inc, Cambridge, MA
                [ 11 ]Sanofi, Vitry-sur-Seine, France
                [ 12 ]Sanofi, Chilly-Mazarin, France
                [ 13 ]Seoul National University Hospital, Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
                Author notes
                Sara M. Tolaney, MD, MPH, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Y1244, Boston, MA 02215; e-mail: Sara_Tolaney@ 123456DFCI.HARVARD.EDU .
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5940-8671
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2135-2286
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2106-9165
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0242-4718
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8459-9828
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3677-6807
                https://orcid.org/0009-0008-1187-1123
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3002-6351
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5396-6533
                Article
                JCO.22.02746 00009
                10.1200/JCO.22.02746
                10461947
                37348019
                2ff60c2b-3189-4ea8-ba42-0a35483d8ffd
                © 2023 by American Society of Clinical Oncology

                Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives 4.0 License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History
                : 6 December 2022
                : 20 April 2023
                : 19 May 2023
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 43, Pages: 13
                Categories
                261-566-9263, Monotherapy, 13
                613-225-2575-2447, Oral administration, 10
                261-566-3525, Targeted therapy, 9
                613-225-325, Drug safety, 7
                130-540-543-12277-2683, Second line therapy, 6
                298-145-222-184-1022-9124, Phase II trials, 6
                298-3438-9870, Intent to treat analysis, 6
                261-492-2769, Treatment efficacy, 2
                613-135-244-3829, Safety, 2
                36, fulvestrant, 31
                312, tamoxifen, 6
                81, palbociclib isethionate, 2
                236, exemestane, 2
                231, letrozole, 1
                307, everolimus, 1
                197, anastrozole, 1
                2015, alpelisib, 1
                38092-22498, ESR1, 38
                38092-19901, CCDC6, 31
                38092-19901, CCDC6, 6
                38092-34892, UBXN11, 4
                38092-22498, ESR1, 2
                38092-29493, PIK3CA, 1
                38114-38096-7094, IGLL3P, 1
                38092-22447, ERBB2, 1
                ORIGINAL REPORTS
                Breast Cancer
                Custom metadata
                TRUE

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content56

                Cited by6

                Most referenced authors1,067