Comparative efficacy of palbociclib, ribociclib and abemaciclib for ER+ metastatic breast cancer: an adjusted indirect analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Aminopyridines
/ adverse effects
Benzimidazoles
/ adverse effects
Breast Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic
Female
Humans
Piperazines
/ adverse effects
Prospective Studies
Purines
/ adverse effects
Pyridines
/ adverse effects
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Receptors, Estrogen
/ metabolism
Survival Analysis
Treatment Outcome
Breast cancer
CDK-4/6 inhibitors
Meta-analysis
Journal
Breast cancer research and treatment
ISSN: 1573-7217
Titre abrégé: Breast Cancer Res Treat
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 8111104
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2019
Apr 2019
Historique:
received:
20
11
2018
accepted:
08
01
2019
pubmed:
20
1
2019
medline:
17
7
2019
entrez:
20
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Several trials have demonstrated the benefit of anti-CDK4/6 inhibitors plus endocrine therapy in estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) advanced breast cancer (BC), in first or subsequent lines of therapy. However, due to the lack of direct/indirect comparisons, there are no data demonstrating the superiority of one drug over the other. We compared the effectiveness of palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib in advanced ER + BC via an indirect adjusted analysis. We performed electronic searches in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for prospective phase 3 randomized trials evaluating anti-CDK4/6 inhibitors plus endocrine agents. We compared the results with an adjusted indirect analysis of randomized-controlled trials. Outcomes of interest were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and G3-4 toxicities occurring in ≥ 5% of patients. Six trials and six treatment arms including a total of 3743 participants, were included. For PFS and ORR analysis, the three agents were similar in both first- and second-line studies. All G3-4 toxicities were similar, with reduced risk of diarrhea for palbociclib versus abemaciclib (relative risk [RR] 0.13, 95% CI 0.02-0.92; P = 0.04) and of QTc prolongation for palbociclib versus ribociclib (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0-0.83; P = 0.03). Despite different inclusion criteria and length of follow-up, similar features were noticed among second-line studies with the exception of increased risk of anemia G3-4 and diarrhea G3-4 for abemaciclib. Based on PFS and ORR results of this indirect meta-analysis, palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib are equally effective in either first- or second-line therapy for advanced ER + BC. They, however, ported different toxicity profiles.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Several trials have demonstrated the benefit of anti-CDK4/6 inhibitors plus endocrine therapy in estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) advanced breast cancer (BC), in first or subsequent lines of therapy. However, due to the lack of direct/indirect comparisons, there are no data demonstrating the superiority of one drug over the other. We compared the effectiveness of palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib in advanced ER + BC via an indirect adjusted analysis.
METHODS
METHODS
We performed electronic searches in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for prospective phase 3 randomized trials evaluating anti-CDK4/6 inhibitors plus endocrine agents. We compared the results with an adjusted indirect analysis of randomized-controlled trials. Outcomes of interest were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and G3-4 toxicities occurring in ≥ 5% of patients.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Six trials and six treatment arms including a total of 3743 participants, were included. For PFS and ORR analysis, the three agents were similar in both first- and second-line studies. All G3-4 toxicities were similar, with reduced risk of diarrhea for palbociclib versus abemaciclib (relative risk [RR] 0.13, 95% CI 0.02-0.92; P = 0.04) and of QTc prolongation for palbociclib versus ribociclib (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0-0.83; P = 0.03). Despite different inclusion criteria and length of follow-up, similar features were noticed among second-line studies with the exception of increased risk of anemia G3-4 and diarrhea G3-4 for abemaciclib.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Based on PFS and ORR results of this indirect meta-analysis, palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib are equally effective in either first- or second-line therapy for advanced ER + BC. They, however, ported different toxicity profiles.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30659432
doi: 10.1007/s10549-019-05133-y
pii: 10.1007/s10549-019-05133-y
doi:
Substances chimiques
Aminopyridines
0
Benzimidazoles
0
Piperazines
0
Purines
0
Pyridines
0
Receptors, Estrogen
0
abemaciclib
60UAB198HK
palbociclib
G9ZF61LE7G
ribociclib
TK8ERE8P56
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM