Impact of BMI on the outcome of metastatic breast cancer patients treated with everolimus: a retrospective exploratory analysis of the BALLET study.
BMI
everolimus
metastatic breast cancer
outcomes
weight
Journal
Oncotarget
ISSN: 1949-2553
Titre abrégé: Oncotarget
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101532965
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 Jun 2020
09 Jun 2020
Historique:
received:
08
01
2020
accepted:
01
05
2020
entrez:
25
6
2020
pubmed:
25
6
2020
medline:
25
6
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Reliable biomarkers of response to mTOR inhibition are yet to be identified. As mTOR is heavily implicated in cell-metabolism, we investigated the relation between BMI variation and outcomes in metastatic breast cancer (mBC) patients treated with everolimus. we found a linear correlation between everolimus exposure duration and BMI/weight decrease. Patients exhibiting >2 kg weight loss or >3% BMI decrease from baseline at the end of treatment (EOT) had a statistically significant improvement in PFS. Interestingly, a similar BMI/weight decrease within the first 8 weeks of therapy identified patients at higher risk of progression. we performed a retrospective analysis of patients enrolled in the BALLET trial who progressed during the study. Primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end-point was the identification of other predictors of response. A >3% weight loss at EOT is associated with better outcome in mBC patients treated with everolimus. On the contrary, a significant early weight loss represents a predictor of poor survival and could therefore be used as an early negative prognostic marker. As PI3K-inhibition also converges onto mTOR, these findings might extend to patients treated with selective PI3K inhibitors and warrant further investigation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32577163
doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.27612
pii: 27612
pmc: PMC7289535
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
2172-2181Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2020 Corona et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The authors have no conflicts of interests to declare.
Références
N Engl J Med. 2019 May 16;380(20):1929-1940
pubmed: 31091374
J Oncol. 2009;2009:693458
pubmed: 19587829
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jan 1;33(1):90-9
pubmed: 25422490
Cancer Res. 2012 Feb 1;72(3):747-56
pubmed: 22158946
J Clin Invest. 2010 Jul;120(7):2406-13
pubmed: 20530877
Adv Ther. 2013 Oct;30(10):870-84
pubmed: 24158787
Skelet Muscle. 2016 Jul 26;6:26
pubmed: 27462398
Eur J Cancer. 2014 Feb;50(3):486-95
pubmed: 24332451
Curr Biol. 2004 Sep 21;14(18):1650-6
pubmed: 15380067
Clin Pharmacokinet. 2004;43(2):83-95
pubmed: 14748618
Ann Oncol. 2007 Jun;18(6):1117
pubmed: 17586751
Clin Med Insights Oncol. 2016 Sep 11;10:83-94
pubmed: 27660506
Ann Oncol. 2016 Sep;27(9):1719-25
pubmed: 27358383
Ann Palliat Med. 2019 Jan;8(1):3-12
pubmed: 30685982
Diabetes. 2010 Jun;59(6):1338-48
pubmed: 20299475
Lancet Oncol. 2011 May;12(5):489-95
pubmed: 21296615
Mol Clin Oncol. 2016 Nov;5(5):641-646
pubmed: 27900103
Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2004 Jan 9;313(2):443-6
pubmed: 14684182
Oncologist. 2017 Jun;22(6):648-654
pubmed: 28432226
ESMO Open. 2016 May 17;1(3):e000045
pubmed: 27843607
Sci Rep. 2016 May 31;6:26991
pubmed: 27244599
N Engl J Med. 2011 Feb 10;364(6):514-23
pubmed: 21306238
Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Jun 1;18(11):3188-96
pubmed: 22472176
Br J Cancer. 2012 Nov 20;107(11):1815-9
pubmed: 23099804
Sci Rep. 2017 Sep 6;7(1):10597
pubmed: 28878375
J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2013 Dec;4(4):259-65
pubmed: 23893509
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2017 Jan;26(1):44-50
pubmed: 27566419
J Cell Physiol. 2016 May;231(5):986-91
pubmed: 26449308
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016 May;81(5):958-70
pubmed: 26580489
N Engl J Med. 2007 May 31;356(22):2271-81
pubmed: 17538086
N Engl J Med. 2012 Feb 9;366(6):520-9
pubmed: 22149876
J BUON. 2016 Jan-Feb;21(1):27-34
pubmed: 27061527
World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 2000;894:i-xii, 1-253
pubmed: 11234459