Efficacy of eribulin for metastatic breast cancer based on localization of specific secondary metastases: a post hoc analysis.
Adult
Antineoplastic Agents
/ therapeutic use
Bone and Bones
/ pathology
Breast
/ pathology
Breast Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Furans
/ therapeutic use
Humans
Ketones
/ therapeutic use
Liver
/ pathology
Lung
/ pathology
Lymph Nodes
/ pathology
Middle Aged
Multicenter Studies as Topic
Neoplasm Metastasis
/ drug therapy
Prognosis
Progression-Free Survival
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Risk Factors
Skin
/ pathology
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 07 2020
08 07 2020
Historique:
received:
19
09
2019
accepted:
28
04
2020
entrez:
10
7
2020
pubmed:
10
7
2020
medline:
22
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Prior pooled analysis of eribulin studies (301 and 305) indicated eribulin prolonged overall survival (OS) in patients with locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer (MBC) regardless of visceral or nonvisceral disease. This hypothesis-generating post hoc analysis examined the efficacy of eribulin according to the location of metastatic sites at baseline in 1864 pretreated patients with locally advanced/MBC from studies 301 and 305. Analyses included OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate; OS and PFS were also analyzed according to estrogen-receptor status. Eribulin appeared efficacious in patients with locally advanced/MBC, irrespective of the location of metastases at baseline. A nominally significant difference in OS in favor of patients randomized to eribulin compared with control in patients with bone, lymph node, and chest wall/breast/skin metastases at baseline was observed. Additionally, a difference in OS was also seen in patients with liver metastases randomized to eribulin versus control (median: 13.4 versus 11.3 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% CI: 0.72, 0.97]). Results of this exploratory analysis suggest that eribulin may be efficacious for the treatment of locally advanced/MBC for patients with bone, liver, lung, lymph node, and chest wall/breast/skin metastases.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32641747
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-66980-0
pii: 10.1038/s41598-020-66980-0
pmc: PMC7343788
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antineoplastic Agents
0
Furans
0
Ketones
0
eribulin
LR24G6354G
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
11203Références
Kamby, C. et al. Pattern of spread and progression in relation to the characteristics of the primary tumour in human breast cancer. Acta Oncol. 30, 301–308 (1991).
doi: 10.3109/02841869109092375
Lobbezoo, D. J. et al. Prognosis of metastatic breast cancer: are there differences between patients with de novo and recurrent metastatic breast cancer? Br. J. Cancer 112, 1445–1451 (2015).
doi: 10.1038/bjc.2015.127
Cardoso, F. et al. 1st International consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC 1). Breast 21, 242–252 (2012).
doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2012.03.003
Chang, J. et al. Survival of patients with metastatic breast carcinoma: importance of prognostic markers of the primary tumor. Cancer 97, 545–553 (2003).
doi: 10.1002/cncr.11083
Savci-Heijink, C. D. et al. Retrospective analysis of metastatic behaviour of breast cancer subtypes. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 150, 547–557 (2015).
doi: 10.1007/s10549-015-3352-0
Khanfir, A. et al. Prognostic factors and survival in metastatic breast cancer: A single institution experience. Rep. Pract. Oncol. Radiother. 18, 127–132 (2013).
doi: 10.1016/j.rpor.2013.01.001
Towle, M. J. et al. In vitro and in vivo anticancer activities of synthetic macrocyclic ketone analogues of halichondrin B. Cancer Res. 61, 1013–1021 (2001).
pubmed: 11221827
Jordan, M. A. et al. The primary antimitotic mechanism of action of the synthetic halichondrin E7389 is suppression of microtubule growth. Mol. Cancer Ther. 4, 1086–1095 (2005).
doi: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-04-0345
Okouneva, T., Azarenko, O., Wilson, L., Littlefield, B. A. & Jordan, M. A. Inhibition of centromere dynamics by eribulin (E7389) during mitotic metaphase. Mol. Cancer Ther. 7, 2003–2011 (2008).
doi: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-08-0095
Smith, J. A. et al. Eribulin binds at microtubule ends to a single site on tubulin to suppress dynamic instability. Biochemistry 49, 1331–1337 (2010).
doi: 10.1021/bi901810u
Dybdal-Hargreaves, N. F., Risinger, A. L. & Mooberry, S. L. Eribulin mesylate: mechanism of action of a unique microtubule-targeting agent. Clin. Cancer Res. 21, 2445–2452 (2015).
doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-3252
Agoulnik, S. I. et al. Eribulin mesylate exerts specific gene expression changes in pericytes and shortens pericyte-driven capillary network in vitro. Vasc. Cell 6, 3 (2014).
doi: 10.1186/2045-824X-6-3
Funahashi, Y. et al. Eribulin mesylate reduces tumor microenvironment abnormality by vascular remodeling in preclinical human breast cancer models. Cancer Sci. 105, 1334–1342 (2014).
doi: 10.1111/cas.12488
Yoshida, T. et al. Eribulin mesilate suppresses experimental metastasis of breast cancer cells by reversing phenotype from epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) to mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) states. Br. J. Cancer 110, 1497–1505 (2014).
doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.80
Ueda, S. et al. In vivo imaging of eribulin-induced reoxygenation in advanced breast cancer patients: a comparison to bevacizumab. Br. J. Cancer 114, 1212–1218 (2016).
doi: 10.1038/bjc.2016.122
Cortes, J. et al. Eribulin monotherapy versus treatment of physician’s choice in patients with metastatic breast cancer (EMBRACE): a phase 3 open-label randomised study. Lancet 377, 914–923 (2011).
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60070-6
Yuan, P. et al. Eribulin mesilate versus vinorelbine in women with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer: A randomised clinical trial. Eur. J. Cancer 112, 57–65 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.02.002
Kaufman, P. A. et al. Phase III open-label randomized study of eribulin mesylate versus capecitabine in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer previously treated with an anthracycline and a taxane. J. Clin. Oncol. 33, 594–601 (2015).
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.52.4892
Twelves, C. et al. Efficacy of eribulin in women with metastatic breast cancer: a pooled analysis of two phase 3 studies. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 148, 553–561 (2014).
doi: 10.1007/s10549-014-3144-y
Therasse, P. et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 92, 205–216 (2000).
doi: 10.1093/jnci/92.3.205
Yücel, B. et al. Importance of metastasis site in survival of patients with breast cancer. Austin J. Med. Oncol. 1, 7 (2014).
Brodt, P. Role of the microenvironment in liver metastasis: From pre- to prometastatic niches. Clin. Cancer Res. 22, 5971–5982 (2016).
doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-0460
Cortes, J., Schöffski, P. & Littlefield, B. A. Multiple modes of action of eribulin mesylate: emerging data and clinical implications. Cancer Treat. Rev. 70, 190–198 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2018.08.008
Twelves, C. et al. “New” metastases are associated with a poorer prognosis than growth of pre-existing metastases in patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res 17, 150 (2015).
doi: 10.1186/s13058-015-0657-1