Effectiveness of palbociclib with aromatase inhibitors for the treatment of advanced breast cancer in an exposure retrospective cohort study: implications for clinical practice.


Journal

Breast cancer research : BCR
ISSN: 1465-542X
Titre abrégé: Breast Cancer Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100927353

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
29 06 2023
Historique:
received: 03 10 2022
accepted: 23 06 2023
medline: 3 7 2023
pubmed: 30 6 2023
entrez: 29 6 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

New drugs for locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer have led to clinical benefits, aside with increasing costs to healthcare systems. The current financing model for health technology assessment (HTA) privileges real-world data. As part of the ongoing HTA, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of palbociclib with aromatase inhibitors (AI) and compare it with the efficacy reported in PALOMA-2. A population-based retrospective exposure cohort study was conducted including all patients initiating treatment in Portugal with palbociclib under early access use and registered in the National Oncology Registry. The primary outcome was progression free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes considered included time to palbociclib failure (TPF), overall survival (OS), time to next treatment (TTNT), and proportion of patients discontinuing treatment due to  adverse events (AEs). The Kaplan-Meier method was used and median, 1- and 2-year survival rates were computed, with two-sided 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines for reporting observational studies were used. There were 131 patients included. Median follow-up was 28.3 months (IQR: 22.7-35.2) and median duration of treatment was 17.5 months (IQR: 7.8-29.1). Median PFS was 19.5 months (95%CI 14.2-24.2), corresponding to a 1-year PFS rate of 67.9% (95%CI 59.2-75.2) and a 2-year PFS rate of 42.0% (95%CI 33.5-50.3). Sensitivity analysis showed median PFS would increase slightly when excluding those not initiating treatment with the recommended dose, raising to 19.8 months (95%CI 14.4-28.9). By considering only patients meeting PALOMA-2 criteria, we could observe a major difference in treatment outcomes, with a mean PFS of 28.8 months (95%CI 19.4-36.0). TPF was 19.8 months (95%CI 14.2-24.9). Median OS was not reached. Median TTNT was 22.5 months (95%CI 18.0-29.8). A total of 14 patients discontinued palbociclib because of AEs (10.7%). Data suggest palbociclib with AI to have an effectiveness of 28.8 months, when used in patients with overlapping characteristics to those used in PALOMA-2. However, when used outside of these eligibility criteria, namely in patients with less favorable prognosis (e.g., presence of visceral disease), the benefits are inferior, even though still favorable.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
New drugs for locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer have led to clinical benefits, aside with increasing costs to healthcare systems. The current financing model for health technology assessment (HTA) privileges real-world data. As part of the ongoing HTA, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of palbociclib with aromatase inhibitors (AI) and compare it with the efficacy reported in PALOMA-2.
METHODS
A population-based retrospective exposure cohort study was conducted including all patients initiating treatment in Portugal with palbociclib under early access use and registered in the National Oncology Registry. The primary outcome was progression free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes considered included time to palbociclib failure (TPF), overall survival (OS), time to next treatment (TTNT), and proportion of patients discontinuing treatment due to  adverse events (AEs). The Kaplan-Meier method was used and median, 1- and 2-year survival rates were computed, with two-sided 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines for reporting observational studies were used.
RESULTS
There were 131 patients included. Median follow-up was 28.3 months (IQR: 22.7-35.2) and median duration of treatment was 17.5 months (IQR: 7.8-29.1). Median PFS was 19.5 months (95%CI 14.2-24.2), corresponding to a 1-year PFS rate of 67.9% (95%CI 59.2-75.2) and a 2-year PFS rate of 42.0% (95%CI 33.5-50.3). Sensitivity analysis showed median PFS would increase slightly when excluding those not initiating treatment with the recommended dose, raising to 19.8 months (95%CI 14.4-28.9). By considering only patients meeting PALOMA-2 criteria, we could observe a major difference in treatment outcomes, with a mean PFS of 28.8 months (95%CI 19.4-36.0). TPF was 19.8 months (95%CI 14.2-24.9). Median OS was not reached. Median TTNT was 22.5 months (95%CI 18.0-29.8). A total of 14 patients discontinued palbociclib because of AEs (10.7%).
CONCLUSIONS
Data suggest palbociclib with AI to have an effectiveness of 28.8 months, when used in patients with overlapping characteristics to those used in PALOMA-2. However, when used outside of these eligibility criteria, namely in patients with less favorable prognosis (e.g., presence of visceral disease), the benefits are inferior, even though still favorable.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37386484
doi: 10.1186/s13058-023-01678-5
pii: 10.1186/s13058-023-01678-5
pmc: PMC10308630
doi:

Substances chimiques

Aromatase Inhibitors 0
palbociclib G9ZF61LE7G

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

78

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Author(s).

Références

Clin Breast Cancer. 2020 Feb;20(1):33-40
pubmed: 31451366
J Clin Oncol. 2020 May 20;38(15):1651-1654
pubmed: 32160103
Cancer. 2020 Apr 15;126(8):1717-1726
pubmed: 31913522
Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2021 Mar 10;13:1758835920987651
pubmed: 33796150
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2020 Oct;29(10):1295-1302
pubmed: 32844487
Oncologist. 2022 Sep 2;27(9):e731-e738
pubmed: 35762676
Eur J Cancer. 2018 Jun;96:17-24
pubmed: 29660596
J Clin Epidemiol. 2008 Sep;61(9):945-50
pubmed: 18468857
ESMO Open. 2021 Jun;6(3):100114
pubmed: 33895695
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019 Jul;176(2):429-434
pubmed: 30895534
Breast. 2019 Feb;43:22-27
pubmed: 30391832
Curr Oncol. 2021 Jun 18;28(3):2270-2280
pubmed: 34207443
Int J Clin Pharm. 2018 Aug;40(4):852-861
pubmed: 29860707
Breast. 2021 Jun;57:36-42
pubmed: 33711698
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2021 Feb 24;37:e40
pubmed: 33622423
Drug Saf. 1999 Feb;20(2):109-17
pubmed: 10082069
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019 Apr;174(3):719-729
pubmed: 30632023
Ann Oncol. 2020 Dec;31(12):1623-1649
pubmed: 32979513
J Clin Epidemiol. 2008 Apr;61(4):344-9
pubmed: 18313558
J Glob Oncol. 2019 May;5:JGO1800239
pubmed: 31050919
N Engl J Med. 2016 Nov 17;375(20):1925-1936
pubmed: 27959613
Eur J Cancer. 2020 Apr;129:41-49
pubmed: 32120274
Breast Cancer Res. 2021 Mar 24;23(1):37
pubmed: 33761995
Eur J Cancer. 2020 Apr;129:60-70
pubmed: 32135312

Auteurs

Filipa Alves da Costa (F)

Registo Oncológico Nacional (RON), Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil, EPE, Lisbon, Portugal. alvesdacosta.f@gmail.com.
Research Institute for Medicines (iMED), Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal. alvesdacosta.f@gmail.com.

Fábio Cardoso Borges (F)

Registo Oncológico Nacional (RON), Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil, EPE, Lisbon, Portugal.

Adriana Ramos (A)

Registo Oncológico Nacional (RON), Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil, EPE, Lisbon, Portugal.

Alexandra Mayer (A)

Registo Oncológico Nacional (RON), Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil, EPE, Lisbon, Portugal.

Claudia Brito (C)

Registo Oncológico Nacional (RON), Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil, EPE, Lisbon, Portugal.

Catarina Ramos (C)

Registo Oncológico Nacional (RON), Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil, EPE, Lisbon, Portugal.

Catarina Bernardo (C)

Registo Oncológico Nacional (RON), Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil, EPE, Lisbon, Portugal.

Mariane Cossito (M)

Direção de Avaliação de Tecnologias de Saúde, Autoridade Nacional do Medicamento e Produtos de Saúde, I.P. (INFARMED I.P.), Lisbon, Portugal.

Cláudia Furtado (C)

Direção de Avaliação de Tecnologias de Saúde, Autoridade Nacional do Medicamento e Produtos de Saúde, I.P. (INFARMED I.P.), Lisbon, Portugal.

Arlindo R Ferreira (AR)

Unidade de Mama, Centro Clínico Champalimaud, Fundação Champalimaud, Lisbon, Portugal.
Católica Medical School, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Lisbon, Portugal.

Diogo Martins-Branco (D)

Serviço de Oncologia Médica, Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil, EPE, Lisbon, Portugal.
Academic Trials Promoting Team, Institute Jules Bordet, Rue Meylemeersch 90, 1070, Brussels, Belgium.

Ana da Costa Miranda (A)

Registo Oncológico Nacional (RON), Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil, EPE, Lisbon, Portugal.

António Lourenço (A)

Registo Oncológico Nacional (RON), Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil, EPE, Lisbon, Portugal.
NOVA Medical School, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH