First- vs second-line CDK 4/6 inhibitor use for patients with hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth-factor receptor-2 negative, metastatic breast cancer in the real world setting
-
Published:2024-06-26
Issue:
Volume:
Page:
-
ISSN:0167-6806
-
Container-title:Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Breast Cancer Res Treat
Author:
Kimmick Gretchen,Pilehvari Asal,You Wen,Bonilla Gloribel,Anderson Roger
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
To compare CDK4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) with endocrine therapy (ET) in the first- versus second-line setting for treatment of hormone receptor positive (HR+), HER2 negative, metastatic breast cancer (MBC) using real-world evidence.
Methods
Patients with HR+, HER2 negative MBC, diagnosed between 2/3/2015 and 11/2/2021 and having ≥ 3 months follow-up were identified from the nationwide electronic health record-derived Flatiron Health de-identified database. Treatment cohorts included: (1) first-line ET with a CDK 4/6i (1st-line CDK4/6i) versus (2) first-line ET alone followed by second-line ET with a CDK4/6i (2nd-line CDK4/6i). Differences in baseline characteristics were tested using chi-square tests and two-sample t-tests. Time to third-line therapy, time to start of chemotherapy, and overall survival were compared using Kaplan-Maier method.
Results
The analysis included 2771 patients (2170 1st-line CDK4/6i and 601 2nd-line CDK4/6i). Patients receiving 1st-line CDK4/6i were younger (75% vs 68% < 75 years old, p = 0.0001), less likely uninsured or not having insurance status documented (10% vs. 13%, p = 0.04), of better performance status (50% vs 43% with ECOG 0, p = 0.03), and more likely to have de novo MBC (36% vs. 24%, p < 0.001). Time to third-line therapy (49 vs 22 months, p < 0.001) and time to chemotherapy (68 vs 41 months, p < 0.001) were longer in those receiving first-line CDK4/6i. Overall survival (54 vs 49 months, p = 0.33) was similar between groups.
Conclusion
Use of CDK4/6i with first-, vs second-, line ET was associated with longer time to receipt of 3rd-line therapy and longer time to receipt of chemotherapy.
Funder
American Cancer Society / FlatIron Health
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference46 articles.
1. Reddy PM, Martin JM, Montero AJ (2022) CDK 4/6 Inhibitors: evolution and revolution in the management of ER+ metastatic breast cancer. JCO Oncol Pract 18(5):329–330. https://doi.org/10.1200/OP.21.00611 2. Knudsen ES, Witkiewicz AK (2016) Defining the transcriptional and biological response to CDK4/6 inhibition in relation to ER+/HER2- breast cancer. Oncotarget 7(43):69111–69123. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.11588 3. Finn RS, Martin M, Rugo HS, Jones S, Im SA, Gelmon K, Harbeck N, Lipatov ON, Walshe JM, Moulder S, Gauthier E, Lu DR, Randolph S, Dieras V, Slamon DJ (2016) Palbociclib and letrozole in advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 375(20):1925–1936. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1607303 4. Rugo HS, Finn RS, Dieras V, Ettl J, Lipatov O, Joy AA, Harbeck N, Castrellon A, Iyer S, Lu DR, Mori A, Gauthier ER, Bartlett CH, Gelmon KA, Slamon DJ (2019) Palbociclib plus letrozole as first-line therapy in estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer with extended follow-up. Breast Cancer Res Treat 174(3):719–729. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-018-05125-4 5. Hortobagyi GN, Stemmer SM, Burris HA, Yap YS, Sonke GS, Paluch-Shimon S, Campone M, Blackwell KL, Andre F, Winer EP, Janni W, Verma S, Conte P, Arteaga CL, Cameron DA, Petrakova K, Hart LL, Villanueva C, Chan A, Jakobsen E, Nusch A, Burdaeva O, Grischke EM, Alba E, Wist E, Marschner N, Favret AM, Yardley D, Bachelot T, Tseng LM, Blau S, Xuan F, Souami F, Miller M, Germa C, Hirawat S, O’Shaughnessy J (2016) Ribociclib as first-line therapy for HR-positive, advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 375(18):1738–1748. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1609709
|
|