TY - JOUR
T1 - Ramucirumab With Eribulin Versus Eribulin in Locally Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer Previously Treated With Anthracycline and Taxane Therapy
T2 - A Multicenter, Randomized, Phase II Study
AU - Yardley, Denise A.
AU - Reeves, James
AU - Dees, E. Claire
AU - Osborne, Cynthia
AU - Paul, Devchand
AU - Ademuyiwa, Foluso
AU - Soliman, Hatem
AU - Guthrie, Troy
AU - Andersen, Jay
AU - Krekow, Lea
AU - Choksi, Janak
AU - Daniel, Brooke
AU - Danso, Michael
AU - Favret, Anne
AU - Oommen, Sanjay
AU - Brufsky, Adam
AU - Bromund, Jane L.
AU - Lin, Yong
AU - Ibrahim, Ayman B.
AU - Richards, Paul D.
N1 - Funding Information:
D.A.Y. reports institutional grants from Eli Lilly during the course of the study. J.R. reports speaker and advisory board participance for Celgene. E.C.D. reports research funding from GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, Novartis, Pfizer, Merck, and Bayer outside of the submitted work, and has an immediate family member in an advisory role at Novartis. F.A. reports research funding from Polyphor, AbbVie, and Novartis outside of the submitted work. H.S. reports grants from Genentech, and personal fees from Celgene and Eisai outside the submitted work. T.G. reports speaker and advisory board participance for Bristol-Myers Squibb and Boehringer Ingelheim. J.A. reports speaker and advisory board participance for Genentech, advisory roles at Genentech and Pfizer, and personal fees from Genentech and Genomic Health outside of the submitted work. J.L.B. and Y.L. were employees and stockholders of Eli Lilly and Company (Indianapolis, IN) during the conduct of the study. A.B.I. was an employee and stockholder of Eli Lilly and Company (Bridgewater, NJ) during the conduct of the study. P.D.R. reports research funding from Blue Ridge Cancer Care outside the submitted work. The remaining authors have stated that they have no conflicts of interest.
Funding Information:
The authors thank the patients, their caregivers, investigators, and study site personnel for their generous support. Funding for this study was provided by Eli Lilly and Company. Eli Lilly and Company contracted with inVentiv Health Clinical for writing support, provided by Emily Cullinan, and editorial support by Teri Tucker and Noelle Gasco.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 The Author(s)
PY - 2016/12/1
Y1 - 2016/12/1
N2 - We describe the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab with eribulin versus eribulin monotherapy as third- to fifth-line therapy in women with advanced breast cancer. The primary end point of progression-free survival was not met. Screening for brain metastases upon trial entry showed an unanticipated prevalence of asymptomatic brain disease, raising new considerations for screening in late-stage metastatic breast cancer irrespective of HER2 or hormone receptor status. Background Use of antiangiogenic agents in treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains controversial. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab and eribulin versus eribulin alone as third- to fifth-line therapy in women with advanced breast cancer. Patients and Methods In this randomized (1:1), open-label, phase II study, US women aged 18 years or older with 2 to 4 previous chemotherapy regimens for locally recurrent or MBC, previous anthracycline and taxane treatment, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 received ramucirumab with eribulin or eribulin alone in 21-day cycles (eribulin 1.4 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8; ramucirumab 10 mg/kg intravenously on day 1). Randomization was stratified according to previous antiangiogenic therapy and triple-negative status. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention to treat population. Results One hundred forty-one women were randomized to ramucirumab with eribulin (n = 71) or eribulin alone (n = 70). Median PFS for ramucirumab with eribulin was 4.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1-6.7) compared with 4.1 months (95% CI, 3.2-5.6) for eribulin (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.56-1.23; P = .35). Median overall survival in patients who received ramucirumab with eribulin was 13.5 months (95% CI, 10.4-17.9) compared with 11.5 months (95% CI, 9.0-17.3) in patients who received eribulin alone (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.59-1.41; P = .68); objective response rate was 21% (13 of 62 patients) for the combination and 28% (17 of 60 patients) for eribulin alone. No unexpected toxicity was identified for the combination. Conclusion Ramucirumab combined with eribulin did not significantly improve PFS in advanced MBC.
AB - We describe the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab with eribulin versus eribulin monotherapy as third- to fifth-line therapy in women with advanced breast cancer. The primary end point of progression-free survival was not met. Screening for brain metastases upon trial entry showed an unanticipated prevalence of asymptomatic brain disease, raising new considerations for screening in late-stage metastatic breast cancer irrespective of HER2 or hormone receptor status. Background Use of antiangiogenic agents in treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains controversial. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab and eribulin versus eribulin alone as third- to fifth-line therapy in women with advanced breast cancer. Patients and Methods In this randomized (1:1), open-label, phase II study, US women aged 18 years or older with 2 to 4 previous chemotherapy regimens for locally recurrent or MBC, previous anthracycline and taxane treatment, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 received ramucirumab with eribulin or eribulin alone in 21-day cycles (eribulin 1.4 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8; ramucirumab 10 mg/kg intravenously on day 1). Randomization was stratified according to previous antiangiogenic therapy and triple-negative status. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention to treat population. Results One hundred forty-one women were randomized to ramucirumab with eribulin (n = 71) or eribulin alone (n = 70). Median PFS for ramucirumab with eribulin was 4.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1-6.7) compared with 4.1 months (95% CI, 3.2-5.6) for eribulin (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.56-1.23; P = .35). Median overall survival in patients who received ramucirumab with eribulin was 13.5 months (95% CI, 10.4-17.9) compared with 11.5 months (95% CI, 9.0-17.3) in patients who received eribulin alone (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.59-1.41; P = .68); objective response rate was 21% (13 of 62 patients) for the combination and 28% (17 of 60 patients) for eribulin alone. No unexpected toxicity was identified for the combination. Conclusion Ramucirumab combined with eribulin did not significantly improve PFS in advanced MBC.
KW - Antiangiogenic therapy
KW - Brain metastasis
KW - Targeted agents
KW - Triple-negative status
KW - VEGFR-2
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84995688301&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.clbc.2016.07.005
DO - 10.1016/j.clbc.2016.07.005
M3 - Article
C2 - 27569274
AN - SCOPUS:84995688301
SN - 1526-8209
VL - 16
SP - 471-479.e1
JO - Clinical breast cancer
JF - Clinical breast cancer
IS - 6
ER -