Zhongsheng Tong

•The phase III IMpassion131 trial evaluated atezolizumab combined with paclitaxel as first-line therapy for aTNBC.•The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS, tested hierarchically in the PD-L1+ and then ITT populations.•Neither PFS nor OS was improved with the combination of atezolizumab plus paclitaxel in either population.•These findings may result from imbalances in prognostic features or chance findings in a relatively small trial.•IMpassion131 results highlight the need for further research into immunotherapy for TNBC. BackgroundIn the phase III IMpassion130 trial, combining atezolizumab with first-line nanoparticle albumin-bound-paclitaxel for advanced triple-negative breast cancer (aTNBC) showed a statistically significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive populations, and a clinically meaningful overall survival (OS) effect in PD-L1-positive aTNBC. The phase III KEYNOTE-355 trial adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy for aTNBC showed similar PFS effects. IMpassion131 evaluated first-line atezolizumab–paclitaxel in aTNBC.Patients and methodsEligible patients [no prior systemic therapy or ≥12 months since (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy] were randomised 2:1 to atezolizumab 840 mg or placebo (days 1, 15), both with paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, 15), every 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were tumour PD-L1 status, prior taxane, liver metastases and geographical region. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS, tested hierarchically first in the PD-L1-positive [immune cell expression ≥1%, VENTANA PD-L1 (SP142) assay] population, and then in the ITT population. OS was a secondary endpoint.ResultsOf 651 randomised patients, 45% had PD-L1-positive aTNBC. At the primary PFS analysis, adding atezolizumab to paclitaxel did not improve investigator-assessed PFS in the PD-L1-positive population [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-1.12; P = 0.20; median PFS 6.0 months with atezolizumab–paclitaxel versus 5.7 months with placebo–paclitaxel]. In the PD-L1-positive population, atezolizumab–paclitaxel was associated with more favourable unconfirmed best overall response rate (63% versus 55% with placebo–paclitaxel) and median duration of response (7.2 versus 5.5 months, respectively). Final OS results showed no difference between arms (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.76-1.64; median 22.1 months with atezolizumab–paclitaxel versus 28.3 months with placebo–paclitaxel in the PD-L1-positive population). Results in the ITT population were consistent with the PD-L1-positive population. The safety profile was consistent with known effects of each study drug.ConclusionCombining atezolizumab with paclitaxel did not improve PFS or OS versus paclitaxel alone.ClinicalTrials.govNCT03125902. In the phase III IMpassion130 trial, combining atezolizumab with first-line nanoparticle albumin-bound-paclitaxel for advanced triple-negative breast cancer (aTNBC) showed a statistically significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive populations, and a clinically meaningful overall survival (OS) effect in PD-L1-positive aTNBC. The phase III KEYNOTE-355 trial adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy for aTNBC showed similar PFS effects. IMpassion131 evaluated first-line atezolizumab–paclitaxel in aTNBC. Eligible patients [no prior systemic therapy or ≥12 months since (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy] were randomised 2:1 to atezolizumab 840 mg or placebo (days 1, 15), both with paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, 15), every 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were tumour PD-L1 status, prior taxane, liver metastases and geographical region. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS, tested hierarchically first in the PD-L1-positive [immune cell expression ≥1%, VENTANA PD-L1 (SP142) assay] population, and then in the ITT population. OS was a secondary endpoint. Of 651 randomised patients, 45% had PD-L1-positive aTNBC. At the primary PFS analysis, adding atezolizumab to paclitaxel did not improve investigator-assessed PFS in the PD-L1-positive population [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-1.12; P = 0.20; median PFS 6.0 months with atezolizumab–paclitaxel versus 5.7 months with placebo–paclitaxel]. In the PD-L1-positive population, atezolizumab–paclitaxel was associated with more favourable unconfirmed best overall response rate (63% versus 55% with placebo–paclitaxel) and median duration of response (7.2 versus 5.5 months, respectively). Final OS results showed no difference between arms (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.76-1.64; median 22.1 months with atezolizumab–paclitaxel versus 28.3 months with placebo–paclitaxel in the PD-L1-positive population). Results in the ITT population were consistent with the PD-L1-positive population. The safety profile was consistent with known effects of each study drug. Combining atezolizumab with paclitaxel did not improve PFS or OS versus paclitaxel alone.

PURPOSE Pyrotinib, an irreversible pan-ErbB inhibitor, showed promising antitumor activity and acceptable tolerability in a phase I trial. We assessed the efficacy and tolerability of pyrotinib versus lapatinib, both in combination with capecitabine, in women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer in an open-label, multicenter, randomized phase II study. PATIENTS AND METHODS Chinese patients with HER2-positive relapsed or metastatic breast cancer previously treated with taxanes, anthracyclines, and/or trastuzumab were assigned (1:1) to receive 400 mg pyrotinib or lapatinib 1,250 mg orally once per day for 21-day cycles in combination with capecitabine (1,000 mg/m 2 orally twice per day on days 1 to 14). The primary end point was investigator-assessed overall response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1. RESULTS Between May 29, 2015, and March 15, 2016, 128 eligible patients were randomly assigned to the pyrotinib (n = 65) or lapatinib (n = 63) treatment groups. The overall response rate was 78.5% (95% CI, 68.5% to 88.5%) with pyrotinib and 57.1% (95% CI, 44.9% to 69.4%) with lapatinib (treatment difference, 21.3%; 95% CI, 4.0% to 38.7%; P = .01). The median progression-free survival was 18.1 months (95% CI, 13.9 months to not reached) with pyrotinib and 7.0 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 9.8 months) with lapatinib (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.58; P < .001). The most frequent grade 3 to 4 adverse events were hand-foot syndrome in 16 of 65 patients (24.6%) in the pyrotinib group versus 13 of 63 (20.6%) in the lapatinib group; diarrhea in 10 patients (15.4%) versus three patients (4.8%), respectively; and decreased neutrophil count in six patients (9.2%) versus two patients (3.2%), respectively. CONCLUSION In women with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer previously treated with taxanes, anthracyclines, and/or trastuzumab, pyrotinib plus capecitabine yielded statistically significant better overall response rate and progression-free survival than lapatinib plus capecitabine in this randomized phase II trial.

Apatinib is an oral, highly potent tyrosine-kinase inhibitor targeting VEGFR2. Phase I study showed the recommended dose of 750 mg/day with substantial antitumor activity. This phase II study aims to evaluate the optimum dose level for the efficacy and safety of apatinib monotherapy in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic triple negative breast cancer (mTNBC) in China. Phase IIa was first performed among 25 patients previously treated with anthracycline and/or taxane. All patients received apatinib 750 mg/day p.o. in a 4-week cycle. Subsequently, a phase IIb study of 59 patients was activated, with the endpoint progression-free survival (PFS). The dosage of drug for the Phase IIb was determined according to safety, tolerability and efficacy from the phase IIa study. As a result of toxicity associated with the 750 mg dose in phase IIa, the recommended initial dose of apatinib in the phase IIb was 500 mg/day. In phase IIb, grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities were thrombocytopenia (13.6%), leukopenia (6.8%), neutropenia (3.4%) and anemia (1.7%). The most frequent grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities were hand-foot syndrome, proteinuria, hypertension, and increased ALT. In the 56 evaluable patients, overall response rate and clinical benefit rate (CBR) were 10.7 and 25.0%, respectively. Median PFS and overall survival were 3.3 (95% CI 1.7-5.0) and 10.6 (95% CI 5.6-15.7) months, respectively. Our results indicate that apatinib dose of 500 mg rather than 750 mg is the recommended starting dose for the heavily pretreated mTNBC patients with measurable rate of partial response and PFS.

BACKGROUND: Apatinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2(VEGFR-2). This study was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of apatinib in patients with non-triple-negative metastatic breast cancer who had received prior chemotherapy for their metastatic disease. METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, single arm study enrolled patients with non-triple-negative breast cancer, pretreated with anthracycline, taxanes and capecitabine, and who failed in the metastatic setting at least 1 and at most 4 prior chemotherapy regimens and at least one endocrine drug for hormone receptor-positive patients as well as at least one anti-Her2 drug for Her2-positive patients. The primary end point of this study was progression free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. Apatinib was administered as 500 mg daily on days 1 through 28 of each 4-week cycle. RESULTS: 38 patients were enrolled with a median age of 49 years (range, 35 to 62 years) and received apatinib for a median of 4 cycles (range from 0 to 10 cycles). 18 (47.4%) patients experienced dose reduction during treatment. The median relative dose intensity (relative to assigned dose for each cycle) was 82% (range, 45.0% to 100.0%). Median follow-up time was 10.1 months. Median PFS of all 38 patients was 4.0 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 2.8 m - 5.2 m). 36 patients were eligible for efficacy analysis. ORR was 16.7% (6/36). DCR was 66.7% (24/36). Median OS was 10.3 months (95% CI, 9.1 m - 11.6 m). The most common grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs were hypertension (20.5%), hand-foot syndrome (10.3%), and proteinuria (5.1%). Of three possibly drug-related SAEs recorded in the study, 2 (3.4%) deaths occurred within 28 days of last treatment and were both considered to be the result of disease progression. The other one was grade 2 diarrhea needing hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Apatinib exhibited objective efficacy in heavily pretreated, metastatic non-triple-negative breast cancer with manageable toxicity, and it might be better to be tested in breast cancer with high angiogenesis dependency. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01653561.