Exemestane Is Superior to Megestrol Acetate After Tamoxifen Failure in Postmenopausal Women With Advanced Breast Cancer: Results of a Phase III Randomized Double-Blind Trial

Manfred Kaufmann(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Emilio Bajetta(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Luc Dirix(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Luis Fein(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Stephen E. Jones(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Nicoletta Zilembo(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Jean-Louis Dugardyn(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Cristina Nasurdi(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Robert Mennel(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Jožica Červek(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Camilla Fowst(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Anna Polli(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), E. Di Salle(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Alexei Arkhipov(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), G. Piscitelli(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Langdon L. Miller(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), Giorgio Massimini(ANT Foundation Italy Onlus), for the Exemestane Study Group
Journal of Clinical Oncology
April 7, 2000
Cited by 525

Abstract

PURPOSE: This phase III, double-blind, randomized, multicenter study evaluated the efficacy, pharmacodynamics, and safety of the oral aromatase inactivator exemestane (EXE) versus megestrol acetate (MA) in postmenopausal women with progressive advanced breast cancer who experienced failure of tamoxifen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 769 patients were randomized to EXE 25 mg/d (n = 366) or MA (n = 403) 40 mg four times daily. Tumor response, duration of tumor control, tumor-related signs and symptoms (TRSS), quality of life (QOL), survival, and tolerability were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall objective response (OR) rates were higher in patients treated with EXE than in those treated with MA (15.0% v 12.4%); a similar trend was noted in patients with visceral metastases (13.5% v 10.5%). Median survival time was significantly longer with EXE (median not reached) than with MA (123.4 weeks; P =.039), as were the median duration of overall success (OR or stable disease > or = 24 weeks; 60.1 v 49.1 weeks; P =.025), time to tumor progression (20.3 v 16.6 weeks; P =.037), and time to treatment failure (16.3 v 15.7 weeks; P =.042). Compared with MA, there were similar or greater improvements in pain, TRSS, and QOL with EXE. Both drugs were well tolerated. Grade 3 or 4 weight changes were more common with MA (17.1% v 7.6%; P =.001). CONCLUSION: EXE prolongs survival time, time to tumor progression, and time to treatment failure compared with MA and offers a well-tolerated treatment option for postmenopausal women with progressive advanced breast cancer who experienced failure of tamoxifen.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis