Sacituzumab Govitecan in Hormone Receptor–Positive/Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer

Hope S. Rugo(University of California, San Francisco), Aditya Bardia(Harvard University), Frederik Marmé(Heidelberg University), Javier Cortés(Universidad Europea de Madrid), Peter Schmid(Queen Mary University of London), Delphine Loirat(Institut Curie), Olivier Trédan(Centre Léon Bérard), Eva Ciruelos(Hospital Universitario 12 De Octubre), Florence Dalenc(Institut Claudius Regaud), P. Gómez Pardo(Vall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari), Komal Jhaveri(Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center), Rosemary Delaney(Gilead Sciences (United States)), Olivia Fu(Gilead Sciences (United States)), Lanjia Lin(Gilead Sciences (United States)), Wendy Verret(Gilead Sciences (United States)), Sara M. Tolaney(Dana-Farber Cancer Institute)
Journal of Clinical Oncology
August 26, 2022
Cited by 294Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

PURPOSE Hormone receptor–positive (HR+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2–) endocrine-resistant metastatic breast cancer is treated with sequential single-agent chemotherapy with poor outcomes. Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) is a first-in-class antibody-drug conjugate with an SN-38 payload targeting trophoblast cell-surface antigen 2, an epithelial antigen expressed in breast cancer. METHODS In this global, randomized, phase III study, SG was compared with physician's choice chemotherapy (eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, or gemcitabine) in endocrine-resistant, chemotherapy-treated HR+/HER2– locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic breast cancer. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review. RESULTS Patients were randomly assigned to receive SG (n = 272) or chemotherapy (n = 271). The median age was 56 years, 95% had visceral metastases, and 99% had a prior cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor, with three median lines of chemotherapy for advanced disease. Primary end point was met with a 34% reduction in risk of progression or death (hazard ratio, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.53 to 0.83; P = .0003]). The median PFS was 5.5 months (95% CI, 4.2 to 7.0) with SG and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.1 to 4.4) with chemotherapy; the PFS at 6 and 12 months was 46% (95% CI, 39 to 53) v 30% (95% CI, 24 to 37) and 21% (95% CI, 15 to 28) v 7% (95% CI, 3 to 14), respectively. Median overall survival (first planned interim analysis) was not yet mature (hazard ratio, 0.84; P = .14). Key grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (SG v chemotherapy) were neutropenia (51% v 38%) and diarrhea (9% v 1%). CONCLUSION SG demonstrated statistically significant PFS benefit over chemotherapy, with a manageable safety profile in patients with heavily pretreated, endocrine-resistant HR+/HER2– advanced breast cancer and limited treatment options.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis