Search

Exemestane (Exe) in combination with Everolimus (Eve) represents an important treatment option for patients diagnosed with hormone receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2‑) metastatic breast cancer (MBC), which was previously treated with non‑steroidal aromatase inhibitors (NSAI). Data from unselected populations may be useful for defining the optimal therapeutic algorithm within a clinical setting. Data from 264 HR+, HER2‑ MBC patients who received Exe‑Eve treatment in combination, following the failure of NSAIs was retrospectively analyzed. Different lines of endocrine treatment (ET) were investigated to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the treatment within the ‘everyday clinical practice’ population. The disease control rate (DCR) was 73.1%, with no statistically significant difference among the different settings. At a median follow‑up of 42 months, the median progression free survival (PFS) was 11.6, 9.7 and 7.5 months for patients treated with Exe‑Eve as first, second or third line therapy, respectively. There was a statistically significant correlation with younger age, no previous adjuvant chemotherapy (CT), no previous adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET), HT duration ≥36 months, involvement of liver and/or lung, no prior CT for metastatic disease and PS=0 at the start of treatment. The median overall survival (OS) was 33.0 months; at a median follow‑up of 67 months, the median OS was 43.1, 31.7 and 27.9 months in patients treated with Exe‑Eve in first, second or third line therapy, respectively. On multivariate analysis, diabetes and previous CT for metastatic disease were revealed to correlate with a worse outcome. Conversely, the presence of mucositis was significantly associated with long‑term survival. Overall, Exe‑Eve was typically well tolerated and the majority toxicities were G1 or 2, while treatment discontinuation due to unacceptable toxicity was only required in 5.7% of patients. Despite the limitations due to the observational nature of this study, the findings suggest that treatment with Exe‑Eve is an active and safe therapeutic option for endocrine‑sensitive MBC patients in a real‑world clinical setting, regardless of treatment lines.

Background: The current study investigated the clinical benefit, the impact on biochemical and objective response and tolerability of weekly docetaxel with vinorelbine (VIN-DOX) in symptomatic patients with hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC). Methods: Patients were treated with docetaxel 25mg/m 2 and vinorelbine 20mg/m 2 , intravenously for 6 consecutive weeks followed by a 2 week rest repeatedly until disease progression. Clinical benefit evaluations, based on Karnofsky performance status (KPS) and pain measure, were assessed weekly during therapy. A clinical benefit response was defined as a sustained (≥4 weeks) improvements in one of these parameters. Changes in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, tumoral response and toxicity also were evaluated. Results: 19 men (median age 68 years), were treated. Overall, 42% of patients achieved a KPS significant change and positive pain response; 47% achieved a 50% or greater reduction in PSA. The objective response rate was observed in 2 of 9 patients with measurable disease (22%). The most important toxicity was neutropenia (Grade 3=32%). Conclusions: The combination of weekly VIN-DOX appears to be feasible. VIN-DOX was found to be associated with improvement in clinical benefit response and biochemical response and well tolerated as first line treatment in HRPC.

Hormonal therapy is the preferred systemic treatment for recurrent or metastatic, post-menopausal hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. Previous studies have shown that there is no cross-resistance between exemestane and reversible aromatase inhibitors. Exposure to hormonal therapy does not hamper later response to chemotherapy. Patients with locally advanced or metastatic, hormonal receptor positive or unknown, breast cancer were treated with oral anastrozole, until disease progression, followed by oral exemestane until new evidence of disease progression. The primary end point of the study was clinical benefit, defined as the sum of complete responses (CR), partial responses (PR) and > 24 weeks stable disease (SD). In all, 100 patients were enrolled in the study. Anastrozole produced eight CR and 19 PR for an overall response rate of 27% (95% CI: 18.6-36.8%). An additional 46 patients had long-term (> 24 weeks) SD for an overall clinical benefit of 73% (95% CI: 63.2-81.4). Median time to progression (TTP) was 11 months (95% CI: 10-12). A total of 50 patients were evaluated for the second-line treatment: exemestane produced one CR and three PR; 25 patients had SD which lasted ≥ 6 months in 18 patients. Median TTP was 5 months. Toxicity of treatment was low. Our study confirms that treatment with sequential hormonal agents can extend the period of time during which endocrine therapy can be used, thereby deferring the decision to use chemotherapy. © 2005 Cancer Research UK.