Back to Search Start Over

Niraparib for Advanced Breast Cancer with Germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations: The EORTC 1307-BCG/ BIG5–13/TESARO PR-30–50–10-C BRAVO Study

Authors :
Gabriele Zoppoli
William Audeh
Theodora Goulioti
David Cameron
Iain R. Macpherson
Marco Colleoni
Antonino Musolino
Luis Manso
Audrey Mailliez
Evangelia Razis
Andrew Tutt
Virginie Adam
Peter Vuylsteke
John K. Erban
Michail Ignatiadis
Kai Yu Jen
István Láng
Bella Kaufman
Aafke H. Honkoop
Konstantinos Tryfonidis
Saskia Litière
Oskar T. Johannsson
Judith Balmaña
Olivier Tredan
Susan Ellard
Nicholas C. Turner
María José Juan-Fita
Lori J. Goldstein
C. Poncet
Source :
Clinical cancer research, 27 (20, Clin Cancer Res, 2021, ' Niraparib for advanced breast cancer with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: the EORTC 1307-BCG/BIG5-13/TESARO PR-30-50-10-C BRAVO study ', Clinical Cancer Research . https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-0310
Publication Year :
2021

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the activity of niraparib in patients with germline-mutated BRCA1/2 (gBRCAm) advanced breast cancer. Patients and Methods: BRAVO was a randomized, open-label phase III trial. Eligible patients had gBRCAm and HER2-negative advanced breast cancer previously treated with ≤2 prior lines of chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer or had relapsed within 12 months of adjuvant chemotherapy, and were randomized 2:1 between niraparib and physician’s choice chemotherapy (PC; monotherapy with eribulin, capecitabine, vinorelbine, or gemcitabine). Patients with hormone receptor–positive tumors had to have received ≥1 line of endocrine therapy and progressed during this treatment in the metastatic setting or relapsed within 1 year of (neo)adjuvant treatment. The primary endpoint was centrally assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), PFS by local assessment (local-PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. Results: After the pre-planned interim analysis, recruitment was halted on the basis of futility, noting a high degree of discordance between local and central PFS assessment in the PC arm that resulted in informative censoring. At the final analysis (median follow-up, 19.9 months), median centrally assessed PFS was 4.1 months in the niraparib arm (n ¼ 141) versus 3.1 months in the PC arm [n ¼ 74; hazard ratio (HR), 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.65–1.44; P ¼ 0.86]. HRs for OS and local-PFS were 0.95 (95% CI, 0.63–1.42) and 0.65 (95% CI, 0.46–0.93), respectively. ORR was 35% (95% CI, 26–45) with niraparib and 31% (95% CI, 19–46) in the PC arm. Conclusions: Informative censoring in the control arm prevented accurate assessment of the trial hypothesis, although there was clear evidence of niraparib’s activity in this patient population.<br />SCOPUS: ar.j<br />info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
10780432
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Clinical cancer research, 27 (20, Clin Cancer Res, 2021, ' Niraparib for advanced breast cancer with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: the EORTC 1307-BCG/BIG5-13/TESARO PR-30-50-10-C BRAVO study ', Clinical Cancer Research . https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-0310
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....96a1bfde4ac52e52c38e495f34c523cc
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-0310