Abstract PS11-03: Safety and efficacy of veliparib plus carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with HER2-negative metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer: A subgroup analysis of germline <i>BRCA1</i> or <i>BRCA2</i> mutations from the phase 3 BROCADE3 trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Veliparib (Vel) is a potent PARP1/2 inhibitor with demonstrated antitumor activity when administered alone or combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel (C/P). The phase 3 randomized, double-blind, multicenter BROCADE3 study (NCT02163694) evaluated the efficacy and safety of Vel + C/P treatment compared with placebo (Pbo) + C/P treatment in patients (pts) with germline BRCA1/2 mutations and HER2-negative metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer (BC). Vel + C/P significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared with Pbo + C/P treatment (14.5 months [mo] vs 12.6 mo, hazard ratio [HR]=0.71 [95% CI: 0.57, 0.88]; P=0.002). Previous studies have identified increased acute hematologic toxicity in response to chemotherapy in pts with BC carrying BRCA1 mutations compared with BRCA2 mutations or wildtype BRCA1/2. Herein we report a subgroup analysis of the efficacy and safety of Vel + C/P treatment in pts with BRCA1- or BRCA2-positive BC. Methods: Pts ≥18 years of age who received ≤2 prior lines of cytotoxic chemotherapy for metastatic disease were randomized 2:1 to receive Vel + C/P or Pbo + C/P: Vel (120 mg PO BID) or Pbo on days -2 to 5, C (AUC 6 IV) on day 1, and P (80 mg/m2 IV) on days 1, 8, and 15 in 21-day cycles. Pts who discontinued C/P in the absence of disease progression could continue receiving Vel or Pbo monotherapy (300-400 mg BID continuous). Subgroup analysis of PFS stratified by BRCA1/2 status was preplanned. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. Adverse events (AEs) were graded according to NCI CTCAE version 4.0. Ten pts with both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations were excluded from the analyses presented here. Results: In the intent-to-treat population, 256 pts had BRCA1 mutations and 243 pts had BRCA2 mutations. The proportion of as-treated pts with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations was comparable between the Vel + C/P (51.4% BRCA1, 48.6% BRCA2) and Pbo + C/P (50.9% BRCA1, 49.1% BRCA2) study arms. Investigator-assessed PFS for the Vel + C/P and Pbo + C/P arms was 14.2 mo vs 12.6 mo, respectively, in the BRCA1 subgroup (HR=0.75 [95% CI: 0.55, 1.03]; P=0.073) and 14.6 mo vs 12.6 mo, respectively, in the BRCA2 subgroup (HR=0.69 [95% CI: 0.50, 0.95]; P=0.021). Safety data in the as-treated population are presented in the Table. Regarding any grade AEs, thrombocytopenia and anemia were slightly more frequent in pts in the BRCA1 subgroup compared with the BRCA2 subgroup, whereas pts in the BRCA2 subgroup experienced slightly more frequent nausea, fatigue, and neuropathy. Conclusions: Globally, there was no clinically relevant difference in toxicity between BRCA1 and BRCA2 subgroups. Comparisons between treatment arms were generally consistent with findings in the overall study population, with more frequent thrombocytopenia and anemia of any grade reported in the Vel + C/P arm within both the BRCA1 and BRCA2 subgroups. Vel + C/P treatment improved PFS similarly in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 subgroups over C/P alone. BRCA1-Positive Subgroup (n=253)BRCA2-Positive Subgroup (n=241)Vel + C/P (n=168)Pbo + C/P (n=85)Vel + C/P (n=159)Pbo + C/P (n=82)Any grade AE [≥50% of pts], n (%)Any event167 (99.4)85 (100)158 (99.4)82 (100)Neutropenia151 (89.9)78 (91.8)140 (88.1)74 (90.2)Thrombocytopenia140 (83.3)66 (77.6)124 (78.0)54 (65.9)Anemia139 (82.7)64 (75.3)122 (76.7)52 (63.4)Nausea118 (70.2)49 (57.6)119 (74.8)58 (70.7)Alopecia89 (53.0)43 (50.6)89 (56.0)41 (50.0)Fatigue79 (47.0)37 (43.5)87 (54.7)48 (58.5)Peripheral sensory neuropathy69 (41.1)37 (43.5)82 (51.6)49 (59.8)Any grade ≥3 AE [≥30% of pts], n (%)Any event164 (97.6)82 (96.5)152 (95.6)77 (93.9)Anemia73 (43.5)31 (36.5)67 (42.1)35 (42.7)Leukopenia54 (32.1)20 (23.5)44 (27.7)25 (30.5)Neutropenia136 (81.0)72 (84.7)131 (82.4)67 (81.7)Thrombocytopenia72 (42.9)30 (35.3)59 (37.1)18 (22.0)Serious AEs, n (%)58 (34.5)26 (30.6)56 (35.2)22 (26.8)AEs of special interest, n (%)Infections within 14 days of neutropenia64 (38.1)34 (40.0)59 (37.1)25 (30.5)Hemorrhages within 14 days of thrombocytopenia14 (8.3)5 (5.9)17 (10.7)7 (8.5)Any AE leading to study drug discontinuation not due to disease progression, n (%)16 (9.5)5 (5.9)15 (9.4)4 (4.9)Any AE leading to study drug interruption, n (%)153 (91.1)77 (90.6)139 (87.4)67 (81.7)Any AE leading to study drug reduction, n (%)28 (16.7)6 (7.1)27 (17.0)7 (8.5)Any AE leading to death with reasonable possibility related to study drug, n (%)0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)AE, adverse event; BRCA, breast cancer susceptibility gene; C/P, carboplatin plus paclitaxel; Pbo, placebo; pts, patients; Vel, veliparib. Citation Format: Hans Wildiers, Jean-Pierre Ayoub, Michael Friedlander, Bella Kaufman, Banu K. Arun, Hyo S. Han, Shannon L. Puhalla, David Maag, Dai Feng, Christine K. Ratajczak, Bruce A. Bach, Véronique Diéras. Safety and efficacy of veliparib plus carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with HER2-negative metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer: A subgroup analysis of germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations from the phase 3 BROCADE3 trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS11-03.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».