MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415368586 · doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2025.10.006

Patient-reported outcomes in the SERENA-6 trial of camizestrant plus CDK4/6 inhibitor in patients with advanced breast cancer and emergent ESR1 mutations during first-line endocrine-based therapy

2025· article· en· W4415368586 on OpenAlexaff
Erica L. Mayer, F.-C. Bidard, Y.H. Park, W Janni, X. Cynthia, Massimo Cristofanilli, Hiroji Iwata, K. Kalinsky, S. Chia, Adam Brufsky, P.A. Fasching, Zbigniew Nowecki, Javier Pascual, L. Moreau, Manuel Ruíz‐Borrego, Nuri Karadurmuş, Joohyuk Sohn, Yanyan Zhu, Isobel Leddin, Cynthia Huang Bartlett, Nicholas C. Turner

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
FundersTakeda OncologyChugai PharmaceuticalWeill Cornell Medical CollegeDaiichi Sankyo CompanyPfizer JapanUnicancerIpsenEisaiRelay TherapeuticsSeagenEuropean Social FundPuma BiotechnologyPfizerFondazione Internazionale MenariniGenentechLilly DeutschlandVeracyteMersana TherapeuticsHelsinnLes Laboratories Pierre FabreMenarini Silicon BiosystemsFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-NürnbergEisai KoreaIpsen BiopharmaceuticalsF. Hoffmann-La RocheDaiichi Sankyo EuropeNovartis FoundationGilead SciencesSanofiCelgeneUniversität UlmBristol-Myers SquibbEli Lilly and CompanyAstraZenecaEmory University
KeywordsClinical trialDiseaseBreast cancerSafety profileMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In SERENA-6, switching from aromatase inhibitor (AI) to camizestrant with continuation of CDK4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) guided by emergence of ESR1 mutations (ESR1-mut) during first-line AI-CDK4/6i in patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive advanced breast cancer (ABC) resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival compared with AI-CDK4/6i and reduction in the risk of deterioration in global health status (GHS)/quality of life (QoL) (hazard ratio 0.54). Here we report additional data from patient-reported outcomes (PROs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients completed PRO questionnaires at pre-specified timepoints, including the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) oncology-specific EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and breast cancer-specific (QLQ-BR23) and Patient Global Impression of Treatment Tolerability (PGI-TT). All PRO endpoints and analyses were pre-defined, including secondary endpoints of time to deterioration (TTD) in pain, physical functioning, breast symptoms and arm symptoms. RESULTS: EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BR23 baseline scores were similar between treatment arms. Switching to camizestrant-CDK4/6i delayed TTD and reduced the risk of deterioration in patient-reported cancer symptoms [pain (hazard ratio 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.37-0.86), fatigue (0.75, 0.46-1.24), shortness of breath/dyspnoea (0.52, 0.28-0.93), breast symptoms (0.59, 0.28-1.24) and arm symptoms (0.69, 0.34-1.39)] and functioning [physical (0.74, 0.44-1.24), role (0.73, 0.48-1.10) and emotional (0.51, 0.29-0.87)] compared with AI-CDK4/6i. Most patients reported they were 'not at all' or 'a little bit' bothered by the side effects of cancer therapy across timepoints (e.g. week 2: 86% camizestrant-CDK4/6i versus 82% AI-CDK4/6i). CONCLUSIONS: Together with the clinical efficacy and manageable safety profile of camizestrant-CDK4/6i, and reduced risk of GHS/QoL deterioration, the PROs from the SERENA-6 trial support switching to this combination as a potential new treatment strategy to optimise and improve outcomes in patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative ABC and ESR1-mut emergence, ahead of disease progression, during first-line AI-CDK4/6i.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.329 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of OncologySame topicAdvanced Breast Cancer TherapiesFrench-language works237,207