The effects of fulvestrant treatment on hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer

Year 2020, Volume: 6 Issue: 3, 210 - 215, 04.05.2020

Serdar Arıcı , Çağlayan Geredeli Şaban Seçmeler Abdullah Sakin , Orçun Can Nurgül Yaşar Şener Cihan

https://doi.org/10.18621/eurj.470881

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Objectives:
To
determine fulvestrant efficacy and tolerability in Turkish patients with
hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer.

Methods: Patients
who developed metastasis while taking tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors in the
adjuvant period or metastatic disease at the diagnosis. Fulvestrant 500 mg was
administered intramuscularly every 28 days. Progression-free survival (PFS) and
overall survival (OS) durations were calculated.

Results: In this
particular research, totally 137 patients were participated. Median PFS was 9 months
(95% CI, 5.7-10.3). The 12-month PFS rate was calculated as 42%, and the
36-month PFS rate was 17%. The median PFS was not reached in the first line use
of fulvestrant in the metastatic period but 9 months and 7 months in the second
and subsequent lines respectively. Results indicated that this difference was
statistically significant (p =
0.002). It was shown that patients with liver and brain metastasis had lower
PFS compared patients with no liver and no brain metastasis. The estimated
median OS was 38 months after fulvestrant started. The 12-month OS rate was
calculated as 82.4%, and the 36-month OS rate was 50%.

Conclusions: Fulvestrant contributes both PFS and OS in patients with
hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer and this effect is more
clear in using fulvestrant as first-line treatment. 

Keywords

fulvestrant, breast cancer, endocrine treatment

References

• 1. Bonneterre J, Buzdar A, Nabholtz JM, Robertson JF, Thürlimann B, von Euler M, et al. Anastrozole is superior totamoxifen as first-line therapy in hormone receptor positive advanced breast carcinoma. Cancer 2001;92:2247-58.
• 2. Bajetta E, Procopio G, Ferrari L, Martinetti A, Zilembo N, Catena L, et al. A randomized, multicenter prospective trial assessing long-acting release octreotide pamoate plus tamoxifen as a first line therapy for advanced breast carcinoma. Cancer 2002;94:299-304.
• 3. Paridaens R, Dirix L, Lohrisch C, Beex L, Nooij M, Cameron D, et al. Mature results of a randomized phase II multicenter study of exemestane versus tamoxifen as first-line hormone therapy for postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2003;14:1391-8.
• 4. Dutertre M, Smith CL. Molecularmechanisms of selectiveestrogenreceptormodulator (SERM) action. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2000;295:431-7.
• 5. Wakeling AE, Dukes M, Bowler J. A potent specific pure antiestrogen with clinical potential. Cancer Res 1991;51:3867-73.
• 6. Wakeling AE. Similarities and distinctions in the mode of action of different classes of antioestrogens. Endocr Relat Cancer 2000;7:17-28.
• 7. Osborne CK, Pippen J, Jones SE, Parker LM, Ellis M, Come S, et al: Double-blind, randomized trial comparing the effi- cacy and tolerability of fulvestrant versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer progressing on prior endocrine therapy: Results of a North American trial. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:3386-95.
• 8. Howell A, Robertson JFR, Quaresma Albano J, Aschermannova A, Mauriac L, Kleeberg UR, et al. Fulvestrant, formerly ICI 182,780, is as effective as anastrozole in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer progressing after prior endocrine treatment. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:3396-403.
• 9. Robertson JFR, Osborne CK, Howell A, Jones SE, Mauriac L, Ellis M, et al. Fulvestrant versus anastrozole for the treatment of advanced breast carcinoma in postmenopausal women: A prospective combined analysis of two multicenter trials. Cancer 2003;98:229-38.
• 10. Di Leo A, Jerusalem G, Petruzelka L, Torres R, Bondarenko IN, Khasanov R, et al. Results of the CONFIRM Phase III trial comparing fulvestrant 250 mg with fulvestrant 500 mg in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor– positive advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:4594-600.
• 11. Di Leo A, Jerusalem G, Petruzelka L, Torres R, Bondarenko IN, Khasanov R, et al. Final overall survival: fulvestrant 500 mg vs 250 mg in the randomized CONFIRM trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014;106:djt337.
• 12. Ellis MJ, Llombart-Cussac A, Feltl D, Dewar JA, Jasiówka M, Hewson N, et al. Fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg for the first-line treatment of advanced breast cancer: overall survival analysis from the phase II FIRST study. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:3781-7.
• 13. Kawaguchi H, Masuda N, Nakayama T, Aogi K, Anan K, Ito Y et al. Outcomes of fulvestrant therapy among Japanese women with advanced breast cancer: a retrospective multicenter cohort study (JBCRG-C06; Safari). Breast Cancer Res Treat 2017;163:545-54.
• 14. Araki K, Ishida N, Horii R,Takahashi S, Akiyama F, Ito Y, et al. Efficacy of fulvestrant 500 mg in Japanese postmenopausal advanced/recurrent breast cancer patients and factors associated with prolonged time-to-treatment failure. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2015;16:2561-8.
• 15. Ishida N, Araki K, Sakai T, Kobayashi K, Kobayashi T, Fukada I, et al. Fulvestrant 500 mg in postmenopausal patients with metastatic breast cancer: the initial clinical experience. Breast Cancer 2016;23:617-23.
• 16. Robertson JFR, Bondarenko IM, Trishkina E, Dvorkin M, Panasci L, Manikhas A, et al. Fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg for hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer (FALCON): an international, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet 2016;388:2997-3005.
• 17. Graham J, Pitz M, Gordon V, Grenier D, Amir E, Niraula S. Clinical predictors of benefit from fulvestrant in advanced breast cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Cancer Treat Rev 2016;45:1-6.
• 18. Bergh J, Jönsson PE, Lidbrink EK, Trudeau M, Eiermann W, Brattström D, et al. FACT: an open-label randomized phase III study of fulvestrant and anastrozole in combination compared with anastrozole alone as first-line therapy for patients with receptor-positive postmenopausal breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:1919-25.