Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Clinical and Translational Oncology
Published in: Clinical and Translational Oncology 7/2018

01-07-2018 | Research Article

Efficacy of fulvestrant in the treatment of postmenopausal women with endocrine-resistant advanced breast cancer in routine clinical practice

Authors: I. Blancas, M. Fontanillas, V. Conde, J. Lao, E. Martínez, M. J. Sotelo, A. Jaen, J. L. Bayo, F. Carabantes, J. J. Illarramendi, M. M. Gordon, J. Cruz, A. García-Palomo, C. Mendiola, E. Pérez-Ruiz, J. S. Bofill, J. M. Baena-Cañada, N. M. Jáñez, G. Esquerdo, M. Ruiz-Borrego

Published in: Clinical and Translational Oncology | Issue 7/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

This study aimed to describe the efficacy of fulvestrant 500 mg in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive advanced/metastatic breast cancer who had disease progression after receiving anti-estrogen therapy in clinical practice, getting real-world data.

Materials and methods

Multicenter, retrospective, observational study conducted in Spain. Postmenopausal women with locally advanced/metastatic ER-positive breast cancer who received treatment with fulvestrant 500 mg after progression with a previous anti-estrogen therapy were eligible. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), clinical benefit rate (CBR), duration of clinical benefit (DoCB), and safety profile.

Results

A total of 263 women were evaluated (median age, 65.8 years). At a median follow-up of 21.5 months, median PFS and OS were 10.6 and 43.2 months, respectively. PFS according to 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and ≥ 4th lines were 11.5, 10.6, 9.9, and 8.5 months, respectively (p = 0.0245). PFS in patients with visceral involvement was 10 months vs 10.6 months in patients without visceral involvement (p = 0.6604), 9.6 months in patients with high Ki67 vs 10 months in patients with low Ki67 (p = 0.7224), and 10.2 months in HER2+ patients vs 10.3 months in HER2− patients (p = 0.6809). The CBR was 56.5% and the DoCB was 18.4 months. The most frequently adverse events were injection site pain (10.3%) and musculoskeletal disorders (7.6%).

Conclusions

Fulvestrant 500 mg administered in clinical practice was shown to be effective (PFS, 10.6 months; CBR, 56.5%) and well tolerated, in accordance with previous trials.
Literature
1.
Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(2):87–108.CrossRef
2.
Hashim D, Boffetta P, La Vecchia C, Rota M, Bertuccio P, Malvezzi M, Negri E. The global decrease in cancer mortality: trends and disparities. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(5):926–33.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Dunnwald LK, Rossing MA, Li CI. Hormone receptor status, tumor characteristics, and prognosis: a prospective cohort of breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res. 2007;9(1):R6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Miller WR. Aromatase inhibitors: prediction of response and nature of resistance. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2010;11(11):1873–87.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Robertson JF. Fulvestrant (Faslodex)—how to make a good drug better. Oncologist. 2007;12(7):774–84.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Howell A, Robertson JF, Quaresma AJ, 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(16):3396–403.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Osborne CK, Pippen J, Jones SE, Parker LM, Ellis M, Come S, et al. Double-blind, randomized trial comparing the efficacy 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(16):3386–95.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Howell A, Robertson JF, Abram P, Lichinitser MR, Elledge R, Bajetta E, et al. Comparison of fulvestrant versus tamoxifen for the treatment of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women previously untreated with endocrine therapy: a multinational, double-blind, randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(9):1605–13.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Di LA, 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(30):4594–600.CrossRef
10.
Di LA, 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(1):djt337.CrossRef
11.
12.
Robertson JF, Llombart-Cussac A, Rolski J, Feltl D, Dewar J, Macpherson E, et al. Activity of fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg as first-line treatment for advanced breast cancer: results from the FIRST study. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(27):4530–5.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Robertson JF, Lindemann JP, Llombart-Cussac A, Rolski J, Feltl D, Dewar J, et al. Fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg for the first-line treatment of advanced breast cancer: follow-up analysis from the randomized ‘FIRST’ study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;136(2):503–11.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Ellis MJ, Llombart-Cussac A, Feltl D, Dewar JA, Jasiowka 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(32):3781–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Migliaccio I, Malorni L, Hart CD, Guarducci C, Di LA. Endocrine therapy considerations in postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 negative advanced breast cancers. BMC Med. 2015;13:46.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Iorfida M, Maiorano E, Orvieto E, Maisonneuve P, Bottiglieri L, Rotmensz N, et al. Invasive lobular breast cancer: subtypes and outcome. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;133(2):713–23.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Wasif N, Maggard MA, Ko CY, Giuliano AE. Invasive lobular vs. ductal breast cancer: a stage-matched comparison of outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(7):1862–9.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Adachi Y, Ishiguro J, Kotani H, Hisada T, Ichikawa M, Gondo N, et al. Comparison of clinical outcomes between luminal invasive ductal carcinoma and luminal invasive lobular carcinoma. BMC Cancer. 2016;16(1):248.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS, Rees CA, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2000;406(6797):747–52.CrossRef
20.
Prat A, Perou CM. Deconstructing the molecular portraits of breast cancer. Mol Oncol. 2011;5(1):5–23.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Anderson WF, Chu KC, Chatterjee N, Brawley O, Brinton LA. Tumor variants by hormone receptor expression in white patients with node-negative breast cancer from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(1):18–27.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Dowsett M, Allred C, Knox J, Quinn E, Salter J, Wale C, et al. Relationship between quantitative estrogen and progesterone receptor expression and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) status with recurrence in the arimidex, tamoxifen, alone or in combination trial. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(7):1059–65.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Viale G, Regan MM, Maiorano E, Mastropasqua MG, Dell’Orto P, Rasmussen BB, et al. Prognostic and predictive value of centrally reviewed expression of estrogen and progesterone receptors in a randomized trial comparing letrozole and tamoxifen adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal early breast cancer: BIG 1-98. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(25):3846–52.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Inic Z, Zegarac M, Inic M, Markovic I, Kozomara Z, Djurisic I, et al. Difference between luminal A and luminal B subtypes according to Ki-67, tumor size, and progesterone receptor negativity providing prognostic information. Clin Med Insights Oncol. 2014;8:107–11.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Untch M, Gerber B, Harbeck N, Jackisch C, Marschner N, Mobus V, et al. 13th st. Gallen international breast cancer conference 2013: primary therapy of early breast cancer evidence, controversies, consensus—opinion of a german team of experts (zurich 2013). Breast Care (Basel). 2013;8(3):221–9.
26.
Johnston S, Pippen J Jr, Pivot X, Lichinitser M, Sadeghi S, Dieras V, et al. Lapatinib combined with letrozole versus letrozole and placebo as first-line therapy for postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(33):5538–46.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Kaufman B, Mackey JR, Clemens MR, Bapsy PP, Vaid A, Wardley A, et al. Trastuzumab plus anastrozole versus anastrozole alone for the treatment of postmenopausal women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: results from the randomized phase III TAnDEM study. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(33):5529–37.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Mauriac L, Romieu G, Bines J. Activity of fulvestrant versus exemestane in advanced breast cancer patients with or without visceral metastases: data from the EFECT trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;117(1):69–75.CrossRefPubMed
29.
30.
Vergote I, Amant F, Leunen K, Van GT, Berteloot P, Neven P. Metastatic breast cancer: sequencing hormonal therapy and positioning of fulvestrant. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006;16(Suppl 2):524–6.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Efficacy of fulvestrant in the treatment of postmenopausal women with endocrine-resistant advanced breast cancer in routine clinical practice
Authors
I. Blancas
M. Fontanillas
V. Conde
J. Lao
E. Martínez
M. J. Sotelo
A. Jaen
J. L. Bayo
F. Carabantes
J. J. Illarramendi
M. M. Gordon
J. Cruz
A. García-Palomo
C. Mendiola
E. Pérez-Ruiz
J. S. Bofill
J. M. Baena-Cañada
N. M. Jáñez
G. Esquerdo
M. Ruiz-Borrego
Publication date
01-07-2018
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Clinical and Translational Oncology / Issue 7/2018
Print ISSN: 1699-048X
Electronic ISSN: 1699-3055
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-017-1797-9

Other articles of this Issue 7/2018

Clinical and Translational Oncology 7/2018 Go to the issue

Research Article

Preoperative plasma fibrinogen is associated with poor prognosis in esophageal carcinoma: a meta-analysis

Brief Research Article

Efficacy of radioiodine therapy for treating 20 patients with pulmonary metastases from differentiated thyroid cancer and a meta-analysis of the current literature

Special Article

SEOM–SERAM–SEMNIM guidelines on the use of functional and molecular imaging techniques in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

Research Article

Curative radiation therapy for very elderly bladder cancer patients with localized disease

Review Article

Biomarkers in breast cancer: A consensus statement by the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology and the Spanish Society of Pathology

Research Article

Bevacizumab for recurrent, persistent or advanced cervical cancer: reproducibility of GOG 240 study results in “real world” patients
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits