Quality of life (QoL) in patients (pts) with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) previously treated with anthracyclines and taxanes who received eribulin mesylate or capecitabine: A phase III, open-label, randomized study.

Authors

Javier Cortes

Javier Cortes

Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain

Javier Cortes , Ahmad Awada , Peter Andrew Kaufman , Louise Yelle , Edith A. Perez , Galina Velikova , Jantien Wanders , Martin S. Olivo , Yi He , Corina Dutcus , W. Robert Simons , Christopher Twelves

Organizations

Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain, Medical Oncology Clinic, Jules Bordet Institute, Brussels, Belgium, Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, and St James's Institute of Oncology, Leeds, United Kingdom, Formerly of Eisai Limited, Hatfield, United Kingdom, Eisai Inc., Woodcliff Lake, NJ

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company

Background: In a phase III trial comparing eribulin (E) vs. capecitabine (C) in pts with locally advanced or MBC, a trend for improved OS was observed but a statistically significant superiority was not demonstrated with E vs. C for OS or PFS. The AE profiles were consistent with known side effects. We now report QoL results from this trial. Methods: Pts received eribulin mesylate 1.4 mg/m2 on Days 1 and 8, or C 1.25 g/m2 BID orally on Days 1-14, of a 21-day cycle. Eligible pts had received prior therapy including an anthracycline and taxane, and were receiving study drug as 1st-, 2nd-, or 3rd-line therapy for advanced disease. QoL, a secondary objective, was assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 questionnaires at baseline, 6 weeks, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after starting treatment (or until progressive disease or treatment change), and at unscheduled visits. Longitudinal analyses were carried out using weighted generalized estimating equations adjusted for non-random attrition due to death within 12 months. Model covariates were time (visit), region, and baseline QoL. The primary endpoint was change from baseline for Global Health Status (GHS)/overall QoL; exploratory endpoints were change from baseline for each functional domain, and signs/symptoms. Results: 1,102 pts were randomized (E 554; C 548). GHS/QoL scores were low at baseline for E (56.3) and C (54.7) on a scale of 0 (worse) to 100 (best). GHS/QoL and cognitive functioning improved significantly more in pts receiving E vs. C, (6.5 [p=0.048] and 15.3 [p<0.001], respectively). Emotional functioning improved significantly for pts receiving C vs. E (3.3; p=0.033). Pain was comparable at baseline, and was lower at subsequent visits with both treatments. Patient-reported signs/symptoms in favor of E included nausea and vomiting (E1.9; p=0.043) and diarrhea (-3.7; p=0.001); systemic side effects (5.2; p<0.001) and upset by hair loss (9.3; p=0.023) favored C. Conclusions: GHS/QoL scores improved more in pts receiving E than C. E showed advantages in terms of gastrointestinal effects while C had advantages in relation to hair loss. Clinical trial information: NCT00337103.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2013 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Breast Cancer - Triple-Negative/Cytotoxics/Local Therapy

Track

Breast Cancer

Sub Track

Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT00337103

Citation

J Clin Oncol 31, 2013 (suppl; abstr 1050^)

DOI

10.1200/jco.2013.31.15_suppl.1050

Abstract #

1050^

Poster Bd #

20A

Abstract Disclosures