Cargando…

Comparative efficacy of different targeted therapies plus fulvestrant for advanced breast cancer following progression on prior endocrine therapy: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to indirectly compare the efficacy of different targeted agents with fulvestrant for patients with hormone-receptor-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2-negative (HER2–) advanced breas...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Tingting, Feng, Fubin, Zhao, Wenge, Yao, Yan, Tian, Jinhui, Zhou, Chao, Zang, Chuanxin, Liu, Cun, Wang, Xue, Sun, Changgang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6248378/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30510455
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S176172
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to indirectly compare the efficacy of different targeted agents with fulvestrant for patients with hormone-receptor-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2-negative (HER2–) advanced breast cancer (ABC) following progression on prior endocrine therapy. METHODS: The titles/abstracts were searched from the PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases for RCTs to evaluate the efficacy of palbociclib plus fulvestrant vs alternative targeted therapies plus fulvestrant for postmenopausal HR+/HER2– ABC following progression on prior endocrine therapy. In addition, the primary measured outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate. The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) value of each treatment was calculated to achieve the best ranking for each treatment. RESULTS: A total of 11 studies, including 4,178 patients in the network meta-analysis, were included and analyzed. In terms of the pooled hazard ratios (HRs) for PFS, palbociclib plus fulvestrant was superior to other target agents plus fulvestrant (HR=0.62, 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.40–0.96; HR=0.62, 95% CrI: 0.47–0.96; for pictilisib plus fulvestrant and buparlisib plus fulvestrant, respectively). Ribociclib plus fulvestrant has no difference in abemaciclib plus fulvestrant and palbociclib plus fulvestrant (HR =1.02, 95% CrI =0.72–1.45; HR =1.22, 95% CrI =0.84–1.78). In terms of objective response rate, compared with placebo plus fulvestrant, abemaciclib plus fulvestrant, dovitinib plus fulvestrant, buparlisib plus fulvestrant, and palbociclib plus fulvestrant had a significant difference (odds ratio [OR] =2.84, 95% CrI =1.91– 4.31; OR =3.62, 95% CrI =1.21–12.48; OR =1.80, 95% CrI =1.25–2.60; and OR =2.52, 95% CrI =1.43– 4.72, respectively). CONCLUSION: According to the present study, palbociclib plus fulvestrant may be the optimal treatment for HR+/HER2– postmenopausal women with ABC after disease progression following endocrine therapy.