Cargando…

Open-Label, Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Study Comparing Oral Paclitaxel Plus Encequidar Versus Intravenous Paclitaxel in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer

Intravenous paclitaxel (IVpac) is complicated by neuropathy and requires premedication to prevent hypersensitivity-type reactions. Paclitaxel is poorly absorbed orally; encequidar (E), a novel P-glycoprotein pump inhibitor, allows oral absorption. METHODS: A phase III open-label study comparing oral...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rugo, Hope S., Umanzor, Gerardo A., Barrios, Francisco J., Vasallo, Rosa H., Chivalan, Marco A., Bejarano, Suyapa, Ramírez, Julio R., Fein, Luis, Kowalyszyn, Ruben D., Kramer, E. Douglas, Wang, Hui, Kwan, Min-Fun R., Cutler, David L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9788977/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35858154
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.21.02953
Descripción
Sumario:Intravenous paclitaxel (IVpac) is complicated by neuropathy and requires premedication to prevent hypersensitivity-type reactions. Paclitaxel is poorly absorbed orally; encequidar (E), a novel P-glycoprotein pump inhibitor, allows oral absorption. METHODS: A phase III open-label study comparing oral paclitaxel plus E (oPac + E) 205 mg/m(2) paclitaxel plus 15 mg E methanesulfonate monohydrate 3 consecutive days per week versus IVpac 175 mg/m(2) once every 3 weeks was performed. Women with metastatic breast cancer and adequate organ function, at least 1 year from last taxane, were randomly assigned 2:1 to oPac + E versus IVpac. The primary end point was confirmed radiographic response using RECIST 1.1, assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Four hundred two patients from Latin America were enrolled (265 oPac + E, 137 IVpac); demographics and prior therapies were balanced. The confirmed response (intent-to-treat) was 36% for oPac + E versus 23% for IVpac (P = .01). The PFS was 8.4 versus 7.4 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.768; 95.5% CI, 0.584 to 1.01; P = .046), and the OS was 22.7 versus 16.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.794; 95.5% CI, 0.607 to 1.037; P = .08). Grade 3-4 adverse reactions were 55% with oPac + E and 53% with IVpac. oPac + E had lower incidence and severity of neuropathy (2% v 15% > grade 2) and alopecia (49% v 62% all grades) than IVpac but more nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and neutropenic complications, particularly in patients with elevated liver enzymes. On-study deaths (8% oPac + E v 9% IVpac) were treatment-related in 3% and 0%, respectively. CONCLUSION: oPac + E increased the confirmed tumor response versus IVpac, with trends in PFS and OS. Neuropathy was less frequent and severe with oPac + E; neutropenic serious infections were increased. Elevated liver enzymes at baseline predispose oPac + E patients to early neutropenia and serious infections (funded by Athenex, Inc; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02594371).