Health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) among cancer patients has gained an increasing importance and is now a key determinant of anticancer treatments’ value. HR-QoL has been assessed in trials testing cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) in breast cancer (BC), using various questionnaires at different timepoints. HR-QoL reports from BC patients treated with CDK4/6i in the real-world setting are also available. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the literature, searching for full-length articles, and selected conference abstracts reporting data on HR-QoL in BC patients at any stage and of any molecular subtype treated with abemaciclib, palbociclib or ribociclib. RESULTS: A total of 533 full-length articles and 143 abstracts were retrieved. After screening for eligibility, 38 records were included (31 clinical trials; 7 real-world reports). Assessment methods were heterogeneous across studies in terms of questionnaires, evaluation timepoints and endpoints. Overall, adding CDK4/6i to endocrine therapy did not worsen patients’ HR-QoL, with a positive trend towards pain improvement. Gastrointestinal scores (diarrhea, nausea and appetite loss) statistically favored the control arm among metastatic BC patients receiving abemaciclib, whereas they were superimposable in the early setting. The combination of palbociclib and endocrine therapy showed similar HR-QoL outcomes compared with endocrine therapy alone, but determined better scores compared with chemotherapy. HR-QoL was specifically assessed in premenopausal patients treated with ribociclib, showing similar scores compared with postmenopausal patients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite methodological heterogeneity does not allow a proper comparison, HR-QoL was generally maintained with CDK4/6i. However, differences between abemaciclib, palbociclib and ribociclib exist and mainly rely on the distinct safety profiles of the compounds. These differences should be acknowledged and taken into account in the clinical practice.