IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0253722.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efficacy and safety of palbociclib and ribociclib in patients with estrogen and/or progesterone receptor positive, HER2 receptor negative metastatic breast cancer in routine clinical practice

Author

Listed:
  • Sushmita Rath
  • Prahalad Elamarthi
  • Pallavi Parab
  • Seema Gulia
  • Ravindra Nandhana
  • Smruti Mokal
  • Yogesh Kembhavi
  • Prema Perumal
  • Jyoti Bajpai
  • Jaya Ghosh
  • Sudeep Gupta

Abstract

Background: There is scant data from India on efficacy and safety of palbociclib and ribociclib in routine clinical practice. Methods: This retrospective, observational, single institution study included patients with estrogen and/or progesterone receptor positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) negative metastatic breast cancers, who received palbociclib or ribociclib with any partner endocrine therapy in any line of treatment between January 2016 and June 2019. Data were analyzed for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. Results: The study included 101 female patients with median age of 57 (IQR 48–62) years, of whom 80 (79.2%) were postmenopausal, 79 (78.2%) received palbociclib or ribociclib in second- or later-line treatment, 59 (58.4%) received fulvestrant and 41 (40.6%) received an aromatase inhibitor. In first-line treatment, at a median follow-up of 21.7 (0.5–41.9) months, median PFS and OS were 21.1 (95%CI 16.36-not estimable) months and not reached, respectively. In second- or later-line setting, at a median follow-up of 17.2 (0.5–43.7) months, median PFS and OS were 5.98 (95%CI 4.96–7.89) months and 20.2 (95%CI 14.1-not estimable) months, respectively. Grade 3–4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were seen in 45 (45.0%) and 9 (9.0%) patients, respectively while dose reduction was required in 32 (31.7%) patients. In multivariable Cox regression analysis, first-line setting (HR 0.49, 95%CI 0.25–0.97, p = 0.043) and ECOG performance status 1 (HR 0.43, 95%CI 0.20–0.91, p = 0.028) were significantly associated with PFS while only ECOG PS 1 was significantly associated (HR 0.04, 95%CI 0.008–0.206, p = 0.000) with OS. Conclusion: Palbociclib and ribociclib, when used in routine clinical practice in first or subsequent lines of treatment, resulted in efficacy and toxicity outcomes in concordance with those expected from pivotal trials.

Suggested Citation

  • Sushmita Rath & Prahalad Elamarthi & Pallavi Parab & Seema Gulia & Ravindra Nandhana & Smruti Mokal & Yogesh Kembhavi & Prema Perumal & Jyoti Bajpai & Jaya Ghosh & Sudeep Gupta, 2021. "Efficacy and safety of palbociclib and ribociclib in patients with estrogen and/or progesterone receptor positive, HER2 receptor negative metastatic breast cancer in routine clinical practice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-12, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0253722
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253722
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0253722
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0253722&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0253722?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0253722. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.