Comparative effectiveness analysis of survival with first-line palbociclib or ribociclib plus AI in HR + /HER2- advanced breast cancer (CEPRA study): preliminary analysis of real-world data from Thailand
Issued Date
2024-12-01
Resource Type
eISSN
14712407
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85201529149
Journal Title
BMC Cancer
Volume
24
Issue
1
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
BMC Cancer Vol.24 No.1 (2024)
Suggested Citation
Dajsakdipon T., Susiriwatananont T., Wongkraisri C., Ithimakin S., Parinyanitikul N., Supavavej A., Dechaphunkul A., Sunpaweravong P., Neesanun S., Akewanlop C., Dejthevaporn T. Comparative effectiveness analysis of survival with first-line palbociclib or ribociclib plus AI in HR + /HER2- advanced breast cancer (CEPRA study): preliminary analysis of real-world data from Thailand. BMC Cancer Vol.24 No.1 (2024). doi:10.1186/s12885-024-12765-x Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/100606
Title
Comparative effectiveness analysis of survival with first-line palbociclib or ribociclib plus AI in HR + /HER2- advanced breast cancer (CEPRA study): preliminary analysis of real-world data from Thailand
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Background: The current standard first-line treatment for hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HR + /HER2 −) advanced breast cancer (ABC) is a combination of aromatase inhibitor (AI) plus CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i). Direct comparison trials of different CDK4/6i are scarce. This real-world study compared the effectiveness of first-line AI plus ribociclib versus palbociclib. Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study, conducted in six cancer centers in Thailand, enrolled patients with HR + /HER2 − ABC treated with first-line AI, and either ribociclib or palbociclib. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), time to chemotherapy (TTC), and adverse events. Results: Of the 250 patients enrolled, 134 patients with ribociclib and 49 patients with palbociclib were captured after PSM. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced between groups. Median PFS in patients receiving ribociclib and palbociclib were 27.9 and 31.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio: 0.87; 0.55–1.37). The median OS in the AI + ribociclib arm was 48.7 months compared to 59.1 months in the AI + palbociclib arm (hazard ratio: 0.55; 0.29–1.05). The median TTC in the AI + palbociclib group was 56 months, but not reached in the AI + ribociclib group (p = 0.42). The ORR of AI + ribociclib and AI + palbociclib were comparable (40.5% vs. 53.6%, p = 0.29). Patients receiving palbociclib demonstrated a higher proportion of neutropenia compared to those receiving ribociclib, despite a similar dose reduction rate (p = 0.28). Hepatitis rate was similar between the ribociclib (21%) and palbociclib groups (22%). Additionally, a low incidence of QT prolongation was observed in both the ribociclib (5%) and palbociclib groups (4%). Conclusion: This preliminary analysis of a real-world study demonstrated the comparable effectiveness of ribociclib and palbociclib with AI as an initial therapy for HR + /HER2 − ABC. No statistically significant difference in PFS, OS, and TTC was found in patients treated with AI combined with palbociclib or ribociclib. Longer follow-up and further prospective randomized head-to-head studies are warranted.