Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display

3093 - Capecitabine monotherapy in patients aged 70 years and older with metastatic breast cancer (MBC)

Date

10 Oct 2016

Session

Poster display

Presenters

David Okonji

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2016) 27 (6): 68-99. 10.1093/annonc/mdw365

Authors

D. Okonji, K. Mohammed, S. Redana, A. Ring, S. Johnston

Author affiliations

  • Medical Oncology, Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, SM2 5PT - London/GB
More

Resources

Abstract 3093

Background

Capecitabine monotherapy is associated with a clinical benefit rate (CBR) of 60% and a median time to progression (TTP) of 4 months in patients ≥65 years (yrs) with MBC. However, 30% require a dose reduction (DR) due to toxicity. At the Royal Marsden Hospital, the starting dose and schedule for capecitabine is 2000mg/m2 on days 1-14, every 3 weeks. Older patients (pts), with a poor performance status (PS), comorbidities and/or moderate to severe renal impairment may start with a further DR. If early CTCAE grade ≥2 toxicity occurs, a switch from 3-weekly to a week-on-week-off (WOWO) schedule is used to improve tolerance.

Methods

To evaluate toxicity and efficacy of capecitabine monotherapy in pts ≥70 yrs diagnosed with MBC. Primary endpoint- toxicity. Secondary endpoints- CBR, TTP & Overall Survival (OS).

Results

From October 2013-October 2015, 77pts ≥70yrs retrospectively identified from the RMH Pharmacy Data Base received capecitabine monotherapy for MBC. Capecitabine was 1st line therapy in 65 pts (84%), with 43 & 34 receiving 2000mg/m2 &

Conclusions

In patients aged 70 years or older, capecitabine monotherapy at a starting dose of 2000mg/m2 or lower is associated with a median TTP of 8.2 months and a CBR of 43-67%. Toxicity can be managed by dose reductions and switching to a WOWO schedule, which enables continued treatment in those deriving clinical benefit.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

The Royal Marsden Hospital Clinical Research and Development Department

Funding

The Royal Marsden Hospital, London.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings