nab-P and Erib are approved for ≥ 2L treatment (Tx) of MBC. However, no data are available on comparative effectiveness of nab-P vs Erib for 2L Tx of MBC in the real-world setting.
Fully de-identified data from a US electronic medical record platform of 1300 community (not university-based) oncologists were used in this retrospective study of women aged ≥ 18 yrs with MBC who started nab-P or Erib monotherapy as 2L Tx from 12/1/10 to 4/6/15 (≥ 1 cycle of nab-P or Erib required to be included). Time to Tx discontinuation (TTD, day 1 to last date + 7 days for 7-day cycle and day 1 to last date + 21 days for 21-day cycle) and time to next Tx (TTNT; day 1 of line 2 to day 1 of line 3) were the primary objectives. Adverse events (AEs) and supportive care were also examined. Subset analyses examined outcomes in pts with hormone receptor–positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2−) or triple-negative (TN) MBC.
This analysis included 176 pts (107 treated with nab-P and 69 with Erib). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups except that more pts treated with 2L nab-P had HR+ disease (P = 0.02) and were on combination Tx with a targeted agent (P = 0.03). More pts in the Erib group had used a taxane prior to MBC diagnosis (P = 0.01 for ≤ 1 year). Few pts with TN MBC were treated with 2L nab-P or Erib (Table). Overall, nab-P was associated with numerically longer TTD and TTNT vs Erib. AE rates were similar except that thrombocytopenia occurred more often with Erib. Antiemetics (IV) and G-CSF were used less often with nab-P. Steroids were used less often with Erib. Similar trends were reported in pts with HR + /HER2− or TN MBC.
|nab-P n = 107||Eribulin n = 69||Unadjusted P Value||Adjusted P Value|
|Age, mean, years||60||61||0.688||-|
|Schedule, weekly, %||75||-||-||-|
|TTD, median, mos||4.0||3.1||0.074||0.507|
|TTNT, median, mos||6.0||4.7||0.538||0.759|
|Any grade AE in > 5% pts, %|
|Nausea + vomiting||11.2||5.8||0.222||0.299|
|Supportive Care doses/pt/100 days|
|Antimetic (IV Only)||5.77||6.92|
In this US-based, real-world analysis, TTD and TTNT were numerically longer with nab-P compared with Erib, including in the HR + /HER2− and TN subsets. AEs were similar between the 2 groups. Pts receiving nab-P required less supportive care.
Clinical trial identification
This study is a retrospective analysis, therefore the protocol number and release data is not applicable.
Legal entity responsible for the study
Monika Parisi, MPH
M. Parisi, S. Glück, C. Pelletier, Q. Ni: Mr: Employee of Celgene Corporation. F. Braiteh: AbbVie, ActiveBiotech, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, BIND, BioMarin, BioTheranostics, BN Therapeutics, BI, Caris, Cell Therapeutics, Celgene, Daiichi, Dendreon, Genomic Health, Gilead, GSK, Halozyme, Heron, Eli Lilly, Incyte, Insys, Novartis, Pfizer, etc.