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 viewing and lunch

239P - Efficacy of Single-Agent Chemotherapy in Endocrine Therapy-Refractory Metastatic Invasive Lobular Carcinoma

Date

12 May 2023

Session

Poster viewing and lunch

Presenters

Jason Mouabbi

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2023) 8 (1suppl_4): 101223-101223. 10.1016/esmoop/esmoop101223

Authors

J. Mouabbi1, W. Qiao2, A. Singareeka Raghavendra1, Y. Shen2, D. Tripathy3, R.M. Layman4

Author affiliations

  • 1 The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston/US
  • 2 The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston/US
  • 3 The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, 77030 - Houston/US
  • 4 The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston/US

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 239P

Background

The majority of metastatic invasive lobular carcinoma (mILC) are hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative and initially responds well to endocrine therapy (ET) in combination with targeted therapies (TT). However, once ET-refractory, data on the efficacy of single-agent chemotherapy regimens are limited. We investigated the efficacy of capecitabine (CAP) versus taxanes (TAX) in ET-refractory HR+ HER2- mILC patients.

Methods

In an observational investigation using data from the MD Anderson breast cancer prospectively collected electronic database, we searched for patients with a diagnosis of HR+ HER2- mILC who were exposed to prior lines of ET (either alone or in combination with TT) and who received first-line chemotherapy in the metastatic setting (ET-refractory mILC). We collected data on clinicopathological features, chemotherapy type, treatment duration and survival status. The Kaplan-Meier product-limit method was used to compare progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) between the two different groups. Backward model selection was used to find the final multivariate Cox model for PFS and OS.

Results

We reviewed 269 subjects: 173 (65%) received CAP and 96 (35%) received TAX. Patients characteristics were well balanced between the 2 groups: median age 52, 80% White, 61% had non-visceral disease, and 47% received only one prior ET. Subjects who received CAP had statistically significant better median PFS compared to TAX (8.8 vs 5.0 months, HR 0.63, P <0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference in OS between the two groups (42.7 vs 36.6 months in CAP vs TAX respectively, HR 0.85, P = 0.214). Multivariate Cox analysis for PFS showed that subjects who received CAP, had fewer metastatic sites, and were exposed to more lines of ET had better outcomes. Multivariate Cox analysis for OS showed that subjects who identified as Asian or Hispanic, and subjects exposed to more lines of ET had better outcomes, whereas subjects who identified as Black had worse outcomes compared to those who identified as White (HR 2.5; P = 0.0016).

Conclusions

The analysis suggest that ET-refractory mILC subjects treated with CAP were associated with longer PFS but not OS compared to those treated with TAX.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

J. Mouabbi: Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: BostonGene; Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Cardinal Health. D. Tripathy: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Novartis, Pfizer, Exact Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca. R.M. Layman: Financial Interests, Personal, Funding: Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Puma, Zentalis, Celcuity. All other 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
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.