Abstract 244P
Background
Although clinical guidelines recommend endocrine therapy (ET) as first-line treatment for hormone-receptor (HR) positive advanced breast cancer (ABC), limited data exist for this in routine clinical practice. This study aimed to report the first-line treatment patterns and outcomes of HR positive ABC patients in China.
Methods
This is a multicenter, non-interventional study. Eligible patients were histologically confirmed to be HR positive ABC with ≥2 complete medical records, and received first-line therapy from January 2015 to June 2019. Patients had other primary malignancies were excluded. First-line treatment was defined as initial therapy received for ABC up to first progression or therapies changed. Treatments patterns and outcomes were extracted from structured or unstructured electronic medical records (LinkDoc database). Progression free survival (PFS) was analyzed with the Kaplan–Meier method.
Results
1072 patients were enrolled at 6 treatment sites. The median age of patients was 50 years. Most patients were invasive ductal carcinoma (65.71%), stage IV (80.13%), and HER2-negative (69.43%). In the first-line setting, majority patients received chemotherapy (CT) with maintenance treatment (34.79%), CT alone (27.51%), combination therapy (BT, 21.46%) or endocrine therapy (ET, 15.49%). Our results suggested the median PFS for CT with maintenance treatment, CT alone, BT and ET were 18.10 [95% confidence interval (CI), 16.39-20.11], 10.68 (95%CI, 7.06-17.28), 19.81 (95%CI, 14.29-23.06) and 10.51 (95%CI, 7.98-12.81) months, respectively. Among patients using CT with maintenance treatment, maintenance ET (54.96%) and maintenance CT (38.34%) were the most commonly used therapies. Maintenance ET had longer median PFS than maintenance CT [18.99 (95%CI, 16.79-21.78) vs. 15.54 (95%CI, 11.73-21.42) months].
Conclusions
This real-world study indicated CT with maintenance treatment was the most common first-line treatment for HR positive ABC patients. Of note, first-line maintenance ET was associated with better PFS than maintenance CT.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.