• Mafalda Oliveira, Denys Pominchuk, Zbigniew Nowecki, Erika Hamilton, Yaroslav Kulyaba, Timur Andabekov, Yevhen Hotko, Tamar Melkadze, Gia Nemsadze, Patrick Neven, Vladimir Vladimirov, Claudio Zamagni, Hannelore Denys, Frédéric Forget, Zsolt Horvath, Alfiya Nesterova, Maxine Ajimi, Bistra Kirova, Teresa Klinowska, LindemannJustin P OJPOResearch and Early Development, Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK., Delphine Lissa, Alastair Mathewson, Christopher J Morrow, Zuzana Traugottova, Ruaan van Zyl, and Ekaterine Arkania.
• Medical Oncology Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital and Breast Cancer Group, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: moliveira@vhio.net.
• Lancet Oncol. 2024 Nov 1; 25 (11): 142414391424-1439.

BackgroundResistance to endocrine therapies in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer is challenging. We aimed to assess the next-generation oral selective oestrogen receptor degrader (SERD) and complete oestrogen receptor antagonist, camizestrant, versus the first-approved SERD, fulvestrant, in post-menopausal women with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer.MethodsSERENA-2 is an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial that is being conducted at 74 study centres across Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and North America. Female patients aged 18 years or older who were post-menopausal with histologically or cytologically confirmed metastastic or locoregional oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group or WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and disease recurrence or progression on at least one line of endocrine therapy, and no more than one previous endocrine therapy in the advanced setting. Patients were initially randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive oral camizestrant once daily at 75 mg, 150 mg, or 300 mg (until the 300 mg group was closed), or fulvestrant intramuscularly at 500 mg (per label). Randomisation was managed through an interactive web-based system and stratified by previous treatment with CDK4/6 inhibitors and presence of liver and/or lung metastases. The primary objective was to determine clinical efficacy of camizestrant versus fulvestrant at each dose level using the primary endpoint of investigator-assessed progression-free survival, per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1), assessed by intention to treat in all randomly assigned patients (full analysis set). No formal statistical comparison for the efficacy analysis of the camizestrant 300 mg dose versus fulvestrant was to be performed. Safety analyses included all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04214288, and is ongoing.FindingsBetween May 11, 2020, and Aug 10, 2021, 240 patients were randomly assigned to receive camizestrant 75 mg (n=74), 150 mg (n=73), 300 mg (n=20), or fulvestrant (n=73), and were included in the full analysis set. All patients received at least one dose of study drug. Median follow-up was 16·6 months (IQR 12·9-19·4) for the camizestrant 75 mg group, 16·3 months (12·9-18·3) for the camizestrant 150 mg group, and 14·7 months (12·7-20·1) for the fulvestrant 500 mg group. Median progression-free survival was 7·2 months (90% CI 3·7-10·9) with camizestrant 75 mg, 7·7 months (5·5-12·9) with camizestrant 150 mg, and 3·7 months (2·0-6·0) with fulvestrant. The hazard ratio for camizestrant 75 mg versus fulvestrant was 0·59 (90% CI 0·42-0·82; p=0·017), and the hazard ratio for camizestrant 150 mg versus fulvestrant was 0·64 (0·46-0·89; p=0·0090). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 39 (53%) of 74 patients in the camizestrant 75 mg group, 49 (67%) of 73 patients in the camizestrant 150 mg group, 14 (70%) of 20 patients in the camizestrant 300 mg group, and 13 (18%) of 73 patients in the fulvestrant group. No single grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse event occurred in more than two (3%) patients in any group. Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in six (8%) patients in the camizestrant 75 mg group, seven (10%) patients in the camizestrant 150 mg group, two (10%) patients in the camizestrant 300 mg group, and four (5%) patients in the fulvestrant group. No treatment-related deaths occurred.InterpretationCamizestrant at 75 and 150 mg showed a significant benefit in progression-free survival versus fulvestrant. These results support further development of camizestrant for the treatment of oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.FundingAstraZeneca.Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.

30 keywords...

hide…