In:
Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 38, No. 15_suppl ( 2020-05-20), p. 1082-1082
Abstract:
1082 Background: Our previous study ( Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21(8):1851) demonstrated that bevacizumab preconditioning followed by etoposide and cisplatin (BEEP) is a highly effective treatment for breast cancer (BC) patients (pts) with brain metastases (BM) progressing from WBRT. We conducted a randomized phase II study A-PLUS (NCT02185352) to test whether using BEEP as an induction therapy could enhance the efficacy of WBRT and provide systemic control. Methods: BC pts with measurable BM not suitable for surgery/radiosurgery and had not received WBRT were randomized (2:1) to experimental arm: induction BEEP for 3 cycles (~2 months [ms]) followed by WBRT or control arm: upfront WBRT. The BEEP regimen consists of bevacizuma b 15 mg/kg on day 1, and etoposide 70 mg/m 2 /day on days 2-4, cisplatin 70 mg/m 2 on day 2, followed by prophylaxis GCSF, every 21 days. After WBRT in both arms, pts received treatment of physician’s choice except BEEP until BM progression. Stratification was based on the Graded Prognostic Assessment score. Primary endpoint was brain-specific progression free survival (BS-PFS) based on RECIST 1.1, with a total of 108 pts, power of 0.8 at the 2-sided α level of 0.2. Results: Of 112 enrolled pts, 74 were in experimental arm and 38 in control arm. Baseline patient characteristics were generally balanced between arms. With median follow up of 28.7 ms, median BS-PFS was 8.1 vs. 6.5 ms ( p= 0.146; HR 0.71 [95% CI 0.44-1.13]), which met the primary endpoint (pre-defined α level of 0.2). Results of preplanned analysis included: 2-month brain-specific objective response rate of BEEP alone vs. WBRT was 41.9% vs. 52.6% ( p= 0.613); 8-month BS-PFS rate was 48.7% vs. 26.3% ( p= 0.027); median PFS was 6.4 vs. 4.7 ms ( p= 0.071; HR 0.67 [95% CI 0.43-1.04] ), and extra-BM PFS was 7.9 vs. 5.0 ms ( p= 0.141; HR 0.71 [95% CI 0.46-1.12]). Median overall survival was 15.6 vs. 13.6 ms ( p= 0.855; HR 0.96 [95% CI 0.59-1.55] ), with 31.6% of pts in control arm received BEEP regimen treatment after BM progression. The most common all-grade adverse events (AEs) in experimental arm were neutropenia (30.2%), nausea (27.9%), anemia (27.4%), and leukopenia (24.2%). Most AEs were mild to moderate in severity. Two pts discontinued BEEP treatment due to grade 4 nephrotoxicity and grade 3 infection, respectively. Conclusions: BEEP as induction treatment followed by WBRT for BC pts with BM may improve control of both BM and systemic disease. Further validation by a phase III study is necessary. Clinical trial information: NCT02185352 .
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
0732-183X
,
1527-7755
DOI:
10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.1082
Language:
English
Publisher:
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Publication Date:
2020
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2005181-5
