Early versus deferred use of CDK4/6 inhibitors in advanced breast cancer
- PMID: 39604725
- DOI: 10.1038/s41586-024-08035-2
Early versus deferred use of CDK4/6 inhibitors in advanced breast cancer
Erratum in
-
Author Correction: Early versus deferred use of CDK4/6 inhibitors in advanced breast cancer.Nature. 2025 Aug;644(8076):E32. doi: 10.1038/s41586-025-09406-z. Nature. 2025. PMID: 40696185 No abstract available.
Abstract
Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) in combination with endocrine therapy improve the outcomes of patients with hormone-receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer and can be used early as first-line treatment or deferred to second-line treatment1-7. Randomized data comparing the use of CDK4/6i in the first- and second-line setting are lacking. The phase 3 SONIA trial (NCT03425838) randomized 1,050 patients who had not received previous therapy for advanced breast cancer to receive CDK4/6i in the first- or second-line setting8. All of the patients received the same endocrine therapy, consisting of an aromatase inhibitor for first-line treatment and fulvestrant for second-line treatment. The primary end point was defined as the time from randomization to disease progression after second-line treatment (progression-free survival 2 (PFS2)). We observed no statistically significant benefit for the use of CDK4/6i as a first-line compared with second-line treatment (median, 31.0 versus 26.8 months, respectively; hazard ratio = 0.87; 95% confidence interval = 0.74-1.03; P = 0.10). The health-related quality of life was similar in both groups. First-line CDK4/6i use was associated with a longer CDK4/6i treatment duration compared with second-line use (median CDK4/6i treatment duration of 24.6 versus 8.1 months, respectively) and more grade ≥3 adverse events (2,763 versus 1,591, respectively). These data challenge the need for first-line use of a CDK4/6i in all patients.
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.
Conflict of interest statement
Competing interests: G.S.S. reports institutional research support from Agendia, AstraZeneca, Merck, Novartis, Roche and Seagen; and consultancy for Biovica, Novartis and Seagen. H.M.B. received grants from CADTH, ZIN and Medical Delta; and participated in a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Pfizer. A.H.H. received consulting fees from Gilead and Lilly; and received payment or honoraria from Lilly. Q.C.v.R.-S. has participated in a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Roche. I.R.K. reports institutional research grant support from Novartis and Gilead. The other authors declare no competing interests.
References
-
- Finn, R. S. et al. Palbociclib and letrozole in advanced breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 1925–1936 (2016). - PubMed
-
- Hortobagyi, G. N. et al. Updated results from MONALEESA-2, a phase III trial of first-line ribociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Ann. Oncol. 29, 1541–1547 (2018). - PubMed
-
- Tripathy, D. et al. Ribociclib plus endocrine therapy for premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive, advanced breast cancer (MONALEESA-7): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 19, 904–915 (2018). - PubMed
-
- Cristofanilli, M. et al. Fulvestrant plus palbociclib versus fulvestrant plus placebo for treatment of hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer that progressed on previous endocrine therapy (PALOMA-3): final analysis of the multicentre, double-blind, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 17, 425–439 (2016). - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Research Materials