Giredestrant for Estrogen Receptor–Positive, HER2-Negative, Previously Treated Advanced Breast Cancer: Results From the Randomized, Phase II acelERA Breast Cancer Study
Miguel Martín,Elgene Lim,Mariana Chavez-MacGregor,Aditya Bardia,Jiong Wu,Qingyuan Zhang,Zbigniew Nowecki,Felipe Melo Cruz,Rustem Safin,Sung-Bae Kim,Christian Schem,Alberto J. Montero,Sarah Khan,Reeti Bandyopadhyay,Heather M. Moore,Mahesh Shivhare,Monika Patre,Jorge Martinalbo,Laura Roncoroni,Pablo Diego Pérez-Moreno,Joohyuk Sohn,G. Aguil,M. Alfie,V. Caceres,G. Lerzo,S. Ostoich,F. Boyle,E. Lim,H. Martin,C. Oakman,F.M. Cruz,F.A. Franke,A. Mattar,E.H. Silva,K. Tiscoski,W. Chen,W. Li,Z. Tong,J. Wang,S. Wang,X. Wang,J. Wu,X. Wu,J. Yang,Q. Zhang,T.-O. Emde,G. Gaffunder,C. Hielscher,M. Lux,C. Schem,M. Welslau,C. Schumacher,I. Kuchuk,T. Peretz,L. Ryvo,R. Yerushalmi,H. Chae,Y. S. Chae,S.-A. Im,H. J. Kim,J. H. Kim,S.-B. Kim,J. E. Lee,Y. H. Park,J. Sohn,M. Jarząb,M. Nowaczyk,Z. Nowecki,T. Pienkowski,M. Wojtukiewicz,P. Wysocki,E. Fomin,I. Ganshina,N. Kislov,M. Kopp,N. Kovalenko,Y. Makarova,M. Matrosova,R. Orlova,A. Poltoratsky,R. Safin,R. Zukov,A. Wong,Y.S. Yap,M. Coccia-Portugal,N. Fourie,R. Khanyile,L. Schoeman,T.-C. Chao,S.-T. Chen,W.-P. Chung,Y.-H. Feng,Y.-C. Lin,T. Dejthevaporn,N. Parinyanitikul,C. Sathitruangsak,A. Somwangprasert,P. Tienchaianada,A. Alacacioglu,E. Algin,D. Cabuk,C. Demir,U. Demirci,D. Erdem,Ş. Gündüz,M.E. Yildirim,S. Khan,P. Schmid,I. Sandri,O. Oikonomidou,T. Ansari,A. Konstantis,S. Hrybach,A. Krochkin,O. Lipetska,D. Osinskii,S. Hrybach,A. Krochkin,O. Lipetska,D. Osinskii,J.C. Andersen,M. Cairo,P. Cobb,V. Konala,S.L. McCune,A.J. Montero,D.A. Patt,I. Sanchez-Rivera,S. Strain,K. Wendell,for the acelERA Breast Cancer Study Investigators
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.23.01500
IF: 45.3
2024-03-29
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Abstract:PURPOSE To compare giredestrant and physician's choice of endocrine monotherapy (PCET) for estrogen receptor–positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer (BC) in the phase II acelERA BC study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04576455 ). METHODS Post-/pre-/perimenopausal women, or men, age 18 years or older with measurable disease/evaluable bone lesions, whose disease progressed after 1-2 lines of systemic therapy (≤1 targeted, ≤1 chemotherapy regimen, prior fulvestrant allowed) were randomly assigned 1:1 to giredestrant (30 mg oral once daily) or fulvestrant/aromatase inhibitor per local guidelines (+luteinizing hormone–releasing hormone agonist in pre-/perimenopausal women, and men) until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. Stratification was by visceral versus nonvisceral disease, prior cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor, and prior fulvestrant. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (INV-PFS). RESULTS At clinical cutoff (February 18, 2022; median follow-up: 7.9 months; N = 303), the INV-PFS hazard ratio (HR) was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.60 to 1.10; P = .1757). In the prespecified secondary end point analysis of INV-PFS by ESR1 mutation (m) status in circulating tumor DNA–evaluable patients (n = 232), the HR in patients with a detectable ESR1m (n = 90) was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.35 to 1.03) versus 0.88 (95% CI, 0.54 to 1.42) in patients with no ESR1m detected (n = 142). Related grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and discontinuations due to AEs were balanced across arms. CONCLUSION Although the acelERA BC study did not reach statistical significance for its primary INV-PFS end point, there was a consistent treatment effect with giredestrant across most key subgroups and a trend toward favorable benefit among patients with ESR1-mutated tumors. Giredestrant was well tolerated, with a safety profile comparable to PCET and consistent with known endocrine therapy risks. Overall, these data support the continued investigation of giredestrant in other studies.
oncology