Evidence Hub

Clinical efficacy of CDK4/6 inhibitor plus endocrine therapy in HR-positive/HER2-0 and HER2-low-positive metastatic breast cancer: a secondary analysis of PALOMA-2 and PALOMA-3 trials

Huiyue Li, Yun Wu, H. Zou, Salil Koner, J. Plichta, S. Tolaney, Jian Zhang, Youwen He et al.

EBioMedicine, 2024

666 participants · 25 citations

Abstract

Summary Background Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors in combination with traditional endocrine therapy (ET) are now the recommended first-line treatment for hormone receptor (HR)-positive and HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, the benefits of adding CDK4/6 inhibitors to ET in HER2-low-positive and HER2-0 subgroups remain unclear. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with ET in patients with HR-positive, HER2-low-positive and HER2-0 MBC. Methods This secondary analysis assessed progression-free survival (PFS) among HER2-low-positive and HER2-0 patients enrolled in the double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised clinical trials PALOMA-2 and PALOMA-3. The study included 1186 HER2-negative, HR-positive female patients, with available immunohistochemistry (IHC) and/or in situ hybridization (ISH) results, across 17 countries enrolled between February 2013 and August 2014. HER2-low-positive status was defined by IHC 1+ or 2+ with negative ISH, and HER2-zero by IHC 0. Data analyses were conducted between March and May 2023. In the PALOMA-2 trial, patients were randomly assigned to receive either palbociclib or placebo, in combination with letrozole in the first-line treatment for HR-positive MBC. Patients in the PALOMA-3 study, who had progression or relapse during previous ET, were randomly allocated to receive either palbociclib plus fulvestrant or placebo plus fulvestrant. The primary endpoint was…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 666 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free