Clinical case of the treatment of metastatic luminal breast cancer
A. F. Nasretdinov,
A. V. Sultanbaev,
K. V. Menshikov,
Sh. I. Musin,
N. I. Sultanbaeva,
A. A. Izmailov,
R. T. Ayupov https://doi.org/10.21518/2079-701X-2021-20-160-166
Abstract
Hormone therapy currently open up the prospect of long-term, comfortable and relatively low-toxic treatment for patients with hormone receptor – positive advanced breast cancer. For a long time, the presence of visceral metastases prompted oncologists to abandon hormone therapy in favor of cytostatic agents. Now days, even in the presence of visceral metastases, clinical guidelines allow use of modern hormonal therapy in the absence of a visceral crisis. In particular, the so-called CDK 4/6 inhibitors, presented on the Russian market by drugs: palbociclib, ribociclib and abemacyclib, became the drugs that significantly improved the results of hormone therapy. Each of them has demonstrated its effectiveness in clinical trials; moreover, there are lots of clinical cases demonstrating the benefits of this therapy in real clinical practice. The article presents a clinical case of treatment of advanced hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. The effectiveness of treatment with CDK 4/6 inhibitors has been demonstrated, a comparatively analysed with the data obtained in the course of clinical trials. The analysis of the tactics of treatment of cytomegalovirus infection of the cornea during therapy with ribociclib was carried out.
About the Authors
A. F. Nasretdinov
Republican Clinical Oncology Dispensary
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Oncologist at the Outpatient Department of Anticancer Drug Therapy,
73/1, Oktyabrya Ave., Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan, 450054
A. V. Sultanbaev
Republican Clinical Oncology Dispensary
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Med.), Head of the Department of Anticancer Drug Therapy,
73/1, Oktyabrya Ave., Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan, 450054
K. V. Menshikov
Bashkir State Medical University;
Republican Clinical Oncology Dispensary
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor of the Department of Oncology with Oncology and Pathology Courses, Institute of Continuing Professional Education, 3, Lenin St., Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan, 450000;
Oncologist at the Chemotherapy Department, 73/1, Oktyabrya Ave., Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan, 450054
Sh. I. Musin
Republican Clinical Oncology Dispensary;
Bashkir State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Med.), Head of the Surgery Department No. 6, 73/1, Oktyabrya Ave., Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan, 450054;
Associate Professor of the Department of Oncology with Courses Oncology and Pathological Anatomy,
Institute of Additional Professional Education, 3, Lenin St., Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan, 450000
N. I. Sultanbaeva
Republican Clinical Oncology Dispensary
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Oncologist at the Department of Anticancer Drug Therapy No. 1,
73/1, Oktyabrya Ave., Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan, 450054
A. A. Izmailov
Bashkir State Medical University;
Republican Clinical Oncology Dispensary
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor of the Department of Urology, Institute of Continuing Professional Education, 73/1, Oktyabrya Ave., Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan, 450054;
Chief Medical Officer, 73/1, Oktyabrya Ave., Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan, 450054
R. T. Ayupov
Republican Clinical Oncology Dispensary
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Med.), Deputy Chief Physician for Medical Affairs,
73/1, Oktyabrya Ave., Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan, 450054
References
1. Klijn J.G., Blamey R.W., Boccardo F., Tominaga T., Duchateau L., Sylvester R. Combined Tamoxifen and Luteinizing Hormone-Releasing Hormone (LHRH) Agonist versus LHRH Agonist Alone in Premenopausal Advanced Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Four Randomized Trials. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(2):343–353. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2001.19.2.343.
2. Jordan V.C. Tamoxifen Treatment for Breast Cancer: Concept to Gold Standard. Oncology (Williston Park). 1997;11(2–S1):7–13. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9065921/.
3. Clemett D., Lamb H.M. Exemestane: A Review of Its Use in Postmenopausal Women with Advanced Breast Cancer. Drugs. 2000;59(6):1279–1296. https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-200059060-00007.
4. Baselga J., Campone M., Piccart M., Burris H.A. 3rd, Rugo H.S., Sahmoud T. et al. Everolimus in Postmenopausal Hormone-Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(6):520–529. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1109653.
5. Robertson J.F.R., Bondarenko I.M., Trishkina E., Dvorkin M., Panasci L., Manikhas A. et al. Fulvestrant 500 mg versus Anastrozole 1 mg for Hormone Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer (FALCON): An International, Randomised, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Trial. Lancet. 2016;388(10063):2997– 3005. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32389-3.
6. Osborne C.K., Pippen J., Jones S.E., Parker L.M., Ellis M., Come S. et al. Double-Blind, Randomized Trial Comparing the Efficacy and Tolerability of Fulvestrant versus Anastrozole in Postmenopausal Women with Advanced Breast Cancer Progressing on Prior Endocrine Therapy: Results of a North American Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(16):3386–3395. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2002.10.058.
7. Chia S., Gradishar W., Mauriac L., Bines J., Amant F., Federico M. et al. Double-Blind, Randomized Placebo Controlled Trial of Fulvestrant Compared with Exemestane after Prior Nonsteroidal Aromatase Inhibitor Therapy in Postmenopausal Women with Hormone Receptor-Positive, Advanced Breast Cancer: Results from EFECT. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(10):1664–1670. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.13.5822.
8. Spring L.M., Wander S.A., Zangardi M., Bardia A. CDK 4/6 Inhibitors in Breast Cancer: Current Controversies and Future Directions. Curr Oncol Rep. 2019;21(3):25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-019-0769-3.
9. Cristofanilli M., Turner N.C., Bondarenko I., Ro J., Im S.A., Masuda N. 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. 2016;17(4):425–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470- 2045(15)00613-0.
10. Finn R.S., Martin M., Rugo H.S., Jones S., Im S.A., Gelmon K. et al. Palbociclib and Letrozole in Advanced Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(20):1925–1936. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1607303.
11. Hortobagyi G.N., Stemmer S.M., Burris H.A., Yap Y.S., Sonke G.S., Paluch-Shimon S. 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. 2018;29(7):1541–1547. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdy155.
12. Slamon D.J., Neven P., Chia S., Fasching P.A., De Laurentiis M., Im S.A. et al. Phase III Randomized Study of Ribociclib and Fulvestrant in Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer: MONALEESA-3. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(24):2465–2472. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2018.78.9909.
13. Zheng R., Han S., Duan C., Chen K., You Z., Jia J. et al. Role of Taxane and Anthracycline Combination Regimens in the Management of Advanced Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94(17):e803. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000000803.
14. Mauri D., Kamposioras K., Tsali L., Bristianou M., Valachis A., Karathanasi I. et al. Overall Survival Benefit for Weekly vs. Three-Weekly Taxanes Regimens in Advanced Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. Cancer Treat Rev. 2010;36(1):69–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2009.10.006.
15. Sbitti Y., Slimani K., Debbagh A., Mokhlis A., Kadiri H., Laraqui A. et al. Visceral Crisis Means Short Survival Among Patients With Luminal A Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study. World J Oncol. 2017;8(4):105–109. https://doi.org/10.14740/wjon1043w.
16. O J.H., Lodge M.A., Wahl R.L. Practical PERCIST: A Simplified Guide to PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.0. Radiology. 2016;280(2):576–584. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016142043.
17. Tripathy D., Im S.A., Colleoni M., Franke F., Bardia A., Harbeck N. 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. 2018;19(7):904–915. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30292-4.
18. Carmichael A. Cytomegalovirus and the Eye. Eye (Lond). 2012;26(2):237–240. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2011.327.
19. Spring L.M., Zangardi M.L., Moy B., Bardia A. Clinical Management of Potential Toxicities and Drug Interactions Related to Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4/6 Inhibitors in Breast Cancer: Practical Considerations and Recommendations. Oncologist. 2017;22(9):1039–1048. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2017-0142.
20. Samant T.S., Huth F., Umehara K., Schiller H., Dhuria S.V., Elmeliegy M. et al. Ribociclib Drug-Drug Interactions: Clinical Evaluations and PhysiologicallyBased Pharmacokinetic Modeling to Guide Drug Labeling. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2020;108(3):575–585. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.1950.
21. Harrell A.W., Wheeler S.M., Pennick M., Clarke S.E., Chenery R.J. Evidence that Famciclovir (BRL 42810) and Its Associated Metabolites Do Not Inhibit the 6 Beta-Hydroxylation of Testosterone in Human Liver Microsomes. Drug Metab Dispos. 1993;21(1):18–23. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8095215/.
Review
For citations:
Nasretdinov AF, Sultanbaev AV, Menshikov KV, Musin SI, Sultanbaeva NI, Izmailov AA, Ayupov RT. Clinical case of the treatment of metastatic luminal breast cancer. Meditsinskiy sovet = Medical Council. 2021;(20):160-166. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21518/2079-701X-2021-20-160-166
Views:
530
Email this article 