ABSTRACT
Background The randomized, double-blind UNIRAD trial evaluating the addition of 2 years of everolimus to endocrine therapy in patients with high-risk, early luminal breast cancer failed to demonstrate a benefit. We report the subgroup analyses.
Patients and Methods We randomized 1278 patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive 2 years of placebo or everolimus, added to endocrine therapy for up to 4 years after initiation. Randomization was stratified by endocrine therapy agent, prior adjuvant versus neoadjuvant therapy, progesterone receptor expression, and lymph node involvement. Subgroup analyses by each stratification factor were prespecified. Post hoc analyses were performed according to menopausal status and age. We also analyzed treatment adherence.
Results We observed a limited trend toward more favorable prognostic features in tamoxifen-treated patients, with more frequent ER+/PR+ tumors (88.5% vs. 84.1%, p=0.026) and less frequent pN2+ status (39.8% vs. 46%, p=0.032). In premenopausal women, we observed a numerical benefit of everolimus: 3y-DFS was 86% in the placebo group and 90% in the everolimus group [HR=0.76 (95%CI: 0.43-1.34)]. In premenopausal patients treated with tamoxifen (n=153; 12.3%), we observed an even stronger trend in favor of everolimus as 3-year DFS was 84% in the placebo group and 91% in the everolimus group [HR=0.54 (95%CI: 0.28-1.02)]. Early discontinuation of either everolimus or placebo was less frequent in the tamoxifen group than in the AI group: 48.0% vs. 56.9% (p=0.028).
Conclusions The present post-hoc analyses generate hypotheses regarding the interaction between menopausal status, tamoxifen and everolimus in patients with high-risk, ER-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. They suggest that tamoxifen alone is no longer the standard of care in high-risk premenopausal patients.
Competing Interest Statement
Paul Cottu daichi, Invited Speaker, Institutional gilead, Invited Speaker, Institutional lilly, Invited Speaker, Personal lilly, Invited Speaker, Institutional pfizer, Advisory Board, Personal pfizer, Invited Speaker, Personal roche, Expert Testimony, Personal novartis, Funding, Institutional, No financial interest other authors no COI to disclose
Clinical Trial
NCT01805271
Funding Statement
This trial was supported by a grant from the French Ministry of Health (PHRC 2012) and received funding from La Ligue contre le Cancer, Cancer Research-UK, Myriad Genetics, and Novartis. The finding sources had no role in the whole process of the study or its publication
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The trial was conducted in accordance with good clinical practice, the Declaration of Helsinki, and all local regulations. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients. The trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01805271). It was sponsored and conducted by UNICANCER Research and Development. The study was approved by the French medicines agency (ANSM, Agence National de Securite du medicament des produits de sante), by an ethics committee (Comite de Protection des Personnes Sud Est IV, Lyon) in September 2012, and by institutional review boards of each participating center.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
the CONSORT check list has been thoroughly respected
