Five-Year Dosing, Efficacy Results for Nab-Paclitaxel in TNBC

Video

Hope S. Rugo, MD, a medical oncologist and Director of the Breast Oncology Clinical Trials Program at University of California San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, discusses 5-year follow-up data from the CALGB 40502//NCCTG N063H study, which was a randomized phase III trial of weekly paclitaxel (Abraxane) compared with nab-paclitaxel or ixabepilone (Ixempra) with bevacizumab (Avastin) as first-line chemotherapy for locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer.

Hope S. Rugo, MD, a medical oncologist and director of the Breast Oncology Clinical Trials Program at University of California, San Francisco, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, discusses 5-year follow-up data from the CALGB 40502/NCCTG N063H study, which was a randomized phase III trial of weekly paclitaxel compared with nab-paclitaxel (Abraxane) or ixabepilone (Ixempra) with bevacizumab (Avastin) as first-line chemotherapy for locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer.

At the 4-year median follow-up, the overall results demonstrated inferiority of the ixabepilone arm for both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Similar results were seen with nab-paclitaxel.

However, a subset analysis showed a trend toward superiority of nab-paclitaxel versus paclitaxel in the triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) group. In the hormone receptor-positive (HR+) group, investigators found nab-paclitaxel and ixabepilone to be inferior to paclitaxel.

For OS, ixabepilone was inferior, while nab-paclitaxel trended toward inferior in the HR+ subset, although ixabepilone was quite superior for PFS, at 21 months versus 15 months, in the TNBC group.

Recent Videos
Aditya Bardia, MD, MPH, FASCO, and Laura Huppert, MD, experts on breast cancer
Related Content