Article

Adjuvant Abemaciclib Plus Endocrine Therapy Has Robust Efficacy in monarchE Cohort of High-Risk, HR+ Breast Cancer

Author(s):

The addition of adjuvant abemaciclib to endocrine therapy resulted in a clinically meaningful reduction in the risk of developing invasive disease, particularly incurable distant metastatic disease, in patients with high-risk, hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative, early breast cancer who comprised cohort 1 of the phase 3 monarchE trial.

breast cancer

The addition of adjuvant abemaciclib (Verzenio) to endocrine therapy resulted in a clinically meaningful reduction in the risk of developing invasive disease, particularly incurable distant metastatic disease, in patients with high-risk, hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative, early breast cancer who comprised cohort 1 of the phase 3 monarchE trial (NCT03155997).1

The data from cohort 1, which were presented during the 2022 ESMO Breast Cancer Congress, showed that abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (n = 2555) improved invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) vs endocrine therapy alone (n = 2565), with 218 and 318 events reported, respectively; this translated to a relative risk reduction of 32% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.680; 95% CI, 0.572-0.808; nominal P < .0001). The 3-year iDFS rate in the investigative arm was 88.6% vs 82.9% in the control arm, translating to an absolute risk reduction of 5.7% with abemaciclib.

Moreover, the addition of abemaciclib to endocrine therapy also resulted in a clinically meaningful improvement in distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) vs endocrine therapy alone in this cohort of patients, with 179 and 266 events reported, respectively, equating to a relative risk reduction of 33% (HR, 0.669; 95% CI, 0.554-0.809; nominal P < .0001). The 3-year DRFS rates in the investigative and control arms were 90.2% and 85.7%, respectively, translating to an absolute risk reduction of 4.5% with the addition of abemaciclib.

“Consistent with the intent-to-treat [ITT] population [of the monarchE trial], cohort 1 demonstrated robust efficacy results,” Mattea Reinisch, MD, of Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany, said in a presentation on the data. “The benefit of abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy in patients with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative breast cancer at a high risk of recurrence is predominantly driven by cohort 1. These data represent the first major advance in the treatment of this early breast cancer subtype in almost 2 decades.”

The trial enrolled patients who were at least 18 years of age and who had hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative disease.2 Those in cohort 1 (n = 5120) were high risk, which was defined as having 4 or more positive axillary lymph nodes or 1 to 3 positive axillary lymph nodes and at least 1 of the following: a tumor that was 5 cm or larger or histologic grade 3 disease.

Patients who had high-risk disease based on Ki-67 were enrolled to cohort 2 (n = 517). Specifically, these patients had 1 to 3 axillary lymph nodes and Ki-67 of 20% or higher and a tumor size that was smaller than 5 cm; this subset did not have grade 3 disease. Cohorts 1 and 2 comprised the ITT population.

Study participants (n = 5637) were randomized 1:1 to receive abemaciclib at a twice-daily dose of 150 mg in combination with endocrine therapy or endocrine therapy alone. Patients received study treatment for 2 years and then entered a follow-up period of 3 to 8 years, where they received only endocrine therapy.

Stratification factors included prior chemotherapy (neoadjuvant, adjuvant, or none), menopausal status (as determined at diagnosis), and region (North America/Europe, Asia, or other). The primary end point of the trial was iDFS, and secondary end points comprised iDFS in the high Ki-67 population, DRFS, overall survival (OS), safety, pharmacokinetics, and patient-reported outcomes.

In October 2021, the FDA approved abemaciclib in combination with endocrine therapy for the adjuvant treatment of adult patients with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-positive, node-positive, early breast cancer at high risk of recurrence and a Ki-67 score of 20% or higher based on earlier data from monarchE.3

Among those in cohort 1 who had a Ki-67 score of 20% or higher (n = 2003), 104 patients who received abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (n = 1017) experienced an iDFS event vs 158 of those who received endocrine therapy alone (n = 986; HR, 0.626; 95% CI, 0.488-0.803; P = .0042). The iDFS rate at 3 years in the investigative and control arms were 86.1% (95% CI, 82.8%-88.8%) and 79.0% (95% CI, 75.3%-82.3%), respectively.3,4

Moreover, at a median follow-up of 27 months, in this subset, 85 of the patients in the investigative arm experienced a DRFS event vs 135 patients in the control arm (HR, 0.599; 95% CI, 0.456-0.787). The 3-year DRFS rate achieved with the addition of abemaciclib was 87.8% vs 82.6% with endocrine therapy alone.

“Here, we present the efficacy data from the largest monarchE subpopulation, which is cohort 1, defined by a combination of high-risk clinicopathological criteria familiar to breast oncologists, and easily identified in clinical practice,” Reinisch said.

The baseline characteristics of cohort 1 were equally distributed between the treatment arms. In both arms, the median age of patients in cohort 1 was 51 years (range, 22-89), and most patients were younger than 65 years.

“[When looking at] the clinically pathologic features…more than 65% of patients had at least 4 or more positive axillary lymph nodes, resulting in a higher-risk profile,” Reinisch noted. Most patients in the investigative and control arms, respectively, had grade 2 (46.2% vs 46.5%) or grade 3 (41.6% vs 40.9%) disease, a tumor size ranging between 2 cm and less than 5 cm (48.3% vs 49.8%), and a Ki-67 of 20% or higher (39.8% vs 38.4%).

With a median follow-up of 28 months, 8.4% of those in the abemaciclib/endocrine therapy arm were still on treatment vs 8.5% of those in the endocrine therapy–alone arm. In the investigative arm, 0.5% of patients were not treated, 17.8% discontinued treatment before completing 2 years, and 73.3% completed 2-year treatment; these rates were 1.1%, 17.0%, and 73.4%, respectively, in the control arm.

Additionally, 203 patients in the abemaciclib/endocrine therapy arm experienced disease recurrence vs 308 of those in the endocrine therapy–alone arm. The majority of recurrences were distant metastases, with a lower incidence of recurrence with abemaciclib; this occurred in 71.9% of those in the investigative arm vs 75.6% of those in the control arm.

In the abemaciclib arm, most patients experienced distant recurrence in the bone (62%), followed by the liver (42%), and the lung (31%). Moreover, 16.3% of patients in this arm experienced local or regional recurrence, 3.9% experienced contralateral recurrence, and 9.4% experienced second primary neoplasm.

Adjuvant abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy has been found to have an acceptable toxicity profile in patients with high-risk early breast cancer.5

The most common grade 3 or higher adverse effects (AEs) experienced in the investigative arm (n = 2791) and the control arm (n = 2800), respectively, include diarrhea (7.8% vs 0.2%), infections (5.6% vs 3.0%), neutropenia (19.6% vs 0.8%), fatigue (2.9% vs 0.1%), nausea (0.5% vs 0.1%), anemia (2.0% vs 0.4%), headache (0.3% vs 0.2%), vomiting (0.5% vs 0.1%), stomatitis (0.1% vs 0%), thrombocytopenia (1.3% vs 0.1%), decreased appetite (0.6% vs 0.1%), alanine aminotransferase increase (2.8% vs 0.7%), aspartate aminotransferase increase (1.9% vs 0.5%), and rash (0.4% vs 0%).

References

  1. Toi M, Boyle F, Im Y-H, et al. Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET): efficacy results in monarchE cohort 1. Presented at: European Society for Medical Oncology Breast Cancer Congress 2022; May 3-5, 2022; Berlin, Germany. Abstract 59M0.
  2. Johnston SRD, Harbeck N, Hegg R, et al. Abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for the adjuvant treatment of HR+, HER2–, node-positive, high-risk, early breast cancer (monarchE). J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(34):3987-3998. doi:10.1200/JCO.20.02514
  3. Abemaciclib. Prescribing information. Eli Lilly and Company; 2021. Accessed May 6, 2022. https://bit.ly/3sfqW2U
  4. O’Shaughnessy JO, Rastogi P, Harbeck N, et al. VP8-2021: adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET): updated results from monarchE. Ann Oncol. 2021;32(suppl 12):1646-1649. doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2021.09.012
  5. Rugo HS, O’Shaughnessy J, Boyle F, et al. Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: safety and patient-reported outcomes from the monarchE study. Ann Oncol. Published online March 23, 2022. doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2022.03.006
Related Videos
Sheldon M. Feldman, MD
In this episode of OncChats: Empowering Community Cancer Care, Dr. Rai emphasizes the importance of community outreach and support for patients with cancer, highlighting the need for holistic care that addresses both physiological and psychological aspects of treatment while reinforcing the value of strong relationships between primary care physicians and specialists.
In this episode of OncChats: Empowering Community Cancer Care, Dr. Woodworth sheds light on the “Road to Recovery” survivorship program at Henry Mayo, which supports cancer survivors by providing them with fitness, education, and mental health resources, and underscores the importance of mentorship programs for community providers to ensure equitable cancer care.
In this episode of OncChats: Empowering Community Cancer Care, Drs Woodworth and Rai, discuss their collaborative approach to cancer screening, emphasizing the importance of community efforts and individual assessments in integrating genetic testing and screenings into routine practice.
In this episode of OncChats: Empowering Community Cancer Care, experts discuss the significance of community-based cancer care, emphasizing that most cancers are diagnosed locally and highlighting the importance of collaboration between primary care physicians and specialists to provide optimal education and treatment.
Sunil Adige, MD
Margaret E. Gatti-Mays, MD, MPH, FACP
Sunil Adige, MD
Seth Wander, MD, PhD