Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtsmedizin, Uniklinik Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Department of Interdisciplinary Medical Services, University Hospital Ulm & Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen, Breast Center, St. Gallen, Switzerland.
ESMO Open. 2024 May;9(5):103009. doi: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2024.103009. Epub 2024 Apr 24.
The GENEVIEVE study, comparing neoadjuvant cabazitaxel versus paclitaxel in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and luminal B/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer (BC), previously reported significant differences in pathological complete response (pCR) rates. Effects on long-term outcome are unknown.
GENEVIEVE randomized patients with cT2-3, any cN or cT1, cN+/pN+, centrally confirmed TNBC or luminal B/HER2-negative BC (latter defined as estrogen/progesterone receptor-positive and >14% Ki-67-stained cells) to receive either cabazitaxel 25 mg/m q3w for four cycles or paclitaxel 80 mg/m weekly for 12 weeks. Anthracycline-containing chemotherapy was allowed in case of histologically proven invasive residuals as neoadjuvant treatment or after surgery as adjuvant treatment. Here we report the secondary endpoints invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and overall survival (OS).
Of the 333 patients randomized, 74.7% and 83.2% completed treatment in the cabazitaxel and paclitaxel arms, respectively. After a median follow-up of 89.3 months (interquartile range 68.8-97.3 months), 80 iDFS events (43 after cabazitaxel and 37 after paclitaxel) and 47 deaths (23 after cabazitaxel and 24 after paclitaxel) were reported. IDFS rates were not significantly different between the cabazitaxel and paclitaxel arms after a 3-year (83.6% versus 85.0%) and 5-year follow-up (76.2% versus 78.3%) [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.27, 95% confidence interval 0.82-1.96, P = 0.294], respectively. DDFS rates at 3 years (88.6% versus 87.8%) and 5 years (82.1% versus 82.8%) for cabazitaxel and paclitaxel were comparable (HR = 1.15, P = 0.573). Similarly, OS rates at 3 years (91.6% versus 91.8%) and 5 years (89.2% versus 86.8%) showed no significant differences (HR = 1.05, P = 0.872). Subgroup analysis for TNBC and luminal B/HER2-negative BCs indicated no significant variations in 3- or 5-year iDFS, DDFS, or OS.
The significant differences in pCR rates observed in both treatment arms did not significantly impact long-term outcomes for patients treated with cabazitaxel versus paclitaxel in the GENEVIEVE trial.
GENEVIEVE 研究比较了新辅助卡巴他赛与紫杉醇在三阴性乳腺癌(TNBC)和 luminal B/人表皮生长因子受体 2(HER2)阴性乳腺癌(BC)中的疗效,先前报道的病理完全缓解(pCR)率存在显著差异。其对长期结果的影响尚不清楚。
GENEVIEVE 将经中心确认的 cT2-3、任何 cN 或 cT1、cN+/pN+、TNBC 或 luminal B/HER2 阴性 BC(后者定义为雌激素/孕激素受体阳性且 Ki-67 染色细胞>14%)患者随机分配至卡巴他赛 25 mg/m q3w 治疗 4 个周期或紫杉醇 80 mg/m 每周治疗 12 周。如果有组织学证实的残留浸润作为新辅助治疗或手术后作为辅助治疗,则允许使用含蒽环类药物的化疗。这里我们报告次要终点无侵袭性疾病生存(iDFS)、无远处疾病生存(DDFS)和总生存(OS)。
在随机的 333 例患者中,分别有 74.7%和 83.2%的患者完成了卡巴他赛和紫杉醇组的治疗。中位随访 89.3 个月(四分位距 68.8-97.3 个月)后,报告了 80 例 iDFS 事件(卡巴他赛组 43 例,紫杉醇组 37 例)和 47 例死亡(卡巴他赛组 23 例,紫杉醇组 24 例)。在 3 年(83.6%对 85.0%)和 5 年(76.2%对 78.3%)随访后,卡巴他赛组和紫杉醇组的 iDFS 率无显著差异(风险比[HR] 1.27,95%置信区间 0.82-1.96,P=0.294)。3 年(88.6%对 87.8%)和 5 年(82.1%对 82.8%)的 DDFS 率在卡巴他赛组和紫杉醇组之间也相似(HR 1.15,P=0.573)。同样,3 年(91.6%对 91.8%)和 5 年(89.2%对 86.8%)的 OS 率也无显著差异(HR 1.05,P=0.872)。TNBC 和 luminal B/HER2 阴性 BC 的亚组分析表明,3 年或 5 年的 iDFS、DDFS 或 OS 无显著差异。
在 GENEVIEVE 试验中,接受卡巴他赛与紫杉醇治疗的患者 pCR 率的显著差异并未显著影响长期结局。