Comparison of antitumor efficacy of first-line palbociclib, ribociclib, or abemaciclib in patients with HR+/HER2- aBC: Results of the multicenter, real-world, Italian study PALMARES-2.
Claudio Vernieri, Leonardo Provenzano, Mario Giuliano, Gianpiero Rizzo, Angela Toss, Marta Piras, Marianna Sirico, Barbara Tagliaferri, Monica Giordano, Daniela Miliziano, Daniele Giulio Generali, Donata Sartori, Alberto Zambelli, Alessandra Gennari, Nicla Maria La Verde, Rebecca Pedersini, Matteo Lambertini, Andrea Botticelli, Giuseppe Curigliano, Maria Vittoria Dieci,1014
Background: The Cyclin Dependent Kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) Palbociclib, Ribociclib and Abemaciclib in combination with Endocrine Therapy (ET) represent the standard-of-care, 1st line treatment for patients with Hormone Receptor-positive, Human Epidermal growth factor Receptor 2-negative, advanced Breast Cancer (HR+/HER2- aBC). So far, no large real-world studies have compared the efficacy of the three CDK4/6i in this clinical setting. Methods: The multicenter, population-based study PALMARES-2 evaluated the antitumor efficacy of 1st line Palbociclib, Ribociclib or Abemaciclib in combination with ET in consecutive HR+/HER2- aBC patients treated in 18 Italian cancer centers between 1st January 2016 and 1st September 2023. The primary study endpoint was real-world Progression-Free Survival (rwPFS), as defined as the time interval between ET plus CDK4/6i initiation and disease progression. Multivariate Cox regression model was used to adjust the association between individual CDK4/6i and rwPFS for clinically relevant variables. Results: With a data cut-off date of January 1st, 2024, we enrolled 1850 patients, 750 (40.6%), 676 (36.5%) and 424 (22.9%) of whom received Palbociclib, Ribociclib and Abemaciclib, respectively. Among 1226 (66.3%) patients with endocrine-sensitive disease, 1087 (89%) received concomitant Aromatase Inhibitors, whereas 441 (70.7%) out of 624 (33.7%) patients with endocrine-resistant disease received concomitant Fulvestrant. Patients treated with Abemaciclib were more likely to have endocrine-resistant disease, liver metastases, lobular tumor histology and lower PgR tumor expression, and less likely to have de novometastatic disease (p<0.001). Median rwPFS in the whole study cohort was 34.9 months (95% CI 32.0-37.4). Abemaciclib and Ribociclib were independently associated with better rwPFS when compared to Palbociclib (Table), whereas Abemaciclib and Ribociclib showed no significantly different efficacy (aHR 0.91, 95% CI 0.70-1.19; p=0.505). Other covariates independently associated with rwPFS are shown (Table). Conclusions: The real-world study PALMARES-2 revealed different antitumor efficacy of individual CDK4/6i in HR+/HER2- aBC patients. Longer follow-up is required to study if Palbociclib, Ribociclib and Abemaciclib are associated with different overall survival. [Table: see text]