6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Cardiac Safety and Efficacy of SB3 Trastuzumab Biosimilar for ERBB2-Positive Early Breast Cancer : Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial compares long-term safety and efficacy of SB3, a trastuzumab biosimilar, with reference trastuzumab for treatment of patients with ERBB2-positive early or locally advanced breast cancer.

          Key Points

          Question

          Does SB3, a trastuzumab biosimilar, have long-term cardiac safety and efficacy comparable to those of reference trastuzumab for treatment of patients with ERBB2-positive early or locally advanced breast cancer?

          Findings

          In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial comparing outcomes of SB3 and reference trastuzumab in 538 patients, long-term cardiac safety and efficacy of SB3 and reference trastuzumab were comparable after up to 6 years of follow-up.

          Meaning

          These findings support the similarity of SB3 and reference trastuzumab.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Trastuzumab has been the standard of care for the treatment of patients with ERBB2-positive breast cancer; however, cardiac events have been reported. This long-term follow-up study provides clinical evidence supporting the similarity of a trastuzumab biosimilar (SB3) to reference trastuzumab (TRZ).

          Objective

          To compare cardiac safety and efficacy between SB3 and TRZ for patients with ERBB2-positive early or locally advanced breast cancer after up to 6 years of follow-up.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          This prespecified secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, conducted from April 2016 to January 2021, included patients with ERBB2-positive early or locally advanced breast cancer from a multicenter double-blind, parallel-group, equivalence phase 3 randomized clinical trial of SB3 vs TRZ with concomitant neoadjuvant chemotherapy who completed neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment.

          Interventions

          In the original trial, patients were randomized to either SB3 or TRZ with concomitant neoadjuvant chemotherapy for 8 cycles (4 cycles of docetaxel followed by 4 cycles of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide). After surgery, patients continued SB3 or TRZ monotherapy for 10 cycles of adjuvant treatment per previous treatment allocation. Following neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment, patients were monitored for up to 5 years.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          The primary outcomes were the incidence of symptomatic congestive heart failure and asymptomatic, significant decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). The secondary outcomes were event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS).

          Results

          A total of 538 female patients were included (median age, 51 years [range, 22-65 years]). Baseline characteristics were comparable between the SB3 and TRZ groups. Cardiac safety was monitored for 367 patients (SB3, n = 186; TRZ, n = 181). Median follow-up was 68 months (range, 8.5-78.1 months). Asymptomatic, clinically significant LVEF decreases were rarely reported (SB3, 1 patient [0.4%]; TRZ, 2 [0.7%]). No patient experienced symptomatic cardiac failure or death due to a cardiovascular event. Survival was evaluated for the 367 patients in the cardiac safety cohort and an additional 171 patients enrolled after a protocol amendment (538 patients [SB3, n = 267; TRZ, n = 271]). No difference was observed in EFS or OS between treatment groups (EFS: hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.58-1.20; P = .34; OS: HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.36-1.05; P = .07). Five-year EFS rates were 79.8% (95% CI, 74.8%-84.9%) in the SB3 group and 75.0% (95% CI, 69.7%-80.3%) in the TRZ group, and OS rates were 92.5% (95% CI, 89.2%-95.7%) in the SB3 group and 85.4% (95% CI, 81.0%-89.7%) in the TRZ group.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, SB3 demonstrated cardiac safety and survival comparable to those of TRZ after up to 6 years of follow-up in patients with ERBB2-positive early or locally advanced breast cancer.

          Trial Registration

          ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02771795

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.

          (2013)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis.

            Pathological complete response has been proposed as a surrogate endpoint for prediction of long-term clinical benefit, such as disease-free survival, event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS). We had four key objectives: to establish the association between pathological complete response and EFS and OS, to establish the definition of pathological complete response that correlates best with long-term outcome, to identify the breast cancer subtypes in which pathological complete response is best correlated with long-term outcome, and to assess whether an increase in frequency of pathological complete response between treatment groups predicts improved EFS and OS. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Medline for clinical trials of neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer. To be eligible, studies had to meet three inclusion criteria: include at least 200 patients with primary breast cancer treated with preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgery; have available data for pathological complete response, EFS, and OS; and have a median follow-up of at least 3 years. We compared the three most commonly used definitions of pathological complete response--ypT0 ypN0, ypT0/is ypN0, and ypT0/is--for their association with EFS and OS in a responder analysis. We assessed the association between pathological complete response and EFS and OS in various subgroups. Finally, we did a trial-level analysis to assess whether pathological complete response could be used as a surrogate endpoint for EFS or OS. We obtained data from 12 identified international trials and 11 955 patients were included in our responder analysis. Eradication of tumour from both breast and lymph nodes (ypT0 ypN0 or ypT0/is ypN0) was better associated with improved EFS (ypT0 ypN0: hazard ratio [HR] 0·44, 95% CI 0·39-0·51; ypT0/is ypN0: 0·48, 0·43-0·54) and OS (0·36, 0·30-0·44; 0·36, 0·31-0·42) than was tumour eradication from the breast alone (ypT0/is; EFS: HR 0·60, 95% CI 0·55-0·66; OS 0·51, 0·45-0·58). We used the ypT0/is ypN0 definition for all subsequent analyses. The association between pathological complete response and long-term outcomes was strongest in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (EFS: HR 0·24, 95% CI 0·18-0·33; OS: 0·16, 0·11-0·25) and in those with HER2-positive, hormone-receptor-negative tumours who received trastuzumab (EFS: 0·15, 0·09-0·27; OS: 0·08, 0·03, 0·22). In the trial-level analysis, we recorded little association between increases in frequency of pathological complete response and EFS (R(2)=0·03, 95% CI 0·00-0·25) and OS (R(2)=0·24, 0·00-0·70). Patients who attain pathological complete response defined as ypT0 ypN0 or ypT0/is ypN0 have improved survival. The prognostic value is greatest in aggressive tumour subtypes. Our pooled analysis could not validate pathological complete response as a surrogate endpoint for improved EFS and OS. US Food and Drug Administration. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Neoadjuvant and adjuvant trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (NOAH): follow-up of a randomised controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort.

              In our randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial NeOAdjuvant Herceptin (NOAH) trial in women with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer, neoadjuvant trastuzumab significantly improved pathological complete response rate and event-free survival. We report updated results from our primary analysis to establish the long-term benefit of trastuzumab-containing neoadjuvant therapy. We did this multicentre, open-label, randomised trial in women with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), by computer program with a minimisation technique, to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone or with 1 year of trastuzumab (concurrently with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and continued after surgery). A parallel group with HER2-negative disease was included and received neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone. Our primary endpoint was event-free survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered at www.controlled-trials.com, ISRCTN86043495. Between June 20, 2002, and Dec 12, 2005, we enrolled 235 patients with HER2-positive disease, of whom 118 received chemotherapy alone and 117 received chemotherapy plus trastuzumab. 99 additional patients with HER2-negative disease were included in the parallel cohort. After a median follow-up of 5.4 years (IQR 3.1-6.8) the event-free-survival benefit from the addition of trastuzumab to chemotherapy was maintained in patients with HER2-positive disease. 5 year event-free survival was 58% (95% CI 48-66) in patients in the trastuzumab group and 43% (34-52) in those in the chemotherapy group; the unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for event-free survival between the two randomised HER2-positive treatment groups was 0.64 (95% CI 0.44-0.93; two-sided log-rank p=0.016). Event-free survival was strongly associated with pathological complete remission in patients given trastuzumab. Of the 68 patients with a pathological complete response (45 with trastuzumab and 23 with chemotherapy alone), the HR for event-free survival between those with and without trastuzumab was 0.29 (95% CI 0.11-0.78). During follow-up only four cardiovascular adverse events were regarded by the investigator to be drug-related (grade 2 lymphostasis and grade 2 lymphoedema, each in one patient in the trastuzumab group, and grade 2 thrombosis and grade 2 deep vein thrombosis, each in one patient in the chemotherapy-alone group). These results show a sustained benefit in event-free survival from trastuzumab-containing neoadjuvant therapy followed by adjuvant trastuzumab in patients with locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer, and provide new insight into the association between pathological complete remission and long-term outcomes in HER2-positive disease. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Network Open
                American Medical Association
                2574-3805
                6 April 2023
                April 2023
                6 April 2023
                : 6
                : 4
                : e235822
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Institut de Cancérologie Strasbourg Europe, Strasbourg, France
                [2 ]International Breast Cancer Center, Pangaea Oncology, Quirónsalud Group, Barcelona, Spain
                [3 ]Scientific Department, Medica Scientia Innovation Research, Valencia, Spain
                [4 ]Faculty of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Department of Medicine, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
                [5 ]Campus Rüdersdorf, Immanuel Hospital Märkische Schweiz and Medical University of Brandenburg Theodor Fontane, Rüdersdorf bei Berlin, Germany
                [6 ]Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
                [7 ]European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
                [8 ]Dnipropetrovsk City Multi-Field Clinical Hospital #4, Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine
                [9 ]Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [10 ]Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [11 ]Greater Poland Cancer Centre and Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland
                [12 ]Lviv State Oncological Regional Therapeutical and Diagnostic Center, Lviv, Ukraine
                [13 ]University Malaya Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
                [14 ]State Budgetary Healthcare Institution of Yaroslavl Region, Regional Clinical Oncology Hospital, Yaroslavl, Russian Federation
                [15 ]Bialostockie Centrum Onkologii im. Marii Skłodowskiej-Curie, Bialystok, Poland
                [16 ]LUX MED Onkologia, Warszawa, Poland
                [17 ]Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital, Daegu, Republic of Korea
                [18 ]Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [19 ]Samsung Bioepis, Incheon, Republic of Korea
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: January 25, 2023.
                Published: April 6, 2023. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.5822
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-ND License. © 2023 Pivot X et al. JAMA Network Open.
                Corresponding Author: Xavier Pivot, MD, PhD, Institut de Cancérologie Strasbourg Europe, 17 Rue A Calmette, BP 23025, Strasbourg 67033, France ( x.pivot@ 123456icans.eu ).
                Author Contributions: Drs Pivot and Lee had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: Pivot, Lüftner, Lyman, Curigliano, Im, Jang, Yoon.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Pivot, Lüftner, Lyman, Curigliano, Lee, Yoon.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Pivot, Cortés, Lüftner, Lyman, Curigliano, Bondarenko, Jin-Hee Ahn, Im, Litwiniuk, Shparyk, Ho, Kislov, Wojtukiewicz, Sarosiek, Chae, Jin Seok Ahn, Jang, Kim, Yoon.
                Statistical analysis: Curigliano, Lee, Yoon.
                Obtained funding: Kislov.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Curigliano, Jin-Hee Ahn, Im, Wojtukiewicz, Yoon.
                Supervision: Pivot, Cortés, Lüftner, Im, Ho.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Pivot reported receiving travel fees from Samsung BioEpis during the conduct of the study, travel fees from Prestige Biopharma outside the submitted work, and grants from Publicreation Biennale de Monaco de Cancerologie and Pierre Fabre outside the submitted work. Dr Cortés reported receiving personal fees and/or honoraria from Roche, Celgene, Cellestia, AstraZeneca, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo, Erytech, Athenex, Polyphor, Eli Lilly and Company, Merck Sharp & Dohme, GSK, Leuko, Bioasis, Clovis Oncology, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ellipses, HiberCell, BioInvent, GEMoaB, Gilead, Menarini, Zymeworks, Reveal Genomics, Novartis, Eisai, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, and Expres2ion Biotechnologies outside the submitted work; receiving grants to the institution from Roche, ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Baxalta GMBH/Servier Affaires, Bayer, Eisai, F. Hoffmann–La Roche, Guardant Health, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, PIQUR Therapeutics, Puma Biotechnology, and Queen Mary University of London outside the submitted work; and having patents for pharmaceutical combinations of a Pi3k inhibitor and a microtubule destabilizing agent and for ERBB2 as a predictor of response to dual ERBB2 blockade in the absence of cytotoxic therapy. Dr Lüftner reported receiving personal fees from Samsung during the conduct of the study and from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Amgen, Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, onkowissen, high5md, Gilead, Eli Lilly and company, Samsung Bioepis, Roche, GSK, and L’oréal outside the submitted work. Dr Lyman reported receiving research grants to the institution from Amgen and personal fees from Sandoz, G1 Therapeutics, BeyondSpring, Samsung Bioepis, ER Squibb, Merck, Jazz Pharma, Teva, Fresenius Kabi, AstraZeneca, Partners Healthcare, and Seattle Genetics outside the submitted work. Dr Curigliano reported receiving grants from Merck and AstraZeneca and personal fees from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Eli Lilly and Company, Pfizer, Seagen, AstraZeneca, Ellipsis, Gilead Sciences, Merck, Celcuity, Sanofi, Exact Sciences, and Daiichi Sankyo outside the submitted work. Dr Im reported receiving grants from the Samsung Bioepis SB3 Clinical Trial Fund during the conduct of the study; research funding to the institution from AstraZeneca, Boryung, Daewoong, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Pfizer, and Roche; grants from AstraZeneca, Eisai, Daewoong, Pfizer, Roche, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Boryung; and personal fees from Amgen, Eli Lilly and Company, Hanmi, MSD, Novartis, GSK, AstraZeneca, Bertis, Eisai, Pfizer, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Roche outside the submitted work. Dr Litwiniuk reported receiving personal fees from Samsung Bioepis during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Eli Lilly and Company, Amgen, Novartis, Pfizer, and Gilead Sciences outside the submitted work; and travel grants from Egis and Gilead Science outside the submitted work. Dr Ho reported receiving grants from Eli Lilly and Company, AB Science, Astellas, Tessa Therapeutics, Arcus Biosciences, and Janssen Research & Development; grants and nonfinancial support from Regeneron; grants and personal fees from MSD, Roche, AstraZeneca, Pfizer Novartis, and Boehringer Ingelheim; nonfinancial support and personal fees from Ipsen and Bristol Myers Squibb; nonfinancial support from Taiho; and personal fees from Pfizer outside the submitted work. Dr Kislov reported receiving grants from Samsung during the conduct of the study; grants from AstraZeneca, EMD Serono, Roche, MSD, GlaxoSmithKline, Ipsen, Novartis, Pfizer, Nektar, and Eli Lilly and company; and personal fees from BIOCAD, AstraZeneca, and Janssen. Dr Jin Seok Ahn reported receiving personal fees from Roche Korea, Menarini Korea, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Kyowa Kirin, Amgen Korea, Yuhan, AstraZeneca Korea, Bayer Korea, Takeda, Novartis Korea, Hanmi, BC World, ImmuneOncia, Pharmbio Korea, YooYoung, Vifor Pharma, and BIXINK outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.
                Funding/Support: This study was sponsored by Samsung Bioepis. All authors received support for third-party writing assistance for this manuscript from Samsung Bioepis.
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The sponsor, Samsung Bioepis, contributed to the design of this study. Data collected by the investigators were analyzed by statisticians at Samsung Bioepis. Authors employed by the study sponsor contributed to the conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, and approval of the manuscript; and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement 3.
                Article
                zoi230196
                10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.5822
                10080377
                37022687
                211afc3e-603b-407d-abe6-ed7840205f95
                Copyright 2023 Pivot X et al. JAMA Network Open.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-ND License.

                History
                : 1 November 2022
                : 25 January 2023
                Categories
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online Only
                Oncology

                Comments

                Comment on this article