4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Treatment of advanced hormone-sensitive breast cancer in postmenopausal women with exemestane alone or in combination with celecoxib

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 26, Issue 8, Pages 1253-1259

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.13.3744

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose Preclinical data showed that the combination of exemestane and celecoxib has synergistic effects. Therefore, a study was undertaken to explore the efficacy and tolerability of this combination in postmenopausal patients with advanced, hormone-sensitive breast cancer. Patients and Methods A randomized phase II study was conducted in postmenopausal patients with hormone-sensitive breast cancer and measurable disease who had progressive disease after treatment with tamoxifen. Patients were randomly assigned to either exemestane 25 mg daily or the combination of exemestane 25 mg daily with celecoxib 400 mg twice daily. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Group criteria were used to determine antitumor efficacy. Primary end point was the rate of clinical benefit. Secondary end points were tolerability, objective response rate, time to progression (TTP), and duration of clinical benefit. A pharmacodynamic and a pharmacokinetic study were conducted in parallel. Results One hundred eleven patients (exemestane, n = 55; combination, n = 56) were enrolled in 2002. The demographic characteristics and prognostic factors were similar in both arms. In the assessable population, 24 of 51 patients in the combination arm and 24 of 49 patients in the exemestane arm achieved clinical benefit. TTP was similar in both groups. Duration of clinical benefit was longer in the combination group (median, 96.6 v 49.1 weeks). The addition of celecoxib did not change the tolerability profile of exemestane alone. Conclusion Similar rates of clinical benefit were achieved in both groups.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available