CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2020; 80(04): 399-409
DOI: 10.1055/a-1126-4247
GebFra Science
Review/Übersicht
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Use of Taxanes in Metastatic HER2-negative Breast Cancer – a Status Report

Article in several languages: English | deutsch
Oleg Gluz
1   Westdeutsche Studiengruppe, Mönchengladbach, Germany
2   Ev. Krankenhaus Bethesda, Brustzentrum Niederrhein, Mönchengladbach, Germany
3   Uniklinik Köln, Köln, Germany
,
Cornelia Kolberg-Liedtke
4   Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Frauenklinik, Berlin, Germany
,
Frederik Marmé
5   Universitätsklinikum Mannheim, Frauenklinik, Mannheim, Germany
,
Marc Thill
6   Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Klinik für Gynäkologie, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received 08 August 2019
revised 20 January 2020

accepted 21 February 2020

Publication Date:
21 April 2020 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The most important goal of treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer is maintenance or even improvement of quality of life. In this setting, chemotherapy should be used with as much restraint as possible. If palliative chemotherapy is indicated, the taxane drug class is an established treatment option. The updated guidelines of the Gynaecological Oncology Working Group (AGO), Breast Committee, of the German Society for Gynaecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) and the German Cancer Society e. V. (DKG) provide recommendations with the greatest possible evidence on which of the licensed taxanes can be used in which treatment situation in the metastatic setting.

Key words

breast cancer - metastatic - chemotherapy - taxanes
 

  • References/Literatur

  • 1 Gluz O. Systemische Therapie bei endokrin nicht empfindlichen HER2-negativen Karzinomen. In: Untch M, Harbeck N, Thomssen C, Costa S-D. Hrsg. Colloquium Senologie 2015/2016. München: Agileum Verlag und Gesundheitsakademie; 2015
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Carrick S, Parker S, Wilcken N. et al. Single agent versus combination chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005; (02) CD003372
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Cardoso F, Costa A, Senkus E. et al. 3rd ESO–ESMO International Consensus Guidelines for Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC3). Ann Oncol 2017; 28: 16-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Empfehlungen, A.. 2019 05.06.2019.
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Rivera E, Cianfrocca M. Overview of neuropathy associated with taxanes for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2015; 75: 659-670
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Guo X, Loibl S, Untch M. et al. Re-Challenging Taxanes in Recurrent Breast Cancer in Patients Treated with (Neo-)Adjuvant Taxane-Based Therapy. Breast Care (Basel) 2011; 6: 279-283
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Ghersi D, Willson ML, Chan MM. et al. Taxane-containing regimens for metastatic breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; (06) CD003366
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Miles DW, Diéras V, Cortés J. et al. First-line bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: pooled and subgroup analyses of data from 2447 patients. Ann Oncol 2013; 24: 2773-2780
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Miller K, Wang M, Gralow J. et al. Paclitaxel plus Bevacizumab versus Paclitaxel Alone for Metastatic Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 2666-2676
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Schmid P, Adams S, Rugo HS. et al. Atezolizumab and Nab-Paclitaxel in Advanced Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2018; 379: 2108-2121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Schmid P, Adams S, Rugo HS. et al. IMpassion130: updated overall survival (OS) from a global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase III study of atezolizumab (atezo) + nab-paclitaxel (nP) in previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). J Clin Oncol 2019; 37 (15_suppl): 1003
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Emens L, Loi S, Rugo HS. et al. Abstract GS1-04: IMpassion130: Efficacy in immune biomarker subgroups from the global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study of atezolizumab + nab-paclitaxel in patients with treatment-naïve, locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer Res 2019; 79 (4 Suppl.): GS1-04
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Schmid P, Cortés J, Dent R. et al. PRKEYNOTE-522: Phase III study of pembrolizumab (pembro) + chemotherapy (chemo) vs. placebo (pbo) + chemo as neoadjuvant treatment, followed by pembro vs. pbo as adjuvant treatment for early triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Ann Oncol 2019; 30 (Supplement_5): v68-v73 doi:10.1093/annonc/mdx364
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Gianni L, Huang C-S, Egle D. et al. Pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant treatment with or without atezolizumab in triple negative, early high-risk and locally advanced breast cancer. NeoTRIPaPDL1 Michelangelo randomized study. SABCS 2019; GS3-04
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Ortner P, Jordan K, Würstlein R. Supportive Maßnahmen bei Therapie mit Zytostatika und modernen Biologika. In: Untch M, Harbeck N, Thomssen C. Hrsg. Colloqium Senologie. München: Agileum Verlag und Gesundheitsakademie; 2019
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Campone M, Dobrovolskaya N, Tjulandin S. et al. A three-arm randomized phase II study of oral vinorelbine plus capecitabine versus oral vinorelbine and capecitabine in sequence versus docetaxel plus capecitabine in patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines. Breast J 2013; 19: 240-249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Albain KS, Nag SM, Calderillo-Ruiz G. et al. Gemcitabine plus Paclitaxel versus Paclitaxel monotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer and prior anthracycline treatment. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 3950-3957
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 OʼShaughnessy J, Miles D, Vukelja S. et al. Superior survival with capecitabine plus docetaxel combination therapy in anthracycline-pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer: phase III trial results. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 2812-2823
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Yardley DA, Burris HA, Simons L. et al. A phase II trial of gemcitabine/carboplatin with or without trastuzumab in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer 2008; 8: 425-431
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Yardley DA, Coleman R, Conte P. et al. nab-Paclitaxel plus carboplatin or gemcitabine versus gemcitabine plus carboplatin as first-line treatment of patients with triple-negative metastatic breast cancer: results from the tnAcity trial. Ann Oncol 2018; 29: 1763-1770
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Perez EA. Microtubule inhibitors: Differentiating tubulin-inhibiting agents based on mechanisms of action, clinical activity, and resistance. Mol Cancer Ther 2009; 8: 2086-2095
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Ghersi D, Wilcken N, Simes RJ. A systematic review of taxane-containing regimens for metastatic breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2005; 93: 293-301
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Willson ML, Burke L, Ferguson T. et al. Taxanes for adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007; (04) CD004421
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Qin YY, Li H, Guo XJ. et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy, with or without taxanes, in early or operable breast cancer: a meta-analysis of 19 randomized trials with 30698 patients. PLoS One 2011; 6: e26946
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Bonadonna G, Valagussa P. Dose-response effect of adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1981; 304: 10-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Sparreboom A, van Tellingen O, Nooijen WJ. et al. Nonlinear pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel in mice results from the pharmaceutical vehicle Cremophor EL. Cancer Res 1996; 56: 2112-2115
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Sparreboom A, van Zuylen L, Brouwer E. et al. Cremophor EL-mediated alteration of paclitaxel distribution in human blood: clinical pharmacokinetic implications. Cancer Res 1999; 59: 1454-1457
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Weiss RB, Donehower RC, Wiernik PH. et al. Hypersensitivity reactions from taxol. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8: 1263-1268
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Rowinsky EK, Eisenhauer EA, Chaudhry V. et al. Clinical toxicities encountered with paclitaxel (Taxol). Semin Oncol 1993; 20 (4 Suppl. 3): 1-15
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Authier N, Gillet JP, Fialip J. et al. Assessment of neurotoxicity following repeated cremophor/ethanol injections in rats. Neurotox Res 2001; 3: 301-306
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Cardoso F, Costa A, Norton L. et al. ESO-ESMO 2nd international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC2)†. Ann Oncol 2014; 25: 1871-1888
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Seidman AD, Berry D, Cirrincione C. et al. Randomized phase III trial of weekly compared with every-3-weeks paclitaxel for metastatic breast cancer, with trastuzumab for all HER-2 overexpressors and random assignment to trastuzumab or not in HER-2 nonoverexpressors: final results of Cancer and Leukemia Group B protocol 9840. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 1642-1649
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Sparano JA, Zhao F, Martino S. et al. Long-Term Follow-Up of the E1199 Phase III Trial Evaluating the Role of Taxane and Schedule in Operable Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33: 2353-2360
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 ten Tije AJ, Verweij J, Loos WJ. et al. Pharmacological effects of formulation vehicles: implications for cancer chemotherapy. Clin Pharmacokinet 2003; 42: 665-685
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Tabernero J, Climent MA, Lluch A. et al. A multicentre, randomised phase II study of weekly or 3-weekly docetaxel in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1358-1365
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Rivera E, Mejia JA, Arun BK. et al. Phase 3 study comparing the use of docetaxel on an every-3-week versus weekly schedule in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Cancer 2008; 112: 1455-1461
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Stemmler HJ, Harbeck N, Gröll de Rivera I. et al. Prospective multicenter randomized phase III study of weekly versus standard docetaxel (D2) for first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Oncology 2010; 79: 197-203
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Schroder CP, de Munck L, Westermann AM. et al. Weekly docetaxel in metastatic breast cancer patients: no superior benefits compared to three-weekly docetaxel. Eur J Cancer 2011; 47: 1355-1362
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Qi WX, Shen Z, Lin F. et al. Paclitaxel-based versus docetaxel-based regimens in metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Curr Med Res Opin 2013; 29: 117-125
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Celgene Fachinformation Abraxane. Stand Januar 2018.
    Google Scholar
  • 41 Nyman DW, Campbell KJ, Hersh E. et al. Phase I and pharmacokinetics trial of ABI-007, a novel nanoparticle formulation of paclitaxel in patients with advanced nonhematologic malignancies. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 7785-7793
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Li Y, Chen N, Palmisano M. et al. Pharmacologic sensitivity of paclitaxel to its delivery vehicles drives distinct clinical outcomes of paclitaxel formulations. Mol Pharm 2015; 12: 1308-1317
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Lindner JL, Loibl S, Denkert C. et al. Expression of secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine (SPARC) in breast cancer and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 2015; 26: 95-100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Gradishar WJ, Tjulandin S, Davidson N. et al. Phase III trial of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel compared with polyethylated castor oil-based paclitaxel in women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 7794-7803
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Cortes J, Saura C. Nanoparticle albumin-bound (nab™)-paclitaxel: improving efficacy and tolerability by targeted drug delivery in metastatic breast cancer. EJC Supplements 2010; 8: 1-10
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Gradishar WJ, Krasnojon D, Cheporov S. et al. Phase II trial of nab-paclitaxel compared with docetaxel as first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer: final analysis of overall survival. Clin Breast Cancer 2012; 12: 313-321
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Gradishar WJ, Krasnojon D, Cheporov S. et al. Significantly longer progression-free survival with nab-paclitaxel compared with docetaxel as first-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 3611-3619
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Davidson N, Tjulandin S, OʼShaughnessy J. et al. Overall survival analysis of a randomized phase III trial comparing nab-paclitaxel with solvent-based paclitaxel in patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracycline. Eur J Cancer 2008; 218 (Suppl. 06) Abstr.. 569
    Google Scholar
  • 49 Rugo HS, Barry WT, Moreno-Aspitia A. et al. Randomized Phase III Trial of Paclitaxel Once Per Week Compared With Nanoparticle Albumin-Bound Nab-Paclitaxel Once Per Week or Ixabepilone With Bevacizumab as First-Line Chemotherapy for Locally Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer: CALGB 40502/NCCTG N063H (Alliance). J Clin Oncol 2015; DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2014.59.5298.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Rugo H, Barry WT, Moreno-Aspitia A. et al. Abstract GS3-06: Long-term follow-up of CALGB 40502/NCCTG N063H (Alliance): A randomized phase III trial of weekly paclitaxel (P) compared to weekly nanoparticle albumin bound nab-Paclitaxel (NP) or ixabepilone (Ix) +/− bevacizumab as first-line therapy for locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Cancer Res 2018; 78 (4 Suppl.): GS3-06
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Untch M, Jackisch C, Schneeweiss A. et al. Nab-paclitaxel versus solvent-based paclitaxel in neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer (GeparSepto-GBG 69): a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17: 345-356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Jackisch C. et al. Nab-Paclitaxel at a dose of 125 mg/m2 weekly is equally efficaceous but less toxic than at 150 mg/m2 – Results from the neoadjuvant randomized GeparSepto study (GBG 69). San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2015.
    Google Scholar
  • 53 Untch M, Jackisch C, Schneeweiss A. et al. Nab-paclitaxel versus solvent-based paclitaxel in neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer (GeparSepto-GBG 69): a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17: 345-356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Untch M, Jackisch C, Schneeweiss A. et al. NAB-Paclitaxel Improves Disease-Free Survival in Early Breast Cancer: GBG 69-GeparSepto. J Clin Oncol 2019; 37: 2226-2234 doi:10.1200/JCO.18.01842
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Gianni L, Mansutti M, Anton A. et al. Comparing Neoadjuvant Nab-paclitaxel vs. Paclitaxel Both Followed by Anthracycline Regimens in Women With ERBB2/HER2-Negative Breast Cancer-The Evaluating Treatment With Neoadjuvant Abraxane (ETNA) Trial: A Randomized Phase 3 Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol 2018; 4: 302-308
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Gianni L, Mansutti M, Anton A. et al. Event-free survival analysis of the prospectively randomized phase III ETNA study with neoadjuvant nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) versus paclitaxel (P) followed by anthracycline regimens in women with HER2-negative high-risk breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2019; 37(15_suppl): 515
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Gluz O, Nitz U, Liedtke C. et al. Comparison of Neoadjuvant Nab-Paclitaxel+Carboplatin vs. Nab-Paclitaxel+Gemcitabine in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Randomized WSG-ADAPT-TN Trial Results. J Natl Cancer Inst 2017; DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djx258.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Gluz O, Nitz U, Liedtke C. et al. Abstract GS5-06: No survival benefit of chemotherapy escalation in patients with pCR and “high-immune” triple-negative early breast cancer in the neoadjuvant WSG-ADAPT-TN trial. Cancer Res 2019; 79 (4 Suppl.): GS5-06
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Hahnen E, Lederer B, Hauke J. et al. Germline Mutation Status, Pathological Complete Response, and Disease-Free Survival in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Secondary Analysis of the GeparSixto Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol 2017; 3: 1378-1385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Blohmer JU, Link T, Kümmel S. et al. Investigating denosumab as an add-on treatment to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and two different nab-paclitaxel schedules in a 2x2 design in primary breast cancer – First results of the GeparX study. SABCS 2019; GS3-01
    Google Scholar
  • 61 Mammakarzinom, S.L.. 2018 [cited 2019 05.06.2019].
    Google Scholar
  • 62 Brenton JD, Carey LA, Ahmed AA. et al. Molecular Classification and Molecular Forecasting of Breast Cancer: Ready for Clinical Application?. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 7350-7360
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Jackisch C, Lück HJ, Untch M. et al. Weekly nab-Paclitaxel in Metastatic Breast Cancer – Summary and Results of an Expert Panel Discussion. Breast Care (Basel) 2012; 7: 137-143
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Socinski MA, Bondarenko I, Karaseva NA. et al. Weekly nab-paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin versus solvent-based paclitaxel plus carboplatin as first-line therapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: final results of a phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30: 2055-2062
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Hersh E, Millward M, Elias I. et al. Phase 3, randomized, open-label, multicenter trial of nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) vs. dacarbazine (DTIC) in previously untreated patients with metastatic malignant melanoma (MMM). Pigment Cell Melanoma Res 2016; 25: 836-903
    Google Scholar
  • 66 Drafta DS, Stroe E, Schindler EE. et al. Adrenal function in early and metastatic breast cancer: dexamethasone suppression of plasma cortisol. Endocrinologie 1981; 19: 115-121
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Hilli J, Sailas L, Jyrkkiö S. et al. NCT01110291: induction of CYP3A activity and lowered exposure to docetaxel in patients with primary breast cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2011; 67: 1353-1362
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Lipp HP. [nab-Paclitaxel. Clinical value of an innovative taxane-containing formulation]. Med Monatsschr Pharm 2013; 36: 14-24
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Hershman DL, Till C, Shen S. et al. Association between patient reported outcomes and quantitative sensory tests for measuring long-term neurotoxicity in breast cancer survivors treated with adjuvant paclitaxel chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011; 125: 767-774
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Hershman DL, Lacchetti C, Dworkin RH. et al. Prevention and Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy in Survivors of Adult Cancers: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32: 1941-1967
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Hayes DF, Thor AD, Dressler LG. et al. HER2 and Response to Paclitaxel in Node-Positive Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 1496-1506
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Nitz U, Gluz O, Huober J. et al. Final analysis of the prospective WSG-AGO EC-Doc versus FEC phase III trial in intermediate-risk (pN1) early breast cancer: efficacy and predictive value of Ki67 expression. Ann Oncol 2014; 25: 1551-1557
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Schneeweiss A, Denkert C, Fasching PA. et al. Diagnosis and Therapy of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC) – Recommendations for Daily Routine Practice. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2019; 79: 605-617
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar