Skip to main content
main-content
Top

13-10-2017 | Breast cancer | Article

A randomized phase II study of weekly paclitaxel with or without pelareorep in patients with metastatic breast cancer: final analysis of Canadian Cancer Trials Group IND.213.

Journal:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Authors: V. Bernstein, S. L. Ellard, S. F. Dent, D. Tu, M. Mates, S. K. Dhesy-Thind, L. Panasci, K. A. Gelmon, M. Salim, X. Song, M. Clemons, D. Ksienski, S. Verma, C. Simmons, H. Lui, K. Chi, H. Feilotter, L. J. Hagerman, L. Seymour

Publisher: Springer US

Abstract

Pelareorep, a serotype 3 reovirus, has demonstrated preclinical and early clinical activity in breast cancer and synergistic cytotoxic activity with microtubule targeting agents. This multicentre, randomized, phase II trial was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding pelareorep to paclitaxel for patients with metastatic breast cancer (mBC).
Following a safety run-in of 7 patients, 74 women with previously treated mBC were randomized either to paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks plus pelareorep 3 × 1010 TCID50 intravenously on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 every 4 weeks (Arm A) or to paclitaxel alone (Arm B). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were objective response rate, overall survival (OS), circulating tumour cell counts, safety, and exploratory correlative analyses. All comparisons used a two-sided test at an alpha level of 20%. Survival analyses were adjusted for prior paclitaxel.
Final analysis was performed after a median follow-up of 29.5 months. Pelareorep was well tolerated. Patients in Arm A had more favourable baseline prognostic variables. Median adjusted PFS (Arm A vs B) was 3.78 mo vs 3.38 mo (HR 1.04, 80% CI 0.76–1.43, P = 0.87). There was no difference in response rate between arms (P = 0.87). Median OS (Arm A vs B) was 17.4 mo vs 10.4 mo (HR 0.65, 80% CI 0.46–0.91, P = 0.1).
This first, phase II, randomized study of pelareorep and paclitaxel in previously treated mBC did not show a difference in PFS (the primary endpoint) or RR. However, there was a significantly longer OS for the combination. Further exploration of this regimen in mBC may be of interest.

Please log in to get access to this content

Related topics