Next Article in Journal
Non-Invasive Assessment of Isocitrate Dehydrogenase-Mutant Gliomas Using Optimized Proton Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy on a Routine Clinical 3-Tesla MRI
Previous Article in Journal
Clinicopathological Factors Associated with Oncotype DX Risk Group in Patients with ER+/HER2- Breast Cancer
Previous Article in Special Issue
Preclinical and Basic Research Strategies for Overcoming Resistance to Targeted Therapies in HER2-Positive Breast Cancer
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Cancers
Volume 15
Issue 18
10.3390/cancers15184452
cancers-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Communication

Clinical Experience with Abemaciclib in Patients Previously Treated with Another CDK 4/6 Inhibitor in a Tertiary Hospital: A Case Series Study

by
Alicia Milagros de Luna Aguilar
1,2,*,
Javier David Benitez Fuentes
1,2,
Justo Ortega Anselmi
1,
Jennifer Olalla Inoa
1,
Paloma Flores Navarro
1,
Alfonso Lopez de Sá
1,
Jesus Fuentes Antras
1,
Cristina Rodríguez Rey
3,
Aída Ortega Candil
3,
Fernando Moreno Antón
1,† and
Jose Ángel García Sáenz
1,†
1
Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clinico San Carlos, IdISSC, Calle Profesor Martín Lagos, S/N, 28040 Madrid, Spain
2
Velindre Cancer Centre, Velindre University NHS Trust, Cardiff CF14 2TL, UK
3
Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hospital Clinico San Carlos, IdISSC, Calle Profesor Martín Lagos, S/N, 28040 Madrid, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors have contributed equally to this work and share last authorship.
Cancers 2023, 15(18), 4452; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15184452
Submission received: 7 June 2023 / Revised: 27 July 2023 / Accepted: 31 August 2023 / Published: 7 September 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Breast Cancers Treatments: Overcoming Drug Resistance)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

This research aimed to study the effectiveness and safety of a drug called abemaciclib in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who had previously received similar treatments. The medical records of 11 patients who were given abemaciclib after their disease worsened despite prior therapies were analyzed. The results demonstrated that abemaciclib, alone or in combination with tamoxifen, showed positive effects against MBC. On average, patients experienced six months without disease progression, and some even had significant improvements, such as one patient achieving complete resolution of liver metastases. The most observed side effects, including diarrhea and fatigue, were generally mild. These findings might add further evidence that abemaciclib could be a safe and effective treatment option for MBC patients who have not responded to previous therapies. This research provides valuable insights for making informed decisions regarding future treatment approaches in the medical community.

Abstract

The three approved cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors, including abemaciclib, have shown differences in their preclinical, pharmacological, and clinical data. Abemaciclib stands out for its broader target range and more rapid and intense activity. It has demonstrated efficacy as a monotherapy or in combination with tamoxifen in endocrine-refractory metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients with prior chemotherapy. However, the clinical data on abemaciclib after exposure to previous CDK4/6 inhibitors are limited. In this single-center retrospective case series, we identified all patients who received abemaciclib until February 2022 after experiencing documented progression on palbociclib or ribociclib. The safety profile and clinical outcomes of abemaciclib treatment in this specific patient cohort were evaluated. Eleven patients were included in this retrospective case series, nine receiving abemaciclib with tamoxifen. Eight patients had visceral involvement, and the median age was 69 (ranging from 42 to 84). The median time from the end of prior CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment to abemaciclib initiation was 17.5 months (ranging from 3 to 41 months). Patients had undergone a median of three prior therapies (ranging from 1 to 7), including chemotherapy in 54.5% of cases. The median follow-up time was six months (ranging from 1 to 22 months). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8 months (95% CI 3.9–12). Five patients continued abemaciclib treatment, and one patient with liver metastases achieved a complete hepatic response. The most common adverse events were diarrhea (72.7%, no grade ≥ 3) and asthenia (27.3%, no grade ≥ 3). Our preliminary findings suggest that abemaciclib could be an effective and safe treatment option for MBC patients who have previously received palbociclib or ribociclib.

1. Introduction

Breast cancer is the leading cancer diagnosed in women globally and the second most common cause of cancer-related death in women, following lung cancer [1]. Hormone receptors (HRs) are expressed in about 70% of breast cancer cases, with early-stage diagnosis being more frequent than metastatic-stage diagnosis [2].
Although estrogen-receptor-positive and epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (ER+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer is considered incurable, there has been a shift in treatment strategies in recent years. CDK4/6 inhibitors, such as ribociclib, palbociclib, and abemaciclib, have emerged as the mainstay of treatment for these patients. These inhibitors work by inhibiting CDK4/CDK6-dependent phosphorylation of retinoblastoma (Rb), which blocks proliferation by inhibiting the progression of tumor cells from the G1 phase into the S phase of the cell cycle. Multiple recent studies have supported using CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) in combination with endocrine therapy in MBC, establishing ribociclib, palbociclib, and abemaciclib as first- and second-line therapies [3].
Abemaciclib has a different clinical and preclinical mode of action compared to other CDK4/6 inhibitors, blocking the activity of other cellular targets, such as Cyclin Dependent Kinase 2 (CDK2/Cyclin A/E) and Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 1 (CDK1/Cyclin B), which results in the arrest of the cell cycle in both the G1 and G2 phases. Additionally, abemaciclib induced senescence and apoptosis at lower concentrations and in earlier stages [4]. In a phase II clinical trial, abemaciclib demonstrated significant activity as a monotherapy or in combination with tamoxifen for patients with metastatic breast cancer who had undergone prior chemotherapy treatment and were considered endocrine-refractory [5,6].
A significant clinical issue is the emergence of resistance to these therapies [7]. Numerous cell-cycle-regulatory proteins, including RB Transcriptional Corepressor 1 (RB1), Cyclin E1 (CCNE1), Cyclin E2 (CCNE2), Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 6 (CDK6), and aurora kinase (AURKA), have been identified as key players in several mechanisms. However, other oncogenic pathways such as Erb-B2 Receptor Tyrosine Kinase 2 (ERBB2), Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor (FGFR), AKT Serine/Threonine Kinase 1 (AKT), and RAS also appear to be crucial. The complexity of the underlying molecular processes, as evidenced by the involvement of these pathways and cell-cycle-regulatory proteins, poses significant challenges to developing effective treatments [7,8,9,10,11,12]. Ongoing research is being conducted using in silico techniques to explore the role of cyclin-dependent kinases in multiple cancers [13,14,15,16].
There are limited clinical data on abemaciclib treatment after a prior CDK 4/6i exposure. Considering the different patterns of action of abemaciclib and the potential usefulness of abemaciclib when CDK4/6 inhibitor resistance appears, this study aimed to analyze the safety and efficacy of abemaciclib in a cohort of HR+/HER2- MBC patients who had previously progressed on palbociclib or ribociclib at our institution. The primary objectives were to assess the safety profile and clinical outcomes of these patients treated with abemaciclib.

2. Materials and Methods

We conducted a single-center, retrospective identification of patients who had been or were being treated with abemaciclib until February 2022. The data were extracted from the hospital pharmacy’s electronic records. From this group of patients, we included those who had received abemaciclib after a previously documented progression on palbociclib or ribociclib. Medical records of patients included in the study were reviewed retrospectively. Clinical characteristics including age, sex, time since diagnosis of metastatic disease, number of previous lines, previous treatment modalities, time until treatment with abemaciclib, endocrine partner used in combination with abemaciclib, visceral and central nervous system (CNS) involvement, and tumor markers from the start of abemaciclib treatment until disease progression were summarized using standard descriptive statistics.
In this study, descriptive statistics were used to summarize and present the results. The efficacy of abemaciclib measured by clinical benefit rate (CBR) and progression-free survival (PFS) was analyzed retrospectively. CBR was defined as the percentage of all patients with a complete or partial response or stable disease at 24 weeks. PFS was defined as the time in months from the start of abemaciclib to death, disease progression, or the date of the last follow-up. The response was assessed by the local radiologist based on RECIST v1.1 [17]. Median PFS was calculated according to the Kaplan–Meier method. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS (version 28.0.1.1 IBM SPSS Statistics). It is important to note that due to the retrospective nature of the study, the findings should be interpreted cautiously.
The safety profile of abemaciclib was analyzed by reviewing all the adverse events (AEs) documented in medical records. The severity of adverse events was graded according to CTCAE version 5.0 [18]. Grade 3 and 4 AEs were reported separately.
The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board. The Hospital Clinico San Carlos Ethics Committee approved the study with the code 22/083-O_M_SP. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study. The authors affirm that human research participants provided informed consent for the publication of the images in Figures 2 and 3.

3. Results

3.1. Patients

The first patient to fulfill inclusion criteria started abemaciclib in April 2020. In February 2022, 11 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study.
All the patients were women; the median age was 69 years (range 42–84 years), and most of them were Caucasian (90.9%). All the tumors were ER+/HER2- MBC. Median time to abemaciclib from the end of previous CDK4/6 inhibitors was 17.5 months (range 3–41 months), and the median number of therapies until abemaciclib use was three (range 1–7), including chemotherapy in 54.5% of patients.
Considering the combined therapy used with abemaciclib, 9 out of 11 received tamoxifen. Regarding disease extension, eight patients had visceral involvement, and none had brain metastasis.
Baseline patient and disease characteristics are presented in Table 1.

3.2. Efficacy

The median follow-up time was six months (range 1–22 months). At the time of data analysis, five patients continued abemaciclib. Median PFS was 8 months (95% CI 3.9–12). The Kaplan–Meier curve for progression-free survival is presented in Figure 1. The PFS of each patient is represented in Table 2. CBR at 24 weeks was identified in five out of eight evaluable patients.
The benefit obtained on previous CDK4/6 inhibitors did not seem to determine the benefit of abemaciclib in the small sample of patients included in this retrospective single-center case series. Two patients with a prolonged PFS on prior CDK4/6 inhibitors achieved a PFS of more than six months on abemaciclib, but this trend was not maintained in the remaining patients. Considering the heterogeneity of the patients included in the study according to the different treatment strategies used and the time elapsed from prior CDK4/6 inhibitors to abemaciclib therapy, no conclusions can be drawn regarding which patients would benefit most from this strategy.
Patient 6 was a 51-year-old woman with liver metastases and three prior lines, including ribociclib in combination with an aromatase inhibitor. The benefit obtained with prior ribociclib had also been prolonged. A relevant and unexpected response was obtained in this patient, who achieved a complete hepatic response after three months on abemaciclib and tamoxifen. The benefit after seven months of treatment continued at the time of data analysis (Figure 2 and Figure 3).

3.3. Safety

Ten patients had at least one adverse event (AE). The most common AEs of any grade were diarrhea and asthenia. Diarrhea was experienced by eight patients (72.7%), mainly grade 1 (n = 5, 45.4%) and grade 2 (n = 3, 27.3%). Asthenia was experienced by three patients (27.3%), typically grade 1 (n = 1, 9.1%) and grade 2 (n = 2, 18.2%). No grade 3 or 4 diarrhea or asthenia was documented according to CTCAE version 5.0 [18].
Grade 2 blood creatinine increase was reported in one patient, in which no treatment adjustment was needed.
Neutropenia grade 4 was recorded in a heavily treated patient who had previous episodes of neutropenia grade 3 and grade 4 when she was on chemotherapy requiring granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs). During the grade 4 neutropenia episode with abemaciclib, no G-CSF was needed. Neutropenia resolved after one week off treatment, and it did not recur after one level of dose reduction.

4. Discussion

CDK4/6 inhibitors are the main treatment strategy in ER+/HER2- MBC [15,16]. Currently, chemotherapy is only recommended for patients experiencing visceral crises in the first-line setting [19,20]. Different studies have evaluated using palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib in these patients [21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28]. Combined with endocrine therapies in the first and second line, these agents significantly improve PFS and overall survival (OS). These therapies’ effectiveness and enhanced safety profile have enabled the postponement of more toxic treatments in this context.
Results from two studies, MONARCH-1 and nextMONARCH, have shown interesting clinical data efficacy in HR+/HER2- endocrine-refractory MBC patients in monotherapy and combination with tamoxifen [5,6].
A phase II trial called MONARCH-1 investigated the efficacy of abemaciclib 200 mg twice daily in 132 patients with HR+/HER2- endocrine-refractory MBC. These patients had received a median of three previous lines of both endocrine and chemotherapy regimens. Despite being heavily used in treatment, abemaciclib as a single agent showed an ORR of 19.7% and a median PFS of 6.0 months. In the final analysis, conducted after 18 months of follow-up, the median OS was 22.3 months [5].
The results of the NextMONARCH phase II clinical trial were published in 2021. Patients with the same characteristics as in MONARCH-1 were included. This study evaluated abemaciclib in monotherapy at two doses (A-150 and A-200) and in combination with tamoxifen (A+T). At 15.1 months of follow-up, the efficacy analysis showed that A+T had a numerically longer PFS of 9.1 months compared to A-200 with 7.4 months (HR, 0.815; p = 0.293), but this difference was not statistically significant. The PFS results of A-200 and A-150 showed no inferiority. The CBR was numerically different, but no statistically significant differences were observed among the three treatment arms [6].
Despite the clinical success of CDK4/6 inhibitors, emerging resistance to them has posed a new challenge in HR+/HER2+ MBC. Data support that this resistance is likely multifactorial [7,29]. Several resistance pathways have been identified that involve different cell-cycle-regulatory proteins. While high expression of CCNE2 is linked to unfavorable outcomes after endocrine therapy, amplification of CCNE1 and CCNE2 has been associated with resistance to CDK4/6 inhibitors [10,11]. C. Yang et al. conducted a study on cell lines exposed to abemaciclib and found that CDK6 amplification increased CDK6 expression and reduced response to CDK4/6 inhibitors [9]. RB1 alterations have been identified in a small fraction (3–5%) of patients in different studies and are associated with poor response to CDK4/6 inhibitors [8]. AURKA is known to regulate cell-cycle progression, and its overexpression in breast cancer is commonly associated with an ER-low/basal phenotype. However, emerging evidence suggests that AURKA also mediates resistance to CDK4/6 inhibitors in vitro and in tumor samples [29].
Other oncogenic pathways also appear to be relevant in resistance to CDK4/6 inhibitors. Previous studies suggest the implication of activating mutations in ERBB2, amplification events in FGFR1 and FGFR2, and alterations in AKT1 and RAS in the resistance to both antiestrogens and CDK4/6 inhibitors in vitro [12,29].
It is unclear if palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib are functionally equivalent in HR+/HER2+ MBC patients. Marc Hafner et al. compared the three drugs using in vitro and in vivo xenograft tumors, revealing differences. Abemaciclib was the most effective CDK4/6 inhibitor, capable of reducing pRb phosphorylation and arresting cells in the G1 phase at a lower drug concentration than ribociclib and palbociclib. Moreover, abemaciclib demonstrated activity against various kinases, including CDK1/cyclin B, CDK2/cyclin A/E, CDK7/cyclin H, and CDK9/cyclin K/T1. Due to its ability to suppress CDK1 and CDK2, which are involved in the progression through the S phase and mitosis, abemaciclib was able to arrest the cell cycle not only in G1 but also in G2 [4].
Considering the preclinical and clinical differences observed between the three CDK4/6 inhibitors approved, the hypothesis that abemaciclib could be effective after progression on palbociclib or ribociclib has emerged in recent years (4). Data have been published recently demonstrating clinical efficacy with abemaciclib in patients after progression on palbociclib or ribociclib. Wander et al. reported the first multicenter experience with 87 patients showing clinical benefit in a substantial number of patients. The median PFS was 5.3 months (95% CI 3.5–7.8) [30,31]. Another case series published by Mariotti V. et al. demonstrated a response with abemaciclib in some patients after progression on palbociclib with a median PFS of 7.0 months (range 1.8–12.1) [32]. Some other case reports and single-center experiences also suggest the clinical efficacy of abemaciclib in this setting [33,34,35].
Considering this hypothesis, the phase III study postMONARCH is open for patients who have progressed to a combination of CDK4/6 and aromatase inhibitors. This multinational study has been presented in ASCO 2022 and is planned for 122 centers. The study anticipates enrolling 350 patients randomized to fulvestrant with abemaciclib or placebo (NCT05169567) [36,37].
Other clinical trials have been designed based on the same hypothesis, investigating the effectiveness of various targeted therapies such as enobosarm and lasofoxifene in combination with abemaciclib for ER+ HER2- MBC patients who have previously experienced progression on CDK4/6 inhibitors [38,39].
Studies have also investigated the potential advantages of switching from palbociclib and ribociclib to a different endocrine therapy after experiencing disease progression with previous CDK4/6 inhibitors. The phase II study MAINTAIN was the first prospective randomized trial published in this setting. It was first presented at the ASCO Congress in June 2022 and published in May 2023. Patients were randomized to receive fulvestrant or exemestane with or without ribociclib. Most patients (84%) had received prior palbociclib. After a median follow-up of 18.2 months, a statistical benefit of 2.53 months in the primary endpoint median PFS was shown for patients randomized to ribociclib versus placebo (HR 0.56; p = 0.004) [40].
Two studies were conducted to investigate the role of palbociclib. The PACE trial (NCT03147287) enrolled 220 HR+/HER2 MBC patients previously treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors, and they were randomly assigned to fulvestrant, fulvestrant with palbociclib, or fulvestrant with palbociclib and avelumab. The first results presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium in December 2022 showed no significant difference in PFS between fulvestrant and palbociclib compared to fulvestrant alone (HR 1.11, p = 0.62). Still, the addition of avelumab showed a numerical benefit [41]. The PALMIRA trial first analysis results (NCT03809988) were presented in ASCO 2023. In this trial, HR+/HER2- MBC patients who had received first-line endocrine therapy and palbociclib with clinical benefit (defined as a response or stable disease ≥24 weeks) or who had progressed on palbociclib in the adjuvant setting or less than 12 months following palbociclib treatment completion were randomized 2:1 to receive a different endocrine agent alone or with palbociclib. At a median follow-up of 8.7 months, no significant improvement had been seen in PFS (HR 0.8, 95% CI 0.6–1.1, p = 0.206) [42].
The characteristics of these studies are summarized in Table 3.
The present retrospective single-center case series offers insights into the efficacy and safety of abemaciclib following progression on prior CDK4/6 inhibitors in HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer patients. However, the study’s inherent limitations, including its small sample size of 11 patients, lack of a control group, heterogeneous treatment regimens, and reliance on medical records for data extraction, call for a cautious interpretation of the findings. The retrospective nature introduces potential biases that limit the generalizability of results. Consequently, prospective studies with larger, diverse cohorts and controlled designs are necessary to better understand the role of abemaciclib in this context.

5. Conclusions

Abemaciclib exhibits a broader spectrum of action, suggesting its potential utility in HR+/HER2- endocrine-resistant MBC patients who have experienced progression on palbociclib or ribociclib. This study adds real-world data evidence in this setting. An ongoing phase III clinical trial is currently evaluating the efficacy of abemaciclib in this context [32,33]. Moving forward, the primary focus of future research will be identifying the patient population that benefits the most from this therapeutic strategy.

Author Contributions

All authors contributed to the study’s conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by A.M.d.L.A., J.D.B.F., J.O.A., J.O.I., A.L.d.S., and P.F.N. A.M.d.L.A. wrote the first draft of the manuscript, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Hospital Clinico San Carlos (code 22/083-O_M_SP and 21 February 2022).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated during the current study are not publicly available but are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

José A. García-Sáenz reports that he has received consultancy/speaker fees from Novartis, Celgene, Eli Lilly, EISAI, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, and MSD; consultative and advisory services from Seagen, Gilead, and Sanofi; institution research funding from AstraZeneca; and travel support from Novartis, Roche, and Pfizer, not relevant to this study. Alicia de Luna Aguilar reports that she has received financial support for attending symposia and honoraria for speaking at symposia from Eli Lilly & Co. and Novartis, which is irrelevant to this study. Fernando Moreno Anton reports that he has received financial support for attending symposia from Pfizer and Novartis; honoraria for speaking at symposia from Pfizer, Daichi Sankyo, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, and MSD; and support from a project sponsor from Pfizer, not relevant to this study. The rest of the authors have no potential conflicting interest.

References

  1. Sung, H.; Ferlay, J.; Siegel, R.L.; Laversanne, M.; Soerjomataram, I.; Jemal, A.; Bray, F. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2021, 71, 209–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Howlader, N.; Altekruse, S.F.; Li, C.I.; Chen, V.W.; Clarke, C.A.; Ries, L.A.; Cronin, K.A. US Incidence of Breast Cancer Subtypes Defined by Joint Hormone Receptor and HER2 Status. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2014, 106, dju055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. de Groot, A.; Kuijpers, C.; Kroep, J. CDK4/6 inhibition in early and metastatic breast cancer: A review. Cancer Treat. Rev. 2017, 60, 130–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Hafner, M.; Mills, C.E.; Subramanian, K.; Chen, C.; Chung, M.; Boswell, S.A.; Everley, R.A.; Liu, C.; Walmsley, C.S.; Juric, D.; et al. Multiomics Profiling Establishes the Polypharmacology of FDA-Approved CDK4/6 Inhibitors and the Potential for Differential Clinical Activity. Cell Chem. Biol. 2019, 26, 1067–1080.e8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Dickler, M.N.; Tolaney, S.M.; Rugo, H.S.; Cortés, J.; Diéras, V.; Patt, D.; Wildiers, H.; Hudis, C.A.; O’Shaughnessy, J.; Zamora, E.; et al. MONARCH 1, A Phase II Study of Abemaciclib, a CDK4 and CDK6 Inhibitor, as a Single Agent, in Patients with Refractory HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 2017, 23, 5218–5224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hamilton, E.; Cortes, J.; Ozyilkan, O.; Chen, S.-C.; Petrakova, K.; Manikhas, A.; Jerusalem, G.; Hegg, R.; Huober, J.; Chapman, S.C.; et al. nextMONARCH: Abemaciclib Monotherapy or Combined With Tamoxifen for Metastatic Breast Cancer. Clin. Breast Cancer 2020, 21, 181–190.e2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Herrera-Abreu, M.T.; Palafox, M.; Asghar, U.; Rivas, M.A.; Cutts, R.J.; Garcia-Murillas, I.; Pearson, A.; Guzman, M.; Rodriguez, O.; Grueso, J.; et al. Early Adaptation and Acquired Resistance to CDK4/6 Inhibition in Estrogen Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer. Cancer Res. 2016, 76, 2301–2313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Condorelli, R.; Spring, L.; O’shaughnessy, J.; Lacroix, L.; Bailleux, C.; Scott, V.; Dubois, J.; Nagy, R.; Lanman, R.; Iafrate, A.; et al. Polyclonal RB1 mutations and acquired resistance to CDK 4/6 inhibitors in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Ann. Oncol. 2017, 29, 640–645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Yang, C.; Li, Z.; Bhatt, T.; Dickler, M.; Giri, D.; Scaltriti, M.; Baselga, J.; Rosen, N.; Chandarlapaty, S. Acquired CDK6 amplification promotes breast cancer resistance to CDK4/6 inhibitors and loss of ER signaling and dependence. Oncogene 2016, 36, 2255–2264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Caldon, C.E.; Sergio, C.M.; Kang, J.; Muthukaruppan, A.; Boersma, M.N.; Stone, A.; Barraclough, J.; Lee, C.S.; Black, M.A.; Miller, L.D.; et al. Cyclin E2 overexpression is associated with endocrine resistance but not insensitivity to CDK2 inhibition in human breast cancer cells. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2012, 11, 1488–1499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Turner, N.C.; Liu, Y.; Zhu, Z.; Loi, S.; Colleoni, M.; Loibl, S.; DeMichele, A.; Harbeck, N.; André, F.; Bayar, M.A.; et al. Cyclin E1 Expression and Palbociclib Efficacy in Previously Treated Hormone Receptor–Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2019, 37, 1169–1178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Formisano, L.; Lu, Y.; Servetto, A.; Hanker, A.B.; Jansen, V.M.; Bauer, J.A.; Sudhan, D.R.; Guerrero-Zotano, A.L.; Croessmann, S.; Guo, Y.; et al. Aberrant FGFR signaling mediates resistance to CDK4/6 inhibitors in ER+ breast cancer. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 1373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Guarducci, C.; Bonechi, M.; Benelli, M.; Biagioni, C.; Boccalini, G.; Romagnoli, D.; Verardo, R.; Schiff, R.; Osborne, C.K.; De Angelis, C.; et al. Cyclin E1 and Rb modulation as common events at time of resistance to palbociclib in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. npj Breast Cancer 2018, 4, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Risi, E.; Grilli, A.; Migliaccio, I.; Biagioni, C.; McCartney, A.; Guarducci, C.; Bonechi, M.; Benelli, M.; Vitale, S.; Biganzoli, L.; et al. A gene expression signature of Retinoblastoma loss-of-function predicts resistance to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ER-positive/HER2-positive breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2018, 170, 329–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Singh, R.; Bhardwaj, V.; Das, P.; Purohit, R. Natural analogues inhibiting selective cyclin-dependent kinase protein isoforms: A computational perspective. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2019, 38, 5126–5135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Singh, R.; Bhardwaj, V.K.; Sharma, J.; Das, P.; Purohit, R. Identification of selective cyclin-dependent kinase 2 inhibitor from the library of pyrrolone-fused benzosuberene compounds: An in silico exploration. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 40, 7693–7701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Eisenhauer, E.A.; Therasse, P.; Bogaerts, J.; Schwartz, L.H.; Sargent, D.; Ford, R.; Dancey, J.; Arbuck, S.; Gwyther, S.; Mooney, M.; et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur. J. Cancer 2009, 45, 228–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. US Department of Health and Human Studies Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). Version 5.0. 27 November 2017. Available online: https://ctep.cancer.gov/protocoldevelopment/electronic_applications/docs/CTCAE_v5_Quick_Reference_5x7.pdf (accessed on 6 June 2023).
  19. Cardoso, F.; Paluch-Shimon, S.; Senkus, E.; Curigliano, G.; Aapro, M.S.; André, F.; Barrios, C.H.; Bergh, J.; Bhattacharyya, G.S.; Biganzoli, L.; et al. 5th ESO-ESMO international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC 5). Ann. Oncol. 2020, 31, 1623–1649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Rugo, H.S.; Rumble, R.B.; Macrae, E.; Barton, D.L.; Connolly, H.K.; Dickler, M.N.; Fallowfield, L.; Fowble, B.; Ingle, J.N.; Jahanzeb, M.; et al. Endocrine Therapy for Hormone Receptor–Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline. J. Clin. Oncol. 2016, 34, 3069–3103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Finn, R.S.; Martin, M.; Rugo, H.S.; Jones, S.; Im, S.-A.; Gelmon, K.; Harbeck, N.; Lipatov, O.N.; Walshe, J.M.; Moulder, S.; et al. Palbociclib and Letrozole in Advanced Breast Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016, 375, 1925–1936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Cristofanilli, M.; Turner, N.C.; Bondarenko, I.; Ro, J.; Im, S.-A.; Masuda, N.; Colleoni, M.; DeMichele, A.; Loi, S.; Verma, S.; et al. Fulvestrant plus palbociclib versus fulvestrant plus placebo for treatment of hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer that progressed on previous endocrine therapy (PALOMA-3): Final analysis of the multicentre, double-blind, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016, 17, 425–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Hortobagyi, G.N.; Stemmer, S.M.; Burris, H.A.; Yap, Y.-S.; Sonke, G.S.; Paluch-Shimon, S.; Campone, M.; Blackwell, K.L.; André, F.; Winer, E.P.; et al. Ribociclib as First-Line Therapy for HR-Positive, Advanced Breast Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016, 375, 1738–1748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Hortobagyi, G.N.; Stemmer, S.M.; Burris, H.A.; Yap, Y.S.; Sonke, G.S.; Paluch-Shimon, S.; O’shaughnessy, J. Updated results from MONALEESA-2, a phase 3 trial of first-line ribociclib plus letrozole in hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2- negative (HER2-), advanced breast cancer (ABC). J. Clin. Oncol. 2017, 35, 1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Im, S.-A.; Lu, Y.-S.; Bardia, A.; Harbeck, N.; Colleoni, M.; Franke, F.; Chow, L.; Sohn, J.; Lee, K.-S.; Campos-Gomez, S.; et al. Overall Survival with Ribociclib plus Endocrine Therapy in Breast Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2019, 381, 307–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Sledge, G.W., Jr.; Toi, M.; Neven, P.; Sohn, J.; Inoue, K.; Pivot, X.; Burdaeva, O.; Okera, M.; Masuda, N.; Kaufman, P.A.; et al. MONARCH 2: Abemaciclib in Combination with Fulvestrant in Women With HR+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer Who Had Progressed While Receiving Endocrine Therapy. J. Clin. Oncol. 2017, 35, 2875–2884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Sledge, G.W.; Toi, M.; Neven, P.; Sohn, J.; Inoue, K.; Pivot, X.; Burdaeva, O.; Okera, M.; Masuda, N.; Kaufman, P.A.; et al. The effect of abemaciclib plus fulvestrant on overall survival in hormone receptor-positive, ERBB2-negative breast cancer that progressed on endocrine therapy-MONARCH 2: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2020, 6, 116–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Goetz, M.P.; Toi, M.; Campone, M.; Sohn, J.; Paluch-Shimon, S.; Huober, J.; Park, I.H.; Trédan, O.; Chen, S.-C.; Manso, L.; et al. MONARCH 3: Abemaciclib As Initial Therapy for Advanced Breast Cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2017, 35, 3638–3646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wander, S.A.; Cohen, O.; Gong, X.; Johnson, G.N.; Buendia-Buendia, J.E.; Lloyd, M.R.; Kim, D.; Luo, F.; Mao, P.; Helvie, K.; et al. The Genomic Landscape of Intrinsic and Acquired Resistance to Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4/6 Inhibitors in Patients with Hormone Receptor–Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer. Cancer Discov. 2020, 10, 1174–1193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wander, S.A.; Spring, L.M.; Stein, C.R.; Yuen, M.; Zangardi, M.; O’Shaughnessy, J.; Bardia, A. Abstract P-06-18-39: Abemaciclib after prior palbociclib exposure in patients with metastatic hormone-receptor positive (HR?)/HER2- breast cancer. In Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, San Antonio, TX, USA, 4–8 December 2018; Available online: https://www.abstracts2view.com/sabcs/view.php?nu=SABCS18L_1832 (accessed on 6 June 2023).
  31. Wander, S.A.; Zangardi, M.; Niemierko, A.; Kambadakone, A.; Kim, L.S.; Xi, J.; Pandey, A.K.; Spring, L.; Stein, C.; Juric, D.; et al. A multicenter analysis of abemaciclib after progression on palbociclib in patients (pts) with hormone receptor-positive (HR?)/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (MBC). J. Clin. Oncol. 2019, 37 (Suppl. S15), 1057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Mariotti, V.; Khong, H.T.; Soliman, H.H.; Costa, R.L.; Fisher, S.; Boulware, D.; Han, H.S. Efficacy of abemaciclib (abema) after palbociclib (palbo) in patients (pts) with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). J. Clin. Oncol. 2019, 37, e12521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kudo, S.; Makino, T.; Umetsu, R.; Tanaka, T. A Case of Palbociclib plus Fulvestrant‒Resistant Metastatic Breast Cancer That Responded to Abemaciclib plus Fulvestrant. Gan Kagaku Ryoho. Cancer Chemother. 2021, 48, 519–521. (In Japanese) [Google Scholar]
  34. Ishiguro, A.; Tanimoto, A.; Ito, K.; Ohigashi, A.; Kato, H.; Abe, M.; Kubota, R.; Chiba, R.; Matsunami, O.; Narita, Y. A Case of Hormone Receptor‒Positive HER2‒Negative Advanced/Recurrent Breast Cancer with 1.5 Years Withdrawal Period of Palbociclib Showed a Good Response Treated by Abemaciclib and Fulvestrant. Gan kagaku ryoho. Cancer Chemother. 2021, 48, 697–699. (In Japanese) [Google Scholar]
  35. Wender, I.O.; Haines, K.; Jahanzeb, M. Response to Abemaciclib After 10 Lines of Therapy Including Palbociclib in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Case Report with Literature Review. Oncol. Ther. 2020, 8, 351–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. ClinicalTrials.gov Web Page. Bethesda (MD): National Library of Medicine (US). Identifier: NCT05169567, Study of Abemaciclib (LY2835219) Plus Fulvestrant Compared to Placebo Plus Fulvestrant in Previously Treated Breast Cancer (postMONARCH). Available online: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05169567?term=postmonarch&draw=2&rank=1 (accessed on 6 June 2022).
  37. Kalinsky, K.; Layman, R.M.; Kaufman, P.A.; Graff, S.L.; Bianchini, G.; Martin, M.; Zhou, Y.; Knoderer, H.; Litchfield, L.; Wander, S.A. postMONARCH: A phase 3 study of abemaciclib plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant in patients with HR+, HER2-, metastatic breast cancer following progression on a CDK4 & 6 inhibitor and endocrine therapy. J. Clin. Oncol. 2022, 40 (Suppl. S16), TPS1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Lim, E.; Brufsky, A.; Rugo, H.S.; Vogel, C.L.; O’Shaughnessy, J.; Getzenberg, R.H.; Barnette, K.G.; Rodriguez, D.; Bird, G.; Steiner, M.S.; et al. Phase 3 ENABLAR-2 study to evaluate enobosarm and abemaciclib combination compared to estrogen-blocking agent for the second-line treatment of AR+, ER+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer in patients who previously received palbociclib and estrogen-blocking agent combination therapy. J. Clin. Oncol. 2022, 40 (Suppl. S16), TPS1121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Damodaran, S.; Plourde, P.V.; Moore, H.C.F.; Anderson, I.C.; Portman, D.J. Open-label, phase 2, multicenter study of lasofoxifene (LAS) combined with abemaciclib (Abema) for treating pre- and postmenopausal women with locally advanced or metastatic ER+/HER2- breast cancer and an ESR1 mutation after progression on prior therapies. J. Clin. Oncol. 2022, 40 (Suppl. S16), 1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kalinsky, K.; Accordino, M.K.; Chiuzan, C.; Mundi, P.S.; Sakach, E.; Sathe, C.; Ahn, H.; Trivedi, M.S.; Novik, Y.; Tiersten, A.; et al. Randomized Phase II Trial of Endocrine Therapy with or Without Ribociclib After Progression on Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4/6 Inhibition in Hormone Receptor–Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: MAINTAIN Trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 2023, JCO2202392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Mayer, E.L.; Ren, Y.; Wagle, N.; Ma, C.; DeMichele, A.; Cristofanilli, M.; Meisel, J. Palbociclib after CDK4/6i and endocrine therapy (PACE): A randomized phase II study of fulvestrant, palbociclib, and avelumab for endocrine pre-treated ER+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer. In Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, San Antonio, TX, USA, 6–10 December 2022. [Google Scholar]
  42. Llombart-Cussac, A.; Harper-Wynne, C.; Perello, A.; Hennequin, A.; Fernandez, A.; Colleoni, M.; Carañana, V.; Quiroga, V.; Medioni, J.; Iranzo, V.; et al. Second-line endocrine therapy (ET) with or without palbociclib (P) maintenance in patients (pts) with hormone receptor-positive (HR[+])/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2[−]) advanced breast cancer (ABC): PALMIRA trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 2023, 41, 1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Cancers 15 04452 g001
Figure 1. Kaplan–Meier curve for progression-free survival on abemaciclib.
Figure 1. Kaplan–Meier curve for progression-free survival on abemaciclib.
Cancers 15 04452 g001
Cancers 15 04452 g002
Figure 2. Positron emission tomography–computed tomography Scan (PET-CT) performed in July 2021 from patient 6. (a) Maximum intensity projection (MIP) image shows pathological fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in the liver. (b) CT images show multiple low-attenuation lesions in several hepatic segments, some of them confluent. (c,d) Lesions show intense fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in the fusion and PET images, respectively. These findings are compatible with multiple metastatic involvement.
Figure 2. Positron emission tomography–computed tomography Scan (PET-CT) performed in July 2021 from patient 6. (a) Maximum intensity projection (MIP) image shows pathological fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in the liver. (b) CT images show multiple low-attenuation lesions in several hepatic segments, some of them confluent. (c,d) Lesions show intense fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in the fusion and PET images, respectively. These findings are compatible with multiple metastatic involvement.
Cancers 15 04452 g002
Cancers 15 04452 g003
Figure 3. PET-CT study performed in November 2021 from patient 6. (a) MIP image showing the disappearance of the hepatic pathologic uptakes visible in the previous study. (b) CT images show no lesions. (c,d) No pathological fluorodeoxyglucose uptakes are seen in the fusion and PET images. These findings, therefore, suggest a complete response of liver metastases.
Figure 3. PET-CT study performed in November 2021 from patient 6. (a) MIP image showing the disappearance of the hepatic pathologic uptakes visible in the previous study. (b) CT images show no lesions. (c,d) No pathological fluorodeoxyglucose uptakes are seen in the fusion and PET images. These findings, therefore, suggest a complete response of liver metastases.
Cancers 15 04452 g003
Table 1. Patient and disease characteristics. CDK, cyclin-dependent kinase; CNS, central nervous system.
Table 1. Patient and disease characteristics. CDK, cyclin-dependent kinase; CNS, central nervous system.
CharacteristicPatients Included (n = 11)
Age in years, median (range)69 (42–84)
Sex, n (%)
Female11 (100)
Ethnicity, n (%)
Caucasian10 (90.9)
Hispanic1 (9.1)
Median number of previous lines (range)3 (1–7)
Previous treatment modalities, n (%)
Endocrine therapy11 (100)
Chemoendocrine therapy6 (54.4)
Prior CDK4/6 inhibitors
Palbociclib7 (63.6)
Ribociclib4 (36.4)
Median time from metastatic diagnosis to treatment with abemaciclib in months, median (range)50 (21–71)
Median time until treatment with abemaciclib in months since previous CDK4/6 inhibitors (range)17.5 (3–41)
Median number of endocrine therapies until treatment with abemaciclib since previous CDK4/6 inhibitors (range)1 (0–2)
Median number of chemotherapies until treatment with abemaciclib since previous CDK4/6 inhibitors (range)2 (0–6)
Combined therapy, n (%)
Monotherapy1 (9.1)
Tamoxifen9 (81.8)
Aromatase inhibitor1 (9.1)
Visceral involvement, n (%)
Yes8 (72.7)
No3 (27.3)
Table 2. Best response and PFS.
Table 2. Best response and PFS.
Patient IDPrior CDK4/6 InhibitorBest ResponseCalculated PFS (Months)
1RibociclibPR6
2RibociclibPD4
3PalbociclibPR10
4PalbociclibPD2
5PalbociclibPR7 (ongoing)
6RibociclibCR7 (ongoing)
7RibociclibSD8
8PalbociclibPD3
9PalbociclibPR5 (ongoing)
10RibociclibSD2 (ongoing)
11PalbociclibPR2 (ongoing)
Table 3. Characteristics of the studies exploring the benefit of continuing CDK4/6 inhibition after disease progression with prior CDK4/6 inhibitors.
Table 3. Characteristics of the studies exploring the benefit of continuing CDK4/6 inhibition after disease progression with prior CDK4/6 inhibitors.
Name of StudyPhase of StudyDrugPrior CDK4/6 Inhibitors UsedArms of TreatmentPrimary Outcome MeasuresResult
postMONARCH [36]IIIAbemaciclibPalbociclib, abemaciclib, ribociclibAbemaciclib plus fulvestrant vs. placebo plus fulvestrantPFSPending
MAINTAIN [40]IIRibociclibPalbociclib, abemaciclib, ribociclibRibociclib plus fulvestrant/exemestane vs. placebo plus fulvestrant/exemestanePFS
Percentage of patients free of progression at 24 weeks from the start of the study		Positive
PACE [41]IIPalbociclibPalbociclib, abemaciclib, ribociclibFulvestrant vs.
fulvestrant with palbociclib vs.
fulvestrant with palbociclib and avelumab		PFSNegative
PALMIRA [42]IIPalbociclibPalbociclib
Must have achieved clinical benefit criteria in response to a first-line palbociclib-based endocrine regimen 		Palbociclib plus letrozole/fulvestrant vs. letrozole/fulvestrantPFSNegative
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

de Luna Aguilar, A.M.; Fuentes, J.D.B.; Ortega Anselmi, J.; Olalla Inoa, J.; Flores Navarro, P.; Lopez de Sá, A.; Fuentes Antras, J.; Rodríguez Rey, C.; Ortega Candil, A.; Moreno Antón, F.; et al. Clinical Experience with Abemaciclib in Patients Previously Treated with Another CDK 4/6 Inhibitor in a Tertiary Hospital: A Case Series Study. Cancers 2023, 15, 4452. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15184452

AMA Style

de Luna Aguilar AM, Fuentes JDB, Ortega Anselmi J, Olalla Inoa J, Flores Navarro P, Lopez de Sá A, Fuentes Antras J, Rodríguez Rey C, Ortega Candil A, Moreno Antón F, et al. Clinical Experience with Abemaciclib in Patients Previously Treated with Another CDK 4/6 Inhibitor in a Tertiary Hospital: A Case Series Study. Cancers. 2023; 15(18):4452. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15184452

Chicago/Turabian Style

de Luna Aguilar, Alicia Milagros, Javier David Benitez Fuentes, Justo Ortega Anselmi, Jennifer Olalla Inoa, Paloma Flores Navarro, Alfonso Lopez de Sá, Jesus Fuentes Antras, Cristina Rodríguez Rey, Aída Ortega Candil, Fernando Moreno Antón, and et al. 2023. "Clinical Experience with Abemaciclib in Patients Previously Treated with Another CDK 4/6 Inhibitor in a Tertiary Hospital: A Case Series Study" Cancers 15, no. 18: 4452. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15184452

APA Style

de Luna Aguilar, A. M., Fuentes, J. D. B., Ortega Anselmi, J., Olalla Inoa, J., Flores Navarro, P., Lopez de Sá, A., Fuentes Antras, J., Rodríguez Rey, C., Ortega Candil, A., Moreno Antón, F., & García Sáenz, J. Á. (2023). Clinical Experience with Abemaciclib in Patients Previously Treated with Another CDK 4/6 Inhibitor in a Tertiary Hospital: A Case Series Study. Cancers, 15(18), 4452. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15184452

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop