Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Original article

Vol. 143 No. 2122 (2013)

Progestin as an alternative treatment option for multi-treated recurrent triple-negative breast cancer

  • Xiangying Meng
  • Shikai Wu
  • Zefei Jiang
  • Bing Sun
  • Yan Ma
  • Xin Zhao
  • Lijuan Ding
  • Yue Wang
  • Tao Wang
  • Shaohua Zhang
  • Santai Song
DOI
https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2013.13765
Cite this as:
Swiss Med Wkly. 2013;143:w13765
Published
19.05.2013

Summary

OBJECTIVE: Patients with recurrent triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) currently have no established treatment option other than chemotherapy. However, long-term chemotherapy is often difficult due to adverse effects. A previous study documented a 10%–30% response rate of progestins in oestrogen receptor–negative breast cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of medroxyprogesterone/megestrol acetate (MPA/MA) in patients with recurrent TNBC.

METHODS: This retrospective observational analysis included 51 patients with recurrent TNBC; 17 were treated with MPA/MA and 34 underwent chemotherapy. The two groups were matched at a 1:2 ratio according to age, metastatic sites, and salvage treatment lines. Efficacy was compared using the χ2 and rank-sum tests. Progression-free survival (PFS) was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method, and the two groups were compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS: The two groups were well balanced in terms of age, disease-free survival, number of metastases, and salvage therapy lines. Clinical benefit rates in the MPA/MA and chemotherapy groups were 52.94% and 73.53%, respectively (χ2 test, p = 0.208), and median PFS was comparable between groups (log-rank test, p = 0.135). Median PFS of 1st–6th-line salvage treatments was shorter in the MPA/MA group than in the chemotherapy group (log-rank test, p = 0.036), but median PFS of ≥7th-line salvage treatments was comparable (log-rank test, p = 0.139). Eight patients discontinued chemotherapy due to adverse effects, and one patient withdrew from MPA treatment because of weight gain.

CONCLUSIONS: Progestins (MPA/MA) are an alternative treatment option for multi-treated recurrent TNBC.

References

  1. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statistics. CA: Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:69–90. doi: 10.3322/caac.20107.
  2. Hudis CA, Gianni L. Triple-negative breast cancer: an unmet medical need. Oncologist. 2011;16:1–11.
  3. Adamo V, Ricciardi GR, De Placido S, Colucci G, Conte P, Giuffrida D, et al. Management and treatment of triple-negative breast cancer patients from the NEMESI study: an Italian experience. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(5):642–7.
  4. Yao-Lung K, Dar-Ren C, Tsai-Wang C. Clinicopathological features of triple-negative breast cancer in Taiwanese women. Int J Clin Oncol. 2011;16(5):500–5.
  5. Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Green AR, Lee AH, Robertson JF, Ellis IO. Prognostic Markers in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. Cancer. 2007;109(1):25–32.
  6. Lin C, Chien SY, Kuo SJ, Chen LS, Chen ST, Lai HW, et al. A 10-year follow-up of triple-negative breast cancer patients in Taiwan. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2012;42(3):161–7.
  7. Lara-Medina F, Pérez-Sánchez V, Saavedra-Pérez D, Blake-Cerda M, Arce C, Motola-Kuba D, et al. Triple-negative breast cancer in Hispanic patients: high prevalence, poor prognosis, and association with menopausal status, body mass index, and parity. Cancer. 2011;117(16):3658–69.
  8. Jang G, Lee SS, Ahn JH, Jung KH, Lee H, Gong G, et al. Clinical features and course of brain metastases in triple-negative breast cancer: comparison with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive and other type at single institution in Korea. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;128(1):171–7.
  9. Foulkes WD, Smith IE, Reis-Filho JS. Triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(20):1938–48.
  10. Carey LA. Directed therapy of subtypes of triple-negative breast cancer. Oncologist. 2011;16(Suppl. 1):71–8.
  11. Howell A, Cuzick J, Baum M, Buzdar A, Dowsett M, Forbes JF, et al. Results of the ATAC (Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination) trial after completion of 5 years’ adjuvant treatment for breast cancer. Lancet. 2005;365(9453):60–2.
  12. Coates AS, Keshaviah A, Thürlimann B, Mouridsen H, Mauriac L, Forbes JF, et al. Five years of letrozole compared with tamoxifen as initial adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer: update of study BIG 1-98. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(5):486–92.
  13. Parazzini F, Colli E, Scatigna M, Tozzi L. Treatment with tamoxifen and progestins for metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women: a quantitative review of published randomized clinical trials. Oncology. 1993;50:483–9.
  14. Willemse PH, van der Ploeg E, Sleijfer DT, Tjabbes T, van Veelen H. A randomized comparison of megestrol acetate (MA) and medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) in patients with advanced breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 1990;26(3):337–43.
  15. Jiang Z, Song S, Li J. Clinical trial of high-dose medroxyprogesterone acetate in advanced breast Cancer. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 1995;17(1):71–3. (article in Chinese)
  16. Pannuti F, Malpighi M. Home care for advanced and very advanced cancer patients: the Bologna experience. J Palliat Care. 1988;4(3):54–7.
  17. Focan C, Beauduin M, Majois F, et al. High-dose oral medroxyprogesterone acetate or tamoxifen as adjuvant hormone therapy for node-negative early-stage breast cancer: randomized trial with 7-year update. Clin Breast Cancer. 2004;5:136–41.
  18. Effectiveness of megestrol acetate in patients with advanced cancer: a randomized, double-blind, crossover study. Bruera E, Ernst S, Hagen N, Spachynski K, Belzile M, Hanson J, Summers N, Brown B, Dulude H, Gallant G Cancer Prev Control. 1998;2(2):74–8.
  19. Megestrol acetate for anorexia in patients with far-advanced cancer: a double-blind controlled clinical trial. De Conno F, Martini C, Zecca E, Balzarini A, Venturino P, Groff L, Caraceni A Eur J Cancer. 1998;34(11):1705–9.
  20. Anders CK, Winer EP, Ford JM, Dent R, Silver DP, Sledge G, et al. Poly(ADP-Ribose) polymerase inhibition: “targeted” therapy for triple-negative breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16(19):4702–10.
  21. Thomssen C, Pierga JY, Pritchard KI, Biganzoli L, Cortes-Funes H, Petráková K, et al. First-line bevacizumab-containing therapy for triple-negative breast cancer: analysis of 585 patients treated in the ATHENA study. Oncology. 2012;82(4):218–27.
  22. Fojo T, Amiri-Kordestani L, Bates SE. Potential pitfalls of crossover and thoughts on iniparib in triple-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(23):1738–40.
  23. Finn RS, Bengala C, Ibrahim N, Roché H, Sparano J, Strauss LC, et al. Dasatinib as a single agent in triple-negative breast cancer: results of an open-label phase 2 study. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17(21):6905–13.
  24. Domagala P, Lubinski J, Domagala W. Iniparib in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(18):1780.
  25. Breast Cancer Res. 2012; 14(3): R79. Published online 2012 May 21. Targeting triple-negative breast cancer cells with the histone deacetylase inhibitor panobinostat.
  26. Lower EE, Blau R, Gazder P, Stahl DL. The effect of estrogen usage on the subsequent hormone receptor status of primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1999;58(3):205–11.
  27. Ludovini V, Gori S, Colozza M, Pistola L, Rulli E, Floriani I, et al. Evaluation of serum HER2 extracellular domain in early breast cancer patients: correlation with clinicopathological parameters and survival. Ann Oncol. 2008;19:883–90.
  28. Ludovini V, Gori S, Colozza M, Pistola L, Rulli E, Floriani I, et al. Evaluation of serum HER2 extracellular domain in early breast cancer patients: correlation with clinicopathological parameters and survival. Ann Oncol. 2008;19:883–90.
  29. Trotti A, Colevas AD, Setser A, et al. CTCAE v3.0: development of a comprehensive grading system for the adverse effects of cancer treatment. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2003;13(3):176–81.
  30. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205–16.
  31. British Breast Group. Assessment of response to treatment in advanced breast cancer. Lancet. 1974;2:38–9.
  32. Hayward JL, Carbone PP, Heuson JC, Kumaoka S, Segaloff A, Rubens RD. Assessment of response to therapy in advanced breast cancer: a project of the Programme on Clinical Oncology of the International Union Against Cancer, Geneva, Switzerland. Cancer. 1977;393:1289–94.
  33. Primo N. Lara Jr, Mary W. Redman, et al. Disease Control Rate at 8 Weeks Predicts Clinical Benefit in Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From Southwest Oncology Group Randomized Trials. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(3):463–7.
  34. Bentel JM, Birrell SN, Pickering MA, Holds DJ, Horsfall DJ, Tilley WD. Androgen receptor agonist activity of the synthetic progestin, medroxyprogesterone acetate, in human breast cancer cells. Mol Cell Endocrinol. 1999;154:11–20.
  35. Teulings FA, van Gilse HA, Henkelman MS, Portengen H, Alexieva-Figusch J. Estrogen, androgen, glucocorticoid, and progesterone receptors in progestin-induced regression of human breast cancer. Cancer Res. 1980;40:2557–61.
  36. Birrell SN, Roder DM, Horsfall DJ, Bentel JM, Tilley WD. Medroxyprogesterone acetate therapy in advanced breast cancer: the predictive value of androgen receptor expression. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:1572–7.
  37. McNamara K, Yoda T, Takagi K, et al. Androgen receptor in triple negative breast cancer. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2012 Sep 5.