Cancers (Mar 2020)

Oral Capecitabine-Vinorelbine is Associated with Longer Overall Survival When Compared to Single-Agent Capecitabine in Patients with Hormone Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer

  • Claudio Vernieri,
  • Michele Prisciandaro,
  • Federico Nichetti,
  • Riccardo Lobefaro,
  • Giorgia Peverelli,
  • Francesca Ligorio,
  • Emma Zattarin,
  • Maria Silvia Cona,
  • Pierangela Sepe,
  • Francesca Corti,
  • Sara Manglaviti,
  • Marta Brambilla,
  • Barbara Re,
  • Antonino Belfiore,
  • Giancarlo Pruneri,
  • Luigi Celio,
  • Gabriella Mariani,
  • Giulia Valeria Bianchi,
  • Licia Rivoltini,
  • Giuseppe Capri,
  • Filippo de Braud

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12030617
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12, no. 3
p. 617

Abstract

Read online

Background: Single-agent capecitabine (C) is a moderately effective chemotherapeutic compound in the treatment of patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC). The capecitabine-vinorelbine (CV) combination is also used due to a good tolerability profile, but no studies have demonstrated its superiority over single-agent C. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis to compare overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and incidence of adverse events (AEs) in patients with HER2-negative mBC treated with CV vs. single-agent C. Results: Out of 290 patients included in this study, 127 (43.8%) received single-agent C, while 163 (56.2%) patients were treated with CV. Median PFS was similar in patients treated with single-agent C or CV, while CV was associated with significantly longer OS in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) BC. This OS advantage was confirmed at multivariable analysis also after propensity score-based matching of patients according to relevant clinical or tumor characteristics. When compared with single-agent C, CV was associated with higher incidence of G3/G4 and any-grade nausea/vomiting, diarrhea and increased transaminases. Conclusions: While prospective studies are needed to confirm our findings, the potential OS advantage of CV over single-agent C in HR+ mBC patients must be weighed against a significantly higher incidence of AEs.

Keywords