Front Oncol: Efficacy of pyrrotinib combined with vinorelbine in the treatment of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: a multicenter retrospective study

Pyrrole erlotinib ( Pyrotinib ) in combination with capecitabine in China is approved for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC TV)
.

At the same time, vinorelbine is another important oral and intravenous chemotherapy regimen for MBC

Pyrrole erlotinib ( Pyrotinib ) in combination with capecitabine in China is approved for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC TV)

The subjects of the study were HER2+ MBC patients who were treated with pigtinib+vinorelbine in 6 institutions in China from May 2018 to June 2020
.

To evaluate the treatment’s progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS) and toxicity

The subjects of the study were HER2+ MBC patients who were treated with pigtinib+vinorelbine in 6 institutions in China from May 2018 to June 2020

The study included 97 patients, and the median age at diagnosis was 53 years (range 26-74 years)

A total of 92.

All patients were included in the PFS analysis

PFS

PFS

The mPFS of patients treated with pyrrotinib plus vinorelbine was 12.
0 months (range 3.
8-20.
2), and the mPFS of third-line or above treatment was 6.
4 months (4.
0-8.
9)
.

Only 2 patients received first-line treatment, which is not enough to calculate mPFS

The mPFS of patients treated with pyrrotinib plus vinorelbine was 12.

Second-line or back-line PFS comparison

Second-line or back-line PFS comparison

In addition, there was no significant difference in mPFS between patients receiving pigtinib + oral vinorelbine or intravenous vinorelbine (7.
8 vs.
6.
4 months, p = 0.
871)
.

In addition, there was no significant difference in mPFS between patients receiving pigatinib + oral vinorelbine or intravenous vinorelbine (7.
8 vs.
6.
4 months, p = 0.
871)
.

In addition, there was no significant difference in mPFS between patients receiving pigatinib + oral vinorelbine or intravenous vinorelbine (7.

 Vinorelbine oral or intravenous PFS comparison

Vinorelbine oral or intravenous PFS comparison

The total mPFS of patients with brain metastases (considering intracranial and extracranial lesions) was 6.
3 months (range, 3.
4-9.
2)
.

In addition, there was no difference in PFS between patients with and without brain metastases (6.

The total mPFS of patients with brain metastases (considering intracranial and extracranial lesions) was 6.
3 months (range, 3.
4-9.
2)
.
In addition, there was no difference in PFS between patients with and without brain metastases (6.
3 vs.
8.
1 months, p = 0.
825)
.
OS data is still immature
.
The total mPFS of patients with brain metastases (considering intracranial and extracranial lesions) was 6.
3 months (range, 3.
4-9.
2)
.
In addition, there was no difference in PFS between patients with and without brain metastases (6.
3 vs.
8.
1 months, p = 0.
825)
.
OS data is still immature
.

          Brain metastasis PFS

          Brain metastasis PFS Brain metastasis PFS

A total of 96 patients were included in the ORR analysis
.
No patient achieved CR, 33 cases were PR, ORR was 34.
3%
.

A total of 96 patients were included in the ORR analysis
.
No patient achieved CR, 33 cases were PR, ORR was 34.
3%
.
A total of 96 patients were included in the ORR analysis
.
No patient achieved CR, 33 cases were PR, ORR was 34.
3%
.

         ORR

     ORR

Univariate analysis showed that age (<50 years vs.
≥50 years), hormone receptor status (positive vs.
negative), DFI (>1 year vs.
≤1 year), number of metastatic sites (≤2 vs.
＞2) Type (visceral vs.
non-visceral), the number of treatment lines of pigtinib + vinorelbine (2 vs.
3), or trastuzumab resistance status (drug resistance vs.
drug resistance) and mPFS in Log-rank analysis There is no significant correlation in
.
The mPFS of patients who used lapatinib before and who did not use lapatinib were 5.
6 months and 10.
8 months, respectively
.
However, in the Cox multivariate analysis, the previous use of lapatinib was not an independent predictor of mPFS
.

Univariate analysis showed that age (<50 years vs.
≥50 years), hormone receptor status (positive vs.
negative), DFI (>1 year vs.
≤1 year), number of metastatic sites (≤2 vs.
＞2) Type (visceral vs.
non-visceral), the number of treatment lines of pigtinib + vinorelbine (2 vs.
3), or trastuzumab resistance status (drug resistance vs.
drug resistance) and mPFS in Log-rank analysis There is no significant correlation in
.
The mPFS of patients who used lapatinib before and who did not use lapatinib were 5.
6 months and 10.
8 months, respectively
.
However, in the Cox multivariate analysis, the previous use of lapatinib was not an independent predictor of mPFS
.
The mPFS of patients who used lapatinib before and who did not use lapatinib were 5.
6 months and 10.
8 months, respectively
.

     Lapatinib use or not PFS comparison

     Lapatinib use or not PFS comparison lapatinib use or PFS comparison

Studies have reported grade 3-4 AEs, the most common being diarrhea (22.
7%), neutropenia (7.
2%), leukopenia (4.
1%; no treatment-related deaths were reported
.
In general, the combination of pigtinib The safety of Vinorelbine is controllable and tolerable
.

Studies have reported grade 3-4 AEs, the most common being diarrhea (22.
7%), neutropenia (7.
2%), leukopenia (4.
1%; no treatment-related deaths were reported
.
In general, the combination of pigtinib The safety of Vinorelbine is controllable and tolerable
.

In summary, studies have shown that pyrrotinib plus vinorelbine is effective in the treatment of HER2+ MBC with controllable toxicity, especially in second-line treatment patients, patients who have not received lapatinib treatment, and patients with brain metastases
.

In summary, studies have shown that pyrrotinib plus vinorelbine is effective in the treatment of HER2+ MBC with controllable toxicity, especially in second-line treatment patients, patients who have not received lapatinib treatment, and patients with brain metastases
.
Studies have shown that pyrrotinib plus vinorelbine is effective and controllable in the treatment of HER2+ MBC, especially in second-line treatment patients, patients who have not received lapatinib treatment, and patients with brain metastases
.
Studies have shown that pyrrotinib plus vinorelbine is effective and controllable in the treatment of HER2+ MBC, especially in second-line treatment patients, patients who have not received lapatinib treatment, and patients with brain metastases
.

Original source:

Original source:

Li Y, Qiu Y, Li H, Luo T, Li W, Wang H, Shao B, Wang B, Ge R.
Pyrotinib Combined With Vinorelbine in HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.
Front Oncol.
2021 Apr 20 ;11:664429.
doi: 10.
3389/fonc.
2021.
664429.
PMID: 33996589; PMCID: PMC8120312.

Li Y, Qiu Y, Li H, Luo T, Li W, Wang H, Shao B, Wang B, Ge R.
Pyrotinib Combined With Vinorelbine in HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.
Front Oncol.
2021 Apr 20 ;11:664429.
doi: 10.
3389/fonc.
2021.
664429.
PMID: 33996589; PMCID: PMC8120312.
Leave a message here