Patients' preference of trastuzumab administration (subcutaneous versus intravenous) in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: Results of the randomised MetaspHer study

Affiliation auteurs!!!! Error affiliation !!!!
TitrePatients' preference of trastuzumab administration (subcutaneous versus intravenous) in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: Results of the randomised MetaspHer study
Type de publicationJournal Article
Year of Publication2017
AuteursPivot X., Spano J.P, Espie M., Cottu P., Jouannaud C., Pottier V., Moreau L., Extra J.M, Lortholary A., Rivera P., Spaeth D., Attar-Rabia H., Benkanoun C., Dima-Martinez L., Esposito N., Gligorov J.
JournalEUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume82
Pagination230-236
Date PublishedSEP
Type of ArticleArticle
ISSN0959-8049
Mots-clésMetastatic breast cancer, Preference, Subcutaneous, Trastuzumab
Résumé

HannaH (NCT00950300) and PrefHer (NCT01401166) studies validated the subcutaneous (H-s.c.) formulation of trastuzumab as effective and safe as intravenous (H-i.v.) and highly preferred by patients in early breast cancer. The present randomised MetaspHer trial (NCT01810393) is the first study assessing patient's preference in metastatic setting. Methods: Patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer who completed a first line chemotherapy with trastuzumab and achieved a long-term response lasting more than 3 years were randomised to receive 3 cycles of 600-mg fixed-dose adjuvant H-s.c., followed by 3 cycles of standard H-i.v., or the reverse sequence. Primary end-point was overall preference for Hs.c. or H-i.v. at cycle six, assessed by Patient Preference Questionnaire (PPQ). Secondary end-points included healthcare professional (HCP) satisfaction; safety and tolerability; quality of life. Results: Hundred and thirteen patients were randomised and treated. H-s.c. was preferred by 79/92 evaluable intent-to-treat patients (85.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI; 78.8-93.0]; p < 0.001), 13/92 preferred H-i.v. (14.1%, 95% CI [7.0-21.3]). HCPs were most satisfied with H-s.c. (56/88 available data, 63.6%, [53.6-73.7]). On the safety population, adverse events occurred in 73 (67.6%) and 49 (44.1%) patients during the H-s.c. and H-i.v. periods, respectively; 7 (6.5%) and 4 (3.6%) were grade >= III, 3 (2.8%) and 2 (1.8%) were serious. Conclusion: The safety was consistent with the known H-i.v. and H-s.c. profiles without safety concern raised. Definitively, patients preferred H-s.c. as reported in early stage by PrefHer study. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

DOI10.1016/j.ejca.2017.05.009