Video

EMERALD Phase 3 Trial of Elacestrant Versus Standard of Care Endocrine Therapy in Patients With ER+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer: Updated Results by Duration of Prior CDK4/6i in Metastatic Setting

Virginia Kaklamani, MD reviews updated results and clinical implications of the phase 3 EMERALD trial evaluating elacestrant in patients with ER+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer presented at the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium.

Video Player is loading.
Current Time 0:00
Duration 0:00
Loaded: 0%
Stream Type LIVE
Remaining Time 0:00
 
1x
  • Chapters
  • descriptions off, selected
  • captions off, selected

    Background

    • Endocrine therapy plus CDK4/6i is the mainstay for the management of ER+/HER2- mBC as 1st-line therapy.1
    • Tumors eventually develop hormonal resistance, mainly through the development of ESR1 mutations.
    • In current practice, sequential endocrine monotherapy or combination therapies are used in the 2nd/3rd line.
    • Sequential endocrine monotherapy is associated with low PFS after CDK4/6i (1.94 months).2 In addition, fulvestrant has low bioavailability and an IM injection burden.
    • Main combinations such as everolimus + exemestane and alpelisib + fulvestrant can be associated with significant toxicity with discontinuation rates around 25%.3,4
    • In this context, there is a significant need for potent oral SERDS for monotherapy use and for enabling oral-oral combinations.
    • Elacestrant is a next-generation oral SERD, which has demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in PFS compared with single-agent endocrine therapy in the EMERALD trial, including in patients with ESR1 mutated tumors. EMERALD is the only pivotal oral SERD trial where prior CDK 4/6i usage was mandated.5

    Study Design

    • Phase III randomized trial evaluating elacestrant (400 mg daily) vs investigator’s choice (fulvestrant, anastrozole, letrozole, exemestane) in men and postmenopausal women with ER-positive, HER2-negative advanced metastatic breast cancer who have progressed or relapsed on or after 1 or 2 lines of endocrine therapy for advanced disease, one of which was given in combination with a CDK4/6i
    • Stratification Factors: ESR1-mutation status; Prior treatment with fulvestrant; Presence of visceral metastases
    • Two Primary Endpoints:PFS in all pts; PFS in ESR1-mut

    Results

    • Baseline characteristics well matched between the two arms; all patients had received prior treatment with a CDK4/6i
    • All Patients: PFS by Duration of CDK4/6i – Improvement demonstrated with elacestrant vs standard of care
      • Duration on CDK4/6i in the metastatic setting, at least 12 months: 3.78 months, elacestrant vs 1.91 months, SOC hormonal therapy [95% CI, HR .613 (453-.828)]
      • Duration on CDK4/6i in the metastatic setting, at least 18 months: 5.45 months elacestrant vs 3.29 months SOC hormonal therapy [95%, CI, HR .703 (.482-1.019)]
    • Patients with ESR1-mut Tumors: PFS by Duration of CDK4/6i – Improvement demonstrated with elacestrant vs standard of care
      • Duration on CDK4/6i in the metastatic setting, at least 12 months: 8.61 months, elacestrant vs 1.91 months, SOC hormonal therapy [95% CI; HR .410 (.262-.634)]
      • Duration on CDK4/6i in the metastatic setting, at least 18 months: 8.61 months, elacestrant vs 2.10 months, SOC hormonal therapy [95% CI; HR .466 (.270-.791)]
    • Updated safety data consistent with previously reported results

    Conclusion

    • EMERALD is the only pivotal trial in 2nd/3rd-line mBC with 100% prior CDK4/6i usage.
    • Duration of CDK4/6i was associated with PFS in the EMERALD trial. The longer the duration of prior CDK4/6i, the longer PFS on elacestrant as compared with SOC.
    • This was even more pronounced in patients with ESR1-mut tumors, where patients who had at least 12 months of prior CDK4/6i duration achieved a mPFS of 8.6 months with elacestrant vs 2 months mPFS with SOC.
    • No new safety signals were identified. Low-grade nausea was common in both treatment arms, but antiemetic usage was low with both drugs: 8% on elacestrant and 10.3% on AIs. There was no incidence of bradycardia.
    • These results showed that elacestrant significantly prolongs PFS vs SOC with a low rate of adverse events.
    • Elacestrant can become an important oral endocrine monotherapy agent in 2nd/3rd line as an alternative to combination therapies that are associated with challenging safety profiles.

    References

    Moy B, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2021:JCO2101374; 2. Lindeman GJ et al. J Clin Oncol 2021,39(suppl 15):1004-1004; 3. Everolimus US Prescribing Information; 4. Alpelisib US Prescribing Information 5. Bidard FC, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(28):3246-3256.

    Funding supported by Stemline Therapeutics. Content independently developed by OncLive.

    Related Videos
    Phase 3 AMPLIFY Trial
    Fixed-Duration Acalabrutinib plus Venetoclax With or Without Obinutuzumab versus Chemoimmunotherapy for First-Line Treatment of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Interim Analysis of the Multicenter, Open-Label, Randomized, Phase 3 AMPLIFY Trial
    RLY-2608
    Efficacy of RLY-2608, a mutant-selective PI3Kα inhibitor, in patients with PIK3CA-mutant HR+HER2- advanced breast cancer: ReDiscover trial
    BOVen
    Multicenter Phase II Trial of Zanubrutinib, Obinutuzumab, and Venetoclax (BOVen) in Treatment-Naïve Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: 5-Year Follow Up, Retreatment Outcomes, and Impact of MRD Kinetics (ΔMRD400)
    RMC-6236
    Updated safety and efficacy from a Phase 1 study of RMC-6236, a RAS(ON) multi-selective, tri-complex inhibitor, in patients with RAS mutant pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)
    5-Year Follow-up of the Phase 2 Optic Study in Patients with Chronic-Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: Efficacy, Safety, and First End-of-Treatment Mutational Results
    5-Year Follow-up of the Phase 2 Optic Study in Patients with Chronic-Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: Efficacy, Safety, and First End-of-Treatment Mutational Results
    LTE-1 ASPEN LTFU
    Long-term clinical outcomes in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) who received zanubrutinib in the phase 3 ASPEN study: A report from the zanubrutinib extension study
    Data from an Ongoing Phase 1/1b Study BGB-11417-101
    Sonrotoclax and Zanubrutinib as Frontline Treatment for CLL Demonstrates High MRD Clearance Rates with Good Tolerability: Data from an Ongoing Phase 1/1b Study BGB-11417-101
    Preliminary Results from the IMMagine-1 Trial
    Phase 2 Registrational Study of Anitocabtagene Autoleucel for the Treatment of Patients with Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Preliminary Results from the IMMagine-1 Trial
    SNDX-5613
    Phase I/II Study of the All-Oral Combination of Revumenib (SNDX-5613) with Decitabine/Cedazuridine (ASTX727) and Venetoclax (SAVE) in R/R AML
    Overall Survival Analysis and Updated Efficacy Outcomes of the Phase 3 Dreamm-7 Trial
    Belantamab Mafodotin, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone Vs Daratumumab, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Overall Survival Analysis and Updated Efficacy Outcomes of the Phase 3 Dreamm-7 Trial
    Related Content