Upfront Versus Deferred CDK4/6 Inhibitor Use in Hormone Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Real-World Study

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background/Objectives: Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) are commonly used as first-line treatment for hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer. However, the optimal timing of CDK4/6i initiation remains uncertain. This study compared overall survival (OS) between upfront first-line and deferred second-line CDK4/6i use in routine clinical practice. Methods: This retrospective, two-center cohort study included 403 patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer who received a CDK4/6i between January 2019 and December 2024. Patients were categorized into upfront-use and deferred-use groups according to whether CDK4/6i treatment was initiated in the first or second metastatic treatment line. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. An exploratory analysis of progression-free survival (PFS) from CDK4/6i initiation was also performed. Cox proportional hazards regression, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), and a 12-month landmark analysis were performed. Results: Of 403 patients, 311 received upfront treatment and 92 received deferred treatment. At a median follow-up of 63.0 months, the deferred-use group had higher rates of visceral metastasis and endocrine-resistant disease. Median PFS from CDK4/6i initiation was longer in the upfront-use group than in the deferred-use group (27.0 vs. 14.0 months; log-rank p < 0.001). Median OS was 61.0 months in the upfront-use group and 76.0 months in the deferred-use group, without a statistically significant difference (log-rank p = 0.059). After adjustment for clinical factors and year of metastatic diagnosis, deferred use was not independently associated with OS (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.167, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.772–1.765, p = 0.463). Similar results were obtained in the IPTW analysis (HR 0.925, 95% CI 0.552–1.549; p = 0.766) and the 12-month landmark analysis. Conclusions: Deferred second-line CDK4/6i use was not independently associated with inferior overall survival compared with upfront use. These findings support an individualized, risk-adapted sequencing approach in carefully selected patients but do not establish equivalence or justify routine deferral.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.