Updated overall survival (OS) results from the phase III MONALEESA-3 trial of postmenopausal patients (pts) with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) treated with fulvestrant (FUL) ± ribociclib (RIB).
Authors: Dennis J. Slamon, Patrick Neven, Stephen K. L. Chia, Guy Heinrich Maria Jerusalem, Michelino De Laurentiis, Seock-Ah Im, Katarina Petrakova, Giulia Valeria Bianchi, Miguel Martin, Arnd Nusch, Gabe S. Sonke, Luis de la Cruz-Merino, J. Thaddeus Beck, Craig Wang, Uday Deore, Arunava Chakravartty, Juan Pablo Zarate, Tetiana Taran, Peter A. Fasching
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2021)

1001 Background: The Phase III MONALEESA-3 trial (NCT02422615) previously demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in OS with RIB, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i), plus FUL compared with placebo (PBO) plus FUL as first-line (1L) or second-line (2L) treatment in postmenopausal pts with HR+/HER2− ABC (median, not reached vs 40.0 mo; hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.57-0.92, P =.00455). This analysis was final per the protocol; following the unblinding of the study, pts still on study treatment in the PBO arm were allowed to cross over to the RIB arm. We report an exploratory analysis of OS after an additional median 16.9 mo of follow-up, allowing for further characterization of long-term survival benefits of RIB. Methods: Postmenopausal pts with HR+/HER2− ABC were randomized 2:1 to receive RIB + FUL or PBO + FUL in 1L and 2L settings. Updated OS was evaluated by Cox proportional hazards model and summarized using Kaplan-Meier methods. Additional postprogression endpoints such as progression-free survival 2 (PFS2), time to chemotherapy (CT), and CT-free survival were also evaluated and summarized. Results: At the data cutoff (Oct 30, 2020), the median follow-up was 56.3 mo (min, 52.7 mo) and 68 (14.0%) and 21 (8.7%) patients were still on treatment in the RIB vs PBO arms, respectively. With this extended follow-up, RIB + FUL continued to demonstrate an OS benefit vs PBO + FUL (median, 53.7 vs 41.5 mo; HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.90). RIB + FUL had prolonged OS vs PBO + FUL in the 1L (median, not reached vs 51.8 mo; HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46-0.88) and 2L subgroups (median, 39.7 vs 33.7 mo; HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.59-1.04). Subgroup analyses also showed a consistent OS benefit compared with the intent-to-treat (ITT) population for most subgroups. PFS2, time to CT, and CT-free survival for the ITT population favored RIB + FUL (Table). Among pts who discontinued study treatment, 81.9% and 86.4% received a next-line subsequent antineoplastic therapy, while 14.0% and 30.0% received a CDK4/6i as any subsequent line in the RIB vs PBO arms, respectively. No new safety signals were observed. Conclusions: The previously demonstrated robust and clinically meaningful OS benefit with RIB + FUL compared with PBO + FUL was maintained after almost 5 years of follow-up in postmenopausal pts with HR+/HER2− ABC. The OS benefit of RIB was observed in the 1L and 2L subgroups, which further supports the use of RIB in these populations. The results also demonstrated a significant delay in the use of subsequent CT with RIB vs PBO. Clinical trial information: NCT02422615 .[Table: see text]