Bresat Cancer Update
Oncology Leader CommentarySpecial FeaturesPrevious Issues
Home: Meeting Highlights: Posters

Rationale for Proposed NSABP Adjuvant Trial (B-35)
A Randomized Trial Comparing 5 Years of Faslodex® (fulvestrant) to 5 years of Tamoxifen in Women with Hormone Receptor - Positive, Node-negative Breast Cancer
Richard Elledge, MD

Background: Prior related NSABP trials

NSABP B-14: A Randomized Clinical Trial Evaluating Tamoxifen in the Treatment of Patients with Node-Negative Breast Cancer Who Have Estrogen Receptor-Positive Tumors

NSABP B-20: Tamoxifen and chemotherapy for lymph node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer

Proposed NSABP B-35 Adjuvant Trial:
(Pending the following)


A. Demonstration of an advantage for Faslodex compared to tamoxifen in metastatic disease trials to be reported in the fall of 2001.

B. Demonstration of efficacy in ongoing Phase II trials involving premenopausal patients with metastatic disease.

Faslodex: Background

Faslodex is a novel antiestrogen without known agonist activity. Unlike nonsteroidal compounds, such as tamoxifen, Faslodex is a steroidal agent that is chemically similar to estradiol. Laboratory studies have demonstrated that Faslodex is a more potent inhibitor of tumor growth than SERMs such as tamoxifen, and that it is capable of inhibiting tamoxifen-resistant tumors. It is adminstered as a monthly 5 cc intramuscular injection.

  • Antagonizes estrogen action by occupying the ER receptor and preventing estrogen-stimulated gene activation
  • Binds to the ER with affinity similar to that of estradiol and 100 times that of tamoxifen
  • In contrast to other SERMs, Faslodex blocks ER transactivation from both the AF-1 and AF-2 domains
  • Capable of impairing ER dimerization and inducing degradation of the ER, and has been termed an "estrogen receptor downregulator"
 

(a) Mode of action of estradiol (E)

1 E binds with high affinity to the estrogen receptor (ER) to form an E-ER complex.

2 The E-ER complex pairs with another E-ER complex (dimerizes) and localizes in the cell nucleus. The two transcription activation functions of ER, called AF1 and AF2, are both active.

3 The E-ER dimer binds to estrogen-sensitive genes at the estrogen response element (ERE).

4 The dimer activates transcription of the estrogen-sensitive gene. (AF1 and AF2 interact with coactivators to stimulate the transcription enzyme RNA polymerase II (RNA POL II).)

(b) Mode of action of tamoxifen (T)

1 T binds to ER with low affinity compared with E.

 

 


2 The T-ER complex dimerizes and localizes in the cell nucleus, and AF1 (but not AF2) is active.

3 The T-ER dimer binds to the gene DNA at the ERE.

4 Transcription of the estrogen-sensitive gene is lessened because AF2 is inactive, and coactivator binding is likewise attenuated. AF1 activity results in the partial agonist activity of T.

(c) Mode of action of Faslodex (F)

1 F binds to ER with affinity similar to E.

2 F triggers rapid degradation of ER.

3 The F-ER complex results in reduced rate of dimerization and nuclear localization.

4 There is reduced binding of F-ER to ERE on the gene resulting in blocked transcription.

Clinical Research

Phase III trials comparing Faslodex versus Arimidex® (anastrozole) in postmenopausal patients with metastatic breast cancer

Initial results from Trials 0020 (European) and 0021 (North American) were reported at the 2000 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. (4,5)

Clinical outcomes were similar in the Faslodex and Arimidex groups. Patients receiving Faslodex had a numerical but statistically non-significant advantage over Arimidex in time to progression (TTP) and clinical benefit (complete response + partial response + stable disease > 24 weeks). Trial 0021 also demonstrated a superior median duration of response for Faslodex (19.3 months) compared to Arimidex (10.5 months).

The incidence of thromboembolic events was equivalent between Faslodex and Arimidex, with a total of 15 and 17 events observed, respectively, when the two trials were combined. Side effects were similar in both arms including vasomotor symptoms. Essentially no significant adverse effects were observed related to the intramuscular injection. Faslodex is not believed to cross the blood-brain barrier and, therefore, may not increase the rate of hot flashes. No data on bone metabolism, fractures or other secondary effects is yet available.

Safety in Premenopausal Women

Trial 0019 evaluated three doses of Faslodex versus goserelin and placebo in 313 premenopausal women with uterine fibroids awaiting hysterectomy. Drug or placebo was given for three months. Overall, this study demonstrated that Faslodex was safe and well-tolerated in premenopausal women. Key findings included:

  • No evidence of menopausal symptoms
  • No evidence of ovarian hyperstimulation
  • Lower excretion of surrogate markers of bone catabolism compared to goserelin and similar to placebo
  • No difference in safety endpoints at three months

References

  1. Fisher B, et al. Tamoxifen and Chemotherapy for Lymph Node-Negative, Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 89.22:1673-1682, 1997.

  2. Fisher B. Highlights from Recent National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Studies in the Treatment and Prevention of Breast Cancer. CA - A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 49(3):159-177, May-June 1999.

  3. Howell A, et al. Comparison of Efficacy and Tolerability of Fulvestrant (Faslodex) with Anastorozle (Arimidex) in Post-Menopausal Women with Advanced Breast Cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 64(1):27, November 2000.

  4. Osborne CK, et al. A Double-Blind Randomized Trial Comparing the Efficacy and Tolerability of Faslodex (Fulvestrant) with Arimidex (Anastrozole) in Post-Menopausal Women with Advanced Breast Cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 64(1):27, November 2000.

  5. Robertson J, et al. The Pharmacokinetics of Single Dose Faslodex® (ICI 182,780) in Postmenopausal Primary Breast Cancer - Relationship with Estrogen Receptor (ER) Down Regulation. Program/Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 19:94a (Abstract 362). May 2000.

Top of Page

Home · Contact us
Terms of use and general disclaimer