P-VERIFY: Real-World Comparative Overall Survival and Progression-Free Survival of CDK4/6 Inhibitors Plus an Aromatase Inhibitor in Patients with HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer in the USA-A Vodcast.

IF 5.1 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Targeted Oncology Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-08-06 DOI:10.1007/s11523-026-01233-0
Hope S Rugo, Joanne C Ryan
{"title":"P-VERIFY: Real-World Comparative Overall Survival and Progression-Free Survival of CDK4/6 Inhibitors Plus an Aromatase Inhibitor in Patients with HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer in the USA-A Vodcast.","authors":"Hope S Rugo, Joanne C Ryan","doi":"10.1007/s11523-026-01233-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To date, there have been no head-to-head randomized controlled trial data comparing cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors in patients with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (mBC), and most prior real-world comparative effectiveness studies have been limited by short follow-up times and small patient sample sizes. In this vodcast, we provide an overview of two recent publications reporting overall survival (OS) and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) results from P-VERIFY, a retrospective comparative effectiveness study of CDK4/6 inhibitors plus an aromatase inhibitor (AI) among patients with HR+/HER2- mBC treated in routine clinical practice in the USA. P-VERIFY used the Flatiron Health Analytic Database to identify 9146 patients who initiated first-line (1L) treatment with palbociclib (n = 6831), ribociclib (n = 1279), or abemaciclib (n = 1036), plus an AI, between February 2015 and November 2023. In primary analyses, there were no significant differences in OS and rwPFS between treatment groups after stabilized inverse probability treatment weighting, with hazard ratios ranging from 0.95 to 0.98 across pairwise group comparisons (all P > 0.05). Findings remained generally consistent across sensitivity and subgroup analyses and in a subanalysis of patients who started treatment in 2017 or later, when all three CDK4/6 inhibitors were commercially available. Taken together, results from P-VERIFY, the largest real-world study to date evaluating CDK4/6 inhibitor comparative effectiveness, suggest that there are no significant differences in OS and rwPFS between 1L palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib, plus an AI, in patients with HR+/HER2- mBC in US routine clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":22195,"journal":{"name":"Targeted Oncology","volume":" ","pages":"635-641"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13630836/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Targeted Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11523-026-01233-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To date, there have been no head-to-head randomized controlled trial data comparing cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors in patients with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (mBC), and most prior real-world comparative effectiveness studies have been limited by short follow-up times and small patient sample sizes. In this vodcast, we provide an overview of two recent publications reporting overall survival (OS) and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) results from P-VERIFY, a retrospective comparative effectiveness study of CDK4/6 inhibitors plus an aromatase inhibitor (AI) among patients with HR+/HER2- mBC treated in routine clinical practice in the USA. P-VERIFY used the Flatiron Health Analytic Database to identify 9146 patients who initiated first-line (1L) treatment with palbociclib (n = 6831), ribociclib (n = 1279), or abemaciclib (n = 1036), plus an AI, between February 2015 and November 2023. In primary analyses, there were no significant differences in OS and rwPFS between treatment groups after stabilized inverse probability treatment weighting, with hazard ratios ranging from 0.95 to 0.98 across pairwise group comparisons (all P > 0.05). Findings remained generally consistent across sensitivity and subgroup analyses and in a subanalysis of patients who started treatment in 2017 or later, when all three CDK4/6 inhibitors were commercially available. Taken together, results from P-VERIFY, the largest real-world study to date evaluating CDK4/6 inhibitor comparative effectiveness, suggest that there are no significant differences in OS and rwPFS between 1L palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib, plus an AI, in patients with HR+/HER2- mBC in US routine clinical practice.

P-VERIFY:美国HR+/HER2-转移性乳腺癌患者中CDK4/6抑制剂加芳香酶抑制剂的真实世界比较总生存期和无进展生存期
到目前为止,还没有比较细胞周期蛋白依赖性激酶4/6 (CDK4/6)抑制剂在HR+/HER2-转移性乳腺癌(mBC)患者中的疗效的头对头随机对照试验数据,而且大多数之前的真实世界比较有效性研究都受到随访时间短和患者样本量小的限制。在本播客中,我们概述了最近两篇报道P-VERIFY的总生存期(OS)和真实无进展生存期(rwPFS)结果的出版物,P-VERIFY是一项在美国常规临床实践中治疗的HR+/HER2- mBC患者中CDK4/6抑制剂加芳香酶抑制剂(AI)的回顾性比较有效性研究。P-VERIFY使用Flatiron健康分析数据库,在2015年2月至2023年11月期间,确定了9146名接受palbociclib (n = 6831)、ribociclib (n = 1279)或abemaciclib (n = 1036)加AI一线(1L)治疗的患者。在初步分析中,经稳定的逆概率处理加权后,各组间OS和rwPFS无显著差异,两两组比较的风险比在0.95 ~ 0.98之间(均P < 0.05)。在敏感性和亚组分析中,以及在2017年或更晚开始治疗的患者的亚分析中,当所有三种CDK4/6抑制剂都已上市时,研究结果总体上保持一致。综上所述,迄今为止评估CDK4/6抑制剂比较有效性的最大现实世界研究P-VERIFY的结果表明,在美国常规临床实践中,HR+/HER2- mBC患者的1L palbociclib, ribociclib和abemaciclib加AI之间的OS和rwPFS没有显着差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Targeted Oncology
Targeted Oncology 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
64
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Targeted Oncology addresses physicians and scientists committed to oncology and cancer research by providing a programme of articles on molecularly targeted pharmacotherapy in oncology. The journal includes: Original Research Articles on all aspects of molecularly targeted agents for the treatment of cancer, including immune checkpoint inhibitors and related approaches. Comprehensive narrative Review Articles and shorter Leading Articles discussing relevant clinically established as well as emerging agents and pathways. Current Opinion articles that place interesting areas in perspective. Therapy in Practice articles that provide a guide to the optimum management of a condition and highlight practical, clinically relevant considerations and recommendations. Systematic Reviews that use explicit, systematic methods as outlined by the PRISMA statement. Adis Drug Reviews of the properties and place in therapy of both newer and established targeted drugs in oncology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书