题目:从不同的乳腺癌试验中添加辅助药物。

IF 2 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Timothée Olivier, Vinay Prasad
{"title":"题目:从不同的乳腺癌试验中添加辅助药物。","authors":"Timothée Olivier, Vinay Prasad","doi":"10.1016/j.jcpo.2025.100568","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Studies conducted in perioperative settings have recently expanded the treatment options for early-stage operable breast cancer. These studies have different inclusion criteria, however they are not entirely mutually exclusive. It results that multiple treatment options may be available to the same patient, making the choice of therapy a significant challenge. The concurrent or sequential administration of these therapies has been suggested by expert panels or international guidelines. Yet combining therapeutic strategies that have been independently tested can be problematic. It is possible that the same subset of patients benefits from each therapy individually, meaning that combining them might offer no additional benefit. Moreover, the toxicity of those combinations - short and long-term - has not been assessed in phase 3 trials. Whether these toxicities and dose reductions offset gains is unknown. Here, we offer clinical scenario where this could happen, like combining pembrolizumab plus olaparib in triple-negative breast cancer, or olaparib plus CDK4/6 inhibitors in hormone receptor-positive disease. Although each therapy has shown efficacy in individual trials, the net gain of their combined or sequential use in the peri-operative setting remains unproven in phase 3 trials. This dilemma extends well beyond breast cancer as a growing number of agents continue to be approved in neoadjuvant or adjuvant space. A cautious evidence-driven approach is needed to ensure these strategies truly benefit patients. This could have important policy implications, including regulatory enforcement for combination trials rather than extrapolating from monotherapy data.</p>","PeriodicalId":38212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Policy","volume":" ","pages":"100568"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adding adjuvant drugs from distinct breast cancer trials.\",\"authors\":\"Timothée Olivier, Vinay Prasad\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcpo.2025.100568\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Studies conducted in perioperative settings have recently expanded the treatment options for early-stage operable breast cancer. These studies have different inclusion criteria, however they are not entirely mutually exclusive. It results that multiple treatment options may be available to the same patient, making the choice of therapy a significant challenge. The concurrent or sequential administration of these therapies has been suggested by expert panels or international guidelines. Yet combining therapeutic strategies that have been independently tested can be problematic. It is possible that the same subset of patients benefits from each therapy individually, meaning that combining them might offer no additional benefit. Moreover, the toxicity of those combinations - short and long-term - has not been assessed in phase 3 trials. Whether these toxicities and dose reductions offset gains is unknown. Here, we offer clinical scenario where this could happen, like combining pembrolizumab plus olaparib in triple-negative breast cancer, or olaparib plus CDK4/6 inhibitors in hormone receptor-positive disease. Although each therapy has shown efficacy in individual trials, the net gain of their combined or sequential use in the peri-operative setting remains unproven in phase 3 trials. This dilemma extends well beyond breast cancer as a growing number of agents continue to be approved in neoadjuvant or adjuvant space. A cautious evidence-driven approach is needed to ensure these strategies truly benefit patients. This could have important policy implications, including regulatory enforcement for combination trials rather than extrapolating from monotherapy data.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38212,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cancer Policy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"100568\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cancer Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcpo.2025.100568\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcpo.2025.100568","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在围手术期进行的研究最近扩大了早期可手术乳腺癌的治疗选择。这些研究有不同的纳入标准,但它们并非完全相互排斥。结果是,同一患者可能有多种治疗选择,使治疗选择成为一个重大挑战。专家小组或国际指南建议同时或依次使用这些疗法。然而,将经过独立测试的治疗策略结合起来可能会有问题。有可能同一组患者单独受益于每种治疗,这意味着联合使用它们可能没有额外的益处。此外,这些组合的短期和长期毒性尚未在3期试验中进行评估。这些毒性和剂量减少是否抵消了收益尚不清楚。在这里,我们提供了可能发生这种情况的临床方案,如在三阴性乳腺癌中联合使用派姆单抗和奥拉帕尼,或在激素受体阳性疾病中联合使用奥拉帕尼和CDK4/6抑制剂。尽管每种疗法在单独的试验中都显示出疗效,但在围手术期联合或顺序使用的净收益仍未在3期试验中得到证实。随着越来越多的药物继续被批准用于新辅助或辅助领域,这种困境远远超出了乳腺癌。需要采取谨慎的循证方法来确保这些策略真正使患者受益。这可能具有重要的政策意义,包括对联合试验的监管执法,而不是从单一治疗数据推断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Adding adjuvant drugs from distinct breast cancer trials.

Studies conducted in perioperative settings have recently expanded the treatment options for early-stage operable breast cancer. These studies have different inclusion criteria, however they are not entirely mutually exclusive. It results that multiple treatment options may be available to the same patient, making the choice of therapy a significant challenge. The concurrent or sequential administration of these therapies has been suggested by expert panels or international guidelines. Yet combining therapeutic strategies that have been independently tested can be problematic. It is possible that the same subset of patients benefits from each therapy individually, meaning that combining them might offer no additional benefit. Moreover, the toxicity of those combinations - short and long-term - has not been assessed in phase 3 trials. Whether these toxicities and dose reductions offset gains is unknown. Here, we offer clinical scenario where this could happen, like combining pembrolizumab plus olaparib in triple-negative breast cancer, or olaparib plus CDK4/6 inhibitors in hormone receptor-positive disease. Although each therapy has shown efficacy in individual trials, the net gain of their combined or sequential use in the peri-operative setting remains unproven in phase 3 trials. This dilemma extends well beyond breast cancer as a growing number of agents continue to be approved in neoadjuvant or adjuvant space. A cautious evidence-driven approach is needed to ensure these strategies truly benefit patients. This could have important policy implications, including regulatory enforcement for combination trials rather than extrapolating from monotherapy data.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cancer Policy
Journal of Cancer Policy Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.70%
发文量
47
审稿时长
65 days
×
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