| Pharmacotherapeutic group: Enzyme inhibitors. Non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor (inhibitor of oestrogen biosynthesis); antineoplastic agent, ATC code: L02B G04 Pharmacodynamic effects The elimination of oestrogen-mediated growth stimulatory effects is a prerequisite for tumour response in cases where the growth of tumour tissue depends on the presence of oestrogens and endocrine therapy is used. In postmenopausal women, oestrogens are mainly derived from the action of the aromatase enzyme, which converts adrenal androgens - primarily androstenedione and testosterone - to oestrone and oestradiol. The suppression of oestrogen biosynthesis in peripheral tissues and the cancer tissue itself can therefore be achieved by specifically inhibiting the aromatase enzyme. Letrozole is a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor. It inhibits the aromatase enzyme by competitively binding to the haem of the aromatase cytochrome P450, resulting in a reduction of oestrogen biosynthesis in all tissues where present. In healthy postmenopausal women, single doses of 0.1, 0.5, and 2.5 mg letrozole suppress serum oestrone and oestradiol by 75-78% and 78% from baseline respectively. Maximum suppression is achieved in 48-78 h. In postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer, daily doses of 0.1 to 5 mg suppress plasma concentration of oestradiol, oestrone, and oestrone sulphate by 75 - 95% from baseline in all patients treated. With doses of 0.5 mg and higher, many values of oestrone and oestrone sulphate are below the limit of detection in the assays, indicating that higher oestrogen suppression is achieved with these doses. Oestrogen suppression was maintained throughout treatment in all these patients. Letrozole is highly specific in inhibiting aromatase activity. Impairment of adrenal steroidogenesis has not been observed. No clinically relevant changes were found in the plasma concentrations of cortisol, aldosterone, 11-deoxycortisol, 17-hydroxy-progesterone, and ACTH or in plasma renin activity among postmenopausal patients treated with a daily dose of letrozole 0.1 to 5 mg. The ACTH stimulation test performed after 6 and 12 weeks of treatment with daily doses of 0.1, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2.5, and 5 mg did not indicate any attenuation of aldosterone or cortisol production. Thus, glucocorticoid and mineralocorticoid supplementation is not necessary. No changes were noted in plasma concentrations of androgens (androstenedione and testosterone) among healthy postmenopausal women after 0.1, 0.5, and 2.5 mg single doses of letrozole or in plasma concentrations of androstenedione among postmenopausal patients treated with daily doses of 0.1 to 5 mg, indicating that the blockade of oestrogen biosynthesis does not lead to accumulation of androgenic precursors. Plasma levels of LH and FSH are not affected by letrozole in patients, nor is thyroid function as evaluated by TSH, T4 and T3 uptake test. Adjuvant treatment A multicentre, double-blind study randomised over 8000 postmenopausal women with resected receptor-positive early breast cancer, to one of the following option:Option 1 A. tamoxifen for 5 yearsB. letrozole for 5 yearsC. tamoxifen for 2 years followed by letrozole for 3 years D. letrozole for 2 years followed by tamoxifen for 3 years. Option 2 A. tamoxifen for 5 yearsB. letrozole for 5 yearsData in Table 2 reflect results based on data from the monotherapy arms in each randomization option and data from the two switching arms up to 30 days after the date of switch. The analysis of monotherapy vs sequencing of endocrine treatments will be conducted when the necessary number of events has been achieved. Patients have been followed for a median of 26 months, 76% of the patients for more than 2 years, and 16% (1252 patients) for 5 years or longer. The primary endpoint of the trial was disease-free survival (DFS) which was assessed as the time from randomisation to the earliest event of loco-regional or distant recurrence (metastases) of the primary disease, development of invasive contralateral breast cancer, appearance of a second non-breast primary tumour or death from any cause without a prior cancer event. Letrozole reduced the risk of recurrence by 19% compared with tamoxifen (hazard ratio 0.81; P=0.003). The 5-year DFS rates were 84.0% for letrozole and 81.4% for tamoxifen. The improvement in DFS with letrozole is seen as early as 12 months and is maintained beyond 5 years. Letrozole also significantly reduced the risk of recurrence compared with tamoxifen whether prior adjuvant chemotherapy was given (hazard ratio 0.72; P=0.018) or not (hazard ratio 0.84 ; P=0.044). For the secondary endpoint overall survival a total of 358 deaths were reported (166 on letrozole and 192 on tamoxifen). There was no significant difference between treatments in overall survival (hazard ratio 0.86; P=0.15). Distant disease-free survival (distant metastases), a surrogate for overall survival, differed significantly overall (hazard ratio 0.73; P=0.001) and in pre-specified stratification subsets. Letrozole significantly reduced the risk of systemic failure by 17% compared with tamoxifen (hazard ratio 0.83; P=0.02) However, although in favour of letrozole non significant difference was obtained in the contralateral breast cancer (hazard ratio 0.61; P=0.09). An exploratory analysis of DFS by nodal status showed that letrozole was significantly superior to tamoxifen in reducing the risk of recurrence in patients with node positive disease (HR 0.71; 95% CI 0.59, 0.85; P=0.0002) while no significant difference between treatments was apparent in patients with node negative disease (HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.77, 1.25; P=0.89).This reduced benefit in node negative patients was confirmed by an exploratory interaction analysis (p=0.03).Patients receiving letrozole, compared to tamoxifen, had fewer second malignancies (1.9% vs 2.4%). Particularly the incidence of endometrial cancer was lower with letrozole compared to tamoxifen (0.2% vs 0.4%). See Tables 2 and 3 that summarize the results. The analyses summarized in Table 4 omit the 2 sequential arms from randomization option 1, i.e. take account only of the monotherapy arms: Table 2 Disease-free and overall survival (ITT population) | | Letrozole N=4003 | Tamoxifen N=4007 | Hazard Ratio (95 % CI) | P-Value1 | | Disease-free survival (primary)
- events (protocol definition, total)
| 351
| 428
| 0.81 (0.70, 0.93)
| 0.0030
| | Distant disease-free survival (metastases) (secondary)
| 184
| 249
| 0.73 (0.60, 0.88)
| 0.0012
| | Overall survival (secondary)
- number of deaths (total)
| 166
| 192
| 0.86 (0.70, 1.06)
| 0.1546
| | Systemic disease-free survival (secondary)
| 323
| 383
| 0.83 (0.72, 0.97)
| 0.0172
| | Contralateral breast cancer (invasive) (secondary)
| 19
| 31
| 0.61 (0.35, 1.08)
| 0.0910
| | CI = confidence interval,
1 Logrank test, stratified by randomization option and use of prior adjuvant chemotherapy
|
Table 3 Disease-free and overall survival by nodal status and prior adjuvant chemotherapy (ITT population) | | Hazard Ratio, 95% CI for hazard ratio
| P-Value1 | | Disease-free survival
| | Nodal status
- Positive
- Negative
| 0.71 (0.59, 0.85)
0.98 (0.77, 1.25)
| 0.0002
0.8875
| | Prior adjuvant chemotherapy
- Yes
- No
| 0.72 (0.55, 0.95)
0.84 (0.71, 1.00)
| 0.0178
0.0435
| | Overall survival
| | | | Nodal status
- Positive
- Negative
| 0.81 (0.63, 1.05)
0.88 (0.59, 1.30)
| 0.1127
0.5070
| | Prior adjuvant chemotherapy
- Yes
- No
| 0.76 (0.51, 1.14)
0.90 (0.71, 1.15)
| 0.1848
0.3951
| | Distant disease-free survival
| | | | Nodal status
- Positive
- Negative
| 0.67 (0.54, 0.84)
0.90 (0.60, 1.34)
| 0.0005
0.5973
| | Prior adjuvant chemotherapy
- Yes
- No
| 0.69 (0.50, 0.95)
0.75 (0.60, 0.95)
| 0.0242
0.0184
| | CI = confidence interval
1 Cox model significance level
|
Table 4 Primary Core Analysis: Efficacy endpoints according to randomization option monotherapy arms (ITT population) | Endpoint | Option | Statistic | Letrozole | Tamoxifen | | DFS (Primary, protocol definition)
| 1
| Events / n
| 100 / 1546
| 137 / 1548
| | | | HR (95% CI), P | 0.73 (0.56, 0.94), 0.0159
| | | 2
| Events / n
| 177 / 917
| 202 / 911
| | | | HR (95% CI), P | 0.85 (0.69, 1.04), 0.1128
| | | Overall
| Events / n
| 277 / 2463
| 339 / 2459
| | | | HR (95% CI), P | 0.80 (0.68, 0.94), 0.0061
| | | | | | | | DFS (excluding second malignancies)
| 1
| Events / n
| 80 / 1546
| 110 / 1548
| | | | HR (95% CI), P | 0.73 (0.54, 0.97), 0.0285
| | | 2
| Events / n
| 159 / 917
| 187 / 911
| | | | HR (95% CI), P | 0.82 (0.67, 1.02), 0.0753
| | | Overall
| Events / n
| 239 / 2463
| 297 / 2459
| | | | HR (95% CI), P | 0.79 (0.66, 0.93), 0.0063
| | | | | | | | Distant DFS (Secondary)
| 1
| Events / n
| 57 / 1546
| 72 / 1548
| | | | HR (95% CI), P | 0.79 (0.56, 1.12), 0.1913
| | | 2
| Events / n
| 98 / 917
| 124 / 911
| | | | HR (95% CI), P | 0.77 (0.59, 1.00), 0.0532
| | | Overall
| Events / n
| 155 / 2463
| 196 / 2459
| | | | HR (95% CI), P | 0.78 (0.63, 0.96), 0.0195
| | | | | | | | Overall survival (Secondary)
| 1
| Events / n
| 41 / 1546
| 48 / 1548
| | | | HR (95% CI), P | 0.86 (0.56, 1.30), 0.4617
| | | 2
| Events / n
| 98 / 917
| 116 / 911
| | | | HR (95% CI), P | 0.84 (0.64, 1.10), 0.1907
| | | Overall
| Events / n
| 139 / 2463
| 164 / 2459
| | | | HR (95% CI), P | 0.84 (0.67, 1.06), 0.1340
| | P
-value given is based on logrank test, stratified by adjuvant chemotherapy for each randomization option, and by randomization option and adjuvant chemotherapy for overall analysis
| The median duration of treatment (safety population) was 25 months, 73% of the patients were treated for more than 2 years, 22% of the patients for more than 4 years. The median duration of follow-up was 30 months for both letrozole and tamoxifen. Adverse events suspected of being related to study drug were reported for 78% of the patients treated with letrozole compared with 73% of those treated with tamoxifen. The most common adverse events experienced with letrozole were hot flushes, night sweats, arthralgia, weight increase, and nausea. Of these, only arthralgia occurred significantly more often with letrozole than with tamoxifen (20% vs 13% for tamoxifen). Letrozole treatment was associated with a higher risk of osteoporosis (2.2% vs 1.2% with tamoxifen). Overall, irrespective of causality, cardiovascular/cerebrovascular events were reported any time after randomization for similar proportions of patients in both treatment arms (10.8% for letrozole, 12.2% for tamoxifen). Amongst these, thromboembolic events were reported significantly less often with letrozole (1.5%) than with tamoxifen (3.2%) (P<0.001), while cardiac failure was reported significantly more often with letrozole (0.9%) than with tamoxifen (0.4%) (P=0.006).Amongst patients who had baseline values of total serum cholesterol within the normal range, increases in total serum cholesterol higher than 1.5 times the ULN were observed in 5.4% of the patients in the letrozole arm, compared with 1.1% in the tamoxifen arm. Extended adjuvant treatment In a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study, performed in over 5,100 postmenopausal patients with receptor-positive or unknown primary breast cancer, patients who had remained disease-free after completion of adjuvant treatment with tamoxifen (4.5 to 6 years) were randomly assigned either letrozole or placebo. The primary analysis conducted at a median follow-up of around 28 months (25% patients of the patients being followed for at least 38 months) showed that letrozole reduced the risk of recurrence by 42% compared with placebo (hazard ratio 0.58 ; P=0.00003). The statistically significant benefit in DFS in favour of letrozole was observed regardless of nodal status node negative : hazard ratio 0.48 ; P=0.002 ; node positive : hazard ratio 0.61 ; P=0.002. For the secondary endpoint overall survival (OS) a total of 113 deaths were reported (51 letrozole, 62 placebo). Overall, there was no significant difference between treatments in OS (hazard ratio 0.82; P=0.29). Afterwards the study continued in an unblended fashion and patients in the placebo arm could switch to letrozole , if they wished to do so. After the study unblinding , over 60% of the patients in the placebo arm eligible to switch opted to switch to letrozole (i.e., late extened adjuvant population). Patients who switched to letrozole from placebo had been off adjuvant tamoxifen for a median 31 months (range 14 to 79 months). Updated intent-to-treat analyses were conducted at a median follow-up of 49 months. In the letrozole arm at least 30% of the patients had completed 5 years and 59% had completed at least 4 years of follow-up. In the updated analysis of DFS, letrozole significantly reduced the risk of breast cancer recurrence compared with placebo (hazard ratio 0.68 ; 95% CI 0.55,0.83 ; P=0.0001). Letrozole also significantly reduced the odds of a new invasive contralateral cancer by 41% compared with placebo (odds ratio 0.59 ; 95% CI 0.36, 0.96 ; P=0.03). There was no significant difference in distant disease-free survival or overall survival. Updated results (median duration of follow-up was 40 months) from the bone mineral density (BMD) substudy (226 patients enrolled) demonstrated that, at 2 years, compared to baseline, patients receiving letrozole were associated with greater decreases in BMD in the total hip (median decrease of 3.8% in hip BMD compared to a median decrease of 2.0% in the placebo group (P=0.012,, adjusted for bisphosphonate use, P=0.018). Patients receiving letrozole were associated with a greater decrease in lumbar spine BMD although not significantly different. Concomitant calcium and vitamin D supplementation was mandatory in the BMD substudy. Updated results (median duration of follow-up was 50 months) from the Lipid substudy (347 patients enrolled) show no significant differences between the Letrozole and placebo arms in total cholesterol or in any lipid fraction. In the updated analysis of the core study 11.1% of patients in the letrozole arm reported cardiovascular adverse events during treatment compared with 8.6% in the placebo arm until switch. These events included myocardial infarction (letrozole 1.3%, placebo 0.9%); angina requiring surgical intervention (letrozole 1.0%, placebo 0.8%), new or worsening angina (letrozole 1.7% vs placebo 1.2%), thromboembolic events (letrozole 1.0%, placebo 0.6%) and cerebrovascular accident (lLetrozole 1.7% vs placebo 1.3%). No significant differences were observed on global physical and mental summary scores, suggesting that overall, letrozole did not worsen quality of life relative to placebo. Treatment differences in favour of placebo were observed in patients` assessments with particularly the measures of physical functioning, bodily pain, vitality, sexual and vasomotor items. Although statistically significant these differences were not considered clinically relevant. First-line treatment: One controlled double-blind trial was conducted comparing letrozole 2.5 mg to tamoxifen 20 mg as first-line therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. In 907 women, letrozole was superior to tamoxifen in time to progression (primary endpoint) and in overall objective response, time to treatment failure and clinical benefit. The results are summarized in Table 5: Table 5 Results at a median follow-up of 32 months | Variable | Statistic | Letrozolen=453 | Tamoxifenn=454 | | Time to progression | Median
| 9.4 months
| 6.0 months
| | | (95% CI for median)
| (8.9, 11.6 months)
| (5.4, 6.3 months)
| | | Hazard ratio (HR)
| 0.72
| | | (95% CI for HR)
| (0.62, 0.83)
| | | P | <0.0001
| | Objective response rate (ORR) | CR+PR
| 145 (32%)
| 95 (21%)
| | | (95% CI for rate)
| (28, 36%)
| (17, 25%)
| | | Odds ratio
| 1.78
| | | (95% CI for odds ratio)
| (1.32, 2.40)
| | | P | 0.0002
| | Overall clinical benefit rate | CR+PR+NC 24 weeks
| 226 (50%)
| 173 (38%)
| | | Odds ratio
| 1.62
| | | (95% CI for odds ratio)
| (1.24, 2.11)
| | | P | 0.0004
| | Time to treatment failure | Median
| 9.1 months
| 5.7 months
| | | (95% for median)
| (8.6, 9.7 months)
| (3.7, 6.1 months)
| | | Hazard ratio
| 0.73
| | | (95% CI for HR)
| (0.64, 0.84)
| | | P | <0.0001
| Time to progression was significantly longer, and response rate was significantly higher for letrozole than for tamoxifen in patients with tumours of unknown receptor status as well as with positive receptor status. Similarly, time to progression was significantly longer, and response rate significantly higher for letrozole irrespective of whether adjuvant anti-oestrogen therapy had been given or not. Time to progression was significantly longer for letrozole irrespective of dominant site of disease. Median time to progression was almost twice as long for letrozole in patients with soft tissue disease only (median 12.1 months for letrozole, 6.4 months for tamoxifen), and in patients with visceral metastases (median 8.3 months for letrozole, 4.6 months for tamoxifen). Response rate was significantly higher for Letrozole in patients with soft tissue disease only (50% vs 34% for letrozole and tamoxifen respectively), and for patients with visceral metastases (28% letrozole vs 17% tamoxifen). Study design allowed patients to cross over upon progression to the other therapy or discontinue from the study. Approximately 50% of patients crossed over to the opposite treatment arm and crossover was virtually completed by 36 months. The median time to crossover was 17 months (letrozole to tamoxifen) and 13 months (tamoxifen to letrozole). Letrozole treatment in the first-line therapy of advanced breast cancer resulted in a median overall survival of 34 months compared with 30 months for tamoxifen (logrank test P=0.53, not significant). Better survival was associated with letrozole up to at least 24 months. The survival rate at 24 months was 64% for the letrozole treatment group versus 58% for the tamoxifen treatment group. The absence of an advantage for letrozole on overall survival could be explained by the crossover design of the study. The total duration of endocrine therapy (time to chemotherapy) was significantly longer for letrozole (median 16.3 months, 95% CI 15 to 18 months) than for tamoxifen (median 9.3 months, 95% CI 8 to 12 months) (logrank P=0.0047). Second-line treatment: Two well-controlled clinical trials were conducted comparing two letrozole doses (0.5 mg and 2.5 mg) to megestrol acetate and to aminoglutethimide, respectively, in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer previously treated with anti-oestrogens. Time to progression was not significantly different between letrozole 2.5 mg and megestrol acetate (P=0.07). Statistically significant differences were observed in favour of letrozole 2.5 mg compared to megestrol acetate in overall objective tumour response rate (24% vs 16%, P=0.04), and in time to treatment failure (P=0.04). Overall survival was not significantly different between the 2 arms (P=0.2). In the second study, the response rate was not significantly different between letrozole 2.5 mg and aminoglutethimide (P=0.06). Letrozole 2.5 mg was statistically superior to aminoglutethimide for time to progression (P=0.008), time to treatment failure (P=0.003) and overall survival (P=0.002). | |