Pharmacotherapeutic group: Endocrine therapy, Anti-oestrogens, ATC code: L02BA03
Mechanism of action and pharmacodynamic effects
Fulvestrant is a competitive oestrogen receptor (ER) antagonist with an affinity comparable to oestradiol. Fulvestrant blocks the trophic actions of oestrogens without any partial agonist (oestrogen-like) activity. The mechanism of action is associated with down-regulation of oestrogen receptor protein levels.
Clinical studies in postmenopausal women with primary breast cancer have shown that fulvestrant significantly down-regulates ER protein in ER positive tumours compared with placebo. There was also a significant decrease in progesterone receptor expression consistent with a lack of intrinsic oestrogen agonist effects. It has also been shown that fulvestrant 500 mg downregulates ER and the proliferation marker Ki67, to a greater degree than fulvestrant 250 mg in breast tumours in postmenopausal neoadjuvant setting.
Clinical safety and efficacy in advanced breast cancer
Monotherapy
A phase III clinical study was completed in 736 postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer who had disease recurrence on or after adjuvant endocrine therapy or progression following endocrine therapy for advanced disease. The study included 423 patients whose disease had recurred or progressed during anti-estrogen therapy (AE subgroup) and 313 patients whose disease had recurred or progressed during aromatase inhibitor therapy (AI subgroup). This study compared the efficacy and safety of fulvestrant 500 mg (n=362) with fulvestrant 250 mg (n=374). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary endpoint; key secondary efficacy endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR) and overall survival (OS). Efficacy results for the CONFIRM study are summarized in Table 3.
| Table 3 Summary of results of the primary efficacy endpoint (PFS) and key secondary efficacy endpoints in the CONFIRM study |
| Variable | Type of estimate; treatment comparison | Fulvestrant 500 mg (N=362) | Fulvestrant 250 mg (N=374) | Comparison between groups (Fulvestrant 500 mg/ Fulvestrant 250 mg) |
| Hazard ratio | 95% CI | p-value |
| PFS | K-M median in months; hazard ratio | | | | | |
| All Patients | | 6.5 | 5.5 | 0.80 | 0.68, 0.94 | 0.006 |
| -AE subgroup (n=423) | | 8.6 | 5.8 | 0.76 | 0.62, 0.94 | 0.013 |
| -AI subgroup (n=313)a | | 5.4 | 4.1 | 0.85 | 0.67, 1.08 | 0.195 |
| OSb | K-M median in months; hazard ratio | | | | | |
| All Patients | | 26.4 | 22.3 | 0.81 | 0.69, 0.96 | 0.016c |
| -AE subgroup (n=423) | | 30.6 | 23.9 | 0.79 | 0.63, 0.99 | 0.038c |
| -AI subgroup (n=313)a | | 24.1 | 20.8 | 0.86 | 0.67, 1.11 | 0.241c |
| Variable | Type of estimate; treatment comparison | Fulvestrant 500 mg (N=362) | Fulvestrant 250 mg (N=374) | Comparison between groups (Fulvestrant 500 mg/ Fulvestrant 250 mg) |
| Absolute difference in % | 95% CI |
| ORRd | % of patients with OR; absolute difference in % | | | | |
| All Patients | | 13.8 | 14.6 | -0.8 | -5.8, 6.3 |
| -AE subgroup (n=296) | | 18.1 | 19.1 | -1.0 | -8.2, 9.3 |
| -AI subgroup (n=205)a | | 7.3 | 8.3 | -1.0 | -5.5, 9.8 |
| CBRe | % of patients with CB; absolute difference in % | | | | |
| All Patients | | 45.6 | 39.6 | 6.0 | -1.1, 13.3 |
| -AE subgroup (n=423) | | 52.4 | 45.1 | 7.3 | -2.2, 16.6 |
| -AI subgroup (n=313)a | | 36.2 | 32.3 | 3.9 | -6.1, 15.2 |
| a. Fulvestrant is indicated in patients whose disease had recurred or progressed on an anti-estrogen therapy. The results in the AI subgroup are inconclusive. b. OS is presented for the final survival analyses at 75% maturity. c. Nominal p-value with no adjustments made for multiplicity between the initial overall survival analyses at 50% maturity and the updated survival analyses at 75% maturity. d. ORR was assessed in patients who were evaluable for response at baseline (ie, those with measurable disease at baseline: 240 patients in the fulvestrant 500 mg group and 261 patients in the fulvestrant 250 mg group). e. Patients with a best objective response of complete response, partial response or stable disease ≥24 weeks. |
PFS:Progression-free survival; ORR:Objective response rate; OR:Objective response; CBR:Clinical benefit rate; CB:Clinical benefit; OS:Overall survival; K-M:Kaplan-Meier; CI:Confidence interval; AI:Aromatase inhibitor; AE:Anti-estrogen.
A Phase 3, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, multicentre study of Fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg was conducted in postmenopausal women with ER-positive and/or PgR-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who had not previously been treated with any hormonal therapy. A total of 462 patients were randomised 1:1 sequentially to receive either fulvestrant 500 mg or anastrozole 1 mg.
Randomisation was stratified by disease setting (locally advanced or metastatic), prior chemotherapy for advanced disease, and measurable disease.
The primary efficacy endpoint of the study was investigator assessed progression-free survival (PFS) evaluated according to RECIST 1.1 (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours). Key secondary efficacy endpoints included overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR).
Patients enrolled in this study had a median age of 63 years (range 36-90). The majority of patients (87.0%) had metastatic disease at baseline. Fifty-five percent (55.0%) of patients had visceral metastasis at baseline. A total of 17.1% of patients received a prior chemotherapy regimen for advanced disease; 84.2% of patients had measurable disease.
Consistent results were observed across the majority of pre-specified patient subgroups. For the subgroup of patients with disease limited to non-visceral metastasis (n=208), the HR was 0.592 (95% CI: 0.419, 0.837) for the Fulvestrant arm compared to the anastrozole arm. For the subgroup of patients with visceral metastasis (n=254), the HR was 0.993 (95% CI: 0.740, 1.331) for the Fulvestrant arm compared to the anastrozole arm. The efficacy results of the FALCON study are presented in Table 4 and Figure 1.
Table 4 Summary of results of the primary efficacy endpoint (PFS) and key secondary efficacy endpoints (Investigator Assessment, Intent-To-Treat Population) ─ FALCON study
| | Fulvestrant 500 mg (N=230) | Anastrozole 1 mg (N=232) |
| Progression-Free Survival |
| Number of PFS Events (%) | 143 (62.2%) | 166 (71.6%) |
| PFS Hazard Ratio (95% CI) and | HR 0.797 (0.637 - 0.999) |
| p-value | p = 0.0486 |
| PFS Median [months (95% CI)] | 16.6 (13.8, 21.0) | 13.8 (12.0, 16.6) |
| Number of OS Events* | 67 (29.1%) | 75 (32.3%) |
| OS Hazard Ratio (95% CI) and | HR 0.875 (0.629 – 1.217) |
| p-value | p = 0.4277 |
| ORR** | 89 (46.1%) | 88 (44.9%) |
| ORR Odds Ratio (95% CI) and | OR 1.074 (0.716 – 1.614) |
| p-value | p = 0.7290 |
| Median DoR (months) | 20.0 | 13.2 |
| CBR | 180 (78.3%) | 172 (74.1%) |
| CBR Odds Ratio (95% CI) and | OR 1.253 (0.815 – 1.932) |
| p-value | p = 0.3045 |
*(31% maturity)-not final OS analysis
**for patients with measurable disease
Figure 1 Kaplan-Meier Plot of Progression-Free Survival (Investigator Assessment, Intent-To- Treat Population) ─ FALCON Study

Two Phase 3 clinical studies were completed in a total of 851 postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer who had disease recurrence on or after adjuvant endocrine therapy or progression following endocrine therapy for advanced disease. Seventy seven percent (77%) of the study population had estrogen receptor positive breast cancer. These studies compared the safety and efficacy of monthly administration of Fulvestrant 250 mg versus the daily administration of 1 mg anastrozole (aromatase inhibitor). Overall, Fulvestrant at the 250 mg monthly dose was at least as effective as anastrozole in terms of progression-free survival, objective response, and time to death. There were no statistically significant differences in any of these endpoints between the two treatment groups. Progression-free survival was the primary endpoint. Combined analysis of both studies showed that 83% of patients who received Fulvestrant progressed, compared with 85% of patients who received anastrozole. Combined analysis of both studies showed the hazard ratio of Fulvestrant 250 mg to anastrozole for progression-free survival was 0.95 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.10). The objective response rate for Fulvestrant 250 mg was 19.2% compared with 16.5% for anastrozole. The median time to death was 27.4 months for patients treated with Fulvestrant and 27.6 months for patients treated with anastrozole. The hazard ratio of Fulvestrant 250 mg to anastrozole for time to death was 1.01 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.19).
Combination therapy with palbociclib
A Phase 3, international, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre study of Fulvestrant 500 mg plus palbociclib 125 mg versus Fulvestrant 500 mg plus placebo was conducted in women with HR-positive, HER2-negative locally advanced breast cancer not amenable to resection or radiation therapy with curative intent or metastatic breast cancer, regardless of their menopausal status, whose disease progressed after prior endocrine therapy in the (neo) adjuvant or metastatic setting.
A total of 521 pre/peri- and postmenopausal women who had progressed on or within 12 months from completion of adjuvant endocrine therapy on or within 1 month from prior endocrine therapy for advanced disease, were randomised 2:1 to Fulvestrant plus palbociclib or Fulvestrant plus placebo and stratified by documented sensitivity to prior hormonal therapy, menopausal status at study entry (pre/peri- versus postmenopausal), and presence of visceral metastases. Pre/perimenopausal women received the LHRH agonist goserelin. Patients with advanced/metastatic, symptomatic, visceral spread, that were at risk of life-threatening complications in the short term (including patients with massive uncontrolled effusions [pleural, pericardial, peritoneal], pulmonary lymphangitis, and over 50% liver involvement), were not eligible for enrolment into the study.
Patients continued to receive assigned treatment until objective disease progression, symptomatic deterioration, unacceptable toxicity, death, or withdrawal of consent, whichever occurred first.
Crossover between treatment arms was not allowed.
Patients were well matched for baseline demographics and prognostic characteristics between the Fulvestrant plus palbociclib arm and the Fulvestrant plus placebo arm. The median age of patients enrolled in this study was 57 years (range 29, 88). In each treatment arm the majority of patients were White, had documented sensitivity to prior hormonal therapy, and were postmenopausal. Approximately 20% of patients were pre/perimenopausal. All patients had received prior systemic therapy and most patients in each treatment arm had received a previous chemotherapy regimen for their primary diagnosis. More than half (62%) had an ECOG PS of 0, 60% had visceral metastases, and 60% had received more than 1 prior hormonal regimen for their primary diagnosis.
The primary endpoint of the study was investigator-assessed PFS evaluated according to RECIST 1.1. Supportive PFS analyses were based on an Independent Central Radiology Review. Secondary endpoints included OR, CBR, Overall Survival (OS),, safety, and time-to-deterioration (TTD) in pain endpoint.
The study met its primary endpoint of prolonging investigator-assessed PFS at the interim analysis conducted on 82% of the planned PFS events; the results crossed the pre-specified Haybittle-Peto efficacy boundary (α=0.00135), demonstrating a statistically significant prolongation in PFS and a clinically meaningful treatment effect. A more mature update of efficacy data is reported in Table 5.
After a median follow-up time of 45 months, the final OS analysis was performed based on 310 events (60% of randomised patients). A 6.9-month difference in median OS in the palbociclib plus fulvestrant arm compared with the placebo plus fulvestrant arm was observed; this result was not statistically significant at the prespecified significance level of 0.0235 (1-sided). In the placebo plus fulvestrant arm, 15.5% of randomised patients received palbociclib and other CDK inhibitors as post-progression subsequent treatments.
The results from the investigator-assessed PFS and final OS data from PALOMA3 study are presented in Table 5. The relevant Kaplan-Meier plots are shown in Figures 2 and 3, respectively.
Table 5 Efficacy results – PALOMA3 study (Investigator assessment, intent-to-treat population)
| | Updated Analysis (23 October 2015 cut-off) |
| Fulvestrant plus palbociclib (N=347) | Fulvestrant plus placebo (N=174) |
| Progression-Free Survival | |
| Median [months (95% CI)] | 11.2 (9.5, 12.9) | 4.6 (3.5, 5.6) |
| Hazard ratio (95% CI) and p-value | 0.497 (0.398, 0.620), p <0.000001 |
| Secondary end points |
| OR [% (95% CI)] | 26.2 (21.7, 31.2) | 13.8 (9.0, 19.8) |
| OR (measurable disease) [% (95% CI)] | 33.7 (28.1, 39.7) | 17.4 (11.5, 24.8) |
| CBR [% (95% CI)] | 68.0 (62.8, 72.9) | 39.7 (32.3, 47.3) |
| Final overall survival (OS) (13 April 2018 cutoff) |
| Number of events (%) | 201 (57.9) | 109 (62.6) |
| Median [months (95% CI)] | 34.9 (28.8, 40.0) | 28.0 (23.6, 34.6) |
| Hazard ratio (95% CI) and p-value† | 0.814 (0.644, 1.029) p=0.0429†* |
CBR=clinical benefit response; CI=confidence interval N=number of patients;; OR=objective response;
Secondary endpoint results are based on confirmed and unconfirmed responses according to RECIST 1.1.
* Not statistically significant.
† 1-sided p-value from the log-rank test stratified by the presence of visceral metastases and sensitivity to prior endocrine therapy per randomisation.
Figure 2. Kaplan-Meier plot of progression-free survival (investigator assessment, intent-to-treat population) – PALOMA3 study (23 October 2015 cutoff)

A reduction in the risk of disease progression or death in the Fulvestrant plus palbociclib arm was observed in all individual patient subgroups defined by stratification factors and baseline characteristics. This was evident for pre/perimenopausal women (HR of 0.46 [95% CI: 0.28, 0.75]) and postmenopausal women (HR of 0.52 [95% CI: 0.40, 0.66]) and patients with visceral site of metastatic disease (HR of 0.50 [95% CI: 0.38, 0.65]) and non-visceral site of metastatic disease (HR of 0.48 [95% CI: 0.33, 0.71]). Benefit was also observed regardless of lines of prior therapy in the metastatic setting, whether 0 (HR of 0.59 [95% CI: 0.37, 0.93]), 1 (HR of 0.46 [95% CI: 0.32, 0.64]), 2 (HR of 0.48 [95% CI: 0.30, 0.76]), or ≥3 lines (HR of 0.59 [95% CI: 0.28, 1.22]).
Figure 3. Kaplan-Meier plot of overall survival (intent-to-treat population) – PALOMA3 study (13 April 2018 cutoff)

FUL=fulvestrant; PAL=palbociclib; PCB=placebo.
Additional efficacy measures (OR and TTR) assessed in the sub-groups of patients with or without visceral disease are displayed in Table 6.
Table 6 Efficacy results in visceral and non-visceral disease from PALOMA3 study (intent- to-treat population)
| | Visceral Disease | Non-visceral Disease |
| | Fulvestrant plus palbociclib (N=206) | Fulvestrant plus placebo (N=105) | Fulvestrant plus palbociclib (N=141) | Fulvestrant plus placebo (N=69) |
| OR [% (95% CI)] | 35.0 | 13.3 | 13.5 | 14.5 |
| (28.5, 41.9) | (7.5, 21.4) | (8.3, 20.2) | (7.2, 25.0) |
| TTR*, Median | 3.8 | 5.4 | 3.7 | 3.6 |
| [months (range)] | (3.5, 16.7) | (3.5, 16.7) | (1.9, 13.7) | (3.4, 3.7) |
*Response results based on confirmed and unconfirmed responses.
N=number of patients; CI=confidence interval; OR= objective response; TTR=time to first tumour response.
Patient-reported symptoms were assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and its Breast Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-BR23). A total of 335 patients in the Fulvestrant plus palbociclib arm and 166 patients in the Fulvestrant plus placebo arm completed the questionnaire at baseline and at least 1 post-baseline visit.Time-to-Deterioration was pre-specified as time between baseline and first occurrence of ≥10 points increase from baseline in pain symptom scores. Addition of palbociclib to fulvestrant resulted in a symptom benefit by significantly delaying Time-to-Deterioration in pain symptom compared with fulvestrant plus placebo (median 8.0 months versus 2.8 months; HR of 0.64 [95% CI: 0.49, 0.85]; p<0.001).
Effects on the postmenopausal endometrium
Preclinical data do not suggest a stimulatory effect of fulvestrant on the postmenopausal endometrium (see section 5.3). A 2-week study in healthy postmenopausal volunteers treated with 20 micrograms per day ethinylestradiol showed that pre-treatment with fulvestrant 250 mg resulted in significantly reduced stimulation of the postmenopausal endometrium, compared to pre-treatment with placebo, as judged by ultrasound measurement of endometrium thickness.
Neoadjuvant treatment for up to 16 weeks in breast cancer patients treated with either fulvestrant 500 mg or fulvestrant 250 mg did not result in clinically significant changes in endometrial thickness, indicating a lack of agonist effect. There is no evidence of adverse endometrial effects in the breast cancer patients studied. No data are available regarding endometrial morphology.
In two short-term studies (1 and 12 weeks) in premenopausal patients with benign gynaecologic disease, no significant differences in endometrial thickness were observed by ultrasound measurement between fulvestrant and placebo groups.
Effects on bone
There are no long-term data on the effect of fulvestrant on bone. Neoadjuvant treatment for up to 16 weeks in breast cancer patients with either fulvestrant 500 mg or fulvestrant 250 mg did not result in clinically significant changes in serum bone-turnover markers.
Paediatric population
Fulvestrant is not indicated for use in children. The European Medicines Agency has waived the obligation to submit the results of studies with fulvestrant in all subsets of the paediatric population in breast cancer (see section 4.2 for information on paediatric use).
An open-label phase II study investigated the safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of fulvestrant in 30 girls aged 1 to 8 years with Progressive Precocious Puberty associated with McCune Albright Syndrome (MAS). The paediatric patients received 4 mg/kg monthly intramuscular dose of fulvestrant. This 12-month study investigated a range of MAS endpoints and showed a reduction in the frequency of vaginal bleeding and a reduction in the rate of bone age advancement. The steady-state trough concentrations of fulvestrant in children in this study were consistent with that in adults (see section 5.2). There were no new safety concerns arising from this small study, but 5-year data are yet not available.