, Volume 73, Issue 6, pp 505–515 | Cite as

Using Multiple Targeted Therapies in Oncology: Considerations for Use, and Progress to Date in Breast Cancer

  • Catherine M. Kelly
  • Aman U. Buzdar
Leading Article


There has been significant progress in our basic understanding of drugs and targets in the management of breast cancer. Recent breast cancer clinical trials have examined whether combinations of drugs targeting transmembrane receptors or their downstream effectors involved in cell signal transduction can increase response rates and overcome acquired and/or de novo drug resistance compared to a single targeted agent with or without systemic chemotherapy. We reviewed published clinical trials and conference proceedings examining combinations of targeted therapies across different breast cancer subtypes. Improvements in pathological complete response (pCR) rates and progression free survival (PFS) in preoperatively treated and metastatic human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer, respectively, have been observed with combinations of anti-HER2 therapies given concomitantly. Promising results were also observed in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer using a mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor with tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor (AI) in the preoperative setting and for patients with metastatic breast cancer that had previously progressed on endocrine therapy alone. A recent phase II trial reported a statistically significant improvement in PFS with the addition of an oral inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 to letrozole compared to letrozole alone (26.1 versus 7.5 months). A phase III study is planned for early 2013. On the basis of preclinical data, clinical trials have examined combinations of hormonal agents such as fulvestrant with an AI. However, the results are conflicting. Early data indicated that poly (ADP–ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors exploiting the concept of synthetic lethality would offer improved outcomes for patients with ER-negative, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative, HER2-negative breast cancer often referred to as triple negative breast cancer (TNBC); however, data in the phase III setting failed to confirm these findings but this may be because the drug was not a true PARP inhibitor. Chemotherapy continues to be the mainstay of treatment for TNBC until specific drugs and their associated targets are identified. As advances in medical technologies continue to identify multiple molecularly distinct breast cancer subgroups that are predicted to respond to combinations of targeted agents new challenges have arisen. In particular, how do we evaluate the safety and efficacy of these new drug combinations in relatively small subgroups of patients? Novel clinical trial designs will be required and increasingly regulatory agencies will require companion diagnostic tests that can identify the subgroups likely to respond to these therapies. The US Food and Drug Administration is assessing the role of pCR in breast cancer studies as a surrogate endpoint to predict clinical benefit in the accelerated drug approval process.


Breast Cancer Tamoxifen Trastuzumab Everolimus Aromatase Inhibitor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review. Drs Buzdar and Kelly have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review.


  1. 1.
    Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK, et al. Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:1784–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goss PE, Ingle JN, Ales-Martinez JE, et al. Exemestane for breast-cancer prevention in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2381–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2005;365:1687–717.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cuzick J, Sestak I, Baum M, et al. Effect of anastrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer: 10-year analysis of the ATAC trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:1135–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cuzick J, Powles T, Veronesi U, et al. Overview of the main outcomes in breast-cancer prevention trials. Lancet. 2003;361:296–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Procter M, Leyland-Jones B, et al. Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:1659–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Romond EH, Perez EA, Bryant J, et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:1673–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Slamon D, Eiermann W, Robert N, et al. Adjuvant trastuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:1273–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Patel AG, De Lorenzo SB, Flatten KS, Poirier GG, Kaufmann SH. Failure of iniparib to inhibit poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase in vitro. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18:1655–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ledford H. Drug candidates derailed in case of mistaken identity. Nature. 2012;483:519.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baselga J, Cortes J, Kim SB, et al. Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel for metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:109–19.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Baselga J, Campone M, Piccart M, et al. Everolimus in postmenopausal hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:520–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gianni L, Pienkowski T, Im YH, et al. Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in women with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a randomised multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:25–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Barker AD, Sigman CC, Kelloff GJ, Hylton NM, Berry DA, Esserman LJ. I-SPY 2: an adaptive breast cancer trial design in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009;86:97–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Prowell TM, Pazdur R. Pathological complete response and accelerated drug approval in early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(26):2438–41. doi: 10.1056/NEJmp1205737.
  16. 16.
    Schott AF, Hayes DF. Defining the benefits of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1747–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Buzdar A, Douma J, Davidson N, et al. Phase III, multicenter, double-blind, randomized study of letrozole, an aromatase inhibitor, for advanced breast cancer versus megestrol acetate. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:3357–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Buzdar AU. Endocrine therapy in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Semin Oncol. 2001;28:291–304.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Baselga J, Semiglazov V, van Dam P, et al. Phase II randomized study of neoadjuvant everolimus plus letrozole compared with placebo plus letrozole in patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:2630–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bachelot T, Bourgier C, Cropet C, et al. Randomized phase II trial of everolimus in combination with tamoxifen in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer with prior exposure to aromatase inhibitors: a GINECO study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2718–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yamnik RL, Digilova A, Davis DC, Brodt ZN, Murphy CJ, Holz MK. S6 kinase 1 regulates estrogen receptor alpha in control of breast cancer cell proliferation. J Biol Chem. 2009;284:6361–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Boulay A, Rudloff J, Ye J, et al. Dual inhibition of mTOR and estrogen receptor signaling in vitro induces cell death in models of breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:5319–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Miller TW, Balko JM, Arteaga CL. Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase and antiestrogen resistance in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:4452–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Finn RS, Crown JP, Lang I. Results of a randomized phase 2 study of PD 0332991, a cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitor, in combination with letrozole vs letrozole alone for first-line treatment of ER+/HER2-advanced breast cancer. (BC)CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 4–8 2012, San Antonio, TX. Abstract S1-6.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Howell A, Cuzick J, Baum M, et al. Results of the ATAC (Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination) trial after completion of 5 years’ adjuvant treatment for breast cancer. Lancet. 2005;365:60–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Smith IE, Dowsett M, Ebbs SR, et al. Neoadjuvant treatment of postmenopausal breast cancer with anastrozole, tamoxifen, or both in combination: the Immediate Preoperative Anastrozole, Tamoxifen, or Combined with Tamoxifen (IMPACT) multicenter double-blind randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:5108–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Macedo LF, Sabnis GJ, Goloubeva OG, Brodie A. Combination of anastrozole with fulvestrant in the intratumoral aromatase xenograft model. Cancer Res. 2008;68:3516–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bergh J, Jonsson PE, Lidbrink EK, et al. FACT: an open-label randomized phase III study of fulvestrant and anastrozole in combination compared with anastrozole alone as first-line therapy for patients with receptor-positive postmenopausal breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1919–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mehta RS, Barlow WE, Albain KS, et al. Combination anastrozole and fulvestrant in metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:435–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Di Leo A, Jerusalem G, Petruzelka L, et al. Results of the CONFIRM phase III trial comparing fulvestrant 250 mg with fulvestrant 500 mg in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:4594–600.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Di Leo A, Jerusalem G, Petruzelka L. Final analysis of overall survival for the phase III CONFIRM trial: Fulvestrant 500 mg versus 250 mg. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium Dec 4–8, San Antonio, TX. Abstract S1-4.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Johnston S, Kilburn LS, Ellis P, Cameron D, Dodwell D, Howell A, Im YH, Coombes G, Dowsett M, Bliss JM. Fulvestrant alone or with concomitant anastrozole vs exemestane following progression on non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor—first results of the SoFEa trial (CRUKE/03/021 & CRUK/09/007) (ISRCTN44195747). Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(Suppl 3):S2 (Late breaking abstract).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    International Breast Cancer Study Group. Suppression of ovarian function and either tamoxifen or exemestane with or without chemotherapy in treating premenopausal women with resected breast cancer. In: National Library of Medicine (US). NLM Identifier:NCT00066807. Accessed 18 June 2012.
  34. 34.
    Vogel C, Cobleigh MA, Tripathy D, et al. First-line, single-agent Herceptin(trastuzumab) in metastatic breast cancer: a preliminary report. Eur J Cancer. 2001;37(Suppl 1):S25–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Joensuu H, Bono P, Kataja V, et al. Fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide with either docetaxel or vinorelbine, with or without trastuzumab, as adjuvant treatments of breast cancer: final results of the FinHer trial. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5685–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Baselga J, Gelmon KA, Verma S, et al. Phase II trial of pertuzumab and trastuzumab in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer that progressed during prior trastuzumab therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1138–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Portera CC, Walshe JM, Rosing DR, et al. Cardiac toxicity and efficacy of trastuzumab combined with pertuzumab in patients with [corrected] human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:2710–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Baselga J, Bradbury I, Eidtmann H, et al. Lapatinib with trastuzumab for HER2-positive early breast cancer (NeoALTTO): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2012;379:633–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Guarneri V, Frassoldati A, Bottini A, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy plus trastuzumab, lapatinib, or both in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer: results of the randomized phase II CHER-LOB study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1989–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Robidoux A, Tang G, Rastogi P, Geyer CE, Azar CA. Evaluation of lapatinib as a component of neoadjuvant therapy for HER21 operable breast cancer: NSABP protocol B-41. Presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting, Chicago, June 1–5. 2012. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30 (suppl; abstr LBA506).Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Miller K, Wang M, Gralow J, et al. Paclitaxel plus bevacizumab versus paclitaxel alone for metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2666–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Medical OncologyMater Misericordiae University Hospital and University College DublinDublin 7Ireland
  2. 2.M.D. Department of Breast Medical OncologyUniversity of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations