↓ Skip to main content

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

Overview of attention for article published in Drugs, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
Title
Using Multiple Targeted Therapies in Oncology: Considerations for Use, and Progress to Date in Breast Cancer
Published in
Drugs, April 2013
DOI 10.1007/s40265-013-0044-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine M. Kelly, Aman U. Buzdar

Abstract

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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 91 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 17%
Student > Master 12 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Other 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Other 23 25%
Unknown 15 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 5%
Other 20 22%
Unknown 18 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 February 2014.
All research outputs
#18,369,403
of 22,751,628 outputs
Outputs from Drugs
#2,979
of 3,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,296
of 197,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs
#29
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,751,628 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,251 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 197,341 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.