Table 1.
Study | Design | Drug combination | N | Results |
---|---|---|---|---|
Baselga et al.28 | Phase II Neoadjuvant |
Letrozole-everolimus | 270 | RR by clinical examination, 59.1% to 68.1% |
TAMRAD30 | Phase II MBC pretreated |
Tamoxifen-everolimus vs tamoxifen | 111 | TTP increased from 4.5 to 8.6 m |
HORIZON29 | Phase III MBC 1st line |
Letrozole-temsirolimus vs letrozole | 1112 | No improvement in PFS 9 vs 8.9 m |
BOLERO-231 | Phase III MBC pretreated |
Exemestane-everolimus vs exemestane | 724 | Increase in PFS from 4.1 to 10.6 m |
BOLERO-432 | Phase II MBC 1st line |
Letrozole-everolimus vs letrozole | 202 | Median PFS not reached at 17.5 m |
PrECOG 010233 | Phase II MBC pretreated |
Fulvestrant-everolimus vs fulvestrant | 131 | Increase in PFS 10.4 to 5.1 m |
m, months; PFS, progression free survival; MBC, metastatic breast cancer: RR, response rate; TTR time to progression.