Метастатическое поражение печени при эстроген-рецептор-положительном HER 2-отрицательном раке молочной железы. Рибоциклиб – терапия, меняющая прогноз.

Продолжительность жизни больных метастатическим люминальным HER 2-отрицательным РМЖ долгие годы стагнировала на уровне 40 месяцев. Внедрение в практику ингибиторов CDK4/6 изменило стандарты терапии, обеспечив не только значимое увеличение времени без прогрессирования при сохранении высокого качества жизни, но и достоверно повысив общую выживаемость. Наличие метастазов в печени определяет крайне неблагоприятный прогноз, при ГР+HER 2-мРМЖ сокращая продолжительность жизни до медианы в 21 месяц. Комбинированная с рибоциклибом эндокринотерапия достоверно повысила показатели общей выживаемости в среднем на год, достигнув медиан 36,1 и 46,5 месяца в зависимости от линии лечения. Данная публикация посвящена метастатическому поражению печени при РМЖ, в частности при люминальном HER 2-отрицательном подтипе. Рассмотрены эпидемиологические аспекты, оценены возможности современной системной терапии. Представлен клинический случай успешной терапии рибоциклибом у молодой пациентки с поражением печени.

1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019. CA: A cancer journal for clinicians. 2019; 69 (1): 7–34. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21551

2. Miller KD, Nogueira L, Mariotto AB, et al. Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2019. CA: A cancer journal for clinicians. 2019; 69 (5): 363–385. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21565.

3. Redig AJ, McAllister SS. Breast cancer as a systemic disease: a view of metastasis. Journal of internal medicine. 2013; 274 (2): 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/joim.12084.

4. Baselga J., Cortés J., Kim S.B., et al. Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel for metastatic breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. 2012; 366 (2): 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1113216

5. Howlader N, Altekruse SF, Li CI, et al. US incidence of breast cancer subtypes defined by joint hormone receptor and HER2 status JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2014; 106 (5). https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju055

6. Parise CA, Bauer KR, Brown MM, et al. Breast cancer subtypes as defined by the estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) among women with invasive breast cancer in California, 1999–2004. The Breast Journal. 2009; 15 (6): 593–602. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524–4741.2009.00822.x

7. Lobbezoo DJA, van Kampen RJW, Voogd AC, et al. Prognosis of metastatic breast 2-positive subtype is associated with cancer subtypes: the hormone receptor/HER the most favorable outcome. Breast cancer research and treatment. 2013; 141 (3): 507–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549–013–2711-y

8. Duan XF, Dong NN, Zhang T, et al. The prognostic analysis of clinical breast cancer subtypes among patients with liver metastases from breast cancer. International journal of clinical oncology. 2013; 18 (1): 26–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147–011–0336-x

9. Sihto H, Lundin J, Lundin M, et al. Breast cancer biological subtypes and protein expression predict for the preferential distant metastasis sites: a nationwide cohort study. Breast Cancer Research. 2011; 13 (5): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr2944

10. N. C. Turner, R. S. Finn, M. Martin, et al. Clinical considerations of the role of palbociclib in the management of advanced breast cancer patients with and without visceral metastases. Annals of Oncology. 2018; 29 (3): 669–680. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdx797

11. Zhao HY, Gong Y, Ye FG, et al. Incidence and prognostic factors of patients with synchronous liver metastases upon initial diagnosis of breast cancer: a population-based study. Cancer Management and Research. 2018; 10: 5937–5950. https://doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S178395.

12. Diamond J. R., Finlayson C. A., Borges V. F. et al. Hepatic complications of breast cancer. The Lancet Oncology. 2009; 10 (6): 615–621. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470–2045 (09)70029–4

13. Berman AT, Thukral AD, Hwang WT, et al. Incidence and patterns of distant metastases for patients with early-stage breast cancer after breast conservation treatment. Clinical Breast Cancer. 2013; 13 (2): 88–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2012.11.001

14. Cummings MC, Simpson PT, Reid LE, et al. Metastatic progression of breast cancer: insights from 50 years of autopsies. The Journal of Pathology. 2014; 232 (1): 23–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.4288

15. Ji L., Cheng L., Zhu X., et al. Risk and prognostic factors of breast cancer with liver metastases. BMC Cancer. 2021; 21 (1): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885–021–07968–5

16. Pentheroudakis G, Fountzilas G, Bafaloukos D, et al. Metastatic breast cancer with liver metastases: a registry analysis of clinicopathologic, management and outcome characteristics of 500 women. Breast cancer research and treatment. 2006; 97 (3): 237–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549–005–9117–4

17. Wyld L, Gutteridge E, Pinder SE, et al. Prognostic factors for patients with hepatic metastases from breast cancer. British Journal of Cancer. 2003; 89 (2): 284–290. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6601038

18. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, Research Data (1975–2016), National Cancer Institute (NCI), Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences (DCCPS), Surveillance Research Program (SRP), released April 2019, based on the November 2018 submission [https://seer.cancer.gov/].

19. Xie J, Xu Z. A population-based study on liver metastases in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. 2019; 28 (2): 283–292. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055–9965.EPI-18–0591

20. Shah AN, Cristofanilli M. The Growing Role of CDK4/6 Inhibitors in Treating Hormone Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer. Current treatment options in oncology. 2017; 18 (1): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864–017–0443–7

21. Mouridsen H., Sun, Y., Gershanovich, M, et al. Superiority of letrozole to tamoxifen in the first-line treatment of advanced breast cancer: evidence from metastatic subgroups and a test of functional ability. The Oncologist. 200; 9 (5): 489–496. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.9–5–489

22. Bonneterre J., Buzdar A., Nabholtz J.M.A., et al. Anastrozole is superior to tamoxifen as first-line therapy in hormone receptor positive advanced breast carcinoma: Results of two randomized trials designed for combined analysis. Cancer. 2001; 92 (9): 2247–2258. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097–0142 (20011101)92:9<2247:: AID-CNCR1570>3.0.CO;2-Y

23. Paridaens R. J., Dirix L.Y., Beex L.V., et al. Phase III study comparing exemestane with tamoxifen as first-line hormonal treatment of metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women: the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2008; 26 (30), 4883. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.14.4659

24. Robertson JFR, Bondarenko IM, Trishkina E, et al. Fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg for hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer (FALCON): an international, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. The Lancet. 2016; 388 (10063): 2997–3005. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140–6736(16)32389–3

25. He M, Li JJ, Zuo WJ, et al. Metastatic breast cancer patients with lung or liver metastases should be distinguished before being treated with fulvestrant. Cancer medicine. 2019; 8 (14): 6212–6220. https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2453

26. Cersosimo RJ. Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors for the management of advanced or metastatic breast cancer in women. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. 2019; 76 (16): 1183–1202. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/zxz121

27. Lamb R., Lehn S., Rogerson L. et al. Cell cycle regulators cyclin D1 and CDK4/6 have estrogen receptordependent divergent functions in breast cancer migration and stem cell-like activity. Cell cycle. 2013; 12 (15): 2384–2394. https://doi.org/10.4161/cc.25403

28. Finn RS, Martin M, Rugo HS, et al. Palbociclib and letrozole in advanced breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. 2016; 375 (20): 1925–1936. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1607303

29. Hortobagyi GN, Stemmer SM, Burris HA, et al. Ribociclib as first-line therapy for HR-positive, advanced breast cancer. New England journal of medicine. 2016; 375 (18): 1738–1748. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1609709.

30. Goetz MP, Toi M, Campone M, et al. MONARCH 3: Abemaciclib as initial therapy for advanced breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2017; 35 (32): 3638–3646. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2017.75.6155

31. Hortobagyi G.N., Stemmer S.M., Burris H.A., et al. Overall survival with ribociclib plus letrozole in advanced breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. 2022; 386 (10): 942–950. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2114663

32. Im S-A, Lu Y-S, Bardia A, et al. Overall survival with ribociclib plus endocrine therapy in breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. 2019; 381 (4): 307–316. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1903765

33. Tripathy D., Im S.A., Colleoni M., et al. Ribociclib plus endocrine therapy for premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive, advanced breast cancer (MONALEESA-7): A randomised phase 3 trial. The Lancet Oncology 2018; 19 (7): 904–915. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470–2045 (18)30292–4

34. Lu Y.S., Im S.A., Colleoni M., et al. Updated Overall Survival of Ribociclib plus Endocrine Therapy versus Endocrine Therapy Alone in Pre-and Perimenopausal Patients with HR+/HER2– Advanced Breast Cancer in MONALEESA-7: A Phase III Randomized Clinical Trial Updated Overall Survival Analysis of the MONALEESA-7 Trial. Clinical Cancer Research. 2021; OF1–OF9. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078–0432.CCR‑21–3032

35. Yardley DA, Chan A, Nusch A, et al. Abstract P6–18–07: Ribociclib+ endocrine therapy in patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer presenting with visceral metastases: Subgroup analysis of phase III MONALEESA trials. Cancer Research. 2019; 79 (4): P6–18–07–P6–18–07. https://doi.org/10.1158/1538–7445.SABCS18-P6–18–07

36. Bardia A. et al. Tamoxifen (TAM) or a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) with ribociclib (RIB) in premenopausal patients (pts) with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative (HER2–) advanced breast cancer (ABC): MONALEESA-7 subgroup analysis. Annals of Oncology. 2018; 29: 106–107. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdy272.320

37. Yardley D.A., Nusch A., Yap Y.S., et al. Overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) with advanced breast cancer (ABC) with visceral metastases (mets), including those with liver mets, treated with ribociclib (RIB) plus endocrine therapy (ET) in the MONALEESA (ML)-3 and -7 trials. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2020; 38 (15): 1054. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.1054

38. Yeung C., Hilton J., Clemons M., et al. Estrogen, progesterone, and HER2/neu receptor discordance between primary and metastatic breast tumours – ​a review. Cancer and Metastasis Reviews. 2016; 35 (3): 427–437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10555–016–9631–3

39. Giuliano M., Schettini F., Rognoni C. et al. Endocrine treatment versus chemotherapy in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2- negative, metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and network metaanalysis. The Lancet Oncology. 2019; 20 (10): 1360–1369. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470–2045 (19)30420–6

40. Taylor C.W., Green S., Dalton W. S., et al. Multicenter randomized clinical trial of goserelin versus surgical ovariectomy in premenopausal patients with receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: an intergroup study. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 1998; 16 (3): 994–999. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1998.16.3.994.

41. Fasching P.A., Bardia A., Nusch A., et al. 276O Pooled analysis of patient (pt)-reported quality of life (QOL) in the MONALEESA (ML)-2,–3, and -7 trials of ribociclib (RIB) plus endocrine therapy (ET) to treat hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative (HR+/HER2–) advanced breast cancer (ABC). Annals of Oncology. 2020; 31: S350–S351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2020.08.378

42. Slamon DJ, Neven P, Chia S, et al. Overall Survival with Ribociclib plus Fulvestrant in Advanced Breast Cancer. New England Journal of medicine. 2020; 382 (6): 514–524. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1911149