Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

, Volume 122, Issue 2, pp 409–418 | Cite as

Analysis of overall survival from a phase III study of ixabepilone plus capecitabine versus capecitabine in patients with MBC resistant to anthracyclines and taxanes

  • Gabriel N. Hortobagyi
  • Henry L. Gomez
  • Rubi K. Li
  • Hyun-Cheol Chung
  • Luis E. Fein
  • Valorie F. Chan
  • Jacek Jassem
  • Guillermo L. Lerzo
  • Xavier B. Pivot
  • Fernando Hurtado de Mendoza
  • Binghe Xu
  • Linda T. Vahdat
  • Ronald A. Peck
  • Pralay Mukhopadhyay
  • Henri H. Roché
Clinical trial


Limited proven treatment options exist for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) resistant to anthracycline and taxane treatment. Ixabepilone, a novel semisynthetic analog of epothilone B, has demonstrated single-agent activity in MBC resistant to anthracyclines and taxanes. In combination with capecitabine in a phase III trial (CA163-046) in this setting, ixabepilone prolonged progression-free survival and increased objective response rate relative to capecitabine (Thomas et al. J Clin Oncol 25:5210–5217, 2007). Here, we report the results of overall survival (OS), a secondary efficacy endpoint from the CA163-046 trial. Seven hundred fifty-two patients with MBC resistant to anthracyclines and taxanes were randomized to ixabepilone (40 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle) plus capecitabine (2,000 mg/m2 orally on days 1 through 14 of a 21-day cycle) or capecitabine alone (2,500 mg/m2 on the same schedule). Patients receiving ixabepilone plus capecitabine treatment had a median survival of 12.9 months compared to 11.1 months for patients receiving capecitabine alone (HR = 0.9; 95%CI: 077–1.05; P = 0.19). This observed increase in median OS favored the combination; however, the difference was not statistically significant. Predefined subset analyses showed a clinically meaningful increase in OS in KPS 70–80 patients receiving ixabepilone plus capecitabine (HR = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.58–0.98). Ixabepilone plus capecitabine did not show a significant improvement in survival compared to capecitabine alone in patients with MBC resistant to anthracyclines and taxanes. The observed differences in survival favored the combination arm. A clinical benefit was also seen in patients in the KPS 70–80 subgroup ( number, NCT000080301).


Epothilone Ixabepilone Metastatic breast cancer Overall survival 



CA163-046 was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb. The authors wish to thank the patients and all the investigators who participated in the study. Professional medical writing and editorial assistance provided by Ananya Bhattacharya, employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb. The authors vouch for the completeness and accuracy of results presented.

Conflict of interest statement

GH has served as a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb and Novartis and has a commercial research grant from Novartis; LF has served as a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb; VC has received honoraria from Eli Lilly and Novartis and has served as a consultant for Astra Zeneca; JJ has served as a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb and Glaxo SmithKleine; XP has received honoraria from Roche, Glaxo SmithKleine, and Novartis, has served as a consultant for Roche and has received commercial research support from Roche; LV has received honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, commercial research grant from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Curagen, Imclone, and Glaxo SmithKleine, and has served as a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bayer, and Onyx; HG, RKL, HCC GL, FM BX, and HR have no financial relationships to disclose; RP and PM are employees of Bristol-Myers Squibb.


  1. 1.
    Ries LAG, Melbert D, Krapcho M et al (2008) Surveillance epidemiology and end results. Available at Posted on SEERS website 2008
  2. 2.
    Henderson IC, Berry DA, Demetri GD et al (2003) Improved outcomes from adding sequential Paclitaxel but not from escalating doxorubicin dose in an adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for patients with node-positive primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 21:976–983CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mamounas EP, Bryant J, Lembersky B et al (2005) Paclitaxel after doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide as adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer: results from NSABP B-28. J Clin Oncol 23:3686–3696CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Martin M, Pienkowski T, Mackey J et al (2005) Adjuvant docetaxel for node-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 352:2302–2313CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bonneterre J, Dieras V, Tubiana-Hulin M et al (2004) Phase II multicentre randomised study of docetaxel plus epirubicin vs 5-fluorouracil plus epirubicin and cyclophosphamide in metastatic breast cancer. Br J Cancer 91:1466–1471PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bontenbal M, Creemers GJ, Braun HJ et al (2005) Phase II to III study comparing doxorubicin and docetaxel with fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer: results of a Dutch Community Setting Trial for the Clinical Trial Group of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre. J Clin Oncol 23:7081–7088CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jassem J, Pienkowski T, Pluzanska A et al (2001) Doxorubicin and paclitaxel versus fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide as first-line therapy for women with metastatic breast cancer: final results of a randomized phase III multicenter trial. J Clin Oncol 19:1707–1715PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nabholtz JM, Falkson C, Campos D (2003) Docetaxel and doxorubicin compared with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: results of a randomized, multicenter, phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 21:968–975CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Longley DB, Johnston PG (2005) Molecular mechanisms of drug resistance. J Pathol 205:275–292CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Valero V, Hortobagyi GN (2003) Are anthracycline-taxane regimens the new standard of care in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer? J Clin Oncol 21:959–962CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cardoso F, Di LA, Lohrisch C et al (2002) Second and subsequent lines of chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: what did we learn in the last two decades? Ann Oncol 13:197–207CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bernard-Marty C, Cardoso F, Piccart MJ (2004) Facts and controversies in systemic treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Oncologist 9:617–632CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee JJ, Swain SM (2005) Development of novel chemotherapeutic agents to evade the mechanisms of multidrug resistance (MDR). Semin Oncol 32:S22–S26CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee FY, Shen H, Lee H et al (2008) Ixabepilone overcomes multiple mechanisms of drug resistance including overexpression of class III ß tubulin and breast cancer resistance protein. Eur J Cancer 6:219 (abstr)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lee FYF, Camuso A, Castenada S et al (2006) Preclinical studies of ixabepilone (BMS-247550) demonstrate optimal anti-tumor activity against both chemotherapy sensitive and resistant tumor types. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 47 (abstr)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Baselga J, Zambetti M, Llombart-Cussac A et al (2009) Phase II genomics study of ixabepilone as neoadjuvant treatment for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 27:526–534CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bunnell C, Vahdat L, Schwartzberg L et al (2008) Phase I/II study of ixabepilone plus capecitabine in anthracycline-pretreated/resistant and taxane-resistant metastatic breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer 8:234–241CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Low JA, Wedam SB, Lee JJ et al (2005) Phase II clinical trial of ixabepilone (BMS-247550), an epothilone B analog, in metastatic and locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:2726–2734CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Perez EA, Lerzo G, Pivot X et al (2007) Efficacy and safety of ixabepilone (BMS-247550) in a phase II study of patients with advanced breast cancer resistant to an anthracycline, a taxane, and capecitabine. J Clin Oncol 25:3407–3414CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Roche H, Yelle L, Cognetti F et al (2007) Phase II clinical trial of ixabepilone (BMS-247550), an epothilone B analog, as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracycline chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 25:3415–3420CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thomas E, Tabernero J, Fornier M et al (2007) Phase II clinical trial of ixabepilone (BMS-247550), an epothilone B analog, in patients with taxane-resistant metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:3399–3406CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Thomas ES, Gomez HL, Li RK et al (2007) Ixabepilone plus capecitabine for metastatic breast cancer progressing after anthracycline and taxane treatment. J Clin Oncol 25:5210–5217CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thomas ES (2008) Ixabepilone plus capecitabine for metastatic breast cancer progressing after anthracycline, taxane treatment. J Clin Oncol 26:2223CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Blum JL, Jones SE, Buzdar AU et al (1999) Multicenter phase II study of capecitabine in paclitaxel-refractory metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 17:485–493PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Oshaughnessy JA, Blum J, Moiseyenko V et al (2001) Randomized, open-label, phase II trial of oral capecitabine (Xeloda) vs. a reference arm of intravenous CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil) as first-line therapy for advanced/metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 12:1247–1254CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hortobagyi GN, Perez E, Vrdoljak E, Medina C, Xu B, Conte P, Roche H, Peck R, Poulart V, Sparano JA (2008) Analysis of overall survival (OS) among patients (pts) with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) receiving either Ixabepilone (I) plus capecitabine (C) or C alone: results from two randomized phase III trials. In: The 2008 Breast Cancer Symposium—integrating emerging science into clinical practice, September 5–7, 2008, Washington, D.C., p 178 (abst 186), (Poster presentation)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cameron D, Casey M, Press M et al (2008) A phase III randomized comparison of lapatinib plus capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in women with advanced breast cancer that has progressed on trastuzumab: updated efficacy and biomarker analyses. Breast Cancer Res Treat 112:533–543CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Geyer CE, Forster J, Lindquist D et al (2006) Lapatinib plus capecitabine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 355:2733–2743CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Martin M, Ruiz A, Munoz M et al (2007) Gemcitabine plus vinorelbine versus vinorelbine monotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines and taxanes: final results of the phase III Spanish Breast Cancer Research Group (GEICAM) trial. Lancet Oncol 8:219–225CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Miller KD, Chap LI, Holmes FA et al (2005) Randomized phase III trial of capecitabine compared with bevacizumab plus capecitabine in patients with previously treated metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:792–799CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sargent DJ, Hayes DF (2008) Assessing the measure of a new drug: is survival the only thing that matters? J Clin Oncol 26:1922–1923CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Petrelli F, Cabiddu M, Cazzaniga ME et al (2008) Targeted therapies for the treatment of breast cancer in the post-trastuzumab era. Oncologist 13:373–381CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Burzykowski T, Buyse M (2008) Taxanes alone or in combination with anthracyclines as first-line therapy of patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:1980–1986CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Giordano SH, Buzdar AU, Smith TL et al (2004) Is breast cancer survival improving? Cancer 100:44–52CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E et al (2008) Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin 58:71–96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lekberg TG, Rutqvist LE et al (2003) Markedly improved survival in patients with systemic metastatic breast cancer during a twenty year period—population based registry data from the Stockholm health care region. Breast Cancer Res Treat 82(Suppl 1) (abstr)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Amar S, Roy V, Perez EA (2008) Treatment of metastatic breast cancer: looking towards the future. Breast Cancer Res TreatGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Carrick S, Parker S, Thornton CE et al (2009) Single agent versus combination chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD003372Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Muss HB, Case LD, Richards F et al (1991) Interrupted versus continuous chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. The Piedmont Oncology Association. N Engl J Med 325:1342–1348CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Coates A, Gebski V, Bishop JF et al (1987) Improving the quality of life during chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. A comparison of intermittent and continuous treatment strategies. N Engl J Med 317:1490–1495CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Pazdur R (2008) Endpoints for assessing drug activity in clinical trials. Oncologist 13(Suppl 2):19–21CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Chia SK, Speers CH, D’yachkova Y et al (2007) The impact of new chemotherapeutic and hormone agents on survival in a population-based cohort of women with metastatic breast cancer. Cancer 110:973–979CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Miller K, Wang M, Gralow J et al (2007) Paclitaxel plus bevacizumab versus paclitaxel alone for metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med 357:2666–2676CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriel N. Hortobagyi
    • 1
  • Henry L. Gomez
    • 2
  • Rubi K. Li
    • 3
  • Hyun-Cheol Chung
    • 4
  • Luis E. Fein
    • 5
  • Valorie F. Chan
    • 6
  • Jacek Jassem
    • 7
  • Guillermo L. Lerzo
    • 8
  • Xavier B. Pivot
    • 9
  • Fernando Hurtado de Mendoza
    • 10
  • Binghe Xu
    • 11
  • Linda T. Vahdat
    • 12
  • Ronald A. Peck
    • 13
  • Pralay Mukhopadhyay
    • 13
  • Henri H. Roché
    • 14
  1. 1.Department of Breast Medical OncologyThe University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA
  2. 2.The Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades NeoplasicasLimaPeru
  3. 3.The St. Luke’s Medical CenterQuezon CityPhilippines
  4. 4.The Yonsei Cancer CenterSeoulRepublic of Korea
  5. 5.The Centro de Oncologia RosarioSanta FeArgentina
  6. 6.The Veterans Memorial Medical CenterQuezon CityPhilippines
  7. 7.The Medical University of GdanskGdanskPoland
  8. 8.The Hospital de Oncologia ‘Maria Curie’Buenos AiresArgentina
  9. 9.University Hospital of BesançonInsermFrance
  10. 10.The Hospital Nacional Edgardo Rebagliati MartinsLimaPeru
  11. 11.The Cancer Hospital—Chinese Academy of Medical SciencesBeijingChina
  12. 12.The Weill Medical College of Cornell UniversityNew YorkUSA
  13. 13.Research and DevelopmentBristol-Myers SquibbWallingfordUSA
  14. 14.The Institut Claudius RegaudToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations