Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

As the overall population ages, the proportion of elderly patients (aged ≥65 years) with breast cancer also increases. Studies have shown that elderly patients with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer can derive as much benefit from treatment as do younger patients, yet they remain underrepresented in clinical trials and are often undertreated in clinical practice. Treatment decisions for older patients should not be based solely on chronologic age; a patient's physiologic functioning and comorbidities must also be taken into consideration. For recurrent or metastatic disease, systemic treatment with endocrine therapies or chemotherapy may prolong a patient's life and alleviate troublesome symptoms. Resistance to therapy remains a problem in the advanced breast cancer setting, with most patients eventually becoming resistant to additional treatment. New combination regimens that target multiple pathways, such as everolimus plus exemestane, have shown efficacy in elderly patients previously resistant to endocrine therapies, and future research may need to focus on such combinations in order to improve outcomes in this patient group. A number of investigational agents are in clinical development, although few studies identify their effects in the elderly patient population. Optimizing effective yet tolerable therapeutic regimens for elderly patients could improve their outcomes while ensuring that the goals of improved survival and quality of life are considered.

Keywords

hormone receptor positive advanced breast cancer targeted therapy

Introduction

The incidence of breast cancer increases with age,¹ and as the overall mean population ages, the proportion of elderly (aged >65 years) breast cancer patients will increase.^2–4 The median age for breast cancer diagnosis is 61 years (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results [SEER] program data, 2007–2011)^2,5; more than 40% of patients are aged at least 65 years at the time of diagnosis,⁵ and approximately 10% are older than 80 years.⁶ Breast cancer can be classified into the following subtypes based on receptor status and cellular proliferation (assessed by the proportion of cells staining for the nuclear antigen Ki67): luminal A–like: low Ki67 expression, estrogen receptor–positive (ER+), progesterone receptor–positive (PR+), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2–); luminal B–like: either high Ki67 expression or low/no expression of PR, ER+, and HER2- (HER2+ luminal B–like subtype consists of ER+, any Ki67 expression, and any PR expression); nonluminal: HER2+ and both ER– and PR–; ductal (triple negative): ER–, PR–, and HER2–.⁷ Compared with younger patients, a larger proportion of elderly breast cancer patients have hormone receptor–positive (HR+) disease, which is defined as being ER+, PR+, or both.⁸ Disease characteristics may vary based on patient age, with younger women typically having more aggressive tumors and older women more commonly having less aggressive disease, although the basis for this disparity remains unclear.^8–10 However, despite improvements in overall survival (OS) rates over the past 20 years, disease-related deaths have not declined as much in elderly breast cancer patients compared with younger patients.^3,11–13

Elderly patients are generally underrepresented in many breast cancer trials compared with the general cancer population,^11–14 and this may contribute to the relative lack of progress seen in reducing mortality in older breast cancer patients compared with younger patients. A post hoc analysis of older postmenopausal patients with HR+ breast cancer showed that older age was associated with higher disease-specific mortality, with undertreatment the most likely explanation.¹⁵ Such data emphasize the need for age-specific studies to be undertaken to improve outcomes for all ages and the necessity of ensuring that elderly women are offered participation in current clinical studies. The relatively low enrollment numbers of elderly women in breast cancer clinical trials may reflect toxicity issues (physician perceived or actual) and the impact of comorbidities on eligibility for entering trials, despite the fact that there is usually no cutoff age specified for clinical trials.^3,16 Compared with younger patients, many older patients may opt for less aggressive treatment of their cancer. In addition, physicians may be less likely to encourage elderly women to participate in clinical trials, compared with younger women.^17,18 To improve the survival chances for older women, it is necessary to optimize their therapeutic regimens while accounting for their comorbid illnesses, functional status, social requirements, and life expectancy.^4,14,19–24 Although many older cancer survivors can function well, they are more likely to be challenged by their comorbid illnesses, which can lead to decreased quality of life.²⁵ It is especially important to include quality-of-life measures in studies of elderly patients with cancer.²⁶ Targeted therapies may lead to an improved therapeutic ratio, if treatment-related toxicities are lower.

Additional Considerations for Treating Elderly Patients

Treating elderly patients requires consideration of a number of potentially confounding factors that may not be as relevant to treating younger cancer patients, such as poorer overall physiologic functioning and, in particular, the presence of comorbidities that can lead to potential adverse drug reactions.^27,28 Increased age is associated with declining organ function, including heart, lungs, kidneys, bone marrow, and liver, which may result in decreased physiologic reserve in older patients.²⁷ However, this needs to be assessed on a case-by-case basis because chronologic age does not always equate with physiologic age.⁴ Adequate assessment of physiologic functioning should be undertaken before deciding on an appropriate breast cancer treatment regimen, using a comprehensive geriatric assessment tool that assesses physical, psychological, and social aspects of function.²⁹

Comorbidities are generally more common in older patients^30,31 and may adversely affect survival.³² When deciding how to treat elderly breast cancer patients, oncologists need to balance the risk posed by the cancer versus the risk from other major comorbidities, such as cardiovascular disease, that could be worsened by cancer therapy.^14,33,34 The role of chemotherapy needs to be questioned if there are several significant comorbid conditions.²⁹ In addition to the direct effects of the comorbidities on a patient's ability to tolerate cancer-related therapy, the treatments associated with those comorbidities might potentially result in unintended drug–drug interactions. The number of drugs taken by a patient is an important predictor of risk for adverse events (AEs) and treatment outcome because AEs may limit treatment duration and benefits.³⁵ Evidence suggests, however, that severe treatment-related symptoms are actually less commonly reported by women aged ≥75 years.³⁶ This implies that oncologists, nurses, and other medical professionals must be vigilant in asking about toxicities before treatment is continued.

Older patients may be at greater risk of not complying with their cancer therapy regimen due to increased prevalence of chronic illnesses and concomitant medications.³⁵ In patients with HR+ breast cancer, the likelihood of discontinuing hormone therapy has been shown to increase with age in breast cancer trials,^37,38 particularly in patients experiencing AEs from their medication.³⁷ Good patient-centered care and advance warning of expected AEs can improve adherence.³⁹

Current Treatment Options for Advanced/Metastatic Breast Cancer

Current treatment options for elderly patients with HR+ breast cancer are similar to those for younger patients.^24,40,41 The International Society of Geriatric Oncology and the European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists have issued recommendations for the management of older individuals with breast cancer.⁴² These recommendations state that the management of elderly breast cancer patients should not be driven by chronologic age alone; instead, a multidisciplinary oncologic and geriatric approach should be used. Patients should be closely monitored for treatment response and AEs. There is evidence that elderly patients may be undertreated,^19,43 and oncologists should keep this in mind when making treatment decisions. In the absence of empirical data from large, randomized, controlled trials about outcomes for elderly breast cancer patients, prospectively defined subgroup analyses and observational studies may provide an alternative source of data to guide management decisions. Table 1 summarizes the current recommendations for the use of individual pharmacological breast cancer therapies in elderly patients.^44–49

Table 1

Recommendations regarding pharmacological therapy use in elderly patients with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR USE IN THE ELDERLY
Anastrozole⁴⁴	• In advanced breast cancer studies, efficacy findings were not affected by age • No dosage adjustment was required for elderly patients • Pharmacokinetics were not affected by age
Everolimus⁴⁵	• No dosage adjustment in initial dosing is required in elderly patients, but close monitoring and appropriate dose adjustments for adverse reactions are recommended
Exemestane⁴⁶	• Use in elderly patients does not require special precautions • Age-related alterations in pharmacokinetics were not seen in healthy postmenopausal women aged 43–68 years
Fulvestrant⁴⁷	• There was no difference in the pharmacokinetic profile related to age (range, 33–89 years) • When tumor response was considered by age, objective responses were seen in 22%–24% of patients aged <65 years and in 11%–16% of patients aged ≥65 years
Letrozole⁴⁸	• In the study populations (adults aged 35 to >80 years), no change in pharmacokinetic parameters were observed with increasing age
Tamoxifen ⁴⁹	• No overall differences in tolerability were observed between older and younger patients

First-line therapy

In contrast to early breast cancer, wherein the goal for treatment is cure,²⁰ for patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer, the emphasis of treatment is to palliate symptoms and extend life.^41,50,51 Current first-line treatment for postmenopausal patients diagnosed with HR+ advanced breast cancer depends on previous treatment. For women who are naive to treatment, or who have been of treatment for at least 1 year, aromatase inhibitors (AIs) would be considered first-line therapy.^41,51–58 The same treatment is recommended for elderly patients diagnosed with HR+ breast cancer,^40,50,55 including those with diminished functional status. The AIs currently approved for use in advanced HR+ disease include anastrozole (Arimidex^®), letrozole (Femara^®), and exemestane (Aromasin^®).^44,46,48 There are no clear differences in efficacy among these three agents.^59,60 As a treatment class, AIs have demonstrated improved outcomes relative to tamoxifen or other first-generation hormone agents.^59,61

For patients with both HR+ and HER2+ metastatic breast cancer, lapatinib (a dual HER2 and epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor) is approved as a first-line treatment in combination with letrozole.⁶² A phase III trial of letrozole plus lapatinib versus letrozole alone as first-line therapy showed that the combination significantly improved the clinical benefit rate (CBR) and progression-free survival (PFS) in postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2+ metastatic breast cancer, but not in patients with HR+/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2–) disease.⁶³ Although the proportion of elderly patients included in the study was not reported, it was found that younger age was a significant stratification factor in the observed efficacy benefit in the HR+/HER2+ population.⁶³ Several other combinations of a HER2 inhibitor plus an endocrine inhibitor are currently under investigation. Trastuzumab in combination with anastrozole was studied in a phase III trial in postmenopausal patients with HR+/HER2+ metastatic breast cancer, some of whom had previous exposure to endocrine therapy. Although anastrozole alone improved time to progression (TTP) by 2.4 months, the TTP for patients receiving the combination was significantly improved, at 4.8 months (P = 0.0007).⁶⁴ A phase III trial comparing letrozole combined with trastuzumab to letrozole alone in patients with HR+/HER2+ metastatic breast cancer, in which approximately 40% of patients had received previous tamoxifen therapy, showed that the median TTP with combination therapy was 14.1 months compared with 3.3 months with letrozole alone.⁶⁵ However, the therapeutic ratio for these combinations in elderly patients remains to be established.

Unfortunately, patients with advanced and metastatic HR+ disease will ultimately become refractory to endocrine treatment,⁶⁶ and resistance is a major treatment problem because of the complex and intersecting growth factor signaling pathways present in breast tissue.⁶⁷ For many women with HR+ advanced breast cancer, sequential use of endocrine therapies at each disease progression will provide continued benefit, and current guidelines state that women who respond to an endocrine treatment with tumor shrinkage or disease stabilization should receive additional endocrine therapy at disease progression.⁴¹

Second and subsequent lines of therapy

Many patients have endocrine-resistant HR+ disease, so there is a significant unmet need for therapies to overcome resistance to endocrine therapy.^53,68,69 Some patients are resistant to therapy at the initial exposure (ie, due to primary or innate resistance), whereas others who initially respond will subsequently have disease progression while on treatment (ie, acquired resistance).^70,71 Most initial responders to endocrine therapy will eventually become resistant.^54,72 Trying sequential endocrine therapies usually results in less benefit with each successive therapy, with shorter duration of response in those patients who do still respond.^66,67

Second-line therapy options after progression on an AI include switching to another endocrine therapy (including fulvestrant), or everolimus plus exemestane (after anastrozole or letrozole only).^41,58,73,74 Evidence from clinical trials indicates that following progression with a nonsteroidal AI (anastrozole or letrozole), it is possible to obtain clinical benefit with a steroidal AI (exemestane) and vice versa.^75–77 Other endocrine options after progression on an AI include fulvestrant or tamoxifen.⁷⁸

Fulvestrant is a 17β-estradiol analog that inhibits the ER with no agonist effect.^47,79 Fulvestrant is currently approved for treating HR+ breast cancer in postmenopausal women only after progression⁴⁷; however, in the first-line setting, it has also demonstrated efficacy similar to that of tamoxifen and anastrozole.^80,81 A combined analysis of two phase III trials^82,83 in the second-line setting in postmenopausal women with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer and disease progression during previous endocrine therapy found fulvestrant 250 mg to be noninferior to anastrozole.⁸⁴ When tumor response was considered by age in these studies, objective responses to fulvestrant were seen in 22%–24% of patients aged <65 years and in 11%–16% of patients aged ≥65 years.⁴⁷ Additionally, fulvestrant (45% of patients in the Evaluation of Faslodex versus Exemestane Clinical Trial (EFECT) were aged ≥65 years) has shown comparable efficacy and tolerability versus exemestane in patients with advanced breast cancer after nonsteroidal AI failure.⁸⁵ In a phase III study assessing fulvestrant 500 mg versus 250 mg in postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer who had disease recurrence on or after endocrine therapy or progression following endocrine therapy for advanced disease, a significant PFS benefit for fulvestrant 500 mg versus 250 mg was shown.⁸⁶ Of note, the last endocrine therapy prior to fulvestrant was either an AI or antiestrogen, and a subgroup analysis of the PFS benefit of fulvestrant 500 mg versus 250 mg based on this pretreatment covariate did not differ. At a final OS analysis of this study, fulvestrant 500 mg was associated with a 19% reduction in the risk of death compared to the 250 mg dose, corresponding to a 4.1-month difference in median OS between the two treatments.⁸⁷ The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) subsequently approved the high-dose fulvestrant schedule as second-line therapy for postmenopausal women with HR+ metastatic disease.⁴⁷

It has been hypothesized that coadministration of fulvestrant with an AI may improve efficacy and delay the onset of resistance by simultaneously blocking both the aromatase enzyme and the ER. However, results from clinical trials have been mixed, with one study indicating that the combination of fulvestrant plus anastrozole was superior to anastrozole alone,⁸⁸ while others reported no advantage with the combination versus either of the agents as monotherapy.^89,90 Women with newly diagnosed stage 4 disease who have not had previous adjuvant endocrine therapy seem to derive the most benefit from this combination. However, more studies are needed to confirm the efficacy of this treatment approach.

The phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B (Akt)/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling pathway has been shown to be another mechanism by which breast cancer cells bypass estrogen blockade, resulting in endocrine resistance,⁹¹ and many agents targeting this pathway are currently under clinical development (Fig. 1).⁹² For patients with advanced HR+ breast cancer who have progressed after treatment with endocrine therapy, one option is to combine an mTOR inhibitor with an endocrine therapy; this combination has demonstrated efficacy with reasonable tolerability.⁹³ Recently, the mTOR inhibitor everolimus in combination with exemestane was approved for the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced HR+/HER2– breast cancer after failure of anastrozole or letrozole therapy,⁴⁵ based on the findings of clinically meaningful benefit in the pivotal phase III Breast cancer trials of OraL EveROlimus-2 (BOLERO-2) trial.^91,93,94 A post hoc analysis of the elderly patients in the BOLERO-2 trial (more than one-third of patients [275/724] were aged ≥65 years, and 164/724 were aged ≥70 years) showed that everolimus and exemestane significantly improved median PFS (primary end point of the study) versus exemestane alone in patients aged ≥70 years (median PFS: 6.77 versus 1.51 months; hazard ratio: 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.30–0.68)⁹⁵; this was similar to the primary efficacy results for the overall population (median PFS at the final analysis: 7.8 versus 3.2 months; hazard ratio: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.38–0.54; P < 0.0001).⁹⁴ Disease and pretreatment characteristics were generally comparable between patients aged ≥70 years and those aged <70 years in the post hoc analysis.⁹⁵ Similarly, the CBR in patients aged ≥70 years in the everolimus plus exemestane group was greater compared with the exemestane-alone group (36% vs 23%).⁹⁵ The safety profile of combination everolimus plus exemestane in patients aged ≥70 years was consistent with the known overall profiles of each agent.⁹⁵ Similar to the results in the overall population in the BOLERO-2 study, the most common AEs were stomatitis (49%), fatigue (38%), decreased appetite (36%), and diarrhea (36%).⁹⁵ The incidence of special-interest AEs was similar between patients aged ≥70 years and those aged <70 years, including pneumonitis (14% vs 17%, respectively), hyperglycemia (12% vs 15%), and hypercholesterolemia (7% vs 11%).⁹⁵ However, the incidence of grade 3/4 AEs was somewhat higher in patients aged ≥70 years than in those aged <70 years, and adverse reactions leading to treatment discontinuation occurred in more patients aged ≥70 years than in those aged <70 years.^45,95 The results from this post hoc analysis of older patients showed that no dosage adjustment in initial dosing is required in older patients who have no other health concerns, although close monitoring is recommended. Dose should be adjusted as appropriate if AEs occur (per the prescribing information).⁴⁵

Figure 1.

Key targeted agents against breast cancer under clinical development. Adapted from: Munagala R et al. Promising molecular targeted therapies in breast cancer. Indian J Pharmacol. 2011;43(3):236–245.⁹²

Recurrent Disease

Once metastatic disease becomes insensitive to further endocrine therapies, cytotoxic chemotherapy becomes the next stage of treatment for many patients.⁹⁶ For recurrent disease, sequential single-agent chemotherapy regimens are preferred, including taxanes (paclitaxel, docetaxel), anthracyclines (doxorubicin, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin [PLD]), capecitabine, gemcitabine, vinorelbine, or eribulin.⁴¹ In a study of taxanes administered to patients aged ≥70 years and/or frail patients with metastatic breast cancer, weekly dosing was shown to be well tolerated, retaining the same efficacy observed in nonfrail/nonelderly patient cohorts.⁹⁷ Furthermore, weekly paclitaxel is as effective as the newer chemotherapeutic agents ixabepilone and nab-paclitaxel, while demonstrating less toxicity.⁹⁸ PLD has been specifically assessed in patients aged ≥70 years with metastatic breast cancer at a dose of 40 mg/m² every 28 days, producing an overall response rate of 21% and a CBR of 84% with manageable hematologic toxicities, although only 48% of patients were able to complete six treatment cycles due to overall toxicity.⁹⁹ A second trial of PLD (the Chemotherapy Adjuvant Study for Women at Advanced Age (CASA) trial), which included women aged ≥66 years with endocrine-nonresponsive tumors and who were not suitable for “standard chemotherapy regimens” because of comorbidities, age, or frailty, demonstrated that PLD may be a suitable treatment for such patients, with 81% of subjects free of disease after 42 months of follow-up.¹⁰⁰ The efficacy and tolerability of other chemotherapeutic agents in an elderly population remain to be elucidated.¹⁶

Investigational Strategies in the Setting of Endocrine Resistance

Several strategies are being assessed for overcoming resistance to therapy in patients with HR+ breast cancer. On the basis of the success observed with the everolimus plus exemestane combination, the use of mTOR inhibitors in combination with other endocrine therapies to overcome endocrine resistance in advanced breast cancer continues to be explored in several ongoing phase II trials: everolimus in combination with letrozole (NCT01698918),¹⁰¹ with letrozole and lapatinib (NCT01499160),¹⁰² and with fulvestrant (NCT01797120¹⁰³; NCT00570921¹⁰⁴). Other mTOR combinations have also demonstrated some efficacy. In postmenopausal women with HR+ advanced breast cancer in whom previous tamoxifen and/or AI therapy was ineffective, sirolimus plus tamoxifen significantly improved TTP and response rates compared with tamoxifen alone in a phase II trial.¹⁰⁵ On the other hand, no benefit was observed when temsirolimus was combined with letrozole versus letrozole alone in a phase III trial in postmenopausal women with AI-naïve locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer in the first-line setting.¹⁰⁶ In this study, 41% of patients were aged >65 years, and an exploratory subset analysis showed an interaction between age and treatment outcome.¹⁰⁶ Patients aged ≤65 years had longer PFS with letrozole plus temsirolimus than with letrozole alone (median PFS: 9.0 vs 5.6 months; hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.60–0.93; P = 0.009), whereas PFS was comparable for patients aged >65 years (median PFS: 8.5 vs 10.1 months; hazard ratio: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.92–1.59; P = 0.17).¹⁰⁶

Additional strategies for targeting the PI3K pathway are also being investigated for ER+ relapsed breast cancer that is resistant to AIs.¹⁰⁷ In early studies, PI3K inhibitors produced partial responses and disease stabilization¹⁰⁸; BKM120, a pan-PI3K inhibitor, in combination with fulvestrant, is now undergoing two phase III trials, with several other PI3K inhibitors in earlier stages of development. The efficacy and safety of BKM120 are being studied in patients with HR+/HER2– mTOR inhibitor–naïve locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer refractory to AIs in the Buparlisib brEast cancer cLinicaL Evaluation-2 (BELLE-2) (NCT01610284) trial.¹⁰⁹ The BELLE-3 trial (NCT01633060) is evaluating the efficacy of BKM120 with or without fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with HR+ HER2– locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who were treated with an AI and are refractory to endocrine/mTOR inhibitor combination therapy.¹¹⁰ An early-stage clinical trial (phase Ib) is assessing BKM120 or BEZ235 (a novel pan-PI3K/mTOR inhibitor) in combination with letrozole in HR+ metastatic breast cancer (NCT01248494).¹¹¹

Also in development for HR+ breast cancer are agents targeting histone deacetylase (HDAC) and cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors (Fig. 1),^92,112,113 although few trials specifically evaluate the investigational agents in elderly patients. One that did include a relatively high proportion of elderly patients is a phase II trial [ENtinostat Combinations Overcoming REsistance (ENCORE) 301] of entinostat (an HDAC inhibitor) in combination with exemestane in patients with HR+ metastatic breast cancer that progressed while using a nonsteroidal A I.¹¹⁴ In this trial, 42% of the patients were aged ≥65 years, and the results suggested a trend for prolonged PFS in the combination arm compared with exemestane alone.¹¹⁴

Palbociclib (PD-0332991) is an orally bioavailable CDK inhibitor that blocks progression of the cell cycle and has shown good efficacy in early studies in women with HR+ endocrine-refractory breast cancer.¹¹⁵ In the PALbociclib: Ongoing trials in the Management of breast cAncer (PALOMA-1) randomized phase II study, PFS improved from 10 to 20 months in women receiving letrozole plus palbociclib versus letrozole alone for first-line metastatic disease.¹¹⁶ The confirmatory larger phase III PALOMA-3 trial has not been reported. Based on the data from the phase II study, palbociclib was recently approved by the FDA for first-line use in combination with letrozole in women with postmenopausal HR+ breast cancer who have metastatic disease. Several other studies with palbociclib are ongoing, including those that evaluate its use as monotherapy in women who experienced progression on first- or second-line endocrine therapy,¹¹⁷ a phase II study in combination with anastrozole (NCT01723774),¹¹⁸ a phase III study in combination with exemestane (NCT02028507),¹¹⁹ and three studies as first-line treatment in combination with letrozole for HR+ advanced breast cancer (phases I/II, NCT00721409¹²⁰; phase II, NCT01709370¹²¹; phase III, NCT01740427¹²²). A second CDK4/6 inhibitor, LEE011, is also in development for the treatment of HER2– advanced breast cancer, in combination with letrozole (phases I/II, NCT01872260¹²³; phase III, NCT01958021¹²⁴) or added to everolimus plus exemestane (phases I/II; NCT01857193¹²⁵).¹⁰¹

Initial accelerated approval for the antiangiogenic antibody bevacizumab, in combination with paclitaxel, in metastatic breast cancer was revoked by the FDA because of additional clinical trial results that failed to demonstrate a significant improvement in OS or a clinically relevant therapeutic benefit.²¹ Overall, however, analysis of bevacizumab in elderly patients included in clinical trials indicates that PFS benefits are comparable in older and younger patients.²¹ In the recently reported Avastin THErapy for advaNced breAst cancer (ATHENA) trial, bevacizumab plus chemotherapy for first-line clinical use produced a median TTP of 10.4 months in a subanalysis of patients aged ≥70 years, thus mirroring the overall results of the ATHENA study.^126,127

Conclusions

Elderly women are an increasingly large proportion of the HR+ breast cancer population, yet they are often underrepresented in clinical trials. Current treatment options for older patients are similar to those for younger patients, although consideration needs to be given to the higher number of comorbidities that may be present in this population. These comorbidities may hinder older patients’ use of more aggressive therapies and limit their involvement in clinical trials. Therefore, a patient's biological rather than chronological age must be considered because of the heterogeneity of characteristics present in older patients. This variability may significantly affect treatment choices and patient outcomes and thus represents a limitation in clinical trials in which patient populations are defined by chronological age. The potential for resistance to endocrine treatment and chemotherapy is the same for older patients. Although elderly patients may be less able to tolerate some of the more toxic combination regimens, a few novel combination therapies entering the treatment market, such as everolimus plus exemestane, have shown good tolerability in elderly patients. It is important that elderly patients receive optimized therapeutic regimens that will improve their PFS, while also taking into account the challenges induced by their comorbid illnesses and functional status.

Author Contributions

DR was involved in the conception, design, writing, and final approval of the article.

Footnotes

Acknowledgment

Editorial support in the preparation of this manuscript was provided by Alison Comer, PhD, and Matthew Grzywacz, PhD (ApotheCom, Yardley, PA, USA). Editorial support in the writing of this article was funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

References

Siegel

, Naishadham

, Jemal

Cancer statistics, 2013.

CA Cancer J Clin. 2013; 63(1): 11–30.

American Cancer Society. American Cancer Society Breast Cancer Facts and Figures 2013–2014. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society; 2013.

Audisio

R.A.

Breast cancer in the elderly: different treatment modalities.

Eur J Cancer. 2011; 47(Suppl 3): S286–9.

Williams

G.R.

, Jones

, Muss

H.B.

Challenges in the treatment of older breast cancer patients.

Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2013; 27(4): 785–804.

Howlader

, Noone

A.M.

, Krapcho

SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2008. Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2008 Accessed February 24, 2015.

Vetter

, Huang

D.J.

, Bosshard

, Guth

Breast cancer in women 80 years of age and older: a comprehensive analysis of an underreported entity.

Acta Oncol. 2013; 52(1): 57–65.

Goldhirsch

, Winer

E.P.

, Coates

A.S.

Panel members. Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2013.

Ann Oncol. 2013; 24(9): 2206–23.

Diab

S.G.

, Elledge

R.M.

, Clark

G.M.

Tumor characteristics and clinical outcome of elderly women with breast cancer.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000; 92(7): 550–6.

Beadle

B.M.

, Woodward

W.A.

, Buchholz

T.A.

The impact of age on outcome in early-stage breast cancer.

Semin Radiat Oncol. 2011; 21(1): 26–34.

10.

Wildiers

, Kunkler

, Biganzoli

International Society of Geriatric Oncology. Management of breast cancer in elderly individuals: recommendations of the international society of geriatric oncology.

Lancet Oncol. 2007; 8(12): 1101–15.

11.

Daidone

M.G.

, Coradini

, Martelli

, Veneroni

Primary breast cancer in elderly women: biological profile and relation with clinical outcome.

Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2003; 45(3): 313–25.

12.

Downey

L.B.

Adjuvant treatment of breast cancer in the elderly. Understanding and addressing the challenges.

Oncology (Williston Park). 2008; 22(3): 286–93.

13.

Hamaker

M.E.

, Seynaeve

, Nortier

J.W.

Slow accrual of elderly patients with metastatic breast cancer in the Dutch multicentre OMEGA study.

Breast. 2013; 22(4): 556–9.

14.

Markopoulos

, van de Water

, van de Velde

C.J.

Breast cancer in the elderly: reducing the losses.

Future Oncol. 2013; 9(9): 1253–6.

15.

van de Water

, Markopoulos

, van de Velde

C.J.

Association between age at diagnosis and disease-specific mortality among postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

JAMA. 2012; 307(6): 590–7.

16.

Debled

, Bellera

, Donamaria

, Soubeyran

Chemotherapy treatment for older women with metastatic breast cancer: what is the evidence?

Cancer Treat Rev. 2011; 37(8): 590–8.

17.

Kemeny

M.M.

, Peterson

B.L.

, Kornblith

A.B.

Barriers to clinical trial participation by older women with breast cancer.

J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21(12): 2268–75.

18.

Brollo

, Curigliano

, Disalvatore

Adjuvant trastuzumab in elderly with HER-2 positive breast cancer: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Cancer Treat Rev. 2013; 39(1): 44–50.

19.

Tran

, Fentiman

I.S.

Better treatment for breast cancer in older patients.

Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2009; 9(8): 1081–90.

20.

Gandhi

, Verma

Early breast cancer in the older woman.

Oncologist. 2011; 16(4): 479–85.

21.

Aprile

, Ferrari

, Fontanella

, Puglisi

Bevacizumab in older patients with advanced colorectal or breast cancer.

Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2013; 87(1): 41–54.

22.

Hamaker

M.E.

, Buurman

B.M.

, van Munster

B.C.

, Kuper

I.M.

, Smorenburg

C.H.

, de Rooij

S.E.

The value of a comprehensive geriatric assessment for patient care in acutely hospitalized older patients with cancer.

Oncologist. 2011; 16(10): 1403–12.

23.

Kartal

, Tezcan

, Canda

Diagnosis, treatment characteristics, and survival of women with breast cancer aged 65 and above: a hospital-based retrospective study.

BMC Womens Health. 2013; 13(1): 34.

24.

Spazzapan

, Crivellari

, Bedard

Therapeutic management of breast cancer in the elderly.

Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2011; 12(6): 945–60.

25.

Bellury

, Pett

M.A.

, Ellington

, Beck

S.L.

, Clark

J.C.

, Stein

K.D.

The effect of aging and cancer on the symptom experience and physical function of elderly breast cancer survivors.

Cancer. 2012; 118(24): 6171–8.

26.

Reimer

, Gerber

Quality-of-life considerations in the treatment of early-stage breast cancer in the elderly.

Drugs Aging. 2010; 27(10): 791–800.

27.

Carlson

R.W.

, Moench

, Hurria

NCCN task force report: breast cancer in the older woman.

J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2008; 6(Suppl 4): S1–25.

28.

Dittus

, Muss

H.B.

Management of the frail elderly with breast cancer.

Oncology (Williston Park). 2007; 21(14): 1727–34.

29.

Burdette-Radoux

, Muss

H.B.

Adjuvant chemotherapy in the elderly: whom to treat, what regimen?

Oncologist. 2006; 11(3): 234–42.

30.

Coebergh

J.W.

, Janssen-Heijnen

M.L.

, Razenberg

P.P.

Prevalence of co-morbidity in newly diagnosed patients with cancer: a population-based study.

Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 1998; 27(2): 97–100.

31.

Khan

A.J.

, Haffty

B.G.

Issues in the curative therapy of breast cancer in elderly women.

Semin Radiat Oncol. 2012; 22(4): 295–303.

32.

Dialla

P.O.

, Dabakuyo

T.S.

, Marilier

Population-based study of breast cancer in older women: prognostic factors of relative survival and predictors of treatment.

BMC Cancer. 2012; 12: 472.

33.

Bardia

, Arieas

E.T.

, Zhang

Comparison of breast cancer recurrence risk and cardiovascular disease incidence risk among postmenopausal women with breast cancer.

Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012; 131(3): 907–14.

34.

Aapro

, Bernard-Marty

, Brain

E.G.

Anthracycline cardiotoxicity in the elderly cancer patient: a SIOG expert position paper.

Ann Oncol. 2011; 22(2): 257–67.

35.

Muss

H.B.

, Busby-Whitehead

Older women with breast cancer: slow progress, great opportunity, now is the time.

J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29(35): 4608–10.

36.

Yoon

, Malin

J.L.

, Tao

M.L.

Symptoms after breast cancer treatment: are they influenced by patient characteristics?

Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008; 108(2): 153–65.

37.

Demissie

, Silliman

R.A.

, Lash

T.L.

Adjuvant tamoxifen: predictors of use, side effects, and discontinuation in older women.

J Clin Oncol. 2001; 19(2): 322–8.

38.

Owusu

, Buist

D.S.

, Field

T.S.

Predictors of tamoxifen discontinuation among older women with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26(4): 549–55.

39.

Kahn

K.L.

, Schneider

E.C.

, Malin

J.L.

, Adams

J.L.

, Epstein

A.M.

Patient-centered experiences in breast cancer: predicting long-term adherence to tamoxifen use.

Med Care. 2007; 45(5): 431–9.

40.

Aapro

, Monfardini

, Jirillo

, Basso

Management of primary and advanced breast cancer in older unft patients (medical treatment).

Cancer Treat Rev. 2009; 35(6): 503–8.

41.

National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc.

NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Breast Cancer. Version 1.2014. February 1, 2014.

42.

Biganzoli

, Wildiers

, Oakman

Management of elderly patients with breast cancer: updated recommendations of the international society of geriatric oncology (SIOG) and European society of breast cancer specialists (EUSOMA).

Lancet Oncol. 2012; 13(4): e148–60.

43.

Malik

M.K.

, Tartter

P.I.

, Belfer

Undertreated breast cancer in the elderly.

J Cancer Epidemiol. 2013; 2013: 893104.

44.

Arimidex (anastrozole tablets). Wilmington, DE: AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP; 2004.

45.

Afinitor (everolimus tablets for oral administration). Afinitor Disperz (everolimus tablets for oral suspension). East Hanover, NJ: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation; 2014.

46.

Aromasin (exemestane tablets). New York, NY: Pharmacia and Upjohn Company; 2004.

47.

Faslodex (fulvestrant) injection. Wilmington, DE: AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP; November 2012.

48.

Femara (letrozole tablets) 2.5 mg tablets. East Hanover, NJ: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation; 2006.

49.

Nolvadex (tamoxifen citrate tablet). Wilmington, DE: AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP; 2007.

50.

Jolly

, Williams

G.R.

, Jones

, Muss

H.B.

Treatment of metastatic breast cancer in women aged 65 years and older.

Womens Health. 2012; 8(4): 455–71.

51.

Cardoso

, Senkus-Konefka

, Fallowfield

, Costa

, Castiglione

Locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.

Ann Oncol. 2010; 21(Suppl 5): v15–9.

52.

Cleator

S.J.

, Ahamed

, Coombes

R.C.

, Palmieri

A 2009 update on the treatment of patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Clin Breast Cancer. 2009; 9(Suppl 1): S6–17.

53.

Johnston

S.R.

New strategies in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

Clin Cancer Res. 2010; 16(7): 1979–87.

54.

Harichand-Herdt

, Zelnak

, O'Regan

Endocrine therapy for the treatment of postmenopausal women with breast cancer.

Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2009; 9(2): 187–98.

55.

Mouridsen

, Chaudri-Ross

H.A.

Efficacy of first-line letrozole versus tamoxifen as a function of age in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer.

Oncologist. 2004; 9(5): 497–506.

56.

Riley

G.F.

, Warren

J.L.

, Harlan

L.C.

, Blackwell

S.A.

Endocrine therapy use among elderly hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients enrolled in medicare part D.

Medicare Medicaid Res Rev. 2011; 1: 4.

57.

Gluck

, von

M.G.

, Untch

Aromatase inhibitors in the treatment of elderly women with metastatic breast cancer.

Breast. 2013; 22(2): 142–9.

58.

Cardoso

, Costa

, Norton

1st international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC 1).

Breast. 2012; 21(3): 242–52.

59.

Gibson

, Lawrence

, Dawson

, Bliss

Aromatase inhibitors for treatment of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009; 4: CD003370.

60.

Riemsma

, Forbes

C.A.

, Kessels

Systematic review of aromatase inhibitors in the first-line treatment for hormone sensitive advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010; 123(1): 9–24.

61.

Mauri

, Pavlidis

, Polyzos

N.P.

, Ioannidis

J.P.

Survival with aromatase inhibitors and inactivators versus standard hormonal therapy in advanced breast cancer: meta-analysis.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006; 98(18): 1285–91.

62.

Tykerb (lapatinib) tablets. Research Triangle Park, NC: GlaxoSmithKline; 2012.

63.

Johnston

, Pippen

Jr , Pivot

Lapatinib combined with letrozole versus letrozole and placebo as first-line therapy for postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer.

J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27(33): 5538–46.

64.

Kaufman

, Mackey

J.R.

, Clemens

M.R.

Trastuzumab plus anastrozole versus anastrozole alone for the treatment of postmenopausal women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: results from the randomized phase III TAnDEM study.

J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27(33): 5529–37.

65.

Huober

, Fasching

P.A.

, Barsoum

Higher efficacy of letrozole in combination with trastuzumab compared to letrozole monotherapy as first-line treatment in patients with HER2-positive, hormone-receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer – results of the eLEcTRA trial.

Breast. 2012; 21(1): 27–33.

66.

Gnant

Overcoming endocrine resistance in breast cancer: importance of mTOR inhibition.

Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2012; 12(12): 1579–89.

67.

Osborne

C.K.

, Schiff

Mechanisms of endocrine resistance in breast cancer.

Annu Rev Med. 2011; 62: 233–47.

68.

Burstein

H.J.

Novel agents and future directions for refractory breast cancer.

Semin Oncol. 2011; 38(Suppl 2): S17–24.

69.

Mansky

P.J.

, Straus

S.E.

St. John's wort: more implications for cancer patients.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002; 94(16): 1187–8.

70.

Chang

, Fan

Endocrine therapy resistance: current status, possible mechanisms and overcoming strategies.

Anticancer Agents Med Chem. 2013; 13(3): 464–75.

71.

Chlebowski

R.T.

Strategies to overcome endocrine therapy resistance in hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer.

Clin Invest. 2014; 4(1): 19–33.

72.

Johnston

S.R.

, Saccani-Jotti

, Smith

I.E.

Changes in estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and pS2 expression in tamoxifen-resistant human breast cancer.

Cancer Res. 1995; 55(15): 3331–8.

73.

Cameron

D.A.

, Camidge

D.R.

, Oyee

, Hirsch

Economic evaluation of fulvestrant as an extra step in the treatment sequence for ER-positive advanced breast cancer.

Br J Cancer. 2008; 99(12): 1984–90.

74.

Barrios

, Forbes

J.F.

, Jonat

The sequential use of endocrine treatment for advanced breast cancer: where are we?

Ann Oncol. 2012; 23(6): 1378–86.

75.

Lønning

P.E.

, Bajetta

, Murray

Activity of exemestane in metastatic breast cancer after failure of nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors: a phase II trial.

J Clin Oncol. 2000; 18(11): 2234–44.

76.

Bertelli

, Garrone

, Merlano

Sequential treatment with exemestane and non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors in advanced breast cancer.

Oncology. 2005; 69(6): 471–7.

77.

Beresford

, Tumur

, Chakrabarti

, Barden

, Rao

, Makris

A qualitative systematic review of the evidence base for non-cross-resistance between steroidal and non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors in metastatic breast cancer.

Clin Oncol. 2011; 23(3): 209–15.

78.

Cruz

J.J.

, Richart

A.P.

, Garcia

M.J.

Management of patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Adv Ther. 2011; 28(Suppl 6): 50–65.

79.

Oakman

, Moretti

, Santarpia

, di Leo

Fulvestrant in the management of postmenopausal women with advanced, endocrine-responsive breast cancer.

Future Oncol. 2011; 7(2): 173–86.

80.

Howell

, Robertson

J.F.

, Abram

Comparison of fulvestrant versus tamoxifen for the treatment of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women previously untreated with endocrine therapy: a multinational, double-blind, randomized trial.

J Clin Oncol. 2004; 22(9): 1605–13.

81.

Robertson

J.F.

, Llombart-Cussac

, Rolski

Activity of fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg as first-line treatment for advanced breast cancer: results from the FIRST study.

J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27(27): 4530–5.

82.

Osborne

C.K.

, Pippen

, Jones

S.E.

Double-blind, randomized trial comparing the efficacy and tolerability of fulvestrant versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer progressing on prior endocrine therapy: results of a North American trial.

J Clin Oncol. 2002; 20(16): 3386–95.

83.

Howell

, Robertson

J.F.

, Quaresma Albano

Fulvestrant, formerly ICI 182,780, is as effective as anastrozole in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer progressing after prior endocrine treatment.

J Clin Oncol. 2002; 20(16): 3396–403.

84.

Flemming

, Madarnas

, Franek

J.A.

Fulvestrant for systemic therapy of locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women: a systematic review.

Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009; 115(2): 255–68.

85.

Chia

, Gradishar

, Mauriac

Double-blind, randomized placebo controlled trial of fulvestrant compared with exemestane after prior nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, advanced breast cancer: results from EFECT.

J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26(10): 1664–70.

86.

di Leo

, Jerusalem

, Petruzelka

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(30): 4594–600.

87.

di Leo

, Jerusalem

, Petruzelka

Final overall survival: fulvestrant 500 mg vs 250 mg in the randomized CONFIRM trial.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014; 106(1): djt337.

88.

Mehta

R.S.

, Barlow

W.E.

, Albain

K.S.

Combination anastrozole and fulvestrant in metastatic breast cancer.

N Engl J Med. 2012; 367(5): 435–44.

89.

Bergh

, Jönsson

P.E.

, Lidbrink

E.K.

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(16): 1919–25.

90.

Johnston

S.R.

, Kilburn

L.S.

, Ellis

; SoFEA investigators. Fulvestrant plus anastrozole or placebo versus exemestane alone after progression on non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal patients with hormone-receptor-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (SoFEA): a composite, multicentre, phase 3 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013; 14(10): 989–98.

91.

Baselga

, Campone

, Piccart

Everolimus in postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer.

N Engl J Med. 2012; 366(6): 520–9.

92.

Munagala

, Aqil

, Gupta

R.C.

Promising molecular targeted therapies in breast cancer.

Indian J Pharmacol. 2011; 43(3): 236–45.

93.

Villarreal-Garza

, Cortes

, Andre

, Verma

mTOR inhibitors in the management of hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: the latest evidence and future directions.

Ann Oncol. 2012; 23(10): 2526–35.

94.

Yardley

D.A.

, Noguchi

, Pritchard

K.I.

Everolimus plus exemestane in post-menopausal patients with HR+ breast cancer: BOLERO-2 final progression-free survival analysis.

Adv Ther. 2013; 30(10): 870–84.

95.

Pritchard

K.I.

, Burris

3rd , Ito

Safety and efficacy of everolimus with exemestane vs. exemestane alone in elderly patients with HER2-negative, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer in BOLERO-2.

Clin Breast Cancer. 2013; 13(6): 421–32.

96.

Wilcken

, Dear

Chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer: a summary of all randomised trials reported 2000–2007.

Eur J Cancer. 2008; 44(15): 2218–25.

97.

Beuselinck

, Wildiers

, Wynendaele

, Dirix

, Kains

J.P.

, Paridaens

Weekly paclitaxel versus weekly docetaxel in elderly or frail patients with metastatic breast carcinoma: a randomized phase-II study of the Belgian society of medical oncology.

Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2010; 75(1): 70–7.

98.

Rugo

H.S.

, Barry

W.T.

, Moreno-Aspitia

CALGB 40502/NCCTG N063H: Randomized phase III trial of weekly paclitaxel (P) compared to weekly nanoparticle bound nab-paclitaxel (NP) or ixabepilone (Ix) with or without bevacizumab (B) as first-line therapy for locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. Presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting; June 1-June 5, 2012; Chicago, IL, USA.

99.

Falandry

, Brain

, Bonnefoy

Impact of geriatric risk factors on pegylated liposomal doxorubicin tolerance and efficacy in elderly metastatic breast cancer patients: final results of the DOGMES multicentre GINECO trial.

Eur J Cancer. 2013; 49(13): 2806–14.

100.

Crivellari

, Gray

K.P.

, Dellapasqua

; International Breast Cancer Study Group. Adjuvant pegylated liposomal doxorubicin for older women with endocrine nonresponsive breast cancer who are NOT suitable for a “standard chemotherapy regimen”: the CASA randomized trial. Breast. 2013; 22(2): 130–7.

101.

Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Open-label, phase II, study of everolimus plus letrozole in postmenopausal women with ER+, HER2– metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer (Bolero-4). In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01698918 [NLM Identifier: NCT01698918].

102.

University of Maryland; Novartis Pharmaceuticals; GlaxoSmithKline. GCC 0901 – study of how well letrozole works in combination with lapatinib followed by an addition of everolimus in postmenopausal women with advanced endocrine resistant breast cancer. In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01499160 [NLM Identifier: NCT01499160].

103.

PrECOG, LLC; Novartis. Study of fulvestrant +/– everolimus in post-menopausal, hormone-receptor + metastatic breast Ca resistant to AI (PrE0102). In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01797120 [NLM Identifier: NCT01797120].

104.

Suleiman Massarweh; Novartis. Study of combined fulvestrant and everolimus in advanced/metastatic breast cancer after aromatase inhibitor failure (BRE-43). In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00570921 [NLM Identifier: NCT00570921].

105.

Bhattacharyya

G.N.

, Biswas

, Singh

J.H.

Reversal of tamoxifen resistance (hormone resistance) by addition of sirolimus (mTOR inhibitor) in metastatic breast cancer. Presented at 2011 European Multidisciplinary Cancer Congress; September 23–27, 2011; Stockholm, Sweden; Abstract 16LBA.

106.

Wolf

A.C.

, Lazar

A.A.

, Bondarenko

Randomized phase III placebo-controlled trial of letrozole plus oral temsirolimus as first-line endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

J Clin Oncol. 2013; 31(2): 195–202.

107.

Sanchez

C.G.

, Ma

C.X.

, Crowder

R.J.

Preclinical modeling of combined phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase inhibition with endocrine therapy for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

Breast Cancer Res. 2011; 13(2): R21.

108.

Rodon

, Dienstmann

, Serra

, Tabernero

Development of PI3K inhibitors: lessons learned from early clinical trials.

Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2013; 10(3): 143–53.

109.

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. Phase III study of BKM120/placebo with fulvestrant in postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor positive HER2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer refractory to aromatase inhibitor (BELLE-2). In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01610284 [NLM Identifier: NCT01610284].

110.

Novartis Pharmaceuticals. A Phase III study of BKM120 with fulvestrant in patients with HR+,HER2–, AI treated, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who progressed on or after mTORi (BELLE-3). In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01633060 [NLM Identifier: NCT01633060].

111.

Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center. PhIb BKM120 or BEZ235+endocrine treatment in post-menopausal patients with hormone receptor + metastatic breast cancer. In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01248494 [NLM Identifier: NCT01248494].

112.

Tinoco

, Warsch

, Gluck

, Avancha

, Montero

A.J.

Treating breast cancer in the 21st century: emerging biological therapies.

J Cancer. 2013; 4(2): 117–32.

113.

Lange

C.A.

, Yee

Killing the second messenger: targeting loss of cell cycle control in endocrine-resistant breast cancer.

Endocr Relat Cancer. 2011; 18(4): C19–24.

114.

Yardley

D.A.

, Ismail-Khan

R.R.

, Melichar

Randomized phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of exemestane with or without entinostat in postmenopausal women with locally recurrent or metastatic estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer progressing on treatment with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor.

J Clin Oncol. 2013; 31(17): 2128–35.

115.

Turner

, Andre

, Loibl

Phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial of fulvestrant with or without PD-0332991 (palbociclib) + goserelin in women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer whose disease progressed after prior endocrine therapy. Presented at 2013 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; December 10–14, 2013; San Antonio, TX, USA.

116.

Finn

R.S.

, Crown

J.P.

, Lang

The cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor palbociclib in combination with letrozole versus letrozole alone as first-line treatment of oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer (PALOMA-1/TRIO-18): a randomised phase 2 study.

Lancet Oncol. 2014; 16(1): 25–35.

117.

Malorni

, Sanna

, Pestrin

Phase 2 study of palbociclib (CDK 4/6 inhibitor) for ER positive, HER2- negative post-menopausal advanced breast cancer patients recurring after hormonal therapy (to reverse endocrine resistance- TREnd trial). Presented at 2013 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; December 10–14, 2013; San Antonio, TX, USA; Abstract OT2–01.

118.

Washington University School of Medicine. PD 0332991 and anastrozole for stage 2 or 3 estrogen receptor positive and HER2 negative breast cancer. In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01723774 [NLM Identifier: NCT01723774].

119.

Spanish Breast Cancer Research Group; Pfizer. Phase III study of palbociclib (PD-0332991) in combination with exemestane versus chemotherapy (capecitabine) in hormonal receptor (HR) positive/HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients with resistance to non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors (PEARL). In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02028507 [NLM Identifier: NCT02028507].

120.

Pfizer. Study Of Letrozole With Or Without Palbociclib (PD-0332991) For The First-Line Treatment Of Hormone-receptor positive advanced breast cancer. In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00721409 [NLM Identifier: NCT00721409].

121.

Organisation for Oncology and Translational Research. Letrozole and CDK 4/6 inhibitor for ER positive, HER2 negative breast cancer in postmenopausal women. In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01709370 [NLM Identifier: NCT01709370].

122.

Pfizer. A study of palbociclib (PD-0332991) + letrozole vs. letrozole for 1st line treatment of postmenopausal women with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (PALOMA-2). In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01740427 [NLM Identifier: NCT01740427].

123.

Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Study of LEE011, BYL719 and letrozole in advanced ER+ breast cancer. In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01872260 [NLM Identifier: NCT01872260].

124.

Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Study of efficacy and safety of LEE011 in post-menopausal women with advanced breast cancer (MONALEESA-2). In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01958021 [NLM Identifier: NCT01958021].

125.

Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Phase Ib/II trial of LEE011 with everolimus (RAD001) and exemestane in the treatment of ER+ Her2- advanced breast cancer. In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 [cited March 9, 2015]. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01857193 [NLM Identifier: NCT01857193].

126.

Biganzoli

, Di Vincenzo

, Jiang

First-line bevacizumab-containing therapy for breast cancer: results in patients aged ≥70 years treated in the ATHENA study.

Ann Oncol. 2012; 23(1): 111–8.

127.

Smith

I.E.

, Pierga

J.Y.

, Biganzoli

First-line bevacizumab plus taxane-based chemotherapy for locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer: safety and efficacy in an open-label study in 2251 patients.

Ann Oncol. 2011; 22(3): 595–802.

Treating Elderly Patients with Hormone Receptor–Positive Advanced Breast Cancer

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Additional Considerations for Treating Elderly Patients

Current Treatment Options for Advanced/Metastatic Breast Cancer

First-line therapy

Second and subsequent lines of therapy

Recurrent Disease

Investigational Strategies in the Setting of Endocrine Resistance

Conclusions

Author Contributions

Footnotes

Acknowledgment

References