The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Buparlisib plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant in postmenopausal, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer (BELLE-2): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial
Open accessAbstract
Summary Background Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway activation is a hallmark of endocrine therapy-resistant, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. This phase 3 study assessed the efficacy of the pan-PI3K inhibitor buparlisib plus fulvestrant in patients with advanced breast cancer, including an evaluation of the PI3K pathway activation status as a biomarker for clinical benefit. Methods The BELLE-2 trial was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study. Postmenopausal women aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed, hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor (HER2)-negative inoperable locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer whose disease had progressed on or after aromatase inhibitor treatment and had received up to one previous line of chemotherapy for advanced disease were included. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using interactive voice response technology (block size of 6) on day 15 of cycle 1 to receive oral buparlisib (100 mg/day) or matching placebo, starting on day 15 of cycle 1, plus intramuscular fulvestrant (500 mg) on days 1 and 15 of cycle 1, and on day 1 of subsequent 28-day cycles. Patients were assigned randomisation numbers with a validated interactive response technology; these numbers were linked to different treatment groups which in turn were linked to treatment numbers. PI3K status in tumour tissue was determined via central laboratory during a 14-day run-in phase. Randomisation was stratified by PI3K pathway activation status (activated vs non-activated vs and unknown) and visceral disease status (present vs absent). Patients, investigators, local radiologists, study team, and anyone involved in the study were masked to the identity of the treatment until unblinding. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival by local investigator assessment per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (version 1.1) in the total population, in patients with known (activated or non-activated) PI3K pathway status, and in PI3K pathway-activated patients. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment according to the treatment they received. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01610284, and is currently ongoing but not recruiting participants. Findings Between Sept 7, 2012, and Sept 10, 2014, 1147 patients from 267 centres in 29 countries were randomly assigned to receive buparlisib (n=576) or placebo plus fulvestrant (n=571). In the total patient population (n=1147), median progression-free survival was 6·9 months (95% CI 6·8–7·8) in the buparlisib group versus 5·0 months (4·0–5·2) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·78 [95% CI 0·67–0·89]; one-sided p=0·00021). In patients with known PI3K status (n=851), median progression-free survival was 6·8 months (95% CI 5·0–7·0) in the buparlisib group vs 4·5 months (3·3–5·0) in the placebo group (HR 0·80 [95% CI 0·68–0·94]; one-sided p=0·0033). In PI3K pathway-activated patients (n=372), median progression-free survival was 6·8 months (95% CI 4·9–7·1) in the buparlisib group versus 4·0 months (3·1–5·2) in the placebo group (HR 0·76 [0·60–0·97], one-sided p=0·014). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events in the buparlisib group versus the placebo group were increased alanine aminotransferase (146 [25%] of 573 patients vs six [1%] of 570), increased aspartate aminotransferase (103 [18%] vs 16 [3%]), hyperglycaemia (88 [15%] vs one [<1%]), and rash (45 [8%] vs none). Serious adverse events were reported in 134 (23%) of 573 patients in the buparlisib group compared with 90 [16%] of 570 patients in the placebo group; the most common serious adverse events (affecting ≥2% of patients) were increased alanine aminotransferase (17 [3%] of 573 vs one [<1%] of 570) and increased aspartate aminotransferase (14 [2%] vs one [<1%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Interpretation The results from this study show that PI3K inhibition combined with endocrine therapy is effective in postmenopausal women with endocrine-resistant, hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Use of more selective PI3K inhibitors, such as α-specific PI3K inhibitor, is warranted to further improve safety and benefit in this setting. No further studies are being pursued because of the toxicity associated with this combination.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
PD-1 and PD-L1 Immune Checkpoint Blockade to Treat Breast Cancer
Hartkopf, A. D., Taran, F.-A., Wallwiener, M., Walter, C. B., Krämer, B., Grischke, E.-M., & Brucker, S. Y. (2016) · Breast Care · doi:10.1159/000453569 · Cited by 30,845
Molecular portraits of human breast tumours
Perou, C. M., Sørlie, T., Eisen, M. B., van de Rijn, M., Jeffrey, S. S., Rees, C. A., Pollack, J. R., Ross, D. T., Johnsen, H., Akslen, L. A., et al. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35021093 · Cited by 16,261
Nishimura, R., Osako, T., Nishiyama, Y., Tashima, R., Nakano, M., Fujisue, M., Toyozumi, Y., & Arima, N. (2013) · Oncology · doi:10.1159/000353099 · Cited by 13,166
Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours
The Cancer Genome Atlas Network (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11412 · Cited by 12,129
Detection of Circulating Tumor DNA in Early- and Late-Stage Human Malignancies
Bettegowda, C., Sausen, M., Leary, R. J., Kinde, I., Wang, Y., Agrawal, N., Bartlett, B. R., Wang, H., Luber, B., Alani, R. M., et al. (2014) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3007094 · Cited by 5,067
Elkablawy, M. A., Albasri, A. M., Mohammed, R. A., Hussainy, A. S., Nouh, M. M., & Alhujaily, A. S. (2016) · Saudi Medical Journal · doi:10.15537/smj.2016.2.12285 · Cited by 4,382
Everolimus in Postmenopausal Hormone-Receptor–Positive Advanced Breast Cancer
Baselga, J., Campone, M., Piccart, M., Burris, H. A., Rugo, H. S., Sahmoud, T., Noguchi, S., Gnant, M., Pritchard, K. I., Lebrun, F., et al. (2012) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1109653 · Cited by 2,863
Self-citationFinn, R. S., Crown, J. P., Lang, I., Boer, K., Bondarenko, I. M., Kulyk, S. O., Ettl, J., Patel, R., Pinter, T., Schmidt, M., et al. (2015) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(14)71159-3 · Cited by 1,900
Palbociclib in hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer
Turner, N. C., Ro, J., André, F., Loi, S., Verma, S., Iwata, H., Harbeck, N., Loibl, S., Huang Bartlett, C., Zhang, K., et al. (2015) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1505270 · Cited by 1,590
Self-citationBachelot, T., Bourgier, C., Cropet, C., Ray-Coquard, I., Ferrero, J.-M., Freyer, G., Abadie-Lacourtoisie, S., Eymard, J.-C., Debled, M., Spaëth, D., et al. (2012) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2011.39.0708 · Cited by 703
Cited by
Harbeck, N., Penault-Llorca, F., Cortes, J., Gnant, M., Houssami, N., Poortmans, P., Ruddy, K., Tsang, J., & Cardoso, F. (2019) · Nature Reviews Disease Primers · doi:10.1038/s41572-019-0111-2 · Cited by 3,024
The PI3K Pathway in Human Disease
Fruman, D. A., Chiu, H., Hopkins, B. D., Bagrodia, S., Cantley, L. C., & Abraham, R. T. (2017) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2017.07.029 · Cited by 2,749
Alpelisib for PIK3CA -Mutated, Hormone Receptor–Positive Advanced Breast Cancer
André, F., Ciruelos, E., Rubovszky, G., Campone, M., Loibl, S., Rugo, H. S., Iwata, H., Conte, P., Mayer, I. A., Kaufman, B., et al. (2019) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1813904 · Cited by 2,622
Self-citationTargeting the PI3K pathway in cancer: are we making headway?
Janku, F., Yap, T. A., & Meric-Bernstam, F. (2018) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2018.28 · Cited by 1,033
Merker, J. D., Oxnard, G. R., Compton, C., Diehn, M., Hurley, P., Lazar, A. J., Lindeman, N., Lockwood, C. M., Rai, A. J., Schilsky, R. L., et al. (2018) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2017.76.8671 · Cited by 959
Metadata
- Authors
- Baselga, J., Im, S.-A., Iwata, H., Cortés, J., De Laurentiis, M., Jiang, Z., Arteaga, C. L., Jonat, W., Clemons, M., Ito, Y., Awada, A., Chia, S., Jagiełło-Gruszfeld, A., Pistilli, B., Tseng, L.-M., Hurvitz, S., Masuda, N., Takahashi, M., Vuylsteke, P., Hachemi, S., Dharan, B., Di Tomaso, E., Urban, P., Massacesi, C., & Campone, M.
- Venue
- The Lancet Oncology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-07
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 904-916
- ISSN
- 1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2619858681
- Cited by
- 533
- References
- 37
- FWCI
- 57.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Buparlisib plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant in postmenopausal, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer (BELLE-2): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1470-2045(17)30376-5
- The paper
- Baselga, J., Im, S.-A., Iwata, H., Cortés, J., De Laurentiis, M., Jiang, Z., Arteaga, C. L., Jonat, W., Clemons, M., Ito, Y., Awada, A., Chia, S., Jagiełło-Gruszfeld, A., Pistilli, B., Tseng, L.-M., Hurvitz, S., Masuda, N., Takahashi, M., Vuylsteke, P., . . . Campone, M. (2017). Buparlisib plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant in postmenopausal, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer (BELLE-2): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. The Lancet Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(17)30376-5
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.