Cited by 94Cancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies

Atezolizumab for the treatment of breast cancer

Reddy, Sangeetha M., Carroll, Emma, Nanda, Rita·2020·Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy

Abstract

Introduction: In March 2019, atezolizumab became the first immune checkpoint inhibitor to receive a breast cancer-specific approval. Based on a significant improvement in progression-free survival as well as a 10-month improvement in overall survival (on interim analysis) seen in the IMpassion 130 trial, the combination of atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel was approved for patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).Areas covered: This article reviews current data and ongoing research on atezolizumab for the treatment of breast cancer. Results of atezolizumab monotherapy trials in the context of other early immune checkpoint blockade trials in breast cancer are discussed as well as data from combination clinical trials with chemotherapy in both early-stage and metastatic breast cancer. We focus on the safety and efficacy analyses from the phase III IMpassion trial that led to FDA and EMA approval of atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel in patients whose tumor tested positive for PD-L1 by the Ventana SP142 companion diagnostic immunohistochemical assay.Expert opinion: The FDA and EMA approvals of atezolizumab mark an important advance for treatment of metastatic TNBC. However, ongoing investigations need to define better biomarkers of response, determine resistance mechanisms, and identify strategies to increase response rates.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14737140.2020.1732211

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Triple-negative breast cancer in humans, marked by mesenchymal appearance, shows susceptibility to anti-PD-L1 checkpoint inhibition.

    “On the other hand, triple-negative breast cancer in humans, which are marked by the mesenchymal appearance of cancer cells, show susceptibility to anti-PD-L1 checkpoint inhibition147,148.”

    From TGFβ biology in cancer progression and immunotherapy (2021) · cites this paper as [147]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 34 · Cited by 94

Authors
Reddy, S. M., Carroll, E., & Nanda, R.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
Corresponding author
Nanda, Rita
Venue
Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy
Published
2020-02-27
Volume
20
Issue
3
Pages
151-158
ISSN
  • 1473-7140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-8328
OpenAlex
W3007838533
Cited by
94
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 7
FWCI
5.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Advanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Keywords
atezolizumab, triple-negative breast cancer, immune checkpoint inhibitors, PD-L1, nab-paclitaxel, metastatic breast cancer, locally advanced breast cancer, PD-L1 immunohistochemistry, treatment response biomarkers, drug resistance
MeSH terms
Progression-Free Survival, Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors, Animals, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols, Female, Humans, Neoplasm Staging, Survival Rate, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized, Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms

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