Phase III Study of Iniparib Plus Gemcitabine and Carboplatin Versus Gemcitabine and Carboplatin in Patients With Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: There is a lack of treatments providing survival benefit for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC), with no standard of care. A randomized phase II trial showed significant benefit for gemcitabine, carboplatin, and iniparib (GCI) over gemcitabine and carboplatin (GC) in clinical benefit rate, response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Here, we formally compare the efficacy of these regimens in a phase III trial. Patients and Methods: Patients with stage IV/locally recurrent TNBC who had received no more than two previous chemotherapy regimens for mTNBC were randomly allocated to gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m 2 and carboplatin area under the curve 2 (days 1 and 8) alone or GC plus iniparib 5.6 mg/kg (days 1, 4, 8, and 11) every 3 weeks. Random assignment was stratified by the number of prior chemotherapies. The coprimary end points were OS and PFS. Patients receiving GC could cross over to iniparib on progression. Results: Five hundred nineteen patients were randomly assigned (261 GCI; 258 GC). In the primary analysis, no statistically significant difference was observed for OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.12; P = .28) nor PFS (HR = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.98; P = .027). An exploratory analysis showed that patients in the second-/third-line had improved OS (HR = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.91) and PFS (HR = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.92) with GCI. The safety profile for GCI was similar to GC. Conclusion: The trial did not meet the prespecified criteria for the coprimary end points of PFS and OS in the ITT population. The potential benefit with iniparib observed in second-/third-line subgroup warrants further evaluation.
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
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.
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?
Positive phase II data are not necessarily replicated in the phase III setting.
“The oncology literature has indicated that positive phase II data are not necessarily replicated in the phase III setting”
Ongoing clinical trials for metastatic TNBC include platinum agents in their treatment regimens.
“Furthermore, ongoing clinical trials for metastatic TNBC are including platinum agents in their treatment regimens (4, 36–38).”
From Potentiation of carboplatin-mediated DNA damage by the Mdm2 modulator Nutlin-3a in a humanized orthotopic breast-to-lung metastatic model (2015) · cites this paper as [37]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 27 · Cited by 311
- Authors
- O'Shaughnessy, J., Schwartzberg, L., Danso, M. A., Miller, K. D., Rugo, H. S., Neubauer, M., Robert, N., Hellerstedt, B., Saleh, M., Richards, P., Specht, J. M., Yardley, D. A., Carlson, R. W., Finn, R. S., Charpentier, E., Garcia-Ribas, I., & Winer, E. P.
- Affiliations
- Joyce O'Shaughnessy, Baylor Charles A. Sammons Cancer Center, Texas Oncology; Joyce O'Shaughnessy, US Oncology, Dallas; Beth Hellerstedt Texas Oncology-Round Rock, Austin, TX; Lee Schwartzberg, Accelerated Community Oncology Research Network; Lee Schwartzberg, The West Clinic, Memphis; Denise A. Yardley, Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Denise A. Yardley, Tennessee Oncology, Nashville, TN; Michael A. Danso, US Oncology; Michael A. Danso, Virginia Oncology Associates, Norfolk; Nicholas Robert, Virginia...
- Sarah Cannon Research Institute (GB)
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2014-12-01
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 34
- Pages
- 3840-3847
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2030566540
- Cited by
- 311
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 48 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 3 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 12.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Clinical Oncology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Sanofi
- European Society for Medical Oncology
- Genentech
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › PARP inhibition in cancer therapy
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Advanced Breast Cancer Therapies
- Keywords
- iniparib, gemcitabine, carboplatin, metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, PARP inhibitors, second-line chemotherapy, overall survival, progression-free survival
- MeSH terms
- Gemcitabine, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols, Benzamides, Deoxycytidine, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local, Neoplasm Staging, Risk Factors, Time Factors, United States, Proportional Hazards Models, Carboplatin, Treatment Outcome, Disease Progression, Disease-Free Survival, Kaplan-Meier Estimate, 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