NCI Rejects NSABP's P-4 Prevention Trial

Publication
Article
Oncology NEWS InternationalOncology NEWS International Vol 16 No 7
Volume 16
Issue 7

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) has rejected funding for the proposed P-4 clinical trial in which researchers planned to compare raloxifene (Evista) and letrozole (Femara) as breast cancer prevention agents.

BETHESDA, Maryland—The National Cancer Institute (NCI) has rejected funding for the proposed P-4 clinical trial in which researchers planned to compare raloxifene (Evista) and letrozole (Femara) as breast cancer prevention agents. A letter to officials of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) said that "after much deliberation," NCI director John E. Niederhuber, MD, had concluded "that the numerous scientific concerns about the P-4 trial are sufficiently formidable that the NCI will not commit to the funding of this particular trial."

NCI acted 5 days after the National Cancer Advisory Board (NCAB) accepted the report of a working group of its clinical investigations subcommittee that raised significant issues about the trial. Because of cost and other issues confronting the study, "we cannot offer a strong endorsement of this trial," said Bruce A. Chabner, MD, clinical director of the Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, who presented the working group's report to the advisory board.

NSABP envisioned P-4 as a logical extension of previous prevention trials showing positive results with tamoxifen and raloxifene, but the working group pointed out that "despite their ability to decrease the number of tumors by 50%, neither has been widely adopted, probably because of concerns about side effects and the relatively low risk [of developing breast cancer] for a major segment of the female population of interest."

Dr. Chabner told the NCAB: "While the P-4 trial is a well-designed, interesting, and relevant clinical trial, even if positive, we were concerned that it is unlikely to change the practice of clinical oncology."

The P-4 study would have enrolled 12,800 postmenopausal women with a Gail score greater than 1.66 for the 5-year risk of breast cancer. Accrual was to take 4 years, with patients receiving 5 years of treatment, then 3 years of follow-up. The trial's first 5 years would have cost an estimated $54 million.

Recent Videos
Breast cancer care providers make it a goal to manage the adverse effects that patients with breast cancer experience to minimize the burden of treatment.
Social workers and case managers may have access to institutional- or hospital-level grants that can reduce financial toxicity for patients undergoing cancer therapy.
Insurance and distance to a tertiary cancer center were 2 barriers to receiving high-quality breast cancer care, according to Rachel Greenup, MD, MPH.
Antibody-drug conjugates are effective, but strategies such as better understanding the mechanisms of action may lead to enhanced care for patients with cancer. Antibody-drug conjugates are effective, but strategies such as better understanding the mechanisms of action may lead to enhanced care for patients with cancer.
ADCs demonstrate superior efficacy vs chemotherapy but maintain a similar efficacy profile that requires multidisciplinary collaboration to optimally treat.
According to Aditya Bardia, MD, MPH, FASCO, antibody-drug conjugates are slowly replacing chemotherapy as a standard treatment for breast cancer.
Administering oral SERD-based regimens may enhance patients’ quality of life when undergoing treatment for ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.
Gedatolisib-based triplet regimens may be effective among patients with prior endocrine resistance or rapid progression following frontline therapy.
Leading experts in the breast cancer field highlight the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors, antibody-drug conjugates, and other treatment modalities.
Related Content