Haney, P. (Patricia)

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Patient perception of the benefit of a BRAF inhibitor in metastatic melanoma: quality-of-life analyses of the BREAK-3 study comparing dabrafenib with dacarbazine
    (Elsevier BV, 2014) Grotzinger, K. (K.); Rutkowski, P. (Piotr); Martin-Algarra, S. (Salvador); Haney, P. (Patricia); Millward, M. (Michael); Goodman, V. (Vicki); Karaszewska, B. (Boguslawa); Swann, S. (Suzanne); Demidov, L.V. (Lev V.); Mauch, C. (Cornelia); Mirakhur, B. (Beloo); Chiarion-Sileni, V. (Vanna); Kämpgen, E. (E.); Amonkar, M.M. (M. M.); Grob, J.J. (Jean-Jacques); Miller, W.H. (Wilson H.); Hauschild, A. (A.)
    Background: In a randomized phase III study (BREAK-3), dabrafenib showed prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) (median 5.1 versus 2.7 months; hazard ratio = 0.30; 95% confidence interval 0.18–0.53; P < 0.0001) compared with dacarbazine (DTIC) in patients with BRAF V600E metastatic melanoma. Assessing how these results are transformed into a real health benefit for patients is crucial. Methods: The EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire assessed quality of life (QoL) at baseline and follow-up visits. Results: For DTIC, all functional dimensions except role dimension worsened from baseline at follow-up. For dabrafenib, all functionality dimensions remained stable relative to baseline or improved at week 6; mean change in seven symptom dimensions improved from baseline, with appetite loss, insomnia, nausea and vomiting, and pain showing the greatest improvement. In the DTIC arm, symptom dimensions were unchanged or worsened from baseline for all symptoms except pain (week 6), with the greatest exacerbations observed for fatigue and nausea and vomiting. Mixed-model-repeated measures analyses showed significant (P < 0.05) and/or clinically meaningful improvements from baseline in favor of dabrafenib for emotional and social functioning, nausea and vomiting, appetite loss, diarrhea, fatigue, dyspnea, and insomnia at weeks 6 and/or 12. After crossing over to dabrafenib upon progression (n = 35), improvements in all QoL dimensions were evident after receiving dabrafenib for 6 (n = 31) to 12 (n = 25) weeks. Conclusions: This first reported QoL analysis for a BRAF inhibitor in metastatic melanoma demonstrates that the high tumor response rates and PFS superiority of dabrafenib over DTIC is not only a theoretical advantage, but also transforms in a rapid functional and symptomatic benefit for the patient.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Dabrafenib in BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma: a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial
    (Elsevier, 2012) Rutkowski, P. (Piotr); Martin-Algarra, S. (Salvador); Haney, P. (Patricia); Millward, M. (Michael); Goodman, V. (Vicki); Karaszewska, B. (Boguslawa); Swann, S. (Suzanne); Demidov, L.V. (Lev V.); Mauch, C. (Cornelia); Mirakhur, B. (Beloo); Chiarion-Sileni, V. (Vanna); Jouary, T. (Thomas); Chapman, P.B. (Paul B.); Grob, J.J. (Jean-Jacques); Miller, W.H. (Wilson H.); Blank, C.U. (Christian U.); Kaempgen, E. (Eckhart); Hauschild, A. (A.); Guckert, M.E. (Mary E.); Gutzmer, R. (Ralf); Martin, A.M. (Anne-Marie)
    Background: Dabrafenib, an inhibitor of mutated BRAF, has clinical activity with a manageable safety profile in studies of phase 1 and 2 in patients with BRAF(V600)-mutated metastatic melanoma. We studied the efficacy of dabrafenib in patients with BRAF(V600E)-mutated metastatic melanoma. Methods: We enrolled patients in this open-label phase 3 trial between Dec 23, 2010, and Sept 1, 2011. This report is based on a data cutoff date of Dec 19, 2011. Patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated, stage IV or unresectable stage III BRAF(V600E) mutation-positive melanoma were randomly assigned (3:1) to receive dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily, orally) or dacarbazine (1000 mg/m(2) intravenously every 3 weeks). Patients were stratified according to American Joint Committee on Cancer stage (unresectable III+IVM1a+IVM1b vs IVM1c). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival and was analysed by intention to treat; safety was assessed per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01227889. Findings: Of the 733 patients screened, 250 were randomly assigned to receive either dabrafenib (187 patients) or dacarbazine (63 patients). Median progression-free survival was 5·1 months for dabrafenib and 2·7 months for dacarbazine, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·30 (95% CI 0·18-0·51; p<0·0001). At data cutoff, 107 (57%) patients in the dabrafenib group and 14 (22%) in the dacarbazine group remained on randomised treatment. Treatment-related adverse events (grade 2 or higher) occurred in 100 (53%) of the 187 patients who received dabrafenib and in 26 (44%) of the 59 patients who received dacarbazine. The most common adverse events with dabrafenib were skin-related toxic effects, fever, fatigue, arthralgia, and headache. The most common adverse events with dacarbazine were nausea, vomiting, neutropenia, fatigue, and asthenia. Grade 3-4 adverse events were uncommon in both groups. Interpretation: Dabrafenib significantly improved progression-free survival compared with dacarbazine.