Drug Discovery and Development

  • Home Drug Discovery and Development
  • Drug Discovery
  • Women in Pharma and Biotech
  • Oncology
  • Neurological Disease
  • Infectious Disease
  • Resources
    • Video features
    • Podcast
    • Voices
    • Views
    • Webinars
  • Pharma 50
    • 2025 Pharma 50
    • 2024 Pharma 50
    • 2023 Pharma 50
    • 2022 Pharma 50
    • 2021 Pharma 50
  • Advertise
  • SUBSCRIBE

Amgen Releases XGEVA Study Data

By Drug Discovery Trends Editor | December 13, 2010

Amgen announced results from new analyses comparing XGEVA (denosumab), the first new treatment for advanced cancer patients with bone metastases in nearly a decade to prevent skeletal-related events, to Zometa (zoledronic acid). These results underscore the efficacy profile of XGEVA in preventing skeletal-related events (SREs) in patients with bone metastases from advanced breast cancer, as well as explore XGEVA’s impact on pain and quality of life outcomes, compared to Zometa. These new results were presented at the 33rd Annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium.

XGEVA was approved on Nov. 18, 2010 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) after a priority review, a designation reserved for drugs that offer major advances in treatment or provide a treatment where no adequate therapy exists. XGEVA is indicated for the prevention of SREs in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors. XGEVA is not indicated for the prevention of SREs in patients with multiple myeloma.

An additional four months of double-blinded treatment data from the pivotal Phase 3 “136” study was presented in a press briefing at SABCS. The data showed that XGEVA was superior to Zometa in delaying the time to first on-study SRE by 18 percent and time to first-and-subsequent on-study event by 22 percent.  Further, the median time to first on-study SRE was five months longer for the patients at risk in the XGEVA group (32.4 months) versus the Zometa group (27.4 months) in patients with advanced breast cancer and bone metastases HR 0.82 (95 percent CI 0.71, 0.95),  p= 0.0096 (superiority). Additionally, continued XGEVA treatment significantly reduced the proportion of patients who experienced pathologic fractures or radiation to bone compared with Zometa.

Overall survival and disease progression were similar for both treatment groups and a similar percentages of patients reported adverse events and serious adverse events. Osteonecrosis of the jaw was reported in 2.5 percent of XGEVA patients and 1.8 percent of Zometa patients, while hypocalcemia was reported in 6.1 percent of XGEVA treated patients and 3.7 Zometa treated patients.

“These results reinforce the superior efficacy  profile of XGEVA versus Zometa and provide us additional reassurance of this important new product’s safety profile,” said Allison Stopeck M.D. associate professor of Medicine, Arizona Cancer Center, University of Arizona Health Sciences Center, Tucson, Ariz. “I feel confident that XGEVA can provide patients with advanced breast cancer that have developed a bone metastases an excellent option to prevent debilitating and costly bone complications.”

Bone pain is one of the first signs that metastatic disease has spread to the bone, and affects approximately 70 percent of patients with metastatic disease, and nearly 80 percent of patients with advanced breast cancer. A new analysis of study “136” data showed that those patients treated with XGEVA experienced less pain-related interference with their daily functioning than those receiving Zometa.

The analysis, presented yesterday, was based on a patient completed Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). Results demonstrated that patients on XGEVA tended to experience a reduction in pain interference with their daily functioning compared to those on Zometa (n=1124; median: 70 days XGEVA vs. 86 days Zometa; p=0.09) and time to pain worsening tended to be longer with XGEVA compared to Zometa (n=1676; median: 394 days XGEVA vs. 310 days Zometa; p=0.13).

In patients with no or mild pain at the beginning of the study, XGEVA also demonstrated a trend for shorter time to improvement for pain interference with daily functioning (n=388; 93 days XGEVA vs. 120 days Zometa; p=0.06) and levels of pain took a longer time to worsen, interfering with daily functioning (n=755; 369 days XGEVA vs. 232 days Zometa; p=0.12).

A third analysis presented yesterday found that a greater proportion of breast cancer patients treated with XGEVA had a meaningful improvement in health-related quality of life compared to those treated with Zometa, regardless of their pain level at baseline.

Specifically, among patients who reported no or mild pain at the beginning of the study, more patients receiving XGEVA had a meaningful (greater than 5 point increase) in their functional assessment score (as measured by FACT-G) compared to patients receiving Zometa. Over the 18 month period, an average of 4.1 percent more (range: -0.6 percent to 9.3 percent) XGEVA-treated patients experienced meaningful improvement in health-related quality of life than Zometa patients. Additionally, fewer patients on XGEVA experienced a meaningful decrease in health-related quality of life over the same timeframe (average of 2.4 percent fewer [range:-4.4 percent to 6.3 percent fewer]).

Similar patterns were found in patients with moderate to severe pain at the beginning of the study.  An average of three percent more (range:-1.7 percent to 7.9 percent) XGEVA-treated patients experienced a meaningful increase in their health-related quality of life compared with Zometa patients over 18 months.  Also, a lower proportion of XGEVA patients (3.5 percent fewer [range: -1.1 percent to 11.5 percent fewer]) than Zometa treated patients had a meaningful decrease in health-related quality of life over the 18 months. 

SREs have an adverse financial impact on healthcare systems, consuming significant resources. The first interim results from the breast cancer section (n=67) of an ongoing study assessing the health resource utilization per type of SRE (119 discreet SREs) found that pathologic fracture required the longest hospital stay (19 days, n=18), with spinal cord compression requiring the second most days (13.3 days, n=5). Additionally, radiation to bone required the most procedures (14.7, n=87), such as imaging, followed by spinal cord compression (10.4, n=5).

This section of an ongoing observational, multinational study assessed SRE-related utilization of health resources by SRE type (surgery or radiation to bone, pathologic fracture, or spinal cord compression) in breast patients with bone metastases. Data was collected on inpatient hospitalizations, length of stay, outpatient visits, emergency room (ER) visits, nursing home/long-term care facility stays, home health visits, procedures, and medications.

Date: December 10, 2010
Source: Amgen 


Filed Under: Drug Discovery

 

Related Articles Read More >

Swissmedic approves first malaria treatment for infants
Korean team reports all-in-one cancer nanomedicine in pre-clinical studies
Nektar’s Phase 2b atopic dermatitis win triggers 1,746% analyst target surge, but legal tussle with ex-partner Lilly could complicate path forward
Dupixent approved to treat bullous pemphigoid
“ddd
EXPAND YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND STAY CONNECTED
Get the latest news and trends happening now in the drug discovery and development industry.

MEDTECH 100 INDEX

Medtech 100 logo
Market Summary > Current Price
The MedTech 100 is a financial index calculated using the BIG100 companies covered in Medical Design and Outsourcing.
Drug Discovery and Development
  • MassDevice
  • DeviceTalks
  • Medtech100 Index
  • Medical Design Sourcing
  • Medical Design & Outsourcing
  • Medical Tubing + Extrusion
  • Subscribe to our E-Newsletter
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • R&D World
  • Drug Delivery Business News
  • Pharmaceutical Processing World

Copyright © 2025 WTWH Media LLC. All Rights Reserved. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of WTWH Media
Privacy Policy | Advertising | About Us

Search Drug Discovery & Development

  • Home Drug Discovery and Development
  • Drug Discovery
  • Women in Pharma and Biotech
  • Oncology
  • Neurological Disease
  • Infectious Disease
  • Resources
    • Video features
    • Podcast
    • Voices
    • Views
    • Webinars
  • Pharma 50
    • 2025 Pharma 50
    • 2024 Pharma 50
    • 2023 Pharma 50
    • 2022 Pharma 50
    • 2021 Pharma 50
  • Advertise
  • SUBSCRIBE