Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 11:37 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-01-05 @ 8:03 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT07237256
Status:
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Last Update Posted:
2025-11-19
First Post:
2025-11-14
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Chemotherapy De-escalation in HR +, HER2-, Intermediate-risk Early Breast Cancer Treated With Adjuvant Ribociclib
Sponsor:
UNICANCER
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
No Chemotherapy in Intermediate-risk HR+ HER2- Early Breast Cancer Treated With Ribociclib (LEE-011) in the Adjuvant Setting, a Non-inferiority Phase III Trial
Status:
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Status Verified Date:
2025-11
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
NoLEEta
Brief Summary:
The advent of CDK4/6 inhibitors (drugs designed to block the action of CDK4/6 proteins, which play a key role in cell proliferation) has improved treatment prospects for patients with metastatic breast cancer whose tumour cells express hormone receptors but not the HER2 protein (HR+/HER2-). The NATALEE study showed that the addition of ribociclib for three years to conventional adjuvant hormone therapy (i.e. after surgery) prolonged survival free of invasive disease (i.e. extending to surrounding tissues) in patients with early HR breast cancer+ /HER2-. Unlike other studies, NATALEE included a group of patients at intermediate risk of recurrence, usually treated with adjuvant chemotherapy before receiving hormone therapy. However, the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in these patients is uncertain. The hypothesis of the NoLEEta study is that by using the CDK 4/6 inhibitor, patients could avoid adjuvant chemotherapy and therefore be spared the side-effects associated with this chemotherapy, without reducing the efficacy of the treatment.
Detailed Description:
The advent of CDK4/6 inhibitors has changed the outlook of patients with metastatic hormone receptor-positive (HR+) HER2- breast cancer. Moreover, including CDK4/6 inhibitors in the adjuvant treatment regimens strategies has led to significant gains in disease-free survival.
The phase III NATALEE trial demonstrated the efficacy of an adjuvant three-year treatment with ribociclib in prolonging invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) in patients with intermediate and high-risk HR+ HER2- early breast cancer.
Contrarily to similar studies of CDK4/6 inhibitors in this setting, NATALEE included a group of patients with intermediate clinical risk (pT1-2 pN1, pT3-4 pN0 or pT2 pN0 with histological grade 3 or grade 2 with Ki67≥ 20%). These patients are usually considered for adjuvant chemotherapy based on their clinicopathological conditions or the results of a genomic signature (e.g. Oncotype Dx). Nevertheless, the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in these patients is uncertain (and likely small) in the context of an adjuvant treatment strategy that includes a CDK 4/6 inhibitor.
As such, a de-escalation trial could demonstrate that patients with intermediate-risk breast cancer treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors could be spared the dreaded chemotherapy side effects while ensuring similar survival outcomes.
In order to be generalizable and practice changing, a trial in this setting should aim to be as pragmatic as possible, particularly in inclusion criteria, with the required resources for patient inclusion and delivery of care being as similar as possible to those employed in usual care. As such, chemotherapy eligibility should be defined similarly to routine clinical practice in the participating centers (i.e. using routine clinicopathological parameters and/or genomic signatures).
While single-arm designs could help address non-inferiority in the previously mentioned setting, they are usually compared to historical controls and lack external validation. Moreover, in some settings, like early breast cancer, the standard of care may change relatively quickly (e.g. Oncotype Dx-based chemotherapy de-escalation or adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors use), rendering the comparison to historical controls challenging, limiting the study conclusions and their impact on clinical practice. Finally, there is no consensus on the optimal non-inferiority threshold in single-arm trials using historical controls as a comparator. As such, randomized controlled non-inferiority trials with a strict non-inferiority margin remain the gold standard design to prove that a de-escalated treatment regimen is safe and advantageous, and the only ones capable of producing level IA evidence according to ESMO (Trapani et al., Annals of Oncology 2022).
The phase III NATALEE trial demonstrated the efficacy of an adjuvant three-year treatment with ribociclib in prolonging invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) in patients with intermediate and high-risk HR+ HER2- early breast cancer.
Contrarily to similar studies of CDK4/6 inhibitors in this setting, NATALEE included a group of patients with intermediate clinical risk (pT1-2 pN1, pT3-4 pN0 or pT2 pN0 with histological grade 3 or grade 2 with Ki67≥ 20%). These patients are usually considered for adjuvant chemotherapy based on their clinicopathological conditions or the results of a genomic signature (e.g. Oncotype Dx). Nevertheless, the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in these patients is uncertain (and likely small) in the context of an adjuvant treatment strategy that includes a CDK 4/6 inhibitor.
As such, a de-escalation trial could demonstrate that patients with intermediate-risk breast cancer treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors could be spared the dreaded chemotherapy side effects while ensuring similar survival outcomes.
In order to be generalizable and practice changing, a trial in this setting should aim to be as pragmatic as possible, particularly in inclusion criteria, with the required resources for patient inclusion and delivery of care being as similar as possible to those employed in usual care. As such, chemotherapy eligibility should be defined similarly to routine clinical practice in the participating centers (i.e. using routine clinicopathological parameters and/or genomic signatures).
While single-arm designs could help address non-inferiority in the previously mentioned setting, they are usually compared to historical controls and lack external validation. Moreover, in some settings, like early breast cancer, the standard of care may change relatively quickly (e.g. Oncotype Dx-based chemotherapy de-escalation or adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors use), rendering the comparison to historical controls challenging, limiting the study conclusions and their impact on clinical practice. Finally, there is no consensus on the optimal non-inferiority threshold in single-arm trials using historical controls as a comparator. As such, randomized controlled non-inferiority trials with a strict non-inferiority margin remain the gold standard design to prove that a de-escalated treatment regimen is safe and advantageous, and the only ones capable of producing level IA evidence according to ESMO (Trapani et al., Annals of Oncology 2022).
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
True
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?:
Secondary ID Infos
| Secondary ID | Type | Domain | Link | View |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-520979-13-00 | CTIS | None | View |