throbber
|), SI5—SI8
`British Journal of Cancer (2004) 90(Suppl
`e
`© 2004 Cancer Research UK All rights reserved 0007- 0920/04
`$25.00
`www.bjcancer.com
`
`Fulvestrant and the sequential endocrine cascade for advanced
`breast cancer
`
`
`
`
`
`S Johnston”!
`‘Department of Medicine (Breast Unit), The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust & Institute of Cancer Research, Fulham Road, London SW3 6{f UK
`
`
`is common for patients to
`it
`Following relapse on endocrine therapy for advanced, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer,
`experience responsesto alternative endocrine agents. Fulvestrant (‘Faslodex’) is a new type of endocrine treatment — an oestrogen
`receptor (ER) antagonist with no agonist effects. Fulvestrant downregulates cellular levels of the ER resulting in decreased expression
`of the progesterone receptor. This unique mode of action means that it
`is important that fulvestrant is placed optimally within the
`sequence of endocrine therapies to ensure that patients gain maximum benefit. Fulvestrant has shown efficacy when used after
`progression on tamoxifen or anastrozole in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. After progression on fulvestrant,
`subsequent endocrine treatments can produce responses in many patients, demonstrating that fulvestrant does not
`lead to
`crossresistance with other endocrine therapies. Responsesto fulvestrant have also been observed in patients heavily pretreated with
`prior endocrine therapy. Fulvestrant is a versatile endocrine agent that may be integrated into the therapeutic sequence prior to, or
`subsequent to, other hormonal therapies, and represents a valuable additional antioestrogen for the treatment of postmenopausal
`women with advanced breast cancer.
`
`British Journal of Cancer (2004) 90(Suppl 1), SIS5—S18. dorl0.1038/sj.bjc.6601632 www.bjcancer.com
`© 2004 Cancer Research U
`
`
`
`Keywords: breast cancer; endocrine therapy; sequencing; fulvestrant; 'Faslodex’
`
`The efficacy and tolerability advantages associated with the use of
`endocrine agents in the treatment of hormone receptor-positive
`advanced breast cancer have been clearly established in many
`clinical
`studies. However, despite an initial
`response, many
`patients will eventually experience disease progression and require
`further endocrine treatment options. In patients who respond to
`endocrine treatments, additional responses to further agents are
`common (Buzdar and Hortobagyi, 1998; Hortobagyi, 1998). This
`potential responsiveness to multiple endocrine therapies means
`that patients may continue to derive clinical benefit while avoiding
`the marked, and often distressing, adverse side effects associated
`with chemotherapy. This is a particularly important consideration
`in a predominantly elderly patient population who maybe least
`able to tolerate severe adverse events. Disease control
`is also
`important in this patient group for whom an absolute cure may not
`be achievable, and instead, prevention of disease progression and
`the maintenance of quality of life may be more important.
`The activity of sequential endocrine therapies is dependent upon
`them possessing different mechanisms of action.
`In this way,
`crossresistance between sequential therapies may be avoided.It is
`therefore important that, as new endocrine therapies with different
`mechanisms of action become available,
`they are integrated
`effectively into the sequential hormonal regimens toallow patients
`to derive maximum benefit.
`
`FULVESTRANT AND THE ENDOCRINE SEQUENCE
`CASCADE
`
`Fulvestrant (‘Faslodex’) is a new type of endocrine treatment - an
`oestrogen receptor
`(ER) antagonist with no agonist effects
`(Wakeling et al, 1991; Robertson et al, 2001). Fulvestrant binds
`to the ER but, due to its steroidal structure and long side-chain,
`induces a different conformational shape with the receptor to that
`achieved by the nonsteroidal antioestrogen tamoxifen. As a result
`of this, fulvestrant prevents ER dimerisation and leads to the rapid
`degradation of the fulvestrant- ER complex, producing the loss of
`cellular ER (Borras et al, 1996). As a result, fulvestrant (unlike
`tamoxifen) inhibits ER- DNA binding and produces abrogation of
`oestrogen-sensitive gene transcription (Dauvois et al, 1993).
`The unique mode ofaction of fulvestrant presents a useful
`addition to the endocrine agents currently available for use in
`sequential therapeutic regimens. Fulvestrant has been approved in
`the United States and Brazil
`for
`the treatment of hormone
`receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer
`in postmenopausal
`women with disease progression following antioestrogen therapy.
`An increasing numberof studies are demonstrating the versatility
`of fulvestrant for the treatment of advanced breast cancer (Howell
`et al, 2002; Osborne et al, 2002; Perey et al, 2002; Steger et al,
`2003a, b). An understanding and appreciation of these data will be
`important for determining the optimal placing of fulvestrant in the
`sequence cascade of hormonaltherapy.
`
`
`
`Efficacy post-tamoxifen
`
`*Correspondence: Dr SRD Johnston;
`E-mail: Stephen johnston@rmh.nthames.nhs.uk
`
`The efficacy of fulvestrant has been proven in two phase III trials
`conducted in postmenopausal patients with hormone-sensitive
`
`AstraZeneca Exhibit 2065 p. 1
`InnoPharma Licensing LLC v. AstraZeneca AB IPR2017-00904
`Fresenius-Kabi USA LLC v. AstraZeneca AB IPR2017-01910
`
`

`

`Fulvestrant and the sequential endocrine cascade
`S Johnston
`S16
`
`advanced breast cancer progressing on prior tamoxifen. In both
`these trials, the efficacy of fulvestrant was comparableto the highly
`selective,
`third-generation aromatase inhibitor (AI) anastrozole
`(‘Arimidex’) (Howell et al, 2002; Osborneet al, 2002). Fulvestrant
`is
`the only antioestrogen acting directly on ER that has
`demonstrated efficacy post-tamoxifen,
`illustrating the lack of
`crossresistance between these two therapies. This is in contrast to
`the selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) such as
`droloxifene,
`idoxifene,
`toremifene, and benzothiophene arzoxi-
`fene, all of which have shown minimal activity in tamoxifen-
`resistant disease (Johnston, 2001).
`
`Efficacy post-Al
`
`Endocrine therapy after progression on fulvestrant
`
`Two studies have provided evidence that the marked reduction in
`ER expression produced by fulvestrant
`is not associated with
`crossresistance to subsequent endocrine therapies (Howell, 2002;
`Vergote et al, 2003). These studies used the retrospective analysis
`of data derived from questionnaires sent to clinicians who were
`involved in trials of fulvestrant as first- or second-line therapy
`(Osborne et al, 2002; Robertson et al, 2002). This methodology
`imposes
`certain limitations on the analyses. However,
`the
`information obtained from these studies does provide further
`evidence with regard to establishing sequencing regimens.
`Responses to subsequent endocrine therapy in patients who
`progressed on fulvestrant or tamoxifen as first-line therapy for
`advanced disease have been examined in a retrospective analysis
`improved efficacy and tolerability, Als are
`Owing to their
`(Howell, 2002). The limitations of this analysis are illustrated by
`increasingly being used in thefirst-line treatment of breast cancer,
`the fact that while 170 patients derived CB on fulvestrant, follow-
`in both early and advanced disease (Nabholtz et al, 2000; ATAC
`up data on patients who received subsequent endocrine therapy
`Trialists’ Group, 2002; Mouridsen et al, 2003). Preclinical data
`were available for only 35 of these. In these patients, subsequent
`indicate that exposure to long-term oestrogen deprivation (similar
`endocrine therapy produced CB in 20 out of 35 (57%) patients,
`to that caused by Als) and subsequent development of acquired
`with Al-based therapy producing CB in 11 out of 22 (50%) patients
`resistance may be accompanied by adaptive increases in ER gene
`(Table 1). It is interesting to note that in those patients who failed
`expression and intercellular signalling, resulting in hypersensitiv-
`to derive CB from fulvestrant, subsequent endocrine therapy
`ity to low oestradiol levels (Jeng et al, 1998; Shim et al, 2000; Chan
`produced a similar numberof responses to those seen in patients
`et al, 2002; Martin et al, 2003). In this situation, tamoxifen may be
`whodid derive CB from fulvestrant (15 out of 35 (43%) and 20 out
`perceived as an agonist. Asaresult, it is important to establish the
`of 35 (57%), respectively; Table 2). While the selection of patients
`efficacy of fulvestrant after progression on Als. In vitro, fulvestrant
`and patient numbers included in this analysis are limited by the
`significantly inhibited the expression of genes such as c-myb and
`nature of the data collection, they do indicate that responses may
`c-myc in cells resistant to long-term oestrogen deprivation (Jeng
`be obtained with AIs and other endocrine therapies
`after
`et al, 1998) and may therefore be an appropriate therapeutic
`progression on fulvestrant.
`option after progression on Als.
`In another retrospective analysis, 186 patients in total derived
`Clinical data so far are limited, but preliminary results from an
`CB on second-line fulvestrant, although questionnaire-based
`ongoing phase II study have shown that fulvestrant produced
`follow-up data were available for only 54 of these patients (Vergote
`clinical benefit
`(CB, complete response (CR)-+ partial response
`et al, 2003). The results showed that treatment with endocrine
`(PR) + stable disease (SD) 24 weeks) in seven out of 17 (41%)
`therapy (predominantly Als) after second-line fulvestrant pro-
`patients who hadreceived, and had progressed on, prior treatment
`duced CB in 25 out of 54 (46%) patients and objective response
`with tamoxifen and an Al (Perey etal, 2002). These results suggest
`(OR, CR+ PR) in four out of 54 (7%) patients who obtained CB
`that in addition to producing responses after prior tamoxifen,
`with second-line fulvestrant (Table 1). In patients who failed to
`disease progression after anastrozole may not preclude subsequent
`derive CB from second-line fulvestrant, further endocrine therapy
`treatment with fulvestrant. Furthertrials in this setting are now in
`produced CB in 18 out of 51 (35%) patients and OR in one out of
`progress and are discussed later in this paper.
`51 (2%) patients (Table 2). Preliminary analyses demonstrated a
`median duration of response to subsequent therapy of 383 and 318
`days, for patients who did and whodid not derive CB from second-
`line fulvestrant,
`respectively. Further endocrine therapy after
`progression on fulvestrant
`is therefore a viable and effective
`therapeutic option, with responses seen in patients treated with
`
`Efficacy in heavily pretreated patients
`
`Many patients may receive a number of different endocrine
`therapies as well as chemotherapies during the course of their
`disease. Preliminary data are becoming available from centres
`using fulvestrant
`in Named Patient Programmes
`involving
`patients heavily pretreated with endocrine therapies including
`tamoxifen, anastrozole,
`letrozole,
`exemestane, and goserelin.
`In 67 postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer, 64
`of whom (96%) had progressed on one,
`two or three prior
`endocrine agents for advanced disease, fulvestrant produced CB in
`40 patients (60%) overall. A total of six patients (9%) derived a PR.
`Of these, one had received fulvestrant as first-line therapy for
`advanced disease,
`two had received fulvestrant as second-line
`therapy, and three had received it as third-line therapy. No
`objective responses were seen in patients receiving fourth-line
`fulvestrant therapy. This might suggest that fulvestrant produces
`better responses when given earlier in the treatment sequence
`(Steger et al, 2003a).
`Similar results have been obtained in a separate single-centre
`study. Postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer who
`had been heavily pretreated with prior hormonal
`therapy
`(including tamoxifen, Als, androgens, and high-dose oestrogens)
`and chemotherapy (including taxanes, capecitabine, doxorubicin,
`and cisplatin) were treated with fulvestrant; SD 224 weeks was
`achieved in eight out of 42 (19%) patients (Franco etal, 2003).
`
`Response to subsequent therapy in patients who derivedclinical
`Table |
`benefit (CB) from fulvestrant
`
`Numberofpatients
`
` CR PR SD 224 weeks PD Total
`
`Patients who derived CB from first-line fulvestrant
`Endocrine therapy total
`|
`2
`\7
`Aromatase inhibitors
`|
`|
`9
`Tamoxifen
`0
`|
`7
`Megestrol acetate
`0
`0
`|
`Medroxyprogesterone acetate
`0
`0
`0
`
`Patients who derived CB from second-line fulvestrant
`Endocrine therapy total
`Oo
`4
`2\
`Aromatase inhibitors
`0
`3
`16
`Megestrol acetate
`0
`|
`5
`
`5
`Ul
`2
`0
`2
`
`29
`27
`2
`
`35
`22
`10
`|
`2
`
`54
`46
`8
`
`(2002) with permission of Breast Cancer Research and
`Adapted from Howell
`Treatment (Vergote et ai, 2003). CR=complete response; PR= partial response;
`SD = stable disease; PD = progressive disease.
`
`British Journal of Cancer (2004) 90(Suppl 1), S$15-S18
`
`© 2004 Cancer Research UK
`
`AstraZeneca Exhibit 2065 p. 2
`
`

`

`Fulvestrant and the sequential endocrine cascade
`S Johnston
`S|7
`
`tamoxifen and megestrol acetate as well as Als such as anastrozole
`andletrozole.
`
`DISCUSSION
`
`It is important to be aware of the sequenceversatility of fulvestrant
`so that it may be effectively and appropriately incorporated into
`the endocrine sequence cascade. Fulvestrant has demonstrated
`efficacy in the
`treatment of postmenopausal women with
`advanced, hormone-sensitive breast cancer, with data indicating
`that fulvestrant exhibits this activity in both the post-tamoxifen
`
`Table 2 Response to subsequent therapy in patients who did not derive
`clinical benefit (CB) from fulvestrant
`
`Numberof patients
`
` CR PR SD 224 weeks PD Total
`
`Patients who did not derive CB from first-line fulvestrant
`Endocrine therapy total
`0
`3
`12
`Aromatase inhibitors
`0
`0
`8
`Tamoxifen
`0
`3
`2
`Megestrol acetate
`0
`0
`|
`Medroxyprogesterone acetate
`0
`0
`|
`
`20
`Ul
`7
`0
`2
`
`Patients who did not derive CB from second-line fulvestrant
`Endocrine therapy total
`0
`|
`\7
`33
`Aromatase inhibitors
`0
`|
`15
`26
`Megestrol acetate
`0
`0
`|
`5
`Medroxyprogesterone acetate
`0
`0
`|
`2
`
`35
`19
`12
`|
`3
`
`51
`42
`6
`3
`
`(2002) with permission of Breast Cancer Research and
`Adapted from Howell
`Treatment. (Vergote et ai, 2003). CR=complete response; PR= partial response;
`SD = stable disease; PD = progressive disease.
`
`First-line
`
`
`Tamoxifen
`
`Second-line Fulvestrant “Al
`
`Al
`Fulvestrant
`
`
`Al Tamoxifen Fulvestrant Tamoxifen
`
`Third-line
`
`Al Fulvestrant Tamoxifen Al
`
`MA
`
`Fulvestrant
`
`fulvestrant has
`and postanastrozole setting. More specifically,
`been shown to be at least as effective as anastrozole in women
`with
`hormone-sensitive
`disease who
`have
`progressed
`on
`first-line
`therapy (mainly tamoxifen)
`(Howell
`et
`al,
`2002;
`Osborne et al, 2002; Robertson et al, 2003), with preliminary
`data
`showing promising results
`after progression on Als
`(Perey et al, 2002). Fulvestrant has also been used in patients
`pretreated with several endocrine agents
`as well as chemo-
`therapy. In one report, an overall CB rate of 60% was obtained,
`although patients who were treated with fulvestrant earlier
`in the sequence appeared to obtain better
`responses
`than
`those whoreceived it after progression on three endocrine agents
`(Steger et al, 2003a).
`In patients who undergo disease progression on fulvestrant, the
`novel modeofaction of this new endocrine therapy ensures a lack
`of crossresistance to other current endocrine agents (Howell, 2002;
`Vergote et al, 2003). Thus,
`the early use of fulvestrant
`in the
`sequence of endocrine therapies may not limit later choices of
`endocrine therapy. Fulvestrant can,
`therefore, potentially be
`integrated into sequential endocrine regimens at a number of
`positions, including the second-line setting after tamoxifen, or,
`potentially, after Als (Figure 1). Endocrine therapies such as
`megestrol acetate or the steroidal Al exemestane may then be
`employed as necessary after progression on fulvestrant. In this
`way, the potentially most effective and well-tolerated agents are
`used earlier in the treatment sequence.
`To optimise the positioning of fulvestrant in the sequence of
`endocrine therapies, additional
`studies will be required to
`elaborate upon the data so far accrued. New phase II andIII
`clinicaltrials of fulvestrant in over 3000 patients are either planned
`or currently in progress (Table 3). These will investigate additional
`roles for fulvestrant in breast cancer therapy,either following prior
`nonsteroidal AI treatment or in combination with Als asfirst-line
`therapy. In addition,
`loading-dose fulvestrant regimens will be
`tested. Two randomised, controlled trials are comparing the
`efficacy and tolerability of fulvestrant vs exemestane in post-
`menopausal womenprogressing after long-term oestrogen depri-
`vation resulting from prior AI therapy. The primary aim of the
`Study Of Faslodex vs Exemestane with/without Arimidex (SOFEA)
`trial is to compare progression-free survival in patients who have
`progressed on a nonsteroidal AI, and who are subsequently treated
`with either
`fulvestrant plus continued anastrozole, or with
`fulvestrant alone. Secondary aims
`include a comparison of
`fulvestrant vs exemestane and an examination of biological
`
`markers of response. A further trial, the Evaluation of Faslodex
`Al = aromataseinhibitor
`vs Exemestane Clinical Trial
`(EFECT)
`is currently recruiting
`patients to assess the efficacy of fulvestrant vs exemestane in
`patients who have progressed on treatment with nonsteroidal Als.
`In addition, two trials (FACT and SWOG 226) will compare the
`efficacy of a combination of fulvestrant plus anastrozole with
`anastrozole alone in thefirst-line setting (Table 3). The results of
`
`Fourth-line=MA MA MA MA Tamoxifen MA
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MA = megestrol acetate
`
`the available
`fulvestrant within
`Proposed positions of
`|
`Figure
`endocrine therapies for the sequential
`treatment of postmenopausal
`women with hormone receptor-positive, advanced disease. Adapted from
`Carlson (2002) with permission of Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.
`
`Table 3 New phaseIl/Ill clinical trials of fulvestrant in over 3000 breast cancer patients
`
`
`Trial
`Phase
`Population
`Treatments
`Patients (n)
`
`Fulvestrant 250 mg
`Fulvestrant 250 mg
`Fulvestrant LD 250mg vs exemestane
`Fulvestrant LD 250mg + anastrozole vs exemestane
`Fulvestrant LD 250 mgtanastrozole vs anastrozole
`Fulvestrant 250 mg+anastrozole vs anastrozole
`Fulvestrant 250 mg+anastrozole vs anastrozole
`Fulvestrant HD vs tamoxifen
`
`
`
`
`
`89
`93
`660
`750
`558
`690
`120
`60
`
`
`
`
`
`NCCTG
`SAKK
`EFECT
`SOFEA
`FACT
`SWOG 226
`0057
`FAST
`
`|
`|
`
`|
`|
`
`|
`|
`|
`|
`
`
`
`Post-tamoxifen or post-Als
`
`Post-tamoxifen or post-Als
`Post-nonsteroidal Al
`Post-nonsteroidal Al
`First-line
`First-line
`Neoadjuvant
`Neoadjuvant
`
`NCCTG =North Central Cancer Treatment Group; SAKK=Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research; EFECT = Evaluation of Faslodex vs Exemestane Clinical Trial;
`SOFEA = Study Of Faslodex vs Exemestane with/without Arimidex, SWOG = Southwest Oncology Group; LD 250 mg = loading-dose schedule of fulvestrant: 500 mg day 0,
`250 mg days 14 and 28, fulvestrant 250 mg per monthly thereafter; HD = high-dose schedule of fulvestrant 750mg 2—3 weeks presurgery.
`
`© 2004 Cancer Research UK
`
`British Journal of Cancer (2004) 90(Suppl
`
`1}, $15-S18
`
`AstraZeneca Exhibit 2065 p. 3
`
`

`

`Fulvestrant and the sequential endocrine cascade
`S Johnston
`S18
`
`these will further define endocrine-sequencing
`trials such as
`strategies, particularly as Als move forward into the first-line or
`adjuvant settings.
`Currently available data therefore indicate that fulvestrant will
`be a useful therapeutic option that may extend the opportunity for
`
`using endocrine therapies before reliance upon cytotoxic che-
`motherapy is necessary. Fulvestrant is also a versatile endocrine
`therapy that maybe used at a variety of positions in the sequential
`use of endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with
`advanced, hormone-sensitive breast cancer.
`
`REFERENCES
`
`ATACTrialists’ Group (2002) Anastrozole alone or in combination with
`tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone for adjuvant treatment of postmeno-
`pausal women with early breast cancer:
`first results of the ATAC
`randomisedtrial. Lancet 359: 2131-2139
`Borras M,LaiosI, el Khissiin A, Seo HS, Lempereur F, Legros N, Leclercq G
`(1996) Estrogenic and antiestrogenic regulation of the half-life of
`covalently labeled estrogen receptor in MCF-7 breast cancer cells. J
`Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 57: 203-213
`Buzdar AU, Hortobagyi G (1998) Update on endocrine therapy for breast
`cancer. Clin Cancer Res 4: 527-534
`Carlson RW (2002) Sequencing of endocrine therapies in breast cancer -
`integration of recent data. Breast Cancer Res Treat 75(Suppl 1): S27- $32
`Chan CM, Martin LA, Johnston SR, Ali S, Dowsett M (2002) Molecular
`changes associated with the acquisition of oestrogen hypersensitivity in
`MCE-7 breast cancer cells on long-term oestrogen deprivation. J Steroid
`Biochem Mol Biol 81: 333-341
`Dauvois S, White R, Parker MG (1993) The antiestrogen ICI 182780
`disrupts estrogen receptor nucleocytoplasmic shuttling. J Cell Sci
`106(Part 4): 1377 - 1388
`Franco S$, Perez A, Tan-Chiu E, Frankel C, Vogel C (2003) Fulvestrant
`(Faslodex®) demonstrates clinical benefit in heavily pretreated post-
`menopausal women with advanced breast cancer: a single-center
`experience. Breast Cancer Res Treat 82(Suppl 1): S105 (abstract 429)
`Hortobagyi GN (1998) Progress in endocrine therapy for breast carcinoma.
`Cancer 83: 1-6
`
`Howell A (2002) Postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer
`who progress on fulvestrant or
`tamoxifen retain sensitivity to
`further endocrine therapies. Breast Cancer Res Treat 76(Suppl 1): $72
`(abstract 251)
`Howell A, Robertson JFR, Quaresma Albano J, Aschermannova A, Mauriac
`L, Kleeberg UR, Vergote I, Erikstein B, Webster A, Morris C (2002)
`Fulvestrant, formerly ICI 182,780,
`is as effective as anastrozole in
`postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer progressing after
`prior endocrine treatment. J Clin Oncol 20: 3396-3403
`Jeng MH, Shupnik MA, Bender TP, Westin EH, Bandyopadhyay D, Kumar
`R, Masamura S, Santen RJ (1998) Estrogen receptor expression and
`function in long-term estrogen-deprived human breast cancer cells.
`Endocrinology 139: 4164-4174
`Johnston SR (2001) Endocrine manipulation in advanced breast
`cancer:
`recent advances with SERM therapies. Clin Cancer Res 7:
`4376s - 4387s
`Martin LA, Farmer I, Johnston SR, Ali S, Marshall C, Dowsett M (2003)
`Enhanced estrogen receptor
`(ER) alpha, ERBB2, and MAPK signal
`transduction pathways operate during the adaptation of MCE-7 cells to
`long term estrogen deprivation. J Biol Chem 278: 30458 - 30468
`Mouridsen H, Gershanovich M, Sun Y, Perez-Carrion R, Boni C, Monnier
`A, Apffelstaedt J, Smith R, Sleeboom HP,Jaenicke F, Pluzanska A, Dank
`M, Becquart D, Bapsy PP, Salminen E, Snyder R, Chaudri-Ross H, Lang
`R, Wyld P, Bhatnagar A (2003) Phase III study of letrozole versus
`tamoxifen asfirst-line therapy of advanced breast cancer in postmeno-
`
`pausal women: analysis of survival and update of efficacy from the
`International Letrozole Breast Cancer Group. J Clin Oncol 21: 2101-2109
`Nabholtz JM, Buzdar A, Pollak M, Harwin W, Burton G, Mangalik A,
`Steinberg M, Webster A, von Euler M (2000) Anastrozole is superior to
`tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer in post-
`menopausal women: results of a North American multicenter rando-
`mized trial. Arimidex Study Group. J Clin Oncol 18: 3758 - 3767
`Osborne CK, Pippen J, Jones SE, Parker LM, Ellis M, ComeS, Gertler SZ,
`MayJT, Burton G, Dimery I, Webster A, Morris C, Elledge R, Buzdar A
`(2002) Double-blind,
`randomized trial comparing the efficacy and
`tolerability of fulvestrant versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women
`with advanced breast cancer progressing on prior endocrine therapy:
`results of a North Americantrial. J Clin Oncol 20: 3386 - 3395
`Perey L, Thiirlimann B, Hawle H, Bonnefoi H, Ahern J, Pagani O,
`Goldhirsch A, Dietrich D (2002) Fulvestrant (‘faslodex’) as hormonal
`treatment
`in postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer
`progressing after treatment with tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors.
`Breast Cancer Res Treat 76(Suppl 1): $72 (abstract 249)
`Robertson JF, Nicholson RI, Bundred NJ, Anderson E, Rayter Z, Dowsett M,
`Fox JN, Gee JM, Webster A, Wakeling AE, Morris C, Dixon M (2001)
`Comparison ofthe short-term biological effects of 7-alpha-[9-(4,4,5,5,5-
`pentafluoropentylsulfinyl)-nonylJestra-1,3,5,
` (10)-triene-3,17beta-diol
`(Faslodex) versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with primary
`breast cancer. Cancer Res 61: 6739 - 6746
`Robertson JF, Osborne CK, Howell A, Jones SE, Mauriac L, Ellis M,
`Kleeberg UR, Come SE, Vergote I, Gertler S, Buzdar A, Webster A,
`Morris C (2003) Fulvestrant versus anastrozole for the treatment of
`advanced breast carcinoma in postmenopausal women - a prospective
`combinedanalysis of two multicenter trials. Cancer 98: 229 - 238
`Robertson JFR, Howell A, Abram P, Lichinitser M, Elledge R (2002)
`Fulvestrant versus tamoxifen for the first-line treatment of advanced
`breast cancer (ABC) in postmenopausal women. Ann Oncol 13(Suppl 5):
`46 (abstract 1640)
`Shim WS, Conaway M, Masamura S, Yue W, Wang JP, Kmar R, Santen RJ
`(2000) Estradiol hypersensitivity and mitogen-activated protein kinase
`expression in long-term estrogen deprived human breast cancer cells in
`vivo. Endocrinology 141: 396-405
`Steger G, Bartsch R, Wenzel C, Pluschnig U, Locker G, Mader RM,Zielinski
`CC (2003a) Fulvestrant
`(‘Faslodex’) demonstrates clinical benefit
`in
`heavily pre-treated patients with metastatic breast cancer. Eur J Cancer
`1(Suppl 5): $135
`Steger G, Bartsch R, Wenzel C, Pluschnig U, Locker G, Mader RM,Zielinski
`CC (2003b) Fulvestrant beyond the second hormonal treatmentline in
`metastatic breast cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 22: 20
`Vergote I, Robertson JFR, Kleeberg U, Burton G, Osborne CK, Mauriac L
`(2003) Postmenopausal women whoprogress on fulvestrant (‘Faslodex’)
`remain sensitive to further endocrine therapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat
`79: 207-211
`
`Wakeling AE, Dukes M, Bowler J (1991) A potent specific pure antiestrogen
`with clinical potential. Cancer Res 51: 3867 - 3873
`
`British Journal of Cancer (2004) 90(Suppl 1), S$15-S18
`
`© 2004 Cancer Research UK
`
`AstraZeneca Exhibit 2065 p. 4
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket