Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

DHP107 noninferior to intravenous paclitaxel in HER2-negative, metastatic breast cancerOral paclitaxel shows similar results to IV for breast cancer

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Consider DHP107 as a noninferior oral alternative to intravenous paclitaxel for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

This Phase III randomized controlled trial enrolled 549 patients with HER2-negative, recurrent or metastatic breast cancer who had received no prior chemotherapy in the metastatic setting. Patients were randomized to receive either DHP107 (oral paclitaxel) at 200 mg/m orally twice daily on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle, or intravenous paclitaxel at 80 mg/m on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle.

In the per-protocol set, DHP107 demonstrated noninferiority in progression-free survival (PFS) compared to intravenous paclitaxel. The median PFS for DHP107 was 10.0 months versus 8.5 months for intravenous paclitaxel (Hazard Ratio 0.869; 95% CI 0.707-1.068). Overall survival (OS) was comparable between the two groups, with median OS of 32.6 months for DHP107 and 31.8 months for intravenous paclitaxel (Hazard Ratio 0.967; 95% CI 0.762-1.227).

Safety profiles differed by route: DHP107 was associated with higher rates of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting. Intravenous paclitaxel was associated with more frequent peripheral neuropathy and hypersensitivity reactions. No treatment-related deaths occurred in the DHP107 group, while one (0.4%) occurred in the intravenous paclitaxel group. Quality of life was reported as comparable between both groups.

Follow-up duration was not reported. While DHP107 provides a noninferior oral alternative to intravenous paclitaxel, clinicians should weigh the specific adverse event profiles, such as higher gastrointestinal and neutropenia risks with oral administration versus neuropathy risks with intravenous administration.

How this fits prior evidence

How this fits prior evidence: This finding addresses a gap in treatment modalities for HER2-negative breast cancer by establishing DHP107 as a noninferior oral alternative to intravenous paclitaxel. While previous coverage noted that local or regional anaesthesia shows no significant difference in overall survival for breast cancer patients, this trial specifically evaluates the efficacy and safety of an oral versus intravenous chemotherapy delivery method.

For many people living with HER2-negative, metastatic breast cancer, the journey involves intensive treatments like paclitaxel. While this medication is effective, it is traditionally delivered through an intravenous (IV) drip. A large study involving 549 patients recently tested a new oral version of the drug, called DHP107, to see if it could offer a comparable experience to the standard IV method.

The results showed that the oral pill was noninferior to the IV treatment. Patients taking the oral medication had a median progression-free survival of 10 months, while those on the IV version had 8.5 months. The overall survival times were also very similar between both groups, with averages of 32.6 months and 31.8 months respectively.

Safety profiles differed slightly between the two methods. The oral pill was linked to higher rates of nausea, vomiting, and low white blood cell counts (neutropenia). In contrast, the IV treatment led to more cases of nerve damage (peripheral neuropathy) and allergic-type reactions. Both groups reported a similar quality of life during treatment.

What this means for you:
An oral version of paclitaxel works as well as the standard IV dose for certain advanced breast cancers.

Common questions

Is the oral pill as effective as the IV treatment?

Yes. The study found that the oral version (DHP107) was noninferior to the standard intravenous paclitaxel. Patients taking the oral pill had a median progression-free survival of 10 months, compared to 8.5 months for those receiving the IV treatment.

What are the different side effects for each treatment?

The oral pill was linked to higher rates of nausea, vomiting, and neutropenia (low white blood cell count). The intravenous treatment was more likely to cause peripheral neuropathy (nerve damage) and hypersensitivity reactions.

How did the patients' quality of life compare?

The study reported that the quality of life was comparable between both groups. While the side effects differed in type, the overall experience for the patients remained similar across both treatment methods.

Study Details

Study typeRct
Sample sizen = 277
EvidenceLevel 2
Follow-up10.0 mo
PublishedJul 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BACKGROUND: Intravenous (i.v.) paclitaxel (Taxol) requires prolonged infusion and is associated with hypersensitivity reactions and peripheral neuropathy. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of DHP107, a novel oral formulation of paclitaxel, compared with i.v. paclitaxel in patients with HER2-negative, recurrent, or metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multinational, multicenter, open-label, randomized phase III trial evaluated the noninferiority of DHP107 compared with i.v. paclitaxel, with a predefined noninferiority margin of 1.33. Eligible patients had recurrent or metastatic breast cancer and had received no prior chemotherapy in the metastatic setting. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either DHP107 (200 mg/m orally twice daily on days 1, 8, and 15) or paclitaxel (80 mg/m i.v. on days 1, 8, and 15) in a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in the per-protocol set (PPS). Secondary endpoints included independent central review-assessed PFS, overall survival (OS), tumor response, quality of life, and safety. RESULTS: Between January 2018 and December 2023, 549 patients were randomly assigned to receive either DHP107 (n = 277) or paclitaxel (n = 272); 519 patients were included in the PPS. DHP107 demonstrated noninferiority in PFS with a median PFS of 10.0 months compared with 8.5 months for paclitaxel (hazard ratio [HR] 0.869; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.707-1.068). The median OS was 32.6 months for DHP107 and 31.8 months for paclitaxel (HR 0.967, 95% CI 0.762-1.227). DHP107 was associated with higher rates of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting, whereas peripheral neuropathy and hypersensitivity reactions were more common with paclitaxel. No treatment-related death occurred in the DHP107 group, and one (0.4%) in the paclitaxel group. Quality of life was comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: DHP107 demonstrated noninferior efficacy compared with i.v. paclitaxel, with a manageable safety profile, supporting its use as an effective and convenient alternative in HER2-negative breast cancer.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.