Skip to main content
KISQALI efficacy across 3 phase III trials
There is controversy on the choice of CDK4/6i as there are no head-to-head comparisons between the agents and there are some differences in the study populations in the phase III randomized studies.
NCCN makes no warranties of any kind whatsoever regarding their content, use, or application and disclaims any responsibility for their application or use in any way.

KISQALI—the only CDK4/6 inhibitor to achieve statistically significant overall survival in a broad range of patients across 3 phase III trials

A proven first-line overall survival benefit across all 3 phase III trials

1L refers to patients with mBC.

Image of Dr Slamon

Overall survival is the hardest end point to achieve in clinical trials. And in many respects, perhaps the most important...we’re trying to improve the survival of a patient; not just the progression-free survival or the time where the tumor is controlled, but how long they live...

Dennis Slamon, MD, PhD
University of California, Los Angeles

MONALEESA study information

MONALEESA-2 was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study of KISQALI + letrozole (n=334) vs placebo + letrozole (n=334) in postmenopausal patients with HR+/HER2- mBC who received no prior therapy for advanced disease. OS was a secondary end point; PFS was the primary end point. At a median follow-up of 80 months, median OS was 63.9 months with KISQALI + letrozole (95% CI: 52.4-71.0) vs 51.4 months with letrozole (95% CI: 47.2-59.7); HR=0.765 (95% CI: 0.628-0.932); P=0.004.2-4  

MONALEESA-3 was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study of KISQALI + fulvestrant (n=484) vs placebo + fulvestrant (n=242) for the treatment of postmenopausal patients with HR+/HER2- mBC who have received no or only 1 line of prior ET for advanced disease. OS was a secondary end point; PFS was the primary end point. At a median follow-up of 71 months (exploratory analysis), in a 1L subgroup analysis, median OS was 67.6 months (95% CI: 59.6-NR) with KISQALI + fulvestrant vs 51.8 months with placebo + fulvestrant (95% CI: 40.4-61.2); HR=0.673 (95% CI: 0.504-0.899). At a median follow-up of 39 months, statistical significance was established for overall survival in the ITT population; HR=0.724 (95% CI: 0.568-0.924); P=0.00455.2,5-7

MONALEESA-7 was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study of KISQALI + ET (NSAI or tamoxifen) + goserelin vs placebo + ET (NSAI or tamoxifen) + goserelin (ITT) in premenopausal patients with HR+/HER2- mBC who received no prior ET for advanced disease. KISQALI is not indicated for concomitant use with tamoxifen. Efficacy results are from a prespecified subgroup analysis of 495 patients who received KISQALI (n=248) or placebo (n=247) with an NSAI + goserelin and were not powered to show statistical significance. OS was a secondary end point; PFS was the primary end point. At a median follow-up of 54 months (exploratory analysis), median OS was 58.7 months with KISQALI + NSAI + goserelin (95% CI: 48.5-NR) vs 47.7 months with NSAI + goserelin (95% CI: 41.2-55.4); HR=0.798 (95% CI: 0.615-1.035). At a median follow-up of 35 months, statistical significance was established for overall survival in the ITT population, HR=0.71 (95% CI: 0.54-0.95); P=0.00973.2,8-10

Video thumbnail

An expert discusses proven overall survival across 3 phase III trials in patients with HR+/HER2- mBC

“The three studies…are compelling as a trio because they have a uniformly positive outcome, both for PFS and overall survival.” —Gabriel Hortobagyi, MD

Explore data proven across 3 phase III trials

MONALEESA-3 Overall Survival

KISQALI + fulvestrant in the postmenopausal patient 1L subgroup

Over 5.5 years median overall survival

1L=first line; AI=aromatase inhibitor; CDK=cyclin-dependent kinase; ET=endocrine therapy; HR=hazard ratio; ITT=intent to treat; mBC=metastatic breast cancer; mOS=median overall survival; NR=not reached; NSAI=nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor; OS=overall survival; PFS=progression-free survival.

References: 1. Referenced with permission from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) for Breast Cancer V.2.2023. © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. 2023. All right reserved. Published February 7, 2023. Accessed February 10, 2023. To view the most recent and complete version of the guideline, go online to NCCN.org. 2. Kisqali. Prescribing information. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. 3. Hortobagyi GN, Stemmer SM, Burris HA, et al. Overall survival with ribociclib plus letrozole in advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(10):942-950. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2114663. 4. Hortobagyi GN, Stemmer SM, Burris HA, et al. Ribociclib as first-line therapy for HR-positive, advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(18):1738-1748. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1609709 5. Slamon DJ, Neven P, Chia S, et al. Phase III randomized study of ribociclib and fulvestrant in hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative advanced breast cancer: MONALEESA-3. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(24):2465-2472. doi:10.1200/JCO.2018.78.9909 6. Data on file. CLEE011F2301 ad hoc OS analysis. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp; 2022. 7. Slamon DJ, Neven P, Chia S, et al. Overall survival with ribociclib plus fulvestrant in advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(6):514-524. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1911149 8. Tripathy D, Im S-A, Colleoni M, et al. Ribociclib plus endocrine therapy for premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive, advanced breast cancer (MONALEESA-7): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(7):904-915. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30292-4 9. Lu YS, Im SA, Colleoni M, et al. Updated overall survival of ribociclib plus endocrine therapy versus endocrine therapy alone in pre- and perimenopausal patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer in MONALEESA-7: a phase III randomized clinical trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2022;28(5):851-859. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-3032 10. Im S-A, Lu Y-S, Bardia A, et al. Overall survival with ribociclib plus endocrine therapy in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(4):307-316. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1903765