396PUSE OF LIPOSOMAL DOXORUBICIN FOR METASTATIC BREAST CANCER MANAGEMENT ACROSS EUROPE: RESULTS OF EOS (EUROPEAN OBSERVATORY & SURVEY)

Abstract Aim: Among the systemic therapeutic options available for metastatic breast cancer (MBC), non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Myocet®, LED) limits anthracycline-related cardiotoxicity. This study aimed to analyse the therapeutic decision for choosing it vs. another chemotherapy drug (n-LED). Methods: A European, multicentre, prospective, observational study comparing at baseline LED vs. n-LED patients (pts) with confirmed MBC and scheduled 1st cycle of chemotherapy was performed in 8 countries (Austria, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Spain, United Kingdom). LED and n-LED pts were matched on centre, MBC chemotherapy line and time (comparisons used univariate logistic regression). Results: 1544 pts (772 in each group) were analysed (median age: 60 yrs; WHO performance status 0-1: 84%; HER2+ at initial diagnosis: 26%). 45% of both groups had 1st line therapy. LED was mainly given alone (39%), or combined with cyclophosphamide only (47%). 62% n-LED pts received monotherapy. Most of pts' clinical and disease characteristics were similar in both groups. However, HER2+ was less frequent in LED group (22% vs. 29%, p < 0.001), particularly in France (13% vs. 23%, p = 0.02) and Italy (16% vs. 35%, p < 0.01). Previous anthracycline use was less frequent in LED (55% vs. 62%, p < 0.01), particularly in Germany and Italy (p = 0.02 and p < 0.001, respectively). In Germany, patients ≥ 70 yrs were more frequent in LED group (29% vs. 16%, p < 0.01). In parallel, among the reasons given by physicians for therapeutic choice, increased cardiac risk was more frequent in LED (58% vs. 35%, p < 0.001). Regarding safety of prescribed chemotherapy, cardiac safety reason was more frequently reported in LED (91% vs. 69%, p < 0.001). Moreover, the chosen treatment was more often reported as the reference approach in institution for the specific pt's profile in n-LED group (92% vs. 75%, p < 0.001), notably in Poland (91% vs. 59%, p < 0.001) and France (94% vs. 75%, p < 0.02). Conclusions: Even if the decision to use LED was not fully explained, some differences emerge across countries reflecting local specificities in MBC management. Cardiac risk remains the first motivation for oncologists to choose LED. Disclosure: G.G. Steger: Honoraria and travel grants from Cephalon and TEVA/Ratiopharm; H. Yosef: I acted as a member of advisory boards for Myocet; E. Albuisson: I receive remuneration from Cephalon France as expert member of the EOS Study Steering Committee; G. Ba