<![CDATA[Capivasertib/Fulvestrant Yields Numerical OS Advantage in PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN–Altered Breast Cancer]]>

Advertisement News|Articles|May 8, 2026 Capivasertib/Fulvestrant Yields Numerical OS Advantage in PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN–Altered Breast Cancer Author(s)Ashling Wahner Fact checked by: Chris Ryan Listen0:00 / 0:00 Key Takeaways CAPItello-291 randomized 708 patients 1:1 to capivasertib (400 mg BID, 4-on/3-off) plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant, after progression on aromatase inhibitor therapy; ≥51% had prior CDK4/6 exposure. Overall survival was not meaningfully different overall (HR 1.00) and was numerically improved but nonsignificant in PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered disease (HR 0.83), with only 53% power for OS. A clinically relevant OS signal emerged in altered tumors previously treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors, with a 6.9-month median OS increase (HR 0.78), warranting cautious interpretation. Post-progression endpoints favored capivasertib, including delayed time to first subsequent chemotherapy in altered (11 vs 6 months; HR 0.62) and overall populations (11 vs 7 months; HR 0.74). Safety remained consistent with known AKT-inhibitor toxicity, dominated by diarrhea (77%) and rash (41%), with 21.9% dose reductions and 6.5% discontinuations due to adverse events.SHOW MORE Capivasertib plus fulvestrant generated a numerical OS benefit vs placebo plus fulvestrant in PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered advanced breast cancer. Advertisement The addition of the AKT inhibitor capivasertib (Truqap) to fulvestrant (Faslodex) demonstrated a numerical trend toward improved overall survival (OS) compared with placebo plus fulvestrant in patients with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN–altered, hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer, according to final results from the phase 3 CAPItello-291 trial (NCT04305496) presented at the 2026 ESMO Breast Cancer Congress.1In the PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN–altered patient population (n = 289), the median OS was 28.5 months with capivasertib plus fulvestrant compared with 30.4 months with placebo plus fulvestrant (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.63-1.10; P = .201). Although this trend numerically favored the investigational combination, the trial was underpowered (at 53%) to detect a statistically significant OS difference in this patient subgroup. In the overall population (n = 708), no meaningful numerical difference in the risk of death was observed; the median OS was 29.4 months vs 28.6 months, respectively (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83-1.19).“The combination at final analysis showed a sustained benefit beyond progression-free survival [PFS], with an improvement in [time to second progression] and time to first subsequent chemotherapy [TTFSC] across both the altered and overall populations,” Hope S. Rugo, MD, FASCO, stated in the presentation of the data.Rugo is director of the Women’s Cancers Program; division chief of breast medical oncology; and a professor in the Department of Medical Oncology & Therapeutics Research at City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center in Duarte, California.What was the design of the phase 3 CAPItello-291 trial?The double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomly assigned 708 patients with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer 1:1 to receive either:Capivasertib (400 mg twice daily; 4 days on, 3 days off) plus fulvestrant (500 mg every 4 weeks with a loading dose)Placebo plus fulvestrantEligible patients had progressed on or within 12 months of completing adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy, or during aromatase inhibitor therapy for advanced disease. Prior treatment with a CDK4/6 inhibitor was allowed and required for at least 51% of patients in the cohort.The study had dual primary end points of PFS in the PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN–altered and overall populations, both of which were met at the primary analysis. OS served as a key secondary end point.What data from CAPItello-291 have been previously reported?At the primary analysis, the addition of capivasertib to fulvestrant generated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful PFS improvement across both the altered and overall populations.2 In the altered population, the median PFS was 7.3 months (95% CI, 5.5-9.0) in the capivasertib arm vs 3.1 months (95% CI, 2.0-3.7) in the control arm (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.38-0.65; P < .001). In the overall population, these respective values were 7.2 months (95% CI, 5.5-7.4) and 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.8-3.7; HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.51-0.71; P < .001). The PFS benefit in the overall population was observed regardless of ESR1 mutation status in circulating tumor DNA, including in patients who had received first-line aromatase inhibition plus a CDK4/6 inhibitor.What additional efficacy signals were observed in the final analysis?In the final OS analysis, investigators noted a clinically relevant subgroup signal among patients in the altered population who had received prior CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy.1 In these patients, capivasertib plus fulvestrant extended the median OS by 6.9 months compared with the control arm (28.1 months vs 21.2 months; HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.57-1.07).Regarding subsequent treatment patterns in the overall population, in the capivasertib arm (n = 355), the rates of patients receiving 3 or 4 or more subsequent lines of treatment were 17.5% and 24.2%, respectively. In the control arm (n = 353), these respective rates were 15.6% and 26.6%. Additionally, a higher rate of targeted therapy use following CAPItello-291 discontinuation was seen in the control arm (36.0%) vs the capivasertib arm (29.6%).Furthermore, capivasertib delayed the TTFSC across both populations. In the altered population, the median TTFSC was 11.0 months with capivasertib vs 6.0 months with placebo (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48-0.80). In the overall population, these values were 11.0 months and 7.0 months, respectively (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63-0.87).What was the safety profile of the capivasertib combination?The safety profile at the final analysis remained consistent with that seen in the primary analysis, with no new safety signals identified. In the altered population, the most common adverse effects (AEs) of any grade in the capivasertib arm included:Diarrhea (77%)Rash (41%)Nausea (35%)Fatigue (23%)Vomiting (22%)Dose reductions were required for 21.9% of patients in the capivasertib arm compared with 0.8% of those in the placebo arm. Treatment discontinuation due to AEs occurred in 6.5% and 0.8% of patients, respectively.“Capivasertib/fulvestrant still provides lasting treatment benefit vs placebo/fulvestrant with manageable safety,” Rugo concluded. “OS interpretation is limited by study power and post-progression treatment confounding, an increasing issue in our phase 3 trials.”Disclosures: Rugo reported receiving grants to her prior institution (the University of California San Francisco) from AstraZeneca, Gilead Sciences, Lilly, Merck & Co., Daiichi Sankyo, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, F. Hoffman-La Roche/AG/Genentech, Stemline Therapeutics, and Ambryx; as well as receiving grants to City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center from Bicycle Therapeutics, F. Hoffman-La Roche/AG/Genentech, PhoenixMD, Merck, Relay Therapeutics, ALX Oncology, Pfizer, and Stemline Therapeutics. She also reported performing consulting or advisory roles with Napo, Bristol Myers Squibb, Helsinn, and BioNTech.ReferencesRugo HS, Oliveira M, Howell S, et al. Capivasertib (C) and fulvestrant (F) for patients (pts) with HR+/HER2_ advanced breast cancer (ABC): final overall survival (OS) results from the phase 3 CAPItello-291 trial. Presented at: 2025 ESMO Breast Cancer Congress. May 6-8, 2026; Berlin, Germany. Abstract 417O.Turner NC, Oliveira M, Howell SJ, et al. Capivasertib in hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2023;388(22):2058-2070. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2214131 NewsletterStay up to date on the most recent and practice-changing oncology dataSubscribe Now! Advertisement Related ContentAdvertisementFDA Approves Zenocutuzumab for NRG1 Fusion+ Cholangiocarcinoma ByAshling Wahner May 8th 2026UT MD Anderson Shares Latest Research BreakthroughsByMD Anderson Cancer CenterMay 8th 2026Giants of Cancer Care Announces the 14th Annual Class of Inductees ByOncLiveMay 8th 2026OncLive Weekly News Quiz (5/8/2026): Test Your Knowledge on Key Breast, Lung, and Pancreatic Cancer UpdatesByOncLive StaffMay 8th 2026OncLive Polls Reveal Picks for Top Lung Cancer Abstracts at ASCO 2026ByCaroline SeymourMay 8th 2026 Latest CMEVideoProactive Adverse Event Management for HER2+ BTC TreatmentsRahul Gosain, MD, MBA; Rohit Gosain, MD; Rachna T. Shroff, MD, MS, FASCOView moreMultimediaCommunity Practice Connections™: Empowering Interventional Radiologists in the Emerging Era of Oncolytic Immunotherapies for MelanomaYana G. Najjar, MD; Douglas B. Johnson, MD, MSCI; Rahul A. Sheth, MD, FSIR View moreVirtual EventWisconsin Association of Hematology and Oncology1 Session is Available!View moreVideoCommunity Oncology Connections™: Beyond Primary End Points – Digging Into Randomized and Real-World Data to Guide Challenging Treatment Decisions in HR+/HER2− Metastatic Breast Cancer | Empire State Hematology & Oncology SocietySeth A. Wander, MD, PhD; Girish Kunapareddy, MDView moreVirtual EventArkansas Association of Cancer Professionals2 Sessions are Available!View moreVideoCommunity Oncology Connections™: Beyond Primary End Points – Digging Into Randomized and Real-World Data to Guide Challenging Treatment Decisions in HR+/HER2− Metastatic Breast Cancer | South Carolina Oncology SocietySeth A. Wander, MD, PhD; Kit Lu, MDView moreVideo19th Annual New York GU Cancers Congress®Maha Hussain, MD, FACP, FASCO; Daniel P. Petrylak, MDView moreIn-Person + Virtual EventGo to PER in ChicagoMay 29-31, 2026View moreVideoCommunity Oncology Connections™: Beyond Primary End Points – Digging Into Randomized and Real-World Data to Guide Challenging Treatment Decisions in HR+/HER2− Metastatic Breast Cancer | Tennessee Oncology Practice SocietySeth A. Wander, MD, PhD; Kamel Abou Hussein, MDView moreVirtual EventKansas Society of Clinical Oncology1 Session is Available!View moreVideoA Case-Guided Discussion on Managing Immune Thrombocytopenic Purpura (ITP)Cindy Neunert, MD, MSCS; Hanny Al-Samkari, MD; Joseph Shatzel, MD, MCRView moreVideoEvolving Treatment Strategies in Pancreatic Cancer: Current Standards, Emerging Targets, and the Role of Molecular TestingEileen M. O’Reilly, MD; E. Gabriela Chiorean, MD, FASCO; Michael J. Pishvaian, MD, PhD; Brian Wolpin, MD, MPHView moreVideoCases and Conversations™: Sorting Through the Expanding Treatment Options for Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple MyelomaC. Ola Landgren, MD, PhD; Mohamad Mohty, MD, PhD; Surbhi Sidana, MDView moreVideoTumor Board: Expert Insights on Managing Classical 𝘌𝘎𝘍𝘙 Mutations, 𝘌𝘎𝘍𝘙 Exon 20 Insertions, and Atypical 𝘌𝘎𝘍𝘙 Mutations in Metastatic NSCLCBalazs Halmos, MD, MS; Enriqueta Felip, MD, PhD; Julia Rotow, MDView moreVideoMedical Crossfire®: Improving Patient Outcomes in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms With Novel Therapeutic ApproachesRami Komrokji, MD; Gabriela Hobbs, MD; John Mascarenhas, MD; Naveen Pemmaraju, MDView moreVideoPER Tumor Board®: Applying Recent Advances to Transform the Treatment Paradigm in SCLC—Expert Perspectives on New Approvals and Emerging StrategiesJonathan W. Goldman, MD; Percy Lee, MD, FASTRO; Erminia Massarelli, MD, PhD, MS; Misty D. Shields, MD, PhDView moreVideoMedical Crossfire®: Precision Medicine in Glioma Treatment — Integration of Molecular Profiling to Inform Targeted TherapiesVinay K. Puduvalli, MD; Manmeet Ahluwalia, MD, MBA; Stephen J. Bagley, MD, MSCE; Angela Waanders, MD, MPH, MSView moreVideoMedical Crossfire®: Harnessing the Power of Modern Therapies in Newly Diagnosed Multiple MyelomaC. Ola Landgren, MD, PhD; Mohamad Mohty, MD, PhD; Surbhi Sidana, MDView moreVideoMedical Crossfire®: Expert Perspectives on Targeting c-Met Overexpression and 𝘔𝘌𝘛 Genomic Alterations in NSCLC – Unveiling the Complexities of 𝘔𝘌𝘛 DysregulationRebecca Heist, MD, MPH; Alex A. Adjei, MD, PhD, FACP; Sandip Patel, MD, FASCO; Jeremy Segal, MD, PhDView moreVideoCases & Conversations™: Transforming AML Care—Precision Strategies, Evolving Therapies, and Clinical InsightsGail J. Roboz, MD; Hagop Kantarjian, MD; Catherine Lai, MD, MPH; Amer Zeidan, MBBS, MHSView moreVideoMedical Crossfire®: Integrating Next-Generation Endocrine Targeting Therapies to Improve Outcomes for Patients With HR+/HER2- Breast CancerWilliam J. Gradishar, MD, FASCO, FACP; Laura Huppert, MD; Yuan Yuan, MD, PhDView moreVideoGI Tumor Board—Applying Recent Advances in Biomarker Testing and Treatment in Metastatic Colorectal CancerJohn H. Strickler, MD; Stacey A. Cohen, MD; Aparna Parikh, MD; Kanwal P.S. Raghav, MBBS, MDView moreVideoBreast Cancer Tumor Board: Targeting TROP2 – Innovations in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer TreatmentJoyce O’Shaughnessy, MD; Matthew P. Goetz, MD; Hope S. Rugo, MD, FASCOView moreMultimediaEstablishing the Rationale for ADC and ICI Combinations in TNBCVirginia Kaklamani, MD, DSc; Tiffany A. Traina, MD, FASCOView moreMultimediaBreaking Down the Rationale for Targeting TROP2 in TNBCFilipa Lynce, MD; Rita Nanda, MDView moreMultimediaDissecting Clinical Trial and Real-World Data for ADCs in TNBCFilipa Lynce, MD; Rita Nanda, MDView moreMultimediaEvaluating the Latest Data and Ongoing Trials for Novel ADC Approaches in TNBCAditya Bardia, MD, MPH, FASCO; Erika P. Hamilton, MDView moreAudioBreaking Down the Latest Clinical Data for First-line Maintenance and R/R SCLCRahul Gosain, MD, MBA; Rohit Gosain, MD; Hossein Borghaei, DO, MSView moreVideoOptimizing Treatment for Biliary Tract CancersGhassan Abou-Alfa, MD, MBA; Laura Williams Goff, MD, MSCI, MMHC, FASCO; Arndt Vogel, MD, PhDView moreVideoCross-Disease Integration of Immunotherapy InnovationsGhassan Abou-Alfa, MD, MBA; Laura Williams Goff, MD, MSCI, MMHC, FASCO; Arndt Vogel, MD, PhDView moreAudioPractical Considerations and Future Directions for New Treatment Strategies in SCLCRahul Gosain, MD, MBA; Rohit Gosain, MD; Misty D. Shields, MD, PhDView moreMultimediaExpert Guidance on Frequently Asked Questions Regarding the Use of ADCs in TNBCAditya Bardia, MD, MPH, FASCO; Erika P. Hamilton, MD; Virginia Kaklamani, MD, DScView moreVideoBroadening the Frontline—Studies Informing the Use of Immunotherapy in Hepatocellular CarcinomaGhassan Abou-Alfa, MD, MBA; Laura Williams Goff, MD, MSCI, MMHC, FASCO; Arndt Vogel, MD, PhDView moreMultimediaPER Resource Center: Integrating Novel Approaches in TNBC – New Avenues for TROP2-Targeting ADCs and Beyond – NursingAditya Bardia, MD, MPH, FASCO; Erika P. Hamilton, MD; Virginia Kaklamani, MD, DSc; Filipa Lynce, MD; Rita Nanda, MD; Tiffany A. Traina, MD, FASCOView moreMultimediaExpert Roundtable and Panel Discussions: Current and Future Landscape of TNBCAditya Bardia, MD, MPH, FASCO; Erika P. Hamilton, MD; Tiffany A. Traina, MD, FASCOView moreVideoShow Me the Data®: New and Emerging Roles for Oral SERD Therapy in the Treatment of ER+/HER2– Breast CancerAna C. Garrido-Castro, MD; Pedram Razavi, MD, PhDView moreAudioNavigating Treatment Gaps in SCLC: Relapse, Resistance, and Need for New OptionsRahul Gosain, MD, MBA; Rohit Gosain, MD; Giannis Mountzios ΜD, PhDView moreVideoMedical Crossfire® in Adjunctive Testing: Charting a New Course in Prostate Cancer Risk AssessmentJason Hafron, MD; Aaron D. Berger, MD; Arpeet Shah, MDView moreMultimediaReady for Radioligand Therapy? Patient Selection and Sequencing SimplifiedJeremie Calais, MD, PhD; Tanya B. Dorff, MD; Scott T. Tagawa, MD, MS, FACP, FASCOView moreMultimediaWorking Together: Overcoming Barriers to Optimize Outcomes in Patients Treated With Radioligand Therapy Through Multidisciplinary CareJeremie Calais, MD, PhD; Tanya B. Dorff, MD; Nerina McDonald, MSPAS, PA-C; Scott T. Tagawa, MD, MS, FACP, FASCOView moreMultimediaBURST CME™ Resource Center: Integrating Novel PSMA-Directed Radioligand Approaches for Diagnosis and Management of Prostate CancerJeremie Calais, MD, PhD; Tanya B. Dorff, MD; Nerina McDonald, MSPAS, PA-C; Scott T. Tagawa, MD, MS, FACP, FASCOView moreMultimediaImaging Matters: Decoding PSMA PET for Better Decision-MakingJeremie Calais, MD, PhD; Tanya B. Dorff, MD; Scott T. Tagawa, MD, MS, FACP, FASCOView moreMultimediaRadioligand Therapy 101: The Science Behind the StrategyJeremie Calais, MD, PhD; Tanya B. Dorff, MD; Scott T. Tagawa, MD, MS, FACP, FASCOView moreVideo Advances in Managing EGFR-Mutant NSCLC: Applying Evidence Across the Disease ContinuumTina Cascone, MD, PhD; Christina Baik, MD, MPH; David Planchard, MD, PhDView moreMultimediaCommunity Practice Connections™: Enhancing Melanoma Outcomes With Intratumoral Oncolytic Immunotherapy–Strategies for the Multidisciplinary TeamYana G. Najjar, MD; Sapna Patel, MDView moreVideoA New Era of Targeted Therapy for Advanced NSCLC: Exploring Future Directions for Bispecific Antibodies and ADCsSandip Patel, MD, FASCO; Myung-Ju Ahn, MD; Giannis Mountzios, MD, MSc, PhD; Zofia Piotrowska, MD, MHSView moreVideoNavigating Advances in Neovascular Retinal Disease: Translating Evidence to Practice in AMD, DME, and RVOSriniVas R. Sadda, MD, FARVO; Mark R. Barakat, MD, FASRS; David A. Eichenbaum, MD, FASRSView moreVideoEnhancing Prostate Cancer Outcomes – The Role of PSMA and Targeted Treatment StrategiesAna Kiess, MD, PhD; Erin Grady, MD, CCD, FACNM, FSNMMI; Himanshu Nagar, MD, MS; Scott T. Tagawa, MD, MS, FASCO, FACPView moreVideo(CME Track) Antibody–Drug Conjugates in Oncology: The Essentials of AE Management for Better Patient OutcomesMichelle L. Taylor, ANP-BC; Emely Alfaro, DNP, RN, CNS, OCN; Paige Griffith, CRNP; Beth Sandy, MSN, CRNP, FAPOView more Advertisement Advertisement Trending on OncLive1Daraxonrasib Monotherapy Elicits Meaningful Responses in Previously Treated, RAS-Mutated Pancreatic Cancer2FDA Approves Zenocutuzumab for NRG1 Fusion+ Cholangiocarcinoma 3Mentorship Is Key to Advance the Next Generation of Oncology Researchers4Dr Mauro on the Significance of Alternative TKI Formulations in CML5First-Line Danvatirsen Plus Pembrolizumab Fails to Improve Response Rates in Metastatic HNSCC