EMERALD Study Design and Results for Elacestrant

Author(s):

Virginia G. Kaklamani, MD, DScHeather McArthur, MD, MPH

Key opinion leaders examine the EMERALD trial, which evaluates the efficacy of elacestrant in patients with HR+ HER2- metastatic breast cancer, focusing on the subgroup analysis of patients with visceral metastases, and explore how the trial's design and results have influenced their clinical practice.

EP: 1.Prevalence and Testing Strategies for ESR1

EP: 2.Evolution of Testing Strategies for ESR1

EP: 3.Dynamics of ESR1 Alterations and Serial Liquid Biopsies

EP: 4.Case Presentation 1: PIK3CA Mutation With ESR1 Mutations

Now Viewing

EP: 5.EMERALD Study Design and Results for Elacestrant

EP: 6.Evolving Best Practices for ESR1 Testing

EP: 7.Case Presentation 2: Co-mutations in ESR1 and PIK3CA

EP: 8.PIK3CA Mutations and Delivering PI3K Inhibitors

EP: 9.PostMONARCH: Dissecting Data on Sequential CDK 4/6 Inhibitors

EP: 10.Combinations and Treatment Sequence Strategies in Breast Cancer

Please provide some background on the EMERALD trial evaluating elacestrant in HR+ HER2- mBC as well as subgroup data in patients with visceral metastases (Shah et al. J Clin Oncol. 2024)
- How have the EMERALD trial impacted your use of Elacestrant in clinical practice, particularly in terms of patients’ selection and treatment sequencing?
- What are your impressions of the overall and subgroup data from EMERALD? Does it expand the ideal patient population for elacestrant?
- For a patient with metastatic breast cancer to bones, liver, and lungs who has an ESR1 mutation, how does this inform treatment selection between continuing endocrine therapy versus switching to other targeted agents or chemotherapy?
- Would elacestrant be an ideal next line treatment for this patient?