Gene expression markers in peripheral blood and outcome in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: A study of the European GANNET53 consortium.

Disease progression is a major problem in ovarian cancer. There are very few treatment options for patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC), and therefore, these patients have a particularly poor prognosis. The aim of the present study was to identify markers for monitoring the response of 123 PROC patients enrolled in the Phase I/II GANNET53 clinical trial, which evaluated the efficacy of Ganetespib in combination with standard chemotherapy versus standard chemotherapy alone. In total, 474 blood samples were collected, comprising baseline samples taken before the first administration of the study drugs and serial samples taken during treatment until further disease progression (PD). After microfluidic enrichment, 27 gene transcripts were analyzed using quantitative polymerase chain reaction and their utility for disease monitoring was evaluated. At baseline, ERCC1 was associated with an increased risk of PD (hazard ratio [HR] 1.75, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.20-2.55; p = 0.005), while baseline CDH1 and ESR1 may have a risk-reducing effect (CDH1 HR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.46-0.96; p = 0.024; ESR1 HR 0.58, 95% CI: 0.39-0.86; p = 0.002). ERCC1 was observed significantly more often (72.7% vs. 53.9%; p = 0.032) and ESR1 significantly less frequently (59.1% vs. 78.3%; p = 0.018) in blood samples taken at radiologically confirmed PD than at controlled disease. At any time during treatment, ERCC1-presence and ESR1-absence were associated with short PFS and with higher odds of PD within 6 months (odds ratio 12.77, 95% CI: 4.08-39.97; p < 0.001). Our study demonstrates the clinical relevance of ESR1 and ERCC1 and may encourage the analysis of liquid biopsy samples for the management of PROC patients.

Discordance between GCIG CA-125 progression and RECIST progression in the CALYPSO trial of patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: CA-125 alone is widely used to diagnose progressive disease (PD) in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (PSROC) on chemotherapy. However, there are increasing concerns regarding its accuracy. We assessed concordance between progression defined by CA-125 and RECIST using data from the CALYPSO trial. METHODS: We computed concordance rates for PD by CA-125 and RECIST to determine the positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV). RESULTS: Of 769 (79%) evaluable participants, 387 had CA-125 PD, where only 276 had concordant RECIST PD (PPV 71%, 95% CI 67-76%). For 382 without CA-125 PD, 255 had RECIST PD but 127 did not (NPV 33%, 95% CI 29-38). There were significant differences in NPV according to baseline CA-125 (≤100 vs >100: 42% vs 25%, P < 0.001); non-measurable vs measurable disease (51% vs 26%, P < 0.001); and platinum-free-interval (>12 vs 6-12 months: 41% vs 14%, P < 0.001). We observed falling CA-125 levels in 78% of patients with RECIST PD and CA-125 non-PD. CONCLUSION: Approximately 2 in 3 women with PSROC have RECIST PD but not CA-125 PD by GCIG criteria. Monitoring CA-125 levels alone is not reliable for detecting PD. Further research is required to investigate the survival impact of local therapy in radiological detected early asymptomatic PD.

Updated progression-free survival and final overall survival with maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab according to clinical risk in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer in the phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial.

OBJECTIVE: In the PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial (NCT02477644), adding maintenance olaparib to bevacizumab provided a substantial progression-free survival benefit in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive tumors, irrespective of clinical risk. Subsequently, a clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival was reported with olaparib plus bevacizumab in the HRD-positive subgroup. We report updated progression-free survival and overall survival by clinical risk and HRD status. METHODS: Patients in clinical response after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab received maintenance olaparib (up to 24 months) plus bevacizumab (up to 15 months in total) or placebo plus bevacizumab. This post hoc analysis evaluated 5-year progression-free survival and mature overall survival in patients classified by clinical risk and HRD status. RESULTS: Of 806 randomized patients, 74% were higher-risk and 26% were lower-risk. In higher-risk HRD-positive patients, the hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival was 0.46 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.34 to 0.61), with 5-year progression-free survival of 35% with olaparib plus bevacizumab versus 15% with bevacizumab alone; and the HR for overall survival was 0.70 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.00), with 5-year overall survival of 55% versus 42%, respectively. In lower-risk HRD-positive patients, the HR for progression-free survival was 0.26 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.45), with 5-year progression-free survival of 72% with olaparib plus bevacizumab versus 28% with bevacizumab alone; and the HR for overall survival was 0.31 (95% CI 0.14 to 0.66), with 5-year overall survival of 88% versus 61%, respectively. No benefit was seen in HRD-negative patients regardless of clinical risk. CONCLUSION: This post hoc analysis indicates that in patients with newly diagnosed advanced HRD-positive ovarian cancer, maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab should not be limited to those considered at higher risk of disease progression. Five-year progression-free survival rates support long-term remission and suggest an increased potential for cure with particular benefit suggested in lower-risk HRD-positive patients.

Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction in Patients With Ovarian Cancer Treated With Avelumab, Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin, or Both.

In the phase III JAVELIN Ovarian 200 trial, 566 patients with platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian cancer were randomized 1:1:1 to receive avelumab alone, avelumab plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), or PLD alone. Cardiac monitoring was included for all patients. We report left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) data from the trial. Grade ≥3 cardiac adverse events (AEs) occurred in 4 (2.1%), 1 (0.5%), and 0 patients in the avelumab, combination, and PLD arms, respectively. LVEF decreases of ≥10% to below institutional lower limit of normal at any time during treatment were observed in 1 (0.8%), 3 (1.9%), and 2 (1.5%) patients, respectively; 4 had subsequent assessments, and these showed transient decreases. No patient had a cardiovascular AE related to LVEF decrease. This analysis is, to our knowledge, the first analysis of LVEF in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02580058.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without nintedanib for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: Lessons from the GINECO double-blind randomized phase II CHIVA trial.

AIM: The oral anti-angiogenic therapy nintedanib prolongs progression-free survival (PFS) when combined with chemotherapy after primary surgery for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. The randomized phase II CHIVA trial evaluated the impact of combining nintedanib with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed unresectable FIGO stage IIIC-IV epithelial ovarian cancer received 3-4 cycles of carboplatin plus paclitaxel every 3 weeks as NACT before interval debulking surgery (IDS), followed by 2-3 post-operative cycles. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive either nintedanib 200 mg twice daily or placebo on days 2-21 every 3 weeks during NACT (omitting peri-operative cycles), and then as maintenance therapy for up to 2 years. The primary endpoint was PFS. RESULTS: Between January 2013 and May 2015, 188 patients were randomized (124 to nintedanib, 64 to placebo). PFS was significantly inferior with nintedanib (median 14.4 versus 16.8 months with placebo; hazard ratio 1.50, p = 0.02). Overall survival (OS) was also inferior (median 37.7 versus 44.1 months, respectively; hazard ratio 1.54, p = 0.054). Nintedanib was associated with increased toxicity (grade 3/4 adverse events: 92% versus 69%, predominantly hematologic and gastrointestinal), lower response rate by RECIST (35% versus 56% before IDS), and lower IDS feasibility (58% versus 77%) versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Adding nintedanib to chemotherapy and in maintenance as part of NACT for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer cannot be recommended as it increases toxicity and compromises chemotherapy efficacy (IDS, PFS, OS). CLINICALTRIALS: govregistration: NCT01583322.

Evaluation of Scores to Reflect Toxicity Impact on Quality of Life of Patients With Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer: AURELIA Substudy.

BACKGROUND: Current standards for toxicity reporting do not fully capture the impact of adverse events (AEs) on patients' quality of life (QoL). This study aimed to evaluate the association between toxicity and QoL by using toxicity scores that take into account CTCAE grade grouping and AE duration and cumulation. METHODS: Analyses were performed on the AURELIA trial dataset, including 361 patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer treated with chemotherapy alone or with bevacizumab. Global and physical functioning QoL were issued from the EORTC QoL Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30), collected at baseline and 8/9 and 16/18 weeks after treatment initiation. Four toxicity scores were computed: the total number of AEs, multiplied by their grade and not, and the cumulative duration of AEs, weighted by their grade and not. Each score included all AEs or only grade 3/4 nonlaboratory or treatment-related AEs. The relationship between toxicity scores and QoL was assessed through linear mixed regression. RESULTS: We found that 171 (47.5%) and 43 (11.9%) patients experienced at least one grade 3 or 4 AE, respectively, whereas 113 (31.4%) experienced grade 2 AEs only. Physical QoL was negatively associated with all toxicity scores when computed with all grades of AEs (all P<.01), with a weaker association when treatment-related AEs were considered. Global QoL was negatively associated with toxicity scores computed with nonlaboratory all-grade AEs only (ß, -3.42 to -3.13; all P<.01). Degrees of association were lower when considering the AE duration. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, toxicity scores based on the cumulative number of AEs, modulated or not by grade, were more effective at predicting QoL changes than those based on AE duration. Toxicity impact on QoL was better reflected when grade 2 AEs were taken into account together with grade 3/4 AEs, whatever their treatment imputability, and when laboratory AEs were excluded.

Olaparib plus Bevacizumab as First-Line Maintenance in Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib has shown significant clinical benefit as maintenance therapy in women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with a BRCA mutation. The effect of combining maintenance olaparib and bevacizumab in patients regardless of BRCA mutation status is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, international phase 3 trial. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed, advanced, high-grade ovarian cancer and were having a response after first-line platinum-taxane chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Patients were eligible regardless of surgical outcome or BRCA mutation status. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) or placebo for up to 24 months; all the patients received bevacizumab at a dose of 15 mg per kilogram of body weight every 3 weeks for up to 15 months in total. The primary end point was the time from randomization until investigator-assessed disease progression or death. RESULTS: Of the 806 patients who underwent randomization, 537 were assigned to receive olaparib and 269 to receive placebo. After a median follow-up of 22.9 months, the median progression-free survival was 22.1 months with olaparib plus bevacizumab and 16.6 months with placebo plus bevacizumab (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49 to 0.72; P<0.001). The hazard ratio (olaparib group vs. placebo group) for disease progression or death was 0.33 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.45) in patients with tumors positive for homologous-recombination deficiency (HRD), including tumors that had BRCA mutations (median progression-free survival, 37.2 vs. 17.7 months), and 0.43 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.66) in patients with HRD-positive tumors that did not have BRCA mutations (median progression-free survival, 28.1 vs. 16.6 months). Adverse events were consistent with the established safety profiles of olaparib and bevacizumab. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced ovarian cancer receiving first-line standard therapy including bevacizumab, the addition of maintenance olaparib provided a significant progression-free survival benefit, which was substantial in patients with HRD-positive tumors, including those without a BRCA mutation. (Funded by ARCAGY Research and others; PAOLA-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02477644.).

Comparison of global treatment guidelines for locally advanced cervical cancer to optimize best care practices: A systematic and scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Survival outcomes for cervical cancer differ between countries and world regions. Locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) is associated with poorer outcomes than early-stage disease. Country-specific variations in diagnostic and treatment recommendations might contribute to differences in LACC outcomes among countries. OBJECTIVE: We compared international and country-specific guidelines for LACC diagnostic imaging and treatment recommendations. METHODS: A systematic literature review and targeted search were used to identify cervical cancer treatment guidelines published between January 1999-August 2021. Guidelines were identified via literature databases, health technology assessment databases, disease-specific websites, and health organization websites. The targeted search included guidelines from countries in regions known to have high cervical cancer prevalence or mortality. Non-English guidelines were translated by native speakers or online translation services. RESULTS: Forty-six guidelines from 31 countries, regions, and international organizations were compared (41/46 using staging criteria, 27 of which used 2009 FIGO). Most guidelines recommended imaging tests for diagnosis and staging. Chest X-ray, intravenous pyelogram, CT, and MRI were commonly recommended for diagnosis and staging while MRI and PET-CT were recommended for the assessment of lymph node status and distant metastases, with a preference for PET-CT over MRI. There was global consensus for cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiation as primary treatment for stages IIB to IVA, with few exceptions. Treatment recommendations for stages IB2 to IIA2 varied. Most guidelines agreed on adjuvant concurrent chemoradiation after radical hysterectomy when there is a high recurrence risk, and adjuvant radiotherapy when there is an intermediate recurrence risk. Recommendations for other adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies varied among the guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Differences among treatment guidelines by LACC stage might be influenced by staging criteria used, resource availability, and prevention program effectiveness. Addressing these areas may unify guidelines and improve global outcomes. Review and update of guidelines will be important as novel LACC therapies become available.

Efficacy and safety of olaparib according to age in BRCA1/2-mutated patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer: Analysis of the phase III SOLO2/ENGOT-Ov21 study.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib has significantly improved outcome and patient-centered endpoints in BRCA1/2-mutated patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC). Specific information on efficacy and safety of olaparib for older patients appears of special interest. METHODS: 295 patients from the SOLO2 trial randomly assigned to olaparib or placebo were categorized according to age-cutoff at 65 years. Efficacy, tolerability, and quality of life (QoL) of olaparib relative to placebo within in each age group was analyzed. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar in patients ≥65 years (N = 62;21.0%) compared to patients <65 years (N = 233;78.9%). No significant difference in the magnitude of progression-free survival (PFS) benefit from olaparib for older patients (N = 40, hazard ratio [HR]≥65 0.43, 95%-confidence interval [CI] 0.24-0.81) as compared with younger patients (N = 155, HR<65 0.31 (95%-CI 0.22-0.43) was seen (interaction P = 0.33). The overall survival (OS)benefit seen in younger patients in the olaparib arm was not observed in older patients. Older and younger patients had comparable safety profiles and QoL scores although higher discontinuation rates for toxicity, and higher frequency of AML/MDS were noted in the older subset. TWiST analysis revealed clinically meaningful duration of good QoL on olaparib for both age groups (≥65: 13.5 vs <65: 18.4 months, P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Results of this large phase III cohort of BRCA1/2-mutated PSOC patients treated with olaparib underline impressive efficacy of olaparib maintenance irrespective of age. Although toxicity and tolerability did not raise significant concerns, some caution, close monitoring, and follow-up needs to be exercised for older patients given higher discontinuation rates, frequency of AML/MDS, and no clear effects on OS.

Efficacy of maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab according to clinical risk in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer in the phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial.

OBJECTIVES: Adding maintenance olaparib to bevacizumab provided a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer in the randomized, double-blind PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial (NCT02477644). We analyzed PFS by clinical risk and biomarker status. METHODS: Patients received olaparib 300 mg twice daily for up to 24 months plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks for up to 15 months in total, or placebo plus bevacizumab. This post hoc exploratory analysis evaluated PFS in patients classified as higher risk (stage III with upfront surgery and residual disease or neoadjuvant chemotherapy; stage IV) or lower risk (stage III with upfront surgery and no residual disease), and by biomarker status. RESULTS: Of 806 randomized patients, 74% were higher risk and 26% were lower risk. After a median 22.9 months of follow-up, PFS favored olaparib plus bevacizumab versus placebo plus bevacizumab in higher-risk patients (hazard ratio [HR] 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.74) and lower-risk patients (0.46; 0.30-0.72). Olaparib plus bevacizumab provided a substantial PFS benefit versus bevacizumab alone in the homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive subgroup (higher risk: HR 0.39; 95% CI 0.28-0.54 and lower risk: 0.15; 0.07-0.30), with 24-month PFS rates in lower-risk patients of 90% versus 43%, respectively (Kaplan-Meier estimates). CONCLUSIONS: In PAOLA-1, maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab provided a substantial PFS benefit in HRD-positive patients with a reduction of risk of progression or death of 61% in the higher-risk group and of 85% in the lower-risk group compared with bevacizumab alone.

Proportions and incidence of locally advanced cervical cancer: a global systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Optimal treatment of cervical cancer is based on disease stage; therefore, an understanding of the global epidemiology of specific stages of locally advanced disease is needed. OBJECTIVE: This systematic literature review was conducted to understand the global and region-specific proportions of patients with cervical cancer with locally advanced disease and to determine the incidence of the locally advanced disease. METHODS: Systematic searches identified observational studies published in English between 2010 and June 10, 2020, reporting the proportion of patients with, and/or incidence of, locally advanced stages of cervical cancer (considered International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) IB2-IVA). Any staging criteria were considered as long as the proportion with locally advanced disease was distinguishable. For each study, the proportion of locally advanced disease among the cervical cancer population was estimated. RESULTS: The 40 included studies represented 28 countries in North or South America, Asia, Europe, and Africa. Thirty-eight studies reported the proportion of locally advanced disease among populations with cervical cancer. The estimated median proportion of locally advanced disease among all cervical cancer was 37.0% (range 5.6-97.5%; IQR 25.8-52.1%); estimates were generally lowest in North America and highest in Asia. Estimated proportions of ≥50% were reported in nine studies from Asia, Europe, Brazil, and Morocco; estimates ≤25% were reported in six studies from Asia, United States, Brazil, and South Africa. Locally advanced disease was reported for 44% and 49% of women aged >70 and ≥60 years, and 5-100% of younger women with cervical cancer. A greater proportion of locally advanced disease was reported for Asian American (19%) versus White women (8%) in one United States study. Two of five studies describing the incidence of locally advanced disease reported rates of 2-4/100 000 women among different time frames. CONCLUSION: This review highlights global differences in proportions of locally advanced cervical cancer, including regional variance and disparities according to patient race and age.

Olaparib tablets as maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation (SOLO2/ENGOT-Ov21): a final analysis of a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib, a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, has previously been shown to extend progression-free survival versus placebo when given to patients with relapsed high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer who were platinum sensitive and who had a BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation, as part of the SOLO2/ENGOT-Ov21 trial. The aim of this final analysis is to investigate the effect of olaparib on overall survival. METHODS: This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial was done across 123 medical centres in 16 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at baseline of 0-1, had histologically confirmed, relapsed, high-grade serous or high-grade endometrioid ovarian cancer, including primary peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer, and had received two or more previous platinum regimens. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive olaparib tablets (300 mg in two 150 mg tablets twice daily) or matching placebo tablets using an interactive web or voice-response system. Stratification was by response to previous chemotherapy and length of platinum-free interval. Treatment assignment was masked to patients, treatment providers, and data assessors. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival has been reported previously. Overall survival was a key secondary endpoint and was analysed in all patients as randomly allocated. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one treatment dose. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01874353, and is no longer recruiting patients. FINDINGS: Between Sept 3, 2013 and Nov 21, 2014, 295 patients were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either olaparib (n=196 [66%]) or placebo (n=99 [34%]). One patient, randomised in error, did not receive olaparib. Median follow-up was 65·7 months (IQR 63·6-69·3) with olaparib and 64·5 months (63·4-68·7) with placebo. Median overall survival was 51·7 months (95% CI 41·5-59·1) with olaparib and 38·8 months (31·4-48·6) with placebo (hazard ratio 0·74 [95% CI 0·54-1·00]; p=0·054), unadjusted for the 38% of patients in the placebo group who received subsequent PARP inhibitor therapy. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse event was anaemia (which occurred in 41 [21%] of 195 patients in the olaparib group and two [2%] of 99 patients in the placebo group). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 50 (26%) of 195 patients receiving olaparib and eight (8%) of 99 patients receiving placebo. Treatment-emergent adverse events with a fatal outcome occurred in eight (4%) of the 195 patients receiving olaparib, six of which were judged to be treatment-related (attributed to myelodysplastic syndrome [n=3] and acute myeloid leukaemia [n=3]). INTERPRETATION: Olaparib provided a median overall survival benefit of 12·9 months compared with placebo in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation. Although statistical significance was not reached, these findings are arguably clinically meaningful and support the use of maintenance olaparib in these patients. FUNDING: AstraZeneca and Merck.

Avelumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer (JAVELIN Ovarian 200): an open-label, three-arm, randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with ovarian cancer will relapse after receiving frontline platinum-based chemotherapy and eventually develop platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory disease. We report results of avelumab alone or avelumab plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) compared with PLD alone in patients with platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer. METHODS: JAVELIN Ovarian 200 was an open-label, parallel-group, three-arm, randomised, phase 3 trial, done at 149 hospitals and cancer treatment centres in 24 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer (maximum of three previous lines for platinum-sensitive disease, none for platinum-resistant disease) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via interactive response technology to avelumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks), avelumab plus PLD (40 mg/m2 intravenously every 4 weeks), or PLD and stratified by disease platinum status, number of previous anticancer regimens, and bulky disease. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival by blinded independent central review and overall survival in all randomly assigned patients, with the objective to show whether avelumab alone or avelumab plus PLD is superior to PLD. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02580058. The trial is no longer enrolling patients and this is the final analysis of both primary endpoints. FINDINGS: Between Jan 5, 2016, and May 16, 2017, 566 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned (combination n=188; PLD n=190, avelumab n=188). At data cutoff (Sept 19, 2018), median duration of follow-up for overall survival was 18·4 months (IQR 15·6-21·9) for the combination group, 17·4 months (15·2-21·3) for the PLD group, and 18·2 months (15·8-21·2) for the avelumab group. Median progression-free survival by blinded independent central review was 3·7 months (95% CI 3·3-5·1) in the combination group, 3·5 months (2·1-4·0) in the PLD group, and 1·9 months (1·8-1·9) in the avelumab group (combination vs PLD: stratified HR 0·78 [repeated 93·1% CI 0·59-1·24], one-sided p=0·030; avelumab vs PLD: 1·68 [1·32-2·60], one-sided p>0·99). Median overall survival was 15·7 months (95% CI 12·7-18·7) in the combination group, 13·1 months (11·8-15·5) in the PLD group, and 11·8 months (8·9-14·1) in the avelumab group (combination vs PLD: stratified HR 0·89 [repeated 88·85% CI 0·74-1·24], one-sided p=0·21; avelumab vs PLD: 1·14 [0·95-1·58], one-sided p=0·83]). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (18 [10%] in the combination group vs nine [5%] in the PLD group vs none in the avelumab group), rash (11 [6%] vs three [2%] vs none), fatigue (ten [5%] vs three [2%] vs none), stomatitis (ten [5%] vs five [3%] vs none), anaemia (six [3%] vs nine [5%] vs three [2%]), neutropenia (nine [5%] vs nine [5%] vs none), and neutrophil count decreased (eight [5%] vs seven [4%] vs none). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 32 (18%) patients in the combination group, 19 (11%) in the PLD group, and 14 (7%) in the avelumab group. Treatment-related adverse events resulted in death in one patient each in the PLD group (sepsis) and avelumab group (intestinal obstruction). INTERPRETATION: Neither avelumab plus PLD nor avelumab alone significantly improved progression-free survival or overall survival versus PLD. These results provide insights for patient selection in future studies of immune checkpoint inhibitors in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer. FUNDING: Pfizer and Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

Molecular and clinical predictors of improvement in progression-free survival with maintenance PARP inhibitor therapy in women with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The authors performed a meta-analysis to better quantify the benefit of maintenance poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) therapy to inform practice in platinum-sensitive, recurrent, high-grade ovarian cancer for patient subsets with the following characteristics: germline BRCA mutation (gBRCAm), somatic BRCA mutation (sBRCAm), wild-type BRCA but homologous recombinant-deficient (HRD), homologous recombinant-proficient (HRP), and baseline clinical prognostic characteristics. METHODS: Randomized trials comparing a PARPi versus placebo as maintenance treatment were identified from electronic databases. Treatment estimates of progression-free survival were pooled across trials using the inverse variance weighted method. RESULTS: Four trials included 972 patients who received a PARPi (olaparib, 31%; niraparib, 35%; or rucaparib, 34%) and 530 patients who received placebo. For patients who had germline BRCA1 mutation (gBRCAm1) (N = 471), the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.29 (95% CI, 0.23-0.37); for those who had germline BRCA2 mutation (gBRCAm2) (N = 236), the HR was 0.26 (95% CI, 0.17-0.39); and, for those who had sBRCAm (N = 123), the HR was 0.22 (95% CI, 0.12-0.41). The treatment effect was similar between the gBRCAm and sBRCAm subsets (P = .48). In patients who had wild-type BRCA HRD tumors (excluding sBRCAm; N = 309), the HR was 0.41 (95% CI, 0.31-0.56); and, in those who had wild-type BRCA HRP tumors (N = 346), the HR was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.49-0.83). The relative treatment effect was greater for the BRCAm versus HRD (P = .03), BRCAm versus HRP (P < .00001), and HRD versus HRP (P < .00001) subsets. There was no difference in benefit based on age, response after recent chemotherapy, and prior bevacizumab. CONCLUSIONS: In platinum-sensitive, recurrent, high-grade ovarian cancer, maintenance PARPi improves progression-free survival for all patient subsets. PARPi therapy has a similar magnitude of benefit for sBRCAm and gBRCAm. Although patients with BRCAm derive the greatest benefit, the absence of a BRCAm or HRD could not be used to exclude patients from maintenance PARPi therapy.

Predicting tumor response and outcome of second-look surgery with 18F-FDG PET/CT: insights from the GINECO CHIVA phase II trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus nintedanib in stage IIIc-IV FIGO ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: This ancillary study aimed to evaluate 18F-FDG PET parameter changes after one cycle of treatment compared to baseline in patients receiving first-line neoadjuvant anti-angiogenic nintedanib combined to paclitaxel-carboplatin chemotherapy or chemotherapy plus placebo and to evaluate the ability of 18F-FDG PET parameters to predict progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and success of second-look surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Central review was performed by two readers blinded to the received treatment and to the patients' outcome, in consensus, by computing percentage change in PET metrics within a volume of interest encompassing the entire tumor burden. EORTC and PERCIST criteria were applied to classify patients as responders (partial metabolic response and complete metabolic response) or non-responders (stable metabolic disease and progressive metabolic disease). Also analyzed was the percentage change in metabolic active tumor volume (MATV) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG). RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were included in this ancillary study: 10 received chemotherapy + placebo and 14 chemotherapy + nintedanib. PERCIST and EORTC criteria showed similar discriminative power in predicting PSF and OS. Variation in MATV/TLG did not predict PFS or OS, and no optimal threshold could be found for MATV/TLG for predicting survival. Complete cytoreductive surgery (no residual disease versus residual disease < 0.25 cm/0.25-2.5 cm/> 2.5 cm) was more frequent in responders versus non-responders (P = 0.002 for PERCIST and P = 0.02 for EORTC criteria). No correlation was observed between the variation of PET data and the variation of CA-125 blood level between baseline sample and that performed contemporary to the interim PET, but a statistically significant correlation was observed between ΔSULpeak and ΔCA-125 between baseline sample and that performed after the second cycle. CONCLUSION: 18F-FDG PET using EORTC or PERCIST criteria appeared to be a useful tool in ovarian cancer trials to analyze early tumor response, and predict second-look surgery outcome and survival. An advantage of PERCIST is the correlation of ΔSULpeak and ΔCA-125, PET response preceding tumor markers response by 1 month. Neither MATV nor TLG was useful in predicting survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01583322 ARCAGY/ GINECO GROUP GINECO-OV119, 24 April 2012.

Concordance of BRCA mutation detection in tumor versus blood, and frequency of bi-allelic loss of BRCA in tumors from patients in the phase III SOLO2 trial.

OBJECTIVE: Maintenance olaparib provided a progression-free survival benefit in the phase III SOLO2 trial (NCT01874353) in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation (BRCAm). However, questions remain regarding tumor versus germline BRCA testing and the impact of heterozygous versus bi-allelic loss of BRCA1 or BRCA2 in the tumor. METHODS: Blood and tumor samples were analyzed. A concordance analysis of germline BRCAm status (BRACAnalysis® CLIA test) and tumor BRCAm status (myChoice® CDx test) was conducted (Myriad Genetic Laboratories, Inc.). Bi-allelic loss of BRCA1 and BRCA2 and a genomic instability score (GIS) (myChoice® CDx test) were also determined. RESULTS: 289 of 295 enrolled patients had a germline BRCAm confirmed centrally and tumor BRCAm status was evaluable in 241 patients. There was 98% and 100% concordance between tumor and germline testing for BRCA1m and BRCA2m, respectively, with discordance found in four cases. Of 210 tumor samples evaluable for BRCA zygosity, 100% of germline BRCA1-mutated tumors (n = 144) and 98% of germline BRCA2-mutated tumors (n = 66) had bi-allelic loss of BRCA. One patient with a heterozygous BRCA2m had a GIS of 53, was progression free for 911 days and remained on olaparib at data cut-off. CONCLUSIONS: Very high concordance was demonstrated between tumor and germline BRCA testing, supporting wider implementation of tumor BRCA testing in ovarian cancer. Near 100% rates of bi-allelic loss of BRCA in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian tumors suggest routine testing for BRCA zygosity is not required in this population and reflects BRCA loss being a driver of tumorigenesis.

Evaluation of surgical resection in advanced ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer: laparoscopic assessment. A European Network of Gynaecological Oncology Trial (ENGOT) group survey.

OBJECTIVE: Laparoscopy is one of the diagnostic tools available for the complex clinical decision-making process in advanced ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal carcinoma. This article presents the results of a survey conducted within the European Network of Gynaecological Oncology Trial (ENGOT) group aimed at reviewing the current patterns of practice at gynecologic oncology centers with regard to the evaluation of resection in advanced ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal carcinoma. METHODS: A 24-item questionnaire was sent to the chair of the 20 cooperative groups that are currently part of the ENGOT group, and forwarded to the members within each group. RESULTS: A total of 142 questionnaires were returned. Only 39 respondents (27.5%) reported using some form of clinical (not operative) score for the evaluation of resection. The frequency of use of diagnostic laparoscopy to assess disease status and feasibility of resection was as follows: never, 21 centers (15%); only in select cases, 83 centers (58.5%); and routinely, 36 centers (25.4%). When laparoscopy was performed, 64% of users declared they made the decision to proceed with maximal effort cytoreductive surgery based on their personal/staff opinion, and 36% based on a laparoscopic score. To the question of whether laparoscopy should be considered the gold standard in the evaluation of resection, 71 respondents (50%) answered no, 66 respondents (46.5%) answered yes, whereas 5 respondents (3.5%) did not provide an answer. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that laparoscopy was routinely performed to assess feasibility of cytoreduction in only 25.4% of centers in Europe. However, it was commonly used to select patients and in a minority of centers it was never used . When laparoscopy was adopted, the treatment strategy was based on laparoscopic scores only in a minority of centers.

Early treatment modifications improve chemotherapy adherence in ovarian cancer patients ≥70 years.

OBJECTIVE: Elderly ovarian cancer patients are underrepresented in clinical trials and disadvantaged with regard to therapeutic standards compared to other age groups. We explored the specific performance of a subset of patients aged ≥70 years in a large meta-data set of 3 phase III trials. METHODS: 3333 patients with advanced ovarian cancer recruited into 3 clinical phase III trials of the AGO & GINECO study groups were retrospectively analysed for age-specific prognostic and toxicity parameters. RESULTS: Only 10% (359/3333) of the patients were aged ≥70 years. This subgroup presented with impaired performance statuses (ECOG 2 14.8 vs 10.1%) and higher FIGO-stages (FIGO IIIC-IV 78.5 vs 73.6%) compared to younger patients. Complete operative tumor resection was achieved less frequently (postoperative tumor burden >10 mm 46.7 vs 33.9%) and elderly received less cycles of platinum/taxane-based chemotherapies (>4 cycles 81.9 vs 90.7%). FIGO-stage, histology, postoperative tumor burden and number of chemotherapy cycles were independent prognostic factors in elderly patients. Elderly patients with ≤4 cycles of chemotherapy showed a median OS of 18.4 months compared to 30.9 months in elderly with 5-6 cycles (p < 0.001). This effect was accentuated in elderly patients after complete tumor resection (cumulative survival benefit of 33.8 months). Analyses of chemotherapeutic delivery revealed that elderly patients with at least one cycle delay had higher chances to complete >4 cycles of chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Protocol defined treatment modifications might support completion of >4 cycles of standard chemotherapy in fit elderly OC patients.

Exploratory outcome analyses according to stage and/or residual disease in the ICON7 trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel with or without bevacizumab for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: In the randomized phase 3 ICON7 trial (ISRCTN91273375), adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS; primary endpoint) but not overall survival (OS; secondary endpoint) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. We explored treatment effect according to stage and extent of residual disease. METHODS: Patients with stage IIB-IV or high-risk (grade 3/clear-cell) stage I-IIA ovarian cancer were randomized to receive six cycles of carboplatin and paclitaxel either alone or with bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg every 3 weeks followed by single-agent bevacizumab for 12 further cycles (total duration 12 months). Post hoc exploratory analyses of subgroups defined by stage and extent of residual disease at diagnosis within the stage IIIB-IV population (European indication) was performed. RESULTS: The PFS benefit from bevacizumab was seen consistently in all subgroups explored. The PFS hazard ratio was 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.99) in 411 patients with stage IIIB-IV ovarian cancer with no visible residuum and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.69-0.95) in 749 patients with stage IIIB-IV disease and visible residuum. As in the ITT population, no OS difference was detected in any subgroup except the previously described 'high-risk' subgroup. Safety results in analyzed subgroups were consistent with the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: Adding bevacizumab to front-line chemotherapy improves PFS irrespective of stage/residual disease. In patients with stage III with >1 cm residuum, stage IV or inoperable disease, this translates into an OS benefit. No OS benefit or detriment was seen in other subgroups explored.

Real-world effectiveness of bevacizumab based on AURELIA in platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer (REBECA): A Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group study (KGOG 3041).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of bevacizumab with single-agent chemotherapy for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer in a real-world setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We enrolled recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer patients from 27 institutions. All had received bevacizumab with single-agent chemotherapy (weekly paclitaxel, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), topotecan) between 2015 and 2017 for second- or third-line chemotherapy in routine clinical practice. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Secondary endpoints included the objective response rate (ORR), PFS2, overall survival, duration of chemotherapy, and reasons for discontinuing chemotherapy. RESULTS: Of 391 patients, 259 (66.2%) received bevacizumab with PLD, 94 (24.0%) with topotecan, and 38 (9.7%) with weekly paclitaxel. The median PFS was 6.1 months with all forms of bevacizumab-containing therapy. Although the cohort with weekly paclitaxel had a better PFS than the PLD cohort (P = 0.028), this finding was not found in patients with a previous platinum-free interval of less than three months. The median duration of therapy was five cycles (range, one to 20 cycles), and 29 patients (7.4%) discontinued treatment because of adverse events from bevacizumab-containing regimens. The PLD cohort had fewer grade ≥ 3 adverse events than the other regimens (PLD, 35.8%; weekly paclitaxel, 52.6%; topotecan, 51.1%; P = 0.012), especially events of hematologic toxicities. CONCLUSION: In Korean ovarian cancer patients, the safety and effectiveness of chemotherapy with bevacizumab in a real-world setting was consistent with the results from a randomized controlled study. The effectiveness and toxicity profiles varied among the chemotherapy regimens, and this finding should be considered in practice. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03367182.