Medical cannabis and its effect on oncological outcomes in patients with ovarian cancer treated with PARP inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) play a pivotal role in ovarian cancer management. With medical cannabis emerging as a novel component of supportive care, this study investigated the impact of medical cannabis use on oncological outcomes in patients with ovarian cancer undergoing PARPi therapy. METHODS: The study included patients from a single institution database treated for ovarian cancer between January 2014 and January 2020 who received PARPi maintenance therapy in a first-line or recurrent disease setting after a confirmed response to platinum-based treatment. The study categorized patients as cannabis users and cannabis-naïve. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis and the Kaplan-Meier method were used to assess the effects of medical cannabis use on the duration of PARPi therapy, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: Among the eligible patients (n=93), most were cannabis-naïve (69%, n=64) while the rest used medical cannabis (31%, n=29). Medical cannabis use rates were comparable for patients receiving PARPi therapy post-primary treatment or for recurrence (42%, n=9, vs 27%, n=20; p=0.1). Both groups exhibited similar median duration for PARPi therapy (12.1 vs 9.5 months; p=0.89) and progression-free survival (20 vs 21 months; p=0.83). Kaplan-Meier analysis detected no differences in progression-free survival associated with cannabis use. Although cannabis users had an extended overall survival compared with the cannabis-naïve group (129.3 vs 99 months; p=0.03), cannabis use was insignificant for overall survival on multivariate analysis (p=0.10). Multivariate analysis showed stage IV at diagnosis (p=0.02) to be the sole factor associated with progression-free survival (p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Medical cannabis usage in patients receiving PARPi treatment showed no association with duration of PARPi therapy, progression-free survival, or overall survival.

Efficacy and safety of rucaparib treatment in patients with BRCA-mutated, relapsed ovarian cancer: final results from Study 10.

BACKGROUND: Study 10, a four-part Phase 1/2 study, evaluated oral rucaparib monotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumours. Here we report the final efficacy and safety results in heavily pretreated patients with ovarian cancer who received rucaparib in Study 10 Parts 2A and 2B. METHODS: Parts 2A and 2B (Phase 2 portions) enrolled patients with relapsed, high-grade, platinum-sensitive or platinum-resistant, BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer who had received 2-4 (Part 2A) or 3-4 (Part 2B) prior chemotherapies. Patients received oral rucaparib 600 mg twice daily (starting dose). The primary endpoint was the investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients were enrolled: 42 in Part 2A (all had platinum-sensitive disease) and 12 in Part 2B (4 with platinum-sensitive disease; 8 with platinum-resistant disease). ORR was 59.3% (95% CI 45.0-72.4%). The median time to onset of the most common nonhaematological treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was typically early (<56 days) and was later for haematological TEAEs (53-84 days). The median duration of grade ≥3 TEAEs was ≤13 days. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with relapsed, platinum-sensitive or platinum-resistant germline BRCA-mutant high-grade ovarian cancer who had received ≥2 prior chemotherapies, rucaparib had robust antitumour activity with a safety profile consistent with prior reports. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01482715.

Prognostic significance of delayed complete metabolic response on PET/CT after primary chemoradiation treatment of cervical cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prognostic significance of near-complete metabolic response on initial follow-up PET/CT after primary chemoradiation treatment of cervical cancer. METHODS: Survival data were retrospectively compared between patients who had complete metabolic response on first follow-up PET/CT, 3 months after chemoradiation (group 1) with those who had near-complete metabolic response on first PET/CT and later showed complete metabolic response at subsequent PET/CT, 6 months or more after treatment (group 2). RESULTS: Of the 108 patients included in the final analysis, 74 (68.5%) showed complete metabolic response on initial PET/CT, 3 months after treatment, and 34 patients (31.5%) showed complete metabolic response on subsequent PET/CT, 6 months after treatment. Tumor characteristics were comparable between groups. Group 1 had higher percent of stage 1 (12% vs 0%) and lower percent of stage 4 disease (3% vs 14%) than those of group 2. Group 2 patients had significantly fewer cases of recurrences and deaths than group 1 patients (6% vs 26%, p=0.018; 0% vs 20%, p=0.003, respectively), with comparable 3-year survival rates (group 1, 90% vs group 2, 100%, p=0.31). Twelve patients had progressive disease on first follow-up PET/CT; these patients had significantly worse overall survival compared with all other patients (log-rank test, p<0.001). Younger age and delayed complete metabolic response were associated with lower chance of recurrence and death on univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis, delayed complete metabolic response remained significantly associated with no recurrence HR=0.14 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.84), p=0.031. CONCLUSIONS: Survival outcome of patients with cervical cancer who show residual 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake on initial PET/CT after treatment, but reach complete metabolic response on follow-up PET/CT, is not inferior compared with survival of patients who show complete metabolic response on initial PET/CT 3 months after treatment. Watchful waiting with follow-up PET/CT seems a safe option for these patients.

Effect of BMI change on recurrence risk in patients with endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to explore the effect of body mass index (BMI) change on cancer recurrence risk during the routine surveillance of endometrial cancer patients. METHODS: Data on patients with endometrial adenocarcinoma that had a staging procedure and continued follow-up was retrospectively collected. We compared patients' BMI at time of surgery and during the last clinic follow-up. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to examine the effect of predictors on BMI change and the risk of recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 211 patients were included in the final analysis. The majority of patients had stage I disease (n=176, 89%) and endometrioid histology (n=178, 86%). Median follow-up time was 53.4 (standard deviation (SD) 40) months. The mean BMI was 30.4 kg/m2 (interquartile range (IQR) 25-34) at surgery compared with 30.9 kg/m2 (IQR 26-36) at last follow-up (p<0.001). The BMI increase was most pronounced in patients with endometroid histology that recurred, 31.6 (IQR 24-35) kg/m2 at surgery compared with 33.5 (IQR 27-36) kg/m2 at last follow-up (p=0.016). On multivariate analysis, age and BMI change were the only predictors that were significantly associated with the risk of recurrence (overall response (OR 1.07 (0.99-1.14), p=0.05, OR 1.37 (1.12-1.67), p=0.002, respectively). CONCLUSION: Patients with endometroid endometrial cancer that had an increase in BMI during follow-up were at an increased risk for cancer recurrence compared with patients that did not change or had a decrease in BMI.

Rucaparib versus standard-of-care chemotherapy in patients with relapsed ovarian cancer and a deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation (ARIEL4): an international, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Few prospective studies have compared poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors to chemotherapy for the treatment of BRCA1-mutated or BRCA2-mutated ovarian carcinoma. We aimed to assess rucaparib versus platinum-based and non-platinum-based chemotherapy in this setting. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study (ARIEL4), conducted in 64 hospitals and cancer centres across 12 countries (Brazil, Canada, Czech Republic, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Poland, Russia, Spain, Ukraine, the UK, and the USA), we recruited patients aged 18 years and older with BRCA1-mutated or BRCA2-mutated ovarian carcinoma, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and who had received two or more previous chemotherapy regimens. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1), using an interactive response technology and block randomisation (block size of six) and stratified by progression-free interval after the most recent platinum-containing therapy, to oral rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) or chemotherapy (administered per institutional guidelines). Patients assigned to the chemotherapy group with platinum-resistant or partially platinum-sensitive disease were given paclitaxel (starting dose 60-80 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15); those with fully platinum-sensitive disease received platinum-based chemotherapy (single-agent cisplatin or carboplatin, or platinum-doublet chemotherapy). Patients were treated in 21-day or 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, assessed in the efficacy population (all randomly assigned patients with deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations without reversion mutations), and then in the intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned patients). Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of assigned study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02855944; enrolment is complete, and the study is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between March 1, 2017, and Sept 24, 2020, 930 patients were screened, of whom 349 eligible patients were randomly assigned to rucaparib (n=233) or chemotherapy (n=116). Median age was 58 years (IQR 52-64) and 332 (95%) patients were White. As of data cutoff (Sept 30, 2020), median follow-up was 25·0 months (IQR 13·8-32·5). In the efficacy population (220 patients in the rucaparib group; 105 in the chemotherapy group), median progression-free survival was 7·4 months (95% CI 7·3-9·1) in the rucaparib group versus 5·7 months (5·5-7·3) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·64 [95% CI 0·49-0·84]; p=0·0010). In the intention-to-treat population (233 in the rucaparib group; 116 in the chemotherapy group), median progression-free survival was 7·4 months (95% CI 6·7-7·9) in the rucaparib group versus 5·7 months (5·5-6·7) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0·67 [95% CI 0·52-0·86]; p=0·0017). Most treatment-emergent adverse events were grade 1 or 2. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse event was anaemia or decreased haemoglobin (in 52 [22%] of 232 patients in the rucaparib group vs six [5%] of 113 in the chemotherapy group). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 62 (27%) patients in the rucaparib group versus 13 (12%) in the chemotherapy group; serious adverse events considered related to treatment by the investigator occurred in 32 (14%) patients in the rucaparib group and six (5%) in the chemotherapy group. Three deaths were considered to be potentially related to rucaparib (one due to cardiac disorder, one due to myelodysplastic syndrome, and one with an unconfirmed cause). INTERPRETATION: Results from the ARIEL4 study support rucaparib as an alternative treatment option to chemotherapy for patients with relapsed, BRCA1-mutated or BRCA2-mutated ovarian carcinoma. FUNDING: Clovis Oncology.

Impact of disease progression on health-related quality of life of advanced ovarian cancer patients - Pooled analysis from the PRIMA trial.

OBJECTIVE: Progression-free survival (PFS) is an important early efficacy endpoint in ovarian cancer (OC) and its relevance to patients should be assessed. PRIMA, a phase III trial, assessed niraparib in patients with OC; this post hoc analysis examined the relationship between disease progression in OC and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: The PRIMA trial randomized patients with advanced OC responsive to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy to once daily maintenance oral niraparib or placebo. This post hoc analysis evaluated the impact of disease progression on HRQoL by comparing HRQoL at the last visit pre-progression to end of treatment (EoT), and after 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks. Assessments included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian Symptom Index (FOSI), the European Quality of Life Five Dimension Five Level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and EQ Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS), the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30), and the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire Ovarian Cancer module (EORTC-QLQ-OV28). RESULTS: This post hoc analysis included 733 patients. Mean FOSI, EQ-5D-5L, and EQ-VAS scores deteriorated from last visit pre-progression to EoT and remained low up to 24-week follow-up. Least squares mean changes from last visit pre-progression to EoT were -2.1 (95% confidence interval -2.4, -1.7) for FOSI, -4.6 (-5.6, -3.5) for the EQ-5D-5L index, and -7.9 (-9.6, -6.3) for EQ-VAS. CONCLUSIONS: Disease progression negatively impacted HRQoL in patients with OC. PFS is clinically relevant, and prolonging PFS may preserve HRQoL.

Brain metastases in patients with ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Brain metastasis (BM) are uncommon among women with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). The frequency, risk factors and clinical repercussions of BM in these patients are not well described. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated EOC patients treated at our center from 2002 to 2020 and assessed their clinical parameters, risk for BM development and association with overall survival (OS). This cohort has a known high frequency of BRCA mutation carriers (BRCAm) due to women of Ashkenazi Jewish descent. RESULTS: Among 1035 EOC patients, 29 (2.8%) were diagnosed with BM. The prevalence of BRCA mutations was more common among women with BM (56.5% vs. 34.3%, p = 0.033). The BM rate in patients with BRCAm was higher than the BM rate in those with wildtype BRCA (BRCAw; 5.1% vs. 2.1%, OR = 2.6; 95% CI: 1.2-5.4, p = 0.013). Median time from diagnosis to BM and from disease recurrence to BM was longer among patients with BRCAm. Median OS was not significantly different among patients with BM versus those without BM (59.4 vs. 73.4 months, p = 0.243). After BM diagnosis, median OS was not statistically significantly different between patients with BRCAm and those with BRCAw (20.6 vs. 12.3 months, p = 0.441). Treatment with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors and bevacizumab had no impact on subsequent development of BM. CONCLUSIONS: BM are rare among EOC patients. However, the risk is three-fold higher among patients with BRCAm. BM do not significantly alter OS among EOC patients. The higher rate of BM in patients with BRCAm may be related to longer OS in this subpopulation.

Weekly Carboplatin and Paclitaxel: A Retrospective Comparison with the Three-Weekly Schedule in First-Line Treatment of Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Conventional first-line combination therapy for ovarian cancer comprises 6 cycles of adjuvant or neoadjuvant carboplatin (AUC5-6) with paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 ) every 3 weeks (PC-3W). Weekly scheduling of paclitaxel may maximize its antiangiogenic effect and reduce adverse effects. We compared the efficacy and safety of PC-3W with a modified protocol of weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 and weekly carboplatin AUC2 administered on days 1, 8, and 15 in a 28-day cycle (i.e., with 1 week off-treatment [PC-W]). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical records of consecutive patients treated between 2000 and 2018 were reviewed; 707 patients were analyzed for demographic and clinical characteristics, effectiveness and toxicity. RESULTS: PC-3W was administered to 402 patients (median age, 60.5 years) and PC-W to 305 patients (median age, 62.5 years). Most patients (91.4%) were diagnosed at stage III-IV. Notwithstanding a higher proportion of residual disease and older patients in the PC-W group, median progression-free survival was 21.4 months and 13.2 months for PC-W and PC-3W, respectively; median overall survival was 75.2 and 54.0 months for PC-W and PC-3W, respectively. Cox proportional hazards model indicated improved survival for patients treated with PC-W (hazard ratio, 0.54). Similar results were observed for older patients diagnosed at ≥75 years. PC-W demonstrated a better safety profile, with lower incidence of neuropathy, neutropenia, and alopecia. CONCLUSION: PC-W is as active and better tolerated than the standard PC-3W regimen. PC-W may serve as an alternative option for elderly or frail patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Weekly scheduling of paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC2, administered on days 1, 8, and 15 in a 28-day cycle (PC-W) for first-line therapy for advanced ovarian cancer, is as active and better tolerated than the standard regimen of carboplatin and paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 ) every 3 weeks (PC-3W). It is possible that the weekly holiday on day 21 in the PC-W regimen may ensure better completion rates (which may result in treatment delays for toxicity in PC-3W). The results of this retrospective analysis highlight the weekly regimen as a valid treatment option, especially for elderly patients and those with significant comorbidities.

Rapid Implementation of Telemedicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Perspectives and Preferences of Patients with Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The use of telemedicine in oncology practice is rapidly expanding and is considered safe and cost effective. However, the implications of telemedicine on patient-physician interaction, patient satisfaction, and absence of the personal touch have not been studied to date. Following the spread of COVID-19, telemedicine services were rapidly incorporated at the Oncology Division of Tel Aviv Medical Center. We aimed to evaluate patients' perspectives and preferences regarding telemedicine and to assess whether this virtual communication platform affects the patient-physician relationship. METHODS: Between March 2020 and May 2020, adult cancer patients who conducted at least one successful telemedicine meeting were interviewed by trained medical personnel. The interview was based on validated patient satisfaction questionnaires and focused on patient-physician interaction in relation to the last in-patient visit. RESULTS: Of 236 patients, 172 (74%) patients agreed to participate. The study population comprised mainly patients with gastrointestinal malignancies (n = 79, 46%) with a median age of 63 years (range 21-88). The majority of patients were male (n = 93, 54%). Eighty-nine (51.7%) patients were receiving active oncologic treatment, and 58 (33.7%) were under routine surveillance following completion of active therapy. Almost all had a sense of secured privacy (n = 171, 96%), the majority of patients affirmed that their concerns were met (n = 166, 93%) and perceived that eye contact with the treating physician was perceived (n = 156, 87%). Only a minority felt that the absence of physical clinic visits harmed their treatment (n = 36, 20%). Most patients (n = 146, 84.9%) wished to continue telemedicine services. A multivariate analysis revealed that higher satisfaction and visits for routine surveillance were both predictors of willingness to continue future telemedicine meetings over physical encounters (odds ratio [OR] = 2.41, p = .01; OR = 3.34, p = .03, respectively). CONCLUSION: Telemedicine is perceived as safe and effective, and patients did not feel that it compromised medical care or the patient-physician relationship. Integration of telemedicine is ideal for patients under surveillance after completion of active oncologic treatment. Physician communication skills workshops are warranted with implementing this platform. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine was rapidly implemented worldwide to facilitate continuity of quality care and treatment. Despite many potential setbacks, telemedicine has become a useful and safe tool for oncology practitioners to care for their patients. The use of telemedicine regarding patients' perspectives, emotions, and patient-physician communication in daily oncology practice has not been studied to date. This study demonstrated telemedicine is perceived as safe and effective and does not compromise medical care or the patient-physician relationship. Its use is ideal for surveillance after completion of active oncologic treatment. Physician communication skills workshops are warranted with implementing this platform.

Preimplantation genetic testing for BRCA gene mutation carriers: a cost effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Gynecologic oncologists should be aware of the option of conception through IVF/PGT-M for families with high BRCA related morbidity or mortality. Our objective was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for selection and transfer of BRCA negative embryo in BRCA mutation carriers compared to natural conception. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness of two strategies, conception through IVF/PGT-M and BRCA negative embryo transfer versus natural conception with a 50% chance of BRCA positive newborn for BRCA mutation carriers was compared using a Markovian process decision analysis model. Costs of the two strategies were compared using quality adjusted life years (QALYs'). All costs were discounted at 3%. Incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) compared to willingness to pay threshold was used for cost-effectiveness analysis. RESULTS: IVF/ PGT-M is cost-effective with an ICER of 150,219 new Israeli Shekels, per QALY gained (equivalent to 44,480 USD), at a 3% discount rate. CONCLUSIONS: IVF/ PGT-M and BRCA negative embryo transfer compared to natural conception among BRCA positive parents is cost effective and may be offered for selected couples with high BRCA mutation related morbidity or mortality. Our results could impact decisions regarding conception among BRCA positive couples and health care providers.

Breast cancer incidence in BRCA mutation carriers with ovarian cancer: A longitudal observational study.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the incidence of breast cancer and overall survival in a multi-center cohort of ovarian cancer patients carrying BRCA1/2 mutations in order to assess risks and formulate optimal preventive interventions and/or surveillance. METHODS: Medical records of 502 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers diagnosed with ovarian cancer between 2000 and 2018 at 7 medical centers in Israel and one in New York were retrospectively analyzed for breast cancer diagnosis. Data included demographics, type of BRCA mutations, surveillance methods, timing of breast cancer diagnosis, and family history of cancer. RESULTS: The median age at diagnosis of ovarian cancer was 55.8 years (range, 23.9-90.1). A third (31.5%) had a family history of breast cancer and 17.1% of ovarian cancer. Most patients (67.3%) were Ashkenazi Jews, 72.9% were BRCA1 carriers. Breast cancer preceded ovarian cancer in 17.5% and was diagnosed after ovarian cancer in 6.2%; an additional 2.2% had a synchronous presentation. Median time to breast cancer diagnosis after ovarian cancer was 46.0 months (range, 11-168). Of those diagnosed with both breast cancer and ovarian cancer (n = 31), 83.9% and 16.1% harbored BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, respectively. No deaths from breast cancer were recorded. Overall survival did not differ statistically between patients with an ovarian cancer diagnosis only and those diagnosed with breast cancer after ovarian cancer. CONCLUSION: The low incidence of breast cancer after ovarian cancer in women carrying BRCA1/2 mutations suggests that routine breast surveillance, rather than risk-reducing surgical interventions, may be sufficient in ovarian cancer survivors.

ATHENA (GOG-3020/ENGOT-ov45): a randomized, phase III trial to evaluate rucaparib as monotherapy (ATHENA-MONO) and rucaparib in combination with nivolumab (ATHENA-COMBO) as maintenance treatment following frontline platinum-based chemotherapy in ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment strategy for women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer has yet to be determined. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have demonstrated substantial improvement in progression-free survival as monotherapy maintenance treatment in the frontline setting versus active surveillance. Furthermore, preclinical and early clinical studies have shown that PARP inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors have synergistic antitumor activity and may provide an additional therapeutic option for patients in this population. PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: In women with newly diagnosed ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer, we wish to assess the efficacy of frontline maintenance treatment with the PARP inhibitor rucaparib versus placebo following response to platinum-based chemotherapy (ATHENA-MONO), and to assess the combination of rucaparib plus nivolumab (a programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1)-blocking monoclonal antibody) versus rucaparib alone (ATHENA-COMBO). STUDY HYPOTHESIS: (1) Maintenance therapy with rucaparib monotherapy may extend progression-free survival following standard treatment for ovarian cancer in the frontline setting. (2) The combination of nivolumab plus rucaparib may extend progression-free survival following standard treatment for ovarian cancer in the frontline setting compared with rucaparib alone. TRIAL DESIGN: ATHENA is an international, randomized, double-blind, phase III trial consisting of two independent comparisons (ATHENA-MONO and ATHENA-COMBO) in patients with newly diagnosed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Patients are randomized 4:4:1:1 to the following: oral rucaparib+ intravenous nivolumab (arm A); oral rucaparib + intravenous placebo (arm B); oral placebo+ intravenous nivolumab (arm C); and oral placebo + intravenous placebo (arm D). The starting dose of rucaparib is 600 mg orally twice a day and nivolumab 480 mg intravenously every 4 weeks. ATHENA-MONO compares arm B with arm D to evaluate rucaparib monotherapy versus placebo, and ATHENA-COMBO evaluates arm A versus arm B to investigate the effects of rucaparib and nivolumab in combination versus rucaparib monotherapy. ATHENA-MONO and ATHENA-COMBO share a common treatment arm (arm B) but each comparison is independently powered. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Patients ≥18 years of age with newly diagnosed advanced, high-grade epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer who have achieved a response after completion of cytoreductive surgery and initial platinum-based chemotherapy are enrolled. No other prior treatment for ovarian cancer, other than the frontline platinum regimen, is permitted. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: The primary endpoint is investigator-assessed progression-free survival by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. SAMPLE SIZE: Approximately 1000 patients have been enrolled and randomized. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: The trial completed accrual in 2020. While dependent on event rates, primary results of ATHENA-MONO are anticipated in early 2022 and results of ATHENA-COMBO are anticipated to mature at a later date. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03522246).

Diagnostic yield of multigene panel testing in an Israeli cohort: enrichment of low-penetrance variants.

BACKGROUND: Carriers of pathogenic variants (PVs) in moderate-high-penetrance cancer susceptibility genes are offered tailored surveillance schemes for early cancer diagnosis. The clinical implications of low-penetrance variant carriers are less clear. METHODS: Clinical and demographic data were retrieved for a cohort of Israeli individuals who underwent oncogenetic testing by the 30-gene cancer panel at Color Genomics laboratory, between 04/2013 and 12/2018. RESULTS: Of 758 genotyped individuals, 504 had been diagnosed with cancer prior to testing: 283 (56%) had breast cancer and 106 (21%) colorectal cancer. Pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants were detected in 123 (16%) individuals. Overall, 44 different P/LP variants were detected in 18/30 cancer susceptibility genes; 20 of them were founder/recurrent mutations. Of the carriers, 39 (32%), 10 (8%), and 74 (60%) carried high-, moderate-, or low-penetrance variants, respectively. After excluding low-penetrance variants, 7% (33/504) of all cancer patients, 6% of breast or ovarian cancer patients were found to be carriers, as well as 7% (14/203) of individuals with colonic polyps, and 4% (11/254) of cancer-free individuals. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic yield of moderate- and high-penetrance PVs using multigene panel testing was 6%, with 3.7% carriers of non-recurrent PVs. This yield should be discussed during pre-test counseling, and emphasizes the need for harmonized recommendations regarding clinical implications of low-penetrance variants.

Early intervention with pulse dye and CO2 ablative fractional lasers to improve cutaneous scarring post-lumpectomy: a randomized controlled trial on the impact of intervention on final cosmesis.

Light-based modalities appear to be effective for ameliorating surgical scar appearance; however, protocols for achieving such outcomes have yet to be established. We studied the safety and efficacy of a combination of pulsed dye laser (PDL) and fractional ablative CO2 laser (FACL) for the attenuation of post-lumpectomy scarring. We conducted a prospective, evaluator-blinded, comparative split-scar study in post-lumpectomy patients. One-half of the scar was treated with three sessions of 595-nm PDL and FACL at 1-month intervals, starting within 6 weeks after suture removal. The entire scar was also treated with standard moisturizers and silicone gels. Six months after the last treatment, the two halves of the scar were assessed by three uninvolved physicians who used the Observer Scar Assessment Scale as well as by the patients who used the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale. Eighteen female patients (mean age, 51.3 years) with a mean scar length of 7.8 cm completed the treatment and follow-up. Six months after the last treatment, both the physician evaluators and the patients noted significant improvements for all assessed scar parameters in the laser-treated scar area compared with the untreated scar area. The treatment was well tolerated, and no remarkable adverse events were reported. All 18 participants were satisfied with the treated scar areas. A combination PDL and FACL protocol starting up to 6 weeks after suture removal is a safe and effective method for the attenuation of post-lumpectomy scar formation.

Long-term efficacy, tolerability and overall survival in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent high-grade serous ovarian cancer treated with maintenance olaparib capsules following response to chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: In Study 19, maintenance monotherapy with olaparib significantly prolonged progression-free survival vs placebo in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent high-grade serous ovarian cancer. METHODS: Study 19 was a randomised, placebo-controlled, Phase II trial enrolling 265 patients who had received at least two platinum-based chemotherapy regimens and were in complete or partial response to their most recent regimen. Patients were randomised to olaparib (capsules; 400 mg bid) or placebo. We present long-term safety and final mature overall survival (OS; 79% maturity) data, from the last data cut-off (9 May 2016). RESULTS: Thirty-two patients (24%) received maintenance olaparib for over 2 years; 15 (11%) did so for over 6 years. No new tolerability signals were identified with long-term treatment and adverse events were generally low grade. The incidence of discontinuations due to adverse events was low (6%). An apparent OS advantage was observed with olaparib vs placebo (hazard ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.55‒0.95, P = 0.02138) irrespective of BRCA1/2 mutation status, although the predefined threshold for statistical significance was not met. CONCLUSIONS: Study 19 showed a favourable final OS result irrespective of BRCA1/2 mutation status and unprecedented long-term benefit with maintenance olaparib for a subset of platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer patients.

Overall survival in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer receiving olaparib maintenance monotherapy: an updated analysis from a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer, maintenance monotherapy with the PARP inhibitor olaparib significantly improves progression-free survival versus placebo. We assessed the effect of maintenance olaparib on overall survival in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer, including those with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations (BRCAm). METHODS: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial involving 82 sites across 16 countries, patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer who had received two or more courses of platinum-based chemotherapy and had responded to their latest regimen were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated sequence to receive oral maintenance olaparib (as capsules; 400 mg twice a day) or a matching placebo by an interactive voice response system. Patients were stratified by ancestry, time to progression on penultimate platinum, and response to most recent platinum. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment by the use of unique identifiers generated during randomisation. The primary endpoint of the trial was progression-free survival. In this updated analysis, we present data for overall survival, a secondary endpoint, from the third data analysis after more than 5 years' follow-up (intention-to-treat population). We did the updated overall survival analysis, described in this Article at 77% data maturity, using a two-sided α of 0·95%. As the study was not powered to assess overall survival, this analysis should be regarded as descriptive and the p values are nominal. We analysed randomly assigned patients for overall survival and all patients who received at least one dose of treatment for safety. This trial is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00753545. FINDINGS: Between Aug 28, 2008, and Feb 9, 2010, 265 patients were randomly assigned to olaparib (n=136) or placebo (n=129). 136 patients had deleterious BRCAm. The data cutoff for this analysis was Sept 30, 2015. An overall survival advantage was seen with maintenance olaparib versus placebo in all patients (hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·55-0·96]; nominal p=0·025, which did not meet the required threshold for statistical significance [p<0·0095]; median overall survival was 29·8 months [95% CI 26·9-35·7] for those treated with olaparib vs 27·8 months [24·9-33·7] for those treated with placebo), and in patients with BRCAm (HR 0·62 [95% CI 0·41-0·94] nominal p=0·025; 34·9 months [95% CI 29·2-54·6] vs 30·2 months [23·1-40·7]). The overall survival data in patients with BRCA wild-type were HR 0·83 (95% CI 0·55-1·24, nominal p=0·37; 24·5 months [19·8-35·0] for those treated with olaparib vs 26·6 months [23·1-32·5] for those treated with placebo). 11 (15%) of 74 patients with BRCAm received maintenance olaparib for 5 years or more. Overall, common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the olaparib and placebo groups were fatigue (11 [8%] of 136 patients vs four [3%] of 128) and anaemia (eight [6%] vs one [1%]). 30 (22%) of 136 patients in the olaparib group and 11 (9%) of 128 patients in the placebo group reported serious adverse events. In patients treated for 2 years or more, adverse events in the olaparib and placebo groups included low-grade nausea (24 [75%] of 32 patients vs two [40%] of five), fatigue (18 [56%] of 32 vs two [40%] of five), vomiting (12 [38%] of 32 vs zero), and anaemia (eight [25%] of 32 vs one [20%] of five); generally, events were initially reported during the first 2 years of treatment. INTERPRETATION: Despite not reaching statistical significance, patients with BRCA-mutated platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer receiving olaparib maintenance monotherapy after platinum-based chemotherapy appeared to have longer overall survival, supporting the reported progression-free survival benefit. Clinically useful long-term exposure to olaparib was seen with no new safety signals. Taken together, these data support both the long-term clinical benefit and tolerability of maintenance olaparib in patients with BRCA-mutated platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Olaparib maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed serous ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation: Overall survival adjusted for postprogression poly(adenosine diphosphate ribose) polymerase inhibitor therapy.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance treatment with the oral poly(adenosine diphosphate ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib (Lynparza) in Study 19 (study number, D0810C00019; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00753545) significantly improved progression-free survival in comparison with a placebo for patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed serous ovarian cancer with a BRCA1/2 mutation (BRCAm), but an interim analysis revealed no statistically significant overall survival (OS) benefit. However, 23% of the patients receiving the placebo switched to a PARP inhibitor after progression. To investigate whether this had a confounding effect on OS, this article reports an exploratory post hoc analysis that excluded all patients from sites where 1 or more placebo patients received postprogression PARP inhibitor treatment. METHODS: In Study 19, 136 of the 265 patients receiving olaparib or a placebo had a BRCAm. Sixteen patients treated at 11 of the 82 investigational sites received a PARP inhibitor after progression; these sites were excluded from this analysis, and 97 BRCAm patients at 50 sites were included. OS was assessed with a Cox proportional hazards model analogous to the primary study analysis. A supporting rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) model analysis was undertaken for all 136 BRCAm patients. RESULTS: The OS hazard ratio (HR) was 0.52 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.97) for the 97 BRCAm patients, whereas for the interim OS analysis with all 136 BRCAm patients, it was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.45-1.17). The supportive RPSFT analysis HR was approximately 0.66. CONCLUSIONS: The numerical improvement in the OS HR suggests that in Study 19, postprogression PARP inhibitor treatment had a confounding influence on the interim OS analysis for BRCAm patients. There is a degree of uncertainty due to the small sample size and the lack of data maturity. Cancer 2016;122:1844-52. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Quality of life during olaparib maintenance therapy in platinum-sensitive relapsed serous ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance monotherapy with the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib significantly prolongs progression-free survival over placebo in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed serous ovarian cancer, with greatest benefit seen in patients with a BRCA1/2 mutation (BRCAm). Preservation of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is important during maintenance therapy; we evaluated the effect of olaparib on HRQoL in this Phase II trial (NCT00753545, Study 19). METHODS: Patients received olaparib 400 mg b.i.d. (capsules) or placebo until progression. Patient-reported HRQoL and disease-related symptoms were evaluated using the FACT-Ovarian (FACT-O) questionnaire (completed at baseline and every 28 days until progression), the FACT/NCCN Ovarian Symptom Index (FOSI) and the Trial Outcome Index (TOI). TOI of the FACT-O was the primary measure. RESULTS: Overall, 265 women were randomised to maintenance olaparib (n=136) or placebo (n=129). Compliance for HRQoL assessment was high (∼80% over time). Most patients in both arms reported a best response of 'no change' on TOI (81%) and other HRQoL measures. There were no statistically significant differences in time to worsening or improvement rates of TOI, FOSI and FACT-O scores in the overall, BRCAm and germline BRCAm populations. CONCLUSIONS: Maintenance treatment with olaparib was well tolerated and had no adverse impact on HRQoL in this study of patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed serous ovarian cancer who had responded to their most recent platinum-based therapy (partial or complete response). Interpretation of the HRQoL results in this population may differ from patients who have not responded to their most recent platinum-based therapy.

Screening for germline mutations in breast/ovarian cancer susceptibility genes in high-risk families in Israel.

We evaluated the clinical utility of screening for mutations in 34 breast/ovarian cancer susceptibility genes in high-risk families in Israel. Participants were recruited from 12, 2012 to 6, 2015 from 8 medical centers. All participants had high breast/ovarian cancer risk based on personal and family history. Genotyping was performed with the InVitae™ platform. The study was approved by the ethics committees of the participating centers; all participants gave a written informed consent before entering the study. Overall, 282 individuals participated in the study: 149 (53 %) of Ashkenazi descent, 80 (28 %) Jewish non-Ashkenazi descent, 22 (8 %) of mixed Ashkenazi/non-Ashkenazi origin, 21 (7 %) were non-Jewish Caucasians, and the remaining patients (n = 10-3.5 %) were of Christian Arabs/Druze/unknown ethnicity. For breast cancer patients (n = 165), the median (range) age at diagnosis was 46 (22-90) years and for ovarian cancer (n = 15) 54 (38-69) years. Overall, 30 cases (10.6 %) were found to carry a pathogenic actionable mutation in the tested genes: 10 BRCA1 (3 non-founder mutations), 9 BRCA2 (8 non-founder mutations), and one each in the RAD51C and CHEK2 genes. Furthermore, actionable mutations were detected in 9 more cases in 4 additional genes (MSH2, RET, MSH6, and APC). No pathogenic mutations were detected in the other genotyped genes. In this high-risk population, 10.6 % harbored an actionable pathogenic mutation, including non-founder mutations in BRCA1/2 and in additional cancer susceptibility genes, suggesting that high-risk families should be genotyped and be assigned a genotype-based cancer risk.

Olaparib maintenance therapy in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib (AZD2281) is an oral poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase inhibitor that has shown antitumor activity in patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer with or without BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline mutations. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study to evaluate maintenance treatment with olaparib in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed, high-grade serous ovarian cancer who had received two or more platinum-based regimens and had had a partial or complete response to their most recent platinum-based regimen. Patients were randomly assigned to receive olaparib, at a dose of 400 mg twice daily, or placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors guidelines. RESULTS: Of 265 patients who underwent randomization, 136 were assigned to the olaparib group and 129 to the placebo group. Progression-free survival was significantly longer with olaparib than with placebo (median, 8.4 months vs. 4.8 months from randomization on completion of chemotherapy; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25 to 0.49; P<0.001). Subgroup analyses of progression-free survival showed that, regardless of subgroup, patients in the olaparib group had a lower risk of progression. Adverse events more commonly reported in the olaparib group than in the placebo group (by more than 10% of patients) were nausea (68% vs. 35%), fatigue (49% vs. 38%), vomiting (32% vs. 14%), and anemia (17% vs. 5%); the majority of adverse events were grade 1 or 2. An interim analysis of overall survival (38% maturity, meaning that 38% of the patients had died) showed no significant difference between groups (hazard ratio with olaparib, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.39; P=0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib as maintenance treatment significantly improved progression-free survival among patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed, high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Interim analysis showed no overall survival benefit. The toxicity profile of olaparib in this population was consistent with that in previous studies. (Funded by AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00753545.).