Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) Applied to Platinum-Resistant Recurrence of Ovarian Tumor: A Single-Institution Experience (ID: PARROT Trial).

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the therapeutic efficacy and safety of Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) in platinum-resistant recurrence of ovarian cancer and peritoneal carcinomatosis, while our secondary endpoint was to establish any changes in quality of life estimated via the EORTC QLQ-30 and QLQ-OV28 questionnaires. METHODS: In this monocentric, single-arm, phase II trial, women were prospectively recruited and every 28-42 days underwent courses of PIPAC with doxorubicin 2.1 mg/m2 followed by cisplatin 10.5 mg/m2 via sequential laparoscopy. RESULTS: Overall, 98 PIPAC procedures were performed on 43 women from January 2016 to January 2020; three procedures were aborted due to extensive intra-abdominal adhesions. The clinical benefit rate (CBR) was reached in 82% of women. Three cycles of PIPAC were completed in 18 women (45%), and 13 (32.5%) and 9 (22.5%) patients were subjected to one and two cycles, respectively. During two PIPAC procedures, patients experienced an intraoperative intestinal perforation. There were no treatment-related deaths. Nineteen patients showed no response according to the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) and 8 patients showed minor response according to the PRGS. Median time from ovarian cancer relapse to disease progression was 12 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.483-17.517), while the median overall survival was 27 months (95% CI 20.337-33.663). The EORTC QLQ-28 and EORTC QLQ-30 scores did not worsen during therapy. CONCLUSIONS: PIPAC seems a feasible approach for the treatment of this subset of patients, without any impact on their quality of life. Since this study had a small sample size and a single-center design, future research is mandatory, such as its application in addition to systemic chemotherapy.

Maintenance therapy for newly and recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer: current therapies and future perspectives.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the fifth cause of cancer death among women, and 70-80% of patients relapse within 2 years from the last cycle of first-line chemotherapy despite a complete response to chemotherapy and optimal debulking surgery. In this context, the goal of the maintenance treatment strategy is to prolong the time to recurrence. The recent development of targeted molecular therapies resulted in a broader spectrum of maintenance therapeutic options with consequent higher clinical benefit but less toxicity. This review summarizes the currently available maintenance strategies for newly and recurrent EOC, focusing on the decision-making process to personalize treatment and future perspectives. RECENT FINDINGS: Over the past 10 years, several studies have demonstrated the clear benefit in terms of survival with the addition of a maintenance treatment strategy over the 'watchful waiting' approach both in the first line and recurrent setting. Since December 2016, the United States Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency have approved four drugs for ovarian cancer maintenance based on the results of several clinical trials demonstrating efficacy and tolerability. These include the antiangiogenic drug Bevacizumab and three polyadenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors: olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib. SUMMARY: These data led American and European Treatment guidelines to include bevacizumab, olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib, and combination bevacizumab-olaparib as maintenance treatment options in first-line and recurrent ovarian cancer therapy. However, with the availability of different maintenance options, identifying the best treatment choice for each patient can be challenging, and several clinical and molecular aspects have to be taken into account in the decision-making process.

Carboplatin and paclitaxel plus avelumab compared with carboplatin and paclitaxel in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (MITO END-3): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Adding immunotherapy to first-line chemotherapy might improve outcomes for patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. We aimed to compare carboplatin and paclitaxel versus avelumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel as first-line treatment with avelumab given concurrent to chemotherapy and as maintenance after the end of chemotherapy. METHODS: MITO END-3 is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial conducted at 31 cancer institutes, hospitals, and universities in Italy. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed advanced (FIGO stage III-IV) or recurrent endometrial cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1, and no previous systemic anticancer therapy as primary treatment for advanced or metastatic disease. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computerised minimisation procedure stratified by centre, histology, and stage at study entry, to either receive carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC] 5 mg/mL × min) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m2; standard group) intravenously every 3 weeks for six to eight cycles or avelumab (10 mg/kg intravenously) added to carboplatin and paclitaxel (experimental group) every 3 weeks and then every 2 weeks as a single maintenance treatment after the end of chemotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients, treating clinicians, and those assessing radiological examinations were not masked to study treatment. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, measured in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Patients who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analysis. Experimental group superiority was tested with 80% power and one-tailed α 0·20. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03503786) and EudraCT (2016-004403-31). FINDINGS: From April 9, 2018, to May 13, 2021, 166 women were assessed for eligibility and 39 were excluded. 125 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin and paclitaxel (n=62) or avelumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (n=63) and included in the ITT population. The median follow-up was 23·3 months (IQR 13·2-29·6) and was similar between the two groups. 91 progression-free survival events were reported, with 49 events in 62 patients in the standard group and 42 events in 63 patients in the experimental group. The median progression-free survival was 9·9 months (95% CI 6·7-12·1) in the standard group and 9·6 months (7·2-17·7) in the experimental group (HR of progression or death 0·78 [60% CI 0·65-0·93]; one-tailed p=0·085). Serious adverse events were reported more frequently in the experimental group (24 vs seven events in the standard group); neutrophil count decrease was the most frequent grade 3-4 adverse event (19 [31%] of 61 patients in the experimental group vs 26 [43%] of 61 patients in the standard group). Two deaths occurred in the experimental group during treatment (one respiratory failure following severe myositis [possibly related to treatment] and one cardiac arrest [not related to treatment]). INTERPRETATION: Adding avelumab to first-line chemotherapy deserves further testing in patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer, although consideration of mismatch repair status is warranted. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Effect of bevacizumab in advanced low grade serous ovarian cancer: Data from the MITO 22 trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present analysis was to explore the efficacy of Bevacizumab (Bev) on survival outcome in advanced low grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC) both in first line and in recurrent setting. METHODS: In retrospective observational multicenter study, we described the outcome of LGSOC patients enrolled in the MITO 22 study and treated with chemotherapy (CT) with or without Bev. Patients receiving Bev in first-line or in recurrence were considered and compared with patients receiving CT alone (stage III and IV in first line; platinum based-CT in second line). Descriptive and survival analyses were performed for each group. RESULTS: Out of 128 patients included in MITO 22, 46 LGSOC patients receiving Bev in first line setting or at the time of first recurrence were identified. In first line, 30 patients received Bev + CT and 65 CT alone and the median PFS were 47.86 months (95% CI: 31.48 - NR) and 22.63 months (95% CI 15-39.24) (p-value 0.0392), respectively. In the recurrent setting, 16 patients who received Bev + CT were compared to 33 women treated with platinum-based CT alone. Median PFS were 37.1 months (95% CI: 13.42-40.56) and 11.22 months (95% CI: 8.26-15.63) (p-value 0.013), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that Bev might be effective in LGSOC both at diagnosis and at the time of relapse. These data warrants further studies.

Consensus statements and treatment algorithm to guide clinicians in the selection of maintenance therapy for patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian carcinoma: Results of a Delphi study.

INTRODUCTION: Standard treatment of newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian carcinoma (OC) consists of cytoreductive surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. Maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors and olaparib-bevacizumab has recently shown to significantly improve progression-free survival in the first-line setting. Some practical aspects of maintenance therapy, however, are still poorly defined. AIM OF THE STUDY: To provide guidance to clinicians in the selection of maintenance therapy for newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian carcinoma. METHODS: A board of six gynecologic oncologists with expertise in the treatment of OC in Italy convened to address issues related to the new options for maintenance treatment. Based on scientific evidences, the board produced practice-oriented statements. Consensus was reached via a modified Delphi study that involved a panel of 22 experts from across Italy. RESULTS: Twenty-seven evidence- and consensus-based statements are presented, covering the following areas of interest: use of biomarkers (BRCA mutations and presence of homologous recombination deficiency); timing and outcomes of surgery; selection of patients eligible for bevacizumab; definition of response to treatment; toxicity and contraindications; evidence of synergy of bevacizumab plus PARP inhibitor. Two treatment algorithms are also included, for selecting maintenance therapy based on timing and outcomes of surgery, response to platinum-based chemotherapy and biomarker status. A score for the assessment of response to chemotherapy is proposed, but its validation is ongoing. CONCLUSIONS: We provide here consensus statements and treatment algorithms to guide clinicians in the selection of appropriate and personalized maintenance therapy in the first-line setting of advanced OC management.

Genome tumor profiling in endometrial cancer and clinical relevance in endometrial cancer management: a retrospective single-center experience.

OBJECTIVE: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis has become an essential tool for endometrial carcinoma management. Moreover, molecular-driven therapies play an increasingly remarkable role in the era of precision oncology. This study aims to determine the clinical relevance of NGS testing in endometrial carcinoma management by analyzing the clinical benefit of NGS-driven targeted therapies. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study was conducted on 25 endometrial carcinoma patients who underwent Foundation Medicine CDx assay at Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS (Rome, Italy). Tumor samples were analyzed by Foundation One CDx. A descriptive analysis of tumor genome profiles was performed. Assessment of clinical benefit according to RECIST 1.1 criteria was analyzed for patients who received a tailored treatment according to actionable targets identified by NGS testing. RESULTS: Out of 25 endometrial carcinoma patients, 11 received targeted therapy. One patient was excluded from the clinical benefit assessment because of COVID-19-related death 1 month after starting the treatment. Eight of the remaining 10 patients benefited from targeted therapies, with an overall clinical benefit rate of 80%. A targeted agent belonging to the PI3K pathway was given to seven patients, with evidence of three partial responses (42.9%), three stable diseases (42.9%), and one progressive disease (14.2%) according to RECIST 1.1 criteria. One complete response (33.3%), one stable disease (33.3%), and one progressive disease (33.3%) were observed in the three patients treated with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors according to their homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the importance of characterizing the mutation profile of patient tumors through NGS. Our findings suggest a clinical benefit of using NGS-driven targeted therapies in endometrial carcinoma patients. However, this personalized approach could benefit the health system in terms of cost-effectiveness by reducing the costs of inappropriate, ineffective, and often expensive treatments.

Survival outcomes in patients with BRCA mutated, variant of unknown significance, and wild type ovarian cancer treated with PARP inhibitors.

OBJECTIVE: Correlation between BRCA1/2 (BRCA) pathogenic variants and the response to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) has been recognized in patients with ovarian cancer. Moreover, data on the clinical implications of variants of unknown significance are lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in survival outcomes in patients with BRCA variants of unknown significance, mutated, and wild type relapsed ovarian cancer treated with PARPi. METHODS: Patients with ovarian cancer whose somatic BRCA testing was available and who were receiving PARPi as maintenance treatment at the first recurrence between January 2014 and January 2021 were included in the present study and analyzed. Patients were divided into three groups according to BRCA mutational status (variant of unknown significance, mutated, and wild type). Progression-free survival was assessed in each study group. RESULTS: Of 67 patients identified, 20 (29.9%), 24 (35.8%), and 23 (34.3%) had BRCA variant of unknown significance, mutated, and wild type, respectively. Patients received PARPi as maintenance treatment at the time of the first relapse after a complete response or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy without differences in the previous platinum-free interval among the analyzed groups. The median progression-free survival of patients with BRCA mutation was significantly longer than for those with BRCA wild type or variant of unknown significance (not reached vs 4 months vs 7 months, respectively; p<0.001). Additionally, no significant difference was found between patients with BRCA wild type and BRCA variant of unknown significance (p=0.50). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that carriers of BRCA variant of unknown significance have survival outcomes comparable to patients with BRCA wild type and shorter progression-free survival than women harboring BRCA pathogenic variants.

Clinical characteristics and molecular aspects of low-grade serous ovarian and peritoneal cancer: a multicenter, observational, retrospective analysis of MITO Group (MITO 22).

BACKGROUND: Low-grade serous ovarian and peritoneal cancer (LGSC) is a rare disease and few data on the clinical and genomic landscape have been published. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with LGSC between 1996 and 2019 was conducted in MITO centers. Objective Response Rate (ORR) to treatments, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Additionally, the tumor molecular profile of 56 patients was evaluated using the Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) FoundationOne CDX (Foundation Medicine®). RESULTS: A total of 128 patients with complete clinical data and pathologically confirmed diagnosis of LGSC were identified. ORR to first and subsequent therapies were 23.7% and 33.7%, respectively. PFS was 43.9 months (95% CI:32.4-53.1) and OS was 105.4 months (95% CI: 82.7-not reached). The most common gene alterations were: KRAS (n = 12, 21%), CDKN2A/B (n = 11, 20%), NRAS (n = 8, 14%), FANCA (n = 8, 14%), NF1 (n = 7, 13%) and BRAF (n = 6, 11%). Unexpectedly, pathogenetic BRCA1 (n = 2, 4%), BRCA2 (n = 1, 2%) and PALB2 (n = 1, 2%) mutations were found. CONCLUSIONS: MITO 22 suggests that LGSC is an heterogenous disease for both its clinical behavior in response to standard therapies and its molecular alterations. Future prospective studies should test treatments according to biological and molecular tumor's characteristics. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered under NCT02408536 on ClinicalTrials.gov .

Efficacy and safety of trabectedin for the treatment of advanced uterine or ovarian carcinosarcoma: Results of a phase II multicenter clinical trial (MITO-26).

OBJECTIVE: This open-label phase II clinical trial evaluated the antitumor activity and safety of trabectedin in patients with advanced ovarian (OC) or uterine carcinosarcomas (UC). METHODS: Eligible patients were adults (≥18 years) with histologically proven recurrent OC/UC not amenable to surgery or radiotherapy who received up to two prior chemotherapy lines. Trabectedin 1.3 mg/m2 was administered as a 3-h infusion every three weeks. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) as per RECIST v.1.1. If at least 8 of 43 patients (18.6%) achieve an objective response, trabectedin would be declared worthy for further investigations. RESULTS: Forty-five patients with either OC (n = 32) or UC (n = 13) from seven MITO centers across Italy were enrolled. The ORR was 11.9% (90% CI: 6-23) and included two patients with a complete response and three with a partial response. Eight patients (19.0%) had disease stabilization for a disease control rate of 31.0% (90% CI: 20-44). Median progression-free survival was 2.01 months (95% CI: 1.78-2.30) and median overall survival was 4.64 months (95% CI: 3.19-8.29). Neutrophil count decreases (n = 8, 18.2%) and transaminase increases (n = 6, 13.6%) were the most common grade 3-5 adverse events related with trabectedin. Two patients died due to trabectedin-related grade 5 hematological toxicity. CONCLUSION: Although trabectedin did not meet the prespecified activity criteria, it confers modest but clinically meaningful benefit to patients with advanced OC/UC as being as effective as any other available treatment for this indication. The toxicity profile appears in line with that previously reported for the drug.

Carboplatin-based doublet plus bevacizumab beyond progression versus carboplatin-based doublet alone in patients with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer: a randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab is approved in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of ovarian cancer, either in first-line therapy or for patients with recurrent disease not previously treated with the same drug. We aimed to test the value of continuing bevacizumab beyond progression after first-line treatment with the same drug. METHODS: In our open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done at 82 sites in four countries, we enrolled women (aged ≥18 years) who had previously received first-line platinum-based therapy including bevacizumab, and had recurrent (≥6 months since last platinum dose), International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics stage IIIB-IV ovarian cancer with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a carboplatin-based doublet intravenously (carboplatin area under the concentration curve [AUC] 5 on day 1 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 on day 1, every 21 days; carboplatin AUC 4 on day 1 plus gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, every 21 days; or carboplatin AUC 5 on day 1 plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 30 mg/m2 on day 1, every 28 days), or a carboplatin-based doublet plus bevacizumab (10 mg/kg intravenous every 14 days combined with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin-carboplatin, or 15 mg/kg every 21 days combined with gemcitabine-carboplatin or paclitaxel-carboplatin). Evaluable disease according to RECIST 1.1 guidelines was required before randomisation. Randomisation was done through the trial website with a minimisation procedure, stratified by centre, time of recurrence, performance status, and type of second-line chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01802749 and EudraCT 2012-004362-17. FINDINGS: Between Dec 6, 2013, and Nov 11, 2016, 406 patients were recruited (203 [50%] assigned to the bevacizumab group and 203 [50%] to the standard chemotherapy group). 130 patients (64%) in the bevacizumab group and 131 (65%) in the standard chemotherapy group had progressed after receiving a last dose of platinum more than 12 months before, and 146 patients (72%) in the bevacizumab group and 147 (72%) in the standard chemotherapy group had progressed after completion of first-line bevacizumab maintenance. 161 participants (79%) progressed in the standard chemotherapy group, as did 143 (70%) in the bevacizumab group. Median progression-free survival was 8·8 months (95% CI 8·4-9·3) in the standard chemotherapy group and 11·8 months (10·8-12·9) in the bevacizumab group (hazard ratio 0·51, 95% CI 0·41-0·65; log-rank p<0·0001). Most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (20 [10%] in the standard chemotherapy group vs 58 (29%) in the bevacizumab group), neutrophil count decrease (81 [41%] vs 80 [40%]), and platelet count decrease (43 [22%] vs 61 [30%]). 68 patients (33%) died in the standard chemotherapy group and 79 (39%) died in the bevacizumab group; two deaths (1%) in the standard chemotherapy group and one death (<1%) in the bevacizumab group were deemed to be treatment-related. INTERPRETATION: Continuing bevacizumab beyond progression combined with chemotherapy in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer improves progression-free survival compared with standard chemotherapy alone and might be considered in clinical practice. FUNDING: Hoffmann-La Roche and Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro.

Neoadjuvant chemoteraphy in unresectable ovarian cancer with olaparib and weekly carboplatin plus paclitaxel: a phase II, open label multicenter study (NUVOLA trial).

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with interval debulking surgery represents an alternative treatment for advanced ovarian cancer. Currently, there are few data about the use of poly adenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase inhibitors in the neoadjuvant setting. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the administration of olaparib in combination with standard chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting can improve tumor response. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: The addition of a poly adenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase inhibitor to standard chemotherapy will achieve a higher response rate in BRCA mutated patients compared with standard chemotherapy TRIAL DESIGN: This is a multicenter, phase II, single arm, open label trial. Eligible patients will receive three cycles of weekly carboplatin plus paclitaxel, and intermittent olaparib administration. Responding patients will undergo an interval debulking surgery with pathological evaluation of response to chemotherapy. MAJOR ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Patients must have histologically confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stages III-IV primary ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancers, high grade serous or endometrioid histology, not suitable for primary cytoreductive surgery with a documented BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline and/or somatic mutation. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: Rate of complete pathological response after three cycles of the experimental chemotherapy regimen. SAMPLE SIZE: A total of 35 patients will be enrolled in the study. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: Expected complete 42 accrual in January 2022, with presentation of results by June 2022. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04261465.

Randomized phase III trial on niraparib-TSR-042 (dostarlimab) versus physician's choice chemotherapy in recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer patients not candidate for platinum retreatment: NItCHE trial (MITO 33).

BACKGROUND: Platinum-resistant ovarian cancer patients have a poor prognosis and few treatment options are available. Preclinical and clinical data demonstrated that the combination of poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors with immune checkpoint inhibitors could have a synergistic antitumor activity in this setting of patients. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: The primary objective is to assess the efficacy of niraparib plus dostarlimab compared with chemotherapy in recurrent ovarian cancer patients not suitable for platinum treatment. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: This trial will assess the hypothesis that niraparib plus dostarlimab therapy is effective to increase overall survival, progression-free survival, and time to first subsequent therapy respect to chemotherapy alone, with an acceptable toxicity profile. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a phase III, multicenter trial, where recurrent ovarian cancer patients not eligible for platinum re-treatment will be randomized 1:1 to receive niraparib plus dostarlimab vs physician's choice chemotherapy until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or withdrawal of patient consent. The study will be performed according to European Network for Gynaecological Oncological Trial groups (ENGOT) model B and patients will be recruited from 40 sites across MITO, CEEGOG, GINECO, HeCOG, MANGO, and NOGGO groups. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Eligible patients must have recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer not eligible for platinum retreatment. Patients who received previous treatment with poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors and/or immune checkpoint inhibitors will be eligible. No more than two prior lines of treatment are allowed. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: The primary endpoint is overall survival defined as the time from the randomization to the date of death by any cause. SAMPLE SIZE: 427 patients will be randomized. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: June 2024 TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04679064.

Cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy and olaparib maintenance in BRCA 1/2 mutated recurrent ovarian cancer: a retrospective MITO group study.

INTRODUCTION: The role of cytoreductive surgery in the poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors era is not fully investigated. We evaluated the impact of surgery performed prior to platinum-based chemotherapy followed by olaparib maintenance in platinum-sensitive BRCA-mutated recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS: This retrospective study included platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer BRCA-mutated patients from 13 Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer and gynecological malignancies centers treated between September 2015 and May 2019. The primary outcomes were progression-free survival and overall survival. Data on post-progression treatment was also assessed. RESULTS: Among 209 patients, 72 patients (34.5%) underwent cytoreductive surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy and olaparib maintenance, while 137 patients (65.5%) underwent chemotherapy treatment alone. After a median follow-up of 37.3 months (95% CI: 33.4 to 40.8), median progression-free survival in the surgery group was not reached, compared with 11 months in patients receiving chemotherapy alone (P<0.001). Median overall survival was nearly double in patients undergoing surgery before chemotherapy (55 vs 28 months, P<0.001). Post-progression therapy was assessed in 127 patients: response rate to chemotherapy was 29.2%, 8.8%, and 9.0% in patients with platinum-free interval >12 months, between 6 and 12 months, and <6 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Cytoreductive surgery performed before platinum therapy and olaparib maintenance was associated with longer progression-free survival and overall survival in BRCA-mutated platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer patients. In accordance with our preliminary results, the response rate to chemotherapy given after progression during olaparib was associated with platinum-free interval.

Thromboembolic events and antithrombotic prophylaxis in advanced ovarian cancer patients treated with bevacizumab: secondary analysis of the phase IV MITO-16A/MaNGO-OV2A trial.

INTRODUCTION: The use of routine antithrombotic prophylaxis is not recommended for advanced cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. The effect of bevacizumab-containing therapy on the risk of thromboembolic events remains controversial in ovarian cancer patients. We report on the incidence of thromboembolic events and the prevalence of antithrombotic therapy in patients enrolled in the single arm, phase IV, MITO-16A/MaNGO-OV2A trial. METHODS: In this trial, potential prognostic factors for patients with previously untreated ovarian cancer receiving a combination of platinum-based chemotherapy and bevacizumab were explored and the final analysis has already been reported. In this secondary analysis, the occurrence of thromboembolic events and the use of antithrombotic therapy were described according to the clinical characteristics of the patients. The prognostic role of thromboembolic events for progression-free and overall survival were also evaluated. RESULTS: From October 2012 to November 2014, 398 eligible patients were enrolled. 76 patients (19.1%) were receiving some type of anticoagulant or anti-aggregant treatment at baseline. Overall, 24 thromboembolic events were reported (cumulative incidence of 6.0%). The occurrence of thromboembolic events was not associated with baseline patient characteristics and was not modified by the use of antithrombotic prophylaxis (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.18 to 2.0). Occurrence of thromboembolic events was not associated with progression-free survival (HR 1.34, 95% CI 0.83 to 2.15) or overall survival (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.61). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, a 6.0% rate of thromboembolic events was reported during treatment with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy. Thromboembolic events were not associated with the clinical characteristics of the patients or with the use of antithrombotic prophylaxis, nor did they significantly affect the long-term prognosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01706120.

Bevacizumab, carboplatin, and paclitaxel in the first line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer patients: the phase IV MITO-16A/MaNGO-OV2A study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the clinical and biological prognostic factors for advanced ovarian cancer patients receiving first-line treatment with carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab. METHODS: A multicenter, phase IV, single arm trial was performed. Patients with advanced (FIGO (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics) stage IIIB-IV) or recurrent, previously untreated, ovarian cancer received carboplatin (AUC (area under the curve) 5), paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) plus bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) on day 1 for six 3-weekly cycles followed by bevacizumab single agent (15 mg/kg) until progression or unacceptable toxicity up to a maximum of 22 total cycles. Here we report the final analysis on the role of clinical prognostic factors. The study had 80% power with a two-tailed 0.01 α error to detect a 0.60 hazard ratio with a factor expressed in at least 20% of the population. Both progression-free and overall survival were used as endpoints. RESULTS: From October 2012 to November 2014, 398 eligible patients were treated. After a median follow-up of 32.3 months (IQR 24.1-40.4), median progression-free survival was 20.8 months (95% CI 19.1 to 22.0) and median overall survival was 41.1 months (95% CI 39.1 to 43.5). Clinical factors significantly predicting progression-free and overall survival were performance status, stage, and residual disease after primary surgery. Neither baseline blood pressure/antihypertensive treatment nor the development of hypertension during bevacizumab were prognostic. There were two deaths possibly related to treatment, but no unexpected safety signal was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy and safety of bevacizumab in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel and as maintenance were comparable to previous data. Hypertension, either at baseline or developed during treatment, was not prognostic. Performance status, stage, and residual disease after primary surgery remain the most important clinical prognostic factors. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT 2012-003043-29; NCT01706120.

Front-line chemo-immunotherapy with carboplatin-paclitaxel using oregovomab indirect immunization in advanced ovarian cancer: A randomized phase II study.

BACKGROUND: This randomized phase II study tested the hypothesis that schedule dependent chemo-immunotherapy with oregovomab improves progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in optimally resected, Stage III/IV ovarian cancer. METHODS: Patients from both academic centers and private practice in the US and Italy with Stage III/IV optimally cytoreduced ovarian cancer were randomized to standard six cycle IV carboplatin-paclitaxel chemotherapy (CP) versus CP plus four immunizations with oregovomab (CPO). A translational assessment of a cellular immune response was the primary endpoint; PFS and OS were measured as secondary endpoints. FINDINGS: 97 patients at thirteen centers were accrued to the protocol, 47 to CPO and 50 to CP. Technical issues led to inconsistent performance of the primary CA125 ELISPOT leading to unevaluable results. At a median follow up of 42 months, PFS and OS outcomes revealed an unexpectedly large treatment effect for CPO relative to CP alone, with median PFS of 41.8 months (95% C.I.: 21.8 - N.E.) for CPO and 12.2 months (10.4-18.6) for CP (p = 0.0027, HR 0.46, CI 0.28-0.7). For OS, the median for CPO has not yet been reached (NE) (45.2-NE) and for CP was 43.2 months (31.8-NE) (p = 0.043, HR 0.35, CI 0.16-0.74). The oregovomab treatment resulted in no change in toxicity profile from CP. INTERPRETATION: The previously identified potential clinical benefit of IV CP when administered with oregovomab was further refined in this randomized phase II study. Increases of PFS and OS of statistically and clinically significant magnitude were evident in this study of a front line chemo-immunotherapy treatment of ovarian cancer.

Olaparib as maintenance therapy in patients with BRCA 1-2 mutated recurrent platinum sensitive ovarian cancer: Real world data and post progression outcome.

OBJECTIVES: Olaparib is approved as maintenance therapy in patients with BRCA mutated platinum sensitive (PS) recurrent ovarian cancer (OC) after response to last platinum based therapy. Few data are available regarding the use out of the registration trials and on response to further treatments after progression. MATERIALS AD METHODS: In this non interventional, retrospective study, patients treated with olaparib in 13 centers, according to the label, have been collected and analyzed. Primary objectives of the study are to describe effectiveness and safety of olaparib in a real world setting with a focus on post progression treatments and response. RESULTS: 234 patients were analyzed. All patients were BRCA mutated and most of them had germline mutations. Around 50% of the patients received olaparib after 3 or more lines of platinum based chemotherapy achieving a radiologic complete (CR) or partial response. 12.4% patients with stable disease were also included. Median PFS was 14.7 months (95% CI:12.6-18), with statistically longer PFS in patients with normal serum Ca125 at baseline, a CR after last platinum based therapy and that received olaparib after second platinum based therapy. Median OS was not reached. Most frequent G3-G4 toxicity was anaemia (6%) with dose discontinuation and dose reduction in 11 (4.7%) and 49 (20.9%) of cases, respectively. Among 66 patients receiving further treatment after olaparib progression and evaluable for response, ORR was 22.2, 11.1% and 9.5% in patients with Platinum Free interval (PFI) of more than 12 months, between 6 and 12 months and less than 6 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib is effective and safe in real world setting. Data on post-progression treatments seem to suggest cross resistance with chemotherapy and need to be confirmed in larger studies because of the potential importance in clinical practice decisions.

Emerging role of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of ovarian cancer.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, ovarian cancer (OC) treatment has been enriched with many new target therapies, most of all antiangiogenic drugs and PARP inhibitors (PARPis), which have literally changed the natural history of the disease. The impressive results of immunotherapy in other malignancies, mainly melanoma and lung cancer, and the good signals of activity in gynecological neoplasms like cervical and microsatellite instable (MSI-H) endometrial cancer, opened the space to the introduction of immune-stimulatory drugs in ovarian cancer. AREA COVERED: The goal of this article is to summarize the newest evidence on the use of immune check point inhibitors in OC trying to explain why, at present, this strategy has failed to improve clinical outcome and focusing on the possible strategies to overcome treatment failure. EXPERT OPINION: Although numerous trials have been undertaken, only scanty results have been obtained so far with immune check-point inhibitors (ICIs) in OC either when used as single agents or in combination with antiangiogenic therapy and ongoing trials are exploring the association of ICIs with PARPis and other ICIs. A better knowledge of predictive biomarkers of response and mechanisms of immunotherapy resistance, will help in identifying the most appropriate population to treat with ICIs.

Sharing real-world experiences to optimize the management of olaparib toxicities: a practical guidance from an Italian expert panel.

Olaparib is the first poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor approved as maintenance therapy of recurrent ovarian cancer (OC) patients with a BRCA mutation. To achieve the maximum clinical benefit, adherence to olaparib must be persistent. However, in clinical practice, this is challenged by the frequent suboptimal management of toxicities. In view of the expanding use of olaparib also in Italy, physicians must learn how to adequately and promptly manage drug toxicities not to unnecessarily interrupt or reduce the dose. The experts agreed that nausea,vomiting, anemia, and fatigue are the most frequent events experienced by OC patients on olaparib, and that these toxicities usually develop early during treatment, are mainly of grade 1-2 and transient and can be managed with simple non-pharmacological interventions. By sharing their real-world experiences, the panel prepared, for each toxicity, an algorithm organized by grade and besides the procedures indicated in the local label, included supportive care interventions based also on nutritional and lifestyle modifications and psycho-oncology consultation. Moreover, in view of the tablet entry into the Italian market, the full and reduced dosages of capsules and tablets were compared. This practical guidance is intended to be a tool to support especially less-experienced physicians in the management of these complex patients, with the aim to help preventing the worsening of patients' conditions and the unnecessary interruption/reduction of olaparib dosage, which may jeopardize treatment efficacy.

Prognostic role of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in first-line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. A pooled analysis of MITO2 and MITO7 trials.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) has been associated with improved prognosis in several cancer conditions. Contrasting data have been produced in ovarian cancer.