ESGO-ESMO-ESP consensus conference recommendations on ovarian cancer: pathology and molecular biology and early, advanced and recurrent disease.

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the European Society of Pathology held a consensus conference (CC) on ovarian cancer on 15-16 June 2022 in Valencia, Spain. The CC panel included 44 experts in the management of ovarian cancer and pathology, an ESMO scientific advisor and a methodologist. The aim was to discuss new or contentious topics and develop recommendations to improve and harmonise the management of patients with ovarian cancer. Eighteen questions were identified for discussion under four main topics: (i) pathology and molecular biology, (ii) early-stage disease and pelvic mass in pregnancy, (iii) advanced stage (including older/frail patients) and (iv) recurrent disease. The panel was divided into four working groups (WGs) to each address questions relating to one of the four topics outlined above, based on their expertise. Relevant scientific literature was reviewed in advance. Recommendations were developed by the WGs and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment before voting. This manuscript focuses on the recommendation statements that reached a consensus, their voting results and a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation.

Effectiveness and safety of menopause treatments: pitfalls of available evidence and future research need.

By 2050 more than 1.6 billion women worldwide will be of post-reproductive age, with >75% reporting severe menopausal symptoms. The last few years saw a gradual uplift in public awareness reaffirming the health needs of women with menopause. Still, effective translation of available evidence on menopause treatments is hindered by several methodological limitations and poor research conduct. We argue that a paradigm shift is required in menopause research to address the remaining knowledge gap and guide safe evidence-based care provision. A critical misconception across studies on menopause is the assumption that women represent a homogeneous group who respond similarly to a particular therapy irrespective of their exposure and individual risk factors. We highlight potential solutions to optimize the quality of future research in menopause including adopting robust trial methodology, standardize outcome reporting to capture quality-of-life measures, and improve lay patient and public involvement in future research.

OVPSYCH2: A randomized controlled trial of psychological support versus standard of care following chemotherapy for ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Fear of disease progression (FOP) is a rational concern for women with Ovarian Cancer (OC) and depression is also common. To date there have been no randomized trials assessing the impact of psychological intervention on depression and FOP in this patient group. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with primary or recurrent OC who had recently completed chemotherapy were eligible if they scored between 5 and 19 on the PHQ-9 depression and were randomized 1:1 to Intervention (3 standardized CBT-based sessions in the 6-12 weeks post-chemotherapy) or Control (standard of care). PHQ-9, FOP-Q-SF, EORTC QLQ C30 and OV28 questionnaires were then completed every 3 months for up to 2 years. The primary endpoint was change in PHQ-9 at 3 months. Secondary endpoints were change in other scores at 3 months and all scores at later timepoints. RESULTS: 182 patients registered; 107 were randomized; 54 to Intervention and 53 to Control; mean age 59 years; 75 (70%) had completed chemotherapy for primary and 32 (30%) for relapsed OC and 67 patients completed both baseline and 3-month questionnaires. Improvement in PHQ-9 was observed for patients in both study arms at three months compared to baseline but there was no significant difference in change between Intervention and Control. A significant improvement on FOP-Q-SF scores was seen in the Intervention arm, whereas for those in the Control arm FOP-Q-SF scores deteriorated at 3 months (intervention effect = -4.4 (-7.57, -1.22), p-value = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: CBT-based psychological support provided after chemotherapy did not significantly alter the spontaneously improving trajectory of depression scores at three months but caused a significant improvement in FOP. Our findings call for the routine implementation of FOP support for ovarian cancer patients.

A phase II randomised, placebo-controlled trial of low dose (metronomic) cyclophosphamide and nintedanib (BIBF1120) in advanced ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the safety and efficacy of a combination of the oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor, nintedanib (BIBF 1120) with oral cyclophosphamide in patients with relapsed ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with relapsed ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer received oral cyclophosphamide (100 mg o.d.) and were randomised (1,1) to also have either oral nintedanib or placebo. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression free survival (PFS), response rate, toxicity, and quality of life. RESULTS: 117 patients were randomised, 3 did not start trial treatment, median age 64 years. Forty-five (39%) had received ≥5 lines chemotherapy. 30% had received prior bevacizumab. The median OS was 6.8 (nintedanib) versus 6.4 (placebo) months (hazard ratio 1.08; 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.62; P = 0.72). The 6-month PFS rate was 29.6% versus 22.8% (P = 0.57). Grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 64% (nintedanib) versus 54% (placebo) of patients (P = 0.28); the most frequent G3/4 toxicities were lymphopenia (18.6% nintedanib versus 16.4% placebo), diarrhoea (13.6% versus 0%), neutropenia (11.9% versus 0%), fatigue (10.2% versus 9.1%), and vomiting (10.2% versus 7.3%). Patients who had received prior bevacizumab treatment had 52 days less time on treatment (P < 0.01). 26 patients (23%) took oral cyclophosphamide for ≥6 months. There were no differences in quality of life between treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest reported cohort of patients with relapsed ovarian cancer treated with oral cyclophosphamide. Nintedanib did not improve outcomes when added to oral cyclophosphamide. Although not significant, more patients than expected remained on treatment for ≥6 months. This may reflect a higher proportion of patients with more indolent disease or the higher dose of cyclophosphamide used. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.govNCT01610869.

An Adaptive Study to Determine the Optimal Dose of the Tablet Formulation of the PARP Inhibitor Olaparib.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib is poorly soluble, requiring advanced drug delivery technologies for adequate bioavailability. Sixteen capsules/day are required for the approved 400 mg twice-daily dose; a tablet formulation was developed to reduce pill burden. This clinical trial evaluated the optimal dose and administration schedule of the tablet formulation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two stages of sequentially enrolled cohorts: stage 1, pharmacokinetic properties of tablet and capsule formulations were compared in patients with advanced solid tumours; stage 2, tablet dose escalation with expansion cohorts at doses/schedules of interest in patients with solid tumours and BRCAm breast/ovarian cancers. RESULTS: Olaparib 200 mg tablets displayed similar Cmax,ss, but lower AUCss and Cmin,ss than 400 mg capsules. Following multiple dosing, steady-state exposure with tablets ≥300 mg matched or exceeded that of 400 mg capsules. After dose escalation, while 400 mg twice daily was the tablet maximum tolerated dose based on haematological toxicity, 65 % of patients in the randomized expansion phase eventually required dose reduction to 300 mg. Intermittent tablet administration did not significantly improve tolerability. Tumour shrinkage was similar for 300 and 400 mg tablet and 400 mg capsule cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The recommended monotherapy dose of olaparib tablet for Phase III trials was 300 mg twice daily, simplifying drug administration from 16 capsules to four tablets per day. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT00777582 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Chemotherapy versus palliative care in non-small cell lung cancer.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the world's leading cause of cancer death and about 75% of all patients have advanced disease incurable with localized treatments (surgery and radiotherapy) alone. The aims of therapy in these are palliation of symptoms and extension of life. A substantial body of evidence has emerged in the last 15 years which shows that cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy prolongs life in advanced NSCLC. This evidence, which was well summarized in a major meta-analysis published in 1995, indicated that the degree of impact on survival is modest. Hence the balance between survival benefit and treatment-related toxicity is crucial in all considerations of chemotherapy in this disease. More recently this balance has been altered by considerable progress in the reduction of treatment-related toxicity and by documentation of lung cancer symptom palliation by effective chemotherapy. In 1999 a randomized trial of mitomycin, ifosfamide and cisplatin versus palliative care in 351 patients demonstrated a significant survival advantage for those receiving chemotherapy, which did not compromise their quality of life. This review looks forward to further progress employing newer agents both as first- and second-line chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC.