21-gene expression assay and clinical outcomes of premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

The prognostic role of the recurrence score (RS) based on the 21-gene expression assay in premenopausal women is not well delineated, and we investigated the association of outcomes and the RS in premenopausal patients who had 21-gene expression assay at Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea, between June 2005 and July 2018. Invasive breast cancer-free survival (IBCFS) by STEEP version 2.0 was compared according to the RS and clinical risk factors. A total of 554 patients were included in our study and 116 patients (20.9%) had age <40 years, 238 patients (43.0%) had luminal B subtype (Ki67 ≥ 20%), and 83 patients (15.0%) had RS >25. All patients received adjuvant tamoxifen ± chemotherapy. Overall, patients with RS >25 showed trend toward worse IBCFS from multivariable analysis (adjusted HR 1.89 [95% CI: 0.95-3.73], P = .069). When comparing outcomes according to age and luminal subtypes, patients with luminal B subtype and age <40 years (n = 60) showed significantly worse outcomes compared to the others (luminal A or luminal B + age ≥40 years, n = 494; adjusted HR 2.95 [95% CI: 1.49-5.82], log-rank P < .001). Among patients with luminal B subtype and age <40 years, there was no significant association observed between IBCFS and the RS (log-rank P = .51). In conclusion, while RS >25 showed association with poor outcomes in premenopausal women, it may have less prognostic significance among those with luminal B subtype and age <40 years.

21-Gene Assay to Inform Chemotherapy Benefit in Node-Positive Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The recurrence score based on the 21-gene breast-cancer assay has been clinically useful in predicting a chemotherapy benefit in hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, axillary lymph-node-negative breast cancer. In women with positive lymph-node disease, the role of the recurrence score with respect to predicting a benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy is unclear. METHODS: In a prospective trial, we randomly assigned women with hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, one to three positive axillary lymph nodes, and a recurrence score of 25 or lower (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a worse prognosis) to endocrine therapy only or to chemotherapy plus endocrine (chemoendocrine) therapy. The primary objective was to determine the effect of chemotherapy on invasive disease-free survival and whether the effect was influenced by the recurrence score. Secondary end points included distant relapse-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 5083 women (33.2% premenopausal and 66.8% postmenopausal) underwent randomization, and 5018 participated in the trial. At the prespecified third interim analysis, the chemotherapy benefit with respect to increasing invasive disease-free survival differed according to menopausal status (P = 0.008 for the comparison of chemotherapy benefit in premenopausal and postmenopausal participants), and separate prespecified analyses were conducted. Among postmenopausal women, invasive disease-free survival at 5 years was 91.9% in the endocrine-only group and 91.3% in the chemoendocrine group, with no chemotherapy benefit (hazard ratio for invasive disease recurrence, new primary cancer [breast cancer or another type], or death, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.26; P = 0.89). Among premenopausal women, invasive disease-free survival at 5 years was 89.0% with endocrine-only therapy and 93.9% with chemoendocrine therapy (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.83; P = 0.002), with a similar increase in distant relapse-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.87; P = 0.009). The relative chemotherapy benefit did not increase as the recurrence score increased. CONCLUSIONS: Among premenopausal women with one to three positive lymph nodes and a recurrence score of 25 or lower, those who received chemoendocrine therapy had longer invasive disease-free survival and distant relapse-free survival than those who received endocrine-only therapy, whereas postmenopausal women with similar characteristics did not benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; RxPONDER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01272037.).

Genomic and transcriptomic profiles associated with response to eribulin and nivolumab combination in HER-2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Biomarkers for predicting response to the immunotherapy and chemotherapy combination in breast cancer patients are not established. In this study, we report exploratory genomic and transcriptomic analyses of pretreatment tumor tissues from patients enrolled in phase II clinical trial of a combination of eribulin and nivolumab for HER-2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC) (KORNELIA trial, NCT04061863). METHODS: We analyzed associations between tumor molecular profiles based on genomic (n = 76) and transcriptomic data (n = 58) and therapeutic efficacy. Patients who achieved progression-free survival (PFS) ≥ 6 months were defined as PFS6-responders and PFS6-nonresponders otherwise. FINDINGS: Analyses on tumor mutation burden (TMB) showed a tendency toward a favorable effect on efficacy, while several analyses related to homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) indicated a potentially negative impact on efficacy. Patients harboring TP53 mutations showed significantly poor PFS6 rate and PFS, which correlated with the enrichment of cell cycle-related signatures in PFS6-nonresponders. High antigen presentation gene set enrichment scores (≥ median) were significantly associated with longer PFS. Naïve B-cell and plasma cell proportions were considerably higher in long responders (≥ 18 months). INTERPRETATION: Genomic features including TMB, HRD, and TP53 mutations and transcriptomic features related to immune cell profiles and cell cycle may distinguish responders. Our findings provide insights for further exploring the combination regimen and its biomarkers in these tumors.

TROPION-Breast01: Datopotamab deruxtecan vs chemotherapy in pre-treated inoperable or metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer.

Improving the prognosis for patients with metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer remains an unmet need. Patients with tumors that have progressed on endocrine therapy and/or are not eligible for endocrine therapy had limited treatment options beyond chemotherapy. Antibody-drug conjugates are a novel and promising treatment class in this setting. Datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) consists of a TROP2-directed humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody attached via a serum-stable cleavable linker to a topoisomerase I inhibitor payload. TROPION-Breast01 is an ongoing phase III study that is evaluating the efficacy and safety of Dato-DXd compared with investigator's choice of standard-of-care chemotherapy in patients with inoperable or metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer who have received one or two prior lines of systemic chemotherapy in the inoperable or metastatic setting. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05104866 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Antibody-drug conjugates are a type of drug with two parts: an antibody that directs the drug to the cancer cells and a cancer-cell killing toxic payload. By binding to cancer cells before releasing the payload, treatment is directed to the site of action so there are fewer side effects in the rest of the body. Datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) is an antibody-drug conjugates made up of datopotamab (antibody) and DXd (payload) which are joined together via a stable linker. Datopotamab binds to a protein found on cancer cells called TROP2; it then goes inside and releases the DXd payload to kill the tumor cells. DXd may leak out to surrounding cancer cells and kill those as well. The TROPION-Breast01 study is comparing Dato-DXd with standard-of-care chemotherapy. Around 700 patients will take part, who have: Tumors that cannot be surgically removed. Tumors that are hormone receptor-positive and do not have HER2 overexpression. Had one or two lines of previous chemotherapy (after the tumor could not be surgically removed, or had spread). Had tumor growth despite hormonal therapy or are ineligible for hormonal therapy. Patients who meet the entry criteria will be randomly assigned to a treatment group in equal numbers to either Dato-DXd or an appropriate chemotherapy, out of four options chosen by the treating doctor. At the end of the study, researchers will look at whether the patients who receive Dato-DXd live longer without their breast cancer getting worse, compared with patients who receive chemotherapy. This study is also looking at how the treatment affects patients' quality of life.

Randomized phase III trial of a neoadjuvant regimen of four cycles of adriamycin plus cyclophosphamide followed by four cycles of docetaxel (AC4-D4) versus a shorter treatment of three cycles of FEC followed by three cycles of docetaxel (FEC3-D3) in node-positive breast cancer (Neo-shorter; NCT02001506).

PURPOSE: To determine whether six cycles of FEC3-D3 has a comparable efficacy to eight of AC4-D4. METHODS: The enrolled patients (pts) were clinically diagnosed with stage II or III breast cancer. The primary endpoint was a pathologic complete response (pCR), and the secondary endpoints were 3 year disease-free survival (3Y DFS), toxicities, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We calculated that 252 pts were needed in each treatment group to enable the detection of non-inferiority (non-inferiority margin of 10%). RESULTS: In terms of ITT analysis, 248 pts were finally enrolled. The 218 pts who completed the surgery were included in the current analysis. The baseline characteristics of these subjects were well balanced between the two arms. By ITT analysis, pCR was achieved in 15/121 (12.4%) pts in the FEC3-D3 arm and 18/126 (14.3%) in the AC4-D4 arm. With a median follow up of 64.1 months, the 3Y DFS was comparable between the two arms (75.8% in FEC3-D3 vs. 75.6% in AC4-D4). The most common adverse event (AE) was Grade 3/4 neutropenia, which arose in 27/126 (21.4%) AC4-D4 arm pts vs 23/121 (19.0%) FEC3-D3 arm cases. The primary HRQoL domains were similar between the two groups (FACT-B scores at baseline, P = 0.35; at the midpoint of NACT, P = 0.20; at the completion of NACT, P = 0.44). CONCLUSION: Six cycles of FEC3-D3 could be an alternative to eight of AC4-D4. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02001506. Registered December 5,2013. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02001506.

TROPION-Breast02: Datopotamab deruxtecan for locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

Despite recent treatment advances, the prognosis for patients with locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) remains poor. The antibody-drug conjugate datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) is composed of a humanized anti-TROP2 IgG1 monoclonal antibody linked to a topoisomerase I inhibitor payload via a stable, cleavable linker. The phase III TROPION-Breast02 trial in patients previously untreated for locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic TNBC, who are not candidates for PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors is evaluating efficacy and safety of Dato-DXd versus investigator's choice of chemotherapy (ICC). Approximately 600 patients will be randomized 1:1 to Dato-DXd 6 mg/kg iv. every 3 weeks or ICC (paclitaxel, nab-paclitaxel, carboplatin, capecitabine or eribulin mesylate). Dual primary end points are progression-free survival by blinded independent central review and overall survival.

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a subtype of breast cancer that is hard to treat. Tumors lack receptors for estrogen and progesterone, which means that standard endocrine therapy is ineffective, and it does not express HER2, so HER2 therapies are also not appropriate. However, the majority of TNBC tumors do possess a cell surface protein called TROP2 which provides a way of directing treatment inside tumor cells that is more selective than traditional chemotherapy. Datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) is a drug that consists of two parts: datopotamab (an antibody) and DXd (the cancer-cell killing toxic component), which are joined via a stable linker. Datopotamab binds to the TROP2 protein found on TNBC tumors and is taken into the cell. The linker is then broken and releases DXd, which kills the tumor cell. By binding to cancer cells before releasing the payload, treatment is directed to the tumor, minimizing side effects in the rest of the body. The TROPION-Breast02 study aims to discover whether Dato-DXd is more effective than standard-of-care chemotherapy, allowing patients with TNBC to live longer without their breast cancer getting worse. This study is also looking at how Dato-DXd may affect patients' overall functioning and quality of life. TROPION-Breast02 will recruit approximately 600 patients who: Have cancer that has spread from the original site (metastatic), or cancer that returned to the same site (locally recurrent) that cannot be surgically removed Have not received any prior treatment for this stage of cancer Cannot receive an alternative type of anticancer treatment called PD-(L)1 inhibitors Had any length of time between their last treatment with the aim of cure and return of their disease Eligible patients will be randomly assigned to a treatment group in equal numbers to either Dato-DXd or an appropriate chemotherapy (one of five available options, chosen by the treating doctor). Each patient will generally continue to receive their designated treatments if the tumor is controlled by the drug, there are no unacceptable side effects, or the patient chooses to stop treatment. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05374512 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Overall Survival with Ribociclib plus Endocrine Therapy in Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: An earlier analysis of this phase 3 trial showed that the addition of a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor to endocrine therapy provided a greater benefit with regard to progression-free survival than endocrine therapy alone in premenopausal or perimenopausal patients with advanced hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer. Here we report the results of a protocol-specified interim analysis of the key secondary end point of overall survival. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients to receive either ribociclib or placebo in addition to endocrine therapy (goserelin and either a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen). Overall survival was evaluated with the use of a stratified log-rank test and summarized with the use of Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: A total of 672 patients were included in the intention-to-treat population. There were 83 deaths among 335 patients (24.8%) in the ribociclib group and 109 deaths among 337 patients (32.3%) in the placebo group. The addition of ribociclib to endocrine therapy resulted in significantly longer overall survival than endocrine therapy alone. The estimated overall survival at 42 months was 70.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63.5 to 76.0) in the ribociclib group and 46.0% (95% CI, 32.0 to 58.9) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.95; P = 0.00973 by log-rank test). The survival benefit seen in the subgroup of 495 patients who received an aromatase inhibitor was consistent with that in the overall intention-to-treat population (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.98). The percentage of patients who received subsequent antineoplastic therapy was balanced between the groups (68.9% in the ribociclib group and 73.2% in the placebo group). The time from randomization to disease progression during receipt of second-line therapy or to death was also longer in the ribociclib group than in the placebo group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.87). CONCLUSIONS: This trial showed significantly longer overall survival with a CDK4/6 inhibitor plus endocrine therapy than with endocrine therapy alone among patients with advanced hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. No new concerns regarding toxic effects emerged with longer follow-up. (Funded by Novartis; MONALEESA-7 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02278120.).

Noncirrhotic Portal Hypertension after Trastuzumab Emtansine in HER2-positive Breast Cancer as Determined by Deep Learning-measured Spleen Volume at CT.

Background Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) is an antibody-drug conjugate approved for use in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer. Case reports have suggested an association between T-DM1 and portal hypertension. Purpose To evaluate the association of T-DM1 therapy with spleen volume changes and portal hypertension on CT scans and clinical findings compared with lapatinib and capecitabine therapy. Materials and Methods Patients with HER2-positive breast cancer who were administered at least two cycles of T-DM1 or lapatinib and capecitabine (controls) in a tertiary institution from 2001 to 2020 and who underwent CT before initial treatment and at least once during treatment were retrospectively enrolled. Spleen volume changes and the signs of portal hypertension (gastroesophageal varix [GEV], spontaneous portosystemic shunt [SPSS], and ascites) were evaluated at contrast-enhanced CT. Patients were followed until treatment ended or for 2 years after the start of treatment. Spleen volume changes were measured with a deep learning algorithm and evaluated by using a linear mixed model. The incidences of splenomegaly and portal hypertension were compared between the T-DM1 and control groups by using a χ2 test or Fisher exact test. Results The T-DM1 group included 111 patients (mean age, 54 years ± 11 [SD]; 111 women) and the control group included 122 patients (mean age, 50 years ± 9; 121 women). Spleen volume progressively increased with T-DM1 therapy but was constant in the control group (104% ± 5 vs -1% ± 6 at the 33rd treatment cycle, respectively; P < .001). Incidences of splenomegaly (46% [51 of 111] vs 3% [four of 122] of patients; P < .001), GEV (11% [12 of 111] vs 1% [one of 122] of patients; P < .001), and SPSS (27% [30 of 111] vs 1% [one of 122] of patients; P < .001) were higher in the T-DM1 group than in the control group. Conclusion Trastuzumab emtansine therapy was associated with noncirrhotic portal hypertension at CT, with higher incidences of splenomegaly, gastroesophageal varix, and spontaneous portosystemic shunt than those with lapatinib and capecitabine therapy. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection plus chemotherapy in HER2-positive early breast cancer (FeDeriCa): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: A subcutaneous formulation of pertuzumab and trastuzumab with recombinant human hyaluronidase in one ready-to-use, fixed-dose combination vial (pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and hyaluronidase-zzxf) was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on June 29, 2020. We report the primary analysis of the FeDeriCa study, which was designed to assess the pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of the fixed-dose subcutaneous formulation compared to intravenous pertuzumab plus trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer in the neoadjuvant-adjuvant setting. METHODS: FeDeriCa, a randomised, open-label, international, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 study, was done across 106 sites in 19 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, HER2-positive, operable, locally advanced, or inflammatory stage II-IIIC breast cancer, and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 55% or more were randomly assigned (1:1), using a voice-based or web-based response system, to receive intravenous pertuzumab (840 mg loading dose, followed by 420 mg maintenance doses) plus intravenous trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose, followed by 6 mg/kg maintenance doses) or the fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection (1200 mg pertuzumab plus 600 mg trastuzumab loading dose in 15 mL, followed by 600 mg pertuzumab plus 600 mg trastuzumab maintenance doses in 10 mL), both administered every 3 weeks with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients were stratified by hormone receptor status, clinical stage, and chemotherapy regimen. The investigator selected one of the two protocol-approved standard chemotherapy regimens before randomisation. Four cycles of HER2-targeted therapy were administered concurrently with the taxane. After surgery, patients continued the HER2-targeted therapy to receive an additional 14 cycles (total of 18). The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of the cycle 7 pertuzumab serum trough concentration (Ctrough; ie, cycle 8 predose pertuzumab concentration) within the fixed-dose combination for subcutaneous injection versus intravenous pertuzumab plus trastuzumab in the per-protocol pharmacokinetic population (all enrolled patients who adhered to prespecified criteria for pharmacokinetic assessment). Non-inferiority was concluded if the lower bound of the 90% CI of the geometric mean ratio was 0·8 or higher. The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of study medication, including chemotherapy or HER2-targeted therapy. Enrolment, neoadjuvant therapy, and surgery have been completed; adjuvant treatment and follow-up are ongoing. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03493854. FINDINGS: Between June 14, 2018, and Dec 24, 2018, 252 patients were randomly assigned to the intravenous infusion group and 248 to the fixed-dose combination group. The geometric mean ratio of pertuzumab serum Ctrough subcutaneous to serum Ctrough intravenous was 1·22 (90% CI 1·14-1·31). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events occurring during neoadjuvant treatment with HER2-targeted therapy plus chemotherapy in 5% or more of patients were neutropenia (34 [13%] of 252 patients in the intravenous infusion group vs 35 [14%] of 248 patients in the fixed-dose combination group), decreased neutrophil count (31 [12%] vs 27 [11%]), febrile neutropenia (14 [6%] vs 16 [6%]), diarrhoea (12 [5%] vs 17 [7%]), and decreased white blood cell count (18 [7%] vs nine [4%]). At least one treatment-related serious adverse event was reported in 25 (10%) patients in the intravenous infusion group and 26 (10%) patients in the fixed-dose combination group. One patient in each treatment group had an adverse event that led to death (urosepsis in the intravenous infusion group and acute myocardial infarction in the fixed-dose combination group); neither death was related to HER2-targeted therapy. INTERPRETATION: The study met its primary endpoint: the fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection provides non-inferior cycle 7 pertuzumab serum Ctrough concentrations to intravenous pertuzumab plus trastuzumab in the neoadjuvant setting with comparable total pathological complete response rates, supporting the FDA approval. Safety was similar between treatment groups, and in line with other pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and chemotherapy trials. Follow-up is ongoing for long-term outcomes, including efficacy and long-term safety. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

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

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