Phase II trial of pembrolizumab and epacadostat in recurrent clear cell carcinoma of the ovary: An NRG oncology study GY016.

INTRODUCTION: Early reports of PD-1 inhibition in ovarian clear cell carcinomas (OCCC) demonstrate promising response. We evaluated the combination of pembrolizumab and IDO-1 inhibitor epacadostat in patients with recurrent OCCC. METHODS: This single arm, two-stage, phase 2 trial included those with measurable disease and 1-3 prior regimens. Patients received intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks and oral epacadostat 100 mg twice a day. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR), secondary endpoints were toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The study was powered to detect an absolute 25% increase in response (15% to 40%). RESULTS: Between September 28, 2018 and April 10, 2019, 14 patients enrolled at first stage. Rate of accrual was 2.3 patients per month. Median age was 65 years (44-89), 10 (71.4%) had ≥2 prior regimens. ORR was 21% (95% CI 5-51%) within 7 months of study entry with 3 partial responses, and 4 had stable disease (disease control rate 50%). Median PFS was 4.8 months (95% CI: 1.9-9.6), OS 18.9 months (95% CI: 1.9-NR). Most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were electrolyte abnormalities and gastrointestinal pain, nausea, vomiting, bowel obstruction. In July 2019, the study reached the pre-specified criteria to re-open to second stage; however, the study closed prematurely in February 2021 due to insufficient drug supply. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab and epacadostat demonstrated an ORR of 21% in this small cohort of recurrent OCCC. The rapid rate of accrual highlights the enthusiasm and need for therapeutic studies in patients with OCCC.

Homologous recombination deficiency should be tested for in patients with advanced stage high-grade serous ovarian cancer aged 70 years and over.

OBJECTIVE: Due to limited data on homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) in older patients (≥ 70 years) with advanced stage high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSC), we aimed to determine the rates of HRD at diagnosis in this age group. METHODS: From the Phase 3 trial VELIA the frequency of HRD and BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants (PVs) was compared between younger (< 70 years) and older participants. HRD and somatic(s) BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants (PVs) were determined at diagnosis using Myriad myChoice® CDx and germline(g) BRCA1/2 PVs using Myriad BRACAnalysis CDx®. HRD was defined if a BRCA PV was present, or the genomic instability score (GIS) met threshold (GIS ≥ 33 & ≥ 42 analyzed). RESULTS: Of 1140 participants, 21% were ≥ 70 years. In total, 26% (n = 298) had a BRCA1/2 PV and HRD, 29% (n = 329) were HRD/BRCA wild-type, 33% (n = 372) non-HRD, and 12% HR-status unknown (n = 141). HRD rates were higher in younger participants, 59% (n = 476/802), compared to 40% (n = 78/197) of older participants (GIS ≥ 42) [p < 0.001]; similar rates demonstrated with GIS ≥ 33, 66% vs 48% [p < 0.001]. gBRCA PVs observed in 24% younger vs 8% of older participants (p < 0.001); sBRCA in 8% vs 10% (p = 0.2559), and HRD (GIS ≥ 42) not due to gBRCA was 35% vs 31% (p = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: HRD frequency was similar in participants aged < 70 and ≥ 70 years (35% vs 31%) when the contribution of gBRCA was excluded; rates of sBRCA PVs were also similar (8% v 10%), thus underscoring the importance of HRD and BRCA testing at diagnosis in older patients with advanced HGSC given the therapeutic implications.

Health-related quality of life in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer treated with niraparib vs placebo: Results from the phase 3 randomized PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with ovarian cancer (OC) who received niraparib as first-line maintenance therapy. METHODS: PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 (NCT02655016) enrolled patients with newly diagnosed advanced OC who responded to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomized (2:1) to niraparib or placebo once daily in 28-day cycles until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or death. HRQoL was assessed as a prespecified secondary end point using patient-reported responses to the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), the EORTC QLQ Ovarian Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-OV28), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian Symptom Index (FOSI), and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. Assessments were collected at baseline and every 8 weeks (±7 days) for 56 weeks, beginning on cycle 1/day 1, then every 12 weeks (±7 days) thereafter while the patient received study treatment. RESULTS: Among trial participants (niraparib, n = 487; placebo, n = 246), PRO adherence exceeded 80% for all instruments across all cycles. Patients reported no decline over time in HRQoL measured via EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QoL and FOSI overall scores. Scores for abdominal/gastrointestinal symptoms (EORTC QLQ-OV28) and nausea and vomiting, appetite loss, and constipation (EORTC QLQ-C30) were higher (worse symptoms) in niraparib-treated patients than placebo-treated patients; except for constipation, these differences resolved over time. Patients did not self-report any worsening from baseline of fatigue, headache, insomnia, or abdominal pain on questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some early, largely transient increases in gastrointestinal symptoms, patients with OC treated with niraparib first-line maintenance therapy reported no worsening in overall HRQoL.

Lifestyle intervention in ovarian cancer enhanced survival (LIVES) study (NRG/GOG0225): Recruitment, retention and baseline characteristics of a randomized trial of diet and physical activity in ovarian cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVE: The Lifestyle Intervention for oVarian cancer Enhanced Survival (LIVES) is a national study of a combined diet and physical activity intervention for stage II-IV ovarian cancer survival, an under-represented cancer in lifestyle behavioral intervention research. Here, we present the data on recruitment, retention, and baseline demographic, clinical and lifestyle behavior characteristics of the LIVES study participants. METHODS: The LIVES study (NRG Oncology/GOG 0225) is a Phase III diet plus physical activity intervention trial testing the hypothesis that ovarian cancer survivors in the lifestyle intervention will demonstrate better progression-free survival than those in the control condition. Study interventions were delivered via centralized telephone-based health coaching. Baseline descriptive statistics were computed for demographic, clinical, and lifestyle behavior characteristics. RESULTS: The LIVES study exceeded its recruitment goals, enrolling 1205 ovarian cancer survivors from 195 NRG/NCORP-affiliated oncology practices across 49 states from 2012 to 2018. The mean age of enrollees was 59.6 years; the majority (69.4%) with stage III disease; 89% White, 5.5% Hispanic; 64% overweight/obese. Baseline self-reported diet showed a mean daily intake of 6.6 servings of fruit and vegetables, 62.7 fat grams, and 21.7 g of fiber. Physical activity averaged 13.0 MET-hours/week of moderate to vigorous physical activity; 50.9 h/week of sedentary time. Retention rates exceeded 88%. CONCLUSION: The LIVES study demonstrates efficiency in recruiting and retaining ovarian cancer survivors in a 24-month study of diet and physical activity intervention with a primary endpoint of progression free survival that will be reported. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT00719303.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy plus Radiation for Locally Advanced Endometrial Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Stage III or IVA endometrial cancer carries a significant risk of systemic and locoregional recurrence. METHODS: In this randomized phase 3 trial, we tested whether 6 months of platinum-based chemotherapy plus radiation therapy (chemoradiotherapy) is associated with longer relapse-free survival (primary end point) than six cycles of combination chemotherapy alone in patients with stage III or IVA endometrial carcinoma. Secondary end points included overall survival, acute and chronic toxic effects, and quality of life. RESULTS: Of the 813 patients enrolled, 736 were eligible and were included in the analysis of relapse-free survival; of those patients, 707 received the randomly assigned intervention (346 received chemoradiotherapy and 361 received chemotherapy only). The median follow-up period was 47 months. At 60 months, the Kaplan-Meier estimate of the percentage of patients alive and relapse-free was 59% (95% confidence interval [CI], 53 to 65) in the chemoradiotherapy group and 58% (95% CI, 53 to 64) in the chemotherapy-only group (hazard ratio, 0.90; 90% CI, 0.74 to 1.10). Chemoradiotherapy was associated with a lower 5-year incidence of vaginal recurrence (2% vs. 7%; hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.82) and pelvic and paraaortic lymph-node recurrence (11% vs. 20%; hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.66) than chemotherapy alone, but distant recurrence was more common in association with chemoradiotherapy (27% vs. 21%; hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.86). Grade 3, 4, or 5 adverse events were reported in 202 patients (58%) in the chemoradiotherapy group and 227 patients (63%) in the chemotherapy-only group. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy plus radiation was not associated with longer relapse-free survival than chemotherapy alone in patients with stage III or IVA endometrial carcinoma. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00942357.).

Secondary Surgical Cytoreduction for Recurrent Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Secondary surgical cytoreduction in women with platinum-sensitive, recurrent epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian-tube ("ovarian") cancer is widely practiced but has not been evaluated in phase 3 investigation. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with recurrent ovarian cancer who had received one previous therapy, had an interval during which no platinum-based chemotherapy was used (platinum-free interval) of 6 months or more, and had investigator-determined resectable disease (to no macroscopic residual disease) to undergo secondary surgical cytoreduction and then receive platinum-based chemotherapy or to receive platinum-based chemotherapy alone. Adjuvant chemotherapy (paclitaxel-carboplatin or gemcitabine-carboplatin) and use of bevacizumab were at the discretion of the investigator. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 485 patients underwent randomization, 240 to secondary cytoreduction before chemotherapy and 245 to chemotherapy alone. The median follow-up was 48.1 months. Complete gross resection was achieved in 67% of the patients assigned to surgery who underwent the procedure. Platinum-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab maintenance was administered to 84% of the patients overall and was equally distributed between the two groups. The hazard ratio for death (surgery vs. no surgery) was 1.29 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97 to 1.72; P = 0.08), which corresponded to a median overall survival of 50.6 months and 64.7 months, respectively. Adjustment for platinum-free interval and chemotherapy choice did not alter the effect. The hazard ratio for disease progression or death (surgery vs. no surgery) was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.66 to 1.01; median progression-free survival, 18.9 months and 16.2 months, respectively). Surgical morbidity at 30 days was 9%; 1 patient (0.4%) died from postoperative complications. Patient-reported quality of life decreased significantly after surgery but did not differ significantly between the two groups after recovery. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer, secondary surgical cytoreduction followed by chemotherapy did not result in longer overall survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; GOG-0213 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00565851.).

Veliparib with First-Line Chemotherapy and as Maintenance Therapy in Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Data are limited regarding the use of poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, such as veliparib, in combination with chemotherapy followed by maintenance as initial treatment in patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. METHODS: In an international, phase 3, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed the efficacy of veliparib added to first-line induction chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel and continued as maintenance monotherapy in patients with previously untreated stage III or IV high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive chemotherapy plus placebo followed by placebo maintenance (control), chemotherapy plus veliparib followed by placebo maintenance (veliparib combination only), or chemotherapy plus veliparib followed by veliparib maintenance (veliparib throughout). Cytoreductive surgery could be performed before initiation or after 3 cycles of trial treatment. Combination chemotherapy was 6 cycles, and maintenance therapy was 30 additional cycles. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the veliparib-throughout group as compared with the control group, analyzed sequentially in the BRCA-mutation cohort, the cohort with homologous-recombination deficiency (HRD) (which included the BRCA-mutation cohort), and the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 1140 patients underwent randomization. In the BRCA-mutation cohort, the median progression-free survival was 34.7 months in the veliparib-throughout group and 22.0 months in the control group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 0.68; P<0.001); in the HRD cohort, it was 31.9 months and 20.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95 CI, 0.43 to 0.76; P<0.001); and in the intention-to-treat population, it was 23.5 months and 17.3 months (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.83; P<0.001). Veliparib led to a higher incidence of anemia and thrombocytopenia when combined with chemotherapy as well as of nausea and fatigue overall. CONCLUSIONS: Across all trial populations, a regimen of carboplatin, paclitaxel, and veliparib induction therapy followed by veliparib maintenance therapy led to significantly longer progression-free survival than carboplatin plus paclitaxel induction therapy alone. The independent value of adding veliparib during induction therapy without veliparib maintenance was less clear. (Funded by AbbVie; VELIA/GOG-3005 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02470585.).

Patient reported outcomes for cisplatin and radiation followed by carboplatin/paclitaxel versus carboplatin/paclitaxel for locally advanced endometrial carcinoma: An NRG oncology study.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy plus radiation (Cis-RT + CP) did not demonstrate superiority in prolonging relapse-free survival compared to chemotherapy alone in patients with stage III or IVA endometrial carcinoma. The impact of treatment on quality of life (QOL), neurotoxicity (NTX) and psychometric properties of the gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms subscale during treatment and up to 1 year are described herein. METHODS: QOL assessments were scheduled at baseline, 6 weeks (post completion of RT (Cis-RT + CP) or prior to cycle 3 (CP)), then 18 weeks (end of treatment) and 70 weeks (1 year after the end of treatment) after starting treatment. QOL instruments included the FACT-En TOI, FACT/GOG-neurotoxicity (Ntx) subscale (short), and the gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms subscale. RESULTS: At the end of treatment, patients receiving Cis-RT + CP reported a statistically significant decreased QOL when compared to CP. The decline in QOL was reflected in physical well-being, functional well-being, and endometrial cancer specific concerns, but the minimally important differences (MID) were not considered clinically meaningful. Patients in both groups reported increased chemotherapy-induced Ntx symptoms with the CP group having worse scores and reaching peak symptoms at the time of chemotherapy completion. Patients on Cis-RT + CP reported statistically significantly worse GI symptoms after radiation therapy compared to patients on CP, this occurred across assessment intervals, though the MID was not meaningful. Psychometric evaluations indicated that the GI symptom scale is reliable, valid, and responsive to change. CONCLUSIONS: PROs indicate that the chemoradiotherapy group experienced worse HRQoL and GI toxicity compared to patients randomized to chemotherapy alone for locally advanced endometrial cancer though based on the MID, these were not clinically meaningful differences. The GI symptom subscale was a reliable and valid scale that has value for future trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00942357.

Adjuvant Therapy in Node-Positive Endometrial Cancer: A Focus on Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In advanced-stage and high-risk endometrial cancer, adjuvant treatment is the standard of care and typically includes chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy. Debate continues over the optimal use of these two treatment modalities together or separately. This review covers the historical literature leading to the current recommendation for adjuvant chemotherapy, in addition to looking forward to the relatively new field of targeted molecular treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: The review covers recent phase III trials comparing chemotherapy to radiotherapy in high-risk endometrial cancer. Additionally, the era of genomic medicine has a new foothold in endometrial cancer, and the review covers new discoveries on molecular classification and prognostic implications. Fortunately, the majority of endometrial cancer has a good prognosis. For advanced-stage and high-risk histologies, the prognosis can be guarded, with adjuvant treatment improving outcomes. Gynecologic oncologists continue to debate the optimal treatment modality/modalities, a debate which will likely become more robust as the field of molecular treatment in endometrial cancer evolves.

Patient-centred outcomes and effect of disease progression on health status in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation receiving maintenance olaparib or placebo (SOLO1): a randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 SOLO1 trial, maintenance olaparib provided a significant progression-free survival benefit versus placebo in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation in response after platinum-based chemotherapy. We analysed health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and patient-centred outcomes in SOLO1, and the effect of radiological disease progression on health status. METHODS: SOLO1 is a randomised, double-blind, international trial done in 118 centres and 15 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older; had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-1; had newly diagnosed, advanced, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer, primary peritoneal cancer, or fallopian tube cancer with a BRCA mutation; and were in clinical complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to either 300 mg olaparib tablets or placebo twice per day using an interactive voice and web response system and were treated for up to 2 years. Treatment assignment was masked for patients and for clinicians giving the interventions, and those collecting and analysing the data. Randomisation was stratified by response to platinum-based chemotherapy (clinical complete or partial response). HRQOL was a secondary endpoint and the prespecified primary HRQOL endpoint was the change from baseline in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian Cancer Trial Outcome Index (TOI) score for the first 24 months. TOI scores range from 0 to 100 (higher scores indicated better HRQOL), with a clinically meaningful difference defined as a difference of at least 10 points. Prespecified exploratory endpoints were quality-adjusted progression-free survival and time without significant symptoms of toxicity (TWiST). HRQOL endpoints were analysed in all randomly assigned patients. The trial is ongoing but closed to new participants. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01844986. FINDINGS: Between Sept 3, 2013, and March 6, 2015, 1084 patients were enrolled. 693 patients were ineligible, leaving 391 eligible patients who were randomly assigned to olaparib (n=260) or placebo (n=131; one placebo patient withdrew before receiving any study treatment), with a median duration of follow-up of 40·7 months (IQR 34·9-42·9) for olaparib and 41·2 months (32·2-41·6) for placebo. There was no clinically meaningful change in TOI score at 24 months within or between the olaparib and placebo groups (adjusted mean change in score from baseline over 24 months was 0·30 points [95% CI -0·72 to 1·32] in the olaparib group vs 3·30 points [1·84 to 4·76] in the placebo group; between-group difference of -3·00, 95% CI -4·78 to -1·22; p=0·0010). Mean quality-adjusted progression-free survival (olaparib 29·75 months [95% CI 28·20-31·63] vs placebo 17·58 [15·05-20·18]; difference 12·17 months [95% CI 9·07-15·11], p<0·0001) and the mean duration of TWiST (olaparib 33·15 months [95% CI 30·82-35·49] vs placebo 20·24 months [17·36-23·11]; difference 12·92 months [95% CI 9·30-16·54]; p<0·0001) were significantly longer with olaparib than with placebo. INTERPRETATION: The substantial progression-free survival benefit provided by maintenance olaparib in the newly diagnosed setting was achieved with no detrimental effect on patients' HRQOL and was supported by clinically meaningful quality-adjusted progression-free survival and TWiST benefits with maintenance olaparib versus placebo. FUNDING: AstraZeneca and Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Maintenance olaparib for patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation (SOLO1/GOG 3004): 5-year follow-up of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a high unmet need for treatment regimens that increase the chance of long-term remission and possibly cure for women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. In the primary analysis of SOLO1/GOG 3004, the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo in patients with a BRCA mutation; median progression-free survival was not reached. Here, we report an updated, post-hoc analysis of progression-free survival from SOLO1, after 5 years of follow-up. METHODS: SOLO1 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, done across 118 centres in 15 countries, that enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 and with BRCA-mutated, newly diagnosed, advanced, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer with a complete or partial clinical response after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) via a web-based or interactive voice-response system to receive olaparib (300 mg twice daily) or placebo tablets orally as maintenance monotherapy for up to 2 years; randomisation was by blocks and was stratified according to clinical response after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients, treatment providers, and data assessors were masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Efficacy is reported in the intention-to-treat population and safety in patients who received at least one dose of treatment. The data cutoff for this updated, post-hoc analysis was March 5, 2020. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01844986) and is ongoing but closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Sept 3, 2013, and March 6, 2015, 260 patients were randomly assigned to olaparib and 131 to placebo. The median treatment duration was 24·6 months (IQR 11·2-24·9) in the olaparib group and 13·9 months (8·0-24·8) in the placebo group; median follow-up was 4·8 years (2·8-5·3) in the olaparib group and 5·0 years (2·6-5·3) in the placebo group. In this post-hoc analysis, median progression-free survival was 56·0 months (95% CI 41·9-not reached) with olaparib versus 13·8 months (11·1-18·2) with placebo (hazard ratio 0·33 [95% CI 0·25-0·43]). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were anaemia (57 [22%] of 260 patients receiving olaparib vs two [2%] of 130 receiving placebo) and neutropenia (22 [8%] vs six [5%]), and serious adverse events occurred in 55 (21%) of 260 patients in the olaparib group and 17 (13%) of 130 in the placebo group. No treatment-related adverse events that occurred during study treatment or up to 30 days after discontinuation were reported as leading to death. No additional cases of myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukaemia were reported since the primary data cutoff, including after the 30-day safety follow-up period. INTERPRETATION: For patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation, after, to our knowledge, the longest follow-up for any randomised controlled trial of a PARP inhibitor in this setting, the benefit derived from 2 years' maintenance therapy with olaparib was sustained beyond the end of treatment, extending median progression-free survival past 4·5 years. These results support the use of maintenance olaparib as a standard of care in this setting. FUNDING: AstraZeneca; Merck Sharpe & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

Maintenance Olaparib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Most women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer have a relapse within 3 years after standard treatment with surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy. The benefit of the oral poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib in relapsed disease has been well established, but the benefit of olaparib as maintenance therapy in newly diagnosed disease is uncertain. METHODS: We conducted an international, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy of olaparib as maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage III or IV) high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer, primary peritoneal cancer, or fallopian-tube cancer (or a combination thereof) with a mutation in BRCA1, BRCA2, or both ( BRCA1/2) who had a complete or partial clinical response after platinum-based chemotherapy. The patients were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) or placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: Of the 391 patients who underwent randomization, 260 were assigned to receive olaparib and 131 to receive placebo. A total of 388 patients had a centrally confirmed germline BRCA1/2 mutation, and 2 patients had a centrally confirmed somatic BRCA1/2 mutation. After a median follow-up of 41 months, the risk of disease progression or death was 70% lower with olaparib than with placebo (Kaplan-Meier estimate of the rate of freedom from disease progression and from death at 3 years, 60% vs. 27%; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.23 to 0.41; P<0.001). Adverse events were consistent with the known toxic effects of olaparib. CONCLUSIONS: The use of maintenance therapy with olaparib provided a substantial benefit with regard to progression-free survival among women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation, with a 70% lower risk of disease progression or death with olaparib than with placebo. (Funded by AstraZeneca and Merck; SOLO1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01844986 .).

Tolerability of maintenance olaparib in newly diagnosed patients with advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation in the randomized phase III SOLO1 trial.

OBJECTIVES: In the phase III SOLO1 trial (NCT01844986), maintenance olaparib provided a substantial progression-free survival benefit in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation who were in response after platinum-based chemotherapy. We analyzed the timing, duration and grade of the most common hematologic and non-hematologic adverse events in SOLO1. METHODS: Eligible patients were randomized to olaparib tablets 300 mg twice daily (N = 260) or placebo (N = 131), with a 2-year treatment cap in most patients. Safety outcomes were analyzed in detail in randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug (olaparib, n = 260; placebo, n = 130). RESULTS: Median time to first onset of the most common hematologic (anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia) and non-hematologic (nausea, fatigue/asthenia, vomiting) adverse events was <3 months in olaparib-treated patients. The first event of anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, nausea and vomiting lasted a median of <2 months and the first event of fatigue/asthenia lasted a median of 3.48 months in the olaparib group. These adverse events were manageable with supportive treatment and/or olaparib dose modification in most patients, with few patients requiring discontinuation of olaparib. Of 162 patients still receiving olaparib at month 24, 64.2% were receiving the recommended starting dose of olaparib 300 mg twice daily. CONCLUSIONS: Maintenance olaparib had a predictable and manageable adverse event profile in the newly diagnosed setting with no new safety signals identified. Adverse events usually occurred early, were largely manageable and led to discontinuation in a minority of patients.

Bevacizumab plus fosbretabulin in recurrent ovarian cancer: Overall survival and exploratory analyses of a randomized phase II NRG oncology/gynecologic oncology group study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the relationship between tumor size and response to combined anti-vascular targeted therapy using the anti-angiogenesis inhibitor, bevacizumab, and the tubulin-binding vascular disrupting agent, fosbretabulin. METHODS: An exploratory, post-hoc analysis of the randomized phase II trial, Gynecologic Oncology Group-0186I, was performed. One hundred and seven patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma, treated with up to 3 prior regimens, were randomized to bevacizumab 15 mg/kg body weight with or without intravenous fosbretabulin 60 mg/m2 body surface area every 21 days until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary analysis favored the combination (HR 0.69; 95% CI, 0.47-1.00; p = .049) [Monk BJ, et al. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:2279-86]. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the treatment effect in various subpopulations. RESULTS: With extended follow-up, the median PFS for bevacizumab plus fosbretabulin was 7.6  months as compared to 4.8  months with bevacizumab alone (HR 0.74; 90% CI, 0.54-1.02). Overall survival was similar in the experimental and control arms (25.2 vs 24.4 mos, respectively, HR 0.85; 90% CI, 0.59-1.22; p = .461). Eighty-one patients had measurable disease and median tumor size was 5.7  cm. In the ≤5.7  cm subgroup, the HR for progression or death was 0.77 (90% CI 0.45-1.31). Patients with tumors >5.7  cm (n = 40) had a HR for progression or death of 0.55; 90% CI, 0.32-0.96; p = .075). CONCLUSIONS: Although no significant survival benefit was observed, the trend showing a reduced HR for progression or death with increasing tumor size when fosbretabulin is added to bevacizumab compared to bevacizumab alone warrants further study.

Niraparib monotherapy for late-line treatment of ovarian cancer (QUADRA): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Late-line treatment options for patients with ovarian cancer are few, with the proportion of patients achieving an overall response typically less than 10%, and median overall survival after third-line therapy of 5-9 months. In this study (QUADRA), we investigated the activity of niraparib monotherapy as the fourth or later line of therapy. METHODS: QUADRA was a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study that evaluated the safety and activity of niraparib in adult patients (≥18 years) with relapsed, high-grade serous (grade 2 or 3) epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer who had been treated with three or more previous chemotherapy regimens. The study was done in the USA and Canada, and 56 sites screened patients (50 sites treated at least one patient). Patients received oral niraparib 300 mg once daily continuously, beginning on day 1 and every cycle (28 days) thereafter until disease progression. The primary objective was the proportion of patients achieving an investigator-assessed confirmed overall response in patients with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive tumours (including patients with BRCA and without BRCA mutations) sensitive to their last platinum-based therapy who had received three or four previous anticancer therapy regimens (primary efficacy population). Efficacy analyses were additionally done in all dosed patients with measurable disease at baseline. FINDINGS: Between April 1, 2015 and Nov 1, 2017, we screened 729 patients for eligibility and enrolled 463 patients, who were initiated on niraparib therapy. At the time of database lock (April 11, 2018), enrolment had closed and the study was ongoing, with 21 patients still on treatment. Patients had received a median of four (IQR 3-5) previous lines of therapy, and the median follow-up for overall survival was 12·2 months (IQR 3·7-22·1). 151 (33%) of 463 patients were resistant and 161 (35%) of 463 patients were refractory to the last administered platinum therapy. 13 (28%) of 47 patients in the primary efficacy population achieved an overall response according to RECIST (95% CI 15·6-42·6; one-sided p=0·00053). The most common drug-related grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (113 [24%] of 463 patients) and thrombocytopenia (95 [21%] of 463 patients). The most common treatment-emergent serious adverse events were small intestinal obstruction (34 [7%] of 463 patients), thrombocytopenia (34 [7%] of 463 patients), and vomiting (27 [6%] of 463 patients). One death due to gastric haemorrhage was considered treatment related. INTERPRETATION: We observed clinically relevant activity of niraparib among women with heavily pretreated ovarian cancer, especially in patients with HRD-positive platinum-sensitive disease, which includes not only patients with a BRCA mutation but also a population with BRCA wild-type disease. We identified no new safety signals. Our data support expansion of the treatment indication for poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors to include patients with HRD-positive ovarian cancer beyond those with BRCA mutations. FUNDING: Tesaro.

Weekly vs. Every-3-Week Paclitaxel and Carboplatin for Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: A dose-dense weekly schedule of paclitaxel (resulting in a greater frequency of drug delivery) plus carboplatin every 3 weeks or the addition of bevacizumab to paclitaxel and carboplatin administered every 3 weeks has shown efficacy in ovarian cancer. We proposed to determine whether dose-dense weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin would prolong progression-free survival as compared with paclitaxel and carboplatin administered every 3 weeks among patients receiving and those not receiving bevacizumab. METHODS: We prospectively stratified patients according to whether they elected to receive bevacizumab and then randomly assigned them to receive either paclitaxel, administered intravenously at a dose of 175 mg per square meter of body-surface area every 3 weeks, plus carboplatin (dose equivalent to an area under the curve [AUC] of 6) for six cycles or paclitaxel, administered weekly at a dose of 80 mg per square meter, plus carboplatin (AUC, 6) for six cycles. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 692 patients were enrolled, 84% of whom opted to receive bevacizumab. In the intention-to-treat analysis, weekly paclitaxel was not associated with longer progression-free survival than paclitaxel administered every 3 weeks (14.7 months and 14.0 months, respectively; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.06; P=0.18). Among patients who did not receive bevacizumab, weekly paclitaxel was associated with progression-free survival that was 3.9 months longer than that observed with paclitaxel administered every 3 weeks (14.2 vs. 10.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.95; P=0.03). However, among patients who received bevacizumab, weekly paclitaxel did not significantly prolong progression-free survival, as compared with paclitaxel administered every 3 weeks (14.9 months and 14.7 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.20; P=0.60). A test for interaction that assessed homogeneity of the treatment effect showed a significant difference between treatment with bevacizumab and without bevacizumab (P=0.047). Patients who received weekly paclitaxel had a higher rate of grade 3 or 4 anemia than did those who received paclitaxel every 3 weeks (36% vs. 16%), as well as a higher rate of grade 2 to 4 sensory neuropathy (26% vs. 18%); however, they had a lower rate of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (72% vs. 83%). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, weekly paclitaxel, as compared with paclitaxel administered every 3 weeks, did not prolong progression-free survival among patients with ovarian cancer. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and Genentech; GOG-0262 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01167712.).

Shaping the standard of care in ovarian cancer management: A review of Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG)/NRG oncology clinical trials of the past twenty years.

The Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG), now part of the NRG Oncology network since the re-alignment of the National Clinical Trials Network in 2014, has played a fundamental role in creating the standard of care for women with ovarian cancer. GOG/NRG Oncology has had a series of achievements that have contributed to how we treat this disease; the approval of bevacizumab in frontline therapy, defining the role of intraperitoneal chemotherapy, optimal chemotherapy for early stage disease and the role of surgery in primary and recurrent disease management. Going forward, GOG/NRG Oncology is positioned to meet the ever changing knowledge that we have about the molecular background of this disease and the expanding repertoire of drugs/interventions in development.

Multiple biomarker algorithms to predict epithelial ovarian cancer in women with a pelvic mass: Can additional makers improve performance?

INTRODUCTION: Management of a woman with a pelvic mass is complicated by difficulty in discriminating malignant from benign disease. Many serum biomarkers have been examined to determine their sensitivity for detecting malignancy. This study was designed to evaluate if the addition of biomarkers to HE4 and CA125, as used in the Risk of Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA), can improve the detection of EOC. METHODS: This was an IRB approved, prospective clinical trial examining serum obtained from women diagnosed with a pelvic mass who subsequently underwent surgery. Serum biomarker levels for CA125, HE4, YKL-40, transthyretin, ApoA1, Beta-2-microglobulin, transferrin, and LPA were measured. Logistic regression analysis was performed for various marker combinations, ROC curves were generated, and the area under the curves (AUCs) were determined. RESULTS: A total of 184 patients met inclusion criteria with a median age of 56 years (Range 20-91). Final pathology revealed there were 103 (56.0%) benign tumors, 4 (2.2%) LMP tumors, 61 EOC (33.1%), 2 (1.1%) non-EOC ovarian cancers, 6 (3.3%) gynecologic cancers with metastasis to the ovary and 8 (4.3%) non-gynecologic cancers with metastasis to the ovary. The combination of HE4 and CA125 (i.e. ROMA) achieved an AUC of 91.2% (95% CI: 86.0-96.4) for the detection of EOC vs benign disease. The combination of CA125, HE4, YKL-40, transthyretin, ApoA1, Beta 2 microglobulin, transferrin, LPA and menopausal status achieved the highest AUC of 94.6% (95% CI: 90.1-99.2) but this combination was not significantly better than the HE4 and CA125 combination alone (p = 0.078). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of select further serum biomarkers to HE4 and CA125 does not add to the performance of the dual marker combination for the detection of ovarian cancer.

GOG 8020/210: Risk stratification of lymph node metastasis, disease progression and survival using single nucleotide polymorphisms in endometrial cancer: An NRG oncology/gynecologic oncology group study.

OBJECTIVES: The ability to stratify a patient's risk of metastasis and survival permits more refined care. A proof of principle study was undertaken to investigate the relationship between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in literature based candidate cancer genes and the risk of nodal metastasis and clinical outcome in endometrioid endometrial cancer (EEC) patients. METHODS: Surgically-staged EEC patients from the Gynecologic Oncology Group or Washington University School of Medicine with germline DNA available were eligible. Fifty-four genes represented by 384 SNPs, were evaluated by Illumina Custom GoldenGate array. Association with lymph node metastases was the primary outcome. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was also evaluated. RESULTS: 361 SNPs with high quality genotype data were evaluated in 337 patients with outcome data. Five SNPs in CXCR2 had an odds ratio (OR) between 0.68 and 0.70 (p-value ≤ 0.025). The A allele rs946486 in ABL had an OR of 1.5 (p-value = 0.01) for metastasis. The G allele in rs7795743 in EGFR had an OR for metastasis of 0.68 (p-value = 0.02) and hazard ratio (HR) for progression of 0.66 (p-value = 0.004). Importantly, no SNP met genome wide significance after adjusting for multiple test correcting and clinical covariates. The A allele in rs2159359 SNP in NME1 and the G allele in rs13222385 in EGFR were associated with worse OS. Both exhibited genome wide significance; rs13222385 remained significant after adjusting for prognostic clinical variables. CONCLUSION: SNPs in cancer genes including rs2159359 SNP in NME1 and rs13222385 in EGFR may stratify risk in EEC and are prioritized for further investigation.

An NRG Oncology/GOG study of molecular classification for risk prediction in endometrioid endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the prognostic significance of a simplified, clinically accessible classification system for endometrioid endometrial cancers combining Lynch syndrome screening and molecular risk stratification. METHODS: Tumors from NRG/GOG GOG210 were evaluated for mismatch repair defects (MSI, MMR IHC, and MLH1 methylation), POLE mutations, and loss of heterozygosity. TP53 was evaluated in a subset of cases. Tumors were assigned to four molecular classes. Relationships between molecular classes and clinicopathologic variables were assessed using contingency tests and Cox proportional methods. RESULTS: Molecular classification was successful for 982 tumors. Based on the NCI consensus MSI panel assessing MSI and loss of heterozygosity combined with POLE testing, 49% of tumors were classified copy number stable (CNS), 39% MMR deficient, 8% copy number altered (CNA) and 4% POLE mutant. Cancer-specific mortality occurred in 5% of patients with CNS tumors; 2.6% with POLE tumors; 7.6% with MMR deficient tumors and 19% with CNA tumors. The CNA group had worse progression-free (HR 2.31, 95%CI 1.53-3.49) and cancer-specific survival (HR 3.95; 95%CI 2.10-7.44). The POLE group had improved outcomes, but the differences were not statistically significant. CNA class remained significant for cancer-specific survival (HR 2.11; 95%CI 1.04-4.26) in multivariable analysis. The CNA molecular class was associated with TP53 mutation and expression status. CONCLUSIONS: A simple molecular classification for endometrioid endometrial cancers that can be easily combined with Lynch syndrome screening provides important prognostic information. These findings support prospective clinical validation and further studies on the predictive value of a simplified molecular classification system.