Randomized Trial of Cytoreductive Surgery for Relapsed Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for patients with recurrent ovarian cancer has been mainly based on systemic therapy. The role of secondary cytoreductive surgery is unclear. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with recurrent ovarian cancer who had a first relapse after a platinum-free interval (an interval during which no platinum-based chemotherapy was used) of 6 months or more to undergo secondary cytoreductive surgery and then receive platinum-based chemotherapy or to receive platinum-based chemotherapy alone. Patients were eligible if they presented with a positive Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO) score, defined as an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance-status score of 0 (on a 5-point scale, with higher scores indicating greater disability), ascites of less than 500 ml, and complete resection at initial surgery. A positive AGO score is used to identify patients in whom a complete resection might be achieved. The primary end point was overall survival. We also assessed quality of life and prognostic factors for survival. RESULTS: A total of 407 patients underwent randomization: 206 were assigned to cytoreductive surgery and chemotherapy, and 201 to chemotherapy alone. A complete resection was achieved in 75.5% of the patients in the surgery group who underwent the procedure. The median overall survival was 53.7 months in the surgery group and 46.0 months in the no-surgery group (hazard ratio for death, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.59 to 0.96; P = 0.02). Patients with a complete resection had the most favorable outcome, with a median overall survival of 61.9 months. A benefit from surgery was seen in all analyses in subgroups according to prognostic factors. Quality-of-life measures through 1 year of follow-up did not differ between the two groups, and we observed no perioperative mortality within 30 days after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In women with recurrent ovarian cancer, cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy resulted in longer overall survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by the AGO Study Group and others; DESKTOP III ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01166737.).

The association of histopathologic features after neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy with clinical outcome: Sub-analyses from the randomized double-blinded, placebo-controlled, Phase III IMagyn050/GOG3015/ENGOT-ov39 study.

OBJECTIVE: Histopathologic characteristics after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) may correlate with outcome. This study evaluates histopathologic features after immunotherapy and NACT/bevacizumab, and associated clinical outcomes. METHODS: Evaluable tissue from IMagyn050/GOG3015/ENGOT-ov39 patients from prespecified anatomic sites from interval cytoreductive surgery (ICS) after NACT/bevacizumab plus atezolizumab/placebo underwent central histopathologic scoring and analyzed with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The predefined population had 243 evaluable NACT patients, with 48.1% tumors being PD-L1-positive. No statistically significant differences in PFS (16.9 months vs. 19.2 months, p = 0.21) or OS (41.5 months vs. 45.1 months, p = 0.67) between treatment arms were seen. Substantial residual tumor (RT) (3+) was identified in 26% atezolizumab vs. 24% placebo arms (p = 0.94). Most showed no (1+) necrosis (82% vs. 96%, respectively, p = 0.69), moderate (2+) to severe (3+) fibrosis (71% vs. 75%, respectively, p = 0.82), and extensive (2+) inflammation (53% vs. 47% respectively, p = 0.48). No significant histopathologic differences were identified by tissue site or by arm. Multivariate analyses showed increased risk for progression with moderate and substantial RT (13.6 mon vs. 21.1 mon, hazard ratio 2.0, p < 0.01; 13.6 mon vs. 21.1 mon, HR 1.9, p < 0.01, respectively); but decreased risk for death with extensive inflammation (46.9 mon vs. 36.3 mon, HR 0.65, p = 0.02). Inflammation also correlated with greater likelihood of response to NACT/bevacizumab plus immunotherapy (odds ratio 2.9, p < 0.01). Modeling showed inflammation as a consistent but modest predictor for OS. CONCLUSIONS: Detailed histologic assessment of ICS specimens appear to identify characteristics, such as inflammation and residual tumor, that may provide insight to certain clinical outcomes. Future work potentially leveraging emerging tools may provide further insight into outcomes.

A phase II, multicenter, open-label study of abemaciclib and letrozole in patients with estrogen receptor-positive rare ovarian cancer: ALEPRO trial.

BACKGROUND: Low-grade serous and endometrioid ovarian cancers and adult-type granulosa cell tumors are rare ovarian malignancies that show high estrogen receptor positivity. Recurrences of these subtypes of ovarian cancer are often treated with conventional chemotherapy, although response rates are disappointing. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To determine the overall response rate of the combination therapy of abemaciclib and letrozole in patients with estrogen receptor-positive rare ovarian cancers. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: The combination therapy of abemaciclib and letrozole will provide a clinically meaningful therapeutic benefit, with an overall response rate of >25%. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a phase II, international, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of abemaciclib and letrozole in patients with advanced, recurrent, and/or metastatic estrogen receptor-positive, rare ovarian cancer. The study will follow a tandem two-stage design. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Patients must have histologically confirmed low-grade serous/endometrioid ovarian cancer or adult-type granulosa cell tumor with estrogen receptor positivity on immunohistochemistry. Patients need to have recurrent and measurable disease according to Radiologic Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. A maximum of two prior lines of endocrine therapy are allowed, and patients cannot have previously received a cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor. Patients with platinum-refractory disease are not allowed in any stage of the study. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: Investigator-assessed confirmed overall response rate, defined as the proportion of patients with a complete or partial response according to RECIST v1.1. SAMPLE SIZE: 40 to 100 patients will be included, depending on the results of the interim analysis. Patients will be included in Belgium, France and the Netherlands. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: Patient recruitment will be completed by the end of 2025 and reporting of the final study results will be done by the end of 2027. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05872204.

Impact of surgery and chemotherapy in ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors from the multicentric Salomé study including 469 patients. A TMRG and GINECO group study.

OBJECTIVE: Identifying prognostic factors and evaluating the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with sex cord stromal tumors (SCST) is crucial. In this study, we aimed to address these challenges. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of data from 13 centers of the French Rare malignant gynecological tumors (TMRG) network. We enrolled 469 adult patients with malignant SCST who received upfront surgery since 2011 to July 2015. RESULTS: 75% were diagnosed with adult Granulosa cell tumors, and 23% had another subtype. With a median follow-up of 6.4 years, 154 patients (33%) developed a first recurrence, 82 (17%) two recurrences, and 49 (10%) three recurrences. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered in 14.7% of patients at initial diagnosis. In relapse, perioperative chemotherapy was administered in 58.5%, 28.2%, and 23.8% of patients, respectively, in the first, second, and third relapse. In the first-line therapy, age under 70 years, FIGO stage, and complete surgery were associated with longer progression-free survival (PFS). Chemotherapy had no impact on PFS in early-stage disease (FIGO I-II). The PFS was similar using BEP or other chemotherapy regimens (HR 0.88 [0.43; 1.81]) in the first-line therapy. In case of recurrence, PFS was statistically prolonged by complete surgery, but perioperative chemotherapy use did not impact PFS. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy use did not impact survival in the first-line or relapse setting in SCST. Only surgery and its quality demonstrated benefit for PFS in ovarian SCST in any lines of treatment.

Evaluation of Scores to Reflect Toxicity Impact on Quality of Life of Patients With Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer: AURELIA Substudy.

BACKGROUND: Current standards for toxicity reporting do not fully capture the impact of adverse events (AEs) on patients' quality of life (QoL). This study aimed to evaluate the association between toxicity and QoL by using toxicity scores that take into account CTCAE grade grouping and AE duration and cumulation. METHODS: Analyses were performed on the AURELIA trial dataset, including 361 patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer treated with chemotherapy alone or with bevacizumab. Global and physical functioning QoL were issued from the EORTC QoL Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30), collected at baseline and 8/9 and 16/18 weeks after treatment initiation. Four toxicity scores were computed: the total number of AEs, multiplied by their grade and not, and the cumulative duration of AEs, weighted by their grade and not. Each score included all AEs or only grade 3/4 nonlaboratory or treatment-related AEs. The relationship between toxicity scores and QoL was assessed through linear mixed regression. RESULTS: We found that 171 (47.5%) and 43 (11.9%) patients experienced at least one grade 3 or 4 AE, respectively, whereas 113 (31.4%) experienced grade 2 AEs only. Physical QoL was negatively associated with all toxicity scores when computed with all grades of AEs (all P<.01), with a weaker association when treatment-related AEs were considered. Global QoL was negatively associated with toxicity scores computed with nonlaboratory all-grade AEs only (ß, -3.42 to -3.13; all P<.01). Degrees of association were lower when considering the AE duration. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, toxicity scores based on the cumulative number of AEs, modulated or not by grade, were more effective at predicting QoL changes than those based on AE duration. Toxicity impact on QoL was better reflected when grade 2 AEs were taken into account together with grade 3/4 AEs, whatever their treatment imputability, and when laboratory AEs were excluded.

Low probability of disease cure in advanced ovarian carcinomas before the PARP inhibitor era.

BACKGROUND: In ovarian carcinomas, the likelihood of disease cure following first-line medical-surgical treatment has been poorly addressed. The objective was to: (a) assess the likelihood of long-term disease-free (LDF) > 5 years; and (b) evaluate the impact of the tumour primary chemosensitivity (assessed with the modelled CA-125 KELIM) with respect to disease stage, and completeness of debulking surgery. METHODS: Three Phase III trial datasets (AGO-OVAR 9; AGO-OVAR 7; ICON-7) were retrospectively investigated in an "adjuvant dataset", whilst the Netherlands Cancer Registry was used in a "neoadjuvant dataset". The prognostic values of KELIM, disease stage and surgery outcomes regarding the likelihood of LDF were assessed using univariate/multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Of 2029 patients in the "adjuvant dataset", 82 (4.0%) experienced LDF (Stage I-II: 25.9%; III: 2.1%; IV: 0.5%). Multivariate analyses identified disease stage and KELIM (OR = 4.24) as independent prognostic factors. Among the 1452 patients from the "neoadjuvant dataset", 36 (2.4%) had LDF (Stage II-III: 3.3%; IV: 1.3%). Using multivariate tests, high-risk diseases (OR = 0.18) and KELIM (OR = 2.96) were significant. CONCLUSION: The probability of LDF > 5 years after first-line treatment in 3486 patients (<4%) was lower than thought. These data could represent a reference for future studies meant to assess progress related to PARP inhibitors.

Olaparib plus Bevacizumab as First-Line Maintenance in Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib has shown significant clinical benefit as maintenance therapy in women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with a BRCA mutation. The effect of combining maintenance olaparib and bevacizumab in patients regardless of BRCA mutation status is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, international phase 3 trial. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed, advanced, high-grade ovarian cancer and were having a response after first-line platinum-taxane chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Patients were eligible regardless of surgical outcome or BRCA mutation status. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) or placebo for up to 24 months; all the patients received bevacizumab at a dose of 15 mg per kilogram of body weight every 3 weeks for up to 15 months in total. The primary end point was the time from randomization until investigator-assessed disease progression or death. RESULTS: Of the 806 patients who underwent randomization, 537 were assigned to receive olaparib and 269 to receive placebo. After a median follow-up of 22.9 months, the median progression-free survival was 22.1 months with olaparib plus bevacizumab and 16.6 months with placebo plus bevacizumab (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49 to 0.72; P<0.001). The hazard ratio (olaparib group vs. placebo group) for disease progression or death was 0.33 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.45) in patients with tumors positive for homologous-recombination deficiency (HRD), including tumors that had BRCA mutations (median progression-free survival, 37.2 vs. 17.7 months), and 0.43 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.66) in patients with HRD-positive tumors that did not have BRCA mutations (median progression-free survival, 28.1 vs. 16.6 months). Adverse events were consistent with the established safety profiles of olaparib and bevacizumab. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced ovarian cancer receiving first-line standard therapy including bevacizumab, the addition of maintenance olaparib provided a significant progression-free survival benefit, which was substantial in patients with HRD-positive tumors, including those without a BRCA mutation. (Funded by ARCAGY Research and others; PAOLA-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02477644.).

Efficacy of niraparib by time of surgery and postoperative residual disease status: A post hoc analysis of patients in the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between surgical timing and postoperative residual disease status on the efficacy of niraparib first-line maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer at high risk of recurrence. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of the phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 (NCT02655016) study of niraparib in patients with newly diagnosed primary advanced ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer with a complete/partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Progression-free survival (PFS) was assessed by surgical status (primary debulking surgery [PDS] vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy/interval debulking surgery [NACT/IDS]) and postoperative residual disease status (no visible residual disease [NVRD] vs visible residual disease [VRD]) in the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: In PRIMA (N = 733), 236 (32.2%) patients underwent PDS, and 481 (65.6%) received NACT/IDS before enrollment. Median PFS (niraparib vs placebo) and hazard ratios (95% CI) for progression were similar in PDS (13.7 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.67 [0.47-0.96]) and NACT/IDS (14.2 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.57 [0.44-0.73]) subgroups. In patients who received NACT/IDS and had NVRD (n = 304), the hazard ratio (95% CI) for progression was 0.65 (0.46-0.91). In patients with VRD following PDS (n = 183) or NACT/IDS (n = 149), the hazard ratios (95% CI) for progression were 0.58 (0.39-0.86) and 0.41 (0.27-0.62), respectively. PFS was not evaluable for patients with PDS and NVRD because of sample size (n = 37). CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis, niraparib efficacy was similar across PDS and NACT/IDS subgroups. Patients who had NACT/IDS and VRD had the highest reduction in the risk of progression with niraparib maintenance.

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.

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.

"Chronic fatigue, quality of life and long-term side-effects of chemotherapy in patients treated for non-epithelial ovarian cancer: national case-control protocol study of the GINECO-Vivrovaire rare tumors INCa French network for rare malignant ovarian tumors".

BACKGROUND: Germ cell tumors and sex cord stromal tumors are rare cancers of the ovary. They mainly affect young women and are associated with a high survival rate. The standard treatment mainly involves conservative surgery combined with chemotherapy [bleomycin, etoposide and cisplatin (BEP)] depending on the stage and the prognostic factors, as for testicular cancers. As reported in testicular cancer survivors, chemotherapy may induce sequelae impacting quality of life, which has not yet been evaluated in survivors of germ cell tumors and sex cord stromal tumors. The GINECO-VIVROVAIRE-Rare tumor study is a two-step investigation aiming to assess i) chronic fatigue and quality of life and ii) long-term side-effects of chemotherapy with a focus on cardiovascular and pulmonary disorders. METHODS: Using self-reported questionnaires, chronic fatigue and quality of life are compared between 134 ovarian cancer survivors (cancer-free ≥2 years after treatment) treated with surgery and chemotherapy and 2 control groups (67 ovarian cancer survivors treated with surgery alone and 67 age-matched healthy women). Medical data are collected from patient records. In the second step evaluating the long-term side-effects of chemotherapy, a subgroup of 90 patients treated with chemotherapy and 45 controls undergo the following work-up: cardiovascular evaluation (clinical examination, non-invasive cardiovascular tests to explore heart disease, blood tests), pulmonary function testing, audiogram, metabolic and hormonal blood tests. Costs of sequelae will be also assessed. Patients are selected from the registry of the INCa French Network for Rare Malignant Ovarian Tumors, and healthy women by the 'Seintinelles' connected network (collaborative research platform). DISCUSSION: This study will provide important data on the potential long-term physical side-effects of chemotherapy in survivors of Germ Cell Tumors (GCT) and Sex Cord Stromal Tumors (SCST), especially cardiovascular and pulmonary disorders, and neurotoxicity. The identification of long-term side-effects can contribute to adjusting the treatment of ovarian GCT or SCST patients and to managing follow-up with adapted recommendations regarding practices and chemotherapy regimens, in order to reduce toxicity while maintaining efficacy. Based on the results, intervention strategies could be proposed to improve the management of these patients during their treatment and in the long term. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov : 03418844 , on 1 February 2018. This trial was registered on 25 October 2017 under the unique European identification number (ID-RCB): 2017-A03028-45. Recruitment Status: Recruiting. PROTOCOL VERSION: Version n° 4.2 dated from Feb 19, 2021. TRIAL SPONSOR: Centre François Baclesse, 3 avenue du Général Harris, F-14076 Caen cedex 05, France.

Phase II study of the safety and efficacy of the anti-PD-1 antibody balstilimab in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic cervical cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This phase II clinical trial evaluated the safety and antitumor activity of balstilimab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in patients with previously-treated, recurrent/metastatic cervical cancer. METHODS: Eligible patients were 18 years or older with recurrent and/or metastatic cervical cancer and who had relapsed after a prior platinum-based treatment regimen for advanced disease. Balstilimab was administered intravenously at 3 mg/kg once every two weeks, for up to 24 months. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR, RECIST v1.1) as assessed by an independent review committee. RESULTS: At data cutoff, 161 women (median age, 53 years [range 25-81]) were enrolled and treated with balstilimab. Of these, 140 had measurable disease at baseline and one prior line of platinum-based therapy in the metastatic, persistent, or recurrent setting; these patients were included in the efficacy analyses. The ORR was 15% (95% CI, 10.0%-21.8%) and included 5 patients with a complete response and 16 with a partial response. The median duration of response was 15.4 months. In patients with PD-L1-positive tumors the ORR was 20%, however patients with PD-L1-negative tumors also responded to balstilimab (ORR, 7.9%). Responses were not restricted to tumors of squamous cell histology, and an ORR of 12.5% was seen in the subset of patients with cervical adenocarcinoma. The disease control rate was 49.3% (95% CI, 41.1%-57.5%). Immune-mediated enterocolitis (3.1%) and diarrhea (1.9%) were the most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSION: Balstilimab demonstrated meaningful and durable clinical activity, with manageable safety, in patients with previously-treated, recurrent/metastatic cervical cancer.

A phase III, randomized, double blinded trial of platinum based chemotherapy with or without atezolizumab followed by niraparib maintenance with or without atezolizumab in patients with recurrent ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer and platinum treatment free interval of more than 6 months: ENGOT-Ov41/GEICO 69-O/ANITA Trial.

BACKGROUND: Platinum based chemotherapy is the treatment of choice for ovarian cancer patients with a platinum treatment free interval of >6 months. Niraparib is an oral poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor approved as maintenance therapy after a response to platinum rechallenge, regardless of BRCA status. Atezolizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). A combination of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor and anti-PD-L1/programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) has shown synergy in preclinical models and promising clinical activity. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the addition of atezolizumab to carboplatin based chemotherapy and to subsequent maintenance with niraparib improves progression free survival compared with placebo in patients with recurrent disease and a platinum treatment free interval of >6 months. TRIAL DESIGN: The Atezolizumab and NIraparib Treatment Association (ANITA) trial is a GEICO (Grupo Español de Investigación en Cáncer de Ovario) led phase III, randomized, double-blinded, multicenter European Network for Gynecological Oncological Trials (ENGOT) study. Patients will be randomized to arm A (control arm) consisting of platinum based chemotherapy (investigator's choice) plus a placebo of atezolizumab followed by maintenance niraparib plus a placebo of atezolizumab, or to arm B (experimental arm) consisting of platinum based chemotherapy (investigator's choice) plus atezolizumab followed by maintenance niraparib plus atezolizumab. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria are women aged over 18 years, diagnosed with relapsed high grade serous, endometrioid, or undifferentiated ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma. Patients are eligible if they received no more than two previous lines of chemotherapy, relapsed ≥6 months after the last platinum containing regimen, and have at least one measurable lesion according to the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors, version 1.1. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: The primary endpoint for this study is progression free survival. SAMPLE SIZE: Approximately 414 patients will be recruited and randomized in a 1:1 ratio, with the aim of demonstrating a benefit in progression free survival for the experimental arm with a hazard ratio of O.7, using a two sided alpha of 0.05 and a power of 80%. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: The trial was launched in the fourth quarter of 2018 and is estimated to close in the second quarter of 2021. Mature results for progression free survival are expected to be presented by 2023. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03598270.

Outcome according to residual disease (surgeon's report vs pre-chemotherapy imaging) in patients with bevacizumab-treated ovarian cancer: Analysis of the ROSiA study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The single-arm ROSiA study evaluated frontline bevacizumab for advanced ovarian cancer. We explored how discordant surgically and radiologically assessed postoperative residual disease affects outcomes. METHODS: After debulking surgery, 1021 patients received 4 to 8 cycles of carboplatin-paclitaxel plus bevacizumab until progression or up to 24 months. The primary endpoint was safety; progression-free survival (PFS) was a secondary endpoint. We performed post hoc exploratory PFS analyses in four subgroups: surgeon-reported no visible residuum (NVR) without target lesions; surgeon-reported NVR with target lesions; macroscopic (≤1 cm) residuum; and >1 cm residuum. RESULTS: Surgical and radiological assessments were concordant in 94% of patients; 61 patients (6%; 21% of those with surgeon-reported NVR) had NVR with target lesions. Median PFS was numerically longest in patients with concordant surgically/radiologically assessed NVR (35.5 months), intermediate for surgeon-reported NVR with target lesions (31.8 months), and shortest for visible residuum (27.9 and 20.2 months for visible residuum ≤1 and >1 cm, respectively). One-year and 2-year PFS rates showed the same pattern. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses suggest that prognosis is potentially worse in patients with radiologically detected target lesions despite surgeon-reported NVR compared with concordant NVR by both assessment methods. Postsurgical imaging may add valuable prognostic information.

Patient-reported outcomes and final overall survival results from the randomized phase 3 PENELOPE trial evaluating pertuzumab in low tumor human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) mRNA-expressing platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The PENELOPE trial evaluated pertuzumab added to chemotherapy for biomarker-selected platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. As previously reported, pertuzumab did not statistically significantly improve progression-free survival (primary end point: HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.11), although results in the paclitaxel and gemcitabine cohorts suggested activity. Here, we report final overall survival and patient-reported outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had ovarian carcinoma that progressed during/within 6 months of completing ≥4 platinum cycles, low tumor human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) mRNA expression, and ≤2 prior chemotherapy lines. Investigators selected single-agent topotecan, gemcitabine or weekly paclitaxel before patients were randomized to either placebo or pertuzumab (840→420 mg every 3 weeks), stratified by selected chemotherapy, prior anti-angiogenic therapy, and platinum-free interval. Final overall survival analysis (key secondary end point) was pre-specified after 129 deaths. Patient-reported outcomes (secondary end point) were assessed at baseline and every 9 weeks until disease progression. RESULTS: At database lock (June 9, 2016), 130 (83%) of 156 randomized patients had died. Median follow-up was 27 months in the pertuzumab arm versus 26 months in the control arm. In the intent-to-treat population there was no overall survival difference between treatment arms (stratified HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.32; p=0.60). Results in subgroups defined by stratification factors indicated heterogeneity similar to previous progression-free survival results. Updated safety was similar to previously published results. Compliance with patient-reported outcomes questionnaire completion was >75% for all validated patient-reported outcomes measures. Pertuzumab demonstrated neither beneficial nor detrimental effects on patient-reported outcomes compared with placebo, except for increased diarrhea symptoms. DISCUSSION: Consistent with the primary results, adding pertuzumab to chemotherapy for low tumor HER3 mRNA-expressing platinum-resistant ovarian cancer did not improve overall survival, but showed trends in some cohorts. Except for increased diarrhea symptoms, pertuzumab had no impact on patient-reported outcomes. ClinicalTrials.gov: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01684878.

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

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

Safety and Efficacy of Extended Bevacizumab Therapy in Elderly (≥70 Years) Versus Younger Patients Treated for Newly Diagnosed Ovarian Cancer in the International ROSiA Study.

OBJECTIVE: The single-arm ROSiA study explored an extended duration of frontline bevacizumab-containing therapy for ovarian cancer. Post hoc analyses explored safety and efficacy according to age. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After primary debulking surgery, patients with stage IIB-IV or grade 3 stage I-IIA ovarian cancer received 4-8 cycles of paclitaxel [weekly or every 3 weeks (q3w)], carboplatin AUC 5-6 q3w, and bevacizumab 15 (or 7.5) mg/kg q3w, followed by single-agent bevacizumab until progression or for up to 24 months. The primary end point was safety; progression-free survival (PFS) was a secondary end point. RESULTS: Of 1021 patients treated, 121 (12%) were aged 70 years or older and 44 (4%) were 75 years or older. Compared with younger patients, more patients aged 70 years or older had hypertension at baseline, stage IV disease, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 1 or above. Bevacizumab was continued for more than 15 months in 49% of older versus 53% of younger patients. Older patients experienced higher incidences of all-grade anemia (44% vs 32%), diarrhea (35% vs 25%), and asthenia (22% vs 12%), and grade ≥3 hypertension (41% vs 22%) and thromboembolic events (7% vs 2%) compared with younger patients. Fatal bevacizumab-related adverse events occurred in 1 (0.8%) older versus 5 (0.6%) younger patients. Median PFS was 23.7 (95% confidence interval, 18.6-27.9) versus 25.6 (95% confidence interval, 23.7-28.4) months in patients aged 70 or older versus those younger than 70 years, respectively. CONCLUSION: Bevacizumab-treated patients aged 70 years or older had higher incidences of anemia, low-grade diarrhea, and asthenia, and grade ≥3 hypertension and thromboembolic events than those younger than 70 years, but no other relevant increase in toxicity. Median PFS of approximately 2 years is similar to that in younger patients despite the worse prognosis. Older age should not preclude bevacizumab therapy for ovarian cancer in carefully selected patients aged 70 years or older. Given the higher background hypertension prevalence, elderly patients should be monitored more closely while receiving bevacizumab.

Olaparib tablets as maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation (SOLO2/ENGOT-Ov21): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, has previously shown efficacy in a phase 2 study when given in capsule formulation to all-comer patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed high-grade serous ovarian cancer. We aimed to confirm these findings in patients with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation using a tablet formulation of olaparib. METHODS: This international, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial evaluated olaparib tablet maintenance treatment in platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer patients with a BRCA1/2 mutation who had received at least two lines of previous chemotherapy. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at baseline of 0-1 and histologically confirmed, relapsed, high-grade serous ovarian cancer or high-grade endometrioid cancer, including primary peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to olaparib (300 mg in two 150 mg tablets, twice daily) or matching placebo tablets using an interactive voice and web response system. Randomisation was stratified by response to previous platinum chemotherapy (complete vs partial) and length of platinum-free interval (6-12 months vs ≥12 months) and treatment assignment was masked for patients, those giving the interventions, data collectors, and data analysers. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival and we report the primary analysis from this ongoing study. The efficacy analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population; safety analyses included patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01874353, and is ongoing and no longer recruiting patients. FINDINGS: Between Sept 3, 2013, and Nov 21, 2014, we enrolled 295 eligible patients who were randomly assigned to receive olaparib (n=196) or placebo (n=99). One patient in the olaparib group was randomised in error and did not receive study treatment. Investigator-assessed median progression-free survival was significantly longer with olaparib (19·1 months [95% CI 16·3-25·7]) than with placebo (5·5 months [5·2-5·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·30 [95% CI 0·22-0·41], p<0·0001). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or worse severity were anaemia (38 [19%] of 195 patients in the olaparib group vs two [2%] of 99 patients in the placebo group), fatigue or asthenia (eight [4%] vs two [2%]), and neutropenia (ten [5%] vs four [4%]). Serious adverse events were experienced by 35 (18%) patients in the olaparib group and eight (8%) patients in the placebo group. The most common in the olaparib group were anaemia (seven [4%] patients), abdominal pain (three [2%] patients), and intestinal obstruction (three [2%] patients). The most common in the placebo group were constipation (two [2%] patients) and intestinal obstruction (two [2%] patients). One (1%) patient in the olaparib group had a treatment-related adverse event (acute myeloid leukaemia) with an outcome of death. INTERPRETATION: Olaparib tablet maintenance treatment provided a significant progression-free survival improvement with no detrimental effect on quality of life in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation. Apart from anaemia, toxicities with olaparib were low grade and manageable. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Efficacy and Safety of Bevacizumab-Containing Therapy in Newly Diagnosed Ovarian Cancer: ROSiA Single-Arm Phase 3B Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of extending bevacizumab therapy beyond 15 months in nonprogressive ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multinational prospective single-arm study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01239732), eligible patients had International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IIB to IV or grade 3 stage I to IIA ovarian cancer without clinical signs or symptoms of gastrointestinal obstruction or history of abdominal fistula, gastrointestinal perforation, or intra-abdominal abscess within the preceding 6 months. Prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy was permitted. After debulking surgery, patients received bevacizumab 15 (or 7.5) mg/kg every 3 weeks (q3w) with 4 to 8 cycles of paclitaxel (investigator's choice of 175 mg/m q3w or 80 mg/m weekly) plus carboplatin AUC 5 to 6 q3w. Single-agent bevacizumab was continued until progression or for up to 24 months. The primary end point was safety. RESULTS: Between December 2010 and May 2012, 1021 patients from 35 countries began study treatment. Bevacizumab was administered at 15 mg/kg in 89% of patients and for more than 15 months in 53%. Median follow-up duration was 32 months (range, 1-50 months). The most common all-grade adverse events were hypertension (55% of patients), neutropenia (49%), and alopecia (43%). The most common grade 3 or higher-grade adverse events were neutropenia (27%) and hypertension (25%). Bevacizumab was discontinued because of proteinuria in 5% of patients and hypertension in 3%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 25.5 months (95% confidence interval, 23.7-27.6 months). CONCLUSION: Extended bevacizumab demonstrated increased incidences of proteinuria and hypertension compared with 12 or 15 months of bevacizumab in previous trials, but these rarely led to bevacizumab discontinuation. Median PFS is the longest reported for frontline bevacizumab-containing therapy. The longer bevacizumab duration beyond 15 months in this study may improve PFS without substantially compromising safety.

Pertuzumab Plus Chemotherapy for Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer: Safety Run-in Results of the PENELOPE Trial.

OBJECTIVE: In platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, adding pertuzumab to gemcitabine improved progression-free survival in the subgroup with low tumor HER3 messenger RNA expression. The 2-part PENELOPE trial (NCT01684878) is prospectively investigating pertuzumab plus chemotherapy in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Part 1 evaluated pertuzumab plus either topotecan or paclitaxel. Patients with platinum-refractory or platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer and low HER3 messenger RNA expression (concentration ratio ≤2.81 by central quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction testing on Cobas z480) received intravenous pertuzumab (840 mg loading dose then 420 mg every 3 weeks) with the investigator's choice of topotecan (1.25 mg/m days 1-5 every 3 weeks) or weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was to assess safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Fifty patients were treated in part 1 (22 topotecan; 28 paclitaxel). In both cohorts, disease progression was the most common primary reason for discontinuing pertuzumab, and the most common all-grade adverse events (AEs) were fatigue/asthenia, anemia, and diarrhea. The most common grade ≥3 AEs were anemia (36%), neutropenia (27%), and fatigue/asthenia (18%) for topotecan, and peripheral sensory neuropathy (14%) and anemia (11%) for paclitaxel. Two patients receiving paclitaxel-pertuzumab died from AEs (abdominal infection; unexplained death). Median progression-free survival was 4.1 months (95% confidence interval, 1.9-6.1) with topotecan-pertuzumab and 4.2 months (95% confidence interval, 3.5-6.0) with paclitaxel-pertuzumab. CONCLUSIONS: Based on part 1 tolerability, the Independent Data Monitoring Committee had no objection to PENELOPE proceeding to part 2, a double-blind randomized comparison of chemotherapy (topotecan, paclitaxel, or gemcitabine) plus pertuzumab or placebo.