Search

BACKGROUND: The phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 study (NCT02477644) showed that addition of olaparib to bevacizumab maintenance improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. We evaluated maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab in older patients in PAOLA-1. METHODS: Baseline clinical and molecular data, and PFS, were compared between older (aged ≥65 years) and younger patients (

OBJECTIVES: Adding maintenance olaparib to bevacizumab provided a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer in the randomized, double-blind PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial (NCT02477644). We analyzed PFS by clinical risk and biomarker status. METHODS: Patients received olaparib 300 mg twice daily for up to 24 months plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks for up to 15 months in total, or placebo plus bevacizumab. This post hoc exploratory analysis evaluated PFS in patients classified as higher risk (stage III with upfront surgery and residual disease or neoadjuvant chemotherapy; stage IV) or lower risk (stage III with upfront surgery and no residual disease), and by biomarker status. RESULTS: Of 806 randomized patients, 74% were higher risk and 26% were lower risk. After a median 22.9 months of follow-up, PFS favored olaparib plus bevacizumab versus placebo plus bevacizumab in higher-risk patients (hazard ratio [HR] 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.74) and lower-risk patients (0.46; 0.30-0.72). Olaparib plus bevacizumab provided a substantial PFS benefit versus bevacizumab alone in the homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive subgroup (higher risk: HR 0.39; 95% CI 0.28-0.54 and lower risk: 0.15; 0.07-0.30), with 24-month PFS rates in lower-risk patients of 90% versus 43%, respectively (Kaplan-Meier estimates). CONCLUSIONS: In PAOLA-1, maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab provided a substantial PFS benefit in HRD-positive patients with a reduction of risk of progression or death of 61% in the higher-risk group and of 85% in the lower-risk group compared with bevacizumab alone. ispartof: GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY vol:164 issue:2 pages:254-264 ispartof: location:United States status: published

Background and aims: Pancreatic cancer is highly lethal and often diagnosed at an advanced stage. This cohort study analyzes the impact of care pathways, delays, and socio-spatial determinants on pancreatic cancer patients’ diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. Method: Patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma newly diagnosed at all stages between January and June 2016 in the AuRA French region were included. The influence on survival of delays of care, healthcare centers’ expertise, and socio-spatial determinants was evaluated. Results: Here, 538 patients were included in 76 centers including 116 patients (21.8%) with resectable, 64 (12.0%) borderline-resectable, 147 (27.6%) locally-advanced tumors, and 205 (38.5%) with metastatic disease. A delay between first symptoms and CT scans did not statistically influence overall survival (OS). In resected patients, OS was significantly higher in centers with more than 20 surgeries (HR 20 surgeries/year p = 0.0081). Regarding socio-spatial determinants, patients living in municipalities with greater access to a general practitioner (HR = 1.673, p = 0.0153) or with a population density below 795.1 people/km2 (HR = 1.881, p = 0.0057) were significantly more often resectable. Conclusion: This cohort study supports the pivotal role of general practitioner in cancer care and the importance of the centralization of pancreatic surgery to optimize pancreatic cancer patients’ care and outcomes. However, delays of care did not impact patient survival.

TPS11585 Background: Primary metastatic osteosarcoma (OS) patients are treated with a curative intent following the same principles of non-metastatic OS, while the treatment of recurrent OS is primarily surgical in the case of isolated lung metastases. When complete removal of all metastases cannot be achieved, the prognosis remains poor, with a median Progression-Free Survival (PFS) between 3 to 8 months, and therefore there is a clinical need to reduce the risk of progression after the initial treatment sequence. The REGOBONE study reported a significant PFS benefit of regorafenib (REG) compared to placebo (in osteosarcomas: median PFS: 16.4 versus 4.1 weeks) and a manageable safety profile in patients with histologically confirmed HGBS (i.e., osteosarcoma or other bone sarcomas with the exception of Ewing sarcomas, chondrosarcoma and chordoma). Methods: This multicenter trial is ongoing to study the efficacy and safety of maintenance REG in pts > = 16 years old with HGBS, without complete remission but with no progressive disease after standard treatment, either at diagnosis or at relapse. Sixty pts will be randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive either oral REG at a daily dose of 120mg or its matching placebo, continuously for a maximum of 12 months. Randomization is stratified according to the setting of the disease: initial diagnosis versus relapse. The primary objective is to compare the efficacy (PFS) between the 2 arms. The expected 4-month PFS rates are 30% in the control arm and 60% in the REGO arm (HR = 0.42). Fifty-two events will provide 87% power to show significant improvement in PFS, using a 2-sided log-rank test at a 5% level. Secondary endpoints include Overall Response Rate (ORR), Disease Control Rate (DCR), Time to Treatment Failure (TTF), Overall Survival (OS), Quality of Life (QoL), and safety profile. Radiological endpoints will be evaluated using the RECIST 1.1 with tumor assessments every 2 months (first 6 months) and then every 3 months. Translational objectives will identify predictive biomarkers for efficacy of REG as maintenance therapy. Pts of the control arm who experience disease progression may switch to receive open label REG. As of Feb 1st, 2022, 3 patients have been randomized. 14 sites of the French Sarcoma Group will participate. An amendment is being implemented to lower the age limit (12 years old) and to expand tumor types to other HGBS (Ewing sarcomas, chondrosarcomas, Undifferentiated Pleomorphic Sarcomas, Leiomyosarcomas and angiosarcomas). Clinical trial information: NCT04698785.

5560 Background: In the Phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial, maintenance olaparib + bevacizumab (bev) provided a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit vs placebo (pbo) + bev in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer in response to platinum-based chemotherapy. Subgroup analyses revealed a substantial PFS benefit in homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive (including BRCA1/2 mutation) pts, leading to US/EU labels for this combination. Preliminary analyses reported that olaparib did not alter global health-related quality of life (G-HQoL; Ray-Coquard I et al. NEJM 2019). We analyzed HQoL by domains and molecular subgroups and explored the impact of disease progression (DP) on HQoL in the 1L setting. Methods: Eligible pts with newly diagnosed advanced (FIGO stage III–IV) HGOC were randomized 2:1 to maintenance olaparib + bev or pbo + bev. Pts completed European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OV28 HQoL questionnaires at baseline and every 12 weeks for 2 years’ follow-up, irrespective of DP. The minimal important difference for clinically relevant change was fixed at 10 points. Longitudinal data were analyzed by mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) and time until definitive deterioration (TUDD). Analyses were in the intent-to-treat population and HRD-positive subgroup. HQoL analyses at DP (± 60 days) were explored. Results: 806 pts were randomized to olaparib + bev (n=537) or pbo + bev (n=269). 465 pts had DP over 2 years’ follow-up. Compliance to HQoL questionnaires was high at baseline (95%) and over time (>70%). MMRM models by HQoL domain did not reveal a clinically relevant difference between treatment arms over time. TUDD of G-HQoL did not differ between arms (hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72–1.07). In the HRD-positive subgroup (n=372), we observed no difference by HQoL domain between treatment arms. Interestingly, TUDD of G-HQoL was statistically significantly in favor of olaparib + bev compared with pbo + bev (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52–0.93). We also observed a clinically significant deterioration in emotional (mean change −12.30 points, 95% CI −16.46 to −8.13) and social (−11.17 points, 95% CI −16.21 to −6.12) functioning in both treatment arms at DP, among 103 pts with HQoL questionnaires at DP. Conclusions: The substantial PFS benefit provided by maintenance olaparib + bev in the newly diagnosed setting was achieved without detrimental effect on HQoL domains, even with longer TUDD of G-HQoL in the HRD-positive subgroup. Use of an effective maintenance therapy (ie one with a significant PFS benefit) in HGOC patients in the 1L setting is likely to delay the clinically significant deterioration in emotional and social functioning we identified in patients at DP across PAOLA-1 treatments arms. Clinical trial information: NCT02477644.

5562 Background: In the Phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial (NCT02477644), maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab (bev) provided a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit, compared with placebo plus bev, in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer in response after platinum-based chemotherapy (Ray-Coquard et al. NEJM 2019). A subgroup analysis revealed a substantial PFS benefit in HRD-positive (including BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation) pts (median PFS 37.2 vs 17.7 months) leading to US and EU labels for this combination. We analyzed TWiST in PAOLA-1, using several definitions of toxicity (TOX) and by molecular subgroups. Methods: Pts were randomized 2:1 to maintenance olaparib (300 mg bid) plus bev (15 mg/kg, Day 1, q3w) or placebo plus bev, stratified by first-line treatment outcome and tumor BRCAm status. TWiST is defined as PFS minus time with TOX after randomization and before disease progression or censoring for progression, and was a prespecified exploratory endpoint. Definitions of significant symptoms or TOX were explored using the following approaches: 1) all grade ≥2 adverse events (AEs); and 2) all grade ≥2 AEs selected to be correlated to olaparib (fatigue, nausea, vomiting, and anemia). Area under PFS curve was split into TOX:TWIST ratio and compared between the two arms. Results: Between May 7, 2015 and August 31, 2017, 806 eligible pts were randomly assigned to olaparib plus bev (n = 537) or placebo plus bev (n = 269), with a median duration of treatment with olaparib of 17.3 months (range 0.03–33.0) for olaparib plus bev arm and 15.6 months (range 0.07–26.2) for placebo plus bev at data cutoff for primary endpoint analysis. In the Intent-to-treat population, median duration of TWiST for all grade ≥2 AEs for olaparib plus bev vs placebo plus bev arms was 14.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 12.5–16.1) vs 7.7 months (95% CI 5.9–9.1), respectively; and 21.9 months (95% CI 20.2–22.5) vs 16.6 months (95% CI 14.6–18.0) considering only grade ≥2 AEs linked to olaparib. The difference was particularly significant within the HRD-positive subgroup where median duration of TWiST was 24.4 months (95% CI 19.3–not evaluable [NE]) vs 7.4 months (5.8–11.2) for TOX linked to all grade ≥2 AEs, and 36.6 months (95% CI 31.9–NE) vs 17.4 months (15.1–19.4) linked to olaparib AEs only for the olaparib plus bev and placebo plus bev arms, respectively. Conclusions: The substantial PFS benefit provided by maintenance olaparib plus bev vs placebo plus bev in pts with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer was supported by significant TWiST benefit. TWiST analyses, including all grade ≥2 symptoms or toxicity related to treatment, confirmed the clinically meaningful benefit from the combination, notably in the HRD-positive subgroup. Clinical trial information: NCT02477644.