Search

Abstract Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors have been increasingly used in ovarian cancer treatment. However, the real-world safety data of these drugs in Japanese patients are limited. This retrospective study included 181 patients with ovarian cancer who received olaparib or niraparib at two independent hospitals in Japan between May 2018 and December 2022. Clinical information and blood sampling data were collected. Regarding patient backgrounds, the olaparib group had higher proportions of patients with serous carcinoma, BRCA positivity, homologous recombination deficiency, and those receiving maintenance therapy after recurrence treatment than the niraparib group. Regarding toxicity properties, the most common reasons for discontinuation in the olaparib group were anemia, fatigue, and nausea, while the reason in the niraparib was thrombocytopenia. Thrombocytopenia caused by niraparib treatment occurred earlier than anemia caused by olaparib treatment. Patients with a low body mass index or who had undergone several previous treatment regimens were more likely to discontinue treatment within the first 3 months. Although we analyzed blood collection data, predicting treatment interruptions due to blood toxicity was challenging. In this study, we revealed the characteristics of patients and the timing of interruptions for each drug, highlighting the importance of carefully managing adverse effects.

Abstract Background Poly (ADP‐ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have been increasingly used in the treatment of ovarian cancer, with BRCA positivity and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) being common biomarkers used for predicting their efficacy. However, given the limitations of these biomarkers, new ones need to be explored. Methods This retrospective study included 181 ovarian cancer patients who received olaparib or niraparib at two independent hospitals in Japan between May 2018 and December 2022. Clinical information and blood sampling data were collected. Patient characteristics, treatment history, and predictability of treatment duration based on blood data before treatment initiation were examined. Results High‐grade serous carcinoma, BRCA positivity, HRD, and maintenance therapy after recurrence treatment were observed more frequently in the olaparib group than in the niraparib group. The most common reasons for treatment interruption were anemia, fatigue, and nausea in the olaparib group and thrombocytopenia in the niraparib group. Regarding response to olaparib treatment, complete response to the most recent treatment, maintenance therapy after the first chemotherapy, high‐grade serous carcinoma, and germline BRCA positivity were observed significantly more frequently among responders than among non‐responders. Furthermore, neutrophil counts were significantly higher among responders than among non‐responders. Conclusions Inflammation‐related blood data, such as neutrophil count, obtained at the initial pre‐treatment visit might serve as potential predictors for prolonged olaparib treatment. While this study offers valuable insights into potential indicators for prolonged olaparib treatment, it underscores the need for more expansive research to strengthen our understanding of PARP inhibitors and optimize treatment strategies in ovarian cancer.