Search

Purpose: This paper reports the efficacy of the poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib alone and in combination with the antiangiogenesis agent cediranib compared with cediranib alone in patients with advanced endometrial cancer., Methods: This was open-label, randomized, phase 2 trial (NCT03660826). Eligible patients had recurrent endometrial cancer, received at least one (<3) prior lines of chemotherapy, and were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), stratified by histology (serous vs. other) to receive cediranib alone (reference arm), olaparib, or olaparib and cediranib for 28-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Homologous repair deficiency was explored using the BROCA-GO sequencing panel., Results: A total of 120 patients were enrolled and all were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Median age was 66 (range, 41-86) years and 47 (39.2%) had serous histology. Median progression-free survival for cediranib was 3.8 months compared with 2.0 months for olaparib (hazard ratio, 1.45 [95% CI, 0.91-2.3] p = .935) and 5.5 months for olaparib/cediranib (hazard ratio, 0.7 [95% CI, 0.43-1.14] p = .064). Four patients receiving the combination had a durable response lasting more than 20 months. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were hypertension in the cediranib (36%) and olaparib/cediranib (33%) arms, fatigue (20.5% olaparib/cediranib), and diarrhea (17.9% cediranib). The BROCA-GO panel results were not associated with response., Conclusion: The combination of cediranib and olaparib demonstrated modest clinical efficacy; however, the primary end point of the study was not met. The combination was safe without unexpected toxicity., (© 2023 American Cancer Society.)

In this analysis, we examined the relationship between progression-free survival (PFS) and mutation status of 18 homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes in patients in the non-germline BRCA -mutated (non-g BRCA m) cohort of the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial (NCT01847274), which evaluated niraparib maintenance therapy for patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. This post hoc exploratory biomarker analysis was performed using tumor samples collected from 331 patients enrolled in the phase III ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial's non-g BRCA m cohort. Niraparib demonstrated PFS benefit in patients with either somatic BRCA- mutated (s BRCA m; HR, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.08-0.88) or BRCA wild-type ( BRCA wt; HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34-0.64) tumors. Patients with BRCA wt tumors with other non- BRCA HRR mutations also derived benefit from niraparib (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.13-0.77), as did patients with BRCA wt/HRRwt (HRR wild-type) tumors (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.35-0.70). When patients with BRCA wt/HRRwt tumors were further categorized by genomic instability score (GIS), clinical benefit was observed in patients with homologous recombination-deficient (GIS ≥ 42; HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.18-0.61) and in patients with homologous recombination-proficient (HRp; GIS < 42; HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.36-0.99) disease. Although patients with s BRCA m, other non- BRCA HRR mutations, or GIS ≥ 42 benefited the most from niraparib treatment, PFS benefit was also seen in HRp (GIS < 42) patients without HRR mutations. These results support the use of niraparib in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer regardless of BRCA /HRR mutation status or myChoice CDx GIS., Significance: We retrospectively evaluated the mutational profile of HRR genes in tumor samples from 331 patients from the non-germline BRCA -mutated cohort of the phase III NOVA trial of patients with platinum-sensitive high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Patients with non- BRCA HRR mutations generally benefited from second-line maintenance treatment with niraparib compared with placebo., Competing Interests: G. Lindahl reports personal fees from Honoraria for lectures outside the submitted work. S. Mahner reports grants, personal fees, and other from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Clovis, Eisai, GSK, Hubro, Medac, MSD, Novartis, Nykode, Olympus, PharmaMar, Pfizer, Roche, Sensor Kinesis, Teva, and Tesaro outside the submitted work. A. Redondo reports personal fees from GSK, MSD; personal fees and other from AstraZeneca; other from Clovis; grants and personal fees from Pharmamar; and grants from Eisai outside the submitted work. M. Fabbro reports personal fees from GSK and AstraZeneca outside the submitted work. B.J. Rimel reports other from GSK, Merck, Immunogen, and personal fees from Deep6AI outside the submitted work. A.M. Oza reports PI and Steering Committees with AstraZeneca, GSK, and Clovis; advisory Board member with AstraZeneca and Morphosys. U. Canzler reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Lilly, and Roche outside the submitted work. J.S. Berek reports grants from Tesaro during the conduct of the study. A. González-Martín reports personal fees from Alkermes, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Genmab, GSK, ImmunoGen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, MacroGenics, Novartis, Oncoinvent, Pfizer/Merck, PharmaMar, Roche, Sotio, Sutro and grants from GSK and Roche outside the submitted work. P. Follana reports personal fees from GSK, AstraZeneca, and Clovis outside the submitted work. R. Lord reports personal fees from GSK outside the submitted work. Z. Wang reports other from GSK during the conduct of the study; other from GSK outside the submitted work. D. Gupta reports other from GSK during the conduct of the study; other from GSK outside the submitted work; and D. Gupta is an employee of GSK which sponsored the NOVA trial. U. Matulonis reports personal fees from GSK, AstraZeneca, Merck, Novartis, Next Cure, Agenus, 2X oncology, Symphogen, Alkermes, and Morphosys during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Clearity Foundation and Ovarian Cancer Research Alliance outside the submitted work. B. Feng is an employee of GSK. No disclosures were reported by the other authors., (© 2022 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Little is known about the role of global DNA methylation in recurrence and chemoresistance of high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC)., Methods: We performed whole genome bisulfite sequencing and transcriptome sequencing in 62 primary and recurrent tumors from 28 patients with stage III/IV HGSOC, of which 11 patients carried germline, pathogenic BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations., Results: Landscapes of genome-wide methylation (on average 24.2 million CpGs per tumor) and transcriptomes in primary and recurrent tumors showed extensive heterogeneity between patients but were highly preserved in tumors from the same patient. We identified significant differences in the burden of differentially methylated regions (DMRs) in tumors from BRCA1/2 compared to non-BRCA1/2 carriers (mean 659 DMRs and 388 DMRs in paired comparisons respectively). We identified overexpression of immune pathways in BRCA1/2 carriers compared to non-carriers, implicating an increased immune response in improved survival (P = 0.006) in these BRCA1/2 carriers., Conclusion: These findings indicate methylome and gene expression programs established in the primary tumor are conserved throughout disease progression, even after extensive chemotherapy treatment, and that changes in methylation and gene expression are unlikely to serve as drivers for chemoresistance in HGSOC., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Despite improvement in progression-free survival with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) as maintenance therapy for ovarian cancer, many patients will eventually progress on therapy. Oligoprogression is uniquely suited to considerations of local consolidation therapy in this setting, but not commonly used in ovarian cancer. In this study we evaluated the proportion of patients on PARPi maintenance who developed limited sites of disease, the location of progression, and their natural history., Methods: From January 2006 to December 2020, natural language processing software (DEEP6AI) was used to identify 58 patients with ovarian cancer treated with PARPi maintenance after complete or partial response after surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy at our institution. Patients were assessed for presence and location of recurrence based on radiologic findings., Results: The median patient age was 65 (IQR 57-71) years. Patients had a median of two lines of chemotherapy prior to starting PARPi. With a median follow-up of 48 (range 12-149) months, 32 (55%) patients had a recurrence on maintenance olaparib and 11 (34%) patients developed oligoprogression (≤3 sites). For the 11 patients with oligoprogression, three patients developed recurrence in one site, five in two sites, and three in three sites. The sites of oligoprogression were pelvic/periaortic nodal (27%), peritoneal (27%), liver (27%), lung/mediastinal (14%), and brain (5%). The median progression-free survival for the entire cohort was 6.0 months (95% CI 4.2 to 7.8); median overall survival was not met. There were no significant differences in overall survival (p=0.81) or progression-free survival (p=0.95) between patients with and without oligoprogression., Conclusions: One-third of patients on PARPi maintenance experienced oligoprogression defined as limited to ≤3 sites. These patients may benefit from local consolidation therapy. A larger dataset is needed to validate these findings to assess if trials investigating local therapy for these patients is of value., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© IGCS and ESGO 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To evaluate the combination of pembrolizumab, cisplatin and gemcitabine in recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer., Methods: Patients received six cycles of chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin on day 1 and day 8 of a 21-day treatment cycle. Pembrolizumab was administered on day 1 of cycles 3-6 and as maintenance monotherapy in cycles 7-34. Palliative radiation to a non-target symptomatic lesion was allowed. The primary objective was overall response rate by RECIST 1.1 criteria. Secondary objectives included safety, progression-free survival, time to progression, duration of response and overall survival., Results: An interim analysis for futility was performed at 18 evaluable patients. Overall response rate was 60%, duration of response was 4.9 months and time to progression was 5.2 months. Progression-free survival at 6 and 12 months was 43% and 5%. Median progression-free survival was 6.2 months and median overall survival was 11.3 months. In all patients, CA125 levels reflected response and progression. There were no pseudoprogression events. After receiving palliative radiation during pembrolizumab maintenance, a patient with recurrent ovarian clear cell carcinoma had an exceptional and durable response that is ongoing for greater than 2 years. After consultation with the sponsor, based on the modest duration of response observed at the interim analysis for futility, the decision was made to close the trial to further accrual., Conclusions: The addition of pembrolizumab to cisplatin and gemcitabine did not appear to provide benefit beyond chemotherapy alone in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer., Competing Interests: This study was funded by the Merck Investigator Studies Program (MISP #52261) (CW). URL: http://engagezone.msd.com/oncology.php. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

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., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Observational studies suggest greater height is associated with increased ovarian cancer risk, but cannot exclude bias and/or confounding as explanations for this. Mendelian randomisation (MR) can provide evidence which may be less prone to bias., Methods: We pooled data from 39 Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium studies (16,395 cases; 23,003 controls). We applied two-stage predictor-substitution MR, using a weighted genetic risk score combining 609 single-nucleotide polymorphisms. Study-specific odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between genetically predicted height and risk were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis., Results: Greater genetically predicted height was associated with increased ovarian cancer risk overall (pooled-OR (pOR) = 1.06; 95% CI: 1.01-1.11 per 5 cm increase in height), and separately for invasive (pOR = 1.06; 95% CI: 1.01-1.11) and borderline (pOR = 1.15; 95% CI: 1.02-1.29) tumours., Conclusions: Women with a genetic propensity to being taller have increased risk of ovarian cancer. This suggests genes influencing height are involved in pathways promoting ovarian carcinogenesis.

Background: Niraparib is an oral poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase (PARP) 1/2 inhibitor that has shown clinical activity in patients with ovarian cancer. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of niraparib versus placebo as maintenance treatment for patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer., Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, patients were categorized according to the presence or absence of a germline BRCA mutation (gBRCA cohort and non-gBRCA cohort) and the type of non-gBRCA mutation and were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive niraparib (300 mg) or placebo once daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival., Results: Of 553 enrolled patients, 203 were in the gBRCA cohort (with 138 assigned to niraparib and 65 to placebo), and 350 patients were in the non-gBRCA cohort (with 234 assigned to niraparib and 116 to placebo). Patients in the niraparib group had a significantly longer median duration of progression-free survival than did those in the placebo group, including 21.0 vs. 5.5 months in the gBRCA cohort (hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17 to 0.41), as compared with 12.9 months vs. 3.8 months in the non-gBRCA cohort for patients who had tumors with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.59) and 9.3 months vs. 3.9 months in the overall non-gBRCA cohort (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.61; P<0.001 for all three comparisons). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events that were reported in the niraparib group were thrombocytopenia (in 33.8%), anemia (in 25.3%), and neutropenia (in 19.6%), which were managed with dose modifications., Conclusions: Among patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer, the median duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer among those receiving niraparib than among those receiving placebo, regardless of the presence or absence of gBRCA mutations or HRD status, with moderate bone marrow toxicity. (Funded by Tesaro; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01847274 .).

Importance: BRCA mutation carriers are at increased risk of developing breast cancer. However, the incidence of breast cancer after a diagnosis of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), one of the tubal/peritoneal cancers collectively referred to as pelvic serous carcinomas, is not well known. Optimal breast cancer surveillance and detection for these patients have also not been well characterized., Objectives: To determine the incidence of breast cancer after a diagnosis of EOC and to evaluate the need for breast cancer surveillance for these patients., Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective database review of 364 patients who underwent BRCA mutation testing for EOC (stages I-IV) between 1998 and 2012 at an academic medical center with gynecologic and breast cancer centers., Main Outcomes and Measures: Incidence of breast cancer and methods of surveillance., Results: Of 364 patients, 135 (37.1%) were found to carry a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. The mean age of patients at diagnosis of EOC was 49.5 years (range, 28-89 years). Of the 135 patients, 12 (8.9%) developed breast cancer. The median time from diagnosis of EOC to diagnosis of breast cancer was 50.5 months. Annual mammography was performed for 80 patients (59.3%), with annual magnetic resonance imaging of the breasts performed for 60 patients (44.4%). Thirteen patients (9.6%) underwent a bilateral prophylactic mastectomy at a median of 23 months following EOC diagnosis. Breast cancer was most commonly diagnosed by mammography for 7 of the 12 patients (58.3%), 3 (25.0%) of whom had a palpable mass and 2 (16.7%) of whom had incidental breast cancer detected during a prophylactic mastectomy. Seven patients with breast cancer (58.3%) underwent a bilateral mastectomy. All patients had early-stage breast cancer (stages 0-II). Four patients (33.3%) received adjuvant chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 6.3 years, 4 of the 12 patients (33.3%) died of recurrent EOC after a diagnosis of breast cancer. The overall 10-year survival rate for the entire cohort of 135 patients was 17.0%., Conclusions and Relevance: The risk of metachronous breast cancer is low in patients with known BRCA mutations and EOC. A majority of these cases of breast cancer at an early stage are detected by use of mammography. Despite the small number of patients in our study, these results suggest that optimal breast cancer surveillance for patients with BRCA-associated EOC needs to be reevaluated given the low incidence of breast cancer among these high-risk patients. Confirmation of our findings from larger studies seems to be indicated.