Search

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

Objectives: The Phase III SOLO2 trial (NCT01874353) showed the significant benefit of maintenance olaparib for patients (pts) with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (PSROC) and a BRCA mutation (BRCAm), compared with placebo (median progression-free survival [PFS] 19.1 vs 5.5 months [m], respectively); however, no pts had a confirmed somatic (s) BRCAm and data prospectively evaluating efficacy of olaparib in this pt group were limited. ORZORA (NCT02476968), an open-label, single-arm, multicenter trial, was conducted to assess efficacy and safety of maintenance olaparib in PSROC pts with a BRCAm (s or germline [g]) who were in response to their most recent platinum-based chemotherapy after ≥2 lines of treatment. Methods: Pts underwent prospective central screening for tumor BRCAm status (myChoice CDx, Myriad Genetic Laboratories, Inc.), then s or g BRCAm status was determined by central g testing (BRACAnalysis CDx, Myriad Genetic Laboratories, Inc.). Pts received maintenance olaparib (400 mg bid; capsules) until disease progression. Co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed PFS (RECIST v1.1) in BRCAm and s cohorts, conducted at 60% maturity. Secondary endpoints included time to second progression or death (PFS2), health-related quality of life (HRQoL; FACT-O trial outcome index) and tolerability. An additional exploratory cohort comprised pts with predefined homologous recombination repair gene mutations (HRRm) excluding BRCAm (FoundationOne CDx, Foundation Medicine, Inc.). Results: A total of 181 pts were enrolled in ORZORA (BRCAm n=145 [s n=55; g n=87; n=3 s vs g status unknown]; HRRm n=33; unassigned n=3). Pt characteristics were similar between s and g cohorts: ≥3 prior lines of chemotherapy (38% vs 48%, respectively); partial response to prior platinum (45% vs 49%); tumor BRCA1-mutated (65% vs 64%). At the data cut-off (April 17, 2020), median follow-up for PFS was 22.3 months. Median PFS was similar in the BRCAm, s and g cohorts, and exploratory HRRm cohort (Figure). Median PFS2 for BRCAm pts was 30.9 m (95% confidence interval [CI] 24.7–40.0; s 24.7 [21.8–36.1]; g 32.5 [25.3–not calculable]). HRQoL was comparable in BRCAm and s cohorts (best overall change from baseline: improved 22 vs 21%; no change 69 vs 68%; worsened 11 vs 12%, respectively). Most common adverse events (AE; n=177 treated pts) were nausea (54% pts), fatigue (43%), anemia (42%) and vomiting (28%). A total of 25% and 35% pts experienced serious and grade ≥3 (anemia 16% pts) AEs, respectively. 5% had an AE leading to treatment discontinuation. A total of 2 new primary malignancies, two acute myeloid leukemia and no myelodysplastic syndrome cases occurred. Download : Download high-res image (102KB) Download : Download full-size image Conclusions: PFS in pts with PSROC who received maintenance olaparib was similar irrespective of s or g BRCAm status. Activity of maintenance olaparib was also shown in pts with a non-BRCA HRRm. PFS, HRQoL and tolerability were consistent with previous olaparib studies in this population. Results highlight that PSROC pts beyond those with a gBRCAm can benefit from maintenance olaparib.

Background PAOLA1 is a phase III study assessing olaparib maintenance therapy in advanced high-grade ovarian carcinoma patients responding to first-line platinum-taxane–based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab as standard of care. Randomization was stratified by treatment outcome and tumor BRCA1/2 status (tBRCA) at screening. Methods tBRCA was tested on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor blocks on 5 French platforms using 2 next-generation sequencing methods based either on hybrid capture or amplicon technology. One of the exploratory objectives was to assess the concordance between germline (gBRCA) and tBRCA testing in French patients. gBRCA testing was performed on blood samples on the same platforms. Results From May 2015 to July 2017, tBRCA tests were performed for 1176 screened patients. Only 52 (4.4%) tumor samples were noncontributive. The median interval between reception of the tumor sample and availability of the tBRCA status result was 37 days (range = 8-260). A pathogenic variant was reported in 27.1% tumor samples (319 of 1176 screened patients). tBRCA and gBRCA testing were performed for 451 French patients with negative results for both tests in 306 patients (67.8%) and positive results for both tests in 85 patients (18.8%). Only 1 large genomic rearrangement of BRCA1 was detected, exclusively in the blood sample. Interestingly, tBRCA testing revealed 6.4% of pathogenic variant (29 of 451) not detected by gBRCA testing. Conclusions tBRCA testing is an appropriate tool with an acceptable turnaround time for clinical practice and a low failure rate, ensuring reliable identification of patients likely to benefit from poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor therapy.

IntroductionSeveral biomarkers have been proposed for the detection of recurrences in adult-type granulosa cell tumors of the ovary. Here we validate the value of inhibin B in detecting recurrences and investigate its role in guiding follow-up examinations and treatment strategies in postmenopausal patients with ovarian adult-type granulosa cell tumors.MethodsData from 140 patients with a diagnosis of adult-type granulosa cell tumor of the ovary referred to the European Institute of Oncology of Milan from January 1996 to March 2016 were retrospectively collected. Among these, we selected data from 47 postmenopausal women for whom serial inhibin B measurements and related imaging examinations were performed according to the follow-up program, with a total of 315 serum inhibin B samples, together with the corresponding clinical examination, and 180 imaging examinations, confirming the presence or absence of macroscopic disease.ResultsAt a cut-off of 7 pg/mL, inhibin B levels were significantly correlated with the presence/absence of disease (pConclusionsOur results confirmed that inhibin B is a sensitive and specific marker for adult-type granulosa cell tumors of the ovary that may be used during follow-up for detection of recurrences. Moreover, it could guide clinicians in the decision regarding when to perform imaging, avoiding redundant interventional tests in the absence of clinical suspicion.

Introduction/Background In the Phase III SOLO1 study (NCT01844986) of patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation (BRCAm), maintenance olaparib significantly improved investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.30, 95% CI 0.23–0.41; P Methodology Patients received olaparib 300 mg twice daily or placebo for up to 2 years or until disease progression. In this exploratory analysis (primary data cut-off: 17 May 2018), patients in the higher-risk group had stage IV disease, stage III disease with residual disease following primary debulking surgery, inoperable stage III disease, or had stage III disease and underwent interval surgery. Patients in the lower-risk group had stage III disease without residual disease following primary debulking surgery. PFS was assessed by investigators and blinded independent central review (BICR). Response was assessed using modified RECIST v1.1. Results Of 391 patients, 56% were higher risk and 44% were lower risk. After a median follow-up overall of ~41 months, the risk of disease progression/death per investigator was significantly reduced with olaparib versus placebo in the higher-risk group (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.24–0.48; 66% reduction) and the lower-risk group (HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.20–0.52; 67% reduction) (figure 1). Investigator-assessed median PFS was 39.0 versus 11.1 months for olaparib versus placebo, respectively in the higher-risk group, and not reached (NR) versus 21.9 months in the lower-risk group (figure 1). Results were similar per BICR (table 1). Conclusion In this exploratory analysis of data from the SOLO1 study, maintenance olaparib provided a substantial PFS benefit over placebo in patients with both higher-risk and lower-risk newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCAm, with an investigator-assessed median PFS of 39 months and NR with olaparib treatment in higher-risk and lower-risk groups respectively after a median follow-up of ~41 months. SOLO1 is the only trial of maintenance monotherapy with a PARP inhibitor to have demonstrated a consistently high reduction in the risk of progression/death in both higher-risk and lower-risk patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. Disclosures Nicoletta Colombo: Consulting fees or advisory role from Roche/Genentech, PharmaMar, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Pfizer, MSD Oncology, Takeda, Tesaro, BioCad and GlaxoSmithKline; honoraria from Roche/Genentech, AstraZeneca, Tesaro and PharmaMar. William Bradley: Nothing to disclose. Kathleen Moore: Advisory board fees from Advaxis, Aravive, AstraZeneca, Clovis, Eisai, Genentech/Roche, Immunogen, Janssen, Merck, Oncomed, Pfizer, Samumed, Tesaro, VBL Therapeutics. Antonio Gonzalez-Martin: Speaker role/consulting fees from AstraZeneca, PharmaMar, Roche, Tesaro; consulting fees from Clovis Oncology, Genmab, Inmunogen, MSD, Pfizer. Giovanni Scambia: Nothing to disclose. Ana Oaknin: Consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Genmab, Immunogen, PharmaMar, Roche, Tesaro. Michael Friedlander: Honoraria and speaker role/advisory boards from AstraZeneca; advisory board fees from Lilly, MSD, Takeda, Novartis; non-remunerated consulting for AbbVie; research funding from Beigene, AstraZeneca, Novartis. Elizabeth S. Lowe: Shareholder and employee of AstraZeneca. Philip Rowe: Shareholder and employee of AstraZeneca. Paul DiSilvestro: Consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Tesaro.

Background The composition of the microbiome plays an important role in human health and disease. Whether there is a direct association between the cervicovaginal microbiome and the host’s epigenome is largely unexplored. Results Here we analyzed a total of 448 cervicovaginal smear samples and studied both the DNA methylome of the host and the microbiome using the Illumina EPIC array and next-generation sequencing, respectively. We found that those CpGs that are hypo-methylated in samples with non-lactobacilli (O-type) dominating communities are strongly associated with gastrointestinal differentiation and that a signature consisting of 819 CpGs was able to discriminate lactobacilli-dominating (L-type) from O-type samples with an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.84 (95% CI = 0.77–0.90) in an independent validation set. The performance found in samples with more than 50% epithelial cells was further improved (AUC 0.87) and in women younger than 50 years of age was even higher (AUC 0.91). In a subset of 96 women, the buccal but not the blood cell DNA showed the same trend as the cervicovaginal samples in discriminating women with L- from O-type cervicovaginal communities. Conclusions These findings strongly support the view that the epithelial epigenome plays an essential role in hosting specific microbial communities.

Background High-risk locally advanced cervical cancer (CC) has a poor prognosis, and >50% of patients recur in 2 years. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) may enhance the immunostimulatory activity of the PD-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab. After KEYNOTE-158, in which pembrolizumab demonstrated durable antitumor activity, pembrolizumab monotherapy was approved for patients with PD-L1–positive recurrent or metastatic CC who progressed during or after chemotherapy. ENGOT-cx11/KEYNOTE-A18 (NCT04221945) is a phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled study evaluating pembrolizumab with concurrent CRT in locally advanced CC. Trial design Approximately 980 patients with high-risk, locally advanced, histologically confirmed CC who have not received systemic therapy, immunotherapy, definitive surgery, or radiation will be randomized 1:1 to receive 5 cycles of pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W + CRT (5 cycles [with optional 6th cycle] of cisplatin 40 mg/m2 Q1W + external beam radiotherapy [EBRT] followed by brachytherapy) followed by 15 cycles of pembrolizumab 400 mg Q6W or 5 cycles of placebo Q3W + CRT followed by 15 cycles of placebo Q6W. Randomization is stratified by planned EBRT type, cancer stage at screening, and planned total radiotherapy dose. Treatment will continue until patient receives ≤20 cycles of pembrolizumab (5 cycles 200 mg Q3W, 15 cycles 400 mg Q6W) vs placebo (~2 years) or until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal. Primary endpoints are PFS per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review and OS. Secondary endpoints include PFS at 2 years, OS at 3 years, complete response at 12 weeks, ORR, PFS and OS in PD-L1–positive patients, and safety. Enrollment is ongoing.

Introduction In ARIEL3 (NCT01968213), rucaparib maintenance for recurrent ovarian cancer (rOC) significantly improved investigator-assessed PFS and postprogression efficacy outcomes versus placebo regardless of biomarker status. PFS was also improved in patients with rOC associated with either BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations (HR, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.19–0.53] and 0.12 [0.06–0.26], respectively). This exploratory analysis further examined the subgroup of patients with rOC associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations to assess the durability of the clinical benefit of rucaparib maintenance following disease progression. Methods Patients were randomised 2:1 to oral rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) or placebo. Postprogression efficacy endpoints were assessed in patients with germline or somatic BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Results Investigator-assessed postprogression efficacy endpoints for patients with either BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations are presented in the table 1. There was a trend for better outcomes across all endpoints in patients with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, with larger differences between the median values among patients with a BRCA2 mutation. The treatment-by-mutation group interaction test reached statistical significance for TFST and CFI. Among rucaparib-treated patients, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (any grade) in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 subgroups were nausea (81.0% and 78.0%) and asthenia/fatigue (74.7% and 80.0%). Conclusions/Implications All postprogression efficacy endpoints were longer with rucaparib maintenance than with placebo in both BRCA-mutant subgroups. Safety data for the two subgroups were similar and were consistent with the overall safety population.

PURPOSE Low-grade serous ovarian carcinomas (LGSOCs) have historically low chemotherapy responses. Alterations affecting the MAPK pathway, most commonly KRAS/BRAF, are present in 30%-60% of LGSOCs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate binimetinib, a potent MEK1/2 inhibitor with demonstrated activity across multiple cancers, in LGSOC. METHODS This was a 2:1 randomized study of binimetinib (45 mg twice daily) versus physician’s choice chemotherapy (PCC). Eligible patients had recurrent measurable LGSOC after ≥ 1 prior platinum-based chemotherapy but ≤ 3 prior chemotherapy lines. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR); additional assessments included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), clinical-benefit rate, biomarkers, and safety. RESULTS A total of 303 patients were randomly assigned to an arm of the study at the time of interim analysis (January 20, 2016). Median PFS by BICR was 9.1 months (95% CI, 7.3 to 11.3) for binimetinib and 10.6 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 14.5) for PCC (hazard ratio,1.21; 95%CI, 0.79 to 1.86), resulting in early study closure according to a prespecified futility boundary after 341 patients had enrolled. Secondary efficacy end points were similar in the two groups: ORR 16% (complete response [CR]/partial responses[PRs], 32) versus 13% (CR/PRs, 13); median DOR, 8.1 months (range, 0.03 to ≥ 12.0 months) versus 6.7 months (0.03 to ≥ 9.7 months); and median OS, 25.3 versus 20.8 months for binimetinib and PCC, respectively. Safety results were consistent with the known safety profile of binimetinib; the most common grade ≥ 3 event was increased blood creatine kinase level (26%). Post hoc analysis suggests a possible association between KRAS mutation and response to binimetinib. Results from an updated analysis (n = 341; January 2019) were consistent. CONCLUSION Although the MEK Inhibitor in Low-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer Study did not meet its primary end point, binimetinib showed activity in LGSOC across the efficacy end points evaluated. A higher response to chemotherapy than expected was observed and KRAS mutation might predict response to binimetinib.

Objective advanced stage clear cell ovarian cancer (CCOC) carries a higher risk of relapse and death compared to other histological subtypes. The prognosis of early-stage CCOC is controversial. Methods Early-stage high-grade OC patients from two Italian oncologic centers were included. Patients with early-stage CCOC were compared with those with high-grade endometrioid (HGE) and serous (HGS) OC in terms of relapse-free interval (RFI), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and post relapse cancer-specific survival (prCSS). The Cox proportional hazard model and the restricted mean survival time were used. Results Between 1981 and 2012, 134 patients with CC, 152 with HGE and 160 with HGS were treated at two referral centers. Median follow-up was 11.5 years. Ten years RFI rates were 80.6%, 72.1%, 60.6%, and CSS rates were 84.3%, 82.6%, 81.7% respectively. Adjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved RFI (aHR 0.61, 95%CI 0.40 to 0.91, P = 0.015). In the multivariable analysis HGS histotype was associated with a shorter RFI compared to CC, (Hazard Ratio [HR]: 1.81; 95%CI: 1.12–2.93; P = 0.016), whereas CSS was not statistically different. prCSS was longer in HGS compared to CCOC (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.17–0.74; P = 0.006). According to the stage, IA/IB/IC1 HGSOC had a shorter RFI (HR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.14–3.99; P = 0.018) compared to IA/IB/IC1 CCOC, but similar CSS. For prCSS, CC compared to HGS conferred a worse prognosis regardless of the initial stage. Conclusions Early-stage CCOC is associated with a longer RFI, similar CSS and a shorter prCSS compared to HGSOC. No prognostic differences were observed between CC and HGE OC. The relapse risk was the lowest in IA/IB/IC1 CC compared to HGS, whereas CC displayed poor sensitivity to chemotherapy after relapse.

Objective Adding bevacizumab to cisplatin–paclitaxel for advanced cervical cancer significantly improves overall and progression-free survival. We evaluated bevacizumab with a widely used carboplatin–paclitaxel backbone. Methods Patients with metastatic/recurrent/persistent cervical cancer not amenable to curative surgery and/or radiotherapy received 3-weekly bevacizumab 15 mg/kg, paclitaxel 175 mg/m2, and carboplatin AUC 5 until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Maintenance bevacizumab was allowed. Patients with ongoing bladder/rectal involvement, prior cobalt radiotherapy, a history of fistula/gastrointestinal perforation, or recent bowel resection/chemoradiation were excluded. The primary objective was to determine incidences of gastrointestinal perforation/fistula, gastrointestinal-vaginal fistula, and genitourinary fistula. Results Among 150 treated patients, disease at study entry was persistent in 21%, recurrent in 56%, and newly diagnosed metastatic in 23%. After 27.8 months' median follow-up, median bevacizumab duration was 6.7 months; 57% received maintenance bevacizumab. Seventeen patients (11.3%; 95% CI: 6.7–17.5%) experienced ≥1 perforation/fistula event: gastrointestinal perforation/fistula in 4.7% (1.9–9.4%), gastrointestinal-vaginal fistula in 4.0% (1.5–8.5%), and genitourinary fistula in 4.7% (1.9–9.4%). Of these, 16 were previously irradiated, several with ongoing radiation effects. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (25%), anemia (19%), and hypertension (14%). Five patients (3%) had fatal adverse events. Objective response rate was 61% (95% CI: 52–69%), median progression-free survival was 10.9 (10.1–13.7) months, and median overall survival was 25.0 (20.9–30.4) months. Conclusions Bevacizumab can be combined with carboplatin–paclitaxel in the CECILIA study population. The fistula/gastrointestinal perforation incidence is in line with GOG-0240; efficacy results are encouraging. Trial registration number. NCT02467907 ( ClinicalTrials.gov ).

Objective: Although endometrial cancer (EC) is a hormone dependent neoplasm, there are no recommendations for the determination of steroid hormone receptors in the tumor tissue and no hormone therapy has ever been assessed in the adjuvant setting. The purpose of this study was to explore the effect of adjuvant aromatase inhibitors (AIs) on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with early stage and steroid receptors-positive EC. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed clinical and pathological factors in 73 patients with high-risk (49.3%) or low-risk (50.7%) stage I (n = 71) or II (n = 2) endometrial cancer who received by their preference after counseling either no treatment (reference group) or AI. Prognostic factors were well balanced between groups. Expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR), and Ki-67 index was correlated with clinical outcomes. Results: Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional regression analyses, adjusted for age, grade, stage, depth of myometrial invasion, lymphovascular space invasion, BMI, ER, PgR and Ki-67 labeling index levels, showed that PFS and OS had a trend to be longer in patients receiving AI than in the reference group HR= 0.23 (95% CI, 0.04&ndash, 1.27) for PFS and HR= 0.11 (95% CI, 0.01&ndash, 1.36) for OS. Conclusion: Compared with no treatment, AI exhibited a trend toward a benefit on PFS and OS in patients with early stage hormone receptor-positive EC. Given the exploratory nature of our study, randomized clinical trials for ER/PgR positive EC patients are warranted to assess the clinical benefit of AI and the potential predictive role of steroid receptors and Ki-67.

Background In recurrent ovarian cancer, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP)-inhibiting agents have transformed the treatment of platinum-sensitive disease. New data support use of PARP inhibitors earlier in the treatment algorithm. Design We review results from recent phase III trials evaluating PARP inhibitors as treatment and/or maintenance therapy for patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. We discuss the efficacy and safety of these agents in the all-comer and biomarker-selected populations studied in clinical trials, and compare the strengths and limitations of the various trial designs. We also consider priorities for future research, with a particular focus on patient selection and future regimens for populations with high unmet need. Results Four phase III trials (SOLO-1, PAOLA-1/ENGOT-OV25, PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26 and VELIA/GOG-3005) demonstrated remarkable improvements in progression-free survival with PARP inhibitor therapy (olaparib, niraparib or veliparib) for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. Differences in trial design (treatment and/or maintenance setting; single agent or combination; bevacizumab or no bevacizumab), patient selection (surgical outcome, biomarker eligibility, prognosis) and primary analysis population (intention-to-treat, BRCA mutated or homologous recombination deficiency positive) affect the conclusions that can be drawn from these trials. Overall survival data are pending and there is limited experience regarding long-term safety. Conclusions PARP inhibitors play a pivotal role in the management of newly diagnosed ovarian cancer, which will affect subsequent treatment choices. Refinement of testing for patient selection and identification of regimens to treat populations that appear to benefit less from PARP inhibitors are a priority.

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; PCONCLUSIONS: 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. opens in new tab.)

The efficacy of therapeutic regimens incorporating weekly or every-3-weeks paclitaxel (PTX) for ovarian cancer is debated. We investigated the addition of bevacizumab in regimens of chemotherapy with different PTX doses and schedules in preclinical models. Treatments were cisplatin (DDP) with weekly PTX (conventional), or dose-dense-equi (every other day to the conventional cumulative dose), or dose-dense-high (total dose 1.5 times higher), with or without bevacizumab. Treatment efficacy was evaluated analyzing tumor growth in different time-windows in two patient-derived ovarian cancer xenografts with different sensitivity to cisplatin. Tumor progression, metastasis and survival were studied in ovarian cancer models growing orthotopically and disseminating in the mouse peritoneal cavity. Short-term effects on cell cycle, tumor cell proliferation/apoptosis and vasculature were evaluated by flow cytometry and immunohistochemistry. PTX dose-dense (with/without DDP) was superior to the conventional scheme in a dose-dependent manner; the high efficacy was confirmed by the lower ratio of tumor to normal cells. All schemes benefited from bevacizumab, which reduced tumor vessels. However, DDP/PTX dose-dense-high (only chemotherapy) was at least as active as DDP/PTX conventional plus bevacizumab. DDP/PTX dose-dense-high plus bevacizumab was the most effective in delaying tumor progression, though it did not prolong mouse survival and the continuous treatment with bevacizumab was associated with a malignant disease. These findings indicate that the effect of bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy may depend on the schedule-dose of the treatment and help to explain the unclear benefits after bevacizumab.

Mirvetuximab soravtansine, an antibody-drug conjugate that binds with high affinity to folate receptor-α to provide tumor-directed delivery of the potent microtubule-disrupting agent DM4, has emerged as a promising investigational agent for the treatment of ovarian cancer, particularly in the setting of platinum-resistant disease. Here we describe the rationale and design of FORWARD I (NCT02631876), the first randomized, multicenter Phase III study to compare the safety and efficacy of mirvetuximab soravtansine versus investigator's choice of chemotherapy in women with folate receptor-α-positive, platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer. Patients will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio. The primary end point is progression-free survival, and key secondary objectives include comparison of overall response rates, overall survival and duration of response. ispartof: Future Oncology vol:14 issue:7 pages:1669-1678 ispartof: location:England status: Published online

Purpose To evaluate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for metachronous oligometastatic ovarian cancer patients in terms of local control, delay of systemic treatment, survival outcomes, and toxicity. Methods and Materials Retrospective data collection from a single institution was performed. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) oligorecurrent or oligoprogressive disease in ovarian cancer patients during or after systemic therapy; (2) surgery or other local therapies not feasible; and (3) relative contraindication to systemic therapy for reasons such as unavailability of additional chemotherapy lines or refusal of the patient. Tumor response and toxicity were evaluated using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors and the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03, respectively. A new systemic therapy regimen was started after an SBRT treatment course in 57 of 109 cases (52.3%). Local progression–free survival, progression-free survival, and overall survival were calculated via the Kaplan-Meier method. The systemic treatment–free interval was calculated in cases without concomitant systemic therapy. Results Between May 2012 and December 2016, 82 patients (156 lesions) underwent SBRT with a median dose of 24 Gy in 3 fractions. The median follow-up period was 17.4 months. Patients received a median of 3 systemic therapy regimens prior to SBRT. Concomitant systemic therapy was performed for 29 lesions (18.6%). Among 152 evaluable lesions, a complete radiologic response, partial response, stabilization, and progressive disease were observed in 91 (60%), 26 (17%), 24 (16%), and 11 (7%), respectively. No grade 3 or 4 acute or late toxicities were observed. The median systemic treatment–free interval after SBRT was 7.4 months, and 1 of 3 patients was disease free at 1 year after SBRT. The actuarial 2-year local progression–free survival, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates were 68%, 18%, and 71%, respectively. The pattern of failure was predominantly out of field. Conclusions SBRT for oligometastatic ovarian cancer showed good local control and a good toxicity profile. It might be an appealing alternative to other invasive local therapies to delay systemic therapy in the case of chemorefractory disease or intolerance to systemic agents.

To determine if radiomic features, alone or combined with clinical data, are associated with residual tumour (RT) at surgery, and predict the risk of disease progression within 12 months (PD12) in ovarian cancer (OC) patients. This retrospective study enrolled 101 patients according to the following inclusion parameters: cytoreductive surgery performed at our institution (9 May 2007–23 February 2016), assessment of BRCA mutational status, preoperative CT available. Radiomic features of the ovarian masses were extracted from 3D structures drawn on CT images. A phantom experiment was performed to assess the reproducibility of radiomic features. The final radiomic features included in the analysis (n = 516) were grouped into clusters using a hierarchical clustering procedure. The association of each cluster’s representative radiomic feature with RT and PD12 was assessed by chi-square test. Multivariate analysis was performed using logistic regression models. P values < 0.05 were considered significant. Patients with values of F2-Shape/Compactness1 below the median, of F1- GrayLevelCooccurenceMatrix25/0-1InformationMeasureCorr2 below the median and of F1-GrayLevelCooccurenceMatrix25/-333-1InverseVariance above the median showed higher risk of RT (36%, 36% and 35%, respectively, as opposed to 18%, 18% and 18%). Patients with values of F4-GrayLevelRunLengthMatrix25/-333RunPercentage above the median, of F2 shape/Max3DDiameter below the median and F1-GrayLevelCooccurenceMatrix25/45-1InverseVariance above the median showed higher risk of PD12 (22%, 24% and 23%, respectively, as opposed to 6%, 5% and 6%). At multivariate analysis F2-Shape/Max3DDiameter remained significant (odds ratio (95% CI) = 11.86 (1.41–99.88)). To predict PD12, a clinical radiomics model performed better than a base clinical model. This study demonstrated significant associations between radiomic features and prognostic factors such as RT and PD12. • No residual tumour (RT) at surgery is the most important prognostic factor in OC. • Radiomic features related to mass size, randomness and homogeneity were associated with RT. • Progression of disease within 12 months (PD12) indicates worse prognosis in OC. • A model including clinical and radiomic features performed better than only-clinical model to predict PD12.

Objectives: In the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA study, maintenance therapy with niraparib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts) with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (PSROC) regardless of germline BRCA mutation (gBRCAm) or homologous recombination deficiency (HRd) biomarker status. This analysis updates long-term safety and available data on secondary efficacy outcomes. Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial, pts with PSROC were enrolled into 1 of 2 independent cohorts by gBRCAm status (gBRCAm or non-gBRCAm). Stratification factors were PFS after the penultimate platinum therapy (6 to Results: A total of 553 pts were randomized in the NOVA study. Median follow-up was 66 months at the time of the current analysis. Hematologic treatment-emergent adverse effects (TEAEs) primarily occurred in the first year of niraparib treatment: incidence of grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia decreased from 33.8% to 2.8%, anemia decreased from 25.6% to 0.7%, and neutropenia decreased from 19.3% to 2.1% from year 1 to year 2–3, respectively. A total of 13 (3.5%; 9 gBRCAm, 4 non-gBRCAm) pts who received niraparib developed MDS/AML vs 3 (1.7%) placebo pts. Survival status could not be obtained for ~15% of pts. Data on post-progression therapy, including PARP inhibitors, were not available for 25% of the study pts. Based on data cut-off on October 2020, 127 and 238 deaths occurred in the gBRCAm and non-gBRCAm cohorts, respectively. For pts with available data, placebo pts received subsequent PARP inhibitor therapy (crossover) after disease progression: 46% (30/65) in the gBRCAm cohort and 13% (15/116) in the non-gBRCAm cohort. Hazard ratios for PFS2 were 0.67 (95% CI: 0.48, 0.95) in the gBRCAm cohort and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.62, 1.05) in the non-gBRCAm cohort. Restricted mean survival time analyses for OS up to 72 months were 43.2 months in placebo vs 45.9 months in niraparib (Δ of 2.7m, 95% CI: -4.1, 9.5) in the gBRCAm cohort and 39.1 months in placebo vs 38.5 months in niraparib (Δ of -0.6m, 95% CI: -6.0, 4.7) in the non-gBRCAm cohort. Conclusions: These final data support the safe long-term use of niraparib for maintenance treatment in pts with PSROC. PFS2 analysis indicates that the benefit of niraparib maintenance therapy extends beyond first progression. No difference in survival was observed. The NOVA study was not powered for OS, and analysis is confounded by a high rate of crossover and missing data thus limiting its interpretation. Sponsor: GlaxoSmithKline. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01847274.

Objectives: Newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer patients (pts) are at high risk of relapse and 5-year survival is 30–50%. Delay of recurrence, prolonged survival and, for some pts, increased chance of cure are goals of treatment in this setting. In SOLO1 (NCT01844986; GOG-3004) pts with advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation (BRCAm) who were in response after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy derived significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit from maintenance olaparib vs placebo (median 41 months follow-up; median not reached vs 13.8 months; hazard ratio 0.30; P Methods: Pts received maintenance olaparib (tablets; 300 mg bid) or placebo for up to 2 years or until progression. PFS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were investigator-assessed by modified RECIST v1.1. An exploratory subgroup analysis of PFS in higher-risk (stage IV disease, stage III disease with residual disease following primary debulking surgery, inoperable stage III disease, or stage III disease and had undergone interval surgery) and lower-risk (stage III disease without residual disease following primary debulking surgery) pts was carried out. For pts in complete response at baseline, RFS was defined post hoc as time from randomization to disease recurrence (new lesions by imaging) or death. Download : Download high-res image (174KB) Download : Download full-size image Results: A total of 260 pts were randomized to olaparib; 131 to placebo (median treatment duration 24.6 vs 13.9 months, respectively). After a median of 4.8 and 5.0 years of follow-up, median PFS was 56 vs 14 months in the olaparib and placebo arms, respectively (Table). In the higher-risk subgroup 42% of olaparib-arm vs 17% of placebo-arm pts were free from progression at 5 years; in the lower-risk subgroup 56% vs 25% of pts, respectively, were progression free at this time point. Among pts in complete response at baseline, risk of disease recurrence or death was reduced by 63%. The safety profile of olaparib was consistent with previous observations. No new cases of myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukaemia were reported (previous DCO: olaparib, 3/260 [1%]; placebo, 0/130), and incidence of new primary malignancies remained balanced between arms (olaparib, 7/260 [3%]; placebo, 5/130 [4%]). Conclusions: For pts with a BRCAm and newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer, the benefit derived from 2 years of maintenance olaparib was sustained beyond the end of treatment, and after 5 years, almost half of pts were progression free vs 20% with placebo. This benefit was consistent across higher- and lower-risk pts. Over 50% of pts in complete response after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy remained free from relapse 5 years after randomization. A total of 5 years of follow-up is the longest for any PARP inhibitor in this setting and no new safety signals were observed.

Objectives: Prospective studies comparing poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors with standard-of-care (SOC) chemotherapy (CT) in patients (pts) with relapsed ovarian cancer (OC) are currently limited. ARIEL4 (NCT02855944) is a phase III, randomized, open-label, international, multicenter study of the efficacy and safety of rucaparib vs SOC CT as treatment for PARP-inhibitor naive pts with relapsed high-grade epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer, who had a deleterious BRCA1/2 (BRCA) mutation and had received ≥2 prior CT regimens. Methods: Pts were randomized 2:1 to oral rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or SOC CT and stratified based on progression-free interval (≥1 to Results: A total of 233 pts were randomized to rucaparib and 116 to CT (visit cutoff Sep 30, 2020); 179 (51.3%) had platinum-resistant, 96 (27.5%) had partially platinum-sensitive, and 74 (21.2%) had fully platinum-sensitive disease. A total of 23 pts (6.6%) with BRCA reversion mutations and 1 pt without a BRCA mutation were excluded from the efficacy population. Median PFS was significantly longer with rucaparib vs CT in both the efficacy and ITT populations (Table). In an exploratory analysis of pts with BRCA reversion mutations, median PFS was shorter with rucaparib (n=13) vs CT (n=10); 2.9 vs 5.5 months, hazard ratio 2.769 (95% CI, 0.989–7.755). ORR was not significantly different between the rucaparib and CT arms in both populations (Table). Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profiles of rucaparib and CT. Download : Download high-res image (119KB) Download : Download full-size image Conclusions: Patients with BRCA-mutated advanced, relapsed OC who received rucaparib had a significant improvement in PFS vs SOC CT. No new safety signals were identified. This is the first prospective report from a randomized trial demonstrating that the presence of a BRCA reversion mutation predicts for primary resistance to rucaparib.

Objectives: In the Phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 (NCT02477644) trial, the addition of the PARP inhibitor olaparib to bevacizumab maintenance therapy led to a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer (hazard ratio [HR] 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.72), particularly in patients who were homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) positive, both including patients with BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations (BRCAm; HR 0.33; 95% CI 0.25-0.45) and patients without a BRCAm (HR 0.43; 95% CI 0.28-0.66; Ray-Coquard et al. NEJM 2019). We explored the role of mutations in genes involved in homologous recombination repair (HRRm) excluding BRCAm as a predictive biomarker in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer who received olaparib + bevacizumab maintenance therapy in PAOLA-1. Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed advanced high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer were randomized (2:1) to olaparib + bevacizumab maintenance or placebo + bevacizumab maintenance following response to platinum-based chemotherapy + bevacizumab. In an exploratory analysis, PFS was assessed in patients harboring a tumor mutation in a wide range of HRR gene panels (excluding tumor BRCAm [tBRCAm]): a panel with 13 pre-defined genes involved in HRR, an expanded panel with five additional genes involved in HRR, a restricted panel using five selected genes with the highest median genomic instability scores, and three published panels (Table). Tumors were analyzed using the Myriad myChoice HRD plus assay. Results: Of the 806 patients randomized in PAOLA-1, 235/806 (29.2%) had a tBRCAm. The percentage of patients harboring deleterious mutations involved in HRR excluding tBRCAm ranged from 3.7% to 9.8% depending on the HRR gene panel (Table). For each gene panel, the number of patients with an HRRm in each treatment arm and HRD status are shown in the Table. PFS using different gene panels for HRRm is summarized in the Table; using the 13-gene panel, in patients with an HRRm excluding tBRCAm (n=54), the HR for PFS was 0.95 (95% CI 0.49-1.94). Expansion of this panel to include five other genes (n=72) demonstrated an HR (95% CI) for PFS of 1.01 (0.55-1.95). Consistent results were seen in patients with HRRm excluding tBRCAm using the three other published HRR gene panels (Table). Conclusions: Acknowledging limitations of small subgroup sizes, HRRm (excluding tBRCAm) was not predictive of PFS benefit with maintenance olaparib in combination with bevacizumab, compared with bevacizumab alone, in PAOLA-1, regardless of the gene panel used. Mutation analysis using HRRm gene panels did not have utility beyond tBRCAm for selecting patients who may benefit from maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab in PAOLA-1 and should not be considered a substitute for HRD determined by BRCA and/or genomic instability testing. Download : Download high-res image (309KB) Download : Download full-size image

Background: Minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment retains high prognostic value in Acute Myeloid Leukemia patients (AML) undergoing intensive induction therapy. Widely available MRD techniques include multicolour flow cytometry (MFC), RT-PCR for recurrent genetic lesion and, for patients lacking specific markers, RT-PCR for the pan- leukemic marker WT1. However, most of the data on the prognostic value of MRD come from trials including younger patients treated with conventional 3+7 regimen. AML arising from a previous myelodisplastic syndrome (s-AML) and therapy-related AML (t-AML) are usually under-represented in trial involving younger patients and are unlikely to respond to conventional induction. Few data are therefore available on the kinetics and the prognostic value of MRD in elderly s- AML and t-AML patients, particularly in the context of alternative induction regimens. Aims: We evaluated MRD in a cohort of elderly s-AML or t-AML patients receiving induction therapy either with a fludarabine-containing regimen or CPX-351, in order to compare the probability of achieving MRD negativity, to disclose the prognostic value of MRD in this setting and to define the best time-points for MRD assessments. Methods: A total of 136 elderly (>60 year, median age 67, range 60-75) patients were analyzed in this study. Patients were treated between January 2005 and January 2020 in our Center, either with CPX-351 (n=35) or fludarabine- high dose cytarabine-idarubicin (FLAI), with (n=72) or without (n =29) gemtuzumab-ozogamicin (GO). MRD was retrospectively analyzed in all patients achieving hematological complete remission (CR) with both MFC and WT1 expression levels.All patients were affected by s-AML or t-AML, defined according to the WHO 2016 criteria. Results: After induction, CR was achieved in 83 patients (61%). CR rate was 28/35 in patients treated with CPX-351 (80%), significantly higher when compared to patients receiving FLAI (55/101, 54.5%, p Moreover, MRD showed significant prognostic value in terms of Overall Survival in all treatment group (2-year OS of 74 and 36% in patients with or without residual MFC MRD after induction, respectively, p Conclusion: In conclusion MRD assessment retains a strong prognostic value and may help to identify patients with suboptimal response to treatment. The higher rate of MRD negativity observed with CPX-351 may be related with a more efficient anti-leukemic activity of the drug in this particular setting. The evaluation of MRD with both MFC and WT1-based assessment lead to superimposable conclusions and allowed us to obtain MRD data from virtually all AML patients treated in the selected time period. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

The platinum-free interval is the most important predictive factor of a response to subsequent lines of chemotherapy and the most important prognostic factor for progression-free and overall survival in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. A nonplatinum regimen is generally considered the most appropriate approach when the disease recurs very early after the end of chemotherapy, whereas platinum-based chemotherapy is usually adopted when the platinum-free interval exceeds 12 months. However, the therapeutic management of patients with intermediate sensitivity (ie, when the relapse occurs between 6 and 12 months) remains debatable. Preclinical and clinical data suggest that the extension of platinum-free interval (using a nonplatinum-based regimen) might restore platinum sensitivity, thus allowing survival improvement. The objective of this review was to critically analyze preclinical and clinical evidences supporting this hypothesis. Cancer 2017;123:3450-9. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

ObjectivesThe purpose of this retrospective report is to define the safety and feasibility, based on our preliminary experience, of surgical transdiaphragmatic resection of enlarged cardiophrenic lymph nodes (CPLNs), as a part of upfront debulking surgery. Supradiaphragmatic nodes located between the diaphragm and the heart are frequently a location for lymph node metastasis in advanced ovarian cancer, and their removal is aimed to obtain no gross residual disease at the primary cytoreductive surgery often requiring aggressive surgical procedures.Patients and MethodsBetween May 2012 and October 2016, a total of 22 patients among 443 with advanced high-grade serous ovarian cancer underwent cytoreductive procedures involving transdiaphragmatic resection of enlarged CPLNs at European Institute of Oncology in Milan.ResultsAll patients who underwent CPLN resection had an extensive disease (median peritoneal cancer index, 18), and more than 77% required complex surgical procedures (complexity score, 3). No residual abdominal disease less than 5 mm at the end of surgery was described in 20 (90%) out of 22. All patients but one had confirmed CPLN positive nodes at histopathological study. The average operative time was 333 min (range, 244–455 min), and the average estimated blood loss was 1000 mL (range, 400–2000 mL). Blood transfusion was necessary in 13 out of 22 patients. Only 7 (33%) out of 21 patients required chest tube placement during the postoperative period.ConclusionsTransdiaphragmatic enlarged CPLN resection seems to be safe and feasible procedure when indicated to achieve no or minimal tumor residual disease. Nevertheless, its impact on survival of patients with stage IV ovarian cancer needs to be determined.

This manuscript reports the consensus statements on designing clinical trials in rare ovarian tumours reached at the fifth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference (OCCC) held in Tokyo, November 2015. Three important questions were identified concerning rare ovarian tumours (rare epithelial ovarian cancers (eOC), sex-cord stromal tumours (SCST) and germ cell tumours (GCT)): (i) What are the research and trial issues that are unique to rare ovarian tumours? There is a lack of randomised phase III data defining standards of care which makes it difficult to define control arms, but identifies unmet needs that merit investigation. Internationally agreed upon diagnostic criteria, expert pathological review and translational research are crucial. (ii) What should be investigated in rare eOC, GCT and SCST? Trials dedicated to each rare ovarian tumour should be encouraged. Nonetheless, where the question is relevant, rare eOC can be included in eOC trials but with rigorous stratification. Although there is emerging evidence suggesting that rare eOC have different molecular profiles, trials are needed to define new type-specific standards for each rare eOC (clear cell, low grade serous and mucinous). For GCTs, a priority is reducing toxicities from treatment while maintaining cure rates. Both a robust prognostic scoring system and more effective treatments for de novo poor prognosis and relapsed GCTs are needed. For SCSTs, validated prognostic markers as well as alternatives to the current standard of bleomycin/etoposide/cisplatin (BEP) should be identified. (iii) Are randomised trials feasible? Randomised controlled trials (RCT) should be feasible in any of the rare tumours through international collaboration. Ongoing trials have already demonstrated the feasibility of RCT in rare eOC and SCST. Mucinous OC may be considered for inclusion, stratified, into RCTs of non-gynaecological mucinous tumours, while RCTs in high risk or relapsed GCT may be carried out as a subset of male and/or paediatric germ cell studies.

Olaparib is currently approved in maintenance treatment of advanced ovarian cancer after response to first-line chemotherapy for breast related cancer antigens (BRCA) mutated patients. The use of this agent is based on data from SOLO1 study that observed a decreased risk of disease progression or death and a median progression-free survival about 36 months longer in case of therapy with olaparib. However, this trial recruited only patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer. The aim of this review is to retrace the available data in order to clarify the potential efficacy and feasibility of olaparib administration in newly diagnosed epithelial ovarian cancer also in early stages.

BackgroundPatients’ reported outcomes and their perspectives around their therapeutic management is a field of continuously increasing relevance in gynecological oncology. We report the results of the Berlin dialog on seven patient-reported parameters and outcomes concerning chemotherapy and maintenance treatment in patients with gynecological cancer.MethodsKey opinion leaders in gynecological oncology from different European counties and representatives of leading patients’ advocate groups in Berlin held a consensus meeting in Berlin on April 6, 2019. Seven topics of interest were identified in advance around quality of life, iatrogenic toxicity, treatment decision-making processes, sexuality, participation in clinical trials, second opinion, and long-term survivors with the the following standard operating procedure for processing and discussion: (1) agreement on its relevance; (2) literature review, and (3) discussion and consensus statements.ResultsAll main topics reached a consensus approval. The defined statements emphasized the importance of patients’ role in incorporating and establishing quality of life as an outcome parameter in clinical trials. Furthermore, discussants raised the importance of identifying new tools for reflecting patient-reported iatrogenic toxicity as well as emphasizing patients’ rights in providing personal information, access to second opinion in the decision-making process, and their participation in clinical trials.ConclusionThe results of this round table meeting could help redefine perspectives on the discussed topics and the importance for therapeutic management as well as for trial designs.

ObjectiveStandard treatment in locally-advanced cervical cancer is external beam radiotherapy concomitant with platinum-based chemotherapy, followed by brachytherapy. The goal of our study was to determine whether an intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) boost is feasible in patients unfit for brachytherapy.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed data of 25 patients unfit for brachytherapy with median age 55 years (range, 30–82) with locally-advanced/metastatic cervical cancer who underwent external beam radiotherapy to pelvis ±para-aortic lymph nodes and sequential IMRT boost between July 2014 and December 2017. Total dose of 45–50.4 Gy in 25–28 fractions (1.8 Gy/fraction) was administered to the cervix, uterus, parametria, ovaries, vaginal tissues (based on vaginal extension), involved lymph nodes, or relevant draining lymph-nodal groups. Para-aortic nodes were included if involved at radiological staging or if common iliac nodes were positive. The IMRT boost included all residual tumor after external beam radiotherapy identified on MRI. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to calculate 2 years' overall survival, 2 years' progression-free survival, and 2 years' local control. Overall survival- and progression-free survival were calculated considering the starting of radiotherapy or neo-adjuvant chemotherapy if prescribed, while local control was calculated from the end of radiotherapy.ResultsMedian radiation dose to pelvis ±para-aortic lymph nodes was 50.4 Gy (45–50.4), boost treatment was homogeneously performed to a total dose of 25 Gy in five fractions every other day.After a median follow-up of 26 months (range, 4–77), tumor persistence at cervix at 6 months from the end of radiotherapy or local recurrence occurred in five women (20%), eight (32%) experienced a further distant progression (two of them had also tumor persistence). Two-year local control and overall survival rates for all stages were 78% and 67%, respectively. According to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.4 scoring criteria, 10 patients experienced gastrointestinal and/or genitourinary grade G1-2 acute toxicity. G2 rectal late toxicity requiring laser-coagulation was registered in two patients, there were no gastrointestinal and/or genitourinary acute or late toxicities≥G3.ConclusionThe combination of external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy remains the standard of care, however our preliminary data show the feasibility of IMRT boost in terms of toxicity with promising results in terms of local control and overall survival.

Background: Recent studies have reported improvement of outcomes (progression-free survival, overall survival, and prolongation of androgen deprivation treatment-free survival) with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in non-small cell lung cancer and prostate cancer. The aim of this retrospective, multicenter study (MITO RT-01) was to define activity and safety of SBRT in a very large, real-world data set of patients with metastatic, persistent, and recurrent ovarian cancer (MPR-OC). Materials and Methods: The endpoints of the study were the rate of complete response (CR) to SBRT and the 24-month actuarial local control (LC) rate on “per-lesion” basis. The secondary endpoints were acute and late toxicities and the 24-month actuarial late toxicity-free survival. Objective response rate (ORR) included CR and partial response (PR). Clinical benefit (CB) included ORR and stable disease (SD). Toxicity was evaluated by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) scales, according to center policy. Logistic and Cox regression were used for the uni- and multivariate analysis of factors predicting clinical CR and actuarial outcomes. Results: CR, PR, and SD were observed in 291 (65.2%), 106 (23.8%), and 33 (7.4%) lesions, giving a rate of CB of 96.4%. Patient aged ≤60 years, planning target volume (PTV) ≤18 cm3, lymph node disease, and biologically effective dose α/β10 > 70 Gy were associated with higher chance of CR in the multivariate analysis. With a median follow-up of 22 months (range, 3–120), the 24-month actuarial LC rate was 81.9%. Achievement of CR and total dose >25 Gy were associated with better LC rate in the multivariate analysis. Mild toxicity was experienced in 54 (20.7%) patients; of 63 side effects, 48 were grade 1, and 15 were grade 2. The 24-month late toxicity-free survival rate was 95.1%. Conclusions: This study confirms the activity and safety of SBRT in patients with MPR-OC and identifies clinical and treatment parameters able to predict CR and LC rate. Implications for Practice: This study aimed to define activity and safety of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in a very large, real life data set of patients with metastatic, persistent, recurrent ovarian cancer (MPR-OC). Patient age 70 Gy were associated with higher chance of complete response (CR). Achievement of CR and total dose >25 Gy were associated with better local control (LC) rate. Mild toxicity was experienced in 20.7% of patients. In conclusion, this study confirms the activity and safety of SBRT in MPR-OC patients and identifies clinical and treatment parameters able to predict CR and LC rate.

Pacients d'edat avançada; Càncer d'ovaris; Inhibidor de la PARP Pacientes de edad avanzada; Cáncer de ovarios; Inhibidor de PARP Elderly patients; Ovarian cancer; PARP inhibitor Background In the phase 3 trial ARIEL3, maintenance treatment with the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor rucaparib provided clinical benefit versus placebo for patients with recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Here, we evaluate the impact of age on the clinical utility of rucaparib in ARIEL3. Methods Patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian carcinoma with ≥2 prior platinum-based chemotherapies who responded to their last platinum-based therapy were enrolled in ARIEL3 and randomized 2:1 to rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or placebo. Exploratory, post hoc analyses of progression-free survival (PFS), patient-centered outcomes (quality-adjusted PFS [QA-PFS] and quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity [Q-TWiST]), and safety were conducted in three age subgroups (

The rapid spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and its related disease (COVID-19) has required an immediate and coordinate healthcare response to face the worldwide emergency and define strategies to maintain the continuum of care for the non-COVID-19 diseases while protecting patients and healthcare providers. The dimension of the COVID-19 pandemic poses an unprecedented risk especially for the more vulnerable populations. To manage patients with cancer adequately, maintaining the highest quality of care, a definition of value-based priorities is necessary to define which interventions can be safely postponed without affecting patients’ outcome. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) has endorsed a tiered approach across three different levels of priority (high, medium, low) incorporating information on the value-based prioritisation and clinical cogency of the interventions that can be applied for different disease sites. Patients with gynaecological cancer are at particular risk of COVID-19 complications because of their age and prevalence of comorbidities. The definition of priority level should be based on tumour stage and histology, cancer-related symptoms or complications, aim (curative vs palliative) and magnitude of benefit of the oncological intervention, patients’ general condition and preferences. The decision-making process always needs to consider the disease-specific national and international guidelines and the local healthcare system and social resources, and a changing situation in relation to COVID-19 infection. These recommendations aim to provide guidance for the definition of deferrable and undeferrable interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic for ovarian, endometrial and cervical cancers within the context of the ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines.

ObjectivesAdult primary cervical rhabdomyosarcoma is a very rare disease and data regarding treatment are sparce. The goal of this study was to report on our experience with the management of this rare entity, along with an evaluation of the literature.MethodsWe conducted a review of the medical records at four centers from January 1990 to December 2017. We reviewed clinical characteristics including age at diagnosis, BMI, medical history and tumor stage, as well as treatment in the primary and recurrent settings and follow-up data. We reclassified tumors according to the Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study (IRS) clinical group.ResultsA total of 15 patients were included in the analysis. Median age at diagnosis was 35 years (range 17–55). Median tumor size at presentation was 5 cm (range 3–10). Eleven patients had the embryonal variant, including five showing the botryoid subtype. Four patients had a pleomorphic rhabdomyosarcoma. Eleven patients had disease classified as IRS Clinical Group I, while the remaining four fell into groups II or III. Fertility-sparing treatment was offered to five patients. Primary treatment types were: surgery alone in eight patients, surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy in six patients, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in two patients. The main risk factors for relapse were: IRS clinical group greater than I, tumor size greater than 5 cm, lymph nodal involvement, and non-embryonal histology. At a median follow-up of 35 months (range 3–282), we observed a 5-year overall survival rate of 78.2% and a progression-free survival of 58.2%. No patient in the IRS I group died of the disease. Three out of four patients in the IRS II-III group died of the disease (survival range 5–16 months following treatment).ConclusionOur data show that cervical rhabdomyosarcomas account for at least two prognostic groups, demonstrating the existence of low-risk and high-risk patterns. The best predictor of prognosis appearsd to be the IRS clinical group classification system. IRS Group I tumors had an overall good prognosis and rarely recurred; when they did recur they were mainly local, following conservative treatment.

Objective To evaluate the role of laparoscopic (LPS) and laparotomic (LPT) re-staging in patients with incompletely surgically staged ovarian granulosa cell tumors (OGCT). Methods We conducted a medical chart retrospective analysis of all patients with sex cord stromal tumors (SCSTs) who were managed in our division between March 1994 and March 2017. After a complete review of surgical and pathological notes, patients with incomplete staging were restaged according to the FIGO guidelines. Statistical analysis was conducted using Statistical Package version 20.0 for Windows (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, Illinois). Results Out of a total of 170 patients SCSTs, 84 patients (49,5%) received primary surgery that included a hysterectomy; 86 patients (50,5%) underwent fertility-sparing surgery. Eighty-one patients (48%) with diagnosis of OGCT were incompletely surgically staged at another institution. We evaluated our results in terms of laparoscopic approach (56 patients) and open treatment (25 patients). Among the IA patient's group, 1 was upstaged to IIB stage and 2 to IIIB; among patients with IC stage, 1 was upstaged to IIA, 2 to IIB and 1 to IIIB stage. Adjuvant chemotherapy was given to the upstaged patients with final stage IIB-IIIC. No statistically significant difference between laparoscopy and open-surgery was detected in terms of upstaged patients after second surgery (p = 0,36). Conclusion According to our series, laparoscopic restaging compared to the open approach seems to be a feasible and efficient technique to complete surgical staging in patients with GCTs incorrectly staged. Surgical restaging seems to upstage a considerable number of OGCT, mainly in the initial stage IC group of patients. However, the impact of restaging on final outcome and survival remains to be demonstrated.

Background Uterine sarcomas are very rare tumours with different histotypes, molecular features and clinical outcomes; therefore, it is difficult to carry out prospective clinical trials, and this often results in heterogeneous management of patients in the clinical practice. Aim We planned to set up an Italian consensus conference on these diseases in order to provide recommendations on treatments and quality of care in our country. Results Early-stage uterine sarcomas are managed by hysterectomy + bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy according to menopausal status and histology; lymphadenectomy is not indicated in patients without bulky nodes, and morcellation must be avoided. The postoperative management is represented by observation, even though chemotherapy can be considered in some high-risk patients. In early-stage low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma and adenosarcomas without sarcomatous overgrowth, hormonal adjuvant treatment can be offered based on hormone receptor expression. In selected cases, external beam radiotherapy ± brachytherapy can be considered to increase local control only. Patients with advanced disease involving the abdomen can be offered primary chemotherapy (or hormonal therapy in the case of low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma and adenosarcoma without sarcomatous overgrowth), even if potentially resectable in the absence of residual disease in order to test the chemosensitivity (or hormonosensitivity); debulking surgery can be considered in patients with clinical and radiological response. Chemotherapy is based on anthracyclines ± ifosfamide or dacarbazine. Palliative radiotherapy can be offered for symptom control, and stereotactic radiotherapy can be used for up to five isolated metastatic lesions. Conclusions Treatment of uterine sarcoma should be centralised at referral centres and managed in a multidisciplinary setting.

Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and net monetary benefit of olaparib maintenance therapy compared with no maintenance therapy after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in newly diagnosed advanced BRCA1/2-mutated ovarian cancer from the Italian National Health Service (NHS) perspective. Methods We developed a lifetime Markov model in which a cohort of patients with newly diagnosed advanced BRCA1/2-mutated ovarian cancer was assigned to receive either olaparib maintenance therapy or active surveillance (Italian standard of care) after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy to compare cost-effectiveness and net monetary benefit of the 2 strategies. Data on clinical outcomes were obtained from related clinical trial literature and extrapolated using parametric survival analyses. Data on costs were derived from Italian official sources and relevant real-world studies. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR), and incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) were computed and compared against an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained of €16,372 willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. We used deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) to assess how uncertainty affects results; we also performed scenario analyses to compare results under different pricing settings. Findings In the base-case scenario, during a 50-year time horizon, the total costs for patients treated with olaparib therapy and active surveillance were €124,359 and €97,043, respectively, and QALYs gained were 7.29 and 4.88, respectively, with an ICER of €9,515 per life-year gained, an ICUR of €11,345 per QALY gained, and an INMB of €12,104. In scenario analyses, considering maximum selling prices for all other drugs, ICUR decreased to €11,311 per QALY and €7,498 per QALY when a 10% and 20% discount, respectively, was applied to the olaparib official price, and the INMB increased to €12,186 and €21,366, respectively. DSA found that the model results were most sensitive to the proportion of patients with relapsing disease in response to platinum-based chemotherapy, time receiving olaparib first-line maintenance treatment, and subsequent treatments price. According to PSAresults, olaparib was associated with a probability of being cost-effective at a €16,372 per QALY WTP threshold ranging from 70% to 100% in the scenarios examined. Implications Our analysis indicates that olaparib maintenance therapy may deliver a significant health benefit with a contained upfront cost during a 50-year time horizon, from the Italian NHS perspective, providing value in a setting with curative intent.

BackgroundWith the approval of the poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib for newly diagnosed, breast cancer gene (BRCA)1/2 mutated, ovarian cancer women, the assessment of BRCA1/2 tumour status will be shortly required at the time of diagnosis.AimTo investigate the feasibility of next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based BRCA tumour test on cytological specimens from ovarian cancer ascites.MethodsWe evaluated the BRCA1/2 status on neoplastic ascites and corresponding tumour tissue of 11 patients with ovarian cancer, using the NGS ‘Oncomine BRCA Research Assay’.ResultsThe NGS-based BRCA test on cytological samples had a success rate of 100%, with 11 of 11 concordant BRCA1/2 results between ascites and tumour tissues analyses, including two wild type samples and nine cases harbouring somatic or germline variants.ConclusionBRCA test may be performed on ovarian cancer ascites, reproducing BRCA1/2 tumour status and representing a useful tool for clinical decision-making.

Carcinoma d'ovari recurrent; Rucaparib Carcinoma de ovario recurrente; Rucaparib Recurrent Ovarian Carcinoma; Rucaparib PURPOSE To investigate quality-adjusted progression-free survival (QA-PFS) and quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) in a post hoc exploratory analysis of the phase III ARIEL3 study of rucaparib maintenance treatment versus placebo. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian carcinoma were randomly assigned to rucaparib (600 mg twice per day) or placebo. QA-PFS was calculated as progression-free survival function × the 3-level version of the EQ-5D questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) index score function. Q-TWiST analyses were performed defining TOX as the mean duration in which a patient experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) or the mean duration in which a patient experienced grade ≥ 2 TEAEs of nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and asthenia. Q-TWiST was calculated as μTOX × TOX + TWiST, with μTOX calculated using EQ-5D-3L data. RESULTS The visit cutoff was Apr 15, 2017. Mean QA-PFS was significantly longer with rucaparib versus placebo in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (375 randomly assigned to rucaparib v 189 randomly assigned to placebo; difference, 6.28 months [95% CI, 4.85 to 7.47 months]); BRCA-mutant cohort (130 rucaparib v 66 placebo; 9.37 months [95% CI, 6.65 to 11.85 months]); homologous recombination deficient (HRD) cohort (236 rucaparib v 118 placebo; 7.93 months [95% CI, 5.93 to 9.53 months]); and BRCA wild-type/loss of heterozygosity (LOH) low patient subgroup (107 rucaparib v 54 placebo; 2.71 months [95% CI, 0.31 to 4.44 months]). With TOX defined using grade ≥ 3 TEAEs, the difference in mean Q-TWiST (rucaparib v placebo) was 6.88 months (95% CI, 5.71 to 8.23 months), 9.73 months (95% CI, 7.10 to 11.94 months), 8.11 months (95% CI, 6.36 to 9.49 months), and 3.35 months (95% CI, 1.66 to 5.40 months) in the ITT population, BRCA-mutant cohort, HRD cohort, and BRCA wild-type/LOH low patient subgroup, respectively. Q-TWiST with TOX defined using select grade ≥ 2 TEAEs also consistently favored rucaparib. CONCLUSION The significant differences in QA-PFS and Q-TWiST confirm the benefit of rucaparib versus placebo in all predefined cohorts. Supported by Clovis Oncology. Additional support was provided in part by the Ann Rife Cox Chair in Gynecology and the Judy Reis/Albert Pisani, MD, Ovarian Cancer Research Fund (to R.L.C.) and by the National Institute of Health Research Biomedical Research Centre at University College London (to J.A.L.). C.A. is supported in part by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Support Grant P30 CA008748. Funding was also provided by US Department of Defense Ovarian Cancer Research Program OC120506, a V Foundation Translational Award, and a Stand Up To Cancer–Ovarian Cancer Research Fund Alliance–National Ovarian Cancer Coalition Dream Team Translational Research Grant (Grant No. SU2C-AACR-DT16–15; all to E.M.S.). Stand Up to Cancer is a program of the Entertainment Industry Foundation; research grants are administered by the American Association for Cancer Research, a scientific partner of Stand Up To Cancer.

Purpose to evaluate the accuracy of Whole Body MRI including Diffusion-Weighted Imaging sequences (WB DWI MR) in the assessment of sites of disease in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), in comparison to CT; to evaluate whether a clinical-radiological score may predict suboptimal cytoreductive surgery. Methods patients with suspected EOC who underwent pre-operative WB DWI MR were included; CT scans were recorded. Data recorded included: age, staging, dates of examinations and surgery; tumour markers; sites of disease at imaging scans and at surgery. For calculation of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of WB DWI MR and CT, surgical evaluation represented the gold standard. The accuracy of WB DWI MR and CT was compared. The association between clinical and radiological criteria with sub-optimal cytoreduction was tested to identify a final model to predict sub-optimal cytoreduction. Results 92 patients were included; 77/92 (83.7 %) were optimally cytoreduced. Sixty-six CT and 92 MR examinations were evaluated. WB DWI MR showed overall higher accuracy than CT in assessing all sites, but it performed significantly better than CT specifically for involvement of mesentery, lumbo-aortic lymph nodes, pelvis, large bowel, sigmoid-rectum. The predicting score for suboptimal cytoreduction included: mesenteric carcinomatosis; mesenteric retraction; large bowel carcinomatosis. Conclusions In pre-operative evaluation of EOC patients, WB DW MRI is accurate for assessment of multiple sites and it is significantly more accurate than CT for specific unresectable sites. In our series, significant sites of disease for suboptimal cytoreduction were mesenteric carcinomatosis, mesenteric retraction and large bowel carcinomatosis.

Background High-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) is a major unmet need in oncology. The remaining uncertainty on its originating tissue has hampered the discovery of molecular oncogenic pathways and the development of effective therapies. Methods We used an approach based on the retention in tumors of a DNA methylation trace (OriPrint) that distinguishes the two putative tissues of origin of HGSOC, the fimbrial (FI) and ovarian surface epithelia (OSE), to stratify HGSOC by several clustering methods, both linear and non-linear. The identified tumor subtypes (FI-like and OSE-like HGSOC) were investigated at the RNAseq level to stratify an in-house cohort of macrodissected HGSOC FFPE samples to derive overall and disease-free survival and identify specific transcriptional alterations of the two tumor subtypes, both by classical differential expression and weighted correlation network analysis. We translated our strategy to published datasets and verified the co-occurrence of previously described molecular classification of HGSOC. We performed cytokine analysis coupled to immune phenotyping to verify alterations in the immune compartment associated with HGSOC. We identified genes that are both differentially expressed and methylated in the two tumor subtypes, concentrating on PAX8 as a bona fide marker of FI-like HGSOC. Results We show that: - OriPrint is a robust DNA methylation tracer that exposes the tissue of origin of HGSOC. - The tissue of origin of HGSOC is the main determinant of DNA methylation variance in HGSOC. - The tissue of origin is a prognostic factor for HGSOC patients. - FI-like and OSE-like HGSOC are endowed with specific transcriptional alterations that impact patients’ prognosis. - OSE-like tumors present a more invasive and immunomodulatory phenotype, compatible with its worse prognostic impact. - Among genes that are differentially expressed and regulated in FI-like and OSE-like HGSOC, PAX8 is a bona fide marker of FI-like tumors. Conclusions Through an integrated approach, our work demonstrates that both FI and OSE are possible origins for human HGSOC, whose derived subtypes are both molecularly and clinically distinct. These results will help define a new roadmap towards rational, subtype-specific therapeutic inroads and improved patients’ care.

PURPOSE A phase II study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00628251 ) showed activity of olaparib capsules versus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in patients with germline BRCA-mutated platinum-resistant or partially platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer. We conducted a phase III trial (SOLO3) of olaparib tablets versus nonplatinum chemotherapy in patients with germline BRCA-mutated platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer who had received at least 2 prior lines of platinum-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this randomized, open-label trial, patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to olaparib 300 mg twice a day or physician’s choice single-agent nonplatinum chemotherapy (pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, paclitaxel, gemcitabine, or topotecan). The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) in the measurable disease analysis set assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR). The key secondary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by BICR in the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS Of 266 randomly assigned patients, 178 were assigned to olaparib and 88 to chemotherapy. In patients with measurable disease (olaparib, n = 151; chemotherapy, n = 72), the BICR-assessed ORR was significantly higher with olaparib than with chemotherapy (72.2% v 51.4%; odds ratio [OR], 2.53 [95% CI, 1.40 to 4.58]; P = .002). In the subgroup who had received 2 prior lines of treatment, the ORR was 84.6% with olaparib and 61.5% with chemotherapy (OR, 3.44 [95% CI, 1.42 to 8.54]). BICR-assessed PFS also significantly favored olaparib versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.43 to 0.91]; P = .013; median, 13.4 v 9.2 months). Adverse events were consistent with the established safety profiles of olaparib and chemotherapy. CONCLUSION Olaparib resulted in statistically significant and clinically relevant improvements in ORR and PFS compared with nonplatinum chemotherapy in patients with germline BRCA-mutated platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer who had received at least 2 prior lines of platinum-based chemotherapy.

Background: In ARIEL3, rucaparib maintenance treatment significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo. Here, we report prespecified, investigator-assessed, exploratory post-progression endpoints and updated safety data. Methods: In this ongoing (enrolment complete) randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, patients aged 18 years or older who had platinum-sensitive, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube carcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 who had received at least two previous platinum-based chemotherapy regimens and responded to their last platinum-based regimen were randomly assigned (2:1) to oral rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) or placebo in 28-day cycles using a computer-generated sequence (block size of six with stratification based on homologous recombination repair gene mutation status, progression-free interval following penultimate platinum-based regimen, and best response to most recent platinum-based regimen). Patients, investigators, site staff, assessors, and the funder were masked to assignments. The primary endpoint of investigator-assessed progression-free survival has been previously reported. Prespecified, exploratory outcomes of chemotherapy-free interval (CFI), time to start of first subsequent therapy (TFST), time to disease progression on subsequent therapy or death (PFS2), and time to start of second subsequent therapy (TSST) and updated safety were analysed (visit cutoff Dec 31, 2017). Efficacy analyses were done in all patients randomised to three nested cohorts: patients with BRCA mutations, patients with homologous recombination deficiencies, and the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01968213. Findings: Between April 7, 2014, and July 19, 2016, 564 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to rucaparib (n=375) or placebo (n=189). Median follow-up was 28·1 months (IQR 22·0–33·6). In the intention-to-treat population, median CFI was 14·3 months (95% CI 13·0–17·4) in the rucaparib group versus 8·8 months (8·0–10·3) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·43 [95% CI 0·35–0·53]; p