Health-related quality of life and patient-centred outcomes with olaparib maintenance after chemotherapy in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation (SOLO2/ENGOT Ov-21): a placebo-controlled, phase 3 randomised trial

Treatment Patterns, Clinical Outcomes and Quality of Life in BRCA1/2-Associated Breast Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Analysis

Background: Breast cancer (BC) patients with germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants (PVs) often face unique challenges compared to non-carriers. However, the impact of PVs on treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and quality of life (QoL) remains insufficiently explored. This study aims to assess these factors in these individuals. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from the Medical University of Vienna Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer between 2011 and 2021. Among 1285 individuals identified, 338 were included (120 BRCA1 PVs, 47 BRCA2 PVs, and 171 non-carriers). Clinical data including treatment patterns and outcomes were collected; QoL was assessed in BRCA1/2 PV carriers using the SF-12 questionnaire. Results: Among 338 BC patients, BRCA1 PV carriers were significantly younger at disease onset and more likely to present with triple-negative BC, with higher Ki-67 (>10%) than BRCA2 or non-carriers. Platinum-based chemotherapy was more frequently administered to BRCA PV carriers for neoadjuvant treatment (OR 7.7, p < 0.001), and therapeutic bilateral mastectomy was more common in BRCA1 carriers (44.7%) compared to BRCA2 (37.8%, p = 0.114) and non-carriers (25.2%, p = 0.003). Epirubicin was the primary agent for adjuvant chemotherapy across all groups compared to other chemotherapeutic agents. QoL assessments revealed significant physical health challenges, particularly among those who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery, while mental health scores remained relatively high. Conclusions: This study highlights the distinct treatment patterns and tumor characteristics associated with BRCA1/2 carriers, including the impact of treatments on quality of life. Nevertheless, our findings ought to be interpreted with caution due to the small sample size. Larger prospective studies with more complete treatment data, including PARP inhibitor use, and further research on supportive care strategies are needed for this high-risk population.

Olaparib: A Chemosensitizer for the Treatment of Glioblastoma

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most prevalent and deadly primary brain tumor. The current treatment for GBM includes adjuvant chemotherapy with temozolomide (TMZ), radiation therapy, and surgical tumor excision. There is still an issue because 50% of patients with GBM who get TMZ have low survival rates due to TMZ resistance. The activation of several DNA repair mechanisms, such as Base Excision Repair (BER), DNA Mismatch Repair (MMR), and O-6- Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase (MGMT), is the main mechanism via which TMZ resistance develops. The zinc-finger DNA-binding enzyme poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 (PARP1), which is activated by binding to DNA breaks, affects the activation of the MGMT, BER, and MMR pathway deficiency, which results in TMZ resistance in GBM. PARP inhibitors have been studied recently as sensitizing medications to increase TMZ potency. The first member of the PARP inhibitor family to be identified was Olaparib. It inhibits PARP1 and PARP2, which causes apoptosis in cancer cells and DNA strand break. Olaparib is currently investigated as a radio- and/or chemo-sensitizer in addition to being used as a single agent because it may increase the cytotoxic effects of other treatments. This review addresses Olaparib and its significance in treating TMZ resistance in GBM.

Safety and quality of life with maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab in older patients with ovarian cancer: subgroup analysis of PAOLA‑1/ENGOT-ov25

BACKGROUND

In PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25, the addition of olaparib to bevacizumab maintenance improved overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. We describe the safety profile and quality of life (QoL) of this combination in older patients in PAOLA-1.

METHODS

Safety (CTCAE v4.03) and QoL (EORTC QoL Questionnaires Core 30 and Ovarian 28) data were collected. We compared safety by age (≥70 vs <70 years) in the olaparib-containing arm. QoL by treatment arm was assessed in older patients. Geriatric features, including Geriatric Vulnerability Score (GVS), were also gathered.

RESULTS

Of 806 patients randomized, 142 were ≥70 years old (olaparib-containing arm: n = 104; placebo arm: n = 38). Older patients treated with olaparib exhibited a similar safety profile to younger patients, except for higher rates of all grades of lymphopenia and grade ≥3 hypertension (31.7% vs 21.6%, P =.032 and 26.9% vs 16.7%, P =.019, respectively). No hematological malignancy was reported. Two years after randomization, mean Global Health Status and cognitive functioning seemed better with olaparib than bevacizumab alone (adjusted mean difference: +4.47 points [95% CI, -0.49 to 9.42] and +4.82 [-0.57 to 10.21], respectively), and other QoL items were similar between arms. In the olaparib-containing arm, older patients with baseline GVS ≥ 1 (n = 48) exhibited increased toxicity and poorer QoL than those with GVS of 0 (n = 34).

CONCLUSION

Among older patients in PAOLA-1, olaparib plus bevacizumab had a manageable safety profile and no adverse impact on QoL. Additional data are required to confirm these results in more vulnerable patients.(ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02477644).

A case of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome of initially presented as cancer of unknown primary with lymph node metastases unveiled by genetic analysis

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is a heterogeneous disease concept involving various malignant tumors. Understanding its pathophysiology is often difficult, together with its treatment. Here, we present a case of CUP with abdominal lymph node enlargement and elevated carbohydrate antigen 125 levels. It initially resembled a favorable prognosis type similar to ovarian cancer, but metastases were observed in cervical lymph nodes, indicating a somewhat atypical CUP compared to the typical ovarian cancer-like CUP. We identified a germline Breast Cancer 1 (BRCA1) p.L63* variant through a family history inquiry and BRCA analysis, indicating hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome. The patient achieved near-complete remission with platinum-based therapy followed by poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor. The variant has shown sensitivity in both clinical and pathogenic reports in the ClinVar database of the National Institutes of Health. No clinical studies reported on the efficacy of PARP inhibitors specific to this variant, but our case demonstrated the sensitivity of platinum-based therapy followed by PARP inhibitor. Reports of CUP in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome are very rare, with only a single report in the literature.

A retrospective analysis of haematological side effects of olaparib in excess-weight and normal BMI patients with ovarian cancer

Background

Olaparib is the first poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor approved in Europe for the treatment of platinum-sensitive patients with newly diagnosed or recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer with a confirmed BRCA mutation or homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). Epidemiological studies have shown an incompatible association between ovarian cancer and obesity, but there have also been scientific reports indicating that obesity, especially severe obesity, increases the risk of ovarian cancer. Olaparib has a wide range of side effects, especially anaemia and neutropenia, which may lead to dose reduction or therapy discontinuation. Therefore, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is recommended. The aim of the study was a retrospective analysis of threshold value of the trough concentration of olaparib (Ctrough) and haematological adverse reactions after olaparib treatment (300 mg/12 h) in excess-weight and normal body mass index (BMI) patients with ovarian cancer.

Materials and methods

The pilot study was conducted on 38 ovarian cancer patients who were divided into two groups: I - normal BMI patients (BMI = 18.5-24.9 kg/m2; n = 14), II - excess-weight patients, i.e. overweight and obese patients (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2; n = 24). The severity of neutropenia and anaemia was graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v5.0). The values of the mean corpuscular volume (MCV), mean corpuscular hemoglobin (MCH), mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration (MCHC), and red blood cell distribution width (RDW) parameters were also taken into account. HPLC-UV method (λ = 254 nm) was applied to measure olaparib plasma concentrations.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in olaparib Ctrough between the groups - 1602.86 vs. 1567.40 ng/mL (p = 0.9156). However, the overweight and obese patients had slightly higher dose/kg-adjusted olaparib Ctrough - 204.17 vs. 159.32 ng/mL/mg/kg. The incidence of grade 1 anaemia in the groups was as follows: I - 42.86%, II - 41.67%. Grade 2 and 3 anaemia was observed only in group II - 4.17% and 8.33%, respectively. The incidence of neutropenia in the groups of patients was as follows: grade 1: group I - 21.43%, group II - 20.83%; grade 2: group I - 7.14%, group II - 4.17%.

Conclusions

The incidence of haematological adverse reactions to olaparib, such as neutropenia and grade 1 anaemia in the group of overweight and obese patients was the same as in the normal BMI group. The overweight and obese patients were characterised by higher severity of haematological adverse reactions to olaparib and slightly higher dose/kg-adjusted olaparib Ctrough. After one month of treatment with olaparib the overweight and obese patients had significantly lower red blood cells (RBC) and haemoglobin (Hgb) levels than the patients with normal BMI, which may indicate that anaemia develops faster in this group of patients.

Analyses of quality of life in cancer drug trials - a review of measurements and analytical choices in post-reimbursement studies

OBJECTIVES

For drugs reimbursed with limited evidence of patient benefits, confirmatory evidence of overall survival (OS) and quality of life (QoL) benefits is important. For QoL data to serve as valuable input to patients and decision-makers, it must be measured and analyzed using appropriate methods. We aimed to assess the measurement and analyses of post-reimbursement QoL data for cancer drugs introduced in Swedish healthcare with limited evidence at the time of reimbursement.

METHODS

We reviewed any published post-reimbursement trial data on QoL for cancer drugs reimbursed in Sweden between 2010 and 2020 with limited evidence of improvement in QoL and OS benefits at the time of reimbursement. We extracted information on the instruments used, frequency of measurement, extent of missing data, statistical approaches, and the use of pre-registration and study protocols.

RESULTS

Out of 22 drugs satisfying our inclusion criteria, we identified published QoL data for 12 drugs in 22 studies covering multiple cancer types. The most frequently used QoL instruments were EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-3/5L. We identified three areas needing improvement in QoL measurement and analysis: (i) motivation for the frequency of measurements, (ii) handling of the substantial missing data problem, and (iii) inclusion and adherence to QoL analyses in clinical trial pre-registration and study protocols.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that the measurements and analysis of QoL data in our sample of cancer trials covering drugs initially reimbursed without any confirmed QoL or OS evidence have significant room for improvement. The increasing use of QoL assessments must be accompanied by a stricter adherence to best-practice guidelines to provide valuable input to patients and decision-makers.

Real-world data on niraparib maintenance treatment in patients with non-gBRCA mutated platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to provide real-world efficacy and safety data on niraparib maintenance treatment in patients with non-germline (gBRCA)1/2 mutated platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective multi-center cohort study included 94 platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer patients without known gBRCA1/2 mutation treated in an individual patient access program in Norway. The primary outcome was time from start of niraparib treatment to first subsequent treatment. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, safety, and tolerability.

RESULTS

After median follow-up of 13.4 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 10.0 to 16.8), 68.1% had progressed and 22.3% had died. Of the entire cohort, 61.7% had commenced a new line of treatment, and 24.5% were still receiving niraparib. The median duration of niraparib treatment was 5.0 months (range 0.4 to 27.3), and the median time to first subsequent treatment was 10.7 months (95% CI 8.4 to 13.0). Patients with elevated CA125 prior to start of niraparib had shorter time to first subsequent treatment (7.3 months, 95% CI 4.2 to 10.3) than patients with normalized CA125 (12.2 months, 95% CI 10.9 to 13.7 (p=0.002). Patients who started on individual dose based on weight and platelet counts had fewer dose reductions (p<0.001) and interruptions (p=0.02).

CONCLUSION

In a real-world setting, niraparib maintenance treatment in patients with non-gBRCA1/2 mutated recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer showed effectiveness comparable with published phase III studies and acceptable safety. Individualized dosing is essential to minimize adverse events. CA125 levels at start of niraparib treatment may help to estimate the individual prognosis.

Heterogeneity and treatment landscape of ovarian carcinoma

Ovarian carcinoma is characterized by heterogeneity at the molecular, cellular and anatomical levels, both spatially and temporally. This heterogeneity affects response to surgery and/or systemic therapy, and also facilitates inherent and acquired drug resistance. As a consequence, this tumour type is often aggressive and frequently lethal. Ovarian carcinoma is not a single disease entity and comprises various subtypes, each with distinct complex molecular landscapes that change during progression and therapy. The interactions of cancer and stromal cells within the tumour microenvironment further affects disease evolution and response to therapy. In past decades, researchers have characterized the cellular, molecular, microenvironmental and immunological heterogeneity of ovarian carcinoma. Traditional treatment approaches have considered ovarian carcinoma as a single entity. This landscape is slowly changing with the increasing appreciation of heterogeneity and the recognition that delivering ineffective therapies can delay the development of effective personalized approaches as well as potentially change the molecular and cellular characteristics of the tumour, which might lead to additional resistance to subsequent therapy. In this Review we discuss the heterogeneity of ovarian carcinoma, outline the current treatment landscape for this malignancy and highlight potentially effective therapeutic strategies in development.

Patient-reported outcomes of maintenance rucaparib in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma in ARIEL3, a phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

PURPOSE

To compare NFOSI-18 Disease Related Symptoms - Physical (DRSP), Total score, and side effect bother between maintenance rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) vs. placebo in the phase III ARIEL3 trial.

METHODS

ARIEL3 (NCT01968213) included patients with ovarian carcinoma who responded to second-line or later platinum-based chemotherapy. The NFOSI-18 DRS-P and Total scales were secondary endpoints. The NFOSI-18 contains a side effect impact item (GP5): "I am bothered by side effects of treatment." We compared treatment arms on change from baseline of DRS-P and Total scores using mixed models with repeated measures (MRMM). Time to first and confirmed deterioration of NFOSI-18 DRS-P and Total scales were analyzed using Cox regression. We also calculated the proportion of patients reporting moderate to high side effect bother on GP5.

RESULTS

In the intention-to-treat (ITT) cohort, mean change from baseline favored the placebo. Compared to placebo, rucaparib was associated with higher risk of deterioration [e.g., 4-point deteriorator definition hazard ratio (HR): 1.85; 95% CI: 1.46, 2.36; median time to first deterioration on DRSP: 1.9 vs. 7.0 months]. Confirmed deterioration results resembled those for first deterioration. Proportions of patients reporting moderate/high side effect bother on GP5 fluctuated around 20% across treatment cycles. Results in BRCA mutant and homologous recombination deficient cohorts were generally similar to those from the ITT cohort.

CONCLUSION

This placebo-controlled study in the maintenance therapy setting provides a unique view of the impact of PARP inhibition on the patient-reported outcomes that are commonly used in ovarian cancer clinical trials. Information regarding the adverse side effect impact of PARP inhibitors should be weighed against their clinical benefit.

PARP Inhibitors in Ovarian Cancer: A Review

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPis) have transformed the ovarian cancer (OC) treatment landscape. This narrative review provides a comprehensive overview of data for the PARPis olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib in patients with OC and discusses their role in disease management, with a focus on the use of PARPis as maintenance therapy in the United States (US). Olaparib was the first PARPi to be approved as first-line maintenance monotherapy in the US, with maintenance niraparib subsequently approved in the first-line setting. Data also support the efficacy of rucaparib as first-line maintenance monotherapy. PARPi maintenance combination therapy (olaparib plus bevacizumab) also provides benefit in patients with newly diagnosed advanced OC whose tumors tested positive for homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). Biomarker testing is critical in the newly diagnosed setting to identify patients most likely to benefit from PARPi maintenance therapy and guide treatment decisions. Clinical trial data support the use of PARPis (olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib) as second-line or later maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed OC. Although distinct differences in tolerability profile were observed between PARPis, they were generally well tolerated, with the majority of adverse events managed by dose modification. PARPis had no detrimental effect on patients' health-related quality of life. Real-world data support the use of PARPis in OC, although some differences between PARPis are apparent. Data from trials investigating novel combination strategies, such as PARPis plus immune checkpoint inhibitors, are awaited with interest; the optimal sequencing of novel therapies in OC remains to be established.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in ovarian cancer: where do we go from here?

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the most lethal gynaecological malignancy, and despite advancements in therapeutics, most women unfortunately still succumb to their disease. Immunotherapies, in particular immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), have been therapeutically transformative in many tumour types, including gynaecological malignancies such as cervical and endometrial cancer. Unfortunately, these therapeutic successes have not been mirrored in ovarian cancer clinical studies. This review provides an overview of the ovarian tumour microenvironment (TME), particularly factors associated with survival, and explores current research into immunotherapeutic strategies in EOC, with an exploratory focus on novel therapeutics in navigating drug resistance.

PARP inhibitors (PARPi) prolongation after local therapy for oligo-metastatic progression in relapsed ovarian cancer patients

BACKGROUND

PARP inhibitors (PARPi) have revolutionized the management of high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (HGOC) treatment. However, a significant number of patients relapse or progress under PARPi, leading to the introduction of a new line of systemic therapy such as chemotherapy. In patients with a limited number of metastatic sites at progression, -referred to as an oligometastatic progression- a potential indication for local therapy followed by re-introduction or continuation of PARPi treatment rather than initiating a new line of chemotherapy could be proposed. However, the impact of such strategies on progression free survival (PFS) in these patients remains unknown.

METHODS

This international multicenter retrospective study evaluated the efficacy of PARPi continuation or re-introduction in patients with HGOC after local treatment for oligometastatic progression. The main objective was to assess PFS under PARPi after local therapy (PFS post-LT). Secondary objectives included safety and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

74 patients were identified in 20 centers between April 2020 and November 2021. 65% of patients were BRCA mutated and 92% had received ≥2 lines of prior systemic chemotherapy before the initial introduction of PARPi. Main progression sites were lymph nodes (42%), peritoneum (27%), liver (16%), other visceral (16%) and abdominal wall (4%). Local therapies included radiotherapy (45%), surgery (43%), both (7%), percutaneous thermal ablation (4%) or chemoembolization (1%). Median PFS post-LT was 11.5 months [95% CI 7.4; 17.2]. After a median follow up of 14.8 months, 6 patients (8.1%) discontinued PARPi due to toxicity. The 1-year overall survival rate was 90.7% [95% CI 79.1; 96.0].

CONCLUSIONS

With close to one year without progression or introduction of a new line of systemic therapy, this study reports the feasibility and potential benefit of this original strategy in patients with oligometastatic progression under PARPi.

Analysis of adverse events and quality of life in high-grade serous ovarian cancer patients with Olaparib maintenance therapy: A single-center study in China

Olaparib showed good efficacy and tolerability in the maintenance treatment of patients with initial therapy or high-grade serous recurrent ovarian cancer patients. This study aimed to analyze adverse events (AEs) of patients taking Olaparib and the quality of life (QoL) with Olaparib in 1 center of China. The study included 98 patients who received Olaparib and 210 patients without Olaparib from July 2018 to October 2021 for high-grade serous ovarian cancer in the Gynecology Oncology Department of Jiangsu Provincial Hospital. Information of clinicopathologic characteristics was collected from medical records. Then, we used the QLQ-C30 and Quality of Life Ovarian Cancer 28 Questionnaire (QLQ-OV28) to determine the QoL of 98 patients with and 210 patients without Olaparib. Among all 98 patients with Olaparib, 66 patients in first-line and 32 patients in more than second-line treatment. Regarding the best objective response with Olaparib maintenance in 78 patients with partial remission from most recent chemotherapy, 3 (3.84%) patients showed complete response (CR) and 6 (7.69%) showed as partial response (PR), whereas stable disease was observed in 42 patients (53.84%) and 27 patients (34.6%) showed as progression disease. AEs of Grade 3 and more were: anemia in 16 patients (16.32%), neutropenia in 20 patients (20.40%), thrombocytopenia in 4 patients (4.08%), and headache in 4 patients (4.08%). Dose reduction and drug discontinuation accounted for 73.40% and 20.40%, respectively. Olaparib as maintenance therapy increased QoL on all functioning domains and several symptom domains. Consistent with previous clinical trials, Olaparib maintenance therapy was proved safe and effective. Most patients may experience Grade 1 and 2 AEs. Olaparib maintenance therapy can increase QoL in several domains.

Outcomes and endpoints of relevance in gynecologic cancer clinical trials

Drug development is paramount to improve outcomes in patients with gynecologic cancers. A randomized clinical trial should measure whether a clinically relevant improvement is detected with the new intervention compared with the standard of care, using reproductible and appropriate endpoints. Clinically meaningful improvements in overall survival and/or quality of life (QoL) are the gold standards to measure benefit of new therapeutic strategies. Alternative endpoints, such as progression-free survival, provide an earlier measure of the effect of the new therapeutic drug, and are not confounded by the effect of subsequent lines of therapy. Yet, its surrogacy with improved overall survival or QoL is unclear in gynecologic malignancies. Of relevance to studies assessing maintenance strategies are other time-to-event endpoints, such as progression-free survival two and time to second subsequent treatment, which provide valuable information on the disease control in the longer term. Translational and biomarker studies are increasingly being incorporated into gynecologic oncology clinical trials, as they may allow understanding of the biology of the disease, resistance mechanisms, and enable a better selection of patients who might benefit from the new therapeutic strategy. Globally, the endpoint selection of a clinical trial will differ according to the type of study, population, disease setting, and type of therapeutic strategy. This review provides an overview of primary and secondary endpoint selection of relevance for gynecologic oncology clinical trials.

SLC11A2: a promising biomarker and therapeutic target in ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer has the highest mortality rate among gynecologic tumors, with a 5-year survival rate of less than 25%. There is an urgent need for early diagnosis and new drugs to reduce the disease burden of ovarian cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of SLC11A2 as a therapeutic target and marker for ovarian cancer. Expression data of SLC11A2 were obtained from public databases. Then, the biological functions of SLC11A2 were validated in four ovarian cancer cell lines. Finally, we collected ovarian cancer clinical tissues, serum, and plasma exosomes and used immunohistochemistry, Elisa, and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) to validate the test efficacy of SLC11A2. The results showed that ovarian cancers with high SLC11A2 mRNA expression had shorter 5-year PFS and MST. Knockdown of SLC11A2 reduced ovarian cancer migration and increased cisplatin-induced apoptosis. Serum SLC11A2 may help improve the detection rate of ovarian cancer.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Ovarian Cancer: Facilitating and Enhancing the Reporting of Symptoms, Adverse Events, and Subjective Benefit of Treatment in Clinical Trials and Clinical Practice

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide a valid, standardized way of assessing symptoms, adverse events and the subjective benefit of treatment from the patient's perspective. Assessment of PROs is critical in ovarian cancer due to the high morbidity of the disease and its treatments. Several well-validated PRO measures are available to assess PROs in ovarian cancer. Their inclusion in clinical trials can provide evidence on the benefits and harms of new treatments based on patients' experiences to guide improvements in clinical practice and health policy. Aggregate PRO data collected in clinical trials can be used to inform patients about likely treatment impacts and assist them to make informed treatment decisions. In clinical practice, PRO assessments can facilitate monitoring of a patient's symptoms throughout treatment and follow-up to guide their clinical management; in this context, an individual patient's responses can facilitate communication with their treating clinician about troublesome symptoms and their impact on their quality of life. This literature review aimed to provide clinicians and researchers with a better understanding of why and how PROs can be incorporated into ovarian cancer clinical trials and routine clinical practice. We discuss the importance of assessing PROs throughout the ovarian cancer disease and treatment trajectory in both clinical trials and clinical practice, and provide examples from existing literature to illustrate the uses of PROs as the goals of treatment change in each setting.

Advances in small molecule maintenance therapies for high-grade serous ovarian cancer

INTRODUCTION

Ovarian cancer is one of the most lethal gynecological tumors with a lack of effective treatment modalities especially in advanced/recurrent disease. Nevertheless, recently, new small molecules have emerged as an effective approach for the management of ovarian cancer patients, especially in the maintenance setting.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the role of small molecules used in the management of high-grade serous ovarian cancer. The authors performed a critical review of current evidence and ongoing studies. Of note, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are the most intriguing medications in this setting.

EXPERT OPINION

Protein-targeted therapies against tumor tissues have progressed significantly in the last years due to an enhanced knowledge of the biological and molecular processes of carcinogenesis. Treatment with small molecules allows the targeting of specific proteins involved in cancer biology. TKIs seem promising but further data are necessary to assess the pros and cons of adopting this treatment modality. PARP inhibitors represent the new standard of care for ovarian cancer patients harboring either a BRCA mutation or with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). Interestingly, the accumulation of data has highlighted that PARP inhibitors provide benefits even in patients with HR proficient tumors.

Targeted therapy and immunotherapy: Diamonds in the rough in the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer

Currently, for ovarian cancer, which has the highest mortality rate among all gynecological cancers, the standard treatment protocol is initial tumor cytoreductive surgery followed by platinum-based combination chemotherapy. Although the survival rate after standard treatment has improved, the therapeutic effect of traditional chemotherapy is very limited due to problems such as resistance to platinum-based drugs and recurrence. With the advent of the precision medicine era, molecular targeted therapy has gradually entered clinicians' view, and individualized precision therapy has been realized, surpassing the limitations of traditional therapy. The detection of genetic mutations affecting treatment, especially breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutations and mutations of other homologous recombination repair defect (HRD) genes, can guide the targeted drug treatment of patients, effectively improve the treatment effect and achieve a better patient prognosis. This article reviews different sites and pathways of targeted therapy, including angiogenesis, cell cycle and DNA repair, and immune and metabolic pathways, and the latest research progress from preclinical and clinical trials related to ovarian cancer therapy.

Synthesis and anti-ovarian cancer effects of benzimidazole-2-substituted pyridine and phenyl propenone derivatives

Background: Given the benzimidazole derivatives have anti-ovarian cancer effects, the authors aimed to determine whether benzimidazole-2-substituted pyridine and phenyl propenone derivatives exert anti-ovarian cancer activity. Materials & methods: 21 derivatives were synthesized and assayed for their antiproliferative activities. Western blotting in A2780 cells was used to detect the effects of compound A-6 on apoptosis-related proteins. Invasion, migration and apoptosis were assayed in SKOV3 cells treated with A-6. The in vivo activity was also examined. Results: A-6 could inhibit proliferation, invasion and migration and induce apoptosis in SKOV3 cells. Additionally, A-6 had potent inhibitory activity in a xenograft mouse model. Conclusion: A-6 shows potent efficacy in the treatment of ovarian cancer and may be a potential antitumor agent.

Quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease or toxicity and quality-adjusted progression-free survival with niraparib maintenance in first-line ovarian cancer in the PRIMA trial

Background:

The PRIMA phase 3 trial showed niraparib significantly prolongs median progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (OC) responsive to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, including those who had tumors with homologous recombination deficiency (HRd). This analysis of PRIMA examined the quality-adjusted PFS (QA-PFS) and quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease or toxicity (Q-TWiST) of patients on maintenance niraparib versus placebo.

Methods:

Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive once-daily maintenance niraparib (n = 487) or placebo (n = 246). QA-PFS was defined as the PFS of patients adjusted for their health-related quality of life (HRQoL) prior to disease progression, measured using European Quality of Life Five-Dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaire index scores from the PRIMA trial. Q-TWiST was calculated by combining data on PFS, duration of symptomatic grade ⩾2 adverse events (fatigue or asthenia, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and abdominal bloating) prior to disease progression, and EQ-5D index scores. Analyses used data collected up to the last date of PFS assessment (May 17, 2019).

Results:

The restricted mean QA-PFS was significantly longer with niraparib versus placebo in the HRd (n = 373) and overall intention-to-treat (ITT; n = 733) populations (mean gains of 6.5 [95% confidence interval; CI, 3.9–8.9] and 4.1 [95% CI, 2.2–5.8] months, respectively). There were also significant improvements in restricted mean Q-TWiST for niraparib versus placebo (mean gains of 5.9 [95% CI, 3.5–8.6] and 3.5 [95% CI, 1.7–5.6] months, respectively) in the HRd and ITT populations.

Conclusions:

In patients with advanced OC, first-line niraparib maintenance was associated with significant gains in QA-PFS and Q-TWiST versus placebo. These findings demonstrate that niraparib maintenance treatment is associated with a PFS improvement and that treatment benefit is maintained even when HRQoL and/or toxicity data are combined with PFS in a single measure.

Trial registration:

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02655016; trial registration date: January 13, 2016

Plain language summary

Background: In a large clinical trial called PRIMA, patients with advanced cancer of the ovary (ovarian cancer) were given either niraparib (a type of cancer medicine) or placebo (a pill containing no medicine/active substances) after having chemotherapy (another type of cancer medicine). Taking niraparib after chemotherapy is called maintenance therapy and aims to give patients more time before their cancer returns or gets worse than if they were not given any further treatment. In the PRIMA trial, patients who took niraparib did have more time before their cancer progressed than if they took placebo. However, it is important to consider patients’ quality of life, which can be made worse by cancer symptoms and/or side effects of treatment. Here, we assessed the overall benefit of niraparib for patients in PRIMA.

Methods: Both the length of time before disease progression (or survival time) and quality of life were considered using two different analyses:

● The first analysis was called quality-adjusted PFS (QA-PFS) and looked at how long patients survived with good quality of life.

● The second analysis was called quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease or toxicity (Q-TWiST) and looked at how long patients survived without cancer symptoms or treatment side effects.

Results: The PRIMA trial included 733 patients; 487 took niraparib and 246 took placebo. Around half of the patients in both groups had a type of ovarian cancer that responds particularly well to drugs like niraparib – they are known as homologous recombination deficiency (HRd) patients.

● When information on quality of life (collected from patient questionnaires) and survival was combined in the QA-PFS analysis, HRd patients who took niraparib had approximately 6.5 months longer with a good quality of life before disease progression than those who took placebo. In the overall group of patients (including HRd patients and non-HRd patients), those who took niraparib had approximately 4 months longer than with placebo.

● Using the second analysis (Q-TWiST) to combine information on survival with cancer symptoms and treatment side effects, the HRd patients taking niraparib had approximately 6 months longer without cancer symptoms or treatment side effects (such as nausea or vomiting) than patients taking placebo. In the overall group of patients, those taking niraparib had approximately 3.5 months longer without these cancer symptoms/side effects than patients receiving placebo.

Conclusions: These results show that the survival benefits of niraparib treatment remain when accounting for patients’ quality of life. These benefits were seen not only in HRd patients who are known to respond better to niraparib, but in the overall group of patients who took niraparib.

Targeting the DNA damage response in pediatric malignancies

INTRODUCTION

High levels of DNA damage and mutations in DNA damage response genes creates a high reliance on DNA damage repair in various tumors. This creates a vulnerability for new cancer therapies. Although there is extensive data for the use of these agents in adult tumors, the evaluation of these compounds in the pediatric population remains in the early stages.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we discuss the role of the DNA damage response as a therapeutic vulnerability in pediatric malignancies, provide a summary of clinical data for the use of DNA damage response inhibitors in cancer, and review how these compounds can be extended to the pediatric population.

EXPERT OPINION

A number of pediatric cancers rely on robust DNA damage repair to maintain cell viability. This provides a therapeutic vulnerability in cancer cells resistant to other traditional therapies. Unfortunately, although clinical evaluation of inhibitors of various components of the DNA damage response has been done in adults, pediatric data remains limited. Further studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of these compounds in the pediatric population.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of olaparib as maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation in china

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of olaparib as the maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation in China.

Methods: A Markov model was developed to simulate the clinical course of typical patients with ovarian cancer in the SOLO2 trial. The Weibull survival model was employed to fit the Kaplan–Meier progression-free survival and overall survival probabilities of the olaparib and placebo strategies, respectively. The clinical and direct costs data were derived from randomized clinical trials and published reports. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated over a 10-year lifetime horizon. Meanwhile, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to explore the impact of uncertainty on the model’s outcomes.

Results: Overall, the incremental effectiveness and cost of olaparib versus placebo were 0.56 QALYs and $43,292.92, respectively, resulting in an ICER of $77,620.56/QALY, higher than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of China ($31,498.70/QALY). The results were sensitive to the cost of olaparib and utility of PFS. Scenario analyses suggested that when the cost of olaparib was reduced by 60%, ICER decreased to $30,611.52/QALY, lower than the WTP threshold of China.

Conclusion: The findings from the present analysis suggest that olaparib with a 60% discount as maintenance therapy might be cost effective in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation in China.

PARP Inhibitors: Clinical Limitations and Recent Attempts to Overcome Them

PARP inhibitors are the first clinically approved drugs that were developed based on synthetic lethality. PARP inhibitors have shown promising outcomes since their clinical applications and have recently been approved as maintenance treatment for cancer patients with BRCA mutations. PARP inhibitors also exhibit positive results even in patients without homologous recombination (HR) deficiency. Therapeutic effects were successfully achieved; however, the development of resistance was unavoidable. Approximately 40–70% of patients are likely to develop resistance. Here, we describe the mechanisms of action of PARP inhibitors, the causes of resistance, and the various efforts to overcome resistance. Particularly, we determined the survival probability of cancer patients according to the expression patterns of genes associated with HR restoration, which are critical for the development of PARP inhibitor resistance. Furthermore, we discuss the innovative attempts to degrade PARP proteins by chemically modifying PARP inhibitors. These efforts would enhance the efficacy of PARP inhibitors or expand the scope of their usage.

Niraparib treatment for patients with BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer: review of clinical data and therapeutic context

We reviewed clinical data for niraparib monotherapy in BRCA-mutated (BRCAm) epithelial ovarian cancer (OC), contextualizing results with data from other poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis). Niraparib reduced the likelihood of progression or death by 60% as first-line maintenance therapy and by 73-78% in recurrent disease. In heavily pretreated OC, efficacy was greater in the BRCAm versus non-BRCAm cohort. Quality-of-life (QoL) was maintained throughout treatment. Adverse events were consistent with the known niraparib safety profile. Cumulative efficacy, safety and QoL evidence demonstrate niraparib maintenance monotherapy has a positive benefit:risk ratio in BRCAm OC. Niraparib significantly improved progression-free survival as first-line maintenance therapy in all patients with OC (i.e., of any biomarker status).

Toward Incorporating Health-Related Quality of Life as Coprimary End Points in Clinical Trials: Time to Achieve Clinical Important Differences and QoL Profiles

PURPOSE

Besides morbidity and mortality, quality of life (QoL) is a key outcome of cancer treatments. Trials on the basis of clinical outcomes have expectations that QoL outcomes can be either tolerated or improved. Simultaneously considering QoL and clinical outcomes is challenging with lack of suitable metrics allowing incorporation of QoL as coprimary end points in clinical trial design and utilization of hierarchical hypothesis testing.

METHOD

We propose combining time to achieving a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and probabilities of a MCID occurring in each QoL domain to provide QoL metrics analogous to those used for clinical end points. For QoL domains of interest, these yield QoL profiles, time to MCID, and number needed to treat. Incorporation of QoL as coprimary end points in clinical trial designs through hierarchical hypothesis testing can easily be achieved. The noninferiority designed Laparoscopic Approach to Carcinoma of the Endometrium trial, evaluating laparoscopic versus open abdominal surgery for endometrial cancer with Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General QoL domains, is used to illustrate the usefulness of these metrics.

RESULTS

This analysis revealed that laparoscopic surgery had a significant shorter time to MCID for physical and functional well-being QoL domains (physical mean: 1.5 months, 95% CI, 0.5 to 2.6; P = .002; and functional mean: 1.4 months; 95% CI, 0.4 to 2.4; P = .003) than abdominal surgery, but little difference between the two approaches for psychologic social and emotion well-being. Probability profile plots show a consistent > 2-fold higher chance of attaining a MCID for physical and functional well-being over time for laparoscopic compared with abdominal surgery.

CONCLUSION

This analysis reinforces the potential value of novel MCID metrics and their usefulness in raising the profile of QoL outcomes to complement clinical end points. The methods will allow health professionals to counsel patients about QoL outcomes and clinical outcomes simultaneously.

Appropriate Selection of PARP Inhibitors in Ovarian Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Poly-ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) are a class of anti-cancer drugs that target DNA repair pathways and have shown promising efficacy in patients with ovarian cancer in recent clinical trials. To date, there have been 9 FDA PARPi approvals/indications in ovarian cancer since 2014, highlighting the importance of this class of agents in the treatment of ovarian cancer. BRCA1/2-mutated tumors or other forms of homologous recombination deficient (HRD) tumors are particularly susceptible to PARP inhibition and have seen the greatest benefits of improvement in response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) in clinical trials. Patients with homologous recombination-proficient tumors also receive benefit, especially when a nice response to paltinum is noted, but to a lesser extent. PARP inhibitors now have FDA approval and indications in first-line and recurrent maintenance, and treatment. PARP inhibitor use as maintenance therapy in the front-line setting is now considered the standard of care in patients with BRCA1/2 mutations based on the SOLO-1/GOG-3004/ENGOT study. PARP inhibitors are also recommended per ASCO guidelines in all patients with ovarian cancer as front-line maintenance therapy based on the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial. The combination of PARP inhibitor, olaparib, and the anti-angiogenesis inhibitor bevacizumab is also approved as maintenance therapy after front-line chemotherapy treatment in patients with HRD tumors and is an option for patients who have initiated bevacizumab with their chemotherapy treatment. PARPi are also FDA approved and can be utilized as a treatment in third-line and beyond in recurrent ovarian cancer patients with BRCA1/2 mutations and HRD tumors. In this review, we will cover in detail when PARP inhibitor use is appropriate in ovarian cancer, as well as the various clinical factors to take into consideration when selecting a PARP inhibitor regimen.

Pain and health-related quality of life with olaparib versus physician's choice of next-generation hormonal drug in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with homologous recombination repair gene alterations (PROfound): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The PROfound study showed significantly improved radiographical progression-free survival and overall survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with alterations in homologous recombination repair genes and disease progression on a previous next-generation hormonal drug who received olaparib then those who received control. We aimed to assess pain and patient-centric health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures in patients in the trial.

METHODS

In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 study, patients (aged ≥18 years) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and gene alterations to one of 15 genes (BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM [cohort A] and BRIP1, BARD1, CDK12, CHEK1, CHEK2, FANCL, PALB2, PPP2R2A, RAD51B, RAD51C, RAD51D, and RAD54L [cohort B]) and disease progression after a previous next-generation hormonal drug were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive olaparib tablets (300 mg orally twice daily) or a control drug (enzalutamide tablets [160 mg orally once daily] or abiraterone tablets [1000 mg orally once daily] plus prednisone tablets [5 mg orally twice daily]), stratified by previous taxane use and measurable disease. The primary endpoint (radiographical progression-free survival in cohort A) has been previously reported. The prespecified secondary endpoints reported here are on pain, HRQOL, symptomatic skeletal-related events, and time to first opiate use for cancer-related pain in cohort A. Pain was assessed with the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form, and HRQOL was assessed with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P). All endpoints were analysed in patients in cohort A by modified intention-to-treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02987543.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 6, 2017, and June 4, 2019, 245 patients were enrolled in cohort A and received study treatment (162 [66%] in the olaparib group and 83 [34%] in the control group). Median duration of follow-up at data cutoff in all patients was 6·2 months (IQR 2·2-10·4) for the olaparib group and 3·5 months (1·7-4·9) for the control group. In cohort A, median time to pain progression was significantly longer with olaparib than with control (median not reached [95% CI not reached-not reached] with olaparib vs 9·92 months [5·39-not reached] with control; HR 0·44 [95% CI 0·22-0·91]; p=0·019). Pain interference scores were also better in the olaparib group (difference in overall adjusted mean change from baseline score -0·85 [95% CI -1·31 to -0·39]; pnominal=0·0004). Median time to progression of pain severity was not reached in either group (95% CI not reached-not reached for both groups; HR 0·56 [95% CI 0·25-1·34]; pnominal=0·17). In patients who had not used opiates at baseline (113 in the olaparib group, 58 in the control group), median time to first opiate use for cancer-related pain was 18·0 months (95% CI 12·8-not reached) in the olaparib group versus 7·5 months (3·2-not reached) in the control group (HR 0·61; 95% CI 0·38-0·99; pnominal=0·044). The proportion of patients with clinically meaningful improvement in FACT-P total score during treatment was higher for the olaparib group than the control group: 15 (10%) of 152 evaluable patients had a response in the olaparib group compared with one (1%) of evaluable 77 patients in the control group (odds ratio 8·32 [95% CI 1·64-151·84]; pnominal=0·0065). Median time to first symptomatic skeletal-related event was not reached for either treatment group (olaparib group 95% CI not reached-not reached; control group 7·8-not reached; HR 0·37 [95% CI 0·20-0·70]; pnominal=0·0013).

INTERPRETATION

Olaparib was associated with reduced pain burden and better-preserved HRQOL compared with the two control drugs in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and homologous recombination repair gene alterations who had disease progression after a previous next-generation hormonal drug. Our findings support the clinical benefit of improved radiographical progression-free survival and overall survival identified in PROfound.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca and Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors for the treatment of ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer in women world-wide. Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the most common; three-quarters of women present when disease has spread outside the pelvis (stage III or IV). Treatment consists of a combination of  surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy. Although initial responses to chemotherapy are good, most women with advanced disease will relapse. PARP (poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase) inhibitors (PARPi), are a type of anticancer treatment that works by preventing cancer cells from repairing DNA damage, especially in those with breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) variants. PARPi offer a different mechanism of anticancer treatment from conventional chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and risks of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase) inhibitors (PARPi) for the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Central 2020, Issue 10), Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trial Register, MEDLINE (1990 to October 2020), Embase (1990 to October 2020), ongoing trials on www.controlled-trials.com/rct, www.clinicaltrials.gov, www.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials, the National Research Register (NRR), FDA database and pharmaceutical industry biomedical literature.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials that randomised women with EOC to PARPi with no treatment, or PARPi versus conventional chemotherapy, or PARPi together with conventional chemotherapy versus conventional chemotherapy alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology. Two review authors independently assessed whether studies met the inclusion criteria. We contacted investigators for additional data. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), quality of life (QoL) and rate of adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 studies (6109 participants); four (3070 participants) with newly-diagnosed, advanced EOC and 11 (3039 participants) with recurrent EOC. The studies varied in types of comparisons and evaluated PARPi. Eight studies were judged as at low risk of bias in most of the domains. Quality of life data were generally poorly reported. Below we present six key comparisons.  The majority of participants had BRCA mutations, either in their tumour (sBRCAmut) and/or germline (gBRCAmut), or homologous recombination deficiencies (HRD) in their tumours. Newly diagnosed EOC Overall, four studies evaluated the effect of PARPi in newly-diagnosed, advanced EOC. Two compared PARPi with chemotherapy and chemotherapy alone. OS data were not reported. The combination of PARPi with chemotherapy may have little to no difference in progression-free survival (PFS) (two studies, 1564 participants; hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI 0).49 to 1.38; very low-certainty evidence)(no evidence of disease progression at 12 months' 63% with PARPi versus 69% for placebo).  PARPi with chemotherapy likely increases any severe adverse event (SevAE) (grade 3 or higher) slightly (45%) compared with chemotherapy alone (51%) (two studies, 1549 participants, risk ratio (RR) 1.13, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.20; high-certainty evidence). PARPi combined with chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone likely results in little to no difference in the QoL (one study; 744 participants, MD 1.56 95% CI -0.42 to 3.54; moderate-certainty evidence).  Two studies compared PARPi monotherapy with placebo as maintenance after first-line chemotherapy in newly diagnosed EOC. PARPi probably results in little to no difference in OS (two studies, 1124 participants; HR 0.81, 95%CI 0.59 to 1.13; moderate-certainty evidence) (alive at 12 months 68% with PARPi versus 62% for placebo). However, PARPi may increase PFS (two studies, 1124 participants; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.92; low-certainty evidence) (no evidence of disease progression at 12 months' 55% with PARPi versus 24% for placebo). There may be an increase in the risk of experiencing any SevAE (grade 3 or higher) with PARPi (54%) compared with placebo (19%)(two studies, 1118 participants, RR 2.87, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.99; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. There is probably a slight reduction in QoL with PARPi, although this may not be clinically significant (one study, 362 participants; MD -3.00, 95%CI -4.48 to -1.52; moderate-certainty evidence).  Recurrent, platinum-sensitive EOC Overall, 10 studies evaluated the effect of PARPi in recurrent platinum-sensitive EOC. Three studies compared PARPi monotherapy with chemotherapy alone. PARPi may result in little to no difference in OS (two studies, 331 participants; HR 0.95, 95%CI 0.62 to 1.47; low-certainty evidence) (percentage alive at 36 months 18% with PARPi versus 17% for placebo). Evidence is very uncertain about the effect of PARPi on PFS (three studies, 739 participants; HR 0.88, 95%CI 0.56 to 1.38; very low-certainty evidence)(no evidence of disease progression at 12 months 26% with PARPi versus 22% for placebo). There may be little to no difference in rates of any SevAE (grade 3 or higher) with PARPi (50%) than chemotherapy alone (47%) (one study, 254 participants; RR 1.06, 95%CI 0.80 to 1.39; low-certainty evidence). Four studies compared PARPi monotherapy as maintenance with placebo. PARPi may result in little to no difference in OS (two studies, 560 participants; HR 0.88, 95%CI 0.65 to 1.20; moderate-certainty evidence)(percentage alive at 36 months 21% with PARPi versus 17% for placebo). However, evidence suggests that PARPi as maintenance therapy results in a large PFS (four studies, 1677 participants; HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.42; high-certainty evidence)(no evidence of disease progression at 12 months 37% with PARPi versus 5.5% for placebo). PARPi maintenance therapy may result in a large increase in any SevAE (51%) (grade 3 or higher) than placebo (19%)(four studies, 1665 participants, RR 2.62, 95%CI 1.85 to 3.72; low-certainty evidence). PARPi compared with chemotherapy may result in little or no change in QoL (one study, 229 participants, MD 1.20, 95%CI -1.75 to 4.16; low-certainty evidence). Recurrent, platinum-resistant EOC Two studies compared PARPi with chemotherapy. The certainty of evidence in both studies was graded as very low. Overall, there was minimal information on the QoL and adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PARPi maintenance treatment after chemotherapy may improve PFS in women with newly-diagnosed and recurrent platinum-sensitive EOC; there may be little to no effect on OS, although OS data are immature. Overall, this is likely at the expense of an increase in SevAE. It is  disappointing that data on quality of life outcomes  are relatively sparse. More research is needed to determine whether PARPi have a role to play in platinum-resistant disease.

Molecular methods for increasing the effectiveness of ovarian cancer treatment: a systematic review

Background: The aim of the current study is to analyze and summarize the latest research on improving therapy in ovarian cancer. Materials & methods: Data analysis was based on a review of publications from 2011 to 2021 in the PubMed database with use of the search terms including 'EGFR ovarian cancer', 'folate receptor inhibitors ovarian cancer', 'VEGF ovarian cancer', 'PDGF ovarian cancer' and 'CTLA-4 ovarian cancer'. Results: 6643 articles were found; 238 clinical trials and randomized control trials were analyzed; 122 studies were rejected due to inconsistency with the topic of the work. Conclusion: Extensive research on the treatment of ovarian cancer increases the chance of developing the most effective therapy suited to the individual needs of the patient.

Efficacy and safety of olaparib according to age in BRCA1/2-mutated patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer: Analysis of the phase III SOLO2/ENGOT-Ov21 study

BACKGROUND

Olaparib has significantly improved outcome and patient-centered endpoints in BRCA1/2-mutated patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC). Specific information on efficacy and safety of olaparib for older patients appears of special interest.

METHODS

295 patients from the SOLO2 trial randomly assigned to olaparib or placebo were categorized according to age-cutoff at 65 years. Efficacy, tolerability, and quality of life (QoL) of olaparib relative to placebo within in each age group was analyzed.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar in patients ≥65 years (N = 62;21.0%) compared to patients <65 years (N = 233;78.9%). No significant difference in the magnitude of progression-free survival (PFS) benefit from olaparib for older patients (N = 40, hazard ratio [HR]_≥65 0.43, 95%-confidence interval [CI] 0.24-0.81) as compared with younger patients (N = 155, HR_<65 0.31 (95%-CI 0.22-0.43) was seen (interaction P = 0.33). The overall survival (OS)benefit seen in younger patients in the olaparib arm was not observed in older patients. Older and younger patients had comparable safety profiles and QoL scores although higher discontinuation rates for toxicity, and higher frequency of AML/MDS were noted in the older subset. TWiST analysis revealed clinically meaningful duration of good QoL on olaparib for both age groups (≥65: 13.5 vs <65: 18.4 months, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this large phase III cohort of BRCA1/2-mutated PSOC patients treated with olaparib underline impressive efficacy of olaparib maintenance irrespective of age. Although toxicity and tolerability did not raise significant concerns, some caution, close monitoring, and follow-up needs to be exercised for older patients given higher discontinuation rates, frequency of AML/MDS, and no clear effects on OS.

Assessment of quality of life among advanced ovarian cancer patients in a tertiary care hospital in India

PURPOSE

The study aims to record the quality of life (Qol) and its changes while ovarian cancer (OC) patients undergo debulking surgeries and chemotherapy in a tertiary care hospital of Eastern India.

METHODS

Patients with advanced epithelial OC (FIGO stages III-IV) were recruited. They underwent primary/interval debulking surgeries with classical chemotherapy (adjuvant/neoadjuvant) of intravenous tri-weekly doses of paclitaxel + carboplatin. QoL was assessed using Fact- O + FACIT-Sp-12 questionnaire with a set of 51 questions in different domains (spiritual, physical, social, emotional, and functional factors) and a special set for OC patients under the heading "Additional concerns." The responses from patients were recorded at baseline (diagnosis/study entry), 2, 4, and 6 months during the treatment visits. Overall survival (OS) was assessed using Kaplan Meier curve.

RESULTS

A majority of patients were 49.15±10.8 years of age, school-educated (54%), unemployed/homemakers (73.5%), belonging from rural setup (64.6%) with a monthly income of Rs. 2000/- to Rs. 5000/-. There was no statistically significant (p>0.05) improvement found in Qol from the baseline till the end of the study, neither overall nor in subsets (responders (Rs)/partial responders (PRs)/non-responder (NRs) groups or the adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy groups). The common toxicities like anemia, constipation, and weight loss were significantly (p<0.05) correlated with the patients' physical, functional, emotional, and social well-being.

CONCLUSION

Ovarian cancer patients represent a poor functional, social, and disease-specific quality of life that needs to be addressed, identified, and improved by the growing nexus of healthcare providers and researchers.

Mental distress, quality of life and physical symptoms in Chinese women with ovarian cancer receiving olaparib treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVES

Women with ovarian cancer (OC) have experienced unprecedented challenges since the novel coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in China. We aim to evaluate the experience of psychological status, physical symptoms and quality of life (QoL) and investigate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on OC patients receiving olaparib.

METHODS

The survey was conducted online from April 22 to May 12 in 2020. Demographic and clinical questions were listed to collect general information. The degree of insomnia, depression, anxiety, stress symptoms and QoL were assessed by the Chinese versions of the Insomnia Severity Index, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, the Impact of Event Scale-Revised, and the General Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to analyze the risk factors for mental distress and QoL.

RESULTS

A total of 56 respondents coming from 15 various provinces in China participated in the survey. The prevalence of insomnia, depressive, anxiety, stress symptoms and reduced QoL were 37.5, 51.8, 37.5, 30.4, and 51.8%, respectively. Unfavorable disease status, shorter period of olaparib administration, adverse events of olaparib and delay in cancer care were correlated with mental health problems. Reduced QoL was also significantly associated with psychological distress.

CONCLUSIONS

This study emphasized that mental health problems and reduced QoL should gain more attention in women with OC who are receiving oral olaparib at home. Appropriate psychological healthcare strategies are necessary for OC patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Low Density Lipoprotein Receptor (LDLR) and 3-Hydroxy-3-Methylglutaryl Coenzyme a Reductase (HMGCR) Expression are Associated with Platinum-Resistance and Prognosis in Ovarian Carcinoma Patients

Purpose

The efficacy of post-surgery platinum-based chemotherapy, the primary choice for the treatment of ovarian cancer (OC), is greatly reduced by the development of drug-resistance. In this study, we investigated the association of expression low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR) and 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase (HMGCR), two cholesterol metabolism-related proteins, in OC tissues and chemoresistance and patient prognosis.

Methods

Survival analysis using LDLR and HMGCR expression in the ovarian cancer patients using the dataset of Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) was carried out online. A retrospective study was performed on 65 patients who had undergone surgery for ovarian cancer. In addition, patients were divided into 2 groups: platinum resistance group and platinum sensitivity group. Serum lipid metabolism data were collected and analyzed. Protein expressions of LDLR and HMGCR in ovarian cancer tissue were detected by immunohistochemistry.

Results

Online survival analysis showed that patients with higher LDLR expression had poorer prognosis than those with lower LDLR expression in ovarian cancer cells, while a higher HMGCR expression was associated with better OC prognosis. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were lower in patients with higher LDLR levels (OS: P=0.046, DFS: P=0.009). Platinum-resistant patients had higher levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and cholesterol in serum as compared with platinum-sensitive patients (P<0.001). Immunohistochemistry showed that LDLR expression was high and HMGCR was low in platinum-resistant patients.

Conclusion

The expression of LDLR and HMGCR proteins, involved in the regulation of cholesterol metabolism and the plasma LDL and cholesterol levels were significantly different in platinum-resistant and platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer patients. We postulate that cholesterol metabolic reprogramming might play a role in platinum resistance in ovarian cancer.

The impact of COVID-19 on cancer care and oncology clinical research: an experts' perspective

The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic promises to have lasting impacts on cancer clinical trials that could lead to faster patient access to new treatments. In this article, an international panel of oncology experts discusses the lasting impacts of the pandemic on oncology clinical trials and proposes solutions for clinical trial stakeholders, with the support of recent data on worldwide clinical trials collected by IQVIA. These lasting impacts and proposed solutions encompass three topic areas. Firstly, acceleration and implementation of new operational approaches to oncology trials with patient-centric, fully decentralized virtual approaches that include remote assessments via telemedicine and remote devices. Geographical differences in the uptake of remote technology, including telemedicine, are discussed in the article, focusing on the impact of the local adoption of new operational approaches. Secondly, innovative clinical trials. The pandemic has highlighted the need for new trial designs that accelerate research and limit risks and burden for patients while driving optimization of clinical trial objectives and endpoints, while testing is being minimized. Areas of considerations for clinical trial stakeholders are discussed in detail. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the underrepresentation of minority groups in clinical trials; the approach for oncology clinical trials to improve generalizability of efficacy and outcomes data is discussed. Thirdly, a new problem-focused collaborative framework between oncology trial stakeholders, including decision makers, to leverage and further accelerate the innovative approaches in clinical research developed during the COVID-19 pandemic. This could shorten timelines for patient access to new treatments by addressing the cultural and technological barriers to adopting new operational approaches and innovative clinical trials. The role of the different stakeholders is described, with the aim of making COVID-19 a catalyst for positive change in oncology clinical research and eventually in cancer care.

Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies

In the era of rapid development of new, expensive cancer therapies, value frameworks have been developed to quantify clinical benefit (CB). We assessed the evolution of CB since the 2015 introduction of The American Society of Clinical Oncology and The European Society of Medical Oncology value frameworks. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing systemic therapies for solid malignancies from 2010 to 2020 were evaluated and CB (Δ) in 2010–2014 (pre-value frameworks (PRE)) were compared to 2015–2020 (POST) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), and quality of life (QoL). In the 485 studies analyzed (12% PRE and 88% POST), the most common primary endpoint was PFS (49%), followed by OS (20%), RR (12%), and QoL (6%), with a significant increase in OS and decrease in RR as primary endpoints in the POST era (p = 0.011). Multivariable analyses revealed significant improvement in ΔOS POST (OR 2.86, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.26, p = 0.02) while controlling for other variables. After the development of value frameworks, median ΔOS improved minimally. The impact of value frameworks has yet to be fully realized in RCTs. Efforts to include endpoints shown to impact value, such as QoL, into clinical trials are warranted.

Quality of Life and Adverse Events: Prognostic Relationships in Long-Term Ovarian Cancer Survival

BACKGROUND

There is a critical need to identify patient characteristics associated with long-term ovarian cancer survival.

METHODS

Quality of life (QOL), measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian-Trial Outcome Index (FACT-O-TOI), including physical, functional, and ovarian-specific subscales, was compared between long-term survivors (LTS) (8+ years) and short-term survivors (STS) (<5 years) of GOG 218 at baseline; before cycles 4, 7, 13, 21; and 6 months post-treatment using linear and longitudinal mixed models adjusted for covariates. Adverse events (AEs) were compared between survivor groups at each assessment using generalized linear models. All P values are 2-sided.

RESULTS

QOL differed statistically significantly between STS (N = 1115) and LTS (N = 260) (P < .001). Baseline FACT-O-TOI and FACT-O-TOI change were independently associated with long-term survival (odds ratio = 1.05, 95% confidence interval = 1.03 to 1.06 and odds ratio = 1.06, 95% confidence interval = 1.05 to 1.07, respectively). A 7-point increase in baseline QOL was associated with a 38.0% increase in probability of LTS, and a 9-point increase in QOL change was associated with a 67.0% increase in odds for LTS. QOL decreased statistically significantly with increasing AE quartiles (cycle 4 quartiles: 0-5 vs 6-8 vs 9-11 vs ≥12 AEs, P = .01; cycle 21 quartiles: 0-2 vs 3 vs 4-5 vs ≥6 AEs, P = .001). Further, LTS reported statistically significantly better QOL compared with STS (P = .03 and P = .01, cycles 4 and 21, respectively), with similar findings across higher AE grades.

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline and longitudinal QOL change scores distinguished LTS vs STS and are robust prognosticators for long-term survival. Results have trial design and supportive care implications, providing meaningful prognostic value in this understudied population.

Research progress on the association between environmental pollutants and the resistance mechanism of PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancer

The occurrence and progression of ovarian cancer are closely related to genetics and environmental pollutants. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have been a major breakthrough in the history of ovarian cancer treatment. PARP is an enzyme responsible for post-translational modification of proteins and repair of single-stranded DNA damage. PARP inhibitors can selectively inhibit PARP function, resulting in a synthetic lethal effect on tumor cells defective in homologous recombination repair. However, with large-scale application, drug resistance also inevitably appears. For PARP inhibitors, the diversity and complexity of drug resistance mechanisms have always been difficult problems in clinical treatment. Herein, we mainly summarized the research progress of DNA damage repair and drug resistance mechanisms related to PARP inhibitors and the impact of environmental pollutants on DNA damage repair to aid the development prospects and highlight urgent problems to be solved.

Efficacy and Safety of PARP Inhibitor Combination Therapy in Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Though it is known to all that PARP inhibitors (PARPis) are effective when used as maintenance alone for women with recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC), little is known about whether using them in combination with other drugs would contribute to a better efficacy. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the efficacy and safety of PARPi combination therapy compared with monotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that offered the date we needed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and major conference. Data extraction and processing were completed by three investigators to compare OS, PFS, and ORR both in intervention and in control subset. Then, we calculated the pooled RR and 95% CI of all-grade and high-grade adverse effects to study its safety. And we evaluated the within-study heterogeneity by using subgroup and sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

A total of three eligible RCTs covering 343 women were included. In PFS analysis, PARP inhibitor (PARPi) combination therapy can significantly improve PFS for women with ROC when compared with the controls (HR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.59), especially for those with mutated BRCA (HR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.45). And in OS analysis, combination therapy is not inferior to monotherapy (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.50 to 1.61). As for ORR, the effectiveness of combination therapy and monotherapy was almost the same (RR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.82 to 1.31). Additionally, combination therapy seldom causes more adverse events, both in all-grade and in high grade.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (identifier, CRD42018109933).

Cost-effectiveness analysis of olaparib and niraparib as maintenance therapy for women with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer

Objective: We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of olaparib and niraparib as maintenance therapy for patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.Methods: A decision analysis model compared the costs and effectiveness of olaparib and niraparib versus placebo for patients with or without germline BRCA mutations. Resource use and associated costs were estimated from the 2020 National Health Insurance Administration reimbursement price list. Clinical effectiveness was measured in progression-free survival per life-years (PFS-LY) based on the results of clinical trials SOLO2/ENHOT-Ov21 and ENGOT-OV16/NOVA. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated from a single-payer perspective.Results: In the base case, olaparib was the more cost-effective treatment regimen. The ICERs for olaparib and niraparib compared to placebo were NT$1,804,785 and NT$2,340,265 per PFS-LY, respectively. Tornado analysis showed that PFS and the total resource use cost of niraparib regimen for patients without gBRCA were the most sensitive parameters impacting the ICER. The ICERs for both drugs in patients with a gBRCA mutation were lower than in patients without a gBRCA mutation. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that olaparib was more cost-effective than niraparib at the willingness-to-pay threshold of NT$2,602,404 per PFS life-year gained.Conclusion: Olaparib was estimated to be less cost and more effective compared to niraparib as maintenance therapy for patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.

Real-world treatment patterns of maintenance therapy in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVES

The clinical utility of maintenance therapy (MT) for patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer has been validated in several clinical trials. We assessed "real-world" treatment patterns using an electronic health record (EHR) database.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer between January 1, 2011 and July 31, 2019 was conducted using the US nationwide Flatiron Health (EHR)-derived de-identified database. Patients were included if they received second- or third-line (2 L or 3 L) platinum-based chemotherapy (PBCT). Information regarding biomarker status was obtained.

RESULTS

2292 patients with ovarian cancer received at least two lines of therapy. 222 patients completed PBCT on or after March 1, 2017 and had ≥2 months of active surveillance or received MT with poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) or bevacizumab. 46 (20%) had BRCA mutations (BRCAm), 132 (59%) had a wildtype BRCA (BRCAwt) gene, and 47 (21%) were unknown. Of patients with BRCAm, 63% received a PARPi, 17% received bevacizumab, and 20% underwent active surveillance. Of patients with BRCAwt, 40% received a PARPi, 23% received bevacizumab, and 36% underwent active surveillance. MT was more common in those with younger age and a BRCA mutation. PARPi use increased on average by 1.3% every 3 months (p = .02) with no statistically significant change in use of bevacizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world population, MT is becoming progressively more common following 2 L or 3 L PBCT regardless of biomarker status. The results provide insight into the shifting treatment patterns for patients with recurrent ovarian cancer.

Antiparasitic mebendazole (MBZ) effectively overcomes cisplatin resistance in human ovarian cancer cells by inhibiting multiple cancer-associated signaling pathways

Ovarian cancer is the third most common cancer and the second most common cause of gynecologic cancer death in women. Its routine clinical management includes surgical resection and systemic therapy with chemotherapeutics. While the first-line systemic therapy requires the combined use of platinum-based agents and paclitaxel, many ovarian cancer patients have recurrence and eventually succumb to chemoresistance. Thus, it is imperative to develop new strategies to overcome recurrence and chemoresistance of ovarian cancer. Repurposing previously-approved drugs is a cost-effective strategy for cancer drug discovery. The antiparasitic drug mebendazole (MBZ) is one of the most promising drugs with repurposing potential. Here, we investigate whether MBZ can overcome cisplatin resistance and sensitize chemoresistant ovarian cancer cells to cisplatin. We first established and characterized two stable and robust cisplatin-resistant (CR) human ovarian cancer lines and demonstrated that MBZ markedly inhibited cell proliferation, suppressed cell wounding healing/migration, and induced apoptosis in both parental and CR cells at low micromole range. Mechanistically, MBZ was revealed to inhibit multiple cancer-related signal pathways including ELK/SRF, NFKB, MYC/MAX, and E2F/DP1 in cisplatin-resistant ovarian cancer cells. We further showed that MBZ synergized with cisplatin to suppress cell proliferation, induce cell apoptosis, and blunt tumor growth in xenograft tumor model of human cisplatin-resistant ovarian cancer cells. Collectively, our findings suggest that MBZ may be repurposed as a synergistic sensitizer of cisplatin in treating chemoresistant human ovarian cancer, which warrants further clinical studies.

Research progress in the treatment of partial platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is a common malignant tumor in gynaecology and its mortality rate is the highest in gynecological cancer. Ovarian cancer patients should face platinum resistance, caused by multiple recurrences. According to the platinum-free interval (PFI), recurrent ovarian cancer can be divided into platinum-resistant (PFI<6 months) and platinum-sensitive (PFI≥6 months). When PFI is 6-12 months, it belongs to the partial platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. At present, how to prolong the survival of patients with partial platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer is difficult. Secondary cytoreductive surgery, non-platinum chemotherapy, anti-angiogenesis drugs, and molecular targeted therapy of poly (ADP ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors can improve the prognosis of patients with partial platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.

Effect of cancer stage on health-related quality of life of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer

We compared the quality of life (QoL) of women with early versus advanced epithelial ovarian cancer and examined predicting factors for the poor QoL. We classified 157 participants into 108 with early disease (stage I-II) and 49 with advanced disease (stage III-IV). They completed two questionnaires: EORTC QLQ-C30 and Chiang Mai University (CMU) ovarian cancer QoL. For EORTC QLQ-C30, the study groups were comparable regarding global health status/QoL, functional scales, and summary scores. The advanced group had worse scores on symptom scales specifically appetite loss and constipation. For CMU Ovarian Cancer QoL, the advanced group had worse scores only in the gastrointestinal domain but not in urinary, lymphatic, and sexual/hormonal domains. These findings remained mostly unchanged after excluding those with recurrence. In multivariable analysis, currently receiving treatment was consistently associated with worse QoL scores. The advanced stage had more adverse impact only on the gastrointestinal domains of QoL, mainly during periods of receiving chemotherapy.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known on this subject? Survival outcome for women with epithelial ovarian cancer varies depending mainly on stage. Those who survive advanced stage disease could expect long-term disease and treatment-related morbidities that significantly affected QoL. However, there has been very limited information regarding QoL of women who have the early disease in comparison to those with more advanced disease especially in the context of Asian culture.What do the results of this study add? Apart from the higher prevalence of gastrointestinal symptoms reported by the patients with advanced disease, the general well-being and other symptom-specific domains of QoL were comparable between women with early and advanced diseases. Receiving treatment is a consistent predictor for poor QoL.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? In comparison to early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer, the advanced stage had more adverse impact only on the gastrointestinal domains of QoL, mainly during periods of receiving chemotherapy. This information will be useful for patient counselling. Future research should examine the underlying causes of this finding.

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

BACKGROUND

Olaparib, a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, has previously been shown to extend progression-free survival versus placebo when given to patients with relapsed high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer who were platinum sensitive and who had a BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation, as part of the SOLO2/ENGOT-Ov21 trial. The aim of this final analysis is to investigate the effect of olaparib on overall survival.

METHODS

This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial was done across 123 medical centres in 16 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at baseline of 0-1, had histologically confirmed, relapsed, high-grade serous or high-grade endometrioid ovarian cancer, including primary peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer, and had received two or more previous platinum regimens. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive olaparib tablets (300 mg in two 150 mg tablets twice daily) or matching placebo tablets using an interactive web or voice-response system. Stratification was by response to previous chemotherapy and length of platinum-free interval. Treatment assignment was masked to patients, treatment providers, and data assessors. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival has been reported previously. Overall survival was a key secondary endpoint and was analysed in all patients as randomly allocated. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one treatment dose. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01874353, and is no longer recruiting patients.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 3, 2013 and Nov 21, 2014, 295 patients were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either olaparib (n=196 [66%]) or placebo (n=99 [34%]). One patient, randomised in error, did not receive olaparib. Median follow-up was 65·7 months (IQR 63·6-69·3) with olaparib and 64·5 months (63·4-68·7) with placebo. Median overall survival was 51·7 months (95% CI 41·5-59·1) with olaparib and 38·8 months (31·4-48·6) with placebo (hazard ratio 0·74 [95% CI 0·54-1·00]; p=0·054), unadjusted for the 38% of patients in the placebo group who received subsequent PARP inhibitor therapy. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse event was anaemia (which occurred in 41 [21%] of 195 patients in the olaparib group and two [2%] of 99 patients in the placebo group). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 50 (26%) of 195 patients receiving olaparib and eight (8%) of 99 patients receiving placebo. Treatment-emergent adverse events with a fatal outcome occurred in eight (4%) of the 195 patients receiving olaparib, six of which were judged to be treatment-related (attributed to myelodysplastic syndrome [n=3] and acute myeloid leukaemia [n=3]).

INTERPRETATION

Olaparib provided a median overall survival benefit of 12·9 months compared with placebo in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation. Although statistical significance was not reached, these findings are arguably clinically meaningful and support the use of maintenance olaparib in these patients.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca and Merck.

Patient-centred outcomes and effect of disease progression on health status in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation receiving maintenance olaparib or placebo (SOLO1): a randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

In the phase 3 SOLO1 trial, maintenance olaparib provided a significant progression-free survival benefit versus placebo in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation in response after platinum-based chemotherapy. We analysed health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and patient-centred outcomes in SOLO1, and the effect of radiological disease progression on health status.

METHODS

SOLO1 is a randomised, double-blind, international trial done in 118 centres and 15 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older; had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-1; had newly diagnosed, advanced, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer, primary peritoneal cancer, or fallopian tube cancer with a BRCA mutation; and were in clinical complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to either 300 mg olaparib tablets or placebo twice per day using an interactive voice and web response system and were treated for up to 2 years. Treatment assignment was masked for patients and for clinicians giving the interventions, and those collecting and analysing the data. Randomisation was stratified by response to platinum-based chemotherapy (clinical complete or partial response). HRQOL was a secondary endpoint and the prespecified primary HRQOL endpoint was the change from baseline in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian Cancer Trial Outcome Index (TOI) score for the first 24 months. TOI scores range from 0 to 100 (higher scores indicated better HRQOL), with a clinically meaningful difference defined as a difference of at least 10 points. Prespecified exploratory endpoints were quality-adjusted progression-free survival and time without significant symptoms of toxicity (TWiST). HRQOL endpoints were analysed in all randomly assigned patients. The trial is ongoing but closed to new participants. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01844986.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 3, 2013, and March 6, 2015, 1084 patients were enrolled. 693 patients were ineligible, leaving 391 eligible patients who were randomly assigned to olaparib (n=260) or placebo (n=131; one placebo patient withdrew before receiving any study treatment), with a median duration of follow-up of 40·7 months (IQR 34·9-42·9) for olaparib and 41·2 months (32·2-41·6) for placebo. There was no clinically meaningful change in TOI score at 24 months within or between the olaparib and placebo groups (adjusted mean change in score from baseline over 24 months was 0·30 points [95% CI -0·72 to 1·32] in the olaparib group vs 3·30 points [1·84 to 4·76] in the placebo group; between-group difference of -3·00, 95% CI -4·78 to -1·22; p=0·0010). Mean quality-adjusted progression-free survival (olaparib 29·75 months [95% CI 28·20-31·63] vs placebo 17·58 [15·05-20·18]; difference 12·17 months [95% CI 9·07-15·11], p<0·0001) and the mean duration of TWiST (olaparib 33·15 months [95% CI 30·82-35·49] vs placebo 20·24 months [17·36-23·11]; difference 12·92 months [95% CI 9·30-16·54]; p<0·0001) were significantly longer with olaparib than with placebo.

INTERPRETATION

The substantial progression-free survival benefit provided by maintenance olaparib in the newly diagnosed setting was achieved with no detrimental effect on patients' HRQOL and was supported by clinically meaningful quality-adjusted progression-free survival and TWiST benefits with maintenance olaparib versus placebo.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca and Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Combination of Niraparib, Cisplatin and Twist Knockdown in Cisplatin-Resistant Ovarian Cancer Cells Potentially Enhances Synthetic Lethality through ER-Stress Mediated Mitochondrial Apoptosis Pathway

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 inhibitors (PARPi) are used to treat recurrent ovarian cancer (OC) patients due to greater survival benefits and minimal side effects, especially in those patients with complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy. However, acquired resistance of platinum-based chemotherapy leads to the limited efficacy of PARPi monotherapy in most patients. Twist is recognized as a possible oncogene and contributes to acquired cisplatin resistance in OC cells. In this study, we show how Twist knockdown cisplatin-resistant (CisR) OC cells blocked DNA damage response (DDR) to sensitize these cells to a concurrent treatment of cisplatin as a platinum-based chemotherapy agent and niraparib as a PARPi on in vitro two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) cell culture. To investigate the lethality of PARPi and cisplatin on Twist knockdown CisR OC cells, two CisR cell lines (OV90 and SKOV3) were established using step-wise dose escalation method. In addition, in vitro 3D spheroidal cell model was generated using modified hanging drop and hydrogel scaffolds techniques on poly-2-hydroxylethly methacrylate (poly-HEMA) coated plates. Twist expression was strongly correlated with the expression of DDR proteins, PARP1 and XRCC1 and overexpression of both proteins was associated with cisplatin resistance in OC cells. Moreover, combination of cisplatin (Cis) and niraparib (Nira) produced lethality on Twist-knockdown CisR OC cells, according to combination index (CI). We found that Cis alone, Nira alone, or a combination of Cis+Nira therapy increased cell death by suppressing DDR proteins in 2D monolayer cell culture. Notably, the combination of Nira and Cis was considerably effective against 3D-cultures of Twist knockdown CisR OC cells in which Endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress is upregulated, leading to initiation of mitochondrial-mediated cell death. In addition, immunohistochemically, Cis alone, Nira alone or Cis+Nira showed lower ki-67 (cell proliferative marker) expression and higher cleaved caspase-3 (apoptotic marker) immuno-reactivity. Hence, lethality of PARPi with the combination of Cis on Twist knockdown CisR OC cells may provide an effective way to expand the therapeutic potential to overcome platinum-based chemotherapy resistance and PARPi cross resistance in OC.

Breast Cancer Therapeutics and Biomarkers: Past, Present, and Future Approaches

Breast cancer (BC) is the leading cause of cancer death in women and the second-most common cancer. An estimated 281 550 new cases of invasive BC will be diagnosed in women in the United States, and about 43 600 will die during 2021. Continual research has shed light on all disease areas, including tumor classification and biomarkers for diagnosis/prognosis. As research investigations evolve, new classes of drugs are emerging with potential benefits in BC treatment that are covered in this manuscript. The initial sections present updated classification and terminology used for diagnosis and prognosis, which leads to the following topics, discussing the past and present treatments available for BC. Our review will generate interest in exploring the complexity of the cell cycle and its association with cancer biology as part of the plethora of target factors toward developing newer drugs and effective therapeutic management of BC.

PARP Inhibitors in Cancer Diagnosis and Therapy

Targeting of PARP enzymes has emerged as an effective therapeutic strategy to selectively target cancer cells with deficiencies in homologous recombination signaling. Currently used to treat BRCA-mutated cancers, PARP inhibitors (PARPi) have demonstrated improved outcome in various cancer types as single agents. Ongoing efforts have seen the exploitation of PARPi combination therapies, boosting patient responses as a result of drug synergisms. Despite great successes using PARPi therapy, selecting those patients who will benefit from single agent or combination therapy remains one of the major challenges. Numerous reports have demonstrated that the presence of a BRCA mutation does not always result in synthetic lethality with PARPi therapy in treatment-naïve tumors. Cancer cells can also develop resistance to PARPi therapy. Hence, combination therapy may significantly affect the treatment outcomes. In this review, we discuss the development and utilization of PARPi in different cancer types from preclinical models to clinical trials, provide a current overview of the potential uses of PARP imaging agents in cancer therapy, and discuss the use of radiolabeled PARPi as radionuclide therapies.

A phase I dose-finding, pharmacokinetics and genotyping study of olaparib and lurbinectedin in patients with advanced solid tumors

The poly (ADP-Ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib has shown antitumor activity in patients with ovarian or breast cancer with or without BRCA1/2 mutations. Lurbinectedin is an ecteinascidin that generates DNA double-strand breaks. We hypothesized that the combination of olaparib and lurbinectedin maximizes the DNA damage increasing the efficacy. A 3 + 3 dose-escalation study examined olaparib tablets with lurbinectedin every 21 days. The purpose of this phase I study is to determine the dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of the combination, to investigate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), the recommended phase II dose (RP2D), efficacy, pharmacokinetics, in addition to genotyping and translational studies. In total, 20 patients with ovarian and endometrial cancers were included. The most common adverse events were asthenia, nausea, vomiting, constipation, abdominal pain, neutropenia, anemia. DLT grade 4 neutropenia was observed in two patients in dose level (DL) 5, DL4 was defined as the MTD, and the RP2D was lurbinectedin 1.5 mg/m² + olaparib 250 mg twice a day (BID). Mutational analysis revealed a median of 2 mutations/case, 53% of patients with mutations in the homologous recombination (HR) pathway. None of the patients reached a complete or partial response; however, 60% of stable disease was achieved. In conclusion, olaparib in combination with lurbinectedin was well tolerated with a disease control rate of 60%. These results deserve further evaluation of the combination in a phase II trial.