Targeting ovarian cancer: The promise of liposome-based therapies

A major cause of mortality among gynecological cancers, ovarian cancer is frequently unresponsive to standard therapies because to systemic toxicity and medication resistance. The contribution of liposomal drug delivery systems, specifically pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), to the advancement of ovarian cancer treatment is examined in this review. Liposomes, spherical lipid vesicles consisting of bilayer phospholipids, enable better drug delivery by preserving encapsulated pharmaceuticals and enabling tailored administration to tumor areas. In comparison to traditional doxorubicin, PLD has a better pharmacokinetic profile and less cardiotoxicity, according to the analysis, which examines several trials showing its effectiveness in treating both platinum-sensitive and platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Furthermore, studies on liposomal versions of other medications, such as paclitaxel and cisplatin, demonstrate encouraging effects in terms of overcoming drug resistance and enhancing therapeutic outcomes. Recent advancements in tailored liposomal delivery systems that include components such tumor-specific peptides and folate receptors show improved tumor selectivity and fewer adverse effects. The study also looks at new combination treatments that use liposomal formulations with immunotherapeutic and new targeted medicines. Although liposomal drug delivery methods have great potential for treating ovarian cancer, further study is required to maximize their effectiveness, reduce side effects, and get beyond resistance mechanisms. These developments in liposomal technology are a major step toward turning ovarian cancer from a deadly illness into a chronic condition that can be managed, possibly increasing patient survival and quality of life.

Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin for relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Cancer of ovarian, fallopian tube and peritoneal origin, referred to collectively as ovarian cancer, is the eighth most common cancer in women and is often diagnosed at an advanced stage. Women with relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) are less well and have a limited life expectancy, therefore maintaining quality of life with effective symptom control is an important aim of treatment. However, the unwanted effects of chemotherapy agents may be severe, and optimal treatment regimens are unclear. Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), which contains a cytotoxic drug called doxorubicin hydrochloride, is one of several treatment modalities that may be considered for treatment of relapsed EOCs. This is an update of the original Cochrane Review which was published in Issue 7, 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of PLD, with or without other anti-cancer drugs, in women with relapsed high grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (via Ovid) and Embase (via Ovid) from 1990 to January 2022. We also searched online registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings and reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated PLD in women diagnosed with relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data to a pre-designed data collection form and assessed the risk of bias according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guidelines. Where possible, we pooled collected data in meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

This is an update of a previous review with 12 additional studies, so this updated review includes a total of 26 RCTs with 8277 participants that evaluated the effects of PLD alone or in combination with other drugs in recurrent EOC: seven in platinum-sensitive disease (2872 participants); 11 in platinum-resistant disease (3246 participants); and eight that recruited individuals regardless of platinum sensitivity status (2079 participants). The certainty of the evidence was assessed for the three most clinically relevant comparisons out of eight comparisons identified in the included RCTs. Recurrent platinum-sensitive EOC PLD with conventional chemotherapy agent compared to alternative combination chemotherapy likely results in little to no difference in overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 1.04; 5 studies, 2006 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) but likely increases progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.89; 5 studies, 2006 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The combination may slightly improve quality of life at three months post-randomisation, measured using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (mean difference 4.80, 95% CI 0.92 to 8.68; 1 study, 608 participants; low-certainty evidence), but this may not represent a clinically meaningful difference. PLD in combination with another chemotherapy agent compared to alternative combination chemotherapy likely results in little to no difference in the rate of overall severe adverse events (grade ≥ 3) (risk ratio (RR) 1.11, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.30; 2 studies, 834 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). PLD with chemotherapy likely increases anaemia (grade ≥ 3) (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.85; 5 studies, 1961 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of PLD with conventional chemotherapy on hand-foot syndrome (HFS)(grade ≥ 3) (RR 4.01, 95% CI 1.00 to 16.01; 2 studies, 1028 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and neurological events (grade ≥ 3) (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.74; 4 studies, 1900 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Recurrent platinum-resistant EOC PLD alone compared to another conventional chemotherapy likely results in little to no difference in OS (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.19; 6 studies, 1995 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of PLD on PFS (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.04; 4 studies, 1803 participants; very low-certainty evidence), overall severe adverse events (grade ≥ 3) (RR ranged from 0.61 to 0.97; 2 studies, 964 participants; very low-certainty evidence), anaemia (grade ≥ 3) (RR ranged from 0.19 to 0.82; 5 studies, 1968 participants; very low-certainty evidence), HFS (grade ≥ 3) (RR ranged from 15.19 to 109.15; 6 studies, 2184 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and the rate of neurological events (grade ≥ 3)(RR ranged from 0.08 to 3.09; 3 studies, 1222 participants; very low-certainty evidence). PLD with conventional chemotherapy compared to PLD alone likely results in little to no difference in OS (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.21; 1 study, 242 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and it may result in little to no difference in PFS (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.22; 2 studies, 353 participants; low-certainty evidence). The combination likely increases overall severe adverse events (grade ≥ 3) (RR 2.48, 95% CI 1.98 to 3.09; 1 study, 663 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and anaemia (grade ≥ 3) (RR 2.38, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.87; 2 studies, 785 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), but likely results in a large reduction in HFS (grade ≥ 3) (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.40; 2 studies, 785 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). It may result in little to no difference in neurological events (grade ≥ 3) (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.31; 1 study, 663 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In platinum-sensitive relapsed EOC, including PLD in a combination chemotherapy regimen probably makes little to no difference in OS compared to other combinations, but likely improves PFS. Choice of chemotherapy will therefore be guided by symptoms from previous chemotherapy and other patient considerations. Single-agent PLD remains a useful agent for platinum-resistant relapsed EOC and choice of agent at relapse will depend on patient factors, e.g. degree of bone marrow suppression or neurotoxicity from previous treatments. Adding another agent to PLD likely increases overall grade ≥ 3 adverse events with little to no improvement in survival outcomes. The limited evidence relating to PLD in combination with other agents in platinum-resistant relapsed EOC does not indicate a benefit, but there is some evidence of increased side effects.

Clinical research in ovarian cancer: consensus recommendations from the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup

The Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) sixth Ovarian Cancer Conference on Clinical Research was held virtually in October, 2021, following published consensus guidelines. The goal of the consensus meeting was to achieve harmonisation on the design elements of upcoming trials in ovarian cancer, to select important questions for future study, and to identify unmet needs. All 33 GCIG member groups participated in the development, refinement, and adoption of 20 statements within four topic groups on clinical research in ovarian cancer including first line treatment, recurrent disease, disease subgroups, and future trials. Unanimous consensus was obtained for 14 of 20 statements, with greater than 90% concordance in the remaining six statements. The high acceptance rate following active deliberation among the GCIG groups confirmed that a consensus process could be applied in a virtual setting. Together with detailed categorisation of unmet needs, these consensus statements will promote the harmonisation of international clinical research in ovarian cancer.

Predicting Response to Anthracyclines in Ovarian Cancer

(1) Background: Anthracyclines are intriguing drugs, representing one of the cornerstones of both first and subsequent-lines of chemotherapy in ovarian cancer (OC). Their efficacy and mechanisms of action are related to the hot topics of OC clinical research, such as BRCA status and immunotherapy. Prediction of response to anthracyclines is challenging and no markers can predict certain therapeutic success. The current narrative review provides a summary of the clinical and biological mechanisms involved in the response to anthracyclines. (2) Methods: A MEDLINE search of the literature was performed, focusing on papers published in the last two decades. (3) Results and Conclusions: BRCA mutated tumors seem to show a higher response to anthracyclines compared to sporadic tumors and the severity of hand-foot syndrome and mucositis may be a predictive marker of PLD efficacy. CA125 can be a misleading marker of clinical response during treatment with anthracyclines, the response of which also appears to depend on OC histology. Immunochemistry, in particular HER-2 expression, could be of some help in predicting the response to such drugs, and high levels of mutated p53 appear after exposure to anthracyclines and impair their antitumor effect. Finally, organoids from OC are promising for drug testing and prediction of response to chemotherapy.

Perioperative outcomes of cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in elderly women with epithelial ovarian cancer: analysis of a prospective registry

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate perioperative outcomes in elderly versus non-elderly women with advanced or recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).

METHODS

A single-institution prospective registry was analyzed for women with ovarian cancer who underwent surgery with HIPEC from January 2014 to December 2020. Elderly age was defined as ≥65 years at surgery. Complications were defined according to the Accordion scale. Univariate and multivariable analysis was used to compare progression-free survival and overall survival.

RESULTS

Of 127 women who underwent surgery with HIPEC, 33.1% (n=42) were ≥65 and 17.3% (n=22) were ≥70 years old. The median age for non-elderly and elderly patients were 55.7±8.3 versus 72.0±5.4 years, respectively (p<0.001). The majority of non-elderly versus elderly patients underwent HIPEC at the time of interval cytoreductive surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (52.9% vs 73.8%, p=0.024). There were no differences in moderate (15.3% vs 26.2%) or severe postoperative complications (10.6% vs 11.9%, p=0.08), acute kidney injury (7.1% vs 16.7%, p=0.12), and length of stay (5.0 vs 5.0 days, p=0.56) for non-elderly versus elderly patients. With a median follow-up of 20 months (95% CI 9.1 to 32.7 months), there was no difference in progression-free survival (18.8 vs 15.7 months, p=0.75) or overall survival (61.6 months vs not estimable, p=0.72) for non-elderly versus elderly patients. Comparing patients 65-69 versus ≥70 years, progression-free survival (33.0 vs 12.5 months, p=0.002) was significantly improved in patients aged 65-69, without difference in overall survival (not estimable vs 36.0 months, p=0.91). On multivariable analysis, age ≥65 did not impact progression-free survival (p=0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

In this prospective registry of women with ovarian cancer, perioperative morbidity is not increased for non-elderly versus elderly patients following surgery with HIPEC. While age should not exclude patients from surgery with HIPEC, additional research is needed regarding oncologic benefits in elderly women.

Clinical management of chemotherapy for elderly gynecological cancer patients

AIM

Since there are no established guidelines for the treatment of gynecological cancer in the elderly, medical treatment policy is currently decided by discussion with patients and their families based on doctors' experiences, referring to data from nonelderly patients and healthy elderly patients. The aim of this review was to clarify the current position of chemotherapy for elderly gynecological cancer patients and discuss the problems to be addressed in the future.

METHODS

Little evidence has been accumulated for anticancer drug treatment in elderly individuals with gynecological cancer. This review presents outlines and representative papers on general cancer chemotherapy for the elderly, and problems that need to be solved in gynecological cancer fields in the future are identified.

RESULTS

In 2018, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) published guidelines for "Practical Assessment and Management of Vulnerabilities in Older Patients Receiving Chemotherapy: ASCO Guideline for Geriatric Oncology Summary". This guideline emphasizes that, when administering chemotherapy to patients over 65 years of age, vulnerabilities should be identified using geriatric assessment (GA). However, there have been no reports of clinical studies using GA in patients with cervical or uterine cancers, and only a few clinical studies using GA have been reported in patients with ovarian cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Scoring systems suitable for elderly Japanese patients remain lacking. A Japanese gynecological GA needs to be developed in cooperation with other disciplines.

Identification of key genes for guiding chemotherapeutic management in ovarian cancer using translational bioinformatics

The emergence of resistance to chemotherapy drugs in patients with ovarian cancer is still the main cause of low survival rates. The present study aimed to identify key genes that may provide treatment guidance to reduce the incidence of drug resistance in patients with ovarian cancer. Original data of chemotherapy sensitivity and chemoresistance of ovarian cancer were obtained from the Gene Expression Omnibus dataset GSE73935. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between sensitive and resistant ovarian cancer cell lines were screened by Empirical Bayes methods. Overlapping DEGs between four chemoresistant groups were identified by Venn map analysis. Protein-protein interaction networks were also constructed, and hub genes were identified. The hub genes were verified by in vitro experiments as well as The Cancer Genome Atlas data. Results from the present study identified eight important genes that may guide treatment decisions regarding chemotherapy regimens for ovarian cancer, including epidermal growth factor-like repeats and discoidin I-like domains 3, NRAS proto-oncogene, hyaluronan and proteoglycan link protein 1, activated protein C receptor, CD53, cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A, insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor and roundabout guidance receptor 2 genes. Their expressions were found to have an impact on the prognosis of different treatment groups (cisplatin, paclitaxel, cisplatin + paclitaxel, cisplatin + doxorubicin and cisplatin + topotecan). The results indicated that these genes may minimise the occurrence of ovarian cancer drug resistance and may provide effective treatment options for patients with ovarian cancer.

Nanoscale drug delivery strategies for therapy of ovarian cancer: conventional vs targeted

Ovarian cancer is the second most common gynaecological malignancy. It usually occurs in women older than 50 years, and because 75% of cases are diagnosed at stage III or IV it is associated with poor diagnosis. Despite the chemosensitivity of intraperitoneal chemotherapy, the majority of patients is relapsed and eventually dies. In addition to the challenge of early detection, its treatment presents several challenges like the route of administration, resistance to therapy with recurrence and specific targeting of cancer to reduce cytotoxicity and side effects. In ovarian cancer therapy, nanocarriers help overcome problems of poor aqueous solubility of chemotherapeutic drugs and enhance their delivery to the tumour sites either by passive or active targeting, and thus reducing adverse side effects to the healthy tissues. Moreover, the bioavailability to the tumour site is increased by the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) mechanism. The present review aims to describe the current conventional treatment with special reference to passively and actively targeted drug delivery systems (DDSs) towards specific receptors designed against ovarian cancer to overcome the drawbacks of conventional delivery. Conclusively, targeted nanocarriers would optimise the intra-tumour distribution, followed by drug delivery into the intracellular compartment. These features may contribute to greater therapeutic effect.

Bevacizumab Dose Affects the Severity of Adverse Events in Gynecologic Malignancies

In this retrospective study, we investigated adverse events and outcomes in patients treated with bevacizumab for ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancers at a single hospital. We determined the cumulative incidences of various bevacizumab-related adverse events and the correlation between dose and adverse event incidences. We analyzed data from 154 patients that received 251 rounds of bevacizumab as first-line, first salvage, >2 salvage treatments. Adverse events of any grade were observed in 121 (78.6%) patients; at least one grade 3 or 4 adverse event occurred in 32 (20.8%) patients. The two most common events were proteinuria (38.3%) and hypertension (33.8%). The first-line treatment group displayed significantly higher frequencies of hypertension (52.7% vs. 18.9% vs. 15.5%, p < 0.001), wound complications (9.1% vs. 0% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.010), arthralgia (29.1% vs. 11.3% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.003), and reduced range of joint motion (14.5% vs. 5.7% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.046), compared to those in the first and >2 lines salvage groups, respectively (Kruskal–Wallis test). The cumulative incidences of all grades and grades 3/4 of hypertension cumulative incidence plateaued at around 30% for all grades and 10% for grades 3 and 4, at bevacizumab doses above 8080 and 3510 mg, respectively. The proteinuria cumulative incidence plateaued at around 35% for all grades and 3% for grades 3 and 4, at bevacizumab doses above 11,190 and 4530 mg, respectively. We concluded that, in this realistic clinical population, different kinds and higher cumulative incidences of adverse events were observed compared to those reported in previous clinical trials. Moreover, bevacizumab doses showed cumulative toxicity and plateau effects on hypertension and proteinuria.

Current treatment of older patients with recurrent gynecologic cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Gynecologic cancer patients of elderly has been increasing rapidly. Useful information on older patients, especially, with recurrent gynecological cancer is extremely limited.

RECENT FINDINGS

A unified concept for assessing treatment risk was proposed when providing cancer treatment to older patients. Fit: patients capable of withstanding the same standard treatment as healthy younger patients; Vulnerable: patients incapable of withstanding the same standard treatment as healthy younger patients, but capable of undergoing some sort of treatment; and Frail: patients incapable of withstanding the same standard treatment as healthy younger patients, and also unsuitable to undergo any kind of active treatment.It is important to identify vulnerability by using geriatric assessment as a patient background factor, to intervene if treatment is required, and to modify the intensity of treatment in an attempt to extend overall survival, decrease adverse events, improve health-related quality of life, and reduce medical costs.

SUMMARY

It is important to carry out a pretreatment functional assessment of older cancer patients using the geriatric assessment, and to choose the method of treatment for older patients in light of its results with recurrent gynecological cancer in addition to chronological age.

Recurrent ovarian cancer

Recurrence still occurs in a majority of patients with advanced ovarian cancer. However, progress in the management has allowed a significant prolongation of survival for relapsing disease. These last years, the field of interest has moved from chemotherapy to targeted therapy which is dominated by anti-angiogenic and anti-PARP agents. It is assumed that platinum-free interval will not remain the main prognostic and predictive criterion in the future, and will be replaced by a multi-factorial approach. This trend for personalization of therapy has highlighted important neglected fields for clinical research such as multi-line (≥3) relapse, frail patients including elderly and symptomatic and supportive measures.

Fifth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference of the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup: recurrent disease

This manuscript reports the consensus statements regarding recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC), reached at the fifth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference (OCCC), which was held in Tokyo, Japan, in November 2015. Three important questions were identified: (i) What are the subgroups for clinical trials in ROC? The historical definition of using platinum-free interval (PFI) to categorise patients as having platinum-sensitive/resistant disease was replaced by therapy-free interval (TFI). TFI can be broken down into TFIp (PFI), TFInp (non-PFI) and TFIb (biological agent-free interval). Additional criteria to consider include histology, BRCA mutation status, number/type of previous therapies, outcome of prior surgery and patient reported symptoms. (ii) What are the control arms for clinical trials in ROC? When platinum is considered the best option, the control arm should be a platinum-based therapy with or without an anti-angiogenic agent or a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor. If platinum is not considered the best option, the control arm could include a non-platinum drug, either as single agent or in combination. (iii) What are the endpoints for clinical trials in ROC? Overall survival (OS) is the preferred endpoint for patient cohorts with an expected median OS < or = 12 months. Progression-free survival (PFS) is an alternative, and it is the preferred endpoint when the expected median OS is > 12 months. However, PFS alone should not be the only endpoint and must be supported by additional endpoints including pre-defined patient reported outcomes (PROs), time to second subsequent therapy (TSST), or time until definitive deterioration of quality of life (TUDD).

Preference of elderly patients' to oral or intravenous chemotherapy in heavily pre-treated recurrent ovarian cancer: final results of a prospective multicenter trial

BACKGROUND

Palliative systemic treatment in elderly gynaecological cancer patients remains a major challenge. In recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC), treosulfan an active alkylating drug showed similar cytotoxicity whether as oral (p.o.) or intravenous (i.v.) application. The aim of this innovative trial was to evaluate the preference of elderly patients (≥65 years) for p.o. or i.v. chemotherapy focusing compliance, outcome, toxicities, and geriatric aspects as secondary endpoints.

METHODS

Patients with ROC had the free choice between treosulfan i.v. (7000 mg/m² d1, q29d) or p.o. (600 mg/m² daily d1-28, q57d). Only indecisive participants were randomized.

RESULTS

Overall 123 patients with 2^nd to 5^th recurrence were registered and 119 received at least one cycle of chemotherapy. 85.7% preferred treosulfan i.v. and 14.3% oral, where only three patients were randomized. Main reasons for i.v. preference associated with individual expectations of lower rate of gastrointestinal disorders, higher activity and tolerability of treatment. Median of applied chemotherapies was three (range 1-12 cycles), with most common grade 3/4 toxicities thrombopenia (18.7%), leukopenia (15.7%), ascites (7.6%), bowel obstruction (6.7%), and abdominal pain (4.2%). Median time until progression/overall survival was 5.2/7.8 months (i.v.), and 5.6/10.4 months (p.o.), respectively, without significant differences in efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients with recurrent ovarian cancer asked and demonstrated active participation in the decision-making process of their oncological treatment and favoured predominantly the i.v. application. Treosulfan was generally well-tolerated despite comorbidities and heavy pre-treatment. Our study demonstrates that patients' preference did not influence prognosis negatively and remains important in gynaecologic oncology decision practice.

EUDRACT NR

2004-000719-25; NCT 00170690.

Improving outcomes for older women with gynaecological malignancies

The incidence of most gynaecological malignancies rises significantly with increasing age. With an ageing population, the proportion of women over the age of 65 with cancer is expected to rise substantially over the next decade. Unfortunately, survival outcomes are much poorer in older patients and evidence suggests that older women with gynaecological cancers are less likely to receive current standard of care treatment options. Despite this, older women are under-represented in practice changing clinical studies. The evidence for efficacy and tolerability is therefore extrapolated from a younger; often more fit population and applied to in every day clinical practice to older patients with co-morbidities. There has been significant progress in the development of geriatric assessment in oncology to predict treatment outcomes and tolerability however there is still no clear evidence that undertaking a geriatric assessment improves patient outcomes. Clinical trials focusing on treating older patients are urgently required. In this review, we discuss the evidence for treatment of gynaecological cancers as well as methods of assessing older patients for therapy. Potential biomarkers of ageing are also summarised.

Ovarian cancer in the older woman

Ovarian cancer is the seventh most common cancer in women worldwide and accounts for nearly 4% of all new cases of cancer in women. Almost half of all patients with ovarian cancer are over the age of 65 at diagnosis, and over 70% of deaths from ovarian cancer occur in this same age group. As the population ages, the number of older women with ovarian cancer is increasing. Compared to younger women, older women with ovarian cancer receive less surgery and chemotherapy, develop worse toxicity, and have poorer outcomes. They are also significantly under-represented in clinical trials and thus application of standard treatment regimens can be challenging. Performance status alone has been shown to be an inadequate tool to predict toxicity of older patients from chemotherapy. Use of formal geriatric assessment tools is a promising direction for stratifying older patients on trials. Elderly-specific trials, adjustments to the eligibility criteria, modified treatment regimens, and interventions to decrease morbidities in the vulnerable older population should be encouraged.

Supportive Care in Older Adults with Cancer: Across the Continuum

Supportive care is an essential component of anticancer treatment regardless of age or treatment intent. As the number of older adults with cancer increases, and supportive care strategies enable more patients to undergo treatment, greater numbers of older patients will become cancer survivors. These patients may have lingering adverse effects from treatment and will need continued supportive care interventions. Older adults with cancer benefit from geriatric assessment (GA)-guided supportive care interventions. This can occur at any stage across the cancer treatment continuum. As a GA commonly uncovers issues potentially unrelated to anticancer treatment, it could be argued that the assessment is essentially a supportive care strategy. Key aspects of a GA include identification of comorbidities, assessing for polypharmacy, screening for cognitive impairment and delirium, assessing functional status, and screening for psychosocial issues. Treatment-related issues of particular importance in older adults include recognition of increased bone marrow toxicity, management of nausea and vomiting, identification of anemia, and prevention of neurotoxicity. The role of physical therapy and cancer rehabilitation as a supportive care strategy in older adults is important regardless of treatment stage or intent.

Management of relapsed ovarian cancer: a review

Around 70 % of ovarian cancer patients relapse after primary cytoreductive surgery and standard first-line chemotherapy. The biology of relapse remains unclear, but cancer stem cells seem to play an important role. There are still some areas of controversy on how to manage these relapses and or progressions that occur almost unavoidably in the course of this disease with shorter intervals between them as the natural history of this disease develops. The goal of treatments investigated in this neoplasm has shifted to maintenance therapy, trying to extend the progression free intervals in a disease that is becoming more and more protracted.

Carboplatin and Liposomal Doxorubicin for Ovarian Cancer

The complexity of cancer chemotherapy requires pharmacists be familiar with the complicated regimens and highly toxic agents used. This column reviews various issues related to preparation, dispensing, and administration of antineoplastic therapy, and the agents, both commercially available and investigational, used to treat malignant diseases. Questions or suggestions for topics should be addressed to Dominic A. Solimando, Jr, President, Oncology Pharmacy Services, Inc., 4201 Wilson Blvd #110-545, Arlington, VA 22203, e-mail: OncRxSvc@comcast.net; or J. Aubrey Waddell, Professor, University of Tennessee College of Pharmacy; Oncology Pharmacist, Pharmacy Department, Blount Memorial Hospital, 907 E. Lamar Alexander Parkway, Maryville, TN 37804, e-mail: waddfour@charter.net.

The Application and Outcome of Standard of Care Treatment in Elderly Women with Ovarian Cancer: A Literature Review over the Last 10 Years

The rising number and increasing longevity of the elderly population calls for improvements and potentially a more personalized approach to the treatment of cancer in this group. Elderly patients frequently present with a number of comorbidities, complicating surgery and chemotherapy tolerability. In the case of ovarian cancer, elderly women present with more advanced disease, making the issue of providing adequate treatment without significant morbidity critical. Most studies support the application of standard of care treatment to elderly women with ovarian cancer, yet it seems to be offered less frequently in the elderly. The objective of this review is to examine the application and outcome of standard of care treatment in elderly women with ovarian cancer. The aim is to ultimately improve the approach to treatment in this group.

Chemotherapy of ovarian cancer in elderly patients

Epithelial ovarian cancer is primarily a disease of older women. Advanced age is risk factor for decreased survival. Optimal surgery and the safe and effective administration of chemotherapy are essential for prolonged progression-free and overall survival (OS). In this article, the available regimens in both the primary treatment and relapsed setting are reviewed.

Topotecan, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin hydrochloride, paclitaxel, trabectedin and gemcitabine for advanced recurrent or refractory ovarian cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer is the fifth most common cancer in the UK, and the fourth most common cause of cancer death. Of those people successfully treated with first-line chemotherapy, 55-75% will relapse within 2 years. At this time, it is uncertain which chemotherapy regimen is more clinically effective and cost-effective for the treatment of recurrent, advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the comparative clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of topotecan (Hycamtin(®), GlaxoSmithKline), pegylated liposomal doxorubicin hydrochloride (PLDH; Caelyx(®), Schering-Plough), paclitaxel (Taxol(®), Bristol-Myers Squibb), trabectedin (Yondelis(®), PharmaMar) and gemcitabine (Gemzar(®), Eli Lilly and Company) for the treatment of advanced, recurrent ovarian cancer.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases (MEDLINE(®), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Health Technology Assessment database, NHS Economic Evaluations Database) and trial registries were searched, and company submissions were reviewed. Databases were searched from inception to May 2013.

METHODS

A systematic review of the clinical and economic literature was carried out following standard methodological principles. Double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials, evaluating topotecan, PLDH, paclitaxel, trabectedin and gemcitabine, and economic evaluations were included. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was carried out. A de novo economic model was developed.

RESULTS

For most outcomes measuring clinical response, two networks were constructed: one evaluating platinum-based regimens and one evaluating non-platinum-based regimens. In people with platinum-sensitive disease, NMA found statistically significant benefits for PLDH plus platinum, and paclitaxel plus platinum for overall survival (OS) compared with platinum monotherapy. PLDH plus platinum significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared with paclitaxel plus platinum. Of the non-platinum-based treatments, PLDH monotherapy and trabectedin plus PLDH were found to significantly increase OS, but not PFS, compared with topotecan monotherapy. In people with platinum-resistant/-refractory (PRR) disease, NMA found no statistically significant differences for any treatment compared with alternative regimens in OS and PFS. Economic modelling indicated that, for people with platinum-sensitive disease and receiving platinum-based therapy, the estimated probabilistic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER; incremental cost per additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY)] for paclitaxel plus platinum compared with platinum was £24,539. Gemcitabine plus carboplatin was extendedly dominated, and PLDH plus platinum was strictly dominated. For people with platinum-sensitive disease and receiving non-platinum-based therapy, the probabilistic ICERs associated with PLDH compared with paclitaxel, and trabectedin plus PLDH compared with PLDH, were estimated to be £25,931 and £81,353, respectively. Topotecan was strictly dominated. For people with PRR disease, the probabilistic ICER associated with topotecan compared with PLDH was estimated to be £324,188. Paclitaxel was strictly dominated.

LIMITATIONS

As platinum- and non-platinum-based treatments were evaluated separately, the comparative clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these regimens is uncertain in patients with platinum-sensitive disease.

CONCLUSIONS

For platinum-sensitive disease, it was not possible to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of platinum-based therapies with non-platinum-based therapies. For people with platinum-sensitive disease and treated with platinum-based therapies, paclitaxel plus platinum could be considered cost-effective compared with platinum at a threshold of £30,000 per additional QALY. For people with platinum-sensitive disease and treated with non-platinum-based therapies, it is unclear whether PLDH would be considered cost-effective compared with paclitaxel at a threshold of £30,000 per additional QALY; trabectedin plus PLDH is unlikely to be considered cost-effective compared with PLDH. For patients with PRR disease, it is unlikely that topotecan would be considered cost-effective compared with PLDH. Randomised controlled trials comparing platinum with non-platinum-based treatments might help to verify the comparative effectiveness of these regimens.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013003555.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Epithelial ovarian cancer in older women: defining the best management approach

Epithelial ovarian cancer is a cancer of older women. In fact, almost half of women diagnosed with ovarian cancer will be older than age 64, and 25% will be older than age 74. Therefore, it is crucial to examine the available data in older populations to optimize the therapeutic approach without negatively affecting the quality of life permanently. Unfortunately, little prospective data are available in this under-represented population of women. Although ovarian cancer traditionally has been approached with aggressive cytoreductive surgery, older patients may benefit from a less aggressive surgical approach and, in some cases, may be candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by an interval cytoreduction. Modalities do exist for assessing an older woman's ability to tolerate surgery and chemotherapy, and these tools should be familiar to clinicians who are caring for this population of women in making treatment decisions. Ongoing planned trials to evaluate pretreatment assessment for older patients will provide objective, feasible, clinical tools for applying our treatment-based knowledge. Future trials of both surgery and chemotherapy, including a focus on the sequence of these two treatment modalities, are crucial to guide decision making in this vulnerable population and to improve outcomes for all.

Breast and ovarian cancer in the older woman

Nearly half of all women diagnosed with breast or ovarian cancer are age 65 years or older with the number of women diagnosed expected to increase as the population ages and life expectancy improves. Older women are less likely to be offered standard cancer treatments, are more likely to develop higher toxicity, and have higher mortality. Chronologic age should not be the only factor used for making treatment decisions. Functional dependence, organ function, comorbidity, polypharmacy, social support, cognitive and/or psychosocial factors, overall life expectancy, and patient's goals of care are equally vital and should be assessed before and during treatment. In this review, current evidence and treatment guidelines for older women with breast or ovarian cancer are outlined.

Patient-reported outcomes in randomised controlled trials of gynaecological cancers: investigating methodological quality and impact on clinical decision-making

AIM

The aim for this study is to investigate the methodological quality and potential impact on clinical decision making of patient reported outcome (PRO) assessment in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the gynaecological cancer sites.

METHODS

A systematic review identified RCTs published between January 2004 and June 2012. Relevant studies were evaluated using a pre-determined extraction form which included: (1) Trial demographics and clinical and PRO characteristics; (2) level of PRO reporting and (3) bias, assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. All studies were additionally analysed in relation to their relevance in supporting clinical decision making.

RESULTS

Fifty RCTs enrolling 24,991 patients were identified. In eight RCTs (16%) a PRO was the primary end-point. Twenty-one studies (42%) were carried out in a multi-national context. Where statistically significant PRO differences between treatments were found, it related in most cases to both symptoms and domains other than symptoms (n=17, 57%). The majority of studies (n=42, 84%) did not mention the mode of administration nor the methods of collecting PRO data. Statistical approaches for dealing with missing data were only explicitly mentioned in nine RCTs (18%). Sixteen RCTs (32%) were considered to be of high-quality and thus able to inform clinical decision making. Higher-quality PRO studies were generally associated with RCTs that were at a low risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that RCTs with PROs were generally well designed and conducted. In a third the information was very informative to fully understand the pros and cons of PROs treatment decision-making.

Bridging cancer biology and the patients' needs with nanotechnology-based approaches

Cancer remains as stressful condition and a leading cause of death in the western world. Actual cornerstone treatments of cancer disease rest as an elusive alternative, offering limited efficacy with extensive secondary effects as a result of severe cytotoxic effects in healthy tissues. The advent of nanotechnology brought the promise to revolutionize many fields including oncology, proposing advanced systems for cancer treatment. Drug delivery systems rest among the most successful examples of nanotechnology. Throughout time they have been able to evolve as a function of an increased understanding from cancer biology and the tumor microenvironment. Marketing of Doxil® unleashed a remarkable impulse in the development of drug delivery systems. Since then, several nanocarriers have been introduced, with aspirations to overrule previous technologies, demonstrating increased therapeutic efficacy besides decreased toxicity. Spatial and temporal targeting to cancer cells has been explored, as well as the use of drug combinations co-encapsulated in the same particle as a mean to take advantage of synergistic interactions in vivo. Importantly, targeted delivery of siRNA for gene silencing therapy has made its way to the clinic for a "first in man" trial using lipid-polymeric-based particles. Focusing in state-of-the-art technology, this review will provide an insightful vision on nanotechnology-based strategies for cancer treatment, approaching them from a tumor biology-driven perspective, since their early EPR-based dawn to the ones that have truly the potential to address unmet medical needs in the field of oncology, upon targeting key cell subpopulations from the tumor microenvironment.

Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin for relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer is the eighth most common cancer in women and it is usually diagnosed at an advanced stage. The majority of ovarian tumours are epithelial in origin. Women with relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) often have a reduced performance status with a limited life expectancy, therefore maintaining quality of life with effective symptom control is the main purpose of treatment. Drug treatment of relapsed disease is directed by the platinum-free interval: relapsed platinum-sensitive disease is usually re-treated with platinum-based therapy and platinum-resistant disease challenged with non-platinum drugs. However, the side-effects of chemotherapy agents may be severe and optimal treatment regimens are unclear. Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), which contains a cytotoxic drug called doxorubicin hydrochloride is one of several treatment modalities that may be considered for single-agent treatment of relapsed EOC, or used in combination with other drugs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of PLD in women with relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group (CGCG) trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE from 1990 to February 2013. We also searched online registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings and reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated PLD in women diagnosed with relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently abstracted data to a pre-designed data collection form and assessed the risk of bias according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guidelines. Where possible, we pooled collected data in meta-analyses using RevMan 5.2 software.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 RCTs that evaluated PLD alone or in combination with other drugs. Four RCTs contributed no data to the meta-analyses. Two studies compared PLD plus carboplatin (carbo) to paclitaxel (PAC)/carbo in women with platinum-sensitive relapsed EOC. Overall survival (OS) was similar for these treatments, however progression-free survival (PFS) was longer with PLD/carbo (1164 participants; hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.97; I² = 7%; P value 0.01). PLD/carbo was associated with significantly more anaemia and thrombocytopenia than PAC/carbo, whereas PAC/carbo was associated with significantly more alopecia, neuropathies, hypersensitivity reactions and arthralgias/myalgias. PLD/carbo was well-tolerated and women receiving this treatment were significantly less likely to discontinue treatment than those receiving PAC/carbo (two studies, 1150 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.38, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.57; I² = 0%; P < 0.00001).Five studies compared other agents to PLD alone. None of these agents were associated with significantly better survival or severe adverse-event profiles than PLD. Topotecan and gemcitabine were associated with significantly more haematological severe adverse events than PLD, and patupilone was associated with significantly more severe neuropathies and diarrhoea. Severe hand-foot syndrome (HFS) occurred consistently more frequently with PLD than the other drugs.Three studies compared PLD combination treatment to PLD alone. Two combinations resulted in a significantly longer PFS compared with PLD alone: trabectedin (TBD)/PLD (one study, 672 women; HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.96; P value 0.02) and vintafolide (EC145)/PLD (one study, 149 women; HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.97; P value 0.04). TBD/PLD appeared to benefit the partially platinum-sensitive subgroup only. Further studies are likely to have an important impact on our confidence in these estimates. TBD/PLD was associated with significantly more haematological and gastrointestinal severe adverse events than PLD alone, whereas EC145/PLD appeared to be well-tolerated.For platinum-resistant relapsed EOC, the median PFS and OS for single-agent PLD across seven included studies was 15 weeks and 54 weeks, respectively. Severe HFS occurred significantly more frequently in women receiving a 50 mg/m² dose of PLD than those receiving less than 50 mg/m² (17% versus 2%, respectively; P value 0.01).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In platinum-sensitive relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer, PLD/carbo is more effective than PAC/carbo and is better tolerated; PLD/carbo should therefore be considered as first-line treatment in women with platinum-sensitive relapsed EOC. PLD alone is a useful agent for platinum-resistant relapsed EOC, however it remains unclear how it compares with other single agents for this subgroup and in what order these agents should be used. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of PLD in combination with other agents in platinum-resistant relapsed EOC.

Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin for platinum-resistant or refractory Müllerian carcinoma (epithelial ovarian carcinoma, primary carcinoma of Fallopian tube and peritoneal carcinoma): A single-institutional experience

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) in patients with Müllerian carcinoma treated at our hospital. Nineteen patients with platinum-resistant Müllerian carcinoma were treated with intravenous PLD 50 mg/m(2) every 4 weeks. Tumor response was assessed by MRI following every 2-3 cycles of treatment. The severity of adverse events was assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (v3.0). The best overall responses in the 19 patients were identified as 5 partial responses (PR), 6 stable diseases (SD) and 8 progressive diseases (PD). Response rate was 26.3%. The proportion of patients with CR, PR or SD was 57.9%. The median time to progression was 188.0 days. The median survival time was 381.0 days. Toxicity grades were identified as one grade III hand-foot syndrome, two grade III neutropenia, one grade IV hand-foot syndrome, one grade IV stomatitis and one grade IV neutropenia. The present study confirmed that PLD is an effective drug when administered as a salvage therapy for the treatment of Müllerian carcinoma and is associated with a reduced toxicity profile compared with current therapeutic options.

Final overall survival results of phase III GCIG CALYPSO trial of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin and carboplatin vs paclitaxel and carboplatin in platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer patients

Background:

The CALYPSO phase III trial compared CD (carboplatin-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD)) with CP (carboplatin-paclitaxel) in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC). Overall survival (OS) data are now mature.

Methods:

Women with ROC relapsing >6 months after first- or second-line therapy were randomised to CD or CP for six cycles in this international, open-label, non-inferiority trial. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. The OS analysis is presented here.

Results:

A total of 976 patients were randomised (467 to CD and 509 to CP). With a median follow-up of 49 months, no statistically significant difference was observed between arms in OS (hazard ratio=0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.85, 1.16); log-rank P=0.94). Median survival times were 30.7 months (CD) and 33.0 months (CP). No statistically significant difference in OS was observed between arms in predetermined subgroups according to age, body mass index, treatment-free interval, measurable disease, number of lines of prior chemotherapy, or performance status. Post-study cross-over was imbalanced between arms, with a greater proportion of patients randomised to CP receiving post-study PLD (68%) than patients randomised to CD receiving post-study paclitaxel (43% P<0.001).

Conclusion:

Carboplatin-PLD led to delayed progression and similar OS compared with carboplatin-paclitaxel in platinum-sensitive ROC.

CA-125 can be part of the tumour evaluation criteria in ovarian cancer trials: experience of the GCIG CALYPSO trial

BACKGROUND

CA-125 as a tumour progression criterion in relapsing ovarian cancer (ROC) trials remains controversial. CALYPSO is a large randomised trial incorporating CA-125 (GCIG criteria) and symptomatic deterioration in addition to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) criteria (radiological) to determine progression.

METHODS

In all, 976 patients with platinum-sensitive ROC were randomised to carboplatin-paclitaxel (C-P) or carboplatin-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (C-PLD). CT-scan and CA-125 were performed every 3 months until progression.

RESULTS

In all, 832 patients (85%) progressed, with 60% experiencing a first radiological progression, 10% symptomatic progression, and 28% CA-125 progression without evidence of radiological or symptomatic progression. The benefit of C-PLD vs C-P in progression-free survival was not influenced by type of first progression (hazard ratio 0.85 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.66-1.10) and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.72-0.98) for CA-125 and RECIST, respectively). In patients with CA-125 first progression who subsequently progressed radiologically, a delay of 2.3 months was observed between the two progression types. After CA-125 first progression, median time to new treatment was 2.0 months. In all, 81%of the patients with CA-125 or radiological first progression and 60% with symptomatic first progression received subsequent treatment.

CONCLUSION

CA-125 and radiological tests performed similarly in determining progression with C-PLD or C-P. Additional follow-up with CA-125 measurements was not associated with overtreatment.