QUALITY OF LIFE OF PATIENTS WITH OVARIAN CANCER OF THE THIRD STAGE USING DIFFERENTIATED TREATMENT

The aim of this research was to assess the quality of life in patients with stage III ovarian cancer during the treatment period, depending on the applied therapeutic approaches. A comparative analysis of the results of treatment of 350 patients with adenocarcinoma of the ovaries of III-IV stage, which have undergone suboptimal or non-optimal cytomelective surgery, was conducted. To assess the quality of life and to examine the relationship between changes in physical health and quality of life, patients in both groups were asked to complete the questionnaires EORTC QLQ-C30 and SF-36. According to the questionnaire of the EORTC QLQ-C30, the indicators of physical activity, the ability to do everyday affairs, were higher in the second group of patients who received differentiated treatment. The indicator of "social functioning" was also higher in the II group of patients. When evaluating the patients' liver on the scale of the questionnaire SF-36, it was found that the positive effect of differentiated therapy is maintained for 3 years. Life quality is an important criterion for evaluating the results of antitumor therapy, and when it is continuously monitored in patients with ovarian cancer the safety of treatment for patients could be improved, including at an advanced stage

Olaparib for Maintenance Treatment of BRCA 1 or 2 Mutated, Relapsed, Platinum-Sensitive Ovarian, Fallopian Tube and Peritoneal Cancer in People Whose Relapsed Disease has Responded to Platinum-Based Chemotherapy: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

As part of its Single Technology Appraisal process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of olaparib (AstraZeneca) to submit evidence on the clinical and cost effectiveness of olaparib for the maintenance treatment of BRCA1/2 mutated (BRCAm), platinum-sensitive relapsed (PSR) ovarian, fallopian tube and peritoneal cancer in people whose relapsed disease has responded to platinum-based chemotherapy. The Evidence Review Group (ERG) produced a critical review of the evidence contained within the company's submission (CS) to NICE. The clinical evidence related to one phase II, double-blind randomised controlled trial that recruited 265 patients with PSR serous ovarian cancer (OC) regardless of BRCAm status. Patients received olaparib 400 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) or matched placebo. In the whole population, the primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) was met (hazard ratio [HR] 0.35; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.25-0.49, p < 0.01) for olaparib versus placebo. The BRCAm subgroup analysis (added after the study commenced but 1 month before the primary analysis was undertaken) reported an HR for PFS of 0.18 (95 % CI 0.10-0.31, p < 0.0001) for olaparib versus placebo, though interaction tests appeared inconclusive. Overall survival was not statistically significant in the whole group (HR 0.88; 95 % CI 0.64-1.21; p = 0.44) or the BRCAm subgroup (0.73; 95 % CI 0.45-1.17; p = 0.19), though treatment switching may have confounded results. The exclusion of data from sites allowing crossover resulted in an HR for overall survival (OS) of 0.52 (95 % CI 0.28-0.97, p = 0.039) in the BRCAm group. Health-related quality-of-life measures were not significantly different between groups. All post hoc exploratory outcomes (time to treatment discontinuation/death, time to first subsequent therapy/death, and time to second subsequent therapy/death) were statistically significantly better in the olaparib arm in the whole population and the BRCAm subgroup analyses. Adverse events were more frequent for olaparib but were largely minor or manageable. The company's semi-Markov model assessed the cost effectiveness of olaparib versus routine surveillance in patients with BRCAm PSR OC from a National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Services (PSS) perspective over a lifetime horizon. The model suggests that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for olaparib versus routine surveillance is expected to be approximately £49,146 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The ERG did not consider the company's cost-effectiveness estimates to be credible. Additional ERG analyses suggested that the ICER is likely to be more than £92,214 per QALY gained. Additional analyses provided by the company in patients who received three or more lines of chemotherapy suggested a more favourable cost-effectiveness profile for olaparib. The NICE Appraisal Committee recommended olaparib for this subgroup provided the cost of olaparib for people who continue to receive treatment after 15 months will be met by the company.

Homologous recombination deficiency and ovarian cancer

The discovery that PARP inhibitors block an essential pathway of DNA repair in cells harbouring a BRCA mutation has opened up a new therapeutic avenue for high-grade ovarian cancers. BRCA1 and BRCA2 proteins are essential for high-fidelity repair of double-strand breaks of DNA through the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway. Deficiency in HRR (HRD) is a target for PARP inhibitors. The first PARP inhibitor, olaparib, has now been licensed for BRCA-mutated ovarian cancers. While mutated BRCA genes are individually most commonly associated with HRD other essential HRR proteins may be mutated or functionally deficient potentially widening the therapeutic opportunities for PARP inhibitors. HRD is the first phenotypically defined predictive marker for therapy with PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancer. Several different PARP inhibitors are being trialled in ovarian cancer and this class of drugs has been shown to be a new selective therapy for high-grade ovarian cancer. Around 20% of high-grade serous ovarian cancers harbour germline or somatic BRCA mutations and testing for BRCA mutations should be incorporated into routine clinical practice. The expanded use of PARP inhibitors in HRD deficient (non-BRCA mutant) tumours using a signature of HRD in clinical practice requires validation.