Weekly Paclitaxel Versus Three-Weekly Paclitaxel in Recurrent Platinum-Resistant Epithelial Ovarian and Peritoneal Cancers: A Phase III Study

Efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab combined with albumin-bound paclitaxel and nedaplatin for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Objective: This research aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab (PBL) combined with albumin-bound paclitaxel (ab-Pac) and nedaplatin (NDP) for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Methods: A total of 47 ESCC patients were administered PBL or NDP on day 1 and ab-Pac on days 1 and 8, every 21 days for one cycle. Tumor and toxicities were evaluated every two cycles and every cycle, respectively. Results: The objective response rate was 68.1% and the disease control rate was 100%. The median follow-up was 16.7 months; median progression-free and overall survival were 12.6 and 19.9 months, respectively. Conclusion: The combination of PBL with ab-Pac and NDP proved to be an effective and safe treatment regimen for advanced ESCC.

Impact of veliparib, paclitaxel dosing regimen, and germline BRCA status on the primary treatment of serous ovarian cancer - an ancillary data analysis of the VELIA trial

OBJECTIVE

In the Phase 3 VELIA trial (NCT02470585), veliparib added to carboplatin plus paclitaxel concomitantly and as maintenance for women with newly-diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus chemotherapy alone. Here we present exploratory analyses by paclitaxel dosing schedule and germline BRCA (gBRCA) status.

METHODS

Women with untreated ovarian carcinoma were randomized (1:1:1) to: veliparib during chemotherapy and maintenance (veliparib-throughout), veliparib during chemotherapy followed by placebo maintenance (veliparib-combination only), or placebo during chemotherapy and maintenance (control). Chemotherapy included carboplatin plus dose-dense (DD; weekly) or every-3-week (Q3W) paclitaxel (a stratification factor at randomization), selected at the investigator's discretion pre-randomization. PFS was assessed by paclitaxel dosing schedule using a Cox proportional hazard model adjusted by treatment arm and stratification factors; safety was analyzed based on paclitaxel dosing schedule and gBRCA status.

RESULTS

1132 patients were analyzed by paclitaxel schedule. Pooled treatment arms demonstrated longer median PFS with DD (n = 586) versus Q3W (n = 546) paclitaxel (ITT: 20.5 vs 15.7 months, hazard ratio [HR] 0.77; homologous recombination proficient cancer: 15.1 vs 11.8 months, HR 0.64; BRCAwt: 18.0 vs 12.9 months, HR 0.70). Comparison between arms favored veliparib-throughout versus control in both DD (PFS, 24.2 vs 18.3 months, hazard ratio 0.67) and Q3W (19.3 vs 14.6, hazard ratio 0.69) subgroups. DD paclitaxel was associated with higher incidence of Grade 3/4 neutropenia, fatigue, and anemia versus Q3W. There were no differences in toxicity between gBRCAm (n = 211) and gBRCAwt (n = 902) subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

DD paclitaxel was tolerable and associated with longer PFS in the HR proficient and gBRCAwt groups, versus Q3W. gBRCA status did not impact safety.

Lapatinib and poziotinib overcome ABCB1-mediated paclitaxel resistance in ovarian cancer

Conventional frontline treatment for ovarian cancer consists of successive chemotherapy cycles of paclitaxel and platinum. Despite the initial favorable responses for most patients, chemotherapy resistance frequently leads to recurrent or refractory disease. New treatment strategies that circumvent or prevent mechanisms of resistance are needed to improve ovarian cancer therapy. We established in vitro paclitaxel-resistant ovarian cancer cell line and organoid models. Gene expression differences in resistant and sensitive lines were analyzed by RNA sequencing. We manipulated candidate genes associated with paclitaxel resistance using siRNA or small molecule inhibitors, and then screened the cells for paclitaxel sensitivity using cell viability assays. We used the Bliss independence model to evaluate the anti-proliferative synergy for drug combinations. ABCB1 expression was upregulated in paclitaxel-resistant TOV-21G (q < 1x10-300), OVCAR3 (q = 7.4x10-156) and novel ovarian tumor organoid (p = 2.4x10-4) models. Previous reports have shown some tyrosine kinase inhibitors can inhibit ABCB1 function. We tested a panel of tyrosine kinase inhibitors for the ability to sensitize resistant ABCB1-overexpressing ovarian cancer cell lines to paclitaxel. We observed synergy when we combined poziotinib or lapatinib with paclitaxel in resistant TOV-21G and OVCAR3 cells. Silencing ABCB1 expression in paclitaxel-resistant TOV-21G and OVCAR3 cells reduced paclitaxel IC50 by 20.7 and 6.2-fold, respectively. Furthermore, we demonstrated direct inhibition of paclitaxel-induced ABCB1 transporter activity by both lapatinib and poziotinib. In conclusion, lapatinib and poziotinib combined with paclitaxel synergizes to inhibit the proliferation of ABCB1-overexpressing ovarian cancer cells in vitro. The addition of FDA-approved lapatinib to second-line paclitaxel therapy is a promising strategy for patients with recurrent ovarian cancer.

Clinical analysis of conformal and intensity-modulated radiotherapy in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer

We aimed to provide evidence for radiotherapy treatment regimens in patients with clinically recurrent ovarian cancer. We analyzed the survival and prognostic factors in 43 patients who were treated for recurrent ovarian cancer at 58 tumor sites using three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) or intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) during January 2006-December 2017. t years 1, 2, and 3, overall survival (OS) rate was 82.4%, 68.4%, and 57.9%; local control (LC) rate was 100%, 100% and 80%; recurrence free survival (RFS) rate was 86.8%, 66.6%, and 61.1%; and disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 79.7%, 56.7%, and 46.8%, respectively. The radiotherapy technique was determined to be an independent prognostic factor for survival; the survival rate of patients was significantly improved with IMRT compared to 3D-CRT (P = 0.035). Radiotherapy dose was an independent prognostic factor; survival rate improved when patients were treated with a radiation dose ≥ 60 Gy as compared to < 60 Gy (P = 0.046). Elective nodal prophylactic radiation therapy (ENRT) did not lead to a significant improvement in survival when compared to involved-field radiation therapy (IFRT). The toxicities of 3D-CRT and IMRT were tolerable. One patient (2.3%) had grade 3 acute gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, 2 (4.6%) grade 3 late GI toxicity, 5 (11.6%) grade 3 hematological toxicity, and 2 (4.6%) had grade 4 hematological toxicity. IMRT improved LC and OS in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer after surgery and multiple chemotherapy; toxicities were tolerable. The IMRT technique and radiotherapy dose of ≥ 60 Gy had independent prognostic significance for the survival of such patients.

Development of new medical treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer recurrence

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the scariest gynaecological cancer. Many advances have been done with evolving knowledge, leading to the introduction of new drugs, most in maintenance setting. The antiangiogenic Bevacizumab and the three approved PARP-inhibitors-olaparib, niraparib and rucaparib-are gradually improving PFS of patients with EOC, with initial effects on OS too. But recurrence is still a heavy sentence and lethality continues to be high. Ovarian cancer is a complex disease, with different clinical presentation, histological aspect, and molecular expression, leading to disappointing results, when using a single drug. Implementation of biobanking and analysis of patients' tumour samples, before starting a treatment, could be a promising way to better understand molecular aspects of this disease, to identify markers predictive of response and to allow a better use of experimental drugs, as immunomodulators, targeted therapies, and combinations of these, to fight tumour growth and clinical progression. We reviewed the literature on the updated treatments for recurrent ovarian cancer, summarizing all the available drugs and combinations to treat patients with this diagnosis, and focusing the attention on the new approved molecules and the contemporary Clinical Trials, investigating new target therapies and new associations.

Dose-dense chemotherapy with weekly paclitaxel and 3-weekly carboplatin for recurrent ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the response to dose-dense chemotherapy of weekly paclitaxel and 3-weekly carboplatin in recurrent ovarian cancer, and to report results of literature review.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients accepted weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m² on day 1, 8, 15 and carboplatin on day1 at area under curve (AUC) 6 every 21 days were reviewed for the response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and toxicity during January 2012 to April 2016 in Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taiwan.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients with recurrent ovarian cancer, including 1 platinum-resistant, 7 partially platinum-sensitive, and 8 platinum-sensitive, accepted a median of 6 cycles of chemotherapy (range 3-10). The overall response rate (ORR) and complete response (CR) rate were 93.8%, and 62.5%, respectively. The median PFS of all patients were 10.9 months (range 4.3-40.5). The median time to response (TTR) was 29.0 days (range 19.6-38.4). The median disease-free survival (DFS) after CR was 5.6 months (range 1.2-34.2). Grade 3 at least toxicity included anemia (6.3%), neutropenia (50%), and thrombocytopenia (18.8%). Twenty-nine articles on phase I, II, III, or retrospective studies of dose-dense chemotherapy with weekly paclitaxel were reviewed.

CONCLUSION

This is the first report using Japanese Gynecologic Oncology Group 3016 protocol, weekly paclitaxel and 3-weely carboplatin, on recurrent ovarian cancer. The current study showed high ORR and CR with tolerable toxicities. Our study suggested dose-dense chemotherapy with paclitaxel, especially combining carboplatin created high efficacy probably by anti-angiogenesis. However, consolidation or maintenance therapy is needed to prolong DFS.

Ovarian cancer relapse: From the latest scientific evidence to the best practice

Ovarian cancer (OC) is the fifth most common cause of cancer death in women worldwide. Despite treatment options have continued to improve in recent years, the recurrence rate is still high; in fact around 80% of patients relapses within 18 months. Recently, the scientific landscape is agree in asserting that the ovarian cancer is not a single disease but the outcome of patients depends from the molecular and biological characterization of tumor tissue. In this scenario, molecular targeted therapy given alone or in combination with chemotherapy is showing significant results. We review the different options for the treatment of ovarian cancer recurrence, including the role of surgery, in order to try outlining a possible treatment algorithm evaluating the recent scientific literature and the most important trials.

Phase 2 study evaluating intermittent and continuous linsitinib and weekly paclitaxel in patients with recurrent platinum resistant ovarian epithelial cancer

BACKGROUND

Linsitinib, an oral, dual inhibitor of insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor and insulin receptor, in combination with weekly paclitaxel, may improve clinical outcomes compared with paclitaxel alone in patients with refractory or platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This open-label phase 1/2 clinical trial (NCT00889382) randomized patients with refractory or platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (1:1:1) to receive either oral intermittent linsitinib (600mg once daily on Days 1-3 per week) combined with paclitaxel (80mg/m² on Days 1, 8, and 15; Arm A) or continuous linsitinib (150mg twice daily) in combination with paclitaxel (Arm B), or paclitaxel alone (Arm C). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety/tolerability.

RESULTS

A total of 152 women were randomized to treatment (n=51 Arm A; n=51 Arm B, n=50 Arm C). In combination with paclitaxel, neither intermittent linsitinib (median PFS 2.8months; 95% confidence interval [CI]:2.5-4.4) nor continuous linsitinib (median PFS 4.2months; 95% CI:2.8-5.1) improved PFS over weekly paclitaxel alone (median PFS 5.6months; 95% CI:3.2-6.9). No improvement in ORR, DCR, or OS in either linsitinib dosing schedule was observed compared with paclitaxel alone. Adverse event (AE) rates, including all-grade and grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs, and treatment-related AEs leading to discontinuation, were higher among patients receiving intermittent linsitinib compared with the other treatment arms.

CONCLUSION

Addition of intermittent or continuous linsitinib with paclitaxel did not improve outcomes in patients with platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian cancer compared with paclitaxel alone.

Overcoming platinum resistance in ovarian cancer treatment: from clinical practice to emerging chemical therapies

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this review is to summarize results from clinical trials that tested cytotoxic drugs and target strategies for the treatment of platinum resistant (PR) recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC) with particular attention to Phase III and ongoing trials. Areas covered: Since platinum free interval (PFI) represents the most important predictive factor for response to platinum re-treatment in ROC, non-platinum regimens are conventionally considered the most appropriate approaches. Impressive progress has been made in recent decades, resulting in the identification of most effective cytotoxic agents and in the development of new target strategies. However, the efficacy of most of these drugs for the treatment of PR disease is still limited. Expert opinion: The most favorable benefit for the treatment of PR disease, has been described by the AURELIA trial that showed a 3.3 months increase in progression free survival (PFS) when bevacizumab was combined with non-platinum single agent chemotherapy in bevacizumab-naïve patients. Nevertheless, the use of novel agents is associated to important costs for just little gains in survival. Thus, in our opinion the economic evaluation, such as the incorporation of quality of life into the clinical studies is crucial for the development of future trials for PR-ROC.

Weekly nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel in combination with cisplatin versus weekly solvent-based paclitaxel plus cisplatin as first-line therapy in Chinese patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

More effective regimens for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) are urgently needed. Therefore, a retrospective study concerning the efficacy and safety of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel plus cisplatin (nab-TP) versus solvent-based paclitaxel plus cisplatin (sb-TP) as a first-line therapy was conducted in Chinese patients with advanced ESCC.

METHODS

From June 2009 to June 2015, 32 patients were treated with nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m²) on the first and eighth days (30 minutes infusion) and cisplatin (75 mg/m²) on the second day every 21 days (nab-TP arm). Also, 43 patients were treated with solvent-based paclitaxel (80 mg/m²) intravenously on the first and eighth days and the same dose of cisplatin (sb-TP arm). The two groups were compared in terms of objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety profile. OS and PFS were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods to determine associations between chemotherapy regimens and survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Nab-TP demonstrated a higher ORR (50% vs 30%; P=0.082) and disease control rate (81% vs 65%; P=0.124) than sb-TP. Median OS was similar for nab-TP and sb-TP (12.5 vs 10.7 months; P=0.269). However, nab-TP resulted in a longer median PFS (6.1 months [95% confidence interval: 5.3-6.9]) than sb-TP (5.0 months [95% confidence interval: 4.4-5.6]) (P=0.029). The most common adverse events included anemia, leukopenia, neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia in both the groups and no statistically significant differences were observed between the groups. With statistically significant differences, significantly less grade ≥3 peripheral neuropathy, arthralgia, and myalgia occurred in the nab-TP arm (all P<0.05). Dose reduction, treatment delays, and second-line therapy were similar between the two regimens. There were no treatment-related deaths in either group.

CONCLUSION

Nab-paclitaxel plus cisplatin is found to be an effective and tolerable option for advanced ESCC in the People's Republic of China.