The predictive value of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status for progression free survival (PFS) after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 159 ◽  
pp. 131-132
Author(s):  
Y. Xu ◽  
A. Saverimuthu ◽  
A. Jadhav ◽  
R. Bhuiyan ◽  
J. Yio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Homologous Recombination ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Homologous Recombination Deficiency ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy

Poly-(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors: paradigm shift in the first-line treatment of newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (10) ◽  
pp. 721-727
Author(s):  
Fady Gh Haddad ◽  
Elias Karam ◽  
Elissar Moujaess ◽  
Hampig Raphael Kourie
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Homologous Recombination ◽  
Excision Repair ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Parp Inhibitors ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Base Excision ◽  
Breast Cancer Gene

Debulking surgery associated with chemotherapy represent the backbone of ovarian cancer therapy. Adding bevacizumab has improved survival. Recently, PARP inhibitors were added in the first line as maintenance treatment for the patients who achieve a complete or partial response. These drugs act by blocking the activity of the PARP enzyme responsible for base-excision repair, and have shown positive responses when used for tumors lacking homologous recombination. Olaparib, niraparib and veliparib were evaluated and showed an increase in the duration of progression-free survival: 22.1 months (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.59), 13.8 (HR = 0.62) and 23.5 (HR = 0.68) with olaparib, niraparib and veliparib, respectively. This review describes the benefit of PARP inhibitors as maintenance therapy and discusses the efficacy according to breast cancer gene and homologous recombination status.

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors in combination with anti-angiogenic agents for the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivia Le Saux ◽  
Hélène Vanacker ◽  
Fatma Guermazi ◽  
Mélodie Carbonnaux ◽  
Clémence Roméo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Homologous Recombination ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Preclinical Study ◽  
The Body ◽  
Synergistic Activity ◽  
High Grade ◽  
First Line ◽  
Homologous Recombination Deficiency

Homologous recombination deficiency and VEGF expression are key pathways in high-grade ovarian cancer. Recently, three randomized practice changing trials were published: the PAOLA-1, PRIMA and VELIA trials. The use of PARP inhibitors (PARPi) following chemotherapy has become standard of care in first line. Combination of PARPi with anti-angiogenic agents has demonstrated synergistic activity in preclinical study. This review summarizes the body of evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of the combination of PARPi and anti-angiogenic drugs in first-line homologous recombination deficiency high-grade ovarian cancer leading to US FDA and EMA approvals. This double maintenance is supported by: a large benefit with bevacizumab + olaparib compared with olaparib alone, a rationale for additive effect, and a good safety and cost-effective profile.

Incorporation of Pazopanib in Maintenance Therapy of Ovarian Cancer

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (30) ◽  
pp. 3374-3382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas du Bois ◽  
Anne Floquet ◽  
Jae-Weon Kim ◽  
Joern Rau ◽  
Josep M. del Campo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Growth Factor ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

PurposePazopanib is an oral, multikinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) -1/-2/-3, platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) -α/-β, and c-Kit. Preclinical and clinical studies support VEGFR and PDGFR as targets for advanced ovarian cancer treatment. This study evaluated the role of pazopanib maintenance therapy in patients with ovarian cancer whose disease did not progress during first-line chemotherapy.Patients and MethodsNine hundred forty patients with histologically confirmed cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, or peritoneum, International Federation Gynecology Obstetrics (FIGO) stages II-IV, no evidence of progression after primary therapy consisting of surgery and at least five cycles of platinum-taxane chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to receive pazopanib 800 mg once per day or placebo for up to 24 months. The primary end point was progression-free survival by RECIST 1.0 assessed by the investigators.ResultsMaintenance pazopanib prolonged progression-free survival compared with placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.91; P = .0021; median, 17.9 v 12.3 months, respectively). Interim survival analysis based on events in 35.6% of the population did not show any significant difference. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events of hypertension (30.8%), neutropenia (9.9%), liver-related toxicity (9.4%), diarrhea (8.2%), fatigue (2.7%), thrombocytopenia (2.5%), and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (1.9%) were significantly higher in the pazopanib arm. Treatment discontinuation related to adverse events was higher among patients treated with pazopanib (33.3%) compared with placebo (5.6%).ConclusionPazopanib maintenance therapy provided a median improvement of 5.6 months (HR, 0.77) in progression-free survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer who have not progressed after first-line chemotherapy. Overall survival data to this point did not suggest any benefit. Additional analysis should help to identify subgroups of patients in whom improved efficacy may balance toxicity (NCT00866697).

Phase III Trial of High-Dose Sequential Chemotherapy With Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Support Compared With Standard Dose Chemotherapy for First-Line Treatment of Advanced Ovarian Cancer: Intergroup Trial of the AGO-Ovar/AIO and EBMT

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (27) ◽  
pp. 4187-4193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Volker Möbus ◽  
Hannes Wandt ◽  
Norbert Frickhofen ◽  
Carmelo Bengala ◽  
Kim Champion ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Peripheral Blood Stem Cell ◽  
Standard Dose ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
High Dose ◽  
First Line ◽  
Sequential Chemotherapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Treatment

PurposeAlthough ovarian cancer is one of the most chemotherapy-sensitive solid tumors, cure after radical surgery and chemotherapy is uncommon. A randomized trial comparing high-dose sequential chemotherapy with peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) support with platinum-based combination chemotherapy was conducted to investigate whether dose-intensification improves outcome.Patients and MethodsOne hundred forty-nine patients with untreated ovarian cancer were randomly assigned after debulking surgery to receive standard combination chemotherapy or sequential high-dose (HD) treatment with two cycles of cyclophosphamide and paclitaxel followed by three cycles of HD carboplatin and paclitaxel with PBSC support. HD melphalan was added to the final cycle. The median age was 50 years (range, 20 to 65 years) and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage was IIb/IIc in 4%, III in 78%, and IV in 17%.ResultsSeventy-six percent of patients received all five cycles in the HD arm and the main toxicities were neuro-/ototoxicity, gastrointestinal toxicity, and infection and one death from hemorrhagic shock. After a median follow-up of 38 months, the progression-free survival was 20.5 months in the standard arm and 29.6 months in the HD arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.26; P, .40). Median overall survival (OS) was 62.8 months in the standard arm and 54.4 months in the HD arm (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.94; P, .54).ConclusionThis is the first randomized trial comparing sequential HD versus standard dose chemotherapy in first-line treatment of patients with advanced ovarian cancer. We observed no statistically significant difference in progression-free survival or OS and conclude that HD chemotherapy does not appear to be superior to conventional dose chemotherapy.

Phase III Trial of Observation Versus Six Courses of Paclitaxel in Patients With Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer in Complete Response After Six Courses of Paclitaxel/Platinum-Based Chemotherapy: Final Results of the After-6 Protocol 1

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (28) ◽  
pp. 4642-4648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergio Pecorelli ◽  
Giuseppe Favalli ◽  
Angiolo Gadducci ◽  
Dionyssios Katsaros ◽  
Pierluigi Benedetti Panici ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Consolidation Treatment ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

Purpose To assess whether six courses of paclitaxel are effective as consolidation treatment in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer who are in complete response after first-line paclitaxel/platinum–based chemotherapy. Patients and Methods Patients with stages IIb to IV disease in clinical or pathologic complete response after six courses of paclitaxel/platinum–based chemotherapy were randomly allocated to either observation (ie, control) or six courses of paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 every 3 weeks (ie, maintenance). Results Two hundred patients were randomly assigned from March 1999 to July 2006. Because of the low accrual rate, an unplanned interim analysis of futility according to the Bayesian approach was performed. Grade 2 or greater motor neurotoxicity and sensory neurotoxicity were reported in 11.3% and 28.0% of the paclitaxel-arm patients, respectively. After a median follow-up of 43.5 months, 107 patients (53%) had experienced relapse, and 48 patients (24%) had died. Two-year progression-free survival rates were 54% (95% CI, 43% to 64%) and 59% (95% CI, 49% to 69%; P = not significant) in the control and maintenance arms, respectively. Corresponding 2-year overall survival rates were 90% (95% CI, 84% to 97%) and 87% (95% CI, 80% to 94%; P = not significant), respectively. The Cox model showed that residual disease after initial surgery (macroscopic v no macroscopic residuum; hazard ratio [HR], 1.91; 95%CI, 1.21 to 3.03) and stage (IIIc to IV v others; HR, 3.10; 95% CI, 1.13 to 8.48) were independent prognostic factors for progression-free survival, whereas the treatment arm (maintenance v control) had no prognostic relevance. Conclusion A consolidation treatment with six cycles of paclitaxel does not prolong progression-free survival or overall survival in patients in complete response after first-line paclitaxel/platinum–based regimens.

Niraparib maintenance in frontline management of ovarian cancer: a cost effectiveness analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (10) ◽  
pp. 1569-1575
Author(s):  
David A Barrington ◽  
Crystal Tubbs ◽  
Haller J Smith ◽  
J Michael Straughn, Jr ◽  
Leigha Senter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Homologous Recombination ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Homologous Recombination Deficiency ◽  
The Cost

ObjectivesNiraparib maintenance after frontline chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer extends progression free survival. The objective of this study was to determine the cost effectiveness of niraparib maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer.MethodsDecision analysis models compared the cost of observation versus niraparib maintenance following chemotherapy for five groups: all newly diagnosed ovarian cancer patients (overall), those with homologous recombination deficiency, those harboring BRCA mutations (BRCA), homologous recombination deficiency patients without BRCA mutations (homologous recombination deficiency non-BRCA), and non-homologous recombination deficiency patients. Drug costs were estimated using average wholesale prices. Progression free survival was estimated from published data and used to estimate projected overall survival. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios per quality adjusted life year were calculated. Sensitivity analyses varying the cost of niraparib were performed. The willingness-to-pay threshold was set at US$100 000 per quality adjusted life year saved.ResultsFor the overall group, the cost of observation was US$5.8 billion versus $20.5 billion for niraparib maintenance, with an incremental cost effectiveness ratio of $72 829. For the homologous recombination deficiency group, the observation cost was $3.0 billion versus $14.8 billion for niraparib maintenance (incremental cost effectiveness ratio $56 329). Incremental cost effectiveness ratios for the BRCA, homologous recombination deficiency non-BRCA, and non-homologous recombination deficiency groups were $58 348, $50 914, and $88 741, respectively. For the overall and homologous recombination deficiency groups, niraparib remained cost effective if projected overall survival was 2.2 and 1.5 times progression free survival, respectively.ConclusionsFor patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer, maintenance therapy with niraparib was cost effective. Cost effectiveness was improved when analyzing those patients with homologous recombination deficiency and BRCA mutations. Efforts should continue to optimize poly-ADP-ribose polymerase utilization strategies.

scholarly journals Estimating long-term overall survival with olaparib as maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with BRCA mutations

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
N. A. Avxentyev ◽  
S. V. Khokhlova ◽  
M. Yu. Frolov ◽  
A. S. Makarov
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
First Line ◽  
Brca Mutations ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

Background. According to randomized clinical trial SOLO1 olaparib statistically significantly improves progression-free survival versus placebo as a maintenance monotherapy in patients aged 18 and over with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with BRCA mutations, who had response to first-line chemotherapy. As the data on overall survival (OS) in this trial remains interim it is still uncertain whether treatment with olaparib can provide any benefits in terms of OS.Objective: to evaluate a long-term OS for olaparib versus placebo as a maintenance monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with BRCA mutations, who had response to first-line chemotherapy.Materials and methods. A 10-year mathematic model of disease progression and survival on olaparib versus placebo was developed. Modelling was based on data on progression-free survival from SOLO1 trial and data on OS after platinum-sensitive and platinum-resistant relapses from OCEANS and AURELIA trials. Additionally, patients who haven’t been treated with olaparib after first-line therapy in base-case scenario were assumed to get olaparib as a second-line treatment after platinum-sensitive relapse; mortality modelling for these patients was based on data from SOLO2 trial.Results. Median OS for olaparib was 107 months versus 66 months for placebo. 46 % of patients treated with olaparib were alive by the end of 10-year modelling period, but only 28 % patients from the placebo group. Hazard ratio of death for olaparib versus placebo was 0.64 (95 % confidence interval 0.49–0.84). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed robustness of these results.Conclusion. Using olaparib as a maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with BRCA mutations, who had response on first line chemotherapy, statistically significantly reduces risk of death by 36 %, compared to placebo.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document