Association of progression-free survival with patient-reported outcomes and survival: results from a randomised phase 3 trial of panitumumab

PURPOSE In the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01847274 ), maintenance therapy with niraparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, prolonged progression-free survival in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer who had a response to their last platinum-based chemotherapy. The objective of the study was to assess the clinical benefit and patient-reported outcomes in patients who had a partial response (PR) and complete response (CR) to their last platinum-based therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 553 patients were enrolled in the trial. Of 203 patients with a germline BRCA mutation (g BRCAmut), 99 had a PR and 104 had a CR to their last platinum-based therapy; of 350 patients without a confirmed g BRCAmut (non–g BRCAmut), 173 had a PR and 177 had a CR. Post hoc analyses were carried out to evaluate safety and the risk of progression in these patients according to g BRCAmut status and response to their last platinum-based therapy. Ovarian cancer–specific symptoms and quality of life were assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Ovarian Symptom Index. RESULTS Progression-free survival was improved in patients treated with niraparib compared with placebo in both the g BRCAmut cohort (PR: hazard ratio [HR], 0.24; 95% CI, 0.131 to 0.441; P < .0001; CR: HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.160 to 0.546; P < .0001) and the non–g BRCAmut cohort (PR: HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.230 to 0.532; P < .0001; CR: HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.383 to 0.868; P = .0082). The incidence of any-grade and grade 3 or greater adverse events was manageable. No meaningful differences were observed between niraparib and placebo in PR and CR subgroups with respect to patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSION Patients achieved clinical benefit from maintenance treatment with niraparib regardless of response to the last platinum-based therapy.

Download Full-text

Patient-reported outcomes and final overall survival results from the randomized phase 3 PENELOPE trial evaluating pertuzumab in low tumor human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) mRNA-expressing platinum-resistant ovarian cancer

International Journal of Gynecological Cancer ◽

10.1136/ijgc-2019-000370 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 29 (7) ◽

pp. 1141-1147 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Domenica Lorusso ◽

Felix Hilpert ◽

Antonio González Martin ◽

Joern Rau ◽

Petronella Ottevanger ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Ovarian Cancer ◽

Overall Survival ◽

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Growth Factor Receptor ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Free Survival ◽

End Point ◽

Platinum Resistant ◽

Patient Reported ◽

Epidermal Growth

IntroductionThe PENELOPE trial evaluated pertuzumab added to chemotherapy for biomarker-selected platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. As previously reported, pertuzumab did not statistically significantly improve progression-free survival (primary end point: HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.11), although results in the paclitaxel and gemcitabine cohorts suggested activity. Here, we report final overall survival and patient-reported outcomes.Patients and methodsEligible patients had ovarian carcinoma that progressed during/within 6 months of completing ≥4 platinum cycles, low tumor human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) mRNA expression, and ≤2 prior chemotherapy lines. Investigators selected single-agent topotecan, gemcitabine or weekly paclitaxel before patients were randomized to either placebo or pertuzumab (840→420 mg every 3 weeks), stratified by selected chemotherapy, prior anti-angiogenic therapy, and platinum-free interval. Final overall survival analysis (key secondary end point) was pre-specified after 129 deaths. Patient-reported outcomes (secondary end point) were assessed at baseline and every 9 weeks until disease progression.ResultsAt database lock (June 9, 2016), 130 (83%) of 156 randomized patients had died. Median follow-up was 27 months in the pertuzumab arm versus 26 months in the control arm. In the intent-to-treat population there was no overall survival difference between treatment arms (stratified HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.32; p=0.60). Results in subgroups defined by stratification factors indicated heterogeneity similar to previous progression-free survival results. Updated safety was similar to previously published results. Compliance with patient-reported outcomes questionnaire completion was >75% for all validated patient-reported outcomes measures. Pertuzumab demonstrated neither beneficial nor detrimental effects on patient-reported outcomes compared with placebo, except for increased diarrhea symptoms.DiscussionConsistent with the primary results, adding pertuzumab to chemotherapy for low tumor HER3 mRNA-expressing platinum-resistant ovarian cancer did not improve overall survival, but showed trends in some cohorts. Except for increased diarrhea symptoms, pertuzumab had no impact on patient-reported outcomes.ClinicalTrials.gov: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01684878.

Download Full-text

Durable Clinical Benefit With Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in DNA Mismatch Repair–Deficient/Microsatellite Instability–High Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2017.76.9901 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 36 (8) ◽

pp. 773-779 ◽

Cited By ~ 490

Author(s):

Michael J. Overman ◽

Sara Lonardi ◽

Ka Yeung Mark Wong ◽

Heinz-Josef Lenz ◽

Fabio Gelsomino ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Colorectal Cancer ◽

Microsatellite Instability ◽

Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽

Mismatch Repair ◽

Clinical Benefit ◽

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Free Survival ◽

Dna Mismatch ◽

Patient Reported

Purpose Nivolumab provides clinical benefit (objective response rate [ORR], 31%; 95% CI, 20.8 to 42.9; disease control rate, 69%; 12-month overall survival [OS], 73%) in previously treated patients with DNA mismatch repair–deficient (dMMR)/microsatellite instability–high (MSI-H) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC); nivolumab plus ipilimumab may improve these outcomes. Efficacy and safety results for the nivolumab plus ipilimumab cohort of CheckMate-142, the largest single-study report of an immunotherapy combination in dMMR/MSI-H mCRC, are reported. Patients and Methods Patients received nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 3 weeks (four doses) followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks. Primary end point was investigator-assessed ORR. Results Of 119 patients, 76% had received ≥ two prior systemic therapies. At median follow-up of 13.4 months, investigator-assessed ORR was 55% (95% CI, 45.2 to 63.8), and disease control rate for ≥ 12 weeks was 80%. Median duration of response was not reached; most responses (94%) were ongoing at data cutoff. Progression-free survival rates were 76% (9 months) and 71% (12 months); respective OS rates were 87% and 85%. Statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements were observed in patient-reported outcomes, including functioning, symptoms, and quality of life. Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 32% of patients and were manageable. Patients (13%) who discontinued treatment because of study drug-related AEs had an ORR (63%) consistent with that of the overall population. Conclusion Nivolumab plus ipilimumab demonstrated high response rates, encouraging progression-free survival and OS at 12 months, manageable safety, and meaningful improvements in key patient-reported outcomes. Indirect comparisons suggest combination therapy provides improved efficacy relative to anti–programmed death-1 monotherapy and has a favorable benefit-risk profile. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab provides a promising new treatment option for patients with dMMR/MSI-H mCRC.

Download Full-text

Association of progression-free survival, overall survival, and patient-reported outcomes by skin toxicity andKRASstatus in patients receiving panitumumab monotherapy

Cancer ◽

10.1002/cncr.24088 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 115 (7) ◽

pp. 1544-1554 ◽

Cited By ~ 95

Author(s):

Marc Peeters ◽

Salvatore Siena ◽

Eric Van Cutsem ◽

Alberto Sobrero ◽

Alain Hendlisz ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Skin Toxicity ◽

Free Survival ◽

Patient Reported

Download Full-text

Progression-free survival, patient-reported outcomes, and the Holy Grail

The Journal of Community and Supportive Oncology ◽

10.12788/jcso.0061 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 12 (8) ◽

pp. 265-266 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

David Cella

Keyword(s):

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Holy Grail ◽

Free Survival ◽

Patient Reported

Download Full-text

Patient‐reported outcomes predict progression‐free survival of patients with advanced breast cancer treated with abemaciclib

The Oncologist ◽

10.1002/onco.13806 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Sarah Badaoui ◽

Ganessan Kichenadasse ◽

Andrew Rowland ◽

Michael J Sorich ◽

Ashley M Hopkins

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Advanced Breast Cancer ◽

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Advanced Breast ◽

Free Survival ◽

Patient Reported

Download Full-text

Patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials

Cancer Breaking News ◽

10.19156/cbn.2016.0019 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 4 (2) ◽

pp. 54-58

Author(s):

Florence Joly ◽

Gloria Mittica

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trials ◽

Health Care Professionals ◽

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Specific Treatment ◽

Disease Free Survival ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Treatment Benefit ◽

Free Survival ◽

Disease Response ◽

Patient Reported

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are progressively being included in clinical trials to provide information about treatment benefits identified by the patients themselves that extend the data on traditional clinical trial endpoints, such as disease free survival, overall survival, progression-free survival, and response rate. PROs may have a greater impact for patients than other endpoints. For example, patients may be prepared to forgo some increase in progression-free survival in return for reduced treatment-related toxicity. PROs may also be an indicator of disease response and have value as prognostic factors. This article discusses the way PROs can be defined and incorporated into clinical trials to enhance the value of clinical trials data and improve the understanding of the clinical benefits of a specific treatment, not only for health care professionals, but for patients and caregivers. The importance and relevance of a patient-centered perspective and shared decision making in defining value and determining treatment benefit is increasingly recognized. However, despite the acknowledged value of PROs, their inclusion in clinical trials remains far from ideal. New guidelines from the research community and technological improvements in data collection and analytics will increase the quality and the importance of PROs as standard methods for the evaluation of medical studies and in the drugs approval process.

Download Full-text