scholarly journals O017/#15 Efficacy and safety of niraparib maintenance treatment in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer after shorter or longer chemotherapy: a post hoc subgroup analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y Gao ◽  
X Wu ◽  
J Zhu ◽  
R Yin ◽  
J Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Recurrent Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
Post Hoc

scholarly journals Comparative Efficacy and Safety of PARP Inhibitors as Maintenance Therapy in Platinum Sensitive Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yangchun Xu ◽  
Lei Ding ◽  
Yuan Tian ◽  
Miaomiao Bi ◽  
Ning Han ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Recurrent Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Comparative Efficacy ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
Highly Effective ◽  
Grade 3

This meta-analysis investigated the comparative efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitor monotherapy as maintenance treatment in platinum sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC). Electronic databases were systematically searched for relevant RCTs. The primary endpoint was PFS. The results were stratified based on three categories: BRCA mutated patients, HRD patients, and overall population. The secondary outcome were discontinuations due to adverse events and grade 3 or 4 adverse events in maintenance phase. Five eligible RCTs were included in the network meta-analysis. For patients with BRCA mutated ovarian cancer, olaparib-throughout (HR = 0.21 with 95% CrI: 0.081–0.55), rucaparib (HR = 0.23 with 95% CrI: 0.16–0.34), olaparib (HR = 0.27 with 95% CrI: 0.20–0.35), and niraparib (HR = 0.26 with 95% CrI: 0.17–0.41) were all highly effective in comparison with placebo at improving PFS. For HRD patients, both rucaparib (HR = 0.32 with 95% CrI: 0.24–0.42) and niraparib (HR = 0.38 with 95% CrI: 0.24–0.60) were all highly effective in comparison with placebo at improving PFS. For the overall population, olaparib-throughout (HR = 0.51 with 95% CrI: 0.34–0.76), rucaparib (HR = 0.37 with 95% CrI: 0.30–0.45), olaparib (HR = 0.35 with 95% CrI: 0.25–0.49), and niraparib (HR = 0.38 with 95% CrI: 0.30–0.48) were all highly effective in comparison with placebo at improving PFS. Regarding grade 3 or 4 adverse events, the incidence of grade 3 or 4 toxicity reactions to rucaparib and niraparib were significantly higher than in the olaparib group. In terms of discontinuations due to adverse events, the treatment discontinuations were not significantly different between the three drugs. In summary, all the included maintenance treatment regimens are effective regardless of BRCA mutational status, and no statistically significant differences between rucaparib, niraparib and Olaparib in terms of PFS. In terms of safety profile, the three drugs present manageable adverse events. Clinicians should consider potential adverse events related to each of these interventions in clinical practice, and the adverse events are generally manageable.

scholarly journals Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of PARP Inhibitors as a Monotherapy for Platinum-Sensitive Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hongmei Wang ◽  
Meng Wu ◽  
Haonan Liu ◽  
Hang Zhou ◽  
Yang Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Brca Mutation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Recurrent Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Home Treatment ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
Grade 3

BackgroundThe present COVID-19 pandemic has tended toward normality. To provide convenient, safe, and effective home treatment programs for patients with recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC), the clinical efficacy and safety of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) (including olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib) monotherapy as a maintenance treatment for platinum-sensitive ROC were systematically evaluated.MethodsNumerous electronic databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of PARPi maintenance treatment for ROC that were published before June 2021. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoint was grade 3-4 adverse effects (AEs). After data extraction and the quality evaluation of the included studies, Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed using R software. The ability of each treatment was ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve.ResultsThe analysis included five studies and 1390 patients. The NMA results demonstrated that compared with the placebo, olaparib and niraparib exhibited significant benefits in the gBRCA-mutated population, and respectively reduced the risk of death by 31% (HR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.53-0.90) and 34% (HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.44-0.99). Olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib were all found to be very effective in prolonging PFS in patients with ROC. All three PARPi treatments increased the number of grade 3-4 AEs in patients with ROC as compared with the placebo.ConclusionsOverall, olaparib and niraparib maintenance treatment can significantly prolong the OS of patients with gBRCA mutations. Furthermore, the three investigated PARPi monotherapy maintenance treatments can prolong PFS regardless of BRCA mutation status. Although the incidence of AEs in the treatment groups was found to be significantly higher than that in the placebo group, the patients in the treatment group tolerated the treatment. Home oral PARPi treatment can balance tumor treatment and pandemic prevention and control, and is the most convenient, safe, and effective home treatment method available against the background of the current COVID-19 pandemic. Systematic Review Registrationhttps://inplasy.com/inplasy-2021-6-0033/.

Bevacizumab after bevacizumab in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer: A subgroup analysis of GOG0213.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5523-5523 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert L. Coleman ◽  
Mark F. Brady ◽  
Thomas J Herzog ◽  
Deborah Kay Armstrong ◽  
Paul Sabbatini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Recurrent Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Platinum Sensitive

Decision analysis for secondline maintenance treatment of platinum sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer: a review

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 684-694
Author(s):  
Rebecca Arend ◽  
Shannon Neville Westin ◽  
Robert L Coleman
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Homologous Recombination ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Recurrent Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Parp Inhibitors ◽  
Homologous Recombination Repair ◽  
Specific Patient ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
Recombination Repair

Most women with ovarian cancer experience disease relapse, presenting numerous treatment challenges for clinicians. Maintenance therapy in the relapsed setting aims to extend the time taken for a cancer to progress, thus delaying the need for additional treatments. Four therapies are currently approved in the USA for secondline maintenance treatment of platinum sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer: one antivascular endothelial growth factor agent (bevacizumab) and three poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib). In addition to efficacy, maintenance therapies must have a good tolerability profile and no significant detrimental impact on quality of life, as patients who receive maintenance are generally free from cancer related symptoms. Data from key bevacizumab trials (OCEANS, NCT00434642; GOG-0213, NCT00565851; MITO16B, NCT01802749) and PARP inhibitor trials (Study 19, NCT00753545; SOLO2, NCT01874353; NOVA, NCT01847274; ARIEL3, NCT01968213) indicate that bevacizumab and the PARP inhibitors are effective in patients with platinum sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer but differ in their tolerability profiles. In addition, the efficacy of PARP inhibitors is dependent on the presence of homologous recombination repair deficiency, with patients with the deficiency experiencing greater responses from treatment compared with those who are homologous recombination repair proficient. Allowing for caveats of cross trial comparisons, we advise that clinicians account for the following points when choosing whether and when to administer a secondline maintenance treatment for a specific patient: presence of a homologous recombination repair deficient tumor; the patient’s baseline characteristics, such as platelet count and blood pressure; mode of administration of therapy; and consideration of future treatment options for thirdline and later therapy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document