scholarly journals Safety Profile of Niraparib as Maintenance Therapy for Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2022 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 321-336
Author(s):  
Antonia Pagkali ◽  
Ioannis Mamais ◽  
Adamantios Michalinos ◽  
Aris P. Agouridis
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
Dichotomous Data ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background: Patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), treated with niraparib maintenance, present with haematological and gastrointestinal toxicities. Limited data exist on niraparib safety assessment. Objective: To evaluate niraparib safety profile, as maintenance therapy, in women with platinum-sensitive EOC. Methods: PubMed and Cochrane searches were carried out up to April 2021 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating niraparib versus placebo in EOC patients with a response to platinum-based chemotherapy. Regarding the meta-analysis, for dichotomous data, the pooled risk ratio (RR) was calculated. Results: A total of 1539 patients from three RCTs revealed that niraparib-treated patients are associated with a significantly higher risk of any grade of nausea (RR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.86 to 2.48), fatigue (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.52, p < 0.00001), anemia (RR, 6.86; 95% CI, 2.54 to 18.52, p = 0.0001), thrombocytopenia (RR, 7.02; 95% CI, 1.68 to 29.38, p < 0.00001), vomiting (RR, 2.51; 95% CI, 1.50 to 4.19, p = 0.0005), neutropenia (RR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.13 to 7.73, p < 0.00001), headache (RR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.57 to 2.74, p < 0.00001), constipation (RR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.72 to 2.57, p < 0.00001) and insomnia (RR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.52 to 2.89, p = 0.0003) when compared with placebo. For grade 3 or 4 adverse effects, significantly higher risk was only noted for fatigue (RR,6.25; 95% CI, 1.70 to 23.05, p = 0.006), anemia (RR, 16.23; 95% CI, 4.86 to 54.17, p < 0.00001), thrombocytopenia (RR, 35.12; 95% CI, 12.23 to 100.82, p < 0.00001) and neutropenia episodes (RR, 6.35; 95% CI, 2.08 to 19.39, p = 0.001) for those taking niraparib. Notably, incidents of adverse effects and discontinuation rates were substantially lower among patients treated with an individualised niraparib dose than those treated with the standard one. Efficacy was not reduced, and no treatment-related deaths occurred during the included trials. Conclusion: Niraparib is considered an effective and well-tolerated choice, with an improved safety profile, for the maintenance treatment of EOC patients.

Real-world treatment patterns of maintenance therapy in platinum-sensitive recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer: Are some patients missing out?

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18042-e18042
Author(s):  
Haley Moss ◽  
Angeles Alvarez Secord ◽  
Jessica Perhanidis ◽  
Carol Hawkes
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Real World ◽  
Brca Mutation ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
World Population ◽  
Brca Mutations ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy

e18042 Background: The clinical utility of maintenance therapy (MT) for patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (PSROC) has been validated in several clinical trials. We assessed real world treatment patterns using a US nationwide electronic health record database. Methods: A retrospective study of patients with PSROC between March 2017 and July 2019 was conducted using the Flatiron Health database. This longitudinal, demographically and geographically diverse de-identified database covers > 2.2 million oncology patients in > 280 cancer clinics. Patients were excluded if second or third line (2L or 3L) platinum-based chemotherapy (PBT) regimens included less than four or more than eight cycles of platinum. Information regarding somatic or germline BRCA mutations and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) were obtained. Results: 2292 patients with PSROC were identified (had 2L or 3L treatment); 1214 of these received PBT at recurrence; 610 completed the PBT for recurrence on or after March 2017; 351 received 4–8 cycles of PBT; 225 patients had ≥2 months of active surveillance or were receiving MT of PARPi or bevacizumab (B) and were included in this analysis. 183 patients (80%) had BRCA testing and 14 patients (6%) had HRD testing. 46 (20%) had a germline or somatic BRCA mutations (t BRCA), 134 (59%) had a wildtype wt BRCA gene, and 48 (21%) were unknown. Of patients with tBRCA, 63% received a PARP inhibitor (PARPi), 17% received B, 20% received active surveillance. Of patients with wt BRCA, 40% received a PARPi, 24% received B, and 37% received active surveillance. Olaparib was the most commonly used PARPi among tBRCA patients (26%), while niraparib was most commonly used among wt BRCA patients (21%). MT was more common in younger patients, those with a better performance status and with a BRCA mutation. MT use trend increased by 21% during the study period. As PARPi use increased, the use of active surveillance as a post-platinum regimen decreased during the later time periods (Table). Conclusions: In this real world population, the majority of patients with PSROC are receiving maintenance therapy. While genetic testing is improving, universal testing of all patients with ovarian cancer remains the goal. The results provide insight into the shifting treatment patterns for patients with ovarian cancer. [Table: see text]

PARALLEL 303: Phase 2 randomized study of pamiparib vs placebo as maintenance therapy in patients (pts) with inoperable locally advanced or metastatic gastric cancer that responded to platinum-based first-line (1L) chemotherapy.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3109-3109
Author(s):  
Fortunato Ciardiello ◽  
Yung-Jue Bang ◽  
Johanna C. Bendell ◽  
Andres Cervantes ◽  
Mikhail Dvorkin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Metastatic Gastric Cancer ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Grade 3

3109 Background: A subset of gastric cancers exhibits platinum sensitivity and genomic instability that is characteristic of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). Cells with HRD are sensitive to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition. PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy following platinum-based chemotherapy has been a successful treatment strategy in pts with ovarian cancer. Pamiparib is an orally administered selective PARP protein 1 and 2 (PARP1/2) inhibitor that has shown potent DNA-PARP trapping activity and crosses the blood brain barrier in preclinical studies. In early phase clinical studies (NCT02361723; NCT03333915), pamiparib showed an acceptable safety profile and promising antitumor activity. PARALLEL 303 compared the efficacy and safety of pamiparib vs placebo as maintenance therapy in pts with inoperable locally advanced or metastatic gastric cancer that responded to platinum-based 1L chemotherapy. Methods: The primary endpoint of this double-blind, randomized, global phase 2 study (NCT03427814) was progression-free survival (PFS) as determined by the investigator per RECIST Version 1.1. Key secondary endpoints included time to subsequent treatment, objective response rate, duration of response, time to response, overall survival (OS) and safety. At the time of this analysis, OS data were immature due to the short duration of study. Data presented here will focus on PFS and safety. Results: 136 pts were randomized 1:1 to receive pamiparib 60 mg orally (PO) twice daily (BID) (n=71) or placebo PO BID (n=65) in 28-day cycles. The median PFS was longer with pamiparib vs placebo, but did not reach statistical significance (3.7 months; 95% CI, 1.94–5.26 vs 2.1 months; 95% CI, 1.87–3.75 months); hazard ratio 0.799 (95% CI, 0.534–1.193; P=0.1428). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of ≥ Grade 3 were experienced by 29 pts (40.8%) in the pamiparib arm, and 20 pts (30.8%) in the placebo arm. The most common TEAEs of ≥ Grade 3 were blood and lymphatic system disorders in the pamiparib arm, and gastrointestinal disorders in the placebo arm. TEAEs leading to treatment discontinuation were: 8 pts (11.3%) in the pamiparib arm and 2 pts (3.1%) in the placebo arm. TEAEs leading to death were: 2 pts (2.8%; 1 pneumonia, 1 unexplained) in the pamiparib arm, and 2 pts (3.1%; 1 hepatic rupture, 1 sepsis) in the placebo arm. Conclusions: Although pamiparib did not meet statistical significance for superiority vs placebo for its primary endpoint, it was generally well tolerated with few treatment discontinuations due to TEAEs. No new safety signals were identified with pamiparib, and its safety profile was consistent with that of other PARP inhibitors. Clinical trial information: NCT03427814.

Efficacy of niraparib maintenance therapy in Chinese women with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer with and without secondary cytoreductive surgery: Results from the NORA trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5534-5534
Author(s):  
Lingying Wu ◽  
Xiaohua Wu ◽  
Jianqing Zhu ◽  
Rutie Yin ◽  
Jiaxin Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Cytoreductive Surgery ◽  
Chinese Women ◽  
Group Analysis ◽  
Recurrent Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
Secondary Cytoreductive Surgery ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy

5534 Background: NORA is the first, phase III, randomized controlled trial (RCT) that demonstrated individualized starting dose regimen of niraparib, which significantly improved PFS in Chinese patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (PSROC). This sub-group analysis evaluated the efficacy of niraparib maintenance therapy with and without secondary cytoreductive surgery (SCS) in PSROC. Methods: The NORA phase III RCT included adult (≥18 years) Chinese women with PSROC who were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive oral niraparib (n = 177) or matched placebo (n = 88). This retrospective subgroup analysis was based on the progression-free survival (PFS) of niraparib maintenance therapy in these two groups of patients with PSROC, patients with SCS, and patients without SCS. The PFS was assessed by blinded independent central review. The Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimator and log-rank test were performed to calculate the median PFS time. Results: Of the 265 evaluable patients, 69 (26.0%) patients received the SCS (niraparib, n = 48; placebo, n = 21), and 196 (74.0%) patients were without SCS (niraparib, n = 129; placebo, n = 67). Among patients with and without SCS, baseline characteristics for BRCA mutation were 26.1% vs 41.8%, complete response to last platinum-based chemotherapy were 68.1% vs 43.9%, time (6-12 months) to progression after penultimate therapy were 23.2% vs 34.7%, respectively. Treatment with niraparib led to a significant reduction of risk to disease progression compared with placebo in patients with SCS (Hazard ratio [95% CI]: 0.32 [0.13–0.78]; P = 0.0102) and without SCS (0.34 [0.23–0.50]; P< 0.001). Moreover, in the subgroups of patients who received SCS, niraparib maintenance therapy had a significantly longer PFS compared with placebo (Median [95% CI]: not reached [18.33 – not estimable] vs 5.75 months [3.68 – not estimable]; P = 0.0102). This trend was also similar in the subgroup of patients who did not receive SCS (Median [95% CI]: 10.28 months [7.49 – 18.37] vs 4.90 months [3.71 – 5.52]; P < 0.0001). Conclusions: The results from this retrospective sub-group analysis revealed that niraparib maintenance therapy provided significant clinical efficacy in patients with PSROC, irrespective of SCS. Clinical trial information: NCT03705156.

Bevacizumab or PARP-inhibitors maintenance therapy for platinum-sensitive (PS) recurrent ovarian cancer (rOC)? A network meta-analysis (NMA).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5564-5564 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Bartoletti ◽  
Giacomo Pelizzari ◽  
Lorenzo Gerratana ◽  
Silvio Ken Garattini ◽  
Debora Basile ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Recurrent Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Parp Inhibitors ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Targeted Agent ◽  
Line Setting

5564 Background: Patients (pts) experiencing a PS rOC are generally re-exposed to a platinum based-chemotherapy (CT). In this setting, the addition of a targeted agent like bevacizumab (BEV) or PARP inhibitors (PARPi) as concomitant and/or maintenance therapy has shown to improve progression free survival (PFS). In the absence of direct comparison in randomized trials (RCTs), we have performed a NMA to evaluate differences in terms of efficacy between BEV and PARPi in pts with PS rOC, according to BRCA status. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase and Medline for RCTs involving pts with PS rOC treated with BEV (n = 3, 1563 pts) or PARPi (n = 5, 1839 pts). Only trials with PFS as primary endpoint were included. Trials in first line setting were excluded. Analyses have been done pooling pts who had received PARPi in three groups, according to the available data on BRCA genes status: all comers (AC), BRCA mutated pts (BRCAm) and BRCA wild-type pts (BRCAwt). A frequentist approach has been used with R statistical software. To rank the effect size of treatments, surface under the cumulative ranking value (SUCRA) has been applied. Results: In AC pts, PARPi improved PFS compared to BEV (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.70, 95% CI 0.54-0.91, test of heterogeneity [I2] = 40.5%). In BRCAm pts the gain in PFS for PARPi was even higher compared to BEV (HR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.36-0.59, I2= 17.2%). In BRCAwt pts the benefit of PARPi over BEV was not statistically significant (HR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.63-1.20, I2= 35.7%) but PARPi had the highest likelihood of being ranked as the best treatment in terms of efficacy according to SUCRA (90% and 60%, respectively for PARPi and BEV). Hazard ratio for PFS between PARPi, BEV and CT in the three cohorts are reported in the table. Conclusions: According to indirect comparisons, PARPi performed the best for the treatment of PS rOC, especially in BRCAm pts who had not previously received PARPi. BEV could be still an option in BRCAwt pts. [Table: see text]

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document