Experience with single-agent paclitaxel consolidation following primary chemotherapy with carboplatin, paclitaxel, and gemcitabine in advanced ovarian cancer

Efficacy and safety of intraperitoneally administered resveratrol against rat orthotopic ovarian cancers

Background

Resveratrol (Res) inhibits ovarian cancer (OC) cell growth but its in vivo anti-OC effects are unclear due to the low bioavailability of systemically administered Res. Intraperitoneal administration may overcome this therapeutic dilemma because it makes Res directly affect the abdominal tumors. Ethanol and DMSO are common Res solvents, while their reliability and safety for long-term in vivo treatment remain unknown.

Methods

A rat orthotopic OC model was established using the rat NUTU-19 OC cell line. Res dissolved in 10% ethanol or 0.2% DMSO was injected intraperitoneally (20 mg/kg/day) into tumor-free and tumor-bearing rats for 2 weeks. The tumors were collected for gross, morphological and molecular examinations, and blood and ascitic samples were obtained for a CA125 ELISA. Res concentration in ovarian tissues was determined by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC).

Results

The average tumor weight (0.187±0.065 g) of the Res-in-DMSO group was lower than that of untreated (0.426±0.091 g; P<0.01) and Res-in-ethanol (0.238±0.073 g; P<0.05) group. The average bloody ascitic volumes collected from untreated, Res-in-ethanol, and Res-in-DMSO groups were 5.65±0.27, 2.75±0.14, and 2.09±0.11 ml, respectively. Abundant TUNEL-positive cells, ARHI and PIAS3 upregulation, CA125 reduction, and decreased STAT3 nuclear translocation were found in the Res-in-ethanol and, especially, the Res-in-DMSO group. Widespread plaques of Res deposits were found on the abdominal serosa of the Res-in-ethanol group, but not in the Res-in-DMSO group. HPLC revealed a higher Res concentration in Res-in-DMSO-treated tumor tissues than in those treated by Res-in-ethanol (P<0.01). Fertility was maintained after long-term Res treatment.

Conclusion

Intraperitoneal administration of Res effectively inhibited rat orthotopic ovarian cancer growth without affecting normal tissues. The Res-in-DMSO group had the highest drug bioavailability and therefore stronger tumor-suppressive effects on ovarian cancer tissues.

Symptom Clusters in Ovarian Cancer Patients With Chemotherapy After Surgery: A Longitudinal Survey

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer is 1 of the most common malignancies in the female reproductive system. Identification of symptom clusters in ovarian cancer patients may improve management of symptoms.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this article is to explore the changes in symptom clusters in ovarian cancer patients with adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery at different time points.

METHODS

Basic details of the patients were documented and a longitudinal investigation was carried out. We used the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale to examine 115 Chinese ovarian cancer patients' symptom experience at 4 time points: days before chemotherapy (T1), chemotherapy cycle 1 (T2), chemotherapy cycle 3 (T3), and chemotherapy cycle 6 (T4). The exploratory factor analysis was performed to determine the numbers and components of symptom clusters.

RESULTS

Symptom clusters varied at different time points, which were classified as pain-related symptom cluster, psychological symptom cluster, menopausal symptom cluster, gastrointestinal symptom cluster, body image symptom cluster, and peripheral neurologic symptom cluster. The gastrointestinal symptom cluster and body image symptom cluster appeared at T1 and remained consistent at T3 and T4, whereas the peripheral neurologic symptom cluster was noted at T3 and T4.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should prioritize symptom management interventions with ovarian cancer patients to focus on the most severe symptom cluster: psychological symptom cluster at T1, gastrointestinal symptom cluster at T2, and body image symptom cluster at T3 and T4.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The ability to predict symptom clusters in ovarian cancer patients receiving chemotherapy may help to make optimized clinical decision in advance to alleviate patients' symptoms and improve their life quality.

Continuous Low-Dose Oral Cyclophosphamide and Methotrexate as Maintenance Therapy in Patients With Advanced Ovarian Carcinoma After Complete Clinical Response to Platinum and Paclitaxel Chemotherapy

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of continuous, low dose of oral, metronomic chemotherapy as maintenance therapy in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma after complete clinical response to platinum and paclitaxel chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this nonrandomized study, patients older than 18 years, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status less than 2, with advanced ovarian carcinoma after complete clinical response to platinum and paclitaxel chemotherapy were enrolled in 2 arms--arm A (maintenance arm), treated with continuous low-dose oral cyclophosphamide 50 mg and methotrexate 2.5 mg, and arm B (observation arm). Both arms were followed up for progression-free survival and toxicity.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were accrued in each arm from January 2009 to December 2010 in Ain Shams University Hospitals, where they received the treatment and followed up for disease progression and toxicity. Patients had a median age of 53 years in maintenance arm and 52.5 years in the observational arm, respectively. Over 80% had papillary serous adenocarcinoma, and over 40% of them had a stage IV disease in both arms. After median follow-up of 27 months, patients achieved median progression-free survival of 18 months in maintenance arm (A) and 15.5 months in observational arm (B), respectively. Toxicity profile was excellent with no grade 3 or 4 toxicity reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Current study may provide an evidence of efficacy and tolerability of continuous low-dose oral cyclophosphamide and methotrexate as a maintenance therapy in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma after complete clinical response to platinum and paclitaxel chemotherapy.

Current status of bevacizumab in advanced ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynecological cancer, mainly because of the delay in diagnosis. Recently, much effort has been put into investigating and introducing novel targeted agents into clinical practice, with the aim of improving prognosis and quality of life. Angiogenesis is a possible target. The aim of this review is to investigate the most common molecular pathways of angiogenesis, which have provided novel targets for tailored therapy in patients with ovarian cancer. These therapeutic strategies include monoclonal antibodies and tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. These drugs have as molecular targets vascular endothelial growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor receptors, platelet-derived growth factor, fibroblast growth factor, and angiopoietin. Bevacizumab was investigated in several Phase III studies, with interesting results. Today, there is strong evidence for introducing bevacizumab in the treatment of patients with advanced and recurrent ovarian cancer. Nevertheless, further investigations and large clinical trials are needed to understand the safety and effectiveness of bevacizumab, the optimal duration and timing of treatment, and activity in association with other chemotherapeutic and targeted agents. It also is necessary to identify biologic factors predictive of efficacy to choose the most appropriate antiangiogenic agent in the integrated treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer.

Phase III trial of induction gemcitabine or paclitaxel plus carboplatin followed by paclitaxel consolidation in ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

The safety and efficacy of gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GC) or paclitaxel plus carboplatin (TC) induction regimens with or without paclitaxel consolidation therapy were assessed in ovarian cancer (OC).

METHODS

Patients with stage IC-IV OC were randomized to either GC (gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2), days 1 and 8, plus carboplatin area under the curve [AUC] 5, day 1) or TC (paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) plus carboplatin AUC 6, day 1) every 21 days for up to six cycles. Patients with complete response (CR) were allowed optional consolidation with paclitaxel 135 mg/m(2) every 28 days for ≤ 12 months. Patients without CR received single-agent crossover therapy at induction doses/schedules until CR, disease progression (PD), or unacceptable toxicity. PD or death in 636 patients was required to compare induction arms with 80% statistical power for progression-free survival (PFS), the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

Randomized induction therapy was received by 820 of 919 patients enrolled; 352 patients with CR received paclitaxel consolidation whereas 155 patients without CR received single-agent crossover therapy. PFS was similar for GC and TC (median, 20.0 and 22.2 months, respectively; P=.199). Despite high censoring rates (>52%), overall survival was longer for TC (median, 57.3 versus 43.8 months for GC; P=.013). Controlling for patient characteristics including performance status, residual tumor size, and tumor stage, there was no statistical difference in a multivariate analysis (HR=1.22; 95% CI=0.99-1.52; P=.067).

CONCLUSIONS

GC does not improve PFS over TC as first-line induction chemotherapy in OC. Although favoring TC, overall survival analyses were limited by the study design and high censoring rates.

Continued chemotherapy after complete response to primary therapy among women with advanced ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer (OC) is associated with a >75% risk of recurrence after completion of primary therapy. Several clinical trials have explored the role of continued therapy after complete response to primary adjuvant therapy to reduce the risk of recurrence; however, these trials have largely been underpowered, leading to inconclusive results.

METHODS

A systematic search strategy was initiated to identify all clinical trials involving consolidation or maintenance therapy regimens for OC in first complete remission. A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate toxicity and progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

There were 37 publications meeting all eligibility criteria, representing 20 consolidation and 9 maintenance therapy trials. Consolidation and maintenance therapies were associated with improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79 [P = .003] and HR, 0.82 [P = .02], respectively) and OS (HR, 0.68 [P = .0008] and HR, 0.68 [P = .007], respectively). This relationship remained statistically significant when the analysis was limited to randomized trials and across other sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Although individual studies have not yet convincingly shown a survival advantage with maintenance chemotherapy in OC, this meta-analysis demonstrates that continued chemotherapy after completion of primary therapy for OC improves PFS and OS. Benefits are greatest in patients with advanced stage OC who reach complete clinical or pathologic response after primary therapy.

A review of the current evidence for maintenance therapy in ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVES

Ovarian cancer (OC) typically is diagnosed at advanced stages, in which the primary goal of therapy is to prolong progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). In recent years, maintenance therapy has been tested for this purpose in advanced OC (AOC). Literature on maintenance therapy in AOC was systematically reviewed to assess current knowledge regarding the impact of this therapeutic approach.

METHODS

A MEDLINE search was performed 2/2009 for articles published 1/2001-1/2009 pertaining to OC maintenance therapy guidelines, patterns, and outcomes. A second search used keywords specific to maintenance and included primary studies published in the last 10 years. Of 406 sources identified, 36 primary studies and 16 review articles were included in this systematic review. A third search used the keyword "consolidation" to find maintenance articles not identified through other searches; of 48 additional sources, 13 primary studies and 6 reviews were included. A fourth search of non-MEDLINE-indexed sources yielded 14 additional relevant publications from the same time period.

RESULTS

Among practice guidelines identified, only the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) 2008 guidelines provide recommendations regarding maintenance therapy, assigning it a category 2B recommendation. No studies were identified that reported current treatment patterns or economic outcomes in maintenance therapy; quality of life data were reported in one study. A variety of agents have been tested for maintenance, with paclitaxel the most commonly evaluated. The Southwest Oncology Group-Gynecologic Oncology Group 178 trial has found that 12 cycles of paclitaxel extend PFS (by 7 months) compared to 3 months paclitaxel, but could not adequately evaluate OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintenance therapy may improve clinical outcomes in AOC, but additional research is needed to demonstrate an OS advantage. Future studies should investigate the long-term clinical benefit of maintenance treatment and its impact on resource utilization and health-related quality of life.

Clinical utility of CA-125 for maintenance therapy in the treatment of advanced stage ovarian carcinoma

Maintenance therapy has been extensively studied to discern any prospective therapeutic advantage in the treatment of advanced stage ovarian carcinoma. The CA-125 assay may have prognostic benefit in determining whether this treatment regimen is appropriate for ovarian carcinoma patients who achieve a complete response to first-line therapy. We retrospectively documented the CA-125 levels of 2 advanced ovarian cancer patient groups who exhibited a clinically defined complete response to their primary induction therapy. Patients were then treated with a paclitaxel-based maintenance therapy regimen. The first group (group A; n = 13 patients) received 3 cycles of single-agent paclitaxel maintenance therapy, and the second group (group B; n = 13 patients) received 12 cycles of single-agent paclitaxel maintenance therapy. The premaintenance therapy CA-125 serum levels (<10 or > or =10 U/mL) of the 2 treatment groups were then retrospectively evaluated in an intragroup analysis to discern any relationship with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival. There was a statistically significantly relationship between the CA-125 levels (<10 U/mL) premaintenance therapy and PFS. The patients who had the lowest CA-125 levels exhibited the most favorable PFS results. Despite the limited sample size and nonrandomized nature of this study, these results are provocative and suggest that advanced ovarian cancer patients who achieve an excellent response to primary platinum-based chemotherapy with a CA-125 serum level less than 10 U/mL may be more amenable to the benefits of paclitaxel maintenance therapy.

Are three additional cycles of chemotherapy useful in patients with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer after a complete response to six cycles of intravenous adjuvant paclitaxel and carboplatin?

Background

To evaluate the efficacy of three additional cycles of chemotherapy in patients with the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Stage III or IV, who achieved a complete response after six cycles of intravenous adjuvant paclitaxel/carboplatin after surgery.

Methods

The clinical data of 94 patients with complete response after six cycles of adjuvant paclitaxel/carboplatin after surgery between January 1997 and March 2007 were reviewed retrospectively. Three additional cycles using the same chemotherapy were administered to 57 patients as consolidation chemotherapy (Group 1). Thirty-seven patients without the additional cycles served as controls (Group 2). Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using the Kaplan–Meier method with the log-rank test. The importance of consolidation chemotherapy as a prognostic factor affecting survival was examined using the Cox's proportional hazard analysis. The incidence of chemotherapy-induced hematological toxicities was compared between the two groups using chi-square test.

Results

Median DFS and mean OS were not significantly different between the two groups (15 versus 22 months, P = 0.703; 69 versus 73 months, P = 0.891, respectively). Consolidation chemotherapy was not a prognostic factor of survival although optimal debulking surgery and lower value of serum CA-125 levels after six cycles of the chemotherapy were prognostic factors improving DFS (P < 0.01). Grade 3 or 4 leukopenia was more common in patients treated with consolidation chemotherapy than in those not treated (50.9 versus 21.6%, P = 0.004).

Conclusion

Consolidation chemotherapy using paclitaxel/carboplatin may be inefficient and relatively toxic to advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer patients with complete response to six cycles of the same chemotherapy after surgery.

Improved Survival with Single-Agent Paclitaxel Consolidation/Maintenance Therapy in Advanced Ovarian Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Consolidation/maintenance therapy in the standard management of ovarian cancer remains controversial, primarily due to the unknown impact of this strategy on overall survival.

METHODS

We examined the survival of a previously reported patient population consecutively treated with either 3 cycles (group A; n = 13 patients) or 12 cycles (group B; n = 13) of single-agent paclitaxel consolidation following 6 cycles of primary induction chemotherapy comprising 6 cycles of carboplatin (AUC = 5), paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)) and gemcitabine (800 mg/m(2)).

RESULTS

There were no differences in the 2 patient populations regarding known relevant prognostic factors (age, stage, tumor grade). The median progression-free survival was 11 months for group A and 24 months for group B (p = 0.0062). The median overall survival in group A was 38 months and was not reached in group B (p = 0.0019). Current follow-up for these 2 patient groups exceeds 43 months.

CONCLUSION

We recognize the important limitations of this study, particularly its sample size and nonrandomized nature. However, these data provide support for the conclusion that paclitaxel 'maintenance/consolidation' therapy may favorably impact overall and progression-free survival in advanced ovarian cancer patients who achieve an excellent response to primary platinum-based chemotherapy.

Analysis of chromosomal changes in serous ovarian carcinoma using high-resolution array comparative genomic hybridization: Potential predictive markers of chemoresistant disease

The mechanism of drug resistance in cancer is multifactorial, and the accumulation of multiple genetic changes may lead to drug-resistant phenotypes. This study sought to determine characteristic genetic changes in chemoresistant serous ovarian carcinomas using high-resolution array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), and identified genomic aberrations that could be used as predictive markers of chemoresistant disease. Seventeen primary ovarian tumors from optimally debulked stage IIIc serous ovarian carcinoma patients were analyzed using aCGH. Ten patients had chemoresistant disease (progression within 12 months of initial chemotherapy), whereas seven patients had chemosensitive disease (no recurrence for more than 36 months). Receiver operating characteristics curve analysis was used to select chromosomal aberrations that could help distinguish chemoresistant disease from chemosensitive disease. In 17 tumors, frequent increases in DNA copy number were seen on 1p36.33, 3q26.2, 8q24.3, 10q26.3, 12p11.21, 20q13.33, and 21q22.3, and frequent losses were observed on 4p12, 5q13.2, 7q11.21, 8p23.1, 14q32.33, Xq13.3, and Xq21.31. The gains on 5p15.33 and 14q11.2, and losses on 4q34.2, 4q35.2, 5q15, 8p21.1, 8p21.2, 11p15.5, 13q14.13, 13q14.2, 13q32.1, 13q34, 16q22.2, 17p11.2, 17p12, and 22q12.3 were more frequent in chemoresistant disease. The losses on 13q32.1 and 8p21.1 had the largest areas under the curve (AUC 0.90 and 0.85, respectively). The most reliable combination of chromosomal aberrations for detecting chemoresistant disease was the loss on 13q32.1 and 8p21.1 (AUC 0.950). Our findings suggest that these chromosomal aberrations are potential predictive markers of chemoresistant disease in patients with serous ovarian carcinomas.

Emerging drugs for ovarian cancer

Because most patients presenting with advanced ovarian cancer are not curable by surgery alone, chemotherapy represents an essential component of treatment. The disease may be considered as chemosensitive, as in around three-quarters of patients major (complete) responses are seen to initial treatment with the platinum-containing drugs cisplatin and carboplatin either used alone or in combination with the taxane, paclitaxel. However, only 15-20% of patients experience long-term remission as tumours often become resistant. The probability of achieving a second response depends on the duration of remission after first-line therapy: if this is < 6 months (considered as platinum resistant) second responses are uncommon and usually short-lived; if this is > 6, and especially if > 12 months (platinum sensitive), responses may be seen in about a quarter of patients, to the same drugs as used first line or to drugs such as pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, topotecan and hexamethylmelamine (all three are approved in this setting by the FDA). Gemcitabine, oral etoposide, docetaxel and oxaliplatin also show some activity either in sequential addition to existing approved of first-line therapy (as with gemcitabine) or as second-line therapy. However, there is an urgent unmet clinical need for new drugs capable of prolonging survival either by increasing long-term remission rates and/or duration as first-line treatment or to improve on outcomes of second-line treatment. Strategies currently being exploited in clinical trials include attempts to deliver more killing selectively to tumours (e.g., intraperitoneal administration of cisplatin or radiolabelled monoclonal antibodies), agents designed to target drug resistance mechanisms (e.g., TLK-286 activated by glutathione transferase), agents targeting proteins/receptors shown to be selectively expressed in the disease (e.g., monoclonal antibodies recognising CA-125 or HER1; small molecules targeting HER1 such as gefitinib) and disrupting established tumour vasculature (e.g., 5,6-dimethyl xanthenone 4-acetic acid). At the pre-clinical level, agents being developed to target the phosphatidylinositol 3 kinase/AKT/mTOR pathway, and K-Ras inhibitors, may offer efficacy in the future.

Consolidation therapy in ovarian cancer: where do we stand?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal of consolidation chemotherapy in ovarian cancer is to maximize the benefit of primary therapy and improve progression-free and overall survival. Consolidation has been tested with multiple treatment modalities including cytotoxic chemotherapy, radiation and biological therapies. A review of recently published clinical trials is presented.

RECENT FINDINGS

Consolidation therapy is not a new concept. More than 30 clinical trials utilizing consolidation therapy have been published in the last two decades. The natural history of many patients who participate in consolidation trials is often favorable, making the effect of consolidation treatments difficult to interpret. Small phase II studies have suggested improved outcomes compared with historical controls, but randomized trials have yet to show a distinct survival advantage with consolidation therapy.

SUMMARY

The role of consolidation therapy in ovarian cancer is evolving. Although it is recognized that ovarian cancer patients commonly suffer recurrences after initial response, it is not clear that current therapies alter this course. Future clinical designs should include appropriate control groups. Novel therapies should be studied in randomized controlled trials with sufficient power to detect relevant clinical differences, the most important being overall survival. Toxicity and ease of administration must be considered against the benefits of therapy.

Epidoxorubicin versus no treatment as consolidation therapy in advanced ovarian cancer: results from a phase II study

To compare the effect of epidoxorubicin given for 4 months versus no treatment in the survival of patients with advanced ovarian cancer and complete pathologic response after first-line surgery and chemotherapy with platinum-based schedules, we conducted a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Patients with histologic diagnosis of epithelial ovarian cancer FIGO stage III or IV at first diagnosis; complete pathologic response at second-look laparotomy/laparoscopy or complete clinic response; and those who have had first-line therapy including surgery and one regimen containing cisplatin or carboplatinum were eligible for the study and were randomly allocated to epidoxorubicin 120 mg/sqm or no treatment. A total of 64 women were allocated to epidoxorubicin and 74 to no treatment. There were 20 and 19 deaths, respectively, in the epidoxorubicin and no-treatment groups. The 3-year percent overall survival was 79.0% and 78.7%, respectively, in the no-treatment and epidoxorubicin groups (log-rank test, P= 0.93).