Ovarian cancer clinical trial endpoints: Society of Gynecologic Oncology white paper

Trends in estimated PARP inhibitor eligibility and benefit among US epithelial ovarian cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the annual percentage of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) who could be eligible for and benefit from PARP inhibitor therapy amidst changing US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved indications.

METHODS

This is a simulated retrospective observational study using publicly available data on patients with advanced-stage EOC. PARPi eligibility is based on FDA approvals and withdrawals from 2014 through 2023, along with published demographic and genomic data. Clinical trial data is used to estimate treatment benefit. PARPi including olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib are analyzed in aggregate with sub-analyses by molecular classification and treatment timing. Results are reported as the percentage of EOC patients appropriate for any cancer-directed therapy.

RESULTS

PARPi were approved for 9 different indications in EOC between 2014 and 2021; reduced to 6 indications by 2023. Eligibility increased from 2.0% (95% CI,1.3%-1.6%) in 2014 to a maximum of 93.4% (95% CI,90.1%-94.6%) in 2021. The maximum percentage of patients with 2-year PFS benefit was 22.0% (95% CI, 17.2%-26.8%) in 2021, projected to decrease to 13.0% (95% CI, 9.9%-15.9%) in 2024. Most of this decrease was seen in the homologous recombination deficient, BRCA wild-type population (8.4% to 4.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

PARPi eligibility increased at a greater rate than benefit resulting in a low population-level benefit-to-eligibility ratio until 2021. Recent FDA withdrawals improved this ratio with an accompanied decrease in the absolute number of patients benefiting. To further optimize population-level benefit-to-eligibility ratio of targeted therapies in ovarian cancer, we need to identify better biomarkers, treatment combinations, and novel therapeutic targets.

A Comprehensive Review on Current Treatments and Challenges Involved in the Treatment of Ovarian Cancer

Ovarian cancer (OC) is the second most common gynaecological malignancy. It typically affects females over the age of 50, and since 75% of cases are only discovered at stage III or IV, this is a sign of a poor diagnosis. Despite intraperitoneal chemotherapy's chemosensitivity, most patients relapse and face death. Early detection is difficult, but treatment is also difficult due to the route of administration, resistance to therapy with recurrence, and the need for precise cancer targeting to minimize cytotoxicity and adverse effects. On the other hand, undergoing debulking surgery becomes challenging, and therapy with many chemotherapeutic medications has manifested resistance, a condition known as multidrug resistance (MDR). Although there are other therapeutic options for ovarian cancer, this article solely focuses on co-delivery techniques, which work via diverse pathways to overcome cancer cell resistance. Different pathways contribute to MDR development in ovarian cancer; however, usually, pump and non-pump mechanisms are involved. Striking cancerous cells from several angles is important to defeat MDR. Nanocarriers are known to bypass the drug efflux pump found on cellular membranes to hit the pump mechanism. Nanocarriers aid in the treatment of ovarian cancer by enhancing the delivery of chemotherapeutic drugs to the tumour sites through passive or active targeting, thereby reducing unfavorable side effects on the healthy tissues. Additionally, the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) mechanism boosts the bioavailability of the tumour site. To address the shortcomings of conventional delivery, the current review attempts to explain the current conventional treatment with special reference to passively and actively targeted drug delivery systems (DDSs) towards specific receptors developed to treat ovarian cancer. In conclusion, tailored nanocarriers would optimize medication delivery into the intracellular compartment before optimizing intra-tumour distribution. Other novel treatment possibilities for ovarian cancer include tumour vaccines, gene therapy, targeting epigenetic alteration, and biologically targeted compounds. These characteristics might enhance the therapeutic efficacy.

Timing and duration of bevacizumab treatment and survival in patients with recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer: a multi-institution study

Bevacizumab has demonstrated significant benefit in recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube and peritoneal cancer (OC), but its optimal position within the sequence of systemic therapies remains controversial. Since rebound progression after bevacizumab has been observed in other cancers, and because bevacizumab is incorporated in several regimens used in the recurrent setting, the duration of treatment may impact survival. We sought to identify whether earlier bevacizumab exposure is associated with prolonged bevacizumab therapy and survival by conducting a multi-institution retrospective study of recurrent OC patients treated with bevacizumab from 2004-2014. Multivariate logistic regression identified factors associated with receiving more than six bevacizumab cycles. Overall survival by duration and ordinal sequence of bevacizumab therapy were evaluated using logrank testing and Cox regression. In total, 318 patients were identified. 89.1% had stage III or IV disease; 36% had primary platinum resistance; 40.5% received two or fewer prior chemotherapy regimens. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that primary platinum sensitivity (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.34, p = 0.001) or initiating bevacizumab at the first or second recurrence (OR 2.73, p < 0.001) were independently associated with receiving more than six cycles of bevacizumab. Receiving more cycles of bevacizumab was associated with improved overall survival whether measured from time of diagnosis (logrank p < 0.001), bevacizumab initiation (logrank p < 0.001), or bevacizumab discontinuation (logrank p = 0.017). Waiting one additional recurrence to initiate bevacizumab resulted in a 27% increased hazard of death (Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.27, p < 0.001) by multivariate analysis. In conclusion, patients with primary platinum sensitive disease who received fewer prior lines of chemotherapy were able to receive more cycles of bevacizumab, which was associated with improved overall survival. Survival worsened when bevacizumab was initiated later in the ordinal sequence of therapies.

Systematic literature review of efficacy and safety of first-line maintenance therapy trials in advanced ovarian cancer

Aim: To review safety and efficacy outcomes in studies of first-line maintenance therapies for advanced ovarian cancer. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed (27 February 2020) to identify clinical outcomes including progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and Grade ≥3 adverse events. Results: Overall 50 references met prespecified criteria; 18 studies evaluated 10 different agents, including PARP inhibitors. PFS was an end point in 16 trials and OS in 12 trials. PARP inhibitors reported better PFS hazard ratios (HRs: 0.59–0.68) compared with other classes; no mature OS data were identified. Safety reporting was inconsistent. Conclusion: Reported PFS HRs were better for PARP inhibitors than for other ovarian cancer maintenance therapies; overall survival data remain immature.

A prospective cross-sectional survey comparing patient and provider expectations regarding ovarian cancer prognosis

•

Providers believe prognostic discussions are important for ovarian cancer patients.

•

Providers report having prognostic conversations more often than patients.

•

Ovarian cancer patients and providers have different expectations surrounding treatment, remission, and survival.

•

Age, marital status, religion, and cancer stage may affect patient perceptions of ovarian cancer prognosis.

Introduction

There is limited data comparing patient and physician expectations regarding ovarian cancer prognosis. Our primary objective was to compare physician and patient estimates of survival to 6 months, 1 year, and 5 years; secondary objectives included comparing provider and patient responses on the likelihood of requiring future treatments and categorizing patient and provider preferences regarding communication about prognosis.

Methods

A prospective cross-sectional survey was delivered to 10 gynecologic oncology providers and 50 adult ovarian cancer patients from November 2015-April 2016 at one institution. Descriptive statistics were used to categorize survey answers and compare survey answers between patients and providers; multivariable logistic regression evaluated patient survey responses.

Results

All providers (100%) believed treating providers should discuss prognosis and 90% reported having prognostic conversations with patients, compared to 63%, 37%, and 4% of patients who reported discussing prognosis, living wills/advance directives, and palliative care/hospice services, respectively, with their provider. Compared to their provider, patients gave significantly lower estimations of requiring any future therapy (mean score 84.6 vs 74, p <.001) and future chemotherapy (mean score 84.1 vs 69.8, p <.001) and significantly higher estimations of requiring future surgery (mean score 23.3 vs 40, p <.001), achieving remission (mean score 33.5 vs 47.5, p =.009), survival to 1 year (mean score 77.1 vs 86.4, p =.002), and survival to 5 years (mean score 40.5 vs 61.3, p <.001).

Conclusions

Although gynecologic oncology providers believe it is important to discuss prognosis and end-of-life care, there are gaps in communication, knowledge, and expectations between providers and ovarian cancer patients.

The Application of Preference Elicitation Methods in Clinical Trial Design to Quantify Trade-Offs: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Patients can express preferences for different treatment options in a healthcare context, and these can be measured with quantitative preference elicitation methods.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to conduct a scoping review to determine how preference elicitation methods have been used in the design of clinical trials.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review to identify primary research studies, involving any health condition, that used quantitative preference elicitation methods, including direct utility-based approaches, and stated preference studies, to value health trade-offs in the context of clinical trial design. Studies were identified by screening existing systematic and scoping reviews and with a primary literature search in MEDLINE from 2010 to the present. We extracted study characteristics and the application of preference elicitation methods to clinical trial design according to the SPIRIT checklist from primary studies and summarized the findings descriptively.

RESULTS

We identified 18 eligible studies. The included studies applied patient preferences to five areas of clinical trial design: intervention selection (n = 1), designing N-of-1 trials (n = 1), outcome selection and weighting composite and ordinal outcomes (n = 12), sample size calculations (n = 2), and recruitment (n = 2). Using preference elicitation methods led to different decisions being made, such as using preference-weighted composite outcomes instead of equally weighted composite outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Preference elicitation methods are infrequently used to design clinical trials but may lead to changes throughout the trial that could affect the evidence generated. Future work should consider measurement challenges and explore stakeholder perceptions.

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors for the treatment of ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer in women world-wide. Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the most common; three-quarters of women present when disease has spread outside the pelvis (stage III or IV). Treatment consists of a combination of  surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy. Although initial responses to chemotherapy are good, most women with advanced disease will relapse. PARP (poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase) inhibitors (PARPi), are a type of anticancer treatment that works by preventing cancer cells from repairing DNA damage, especially in those with breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) variants. PARPi offer a different mechanism of anticancer treatment from conventional chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and risks of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase) inhibitors (PARPi) for the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Central 2020, Issue 10), Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trial Register, MEDLINE (1990 to October 2020), Embase (1990 to October 2020), ongoing trials on www.controlled-trials.com/rct, www.clinicaltrials.gov, www.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials, the National Research Register (NRR), FDA database and pharmaceutical industry biomedical literature.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials that randomised women with EOC to PARPi with no treatment, or PARPi versus conventional chemotherapy, or PARPi together with conventional chemotherapy versus conventional chemotherapy alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology. Two review authors independently assessed whether studies met the inclusion criteria. We contacted investigators for additional data. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), quality of life (QoL) and rate of adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 studies (6109 participants); four (3070 participants) with newly-diagnosed, advanced EOC and 11 (3039 participants) with recurrent EOC. The studies varied in types of comparisons and evaluated PARPi. Eight studies were judged as at low risk of bias in most of the domains. Quality of life data were generally poorly reported. Below we present six key comparisons.  The majority of participants had BRCA mutations, either in their tumour (sBRCAmut) and/or germline (gBRCAmut), or homologous recombination deficiencies (HRD) in their tumours. Newly diagnosed EOC Overall, four studies evaluated the effect of PARPi in newly-diagnosed, advanced EOC. Two compared PARPi with chemotherapy and chemotherapy alone. OS data were not reported. The combination of PARPi with chemotherapy may have little to no difference in progression-free survival (PFS) (two studies, 1564 participants; hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI 0).49 to 1.38; very low-certainty evidence)(no evidence of disease progression at 12 months' 63% with PARPi versus 69% for placebo).  PARPi with chemotherapy likely increases any severe adverse event (SevAE) (grade 3 or higher) slightly (45%) compared with chemotherapy alone (51%) (two studies, 1549 participants, risk ratio (RR) 1.13, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.20; high-certainty evidence). PARPi combined with chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone likely results in little to no difference in the QoL (one study; 744 participants, MD 1.56 95% CI -0.42 to 3.54; moderate-certainty evidence).  Two studies compared PARPi monotherapy with placebo as maintenance after first-line chemotherapy in newly diagnosed EOC. PARPi probably results in little to no difference in OS (two studies, 1124 participants; HR 0.81, 95%CI 0.59 to 1.13; moderate-certainty evidence) (alive at 12 months 68% with PARPi versus 62% for placebo). However, PARPi may increase PFS (two studies, 1124 participants; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.92; low-certainty evidence) (no evidence of disease progression at 12 months' 55% with PARPi versus 24% for placebo). There may be an increase in the risk of experiencing any SevAE (grade 3 or higher) with PARPi (54%) compared with placebo (19%)(two studies, 1118 participants, RR 2.87, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.99; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. There is probably a slight reduction in QoL with PARPi, although this may not be clinically significant (one study, 362 participants; MD -3.00, 95%CI -4.48 to -1.52; moderate-certainty evidence).  Recurrent, platinum-sensitive EOC Overall, 10 studies evaluated the effect of PARPi in recurrent platinum-sensitive EOC. Three studies compared PARPi monotherapy with chemotherapy alone. PARPi may result in little to no difference in OS (two studies, 331 participants; HR 0.95, 95%CI 0.62 to 1.47; low-certainty evidence) (percentage alive at 36 months 18% with PARPi versus 17% for placebo). Evidence is very uncertain about the effect of PARPi on PFS (three studies, 739 participants; HR 0.88, 95%CI 0.56 to 1.38; very low-certainty evidence)(no evidence of disease progression at 12 months 26% with PARPi versus 22% for placebo). There may be little to no difference in rates of any SevAE (grade 3 or higher) with PARPi (50%) than chemotherapy alone (47%) (one study, 254 participants; RR 1.06, 95%CI 0.80 to 1.39; low-certainty evidence). Four studies compared PARPi monotherapy as maintenance with placebo. PARPi may result in little to no difference in OS (two studies, 560 participants; HR 0.88, 95%CI 0.65 to 1.20; moderate-certainty evidence)(percentage alive at 36 months 21% with PARPi versus 17% for placebo). However, evidence suggests that PARPi as maintenance therapy results in a large PFS (four studies, 1677 participants; HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.42; high-certainty evidence)(no evidence of disease progression at 12 months 37% with PARPi versus 5.5% for placebo). PARPi maintenance therapy may result in a large increase in any SevAE (51%) (grade 3 or higher) than placebo (19%)(four studies, 1665 participants, RR 2.62, 95%CI 1.85 to 3.72; low-certainty evidence). PARPi compared with chemotherapy may result in little or no change in QoL (one study, 229 participants, MD 1.20, 95%CI -1.75 to 4.16; low-certainty evidence). Recurrent, platinum-resistant EOC Two studies compared PARPi with chemotherapy. The certainty of evidence in both studies was graded as very low. Overall, there was minimal information on the QoL and adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PARPi maintenance treatment after chemotherapy may improve PFS in women with newly-diagnosed and recurrent platinum-sensitive EOC; there may be little to no effect on OS, although OS data are immature. Overall, this is likely at the expense of an increase in SevAE. It is  disappointing that data on quality of life outcomes  are relatively sparse. More research is needed to determine whether PARPi have a role to play in platinum-resistant disease.

A Systematic Review of Patient Preferences, Expectations, and Values for the Management and Treatment of Hypertension

OBJECTIVE

To comprehensively summarize the evidence on the preferences, expectations, and values of hypertension management and treatment in hypertensive patients.

METHODS

From inception through January 2022, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched for studies with hypertension value, preference, or expectation. A qualitative retrospective analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 24 studies involving 8701 participants were included. Although studies on the preferences of hypertensive patients are difficult to standardize, considerable convergence has occurred: 1) Patients preferred treatment regimens with lower incidence of comorbidities, faster response, lower cost, more frequent blood pressure monitoring, fewer side effects, and more convenient medication. 2) Patients have a crucial role in the treatment, and their physicians are expected to develop a shared patient-centered decision-making model.

CONCLUSION

The results of this systematic review demonstrated that side effects, cost, and convenience are important factors for patients when selecting a treatment regimen for hypertension. Patients often obtain hypertension information from their physicians and prefer shared patient-centered decision-making.

Preferences of adults with cancer for systemic cancer treatment: do preferences differ based on age?

Background: We used the Therapy Preference Scale, a 30-item questionnaire, to determine cancer treatment preferences of adults with cancer. Methods: We used Wilcoxon's rank sum test and Fisher's exact test to compare the preferences of younger (<60 years) versus older adults (≥60 years). Results: While 56% of patients would accept treatment offering increased life expectancy at an expense of short-term side effects, 75% preferred maintenance of cognition, functional ability and quality of life to quantity of days. Oral instead of intravenous treatment (p = 0.003), shorter hospital stay (p = 0.03), preservation of cognitive function (p = 0.01) and avoidance of pain (p = 0.02) were more important to older patients compared with younger patients. Conclusion: Many patients prioritized maintenance of cognition, functional ability and quality of life; older patients valued oral treatment, shorter hospital stay, preservation of cognitive function and avoidance of pain.

A phase II trial of cytoreductive surgery combined with niraparib maintenance in platinum-sensitive, secondary recurrent ovarian cancer: SGOG SOC-3 study

Background

In China, secondary cytoreductive surgery (SCR) has been widely used in ovarian cancer (OC) over the past two decades. Although Gynecologic Oncology Group-0213 trial did not show its overall survival benefit in first relapsed patients, the questions on patient selection and effect of subsequent targeting therapy are still open. The preliminary data from our pre-SOC1 phase II study showed that selected patients with second relapse who never received SCR at recurrence may still benefit from surgery. Moreover, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) maintenance now has been a standard care for platinum sensitive relapsed OC. To our knowledge, no published or ongoing trial is trying to answer the question if patient can benefit from a potentially complete resection combined with PARPi maintenance in OC patients with secondary recurrence.

Methods

SOC-3 is a multi-center, open, randomized, controlled, phase II trial of SCR followed by chemotherapy and niraparib maintenance vs chemotherapy and niraparib maintenance in patients with platinum-sensitive second relapsed OC who never received SCR at recurrence. To guarantee surgical quality, if the sites had no experience of participating in any OC-related surgical trials, the number of recurrent lesions evaluated by central-reviewed positron emission tomography–computed tomography image shouldn't be more than 3. Eligible patients are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either SCR followed by 6 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy and niraparib maintenance or 6 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy and niraparib maintenance alone. Patients who undergo at least 4 cycles of chemotherapy and must be, in the opinion of the investigator, without disease progression, will be assigned niraparib maintenance. Major inclusion criteria are secondary relapsed OC with a platinum-free interval of no less than 6 months and a possibly complete resection. Major exclusion criteria are borderline tumors and non-epithelial ovarian malignancies, received debulking surgery at recurrence and impossible to complete resection. The sample size is 96 patients. Primary endpoint is 12-month non-progression rate.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03983226

The survival outcome and complication of secondary cytoreductive surgery plus chemotherapy in recurrent ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the effectiveness and safety of secondary cytoreductive surgery plus chemotherapy (SCS + CT) in recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC). Our secondary purpose was to analyze whether patients could benefit from complete resection.

Methods

We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception to April 2021. We used appropriate scales to assess the risk of bias. Data from included studies that reported median PFS or OS were weighted by individual study sample size, and aggregated for meta-analysis. We calculated the pooled proportion of complications within 30 days after surgery.

Results

We identified 13 articles, including three RCTs and ten retrospective cohort studies. A total of 4572 patients were included, of which 916 patients achieved complete resection, and all patients were comparable at baseline. Compared with chemotherapy alone, SCS + CT significantly improved the PFS (HR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.43–0.67) and OS (HR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.44–0.81). Contrary to the results of cohort studies, the meta-analysis of RCTs showed that SCS + CT could not bring OS benefits (HR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.66–1.3). The subgroup analysis showed the prognostic importance of complete resection. Compared with chemotherapy alone, complete resection was associated with longer PFS (HR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.45–0.61) and OS (HR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.39–0.81), while incomplete resection had no survival benefit. Additionally, complete resection could maximize survival benefit compared with incomplete resection (HR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.46–0.69; HR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.50–0.75). The pooled proportion for complications at 30 days was 21% (95% CI: 0.12–0.30), and there was no statistical difference in chemotherapy toxicity between the two groups.

Conclusion

The review indicated that SCS + CT based regimens was correlated with better clinical prognosis for patients with recurrent ovarian cancer, but the interpretation of OS should be cautious. The meta-analysis emphasizes the importance of complete resection, suggesting that the potential benefits of prolonging survival may outweigh the disadvantages of any short-term complications associated with surgery.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13048-021-00842-9.

The preferences of women with ovarian cancer for oral versus intravenous recurrence regimens

OBJECTIVE

To assess preferences of women with ovarian cancer regarding features of available anti-cancer regimens for platinum-resistant, biomarker-positive disease, with an emphasis on oral PARP inhibitor and standard intravenous (IV) chemotherapy regimens.

METHODS

A discrete-choice-experiment preferences survey was designed, tested, and administered to women with ovarian cancer, with 11 pairs of treatment profiles defined using seven attributes (levels/ranges): regimen (oral daily, IV weekly, IV monthly); probability of progression-free (PFS) at 6 months (40%-60%); probability of PFS at 2 years (10%-20%); nausea (none, moderate); peripheral neuropathy (none, mild, moderate); memory problems (none, mild); and total out-of-pocket cost ($0 to $10,000).

RESULTS

Of 123 participants, 38% had experienced recurrence, 25% were currently receiving chemotherapy, and 18% were currently taking a PARP inhibitor. Given attributes and levels, the relative importance weights (sum 100) were: 2-year PFS, 28; cost, 27; 6-month PFS, 19; neuropathy,14; memory problems, nausea, and regimen, all ≤5. To accept moderate neuropathy, participants required a 49% (versus 40%) chance of PFS at 6 months or 14% (versus 10%) chance at 2 years. Given a 3-way choice where PFS and cost were equal, 49% preferred a monthly IV regimen causing mild memory problems, 47% preferred an oral regimen causing moderate nausea, and 4% preferred a weekly IV regimen causing mild memory and mild neuropathy.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings challenge the assumption that oral anti-cancer therapies are universally preferred by patients and demonstrate that there is no "one size fits all" regimen that is preferable to women with ovarian cancer when considering recurrence treatment regimens.

The GOG partners: A program for industry sponsored clinical trials in gynecologic oncology within the GOG foundation

The GOG Foundation, Inc. (GOG-F) is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization with the purpose of promoting excellence in the quality and integrity of clinical and basic scientific research in the field of gynecologic malignancies. GOG Partners (GOG-P) is a program of the GOG-F and is positioned alongside NRG Oncology under the GOG-F organizational umbrella. GOG-P operates outside of the federally funded NCI NRG Oncology, a key distinguishing feature. By functioning as a site management organization (SMO), GOG-P provides an additional platform for clinical trial development, mentorship opportunities, patient accrual, and site infrastructure support yielding an expanded gynecologic oncology clinical trials infrastructure in the US. GOG-P has a consistent track record of conducting high quality clinical trials that lead to bringing novel FDA approved treatments for gynecologic cancer. This manuscript summarizes the history and organizational structure of the GOG-P. In addition, we outline the other key supportive programs within the GOG-F that help support the GOG-P effort to perform transformative gynecologic cancer research.

Secondary cytoreduction followed by chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (SOC-1): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The benefits of secondary cytoreduction for platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer are still widely debated. We aimed to assess the efficacy of secondary cytoreduction plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in this patient population.

METHODS

This multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial (SOC-1), was done in four primarily academic centres in China (two in Shanghai, one in Hangzhou, and one in Guangzhou). Eligible patients were women aged 18 years and older with platinum-sensitive relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer with a platinum-free interval of at least 6 months after the end of first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and were predicted to have potentially resectable disease according to the international model (iMODEL) score and PET-CT imaging. iMODEL score was calculated using six variables: International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, residual disease after primary surgery, platinum-free interval, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, serum level of cancer antigen 125 at recurrence, and presence of ascites at recurrence. An iMODEL score of 4·7 or lower predicted a potentially complete resection. As per a protocol amendment, patients with an iMODEL score of more than 4·7 could only be included if the serum level of cancer antigen 125 was more than 105 U/mL, but the principal investigators assessed the disease to be resectable by PET-CT. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via a permuted block design (block size of six) and stratified by study centre, iMODEL score, residual disease at primary surgery, and enrolment in the Shanghai Gynecologic Oncology Group SUNNY trial, to undergo secondary cytoreductive surgery followed by intravenous chemotherapy (six 3-weekly cycles of intravenous paclitaxel [175 mg/m²] or docetaxel [75 mg/m²] combined with intravenous carboplatin [area under the curve of 5 mg/mL per min]; surgery group) or intravenous chemotherapy alone (no surgery group). Primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival, analysed in all participants randomly assigned to treatment, regardless of treatment received (intention-to-treat [ITT] population). Here, we report the final analysis of progression-free survival and the prespecified interim analysis of overall survival. Safety was assessed in all participants who received their assigned treatment and had available adverse event data. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01611766, and is ongoing but closed to accrual.

FINDINGS

Between July 19, 2012, and June 3, 2019, 357 patients were recruited and randomly assigned to the surgery group (182) or the no surgery group (175; ITT population). Median follow-up was 36·0 months (IQR 18·1-58·3). In the no surgery group, 11 (6%) of 175 participants had secondary cytoreduction during second-line therapy while 48 (37%) of 130 participants who had disease progression crossed-over and had surgery at a subsequent recurrence. Median progression-free survival was 17·4 months (95% CI 15·0-19·8) in the surgery group and 11·9 months (10·0-13·8) in the no surgery group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·58; 95% CI 0·45-0·74; p<0·0001). At the interim overall survival analysis, median overall survival was 58·1 months (95% CI not estimable to not estimable) in the surgery group and 53·9 months (42·2-65·5) in the no surgery group (HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·57-1·19). In the safety population, nine (5%) of 172 patients in the surgery group had grade 3-4 surgical morbidity at 30 days, and no patients in either group had died at 60 days after receiving assigned treatment. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events during chemotherapy were neutropenia (29 [17%] of 166 patients in the surgery group vs 19 [12%] of 156 patients in the no surgery group), leucopenia (14 [8%] vs eight [5%]), and anaemia (ten [6%] vs nine [6%]). Four serious adverse events occurred, all in the surgery group. No treatment-related deaths occurred in either group.

INTERPRETATION

Secondary cytoreduction followed by chemotherapy was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival than was chemotherapy alone in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer, and patients should be counselled about the option of secondary cytoreduction in specialised centres. Long-term survival outcomes will be assessed using mature data on overall survival.

FUNDING

Zhongshan Development Program.

TRANSLATION

For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Outcome quality standards in advanced ovarian cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

Advanced ovarian cancer surgery (AOCS) frequently results in serious postoperative complications. Because managing AOCS is difficult, some standards need to be established that allow surgeons to assess the quality of treatment provided and consider what aspects should improve. This study aimed to identify quality indicators (QIs) of clinical relevance and to establish their acceptable quality limits (i.e., standard) in AOCS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic search on clinical practice guidelines, consensus conferences, and reviews on the outcome and quality of AOCS to identify which QIs have clinical relevance in AOCS. We then searched the literature (from January 2006 to December 2018) for each QI in combination with the keywords of advanced ovarian cancer, surgery, outcome, and oncology. Standards for each QI were determined by statistical process control techniques. The acceptable quality limits for each QI were defined as being within the limits of the 99.8% interval, which indicated a favorable outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 38 studies were included. The QIs selected for AOCS were complete removal of the tumor upon visual inspection (complete cytoreductive surgery), a residual tumor of < 1 cm (optimal cytoreductive surgery), a residual tumor of > 1 cm (suboptimal cytoreductive surgery), major morbidity, and 5-year survival. The rates of complete cytoreductive surgery, optimal cytoreductive surgery, suboptimal cytoreductive surgery, morbidity, and 5-year survival had quality limits of < 27%, < 23%, > 39%, > 33%, and < 27%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our results provide a general view of clinical indicators for AOCS. Acceptable quality limits that can be considered as standards were established.

Therapeutic options following second-line platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer: Comparison of active surveillance and maintenance treatment

Most women with advanced ovarian cancer respond to initial treatment, consisting of surgical resection and ≈6 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy. However, disease recurrence occurs in most patients, and subsequent therapies become necessary. Historically, close monitoring following treatment (active surveillance) was the only available option, as continued maintenance chemotherapy treatment led to increased toxicity without providing any meaningful clinical benefit. Recently, targeted therapy with the angiogenesis inhibitor bevacizumab and the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib have demonstrated significant clinical benefits as maintenance treatment for recurrent disease. Despite consensus guidelines recommending their use, maintenance treatments are currently underutilized. Here, we review evidence from pivotal clinical trials of approved second-line maintenance treatments demonstrating efficacy in terms of progression-free survival and postprogression efficacy outcomes for patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. Adverse events frequently associated with bevacizumab include hypertension, proteinuria, and non-central nervous system bleeding, whereas PARP inhibitors are associated with nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and anemia. Patient-centered outcomes analyses show that PARP inhibitors provide significant benefits to patient health status, even when accounting for the toxicities associated with treatment. Many factors influence the selection of second-line maintenance treatment for patients with recurrent ovarian cancer, including the maintenance treatment received in the first-line setting. Overall, targeted maintenance treatment represents a new standard of care for patients with ovarian cancer, and we recommend that maintenance treatment should be offered to all eligible patients with recurrent ovarian cancer.

Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing "PARP inhibitors-for-all" to the biomarker-directed use of PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy for newly diagnosed advanced stage ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVES

Clinical trials evaluating universal PARP inhibitor (PARPi) frontline maintenance therapy for advanced stage ovarian cancer have reported progression-free survival (PFS) benefit. It is unclear whether PARPi maintenance therapy will universally enhance value (clinical benefits relative to cost of delivery). We compared a "PARPi-for-all" to a biomarker-directed frontline maintenance therapy approach as a value-based care strategy.

METHODS

The cost of two frontline PARPi maintenance strategies, PARPi-for-all and biomarker-directed maintenance, was compared using modified Markov decision models simulating the study designs of the PRIMA, VELIA, and, PAOLA-1 trials. Outcomes of interest included overall costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) reported in US dollars per quality adjusted progression-free life-year (QA-PFY) gained.

RESULTS

PARPi-for-all was more costly and provided greater PFS benefit than a biomarker-directed strategy for each trial. The mean cost per patient for the PARPi-for-all strategy was $166,269, $286,715, and $366,506 for the PRIMA, VELIA, and PAOLA-1 models, respectively. For the biomarker-directed strategy, the mean cost per patient was $98,188, $167,334, and $260,671 for the PRIMA, VELIA, and PAOLA-1 models. ICERs of PARPi-for-all compared to biomarker-directed maintenance were: $593,250/QA-PFY (PRIMA), $1,512,495/QA-PFY (VELIA), and $3,347,915/QA-PFY (PAOLA-1). At current drug pricing, there is no PFS improvement in a biomarker negative cohort that would make PARPi-for-all cost-effective compared to biomarker-directed maintenance.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the high costs of universal PARPi maintenance treatment, compared with a biomarker-directed PARPi strategy. Maintenance therapy in the front-line setting should be reserved for those with germline or somatic HRD mutations until the cost of therapy is significantly reduced.

Patient-Centered Outcomes in ARIEL3, a Phase III, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Rucaparib Maintenance Treatment in Patients With Recurrent Ovarian Carcinoma

PURPOSE

To investigate quality-adjusted progression-free survival (QA-PFS) and quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) in a post hoc exploratory analysis of the phase III ARIEL3 study of rucaparib maintenance treatment versus placebo.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian carcinoma were randomly assigned to rucaparib (600 mg twice per day) or placebo. QA-PFS was calculated as progression-free survival function × the 3-level version of the EQ-5D questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) index score function. Q-TWiST analyses were performed defining TOX as the mean duration in which a patient experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) or the mean duration in which a patient experienced grade ≥ 2 TEAEs of nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and asthenia. Q-TWiST was calculated as μTOX × TOX + TWiST, with μTOX calculated using EQ-5D-3L data.

RESULTS

The visit cutoff was Apr 15, 2017. Mean QA-PFS was significantly longer with rucaparib versus placebo in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (375 randomly assigned to rucaparib v 189 randomly assigned to placebo; difference, 6.28 months [95% CI, 4.85 to 7.47 months]); BRCA-mutant cohort (130 rucaparib v 66 placebo; 9.37 months [95% CI, 6.65 to 11.85 months]); homologous recombination deficient (HRD) cohort (236 rucaparib v 118 placebo; 7.93 months [95% CI, 5.93 to 9.53 months]); and BRCA wild-type/loss of heterozygosity (LOH) low patient subgroup (107 rucaparib v 54 placebo; 2.71 months [95% CI, 0.31 to 4.44 months]). With TOX defined using grade ≥ 3 TEAEs, the difference in mean Q-TWiST (rucaparib v placebo) was 6.88 months (95% CI, 5.71 to 8.23 months), 9.73 months (95% CI, 7.10 to 11.94 months), 8.11 months (95% CI, 6.36 to 9.49 months), and 3.35 months (95% CI, 1.66 to 5.40 months) in the ITT population, BRCA-mutant cohort, HRD cohort, and BRCA wild-type/LOH low patient subgroup, respectively. Q-TWiST with TOX defined using select grade ≥ 2 TEAEs also consistently favored rucaparib.

CONCLUSION

The significant differences in QA-PFS and Q-TWiST confirm the benefit of rucaparib versus placebo in all predefined cohorts.

Rucaparib for patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian carcinoma (ARIEL3): post-progression outcomes and updated safety results from a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

In ARIEL3, rucaparib maintenance treatment significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo. Here, we report prespecified, investigator-assessed, exploratory post-progression endpoints and updated safety data.

METHODS

In this ongoing (enrolment complete) randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, patients aged 18 years or older who had platinum-sensitive, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube carcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 who had received at least two previous platinum-based chemotherapy regimens and responded to their last platinum-based regimen were randomly assigned (2:1) to oral rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) or placebo in 28-day cycles using a computer-generated sequence (block size of six with stratification based on homologous recombination repair gene mutation status, progression-free interval following penultimate platinum-based regimen, and best response to most recent platinum-based regimen). Patients, investigators, site staff, assessors, and the funder were masked to assignments. The primary endpoint of investigator-assessed progression-free survival has been previously reported. Prespecified, exploratory outcomes of chemotherapy-free interval (CFI), time to start of first subsequent therapy (TFST), time to disease progression on subsequent therapy or death (PFS2), and time to start of second subsequent therapy (TSST) and updated safety were analysed (visit cutoff Dec 31, 2017). Efficacy analyses were done in all patients randomised to three nested cohorts: patients with BRCA mutations, patients with homologous recombination deficiencies, and the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01968213.

FINDINGS

Between April 7, 2014, and July 19, 2016, 564 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to rucaparib (n=375) or placebo (n=189). Median follow-up was 28·1 months (IQR 22·0-33·6). In the intention-to-treat population, median CFI was 14·3 months (95% CI 13·0-17·4) in the rucaparib group versus 8·8 months (8·0-10·3) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·43 [95% CI 0·35-0·53]; p<0·0001), median TFST was 12·4 months (11·1-15·2) versus 7·2 months (6·4-8·6; HR 0·43 [0·35-0·52]; p<0·0001), median PFS2 was 21·0 months (18·9-23·6) versus 16·5 months (15·2-18·4; HR 0·66 [0·53-0·82]; p=0·0002), and median TSST was 22·4 months (19·1-24·5) versus 17·3 months (14·9-19·4; HR 0·68 [0·54-0·85]; p=0·0007). CFI, TFST, PFS2, and TSST were also significantly longer with rucaparib than placebo in the BRCA-mutant and homologous recombination-deficient cohorts. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event of grade 3 or higher was anaemia or decreased haemoglobin (80 [22%] patients in the rucaparib group vs one [1%] patient in the placebo group). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 83 (22%) patients in the rucaparib group and 20 (11%) patients in the placebo group. Two treatment-related deaths have been previously reported in this trial; there were no new treatment-related deaths.

INTERPRETATION

In these exploratory analyses over a median follow-up of more than 2 years, rucaparib maintenance treatment led to a clinically meaningful delay in starting subsequent therapy and provided lasting clinical benefits versus placebo in all three analysis cohorts. Updated safety data were consistent with previous reports.

FUNDING

Clovis Oncology.

Olaparib plus Bevacizumab as First-Line Maintenance in Ovarian Cancer

BACKGROUND

Olaparib has shown significant clinical benefit as maintenance therapy in women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with a BRCA mutation. The effect of combining maintenance olaparib and bevacizumab in patients regardless of BRCA mutation status is unknown.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, international phase 3 trial. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed, advanced, high-grade ovarian cancer and were having a response after first-line platinum-taxane chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Patients were eligible regardless of surgical outcome or BRCA mutation status. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) or placebo for up to 24 months; all the patients received bevacizumab at a dose of 15 mg per kilogram of body weight every 3 weeks for up to 15 months in total. The primary end point was the time from randomization until investigator-assessed disease progression or death.

RESULTS

Of the 806 patients who underwent randomization, 537 were assigned to receive olaparib and 269 to receive placebo. After a median follow-up of 22.9 months, the median progression-free survival was 22.1 months with olaparib plus bevacizumab and 16.6 months with placebo plus bevacizumab (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49 to 0.72; P<0.001). The hazard ratio (olaparib group vs. placebo group) for disease progression or death was 0.33 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.45) in patients with tumors positive for homologous-recombination deficiency (HRD), including tumors that had BRCA mutations (median progression-free survival, 37.2 vs. 17.7 months), and 0.43 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.66) in patients with HRD-positive tumors that did not have BRCA mutations (median progression-free survival, 28.1 vs. 16.6 months). Adverse events were consistent with the established safety profiles of olaparib and bevacizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with advanced ovarian cancer receiving first-line standard therapy including bevacizumab, the addition of maintenance olaparib provided a significant progression-free survival benefit, which was substantial in patients with HRD-positive tumors, including those without a BRCA mutation. (Funded by ARCAGY Research and others; PAOLA-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02477644.).

Bridging the Gap: A Priorities Assessment Tool to Support Shared Decision Making, Maximize Appointment Time, and Increase Patient Satisfaction in Women With Ovarian Cancer

PURPOSE

Women with ovarian cancer identify patient-physician communication as an essential element in determining treatment course and believe a discussion about goals and values should precede treatment decisions. We sought to develop a patient-centered priorities assessment tool for women with ovarian cancer that could streamline communication, enhance treatment discussions, and increase patient satisfaction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We designed a priorities assessment tool using a validated ovarian cancer symptom index (National Comprehensive Cancer Center-Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Ovarian Symptom Index-18) combined with an index to assess daily quality-of-life priorities. The tool was distributed to women with ovarian cancer in small focus group settings and online, followed by a postactivity feedback form.

RESULTS

In this pilot study, 36 women completed the priorities assessment tool and 35 completed the postactivity feedback form between September 2015 and May 2016. All participants reported that the tool was easy to understand and comprehensive in scope. Twenty-nine participants (82.9%) completed the tool in 10 minutes or less. Most participants (n = 31, 86.1%) were able to stratify their priorities and identify 5 top treatment-related priorities. Participants who indicated that their goals and priorities had changed since diagnosis (n = 25, 69.4%) reported that the tool helped to identify current goals and priorities (22 [88%] of 25 participants) and would help them feel more comfortable participating in shared decision making with their medical team (21 [84%] of 25 participants).

CONCLUSION

A patient-centered priorities assessment tool was easy to complete and viewed as comprehensive and useful in a pilot cohort of women with ovarian cancer. Use of a priorities assessment tool has the potential to enhance communication, promote shared decision making, and improve patient satisfaction.

Prognostic role of pathologic response and cytoreductive status at interval debulking surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine if complete pathologic response (cPR) and cytoreductive status at interval debulking surgery (IDS) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) are associated with improved clinical outcomes in ovarian cancer.

METHODS

We evaluated 91 patients with advanced ovarian cancer who underwent NACT and IDS. Pathologic response, cytoreductive status, and outcomes were determined. Descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, and Kaplan-Meier survival probabilities were calculated.

RESULTS

cPR occurred in 9 (10%), microscopic pathologic response (microPR) in 18 (20%), and macroscopic pathologic response (macroPR) in 64 (70%) patients. Median progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with cPR was significantly improved compared with patients with any pathologic residual disease (microPR/macroPR; undefined vs 10.9 months, P = .01); whereas, microPR was not associated with significantly improved PFS compared with macroPR (16.3 months vs 10 months, P = .08). Cytoreduction to no gross residual disease was associated with improved PFS (undefined vs 7.5 months vs 5.5 months, P < .01) and overall survival (undefined vs 38.7 months vs 12 months, P < .01) compared with visible residual disease less than or equal to 1 cm or suboptimal.

CONCLUSIONS

cPR is uncommon (10%) after NACT for advanced ovarian cancer. Better pathologic response and cytoreductive status are associated with improved PFS, emphasizing the importance of both chemotherapy response and surgical effort.

Use of a multi-drug regimen gemcitabine, 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, cisplatin, bevacizumab, docetaxel, and cyclophosphamide (GFIP/BDC) for heavily pretreated relapsed epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer

Background

Epithelial ovarian cancer has the highest fatality rate of all gynecologic malignancies. Although the majority of patients achieve complete clinical response after initial cytoreductive surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy, most recur and almost all will eventually acquire platinum-resistance for which treatment options become limited. The objective of the study was to describe response and tolerability of metronomic chemotherapy regimen GFIP/BDC, a modification of the G-FLIP regimen, in patients with persistent or recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer.

Methods

A retrospective descriptive analysis of 20 patients from a single academic institution who received combination GFIP/BDC therapy from January 1, 2011 to August 31, 2016 for persistent or recurrent EOC/FT/PP. Treatment consisted of a 2-day combination of gemcitabine 300 mg, 5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m2, irinotecan 20-30 mg/m2, cisplatin 20 mg/m2, bevacizumab 4 mg/kg, docetaxel 20 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide 200 mg/m2 administered every 14 days. Toxicities were retrospectively graded using CTCAE v4.0.

Results

Twenty patients were identified with a median age 57.5 years (range 32–71). A total of 85% of patients were non-Hispanic white, 90% had cancer of high-grade serous histology, and all had a GOG performance status of 0–1. Patients had received a median of 3 prior regimens and 95% were platinum-resistant. Median number of cycles of GFIP/BDC administered was 9 (range 3–48) and patients remained on treatment for a median of 5.1 months (range 1.5–24). Eleven patients (55%) experienced a partial clinical response with a median duration of 6 months (range 1.5–20). Six patients (30%) survived progression free for at least 6 months.

Ten patients (50%) experienced at least one grade 3/4 adverse event. Grade 3 adverse events were hematologic (n = 5), constitutional (n = 3), gastrointestinal (n = 3), neurologic (n = 2), and vascular (n = 1). There was only one grade 4 adverse event which was severe neutropenia. Patients discontinued treatment due to disease progression 65% (n = 13), toxicity 20% (n = 4), patient preference 10% (n = 2), and 5% (n = 1) is currently on treatment.

Conclusions

Selected patients with epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer who have failed multiple lines of conventional cytotoxic treatment may benefit from GFIP/BDC. Toxicity might be a limiting factor for administration.

Progression-free survival as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in modern ovarian cancer trials: a meta-analysis

Background

Progression-free survival (PFS) has been adopted as the primary endpoint in many randomized controlled trials, and can be determined much earlier than overall survival (OS). We investigated whether PFS is a good surrogate endpoint for OS in trials of first-line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), and whether this relationship has changed with the introduction of new treatment types.

Methods

In a meta-analysis, we identified summary data [hazard ratio (HR) and median time] from published randomized controlled trials. Linear regression was used to assess the association between treatment effects on PFS and OS overall, and for subgroups defined by treatment type, postprogression survival (PPS) and established prognostic factors.

Results

Correlation between HRs for PFS and OS, in 26 trials with 30 treatment comparisons comprising 24,870 patients, was modest (r² = 0.52, weighted by trial sample size). The correlation diminished with recency: preplatinum/paclitaxel era, r²= 0.66; platinum/paclitaxel, r²= 0.44; triplet combinations, r²= 0.22; biologicals, r²= 0.30. The median PPS increased over time for the experimental (P_trend = 0.03) and control arms (P_trend = 0.003). The difference in median PPS between treatment arms strongly correlated with the difference in median OS (r² = 0.83). In trials where the control therapy had median PPS of less than 18 months, correlation between PFS and OS was stronger (r² = 0.64) than where the median PPS was longer (r² = 0.48).

Conclusions

In EOC, correlation in the relative treatment effect between PFS and OS in first-line platinum-based chemotherapy randomized controlled trials is moderate and has weakened with increasing availability of effective salvage therapies.

Health-related quality of life and patient-centred outcomes with olaparib maintenance after chemotherapy in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation (SOLO2/ENGOT Ov-21): a placebo-controlled, phase 3 randomised trial

BACKGROUND

In the phase 3 SOLO2 trial (ENGOT Ov-21), maintenance therapy with olaparib tablets significantly prolonged progression-free survival (primary endpoint) compared with placebo in patients with a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation and platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer who had received two or more lines of previous chemotherapy. The most common subjective adverse effects included fatigue, nausea, and vomiting, which were typically low grade and self-limiting. Our a-priori hypothesis was that maintenance olaparib would not negatively affect health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and additionally that the prolongation of progression-free survival with olaparib would be underpinned by additional patient-centred benefits.

METHODS

In SOLO2, 196 patients were randomly assigned to olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) and 99 to placebo. Randomisation was stratified by response to previous chemotherapy (complete vs partial) and length of platinum-free interval (>6-12 vs >12 months). The prespecified primary HRQOL analysis evaluated the change from baseline in the Trial Outcome Index (TOI) score during the first 12 months of the study. To be assessable, patients had to have an evaluable score at baseline and at least one evaluable follow-up form. Secondary planned quality-of-life (QOL) analyses included the duration of good quality of life (defined as time without significant symptoms of toxicity [TWiST] and quality-adjusted progression-free survival [QAPFS]). Efficacy and QOL outcomes were analysed in all randomly assigned patients (the full analysis set), and safety outcomes were analysed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01874353, and is closed to new participants.

FINDINGS

The adjusted average mean change from baseline over the first 12 months in TOI was -2·90 (95% CI -4·13 to -1·67) with olaparib and -2·87 (-4·64 to -1·10) with placebo (estimated difference -0·03; 95% CI -2·19 to 2·13; p=0·98). Mean QAPFS (13·96 [SD 10·96] vs 7·28 [5·22] months; difference 6·68, 95% CI 4·98-8·54) and mean duration of TWiST (15·03 [SD 12·79] vs 7·70 [6·42] months; difference 7·33, 95% CI 4·70-8·96) were significantly longer with olaparib than with placebo.

INTERPRETATION

Olaparib maintenance therapy did not have a significant detrimental effect on HRQOL compared with placebo. There were clinically meaningful patient-centred benefits in both TWiST and QAPFS despite the adverse effects associated with olaparib. These patient-centred endpoints support the improvement in progression-free survival, the primary endpoint in SOLO2, and should be included in future trials of maintenance therapies.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca.

Comparison of first-line chemotherapy regimens for ovarian carcinosarcoma: a single institution case series and review of the literature

Background

The optimal first-line chemotherapy for ovarian carcinosarcoma has not yet been determined. We therefore sought to determine the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients with ovarian carcinosarcoma treated at our institution with different first-line chemotherapy regimens.

Methods

This single-institution, retrospective analysis included all patients with ovarian or primary peritoneal carcinosarcoma diagnosed from September 1996 to July 2017. Kaplan Meier analysis with a log-rank Mantel-Cox test was used to compare PFS and OS between treatment groups, and a p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Thirty-one patients met inclusion criteria: two patients were stage IC, 5 were stage II, 21 were stage III, and 3 were stage IV. The median PFS and OS for all stages was 9.3 and 19.7 months respectively. Fifteen patients (48%) received carboplatin/paclitaxel as first therapy, 7 (23%) received ifosfamide/paclitaxel, 6 (19%) received a different regimen, and 3 (10%) did not receive chemotherapy. Patients treated with carboplatin/paclitaxel had a statistically significant longer PFS when compared to those receiving ifosfamide/paclitaxel (17.8 vs. 8.0 months, p = 0.025). OS was similar between all comparisons.

Conclusions

In summary, in our cohort of ovarian carcinosarcoma patients, median PFS is longer in patients treated with carboplatin/paclitaxel compared to ifosfamide/paclitaxel. Overall survival was similar for all treatment groups, potentially due to subsequent treatment crossover. Given the rarity and aggressive nature of this tumor, further study into optimal first-line chemotherapy is warranted.

A review of mirvetuximab soravtansine in the treatment of platinum-resistant ovarian cancer

Resistance to platinum-based therapy poses a significant clinical challenge for the management of advanced ovarian cancer, a leading cause of cancer mortality among women. Mirvetuximab soravtansine is a novel antibody–drug conjugate that targets folate receptor-α, a validated molecular target for therapeutic intervention in this disease. Here, we examine mirvetuximab soravtansine's mechanism of action and pharmacology, and review its clinical evaluation in ovarian cancer to date. We focus on the favorable tolerability and encouraging signals of efficacy that have emerged, most notably in patients with platinum-resistant disease. Ongoing Phase III monotherapy and Phase Ib/II combination trials evaluating its activity in the setting of platinum resistance are emphasized, which will help define its role in the evolving landscape of ovarian cancer therapy.

Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in ovarian cancer clinical trials-lost opportunities and lessons learned

Despite increased recognition of the value of including patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as important end points in phase III clinical trials, there has been a lack of pre-specified PRO hypotheses and shortcomings with the analyses and interpretation of PROs in many ovarian cancer trials. This paper discusses and provides examples of the so-called lost opportunities in ovarian cancer trials. These include: (i) no clear pre-specified PRO hypotheses; (ii) PRO end points not included; (iii) insensitive PRO end point selection; (iv) collection of poor-quality PRO data not suitable for analysis; (v) differences in PROs between treatment arms ignored; and (vi) poor reporting quality. We can learn from the past and with relatively little additional effort, improve the collection and interpretation of PRO data in future ovarian cancer trials. The importance of doing so is underpinned by recent initiatives to improve the standard and usefulness of PRO data in clinical trials. These include the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Guidance for PROs to support labelling claims, the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO MCBS), the International Society for Quality-of-Life Research PRO reporting guidance and the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Clinical Trials (CONSORT)-PRO-extension statement which includes a checklist of recommended items to include in PRO sections of trial protocols. Promoting the importance of hypothesis-driven PROs in ovarian cancer clinical trials will lead to improvements in the design of these trials and the interpretation of their results.

ICG-fluorescence imaging for detection of peritoneal metastases and residual tumoral scars in locally advanced ovarian cancer: A pilot study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

No intraoperative imaging techniques exist for detecting tumor nodules or tumor scar tissues in patients treated with upfront or interval cytoreductive surgery (CS) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The aims of this study were to evaluate the role of indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging (FI) for the detection of peritoneal metastases (PM) and evaluate whether it can be used to detect remnant tumor cells in scar tissue.

METHODS

Patients with PM from ovarian cancer admitted for CS were included. ICG, at 0.25 mg per kg of patient weight, was injected intraoperatively after explorative laparotomy before CS.

RESULTS

A total of 108 peritoneal lesions, including 25 scars, were imaged in 20 patients. Seventy-three were malignant (67.6%) and 35 benign (32.4%). The mean Tumor to Background Ratio (ex vivo) was 1.8 (SD 1.3) in malignant and 1.0 (SD 0.79) in benign nodules (P = 0.007). Of 25 post-NAC scars, the mean Tumor to Background Ratio (TBR) (in vivo) was 2.06 (SD 1.15) in malignant and 1.21 (SD 0.50) in benign nodules (P = 0.26). The positive predictive value of ICG-FI to detect tumor cells in scars was 57.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

ICG-FI is accurate to demonstrate PM in ovarian cancer but unable to discriminate between benign and malignant post-NAC.

A systematic review of patient values, preferences and expectations for the treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

It is our belief that patient preference should play a significant role in disease management of recurrent ovarian cancer. Since cure is seldom an endpoint in this circumstance, patients' attitudes toward the risks and benefits of chemotherapy versus palliation are relevant.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO from were searched from January 1, 2000 to December 13, 2016 for studies of values, preferences or expectations of women with platinum-sensitive recurrent or refractory ovarian cancer.

RESULTS

Ten studies representing five countries met inclusion criteria. Although there was regional variation in preference for palliation over treatment, certain themes emerged. 1) Patients, even in the context of counselling overestimated the curative capability of chemotherapy. In one study 92% of patients had high expectations of healing after completing an expectation of treatment checklist. Another study observed that patients are often overwhelmed by information provided at diagnosis and there can be a discrepancy between what patients report to have heard and what the clinicians said. 2) Patients who had previously tolerated chemotherapy well were more likely to be accepting of the side-effects of chemotherapy. 3) Patients were more willing to accept chemotherapy and the related side effects when treatment was of curative intent or when overall survival was increased. 4) Patients valued both overall and progression free survival. 5) A significant minority (24%) consistently chose treatment over palliation. 6) Patients were more willing to accept the side effects of chemotherapy than were their health care providers.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings, in aggregate, highlight the importance of communication with patients regarding prognosis, adverse effects and symptom management to help negotiate the decision making process. Chemotherapy in the recurrent setting should be managed on a case by case basis, combining both medical constraints and consideration to patient preferences.

Quality of life is significantly associated with survival in women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: An ancillary data analysis of the NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG-0218) study

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate association between baseline quality of life (QOL) and changes in QOL measured by FACT-O TOI with progression-free disease (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

METHODS

Patients enrolled in GOG-0218 with completed FACT-O TOI assessments at baseline and at least one follow-up assessment were eligible. Baseline FACT-O TOI scores were sorted by quartiles (Q1-4) and outcomes compared between Q1 and Q2-4 with log-rank statistic and multivariate Cox regression adjusting for age, stage, post-surgical residual disease size, and performance status (PS). Trends in FACT-O TOI scores from baseline to the latest follow-up assessment were evaluated for impact on intragroup (Q1 or Q2-4) outcome by log-rank analysis.

RESULTS

Of 1152 eligible patients, 283 formed Q1 and 869 formed Q2-4. Mean baseline FACT-O TOI scores were 47.5 for Q1 vs. 74.7 for Q2-4 (P<0.001). Q1 compared to Q2-4 had worse median OS (37.5 vs. 45.6months, P=0.001) and worse median PFS (12.5 vs. 13.1months, P=0.096). Q2-4 patients had decreased risks of disease progression (HR 0.974, 95% CI 0.953-0.995, P=0.018), and death (HR 0.963, 95% CI 0.939-0.987, P=0.003) for each five-point increase in baseline FACT-O TOI. Improving versus worsening trends in FACT-O TOI scores were associated with longer median PFS (Q1: 12.7 vs. 8.6months, P=0.001; Q2-4: 16.7 vs. 11.1months, P<0.001) and median OS (Q1: 40.8 vs. 16months, P<0.001; Q2-4: 54.4 vs. 33.6months, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline FACT-O TOI scores were independently prognostic of PFS and OS while improving compared to worsening QOL was associated with significantly better PFS and OS in women with EOC.

Ovarian cancer survivors' acceptance of treatment side effects evolves as goals of care change over the cancer continuum

OBJECTIVES

Women with ovarian cancer can have long overall survival and goals of treatment change over time from cure to remission to stable disease. We sought to determine whether survivors' acceptance of treatment side effects also changes over the disease continuum.

METHODS

Women with ovarian cancer completed an online survey focusing on survivors' goals and priorities. The survey was distributed through survivor networks and social media.

RESULTS

Four hundred and thirty-four women visited the survey website and 328 (76%) completed the survey. Among participants, 141 (43%) identified themselves as having ever recurred, 119 (36%) were undergoing treatment at the time of survey completion and 86 (26%) had received four or more chemotherapy regimens. Respondents' goals of care were cure for 115 women (35%), remission for 156 (48%) and stable disease for 56 (17%). When asked what was most meaningful, 148 women (45%) reported overall survival, 135 (41%) reported quality of life and 40 (12%) reported progression-free survival. >50% of survivors were willing to tolerate the following symptoms for the goal of cure: fatigue (283, 86%), alopecia (281, 86%), diarrhea (232, 71%), constipation (227, 69%), neuropathy (218, 66%), arthralgia (210, 64%), sexual side effects (201, 61%), reflux symptoms (188, 57%), memory loss (180, 55%), nausea/vomiting (180, 55%), hospitalization for treatment side effects (179, 55%) and pain (169, 52%). The rates of tolerance for most symptoms decreased significantly as the goal of treatment changed from cure to remission to stable disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Women with ovarian cancer willingly accept many treatment side effects when the goal of treatment is cure, however become less accepting when the goal is remission and even less so when the goal is stable disease. Physicians and survivors must carefully consider treatment toxicities and quality of life effects when selecting drugs for patients with incurable disease.

Fifth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference of the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup: recurrent disease

This manuscript reports the consensus statements regarding recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC), reached at the fifth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference (OCCC), which was held in Tokyo, Japan, in November 2015. Three important questions were identified: (i) What are the subgroups for clinical trials in ROC? The historical definition of using platinum-free interval (PFI) to categorise patients as having platinum-sensitive/resistant disease was replaced by therapy-free interval (TFI). TFI can be broken down into TFIp (PFI), TFInp (non-PFI) and TFIb (biological agent-free interval). Additional criteria to consider include histology, BRCA mutation status, number/type of previous therapies, outcome of prior surgery and patient reported symptoms. (ii) What are the control arms for clinical trials in ROC? When platinum is considered the best option, the control arm should be a platinum-based therapy with or without an anti-angiogenic agent or a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor. If platinum is not considered the best option, the control arm could include a non-platinum drug, either as single agent or in combination. (iii) What are the endpoints for clinical trials in ROC? Overall survival (OS) is the preferred endpoint for patient cohorts with an expected median OS < or = 12 months. Progression-free survival (PFS) is an alternative, and it is the preferred endpoint when the expected median OS is > 12 months. However, PFS alone should not be the only endpoint and must be supported by additional endpoints including pre-defined patient reported outcomes (PROs), time to second subsequent therapy (TSST), or time until definitive deterioration of quality of life (TUDD).

Surgical lymph node assessment in mucinous ovarian carcinoma staging: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The proportion of women with mucinous ovarian carcinoma in whom nodal metastases are identified during staging remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To review the literature on surgical lymph node assessment during staging of women diagnosed with mucinous ovarian carcinoma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A systematic search using synonyms of 'mucinous ovarian carcinoma' and 'lymph node assessment' was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Embase and the Cochrane Library.

SELECTION CRITERIA

When they covered ten or more mucinous ovarian carcinoma cases, staging surgery and minimally one of the following outcomes: prevalence of metastases, stage shift or survival data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were quality evaluated with the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool for non-randomised studies of interventions. Outcomes were pooled using an inverse variance weighted random effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included. In 278 women with mucinous ovarian cancer suspected to be stage I-II, a pooled proportion of 0.8% (95% CI <0.1-2.9%) had lymph node metastases and were upstaged. In those suspected of stage I (n = 184), this proportion was 0.7% (95% CI <0.1-3.8%). No difference (P = 0.287) was found in metastases between sampling at 0.0% (95% CI 0.0-3.3%) and complete pelvic and/or para-aortic lymph node dissection at 1.2% (95% CI <0.1-4.2%). One study directly compared the survival of patients staged with and without lymph node dissection and reported no significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical lymph node assessment in women suspected of stage I-II mucinous ovarian carcinoma rarely identifies nodal metastases and consequently has no significant impact on staging.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Surgical lymph node assessment in women with stage I-II mucinous ovarian cancer rarely has staging consequences.

Fifth annual workshop of cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer and peritoneal surface malignancies

The Fifth Annual Advanced Course in Cytoreductive Surgery for Ovarian Cancer and Peritoneal Surface Malignancies was held at and sponsored by the Division of Gynecologic Oncology at the the University of California, Irvine on Friday and Saturday, October 9-10, 2015. The workshop was comprised of didactic modules, historical treatise, an impassioned tribute, a cadaver laboratory, and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy demonstration. This was a not-for-profit workshop, and registration fees were used to support course faculty travel to U.C. Irvine and to pay for the cadavers. The original 56 available spots were filled within three weeks of the initial announcement, prompting procurement of two additional cadavers to satisfy registration overflow and accommodate the six U.C. Irvine fellows-in-training. While international participation in the Workshops continues to rise, we have also noted more U.S.-trained Gynecologic Oncologists among the registrants.

Ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is not a single disease and can be subdivided into at least five different histological subtypes that have different identifiable risk factors, cells of origin, molecular compositions, clinical features and treatments. Ovarian cancer is a global problem, is typically diagnosed at a late stage and has no effective screening strategy. Standard treatments for newly diagnosed cancer consist of cytoreductive surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy. In recurrent cancer, chemotherapy, anti-angiogenic agents and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors are used, and immunological therapies are currently being tested. High-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) is the most commonly diagnosed form of ovarian cancer and at diagnosis is typically very responsive to platinum-based chemotherapy. However, in addition to the other histologies, HGSCs frequently relapse and become increasingly resistant to chemotherapy. Consequently, understanding the mechanisms underlying platinum resistance and finding ways to overcome them are active areas of study in ovarian cancer. Substantial progress has been made in identifying genes that are associated with a high risk of ovarian cancer (such as BRCA1 and BRCA2), as well as a precursor lesion of HGSC called serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma, which holds promise for identifying individuals at high risk of developing the disease and for developing prevention strategies.

Ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is not a single disease and can be subdivided into at least five different histological subtypes that have different identifiable risk factors, cells of origin, molecular compositions, clinical features and treatments. Ovarian cancer is a global problem, is typically diagnosed at a late stage and has no effective screening strategy. Standard treatments for newly diagnosed cancer consist of cytoreductive surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy. In recurrent cancer, chemotherapy, anti-angiogenic agents and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors are used, and immunological therapies are currently being tested. High-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) is the most commonly diagnosed form of ovarian cancer and at diagnosis is typically very responsive to platinum-based chemotherapy. However, in addition to the other histologies, HGSCs frequently relapse and become increasingly resistant to chemotherapy. Consequently, understanding the mechanisms underlying platinum resistance and finding ways to overcome them are active areas of study in ovarian cancer. Substantial progress has been made in identifying genes that are associated with a high risk of ovarian cancer (such as BRCA1 and BRCA2), as well as a precursor lesion of HGSC called serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma, which holds promise for identifying individuals at high risk of developing the disease and for developing prevention strategies.

Ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is not a single disease and can be subdivided into at least five different histological subtypes that have different identifiable risk factors, cells of origin, molecular compositions, clinical features and treatments. Ovarian cancer is a global problem, is typically diagnosed at a late stage and has no effective screening strategy. Standard treatments for newly diagnosed cancer consist of cytoreductive surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy. In recurrent cancer, chemotherapy, anti-angiogenic agents and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors are used, and immunological therapies are currently being tested. High-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) is the most commonly diagnosed form of ovarian cancer and at diagnosis is typically very responsive to platinum-based chemotherapy. However, in addition to the other histologies, HGSCs frequently relapse and become increasingly resistant to chemotherapy. Consequently, understanding the mechanisms underlying platinum resistance and finding ways to overcome them are active areas of study in ovarian cancer. Substantial progress has been made in identifying genes that are associated with a high risk of ovarian cancer (such as BRCA1 and BRCA2), as well as a precursor lesion of HGSC called serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma, which holds promise for identifying individuals at high risk of developing the disease and for developing prevention strategies.

Final results of a phase 3 study of trebananib plus weekly paclitaxel in recurrent ovarian cancer (TRINOVA-1): Long-term survival, impact of ascites, and progression-free survival-2

PURPOSE

Trebananib, a peptibody that blocks binding of angiopoietin-1 and -2 to Tie2, significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer in the phase 3 TRINOVA-1 study. We report overall survival (OS) in the intent-to-treat population and clinically relevant subgroups and time to second disease progression (PFS-2).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women with recurrent disease (platinum-free interval<12months) were randomized to receive intravenous paclitaxel 80mg/m(2) (3weeks on/1week off) plus intravenous trebananib 15mg/kg or placebo, weekly. OS in the intent-to-treat population was a key secondary endpoint. Exploratory analysis of PFS-2 was conducted according to guidance by the European Medicines Agency.

RESULTS

Median OS was not significantly improved with trebananib compared with placebo (19.3 versus 18.3months; HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.81-1.11; P=0.52) in the intent-to-treat population (n=919). In subgroup analysis, trebananib improved median OS compared with placebo (14.5 versus 12.3months; HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55-0.93; P=0.011) in patients with ascites at baseline (n=295). In the intent-to-treat population, trebananib significantly improved median PFS-2 compared with placebo (12.5 versus 10.9months; HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74-0.98; P=0.024). The incidence and type of adverse events in this updated analysis was consistent with that described in the primary analysis; no new safety signals were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

OS was not significantly longer in the intent-to-treat population, although there was an improvement in OS in patients with ascites receiving trebananib. PFS-2 confirmed that the PFS benefit associated with trebananib was maintained through the second disease progression independent of the choice of subsequent therapy.

Is FDA-Approved Bevacizumab Cost-Effective When Included in the Treatment of Platinum-Resistant Recurrent Ovarian Cancer?

PURPOSE

Although the Food and Drug Administration has approved incorporation of bevacizumab (BEV) into the treatment of platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC), cost-value measures are an essential consideration, as evidenced by the recent ASCO Value Framework initiative. We assessed the cost-effectiveness and reviewed the net health benefit (NHB) of this expensive treatment.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness decision model was constructed using results from a phase III trial comparing BEV plus cytotoxic chemotherapy with chemotherapy alone in patients with PROC. The Avastin Use in Platinum-Resistant Epithelial Ovarian Cancer (AURELIA) trial demonstrated improvement in progression-free survival and quality of life in patients receiving BEV. Costs, paracentesis rates, and adverse events were incorporated, including subgroup analysis of different partner chemotherapy agents.

RESULTS

Inclusion of BEV in the treatment of platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer meets the common willingness-to-pay incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) threshold of $100,000 per progression-free life-year saved (LYS) for 15-mg/kg dosing and approaches this threshold for 10-mg/kg dosing, with an ICER of $160,000. In sensitivity analysis, reducing the cost of BEV by 13% (from $9,338 to $8,100 per cycle) allows 10-mg/kg dosing to reach a $100,000 ICER. Exploratory analysis of different BEV chemotherapy partners showed an ICER of $76,000 per progression-free LYS (6.5-month progression-free survival improvement) and $54,000 per LYS (9.1-month overall survival improvement) for the addition of BEV to paclitaxel once per week. Using the ASCO framework for value assessment, the NHB score for BEV plus paclitaxel once per week is 48.

CONCLUSION

Using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 ICER, the addition of BEV to chemotherapy either demonstrates or approaches cost-effectiveness and NHB when added to the treatment of patients with PROC.

Emerging therapies: angiogenesis inhibitors for ovarian cancer

INTRODUCTION

Patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) have a high rate of recurrence, and overall survival remains at ∼ 25%. There is a need for new treatments that can increase progression free survival and quality of life. Recent clinical trials focus on angiogenesis, VEGFs, and tyrosine kinase inhibitors that play a role in recurrence, metastasis, and ascites in EOC.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes clinical rationale, mechanisms of action, and clinical data for angiogenesis inhibitors under evaluation in Phase II and III trials for EOC. Anti-angiogenesis agents reviewed in this paper include aflibercept, bevacizumab, cediranib, fosbretabulin, imatinib, nintedanib, pazopanib, saracatinib, sorafenib, sunitinib, and trebananib.

EXPERT OPINION

These agents have particular rationale for potential use in EOC due to the molecular changes associated with EOC tumorigenesis, namely a significant increase in angiogenic activity. Due to the costs and toxicities associated with anti-angiogenics, biomarker or molecular signature selection strategy for patients who will most benefit would be ideal but no such strategy has been validated to date.

The Aminosteroid Derivative RM-133 Shows In Vitro and In Vivo Antitumor Activity in Human Ovarian and Pancreatic Cancers

Ovarian and pancreatic cancers are two of the most aggressive and lethal cancers, whose management faces only limited therapeutic options. Typically, these tumors spread insidiously accompanied first with atypical symptoms, and usually shift to a drug resistance phenotype with the current pharmaceutical armamentarium. Thus, the development of new drugs acting via a different mechanism of action represents a clear priority. Herein, we are reporting for the first time that the aminosteroid derivative RM-133, developed in our laboratory, displays promising activity on two models of aggressive cancers, namely ovarian (OVCAR-3) and pancreatic (PANC-1) cancers. The IC₅₀ value of RM-133 was 0.8 μM and 0.3 μM for OVCAR-3 and PANC-1 cell lines in culture, respectively. Based on pharmacokinetic studies on RM-133 using 11 different vehicles, we selected two main vehicles: aqueous 0.4% methylcellulose:ethanol (92:8) and sunflower oil:ethanol (92:8) for in vivo studies. Using subcutaneous injection of RM-133 with the methylcellulose-based vehicle, growth of PANC-1 tumors xenografted to nude mice was inhibited by 63%. Quite interestingly, RM-133 injected subcutaneously with the methylcellulose-based or sunflower-based vehicles reduced OVCAR-3 xenograft growth by 122% and 100%, respectively. After the end of RM-133 treatment using the methylcellulose-based vehicle, OVCAR-3 tumor growth inhibition was maintained for ≥ 1 week. RM-133 was also well tolerated in the whole animal, no apparent sign of toxicity having been detected in the xenograft studies.

New strategies in ovarian cancer: translating the molecular complexity of ovarian cancer into treatment advances

An improved understanding of the genomics of ovarian cancer and the separation of ovarian cancer into histologically and molecularly defined subgroups have affected drug development and clinical trial design in ovarian cancer. Active therapies that have been tested in ovarian cancer include agents that inhibit angiogenesis and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi). However, no FDA drug approvals for ovarian cancer have been granted since 2006, and overall survival improvements have been difficult to achieve with new agents. The genomic complexity of ovarian cancer and modest single-agent activity of many biologic agents in this disease have led to testing of biologic agent combinations. In this article, we review recent advances in the understanding of the molecular diversity of ovarian cancer as well as emerging therapeutic strategies such as new agents and biologic combinations that attempt to target multiple aberrant pathways in this cancer.