First-line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer with paclitaxel/carboplatin with or without epirubicin (TEC versus TC)--a gynecologic cancer intergroup study of the NSGO, EORTC GCG and NCIC CTG

A signature of circulating miRNAs predicts the prognosis and therapeutic outcome of taxane/platinum regimen in advanced ovarian carcinoma patients

PURPOSE

Ovarian carcinoma (OC) is ranked as the eighth most lethal gynecological cancer due to late diagnosis and high recurrence. Existing biomarkers are lacking to predict the recurrence and stratify patients who are likely to benefit from chemotherapy. MicroRNAs (miRNAs/miRs) are persistently present in humans and are capable of predicting treatment outcomes. Thus, the purpose of the study was to assess the potential of circulatory miRNAs to predict the efficacy of OC.

METHODS

Newly diagnosed n = 208 OC patients were administrated neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy (taxane + platinum) after surgery. Their demographic, gynecologic, clinical parameters, response, and survival were recorded. MiR-27a, miR-182, miR-199a, miR-214, and miR-591 were taken and the expression were analyzed using real-time PCR at different treatment intervals. Further, its prognostic value (Kaplan-Meier, and Cox regression analysis) and diagnostic importance (receiver operating characteristic curve) were validated.

RESULT

The mean age of patients with poorly differentiated (45.2%) serous OC was 48.69 ± 10.38. The majority experienced menarche at ≥ 12 (62.2%) with poor menstrual hygiene (81.8%) and were post-menopausal (69.4%), some were associated with high risk of survival (HR =  > 1). MiRNA signature showed three over-expression and two under-expression (miR-27a, miR-182, and miR-214; miR-199a and miR-591) in advanced OC compared to the control (P=  < 0.05). Also, a significant difference was detected at each time interval of treatment with the response (P =  ≤ 0.001) associated with resistance and overall survival (P =  ≤ 0.001) with risk (HR =  > 1). ROC analysis showed enhanced the diagnostics accuracy (< 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that circulating miRNAs might be a potential minimally invasive diagnostic marker for treatment outcome and recurrence in ovarian carcinoma.

Deciphering the Molecular Mechanisms behind Drug Resistance in Ovarian Cancer to Unlock Efficient Treatment Options

Ovarian cancer is a highly lethal form of gynecological cancer. This disease often goes undetected until advanced stages, resulting in high morbidity and mortality rates. Unfortunately, many patients experience relapse and succumb to the disease due to the emergence of drug resistance that significantly limits the effectiveness of currently available oncological treatments. Here, we discuss the molecular mechanisms responsible for resistance to carboplatin, paclitaxel, polyadenosine diphosphate ribose polymerase inhibitors, and bevacizumab in ovarian cancer. We present a detailed analysis of the most extensively investigated resistance mechanisms, including drug inactivation, drug target alterations, enhanced drug efflux pumps, increased DNA damage repair capacity, and reduced drug absorption/accumulation. The in-depth understanding of the molecular mechanisms associated with drug resistance is crucial to unveil new biomarkers capable of predicting and monitoring the kinetics during disease progression and discovering new therapeutic targets.

Upregulation of CALD1 predicted a poor prognosis for platinum-treated ovarian cancer and revealed it as a potential therapeutic resistance target

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer (OC) has the worst prognosis among gynecological malignancies, most of which are found to be in advanced stage. Cell reduction surgery based on platinum-based chemotherapy is the current standard of treatment for OC, but patients are prone to relapse and develop drug resistance. The objective of this study was to identify a specific molecular target responsible for platinum chemotherapy resistance in OC.

RESULTS

We screened the protein-coding gene Caldesmon (CALD1), expressed in cisplatin-resistant OC cells in vitro. The prognostic value of CALD1 was evaluated using survival curve analysis in OC patients treated with platinum therapy. The diagnostic value of CALD1 was verified by drawing a Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve using clinical samples from OC patients. This study analyzed data from various databases including Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO), Human Protein Atlas (HPA), The Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE), The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), GEPIA 2, UALCAN, Kaplan-Meier (KM) plotter, LinkedOmics database, and String. Different expression genes (DEGs) between cisplatin-sensitive and cisplatin-resistant cells were acquired respectively from 5 different datasets of GEO. CALD1 was selected as a common gene from 5 groups DEGs. Online data analysis of HPA and CCLE showed that CALD1 was highly expressed in both normal ovarian tissue and OC. In TCGA database, high expression of CALD1 was associated with disease stage and venous invasion in OC. Patients with high CALD1 expression levels had a worse prognosis under platinum drug intervention, according to Kaplan-Meier (KM) plotter analysis. Analysis of clinical sample data from GEO showed that CALD1 had superior diagnostic value in distinguishing patients with platinum "resistant" and platinum "sensitive" (AUC = 0.816), as well as patients with worse progression-free survival (AUC = 0.741), and those with primary and omental metastases (AUC = 0.811) in ovarian tumor. At last, CYR61 was identified as a potential predictive molecule that may play an important role alongside CALD1 in the development of platinum resistance in OC.

CONCLUSIONS

CALD1, as a member of cytoskeletal protein, was associated with poor prognosis of platinum resistance in OC, and could be used as a target protein for mechanism study of platinum resistance in OC.

Survival and modelled cancer antigen-125 ELIMination rate constant K score in ovarian cancer patients in first-line before poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor era: A Gynaecologic Cancer Intergroup meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In patients with advanced ovarian cancer, the modelled CA-125 ELIMination rate constant K (KELIM) is an early indicator of the tumour intrinsic chemosensitivity. We assessed the prognostic and surrogate values of KELIM with respect to those of surgery outcome (based on post-operative residual lesions) in the Gynaecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) individual patient data meta-analysis MAOV (Meta-Analysis in OVarian cancer) built before the emergence of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors.

METHODS

The dataset was split into learning and validation cohorts (ratio 1:2). The individual modelled KELIM values were estimated, standardised by the median value, then scored as unfavourable (<1.0) or favourable (≥1.0). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) analyses were performed with a two-step meta-analytic approach and surrogacy through a two-level meta-analytic model.

RESULTS

KELIM was assessed in 5884 patients from eight first-line trials (learning, 1962; validation, 3922). A favourable KELIM score was significantly associated with longer OS (validation set, median, 78.8 versus 28.4 months, hazard-ratios [HR] 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.50, C-index 0.68), and longer PFS (validation set, median 30.5 versus 9.8 months, HR 0.49, 95% CI, 0.45-0.54, C-index 0.68), as were International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage and debulking surgery outcome. Three prognostic groups were identified based on the surgery outcome and KELIM score, with large differences in OS (105.1, ∼45.0, and 22.1 months) and PFS (58.1, ∼15.0, and 8.0 months). Surrogacy for OS and for PFS was not established.

CONCLUSION

KELIM is an independent prognostic biomarker for survival, complementary to surgery outcome, representing a new determinant of first-line treatment success.

Exploring the tumor immune microenvironment in ovarian cancer: a way-out to the therapeutic roadmap

INTRODUCTION

Despite cancer treatment strides, mortality due to ovarian cancer remains high globally. While immunotherapy has proven effective in treating cancers with low cure rates, it has limitations. Growing evidence suggests that both tumoral and non-tumoral components of the tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) play a significant role in cancer growth. Therefore, developing novel and focused therapy for ovarian cancer is critical. Studies indicate that TIME is involved in developing ovarian cancer, particularly genome-, transcriptome-, and proteome-wide studies. As a result, TIME may present a prospective therapeutic target for ovarian cancer patients.

AREAS COVERED

We examined several TIME-targeting medicines and the connection between TIME and ovarian cancer. The key protagonists and events in the TIME and therapeutic strategies that explicitly target these events in ovarian cancer are discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

We highlighted various targeted therapies against TIME in ovarian cancer, including anti-angiogenesis therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors. While these therapies are in their infancy, they have shown promise in controlling ovarian cancer progression. The use of 'omics' technology is helping in better understanding of TIME in ovarian cancer and potentially identifying new therapeutic targets. TIME-targeted strategies could account for an additional treatment strategy when treating ovarian cancer.

The potential feasibility of nab-paclitaxel as the first-line chemotherapy for ovarian cancer: clinical development and future perspectives

PURPOSE

Optimal first-line chemotherapy regimens are crucial for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) treatment. Nab-paclitaxel has showed its considerable survival and low toxicity profiles in first-line treatment for three solid tumors and is recommended as a treatment for recurrent EOC. We focus on clinical efficacy and safety outcomes of nab-paclitaxel in current clinical studies of EOC treatment and aim to explore the potential feasibility of nab-paclitaxel as the first-line treatment for EOC.

METHODS

We searched for eligible studies up to January 2020 in Pubmed. Outcomes of interests included drug regimes, objective response rate (ORR), median progression free survival (PFS), median overall survival (OS) and main adverse events to determine feasibility of nab-paclitaxel.

RESULTS

This review included nine eligible studies. One study about nab-paclitaxel with carboplatin as first-line therapy in ten cases after hypersensitivity to paclitaxel had an ORR of 100%, median PFS of 16.7 months and median OS of 65.4 months. Evidence of nab-paclitaxel activity in platinum-sensitive EOC demonstrated an ORR of 64%, a median time to response of 1.3 months and PFS of 8.5 months. The ORR, median PFS and median OS range in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant EOC from 23%-72%, 4.0-8.5 months, 16.8-17.4 months, respectively. All studies demonstrated manageable toxicity profile in EOC patients.

CONCLUSION

Nab-paclitaxel presents potentials as the first-line chemotherapy for considerable survival and safety in EOC compared to conventional paclitaxel. However, there is no prospective trial in EOC so far. Therefore, more studies about nab-paclitaxel are needed.

Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Systemic Therapy for Newly Diagnosed Stage II–IV Epithelial Ovary, Fallopian Tube, or Primary Peritoneal Carcinoma: A Practice Guideline

Background: This study aims to provide guidance for the use of neoadjuvant and adjuvant systemic therapy in women with newly diagnosed stage II–IV epithelial ovary, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma. Methods: EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library were investigated for relevant systematic reviews and phase III trials. Articles focusing on consolidation and maintenance therapies were excluded. Results: For women with potentially resectable disease, primary cytoreductive surgery, followed by six to eight cycles of intravenous three-weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin is recommended. For those with a high-risk profile for primary cytoreductive surgery, neoadjuvant chemotherapy can be an option. Adjuvant chemotherapy with six cycles of dose-dense weekly paclitaxel plus three-weekly carboplatin can be considered for women of Japanese descent. In women with stage III or IV disease, the incorporation of bevacizumab concurrent with paclitaxel and carboplatin is not recommended for use as adjuvant therapy unless bevacizumab is continued as maintenance therapy. Intravenous paclitaxel plus intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel can be considered for stage III optimally debulked women who did not receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy. However, intraperitoneal administration of chemotherapy with bevacizumab should not be considered as an option for stage II–IV optimally debulked women. Discussion: The recommendations represent a current standard of care that is feasible to implement and valued by both clinicians and patients.

Neoadjuvant and adjuvant systemic therapy for newly diagnosed stage II- IV epithelial ovary, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

To systematically review neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy options for women with newly diagnosed stage II-IV ovarian cancer.

METHODS

Phase III trials were searched using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Maintenance therapies were excluded.

RESULTS

Thirty-three trials were included. For women with high-risk profiles that would contraindicate upfront cytoreductive surgery, neoadjuvant chemotherapy can be an option. In the post-surgical adjuvant setting, the three-weekly regimen consisting of paclitaxel and carboplatin remains the standard of care. Docetaxel may be offered to those who are unable to tolerate paclitaxel. Intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel increased OS for stage III optimally debulked women (GOG 172). The intraperitoneal regimens in GOG 252 offered no survival benefit and some harms in terms of toxicity and quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence to support adding a third agent to the standard carboplatin and paclitaxel. Results of the iPocc study will clarify the role of intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Ovarian Cancer, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Epithelial ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death from gynecologic cancer in the United States and is the country's fifth most common cause of cancer mortality in women. A major challenge in treating ovarian cancer is that most patients have advanced disease at initial diagnosis. These NCCN Guidelines discuss cancers originating in the ovary, fallopian tube, or peritoneum, as these are all managed in a similar manner. Most of the recommendations are based on data from patients with the most common subtypes─high-grade serous and grade 2/3 endometrioid. The NCCN Guidelines also include recommendations specifically for patients with less common ovarian cancers, which in the guidelines include the following: carcinosarcoma, clear cell carcinoma, mucinous carcinoma, low-grade serous, grade 1 endometrioid, borderline epithelial, malignant sex cord-stromal, and malignant germ cell tumors. This manuscript focuses on certain aspects of primary treatment, including primary surgery, adjuvant therapy, and maintenance therapy options (including PARP inhibitors) after completion of first-line chemotherapy.

Immunotherapy for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is characterized by a high mortality on incidence ratio. Although the majority of patients achieve complete response after primary treatment, approximately 65-80% of patients recur with the first 5 years. Platinum-free interval is one of the main prognostic factors. Patients recurring with 6 months within the end of platinum-based chemotherapy are characterized by poor prognosis. To date no effective treatment modality are identified for those patients. The mainstay of treatment for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer is single agent chemotherapy. Other treatment modalities have tested in this setting with discouraging results. Growing evidence suggested that immunotherapy would improve outcomes of patients with various types of solid tumors including melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer as well as uterine malignancies. Here, we reviewed current evidence on the adoption of immunotherapy in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. To date no mature evidence supports the routine adoption of immunotherapy in ovarian cancer patients. Further strategies have to be explored.

Phase II clinical trial of metformin as a cancer stem cell-targeting agent in ovarian cancer

BACKGROUNDEpidemiologic studies suggest that metformin has antitumor effects. Laboratory studies indicate metformin impacts cancer stem-like cells (CSCs). As part of a phase II trial, we evaluated the impact of metformin on CSC number and on carcinoma-associated mesenchymal stem cells (CA-MSCs) and clinical outcomes in nondiabetic patients with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).METHODSThirty-eight patients with stage IIC (n = 1)/III (n = 25)/IV (n = 12) EOC were treated with either (a) neoadjuvant metformin, debulking surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy plus metformin or (b) neoadjuvant chemotherapy and metformin, interval debulking surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy plus metformin. Metformin-treated tumors, compared with historical controls, were evaluated for CSC number and chemotherapy response. Primary endpoints were (a) a 2-fold or greater reduction in aldehyde dehydrogenase-positive (ALDH+) CD133+ CSCs and (b) a relapse-free survival at 18 months of more than 50%.RESULTSMetformin was well tolerated. Median progression-free survival was 18.0 months (95% CI 14.0-21.6) with relapse-free survival at 18 months of 59.3% (95% CI 38.6-70.5). Median overall survival was 57.9 months (95% CI 28.0-not estimable). Tumors treated with metformin had a 2.4-fold decrease in ALDH+CD133+ CSCs and increased sensitivity to cisplatin ex vivo. Furthermore, metformin altered the methylation signature in CA-MSCs, which prevented CA-MSC-driven chemoresistance in vitro.CONCLUSIONTranslational studies confirm an impact of metformin on EOC CSCs and suggest epigenetic change in the tumor stroma may drive the platinum sensitivity ex vivo. Consistent with this, metformin therapy was associated with better-than-expected overall survival, supporting the use of metformin in phase III studies.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov NCT01579812.

Assessment of Progression-Free Survival as a Surrogate End Point of Overall Survival in First-Line Treatment of Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

The Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) recommended that progression-free survival (PFS) can serve as a primary end point instead of overall survival (OS) in advanced ovarian cancer. Evidence is lacking for the validity of PFS as a surrogate marker of OS in the modern era of different treatment types.

Objective

To evaluate whether PFS is a surrogate end point for OS in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

Data Sources

In September 2016, a comprehensive search of publications in MEDLINE was conducted for randomized clinical trials of systematic treatment in patients with newly diagnosed ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. The GCIG groups were also queried for potentially completed but unpublished trials.

Study Selection

Studies with a minimum sample size of 60 patients published since 2001 with PFS and OS rates available were eligible. Investigational treatments considered included initial, maintenance, and intensification therapy consisting of agents delivered at a higher dose and/or frequency compared with that in the control arm.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Using the meta-analytic approach on randomized clinical trials published from January 1, 2001, through September 25, 2016, correlations between PFS and OS at the individual level were estimated using the Kendall τ model; between-treatment effects on PFS and OS at the trial level were estimated using the Plackett copula bivariate (R2) model. Criteria for PFS surrogacy required R2 ≥ 0.80 at the trial level. Analysis was performed from January 7 through March 20, 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Overall survival and PFS based on measurement of cancer antigen 125 levels confirmed by radiological examination results or by combined GCIG criteria.

Results

In this meta-analysis of 17 unique randomized trials of standard (n = 7), intensification (n = 5), and maintenance (n = 5) chemotherapies or targeted treatments with data from 11 029 unique patients (median age, 58 years [range, 18-88 years]), a high correlation was found between PFS and OS at the individual level (τ = 0.724; 95% CI, 0.717-0.732), but a low correlation was found at the trial level (R2 = 0.24; 95% CI, 0-0.59). Subgroup analyses led to similar results. In the external validation, 14 of the 16 hazard ratios for OS in the published reports fell within the 95% prediction interval from PFS.

Conclusions and Relevance

This large meta-analysis of individual patient data did not establish PFS as a surrogate end point for OS in first-line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer, but the analysis was limited by the narrow range of treatment effects observed or by poststudy treatment. These results suggest that if PFS is chosen as a primary end point, OS must be measured as a secondary end point.

Hopes and failures in front-line ovarian cancer therapy

Through the last three decades, the combination of paclitaxel and carboplatin remains the standard of care chemotherapy in newly diagnosed epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Based on a single trial, first-line maintenance therapy with angiogenesis inhibitor bevacizumab was approved in Europe and widely applied. In 2018, based on a second trial bevacizumab was approved for first-line maintenance in the United States. Despite complete remission upon chemotherapy, the majority of the patients recur. A large number of randomized trials were conducted to explore the optimal front-line therapy regimen, but neither dose-densing, nor adding of a third chemotherapy agent or intraperitoneal administration could improve overall survival (OS). Also implementation of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) or the neoadjuvant approach failed to improve OS. Recently, maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors showed encouraging results in patients with BRCA1/2 mutation. Further trials with targeted therapies are ongoing. Here we review the achievements of front-line therapy in primary advanced EOC through the last three decades and discuss future treatment strategies.

Chemotherapy Resistance in Advanced Ovarian Cancer Patients

Ovarian cancer is the seventh most common gynaecologic malignancy seen in women. Majority of the patients with ovarian cancer are diagnosed at the advanced stage making prognosis poor. The standard management of advanced ovarian cancer includes tumour debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy. Various types of chemotherapeutic regimens have been used to treat advanced ovarian cancer, but the most promising and the currently used standard first-line treatment is carboplatin and paclitaxel. Despite improved clinical response and survival to this combination of chemotherapy, numerous patients either undergo relapse or succumb to the disease as a result of chemotherapy resistance. To understand this phenomenon at a cellular level, various macromolecules such as DNA, messenger RNA and proteins have been developed as biomarkers for chemotherapy response. This review comprehensively summarizes the problem that pertains to chemotherapy resistance in advanced ovarian cancer and provides a good overview of the various biomarkers that have been developed in this field.

A Systematic Review of Health-Related Quality of Life Reporting in Ovarian Cancer Phase III Clinical Trials: Room to Improve

BACKGROUND

Epithelial ovarian cancer (OC) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality for women worldwide. Patients may experience a multitude of disease- and treatment-related symptoms that can impact quality of life (QOL) and should be measured and reported in clinical trials. This systematic review investigated the adequacy of reporting of QOL in randomized phase III trials in OC in both the first-line and recurrent disease setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of MEDLINE and EMBASE identified randomized clinical trials of systemic therapy in OC from 1980 to 2014. The adequacy of reporting QOL was evaluated with respect to adherence to established guidelines on reporting QOL in clinical trials and the recent recommendations on the inclusion of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials from the Fifth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference.

RESULTS

Of 3,247 abstracts, 35 studies, including 24,664 patients, met inclusion criteria. Twenty-two trials (63%) were in the first-line setting, with 13 (37%) in the recurrent setting. The inclusion of QOL assessments increased from 2% (1980s) to 62% (2010+). Quality of life was a co-primary endpoint in only one trial.Minimal clinically important differences in QOL were defined in eight trials (23%), with results included in the abstract in 37% and article in 86%. Compliance was reported in 26 trials (74%), with 13 trials (37%) reporting specifically how they dealt with missing data. Only seven trials reported the reasons for missing data (20%).Group results were published in 29 trials (83%), with 6 (17%) reporting individual patient results. Results were more commonly reported as a mean overall score (21 trials; 60%), with specific domain scores in only 9 trials (26%). No studies reported QOL beyond progression or included predefined context-specific endpoints based on objectives of treatment (i.e., palliation/cure/maintenance) and the patient population. Duration of benefit of palliative chemotherapy was reported in only one study.

CONCLUSION

Inclusion and reporting of QOL as a trial endpoint has improved in phase III trials in OC, but there are still significant shortfalls that need to be addressed in future trials.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The impact of treatment on quality of life (QOL) is an important consideration in patients with ovarian cancer for whom treatment is often given with palliative intent. Both the disease and treatment impact a patient's QOL and require careful evaluation in clinical trials. Matching the QOL questions to the patient population of interest is critical. Similar rigor to that used to assess progression-based endpoints is essential to guide clinical decisions. This systematic review demonstrated that although the inclusion and reporting of QOL as a trial endpoint has improved in phase III trials there are still significant shortfalls that need to be addressed in future trials.

A network meta-analysis of eight chemotherapy regimens for treatment of advanced ovarian cancer

This study compared the short-term efficacies of different chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) through pair-wise and network meta-analyses (NMA). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified in a comprehensive online literature search met our inclusion criteria. Direct and indirect evidence was combined to compare odds ratios (OR) and surfaces under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) across the different treatment regimens. Twelve eligible RCTs were finally included, involving eight regimens (Paclitaxel + Carboplatin [PC], Gemcitabine + Carboplatin [GC], Carboplatin, Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin + Carboplatin [PLD + Carboplatin], Paclitaxel, Paclitaxel + Carboplatin + Topotecan [PC + Topotecan], Paclitaxel + Carboplatin + Epirubicin [PC + Epirubicin] and Docetaxel + Carboplatin [DC]). The NMA results revealed that in terms of overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR), PC (ORR: OR=2.59, 95%CI=1.20-6.22; DCR: OR=2.58, 95%CI=1.05-6.82) and GC (ORR: OR=2.08, 95%CI=1.08-4.37; DCR: OR=2.43, 95%CI=1.07-5.80) were more effective against AOC than Carboplatin alone. Similarly, PC (OR=0.21, 95%CI=0.05-0.69), GC (OR=0.31, 95%CI=0.09-0.90) and PLD + Carboplatin (OR=0.22, 95%CI=0.04-0.92) slowed disease progression better than Carboplatin alone. We also found that PC was more efficacious against AOC than Carboplatin or Paclitaxel single-agent chemotherapy. Combination chemotherapy is thus recommended for AOC, and should guide subsequent drug development and treatment strategies.

Toxicities of different first-line chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer (OC) is the 5th leading cause of cancer-related deaths around the world, and several chemotherapy regimens have been applied in the treatment of OC. We aim to compare toxicities of different chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) using network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Literature research in Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE was performed up to November 2015. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of different chemotherapy regimens were included. Network meta-analysis combined direct and indirect evidence to assess pooled odds ratios (ORs) and draw the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curves.

RESULTS

Thirteen eligible RCTs were included in this network meta-analysis, including 8 chemotherapy regimens (paclitaxel + carboplatin [PC], pegylated liposomal doxorubicin [PLD] + carboplatin, carboplatin, gemcitabine + carboplatin, paclitaxel, PC + epirubicin, PC + topotecan, docetaxel + carboplatin). Gemcitabine + carboplatin regimen exerted higher incidence of anemia when compared with carboplatin and paclitaxel regimens. The incidence of febrile neutropenia of gemcitabine + carboplatin regimen was higher than that of PC, PLD + carboplatin, carboplatin, and PC + topotecan regimens. Topotecan PC + epirubicin regimen had a higher toxicity, comparing with PC, PLD + carboplatin, and PC + topotecan regimens. As for thrombocytopenia, gemcitabine + carboplatin chemotherapy regimen produced an obviously higher toxicity than PC and carboplatin. As for nausea, PLD + carboplatin chemotherapy regimen had a significantly higher toxicity than that of carboplatin chemotherapy regimen. Moreover, when compared with PC and carboplatin chemotherapy regimens, the toxicity of PC + epirubicin was greatly higher to patients with AOC.

CONCLUSION

The nonhematologic toxicity of PLD + carboplatin regimen was higher than other regimens, which was clinically significant for the treatment of AOC.

Long-term results of a randomised phase III trial of weekly versus three-weekly paclitaxel/platinum induction therapy followed by standard or extended three-weekly paclitaxel/platinum in European patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Weekly paclitaxel/carboplatin might improve survival in platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). We compared efficacy of first-line weekly to three-weekly paclitaxel/cis- or carboplatin (PCw and PC3w) induction therapy, followed by either three or six PC3w cycles.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this multicentre, randomised phase III trial with 2×2 design, patients with FIGO stage IIb-IV EOC were randomised to six cycles PCw (paclitaxel 90mg/m(2), cisplatin 70mg/m(2) or carboplatin AUC 4) or three cycles PC3w (paclitaxel 175mg/m(2), cisplatin 75mg/m(2) or carboplatin AUC 6), followed by either three or six cycles PC3w. Primary endpoints were progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were response rate (RR) and toxicity.

RESULTS

Of 267 eligible patients, 133 received PCw and 134 PC3w. The first 105 patients received cisplatin, after protocol amendment the subsequent 162 patients received carboplatin. Weekly cisplatin was less well tolerated than weekly carboplatin. All PC3w cycles were well tolerated. At the end of all treatments, RR was 90.8% with no differences between the treatment arms. After a follow-up of median 10.3years (range 7.1-14.8), median PFS was 18.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 15.9-21.0) months for PCw and 16.4 (95% CI 13.5-19.2) months for PC3w (p=0.78). Median OS was 44.8 (95% CI 33.1-56.5) months for PCw and 41.1 (95% CI 34.4-47.7) months for PC3w (p=0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no benefit in terms of OS, PFS or RR for a weekly regimen nor for extended chemotherapy as first-line treatment for EOC in European patients.

Clinicopathologic features of epithelial ovarian carcinoma in younger vs. older patients: analysis in Japanese women

Objective

The purpose of this study was to clarify the clinical features of epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC) in younger vs. older patients in Japan.

Methods

We collected data on 1,562 patients with EOC treated at multiple institutions in the Tokai Ovarian Tumor Study Group, and analyzed them retrospectively. All patients were divided into 2 groups: group A (≤40 years old) and group B (>40 years old). The data were analyzed to evaluate prognostic factors and the distribution of features in each group. Patients were subjected to univariate and multivariate analyses to evaluate overall survival (OS).

Results

The median follow-up time was 45.1 months (range, 1 to 257 months). Patients in group A had a significantly higher rate of stage I disease (67.3% vs. 42.6%, respectively; p<0.001) and the mucinous type (36.7% vs. 13.5%, respectively; p<0.001) than those in group B. There was a significant difference of OS between the 2 groups (p=0.013). However, upon stratification according to the stage, there were no significant differences in the OS between the 2 groups (group A vs. B: stage I, p=0.533; stage II-IV, p=0.407). Multivariate analysis revealed that younger age was not an independent prognostic factor for OS.

Conclusion

On the basis of our data, younger patients had a different clinical profile than older patients, particularly regarding the stage of the disease and pathological distribution; however, they showed a similar long-term prognosis, even upon stratification according to the stage.