NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Ovarian Cancer, Version 3.2022

Epithelial ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death from gynecologic cancer in the United States, with less than half of patients living >5 years following diagnosis. The NCCN Guidelines for Ovarian Cancer provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up for patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancers. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines, including revised guidance on alternative chemotherapy regimens for patients with advanced age and/or comorbidities, a new algorithm for recurrent low-grade serous carcinoma based on developing research and novel therapeutic agents, and updated language regarding tumor molecular analysis applications in ovarian cancer.

Weekly versus tri-weekly paclitaxel with carboplatin for first-line treatment in women with epithelial ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Epithelial ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer worldwide: 295,414 new cases were diagnosed in 2018, with 184,799 deaths. The lack of an effective screening strategy has led to the majority of women being diagnosed at an advanced stage. For these women, intravenous carboplatin combined with paclitaxel for six cycles is widely accepted as the standard first-line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer, in combination with debulking surgery. However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the optimal dosing schedule of paclitaxel when combined with carboplatin in this setting.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and tolerability of intravenous weekly paclitaxel with that of tri-weekly paclitaxel, in combination with intravenous carboplatin, as first-line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer (defined as epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal and fallopian tube cancer).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase databases for relevant studies up to 15 November 2021, using keywords and MeSH terms. We additionally handsearched conference libraries, online clinical trial databases and screened through lists of retrieved references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We Included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin versus tri-weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin, for treatment of newly-diagnosed epithelial ovarian cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the hazard ratio (HR) to estimate the primary efficacy outcomes progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We used the risk ratio (RR) to estimate the primary toxicity outcome of severe neutropenia and secondary outcomes of quality of life (QoL) and treatment-related adverse events. Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, using standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We included individual participant data (IPD) from one of the included studies, ICON-8, provided by the study team. We analysed data using a random-effects model in Review Manager 5.4 software. Additionally, we reconstructed IPD for PFS and OS data from published Kaplan-Meier curves from all studies and subsequently pooled these to analyse the two primary efficacy outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

From 2469 records, we identified four eligible RCTs with data for 3699 participants. All eligible studies were included in the main meta-analysis and reported on PFS and OS. There was likely a slight improvement in PFS when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (HR 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 0.98; 4 studies, 3699 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We found little to no improvement in OS when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.06; 4 studies, 3699 participants; high-certainty evidence). There was likely little to no difference in high-grade (grade 3 or 4) neutropenia when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.43; 4 studies, 3639 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). However, weekly paclitaxel increased high-grade (grade 3 or 4) anaemia when compared to tri-weekly dosing (RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.20; 4 studies, 3639 participants; high-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in high-grade neuropathy when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.94; 4 studies, 3639 participants; low-certainty evidence). The overall risk of detection bias and performance bias was low for OS, but was unclear for other outcomes, as treatments were not blinded. The risk of bias in other domains was low or unclear. We note that OS data were immature for three of the included studies (GOG-0262, ICON-8 and MITO-7).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Weekly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin for first-line treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer likely improves PFS slightly (moderate-certainty evidence) but not OS (high-certainty evidence), compared to tri-weekly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin. However, this was associated with increased risk for high-grade anaemia, treatment discontinuation, dose delays and dose omissions (high- to low-certainty evidence). Our findings may not apply to women receiving bevacizumab in first-line therapy, those receiving treatment in the neo-adjuvant setting, or those with rare subtypes of clear cell or mucinous ovarian cancer.

Efficacy and safety of olaparib according to age in BRCA1/2-mutated patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer: Analysis of the phase III SOLO2/ENGOT-Ov21 study

BACKGROUND

Olaparib has significantly improved outcome and patient-centered endpoints in BRCA1/2-mutated patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC). Specific information on efficacy and safety of olaparib for older patients appears of special interest.

METHODS

295 patients from the SOLO2 trial randomly assigned to olaparib or placebo were categorized according to age-cutoff at 65 years. Efficacy, tolerability, and quality of life (QoL) of olaparib relative to placebo within in each age group was analyzed.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar in patients ≥65 years (N = 62;21.0%) compared to patients <65 years (N = 233;78.9%). No significant difference in the magnitude of progression-free survival (PFS) benefit from olaparib for older patients (N = 40, hazard ratio [HR]_≥65 0.43, 95%-confidence interval [CI] 0.24-0.81) as compared with younger patients (N = 155, HR_<65 0.31 (95%-CI 0.22-0.43) was seen (interaction P = 0.33). The overall survival (OS)benefit seen in younger patients in the olaparib arm was not observed in older patients. Older and younger patients had comparable safety profiles and QoL scores although higher discontinuation rates for toxicity, and higher frequency of AML/MDS were noted in the older subset. TWiST analysis revealed clinically meaningful duration of good QoL on olaparib for both age groups (≥65: 13.5 vs <65: 18.4 months, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this large phase III cohort of BRCA1/2-mutated PSOC patients treated with olaparib underline impressive efficacy of olaparib maintenance irrespective of age. Although toxicity and tolerability did not raise significant concerns, some caution, close monitoring, and follow-up needs to be exercised for older patients given higher discontinuation rates, frequency of AML/MDS, and no clear effects on OS.

Traitement médical de première ligne du cancer épithélial de l'ovaire de haut grade: First-line medical treatment of high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer

In early stages, standard treatment is adjuvant chemotherapy, consisting of platinum-based combination for 6 cycles, especially in serous and endometrioid high grade carcinomas. In advanced stages, indication of neoadjuvant chemotherapy must be discussed on a case-by-case basis in multidisciplinary meetings (MDM). Bevacizumab can also be considered in the neoadjuvant setting in some circumstances, always after discussion in MDM. Carboplatin plus paclitaxel every 21 days, with or without bevacizumab remains the standard of care for first-line chemotherapy. Inhibitors of poly-(ADP-riboses) polymerases (PARPi) have been approved and are reimbursed as maintenance monotherapy in tumors carrying BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation after complete or partial response to chemotherapy. Two recent studies demonstrated the efficacy of PARPi on progression free survival, one for niraparib single-agent in patients with high-grade ovarian carcinoma regardless of BRCA status, the other one for the combination of bevacizumab and olaparib in patients with high grade carcinoma, with positive test for homologous recombination DNA repair deficiency (regardless of BRCA status). These two new modalities of maintenance therapy are now available in compassionate use programs or post compassionate use programs. Depending on pending decisions upon reimbursement, these indications might be somewhat modified.

Characterization of the Early Years of Bevacizumab Use for First-Line Treatment of Ovarian Cancer in the United States

PURPOSE

To quantify early dissemination patterns, factors influencing use, and costs of bevacizumab (BEV) for the treatment of newly diagnosed ovarian cancer (OC) in the United States before its regulatory approval for this indication (off-label use).

METHODS

We identified women 18-65 years of age with newly diagnosed OC treated with surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy from 2008 to 2016 through the MarketScan database (N = 8,109). The proportion of women receiving BEV over time was calculated, multivariate logistic regression used to determine factors associated with BEV use, and total costs per cycle of chemotherapy with and without BEV abstracted.

RESULTS

BEV utilization rose 1.8-fold during the study period, from 4.1% (2008) to 7.4 % (2016). BEV was used with non-platinum/taxane regimens over a third of the time (37.2%). Physician specialty (medical oncology v gyn oncology) and geography (southeast region) were significantly associated with higher rates of use. Clinical factors associated with BEV use were metastatic disease and presence of ascites. The median cost of one cycle of platinum/taxane chemotherapy plus BEV was $10,897 in US dollars (USD) (interquartile range $7,573-$18,133 USD), compared with $1,629 USD (interquartile range, $683.0-$4,461 USD) for platinum/taxane alone.

CONCLUSION

Off-label use of BEV for newly diagnosed OC was rare (< 10%), but doubled following presentation of phase II and III data at international meetings. Both clinical (ascites, metastatic disease, and age) and nonclinical (specialty and region) factors were associated with BEV use, and its use was accompanied by a six-fold increase in the cost of one cycle of treatment.

Insights into ovarian cancer care: report from the ANZGOG Ovarian Cancer Webinar Series 2020

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is among the top ten causes of cancer deaths worldwide, and is one of the most lethal gynecological malignancies in high income countries, with incidence and death rates expected to rise particularly in Asian countries where ovarian cancer is among the 5 most common cancers. Despite the plethora of randomised clinical trials investigating various systemic treatment options in EOC over the last few decades, both progression-free and overall survival have remained at approximately 16 and 40 months respectively. To date the greatest impact on treatment has been made by the use of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in women with advanced EOC and a BRCA1/2 mutation. Inhibition of PARP, the key enzyme in base excision repair, is based on synthetic lethality whereby alternative DNA repair pathways in tumor cells that are deficient in homologous recombination is blocked, rendering them unviable and leading to cell death. The Australia New Zealand Gynaecological Oncology Group (ANZGOG) is the national gynecological cancer clinical trials organization for Australia and New Zealand. ANZGOG's purpose is to improve outcomes and quality of life for women with gynecological cancer through cooperative clinical trials and undertaking multidisciplinary research into the causes, prevention and treatments of gynecological cancer. This review summarizes current ovarian cancer research and treatment approaches presented by Australian and New Zealand experts in the field at the 2020 ANZGOG webinar series entitled “Ovarian Cancer systems of Care”.

Cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum: 2021 update

In 2014, FIGO's Committee for Gynecologic Oncology revised the staging of ovarian cancer, incorporating ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer into the same system. Most of these malignancies are high-grade serous carcinomas (HGSC). Stage IC is now divided into three categories: IC1 (surgical spill); IC2 (capsule ruptured before surgery or tumor on ovarian or fallopian tube surface); and IC3 (malignant cells in the ascites or peritoneal washings). The updated staging includes a revision of Stage IIIC based on spread to the retroperitoneal lymph nodes alone without intraperitoneal dissemination. This category is now subdivided into IIIA1(i) (metastasis ≤10 mm in greatest dimension), and IIIA1(ii) (metastasis >10 mm in greatest dimension). Stage IIIA2 is now "microscopic extrapelvic peritoneal involvement with or without positive retroperitoneal lymph node" metastasis. This review summarizes the genetics, surgical management, chemotherapy, and targeted therapies for epithelial cancers, and the treatment of ovarian germ cell and stromal malignancies.

Exploring Older Women's Attitudes to and Experience of Treatment for Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Qualitative Phenomenological Study

Simple Summary

Older women with ovarian cancer often receive less anti-cancer treatment than younger women despite evidence showing they may benefit from similar levels of treatment. Little is known, however, about older women’s preferences toward chemotherapy and treatment experience. We aimed to understand the lived experience of older women with ovarian cancer undergoing chemotherapy though interviews and focus groups. Participants expressed a strong desire to undergo full treatment to improve survival for themselves and for their families. Women did not see their age as a reason to have less intensive treatment. Despite feeling overwhelmed with information and daily tasks due to fatigue, participants did not want cancer to interfere with their daily lives. Women felt distressed by logistical issues with transportation and communication between healthcare providers; however, they still felt positive about their care experience and desire for treatment. Older women may benefit from additional help to support effective communication around treatment preferences.

Abstract

Older women with ovarian cancer more often receive less intensive treatment and early discontinuation compared to younger women. There is little understanding of older women’s treatment experience and whether this contributes to declining intensive treatment. We aimed to explore the lived experience of older patients with advanced ovarian cancer undergoing chemotherapy, their treatment preferences and treatment burden. We conducted a phenomenological qualitative study with 15 women who had completed at least three cycles of first-line chemotherapy for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, aged 65 years or older at the first cycle, at one tertiary cancer centre. We conducted interviews and focus groups and analysed the transcripts using inductive thematic analysis. Women reported a strong preference for active treatment despite treatment burden and toxicities. Participants undertook treatment to lengthen their lives for themselves and their families. Participants did not see age as a barrier to treatment. Patients expressed determination not to let cancer interfere with daily life. Women felt overwhelmed with information and struggled with daily tasks due to fatigue. Logistical issues, such as transportation and ineffective communication between healthcare providers, caused substantial distress. Despite these logistical burdens and toxicities, participants were positive about their care experience and desire for anticancer treatment. Older women may benefit from additional support to facilitate effective communication during the early stages of treatment.

Management of the Elderly Patients with High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer in the REAL-WORLD Setting

Treatment of elderly patients with neoplasia is challenging. Age is a known prognostic factor in ovarian cancer but the optimal treatment of elderly patients has not been determined. We undertook a retrospective analysis to determine clinical practice in advanced-stage ovarian cancer patients older than 70 years of age. Methods: Medical records of women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer, stage III and IV were retrospectively analyzed. Results: A total of 735 patients were identified with a median age of 61.5 years. 22.4% among them were older than 70 years of age at diagnosis. First-line Progression-Free Survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS) were significantly worse in elderly patients in comparison to the younger ones [mPFS 11.3 months vs. 14.8 months, (p < 0.001) and mOS 30.2 months vs. 45.6 months (p < 0.001)]. However, elderly patients were characterized by worse ECOG-Performance Status and they were more frequently treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy followed by Interval Debulking Surgery, while often they were more frequently denied debulking surgery compared to patients under 70 years of age. Moreover, elderly patients received more frequently monotherapy with platinum as frontline treatment. In contrast, there was no significant difference in the outcome of the debulking surgery in comparison to the younger patients or the frequency that gBRCA test was performed. Age over 70 years did not retain its significance for either Progression-Free Survival or Overall Survival when adjusted for all other reported prognostic factors. Conclusions: Elderly ovarian cancer patients have a worse prognosis. Comprehensive geriatric assessment should be performed for the optimal treatment of these patients.

Older adults with cancer and their caregivers - current landscape and future directions for clinical care

Despite substantial improvements in the outcomes of patients with cancer over the past two decades, older adults (aged ≥65 years) with cancer are a rapidly increasing population and continue to have worse outcomes than their younger counterparts. Managing cancer in this population can be challenging because of competing health and ageing-related conditions that can influence treatment decision-making and affect outcomes. Geriatric screening tools and comprehensive geriatric assessment can help to identify patients who are most at risk of poor outcomes from cancer treatment and to better allocate treatment for these patients. The use of evidence-based management strategies to optimize geriatric conditions can improve communication and satisfaction between physicians, patients and caregivers as well as clinical outcomes in this population. Clinical trials are currently underway to further determine the effect of geriatric assessment combined with management interventions on cancer outcomes as well as the predictive value of geriatric assessment in the context of treatment with contemporary systemic therapies such as immunotherapies and targeted therapies. In this Review, we summarize the unique challenges of treating older adults with cancer and describe the current guidelines as well as investigational studies underway to improve the outcomes of these patients.

Treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is the third most common gynecologic malignancy worldwide but accounts for the highest mortality rate among these cancers. A stepwise approach to assessment, diagnosis, and treatment is vital to appropriate management of this disease process. An integrated approach with gynecologic oncologists as well as medical oncologists, pathologists, and radiologists is of paramount importance to improving outcomes. Surgical cytoreduction to R0 is the mainstay of treatment, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. Genetic testing for gene mutations that affect treatment is the standard of care for all women with epithelial ovarian cancer. Nearly all women will have a recurrence, and the treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer continues to be nuanced and requires extensive review of up to date modalities that balance efficacy with the patient's quality of life. Maintenance therapy with poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors, bevacizumab, and/or drugs targeting homologous recombination deficiency is becoming more widely used in the treatment of ovarian cancer, and the advancement of immunotherapy is further revolutionizing treatment targets.

First-Line Treatment with Olaparib for Early Stage BRCA-Positive Ovarian Cancer: May It Be Possible? Hypothesis Potentially Generating a Line of Research

Olaparib is currently approved in maintenance treatment of advanced ovarian cancer after response to first-line chemotherapy for breast related cancer antigens (BRCA) mutated patients. The use of this agent is based on data from SOLO1 study that observed a decreased risk of disease progression or death and a median progression-free survival about 36 months longer in case of therapy with olaparib. However, this trial recruited only patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer. The aim of this review is to retrace the available data in order to clarify the potential efficacy and feasibility of olaparib administration in newly diagnosed epithelial ovarian cancer also in early stages.

Ovarian Cancer in the Elderly: Time to Move towards a More Logical Approach to Improve Prognosis-A Study from the FRANCOGYN Group

Background and objective: Elderly and/or frail women with ovarian cancer are often undertreated. The aim of the study is to compare the effects of age and frailty on surgical approaches, postoperative complications, and prognosis in elderly women with ovarian cancer. Methods: A retrospective multicenter study of women ≥70 years were treated for ovarian cancer at seven French university hospitals between 2007 and 2015. Results: Of the 1119 women treated for ovarian cancer during the study period, 147 were ≥70 years and had complete data. Of these women, 65 were aged 70–74 years, and 82 were aged ≥75 years. Overall, 77% of the younger women (49/65) received optimal treatment compared with 51% (40/82) of the older women (p = 0.018). Women ≥75 years underwent fewer bowel resections (32% vs. 67%, p < 0.001) and experienced fewer postoperative complications (22.6% vs. 38.9%, p < 0.001); 53.2% of the women in this age group were treated by primary surgery or surgery only. These women also received more chemotherapy with platinum only (15% [9/56] vs. 2% [1/57], p = 0.007) and less bevacizumab (9% [5/56] vs. 32% [18/57], p = 0.003). Patients with greater frailty (a modified Charlson Comorbidity Index [mCCI] score >3) had a five-year survival rate of 30% versus 62% for those with a score ≤3 (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Surgeons modify their approach to treating ovarian cancer in women ≥75 years probably to reduce immediate postoperative complications. The prognosis is significantly worse in patients with greater frailty. Improvements to the sequence of treatments administered, with priority given to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with greater frailty, could help increase the number of women who receive optimal treatment and improve their prognosis.

Assessment of poor functional status and post-acute care needs following primary ovarian cancer debulking surgery

INTRODUCTION

Poor baseline functional status is associated with adverse surgical outcomes. Additionally, decline in the postoperative setting may result in the delay of additional treatments, impacting overall survival. This study assesses the incidence and risk factors for functional decline following primary ovarian cancer debulking surgery in previously independent women using discharge location as a surrogate.

METHODS

All patients with a postoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer who underwent surgical debulking and had documentation of discharge location were identified using the 2011-2012 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients were excluded if their baseline functional status was dependent or partially dependent, or if they died before discharge. Discharge destination was dichotomized as home versus non-home. Descriptive data included demographics, comorbidities, and perioperative outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association of clinical and surgical factors on discharge destination.

RESULTS

1786 patients met the criteria for analysis; 120 (6.7%) patients were discharged to non-home. Differences between home and non-home discharges included age (53.2% vs 83.3% ≥60), body mass index (26.5 vs 27.8 median), comorbidities (45.2% vs 64.2% with ≥1), and complications (8.6% vs 30.0% with ≥1, all p<0.05). In multivariable logistic regression analyses, only increasing age and complications were independently associated with discharge to non-home. Those age ≥70 had 9.0 times the risk (95% CI 3.5 to 23.4; p<0.001) as age <50. The presence of one or more postoperative complications carried 4.5 times (95% CI 2.9 to 7.0; p<0.001) the risk of those without complications. 30 day mortality was also increased in patients discharged to non-home.

DISCUSSION

6.7% of previously independent ovarian cancer patients were discharged to non-home following surgery. Major risk factors for non-home include older age, comorbidities, and postoperative complications. Efforts to optimize baseline functional status and minimize surgical complications may improve discharge rates to non-home and postoperative functional status.

[Docetaxel for octogerian metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patient: A multicentric ten years' experience]

INTRODUCTION

There is very few data about the management of elderly patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The aim of this study was to analyze the management of patients aged 80 and over treated with docetaxel for a mCRPC.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Clinical and pathological characteristics of octogerians treated with docetaxel were collected retrospectively from 3 French centers from 2009 to 2019. Patient's outcome, treatments administered before and/or after docetaxel were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Data of 89 patients could be analyzed. A total of 20.2 % of patients received the standard regimen and 79.8 % received an adapted one. Patients in the adapted group were significantly older than in standard one. Other patient's characteristics - including the geriatric scales - were similar. Dose reductions for toxicity were more frequent in the standard group (P=0.04). The median overall survival of the total population was 13.3 months. It was longer in the standard group than in the adapted group (26.1 months vs 12.4 months=0.01). In multivariate analysis, the type of docetaxel regimen (standard versus adapted) was an independent predictor of survival.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests the benefit of the standard management even in oldest patients. A geriatric evaluation should certainly be processed in patients with poor oncogeriatric scale in order to select the sub-population able to receive the full dose standard docetaxel regimen.