1
|
Kopelman ZA, Tian C, Tumas J, Phippen NT, Tarney CM, Hope ER, Winkler SS, Jokajtys S, Kucera CW, Chan JK, Richardson MT, Kapp DS, Hamilton CA, Leath CA, Jones NL, Rocconi RP, Farley JH, Secord AA, Cosgrove CM, Powell MA, Klopp A, Walker JL, Fleming GF, Bateman NW, Conrads TP, Maxwell GL, Darcy KM. Disease progression, survival, and molecular disparities in Black and White patients with endometrioid endometrial carcinoma in real-world registries and GOG/NRG oncology randomized phase III clinical trials. Gynecol Oncol 2024; 183:103-114. [PMID: 38593674 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2024.03.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2024] [Revised: 03/25/2024] [Accepted: 03/27/2024] [Indexed: 04/11/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Investigate racial disparities in outcomes and molecular features in Black and White patients with endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (EEC). METHODS Black and White patients diagnosed with EEC who underwent hysterectomy ± adjuvant treatment in SEER, National Cancer Database (NCDB), the Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange (GENIE) project (v.13.0), and eight NCI-sponsored randomized phase III clinical trials (RCTs) were studied. Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated for cancer-related death (CRD), non-cancer death (NCD), and all-cause death. RESULTS Black (n = 4397) vs. White (n = 47,959) patients in SEER had a HR (95% CI) of 2.04 (1.87-2.23) for CRD and 1.22 (1.09-1.36) for NCD. In NCDB, the HR (95% CI) for death in Black (n = 13,468) vs. White (n = 155,706) patients was 1.52 (1.46-1.58) dropping to 1.29 (1.23-1.36) after propensity-score matching for age, comorbidity, income, insurance, grade, stage, LVSI, and treatment. In GENIE, Black (n = 109) vs. White (n = 1780) patients had fewer PTEN, PIK3R1, FBXW7, NF1, mTOR, CCND1, and PI3K-pathway-related gene mutations. In contrast, TP53 and DNA-repair-related gene mutation frequency as well as tumor mutational burden-high status were similar in Black and White patients. In RCTs, Black (n = 187) vs. White (n = 2877) patients were more likely to have advanced or recurrent disease, higher grade, worse performance status and progressive disease. Risk of death in Black vs. White patients in RCTs was 2.19 (1.77-2.71) persisting to 1.32 (1.09-1.61) after matching for grade, stage, and treatment arm while balancing age and performance status. CONCLUSIONS Differences exist in clinical presentation, outcomes, and molecular features in Black vs. White patients with EEC in real-world registries and RCTs. Targeted-drug development, strategies to modify social determinants, and diverse inclusion in RCTs are approaches to reduce disparities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zachary A Kopelman
- Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Department of Gynecologic Surgery and Obstetrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; Murtha Cancer Center Research Program, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Chunqiao Tian
- Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Department of Gynecologic Surgery and Obstetrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; Murtha Cancer Center Research Program, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; The Henry M Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc., Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Jordyn Tumas
- Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Department of Gynecologic Surgery and Obstetrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; Murtha Cancer Center Research Program, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Neil T Phippen
- Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Department of Gynecologic Surgery and Obstetrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; Murtha Cancer Center Research Program, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Christopher M Tarney
- Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Department of Gynecologic Surgery and Obstetrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; Murtha Cancer Center Research Program, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Erica R Hope
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Gynecologic Surgery and Obstetrics, Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Stuart S Winkler
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Gynecologic Surgery and Obstetrics, Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Suzanne Jokajtys
- Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Department of Gynecologic Surgery and Obstetrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; Murtha Cancer Center Research Program, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Calen W Kucera
- Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Department of Gynecologic Surgery and Obstetrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; Murtha Cancer Center Research Program, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - John K Chan
- Palo Alto Medical Foundation, California Pacific Medical Center, Sutter Health, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Michael T Richardson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California, Los Angeles School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Daniel S Kapp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Chad A Hamilton
- Gynecologic Oncology Section, Women's Services and The Ochsner Cancer Institute, Ochsner Health, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | - Charles A Leath
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Nathaniel L Jones
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mitchell Cancer Institute, University of South Alabama, Mobile, AL, USA
| | - Rodney P Rocconi
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Cancer Center & Research Institute, the University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA
| | - John H Farley
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Center for Women's Health, Cancer Institute, Dignity Health St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | | | - Casey M Cosgrove
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Matthew A Powell
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University, St Louis, MO, USA
| | - Ann Klopp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Joan L Walker
- Gynecologic Oncology Division, Stephenson Cancer Center, Oklahoma University Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Gini F Fleming
- Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Nicholas W Bateman
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Center for Women's Health, Cancer Institute, Dignity Health St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix, AZ, USA; The Henry M Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc., Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Thomas P Conrads
- Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Department of Gynecologic Surgery and Obstetrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; The Henry M Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc., Bethesda, MD, USA; Women's Health Integrated Research Center, Inova Women's Service Line, Inova Health System, Falls Church, VA, USA
| | - G Larry Maxwell
- Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Department of Gynecologic Surgery and Obstetrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; The Henry M Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc., Bethesda, MD, USA; Women's Health Integrated Research Center, Inova Women's Service Line, Inova Health System, Falls Church, VA, USA.
| | - Kathleen M Darcy
- Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Department of Gynecologic Surgery and Obstetrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; Murtha Cancer Center Research Program, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; The Henry M Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc., Bethesda, MD, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Fill JM, Meadows I, Walker JL, Crandall RM, Kerrigan JL. Smut fungus (Langdonia walkerae) incidence is lower in two bunchgrass species (Aristida stricta and A. beyrichiana) after fires early in the year. Am J Bot 2024; 111:e16286. [PMID: 38366863 DOI: 10.1002/ajb2.16286] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2023] [Revised: 12/04/2023] [Accepted: 12/04/2023] [Indexed: 02/18/2024]
Abstract
PREMISE In frequently burned southeastern USA pine-grassland communities, wiregrass (Aristida stricta and A. beyrichiana) are dominant bunchgrasses whose flowers are infected during flowering by a smut fungus (Langdonia walkerae). We hypothesized that because prescribed fire timing affects wiregrass flowering patterns, it could affect smut incidence (occurrence of smut on plants) and severity of infection in inflorescences and spikelets. Because soil order could influence plant susceptibility, we hypothesized that these patterns would differ between soil orders. We hypothesized differences between species as representative of geographic variation in this ecosystem. METHODS We surveyed the incidence and severity of L. walkerae in wiregrass populations (85 populations at 14 sites) that had been prescription burned at different times during the previous year. We used binomial regressions to test whether incidence and severity differed by burn day, soil order, or species, with site as a random effect. RESULTS Fires that occurred in the winter were associated with significantly lower incidence than fires later in the year (as the months progressed into summer). Plants growing on Spodosol soils were significantly less likely to be infected than those on other soils. More variation in incidence, however, was explained by site, suggesting that site-specific characteristics were important. Smut severity in inflorescences and spikelets was greater overall in populations of A. stricta than in southern populations (A. beyrichiana). CONCLUSIONS Our findings indicate that fire timing and soil order affect L. walkerae incidence in wiregrass plants, but neither appears to be associated with greater severity. Patterns of smut infection are related to site history and geographic variation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer M Fill
- School of Forest, Fisheries, and Geomatics Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, 32611
| | - Inga Meadows
- Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology, Mountain Research Station, North Carolina State University, Waynesville, NC, 28786
| | - Joan L Walker
- US Forest Service Southern Research Station, Clemson, SC, 29631
| | - Raelene M Crandall
- School of Forest, Fisheries, and Geomatics Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, 32611
| | - Julia L Kerrigan
- Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, 29634
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Chan JK, Tian C, Kesterson JP, Lin KY, Darcy K, Richardson MT, Kapp DS, Monk BJ, McNally L, Landrum L, Copeland L, Walker JL, Wenham RM, Phippen N, Spirtos NM, Tewari K, Shahin M, Berry L, Bell JG. Preoperative and pre-chemotherapy CA-125 levels in high-risk early-stage ovarian cancer - An NRG/GOG study. Gynecol Oncol 2024; 181:54-59. [PMID: 38134754 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.12.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2023] [Revised: 12/04/2023] [Accepted: 12/11/2023] [Indexed: 12/24/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine clinical significance of preoperative and pre-chemotherapy CA-125 in high-risk early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer patients. METHODS All patients with stage IA/IB and grade 3, stage IC, clear cell, or completed resected stage II cancer were enrolled in a phase III trial and treated with chemotherapy. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS 427 patients with high-risk early-stage ovarian cancer were enrolled. Of 213 patients with preoperative CA-125 data, 79% had elevated CA-125. Median preoperative CA-125 level was 103 U/mL. Patients with ≤10, 11-15, and > 15 cm tumors had median preoperative CA-125 levels of 62, 131 and 158 U/mL, respectively (p = 0.002). For the 350 patients with data for pre-chemotherapy CA-125 level, 69% had elevated pre-chemotherapy CA-125 above 35 U/mL with median value of 65 U/mL. However, age, race, stage, cell type and grade of disease were not correlated with CA-125 levels before and after surgery. On multivariate analysis, elevated pre-chemotherapy CA-125 independently predicted worse recurrence-free survival (HR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.23-3.69; p = 0.007) and overall survival (HR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.10-3.59; p = 0.022) after adjusting for age, stage, cell type and grade of disease. Compared to those with normal CA-125, patients with elevated pre-chemotherapy CA-125 had lower recurrence-free survival (RFS, 87% vs. 75%; p = 0.007) and overall survival (OS, 88% vs. 82%; p = 0.02). However, preoperative CA-125 was not prognostic of RFS (p = 0.699) or OS (p = 0.701). CONCLUSIONS Preoperative CA-125 was elevated in nearly 80% of high-risk early-stage ovarian cancer patients. Pre-chemotherapy CA-125 was associated with recurrence-free and overall survival; however, preoperative CA-125 was not prognostic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John K Chan
- California Pacific/Palo Alto Medical Foundation/Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco, CA, USA.
| | - Chunqiao Tian
- NRG Statistical Center, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | | | - Ken Y Lin
- Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA
| | - Kathleen Darcy
- NRG Statistical Center, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA.
| | | | - Daniel S Kapp
- Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
| | - Bradley J Monk
- HonorHealth Research Institute, University of Arizona, Creighton University, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
| | | | | | - Larry Copeland
- Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
| | | | - Robert M Wenham
- Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA.
| | - Neil Phippen
- Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA.
| | | | | | - Mark Shahin
- Abington Memorial Hospital, Abington, PA, USA.
| | - Laurel Berry
- Wake Forest University Health Sciences, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Inturrisi F, de Sanjosé S, Desai KT, Dagnall C, Egemen D, Befano B, Rodriguez AC, Jeronimo JA, Zuna RE, Hoffman A, Farhat Nozzari S, Walker JL, Perkins RB, Wentzensen N, Palefsky JM, Schiffman M. A rapid HPV typing assay to support global cervical cancer screening and risk-based management: A cross-sectional study. Int J Cancer 2024; 154:241-250. [PMID: 37772799 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.34698] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2023] [Revised: 07/12/2023] [Accepted: 07/31/2023] [Indexed: 09/30/2023]
Abstract
The World Health Organization recommends human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical screening. Extended genotyping can identify the highest-risk HPV-positive women. An inexpensive, rapid, mobile isothermal amplification assay (ScreenFire HPV RS test) was recently redesigned to yield four channels ordered by cancer risk (ie, hierarchical approach): HPV16, HPV18/45, HPV31/33/35/52/58 and HPV39/51/56/59/68. Stored specimens from 2076 women (mean age 30.9) enrolled in a colposcopy clinic, with high HPV prevalence, were tested with ScreenFire. We calculated hierarchical channel positivity and non-hierarchical channel and type positivity, according to histologic diagnosis (256 cancer, 350 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [CIN]3, 409 CIN2, 1020 < CIN2) and known virologic reference results (Linear Array and TypeSeq). Additionally, we analyzed ScreenFire time-to-positive up to 60 min by channel and histology. Overall clinical sensitivity for CIN3+ was 94.7% (95% confidence interval 92.6-96.4), similar to Linear Array (92.3, 89.7-94.3) and TypeSeq (96.0, 93.9-97.6). Sensitivity was high for all types and channels. The hierarchical approach was well in line with HPV typing and histologic diagnosis, prioritizing higher risk women having HPV16 and precancer. For HPV16, time-to-positive was shorter in women with precancer. ScreenFire showed excellent agreement with research reference typing tests and detection of CIN2+. Risk-based type results could help guide clinical management of HPV-positive women. Time-to-positive combined with genotyping might be useful. ScreenFire is rapid, mobile, relatively inexpensive and designed for implementation of HPV-based screening and management, including in lower-resource settings. Further validation in screening by self-sampling and practical effectiveness merit evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Federica Inturrisi
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland, USA
| | - Silvia de Sanjosé
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland, USA
- ISGlobal, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Kanan T Desai
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland, USA
| | - Casey Dagnall
- Cancer Genomics Research Laboratory, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Leidos Biomedical Research Inc., Frederick, Maryland, USA
| | - Didem Egemen
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland, USA
| | - Brian Befano
- Information Management Services Inc., Calverton, Maryland, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Ana Cecilia Rodriguez
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland, USA
| | - Jose A Jeronimo
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland, USA
| | - Rosemary E Zuna
- Department of Pathology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA
| | - Amanda Hoffman
- Cancer Genomics Research Laboratory, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Leidos Biomedical Research Inc., Frederick, Maryland, USA
| | - Sepideh Farhat Nozzari
- Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Joan L Walker
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA
| | - Rebecca B Perkins
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Boston Medical Center/Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Maryland, USA
| | - Nicolas Wentzensen
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland, USA
| | - Joel M Palefsky
- Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Mark Schiffman
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Krouse RS, Anderson GL, Arnold KB, Thomson CA, Nfonsam VN, Al-Kasspooles MF, Walker JL, Sun V, Alvarez Secord A, Han ES, Leon-Takahashi AM, Isla-Ortiz D, Rodgers P, Hendren S, Sanchez Salcedo M, Laryea JA, Graybill WS, Flaherty DC, Mogal H, Miner TJ, Pimiento JM, Kitano M, Badgwell B, Whalen G, Lamont JP, Guevara OA, Senthil MS, Dewdney SB, Silberfein E, Wright JD, Friday B, Fahy B, Anantha Sathyanarayana S, O'Rourke M, Bakitas M, Sloan J, Grant M, Deutsch GB, Deneve JL. Surgical versus non-surgical management for patients with malignant bowel obstruction (S1316): a pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 8:908-918. [PMID: 37541263 PMCID: PMC10530384 DOI: 10.1016/s2468-1253(23)00191-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2023] [Revised: 06/09/2023] [Accepted: 06/12/2023] [Indexed: 08/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Malignant small bowel obstruction has a poor prognosis and is associated with multiple related symptoms. The optimal treatment approach is often unclear. We aimed to compare surgical versus non-surgical management with the aim to determine the optimal approach for managing malignant bowel obstruction. METHODS S1316 was a pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial done within the National Cancer Trials Network at 30 hospital and cancer research centres in the USA, Mexico, Peru, and Colombia. Participants had an intra-abdominal or retroperitoneal primary cancer confirmed via pathological report and malignant bowel disease; were aged 18 years or older with a Zubrod performance status 0-2 within 1 week before admission; had a surgical indication; and treatment equipoise. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to surgical or non-surgical treatment using a dynamic balancing algorithm, balancing on primary tumour type. Patients who declined consent for random assignment were offered a prospective observational patient choice pathway. The primary outcome was the number of days alive and out of the hospital (good days) at 91 days. Analyses were based on intention-to-treat linear, logistic, and Cox regression models combining data from both pathways and adjusting for potential confounders. Treatment complications were assessed in all analysed patients in the study. This completed study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02270450. FINDINGS From May 11, 2015, to April 27, 2020, 221 patients were enrolled (143 [65%] were female and 78 [35%] were male). There were 199 evaluable participants: 49 in the randomised pathway (24 surgery and 25 non-surgery) and 150 in the patient choice pathway (58 surgery and 92 non-surgery). No difference was seen between surgery and non-surgery for the primary outcome of good days: mean 42·6 days (SD 32·2) in the randomised surgery group, 43·9 days (29·5) in the randomised non-surgery group, 54·8 days (27·0) in the patient choice surgery group, and 52·7 days (30·7) in the patient choice non-surgery group (adjusted mean difference 2·9 additional good days in surgical versus non-surgical treatment [95% CI -5·5 to 11·3]; p=0·50). During their initial hospital stay, six participants died, five due to cancer progression (four patients from the randomised pathway, two in each treatment group, and one from the patient choice pathway, in the surgery group) and one due to malignant bowel obstruction treatment complications (patient choice pathway, non-surgery). The most common grade 3-4 malignant bowel obstruction treatment complication was anaemia (three [6%] patients in the randomised pathway, all in the surgical group, and five [3%] patients in the patient choice pathway, four in the surgical group and one in the non-surgical group). INTERPRETATION In our study, whether patients received a surgical or non-surgical treatment approach did not influence good days during the first 91 days after registration. These findings should inform treatment decisions for patients hospitalised with malignant bowel obstruction. FUNDING Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Cancer Institute. TRANSLATION For the Spanish translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert S Krouse
- Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Corporal Michael J Crescenz Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| | - Garnet L Anderson
- SWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Kathryn B Arnold
- SWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Cynthia A Thomson
- Department of Health Promotion Sciences, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
| | - Valentine N Nfonsam
- Department of Surgery, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA; Department of Surgery, Louisiana State University, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | | | - Joan L Walker
- Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Virginia Sun
- Division of Nursing Research and Education, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, USA
| | - Angeles Alvarez Secord
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Ernest S Han
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, USA
| | | | - David Isla-Ortiz
- Department of Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Institute, Tlalpan, Mexico City, Mexico
| | - Phillip Rodgers
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Samantha Hendren
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Marco Sanchez Salcedo
- Department of Surgery, Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplásicas, Surquillo, Peru
| | - Jonathan A Laryea
- Department of Surgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA
| | - Whitney S Graybill
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| | - Devin C Flaherty
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Valley Health, Winchester, VA, USA
| | - Harveshp Mogal
- Department of Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA; University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Thomas J Miner
- Department of Surgery, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Jose M Pimiento
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Mio Kitano
- Mays Cancer Center, University of Texas Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Brian Badgwell
- Department of Surgical Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Giles Whalen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Umass Memorial Medical Center, Worcester, MA, USA
| | - Jeffrey P Lamont
- Department of Surgery, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Oscar A Guevara
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia, Bogota, Colombia
| | - Maheswari S Senthil
- Department of Surgery, Loma Linda University Health, Loma Linda, CA, USA; University of California-Irvine, Orange, CA, USA
| | - Summer B Dewdney
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Eric Silberfein
- Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jason D Wright
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Bret Friday
- Department of Hematology/Oncology Essentia Health Cancer Center, Duluth, MN, USA
| | - Bridget Fahy
- Department of Surgery, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| | | | - Mark O'Rourke
- Center for Integrative Oncology and Survivorship, Greenville Health System, Clemson, SC, USA
| | - Marie Bakitas
- School of Nursing, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Jeff Sloan
- Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Marcia Grant
- Division of Nursing Research and Education, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, USA
| | - Gary B Deutsch
- Northwell Health Cancer Institute, Lake Success, NY, USA
| | - Jeremiah L Deneve
- Department of Surgery, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Pothuri B, Blank SV, Myers TK, Hines JF, Randall LM, O'Cearbhaill RE, Slomovitz BM, Eskander RN, Alvarez Secord A, Coleman RL, Walker JL, Monk BJ, Moore KN, O'Malley DM, Copeland LJ, Herzog TJ. Inclusion, diversity, equity, and access (IDEA) in gynecologic cancer clinical trials: A joint statement from GOG foundation and Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO). Gynecol Oncol 2023; 174:278-287. [PMID: 37315373 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.05.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2023] [Revised: 05/08/2023] [Accepted: 05/10/2023] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- B Pothuri
- NYU Langone Health and Laura & Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - S V Blank
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Tisch Cancer Institute, Blavatnik Family Women's Health Research Institute, New York, MY, USA
| | - T K Myers
- University of Massachusetts-Baystate, Springfield, MA, USA
| | - J F Hines
- University of Connecticut Health System, Farmington, CT, USA
| | - L M Randall
- Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - R E O'Cearbhaill
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - R N Eskander
- University of California, San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - A Alvarez Secord
- Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Health System, Durham, NC, USA
| | - R L Coleman
- Texas Oncology, US Oncology Network, The Woodlands, TX, USA
| | - J L Walker
- Stephenson Cancer Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - B J Monk
- University of Arizona College of Medicine, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - K N Moore
- Stephenson Cancer Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - D M O'Malley
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center Columbus, OH, USA
| | - L J Copeland
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center Columbus, OH, USA
| | - T J Herzog
- University of Cincinnati Cancer Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Vidrine JI, Sutton SK, Wetter DW, Shih YCT, Ramondetta LM, Elting LS, Walker JL, Smith KM, Frank-Pearce SG, Li Y, Jones SR, Kendzor DE, Simmons VN, Vidrine DJ. Efficacy of a Smoking Cessation Intervention for Survivors of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia or Cervical Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Clin Oncol 2023; 41:2779-2788. [PMID: 36921237 PMCID: PMC10414739 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.01228] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2022] [Accepted: 02/06/2023] [Indexed: 03/17/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Women who smoke and have a history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or cervical cancer represent a vulnerable subgroup at elevated risk for recurrence, poorer cancer treatment outcomes, and decreased quality of life. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy of Motivation And Problem Solving (MAPS), a novel treatment well-suited to meeting the smoking cessation needs of this population. METHODS Women who were with a history of CIN or cervical cancer, age 18 years and older, spoke English or Spanish, and reported current smoking (≥100 lifetime cigarettes plus any smoking in the past 30 days) were eligible. Participants (N = 202) were recruited in clinic in Oklahoma City and online nationally and randomly assigned to (1) standard treatment (ST) or (2) MAPS. ST consisted of repeated referrals to a tobacco cessation quitline, self-help materials, and combination nicotine replacement therapy (patch plus lozenge). MAPS comprised all ST components plus up to six proactive telephone counseling sessions over 12 months. Logistic regression and generalized estimating equations evaluated the intervention. The primary outcome was self-reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence from tobacco at 18 months, with abstinence at 3, 6, and 12 months and biochemically confirmed abstinence as secondary outcomes. RESULTS There was no significant effect for MAPS over ST at 18 months (14.2% v 12.9%, P = .79). However, there was a significant condition × assessment interaction (P = .015). Follow-up analyses found that MAPS (v ST) abstinence rates were significantly greater at 12 months (26.4% v 11.9%, P = .017; estimated OR, 2.60; 95% CI, 1.19 to 5.89). CONCLUSION MAPS led to a greater than two-fold increase in smoking abstinence among survivors of CIN and cervical cancer at 12 months. At 18 months, abstinence in MAPS declined to match the control condition and the treatment effect was no longer significant.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer I. Vidrine
- Tobacco Research and Intervention Program and Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
- Department of Psychology, College of Arts and Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
- Department of Oncologic Sciences, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
| | - Steven K. Sutton
- Department of Psychology, College of Arts and Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
- Department of Oncologic Sciences, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
| | - David W. Wetter
- Center for Health Outcomes and Population Equity (HOPE), Huntsman Cancer Institute and the Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
| | - Ya-Chen Tina Shih
- Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Lois M. Ramondetta
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Linda S. Elting
- Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Joan L. Walker
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Katie M. Smith
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Summer G. Frank-Pearce
- TSET Health Promotion Research Center, Stephenson Cancer Center, Oklahoma City, OK
- University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Yisheng Li
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Sarah R. Jones
- Tobacco Research and Intervention Program and Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
| | - Darla E. Kendzor
- TSET Health Promotion Research Center, Stephenson Cancer Center, Oklahoma City, OK
- University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
- Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Vani N. Simmons
- Tobacco Research and Intervention Program and Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
- Department of Psychology, College of Arts and Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
- Department of Oncologic Sciences, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
| | - Damon J. Vidrine
- Tobacco Research and Intervention Program and Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
- Department of Oncologic Sciences, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Farley JH, Brady WE, O'Malley D, Fujiwara K, Yonemori K, Bonebrake A, Secord AA, Stephan JM, Walker JL, Nam JH, Birrer MJ, Gershenson DM. A phase II evaluation of temsirolimus with carboplatin and paclitaxel followed by temsirolimus consolidation in clear cell ovarian cancer: An NRG oncology trial. Gynecol Oncol 2022; 167:423-428. [PMID: 36244829 PMCID: PMC9789681 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2022.10.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2022] [Revised: 10/06/2022] [Accepted: 10/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The primary objective of the study was to estimate the 12-month progression-free survival (PFS) for carboplatin/paclitaxel + temsirolimus in women with newly diagnosed clear cell ovarian cancer (CCOC), compared to historical controls in this patient population. METHODS Patients with Stage III or IV CCOC were treated with Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 on Day 1, Carboplatin AUC 6 Day 1, and temsirolimus (CCI-779) 25 mg IV Days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for Cycles 1-6 or disease progression, followed by consolidation therapy with temsirolimus 25 mg Days 1, 8, and 15 every 3 weeks cycles 7-17 or until disease progression. RESULTS Ninety patients were accrued to the study: 45 in the US and Korea (US/Korea) and 45 in Japan. Twenty-two percent received ≤6 cycles of therapy while 28% completed all 17 cycles of chemotherapy. Median PFS (OS) was 11 (23) months for US/Korea and 12 (26) months for Japan. In the US, none of suboptimally debulked patients had PFS >12 months, and 49% of optimal patients did, compared to 25% and 59% in Japan. Most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, hypertension, hypertriglyceridemia, and oral mucositis. CONCLUSION The carboplatin/paclitaxel + temsirolimus regimen was well tolerated. In optimally debulked patients, 54% had a PFS >12 months. This regimen did not statistically significantly increase PFS at 12 months compared to historical controls. No statistically significant differences in PFS or OS were observed between US/Korea vs Japan, or Asians vs non-Asians.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John H Farley
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Creighton University School of Medicine at St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
| | - William E Brady
- NRG Oncology, Clinical Trial Development Division, Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | | | | | - Kan Yonemori
- National Cancer Center Hospital, 5 Chome-1 - 1 Tsukiji, Chuo City, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan.
| | - Albert Bonebrake
- Cancer Research for the Ozarks-Cox Health, Springfield, MO, USA.
| | | | | | - Joan L Walker
- University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, USA.
| | - Joo-Hyun Nam
- Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan, Seoul 13876 05505, KR, Republic of Korea.
| | | | - David M Gershenson
- Dept. of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Texas, MD, USA; Anderson Cancer Center, Unit 1362, PO Box 301439, Houston, TX 77230-1439, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
You B, Purdy C, Copeland LJ, Swisher EM, Bookman MA, Fleming G, Coleman R, Randall LM, Tewari KS, Monk BJ, Mannel RS, Walker JL, Cappuccini F, Cohn D, Muzaffar M, Mutch D, Wahner-Hendrickson A, Martin L, Colomban O, Burger RA. Identification of Patients With Ovarian Cancer Experiencing the Highest Benefit From Bevacizumab in the First-Line Setting on the Basis of Their Tumor-Intrinsic Chemosensitivity (KELIM): The GOG-0218 Validation Study. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40:3965-3974. [PMID: 36252167 PMCID: PMC9746742 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.01207] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2022] [Revised: 06/30/2022] [Accepted: 08/26/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE In patients with high-grade ovarian cancer, predictors of bevacizumab efficacy in first-line setting are needed. In the ICON-7 trial, a poor tumor intrinsic chemosensitivity (defined by unfavorable modeled cancer antigen-125 [CA-125] ELIMination rate constant K [KELIM] score) was a predictive biomarker. Only the patients with high-risk disease (suboptimally resected stage III, or stage IV) exhibiting unfavorable KELIM score < 1.0 had overall survival (OS) benefit from bevacizumab (median: 29.7 v 20.6 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.78). An external validation study in the GOG-0218 trial was performed. METHODS In GOG-0218, 1,873 patients were treated with carboplatin-paclitaxel ± concurrent-maintenance bevacizumab/placebo. Patient KELIM values were calculated with CA-125 kinetics during the first 100 chemotherapy days by the Lyon University team. The association between KELIM score (favorable ≥ 1.0, or unfavorable < 1.0) and bevacizumab benefit for progression-free survival (PFS)/OS was independently assessed by NGR-GOG using univariate/multivariate analyses. RESULTS KELIM was assessable in 1,662 patients with ≥ 3 CA-125 available values. An unfavorable KELIM score was associated with bevacizumab benefit compared with placebo (PFS: HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.82; OS: HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.03), whereas a favorable KELIM was not (PFS: HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.17; OS: HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.39). The highest benefit was observed in patients with a high-risk disease exhibiting unfavorable KELIM, for PFS (median: 9.1 v 5.6 months; HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.78), and for OS (median: 35.1 v 29.1 months; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.97). CONCLUSION This GOG-0218 trial investigation validates ICON-7 findings about the association between poor tumor chemosensitivity and benefit from concurrent-maintenance bevacizumab, suggesting that bevacizumab may mainly be effective in patients with poorly chemosensitive disease. Bevacizumab may be prioritized in patients with a high-risk and poorly chemosensitive disease to improve their PFS/OS (patient KELIM score calculator available on the Biomarker Kinetics website).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benoit You
- Université Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Faculté de Médecine Lyon-Sud, EMR UCBL/HCL 3738, Lyon, France GINECO, Paris, France
- Medical Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie des Hospices Civils de Lyon (IC-HCL), CITOHL, GINECO-GINEGEPS, Lyon, France
| | - Christopher Purdy
- Clinical Trial Development Division, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Department, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY
| | | | - Elizabeth M. Swisher
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Ob/Gyn, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Michael A. Bookman
- Director, Gynecologic Oncology Therapeutics, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, San Francisco, CA
| | - Gini Fleming
- Hematology and Oncology, The University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL
| | - Robert Coleman
- Chief Scientific Officer, US Oncology Research, The Woodlands, TX
| | - Leslie M. Randall
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, School of Medicine, Richmond, VA
| | | | - Bradley J. Monk
- HonorHealth Research Institute, University of Arizona, Creighton University, Phoenix, AZ
| | | | | | | | - David Cohn
- The Ohio State University, James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, OH
| | | | - David Mutch
- Washington University School of Medicine, Siteman Cancer Center, St Louis, MO
| | | | - Lainie Martin
- Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
- Mersana Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA
| | - Olivier Colomban
- Université Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Faculté de Médecine Lyon-Sud, EMR UCBL/HCL 3738, Lyon, France GINECO, Paris, France
- Medical Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie des Hospices Civils de Lyon (IC-HCL), CITOHL, GINECO-GINEGEPS, Lyon, France
| | - Robert A. Burger
- Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
- Mersana Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Jackson CG, Moore KN, Cantrell L, Erickson BK, Duska LR, Richardson DL, Landrum LM, Holman LL, Walker JL, Mannel RS, Moxley KM, Queimado L, Cohoon A, Ding K, Dockery LE. A phase II trial of bevacizumab and rucaparib in recurrent carcinoma of the cervix or endometrium. Gynecol Oncol 2022; 166:44-49. [PMID: 35491267 PMCID: PMC10428664 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2022.04.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2021] [Revised: 04/17/2022] [Accepted: 04/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to examine the tolerability and efficacy of combination bevacizumab rucaparib therapy in patients with recurrent cervical or endometrial cancer. PATIENTS & METHODS Thirty-three patients with recurrent cervical or endometrial cancer were enrolled. Patients were required to have tumor progression after first line treatment for metastatic, or recurrent disease. Rucaparib was given at 600 mg BID twice daily for each 21-day cycle. Bevacizumab was given at 15 mg/kg on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint was efficacy as determined by objective response rate or 6-month progression free survival. RESULTS Of the 33 patients enrolled, 28 were evaluable. Patients with endometrial cancer had a response rate of 17% while patients with cervical cancer had a response rate of 14%. Median progression free survival was 3.8 months (95% C·I 2.5 to 5.7 months), and median overall survival was 10.1 months (95% C·I 7.0 to 15.1 months). Patients with ARID1A mutations displayed a better response rate (33%) and 6-month progression free survival (PFS6) rate (67%) than the entire study population. Observed toxicity was similar to that of previous studies with bevacizumab and rucaparib. CONCLUSIONS The combination of bevacizumab with rucaparib did not show significantly increased anti-tumor activity in all patients with recurrent cervical or endometrial cancer. However, patients with ARID1A mutations had a higher response rate and PFS6 suggesting this subgroup may benefit from the combination of bevacizumab and rucaparib. Further study is needed to confirm this observation. No new safety signals were seen.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C G Jackson
- Stephenson Cancer Center Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center; Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - K N Moore
- Stephenson Cancer Center Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center; Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - L Cantrell
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Virginia, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology; Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - B K Erickson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Minnesota; Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - L R Duska
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Virginia, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology; Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - D L Richardson
- Stephenson Cancer Center Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center; Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - L M Landrum
- Stephenson Cancer Center Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center; Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - L L Holman
- Stephenson Cancer Center Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center; Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - J L Walker
- Stephenson Cancer Center Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center; Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - R S Mannel
- Stephenson Cancer Center Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center; Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - K M Moxley
- Stephenson Cancer Center Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center; Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - L Queimado
- Department of Otolaryngology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center; Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - A Cohoon
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center; Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - K Ding
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center; Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - L E Dockery
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of North Carolina; Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Huh WK, Pugh SL, Walker JL, Pennington K, Jewell EL, Havrilesky LJ, Carter J, Muller C, Drapkin R, Lankes HA, Demora L, Kachnic LA. NRG-CC008: A nonrandomized prospective clinical trial comparing the non-inferiority of salpingectomy to salpingo-oophorectomy to reduce the risk of ovarian cancer among BRCA1 carriers [SOROCk]. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.tps10615] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
TPS10615 Background: Studies of ovarian cancer screening in the general population have not demonstrated a reduction in ovarian cancer mortality. High-grade pelvic serous carcinomas (HGSCs) have traditionally been thought to originate from the ovarian surface epithelium. However, more recent data strongly suggests that most HGSCs originate from precursor lesions found in the distal fallopian tube. Serous tubal intra-epithelial carcinoma (STIC) lesions are found in association with HGSCs in 50-60% of cases and other early serous precursor lesions can be identified in an additional 25% of cases. The Society of Gynecologic Oncology has recently issued recommendations that salpingectomy can be considered at the completion of childbearing in indiviuals at increased genetic risk of ovarian cancer who do not agree to salpingo-oophorectomy. They also indicated that approximately 30% of BRCA1 mutation carriers choose not to remove their ovaries, and the mean age at RRSO for those who do is in the late 40s, much later than recommended age per guidelines. The purpose of this study is to compare risk-reducing approaches in high-risk women with deleterious germline BRCA1mutations; specifically, to demonstrate the non-inferiority of bilateral salpingectomy compared to bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy to reduce the incidence of ovarian cancer among deleterious germline BRCA1mutation carriers. Methods: This is a non-randomized prospective trial to determine if bilateral salpingectomy is non-inferior to bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in terms ovarian, primary peritoneal, and fallopian tube cancer risk among gBRCA1m carriers between 35 and 50 years old. Individuals choose the treatment they want to receive in collaboration with their physician(s). The primary endpoint is the time to development of incident HGSC, specifically ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancers. Secondary endpoints include measurement of health-related quality of life, estrogen deprivation symptoms, sexual function, menopausal symptoms, cancer distress, Medical Decision Making, and adverse events. Results: As of 1/31/2022, 116 individuals have been enrolled into this trial. A recent amendment was put forward to allow the following individuals to also participate in this trial: 1) Individuals who are receiving hormonal therapy for maintenance therapy (eg, tamoxifen, AIs, etc), 2) Individuals with a history of any prior cancer and have completed chemotherapy, at least 30 days ago, and 3) Individuals who are considering Assisted Reproductive Technologies (eg, IVF). Furthermore, there is ongoing consideration of allowing general Ob/Gyn providers to recruit patients to this trial and perform procedures, with proper pathology training and sign off at their hospitals. NCI grant UG1CA189867. Clinical trial information: NCT04251052.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Warner King Huh
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| | - Stephanie L. Pugh
- NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Management Center, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Joan L. Walker
- The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | | | - Elizabeth Lin Jewell
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Laura J Havrilesky
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
| | - Jeanne Carter
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | | | | | - Heather A. Lankes
- NRG Operations Center - Philadelphia East Four Penn Center, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Lyudmila Demora
- NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Management Center, Philadelphia, PA
| | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
You B, Purdy C, Swisher EM, Bookman MA, Fleming GF, Coleman RL, Randall LM, Tewari KS, Monk BJ, Mannel RS, Walker JL, Cappuccini F, Copeland LJ, Muzaffar M, Mutch DG, Wahner Hendrickson AE, Martin LP, Colomban O, Burger RA. Identification of patients with ovarian cancer who are experiencing the highest benefit from bevacizumab in first-line setting based on their tumor intrinsic chemosensitivity (KELIM): GOG-0218 validation study. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.5553] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
5553 Background: In patients with high-grade ovarian cancer in first-line setting, predictive factors of bevacizumab efficacy are needed, for selecting patients. In ICON-7 trial, a poor tumor intrisic chemosensitivity (defined by unfavorable modeled CA-125 kinetic ELIMination rate constant KELIM) was a predictive biomarker. Among patients with high-risk diseases, only those with unfavorable KELIM had survival benefit from bevacizumab (mOS: 29.7 vs 20.6 months, HR = 0.78)(Colomban. JNCI CS 2020). The objective was to perform an external validation in GOG-0218 trial (NCT00262847). Methods: In GOG-0218, 1,873 patients were treated with carboplatin-paclitaxel +/- concurrent bevacizumab/placebo followed by a 15 month maintenance. Patient KELIM values were estimated with longitudinal CA-125 kinetics during the first 100 chemotherapy days. The association between KELIM score (categorized as favorable ≥ 1, or unfavorable < 1) and efficacy of bevacizumab (bevacizumab-concurrent + maintenance, vs placebo) for PFS and OS was assessed using univariate/multivariate analyses, in a Training set with 2/3 patients managed the investigators, and then a Validation set with all patients, managed by NGR-GOG. Results: KELIM was assessable in 1,662 patients with ≥ 3 CA-125 available values. In both sets, the patients with unfavorable KELIM derived benefit from bevacizumab compared to placebo (Training: PFS, HR = 0.65 [0.54-0.80]; OS, HR = 0.80 [0.65-0.99]; Validation: PFS, HR = 0.69 [0.59-0.82]; OS, HR = 0.87 [0.73-1.03]), whilst those with favorable KELIM had no benefit from bevacizumab (Training: PFS, HR = 0.96 [0.75-1.23]; OS, HR = 1.05 [0.80-1.37]; Validation, PFS, HR = 0.96 [0.79-1.17]; OS HR = 1.11 [0.89-1.84]). The highest benefit was observed in patients with high-risk diseases (stage IV or sub-optimally resected stage III) characterized by unfavorable KELIM, for PFS (Learning (n = 276): mPFS: 9.0 vs 5.2 months, HR = 0.61 [0.48-0.78]; Validation (n = 433): mPFS: 9.1 vs 5.6 months, HR = 0.64 [0.53-0.78]), and for OS (Learning (n = 278): mOS: 38.9 vs 27.9 months, HR = 0.72 [0.56-0.93], Validation set (n = 438): mOS: 35.1 vs 29.1 months, HR = 0.79 [0.65-0.97]). Conclusions: This validation analysis of GOG-0218 trial confirms the outcomes of ICON-7 trial about the association between poor tumor chemosensitivity and benefit from concurrent + maintenance bevacizumab, suggesting that bevacizumab is mainly effective in patients with poorly chemosensitive diseases. No benefit was found in patients with favorable KELIM. The patients who derived the highest benefit from bevacizumab in PFS and OS (OS absolute benefit ̃ 6 to 9 months) were those with high-risk diseases (stage IV, or incompletely resected stage III) associated with an unfavorable KELIM score (calculator on https://www.biomarker-kinetics.org/CA-125).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benoit You
- Institut de Cancérologie des Hospices Civils de Lyon (IC-HCL), Lyon, France
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Krishnansu Sujata Tewari
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of California, Irvine, CA
| | - Bradley J. Monk
- GOG Foundation, Creighton University, University of Arizona, Phoenix, AZ
| | | | - Joan L. Walker
- The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Fabio Cappuccini
- University of California-Irvine Medical Center, Orange County, CA
| | - Larry J. Copeland
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, OH
| | | | | | | | - Lainie P. Martin
- University of Pennsylvania, Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA
| | | | - Robert Allen Burger
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Landen CN, Buckanovich RJ, Sill M, Mannel RS, Walker JL, Disilvestro P, Mathews CA, Mutch DG, Hernandez M, Martin LP, Bishop E, Gill S, Gordinier ME, Burger RA, Aghajanian C, Liu JF, Moore KN, Bookman MA. A phase I/II study of ruxolitinib with frontline neoadjuvant and post-surgical therapy in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian, Fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.5501] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
5501 Background: The Interleukin-6/JAK/STAT3 axis, via an increase in cancer stem-like cell (CSC) survival, is a reported driver of chemotherapy resistance. We hypothesized that addition of the JAK1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib to standard chemotherapy would be tolerable and, by targeting therapy-resistant cells, improve the progression-free survival (PFS) of ovarian/fallopian tube/primary peritoneal carcinoma (OV/FT/PPC) patients treated in the up-front setting. Methods: Patients with OV/FT/PPC dispositioned to neoadjuvant chemotherapy were eligible for NRG-GY007 (NCT #02713386). In phase I, treatment was with dose-dense paclitaxel (P) 70 or 80 mg/m2 days 1, 8, and 15; carboplatin (C) AUC 5 or 6 day 1; and ruxolitinib (R) 15mg PO BID, every 21 days. In the absence of tumor progression or an inability to tolerate surgery, interval tumor reductive surgery (TRS) was required after cycle 3. After TRS, 3 additional cycles were administered, followed by maintenance ruxolitinib until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or voluntary withdrawal. In phase II, patients were randomized to dose-dense PC (arm 1) or dose-dense PC plus ruxolitinib (arm 2) at the phase I-defined dose of 15mg PO BID. After 3 cycles, TRS was performed, followed by another 3 cycles of the randomized regimen, without maintenance ruxolitinib. The primary phase II endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: 17 patients were enrolled in phase I. The MTD was P at 70, C at 5, and R at 15, which was chosen as the phase II dose. 130 patients were enrolled in phase II with a median follow-up of 24 months. There were five Grade 5 events in phase II, 2 in arm 1 and 3 in arm 2, with all except one being unrelated to therapy; a G5 febrile neutropenia in arm 2 was considered possibly related. In arm 2 there was potential trend towards higher grade 3-4 anemia (64% v 27% control), grade 3-4 neutropenia (53% v 37%), thromboembolic events (12.6% v 2.4%), and febrile neutropenia (6% v 0%). The HR for PFS was 0.702 (90% 1-sided CI = 0-0.89, log-rank p = 0.059). The median PFS in arm 1 was 11.6 versus 14.6 in arm 2. The overall survival HR = 0.785 (90% CI = 0.44 to 1.39, p = 0.70). There were no differences between rates of total gross resection. Conclusions: Ruxolitinib 15mg PO BID was well-tolerated with acceptable toxicity in combination with dose-dense PC. The primary endpoint of prolongation of PFS was achieved in the experimental arm. Further study of this combination can be considered. This trial also demonstrates the feasibility of early-phase randomized studies with novel agents and biospecimen collection in front line neoadjuvant treatment of ovarian cancer. Clinical trial information: 02713386.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Michael Sill
- Gynecologic Oncology Group Statistical and Data Center, Buffalo, NY
| | | | - Joan L. Walker
- The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | | | - Cara Amanda Mathews
- Program in Women’s Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women and Infants Hospital, Brown University, Providence, RI
| | | | | | - Lainie P. Martin
- University of Pennsylvania, Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Erin Bishop
- Froedtert and the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI
| | - Sarah Gill
- Nancy N. and J.C. Lewis Cancer and Research Pavilion, Savannah, GA
| | | | - Robert Allen Burger
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | | | | | - Kathleen N. Moore
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Science Center, Stephenson Cancer Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Schoen RE, Bandos H, Corley D, Dueker J, Yothers G, Bai J, Huh WK, Bauman JE, Walker JL, Bruner D, Kachnic LA. Five- or 10-year colonoscopy for 1-2 non-advanced adenomatous polyps (FORTE) NRG-CC005 study: A randomized phase III non-inferiority trial comparing colorectal cancer incidence in participants with 1-2 non-advanced adenomas randomized to a 5- and 10-year surveillance colonoscopy exam schedule versus a 10-year surveillance colonoscopy exam schedule. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.tps3631] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
TPS3631 Background: Adenomatous polyps are the acknowledged precursors of colorectal cancer (CRC). Identification and removal of adenomas is the mechanism by which screening is effective in reducing CRC incidence and mortality. Patients with 1-2 non-advanced adenomas ( < 1 cm with neither villous components nor high grade dysplasia) are recommended to return at a timing ranging from 5-10 yrs. However, evidence for the benefit, optimal timing, and recommended frequency of surveillance colonoscopy is not available. A randomized, clinical trial to demonstrate the difference in results between 5- or 10-yr surveillance for participants with non-advanced adenoma can guide clinical practice. Methods: NRG-CC005/FORTE is a prospective, randomized, non-blinded, Phase III, non-inferiority clinical trial comparing CRC incidence in participants randomized to recommendation for a 5- and 10-yr vs. a 10-yr only surveillance colonoscopy exam schedule. Other pre-defined exploratory endpoints include incidence of advanced adenomas, CRC mortality, and incidence of stage III-IV CRCs. Stratification factors include age, gender, and time from qualifying colonoscopy to randomization. Participants ≥50 and < 70 yrs of age at the time of randomization with a first-time diagnosis of 1-2 non-advanced tubular adenomas from the qualifying colonoscopy within 4 yrs prior to randomization will be eligible. Participants with a clinical diagnosis of a significant genetic risk for CRC or with a family history of CRC diagnosed at ≤60 yrs in a first degree relative or in two first degree relatives diagnosed at any age are ineligible. Other ineligibility criteria include prior history of CRC or colorectal adenomas, a hyperplastic polyp measuring ≥1 cm or traditional serrated adenomas, or life expectancy < 10 yrs due to comorbid conditions. Collection of blood, stool, and tissue samples is planned. Statistics: The primary endpoint for the trial is CRC incidence. The trial is focused on CRCs diagnosed between year 5 and year 10. By incorporating a window of +/- 1 yr to allow for somewhat earlier and later procedures, as typically occurs in clinical medicine, the primary endpoint will include incident cancers identified in years 4 through 11. A crude 4- to 11-yr incidence rate of 0.387% is assumed for the 5- and 10-yr schedule arm. The study is powered at 90% to detect a non-inferiority margin difference of 0.387% at alpha 5% in CRC incidence rate between two schedules. 9,500 participants are to be enrolled. Support: U10CA180868, -180822, UG1CA189867, U24CA196067 Clinical trial information: NCT05080673.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Hanna Bandos
- NSABP and The University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Douglas Corley
- Kaiser Permanente, Northern California Division of Research, Oakland, CA
| | - Jeff Dueker
- University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Greg Yothers
- The Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Jinbing Bai
- Nell Hodgson Woodruff School of Nursing, Emory University, Atlanta, GA
| | - Warner King Huh
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| | | | - Joan L. Walker
- The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Deborah Bruner
- Winship Cancer Institute at Emory University, Atlanta, GA
| | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Bixel KL, Leitao MM, Chase DM, Quick A, Lim PC, Eskander RN, Gotlieb WH, LoCoco S, Martino MA, McCormick C, Myers TKN, Tewari KS, Slomovitz BM, Walker JL, Copeland LJ, Monk BJ, Randall LM. ROCC/GOG-3043: A randomized non-inferiority trial of robotic versus open radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.tps5605] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
TPS5605 Background: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is associated with improved perioperative safety outcomes, but, in 2018, the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial, a non-inferiority study comparing laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer, reported significantly worse disease-specific (DSS) and overall survival (OS) in the MIS group. Criticisms of the LACC trial include lack of proper preoperative imaging and assessment, use of transcervical uterine manipulators, and lack of proper tumor containment leading to peritoneal contamination. Subsequent retrospective studies have reported conflicting results. Given the potential benefit of MIS, the ROCC trial seeks to address the limitations of the LACC trial. Methods: ROCC is a multi-center, prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial. The primary objective is to determine whether robotic-assisted (RBT) radical hysterectomy is not inferior to abdominal (OPEN) approach with respect to 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary objectives include DSS, OS, patterns of recurrence, peri- and postoperative complications, long-term morbidity, impact on patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and development of lower extremity lymphedema (LEL). Key inclusion criteria include patients with histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma, squamous cell, and adenosquamous cell carcinoma of FIGO 2018 stage IA2-IB2. All patients must have a preoperative pelvic MRI confirming that the cervical tumor is < 4 cm in size, no obvious evidence of extracervical extension and no nodal or other regional metastasis. Intraoperatively, the use of transcervical uterine manipulators is not allowed and specific detailed surgical techniques for proper tumor containment is required. Photographic evidence of specimen with tumor contained is mandated. We estimate the 3-year DFS to be 92% in the control (OPEN) arm. If the DFS does not differ by more than 7% and the one-sided 95% CI does not cross the non-inferiority boundary, then the RBT arm will be deemed non-inferior. 840 patients will be enrolled (420 per arm, 89 events total), which provides 90% power to exclude an absolute decrease in DFS by 7% (HR < = 1.375) with a log-rank test for non-inferiority with a one-sided alpha of 0.05. The primary analysis will be conducted in all randomized patients (ITT). Given the LACC findings of worse oncologic outcomes with MIS, a formal DSMC will conduct periodic reviews of safety including two planned formal interim analyses for futility (harm) after accrual of 370 and 640 patients using an aggressive Lan-DeMets beta-spending function similar to a Pocock boundary. Results of this trial may be practice changing and will either support or refute the findings of the LACC trial. The study is currently activating sites for enrollment. Clinical trial information: NCT04831580.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristin Leigh Bixel
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, OH
| | | | - Dana Meredith Chase
- Creighton University School of Medicine at St Joseph's Medical Center, Phoenix, AZ
| | - Allison Quick
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, OH
| | - Peter C Lim
- Center of Hope at Renown Regional Medical Center, Reno, NE
| | | | - Walter H. Gotlieb
- Surgical Oncology McGill University-SMBD Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | - Krishnansu Sujata Tewari
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of California, Irvine, CA
| | | | - Joan L. Walker
- The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Larry J. Copeland
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, OH
| | - Bradley J. Monk
- GOG Foundation, Creighton University, University of Arizona, Phoenix, AZ
| | - Leslie M. Randall
- Massey Cancer Center, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
duPont NC, Enserro D, Brady MF, Moxley K, Walker JL, Cosgrove C, Bixel K, Tewari KS, Thaker P, Wahner Hendrickson AE, Rubin S, Fujiwara K, Casey AC, Soper J, Burger RA, Monk BJ. Prognostic significance of ethnicity and age in advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer: An NRG oncology/gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol 2022; 164:398-405. [PMID: 34857397 PMCID: PMC9400113 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.11.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2021] [Revised: 11/04/2021] [Accepted: 11/16/2021] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Age and ethnicity are among several factors that influence overall survival (OS) in ovarian cancer. The study objective was to determine whether ethnicity and age were of prognostic significance in women enrolled in a clinical trial evaluating the addition of bevacizumab to front-line therapy. METHODS Women with advanced stage ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer were enrolled in a phase III clinical trial. All women had surgical staging and received adjuvant chemotherapy with one of three regimens. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the relationship between OS with age and race/ethnicity among the study participants. RESULTS One-thousand-eight-hundred-seventy-three women were enrolled in the study. There were 280 minority women and 328 women over the age of 70. Women age 70 and older had a 34% increase risk for death when compared to women under 60 (HR = 1.34; 95% CI 1.16-1.54). Non-Hispanic Black women had a 54% decreased risk of death with the addition of maintenance bevacizumab (HR = 0.46, 95% CI:0.26-0.83). Women of Asian descent had more hematologic grade 3 or greater adverse events and a 27% decrease risk of death when compared to non-Hispanic Whites (HR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.59-0.90). CONCLUSIONS Non-Hispanic Black women showed a decreased risk of death with the addition of bevacizumab and patients of Asian ancestry had a lower death rate than all other minority groups, but despite these clinically meaningful improvements there was no statistically significant difference in OS among the groups.
Collapse
MESH Headings
- Adenocarcinoma/drug therapy
- Adenocarcinoma/pathology
- Black or African American/statistics & numerical data
- Age Factors
- Aged
- Aged, 80 and over
- Angiogenesis Inhibitors/therapeutic use
- Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use
- Asian/statistics & numerical data
- Bevacizumab/therapeutic use
- Carboplatin/administration & dosage
- Carcinoma, Endometrioid/drug therapy
- Carcinoma, Endometrioid/pathology
- Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial/drug therapy
- Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial/pathology
- Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/methods
- Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data
- Fallopian Tube Neoplasms/drug therapy
- Fallopian Tube Neoplasms/pathology
- Female
- Hispanic or Latino/statistics & numerical data
- Humans
- Middle Aged
- Neoplasm Staging
- Neoplasms, Cystic, Mucinous, and Serous/drug therapy
- Neoplasms, Cystic, Mucinous, and Serous/pathology
- Ovarian Neoplasms/drug therapy
- Ovarian Neoplasms/pathology
- Paclitaxel/administration & dosage
- Peritoneal Neoplasms/drug therapy
- Peritoneal Neoplasms/pathology
- Prognosis
- Proportional Hazards Models
- Survival Rate
- White People/statistics & numerical data
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Danielle Enserro
- NRG Oncology, Clinical Trial Development Division, Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA.
| | - Mark F Brady
- NRG Oncology, Clinical Trial Development Division, Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA.
| | - Katherine Moxley
- University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma University Hospital Science Center, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, USA.
| | - Joan L Walker
- University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma University Hospital Science Center, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Stephen Rubin
- Abramson Cancer Center at University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19111, USA.
| | - Keiichi Fujiwara
- Saitama Medical University/International Medical Center, Saitama, JP 350-1298, Japan.
| | | | - John Soper
- University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
| | - Robert A Burger
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Arizona Oncology (US Oncology Network), Phoenix, AZ, USA.
| | - Bradley J Monk
- University of Arizona College of Medicine, Phoenix Creighton University School of Medicine at St. Joseph's Hospital, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Slomovitz BM, Filiaci VL, Walker JL, Taub MC, Finkelstein KA, Moroney JW, Fleury AC, Muller CY, Holman LL, Copeland LJ, Miller DS, Coleman RL. A randomized phase II trial of everolimus and letrozole or hormonal therapy in women with advanced, persistent or recurrent endometrial carcinoma: A GOG Foundation study. Gynecol Oncol 2022; 164:481-491. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.12.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2021] [Revised: 12/24/2021] [Accepted: 12/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
|
18
|
Jones SR, Vidrine DJ, Wetter DW, Shih YCT, Sutton SK, Ramondetta LM, Elting LS, Walker JL, Smith KM, Frank-Pearce SG, Li Y, Simmons VN, Vidrine JI. Evaluation of the Efficacy of a Smoking Cessation Intervention for Cervical Cancer Survivors and Women With High-Grade Cervical Dysplasia: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Res Protoc 2021; 10:e34502. [PMID: 34967755 PMCID: PMC8765796 DOI: 10.2196/34502] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2021] [Accepted: 11/04/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The prevalence of smoking among cervical cancer survivors is strikingly high, yet no smoking cessation interventions to date have specifically targeted this population. This paper describes the study design, methods, and data analysis plans for a randomized clinical trial designed to evaluate the efficacy of a theoretically and empirically based Motivation And Problem Solving (MAPS) approach for promoting and facilitating smoking cessation among cervical cancer survivors. MAPS is a comprehensive, dynamic, and holistic intervention that incorporates empirically supported cognitive behavioral and social cognitive theory-based treatment strategies within an overarching motivational framework. MAPS is designed to be appropriate for all smokers regardless of their motivation to change and views motivation as dynamically fluctuating from moment to moment throughout the behavior change process. OBJECTIVE This 2-group randomized controlled trial compares the efficacy of standard treatment to MAPS in facilitating smoking cessation among women with a history of high-grade cervical dysplasia or cervical cancer. METHODS Participants (N=202) are current smokers with a history of high-grade cervical dysplasia or cervical cancer recruited nationally and randomly assigned to one of two treatment conditions: (1) standard treatment (ST) or (2) MAPS. ST consists of repeated letters referring participants to their state's tobacco cessation quitline, standard self-help materials, and free nicotine replacement therapy when ready to quit. MAPS has all ST components along with 6 proactive telephone counseling sessions delivered over 12 months. The primary outcome is abstinence from tobacco at 18 months. Secondary outcomes include abstinence over time across all assessment points, abstinence at other individual assessment time points, quit attempts, cigarettes per day, and use of state quitlines. Hypothesized treatment mechanisms and cost-effectiveness will also be evaluated. RESULTS This study was approved by the institutional review boards at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, and Moffitt Cancer Center. Participant enrollment concluded at Moffitt Cancer Center in January 2020, and follow-up data collection was completed in July 2021. Data analysis is ongoing. CONCLUSIONS This study will yield crucial information regarding the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a MAPS approach for smoking cessation tailored to the specific needs of women with a history of high-grade cervical dysplasia or cervical cancer. Findings indicating that MAPS has substantially greater efficacy than existing evidence-based tobacco cessation treatments would have tremendous public health significance. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02157610; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02157610. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/34502.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah R Jones
- Tobacco Research & Intervention Program, Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| | - Damon J Vidrine
- Tobacco Research & Intervention Program, Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| | - David W Wetter
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
| | - Ya-Chen Tina Shih
- Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Steven K Sutton
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| | - Lois M Ramondetta
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Linda S Elting
- Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Joan L Walker
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, United States.,Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, United States
| | - Katie M Smith
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, United States
| | - Summer G Frank-Pearce
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, College of Public Health, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, United States.,TSET Health Promotion Research Center, Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, United States
| | - Yisheng Li
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Vani N Simmons
- Tobacco Research & Intervention Program, Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| | - Jennifer I Vidrine
- Tobacco Research & Intervention Program, Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Verberk JDM, van Dongen JAP, van de Kassteele J, Andrews NJ, van Gaalen RD, Hahné SJM, Vennema H, Ramsay M, Braeckman T, Ladhani S, Thomas SL, Walker JL, de Melker HE, Fischer TK, Koch J, Bruijning-Verhagen P. Impact analysis of rotavirus vaccination in various geographic regions in Western Europe. Vaccine 2021; 39:6671-6681. [PMID: 34635375 DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.09.059] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2021] [Revised: 08/30/2021] [Accepted: 09/22/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Universal mass vaccination (UMV) against rotavirus has been implemented in many but not all European countries. This study investigated the impact of UMV on rotavirus incidence trends by comparing European countries with UMV: Belgium, England/Wales and Germany versus countries without UMV: Denmark and the Netherlands. METHODS For this observational retrospective cohort study, time series data (2001-2016) on rotavirus detections, meteorological factors and population demographics were collected. For each country, several meteorological and population factors were investigated as possible predictors of rotavirus incidence. The final set of predictors were incorporated in negative binomial models accounting for seasonality and serial autocorrelation, and time-varying incidence rate ratios (IRR) were calculated for each age group and country separately. The overall vaccination impact two years after vaccine implementation was estimated by pooling the results using a random effects meta-analyses. Independent t-tests were used to compare annual epidemics in the pre-vaccination and post-vaccination era to explore any changes in the timing of rotavirus epidemics. RESULTS The population size and several meteorological factors were predictors for the rotavirus epidemiology. Overall, we estimated a 42% (95%-CI 23;56%) reduction in rotavirus incidence attributable to UMV. Strongest reductions were observed for age-groups 0-, 1- and 2-years (IRR 0.47, 0.48 and 0.63, respectively). No herd effect induced by UMV in neighbouring countries was observed. In all UMV countries, the start and/or stop and corresponding peak of the rotavirus season was delayed by 4-7 weeks. CONCLUSIONS The introduction of rotavirus UMV resulted in an overall reduction of 42% in rotavirus incidence in Western European countries two years after vaccine introduction and caused a change in seasonal pattern. No herd effect induced by UMV neighbouring countries was observed for Denmark and the Netherlands.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J D M Verberk
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - J A P van Dongen
- Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - J van de Kassteele
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - N J Andrews
- Statistics, Modelling, and Economics Department, Public Health England (PHE), London, United Kingdom
| | - R D van Gaalen
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - S J M Hahné
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - H Vennema
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - M Ramsay
- Statistics, Modelling, and Economics Department, Public Health England (PHE), London, United Kingdom
| | - T Braeckman
- Formerly at Service Epidemiology of Infectious Diseases, Department Public Health and Surveillance, Sciensano Institute, Brussels, Belgium
| | - S Ladhani
- Immunisation Department, Public Health England (PHE), London, United Kingdom
| | - S L Thomas
- Faculty of Epidemiology & Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), London, United Kingdom
| | - J L Walker
- Immunisation Department, Public Health England (PHE), London, United Kingdom; Faculty of Epidemiology & Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), London, United Kingdom
| | - H E de Melker
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - T K Fischer
- Virology Surveillance and Research, Department of Virology and Special Microbiology Diagnostics Statens Serum Institut (SSI), Copenhagen, Denmark and University of Copenhagen, Department of Public Health, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - J Koch
- Immunization Unit, Department for Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Robert Koch Institute (RKI), Berlin, Germany
| | - P Bruijning-Verhagen
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands; Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Wenzel L, Huang HQ, Cella D, McKinney CO, Zevon MA, LaChance JA, Walker JL, Salani R, Modesitt SC, Morris RT, Bradley WH, Boente MP, von Gruenigen VE. Patient-reported outcome changes at the end of life in recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: An NRG oncology/GOG study. Gynecol Oncol 2021; 163:392-397. [PMID: 34548162 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.08.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2021] [Revised: 08/20/2021] [Accepted: 08/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES In a prospective study of platinum-resistant ovarian cancer patients, we examined whether the Disease-related Symptoms-Physical (DRS--P) scale of the NCCN/FACT-Ovarian Cancer Symptom Index-18 (NFOSI-18) is responsive to clinical change in patients estimated by their provider to survive at least six months. METHODS The NFOSI-18, and other FACT measures, was collected at study entry and 3 and 6 months post-enrollment. Measures were compared for those who died or dropped off study prior to 3 months or prior to 6 months (assumed as health deterioration over time), or those who stayed on study through 6 months (presumed as stable disease over time). Statistical analyses included a fitted linear mixed model for estimating the group differences over time, Cox regression to assess the probability of survival with patient-reported outcomes, and effect size. RESULTS DRS-P scores of patients who completed only one assessment were significantly lower compared to patients who were able to complete two assessments [5.9 points lower (2.0-9.8); p < 0.01], or three assessments [8.1 points lower (4.8-11.5); p < 0.01]. Measures of abdominal discomfort, functional well-being, emotional well-being, and quality of life were also significant, but treatment side effects were not. Further, in every scale except for neurotoxicity, higher (better) baseline scores were associated with a decreased likelihood of death, after adjusting for age, performance and disease status. CONCLUSION The NFOSI-18 DRS-P scale is responsive to clinical change. It has potential as an indicator of changing health status with ovarian cancer disease progression, distinct from treatment side effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lari Wenzel
- Department of Medicine, Program in Public Health and Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697, United States of America.
| | - Helen Q Huang
- NRG Oncology Statistics & Data Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY 14263, United States of America.
| | - David Cella
- Department of Medical Social Sciences and Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60612, United States of America.
| | - Chelsea O McKinney
- Department of Medicine, Program in Public Health and Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697, United States of America.
| | - Michael A Zevon
- Department of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY 14263, United States of America
| | - Jason A LaChance
- Maine Medical Partners Women's Health Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Scarborough, ME 04074, United States of America.
| | - Joan L Walker
- Stephenson Cancer Center, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, United States of America.
| | - Ritu Salani
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America.
| | - Susan C Modesitt
- Gynecologic Oncology Division, OB/GYN Department, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22908, United States of America.
| | - Robert T Morris
- Gynecologic Oncology Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, United States of America.
| | - William H Bradley
- Department of OB/GYN, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53226, United States of America.
| | - Matthew P Boente
- U.S. Medical Affairs, Gyn-Oncology, Genentech, South San Francisco, CA 94080, United States of America.
| | - Vivian E von Gruenigen
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Summa Health System, NEOMED, Akron, OH 44310, United States of America.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Jackson CC, Cantrell L, Erickson BK, Moore KN, Duska LR, Richardson DL, Landrum LM, Holman LL, Walker JL, Mannel RS, Moxley KM, Queimado L, Ding K, Cohoon A, Vesely S, Dockery LE. A phase II trial of bevacizumab and rucaparib in recurrent carcinoma of the cervix or endometrium. J Clin Oncol 2021. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2021.39.15_suppl.5527] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
5527 Background: Treatment options for patients with recurrent cervical and endometrial cancer remain limited. Even with optimum care, median survival has stalled at 12-17 months. The PARP inhibitor rucaparib has demonstrated activity in both BRCA wild-type and mutant cancers. Furthermore, preclinical studies suggest a synergistic effect of PARP inhibitors and antiangiogenic agents. We hypothesized that the combination of rucaparib and the VEGF inhibitor bevacizumab would yield a clinically-significant anti-cancer effect in patients with persistent or recurrent cervical or endometrial carcinoma. Methods: NCT03476798 is a phase II trial of adults with histologically-documented carcinoma of the cervix or endometrium. Patients with evaluable lesions who had undergone at least one prior line of systemic therapy, had adequate performance status and organ function, with a life expectancy of at least three months were eligible. Biopsies were obtained prior to treatment initiation for assessment of baseline tumor biomarkers, including ARID1A mutation status. Each cycle comprised 21 days. Rucaparib was administered orally at 600 mg, twice daily. Bevacizumab was administered by IV at 15 mg/kg on day 1 of each cycle. The primary objective was to estimate the proportion of patients with persistent or recurrent cervical or endometrial cancer who survive progression-free for at least six months (PFS6). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate progression-free survival. Results: There were 28 evaluable patients; six had cervical and 22 had endometrial cancer. Median age was 60.5 years (range, 30-74). Self-reported patient races were White (82.1%), Black (10.7%), and Native American (7.1%). Self-identified Hispanic or Latina patients comprised 3.6% of the cohort. Twenty-two of 28 patients had progressive disease by six months [survival distribution function estimate = 0.214 (lower CI, 0.087; upper CI, 0.378)]. Of the six patients who achieved PFS6, one had cervical and five had endometrial cancer. Six patients had a mutation in the ARID1A gene and those patients achieved PFS6 at a rate of 66.7%. Conclusions: The study hypothesis was evaluated in a two-stage design, and the interim analysis occurred once 28 evaluable patients were enrolled. In order to move on to the second stage, at least seven patients needed to remain progression-free at six months, but only six did. Thus, the study was ended after the interim analysis. The combination of rucaparib and bevacizumab did not provide the expected clinical benefit in this cohort of patients, but may warrant further exploration in patients with ARID1A mutations. Clinical trial information: NCT03476798.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Kathleen N. Moore
- Stephenson Cancer Center at The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | | | - Debra L. Richardson
- Stephenson Cancer Center at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | | | | | - Joan L. Walker
- The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | | | | | - Lurdes Queimado
- University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Kai Ding
- Oklahoma University Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Andrew Cohoon
- University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Sara Vesely
- College of Public Health, University of Oklahoma HSC, Oklahoma City, OK
| | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Duska LR, Filiaci VL, Walker JL, Holman LL, Hill EK, Moore RG, Ring KL, Pearl ML, Muller CY, Kushnir CL, Lankes HA, Samuelson MI, Carrick KS, Rajan A, Rodgers WH, Kohn EC, Piekarz R, Leslie KK. A Surgical Window Trial Evaluating Medroxyprogesterone Acetate with or without Entinostat in Patients with Endometrial Cancer and Validation of Biomarkers of Cellular Response. Clin Cancer Res 2021; 27:2734-2741. [PMID: 33766814 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-20-4618] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2020] [Revised: 01/23/2021] [Accepted: 02/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE This surgical window of opportunity (window) study assessed the short-term effect of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) alone versus MPA plus the histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor entinostat on regulation of progesterone receptor (PR) in women with newly diagnosed endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS This multisite, randomized, open-label surgical window study treated women intramuscularly on day 1 with 400 mg MPA. Entinostat given 5 mg by mouth on days 1, 8, and 15 was randomly assigned with equal probability. Surgery followed on days 21-24. Pretreatment and posttreatment tissue was assessed for PR H-scores, Ki-67 levels, and histologic response. RESULTS Fifty patients were accrued in 4 months; 22 and 20 participants had PR evaluable pretreatment and posttreatment slides in the MPA and MPA/entinostat arms, respectively. Median posttreatment PR H-scores were significantly lower than pretreatment H-scores in both arms but did not differ significantly (MPA: 247 vs. 27, MPA/entinostat 260 vs. 23, respectively, P = 0.87). Decreased Ki-67 was shown in 90% treated with MPA/entinostat compared with 68% treated with MPA alone (P = 0.13). Median PR H-score decreases were larger when Ki-67 was decreased (208) versus not decreased (45). The decrease in PR pretreatment versus posttreatment was associated with loss of Ki-67 nuclear staining, consistent with reduced cellular proliferation (P < 0.008). CONCLUSIONS This surgical window trial rapidly accrued in a multisite setting and evaluated PR as its primary endpoint and Ki-67 as secondary endpoint. Despite no immediate effect of entinostat on PR in this short-term study, lessons learned can inform future window and treatment trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Linda R Duska
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia.
| | - Virginia L Filiaci
- NRG Oncology SDMC, CTD Division, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York
| | - Joan L Walker
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
| | - Laura L Holman
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
| | - Emily K Hill
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - Richard G Moore
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wilmont Cancer Institute, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York
| | - Kari L Ring
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia
| | - Michael L Pearl
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, New York
| | - Carolyn Y Muller
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico
| | - Christina L Kushnir
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women's Cancer Center, Las Vegas, Nevada
| | - Heather A Lankes
- NRG Oncology, Operations Center-Philadelphia East, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.,Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Megan I Samuelson
- Department of Pathology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - Kelley S Carrick
- Department of Pathology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Anand Rajan
- Department of Pathology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - William H Rodgers
- Department of Pathology, New York Hospital Queens, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, Flushing, New York
| | - Elise C Kohn
- Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, NCI, Rockville, Maryland
| | | | - Kimberly K Leslie
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Gillen J, Miller A, Bell-McGuinn KM, Schilder RJ, Walker JL, Mathews CA, Duska LR, Guntupalli SR, O'Cearbhaill R, Hays J, Hagemann AR, Gray HJ, Gordon SW, Armstrong DK, Chen A, Fracasso PM, Aghajanian C, Moore KN. Post hoc analyses of GOG 9923: Does BRCA status affect toxicities?: An NRG oncology study. Gynecol Oncol 2021; 161:512-515. [PMID: 33610319 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.01.037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2020] [Accepted: 01/25/2021] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate how women with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), dichotomized by BRCA status, tolerate intravenous (IV) or intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy given with veliparib and bevacizumab (bev) on a GOG phase I study (GOG 9923, NCT00989651). METHODS This is an unplanned, post hoc analysis of an IRB approved, multi-institutional, prospective study (GOG 9923). Clinical characteristics and toxicity data based on BRCA status were evaluated and descriptive statistics were used to summarize baseline patient characteristics and toxicities. The Kaplan Meier method was used to generate survival estimates. RESULTS Four hundred twenty-four patients were evaluable. Patients were treated with IV carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bev every 21 days (regimen 1), weekly IV paclitaxel with carboplatin and bev (regimen 2) or IV paclitaxel and bev with IP cisplatin (regimen 3). Bev was continued as maintenance in all arms. Within each of these regimens, veliparib was given either twice daily for the entirety of each cycle (continuous) or on days -2 to 5 (intermittent). Ten percent of patients treated on regimen 1, 12% on regimen 2, and 19.8% on regimen 3 had BRCA-associated tumors. Patients with BRCA-associated tumors, when compared to wild type, experienced similar rates of anemia, febrile neutropenia (, abdominal pain, colonic perforation, nausea, vomiting, and peripheral sensory neuropathy. Median progression free survival (PFS) was not significantly different between BRCA-associated and wild type cancers (HR 0.96, CI 0.65-1.42), though this study's primary aim was not to evaluate outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Germline BRCA mutations positively affect chemosensitivity in EOC, but whether differences in toxicities among BRCA-associated and BRCA wild type tumors existed was previously not reported. In this population with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer no differences in reported toxicity between the two groups was observed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica Gillen
- Stephenson Cancer Center at the University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, United States of America.
| | - Austin Miller
- NRG Oncology SDMC, CTD Division, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, United States of America.
| | - Katherine M Bell-McGuinn
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, United States of America.
| | - Russell J Schilder
- Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America.
| | - Joan L Walker
- Stephenson Cancer Center at the University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, United States of America.
| | - Cara A Mathews
- Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Providence, RI, United States of America.
| | - Linda R Duska
- University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, United States of America.
| | | | - Roisin O'Cearbhaill
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, United States of America.
| | - John Hays
- The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States of America.
| | | | - Heidi J Gray
- University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States of America.
| | - Sarah W Gordon
- Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States of America.
| | | | - Alice Chen
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, NCI, NIH, Bethesda, MD, United States of America.
| | - Paula M Fracasso
- University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, United States of America.
| | - Carol Aghajanian
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, United States of America.
| | - Kathleen N Moore
- Stephenson Cancer Center at the University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, United States of America.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Russo S, Walker JL, Carlson JW, Carter J, Ward LC, Covens A, Tanner EJ, Armer JM, Ridner S, Hayes S, Taghian AG, Brunelle C, Lopez-Acevedo M, Davidson BA, Schaverien MV, Ghamande SA, Bernas M, Cheville AL, Yost KJ, Schmitz K, Coyle B, Zucker J, Enserro D, Pugh S, Paskett ED, Ford L, McCaskill-Stevens W. Standardization of lower extremity quantitative lymphedema measurements and associated patient-reported outcomes in gynecologic cancers. Gynecol Oncol 2020; 160:625-632. [PMID: 33158510 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.10.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2020] [Accepted: 10/20/2020] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
Practice changing standardization of lower extremity lymphedema quantitative measurements with integrated patient reported outcomes will likely refine and redefine the optimal risk-reduction strategies to diminish the devastating limb-related dysfunction and morbidity associated with treatment of gynecologic cancers. The National Cancer Institute (NCI), Division of Cancer Prevention brought together a diverse group of cancer treatment, therapy and patient reported outcomes experts to discuss the current state-of-the-science in lymphedema evaluation with the potential goal of incorporating new strategies for optimal evaluation of lymphedema in future developing gynecologic clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Russo
- National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Prevention, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20892-9785, USA.
| | - Joan L Walker
- Stephen Cancer Center, OUHSC, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, USA.
| | - Jay W Carlson
- Cancer Research for Ozarks, 1235 E. Cherokee, Springfield, MO 65804, USA.
| | - Jeanne Carter
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Avenue, New York, NY, 10022, USA.
| | - Leigh C Ward
- University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia.
| | - Allan Covens
- University of Toronto and Sunnybrook Health Science Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
| | - Edward J Tanner
- Northwestern Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Prentice Women's Hospital, 250 E Superior, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.
| | - Jane M Armer
- Sinclair School of Nursing, University of Missouri Health, DC 116.05, Ellis Fischel Cancer Center, 115 Business Loop 70 West, Columbia, MO 65203, USA.
| | - Sheila Ridner
- Vanderbilt University School of Nursing, 461 21st Ave South, Nashville, TN 37240, USA.
| | - Sandi Hayes
- Queensland University of Technology, School of Public Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland, Australia.
| | - Alphonse G Taghian
- Harvard Medical School/Massachusetts General Hospital, Radiation Oncology, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
| | - Cheryl Brunelle
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
| | - Micael Lopez-Acevedo
- The George Washington University Hospital, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20037, USA.
| | - Brittany A Davidson
- Duke University School of Medicine, Duke Cancer Center, 20 Duke Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
| | - Mark V Schaverien
- The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
| | - Sharad A Ghamande
- Augusta University, Augusta Oncology, 3696 Wheeler Road, Augusta, GA 30909, USA.
| | - Michael Bernas
- TCU and UNTHSC School of Medicine, Forth Worth, TX 76207, USA.
| | | | | | - Kathryn Schmitz
- Penn State Cancer Institute, 400 University Drive, Hershey, PA 17033, USA.
| | - Barbara Coyle
- Patient Advocate, Lymphedema Advocacy Group, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Jeannette Zucker
- National Lymphedema Network, 411 Lafayette Street, 6th Floor, New York, NY 10003, USA.
| | - Danielle Enserro
- NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA.
| | - Stephanie Pugh
- NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Management Center, 1600 JFK Blvd, Suite 1020, Philadelphia, PA 1903, USA.
| | - Electra D Paskett
- The Ohio State University, 1590 N High Street, Suite 525, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
| | - Leslie Ford
- National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Prevention, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20892-9785, USA.
| | - Worta McCaskill-Stevens
- National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Prevention, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20892-9785, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Mullany SA, Miller DS, Robison K, Levinson K, Lee YC, Yamada SD, Walker JL, Markman M, Marin A, Mast P, Dizerega G. Phase II study of intraperitoneal submicron particle paclitaxel (SPP) plus IV carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing cytoreductive surgery. J Clin Oncol 2020. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2020.38.15_suppl.e18046] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
e18046 Background: Although advances in chemotherapy, cytoreductive surgery, and maintenance therapy (SOC) improved PFS for high grade epithelial ovarian cancer, > 20% of patients relapse during the first 6 months and 60% relapse after 6 months. Submicron particles (~800 nm) of paclitaxel (SPP) contain 1-2 billion molecules of pure drug that release tumoricidal levels of paclitaxel over many weeks. In a previous trial, percutaneous instillations of SPP in nonsurgical patients with intraperitoneal cancer were associated with reduced systemic and local toxicity as compared to standard chemotherapy regimens. (Williamson et al Cancer Chemo Pharm (2015) 75:1075). Methods: This study compared two dose-levels of IP SPP instilled in 200 ml of saline post-cytoreductive surgery. Eligible patients with primary (n = 6) or recurrent (n = 4) epithelial ovarian cancer who underwent complete cytoreductive surgery were enrolled to receive a single instillation of IP SPP followed by standard IV carboplatin and paclitaxel. Endpoints were PFS and evaluation of treatment-emergent adverse events. Clinical response was determined by CT scans and serum CA-125 measurements. Results: Of the 24 subjects screened, 10 were enrolled and received treatment: seven patients received 100 mg/m2 and three received 200 mg/m2. For analysis purposes, 7 out of 10 subjects were evaluable (1 withdrew, 1 died unrelated to study drug during IV treatment and 1 was unevaluable). Upon completion of planned chemotherapy post-SPP instillation, the PFS at 6 months was 66% (4/6) and at 12-months 66% (4/6) using RECIST 1.1. One subject had a complete response at the end of IV treatment, but died (unrelated to study treatment) before PFS evaluation. There was one case of incision dehiscence and one case of vaginal cuff leakage after surgery. Conclusions: This pilot study supports further evaluation of IP SPP to treat peritoneal carcinomas. Clinical trial information: NCT03029585.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - David S. Miller
- The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Katina Robison
- Women and Infants Hospital in Rhode Island, Providence, RI
| | | | - Yi-Chun Lee
- SUNY Health Science Center at Brooklyn, Brooklyn, NY
| | - Seiko Diane Yamada
- Section of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
| | - Joan L. Walker
- The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Mai PL, Huang HQ, Wenzel LB, Han PK, Moser RP, Rodriguez GC, Boggess J, Rutherford TJ, Cohn DE, Kauff ND, Phillips KA, Wilkinson K, Wenham RM, Hamilton C, Powell MA, Walker JL, Greene MH, Hensley ML. Prospective follow-up of quality of life for participants undergoing risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy or ovarian cancer screening in GOG-0199: An NRG Oncology/GOG study. Gynecol Oncol 2020; 156:131-139. [PMID: 31759774 PMCID: PMC6980744 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.10.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2019] [Revised: 10/08/2019] [Accepted: 10/22/2019] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) and ovarian cancer screening (OCS) are management options for women at increased risk of ovarian cancer. Long-term effects of these interventions on quality of life (QOL) are not well understood. METHODS GOG-0199 is a prospective cohort study of women at increased ovarian cancer risk who chose either RRSO or OCS as their risk management intervention. At study entry, 6, 12, 24 and 60 months of follow-up, participants completed the QOL questionnaire, which included the Medical Outcome Study Short Form-36, the Impact of Events Scales, the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Subscale, and the Sexual Activity Questionnaire. QOL measures were compared between the RRSO and OCS cohort at baseline and over time. RESULTS Five-hundred-sixty-two participants in the RRSO cohort and 1,010 in the OCS completed the baseline and at least one follow-up questionnaire. At baseline, participants selecting RRSO reported lower health-related QOL (HRQOL), greater ovarian cancer-related stress, greater anxiety, and more depressive symptomatology, which improved during follow-up, especially for ovarian cancer-related stress. Screening was not found to adversely impact HRQOL. Hormone-related menopausal symptoms worsened and sexual functioning declined during follow-up in both cohorts, but more so among participants who underwent RRSO. CONCLUSIONS HRQOL improved after surgery among women who chose RRSO and remained stable among participants undergoing screening. The adverse effects of RRSO and screening on short-term and long-term sexual activity and sexual functioning warrant consideration in the decision-making process for high-risk women.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Phuong L Mai
- Clinical Genetics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, 20850-9772, USA.
| | - Helen Q Huang
- NRG Oncology, Statistical and Data Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, 14263-0001, USA.
| | - Lari B Wenzel
- Center for Health Policy Research, University of California, Irvine, Irvine CA, 92697, USA.
| | - Paul K Han
- Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Maine Medical Center Research Institute, Portland, ME, 04101, USA.
| | - Richard P Moser
- Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, 20850-9761, USA.
| | - Gustavo C Rodriguez
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, North Shore University Health System; Evanston, IL, 60201, USA.
| | - John Boggess
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Raleigh NY 27607, USA.
| | | | - David E Cohn
- Ohio State University, Columbus Cancer Council; GYN Oncology; Columbus, OH, 43026, USA.
| | - Noah D Kauff
- Gynecologic Medical Oncology Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center; Surgery Department; New York, NY, 10065, USA.
| | - Kelly-Anne Phillips
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Division of Cancer Medicine, Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, 300 AU, Australia.
| | - Kelly Wilkinson
- University of Mississippi Medical Center, Dept. of Hematology/Oncology, Jackson, MS, 39216, USA.
| | - Robert M Wenham
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Gynecology Oncology Division; Tampa, FL, 33612-9497, USA.
| | - Chad Hamilton
- Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, 20889, USA.
| | - Matthew A Powell
- Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
| | - Joan L Walker
- Stephenson Cancer Center, Department of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104, USA.
| | - Mark H Greene
- Clinical Genetics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, 20850-9772, USA.
| | - Martee L Hensley
- Gynecologic Medical Oncology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Moore KN, Miller A, Bell-McGuinn KM, Schilder RJ, Walker JL, O'Cearbhaill RE, Guntupalli SR, Armstrong DK, Hagemann AR, Gray HJ, Duska LR, Mathews CA, Chen A, O'Malley D, Gordon S, Fracasso PM, Aghajanian C. A phase I study of intravenous or intraperitoneal platinum based chemotherapy in combination with veliparib and bevacizumab in newly diagnosed ovarian, primary peritoneal and fallopian tube cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2020; 156:13-22. [PMID: 31708167 PMCID: PMC7048389 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.10.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2019] [Revised: 10/06/2019] [Accepted: 10/09/2019] [Indexed: 01/23/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Improvements in disease free survival for epithelial ovarian, peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer (EOC) will only come with improved primary therapy. Incorporation of poly-ADP-ribose inhibitors (PARPi) in the frontline setting may represent one strategy. This study sought to determine the maximum tolerated and feasible doses of the PARPi veliparib in combination with chemotherapy for EOC. METHODS A phase I, 3 + 3 dose escalation evaluated dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in cycles 1-2. Once <2/6 patients experienced a DLT, that dose level expanded to evaluate feasibility over 4 cycles. This study opened 10/2009 and closed 8/2016. Eligible patients had untreated, stage II-IV EOC. Veliparib was added either continuous (day 1-21) or intermittent (day - 2 to 5) during 6 cycles of chemotherapy. Three chemotherapy backbones were evaluated (2 intravenous (q3week and weekly) and 1 intraperitoneal (IP)) all inclusive of bevacizumab with and as maintenance to 22 cycles. FINDINGS Dose evaluations for 424 treated patients were available. Regimen 1 (q3 week), continuous (Reg1c) the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was 250 mg veliparib BID and feasible dose was 150 mg BID. For regimen 1, intermittent (Reg1i) the MTD and feasible dose were 400 and 250 mg BID. For Reg2c (weekly paclitaxel) the MTD and feasible dose were 150 mg BID. For Reg2i the MTD and feasible dose were 250 and 150 mg BID. For Reg3c (IP) the MTD and feasible dose were 150 mg BID and for Reg3i (IP), the MTD and feasible dose were 400 mg and 300 mg BID. INTERPRETATION The feasible dose for Reg1c, 2c, 2i and 3c was 150 mg po BID. For Reg1i and 3i the dose was pushed to 250 and 300 mg po BID respectively. There is no apparent difference in efficacy between continuous and intermittent dosing indicating that the higher doses achieved in intermittent dosing may not be needed. (NCT00989651). FUNDING National Cancer Institute.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathleen N Moore
- Stephenson Cancer Center at the University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, USA.
| | - Austin Miller
- NRG Oncology Statistics & Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute.
| | | | - Russell J Schilder
- Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| | - Joan L Walker
- Stephenson Cancer Center at the University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Roisin E O'Cearbhaill
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | - Linda R Duska
- University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
| | - Cara A Mathews
- Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Providence, RI, USA.
| | - Alice Chen
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, NCI, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.
| | | | - Sarah Gordon
- Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA.
| | - Paula M Fracasso
- University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
| | - Carol Aghajanian
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Walker JL. Reply to F. Tomao et al and E.A. De Jaeghere et al. J Clin Oncol 2019; 37:3170. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.19.02091] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Joan L. Walker
- Joan L. Walker, MD, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Coleman RL, Spirtos NM, Enserro D, Herzog TJ, Sabbatini P, Armstrong DK, Kim JW, Park SY, Kim BG, Nam JH, Fujiwara K, Walker JL, Casey AC, Alvarez Secord A, Rubin S, Chan JK, DiSilvestro P, Davidson SA, Cohn DE, Tewari KS, Basen-Engquist K, Huang HQ, Brady MF, Mannel RS. Secondary Surgical Cytoreduction for Recurrent Ovarian Cancer. N Engl J Med 2019; 381:1929-1939. [PMID: 31722153 PMCID: PMC6941470 DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa1902626] [Citation(s) in RCA: 178] [Impact Index Per Article: 35.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Secondary surgical cytoreduction in women with platinum-sensitive, recurrent epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian-tube ("ovarian") cancer is widely practiced but has not been evaluated in phase 3 investigation. METHODS We randomly assigned patients with recurrent ovarian cancer who had received one previous therapy, had an interval during which no platinum-based chemotherapy was used (platinum-free interval) of 6 months or more, and had investigator-determined resectable disease (to no macroscopic residual disease) to undergo secondary surgical cytoreduction and then receive platinum-based chemotherapy or to receive platinum-based chemotherapy alone. Adjuvant chemotherapy (paclitaxel-carboplatin or gemcitabine-carboplatin) and use of bevacizumab were at the discretion of the investigator. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS A total of 485 patients underwent randomization, 240 to secondary cytoreduction before chemotherapy and 245 to chemotherapy alone. The median follow-up was 48.1 months. Complete gross resection was achieved in 67% of the patients assigned to surgery who underwent the procedure. Platinum-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab maintenance was administered to 84% of the patients overall and was equally distributed between the two groups. The hazard ratio for death (surgery vs. no surgery) was 1.29 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97 to 1.72; P = 0.08), which corresponded to a median overall survival of 50.6 months and 64.7 months, respectively. Adjustment for platinum-free interval and chemotherapy choice did not alter the effect. The hazard ratio for disease progression or death (surgery vs. no surgery) was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.66 to 1.01; median progression-free survival, 18.9 months and 16.2 months, respectively). Surgical morbidity at 30 days was 9%; 1 patient (0.4%) died from postoperative complications. Patient-reported quality of life decreased significantly after surgery but did not differ significantly between the two groups after recovery. CONCLUSIONS In this trial involving patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer, secondary surgical cytoreduction followed by chemotherapy did not result in longer overall survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; GOG-0213 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00565851.).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert L Coleman
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Nick M Spirtos
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Danielle Enserro
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Thomas J Herzog
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Paul Sabbatini
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Deborah K Armstrong
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Jae-Weon Kim
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Sang-Yoon Park
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Byoung-Gie Kim
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Joo-Hyun Nam
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Keiichi Fujiwara
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Joan L Walker
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Ann C Casey
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Angeles Alvarez Secord
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Steve Rubin
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - John K Chan
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Paul DiSilvestro
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Susan A Davidson
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - David E Cohn
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Krishnansu S Tewari
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Karen Basen-Engquist
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Helen Q Huang
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Mark F Brady
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| | - Robert S Mannel
- From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (R.L.C., K.B.-E.); Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, Las Vegas (N.M.S.); NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo (D.E., H.Q.H., M.F.B.), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (P.S.) - both in New York; the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati (T.J.H.); the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (D.K.A.); Seoul National University College of Medicine (J.-W.K.), Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (B.-G.K.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.-H.N.), Seoul, and the Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang (S.-Y.P.) - all in South Korea; Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan (K.F.); the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (J.L.W., R.S.M.); National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis (A.C.C.); Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.A.S.); Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.R.); Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco (J.K.C.); Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI (P.D.); the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver (S.A.D.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.E.C.); and the University of California, Irvine, Orange (K.S.T.)
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Carter J, Huang HQ, Armer J, Carlson JW, Lockwood S, Nolte S, Stewart BR, Kauderer J, Hutson A, Walker JL, Fleury AC, Bonebrake A, Soper JT, Mathews C, Zivanovic O, Richards WE, Tan A, Alberts DS, Barakat RR, Wenzel L. GOG 244 - The LymphEdema and Gynecologic cancer (LEG) study: The association between the gynecologic cancer lymphedema questionnaire (GCLQ) and lymphedema of the lower extremity (LLE). Gynecol Oncol 2019; 155:452-460. [PMID: 31679787 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.09.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2019] [Revised: 09/12/2019] [Accepted: 09/18/2019] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To explore whether patient-reported lymphedema-related symptoms, as measured by the Gynecologic Cancer Lymphedema Questionnaire (GCLQ), are associated with a patient-reported diagnosis of lymphedema of the lower extremity (LLE) and limb volume change (LVC) in patients who have undergone radical surgery, including lymphadenectomy, for endometrial, cervical, or vulvar cancer on Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) study 244. METHODS Patients completed the baseline and at least one post-surgery GCLQ and LVC assessment. The 20-item GCLQ measures seven symptom clusters-aching, heaviness, infection-related, numbness, physical functioning, general swelling, and limb swelling. LLE was defined as a patient self-reported LLE diagnosis on the GCLQ. LVC was measured by volume calculations based on circumferential measurements. A linear mixed model was fitted for change in symptom cluster scores and GCLQ total score and adjusted for disease sites and assessment time. RESULTS Of 987 eligible patients, 894 were evaluable (endometrial, 719; cervical, 136; vulvar, 39). Of these, 14% reported an LLE diagnosis (endometrial, 11%; cervical, 18%; vulvar, 38%). Significantly more patients diagnosed versus not diagnosed with LLE reported ≥4-point increase from baseline on the GCLQ total score (p < 0.001). Changes from baseline were significantly larger on all GCLQ symptom cluster scores in patients with LLE compared to those without LLE. An LVC increment of >10% was significantly associated with reported general swelling (p < 0.001), heaviness (p = 0.005), infection-related symptoms (p = 0.002), and physical function (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS Patient-reported symptoms, as measured by the GCLQ, discerned those with and without a patient-reported LLE diagnosis and demonstrated predictive value. The GCLQ combined with LVC may enhance our ability to identify LLE.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeanne Carter
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Dept Surgery, Gynecology Service and Dept Psychiatry, New York, NY, 10022, USA.
| | - Helen Q Huang
- NRG Oncology, Clinical Trial Development Division, Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Elm & Carlton Streets., Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA.
| | - Jane Armer
- Sinclair School of Nursing, DC 116.05, Mizzou North Suite 415, 115 Business Loop 70 West, Columbia, MO 65010, USA.
| | - Jay W Carlson
- Cancer Research for the Ozarks, 1235 E. Cherokee, Springfield, MO, 65804, USA.
| | - Suzy Lockwood
- Texas Christian University, Harris College of Nursing & Health Sciences, TCU Box 298620, Ft Worth, TX, 76129, USA.
| | - Susan Nolte
- Abington Memorial Hospital, 1200 Old York Road, Abington, PA, 19001, USA.
| | - Bob R Stewart
- Sinclair School of Nursing, DC 116.05, Mizzou North Suite 415, 115 Business Loop 70 West, Columbia, MO, 65010, USA.
| | - James Kauderer
- NRG Oncology, Clinical Trial Development Division, Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Elm & Carlton Streets., Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA.
| | - Alan Hutson
- NRG Oncology, Clinical Trial Development Division, Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Elm & Carlton Streets., Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA.
| | - Joan L Walker
- Stephenson Cancer Center, OUHSC, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104, USA.
| | - Aimee C Fleury
- Women's Cancer Center of Nevada, 3131 la Canada St. Ste 241, Las Vegas, NV, 89169, USA.
| | - Albert Bonebrake
- Cancer Research for the Ozarks-Cox Health. Ferrell Duncan Clinic GYN-ONC, Springfield, MO, 65807, USA.
| | - John T Soper
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, 110 Physicians Office BLDG, 170 Manning Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
| | - Cara Mathews
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Women & Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Alpert School of Medicine at Brown University, 101 Dudley St., Providence, RI, 02905, USA.
| | - Oliver Zivanovic
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
| | - William Edwards Richards
- Director of Gynecologic Oncology and Surgical Specialists, St. Joseph's/Candler Health System, 225 Candler Dr., Savannah, GA, 31405, USA.
| | - Annie Tan
- Minnesota Oncology, 11850 Blackfoot Street, NW, Suite 100, Coon Rapids, MN, 55433, USA.
| | - David S Alberts
- Department of Medicine, University of Arizona College of Medicine, 1501 N. Campbell Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85724, USA.
| | - Richard R Barakat
- Northwell Health Cancer Institute, 1111 Marcus Avenue, New Hyde Park, NY, 11042, USA.
| | - Lari Wenzel
- Program in Public Health, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA; Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA; Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Mai PL, Miller A, Gail MH, Skates S, Lu K, Sherman ME, Ioffe OB, Rodriguez G, Cohn DE, Boggess J, Rutherford T, Kauff ND, Rader JS, Phillips KA, DiSilvestro PA, Olawaiye AB, Ridgway MR, Greene MH, Piedmonte M, Walker JL. Risk-Reducing Salpingo-Oophorectomy and Breast Cancer Risk Reduction in the Gynecologic Oncology Group Protocol-0199 (GOG-0199). JNCI Cancer Spectr 2019; 4:pkz075. [PMID: 32337492 DOI: 10.1093/jncics/pkz075] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2019] [Revised: 03/18/2019] [Accepted: 10/02/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) has been associated with approximately 50% breast cancer risk reduction among women with a pathogenic variant in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2), a finding that has recently been questioned. Methods We estimated incidence rates of breast cancer and all cancers combined during 5 years of follow-up among participants selecting RRSO or ovarian cancer screening (OCS) among women with a BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant or strong breast and/or ovarian cancer family history. Ovarian or fallopian tube or peritoneal cancer incidence rates were estimated for the OCS group. Breast cancer hazard ratios (HRs) for time-dependent RRSO were estimated using Cox regression with age time-scale (4943 and 4990 women-years in RRSO and OCS cohorts, respectively). All statistical tests were two-sided. Results The RRSO cohort included 925 participants, and 1453 participants were in the OCS cohort (381 underwent RRSO during follow-up), with 88 incident breast cancers diagnosed. Among BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers, a non-statistically significant lower breast cancer incidence was observed in the RRSO compared with the OCS cohort (HR = 0.86, 95% confidence interval = 0.45 to 1.67; P = .67). No difference was observed in the overall population or among subgroups stratified by prior breast cancer history or menopausal status. Seven fallopian tube and four ovarian cancers were prospectively diagnosed in the OCS cohort, and one primary peritoneal carcinoma occurred in the RRSO cohort. Conclusions These data suggest that RRSO might be associated with reduced breast cancer incidence among women with a BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant, although the effect, if present, is small. This evolving evidence warrants a thorough discussion regarding the impact of RRSO on breast cancer risk with women considering this intervention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Phuong L Mai
- Clinical Genetics Branch, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD
| | - Austin Miller
- NRG Oncology, Statistical and Data Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY
| | - Mitchell H Gail
- Biostatistics Branch, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD
| | - Steven Skates
- Department of Biostatistics Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Karen Lu
- Department of GYN Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Mark E Sherman
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, and Environmental Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD
| | - Olga B Ioffe
- Department of Pathology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD
| | - Gustavo Rodriguez
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, IL.,Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chicago, Evanston, IL
| | - David E Cohn
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
| | - John Boggess
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Raleigh, NC
| | | | - Noah D Kauff
- Gynecology and Clinical Genetics Services, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Janet S Rader
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI
| | - Kelly-Anne Phillips
- Division of Cancer Medicine, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Paul A DiSilvestro
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Women & Infants Hospital, Providence, RI
| | - Alexander B Olawaiye
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Magee-Womens Hospital of UPMC, Pittsburgh, PA
| | | | - Mark H Greene
- Clinical Genetics Branch, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD
| | - Marion Piedmonte
- NRG Oncology, Statistical and Data Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY
| | - Joan L Walker
- Department of OB/GYN, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Affiliation(s)
| | - Joan L Walker
- University of Oklahoma School of Medicine, Oklahoma City, OK
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Walker JL, Brady MF, Wenzel L, Fleming GF, Huang HQ, DiSilvestro PA, Fujiwara K, Alberts DS, Zheng W, Tewari KS, Cohn DE, Powell MA, Van Le L, Davidson SA, Gray HJ, Rose PG, Aghajanian C, Myers T, Alvarez Secord A, Rubin SC, Mannel RS. Randomized Trial of Intravenous Versus Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Plus Bevacizumab in Advanced Ovarian Carcinoma: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol 2019; 37:1380-1390. [PMID: 31002578 PMCID: PMC6544459 DOI: 10.1200/jco.18.01568] [Citation(s) in RCA: 149] [Impact Index Per Article: 29.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/04/2019] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the impact of two different intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy regimens on progression-free survival (PFS) among women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian carcinoma. METHODS Eligible patients were randomly assigned to six cycles of IV paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 once per week with intravenous (IV) carboplatin area under the curve 6 (IV carboplatin) versus IV paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 once per week with IP carboplatin area under the curve 6 (IP carboplatin) versus once every 3 weeks IV paclitaxel 135 mg/m2 over 3 hours day 1, IP cisplatin 75 mg/m2 day 2, and IP paclitaxel 60 mg/m2 day 8 (IP cisplatin). All participants received bevacizumab 15 mg/kg IV every 3 weeks in cycles 2 to 22. RESULTS A total of 1,560 participants were enrolled and had 84.8 months of follow-up. The median PFS duration was 24.9 months in the IV carboplatin arm, 27.4 months in the IP carboplatin arm, and 26.2 months in the IP cisplatin arm. For the subgroup of 1,380 patients with stage II/III and residual disease of 1 cm or less, median PFS was 26.9 (IV-carboplatin), 28.7 (IP-carboplatin), and 27.8 months (IP cisplatin), respectively. Median PFS for patients with stage II/III and no residual disease was 35.9, 38.8, and 35.5 months, respectively. Median overall survival for all enrolled was 75.5, 78.9, and 72.9 months, respectively, and median overall survival for stage II/III with no gross residual disease was 98.8 months, 104.8 months, and not reached. Mean patient-reported Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy neurotoxicity scores (Gynecologic Oncology Group) were similar for all arms, but the mean Trial Outcome Index of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovary scores during chemotherapy were statistically worse in the IP cisplatin arm. CONCLUSION Compared with the IV carboplatin reference arm, the duration of PFS was not significantly increased with either IP regimen when combined with bevacizumab and was better tolerated than IP cisplatin.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joan L. Walker
- University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | | | - Lari Wenzel
- University of California, Irvine, Medical Center, Orange, CA
| | | | | | | | - Keiichi Fujiwara
- Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka-Shi, Japan
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Linda Van Le
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | | | - Heidi J. Gray
- University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Robert S. Mannel
- University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Armstrong DK, Moore KN, Miller A, Bell-McGuinn KM, Schilder RJ, Fracasso PM, Walker JL, Duska LR, Mathews CA, Chen AP, O'Malley DM, Gray HJ, O'Cearbhaill RE, Guntupalli SR, Hagemann AR, Aghajanian C. A phase I study of veliparib incorporated into front-line platinum based cheotherpy and bevacizumab in epithelial ovarian cancer (NCT00989651): A GOG/nrg trial. J Clin Oncol 2019. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.5523] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
5523 Background: Veliparib, a poly-(ADP-ribose)-polymerase inhibitor, increases anti-tumor activity when combined with platinum chemotherapy and has monotherapy activity in BRCA deficient tumors. This study was done to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of veliparib in combination with front line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Methods: Eligible patients had newly diagnosed, stage II-IV EOC. Six regimens were evaluated, 3 variations of chemo delivery with either continuous (D1-21) or intermittent (days-2-5) veliparib BID. Chemo included 1: IV q3week carboplatin (C) (AUC 6) and paclitaxel(T) (175mg/m2); 2, IV q3week C (AUC 6) and weekly T(80mg/m2); and 3, IV T (135mg/m2, day 1), IP cisplatin (75mg/m2, day 1 or 2) and IP T (60mg/m2, day 8). Bevacizumab 15mg/kg started cycle 2 and continued as monotherapy cycles 7-22. A 3+3 dose escalation design evaluated dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in cycles 1 and 2. Once < 2/6 patients experienced a DLT, that dose level was expanded to evaluate feasibility over 4 cycles. Results: The study accrued 424 treated patients. For regimen 1, continuous (Reg1c) the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was 250mg veliparib BID but the feasible dose was found to be 150mg BID. For regimen 1, intermittent (Reg1i) the MTD and feasible dose were 400 and 250mg BID respectively. For Reg2c the MTD and feasible dose were the same at 150mg BID. For Reg2i the MTD and feasible dose were 250 and 150mg BID respectively. For Reg3c the MTD and feasible dose are both 150mg BID and for Reg3i, the MTD was 400mg BID and the feasible dose felt to be 300mg BID. Median PFS by residual disease and BRCA status is: (Positive residual disease) 14.6, 19.1 and 16.9 months for BRCA+, BRCAwt and BRCA ukn respectively. For no gross residual disease the PFS is NR, 34.2 and 24.5 months respectively. Conclusions: Given the difficulty with toxicity not defined as a DLT, the RP2D for all regimens is veliparib 150mg BID. This data informed the dose that moved into the phase III trial GOG 3005/Velia: NCT02470585. Velia also incorporated maintenance veliparib instead of maintenance bevacizumab among all high grade serous patients (BRCA+ and wt). These results will determine utilization of veliparib in this space. Clinical trial information: NCT00989651.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah Kay Armstrong
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
| | - Kathleen N. Moore
- Stephenson Cancer Center at the University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Austin Miller
- Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY
| | | | | | | | - Joan L. Walker
- The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | | | | | - Alice P. Chen
- Developmental Therapeutics Clinic/Early Clinical Trials Development Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | | | - Heidi J. Gray
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | - Andrea R. Hagemann
- Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis and Siteman Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO
| | | |
Collapse
|
35
|
Hoover DS, Spears CA, Vidrine DJ, Walker JL, Shih YCT, Wetter DW. Smoking Cessation Treatment Needs of Low SES Cervical Cancer Survivors. Am J Health Behav 2019; 43:606-620. [PMID: 31046890 PMCID: PMC6686858 DOI: 10.5993/ajhb.43.3.14] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Objectives: We investigated the treatment needs and preferences of low socioeconomic status cervical cancer survivors to inform the adaptation of a theoretically- and empirically-based Motivation and Problem-Solving approach to facilitate cessation in this at-risk population. Methods: Individual in-depth interviews were conducted with 12 female smokers with cervical cancer. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using NVivo 10. Results: Most participants did not believe that smoking caused cervical cancer and attributed their diagnosis solely to human papillomavirus. They suggested that cessation treatment for cervical cancer survivors include psychoeducation about the impact of smoking on health and cancer and the benefits of quitting, pharmacotherapy, planning for quitting, strategies for coping with cravings/withdrawal, social support, real-time support, a nonjudgmental and understanding counselor, tailoring, and follow-up. They recommended that negativity/judgment and being told that "smoking is bad" not be included in treatment. Participants also suggested that treatment address stress management, issues specific to cervical cancer survivorship, and physical activity and healthy eating. Conclusions: Results highlight the unique treatment needs of low socioeconomic status smokers with cervical cancer and will inform the adaptation of an existing evidence-based inter- vention to encourage smoking cessation in this population.
Collapse
|
36
|
Conrad RD, Liu AH, Wentzensen N, Zhang RR, Dunn ST, Wang SS, Schiffman M, Gold MA, Walker JL, Zuna RE. Cytologic patterns of cervical adenocarcinomas with emphasis on factors associated with underdiagnosis. Cancer Cytopathol 2018; 126:950-958. [PMID: 30351473 PMCID: PMC6231976 DOI: 10.1002/cncy.22055] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2018] [Revised: 07/12/2018] [Accepted: 07/30/2018] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND New cervical cancers continue to be diagnosed despite the success of Papanicolaou (Pap) tests. In an effort to identify pitfalls that limit the diagnosis of adenocarcinoma, the authors reviewed the cytologic characteristics of endocervical adenocarcinomas in their patient population. METHODS Liquid-based cytology slides from 45 women who had concurrent, histologically confirmed cervical adenocarcinomas were reviewed retrospectively and semiquantitatively for 25 key cytologic traits. The original sign-out diagnosis, available clinical findings, and high-risk human papillomavirus (HR HPV) results also were noted. RESULTS Abundant tumor cellularity, nuclear size from 3 to 6 times normal, abundant 3-dimensional tumor cell groups, round cell shape, and cytoplasmic neutrophils characterized the 23 cases that were identified correctly as adenocarcinomas. Key reasons for undercalls included low tumor cellularity and low-grade columnar morphology; these also tended to correlate with low-grade or unusual adenocarcinoma variants on histology. Overall, 73% of adenocarcinomas had a concurrent positive HR HPV test. CONCLUSIONS Most endocervical adenocarcinomas can be diagnosed accurately in cases with classical features, but some cases continue to be problematic when evaluated based on cytologic features alone. Reflex HPV testing may help increase Pap test sensitivity for challenging cases that have atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance. Occasional cases with negative HR HPV test results remain of concern.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel D. Conrad
- Department of PathologyUniversity of Oklahoma Health Sciences CenterOklahoma CityOklahoma
| | - Angela H. Liu
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and GeneticsNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of HealthBethesdaMaryland
| | - Nicolas Wentzensen
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and GeneticsNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of HealthBethesdaMaryland
| | - Roy R. Zhang
- Department of PathologyUniversity of Oklahoma Health Sciences CenterOklahoma CityOklahoma
| | - S. Terence Dunn
- Department of PathologyUniversity of Oklahoma Health Sciences CenterOklahoma CityOklahoma
| | - Sophia S. Wang
- Cancer EtiologyBeckman Institute, City of HopeDuarteCalifornia
| | - Mark Schiffman
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and GeneticsNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of HealthBethesdaMaryland
| | - Michael A. Gold
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyUniversity of Oklahoma Health Sciences CenterOklahoma CityOklahoma
| | - Joan L. Walker
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyUniversity of Oklahoma Health Sciences CenterOklahoma CityOklahoma
| | - Rosemary E. Zuna
- Department of PathologyUniversity of Oklahoma Health Sciences CenterOklahoma CityOklahoma
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Felix AS, Cohn DE, Brasky TM, Zaino R, Park K, Mutch DG, Creasman WT, Thaker PH, Walker JL, Moore RG, Lele SB, Guntupalli SR, Downs LS, Nagel CI, Boggess JF, Pearl ML, Ioffe OB, Randall ME, Brinton LA. Receipt of adjuvant endometrial cancer treatment according to race: an NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group 210 Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018; 219:459.e1-459.e11. [PMID: 30096321 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2018] [Revised: 07/30/2018] [Accepted: 08/01/2018] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Black women with endometrial cancer are more likely to die of their disease compared with white women with endometrial cancer. These survival disparities persist even when disproportionately worse tumor characteristics among black women are accounted. Receipt of less complete adjuvant treatment among black patients with endometrial cancer could contribute to this disparity. OBJECTIVE We assessed the hypothesis that black women with endometrial cancer are less likely than their white counterparts to receive adjuvant treatment within subgroups defined by tumor characteristics in the NRG Oncology/Gynecology Oncology Group 210 Study. STUDY DESIGN Our analysis included 615 black and 4283 white women with endometrial cancer who underwent hysterectomy. Women completed a questionnaire that assessed race and endometrial cancer risk factors. Tumor characteristics were available from pathology reports and central review. We categorized women as low-, intermediate-, or high-risk based on the European Society for Medical Oncology definition. Adjuvant treatment was documented during postoperative visits and was categorized as no adjuvant treatment (54.3%), radiotherapy only (16.5%), chemotherapy only (15.2%), and radiotherapy plus chemotherapy (14.0%). We used polytomous logistic regression to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for multivariable-adjusted associations between race and adjuvant treatment in the overall study population and stratified by tumor subtype, stage, or European Society for Medical Oncology risk category. RESULTS Overall, black women were more likely to have received chemotherapy only (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.86) or radiotherapy plus chemotherapy (odds ratio, 2.01; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-2.62) compared with white women in multivariable-adjusted models. No racial difference in the receipt of radiotherapy only was observed. In tumor subtype-stratified models, black women had higher odds of receiving radiotherapy plus chemotherapy than white women when diagnosed with low-grade endometrioid (odds ratio, 2.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-3.93) or serous tumors (odds ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-3.08). Race was not associated with adjuvant treatment among women who had been diagnosed with other tumor subtypes. In stage-stratified models, we observed no racial differences in the receipt of adjuvant treatment. In models that were stratified by European Society for Medical Oncology risk group, black women with high-risk cancer were more likely to receive radiotherapy plus chemotherapy compared with white women (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.94). CONCLUSION Contrary to our hypothesis, we observed higher odds of specific adjuvant treatment regimens among black women as compared with white women within specific subgroups of endometrial cancer characteristics.
Collapse
|
38
|
Chan JK, Brady W, Monk BJ, Brown J, Shahin MS, Rose PG, Kim JH, Secord AA, Walker JL, Gershenson DM. A phase II evaluation of sunitinib in the treatment of persistent or recurrent clear cell ovarian carcinoma: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Study (GOG-254). Gynecol Oncol 2018; 150:247-252. [PMID: 29921512 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.05.029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2018] [Revised: 05/29/2018] [Accepted: 05/31/2018] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine the efficacy and tolerability of sunitinib in recurrent or persistent clear cell ovarian cancer patients. METHODS All patients had one or two prior regimens with measurable disease. Tumors were at least 50% clear cell histomorphology and negative for WT-1 antigen and estrogen receptor expression by immunohistochemistry. Sunitinib 50 mg per day for 4 weeks was administered in repeated 6-week cycles until disease progression or prohibitive toxicity. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months and clinical response. The study was designed to determine if the drug had a response rate of at least 20% or 6-month PFS of at least 25%. RESULTS Of 35 patients enrolled, 30 were treated and eligible (median age: 51, range: 27-73). Twenty-five (83%) were White, 4 (13%) Asian, and 1 (3%) unknown. The majority 28 (83%) patients, underwent ≤3 but 2 (7%) had 16 courses of study therapy. Five (16.7%) patients had PFS ≥6 months (90% CI: 6.8%-31.9%). Two (6.7%) patients had a partial or complete response (90% CI: 1.2%-19.5%). The median PFS was 2.7 months. The median overall survival was 12.8 months. The most common grade 3 adverse events were fatigue (4), hypertension (4), neutropenia (4), anemia (3), abdominal pain (3), and leukopenia (3). Grade 4-5 adverse events included: thrombocytopenia (5), anemia (2), acute kidney Injury (1), stroke (1), and allergic reaction (1). CONCLUSION Sunitinib demonstrated minimal activity in the second- and third-line treatment of persistent or recurrent clear cell ovarian carcinoma. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00979992.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John K Chan
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco, CA 94115, United States.
| | - William Brady
- NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Statistics & Data Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY 14263, United States.
| | - Bradley J Monk
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Arizona Oncology (US Oncology Network), University of Arizona College of Medicine, Creighton University School of Medicine at St. Joseph's Hospital, Phoenix, AZ 85016, United States.
| | - Jubilee Brown
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77230, United States.
| | - Mark S Shahin
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Abington Hospital-Jefferson Health, Abington, PA 19001, United States.
| | - Peter G Rose
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH 44195, United States.
| | - Jae-Hoon Kim
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Gangann Severence Hospital, Seoul 06273, Republic of Korea.
| | - Angeles Alvarez Secord
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC 27710, United States.
| | - Joan L Walker
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Oklahoma University, Stephenson Cancer Center, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, United States.
| | - David M Gershenson
- Department of GYN/ONC, Unit 1362, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77230, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Coleman RL, Enserro D, Spirtos N, Herzog TJ, Sabbatini P, Armstrong DK, Kim B, Fujiwara K, Walker JL, Flynn PJ, Secord AA, Cohn DE, Brady MF, Mannel RS. A phase III randomized controlled trial of secondary surgical cytoreduction (SSC) followed by platinum-based combination chemotherapy (PBC), with or without bevacizumab (B) in platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer (PSOC): A NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) study. J Clin Oncol 2018. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2018.36.15_suppl.5501] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Thomas J. Herzog
- University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati, OH
| | - Paul Sabbatini
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Deborah Kay Armstrong
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
| | - Byoung Kim
- Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea, Republic of (South)
| | - Keiichi Fujiwara
- Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan
| | - Joan L. Walker
- The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Patrick J. Flynn
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consotrium (MMCORC), Minneapolis, MN
| | | | | | - Mark F. Brady
- NRG Statistical and Data Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY
| | | |
Collapse
|
40
|
Walker JL, Bleaken BM, Romisher AR, Alnwibit AA, Menko AS. In wound repair vimentin mediates the transition of mesenchymal leader cells to a myofibroblast phenotype. Mol Biol Cell 2018; 29:1555-1570. [PMID: 29718762 PMCID: PMC6080657 DOI: 10.1091/mbc.e17-06-0364] [Citation(s) in RCA: 58] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Following injury, mesenchymal repair cells are activated to function as leader cells that modulate wound healing. These cells have the potential to differentiate to myofibroblasts, resulting in fibrosis and scarring. The signals underlying these differing pathways are complex and incompletely understood. The ex vivo mock cataract surgery cultures are an attractive model with which to address this question. With this model we study, concurrently, the mechanisms that control mesenchymal leader cell function in injury repair within their native microenvironment and the signals that induce this same cell population to acquire a myofibroblast phenotype when these cells encounter the environment of the adjacent tissue culture platform. Here we show that on injury, the cytoskeletal protein vimentin is released into the extracellular space, binds to the cell surface of the mesenchymal leader cells located at the wound edge in the native matrix environment, and supports wound closure. In profibrotic environments, the extracellular vimentin pool also links specifically to the mesenchymal leader cells and has an essential role in signaling their fate change to a myofibroblast. These findings suggest a novel role for extracellular, cell-surface–associated vimentin in mediating repair-cell function in wound repair and in transitioning these cells to a myofibroblast phenotype.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J L Walker
- Department of Pathology, Anatomy and Cell Biology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107
| | - B M Bleaken
- Department of Pathology, Anatomy and Cell Biology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107
| | - A R Romisher
- Department of Pathology, Anatomy and Cell Biology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107
| | - A A Alnwibit
- Department of Pathology, Anatomy and Cell Biology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107
| | - A S Menko
- Department of Pathology, Anatomy and Cell Biology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Kunos CA, Massett HA, Galassi A, Walker JL, Good MJ, Díaz LB, McCaskill-Stevens W. Leveraging National Cancer Institute Programmatic Collaboration for Uterine Cervix Cancer Patient Accrual in Puerto Rico. Front Oncol 2018; 8:102. [PMID: 29692980 PMCID: PMC5902541 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2018.00102] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2018] [Accepted: 03/23/2018] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Women in the U.S. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (PR) have a higher age-adjusted incidence rate for uterine cervix cancer than the U.S. mainland as well as substantial access and economic barriers to cancer care. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) funds a Minority/Underserved NCI Community Oncology Research Program in PR (PRNCORP) as part of a national network of community-based health-care systems to conduct multisite cancer clinical trials in diverse populations. Participation by the PRNCORP in NCI’s uterine cervix cancer clinical trials, however, has remained limited. This study reports on the findings of an NCI site visit in PR to assess barriers impeding site activation and accrual to its sponsored gynecologic cancer clinical trials. Qualitative, semi-structured individual, and group interviews were conducted at six PRNCORP-affiliated locations to ascertain: long-term trial accrual objectives; key stakeholders in PR that address uterine cervix cancer care; key challenges or barriers to activating and to enrolling patients in NCI uterine cervix cancer treatment trials; and resources, policies, or procedures in place or needed on the island to support NCI-sponsored clinical trials. An NCI-sponsored uterine cervix cancer radiation–chemotherapy intervention clinical trial (NCT02466971), already activated on the island, served as a test case to identify relevant patient accrual and site barriers. The site visit identified five key barriers to accrual: (1) lack of central personnel to coordinate referrals for treatment plans, medical tests, and medical imaging across the island’s clinical trial access points; (2) patient insurance coverage; (3) lack of a coordinated brachytherapy schedule at San Juan-centric service providers; (4) limited credentialed radiotherapy machines island-wide; and (5) too few radiology medical physicists tasked to credential trial-specified positron emission tomography scanners island-wide. PR offers a unique opportunity to study overarching and tactical strategies for improving accrual to NCI-sponsored gynecologic cancer clinical trials. Interview findings support adding and re-tasking personnel for coordinated trial-eligible patient referral, accrual, and treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles A Kunos
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Holly A Massett
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Annette Galassi
- Center for Global Health, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Joan L Walker
- Gynecologic Oncology Section, Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, United States
| | - Marge J Good
- Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Luis Báez Díaz
- Minority/Underserved NCI Community Oncology Research Program, San Juan, PR, United States
| | | |
Collapse
|
42
|
Felix AS, Brasky TM, Cohn DE, Mutch DG, Creasman WT, Thaker PH, Walker JL, Moore RG, Lele SB, Guntupalli SR, Downs LS, Nagel C, Boggess JF, Pearl ML, Ioffe OB, Deng W, Miller DS, Brinton LA. Endometrial carcinoma recurrence according to race and ethnicity: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group 210 Study. Int J Cancer 2017; 142:1102-1115. [PMID: 29063589 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.31127] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2017] [Revised: 09/20/2017] [Accepted: 10/04/2017] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
Non-Hispanic black (NHB) women are more likely to experience an endometrial carcinoma (EC) recurrence compared to non-Hispanic white (NHW) women. The extent to which tumor characteristics, socioeconomic status (SES) and treatment contribute to this observation is not well defined. In the NRG Oncology/Gynecology Oncology Group (GOG) 210 Study we evaluated associations between race/ethnicity and EC recurrence according to tumor characteristics with adjustment for potential confounders. Our analysis included 3,199 NHW, 532 NHB and 232 Hispanic women with EC. Recurrence was documented during follow-up. We used Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between race/ethnicity and EC recurrence in models stratified by histologic subtype (low-grade endometrioid, high-grade endometrioid, serous, mixed cell, carcinosarcoma, clear cell) or stage (I, II, III) and adjusted for age, SES, body mass index, smoking status and treatment. In histologic subtype-stratified models, higher EC recurrence was noted in NHB women with low-grade endometrioid (HR = 1.94, 95% CI = 1.21-3.10) or carcinosarcomas (HR = 1.66, 95% CI = 0.99-2.79) compared to NHWs. In stage-stratified models, higher EC recurrence was noted among NHB women with stage I (HR = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.06-2.05) and Hispanic women with stage III disease (HR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.11-2.95). Our observations of higher EC recurrence risk among NHB and Hispanic women, as compared to NHW women, were not explained by tumor characteristics, SES, treatment or other confounders. Other factors, such as racial differences in tumor biology or other patient factors, should be explored as contributors to racial disparities in EC recurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A S Felix
- Division of Epidemiology, Ohio State University College of Public Health, Columbus, OH
| | - T M Brasky
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH
| | - D E Cohn
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH
| | - D G Mutch
- Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
| | - W T Creasman
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC
| | - P H Thaker
- Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
| | - J L Walker
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma, OK
| | - R G Moore
- Program in Women's Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women and Infants Hospital/Brown University, Providence, RI
| | - S B Lele
- Gynecologic Oncology [SBL] & NRG Statistics and Data Management Center [WD], Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY
| | - S R Guntupalli
- Gynecologic Oncology, University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO
| | - L S Downs
- Gynecologic Oncology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
| | - Ci Nagel
- Gynecologic Oncology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH
| | - J F Boggess
- Gynecologic Oncology Program, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - M L Pearl
- Gynecologic Oncology, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY
| | - O B Ioffe
- Anatomical Pathology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD
| | - W Deng
- Gynecologic Oncology [SBL] & NRG Statistics and Data Management Center [WD], Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY
| | - D S Miller
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - L A Brinton
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Cohn DE, Sill MW, Walker JL, O'Malley D, Nagel CI, Rutledge TL, Bradley W, Richardson DL, Moxley KM, Aghajanian C. Randomized phase IIB evaluation of weekly paclitaxel versus weekly paclitaxel with oncolytic reovirus (Reolysin®) in recurrent ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 2017; 146:477-483. [PMID: 28756871 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.07.135] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2017] [Revised: 07/19/2017] [Accepted: 07/20/2017] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess whether the addition of oncolytic reovirus (Reolysin®) to weekly paclitaxel prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in the treatment of women with recurrent or persistent ovarian, tubal or primary peritoneal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with recurrent or persistent epithelial ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma, measurable or detectable disease, and three or fewer prior regimens were randomly assigned to paclitaxel (80mg/m2 intravenously days 1, 8, and 15 every 4weeks) or the combination of paclitaxel (80mg/m2 intravenously days 1, 8, and 15) plus reovirus 3×1010TCID50/day intravenously on days 1-5, both every 4weeks until disease progression or toxicity. The primary end point was PFS. The study was designed with 80% power for a one-sided alternative at a 10% level of significance to detect a reduction in the hazard by 37.5%. RESULTS The study accrued 108 patients, 100 of whom were evaluable for toxicity. Median PFS was 4.3months for paclitaxel and 4.4months for paclitaxel plus reovirus (hazard ratio, 1.11; 90% two-sided CI, 0.78 to 1.59; one-sided P=0.687). The proportion responding (overall response rate) to paclitaxel was 20% among 45 patients with measurable disease receiving paclitaxel alone, and 17.4% among the 46 patients treated with the combination. The asymptotic relative probability of responding was 0.87 (90% CI, 0.42 to 1.79). Severe adverse events were more common in the combination regimen than in paclitaxel arm for severe neutropenia (grade≥4, 12% versus 0%), and severe respiratory adverse events (grade≥3, 25% versus 2%). No deaths were considered treatment related. CONCLUSION The addition of reovirus to weekly paclitaxel in the treatment of women with recurrent or persistent ovarian, tubal or peritoneal cancer did not sufficiently reduce the hazard of progression or death to warrant further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David E Cohn
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, United States.
| | - Michael W Sill
- NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group, Statistics & Data Management, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, United States.
| | - Joan L Walker
- Department of OB/GYN, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, United States.
| | - David O'Malley
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, United States.
| | - Christa I Nagel
- Dept of Gynecologic Oncology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106, United States.
| | - Teresa L Rutledge
- Division of Gyn/Oncology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, United States.
| | - William Bradley
- Dept. of OB/GYN, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53226, United States.
| | - Debra L Richardson
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX 95390-9032, United States.
| | - Katherine M Moxley
- Department of OB/GYN, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, United States.
| | - Carol Aghajanian
- Department of Medical Oncology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 120021, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Brasky TM, Felix AS, Cohn DE, McMeekin DS, Mutch DG, Creasman WT, Thaker PH, Walker JL, Moore RG, Lele SB, Guntupalli SR, Downs LS, Nagel CI, Boggess JF, Pearl ML, Ioffe OB, Park KJ, Ali S, Brinton LA. Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs and Endometrial Carcinoma Mortality and Recurrence. J Natl Cancer Inst 2017; 109:1-10. [PMID: 28376204 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djw251] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2016] [Accepted: 09/26/2016] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Recent data suggest that the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may be associated with reductions in endometrial cancer risk, yet very few have examined whether their use is related to prognosis among endometrial cancer patients. Methods Study subjects comprised 4374 participants of the NRG Oncology/Gynecology Oncology Group 210 Study with endometrial carcinoma who completed a presurgical questionnaire that assessed history of regular prediagnostic NSAID use and endometrial cancer risk factors. Recurrences, vital status, and causes of death were obtained from medical records and cancer registries. Fine-Gray semiproportional hazards regression estimated adjusted subhazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations of NSAID use with endometrial carcinoma-specific mortality and recurrence. Models were stratified by endometrial carcinoma type (ie, type I [endometrioid] vs type II [serous, clear cell, or carcinosarcoma]) and histology. Results Five hundred fifty endometrial carcinoma-specific deaths and 737 recurrences occurred during a median of five years of follow-up. NSAID use was associated with 66% (HR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.21 to 2.30) increased endometrial carcinoma-specific mortality among women with type I cancers. Associations were statistically significant for former and current users, and strongest among former users who used NSAIDs for 10 years or longer (HR = 2.23, 95% CI = 1.19 to 4.18, two-sided P trend = .01). NSAID use was not associated with recurrence or endometrial carcinoma-specific mortality among women with type II tumors. Conclusions In this study, use of NSAIDs was associated with increased endometrial carcinoma-specific mortality, especially in patients with type I tumors. Barring a clear biologic mechanism by which NSAIDs would increase the risk of cause-specific mortality, cautious interpretation is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Theodore M Brasky
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Ashley S Felix
- College of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.,Hormonal and Reproductive Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.,Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - David E Cohn
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - D Scott McMeekin
- Stephenson Oklahoma Cancer Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma, USA
| | - David G Mutch
- Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - William T Creasman
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| | - Premal H Thaker
- Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Joan L Walker
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Richard G Moore
- Program in Women's Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women and Infants Hospital/Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Shashikant B Lele
- Gynecologic Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | | | - Levi S Downs
- Gynecologic Oncology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Christa I Nagel
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - John F Boggess
- Gynecologic Oncology Program, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Michael L Pearl
- Gynecologic Oncology, State University of New York at Stonybrook, Stonybrook, NY , USA
| | - Olga B Ioffe
- Anatomical Pathology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA
| | - Kay J Park
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Shamshad Ali
- NRG Statistics and Data Management Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Louise A Brinton
- Hormonal and Reproductive Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Wenzel LB, Mukamel DB, Osann K, Sparks L, Havrilesky LJ, Wright AA, Walker JL, Robison K, Alvarez RD, Van Le L, Wakabayashi MT, Randall LM, Wahi A, Hsieh S, Lipscomb J, Cohn DE. Shared decision-making in ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2017. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.5549] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
5549 Background: The value of shared decision-making in ovarian cancer is relatively unexplored. The goal of this study was to test a new decision aid, Patient Centered Outcome Aid (PCOA), that facilitates shared decision-making and helps ovarian cancer patients assimilate information and identify quality of life (QOL), toxicity and survival trade-offs between IP/IV therapy and IV therapy alone, based on their preferences and personal clinical characteristics. Methods: Participants were randomized to either PCOA (N=64) or usual care (N=59). Patient characteristics, QOL and shared decision-making data were collected at baseline and treatment initiation. Primary outcomes included satisfaction with treatment decision and decisional regret. Comparisons were made using t-tests and multivariate methods, adjusting for patient covariates. Multivariate linear models were used to investigate predictors of the primary outcomes. Results: Although satisfaction and decisional regret did not differ significantly by arm at any time point, the majority of PCOA patients indicated that the aid helped them understand treatment options and side effects. Notably, low shared decision-making and low QOL, were significant predictors of low satisfaction at treatment initiation (multiple r=0.76), six months (multiple r=0.48) and nine months (r=0.58). They were also significant predictors of decisional regret (multiple r=0.48 and 0.36 at 6 and 9 months). Patient covariates including age, stage, treatment and neoadjuvant status were not associated with differences in satisfaction or decisional regret. Conclusions: There were no clinically meaningful differences in satisfaction with the treatment decision, or decisional regret between the study arms. The absence of a difference may reflect the high degree of shared decision-making in both arms and greater disease severity in PCOA patients, who were more likely to report low baseline QOL and declining QOL over time. Both shared decision-making and quality of life were robust, independent predictors of satisfaction with the treatment decision over time. This implies that women who perceive themselves as less engaged in the decision process, and report poor QOL may benefit from a decision aid, in addition to physician counseling. Clinical trial information: NCT02259699.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Laura Jean Havrilesky
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
| | | | - Joan L. Walker
- The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Katina Robison
- Women and Infants Hospital in Rhode Island, Providence, RI
| | | | - Linda Van Le
- The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | | | | | - Aditi Wahi
- University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA
| | - Susie Hsieh
- University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA
| | - Joseph Lipscomb
- Rollins School of Public Health, Winship Cancer Institute, Atlanta, GA
| | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Grabosch S, Tseng G, Edwards RP, Lankes HA, Moore K, Odunsi K, Vlad A, Ma T, Strange M, Brozick J, Lugade A, Omilian A, Bshara W, Stuckey AR, Walker JL, Birrer M. Multiplex profiling identifies distinct local and systemic alterations during intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Gynecol Oncol 2017; 146:137-145. [PMID: 28483269 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.04.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2017] [Revised: 04/11/2017] [Accepted: 04/11/2017] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Ovarian cancer leads to abdominal carcinomatosis and late stage (III/IV) diagnosis in 75% of patients. Three randomized phase III trials have demonstrated that intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy improves outcomes in epithelial ovarian cancer. While IP treatment is validated by clinical trials, there is a poor understanding of the mechanism(s) leading to the survival advantage other than the increased concentration of cytotoxic drugs within the tumor microenvironment. A better understanding of this process through analysis of dynamic biomarkers should promote novel approaches that may enhance tumor clearance. We propose this pilot study to confirm the feasibility of collecting serial peritoneal samples from implanted catheters in women receiving IP chemotherapy. We believe these specimens may be used for multiplex analysis to reveal unique biomarker fluctuations when compared to peripheral blood. METHODS From 13 women participating on GOG 252, 30 whole blood, 12 peritoneal fluid (PF), and 20 peritoneal wash (PW) with 30mL saline were obtained. Samples were requested prior to the first three chemotherapy cycles. Samples were assessed for volume, cell populations, protein, RNA, and miRNA content changes. RESULTS Median volume for PF was 1.6mL and 3.1mL for PW. PW is a dilution of PF capable of capturing measurable biomarkers. Peritoneal aspirates contain a unique profile of biomarkers distinct from blood. miRNA undergo earlier alteration with chemotherapy than genes. Flow cytometry does not adequately capture biomarker fluctuations. CONCLUSIONS As a proof of principle study, this trial provides evidence that sampling the peritoneal cavity can be adapted for biomarker analysis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shannon Grabosch
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Magee-Womens Research Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Magee-Womens Hospital of UPMC, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
| | - George Tseng
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
| | - Robert P Edwards
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Magee-Womens Research Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Magee-Womens Hospital of UPMC, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
| | - Heather A Lankes
- Statistics & Data Management Center, NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA.
| | - Kathleen Moore
- Stephenson Oklahoma Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, USA.
| | - Kunle Odunsi
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA.
| | - Anda Vlad
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Magee-Womens Research Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
| | - Tianzhou Ma
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
| | - Mary Strange
- Magee-Womens Research Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
| | - Joan Brozick
- Magee-Womens Research Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
| | - Amit Lugade
- Center for Immunotherapy, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA.
| | - Angela Omilian
- Department of Pathology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA.
| | - Wiam Bshara
- Department of Pathology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA.
| | - Ashley R Stuckey
- The Program in Women's Oncology, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI, USA.
| | - Joan L Walker
- Stephenson Oklahoma Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, USA.
| | - Michael Birrer
- Department of Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital Gillette Center, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Coleman RL, Brady MF, Herzog TJ, Sabbatini P, Armstrong DK, Walker JL, Kim BG, Fujiwara K, Tewari KS, O'Malley DM, Davidson SA, Rubin SC, DiSilvestro P, Basen-Engquist K, Huang H, Chan JK, Spirtos NM, Ashfaq R, Mannel RS. Bevacizumab and paclitaxel-carboplatin chemotherapy and secondary cytoreduction in recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group study GOG-0213): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2017; 18:779-791. [PMID: 28438473 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(17)30279-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 393] [Impact Index Per Article: 56.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2016] [Revised: 02/27/2017] [Accepted: 02/27/2017] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Platinum-based chemotherapy doublets are a standard of care for women with ovarian cancer recurring 6 months after completion of initial therapy. In this study, we aimed to explore the roles of secondary surgical cytoreduction and bevacizumab in this population, and report the results of the bevacizumab component here. METHODS The multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 GOG-0213 trial was done in 67 predominantly academic centres in the USA (65 centres), Japan (one centre), and South Korea (one centre). Eligible patients were adult women (aged ≥18 years) with recurrent measurable or evaluable epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer, and a clinical complete response to primary platinum-based chemotherapy, who had been disease-free for at least 6 months following last infused cycle of platinum. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to standard chemotherapy (six 3-weekly cycles of paclitaxel [175 mg/m2 of body surface area] and carboplatin [area under the curve 5]) or the same chemotherapy regimen plus bevacizumab (15 mg/kg of bodyweight) every 3 weeks and continued as maintenance every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Individuals who participated in both the bevacizumab objective and surgical objective (which is ongoing) were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive either of these two chemotherapy regimens with or without prior secondary cytoreductive surgery. Randomisation for the bevacizumab objective was stratified by treatment-free interval and participation in the surgical objective. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00565851. FINDINGS Between Dec 10, 2007, and Aug 26, 2011, 674 women were enrolled and randomly assigned to standard chemotherapy (n=337) or chemotherapy plus bevacizumab (n=377). Median follow-up at the end of the trial on Nov 5, 2014, was 49·6 months in each treatment group (IQR 41·5-62·2 for chemotherapy plus bevacizumab; IQR 40·8-59·3 for chemotherapy), at which point 415 patients had died (214 in the chemotherapy group and 201 in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group). Based on pretreatment stratification data, median overall survival in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group was 42·2 months (95% CI 37·7-46·2) versus 37·3 months (32·6-39·7) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·829; 95% CI 0·683-1·005; p=0·056). We identified incorrect treatment-free interval stratification data for 45 (7%) patients (equally balanced between treatment groups); a sensitivity analysis of overall survival based on the audited treatment-free interval stratification data gave an adjusted HR of 0·823 (95% CI 0·680-0·996; p=0·0447). In the safety population (all patients who initiated treatment), 317 (96%) of 325 patients in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group had at least one grade 3 or worse adverse event compared with 282 (86%) of 332 in the chemotherapy group; the most frequently reported of these in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group compared with the chemotherapy group were hypertension (39 [12%] vs two [1%]), fatigue (27 [8%] vs eight [2%]), and proteinuria (27 [8%] vs none). Two (1%) treatment-related deaths occurred in the chemotherapy group (infection [n=1] and myelodysplastic syndrome [n=1]) compared with nine (3%) in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group (infection [n=1], febrile neutropenia [n=1], myelodysplastic syndrome [n=1], secondary malignancy [n=1]; deaths not classified with CTCAE terms: disease progression [n=3], sudden death [n=1], and not specified [n=1]). INTERPRETATION The addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy, followed by maintenance therapy until progression, improved the median overall survival in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer. Although the intention-to-treat analysis for overall survival was not significant, our sensitivity analysis based on corrected treatment-free interval stratification indicates that this strategy might be an important addition to the therapeutic armamentarium in these patients. FUNDING National Cancer Institute and Genentech.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert L Coleman
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology & Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
| | - Mark F Brady
- NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Statistics & Data Center, University of Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Thomas J Herzog
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Paul Sabbatini
- Gynecologic Medical Oncology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Deborah K Armstrong
- Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Department of Medical Oncology, Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Joan L Walker
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Byoung-Gie Kim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwayn University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Keiichi Fujiwara
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka-Shi, Japan
| | - Krishnansu S Tewari
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California, Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA, USA
| | - David M O'Malley
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Ohio State University, James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Susan A Davidson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Colorado School of Medicine and Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, CO, USA
| | - Stephen C Rubin
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Paul DiSilvestro
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women & Infants Hospital, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Karen Basen-Engquist
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology & Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Helen Huang
- NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Statistics & Data Center, University of Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - John K Chan
- Gynecologic Cancer Program, California Pacific-Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Sutter Research Institute, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | | | - Robert S Mannel
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Mai PL, Piedmonte M, Han PK, Moser RP, Walker JL, Rodriguez G, Boggess J, Rutherford TJ, Zivanovic O, Cohn DE, Thigpen JT, Wenham RM, Friedlander ML, Hamilton CA, Bakkum-Gamez J, Olawaiye AB, Hensley ML, Greene MH, Huang HQ, Wenzel L. Factors associated with deciding between risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and ovarian cancer screening among high-risk women enrolled in GOG-0199: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 2017; 145:122-129. [PMID: 28190649 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.02.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2017] [Accepted: 02/03/2017] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Women at increased genetic risk of ovarian cancer (OC) are recommended to have risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) after completion of reproductive planning. Effective screening has not been established, and novel screening modalities are being evaluated. METHODS Participants chose either RRSO or a novel OC screening regimen (OCS) as their risk management option, and provided demographic and other data on BRCA mutation status, cancer worry, perceived intervention risks/benefits, perceived cancer risk, and quality-of-life at enrollment. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses to evaluate factors influencing decision between RRSO and OCS. RESULTS Of 2287 participants enrolled, 904 (40%) chose RRSO and 1383 (60%) chose OCS. Compared with participants choosing OCS, participants choosing RRSO were older (p<0.0001), more likely to carry deleterious BRCA1/2 mutations (p<0.0001), perceive RRSO as effective, be more concerned about surgical harms and OCS limitations, and report higher perceived OC risk and OC-related worry. OCS participants were more likely to perceive screening as effective, be more concerned about menopausal symptoms, infertility, and loss of femininity, and report better overall quality-of-life. Twenty-four percent of participants believed they would definitely develop OC, and half estimated their lifetime OC risk as >50%, both higher than objective risk estimates. CONCLUSIONS Cancer worry, BRCA1/2 mutation status, and perceived intervention-related risks and benefits were associated with choosing between RRSO and OCS. Efforts to promote individualized, evidence-based, shared medical decision-making among high-risk women facing management choices should focus on conveying accurate OC risk estimates, clarifying the current understanding of intervention-related benefits and limitations, and addressing OC worry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Phuong L Mai
- Clinical Genetics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD 20852-9772, United States.
| | - Marion Piedmonte
- NRG Oncology, Statistical and Data Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY 14263, United States.
| | - Paul K Han
- Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Maine Medical Center Research Institute, Portland, ME 04101, United States.
| | - Richard P Moser
- Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD 20850, United States.
| | - Joan L Walker
- Stephenson Cancer Center, Department of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, United States.
| | - Gustavo Rodriguez
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, IL 60201, United States.
| | - John Boggess
- Gynecologic Oncology Program, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, United States.
| | - Thomas J Rutherford
- Gynecologic Oncology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06520, United States.
| | - Oliver Zivanovic
- Innovative Surgical Technology, Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10022, United States.
| | - David E Cohn
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, United States.
| | - J Tate Thigpen
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS 39216, United States.
| | - Robert M Wenham
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Program of Chemical Biology and Molecular Medicine, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL 33612, United States.
| | | | - Chad A Hamilton
- Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD 20889, United States.
| | - Jamie Bakkum-Gamez
- Department of GYN Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, United States.
| | - Alexander B Olawaiye
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Womens Hospital of UPMC, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15143, United States.
| | - Martee L Hensley
- Gynecologic Medical Oncology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY 10065, United States.
| | - Mark H Greene
- Clinical Genetics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD 20852-9772, United States.
| | - Helen Q Huang
- NRG Oncology, Statistical and Data Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY 14263, United States.
| | - Lari Wenzel
- Center for Health Policy Research, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA 92697, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Ng CS, Zhang Z, Lee SI, Marques HS, Burgers K, Su F, Bauza J, Mannel RS, Walker JL, Huh WK, Rubin SC, DiSilvestro P, Martin LP, Chan JK, Bookman MA, Coleman RL, Lee TY. CT Perfusion as an Early Biomarker of Treatment Efficacy in Advanced Ovarian Cancer: An ACRIN and GOG Study. Clin Cancer Res 2017; 23:3684-3691. [PMID: 28174234 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-16-1859] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2016] [Revised: 01/05/2017] [Accepted: 01/10/2017] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Purpose: ACRIN 6695 was a feasibility study investigating whether CT perfusion (CTP) biomarkers are associated with progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months (PFS-6) in patients with advanced ovarian cancer who were treated with carboplatin and either dose-dense (weekly) or conventional (3-weekly) paclitaxel, with optional bevacizumab in the prospective phase III GOG-0262 trial.Experimental Design: ACRIN 6695 recruited participants with residual disease after primary cytoreductive surgery or planned interval cytoreduction following neoadjuvant therapy, to undergo CTP studies before (T0), 3 weeks (T1), and 4 weeks (T2) after chemotherapy initiation. Tumor blood flow (BF) and blood volume (BV) were derived with commercial software. Fisher exact tests assessed the associations of CTP biomarkers changes from T0 to T2 dichotomized at zero with PFS-6 and overall radiographic response rate, while Cox regression assessed the associations between CTP biomarker changes and PFS and overall survival (OS). Bonferroni correction was used to account for multiple comparisons.Results: Seventy-six of 120 enrolled patients from 19 centers were evaluable with a median age of 61 years. BV increase was significantly associated with lower chance of PFS-6 (P = 0.028), while BF achieves borderline significance (P = 0.053). In addition, BF increase was associated with shorter PFS (HR 2.9, 95% CI, 1.3-6.4, P = 0.008) and remained significant after adjusting for age, change in tumor volume, and surgery status (P = 0.007). Neither BF nor BV changes were significantly associated with treatment response rate or OS.Conclusions: Early CTP biomarkers measurement may provide early prognostic information for PFS in newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. Clin Cancer Res; 23(14); 3684-91. ©2017 AACR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chaan S Ng
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Susanna I Lee
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | | | - Feng Su
- Robarts Research Institute, London, Ontario
| | | | - Robert S Mannel
- University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
| | - Joan L Walker
- University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
| | | | | | - Paul DiSilvestro
- Women and Infants Hospital, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
| | | | | | | | - Robert L Coleman
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Ting-Yim Lee
- Robarts Research Institute, London, Ontario. .,Lawson Health Research Institute, London, Ontario
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Gourley C, Walker JL, Mackay HJ. Update on Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2017; 35:143-51. [PMID: 27249695 DOI: 10.1200/edbk_158927] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
Surgical treatment and chemotherapy administration in women with epithelial ovarian cancer is more controversial today than at any point in the last 3 decades. The use of chemotherapy administered intraperitoneally has been particularly contentious. Three large randomized phase III studies, multiple meta-analyses, and now real-world data have demonstrated substantial outcome benefit for the use of chemotherapy administered intraperitoneally versus intravenously for first-line postoperative treatment of optimally debulked advanced ovarian cancer. Unfortunately, for each of these randomized studies, there was scope to either criticize the design or otherwise refute adoption of this route of administration. As a result, the uptake has been variable in North America, although in Europe it has been practically nonexistent. Reasons for this include unquestionable additional toxicity, more inconvenience, and extra cost. However, 10-year follow up of these studies demonstrates unprecedented survival in the intraperitoneal arm (median survival 110 months in patients with completely debulked stage III), raising the possibility that by combining maximal debulking surgery with postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy it may be possible to bring about a step change in the outcomes for these patients. In this review, we discuss the rationale for administering chemotherapy intraperitoneally, the merits of the main randomized clinical trials, the evidence regarding optimal regimes, issues of toxicity, port considerations, and reasons for lack of universal adoption. We also explore potential clinical and biologic factors that may be useful for patient selection in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlie Gourley
- From the Edinburgh Cancer Research Centre, Medical Research Council, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom; Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma, Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK; Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - Joan L Walker
- From the Edinburgh Cancer Research Centre, Medical Research Council, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom; Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma, Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK; Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - Helen J Mackay
- From the Edinburgh Cancer Research Centre, Medical Research Council, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom; Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma, Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK; Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada
| |
Collapse
|