BRCA1/2 Mutation Types Do Not Affect Prognosis in Ovarian Cancer Patients

Background: High grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC) is the most lethal type of epithelial ovarian cancer, with a prevalence of germline BRCA1/2 mutations as high as 20%. Our objective is to determine whether the location of mutations in the different domains of the BRCA1/2 genes affects the clinical outcome of HGSOC patients. Methods: A total of 51 women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutated ovarian cancer were identified. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. Results: In our study cohort, 35 patients were carriers of germline mutations in BRCA1 and 16 in BRCA2. The median PFS time following completion of the primary therapy was 23.8 months (95% CI 20.1–27.5) and the median OS was 92.9 months (95% CI 69.8–116.1) in all BRCA carriers. After multivariate analysis, no significant association among the location or type of BRCA1/2 mutation with PFS or OS was identified. Notably, significant differences in PFS between carriers of identical mutations in the same BRCA gene were detected. Conclusions: Among HGSOC patients, BRCA1/2 carriers with mutations in different locations of the genes show no significant difference in survival outcomes, in terms of PFS and OS, suggesting the potential effect of other genetic abnormalities and co-contributing risk factors.     

Prognostic value of complete metabolic response on 18F-FDG-PET/CT after three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced high-grade serous ovarian cancer

ObjectiveWe investigated the prognostic value of complete metabolic response (CMR) on ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT) after 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in advanced high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSC).MethodsPET/CT at baseline and after 3 cycles of NAC were performed; peak standardized uptakes were measured. PET parameters were compared with NAC parameter: cancer antigen-125 (CA-125) normalization before interval debulking surgery (IDS) and chemotherapy response score (CRS) to predict platinum-sensitivity. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine correlations between PET parameters and survival. Prognostic factors were obtained by multivariate Cox regression analysis.ResultsBetween 2007 and 2020, 102 patients were recruited: 19 (18.6%) were designated as CMR group and 83 (81.4%) as non-CMR group. CMR after 3 cycles of NAC showed the highest accuracy in predicting platinum-sensitivity (area under the curve [AUC]=0.729; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.552–0.823; p=0.017), compared with CA-125 normalization before IDS (AUC=0.626; 95% CI=0.542–0.758; p=0.010) and CRS (AUC=0.613; 95% CI=0.490–0.735; p=0.080). CMR demonstrated better prognosis than non-CMR in progression-free survival (PFS) (median PFS, 23.9 months vs. 16.4 months; p=0.021) and overall survival (OS) (median OS, not reached vs. 69.7 months; p=0.025). In multivariate analysis, CMR was associated with a lower risk of recurrence (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]=0.50; 95% CI=0.27–0.92; p=0.027) and death (aHR=0.23; 95% CI=0.05–0.99; p=0.048).ConclusionCMR after 3 cycles of NAC can be a prognostic factor for both recurrence and death in advanced HGSC.     

Overall survival and updated progression-free survival outcomes in a randomized phase II study of combination cediranib and olaparib versus olaparib in relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer

BackgroundOlaparib is a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor and cediranib is an oral anti-angiogenic. In the primary analysis of this phase II study, combination cediranib/olaparib improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with olaparib alone in relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. This updated analysis was conducted to characterize overall survival (OS) and update PFS outcomes.Patients and methodsNinety patients were enrolled to this randomized, open-label, phase II study between October 2011 and June 2013 across nine United States-based academic centers. Data cut-off was 21 December 2016, with a median follow-up of 46 months. Participants had relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer of high-grade serous or endometrioid histology or had a deleterious germline BRCA1/2 mutation (gBRCAm). Participants were randomized to receive olaparib capsules 400 mg twice daily or cediranib 30 mg daily and olaparib capsules 200 mg twice daily until disease progression.ResultsIn this updated analysis, median PFS remained significantly longer with cediranib/olaparib compared with olaparib alone (16.5 versus 8.2 months, hazard ratio 0.50; P = 0.007). Subset analyses within stratum defined by BRCA status demonstrated statistically significant improvement in PFS (23.7 versus 5.7 months, P = 0.002) and OS (37.8 versus 23.0 months, P = 0.047) in gBRCA wild-type/unknown patients, although OS was not statistically different in the overall study population (44.2 versus 33.3 months, hazard ratio 0.64; P = 0.11). PFS and OS appeared similar between the two arms in gBRCAm patients. The most common CTCAE grade 3/4 adverse events with cediranib/olaparib remained fatigue, diarrhea, and hypertension.ConclusionsCombination cediranib/olaparib significantly extends PFS compared with olaparib alone in relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Subset analyses suggest this margin of benefit is driven by PFS prolongation in patients without gBRCAm. OS was also significantly increased by the cediranib/olaparib combination in this subset of patients. Additional studies of this combination are ongoing and should incorporate analyses based upon BRCA status.Trial RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT0111648     

PARP inhibitors for BRCA1/2-mutated and sporadic ovarian cancer: current practice and future directions

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors cause targeted tumour cell death in homologous recombination (HR)-deficient cancers, including BRCA-mutated tumours, by exploiting synthetic lethality. PARP inhibitors are being evaluated in late-stage clinical trials of ovarian cancer (OC). Recently, olaparib was the first PARP inhibitor approved in the European Union and United States for the treatment of advanced BRCA-mutated OC. This paper reviews the role of BRCA mutations for tumorigenesis and PARP inhibitor sensitivity, and summarises the clinical development of PARP inhibitors for the treatment of patients diagnosed with OC. Among the five key PARP inhibitors currently in clinical development, olaparib has undergone the most extensive clinical investigation. PARP inhibitors have demonstrated durable antitumour activity in BRCA-mutated advanced OC as a single agent in the treatment and maintenance setting, particularly in platinum-sensitive disease. PARP inhibitors are well tolerated; however, further careful assessment of moderate and late-onset toxicity is mandatory in the maintenance and adjuvant setting, respectively. PARP inhibitors are also being evaluated in combination with chemotherapeutic and novel targeted agents to potentiate antitumour activities. Current research is extending the use of PARP inhibitors beyond BRCA mutations to other sensitising molecular defects that result in HR-deficient cancer, and is defining an HR-deficiency signature. Trials are underway to determine whether such a signature will predict sensitivity to PARP inhibitors in women with sporadic OC.     

What Is the Place of PARP Inhibitors in Ovarian Cancer Treatment?

Poly-ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have been one of the most exciting developments in the treatment of ovarian cancer in recent years. Demonstration of anti-cancer activity has led to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) approval of the PARP inhibitor (PARPi) olaparib as maintenance therapy in women with BRCA-mutated (BRCAm) ovarian cancer with platinum-sensitive recurrence following response to platinum therapy and the US Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) approval of olaparib in relapsed germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm) ovarian cancer in women who have received at least three prior chemotherapy treatments, both occurring in 2014. Additional trials are underway or awaiting final analysis with olaparib, other PARPis, and PARPi combinations to further elucidate the activity of these drugs in various clinical settings. This review will focus on the current clinical experience and ongoing trials with PARPis in ovarian cancer.     

Relative cerebral blood volume is a potential predictive imaging biomarker of bevacizumab efficacy in recurrent glioblastoma

Background

To analyze the relevance of dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MRI (DSC-MRI) derived relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) analysis for predicting response to bevacizumab (BEV) in patients with recurrent glioblastoma (rGB).

Methods

A total of 127 patients diagnosed with rGB receiving either bevacizumab (71 patients, BEV cohort) or alkylating chemotherapy (56 patients, non–BEV cohort) underwent conventional anatomic MRI and DSC-MRI at baseline and at first follow-up after treatment initiation. The mean rCBV of the contrast-enhancing tumor (cT1) as well as cT1 and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) volumes at both time points were correlated with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) using Cox proportional hazard models, logisticregression, and the log-rank test.

Results

Baseline rCBV was associated with both PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.3; P < .01) and OS (HR = 1.3; P < .01) in the BEV cohort and predicted 6-month PFS in 82% and 12-month OS in 79% of patients, whereas it was not associated with PFS (HR = 1.0; P = .70) or OS (HR = 1.0; P = .47) in the non-BEV cohort. Corresponding median OS and PFS rates in the BEV cohort for patients with rCBV-values less than 3.92 (optimal threshold from receiver operating characteristic [ROC] analysis of 12-month OS data) were 14.2 and 6.0 months, as compared to 6.6 and 2.8 months for patients with rCBV-values greater than 3.92 (P < .01, respectively). cT1 and FLAIR volumes at first follow-up were significant predictors of 6-month PFS and 12-month OS in the BEV cohort but not in the non-BEVcohort. Corresponding volumes at baseline were not significant in any cohort.

Conclusions

Pretreatment rCBV is a potential predictive imaging biomarker in BEV-treated rGB but not alkylating chemotherapy-treated rGB, which is superior to volumetric analysis of conventional anatomic MRI and predicts 6-month PFS and 12-month OS in 80% of BEV-treated patients.     

Systemic Inflammatory Markers of Survival in Epidermal Growth Factor–Mutated Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Single-Institution Analysis,Systematic Review,and Meta-analysis

BackgroundSystemic inflammatory response (SIR) may influence prognosis in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated (m) non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Pretreatment SIR markers (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio [NLR], platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio [LMR], lactate dehydrogenase [LDH], and lung immune prognostic index [LIPI]) were assessed as prognostic factors in NSCLC survival.Patients and MethodsRetrospective survival analysis (overall survival [OS] and progression-free survival [PFS]) of EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre were performed separately for early (I-IIIa) and late (IIIb-IV) stage disease for individual SIR variables, dichotomized by optimal cutoff points by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling. A systematic review and meta-analysis of known SIR studies in patients with late-stage EGFR-mutated were also performed.ResultsFrom 2012 to 2019, in 530 patients, significant adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) for OS comparing high versus low NLR were 2.12 for early stage and 1.79 for late stage disease. Additionally, late stage cohorts had significant associations, as follows: high versus low derived NLR, aHR = 1.53; LMR, aHR = 0.62; LDH, aHR = 2.04; and LIPI, aHR = 2.04. Similar patterns were found for PFS in early stage NLR (aHR = 1.96) and late stage NLR (aHR = 1.46), while for PFS, only late stage derived NLR (aHR = 1.34), LDH (aHR = 1.75), and LIPI (aHR = 1.66) were significant. A meta-analysis confirmed that NLR, LMR, LDH, and LIPI were all significantly associated with OS and PFS in the late stage.ConclusionThis primary study and meta-analysis demonstrated that LMR and LDH were significantly associated with late stage EGFR-mutated NSCLC outcomes, and the LIPI scoring system was prognostic. NLR remained an independent prognostic factor across all stages and could represent an early marker of immuno-oncology interactions.     

Reproductive potential and performance of fertility preservation strategies in BRCA-mutated breast cancer patients

BackgroundPreclinical evidence suggests a possible negative impact of deleterious BRCA mutations on female fertility. However, limited and rather conflicting clinical data are available. This study assessed the reproductive potential and performance of fertility preservation strategies in BRCA-mutated breast cancer patients.Patients and methodsThis was a retrospective analysis of two prospective studies investigating oocyte cryopreservation and ovarian tissue cryopreservation in newly diagnosed early breast cancer patients. In the current analysis, baseline anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) and performance of cryopreservation strategies were compared between patients with or without germline deleterious BRCA mutations.ResultsOut of 156 patients included, 101 had known BRCA status of whom 29 (18.6%) were BRCA-mutated and 72 (46.1%) had no mutation. Median age in the entire cohort was 31 years [interquartile range (IQR) 28–33). Median AMH levels were 1.8 µg/l (IQR 1.0–2.7) and 2.6 µg/l (IQR 1.5–4.1) in the BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative cohorts, respectively (P = 0.109). Among patients who underwent oocyte cryopreservation (N = 29), women in the BRCA-positive cohort tended to retrieve (6.5 versus 9; P = 0.145) and to cryopreserve (3.5 versus 6; P = 0.121) less oocytes than those in the BRCA-negative cohort. Poor response rate (i.e. retrieval of ≤4 oocytes) was 40.0% and 11.1% in the BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative cohorts, respectively (P = 0.147). Among patients who underwent ovarian tissue cryopreservation (N = 72), women in the BRCA-positive cohort tended to have a numerically lower number of oocytes per fragment (0.08 versus 0.14; P = 0.193) and per square millimeter (0.33 versus 0.78; P = 0.153) than those in the BRCA-negative cohort. Two BRCA-mutated patients were transplanted after chemotherapy and one delivered at term a healthy baby. No difference between BRCA1- and BRCA2-mutated patients was observed in any of the above-mentioned outcomes.ConclusionA consistent trend for reduced reproductive potential and performance of cryopreservation strategies was observed in BRCA-mutated breast cancer patients. Independent validation of these results is needed.     

Antitumor efficacy of PARP inhibitors in homologous recombination deficient carcinomas

PARP inhibitors (PARPis) have remarkable antitumor activity in BRCA mutant ovarian carcinoma. Emerging evidence has shown that responses to PARPis are not limited to BRCA mutant tumors, but could expand to other homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) carcinomas. However, relatively little is known about the efficacy of PARPis in patients with HRD when compared to non-HRD carriers. In this systematic review, 13 clinical trials were included and analyzed for the treatment effect of PARPis on progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for HRD (BRCA mutant HRD, n = 697; BRCA wild-type HRD, n = 478) vs. non-HRD (n = 1,417) patients. Pooled analyses of the effect of PARPis in both ovarian and nonovarian carcinoma groups showed significantly higher PFS rates at 6 months and 12 months (PFS6 and PFS12) in the HRD subgroup, as compared to the non-HRD subgroup. Within the HRD subgroup, the BRCA-mutant population achieved significantly higher PFS6 (OR: 2.29, 95% CI: 1.03–5.08) and PFS12 (OR: 1.95, 95% CI: 1.26–3.01) when compared to BRCA wild-type patients. Furthermore, within BRCA wild-type carcinomas, mutations in other HRD-related genes also led to increased PFS6 (OR: 1.72, 95% CI: 1.27–2.43) and PFS12 (OR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.31–2.62), as compared to non-HRD counterparts. Therefore, patients with HRD carcinomas exhibited pronounced PFS advantages upon treatment with PARPis, as compared to non-HRD carcinomas. In addition to BRCA mutations, other non-BRCA HRD-related aberrations may serve as novel biomarkers for the prediction of PARPi efficacy.     

RECORD-2: phase II randomized study of everolimus and bevacizumab versus interferon α-2a and bevacizumab as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

BackgroundThe open-label, phase II RECORD-2 trial compared efficacy and safety of first-line everolimus plus bevacizumab (EVE/BEV) with interferon plus bevacizumab (IFN/BEV) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.Patients and methodsPreviously untreated patients were randomized 1:1 to bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks with either everolimus 10 mg/day (EVE/BEV) or interferon (9 MIU 3 times/week, if tolerated) (IFN/BEV). Tumor assessments occurred every 12 weeks. The primary objective was the assessment of treatment effect on progression-free survival (PFS), based on an estimate of the chance of a subsequent phase III trial success (50% threshold for phase II success).ResultsBaseline characteristics were balanced between the EVE/BEV (n = 182) and IFN/BEV (n = 183) arms. The median PFS was 9.3 and 10.0 months in the EVE/BEV and IFN/BEV arms, respectively (P = 0.485). The predicted probability of phase III success was 5.05% (hazard ratio = 0.91; 95% confidence interval 0.69–1.19). The median duration of exposure was 8.5 and 8.3 months for EVE/BEV and IFN/BEV, respectively. The percentage of patients discontinuing because of adverse events (AEs) was 23.4% for EVE/BEV and 26.9% for IFN/BEV. Common grade 3/4 AEs included proteinuria (24.4%), stomatitis (10.6%), and anemia (10.6%) for EVE/BEV and fatigue (17.1%), asthenia (14.4%), and proteinuria (10.5%) for IFN/BEV. The median overall survival was 27.1 months in both arms.ConclusionsThe efficacy of EVE/BEV and IFN/BEV appears similar. No new or unexpected safety findings were identified and, with the exception of proteinuria in about one-fourth of the population, EVE/BEV was generally well tolerated.Clinical trial registry and trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00719264.     

A phase III trial of exemestane plus bevacizumab maintenance therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer after first-line taxane and bevacizumab: a GINECO group study

BackgroundMaintenance strategies beyond response or tumor stabilization with first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) have not been extensively studied. Endocrine therapy combined with continued bevacizumab may be a helpful option for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive MBC.Patients and methodsIn this prospective, open-label, phase III study, patients with histologically confirmed ER-positive, HER2-negative MBC and non-progressive disease after 16–24 weeks of taxane plus bevacizumab (T + BEV) were randomized to continuation of T + BEV or maintenance bevacizumab plus exemestane (E + BEV). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) from randomization. To have 80% power to detect an improvement in the 6-month PFS rate (PFS6m) from 50% to 65%, 186 assessable patients were needed for a total of 141 PFS events. An interim analysis was planned after 40% of the required events.ResultsThe interim analysis with 98 patients showed that the probability of reaching a statistically significant improvement in PFS by the end of the study was only 7%. This led the Independent Data and Monitoring Committee to recommend termination of patient enrollment. After a median of 21-month follow-up of all randomized patients (117 in total), PFS6m from randomization was 67.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 53.6–77.7] with T + BEV and 55.2% (95% CI 41.5–66.9) with E + BEV [hazard ratio (HR): 1.0, 95% CI 0.7–1.5, P = 0.998]. Median PFS from BEV initiation was 12.5 and 12.3 months in the T + BEV and E + BEV arms, respectively. In the T + BEV arm, taxane was prematurely stopped for the majority of patients (94.9%), mainly due to toxicity (49.2%). Updated data after 35 months' median follow-up showed death rates of 44% and 55% in T + BEV and E + BEV arms, respectively.ConclusionIn this trial, maintenance therapy with E + BEV in ER-positive, HER2-negative MBC patients with no evidence of progression after first-line T + BEV did not achieve longer PFS compared with continuation of T + BEV.ClinicalTrials.govNCT01303679     

Carboplatin and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin versus carboplatin and paclitaxel in partially platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer patients: results from a subset analysis of the CALYPSO phase III trial

BackgroundTo perform a subset analysis of patients with partially platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC) who received either CD [carboplatin–pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD)] or CP (carboplatin–paclitaxel) in the CALYPSO trial.Patients and methodsCALYPSO, an international phase III, non-inferiority trial, enrolled women with ROC that relapsed >6 months following first- or second-line therapy. Patients were randomized to CD or CP. Patients with a treatment-free interval of >6 and ≤12 months were evaluated for progression-free survival (PFS), the primary end point of CALYPSO trial, and safety.ResultsA total of 344 partially platinum-sensitive patients were included (N = 161, CD and N = 183, CP). The hazard ratio for PFS was 0.73 (95% confidence interval: 0.58–0.90; P = 0.004 for superiority) in favor of CD. Median PFS times were 9.4 months (CD) and 8.8 months (CP). Toxicities more common with CP versus CD included grade 3/4 neutropenia (50% versus 39%; P = 0.015), grade 2 alopecia (86% versus 9%; P < 0.001), neuropathy and hypersensitivity reactions. Hand-foot syndrome was more common with CD; however, grade 3/4 reactions were low (one patient in each arm).ConclusionCarboplatin–PLD has a more favorable risk-benefit profile than CP in patients with partially platinum-sensitive ROC and should be considered an effective treatment option for these patients.     

Veliparib with temozolomide or carboplatin/paclitaxel versus placebo with carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with BRCA1/2 locally recurrent/metastatic breast cancer: randomized phase II study

BackgroundHomologous recombination defects in BRCA1/2-mutated tumors result in sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, which interfere with DNA damage repair. Veliparib, a potent poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, enhanced the antitumor activity of platinum agents and temozolomide in early phase clinical trials. This phase II study examined the safety and efficacy of intermittent veliparib with carboplatin/paclitaxel (VCP) or temozolomide (VT) in patients with BRCA1/2-mutated breast cancer.Patients and methodsEligible patients ≥18 years with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer and a deleterious BRCA1/2 germline mutation were randomized 1:1:1 to VCP, VT, or placebo plus carboplatin/paclitaxel (PCP). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR).ResultsOf 290 randomized patients, 284 were BRCA+, confirmed by central laboratory. For VCP versus PCP, median PFS was 14.1 and 12.3 months, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) 0.789; 95% CI 0.536–1.162; P = 0.227], interim median OS 28.3 and 25.9 months (HR 0.750; 95% CI 0.503–1.117; P = 0.156), and ORR 77.8% and 61.3% (P = 0.027). For VT (versus PCP), median PFS was 7.4 months (HR 1.858; 95% CI 1.278–2.702; P = 0.001), interim median OS 19.1 months (HR 1.483; 95% CI 1.032–2.131; P = 0.032), and ORR 28.6% (P < 0.001). Safety profile was comparable between carboplatin/paclitaxel arms. Adverse events (all grades) of neutropenia, anemia, alopecia, and neuropathy were less frequent with VT versus PCP.ConclusionNumerical but not statistically significant increases in both PFS and OS were observed in patients with BRCA1/2-mutated recurrent/metastatic breast cancer receiving VCP compared with PCP. The addition of veliparib to carboplatin/paclitaxel significantly improved ORR. There was no clinically meaningful increase in toxicity with VCP versus PCP. VT was inferior to PCP. An ongoing phase III trial is evaluating VCP versus PCP, with optional continuation single-agent therapy with veliparib/placebo if chemotherapy is discontinued without progression, in this patient population.Clinical trial informationNCT01506609     

Topotecan plus carboplatin versus standard therapy with paclitaxel plus carboplatin (PC) or gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GC) or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus carboplatin (PLDC): a randomized phase III trial of the NOGGO-AGO-Study Group-AGO Austria and GEICO-ENGOT-GCIG intergroup study (HECTOR)

The combination of carboplatin and topotecan in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer could not improve progression-free survival or overall survival compared with established standard regimens.BackgroundRandomized, phase III trial to evaluate safety and efficacy of topotecan and carboplatin (TC) compared with standard platinum-based combinations in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC).Patients and methodsPatients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the experimental TC arm (topotecan 0.75 mg/m²/ days 1–3 and carboplatin AUC 5 on day 3 every 3 weeks) or to one of the standard regimes [(PC) paclitaxel plus carboplatin; (GC) gemcitabine plus carboplatin; (PLDC) pegylated liposomal doxorubicin and carboplatin] which could be chosen by individual preference but before randomization. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) after 12 months. Overall survival (OS), response rate, toxicity, quality of life and treatment preference regarding standard treatment were defined as secondary end points.ResultsA total of 550 patients were recruited. The PFS rate after 12 months was 37.0% for TC compared with 40.2% in the standard combinations (P = 0.470). The overall response rate was 73.1% for TC versus 75.1% for standard combinations (P = 0.149). After a median follow-up of 20 months, the median PFS was 10 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 9.4–10.6] and did not differ between both arms (P = 0.414). The median OS was 25 months in the TC arm versus 31 months in the standard arm (95% CI: 22.4–27.6 resp. 26.0–36.0; P = 0.163). Severe hematologic toxicities (grade 3/4) were rare in the experimental arm (P < 0.001), with 17.4% leucopenia, 27.8% neutropenia and 15.9% thrombopenia.ConclusionThe combination of carboplatin and topotecan was well tolerated with significant lower rates of severe hematological toxicities but did not improve PFS or OS in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer compared with established standard regimens.     

Bevacizumab Reduces S100A9-Positive MDSCs Linked to Intracranial Control in Patients with EGFR-Mutant Lung Adenocarcinoma

Introduction

In vitro models have demonstrated immune-modulating effects of bevacizumab (BEV). Combinations of an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) with BEV improve progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with EGFR-mutated lung adenocarcinoma. How BEV confers this clinical effect and the underlying mechanisms of its effect are not clear.

Implications of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations for the efficacy of paclitaxel monotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer

IntroductionPreclinical data suggest that BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2)-mutated ovarian cancers (BMOC) are exquisitely sensitive to platinum-salts, but resistant to microtubule-stabilizing anticancer agents. The clinical relevance of these preclinical data is unclear, since there are currently no published data on the efficacy of single-agent taxane chemotherapy in patients with BMOC. A retrospective study was undertaken to investigate the clinical effects of paclitaxel monotherapy in patients with BMOC.MethodsClinical data on responses and progression-free-survival (PFS) following paclitaxel (3-weekly/weekly) monotherapy in BMOC patients were collected from four cancer centres. Antitumour response was defined as RECIST partial or complete response (PR/CR), and clinical benefit was defined as PR/CR and stable disease (SD) lasting at least 18 weeks. Comparisons of the rate and duration of response and clinical benefit between categorical variables (e.g. platinum-sensitive versus platinum-resistant patients) were undertaken.ResultsWe identified 26 BMOC patients who received paclitaxel monotherapy for relapsed disease, of which 15/26 (58%) were platinum-sensitive and 11/26 (42%) were platinum-resistant. The response rate to paclitaxel monotherapy was 46% (12/26). Clinical benefit rate was significantly higher in platinum-sensitive than platinum-resistant patients (80% versus 36%, p = 0.04). BMOC patients with platinum-sensitive disease had significantly longer median PFS compared with platinum-resistant patients (42 versus 21 weeks, p = 0.003).ConclusionsThese data provide the first clinical evidence that paclitaxel monotherapy is active in BMOC and may be more effective in platinum-sensitive BMOC.     

Platinum versus platinum-combination chemotherapy in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis using individual patient data

BackgroundThe majority of women with ovarian cancer develop recurrent disease. For patients with a platinum-free interval of >6 months, platinum-based chemotherapy is a treatment of choice. The benefit of platinum-based combination chemotherapy in randomized trials varies, and a meta-analysis was carried out to gain more secure information on the size of the benefit of this treatment.Materials and methodsWe initiated a systematic review and meta-analysis following a pre-specified protocol to determine whether combination chemotherapy is superior to single-agent platinum chemotherapy in women with relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.ResultsA total of five potentially eligible randomized trials were identified that had used combination-platinum chemotherapy versus single-agent platinum chemotherapy in women with relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. For one trial (190 patients), adequate contact with the investigators could not be established. Therefore, four trials that randomly assigned 1300 patients were included, with a median follow-up of 36.1 months. Overall survival (OS) analyses were based on 865 deaths and demonstrated evidence for the benefit of combination-platinum chemotherapy (HR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64–1.00; P = 0.05). Progression-free survival (PFS) analyses were based on 1167 events and demonstrated strong evidence for the benefit of combination-platinum chemotherapy (HR = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.57–0.81; P < 0.001). There was no evidence of a difference in the relative effect of combination-platinum chemotherapy on either OS or PFS in patient subgroups defined by previous paclitaxel (Taxol) treatment (OS, P = 0.49; PFS, P = 0.66), duration of treatment-free interval (OS, P = 0.86; PFS, P = 0.48) or the number of previous lines of chemotherapy (OS, P = 0.21; PFS, P = 0.27).ConclusionsIn this individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis, we have demonstrated that combination-platinum chemotherapy improves OS and PFS across all subgroups. This provides the strongest evidence to date of the benefit of combination-platinum over single-agent platinum.     

Exaggeration of PFS by blinded,independent, central review (BICR)

BackgroundRecent published studies have shown meaningful discrepancies between local investigator and blinded, independent, central review (BICR) assessed median progression-free survival (PFS). When the local review but not BICR shows progression, generally, no further assessments are carried out and patients are censored in the BICR analysis, leading to violation of the statistical assumptions of independence between censoring and outcome used in survival analysis methods.MethodsWe carried out a simulation study to assess methodological reasons behind these discrepancies and corroborated our findings in a case study of three BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer trials. We briefly outline possible methodological solutions that may lead to improved estimation of the BICR medians.ResultsThe Kaplan–Meier (KM) curve for the BICR PFS can often be exaggerated. The degree of bias is largest when there is reasonably strong correlation between BICR and local PFS, especially when PFS is long compared with assessment frequency. This can result in an exaggeration of the medians and their difference; however, the hazard ratio (HR) is much less susceptible to bias. Our simulation shows that when the true BICR median PFS was 19 months, and patients assessed every 12 weeks, the estimated KM curves were materially biased whenever the correlation between BICR and local PFS was 0.4 or greater. This was corroborated by case studies where, in the active arm, the BICR median PFS was between 6 and 11 months greater than the local median PFS. Further research is required to find improved methods for estimating BICR survival curves.ConclusionsIn general, when there is a difference between local and BICR medians, the true BICR KM curve is likely to be exaggerated and its true median will probably lie somewhere between the observed local and BICR medians. Presentation of data should always include both BICR and local results whenever a BICR is carried out.     

Phase Ib/II Study of Biweekly TAS-102 in Combination with Bevacizumab for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Refractory to Standard Therapies (BiTS Study)

Lessons Learned

• A biweekly TAS‐102 plus BEV schedule in patients with heavily pretreated mCRC showed equivalent efficacy with less toxicity compared with the current schedule of TAS‐102 plus BEV combination.
• Biweekly TAS‐102 plus BEV combination could reduce unnecessary dose reduction of TAS‐102, maintain higher doses, and possibly be effective even in cases without chemotherapy‐induced neutropenia (CIN).
• The prespecified subgroup analysis of this study showed an obvious association between CIN within the first two cycles and prognosis of biweekly TAS‐102 plus BEV.

BackgroundTAS‐102 (trifluridine/tipiracil) plus bevacizumab (BEV) combination therapy has shown promising activity in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the previously reported dose and schedule for the TAS‐102 (70 mg/m²/day on days 1–5 and 8–12, every 4 weeks) plus BEV (5 mg/kg on day 1, every 2 weeks) regimen is complicated by severe hematological toxicities and difficult administration schedules. Here, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of a more convenient biweekly TAS‐102 plus BEV combination.MethodsPatients with mCRC who were refractory or intolerant to standard chemotherapies were enrolled. Patients received biweekly TAS‐102 (twice daily on days 1–5, every 2 weeks) with BEV (5mg/kg on day 1, every 2 weeks). The primary endpoint was progression‐free survival rate at 16 weeks (16‐w PFS rate).ResultsFrom October 2017 to January 2018, 46 patients were enrolled. The recommended phase II dose was determined to be TAS‐102 (70 mg/m²/day). Of the 44 eligible patients, the 16‐w PFS rate was 40.9% (95% confidence interval, 26.3%–56.8%), and the null hypothesis was rejected (p < .0001). Median progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 4.29 months and 10.86 months, respectively. Disease control rate was 59.1%. Common grade 3 or higher adverse events were hypertension (40.9%), neutropenia (15.9%), and leucopenia (15.9%).ConclusionBiweekly TAS‐102 plus BEV showed promising antitumor activity with safety.     

Definitive Chemoradiation and Durvalumab Consolidation for Locally Advanced,Unresectable KRAS-mutated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

BackgroundConsolidation durvalumab immunotherapy following definitive chemoradiation (CRT) for unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) improves overall survival. As therapeutic options for patients with KRAS-driven disease evolve, more understanding regarding genomic determinants of response and patterns of progression for durvalumab consolidation is needed to optimize outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a single-institutional retrospective analysis of real-world patients with locally advanced, unresectable NSCLC who completed CRT and received durvalumab consolidation. Kaplan-Meier analyses compared progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from start of durvalumab consolidation between patients with KRAS-mutated and non-mutated tumors. Fisher's exact test was used to compare rates of intrathoracic or extrathoracic progression.ResultsOf 74 response-evaluable patients, 39 had clinical genomic profiling performed. 18 patients had tumors with KRAS mutations, 7 patients had tumors with non-KRAS actionable alterations (EGFR, ALK, ERBB2, BRAF, MET, RET, or ROS1), and 14 patients had tumors without actionable alterations. Median PFS for the overall cohort was 16.1 months. PFS for patients with KRAS-mutated NSCLC was 12.6 months versus 12.7 months for patients with non-actionable tumors (P= 0.77, log-rank). Fisher's exact test revealed a statistically significantly higher rate of extrathoracic progression versus intrathoracic-only progression for patients with KRAS-driven disease compared to patients with non-actionable tumors (P= 0.015).ConclusionPatients with KRAS-mutated NSCLC derived similar benefit from durvalumab as patients with non-actionable tumors. A higher rate of extrathoracic progression was also observed among the patients with KRAS-mutated NSCLC compared to patients with non-actionable tumors. This highlights the potential unmet needs for novel systemic therapies and surveillance methods for KRAS-mutated stage III NSCLC.