Search

Aim: Demand for nipple- and skin- sparing mastectomy (NSM/SSM) with immediate breast reconstruction (BR) has increased at the same time as indications for post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) have broadened. The aim of the Oncoplastic Breast Consortium initiative was to address relevant questions arising with this clinically challenging scenario. Methods: A large global panel of oncologic, oncoplastic and reconstructive breast surgeons, patient advocates and radiation oncologists developed recommendations for clinical practice in an iterative process based on the principles of Delphi methodology. Results: The panel agreed that surgical technique for NSM/SSM should not be formally modified when PMRT is planned with preference for autologous over implant-based BR due to lower risk of long-term complications and support for immediate and delayed-immediate reconstructive approaches. Nevertheless, it was strongly believed that PMRT is not an absolute contraindication for implant-based or other types of BR, but no specific recommendations regarding implant positioning, use of mesh or timing were made due to absence of high-quality evidence. The panel endorsed use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice. It was acknowledged that the shape and size of reconstructed breasts can hinder radiotherapy planning and attention to details of PMRT techniques is important in determining aesthetic outcomes after immediate BR. Conclusions: The panel endorsed the need for prospective, ideally randomised phase III studies and for surgical and radiation oncology teams to work together for determination of optimal sequencing and techniques for PMRT for each patient in the context of BR © 2022 The Authors

IntroductionThe PENELOPE trial evaluated pertuzumab added to chemotherapy for biomarker-selected platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. As previously reported, pertuzumab did not statistically significantly improve progression-free survival (primary end point: HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.11), although results in the paclitaxel and gemcitabine cohorts suggested activity. Here, we report final overall survival and patient-reported outcomes.Patients and methodsEligible patients had ovarian carcinoma that progressed during/within 6 months of completing ≥4 platinum cycles, low tumor human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) mRNA expression, and ≤2 prior chemotherapy lines. Investigators selected single-agent topotecan, gemcitabine or weekly paclitaxel before patients were randomized to either placebo or pertuzumab (840→420 mg every 3 weeks), stratified by selected chemotherapy, prior anti-angiogenic therapy, and platinum-free interval. Final overall survival analysis (key secondary end point) was pre-specified after 129 deaths. Patient-reported outcomes (secondary end point) were assessed at baseline and every 9 weeks until disease progression.ResultsAt database lock (June 9, 2016), 130 (83%) of 156 randomized patients had died. Median follow-up was 27 months in the pertuzumab arm versus 26 months in the control arm. In the intent-to-treat population there was no overall survival difference between treatment arms (stratified HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.32; p=0.60). Results in subgroups defined by stratification factors indicated heterogeneity similar to previous progression-free survival results. Updated safety was similar to previously published results. Compliance with patient-reported outcomes questionnaire completion was >75% for all validated patient-reported outcomes measures. Pertuzumab demonstrated neither beneficial nor detrimental effects on patient-reported outcomes compared with placebo, except for increased diarrhea symptoms.DiscussionConsistent with the primary results, adding pertuzumab to chemotherapy for low tumor HER3 mRNA-expressing platinum-resistant ovarian cancer did not improve overall survival, but showed trends in some cohorts. Except for increased diarrhea symptoms, pertuzumab had no impact on patient-reported outcomes.ClinicalTrials.gov:ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT01684878.

Background: Angiopoietin 1 and 2 regulate angiogenesis and vascular remodelling by interacting with the tyrosine kinase receptor Tie2, and inhibition of angiogenesis has shown promise in the treatment of ovarian cancer. We aimed to assess whether trebananib, a peptibody that inhibits binding of angiopoietin 1 and 2 to Tie2, improved progression-free survival when added to carboplatin and paclitaxel as first-line therapy in advanced epithelial ovarian, primary fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer in a phase 3 clinical trial. Methods: TRINOVA-3, a multicentre, multinational, phase 3, double-blind study, was done at 206 investigational sites (hospitals and cancer centres)in 14 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with biopsy-confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO)stage III to IV epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancers, and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1)using a permuted block method (block size of six patients)to receive six cycles of paclitaxel (175 mg/m2)and carboplatin (area under the serum concentration-time curve 5 or 6)every 3 weeks, plus weekly intravenous trebananib 15 mg/kg or placebo. Maintenance therapy with trebananib or placebo continued for up to 18 additional months. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, as assessed by the investigators, in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01493505, and is complete. Findings: Between Jan 30, 2012, and Feb 25, 2014, 1164 patients were screened and 1015 eligible patients were randomly allocated to treatment (678 to trebananib and 337 to placebo). After a median follow-up of 27·4 months (IQR 17·7–34·2), 626 patients had progression-free survival events (405 [60%]of 678 in the trebananib group and 221 [66%]of 337 in the placebo group). Median progression-free survival did not differ between the trebananib group (15·9 months [15·0–17·6])and the placebo group (15·0 months [12·6–16·1])groups (hazard ratio 0·93 [95% CI 0·79–1·09]; p=0·36). 512 (76%)of 675 patients in the trebananib group and 237 (71%)of 336 in the placebo group had grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events; of which the most common events were neutropenia (trebananib 238 [35%]vs placebo 126 [38%])anaemia (76 [11%]vs 40 [12%]), and leucopenia (81 [12%]vs 35 [10%]). 269 (40%)patients in the trebananib group and 104 (31%)in the placebo group had serious adverse events. Two fatal adverse events in the trebananib group were considered related to trebananib, paclitaxel, and carboplatin (lung infection and neutropenic colitis); two were considered to be related to paclitaxel and carboplatin (general physical health deterioration and platelet count decreased). No treatment-related fatal adverse events occurred in the placebo group. Interpretation: Trebananib plus carboplatin and paclitaxel did not improve progression-free survival as first-line treatment for advanced ovarian cancer. The combination of trebananib plus carboplatin and paclitaxel did not produce new safety signals. These results show that trebananib in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel is minimally effective in this patient population. Funding: Amgen. © 2019 Elsevier Ltd

The first joint European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) consensus conference on endometrial cancer was held on 11-13 December 2014 in Milan, Italy, and comprised a multidisciplinary panel of 40 leading experts in the management of endometrial cancer. Before the conference, the expert panel prepared three clinically relevant questions about endometrial cancer relating to the following four areas: prevention and screening, surgery, adjuvant treatment and advanced and recurrent disease. All relevant scientific literature, as identified by the experts, was reviewed in advance. During the consensus conference, the panel developed recommendations for each specific question and a consensus was reached. Results of this consensus conference, together with a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation, are detailed in this article. All participants have approved this final article. © The Author 2015.

Background: Angiogenesis plays a role in the biology of ovarian cancer. We examined the effect of bevacizumab, the vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor, on survival in women with this disease.\ud \ud \ud \ud Methods: We randomly assigned women with ovarian cancer to carboplatin (area under the curve, 5 or 6) and paclitaxel (175 mg per square meter of body-surface area), given every 3 weeks for 6 cycles, or to this regimen plus bevacizumab (7.5 mg per kilogram of body weight), given concurrently every 3 weeks for 5 or 6 cycles and continued for 12 additional cycles or until progression of disease. Outcome measures included progression-free survival, first analyzed per protocol and then updated, and interim overall survival.\ud \ud \ud \ud Results: A total of 1528 women from 11 countries were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment regimens. Their median age was 57 years; 90% had epithelial ovarian cancer, 69% had a serous histologic type, 9% had high-risk early-stage disease, 30% were at high risk for progression, and 70% had stage IIIC or IV ovarian cancer. Progression-free survival (restricted mean) at 36 months was 20.3 months with standard therapy, as compared with 21.8 months with standard therapy plus bevacizumab (hazard ratio for progression or death with bevacizumab added, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.70 to 0.94; P=0.004 by the log-rank test). Nonproportional hazards were detected (i.e., the treatment effect was not consistent over time on the hazard function scale) (P

B cells of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (B-CLL) are resistant to transduction with most currently available vector systems. Using an optimized adenovirus-free packaging system, recombinant adeno-associated virus (rAAV) vectors coding for the enhanced green fluorescent protein (AAV/EGFP) and CD40 ligand (AAV/CD40L) were packaged and highly purified resulting in genomic titers up to 3 × 1011/mL. Cells obtained from 24 patients with B-CLL were infected with AAV/EGFP or AAV/CD40L at a multiplicity of infection (MOI) of 100 resulting in transgene expression in up to 97% of cells as detected by flow cytometry 48 hours after infection. Viral transduction could be specifically blocked by heparin. Transduction with AAV/CD40L resulted in up-regulation of the costimulatory molecule CD80 not only on infected CLL cells but also on noninfected bystander leukemia B cells, whereas this effect induced specific proliferation of HLA-matched allogeneic T cells. Vaccination strategies for patients with B-CLL using leukemia cells infected ex vivo by rAAV vectors now seems possible in the near future.

LBA5510 Background: One option to increase the efficacy of TC in pts with first diagnosis of ovarian cancer is to add a not cross-resistant drug. Methods: We conducted a randomized, prospective, stratified, phase III study comparing therapy with TC to TC plus gemcitabine. From 7/02 to 4/04, pts with a histological verified first diagnosis of epithelial OC, FIGO IC-IV were randomized to either TC (paclitaxel [T] 175 mg/m2 3h iv d1 + carboplatin [C] AUC 5 iv d1) or TCG (TC + gemcitabine [G] 800 mg/m2 iv d1+8) for at least 6 cycles every 21 days starting within 6 weeks post-operatively. The randomization was balanced within three strata: 1) FIGO I-IIA, 2) FIGO IIB-IIIC with residual tumor ≤ 10mm, 3) FIGO IIB-IIIC with residual tumor > 10 mm or FIGO IV. Primary endpoint is overall survival. Results: We enrolled 1,742 pts and administered 5,268 cycles TC and 5,129 cycles TCG. All baseline characteristics of the patients in both arms were well balanced. Most pts received 6+ cycles (87.2% TC, 86.2% TCG). Previous interim analyses has shown that TCG was tolerable but induced more hematological toxicity and final analysis has shown that addition of gemcitabine did not improve overall survival in patients with FIGO stage IIB-IV disease. Approximately 11% of the patients (n = 175) had FIGO stage I-IIA disease (stratum I). Most patients received 6+ cycles (93.3% TC, 86.9% TCG). With a median follow-up of 53.8 (range 0 –75) months, and using the log rank test and Cox regression analysis, no relevant differences in progression free survival (first quartile about 57 months and median ≥ 75 months in both groups, HR = 0.90 [95% CI: 0.47–1.72], p = 0.7500) and a negative trend in overall survival (first quartile ≥ 75 months in both groups, HR = 2.19 [95% CI: 0.75–6.41], p = 0.1419) were seen. Conclusions: Addition of G to TC did not improve efficacy in patients with stage I-IIA ovarian cancer. This was also the case for stratum II-III patients (previously reported). The addition of G to TC in patients with first diagnosis of ovarian cancer cannot be recommended. [Table: see text]

BACKGROUND: Treatment for patients with recurrent ovarian cancer has been mainly based on systemic therapy. The role of secondary cytoreductive surgery is unclear. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with recurrent ovarian cancer who had a first relapse after a platinum-free interval (an interval during which no platinum-based chemotherapy was used) of 6 months or more to undergo secondary cytoreductive surgery and then receive platinum-based chemotherapy or to receive platinum-based chemotherapy alone. Patients were eligible if they presented with a positive Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO) score, defined as an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance-status score of 0 (on a 5-point scale, with higher scores indicating greater disability), ascites of less than 500 ml, and complete resection at initial surgery. A positive AGO score is used to identify patients in whom a complete resection might be achieved. The primary end point was overall survival. We also assessed quality of life and prognostic factors for survival. RESULTS: A total of 407 patients underwent randomization: 206 were assigned to cytoreductive surgery and chemotherapy, and 201 to chemotherapy alone. A complete resection was achieved in 75.5% of the patients in the surgery group who underwent the procedure. The median overall survival was 53.7 months in the surgery group and 46.0 months in the no-surgery group (hazard ratio for death, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.59 to 0.96; P = 0.02). Patients with a complete resection had the most favorable outcome, with a median overall survival of 61.9 months. A benefit from surgery was seen in all analyses in subgroups according to prognostic factors. Quality-of-life measures through 1 year of follow-up did not differ between the two groups, and we observed no perioperative mortality within 30 days after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In women with recurrent ovarian cancer, cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy resulted in longer overall survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by the AGO Study Group and others; DESKTOP III ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01166737.).

Aims Trebananib, a peptide-Fc fusion protein, inhibits angiogenesis by inhibiting binding of angiopoietin-1/2 to the receptor tyrosine kinase Tie2. This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study evaluated whether trebananib plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. Methods Women with recurrent ovarian cancer (platinum-free interval ≤12 months) were randomised to intravenous PLD 50 mg/m2 once every 4 weeks plus weekly intravenous trebananib 15 mg/kg or placebo. PFS was the primary end-point; key secondary end-points were objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR). Owing to PLD shortages, enrolment was paused for 13 months; the study was subsequently truncated. Results Two hundred twenty-three patients were enrolled. Median PFS was 7.6 months (95% CI, 7.2–9.0) in the trebananib arm and 7.2 months (95% CI, 4.8–8.2) in the placebo arm, with a hazard ratio of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.68–1.24). However, because the proportional hazards assumption was not fulfilled, the standard Cox model did not provide a reliable estimate of the hazard ratio. ORR in the trebananib arm was 46% versus 21% in the placebo arm (odds ratio, 3.43; 95% CI, 1.78–6.64). Median DOR was improved (trebananib, 7.4 months [95% CI, 5.7–7.6]; placebo, 3.9 months [95% CI, 2.3–6.5]). Adverse events with a greater incidence in the trebananib arm included localised oedema (61% versus 32%), ascites (29% versus 9%) and vomiting (45% versus 33%). Conclusions Trebananib demonstrated anticancer activity in this phase 3 study, indicated by improved ORR and DOR. Median PFS was not improved. No new safety signals were identified. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01281254

Purpose The AGO-OVAR 2.29/ENGOT-ov14/PENELOPE prospectively randomized phase III trial evaluated the addition of pertuzumab to chemotherapy in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian carcinoma with low tumor human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) mRNA expression. We report the results of the primary efficacy analysis. Patients and Methods Eligible patients had ovarian carcinoma that progressed during or within 6 months of completing four or more platinum cycles, centrally tested low tumor HER3 mRNA expression (concentration ratio ≤ 2.81 by quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction on cobas z480 [Roche Molecular Diagnostics, Pleasanton, CA]), and no more than two prior lines of chemotherapy. After investigators’ selection of the chemotherapy backbone (single-agent topotecan, weekly paclitaxel, or gemcitabine), patients were randomly assigned to also receive either placebo or pertuzumab (840-mg loading dose followed by 420 mg every 3 weeks). Stratification factors were selected chemotherapy, prior antiangiogenic therapy, and platinum-free interval. The primary end point was independent review committee–assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Additional end points included overall survival, investigator-assessed PFS, objective response rate, safety, patient-reported outcomes, and translational research. Results Overall, 156 patients were randomly assigned. Adding pertuzumab to chemotherapy did not significantly improve independent review committee–assessed PFS for the primary analysis (stratified hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.11; P = .14; median PFS, 4.3 months for pertuzumab plus chemotherapy v 2.6 months for placebo plus chemotherapy). Sensitivity analyses and secondary efficacy end point results were consistent with the primary analysis. The effect on PFS favoring pertuzumab was more pronounced in the gemcitabine and paclitaxel cohorts. No new safety signals were seen. Conclusion Although the primary objective was not met, subgroup analyses showed trends in PFS favoring pertuzumab in the gemcitabine and paclitaxel cohorts, meriting further exploration of pertuzumab in ovarian cancer.

ObjectiveIn platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, adding pertuzumab to gemcitabine improved progression-free survival in the subgroup with low tumor HER3 messenger RNA expression. The 2-part PENELOPE trial (NCT01684878) is prospectively investigating pertuzumab plus chemotherapy in this population.Patients and MethodsPart 1 evaluated pertuzumab plus either topotecan or paclitaxel. Patients with platinum-refractory or platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer and low HER3 messenger RNA expression (concentration ratio ≤2.81 by central quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction testing on Cobas z480) received intravenous pertuzumab (840 mg loading dose then 420 mg every 3 weeks) with the investigator’s choice of topotecan (1.25 mg/m2days 1–5 every 3 weeks) or weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was to assess safety and tolerability.ResultsFifty patients were treated in part 1 (22 topotecan; 28 paclitaxel). In both cohorts, disease progression was the most common primary reason for discontinuing pertuzumab, and the most common all-grade adverse events (AEs) were fatigue/asthenia, anemia, and diarrhea. The most common grade ≥3 AEs were anemia (36%), neutropenia (27%), and fatigue/asthenia (18%) for topotecan, and peripheral sensory neuropathy (14%) and anemia (11%) for paclitaxel. Two patients receiving paclitaxel-pertuzumab died from AEs (abdominal infection; unexplained death). Median progression-free survival was 4.1 months (95% confidence interval, 1.9–6.1) with topotecan-pertuzumab and 4.2 months (95% confidence interval, 3.5–6.0) with paclitaxel-pertuzumab.ConclusionsBased on part 1 tolerability, the Independent Data Monitoring Committee had no objection to PENELOPE proceeding to part 2, a double-blind randomized comparison of chemotherapy (topotecan, paclitaxel, or gemcitabine) plus pertuzumab or placebo.

Purpose Pazopanib is an oral, multikinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) -1/-2/-3, platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) -α/-β, and c-Kit. Preclinical and clinical studies support VEGFR and PDGFR as targets for advanced ovarian cancer treatment. This study evaluated the role of pazopanib maintenance therapy in patients with ovarian cancer whose disease did not progress during first-line chemotherapy. Patients and Methods Nine hundred forty patients with histologically confirmed cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, or peritoneum, International Federation Gynecology Obstetrics (FIGO) stages II-IV, no evidence of progression after primary therapy consisting of surgery and at least five cycles of platinum-taxane chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to receive pazopanib 800 mg once per day or placebo for up to 24 months. The primary end point was progression-free survival by RECIST 1.0 assessed by the investigators. Results Maintenance pazopanib prolonged progression-free survival compared with placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.91; P = .0021; median, 17.9 v 12.3 months, respectively). Interim survival analysis based on events in 35.6% of the population did not show any significant difference. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events of hypertension (30.8%), neutropenia (9.9%), liver-related toxicity (9.4%), diarrhea (8.2%), fatigue (2.7%), thrombocytopenia (2.5%), and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (1.9%) were significantly higher in the pazopanib arm. Treatment discontinuation related to adverse events was higher among patients treated with pazopanib (33.3%) compared with placebo (5.6%). Conclusion Pazopanib maintenance therapy provided a median improvement of 5.6 months (HR, 0.77) in progression-free survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer who have not progressed after first-line chemotherapy. Overall survival data to this point did not suggest any benefit. Additional analysis should help to identify subgroups of patients in whom improved efficacy may balance toxicity (NCT00866697).

Purpose To determine whether abagovomab maintenance therapy prolongs recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with ovarian cancer in first clinical remission. Patients and Methods Patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage III to IV ovarian cancer in complete clinical remission after primary surgery and platinum- and taxane-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned at a ratio of 2:1 in a phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study. Abagovomab 2 mg or placebo was administered as 1-mL suspension once every 2 weeks for 6 weeks (induction phase) and then once every 4 weeks (maintenance phase) until recurrence or up to 21 months after random assignment of the last patient. The primary end point was RFS; secondary end points were OS and immunologic response. Results Characteristics of the 888 patients included: mean age, 56.3 years; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, ≤ 1 in > 99% of patients; serous papillary subtype, 81.5%; stage III, 85.9%; and cancer antigen 125 ≤ 35U/mL after third cycle, 80.9%. Mean exposure to study treatment (± standard deviation) was 449.7 ± 333.08 days. Hazard ratio (HR) of RFS for the treatment group using tumor size categorization (≤ 1 cm, > 1 cm) was 1.099 (95% CI, 0.919 to 1.315; P = .301). HR of OS using tumor size categorization (≤ 1 cm, > 1 cm) was 1.150 (95% CI, 0.872 to 1.518; P = .322). The most frequently reported type of adverse event was an injection site reaction in 445 patients (50.2%), followed by injection site erythema and fatigue in 227 (25.6%) and 212 patients (23.9%), respectively. By the final visit, median anti–anti-idiotypic antibody level was 493,000.0 ng/mL, indicating a robust response. Conclusion Abagovomab administered as repeated monthly injections is safe and induces a measurable immune response. Administration as maintenance therapy for patients with ovarian cancer in first remission does not prolong RFS or OS.