Search

ObjectivePatients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) alive without progression at a landmark time-point of 10 years from diagnosis are likely cured. We report the proportion of patients with Stage III EOC who were long-term disease-free survivors (LTDFS≥10 years) following either intraperitoneal (IP) or intravenous (IV) chemotherapy as well as the predictors of LTDFS.MethodsData from 3 mature NRG/GOG trials (104, 114, 172) were analyzed and included demographics, clinicopathologic details, route of administration, and survival outcomes of patients living ≥10 years assessed according to the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression survival analysis was performed to evaluate independent prognostic predictors of LTDFS.ResultsOf 1174 patients randomized, 10-year overall survival (OS) was 26% (95% CI, 23-28%) and LTDFS ≥10 years was 18% (95% CI, 16-20%). Patients with LTDFS ≥10 years had a median age of 54.6 years (p < 0.001). Younger age (p < 0.001) was the only independent prognostic factor for LTDFS≥10 years on multivariate Cox analysis.ConclusionsApproximately 18% of patients were LTDFS ≥10 years. They form the tail end of the survival curve and are likely cured. Our results provide a comparative benchmark to evaluate the impact of PARP inhibitors in 1st line maintenance trials on survival outcomes.

The COVID-19 pandemic changed health-care operations around the world and has interrupted standard clinical practices as well as created clinical research challenges for cancer patients. Cancer patients are uniquely susceptible to COVID-19 infection and have some of the worst outcomes. Importantly, cancer therapeutics could potentially render cancer patients more susceptible to demise from COVID-19 yet the poor survival outcome of many cancer diagnoses outweighs this risk. In addition, the pandemic has resulted in risks to health-care workers and research staff driving important change in clinical research operations and procedures. Remote telephone and video visits, remote monitoring, electronic capture of signatures and data, and limiting sample collections have allowed the leadership in our institution to ensure the safety of our staff and patients while continuing critical clinical research operations. Here we discuss some of these unique challenges and our response to change that was necessary to continue cancer clinical research; and, the impacts the pandemic has caused including increases in efficiency for our cancer research office.

ObjectivesScalable informatics solutions that provide molecularly tailored treatment recommendations to clinicians are needed to streamline precision oncology in care settings.Materials and methodsWe developed a cloud-based virtual molecular tumor board (VMTB) platform that included a knowledgebase, scoring model, rules engine, an asynchronous virtual chat room and a reporting tool that generated a treatment plan for each of the 1725 patients based on their molecular profile, previous treatment history, structured trial eligibility criteria, clinically relevant cancer gene-variant assertions, biomarker-treatment associations, and current treatment guidelines. The VMTB systematically allows clinician users to combine expert-curated data and structured data from clinical charts along with molecular testing data to develop consensus on treatments, especially those that require off-label and clinical trial considerations.ResultsThe VMTB was used as part of the cancer care process for a focused subset of 1725 patients referred by advocacy organizations wherein resultant personalized reports were successfully delivered to treating oncologists. Median turnaround time from data receipt to report delivery decreased from 14 days to 4 days over 4 years while the volume of cases increased nearly 2-fold each year. Using a novel scoring model for ranking therapy options, oncologists chose to implement the VMTB-derived therapies over others, except when pursuing immunotherapy options without molecular support.DiscussionVMTBs will play an increasingly critical role in precision oncology as the compendium of biomarkers and associated therapy options available to a patient continues to expand.ConclusionFurther development of such clinical augmentation tools that systematically combine patient-derived molecular data, real-world evidence from electronic health records and expert curated knowledgebases on biomarkers with computational tools for ranking best treatments can support care pathways at point of care.

BackgroundSecondary 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsA 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.ConclusionsIn 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.).

PurposeWe report the final, protocol-specified analysis of overall survival (OS) in GOG-0218, a phase III, randomized trial of bevacizumab in women with newly diagnosed ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma.MethodsA total of 1,873 women with incompletely resected stage III to IV disease were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to six 21-day cycles of intravenous carboplatin (area under the concentration v time curve 6) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) versus chemotherapy plus concurrent bevacizumab (15 mg/kg, cycles 2 to 6) versus chemotherapy plus concurrent and maintenance bevacizumab (cycles 2 to 22). Inclusion criteria included a Gynecologic Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 and no history of clinically significant vascular events or evidence of intestinal obstruction. OS was analyzed in the intention-to-treat population. A total of 1,195 serum and/or tumor specimens were sequenced for BRCA1/2 and damaging mutations in homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes. Intratumoral microvessel density was studied using CD31 immunohistochemistry.ResultsMedian follow-up was 102.9 months. Relative to control (n = 625), for patients receiving bevacizumab-concurrent (n = 625), the hazard ratio (HR) of death was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.94 to 1.20); for bevacizumab-concurrent plus maintenance (n = 623), the HR was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.85 to 1.09). Disease-specific survival was not improved in any arm. No survival advantage was observed after censoring patients who received bevacizumab at crossover or as second line. Median OS for stage IV bevacizumab-concurrent plus maintenance was 42.8 v 32.6 months for stage IV control (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.95). Relative to wild type, the HR for death for BRCA1/2 mutated carcinomas was 0.62 (95% CI, 0.52 to 0.73), and for non-BRCA1/2 HRR, the HR was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.51 to 0.85). BRCA1/2, HRR, and CD31 were not predictive of bevacizumab activity.ConclusionNo survival differences were observed for patients who received bevacizumab compared with chemotherapy alone. Testing for BRCA1/2 mutations and homologous recombination deficiency is essential.

Staying current on the rapidly evolving therapeutic landscape in oncology is challenging for clinicians. This commentary discusses exciting practice‐changing data specific to ovarian cancer.

BackgroundPlatinum-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.MethodsThe 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.FindingsBetween 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]).InterpretationThe 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.FundingNational Cancer Institute and Genentech.

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is responsible for more cancer-related deaths than any other malignancy of the female reproductive system. The standard of care for advanced EOC involves a combination of cytoreductive surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy. Although a majority of patients respond to a platinum-containing regimen, many fail to respond to first-line treatment (platinum-refractory disease) or experience disease progression within 6 months of completing treatment (platinum-resistant disease). Even in patients who initially respond to platinum-based therapy, secondary development of platinum resistance is common. Many chemotherapeutic regimens with comparable efficacy and toxicities are available, leaving the determination of optimal therapy to the physician's discretion. There have been many efforts over the years to develop accurate predictors of outcomes in patients treated with chemotherapy to help inform treatment decisions. Predictive treatment markers are particularly relevant in a disease such as EOC, where a large number of similarly efficacious chemotherapy regimens are available. Chemosensitivity and resistance assays (CSRAs) are attractive approaches to interrogate the efficacy and complex biology of EOC. Some early predictive cellular tests, such as the early clonogenic assays, were limited by technical and logistical issues. Over time, changes in these assays have improved their prognostic and predictive value, but there is still a lack of widespread adoption due to methodological difficulties or limited clinical validation. Herein, we provide an overview of the evolution of CSRAs used to predict outcomes in patients treated with chemotherapy that have been evaluated for use in EOC, with a focus on the latest generation chemoresponse assay.

BackgroundAngiogenesis is a valid target in the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer. Trebananib inhibits the binding of angiopoietins 1 and 2 to the Tie2 receptor, and thereby inhibits angiogenesis. We aimed to assess whether the addition of trebananib to single-agent weekly paclitaxel in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer improved progression-free survival.MethodsFor this randomised, double-blind phase 3 study undertaken between Nov 10, 2010, and Nov 19, 2012, we enrolled women with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer from 32 countries. Patient eligibility criteria included having been treated with three or fewer previous regimens, and a platinum-free interval of less than 12 months. We enrolled patients with a computerised interactive voice response system, and patients were randomly assigned using a permuted block method (block size of four) in a 1:1 ratio to receive weekly intravenous paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2)) plus either weekly masked intravenous placebo or trebananib (15 mg/kg). Patients were stratified on the basis of platinum-free interval (≥0 and ≤6 months vs >6 and ≤12 months), presence or absence of measurable disease, and region (North America, western Europe and Australia, or rest of world). The sponsor, investigators, site staff, and patients were masked to the treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01204749, and is no longer accruing patients.Findings919 patients were enrolled, of whom 461 were randomly assigned to the trebananib group and 458 to the placebo group. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the trebananib group than in the placebo group (7·2 months [5·8-7·4] vs 5·4 months [95% CI 4·3-5·5], respectively, hazard ratio 0·66, 95% CI 0·57-0·77, p