Search

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of the multigene EndoPredict test in prospectively collected data of patients screened for the randomized, double-blind, phase III UNIRAD trial, which evaluated the addition of everolimus to adjuvant endocrine therapy in high-risk, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative early breast cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients were classified into low or high risk according to the EPclin score, consisting of a 12-gene molecular score combined with tumor size and nodal status. Association of the EPclin score with disease-free survival (DFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier estimates. The independent prognostic added value of EPclin score was tested in a multivariate Cox model after adjusting on tumor characteristics., Results: EndoPredict test results were available for 768 patients: 663 patients classified as EPclin high risk (EPCH) and 105 patients as EPclin low risk (EPCL). Median follow-up was 70 months (range 1-172 months). For the 429 EPCH randomized patients, there was no significant difference in DFS between treatment arms. The 60-month relapse rate for patients in the EPCL and EPCH groups was 0% and 7%, respectively. Hazard ratio (HR) supposing continuous EPclin score was 1.87 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4-2.5, P < 0.0001]. This prognostic effect remained significant when assessed in a Cox model adjusting on tumor size, number of positive nodes and tumor grade (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.09-2.13, P = 0.0141). The 60-month DMFS for patients in the EPCL and EPCH groups was 100% and 94%, respectively (adjusted HR 8.10, 95% CI 1.1-59.1, P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: The results confirm the value of EPclin score as an independent prognostic parameter in node-positive, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer patients receiving standard adjuvant treatment. EPclin score can be used to identify patients at higher risk of recurrence who may warrant additional systemic treatments., Competing Interests: Disclosure FPL: advisor for AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Genomic Health, GILEAD, GSK, Lilly, Menarini/Stemline, MSD, Myriad, Nanostring, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre-Fabre, Roche; funding: MSD, Myriad, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo; travel/expenses: AstraZeneca, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer. FD: advisor for Daichi, Seagen, Novartis, Gilead, Lilly, MSD; travel/expenses: Daichi, Novartis, Pfizer. PC: advisor for Pfizer, Lilly; travel/expenses: Roche, Pfizer, Lilly, Novartis, Sanofi, BMS. JG: advisor for Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead, Pfizer; travel/expenses: Eisai Europe. MC: advisor for Novartis, Sandoz, Accord, Sanofi, Lilly, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo; consulting fees: Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, Novartis, Servier, Daiichi Sankyo; travel//expenses: Novartis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche. ACHB: advisor for Novartis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, Clovis Onco, Seattle Genetics, Eisai, Daiichi Sankyo/Astra Zeneca, MSD. SG: advisor for Eisai, Lilly; funding: Merck, AstraZeneca; travel/expenses: Lilly. PB: advisor for Ipsen, BMS, MSD, Pfizer, Merck KGaA, Astellas, Novartis, Gilead, Bayer; travel/expenses: BMS, Pfizer, Janssen-Cilag, Astellas, MSD, Ipsen, Merck. AM: advisor for Pfizer; travel/expenses: AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, Lilly. MS: travel/expenses: Eisai Europe. MLT: consulting fees: Myriad Genetics. JB: funding: AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Puma Biotech, Pfizer, Roche, Lilly, Janssen-Cilag, Clovis Onco; travel/expenses: Pfizer. FA: stock and other ownership interests: PEGASCY; funding: AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pfizer, Lilly, Roche, Daiichi; travel/expenses: Novartis, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca. TB: advisor for Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, MSD; funding: Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Seattle Genetics, Pfizer; travel/expenses: Roche, Pfizer, AstraZeneca. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Older patients with ovarian cancer represent a heterogeneous population. The French National Group of Investigators for the Study of Ovarian and Breast Cancer developed the geriatric vulnerability score (GVS) to identify geriatric parameters predictive of poor outcomes. A prospective validation of the GVS was needed., Methods: The EWOC-1 study (NCT02001272) was an international, open-label, phase 2, three-arm trial designed according to a two-step process. Patients aged 70 years or older with newly diagnosed stage III or IV ovarian cancer were identified and the GVS determined. Those with a GVS of 3 or greater were randomly assigned to the EWOC-1 trial, stratified by country and surgical outcome, to receive three different carboplatin with or without paclitaxel regimens; those not included in the EWOC-1 trial were followed up in the EWOC-1 registry. External validation of the GVS was a secondary endpoint of the trial. Three validation cohorts were identified: the total population (validation cohort 1 [V1], n=447), the registry-only population (validation cohort 2 [V2], n=327), and the carboplatin-paclitaxel-treated population (validation cohort 3 [V3], n=320)., Findings: From Dec 11, 2013, to Nov 16, 2018, 447 patients were included in 48 academic centres in six countries; 120 in the EWOC-1 trial and 327 in the EWOC-1 registry. Median follow-up was 19·7 (95% CI 8·5-29·7) months for the total cohort; missing values were low (<2%). According to the maximum likelihood analysis, the hazard ratio (HR) of death in V1 was 1·8 (95% CI 1·1-3·1, p=0·029) for those with a GVS of 1; 2·4 (1·4-4·0, p=0·0009) with a GVS of 2; 4·1 (2·5-7·0, p<0·0001) for a GVS of 3; 5·5 (3·3-9·3, p<0·0001) for a GVS of 4; and 9·1 (4·7-17·5, p<0·0001) for a GVS of 5 compared with a score of 0. Whatever the validation cohort, GVS of 3 or more significantly segregated two groups with different overall survival: V1 (median 13·2 [95% CI: 10·8-18·7] vs 40·8 [32·0-45·6] months; HR 2·8 [95% CI 2·2-3·7]; p<0·0001); V2 (11·9 [95% CI 8·8-18·1] vs 40·8 [32·0-45·6] months, HR 3·5 [2·5-4·9]; p<0·0001); and V3 (18·1 [95% CI 15·8-31·8] vs 43·0 [40·6-49·7] months, HR 2·6 [1·9 to 3·7]; p<0·0001)., Interpretation: The GVS has high prognostic performance for overall survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer, independently of geographic and historic effect (V1), as well as treatment patterns (V3), validated in an international population. Even though the GVS is time consuming it will allow the stratification of populations for clinical research and might permit the orientation of the geriatric intervention to specific domains., Funding: French National Cancer Institute., Translation: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests CF reports a grant from the French National Cancer Institute during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Leo Pharma, Pfizer, MSD Oncology, Teva, AstraZeneca, Baxter, Eisai, Janssen Oncology, Novartis, Chugai Pharma, and Astellas Pharma, outside the submitted work; grants from Chugai Pharma, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, and Astellas Pharma, outside the submitted work; and non-financial support from Janssen Oncology, Pierre Fabre, AstraZeneca, and Leo Pharma, outside the submitted work. FT reports grants from French National Institute (via Hospices Civils de Lyon), during the conduct of the study. DL reports grants from PharmaMar, Merck Serono, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Tesaro, GSK, Roche, Genmab, and Immunogen, during the conduct of the study. AF reports personal fees from MSD, AstraZeneca, GSK, and Clovis Oncology, outside the submitted work. FR reports participation in a specialist advisory board for Bristol Myers Squibb. OT reports grants and personal fees from Roche and MSD, grants from BMS, and personal fees from Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Pierre Fabre, and Seagen, outside the submitted work. EP-L reports personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, Tesaro, and Roche; personal fees from Clovis, Incyte, and Pfizer; and other from Association de Recherche sur les CAncers dont GYnécologiques (ARCAGY) Research, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Bevacizumab-containing therapy is considered a standard-of-care front-line option for stage IIIB-IV ovarian cancer based on results of randomized phase 3 trials. The multicenter non-interventional ENCOURAGE prospective cohort study assessed treatment administration and outcomes in the French real-world setting. Patients and Methods: Eligible patients were aged ≥ 18 years with planned bevacizumab-containing therapy for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. The primary objective was to assess the safety profile of front-line bevacizumab in routine clinical practice; secondary objectives were to describe patient characteristics, indications/contraindications for bevacizumab, treatment regimens and co-medications, follow-up and monitoring, progression-free survival, and treatment at recurrence. In this non-interventional study, treatment was administered as chosen by the investigator and participation in the trial had no influence on the management of the disease. Results: Of 1,290 patients screened between April 2013 and February 2015, 468 were eligible. Most patients (86%) received bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks or equivalent, typically with carboplatin (99%) and paclitaxel (98%). The median duration of bevacizumab was 12.2 (range 0-28, interquartile range 6.9-14.9) months; 8% of patients discontinued bevacizumab because of toxicity. The most common adverse events were hypertension (38% of patients), fatigue (35%), and bleeding (32%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Most physicians (90%) reported blood pressure measurement immediately before each bevacizumab infusion and almost all (97%) reported monitoring for proteinuria before each bevacizumab infusion. Median progression-free survival was 17.4 (95% CI, 16.4-19.1) months. The 3-year overall survival rate was 62% (95% CI, 58-67%). The most commonly administered chemotherapies at recurrence were carboplatin and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin. Discussion: Clinical outcomes and tolerability with bevacizumab in this real-life setting are consistent with randomized trial results, notwithstanding differences in the treated patient population and treatment schedule. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier NCT01832415., Competing Interests: AF reports honoraria and travel/accommodation/expenses from AstraZeneca, Clovis, and GSK, and non-remunerated activities for MSD and Roche. PT reports honoraria from MSD, Tesaro/GSK, and Pfizer, and advisory/consultancy roles for MSD and Tesaro/GSK. JA reports honoraria from GSK, AstraZeneca, MSD, PharmaMar, and Eisai; travel/accommodation/expenses from Novartis, Janssen, and GSK; and research grant/funding to his institution from Janssen and MSD. CG-T reports honoraria from and advisory/consultancy roles for Pfizer; speaker bureau/expert testimony for AstraZeneca and MSD; travel/accommodation/expenses from MSD, Pfizer, and Mylan; and research grant/funding to her institution from Roche. PF reports honoraria from and advisory/consultancy roles for Novartis, AstraZeneca, GSK, and Clovis, and travel/accommodation/expenses from Novartis, AstraZeneca, and GSK. CBL reports honoraria (paid to his institution) from Roche, Novartis, Isofol, Array Biopharma, AstraZeneca, BMS, and Celgene. FS reports honoraria from Roche, AstraZeneca, Tesaro, Clovis, MSD, PharmaMar, and GlaxoSmithKline; advisory/consultancy role for Roche; speaker bureau/expert testimony for Roche, AstraZeneca, Tesaro, and GlaxoSmithKline; and travel/accommodation/expenses from Roche, AstraZeneca, Tesaro, MSD, and PharmaMar. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Berton, Floquet, Lescaut, Baron, Kaminsky, Toussaint, Largillier, Savoye, Alexandre, Delbaldo, Malaurie, Barletta, Bosacki, Garnier-Tixidre, Follana, Laharie-Mineur, Briac Levache, Valenza, Dechartres, Mollon-Grange and Selle.)