Back to Search
Start Over
The effect of age on efficacy, safety and patient-centered outcomes with rucaparib: A post hoc exploratory analysis of ARIEL3, a phase 3, randomized, maintenance study in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma.
- Source :
-
Gynecologic Oncology . Oct2020, Vol. 159 Issue 1, p101-111. 11p. - Publication Year :
- 2020
-
Abstract
- In the phase 3 trial ARIEL3, maintenance treatment with the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor rucaparib provided clinical benefit versus placebo for patients with recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Here, we evaluate the impact of age on the clinical utility of rucaparib in ARIEL3. Patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian carcinoma with ≥2 prior platinum-based chemotherapies who responded to their last platinum-based therapy were enrolled in ARIEL3 and randomized 2:1 to rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or placebo. Exploratory, post hoc analyses of progression-free survival (PFS), patient-centered outcomes (quality-adjusted PFS [QA-PFS] and quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity [Q-TWiST]), and safety were conducted in three age subgroups (<65 years, 65–74 years, and ≥75 years). Investigator-assessed PFS was significantly longer with rucaparib than placebo in patients aged <65 years (rucaparib n = 237 vs placebo n = 117; median, 11.1 vs 5.4 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.33 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.25–0.43]; P < 0.0001) and 65–74 years (n = 113 vs n = 64; median, 8.3 vs 5.3 months; HR 0.43 [95% CI 0.29–0.63]; P < 0.0001) and numerically longer in patients aged ≥75 years (n = 25 vs n = 8; median, 9.2 vs 5.5 months; HR 0.47 [95% CI 0.16–1.35]; P = 0.1593). QA-PFS and Q-TWiST were significantly longer with rucaparib than placebo across all age subgroups. Safety of rucaparib was generally similar across the age subgroups. Efficacy, patient-centered outcomes, and safety of rucaparib were similar between age subgroups, indicating that all eligible women with recurrent ovarian cancer should be offered this therapeutic option, irrespective of age. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01968213. • PFS was significantly longer with rucaparib maintenance treatment vs placebo across age subgroups (<65, 65–74, and ≥75 y). • Rucaparib provided significant improvements in patient-centered outcomes (QA-PFS; Q-TWiST) vs placebo across age subgroups. • The safety profile of rucaparib was generally similar across age subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 00908258
- Volume :
- 159
- Issue :
- 1
- Database :
- Academic Search Index
- Journal :
- Gynecologic Oncology
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 146146684
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.05.045