Ofranergene Obadenovec (Ofra-Vec, VB-111) With Weekly Paclitaxel for Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer: Randomized Controlled Phase III Trial (OVAL Study/GOG 3018).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the addition of ofranergene obadenovec (ofra-vec, VB-111), a novel gene-based anticancer targeted therapy, to once a week paclitaxel in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC). METHODS: This placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase III trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03398655) randomly assigned patients with PROC 1:1 to receive intravenous ofra-vec every 8 weeks with once a week IV paclitaxel or placebo with paclitaxel until disease progression. The dual primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by Blinded Independent Central Review. RESULTS: Between December 2017 and March 2022, 409 patients were randomly assigned. The median PFS was 5.29 months in the ofra-vec arm and 5.36 months in the control arm, hazard ratio (HR) 1.03 (CI, 0.83 to 1.29; P = .7823). The median OS with ofra-vec was 13.37 months versus 13.14 months, HR 0.97 (CI, 0.75 to 1.27; P = .8440). Objective response rates (ORRs) per RECIST 1.1 were similar in both arms: 28.9% with ofra-vec versus 29.6% with control. In both treatment arms, response to CA-125 was a substantial prognostic factor for both PFS and OS. In the ofra-vec arm, the HR in CA-125 responders compared with that in nonresponders for PFS was 0.2428 (CI, 0.1642 to 0.3588), and for OS, the HR was 0.3343 (CI, 0.2134 to 0.5238). Safety profile was characterized by common transient flu-like symptoms such as fever and chills. CONCLUSION: The addition of ofra-vec to paclitaxel did not improve PFS or OS. The PFS and ORR in the control arm exceeded the results that were anticipated on the basis of the AURELIA chemotherapy control arm. CA-125 response was a substantial prognostic biomarker for PFS and OS in patients with PROC treated with paclitaxel.

Efficacy of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors in combination with hormonal therapy in patients with recurrent granulosa cell tumor of the ovary: A case series.

Cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors are approved in combination with hormonal therapy for treatment of hormone receptor expressing breast cancers. Activity in hormone receptor expressing gynecologic cancers has been postulated. Granulosa cell tumor of the ovary is one such cancer, which is relatively resistant to traditional cytotoxic chemotherapy. We report a case series of 7 heavily pre-treated patients with recurrent granulosa cell tumor of the ovary with a cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor in combination with hormonal therapy, with 3 patients demonstrating partial response and 2 with stable disease. As of the data cutoff, 3 patients remained on treatment and 5 were alive, with true medians for duration of treatment and overall survival not reached (medians at data cutoff of 64 weeks and 62 months respectively). The treatment was generally well tolerated, with 1 patient choosing to discontinue treatment due to grade 3 fatigue. This regimen represents a possible option in the treatment of granulosa cell tumor of the ovary, warranting further prospective study for this unmet need in this indolent disease which often requires many lines of treatment.

TP53 mutation and abnormal p53 expression in endometrial cancer: Associations with race and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This multi-center cohort study assessed associations between race, TP53 mutations, p53 expression, and histology to investigate racial survival disparities in endometrial cancer (EC). METHODS: Black and White patients with advanced or recurrent EC with Next Generation Sequencing data in the Endometrial Cancer Molecularly Targeted Therapy Consortium database were identified. Clinicopathologic and treatment variables were summarized by race and compared. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) among all patients were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models estimated the association between race, TP53 status, p53 expression, histology, and survival outcomes. RESULTS: Black patients were more likely than White patients to have TP53-mutated (N = 727, 71.7% vs 49.7%, p < 0.001) and p53-abnormal (N = 362, 71.1% vs 53.2%, p = 0.003) EC. Patients with TP53-mutated EC had worse PFS (HR 2.73 (95% CI 1.88-3.97)) and OS (HR 2.20 (95% CI 1.77-2.74)) compared to those with TP53-wildtype EC. Patients with p53-abnormal EC had worse PFS (HR 2.01 (95% CI 1.22-3.32)) and OS (HR 1.61 (95% CI 1.18-2.19)) compared to those with p53-wildtype EC. After adjusting for TP53 mutation and p53 expression, race was not associated with survival outcomes. The most frequent TP53 variants were at nucleotide positions R273 (n = 54), R248 (n = 38), and R175 (n = 23), rates of which did not differ by race. CONCLUSIONS: Black patients are more likely to have TP53-mutated and p53-abnormal EC, which are associated with worse survival outcomes than TP53- and p53-wildtype EC. The higher frequency of these subtypes among Black patients may contribute to survival disparities.

Surgical versus non-surgical management for patients with malignant bowel obstruction (S1316): a pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial.

BACKGROUND: Malignant small bowel obstruction has a poor prognosis and is associated with multiple related symptoms. The optimal treatment approach is often unclear. We aimed to compare surgical versus non-surgical management with the aim to determine the optimal approach for managing malignant bowel obstruction. METHODS: S1316 was a pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial done within the National Cancer Trials Network at 30 hospital and cancer research centres in the USA, Mexico, Peru, and Colombia. Participants had an intra-abdominal or retroperitoneal primary cancer confirmed via pathological report and malignant bowel disease; were aged 18 years or older with a Zubrod performance status 0-2 within 1 week before admission; had a surgical indication; and treatment equipoise. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to surgical or non-surgical treatment using a dynamic balancing algorithm, balancing on primary tumour type. Patients who declined consent for random assignment were offered a prospective observational patient choice pathway. The primary outcome was the number of days alive and out of the hospital (good days) at 91 days. Analyses were based on intention-to-treat linear, logistic, and Cox regression models combining data from both pathways and adjusting for potential confounders. Treatment complications were assessed in all analysed patients in the study. This completed study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02270450. FINDINGS: From May 11, 2015, to April 27, 2020, 221 patients were enrolled (143 [65%] were female and 78 [35%] were male). There were 199 evaluable participants: 49 in the randomised pathway (24 surgery and 25 non-surgery) and 150 in the patient choice pathway (58 surgery and 92 non-surgery). No difference was seen between surgery and non-surgery for the primary outcome of good days: mean 42·6 days (SD 32·2) in the randomised surgery group, 43·9 days (29·5) in the randomised non-surgery group, 54·8 days (27·0) in the patient choice surgery group, and 52·7 days (30·7) in the patient choice non-surgery group (adjusted mean difference 2·9 additional good days in surgical versus non-surgical treatment [95% CI -5·5 to 11·3]; p=0·50). During their initial hospital stay, six participants died, five due to cancer progression (four patients from the randomised pathway, two in each treatment group, and one from the patient choice pathway, in the surgery group) and one due to malignant bowel obstruction treatment complications (patient choice pathway, non-surgery). The most common grade 3-4 malignant bowel obstruction treatment complication was anaemia (three [6%] patients in the randomised pathway, all in the surgical group, and five [3%] patients in the patient choice pathway, four in the surgical group and one in the non-surgical group). INTERPRETATION: In our study, whether patients received a surgical or non-surgical treatment approach did not influence good days during the first 91 days after registration. These findings should inform treatment decisions for patients hospitalised with malignant bowel obstruction. FUNDING: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Cancer Institute. TRANSLATION: For the Spanish translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

TP53 Sequencing and p53 Immunohistochemistry Predict Outcomes When Bevacizumab Is Added to Frontline Chemotherapy in Endometrial Cancer: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Study.

PURPOSE: The status of p53 in a tumor can be inferred by next-generation sequencing (NGS) or by immunohistochemistry (IHC). We examined the association between p53 IHC and sequence and whether p53 IHC alone, or integrated with TP53 NGS, predicts the outcome. METHODS: From GOG-86P, a randomized phase II study of chemotherapy combined with either bevacizumab or temsirolimus in advanced endometrial cancer, 213 cases had p53 protein expression data measured by IHC and TP53 NGS data. An analysis was designed to integrate p53 expression by IHC with the presence or absence of a TP53 mutation. These variables were further correlated with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab arms versus the chemotherapy plus temsirolimus arm. RESULTS: In the analysis of p53 IHC, the most striking treatment effect favoring bevacizumab was in cases where p53 was overexpressed (PFS hazard ratio [HR]: 0.46, 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.88; OS HR: 0.31, 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.62). On integrated analysis, patients with TP53 missense mutations and p53 protein overexpression had a similar treatment effect on PFS (HR: 0.41, 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.83) and OS (HR: 0.28, 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.59) favoring bevacizumab plus chemotherapy relative to temsirolimus plus chemotherapy. Concordance between TP53 NGS and p53 IHC was 88%. Concordance was 92% when cases with TP53 mutations and POLE mutations or mismatch repair deficiency were removed. CONCLUSION: IHC for p53 alone or when integrated with sequencing for TP53 identifies a specific, high-risk tumor genotype/phenotype for which bevacizumab is particularly beneficial in improving outcomes when combined with chemotherapy.

Olaparib With or Without Cediranib Versus Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Recurrent Platinum-Sensitive Ovarian Cancer (NRG-GY004): A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: Platinum-based chemotherapy is the standard of care for platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer, but complications from repeated platinum therapy occur. We assessed the activity of two all-oral nonplatinum alternatives, olaparib or olaparib/cediranib, versus platinum-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: NRG-GY004 is an open-label, randomized, phase III trial conducted in the United States and Canada. Eligible patients had high-grade serous or endometrioid platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to platinum-based chemotherapy, olaparib, or olaparib/cediranib. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary end points included activity within germline BRCA-mutated or wild-type subgroups and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). RESULTS: Between February 04, 2016, and November 13, 2017, 565 eligible patients were randomly assigned. Median PFS was 10.3 (95% CI, 8.7 to 11.2), 8.2 (95% CI, 6.6 to 8.7), and 10.4 (95% CI, 8.5 to 12.5) months with chemotherapy, olaparib, and olaparib/cediranib, respectively. Olaparib/cediranib did not improve PFS versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.86; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.10; P = .077). In women with germline BRCA mutation, the PFS HR versus chemotherapy was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.32 to 0.94) for olaparib/cediranib and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.37 to 1.07) for olaparib. In women without a germline BRCA mutation, the PFS HR versus chemotherapy was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.30) for olaparib/cediranib and 1.41 (95% CI, 1.07 to 1.86) for olaparib. Hematologic adverse events occurred more commonly with chemotherapy; however, nonhematologic adverse events were higher with olaparib/cediranib. In 489 patients evaluable for PROs, patients receiving olaparib/cediranib scored on average 1.1 points worse on the NFOSI-DRS-P subscale (97.5% CI, -2.0 to -0.2, P = .0063) versus chemotherapy; no difference between olaparib and chemotherapy was observed. CONCLUSION: Combination olaparib/cediranib did not improve PFS compared with chemotherapy and resulted in reduced PROs. Notably, in patients with a germline BRCA mutation, both olaparib and olaparib/cediranib had significant clinical activity.

Rationale for combination PARP inhibitor and antiangiogenic treatment in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: A review.

Inhibitors of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) and angiogenesis have demonstrated single-agent activity in women with advanced ovarian cancer. Recent studies have aimed to establish whether combination therapy can augment the response seen with PARP inhibitors or antiangiogenic agents alone. This review provides an overview of PARP inhibitors and antiangiogenics as monotherapy in women with advanced ovarian cancer, explores potential mechanisms of action of PARP inhibitor and antiangiogenic combination treatments, reviews efficacy and safety data from trials evaluating this combination, and outlines ongoing and future trials evaluating this combination, discussing these in the context of the current and future treatment landscape for women with advanced ovarian cancer. Sentinel studies evaluating PARP inhibitor (n = 8), antiangiogenic (n = 4), and combination (n = 7) therapy were identified in women with newly diagnosed (n = 7) and recurrent (n = 12) ovarian cancer. PARP inhibitors included olaparib (n = 9), niraparib (n = 4), rucaparib (n = 1), and veliparib (n = 1). Antiangiogenic agents included bevacizumab (n = 7) and cediranib (n = 4). PARP inhibitors combined with antiangiogenics demonstrated efficacy based on objective response rates and progression-free survival (PFS) in the relapsed disease setting. Maintenance therapy with the PARP inhibitor, olaparib, plus antiangiogenic therapy offered a significant PFS benefit versus the antiangiogenic alone in women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer who tested positive for homologous recombination deficiency. Combination therapy was tolerated, with no new safety signals reported compared with monotherapy trials. PARP inhibitors and antiangiogenics have changed the landscape of ovarian cancer treatment. The PARP inhibitor plus antiangiogenic combination is a novel treatment option that appears promising in the first-line advanced and recurrent ovarian cancer settings, although the role of this combination in recurrent disease requires further elucidation. Defining which patients are candidates for monotherapy or combination therapy is critical, taking into consideration safety profiles of therapies alone or in combination, and how these treatments should be sequenced in clinical practice.

H2O2-Driven Anticancer Activity of Mn Porphyrins and the Underlying Molecular Pathways.

Mn(III) ortho-N-alkyl- and N-alkoxyalkyl porphyrins (MnPs) were initially developed as superoxide dismutase (SOD) mimics. These compounds were later shown to react with numerous reactive species (such as ONOO-, H2O2, H2S, CO3 •-, ascorbate, and GSH). Moreover, the ability of MnPs to oxidatively modify activities of numerous proteins has emerged as their major mechanism of action both in normal and in cancer cells. Among those proteins are transcription factors (NF-κB and Nrf2), mitogen-activated protein kinases, MAPKs, antiapoptotic bcl-2, and endogenous antioxidative defenses. The lead Mn porphyrins, namely, MnTE-2-PyP5+ (BMX-010, AEOL10113), MnTnBuOE-2-PyP5+ (BMX-001), and MnTnHex-2-PyP5+, were tested in numerous injuries of normal tissue and cellular and animal cancer models. The wealth of the data led to the progression of MnTnBuOE-2-PyP5+ into four Phase II clinical trials on glioma, head and neck cancer, anal cancer, and multiple brain metastases, while MnTE-2-PyP5+ is in Phase II clinical trial on atopic dermatitis and itch.

Anti-cancer therapy and clinical trial considerations for gynecologic oncology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has consumed considerable resources and has impacted the delivery of cancer care. Patients with cancer may have factors which place them at high risk for COVID 19 morbidity or mortality. Highly immunosuppressive chemotherapy regimens and possible exposure to COVID-19 during treatment may put patients at additional risk. The Society of Gynecologic Oncology convened an expert panel to address recommendations for best practices during this crisis to minimize risk to patients from deviations in cancer care and from COVID-19 morbidity. METHODS: An expert panel convened to develop initial consensus guidelines regarding anti-neoplastic therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic with respect to gynecologic cancer care and clinical trials. RESULTS: COVID-19 poses special risks to patients who are older, have medical co-morbidities, and cancer. In addition, this pandemic will likely strain resources, making delivery of cancer care or conduct of clinical trials unpredictable. Recommendations are to limit visits and contact with health care facilities by using telemedicine when appropriate, and choosing regimens which require less frequent visits and which are less immunosuppressive. Deviations will occur in clinical trials as a result of limited resources, and it is important to understand regulatory obligations to trial sponsors as well as to the IRB to ensure that clinical trial and patient safety oversight are maintained. CONCLUSIONS: The ongoing crisis will strain resources needed to deliver cancer care. When alterations to the delivery of care are mandated, efforts should be taken to minimize risks and maximize safety while approximating standard practice.

Differential expression of immune related genes in high-grade ovarian serous carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To identify novel immunologic targets and biomarkers associated with overall survival (OS) in high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSC). METHODS: In this retrospective study, microarray data from 51 HGSC specimens were analyzed (Affymetrix HG-U133A). A panel of 183 immune/inflammatory response related genes linked to 279 probe sets was constructed a priori and screened. Associations between gene expression and OS were assessed using logrank tests. Multiple testing was addressed within the False Discovery Rate (FDR) framework. For external validation, TCGA Ovarian dataset and five GSE publicly available HGSC datasets were evaluated. RESULTS: In Duke data, 110 probe sets linked to 83 immunologic/inflammatory-related genes were differentially expressed in tumors from long versus short-term HGSC survivors (adjusted p < 0.05). In TCGA, concordant with the results from the Duke discovery cohort, high expression of one probe (IL6R) demonstrated a consistent significance and concordant association with higher expression in long-term HGSC survivors (Duke q-value = 0.022) and improved OS in the TCGA dataset (p-value = 0.015, HR = 0.8). Thirteen genes in GSE14764 (N = 4) and GSE26712 (N = 9) datasets had significant p-values and consistent concordant with Duke Data. Despite the significant associations of gene expression and OS in the individual GSE datasets, in the GSE meta-analysis no genes were consistently concordant and significantly associated with survival. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of IL6R expression may be warranted based on higher expression in long-term survivors and association with improved survival in advanced HGSC. The other candidate genes may also be of worthy of further exploration to enhance immuno-oncology drug discovery.

Predictive Blood-Based Biomarkers in Patients with Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Treated with Carboplatin and Paclitaxel with or without Bevacizumab: Results from GOG-0218.

PURPOSE: GOG-0218, a double-blind placebo-controlled phase III trial, compared carboplatin and paclitaxel with placebo, bevacizumab followed by placebo, or bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Results demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), but no overall survival (OS) benefit with bevacizumab. Blood samples were collected for biomarker analyses. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Plasma samples were analyzed via multiplex ELISA technology for seven prespecified biomarkers [IL6, Ang-2, osteopontin (OPN), stromal cell-derived factor-1 (SDF-1), VEGF-D, IL6 receptor (IL6R), and GP130]. The predictive value of each biomarker with respect to PFS and OS was assessed using a protein marker by treatment interaction term within the framework of a Cox proportional hazards model. Prognostic markers were identified using Cox models adjusted for baseline covariates. RESULTS: Baseline samples were available from 751 patients. According to our prespecified analysis plan, IL6 was predictive of a therapeutic advantage with bevacizumab for PFS (P = 0.007) and OS (P = 0.003). IL6 and OPN were found to be negative prognostic markers for both PFS and OS (P < 0.001). Patients with high median IL6 levels (dichotomized at the median) treated with bevacizumab had longer PFS (14.2 vs. 8.7 months) and OS (39.6 vs. 33.1 months) compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The inflammatory cytokine IL6 may be predictive of therapeutic benefit from bevacizumab when combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel. Aligning with results observed in patients with renal cancer treated with antiangiogenic therapies, it appears plasma IL6 may also define those patients with EOC more or less likely to benefit from the addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy.

Patient preferences for maintenance PARP inhibitor therapy in ovarian cancer treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To measure preferences of women with ovarian cancer regarding risks, side effects, costs and benefits afforded by maintenance therapy (MT) with a poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitor. METHODS: A discrete-choice experiment elicited preferences of women with ovarian cancer regarding 6 attributes (levels in parentheses) relevant to decisions for MT versus treatment break: (1) overall survival (OS; 36, 38, 42 months); (2) progression-free survival (PFS; 15, 17, 21 months); (3) nausea (none, mild, moderate); (4) fatigue (none, mild, moderate); (5) probability of death from myelodysplastic syndrome/acute myelogenous leukemia (MDS/AML; 0% to 10%); (6) monthly out-of-pocket cost ($0 to $1000). Participants chose between 2 variable MT scenarios and a static scenario representing treatment break, with multiple iterations. Random-parameters logit regression was applied to model choices as a function of attribute levels. RESULTS: 95 eligible participants completed the survey; mean age was 62, 48% had recurrence, and 17% were ever-PARP inhibitor users. Participants valued OS (average importance weight 24.5 out of 100) and monthly costs (24.6) most highly, followed by risk of death from MDS/AML (17.9), nausea (14.7), PFS (10.5) and fatigue (7.8). Participants would accept 5% risk of MDS/AML if treatment provided 2.2 months additional OS or 4.8 months PFS. Participants would require gains of 2.6 months PFS to accept mild treatment-related fatigue and 4.4 months to accept mild nausea. CONCLUSIONS: When considering MT, women with ovarian cancer are most motivated by gains in OS. Women expect at least 3-4 months of PFS benefit to bear mild side effects of treatment.

A Randomized Phase II Trial of Epigenetic Priming with Guadecitabine and Carboplatin in Platinum-resistant, Recurrent Ovarian Cancer.

PURPOSE: Platinum resistance in ovarian cancer is associated with epigenetic modifications. Hypomethylating agents (HMA) have been studied as carboplatin resensitizing agents in ovarian cancer. This randomized phase II trial compared guadecitabine, a second-generation HMA, and carboplatin (G+C) against second-line chemotherapy in women with measurable or detectable platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received either G+C (guadecitabine 30 mg/m2 s.c. once-daily for 5 days and carboplatin) or treatment of choice (TC; topotecan, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, paclitaxel, or gemcitabine) in 28-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints were RECIST v1.1 and CA-125 response rate, 6-month PFS, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 100 patients treated, 51 received G+C and 49 received TC, of which 27 crossed over to G+C. The study did not meet its primary endpoint as the median PFS was not statistically different between arms (16.3 weeks vs. 9.1 weeks in the G+C and TC groups, respectively; P = 0.07). However, the 6-month PFS rate was significantly higher in the G+C group (37% vs. 11% in TC group; P = 0.003). The incidence of grade 3 or higher toxicity was similar in G+C and TC groups (51% and 49%, respectively), with neutropenia and leukopenia being more frequent in the G+C group. CONCLUSIONS: Although this trial did not show superiority for PFS of G+C versus TC, the 6-month PFS increased in G+C treated patients. Further refinement of this strategy should focus on identification of predictive markers for patient selection.

Secondary Surgical Cytoreduction for Recurrent Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Secondary 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. METHODS: We 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. RESULTS: A 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. CONCLUSIONS: In 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.).

Constitutively active ESR1 mutations in gynecologic malignancies and clinical response to estrogen-receptor directed therapies.

OBJECTIVE: Endocrine therapy is often considered as a treatment for hormone-responsive gynecologic malignancies. In breast cancer, activating mutations in the estrogen receptor (mutESR1) contribute to therapeutic resistance to endocrine therapy, especially aromatase inhibitors (AIs). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the frequency and clinical relevance of ESR1 genomic alterations in gynecologic malignancies. METHODS: DNA from FFPE tumor tissue obtained during routine clinical care for 9645 gynecologic malignancies (ovary, fallopian tube, uterus, cervix, vagina, vulvar, and placenta) was analyzed for all classes of genomic alterations (base substitutions (muts), insertions, deletions, rearrangements, and amplifications) in ESR1 by hybrid capture next generation sequencing. A subset of alterations was characterized in laboratory-based transcription assays for response to endocrine therapies. RESULTS: A total of 295 ESR1 genomic alterations were identified in 285 (3.0%) cases. mutESR1 were present in 86 (0.9%) cases and were more common in uterine compared to other cancers (2.0% vs <1%, respectively p < 0.001). mutESR1 were enriched in carcinomas with endometrioid versus serous histology (4.4% vs 0.2% respectively, p < 0.0001 in uterine and 3.5% vs 0.3% respectively, p = 0.0004 in ovarian carcinomas). In three of four patients with serial sampling, mutESR1 emerged under the selective pressure of AI therapy. Despite decreased potency of estrogen receptor (ER) antagonists in transcriptional assays, clinical benefit was observed following treatment with selective ER-targeted therapy, in one case lasting >48 months. CONCLUSIONS: While the prevalence of ESR1 mutations in gynecologic malignancies is low, there are significant clinical implications useful in guiding therapeutic approaches for these cancers.

Randomized Trial of Intravenous Versus Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Plus Bevacizumab in Advanced Ovarian Carcinoma: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of two different intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy regimens on progression-free survival (PFS) among women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian carcinoma. METHODS: Eligible patients were randomly assigned to six cycles of IV paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 once per week with intravenous (IV) carboplatin area under the curve 6 (IV carboplatin) versus IV paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 once per week with IP carboplatin area under the curve 6 (IP carboplatin) versus once every 3 weeks IV paclitaxel 135 mg/m2 over 3 hours day 1, IP cisplatin 75 mg/m2 day 2, and IP paclitaxel 60 mg/m2 day 8 (IP cisplatin). All participants received bevacizumab 15 mg/kg IV every 3 weeks in cycles 2 to 22. RESULTS: A total of 1,560 participants were enrolled and had 84.8 months of follow-up. The median PFS duration was 24.9 months in the IV carboplatin arm, 27.4 months in the IP carboplatin arm, and 26.2 months in the IP cisplatin arm. For the subgroup of 1,380 patients with stage II/III and residual disease of 1 cm or less, median PFS was 26.9 (IV-carboplatin), 28.7 (IP-carboplatin), and 27.8 months (IP cisplatin), respectively. Median PFS for patients with stage II/III and no residual disease was 35.9, 38.8, and 35.5 months, respectively. Median overall survival for all enrolled was 75.5, 78.9, and 72.9 months, respectively, and median overall survival for stage II/III with no gross residual disease was 98.8 months, 104.8 months, and not reached. Mean patient-reported Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy neurotoxicity scores (Gynecologic Oncology Group) were similar for all arms, but the mean Trial Outcome Index of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovary scores during chemotherapy were statistically worse in the IP cisplatin arm. CONCLUSION: Compared with the IV carboplatin reference arm, the duration of PFS was not significantly increased with either IP regimen when combined with bevacizumab and was better tolerated than IP cisplatin.

Maintenance treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer: Is it ready for prime time?

Approximately 1% of women in the United States will be diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) during their lifetime. It is most likely to present at a more advanced stage, requiring aggressive therapeutic measures, and most women will succumb to this illness. Due to advancements in therapy, the oncology community has begun to shift its focus to molecular targeted agents, alternative dosing schedules, and maintenance therapy. Women who achieve a response to initial adjuvant chemotherapy may be candidates for maintenance therapy, with the goal of inducing a lasting remission or prolonging the disease-free interval before recurrence. The rationale for maintenance therapy is to delay disease progression by eliminating residual, slowly-dying cancerous cells, or impeding cell turnover. This review discusses the goals of maintenance therapy for EOC with antiangiogenic agents or poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, and reviews clinical studies that have demonstrated improvements in survival outcomes. The side-effect profiles for PARP inhibitors and the implications for preserving quality of life during maintenance therapy will also be discussed.

A Phase I Clinical Trial of Guadecitabine and Carboplatin in Platinum-Resistant, Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: Clinical, Pharmacokinetic, and Pharmacodynamic Analyses.

Purpose: Epigenetic changes are implicated in acquired resistance to platinum. Guadecitabine is a next-generation hypomethylating agent (HMA). Here, we report the clinical results, along with pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic analyses of the phase I study of guadecitabine and carboplatin in patients with recurrent, platinum-resistant high-grade serous ovarian cancer, primary peritoneal carcinoma (PPC), or fallopian tube cancer (FTC).Experimental Design: Guadecitabine was administered once daily on days 1 to 5 followed by carboplatin i.v. on day 8 of a 28-day cycle. Patients had either measurable or detectable disease. Safety assessments used CTCAE v4.Results: Twenty patients were enrolled and treated. Median age was 56 years (38-72 years). The median number of prior regimens was 7 (1-14). In the first cohort (N = 6), the starting doses were guadecitabine 45 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC5. Four patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT; neutropenia and thrombocytopenia), leading to dose deescalation of guadecitabine to 30 mg/m2 and of carboplatin to AUC4. No DLTs were observed in the subsequent 14 patients. Grade ≥3 adverse events ≥10% were neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, nausea, vomiting, ascites, constipation, hypokalemia, pulmonary embolism, small-intestinal obstruction, and thrombocytopenia. Three patients had a partial response (PR), and 6 patients had stable disease (SD) >3 months, for an overall response rate (ORR) and clinical benefit rate of 15% and 45%, respectively. LINE-1 demethylation in PBMCs and promoter demethylation/gene reexpression in paired tumor biopsies/ascites were recorded.Conclusions: Guadecitabine and carboplatin were tolerated and induced clinical responses in a heavily pretreated platinum-resistant ovarian cancer population, supporting a subsequent randomized phase II trial. Clin Cancer Res; 24(10); 2285-93. ©2018 AACR.

Predicting 6- and 12-Month Risk of Mortality in Patients With Platinum-Resistant Advanced-Stage Ovarian Cancer: Prognostic Model to Guide Palliative Care Referrals.

OBJECTIVE: Predictive models are increasingly being used in clinical practice. The aim of the study was to develop a predictive model to identify patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer with a prognosis of less than 6 to 12 months who may benefit from immediate referral to hospice care. METHODS: A retrospective chart review identified patients with platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer who were treated at our institution between 2000 and 2011. A predictive model for survival was constructed based on the time from development of platinum resistance to death. Multivariate logistic regression modeling was used to identify significant survival predictors and to develop a predictive model. The following variables were included: time from diagnosis to platinum resistance, initial stage, debulking status, number of relapses, comorbidity score, albumin, hemoglobin, CA-125 levels, liver/lung metastasis, and the presence of a significant clinical event (SCE). An SCE was defined as a malignant bowel obstruction, pleural effusion, or ascites occurring on or before the diagnosis of platinum resistance. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-four patients met inclusion criteria. In the regression analysis, only an SCE and the presence of liver or lung metastasis were associated with poorer short-term survival (P < 0.001). Nine percent of patients with an SCE or liver or lung metastasis survived 6 months or greater and 0% survived 12 months or greater, compared with 85% and 67% of patients without an SCE or liver or lung metastasis, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer who have experienced an SCE or liver or lung metastasis have a high risk of death within 6 months and should be considered for immediate referral to hospice care.

Paclitaxel With and Without Pazopanib for Persistent or Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of gynecologic cancer deaths in the United States. Pazopanib is an oral, multitarget kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3; platelet-derived growth factor receptors α and ß; and proto-oncogene receptor tyrosine kinase (c-KIT). OBJECTIVE: To estimate the progression-free survival (PFS) hazard ratio (HR) of weekly paclitaxel and pazopanib compared with weekly paclitaxel and placebo in women with recurrent ovarian cancer. Secondary objectives included frequency and severity of adverse events, proportion responding, and overall survival (OS) in each arm. Translational research objectives included exploring the association between possible biomarkers and single-nucleotide polymorphisms in vascular endothelial growth factor A, interleukin 8, and hypoxia-inducible factor 1α; and PFS, OS, and proportion responding. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 2 study was conducted at 26 participating institutions. Patients were enrolled between December 12, 2011, and April 22, 2013. Data were frozen on August 11, 2014. Participants were patients with persistent or recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma with 1 to 3 prior regimens and performance status of 0 to 2. One hundred six patients enrolled; 100 were evaluable for toxic effects. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days and were randomized 1:1 to pazopanib 800 mg orally daily or placebo. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was PFS. The study was designed to detect a 37.5% reduction in the hazard with 80% power (α = 10%). RESULTS: A total of 106 women (median age [range], 61 [35-87] years; 88 [83%] white) were enrolled. Study arms were well balanced for age, performance status, measurable disease, and prior bevacizumab. Proportion responding was 14 of 44 (31.8%) vs 10 of 44 (22.7%) for pazopanib plus paclitaxel vs paclitaxel alone. Median PFS was 7.5 vs 6.2 months for pazopanib plus paclitaxel vs paclitaxel alone, respectively (HR, 0.84; 90% CI, 0.57-1.22; P = .20). Median OS was 20.7 vs 23.3 months for pazopanib plus paclitaxel vs paclitaxel alone (HR, 1.04; 90% CI, 0.60-1.79; P = .90). Severe hypertension was more common on the pazopanib plus paclitaxel arm (relative risk, 12.0; 95% CI, 1.62-88.84). More patients discontinued treatment on the paclitaxel arm for disease progression (34 of 52 [65.4%] vs 17 of 54 [31.5%]), and more on the pazopanib plus paclitaxel arm for adverse events (20 of 54 [37%] vs 5 of 52 [9.6%]). No association was found between single-nucleotide polymorphisms (interleukin 8 and hypoxia-inducible factor 1α) and OS and proportion responding. Patients with VEGFA CC genotype may be more resistant to weekly paclitaxel than those with the AC or AA genotype, with 1 of 14 (7%), 3 of 15 (20%), and 4 of 8 (50%) responding, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The combination of pazopanib plus paclitaxel is not superior to paclitaxel in women with recurrent ovarian cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01468909.