Temporal Patterns and Adoption of Germline and Somatic BRCA Testing in Ovarian Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the testing rate, patient characteristics, temporal trends, timing, and results of germline and somatic BRCA testing in patients with ovarian cancer using real-world data. METHODS: We included a cross-sectional subset of adult patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer between January 1, 2011, and November 30, 2018, who received frontline treatment and were followed for at least 1 year in a real-world database. The primary outcome was receipt of BRCA testing, classified by biosample source as germline (blood or saliva) or somatic (tissue). Lines of therapy (frontline, second line, third line) were derived based on dates of surgery and chemotherapy. Descriptive statistics were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 2,557 patients, 72.2% (n=1,846) had at least one documented BRCA test. Among tested patients, 62.5% (n=1,154) had only germline testing, 10.6% (n=197) had only somatic testing, and 19.9% (n=368) had both. Most patients had testing before (9.7%, n=276) or during (48.6%, n=1,521) frontline therapy, with 17.6% (n=273) tested during second-line and 12.7% (n=129) tested during third-line therapy. Patients who received BRCA testing, compared with patients without testing, were younger (mean age 63 years vs 66 years, P <.001) and were more likely to be treated at an academic practice (10.4% vs 7.0%, P =.01), with differences by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score ( P <.001), stage of disease ( P <.001), histology ( P <.001), geography ( P <.001), and type of frontline therapy ( P <.001), but no differences based on race or ethnicity. The proportion of patients who received BRCA testing within 1 year of diagnosis increased from 24.6% of patients in 2011 to 75.6% of patients in 2018. CONCLUSION: In a large cohort of patients with ovarian cancer, significant practice disparities existed in testing for actionable BRCA mutations. Despite increased testing over time, many patients did not receive testing, suggesting missed opportunities to identify patients appropriate for targeted therapy and genetic counseling.

Patient-reported outcomes and final overall survival results from the randomized phase 3 PENELOPE trial evaluating pertuzumab in low tumor human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) mRNA-expressing platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The 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 METHODS: Eligible 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. RESULTS: At 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. DISCUSSION: Consistent 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.

Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Phase III Trial Evaluating Pertuzumab Combined With Chemotherapy for Low Tumor Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 3 mRNA-Expressing Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer (PENELOPE).

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.

Pertuzumab Plus Chemotherapy for Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer: Safety Run-in Results of the PENELOPE Trial.

OBJECTIVE: In 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 METHODS: Part 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/m days 1-5 every 3 weeks) or weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was to assess safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Fifty 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. CONCLUSIONS: Based 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.