Real-World Safety of Niraparib for Maintenance Treatment of Ovarian Cancer in Canada.

Niraparib was recently funded in Canada for the maintenance treatment of ovarian cancer following platinum-based chemotherapy. However, the drug's safety profile in the real world remains uncertain. We conducted a cohort study to describe the patient population using niraparib and the proportion that experienced adverse events between June 2019 and December 2022 in four Canadian provinces (Ontario, Alberta, British Columbia [BC], and Quebec). We used administrative data and electronic medical records from Ontario Health, Alberta Health Services, and BC Cancer, and registry data from Exactis Innovation. We summarized baseline characteristics using descriptive statistics and reported safety outcomes using cumulative incidence. We identified 514 patients receiving niraparib. Mean age was 67 years and most were initiated on a daily dose of 100 or 200 mg/day. Grade 3/4 anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia occurred in 11-16% of the cohort. In Ontario, the three-month cumulative incidence of grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia was 11.6% (95% CI, 8.3-15.4%), neutropenia was 7.1% (95% CI, 4.6-10.4%), and anemia was 11.3% (95% CI, 8.0-15.2%). Cumulative incidences in the remaining provinces were similar. Initial daily dose and proportions of hematological adverse events were low in the real world and may be related to cautious prescribing and close monitoring by clinicians.

Safety assessments and clinical features of PARP inhibitors from real-world data of Japanese patients with ovarian cancer.

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors have been increasingly used in ovarian cancer treatment. However, the real-world safety data of these drugs in Japanese patients are limited. This retrospective study included 181 patients with ovarian cancer who received olaparib or niraparib at two independent hospitals in Japan between May 2018 and December 2022. Clinical information and blood sampling data were collected. Regarding patient backgrounds, the olaparib group had higher proportions of patients with serous carcinoma, BRCA positivity, homologous recombination deficiency, and those receiving maintenance therapy after recurrence treatment than the niraparib group. Regarding toxicity properties, the most common reasons for discontinuation in the olaparib group were anemia, fatigue, and nausea, while the reason in the niraparib was thrombocytopenia. Thrombocytopenia caused by niraparib treatment occurred earlier than anemia caused by olaparib treatment. Patients with a low body mass index or who had undergone several previous treatment regimens were more likely to discontinue treatment within the first 3 months. Although we analyzed blood collection data, predicting treatment interruptions due to blood toxicity was challenging. In this study, we revealed the characteristics of patients and the timing of interruptions for each drug, highlighting the importance of carefully managing adverse effects.

Comparing niraparib versus platinum-taxane doublet chemotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with newly diagnosed homologous recombination-deficient stage III/IV ovarian cancer: study protocol for cohort C of the open-label, phase 2, randomized controlled multicenter OPAL trial.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance therapy with niraparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, has been shown to extend progression-free survival in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer who responded to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, regardless of biomarker status. However, there are limited data on niraparib's efficacy and safety in the neoadjuvant setting. The objective of Cohort C of the OPAL trial (OPAL-C) is to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of neoadjuvant niraparib treatment compared with neoadjuvant platinum-taxane doublet chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed stage III/IV ovarian cancer with confirmed homologous recombination-deficient tumors. METHODS: OPAL is an ongoing global, multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 2 trial. In OPAL-C, patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive three 21-day cycles of either neoadjuvant niraparib or platinum-taxane doublet neoadjuvant chemotherapy per standard of care. Patients with a complete or partial response per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) will then undergo interval debulking surgery; patients with stable disease may proceed to interval debulking surgery or alternative therapy at the investigator's discretion. Patients with disease progression will exit the study treatment and proceed to alternative therapy at the investigator's discretion. After interval debulking surgery, all patients will receive up to three 21-day cycles of platinum-taxane doublet chemotherapy followed by niraparib maintenance therapy for up to 36 months. Adult patients with newly diagnosed stage III/IV ovarian cancer eligible to receive neoadjuvant platinum-taxane doublet chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery may be enrolled. Patients must have tumors that are homologous recombination-deficient. The primary endpoint is the pre-interval debulking surgery unconfirmed overall response rate, defined as the investigator-assessed percentage of patients with unconfirmed complete or partial response on study treatment before interval debulking surgery per RECIST v1.1. DISCUSSION: OPAL-C explores the use of niraparib in the neoadjuvant setting as an alternative to neoadjuvant platinum-taxane doublet chemotherapy to improve postsurgical residual disease outcomes for patients with ovarian cancer with homologous recombination-deficient tumors. Positive findings from this approach could significantly impact preoperative ovarian cancer therapy, particularly for patients who are ineligible for primary debulking surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03574779. Registered on February 28, 2022.

The effect of concomitant beta-blocker use on survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitors in the first line.

PURPOSE: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibition is one of the cornerstones of treatment in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Since RCC is a disease of advanced age and hypertension as a side effect of VEGF receptor inhibitors, beta-blocker use is common in these patients. We aimed to compare the treatment efficacy and survival results in case of concomitant use of these two drugs due to the inhibition of VEGF in beta-blockers. METHODS: A total of 121 patients with a diagnosis of mRCC who used sunitinib or pazopanib in first-line therapy were included in the study. These patients were divided into two groups as those using concomitant beta-blockers and those not using them. RESULT: The median overall survival (mOS) of the patient using sunitinib or pazopanib and concomitant beta-blocker was 47 (95% CI 29.0-65.0) months, and the mOS of those not using concomitant beta-blocker was 18 (95% CI 8.9-27.1) months (p < 0.001). The median progression-free survival (mPFS) of the patients using sunitinib or pazopanib and concomitant beta-blocker was 20.4 (95% CI 4.5-40.1) months, and the mPFS of those not using it was 11.4 (95% CI 5.9-16.9) months (p = 0.042). Concomitant beta-blocker use was found to be a good prognostic factor for OS in the multivariate analysis (p = 0.029). In the multivariate analysis, concomitant beta-blocker use had a trend towards statistical significance for PFS (p = 0.062). CONCLUSION: Concomitant use of betablockers with sunitinib or pazopanib is associated with longer overall survial and progression free survival.

Health-related quality of life in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer treated with niraparib vs placebo: Results from the phase 3 randomized PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with ovarian cancer (OC) who received niraparib as first-line maintenance therapy. METHODS: PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 (NCT02655016) enrolled patients with newly diagnosed advanced OC who responded to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomized (2:1) to niraparib or placebo once daily in 28-day cycles until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or death. HRQoL was assessed as a prespecified secondary end point using patient-reported responses to the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), the EORTC QLQ Ovarian Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-OV28), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian Symptom Index (FOSI), and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. Assessments were collected at baseline and every 8 weeks (±7 days) for 56 weeks, beginning on cycle 1/day 1, then every 12 weeks (±7 days) thereafter while the patient received study treatment. RESULTS: Among trial participants (niraparib, n = 487; placebo, n = 246), PRO adherence exceeded 80% for all instruments across all cycles. Patients reported no decline over time in HRQoL measured via EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QoL and FOSI overall scores. Scores for abdominal/gastrointestinal symptoms (EORTC QLQ-OV28) and nausea and vomiting, appetite loss, and constipation (EORTC QLQ-C30) were higher (worse symptoms) in niraparib-treated patients than placebo-treated patients; except for constipation, these differences resolved over time. Patients did not self-report any worsening from baseline of fatigue, headache, insomnia, or abdominal pain on questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some early, largely transient increases in gastrointestinal symptoms, patients with OC treated with niraparib first-line maintenance therapy reported no worsening in overall HRQoL.

Influence of genetic polymorphisms in vascular endothelial-related genes on the clinical outcome of axitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Axitinib is an oral multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitor used for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Because of the severe adverse events (AEs) associated with axitinib, patients often need dose reductions or discontinue its use, highlighting the need for effective biomarkers to assess efficacy and/or AEs. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes involved in the pharmacodynamic action of axitinib and clinical prognosis and AEs in metastatic RCC (mRCC) patients. METHODS: This study included 80 mRCC patients treated with first-, second-, or third-line axitinib (5 mg orally twice daily). Clinical parameters and genetic polymorphisms were examined in 75 cases (53 males and 22 females). We assessed three SNPs in each of three candidate genes namely, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE), nitric oxide synthase 3 (NOS3), and angiotensin II receptor type 1 (AT1R), all of which are involved in axitinib effects on vascular endothelial function. RESULTS: Axitinib-treated patients carrying the ACE deletion allele suffered more frequently from hand-foot syndrome and a deterioration in kidney function (p = .045 and p = 0.005, respectively) whereas those carrying the NOS3 G allele suffered more frequently from proteinuria and multiple AEs (p = .025 and p = 0.036, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that the ACE deletion allele and the NOS3 G allele are associated with increased AEs.

Real world data of niraparib in platinum sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer: A multicenter experience of the MITO group.

OBJECTIVE: PARP (poly adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose polymerase) inhibitors are approved as maintenance therapy in platinum sensitive ovarian cancer (OC), in first line and in the recurrent setting, regardless of BRCA mutational status. Real-world data after the introduction of these agents are needed to evaluate whether the benefit observed in phase III randomized clinical trials can be translated into clinical practice. The aim of our study was to provide real-life data on efficacy and safety of niraparib administered as maintenance in platinum sensitive relapsed OC patients (PSROC). METHODS: This retrospective/prospective observational study included relapsed OC patients that received niraparib as maintenance, at the time of platinum sensitive recurrence within the Italian expanded-access program. Clinical data at the time of diagnosis and at the time of recurrence were collected and analyzed. Median progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated as the time from start of niraparib treatment to subsequent radiologically confirmed relapse and death or last contact, respectively. RESULTS: Among 304 eligible patients, 260 (85%) had BRCA wild-type tumor and 36. (11.9%) were BRCA mutated. Median PFS was 9.1 months (95% CI: 6.9-11.2) and 10.3 months (95% CI: 7.0-13.5) in the BRCAwt and BRCAmut cohorts, respectively. Furthermore, median OS was 41.7 months (95% CI: 31.6-41.9) and 34.6 months (95% CI: N.E.) in the BRCAwt and BRCAmut cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSION: Data from this large real-life dataset suggested that maintenance with niraparib in the real-life setting of platinum sensitive OC recurrence is effective and well tolerated.

Acute heart failure following pazopanib treatment: a literature review featuring two case reports.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have transformed cancer treatment but are associated with cardiovascular toxicity, including heart failure. This review examines the cardiotoxicity of pazopanib, a VEGFR-TKI, through two case reports and explores potential mechanisms. The importance of vigilant clinical monitoring to prevent cardiac dysfunction in cancer patients receiving pazopanib is emphasized. We present two cases of acute heart failure following pazopanib treatment. Case 1 involves a comorbidity-free, 62-year-old woman with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who experienced irreversible heart failure. In case 2, a 40-year-old woman with a history of anthracycline-containing chemotherapy developed reversible left ventricular systolic dysfunction following pazopanib discontinuation. Both patients received appropriate management for their heart failure symptoms. Case 1's condition rapidly deteriorated, leading to her unfortunate demise 3 months after starting pazopanib. In contrast, case 2's cardiac function improved after discontinuing pazopanib. The advent of TKIs has revolutionized cancer treatment, but their association with cardiovascular toxicity necessitates meticulous monitoring of patients. The cases presented here highlight the importance of recognizing and managing cardiotoxicity, particularly in patients without prior cardiovascular risk factors. Understanding the underlying mechanisms and risk factors for TKI-induced heart failure is crucial to optimize patient care and treatment outcomes. Oncologists should be vigilant in identifying clinical symptoms and closely monitoring cardiac function throughout TKI therapy.

Inhibition of angiogenesis in the management of refractory gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with LVAD support.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in patients with continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) is often related to GI angiodysplasia (GIAD). We previously reported data on VEGF inhibition with IV bevacizumab in the treatment of LVAD-associated GIAD bleeding, and now present follow-up data on patients treated with IV bevacizumab and/or low-dose oral pazopanib. METHODS: All consecutive adult patients with LVAD-associated GIB from GIAD treated with bevacizumab or pazopanib, from July 20, 2017 to June 22, 2022, were included in the analysis. Data on hospitalizations, GI endoscopic procedures, and blood transfusions were obtained from first admission for GIB up to a median of 35.7 months following treatment initiation (range 1.3-59.8 months). RESULTS: Eleven patients (91% male, mean 69.5 ± 8.9 years) were included. Eight patients (73%) received IV bevacizumab, two patients (18%) received oral pazopanib, and one patient (9%) received bevacizumab followed by pazopanib therapy. We observed a significantly decreased number of annualized hospitalizations for GIB (median difference - 2.87, p = 0.002), blood transfusions (median difference - 20.9, p = 0.01), and endoscopies (median difference - 6.95, p = 0.007) in patients pre- and post-anti-angiogenic therapy (bevacizumab and/or pazopanib). Similarly, a significant improvement in these clinical outcomes was noted in the bevacizumab group with decreased annualized hospitalizations (median difference - 2.75, p = 0.014), blood transfusions (median difference - 24.5, p = 0.047), and number of endoscopies (median differences -6.88, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Anti-angiogenic therapy with IV bevacizumab and/or low-dose oral pazopanib appears to provide benefits in patients with LVAD-associated GIB with reduced hospitalizations, blood transfusions, and need for GI endoscopic procedures.

Interstitial lung disease caused by niraparib in ovarian cancer patient: a case report and literature review.

Drug-induced interstitial lung disease (DIILD) is one of the most common and important adverse drug reactions. Still, the details of the clinical presentation of DIILD caused by poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are unknown. A 73-year-old Japanese woman was started on niraparib maintenance therapy after radical surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy for high-grade serous carcinoma originating from the fallopian tube. Forty-seven days after starting niraparib, she presented to the hospital with dyspnea and was diagnosed with DIILD caused by niraparib. The drug was discontinued, and the patient was treated with steroid pulse therapy, and her condition improved. In clinical trials of PARP inhibitors, DIILD was reported in 0.13% of patients with olaparib, but no DIILDs, including pneumonia or pneumonitis, were reported in any patient with niraparib. This is the first report of DIILD caused by niraparib worldwide. In the future, the frequency of DIILD caused by niraparib should be clarified in real-world data.

Efficacy and safety of axitinib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Real-world data on patients with renal impairment.

OBJECTIVES: Limited information is currently available on the efficacy and safety of axitinib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients with renal impairment. Therefore, the present study investigated the efficacy and toxicity of axitinib in patients with chronic kidney disease. METHODS: Post-hoc analyses were performed on a Japanese multicenter cohort study of 477 mRCC patients who received axitinib followed by 1 or 2 regimens of systemic antiangiogenic therapy between January 2012 and December 2016. Differences in clinical characteristics and the efficacy and safety of axitinib were assessed based on pretreatment renal function. RESULTS: Patients were categorized into the following 5 renal function groups according to baseline renal function: estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥60 ml/min (n = 133), 45 ml/min ≤eGFR <60 ml/min (n = 153), 30 ml/min ≤eGFR< 45 ml/min (n = 130), eGFR <30 ml/min (n = 45), and dialysis (n = 16). Median progression-free survival (PFS) (95% confidence interval [CI]) in the 5 groups was 11 (8-16), 14 (11-19), 14 (10-19), 12 (8-24), and 6 (3-NR) months, respectively (p = 0.781). After adjustments for treatment-related confounders, the renal function group was not a significant prognostic factor for PFS. Objective response rates in the 5 groups were 22%, 23%, 23%, 18%, 20%, and 38%, respectively (p = 0.468). Regarding adverse events of all grades, hypertension (p = 0.0006) and renal and urinary disorders (p < 0.0001) were more frequently observed in the eGFR <30 ml/min group than in the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Since renal function at the initiation of treatment with axitinib does not adversely affect the efficacy of VEGF-TKI therapy, clinicians do not need to avoid its administration to mRCC patients with impaired renal function in consideration of the risk of progression to end-stage renal disease.

Niraparib and dostarlimab for the treatment of recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: results of a Phase II study (MOONSTONE/GOG-3032).

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the efficacy, safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of the treatment regimen of dostarlimab, a programmed death-1 inhibitor, combined with niraparib, a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, in patients with BRCA wild type (BRCAwt) recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) who had previously received bevacizumab treatment. METHODS: This Phase II, open-label, single-arm, multicenter study, conducted in the USA, enrolled patients with recurrent PROC to receive niraparib and dostarlimab until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (up to 3 years). A preplanned interim futility analysis was performed after the first 41 patients had undergone ≥1 radiographic evaluation (approximately 9 weeks from the first treatment). RESULTS: The prespecified interim futility criterion was met and the study was therefore terminated. For the 41 patients assessed, the objective response rate (ORR) was 7.3% (95% confidence interval: 1.5-19.9); no patients achieved a complete response, 3 patients (7.3%) achieved a partial response (duration of response; 3.0, 3.8, and 9.2 months, respectively), and 9 patients (22.0%) had stable disease. In total, 39 patients (95.1%) experienced a treatment-related adverse event, but no new safety issues were observed. HRQoL, assessed using FOSI, or Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Ovarian Symptom Index scores, worsened over time compared with baseline scores. CONCLUSIONS: The study was terminated due to the observed ORR at the interim futility analysis. This highlights a need for effective therapies in treating patients with recurrent BRCAwt PROC.

Treatment With Niraparib Maintenance Therapy in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The efficacy of niraparib maintenance therapy with an individualized starting dose (ISD) warrants further investigation in a broad population with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer (aOC), including patients without postoperative residual disease. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of niraparib with an ISD in a broad population with newly diagnosed aOC (R0 resection permitted). Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study was conducted in China and enrolled 384 patients with newly diagnosed aOC who received primary or interval debulking surgery and responded to treatment with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. By data cutoff (September 30, 2021), median follow-up for progression-free survival (PFS) was 27.5 (IQR, 24.7-30.4) months. Interventions: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive niraparib or placebo with ISD (200 mg/d for those with a body weight of <77 kg and/or platelet count of <150 ×103/µL [to convert to ×109/µL, multiply by 1] at baseline; 300 mg/d otherwise) stratified by germline BRCA variant status, tumor homologous recombination deficiency status, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measurements: The primary end point was blinded, independent central review-assessed PFS in the intention-to-treat population. Results: A total of 384 patients were randomized (255 niraparib [66.4%]; median [range] age, 53 [32-77] years; 129 placebo [33.6%]; median [range] age, 54 [33-77] years), and 375 (247 niraparib [65.9%], 128 placebo [34.1%]) received treatment at a dose of 200 mg per day. Median PFS with niraparib vs placebo was 24.8 vs 8.3 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34-0.60; P < .001) in the intention-to-treat population; not reached vs 10.8 months (HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.23-0.68) and 19.3 vs 8.3 months (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.34-0.67) in patients with and without germline BRCA variants, respectively; not reached vs 11.0 months (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.34-0.68) and 16.6 vs 5.5 months (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.75) in homologous recombination deficient and proficient patients, respectively; and 24.8 vs 8.3 months (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.32-0.61) and 16.5 vs 8.3 months (HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.10-0.72) in those with optimal and suboptimal debulking, respectively. Similar proportions of niraparib-treated and placebo-treated patients (6.7% vs 5.4%) discontinued treatment due to treatment-emergent adverse events. Conclusion and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that niraparib maintenance therapy prolonged PFS in patients with newly diagnosed aOC regardless of postoperative residual disease or biomarker status. The ISD was effective and safe in the first-line maintenance setting. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03709316.

Progression-free survival and safety at 3.5years of follow-up: results from the randomised phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial of niraparib maintenance treatment in patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE: To report updated long-term efficacy and safety from the double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study (NCT02655016). METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with complete or partial response (CR or PR) to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy received niraparib or placebo once daily (2:1 ratio). Stratification factors were best response to first-line chemotherapy regimen (CR/PR), receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (yes/no), and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status (deficient [HRd]/proficient [HRp] or not determined). Updated (ad hoc) progression-free survival (PFS) data (as of November 17, 2021) by investigator assessment (INV) are reported. RESULTS: In 733 randomised patients (niraparib, 487; placebo, 246), median PFS follow-up was 3.5years. Median INV-PFS was 24.5 versus 11.2months (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.68) in the HRd population and 13.8 versus 8.2months (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56-0.79) in the overall population for niraparib and placebo, respectively. In the HRp population, median INV-PFS was 8.4 versus 5.4months (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.87), respectively. Results were concordant with the primary analysis. Niraparib-treated patients were more likely to be free of progression or death at 4years than placebo-treated patients (HRd, 38% versus 17%; overall, 24% versus 14%). The most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events in niraparib patients were thrombocytopenia (39.7%), anaemia (31.6%), and neutropenia (21.3%). Myelodysplastic syndromes/acute myeloid leukaemia incidence rate (1.2%) was the same for niraparib- and placebo-treated patients. Overall survival remained immature. CONCLUSIONS: Niraparib maintained clinically significant improvements in PFS with 3.5years of follow-up in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer at high risk of progression irrespective of HRD status. No new safety signals were identified.

Evaluation of the Drug-Drug Interaction Potential of Ensitrelvir Fumaric Acid with Cytochrome P450 3A Substrates in Healthy Japanese Adults.

BACKGROUND: Management of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) for ensitrelvir, a novel 3-chymotrypsin-like protease inhibitor of SARS-CoV-2 infection is crucial. A previous clinical DDI study of ensitrelvir with midazolam, a clinical index cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A substrate, demonstrated that ensitrelvir given for 5 days orally with a loading/maintenance dose of 750/250 mg acted as a strong CYP3A inhibitor. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to investigate the effect of ensitrelvir on the pharmacokinetics of CYP3A substrates, dexamethasone, prednisolone and midazolam, and to assess the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of ensitrelvir following multiple-dose administration of ensitrelvir. METHODS: This was a Phase 1, multicenter, single-arm, open-label study in healthy Japanese adult participants. The effects of multiple doses of ensitrelvir in the fasted state on the pharmacokinetics of dexamethasone, prednisolone, and midazolam were investigated. Ensitrelvir was administered from Day 1 through Day 5, with a loading/maintenance dose of 750/250 mg for the dexamethasone and prednisolone cohorts whereas 375/125 mg for the midazolam cohort. Either dexamethasone, prednisolone, or midazolam was administered alone (Day - 2) or in combination with ensitrelvir (Day 5) in each of the cohorts. Additionally, dexamethasone or prednisolone was administered on Days 9 and 14. The pharmacokinetic parameters of ensitrelvir, dexamethasone, prednisolone, and midazolam were calculated based on their plasma concentration data with non-compartmental analysis. In safety assessments, the nature, frequency, and severity of treatment-emergent adverse events were evaluated and recorded. RESULTS: The area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) ratio of dexamethasone on Day 5 was 3.47-fold compared with the corresponding values for dexamethasone alone on Day - 2 and the effect diminished over time after the last dose of ensitrelvir. No clinically meaningful effect was observed for prednisolone. The AUC ratio of midazolam was 6.77-fold with ensitrelvir 375/125 mg suggesting ensitrelvir at 375/125 mg strongly inhibits CYP3A similar to that at 750/250 mg. No new safety signals with ensitrelvir were reported during the study. CONCLUSION: The inhibitory effect for CYP3A was confirmed after the last dose of ensitrelvir, and the effect diminished over time. In addition, ensitrelvir at 375/125 mg showed CYP3A inhibitory potential similar to that at 750/250 mg. These findings can be used as a clinical recommendation for prescribing ensitrelvir with regard to concomitant medications. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials identifier: jRCT2031210202.

Safety and management of niraparib monotherapy in ovarian cancer clinical trials.

Niraparib is a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor that has shown a significant improvement in progression-free survival irrespective of biomarker status in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. This review focuses on the adverse events associated with niraparib and their management to maintain efficacy of niraparib treatment and improve quality of life for patients. In five trials assessing efficacy of niraparib in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (PRIMA, NOVA, NORA, QUADRA, and PRIME), treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade were reported in nearly all patients (≥99%) receiving niraparib; the events were grade ≥3 in 51-74% of patients. Across all lines of therapy, treatment-emergent adverse events led to dose interruptions in 62-80% of patients receiving niraparib and dose reductions in 47-71%. Hematologic events were most frequently reported, including thrombocytopenia, anemia, and neutropenia. Common non-hematologic events included gastrointestinal events, which were generally low grade (<5% were grade ≥3). Clinical strategies to manage these and other events, such as fatigue and insomnia, cognitive behavioral therapy and pharmacologic agents, are summarized. Once-daily niraparib dosing may be advantageous for some patients for many reasons, including night-time dosing which may help alleviate gastrointestinal symptoms. An individualized starting dose (determined by baseline body weight and platelet count) of niraparib demonstrated an improved safety profile while maintaining efficacy. Patients receiving the niraparib individualized starting dose had fewer grade ≥3 adverse events, dose interruptions, and dose reductions than patients receiving a fixed starting dose. The safety profile of niraparib across five pivotal studies in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer was consistent across multiple lines of treatment, including as maintenance therapy in first-line and recurrent settings and as treatment in heavily pre-treated patients. Long-term safety data from the NOVA trial confirmed that, with appropriate and early dose modifications, niraparib is well tolerated.

A post hoc analysis of the EPAZ trial: The role of geriatric variables in elderly soft tissue sarcoma patients on toxicity and outcome.

OBJECTIVE: The EPAZ study (NCT01861951) showed recently that pazopanib was non-inferior to doxorubicin in patients ≥60 years treated in first line for advanced soft tissue sarcoma . The current post-hoc analysis aimed to assess the prognostic impact of frailty. METHODS: Geriatric assessments were evaluated at baseline. Age >75 years, liposarcoma, ECOG = 2, G8 ≤14, instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) ≥1 and Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥2 were tested for their impact on progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), CTCAE grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) or serious AEs (SAEs), using univariate and multivariate analysis models. RESULTS: univariate analysis showed an increased risk of grade 3/4 AEs and SAEs for ECOG = 2, G8 score ≤14 or IADL ≥1, independent of treatment. The multivariate analysis exhibited for pazopanib a significantly reduced risk for grade 3/4 AEs (HR 0.53; p = 0.033), and in patients with G8 ≤14 an increased risk for SAEs (HR 2.67; p = 0.011). In the multivariate analysis, G8 ≤14 was a negative prognostic factor for PFS (HR 1.82; p = 0.009) and IADL ≥1 for OS (HR 2.02; p = 0.007). ECOG = 2 was the strongest negative predictor for PFS (HR 4.39; p = 0.001) and OS (HR 3.74; p = 0.004). Neither age nor Charlson Comorbidity Index showed any impact on PFS, OS, incidence of grade 3/4 AEs or SAEs. CONCLUSIONS: This post hoc analysis demonstrated that age is not a denominator for outcome or toxicity in elderly patients with soft tissue sarcoma . Instead, geriatric and functional assessments should be used to counsel patients and tailor therapy to individual needs. Moreover, pazopanib has a reduced risk for grade 3/4 AEs compared to doxorubicin.

Pancytopenia in a patient treated with fusidic acid and niraparib: a case report.

Fusidic acid is an antibiotic used in the treatment of staphylococcal infections. Niraparib is an anticancer drug indicated for the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. The interaction between these two drugs has not been studied and is not referenced in drug databases. We present the case of a patient with pancytopenia who had been treated with fusidic acid and niraparib. No other treatment was taken by this patient. According to the literature, both substances can cause haematological toxicity. It seems unlikely that this is due to niraparib alone because it had been well tolerated by the patient for over a year before the pancytopenia was diagnosed. It was also perfectly well tolerated when it was reintroduced. We cannot determine whether this pancytopenia is due to fusidic acid alone or to a drug interaction between the two treatments. We therefore recommend caution in patients treated with this combination.