Impact of metformin, statins, and beta blockers on survival in patients with primary ovarian cancer: combined analysis of four prospective trials of AGO-OVAR and ENGOT/GCIG collaborators.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the association of co-medication with metformin, a statin, or beta blocker with survival in patients with primary ovarian cancer. METHODS: Individual data from three phase III, randomized controlled trials (AGO-OVAR 11, AGO-OVAR 12, and AGO-OVAR 16) and one phase II trial (AGO-OVAR 15) were pooled and analyzed. Patients were classified as ever user if the specific co-medication was documented at least once during the trial, and were compared with never users as controls. Association of co-medications and outcomes were adjusted for potential confounders (age, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, histology, residual disease after surgery, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and assigned treatment within the trial) in multivariate Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: Overall, n=2857 patients were included. Ever users were: 100 patients received metformin (3.5%), 226 patients received statins (7.9%), and 475 (16.6%) patients received beta blockers (n=391 selective beta blockers; 84 non-selective beta blockers) as co-medication. There were no significant differences regarding the baseline characteristics except that ever users were significantly older, more obese, and had more comorbidities, according to the Charlson Comorbidity Index, compared with controls. Multivariate analyses for progression free survival and overall survival revealed neither a significant impact of metformin on survival (progression free survival hazard ratio (HR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval CI 0.69 to 1.29, p=0.7; overall survival HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.17, p=0.28) nor for statins (progression free survival HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.18, p=0.87; overall survival HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.12, p=0.37). In contrast, ever users of selective beta blockers had a significantly higher risk for recurrence and death (progression free survival HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.41, p=0.009; overall survival HR 1.25 95% CI 1.06 to 1.47, p=0.009). CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis, co-medication with metformin or statins had no significant impact on survival in patients with primary ovarian cancer. In contrast, co-medication with a beta blocker was associated with worse survival. However, whether this observation is related to the underlying condition rather than a direct negative impact on tumor biology remains unclear.

Atezolizumab Combined With Platinum and Maintenance Niraparib for Recurrent Ovarian Cancer With a Platinum-Free Interval >6 Months: ENGOT-OV41/GEICO 69-O/ANITA Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate atezolizumab combined with platinum-based chemotherapy (CT) followed by maintenance niraparib for late-relapsing recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS: The multicenter placebo-controlled double-blind randomized phase III ENGOT-OV41/GEICO 69-O/ANITA trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03598270) enrolled patients with measurable high-grade serous, endometrioid, or undifferentiated recurrent ovarian cancer who had received one or two previous CT lines (most recent including platinum) and had a treatment-free interval since last platinum (TFIp) of >6 months. Patients were stratified by investigator-selected carboplatin doublet, TFIp, BRCA status, and PD-L1 status in de novo biopsy and randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either atezolizumab or placebo throughout standard therapy comprising six cycles of a carboplatin doublet followed (in patients with response/stable disease) by maintenance niraparib until progression. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: Between November 2018 and January 2022, 417 patients were randomly assigned (15% BRCA-mutated, 36% PD-L1-positive, 66% TFIp >12 months, 11% previous poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase inhibitor after frontline CT, and 53% previous bevacizumab). Median follow-up was 28.6 months (95% CI, 26.6 to 30.5 months). Atezolizumab did not significantly improve PFS (hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.71 to 1.10]; P = .28). Median PFS was 11.2 months (95% CI, 10.1 to 12.1 months) with atezolizumab versus 10.1 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 11.2 months) with standard therapy. Subgroup analyses generally showed consistent results, including analyses by PD-L1 status. The objective response rate (ORR) was 45% (95% CI, 39 to 52) with atezolizumab and 43% (95% CI, 36 to 49) with standard therapy. The safety profile was as expected from previous experience of these drugs. CONCLUSION: Combining atezolizumab with CT and maintenance niraparib for late-relapsing recurrent ovarian cancer did not significantly improve PFS or the ORR.

Reproductive outcomes after fertility-sparing surgery for cervical cancer - results of the multicenter FERTISS study.

INTRODUCTION: Fertility-sparing treatment (FST) for patients with cervical cancer intends to achieve oncologic outcomes comparable to those after radical treatment while maximizing reproductive outcomes, including the ability to conceive and minimizing the risk of prematurity. METHODOLOGY: International multicentre retrospective FERTISS study focused on patients treated with FST analysed timing of FST relative to pregnancy, conception attempts and methods, abortion rates, prophylactic procedures reducing the risk of severe prematurity, pregnancy duration, and delivery mode. RESULTS: Of the 733 patients treated at 44 centres in 13 countries, 49.7% attempted to conceive during median follow-up of 72 months and 22.6% (166/733) patients achieved a successful pregnancy. Success rate was significantly higher after non-radical surgery (63.2%; 122/193) compared to radical trachelectomy (25.7%; 44/171, p < 0.001). Available perinatological data shows that 89.5% (111/124) of the patients became pregnant naturally. There was no significant difference in the abortion rate in the first pregnancy nor delivery success rates between non-radical and radical procedures patients. Preterm delivery (<38 weeks gestation) occurred more frequently after radical than non-radical procedures (76.5% vs. 57.7%, p = 0.15). Almost all patients (97.3%; 73/75) who underwent regular ultrasound cervicometry in pregnancy with subsequent prophylactic procedures delivered a live fetus, compared to 30.6% (15/49) women without such management, p < 0.001. CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent non-radical surgery had significantly higher pregnancy rates. Most pregnancies resulted in a viable fetus, but radical trachelectomy led to a higher rate of preterm births in the severe prematurity range. Half of the patients did not attempt pregnancy after FST.

Efficacy and safety of niraparib in patients aged 65 years and older with advanced ovarian cancer: Results from the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of age on the efficacy and safety of niraparib first-line maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with a complete/partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of the phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study (NCT02655016). Patients in the intent-to-treat population were categorized according to age at baseline (<65 years vs ≥65 years), and progression-free survival (PFS), safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) were evaluated for each age subgroup (clinical cutoff date, May 17, 2019). Safety findings were also evaluated according to a fixed starting dose (FSD) or an individualized starting dose (ISD). RESULTS: Of 733 randomized patients, 289 (39.4%) were ≥65 years (190 niraparib, 99 placebo) at baseline. Median PFS (niraparib vs placebo) and hazard ratios (95% CI) were similar in patients aged <65 years (13.9 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.61 [0.47-0.81]) and ≥65 years (13.7 vs 8.1 months; HR, 0.53 [0.39-0.74]). The incidences of any-grade and grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were similar across age subgroups; in the niraparib arm, TEAEs leading to dose discontinuation occurred in 7.8% of patients <65 years and 18.4% of patients ≥65 years. ISD use lowered the incidence of grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia events in niraparib-treated patients compared with the FSD (<65 years: 42.8% vs 18.0%; ≥65 years 57.0% vs 26.1%). HRQOL was comparable across age subgroups. CONCLUSION: Niraparib efficacy, safety, and HRQOL were generally comparable across age subgroups, although patients ≥65 years had a higher rate of discontinuations due to TEAEs. ISD use reduced grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia events regardless of age.

Role of fertility-sparing surgery and further prognostic factors in borderline tumors of the ovary.

OBJECTIVE: Borderline tumors of the ovary are a rare group of ovarian neoplasms with distinctive histological features. Considering their favorable prognosis and occurrence at a younger age, fertility-sparing surgery may be considered. Several risk factors have been identified as contributing to a higher recurrence rate, while the impact of pathohistological features varies in the literature. This study aimed to analyze risk factors for recurrence in patients with borderline tumors of the ovary. METHODS: Analysis included patients treated with first diagnosis of a borderline tumor at our center between January 1997 and December 2022 to analyze disease-free survival and to identify the role of fertility-sparing surgery, defined as preservation of at least one ovary, pathohistological features, and other prognostic factors for relapse. All stages classified according to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) were included. RESULTS: Among 507 patients, 26 patients (5.2%) had a recurrence, with 21 (4.1%) showing borderline histology and 5 (1%) with invasive relapses. Recurrence rate was higher following fertility-sparing surgery (p<0.0001). Median follow-up period was 49.2 (range 42.0-57.6) months. Among 153 patients (30.2%) who had fertility-sparing surgery, 21 (13.7%) experienced a recurrence (including one invasive relapse). Fertility-sparing surgery (HR 20; 95% CI 6.9 to 60; p<0.001), FIGO stage I with bilateral presence of tumor (HR 6.4; 95% CI 1.3 to 31; p=0.020), FIGO stage II (HR 15; 95% CI 3.4 to 68; p<0.001), FIGO stages III-IV (HR 38; 95% CI 10 to 140; p<0.001) in comparison with FIGO stage I with unilateral tumor, microinvasion (HR 8.6; 95% CI 2.7 to 28; p<0.001), and micropapillary growth patterns (HR 4.4; 95% CI 1.8 to 10; p=0.001) were identified as independent risk factors for recurrence in multivariate analysis. None of these factors were associated with an increased risk of disease-related death. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that although a fertility-preserving approach is associated with increased recurrence rates of a borderline tumor, it does not affect overall survival and can therefore be regarded as oncologically safe for patients desiring to preserve fertility. Additionally, presence of micropapillary patterns and microinvasion were identified as prognostic risk factors.

Olaparib Addition to Maintenance Bevacizumab Therapy in Ovarian Carcinoma With BRCA-Like Genomic Aberrations.

Importance: Testing for homologous recombination deficiency is required for the optimal treatment of high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer. The search for accurate biomarkers is ongoing. Objective: To investigate whether progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer treated with maintenance olaparib or placebo differed between patients with a tumor BRCA-like genomic profile and patients without a tumor BRCA-like profile. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was a secondary analysis of the PAOLA-1 randomized clinical trial that compared olaparib plus bevacizumab with placebo plus bevacizumab as maintenance treatment in patients with advanced high-grade ovarian cancer after a good response to first-line platinum with taxane chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, irrespective of germline or tumor BRCA1/2 mutation status. All patients with available tumor DNA were included in the analysis. The current analysis tested for an interaction between BRCA-like status and olaparib treatment on survival outcomes. The original trial was conducted between July 2015 and September 2017; at the time of data extraction for analysis in March 2022, a median follow-up of 54.1 months (IQR, 28.5-62.2 months) and a total follow-up time of 21 711 months was available, with 336 PFS and 245 OS events. Exposures: Tumor homologous recombination deficiency was assessed using the BRCA-like copy number aberration profile classifier. Myriad MyChoice CDx was previously measured. The trial was randomized between the olaparib and bevacizumab and placebo plus bevacizumab groups. Main Outcomes and Measures: This secondary analysis assessed hazard ratios (HRs) of olaparib vs placebo among biomarker strata and tested for interaction between BRCA-like status and olaparib treatment on PFS and OS, using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: A total of 469 patients (median age, 60 [range 26-80] years) were included in this study. The patient cohort consisted of women with International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics stage III (76%) high-grade serous (95%) ovarian cancer who had no evaluable disease or complete remission at initial or interval debulking surgery (76%). Thirty-one percent of the tumor samples (n = 138) harbored a pathogenic BRCA mutation, and BRCA-like classification was performed for 442 patients. Patients with a BRCA-like tumor had a longer PFS after olaparib treatment than after placebo (36.4 vs 18.6 months; HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.37-0.65; P < .001). No association of olaparib with PFS was found in patients with a non-BRCA-like tumor (17.6 vs 16.6 months; HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.68-1.51; P = .93). The interaction was significant (P = .004), and HRs and P values (for interaction) were similar in the relevant subgroups, OS, and multivariable analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of the PAOLA-1 randomized clinical trial, patients with a BRCA-like tumor, but not those with a non-BRCA-like tumor, had a significantly longer survival after olaparib plus bevacizumab treatment than placebo plus bevacizumab treatment. Thus, the BRCA1-like classifier could be used as a biomarker for olaparib plus bevacizumab as a maintenance treatment.

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

What is this summary about? This PLSP provides a short summary of an original scientific article that presented results from the PRIMA study after 3.5 years of follow-up time. The original article was published in the European Journal of Cancer in 2023.The PRIMA study included adult patients with newly diagnosed advanced high-risk ovarian cancer whose tumors shrunk or became undetectable after treatment with chemotherapy with or without surgery. The PRIMA study evaluated how well the drug niraparib, also known as Zejula, worked at delaying or preventing ovarian cancer from coming back (recurring) or getting worse (progressing) compared with placebo (a substance with no effects that a doctor gives to a patient instead of a drug). The first results from the PRIMA study were published in 2019, when patients had participated in the PRIMA study for about 1.2 years.The article this PLSP is based on reports longer-term data from the PRIMA study, when patients had participated in the PRIMA study for about 3.5 years. Patients were monitored (or followed) for a longer time to understand how well niraparib continued to work and to evaluate whether the safety of niraparib changed with additional time being monitored.What were the results? Patients who took niraparib had more time before their cancer came back or got worse than patients who took placebo. In terms of safety, no new types of side effects with niraparib treatment were observed with additional time being monitored as part of the PRIMA study.What do the results mean? These results support that niraparib remains an important treatment option to help delay the cancer from coming back or getting worse in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer that responded to initial treatment.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02655016 (PRIMA study) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

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.

Systematic Analysis of Homologous Recombination Deficiency Testing in Ovarian Cancer-Development of Recommendations for Optimal Assay Performance.

Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) assays are an important element of personalized oncology in ovarian carcinomas, but the optimal tissue requirements for these complex molecular assays remain unclear. As a result, a considerable percentage of assays are not successful, leading to suboptimal diagnoses for these patients. In this study, we have systematically analyzed tumor and tissue parameters for HRD analysis in a large cohort of real-world cancer samples. The aim of this study is to give recommendations for pathologists and gynecologic oncologists for selection of tissue samples to maximize the success rate of HRD analyses. Tumor samples from 2702 patients were sent to the Institute of Pathology of the Philipps-University Marburg between October 2020 and September 2022, of which 2654 were analyzed using the Myriad MyChoice HRD+ CDx assay. A total of 2396 of 2654 samples (90.3%) were successfully tested, of which 984 of 2396 (41.1%) were HRD positive and 1412 (58.9%) were HRD negative. Three hundred sixty-three of 2396 samples (15.2%) were BRCA1/2-mutated; 27 samples had a BRCA1/2 mutation and a genomic instability score (GIS) < 42. Twenty-two samples (0.9%) failed GIS measurement but displayed a BRCA1/2 mutation. BRCA1/2-mutated samples showed significantly (P < .0001) higher GIS values than those with a wild-type BRCA1/2 status. Tumor cell content, tumor area, and histology significantly (P < .0001) affected the probability of successfully analyzing a sample. Based on a systematic analysis of tumor cell content and tumor area, we recommend selecting patient high-grade serous ovarian cancer samples that display a tumor cell content ≥30% and a tumor area ≥0.5 cm2 (based on their hematoxylin and eosin) for HRD testing to allow for optimal chances of a successful analysis and conclusive results. Considering histologic and sample conditions, success rates of up to 98% can be achieved. Our comprehensive evaluation contributes to further standardization of recommendations on HRD testing in ovarian cancer, which will have a large impact on personalized therapeutic strategies in this highly aggressive tumor type.

AGO-OVAR 28/ENGOT-ov57. Niraparib alone versus niraparib in combination with bevacizumab in patients with carboplatin-taxane-based chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer: a multicenter randomized phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Phase III trial data have shown a significant benefit by the addition of a maintenance treatment with niraparib, irrespective of BRCA or HRD status, in patients with advanced high-grade ovarian cancers; and, a significant benefit of the combination of olaparib and bevacizumab compared with bevacizumab monotherapy in HRD positive patients. However, it is unclear whether a PARP inhibitor monotherapy is sufficient, or if the addition of bevacizumab is needed. PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: This trial will investigate if the treatment strategy of carboplatin/paclitaxel/bevacizumab/niraparib is superior to the treatment of carboplatin/paclitaxel/niraparib in an all-comer population. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: Adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy followed by niraparib maintenance improves progression-free survival in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. TRIAL DESIGN: AGO-OVAR 28/ENGOT-ov57 is an international, multicenter, randomized, prospective phase III trial within the the European Network for Gynecological Oncological Trial (ENGOT), led by the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO) study group. All patients should have completed the first cycle of chemotherapy (carboplatin and paclitaxel) as part of the Study Run-In-Period. Prior to day 1 of cycle 2, patients with a valid central tumor BRCA (tBRCA) test result were randomized in a 1:1 ratio into either: Arm 1, to receive five additional cycles of carboplatin and paclitaxel q21d, followed by niraparib for up to 3 years; or Arm 2, to receive five additional cycles of carboplatin and paclitaxel plus bevacizumab q21d, followed by bevacizumab q21d (for up to 1 year), and niraparib for up to 3 years. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: The trial population is composed of adult patients with newly diagnosed, advanced high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer, primary peritoneal cancer, or fallopian tube cancer FIGO III/IV (except FIGO IIIA2 without nodal involvement). Patients who are scheduled for neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval debulking surgery are also eligible for the trial. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: The primary endpoint is progression-free survival. SAMPLE SIZE: The study plans to recruit 970 patients (485 patients in each arm). ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: The Last-Patient-In is expected to be enrolled in September 2024, with presentation of the primary endpoint in 2028. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05009082; EudraCT Number: 2021-001271-16.

Shallow whole genome sequencing approach to detect Homologous Recombination Deficiency in the PAOLA-1/ENGOT-OV25 phase-III trial.

The bevacizumab (bev)/olaparib (ola) maintenance regimen was approved for BRCA1/2-mutated (BRCAmut) and Homologous Recombination Deficient (HRD) high-grade Advanced Ovarian Cancer (AOC) first line setting, based on a significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared to bev alone in the PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial (NCT02477644), where HRD was detected by MyChoice CDx PLUS test. The academic shallowHRDv2 test was developed based on shallow whole-genome sequencing as an alternative to MyChoice. Analytical and clinical validities of shallowHRDv2 as compared to MyChoice on 449 PAOLA-1 tumor samples are presented. The overall agreement between shallowHRDv2 and MyChoice was 94% (369/394). Less non-contributive tests were observed with shallowHRDv2 (15/449; 3%) than with MyChoice (51/449; 11%). Patients with HRD tumors according to shallowHRDv2 (including BRCAmut) showed a significantly prolonged PFS with bev+ola versus bev (median PFS: 65.7 versus 20.3 months, hazard ratio (HR): 0.36 [95% CI: 0.24-0.53]). This benefit was significant also for BRCA1/2 wild-type tumors (40.8 versus 19.5 months, HR: 0.45 [95% CI: 0.26-0.76]). ShallowHRDv2 is a performant, clinically validated, and cost-effective test for HRD detection.

Lymph node staging in grade 1-2 endometrioid ovarian carcinoma apparently confined to the ovary: Is it worth?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with grade 1-2 endometrioid ovarian carcinoma apparently confined to the ovary, according to surgical staging. METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study. Patients with endometrioid ovarian carcinoma, surgical procedure performed between May 1985 and December 2019, stage pT1 N0/N1/Nx, grade 1-2 were included. Patients were stratified according to lymphadenectomy (defined as removal of any lymph node versus no lymph node assessment), and subgroup analyses according to tumor grade were performed. Kaplan-Meier curves and cox regression analyses were used to perform survival analyses. RESULTS: 298 patients were included. 199 (66.8 %) patients underwent lymph node assessment. Of these, 166 (83.4 %) had unilateral/bilateral pelvic and para-aortic/caval lymphadenectomy. Eleven (5.5 %) patients of those who underwent lymph node assessment showed pathologic metastatic lymph nodes (FIGO stage IIIA1). Twenty-seven patients (9.1 %) had synchronous endometrioid endometrial cancer. After a median follow up of 45 months (95 %CI:37.5-52.5), 5-year DFS and OS of the entire cohort were 89.8 % and 96.2 %, respectively. Age ≤ 51 years (HR=0.24, 95 %CI:0.06-0.91; p = 0.036) and performance of lymphadenectomy (HR=0.25, 95 %CI: 0.07-0.82; p = 0.022) represented independent protective factors toward risk of death. Patients undergoing lymphadenectomy had better 5-year DFS and OS compared to those not receiving lymphadenectomy, 92.0 % versus 85.6 % (p = 0.016) and 97.7 % versus 92.8 % (p = 0.013), respectively. This result was confirmed after exclusion of node-positive patients. When stratifying according to tumor grade (node-positive excluded), patients with grade 2 who underwent lymphadenectomy had better 5-year DFS and OS than those without lymphadenectomy (93.0 % versus 83.1 %, p = 0.040 % and 96.5 % versus 90.6 %, p = 0.037, respectively). CONCLUSION: Staging lymphadenectomy in grade 2 endometrioid ovarian carcinoma patients was associated with improved DFS and OS. Grade 1 and grade 2 might be considered as two different entities, which could benefit from different approach in terms of surgical staging. Prospective studies, including molecular profiles are needed to confirm the survival drivers in this rare setting.

Low anterior resection syndrome and its impact on quality of life of ovarian carcinoma patients: A prospective longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVES: Bowel dysfunction is frequently reported in patients with ovarian carcinoma (OC). Our aim was to evaluate the incidence of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) like symptoms in patients with primary OC and its impact on quality of life (QoL). METHODS: A prospective longitudinal observational cohort study was performed, including patients with newly diagnosed OC treated by primary or interval surgery with residual tumor <1 cm, from 2018 until 2021. Patients with a stoma or recurrence of disease were excluded. Intestinal dysfunction was assessed using the validated LARS score questionnaire pre- and postoperatively. There are 3 subgroups based on the results: no, minor, or major LARS. The impact on QoL was evaluated by an additional question to demonstrate the severity of patient's life impairment. RESULTS: The questionnaire was answered by 78 patients pre- and post-operatively. LARS like symptoms were reported preoperatively in 34.6% (24.4% minor/10.2% major) and significantly increased postoperatively to 47.4% (28.2% minor/19.2% major; p = 0.011). Moderate to severe impairment of QoL correlated with LARS scores pre- (80%) and post-operatively (90%). Patients with two bowel anastomoses (mean score 18.6 pre- and 24.9 post-operatively, p = 0.041) showed a significant increase of the questionnaire score. CONCLUSIONS: Major LARS like symptoms appear in 10% of OC patients preoperatively and significantly increase to almost two-fold postoperatively. Multiple bowel anastomoses had a significant risk for higher postoperative LARS score. QoL impairment correlates linearly with LARS positive scoring, independent on the timing of the complaints.

Atezolizumab Combined With Bevacizumab and Platinum-Based Therapy for Platinum-Sensitive Ovarian Cancer: Placebo-Controlled Randomized Phase III ATALANTE/ENGOT-ov29 Trial.

PURPOSE: Platinum-based doublets with concurrent and maintenance bevacizumab are standard therapy for ovarian cancer (OC) relapsing after a platinum-free interval (PFI) >6 months. Immunotherapy may be synergistic with bevacizumab and chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ATALANTE/ENGOT-ov29 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02891824), a placebo-controlled double-blinded randomized phase III trial, enrolled patients with recurrent epithelial OC, one to two previous chemotherapy lines, and PFI >6 months. Eligible patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to atezolizumab (1,200 mg once every 3 weeks or equivalent) or placebo for up to 24 months, combined with bevacizumab and six cycles of chemotherapy doublet, stratified by PFI, PD-L1 status, and chemotherapy regimen. Coprimary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and PD-L1-positive populations (alpha .025 for each population). RESULTS: Between September 2016 and October 2019, 614 patients were randomly assigned: 410 to atezolizumab and 204 to placebo. Only 38% had PD-L1-positive tumors. After 3 years' median follow-up, the PFS difference between atezolizumab and placebo did not reach statistical significance in the ITT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.99; P = .041; median 13.5 v 11.3 months, respectively) or PD-L1-positive (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.16; P = .30; median 15.2 v 13.1 months, respectively) populations. The immature overall survival (OS) HR was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.01; median 35.5 v 30.6 months with atezolizumab v placebo, respectively). Global health-related quality of life did not differ between treatment arms. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 88% of atezolizumab-treated and 87% of placebo-treated patients; grade ≥3 AEs typical of immunotherapy were more common with atezolizumab (13% v 8%, respectively). CONCLUSION: ATALANTE/ENGOT-ov29 did not meet its coprimary PFS objectives in the ITT or PD-L1-positive populations. OS follow-up continues. Further research on biopsy samples is warranted to decipher the immunologic landscape of late-relapsing OC.

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.

The Prognostic Effect of Immune Cell Infiltration Depends on Molecular Subtype in Endometrioid Ovarian Carcinomas.

PURPOSE: Endometrioid ovarian carcinoma (ENOC) is the second most-common type of ovarian carcinoma, comprising 10%-20% of cases. Recently, the study of ENOC has benefitted from comparisons to endometrial carcinomas including defining ENOC with four prognostic molecular subtypes. Each subtype suggests differential mechanisms of progression, although tumor-initiating events remain elusive. There is evidence that the ovarian microenvironment may be critical to early lesion establishment and progression. However, while immune infiltrates have been well studied in high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma, studies in ENOC are limited. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We report on 210 ENOC, with clinical follow-up and molecular subtype annotation. Using multiplex IHC and immunofluorescence, we examine the prevalence of T-cell lineage, B-cell lineage, macrophages, and populations with programmed cell death protein 1 or programmed death-ligand 1 across subtypes of ENOC. RESULTS: Immune cell infiltrates in tumor epithelium and stroma showed higher densities in ENOC subtypes with known high mutation burden (POLEmut and MMRd). While molecular subtypes were prognostically significant, immune infiltrates were not (overall survival P > 0.2). Analysis by molecular subtype revealed that immune cell density was prognostically significant in only the no specific molecular profile (NSMP) subtype, where immune infiltrates lacking B cells (TILB minus) had inferior outcome (disease-specific survival: HR, 4.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-14.7; P < 0.05). Similar to endometrial carcinomas, molecular subtype stratification was generally superior to immune response in predicting outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Subtype stratification is critical for better understanding of ENOC, in particular the distribution and prognostic significance of immune cell infiltrates. The role of B cells in the immune response within NSMP tumors warrants further study.

Incidence and Prognostic Impact of Deleterious Germline Mutations in Primary Advanced Ovarian Carcinoma Patients.

Data on deleterious variants in genes other than BRCA1/2 remain limited. A retrospective cohort study was performed, including primary OC cases with TruRisk® germline gene panel testing between 2011 and 2020. Patients with testing after relapse were excluded. The cohort was divided into three groups: (A) no mutations, (B) deleterious BRCA1/2 mutations, and (C) deleterious mutations in other genes. A total of 702 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these 17.4% (n = 122) showed BRCA1/2 mutations and a further 6.0% (n = 42) in other genes. Three-year overall survival (OS) of the entire cohort was significantly longer in patients with germline mutations (85%/82.8% for cohort B/C vs. 70.2% for cohort A, p < 0.001) and 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) only for cohort B (58.1% vs. 36.9%/41.6% in cohort A/C, p = 0.002). In multivariate analysis for the subgroup of advanced-stages of high-grade serous OC, both cohorts B/C were found to be independent factors for significantly better outcome, cohort C for OS (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.25-0.84), and cohort B for both OS and PFS (HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.27-0.61 and HR 0.49; 95% CI 0.37-0.66, respectively). Germline mutations were detected in a quarter of OC patients, and a quarter of those in genes other than BRCA1/2. Germline mutations demonstrate in our cohort a prognostic factor and predict better prognosis for OC patients.

The KORE-INNOVATION trial, a prospective controlled multi-site clinical study to implement and assess the effects of an innovative peri-operative care pathway for patients with ovarian cancer: rationale, methods and trial design.

BACKGROUND: Advanced ovarian cancer is managed by extensive surgery, which could be associated with high morbidity. A personalized pre-habilitation strategy combined with an 'enhanced recovery after surgery' (ERAS) pathway may decrease post-operative morbidity. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effects of a combined multi-modal pre-habilitation and ERAS strategy on severe post-operative morbidity for patients with ovarian cancer (primary diagnosis or first recurrence) undergoing cytoreductive surgery. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: A personalized multi-modal pre-habilitation algorithm entailing a physical fitness intervention, nutritional and psycho-oncological support, completed by an ERAS pathway, reduces post-operative morbidity. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a prospective, controlled, non-randomized, open, interventional two-center clinical study. Endpoints will be compared with a three-fold control: (a) historic control group (data from institutional ovarian cancer databases); (b) prospective control group (assessed before implementing the intervention); and (c) matched health insurance controls. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Patients with ovarian, fallopian, or primary peritoneal cancer undergoing primary surgical treatment (primary ovarian cancer or first recurrence) can be included. The intervention group receives an additional multi-level study treatment: (1) standardized frailty assessment followed by (2) a personalized tri-modal pre-habilitation program and (3) peri-operative care according to an ERAS pathway. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Inoperable disease or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, simultaneous diagnosis of simultaneous primary tumors, in case of interference with the overall prognosis (except for breast cancer); dementia or other conditions that impair compliance or prognosis. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: Reduction of severe post-operative complications (according to Clavien- Dindo Classification (CDC) III-V) within 30 days after surgery. SAMPLE SIZE: Intervention group (n=414, of which approximately 20% insure with the participating health insurance); historic control group (n=198); prospective control group (n=50), health insurance controls (for those intervention patients who are members of the participating health insurance). ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: The intervention phase started in December 2021 and will continue until June 2023. As of March 2023, 280 patients have been enrolled in the intervention group. The expected completion of the entire study is September 2024. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05256576.

Treatment and survival of patients with malignant ovarian sex cord-stromal cell tumours: An analysis of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO) study group CORSETT database.

BACKGROUND: Malignant sex cord-stromal cell tumours (SCST) account for only 7% of ovarian malignancies. The Arbeitsgemeinschaft fuer Gynaekologische Onkologie (AGO) study group has established a clinicopathological database to provide an overview of the current treatment strategies and survival of SCST patients and to identify research needs. METHODS: Twenty centres provided mixed retro- and prospective data of patients with tumour specimens and second-opinion pathology review treated between 2000 and 2014. Descriptive analyses of treatment strategies, Kaplan-Meier curves and cox regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-two SCST patients were included. One hundred and ninety-one Granulosa-cell tumour (GCT) and 17 Sertoli-Leydig cell tumour (SLCT) patients were stage I disease (>80%). Forty four GCT (18.7%) and two (8.3%) SLCT patients received adjuvant systemic treatment. After a median observation time of 78.2 months, 46% of all SCST patients experienced disease recurrence, treated predominantly with secondary debulking surgery (> 90%). Advanced FIGO stage, lymph node involvement and intra-operative capsule rupture were associated with disease recurrence on univariate analysis (all p < 0.05). Median OS time was not reached. DISCUSSION: In this analysis of SCST patients, adjuvant chemotherapy was unable to prevent disease recurrence. Despite high recurrence rates, overall survival rates were excellent.

Quality of therapy in early ovarian cancer: results of the quality assurance program of the AGO Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: The quality assurance program for ovarian cancer (QS-OVAR) evaluates the implementation of treatment standards and impact on survival for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I ovarian cancer. METHODS: Patients with a first diagnosis of ovarian cancer, diagnosed in the third quarter of 2004, 2008, 2012, and 2016, were documented. Surgical quality was categorized as optimal (maximum one surgical item missing) versus suboptimal (≥2 surgical items missing). Chemotherapy was defined as optimal according to national guidelines. Treatment quality was classified into four categories: surgery and chemotherapy were optimal, optimal surgery and suboptimal chemotherapy, suboptimal surgery and optimal chemotherapy, and surgery and chemotherapy were suboptimal. RESULTS: In total, 19.9% (n=700) of ovarian cancer patients were diagnosed with FIGO stage I. Median age was 60 years (range 18-96), 47.1% had FIGO stage IA and 47.9% had stage IC, with 37.1% high grade serous histology. Optimal surgical quality increased over time from 19.9% to 54.1%. The optimal surgery population increased from 42.2% to 70.9%. Disease free survival improved significantly in the optimal surgery population (84% after 48 months vs 71% in the suboptimal surgery population). Overall survival increased with 91% after 48 months in the optimal surgery population versus 76% in the suboptimal surgery population. In total, 20.7% of patients were undertreated concerning systemic treatment and 1% overtreated. Optimal chemotherapy standard was administered increasingly over time (71.4-80.8%). Disease free survival and overall survival were prolonged with adjuvant chemotherapy. The optimal surgery/chemotherapy subgroup increased from 37.9% to 54.1% with significantly longer disease free survival and overall survival (overall survival at 48 months: optimal surgery and chemotherapy 93%; suboptimal surgery and chemotherapy 68%). CONCLUSION: Although QS-OVAR data showed that the quality of therapy has improved over the years, not all surgical standards were met in nearly 50% of patients. The steady increase in the optimal surgery and chemotherapy collective is an important tool for improvement of prognosis of ovarian cancer patients.