Olaparib Treatment in BRCA Mutated Ovarian Cancer Patients After Complete or Partial Response to Platinum Chemotherapy

Patterns of genomic instability in > 2000 patients with ovarian cancer across six clinical trials evaluating olaparib

Abstract Background The introduction of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors represented a paradigm shift in the treatment of ovarian cancer. Genomic data from patients with high-grade ovarian cancer in six phase II/III trials involving the PARP inhibitor olaparib were analyzed to better understand patterns and potential causes of genomic instability. Patients and methods Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) was assessed in 2147 tumor samples from SOLO1, PAOLA-1, Study 19, SOLO2, OPINION, and LIGHT using next-generation sequencing technology. Genomic instability scores (GIS) were assessed in BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 (BRCA)-mutated (BRCAm), non-BRCA homologous recombination repair-mutated (non-BRCA HRRm), and non-HRRm tumors. Results BRCAm was identified in 1021/2147 (47.6%) tumors. BRCAm tumors had significantly higher GIS than non-BRCAm tumors (P < 0.001) and high biallelic loss (815/838; 97.3%) regardless of germline (658/672; 97.9%) or somatic (101/108; 93.5%) BRCAm status. In non-BRCA HRRm tumors (n = 121) a similar proportion were HRD-positive (GIS ≥ 42: 55/121; 45.5%) relative to HRD-negative (GIS < 42: 52/121; 43.0%). GIS was highly variable in non-BRCA HRRm (median 42 [interquartile range (IQR) 29–58]) and non-HRRm (n = 1005; median 32 [IQR 20–55]) tumors. Gene mutations with high GIS included HRR genes BRIP1 (median 46 [IQR 41–58]), RAD51C (median 58 [IQR 48–66]), RAD51D (median 62 [IQR 54–69]), and PALB2 (median 64 [IQR 58–74]), and non-HRR genes NF1 (median 49 [IQR 25–60]) and RB1 (median 55 [IQR 30–71]). CCNE1-amplified and PIK3CA-mutated tumors had low GIS (CCNE1-amplified: median 24 [IQR 18–29]; PIK3CA-mutated: median 32 [IQR 14–52]) and were predominantly non-BRCAm. Conclusions These analyses provide valuable insight into patterns of genomic instability and potential drivers of HRD, besides BRCAm, in ovarian cancer and will help guide future research into the potential clinical effectiveness of anti-cancer treatments in ovarian cancer, including PARP inhibitors as well as other precision oncology agents. Trial registration The SOLO1 trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01844986) on April 30, 2013; the PAOLA-1 trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02477644) on June 18, 2015 (retrospectively registered); Study 19 was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00753545) on September 12, 2008 (retrospectively registered); the SOLO2 trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01874353) on June 7, 2013; the OPINION trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03402841) on January 3, 2018; the LIGHT trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02983799) on November 4, 2016.

Efficacy of subsequent chemotherapy for patients with BRCA1/2-mutated recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer progressing on olaparib versus placebo maintenance: post-hoc analyses of the SOLO2/ENGOT Ov-21 trial

In the SOLO2 trial (ENGOT Ov-21; NCT01874353), maintenance olaparib in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (PSROC) and BRCA mutation significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and prolonged overall survival (OS). Following disease progression on olaparib, efficacy of subsequent chemotherapy remains unknown. We conducted a post-hoc hypothesis-generating analysis of SOLO2 data to determine the efficacy of different chemotherapy regimens following RECIST disease progression in patients who received olaparib or placebo. We evaluated time to second progression (TTSP) calculated from the date of RECIST progression to the next progression/death. The study population comprised 147 patients who received chemotherapy as their first subsequent treatment after RECIST progression. Of these, 69 (47%) and 78 (53%) were originally randomized to placebo and olaparib arms, respectively. In the placebo-treated cohort, 27/69 and 42/69 received non-platinum and platinum-based chemotherapy, respectively, compared with 24/78 and 54/78, respectively, in the olaparib-treated cohort. Among patients treated with chemotherapy (N = 147), TTSP was significantly longer in the placebo than in the olaparib arm: 12.1 versus 6.9 months [hazard ratio (HR) 2.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.47-3.19]. Similar result was obtained on multivariable analysis adjusting for prognostic factors at RECIST progression (HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.41-3.22). Among patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy (n = 96), TTSP was significantly longer in the placebo arm: 14.3 versus 7.0 months (HR 2.89, 95% CI 1.73-4.82). Conversely, among patients treated with non-platinum-based chemotherapy (n = 51), the TTSP was comparable in the placebo and olaparib arms: 8.3 versus 6.0 months (HR 1.58, 95% CI 0.86-2.90). Following progression from maintenance olaparib in the recurrent setting, the efficacy of platinum-based subsequent chemotherapy seems to be reduced in BRCA1/2-mutated patients with PSROC compared to patients not previously receiving poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi). The optimal strategy for patients who relapse after PARPi is an area of ongoing research.

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors for the treatment of ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer in women world-wide. Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the most common; three-quarters of women present when disease has spread outside the pelvis (stage III or IV). Treatment consists of a combination of  surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy. Although initial responses to chemotherapy are good, most women with advanced disease will relapse. PARP (poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase) inhibitors (PARPi), are a type of anticancer treatment that works by preventing cancer cells from repairing DNA damage, especially in those with breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) variants. PARPi offer a different mechanism of anticancer treatment from conventional chemotherapy. To determine the benefits and risks of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase) inhibitors (PARPi) for the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Central 2020, Issue 10), Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trial Register, MEDLINE (1990 to October 2020), Embase (1990 to October 2020), ongoing trials on www.controlled-trials.com/rct, www.clinicaltrials.gov, www.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials, the National Research Register (NRR), FDA database and pharmaceutical industry biomedical literature. We included trials that randomised women with EOC to PARPi with no treatment, or PARPi versus conventional chemotherapy, or PARPi together with conventional chemotherapy versus conventional chemotherapy alone. We used standard Cochrane methodology. Two review authors independently assessed whether studies met the inclusion criteria. We contacted investigators for additional data. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), quality of life (QoL) and rate of adverse events. We included 15 studies (6109 participants); four (3070 participants) with newly-diagnosed, advanced EOC and 11 (3039 participants) with recurrent EOC. The studies varied in types of comparisons and evaluated PARPi. Eight studies were judged as at low risk of bias in most of the domains. Quality of life data were generally poorly reported. Below we present six key comparisons.  The majority of participants had BRCA mutations, either in their tumour (sBRCAmut) and/or germline (gBRCAmut), or homologous recombination deficiencies (HRD) in their tumours. Newly diagnosed EOC Overall, four studies evaluated the effect of PARPi in newly-diagnosed, advanced EOC. Two compared PARPi with chemotherapy and chemotherapy alone. OS data were not reported. The combination of PARPi with chemotherapy may have little to no difference in progression-free survival (PFS) (two studies, 1564 participants; hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI 0).49 to 1.38; very low-certainty evidence)(no evidence of disease progression at 12 months' 63% with PARPi versus 69% for placebo).  PARPi with chemotherapy likely increases any severe adverse event (SevAE) (grade 3 or higher) slightly (45%) compared with chemotherapy alone (51%) (two studies, 1549 participants, risk ratio (RR) 1.13, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.20; high-certainty evidence). PARPi combined with chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone likely results in little to no difference in the QoL (one study; 744 participants, MD 1.56 95% CI -0.42 to 3.54; moderate-certainty evidence).  Two studies compared PARPi monotherapy with placebo as maintenance after first-line chemotherapy in newly diagnosed EOC. PARPi probably results in little to no difference in OS (two studies, 1124 participants; HR 0.81, 95%CI 0.59 to 1.13; moderate-certainty evidence) (alive at 12 months 68% with PARPi versus 62% for placebo). However, PARPi may increase PFS (two studies, 1124 participants; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.92; low-certainty evidence) (no evidence of disease progression at 12 months' 55% with PARPi versus 24% for placebo). There may be an increase in the risk of experiencing any SevAE (grade 3 or higher) with PARPi (54%) compared with placebo (19%)(two studies, 1118 participants, RR 2.87, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.99; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. There is probably a slight reduction in QoL with PARPi, although this may not be clinically significant (one study, 362 participants; MD -3.00, 95%CI -4.48 to -1.52; moderate-certainty evidence).  Recurrent, platinum-sensitive EOC Overall, 10 studies evaluated the effect of PARPi in recurrent platinum-sensitive EOC. Three studies compared PARPi monotherapy with chemotherapy alone. PARPi may result in little to no difference in OS (two studies, 331 participants; HR 0.95, 95%CI 0.62 to 1.47; low-certainty evidence) (percentage alive at 36 months 18% with PARPi versus 17% for placebo). Evidence is very uncertain about the effect of PARPi on PFS (three studies, 739 participants; HR 0.88, 95%CI 0.56 to 1.38; very low-certainty evidence)(no evidence of disease progression at 12 months 26% with PARPi versus 22% for placebo). There may be little to no difference in rates of any SevAE (grade 3 or higher) with PARPi (50%) than chemotherapy alone (47%) (one study, 254 participants; RR 1.06, 95%CI 0.80 to 1.39; low-certainty evidence). Four studies compared PARPi monotherapy as maintenance with placebo. PARPi may result in little to no difference in OS (two studies, 560 participants; HR 0.88, 95%CI 0.65 to 1.20; moderate-certainty evidence)(percentage alive at 36 months 21% with PARPi versus 17% for placebo). However, evidence suggests that PARPi as maintenance therapy results in a large PFS (four studies, 1677 participants; HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.42; high-certainty evidence)(no evidence of disease progression at 12 months 37% with PARPi versus 5.5% for placebo). PARPi maintenance therapy may result in a large increase in any SevAE (51%) (grade 3 or higher) than placebo (19%)(four studies, 1665 participants, RR 2.62, 95%CI 1.85 to 3.72; low-certainty evidence). PARPi compared with chemotherapy may result in little or no change in QoL (one study, 229 participants, MD 1.20, 95%CI -1.75 to 4.16; low-certainty evidence). Recurrent, platinum-resistant EOC Two studies compared PARPi with chemotherapy. The certainty of evidence in both studies was graded as very low. Overall, there was minimal information on the QoL and adverse events. PARPi maintenance treatment after chemotherapy may improve PFS in women with newly-diagnosed and recurrent platinum-sensitive EOC; there may be little to no effect on OS, although OS data are immature. Overall, this is likely at the expense of an increase in SevAE. It is  disappointing that data on quality of life outcomes  are relatively sparse. More research is needed to determine whether PARPi have a role to play in platinum-resistant disease.

Olaparib tablets as maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation (SOLO2/ENGOT-Ov21): a final analysis of a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

Olaparib, a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, has previously been shown to extend progression-free survival versus placebo when given to patients with relapsed high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer who were platinum sensitive and who had a BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation, as part of the SOLO2/ENGOT-Ov21 trial. The aim of this final analysis is to investigate the effect of olaparib on overall survival. This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial was done across 123 medical centres in 16 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at baseline of 0-1, had histologically confirmed, relapsed, high-grade serous or high-grade endometrioid ovarian cancer, including primary peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer, and had received two or more previous platinum regimens. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive olaparib tablets (300 mg in two 150 mg tablets twice daily) or matching placebo tablets using an interactive web or voice-response system. Stratification was by response to previous chemotherapy and length of platinum-free interval. Treatment assignment was masked to patients, treatment providers, and data assessors. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival has been reported previously. Overall survival was a key secondary endpoint and was analysed in all patients as randomly allocated. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one treatment dose. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01874353, and is no longer recruiting patients. Between Sept 3, 2013 and Nov 21, 2014, 295 patients were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either olaparib (n=196 [66%]) or placebo (n=99 [34%]). One patient, randomised in error, did not receive olaparib. Median follow-up was 65·7 months (IQR 63·6-69·3) with olaparib and 64·5 months (63·4-68·7) with placebo. Median overall survival was 51·7 months (95% CI 41·5-59·1) with olaparib and 38·8 months (31·4-48·6) with placebo (hazard ratio 0·74 [95% CI 0·54-1·00]; p=0·054), unadjusted for the 38% of patients in the placebo group who received subsequent PARP inhibitor therapy. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse event was anaemia (which occurred in 41 [21%] of 195 patients in the olaparib group and two [2%] of 99 patients in the placebo group). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 50 (26%) of 195 patients receiving olaparib and eight (8%) of 99 patients receiving placebo. Treatment-emergent adverse events with a fatal outcome occurred in eight (4%) of the 195 patients receiving olaparib, six of which were judged to be treatment-related (attributed to myelodysplastic syndrome [n=3] and acute myeloid leukaemia [n=3]). Olaparib provided a median overall survival benefit of 12·9 months compared with placebo in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation. Although statistical significance was not reached, these findings are arguably clinically meaningful and support the use of maintenance olaparib in these patients. AstraZeneca and Merck.

Concordance between CA-125 and RECIST progression in patients with germline BRCA-mutated platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer treated in the SOLO2 trial with olaparib as maintenance therapy after response to chemotherapy

Limited evidence exists to support CA-125 as a valid surrogate biomarker for progression in patients with ovarian cancer on maintenance PARP inhibitor (PARPi) therapy. We aimed to assess the concordance between CA-125 and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) criteria for progression in patients with BRCA mutations on maintenance PARPi or placebo. We extracted data on progression as defined by Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup CA-125, investigator- and independent central-assessed RECIST from the SOLO2/ENGOT-ov21(NCT01874353) trial. We excluded those with progression other than by RECIST, progression on date of randomisation, and no repeat CA-125 beyond baseline. We evaluated the concordance between CA-125 progression and RECIST progression, and assessed the negative (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV). Of 295 randomised patients, 275 (184 olaparib, 91 placebo) were included. 171 patients had investigator-assessed RECIST progression. Of 80 patients with CA-125 progression, 77 had concordant RECIST progression (PPV 96%, 95% confidence interval 90-99%). Of 195 patients without CA-125 progression, 94 had RECIST progression (NPV 52%, 45-59%). Within treatment arms, PPV was similar (olaparib: 95% [84-99%], placebo: 97% [87-100%]) but NPV was lower in patients on placebo (olaparib: 60% [52-68%], placebo: 30% [20-44%]). Of 94 patients with RECIST but without CA-125 progression, 64 (68%) had CA-125 that remained within normal range. We observed similar findings using independent-assessed RECIST. Almost half the patients without CA-125 progression had RECIST progression, and most of these had CA-125 within the normal range. Regular computed tomography imaging should be considered as part of surveillance in patients treated with or without maintenance olaparib rather than relying on CA-125 alone.

Angelina Tjokrowidjaja

Luis Manso

Sally Lord