Guilherme H. Cantuaria

Long-Term Follow-Up and Overall Survival in NRG258, a Randomized Phase III Trial of Chemoradiation Versus Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Endometrial Carcinoma

This randomized phase III trial aimed to determine whether treatment with cisplatin and volume-directed radiation followed by carboplatin and paclitaxel for four cycles (chemoradiotherapy [C-RT]) increased recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) when compared with carboplatin and paclitaxel for six cycles (chemotherapy [CT]) in locally advanced endometrial cancer (UC). Previously reported results showed that C-RT did not improve RFS compared with CT. Here we report the final OS analysis. Patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage III-IVA UC or stage I/II serous or clear cell UC and positive cytology were enrolled. The primary objective was RFS. Secondary objectives were OS, toxicity, and quality of life. Cumulative probabilities of OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Subgroup analyses of treatment effect for FIGO stage, age, race, gross residual disease, histology, lymph-vascular space invasion, and body mass index were performed. In total, 813 patients were randomly assigned (407 C-RT and 406 CT). The median follow-up was 112 months. Median OS was not achieved in either arm. The stratified hazard ratio for death comparing C-RT versus CT was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.34, log-rank two-sided P value = .72). None of the factors analyzed predicted OS benefit from C-RT. Although C-RT reduced the rate of local recurrence compared with CT, it did not increase OS or RFS in stage III/IVA UC.

Population-adjusted indirect treatment comparison of the SOLO1 and PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trials evaluating maintenance olaparib or bevacizumab or the combination of both in newly diagnosed, advanced BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer

In the absence of randomised head-to-head trials, we conducted a population-adjusted indirect treatment comparison (PA-ITC) of phase III trial data to evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of maintenance olaparib and bevacizumab alone and in combination in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation (BRCAm). An unanchored PA-ITC was performed on investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) data. Individual patient data from SOLO1 (olaparib versus placebo) and from BRCA-mutated patients in PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 (olaparib plus bevacizumab versus placebo plus bevacizumab) were pooled. Each arm of PAOLA-1 was weighted so that key baseline patient characteristics were similar to the SOLO1 cohort. Analyses were performed in patients with complete baseline data. Weighted Cox regression analysis was used to estimate the comparative efficacy of different maintenance therapy strategies, supplemented by weighted Kaplan-Meier analyses. Data from SOLO1 patients (olaparib, n = 254; placebo, n = 126) were compared with data from BRCA-mutated PAOLA-1 patients (olaparib plus bevacizumab, n = 151; placebo plus bevacizumab, n = 71). Adding bevacizumab to olaparib was associated with a numerical improvement in PFS compared with olaparib alone (hazard ratio [HR] 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-1.09). Statistically significant improvements in PFS were seen with olaparib alone versus placebo plus bevacizumab (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.30-0.75), olaparib plus bevacizumab versus placebo (0.23; 0.14-0.34), and placebo plus bevacizumab versus placebo (0.65; 0.43-0.95). Results of this hypothesis-generating PA-ITC analysis support the use of maintenance olaparib alone or with bevacizumab in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCAm.

Cediranib and Olaparib Combination Compared With Cediranib or Olaparib Alone, or Chemotherapy in Platinum-Resistant or Primary Platinum-Refractory Ovarian Cancer: NRG-GY005

PURPOSE We assessed the efficacy of cediranib, olaparib, and cediranib/olaparib compared with standard-of-care chemotherapy (SOC) in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory epithelial ovarian cancer (PROC). PATIENTS AND METHODS NRG-GY005 is an open-label, four-arm, phase II/III superiority trial enrolling patients with high-grade serous/endometrioid PROC and one to three previous therapies. Key exclusion criteria included previous receipt of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor or receipt of antiangiogenic therapy in the recurrent setting. Treatment arms (SOC [once weekly paclitaxel, topotecan, or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin], cediranib, olaparib, or cediranib/olaparib) were equally randomized. A preplanned interim futility analysis on the basis of progression-free survival (PFS) selected treatment arms to advance to phase III. PFS and overall survival (OS) were phase III coprimary end points, with hierarchical testing of PFS followed by OS to preserve type 1 error control, designed to have 90% power for a 0.625 PFS hazard ratio (HR). OS was tested after PFS in the multiple hierarchical testing procedure. Secondary end points included objective response rate (ORR) and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS Five hundred sixty-two eligible patients were enrolled for phase II/III. Three arms met PFS criteria to carry forward to phase III (SOC, cediranib/olaparib, and cediranib). Median PFS was 3.4, 5.2, and 4 months with SOC, cediranib/olaparib, and cediranib, respectively, with a median follow-up duration of 42.2 months. PFS HR estimates for cediranib/olaparib and cediranib ( v SOC) were 0.796 (98.3% CI, 0.597 to 1.060) and 0.972 (98.3% CI, 0.726 to 1.300), respectively. Median OS was 13.6, 12.8, and 10.5 months, and of 443 patients with measurable disease, ORR was 8.6%, 24.7%, and 13.1% for SOC, cediranib/olaparib, and cediranib, respectively. No new safety signals were identified. In patients receiving cediranib/olaparib, no statistically significant difference was observed on the NFOSI-DRS-P subscale compared with SOC (98.3% CI, –1.3 to 1.5, P = .8725). CONCLUSION The cediranib-containing arms demonstrated clinical activity on the basis of PFS but were not superior compared with SOC.

Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer: overall survival and exploratory analyses of the NRG GY018 phase 3 randomized trial

Historically, the treatment of patients with advanced stage or recurrent endometrial cancer included paclitaxel plus carboplatin. Immunotherapy in combination with chemotherapy resulted in improved clinical outcomes in several solid tumors. In the phase 3 NRG GY018 study, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy significantly improved investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; primary endpoint) versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced/metastatic/recurrent endometrial cancer regardless of mismatch repair status. Here we report on key secondary endpoints and exploratory analyses. Patients were women ≥18 years old with newly diagnosed stage III or IVA endometrial cancer with measurable disease, or stage IVB or recurrent endometrial cancer with or without measurable disease. Patients (n = 810) were randomized (1:1) to pembrolizumab or placebo plus paclitaxel-carboplatin followed by maintenance pembrolizumab or placebo for up to 24 months. Overall survival was a secondary endpoint and PFS per RECIST v.1.1 by blinded independent central review was an exploratory endpoint. Overall survival data were immature; hazard ratios favored pembrolizumab (mismatch repair-proficient: 0.79 (0.53-1.17); 1-sided nominal P = 0.1157; mismatch repair-deficient: 0.55 (0.25-1.19); 1-sided nominal P = 0.0617). Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for PFS per blinded independent central review favored pembrolizumab (mismatch repair-proficient: 0.64 (0.49-0.85); P = 0.0008; mismatch repair-deficient: 0.45 (0.27-0.73); P = 0.0005). These findings further support the use of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with advanced stage or recurrent endometrial cancer regardless of mismatch repair status. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03914612 .

Testing the Combination of Cediranib and Olaparib in Comparison to Each Drug Alone or Other Chemotherapy in Recurrent Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer

This randomized phase II/III trial studies how well cediranib maleate and olaparib work when given together or separately, and compares them to standard chemotherapy in treating patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer that has returned (recurrent) after receiving chemotherapy with drugs that contain platinum (platinum-resistant) or continued to grow while being treated with platinum-based chemotherapy drugs (platinum-refractory). Cediranib maleate and olaparib may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking enzymes needed for cell growth. Chemotherapy drugs work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. It is not yet known whether giving cediranib maleate and olaparib together may cause more damage to cancer cells when compared to either drug alone or standard chemotherapy.