Keiichi Fujiwara

Geneva Homologous Recombination Deficiency Test Is Predictive of Survival Benefit From Olaparib and Bevacizumab Maintenance in Ovarian Cancer

PURPOSE The ability of the Geneva homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) test to predict progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with high-grade ovarian cancer treated with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors has been demonstrated. Its performance with respect to overall survival (OS) has not been assessed yet. METHODS Using the final results of the PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 phase III clinical trial with a median follow-up of 5 years, we evaluated the Geneva HRD test on 468 samples as part of the ENGOT HRD European Initiative. Results were evaluated in terms of final PFS and OS in the olaparib + bevacizumab and placebo + bevacizumab arms and compared with the Myriad MyChoice HRD test. RESULTS Final PFS was consistent with previously published data and confirmed the predictive value of the Geneva HRD test with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.41 (95% CI, 0.30 to 0.57) for HRD-positive patients. The results for OS showed a HR of 0.56 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.85) for HRD-positive patients and 1.6 (95% CI, 1.1 to 2.3) for HRD-negative patients. These results are consistent with those observed with the Myriad test, including the negative OS trend in the HRD-negative subgroup treated with olaparib + bevacizumab (HR, 1.2 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.8]). A subgroup analysis of patients with intermediate HRD scores showed that the normalized large-scale state transition score used by the Geneva HRD test had both predictive and prognostic value. CONCLUSION The Geneva HRD test predicts PFS and OS benefit from olaparib + bevacizumab. The potential detrimental effect of olaparib + bevacizumab on OS in the HRD-negative population is hypothesis-generating and needs to be confirmed prospectively.

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy is now back for ovarian cancer

Abstract The Intraperitoneal Carboplatin for Ovarian Cancer (iPocc) trial demonstrated that intraperitoneal (IP) administration of carboplatin is more effective than intravenous (IV) administration for advanced ovarian cancer, especially in cases with large residual tumors, challenging previous assumptions that IP chemotherapy is only beneficial for small residual tumors. Additionally, the iPocc trial showed that IP chemotherapy has a comparable safety profile to IV chemotherapy, with the exception of port-related toxicities. This review summarizes the principles, development, and significance of IP chemotherapy and discusses its future potential in light of recent studies. Notably, the iPocc trial, conducted under Japan’s new clinical trial regulations, achieving regulatory approval based on investigator-initiated results. The iPocc regimen offers a viable treatment option for patients with advanced ovarian cancer (stages II–IV). However, bevacizumab is recommended for later-line treatments rather than combining it with IP chemotherapy until further trials support such combinations. Future studies are needed to identify biomarkers that predict response to the iPocc regimen. The trial’s success underscores the dedication of patients and families who contributed to this groundbreaking research.

Normalized LST Is an Efficient Biomarker for Homologous Recombination Deficiency and Olaparib Response in Ovarian Carcinoma

PURPOSE The efficiency of the Myriad Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD) test to guide the use of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors has been demonstrated in several phase III trials. However, a need exists for alternative clinically validated tests. METHODS A novel biomarker for HRD was developed using The Cancer Genome Atlas database and, as part of the ENGOT HRD European Initiative, applied to 469 samples from the PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial. Results were compared with the Myriad myChoice Genomic Instability Score (GIS) with respect to the progression-free survival in the olaparib + bevacizumab and placebo + bevacizumab arms. RESULTS Analysis of the TCGA cohort revealed that a normalization of the number of large-scale state transitions by the number of whole-genome doubling events allows a better separation and classification of HRD samples than the GIS. Analysis of the PAOLA-1 samples, using the Geneva test (OncoScan + nLST), yielded a lower failure rate (27 of 469 v 59 of 469) and a hazard ratio of 0.40 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.57) compared with 0.37 for Myriad myChoice (BRCAm or GIS+) in the nLST-positive samples. In patients with BRCAwt, the Geneva test identified a novel subpopulation of patients, with a favorable 1-year PFS (85%) but a poor 2-year PFS (30%) on olaparib + bevacizumab treatment. CONCLUSION The proposed test efficiently separates HRD-positive from HRD-negative patients, predicts response to PARP inhibition, and can be easily deployed in a clinical laboratory for routine practice. The performance is similar to the available commercial test, but its lower failure rate allows an increase in the number of patients who will receive a conclusive laboratory result.

High expression of maternal embryonic leucine-zipper kinase (MELK) impacts clinical outcomes in patients with ovarian cancer and its inhibition suppresses ovarian cancer cells growth ex vivo

Maternal embryonic leucine zipper kinase (MELK) is receiving an attention as a therapeutic target in various types of cancers. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of Expression levels of MELK in 11 ovarian cancer cell lines were confirmed by western blotting. Inhibitory concentration of OTS167 was determined by colorimetric assay. We demonstrated MELK as both a prognostic marker and a therapeutic target for ovarian cancer using clinical ovarian cancer samples. MELK inhibition by OTS167 may be an effective approach to treat ovarian cancer patients.

Predictive Blood-Based Biomarkers in Patients with Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Treated with Carboplatin and Paclitaxel with or without Bevacizumab: Results from GOG-0218

Abstract Purpose: GOG-0218, a double-blind placebo-controlled phase III trial, compared carboplatin and paclitaxel with placebo, bevacizumab followed by placebo, or bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Results demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), but no overall survival (OS) benefit with bevacizumab. Blood samples were collected for biomarker analyses. Experimental Design: Plasma samples were analyzed via multiplex ELISA technology for seven prespecified biomarkers [IL6, Ang-2, osteopontin (OPN), stromal cell–derived factor-1 (SDF-1), VEGF-D, IL6 receptor (IL6R), and GP130]. The predictive value of each biomarker with respect to PFS and OS was assessed using a protein marker by treatment interaction term within the framework of a Cox proportional hazards model. Prognostic markers were identified using Cox models adjusted for baseline covariates. Results: Baseline samples were available from 751 patients. According to our prespecified analysis plan, IL6 was predictive of a therapeutic advantage with bevacizumab for PFS (P = 0.007) and OS (P = 0.003). IL6 and OPN were found to be negative prognostic markers for both PFS and OS (P < 0.001). Patients with high median IL6 levels (dichotomized at the median) treated with bevacizumab had longer PFS (14.2 vs. 8.7 months) and OS (39.6 vs. 33.1 months) compared with placebo. Conclusions: The inflammatory cytokine IL6 may be predictive of therapeutic benefit from bevacizumab when combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel. Aligning with results observed in patients with renal cancer treated with antiangiogenic therapies, it appears plasma IL6 may also define those patients with EOC more or less likely to benefit from the addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy.

ATHENA (GOG-3020/ENGOT-ov45): a randomized, phase III trial to evaluate rucaparib as monotherapy (ATHENA–MONO) and rucaparib in combination with nivolumab (ATHENA–COMBO) as maintenance treatment following frontline platinum-based chemotherapy in ovarian cancer

The optimal treatment strategy for women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer has yet to be determined. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have demonstrated substantial improvement in progression-free survival as monotherapy maintenance treatment in the frontline setting versus active surveillance. Furthermore, preclinical and early clinical studies have shown that PARP inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors have synergistic antitumor activity and may provide an additional therapeutic option for patients in this population. In women with newly diagnosed ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer, we wish to assess the efficacy of frontline maintenance treatment with the PARP inhibitor rucaparib versus placebo following response to platinum-based chemotherapy (ATHENA-MONO), and to assess the combination of rucaparib plus nivolumab (a programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1)-blocking monoclonal antibody) versus rucaparib alone (ATHENA-COMBO). (1) Maintenance therapy with rucaparib monotherapy may extend progression-free survival following standard treatment for ovarian cancer in the frontline setting. (2) The combination of nivolumab plus rucaparib may extend progression-free survival following standard treatment for ovarian cancer in the frontline setting compared with rucaparib alone. ATHENA is an international, randomized, double-blind, phase III trial consisting of two independent comparisons (ATHENA-MONO and ATHENA-COMBO) in patients with newly diagnosed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Patients are randomized 4:4:1:1 to the following: oral rucaparib+ intravenous nivolumab (arm A); oral rucaparib + intravenous placebo (arm B); oral placebo+ intravenous nivolumab (arm C); and oral placebo + intravenous placebo (arm D). The starting dose of rucaparib is 600 mg orally twice a day and nivolumab 480 mg intravenously every 4 weeks. ATHENA-MONO compares arm B with arm D to evaluate rucaparib monotherapy versus placebo, and ATHENA-COMBO evaluates arm A versus arm B to investigate the effects of rucaparib and nivolumab in combination versus rucaparib monotherapy. ATHENA-MONO and ATHENA-COMBO share a common treatment arm (arm B) but each comparison is independently powered. Patients ≥18 years of age with newly diagnosed advanced, high-grade epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer who have achieved a response after completion of cytoreductive surgery and initial platinum-based chemotherapy are enrolled. No other prior treatment for ovarian cancer, other than the frontline platinum regimen, is permitted. The primary endpoint is investigator-assessed progression-free survival by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. Approximately 1000 patients have been enrolled and randomized. The trial completed accrual in 2020. While dependent on event rates, primary results of ATHENA-MONO are anticipated in early 2022 and results of ATHENA-COMBO are anticipated to mature at a later date. This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03522246).

Nivolumab Versus Gemcitabine or Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin for Patients With Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer: Open-Label, Randomized Trial in Japan (NINJA)

PURPOSE This phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label study investigated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab versus chemotherapy (gemcitabine [GEM] or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin [PLD]) in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS Eligible patients had platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer, received ≤ 1 regimen after diagnosis of resistance, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of ≤ 1. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab (240 mg once every 2 weeks [as one cycle]) or chemotherapy (GEM 1000 mg/m2 for 30 minutes [once on days 1, 8, and 15] followed by a week's rest [as one cycle], or PLD 50 mg/m2 once every 4 weeks [as one cycle]). The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate, duration of response, and safety. RESULTS Patients (n = 316) were randomly assigned to nivolumab (n = 157) or GEM or PLD (n = 159) between October 2015 and December 2017. Median OS was 10.1 (95% CI, 8.3 to 14.1) and 12.1 (95% CI, 9.3 to 15.3) months with nivolumab and GEM or PLD, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.8 to 1.3; P = .808). Median PFS was 2.0 (95% CI, 1.9 to 2.2) and 3.8 (95% CI, 3.6 to 4.2) months with nivolumab and GEM or PLD, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.9; P = .002). There was no statistical difference in overall response rate between groups (7.6% v 13.2%; odds ratio, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.2 to 1.3; P = .191). Median duration of response was numerically longer with nivolumab than GEM or PLD (18.7 v 7.4 months). Fewer treatment-related adverse events were observed with nivolumab versus GEM or PLD (61.5% v 98.1%), with no additional or new safety risks. CONCLUSION Although well-tolerated, nivolumab did not improve OS and showed worse PFS compared with GEM or PLD in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

Analysis of East Asia subgroup in Study 309/KEYNOTE-775: lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus treatment of physician’s choice chemotherapy in patients with previously treated advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer

In the global phase 3 Study 309/KEYNOTE-775 (NCT03517449) at the first interim analysis, lenvatinib+pembrolizumab significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) versus treatment of physician's choice chemotherapy (TPC) in patients with previously treated advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer (EC). This exploratory analysis evaluated outcomes in patients enrolled in East Asia at the time of prespecified final analysis. Women ≥18 years with histologically confirmed advanced, recurrent, or metastatic EC with progressive disease after 1 platinum-based chemotherapy (2 if 1 given in neoadjuvant/adjuvant setting) were enrolled. Patients were randomized 1:1 to lenvatinib 20 mg orally once daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks (≤35 cycles) or TPC (doxorubicin or paclitaxel). Primary endpoints were PFS per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review and OS. No alpha was assigned for this subgroup analysis. Among 155 East Asian patients (lenvatinib+pembrolizumab, n=77; TPC, n=78), median follow-up time (data cutoff: March 1, 2022) was 34.3 (range, 25.1-43.0) months. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for PFS (lenvatinib+pembrolizumab vs. TPC) were 0.74 (0.49-1.10) and 0.64 (0.44-0.94) in the mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) and all-comer populations, respectively. HRs (95% CI) for OS were 0.68 (0.45-1.02) and 0.61 (0.41-0.90), respectively. ORRs were 36% with lenvatinib+pembrolizumab and 22% with TPC (pMMR) and 39% and 21%, respectively (all-comers). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 97% and 96% (grade 3-5, 74% and 72%), respectively. Lenvatinib+pembrolizumab provided clinically meaningful benefit with manageable safety compared with TPC, supporting its use in East Asian patients with previously treated advanced/recurrent EC. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03517449.

A Study in Ovarian Cancer Patients Evaluating Rucaparib and Nivolumab as Maintenance Treatment Following Response to Front-Line Platinum-Based Chemotherapy

This is a Phase 3, randomized, multinational, double-blind, dual placebo-controlled, 4-arm study evaluating rucaparib and nivolumab as maintenance treatment following response to front-line treatment in newly diagnosed ovarian cancer patients. Response to treatment will be analyzed based on homologous recombination (HR) status of tumor samples.