Marcia Hall

Results of a randomised Phase II trial of olaparib, chemotherapy or olaparib and cediranib in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer

Abstract Background OCTOVA compared the efficacy of olaparib (O) versus weekly paclitaxel (wP) or olaparib + cediranib (O + C) in recurrent ovarian cancer (OC). Aims The main aim of the OCTOVA trial was to determine the progression-free survival (PFS) of olaparib (O) versus the oral combination of olaparib plus cediranib (O + C) and weekly paclitaxel (wP) in recurrent ovarian cancer (OC). Methods In total, 139 participants who had relapsed within 12 months of platinum therapy were randomised to O (300 mg twice daily), wP (80 mg/m2 d1,8,15, q28) or O + C (300 mg twice daily/20 mg daily, respectively). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) of olaparib (O) versus olaparib plus cediranib (O + C) or weekly paclitaxel (wP). The sample size was calculated to observe a PFS hazard ratio (HR) 0.64 in favour of O + C compared to O (20% one-sided type I error, 80% power). Results The majority had platinum-resistant disease (90%), 22% prior PARPi, 34% prior anti-angiogenic therapy, 30% germline BRCA1/2 mutations. The PFS was increased for O + C vs O (O + C 5.4 mo (2.3, 9.6): O 3.7 mo (1.8, 7.6) HR = 0.73; 60% CI: 0.59, 0.89; P = 0.1) and no different between wP and O (wP 3.9 m (1.9, 9.1); O 3.7 mo (1.8, 7.6) HR = 0.89, 60% CI: 0.72, 1.09; P = 0.69). The main treatment-related adverse events included manageable diarrhoea (4% Grade 3) and hypertension (4% Grade 3) in the O + C arm. Discussion OCTOVA demonstrated the activity of O + C in women with recurrent disease, offering a potential non-chemotherapy option. Trial registration ISRCTN14784018, registered on 19th January 2018 http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN14784018.

Identification of RAD51 foci in cancer-associated circulating cells of patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer: association with treatment outcomes

Fifty percent of patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer harbor defects in the homologous recombination repair pathway. RAD51 foci form where DNA is damaged, indicating its involvement in repairing double-stranded breaks. High levels of RAD51 in ovarian cancer tissue have been associated with a poorer prognosis. To demonstrate RAD51 foci in circulating cancer-associated cells of patients with ovarian cancer and their association with clinical outcomes. One hundred and twenty-four patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer had blood samples taken at strategic points during treatment and follow-up. Cells were stained using WT1 and RAD51 antibodies with immunofluorescence and reviewed under Leica camera microscopy; RAD51 foci were counted. Correlations were made between numbers of RAD51 foci and treatment response, RAD51 foci were identified in all patients (n=42) with wild-type Levels of RAD51 foci in circulating cancer-associated cells of patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer are associated with clinical outcomes and may be a more pragmatic method of determining a homologous repair-deficient population.

Development of a dual energy CT based model to assess response to treatment in patients with high grade serous ovarian cancer: a pilot cohort study

Abstract Background In patients with cancer, the current gold standard for assessing response to treatment involves measuring cancer lesions on computed tomography (CT) imaging. The percentage change in size of specific lesions determines whether patients have had a complete/partial response or progressive disease, according to RECIST criteria. Dual Energy CT (DECT) permits additional measurements of iodine concentration, a surrogate marker of vascularity. Here we explore the role of changes in iodine concentration within cancer tissue on CT scans to assess its suitability for determining treatment response in patients with high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC). Methods Suitable RECIST measurable lesions were identified from the CT images of HGSOC patients, taken at 2 different time points (pre and post treatment). Changes in size and iodine concentration were measured for each lesion. PR/SD were classified as responders, PD was classified as non-responder. Radiological responses were correlated with clinical and CA125 outcomes. Results 62 patients had appropriate imaging for assessment. 22 were excluded as they only had one DECT scan. 32/40 patients assessed (113 lesions) had received treatment for relapsed HGSOC. RECIST and GCIG (Gynaecologic Cancer Inter Group) CA125 criteria / clinical assessment of response for patients was correlated with changes in iodine concentration, before and after treatment. The prediction of median progression free survival was significantly better associated with changes in iodine concentration (p = 0.0001) and GCIG Ca125 / clinical assessment (p = 0.0028) in comparison to RECIST criteria (p = 0.43). Conclusion Changes in iodine concentration from dual energy CT imaging may be more suitable than RECIST in assessing response to treatment in patients with HGSOC. Trial Registration CICATRIx IRAS number 198179, 14 Dec 2015, https://www.myresearchproject.org.uk/.

A Biomarker-enriched, Randomized Phase II Trial of Adavosertib (AZD1775) Plus Paclitaxel and Carboplatin for Women with Platinum-sensitive TP53 -mutant Ovarian Cancer

Abstract Purpose: Preclinical studies show that adavosertib, a WEE1 kinase inhibitor, sensitizes TP53-mutant cells to chemotherapy. We hypothesized that adavosertib, plus chemotherapy, would enhance efficacy versus placebo in TP53-mutated ovarian cancer. Patients and Methods: Following safety run-in, this double-blind phase II trial (NCT01357161) randomized women with TP53-mutated, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer to oral adavosertib (225 mg twice daily for 2.5 days/21-day cycle) or placebo, plus carboplatin (AUC5) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m2), until disease progression or for six cycles. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) by enhanced RECIST v1.1 [ePFS (volumetric)] and safety. Secondary/exploratory objectives included PFS by RECIST v1.1 (single dimension), objective response rate, overall survival, and analysis of tumor gene profile versus sensitivity to adavosertib. Results: A total of 121 patients were randomized to adavosertib (A+C; n = 59) and placebo (P+C; n = 62) plus chemotherapy. Adding adavosertib to chemotherapy improved ePFS [median, 7.9 (95% confidence interval (CI), 6.9–9.9) vs. 7.3 months (5.6–8.2); HR 0.63 (95% CI, 0.38–1.06); two-sided P = 0.080], meeting the predefined significance threshold (P < 0.2). Clinical benefit was observed following A+C for patients with different TP53 mutation subtypes, identifying possible response biomarkers. An increase in adverse events was seen with A+C versus P+C: greatest for diarrhea (adavosertib 75%; placebo 37%), vomiting (63%; 27%), anemia (53%; 32%), and all grade ≥3 adverse events (78%; 65%). Conclusions: Establishing an optimal strategy for managing tolerability and identifying specific patient populations most likely to benefit from treatment may increase clinical benefit. Future studies should consider additional adavosertib doses within the chemotherapy treatment cycle and the potential for maintenance therapy.

Pazopanib and Fosbretabulin in recurrent ovarian cancer (PAZOFOS): A multi-centre, phase 1b and open-label, randomised phase 2 trial

Vascular co-option is a resistance mechanism to anti-angiogenic agents, but combinations of anti-vascular agents may overcome this resistance. We report a phase 1b and randomised phase 2 trial to determine the safety and efficacy of pazopanib with fosbretabulin. Eligible patients had recurrent, epithelial ovarian cancer with a platinum-free interval (PFI) of 3 to 12 months. Patients were stratified according to PFI (>6 versus ≤6 months) and prior bevacizumab use. Twelve patients were treated in the phase 1b. Commonest grade ≥ 2 adverse events (AEs) were hypertension (100%), neutropenia (50%), fatigue (50%), vomiting (50%). There was one DLT (grade 3 fatigue). The recommended phase 2 dose level was fosbretabulin 54 mg/m It remains unclear whether pazopanib with with fosbretabulin is an efficacious regimen to treat epithelial ovarian cancer. Effective cardiac risk mitigation is needed to increase the tolerability and maximize patient safety in future trials.

Preclinical Studies on the Effect of Rucaparib in Ovarian Cancer: Impact of BRCA2 Status

Background: Approximately 50% of ovarian cancer patients harbour homologous recombination repair deficiencies. These deficiencies have been successfully targeted using poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) particularly for patients harbouring BRCA1/2 mutations. The aim of this study is to assess the effects of the PARPi rucaparib in vitro using cell lines with BRCA2 mutations in comparison to those with BRCA2 wild type. Methods: Cell proliferation assays, RT-qPCR, immunofluorescence, annexin V/PI assays were used to assess the effects of rucaparib in vitro. Results: The BRCA2 mutant ovarian cancer cell line PEO1 exhibited higher PARP1 activity when treated with H2O2 compared to wild type cell lines. The migratory and proliferative capacity of PEO1 cells was compromised following treatment with rucaparib 10 µM compared to BRCA2 wild-type cell lines via a mechanism involving the mTOR pathway. Rucaparib treatment significantly increased DNA damage primarily in PEO1 cells and SKOV3 cells compared with wild type. Conclusions: Appropriate identification of robust predictive biomarkers for homologous recombination deficiency using ‘liquid’ biopsies would facilitate the identification of patients suitable for PARPi therapy. Preliminary efforts to undertake such testing are described here. This study also demonstrates the mechanisms of action of rucaparib (PARPi) which may involve elements of the mTOR pathway.

British Gynaecological Cancer Society (BGCS) vulval cancer guidelines: Recommendations for practice

The purpose of this guideline is to collate evidence and propose evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and management of adult patients with vulva carcinoma treated in the UK. Malignant melanoma may present via similar routes and will be discussed. The reader is referred to the Ano-uro-genital Mucosal Melanoma Full Guideline [1] for more detailed recommendations. The management of vulval sarcoma is outside of the scope of this guideline. For further information, including details of guideline development and GRADE of recommendations, please see BGCS website for details (https://www.bgcs.org.uk/professionals/guidelines-for-recent-publications/).

First-Line Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab Versus Chemotherapy for Advanced Endometrial Cancer: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial

PURPOSE Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (len + pembro) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy in previously treated advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (aEC) in the phase III Study 309/KEYNOTE-775. We report results from the phase III, randomized, open-label European Network of Gynaecological Oncological Trial-en9/LEAP-001 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03884101 ) that evaluated len + pembro versus chemotherapy in first-line aEC. METHODS Patients with stage III to IV or recurrent, radiographically apparent EC and no previous chemotherapy or disease progression ≥6 months after neo/adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to lenvatinib 20 mg once daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks or paclitaxel 175 mg/m 2 plus carboplatin AUC 6 mg/mL/min once every 3 weeks. Primary end points were PFS and OS, evaluated in the mismatch repair-proficient (pMMR) and all-comers populations. Noninferiority was assessed for OS at final analysis (FA) for len + pembro versus chemotherapy (multiplicity-adjusted, one-sided nominal alpha, .0159; null hypothesis–tested hazard ratio [HR], 1.1). RESULTS Eight hundred forty-two patients were randomly assigned (len + pembro, n = 420 [pMMR population, n = 320]; chemotherapy, n = 422 [pMMR population, n = 322]). At FA (data cutoff, October 2, 2023), median PFS (95% CI) in the pMMR population was 9.6 (8.2 to 11.9) versus 10.2 (8.4 to 10.5) months with len + pembro versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.82 to 1.21]) and among all-comers was 12.5 (10.3 to 15.1) versus 10.2 (8.4 to 10.4) months (HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.76 to 1.09]; descriptive analyses). Median OS (95% CI) in the pMMR population was 30.9 (25.4 to 37.7) versus 29.4 (26.2 to 35.4) months with len + pembro versus chemotherapy (HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.26]; noninferiority P = .246, not statistically significant per multiplicity control strategy) and among all-comers was 37.7 (32.2 to 43.6) versus 32.1 (27.2 to 35.7) months (HR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.12]). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 331/420 (79%) versus 274/411 (67%) treated patients. CONCLUSION First-line len + pembro did not meet prespecified statistical criteria for PFS or OS versus chemotherapy in pMMR aEC.

PAZOFOS: Phase Ib and Phase II Trial of Pazopanib +/- Fosbretabulin in Advanced Recurrent Ovarian Cancer

The first part of this study is to find the recommended dosages of a combination of two drugs: pazopanib and fosbretabulin, which will be given to female patients with relapsed ovarian cancer. The second part of the study involves comparing the recommended dose of pazopanib and fosbretabulin in combination against pazopanib alone in female patients with relapsed ovarian cancer to determine whether the combination is more beneficial that pazopanib on it's own.