Investigator
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Newly Diagnosed, Advanced Ovarian Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update
ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by clinicians and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 and 2 (online only) for more . PURPOSE To provide updated guidance regarding neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS) among patients with stage III-IV epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer (epithelial ovarian cancer [EOC]). METHODS A multidisciplinary Expert Panel convened and updated the systematic review. RESULTS Sixty-one studies form the evidence base. RECOMMENDATIONS Patients with suspected stage III-IV EOC should be evaluated by a gynecologic oncologist, with cancer antigen 125, computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis, and chest imaging included. All patients with EOC should be offered germline genetic and somatic testing at diagnosis. For patients with newly diagnosed advanced EOC who are fit for surgery and have a high likelihood of achieving complete cytoreduction, PCS is recommended. For patients fit for PCS but deemed unlikely to have complete cytoreduction, NACT is recommended. Patients with newly diagnosed advanced EOC and a high perioperative risk profile should receive NACT. Before NACT, patients should have histologic confirmation of invasive ovarian cancer. For NACT, a platinum-taxane doublet is recommended. Interval cytoreductive surgery (ICS) should be performed after ≤four cycles of NACT for patients with a response to chemotherapy or stable disease. For patients with stage III disease, good performance status, and adequate renal function treated with NACT, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy may be offered during ICS. After ICS, chemotherapy should continue to complete a six-cycle treatment plan with the optional addition of bevacizumab. Patients with EOC should be offered US Food and Drug Administration–approved maintenance treatments. Patients with progressive disease on NACT should have diagnosis reconfirmed via tissue biopsy. Patients without previous comprehensive genetic or molecular profiling should be offered testing. Treatment options include alternative chemotherapy regimens, clinical trials, and/or initiation of end-of-life care. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gynecologic-cancer-guidelines . This guideline has been endorsed by the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.
Top advances of the year: Ovarian cancer
AbstractAlthough cure rates remain low and effective screening strategies are elusive, the recent advances in systemic therapies over the past year highlighted in this review have prolonged survival for women with ovarian cancer. In 2022, the first antibody–drug conjugate for platinum‐resistant ovarian cancer received accelerated US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. Confirmatory studies examining the efficacy of mirvetuximab and other antibody–drug conjugates are underway. In the upfront setting, the first data establishing an overall survival benefit from poly(ADP‐ribose) polymerase inhibitor maintenance was demonstrated after a 7‐year follow‐up period. In contrast, long‐term updates from poly(ADP‐ribose) polymerase inhibitor trials in the noncurative setting reported survival detriments, and the FDA withdrew the respective indications. Several trials attempted to improve upon the standard of care for platinum‐sensitive ovarian carcinoma and those with rare ovarian cancer histologies (carcinosarcoma, clear cell carcinoma) but failed to demonstrate a clinically or statistically meaningful benefit. This leaves the open question of how to further optimize systemic therapy for advanced ovarian carcinoma to improve long‐term survival and cure rates.
A Phase II Study of Fulvestrant plus Abemaciclib in Hormone Receptor–Positive Advanced or Recurrent Endometrial Cancer
Abstract Purpose: Inhibition of the cyclin D–cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK)4/6–INK4–retinoblastoma pathway can overcome acquired or de novo treatment resistance to endocrine monotherapy. Responses to endocrine monotherapy in advanced endometrial cancer are suboptimal, perhaps due to genomic alterations that promote estrogen receptor–independent cyclin D1–CDK4/6 activation. We hypothesized that the addition of abemaciclib, a CDK4/6 kinase inhibitor, to antiestrogen therapy with fulvestrant would be an effective therapeutic strategy in patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. Patients and Methods: In this phase II study, patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer received 150 mg of abemaciclib orally twice daily with 500 mg of fulvestrant intramuscularly monthly with a 2-week loading dose. Eligibility included estrogen receptor or progesterone receptor expression ≥1% by IHC, measurable disease, ≤2 prior lines of chemotherapy, and ≤1 prior lines of hormonal therapy. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate by RECIST v1.1. Results: Twenty-seven patients initiated therapy, and 25 were evaluable for efficacy. Eleven patients achieved partial response; 10 responses (91%) were in copy number–low/no specific molecular profile tumors, 1 response (9%) was in a microsatellite instability–high tumor, and no responses were observed in copy number–high/TP53abnormal tumors. The objective response rate was 44% (90% confidence interval, 27.0%–62.1%). The median duration of response was 15.6 months. The median progression-free survival was 9.0 months (90% confidence interval, 1.8–20.4). The most common grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (26%) and anemia (19%); no new safety signals were identified. Conclusions: The combination of abemaciclib and fulvestrant has promising activity with durable responses in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer; a randomized trial is planned. See related commentary by Garg and Oza, p. 2073
Germline Pathogenic Variants and Genetic Counseling by Ancestry in Patients With Epithelial Ovarian Cancer
Mutations in ovarian cancer risk genes are found in women of diverse ancestries, supporting genetic testing for ALL
Overcoming Barriers to Tumor Genomic Profiling through Direct-to-Patient Outreach
Abstract Purpose: To overcome barriers to genomic testing for patients with rare cancers, we initiated a program to offer free clinical tumor genomic testing worldwide to patients with select rare cancer subtypes. Experimental Design: Patients were recruited through social media outreach and engagement with disease-specific advocacy groups, with a focus on patients with histiocytosis, germ cell tumors (GCT), and pediatric cancers. Tumors were analyzed using the MSK-IMPACT next-generation sequencing assay with the return of results to patients and their local physicians. Whole-exome recapture was performed for female patients with GCTs to define the genomic landscape of this rare cancer subtype. Results: A total of 333 patients were enrolled, and tumor tissue was received for 288 (86.4%), with 250 (86.8%) having tumor DNA of sufficient quality for MSK-IMPACT testing. Eighteen patients with histiocytosis have received genomically guided therapy to date, of whom 17 (94%) have had clinical benefit with a mean treatment duration of 21.7 months (range, 6–40+). Whole-exome sequencing of ovarian GCTs identified a subset with haploid genotypes, a phenotype rarely observed in other cancer types. Actionable genomic alterations were rare in ovarian GCT (28%); however, 2 patients with ovarian GCTs with squamous transformation had high tumor mutational burden, one of whom had a complete response to pembrolizumab. Conclusions: Direct-to-patient outreach can facilitate the assembly of cohorts of rare cancers of sufficient size to define their genomic landscape. By profiling tumors in a clinical laboratory, results could be reported to patients and their local physicians to guide treatment. See related commentary by Desai and Subbiah, p. 2339
Characteristics and survival of ovarian cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy but not undergoing interval debulking surgery
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS) confers similar outcomes as primary debulking surgery and chemotherapy. Little is known about patients who receive NACT but do not undergo debulking surgery. Our aim was to characterize these patients. We prospectively identified patients with newly diagnosed stage III/IV ovarian cancer treated with NACT from 7/1/15-12/1/17. Fisher exact and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to compare clinical characteristics by surgical status. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival outcomes. Log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model were applied to assess the relationship of covariates to outcome, and time-dependent covariates were applied to variables collected after diagnosis. Of 224 women who received NACT, 162 (72%) underwent IDS and 62 (28%) did not undergo surgery. The non-surgical group was older (p<0.001), had higher Charlson comorbidity index (CCI; p<0.001), lower albumin levels (p=0.007), lower Karnofsky performance scores (p<0.001), and were more likely to have dose reductions in NACT (p<0.001). Reasons for no surgery included poor response to NACT (39%), death (15%), comorbidities (24%), patient preference (16%), and loss to follow-up (6%). The no surgery group had significantly worse overall survival (OS) than the surgery group (hazard ratio=3.34; 95% confidence interval=1.66-6.72; p<0.001), after adjustment for age, CCI, and dose reductions. A significant proportion of women treated with NACT do not undergo IDS, and these women are older, frailer, and have worse OS. More studies are needed to find optimal therapies to maximize outcomes in this high-risk, elderly population.
Secondary Cytoreduction and Carboplatin Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Platinum-Sensitive Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: An MSK Team Ovary Phase II Study
PURPOSEThe purpose of this phase II study was to evaluate hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) with carboplatin for recurrent ovarian cancer during secondary cytoreductive surgery.MATERIALS AND METHODSPatients were intraoperatively randomly assigned to carboplatin HIPEC (800 mg/m2for 90 minutes) or no HIPEC, followed by five or six cycles of postoperative IV carboplatin-based chemotherapy, respectively. Based on a binomial single-stage pick-the-winner design, an arm was considered winner if ≥ 17 of 49 patients were without disease progression at 24 months post-surgery. Secondary objectives included postoperative toxicity and HIPEC pharmacokinetics.RESULTSOf 98 patients, 49 (50%) received HIPEC. Complete gross resection was achieved in 82% of the HIPEC patients and 94% of the standard-arm patients. Bowel resection was performed in 37% of patients in the HIPEC arm compared with 65% in the standard ( P = .008). There was no perioperative mortality and no difference in use of ostomies, length of stay, or postoperative toxicity. At 24 months, eight patients (16.3%; 1-sided 90% CI, 9.7 to 100) were without progression or death in the HIPEC arm and 12 (24.5%; 1-sided 90% CI, 16.5 to 100) in the standard arm. With a medium follow-up of 39.5 months, 82 patients progressed and 37 died. The median progression-free survival in the HIPEC and standard arms were 12.3 and 15.7 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.54; 95% CI, 1 to 2.37; P = .05). There was no significant difference in median overall survival (52.5 v 59.7 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.73 to 2.67; P = .31). These analyses were exploratory.CONCLUSIONHIPEC with carboplatin was well tolerated but did not result in superior clinical outcomes. This study does not support the use of HIPEC with carboplatin during secondary cytoreductive surgery for platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.
Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors in the Management of Ovarian Cancer: ASCO Guideline Rapid Recommendation Update
ASCO Rapid Recommendations Updates highlight revisions to select ASCO guideline recommendations as a response to the emergence of new and practice-changing data. The rapid updates are supported by an evidence review and follow the guideline development processes outlined in the ASCO Guideline Methodology Manual. The goal of these articles is to disseminate updated recommendations, in a timely manner, to better inform health practitioners and the public on the best available cancer care options.
Outcomes After Secondary Cytoreductive Surgery With or Without Carboplatin Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) Followed by Systemic Combination Chemotherapy for Recurrent Platinum-Sensitive Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, or Primary Peritoneal Cancer
The purpose of this study is to see if the investigators can improve the treatment of this type of cancer. They want to find out what effects, good and/or bad, giving heated chemotherapy into the belly, known as hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), has on the patient and this type of cancer. The goal of HIPEC is to expose any cancer left in the abdomen after surgery to high doses of chemotherapy. The chemotherapy is heated in the hope that this will make it easier for it to get into and kill the cancer cells. The drug used for HIPEC will be carboplatin, a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drug for use in ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer.