Overall survival in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer receiving olaparib maintenance monotherapy: an updated analysis from a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial

Background: In patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer, maintenance monotherapy with the PARP inhibitor olaparib significantly improves progression-free survival versus placebo. We assessed the effect of maintenance olaparib on overall survival in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer, including those with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations (BRCAm). / Methods: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial involving 82 sites across 16 countries, patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer who had received two or more courses of platinum-based chemotherapy and had responded to their latest regimen were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated sequence to receive oral maintenance olaparib (as capsules; 400 mg twice a day) or a matching placebo by an interactive voice response system. Patients were stratified by ancestry, time to progression on penultimate platinum, and response to most recent platinum. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment by the use of unique identifiers generated during randomisation. The primary endpoint of the trial was progression-free survival. In this updated analysis, we present data for overall survival, a secondary endpoint, from the third data analysis after more than 5 years’ follow-up (intention-to-treat population). We did the updated overall survival analysis, described in this Article at 77% data maturity, using a two-sided α of 0·95%. As the study was not powered to assess overall survival, this analysis should be regarded as descriptive and the p values are nominal. We analysed randomly assigned patients for overall survival and all patients who received at least one dose of treatment for safety. This trial is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00753545. / Findings: Between Aug 28, 2008, and Feb 9, 2010, 265 patients were randomly assigned to olaparib (n=136) or placebo (n=129). 136 patients had deleterious BRCAm. The data cutoff for this analysis was Sept 30, 2015. An overall survival advantage was seen with maintenance olaparib versus placebo in all patients (hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·55–0·96]; nominal p=0·025, which did not meet the required threshold for statistical significance [p<0·0095]; median overall survival was 29·8 months [95% CI 26·9–35·7] for those treated with olaparib vs 27·8 months [24·9–33·7] for those treated with placebo), and in patients with BRCAm (HR 0·62 [95% CI 0·41–0·94] nominal p=0·025; 34·9 months [95% CI 29·2–54·6] vs 30·2 months [23·1–40·7]). The overall survival data in patients with BRCA wild-type were HR 0·83 (95% CI 0·55–1·24, nominal p=0·37; 24·5 months [19·8–35·0] for those treated with olaparib vs 26·6 months [23·1–32·5] for those treated with placebo). 11 (15%) of 74 patients with BRCAm received maintenance olaparib for 5 years or more. Overall, common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the olaparib and placebo groups were fatigue (11 [8%] of 136 patients vs four [3%] of 128) and anaemia (eight [6%] vs one [1%]). 30 (22%) of 136 patients in the olaparib group and 11 (9%) of 128 patients in the placebo group reported serious adverse events. In patients treated for 2 years or more, adverse events in the olaparib and placebo groups included low-grade nausea (24 [75%] of 32 patients vs two [40%] of five), fatigue (18 [56%] of 32 vs two [40%] of five), vomiting (12 [38%] of 32 vs zero), and anaemia (eight [25%] of 32 vs one [20%] of five); generally, events were initially reported during the first 2 years of treatment. / Interpretation: Despite not reaching statistical significance, patients with BRCA-mutated platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer receiving olaparib maintenance monotherapy after platinum-based chemotherapy appeared to have longer overall survival, supporting the reported progression-free survival benefit. Clinically useful long-term exposure to olaparib was seen with no new safety signals. Taken together, these data support both the long-term clinical benefit and tolerability of maintenance olaparib in patients with BRCA-mutated platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer. / Funding: AstraZeneca

Quality of life during olaparib maintenance therapy in platinum-sensitive relapsed serous ovarian cancer

Maintenance monotherapy with the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib significantly prolongs progression-free survival over placebo in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed serous ovarian cancer, with greatest benefit seen in patients with a BRCA1/2 mutation (BRCAm). Preservation of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is important during maintenance therapy; we evaluated the effect of olaparib on HRQoL in this Phase II trial (NCT00753545, Study 19).status: publishe

Long-term efficacy, tolerability and overall survival in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent high-grade serous ovarian cancer treated with maintenance olaparib capsules following response to chemotherapy

BACKGROUND: In Study 19, maintenance monotherapy with olaparib significantly prolonged progression-free survival vs placebo in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent high-grade serous ovarian cancer. METHODS: Study 19 was a randomised, placebo-controlled, Phase II trial enrolling 265 patients who had received at least two platinum-based chemotherapy regimens and were in complete or partial response to their most recent regimen. Patients were randomised to olaparib (capsules; 400 mg bid) or placebo. We present long-term safety and final mature overall survival (OS; 79% maturity) data, from the last data cut-off (9 May 2016). RESULTS: Thirty-two patients (24%) received maintenance olaparib for over 2 years; 15 (11%) did so for over 6 years. No new tolerability signals were identified with long-term treatment and adverse events were generally low grade. The incidence of discontinuations due to adverse events was low (6%). An apparent OS advantage was observed with olaparib vs placebo (hazard ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.55‒0.95, P = 0.02138) irrespective of BRCA1/2 mutation status, although the predefined threshold for statistical significance was not met. CONCLUSIONS: Study 19 showed a favourable final OS result irrespective of BRCA1/2 mutation status and unprecedented long-term benefit with maintenance olaparib for a subset of platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer patients

Candidate biomarkers of PARP inhibitor sensitivity in ovarian cancer beyond the BRCA genes

BACKGROUND: Olaparib (Lynparza™) is a PARP inhibitor approved for advanced BRCA-mutated (BRCAm) ovarian cancer. PARP inhibitors may benefit patients whose tumours are dysfunctional in DNA repair mechanisms unrelated to BRCA1/2. We report exploratory analyses, including the long-term outcome of candidate biomarkers of sensitivity to olaparib in BRCA wild-type (BRCAwt) tumours. METHODS: Tumour samples from an olaparib maintenance monotherapy trial (Study 19, D0810C00019; NCT00753545) were analysed. Analyses included classification of mutations in genes involved in homologous recombination repair (HRR), BRCA1 promoter methylation status, measurement of BRCA1 protein and Myriad HRD score. RESULTS: Patients with BRCAm tumours gained most benefit from olaparib; a similar treatment benefit was also observed in 21/95 patients whose tumours were BRCAwt but had loss-of-function HRR mutations compared to patients with no detectable HRR mutations (58/95). A higher median Myriad MyChoice® HRD score was observed in BRCAm and BRCAwt tumours with BRCA1 methylation. Patients without BRCAm tumours derived benefit from olaparib treatment vs placebo although to a lesser extent than BRCAm patients.CONCLUSIONS: Ovarian cancer patients with tumours harbouring loss-of-function mutations in HRR genes other than BRCA1/2 may constitute a small, molecularly identifiable and clinically relevant population who derive treatment benefit from olaparib similar to patients with BRCAm

Olaparib efficacy in patients with germline BRCA-mutated, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: Subgroup analyses from the phase III OlympiAD trial

In the primary analysis of the phase III OlympiAD trial, olaparib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) vs chemotherapy treatment of physician&apos;s choice (TPC) in patients with germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm), HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC). We report subgroup analyses for the final analysis at a median OS follow-up of 18.9 months (olaparib) and 15.5 months (TPC). Patients (N = 302) with gBRCAm, HER2-negative mBC and &lt;= 2 previous lines of chemotherapy for mBC were randomized 2:1 to open-label olaparib (300 mg twice daily) or TPC. All subgroup analyses were prespecified except site of metastases. Investigator-assessed median PFS was 8.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.8-8.4; 176/205 events) for olaparib and 3.8 months (95% CI 2.8-4.2; 83/97 events) for TPC (hazard ratio 0.51, 95% CI 0.39-0.66). In subgroup analyses, median PFS hazard ratios (95% CI) favored olaparib: hormone receptor status (triple-negative: 0.47, 0.32-0.69; hormone receptor-positive: 0.52, 0.36-0.75); gBRCAm (BRCA1: 0.49, 0.35-0.71; BRCA2: 0.49, 0.33-0.74); site of metastases (visceral/CNS: 0.53, 0.40-0.71; non-visceral: 0.45, 0.23-0.98); prior chemotherapy for mBC (yes: 0.51, 0.38-0.70; no: 0.49, 0.30-0.82); prior platinum-based chemotherapy for BC (yes: 0.49, 0.30-0.83; no: 0.50, 0.37-0.69); progressive disease at randomization (yes: 0.48, 0.35-0.65; no: 0.61, 0.36-1.07). Investigator-assessed objective response rates were higher across all subgroups with olaparib (35-68%) vs TPC (5-40%). Global health status/health-related quality of life increased in all subgroups with olaparib vs decreased/no change with TPC. These data confirm the consistency of olaparib benefit across patient subgroups in OlympiAD.Y

OlympiAD extended follow-up for overall survival and safety: Olaparib versus chemotherapy treatment of physician?s choice in patients with a germline BRCA mutation and HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer

Background: In the Phase III OlympiAD study, olaparib significantly prolonged progression-free survival versus chemotherapy treatment of physician&apos;s choice (TPC) in pa-tients with germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC). In the final pre-specified analysis (64% maturity), median overall survival (OS) was 19.3 months for olaparib and 17.1 months for TPC (P Z 0.513). Post-hoc extended follow-up, 25.7 months longer than previously reported for OS, is reported. Patients and methods: Patients with gBRCAm, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 -negative mBC, who had received &lt;2 lines of chemotherapy for metastatic disease, were ran-domised 2:1 to olaparib (300 mg bid) or TPC. During extended follow-up, OS was analysed every 6 months using the stratified log-rank test (overall population) and Cox proportional hazards model (pre-specified subgroups). Results: In the overall population (302 patients; 76.8% maturity), median OS was 19.3 months for olaparib and 17.1 months for TPC (hazard ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.67-1.18); median follow-up was 18.9 and 15.5 months, respectively. Three-year survival was 27.9% for olaparib versus 21.2% for TPC. With olaparib, 8.8% of patients received study treatment for &gt;3 years versus none with TPC. In first-line mBC, median OS was longer for olaparib than TPC (22.6 versus 14.7 months; hazard ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.33-0.95) and 3 -year survival was 40.8% for olaparib versus 12.8% for TPC. No new serious adverse events related to olaparib were observed. Conclusions: OS was consistent with previous analyses from OlympiAD. These findings sup-port the possibility of meaningful long-term survival benefit with olaparib, particularly in first-line mBC.(c) 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.N

Modernizing clinical trial eligibility criteria: Recommendations of the ASCO-Friends of Cancer Research Laboratory Reference Ranges and Testing Intervals Work Group

PURPOSE: In clinical research, eligibility criteria promote patient safety and optimize the evidence generated from clinical trials. However, overly stringent eligibility criteria, including laboratory requirements, may limit enrollment, resulting in delayed trial completion and potentially limiting applicability of trial results to a general practice population. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Starting in 2018, a working group consisting of experts in direct patient care, the FDA, industry, and patient advocacy developed recommendations to guide the optimal use of laboratory reference ranges and testing intervals in clinical trial eligibility criteria and study procedures. The working group evaluated current eligibility criteria across different clinical trial phases and performed a literature review to evaluate the impact of and justification for laboratory test eligibility requirements and testing intervals in clinical trials. Recommendations were developed on the basis of the goals of promoting safety and optimizing the evidence generated, while also expanding eligibility and applicability, and minimizing excess burden of trial participation. RESULTS: In general, we found little variation over time and trial phase in laboratory test requirements, suggesting that these eligibility criteria are not refined according to ongoing clinical experience. We propose recommendations to optimize the use of laboratory tests when considering eligibility criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Tailoring the use of laboratory test requirements and testing intervals may increase the number and diversity of patients in clinical trials and provide clinical data that more closely represent the general practice populations