Management of advanced ovarian cancer in Spain: an expert Delphi consensus

Malaltia avançada; Consens; Càncer d'ovarisEnfermedad avanzada; Consenso; Cáncer de ovariosAdvanced disease; Consensus; Ovarian cancerBackground To determine the state of current practice and to reach a consensus on recommendations for the management of advanced ovarian cancer using a Delphi survey with a group of Spanish gynecologists and medical oncologists specially dedicated to gynecological tumors. Methods The questionnaire was developed by the byline authors. All questions but one were answered using a 9-item Likert-like scale with three types of answers: frequency, relevance and agreement. We performed two rounds between December 2018 and July 2019. A consensus was considered reached when at least 75% of the answers were located within three consecutive points of the Likert scale. Results In the first round, 32 oncologists and gynecologists were invited to participate, and 31 (96.9%) completed the online questionnaire. In the second round, 27 (87.1%) completed the online questionnaire. The results for the questions on first-line management of advanced disease, treatment of patients with recurrent disease for whom platinum might be the best option, and treatment of patients with recurrent disease for whom platinum might not be the best option are presented. Conclusions This survey shows a snapshot of current recommendations by this selected group of physicians. Although the majority of the agreements and recommendations are aligned with the recently published ESMO-ESGO consensus, there are some discrepancies that can be explained by differences in the interpretation of certain clinical trials, reimbursement or accessibility issues.This study was sponsored by TESARO without restriction, nowadays a GlaxoSmithkline company

SEOM clinical guideline in ovarian cancer (2020)

Despite remarkable advances in the knowledge of molecular biology and treatment, ovarian cancer remains the leading cause of death from gynecologic cancer. In the last decade, there have been important advances both in systemic and surgical treatment. However, there is no doubt that the incorporation of PARP inhibitors as maintenance after the response to platinum-based chemotherapy, first in recurrent disease and recently also in first line, will change the natural history of the disease. The objective of this guide is to summarize the current evidence for the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of ovarian cancer, and to provide evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice

Prognostic Role of Neutrophil, Monocyte and Platelet to Lymphocyte Ratios in Advanced Ovarian Cancer According to the Time of Debulking Surgery

Despite a multimodal radical treatment, mortality of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC) remains high. Host-related factors, such as systemic inflammatory response and its interplay with the immune system, remain underexplored. We hypothesized that the prognostic impact of this response could vary between patients undergoing primary debulking surgery (PDS) and those undergoing interval debulking surgery (IDS). Therefore, we evaluated the outcomes of two surgical groups of newly diagnosed AEOC patients according to the neutrophil, monocyte and platelet to lymphocyte ratios (NLR, MLR, PLR), taking median ratio values as cutoffs. In the PDS group (n = 61), low NLR and PLR subgroups showed significantly better overall survival (not reached (NR) vs. 72.7 months, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 40.9-95.2, p = 0.019; and NR vs. 56.1 months, 95% CI: 40.9-95.2, p = 0.004, respectively) than those with high values. Similar results were observed in progression free survival. NLR and PLR-high values resulted in negative prognostic factors, adjusting for residual disease, BRCA1/2 status and stage (HR 2.48, 95% CI: 1.03-5.99, p = 0.043, and HR 2.91, 95% CI: 1.11-7.64, p = 0.03, respectively). In the IDS group (n = 85), ratios were not significant prognostic factors. We conclude that NLR and PLR may have prognostic value in the PDS setting, but none in IDS, suggesting that time of surgery can modulate the prognostic impact of baseline complete blood count (CBC)

Multicenter Real-World Data of Subsequent Chemotherapy after Progression to PARP Inhibitors in a Maintenance Relapse Setting

Simple Summary Since the irruption of PARPi in the therapeutic armamentarium for ovarian cancer, concerns regarding post-progression treatment outcomes have emerged, owing to known crossed-resistance mechanisms between PARPi and platinum. In this multicentric retrospective series of ovarian cancer patients, we evaluated chemotherapy results upon progression to maintenance with PARPi in the relapsed setting. We further selected the population of platinum-sensitive patients (according to the classical definition) retreated with platinum (n = 74). In this platinum-sensitive population, overall response rate and survival outcomes of platinum rechallenge after PARPi were similar to historical series of the prePARPi era. However, within this group, analysis according to BRCA status showed that BRCA mutant patients (n = 35) presented higher rates of progression and worse survival outcomes under subsequent platinum than BRCA wild type patients (n = 39), with statistically significant differences. This is the largest real-world data series of ovarian cancer patients treated with platinum rechallenge in the post-PARPi scenario. Background: Despite impressive progression-free survival (PFS) results from PARP inhibitors (PARPi) in ovarian cancer, concerns about their effect on post-progression treatment outcomes have recently arisen, particularly when administered in the relapsed setting. Overlapping mechanisms of resistance between PARPi and platinum have been described, and optimal therapies upon progression to PARPi are unknown. We communicate real-world data (RWD) on outcomes of subsequent chemotherapy upon progression to PARPi used as maintenance in ovarian cancer relapses, particularly focusing on platinum rechallenge, according to BRCA status. Methods: Data from high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer patients who received subsequent chemotherapy after progression to maintenance PARPi in the relapsed setting, in 16 Catalan hospitals between August 2016 and April 2021, and who were followed-up until July 2021, were included. Endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), and PFS and overall survival (OS) measured from the subsequent chemotherapy starting date. Results: 111 patients were included [46 (41.4%) presented pathological BRCA1/2 mutations, 8 (7.5%) in other homologous recombination-related genes]. Sixty-four patients (57.7%) had received two prior chemotherapy lines, including the one immediately prior to PARPi. PARPi were niraparib (n = 60, 54.1%), olaparib (n = 49, 44.1%), and rucaparib (n = 2, 1.8%). A total of 81 patients remained platinum-sensitive (PS population) after progression to PARPi (when progression-free interval [PFI] was >6 months after the last cycle of prior platinum) [median PFI 12.0 months (interquartile range, IQR, 8.8-17.1)]. Of those, 74 were treated with subsequent platinum regimens, with the following results: ORR of 41.9%, median PFS (mPFS) of 6.6 months (95% CI 6-9.2), and median OS (mOS) of 20.6 months (95% CI 13.6-28.9). Analysis of these 74 patients according to BRCA status showed that PFIs for BRCA mutant and non BRCA-mutant patients were 13.6 [IQR11.2-22.2] and 10.3 [IQR 7.4-14.9] months, respectively (p = 0.010); ORR were 40.0% versus 43.6%, respectively; Rates of progression (as best response) to subsequent platinum were 45.7% versus 17.9%, respectively (p = 0.004); mPFS and mOS were 3.5 (95% CI 2.5-8.6) versus 7.5 months (95% CI 6.5-10.1, p = 0.03), and 16.4 (95% CI 9.3-27.5) versus 24.2 months (95% CI 17.2-NR, p = 0.036), respectively. Conclusion: This is the largest series of real-world data on ovarian cancer patients retreated with platinum in the post-PARPi scenario, separately analyzing BRCA mutant and non-mutant patients, to our knowledge. In our platinum-sensitive population, rechallenge with platinum after progression upon PARPi in the 3rd or later lines for ovarian cancer relapses shows relevant ORR and similar PFS outcomes to historical series of the prePARPi era. However, BRCA mutant patients presented significantly higher rates of progression under subsequent platinum and worse survival outcomes associated with subsequent platinum than non-BRCA-mutant patients

ICO-ICS Praxis para el tratamiento médico del cáncer epitelial de ovario

Tractament mèdic; Càncer epitelial d'ovari; CirurgiaTratamiento médico; Cáncer epitelial de ovario; CirugíaMedical treatment; Ovarian epithelial cancer; SurgeryEl càncer epitelial d'ovari (CEO) és la segona neoplàsia ginecològica més freqüent als països desenvolupats i constitueix la principal causa de mort per càncer ginecològic i la quarta causa de mort per càncer en dones a Europa i als Estats Units. Els objectius d'aquesta guia són -Desenvolupar, difondre, implementar i avaluar resultats de la ICO-ICSPraxi de CEO epitelial. -Disminuir la variabilitat terapèutica entre les pacients tractades als diversos centres d’aquesta institució. -Implementar els resultats de la terapèutica en les pacients amb CEO epitelial tractades d’acord amb les recomanacions d’aquesta guia

Quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease or toxicity and quality-adjusted progression-free survival with niraparib maintenance in first-line ovarian cancer in the PRIMA trial

Background: The PRIMA phase 3 trial showed niraparib significantly prolongs median progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (OC) responsive to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, including those who had tumors with homologous recombination deficiency (HRd). This analysis of PRIMA examined the quality-adjusted PFS (QA-PFS) and quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease or toxicity (Q-TWiST) of patients on maintenance niraparib versus placebo. Methods: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive once-daily maintenance niraparib (n = 487) or placebo (n = 246). QA-PFS was defined as the PFS of patients adjusted for their health-related quality of life (HRQoL) prior to disease progression, measured using European Quality of Life Five-Dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaire index scores from the PRIMA trial. Q-TWiST was calculated by combining data on PFS, duration of symptomatic grade ⩾2 adverse events (fatigue or asthenia, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and abdominal bloating) prior to disease progression, and EQ-5D index scores. Analyses used data collected up to the last date of PFS assessment (May 17, 2019). Results: The restricted mean QA-PFS was significantly longer with niraparib versus placebo in the HRd (n = 373) and overall intention-to-treat (ITT; n = 733) populations (mean gains of 6.5 [95% confidence interval; CI, 3.9–8.9] and 4.1 [95% CI, 2.2–5.8] months, respectively). There were also significant improvements in restricted mean Q-TWiST for niraparib versus placebo (mean gains of 5.9 [95% CI, 3.5–8.6] and 3.5 [95% CI, 1.7–5.6] months, respectively) in the HRd and ITT populations. Conclusions: In patients with advanced OC, first-line niraparib maintenance was associated with significant gains in QA-PFS and Q-TWiST versus placebo. These findings demonstrate that niraparib maintenance treatment is associated with a PFS improvement and that treatment benefit is maintained even when HRQoL and/or toxicity data are combined with PFS in a single measure. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02655016; trial registration date: January 13, 2016 Plain language summary: Background: In a large clinical trial called PRIMA, patients with advanced cancer of the ovary (ovarian cancer) were given either niraparib (a type of cancer medicine) or placebo (a pill containing no medicine/active substances) after having chemotherapy (another type of cancer medicine). Taking niraparib after chemotherapy is called maintenance therapy and aims to give patients more time before their cancer returns or gets worse than if they were not given any further treatment. In the PRIMA trial, patients who took niraparib did have more time before their cancer progressed than if they took placebo. However, it is important to consider patients’ quality of life, which can be made worse by cancer symptoms and/or side effects of treatment. Here, we assessed the overall benefit of niraparib for patients in PRIMA. Methods: Both the length of time before disease progression (or survival time) and quality of life were considered using two different analyses: ● The first analysis was called quality-adjusted PFS (QA-PFS) and looked at how long patients survived with good quality of life. ● The second analysis was called quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease or toxicity (Q-TWiST) and looked at how long patients survived without cancer symptoms or treatment side effects. Results: The PRIMA trial included 733 patients; 487 took niraparib and 246 took placebo. Around half of the patients in both groups had a type of ovarian cancer that responds particularly well to drugs like niraparib – they are known as homologous recombination deficiency (HRd) patients. ● When information on quality of life (collected from patient questionnaires) and survival was combined in the QA-PFS analysis, HRd patients who took niraparib had approximately 6.5 months longer with a good quality of life before disease progression than those who took placebo. In the overall group of patients (including HRd patients and non-HRd patients), those who took niraparib had approximately 4 months longer than with placebo. ● Using the second analysis (Q-TWiST) to combine information on survival with cancer symptoms and treatment side effects, the HRd patients taking niraparib had approximately 6 months longer without cancer symptoms or treatment side effects (such as nausea or vomiting) than patients taking placebo. In the overall group of patients, those taking niraparib had approximately 3.5 months longer without these cancer symptoms/side effects than patients receiving placebo. Conclusions: These results show that the survival benefits of niraparib treatment remain when accounting for patients’ quality of life. These benefits were seen not only in HRd patients who are known to respond better to niraparib, but in the overall group of patients who took niraparib.publishedVersionPeer reviewe

Multicenter real-world data of subsequent chemotherapy after progression to PARP inhibitors in a maintenance relapse setting

Despite impressive progression-free survival (PFS) results from PARP inhibitors (PARPi) in ovarian cancer, concerns about their effect on post-progression treatment outcomes have recently arisen, particularly when administered in the relapsed setting. Overlapping mechanisms of resistance between PARPi and platinum have been described, and optimal therapies upon progression to PARPi are unknown. We communicate real-world data (RWD) on outcomes of subsequent chemotherapy upon progression to PARPi used as maintenance in ovarian cancer relapses, particularly focusing on platinum rechallenge, according to BRCA status. Methods: Data from high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer patients who received subsequent chemotherapy after progression to maintenance PARPi in the relapsed setting, in 16 Catalan hospitals between August 2016 and April 2021, and who were followed-up until July 2021, were included. Endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), and PFS and overall survival (OS) measured from the subsequent chemotherapy starting date. Results: 111 patients were included [46 (41.4%) presented pathological BRCA1/2 mutations, 8 (7.5%) in other homologous recombination-related genes]. Sixty-four patients (57.7%) had received two prior chemotherapy lines, including the one immediately prior to PARPi. PARPi were niraparib (n = 60, 54.1%), olaparib (n = 49, 44.1%), and rucaparib (n = 2, 1.8%). A total of 81 patients remained platinum-sensitive (PS population) after progression to PARPi (when progressionfree interval [PFI] was >6 months after the last cycle of prior platinum) [median PFI 12.0 months (interquartile range, IQR, 8.8–17.1)]. Of those, 74 were treated with subsequent platinum regimens, with the following results: ORR of 41.9%, median PFS (mPFS) of 6.6 months (95% CI 6–9.2), and median OS (mOS) of 20.6 months (95% CI 13.6–28.9). Analysis of these 74 patients according to BRCA status showed that PFIs for BRCA mutant and non BRCA-mutant patients were 13.6 [IQR11.2–22.2] and 10.3 [IQR 7.4–14.9] months, respectively (p = 0.010); ORR were 40.0% versus 43.6%, respectively; Rates of progression (as best response) to subsequent platinum were 45.7% versus 17.9%, respectively (p = 0.004); mPFS and mOS were 3.5 (95% CI 2.5–8.6) versus 7.5 months (95% CI 6.5–10.1, p = 0.03), and 16.4 (95% CI 9.3–27.5) versus 24.2 months (95% CI 17.2–NR, p = 0.036), respectively. Conclusion: this is the largest series of real-world data on ovarian cancer patients retreated with platinum in the post-PARPi scenario, separately analyzing BRCA mutant and non-mutant patients, to our knowledge. In our platinum-sensitive population, rechallenge with platinum after progression upon PARPi in the 3rd or later lines for ovarian cancer relapses shows relevant ORR and similar PFS outcomes to historical series of the prePARPi era. However, BRCA mutant patients presented significantly higher rates of progression under subsequent platinum and worse survival outcomes associated with subsequent platinum than non-BRCA-mutant patients

Evaluation of Prognostic and Predictive Significance of Circulating MicroRNAs in Ovarian Cancer Patients

Ovarian cancer patients are recognized with poor prognosis. This study aimed to identify microRNAs in plasma for predicting response to treatment and outcome. We have investigated microRNAs in plasma from ovarian cancer patients enrolled in a large multicenter study (ICON7), investigating the effect of adding bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy in patients diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer. Patients with different histology, grade, and FIGO stages were included (n=207) in this study. Screening of 754 unique microRNAs was performed in the discovery phase (n=91) using TaqMan Low Density Arrays. The results were validated using single assays and RT-qPCR. Low levels of miR-200b, miR-1274A (tRNALys5), and miR-141 were significantly associated with better survival, confirmed with log-rank test in the validation set. The level of miR-1274A (tRNALys5) correlated with outcome was especially pronounced in the high-grade serous tumors. Interestingly, low level of miR-200c was associated with 5-month prolongation of PFS when treated with bevacizumab compared to standard chemotherapy. We found prognostic significance of miR-200b, miR-141, and miR-1274A (tRNALys5) in all histological types, where miR-1274A (tRNALys5) may be a specific marker in high-grade serous tumors. The level of miR-200c may be predictive of effect of treatment with bevacizumab. However, this needs further validation

Gynaecological malignancies after breast cancer diagnosis: A population-based study

Background: Breast cancer (BC) is one of the most prevalent malignancies. BC survivors have higher risk of second primary cancers than the general population. There is an increased interest in BC survivor management, including the prevention of these second cancers. The aim of this study was to assess the risk of gynaecological malignancy (GM) as second neoplasm among BC patients in our population. Methods: Patients with invasive BC diagnosed from 1980 to 2014 included in the Girona Cancer Registry were included. The incidence of second GM in these patients was compared to those in the general population. Second primary cancer was stated as a tumour diagnosed after 2 months from the BC diagnosis. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) and absolute excess of risk (AER) were calculated. Results: 9,717 patients were diagnosed with invasive BC during this period, with a median age at diagnosis of 61 years, and a median follow-up of 7.9 years. 117 of them developed a second GM. By tumour type, the only statistically significant higher SIR was observed for corpus uteri cancer (SIR:2.28 95% CI 1.82-2.83; AER:6.43 95% CI 4.13-9.14). After reviewing the histology of the corpus uteri cancer cases, we found that 71.4% were type I (endometrioid adenocarcinoma), 15.5% type II (serous adenocarcinomas and clear cell carcinomas), 10.7% carcinosarcomas, 2.4% sarcomas and there were no unspecified malignant neoplasms. Conclusion: BC survivors have an increased risk of corpus uteri cancer, with an increase in unfavourable histologies compared to the general population. Lifelong primary and secondary prevention interventions should be recommended for these patients

Evaluation of prognostic and predictive significance of circulating MicroRNAs in ovarian cancer patients

Ovarian cancer patients are recognized with poor prognosis. This study aimed to identify microRNAs in plasma for predicting response to treatment and outcome. We have investigated microRNAs in plasma from ovarian cancer patients enrolled in a large multicenter study (ICON7), investigating the effect of adding bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy in patients diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer. Patients with different histology, grade, and FIGO stages were included (n = 207) in this study. Screening of 754 unique microRNAs was performed in the discovery phase (n = 91) using TaqMan Low Density Arrays. The results were validated using single assays and RT-qPCR. Low levels of miR-200b, miR-1274A (tRNALys5), and miR-141 were significantly associated with better survival, confirmed with log-rank test in the validation set. The level of miR-1274A (tRNALys5) correlated with outcome was especially pronounced in the high-grade serous tumors. Interestingly, low level of miR-200c was associated with 5-month prolongation of PFS when treated with bevacizumab compared to standard chemotherapy. We found prognostic significance of miR-200b, miR-141, and miR-1274A (tRNALys5) in all histological types, where miR-1274A (tRNALys5) may be a specific marker in high-grade serous tumors. The level of miR-200c may be predictive of effect of treatment with bevacizumab. However, this needs further validatio