Angiogenic mRNA and microRNA Gene Expression Signature Predicts a Novel Subtype of Serous Ovarian Cancer

Ovarian cancer is the fifth leading cause of cancer death for women in the U.S. and the seventh most fatal worldwide. Although ovarian cancer is notable for its initial sensitivity to platinum-based therapies, the vast majority of patients eventually develop recurrent cancer and succumb to increasingly platinum-resistant disease. Modern, targeted cancer drugs intervene in cell signaling, and identifying key disease mechanisms and pathways would greatly advance our treatment abilities. In order to shed light on the molecular diversity of ovarian cancer, we performed comprehensive transcriptional profiling on 129 advanced stage, high grade serous ovarian cancers. We implemented a, re-sampling based version of the ISIS class discovery algorithm (rISIS: robust ISIS) and applied it to the entire set of ovarian cancer transcriptional profiles. rISIS identified a previously undescribed patient stratification, further supported by micro-RNA expression profiles, and gene set enrichment analysis found strong biological support for the stratification by extracellular matrix, cell adhesion, and angiogenesis genes. The corresponding “angiogenesis signature” was validated in ten published independent ovarian cancer gene expression datasets and is significantly associated with overall survival. The subtypes we have defined are of potential translational interest as they may be relevant for identifying patients who may benefit from the addition of anti-angiogenic therapies that are now being tested in clinical trials

Niraparib Maintenance Therapy in Patients With Recurrent Ovarian Cancer After a Partial Response to the Last Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA Trial

PURPOSEIn the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01847274), maintenance therapy with niraparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, prolonged progression-free survival in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer who had a response to their last platinum-based chemotherapy. The objective of the study was to assess the clinical benefit and patient-reported outcomes in patients who had a partial response (PR) and complete response (CR) to their last platinum-based therapy.PATIENTS AND METHODSA total of 553 patients were enrolled in the trial. Of 203 patients with a germline BRCA mutation (gBRCAmut), 99 had a PR and 104 had a CR to their last platinum-based therapy; of 350 patients without a confirmed gBRCAmut (non?gBRCAmut), 173 had a PR and 177 had a CR. Post hoc analyses were carried out to evaluate safety and the risk of progression in these patients according to gBRCAmut status and response to their last platinum-based therapy. Ovarian cancer?specific symptoms and quality of life were assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy?Ovarian Symptom Index.RESULTSProgression-free survival was improved in patients treated with niraparib compared with placebo in both the gBRCAmut cohort (PR: hazard ratio [HR], 0.24; 95% CI, 0.131 to 0.441; P < .0001; CR: HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.160 to 0.546; P < .0001) and the non?gBRCAmut cohort (PR: HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.230 to 0.532; P < .0001; CR: HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.383 to 0.868; P = .0082). The incidence of any-grade and grade 3 or greater adverse events was manageable. No meaningful differences were observed between niraparib and placebo in PR and CR subgroups with respect to patient-reported outcomes.CONCLUSIONPatients achieved clinical benefit from maintenance treatment with niraparib regardless of response to the last platinum-based therapy

Niraparib maintenance treatment improves time without symptoms or toxicity (TWiST) versus routine surveillance in recurrent ovarian cancer: a TWiST analysis of the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial

Purpose: this study estimated time without symptoms or toxicity (TWiST) with niraparib compared with routine surveillance (RS) in the maintenance treatment of patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. Patients and methods: mean progression-free survival (PFS) was estimated for niraparib and RS by fitting parametric survival distributions to Kaplan-Meier data for 553 patients with recurrent ovarian cancer who were enrolled in the phase III ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial. Patients were categorized according to the presence or absence of a germline BRCA mutation-gBRCAmut and non-gBRCAmut cohorts. Mean time with toxicity was estimated based on the area under the Kaplan-Meier curve for symptomatic grade 2 or greater fatigue, nausea, and vomiting adverse events (AEs). Time with toxicity was the number of days a patient experienced an AE post-random assignment and before disease progression. TWiST was estimated as the difference between mean PFS and time with toxicity. Uncertainty was explored using alternative PFS estimates and considering all symptomatic grade 2 or greater AEs. Results: in the gBRCAmut and non-gBRCAmut cohorts, niraparib treatment resulted in a mean PFS benefit of 3.23 years and 1.44 years, respectively, and a mean time with toxicity of 0.28 years and 0.10 years, respectively, compared with RS. Hence, niraparib treatment resulted in a mean TWiST benefit of 2.95 years and 1.34 years, respectively, compared with RS, which is equivalent to more than four-fold and two-fold increases in mean TWiST between niraparib and RS in the gBRCAmut and non-gBRCAmut cohorts, respectively. This TWiST benefit was consistent across all sensitivity analyses, including modeling PFS over 5-, 10-, and 15-year time horizons. Conclusion: patients who were treated with niraparib compared with RS experienced increased mean TWiST. Thus, patients who were treated with niraparib in the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial experienced more time without symptoms or symptomatic toxicities compared with control

Efficacy and safety of niraparib as maintenance treatment in older patients (≥ 70 years) with recurrent ovarian cancer: Results from the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial.

peer reviewed[en] OBJECTIVE: To analyze the safety and efficacy of niraparib in patients aged ≥70 years with recurrent ovarian cancer in the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial. METHODS: The trial enrolled 2 independent cohorts with histologically diagnosed recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer who responded to platinum rechallenge, on the basis of germline breast cancer susceptibility gene mutation (gBRCAmut) status. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive niraparib (300 mg) or placebo once daily until disease progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review. Adverse events (AEs) of special interest were based on the known safety profile of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. RESULTS: Patients aged ≥70 years in the gBRCAmut cohort receiving niraparib (n = 14) had not yet reached a median PFS compared with a median PFS of 3.7 months for the same age group in the placebo arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.09 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.01 to 0.73]). Non-gBRCAmut patients aged ≥70 years receiving niraparib (n = 47) had a median PFS of 11.3 months compared with 3.8 months in the placebo arm (HR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.18 to 0.71]). Median duration of follow-up in the niraparib arm was 17.3 months in patients ≥70 years and 17.2 months in patients <70 years. Frequency, severity of AEs, and dose reductions in the niraparib arm were similar in patients aged <70 and ≥ 70 years population. The most common grade ≥ 3 AEs in patients ≥70 years were hematologic: thrombocytopenia event (34.4%), anemia event (13.1%), and neutropenia event (16.4%). CONCLUSIONS: For patients ≥70 years of age receiving niraparib as maintenance treatment in the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial, PFS benefits and incidence of any grade or serious treatment-emergent AEs were comparable to results in the younger population. Use of niraparib should be considered in this population

Niraparib Maintenance Therapy in Platinum-Sensitive, Recurrent Ovarian Cancer

BACKGROUND Niraparib is an oral poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase (PARP) 1/2 inhibitor that has shown clinical activity in patients with ovarian cancer. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of niraparib versus placebo as maintenance treatment for patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, patients were categorized according to the presence or absence of a germline BRCA mutation (gBRCA cohort and non-gBRCA cohort) and the type of non-gBRCA mutation and were randomly assigned in a 2: 1 ratio to receive niraparib (300 mg) or placebo once daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS Of 553 enrolled patients, 203 were in the gBRCA cohort (with 138 assigned to niraparib and 65 to placebo), and 350 patients were in the non-gBRCA cohort (with 234 assigned to niraparib and 116 to placebo). Patients in the niraparib group had a significantly longer median duration of progression-free survival than did those in the placebo group, including 21.0 vs. 5.5 months in the gBRCA cohort (hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17 to 0.41), as compared with 12.9 months vs. 3.8 months in the non-gBRCA cohort for patients who had tumors with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.59) and 9.3 months vs. 3.9 months in the overall non-gBRCA cohort (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.61; P < 0.001 for all three comparisons). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events that were reported in the niraparib group were thrombocytopenia (in 33.8%), anemia (in 25.3%), and neutropenia (in 19.6%), which were managed with dose modifications. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer, the median duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer among those receiving niraparib than among those receiving placebo, regardless of the presence or absence of gBRCA mutations or HRD status, with moderate bone marrow toxicity. (Funded by Tesaro; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01847274.)Tesaro; Amgen; Genentech; Roche; AstraZeneca; Myriad Genetics; Merck; Gradalis; Cerulean; Vermillion; ImmunoGen; Pfizer; Bayer; Nu-Cana BioMed; INSYS Therapeutics; GlaxoSmithKline; Verastem; Mateon Therapeutics; Pharmaceutical Product Development; Clovis Oncology; Janssen/Johnson Johnson; Eli Lilly; Merck Sharp DohmeThis article was published on October 8, 2016; 6 Month Embargo.This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]

CA125 Immune Complexes in Ovarian Cancer Patients with Low CA125 Concentrations

BACKGROUND About 20% of women with ovarian cancer have low concentrations of serum cancer antigen 125 (CA125), and this important tumor marker cannot be used to monitor their disease. The measured concentration for mucin 1 (MUC1), or CA15–3, another tumor marker, can be lowered in breast and ovarian cancer patients when circulating immune complexes (CICs) containing antibodies bound to the free antigen are present. Because CA125 and MUC1 are related members of the mucin family, we sought to determine whether CICs might also exist for CA125 and interfere with its clinical assay. METHODS We developed an antigen capture–based assay to determine the presence of CICs for CA125. We spotted mouse antibodies to CA125 onto nanoparticle slides, incubated them with patient serum, and added Cy5-tagged goat antihuman IgG antibodies. Fluorescence intensities were read and normalized to the intensities for glutathione S-transferase A1 as a control. RESULTS Assay results for 23 ovarian cancer cases with high CA125 concentrations, 43 cases with low CA125 concentrations, and 19 controls (mean CA125 concentrations, 2706, 23, and 11 kilounits/L, respectively) revealed mean fluorescence intensities for CA125 CIC of 2.30, 2.72, and 1.99 intensity units (iu), respectively. A generalized linear model adjusted for batch and age showed higher CA125 CIC fluorescence intensities in low-CA125 cases than in high-CA125 cases (P = 0.03) and controls (P = 0.0005). Four ovarian cancer patients who had recurrent disease and always had low CA125 values had a mean CA125 CIC value of 3.06 iu (95% CI, 2.34–4.01 iu). CONCLUSIONS These preliminary results suggest the existence of CICs involving CA125, which may help explain some ovarian cancer cases with low CA125 concentrations

Association of Polymerase e–Mutated and Microsatellite-Instable Endometrial Cancers With Neoantigen Load, Number of Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes, and Expression of PD-1 and PD-L1

Importance Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy has shown benefit in various cancers, but their potential in endometrial cancer (EC) is unknown. Observations Prediction of neoantigen load was performed using sequencing data from the Cancer Genome Atlas data set. Evaluation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and PD-1 and PD-L1 expression was performed in 63 patients with EC referred to our institution. The predicted median (range) neoantigen load (predicted neoepitopes per sample) was proportional to the mutational load: highest in ultramutated polymerase e (POLE) tumors (8342 [628-20 440]), less in hypermutated MSI (541 [146-8063]; P < .001), and lowest in microsatellite-stable tumors (70.5 [7-1877]; P < .001). The POLE and MSI ECs exhibited higher numbers of CD3+ (44.5 vs 21.8; P = .001) and CD8+ (32.8 vs 13.5; P < .001) TILs compared with microsatellite-stable tumors. PD-1 was overexpressed in TILs (81% vs 28%; P < .001) and peritumoral lymphocytes (90% vs 28%; P < .001) of POLE and MSI tumors. PD-L1 expression was infrequently noted in tumor cells but was common in intraepithelial immune cells and more frequent in POLE and MSI tumors (39% vs 13%; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance Polymerase e–mutated and MSI ECs are associated with high neoantigen loads and number of TILs, which is counterbalanced by overexpression of PD-1 and PD-L1. Polymerase e–mutated and MSI EC tumors may be excellent candidates for PD-1–targeted immunotherapies

Profiles of Genomic Instability in High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer Predict Treatment Outcome

Purpose—High-grade serous cancer (HGSC) is the most common cancer of the ovary and is characterized by chromosomal instability. Defects in homologous recombination repair (HRR) are associated with genomic instability in HGSC, and are exploited by therapy targeting DNA repair. Defective HRR causes uniparental deletions and loss of heterozygosity (LOH). Our purpose is to profile LOH in HGSC and correlate our findings to clinical outcome, and compare HGSC and high-grade breast cancers. Experimental Design—We examined LOH and copy number changes using single nucleotide polymorphism array data from three HGSC cohorts and compared results to a cohort of high-grade breast cancers. The LOH profiles in HGSC were matched to chemotherapy resistance and progression-free survival (PFS). Results—LOH-based clustering divided HGSC into two clusters. The major group displayed extensive LOH and was further divided into two subgroups. The second group contained remarkably less LOH. BRCA1 promoter methylation was associated with the major group. LOH clusters were reproducible when validated in two independent HGSC datasets. LOH burden in the major cluster of HGSC was similar to triple-negative, and distinct from other high-grade breast cancers. Our analysis revealed an LOH cluster with lower treatment resistance and a significant correlation between LOH burden and PFS. Conclusions—Separating HGSC by LOH-based clustering produces remarkably stable subgroups in three different cohorts. Patients in the various LOH clusters differed with respect to chemotherapy resistance, and the extent of LOH correlated with PFS. LOH burden may indicate vulnerability to treatment targeting DNA repair, such as PARP1 inhibitors