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

A phase 1a/1b trial of CSF-1R inhibitor LY3022855 in combination with durvalumab or tremelimumab in patients with advanced solid tumors

Background LY3022855 is a recombinant, immunoglobulin, human monoclonal antibody targeting the colony-stimulating factor-1 receptor. This phase 1 trial determined the safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of LY3022855 in combination with durvalumab or tremelimumab in patients with advanced solid cancers who had received standard anti-cancer treatments. Methods In Part A (dose-escalation), patients received intravenous (IV) LY3022855 25/50/75/100 mg once weekly (QW) combined with durvalumab 750 mg once every two weeks (Q2W) IV or LY3022855 50 or 100 mg QW IV with tremelimumab 75/225/750 mg once every four weeks. In Part B (dose-expansion), patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or ovarian cancer (OC) received recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of LY3022855 from Part A and durvalumab 750 mg Q2W. Results Seventy-two patients were enrolled (median age 61 years): PartA = 33, Part B = 39. In Part A, maximum tolerated dose was not reached, and LY3022855 100 mg QW and durvalumab 750 mg Q2W was the RP2D. Four dose-limiting equivalent toxicities occurred in two patients from OC cohort. In Part A, maximum concentration, area under the concentration-time curve, and serum concentration showed dose-dependent increase over two cycles of therapy. Overall rates of complete response, partial response, and disease control were 1.4%, 2.8%, and 33.3%. Treatment-emergent anti-drug antibodies were observed in 21.2% of patients. Conclusions LY3022855 combined with durvalumab or tremelimumab in patients with advanced NSCLC or OC had limited clinical activity, was well tolerated. The RP2D was LY3022855 100 mg QW with durvalumab 750 mg Q2W

Antitumor activity and safety of the PARP inhibitor rucaparib in patients with high grade ovarian carcinoma and a germline or somatic BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation: integrated analysis of data from Study 10 and ARIEL2

Objective: An integrated analysis was undertaken to characterize the antitumor activity and safety profile of the oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor rucaparib in patients with relapsed high-grade ovarian carcinoma (HGOC). Methods: Eligible patients from Study 10 (NCT01482715) and ARIEL2 (NCT01891344) who received a starting dose of oral rucaparib 600 mg twice daily (BID) with or without food were included in these analyses. The integrated efficacy population included patients with HGOC and a deleterious germline or somatic BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation who received at least two prior chemotherapies and were sensitive, resistant, or refractory to platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS). The integrated safety population included patients with HGOC who received at least one dose of rucaparib 600 mg BID, irrespective of BRCA1/2 mutation status and prior treatments. Results: In the efficacy population (n = 106), ORR was 53.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.8–63.5); 8.5% and 45.3% of patients achieved complete and partial responses, respectively. Median DOR was 9.2 months (95% CI, 6.6–11.6). In the safety population (n = 377), the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were nausea, asthenia/fatigue, vomiting, and anemia/hemoglobin decreased. The most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent AE was anemia/hemoglobin decreased. Treatment-emergent AEs led to treatment interruption, dose reduction, and treatment discontinuation in 58.6%, 45.9%, and 9.8% of patients, respectively. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Conclusions: Rucaparib has antitumor activity in advanced BRCA1/2-mutated HGOC and a manageable safety profile

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

Comparison of non-myeloablative lymphodepleting preconditioning regimens in patients undergoing adoptive T cell therapy

Background Adoptive cell therapy with T cells genetically engineered to express a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR-T) or tumor-infiltrating T lymphocytes (TIL) demonstrates impressive clinical results in patients with cancer. Lymphodepleting preconditioning prior to cell infusion is an integral part of all adoptive T cell therapies. However, to date, there is no standardization and no data comparing different non-myeloablative (NMA) regimens.Methods In this study, we compared NMA therapies with different doses of cyclophosphamide or total body irradiation (TBI) in combination with fludarabine and evaluated bone marrow suppression and recovery, cytokine serum levels, clinical response and adverse events.Results We demonstrate that a cumulative dose of 120 mg/kg cyclophosphamide and 125 mg/m2 fludarabine (120Cy/125Flu) and 60Cy/125Flu preconditioning were equally efficient in achieving deep lymphopenia and neutropenia in patients with metastatic melanoma, whereas absolute lymphocyte counts (ALCs) and absolute neutrophil counts were significantly higher following 200 cGyTBI/75Flu-induced NMA. Thrombocytopenia was most profound in 120Cy/125Flu patients. 30Cy/75Flu-induced preconditioning in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia resulted in a minor ALC decrease, had no impact on platelet counts and did not yield deep neutropenia. Following cell infusion, 120Cy/125Flu patients with objective tumor response had significantly higher ALC and significant lower inflammatory indexes, such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR). Receiver-operating characteristics curve analysis 7 days after cell infusion was performed to determine the cut-offs, which distinguish between responding and non-responding patients in the 120Cy/125Flu cohort. NLR≤1.79 and PLR≤32.7 were associated with clinical response and overall survival. Cytokine serum levels did not associate with clinical response in patients with TIL. Patients in the 120Cy/125Flu cohort developed significantly more acute NMA-related adverse events, including thrombocytopenia, febrile neutropenia and cardiotoxicity, and stayed significantly longer in hospital compared with the 60Cy/125Flu and TBI/75Flu cohorts.Conclusions Bone marrow depletion and recovery were equally affected by 120Cy/125Flu and 60Cy/125Flu preconditioning; however, toxicity and consequently duration of hospitalization were significantly lower in the 60Cy/125Flu cohort. Patients in the 30Cy/75Flu and TBI/75Flu groups rarely developed NMA-induced adverse events; however, both regimens were not efficient in achieving deep bone marrow suppression. Among the regimens, 60Cy/125Flu preconditioning seems to achieve maximum effect with minimum toxicity

DataSheet_1_Efficacy and toxicity of Ipilimumab-Nivolumab combination therapy in elderly metastatic melanoma patients.pdf

IntroductionImmunotherapy has revolutionized metastatic Melanoma therapy. The most active regimen is combination therapy of Ipilimumab-Nivolumab (Ipi-Nivo) with response rates (RR) of ~60% and median overall survival (OS) of ~6 years. Immune-related adverse events (irAE) are common (~60% develop grade 3-4) and pose a challenge when treating frail patients. We sought to examine whether Ipi-Nivo therapy is feasible in elderly metastatic melanoma patients.MethodsElectronic records of patients treated at the Ella Lemelbaum Institute with Ipi-Nivo between the years 2017-2021 were screened for age. Elderly patients were defined as age 75 and older (group A) and were matched with records of patients age ResultsTwenty-six relevant patients age >75 (median 77) were identified and were matched to 34 younger patients (median age 57). No statistically significant differences were noted in terms of baseline parameters except for BRAF mutation status (group A 15%, group B 47%, p=0.008). Response rate in group A was 38% and is consistent with previously published data. Median PFS was the same for both groups (A = 5.5 months, B= 7.5 months, p=NS). Treatment was similarly tolerated: 35% of group A patients completed 4 cycles of therapy compared to 28% for group B (p=NS). Grade 2-4 irAE were the same (A=58%, B=66%, p=NS) and there was no difference in the need for hospitalization for G3-4 events between the groups. (A=63%, B=69%, p=NS). Further division into 4 age groups (>80 vs 75-79 in group A and 65-74 vs ConclusionIpilimumab-Nivolumab combination therapy in elderly metastatic Melanoma patients seems to be well tolerated and efficient in selected elderly patients based on performance status and comorbidities, just as in younger patients. This regimen seems to be a feasible treatment option for this age group.</p

The implications of a dermatopathologist’s report on melanoma diagnosis and treatment

An accurate and comprehensive histopathology report is essential for cutaneous melanoma management, providing critical information for accurate staging and risk estimation and determining the optimal surgical approach. In many institutions, a review of melanoma biopsy specimens by expert dermatopathologists is considered a necessary step. This study examined these reviews to determine the critical primary histopathology Breslow score in which a histopathology review would be most beneficial. Histopathology reports of patients referred to our institute between January 2011 and September 2019 were compared with our in-house review conducted by an expert dermatopathologist. The review focused on assessing fundamental histologic and clinical prognostic features. A total of 177 specimens underwent histopathology review. Significant changes in the Breslow index were identified in 103 cases (58.2%). Notably, in many of these cases (73.2%), the revised Breslow was higher than the initially reported score. Consequently, the T-stage was modified in 51 lesions (28.8%). Substantial discordance rates were observed in Tis (57%), T1b (59%), T3a (67%) and T4a (50%) classifications. The revised histopathology reports resulted in alterations to the surgical plan in 15.3% of the cases. These findings emphasize the importance of having all routine pathologies of pigmented lesions referred to a dedicated cancer center and reviewed by an experienced dermatopathologist. This recommendation is particularly crucial in instances where the histopathology review can potentially alter the diagnosis and treatment plan, such as in melanoma in situ and thinner melanomas measuring 0.6–2.2 mm in thickness. Our study highlights the significant impact of histopathology reviews in cutaneous melanoma cases. The observed changes in Breslow scores and subsequent modifications in T-stage classification underline the need for thorough evaluation by an expert dermatopathologist, especially in cases of melanoma in situ and thin melanomas. Incorporating such reviews into routine practice within dedicated cancer centers can improve diagnostic accuracy and guide appropriate treatment decisions, ultimately leading to better patient outcomes