Olaparib and niraparib are poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) that have shown efficacy as maintenance treatment in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (PSROC). The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of maintenance PARPis in patients with PSROC, in a comprehensive cancer centre.
Methodology
We retrospectively evaluated patients with PSROC treated with maintenance olaparib (400mg bid, capsules or 300mg bid, tablets) and niraparib (300mg id), who received ≥2 previous lines of platinum-based chemotherapy (ChT) and had a partial or complete response to the last platinum-based regimen. Patients who received olaparib were BRCA 1/2 mutated (germline and/or somatic) and those who received niraparib were BRCA 1/2 wild-type. Study endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs).
Result(s)*
Between May 2016 and December 2020, 35 patients received maintenance PARPis (21 received olaparib and 14 received niraparib). Median age was 55 years (43-75), and all had ECOG ≤1. The majority had an ovary primary tumour location (74.3%) with serous histology (85.7%). Most patients (65.7%) received 2 prior platinum regimens; 22 (62.9%) had partial response and 13 (37.1%) had complete response to last platinum-based ChT. Median follow-up was 15.1 months (1.8-60.1), with 26 patients alive (61.9% olaparib and 92.8% niraparib patients alive). Median PFS was 7.0 months (95%CI 4.3-9.7) [median PFS for BRCA 1/2 mutated and BRCA 1/2 wild-type patients was 8.3 (95%CI 6.0-10.6) and 5.9 (95%CI 2.3-9.4) months, respectively]. There were no differences in PFS by number of prior platinum regimens, response to last platinum-based ChT or time-to-progression after penultimate platinum-based ChT (>6-12 vs >12 months). Median OS was not reached. Grade ≥3 AEs (anaemia, thrombocytopaenia, neutropaenia and nausea) occurred in 11 (31.4%) patients (17.1% with olaparib and 14.3% with niraparib). Treatment was suspended in 24 (68.6%) patients: 20 (57.2%) due to progression (34.3% with olaparib and 22.9% with niraparib) and 3 (8.6%) due to toxicity to niraparib (none due to olaparib). Eighteen (51.4%) patients required dose reduction due to AEs (28.6% with olaparib and 22.8% with niraparib).
Conclusion*
Maintenance PARPis in real-world setting is effective and has a safe toxicity profile.
e13017 Background: Activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin intracellular signaling pathway is one of the mechanisms of endocrine resistance in breast cancer. The addition of everolimus to exemestane improves progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with hormone receptor positive (HR+) advanced breast cancer (ABC) previously treated with nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors (NSAIs). The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of everolimus plus exemestane in patients with HR+ ABC. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated patients with HR+, HER2 negative ABC treated with everolimus/exemestane that recurred or progressed during/after treatment with NSAIs in a portuguese comprehensive cancer center. Study endpoints were PFS, overall survival (OS), overall response rate and adverse events. Results: Between April 2014 and September 2020, 63 female patients were treated with everolimus/exemestane. Median age was 59 years (36-79), and all had performance status ECOG ≤2. Seventeen (27.0%) patients had bone metastasis alone, 39 (61.9%) had bone and visceral metastasis, 25 (39.7%) had metastasis in 3 or more sites and 87.3% had previous hormone-sensitive disease. Before everolimus/exemestane, 61 (96.8%) patients were being treated with palliative endocrine therapy (alone or in combination with CDK4/6 inhibitors) or chemotherapy (ChT) and 2 (3.2%) patients were under adjuvant endocrine therapy. Median follow-up time was 12.8 months (1.4-74.6), with 39 patients alive. Overall response rate was 14.3% (1 complete response and 8 partial responses) and 45 patients had stable disease. Median PFS was 5.6 months (CI95% 2.4-8.8) and median OS was 25.4 months (CI95% 10.3-40.5). Subgroup analysis regarding PFS was statistically significant for previous treatment with CDK4/6 inhibitors (p = 0.026) and for site of metastasis (p = 0.025). In the subgroup of patients that previously underwent palliative ChT, median PFS was 4.0 months (CI95% 0.2-9.6) and median OS was 18.6 months (CI95% 8.2-29.0). For patients that did not receive previous palliative ChT, median PFS was 5.8 months (CI95% 3.8-7.8) and median OS was 43.5 months (CI95% 2.0-85.0). Grade 3 and 4 adverse events occurred in 21 (33.3%) patients, and were: nausea, anorexia, rash, headache, haematologic toxicity, hepatic cytolysis, hyperglycaemia, pneumonitis, oral mucositis and acute kidney failure with need for haemodialysis. Fifty-five (87.3%) patients suspended everolimus, 34 (54.0%) due to disease progression and 21 (33.3%) due to toxicity. Conclusions: Our results confirm the effectiveness and safety of everolimus/exemestane in real-world setting and support its use mainly before palliative ChT. Everolimus/exemestane in HR+ ABC is feasible in the clinic, with toxicity manageable under close surveillance.
Purpose: No consensus exists for the diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF). Current studies recommend stress echocardiography protocols, but single standard peak or timing measurements are limited towards the complexity of the disease. We show the contribution of a combined analysis of multiple myocardial velocity patterns and investigate their relative relevance for the characterization of HFPEF.
Methods: Velocity traces from 55 subjects were examined (69±6 years, 22 healthy, 19 HFPEF and 14 breathless subjects). Data came from tissue Doppler acquisitions at rest and exercise at the basal septum and lateral wall, and were temporally aligned to a common reference for comparison. Each phase of the cycle at each stage of the protocol was identified for analysis (figure). Unsupervised machine learning (multiple kernel learning) was used to characterize this population and automatically determine the relevance of each velocity pattern.
Results: The learning found a discrimination algorithm that performed well in agreement with diagnosis based on current guidelines (sens=78.9%, spec=86.3%, K=0.65). The importance given to early diastole at exercise was substantially higher, while the isovolumic contraction was the lowest contributor. The breathless subjects were associated to their closest subgroup.
Conclusion: The characterization of HFPEF is improved by a combined analysis of multiple velocity traces from stress echo studies using machine learning. The method additionally suggests features of interest to be used in clinical diagnosis.
UNSTRUCTURED Endometrial carcinoma (EC) is the most common gynaecologic malignancy in developed countries and the fourth most frequent in women worldwide. Incidence of EC has been increasing in the past several years, mainly due to increasing rates of metabolic syndrome. The cornerstone of treatment for EC is surgery. Clinicopathological features are currently used to help determine the individual risk of recurrence and the need for adjuvant treatment after surgery. Nonetheless, there is a significant inter-observer variability in assigning histologic subtype when using a morphological classification, revealing the need for a more unified approach. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) project identified four distinct prognostic EC subtypes based on genomic abnormalities. Surrogate assays including three immunohistochemical markers (p53, MSH6 and PMS2) and one molecular test (mutation analysis of the exonuclease domain of POLE), allowed the development and validation of a simplified molecular classifier that correlates with the TCGA classification, has prognostic value and can easily be used in clinical practice. This molecular classification categorizes EC in 4 subtypes: POLE mutated, mismatch repair deficient, p53 abnormal and no specific molecular profile. Applying this classification in clinical practice will help tailor adjuvant treatment decisions. The aim of this study is to retrospectively apply this novel molecular classification on a cohort of EC patients treated in a comprehensive cancer centre, to assess its applicability in clinical practice, to evaluate clinical outcomes by molecular subtypes and assess its prognostic value.
e17615 Background: Management of endometrial carcinoma (EC) relies on prognostic risk group classification to help to determine the individual risk of recurrence and the need for adjuvant treatment after surgery. A molecular classification with four distinct prognostic EC subtypes based on genomic abnormalities - DNA polymerase epsilon ( POLE) mutated ( POLEmut), mismatch repair deficient (MMRd), p53 abnormal (p53abn) and no specific molecular profile (NSMP) - has emerged, that raises the possibility of a more precise tailoring of adjuvant therapy. This study aimed to describe the clinicopathological and molecular characteristics of an EC Portuguese cohort, assess its potential impact in patient management and evaluate its prognostic value. Methods: Multicentre, retrospective cohort study of 230 patients with EC diagnosed between 2019 and 2022. Sample processing, clinicopathological, treatment and follow-up data was collected. Molecular classification was obtained by p53 and mismatch repair proteins immunohistochemistry, and POLE next-generation sequencing. Results: Overall, 230 patients from two institutions were included. Median age at diagnosis was 68 years. The most frequent histology was endometrioid (n=163; 70.9%) and most were low-grade (n=129, 56.1%).At diagnosis, disease was confined to the uterus in the majority of patients (FIGO stage I/II, n=153, 66.5%). Most had surgery upfront (n=196, 85.2%) and, of those, 120 (52.2%) received adjuvant treatment. 26 (11.3%) had metastatic disease. Median follow-up time was 15.4 months. Regarding molecular subgroups, the majority were classified as NSMP (n=87, 37.8%), followed by p53abn (n=73, 31.7%), MMRd (n=56, 24.3%), and POLEmut (n=14, 6.1%); 11 (4.8%) were multiple-classifier. Integration of these results led to a change in adjuvant treatment in 3 patients. Median disease-specific survival (DSS) was 108 months. Factors that significantly influenced survival included age (p=0.030), histological type (p<0.001), grade (p<0.001) and FIGO stage (p=0.006). Overall, 35 (15.2%) patients developed recurrences. Median recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 46.7 months. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that molecular alterations were significantly associated both with DSS and RFS (p=0.0092 and p=0.0139, respectively). Tumours with p53abn had the worst prognosis, and patients with POLEmut tumours experienced an excellent prognosis. Comparative measures (BIC, C-index, log-likelihood) showed that considering the molecular classification in establishing risk groups for adjuvant treatment had prognostic significance. Conclusions: The molecular classification has prognostic value and should be considered in adjuvant treatment decisions. It allows for a more personalised approach, helps to reduce under and overtreatment, and therefore reduce patient morbidity associated with treatment toxicities, and healthcare related costs.