Advertisement


Benoit You, MD, PhD, on Ovarian Cancer: Who Benefits From Bevacizumab in the First-Line Setting

2022 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Benoit You, MD, PhD, of Lyon University hospital (HCL, France) and GINECO group (France), discusses findings from the GOG-0218 trial of patients with ovarian cancer, which appears to confirm earlier data on the link between poor tumor chemosensitivity and benefit from concurrent plus maintenance bevacizumab. In Dr. You’s validation study, patients who derived the most progression-free and overall survival benefit from bevacizumab were those with high-risk disease (stage IV or incompletely resected stage III) associated with an unfavorable KELIM score (CA-125 kinetic elimination rate constant, calculable online) (Abstract 5553).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
I presented the results of a validation study done in collaboration with the U.S. GOG group about the patients with ovarian carcinoma who have the maximum benefit from bevacizumab. Bevacizumab has been approved for patients with ovarian carcinoma stage 3 and stage 4. However, there is still a big debate about what patients should actually be treated with bevacizumab, because two main large phase III trials had inconsistent outcomes about the characteristics of patients who had a maximum overall survival benefit, and there was no real biomarker of bevacizumab efficacy. So we assume that the tumor primary chemosensitivity, meaning the sensitivity of the tumor to the first cycle of chemotherapy assessed by the model CA-125 kinetic parameter KELIM, could be an interesting parameter. In an initial study with ICON7 trial, we found that among patients with high-risk disease, meaning stage 3 incompletely resected and stage 4 disease, only those who had unfavorable KELIM score, meaning poly-chemosensitive disease, had the benefit from bevacizumab. So, a validation was needed, and this is what we did with the U.S. GOG group on the trial, the GOG-0218 trial. KELIM was assessed by our team, and then we sent the KELIM score to the statistic team of the GOG group. We had very consistent outcomes. In patients with high-risk disease, only those who had unfavorable KELIM score, meaning poly-chemosensitive disease, had the benefit in overall survival by about 6 months, 29 to 35 months. And in patients with low-risk disease, those who had favorable KELIM, meaning highly chemosensitive disease, they had deleterious effect of bevacizumab on the overall survival by about 17 months. So, in conclusion, the two studies are now very consistent in terms of outcomes. We reconcile the data of the two trials. The survivor cures are very, very similar, and we consider that the tumor primary chemosensitivity is probably a biomarker of bevacizumab efficacy. So bevacizumab should be encouraged in patients with high-risk disease and poly-chemosensitive disease, but should be discouraged in patients with low-risk disease and highly chemosensitive disease. Just of note, KELIM can be calculated online for your patient. You will be requested to enter the dates of the first three cycles of chemotherapy, the value of CA-125, and the dates of CA-125. You press compute and you will have the KELIM score for your patients.

Related Videos

Gynecologic Cancers

Bradley J. Monk, MD, on Ovarian Cancer: New Data on Rucaparib Monotherapy vs Placebo as Maintenance Treatment

Bradley J. Monk, MD, of the University of Arizona College of Medicine and Creighton University School of Medicine, discusses phase III findings from the ATHENA–MONO (GOG-3020/ENGOT-ov45) trial. It showed that rucaparib as first-line maintenance treatment, following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, improved progression-free survival in patients with ovarian cancer, irrespective of homologous recombination deficiency status (Abstract LBA5500).

Lung Cancer
Immunotherapy

Gilberto de Lima Lopes, Jr, MD, MBA, and Karen L. Reckamp, MD, on NSCLC: Overall Survival Results With Ramucirumab Plus Pembrolizumab vs Standard of Care

Gilberto de Lima Lopes, Jr, MD, MBA, of the Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of Miami, and Karen L. Reckamp, MD, of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, discuss phase II findings from substudy S1800A of the Lung-MAP protocol. The data showed that ramucirumab and pembrolizumab improved overall survival compared with the standard of care for patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer who were previously treated with immunotherapy and platinum-based chemotherapy (Abstract 9004).

 

Skin Cancer

Georgina V. Long, MD, PhD, on Melanoma: New Data on Pembrolizumab, Dabrafenib, and Trametinib

Georgina V. Long, MD, PhD, of the Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, discusses findings from the NeoTrio trial on neoadjuvant pembrolizumab alone, in sequence with, or concurrent with dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with resectable BRAF-mutant stage III melanoma. The study may help clinicians determine the optimal combination of therapy (Abstract 9503).

Lung Cancer

Apar Kishor Ganti, MD, on SCLC: Comparing Quality of Life With Once- and Twice-Daily Thoracic Radiotherapy

Apar Kishor Ganti, MD, of the University of Nebraska Medical Center, discusses results from the CALGB 30610 study, which showed a similar clinical benefit for once- and twice-daily radiotherapy administered to patients with limited-stage small cell lung cancer. While both regimens were well tolerated, patients who received radiotherapy once daily had better quality-of-life scores at week 3 and slightly worse scores at week 12. Patients believed the once-daily regimen was more convenient (Abstract 8504).

Prostate Cancer
Genomics/Genetics

Neal D. Shore, MD, on Germline Genetic Testing and Its Impact on Prostate Cancer Clinical Decision-Making

Neal D. Shore, MD, of the Carolina Urologic Research Center, discusses his study findings, showing that germline genetic testing influenced care for patients with prostate cancer. Men whose genetic test was positive for a pathogenic germline variant received more recommendations for changes to follow-up and treatment, and for testing and counseling of relatives, than did patients with negative or uncertain test results (Abstract 10500).

 

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement