Advertisement


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

2022 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

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).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
ATHENA-MONO was a randomized Phase 3 trial looking at rucaparib versus placebo in frontline maintenance after responding to platinum-based therapy. Now you may say, "We already use that." There was another study, which I'm very proud of, called PRIMA that I was the last author on. That study is very helpful and gained FDA approval as you know in April 2020, but this adds confidence to that. In fact, the ASCO guidelines say that all patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer who respond to a platinum-based therapy should be considered for a PARP inhibitor. So hopefully if you're not doing it, you'll begin, that ATHENA-MONO will add confidence to it. Now, the medication that we studied was rucaparib. Rucaparib is a PARP inhibitor. It has four doses, 600, 500, 400, 300. The primary endpoint was in patients who had a molecular signature consistent with homologous recombination according to the FoundationOne CDx. When we randomized patients, and they're randomized 4:1, 528 patients in 24 countries in more than 200 sites, we reached our primary endpoint. Think of this. The hazard ratio versus placebo in the rucaparib patients, according to the HRD biomarker, which is about half of the patients based on the investigator, was 28.7 months. Think of that. Newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer, stage three and four that respond to platinum-based therapy now can live more than two years versus placebo where they live less than a year, 11.3 months. Based on a step-down analysis, we pivoted to an intent-to-treat analysis and it was still double: placebo, 9.2 months, the rucaparib arm, 20.2 months, hazard ratio of 0.52. Even in the biomarker negative subgroup there was still a statistically significant and clinically relevant impact in progression-free survival. Now that comes with a cost. About half of the patients required a dose reduction after an interruption, but the quality of life was maintained, and because of the dosing flexibility, again, 600, 500, 400, 300 twice daily, more than 70% of the patients could be maintained on 80% of the dose, which was 500 or 600. What's next? Next is ATHENA-COMBO. So in this ATHENA-MONO arm, the rucaparib was the experimental arm, but in ATHENA-COMBO, which is a fully powered independent but related study, now the rucaparib is the control arm. The experimental arm now randomized 1:1, 400 patients in each arm, will be rucaparib/nivolumab. You recall that JAVELIN 100 was negative adding avelumab to frontline chemotherapy. You'll recall that IMAGINE 50 was negative adding atezolizumab to bevacizumab, but now this is maintenance in PARP plus IO. So stay tuned. We hope to have the results to ATHENA-COMBO potentially next year against its event-driven analysis. It's my pleasure to share these data with you that were also published simultaneously in the Journal of Clinical Oncology on June 6, 2022.

Related Videos

Breast Cancer

Nancy Davidson, MD: In It for the Long Haul: Outcomes in Hormone Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer

Nancy Davidson, MD, of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, reviews results from four abstracts about the importance of long-term follow-up in studies of adjuvant endocrine therapy for hormone receptor–positive breast cancer. Because the natural history of hormone receptor–positive breast cancer is long, an effort is underway to improve selection of patients by clinical parameters or biomarkers, refine the endocrine therapy background, and administer more effective combinations of endocrine therapy with other agents.

Leukemia

Courtney D. DiNardo, MD, MSCE, and Stéphane de Botton, MD, PhD, on AML: New Data on IDH2-Mutant Alleles, Enasidenib, and Conventional Care

Courtney D. DiNardo, MD, MSCE, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, and Stéphane de Botton, MD, PhD, of Institut Gustave Roussy, discuss phase III findings from the IDHENTIFY trial, which showed that mutational burden and co-mutational profiles differed between patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia that exhibited IDH2-R140 and IDH2-R172 mutations. Enasidenib improved survival outcomes for patients with IDH2-R172 mutations: median overall survival and 1-year survival rates were approximately double those in the conventional care arm (Abstract 7005).

Breast Cancer

Ann H. Partridge, MD, MPH, and Véronique Diéras, MD, on the Future of Cytotoxic Therapy: Antibody-Drug Conjugates?

Ann H. Partridge, MD, MPH, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Véronique Diéras, MD, of the Centre Eugène Marquis, discuss the many challenges posed by next-generation antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs). They include side effects such as hematotoxicity, gastrointestinal toxicities, and interstitial lung disease; tumor targeting and payload release; drug resistance; and the urgent need to understand ADCs’ mechanisms of action to better sequence and combine drugs.

COVID-19

Jenny S. Guadamuz, PhD, on Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Telemedicine Use Among U.S. Patients With Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Jenny S. Guadamuz, PhD, of Flatiron Health, discusses the use of telemedicine services in community oncology clinics for patients initiating treatments for 21 common cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Black, uninsured, non-urban, and less affluent patients were less likely to use telemedicine services. Although telemedicine may expand access to specialty care, the proliferation of these services may widen cancer care disparities if equitable access to these services is not ensured, according to Dr. Guadamuz (Abstract 6511).

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