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

Bladder Cancer
Immunotherapy

Thomas Powles, MD, PhD, and Jonathan E. Rosenberg, MD, on Urothelial Carcinoma: Long-Term Outcomes With Enfortumab Vedotin-ejfv vs Chemotherapy

Thomas Powles, MD, PhD, of Barts Health NHS Trust, Queen Mary University of London, and Jonathan E. Rosenberg, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, discuss the 24-month findings from the phase III EV-301 trial, which suggest that enfortumab vedotin-ejfv continues to show a significant and consistent survival advantage over standard chemotherapy in patients with previously treated advanced urothelial carcinoma (Abstract 4516).

Breast Cancer

Ann H. Partridge, MD, MPH, and Kevin Kalinsky, MD, on Breast Cancer: Latest Findings on Fulvestrant or Exemestane With or Without Ribociclib

Ann H. Partridge, MD, MPH, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Kevin Kalinsky, MD, of Winship Cancer Institute at Emory University, discuss phase II findings from the MAINTAIN trial, which showed a benefit in progression-free survival for patients with hormone receptor–positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer when they switched to endocrine therapy and received ribociclib after disease progression on another CDK4/6 inhibitor (Abstract LBA1004).

Pancreatic Cancer

Rainer Fietkau, MD, on Pancreatic Cancer: Initial Trial Results on Sequential Chemotherapy and Chemoradiotherapy

Rainer Fietkau, MD, of Germany’s University Hospital Erlangen, discusses phase III findings of the CONKO-007 trial, which examined the role of sequential chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy administered to patients with nonresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer following standard-of-care chemotherapy (Abstract 4008).

Breast Cancer

Tara B. Sanft, MD, on How Diet and Exercise May Affect Completion of Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer

Tara B. Sanft, MD, of Yale University, discusses the results of the LEANer study (Lifestyle, Exercise, and Nutrition Early After Diagnosis) in women with breast cancer. It showed that patients with newly diagnosed disease who were just starting chemotherapy could improve physical activity and diet quality. While both groups had high rates of treatment completion, women in the intervention who exercised at or above the recommended levels did better in terms of treatment completion, with fewer dose reductions and delays (Abstract 12007).

 

Supportive Care

Manali I. Patel, MD, MPH, on Equitable, Value-Based Care: The Effectiveness of Community Health Worker–Led Interventions

Manali I. Patel, MD, MPH, of Stanford University School of Medicine, discusses clinical trial findings on the best ways to integrate community-based interventions into cancer care delivery for low-income and minority populations. Such interventions may improve quality of life and patient activation (often defined as patients having the knowledge, skills, and confidence to manage their health), as well as reduce hospitalizations and the total costs of care (Abstract 6500).

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement