TY - JOUR
T1 - Efficacy of niraparib by time of surgery and postoperative residual disease status
T2 - A post hoc analysis of patients in the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study
AU - O'Cearbhaill, Roisin E.
AU - Pérez-Fidalgo, Jose Alejandro
AU - Monk, Bradley J.
AU - Tusquets, Ignacio
AU - McCormick, Colleen
AU - Fuentes, Jose
AU - Moore, Richard G.
AU - Vulsteke, Christof
AU - Shahin, Mark S.
AU - Forget, Frédéric
AU - Bradley, William H.
AU - Hietanen, Sakari
AU - O'Malley, David M.
AU - Dørum, Anne
AU - Slomovitz, Brian M.
AU - Baumann, Klaus
AU - Selle, Frédéric
AU - Calvert, Paula M.
AU - Artioli, Grazia
AU - Levy, Tally
AU - Kumar, Aalok
AU - Malinowska, Izabela A.
AU - Li, Yong
AU - Gupta, Divya
AU - González-Martín, Antonio
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors
PY - 2022/7
Y1 - 2022/7
N2 - Objective: To evaluate the association between surgical timing and postoperative residual disease status on the efficacy of niraparib first-line maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer at high risk of recurrence. Methods: Post hoc analysis of the phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 (NCT02655016) study of niraparib in patients with newly diagnosed primary advanced ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer with a complete/partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Progression-free survival (PFS) was assessed by surgical status (primary debulking surgery [PDS] vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy/interval debulking surgery [NACT/IDS]) and postoperative residual disease status (no visible residual disease [NVRD] vs visible residual disease [VRD]) in the intent-to-treat population. Results: In PRIMA (N = 733), 236 (32.2%) patients underwent PDS, and 481 (65.6%) received NACT/IDS before enrollment. Median PFS (niraparib vs placebo) and hazard ratios (95% CI) for progression were similar in PDS (13.7 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.67 [0.47–0.96]) and NACT/IDS (14.2 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.57 [0.44–0.73]) subgroups. In patients who received NACT/IDS and had NVRD (n = 304), the hazard ratio (95% CI) for progression was 0.65 (0.46–0.91). In patients with VRD following PDS (n = 183) or NACT/IDS (n = 149), the hazard ratios (95% CI) for progression were 0.58 (0.39–0.86) and 0.41 (0.27–0.62), respectively. PFS was not evaluable for patients with PDS and NVRD because of sample size (n = 37). Conclusions: In this post hoc analysis, niraparib efficacy was similar across PDS and NACT/IDS subgroups. Patients who had NACT/IDS and VRD had the highest reduction in the risk of progression with niraparib maintenance.
AB - Objective: To evaluate the association between surgical timing and postoperative residual disease status on the efficacy of niraparib first-line maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer at high risk of recurrence. Methods: Post hoc analysis of the phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 (NCT02655016) study of niraparib in patients with newly diagnosed primary advanced ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer with a complete/partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Progression-free survival (PFS) was assessed by surgical status (primary debulking surgery [PDS] vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy/interval debulking surgery [NACT/IDS]) and postoperative residual disease status (no visible residual disease [NVRD] vs visible residual disease [VRD]) in the intent-to-treat population. Results: In PRIMA (N = 733), 236 (32.2%) patients underwent PDS, and 481 (65.6%) received NACT/IDS before enrollment. Median PFS (niraparib vs placebo) and hazard ratios (95% CI) for progression were similar in PDS (13.7 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.67 [0.47–0.96]) and NACT/IDS (14.2 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.57 [0.44–0.73]) subgroups. In patients who received NACT/IDS and had NVRD (n = 304), the hazard ratio (95% CI) for progression was 0.65 (0.46–0.91). In patients with VRD following PDS (n = 183) or NACT/IDS (n = 149), the hazard ratios (95% CI) for progression were 0.58 (0.39–0.86) and 0.41 (0.27–0.62), respectively. PFS was not evaluable for patients with PDS and NVRD because of sample size (n = 37). Conclusions: In this post hoc analysis, niraparib efficacy was similar across PDS and NACT/IDS subgroups. Patients who had NACT/IDS and VRD had the highest reduction in the risk of progression with niraparib maintenance.
KW - Maintenance therapy
KW - Niraparib
KW - Ovarian cancer
KW - PARP inhibitor
KW - Surgery
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85129973668&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85129973668&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ygyno.2022.04.012
DO - 10.1016/j.ygyno.2022.04.012
M3 - Article
C2 - 35550709
AN - SCOPUS:85129973668
SN - 0090-8258
VL - 166
SP - 36
EP - 43
JO - Gynecologic oncology
JF - Gynecologic oncology
IS - 1
ER -