The effect of age on efficacy, safety and patient-centered outcomes with rucaparib: A post hoc exploratory analysis of ARIEL3, a phase 3, randomized, maintenance study in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma

Nicoletta Colombo, Amit M Oza, Domenica Lorusso, Carol Aghajanian, Ana Oaknin, Andrew Dean, Johanne I Weberpals, Andrew R Clamp, Giovanni Scambia, Alexandra Leary, Robert W Holloway, Margarita Amenedo Gancedo, Peter C Fong, Jeffrey C Goh, David M O'Malley, Deborah K Armstrong, Susana Banerjee, Jesus García-Donas, Elizabeth M Swisher, Juliette Meunier, Terri Cameron, Lara Maloney, Sandra Goble, Josh Bedel, Jonathan A Ledermann, Robert L Coleman, Nicoletta Colombo, Amit M Oza, Domenica Lorusso, Carol Aghajanian, Ana Oaknin, Andrew Dean, Johanne I Weberpals, Andrew R Clamp, Giovanni Scambia, Alexandra Leary, Robert W Holloway, Margarita Amenedo Gancedo, Peter C Fong, Jeffrey C Goh, David M O'Malley, Deborah K Armstrong, Susana Banerjee, Jesus García-Donas, Elizabeth M Swisher, Juliette Meunier, Terri Cameron, Lara Maloney, Sandra Goble, Josh Bedel, Jonathan A Ledermann, Robert L Coleman

Abstract

Background: In the phase 3 trial ARIEL3, maintenance treatment with the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor rucaparib provided clinical benefit versus placebo for patients with recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Here, we evaluate the impact of age on the clinical utility of rucaparib in ARIEL3.

Methods: Patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian carcinoma with ≥2 prior platinum-based chemotherapies who responded to their last platinum-based therapy were enrolled in ARIEL3 and randomized 2:1 to rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or placebo. Exploratory, post hoc analyses of progression-free survival (PFS), patient-centered outcomes (quality-adjusted PFS [QA-PFS] and quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity [Q-TWiST]), and safety were conducted in three age subgroups (<65 years, 65-74 years, and ≥75 years).

Results: Investigator-assessed PFS was significantly longer with rucaparib than placebo in patients aged <65 years (rucaparib n = 237 vs placebo n = 117; median, 11.1 vs 5.4 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.33 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.25-0.43]; P < 0.0001) and 65-74 years (n = 113 vs n = 64; median, 8.3 vs 5.3 months; HR 0.43 [95% CI 0.29-0.63]; P < 0.0001) and numerically longer in patients aged ≥75 years (n = 25 vs n = 8; median, 9.2 vs 5.5 months; HR 0.47 [95% CI 0.16-1.35]; P = 0.1593). QA-PFS and Q-TWiST were significantly longer with rucaparib than placebo across all age subgroups. Safety of rucaparib was generally similar across the age subgroups.

Conclusions: Efficacy, patient-centered outcomes, and safety of rucaparib were similar between age subgroups, indicating that all eligible women with recurrent ovarian cancer should be offered this therapeutic option, irrespective of age. https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT01968213.

Keywords: Elderly patients; Maintenance; Ovarian cancer; PARP inhibitor; Rucaparib.

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of competing interest Nicoletta Colombo: Served in a consulting or advisory role for Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, BIOCAD, Pfizer, PharmaMar, Roche, and Tesaro. Amit M. Oza: Served on advisory boards for Clovis Oncology, Amgen, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, and Immunovaccine. Domenica Lorusso: Served in a consulting or advisory role for Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, ImmunoGen, Merck, PharmaMar, Roche, Takeda, and Tesaro and received support for travel or accommodation from PharmaMar and Roche. Carol Aghajanian: Served on a steering committee for Clovis Oncology, AbbVie, Genentech, and Mateon Therapeutics; served on advisory boards for Clovis Oncology, Cerulean Pharma, Eisai/Merck, ImmunoGen, and Tesaro; received research grants from Clovis Oncology, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and Genentech; and received honoraria from Clovis Oncology, Cerulean Pharma, Eisai/Merck, ImmunoGen, Mateon Therapeutics, and Tesaro. Ana Oaknin: Served on advisory boards for Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, ImmunoGen, Genmab/Seattle Genetics, PharmaMar, Roche, and Tesaro; received support for travel or accommodation from Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, PharmaMar, and Roche; and received research grants from Clovis Oncology, AbbVie Deutschland, Ability Pharmaceuticals, Advaxis, Aeterna Zentaris, Amgen SA, Aprea Therapeutics AB, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, ImmunoGen, Merck Sharp & Dohme de España SA, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, PharmaMar, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and Tesaro. Andrew Dean: Served in a consulting or advisory role for Precision Oncology Australia, Shire Pharmaceuticals, and Specialised Therapeutics Australia. Johanne I. Weberpals: Received research support from AbbVie and AstraZeneca and served on advisory boards for AstraZeneca. Andrew R. Clamp: Served on advisory boards for AstraZeneca; received research funding from Clovis Oncology and AstraZeneca; and received support for travel and accommodation for congress attendance from Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, and Roche. Giovanni Scambia: Served in a consulting or advisory role for Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, PharmaMar, Roche, and Tesaro. Alexandra Leary: Served on advisory boards for Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, BIOCAD, GamaMabs, Genmab/Seattle Genetics, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, PharmaMar, and Tesaro; received support for travel and accommodation from Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, Roche, and Tesaro; and reports institutional research grant support from Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, GamaMabs, Inivata, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merus, Sanofi, and Tesaro. Robert W. Holloway: Served on speakers bureaus for Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, and Tesaro. Margarita Amenedo Gancedo: Served on advisory boards for Clovis Oncology and on speakers bureaus for AstraZeneca, PharmaMar, and Roche. Peter C. Fong: Served on advisory boards for Clovis Oncology and AstraZeneca and received honoraria from AstraZeneca. Jeffrey C. Goh: Served in a consulting or advisory role for AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Tesaro; served on speakers bureaus for Ipsen and Merck Sharp & Dohme; and received support for travel or accommodation from Astellas, AstraZeneca, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. David M. O'Malley: Served on advisory boards for Clovis Oncology, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Eisai, Genentech/Roche, Genelux, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Janssen, Novocure, Regeneron, and Tesaro; has served on steering committees for Clovis Oncology, Agenus, Amgen, and Novocure; has served as a consultant for AbbVie, Ambry, AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Gynecologic Oncology Group Foundation, and Tesaro; has given a presentation on ovarian cancer at the National Comprehensive Cancer Network; and his institution has received research support from Clovis Oncology, AbbVie, Agenus, Amgen, Ajinomoto, Array BioPharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cerulean Pharma, Eisai, EMD Serono, ERGOMED Clinical Research, Genentech, Gynecologic Oncology Group, INC Research, inVentiv Health Clinical, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Janssen Research and Development, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, New Mexico Cancer Care Alliance, Novocure, PRA International, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Serono, Stemcentrx, Tesaro, TRACON Pharmaceuticals, VentiRx, and Yale University. Deborah K. Armstrong: Served as a scientific advisor for Morphotek and received research funding from Clovis Oncology, Advaxis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Syndax, and Tesaro. Susana Banerjee: Served on advisory boards and received honoraria from Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, PharmaMar, Seattle Genetics, and Tesaro; received honoraria from Merck Serono and Roche; and received support for travel or accommodation from NuCana and Tesaro. Jesus García-Donas: Received research funding from AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, and Pfizer; received personal fees from Clovis Oncology, Astellas, Pierre Fabre, and Pfizer; and received nonfinancial support from Astellas, Pierre Fabre, and Pfizer. Elizabeth M. Swisher: Has nothing to disclose. Juliette Meunier: Employee of Modus Outcomes, which was contracted by Clovis Oncology to conduct these analyses. Terri Cameron, Lara Maloney, Sandra Goble, and Josh Bedel: Employees of Clovis Oncology and may own stock or have stock options in that company. Jonathan A. Ledermann: Received lecture fees from Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, Merck/Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, and Tesaro; served on advisory boards for Clovis Oncology, Artios Pharma, AstraZeneca, Cristal Therapeutics, Merck/Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Seattle Genetics, and Tesaro; and received research grants from AstraZeneca and Merck/Merck Sharp & Dohme. Robert L. Coleman: Reports grants from Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, Gateway Foundation, Janssen, Judy Reis/Albert Pisani, MD, Ovarian Cancer Research Fund, Merck, National Institutes of Health, Roche/Genentech, and V-Foundation; has served as an advisor to Clovis Oncology, Agenus, AstraZeneca, GamaMabs, Genmab, Janssen, OncoQuest, Pfizer (Medivation), Regeneron, Roche/Genentech, and Tesaro; and has an endowment as the Ann Rife Cox Chair in Gynecology.

Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Probability of PFS as assessed by investigator (A, B, C) and BICR (D, E, F) according to age subgroup (A, D:

Fig. 2.

Comparison of investigator-assessed PFS and…

Fig. 2.

Comparison of investigator-assessed PFS and QA-PFS according to age subgroup (A:

Fig. 2.
Comparison of investigator-assessed PFS and QA-PFS according to age subgroup (A:

Fig. 3.

TWiST analyses with TOX defined…

Fig. 3.

TWiST analyses with TOX defined as all grade ≥3 TEAEs (A: a (G)…65>

Fig. 3.
TWiST analyses with TOX defined as all grade ≥3 TEAEs (A: a (G) and as grade ≥2 TEAEs of nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and astheniab (H). aμTOX values: 0.90 (<65 years), 0.87 (65–74 years), 0.94 (≥75 years). bμTOX values: 0.86 (<65 years), 0.84 (65–74 years), 0.83 (≥75 years). μTOX, mean utility weight for TOX health state; CI, confidence interval; Q-TWiST, quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity; TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event; TOX, time with toxicity of treatment.

Fig. 3.

TWiST analyses with TOX defined…

Fig. 3.

TWiST analyses with TOX defined as all grade ≥3 TEAEs (A: a (G)…65>

Fig. 3.
TWiST analyses with TOX defined as all grade ≥3 TEAEs (A: a (G) and as grade ≥2 TEAEs of nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and astheniab (H). aμTOX values: 0.90 (<65 years), 0.87 (65–74 years), 0.94 (≥75 years). bμTOX values: 0.86 (<65 years), 0.84 (65–74 years), 0.83 (≥75 years). μTOX, mean utility weight for TOX health state; CI, confidence interval; Q-TWiST, quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity; TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event; TOX, time with toxicity of treatment.

Fig. 4.

Forest plot of relative risk…

Fig. 4.

Forest plot of relative risk of most frequent any grade TEAEs (≥35% of…

Fig. 4.
Forest plot of relative risk of most frequent any grade TEAEs (≥35% of patients. in any age subgroup) and grade ≥3 TEAEs. aCombined AST elevation and ALT elevation. bCombined anemia and decreased hemoglobin. cCombined asthenia and fatigue. dCombined thrombocytopenia and decreased platelet count. ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; CI, confidence interval; TEAEs, treatment-emergent adverse events.
Similar articles
Cited by
References
    1. Ferlay J, Ervik M, Lam F, Colombet M, Mery L, Piñeros M, et al., Global cancer observatory: cancer today, https://gco.iarc.fr/today2018. (Accessed date: 23 January 2020).
    1. National Cancer Institute (NCI), SEER Cancer Statistics Factsheets: Ovarian Cancer. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/ovary.html (Accessed date: 23 January 2020).
    1. Malvezzi M, Carioli G, Rodriguez T, Negri E, La Vecchia C, Global trends and predictions in ovarian cancer mortality, Ann. Oncol 27 (2016) 2017–2025. - PubMed
    1. Tortorella L, Vizzielli G, Fusco D, Cho WC, Bernabei R, Scambia G, et al., Ovarian cancer management in the oldest old: improving outcomes and tailoring treatments, Aging Dis. 8 (2017) 677–684. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Liposits G, Loh KP, Soto-Perez-de-Celis E, Dumas L, Battisti NML, Kadambi S, et al., PARP inhibitors in older patients with ovarian and breast cancer: Young International Society of Geriatric Oncology review paper, J. Geriatr. Oncol 10 (2019) 337–345. - PubMed
Show all 29 references
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
[x]
Cite
Copy Download .nbib
Format: AMA APA MLA NLM
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
Comparison of investigator-assessed PFS and QA-PFS according to age subgroup (A:

Fig. 3.

TWiST analyses with TOX defined…

Fig. 3.

TWiST analyses with TOX defined as all grade ≥3 TEAEs (A: a (G)…65>

Fig. 3.
TWiST analyses with TOX defined as all grade ≥3 TEAEs (A: a (G) and as grade ≥2 TEAEs of nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and astheniab (H). aμTOX values: 0.90 (<65 years), 0.87 (65–74 years), 0.94 (≥75 years). bμTOX values: 0.86 (<65 years), 0.84 (65–74 years), 0.83 (≥75 years). μTOX, mean utility weight for TOX health state; CI, confidence interval; Q-TWiST, quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity; TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event; TOX, time with toxicity of treatment.

Fig. 3.

TWiST analyses with TOX defined…

Fig. 3.

TWiST analyses with TOX defined as all grade ≥3 TEAEs (A: a (G)…65>

Fig. 3.
TWiST analyses with TOX defined as all grade ≥3 TEAEs (A: a (G) and as grade ≥2 TEAEs of nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and astheniab (H). aμTOX values: 0.90 (<65 years), 0.87 (65–74 years), 0.94 (≥75 years). bμTOX values: 0.86 (<65 years), 0.84 (65–74 years), 0.83 (≥75 years). μTOX, mean utility weight for TOX health state; CI, confidence interval; Q-TWiST, quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity; TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event; TOX, time with toxicity of treatment.

Fig. 4.

Forest plot of relative risk…

Fig. 4.

Forest plot of relative risk of most frequent any grade TEAEs (≥35% of…

Fig. 4.
Forest plot of relative risk of most frequent any grade TEAEs (≥35% of patients. in any age subgroup) and grade ≥3 TEAEs. aCombined AST elevation and ALT elevation. bCombined anemia and decreased hemoglobin. cCombined asthenia and fatigue. dCombined thrombocytopenia and decreased platelet count. ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; CI, confidence interval; TEAEs, treatment-emergent adverse events.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
TWiST analyses with TOX defined as all grade ≥3 TEAEs (A: a (G) and as grade ≥2 TEAEs of nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and astheniab (H). aμTOX values: 0.90 (<65 years), 0.87 (65–74 years), 0.94 (≥75 years). bμTOX values: 0.86 (<65 years), 0.84 (65–74 years), 0.83 (≥75 years). μTOX, mean utility weight for TOX health state; CI, confidence interval; Q-TWiST, quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity; TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event; TOX, time with toxicity of treatment.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
TWiST analyses with TOX defined as all grade ≥3 TEAEs (A: a (G) and as grade ≥2 TEAEs of nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and astheniab (H). aμTOX values: 0.90 (<65 years), 0.87 (65–74 years), 0.94 (≥75 years). bμTOX values: 0.86 (<65 years), 0.84 (65–74 years), 0.83 (≥75 years). μTOX, mean utility weight for TOX health state; CI, confidence interval; Q-TWiST, quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity; TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event; TOX, time with toxicity of treatment.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.
Forest plot of relative risk of most frequent any grade TEAEs (≥35% of patients. in any age subgroup) and grade ≥3 TEAEs. aCombined AST elevation and ALT elevation. bCombined anemia and decreased hemoglobin. cCombined asthenia and fatigue. dCombined thrombocytopenia and decreased platelet count. ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; CI, confidence interval; TEAEs, treatment-emergent adverse events.

References

    1. Ferlay J, Ervik M, Lam F, Colombet M, Mery L, Piñeros M, et al., Global cancer observatory: cancer today, 2018. (Accessed date: 23 January 2020).
    1. National Cancer Institute (NCI), SEER Cancer Statistics Factsheets: Ovarian Cancer. (Accessed date: 23 January 2020).
    1. Malvezzi M, Carioli G, Rodriguez T, Negri E, La Vecchia C, Global trends and predictions in ovarian cancer mortality, Ann. Oncol 27 (2016) 2017–2025.
    1. Tortorella L, Vizzielli G, Fusco D, Cho WC, Bernabei R, Scambia G, et al., Ovarian cancer management in the oldest old: improving outcomes and tailoring treatments, Aging Dis. 8 (2017) 677–684.
    1. Liposits G, Loh KP, Soto-Perez-de-Celis E, Dumas L, Battisti NML, Kadambi S, et al., PARP inhibitors in older patients with ovarian and breast cancer: Young International Society of Geriatric Oncology review paper, J. Geriatr. Oncol 10 (2019) 337–345.
    1. Tew WP, Ovarian cancer in the older woman, J. Geriatr. Oncol 7 (2016) 354–361.
    1. Dumas L, Ring A, Butler J, Kalsi T, Harari D, Banerjee S, Improving outcomes for older women with gynaecological malignancies, Cancer Treat. Rev 50 (2016) 99–108.
    1. Colombo N, Sessa C, du Bois A, Ledermann J, McCluggage WG, McNeish I, et al., ESMO–ESGO consensus conference recommendations on ovarian cancer: pathology and molecular biology, early and advanced stages, borderline tumours and recurent disease, Ann. Oncol 30 (2019) 672–705.
    1. Kemp Z, Ledermann JA, Update on first-line treatment of advanced ovarian carcinoma, Int. J. Womens Health 5 (2013) 45–51.
    1. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®), Ovarian Cancer Including Fallopian Tube Cancer and Primary Peritoneal Cancer (Version 3.2019), 2019. (Accessed date: 23 January 2020).
    1. Bouberhan S, Pujade-Lauraine E, Cannistra SA, Advances in the management of platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer, J. Clin. Oncol 37 (2019) 2424–2436.
    1. Ledermann JA, Raja FA, Fotopoulou C, Gonzalez-Martin A, Colombo N, Sessa C, et al., Newly diagnosed and relapsed epithelial ovarian carcinoma: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up, Ann. Oncol 24 (Suppl. 6) (2013) vi24–vi32.
    1. Lynparza (Olaparib) Tablets [Prescribing Information], AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, Wilmington, DE, 2020.
    1. Avastin (Bevacizumab) Injection, for Intravenous Use [Prescribing Information], Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA, 2020.
    1. DiSilvestro P, Alvarez Secord A, Maintenance treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer: is it ready for prime time? Cancer Treat. Rev 69 (2018) 53–65.
    1. Markman M, Maintenance chemotherapy in the management of epithelial ovarian cancer, Cancer Metastasis Rev. 34 (2015) 11–17.
    1. Coleman RL, Oza AM, Lorusso D, Aghajanian C, Oaknin A, Dean A, et al., Rucaparib maintenance treatment for recurrent ovarian carcinoma after response to platinum therapy (ARIEL3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, Lancet. 390 (2017) 1949–1961.
    1. Rubraca (Rucaparib) Tablets [Prescribing Information], Clovis Oncology, Inc., Boulder, CO, 2020.
    1. Rubraca (Rucaparib) Tablets [Summary of Product Characteristics], Clovis Oncology Ireland Ltd., Swords, Ireland, 2019.
    1. Cabarrou B, Filleron T, Boher JM, Bogart E, Tresch-Bruneel E, Penel N, et al., How to report toxicity associated with targeted therapies? Ann. Oncol 27 (2016) 1633–1638.
    1. Brown EG, Wood L, Wood S, The medical dictionary for regulatory activities (MedDRA), Drug Saf. 20 (1999) 109–117.
    1. National Cancer Institute, NCI Term Browser, CTCAE. (Accessed date: 23 January 2020).
    1. Oza A, Lorusso D, Aghajanian C, Oaknin A, Dean A, Colombo N, et al., Patient-centered outcomes in ARIEL3, a phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of rucaparib maintenance treatment in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma, J. Clin. Oncol (2020) In press.
    1. Greene WH, Econometric Analysis (Fifth Edition), Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2003.
    1. Friedlander M, Gebski V, Gibbs E, Davies L, Bloomfield R, Hilpert F, et al., Health-related quality of life and patient-centred outcomes with olaparib maintenance after chemotherapy in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation (SOLO2/ENGOT Ov-21): a placebo-controlled, phase 3 randomised trial, Lancet Oncol. 19 (2018) 1126–1134.
    1. Matulonis UA, Walder L, Nottrup TJ, Bessette P, Mahner S, Gil-Martin M, et al., Niraparib maintenance treatment improves time without symptoms or toxicity (TWiST) versus routine surveillance in recurrent ovarian cancer: a TWiST analysis of the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial, J. Clin. Oncol 37 (2019) 3183–3191.
    1. Aghajanian C, Goff B, Nycum LR, Wang YV, Husain A, Blank SV, Final overall survival and safety analysis of OCEANS, a phase 3 trial of chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer, Gynecol. Oncol 139 (2015) 10–16.
    1. Dockery LE, Tew WP, Ding K, Moore KN, Tolerance and toxicity of the PARP inhibitor olaparib in older women with epithelial ovarian cancer, Gynecol. Oncol 147 (2017) 509–513.
    1. Fabbro M, Moore KN, Dorum A, Tinker AV, Mahner S, Bover I, et al., Efficacy and safety of niraparib as maintenance treatment in older patients (≥70 years) with recurrent ovarian cancer: results from the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial, Gynecol. Oncol 152 (2019) 560–567.

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir