The DNA damage response (DDR) pathway coordinates the identification, signaling, and repair of DNA damage caused by endogenous or exogenous factors and regulates cell-cycle progression with DNA ...repair to minimize DNA damage being permanently passed through cell division. Severe DNA damage that cannot be repaired may trigger apoptosis; as such, the DDR pathway is of crucial importance as a cancer target. Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) is the best-known element of the DDR, and several PARP inhibitors have been licensed. However, there are approximately 450 proteins involved in DDR, and a number of these other targets are being investigated in the laboratory and clinic. We review the most recent evidence for the clinical effect of PARP inhibition in breast and ovarian cancer and explore expansion into the first-line setting and into other tumor types. We critique the evidence for patient selection techniques and summarize what is known about mechanisms of PARP inhibitor resistance. We then discuss what is known about the preclinical rationale for targeting other members of the DDR pathway and the associated tumor cell genetics that may confer sensitivity to these agents. Examples include DNA damage sensors (MLH1), damage signaling molecules (ataxia-telangiectasia mutated; ataxia-telangiectasia mutated-related and Rad3-related; CHK1/2; DNA-dependent protein kinase, catalytic subunit; WEE1; CDC7), or effector proteins for repair (POLQ also referred to as POLθ, RAD51, poly ADP-ribose glycohydrolase). Early-phase clinical trials targeting some of these molecules, either as a single agent or in combination, are discussed. Finally, we outline the challenges that must be addressed to maximize the therapeutic opportunity that targeting DDR provides.
Clear cell carcinoma of the ovary has distinct biology and clinical behavior. There are significant geographical and racial differences in the incidence of clear cell carcinoma compared with other ...epithelial ovarian tumors. Patients with clear cell carcinoma are younger, tend to present at an early stage, and their tumors are commonly associated with endometriosis, which is widely accepted as a direct precursor of clear cell carcinoma and has been identified pathologically in approximately 50% of clear cell carcinoma cases. The most frequent and important specific gene alterations in clear cell carcinoma are mutations of AT-rich interaction domain 1A (
) (~50% of cases) and phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha (
) (~50% cases). More broadly, subgroups of clear cell carcinoma have been identified based on C-APOBEC (apolipoprotein B mRNA editing enzyme, catalytic polypeptide-like) and C-AGE (age-related) mutational signatures. Gene expression profiling shows upregulation of hepatocyte nuclear factor 1-beta (
) and oxidative stress-related genes, and has identified epithelial-like and mesenchymal-like tumor subgroups. Although the benefit of platinum-based chemotherapy is not clearly defined it remains the mainstay of first-line therapy. Patients with early-stage disease have a favorable clinical outcome but the prognosis of patients with advanced-stage or recurrent disease is poor. Alternative treatment strategies are required to improve patient outcome and the development of targeted therapies based on molecular characteristics is a promising approach. Improved specificity of the histological definition of this tumor type is helping these efforts but, due to the rarity of clear cell carcinoma, international collaboration will be essential to design appropriately powered, large-scale clinical trials.
Summary Background Maintenance monotherapy with the PARP inhibitor olaparib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ...ovarian cancer. We aimed to explore the hypothesis that olaparib is most likely to benefit patients with a BRCA mutation. Methods We present data from the second interim analysis of overall survival and a retrospective, preplanned analysis of data by BRCA mutation status from our randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study that assessed maintenance treatment with olaparib 400 mg twice daily (capsules) versus placebo in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer who had received two or more platinum-based regimens and who had a partial or complete response to their most recent platinum-based regimen. Randomisation was by an interactive voice response system, stratified by time to progression on penultimate platinum-based regimen, response to the most recent platinum-based regimen before randomisation, and ethnic descent. The primary endpoint was PFS, analysed for the overall population and by BRCA status. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00753545. Findings Between Aug 28, 2008, and Feb 9, 2010, 136 patients were assigned to olaparib and 129 to placebo. BRCA status was known for 131 (96%) patients in the olaparib group versus 123 (95%) in the placebo group, of whom 74 (56%) versus 62 (50%) had a deleterious or suspected deleterious germline or tumour BRCA mutation. Of patients with a BRCA mutation, median PFS was significantly longer in the olaparib group than in the placebo group (11·2 months 95% CI 8·3–not calculable vs 4·3 months 3·0–5·4; HR 0·18 0·10–0·31; p<0·0001); similar findings were noted for patients with wild-type BRCA , although the difference between groups was lower (7·4 months 5·5–10·3 vs 5·5 months 3·7–5·6; HR 0·54 0·34–0·85; p=0·0075). At the second interim analysis of overall survival (58% maturity), overall survival did not significantly differ between the groups (HR 0·88 95% CI 0·64–1·21; p=0·44); similar findings were noted for patients with mutated BRCA (HR 0·73 0·45–1·17; p=0·19) and wild-type BRCA (HR 0·99 0·63–1·55; p=0·96). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the olaparib group were fatigue (in ten 7% patients in the olaparib group vs four 3% in the placebo group) and anaemia (seven 5% vs one <1%). Serious adverse events were reported in 25 (18%) patients who received olaparib and 11 (9%) who received placebo. Tolerability was similar in patients with mutated BRCA and the overall population. Interpretation These results support the hypothesis that patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer with a BRCA mutation have the greatest likelihood of benefiting from olaparib treatment. Funding AstraZeneca.
In a placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, olaparib, an oral PARP inhibitor that should be effective in tumor cells with
BRCA1/2
-related base excision repair defects, increased progression-free ...survival from 4 months to 8 months in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer.
Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death from gynecologic tumors in the Western world.
1
Approximately 80% of patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer have a response to platinum-based chemotherapy. However, most patients have relapses, and responses to subsequent therapies are generally short-lived.
2
–
6
Maintenance chemotherapy as part of first-line treatment has been shown to prolong control of ovarian cancer,
7
and disease control has also been prolonged with the combination of bevacizumab and chemotherapy in patients receiving first-line treatment
8
,
9
and in those with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer.
10
However, new treatments are needed because most patients eventually have a relapse. . . .
Summary Background In patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer, maintenance monotherapy with the PARP inhibitor olaparib significantly improves progression-free survival ...versus placebo. We assessed the effect of maintenance olaparib on overall survival in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer, including those with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations ( BRCA m). Methods In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial involving 82 sites across 16 countries, patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer who had received two or more courses of platinum-based chemotherapy and had responded to their latest regimen were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated sequence to receive oral maintenance olaparib (as capsules; 400 mg twice a day) or a matching placebo by an interactive voice response system. Patients were stratified by ancestry, time to progression on penultimate platinum, and response to most recent platinum. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment by the use of unique identifiers generated during randomisation. The primary endpoint of the trial was progression-free survival. In this updated analysis, we present data for overall survival, a secondary endpoint, from the third data analysis after more than 5 years’ follow-up (intention-to-treat population). We did the updated overall survival analysis, described in this Article at 77% data maturity, using a two-sided α of 0·95%. As the study was not powered to assess overall survival, this analysis should be regarded as descriptive and the p values are nominal. We analysed randomly assigned patients for overall survival and all patients who received at least one dose of treatment for safety. This trial is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00753545. Findings Between Aug 28, 2008, and Feb 9, 2010, 265 patients were randomly assigned to olaparib (n=136) or placebo (n=129). 136 patients had deleterious BRCA m. The data cutoff for this analysis was Sept 30, 2015. An overall survival advantage was seen with maintenance olaparib versus placebo in all patients (hazard ratio HR 0·73 95% CI 0·55–0·96; nominal p=0·025, which did not meet the required threshold for statistical significance p<0·0095; median overall survival was 29·8 months 95% CI 26·9–35·7 for those treated with olaparib vs 27·8 months 24·9–33·7 for those treated with placebo), and in patients with BRCA m (HR 0·62 95% CI 0·41–0·94 nominal p=0·025; 34·9 months 95% CI 29·2–54·6 vs 30·2 months 23·1–40·7). The overall survival data in patients with BRCA wild-type were HR 0·83 (95% CI 0·55–1·24, nominal p=0·37; 24·5 months 19·8–35·0 for those treated with olaparib vs 26·6 months 23·1–32·5 for those treated with placebo). 11 (15%) of 74 patients with BRCA m received maintenance olaparib for 5 years or more. Overall, common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the olaparib and placebo groups were fatigue (11 8% of 136 patients vs four 3% of 128) and anaemia (eight 6% vs one 1%). 30 (22%) of 136 patients in the olaparib group and 11 (9%) of 128 patients in the placebo group reported serious adverse events. In patients treated for 2 years or more, adverse events in the olaparib and placebo groups included low-grade nausea (24 75% of 32 patients vs two 40% of five), fatigue (18 56% of 32 vs two 40% of five), vomiting (12 38% of 32 vs zero), and anaemia (eight 25% of 32 vs one 20% of five); generally, events were initially reported during the first 2 years of treatment. Interpretation Despite not reaching statistical significance, patients with BRCA -mutated platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer receiving olaparib maintenance monotherapy after platinum-based chemotherapy appeared to have longer overall survival, supporting the reported progression-free survival benefit. Clinically useful long-term exposure to olaparib was seen with no new safety signals. Taken together, these data support both the long-term clinical benefit and tolerability of maintenance olaparib in patients with BRCA -mutated platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer. Funding AstraZeneca.
Epithelial ovarian cancer represents the most lethal gynecological malignancy in the developed world, and can be divided into five main histological subtypes： high grade serous, endometrioid, clear ...cell, mucinous and low grade serous. These subtypes represent distinct disease entities, both clinically and at the molecular level. Molecular analysis has revealed significant genetic heterogeneity in ovarian cancer, particularly within the high grade serous subtype. As such, this subtype has been the focus of much research effort to date, revealing molecular subgroups at both the genomic and transcriptomic level that have clinical implications. However, stratification of ovarian cancer patients based on the underlying biology of their disease remains in its infancy. Here, we summarize the molecular changes that characterize the five main ovarian cancer subtypes, highlight potential opportunities for targeted therapeutic intervention and outline priorities for future research.
High-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) accounts for 70-80% of ovarian cancer deaths, and overall survival has not changed significantly for several decades. In this Opinion article, we outline a ...set of research priorities that we believe will reduce incidence and improve outcomes for women with this disease. This 'roadmap' for HGSOC was determined after extensive discussions at an Ovarian Cancer Action meeting in January 2015.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IJS, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBMB, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Summary Background Medical conditions are often complicated by major depression, with consequent additional impairment of quality of life. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of an integrated ...treatment programme for major depression in patients with cancer (depression care for people with cancer) with usual care. Methods SMaRT Oncology-2 is a parallel-group, multicentre, randomised controlled effectiveness trial. We enrolled outpatients with major depression from three cancer centres and their associated clinics in Scotland, UK. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the depression care for people with cancer intervention or usual care, with stratification (by trial centre) and minimisation (by age, primary cancer, and sex) with allocation concealment. Depression care for people with cancer is a manualised, multicomponent collaborative care treatment that is delivered systematically by a team of cancer nurses and psychiatrists in collaboration with primary care physicians. Usual care is provided by primary care physicians. Outcome data were collected up until 48 weeks. The primary outcome was treatment response (≥50% reduction in Symptom Checklist Depression Scale SCL-20 score, range 0–4) at 24 weeks. Trial statisticians and data collection staff were masked to treatment allocation, but participants could not be masked to the allocations. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN40568538. Findings 500 participants were enrolled between May 12, 2008, and May 13, 2011; 253 were randomly allocated to depression care for people with cancer and 247 to usual care. 143 (62%) of 231 participants in the depression care for people with cancer group and 40 (17%) of 231 in the usual care group responded to treatment: absolute difference 45% (95% CI 37–53), adjusted odds ratio 8·5 (95% CI 5·5–13·4), p<0·0001. Compared with patients in the usual care group, participants allocated to the depression care for people with cancer programme also had less depression, anxiety, pain, and fatigue; and better functioning, health, quality of life, and perceived quality of depression care at all timepoints (all p<0·05). During the study, 34 cancer-related deaths occurred (19 in the depression care for people with cancer group, 15 in the usual care group), one patient in the depression care for people with cancer group was admitted to a psychiatric ward, and one patient in this group attempted suicide. None of these events were judged to be related to the trial treatments or procedures. Interpretation Our findings suggest that depression care for people with cancer is an effective treatment for major depression in patients with cancer. It offers a model for the treatment of depression comorbid with other medical conditions. Funding Cancer Research UK and Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government.
PDF
