James S Ferriss1, James J Java2, Michael A Bookman3, Gini F Fleming4, Bradley J Monk5, Joan L Walker6, Howard D Homesley7, Jeffrey Fowler8, Benjamin E Greer9, Matthew P Boente10, Robert A Burger11. 1. Temple University School of Medicine & Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States. 2. Gynecologic Oncology Group Statistical & Data Center, Buffalo, NY, United States. 3. Arizona Oncology, Tucson, AZ, United States. 4. University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, United States. 5. St Joseph's Hospital, Creighton School of Medicine, Phoenix, AZ, United States. 6. University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, United States. 7. Gynecologic Oncology Group, Buffalo, NY, United States. 8. Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States. 9. University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States. 10. Minnesota Oncology, Edina, MN, United States. 11. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Electronic address: burgerr@uphs.upenn.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Predictive factors for efficacy of bevacizumab in advanced ovarian cancer have remained elusive. We investigated ascites both as a prognostic factor and as a predictor of efficacy for bevacizumab. METHODS: Using data from GOG 0218, patients receiving cytotoxic therapy plus concurrent and maintenance bevacizumab were compared to those receiving cytotoxic therapy plus placebo. The presence of ascites was determined prospectively. Chi-square and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests compared baseline variables between subgroups. Survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate independent prognostic factors and estimate their covariate-adjusted effects on survival. RESULTS: Treatment arms were balanced with respect to ascites and other prognostic factors. Overall, 886 (80%) women had ascites, 221 (20%) did not. Those with ascites were more likely to have: poorer performance status (p<0.001); serous histology (p=0.012); higher baseline CA125 (p<0.001); and suboptimal cytoreduction (p=0.004). In multivariate survival analysis, ascites was prognostic of poor OS (Adjusted HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.00-1.48, p=0.045), but not PFS. In predictive analysis, patients without ascites treated with bevacizumab had no significant improvement in either PFS (AHR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59-1.10, p=0.18) or OS (AHR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65-1.36, p=0.76). Patients with ascites treated withbevacizumab had significantly improved PFS (AHR 0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.81, p<0.001) and OS (AHR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70-0.96, p=0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Ascites in women with advanced ovarian cancer is prognostic of poor overall survival. Ascites may predict the population of women more likely to derive long-term benefit from bevacizumab.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: Predictive factors for efficacy of bevacizumab in advanced ovarian cancer have remained elusive. We investigated ascites both as a prognostic factor and as a predictor of efficacy for bevacizumab. METHODS: Using data from GOG 0218, patients receiving cytotoxic therapy plus concurrent and maintenance bevacizumab were compared to those receiving cytotoxic therapy plus placebo. The presence of ascites was determined prospectively. Chi-square and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests compared baseline variables between subgroups. Survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate independent prognostic factors and estimate their covariate-adjusted effects on survival. RESULTS: Treatment arms were balanced with respect to ascites and other prognostic factors. Overall, 886 (80%) women had ascites, 221 (20%) did not. Those with ascites were more likely to have: poorer performance status (p<0.001); serous histology (p=0.012); higher baseline CA125 (p<0.001); and suboptimal cytoreduction (p=0.004). In multivariate survival analysis, ascites was prognostic of poor OS (Adjusted HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.00-1.48, p=0.045), but not PFS. In predictive analysis, patients without ascites treated with bevacizumab had no significant improvement in either PFS (AHR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59-1.10, p=0.18) or OS (AHR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65-1.36, p=0.76). Patients with ascites treated with bevacizumab had significantly improved PFS (AHR 0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.81, p<0.001) and OS (AHR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70-0.96, p=0.014). CONCLUSIONS:Ascites in women with advanced ovarian cancer is prognostic of poor overall survival. Ascites may predict the population of women more likely to derive long-term benefit from bevacizumab.
Authors: John K Chan; Tuyen K Kiet; Kevin Blansit; Rashmi Ramasubbaiah; Joan F Hilton; Daniel S Kapp; Daniela Matei Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2014-03-25 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Timothy J Perren; Ann Marie Swart; Jacobus Pfisterer; Jonathan A Ledermann; Eric Pujade-Lauraine; Gunnar Kristensen; Mark S Carey; Philip Beale; Andrés Cervantes; Christian Kurzeder; Andreas du Bois; Jalid Sehouli; Rainer Kimmig; Anne Stähle; Fiona Collinson; Sharadah Essapen; Charlie Gourley; Alain Lortholary; Frédéric Selle; Mansoor R Mirza; Arto Leminen; Marie Plante; Dan Stark; Wendi Qian; Mahesh K B Parmar; Amit M Oza Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-12-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Robert A Burger; Mark F Brady; Michael A Bookman; Gini F Fleming; Bradley J Monk; Helen Huang; Robert S Mannel; Howard D Homesley; Jeffrey Fowler; Benjamin E Greer; Matthew Boente; Michael J Birrer; Sharon X Liang Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-12-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Carol Aghajanian; Stephanie V Blank; Barbara A Goff; Patricia L Judson; Michael G Teneriello; Amreen Husain; Mika A Sovak; Jing Yi; Lawrence R Nycum Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-04-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Fiona Collinson; Michelle Hutchinson; Rachel A Craven; David A Cairns; Alexandre Zougman; Tobias C Wind; Narinder Gahir; Michael P Messenger; Sharon Jackson; Douglas Thompson; Cybil Adusei; Jonathan A Ledermann; Geoffrey Hall; Gordon C Jayson; Peter J Selby; Rosamonde E Banks Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-08-09 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Krishnansu S Tewari; Robert A Burger; Danielle Enserro; Barbara M Norquist; Elizabeth M Swisher; Mark F Brady; Michael A Bookman; Gini F Fleming; Helen Huang; Howard D Homesley; Jeffrey M Fowler; Benjamin E Greer; Matthew Boente; Sharon X Liang; Chenglin Ye; Carlos Bais; Leslie M Randall; John K Chan; J Stuart Ferriss; Robert L Coleman; Carol Aghajanian; Thomas J Herzog; Philip J DiSaia; Larry J Copeland; Robert S Mannel; Michael J Birrer; Bradley J Monk Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-06-19 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Alexandra Lainé; Travis T Sims; Olivia Le Saux; Isabelle Ray-Coquard; Robert L Coleman Journal: Curr Oncol Rep Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 5.075
Authors: Irina V Tiper; Sarah M Temkin; Sarah Spiegel; Simeon E Goldblum; Robert L Giuntoli; Mathias Oelke; Jonathan P Schneck; Tonya J Webb Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2016-04-13 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Megan E Buechel; Danielle Enserro; Robert A Burger; Mark F Brady; Katrina Wade; Angeles Alvarez Secord; Andrew B Nixon; Seyedehnafiseh Mirniaharikandehei; Hong Liu; Bin Zheng; David M O'Malley; Heidi Gray; Krishnansu S Tewari; Robert S Mannel; Michael J Birrer; Kathleen N Moore Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2021-03-10 Impact factor: 5.482