Michael Friedlander1, Val Gebski2, Emma Gibbs2, Lucy Davies3, Ralph Bloomfield4, Felix Hilpert5, Lari B Wenzel6, Daniel Eek7, Manuel Rodrigues8, Andrew Clamp9, Richard T Penson10, Diane Provencher11, Jacob Korach12, Tomasz Huzarski13, Laura Vidal14, Vanda Salutari15, Clare Scott16, Maria Ornella Nicoletto17, Kenji Tamura18, David Espinoza2, Florence Joly19, Eric Pujade-Lauraine20. 1. University of New South Wales Clinical School, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia. Electronic address: m.friedlander@unsw.edu.au. 2. NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 3. NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 4. AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK. 5. Jerusalem Hospital, Hamburg, Germany. 6. University of California, Irvine, CA, USA. 7. AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden. 8. Institut Curie, Paris, France. 9. The Christie and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. 10. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 11. University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada. 12. Sheba Medical Center, Tel Aviv University, Tel Hashomer, Israel. 13. Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland. 14. Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain. 15. Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, Rome, Italy. 16. The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Parkville, VA, Australia. 17. Istituto Oncologico Veneto, Padova, Italy. 18. National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. 19. Centre François Baclesse, Caen, France. 20. Université Paris Descartes, AP-HP, Paris, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 SOLO2 trial (ENGOT Ov-21), maintenance therapy with olaparib tablets significantly prolonged progression-free survival (primary endpoint) compared with placebo in patients with a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation and platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer who had received two or more lines of previous chemotherapy. The most common subjective adverse effects included fatigue, nausea, and vomiting, which were typically low grade and self-limiting. Our a-priori hypothesis was that maintenance olaparib would not negatively affect health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and additionally that the prolongation of progression-free survival with olaparib would be underpinned by additional patient-centred benefits. METHODS: In SOLO2, 196 patients were randomly assigned to olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) and 99 to placebo. Randomisation was stratified by response to previous chemotherapy (complete vs partial) and length of platinum-free interval (>6-12 vs >12 months). The prespecified primary HRQOL analysis evaluated the change from baseline in the Trial Outcome Index (TOI) score during the first 12 months of the study. To be assessable, patients had to have an evaluable score at baseline and at least one evaluable follow-up form. Secondary planned quality-of-life (QOL) analyses included the duration of good quality of life (defined as time without significant symptoms of toxicity [TWiST] and quality-adjusted progression-free survival [QAPFS]). Efficacy and QOL outcomes were analysed in all randomly assigned patients (the full analysis set), and safety outcomes were analysed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01874353, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: The adjusted average mean change from baseline over the first 12 months in TOI was -2·90 (95% CI -4·13 to -1·67) with olaparib and -2·87 (-4·64 to -1·10) with placebo (estimated difference -0·03; 95% CI -2·19 to 2·13; p=0·98). Mean QAPFS (13·96 [SD 10·96] vs 7·28 [5·22] months; difference 6·68, 95% CI 4·98-8·54) and mean duration of TWiST (15·03 [SD 12·79] vs 7·70 [6·42] months; difference 7·33, 95% CI 4·70-8·96) were significantly longer with olaparib than with placebo. INTERPRETATION:Olaparib maintenance therapy did not have a significant detrimental effect on HRQOL compared with placebo. There were clinically meaningful patient-centred benefits in both TWiST and QAPFS despite the adverse effects associated with olaparib. These patient-centred endpoints support the improvement in progression-free survival, the primary endpoint in SOLO2, and should be included in future trials of maintenance therapies. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 SOLO2 trial (ENGOT Ov-21), maintenance therapy with olaparib tablets significantly prolonged progression-free survival (primary endpoint) compared with placebo in patients with a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation and platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer who had received two or more lines of previous chemotherapy. The most common subjective adverse effects included fatigue, nausea, and vomiting, which were typically low grade and self-limiting. Our a-priori hypothesis was that maintenance olaparib would not negatively affect health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and additionally that the prolongation of progression-free survival with olaparib would be underpinned by additional patient-centred benefits. METHODS: In SOLO2, 196 patients were randomly assigned to olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) and 99 to placebo. Randomisation was stratified by response to previous chemotherapy (complete vs partial) and length of platinum-free interval (>6-12 vs >12 months). The prespecified primary HRQOL analysis evaluated the change from baseline in the Trial Outcome Index (TOI) score during the first 12 months of the study. To be assessable, patients had to have an evaluable score at baseline and at least one evaluable follow-up form. Secondary planned quality-of-life (QOL) analyses included the duration of good quality of life (defined as time without significant symptoms of toxicity [TWiST] and quality-adjusted progression-free survival [QAPFS]). Efficacy and QOL outcomes were analysed in all randomly assigned patients (the full analysis set), and safety outcomes were analysed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01874353, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: The adjusted average mean change from baseline over the first 12 months in TOI was -2·90 (95% CI -4·13 to -1·67) with olaparib and -2·87 (-4·64 to -1·10) with placebo (estimated difference -0·03; 95% CI -2·19 to 2·13; p=0·98). Mean QAPFS (13·96 [SD 10·96] vs 7·28 [5·22] months; difference 6·68, 95% CI 4·98-8·54) and mean duration of TWiST (15·03 [SD 12·79] vs 7·70 [6·42] months; difference 7·33, 95% CI 4·70-8·96) were significantly longer with olaparib than with placebo. INTERPRETATION:Olaparib maintenance therapy did not have a significant detrimental effect on HRQOL compared with placebo. There were clinically meaningful patient-centred benefits in both TWiST and QAPFS despite the adverse effects associated with olaparib. These patient-centred endpoints support the improvement in progression-free survival, the primary endpoint in SOLO2, and should be included in future trials of maintenance therapies. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.
Authors: Thomas J Herzog; Deborah K Armstrong; Mark F Brady; Robert L Coleman; Mark H Einstein; Bradley J Monk; Robert S Mannel; J Tate Thigpen; Sharee A Umpierre; Jeannine A Villella; Ronald D Alvarez Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2013-11-15 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Eric Pujade-Lauraine; Jonathan A Ledermann; Frédéric Selle; Val Gebski; Richard T Penson; Amit M Oza; Jacob Korach; Tomasz Huzarski; Andrés Poveda; Sandro Pignata; Michael Friedlander; Nicoletta Colombo; Philipp Harter; Keiichi Fujiwara; Isabelle Ray-Coquard; Susana Banerjee; Joyce Liu; Elizabeth S Lowe; Ralph Bloomfield; Patricia Pautier Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-07-25 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: K Basen-Engquist; D Bodurka-Bevers; M A Fitzgerald; K Webster; D Cella; S Hu; D M Gershenson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M K Wilson; E Pujade-Lauraine; D Aoki; M R Mirza; D Lorusso; A M Oza; A du Bois; I Vergote; A Reuss; M Bacon; M Friedlander; D Gallardo-Rincon; F Joly; S-J Chang; A M Ferrero; R J Edmondson; P Wimberger; J Maenpaa; D Gaffney; R Zang; A Okamoto; G Stuart; K Ochiai Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Jonathan Ledermann; Philipp Harter; Charlie Gourley; Michael Friedlander; Ignace Vergote; Gordon Rustin; Clare L Scott; Werner Meier; Ronnie Shapira-Frommer; Tamar Safra; Daniela Matei; Anitra Fielding; Stuart Spencer; Brian Dougherty; Maria Orr; Darren Hodgson; J Carl Barrett; Ursula Matulonis Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2014-05-31 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Alfredo Perales-Puchalt; Krzysztof Wojtak; Elizabeth K Duperret; Xue Yang; Anna M Slager; Jian Yan; Kar Muthumani; Luis J Montaner; David B Weiner Journal: Mol Ther Date: 2018-12-13 Impact factor: 11.454
Authors: Ling Zhao; Linjuan Huang; Jing Zhang; Jiaming Fan; Fang He; Xia Zhao; Hao Wang; Qing Liu; Deyao Shi; Na Ni; William Wagstaff; Mikhail Pakvasa; Kai Fu; Andrew B Tucker; Connie Chen; Russell R Reid; Rex C Haydon; Hue H Luu; Le Shen; Hongbo Qi; Tong-Chuan He Journal: Am J Transl Res Date: 2020-12-15 Impact factor: 4.060
Authors: Lari Wenzel; Kathryn Osann; Chelsea McKinney; David Cella; Giulia Fulci; Mary J Scroggins; Heather A Lankes; Victoria Wang; Kenneth P Nephew; George L Maxwell; Samuel C Mok; Thomas P Conrads; Austin Miller; Robert S Mannel; Heidi J Gray; Parviz Hanjani; Warner K Huh; Nick Spirtos; Mario M Leitao; Gretchen Glaser; Sudarshan K Sharma; Alessandro D Santin; Paul Sperduto; Shashikant B Lele; Robert A Burger; Bradley J Monk; Michael Birrer Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 13.506