Literature DB >> 34143970

Avelumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer (JAVELIN Ovarian 200): an open-label, three-arm, randomised, phase 3 study.

Eric Pujade-Lauraine1, Keiichi Fujiwara2, Jonathan A Ledermann3, Amit M Oza4, Rebecca Kristeleit3, Isabelle-Laure Ray-Coquard5, Gary E Richardson6, Cristiana Sessa7, Kan Yonemori8, Susana Banerjee9, Alexandra Leary10, Anna V Tinker11, Kyung Hae Jung12, Radoslaw Madry13, Sang-Yoon Park14, Charles K Anderson15, Fabian Zohren16, Ross A Stewart17, Caimiao Wei18, Samuel S Dychter17, Bradley J Monk19.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Most patients with ovarian cancer will relapse after receiving frontline platinum-based chemotherapy and eventually develop platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory disease. We report results of avelumab alone or avelumab plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) compared with PLD alone in patients with platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer.
METHODS: JAVELIN Ovarian 200 was an open-label, parallel-group, three-arm, randomised, phase 3 trial, done at 149 hospitals and cancer treatment centres in 24 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer (maximum of three previous lines for platinum-sensitive disease, none for platinum-resistant disease) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via interactive response technology to avelumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks), avelumab plus PLD (40 mg/m2 intravenously every 4 weeks), or PLD and stratified by disease platinum status, number of previous anticancer regimens, and bulky disease. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival by blinded independent central review and overall survival in all randomly assigned patients, with the objective to show whether avelumab alone or avelumab plus PLD is superior to PLD. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02580058. The trial is no longer enrolling patients and this is the final analysis of both primary endpoints.
FINDINGS: Between Jan 5, 2016, and May 16, 2017, 566 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned (combination n=188; PLD n=190, avelumab n=188). At data cutoff (Sept 19, 2018), median duration of follow-up for overall survival was 18·4 months (IQR 15·6-21·9) for the combination group, 17·4 months (15·2-21·3) for the PLD group, and 18·2 months (15·8-21·2) for the avelumab group. Median progression-free survival by blinded independent central review was 3·7 months (95% CI 3·3-5·1) in the combination group, 3·5 months (2·1-4·0) in the PLD group, and 1·9 months (1·8-1·9) in the avelumab group (combination vs PLD: stratified HR 0·78 [repeated 93·1% CI 0·59-1·24], one-sided p=0·030; avelumab vs PLD: 1·68 [1·32-2·60], one-sided p>0·99). Median overall survival was 15·7 months (95% CI 12·7-18·7) in the combination group, 13·1 months (11·8-15·5) in the PLD group, and 11·8 months (8·9-14·1) in the avelumab group (combination vs PLD: stratified HR 0·89 [repeated 88·85% CI 0·74-1·24], one-sided p=0·21; avelumab vs PLD: 1·14 [0·95-1·58], one-sided p=0·83]). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (18 [10%] in the combination group vs nine [5%] in the PLD group vs none in the avelumab group), rash (11 [6%] vs three [2%] vs none), fatigue (ten [5%] vs three [2%] vs none), stomatitis (ten [5%] vs five [3%] vs none), anaemia (six [3%] vs nine [5%] vs three [2%]), neutropenia (nine [5%] vs nine [5%] vs none), and neutrophil count decreased (eight [5%] vs seven [4%] vs none). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 32 (18%) patients in the combination group, 19 (11%) in the PLD group, and 14 (7%) in the avelumab group. Treatment-related adverse events resulted in death in one patient each in the PLD group (sepsis) and avelumab group (intestinal obstruction).
INTERPRETATION: Neither avelumab plus PLD nor avelumab alone significantly improved progression-free survival or overall survival versus PLD. These results provide insights for patient selection in future studies of immune checkpoint inhibitors in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer. FUNDING: Pfizer and Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34143970     DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00216-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Oncol        ISSN: 1470-2045            Impact factor:   41.316


  42 in total

1.  Innovative therapies to tackle platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Amanda B Keener
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 2.  Clinical research in ovarian cancer: consensus recommendations from the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup.

Authors:  Ignace Vergote; Antonio Gonzalez-Martin; Domenica Lorusso; Charlie Gourley; Mansoor Raza Mirza; Jean-Emmanuel Kurtz; Aikou Okamoto; Kathleen Moore; Frédéric Kridelka; Iain McNeish; Alexander Reuss; Bénédicte Votan; Andreas du Bois; Sven Mahner; Isabelle Ray-Coquard; Elise C Kohn; Jonathan S Berek; David S P Tan; Nicoletta Colombo; Rongyu Zang; Nicole Concin; Dearbhaile O'Donnell; Alejandro Rauh-Hain; C Simon Herrington; Christian Marth; Andres Poveda; Keiichi Fujiwara; Gavin C E Stuart; Amit M Oza; Michael A Bookman
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2022-08       Impact factor: 54.433

Review 3.  Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer: Current Perspectives.

Authors:  Ahmad Awada; Sarfraz Ahmad; Nathalie D McKenzie; Robert W Holloway
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2022-08-10       Impact factor: 4.345

Review 4.  Incidence of hepatotoxicity associated with addition of immune checkpoint blockade to systemic solid tumor therapy: a meta-analysis of phase 3 randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Yu Fujiwara; Nobuyuki Horita; Matthew Harrington; Ho Namkoong; Hirotaka Miyashita; Matthew D Galsky
Journal:  Cancer Immunol Immunother       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 6.630

Review 5.  Immunobiology of high-grade serous ovarian cancer: lessons for clinical translation.

Authors:  Lana E Kandalaft; Denarda Dangaj Laniti; George Coukos
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2022-09-15       Impact factor: 69.800

Review 6.  Advances in the management of peritoneal malignancies.

Authors:  Vahan Kepenekian; Aditi Bhatt; Julien Péron; Mohammad Alyami; Nazim Benzerdjeb; Naoual Bakrin; Claire Falandry; Guillaume Passot; Pascal Rousset; Olivier Glehen
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2022-09-07       Impact factor: 65.011

7.  Identification of key genes and pathways related to cancer-associated fibroblasts in chemoresistance of ovarian cancer cells based on GEO and TCGA databases.

Authors:  Li Han; Xiaojuan Guo; Ruijuan Du; Kelei Guo; Pei Qi; Hua Bian
Journal:  J Ovarian Res       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 5.506

Review 8.  Current Advances in PD-1/PD-L1 Blockade in Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.

Authors:  Yuedi Zhang; Qiulin Cui; Manman Xu; Duo Liu; Shuzhong Yao; Ming Chen
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2022-06-27       Impact factor: 8.786

9.  Checkpoint Blockade: Not Yet NINJA Status in Ovarian Cancer.

Authors:  Rebecca L Porter; Ursula A Matulonis
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2021-09-16       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Immunotherapy in ovarian cancer: we are not there yet.

Authors:  Emma Barber; Daniela Matei
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 54.433

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.