AVAHO

ORLANDO – While African Americans with acute myeloid leukemia were more likely to have evidence of abnormal kidney function, the excess of this comorbidity didn’t affect overall survival, compared with whites, according to a study of more than 1,000 patients.

Andrew Bowser/MDedge News

A total of 63% of African Americans with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) presented with a renal function abnormality that could have excluded them from a clinical trial, compared with 56% in the overall cohort; however, analysis of outcomes data suggested that renal function abnormalities were not associated with decreased survival in African Americans versus whites, said Abby Statler, PhD, MPH, of the Cleveland Clinic.

The findings may have implications for the design of clinical trials that might exclude patients on the basis of comorbidities that don’t actually affect survival, according to Dr. Statler.

“If we’re able to liberalize renal function eligibility criteria ... this may reduce racial disparities in clinical trial enrollment, which might be a major step in improving the diversity of cancer patient populations,” Dr. Statler said in a press conference at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

Overly restrictive criteria could be a significant barrier to clinical trial enrollment among minority patient populations, according to Dr. Statler.

Eligibility criteria are generally biased toward “fit” patient populations, which means they may discriminate against less-fit groups, such as African Americans who, compared with whites, have higher rates of comorbidities and report poorer overall health, according to Dr. Statler.

Laura Michaelis, MD, who chaired the press conference, said these findings suggest current clinical trial designs may be “too restrictive.”

“Once it’s published and validated, [these] data should definitely make us think twice about when you limit a patient’s enrollment in a trial,” Dr. Michaelis said in an interview.

Restrictive eligibility criteria may not only limit access to minority populations, but also may slow clinical trial accrual and completion, and make it harder to generalize clinical trial findings to the overall population, said Dr. Michaelis, associate professor of medicine in the division of hematology and oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee.

SOURCE: Statler A et al. ASH 2019, Abstract 381.

ORLANDO – While African Americans with acute myeloid leukemia were more likely to have evidence of abnormal kidney function, the excess of this comorbidity didn’t affect overall survival, compared with whites, according to a study of more than 1,000 patients.

Andrew Bowser/MDedge News

A total of 63% of African Americans with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) presented with a renal function abnormality that could have excluded them from a clinical trial, compared with 56% in the overall cohort; however, analysis of outcomes data suggested that renal function abnormalities were not associated with decreased survival in African Americans versus whites, said Abby Statler, PhD, MPH, of the Cleveland Clinic.

The findings may have implications for the design of clinical trials that might exclude patients on the basis of comorbidities that don’t actually affect survival, according to Dr. Statler.

“If we’re able to liberalize renal function eligibility criteria ... this may reduce racial disparities in clinical trial enrollment, which might be a major step in improving the diversity of cancer patient populations,” Dr. Statler said in a press conference at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

Overly restrictive criteria could be a significant barrier to clinical trial enrollment among minority patient populations, according to Dr. Statler.

Eligibility criteria are generally biased toward “fit” patient populations, which means they may discriminate against less-fit groups, such as African Americans who, compared with whites, have higher rates of comorbidities and report poorer overall health, according to Dr. Statler.

Laura Michaelis, MD, who chaired the press conference, said these findings suggest current clinical trial designs may be “too restrictive.”

“Once it’s published and validated, [these] data should definitely make us think twice about when you limit a patient’s enrollment in a trial,” Dr. Michaelis said in an interview.

Restrictive eligibility criteria may not only limit access to minority populations, but also may slow clinical trial accrual and completion, and make it harder to generalize clinical trial findings to the overall population, said Dr. Michaelis, associate professor of medicine in the division of hematology and oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee.

SOURCE: Statler A et al. ASH 2019, Abstract 381.

ORLANDO – While African Americans with acute myeloid leukemia were more likely to have evidence of abnormal kidney function, the excess of this comorbidity didn’t affect overall survival, compared with whites, according to a study of more than 1,000 patients.

Andrew Bowser/MDedge News

A total of 63% of African Americans with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) presented with a renal function abnormality that could have excluded them from a clinical trial, compared with 56% in the overall cohort; however, analysis of outcomes data suggested that renal function abnormalities were not associated with decreased survival in African Americans versus whites, said Abby Statler, PhD, MPH, of the Cleveland Clinic.

The findings may have implications for the design of clinical trials that might exclude patients on the basis of comorbidities that don’t actually affect survival, according to Dr. Statler.

“If we’re able to liberalize renal function eligibility criteria ... this may reduce racial disparities in clinical trial enrollment, which might be a major step in improving the diversity of cancer patient populations,” Dr. Statler said in a press conference at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

Overly restrictive criteria could be a significant barrier to clinical trial enrollment among minority patient populations, according to Dr. Statler.

Eligibility criteria are generally biased toward “fit” patient populations, which means they may discriminate against less-fit groups, such as African Americans who, compared with whites, have higher rates of comorbidities and report poorer overall health, according to Dr. Statler.

Laura Michaelis, MD, who chaired the press conference, said these findings suggest current clinical trial designs may be “too restrictive.”

“Once it’s published and validated, [these] data should definitely make us think twice about when you limit a patient’s enrollment in a trial,” Dr. Michaelis said in an interview.

Restrictive eligibility criteria may not only limit access to minority populations, but also may slow clinical trial accrual and completion, and make it harder to generalize clinical trial findings to the overall population, said Dr. Michaelis, associate professor of medicine in the division of hematology and oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee.

SOURCE: Statler A et al. ASH 2019, Abstract 381.

ORLANDO – Age 70 may be the new 60, at least when it comes to outcomes following autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT) in multiple myeloma.

Benjamin Pena/Medscape

A large-scale study looking at transplant outcomes across age groups in multiple myeloma patients found similar rates of nonrelapse mortality, relapse/progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival between patients who were aged 70 years and older and those who were aged 60-69 years.

“Age has no implication in terms of the antimyeloma effect of transplant,” Anita D’Souza, MD, of the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The study analyzed outcomes from 15,999 multiple myeloma patients aged 20 years or older in the United States who received a single auto-HCT with melphalan conditioning within 12 months of diagnosis between 2013 and 2017. Within that dataset, the researchers compared outcomes from 7,032 patients aged 60-69 years and 2,092 patients aged 70 years and older.

This is the largest study of auto-HCT in older adults with multiple myeloma, the researchers said, and provides important data about the benefit of transplant at any age.

Univariate analysis showed that 100-day nonrelapse mortality was higher in patients aged 70 years and older – at 1% – compared with younger patients (P less than .01). Also, 2-year overall survival was lower in older adults – at 86% – compared with 60- to 69-year-olds (P less than .01).

However, on multivariate analysis with 60- to 69-year-olds as the reference group, patients older than age 70 years had similar nonrelapse mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1, 1.7, P = .06). The same trends were seen for relapse/progression (HR 1.0, 95% CI, 0.9-1, P = .6), progression-free survival (HR 1.1, 95% CI 1-1.2, P = .2), and overall survival (HR 1.2, 95% CI 1-1.4, P = .03). Given the large sample size, a P value of .01 was considered statistically significant.

Over the course of the study period, the percentage of patients aged 70 and older who received a transplant grew each year, rising to 28% by 2017. But Dr. D’Souza said that number is still too low given the safety and efficacy of auto-HCT in these patients.

“Every patient with myeloma should be referred to a transplant center,” she said.

Dr. D’Souza reported financial disclosures related to EDO-Mundapharma, Merck, Prothena, Sanofi, TeneoBio, Prothena, Pfizer, Imbrium, and Akcea. Other study authors reported financial relationships with multiple companies including Celgene, Takeda, BMS, and Janssen.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Munshi PN et al. ASH 2019, Abstract 782.

ORLANDO – Age 70 may be the new 60, at least when it comes to outcomes following autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT) in multiple myeloma.

Benjamin Pena/Medscape

A large-scale study looking at transplant outcomes across age groups in multiple myeloma patients found similar rates of nonrelapse mortality, relapse/progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival between patients who were aged 70 years and older and those who were aged 60-69 years.

“Age has no implication in terms of the antimyeloma effect of transplant,” Anita D’Souza, MD, of the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The study analyzed outcomes from 15,999 multiple myeloma patients aged 20 years or older in the United States who received a single auto-HCT with melphalan conditioning within 12 months of diagnosis between 2013 and 2017. Within that dataset, the researchers compared outcomes from 7,032 patients aged 60-69 years and 2,092 patients aged 70 years and older.

This is the largest study of auto-HCT in older adults with multiple myeloma, the researchers said, and provides important data about the benefit of transplant at any age.

Univariate analysis showed that 100-day nonrelapse mortality was higher in patients aged 70 years and older – at 1% – compared with younger patients (P less than .01). Also, 2-year overall survival was lower in older adults – at 86% – compared with 60- to 69-year-olds (P less than .01).

However, on multivariate analysis with 60- to 69-year-olds as the reference group, patients older than age 70 years had similar nonrelapse mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1, 1.7, P = .06). The same trends were seen for relapse/progression (HR 1.0, 95% CI, 0.9-1, P = .6), progression-free survival (HR 1.1, 95% CI 1-1.2, P = .2), and overall survival (HR 1.2, 95% CI 1-1.4, P = .03). Given the large sample size, a P value of .01 was considered statistically significant.

Over the course of the study period, the percentage of patients aged 70 and older who received a transplant grew each year, rising to 28% by 2017. But Dr. D’Souza said that number is still too low given the safety and efficacy of auto-HCT in these patients.

“Every patient with myeloma should be referred to a transplant center,” she said.

Dr. D’Souza reported financial disclosures related to EDO-Mundapharma, Merck, Prothena, Sanofi, TeneoBio, Prothena, Pfizer, Imbrium, and Akcea. Other study authors reported financial relationships with multiple companies including Celgene, Takeda, BMS, and Janssen.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Munshi PN et al. ASH 2019, Abstract 782.

ORLANDO – Age 70 may be the new 60, at least when it comes to outcomes following autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT) in multiple myeloma.

Benjamin Pena/Medscape

A large-scale study looking at transplant outcomes across age groups in multiple myeloma patients found similar rates of nonrelapse mortality, relapse/progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival between patients who were aged 70 years and older and those who were aged 60-69 years.

“Age has no implication in terms of the antimyeloma effect of transplant,” Anita D’Souza, MD, of the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The study analyzed outcomes from 15,999 multiple myeloma patients aged 20 years or older in the United States who received a single auto-HCT with melphalan conditioning within 12 months of diagnosis between 2013 and 2017. Within that dataset, the researchers compared outcomes from 7,032 patients aged 60-69 years and 2,092 patients aged 70 years and older.

This is the largest study of auto-HCT in older adults with multiple myeloma, the researchers said, and provides important data about the benefit of transplant at any age.

Univariate analysis showed that 100-day nonrelapse mortality was higher in patients aged 70 years and older – at 1% – compared with younger patients (P less than .01). Also, 2-year overall survival was lower in older adults – at 86% – compared with 60- to 69-year-olds (P less than .01).

However, on multivariate analysis with 60- to 69-year-olds as the reference group, patients older than age 70 years had similar nonrelapse mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1, 1.7, P = .06). The same trends were seen for relapse/progression (HR 1.0, 95% CI, 0.9-1, P = .6), progression-free survival (HR 1.1, 95% CI 1-1.2, P = .2), and overall survival (HR 1.2, 95% CI 1-1.4, P = .03). Given the large sample size, a P value of .01 was considered statistically significant.

Over the course of the study period, the percentage of patients aged 70 and older who received a transplant grew each year, rising to 28% by 2017. But Dr. D’Souza said that number is still too low given the safety and efficacy of auto-HCT in these patients.

“Every patient with myeloma should be referred to a transplant center,” she said.

Dr. D’Souza reported financial disclosures related to EDO-Mundapharma, Merck, Prothena, Sanofi, TeneoBio, Prothena, Pfizer, Imbrium, and Akcea. Other study authors reported financial relationships with multiple companies including Celgene, Takeda, BMS, and Janssen.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Munshi PN et al. ASH 2019, Abstract 782.

ORLANDO – A dual-targeted chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has demonstrated a high overall response rate, a long response duration, and manageable safety in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, according to an investigator in a phase 1 study.

Benjamin Pena/Medscape

The overall response rate exceeded 90%, and about three-quarters of patients remained progression-free at 9 months after treatment with the CAR T-cell therapy, which targets both B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) and CD38, the study investigator reported.

Grade 3 or greater cytokine release syndrome (CRS) occurred in about one-quarter of the patients, and no neurotoxicity was observed, according to investigator Yu Hu, MD, of Tongji Medical College in Hubei, China.

“These initial data provide strong evidence to support the further development of a dual-targeted CAR T-cell therapy for hard to treat multiple myeloma,” Dr. Hu said in a press conference.

Short-term relapse has been a “major challenge” with current CAR T-cell therapies currently under investigation for myeloma, most of which target BCMA, according to Dr. Hu.

He said the bispecific CAR T-cell therapy under investigation, known as BM38, was designed to target antigen loss and increase persistence of effector cells. According to the investigator, this was the first study to focus on an anti-BCMA and CD38 dual-targeted CAR T-cell therapy for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Gary J. Schiller, MD, of UCLA Health, who moderated the press conference, said that while dual-targeting is a potentially “attractive” approach in these hard-to-treat patients, further follow-up is needed to see duration of response and to see if antigen escape re-emerges.

“Cellular therapy is costly, in terms of toxicity as well as financial costs, so you would like to see what the durability of responses is before engaging in that as a late-stage therapy, not to mention moving it up front,” Dr. Schiller said in an interview.

The median progression-free survival (PFS) duration had not been reached at the time of this report, though the 9-month PFS rate was 78.87%, according to the data presented by Dr. Hu.

SOURCE: Li C et al. ASH 2019. Abstract 930.

ORLANDO – A dual-targeted chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has demonstrated a high overall response rate, a long response duration, and manageable safety in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, according to an investigator in a phase 1 study.

Benjamin Pena/Medscape

The overall response rate exceeded 90%, and about three-quarters of patients remained progression-free at 9 months after treatment with the CAR T-cell therapy, which targets both B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) and CD38, the study investigator reported.

Grade 3 or greater cytokine release syndrome (CRS) occurred in about one-quarter of the patients, and no neurotoxicity was observed, according to investigator Yu Hu, MD, of Tongji Medical College in Hubei, China.

“These initial data provide strong evidence to support the further development of a dual-targeted CAR T-cell therapy for hard to treat multiple myeloma,” Dr. Hu said in a press conference.

Short-term relapse has been a “major challenge” with current CAR T-cell therapies currently under investigation for myeloma, most of which target BCMA, according to Dr. Hu.

He said the bispecific CAR T-cell therapy under investigation, known as BM38, was designed to target antigen loss and increase persistence of effector cells. According to the investigator, this was the first study to focus on an anti-BCMA and CD38 dual-targeted CAR T-cell therapy for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Gary J. Schiller, MD, of UCLA Health, who moderated the press conference, said that while dual-targeting is a potentially “attractive” approach in these hard-to-treat patients, further follow-up is needed to see duration of response and to see if antigen escape re-emerges.

“Cellular therapy is costly, in terms of toxicity as well as financial costs, so you would like to see what the durability of responses is before engaging in that as a late-stage therapy, not to mention moving it up front,” Dr. Schiller said in an interview.

The median progression-free survival (PFS) duration had not been reached at the time of this report, though the 9-month PFS rate was 78.87%, according to the data presented by Dr. Hu.

SOURCE: Li C et al. ASH 2019. Abstract 930.

ORLANDO – A dual-targeted chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has demonstrated a high overall response rate, a long response duration, and manageable safety in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, according to an investigator in a phase 1 study.

Benjamin Pena/Medscape

The overall response rate exceeded 90%, and about three-quarters of patients remained progression-free at 9 months after treatment with the CAR T-cell therapy, which targets both B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) and CD38, the study investigator reported.

Grade 3 or greater cytokine release syndrome (CRS) occurred in about one-quarter of the patients, and no neurotoxicity was observed, according to investigator Yu Hu, MD, of Tongji Medical College in Hubei, China.

“These initial data provide strong evidence to support the further development of a dual-targeted CAR T-cell therapy for hard to treat multiple myeloma,” Dr. Hu said in a press conference.

Short-term relapse has been a “major challenge” with current CAR T-cell therapies currently under investigation for myeloma, most of which target BCMA, according to Dr. Hu.

He said the bispecific CAR T-cell therapy under investigation, known as BM38, was designed to target antigen loss and increase persistence of effector cells. According to the investigator, this was the first study to focus on an anti-BCMA and CD38 dual-targeted CAR T-cell therapy for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Gary J. Schiller, MD, of UCLA Health, who moderated the press conference, said that while dual-targeting is a potentially “attractive” approach in these hard-to-treat patients, further follow-up is needed to see duration of response and to see if antigen escape re-emerges.

“Cellular therapy is costly, in terms of toxicity as well as financial costs, so you would like to see what the durability of responses is before engaging in that as a late-stage therapy, not to mention moving it up front,” Dr. Schiller said in an interview.

The median progression-free survival (PFS) duration had not been reached at the time of this report, though the 9-month PFS rate was 78.87%, according to the data presented by Dr. Hu.

SOURCE: Li C et al. ASH 2019. Abstract 930.

ORLANDO – A novel chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR T) cell construct is associated with deep clinical responses in patients with multiple myeloma for whom prior lines of therapy – some numbering in the double digits – have failed.

Nephron/Wikimedia Commons

Among 29 patients with multiple myeloma enrolled in a phase 1b/2 trial of JNJ-4528, the overall response rate (ORR) at 6 months median follow-up was 100%, including 69% complete responses, with 27 patients remaining free of disease progression at a median of 6 months, reported Deepu Madduri, MD, of Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York.

Benjamin Pena/Medscape

“These are very heavily pretreated patients, and so getting early and deep responses is quite amazing,” she said at a briefing prior to presentation of the data at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

JNJ-4528 is a second-generation CAR T containing two single-domain antibodies targeted against B-cell maturation protein (BCMA). As previously reported, an identical CAR T cell construct showed a high overall response with manageable toxicities in 74 patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. JNJ-4528 was granted a breakthrough therapy designation for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma by the Food and Drug Administration on Dec. 6, 2019, and a priority medicines (PRIME) designation by the European Medicines Agency in April 2019.

BCMA was first described in myeloma in 2004 as a mechanism for the growth and survival of malignant plasma cells. Several research groups are currently investigating CAR T cells or monoclonal antibodies targeted to BCMA. The product closest to receiving FDA approval is likely BB2121.

SOURCE: Madduri D et al. ASH 2019. Abstract 577.

ORLANDO – A novel chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR T) cell construct is associated with deep clinical responses in patients with multiple myeloma for whom prior lines of therapy – some numbering in the double digits – have failed.

Nephron/Wikimedia Commons

Among 29 patients with multiple myeloma enrolled in a phase 1b/2 trial of JNJ-4528, the overall response rate (ORR) at 6 months median follow-up was 100%, including 69% complete responses, with 27 patients remaining free of disease progression at a median of 6 months, reported Deepu Madduri, MD, of Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York.

Benjamin Pena/Medscape

“These are very heavily pretreated patients, and so getting early and deep responses is quite amazing,” she said at a briefing prior to presentation of the data at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

JNJ-4528 is a second-generation CAR T containing two single-domain antibodies targeted against B-cell maturation protein (BCMA). As previously reported, an identical CAR T cell construct showed a high overall response with manageable toxicities in 74 patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. JNJ-4528 was granted a breakthrough therapy designation for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma by the Food and Drug Administration on Dec. 6, 2019, and a priority medicines (PRIME) designation by the European Medicines Agency in April 2019.

BCMA was first described in myeloma in 2004 as a mechanism for the growth and survival of malignant plasma cells. Several research groups are currently investigating CAR T cells or monoclonal antibodies targeted to BCMA. The product closest to receiving FDA approval is likely BB2121.

SOURCE: Madduri D et al. ASH 2019. Abstract 577.

ORLANDO – A novel chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR T) cell construct is associated with deep clinical responses in patients with multiple myeloma for whom prior lines of therapy – some numbering in the double digits – have failed.

Nephron/Wikimedia Commons

Among 29 patients with multiple myeloma enrolled in a phase 1b/2 trial of JNJ-4528, the overall response rate (ORR) at 6 months median follow-up was 100%, including 69% complete responses, with 27 patients remaining free of disease progression at a median of 6 months, reported Deepu Madduri, MD, of Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York.

Benjamin Pena/Medscape

“These are very heavily pretreated patients, and so getting early and deep responses is quite amazing,” she said at a briefing prior to presentation of the data at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

JNJ-4528 is a second-generation CAR T containing two single-domain antibodies targeted against B-cell maturation protein (BCMA). As previously reported, an identical CAR T cell construct showed a high overall response with manageable toxicities in 74 patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. JNJ-4528 was granted a breakthrough therapy designation for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma by the Food and Drug Administration on Dec. 6, 2019, and a priority medicines (PRIME) designation by the European Medicines Agency in April 2019.

BCMA was first described in myeloma in 2004 as a mechanism for the growth and survival of malignant plasma cells. Several research groups are currently investigating CAR T cells or monoclonal antibodies targeted to BCMA. The product closest to receiving FDA approval is likely BB2121.

SOURCE: Madduri D et al. ASH 2019. Abstract 577.

Women are more likely to experience acute toxic effects from chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer than men, but this does not appear to negatively impact treatment adherence or outcomes, research suggests.

In a research letter published in JAMA Oncology, Markus Diefenhardt, MD, from the University of Frankfurt and coauthors wrote that, while the risk of toxic chemotherapy effects was known to be greater in women for a number of cancers, this association was relatively unexplored for rectal cancer.

The researchers performed a pooled analysis of data from two phase 3, randomized clinical trials, involving 1,016 patients with rectal cancer – 28.6% of whom were female – treated with fluorouracil-based chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant fluorouracil.

They found that women experienced significantly higher rates of leukopenia and diarrhea than men. Grade 3-4 leukopenia was experienced by 28.6% of women, compared with 20.5% of men, and grades 3-4 diarrhea was experienced by 17.2% of women, compared with 8.1% of men.

Despite this, the study found similar rates of adherence to treatment between men and women both for neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Women also had similar rates of disease-free survival and overall survival as men, and there were no significant differences in local recurrence or distant metastases.

“Although to our knowledge no data support using different chemotherapy regimens for men and women with rectal cancer, increased awareness of a higher risk of toxic effects among women may facilitate refinement of fluorouracil-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy, such as tailored patient education, closer monitoring of adverse effects, and earlier introduction of supportive measures,” the authors wrote.

The authors proposed several possible explanations for the higher rate of toxic effects in women. For example, women may have lower levels of the enzyme dihydropyridine dehydrogenase, which catabolizes fluorouracil, which could result in overdosing of fluorouracil. Similarly, sex-specific body fat composition could also contribute to fluorouracil overdosing in women.

The study also saw fewer postoperative complications in women, which the authors suggested could be related to the lower rate of abdominoperineal resections in women.

The two clinical trials included in the study were funded by German Cancer Aid. One author declared funding from German Cancer Aid, another declared a range of honoraria, research fees and institutional funding from the pharmaceutical sector. No other conflicts of interest were declared.

SOURCE: Diefendhardt M et al. JAMA Oncol. 2019 Dec 5. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.5102.

Women are more likely to experience acute toxic effects from chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer than men, but this does not appear to negatively impact treatment adherence or outcomes, research suggests.

In a research letter published in JAMA Oncology, Markus Diefenhardt, MD, from the University of Frankfurt and coauthors wrote that, while the risk of toxic chemotherapy effects was known to be greater in women for a number of cancers, this association was relatively unexplored for rectal cancer.

The researchers performed a pooled analysis of data from two phase 3, randomized clinical trials, involving 1,016 patients with rectal cancer – 28.6% of whom were female – treated with fluorouracil-based chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant fluorouracil.

They found that women experienced significantly higher rates of leukopenia and diarrhea than men. Grade 3-4 leukopenia was experienced by 28.6% of women, compared with 20.5% of men, and grades 3-4 diarrhea was experienced by 17.2% of women, compared with 8.1% of men.

Despite this, the study found similar rates of adherence to treatment between men and women both for neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Women also had similar rates of disease-free survival and overall survival as men, and there were no significant differences in local recurrence or distant metastases.

“Although to our knowledge no data support using different chemotherapy regimens for men and women with rectal cancer, increased awareness of a higher risk of toxic effects among women may facilitate refinement of fluorouracil-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy, such as tailored patient education, closer monitoring of adverse effects, and earlier introduction of supportive measures,” the authors wrote.

The authors proposed several possible explanations for the higher rate of toxic effects in women. For example, women may have lower levels of the enzyme dihydropyridine dehydrogenase, which catabolizes fluorouracil, which could result in overdosing of fluorouracil. Similarly, sex-specific body fat composition could also contribute to fluorouracil overdosing in women.

The study also saw fewer postoperative complications in women, which the authors suggested could be related to the lower rate of abdominoperineal resections in women.

The two clinical trials included in the study were funded by German Cancer Aid. One author declared funding from German Cancer Aid, another declared a range of honoraria, research fees and institutional funding from the pharmaceutical sector. No other conflicts of interest were declared.

SOURCE: Diefendhardt M et al. JAMA Oncol. 2019 Dec 5. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.5102.

Women are more likely to experience acute toxic effects from chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer than men, but this does not appear to negatively impact treatment adherence or outcomes, research suggests.

In a research letter published in JAMA Oncology, Markus Diefenhardt, MD, from the University of Frankfurt and coauthors wrote that, while the risk of toxic chemotherapy effects was known to be greater in women for a number of cancers, this association was relatively unexplored for rectal cancer.

The researchers performed a pooled analysis of data from two phase 3, randomized clinical trials, involving 1,016 patients with rectal cancer – 28.6% of whom were female – treated with fluorouracil-based chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant fluorouracil.

They found that women experienced significantly higher rates of leukopenia and diarrhea than men. Grade 3-4 leukopenia was experienced by 28.6% of women, compared with 20.5% of men, and grades 3-4 diarrhea was experienced by 17.2% of women, compared with 8.1% of men.

Despite this, the study found similar rates of adherence to treatment between men and women both for neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Women also had similar rates of disease-free survival and overall survival as men, and there were no significant differences in local recurrence or distant metastases.

“Although to our knowledge no data support using different chemotherapy regimens for men and women with rectal cancer, increased awareness of a higher risk of toxic effects among women may facilitate refinement of fluorouracil-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy, such as tailored patient education, closer monitoring of adverse effects, and earlier introduction of supportive measures,” the authors wrote.

The authors proposed several possible explanations for the higher rate of toxic effects in women. For example, women may have lower levels of the enzyme dihydropyridine dehydrogenase, which catabolizes fluorouracil, which could result in overdosing of fluorouracil. Similarly, sex-specific body fat composition could also contribute to fluorouracil overdosing in women.

The study also saw fewer postoperative complications in women, which the authors suggested could be related to the lower rate of abdominoperineal resections in women.

The two clinical trials included in the study were funded by German Cancer Aid. One author declared funding from German Cancer Aid, another declared a range of honoraria, research fees and institutional funding from the pharmaceutical sector. No other conflicts of interest were declared.

SOURCE: Diefendhardt M et al. JAMA Oncol. 2019 Dec 5. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.5102.

Sequential chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and immunotherapy is safe, well tolerated, and efficacious among patients with locally advanced cervical cancer being treated with curative intent, a multicenter phase 1 trial suggests.

Less than 10% of patients treated with this sequence experienced a grade 3 toxicity. Meanwhile, more than 80% were alive and free of disease progression at 1 year.

“Despite standard CRT, most women with lymph node–positive cervical cancer experience disease recurrence,” note the investigators, led by Jyoti S. Mayadev, MD, associate professor in the department of radiation medicine and applied sciences, University of California, San Diego, in La Jolla. “Our study is potentially transformative in the standard treatment schema of locally advanced cervical cancer, with the prospect for immuno-oncology to add durable survival in patients with node-positive disease, a current unmet oncologic need.”

The investigators enrolled in the trial 32 women from Gynecology Oncology Cooperative Group member institutions who had stage IB2 to IVA cervical cancer with positive pelvic and/or para-aortic lymph nodes. Treatment consisted of six weekly doses of cisplatin, 40 mg/m², concurrent with extended-field, 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, followed by the immune checkpoint inhibitor ipilimumab (Yervoy) every 21 days for four cycles.

Results reported in JAMA Oncology showed that all 32 patients completed CRT and 21 patients went on to receive ipilimumab. Among the latter, 86% completed all four planned cycles and the rest completed two cycles.

In the group receiving sequential CRT and ipilimumab, 9.5% experienced grade 3 toxicity (lipase increase in one case and dermatitis in another case). Both toxicities were self-limited.

With a 14.8-month median follow-up, the patients treated with CRT-ipilimumab had a 12-month overall survival rate of 90%, and a 12-month progression-free survival rate of 81% (median durations were not reached). Neither human papillomavirus genotype nor HLA subtype was associated with these outcomes.

Translational analyses showed that patients experienced an increase in peripheral blood T cells expressing programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) after CRT that was then sustained with ipilimumab therapy. “[T]he use of an immune checkpoint inhibitor could stimulate the antitumor activity of tumor-specific cytotoxic T cells and augment radiation-induced neoantigen load,” the investigators proposed.

“To our knowledge, this phase 1 study is the first to show tolerability with a signal of efficacy of an immune check-point inhibitor ... as a part of the definitive treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer,” they concluded. “Our findings show promise for the use of immunotherapy in the definitive setting of locally advanced, node-positive cervical cancer; patients with this cancer historically have a poor prognosis with standard therapy alone.”

Dr. Mayadev disclosed receiving a grant from the National Cancer Institute during the conduct of the study, personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants from NRG Oncology, and personal fees and nonfinancial support from the Gynecology Oncology Group Foundation outside the submitted work; receiving compensation for serving on the advisory board of Varian Medical Systems in 2018; and being a speaker for Samsung Medical Systems in 2017. The study was supported by the National Cancer Institute and by institutional funds.

SOURCE: Mayadev JS et al. JAMA Oncol. 2019 Nov 27. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.3857.

Sequential chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and immunotherapy is safe, well tolerated, and efficacious among patients with locally advanced cervical cancer being treated with curative intent, a multicenter phase 1 trial suggests.

Less than 10% of patients treated with this sequence experienced a grade 3 toxicity. Meanwhile, more than 80% were alive and free of disease progression at 1 year.

“Despite standard CRT, most women with lymph node–positive cervical cancer experience disease recurrence,” note the investigators, led by Jyoti S. Mayadev, MD, associate professor in the department of radiation medicine and applied sciences, University of California, San Diego, in La Jolla. “Our study is potentially transformative in the standard treatment schema of locally advanced cervical cancer, with the prospect for immuno-oncology to add durable survival in patients with node-positive disease, a current unmet oncologic need.”

The investigators enrolled in the trial 32 women from Gynecology Oncology Cooperative Group member institutions who had stage IB2 to IVA cervical cancer with positive pelvic and/or para-aortic lymph nodes. Treatment consisted of six weekly doses of cisplatin, 40 mg/m², concurrent with extended-field, 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, followed by the immune checkpoint inhibitor ipilimumab (Yervoy) every 21 days for four cycles.

Results reported in JAMA Oncology showed that all 32 patients completed CRT and 21 patients went on to receive ipilimumab. Among the latter, 86% completed all four planned cycles and the rest completed two cycles.

In the group receiving sequential CRT and ipilimumab, 9.5% experienced grade 3 toxicity (lipase increase in one case and dermatitis in another case). Both toxicities were self-limited.

With a 14.8-month median follow-up, the patients treated with CRT-ipilimumab had a 12-month overall survival rate of 90%, and a 12-month progression-free survival rate of 81% (median durations were not reached). Neither human papillomavirus genotype nor HLA subtype was associated with these outcomes.

Translational analyses showed that patients experienced an increase in peripheral blood T cells expressing programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) after CRT that was then sustained with ipilimumab therapy. “[T]he use of an immune checkpoint inhibitor could stimulate the antitumor activity of tumor-specific cytotoxic T cells and augment radiation-induced neoantigen load,” the investigators proposed.

“To our knowledge, this phase 1 study is the first to show tolerability with a signal of efficacy of an immune check-point inhibitor ... as a part of the definitive treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer,” they concluded. “Our findings show promise for the use of immunotherapy in the definitive setting of locally advanced, node-positive cervical cancer; patients with this cancer historically have a poor prognosis with standard therapy alone.”

Dr. Mayadev disclosed receiving a grant from the National Cancer Institute during the conduct of the study, personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants from NRG Oncology, and personal fees and nonfinancial support from the Gynecology Oncology Group Foundation outside the submitted work; receiving compensation for serving on the advisory board of Varian Medical Systems in 2018; and being a speaker for Samsung Medical Systems in 2017. The study was supported by the National Cancer Institute and by institutional funds.

SOURCE: Mayadev JS et al. JAMA Oncol. 2019 Nov 27. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.3857.

Sequential chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and immunotherapy is safe, well tolerated, and efficacious among patients with locally advanced cervical cancer being treated with curative intent, a multicenter phase 1 trial suggests.

Less than 10% of patients treated with this sequence experienced a grade 3 toxicity. Meanwhile, more than 80% were alive and free of disease progression at 1 year.

“Despite standard CRT, most women with lymph node–positive cervical cancer experience disease recurrence,” note the investigators, led by Jyoti S. Mayadev, MD, associate professor in the department of radiation medicine and applied sciences, University of California, San Diego, in La Jolla. “Our study is potentially transformative in the standard treatment schema of locally advanced cervical cancer, with the prospect for immuno-oncology to add durable survival in patients with node-positive disease, a current unmet oncologic need.”

The investigators enrolled in the trial 32 women from Gynecology Oncology Cooperative Group member institutions who had stage IB2 to IVA cervical cancer with positive pelvic and/or para-aortic lymph nodes. Treatment consisted of six weekly doses of cisplatin, 40 mg/m², concurrent with extended-field, 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, followed by the immune checkpoint inhibitor ipilimumab (Yervoy) every 21 days for four cycles.

Results reported in JAMA Oncology showed that all 32 patients completed CRT and 21 patients went on to receive ipilimumab. Among the latter, 86% completed all four planned cycles and the rest completed two cycles.

In the group receiving sequential CRT and ipilimumab, 9.5% experienced grade 3 toxicity (lipase increase in one case and dermatitis in another case). Both toxicities were self-limited.

With a 14.8-month median follow-up, the patients treated with CRT-ipilimumab had a 12-month overall survival rate of 90%, and a 12-month progression-free survival rate of 81% (median durations were not reached). Neither human papillomavirus genotype nor HLA subtype was associated with these outcomes.

Translational analyses showed that patients experienced an increase in peripheral blood T cells expressing programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) after CRT that was then sustained with ipilimumab therapy. “[T]he use of an immune checkpoint inhibitor could stimulate the antitumor activity of tumor-specific cytotoxic T cells and augment radiation-induced neoantigen load,” the investigators proposed.

“To our knowledge, this phase 1 study is the first to show tolerability with a signal of efficacy of an immune check-point inhibitor ... as a part of the definitive treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer,” they concluded. “Our findings show promise for the use of immunotherapy in the definitive setting of locally advanced, node-positive cervical cancer; patients with this cancer historically have a poor prognosis with standard therapy alone.”

Dr. Mayadev disclosed receiving a grant from the National Cancer Institute during the conduct of the study, personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants from NRG Oncology, and personal fees and nonfinancial support from the Gynecology Oncology Group Foundation outside the submitted work; receiving compensation for serving on the advisory board of Varian Medical Systems in 2018; and being a speaker for Samsung Medical Systems in 2017. The study was supported by the National Cancer Institute and by institutional funds.

SOURCE: Mayadev JS et al. JAMA Oncol. 2019 Nov 27. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.3857.

In Massachusetts, the rate of lung cancer screening in high-risk individuals is almost 25 times higher than that seen in Nevada, according to the American Lung Association.

That disparity might suggest that Massachusetts has an exceptionally high rate, but it’s only 12.3%. And that means Nevada’s rate is very low, which it is: Only 0.5% of those at high risk are getting screened with annual low-dose CT scans, the ALA said in its 2019 State of Lung Cancer report.

“[The low rate of screening] may be because of a lack of access or low awareness and knowledge among patients and providers. As rates vary tremendously between states, it is clear that more can be done to increase screening rates,” the ALA stated.

Nationally, the screening rate is 4.2% among those at high risk for lung cancer, but “if everyone currently eligible were screened, close to 48,000 lives could be saved,” the ALA noted in its report.

Six states other than Nevada are below the 2% mark: Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, and Wyoming. Besides Massachusetts, the three other states above 10% are Kentucky, New Hampshire, and Vermont, according to data from the American College of Radiology’s Lung Cancer Screening Registry state-level comparison for 2018.

For individuals at high risk for lung cancer – those aged 55-80 years who have at least a 30 pack-year history and either still smoke or have quit within 15 years – “screening with annual low-dose CT scans can reduce the lung cancer death rate by up to 20% by detecting tumors at early stages when the cancer is more likely to be curable,” the ALA wrote.

[email protected]

In Massachusetts, the rate of lung cancer screening in high-risk individuals is almost 25 times higher than that seen in Nevada, according to the American Lung Association.

That disparity might suggest that Massachusetts has an exceptionally high rate, but it’s only 12.3%. And that means Nevada’s rate is very low, which it is: Only 0.5% of those at high risk are getting screened with annual low-dose CT scans, the ALA said in its 2019 State of Lung Cancer report.

“[The low rate of screening] may be because of a lack of access or low awareness and knowledge among patients and providers. As rates vary tremendously between states, it is clear that more can be done to increase screening rates,” the ALA stated.

Nationally, the screening rate is 4.2% among those at high risk for lung cancer, but “if everyone currently eligible were screened, close to 48,000 lives could be saved,” the ALA noted in its report.

Six states other than Nevada are below the 2% mark: Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, and Wyoming. Besides Massachusetts, the three other states above 10% are Kentucky, New Hampshire, and Vermont, according to data from the American College of Radiology’s Lung Cancer Screening Registry state-level comparison for 2018.

For individuals at high risk for lung cancer – those aged 55-80 years who have at least a 30 pack-year history and either still smoke or have quit within 15 years – “screening with annual low-dose CT scans can reduce the lung cancer death rate by up to 20% by detecting tumors at early stages when the cancer is more likely to be curable,” the ALA wrote.

[email protected]

In Massachusetts, the rate of lung cancer screening in high-risk individuals is almost 25 times higher than that seen in Nevada, according to the American Lung Association.

That disparity might suggest that Massachusetts has an exceptionally high rate, but it’s only 12.3%. And that means Nevada’s rate is very low, which it is: Only 0.5% of those at high risk are getting screened with annual low-dose CT scans, the ALA said in its 2019 State of Lung Cancer report.

“[The low rate of screening] may be because of a lack of access or low awareness and knowledge among patients and providers. As rates vary tremendously between states, it is clear that more can be done to increase screening rates,” the ALA stated.

Nationally, the screening rate is 4.2% among those at high risk for lung cancer, but “if everyone currently eligible were screened, close to 48,000 lives could be saved,” the ALA noted in its report.

Six states other than Nevada are below the 2% mark: Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, and Wyoming. Besides Massachusetts, the three other states above 10% are Kentucky, New Hampshire, and Vermont, according to data from the American College of Radiology’s Lung Cancer Screening Registry state-level comparison for 2018.

For individuals at high risk for lung cancer – those aged 55-80 years who have at least a 30 pack-year history and either still smoke or have quit within 15 years – “screening with annual low-dose CT scans can reduce the lung cancer death rate by up to 20% by detecting tumors at early stages when the cancer is more likely to be curable,” the ALA wrote.

[email protected]

Several practice-changing developments in the treatment of ovarian cancer were seen in 2019, including the results of the pivotal trial Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG)-213, which were published in November in the New England Journal of Medicine.¹ This trial randomly assigned women with ovarian cancer who had achieved a remission of more than 6 months after primary therapy (“platinum sensitive”) to either a repeat surgical cytoreduction followed by chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone. It found that the addition of surgery provided no benefit in overall survival, challenging the notion that repeat surgical “debulking” should be routinely considered for the treatment of women with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.

Alexander Raths/Fotolia

The primary treatment of ovarian cancer includes a combination of surgery and chemotherapy, after which the vast majority of patients will experience a complete clinical response, a so-called “remission.” At that time patients enter surveillance care, in which their providers evaluate them, typically every 3 months in the first 2-3 years. These visits are designed to address ongoing toxicities of therapy in addition to evaluation for recurrence. At these visits, it is common for providers to assess tumor markers, such as CA 125 (cancer antigen 125), if they had been elevated at original diagnosis. As a gynecologic oncologist, I can vouch for the fact that patients “sweat” on this lab result the most. No matter how reassuring my physical exams or their symptom profiles are, there is nothing more comforting as a normal, stable CA 125 value in black and white. However, the results of GOG-213 should make us question whether drawing CA 125 in the surveillance period is of any value to patients beyond objective reassurance, and may, in fact, be harmful.

Providers have drawn tumor markers at surveillance exams under the working premise that abnormal or rising values signal the onset of asymptomatic recurrence, and that earlier treatment will be associated with better responses to salvage therapy. However, this has not been shown to be the case in randomized, controlled trials. In a large European cooperative-group trial, more than 500 patients with a history of completely treated ovarian cancer were randomized to either reinitiation of chemotherapy (salvage therapy) when CA 125 values first doubled or to reinitiation of therapy when they became symptomatic without knowledge of their CA 125 values.² In this trial the mean survival of both groups was the same (26 months for the early initiation of chemotherapy vs. 27 for late initiation). However, what did differ were the quality of life scores, which were lower for the group who initiated chemotherapy earlier, likely because they received toxic therapies for longer periods of time.

The results of this trial were challenged by those who felt that this study did not evaluate the role that surgery might play. Their argument was that surgery in the recurrent setting would improve the outcomes from chemotherapy for certain patients with long platinum-free intervals (duration of remission since last receiving a platinum-containing drug), oligometastatic disease, and good performance status, just as it had in the primary setting. Retrospective series seemed to confirm this phenomenon, particularly if surgeons were able to achieve a complete resection (no residual measurable disease).^3,4 By detecting asymptomatic patients with early elevations in CA 125, they proposed they might identify patients with lower disease burden in whom complete debulking would be more feasible. Whereas, in waiting for symptoms alone, they might “miss the boat,” and discover recurrence when it was too advanced to be completely resected.

The results of the GOG-213 study significantly challenge this line of thought, although with some caveats. Because this new trial showed no survival benefit for women with secondary debulking prior to chemotherapy, one could question whether there is any benefit in screening for asymptomatic, early recurrence. The authors of the study looked in subgroup analyses to attempt to identify groups who might benefit over others, such as women who had complete surgical cytoreduction (no residual disease) but still did not find a benefit to surgery. The trial population as a whole included women who had very favorable prognostic factors, including very long disease-free intervals (median, 20.4 months), and most women had only one or two sites of measurable recurrence. Yet it is remarkable that, in this group of patients who were predisposed to optimal outcomes, no benefit from surgery was observed.

However, it is important to recognize that the equivalent results of single-modality chemotherapy were achieved with the majority of women receiving bevacizumab with their chemotherapy regimen. An additional consideration is that the chemotherapy for platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer has changed in recent years as we have learned the benefit of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor drugs as maintenance therapy following complete or partial response to chemotherapy.⁵ It is unclear how the addition of PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy might have influenced the results of GOG-213. Further advancements in targeted therapies and consideration of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy at the time of surgery also are being developed, and so, the answer of optimal therapy for platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer is a fluid one and might include a role for surgery for some of these patients.

However, in the meantime, before routinely ordering that tumor marker assessment in the surveillance period, it is important to remember that, if secondary cytoreduction is not beneficial and early initiation of chemotherapy is not helpful either, then these tumor marker results might provide more hindrance than help. Why search for recurrence at an earlier time point with CA 125 elevations if there isn’t a benefit to the patient in doing so? There certainly appears to be worse quality of life in doing so, and most likely also additional cost. Perhaps we should wait for clinical symptoms to confirm recurrence?

In the meantime, we will continue to have discussions with patients after primary therapy regarding how to best monitor them in the surveillance period. We will educate them about the limitations of early initiation of chemotherapy and the potentially limited role for surgery. Hopefully with individualized care and shared decision making, patients can guide us as to how they best be evaluated. While receiving a normal CA 125 result is powerfully reassuring, it is just as powerfully confusing and difficult for a patient to receive an abnormal one followed by a period of “doing nothing,” otherwise known as expectant management, if immediate treatment is not beneficial.

Dr. Rossi is assistant professor in the division of gynecologic oncology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She had no relevant financial disclosures. Email her at [email protected].

References

1. N Engl J Med. 2019 Nov 14;381(20):1929-39.

2. Lancet. 2010 Oct 2;376(9747):1155-63.

3. Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Jan;112(1):265-74.

4. Br J Cancer. 2011 Sep 27;105(7):890-6.

5. N Engl J Med. 2016 Dec 1;375(22):2154-64.

Several practice-changing developments in the treatment of ovarian cancer were seen in 2019, including the results of the pivotal trial Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG)-213, which were published in November in the New England Journal of Medicine.¹ This trial randomly assigned women with ovarian cancer who had achieved a remission of more than 6 months after primary therapy (“platinum sensitive”) to either a repeat surgical cytoreduction followed by chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone. It found that the addition of surgery provided no benefit in overall survival, challenging the notion that repeat surgical “debulking” should be routinely considered for the treatment of women with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.

Alexander Raths/Fotolia

The primary treatment of ovarian cancer includes a combination of surgery and chemotherapy, after which the vast majority of patients will experience a complete clinical response, a so-called “remission.” At that time patients enter surveillance care, in which their providers evaluate them, typically every 3 months in the first 2-3 years. These visits are designed to address ongoing toxicities of therapy in addition to evaluation for recurrence. At these visits, it is common for providers to assess tumor markers, such as CA 125 (cancer antigen 125), if they had been elevated at original diagnosis. As a gynecologic oncologist, I can vouch for the fact that patients “sweat” on this lab result the most. No matter how reassuring my physical exams or their symptom profiles are, there is nothing more comforting as a normal, stable CA 125 value in black and white. However, the results of GOG-213 should make us question whether drawing CA 125 in the surveillance period is of any value to patients beyond objective reassurance, and may, in fact, be harmful.

Providers have drawn tumor markers at surveillance exams under the working premise that abnormal or rising values signal the onset of asymptomatic recurrence, and that earlier treatment will be associated with better responses to salvage therapy. However, this has not been shown to be the case in randomized, controlled trials. In a large European cooperative-group trial, more than 500 patients with a history of completely treated ovarian cancer were randomized to either reinitiation of chemotherapy (salvage therapy) when CA 125 values first doubled or to reinitiation of therapy when they became symptomatic without knowledge of their CA 125 values.² In this trial the mean survival of both groups was the same (26 months for the early initiation of chemotherapy vs. 27 for late initiation). However, what did differ were the quality of life scores, which were lower for the group who initiated chemotherapy earlier, likely because they received toxic therapies for longer periods of time.

The results of this trial were challenged by those who felt that this study did not evaluate the role that surgery might play. Their argument was that surgery in the recurrent setting would improve the outcomes from chemotherapy for certain patients with long platinum-free intervals (duration of remission since last receiving a platinum-containing drug), oligometastatic disease, and good performance status, just as it had in the primary setting. Retrospective series seemed to confirm this phenomenon, particularly if surgeons were able to achieve a complete resection (no residual measurable disease).^3,4 By detecting asymptomatic patients with early elevations in CA 125, they proposed they might identify patients with lower disease burden in whom complete debulking would be more feasible. Whereas, in waiting for symptoms alone, they might “miss the boat,” and discover recurrence when it was too advanced to be completely resected.

The results of the GOG-213 study significantly challenge this line of thought, although with some caveats. Because this new trial showed no survival benefit for women with secondary debulking prior to chemotherapy, one could question whether there is any benefit in screening for asymptomatic, early recurrence. The authors of the study looked in subgroup analyses to attempt to identify groups who might benefit over others, such as women who had complete surgical cytoreduction (no residual disease) but still did not find a benefit to surgery. The trial population as a whole included women who had very favorable prognostic factors, including very long disease-free intervals (median, 20.4 months), and most women had only one or two sites of measurable recurrence. Yet it is remarkable that, in this group of patients who were predisposed to optimal outcomes, no benefit from surgery was observed.

However, it is important to recognize that the equivalent results of single-modality chemotherapy were achieved with the majority of women receiving bevacizumab with their chemotherapy regimen. An additional consideration is that the chemotherapy for platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer has changed in recent years as we have learned the benefit of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor drugs as maintenance therapy following complete or partial response to chemotherapy.⁵ It is unclear how the addition of PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy might have influenced the results of GOG-213. Further advancements in targeted therapies and consideration of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy at the time of surgery also are being developed, and so, the answer of optimal therapy for platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer is a fluid one and might include a role for surgery for some of these patients.

However, in the meantime, before routinely ordering that tumor marker assessment in the surveillance period, it is important to remember that, if secondary cytoreduction is not beneficial and early initiation of chemotherapy is not helpful either, then these tumor marker results might provide more hindrance than help. Why search for recurrence at an earlier time point with CA 125 elevations if there isn’t a benefit to the patient in doing so? There certainly appears to be worse quality of life in doing so, and most likely also additional cost. Perhaps we should wait for clinical symptoms to confirm recurrence?

In the meantime, we will continue to have discussions with patients after primary therapy regarding how to best monitor them in the surveillance period. We will educate them about the limitations of early initiation of chemotherapy and the potentially limited role for surgery. Hopefully with individualized care and shared decision making, patients can guide us as to how they best be evaluated. While receiving a normal CA 125 result is powerfully reassuring, it is just as powerfully confusing and difficult for a patient to receive an abnormal one followed by a period of “doing nothing,” otherwise known as expectant management, if immediate treatment is not beneficial.

Dr. Rossi is assistant professor in the division of gynecologic oncology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She had no relevant financial disclosures. Email her at [email protected].

References

1. N Engl J Med. 2019 Nov 14;381(20):1929-39.

2. Lancet. 2010 Oct 2;376(9747):1155-63.

3. Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Jan;112(1):265-74.

4. Br J Cancer. 2011 Sep 27;105(7):890-6.

5. N Engl J Med. 2016 Dec 1;375(22):2154-64.

Several practice-changing developments in the treatment of ovarian cancer were seen in 2019, including the results of the pivotal trial Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG)-213, which were published in November in the New England Journal of Medicine.¹ This trial randomly assigned women with ovarian cancer who had achieved a remission of more than 6 months after primary therapy (“platinum sensitive”) to either a repeat surgical cytoreduction followed by chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone. It found that the addition of surgery provided no benefit in overall survival, challenging the notion that repeat surgical “debulking” should be routinely considered for the treatment of women with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.

Alexander Raths/Fotolia

The primary treatment of ovarian cancer includes a combination of surgery and chemotherapy, after which the vast majority of patients will experience a complete clinical response, a so-called “remission.” At that time patients enter surveillance care, in which their providers evaluate them, typically every 3 months in the first 2-3 years. These visits are designed to address ongoing toxicities of therapy in addition to evaluation for recurrence. At these visits, it is common for providers to assess tumor markers, such as CA 125 (cancer antigen 125), if they had been elevated at original diagnosis. As a gynecologic oncologist, I can vouch for the fact that patients “sweat” on this lab result the most. No matter how reassuring my physical exams or their symptom profiles are, there is nothing more comforting as a normal, stable CA 125 value in black and white. However, the results of GOG-213 should make us question whether drawing CA 125 in the surveillance period is of any value to patients beyond objective reassurance, and may, in fact, be harmful.

Providers have drawn tumor markers at surveillance exams under the working premise that abnormal or rising values signal the onset of asymptomatic recurrence, and that earlier treatment will be associated with better responses to salvage therapy. However, this has not been shown to be the case in randomized, controlled trials. In a large European cooperative-group trial, more than 500 patients with a history of completely treated ovarian cancer were randomized to either reinitiation of chemotherapy (salvage therapy) when CA 125 values first doubled or to reinitiation of therapy when they became symptomatic without knowledge of their CA 125 values.² In this trial the mean survival of both groups was the same (26 months for the early initiation of chemotherapy vs. 27 for late initiation). However, what did differ were the quality of life scores, which were lower for the group who initiated chemotherapy earlier, likely because they received toxic therapies for longer periods of time.

The results of this trial were challenged by those who felt that this study did not evaluate the role that surgery might play. Their argument was that surgery in the recurrent setting would improve the outcomes from chemotherapy for certain patients with long platinum-free intervals (duration of remission since last receiving a platinum-containing drug), oligometastatic disease, and good performance status, just as it had in the primary setting. Retrospective series seemed to confirm this phenomenon, particularly if surgeons were able to achieve a complete resection (no residual measurable disease).^3,4 By detecting asymptomatic patients with early elevations in CA 125, they proposed they might identify patients with lower disease burden in whom complete debulking would be more feasible. Whereas, in waiting for symptoms alone, they might “miss the boat,” and discover recurrence when it was too advanced to be completely resected.

The results of the GOG-213 study significantly challenge this line of thought, although with some caveats. Because this new trial showed no survival benefit for women with secondary debulking prior to chemotherapy, one could question whether there is any benefit in screening for asymptomatic, early recurrence. The authors of the study looked in subgroup analyses to attempt to identify groups who might benefit over others, such as women who had complete surgical cytoreduction (no residual disease) but still did not find a benefit to surgery. The trial population as a whole included women who had very favorable prognostic factors, including very long disease-free intervals (median, 20.4 months), and most women had only one or two sites of measurable recurrence. Yet it is remarkable that, in this group of patients who were predisposed to optimal outcomes, no benefit from surgery was observed.

However, it is important to recognize that the equivalent results of single-modality chemotherapy were achieved with the majority of women receiving bevacizumab with their chemotherapy regimen. An additional consideration is that the chemotherapy for platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer has changed in recent years as we have learned the benefit of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor drugs as maintenance therapy following complete or partial response to chemotherapy.⁵ It is unclear how the addition of PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy might have influenced the results of GOG-213. Further advancements in targeted therapies and consideration of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy at the time of surgery also are being developed, and so, the answer of optimal therapy for platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer is a fluid one and might include a role for surgery for some of these patients.

However, in the meantime, before routinely ordering that tumor marker assessment in the surveillance period, it is important to remember that, if secondary cytoreduction is not beneficial and early initiation of chemotherapy is not helpful either, then these tumor marker results might provide more hindrance than help. Why search for recurrence at an earlier time point with CA 125 elevations if there isn’t a benefit to the patient in doing so? There certainly appears to be worse quality of life in doing so, and most likely also additional cost. Perhaps we should wait for clinical symptoms to confirm recurrence?

In the meantime, we will continue to have discussions with patients after primary therapy regarding how to best monitor them in the surveillance period. We will educate them about the limitations of early initiation of chemotherapy and the potentially limited role for surgery. Hopefully with individualized care and shared decision making, patients can guide us as to how they best be evaluated. While receiving a normal CA 125 result is powerfully reassuring, it is just as powerfully confusing and difficult for a patient to receive an abnormal one followed by a period of “doing nothing,” otherwise known as expectant management, if immediate treatment is not beneficial.

Dr. Rossi is assistant professor in the division of gynecologic oncology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She had no relevant financial disclosures. Email her at [email protected].

References

1. N Engl J Med. 2019 Nov 14;381(20):1929-39.

2. Lancet. 2010 Oct 2;376(9747):1155-63.

3. Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Jan;112(1):265-74.

4. Br J Cancer. 2011 Sep 27;105(7):890-6.

5. N Engl J Med. 2016 Dec 1;375(22):2154-64.

Cancer-related pain was more common among patients in 2019 than in 2018, as was the use of prescription opioids, according to the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Patients who have/had cancer were significantly more likely to report that they were currently experiencing cancer-related pain in 2019 (19%) than in 2018 (12%), but there was only a slight increase in patients who said that they had experienced cancer-related pain in the past, the society reported in its National Cancer Opinion Survey.

When asked about methods used to manage pain, nausea, and other symptoms, patients diagnosed with cancer most often said that they had not used anything in the last 12 months, although this response was significantly less common in 2019 (48%) than in 2018 (55%). Over-the-counter pain relievers were the most common method used (24% in 2019 and 22% in 2018), followed by vitamins/minerals/herbs (18% in 2019 and 17% in 2018), ASCO said.

Prescription opioids were the third most popular choice for symptom management both years, but use was significantly higher in 2019 (17%) than in 2018 (12%). Also showing a significant increase from 2018 to 2019 was use of medical marijuana, which went from 5% to 10%, ASCO said.

The survey was conducted online for ASCO by the Harris Poll from July 9 to Aug. 10, 2019. The total sample consisted of 4,815 U.S. adults, of whom 1,009 had been diagnosed with cancer.

[email protected]

Cancer-related pain was more common among patients in 2019 than in 2018, as was the use of prescription opioids, according to the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Patients who have/had cancer were significantly more likely to report that they were currently experiencing cancer-related pain in 2019 (19%) than in 2018 (12%), but there was only a slight increase in patients who said that they had experienced cancer-related pain in the past, the society reported in its National Cancer Opinion Survey.

When asked about methods used to manage pain, nausea, and other symptoms, patients diagnosed with cancer most often said that they had not used anything in the last 12 months, although this response was significantly less common in 2019 (48%) than in 2018 (55%). Over-the-counter pain relievers were the most common method used (24% in 2019 and 22% in 2018), followed by vitamins/minerals/herbs (18% in 2019 and 17% in 2018), ASCO said.

Prescription opioids were the third most popular choice for symptom management both years, but use was significantly higher in 2019 (17%) than in 2018 (12%). Also showing a significant increase from 2018 to 2019 was use of medical marijuana, which went from 5% to 10%, ASCO said.

The survey was conducted online for ASCO by the Harris Poll from July 9 to Aug. 10, 2019. The total sample consisted of 4,815 U.S. adults, of whom 1,009 had been diagnosed with cancer.

[email protected]

Cancer-related pain was more common among patients in 2019 than in 2018, as was the use of prescription opioids, according to the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Patients who have/had cancer were significantly more likely to report that they were currently experiencing cancer-related pain in 2019 (19%) than in 2018 (12%), but there was only a slight increase in patients who said that they had experienced cancer-related pain in the past, the society reported in its National Cancer Opinion Survey.

When asked about methods used to manage pain, nausea, and other symptoms, patients diagnosed with cancer most often said that they had not used anything in the last 12 months, although this response was significantly less common in 2019 (48%) than in 2018 (55%). Over-the-counter pain relievers were the most common method used (24% in 2019 and 22% in 2018), followed by vitamins/minerals/herbs (18% in 2019 and 17% in 2018), ASCO said.

Prescription opioids were the third most popular choice for symptom management both years, but use was significantly higher in 2019 (17%) than in 2018 (12%). Also showing a significant increase from 2018 to 2019 was use of medical marijuana, which went from 5% to 10%, ASCO said.

The survey was conducted online for ASCO by the Harris Poll from July 9 to Aug. 10, 2019. The total sample consisted of 4,815 U.S. adults, of whom 1,009 had been diagnosed with cancer.

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration has approved givosiran (Givlaari) for the treatment of adult patients with acute hepatic porphyria, a genetic disorder that causes buildup of porphyrin molecules.

Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/ Creative Commons License

“This buildup can cause acute attacks, known as porphyria attacks, which can lead to severe pain and paralysis, respiratory failure, seizures, and mental status changes. These attacks occur suddenly and can produce permanent neurological damage and death. Prior to today’s approval, treatment options have only provided partial relief from the intense unremitting pain that characterizes these attacks,” Richard Pazdur, MD, director of the FDA’s Oncology Center of Excellence, said in a statement.

Approval for givosiran is based on results from a clinical trial of 94 patients with acute hepatic porphyria. Patients who received givosiran experienced 70% fewer porphyria attacks that required hospitalization, urgent health care visits, or home intravenous hemin injections compared with patients who received a placebo.

The most common adverse events associated with givosiran were nausea and injection site reactions. Patients receiving the medication should be monitored for anaphylactic reaction and renal function, and liver function should be tested before and periodically during treatment.

“The drug approved today can treat this disease by helping to reduce the number of attacks that disrupt the lives of patients,” said Dr. Pazdur, acting director of the Office of Oncologic Diseases in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration has approved givosiran (Givlaari) for the treatment of adult patients with acute hepatic porphyria, a genetic disorder that causes buildup of porphyrin molecules.

Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/ Creative Commons License

“This buildup can cause acute attacks, known as porphyria attacks, which can lead to severe pain and paralysis, respiratory failure, seizures, and mental status changes. These attacks occur suddenly and can produce permanent neurological damage and death. Prior to today’s approval, treatment options have only provided partial relief from the intense unremitting pain that characterizes these attacks,” Richard Pazdur, MD, director of the FDA’s Oncology Center of Excellence, said in a statement.

Approval for givosiran is based on results from a clinical trial of 94 patients with acute hepatic porphyria. Patients who received givosiran experienced 70% fewer porphyria attacks that required hospitalization, urgent health care visits, or home intravenous hemin injections compared with patients who received a placebo.

The most common adverse events associated with givosiran were nausea and injection site reactions. Patients receiving the medication should be monitored for anaphylactic reaction and renal function, and liver function should be tested before and periodically during treatment.

“The drug approved today can treat this disease by helping to reduce the number of attacks that disrupt the lives of patients,” said Dr. Pazdur, acting director of the Office of Oncologic Diseases in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration has approved givosiran (Givlaari) for the treatment of adult patients with acute hepatic porphyria, a genetic disorder that causes buildup of porphyrin molecules.

Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/ Creative Commons License

“This buildup can cause acute attacks, known as porphyria attacks, which can lead to severe pain and paralysis, respiratory failure, seizures, and mental status changes. These attacks occur suddenly and can produce permanent neurological damage and death. Prior to today’s approval, treatment options have only provided partial relief from the intense unremitting pain that characterizes these attacks,” Richard Pazdur, MD, director of the FDA’s Oncology Center of Excellence, said in a statement.

Approval for givosiran is based on results from a clinical trial of 94 patients with acute hepatic porphyria. Patients who received givosiran experienced 70% fewer porphyria attacks that required hospitalization, urgent health care visits, or home intravenous hemin injections compared with patients who received a placebo.

The most common adverse events associated with givosiran were nausea and injection site reactions. Patients receiving the medication should be monitored for anaphylactic reaction and renal function, and liver function should be tested before and periodically during treatment.

“The drug approved today can treat this disease by helping to reduce the number of attacks that disrupt the lives of patients,” said Dr. Pazdur, acting director of the Office of Oncologic Diseases in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.

[email protected]