First-line Maintenance Treatment Research Articles

Efficacy and safety of niraparib as first-line maintenance treatment for patients with advanced ovarian cancer: Real-world data from a multicenter study in China

Efficacy and safety of niraparib as first-line maintenance treatment for patients with advanced ovarian cancer: Real-world data from a multicenter study in China

Case report: Long-term progression-free survival in advanced ovarian cancer treated with apatinib in first-line maintenance treatment

Ovarian cancer is one of the most common gynecological malignancies. The current first-line treatment strategies for advanced ovarian cancer include surgery, chemotherapy, and maintenance therapy. Bevacizumab and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) are primary maintenance treatments for advanced ovarian cancer. Previously, many patients declined these therapies before medicare coverage because of high costs. Bevacizumab and apatinib are anti-tumor angiogenic agents. In this case study, we describe a patient with advanced ovarian cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy, interval debulking surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy. She declined bevacizumab and PARPi maintenance therapy owing to the prohibitive expenses. The patient was administered off-label apatinib and achieved a progression-free survival of 54 months. Thus, apatinib may offer substantial therapeutic value as a first-line maintenance therapy in advanced ovarian cancer.

A randomized phase II study of secondary cytoreductive surgery in patients with relapsed ovarian cancer who have progressed on a PARP inhibitor as first-line maintenance therapy: the SOCCER-P study (KGOG 3067/JGOG 3036/APGOT-OV11)

BackgroundAlthough two recent phase III randomized controlled trials showed survival benefits of undergoing secondary cytoreductive surgery for an initial relapse of ovarian cancer, patients who received a poly-ADP ribose polymerase...

Physician-reported patient involvement and treatment decisions in first-line ovarian cancer in the USA and Europe

ObjectivesReal-world data evaluating how approvals of novel treatment regimens for ovarian cancer have impacted the treatment paradigm, including first-line maintenance, are lacking. This analysis aimed to describe treatment patterns for...

Diagnosis, treatment and burden in advanced ovarian cancer: a UK real-world survey of healthcare professionals and patients.

Aim: Little is known regarding uptake of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) treatments or patient burden in UK real-world practice.Methods: Cross-sectional surveys of patients with advanced EOC and healthcare professionals (HCPs).Results: 101 HCPs and 142 patients participated. Time from initial primary care consultation to diagnosis was ∼7weeks. 83% patients were offered hereditary genetic testing, with 89% uptake. 53% HCPs reported surgery was performed ≤1month in non-neoadjuvant setting. Surgery delay negatively impacted patient quality of life(61%), mental health (89%), and surgical outcomes (63%). 56% patients received active first-line maintenance treatment; patients on active surveillance had greater emotional/psychological distress.Conclusion: Treatment delays and low uptake of active first-line treatment should be addressed. Emotional support must be readily accessible throughout treatment.

First-line PARP inhibitor maintenance treatment in ovarian carcinoma for older adult women: a review of the current literature.

Ovarian cancer (OC) is the leading cause of death in women with gynecological cancers. Its diagnosis is more likely in advanced ages, with the older population being the most seen in consultations. Poly(ADP-ribose) inhibitors (PARPi) have changed OC clinical practice and evolution, showing great benefit. However, there is a lack of evidence of PARPi in elderly population that can impact the therapeutic decision and the safety/efficacy. It is necessary to avoid age as limiting factor in PARPis prescription. We conducted a review of the most relevant randomized phase III trials of maintenance PARPi after first-line treatment of advanced OC. We observed the lack of a single criterion for considering older patients, varying among trials. There is a benefit of PARPis in different populations. However, PARPi effect on quality of life is not reported, something of great relevance considering their vulnerability. Measures are needed to benefit older patients to better adapt PARPi treatment.

A Podcast on Platinum Eligibility and Treatment Sequencing in Platinum-Eligible Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

The treatment landscape for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma continues to evolve. Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab has received Food and Drug Administration approval based on recent phase 3 trial data showing superior efficacy compared with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy; however, its distinct toxicity profile may make it less suitable for some patients, and availability in some countries may be limited by cost considerations. Consequently, platinum-based chemotherapy is expected to remain an important first-line treatment option. Choice of platinum regimen (cisplatin- or carboplatin-based) is informed by assessment of clinical characteristics, including performance status, kidney function, and presence of peripheral neuropathy or heart failure. For patients without disease progression after completing platinum-based chemotherapy, avelumab first-line maintenance treatment is recommended by international guidelines. For patients who have disease progression, pembrolizumab is the preferred approach. Additionally, following results from a recent phase 3 trial, nivolumab plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy has also received Food and Drug Administration approval and is an additional first-line treatment option for cisplatin-eligible patients. Later-line options for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma, depending on prior treatment, may include enfortumab vedotin, erdafitinib (for patients with FGFR2/3 mutations or fusions/rearrangements), sacituzumab govitecan, and platinum rechallenge. For the small proportion of patients ineligible for any platinum-based chemotherapy (i.e., unsuitable for cisplatin or carboplatin), immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy with pembrolizumab or atezolizumab is a first-line treatment option, although approved agents vary between countries. In summary, this podcast discusses recent developments in the treatment landscape for advanced urothelial carcinoma, eligibility for platinum-based chemotherapy, potential first-line treatment options, and treatment sequencing. Supplementary file1 (MP4 246907 KB).

Avelumab first-line maintenance treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: real-world results from a Korean expanded access program.

The JAVELIN Bladder 100 phase 3 trial demonstrated the efficacy and safety of avelumab administered as first-line (1L) maintenance treatment in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) without disease progression after 1L platinum-based chemotherapy. This study provides the first real-world data from Korea regarding avelumab 1L maintenance treatment, comprising data obtained from a nationwide expanded access program (EAP). This open-label EAP was conducted at five centers from September 2021 until June 2023. Eligible patients had unresectable locally advanced or metastatic UC and were progression free after 1L platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients received avelumab 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks per local prescribing information. Safety and effectiveness were assessed by treating physicians according to routine practice. Overall, 30 patients were enrolled. At initial UC diagnosis, 20 patients (66.7%) had stage 4 disease and 12 (40.0%) had visceral metastases. The most common 1L chemotherapy regimen was gemcitabine + cisplatin (21 patients; 70.0%). All but one patient (96.7%) had received 4-6 cycles of 1L chemotherapy. The median interval from end of 1L chemotherapy to start of avelumab was 4.4 weeks. Median duration of avelumab treatment was 6.2 months (range, 0.9-20.7); nine patients (30.0%) received >12 months of treatment. Adverse events related to avelumab occurred in 21 patients (70.0%) and were grade ≥3 or classified as serious in three patients (10.0%). Median progression-free survival was 7.9 months (95% CI, 4.3-13.1). Overall survival was not analyzed because only one patient died. Results from this EAP demonstrated the clinical activity and acceptable safety of avelumab 1L maintenance treatment in Korean patients with advanced UC, consistent with previous studies.

Fruquintinib plus capecitabine versus capecitabine as first-line maintenance treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Update results from the randomized, controlled, phase Ib/II study.

3567 Background: Capecitabine (Cap) is a standard first-line maintenance treatment option for colorectal cancer. Fuquinitinib (Fru) is a highly selective small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor that inhibits VEGFR1/2/3, which has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for adults with mCRC who have been previously treated with fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin-, and irinotecan-based chemotherapy and has recommended by NCCN guidelines as a standard treatment. Preliminary research results found that adding Fru to Cap as maintenance treatment was safe and improved progression-free survival (PFS, primary endpoint) for mCRC patients (pts). Methods: Eligible pts had been confirmed mCRC who achieved disease control (including CR/PR and SD) after at least six cycles of first-line standard chemotherapy. During phase Ib, pts received Fru (4 mg p.o. qd, 3 weeks on/1 week off, q4w]) plus Cap (850 mg/m2, p.o. bid, d1-7 and d15-21, q4w). In phase II, pts were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either Fru (RP2D, 3mg, 3 weeks on/1 week off) plus Cap or Cap alone. The primary outcome was PFS 1 (defined as time from randomization to disease progression or death). Secondary were PFS 2 (defined as time from first time receiving 1L treatment to disease progression or death), ORR and DCR. Results: At data cutoff (Jan 23, 2024), 46 pts were enrolled and 38 pts who had at least one tumor assessment post treatment were randomly assigned in Fru plus Cap arm (n=20) and Cap arm (n=18). Of these pts, the median age was 59.5 (39-78) and 58.5 (32-75) years, 11 (55.0%) and 10 (55.6%) had left-sided tumors, respectively. Most pts had previously received bevacizumab therapy (65.0% /66.7%) or cetuximab (30% /22.2%). The median cycles of first-line treatment were 8 (5-12) and 8 (4-13), 8 (40.0%) and 8 (44.4%) achieved PR in the pts who had received first-line therapy, respectively. The median PFS 1 was 9.2 mo in Fru plus Cap arm and 3.1 mo in Cap arm (HR=0.385 [95% CI: 0.163 - 0.906], p=0.024). And PFS 2 was also significantly prolonged in Fru plus Cap vs Cap (16.8 vs 8.5 mo, HR=0.314 [95% CI: 0.125 - 0.788], p=0.0098). Consistently, ORR (15.0% vs 5.6%) and DCR (80% vs 55.6%) were improved in Fru plus Cap arm. The safety was similar to the previous results without new safety signals appearing. Conclusions: PFS was significantly prolonged and ORR was improved in mCRC pts treated with Fru plus Cap as first-line maintenance treatment. This trial is ongoing and updated data will be presented in the future. Clinical trial information: NCT05451719 .

Study on the efficacy and toxicity of pamiparib combined with tamoxifen in the treatment of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer with biochemical recurrence during first-line PARPi maintenance therapy.

TPS5621 Background: A high proportion of ovarian cancer patients tend to have elevated CA-125 1-6 months before imaging recurrence. The time between biochemical recurrence (i.e., only elevated CA-125 without imaging finding or clinical symptoms) to imaging recurrence can be considered a "window period", and if the “window period” can be extended, it may convert platinum-resistant relapsed patients to platinum-sensitive patients, and ultimately improving patient outcomes. The timing of treatment for the biochemical recurrent patients has been controversial. Tamoxifen, an anti-estrogenic drug, is considered an effective option for these patients. Pamiparib (BGB-290) is an investigational small molecule inhibitor of PARP1 and PARP2. According to OReO study(NCT03106987), the "PARPi after PARPi" strategy is effective in recurrent ovarian cancer patients previously treated with a PARP inhibitor. Therefore, we aim to further explore the use of PARP inhibitors in maintenance therapy for patients with ovarian cancer. Methods: This study (NCT05669768) will evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of pamiparib and tamoxifen in ovarian cancer patients with biochemical recurrence during first-line PARPi maintenance therapy. The included ovarian cancer patients are required to achieve No Evidence of Disease (NED) or demonstrated a response following platinum-based chemotherapy, with normalized CA-125 levels. First-line maintenance treatment with a PARP inhibitor is mandatory, with a minimum interval of ≥6 months to biochemical recurrence. The trial design is interventional, employing a Simon two-stage design to estimate sample size. The primary outcome of the study is the CA-125 response rate, which was assessed according to the GCIG criteria.1 The secondary outcome was Time to First Subsequent Therapy (TFST). Patients undergo regular assessments for tumor markers and imaging throughout treatment. If persistent elevation of tumor markers or the detection of recurrent lesions or distant metastases is observed, the patient is promptly removed from the study group. Standardized antitumor therapy is then initiated based on the patient's condition. The total planned enrollment is 46 participants, utilizing a single-group assignment and an open-label design. 1 of planned 12 patients for the first stage of accrual have been enrolled. Reference: 1. Rustin GJ, Vergote I, Eisenhauer E, et al. Definitions for response and progression in ovarian cancer clinical trials incorporating RECIST 1.1 and CA 125 agreed by the Gynecological Cancer Intergroup (GCIG). Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011;21(2):419-423. Clinical trial information: NCT05669768 .

Evaluation of the Hepatotoxicity of Buprenorphine in Rat Pups Born to an Exposed Mother During Lactation.

This study aimed to evaluate the hepatotoxicity of buprenorphine in lactating rat pups of buprenorphine-injected mothers. Buprenorphine (BUP), a semisynthetic opioid, is increasingly administrated as a first-line standard maintenance treatment for opioid dependence due to its high safety and efficacy compared to other opioids. Numerous studies have confirmed the safety of BUP maintenance treatment in addicted patients. This study was designed to assess the effects of BUP on the activities of liver enzymes, oxidative parameters, and liver histopathological changes in pups born to a mother exposed to this drug during lactation. BUP at a dose of 0.5 or 0.1 mg/kg was subcutaneously administrated to lactating rats for 28 days. At the end of the experiment, the pups were anesthetized, and blood samples were obtained from their hearts for measuring liver enzymes. Then the livers of the animals were dissected to measure oxidative stress parameters. In addition, the liver samples were fixed for histopathological evaluation. The findings indicated a decrease in the activities of serum liver enzymes (ALT and AST) of the pups born to mothers exposed to 0.5 and 1 mg/kg of BUP during lactation. BUP could not change malondialdehyde (MDA), glutathione (GSH), nitric oxide (NO) levels, nor superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity in the liver tissue of animals. Some vacuolated hepatocytes with dark, eccentric nuclei, necrosis with karyolytic nuclei, mitotic figures, and multiple binucleated cells were seen in the pups which received 1 mg/kg of BUP. In conclusion, BUP may induce liver dysfunction in pups born to mothers exposed to this drug during lactation.

#1739 Combination rituximab & low-dose IV cyclophosphamide induction therapy for severe multi-system eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis

Abstract Background and Aims Current guidelines advise rituximab (RTX) or cyclophosphamide treatment for organ-threatening disease in eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA). However, conventional treatment is often limited by partial efficacy, toxicity, high relapse rate and steroid dependency. We investigate the use of a combined RTX, low-dose cyclophosphamide, and steroid regimen for treatment of severe EGPA. Method Single-centre retrospective cohort study of patients treated with a combination induction regimen for severe EGPA (with kidney, cardiac or neurological involvement) between 2012-23. Data reported as median (±IQR) Results Eighteen patients (10 male; age 56 years [52-62]) are included. At treatment, BVAS was 16.3 [14-20], peak eosinophil count 9.3 × 109/L [5-13], C-reactive protein (CRP) 122 mg/L [80-193]. Eleven cases were ANCA positive (10 MPO-, 1 PR3-ANCA.) The proportions of patients affected by active/new respiratory, ENT, neurological, and gastrointestinal disease were 18/18 (100%), 14/18 (78%), 11/18 (61%), and 1/18 (6%), respectively. 11/18 (61%) had cardiac involvement (troponin 10345 ng/L [1240-7621]) and 6/18 (33%) had necrotising glomerulonephritis confirmed by renal biopsy (creatinine 123 µmol/L [83-167]). Cumulative cyclophosphamide dose was 3.5g [3.0-3.5] and total RTX dose was 2g. Initial prednisolone dose was 0.5-1.0 mg/kg/day, and this was rapidly weaned to 5 mg daily at a median time of 6.1 months [3.9-7.2], and 9/18 (50%) had steroids withdrawn completely by 11.7 months [4.6-20.6]. First-line maintenance treatment was azathioprine or MMF. By 6 months, all achieved disease remission as assessed by BVAS (all 0) and improved laboratory parameters: CRP 1 mg/L, eosinophil count 0.1 × 109/L, and ANCA testing negative. In those with renal disease, kidney function improved or stabilised in all (creatinine 95 µmol/L). In those with cardiac disease (11/18), magnetic resonance imaging was performed at baseline and at follow up (median time of 3.7 months) in all patients. Of these, 9/11 (82%) had oedema on initial scan and this improved in all cases; 10/11 (91%) had late gadolinium enhancement at baseline, which persisted in every case, though with significantly lower burden. The median follow-up period was 38 months [14-55]. At 1, 3 and 5 years, 100%, 92% and 76% of patients were in sustained remission (Fig. 1A). Three patients experienced relapse; one patient had major relapse with skin involvement requiring reinduction treatment; two patients had minor ENT relapse requiring retreatment with glucocorticoids. Infection-free survival at 1, 3 and 5 years was 94%, 78%, 62%, respectively (Fig. 1B). There were no deaths. Conclusion This regimen provided rapid disease control in patients with severe multi-system EGPA, including those with life-threatening cardiac manifestations, and enabled rapid glucocorticoid tapering and withdrawal. Disease-free remission was sustained during long-term follow up. Combination induction regimens may have a role in the treatment of organ-threatening disease in EGPA.

Comparison of Acebrophylline vs Theophylline on Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Over the past few decades, there has been a positive increase in the use of pharmaceutical treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methylamines are often used in COPD patients. Theophylline is a well-known bronchodilator and anti-inflammatory medication, and acebrophylline is a relatively recent addition to contemporary respiratory care. Both are used as adjunctive therapy for patients with stable COPD who are receiving long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs). One of the world's most pressing public health issues at the moment is chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Oral medication therapy is utilised as a second- or third-line maintenance treatment for COPD, while inhaled treatments constitute the first-line maintenance treatment. In comparison to inhaled therapy, oral medications exhibit modest bronchodilator and anti-inflammatory properties, albeit at a lesser concentration. A number of benefits of oral medication therapy include its rapid availability, cloudiest pharmacologic methods of action, convenience of administration, lack of complications with correct inhalational drug deposition in lung airways, and cost-effectiveness.

Subgroup analyses from READY: Real-world data from an Italian compassionate use program (CUP) of avelumab first-line maintenance (1LM) treatment for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC).

558 Background: A multicenter CUP provided early access to avelumab 1LM in Italian patients (pts) with Ia/mUC before reimbursement. Real-world pt characteristics and outcomes with avelumab 1LM from READY were reported previously. Here, we report updated data and subgroup analyses of effectiveness with avelumab 1LM. Methods: This prospective, noninterventional CUP included pts with la/mUC who were progression free after 1L platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC; 4-6 cycles, starting avelumab 1LM 4-10 wk after last PBC dose). Pts were enrolled from Jan 18, 2021 to Mar 7, 2022. Avelumab was provided per physician request and after approval by local ethics committees, per Italian compassionate-use regulations. Pts who had a relapse within 12 mo of prior adjuvant or neoadjuvant systemic therapy, including immune checkpoint inhibitors, were excluded. Results: 464 pts were included (78.45/21.55% male/female; median age, 70.0 y [interquartile range, 63.0-76.0]). At data cutoff (July 30, 2023), median follow-up from start of avelumab 1LM in 411 evaluable pts was 20.24 mo (95% CI, 19.78-20.93); median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from start of avelumab were 26.22 mo (95% CI, 19.97-not estimable [NE]) and 7.63 mo (95% CI, 5.79-9.24), respectively. In pts aged <60 y (n=53), 60-70 y (n=150), and >70 y (n=208), median OS (95% CI) was not reached (NR; 12.86 mo-NE), NR (24.21 mo-NE), and 24.01 mo (16.94-NE), and median PFS was 5.20 mo (2.83-6.71), 7.70 mo (5.26-10.07), and 8.82 mo (6.05-12.93), respectively. In pts who received 1L cisplatin + gemcitabine (n=183) and 1L carboplatin + gemcitabine (n=219), median OS (95% CI) was NR (16.05 mo-NE) and 25.10 mo (19.97-NE), and median PFS was 6.61 mo (5.30-9.18) and 8.42 mo (6.05-12.73), respectively. The table shows OS and PFS in other subgroups defined by best response to 1L PBC and number of 1L PBC cycles received. Conclusions: Real-world outcomes with avelumab 1LM in this CUP in Italy show clinical benefit across various subgroups. These data are clinically relevant and are consistent with other real-world country-based studies and the phase 3 JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial. Findings further support the use of avelumab 1LM as standard of care in pts with la/mUC who are progression free after PBC. [Table: see text]

Olaparib plus bevacizumab as a first-line maintenance treatment for patients with advanced ovarian cancer by molecular status: an updated PAOLA-1 based cost-effectiveness analysis.

The PAOLA-1 trial (NCT02477644) reported final survival benefit associated with olaparib plus bevacizumab maintenance treatment of patients with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) based on molecular status. Our aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of olaparib plus bevacizumab for overall patients, patients with a breast cancer susceptibility genes (BRCA) mutation, homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), or HRD without BRCA mutations AOC from the context of the American healthcare system. Analysis of health outcomes in life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in various molecular status-based AOC patient at a $150,000/QALY of willingness-to-pay was performed using a state-transitioned Markov model with a 20-year time horizon. Meanwhile, sensitivity analyses assessments were also used to gauge the model's stability. The ICERs of olaparib plus bevacizumab versus bevacizumab alone were $487,428 ($374,758), $249,579 ($191,649), $258,859 ($198,739), and $270,736 ($206,640) per QALY (LY) in the overall patients, patients with BRCA mutations, patients with HRD, and patients with HRD without BRCA mutations AOC, respectively, which indicated that The ICERs was higher than $150,000/QALY in the US. Progression-free survival (PFS) value and olaparib cost emerged as the primary influencing factors of these findings in the sensitivity analysis. At current cost levels, olaparib plus bevacizumab treatment is not a cost-effective treatment for patients with AOC regardless of their molecular status in the US. However, this maintenance treatment may be more favorable health advantages for patients with BRAC mutations AOC.

Evaluating Oncologists' Practice Patterns and Decision-Making in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: The US Physician PARADIGM Study.

The treatment landscape for locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) has evolved. This study examined US prescribing patterns and clinical decision-making for first-line (1L) and first-line maintenance (1LM) treatment. US-based oncologists (N = 150) completed an online survey on patient demographics, practice patterns, and important factors considered in 1L/1LM selection. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with more vs less frequent 1L/1LM prescribing. Physician reports estimated that 23% of patients with la/mUC had not received any systemic therapy in the previous 6 months; however, 46% received 1L, 32% received second-line, and 22% received subsequent-line systemic treatments. Of patients who were receiving 1L treatment, 72% were estimated to be receiving 1L platinum-based chemotherapy. Around 69% of patients eligible for 1LM received the treatment. Physicians categorized as frequent prescribers reported overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR), and rate of grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) as factors associated with 1L treatment selection (all P < .05). OS, rate of grade 3/4 immune-mediated AEs, and inclusion in institutional guidelines were reported as attributes used in 1LM treatment selection (all P < .05). Multivariable analysis revealed OS, DCR, and rate of grade 3/4 AEs as important factors in oncologists' 1L treatment selection; academic practice setting and use of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 were associated with 1LM use (all P < .05). OS and AEs were found to be relevant factors associated with offering 1L and 1LM treatment. Variability exists in physicians' decision-making in the real-world setting for la/mUC.

Nationwide Study of Real-World Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma in Hungary.

Data describing real-world treatment patterns in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) in Central-Eastern Europe are scarce, and data from Hungary have not been published. This retrospective, nationwide, real-world study investigated patient characteristics, treatment patterns, comorbidities, and clinical outcomes in patients with mUC in Hungary. Adults diagnosed with mUC from January 2016 through June2021 were identified using the National Health Insurance Fund Administration database. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. In total, 2523 patients with mUC were identified. Median follow-up was 7.1months. Overall, 50% of patients received an identified systemic anticancer treatment; within this subgroup, first-line treatment was platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC) in 86%, non-PBC in 8%, and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) in 6%. The proportion of patients receiving treatment increased from 41% in 2016 to 59% in 2020, driven by increased use of first-line PBC or first-line ICI treatment. Comorbidities were more common in patients receiving first-line ICI treatment vs PBC or non-PBC and in patients receiving carboplatin + gemcitabine vs cisplatin + gemcitabine. Overall, only 24% received a second-line treatment. Unadjusted median OS from the start of first-line treatment in the PBC, non-PBC, and ICI subgroups was 12.8, 7.5, and 6.3months, respectively. Median OS from date of diagnosis in untreated patients was 7.8months. OS comparisons adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics between subgroups could not be performed. To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess treatment patterns in patients with mUC in clinical practice in Hungary, using the national health insurance database. Rates of first- and second-line treatment were consistent with those observed in other countries. Avelumab first-line maintenance treatment became available for reimbursement in Hungary in late 2022, after the study period. Given the evolving landscape of reimbursed treatments in Hungary, further analyses are warranted.

Analysis of olaparib efficacy in patients with serous ovarian cancer

Modern treatment of ovarian cancer is impossible without understanding the carcinogenesis and the structure of malignant epithelial ovarian tumors and carrying out molecular genetic testing for homologous recombination deficiency. The choice of maintenance therapy depends on the presence of a mutation in the BRCA1/2 genes and the HRD status of the tumor. Targeted drugs, such as bevacizumab and olaparib, are used in the treatment of ovarian cancer. The aim of the work is to determine the effectiveness of olaparib in first-line maintenance therapy and in the treatment of platinum-sensitive recurrence of ovarian cancer. A retrospective study included 67 patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer stages I–IV who were prescribed olaparib in first-line maintenance therapy or in maintenance therapy for the treatment of disease progression, provided a complete or partial response to platinum-containing chemotherapy in the period from 2016 to 2022. The median life expectancy of the patients receiving first-line maintenance treatment coincides with the median time to progression; only one patient died due to the progression of the disease, and the rest are alive. The median time to progression in the group of patients with maintenance therapy of relapses was 23.0 ± 1.5 months, and the median life expectancy was 24.7 ± 2.3 months. When comparing the patients of the first group, depending on the term of surgical treatment performed, the median life expectancy was statistically higher with primary cytoreduction and constituted 46.0 months, while in the interval cytoreduction group, it was 25.0 months (p = 0.018). When comparing the patients of the second group, depending on the mutation in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, the median life expectancy was statistically higher in the patients with a mutation in the BRCA2 gene — by 38.6 months (p = 0.020). The addition of olaparib to the treatment of BRCA-associated ovarian cancer in first-line maintenance therapy and in the treatment of platinum-sensitive relapses of the disease makes it possible to increase the median time to progression and median life expectancy.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of avelumab plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone as first-line maintenance treatment for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in Taiwan.

Patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma have limited treatment options and a poor prognosis. The JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial showed that avelumab as first-line maintenance plus best supportive care significantly prolonged overall survival and progression-free survival versus best supportive care alone in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma that had not progressed with first-line platinum-containing chemotherapy. We assessed whether avelumab plus best supportive care is a cost-effective treatment option versus best supportive care alone in this patient group in Taiwan. A partitioned survival model was used to estimate the costs and effects of avelumab plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone over a 20-year time horizon from the perspective of Taiwan's National Health Insurance Administration. Patient-level data from JAVELIN Bladder 100 on efficacy, safety, utility, and time on treatment were analyzed to provide parameters for the model. Log-normal and Weibull distributions were used for overall survival and progression-free survival, respectively. Costs of healthcare resources, drug acquisition, adverse events, and progression were identified through publicly available data sources and clinician interviews. The model estimated total costs, life years, and quality-adjusted life years. In the modeled base case, avelumab plus best supportive care increased survival versus best supportive care alone by 0.79 life years (2.93 vs. 2.14) and 0.61 quality-adjusted life years (2.15 vs. 1.54). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for avelumab plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone was NT$1 827 680. Most (78%) of the probabilistic sensitivity analyses fell below three times the gross domestic product per capita. Scenario analysis indicated that life year and quality-adjusted life year gains were most sensitive to alternative survival extrapolations for both avelumab plus best supportive care and best supportive care alone. Avelumab first-line maintenance therapy combined with best supportive care was determined as a cost-effective treatment strategy for patients in Taiwan diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma that had not progressed with platinum-containing chemotherapy.

Avelumab as First-Line Maintenance Treatment in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

This work provides a summary of guideline recommendations and an expert position on the use of maintenance avelumab therapy based on a review of current international clinical practice guidelines for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC). A PubMed literature search was conducted in March 2022 (updated in July 2023) to identify guidelines for locally advanced or metastatic UC. An expert panel (four oncologists and one urologist) reviewed the guidelines and clinical evidence, and discussed practical questions regarding the use of avelumab maintenance therapy in this clinical setting. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network, European Association of Urology and European Society for Medical Oncology guidelines recommend first-line cisplatin-containing chemotherapy for cisplatin-eligible patients, carboplatin-gemcitabine for cisplatin-ineligible patients who are fit for carboplatin, or immunotherapy with programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitors (e.g. atezolizumab) in platinum-ineligible patients. Maintenance avelumab is recommended in patients with response/stable disease following chemotherapy (regardless of PD-L1 status). In patients who relapse after/during chemotherapy, options include immunotherapy, erdafitinib [in those with fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) mutations], enfortumab vedotin or further chemotherapy. The expert panel provided the following practical guidance: (1) consider maintenance avelumab in all eligible patients; (2) continue avelumab until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity; (3) ideally, administer six cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy prior to maintenance avelumab; (4) perform radiological evaluation after four chemotherapy cycles and prior to maintenance avelumab; (5) carboplatin-gemcitabine followed by maintenance avelumab is preferred in cisplatin-ineligible patients (regardless of PD-L1 expression), but consider first-line immunotherapy in PD-L1-positive patients and platinum-ineligible patients (regardless of PD-L1 status); and (6) for patients who relapse on avelumab, second-line options include enfortumab vedotin, FGFR inhibitors (in those with FGFR mutations) or clinical trial inclusion. In conclusion, avelumab maintenance therapy is recommended following platinum-based chemotherapy in all eligible patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC, continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.