The effect of age on efficacy, safety and patient-centered outcomes with rucaparib: A post hoc exploratory analysis of ARIEL3, a phase 3, randomized, maintenance study in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma
Authors
Colombo, N.Oza, A. M.
Lorusso, D.
Aghajanian, C.
Oaknin, A.
Dean, A.
Weberpals, J. I.
Clamp, Andrew R
Scambia, G.
Leary, A.
Holloway, R. W.
Gancedo, M. A.
Fong, P. C.
Goh, J. C.
O'Malley, D. M.
Armstrong, D. K.
Banerjee, S.
Garcia-Donas, J
Swisher, E. M.
Meunier, J.
Cameron, T.
Maloney, L.
Goble, S.
Bedel, J.
Ledermann, J. A.
Coleman, R. L.
Affiliation
Gynecologic Cancer Program, University of Milan-Bicocca and European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Ripamonti 435, 20146 Milan, Italy.Issue Date
2020
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Background: In the phase 3 trial ARIEL3, maintenance treatment with the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor rucaparib provided clinical benefit versus placebo for patients with recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Here, we evaluate the impact of age on the clinical utility of rucaparib in ARIEL3. Methods: Patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian carcinoma with ?2 prior platinum-based chemotherapies who responded to their last platinum-based therapy were enrolled in ARIEL3 and randomized 2:1 to rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or placebo. Exploratory, post hoc analyses of progression-free survival (PFS), patient-centered outcomes (quality-adjusted PFS [QA-PFS] and quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity [Q-TWiST]), and safety were conducted in three age subgroups (<65 years, 65-74 years, and ?75 years). Results: Investigator-assessed PFS was significantly longer with rucaparib than placebo in patients aged <65 years (rucaparib n = 237 vs placebo n = 117; median, 11.1 vs 5.4 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.33 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.25-0.43]; P < 0.0001) and 65-74 years (n = 113 vs n = 64; median, 8.3 vs 5.3 months; HR 0.43 [95% CI 0.29-0.63]; P < 0.0001) and numerically longer in patients aged ?75 years (n = 25 vs n = 8; median, 9.2 vs 5.5 months; HR 0.47 [95% CI 0.16-1.35]; P = 0.1593). QA-PFS and Q-TWiST were significantly longer with rucaparib than placebo across all age subgroups. Safety of rucaparib was generally similar across the age subgroups. Conclusions: Efficacy, patient-centered outcomes, and safety of rucaparib were similar between age subgroups, indicating that all eligible women with recurrent ovarian cancer should be offered this therapeutic option, irrespective of age. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01968213.Citation
Colombo N, Oza AM, Lorusso D, Aghajanian C, Oaknin A, Dean A, et al. The effect of age on efficacy, safety and patient-centered outcomes with rucaparib: A post hoc exploratory analysis of ARIEL3, a phase 3, randomized, maintenance study in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma. Gynecologic Oncology. 2020.Journal
Gynecologic OncologyDOI
10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.05.045PubMed ID
32861537Additional Links
https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.05.045Type
ArticleLanguage
enae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.05.045