Comparison of survival outcomes between olaparib and niraparib maintenance therapy in BRCA-mutated, newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer
Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved..
INTRODUCTION: This multicenter retrospective cohort study aimed to compare survival outcomes and adverse events between maintenance therapy with two poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, olaparib and niraparib, in patients with BRCA-mutated, newly diagnosed advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) who responded to platinum-based chemotherapy.
METHODS: We enrolled stage III-IV EOC patients with germline and/or somatic BRCA1/2 mutations that had received maintenance therapy with olaparib or niraparib. A 3:1 propensity score matching was conducted using two variables: residual disease size and the presence of germline variants. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary outcomes were time to first subsequent therapy (TFST), overall survival (OS), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).
RESULTS: In the propensity score-matched analysis, 80 patients who received olaparib and 31 patients who received niraparib were matched (3:1). In the propensity score-matched cohort, median PFS with olaparib vs. niraparib was not reached vs 31.5 months (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.47-2.52; p = 0.854). The median TFST was not reached vs 31.8 months (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.51-2.81; p = 0.682), and neither olaparib nor niraparib reached the median OS (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.01-17.61; p = 0.649). In terms of the incidence rates of any-grade hematologic or non-hematologic TEAEs, higher rates of thrombocytopenia (p = 0.021) and neutropenia (p = 0.011) were observed in the niraparib group.
CONCLUSION: Advanced EOC patients with BRCA1/2 mutations exhibited no significant difference in OS between olaparib and niraparib, indicating the need to consider individualized strategies for selecting PARP inhibitors based on adverse event profiles.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:181 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Gynecologic oncology - 181(2024) vom: 16. Feb., Seite 33-39 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Kim, Ji Hyun [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 01.03.2024 Date Revised 01.03.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.11.037 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM365952214 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM365952214 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240301232228.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231227s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.11.037 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1313.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM365952214 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38104527 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S0090-8258(23)01592-5 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Kim, Ji Hyun |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Comparison of survival outcomes between olaparib and niraparib maintenance therapy in BRCA-mutated, newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 01.03.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 01.03.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a INTRODUCTION: This multicenter retrospective cohort study aimed to compare survival outcomes and adverse events between maintenance therapy with two poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, olaparib and niraparib, in patients with BRCA-mutated, newly diagnosed advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) who responded to platinum-based chemotherapy | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: We enrolled stage III-IV EOC patients with germline and/or somatic BRCA1/2 mutations that had received maintenance therapy with olaparib or niraparib. A 3:1 propensity score matching was conducted using two variables: residual disease size and the presence of germline variants. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary outcomes were time to first subsequent therapy (TFST), overall survival (OS), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: In the propensity score-matched analysis, 80 patients who received olaparib and 31 patients who received niraparib were matched (3:1). In the propensity score-matched cohort, median PFS with olaparib vs. niraparib was not reached vs 31.5 months (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.47-2.52; p = 0.854). The median TFST was not reached vs 31.8 months (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.51-2.81; p = 0.682), and neither olaparib nor niraparib reached the median OS (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.01-17.61; p = 0.649). In terms of the incidence rates of any-grade hematologic or non-hematologic TEAEs, higher rates of thrombocytopenia (p = 0.021) and neutropenia (p = 0.011) were observed in the niraparib group | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: Advanced EOC patients with BRCA1/2 mutations exhibited no significant difference in OS between olaparib and niraparib, indicating the need to consider individualized strategies for selecting PARP inhibitors based on adverse event profiles | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Comparative Study | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Multicenter Study | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Ovarian cancer | |
| 650 | 4 | |a PARP inhibitors | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Prognosis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Progression-free survival | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Targeted therapy | |
| 650 | 7 | |a BRCA1 Protein |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a BRCA1 protein, human |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a BRCA2 Protein |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a BRCA2 protein, human |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Indazoles |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a niraparib |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a HMC2H89N35 |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a olaparib |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a WOH1JD9AR8 |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Phthalazines |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Piperazines |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Piperidines |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kim, Se Ik |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Park, Eun Young |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kim, Eun Taeg |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kim, Hyesu |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kim, Sangeon |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Park, Sang-Yoon |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Lim, Myong Cheol |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Gynecologic oncology |d 1972 |g 181(2024) vom: 16. Feb., Seite 33-39 |w (DE-627)NLM000614610 |x 1095-6859 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:181 |g year:2024 |g day:16 |g month:02 |g pages:33-39 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.11.037 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 181 |j 2024 |b 16 |c 02 |h 33-39 | ||