Current Ovarian Cancer Maintenance Strategies and Promising New
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Cancer 2021, Vol. 12 38 Ivyspring International Publisher Journal of Cancer 2021; 12(1): 38-53. doi: 10.7150/jca.49406 Review Current Ovarian Cancer Maintenance Strategies and Promising New Developments Vinaya Gogineni1, Susan Morand1, Hannah Staats1, Rachel Royfman1, Monika Devanaboyina1, Katelyn Einloth1, Danielle Dever1, Laura Stanbery2, Phylicia Aaron2, Luisa Manning2, Adam Walter3, Gerald Edelman1, Lance Dworkin1, John Nemunaitis2 1. University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH 2. Gradalis, Inc, Carrollton, TX 3. Promedica Health System, Toledo, OH Corresponding author: John Nemunaitis, MD. [email protected] © The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). See http://ivyspring.com/terms for full terms and conditions. Received: 2020.06.12; Accepted: 2020.10.17; Published: 2021.01.01 Abstract While ovarian cancer typically responds well to front line treatment, many patients will relapse within 5 years. Treatment options are less effective at each recurrence highlighting the need for novel maintenance therapies. PolyADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have recently gained approval in ovarian cancer maintenance. Niraparib was approved regardless of BRCA mutation status, however impact on overall survival is limited. Oliparib was approved for BRCA mutant and BRCA wildtype/homologous recombination deficient patients. This review will focus on current frontline ovarian cancer treatment as well molecularly based approaches to ovarian cancer management. Key words: ovarian cancer maintenance, HGSOC, ovarian cancer treatment, Vigil Introduction Therapeutic management of ovarian cancer is consists of surgery in conjunction with chemotherapy. complex. A multitude of risk factors including, Ovarian cancer usually metastasizes first within the inherited mutations that vary in penetrance, somatic peritoneal cavity, and surgical debulking informs mutations, hormonal effect related to older onset of staging and adjuvant therapy. Multiple studies have menopause, relationship of exposure to environ- shown a relationship between the amount of residual mental hazards, and/or associated gynecological tumor following debulking surgery and response factors, such as pelvic inflammatory disease, rates [4]. The goal of surgical debulking is to leave the endometriosis and polycystic ovarian syndrome patient with no visible sites of disease therefore, complicate management and preventive care [1]. guidelines for optimal debulking have been adopted. Epithelial ovarian cancer is the most common Optimal debulking is defined as the largest residual subtype, comprising roughly 90% of the cases. tumor nodule measuring less than 1cm, while Moreover, due to site of presentation it often presents suboptimal debulking is when residual tumor is at late stage resulting in a poor 5 year survival rate greater than 1cm [5]. Debulking surgery can be even with optimal care [2, 3]. We will review sandwiched with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or preventive, therapeutic and future advances with a chemotherapy can be administered following primary focus on frontline maintenance therapy and the debulking surgery. Platinum containing doublet molecular relationship of ovarian cancer biology to therapy either intravenously or intraperitoneally therapeutic activity. (usually paclitaxel) for 6 cycles has been the standard of care for many years [5]. Complete clinical response Frontline Treatment and Recurrence will be achieved for the majority of these patients. Frontline treatment for advanced ovarian cancer However, recurrence rates are high and vary by stage. http://www.jcancer.org Journal of Cancer 2021, Vol. 12 39 Patients with stage III or IV disease have a 70-75% maintenance therapy. Previously this has been largely chance of recurrence within two years of diagnosis [6]. physician choice, as maintenance therapy showed Recurrence can be suspected by the onset of new little improvement and carried significant toxicity. A symptoms or rising CA 125 levels. Patients who recur meta-analysis of 8 trials combining chemotherapy after >6 months from the date of the last platinum regimens, did not show an improvement in OS dose are defined as platinum sensitive and typically (HR=1.03), or PFS (HR=1.06) [10]. In addition, have a response to retreatment with platinum based continued exposure to chemotherapy was associated doublet therapy. Those patients who recur after 12 with cumulative toxicity which carried the potential months have an even better response to retreatment to impact later lines of therapy. However, the recent with platinum based chemotherapy [7]. Determining development of targeted molecular therapies has recurrence early, with attempt to utilize rising CA 125 resulted in greater maintenance therapy options with levels is controversial. In a prospective study of less toxicity and greater therapeutic benefit (Figure 1). patients with elevated CA 125 levels, individuals were randomized to receive treatment immediately, or at Targeted Molecular Therapies symptomatic or clinical relapse. The study found no BRCA1/2 Mutation and PARP Inhibitors survival benefit in patients receiving immediate treatment (25.7 versus 27.1 months) and patients Breast cancer susceptibility genes 1 and 2 reported decreased quality of life therefore treatment (BRCA1, BRCA2) are independent tumor suppressor based on CA 125 levels is not routine [8]. genes (TSG) working in concert to protect the genome Platinum resistant patients are defined as against mutations [11]. The encoded proteins, BRCA1 recurrence <6 months after the last dose of platinum and BRCA2, are largely involved in DNA repair, therapy. These patients are typically treated with where they facilitate homologous recombination (HR) pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, topotecan, and non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) by gemcitabine, paclitaxel or experimental therapy. stabilizing repair proteins and activating checkpoints These systemic therapies can be considered alone or [11]. Fifteen to 25% of patients with ovarian cancer in combination with bevacizumab. The Aurelia Phase have a germline BRCA1/2 mutation, whereas the other III study investigated the use of bevacizumab with 75-85% are BRCA1/2 wildtype [12]. Because of BRCA’s chemotherapy in platinum resistant ovarian cancer core involvement with DNA repair, a mutation in one [9]. Although the study reported significantly longer or both BRCA genes renders the genome susceptible PFS and ORR compared to single agent to the accumulation of DNA damage. Resultant chemotherapy, results exhibited moderately mutations alter cellular signal pathway activity significant drug related toxicity related to the addition contributing to cancer transformation [11]. of bevacizumab. Consequently, patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations are at increased risk for multiple cancer Maintenance Therapies types. These include but are not limited to breast, Following initial debulking surgery and ovarian, pancreatic, colorectal, laryngeal, fallopian consolidation chemotherapy, patients who have tube, primary peritoneal, and prostate cancers [13-20]. achieved a complete clinical response may receive However, mutations in BRCA1/2 may initiate as a Figure 1. Currently approved therapies in ovarian cancer maintenance. Platinum therapies function by damaging DNA through the formation of cross-links. PARP inhibitors function by disrupting PARP, a key molecule in the DNA repair complex. This kills tumorous cells by the principle of synthetic lethality in homologous repair deficient patients, such as BRCA-mutant. Taxanes prevent depolymerization of microtubules, thereby disrupting the mitotic spindle’s ability to separate in mitosis. Angiogenesis inhibitors interrupt the interaction of proangiogenic factors with their receptors, effectively halting angiogenesis in the tumor microenvironment. http://www.jcancer.org Journal of Cancer 2021, Vol. 12 40 single cell event. These are somatic mutations PARP inhibitors have been designed to negate containing BRCA1/2 and related gene mutations. One PARP’s role in DNA repair. Molecularly, PARPi study evaluating monocellular blood and tumor compete with NAD+ at the PARP catalytic domain, samples from 343 ovarian patients with blocking PARylation and the subsequent formation of next-generation sequencing (NGS) and an Agilent DNA repair complexes [26, 27]. Therefore, PARPi SureSelect XT gene panel determined that 84.9% of remove an essential component of DNA repair mutations in BRCA1/2 and other predisposition genes pathways, rendering cells susceptible to genomic (ATM, PALB2, RAD15D, FANCM) were germline and damage. Normal cells with functional DNA repair the remainder were somatic [21]. pathways may circumvent PARP inhibition to repair Patients with cancer mutations of BRCA1 and DNA via alternative pathways. In contrast, cells that BRCA2 have shown remarkable sensitivity to recently are deficient in DNA repair will be particularly developed poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) sensitive to PARP inhibition, resulting in rapid inhibitors (PARPi). Moreover, PARPi use accumulation of mutations. These highly damaged demonstrates moderate activity in patients with cells will then undergo rapid cell death via apoptosis. BRCA1/2 wildtype tumors and positive homologous This principle, termed “synthetic lethality,” provides recombination deficiency (HRD) above a threshold the logic behind using PARPi in patients with level (dependent on the PARPi)