» Articles » PMID: 30177462

Randomized Phase II Trial of Bevacizumab Plus Everolimus Versus Bevacizumab Alone for Recurrent or Persistent Ovarian, Fallopian Tube or Peritoneal Carcinoma: An NRG Oncology/gynecologic Oncology Group Study

Overview
Journal Gynecol Oncol
Date 2018 Sep 5
PMID 30177462
Citations 15
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Bevacizumab (BV) monotherapy leads to compensatory upregulation of multiple signaling pathways, resulting in mTOR activation. We evaluated combining BV and everolimus (EV), an mTOR kinase inhibitor, to circumvent BV-resistance in women with recurrent or persistent ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer (OC).

Patients And Methods: Eligible OC patients had measurable (RECIST1.1) or detectable disease, 1-3 prior regimens, performance status (PS) 0-2, and no prior m-TOR inhibitor. All patients received BV 10 mg/kg IV every 2wks. Patients were randomized (1:1) to oral EV (10 mg daily) or placebo stratified by platinum-free interval (PFI), measurable disease and prior BV. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included safety and response.

Results: 150 patients were randomized to BV with (n = 75) and without (n = 75) EV. Arms were well-balanced for age (median 63: range 28-92), PS (0: 73%, 1-2: 27%), prior regimens (1: 37%, 2: 47%, 3: 16%), prior BV (11%), PFI (<6mos: 65%) and measurable disease (81%). The BV + EV vs BV median PFS was 5.9 vs 4.5 months (hazard ratio [HR] 0.95 (95% CI, 0.66-1.37, p = 0.39)). Median OS was 16.6 vs 17.3 months (HR 1.16 (95% CI, 0.72-1.87, p = 0.55). Objective measurable responses were higher with BV + EV (22% vs 12%). Study removal due to toxicity was higher with BV + EV (29% vs 12%). Toxicity (≥grade 3) from BV + EV were "other GI (mucositis)" (23 vs 1%) and "metabolic/nutrition" (19 vs. 7%); common ≥ grade 2 toxicities with BV + EV were cytopenia, nausea, fatigue and rash.

Conclusion: The combination regimen (BV + EV) did not significantly reduce the hazard of progression or death relative to BV and was associated with higher rates of adverse events and study discontinuation when compared to BV alone.

Citing Articles

Interleukin-6 Modulation in Ovarian Cancer Necessitates a Targeted Strategy: From the Approved to Emerging Therapies.

Amer H, Kampan N, Itsiopoulos C, Flanagan K, Scott C, Kartikasari A Cancers (Basel). 2025; 16(24.

PMID: 39766086 PMC: 11674514. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16244187.


COL6A3 Exosomes Promote Tumor Dissemination and Metastasis in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.

Ho C, Yen T, Chang T, Huang S Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(15).

PMID: 39125689 PMC: 11311469. DOI: 10.3390/ijms25158121.


New clinical trial design in precision medicine: discovery, development and direction.

Duan X, Qin B, Jiao X, Liu K, Wang Z, Zang Y Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2024; 9(1):57.

PMID: 38438349 PMC: 10912713. DOI: 10.1038/s41392-024-01760-0.


Angiogenesis inhibitors for the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer.

Gaitskell K, Rogozinska E, Platt S, Chen Y, Abd El Aziz M, Tattersall A Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023; 4:CD007930.

PMID: 37185961 PMC: 10111509. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007930.pub3.


Kinase Inhibitors in the Treatment of Ovarian Cancer: Current State and Future Promises.

Skorda A, Bay M, Hautaniemi S, Lahtinen A, Kallunki T Cancers (Basel). 2022; 14(24).

PMID: 36551745 PMC: 9777107. DOI: 10.3390/cancers14246257.


References
1.
Zebrowski B, Liu W, Ramirez K, Akagi Y, Mills G, Ellis L . Markedly elevated levels of vascular endothelial growth factor in malignant ascites. Ann Surg Oncol. 1999; 6(4):373-8. DOI: 10.1007/s10434-999-0373-0. View

2.
Chen C, Cheng W, Lee C, Chen T, KUNG C, Hsieh F . Serum vascular endothelial growth factor in epithelial ovarian neoplasms: correlation with patient survival. Gynecol Oncol. 1999; 74(2):235-40. DOI: 10.1006/gyno.1999.5418. View

3.
Shen G, Ghazizadeh M, Kawanami O, Shimizu H, Jin E, Araki T . Prognostic significance of vascular endothelial growth factor expression in human ovarian carcinoma. Br J Cancer. 2000; 83(2):196-203. PMC: 2363477. DOI: 10.1054/bjoc.2000.1228. View

4.
Rustin G, Quinn M, Thigpen T, du Bois A, Pujade-Lauraine E, Jakobsen A . Re: New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors (ovarian cancer). J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004; 96(6):487-8. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djh081. View

5.
Altomare D, Wang H, Skele K, De Rienzo A, Klein-Szanto A, Godwin A . AKT and mTOR phosphorylation is frequently detected in ovarian cancer and can be targeted to disrupt ovarian tumor cell growth. Oncogene. 2004; 23(34):5853-7. DOI: 10.1038/sj.onc.1207721. View