Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
s Napoli 20 Maggio 2016 Le terapie a bersaglio molecolare nel carcinoma ovarico Sandro Pignata Direttore Dip Uro Ginecologico Istituto Tumori di Napoli Carcinoma ovarico 4800 nuovi casi nel 2015 in Italia 3251 decessi nel 2012 80 % III e IV stadi 20 % I e II stadi Perché questa malattia è così letale? E’ impossibile la diagnosi precoce (eccetto che nelle pazienti BRCA mutate) I numerosi trattamenti disponibili hanno ritardato la progressione ma non ridotto la mortalità I farmaci biologici sono arrivati con ritardo a causa di una biologia estremamente complessa OC subtypes: mutations 70 % 5% 20% 2% • 5% Romero I et al. Endocrinology 2012; 153: 1593-1602 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 4.9% 2.1% 0% Response Rate in Platinum-Sensitive Response Rate in Platinum-Resistant All Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian *75% received 1-2 prior chemo regimens Recurrent LGSOC* Sources: Gonzalez-Martin et al. Ann Oncol 2005; Kushner et al. J Clin Oncol 2004; Mutch et al. J Clin Oncol 2007; Abushahin et al. J Clin Oncol 2006; Gershenson et al. Gynecol Oncol 2009 • LGSOC frequent mutations in RAS/RAF. • 40 -60% LGSOC KRAS or BRAF mutated • Never LGSOC with both KRAS and BRAF • BRAF decrease in advanced stages. Sources: a Singer et al. J Nat Canc Inst 2003; b Wong et al. Amer J Path 2010; c Grisham et al. Cancer 2012; d Jones et al. J Pathol 2012; 8 e Farley et al. Lancet Oncol 2013 Phase 3 trials: MILO MEK Inhibitor in Low Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer High grade serous: The Post Genome Era Table of Contents 16 February 2001 Volume 291 Number 5507 The Human Genome Molecula subtypes The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network, Nature. 2011 Jun 29;474(7353):609-15 Serous Ovarian Cancer is a disease of DNA repair abnormalities and resulting ‘ “genomic instability” • Subsets of high grade serous OC do not exist? • Tumor can adapt rapidly • may not be be able to be treated with “targeted agents” – TKIs, antibodies etc • May not be “predictable.” Personalized medicine: angiogenesis • GOG-0218: Schema Arm Carboplatin (C) AUC 6 Front-line: epithelial OV, PP or FT cancer ● Stage III optimal (macroscopic) ● Stage III suboptimal ● Stage IV N=1873 R A N D O M I S E Stratification variables – GOG performance status – Stage/debulking status OV = ovarian; PP = primary peritoneal FT = fallopian tube; Bev = bevacizumab I Paclitaxel (P) 175 mg/m2 (CP) Placebo 1:1:1 Carboplatin (C) AUC 6 II Paclitaxel (P) 175 mg/m2 Bev 15 mg/kg Placebo Carboplatin (C) AUC 6 (CP + Bev) III Paclitaxel (P) 175 mg/m2 Bevacizumab 15 mg/kg (CP + Bev Bev) 15 months Burger et al. ASCO 2010 GOG-0218: Investigator-Assessed PFS Proportion surviving progression free 1.0 10.7 vs 11.2 vs 14.1 months p<0,0001 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 CP (Arm I) + BEV (Arm II) 0.1 + BEV → BEV maintenance (Arm III) 0 0 12 24 Months since randomization ASCO 2010 36 ap-value boundary = 0.0116 Edinburgh dataset; unsupervised hierarchical clustering Presented by: Control arm ICON7 Immune and proangiogenic groups BEVACIZUMAB Adverse effect on PFS in the immune subgroup Benefit in proangiogenic group BEVACIZUMAB Adverse effect on OS in the immune subgroup Benefit in proangiogenic group Gourley et al, ASCO 2015. MITO 16/MANGO OV2 project: Translational Project Chemotherapy associated genes Angiogenesis-related genes miRNA-machineryrelated genes APE1, ERCC1, hMLH1,hMSH2 hOGG 1, RAD51 XPD,XRCC1 XRCC3,CYP3A4 CYP3A5, CYP1B1 CYP2C8, GSTM1 GSTT1, GSTM3 GSTP1, ABCG2 ABCC2, ABCB1 VEGF-A,VEGF-B VEGF-C,VEGF-D VEGF-E,VEGF-F IGF-1, IGF-2, IGFR-1,PIGF VEGF-R1, VEGF-R2, VEGF-R3,PGF PDGFa, PDGFb PDGFc,PDGFRa PDGFRb, NRP1 HLFB,HIF1α ADAR, Argonaute1 (EIF2C1), Argonaute 2 (EIF2C2), Argonaute4 (EIF2C4), CNOT1 (o NOT1), CNOT2 (o NOT2), CNOT3(o NOT3), CNOT4 (o NOT4), CNOT6 (o CCR4), DGCR8 (o Pasha),Dicer, EDC4 (oHEDLS/Ge-1), FMRP, GEMIN3 (o DDX20), GEMIN4, GEMIN5,HIWI,hnRNP-A1, LSM4, MOV10,p68 (DDX5 DEAD),POLR2A, Ran,RNASEN (Drosha), SMAD1, SMAD2 SMAD3, SMAD5, SND1 (o Tudor-SN), TNRC6A (o GW182), TNRC6B TRBP, TUT4, XPO5 (exportin-5) Angiogenesis • No predictive biomarker • No biomarker for resistance • All patients treated Personalized medicine: BRCA Probability of progression-free survival Study 19: Olaparib maintenance therapy in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer Primary analysis (58% maturity; n=154/265) 1.0 0.9 0.8 PFS HR=0.35 (95% CI, 0.25–0.49) P<0.00001 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 Randomized treatment* Placebo (n=129) Olaparib 400 mg bd monotherapy (n=136) 0.2 0.1 0 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 Time from randomization (months) • Interim OS analysis (38% maturity): HR=0.94; 95% CI, 0.63–1.39; P=0.75 Ledermann J et al. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1382–1392 PFS by BRCA mutation status BRCAm (n=136) Olaparib Placebo Events: total pts (%) 26:74 (35.1) 46:62 (74.2) Median PFS, months 11.2 4.3 HR=0.18 95% CI (0.11, 0.31); P<0.00001 1.0 Proportion of patients progression-free 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 Olaparib BRCAm 0.2 Placebo BRCAm 0.1 0 0 3 6 9 12 15 Time from randomization (months) Number at risk Olaparib BRCAm 74 59 33 14 4 0 Placebo BRCAm 62 35 13 2 0 0 • 82% reduction in risk of disease progression or death with olaparib Ledermann JA et al . J Clin Oncol 2013;31(15S); abstr 5505 Study 19: Time to second subsequent therapy BRCAm (n=136) Events: total pts (%) Median TSST, months Proportion of patients receiving study treatment or first subsequent therapy 1.0 0.9 Olaparib Placebo 42:74 (57%) 49:62 (79%) 23.8 15.2 HR=0.44 95% CI: 0.29, 0.67; p<0.00013 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 Olaparib BRCAm 0.2 Placebo BRCAm 0.1 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Time from randomisation (months) Number at risk Olaparib BRCAm 74 70 65 50 38 33 30 23 9 0 Placebo BRCAm 62 60 46 31 21 18 11 9 2 0 Ledermann J et al. Lancet Oncol 2014 A uso esclusivo Medical Affairs – riservato – non promozionale AstraZeneca raccomanda l'uso dei propri prodotti secondo il Riassunto delle Caratteristiche di prodotto Solo 1 Olaparib Carbo-taxolo Placebo Studio multicentrico di Fase III, randomizzato, in doppio cieco, controllato con placebo, per valutare il trattamento di mantenimento con Olaparib in monoterapia dopo una prima linea di chemioterapia a base di platino in pazienti con carcinoma ovarico in stadio avanzato (stadio FIGO III-IV) e mutazione del gene BRCA PAOLA1 Platine, Avastin and OLAparib in 1st line of advanced high grade epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer Randomized, Double-blind, Phase III Trial of olaparib vs. placebo in combination with bevacizumab in women following first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab for advanced high grade epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer 30 BRCA • • • • PARP inhibitors More patients tested for BRCA mutation Useful for selecting chemotherapy All old trials should be revised? BRCAness and genetic instability PARP Inhibition in HRD deficient 61 % response rate in platinum sensitive BRCA mut 32 % response rate in High LOH 8% response rate in Low LOH Rucaparib Ariel 3 CD3+ TIL Present 55% Stroma TIL Absent 40% Islet Zhang, et al. N Engl J Med 2003 CD8 T -lymphocytes in Ovarian Cancer Intratumoral T cells Intratumoral T cells No intratumoral T cells No intratumoral T cells Zhang, Conejo-Garcia, Katsaros, Gimotty, Massobrio, Regnani, Makrigiannakis, Gray, Schlienger, Liebman, Rubin, Coukos. Intratumoral T cells, recurrence, and survival in epithelial ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003 Clinical Efficacy of Nivolumab in Platinum-resistant Ovarian Cancer Response by Recist Hamanishi, ASCO 2014 AVELUMAB and OC Response by subgroup PEMBROLIZUMAB and OC CHANGE FROM BASELINE IN TUMOR SIZE A. Varga, S. et al JCO ASCO Annual Meeting 2 Tumor infiltrating and peritumoral T cells and expression of PD-L1 in BRCA1/2-mutated high grade serous OC • These findings support trials of immune-checkpoint inhibitors targeting the PD1/PDL1 pathway in BRCA1/2-mutated OC • An elevated number of CD3+ and CD8+ in BRCA1/2-mutated OC may provide an additional explanation for the improved clinical outcomes associated with these mutations Conclusions • Ovarian cancer is a heterogenous disease. • BRCA • Serous cancers have genomic instability. • Integration of genomics and clinical biomarkers for prognosis and treatment. • Personalized medicine and immunotherapy is coming?