We are upgrading the repository! We will continue our upgrade in February 2025 - we have taken a break from the upgrade to open some collections for end-of-semester submission. The MS-GIST Master's Reports, SBE Senior Capstones, IPLP dissertations, and UA Faculty Publications collections are currently open for submission. Please reach out to repository@u.library.arizona.edu with your questions, or if you are a UA affiliate who needs to make content available in another collection.
Niraparib Maintenance Therapy in Platinum-Sensitive, Recurrent Ovarian Cancer
Author
Mirza, Mansoor R.Monk, Bradley J.
Herrstedt, Jørn
Oza, Amit M.
Mahner, Sven
Redondo, Andrés
Fabbro, Michel
Ledermann, Jonathan A.
Lorusso, Domenica
Vergote, Ignace
Ben-Baruch, Noa E.
Marth, Christian
Mądry, Radosław
Christensen, René D.
Berek, Jonathan S.
Dørum, Anne
Tinker, Anna V.
du Bois, Andreas
González-Martín, Antonio
Follana, Philippe
Benigno, Benedict
Rosenberg, Per
Gilbert, Lucy
Rimel, Bobbie J.
Buscema, Joseph
Balser, John P.
Agarwal, Shefali
Matulonis, Ursula A.
Affiliation
Univ ArizonaIssue Date
2016-12
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SOCCitation
Niraparib Maintenance Therapy in Platinum-Sensitive, Recurrent Ovarian Cancer 2016, 375 (22):2154 New England Journal of MedicineJournal
New England Journal of MedicineRights
Copyright © 2016 Massachusetts Medical Society.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
BACKGROUND Niraparib is an oral poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase (PARP) 1/2 inhibitor that has shown clinical activity in patients with ovarian cancer. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of niraparib versus placebo as maintenance treatment for patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, patients were categorized according to the presence or absence of a germline BRCA mutation (gBRCA cohort and non-gBRCA cohort) and the type of non-gBRCA mutation and were randomly assigned in a 2: 1 ratio to receive niraparib (300 mg) or placebo once daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS Of 553 enrolled patients, 203 were in the gBRCA cohort (with 138 assigned to niraparib and 65 to placebo), and 350 patients were in the non-gBRCA cohort (with 234 assigned to niraparib and 116 to placebo). Patients in the niraparib group had a significantly longer median duration of progression-free survival than did those in the placebo group, including 21.0 vs. 5.5 months in the gBRCA cohort (hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17 to 0.41), as compared with 12.9 months vs. 3.8 months in the non-gBRCA cohort for patients who had tumors with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.59) and 9.3 months vs. 3.9 months in the overall non-gBRCA cohort (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.61; P < 0.001 for all three comparisons). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events that were reported in the niraparib group were thrombocytopenia (in 33.8%), anemia (in 25.3%), and neutropenia (in 19.6%), which were managed with dose modifications. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer, the median duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer among those receiving niraparib than among those receiving placebo, regardless of the presence or absence of gBRCA mutations or HRD status, with moderate bone marrow toxicity. (Funded by Tesaro; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01847274.)Note
This article was published on October 8, 2016; 6 Month Embargo.ISSN
0028-47931533-4406
Version
Final published versionSponsors
Tesaro; Amgen; Genentech; Roche; AstraZeneca; Myriad Genetics; Merck; Gradalis; Cerulean; Vermillion; ImmunoGen; Pfizer; Bayer; Nu-Cana BioMed; INSYS Therapeutics; GlaxoSmithKline; Verastem; Mateon Therapeutics; Pharmaceutical Product Development; Clovis Oncology; Janssen/Johnson Johnson; Eli Lilly; Merck Sharp DohmeAdditional Links
http://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa1611310ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1056/NEJMoa1611310