Back to Authors

Jackson, Camille Gunderson

Mayo Clinic

OU Health Stephenson Cancer Center

Citations 2

Niraparib, Dostarlimab, and Bevacizumab as Combination Therapy in Pretreated, Advanced Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer: Findings From Cohort A of the OPAL Phase II Trial
Liu, Joyce F. , Gaillard, Stéphanie , Hendrickson, Andrea E. Wahner , Yeku, Oladapo , Jackson, Camille Gunderson, Arend, Rebecca C. , Ratner, Elena , Samnotra, Vivek, Gupta, Divya , Chung, Jon , Zhang, Hailei , Compton, Natalie, Baines, Amanda, Bacqué, Emeline , Felicetti, Brunella, Konecny, Gottfried E. , Wahner Hendrickson, Andrea E , Konecny, Gottfried E , Gaillard, Stéphanie , Yeku, Oladapo O , Diver, Elisabeth , Liu, Xiaohong

JCO Precision Oncology | May 16, 2024 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: 8 | Pages: No page available

10.1200/po.23.00693 Get It

PURPOSE To report the results of OPAL (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03574779 ) cohort A, a single-arm substudy of niraparib plus dostarlimab and bevacizumab for the treatment of advanced, platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC). METHODS Participants with PROC who received 1-2 previous lines of therapy were treated with niraparib (200 or 300 mg once daily), dostarlimab (500 mg once every 3 weeks for four 21-day cycles, followed by 1,000 mg once every 6 weeks), and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg once every 3 weeks). The primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Safety was also assessed. Exploratory biomarker end points included evaluation of changes in the tumor molecular profile and microenvironment using baseline and on-treatment tumor samples. RESULTS Of 41 enrolled participants (median age, 66.0 years [range, 37-83 years]), 9.8% had tumors that were BRCA-mutated, 19.5% were homologous recombination (HR)–deficient, and 17.1% were HR repair (HRR)–mutated. As of the cutoff date, all participants discontinued treatment. The ORR was 17.1% (80% CI, 9.8 to 27.0), including one complete response (2.4%); the disease control rate was 73.2% (80% CI, 62.3 to 82.2). Two participants withdrew before first postbaseline scan because of adverse events (AEs). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AEs were reported in 92.7% of participants, with the most common being hypertension (26.8%). Response was not correlated with BRCA, HRR, HR deficiency (HRD), or PD-L1 status. Changes suggesting immune activation were observed in on-treatment samples after triplet therapy. CONCLUSION Results demonstrated modest activity of niraparib, dostarlimab, and bevacizumab in participants with PROC, many of whom had prognostic factors for poor treatment response. Most participants with response were bevacizumab-naïve. No association was found with HRD, BRCA, or PD-L1 status. AEs were consistent with previous monotherapy reports, except that hypertension was reported more frequently.
NRG‐GY012: Randomized phase 2 study comparing olaparib, cediranib, and the combination of cediranib/olaparib in women with recurrent, persistent, or metastatic endometrial cancer
Rimel, B.J. , Enserro, Danielle , Bender, David , Jackson, Camille Gunderson, Tan, Annie , Alluri, Nitya , Borowsky, Mark E., Moroney, John W. , Hendrickson, Andrea Wahner, Backes, Floor , Swisher, Elizabeth M. , Powell, Matthew A. , Mackay, Helen , Rimel, Bobbie J , Swisher, Elizabeth M , Backes, Floor

Cancer | December 21, 2023 | Volume: 130 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 1234-1245

10.1002/cncr.35151 Get It

AbstractPurposeThis paper reports the efficacy of the poly (ADP‐ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib alone and in combination with the antiangiogenesis agent cediranib compared with cediranib alone in patients with advanced endometrial cancer.MethodsThis was open‐label, randomized, phase 2 trial (NCT03660826). Eligible patients had recurrent endometrial cancer, received at least one (<3) prior lines of chemotherapy, and were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), stratified by histology (serous vs. other) to receive cediranib alone (reference arm), olaparib, or olaparib and cediranib for 28‐day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was progression‐free survival in the intention‐to‐treat population. Homologous repair deficiency was explored using the BROCA‐GO sequencing panel.ResultsA total of 120 patients were enrolled and all were included in the intention‐to‐treat analysis. Median age was 66 (range, 41–86) years and 47 (39.2%) had serous histology. Median progression‐free survival for cediranib was 3.8 months compared with 2.0 months for olaparib (hazard ratio, 1.45 [95% CI, 0.91‐2.3] p = .935) and 5.5 months for olaparib/cediranib (hazard ratio, 0.7 [95% CI, 0.43–1.14] p = .064). Four patients receiving the combination had a durable response lasting more than 20 months. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were hypertension in the cediranib (36%) and olaparib/cediranib (33%) arms, fatigue (20.5% olaparib/cediranib), and diarrhea (17.9% cediranib). The BROCA‐GO panel results were not associated with response.ConclusionThe combination of cediranib and olaparib demonstrated modest clinical efficacy; however, the primary end point of the study was not met. The combination was safe without unexpected toxicity.