LBA36 Efficacy and Safety of Senaparib As Maintenance Treatment in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer (FLAMES Study): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase III Trial

Xiaohua Wu,Jihong Liu,Xiaobin Wang,Jing Wang,Li Wang,Jianqing Zhu,Beihua Kong,Junwei Fei,Ying Tang,Bairong Xia,Zhiqing Liang,Ke Wang,Zhongqiu Lin,Yi Huang,Hong Zheng,An Lin,Kui Jiang,Wei Wang,Xin Wang,Ge Lou
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2023.10.030
IF: 51.769
2023-01-01
Annals of Oncology
Abstract:Ovarian cancer (OC) is one of the most lethal gynecologic cancers. Approximately 85% of newly diagnosed advanced OC may experience a relapse after the first line (1L) platinum-based chemotherapy. PARP inhibitors are recommended as maintenance therapy to prolong the benefit of platinum. Senaparib (IMP4297) is a novel, highly potency PARP inhibitor. The phase 3 study FLAMES is to investigate the efficacy and safety of Senaparib in Chinese patients (pts) with newly diagnosed advanced OC as 1L maintenance therapy. Eligible pts had newly diagnosed, FIGO stage III–IV, high-grade serous or endometrioid OC, who have completed 1L platinum-based chemotherapy with complete response (CR) or partial response (PR). Pts were randomized (2:1) to receive senaparib (Sena) or placebo (PBO) 100 mg/day orally, stratified by CR/PR and BRCA mutation positive/negative. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS ) evaluated by blinded independent central review (BICR) according to RECIST v1.1. 404 pts were randomized. As of 16 Mar. 2023, 270 and 133 pts received Sena and PBO with a median follow-up of 22.4 and 22.2 months, respectively. Primary analysis showed Sena significantly improved PFS over placebo (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.32-0.58, P < 0.0001), irrespective of BRCA mutation status ( HR 0.43, P < 0.01). Secondary endpoints support the primary analysis (Table). Incidence rates of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were 66.3 % vs 20.3%, AEs leading to dose reduction 63.3 % vs 6.0% and discontinuation 4.4 % vs 0% in Sena and PBO arm. No AE leading to death.Table: LBA36Senaparib (n=271), mPlacebo (n=133), mHR (95%CI), P valuePFS (BICR)NR13.60.43 (0.32-0.58) P < 0.0001PFS (BICR) BRCA +NR15.60.43 (0.24-0.76) P = 0.0026PFS (BICR) BRCA-NR12.90.43 (0.30-0.61) P < 0.0001PFS (INVR)NR11.10.43 (0.32-0.57) P < 0.0001PFS (INVR) BRCA +NR11.10.33 (0.20-0.56) P < 0.0001PFS (INVR) BRCA-NR11.10.48 (0.34-0.67) P < 0.0001TFSTNR14.40.44 (0.33-0.59) P < 0.0001BICR, blinded independent central review; INVR, investigator review; HR, hazard ratio; NR, not reached; PFS, progression-free survival; BRCA +, breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutation positive; BRCA -, BRCA mutation negative; TFST, time to first subsequent therapy or death; m, month Open table in a new tab BICR, blinded independent central review; INVR, investigator review; HR, hazard ratio; NR, not reached; PFS, progression-free survival; BRCA +, breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutation positive; BRCA -, BRCA mutation negative; TFST, time to first subsequent therapy or death; m, month 1L maintenance Senaparib led to an unprecedented reduction in the risk of progression or death versus placebo in OC, regardless of biomarker status. Senaparib was well tolerated, no new safety signals were identified.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?