Primary treatment approaches in advanced HRD-positive (BRCAm and BRCAwt) ovarian cancer in the Russian non-interventional OVARD study.

S Svetlana Victorovna Khokhlova (B.I. Kulakov Research National Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russian Federation) R Rashida Orlova (Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation) A Alexander Valerievich Sultanbaev (Republican Clinical Oncological Dispensary of the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Bashkortostan, Ufa, Russian Federation) A Alexey Rumyantsev (Federal State Budgetary Institution (N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology) оf the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russian Federation) V Valeria Saevets (Chelyabinsk Regional Clinical Center of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation) A Alina Aleksandrovna Gofman (Altai Regional Oncology Dispensary, Barnaul, Russian Federation) D Daniil Stroyakovskiy (Moscow City Oncology Hospital No. 62, Moscow) D Denis Iukalchuk (SBIH "Irkutsk Regional Oncological Dispensary", Irkutsk, Russian Federation) R Ruslan Zukov (20Krasnoyarsk Regional Oncology Dispensary, Krasnoyarsk, Russian Federation) Y Yana Chapko (Arkhangelsk Clinical Oncological Dispensary, Arkhangelsk, Russian Federation) S Sergey Belonogov (State Budgetary Healthcare Institution of the Yaroslavl Region "Regional Clinical Oncology Hospital", Yaroslavl, Russian Federation) S Svetlana Goncharova (State Budgetary Healthcare Institution "Primorsky Regional Oncology Dispensary", Vladivostok, Russian Federation) H Hedi Musaeva (Oncological Dispensary, Grozny, Russian Federation) V Vladimir Alimov (Moscow Botkin Multidisciplinary Scientific-Clinical Center, Moscow, Russian Federation) O Orazgul Aymamedova (Lyubertsy Regional Hospital, Moscow, Russian Federation) N Natalia Prokudina (Kaliningrad Regional Clinical Hospital, Kaliningrad, Russian Federation) L Larisa Kolomiets (Tomsk National Research Medical Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Tomsk, Russian Federation) O Olga Vedrova (AstraZeneca, Moscow, Russian Federation) E Elena Ulrikh (Almazov National Medical Research Center of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation) I Ilya Pokataev (Moscow State Budgetary Healthcare Institution "Moscow City Hospital Named After S.S. Yudin, Moscow Healthcare Department", Moscow, Russian Federation)

Abstract

e17561 Background: Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) positive status is a clinically meaningful biomarker in ovarian cancer (OC), associated with improved progression-free survival with the addition of olaparib (ola) to bevacizumab (bev) as maintenance after first-line therapy in PAOLA-1 study. The OVARD study evaluated real-world primary treatment patterns in HRD+BRCAm and HRD+BRCAwt high-grade OC (HGOC). Methods: This non-interventional study analyzed demographics, clinical characteristics, surgery and systemic treatment in HRD+BRCAm and HRD+BRCAwt HGOC using descriptive statistics; multivariable analysis explored factors associated with treatment choice. Results: A total of 400 patients (pts) with newly diagnosed HRD-positive HGOC (FIGO IC–IV) who completed surgery and first-line carboplatin/paclitaxel with or without bev at 29 Russian sites were analyzed: 234 BRCAm and 160 BRCAwt pts. HRD+BRCAm pts were younger (median 52 vs 61 years, p=0.000001) and more frequently had family (44.5% vs 7.5%) and personal (breast cancer 13.3% vs 1.3%) cancer history. HRD status results became available at median 83 days after diagnosis with primary cytoreduction and 105.5 days with interval cytoreduction from routine HRD-testing. Bev was added to first-line chemotherapy in 14.1% (33/234) of BRCAm vs 29.4% (47/160) of BRCAwt pts (p=0.00021), with subsequent ola+bev maintenance in 5.6% vs 17.5% (p=0.00014). Ola maintenance monotherapy was used more often in BRCAm (62.8% vs 35.6%, p=0.000001), while bev monotherapy was more frequent in BRCAwt (14.4% vs 5.1%, p=0.00153). Among pts with residual disease after cytoreduction, response rates to first-line therapy were comparable between BRCAm and BRCAwt (Table). Conclusions: HRD-positive status has become a routine biomarker at HGOC diagnosis and substantially influences first-line and maintenance treatment selection, with bev-containing regimens more often chosen in BRCAwt and ola-based maintenance widely used in both subgroups in real-world practice. Clinical trial information: NCT05918042 . Response on 1 st line therapy in pts with residual disease after cytoreduction. Type of objective response BRCAmn/N BRCAm% BRCAwtn/N BRCAwt% P value Complete response 19/43 44.19 13/36 36.11 0.46653 Partial response 7/43 16.28 10/36 27.78 0.21550

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 44, Issue 16_suppl
Published June 01, 2026
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (20)

S

Svetlana Victorovna Khokhlova

B.I. Kulakov Research National Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russian Federation

R

Rashida Orlova

Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation

A

Alexander Valerievich Sultanbaev

Republican Clinical Oncological Dispensary of the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Bashkortostan, Ufa, Russian Federation

A

Alexey Rumyantsev

Federal State Budgetary Institution (N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology) оf the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russian Federation

V

Valeria Saevets

Chelyabinsk Regional Clinical Center of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation

A

Alina Aleksandrovna Gofman

Altai Regional Oncology Dispensary, Barnaul, Russian Federation

D

Daniil Stroyakovskiy

Moscow City Oncology Hospital No. 62, Moscow

D

Denis Iukalchuk

SBIH "Irkutsk Regional Oncological Dispensary", Irkutsk, Russian Federation

R

Ruslan Zukov

20Krasnoyarsk Regional Oncology Dispensary, Krasnoyarsk, Russian Federation

Y

Yana Chapko

Arkhangelsk Clinical Oncological Dispensary, Arkhangelsk, Russian Federation

S

Sergey Belonogov

State Budgetary Healthcare Institution of the Yaroslavl Region "Regional Clinical Oncology Hospital", Yaroslavl, Russian Federation

S

Svetlana Goncharova

State Budgetary Healthcare Institution "Primorsky Regional Oncology Dispensary", Vladivostok, Russian Federation

H

Hedi Musaeva

Oncological Dispensary, Grozny, Russian Federation

V

Vladimir Alimov

Moscow Botkin Multidisciplinary Scientific-Clinical Center, Moscow, Russian Federation

O

Orazgul Aymamedova

Lyubertsy Regional Hospital, Moscow, Russian Federation

N

Natalia Prokudina

Kaliningrad Regional Clinical Hospital, Kaliningrad, Russian Federation

L

Larisa Kolomiets

Tomsk National Research Medical Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Tomsk, Russian Federation

O

Olga Vedrova

AstraZeneca, Moscow, Russian Federation

E

Elena Ulrikh

Almazov National Medical Research Center of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation

I

Ilya Pokataev

Moscow State Budgetary Healthcare Institution "Moscow City Hospital Named After S.S. Yudin, Moscow Healthcare Department", Moscow, Russian Federation