Progression patterns and management after frontline platinum in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).
Abstract
e17581 Background: Most patients with EOC relapse after frontline platinum-based chemotherapy, even with maintenance therapy. Oligoprogression may define a distinct, locally treatable relapse pattern. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed advanced EOC patients treated at our institution (January/2014–December/2024) with surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy, or achieving radiologic complete response after frontline platinum chemotherapy without surgery. Progression was categorized as oligoprogression (1–5 lesions; group A) or multiple progression (group B). Associations were assessed using chi-square tests. Survival outcomes were estimated by Kaplan–Meier and compared by Cox regression. Baseline characteristics are summarized in the Table. Results: Among 107 patients (mean age 65±9.3 years), 75 (70%) relapsed and 29/75 (39%) had oligoprogression. Group A had a higher rate of frontline PARP inhibitor (PARPi) maintenance than group B (14/15 vs 11/35; p=0.02) and fewer metastatic sites at relapse (p=0.01). In the overall cohort, progression-free survival (PFS) >12 months from the end of frontline chemotherapy was associated with a higher likelihood of receiving local vs systemic therapy (p=0.002). In group A, median overall survival (OS) was 110.4±32.4 months and median PFS was 12.5±0.88 months. Local therapy (surgery and/or radiotherapy) versus systemic therapy was associated with longer OS (102.6 vs 34.3 months; p<0.001) and PFS (18.8 vs 9.4 months; p=0.003). Maintenance duration >12 months showed a trend toward longer PFS (25.4 vs 13.4 months; p=0.053). Excluding bevacizumab, PARPi >12 months versus ≤12/no maintenance showed a non-significant trend toward longer PFS (24.5 vs 13.1 months; p=0.10). Conclusions: In this real-world cohort, frontline PARPi maintenance was associated with a higher proportion of oligoprogressive relapse. Among oligoprogressive patients, local therapy was associated with clinically meaningful OS and PFS prolongation, supporting its consideration within multidisciplinary post-progression management. Characteristic Group A (n=29) (%) Group B (n=46) (%) Stage III / IV 51.7 / 48.3 69.6 / 30.4 Debulking surgery(S)/ Interval S/ no S 37.9 / 58.6 / 3.4 43.5/ 54.3 / 2.2 Chemotherapy (CT): neoadjuvant / adjuvant / palliative 58.6 / 31 / 10.3 50 / 39.1 / 10.9 HRD status: HRD+/ BRCA +, HRD+/ BRCA -, HRP, unknown 10.3 / 0 / 10.3 / 79.3 4.3 / 0 / 10.9 / 84.8 Germline BRCA status: BRCA1 / BRCA2 / wild-type / unknown 6.9 / 13.8 / 55.2 / 24.1 8.7 / 2.2 / 71.7 / 17.4 Maintenance therapy: bevacizumab / PARPi/ no maintenance 13.8 / 48.3/ 37.9 16.7 / 23.9/ 59.4 Relapse metastatic sites: 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 86.2 / 13.8 / 0 / 0 / 0 54.3 / 32.6 / 13 / 0 / 0 Progression sites (non-mutually exclusive): peritoneal/lymph nodes/liver/pleura/other 62.1 / 24.1 / 10.3 / 3.4 / 20.6 82.6 / 41.3 / 15.2 / 15.2 / 6.5 Treatment at relapse: S/radiotherapy/CT/S and CT/no therapy 31 / 6.9 / 34.5 / 24.1 / 3.4 0 / 0 / 93.5 / 4.3 / 2.2
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (4)
Eluska Iruarrizaga
Hospital Universitario de Cruces, Barakaldo, Spain
Estibaliz Iza
Department of Medical Oncology, Cruces University Hospital, Barakaldo, Spain
Joan Manel Mañe
Department of Medical Oncology, Cruces University Hospital, Barakaldo, Spain
Alberto Munoz