Role For Gemcitabine As Second-line Chemotherapy in Recurrent Clear Cell Ovarian Cancer

In a recent 2014 retrospective analysis involving 72 recurrent ovarian clear cell patients who underwent second-line therapy at one of 20 Italian centers over a 16-year period, the researchers noted that a small subgroup of patients who received the drug gemcitabine (Gemzar®) appeared to have a higher rate of tumor response, as compared to women who were treated with topotecan (Hycamtin®) or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Doxil®).

Clear Cell Carcinoma of the Ovary

In the July 2014 issue of Oncology, Italian researchers present an interesting retrospective analysis of patients with recurrent clear-cell ovarian cancer [1], a fairly chemoresistant subtype of ovarian cancer that can be difficult to treat.

This retrospective analysis included 72 recurrent ovarian clear cell patients (OCCC), who underwent second-line therapy at one of 20 Italian centers over a 16-year period (as part of the “Multicenter Italian Trial in Ovarian Cancer” or “MITO-9”).

In 56% of the OCCC patients, the clear cell histology was “pure,” meaning the predominant cell type identified within the primary tumor was classified as clear cell (i.e., a subtype of epithelial ovarian cancer) by a molecular pathologist. Twenty-five patients were platinum-resistant, 18 patients were platinum-sensitive with a platinum-free interval (PFI) of 6-to-12 months, and 29 patients had a PFI >12 months. Upon disease recurrence, 47% of patients were treated with platinum chemotherapy (e.g., carboplatin or cisplatin) based upon PFI.

The overall tumor response rate (RR) to the use of platinum drugs was 80%, with 55%, 100%, and 80% RRs in patients with PFIs of 6-to-12 months, >12 months, and >24 months, respectively. The RR to non-platinum drugs in resistant OCCC patients was 33%. Among the non-platinum drugs used in primary and secondary resistant cases, gemcitabine (Gemzar®), administered to 12 OCCC patients, produced higher anti-cancer activity (RR = 66%), as compared to topotecan (Hycamtin®) or liposomal doxorubicin (Doxil®) (number of patients = 31; RRs = 33% and 10%, respectively).

The Italian researchers concluded that the overall study results suggest that the treatment of recurrent OCCC, in general, should be based upon the duration of the patient’s PFI, as is customary in the treatment of other epithelial ovarian cancer subtypes. However, the data relating to the platinum-resistant OCCC patients evaluated in the Italian study suggest that gemcitabine (Gemzar®) was the drug that produced the greatest anti-cancer activity.

Notably, the results reported by the Italian researchers are consistent with the similar findings reported in a small number of previous studies involving an equally small number of recurrent OCCC patients. [2 – 5]

Also appearing in the July 2014 Oncology issue is a commentary written by Maurie Markman, M.D., the President of the Medicine and Science unit of the Cancer Treatment Centers of America (CTCA).[6] Dr. Markman oversees the CTCA national clinical team, with a focus on the application of all clinical and translational research to patient care. In his commentary, Dr. Markman notes the importance of retrospective studies as a “long-established tradition in clinical cancer investigation.” Dr. Markman highlights the potential inportance of retrospective studies as noted below.

• Single institutional data or large multicenter efforts examining past experiences can serve both as “hypothesis-generating” elements for a future prospective clinical study, an idea to be explored in a translational laboratory research project, and even as confirmation of the results of a reported study in a more heterogeneous patient population.

• Retrospective analyses can provide critically relevant data in populations known to be poorly represented in cancer clinical trials and may identify adverse events potentially not recognized in the often highly homogenous groups of study participants.

• The safety and the efficacy associated with longer observation periods and a more prolonged therapy than reported in many prospective clinical trials can be revealed through retrospective examinations of previously treated patients.

Within this context, Dr. Markman addresses the limitations of the Italian recurrent OCCC retrospective analyses cited above, but he also emphasizes the potential benefit of that study, as follows:

“Of course, it must be emphasized that the very limited sample size does not permit any definitive conclusions regarding the relative utility of any individual strategy, including providing a truly meaningful ‘objective response rate’. However, recognizing the rarity of this specific malignant condition (72 total [OCCC] patients identified in a period of 16 years at 20 centers), this retrospective experience will likely be of some value to individual oncologists needing to consider potential therapeutic options for a patient with recurrent clear-cell ovarian cancer. Further, in the event a multi-institutional prospective trial is ultimately undertaken in this most uncommon clinical setting, the results of this retrospective analysis should surely help to inform the planned study design.” [emphasis added]

At Libby’s H*O*P*E*, we generally recommend that recurrent OCCC patients speak to their doctor about the potential benefits (and limitations) associated with (i) molecular/genomic tumor profiling,  and (ii) chemosensistivity and resistance assay (CSRA) testing. The use of both forms of tumor testing may provide a recurrent OCCC patient and her doctor(s) with additional insights related to specific treatment options. In the event that neither form of tumor testing is possible, the results from the Italian study discussed above suggest that the use of gemcitabine (Gemzar®) to treat recurrent OCCC should be, at a minimum, considered by a recurrent OCCC patient and her doctor.

In addition, we strongly recommend that a newly-diagnosed or recurrent OCCC patient should consider the drugs being currently evaluated, as of this writing, in open OCCC patient-dedicated clinical trials, including as temsirolimus (Torisel®) [7], sunitinib (Sutent®) [8], ENMD-2076 [9], and dasatinib (Sprycel®) [10].

References:

1./ Esposito F et al. Second-line chemotherapy in recurrent clear cell ovarian cancer: Results from the Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian Cancer (MITO-9). Oncology 2014;86:351-358. PubMed PMID:24942520.

2./ Yoshino K, et al. Salvage chemotherapy for recurrent or persistent clear cell carcinoma of the ovary: a single-institution experience for a series of 20 patients. Int J Clin Oncol. 2013 Feb;18(1):148-53. doi: 10.1007/s10147-011-0357-5. Epub 2011 Dec 10. PubMed PMID: 22160560.

3./ Komiyama S et al. A heavily pretreated patient with recurrent clear cell adenocarcinoma of the ovary in whom carcinomatous peritonitis was controlled successfully by salvage therapy with gemcitabine. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2008 Dec;278(6):565-8. Epub 2007 Jun 19. Erratum in: Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009 Feb;279(2):271. Komiyama, Shin [corrected to Komiyama, Shin-ichi]. PubMed PMID: 17576588.

4./ Ferrandina G et al. A case of drug resistant clear cell ovarian cancer showing responsiveness to gemcitabine at first administration and at re-challenge. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2007 Aug;60(3):459-61. Epub 2007 Apr 11. PubMed PMID: 17429624.

5./ Crotzer DR et al. Lack of effective systemic therapy for recurrent clear cell carcinoma of the ovary. Gynecol Oncol. 2007 May;105(2):404-8. Epub 2007 Feb 9. PubMed PMID: 17292461.

6./ Markman M. A Unique Role for Retrospective Studies in Clinical Oncology. Oncology. 2014;86(5-6):350. doi: 10.1159/000360911. Epub 2014 Jun 12. PubMed PMID:24942408.

7./ A Phase II Evaluation of Temsirolimus (CCI-779) (NCI Supplied Agent: NSC# 683864,) in Combination With Carboplatin and Paclitaxel Followed by Temsirolimus (CCI-779) Consolidation as First-Line Therapy in the Treatment of Stage III-IV Clear Cell Carcinoma of the Ovary. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01196429.

8./ A Phase II Evaluation of the Efficacy of Sunitinib® in Patients With Recurrent Ovarian Clear Cell Carcinoma. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01824615.

9./ A Phase II Study of Oral ENMD-2076 Administered to Patients With Ovarian Clear Cell Carcinomas. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01914510.

10./ A Phase II Trial of DCTD-Sponsored Dasatinib (NSC #732517) in Recurrent/Persistent Ovary, Fallopian Tube, Primary Peritoneal, and Endometrial Clear Cell Carcinoma Characterized for the Retention or Loss of BAF250a Expression. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02059265.

 

 

European Researchers Find Estrogen Receptor Gene Amplification Occurs Rarely in Ovarian Cancer

“… ESR1 [gene] amplification is an uncommon mechanism for estrogen receptor overexpression in ovarian cancer occurring in about 2.1% of the total number of ovarian cancers. In general, this frequency parallels the fraction of ovarian cancers reported to show complete response to antiestrogenic [anti-hormonal] therapies. Given the strong predictive power of ESR1 [gene] amplification for response to tamoxifen in breast cancer, an evaluation of such treatments in ESR1 [gene] amplified ovarian cancers appears justified.”

Abstract:

“Amplification of the gene encoding estrogen receptor-alpha occurs in about 20% of breast cancers and is an important mechanism for estrogen receptor overexpression in this tumor type. In ovarian cancer, overexpression of estrogen receptor protein has been described in more than two thirds of cases.

To study a potential role of estrogen receptor-alpha gene amplification for estrogen receptor overexpression in ovarian cancer, a tumor tissue microarray containing 428 ovarian cancers was analyzed by fluorescence in situ hybridization [FISH] for estrogen receptor-alpha gene amplification and immunohistochemistry [IHC] for estrogen receptor expression. The estrogen receptor-alpha gene status was successfully determined in 243 of 428 arrayed cancers.

Estrogen receptor gene amplification was found in 5 of 243 (2%) of tumors. Amplification levels were usually low, with 4-8 estrogen receptor-alpha gene copies. However, one case had a high-level amplification, with more than 30 estrogen receptor-alpha gene copies. All five amplified tumors were estrogen receptor positive, with 3 of 5 tumors showing highest (Allred score, 7-8) estrogen receptor levels. The data demonstrate that estrogen receptor-alpha amplification occurs only rarely in ovarian cancer.”

Article Discussion Points:

• “The results of this study show that ESR1 amplification is rare in ovarian cancers (2.1%). More than one-third of ovarian tumors showed immunohistochemically detectable estrogen receptor protein expression, most abundant in serous and endometroid subtypes. This is in line with previous studies done on the classical paraffin blocks. The good concordance between our data and previous studies demonstrates the representation of our tumor tissue microarray data obtained on a 0.6 mm tissue spot per tumor and enhances the results of other studies used in this method.”

• “A small subset of ESR1 [gene] amplified estrogen receptor-positive cases was indeed found in ovarian cancers. In comparison, some other genes showed higher rates of amplifications in these cancers. For example, the amplification of ERBB2 ranges (0-66%),  EGFR (3.65-12%),  CCND1 (0-19%), C-MYC up to 54.5,  and KRAS (31%).”

• “The significant frequency of estrogen receptor positivity in ovarian cancers had prompted treatment efforts using hormonal therapy early on. In addition their relatively little toxicity was another provoking factor to continue going on to achieve more advance in this therapeutic field. Monotherapy studies using tamoxifen, aromatase inhibitors, and GnRH analogues had yielded variable results with objective response rates ranging between 0 and 56%.  Combinatorial treatment regimens combining tamoxifen and goserelin or tamoxifen and Gefitinib had obtained results with objective response rates of up to 11.5%.”

• “The role of estrogen receptor expression for response prediction to anti-hormonal drugs has been much better studied in breast cancer, where a strong association between estrogen receptor positivity and response to anti-hormonal drugs is well established. … More than 20% of breast cancers had amplified or at least elevated ESR1 [gene] copy number. Possible explanations for the predictive effect of ESR1 [gene] amplification could be a particularly high expression of amplified as compared to non-amplified cancers. Alternatively, it could be speculated, that ESR1 [gene] amplified are more dependent on the estrogen receptor pathway than other tumors that express estrogen receptors together with many other growth receptors. If this latter hypothesis was true, visualization of ESR1 [gene] amplification would pinpoint toward an ‘Achilles tendon‘ of a tumor that could be most successfully targeted.”

• “The frequency of ESR1 [gene] amplified ovarian cancers (2.1%) is much lower than that in breast cancer. Interestingly, this fraction somehow parallels the percentage of ovarian cancers reported to show strong responses to hormonal therapies.”

• “For example, in retrospective analysis was conducted of patients who received tamoxifen at a dose 20 mg twice daily for the treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer,

• • Karagol et al found that out of 29 eligible patients included in the study, there were 1 (3%) complete response, 2 (7%) partial response, 6 (21%) stable disease, and 20 (69%) progressive disease.
  • Papadimitriou et al have studied response rate in 27 patients treated with letrozole at a dose of 2.5 mg once a day. Patients with measurable or evaluable disease (n=21) and those with only increasing CA-125 serum levels (n=6) were eligible. Among the 21 patients with measurable or evaluable disease, 1 complete response (5%) and 2 partial responses were observed (10%) for an objective response rate of 15%.
  • Other studies, in which the combined regiment had been implicated, patients were given oral tamoxifen 20 mg twice daily on a continuous basis and subcutaneous goserelin 3.6 mg once a month until disease progression. In total, 26 patients entered this study, of which 17 had platinum–resistant disease, using the definition of endocrine response that included patients with stable disease of 6 months or greater, the overall response rate (clinical benefit rate) was 50%. This included one complete response (3.8%), two partial responses (7.7%), and 10 patients with stable disease (38.5%).”

• “In summary, ESR1 [gene] amplification is an uncommon mechanism for estrogen receptor overexpression in ovarian cancer occurring in about 2.1% of the total number of ovarian cancers. In general, this frequency parallels the fraction of ovarian cancers reported to show complete response to antiestrogenic [anti-hormonal] therapies. Given the strong predictive power of ESR1 [gene] amplification for response to tamoxifen in breast cancer, an evaluation of such treatments in ESR1 [gene] amplified ovarian cancers appears justified.”

Quoted Source:  Estrogen receptor gene amplification occurs rarely in ovarian cancer, Issa RM et. al., Mod Pathol. 2009;22(2):191-196, reprinted in From Modern Pathology, Medscape Today, February 18, 2009. [Free Medscape subscription required to view full text article.]

Comment:  This study indicates that the occurrence of estrogen positivity (ER+)/ESR1 gene amplification with respect to ovarian cancer is significantly lower than such occurrence in the breast cancer area.  Nevertheless, it is prudent to request your doctor to have your ovarian cancer tumor tissue tested by a pathologist for estrogen positivity or ESR1 gene amplification (through IHC or FISH testing, respectively).  If your ovarian cancer tissue tests ER+, you may respond to anti-estrogen drugs.  Although this type of pathology testing is commonplace in the breast cancer area, it is not in the ovarian cancer area due to the much lower percentage of ER+ ovarian cancer tumors.  As the study above notes, further research of anti-estrogen therapy use within the area of ovarian cancer is needed, especially given the potential high effectiveness and low toxicity of such therapies.

Let the Sunshine In!

“People with a vitamin D deficiency are as much as twice as likely to die compared to people whose blood contains higher amounts of the so-called sunshine vitamin, Austrian researchers said on Monday. Their study — the latest to suggest a health benefit from the vitamin — showed death rates from any cause as well as from heart-related problems varied greatly depending on vitamin D. ‘This is the first association study that shows vitamin D affects mortality regardless of the reason for death,’ said Harald Dobnig, an internist and endocrinologist at the University of Graz in Austria who led the study. …Many doctors agree that people with low levels of vitamin D cannot make up for it safely by sitting in the sun, but should take supplements. ‘These results should prompt us to perform vitamin D measurements on a more frequent basis especially in populations at risk,’ Dobnig said.”

“People with a vitamin D deficiency are as much as twice as likely to die compared to people whose blood contains higher amounts of the so-called sunshine vitamin, Austrian researchers said on Monday. Their study — the latest to suggest a health benefit from the vitamin — showed death rates from any cause as well as from heart-related problems varied greatly depending on vitamin D. ‘This is the first association study that shows vitamin D affects mortality regardless of the reason for death,’ said Harald Dobnig, an internist and endocrinologist at the University of Graz in Austria who led the study.

The body makes vitamin D when the skin is exposed to sunlight, a reason for its nickname as the ‘sunshine vitamin.’ It is added to milk and fatty fish like salmon but many people do not get enough of it. Vitamin D helps the body absorb calcium and is considered important for bone health. In adults, vitamin D deficiency can lead to osteoporosis, and it can lead to rickets in children. A number of recent studies have also indicated vitamin D may offer a variety of other health benefits, including protecting against cancer, peripheral artery disease and tuberculosis. Last week, U.S. researchers said vitamin D may extend the lives of people with colon and rectal cancer.

Dobnig and colleagues, who reported their findings in the Archives of Internal Medicine, studied more than 3,200 people with an average age of 62 who were scheduled for a heart exam between 1997 and 2000. During an eight-year follow-up the researchers found that the quarter of volunteers with the lowest levels of vitamin D in their blood were at greater risk of dying. ‘Even when accounting for factors such as heart disease, exercise and other conditions, the researchers found that the risk was double for people with between 5 to 10 nanograms per millilitre of vitamin D in their blood,’ Dobnig said. ‘Most doctors believe people should have between 20 to 30 nanograms per millilitre of the vitamin in their blood,’ he added in a telephone interview.

What causes this effect is not clear, but Dobnig pointed to a host of studies suggesting links to high blood pressure, cancer and fractures as places to begin looking. ‘The potential health risk of low levels of vitamin D should also prod physicians to be more aware of the potential problem, especially for the immobile, elderly and others who spend a great amount of time indoors,’ he added. Many doctors agree that people with low levels of vitamin D cannot make up for it safely by sitting in the sun, but should take supplements. ‘These results should prompt us to perform vitamin D measurements on a more frequent basis especially in populations at risk,’ Dobnig said.”

[Quoted Source: Study shows more benefits of sunshine vitamin, by Michael Kahn, Reuters Health On-Line News Release, June 24, 2008 (summarizing the findings of Independent association of low serum 25-hydroxyvitamin d and 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin d levels with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality; Dobnig, H. et. al., Arch Intern Med. 2008 Jun 23;168(12):1340-9.)]

Additional Information:

• Dietary Supplement Fact Sheet: Vitamin D, Office of Dietary Supplements, National Institutes of Health, May 16, 2008.
• Lab Tests Online® – Vitamin D.
• Laboratory Corporation of America – Vitamin D (click the letter “V” on the left side panel keyboard and search for the keyword “Vitamin D”.
• Quest Diagnostics – Vitamin D Deficiency and Toxicity.
• Related Topics – Click Here to Sphere It!.

Updates:

• Low vitamin D levels increase death risk, by Mark Cowen, MedWire News, August 12, 2008 (summarizing the findings of 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Levels and the Risk of Mortality in the General Population; Melamed ML et. al., Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(15):1629-1637.)