NIRVANA-1: maintenance therapy with niraparib versus niraparib-bevacizumab in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

Following the results of the PRIMA and PAOLA-1 trials, the most effective maintenance strategy for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage III patients is still debated, raising the question which of those two maintenance strategies is the most effective: PARP inhibitors alone or PARP inhibitors in combination with bevacizumab. The ongoing NIRVANA-1 study will try to answer this question by assessing the efficacy and safety of niraparib + bevacizumab in comparison with niraparib alone after adjuvant chemotherapy for completely resected stage III patients. Stratification factors include tumor BRCA status, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage (IIIA vs IIIB/IIIC) and the use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy during surgery - within the OVHIPEC-2 trial. The primary end point will be progression-free survival rate at 24 months. Safety, median progression-free survival and overall survival will also be studied.

[1]  P. Fasching,et al.  Maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab in patients with newly diagnosed advanced high-grade ovarian cancer: Main analysis of second progression-free survival in the phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial. , 2022, European journal of cancer.

[2]  C. Denkert,et al.  Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) as an ovarian cancer biomarker in a real-world cohort - validation of decentralized genomic profiling. , 2022, The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD.

[3]  Richard G. Moore,et al.  OVARIO phase II trial of combination niraparib plus bevacizumab maintenance therapy in advanced ovarian cancer following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab. , 2022, Gynecologic oncology.

[4]  J. Brenton,et al.  European Experts Consensus: BRCA/Homologous Recombination Deficiency Testing in First-Line Ovarian Cancer. , 2021, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[5]  Jing Li,et al.  Haematologic toxicities with PARP inhibitors in cancer patients: an up‑to‑date meta‑analysis of 29 randomized controlled trials , 2021, Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics.

[6]  S. Arias-Santiago,et al.  Using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE - Version 5.0) to Evaluate the Severity of Side Effects of Antineoplastic Treatments. , 2020, Actas dermo-sifiliograficas.

[7]  P. Colombo,et al.  Primary cytoreductive surgery with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for FIGO stage III epithelial ovarian cancer: OVHIPEC-2, a phase III randomized clinical trial , 2020, International Journal of Gynecological Cancer.

[8]  J. Berek,et al.  Cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum , 2018, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

[9]  Erich P Huang,et al.  RECIST 1.1-Update and clarification: From the RECIST committee. , 2016, European journal of cancer.

[10]  Vrishabhsagar Ruikar,et al.  Interactive Voice/Web Response System in clinical research , 2016, Perspectives in clinical research.

[11]  M. O’Connor,et al.  Targeting the DNA Damage Response in Cancer. , 2015, Molecular cell.

[12]  Benjamin J. Raphael,et al.  Integrated Genomic Analyses of Ovarian Carcinoma , 2011, Nature.

[13]  E. Lakatos,et al.  Sample sizes based on the log-rank statistic in complex clinical trials. , 1988, Biometrics.

[14]  J. Escrig,et al.  Prognostic value of peritoneal cancer index in primary advanced ovarian cancer. , 2018, European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology.