Although chemotherapy is initially effective for the treatment of EOC, nearly all advanced-disease patients eventually relapse and become resistant to platinum-based therapies within 5 years. Therefore, how to extend the relapse-free interval is of great clinical significance in improving the prognosis of ovarian cancer patients. Currently, maintenance therapy has emerged as a novel treatment strategy for advanced ovarian cancer patients, i.e., PARP inhibitors (olaparib, rucaparib, and niraparib) and anti-angiogenesis therapies (bevacizumab) [7].
In the PRIMA study, the mPFS of the niraparib group was markedly longer than that of the placebo group (13.8 vs. 8.2 months) in the overall population. Subgroup analysis revealed that the mPFS was 22.1 and 21.9 months for the BRCA-mutation and homologous-recombination deficiency (HRD) groups, respectively. Of note, the homologous-recombination proficiency (HRP) subgroup of ovarian cancer patients accounted for 65.7% of all patients with an mPFS of 8.1 months [9]. In both GOG-0218 and ICON-7, first-line bevacizumab maintenance only prolonged the mPFS by about 4.0 months for patients with advanced ovarian cancer, indicating a limited efficacy of bevacizumab maintenance in extending the relapse-free survival [10]. The phase III study of PAOLA-1 reported that olaparib plus bevacizumab greatly improved the mPFS in comparison to bevacizumab alone in ovarian cancer patients with HRD (37.2 vs. 17.7 months), the prevalence of which was about 50% [15]. However, about 50% of ovarian cancer cases had a BRCA-wild type and HRP status, and these patients only marginally benefited from PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy, with an mPFS of about 5 months [12; 17]. Thus, there is an unmet need to extend the relapse-free interval for patients with ovarian cancer, especially with a BRCA-wild type and HRP status.
Anlotinib is an oral multi-targeted tyrosine kinase receptor inhibitor that can inhibit tumor angiogenesis and growth in a wide range of cancers. At present, the National Medical Production Administration of China has approved anlotinib for posterior-line treatment of advanced small-cell lung cancer, non–small-cell lung cancer, esophageal carcinoma, and soft tissue sarcoma [3; 11; 20; 21]. In 2015, anlotinib was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as an orphan drug for use in ovarian cancer treatment. Zhang et al. reported that anlotinib monotherapy resulted in a marked PR and a PFS of > 4 months in an elderly patient with advanced EOC after the failure of multiple-line chemotherapy [19]. In a retrospective observational study, anlotinib alone, anlotinib combined with chemotherapy, or the anti–programmed cell death protein 1 therapeutic pembrolizumab was administered to 38 patients with platinum-resistant or -refractory EOC. The mPFS and median OS were 7.7 and 16.5 months, respectively. Among them, 17 patients receiving anlotinib monotherapy achieved an mPFS of 7.7 months. The ORR was 42.1%, while the DCR was 86.8% [5]. A prospective, single-arm phase II study documented an ORR of 25% and a DCR of 100% for a group of platinum-resistant EOC patients receiving anlotinib plus pemetrexed [4]. The results indicated that anlotinib exhibited moderate clinical outcomes for platinum-resistant EOC. However, the subjects in these studies had chemo-resistant ovarian carcinoma.
In this retrospective study, we first explored the effect of anlotinib maintenance on the relapse-free interval of newly diagnosed EOC patients. The ORR was 65%, and the DCR was 95%. Among all cases, the mPFS time was 14.8 months, which is comparable to the effect of niraparib (13.8 months) in the PRIMA study. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis revealed that the mPFS was 11.8 months in the BRCA1/2-mutation subgroup. Relatively speaking, anlotinib maintenance was less effective against BRCA1/2-mutation EOC than niraparib maintenance (22.1 months). However, anlotinib triggered a satisfactory clinical efficacy for patients with BRCA wild-type EOC, with an mPFS of 14.8 months, which was considerably better than that of PRAP inhibitors (about 5 months). Additionally, 35% of all patients experienced a dose reduction due to grade III–IV toxicities, which was manageable and tolerable.
This study has some limitations that need to be addressed. First, this was a retrospective study, which is a limitation. Second, the overall sample size of this study was small, which needs to be expanded further to validate the therapeutic findings. Finally, not all patients had their BRCA-mutation status tested. However, we believe that this study can provide a reference for anlotinib maintenance therapy in newly diagnosed ovarian cancer patients.
In conclusion, first-line anlotinib maintenance therapy might be a promising agent for ovarian cancer patients after they complete the recommend cycles of chemotherapy, especially for BRCA wild-type EOC patients with manageable toxicities. Further investigations are warranted to confirm the clinical outcome of anlotinib maintenance treatment following adjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of newly diagnosed EOC patients.