Overall survival with maintenance olaparib in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer by somatic or germline BRCA and homologous recombination repair mutation status
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The open-label, single-arm, multicentre ORZORA trial (NCT02476968) evaluated maintenance olaparib in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (PSR OC) with a germline (g) or somatic (s) BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation (BRCAm) or a non-BRCA homologous recombination repair mutation (non-BRCA HRRm). METHODS: Patients were in response to platinum-based chemotherapy after ≥2 prior lines of treatment and underwent prospective central screening for tumour BRCA status, then central gBRCAm testing to determine sBRCAm or gBRCAm status. An exploratory cohort evaluated non-BRCA HRRm in 13 predefined genes. Patients received olaparib 400 mg (capsules) twice daily until investigator-assessed disease progression. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS: 177 patients received olaparib. At the final data cutoff (25 June 2021), median OS from study enrolment was 46.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 37.9-54.4), 43.2 (31.7-NC [not calculated]), 47.4 (37.9-NC) and 44.9 (28.9-NC) months in the BRCAm, sBRCAm, gBRCAm and non-BRCA HRRm cohorts, respectively. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSION: Maintenance olaparib showed consistent clinical activity in the BRCAm and sBRCAm cohorts; exploratory analysis suggested similar activity in the non-BRCA HRRm cohort. These findings highlight that patients with PSR OC, beyond those with gBRCAm, may benefit from maintenance olaparib.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".