Background/Purpose This study was designed to evaluate the response and toxicity of sorafenib alone or when combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, or primary peritoneal cancer (EOC). Methods Patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive EOC with no more than 2 prior courses of chemotherapy were randomized to single-agent sorafenib 400 mg twice daily or combination sorafenib 400 mg bid (days 2–19) with IV carboplatin (AUC 6) and IV paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 (S+C/T) every 3 weeks. Single agent sorafenib could cross over to combination upon progression. Results Patients were initially randomized to either arm, however, due to poor accrual, sorafenib arm was prematurely closed. A total of 13 patients were evaluable for response to sorafenib and 23 patients were evaluable for response to S+C/T. Objective response rate (RR) was 15 % for patients on sorafenib vs. 61 % for patients on S+C/T (p = 0.014); stable disease was seen in 62 % and 35 %, respectively. Clinical benefit rate (CBR) at 4 months (mos.) was 69 % for S and 65 % for S+C/T. The median progression free survival was 5.6 months on sorafenib vs. 16.8 months on S+C/T (p = 0.012) and there was no significant difference of overall survival between two arms (p = 0.974) with median overall survival 25.6 months under sorafenib vs. 25.9 months on S+C/T. Patients remained on trial for a median of 7.8 cycles on sorafenib and 5.4 cycles on S+C/T. Conclusion Sorafenib, alone or in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel, has activity in patients with platinum-sensitive EOC. Sorafenib in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel improved RR and PFS; however, there were increased grade and frequencies of toxicities.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Supported by grant U01-CA62502 (PI: A. Dowlati) from the National Institutes of Health.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Van Cutsem E et al (2009) Safety and efficacy of first-line bevacizumab with FOLFOX, XELOX, FOLFIRI and fluoropyrimidines in metastatic colorectal cancer: the BEAT study. Ann Oncol Off J Eur Soc Med Oncol 20:1842–1847. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdp233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aghajanian C et al (2012) OCEANS: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial of chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol 30:2039–2045. doi:10.1200/jco.2012.42.0505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welch SA et al (2010) Sorafenib in combination with gemcitabine in recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer: a study of the Princess Margaret Hospital Phase II Consortium. Int J Gynecol Cancer Off J Int Gynecol Cancer Soc 20:787–793. doi:10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181e273a8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matei D et al (2011) Activity of sorafenib in recurrent ovarian cancer and primary peritoneal carcinomatosis: a gynecologic oncology group trial. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol 29:69–75. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.26.7856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Therasse P et al (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205–216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Brown LD et al (2001) Interval estimation for a binomial proportion - Comment - Rejoinder. Stat Sci 16:101–133Google Scholar
Kaplan EL, Meier P (1958) Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 53:457–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marquez CB et al (2009) Multiple keratoacanthomas arising in the setting of sorafenib therapy: novel chemoprophylaxis with bexarotene. Cancer Control 16:66–69PubMedGoogle Scholar
Rose PG, Fusco N, Fluellen L, Rodriguez M (1998) Second-line therapy with paclitaxel and carboplatin for recurrent disease following first-line therapy with paclitaxel and platinum in ovarian or peritoneal carcinoma. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol 16:1494–1497Google Scholar
Wheler JJ et al (2012) Risk of serious toxicity in 1181 patients treated in phase I clinical trials of predominantly targeted anticancer drugs: the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Ann Oncol Off J Eur Soc Med Oncol 23:1963–1967. doi:10.1093/annonc/mds027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnault JP et al (2012) Skin tumors induced by sorafenib; paradoxic RAS-RAF pathway activation and oncogenic mutations of HRAS, TP53, and TGFBR1. Clin Cancer Res Off J Am Assoc Cancer Res 18:263–272. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-1344CrossRefGoogle Scholar