Introduction: Treatment options for relapsed ovarian cancer have increased over the decade with the addition of targeted agents, such as PARP inhibitors and antiangiogenic agents. Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody binding vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), was the first anti-angiogenic agent to be incorporated in the ovarian cancer treatment landscape. Other molecules utilising different mechanisms of action to target angiogenesis have been developed, including cediranib, an oral potent inhibitor of VEGF Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor that has demonstrated activity in both phase II and phase III studies. Areas covered: Herein we will review cediranib as well as the evidence for its use in ovarian cancer, both as monotherapy and in combination with chemotherapy, PARP inhibitors and immunotherapy. A literature search was made in PubMed and on ClinicalTrials.gov for clinical trials with cediranib. Expert opinion: The addition of cediranib for the treatment of ovarian cancer is promising, and has demonstrated a significant improvement in progression free survival in a phase III trial in combination with chemotherapy and maintenance treatment. Cediranib is currently being explored in ovarian cancer and other gynaecological malignancies aiming to improve patient care; further research will help define its role in standard clinical practice for patients with ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate atezolizumab combined with platinum-based chemotherapy (CT) followed by maintenance niraparib for late-relapsing recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS: The multicenter placebo-controlled double-blind randomized phase III ENGOT-OV41/GEICO 69-O/ANITA trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03598270 ) enrolled patients with measurable high-grade serous, endometrioid, or undifferentiated recurrent ovarian cancer who had received one or two previous CT lines (most recent including platinum) and had a treatment-free interval since last platinum (TFIp) of >6 months. Patients were stratified by investigator-selected carboplatin doublet, TFIp, BRCA status, and PD-L1 status in de novo biopsy and randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either atezolizumab or placebo throughout standard therapy comprising six cycles of a carboplatin doublet followed (in patients with response/stable disease) by maintenance niraparib until progression. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: Between November 2018 and January 2022, 417 patients were randomly assigned (15% BRCA- mutated, 36% PD-L1–positive, 66% TFIp >12 months, 11% previous poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase inhibitor after frontline CT, and 53% previous bevacizumab). Median follow-up was 28.6 months (95% CI, 26.6 to 30.5 months). Atezolizumab did not significantly improve PFS (hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.71 to 1.10]; P = .28). Median PFS was 11.2 months (95% CI, 10.1 to 12.1 months) with atezolizumab versus 10.1 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 11.2 months) with standard therapy. Subgroup analyses generally showed consistent results, including analyses by PD-L1 status. The objective response rate (ORR) was 45% (95% CI, 39 to 52) with atezolizumab and 43% (95% CI, 36 to 49) with standard therapy. The safety profile was as expected from previous experience of these drugs. CONCLUSION: Combining atezolizumab with CT and maintenance niraparib for late-relapsing recurrent ovarian cancer did not significantly improve PFS or the ORR.

Background: The introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has revolutionized the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), resulting in a substantial gain in median overall survival. Subsequently, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has become more relevant. Here, we systematically review the available literature on HRQoL issues and side effects of different TKIs registered for the treatment of GIST. Methods: A search through five databases was performed. Full reports in English describing HRQoL outcomes and/or side effects in GIST patients on TKI therapy were included. Results: A total of 104 papers were included; 13 studies addressed HRQoL, and 96 studies investigated adverse events. HRQoL in patients treated with imatinib, regorafenib, and ripretinib remained stable, whereas most sunitinib-treated patients reported a decrease in HRQoL. Severe fatigue and fear of recurrence or progression were specifically assessed as HRQoL issues and had a negative impact on overall HRQoL as well as psychological and physical well-being. The majority of studies focused on physician-reported side effects. Nearly all GIST patients treated with a TKI experienced at least one adverse event, mostly mild to moderate. Conclusions: Despite the fact that almost all patients treated with a TKI experienced side effects, this did not seem to affect overall HRQoL during TKI therapy. In daily practice, it are the side effects that hamper a patient’s HRQoL resulting in treatment adjustments, suggesting that the reported side effects were underestimated by physicians, or the measures used to assess HRQoL do not capture all relevant issues that determine a GIST patient’s HRQoL.