, Volume 74, Issue 8, pp 879–889 | Cite as

First-Line and Maintenance Therapy for Ovarian Cancer: Current Status and Future Directions

  • Antonio González-Martín
  • Luisa Sánchez-Lorenzo
  • Raquel Bratos
  • Raúl Márquez
  • Luis Chiva
Review Article


Paclitaxel and carboplatin combination chemotherapy has remained the standard of care in the frontline therapy of advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma during the last decade. Maintenance chemotherapy or immunotherapy has not been proven to impact on overall survival and only one clinical trial that explored the administration of monthly paclitaxel for 1 year showed a benefit in terms of progression-free survival (PFS), but at the cost of maintained alopecia and increased peripheral neuropathy. This scenario may be changing with the incorporation of targeted therapy to the frontline therapy of ovarian cancer. In particular, anti-angiogenic therapy has been identified as the most promising targeted therapy, and the addition of bevacizumab to first-line chemotherapy followed by a maintenance period of bevacizumab in monotherapy has shown to prolong PFS. This was considered the proof of concept of the value of anti-angiogenic therapy in the frontline of ovarian cancer, and the results of two additional clinical trials with anti-angiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitors have shown results in the same direction.


  1. 1.
    Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62(1):10–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bast RC Jr, Hennessy B, Mills GB. The biology of ovarian cancer: new opportunities for translation. Nat Rev Cancer. 2009;9(6):415–28.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Stuart GC, Kitchener H, Bacon M, et al. 2010 Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) consensus statement on clinical trials in ovarian cancer: report from the Fourth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011;21(4):750–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    du Bois A, Reuss A, Pujade-Lauraine E, et al. Role of surgical outcome as prognostic factor in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a combined exploratory analysis of 3 prospectively randomized phase 3 multicenter trials: by the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Studiengruppe Ovarialkarzinom (AGO-OVAR) and the Groupe d’Investigateurs Nationaux Pour les Etudes des Cancers de l’Ovaire (GINECO). Cancer. 2009;115(6):1234–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    du Bois A, Rochon J, Pfisterer J, Hoskins WJ. Variations in institutional infrastructure, physician specialization and experience, and outcome in ovarian cancer: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;112(2):422–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    du Bois A, Quinn M, Thigpen T, et al. 2004 consensus statements on the management of ovarian cancer: final document of the 3rd International Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference (GCIG OCCC 2004). Ann Oncol. 2005;16(Suppl 8):viii7–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McGuire WP, Hoskins WJ, Brady MF, et al. Cyclophosphamide and cisplatin compared with paclitaxel and cisplatin in patients with stage III and IV ovarian cancer. N Eng J Med. 1996;334:1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Piccart M, Bertelsen K, James K, et al. Randomized intergroup trial of cisplatin-paclitaxel vs cisplatin-cyclophosphamide in women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: three year results. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:699–708.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Neijt JP, Engelholm SA, Tuxen MK, et al. Exploratory phase III study of paclitaxel and cisplatin versus paclitaxel and carboplatin in advanced ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:3084–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    du Bois A, Lück H-J, Meier W, et al. A randomized clinical trial of cisplatin/paclitaxel versus carboplatin/paclitaxel as first-line treatment of ovarian cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95:1320–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ozols RF, Bundy BN, Greer BE, et al. Phase III trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel compared with cisplatin and paclitaxel in patients with optimally resected stage III ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:3194–200.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vasey PA, Jayson GC, Gordon A, et al. Phase III randomized trial of docetaxel-carboplatin versus paclitaxel-carboplatin as first-line chemotherapy for ovarian carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96(22):1682–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pignata S, Scambia G, Ferrandina G, et al. Carboplatin plus paclitaxel versus carboplatin plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin as first-line treatment for patients with ovarian cancer: the MITO-2 randomized phase III trial. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(27):3628–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bookman MA. The addition of new drugs to standard therapy in the first-line treatment of ovarian cancer. Ann Oncol. 2010;21(Suppl 7):vii211–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Armstrong D, Bunden B, Wenel L, et al. Phase III randomized trial of intravenous cisplatin and paclitaxel versus an intensive regimen of intravenous paclitaxel, intraperitoneal cisplatin, and intraperitoneal paclitaxel in stage III ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:34–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ozols RF, Bookman MA, du Bois A, Pfisterer J, Reuss A, Young RC. Intraperitoneal cisplatin therapy in ovarian cancer: comparison with standard intravenous carboplatin and paclitaxel. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;103(1):1–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    González Martín A. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for optimally debulked advanced ovarian cancer: a new standard in patient care? Clin Transl Oncol. 2007;9(7):409–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Katsumata N, Yasuda M, Takahashi F, et al. for the Japanese Gynecologic Oncology Group. Dose-dense paclitaxel once a week in combination with carboplatin every 3 weeks for advanced ovarian cancer: a phase III, open-label, randomized controlled trial. Lancet. 2009;374:1331–8.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Katsumata N, Yasuda M, Isonishi Y, et al. Long-term follow-up of a randomized trial comparing conventional paclitaxel and carboplatin with dose-dense weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin in women with advanced epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer: JGOG 3016 [abstract no. 5003]. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(15 Suppl).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pignata S, Scambia G, Lauria R, et al. A randomized multicenter phase III study comparing weekly versus every 3 week carboplatin (C) plus paclitaxel (P) in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC): Multicentre Italian Trials in Ovarian Cancer (MITO-7)—European Network of Gynaecological Oncological Trial Groups (ENGOT-ov-10)–Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) trial [abstract no. LBA5501]. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(15 Suppl).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chan J, Brady M, Penson R, et al. Every 3 weeks versus dose dense weekly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin +/− bevacizumab in advanced epithelial, fallopian tube or peritoneal cancer: GOG 262. Abstracts from the 18th International Meeting of the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), 19–22 October 2013, Liverpool, UK. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013;23(8 Suppl 1). Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Markman M, et al. Phase III randomized trial of 12 versus 3 months of maintenance paclitaxel in patients with advanced ovarian cancer alter complete response to platinum and paclitaxel-based chemotherapy: a Southwest Oncology Group and Gynecologic Oncology Group trial. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(13):2460–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    De Placido S, et al. Topotecan compared with no therapy after response to surgery and carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with ovarian cancer: Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian Cancer (MITO-1) randomized study. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(13):2635–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pfisterer J, Weber B, Reuss A, et al. Randomized phase III trial of topotecan following carboplatin and paclitaxel in first-line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer: a gynecologic cancer intergroup trial of the AGO-OVAR and GINECO. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98(15):1036–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hall GD, et al. Maintenance treatment with interferon for advanced ovarian cancer: results of the Northern and Yorkshire Gynaecology Group randomised phase III study. Br J Cancer. 2004;91(4):621–6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Berek J, Taylor P, McGuire W, et al. Oregovomab maintenance monoimmunotherapy does not improve outcomes in advanced ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(3):418–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sabbatini P, Harter P, Scambia G, et al. Abagovomab as maintenance therapy in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: a phase III trial of the AGO OVAR, COGI, GINECO, and GEICO—the MIMOSA study. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(12):1554–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kerbel RS. Tumor angiogenesis. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(19):2039–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hefler LA, Zeillinger R, Grimm C, et al. Preoperative serum vascular endothelial growth factor as a prognostic parameter in ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;103(2):512–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Siddiqui GK, Elmasry K, Wong Te Fong AC, et al. Prognostic significance of intratumoral vascular endothelial growth factor as a marker of tumour angiogenesis in epithelial ovarian cancer. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2010;31(2):156–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Madsen CV, Steffensen KD, Olsen DA, et al. Serum platelet-derived growth factor and fibroblast growth factor in patients with benign and malignant ovarian tumors. Anticancer Res. 2012;32(9):3817–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bergers G, Hanahan D. Modes of resistance to anti-angiogenic therapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2008;8:592–603.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Burger RA, Sill MW, Monk BJ, et al. Phase II trial of bevacizumab in persistent or recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer or primary peritoneal cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5165–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cannistra SA, Matulonis UA, Penson RT, et al. Phase II study of bevacizumab in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer or peritoneal serous cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5180–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Burger RA, Brady MF, Bookman MA, et al. Incorporation of bevacizumab in the primary treatment of ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(26):2473–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Perren TJ, Swart AM, Pfisterer J, et al. A phase III trial of bevacizumab in ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(26):2484–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Friedlander M, Hancock KC, Rischin D, et al. A phase II, open-label study evaluating pazopanib in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;119(1):32–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Oaknin A, González-Martín A, García Y, et al. A phase II study of pazopanib in recurrent or persistent ovarian (EOC), peritoneal (PPC), or fallopian tube cancer (FTC): a Spanish Ovarian Cancer Group (GEICO) study [abstract no. 5068]. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30 Suppl.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Du Bois A, Floquet A, Kim JW, et al. Randomized, double-blind, phase III trial of pazopanib versus placebo in women who have not progressed after first-line chemotherapy for advanced epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer (AEOC): results of an international Intergroup trial (AGO-OVAR16) [abstract no. LBA5503]. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31 Suppl.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ledermann JA, Hackshaw A, Kaye S, et al. Randomized phase II placebo-controlled trial of maintenance therapy using the oral triple angiokinase inhibitor BIBF 1120 after chemotherapy for relapsed ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:3798–804.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    du Bois A, Huober J, Stopfer P, et al. A phase I open-label dose escalation study of oral BIBF 1120 combined with standard paclitaxel and carboplatin in patients with advanced gynecological malignancies. Ann Oncol. 2010;21:370–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    du Bois A, Kristensen G, Ray-Coquard I, et al. AGO-OVAR 12: a randomized placebo-controlled GCIG/ENGOT-Intergroup phase III trial of standard frontline chemotherapy +/− nintedanib for advanced ovarian cancer. Abstracts from the 18th International Meeting of the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), 19–22 October 2013, Liverpool, UK. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013;23(8 Suppl 1). Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Matei D, Sill MW, Lankes HA, et al. Activity of sorafenib in recurrent ovarian cancer and primary peritoneal carcinomatosis: a Gynecologic Oncology Group trial. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:69–75.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Herzog TJ, Scambia G, Kim BG, et al. A randomized, double-blind phase 2 trial of maintenance sorafenib in epithelial ovarian or primary peritoneal cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2012;22(8 Suppl 3):E99–100.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Matulonis UA, Berlin S, Ivy P, et al. Cediranib, an oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor kinases, is an active drug in recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5601–6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hirte HW, Vidal L, Fleming GF, et al. A phase II study of cediranib (AZD2171) in recurrent or persistent ovarian, peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer: final results of a PMH, Chicago and California consortia trial [abstract no. 5521]. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ledermann JA, Perren TJ, Raja FA, et al. Randomised double-blind phase III trial of cediranib (AZD 2171) in relapsed platinum sensitive ovarian cancer: results of the ICON6 trial. Late Breaking abstract. Presented at the European Cancer Congress, Amsterdam [abstract no. 10]. ECCO 17-ESMO 38. 2013.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Herbst RS, Hong D, Chap L, et al. Safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of AMG 386, a selective angiopoietin inhibitor, in adult patients with advanced solid tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3557–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Karlan BY, Oza AM, Richardson GE, et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II study of AMG 386 combined with weekly paclitaxel in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:362–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Monk BJ, Poveda A, Vergote I, et al. A phase III, randomized, double-blind trial of weekly paclitaxel plus the angiopoietin 1 and 2 inhibitor, trebananib, or placebo in women with recurrent ovarian cancer: TRINOVA-1. 17th ECCO, 38th ESMO, 32nd ESTRO European Cancer Congress. 2013, 1 October during Gynaecological Cancer proferred paper session ( Abstract E17-7107) [abstract no. 41]. ECCO 17-ESMO 38. 2013.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Roy R, Chun J, Powell SN. BRCA1 and BRCA2: different roles in a common pathway of genome protection. Nat Rev Cancer. 2011;12(1):68–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature. 2011;474:609–15.PubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Javle M, Curtin NJ. The role of PARP in DNA repair and its therapeutic exploitation. Br J Cancer. 2011;105(8):1114–22.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Farmer H, McCabe N, Lord CJ, et al. Targeting the DNA repair defect in BRCA mutant cells as a therapeutic strategy. Nature. 2005;434:917–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Ashworth A. A synthetic lethal therapeutic approach: poly (ADP) ribose polymerase inhibitors for the treatment of cancers deficient in DNA double-strand break repair. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3785–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Iglehart JD, Silver DP. Synthetic lethality: a new direction in cancer-drug development. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:189–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Gelmon KA, Tischkowitz M, Mackay H, et al. Olaparib in patients with recurrent high-grade serous or poorly differentiated ovarian carcinoma or triple-negative breast cancer: a phase 2, multicentre, open-label, non-randomised study. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:852–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Ledermann J, Harter P, Gourley C, et al. Olaparib maintenance therapy in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(15):1382–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Oza AM, Cibula D, Oaknin A, et al. Olaparib plus paclitaxel plus carboplatin (P/C) followed by olaparib maintenance treatment in patients (pts) with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer (PSR SOC): a randomized, open-label phase II study [abstract no. 5001]. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30 Suppl.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonio González-Martín
    • 1
  • Luisa Sánchez-Lorenzo
    • 2
  • Raquel Bratos
    • 1
  • Raúl Márquez
    • 1
  • Luis Chiva
    • 3
  1. 1.Medical Oncology DepartmentMD Anderson Cancer CenterMadridSpain
  2. 2.Medical Oncology ServiceHospital Central de AsturiasOviedoSpain
  3. 3.Gynecologic Oncology DepartmentMD Anderson Cancer CenterMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations