TEDOVA: vaccine OSE2101 +/- pembrolizumab as maintenance in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.

Ovarian cancer is a leading cause of death from gynecological cancers worldwide. Platinum-based chemotherapy provides the cornerstone of the medical management. In first line and subsequent relapses, maintenance strategies are offered to prolong intervals between lines of chemotherapy. Current maintenance options involve bevacizumab and poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors, but these lines of therapy can only be used once in the disease course. Patients in first or second platinum sensitive relapse after poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors and bevacizumab represent an area of unmet medical need. This academic sponsored, international Phase II randomized trial is evaluating the combination of a therapeutic cancer vaccine (OSE2101) with anti-PD1 (pembrolizumab) as maintenance therapy, in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrence regardless of number of prior lines and no progression after platinum-based chemotherapy.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04713514 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Ongoing Phase II study randomizing vaccine OSE2101 +/- Pembrolizumab vs supportive care as maintenance in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.

Neoadjuvant and adjuvant pembrolizumab in advanced high-grade serous carcinoma: the randomized phase II NeoPembrOV clinical trial.

This open-label, non-comparative, 2:1 randomized, phase II trial (NCT03275506) in women with stage IIIC/IV high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) for whom upfront complete resection was unachievable assessed whether adding pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) to standard-of-care carboplatin plus paclitaxel yielded a complete resection rate (CRR) of at least 50%. Postoperatively patients continued assigned treatment for a maximum of 2 years. Postoperative bevacizumab was optional. The primary endpoint was independently assessed CRR at interval debulking surgery. Secondary endpoints were Completeness of Cytoreduction Index (CCI) and peritoneal cancer index (PCI) scores, objective and best response rates, progression-free survival, overall survival, safety, postoperative morbidity, and pathological complete response. The CRR in 61 pembrolizumab-treated patients was 74% (one-sided 95% CI = 63%), exceeding the prespecified ≥50% threshold and meeting the primary objective. The CRR without pembrolizumab was 70% (one-sided 95% CI = 54%). In the remaining patients CCI scores were ≥3 in 27% of the standard-of-care group and 18% of the investigational group and CC1 in 3% of the investigational group. PCI score decreased by a mean of 9.6 in the standard-of-care group and 10.2 in the investigational group. Objective response rates were 60% and 72%, respectively, and best overall response rates were 83% and 90%, respectively. Progression-free survival was similar with the two regimens (median 20.8 versus 19.4 months in the standard-of-care versus investigational arms, respectively) but overall survival favored pembrolizumab-containing therapy (median 35.3 versus 49.8 months, respectively). The most common grade ≥3 adverse events with pembrolizumab-containing therapy were anemia during neoadjuvant therapy and infection/fever postoperatively. Pembrolizumab was discontinued prematurely because of adverse events in 23% of pembrolizumab-treated patients. Combining pembrolizumab with neoadjuvant chemotherapy is feasible for HGSC considered not completely resectable; observed activity in some subgroups justifies further evaluation to improve understanding of the role of immunotherapy in HGSC.

Tisotumab Vedotin as Second- or Third-Line Therapy for Recurrent Cervical Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent cervical cancer is a life-threatening disease, with limited treatment options available when disease progression occurs after first-line combination therapy. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, multinational, open-label trial of tisotumab vedotin as second- or third-line therapy in patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive tisotumab vedotin monotherapy (2.0 mg per kilogram of body weight every 3 weeks) or the investigator's choice of chemotherapy (topotecan, vinorelbine, gemcitabine, irinotecan, or pemetrexed). The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 502 patients underwent randomization (253 were assigned to the tisotumab vedotin group and 249 to the chemotherapy group); the groups were similar with respect to demographic and disease characteristics. The median overall survival was significantly longer in the tisotumab vedotin group than in the chemotherapy group (11.5 months [95% confidence interval {CI}, 9.8 to 14.9] vs. 9.5 months [95% CI, 7.9 to 10.7]), results that represented a 30% lower risk of death with tisotumab vedotin than with chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.89; two-sided P = 0.004). The median progression-free survival was 4.2 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 4.4) with tisotumab vedotin and 2.9 months (95% CI, 2.6 to 3.1) with chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.82; two-sided P<0.001). The confirmed objective response rate was 17.8% in the tisotumab vedotin group and 5.2% in the chemotherapy group (odds ratio, 4.0; 95% CI, 2.1 to 7.6; two-sided P<0.001). A total of 98.4% of patients in the tisotumab vedotin group and 99.2% in the chemotherapy group had at least one adverse event that occurred during the treatment period (defined as the period from day 1 of dose 1 until 30 days after the last dose); grade 3 or greater events occurred in 52.0% and 62.3%, respectively. A total of 14.8% of patients stopped tisotumab vedotin treatment because of toxic effects. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with recurrent cervical cancer, second- or third-line treatment with tisotumab vedotin resulted in significantly greater efficacy than chemotherapy. (Funded by Genmab and Seagen [acquired by Pfizer]; innovaTV 301 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04697628.).

FOLFIRI Plus Durvalumab With or Without Tremelimumab in Second-Line Treatment of Advanced Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: The PRODIGE 59-FFCD 1707-DURIGAST Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Efficacy of second-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric or gastrooesphageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma remains limited. Ojectives: To determine the efficacy of 1 or 2 immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with FOLFIRI (leucovorin [folinic acid], fluorouracil, and irinotecan) in the treatment of advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: The PRODIGE 59-FFCD 1707-DURIGAST trial is a randomized, multicenter, noncomparative, phase 2 trial, conducted from August 27, 2020, and June 4, 2021, at 37 centers in France that included patients with advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma who had disease progression after platinum-based first-line chemotherapy. Intervention: Patients were randomized to receive FOLFIRI plus durvalumab (anti-programmed cell death 1 [PD-L1]) (FD arm) or FOLFIRI plus durvalumab and tremelimumab (anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 [CTLA-4]) (FDT arm). The efficacy analyses used a clinical cutoff date of January 9, 2023. Main outcome and Measures: The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) at 4 months according to RECIST 1.1 criteria evaluated by investigators. Results: Overall, between August 27, 2020, and June 4, 2021, 96 patients were randomized (48 in each arm). The median age was 59.7 years, 28 patients (30.4%) were women and 49 (53.3%) had GEJ tumors. Four month PFS was 44.7% (90% CI, 32.3-57.7) and 55.6% (90% CI, 42.3-68.3) in the FD and FDT arms, respectively. The primary end point was not met. Median PFS was 3.8 and 5.4 months, objective response rates were 34.7% and 37.7%, and median overall survival was 13.2 and 9.5 months in the FD and FDT arms, respectively. Disease control beyond 1 year was 14.9% in the FD arm and 24.4% in the FDT arm. Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events were observed in 22 (47.8%) patients in each arm. A combined positive score (CPS) PD-L1 of 5 or higher was observed in 18 tumors (34.0%) and a tumor proportion score (TPS) PD-L1 of 1% or higher in 13 tumors (24.5%). Median PFS according to CPS PD-L1 was similar (3.6 months for PD-L1 CPS ≥5 vs 5.4 months for PD-L1 CPS <5) by contrast for TPS PD-L1 (6.0 months for PD-L1 TPS ≥1% vs 3.8 months for PD-L1 TPS <1%). Conclusions and Relevance: Combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors with FOLFIRI in second-line treatment for advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma showed an acceptable safety profile but antitumor activity only in a subgroup of patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03959293.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy for metastatic, persistent, or recurrent cervical cancer (BEATcc): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The GOG240 trial established bevacizumab with chemotherapy as standard first-line therapy for metastatic or recurrent cervical cancer. In the BEATcc trial (ENGOT-Cx10-GEICO 68-C-JGOG1084-GOG-3030), we aimed to evaluate the addition of an immune checkpoint inhibitor to this standard backbone. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, patients from 92 sites in Europe, Japan, and the USA with metastatic (stage IVB), persistent, or recurrent cervical cancer that was measurable, previously untreated, and not amenable to curative surgery or radiation were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive standard therapy (cisplatin 50 mg/m2 or carboplatin area under the curve of 5, paclitaxel 175 mg/m2, and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg, all on day 1 of every 3-week cycle) with or without atezolizumab 1200 mg. Treatment was continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient withdrawal, or death. Stratification factors were previous concomitant chemoradiation (yes vs no), histology (squamous cell carcinoma vs adenocarcinoma including adenosquamous carcinoma), and platinum backbone (cisplatin vs carboplatin). Dual primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 and overall survival analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03556839, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Oct 8, 2018, and Aug 20, 2021, 410 of 519 patients assessed for eligibility were enrolled. Median progression-free survival was 13·7 months (95% CI 12·3-16·6) with atezolizumab and 10·4 months (9·7-11·7) with standard therapy (hazard ratio [HR]=0·62 [95% CI 0·49-0·78]; p<0·0001); at the interim overall survival analysis, median overall survival was 32·1 months (95% CI 25·3-36·8) versus 22·8 months (20·3-28·0), respectively (HR 0·68 [95% CI 0·52-0·88]; p=0·0046). Grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 79% of patients in the experimental group and in 75% of patients in the standard group. Grade 1-2 diarrhoea, arthralgia, pyrexia, and rash were increased with atezolizumab. INTERPRETATION: Adding atezolizumab to a standard bevacizumab plus platinum regimen for metastatic, persistent, or recurrent cervical cancer significantly improves progression-free and overall survival and should be considered as a new first-line therapy option. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Mirvetuximab Soravtansine in FRα-Positive, Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx (MIRV), a first-in-class antibody-drug conjugate targeting folate receptor α (FRα), is approved for the treatment of platinum-resistant ovarian cancer in the United States. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, global, confirmatory, open-label, randomized, controlled trial to compare the efficacy and safety of MIRV with the investigator's choice of chemotherapy in the treatment of platinum-resistant, high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Participants who had previously received one to three lines of therapy and had high FRα tumor expression (≥75% of cells with ≥2+ staining intensity) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive MIRV (6 mg per kilogram of adjusted ideal body weight every 3 weeks) or chemotherapy (paclitaxel, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, or topotecan). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival; key secondary analytic end points included objective response, overall survival, and participant-reported outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 453 participants underwent randomization; 227 were assigned to the MIRV group and 226 to the chemotherapy group. The median progression-free survival was 5.62 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.34 to 5.95) with MIRV and 3.98 months (95% CI, 2.86 to 4.47) with chemotherapy (P<0.001). An objective response occurred in 42.3% of the participants in the MIRV group and in 15.9% of those in the chemotherapy group (odds ratio, 3.81; 95% CI, 2.44 to 5.94; P<0.001). Overall survival was significantly longer with MIRV than with chemotherapy (median, 16.46 months vs. 12.75 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.89; P = 0.005). During the treatment period, fewer adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred with MIRV than with chemotherapy (41.7% vs. 54.1%), as did serious adverse events of any grade (23.9% vs. 32.9%) and events leading to discontinuation (9.2% vs. 15.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Among participants with platinum-resistant, FRα-positive ovarian cancer, treatment with MIRV showed a significant benefit over chemotherapy with respect to progression-free and overall survival and objective response. (Funded by ImmunoGen; MIRASOL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04209855.).

Recommandations pour la pratique clinique Nice/Saint-Paul-de-Vence 2022­2023 : Prise en charge du cancer de l'endomètre métastatique et/ou en rechute.

Recommendations for clinical practice Nice/Saint-Paul-de-Vence 2022-2023 : Management of advanced/relapsing endometrial cancer Since the first recommendations in 2020 concerning metastatic and/or relapsed endometrial cancer, new treatment options have shown a benefit on patients' life expectancy, justifying their update. In first line, the choice will be made between chemotherapy with carboplatin/paclitaxel or hormone therapy with progestin, depending on tumor characteristics (histological type, grade, expression of hormone receptors, rate of progression). In case of a dMMR tumors, the use of immunotherapy within the framework of a therapeutic trial is an option. Beyond first-line chemotherapy, current standard treatment consists of the combination of pembrolizumab and lenvatinib, regardless of MMR status. Close clinical and biological monitoring is however necessary given the potential toxicity. Chemotherapy retains its place either as monotherapy (paclitaxel or doxorubicin) in the event of failure or contraindication to pembrolizumab-lenvatinib, or in combination with carboplatin in the event of a long free interval and pMMR tumor. The numerous ongoing clinical trials evaluating new therapeutic targets or strategies adapted to molecular or histological types should allow further improvements the prognosis of patients with metastatic endometrial cancer.

[Practical management of PARP inhibitors: A French DELPHI consensus]. / Gestion pratique des inhibiteurs de PARP : Un consensus national DELPHI.

OBJECTIVE: Despite an increasing number of therapeutic indications, there are no specific recommendations regarding the management of PARP inhibitors other than what is specified in the SmPC of each substance. A Delphi French consensus was conducted to establish practical guidelines to meet the needs identified by healthcare professionals and patients. METHOD: Following the Delphi method, statements to optimize PARP inhibitor management were drafted by a multidisciplinary Steering Committee made up of 17 experts. These statements were submitted to the independent and anonymous vote of clinicians involved in treating patients on PARP inhibitors. RESULTS: This article presents 52 statements on the following topics: initiation and treatment; management of adverse events (hematological effects, gastrointestinal effects, renal effects, pulmonary effects, cutaneous effects, hypertension, insomnia, fatigue, dizziness); special populations and situations; communication with the patient; adherence. Forty-nine statements obtained voter consensus after 3 voting rounds. A hematologist and a nephrologist supplemented this task by drafting an expert opinion on the risk of occurrence of secondary leukemia and nephrological toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: This paper is the first Delphi consensus on the practical management of PARP inhibitors. The pragmatic recommendations resulting from this paper should make it possible to manage the side effects of PARP inhibitors better and thus prevent early treatment discontinuation and improve patient adherence by preserving quality of life.

Results of the FLAC European Database of Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Patients Treated With Docetaxel, Cabazitaxel, and Androgen Receptor-Targeted Agents.

BACKGROUND: Several agents have demonstrated an overall survival (OS) benefit in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC); however, the optimal sequencing of these therapies is unknown as a result of a lack of prospective randomized controlled trials. This retrospective study aimed to identify clinical factors influencing outcomes and to determine optimal treatment sequencing in patients with mCRPC treated with cabazitaxel (CABA) and/or androgen receptor-targeted agents (ART) after androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) and docetaxel (DOC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Records of 574 consecutive patients treated (2012-2016) at 44 centers in 6 countries were retrospectively examined. RESULTS: A total of 267 patients received ADT → DOC → CABA (group 1), 183 patients ADT → DOC → ART → CABA (group 2), and 124 patients ADT → DOC → CABA → ART (group 3), with respective median OS from diagnosis of mCRPC of 38.3, 44.45, and 53.9 months (P = .012 for group 3 vs. group 1). Multivariate analysis showed response to first ADT ≤ 12 months, Gleason score of 8 to 10, clinical progression, and high prostate-specific antigen levels at mCRPC diagnosis were associated with worse OS. Prior receipt of ART did not influence activity of CABA. CONCLUSION: OS appeared to increase with the number of life-extending therapies, with a sequence including DOC, CABA, and an ART providing the greatest OS benefit.

Safety and efficacy of 2-weekly cabazitaxel in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a 2-weekly cabazitaxel schedule in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: During the period October 2013 to February 2016, 43 patients with mCRPC were treated with cabazitaxel (16 mg/m2 , on days 1 and 15 of a 4-week cycle) together with prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). The safety profile and efficacy (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] response; biological, clinical or radiological progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]) of the treatment were analysed. RESULTS: All patients had received prior docetaxel and 79.1% abiraterone acetate. At inclusion, 46.5% were aged >70 years and 27.9% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2. Six patients stopped treatment because of toxicity. Grade ≥3 toxicities were: asthenia (16.3%); neutropenia (11.6%); thrombocytopenia (9.3%); diarrhoea (7%), anaemia (4.7%), febrile neutropenia (4.7%) and haematuria (2.3%). In all, 52.4% achieved a ≥30% PSA response and 40.5% had a ≥50% PSA response. The median OS was 15.2 months. CONCLUSION: This prospective pilot study suggests that cabazitaxel 16 mg/m² given 2-weekly has a manageable toxicity profile in docetaxel- and abiraterone acetate-pretreated patients with mCRPC. A prospective phase III trial comparing this regimen with the standard cabazitaxel regimen is planned to confirm these results.

Immunothérapie dans les cancers de la prostate.

IMMUNOTHERAPY IN URO-ONCOLOGY: Immunotherapy is moving forward in prostate cancer. The autologous vaccine, Sipuleucel-T has been the first vaccine to be approved by FDA. First results with GVAX, tasquinimob or anti-PD-1 have been disappointing. Ipilimumab seen to be more active at an earlier stage of prostate disease. Identifying predictive factor or surrogate markers of activity of immunotherapy and which agents are clinically effective alone or in combination with others therapies such as hormonal or bone targeted therapies are warranted.

Human and murine prostate basal/stem cells are not direct targets of prolactin.

Local overexpression of prolactin (PRL) in the prostate of Pb-PRL transgenic mice induces benign prostate tumors exhibiting marked amplification of the epithelial basal/stem cell compartment. However, PRL-activated intracellular signaling seems to be restricted to luminal cells, suggesting that basal/stem cells may not be direct targets of PRL. Given their described role as prostate cancer-initiating cells, it is important to understand the mechanisms that regulate basal/stem cells. In this study, we evaluated whether PRL can act directly on these cells, by growing them as prostaspheres. For this, primary 3D prostasphere cultures were prepared from unfractionated cells isolated from freshly harvested human and mouse benign prostate tissues and subjected to PRL stimulation in vitro. None of the various concentrations of PRL tested showed any effects on the sizes or numbers of the prostaspheres generated. In addition, neither activation of canonical PRL-induced signaling pathways (Stat5, Stat3 or Erk1/2) nor increased expression of the proliferation marker Ki-67 were detected by immunostaining in PRL-stimulated prostaspheres. Consistent with the absence of response, PRL receptor mRNA levels were generally undetectable in mouse sphere cells. We conclude that human and mouse prostate basal/stem cells are not direct targets of PRL action. The observed amplification of basal/stem cells in Pb-PRL prostates might be due to paracrine mechanisms originating from PRL action on other cell compartments. Our current efforts are aimed at unraveling these mechanisms.

Prostate cancer: cabazitaxel--the taxane of choice in the new mCRPC landscape?

Cabazitaxel, a next-generation taxane, retains its efficacy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who progress on new androgen receptor (AR)-targeted agents such as abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide. These findings are reinforced by in vitro preclinical data confirming cross-resistance between abiraterone and enzalutamide, but not between cabazitaxel and AR-targeted agents.

Prostate-specific antigen flare induced by cabazitaxel-based chemotherapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: A prostate-specific antigen (PSA) flare occurs in about 15% of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients receiving docetaxel. This flare has no standard definition. Its impact on treatment efficacy is unclear. We sought to evaluate the incidence and characteristics of PSA flare on cabazitaxel, and its impact on survival. METHODS: Multicentre retrospective review of consecutive patients treated with cabazitaxel second-line chemotherapy for mCRPC. Collection of baseline characteristics, disease history and PSA levels before and during cabazitaxel therapy. Overall survival (OS) and radiological/clinical progression-free survival (PFS) for patient groups corresponding to different definitions of PSA flare estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Overall, 125 patients were included. Median PFS and OS were 6.5 and 13.3 months, respectively. Depending upon the definition used, flare incidence ranged from 8.3% to 30.6%. The flare lasted <2.6 months. A PSA flare followed by a ⩾ 50% decrease was associated with a median PFS and OS of 11.2 and 25.2 months, respectively. Median PFS and OS for a ⩾ 30% rather than ⩾ 5 0% decrease were 10.4 and 16.5 months. These outcomes were not significantly different from those in patients with immediate PSA decreases of ⩾ 50% or ⩾ 30% from baseline, but were significantly better than in patients experiencing no PSA decrease (p = 0.006 and 0.015, respectively, for OS). CONCLUSION: The PSA response to cabazitaxel, with or without initial flare, was associated with a strong survival benefit. The taxane-induced flare during the first 12 weeks of therapy can be ignored when evaluating PSA response.

Prospective and comparative evaluation of the toxicity of adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The lack of pathologic breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT), a negative prognostic factor, has prompted the addition of chemotherapy to adjuvant radiotherapy. This study aims to investigate prospectively the toxicities of adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two groups of patients treated for breast cancer between 1997 and 2002 by NCT, surgery, and radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy, were matched on age, body mass index (BMI), treatment period, treated side, and surgery type. Late toxicity was prospectively evaluated according to the CTCAE v3.0. Acute toxicity was derived from the medical charts. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients were matched. Median follow-up was 10 years. Acute toxicity was higher in the chemoradiotherapy group compared with the radiotherapy alone group: 37% patients versus 10% experienced a grade 2/3 epithelitis (P=0.002); 48% versus 8% experienced a grade ≥1 mucositis (P=0.00001). Late toxicity was not significantly different in both univariate (51% vs. 49%; P=0.79) and multivariate analyses adjusted on the BMI (P=0.08). In univariate analysis, only the BMI tended to be predictive of toxicity (P=0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy after NCT and surgery was associated with increased acute toxicity but not long-term toxicity. The efficacy of this therapeutic strategy should be evaluated to better define its indications.