Patient involvement in research within the Gynecological Cancer InterGroup: A call to action for a systematic approach: Results from a survey.

Background and Aims: Involving patients in research, not only as trial subjects, is not a newly established practice. Over the last two decades, patient roles have gradually expanded to become active research contributors, creating a more patient-centered research landscape. Our survey has explored the scope of patient involvement within the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG), an International Gynecologic Cancer Research Consortium, and identified challenges in developing a systematic, meaningful and sustainable level of patient involvement. Methods: In late 2019, the GCIG Harmonisation Operations Committee conducted an online survey across 26 national and/or international research cooperative groups, aiming to identify current patient involvement practices implemented by each group. Twelve questions were asked. The results have been generated to support a systematic strategic planning process to increase patient involvement into clinical research projects. Results: More than half of the 26 participating groups have either already involved (15, [58%]) or are planning (6, [23%]) to involve patients in their research activities. Gaining patient support in raising public awareness around clinical trials appears to be one of the most desired benefits (21, [81%]). Ten respondents managed to integrate patient involvement into their standard practice. When involving patients in research the groups mostly consider that patients bring added value to the study (19, [73%]), although only eight groups (40%) have a well-organized process in doing so. Conclusion: Even though patient involvement is considered a significant added value to clinical research, its application within GCIG groups is not considered on a regular basis and is predominantly limited to operational aspects of research activities. The lack of resources and expertize, as well as the missing well-organized and structured process of some groups, combined with their ability to ensure process sustainability, are among the main factors affecting implementation and adoption of patient involvement within GCIG research activities.

Molecular Results and Potential Biomarkers Identified from the Phase 3 MILO/ENGOT-ov11 Study of Binimetinib versus Physician Choice of Chemotherapy in Recurrent Low-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer.

PURPOSE: We present the results of a post hoc tumor tissue analysis from the phase 3 MILO/ENGOT-ov11 study (NCT01849874). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Mutation/copy-number analysis was performed on tissue obtained pre-randomization. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate progression-free survival (PFS). Unbiased univariate analysis, Cox regression, and binary logistic regression were used to test associations between mutation status and outcomes, including PFS and binary response by local RECIST 1.1. RESULTS: MILO/ENGOT-ov11 enrolled 341 patients, ranging in age from 22 to 79, from June, 2013 to April, 2016. Patients were randomized 2:1 to binimetinib or physician's choice of chemotherapy (PCC). The most commonly altered gene was KRAS (33%). In 135 patients treated with binimetinib with response rate (RR) data, other detected MAPK pathway alterations included: NRAS (n = 11, 8.1%), BRAF V600E (n = 8, 5.9%), RAF1 (n = 2, 1.5%), and NF1 (n = 7, 5.2%). In those with and without MAPK pathway alterations, the RRs with binimetinib were 41% and 13%, respectively. PFS was significantly longer in patients with, compared with those without, MAPK pathway alterations treated with binimetinib [HR, 0.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-0.79]. There was a nonsignificant trend toward PFS improvement in PCC-treated patients with MAPK pathway alterations compared with those without (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.43-1.59). CONCLUSIONS: Although this hypothesis-generating analysis is limited by multiple testing, higher RRs and longer PFS were seen in patients with low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC) treated with binimetinib, and to a lesser extent in those treated with PCC, who harbored MAPK pathway alterations. Somatic tumor testing should be routinely considered in patients with LGSOC and used as a future stratification factor.

Development of the NOGGO GIS v1 Assay, a Comprehensive Hybrid-Capture-Based NGS Assay for Therapeutic Stratification of Homologous Repair Deficiency Driven Tumors and Clinical Validation.

The worldwide approval of the combination maintenance therapy of olaparib and bevacizumab in advanced high-grade serous ovarian cancer requires complex molecular diagnostic assays that are sufficiently robust for the routine detection of driver mutations in homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes and genomic instability (GI), employing formalin-fixed (FFPE) paraffin-embedded tumor samples without matched normal tissue. We therefore established a DNA-based hybrid capture NGS assay and an associated bioinformatic pipeline that fulfils our institution's specific needs. The assay´s target regions cover the full exonic territory of relevant cancer-related genes and HRR genes and more than 20,000 evenly distributed single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) loci to allow for the detection of genome-wide allele specific copy number alterations (CNA). To determine GI status, we implemented an %CNA score that is robust across a broad range of tumor cell content (25-85%) often found in routine FFPE samples. The assay was established using high-grade serous ovarian cancer samples for which BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation status as well as Myriad MyChoice homologous repair deficiency (HRD) status was known. The NOGGO (Northeastern German Society for Gynecologic Oncology) GIS (GI-Score) v1 assay was clinically validated on more than 400 samples of the ENGOT PAOLA-1 clinical trial as part of the European Network for Gynaecological Oncological Trial groups (ENGOT) HRD European Initiative. The "NOGGO GIS v1 assay" performed using highly robust hazard ratios for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), as well a significantly lower dropout rate than the Myriad MyChoice clinical trial assay supporting the clinical utility of the assay. We also provide proof of a modular and scalable routine diagnostic method, that can be flexibly adapted and adjusted to meet future clinical needs, emerging biomarkers, and further tumor entities.

Influence of Genomic Landscape on Cancer Immunotherapy for Newly Diagnosed Ovarian Cancer: Biomarker Analyses from the IMagyn050 Randomized Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: To explore whether patients with BRCA1/2-mutated or homologous recombination deficient (HRD) ovarian cancers benefitted from atezolizumab in the phase III IMagyn050 (NCT03038100) trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer were randomized to either atezolizumab or placebo with standard chemotherapy and bevacizumab. Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) status of tumor-infiltrating immune cells (IC) was determined centrally (VENTANA SP142 assay). Genomic alterations, including deleterious BRCA1/2 alterations, genomic loss of heterozygosity (gLOH), tumor mutation burden (TMB), and microsatellite instability (MSI), were evaluated using the FoundationOne assay. HRD was defined as gLOH ≥ 16%, regardless of BRCA1/2 mutation status. Potential associations between progression-free survival (PFS) and genomic biomarkers were evaluated using standard correlation analyses and log-rank of Kaplan-Meier estimates. RESULTS: Among biomarker-evaluable samples, 22% (234/1,050) harbored BRCA1/2 mutations and 46% (446/980) were HRD. Median TMB was low irrespective of BRCA1/2 or HRD. Only 3% (29/1,024) had TMB ≥10 mut/Mb, and 0.3% (3/1,022) were MSI-high. PFS was better in BRCA2-mutated versus BRCA2-non-mutated tumors and in HRD versus proficient tumors. PD-L1 positivity (≥1% expression on ICs) was associated with HRD but not BRCA1/2 mutations. PFS was not improved by adding atezolizumab in BRCA2-mutated or HRD tumors; there was a trend toward enhanced PFS with atezolizumab in BRCA1-mutated tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Most ovarian tumors have low TMB despite BRCA1/2 mutations or HRD. Neither BRCA1/2 mutation nor HRD predicted enhanced benefit from atezolizumab. This is the first randomized double-blind trial in ovarian cancer demonstrating that genomic instability triggered by BRCA1/2 mutation or HRD is not associated with improved sensitivity to immune checkpoint inhibitors. See related commentary by Al-Rawi et al., p. 1645.

Maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab in patients with newly diagnosed advanced high-grade ovarian cancer: Main analysis of second progression-free survival in the phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial.

BACKGROUND: PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 (NCT02477644) demonstrated a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit with maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab versus placebo plus bevacizumab in newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer. We report the prespecified main second progression-free survival (PFS2) analysis for PAOLA-1. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, phase III trial was conducted in 11 countries. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed, advanced, high-grade ovarian cancer and were in response after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Patients were randomised 2:1 to olaparib (300 mg twice daily) or placebo for up to 24 months; all patients received bevacizumab (15 mg/kg every 3 weeks) for up to 15 months. Primary PFS end-point was reported previously. Time from randomisation to second disease progression or death was a key secondary end-point included in the hierarchical-testing procedure. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 35.5 months and 36.5 months, respectively, median PFS2 was 36.5 months (olaparib plus bevacizumab) and 32.6 months (placebo plus bevacizumab), hazard ratio 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64-0.95; P = 0.0125. Median time to second subsequent therapy or death was 38.2 months (olaparib plus bevacizumab) and 31.5 months (placebo plus bevacizumab), hazard ratio 0.78; 95% CI 0.64-0.95; P = 0.0115. Seventy-two (27%) patients in the placebo plus bevacizumab group received a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor as first subsequent therapy. No new safety signals were observed for olaparib plus bevacizumab. CONCLUSION: In newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer, maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab provided continued benefit beyond first progression, with a significant PFS2 improvement and a time to second subsequent therapy or death delay versus placebo plus bevacizumab.

Topical imiquimod compared with conization to treat cervical high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions: Multicenter, randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: In a previous phase II trial, we showed that topical imiquimod (IMQ) therapy is an efficacious treatment for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). Aim of the present study was to investigate the non-inferiority of a 16-week topical, self-applied IMQ therapy compared to large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) in patients diagnosed with HSIL. METHODS: Phase III randomized, controlled, multicenter, open trial performed by Austrian Gynecologic Oncology group. Patients with histologically proven cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2 (30 years and older) or CIN3 (18 years and older) and satisfactory colposcopy were randomized to topical IMQ treatment or LLETZ. Successful treatment was defined as negative HPV high-risk test result 6 months after start of the treatment. Secondary endpoints were histological outcome and HPV clearance rates. RESULTS: Within 3 years 93 patients were randomized, received the allocated treatment and were available for ITT analysis. In the IMQ group negative HPV test at 6 months after treatment start was observed in 22/51 (43.1%) of patients compared to 27/42 (64.3%) in the LLETZ group on ITT analysis (rate difference 21.2%-points, 95% two-sided CI: 0.8 to 39.1). In the IMQ group histologic regression 6 months after treatment was observed in 32/51 (63%) of patients and complete histologic remission was observed in 19/51 (37%) of patients. Complete surgical resection was observed in 84% after LLETZ. CONCLUSION: In women with HSIL, IMQ treatment results in lower HPV clearance rates when compared to LLETZ. LLETZ remains the standard for women with HSIL when treatment is required. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01283763, EudraCT number: 2012-004518-32.

Phase 3, randomized, open-label study of pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib versus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer: ENGOT-en9/LEAP-001.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib is a novel combination with promising efficacy in patients with advanced and recurrent endometrial cancer. This combination demonstrated high objective response rates in a single-arm phase 1b/2 trial of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in patients with advanced endometrial cancer (KEYNOTE-146/Study 111) after ≤2 previous lines of therapy. In a randomized phase 3 trial of lenvatinib in combination with pembrolizumab versus treatment of physician's choice in patients with advanced endometrial cancer (KEYNOTE-775/Study 309), after 1‒2 previous lines of therapy (including neoadjuvant/adjuvant), this combination improved objective response rates, progression-free survival, and overall survival compared with chemotherapy. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of first-line pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin in patients with newly diagnosed stage III/IV or recurrent endometrial cancer, with measurable or radiographically apparent disease. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib is superior to chemotherapy with respect to progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with mismatch repair-proficient tumors and all patients (all-comers). TRIAL DESIGN: Phase 3, randomized (1:1), open-label, active-controlled trial. Patients will receive pembrolizumab intravenously every 3 weeks plus lenvatinib orally daily or paclitaxel plus carboplatin intravenously every 3 weeks, stratified by mismatch repair status (proficient vs deficient). Patients with mismatch repair-proficient tumors will be further stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0/1), measurable disease (yes/no), and prior chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation (yes/no). MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Adults with stage III/IV/recurrent histologically confirmed endometrial cancer that is measurable or radiographically apparent per blinded independent central review. Patients may have received previous chemotherapy only as neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy and/or concurrently with radiation. Patients with carcinosarcoma (malignant mixed Müllerian tumor), endometrial leiomyosarcoma, or other high grade sarcomas, or endometrial stromal sarcomas were excluded. PRIMARY ENDPOINTS: Progression-free and overall survival (dual primary endpoints). SAMPLE SIZE: About 875 patients. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: Enrollment is expected to take approximately 24 months, with presentation of results in 2022. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03884101.

MILO/ENGOT-ov11: Binimetinib Versus Physician's Choice Chemotherapy in Recurrent or Persistent Low-Grade Serous Carcinomas of the Ovary, Fallopian Tube, or Primary Peritoneum.

PURPOSE: Low-grade serous ovarian carcinomas (LGSOCs) have historically low chemotherapy responses. Alterations affecting the MAPK pathway, most commonly KRAS/BRAF, are present in 30%-60% of LGSOCs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate binimetinib, a potent MEK1/2 inhibitor with demonstrated activity across multiple cancers, in LGSOC. METHODS: This was a 2:1 randomized study of binimetinib (45 mg twice daily) versus physician's choice chemotherapy (PCC). Eligible patients had recurrent measurable LGSOC after ≥ 1 prior platinum-based chemotherapy but ≤ 3 prior chemotherapy lines. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR); additional assessments included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), clinical-benefit rate, biomarkers, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 303 patients were randomly assigned to an arm of the study at the time of interim analysis (January 20, 2016). Median PFS by BICR was 9.1 months (95% CI, 7.3 to 11.3) for binimetinib and 10.6 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 14.5) for PCC (hazard ratio,1.21; 95%CI, 0.79 to 1.86), resulting in early study closure according to a prespecified futility boundary after 341 patients had enrolled. Secondary efficacy end points were similar in the two groups: ORR 16% (complete response [CR]/partial responses[PRs], 32) versus 13% (CR/PRs, 13); median DOR, 8.1 months (range, 0.03 to ≥ 12.0 months) versus 6.7 months (0.03 to ≥ 9.7 months); and median OS, 25.3 versus 20.8 months for binimetinib and PCC, respectively. Safety results were consistent with the known safety profile of binimetinib; the most common grade ≥ 3 event was increased blood creatine kinase level (26%). Post hoc analysis suggests a possible association between KRAS mutation and response to binimetinib. Results from an updated analysis (n = 341; January 2019) were consistent. CONCLUSION: Although the MEK Inhibitor in Low-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer Study did not meet its primary end point, binimetinib showed activity in LGSOC across the efficacy end points evaluated. A higher response to chemotherapy than expected was observed and KRAS mutation might predict response to binimetinib.

Expectations and preferences of patients with primary and relapsed ovarian cancer to maintenance therapy: A NOGGO/ENGOT-ov22 and GCIG survey (Expression IV).

BACKGROUND: Maintenance therapy induces remission and prolongs disease free interval in primary and recurrent ovarian disease. For the treatment decision making process, aspects of quality of life and patients' preferences are crucial, despite the fact that scientific data are lacking. Therefore, we conducted this European-wide study in patients with ovarian cancer. METHODS: A 25 item questionnaire was provided to ovarian cancer patients via the internet or as a paper version in 10 European countries (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Romania, Slovenia, Finland, Turkey, and Spain). Data recorded were demographics, tumor stage, therapy after firstline and recurrent disease, preferences for administration, and expectations concerning maintenance therapy. RESULTS: Overall, 1954 patients participated from September 2013 to March 2016; 42% had recurrent disease. Most patients (98%) with primary epithelial ovarian cancer underwent surgery followed by chemotherapy (91%). Almost one-third of participants (29%) were receiving maintenance therapy whereas 45% had only heard of it. For 70% of patients with primary epithelial ovarian cancer, they heard about maintenance therapy from their doctor, 10% heard about maintenance therapy from other patients, and 8% from the internet. The main source of information about maintenance therapy in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer relapse was from the treating physician (72%), from other patients (8%), and from the internet (7%). For patients undergoing maintenance therapy, the four most disturbing adverse effects were polyneuropathy (37%), nausea (36%), hair loss (34%), and vomiting (34%). The main objective of maintenance treatment, as perceived by patients, was to increase the chances of cure (73%), improvement in quality of life (47%), and delay in tumor growth (37%). Many patients were willing to undergo maintenance therapy until tumor progression (38%) and 39% would prefer oral administration. No significant differences were detected in the cross country subanalysis regarding expectations of maintenance therapy and patients with primary or relapsed ovarian cancer. CONCLUSION: Patients with ovarian cancer were willing to accept maintenance therapy of prolonged duration and preferred oral administration. There is still a gap between the efficacy of maintenance therapy and patient expectations. Patients need more information on the adverse effects and treatment goals of maintenance therapy to avoid misunderstandings.

Olaparib plus Bevacizumab as First-Line Maintenance in Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib has shown significant clinical benefit as maintenance therapy in women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with a BRCA mutation. The effect of combining maintenance olaparib and bevacizumab in patients regardless of BRCA mutation status is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, international phase 3 trial. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed, advanced, high-grade ovarian cancer and were having a response after first-line platinum-taxane chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Patients were eligible regardless of surgical outcome or BRCA mutation status. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) or placebo for up to 24 months; all the patients received bevacizumab at a dose of 15 mg per kilogram of body weight every 3 weeks for up to 15 months in total. The primary end point was the time from randomization until investigator-assessed disease progression or death. RESULTS: Of the 806 patients who underwent randomization, 537 were assigned to receive olaparib and 269 to receive placebo. After a median follow-up of 22.9 months, the median progression-free survival was 22.1 months with olaparib plus bevacizumab and 16.6 months with placebo plus bevacizumab (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49 to 0.72; P<0.001). The hazard ratio (olaparib group vs. placebo group) for disease progression or death was 0.33 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.45) in patients with tumors positive for homologous-recombination deficiency (HRD), including tumors that had BRCA mutations (median progression-free survival, 37.2 vs. 17.7 months), and 0.43 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.66) in patients with HRD-positive tumors that did not have BRCA mutations (median progression-free survival, 28.1 vs. 16.6 months). Adverse events were consistent with the established safety profiles of olaparib and bevacizumab. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced ovarian cancer receiving first-line standard therapy including bevacizumab, the addition of maintenance olaparib provided a significant progression-free survival benefit, which was substantial in patients with HRD-positive tumors, including those without a BRCA mutation. (Funded by ARCAGY Research and others; PAOLA-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02477644.).

Part I of GANNET53: A European Multicenter Phase I/II Trial of the Hsp90 Inhibitor Ganetespib Combined With Weekly Paclitaxel in Women With High-Grade, Platinum-Resistant Epithelial Ovarian Cancer-A Study of the GANNET53 Consortium.

Background: Stabilized mutant p53 protein (mutp53) is a novel target in epithelial ovarian cancer. Due to aberrant conformation, mutp53 proteins depend on folding support by the Hsp90 chaperone. Hsp90 blockade induces degradation of mutp53, resulting in tumor cell cytotoxicity and increased sensitivity to chemotherapeutics. Preclinical synergy of the Hsp90 inhibitor ganetespib combined with paclitaxel provided the rationale for testing the combination in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) patients in the GANNET53 trial (NCT02012192). Methods: Eligible patients had high-grade PROC with ≤ 4 prior lines of chemotherapy. Weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) and increasing doses of ganetespib (100, 150 mg/m2) were given i.v. on days 1, 8, 15 in a 28 days cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Endpoints were safety and determination of phase II dose. Dose limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as grade 4 toxicity (with exceptions) occurring in cycles 1&2. Results: Ten patients (median age 59 years; range 43-70) were enrolled. No DLT occurred in cohort 1 (4 patients treated with paclitaxel + ganetespib 100 mg/m2), nor in cohorts 2 and 3 (6 patients treated with paclitaxel + ganetespib 150 mg/m2). The most common adverse event (AE) related to ganetespib was transient grade 1/2 diarrhea (n = 6). Related grade 1/2 AEs in >2 patients included QTc prolongation (n = 4), nausea (n = 3), anemia (n = 3), headache (n = 3), fatigue (n = 3), and dyspnoea (n = 3). Most frequently related grade 3/4 AEs were diarrhea (n = 3) and neutropenia (n = 2). There was 1 death on study due to hemorrhage from a duodenal ulcer. Three patients discontinued study treatment due to serious AEs (digestive hemorrhage n = 1, cardiac failure n = 1, abdominal pain and vomiting n = 1), 6 due to progressive disease, one due to investigator and patient decision. Two patients achieved a partial response (ORR 20%) and 4 patients a stable disease (disease control rate of 60%). Median PFS was 2.9 months (1.6 months in cohort 1 at 100 mg/m2 ganetespib, 5.1 months in cohorts 2+3 at 150 mg/m2 ganetespib). Conclusions: The combination of ganetespib 150 mg/m2 with paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 once weekly for 3 out of 4 weeks was generally well-tolerated with no DLTs, and therefore chosen for the randomized phase II trial.

Patient-reported outcomes and final overall survival results from the randomized phase 3 PENELOPE trial evaluating pertuzumab in low tumor human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) mRNA-expressing platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The PENELOPE trial evaluated pertuzumab added to chemotherapy for biomarker-selected platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. As previously reported, pertuzumab did not statistically significantly improve progression-free survival (primary end point: HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.11), although results in the paclitaxel and gemcitabine cohorts suggested activity. Here, we report final overall survival and patient-reported outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had ovarian carcinoma that progressed during/within 6 months of completing ≥4 platinum cycles, low tumor human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) mRNA expression, and ≤2 prior chemotherapy lines. Investigators selected single-agent topotecan, gemcitabine or weekly paclitaxel before patients were randomized to either placebo or pertuzumab (840→420 mg every 3 weeks), stratified by selected chemotherapy, prior anti-angiogenic therapy, and platinum-free interval. Final overall survival analysis (key secondary end point) was pre-specified after 129 deaths. Patient-reported outcomes (secondary end point) were assessed at baseline and every 9 weeks until disease progression. RESULTS: At database lock (June 9, 2016), 130 (83%) of 156 randomized patients had died. Median follow-up was 27 months in the pertuzumab arm versus 26 months in the control arm. In the intent-to-treat population there was no overall survival difference between treatment arms (stratified HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.32; p=0.60). Results in subgroups defined by stratification factors indicated heterogeneity similar to previous progression-free survival results. Updated safety was similar to previously published results. Compliance with patient-reported outcomes questionnaire completion was >75% for all validated patient-reported outcomes measures. Pertuzumab demonstrated neither beneficial nor detrimental effects on patient-reported outcomes compared with placebo, except for increased diarrhea symptoms. DISCUSSION: Consistent with the primary results, adding pertuzumab to chemotherapy for low tumor HER3 mRNA-expressing platinum-resistant ovarian cancer did not improve overall survival, but showed trends in some cohorts. Except for increased diarrhea symptoms, pertuzumab had no impact on patient-reported outcomes. ClinicalTrials.gov: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01684878.

ENGOT-ov-6/TRINOVA-2: Randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus trebananib or placebo in women with recurrent partially platinum-sensitive or resistant ovarian cancer.

AIMS: Trebananib, a peptide-Fc fusion protein, inhibits angiogenesis by inhibiting binding of angiopoietin-1/2 to the receptor tyrosine kinase Tie2. This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study evaluated whether trebananib plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: Women with recurrent ovarian cancer (platinum-free interval ≤12 months) were randomised to intravenous PLD 50 mg/m2 once every 4 weeks plus weekly intravenous trebananib 15 mg/kg or placebo. PFS was the primary end-point; key secondary end-points were objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR). Owing to PLD shortages, enrolment was paused for 13 months; the study was subsequently truncated. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-three patients were enrolled. Median PFS was 7.6 months (95% CI, 7.2-9.0) in the trebananib arm and 7.2 months (95% CI, 4.8-8.2) in the placebo arm, with a hazard ratio of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.68-1.24). However, because the proportional hazards assumption was not fulfilled, the standard Cox model did not provide a reliable estimate of the hazard ratio. ORR in the trebananib arm was 46% versus 21% in the placebo arm (odds ratio, 3.43; 95% CI, 1.78-6.64). Median DOR was improved (trebananib, 7.4 months [95% CI, 5.7-7.6]; placebo, 3.9 months [95% CI, 2.3-6.5]). Adverse events with a greater incidence in the trebananib arm included localised oedema (61% versus 32%), ascites (29% versus 9%) and vomiting (45% versus 33%). CONCLUSIONS: Trebananib demonstrated anticancer activity in this phase 3 study, indicated by improved ORR and DOR. Median PFS was not improved. No new safety signals were identified. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01281254.

Association of TNFRSF10D DNA-methylation with the survival of melanoma patients.

In this retrospective pilot study, the DNA-methylation status of genes that have been demonstrated to be involved in melanoma carcinogenesis was analyzed in order to identify novel biomarkers for the risk assessment of melanoma patients. We analyzed DNA extracted from punch-biopsies from 68 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) melanoma specimens. Using MethyLight PCR, we examined 20 genes in specimens from a training set comprising 36 melanoma patients. Selected candidate genes were validated in a test set using FFPE tissue samples from 32 melanoma patients. First, we identified the TNFRSF10D DNA-methylation status (TNFRSF10D methylated vs. unmethylated) as a prognostic marker for overall (p = 0.001) and for relapse-free survival (p = 0.008) in the training set. This finding was confirmed in the independent test set (n = 32; overall survival p = 0.041; relapse-free survival p = 0.012). In a multivariate Cox-regression analysis including all patients, the TNFRSF10D DNA-methylation status remained as the most significant prognostic parameter for overall and relapse-free survival (relative-risk (RR) of death, 4.6 (95% CI: 2.0-11.0; p < 0.001), RR of relapse, 7.2 (95% CI: 2.8-18.3; p < 0.001)). In this study, we demonstrate that TNFRSF10D DNA-methylation analysis of a small tissue-punch from archival FFPE melanoma tissue is a promising approach to provide prognostic information in patients with melanoma.

The N-terminally truncated p53 isoform Δ40p53 influences prognosis in mucinous ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The tumor suppressor p53 generates the N-terminally truncated isoforms Δ40p53 and Δ133p53 that possess the ability to modulate p53 function in vitro. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical relevance of p53 isoforms in the main histological subtypes of ovarian cancer. METHODS: Δ40p53, Δ133p53, and full-length p53 (FLp53) expression was determined in 45 mucinous, 30 endometrioid, and 91 serous ovarian cancer specimens as well as 42 normal ovarian tissues using reverse transcriptase-quantitative polymerase chain reaction. In a subgroup of mucinous ovarian cancer cases, Δ40p53 expression was examined using Western blot analysis. A functional yeast-based assay and subsequent sequencing were performed to analyze the p53 mutational status. RESULTS: In endometrioid cancer specimens, Δ133p53 expression was significantly lower than in mucinous and serous cases (P = 0.016) or in normal tissues (P = 0.004). Mucinous cancer samples showed elevated Δ40p53 expression as compared with normal ovarian tissues (P = 0.003). In addition, high Δ40p53 expression constituted an independent prognostic marker for recurrence-free but not for overall survival in patients with mucinous ovarian cancer (hazard ratio, 0.267; 95% confidence interval, 0.094-0.756 [P = 0.013]; hazard ratio, 0.453, 95% confidence interval, 0.193-1.064 [P = 0.069]). Western blot analysis confirmed the presence of p53ß and Δ40p53α in a subset of patients with mucinous ovarian cancer. Expression of p53 isoforms was not associated with p53 mutational status or clinicopathologic parameters. CONCLUSIONS: We show that expression of p53 isoforms differs in histological subtypes, thus supporting the hypothesis that histological subtypes represent distinct disease entities. In addition, we provide first evidence for a favorable role of Δ40p53 in patients with mucinous ovarian cancer.

Toll-like receptor 9 expression in breast and ovarian cancer is associated with poorly differentiated tumors.

Toll-like receptor 9 (TLR9) activates the innate immune response when exposed to non-methylated CpG-DNA. TLR9 was recently shown to be expressed by cancer cells which have been previously characterized by global hypomethylation. We set out to examine the expression and molecular activity of TLR9 in breast and ovarian cancer cells. Firstly, we confirmed higher levels of hypomethylated DNA in the serum of patients with metastatic breast cancer (n = 18) versus age-matched tumor-free women (n = 18). In breast cancer cell lines and tissues, TLR9 mRNA expression was associated with estrogen-receptor (ER) status (n = 124, P = 0.005). Expression also correlated with increasing tumor grade in both breast (P = 0.03) and ovarian cancer specimens (n = 138, P = 0.04). Immunohistochemical analysis of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) breast cancer tissues revealed higher TLR9 protein expression in hormone-receptor (HR)-negative specimens (n = 116, P < 0.001). Using an in vitro scratch assay, we observed that cell lines transfected to overexpress TLR9 demonstrated increased cellular migration when stimulated with CpG-DNA. When assessing the molecular activity of TLR9 in breast cancer, we found a strong positive correlation of nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-kappaB) activity with TLR9 mRNA expression (correlation coefficient r = 0.7, P < 0.001). Finally, immunofluorescence analysis of BT-20 and Hs578T breast cancer cell lines showed partial colocalizations of CpG-DNA with TLR9, which diminished when the cells were exposed to methylated CpG-DNA (mCpG-DNA) or control GpC-DNA. In summary we demonstrate that TLR9 expression is associated with poor differentiation in breast and ovarian cancer specimens, and that TLR9 overexpression and stimulation with hypomethylated DNA augments the migratory capacity of cancer cell lines.