Efficacy of Trastuzumab Deruxtecan in HER2-Expressing Solid Tumors by Enrollment HER2 IHC Status: Post Hoc Analysis of DESTINY-PanTumor02.

INTRODUCTION: DESTINY-PanTumor02 (NCT04482309) evaluated the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) in pretreated patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-expressing [immunohistochemistry (IHC) 3+/2+] solid tumors across seven cohorts: endometrial, cervical, ovarian, bladder, biliary tract, pancreatic, and other. Subgroup analyses by HER2 status were previously reported by central HER2 IHC testing, determined at enrollment or confirmed retrospectively. Reflecting the testing methods available in clinical practice, most patients (n = 202; 75.7%) were enrolled based on local HER2 IHC testing. Here, we report outcomes by HER2 IHC status as determined by the local or central test results used for study enrollment. METHODS: This phase 2, open-label study evaluated T-DXd (5.4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks) for HER2-expressing (IHC 3+/2+ by local or central testing) locally advanced or metastatic disease after ≥ 1 systemic treatment or without alternative treatments. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included safety, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival. RESULTS: In total, 111 (41.6%) and 151 (56.6%) patients were enrolled with IHC 3+ and IHC 2+ tumors, respectively. In patients with IHC 3+ tumors, investigator-assessed confirmed ORR was 51.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 41.7, 61.0], and median DOR was 14.2 months (95% CI 10.3, 23.6). In patients with IHC 2+ tumors, investigator-assessed ORR was 26.5% (95% CI 19.6, 34.3), and median DOR was 9.8 months (95% CI 4.5, 12.6). Safety was consistent with the known profile of T-DXd. CONCLUSION: In line with previously reported results, T-DXd demonstrated clinically meaningful benefit in patients with HER2-expressing tumors, with the greatest benefit in patients with IHC 3+ tumors. These data support the antitumor activity of T-DXd in HER2-expressing solid tumors, irrespective of whether patients are identified by local or central HER2 IHC testing.

Atezolizumab Combined With Platinum and Maintenance Niraparib for Recurrent Ovarian Cancer With a Platinum-Free Interval >6 Months: ENGOT-OV41/GEICO 69-O/ANITA Phase III Trial.

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.

Physician-reported patient involvement and treatment decisions in first-line ovarian cancer in the USA and Europe.

OBJECTIVES: Real-world data evaluating how approvals of novel treatment regimens for ovarian cancer have impacted the treatment paradigm, including first-line maintenance, are lacking. This analysis aimed to describe treatment patterns for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer in Europe and the USA in the first-line maintenance setting. Patient characteristics, biomarker testing rates, and drivers of treatment choice were also evaluated. METHODS: A retrospective chart review study of electronic medical records in Europe and the USA was conducted for patients diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer (June 1, 2017-May 31, 2020), in line with Healthcare Market Research guidelines. Eligible physicians extracted data from electronic medical records by completing standardized patient record forms, including questions on patient involvement in treatment decisions. Patients with advanced (stage III/IV) disease were stratified by country and diagnosis date to provide information on treatment patterns. RESULTS: Patient record forms for 7072 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer were completed by 416 physicians; 5386 patients had stage III/IV ovarian cancer. Over time, the percentage of patients who were tested for BRCA mutations or homologous recombination deficiency increased. Patient preference was documented as a reason for treatment selection in approximately one-sixth of cases in the first-line adjuvant and first-line maintenance settings. The use of first-line maintenance poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor monotherapy increased over time, while the use of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor monotherapy decreased. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study showed that treatment patterns for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer varied by country. Rates of physician-reported patient involvement in treatment decisions in the first-line adjuvant and maintenance treatment settings for ovarian cancer were low, highlighting an unmet need for initiatives to improve patient involvement in shared decision-making regarding maintenance therapy selection.

SENECA study: staging endometrial cancer based on molecular classification.

OBJECTIVE: Management of endometrial cancer is advancing, with accurate staging crucial for guiding treatment decisions. Understanding sentinel lymph node (SLN) involvement rates across molecular subgroups is essential. To evaluate SLN involvement in early-stage (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 I-II) endometrial cancer, considering molecular subtypes and new European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) risk classification. METHODS: The SENECA study retrospectively reviewed data from 2139 women with stage I-II endometrial cancer across 66 centers in 16 countries. Patients underwent surgery with SLN assessment following ESGO guidelines between January 2021 and December 2022. Molecular analysis was performed on pre-operative biopsies or hysterectomy specimens. RESULTS: Among the 2139 patients, the molecular subgroups were as follows: 272 (12.7%) p53 abnormal (p53abn, 1191 (55.7%) non-specific molecular profile (NSMP), 581 (27.2%) mismatch repair deficient (MMRd), 95 (4.4%) POLE mutated (POLE-mut). Tracer diffusion was detected in, at least one side, in 97.2% of the cases; with a bilateral diffusion observed in 82.7% of the cases. By ultrastaging (90.7% of the cases) or one-step nucleic acid amplification (198 (9.3%) of the cases), 205 patients were identified with affected sentinel lymph nodes, representing 9.6% of the sample. Of these, 139 (67.8%) had low-volume metastases (including micrometastases, 42.9%; and isolated tumor cells, 24.9%) while 66 (32.2%) had macrometastases. Significant differences in SLN involvement were observed between molecular subtypes, with p53abn and MMRd groups having the highest rates (12.50% and 12.40%, respectively) compared with NSMP (7.80%) and POLE-mut (6.30%), (p=0.004); (p53abn, OR=1.69 (95% CI 1.11 to 2.56), p=0.014; MMRd, OR=1.67 (95% CI 1.21 to 2.31), p=0.002). Differences were also noted among ESGO risk groups (2.84% for low-risk patients, 6.62% for intermediate-risk patients, 21.63% for high-intermediate risk patients, and 22.51% for high-risk patients; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study reveals significant differences in SLN involvement among patients with early-stage endometrial cancer based on molecular subtypes. This underscores the importance of considering molecular characteristics for accurate staging and optimal management decisions.

Tolerability of the niraparib individualized starting dose in the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial of niraparib first-line maintenance therapy.

PURPOSE: To explore safety and tolerability parameters for the niraparib individualized starting dose (ISD) in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer that responded to platinum-based chemotherapy who participated in the phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial (NCT02655016). METHODS: The PRIMA protocol was amended so newly enrolled patients received an ISD based on baseline body weight/platelet count. In this ad hoc analysis, the timing, duration, and resolution of the first occurrence of common any-grade hematologic (thrombocytopenia, anemia, neutropenia) and nonhematologic (nausea, asthenia/fatigue, constipation, insomnia, hypertension) treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were evaluated by treatment arm in the ISD safety population (data cutoff, November 17, 2021; median follow-up, 3.5 years). RESULTS: Of 733 randomized patients, 255 were enrolled after the ISD protocol amendment and received ≥ 1 dose of study treatment (niraparib, 169; placebo, 86). In the niraparib arm, median times to first events were 22.0-35.0 days for hematologic TEAEs and 7.0-56.0 days for nonhematologic TEAEs. First events resolved in ≥ 89.8% of patients for hematologic TEAEs; for nonhematologic TEAEs, resolution rates ranged from 55.3% (insomnia) to 86.0% (nausea). Median durations of first hematologic TEAEs were ≤ 16.0 days, but for first nonhematologic TEAEs ranged from 18.0 days (nausea) to 134.0 days (insomnia). CONCLUSION: The niraparib ISD was generally well tolerated and TEAEs were manageable. Common hematologic and nonhematologic TEAEs occurred early and first events of hematologic TEAEs had a short duration (≈ 2 weeks) and a high resolution rate. These findings support close monitoring immediately following niraparib initiation and may help inform patient expectations for niraparib safety.

Niraparib Population Pharmacokinetics and Exposure-Response Relationships in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

PURPOSE: Niraparib is a poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase inhibitor approved for the maintenance treatment of advanced ovarian cancer (OC). Niraparib was originally approved in recurrent OC at a fixed starting dose (FSD) of 300 mg once daily (QD). This analysis characterized the population pharmacokinetics (PK) of niraparib and evaluated the relationships between exposure, efficacy, and safety to support clinical use of an individualized dosing strategy, in which the starting dose of niraparib was adjusted based on patient characteristics to improve the benefit-risk profile. METHODS: A population PK model was developed by pooling data from four niraparib clinical trials (PN001 [n = 104], QUADRA [n = 455], NOVA [n = 403], and PRIMA [n = 480]) in patients with solid tumors, including OC. Exposure-response analyses were conducted to explore the relationships of niraparib exposure with progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events in the PRIMA study. A multivariate logistic regression model was also developed to estimate the probability of grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia, using data from patients enrolled in PRIMA and NOVA. The impact of an individualized starting dose (ISD) regimen (200 mg QD in patients with body weight [BW] <77 kg or platelet count [PLT] <150,000/µL, or 300 mg QD in patients with BW ≥77 kg and PLT ≥150,000/µL) on systemic exposure, efficacy, and safety was assessed. FINDINGS: Niraparib disposition was best described by a 3-compartment model with linear elimination. Key covariates included baseline creatinine clearance, BW, albumin, and age, all of which had minor effects on niraparib exposure. Comparable model-predicted exposure up to the time of disease progression/death or censoring in the 300-mg FSD and 200-/300-mg ISD groups was consistent with the lower rate of dose reduction in the ISD groups. No consistent niraparib exposure-response relationship was observed for efficacy in all PRIMA patients (first-line OC), and no statistically significant difference was seen in PFS curves for patients receiving a niraparib dose of 200 mg versus 300 mg. In the multivariate regression model, performed using combined data from PRIMA and NOVA, higher niraparib exposure (area under the concentration-time curve at steady-state [AUCss]), lower BW, and lower PLT were associated with an increased risk of grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia. IMPLICATIONS: Population PK and exposure-response analyses support use of an ISD to improve the safety profile of niraparib, including reducing the rate of grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia, without compromising efficacy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01847274 (NOVA), NCT00749502 (PN001), NCT02655016 (PRIMA), NCT02354586 (QUADRA), www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Patterns of initial ovarian cancer recurrence on niraparib maintenance monotherapy in patients with no baseline evidence of disease after first-line chemotherapy: An ad hoc subgroup analysis of PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012.

OBJECTIVES: Patterns of disease recurrence on poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor maintenance therapy are unclear and may affect subsequent treatment. This ad hoc subgroup analysis of the phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study evaluated patterns of initial recurrence in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC). METHODS: PRIMA included participants at high risk for disease progression. This ad hoc analysis only evaluated participants randomized to niraparib maintenance without evidence of disease at baseline. The number and site(s) of initial recurrent lesions at investigator-assessed progressive disease (PD) were evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 314 niraparib-treated patients analyzed, 190 developed ≥1 new lesion (median number of new lesions, 1.0; interquartile range, 1-2). In total, 93.2% (177/190) of patients developed 1-3 lesions at first disease progression. The most common sites of recurrence were the peritoneum (30.0% [57/190]), lymph nodes (26.3% [50/190]), and liver (20.5% [39/190]). Similar results were observed when patients with PD were stratified by biomarker status, disease stage at diagnosis, and type of debulking surgery. Patients with homologous recombination-proficient tumors, stage III disease, or a history of primary debulking developed a median of 2.0 new lesions at first progression; patients with homologous recombination-deficient tumors, stage IV disease, or a history of interval debulking developed a median of 1.0 new lesion. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients with AOC without lesions at first-line maintenance treatment initiation develop oligometastatic disease at first recurrence. Prospective evaluation is required to determine whether these patients have improved outcomes when local therapies are combined with continuous, systemic, targeted maintenance therapy.

Predictors of long-term progression-free survival in patients with ovarian cancer treated with niraparib in the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify characteristics associated with long-term progression-free survival (≥2 years) in patients with advanced ovarian cancer treated with niraparib first-line maintenance therapy in the phase III PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of PRIMA, patients randomized to niraparib were grouped based on investigator-assessed progression-free survival (progressive disease/censoring <2 years or ≥2 years after randomization). Variables assessed for predictive value were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage at diagnosis, clinical response to platinum-based chemotherapy, number of prior chemotherapy cycles, primary tumor location, body mass index, categorical age, debulking surgery type, number of baseline target lesions, number of baseline non-target lesions, BRCA/homologous recombination-deficiency status, residual disease status, and duration from end of chemotherapy to randomization. Logistic regression modeling using backward elimination (significance level=0.15) identified covariates associated with long-term progression-free survival (clinical cut-off date November 17, 2021). RESULTS: Of 487 patients randomized to niraparib, 152 (31%) had progressive disease/censoring ≥2 years after randomization. Multivariable logistic regression modeling using backward elimination identified BRCA1/2 mutation/homologous recombination deficiency status (p<0.0001), FIGO stage (p=0.041), primary tumor location (p=0.095), and number of baseline non-target lesions (p=0.0001) to be associated with long-term progression-free survival. Patients significantly more likely to achieve progression-free survival of ≥2 years in the final model were those with BRCA1- and BRCA2-mutated/homologous recombination-deficient tumors or BRCA wild-type/not determined/homologous recombination-deficient tumors (vs BRCA wild-type/homologous recombination-proficient/not determined tumors), FIGO stage III (vs IV), and 0 or 1 baseline non-target lesions (vs ≥2 baseline non-target lesions). CONCLUSIONS: The hypothesis-generating results of this analysis suggest that BRCA1/2 mutation/homologous recombination-deficiency status, FIGO stage, and number of baseline non-target lesions may predict progression-free survival of ≥2 years in patients with advanced ovarian cancer receiving niraparib first-line maintenance therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02655016.

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.).

Retrospective multicenter study of elderly patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer treated with trabectedin and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (pld) in a real-world setting: a geico study.

BACKGROUND: Trabectedin in combination with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) is approved for the treatment of patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer. Nevertheless, there is currently limited information regarding this treatment in elderly patients with ovarian cancer in a real-world setting. METHODS: This observational and multicentric study retrospectively evaluated trabectedin plus PLD in a real-world setting treatment of elderly patients diagnosed with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer, treated according to the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) from 15 GEICO-associated hospitals. Patients ≥ 70 years old at the time of treatment initiation and platinum-free intervals ≥ 6 months were considered eligible. RESULTS: Forty-three patients with a median age of 74.0 years were treated between January 1st, 2015, and December 31st, 2019 in 15 Spanish centers. Four patients achieved complete response (9.3%), 14 (32.6%) partial response, and 13 (30.2%) stable disease as the best radiological response. In the analysis of biological overall response according to CA125 serum levels (i.e., Rustin criteria), 14 responded to the treatment (32.6%), 11 responded and normalized (25.6%), three patients stabilized (7.0%) and three progressed (7.0%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the study population were 7.7 and 19.5 months, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (n = 8, 18.7%) and asthenia (n = 5, 11.6%). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrated that trabectedin combined with PLD is a feasible and effective treatment in elderly patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer, showing an acceptable safety profile, which is crucial in the palliative treatment of these patients.

Efficacy and safety of niraparib in patients aged 65 years and older with advanced ovarian cancer: Results from the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of age on the efficacy and safety of niraparib first-line maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with a complete/partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of the phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study (NCT02655016). Patients in the intent-to-treat population were categorized according to age at baseline (<65 years vs ≥65 years), and progression-free survival (PFS), safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) were evaluated for each age subgroup (clinical cutoff date, May 17, 2019). Safety findings were also evaluated according to a fixed starting dose (FSD) or an individualized starting dose (ISD). RESULTS: Of 733 randomized patients, 289 (39.4%) were ≥65 years (190 niraparib, 99 placebo) at baseline. Median PFS (niraparib vs placebo) and hazard ratios (95% CI) were similar in patients aged <65 years (13.9 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.61 [0.47-0.81]) and ≥65 years (13.7 vs 8.1 months; HR, 0.53 [0.39-0.74]). The incidences of any-grade and grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were similar across age subgroups; in the niraparib arm, TEAEs leading to dose discontinuation occurred in 7.8% of patients <65 years and 18.4% of patients ≥65 years. ISD use lowered the incidence of grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia events in niraparib-treated patients compared with the FSD (<65 years: 42.8% vs 18.0%; ≥65 years 57.0% vs 26.1%). HRQOL was comparable across age subgroups. CONCLUSION: Niraparib efficacy, safety, and HRQOL were generally comparable across age subgroups, although patients ≥65 years had a higher rate of discontinuations due to TEAEs. ISD use reduced grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia events regardless of age.

Prognostic value of systemic inflammation response indexes obtained from the complete blood count in patients treated for advanced ovarian carcinoma in front line.

OBJECTIVE: Various systemic inflammation response indexes (SIRI) have repeatedly been described as prognostic factors in ovarian cancer. They have not been validated in prospective trials and published results are sometimes contradictory. We aimed to explore their role in a cohort of patients diagnosed with stage III and IV ovarian cancer treated at our institution. METHODS: We retrospectively examined the prognostic influence of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), the monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), the red cell distribution width (RDW), and the mean platelet volume (MPV). RESULTS: A total of 77 patients were analyzed. NLR > 2.243 at diagnosis, NLR before primary surgery, MLR at diagnosis, PLR > 289.1 at diagnosis, and PLR at diagnosis were significant in univariate Cox regression for progression-free survival, but none of them retained their significance in the multivariate Cox regression analysis. For overall survival, NLR > = 2.53 at diagnosis, MLR > = 0.245 at diagnosis, and PLR > = 198.3 at diagnosis resulted significant in univariate COX regression; only PLR > = 198.3 at diagnosis retained its significance in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: In our cohort, PLR > = 198.3 was an independent prognostic factor for worse OS. The definitive role of SIRI in ovarian cancer has not yet been established. If their value as prognostic factors could finally be established, they would become a simple and economical method to predict prognosis in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Therefore, it is time to conduct prospective, multicenter studies with larger samples to definitively establish its role in ovarian cancer, if any.

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab for patients with previously treated advanced ovarian cancer: Results from the phase 2 multicohort LEAP-005 study.

OBJECTIVES: The phase 2, multicohort, open-label LEAP-005 study evaluated lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in patients with previously treated advanced solid tumors. We report outcomes from the ovarian cancer cohort. METHODS: Eligible patients had metastatic/unresectable ovarian cancer and had received 3 previous lines of therapy. Patients received lenvatinib 20 mg/day plus pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. Treatment continued until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or (for pembrolizumab) completion of 35 cycles. Primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST version 1.1 and safety. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were enrolled. 39% had high grade serous ovarian cancer, 23% were platinum-sensitive, 55% were platinum-resistant, 23% were platinum-refractory, and 84% had tumors that had a PD-L1 combined positive (CPS) score ≥1. ORR (95% CI) was 26% (12%-45%) by investigator assessment and 35% (19%-55%) by blinded independent central review (BICR). Per BICR, median DOR was 9.2 (1.5+ to 37.8+) months. ORRs (95% CI) by BICR were 35% (9/26 patients; 17%-56%) for PD-L1 CPS ≥ 1 disease and 50% (2/4 patients; 7%-93%) for PD-L1 CPS < 1 disease. Median (95% CI) PFS by BICR and OS were 6.2 (4.0-8.5) months and 21.3 (11.7-32.3) months, respectively. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 94% of patients (grade 3-4, 77%). One patient died from treatment-related hypovolemic shock. CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab demonstrated antitumor activity as fourth line therapy in patients with advanced ovarian cancer, and no unanticipated safety signals were identified. Responses were observed regardless of PD-L1 status.

Clinical evaluation of a low-coverage whole-genome test for detecting homologous recombination deficiency in ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: The PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial showed that maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab increases survival of advanced ovarian cancer patients with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). However, decentralized solutions to test for HRD in clinical routine are scarce. The goal of this study was to retrospectively validate on tumor samples from the PAOLA-1 trial, the decentralized SeqOne assay, which relies on shallow Whole Genome Sequencing (sWGS) to capture genomic instability and targeted sequencing to determine BRCA status. METHODS: The study comprised 368 patients from the PAOLA-1 trial. The SeqOne assay was compared to the Myriad MyChoice HRD test (Myriad Genetics), and results were analyzed with respect to Progression-Free Survival (PFS). RESULTS: We found a 95% concordance between the HRD status of the two tests (95% Confidence Interval (CI); 92%-97%). The Positive Percentage Agreement (PPA) of the sWGS test was 95% (95% CI; 91%-97%) like its Negative Percentage Agreement (NPA) (95% CI; 89%-98%). In patients with HRD-positive tumors treated with olaparib plus bevacizumab, the PFS Hazard Ratio (HR) was 0.38 (95% CI; 0.26-0.54) with SeqOne assay and 0.32 (95% CI; 0.22-0.45) with the Myriad assay. In patients with HRD-negative tumors, HR was 0.99 (95% CI; 0.68-1.42) and 1.05 (95% CI; 0.70-1.57) with SeqOne and Myriad assays. Among patients with BRCA-wildtype tumors, those with HRD-positive tumors, benefited from olaparib plus bevacizumab maintenance, with HR of 0.48 (95% CI: 0.29-0.79) and of 0.38 (95% CI: 0.23 to 0.63) with the SeqOne and Myriad assay. CONCLUSION: The SeqOne assay offers a clinically validated approach to detect HRD.

An international worldwide retrospective cohort observational study comparing primary cytoreductive surgery with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreductive surgery in patients with carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tubes, and peritoneum (SUROVA trial).

BACKGROUND: Currently, a lively debate exists within the scientific community regarding the most suitable procedure for treating stages IIIB-IVB carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tubes, and peritoneum. The options under most consideration are primary cytoreductive surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To compare overall survival at 5 years in patients who underwent primary cytoreductive surgery versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval cytoreductive surgery for stage IIIB-IVB ovarian cancer STUDY HYPOTHESIS: The treatment with primary cytoreductive surgery results in superior patient survival compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a multicenter, retrospective cohort observational study. Data will be collected from patients undergoing surgery in hospitals worldwide. Two arms will be compared: primary cytoreductive surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Patients must have suspected or histologically confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages IIIB-IVB ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancers. They must have undergone primary surgery or first course of neoadjuvant chemotherapy between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2019. Based on all available information before the surgery (primary or interval), the patient must have been considered completely resectable. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: Overall survival at 5 years from the first treatment (chemotherapy in the case of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and cytoreduction in the case of primary cytoreductive surgery). SAMPLE SIZE: An estimated total of 5000 patients will be enrolled in the study. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: March 2025 TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT06223763.

Progression-free survival and safety at 3.5 years of follow-up: results from the randomized phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial of niraparib maintenance treatment in patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer - a plain language summary.

What is this summary about? This PLSP provides a short summary of an original scientific article that presented results from the PRIMA study after 3.5 years of follow-up time. The original article was published in the European Journal of Cancer in 2023.The PRIMA study included adult patients with newly diagnosed advanced high-risk ovarian cancer whose tumors shrunk or became undetectable after treatment with chemotherapy with or without surgery. The PRIMA study evaluated how well the drug niraparib, also known as Zejula, worked at delaying or preventing ovarian cancer from coming back (recurring) or getting worse (progressing) compared with placebo (a substance with no effects that a doctor gives to a patient instead of a drug). The first results from the PRIMA study were published in 2019, when patients had participated in the PRIMA study for about 1.2 years.The article this PLSP is based on reports longer-term data from the PRIMA study, when patients had participated in the PRIMA study for about 3.5 years. Patients were monitored (or followed) for a longer time to understand how well niraparib continued to work and to evaluate whether the safety of niraparib changed with additional time being monitored.What were the results? Patients who took niraparib had more time before their cancer came back or got worse than patients who took placebo. In terms of safety, no new types of side effects with niraparib treatment were observed with additional time being monitored as part of the PRIMA study.What do the results mean? These results support that niraparib remains an important treatment option to help delay the cancer from coming back or getting worse in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer that responded to initial treatment.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02655016 (PRIMA study) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Health-related quality of life in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer treated with niraparib vs placebo: Results from the phase 3 randomized PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with ovarian cancer (OC) who received niraparib as first-line maintenance therapy. METHODS: PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 (NCT02655016) enrolled patients with newly diagnosed advanced OC who responded to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomized (2:1) to niraparib or placebo once daily in 28-day cycles until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or death. HRQoL was assessed as a prespecified secondary end point using patient-reported responses to the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), the EORTC QLQ Ovarian Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-OV28), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian Symptom Index (FOSI), and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. Assessments were collected at baseline and every 8 weeks (±7 days) for 56 weeks, beginning on cycle 1/day 1, then every 12 weeks (±7 days) thereafter while the patient received study treatment. RESULTS: Among trial participants (niraparib, n = 487; placebo, n = 246), PRO adherence exceeded 80% for all instruments across all cycles. Patients reported no decline over time in HRQoL measured via EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QoL and FOSI overall scores. Scores for abdominal/gastrointestinal symptoms (EORTC QLQ-OV28) and nausea and vomiting, appetite loss, and constipation (EORTC QLQ-C30) were higher (worse symptoms) in niraparib-treated patients than placebo-treated patients; except for constipation, these differences resolved over time. Patients did not self-report any worsening from baseline of fatigue, headache, insomnia, or abdominal pain on questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some early, largely transient increases in gastrointestinal symptoms, patients with OC treated with niraparib first-line maintenance therapy reported no worsening in overall HRQoL.

Efficacy and Safety of Trastuzumab Deruxtecan in Patients With HER2-Expressing Solid Tumors: Primary Results From the DESTINY-PanTumor02 Phase II Trial.

PURPOSE: Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) is a human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)-directed antibody-drug conjugate approved in HER2-expressing breast and gastric cancers and HER2-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer. Treatments are limited for other HER2-expressing solid tumors. METHODS: This open-label phase II study evaluated T-DXd (5.4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks) for HER2-expressing (immunohistochemistry [IHC] 3+/2+ by local or central testing) locally advanced or metastatic disease after ≥1 systemic treatment or without alternative treatments. The primary end point was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end points included safety, duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: At primary analysis, 267 patients received treatment across seven tumor cohorts: endometrial, cervical, ovarian, bladder, biliary tract, pancreatic, and other. The median follow-up was 12.75 months. In all patients, the ORR was 37.1% (n = 99; [95% CI, 31.3 to 43.2]), with responses in all cohorts; the median DOR was 11.3 months (95% CI, 9.6 to 17.8); the median PFS was 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 8.0); and the median OS was 13.4 months (95% CI, 11.9 to 15.5). In patients with central HER2 IHC 3+ expression (n = 75), the ORR was 61.3% (95% CI, 49.4 to 72.4), the median DOR was 22.1 months (95% CI, 9.6 to not reached), the median PFS was 11.9 months (95% CI, 8.2 to 13.0), and the median OS was 21.1 months (95% CI, 15.3 to 29.6). Grade ≥3 drug-related adverse events were observed in 40.8% of patients; 10.5% experienced adjudicated drug-related interstitial lung disease (ILD), with three deaths. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates durable clinical benefit, meaningful survival outcomes, and safety consistent with the known profile (including ILD) in pretreated patients with HER2-expressing tumors receiving T-DXd. Greatest benefit was observed for the IHC 3+ population. These data support the potential role of T-DXd as a tumor-agnostic therapy for patients with HER2-expressing solid tumors.

Statement of the AGO Kommission Ovar, AGO Study Group, NOGGO, AGO Austria, Swiss AGO, BGOG, CEEGOG, GEICO, and SFOG regarding the use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in epithelial ovarian cancer.

An international joint statement about the use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in ovarian cancer was published in 2016, warning about the uncritical use of HIPEC outside controlled studies. This statement has now been updated after the most recent literature was reviewed by the participating study groups and societies. HIPEC became a treatment option in patients with advanced colon cancer after positive results of a randomized trial comparing surgery and HIPEC versus palliative treatment alone. Although this trial did not compare the added value of HIPEC to surgery alone, HIPEC for the treatment of peritoneal metastases was in the subsequent years generalized to many other cancer types associated with peritoneal carcinomatosis including epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). In the meantime, new evidence from prospective randomized trials specifically for EOC-patients emerged, with however contradicting results and several quality aspects that made the interpretation of their findings critical. Moreover, three additional trials in colorectal cancer failed to confirm the previously presumed survival benefit through the implementation of HIPEC in peritoneally disseminated colorectal cancers. Based on a still unclear and inconsistent landscape, the authors conclude that HIPEC should remain within the remit of clinical trials for EOC-patients. Available evidence is not yet sufficient to justify its broad endorsement into the routine clinical practice.