Endocrine therapy in advanced high-grade ovarian cancer: real-life data from a multicenter study and a review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: In women, ovarian cancer is the eighth most frequent cancer in incidence and mortality. It is often diagnosed at advanced stages; relapses are frequent, with a poor prognosis. When platinum resistant, subsequent lines of chemotherapy are of limited effect and often poorly tolerated, leading to quality of life deterioration. Various studies suggest a hormonal role in ovarian carcinogenesis, with a rationale for endocrine therapy in these cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective study assessed the use of endocrine treatment for high-grade ovarian epithelial carcinomas treated between 2010 and 2020. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients with ovarian cancers were included. The median duration of platinum sensitivity was 29 months. We observed a 35% disease control rate with endocrine therapy, and 10% reported symptom improvement. For 19 patients (23.5%), the disease was stabilized for more than 6 months. Median overall survival from diagnosis was 62.6 months. Regarding endocrine therapy predictive factors of response, in a multivariate analysis, 3 factors were statistically significant in favoring progression-free survival: platinum sensitivity (P = .021), an R0 surgical resection (P = .020), and the indication for hormone therapy being maintenance therapy (P = .002). CONCLUSION: This study shows real-life data on endocrine therapy in ovarian cancer. As it is a low-cost treatment with many advantages such as its oral administration and its safety, it may be an option to consider. A perspective lies in the search for cofactors to aim as future therapeutic targets to improve the effectiveness of hormone treatment by means of combination therapy.

Exploring the Role of Target Expression in Treatment Efficacy of Antibody-Drug Conjugates (ADCs) in Solid Cancers: A Comprehensive Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) offer a promising path for cancer therapy, leveraging the specificity of monoclonal antibodies and the cytotoxicity of linked drugs. The success of ADCs hinges on precise targeting of cancer cells based on protein expression levels. This review explores the relationship between target protein expression and ADC efficacy in solid tumours, focusing on results of clinical trials conducted between January 2019 and May 2023. RECENT FINDINGS: We hereby highlight approved ADCs, revealing their effectiveness even in low-expressing target populations. Assessing target expression poses challenges, owing to variations in scoring systems and biopsy types. Emerging methods, like digital image analysis, aim to standardize assessment. The complexity of ADC pharmacokinetics, tumour dynamics, and off-target effects emphasises the need for a balanced approach. This review underscores the importance of understanding target protein dynamics and promoting standardized evaluation methods in shaping the future of ADC-based cancer therapies.

Phase 1 first-in-human dose-escalation study of ANV419 in patients with relapsed/refractory advanced solid tumors.

Patients with advanced cancer, previously treated with immune checkpoint blockade therapy, may retain residual treatment when undergoing the initial infusion of experimental monotherapy in phase 1 clinical trials. ANV419, an antibody-cytokine fusion protein, combines interleukin-2 (IL-2) with an anti-IL-2 monoclonal antibody, aiming to stimulate the expansion of CD8 T and natural killer lymphocytes while restricting regulatory T lymphocytes. In the recent publication of the phase 1 dose escalation study of ANV419, a notable gap exists in detailed information regarding patients' prior antitumoral treatments, specifically programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) targeted monoclonal antibodies. Some patients likely retained residual anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies, potentially influencing the outcomes of ANV419. In a separate clinical cohort, we retrospectively measured the residual concentration of nivolumab and pembrolizumab, revealing persistent serum concentrations of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies even months after treatment cessation. This underscores the importance of comprehensively documenting prior immunotherapy details in clinical trials. Such information is crucial for understanding potential interactions that may impact both immunological and clinical effects.

Prognostic Impact of TP53 Mutations in Metastatic Nonsquamous Non-small-cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic impact of TP53 mutations in advanced or metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (nsNSCLC) patients treated with chemotherapy and/or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) remains unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively collected data from patients with nsNSCLC treated in the first line from January 2018 to May 2021. The patient was separated into 2 groups according to their TP53 mutation status (wt vs. mut). Survival was estimated through the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank test. RESULTS: Of 220 patients included, 126 were in the mutTP53 group, and 94 were in the wtTP53wt group. Median OS (mOS) was not significantly different between the mutTP53 and wtTP53 groups [17.5 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 11.3-21.5) vs. 9.5 months (95% CI, 7.4-14.2), (P = .051)]. In subgroup analyses, the mutTP53 group treated with ICI had a significantly improved mOS compared to the wtTP53 group [(24.7 months (95% CI, 20.8-not reach) vs. 12.0 months (95% CI, 4.7-not reach), (P = .017)] and mPFS [(9.6 months (95% CI, 5.8-not reach) vs. 3.2 months (95% CI, 1.3-13.8) (P = .048)]. There was no difference in terms of mOS and mPFS between the mutTP53 and the wtTP53 group treated by chemotherapy alone or combined with ICI. CONCLUSION: TP53 mutation had no survival impact in the overall population, but is associated with better outcomes with ICI alone. These results suggest that patients with TP53 mutations could be treated with ICI alone, and wild-type patients could benefit from the addition of chemotherapy.

Impact of first-line immunotherapy on survival and intracranial outcomes in a cohort of non-small cell lung cancer patients with brain metastases at diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Although brain metastases (BM) at diagnosis are common in non-squamous NSCLC patients (ns-NSCLC), they have been mostly excluded from randomized trials. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate real-word outcomes of frontline immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) in these patients. METHODS: Our study assess the intracranial and overall efficacy of first-line ICI-based therapy compared to chemotherapy (CT) in ns-NSCLC patients diagnosed with BM, showing no targetable alterations. Patients were divided according to systemic therapy: CT, ICI, or CT-ICI. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), compared using Kaplan-Meier and Cox methodology. Secondary endpoint was intracranial progression free survival (icPFS). RESULTS: Between 01 and 2018 and 05-2021, 118 patients were included (52 CT, 38 ICI and 28 CT-ICI). Median follow-up was 30.0 months. Intracranial radiotherapy was delivered for 75.0%, 68.4% and 67.9% of patients for CT, ICI and CT-ICI groups (p = 0.805). After adjustment, ICI and CT-ICI were associated with a better OS compared to CT (HR = 0.46, 95 %CI: 0.23-0.89, and HR = 0.52, 95 %CI: 0.27-1.01, respectively). ICI and CT-ICI were associated with a significant reduction in the risk of intracranial progression by 54% (HR = 0.46, 95 %CI: 0.25-0.84) and 59% (HR = 0.41, 95 %CI: 0.23-0.77) compared to CT. Stereotactic radiosurgery was associated with an increased icPFS compared to systemic therapy alone (HR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.29 - 0.92), whereas whole-brain was not. CONCLUSIONS: Real-life ns-NSCLC patients with BM at diagnosis treated frontline with ICI presented OS and icPFS benefit compared to CT alone. A prospective assessment of the ideal type and sequence of systemic and local therapy should be conducted.

HRAS Q61L Mutation as a Possible Target for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Case Series and Review of Literature.

INTRODUCTION: Assessment of actionable gene mutations and oncogene fusions have made a paradigm shift in treatment strategies of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). HRAS mutations involved around 0.2-0.8% of NSCLC patients, mostly on codon 61. For these patients, few data are available regarding clinical characteristics and response to therapies. METHODS: Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) done routinely at Nantes University Hospital was used to identify HRAS molecular alterations in NSCLC patients. We identified and described four HRAS p.GlnQ61Leu mutated patients. Literature of previously HRAS-mutant NSCLC cases was reviewed, and available data in solid tumour with the most advanced H-Ras specific inhibitor, tipifarnib, were presented. RESULTS: Of 1614 patients diagnosed with advanced NSCLC from January 2018 to December 2020, four (0.25%) had HRAS p.Gln61Leu mutation. Three of them died during the first-line systemic therapy. Furthermore, three additional cases were identified in literature. All cases were current or former smokers, most of them had pleural or pericardial effusion at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical course of patients with HRAS-mutant NSCLC remains unclear. Furthers cases should be identified in order to clarify prognosis and response to therapies. Tipifarnib, a farnesyl transferase inhibitor, is a promising candidate to target HRAS-mutant tumours and should be explored in NSCLC patients.