Adding immunotherapy to first-line treatment of advanced and metastatic endometrial cancer.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy has transformed the endometrial cancer treatment landscape, particularly for those exhibiting mismatch repair deficiency [MMRd/microsatellite instability-hypermutated (MSI-H)]. A growing body of evidence supports the integration of immunotherapy with chemotherapy as a first-line treatment strategy. Recently, findings from ongoing trials such as RUBY (NCT03981796), NRG-GY018 (NCT03914612), AtTEnd (NCT03603184), and DUO-E (NCT04269200) have been disclosed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This paper constitutes a review and meta-analysis of phase III trials investigating the role of immunotherapy in the first-line setting for advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. RESULTS: The pooled data from 2320 patients across these trials substantiate the adoption of chemotherapy alongside immunotherapy, revealing a significant improvement in progression-free survival compared to chemotherapy alone [hazard ratio (HR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-0.79] across all patient groups. Progression-free survival benefits are more pronounced in MMRd/MSI-H tumors (n = 563; HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.23-0.43). This benefit, albeit less robust, persists in the MMR-proficient/microsatellite stable group (n = 1757; HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.60-0.91). Pooled data further indicate that chemotherapy plus immunotherapy enhances overall survival compared to chemotherapy alone in all patients (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.89). However, overall survival data maturity remains low. CONCLUSIONS: The incorporation of immunotherapy into the initial treatment for advanced and metastatic endometrial cancer brings about a substantial improvement in oncologic outcomes, especially within the MMRd/MSI-H subset. This specific subgroup is currently a focal point of investigation for evaluating the potential of chemotherapy-free regimens. Ongoing exploratory analyses aim to identify non-responding patients eligible for inclusion in clinical trials.

ENGOT-en11/GOG-3053/KEYNOTE-B21: A Randomised, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Study of Pembrolizumab or Placebo Plus Adjuvant Chemotherapy With or Without Radiotherapy in Patients With Newly Diagnosed, High-Risk Endometrial Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy provides clinically meaningful benefit as first-line therapy for advanced (locoregional extension and residual disease after surgery)/metastatic/recurrent pMMR and dMMR endometrial cancer (EC), with greater magnitude of benefit in the dMMR phenotype. We evaluated addition of pembrolizumab to adjuvant chemotherapy (with/without radiation therapy) among patients with newly-diagnosed, high-risk EC without any residual macroscopic disease following curative-intent surgery. METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed high-risk (FIGO stage I/II of non-endometrioid histology or endometrioid histology with p53/TP53 abnormality, or stage III/IVA of any histology) EC following surgery with curative intent and no evidence of disease postoperatively, with no prior radiotherapy or systemic therapy. Patients were randomised to pembrolizumab 200mg or placebo Q3W for 6 cycles added to carboplatin-paclitaxel followed by pembrolizumab 400mg or placebo Q6W for 6 cycles per treatment assignment. Radiotherapy was at the investigator's discretion. Primary endpoints were investigator-assessed disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: 1095 patients were randomised (pembrolizumab, n=545; placebo, n=550). At this interim analysis (data cutoff, 4-March2024), 119 (22%) DFS events occurred in the pembrolizumab group and 121 (22%) occurred in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.79‒1.32]; P=0.570). Kaplan-Meier estimates of 2-year DFS rates were 75% and 76% in the pembrolizumab and placebo groups, respectively. The hazard ratio for DFS was 0.31 (95% CI, 0.14‒0.69) in the dMMR population (n=281) and 1.20 (95% CI, 0.91‒1.57) in the pMMR population (n=814). Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 386 of 543 (71%) and 348 of 549 (63%) patients in the pembrolizumab and placebo groups, respectively. No treatment-related grade 5 AEs occurred. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy did not improve DFS in patients with newly-diagnosed, high-risk, all-comer EC. Preplanned subgroup analyses for stratification factors suggests pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy improved DFS in patients with dMMR tumours. Safety was manageable.

Niraparib first-line maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer: final overall survival results from PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial.

BACKGROUND: The phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial met its primary endpoint. Niraparib first-line maintenance significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer (aOC) that responded to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, regardless of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status. Final overall survival (OS) results are reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 2:1 to niraparib or placebo, stratified by response to first-line treatment, receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and tumor HRD status. After reaching 60% target maturity, OS was evaluated via a stratified log-rank test using randomization stratification factors and summarized using Kaplan-Meier methodology. OS testing was hierarchical (overall population first, then the homologous recombination-deficient [HRd] population). Other secondary outcomes and long-term safety were assessed; an updated, ad hoc analysis of investigator-assessed PFS was also conducted (cutoff date, 08Apr2024). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 73.9 months. In the overall population, the OS hazard ratio (HR) was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.84-1.23; P= 0.8834) for niraparib (n= 487) versus placebo (n;= 246). In the HRd (n= 373) and homologous recombination-proficient (n= 249) populations, the OS HRs were 0.95 (95% CI, 0.71-1.29) and 0.93 (95% CI 0.69-1.26), respectively. Subsequent poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor therapy was received by 11.7% and 15.8% of niraparib patients and 37.8% and 48.4% of placebo patients in the overall and HRd populations, respectively. The 5-year PFS rate numerically favored niraparib in the overall (niraparib, 22%; placebo, 12%) and HRd populations (niraparib, 35%; placebo, 16%). Myelodysplastic syndromes/acute myeloid leukemia incidence was <2.5% (niraparib, 2.3%; placebo, 1.6%). No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with newly diagnosed aOC at high risk of recurrence, there was no difference in OS between treatment arms. In the HRd population, patients alive at 5 years were twice as likely to be progression free with niraparib treatment than placebo. Long-term safety remained consistent with the established niraparib safety profile.

INOVATYON/ ENGOT-ov5 study: Randomized phase III international study comparing trabectedin/pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) followed by platinum at progression vs carboplatin/PLD in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer progressing within 6-12 months after last platinum line.

BACKGROUND: This trial investigated the hypothesis that the treatment with trabectedin/PLD (TP) to extend the platinum-free interval (TFIp) can improve overall survival (OS) in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer (OC). METHODS: Patients with OC (up to two previous platinum-based lines), with a TFIp of 6-12 months, were randomised to receive carboplatin/PLD (CP) or TP followed by platinum therapy at relapse. The primary endpoint was OS (HR: 0.75). RESULTS: The study enrolled 617 patients. The median TFIp was 8.3 months and 30.3% of patients had received two previous platinum lines. 74% and 73.9% of patients, respectively, received a subsequent therapy (ST) in the CP and TP arm; in the latter TP arm 87.2% of ST was platinum-based, as per protocol. The median OS was 21.4 for CP and 21.9 months for TP (HR 1.13; 95% CI: 0.94-1.35; p = 0.197). Grade 3-5 adverse reactions occurred in 37.1% of patients in the CP arm and 69.7% of patients in the TP arm, and the most frequent were neutropenia (22.8% CP, 39.5% TP), gastrointestinal (7.1% CP, 17.4% TP), hepatic (0.7% CP, 19.1% TP). CONCLUSIONS: This study did not meet the primary endpoint. CP combination remains the standard for patients with recurrent OC and a 6-12 months TFIp; TP is an effective treatment in patients suffering from persistent platinum toxicities. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01379989.

GCIG-Consensus guideline for Long-term survivorship in gynecologic Cancer: A position paper from the gynecologic cancer Intergroup (GCIG) symptom benefit committee.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term survivors of gynecological cancers may be cured but still have ongoing health concerns and long-term side effects following cancer treatment. The aim of this brainstorming meeting was to develop recommendations for long-term follow-up for survivors from gynecologic cancer. METHODS: International experts, representing each member group within the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG), met to define long-term survival, propose guidelines for long term follow-up and propose ways to implement long term survivorship follow-up in clinical trials involving gynecological cancers. RESULTS: Long-term survival with/from gynecological cancers was defined as survival of at least five years from diagnosis, irrespective of disease recurrences. Review of the literature showed that more than 50% of cancer survivors with gynecological cancer still experienced health concerns/long-term side effects. Main side effects included neurologic symptoms, sleep disturbance, fatigue, sexual dysfunction, bowel and urinary problems and lymphedema. In this article, long-term side effects are discussed in detail and treatment options are proposed. Screening for second primary cancers and lifestyle counselling (nutrition, physical activity, mental health) may improve quality of life and overall health status, as well as prevent cardiovascular events. Clinical trials should address cancer survivorship and report patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for cancer survivors. CONCLUSION: Long-term survivors after gynecological cancer have unique longer term challenges that need to be addressed systematically by care givers. Follow-up after completing treatment for primary gynecological cancer should be offered lifelong. Survivorship care plans may help to summarize cancer history, long-term side effects and to give information on health promotion and prevention.

SEOM clinical guideline in ovarian cancer (2020).

Despite remarkable advances in the knowledge of molecular biology and treatment, ovarian cancer remains the leading cause of death from gynecologic cancer. In the last decade, there have been important advances both in systemic and surgical treatment. However, there is no doubt that the incorporation of PARP inhibitors as maintenance after the response to platinum-based chemotherapy, first in recurrent disease and recently also in first line, will change the natural history of the disease.The objective of this guide is to summarize the current evidence for the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of ovarian cancer, and to provide evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice.

Treatment of patients with unresectable squamous head and neck cancer with induction chemotherapy followed by hyperfractionated radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: The contribution of induction chemotherapy (CT) followed by hyperfractionated radiotherapy (hfRT) in unresectable squamous head and neck cancer has been evaluated in a single institution as an assistencial protocol. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From March 1994 to June 2000 all consecutive patients with unresectable disease were treated with four courses of platin plus fluorouracil based CT followed by hfRT. Tumor resectability and response was assessed by a multidisciplinary committee. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients (pts) were treated. All of them had stage IV-M0 disease: 67 T4, 88 N2-N3. Tumor location: 62 oropharynx, 22 hypopharynx, eight oral cavity and seven larynx. Tumor response at the end of treatment: 61 patients complete response, 17 partial response, two stable disease, 10 progressive disease and nine unevaluated. With a median follow-up of 70 months the 5-year loco-regional control and overall survival was 30.3% (95% CI: 21.9-38.6) and 21.6% (95% CI: 13.4-29.8), respectively. Loco-regional control and overall survival is significantly influenced by prior response to induction CT. Main grade 3-4 toxicity related to CT was stomatitis, but there were five patients with an ischemic event. Grade 3-4 acute toxicity related to hfRT: 47 stomatitis, 20 epithelitis. Chronic toxicity related to hfRT: six emergency tracheotomies due to laryngeal edema, five pneumonia and one mucous/soft-tissue necrosis. There were eight toxic related deaths. CONCLUSION: Induction CT followed by hfRT might increase the overall survival rate in unresectable disease. HfRT resulted in a high rate of acute toxicity and its use would not be warranted in those patients with no response to induction CT who had a low probability of long-term control.