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.).

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

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

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

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

Pembrolizumab or placebo with chemoradiotherapy followed by pembrolizumab or placebo for newly diagnosed, high-risk, locally advanced cervical cancer (ENGOT-cx11/GOG-3047/KEYNOTE-A18): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab has shown efficacy in persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer. The effect of chemoradiotherapy might be enhanced by immunotherapy. In this phase 3 trial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of adding pembrolizumab to chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 ENGOT-cx11/GOG-3047/KEYNOTE-A18 clinical trial, adults (age ≥18 years) at 176 medical centres in 30 countries with newly diagnosed, high-risk, locally advanced cervical cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive voice-response system with integrated web response to receive 5 cycles of pembrolizumab (200 mg) or placebo every 3 weeks plus chemoradiotherapy, followed by 15 cycles of pembrolizumab (400 mg) or placebo every 6 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by planned external beam radiotherapy type (intensity-modulated radiotherapy or volumetric-modulated arc therapy vs non-intensity-modulated radiotherapy or non-volumetric-modulated arc therapy), cervical cancer stage at screening (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2014 stage IB2-IIB node positive vs stage III-IVA), and planned total radiotherapy (external beam radiotherapy plus brachytherapy) dose (<70 Gy vs ≥70 Gy equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions). Primary endpoints were progression-free survival per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1-by investigator or by histopathologic confirmation of suspected disease progression-and overall survival. Primary analysis was conducted in the intention-to-treat population, which included all randomly allocated participants. Safety was assessed in the as-treated population, which included all randomly allocated patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04221945, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between June 9, 2020, and Dec 15, 2022, 1060 participants were randomly assigned to treatment, with 529 assigned to the pembrolizumab-chemoradiotherapy group and 531 to the placebo-chemoradiotherapy group. At data cutoff (Jan 9, 2023), median follow-up was 17·9 months (IQR 11·3-22·3) in both treatment groups. Median progression-free survival was not reached in either group; rates at 24 months were 68% in the pembrolizumab-chemoradiotherapy group versus 57% in the placebo-chemoradiotherapy group. The hazard ratio (HR) for disease progression or death was 0·70 (95% CI 0·55-0·89, p=0·0020), meeting the protocol-specified primary objective. Overall survival at 24 months was 87% in the pembrolizumab-chemoradiotherapy group and 81% in the placebo-chemoradiotherapy group (information fraction 42·9%). The HR for death was 0·73 (0·49-1·07); these data have not crossed the boundary of statistical significance. Grade 3 or higher adverse event rates were 75% in the pembrolizumab-chemoradiotherapy group and 69% in the placebo-chemoradiotherapy group. INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab plus chemoradiotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk, locally advanced cervical cancer. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co (MSD).

Lenvatinib plus Pembrolizumab for Advanced Endometrial Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Standard therapy for advanced endometrial cancer after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy remains unclear. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with advanced endometrial cancer who had previously received at least one platinum-based chemotherapy regimen to receive either lenvatinib (20 mg, administered orally once daily) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg, administered intravenously every 3 weeks) or chemotherapy of the treating physician's choice (doxorubicin at 60 mg per square meter of body-surface area, administered intravenously every 3 weeks, or paclitaxel at 80 mg per square meter, administered intravenously weekly [with a cycle of 3 weeks on and 1 week off]). The two primary end points were progression-free survival as assessed on blinded independent central review according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, and overall survival. The end points were evaluated in patients with mismatch repair-proficient (pMMR) disease and in all patients. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 827 patients (697 with pMMR disease and 130 with mismatch repair-deficient disease) were randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (411 patients) or chemotherapy (416 patients). The median progression-free survival was longer with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab than with chemotherapy (pMMR population: 6.6 vs. 3.8 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50 to 0.72; P<0.001; overall: 7.2 vs. 3.8 months; hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.66; P<0.001). The median overall survival was longer with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab than with chemotherapy (pMMR population: 17.4 vs. 12.0 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.84; P<0.001; overall: 18.3 vs. 11.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.75; P<0.001). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 88.9% of the patients who received lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab and in 72.7% of those who received chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab led to significantly longer progression-free survival and overall survival than chemotherapy among patients with advanced endometrial cancer. (Funded by Eisai and Merck Sharp and Dohme [a subsidiary of Merck]; Study 309-KEYNOTE-775 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03517449.).

Survival with Cemiplimab in Recurrent Cervical Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with recurrent cervical cancer have a poor prognosis. Cemiplimab, the fully human programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)-blocking antibody approved to treat lung and skin cancers, has been shown to have preliminary clinical activity in this population. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients who had disease progression after first-line platinum-containing chemotherapy, regardless of their programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status. Women were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive cemiplimab (350 mg every 3 weeks) or the investigator's choice of single-agent chemotherapy. The primary end point was overall survival. Progression-free survival and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 608 women were enrolled (304 in each group). In the overall trial population, median overall survival was longer in the cemiplimab group than in the chemotherapy group (12.0 months vs. 8.5 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 0.84; two-sided P<0.001). The overall survival benefit was consistent in both histologic subgroups (squamous-cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma [including adenosquamous carcinoma]). Progression-free survival was also longer in the cemiplimab group than in the chemotherapy group in the overall population (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.89; two-sided P<0.001). In the overall population, an objective response occurred in 16.4% (95% CI, 12.5 to 21.1) of the patients in the cemiplimab group, as compared with 6.3% (95% CI, 3.8 to 9.6) in the chemotherapy group. An objective response occurred in 18% (95% CI, 11 to 28) of the cemiplimab-treated patients with PD-L1 expression greater than or equal to 1% and in 11% (95% CI, 4 to 25) of those with PD-L1 expression of less than 1%. Overall, grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 45.0% of the patients who received cemiplimab and in 53.4% of those who received chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Survival was significantly longer with cemiplimab than with single-agent chemotherapy among patients with recurrent cervical cancer after first-line platinum-containing chemotherapy. (Funded by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi; EMPOWER-Cervical 1/GOG-3016/ENGOT-cx9 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03257267.).

Characterization and Management of Adverse Reactions in Patients With Advanced Endometrial Cancer Receiving Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab.

BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab significantly improved efficacy compared with chemotherapy in patients with advanced endometrial cancer (aEC) regardless of microsatellite instability status or histologic subtype, who had disease progression following prior platinum-based therapy, in Study-309/KEYNOTE-775. The safety profile of the combination was generally consistent with that of each monotherapy drug and of the combination in patients with endometrial cancer and other solid tumors. Given the medical complexity of patients with aEC, this paper aims to characterize key adverse reactions (ARs) of the combination treatment and review management strategies, providing a guide for AR management to maximize anticancer benefits and minimize treatment discontinuation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In Study-309/KEYNOTE-775, patients received lenvatinib (20 mg orally once daily) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks) or chemotherapy (doxorubicin or paclitaxel). The incidence and median time to the first onset of ARs, dose modifications, and concomitant medications are described. Key ARs characterized include hypothyroidism, hypertension, fatigue, diarrhea, musculoskeletal disorders, nausea, decreased appetite, vomiting, stomatitis, weight decreased, proteinuria, and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome. RESULTS: As expected, the most common any-grade key ARs included: hypothyroidism, hypertension, fatigue, diarrhea, and musculoskeletal disorders. Grades 3-4 key ARs with incidence ≥10% included: hypertension, fatigue, and weight decreased. Key ARs first occurred within approximately 3 months of treatment initiation. AR management strategies consistent with the prescribing information and the study protocol are discussed. CONCLUSION: Successful AR management strategies for lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab include education of the patient and entire treatment team, preventative measures and close monitoring, and judicious use of dose modifications and concomitant medications. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV ID: NCT03517449.

Pembrolizumab for Persistent, Recurrent, or Metastatic Cervical Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab has efficacy in programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive metastatic or unresectable cervical cancer that has progressed during chemotherapy. We assessed the relative benefit of adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. METHODS: In a double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer in a 1:1 ratio to receive pembrolizumab (200 mg) or placebo every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles plus platinum-based chemotherapy and, per investigator discretion, bevacizumab. The dual primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival, each tested sequentially in patients with a PD-L1 combined positive score of 1 or more, in the intention-to-treat population, and in patients with a PD-L1 combined positive score of 10 or more. The combined positive score is defined as the number of PD-L1-staining cells divided by the total number of viable tumor cells, multiplied by 100. All results are from the protocol-specified first interim analysis. RESULTS: In 548 patients with a PD-L1 combined positive score of 1 or more, median progression-free survival was 10.4 months in the pembrolizumab group and 8.2 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50 to 0.77; P<0.001). In 617 patients in the intention-to-treat population, progression-free survival was 10.4 months and 8.2 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.79; P<0.001). In 317 patients with a PD-L1 combined positive score of 10 or more, progression-free survival was 10.4 months and 8.1 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.77; P<0.001). Overall survival at 24 months was 53.0% in the pembrolizumab group and 41.7% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.81; P<0.001), 50.4% and 40.4% (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.84; P<0.001), and 54.4% and 44.6% (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.84; P = 0.001), respectively. The most common grade 3 to 5 adverse events were anemia (30.3% in the pembrolizumab group and 26.9% in the placebo group) and neutropenia (12.4% and 9.7%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Progression-free and overall survival were significantly longer with pembrolizumab than with placebo among patients with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer who were also receiving chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme; KEYNOTE-826 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03635567.).

Antitumor activity and safety of the PD-1 inhibitor retifanlimab in patients with recurrent microsatellite instability-high or deficient mismatch repair endometrial cancer: Final safety and efficacy results from cohort H of the POD1UM-101 phase I study.

OBJECTIVE: Retifanlimab is a humanized immunoglobulin G4 monoclonal antibody against programmed death 1 being investigated in several solid tumor types. We report final results from patients with recurrent microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)/mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) endometrial cancer treated with retifanlimab in a POD1UM-101 expansion cohort. METHODS: Eligible patients (≥18 years; histologically proven/unresectable/recurrent, MSI-H/dMMR endometrial cancer; checkpoint inhibitor naive) received retifanlimab 500 mg intravenously every 4 weeks for ≤2 years. Primary endpoint was safety/tolerability. RESULTS: At data cutoff (May 17, 2023), 76 patients had received at least one retifanlimab dose. Median (range) age was 67 (49-88) years; 88.2% of patients had recurrent metastatic disease and 80.3% had visceral metastases. Seventy-five patients (98.7%) had received at least one prior systemic therapy. Median retifanlimab exposure was 10.0 (0.03-25.9) months; 23 patients completed treatment. 38 patients (50.0%) had grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), most commonly anemia (n = 10 [13.2%]). 63 patients (82.9%) had treatment-related AEs (TRAEs; grade ≥3, n = 14 [18.4%]); most common was fatigue (n = 14 [18.4%]). Two patients had TEAEs that led to death; no TRAEs were fatal. 39 patients had objective responses (51.3%; 95% CI, 39.6-63.0%); 19 patients (25.0%) had complete response and 20 (26.3%) had partial response. Median progression-free survival was 12.2 months; 30 patients (76.9%) had duration of response (DOR) ≥12 months. Median DOR was not reached after median follow-up time of 26.0 months. CONCLUSIONS: Retifanlimab was generally well tolerated and demonstrated encouraging anti-tumor activity in patients with pre-treated recurrent MSI-H/dMMR endometrial cancer.

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.

Real world data of niraparib in platinum sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer: A multicenter experience of the MITO group.

OBJECTIVE: PARP (poly adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose polymerase) inhibitors are approved as maintenance therapy in platinum sensitive ovarian cancer (OC), in first line and in the recurrent setting, regardless of BRCA mutational status. Real-world data after the introduction of these agents are needed to evaluate whether the benefit observed in phase III randomized clinical trials can be translated into clinical practice. The aim of our study was to provide real-life data on efficacy and safety of niraparib administered as maintenance in platinum sensitive relapsed OC patients (PSROC). METHODS: This retrospective/prospective observational study included relapsed OC patients that received niraparib as maintenance, at the time of platinum sensitive recurrence within the Italian expanded-access program. Clinical data at the time of diagnosis and at the time of recurrence were collected and analyzed. Median progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated as the time from start of niraparib treatment to subsequent radiologically confirmed relapse and death or last contact, respectively. RESULTS: Among 304 eligible patients, 260 (85%) had BRCA wild-type tumor and 36. (11.9%) were BRCA mutated. Median PFS was 9.1 months (95% CI: 6.9-11.2) and 10.3 months (95% CI: 7.0-13.5) in the BRCAwt and BRCAmut cohorts, respectively. Furthermore, median OS was 41.7 months (95% CI: 31.6-41.9) and 34.6 months (95% CI: N.E.) in the BRCAwt and BRCAmut cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSION: Data from this large real-life dataset suggested that maintenance with niraparib in the real-life setting of platinum sensitive OC recurrence is effective and well tolerated.

Alpelisib for PIK3CA-mutated advanced gynecological cancers: First clues of clinical activity.

OBJECTIVE: Recurrent gynecological tumors (e.g., endometrial, and ovarian cancers) are incurable diseases; therefore, new treatment options are urgently needed. The PTEN-AKT-PI3K pathway is frequently altered in these tumors, representing a potential treatment target. Alpelisib is an α-specific PI3K inhibitor approved in PIK3CA-mutated advanced breast cancer. We report outcomes from a large series of patients with PIK3CA-mutated gynecological cancers prospectively treated with alpelisib within a controlled program. METHODS: From April 2021 to December 2022, 36 patients with PIK3CA-mutated advanced gynecological cancers received alpelisib 300 mg orally once daily. Objective response (ORR) and disease control (DCR) rates provided measure of the antitumor activity of alpelisib, the primary objective of the study. RESULTS: Included patients had endometrial (17/36 [47%]), ovarian (10/36 [28%]), or other gynecological cancers (9/36 [25%]). Most patients had received 2-3 prior systemic treatments (endometrial, 47·2%; ovarian, 60%; other, 56%), and presented with visceral metastases at baseline (82%, 70%, and 56%, respectively). Overall, 17 different PIK3CA mutations were found, including 53% in the kinase domain (most commonly H1047R) and 36% in the helical domain (most commonly E545K). Overall, the ORR was 28% and DCR was 61%, with the greatest benefit observed in patients with endometrial cancer (35% and 71%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Alpelisib represents an active treatment option in patients with recurrent gynecological cancers harboring a PIK3CA mutation. These findings support the need of biomarker-driven randomized trials of PI3K inhibitors in gynecological cancers.

Effects of niraparib dose reduction on short-term outcomes in ovarian cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the individualized starting dose for maintenance therapy in ovarian cancer, the niraparib dose reduction rate remains high. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of niraparib dose reduction on progression-free survival in newly diagnosed primary advanced ovarian cancer and recurrent ovarian cancer patients. We also aimed to compare the reduction rates and the safety of niraparib on primary and relapse groups, and identify which factors may predict dose reduction. METHODS: Patients with primary or recurrent ovarian cancer in maintenance who received niraparib between 2019 and 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. Niraparib dosing was based on individualized starting dose of 300 or 200 mg/day. The impact of niraparib dose reductions was focused on patients treated with 200 or 100 mg in both groups. Reduction rates, adverse events and predictive factors of reduction were assessed in each study group. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in primary and relapse groups; the secondary endpoints were the reduction rates, the safety and tolerability of niraparib in both groups. RESULTS: Of 215 patients identified, 124 (57.7%) primary and 91 (42.3%) recurrent ovarian cancer patients were included. The majority of patients started niraparib at 200 mg/day (92.7% primary and 80.2% relapse group); dose reductions from 300 or 200 mg/day to 200 or 100 mg/day occurred more frequently within cycles 1-3 (67% primary and 45% relapse group, p=0.001). Grade≥3 adverse events were lower in the relapse group (54.8% primary and 35.1% relapse, p=0.001). In both groups, dose modifications over the treatment did not significantly impair median progression-free survival. Univariate and multivariate analysis demonstrated that weight and platinum-doublets were possible risk factors for dose reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Niraparib dose reduction occurs in almost half of patients within cycles 1-3, although it is significantly more common in the first-line setting. Survival outcomes seem not to be impaired by dose reduction.

Best original research presented at the 24th European Congress on Gynaecological Oncology-Best of ESGO 2023.

The 'Best of ESGO 2023' manuscript comprises a compilation of the best original research presented during the European Society of Gynaecologic Oncology annual congress held in Istanbul between September 28 and October 1, 2023. Out of 1030 submitted abstracts, 33 studies presented during the Best Oral Sessions, Mini Oral Sessions, and Young Investigator Session were selected by the ESGO Abstract Committee and the European Network of Young Gynae Oncologists (ENYGO) authors. There was a strong focus on surgical de-escalation, immunotherapy, maintenance therapy, and molecular profiling in gynecologic oncology. With this manuscript, ENYGO and ESGO aim to disseminate the valuable research results to readers interested in our field.

Mirvetuximab soravtansine in folate receptor alpha (FRα)-high platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: final overall survival and post hoc sequence of therapy subgroup results from the SORAYA trial.

OBJECTIVE: The single-arm, phase II SORAYA trial (NCT04296890) of mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx in folate receptor alpha (FRα)-high platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (n=105 (efficacy-evaluable)) met its primary endpoint with an objective response rate of 32.4% (95% CI, 23.6 to 42.2). Here we report final SORAYA trial results for overall survival and post hoc objective response rates in subgroups by sequence and number of prior therapies. METHODS: Eligible patients had high-grade serous platinum-resistant ovarian cancer with high FRα expression and one to three prior therapies (prior bevacizumab required). Enrolled participants received 6 mg/kg mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx adjusted ideal body weight intravenously once every 3 weeks until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or death. Final overall survival and post hoc objective response rates were assessed in efficacy-evaluable participants. The safety population included all patients who received ≥1 dose of mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx. RESULTS: At data cut-off (December 22, 2022; n=105), final median overall survival was 15.0 months (95% CI, 11.5 to 18.7). Median overall survival in participants with one to two prior therapy lines was 18.7 months (95% CI, 13.8 to not estimable (NE)) and 11.6 months (95% CI, 7.1 to 16.7) with three prior therapy lines. Median overall survival was 15.0 months (95% CI, 11.5 to NE) in participants with prior poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) treatment versus 14.0 months (95% CI, 7.1 to NE) in those without. Objective response rate (data cut-off: November 17, 2021) differed among participants who received mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx as their first treatment in the platinum-resistant setting (34.8%; 95% CI, 23.5 to 47.6) versus a different first treatment (28.2%; 95% CI, 15.0 to 44.9) or had received prior bevacizumab in a platinum-sensitive (34.0%; 95% CI, 24.6 to 44.5) versus platinum-resistant setting (17.6%; 95% CI, 3.8 to 43.4). No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: These results support the clinically meaningful efficacy of mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx in FRα-expressing platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, irrespective of prior treatment or sequence.

Predictive factors for adnexal involvement in endometrial cancer FIGO stage IIIA.

OBJECTIVE: Understanding ovarian involvement incidence and risk factors in women with endometrial cancer may inform the decision of ovary preservation. METHODS: Our retrospective study included all consecutive fully surgically staged patients with endometrial cancer who underwent primary surgery between January 2005 and November 2021, assessing the incidence of ovarian metastasis, its role as a prognostic factor for recurrence and death, and evaluated predictors of adnexal involvement. RESULTS: Women with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 IIIA endometrial cancer comprised 2.3% of the population (36 of 1535 included patients), 23 (63.9%) with endometrioid histology, and a median age of 57.0 years (range 47.7-66.7). A higher body mass index, post-menopausal status, endometrioid histotype, and ß-catenin expression were associated with a lower risk of adnexal involvement. Conversely, dMMR phenotype, p53 expression, myometrial infiltration >50%, lymphovascular space invasion, and cervical stromal invasion were independent predictors of an increased risk of adnexal involvement. A total of 145 (9.5%) patients had adnexal involvement, with an incidence rate of 0.27/100 person-days. Overall survival for FIGO (2009) stage IIIA was 88.9%. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that ovarian preservation may be considered for younger patients with low-risk endometrial cancer (G1 and G2 tumors, absence of lymphovascular space invasion, no cervical involvement, and myometrial invasion <50%), adding a favorable predictive role to higher body mass index and high ß-catenin expression.

A non-comparative, randomized, phase II trial of atezolizumab or atezolizumab plus tiragolumab for programmed death-ligand 1-positive recurrent cervical cancer (SKYSCRAPER-04).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate tiragolumab (anti-TIGIT) and atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) as second- or third-line therapy for PD-L1-positive persistent/recurrent cervical cancer. METHODS: In the open-label, non-comparative, randomized phase II SKYSCRAPER-04 trial (NCT04300647), patients with PD-L1-positive (SP263 tumor area positivity ≥5%) recurrent/persistent cervical cancer after 1-2 chemotherapy lines (≥1 platinum-based) were randomized 3:1 to atezolizumab 1200 mg with/without tiragolumab 600 mg every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were performance status, prior (chemo)radiotherapy, and disease status. The primary endpoint was independent review committee-assessed confirmed objective response rate per RECIST v1.1 in patients receiving tiragolumab plus atezolizumab. An objective response rate ≥21% (one-sample z-test p≤0.0245) was required for statistical significance versus a historical reference. RESULTS: Protocol-defined independent review committee-assessed objective response rates were 19.0% (95% CI 12.6 to 27.0) in 126 patients receiving tiragolumab plus atezolizumab (p=0.0787 vs historical reference) and 15.6% (95% CI 6.5 to 29.5) in 45 atezolizumab-treated patients. Response rates were higher in PD-L1high (tumor area positivity ≥10%) than PD-L1low (tumor area positivity 5%-9%) subgroups with both regimens. At 8.5 months' median follow-up, independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival was 2.8 months (95% CI 1.7 to 4.1) with tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and 1.9 months (95% CI 1.5 to 3.0) with atezolizumab. In post hoc analyses (10.4 months' median follow-up), median overall survival was 11.1 months (95% CI 9.6 to 14.5) with the combination and 10.6 months (95% CI 6.9 to 13.8) with atezolizumab (crossover permitted). In the combination group, 3% of patients had adverse events requiring treatment discontinuation and 8% had grade ≥3 adverse events of special interest; corresponding values in the single-agent arm were 4% and 11%. There were no treatment-related deaths or new safety findings. CONCLUSION: The objective response rate with the tiragolumab-plus-atezolizumab combination was numerically higher than the historical reference but did not reach statistical significance.

Best original research presented at the 25th European Congress on Gynaecological Oncology: best of ESGO 2024.

The 'Best of ESGO 2024' article includes a selection of the most highly rated original research presented during the 25th Annual Congress of the European Society of Gynaecologic Oncology (ESGO), held in Barcelona, Spain, March 7-10, 2024. Of 1218 asbtracts submitted, 35 studies presented during the best oral sessions, mini oral sessions, best three minute presentations session, and young investigator session were selected by the ESGO abstract committee and the authors of the European Network of Young Gynae Oncologists (ENYGO). There was a strong focus on the surgical treatment of early stage cervical cancer and the management of advanced or recurrent gynecological cancers using induction therapy, immunotherapy, and maintenance therapy. With this work, ENYGO and ESGO aim to focus the attention of clinicians, scientists, patients, and all stakeholders interested in gynecologic oncology on research advances in the field.

Updated progression-free survival and final overall survival with maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab according to clinical risk in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer in the phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial.

OBJECTIVE: In the PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial (NCT02477644), adding maintenance olaparib to bevacizumab provided a substantial progression-free survival benefit in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive tumors, irrespective of clinical risk. Subsequently, a clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival was reported with olaparib plus bevacizumab in the HRD-positive subgroup. We report updated progression-free survival and overall survival by clinical risk and HRD status. METHODS: Patients in clinical response after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab received maintenance olaparib (up to 24 months) plus bevacizumab (up to 15 months in total) or placebo plus bevacizumab. This post hoc analysis evaluated 5-year progression-free survival and mature overall survival in patients classified by clinical risk and HRD status. RESULTS: Of 806 randomized patients, 74% were higher-risk and 26% were lower-risk. In higher-risk HRD-positive patients, the hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival was 0.46 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.34 to 0.61), with 5-year progression-free survival of 35% with olaparib plus bevacizumab versus 15% with bevacizumab alone; and the HR for overall survival was 0.70 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.00), with 5-year overall survival of 55% versus 42%, respectively. In lower-risk HRD-positive patients, the HR for progression-free survival was 0.26 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.45), with 5-year progression-free survival of 72% with olaparib plus bevacizumab versus 28% with bevacizumab alone; and the HR for overall survival was 0.31 (95% CI 0.14 to 0.66), with 5-year overall survival of 88% versus 61%, respectively. No benefit was seen in HRD-negative patients regardless of clinical risk. CONCLUSION: This post hoc analysis indicates that in patients with newly diagnosed advanced HRD-positive ovarian cancer, maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab should not be limited to those considered at higher risk of disease progression. Five-year progression-free survival rates support long-term remission and suggest an increased potential for cure with particular benefit suggested in lower-risk HRD-positive patients.

Maintenance therapy for newly and recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer: current therapies and future perspectives.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the fifth cause of cancer death among women, and 70-80% of patients relapse within 2 years from the last cycle of first-line chemotherapy despite a complete response to chemotherapy and optimal debulking surgery. In this context, the goal of the maintenance treatment strategy is to prolong the time to recurrence. The recent development of targeted molecular therapies resulted in a broader spectrum of maintenance therapeutic options with consequent higher clinical benefit but less toxicity. This review summarizes the currently available maintenance strategies for newly and recurrent EOC, focusing on the decision-making process to personalize treatment and future perspectives. RECENT FINDINGS: Over the past 10 years, several studies have demonstrated the clear benefit in terms of survival with the addition of a maintenance treatment strategy over the 'watchful waiting' approach both in the first line and recurrent setting. Since December 2016, the United States Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency have approved four drugs for ovarian cancer maintenance based on the results of several clinical trials demonstrating efficacy and tolerability. These include the antiangiogenic drug Bevacizumab and three polyadenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors: olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib. SUMMARY: These data led American and European Treatment guidelines to include bevacizumab, olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib, and combination bevacizumab-olaparib as maintenance treatment options in first-line and recurrent ovarian cancer therapy. However, with the availability of different maintenance options, identifying the best treatment choice for each patient can be challenging, and several clinical and molecular aspects have to be taken into account in the decision-making process.