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.

Long-term follow-up of efficacy and safety of selinexor maintenance treatment in patients with TP53wt advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer: A subgroup analysis of the ENGOT-EN5/GOG-3055/SIENDO study.

OBJECTIVE: To report long-term efficacy and safety of selinexor maintenance therapy in adults with TP53 wild-type (TP53wt) stage IV or recurrent endometrial cancer (EC) who achieved partial remission (PR) or complete remission (CR) following chemotherapy. METHODS: Analysis of the prespecified, exploratory subgroup of patients with TP53wt EC from the phase 3 SIENDO study was performed. Progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in patients with TP53wt EC and across other patient subgroups were exploratory endpoints. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 263 patients enrolled in the SIENDO trial, 113 patients had TP53wt EC; 70/113 (61.9%) had TP53wt/proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) EC, and 29/113 (25.7%) had TP53wt/deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) EC. As of April 1, 2024, the median PFS (mPFS) for TP53wt patients who received selinexor compared with placebo was 28.4 versus 5.2 months (36.8-month follow-up, HR 0.44; 95% CI 0.27-0.73). A benefit in mPFS was seen with selinexor versus placebo regardless of MMR status (patients with TP53wt/pMMR EC: 39.5 vs 4.9 months, HR 0.36; 95% CI 0.19-0.71; patients with TP53wt/dMMR EC: 13.1 vs 3.7 months, HR 0.49; 95% CI 0.18-1.34). Selinexor treatment was generally manageable, with no new safety signals identified. CONCLUSION: In the phase 3 SIENDO study, selinexor maintenance therapy showed a promising efficacy signal and a manageable safety profile in the prespecified subgroup of patients with TP53wt EC who achieved a PR or CR following chemotherapy. These results are being further evaluated in an ongoing randomized phase 3 trial (NCT05611931).

Harmonization of homologous recombination deficiency testing in ovarian cancer: Results from the MITO16A/MaNGO-OV2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD) status predicts response to treatment with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors in Ovarian Cancer (OC) patients. The Myriad myChoiceCDx Assay is approved by Food and Drug Agency for the HRD assessment. Here we compared the HRD status obtained by three commercial panels with the results from Myriad reference test. METHODS: The HRD analysis was performed on DNA from formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tumor samples of 100 untreated OC patients for which Myriad assay results were available, using TruSight Oncology 500 HRD assay (Illumina), Oncomine Comprehensive Assay Plus (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and SOPHiA DDM HRD solution panel (SOPHiA Genetics). RESULTS: A good overall concordance with the reference method was demonstrated at three different levels: BRCA mutational status (from 94.4 % to 97.7 %), the genomic instability value (from 88.2 % to 95.3 %) and for the HRD status (from 90.4 % to 97.6 %). Moreover, a trend in favour of HRD positive patients for response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival similar to Myriad was observed for all three tests. DISCUSSION: Our data suggest the feasibility of commercial testing for assessing HRD status, with a good concordance with the reference method and association with clinical outcome.

Real-life efficacy and safety of cemiplimab in advanced cervical cancer from a nominal use program in Italy: The MITO 44 study.

BACKGROUND: cemiplimab is an immunoglobulin G4 monoclonal antibody targeting the programmed cell death-1 receptor. A nominal use program is available in Italy in advanced cervical cancer (CC) patients treated with platinum based chemotherapy based on the results of EMPOWER-Cervical 1/GOG-3016/ENGOTcx9 trial. This real-world, retrospective cohort, multicenter study aimed at describing clinical outcomes of patients with advanced CC treated with cemiplimab in Italy. METHODS: The primary objective of the study was to assess the feasibility and the replicability of the initial results in a real world setting of cemiplimab nominal use. The primary endpoint of our analysis was progression free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS) and safety data. RESULTS: From March 2022 to December 2023, 135 patients were treated in 12 Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer and gynecologic malignancies (MITO) Centers. Forty-two percent of patients had one or more comorbidities, hypertension being the most common (23.4%). Median PFS was 4.0 months (range 3.0-6.0) and median OS was 12.0 months (12.0- NR) with no differences according to PD-L1 status. Complete response (CR) or no evidence of disease (NED) were observed in 8.6%; partial response (PR) in 21.1%, stable disease (SD) in 14.8% and progression was recorded in 44.5% of patients. Most common drug related adverse events (AEs) were anemia (39.1%) and fatigue (27.8%). Immune related AEs occurred in 18.0%. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the feasibility and the replicability of the cemiplimab nominal use in advanced CC, in a real-world practice in Italy.

Olaparib Addition to Maintenance Bevacizumab Therapy in Ovarian Carcinoma With BRCA-Like Genomic Aberrations.

Importance: Testing for homologous recombination deficiency is required for the optimal treatment of high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer. The search for accurate biomarkers is ongoing. Objective: To investigate whether progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer treated with maintenance olaparib or placebo differed between patients with a tumor BRCA-like genomic profile and patients without a tumor BRCA-like profile. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was a secondary analysis of the PAOLA-1 randomized clinical trial that compared olaparib plus bevacizumab with placebo plus bevacizumab as maintenance treatment in patients with advanced high-grade ovarian cancer after a good response to first-line platinum with taxane chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, irrespective of germline or tumor BRCA1/2 mutation status. All patients with available tumor DNA were included in the analysis. The current analysis tested for an interaction between BRCA-like status and olaparib treatment on survival outcomes. The original trial was conducted between July 2015 and September 2017; at the time of data extraction for analysis in March 2022, a median follow-up of 54.1 months (IQR, 28.5-62.2 months) and a total follow-up time of 21 711 months was available, with 336 PFS and 245 OS events. Exposures: Tumor homologous recombination deficiency was assessed using the BRCA-like copy number aberration profile classifier. Myriad MyChoice CDx was previously measured. The trial was randomized between the olaparib and bevacizumab and placebo plus bevacizumab groups. Main Outcomes and Measures: This secondary analysis assessed hazard ratios (HRs) of olaparib vs placebo among biomarker strata and tested for interaction between BRCA-like status and olaparib treatment on PFS and OS, using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: A total of 469 patients (median age, 60 [range 26-80] years) were included in this study. The patient cohort consisted of women with International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics stage III (76%) high-grade serous (95%) ovarian cancer who had no evaluable disease or complete remission at initial or interval debulking surgery (76%). Thirty-one percent of the tumor samples (n = 138) harbored a pathogenic BRCA mutation, and BRCA-like classification was performed for 442 patients. Patients with a BRCA-like tumor had a longer PFS after olaparib treatment than after placebo (36.4 vs 18.6 months; HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.37-0.65; P < .001). No association of olaparib with PFS was found in patients with a non-BRCA-like tumor (17.6 vs 16.6 months; HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.68-1.51; P = .93). The interaction was significant (P = .004), and HRs and P values (for interaction) were similar in the relevant subgroups, OS, and multivariable analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of the PAOLA-1 randomized clinical trial, patients with a BRCA-like tumor, but not those with a non-BRCA-like tumor, had a significantly longer survival after olaparib plus bevacizumab treatment than placebo plus bevacizumab treatment. Thus, the BRCA1-like classifier could be used as a biomarker for olaparib plus bevacizumab as a maintenance treatment.

Single-Agent Trabectedin Versus Physician's Choice Chemotherapy in Patients With Recurrent Ovarian Cancer With BRCA-Mutated and/or BRCAness Phenotype: A Randomized Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: Literature evidence suggests that trabectedin monotherapy is effective in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer (OC) presenting BRCA mutation and/or BRCAness phenotype. METHODS: A prospective, open-label, randomized phase III MITO-23 trial evaluated the activity and safety of trabectedin 1.3 mg/m2 given once every 3 weeks (arm A) in BRCA 1/2 mutation carriers or patients with BRCAness phenotype (ie, patients who responded to ≥two previous platinum-based treatments) with recurrent OC, primary peritoneal carcinoma, or fallopian tube cancer in comparison with physician's choice chemotherapy in the control arm (arm B; pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, topotecan, gemcitabine, once-weekly paclitaxel, or carboplatin). The primary end point was overall survival (OS) evaluated in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Overall, 244 patients from 21 MITO centers were randomly assigned (arm A = 122/arm B = 122). More than 70% of patients received ≥three previous chemotherapy lines and 35.7% had received a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) before enrollment. Median OS was not significantly different between the arms: arm A: 15.8 versus arm B: 17.9 months (P = .304). Median progression-free survival was 4.9 months in arm A versus 4.4 months in arm B (P = .897). Among 208 patients evaluable for efficacy, the objective response rate was 17.1% in arm A and 21.4% in arm B, with comparable median duration of response (5.62 v 5.66 months, respectively). No superior effect was observed for trabectedin in the prespecified subgroup analyses according to BRCA mutational status, chemotherapy type, and pretreatment with a PARPi and/or platinum-free interval. Trabectedin showed a higher frequency of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and serious adverse drug reactions compared with control chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Trabectedin did not improve median OS and showed a worse safety profile in comparison with physician's choice control chemotherapy.

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.

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.

Management of metastatic endometrial cancer: physicians' choices beyond the first line after approval of checkpoint inhibitors.

Introduction: Endometrial cancer (EC) represents 3.4% of all newly diagnosed cancer cases and is responsible for 2.1% of all cancer-related deaths. Approximately 10%-15% of women with EC are diagnosed with advanced-stage disease, resulting in a reported 5-year survival rate of only 17% for those with distant metastases. A better understanding of its molecular features has ushered in a new era of immunotherapy for the treatment of EC, allowing for alternative therapeutic approaches, even in cases of advanced disease. Methods: We administered a multi-choice online survey for Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer and gynecologic malignancies (MITO) members. The questionnaire was available for 2 months, starting in October 2022. Our objective was to evaluate the current attitude of incorporating molecular characterization of EC into routine clinical practice, appraise the implementation of newly available therapies, and compare the outcomes with the previous survey conducted in April-May 2021 to ascertain the actual changes that have transpired during this recent time period. Results: The availability of molecular classification in Italian centers has changed in 1 year. Seventy-five percent of centers performed the molecular classification compared with 55.6% of the previous survey. Although this percentage has increased, only 18% performed all the tests. Significant changes have occurred in the administration of new treatments in EC patients in MITO centers. In 2022, 82.1% of the centers administrated dostarlimab in recurrent or advanced MMR-deficient (dMMR) EC experiencing disease progression after platinum-based chemotherapy regimens, compared to only 24.4% in 2021. In 2022, 85.7% of the centers already administrated the pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib combination as a second-line therapy for MMR-proficient (pMMR) patients with advanced or recurrent EC who had progressed from first-line platinum-based therapy. Conclusion: Both the therapeutic and diagnostic scenarios have changed over the last couple of years in MITO centers, with an increased prescription of immune checkpoint inhibitors and use of the molecular classification.

Safety of PARP inhibitors as maintenance therapy in ovarian cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Antiangiogenic agents and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARP-Is) have improved the outcome of patients suffering from ovarian cancer. However, as they are associated with many adverse events (AEs), it is important to be aware of their safety and toxicity profiles. AREAS COVERED: We reviewed PARP-I therapeutical indications, mechanism of action, metabolism, and interactions. We reported on all major and minor AEs that have emerged from clinical trials (SOLO1, PRIMA, PAOLA1, ATHENA, SOLO2, NOVA, ARIEL3, NORA), their follow-ups, meta-analyses, and real-world studies, particularly hematologic toxicities and their management, and secondary malignancies (myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia). We also addressed gastrointestinal, neurological, respiratory, hepatic, and renal toxicity and the use of PARP-Is in older, pregnant, and lactating patients. No specific research strategy in terms of keywords, inclusive dates and databases was used. EXPERT OPINION: PARP-Is benefits largely outweigh the risks associated with potential AEs. Randomized controlled trials produced strong good, quality data, but they enrolled a selected population and failed to capture rare events. More pharmacovigilance data and real-life studies on a larger and more heterogeneous sample are needed to understand PARP-Is differences and to clarify the incidence of late AEs to balance the risk/benefit ratio.

The role of immunotherapy treatment in non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma: An analysis of the literature.

Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) is a heterogeneous group representing 15-30% of renal tumors. They are mostly excluded from immunotherapy trials due to their rarity and worse prognosis. This, alongside nccRCC misdiagnosis/misclassification, lack of immune-biomarker expression rate data, lack of homogeneous data reporting, the retrospective nature of many studies, small sample sizes, and the fact that high-grade evidence only stems from trials mostly addressing the clear cell subtype, result in poorly defined treatments. We thus reviewed available data from several clinical trials, retrospective studies, and meta-analyses on immunotherapy responses and their correlation with histological subtypes and prognostic biomarkers. The papillary and unclassified subtypes are the best candidate for immunotherapy, showing response rates up to ∼35%. Chromophobe cancers, on the other end, have mostly null response rates. Cancers with sarcomatoid features respond very well to immunotherapy, regardless of their histology. Available data for translocation, medullary, collecting duct, and other nccRCCs are inconclusive. Regarding PD-L1, its expression correlates with better responses, but its prognostic value remains to be determined due to small sample sizes hindering direct statistical comparisons. It is necessary to involve a larger number of nccRCC patients and centers in clinical trials and report tumor response rates and PD-(L)1 and other markers' expression rates divided by nccRCC subtypes and not just for the whole cohorts. This will allow us to collect more robust data to best identify patients who can benefit from immunotherapy and ultimately define the standard of treatment. AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND MATERIAL: N/A.

Machine Learning Application Identifies Germline Markers of Hypertension in Patients With Ovarian Cancer Treated With Carboplatin, Taxane, and Bevacizumab.

Pharmacogenomics studies how genes influence a person's response to treatment. When complex phenotypes are influenced by multiple genetic variations with little effect, a single piece of genetic information is often insufficient to explain this variability. The application of machine learning (ML) in pharmacogenomics holds great potential - namely, it can be used to unravel complicated genetic relationships that could explain response to therapy. In this study, ML techniques were used to investigate the relationship between genetic variations affecting more than 60 candidate genes and carboplatin-induced, taxane-induced, and bevacizumab-induced toxicities in 171 patients with ovarian cancer enrolled in the MITO-16A/MaNGO-OV2A trial. Single-nucleotide variation (SNV, formerly SNP) profiles were examined using ML to find and prioritize those associated with drug-induced toxicities, specifically hypertension, hematological toxicity, nonhematological toxicity, and proteinuria. The Boruta algorithm was used in cross-validation to determine the significance of SNVs in predicting toxicities. Important SNVs were then used to train eXtreme gradient boosting models. During cross-validation, the models achieved reliable performance with a Matthews correlation coefficient ranging from 0.375 to 0.410. A total of 43 SNVs critical for predicting toxicity were identified. For each toxicity, key SNVs were used to create a polygenic toxicity risk score that effectively divided individuals into high-risk and low-risk categories. In particular, compared with low-risk individuals, high-risk patients were 28-fold more likely to develop hypertension. The proposed method provided insightful data to improve precision medicine for patients with ovarian cancer, which may be useful for reducing toxicities and improving toxicity management.

Prospective evaluation of the tolerability and efficacy of niraparib dosing based on baseline body weight and platelet count: Results from the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial.

BACKGROUND: The PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 (NCT02655016) trial was amended to prospectively evaluate the safety and efficacy of an individualized starting dose (ISD) regimen of niraparib for first-line maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. METHODS: In the phase 3 PRIMA trial, patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with a complete/partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy (N = 733) were initially treated with a fixed starting dose (FSD) regimen of 300 mg once daily. Subsequently, the protocol was amended so newly enrolled patients received an ISD: 200 mg once daily in patients with baseline body weight < 77 kg or baseline platelet count < 150,000/µL, and 300 mg once daily in all other patients. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed by starting dose. RESULTS: Overall, 475 (64.8%) patients were assigned to an FSD (niraparib, n = 317; placebo, n = 158) and 258 (35.2%) were assigned to an ISD (niraparib, n = 170; placebo, n = 88). Efficacy in patients who received FSD or ISD was similar for the overall (FSD hazard ratio [HR], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.46-0.76] vs. ISD HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.48-0.98]) and the homologous recombination-deficient (FSD HR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.30-0.64] vs. ISD HR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.22-0.72]) populations. In patients with low body weight/platelet count, rates of grades ≥3 and 4 hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events, dose interruptions, and dose reductions were lower for those who received ISD than for those who received FSD. CONCLUSIONS: In PRIMA, similar dose intensity, similar efficacy, and improved safety were observed with the ISD compared with the FSD regimen.

Carboplatin and paclitaxel plus avelumab compared with carboplatin and paclitaxel in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (MITO END-3): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Adding immunotherapy to first-line chemotherapy might improve outcomes for patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. We aimed to compare carboplatin and paclitaxel versus avelumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel as first-line treatment with avelumab given concurrent to chemotherapy and as maintenance after the end of chemotherapy. METHODS: MITO END-3 is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial conducted at 31 cancer institutes, hospitals, and universities in Italy. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed advanced (FIGO stage III-IV) or recurrent endometrial cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1, and no previous systemic anticancer therapy as primary treatment for advanced or metastatic disease. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computerised minimisation procedure stratified by centre, histology, and stage at study entry, to either receive carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC] 5 mg/mL × min) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m2; standard group) intravenously every 3 weeks for six to eight cycles or avelumab (10 mg/kg intravenously) added to carboplatin and paclitaxel (experimental group) every 3 weeks and then every 2 weeks as a single maintenance treatment after the end of chemotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients, treating clinicians, and those assessing radiological examinations were not masked to study treatment. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, measured in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Patients who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analysis. Experimental group superiority was tested with 80% power and one-tailed α 0·20. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03503786) and EudraCT (2016-004403-31). FINDINGS: From April 9, 2018, to May 13, 2021, 166 women were assessed for eligibility and 39 were excluded. 125 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin and paclitaxel (n=62) or avelumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (n=63) and included in the ITT population. The median follow-up was 23·3 months (IQR 13·2-29·6) and was similar between the two groups. 91 progression-free survival events were reported, with 49 events in 62 patients in the standard group and 42 events in 63 patients in the experimental group. The median progression-free survival was 9·9 months (95% CI 6·7-12·1) in the standard group and 9·6 months (7·2-17·7) in the experimental group (HR of progression or death 0·78 [60% CI 0·65-0·93]; one-tailed p=0·085). Serious adverse events were reported more frequently in the experimental group (24 vs seven events in the standard group); neutrophil count decrease was the most frequent grade 3-4 adverse event (19 [31%] of 61 patients in the experimental group vs 26 [43%] of 61 patients in the standard group). Two deaths occurred in the experimental group during treatment (one respiratory failure following severe myositis [possibly related to treatment] and one cardiac arrest [not related to treatment]). INTERPRETATION: Adding avelumab to first-line chemotherapy deserves further testing in patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer, although consideration of mismatch repair status is warranted. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Effect of bevacizumab in advanced low grade serous ovarian cancer: Data from the MITO 22 trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present analysis was to explore the efficacy of Bevacizumab (Bev) on survival outcome in advanced low grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC) both in first line and in recurrent setting. METHODS: In retrospective observational multicenter study, we described the outcome of LGSOC patients enrolled in the MITO 22 study and treated with chemotherapy (CT) with or without Bev. Patients receiving Bev in first-line or in recurrence were considered and compared with patients receiving CT alone (stage III and IV in first line; platinum based-CT in second line). Descriptive and survival analyses were performed for each group. RESULTS: Out of 128 patients included in MITO 22, 46 LGSOC patients receiving Bev in first line setting or at the time of first recurrence were identified. In first line, 30 patients received Bev + CT and 65 CT alone and the median PFS were 47.86 months (95% CI: 31.48 - NR) and 22.63 months (95% CI 15-39.24) (p-value 0.0392), respectively. In the recurrent setting, 16 patients who received Bev + CT were compared to 33 women treated with platinum-based CT alone. Median PFS were 37.1 months (95% CI: 13.42-40.56) and 11.22 months (95% CI: 8.26-15.63) (p-value 0.013), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that Bev might be effective in LGSOC both at diagnosis and at the time of relapse. These data warrants further studies.

Complete and early response to cemiplimab associated to severe immune toxicity in advanced cervical cancer: a case report.

Cervical cancer (CC) is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer and the third leading cause of cancer death among females. The options of treatment for recurrent/advanced CC are limited and patients experiencing recurrence after first line platinum-based chemotherapy have a poor prognosis. In this context, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI)s antagonizing PD-1 and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) have profoundly changed the treatment scenario and outcomes in CC in the first or subsequent lines both as monotherapies or in combination with chemotherapy or other ICIs. Herein, we report the clinical case of a 74-year-old woman with metastatic CC with negative tumor PD-L1 expression who having disease progression after first-line of systemic treatment with platinum, thus undergoing to anti-PD-1 namely cemiplimab. The patient achieved a surprising, fast and complete metabolic response to cemiplimab immediately discontinued after only two cycles due to the onset of rare and severe immune-related adverse events (irAE)s such cardiovascular toxicity and hypertransaminasemia. Despite this, thirteen months later, the patient remains disease-free despite cemiplimab was withdrawn.

Corrigendum: Management of metastatic endometrial cancer: physicians' choices beyond the first line after approval of checkpoint inhibitors.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1247291.].

MITO39: Efficacy and Tolerability of Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin (PLD)-Trabectedin in the Treatment of Relapsed Ovarian Cancer after Maintenance Therapy with PARP Inhibitors-A Multicenter Italian Trial in Ovarian Cancer Observational Case-Control Study.

OBJECTIVE: While PLD-Trabectedin is an approved treatment for relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer, its efficacy and tolerability has so far not been tested extensively in patients who progress after poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) treatment. METHODOLOGY: This multicenter, retrospective analysis had the objective of comparing patients receiving PLD-Trabectedin after being treated with PARP-I (cases) with PARPi-naïve patients. Descriptive and survival analyses were performed for each group. RESULTS: Data from 166 patients were collected, composed of 109 cases and 57 controls. In total, 135 patients were included in our analyses, composing 46 controls and 89 cases. The median PFS was 11 months (95% IC 10-12) in the control group vs. 8 months (95% IC 6-9) in the case group (p value 0.0017). The clinical benefit rate was evaluated, with an HR for progression of 2.55 (1.28-5.06) for the case group (p value 0.008), persisting when adjusted for BRCA and line with treatment. We compared hematological toxicity, gastro-intestinal toxicity, hand-foot syndrome (HFS), fatigue, and liver toxicity, and no statistically significant disparity was noted, except for HFS with a p value of 0.006. The distribution of G3 and G4 toxicities was also equally represented. CONCLUSION: The MITO39 study showed a statistically significant difference in terms of PFS, suggesting that previous exposure to PARPi might inhibit the efficacy of PLD-Trabectedin. Regarding tolerability, no remarkable disparity was noted; PLD-Trabectedin was confirmed to be a well-tolerated scheme in both groups. To our knowledge, these are the first data regarding this topic, which we deem to be of great relevance in the current landscape.

Efficacy and safety of trabectedin for the treatment of advanced uterine or ovarian carcinosarcoma: Results of a phase II multicenter clinical trial (MITO-26).

OBJECTIVE: This open-label phase II clinical trial evaluated the antitumor activity and safety of trabectedin in patients with advanced ovarian (OC) or uterine carcinosarcomas (UC). METHODS: Eligible patients were adults (≥18 years) with histologically proven recurrent OC/UC not amenable to surgery or radiotherapy who received up to two prior chemotherapy lines. Trabectedin 1.3 mg/m2 was administered as a 3-h infusion every three weeks. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) as per RECIST v.1.1. If at least 8 of 43 patients (18.6%) achieve an objective response, trabectedin would be declared worthy for further investigations. RESULTS: Forty-five patients with either OC (n = 32) or UC (n = 13) from seven MITO centers across Italy were enrolled. The ORR was 11.9% (90% CI: 6-23) and included two patients with a complete response and three with a partial response. Eight patients (19.0%) had disease stabilization for a disease control rate of 31.0% (90% CI: 20-44). Median progression-free survival was 2.01 months (95% CI: 1.78-2.30) and median overall survival was 4.64 months (95% CI: 3.19-8.29). Neutrophil count decreases (n = 8, 18.2%) and transaminase increases (n = 6, 13.6%) were the most common grade 3-5 adverse events related with trabectedin. Two patients died due to trabectedin-related grade 5 hematological toxicity. CONCLUSION: Although trabectedin did not meet the prespecified activity criteria, it confers modest but clinically meaningful benefit to patients with advanced OC/UC as being as effective as any other available treatment for this indication. The toxicity profile appears in line with that previously reported for the drug.

Pembrolizumab as a single agent for patients with MSI-H advanced endometrial carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Endometrial cancer can be characterized by high instability of microsatellites (MSI-H), a biomarker indicative of sensibility to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The results of the KEYNOTE-158 trial led to the approval of pembrolizumab - a monoclonal, humanized IgG4 kappa anti-PD-1 antibody able to prevent T-cell PD-1/tumor cell PD-L1/2 interaction, thus restoring T-cell-mediated anti-tumor immunity - in MSI-H endometrial cancer relapsing after at least one line of chemotherapy (CT). AREAS COVERED: Ongoing trials, such as KEYNOTE-B21/ENGOT-en11, KEYNOTE-C93/ENGOT-en15/GOG-3064, and NRG/GY018, aim to move this option earlier in the algorithm, whether adjuvant or first-line, even CT-free. Combinatorial approaches associating ICIs with other target therapies blocking immunosuppressive pathways are also being studied. EXPERT OPINION: The ICI overall response rates in MSI-H patients are encouraging, but over 50% do not respond to treatment. A more thorough definition of the MSI status regarding specific missing proteins could allow better use of this biomarker and explain why specific populations may not respond to immunotherapy regardless of widely accepted predictive biomarkers. Future developments should focus on identifying who can benefit from a CT-free treatment and translational research on primary resistant MSI-H EC.