Phase II trial of pembrolizumab and epacadostat in recurrent clear cell carcinoma of the ovary: An NRG oncology study GY016.

INTRODUCTION: Early reports of PD-1 inhibition in ovarian clear cell carcinomas (OCCC) demonstrate promising response. We evaluated the combination of pembrolizumab and IDO-1 inhibitor epacadostat in patients with recurrent OCCC. METHODS: This single arm, two-stage, phase 2 trial included those with measurable disease and 1-3 prior regimens. Patients received intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks and oral epacadostat 100 mg twice a day. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR), secondary endpoints were toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The study was powered to detect an absolute 25% increase in response (15% to 40%). RESULTS: Between September 28, 2018 and April 10, 2019, 14 patients enrolled at first stage. Rate of accrual was 2.3 patients per month. Median age was 65 years (44-89), 10 (71.4%) had ≥2 prior regimens. ORR was 21% (95% CI 5-51%) within 7 months of study entry with 3 partial responses, and 4 had stable disease (disease control rate 50%). Median PFS was 4.8 months (95% CI: 1.9-9.6), OS 18.9 months (95% CI: 1.9-NR). Most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were electrolyte abnormalities and gastrointestinal pain, nausea, vomiting, bowel obstruction. In July 2019, the study reached the pre-specified criteria to re-open to second stage; however, the study closed prematurely in February 2021 due to insufficient drug supply. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab and epacadostat demonstrated an ORR of 21% in this small cohort of recurrent OCCC. The rapid rate of accrual highlights the enthusiasm and need for therapeutic studies in patients with OCCC.

ENGOT-EN20/GOG-3083/XPORT-EC-042 - A phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter trial of selinexor in maintenance therapy after systemic therapy for patients with p53 wild-type, advanced, or recurrent endometrial carcinoma: rationale, methods, and trial design.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Biomarkers such as tumor protein 53 (TP53) in endometrial cancer can integrate novel strategies for improved and individualized treatment that could impact patient outcomes. In an exploratory analysis of the phase III ENGOT-EN5/GOG-3055/SIENDO study of selinexor maintenance monotherapy 80 mg in advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer, a pre-specified subgroup of patients with TP53 wild type (wt) endometrial cancer showed preliminary activity at long-term follow-up with a generally manageable safety profile (median progression-free survival 27.4 months vs 5.2 months placebo, HR=0.41). PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of selinexor compared with placebo as maintenance therapy in patients with advanced or recurrent TP53wt endometrial cancer. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: Selinexor administered at 60 mg weekly as maintenance therapy will show manageable safety and maintain efficacy in patients with TP53wt advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer after systemic therapy versus placebo. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase III study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of selinexor as a maintenance therapy in patients with advanced or recurrent TP53wt endometrial cancer. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Eligible patients must have histologically confirmed endometrial cancer, TP53wt confirmed by next-generation sequencing, completed at least 12 weeks of platinum-based therapy with or without immunotherapy, with confirmed partial response or complete response, and primary Stage IV disease or at first relapse. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: The primary endpoint is investigator-assessed progression-free survival per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 in the intent-to-treat population. SAMPLE SIZE: A total of 220 patients will be enrolled. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: Accrual is expected to be completed in 2024 with presentation of results in 2025. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05611931.

Defining the Educational Needs for a Community-Based Hematology/Oncology Career: A National Needs Assessment.

PURPOSE: Little is known about the specific needs during training for hematology/oncology providers practicing in community-based settings. We conducted a national survey of hematologists/oncologists employed in community or academic-community hybrid settings to delineate their educational needs. METHODS: An electronic questionnaire was developed and distributed nationally through professional organizations. We primarily assessed whether survey participants received any specific training during fellowship for community-based practice. Participants were also surveyed regarding training experiences that might have affected their preparation. Relative risk (RR) and 95% CI were calculated using modified Poisson regression to identify factors associated with receiving training specifically for community-based settings. RESULTS: Of 125 participants from across 25 states, 63% were male and 58% identified as White. Less than half (41.6%, binomial 95% CI, 32.8 to 50.7) received any training in a community-based setting. Participants identified rotations in community settings (47%), direct mentorship from community-based physicians (40%), and longitudinal clinic in a community setting (36%) as experiences that would have been valuable. Specific curricula of interest included medical operations and administration (63%), health policy (35%), and quality improvement (27%). Respondents in clinical practice for <10 years were more likely to have received any training specifically for a community-based career (RR, 2.13 [95% CI, 1.18 to 3.86]). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates substantial unmet needs as they relate to deliberately training fellows destined for community-based careers. Prospective design of clinical training and curricula emphasizing longitudinal exposures to and key aspects of health care delivery in the community setting are paramount to achieving optimal goal-concordant hematology/oncology training during fellowship.

Poor Concordance Between Cancer Antigen-125 and RECIST Assessment for Progression in Patients With Platinum-Sensitive Relapsed Ovarian Cancer on Maintenance Therapy With a Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitor.

PURPOSE: Cancer antigen-125 (CA-125) is recommended by treatment guidelines and widely used to diagnose ovarian cancer recurrence. The value of CA-125 as a surrogate for disease progression (PD) and its concordance with radiologic progression are unclear, particularly for women with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (PSROC) who have responded to chemotherapy and treated with maintenance poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi). METHODS: In this pooled analysis of four randomized trials of maintenance PARPi or placebo (Study 19, SOLO2, ARIEL3, and NOVA), we extracted data on CA-125 PD as defined by Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup criteria and RECIST v1.1. We evaluated the concordance between CA-125 and RECIST PD and reported on the negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV). RESULTS: Of 1,262 participants (n = 818 PARPi, n = 444 placebo), 403 (32%) had CA-125 PD, and of these, 366 had concordant RECIST PD (PPV, 91% [95% CI, 88 to 93]). However, of 859 (68%) without CA-125 PD, 382 also did not have RECIST PD (NPV, 44% [95% CI, 41 to 48]). Within the treatment arms, PPV remained high (PARPi, 91% [95% CI, 86 to 94]; placebo, 91% [95% CI, 86 to 95]) but NPV was lower on placebo (PARPi, 53% [95% CI, 49 to 57]; placebo, 25% [95% CI, 20 to 31]). Of 477 with RECIST-only PD, most (95%) had a normal CA-125 at the start of maintenance therapy and the majority (n = 304, 64%) had CA-125 that remained within normal range. Solid organ recurrence without peritoneal disease was more common in those with RECIST-only PD than in those with CA-125 and RECIST PD (36% v 24%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: In patients with PSROC treated with maintenance PARPi, almost half with RECIST PD did not have CA-125 PD, challenging current guidelines. Periodic computed tomography imaging should be considered as part of surveillance, particularly in those with a normal CA-125 at the start of maintenance therapy and on treatment.

Mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx: first antibody/antigen-drug conjugate (ADC) in advanced or recurrent ovarian cancer.

Mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx (MIRV) is a conjugate of a folate receptor alpha (FRα)-directed antibody and the maytansinoid microtubule inhibitor, DM4. Accumulating pre-clinical and clinical data supported the safety and anti-tumor activity of MIRV in tumors expressing FRα. In 2017, a phase I expansion study reported the first experience of MIRV in FRα-positive platinum-resistant ovarian cancer with promising results. However, the phase III FORWARD I study failed to demonstrate a significant benefit of MIRV in FRα-positive tumors. On the basis of the data reported from this latter study, MIRV was then explored in the FRα-high population only and using a different folate receptor assay. The phase II SORAYA trial supported the adoption of MIRV in this setting. Hence, the US Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval of MIRV for patients with FRα-positive platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer who have received 1-3 prior systemic treatment regimens. Moreover, the results of the MIRASOL trial showed a significant reduction in the risk of tumor progression or death among patients treated with MIRV versus chemotherapy. VENTANA FOLR1 (FOLR-2.1) was approved as a companion diagnostic test to identify FRα patients. MIRV appears to be a significant asset in managing advanced or recurrent ovarian cancer. Further trials are needed to confirm these promising results, even in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and maintenance settings.

Clonal Neoantigen: Emerging "Mechanism-based" Biomarker of Immunotherapy Response.

Clonal mutations represent the initiating molecular defects related to cellular transition of a normal phenotype to a malignant phenotype. Molecular genomic assessment utilizing next generation and whole exome sequencing is now being increasingly applied to biomarker determination to refine the use of targeted immune therapies. Case examples followed by retrospective study assessment have convincingly demonstrated clonal neoantigens provide a relevant predictor of response to checkpoint inhibition. A meta-analysis, by Litchfield et al., of over 1000 cancer patients from 12 landmark trials demonstrated no clinical benefit to checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapy in correlation to high subclonal tumor mutational burden (TMB), whereas high clonal TMB was found to be significantly correlated with better overall survival (p = 0.000000029). We discuss the mechanism of clonal vs. subclonal neoantigen targeting relationship to homologous recombination proficient (HRP) profile, evidence of preclinical and clinical benefit related to clonal neoantigens, and review a novel developing therapy called Vigil®, designed to expand the clonal neoantigen targeting effector cell populations. Vigil® is an autologous cellular immunotherapy which is designed to carry the full set of personal clonal neoantigens. Phase 2b results demonstrate a durable recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) advantage for Vigil® in a subset ovarian cancer population with an HRP cancer profile.

Overcoming the challenges of drug development in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

The definition of "platinum-resistant ovarian cancer" has evolved; it now also reflects cancers for which platinum treatment is no longer an option. Standard of care for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer is single-agent, non-platinum chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab, which produces modest response rates, with the greatest benefits achieved using weekly paclitaxel. Several recent phase 3 trials of pretreated patients with prior bevacizumab exposure failed to meet their primary efficacy endpoints, highlighting the challenge in improving clinical outcomes among these patients. Combination treatment with antiangiogenics has improved outcomes, whereas combination strategies with immune checkpoint inhibitors have yielded modest results. Despite extensive translational research, there has been a lack of reliable and established biomarkers that predict treatment response in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Additionally, in the platinum-resistant setting, implications for the time between the penultimate dose of platinum therapy and platinum retreatment remain an area of debate. Addressing the unmet need for an effective treatment in the platinum-resistant setting requires thoughtful clinical trial design based on a growing understanding of the disease. Recent cancer drug approvals highlight the value of incorporating molecular phenotypes to better define patients who are more likely to respond to novel therapies. Clinical trials designed per the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup recommendations-which advocate against relying solely upon the platinum-free interval-will help advance our understanding of recurrent ovarian cancer response where platinum rechallenge in the platinum-resistant setting may be considered. The inclusion of biomarkers in clinical trials will improve patient stratification and potentially demonstrate correlations with biomarker expression and duration of response. With the efficacy of antibody-drug conjugates shown for the treatment of some solid and hematologic cancers, current trials are evaluating the use of various novel conjugates in the setting of platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Emerging novel treatments coupled with combination trials and biomarker explorations offer encouraging results for potential strategies to improve response rates and prolong progression-free survival in this population with high unmet need. This review outlines existing data from contemporary clinical trials of patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer and suggests historical synthetic benchmarks for non-randomized trials.

Treatment Patterns and Outcomes Among Patients With Advanced or Recurrent Endometrial Cancer Initiating First-Line Therapy in the United States.

Background: Patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (EC) typically have limited treatment options and poor long-term survival outcomes following first-line therapy. Real-world treatment patterns and survival outcomes data are limited for patients in this setting. Objectives: The objective of this retrospective study was to describe real-world demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and overall survival among patients in the United States with primary advanced or recurrent EC who initiated at least 1 line of therapy (LOT). Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of primary advanced or recurrent EC in a real-world database from January 1, 2013, to July 31, 2021, were included. The date for inclusion was the date of EC diagnosis documentation; patients were indexed for treatment patterns and outcomes at the start of the first LOT and at the start of each subsequent LOT they initiated. Data were stratified by subgroups of patients who had mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) or microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumors. Results: A total of 1961 patients who received at least 1 LOT were included. Most patients in this cohort, and the dMMR/MSI-H subgroup, received a platinum combination as first-line treatment, with carboplatin-paclitaxel being the most common regimen. Only 53% of patients who received first-line treatment subsequently received second-line therapy. Of the patients who received at least 1 LOT, use of immunotherapy in the second-line setting was more common in the dMMR/MSI-H subgroup. Median overall survival ranged from 14.1 to 31.8 months across the 5 most frequently used first-line treatment regimens in the ≥1 LOT cohort and became shorter with each subsequent LOT. Discussion: The use of platinum-based chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced or recurrent EC predominates in the real-world setting, despite the poor long-term survival outcomes associated with most of these regimens. Conclusions: Patients with recurrent/advanced EC have a poor prognosis, highlighting the need for therapies with more durable benefits.

Niraparib and dostarlimab for the treatment of recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: results of a Phase II study (MOONSTONE/GOG-3032).

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the efficacy, safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of the treatment regimen of dostarlimab, a programmed death-1 inhibitor, combined with niraparib, a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, in patients with BRCA wild type (BRCAwt) recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) who had previously received bevacizumab treatment. METHODS: This Phase II, open-label, single-arm, multicenter study, conducted in the USA, enrolled patients with recurrent PROC to receive niraparib and dostarlimab until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (up to 3 years). A preplanned interim futility analysis was performed after the first 41 patients had undergone ≥1 radiographic evaluation (approximately 9 weeks from the first treatment). RESULTS: The prespecified interim futility criterion was met and the study was therefore terminated. For the 41 patients assessed, the objective response rate (ORR) was 7.3% (95% confidence interval: 1.5-19.9); no patients achieved a complete response, 3 patients (7.3%) achieved a partial response (duration of response; 3.0, 3.8, and 9.2 months, respectively), and 9 patients (22.0%) had stable disease. In total, 39 patients (95.1%) experienced a treatment-related adverse event, but no new safety issues were observed. HRQoL, assessed using FOSI, or Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Ovarian Symptom Index scores, worsened over time compared with baseline scores. CONCLUSIONS: The study was terminated due to the observed ORR at the interim futility analysis. This highlights a need for effective therapies in treating patients with recurrent BRCAwt PROC.

A phase III, multicenter, randomized study of olvimulogene nanivacirepvec followed by platinum-doublet chemotherapy and bevacizumab compared with platinum-doublet chemotherapy and bevacizumab in women with platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for patients with platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian cancers are limited and only marginally effective. The development of novel, more effective therapies addresses a critical unmet medical need. Olvimulogene nanivacirepvec (Olvi-Vec), with its strong immune modulating effect on the tumor microenvironment, may provide re-sensitization to platinum and clinically reverse platinum resistance or refractoriness in platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian cancer. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: The primary objective is to evaluate the efficacy of intra-peritoneal Olvi-Vec followed by platinum-based chemotherapy and bevacizumab in patients with platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian cancer. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: This phase III study investigates Olvi-Vec oncolytic immunotherapy followed by platinum-based chemotherapy and bevacizumab as an immunochemotherapy evaluating the hypothesis that such sequential combination therapy will prolong progression-free survival (PFS) and bring other clinical benefits compared with treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy and bevacizumab. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, and active-controlled phase III trial. Patients will be randomized 2:1 into the experimental arm treated with Olvi-Vec followed by platinum-doublet chemotherapy and bevacizumab or the control arm treated with platinum-doublet chemotherapy and bevacizumab. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Eligible patients must have recurrent, platinum-resistant/refractory, non-resectable high-grade serous, endometrioid, or clear-cell ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. Patients must have had ≥3 lines of prior chemotherapy. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: The primary endpoint is PFS in the intention-to-treat population. SAMPLE SIZE: Approximately 186 patients (approximately 124 patients randomized to the experimental arm and 62 to the control arm) will be enrolled to capture 127 PFS events. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: Expected complete accrual in 2024 with presentation of primary endpoint results in 2025. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05281471.

Outcomes for Dostarlimab and Real-World Treatments in Post-platinum Patients With Advanced/Recurrent Endometrial Cancer: The GARNET Trial Versus a US Electronic Health Record-Based External Control Arm.

Background: Patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (EC) have limited treatment options following platinum-based chemotherapy and poor prognosis. The single-arm, Phase I GARNET trial (NCT02715284) previously reported dostarlimab efficacy in mismatch repair-deficient/microsatellite instability-high advanced or recurrent EC. Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare overall survival (OS) and describe time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) for dostarlimab (GARNET Cohort A1 safety population) with an equivalent real-world external control arm receiving non-anti-programmed death (PD)-1/PD-ligand (L)1/2 treatments (constructed using data from a nationwide electronic health record-derived de-identified database and applied GARNET eligibility criteria). Methods: Propensity scores constructed from prognostic factors, identified by literature review and clinical experts, were used for inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed and OS/TTD was estimated (Cox regression model was used to estimate the OS-adjusted hazard ratio). Results: Dostarlimab was associated with a 52% lower risk of death vs real-world treatments (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-0.66). IPTW-adjusted median OS for dostarlimab (N=143) was not estimable (95% CI, 19.4-not estimable) versus 13.1 months (95% CI, 8.3-15.9) for real-world treatments (N = 185). Median TTD was 11.7 months (95% CI, 6.0-38.7) for dostarlimab and 5.3 months (95% CI, 4.1-6.0) for the real-world cohort. Discussion: Consistent with previous analyses, patients treated with dostarlimab had significantly longer OS than patients in the US real-world cohort after adjusting for the lack of randomization using stabilized IPTW. Additionally, patients had a long TTD when treated with dostarlimab, suggesting a favorable tolerability profile. Conclusion: Patients with advanced or recurrent EC receiving dostarlimab in GARNET had significantly lower risk of death than those receiving real-world non-anti-PD-(L)1/2 treatments.

Gestational choriocarcinoma.

Gestational choriocarcinoma accounts for 5% of gestational trophoblastic neoplasms. Approximately 50%, 25%, and 25% of gestational choriocarcinoma occur after molar pregnancies, term pregnancies, and other gestational events, respectively. The FIGO scoring system categorizes patients into low (score 0 to 6) and high risk (score 7 or more) choriocarcinoma. Single-agent and multi-agent chemotherapy are used in low- and high-risk patients, respectively. Chemotherapy for localized disease has a goal of eradication of disease without surgery and is associated with favorable prognosis and fertility preservation. Most patients with gestational choriocarcinoma are cured with chemotherapy; however, some (<5.0%) will die as a result of multi-drug resistance, underscoring the need for novel approaches in this group of patients. Although there are limited data due to its rarity, the treatment response with immunotherapy is high, ranging between 50-70%. Novel combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors with targeted therapies (including VEGFR-2 inhibitors) are under evaluation. PD-L1 inhibitors are considered a potential important opportunity for chemo-resistant patients, and to replace or de-escalate chemotherapy to avoid or minimize chemotherapy toxicity. In this review, the Rare Tumor Working Group and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer evaluated the current landscape and further perspective in the management of patients diagnosed with gestational choriocarcinoma.

Sequential Targeted Therapy for Advanced, Metastatic, and Recurrent Cervical Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Patient Journey.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate outcomes and cost-effectiveness of targeted therapy sequencing for metastatic and recurrent cervical cancer. METHOD: Models were simulated based on phase II and III trials on bevacizumab (bev) from GOG-240, cemiplimab (cemi) from GOG 3016, pembrolizumab (pembro) from KEYNOTE-826, and tisotumab vedotin (tiso) from GOG 3023. Costs were based on IBM Micromedex RED BOOK™ and company listed costs. RESULTS: For [chemo + bev → chemo], total cost was $125,918.04, with median overall survival (mOS) of 21.8 months, and cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) of $119,835.79. For [chemo + bev → cemi], total cost was $187,562.99 with mOS of 28.5 months and CER of $162,039.16. For [chemo + bev + pembro → chemo], total cost was $319,963.78 with mOS 32.9 months and CER of $249,930.10. For [chemo + bev + pembro → tiso], total cost was $455,204.45, with mOS 36.5 months and CER of $320,072.99. CONCLUSION: The combination of immunotherapies and biologics have significantly increased overall survival, but with associated higher costs, primarily related to drug costs.

Exploring international differences in ovarian cancer care: a survey report on global patterns of care, current practices, and barriers.

OBJECTIVE: Although global disparities in survival rates for patients with ovarian cancer have been described, variation in care has not been assessed globally. This study aimed to evaluate global ovarian cancer care and barriers to care. METHODS: A survey was developed by international ovarian cancer specialists and was distributed through networks and organizational partners of the International Gynecologic Cancer Society, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology, and the European Society of Gynecological Oncology. Respondents received questions about care organization. Outcomes were stratified by World Bank Income category and analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regressions. RESULTS: A total of 1059 responses were received from 115 countries. Respondents were gynecological cancer surgeons (83%, n=887), obstetricians/gynecologists (8%, n=80), and other specialists (9%, n=92). Income category breakdown was as follows: high-income countries (46%), upper-middle-income countries (29%), and lower-middle/low-income countries (25%). Variation in care organization was observed across income categories. Respondents from lower-middle/low-income countries reported significantly less frequently that extensive resections were routinely performed during cytoreductive surgery. Furthermore, these countries had significantly fewer regional networks, cancer registries, quality registries, and patient advocacy groups. However, there is also scope for improvement in these components in upper-middle/high-income countries. The main barriers to optimal care for the entire group were patient co-morbidities, advanced presentation, and social factors (travel distance, support systems). High-income respondents stated that the main barriers were lack of surgical time/staff and patient preferences. Middle/low-income respondents additionally experienced treatment costs and lack of access to radiology/pathology/genetic services as main barriers. Lack of access to systemic agents was reported by one-third of lower-middle/low-income respondents. CONCLUSIONS: The current survey report highlights global disparities in the organization of ovarian cancer care. The main barriers to optimal care are experienced across all income categories, while additional barriers are specific to income levels. Taking action is crucial to improve global care and strive towards diminishing survival disparities and closing the care gap.

Low-grade serous ovarian cancer: expert consensus report on the state of the science.

Compared with high-grade serous carcinoma, low-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary or peritoneum is a less frequent epithelial ovarian cancer type that is poorly sensitive to chemotherapy and affects younger women, many of whom endure years of ineffective treatments and poor quality of life. The pathogenesis of this disease and its management remain incompletely understood. However, recent advances in the molecular characterization of the disease and identification of novel targeted therapies with activity in low-grade serous carcinoma offer the promise of improved outcomes. To update clinicians regarding recent scientific and clinical trial advancements and discuss unanswered questions related to low-grade serous carcinoma diagnosis and treatment, a panel of experts convened for a workshop in October 2022 to develop a consensus document addressing pathology, translational research, epidemiology and risk, clinical management, and ongoing research. In addition, the patient perspective was discussed. The recommendations developed by this expert panel-presented in this consensus document-will guide practitioners in all settings regarding the clinical management of women with low-grade serous carcinoma and discuss future opportunities to improve research and patient care.

Systemic therapy de-escalation in advanced ovarian cancer: a new era on the horizon?

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) have sculpted the current landscape of advanced ovarian cancer treatment. With the advent of targeted maintenance therapies, improved survival rates have led to a timely interest in exploring de-intensified strategies with the goal of improving quality of life without compromising oncologic outcomes. The emerging concept of systemic treatment de-escalation would represent a new frontier in personalizing therapy in ovarian cancer. PARPi are so effective that properly selected patients treated with these agents might require less chemotherapy to achieve the same oncologic outcomes. The fundamental key is to limit de-escalation to a narrow subpopulation with favorable prognostic factors, such as patients with BRCA-mutated and/or homologous recombination-deficient tumors without macroscopic residual disease after surgery or other high-risk clinical factors. Potential de-escalation strategies include shifting PARPi in the neoadjuvant setting, de-escalating adjuvant chemotherapy after primary debulking surgery, reducing PARPi maintenance therapy duration, starting PARPi directly after interval debulking surgery, omitting maintenance therapy, and continuing PARPi beyond oligoprogression (if combined with locoregional treatment). Several ongoing trials are currently investigating the feasibility and safety of de-escalating approaches in ovarian cancer and the results are eagerly awaited. This review aims to discuss the current trends, drawbacks, and future perspectives regarding systemic treatment de-escalation in advanced ovarian cancer.

Molecular Results and Potential Biomarkers Identified from the Phase 3 MILO/ENGOT-ov11 Study of Binimetinib versus Physician Choice of Chemotherapy in Recurrent Low-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer.

PURPOSE: We present the results of a post hoc tumor tissue analysis from the phase 3 MILO/ENGOT-ov11 study (NCT01849874). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Mutation/copy-number analysis was performed on tissue obtained pre-randomization. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate progression-free survival (PFS). Unbiased univariate analysis, Cox regression, and binary logistic regression were used to test associations between mutation status and outcomes, including PFS and binary response by local RECIST 1.1. RESULTS: MILO/ENGOT-ov11 enrolled 341 patients, ranging in age from 22 to 79, from June, 2013 to April, 2016. Patients were randomized 2:1 to binimetinib or physician's choice of chemotherapy (PCC). The most commonly altered gene was KRAS (33%). In 135 patients treated with binimetinib with response rate (RR) data, other detected MAPK pathway alterations included: NRAS (n = 11, 8.1%), BRAF V600E (n = 8, 5.9%), RAF1 (n = 2, 1.5%), and NF1 (n = 7, 5.2%). In those with and without MAPK pathway alterations, the RRs with binimetinib were 41% and 13%, respectively. PFS was significantly longer in patients with, compared with those without, MAPK pathway alterations treated with binimetinib [HR, 0.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-0.79]. There was a nonsignificant trend toward PFS improvement in PCC-treated patients with MAPK pathway alterations compared with those without (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.43-1.59). CONCLUSIONS: Although this hypothesis-generating analysis is limited by multiple testing, higher RRs and longer PFS were seen in patients with low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC) treated with binimetinib, and to a lesser extent in those treated with PCC, who harbored MAPK pathway alterations. Somatic tumor testing should be routinely considered in patients with LGSOC and used as a future stratification factor.

Patient-reported outcomes of maintenance rucaparib in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma in ARIEL3, a phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To compare NFOSI-18 Disease Related Symptoms - Physical (DRSP), Total score, and side effect bother between maintenance rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) vs. placebo in the phase III ARIEL3 trial. METHODS: ARIEL3 (NCT01968213) included patients with ovarian carcinoma who responded to second-line or later platinum-based chemotherapy. The NFOSI-18 DRS-P and Total scales were secondary endpoints. The NFOSI-18 contains a side effect impact item (GP5): "I am bothered by side effects of treatment." We compared treatment arms on change from baseline of DRS-P and Total scores using mixed models with repeated measures (MRMM). Time to first and confirmed deterioration of NFOSI-18 DRS-P and Total scales were analyzed using Cox regression. We also calculated the proportion of patients reporting moderate to high side effect bother on GP5. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat (ITT) cohort, mean change from baseline favored the placebo. Compared to placebo, rucaparib was associated with higher risk of deterioration [e.g., 4-point deteriorator definition hazard ratio (HR): 1.85; 95% CI: 1.46, 2.36; median time to first deterioration on DRSP: 1.9 vs. 7.0 months]. Confirmed deterioration results resembled those for first deterioration. Proportions of patients reporting moderate/high side effect bother on GP5 fluctuated around 20% across treatment cycles. Results in BRCA mutant and homologous recombination deficient cohorts were generally similar to those from the ITT cohort. CONCLUSION: This placebo-controlled study in the maintenance therapy setting provides a unique view of the impact of PARP inhibition on the patient-reported outcomes that are commonly used in ovarian cancer clinical trials. Information regarding the adverse side effect impact of PARP inhibitors should be weighed against their clinical benefit.