Primary results and characterization of patients with exceptional outcomes in a phase 1b study combining PARP and MEK inhibition, with or without anti-PD-L1, for BRCA wild-type, platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: This phase 1b study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03695380) evaluated regimens combining PARP and MEK inhibition, with or without PD-L1 inhibition, for BRCA wild-type, platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer (PSROC). METHODS: Patients with PSROC who had received one or two prior treatment lines were treated with 28-day cycles of cobimetinib 60 mg daily (days 1-21) plus niraparib 200 mg daily (days 1-28) with or without atezolizumab 840 mg (days 1 and 15). Stage 1 assessed safety before expansion to stage 2, which randomized patients who had BRCA wild-type PSROC to receive either doublet or triplet therapy, stratified by genome-wide loss of heterozygosity status (<16% vs. ≥16%; FoundationOne CDx assay) and platinum-free interval (≥6 to <12 vs. ≥12 months). Coprimary end points were safety and the investigator-determined objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Potential associations between genetic parameters and efficacy were explored, and biomarker profiles of super-responders (complete response or those with progression-free survival [PFS] >15 months) and progressors (disease progression as the best response) were characterized. RESULTS: The ORR in patients who had BRCA wild-type PSROC was 35% (95% confidence interval, 20%-53%) with the doublet regimen (n = 37) and 27% (95% confidence interval, 14%-44%) with the triplet regimen (n = 37), and the median PFS was 6.0 and 7.4 months, respectively. Post-hoc analyses indicated more favorable ORR and PFS in the homologous recombination-deficiency-signature (HRDsig)-positive subgroup than in the HRDsig-negative subgroup. Tolerability was consistent with the known profiles of individual agents. NF1 and MKNK1 mutations were associated with sustained benefit from the doublet and triplet regimens, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy-free doublet and triplet therapy demonstrated encouraging activity, including among patients who had BRCA wild-type, HRDsig-positive or HRDsig-negative PSROC harboring NF1 or MKNK1 mutations.

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).

Clinical and molecular signature of survival and resistance to olaparib plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: a stratified analysis from the phase II clinical trial ROLANDO, GEICO-1601.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the potential prognostic value of clinical and molecular biomarkers in the survival of patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer treated with olaparib and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin. METHODS: ROLANDO was a single-arm phase II trial that included patients with high-grade serous or endometrioid tumors and at least one previous platinum-resistant recurrence regardless of BRCA status. Patients received 6 cycles of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin every 28 days plus olaparib 300 mg twice daily. followed by olaparib 300 mg twice daily; monotherapy until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Prognostic factors including previous lines (and platinum-containing ones), BRCA mutation status, previous bevacizumab, CA-125 levels, and the neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, lymphocyte/monocyte ratio, and platelet/lymphocyte ratio calculated at inclusion were analyzed through a multivariate logistic regression and factor analysis of mixed data. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were included. Median age was 57 years (range 43-75), Eastern Cooperative Oncolgy Group performance status 0/1: 32.3%/67.7% and BRCA mutated: 16.1%. Prior treatment lines were >2 lines: 14 (45.2%) patients, ≥2 platinum lines: 21 patients (67.7%) and previous bevacizumab 19 (61.3%) patients. CA-125 was >2 upper limit normal in 24 (77.4%) patients. A high neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio was associated with worse overall survival by univariate/multivariate regression model (HR=11.18; 95% CI 1.1 to 114.5; p=0.042). No other factors were associated with overall survival in the multivariate model. A multifactorial signature based on clinical and molecular baseline characteristics was capable of defining six patient clusters. Three of these clusters had significantly better prognosis, with a median overall survival of 21.3 months (95% CI 12.2 to not reached). CONCLUSIONS: High neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio at platinum-resistant relapse indicated poor prognosis in patients treated with olaparib plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin. A multifactorial clinical signature was more precise than single variables for implying the prognosis and may help in therapeutic assignment after further validation in large prospective cohorts.

Olaparib as first line in BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian carcinoma: Is it cost-effective in Spain?

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of olaparib after being funded by the Spanish National Health Service (SNHS) as first-line monotherapy maintenance treatment in patients with advanced high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC) and BRCA mutations in Spain. METHODS: A semi-Markov model with one-month cycles was adapted to the Spanish healthcare setting, using the perspective of the SNHS, and a time horizon of 50 years. Two scenarios were compared: receiving olaparib vs. no maintenance treatment. The model comprised four health states and included the clinical results of the SOLO1 study, along with the direct healthcare costs associated with the use of first-line and subsequent treatment resources (2020 €). A discount rate of 3% was applied for future cost and quality-of-life outcomes. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was also carried out and a cost-effectiveness threshold of €25,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) was considered. RESULTS: The introduction of olaparib as a first-line maintenance treatment for advanced HGSOC patients with BRCA mutations implied a cost of €131,614.98 compared to €102,369.54 without olaparib (difference: €29,245.44), with an improvement of 2.00 QALYs (5.56 and 3.57, respectively). Therefore, olaparib is cost-effective for advanced HGSOC patients with BRCA mutations, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €14,653.2/QALY. The results from the PSA showed that 92.1% of the simulations fell below the €25,000/QALY threshold. The model showed that olaparib could improve the overall survival by 2 years, vs. no maintenance treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib as first-line maintenance treatment is cost-effective in advanced HGSOC patients with BRCA mutations in Spain.

Efficacy of niraparib by time of surgery and postoperative residual disease status: A post hoc analysis of patients in the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between surgical timing and postoperative residual disease status on the efficacy of niraparib first-line maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer at high risk of recurrence. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of the phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 (NCT02655016) study of niraparib in patients with newly diagnosed primary advanced ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer with a complete/partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Progression-free survival (PFS) was assessed by surgical status (primary debulking surgery [PDS] vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy/interval debulking surgery [NACT/IDS]) and postoperative residual disease status (no visible residual disease [NVRD] vs visible residual disease [VRD]) in the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: In PRIMA (N = 733), 236 (32.2%) patients underwent PDS, and 481 (65.6%) received NACT/IDS before enrollment. Median PFS (niraparib vs placebo) and hazard ratios (95% CI) for progression were similar in PDS (13.7 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.67 [0.47-0.96]) and NACT/IDS (14.2 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.57 [0.44-0.73]) subgroups. In patients who received NACT/IDS and had NVRD (n = 304), the hazard ratio (95% CI) for progression was 0.65 (0.46-0.91). In patients with VRD following PDS (n = 183) or NACT/IDS (n = 149), the hazard ratios (95% CI) for progression were 0.58 (0.39-0.86) and 0.41 (0.27-0.62), respectively. PFS was not evaluable for patients with PDS and NVRD because of sample size (n = 37). CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis, niraparib efficacy was similar across PDS and NACT/IDS subgroups. Patients who had NACT/IDS and VRD had the highest reduction in the risk of progression with niraparib maintenance.

A phase III trial of alpelisib + trastuzumab ± fulvestrant versus trastuzumab + chemotherapy in HER2+ PIK3CA-mutated breast cancer.

ALPHABET is a randomized phase III trial assessing alpelisib + trastuzumab with or without fulvestrant in previously treated HER2-positive PIK3CA-mutated advanced breast cancer. Patients will be included in two cohorts according to hormone receptor (HR) status. In the experimental arms, patients in the HR-negative cohort will receive trastuzumab + alpelisib, and patients in the HR-positive cohort will receive the same treatment plus fulvestrant. Patients in the control arms will receive trastuzumab + physician's choice chemotherapy (eribuline, capecitabine or vinorelbine). Key eligibility criteria include 1-4 previous lines of anti-HER2 therapy and prior trastuzumab emtansine. The primary end point is investigator-assessed progression-free survival. The study aims to recruit a total of 300 patients.

ALPHABET is a clinical study investigating the potential use of alpelisib for the treatment of certain subtypes of breast cancer. Alpelisib is a novel drug that is given orally. It specifically targets a protein called PI3K. PI3K is hyperactivated in some tumors, allowing uncontrolled growth. This study is enrolling patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer whose tumor tests positive for a mutation in the PIK3CA gene, which encodes PI3K. Patients are allocated at random to receive either a combination treatment of trastuzumab (an anti-HER2-targeted therapy) with alpelisib or standard chemotherapy and trastuzumab without alpelisib. The efficacy of each treatment will be determined by comparing how long patients in each group live for without further tumor growth. Additional analyses will also look at the side effects experienced by patients, as well as their quality of life.

Balixafortide plus eribulin in HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: a phase 1, single-arm, dose-escalation trial.

BACKGROUND: The C-X-C chemokine receptor type 4 (CXCR4)-stromal cell-derived factor-1α (SDF-1α) axis regulates function and trafficking of immune cells and the tumour microenvironment. CXCR4 antagonists have been shown to enhance the activity of different anticancer treatments in preclinical models. We assessed the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary phase 1 activity of the CXCR4 antagonist, balixafortide, in combination with eribulin chemotherapy in patients with heavily pretreated, relapsed metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: This single-arm, dose-escalation, phase 1 trial enrolled patients at 11 sites in Spain and the USA. Eligible patients were women aged 18 years or older who had histologically confirmed HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer, evidence of tumour cell CXCR4 expression, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and who had previously received between one and three chemotherapy regimens for metastatic breast cancer, and at least one endocrine therapy if they had hormone receptor-positive disease, unless they were considered unsuitable for endocrine therapy. A standard 3+3 dose-escalation design was used, followed by an expanded cohort at the established maximum tolerated dose or highest dose if no dose-limiting toxicity was observed for the combination. After a treatment-related fatal adverse event in the first cohort who received 21-day cycles of treatment with eribulin and balixafortide, a protocol amendment modified the study design to be done in two parts. Patients enrolled to part 1 received an initial 28-day run-in cycle, with some cohorts receiving de-escalated doses of eribulin plus balixafortide to assess the safety and pharmacokinetics of the combination. The evaluation of part 1 did not confirm any dose-limiting toxicities or eribulin-balixafortide interactions, and therefore part 2 started enrolling patients to receive eribulin at the originally planned dose of 1·4 mg/m2 on days 2 and 9 of a 21-day cycle and balixafortide from a starting dose of 2 mg/kg with dose increments of 0·5 or 1 mg/kg on days 1-3 and 8-10 of the 21-day cycle. Both drugs were administered as intravenous infusions. All patients were to receive treatment until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicities and adverse events, and the establishment of a maximum tolerated dose or recommended phase 2 dose, and pharmacokinetic parameters. Safety analysis was done in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. Analysis of antitumour activity was done in all patients who received at least one full cycle of study treatment. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01837095, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Jan 28, 2014, and Oct 4, 2016, 56 patients were enrolled into the trial. No dose-limiting toxicities were confirmed and the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. The highest dose was established as eribulin 1·4 mg/m2 on days 2 and 9, and balixafortide 5·5 mg/kg on days 1-3 and 8-10 of the 21-day cycle. Objective responses (all partial responses) were observed in 16 (30%; 95% CI 18-44) of 54 patients who were evaluable for antitumour activity. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade were fatigue (44 [79%] of 56 patients), neutropenia (32 [57%]), infusion-related reactions (27 [48%]), alopecia (26 [46%]), constipation (26 [46%]), and nausea (25 [45%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 21 (38%) of 56 patients, including febrile neutropenia in five (9%) of 56 patients, neutrophil count decrease in two (4%) patients, constipation in two (4%) patients, pneumonia in two (4%) patients, and urinary tract infection in three (5%) patients. Two (4%) of 56 patients died while receiving study treatment; one from septic shock and one from pneumonia. INTERPRETATION: The safety and tolerability of balixafortide plus eribulin seems to be similar to that of eribulin or balixafortide monotherapy, and the preliminary activity of the combination seems promising in patients with HER-negative metastatic breast cancer. The results suggest that balixafortide plus eribulin has potential to provide a new therapeutic option in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer and warrants further investigation in randomised trials. FUNDING: Polyphor.

Zoledronic acid in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer.

Bone is the most common location of metastatic disease. Approximately 80% of all bone metastases are observed in patients with breast or prostate tumours and are responsible for more than 300 000 deaths every year. Treatment of malignant bone disease with bisphosphonates has been shown to reduce bone events and delay their onset, and several reviews and meta-analyses have confirmed the benefit of these drugs in controlling bone metastases. Zoledronic acid is a bisphosphonate that has been shown to delay or prevent the development of skeletal-related events in patients with bone metastases. Furthermore, compared with other bisphosphonates, zoledronic acid has also shown better pain control and various studies also suggest an improvement in quality of life, although with no impact on overall survival. The duration and optimal regimen for long-term zoledronic acid therapy have not yet been defined, but some studies suggest that continuing zoledronic acid therapy for more than 2 years could also extend its beneficial effect.

Emerging EGFR antagonists for breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The EGFR has been associated with the pathogenesis and progression of breast cancer. Treatment based on an EGFR target is emerging as a promising option, especially in combination with conventional therapies. Unfortunately, there are no validated predictor biomarkers, and combinatorial treatments are meeting new resistance. AREAS COVERED: The purpose of this review is to summarize the existing treatments and the current research based on targeting the EGFR pathway. EXPERT OPINION: The existing EGFR treatments in breast cancer have shown limited benefit. The combination of the monoclonal antibody cetuximab and platinum salts achieves a 15 - 20% response rate. The effectiveness of tyrosine kinase inhibitors is not completely clear, showing modest or no benefits. Gefitinib treatment has offered some promising results in estrogen receptor + breast cancer. However, it has not been identified as a predictive factor for the appropriate selection of patients. Radioimmunotherapy with anti-EGFR radiolabeled antibodies is a promising strategy in BRCA-mutated breast cancer, but it still requires clinical confirmation. Nevertheless, the crosstalk between pathways frequently leads to treatment resistance. Current research is focused on increasing knowledge about the mechanisms of response and the discovery of predictive markers. Targeting several pathways simultaneously and a correct selection of patients seem essential.

Paclitaxel alters melanogenesis and causes pigmentation in the skin of gynecological cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Paclitaxel (PTX) is a microtubule-stabilizing antineoplastic that has been shown to damage healthy tissues like the skin. Hyperpigmentation can be found among the adverse effects caused by PTX, but the literature is limited and the mechanisms driving PTX-induced pigmentary alterations are unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe the pigmentary alterations caused by PTX and to determine the effects of PTX on melanocytes. METHODS: Pigmentary skin alterations were measured in 20 gynecological cancer patients under PTX treatment by using specific probes, which determine the melanin index and the pigmentation level. Melanocytes were incubated with paclitaxel to analyze melanogenesis markers gene expression, melanin content, and transcription factors activation. RESULTS: Paclitaxel induced alterations in the skin pigmentation with no visible clinical manifestations. Gynecological cancer patients under paclitaxel treatment had an increase in the melanin index and pigmentation levels. In vitro, PTX exposure to melanocytes increased the expression of melanogenesis markers, melanin content, and induced activation of ERK and MITF. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that PTX alters pigmentation in patients with no clinically visible manifestations, and these alterations might be driven by its capacity to stimulate melanogenesis on melanocytes through the MITF activation pathway.

Immunotherapy Combined With Standard Therapies in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma - A Meta-analysis.

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is a deadly disease with a poor prognosis due to late diagnosis and limited treatment options. Immunotherapy (IT) is emerging as a promising approach, especially after the failure of standard of care therapies (STs). The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate whether the addition of IT to STs improves outcomes for patients with HNSCC, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and quality of life (QoL). This review employed the Population Intervention Comparison and Outcome (PICO) framework to identify relevant search terms in electronic databases, and also included supplementary hand searches. Six primary research articles were selected using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) flow chart, and were critically appraised. Data extraction from these studies was conducted, and a meta-analysis was performed to aid in the generation of forest plots. The addition of IT to standard anticancer therapies was found to enhance patient outcomes, such as OS, PFS, and QoL. The toxicity profile of IT was acceptable, with minimal treatment-related deaths. The most frequently observed adverse events (AE) were related to the skin, followed by hematological toxicities. Based on our analysis, the addition of IT to STs is a suitable treatment option and is supported by current research. However, further studies are needed to investigate factors that influence treatment effectiveness and to develop optimal therapies. To achieve this, we recommend a comprehensive treatment approach that involves the multidisciplinary team (MDT) and patient assessment tools.

Uterine sarcomas: clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up, by Spanish group for research on sarcomas (GEIS).

Uterine sarcomas are very infrequent and heterogeneous entities. Due to its rarity, pathological diagnosis, surgical management, and systemic treatment are challenging. Treatment decision process in these tumors should be taken in a multidisciplinary tumor board. Available evidence is low and, in many cases, based on case series or clinical trials in which these tumors have been included with other soft tissue sarcoma. In these guidelines, we have tried to summarize the most relevant evidence in the diagnosis, staging, pathological disparities, surgical management, systemic treatment, and follow-up of uterine sarcomas.

Oral Selinexor as Maintenance Therapy After First-Line Chemotherapy for Advanced or Recurrent Endometrial Cancer.

PURPOSE: Selinexor inhibits exportin-1 (XPO1) resulting in nuclear accumulation of tumor suppressor proteins including p53 and has clinical activity in endometrial cancer (EC). The primary end point was to assess progression-free survival (PFS) with once-weekly oral selinexor in patients with advanced or recurrent EC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ENGOT-EN5/GOG-3055/SIENDO was a randomized, prospective, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study at 107 sites in 10 countries. Patients 18 years or older with histologically confirmed EC were enrolled. All had completed a single line of at least 12 weeks of taxane-platinum combination chemotherapy and achieved partial or complete response. Patients were assigned to receive 80 mg oral selinexor once weekly or placebo with 2:1 random assignment (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03555422). RESULTS: Between January 2018 and December 2021, 263 patients were randomly assigned, with 174 allocated to selinexor and 89 to placebo. The median PFS was 5.7 months (95% CI, 3.81 to 9.20) with selinexor versus 3.8 months (95% CI, 3.68 to 7.39) with placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76 [95% CI, 0.54 to 1.08]; two-sided P = .126), which did not meet the criteria for statistical significance in the intent-to-treat population. Incorrect chemotherapy response stratification data for 7 (2.7%) patients were identified. In a prespecified exploratory analysis of PFS in audited stratification data, PFS for selinexor met the threshold for statistical significance (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.499 to 0.996; two-sided P = .049). Furthermore, patients with the TP53 wild-type (wt) EC had a median PFS of 13.7 and 3.7 months with selinexor and placebo. The most common grade 3 treatment-related adverse events were nausea (9%), neutropenia (9%), and thrombocytopenia (7%). CONCLUSION: The significance level for PFS was only met in the audited analysis. However, a preliminary analysis of a prespecified exploratory subgroup of patients with TP53wt EC showed promising results with selinexor maintenance therapy.

An Open-label Phase I Study of GDC-0927 in Postmenopausal Women with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: GDC-0927 is a novel, potent, nonsteroidal, orally bioavailable, selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader that induces tumor regression in ER+ breast cancer xenograft models. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase I dose-escalation multicenter study enrolled postmenopausal women with ER+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer to determine the safety, pharmacokinetics, and recommended phase II dose of GDC-0927. Pharmacodynamics was assessed with [18F]-fluoroestradiol (FES) PET scans. RESULTS: Forty-two patients received GDC-0927 once daily. The MTD was not reached. The most common adverse events (AE) regardless of causality were nausea, constipation, diarrhea, arthralgia, fatigue, hot flush, back pain, and vomiting. There were no deaths, grade 4/5 AEs, or treatment-related serious AEs. Two patients experienced grade 2 AEs of special interest of deep vein thrombosis and jugular vein thrombosis, both considered unrelated to GDC-0927. Following dosing, approximately 1.6-fold accumulation was observed, consistent with the observed half-life and dosing frequency. There were no complete or partial responses. Pharmacodynamics was supported by >90% reduction in FES uptake and an approximately 40% reduction in ER expression, suggesting ER degradation is not the mechanistic driver of ER antagonism. Twelve patients (29%) achieved clinical benefit; 17 patients (41%) showed a confirmed best overall response of stable disease. Baseline levels of ER and progesterone receptor protein and mutant ESR1 circulating tumor DNA did not correlate with clinical benefit. CONCLUSIONS: GDC-0927 appeared to be well tolerated with pharmacokinetics supporting once-daily dosing. There was evidence of target engagement and preliminary evidence of antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with advanced/metastatic ER+/HER2- breast cancer with and without ESR1 mutations.

Evaluation of Antineoplastic Delayed-Type Hypersensitivity Skin Reactions In Vitro.

Delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) is caused by a broad number of drugs used in clinic, and antineoplastic drugs show an elevated proportion of DTH, which potentially affects the quality of life of patients. Despite the serious problem and the negative economic impact deriving from market withdrawal of such drugs and high hospitalization costs, nowadays, there are no standard validated methods in vitro or in vivo to evaluate the sensitizing potential of drugs in the preclinical phase. Enhanced predictions in preclinical safety evaluations are really important, and for that reason, the aim of our work is to adapt in vitro DPRA, ARE-Nrf2 luciferase KeratinoSensTM, and hCLAT assays for the study of the sensitizing potential of antineoplastic agents grouped by mechanism of action. Our results reveal that the above tests are in vitro techniques able to predict the sensitizing potential of the tested antineoplastics. Moreover, this is the first time that the inhibition of the VEGFR1 pathway has been identified as a potential trigger of DTH.

Paclitaxel Induces Epidermal Molecular Changes and Produces Subclinical Alterations in the Skin of Gynecological Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Paclitaxel is a microtubule-stabilizing chemotherapeutic agent. Despite its widespread use, it damages healthy tissues such as skin. The goal of this study was to prove that the real impact of paclitaxel-induced skin toxicity could be underestimated because the adverse events might appear asymptomatic. METHODS: Gynecological cancer patients were recruited. Skin parameters measurements were taken after three and six paclitaxel cycles. Measurements were conducted using specific probes which measure hydration, transepidermal water loss (TEWL), sebum, elasticity and firmness, erythema, roughness, smoothness, skin thickness, and desquamation levels. Further, a 3D epidermis model was incubated with paclitaxel to analyze gene and protein expression of aquaporin 3, collagen type 1, elastin, and fibronectin. RESULTS: Paclitaxel induced alterations in the skin parameters with no visible clinical manifestations. Gynecological cancer patients under paclitaxel treatment had a decrease in hydration, TEWL, sebum, elasticity, and thickness of the skin, while erythema, roughness, and desquamation were increased. The molecular markers, related to hydration and the support of the skin layers, and analyzed in the 3D epidermis model, were decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that paclitaxel modifies gene and protein expression of skin-related molecular markers, and impairs different physical, physiological, and biomechanical properties of the skin of cancer patients at a subclinical level.

Prospective Real-World Gynaecological Cancer Clinical Registry with Associated Biospecimens: A Collaborative Model to Promote Translational Research between GEICO and the Spanish Biobank Network.

Patient registries linked to biorepositories constitute a valuable asset for clinical and translational research in oncology. The Spanish Group of Ovarian Cancer Research (GEICO), in collaboration with the Spanish Biobank Network (RNBB), has developed a multicentre, multistakeholder, prospective virtual clinical registry (VCR) associated with biobanks for the collection of real-world data and biological samples of gynaecological cancer patients. This collaborative project aims to promote research by providing broad access to high-quality clinical data and biospecimens for future research according to the needs of investigators and to increase diagnostic and therapeutic opportunities for gynaecological cancer patients in Spain. The VCR will include the participation of more than 60 Spanish hospitals entering relevant clinical information in harmonised electronic case report forms (eCRFs) in four different cohorts: ovarian, endometrial, cervical, and rare gynaecological cancers (gestational trophoblastic disease). Initial data for the cases included till December 2021 are presented. The model described herein establishes a real-world win-win collaboration between multicentre structures, promoted and supported by GEICO, that will contribute to the success of translational research in gynaecological cancer.

Melanoma of unknown primary: New perspectives for an old story.

Melanoma of unknown primary site (MUP) comprises 3-4 % of all melanomas. It mostly presents in lymph nodes (LNs), followed by subcutaneous sites, and visceral organs; nevertheless, there is a trend of increase in the relative incidence of visceral counterpart in recent years. Spontaneous regression of the primary lesion is a well-established theory, based on the evidence that melanoma can undergo regression at the primary site. MUP and stage-matched melanoma of known primary site (MKP) share similar prognostic factors. The survival rate of patients with MUP has been compared to those with stage-matched MKP. Multiple studies conducted before the era of novel therapy with immune checkpoint or BRAF/MEK inhibitors found improved survival in favor of MUP, whereas others reported equivalent or poorer outcomes. Here, we discuss the genetic and molecular features, epidemiology, diagnosis, prognostic factors, survival, and treatment of MUP in comparison with MKP, in the pre- and post-novel therapy era.

Clinical behavior and outcomes of breast cancer in young women with germline BRCA pathogenic variants.

Young breast cancer (BC) patients carrying a germline BRCA pathogenic variant (mBRCA) have similar outcomes as non-carriers. However, the impact of the type of gene (BRCA1 vs. BRCA2) and hormone receptor status (positive [HR+] vs. negative [HR-]) on clinical behavior and outcomes of mBRCA BC remains largely unknown. This is an international, multicenter, hospital-based, retrospective cohort study that included mBRCA patients diagnosed, between January 2000 and December 2012, with stage I-III invasive early BC at age ≤40 years. From 30 centers worldwide, 1236 young mBRCA BC patients were included. Among 808 and 428 patients with mBRCA1 or mBRCA2, 191 (23.6%) and 356 (83.2%) had HR+tumors, respectively (P < 0.001). Median follow-up was 7.9 years. Second primary BC (P = 0.009) and non-BC malignancies (P = 0.02) were more frequent among mBRCA1 patients while distant recurrences were less frequent (P = 0.02). Irrespective of hormone receptor status, mBRCA1 patients had worse disease-free survival (DFS; adjusted HR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.60-0.96), with no difference in distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) and overall survival (OS). Patients with HR+ disease had more frequent distant recurrences (P < 0.001) and less frequent second primary malignancies (BC: P = 0.005; non-BC: P = 0.18). No differences in DFS and OS were observed according to hormone receptor status, with a tendency for worse DRFI (adjusted HR = 1.39, 95% CI = 0.94-2.05) in patients with HR+ BC. Type of mBRCA gene and hormone receptor status strongly impact BC clinical behavior and outcomes in mBRCA young patients. These results provide important information for patients' counseling on treatment, prevention, and surveillance strategies.

Incidence of chemotherapy-induced amenorrhea in hormone-sensitive breast cancer patients: the impact of addition of taxanes to anthracycline-based regimens.

Adjuvant chemotherapy prolongs survival in patients with breast cancer, but it also causes side effects such as ovarian-function suppression. The incidence of chemotherapy-induced amenorrhea (CIA) varies depending on the patients' age, dose and the type of chemotherapy that they receive. CIA produced by anthracycline-based regimens has been widely studied, but less is known about the incidence of CIA caused by the combined use of taxanes and anthracyclines. It has been suggested that tamoxifen might influence the maintenance of amenorrhea. However, most studies of CIA have explored series of patients with hormone-sensitive and hormone-resistant tumors, so data about CIA could be strongly influenced by endocrine adjuvant therapy. The aims of our study were to assess the incidence of CIA with the addition of taxanes to anthracyclines regimens in pre- or perimenopausal patients diagnosed with hormone-sensitive breast cancer and to determine predictive factors for CIA. A retrospective non-randomized study was conducted in the Hospital Clinico Universitario of Valencia, Spain. Three hundred and five premenopausal and perimenopausal patients were recruited between January 1998 and May 2005, 212 of whom had been treated with anthracycline-based regimens and 93 with a combination of anthracyclines and taxanes. Amenorrhea was permanent in 222 patients (93.7%) and menses returned in 6.3%. CIA was present in 75.5% of patients treated with anthracyclines and in 82.7% of patients treated with anthracyclines and taxanes. This difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.16). CIA appeared in 95% of patients older than 45 years, while the proportion of CIA decreased to 52% in patients younger than 40 years. This suggests age as an important predictive factor for CIA (p < 0.001). Although a slightly superior incidence of CIA in patients with hormone-sensitive tumors treated with combination regimens was observed, no statistically significant difference in incidence was found. Age was found to be the main predictive factor for CIA in both groups.