Professor Susana Banerjee
Honorary Faculty: Gynaecological Cancers (Systemic Therapy and Clinical Trials)
Biography
Professor Susana Banerjee is a Consultant Medical Oncologist and Research Lead for the Gynaecology Unit at The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. She is a Reader in Women’s Cancers and Group Leader in Gynaecological Cancers (Systemic Therapy and Clinical Trials) at the ICR. Professor Banerjee specialises in ovarian cancer and advanced endometrial and cervical cancers. She is a Theme Lead (Cancer Treatment Effects 2022-2027) for the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) ICR/RM Biomedical Research Centre (BRC).
Professor Banerjee graduated with a 1st class degree from St John's College, University of Cambridge and completed her medical training at Royal Free Medical School, where she was a University of London Gold Medal Finalist.
Professor Banerjee was awarded an Avon Breast Cancer Crusade Clinical Fellowship for laboratory research and gained a PhD in 2009 from The Institute of Cancer Research, London. In 2007, she was awarded the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium Novartis Oncology Basic Science Award for her research.
Other prizes include the Association of Cancer Physicians McElwain Prize, Sir Antony Driver Prize (ICR) and Pfizer British Oncology Association Young Investigator Award (highly commended). She completed specialist medical oncology training at The Royal Marsden and was appointed a Consultant in 2011. In June 2015, she re-joined the ICR and gained the title of Reader in Women’s Cancers at the ICR in 2019.
Professor Banerjee has been part of national and international specialist groups, including the National Cancer Research Institute Gynaecological Cancers Clinical Studies Group, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Executive Steering Committee for Gynaecological Cancers, the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) Gynaecological Cancers Faculty. She was scientific co-chair of the ESMO Asia Congress in 2018 and co-chair of the ESMO Gynaecological Cancers Annual Congress (2021-2024). She was part of the ESMO Women for Oncology Committee, and is Chair of the ESMO Resilience Task Force. Professor Banerjee served on the ESMO Executive Board and was elected ESMO Director of Membership (2020-2022). She is a member of the Medical Advisory Board for the Ovacome UK charity.
She is actively involved in clinical trials and translational research. Her research interests include individualisation of patient treatment and targeted therapies in gynaecological cancers including rare malignancies. Professor Banerjee is co-chair of the Gynecological Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) Rare Cancers Committee. Professor Banerjee is UK and Global Chief Investigator for a number of national and international clinical trials.
Professor Banerjee has active collaborations with other ICR groups – Professor Chris Lord (Gene Function Group), Dr Rachael Natrajan (Functional Genomics), Professor Jessica Downs (Epigenetics and Genome Stability) and Professor Udai Banerji (Clinical Pharmacology and Trials). She supervises MD(Res) and PhD clinical fellows.
Types of Publications
Journal articles
Endocrine therapy is well established for the treatment of breast cancer, and antiangiogenic agents are showing considerable promise. Targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and estrogen receptor (ER) signaling pathways concomitantly may provide enhanced therapeutic benefit in ER-positive breast cancer. Therefore, the effects of the VEGF receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor PTK787/ZK222584 (PTK/ZK) were investigated using human breast cancer cell lines engineered to express aromatase. As expected in this system, estrogen (E2) or androstenedione induced a proliferative response and increased ER-mediated transcription in ER-positive cell lines expressing aromatase. However, surprisingly, in the presence of androstenedione, PTK/ZK suppressed both the androstenedione-stimulated proliferation and ER-mediated transcription. PTK/ZK alone and in the presence of E2 had no observable effect on proliferation or ER-mediated transcription. These effects result from PTK/ZK having previously unrecognized antiaromatase activity and PTK/ZK being a competitive aromatase inhibitor. Computer-assisted molecular modeling showed that PTK/ZK could potentially bind directly to aromatase. The demonstration that PTK/ZK inhibits aromatase and VEGFR indicates that agents cross-inhibiting two important classes of targets in breast cancer could be developed.
Acquired resistance to endocrine therapies remains a major clinical obstacle in hormone-sensitive breast tumors. We used an MCF-7 breast tumor cell line (Tam(R)-1) resistant to tamoxifen to investigate this mechanism. We demonstrate that Tam(R)-1 express elevated levels of phosphorylated AKT and MAPK3/1-activated RPS6KA2 compared with the parental MCF-7 cell line (MCF-7). There was no change in the level of total ESR between the two cell lines; however, the Tam(R)-1 cells had increased phosphorylation of ESR1 ser(167). SiRNA blockade of AKT or MAPK3/1 had little effect on ESR1 ser(167) phosphorylation, but a combination of the two siRNAs abrogated this. Co-localization studies revealed an association between ERBB2 and ESR1 in the Tam(R)-1 but not MCF-7 cells. ESR1 was redistributed to extranuclear sites in Tam(R)-1 and was less transcriptionally competent compared with MCF-7 suggesting that nuclear ESR1 activity was suppressed in Tam(R)-1. Tamoxifen resistance in the Tam(R)-1 cells could be partially overcome by the ERBB2 inhibitor AG825 in combination with tamoxifen, and this was associated with re-localization of ESR1 to the nucleus. These data demonstrate that tamoxifen-resistant cells have the ability to switch between ERBB2 or ESR1 pathways promoting cell growth and that pharmacological inhibition of ERBB2 may be a therapeutic strategy for overcoming tamoxifen resistance.
BACKGROUND: Grade-III invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type (IDCs-NST) constitute a heterogeneous group of tumours with different clinical behaviour and response to chemotherapy. As many as 25% of all grade-III IDCs-NST are known to harbour a basal-like phenotype, as defined by gene expression profiling or immunohistochemistry for basal cytokeratins. Patients with basal-like breast carcinomas (BLBC) are reported to have a shorter disease-free and overall survival. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 49 patients with BLBC (as defined by basal cytokeratin expression) and 49 controls matched for age, nodal status and grade was carried out. Histological features, immunohistochemical findings for oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR) and HER2, and clinical outcome and survival after adjuvant chemotherapy were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: It was more likely for patients with BLBCs to be found negative for ER (p<0.0001), PgR (p<0.0001) and HER2 (p<0.01) than controls. Patients with BLBCs were found to have a significantly higher recurrence rate (p<0.05) and were associated with significantly shorter disease-free and overall survival (both p<0.05). In the group of patients who received anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy (BLBC group, n = 47; controls, n = 49), both disease-free and overall survival were found to be significantly shorter in the BLBC group (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: BLBCs are a distinct clinical and pathological entity, characterised by high nuclear grade, lack of hormone receptors and HER2 expression and a more aggressive clinical course. Standard adjuvant chemotherapy seems to be less effective in these tumours and new therapeutic approaches are indicated.
PURPOSE: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is a key angiogenic factor mediating neovascularization. Soluble VEGF receptor 1 (sVEGFR-1) is an intrinsic negative counterpart of VEGF signaling and the ratio of sVEGFR-1 to VEGF has been shown to be a prognostic factor. Estrogen-bound estrogen receptor enhances VEGF expression, providing a common link between these signaling pathways that may be targeted by endocrine therapy. We investigated the effects of anastrozole and tamoxifen over time on serum VEGF and sVEGFR-1. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The Immediate Preoperative Anastrozole, Tamoxifen, or Combined with Tamoxifen (IMPACT) trial compared the preoperative use of anastrozole with tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive primary operable breast cancer over 12 weeks. Circulating VEGF and sVEGFR-1 were measured by ELISA in 106 patients treated with anastrozole or tamoxifen alone at baseline and after 2 and 12 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: The increase in serum VEGF from baseline to 12 weeks was significantly different between anastrozole and tamoxifen (anastrozole versus tamoxifen, 6% versus 38%; P = 0.047). There was a significant increase in sVEGFR-1 levels after 12 weeks of anastrozole (P = 0.037). The sVEGFR-1/VEGF ratio significantly decreased in the tamoxifen arm (P = 0.013) and the change in sVEGFR-1/VEGF ratio from baseline to 12 weeks was significantly different between anastrozole and tamoxifen (anastrozole versus tamoxifen, 24% increase versus 34% decrease; P = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with anastrozole and tamoxifen resulted in differential effects on serum angiogenic markers. This may be related to the relative effectiveness of the treatments. These data provide further support for cross talk between estrogen receptor and VEGF.
Demonstration of the clinically significant activity of bevacizumab in breast cancer has attracted a great deal of interest. Numerous other antiangiogenic treatments are in clinical development and some established therapies including tamoxifen and trastuzumab might function, in part, by suppressing angiogenesis. In this Review, we discuss the potential of various components of the angiogenic pathway as prognostic and predictive factors in breast cancer. In addition, we describe existing clinical trials of antiangiogenic agents and the challenges facing the clinical development and optimum use of these agents for the treatment of breast cancer.
PURPOSE: Targeting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and estrogen receptor signaling pathways concomitantly may enhance benefit in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. We had shown previously that the VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor PTK787/ZK222584 (PTK/ZK) is a competitive aromatase inhibitor in vitro. Here we investigated (a) whether PTK/ZK shows both antiangiogenic and antiaromatase inhibitory properties in vivo, and (b) whether the combination of PTK/ZK and letrozole is superior to letrozole alone. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Estrogen-dependent human breast cancer cells engineered to express aromatase (MCF7 AROM 1 and BT474 AROM) were used. Mice were treated with vehicle, PTK/ZK (25, 50, or 100 mg/kg), letrozole, or PTK/ZK in combination with letrozole. RESULTS: In MCF7 AROM 1 tumors, all treatments induced growth suppression and were associated with a reduction in cell turnover index, a composite measurement of both proliferation and apoptosis. PTK/ZK significantly reduced vessel density. Whereas letrozole caused tumor regression, PTK/ZK stabilized tumor volumes. The growth suppressive and antiangiogenic effects of PTK/ZK were confirmed in BT474 AROM xenografts. The addition of PTK/ZK did not enhance the growth-suppressive effects of letrozole. However, PTK/ZK decreased progesterone receptor (PgR) and TFF1 expression and uterine weight, indicating that PTK/ZK decreases 17beta-estradiol (E2) signaling in vivo. CONCLUSION: The VEGF receptor inhibitor PTK/ZK showed effects on E2-dependent gene expression consistent with aromatase inhibition as well as antiangiogenesis in xenograft models of breast cancer. The combination with letrozole was not superior to letrozole alone. Overall, these results provide further support for a potential therapeutic approach of dual inhibition of VEGF and E2 signaling using a single agent.
BACKGROUND: Estrogen has beneficial effects on lipid metabolism and bone preservation. The IMPACT trial evaluated neoadjuvant therapy with anastrozole or tamoxifen alone, or a combination. The comparative effects of these treatments on serum lipids and bone resorption were assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Non-fasting clotted blood samples were taken from 176 postmenopausal patients at baseline, 2 and 12 weeks for assessment of serum levels of estradiol, the bone resorption marker CTx and lipid profiles [total cholesterol (TC), high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and non-HDL cholesterol (N-HDL-C)]. RESULTS: After 12 weeks, tamoxifen was associated with a significant increase in HDL-C (26.5%), and a decrease in TC (6.5%) and N-HDL-C (12.3%). Anastrozole was associated with a significant increase in HDL-C (11.2%), and a non-significant increase in TC (2.9%) and N-HDL-C (3.4%), both of which were significantly different from tamoxifen. The combination was associated with a significant increase in HDL-C (9.4%), and a decrease in TC (10.9%) and N-HDL-C (13.9%). For tamoxifen and the combination, there were non-significant decreases in CTx compared with a significant increase (45.6%) with anastrozole. No correlation between serum estradiol and CTx was seen in any of the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Anastrozole did not have a detrimental effect on lipid profiles following 3 months of therapy. There was a significant increase in CTx with anastrozole in contrast to tamoxifen.
INTRODUCTION: Preclinical data suggest that BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2)-mutated ovarian cancers (BMOC) are exquisitely sensitive to platinum-salts, but resistant to microtubule-stabilizing anticancer agents. The clinical relevance of these preclinical data is unclear, since there are currently no published data on the efficacy of single-agent taxane chemotherapy in patients with BMOC. A retrospective study was undertaken to investigate the clinical effects of paclitaxel monotherapy in patients with BMOC. METHODS: Clinical data on responses and progression-free-survival (PFS) following paclitaxel (3-weekly/weekly) monotherapy in BMOC patients were collected from four cancer centres. Antitumour response was defined as RECIST partial or complete response (PR/CR), and clinical benefit was defined as PR/CR and stable disease (SD) lasting at least 18 weeks. Comparisons of the rate and duration of response and clinical benefit between categorical variables (e.g. platinum-sensitive versus platinum-resistant patients) were undertaken. RESULTS: We identified 26 BMOC patients who received paclitaxel monotherapy for relapsed disease, of which 15/26 (58%) were platinum-sensitive and 11/26 (42%) were platinum-resistant. The response rate to paclitaxel monotherapy was 46% (12/26). Clinical benefit rate was significantly higher in platinum-sensitive than platinum-resistant patients (80% versus 36%, p=0.04). BMOC patients with platinum-sensitive disease had significantly longer median PFS compared with platinum-resistant patients (42 versus 21 weeks, p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: These data provide the first clinical evidence that paclitaxel monotherapy is active in BMOC and may be more effective in platinum-sensitive BMOC.
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study is to demonstrate that intrapatient dose escalation of carboplatin would improve the outcome in ovarian cancer compared with flat dosing. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with untreated stage IC-IV ovarian cancer received six cycles of carboplatin area under the curve 6 (AUC 6) 3 weekly either with no dose modification except for toxicity (Arm A) or with dose escalations in cycles 2-6 based on nadir neutrophil and platelet counts (Arm B). The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Nine hundred and sixty-four patients were recruited from 71 centers. Dose escalation was achieved in 77% of patients who had ≥1 cycle. The median AUCs (cycle 2-6) received were 6.0 (Arm A) and 7.2 (Arm B) (P < 0.001). Grade 3/4 non-hematological toxicity was higher in Arm B (31% versus 22% P = 0.001). The median PFS was 12.1 months in Arm A and B [hazard ratio (HR) 0.99; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85-1.15; P = 0.93]. The median overall survival (OS) was 34.1 and 30.7 months in Arms A and B, respectively (HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.81-1.18, P = 0.82). In multivariate analysis, baseline neutrophil (P < 0.001), baseline platelet counts (P < 0.001) and the difference between white blood cell (WBC) and neutrophil count (P = 0.009) had a significant adverse prognostic value. CONCLUSIONS: Intrapatient dose escalation of carboplatin based on nadir blood counts is feasible and safe. However, it provided no improvement in PFS or OS compared with flat dosing. Baseline neutrophils over-ride nadir counts in prognostic significance. These data may have wider implications particularly in respect of the management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.
Ovarian cancer remains the leading cause of death from gynaecological cancer. Advances in surgical and chemotherapeutic strategies have led to improvements in outcome. However, the majority of women present with advanced disease with little prospect for cure. In this article, we summarize the systemic management and ovarian cancer and raise a number of important issues: namely the timing of systemic therapy in relation to surgery, the selection of patients who do not require systemic therapy and the development of novel agents.
Survival rates for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) have increased considerably over the years largely because of the application of optimized chemotherapy regimens. More recently, the addition of the targeted agents bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab in advanced disease has also demonstrated clinical benefit. Adjuvant chemotherapy is the standard of care in patients with early-stage CRC who are at high risk of recurrence. One challenge is how to apply targeted agents in early-stage CRC. Initial results from the NSABP-08 trial in CRC, the first report of bevacizumab in the adjuvant treatment of solid cancers, are disappointing. Nevertheless, the results of several important phase III trials of targeted adjuvant therapy are awaited. Until then, the use of targeted agents in early-stage CRC cannot be recommended. The identification of biomarkers to select patients who might derive clinical benefit is crucial in determining the full potential of targeted agents in the adjuvant setting. In this review, we discuss the biologic rationale for targeted therapies in early-stage CRC, the current clinical trials, and the clinical challenges facing the success of these agents in the adjuvant setting.
Ovarian cancer is the second most common gynecological malignancy and the leading cause of death from gynecological cancer. Most women present with advanced disease with little prospect for cure. There have been some advances in surgical and chemotherapeutic strategies, but these approaches have led to only minor improvements in outcome. There remains a significant risk for recurrence and resistance to therapy, and hence there is a need to improve upon the current treatment options. Molecularly directed therapy aims to target tumor cells and the tumor microenvironment by blocking specific molecular changes in the cancer. The most promising agents so far are the antiangiogenic agents and polyadenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase inhibitors. This article reviews the various targeted therapeutic approaches under clinical investigation in ovarian cancer and the challenges facing their future success in the clinic.
BACKGROUND: We have found that the platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR)/Abl signaling pathway is up-regulated as a determinant of the acquisition of resistance to estrogen deprivation in vitro. We aimed to determine its clinical relevance in aromatase inhibitor (AI)-resistant breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified a cohort of 45 patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer who had been treated with an AI, subsequently relapsed and had biopsy material available from both the presentation and post-AI recurrent lesion. PDGFRα, PDGFRβ and Abl expression was assessed in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded sections. RESULTS: Tumor protein expression of PDGFRα (1.39-fold, P=0.0065), PDGFRβ (4.32-fold, P=0.006) and Abl (1.8-fold, P=0.001) was increased at the point of relapse. Tumor and stromal expression of PDGFRα as well as PDGFRβ was significantly correlated in pre-treatment and relapse samples. High post-treatment tumor and stromal PDGFRβ levels were associated with a short time to treatment failure (TTF). Expression of PDGFRα in relapsing tumor specimens was correlated with Abl expression and Ki67 levels. Furthermore, changes in Abl correlated significantly with changes in ER expression. CONCLUSIONS: These clinical data support a role for enhanced PDGF/Abl signaling in AI-resistant disease and provide a rationale for targeting the pathway in endocrine-resistant breast cancer.
Trastuzumab has revolutionised the treatment of HER2-positive early-stage breast cancer and is now standard of care in combination with chemotherapy for patients with tumours larger than 1 cm. However, 5 years after publication of the landmark trials establishing the efficacy of the drug, the management of small (≤1 cm), HER2-positive tumours remains difficult. Most small breast cancers have a good prognosis and adjuvant chemotherapy is not routinely recommended. However, retrospective data suggest that some small HER2-positive cancers might have a worse clinical outcome than others. This notion raises the key clinical question of whether patients with small HER2-positive cancers should be offered adjuvant trastuzumab and chemotherapy. The pivotal adjuvant trastuzumab trials did not include patients with tumours smaller than 1 cm, but a subset analysis of one trial showed that patients with tumours 1-2 cm in size derived at least as much clinical benefit from 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab as did the overall cohort. Clinicians face the dilemma of whether the potential reduction in risk of recurrence in this patient group warrants the toxic effects and risks of adjuvant chemotherapy and trastuzumab. In this review, we discuss the evidence for prognosis of small HER2-positive cancers, and for possible benefit from adjuvant trastuzumab. We suggest potential treatment strategies and clinical trial designs to address this important issue. On the basis of present evidence, we recommend that the benefits and risks of adjuvant trastuzumab should be discussed with patients with small, HER2-positive breast cancer.
PURPOSE: Preclinical data suggest that exposure to PARP inhibitors (PARPi) may compromise benefit to subsequent chemotherapy, particularly platinum-based regimens, in patients with BRCA1/2 mutation carrier ovarian cancer (PBMCOC), possibly through the acquisition of secondary BRCA1/2 mutations. The efficacy of chemotherapy in the PARPi-resistant setting was therefore investigated. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective review of PBMCOC who received chemotherapy following disease progression on olaparib, administered at ≥200 mg twice daily for one month or more. Tumor samples were obtained in the post-olaparib setting where feasible and analyzed by massively parallel sequencing. RESULTS: Data were collected from 89 patients who received a median of 3 (range 1-11) lines of pre-olaparib chemotherapy. The overall objective response rate (ORR) to post-olaparib chemotherapy was 36% (24 of 67 patients) by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and 45% (35 of 78) by RECIST and/or Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) CA125 criteria with median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of 17 weeks [95% confidence interval (CI), 13-21] and 34 weeks (95% CI, 26-42), respectively. For patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy, ORRs were 40% (19 of 48) and 49% (26/53), respectively, with a median PFS of 22 weeks (95% CI, 15-29) and OS of 45 weeks (95% CI, 15-75). An increased platinum-to-platinum interval was associated with an increased OS and likelihood of response following post-olaparib platinum. No evidence of secondary BRCA1/2 mutation was detected in tumor samples of six PARPi-resistant patients [estimated frequency of such mutations adjusted for sample size: 0.125 (95%-CI: 0-0.375)]. CONCLUSIONS: Heavily pretreated PBMCOC who are PARPi-resistant retain the potential to respond to subsequent chemotherapy, including platinum-based agents. These data support the further development of PARPi in PBMCOC.
Over the past 40 years, the treatment of ovarian cancer has undoubtedly improved as a result of better multi-modality care and platinum-based chemotherapy. More recently, the introduction of anti-angiogenic therapy, PARP inhibitors and a weekly regimen for paclitaxel indicate that results are likely to improve further. However, major challenges remain and these will be reviewed in this article. We assess key issues in anti-angiogenic treatment including potential ways for addressing resistance; we review the current studies of PARP inhibitor treatment, which shows most promise in patients with germline BRCA mutations; we describe the potential for folate-receptor-directed therapy, given the high level of FR expression in ovarian cancer and we highlight the potential for molecular targeted therapy, focusing on specific subgroups of the disease with targets such as the PI3 K/AKT and RAS/RAF/MEK pathways and the ErbB family of oncogenes. We anticipate that progress will accelerate with a better understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of the various subtypes of ovarian cancer, leading to an increasingly personalized approach to treating women with this disease.
We describe a case of ovarian carcinosarcoma occurring in a 60-year-old female. The neoplasm was excised after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and contained a predominant heterologous pleomorphic rhabdomyosarcomatous component in which there were numerous multivacuolated rhabdomyoblasts that strongly mimicked lipoblasts. The clear cell variant of rhabdomyosarcoma is rarely documented, but this case shows a highly unusual finding in which the rhabdomyoblasts show the prominent multivacuolation with nuclear indentation characteristic of and indistinguishable from pleomorphic lipoblasts. This appears to represent a posttreatment phenomenon. As this finding might conceivably occur in other rhabdomyosarcomas after chemotherapy, we highlight the potential for diagnostic confusion with pleomorphic liposarcoma, which is usually diagnosed by morphology so that immunohistochemistry for muscle markers might not be performed.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Primary melanomas originating from the gynaecological tract are rare and aggressive cancers. The 5-year survival is around 10%. The majority of tumours differ from cutaneous melanomas, which arise from the skin, by developing from melanocytes located in mucosal epithelium. The clinical behaviour, prognosis and the biology of mucosal melanomas are distinct from cutaneous melanomas. In this article, we summarize the current management of melanomas of the gynaecological tract (vulva, vagina, ovary and cervix) and discuss the progress in developing new treatments. RECENT FINDINGS: The management of mucosal melanomas has not changed substantially over the last decade and the prognosis remains poor. Surgery remains the primary treatment of choice in all localized melanomas of the genital tract. Radiotherapy and chemotherapy are options but have limited success for the majority of women. Activation of c-KIT occurs in vulvar melanomas. Clinical trials of targeted agents are underway. SUMMARY: As a result of the rarity of gynaecological tract melanomas, challenges associated with their anatomical locations and resistance to conventional radiotherapy and chemotherapy, this group of conditions remain difficult to treat and continue to have a poor prognosis. A greater understanding of the molecular profile of these cancers may provide promising targeted approaches.
OBJECTIVE: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor-mediated signaling contributes to ovarian cancer pathogenesis. Elevated VEGF expression is associated with poor clinical outcomes. We investigated ramucirumab, a fully human anti-VEGFR-2 antibody, in patients with persistent or recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival at 6 months (PFS-6) and confirmed objective response rate (ORR). METHODS: Women who received ≥ 1 platinum-based chemotherapeutic regimen and had a platinum-free interval of <12 months with measurable disease were eligible. Patients received 8 mg/kg ramucirumab intravenously every 2 weeks. RESULTS: Sixty patients were treated; one patient remained on study as of September 2013. The median age was 62 years (range: 27-80), and median number of prior regimens was 3. Forty-five (75%) patients had platinum refractory/resistant disease. Thirty-nine patients (65.0%) had serous tumors. PFS-6 was 25.0% (n=15/60, 95% CI: 14.7-37.9%). Best overall response was: partial response 5.0% (n=3/60), stable disease 56.7% (n=34/60), and progressive disease 33.3% (n=20/60). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events possibly related to study drug were headache (65.0%; 10.0% Grade ≥ 3), fatigue (56.7%; 3.3% Grade ≥ 3), diarrhea (28.3%; 1.7% Grade ≥ 3), hypertension (25.0%; 3.3% Grade ≥ 3), and nausea (20.0%; no Grade ≥ 3). Two patients experienced intestinal perforations (3.3% Grade ≥ 3). Pharmacodynamic analyses revealed changes in several circulating VEGF proteins following initial ramucirumab infusion, including increased VEGF-A, PlGF and decreased sVEGFR-2. CONCLUSIONS: Although antitumor activity was observed, the predetermined efficacy endpoints were not met.
BACKGROUND: We investigated whether the Src inhibitor saracatinib (AZD0530) improved efficacy of weekly paclitaxel in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with platinum-resistant ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer were randomised 2 : 1 to receive 8-week cycles of weekly paclitaxel (wPxl; 80 mg/m(2)/week ×6 with 2-week break) plus saracatinib (S; 175 mg o.d.) or placebo (P) continuously, starting 1 week before wPxl, until disease progression. Patients were stratified by taxane-free interval (<6 versus ≥6 months/no prior taxane). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and response rate (RR). RESULTS: A total of 107 patients, median age 63 years, were randomised. Forty-three (40%) had received >2 lines of prior chemotherapy. The 6-month PFS rate was 29% (wPxl + S) versus 34% (wPxl + P) (P = 0.582). Median PFS was 4.7 versus 5.3 months (hazard ratio 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.65-1.54; P = 0.99). RR (complete + partial) was 29% (wPxl + S) versus 43% (wPxl + P), P value = 0.158. Grade 3/4 adverse events were 36% versus 31% (P = 0.624); the most frequent G3/4 toxicities were vomiting (5.8% saracatinib versus 8.6% placebo), abdominal pain (5.8% versus 0%) and diarrhoea (4.3% versus 5.7%). Febrile neutropenia was more common in the saracatinib arm (4.3%) than placebo (0%). Response, PFS and OS were all significantly (P < 0.05) better in patients with taxane interval ≥6 months/no prior taxane (n = 85) than those <6 months (n = 22), regardless of randomisation. CONCLUSIONS: Saracatinib does not improve activity of weekly paclitaxel in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Taxane-free interval of ≥6 months/no prior taxane was associated with better outcome in both groups. TRIALS REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01196741; ISRCTN 32163062.
<h4>Background</h4>Some guidelines suggest that poor performance status (PS) is a contraindication to 1st line chemotherapy. Poor PS is a known adverse prognostic factor in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). We show in this retrospective analysis that 1st line chemotherapy in this patient group is not only safe but is associated with good outcomes.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>A retrospective review of 114 patients with stage III/IV EOC, who presented with a PS ≥3 at diagnosis and treated as inpatients with upfront platinum-based chemotherapy between 2000 and 2013, at the Royal Marsden Hospital, was conducted. The association between clinical parameters and the likelihood of completion of chemotherapy and overall survival (OS) was assessed.<h4>Results</h4>66% of patients completed ≥6cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy. Prognostic factors for completion of chemotherapy were improvement of PS during hospital stay (p<0.001) and doublet-chemotherapy with carboplatin/paclitaxel compared to single-agent carboplatin (p=0.004). A negative trend for completion of treatment was seen for patients with low albumin (<25g/l) and low CA125 levels at baseline. The median OS for all patients was 13.1months (95% CI: 10.4-15.8) and 21.2months (95% CI: 16.5-25.8) for those who completed 6cycles of chemotherapy.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Upfront platinum-based chemotherapy is feasible, beneficial and tolerable for the majority of patients with advanced EOC and poor PS. Guidelines suggesting that best supportive care is the preferred option for poor PS patients with solid tumours should be revised to exclude those with advanced EOC. An aggressive approach utilising neoadjuvant carboplatin plus paclitaxel should be regarded as standard of care.
Concerted efforts in genomic studies examining RNA transcription and DNA methylation patterns have revealed profound insights in prognostic ovarian cancer subtypes. On the other hand, abundant histology slides have been generated to date, yet their uses remain very limited and largely qualitative. Our goal is to develop automated histology analysis as an alternative subtyping technology for ovarian cancer that is cost-efficient and does not rely on DNA quality. We developed an automated system for scoring primary tumour sections of 91 late-stage ovarian cancer to identify single cells. We demonstrated high accuracy of our system based on expert pathologists' scores (cancer = 97.1%, stromal = 89.1%) as well as compared to immunohistochemistry scoring (correlation = 0.87). The percentage of stromal cells in all cells is significantly associated with poor overall survival after controlling for clinical parameters including debulking status and age (multivariate analysis p = 0.0021, HR = 2.54, CI = 1.40-4.60) and progression-free survival (multivariate analysis p = 0.022, HR = 1.75, CI = 1.09-2.82). We demonstrate how automated image analysis enables objective quantification of microenvironmental composition of ovarian tumours. Our analysis reveals a strong effect of the tumour microenvironment on ovarian cancer progression and highlights the potential of therapeutic interventions that target the stromal compartment or cancer-stroma signalling in the stroma-high, late-stage ovarian cancer subset.
<h4>Objectives</h4>To determine the impact on survival of symptomatic and asymptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) at time of diagnosis of primary ovarian malignancy.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>The clinical records of 397 consecutive cases of primary ovarian malignancy were studied. Clinical, pathological and survival data were obtained.<h4>Results and conclusions</h4>Of 397 cases, 19 (4.8%) were found to have VTE at diagnosis, of which 63.2% (n=12) were asymptomatic. VTE was significantly associated with reduced overall median survival (28 vs. 45 months, p=0.004). Decreased survival was associated with symptomatic VTE compared to patients with asymptomatic VTE (21 vs. 36 months, p=0.02) whose survival was similar to that of patients without VTE. Decreased survival remained significant in symptomatic patients after controlling for stage of disease at diagnosis, cytoreductive status and adjuvant chemotherapy use. Overall these data suggest for the first time that symptomatic but not asymptomatic VTE prior to primary treatment of ovarian cancer is an independent adverse prognostic factor.
<h4>Background</h4>The K3326X variant in BRCA2 (BRCA2*c.9976A>T; p.Lys3326*; rs11571833) has been found to be associated with small increased risks of breast cancer. However, it is not clear to what extent linkage disequilibrium with fully pathogenic mutations might account for this association. There is scant information about the effect of K3326X in other hormone-related cancers.<h4>Methods</h4>Using weighted logistic regression, we analyzed data from the large iCOGS study including 76 637 cancer case patients and 83 796 control patients to estimate odds ratios (ORw) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for K3326X variant carriers in relation to breast, ovarian, and prostate cancer risks, with weights defined as probability of not having a pathogenic BRCA2 variant. Using Cox proportional hazards modeling, we also examined the associations of K3326X with breast and ovarian cancer risks among 7183 BRCA1 variant carriers. All statistical tests were two-sided.<h4>Results</h4>The K3326X variant was associated with breast (ORw = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.40, P = 5.9x10(-) (6)) and invasive ovarian cancer (ORw = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.43, P = 3.8x10(-3)). These associations were stronger for serous ovarian cancer and for estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer (ORw = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.2 to 1.70, P = 3.4x10(-5) and ORw = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.28 to 1.76, P = 4.1x10(-5), respectively). For BRCA1 mutation carriers, there was a statistically significant inverse association of the K3326X variant with risk of ovarian cancer (HR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.84, P = .013) but no association with breast cancer. No association with prostate cancer was observed.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Our study provides evidence that the K3326X variant is associated with risk of developing breast and ovarian cancers independent of other pathogenic variants in BRCA2. Further studies are needed to determine the biological mechanism of action responsible for these associations.
The significant activity of poly(ADP-ribose)polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in the treatment of germline BRCA mutation-associated ovarian cancer, which represents ∼15% of HGS cases, has recently led to European Medicines Agency and food and drug administration approval of olaparib. Accumulating evidence suggests that PARP inhibitors may have a wider application in the treatment of sporadic ovarian cancers. Up to 50% of HGS ovarian cancer patients may exhibit homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) through mechanisms including germline BRCA mutations, somatic BRCA mutations, and BRCA promoter methylation. In this review, we discuss the role of somatic BRCA mutations and BRCA methylation in ovarian cancer. There is accumulating evidence for routine somatic BRCA mutation testing, but the relevance of BRCA epigenetic modifications is less clear. We explore the challenges that need to be addressed if the full potential of these markers of HRD is to be utilised in clinical practice.
<h4>Purpose</h4>The PARP inhibitor, Olaparib, is approved for women with BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer. Therefore there is an urgent need to test patients and obtain results in time to influence treatment. Models of BRCA testing, such as the mainstreaming oncogenetic pathway, involving oncology health professionals are being used. The authors report on the establishment of the extended role of the clinical nurse specialist in consenting women for BRCA testing in routine gynaecology-oncology clinics using the mainstreaming model.<h4>Methods</h4>Nurses undertook generic consent training and specific counselling training for BRCA testing in the form of a series of online videos, written materials and checklists before obtaining approval to consent patients for germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.<h4>Results</h4>Between July 2013 and December 2015, 108 women with ovarian cancer were counselled and consented by nurses in the medical oncology clinics at a single centre (The Royal Marsden, UK). This represented 36% of all ovarian cancer patients offered BRCA testing in the oncology clinics at the centre. Feedback from patients and nurses was encouraging with no significant issues raised in the counselling and consenting process.<h4>Conclusion</h4>The mainstreaming model allows for greater access to BRCA testing for ovarian cancer patients, many of whom may benefit from personalised therapy (PARP inhibitors). This is the first report of oncology nurses in the BRCA testing pathway. Specialist oncology nurses trained in BRCA testing have an important role within a multidisciplinary team counselling and consenting patients to undergo BRCA testing.
Advances in DNA sequencing have made genetic testing fast and affordable, but limitations of testing processes are impeding realisation of patient benefits. Ovarian cancer exemplifies the potential value of genetic testing and the shortcomings of current pathways to access testing. Approximately 15% of ovarian cancer patients have a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation which has substantial implications for their personal management and that of their relatives. Unfortunately, in most countries, routine implementation of BRCA testing for ovarian cancer patients has been inconsistent and largely unsuccessful. We developed a rapid, robust, mainstream genetic testing pathway in which testing is undertaken by the trained cancer team with cascade testing to relatives performed by the genetics team. 207 women with ovarian cancer were offered testing through the mainstream pathway. All accepted. 33 (16%) had a BRCA mutation. The result informed management of 79% (121/154) women with active disease. Patient and clinician feedback was very positive. The pathway offers a 4-fold reduction in time and 13-fold reduction in resource requirement compared to the conventional testing pathway. The mainstream genetic testing pathway we present is effective, efficient and patient-centred. It can deliver rapid, robust, large-scale, cost-effective genetic testing of BRCA1 and BRCA2 and may serve as an exemplar for other genes and other diseases.
<h4>Aims</h4>Despite recent advances in the primary and secondary prevention of cervical cancer, a significant number of women present with or develop metastatic disease. There is currently no consensus on the standard of care for second-line systemic treatment of recurrent/metastatic cervical cancer. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the second-line systemic therapy used and the associated outcomes in a single cancer centre.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>A retrospective review of patients with cervical cancer who received one or more lines of treatment for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer at the Royal Marsden Hospital between 2004 and 2014 was carried out. The primary objective was to establish the types of second-line systemic treatment used. Secondary end points included objective response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival after second-line therapy.<h4>Results</h4>In total, 75 patients were included in the study; 53 patients (70.7%) received second-line therapy for recurrent/metastatic disease. The most common second-line therapy was weekly paclitaxel (28.3%). Carboplatin-based chemotherapy (24.5%), targeted agent monotherapy within clinical trials (22.6%), docetaxel-based chemotherapy (13.2%), topotecan (9.4%) and gemcitabine (1.9%) were also used. The objective response rate to second-line therapy was 13.2%, which included three partial responses to carboplatin and paclitaxel, two partial responses to docetaxel-based chemotherapy, one partial response to weekly paclitaxel and one partial response to cediranib. Twenty-two patients (41.5%) achieved stable disease at 4 months. The median progression-free survival for women treated with second-line therapy was 3.2 months (95% confidence interval 2.1-4.3) and median overall survival was 9.3 months (95% confidence interval 6.4-12.5). Thirty-nine per cent of patients received third-line therapy.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Seventy per cent of patients treated with first-line systemic therapy for recurrent/metastatic cervical cancer subsequently received second-line treatment but response rates were poor. There remains no standard of care for second-line systemic therapy for advanced cervical cancer. Patients should be considered for clinical trials whenever feasible, including novel targeted agents and immunotherapy.
The treatment of patients with ovarian cancer is rapidly changing following the success of poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in clinical trials. Olaparib is the first PARP inhibitor to be approved by the EMA and FDA for BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer. Germ line BRCA mutation status is now established as a predictive biomarker of potential benefit from treatment with a PARP inhibitor; therefore, knowledge of the BRCA status of an individual patient with ovarian cancer is essential, in order to guide treatment decisions. BRCA testing was previously offered only to women with a family or personal history of breast and/or ovarian cancer; however, almost 20% of women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer are now recognized to harbour a germ line BRCA mutation, and of these, >40% might not have a family history of cancer and would not have received BRCA testing. A strategy to enable more widespread implementation of BRCA testing in routine care is, therefore, necessary. In this Review, we summarize data from key clinical trials of PARP inhibitors and discuss how to integrate these agents into the current treatment landscape of ovarian cancer. The validity of germ line BRCA testing and other promising biomarkers of homologous-recombination deficiency will also be discussed.
7099 Background: Gefitinib (Iressa), an inhibitor of the intracellular tyrosine kinase domain, has demonstrated useful activity in advanced pre-treated NSCLC (IDEAL I / II). The clinical efficacy of gefitinib was assessed as part of an Expanded Access Programme. METHODS: Patients (pts)were treated with gefitinib 250mg/day. Endpoints included overall survival (OS)and time to treatment failure (TTF). Objective and symptom response (OR, SR) were assessed at 1 month intervals. RESULTS: 140 patients were assessed: median age (range), 65 (35-88) years; male/female, 80/60; performance status (PS)0/1/2/3, 1/45/37/17%; advanced disease (IIIB/IV), 123pts; median number of prior chemotherapy regimens (range), 1 (0-4). 124 patients were evaluable for OR: partial responses (PR) 6%; stable disease (SD) 55%; progressive disease (PD) 39%. Median duration of disease control (PR + SD) was 13 weeks (95% CI 9-17). 130 patients were evaluable for SR: symptom improvement (SI) 30%; No change (NC)33%; worsening symptoms (WS) 37%. Median duration of symptom control (SI+NC) was 11 weeks (95% CI 9-13). The most common toxicity was diarrhoea (Grade 3: 4.5%; Grade IV: 1%). 1 patient died of suspected pneumonitis. Median OS and TTF was 20 weeks (95% CI 15-25) and 8 weeks (95% CI 7-9) respectively. Patients (n=12) with bronchoalveolar adenocarcinoma (BAC) had significantly longer TTF than adenocarcinoma and squamous-cell carcinoma (median duration was 13, 8 and 9 weeks respectively, p=0.04). OR and SI for patients with BAC was 9.1% and 50% respectively. Pts with a PS of 3 had significantly lower OS and TTF (8 and 5 weeks respectively), and OR and SI was 0% and 13.3% respectively. Number of prior chemotherapy regimens did not significantly alter survival. CONCLUSIONS: This large series of patients treated with gefitinib at 250mg/day, demonstrated similar survival and symptom response to published phase II data. Pts with BAC appeared to benefit more than other histological subtypes. Despite low toxicity, gefitinib does not benefit those with poor PS. However, gefitinib can benefit heavily pre-treated patients, since the number of prior chemotherapy regimens did not influence survival. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
e20507 Background: Trabectedin (T) is approved in Europe for advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS). The Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) has treated 133 STS pts with this agent, the majority outside of clinical trial. This affords the opportunity to determine the toxicity profile and clinical benefit of T in the largest, non-selected cohort published to date. METHODS: Patients who started T as a 24 hr infusion for advanced STS between May 1999 and August 2010 were analysed for clinical outcome and toxicity. RESULTS: 133 patients were identified: 60% female; median age 50yrs (18-77yrs) and median prior treatments =1 (0-4). The histological subtypes included leiomyosarcoma (43%), myxoid liposarcoma (13%) and synovial sarcoma (12%); metastatic sites: lung (57%), liver (27%), retroperitoneal (20%). Median number of cycles was 3 (1-24); 32% ≥6 cycles, and 19% only 1 cycle (65% due to PD). Median overall PFS and OS were 67 and 153 days respectively and 28% were progression-free at 6 months. Myxoid liposarcomas were associated with significantly better PFS (median 221 vs 52 days; p=0.003), with synovial sarcomas showing a trend towards an improved PFS. Clinical benefit (PR +SD) was seen in 52% (PR=10%). Dose reductions, delays and change to q4wk schedule due to toxicity were necessary in 25%, 28% and 11% respectively. 22% required hospitalisation and 9% died within 3 weeks of therapy (3.5% toxicity-related). Overall 55% of patients experienced grade 3/4 toxicity (predominantly myelotoxicity, transaminitis, and fatigue), toxicity-related dose modification (25%), and there were 5 toxicity related deaths. Elevations in creatinine kinase occurred in 18% of cycles. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of this largely non-selected STS cohort confirms the clinical activity of trabectedin, particularly in myxoid liposarcomas and synovial sarcomas, with approximately a third of patients experiencing prolonged disease control. Whilst it is generally well tolerated, significant toxicity was observed, with 25% of cases requiring dose reduction. Further analysis of the data is ongoing to better define those factors that may better define those not likely to benefit from T.
<h4>Background</h4>The PARP inhibitor olaparib was recently granted Food and Drug Administration (FDA) accelerated approval in patients with advanced BRCA1/2 mutation ovarian cancer. However, antitumor responses are observed in only approximately 40% of patients and the impact of baseline clinical factors on response to treatment remains unclear. Although platinum sensitivity has been suggested as a marker of response to PARP inhibitors, patients with platinum-resistant disease still respond to olaparib.<h4>Results</h4>108 patients with advanced BRCA1/2 mutation ovarian cancers were included. The interval between the end of the most recent platinum chemotherapy and PARPi (PTPI) was used to predict response to olaparib independent of conventional definition of platinum sensitivity. RECIST complete response (CR) and partial response (PR) rates were 35% in patients with platinum-sensitive versus 13% in platinum-resistant (p<0.005). Independent of platinum sensitivity status, the RECIST CR/PR rates were 42% in patients with PTPI greater than 52 weeks and 18% in patients with PTPI less than 52 weeks (p=0.016). No association was found between baseline clinical factors such as FIGO staging, debulking surgery, BRCA1 versus BRCA2 mutations, prior history of breast cancer and prior chemotherapy for breast cancer, and the response to olaparib.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted an international multicenter retrospective study to investigate the association between baseline clinical characteristics of patients with advanced BRCA1/2 mutation ovarian cancers from eight different cancer centers and their antitumor response to olaparib.<h4>Conclusion</h4>PTPI may be used to refine the prediction of response to PARP inhibition based on the conventional categorization of platinum sensitivity.
<h4>Background</h4>Burnout in health care professionals could have serious negative consequences on quality of patient care, professional satisfaction and personal life. Our aim was to investigate the burnout prevalence, work and lifestyle factors potentially affecting burnout amongst European oncologists ≤40 (YOs).<h4>Methods</h4>A survey was conducted using the validated Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) and additional questions exploring work/lifestyle factors. Statistical analyses were carried out to identify factors associated with burnout.<h4>Results</h4>Total of 737 surveys (all ages) were collected from 41 European countries. Countries were divided into six regions. Results from 595 (81%) YOs were included (81% medical oncologists; 52% trainees, 62% women). Seventy-one percent of YOs showed evidence of burnout (burnout subdomains: depersonalization 50%; emotional exhaustion 45; low accomplishment 35%). Twenty-two percent requested support for burnout during training and 74% reported no hospital access to support services. Burnout rates were significantly different across Europe (P < 0.0001). Burnout was highest in central European (84%) and lowest in Northern Europe (52%). Depersonalization scores were higher in men compared with women (60% versus 45% P = 0.0001) and low accomplishment was highest in the 26-30 age group (P < 0.01). In multivariable linear regression analyses, European region, work/life balance, access to support services, living alone and inadequate vacation time remained independent burnout factors (P < 0.05).<h4>Conclusions</h4>This is the largest burnout survey in European Young Oncologists. Burnout is common amongst YOs and rates vary across Europe. Achieving a good work/life balance, access to support services and adequate vacation time may reduce burnout levels. Raising awareness, support and interventional research are needed.
<h4>Background</h4>Hormonal therapy is used as a treatment option in high-grade ovarian carcinoma (HGOC), but the role and choice of treatment remains unclear. Agents used include tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of tamoxifen (T) and letrozole (L) in HGOC in clinical practice and investigate factors influencing clinical outcome.<h4>Methods</h4>A retrospective review of patients with relapsed HGOC treated with either tamoxifen or letrozole at the Royal Marsden Hospital between 2007 and 2012 was performed. The primary endpoint of the study was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included CA125 response, clinical benefit rate (CBR) and duration of response. Platinum-sensitivity and ER-status were evaluated as predictors of treatment response.<h4>Results</h4>97 patients were included (43 T, 54 L); median age 63 years (20-92); 91% high-grade serous; median number of lines of prior chemotherapy 3 (1-8); 60% platinum-resistant, 40% platinum-sensitive; 52% ER + ve, 1% ER-ve, 47% unknown. 14 patients (6 T, 8 L) achieved a partial response, with ORR (RECIST) of 14% (T) and 15% (L). The CBR for ≥3 months was 65% (22/43) for tamoxifen and 56% (22/54) for letrozole. There was no significant difference in ORR (p = 0.99) or CBR (p = 0.14) between tamoxifen and letrozole. 22 patients (23%) had a CA-125 response with hormonal therapy (10 T - 23% and 12 L - 22%). ORR did not differ by platinum sensitivity (p = 0.42); or ER-status (positive vs unknown, p = 0.12). Responders to letrozole had longer durations of response than responders to tamoxifen (26 vs 11.5 months, p = 0.03), but equivalent disease stability duration (9.6 vs 7.2 months respectively, p = 0.11).<h4>Conclusions</h4>Within the constraints of a retrospective study, we identified that patients treated with letrozole had a significantly longer duration of response than those treated with tamoxifen. Treatment with either tamoxifen or letrozole is a rational treatment option for patients with ER + ve HGOC, with equivalent ORR, CBR and disease stability.
<h4>Introduction</h4>Advanced ovarian cancer remains an unmet clinical need. Angiogenesis is considered a therapeutic target in ovarian cancer, with bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody against VEGF, being the first drug to show a progression-free survival benefit. Nintedanib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting VEGF receptor 1-3, FGFR 1-3 and PDGFR α and β, which has entered phase III trial development in ovarian cancer. Areas covered: This article reviews the preclinical and clinical efficacy of nintedanib in ovarian cancer, its pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics profile, safety issues, together with an overview of clinical trials carried out so far. A literature search was made in PubMed for nintedanib, ovarian cancer, angiogenesis, and on ClinicalTrials.gov site for clinical trials with nintedanib. Expert opinion: An ongoing phase III trial investigating nintedanib combined with first-line chemotherapy in ovarian cancer has shown a statistically significant progression free survival benefit, although there were toxicity issues. The true clinical benefit of nintedanib in ovarian cancer including its optimal treatment setting and dosage still need to be addressed.
<h4>Background</h4>Olaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, has previously shown efficacy in a phase 2 study when given in capsule formulation to all-comer patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed high-grade serous ovarian cancer. We aimed to confirm these findings in patients with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation using a tablet formulation of olaparib.<h4>Methods</h4>This international, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial evaluated olaparib tablet maintenance treatment in platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer patients with a BRCA1/2 mutation who had received at least two lines of previous chemotherapy. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at baseline of 0-1 and histologically confirmed, relapsed, high-grade serous ovarian cancer or high-grade endometrioid cancer, including primary peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to olaparib (300 mg in two 150 mg tablets, twice daily) or matching placebo tablets using an interactive voice and web response system. Randomisation was stratified by response to previous platinum chemotherapy (complete vs partial) and length of platinum-free interval (6-12 months vs ≥12 months) and treatment assignment was masked for patients, those giving the interventions, data collectors, and data analysers. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival and we report the primary analysis from this ongoing study. The efficacy analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population; safety analyses included patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01874353, and is ongoing and no longer recruiting patients.<h4>Findings</h4>Between Sept 3, 2013, and Nov 21, 2014, we enrolled 295 eligible patients who were randomly assigned to receive olaparib (n=196) or placebo (n=99). One patient in the olaparib group was randomised in error and did not receive study treatment. Investigator-assessed median progression-free survival was significantly longer with olaparib (19·1 months [95% CI 16·3-25·7]) than with placebo (5·5 months [5·2-5·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·30 [95% CI 0·22-0·41], p<0·0001). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or worse severity were anaemia (38 [19%] of 195 patients in the olaparib group vs two [2%] of 99 patients in the placebo group), fatigue or asthenia (eight [4%] vs two [2%]), and neutropenia (ten [5%] vs four [4%]). Serious adverse events were experienced by 35 (18%) patients in the olaparib group and eight (8%) patients in the placebo group. The most common in the olaparib group were anaemia (seven [4%] patients), abdominal pain (three [2%] patients), and intestinal obstruction (three [2%] patients). The most common in the placebo group were constipation (two [2%] patients) and intestinal obstruction (two [2%] patients). One (1%) patient in the olaparib group had a treatment-related adverse event (acute myeloid leukaemia) with an outcome of death.<h4>Interpretation</h4>Olaparib tablet maintenance treatment provided a significant progression-free survival improvement with no detrimental effect on quality of life in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation. Apart from anaemia, toxicities with olaparib were low grade and manageable.<h4>Funding</h4>AstraZeneca.
Peritoneal mesothelioma (MPeM) is a scarce abdominal-pelvic malignancy that presents with non-specific features and exhibits a wide clinical spectrum from indolent to aggressive disease. Due to it being a rare entity, there is a lack of understanding of its molecular drivers. Most treatment data are from limited small studies or extrapolated from pleural mesothelioma. Standard treatment includes curative surgery or pemetrexed-platinum palliative chemotherapy. To date, the use of novel targeted agents has been disappointing. Described is the management of two young women with papillary peritoneal mesothelioma with widespread recurrence having received platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy. Both patients obtained symptomatic and disease benefit with apitolisib, a dual phosphoinositide 3-kinase-mammalian target of rapamycin (PI3K-mTOR) inhibitor for subsequent relapses, with one patient having a partial response for almost 3 years. Both are alive and well 10-13 years from diagnosis.<h4>Conclusion</h4>These case presentations highlight a subgroup of rare MPeM that behave indolently that is compatible with long-term survival. This series identifies the use of targeted therapies with PI3K-mTOR-based inhibitors as a novel approach, warranting further clinical assessment. Development of prognostic biomarkers is essential to aid identify tumour aggressiveness, help stratify patients and facilitate treatment decisions.
Drug resistance to conventional anticancer therapies is almost inevitable in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC), limiting their available treatment options. Novel phase I trial therapies within a dedicated drug development unit may represent a viable alternative; however, there is currently little evidence for patient outcomes in such patients. To address this, we undertook a retrospective review of patients with AOC allocated to phase I trials in the Drug Development Unit at Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) between June 1998 and October 2010. A total of 200 AOC patients with progressive disease were allocated to ≥1 trial each, with a total of 281 allocations. Of these, 135 (68%) patients commenced ≥1 trial (mean 1.4 [1-8]), totaling 216 allocated trials; 65 (32%) patients did not start due to deterioration resulting from rapidly progressive disease (63 patients) or patient choice (2 patients). Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) complete/partial responses (CR/PR) were observed in 43 (20%) of those starting trials, including those on poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (18/79 [23%]), antiangiogenics (9/65 [14%]) and chemotherapy combinations (14/43 [33%]). Factors associated with CR/PR included: fewer prior treatments, platinum-sensitive disease, CR/PR with prior therapy, (the United States-based) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score, fewer metastatic sites, higher albumin and haemoglobin levels, lower white cell counts and baseline CA125 levels, germline BRCA1/2 mutations and better RMH Prognostic Score. Mean survival was 32° months for patients who achieved CR/PR. Treatments were generally well tolerated. Most patients with AOC (134/200 [67%]) received ≥1 subsequent line of therapy after phase I trials. Our data suggest that phase I trial referrals should be considered earlier in the AOC treatment pathway and before the onset of rapid disease progression particularly with the emergence of promising novel agents in the era of precision medicine.
To identify common alleles associated with different histotypes of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), we pooled data from multiple genome-wide genotyping projects totaling 25,509 EOC cases and 40,941 controls. We identified nine new susceptibility loci for different EOC histotypes: six for serous EOC histotypes (3q28, 4q32.3, 8q21.11, 10q24.33, 18q11.2 and 22q12.1), two for mucinous EOC (3q22.3 and 9q31.1) and one for endometrioid EOC (5q12.3). We then performed meta-analysis on the results for high-grade serous ovarian cancer with the results from analysis of 31,448 BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, including 3,887 mutation carriers with EOC. This identified three additional susceptibility loci at 2q13, 8q24.1 and 12q24.31. Integrated analyses of genes and regulatory biofeatures at each locus predicted candidate susceptibility genes, including OBFC1, a new candidate susceptibility gene for low-grade and borderline serous EOC.
<h4>Introduction</h4>Treatment options for relapsed ovarian cancer have increased over the decade with the addition of targeted agents, such as PARP inhibitors and antiangiogenic agents. Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody binding vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), was the first anti-angiogenic agent to be incorporated in the ovarian cancer treatment landscape. Other molecules utilising different mechanisms of action to target angiogenesis have been developed, including cediranib, an oral potent inhibitor of VEGF Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor that has demonstrated activity in both phase II and phase III studies. Areas covered: Herein we will review cediranib as well as the evidence for its use in ovarian cancer, both as monotherapy and in combination with chemotherapy, PARP inhibitors and immunotherapy. A literature search was made in PubMed and on ClinicalTrials.gov for clinical trials with cediranib. Expert opinion: The addition of cediranib for the treatment of ovarian cancer is promising, and has demonstrated a significant improvement in progression free survival in a phase III trial in combination with chemotherapy and maintenance treatment. Cediranib is currently being explored in ovarian cancer and other gynaecological malignancies aiming to improve patient care; further research will help define its role in standard clinical practice for patients with ovarian cancer.
The approval, in 2015, of the first poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi; olaparib, Lynparza) for platinum-sensitive relapsed high-grade ovarian cancer with either germline or somatic BRCA1/2 deleterious mutations is changing the way that BRCA1/2 testing services are offered to patients with ovarian cancer. Ovarian cancer patients are now being referred for BRCA1/2 genetic testing for treatment decisions, in addition to familial risk estimation, and irrespective of a family history of breast or ovarian cancer. Furthermore, testing of tumor samples to identify the estimated 3%-9% of patients with somatic BRCA1/2 mutations who, in addition to germline carriers, could benefit from PARPi therapy is also now being considered. This new testing paradigm poses some challenges, in particular the technical and analytical difficulties of analyzing chemically challenged DNA derived from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded specimens. The current manuscript reviews some of these challenges and technical recommendations to consider when undertaking BRCA1/2 testing in tumor tissue samples to detect both germline and somatic BRCA1/2 mutations. Also provided are considerations for incorporating genetic analysis of ovarian tumor samples into the patient pathway and ethical requirements.
<h4>Background</h4>Linsitinib, an oral, dual inhibitor of insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor and insulin receptor, in combination with weekly paclitaxel, may improve clinical outcomes compared with paclitaxel alone in patients with refractory or platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>This open-label phase 1/2 clinical trial (NCT00889382) randomized patients with refractory or platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (1:1:1) to receive either oral intermittent linsitinib (600mg once daily on Days 1-3 per week) combined with paclitaxel (80mg/m<sup>2</sup> on Days 1, 8, and 15; Arm A) or continuous linsitinib (150mg twice daily) in combination with paclitaxel (Arm B), or paclitaxel alone (Arm C). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety/tolerability.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 152 women were randomized to treatment (n=51 Arm A; n=51 Arm B, n=50 Arm C). In combination with paclitaxel, neither intermittent linsitinib (median PFS 2.8months; 95% confidence interval [CI]:2.5-4.4) nor continuous linsitinib (median PFS 4.2months; 95% CI:2.8-5.1) improved PFS over weekly paclitaxel alone (median PFS 5.6months; 95% CI:3.2-6.9). No improvement in ORR, DCR, or OS in either linsitinib dosing schedule was observed compared with paclitaxel alone. Adverse event (AE) rates, including all-grade and grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs, and treatment-related AEs leading to discontinuation, were higher among patients receiving intermittent linsitinib compared with the other treatment arms.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Addition of intermittent or continuous linsitinib with paclitaxel did not improve outcomes in patients with platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian cancer compared with paclitaxel alone.
ARID1A is a tumour suppressor gene that is frequently mutated in clear cell and endometrioid carcinomas of the ovary and endometrium and is an important clinical biomarker for novel treatment approaches for patients with ARID1A defects. However, the accuracy of ARID1A immunohistochemistry (IHC) as a surrogate for mutation status has not fully been established for patient stratification in clinical trials. Here we tested whether ARID1A IHC could reliably predict ARID1A mutations identified by next-generation sequencing. Three commercially available antibodies - EPR13501 (Abcam), D2A8U (Cell Signaling), and HPA005456 (Sigma) - were optimised for IHC using cell line models and human tissue, and screened across a cohort of 45 gynaecological tumours. IHC was scored independently by three pathologists using an immunoreactive score. ARID1A mutation status was assessed using two independent sequencing platforms and the concordance between ARID1A mutation and protein expression was evaluated using Receiver Operating Characteristic statistics. Overall, 21 ARID1A mutations were identified in 14/43 assessable tumours (33%), the majority of which were predicted to be deleterious. Mutations were identified in 6/17 (35%) ovarian clear cell carcinomas, 5/8 (63%) ovarian endometrioid carcinomas, 2/5 (40%) endometrial carcinomas, and 1/7 (14%) carcinosarcomas. ROC analysis identified greater than 95% concordance between mutation status and IHC using a modified immunoreactive score for all three antibodies allowing a definitive cut-point for ARID1A mutant status to be calculated. Comprehensive assessment of concordance of ARID1A IHC and mutation status identified EPR13501 as an optimal antibody, with 100% concordance between ARID1A mutation status and protein expression, across different gynaecological histological subtypes. It delivered the best inter-rater agreement between all pathologists, as well as a clear cost-benefit advantage. This could allow patients to be accurately stratified based on their ARID1A IHC status into early phase clinical trials.
<h4>Background</h4>We have previously shown that raised p-S6K levels correlate with resistance to chemotherapy in ovarian cancer. We hypothesised that inhibiting p-S6K signalling with the dual m-TORC1/2 inhibitor in patients receiving weekly paclitaxel could improve outcomes in such patients.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>In dose escalation, weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) was given 6/7 weeks in combination with two intermittent schedules of vistusertib (dosing starting on the day of paclitaxel): schedule A, vistusertib dosed bd for 3 consecutive days per week (3/7 days) and schedule B, vistusertib dosed bd for 2 consecutive days per week (2/7 days). After establishing a recommended phase II dose (RP2D), expansion cohorts in high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) and squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (sqNSCLC) were explored in 25 and 40 patients, respectively.<h4>Results</h4>The dose-escalation arms comprised 22 patients with advanced solid tumours. The dose-limiting toxicities were fatigue and mucositis in schedule A and rash in schedule B. On the basis of toxicity and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) evaluations, the RP2D was established as 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel with 50 mg vistusertib bd 3/7 days for 6/7 weeks. In the HGSOC expansion, RECIST and GCIG CA125 response rates were 13/25 (52%) and 16/25 (64%), respectively, with median progression-free survival (mPFS) of 5.8 months (95% CI: 3.28-18.54). The RP2D was not well tolerated in the SqNSCLC expansion, but toxicities were manageable after the daily vistusertib dose was reduced to 25 mg bd for the following 23 patients. The RECIST response rate in this group was 8/23 (35%), and the mPFS was 5.8 months (95% CI: 2.76-21.25).<h4>Discussion</h4>In this phase I trial, we report a highly active and well-tolerated combination of vistusertib, administered as an intermittent schedule with weekly paclitaxel, in patients with HGSOC and SqNSCLC.<h4>Clinical trial registration</h4>ClinicialTrials.gov identifier: CNCT02193633.
How tumor microenvironmental forces shape plasticity of cancer cell morphology is poorly understood. Here, we conduct automated histology image and spatial statistical analyses in 514 high grade serous ovarian samples to define cancer morphological diversification within the spatial context of the microenvironment. Tumor spatial zones, where cancer cell nuclei diversify in shape, are mapped in each tumor. Integration of this spatially explicit analysis with omics and clinical data reveals a relationship between morphological diversification and the dysregulation of DNA repair, loss of nuclear integrity, and increased disease mortality. Within the Immunoreactive subtype, spatial analysis further reveals significantly lower lymphocytic infiltration within diversified zones compared with other tumor zones, suggesting that even immune-hot tumors contain cells capable of immune escape. Our findings support a model whereby a subpopulation of morphologically plastic cancer cells with dysregulated DNA repair promotes ovarian cancer progression through positive selection by immune evasion.
The main prognostic factor in ovarian cancer is the stage of disease at diagnosis. The staging system in use (FIGO classification, updated in 2014) is based on the surgical-pathological findings. Although surgical staging is the gold standard in ovarian cancer, the initial patient management depends on the imaging-based pre-surgical staging assessment, in order to identify unresectable or difficult to resect disease. Radiologists need to be aware of the strengths of the available imaging modalities, as well as the imaging pitfalls. Clear understanding of pattern of disease spread and review areas are critical for accurate staging and treatment planning. The current standard of care for pre-surgical staging is CT of the thorax, abdomen, and pelvis. This allows a rapid evaluation of disease extent and is fairly accurate in identifying bulky disease but has definite limitations in assessing the extent of small volume disease and in the confirmation of certain sites of disease beyond the abdomen. Functional MRI has been reported to be superior in detecting small peritoneal deposits. PET/CT may be used as a problem-solving tool in some patients where determination remains unclear, particularly in confirmation of advanced stage beyond the abdomen.
Breast and ovarian cancer are common malignancies among older adults, causing significant morbidity and mortality. Although most cases of breast and ovarian cancer are sporadic, a significant proportion is caused by mutations in cancer susceptibility genes, most often breast cancer susceptibility genes (BRCA) 1 and 2. Furthermore, some breast and ovarian tumors are phenotypically similar to those with BRCA mutations, a phenomenon known as "BRCAness". BRCA mutations and "BRCAness" lead to defects in DNA repair, which may be a target for therapeutic agents such as Poly ADP-Ribose Polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. PARP inhibitors are novel medications which lead to double-strand breaks resulting in cell death due to synthetic lethality, and which have been shown to be effective in patients with advanced breast and ovarian cancers with or without BRCA mutations. Three different PARP inhibitors (olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib) have been approved for the treatment of ovarian cancer and one (olaparib) for breast cancer harboring BRCA mutations. Here, we review the currently available evidence regarding the use of PARP inhibitors for the treatment of patients with breast and ovarian cancer, with a particular focus on the inclusion of older adults in clinical trials of these therapies. Additionally, we provide an overview of currently ongoing studies of PARP inhibitors in breast and ovarian cancer, and include recommendations for increasing the evidence-base for using these medications among older patients.
DNA methylation is instrumental for gene regulation. Global changes in the epigenetic landscape have been recognized as a hallmark of cancer. However, the role of DNA methylation in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) remains unclear. In this study, high-density genetic and DNA methylation data in white blood cells from the Framingham Heart Study (<i>N</i> = 1,595) were used to build genetic models to predict DNA methylation levels. These prediction models were then applied to the summary statistics of a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of ovarian cancer including 22,406 EOC cases and 40,941 controls to investigate genetically predicted DNA methylation levels in association with EOC risk. Among 62,938 CpG sites investigated, genetically predicted methylation levels at 89 CpG were significantly associated with EOC risk at a Bonferroni-corrected threshold of <i>P</i> < 7.94 × 10<sup>-7</sup>. Of them, 87 were located at GWAS-identified EOC susceptibility regions and two resided in a genomic region not previously reported to be associated with EOC risk. Integrative analyses of genetic, methylation, and gene expression data identified consistent directions of associations across 12 CpG, five genes, and EOC risk, suggesting that methylation at these 12 CpG may influence EOC risk by regulating expression of these five genes, namely <i>MAPT, HOXB3, ABHD8, ARHGAP27</i>, and <i>SKAP1</i>. We identified novel DNA methylation markers associated with EOC risk and propose that methylation at multiple CpG may affect EOC risk via regulation of gene expression. SIGNIFICANCE: Identification of novel DNA methylation markers associated with EOC risk suggests that methylation at multiple CpG may affect EOC risk through regulation of gene expression.
Ovarian clear cell carcinomas (OCCC) are rare aggressive, chemo-resistant tumours comprising approximately 13% of all epithelial ovarian cancers, which have distinct clinical and molecular features, when compared to other gynaecological malignancies. At present, there are no specific licensed targeted therapies for OCCC, although a number of candidate targets have been identified. This review focuses on recent knowledge underpinning our understanding of the pathogenesis of OCCC including direct and synthetic-lethal therapeutic strategies in particular focussing on ARID1A deficiency. We also discuss current targeted clinical trials and immunotherapeutic approaches.
<h4>Background</h4>Despite treatment advances, there remains a significant risk of recurrence in ovarian cancer, at which stage it is usually incurable. Consequently, there is a clear need for improved patient stratification. However, at present clinical prognosticators remain largely unchanged due to the lack of reproducible methods to identify high-risk patients.<h4>Methods</h4>In high-grade serous ovarian cancer patients with advanced disease, we spatially define a tumour ecological balance of stromal resource and immune hazard using high-throughput image and spatial analysis of routine histology slides. On this basis an EcoScore is developed to classify tumours by a shift in this balance towards cancer-favouring or inhibiting conditions.<h4>Findings</h4>The EcoScore provides prognostic value stronger than, and independent of, known risk factors. Crucially, the clinical relevance of mutational burden and genomic instability differ under different stromal resource conditions, suggesting that the selective advantage of these cancer hallmarks is dependent on the context of stromal spatial structure. Under a high resource condition defined by a high level of geographical intermixing of cancer and stromal cells, selection appears to be driven by point mutations; whereas, in low resource tumours featured with high hypoxia and low cancer-immune co-localization, selection is fuelled by aneuploidy.<h4>Interpretation</h4>Our study offers empirical evidence that cancer fitness depends on tumour spatial constraints, and presents a biological basis for developing better assessments of tumour adaptive strategies in overcoming ecological constraints including immune surveillance and hypoxia.
Development of resistance to platinum and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors via secondary BRCA gene mutations that restore functional homologous recombination has been observed in a number of cancer types. Here we report a case of somatic BRCA2 mutation in a patient with high grade serous ovarian carcinoma. A secondary mutation predicted to restore the BRCA2 open reading frame was detected at low frequency (2.3%) in whole exome sequencing of a peritoneal biopsy at disease progression after treatment that included carboplatin and olaparib. We used digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) to verify the presence and frequency of this mutation in the biopsy sample at progression and also used this approach to assess the presence of the secondary mutation in preceding biopsies at diagnosis and first relapse. We found no evidence for the secondary mutation being present prior to the final progression biopsy, suggesting that this mutation was acquired late in the course of treatment. ddPCR provides a sensitive and specific technique to investigate the presence of low frequency mutations in a time series of biopsies.
<b>Aim:</b> Describe rates of prespecified adverse events in patients who switched from olaparib capsules to tablets. <b>Patients & methods:</b> Retrospective, observational cohort analysis using self-controlled, pre-post design. Data on patients with ovarian cancer who switched from olaparib capsules to tablets between January 2015 and February 2019 were obtained from a US claims database. <b>Results:</b> Among all patients (n = 48), proportion with any prespecified adverse event was 45.8% (95% confidence interval: 31.4-60.8) during initial 90 days' capsule use and 35.4% (22.2-50.5) during initial 90 days' tablets use; difference -10.4% (-28.8-9.0). <b>Conclusion:</b> Switching from olaparib capsules to tablets was manageable with no evidence of increased toxicity. This real-world study supports the manageable tolerability of olaparib in women with ovarian cancer.
Small-cell carcinoma of the ovary, hypercalcemic type (SCCOHT) is a rare and highly aggressive ovarian malignancy. In almost all cases, it is associated with somatic and often germline pathogenic variants in <i>SMARCA4</i>, which encodes for the SMARCA4 protein (BRG1), a subunit of the SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling complex. Approximately 20% of human cancers possess pathogenic variants in at least one SWI/SNF subunit. Because of their role in regulating many important cellular processes including transcriptional control, DNA repair, differentiation, cell division, and DNA replication, SWI/SNF complexes with mutant subunits are thought to contribute to cancer initiation and progression. Fewer than 500 cases of SCCOHT have been reported in the literature and approximately 60% are associated with hypercalcemia. SCCOHT primarily affects females under 40 years of age who usually present with symptoms related to a pelvic mass. SCCOHT is an aggressive cancer, with long-term survival rates of 30% in early-stage cases. Although various treatment approaches have been proposed, there is no consensus on surveillance and therapeutic strategy. An international group of multidisciplinary clinicians and researchers recently formed the International SCCOHT Consortium to evaluate current knowledge and propose consensus surveillance and therapeutic recommendations, with the aim of improving outcomes. Here, we present an overview of the genetics of this cancer, provide updates on new treatment targets, and propose management guidelines for this challenging cancer.
<h4>Objective</h4>Vascular co-option is a resistance mechanism to anti-angiogenic agents, but combinations of anti-vascular agents may overcome this resistance. We report a phase 1b and randomised phase 2 trial to determine the safety and efficacy of pazopanib with fosbretabulin.<h4>Methods</h4>Eligible patients had recurrent, epithelial ovarian cancer with a platinum-free interval (PFI) of 3 to 12 months. Patients were stratified according to PFI (>6 versus ≤6 months) and prior bevacizumab use.<h4>Results</h4>Twelve patients were treated in the phase 1b. Commonest grade ≥ 2 adverse events (AEs) were hypertension (100%), neutropenia (50%), fatigue (50%), vomiting (50%). There was one DLT (grade 3 fatigue). The recommended phase 2 dose level was fosbretabulin 54 mg/m<sup>2</sup> on days 1, 8 and 15 and pazopanib 600 mg once daily (od), every 28 days, which was then compared to pazopanib 800 mg od in a randomised phase 2 trial. Twenty-one patients were randomised (1:1) in the phase 2 trial. In phase 1b and phase 2, four patients treated with pazopanib and fosbretabulin developed reversible, treatment-related cardiac AEs, leading to premature discontinuation of the study. In the phase 2 trial, the median PFS was 7.6 months (95% CI 4.1-not estimated) versus 3.7 months (95% CI 1.0-8.1) in favour of the experimental arm (HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.09-1.03, P = .06).<h4>Conclusions</h4>It remains unclear whether pazopanib with with fosbretabulin is an efficacious regimen to treat epithelial ovarian cancer. Effective cardiac risk mitigation is needed to increase the tolerability and maximize patient safety in future trials.
<h4>Purpose</h4>Platinum resistance in ovarian cancer is associated with epigenetic modifications. Hypomethylating agents (HMA) have been studied as carboplatin resensitizing agents in ovarian cancer. This randomized phase II trial compared guadecitabine, a second-generation HMA, and carboplatin (G+C) against second-line chemotherapy in women with measurable or detectable platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>Patients received either G+C (guadecitabine 30 mg/m<sup>2</sup> s.c. once-daily for 5 days and carboplatin) or treatment of choice (TC; topotecan, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, paclitaxel, or gemcitabine) in 28-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints were RECIST v1.1 and CA-125 response rate, 6-month PFS, and overall survival (OS).<h4>Results</h4>Of 100 patients treated, 51 received G+C and 49 received TC, of which 27 crossed over to G+C. The study did not meet its primary endpoint as the median PFS was not statistically different between arms (16.3 weeks vs. 9.1 weeks in the G+C and TC groups, respectively; <i>P</i> = 0.07). However, the 6-month PFS rate was significantly higher in the G+C group (37% vs. 11% in TC group; <i>P</i> = 0.003). The incidence of grade 3 or higher toxicity was similar in G+C and TC groups (51% and 49%, respectively), with neutropenia and leukopenia being more frequent in the G+C group.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Although this trial did not show superiority for PFS of G+C versus TC, the 6-month PFS increased in G+C treated patients. Further refinement of this strategy should focus on identification of predictive markers for patient selection.
The development of guidelines recommendations is one of the core activities of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and European Society of Gynaecologial Oncology (ESGO), as part of the mission of both societies to improve the quality of care for patients with cancer across Europe. ESMO and ESGO jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based recommendations in several selected areas in order to improve the quality of care for women with ovarian cancer. The ESMO-ESGO consensus conference on ovarian cancer was held on 12-14 April 2018 in Milan, Italy, and comprised a multidisciplinary panel of 40 leading experts in the management of ovarian cancer. Before the conference, the expert panel worked on five clinically relevant questions regarding ovarian cancer relating to each of the following four areas: pathology and molecular biology, early-stage and borderline tumours, advanced stage disease and recurrent disease. Relevant scientific literature, as identified using a systematic search, was reviewed in advance. During the consensus conference, the panel developed recommendations for each specific question and a consensus was reached. The recommendations presented here are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. This article presents the recommendations of this ESMO-ESGO consensus conference, together with a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation.
The development of guidelines is one of the core activities of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and European Society of Gynaecologial Oncology (ESGO), as part of the mission of both societies to improve the quality of care for patients with cancer across Europe. ESMO and ESGO jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based recommendations in several selected areas in order to improve the quality of care for women with ovarian cancer. The ESMO-ESGO consensus conference on ovarian cancer was held on April 12-14, 2018 in Milan, Italy, and comprised a multidisciplinary panel of 40 leading experts in the management of ovarian cancer. Before the conference, the expert panel worked on five clinically relevant questions regarding ovarian cancer relating to each of the following four areas: pathology and molecular biology, early-stage and borderline tumours, advanced stage disease and recurrent disease. Relevant scientific literature, as identified using a systematic search, was reviewed in advance. During the consensus conference, the panel developed recommendations for each specific question and a consensus was reached. The recommendations presented here are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. This article presents the recommendations of this ESMO-ESGO consensus conference, together with a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation.
Folate receptor α (FRα) came into focus as an anticancer target many decades after the successful development of drugs targeting intracellular folate metabolism, such as methotrexate and pemetrexed. Binding to FRα is one of several methods by which folate is taken up by cells; however, this receptor is an attractive anticancer drug target owing to the overexpression of FRα in a range of solid tumours, including ovarian, lung and breast cancers. Furthermore, using FRα to better localize effective anticancer therapies to their target tumours using platforms such as antibody-drug conjugates, small-molecule drug conjugates, radioimmunoconjugates and, more recently, chimeric antigen receptor T cells could further improve the outcomes of patients with FRα-overexpressing cancers. FRα can also be harnessed for predictive biomarker research. Moreover, imaging FRα radiologically or in real time during surgery can lead to improved functional imaging and surgical outcomes, respectively. In this Review, we describe the current status of research into FRα in cancer, including data from several late-phase clinical trials involving FRα-targeted therapies, and the use of new technologies to develop FRα-targeted agents with improved therapeutic indices.
<h4>Background</h4>In ARIEL3, rucaparib maintenance treatment significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo. Here, we report prespecified, investigator-assessed, exploratory post-progression endpoints and updated safety data.<h4>Methods</h4>In this ongoing (enrolment complete) randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, patients aged 18 years or older who had platinum-sensitive, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube carcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 who had received at least two previous platinum-based chemotherapy regimens and responded to their last platinum-based regimen were randomly assigned (2:1) to oral rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) or placebo in 28-day cycles using a computer-generated sequence (block size of six with stratification based on homologous recombination repair gene mutation status, progression-free interval following penultimate platinum-based regimen, and best response to most recent platinum-based regimen). Patients, investigators, site staff, assessors, and the funder were masked to assignments. The primary endpoint of investigator-assessed progression-free survival has been previously reported. Prespecified, exploratory outcomes of chemotherapy-free interval (CFI), time to start of first subsequent therapy (TFST), time to disease progression on subsequent therapy or death (PFS2), and time to start of second subsequent therapy (TSST) and updated safety were analysed (visit cutoff Dec 31, 2017). Efficacy analyses were done in all patients randomised to three nested cohorts: patients with BRCA mutations, patients with homologous recombination deficiencies, and the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01968213.<h4>Findings</h4>Between April 7, 2014, and July 19, 2016, 564 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to rucaparib (n=375) or placebo (n=189). Median follow-up was 28·1 months (IQR 22·0-33·6). In the intention-to-treat population, median CFI was 14·3 months (95% CI 13·0-17·4) in the rucaparib group versus 8·8 months (8·0-10·3) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·43 [95% CI 0·35-0·53]; p<0·0001), median TFST was 12·4 months (11·1-15·2) versus 7·2 months (6·4-8·6; HR 0·43 [0·35-0·52]; p<0·0001), median PFS2 was 21·0 months (18·9-23·6) versus 16·5 months (15·2-18·4; HR 0·66 [0·53-0·82]; p=0·0002), and median TSST was 22·4 months (19·1-24·5) versus 17·3 months (14·9-19·4; HR 0·68 [0·54-0·85]; p=0·0007). CFI, TFST, PFS2, and TSST were also significantly longer with rucaparib than placebo in the BRCA-mutant and homologous recombination-deficient cohorts. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event of grade 3 or higher was anaemia or decreased haemoglobin (80 [22%] patients in the rucaparib group vs one [1%] patient in the placebo group). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 83 (22%) patients in the rucaparib group and 20 (11%) patients in the placebo group. Two treatment-related deaths have been previously reported in this trial; there were no new treatment-related deaths.<h4>Interpretation</h4>In these exploratory analyses over a median follow-up of more than 2 years, rucaparib maintenance treatment led to a clinically meaningful delay in starting subsequent therapy and provided lasting clinical benefits versus placebo in all three analysis cohorts. Updated safety data were consistent with previous reports.<h4>Funding</h4>Clovis Oncology.
<h4>Introduction</h4>Despite recent advances in the management of epithelial ovarian cancer, overall survival rates remain poor, and there is a pressing need to develop novel therapeutic agents and maintenance strategies to improve outcomes for women with this disease. Olaparib, a potent oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, has demonstrated antitumor activity in women with ovarian cancer, associated with homologous recombination deficiency.<h4>Areas covered</h4>This review outlines the rationale for PARP inhibitor therapy in ovarian cancer and summarizes the efficacy and tolerability data for olaparib to date. Ongoing phase III clinical trials of olaparib in ovarian cancer will be discussed.<h4>Expert opinion</h4>There are a number of issues regarding the optimal use of olaparib in ovarian cancer, including the identification of a homologous recombination deficiency signature to predict treatment response, establishment of the optimal treatment setting (maintenance or relapsed disease), and evaluation of cost-effectiveness. Finally, the long term consequences of PARP inhibitors, including the risk of myelodysplasia and acute myeloid leukemia need to be quantified in ongoing large phase III clinical trials.
Epithelial ovarian cancer is a heterogeneous disease with distinct histological subtypes characterized by different patterns of clinical behaviour. The identification of molecular pathways associated with individual subtypes has fuelled enthusiasm for the development of targeted therapies directed at specific subtypes of ovarian cancer. To date, the most successful targeted therapies in ovarian cancer to have undergone clinical development include anti-angiogenic agents and PARP inhibitors. Other promising areas of development include folate receptor antagonists, MEK and BRAF inhibitors in low-grade serous carcinoma, and immunotherapy. These novel therapeutic agents have the potential to maximize tumor efficacy, minimize toxicity and improve outcomes for women with epithelial ovarian cancer.
<h4>Background</h4>Ovarian germ cell tumors (OGCT) account for 2-5% of ovarian malignancies, with an annual incidence of 1:100,000, and typically occur in young women and adolescents. The yolk sac tumor (YST) is the second most common subtype of OGCTs and has an aggressive phenotype. Their rarity in postmenopausal women has the potential to cause initial diagnostic uncertainty and lead to delayed or sub-optimal treatment. In this article, we report two cases. The first case is a 67-year-old woman with a pure YST and the second refers to a 59-year-old patient with YST with neuroendocrine differentiation. We also review and summarise the current literature.<h4>Discussion</h4>YSTs in older women, either in association with ovarian epithelial tumors or without an identifiable epithelial precursor, are a challenging clinical situation. The disease is aggressive and the outcome remains poor. Thirty-seven cases, including the two reported in this article, have been described in the literature to date. 12/ 37 described patients with malignant OGCTs died within 8 months of diagnosis.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Ovarian cancer with a YST component in postmenopausal women has an aggressive behaviour and adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy should be considered.
The majority of women with ovarian cancer present with advanced disease, and ultimately relapse following primary surgery and platinum-taxane chemotherapy. Despite recent advances in the development of targeted agents in ovarian cancer, survival rates remain poor. The promising activity of bevacizumab, a VEGF receptor inhibitor, has stimulated research on the use of additional anti-angiogenic agents in ovarian cancer. Pazopanib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor, targets VEGF receptor-1, -2 and -3, platelet-derived growth factor receptor-α and -β and c-kit; resulting in the inhibition of angiogenesis and tumor proliferation. Early phase studies have demonstrated promising efficacy and tolerability. To date, there has been one Phase III trial of pazopanib in ovarian cancer, demonstrating a progression-free survival benefit in women treated with maintenance pazopanib following primary surgery and systemic therapy. This article summarizes the preclinical and clinical data of pazopanib in ovarian cancer, highlighting future research options for this agent.
Targeting angiogenesis is proving to be a successful approach in the management of ovarian cancer. The vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor, bevacizumab, is the first angiogenesis inhibitor to have shown a significant progression-free survival advantage in the Phase III setting. There is now evidence supporting the use of bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy for first-line and relapsed (platinum-sensitive and resistant) ovarian cancer. In this review, we summarize the positive Phase III trial (OCEANS [Ovarian Cancer Study Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Chemotherapy and Anti-Angiogenic Therapy in Platinum-Sensitive Recurrent Disease]) that led to European Medicines Agency approval of bevacizumab in platinum-sensitive first relapse and discuss the best use of the drug in this disease.
INTRODUCTION: Pemetrexed is a multitargeted antifolate drug that has shown benefit in several clinical trials in solid tumors. It is currently approved for the treatment of nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and mesothelioma, and is being explored in epithelial ovarian cancer. AREAS COVERED: In this article, the clinical development of pemetrexed in relation to ovarian cancer is discussed. Early phase clinical trials using pemetrexed monotherapy or in combination with other cytotoxic or target agents are reviewed. The safety profile of pemetrexed will also be evaluated. EXPERT OPINION: A number of Phase I and II clinical trials have evaluated the use of pemetrexed in patients with ovarian cancer. Thus far, there are no randomized studies that address the role of pemetrexed compared to current, standard treatments. The activity of single agent pemetrexed in platinum-resistant patients is worth exploring. Biomarker-driven randomized, clinical trials and patient selection are key for the future development of pemetrexed.
The treatment of ovarian cancer is set to undergo rapid changes, as strategies incorporating molecular targeted therapies begin to take shape. These are based on a better appreciation of approaches targeting the tumor microenvironment as well as specific subtypes of the disease, with distinct molecular aberrations. Targeting the VEGF pathway through bevacizumab is clearly effective, with positive randomized trials at all disease stages; targeting defective homologous recombination repair pathways with PARP inhibitors is also proving successful in a substantial proportion of patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer. In this article, we will review progress in these two leading areas and also discuss the potential for targeting other pathways and receptors that may be activated in ovarian cancer, including the RAS/RAF/MEK and PI3K/AKT/mToR pathways, the ErbB and IGF family of receptors, mitotic check points, and also the folate receptor. Here, single-agent therapy may play a role in selected cases but essential components of future strategies should include combination treatments aimed at dealing with the key problem of drug resistance, together with rational approaches to patient selection.
Poly(ADP-ribose)polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are showing considerable promise for the treatment of BRCA mutation-associated ovarian and breast cancer. This approach exploits a synthetic lethal strategy to target the specific DNA repair pathway in cancers that harbor mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. Accumulating evidence suggests that PARP inhibitors may have a wider application in the treatment of sporadic, high-grade serous ovarian cancers and other cancers including endometrial cancer. In this review, we discuss the clinical development of PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancer and explore challenges that need to be addressed if the full potential of these agents is to be realized.
Ovarian cancer is the second most common gynaecological malignancy and the leading cause of death from gynaecological cancer. Although in some cases treatment is initially effective, there is a considerable risk of disease recurrence and resistance to therapy. Therapies targeting molecular alterations in tumours offer the promise of significantly improved treatment. So far, the most promising targeted agents are angiogenesis inhibitors and PARP inhibitors. Here, we review the various targeted therapeutic approaches under clinical investigation in phase I and II trials of ovarian cancer and the challenges facing their future success in the clinic.
Despite effective treatments for oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancers, drug resistance is common and remains a significant clinical challenge. Targeting tumour vasculature by blockade of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) has proved successful in a variety of cancers. Phase III clinical trials of bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy showed some efficacy in breast cancer. Concomitant targeting of the VEGF and oestrogen signalling pathways has the potential to provide enhanced therapeutic benefit in oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, and this strategy is under evaluation in clinical trials. This article summarises the rationale for this approach and clinical studies so far.
Olaparib is the first oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor to be approved as maintenance monotherapy for treatment of patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed BRCA-mutated (BRCAm) serous ovarian cancer. This review provides practical guidance on the use of olaparib (capsule formulation) in the maintenance setting. The article focuses on the key toxicities that can arise with olaparib therapy and recommendations for their management. Nausea, vomiting, fatigue and anemia are the most commonly reported adverse events in olaparib clinical trials and are generally mild to moderate and transient in nature in most patients. Implementation of an effective and timely management plan can control many of the side effects. It is vital that health care providers effectively communicate the potential side effects of olaparib, as well as educate patients on management strategies to combat these symptoms. To this end, realistic expectations regarding the potential side effects need to be set, with an understanding that dose interruptions and modifications may be required to allow patients to continue receiving treatment.
The incidence of most gynaecological malignancies rises significantly with increasing age. With an ageing population, the proportion of women over the age of 65 with cancer is expected to rise substantially over the next decade. Unfortunately, survival outcomes are much poorer in older patients and evidence suggests that older women with gynaecological cancers are less likely to receive current standard of care treatment options. Despite this, older women are under-represented in practice changing clinical studies. The evidence for efficacy and tolerability is therefore extrapolated from a younger; often more fit population and applied to in every day clinical practice to older patients with co-morbidities. There has been significant progress in the development of geriatric assessment in oncology to predict treatment outcomes and tolerability however there is still no clear evidence that undertaking a geriatric assessment improves patient outcomes. Clinical trials focusing on treating older patients are urgently required. In this review, we discuss the evidence for treatment of gynaecological cancers as well as methods of assessing older patients for therapy. Potential biomarkers of ageing are also summarised.
Traditionally, BRCA genetic testing has been undertaken to identify patients and family members at future risk of developing cancer and patients have been referred for testing based on family history. However, the now recognised risk of ovarian cancer (OC) patients, even those with no known family history, harbouring a mutation in BRCA1/2, together with the first poly adenosine diphosphate ribose polymerase inhibitor (PARPi; olaparib [Lynparza]) being licenced for the treatment of BRCA-mutated OC, has led to reconsideration of referral criteria for OC patients. Provided here is a review of the existing data and guidelines in the European Union, relating to recommendations, as well as considerations, for the referral of OC patients for BRCA genetic testing. Based on this review of newly updated guidance and up-to-date evidence, the following is recommended: all patients with invasive epithelial OC (excluding borderline or mucinous), including those with fallopian tube and peritoneal cancers, should be considered as candidates for referral for BRCA genetic testing, irrespective of age; genetic testing should ideally be offered at diagnosis, although patients can be referred at any stage; retrospective testing should be offered to patients in long-term follow-up because of the implications for family members and individual future breast cancer risk; and germline BRCA testing of a blood/saliva sample should initially be conducted and, if negative, tumour tissue should be tested (to identify non-germline [somatic] BRCA PARPi therapy candidates).
<h4>Background</h4>Patients treated with standard chemotherapy for metastatic or relapsed cervical cancer respond poorly to conventional chemotherapy (response achieved in 20-30% of patients) with an overall survival of less than 1 year. High tumour angiogenesis and high concentrations of intratumoural VEGF are adverse prognostic features. Cediranib is a potent tyrosine kinase inhibitor of VEGFR1, 2, and 3. In this trial, we aimed to assess the effect of the addition of cediranib to carboplatin and paclitaxel chemotherapy in patients with metastatic or recurrent cervical cancer.<h4>Methods</h4>In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial, which was done in 17 UK cancer treatment centres, patients aged 18 years or older initially diagnosed with metastatic carcinoma or who subsequently developed metastatic disease or local pelvic recurrence after radical treatment that was not amenable to exenterative surgery were recruited. Eligible patients received carboplatin AUC of 5 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) by infusion every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles and were randomised centrally (1:1) through a minimisation approach to receive cediranib 20 mg or placebo orally once daily until disease progression. The stratification factors were disease site, disease-free survival after primary therapy or primary stage IVb disease, number of lines of previous treatment, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and investigational site. All patients, investigators, and trial personnel were masked to study drug allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Efficacy analysis was by intention to treat, and the safety analysis included all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with the ISCRTN registry, number ISRCTN23516549, and has been completed.<h4>Findings</h4>Between Aug 19, 2010, and July 27, 2012, 69 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to cediranib (n=34) or placebo (n=35). After a median follow-up of 24·2 months (IQR 21·9-29·5), progression-free survival was longer in the cediranib group (median 8·1 months [80% CI 7·4-8·8]) than in the placebo group (6·7 months [6·2-7·2]), with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·58 (80% CI 0·40-0·85; one-sided p=0·032). Grade 3 or worse adverse events that occurred in the concurrent chemotherapy and trial drug period in more than 10% of patients were diarrhoea (five [16%] of 32 patients in the cediranib group vs one [3%] of 35 patients in the placebo group), fatigue (four [13%] vs two [6%]), leucopenia (five [16%] vs three [9%]), neutropenia (10 [31%] vs four [11%]), and febrile neutropenia (five [16%] vs none). The incidence of grade 2-3 hypertension was higher in the cediranib group than in the control group (11 [34%] vs four [11%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 18 patients in the placebo group and 19 patients in the cediranib group.<h4>Interpretation</h4>Cediranib has significant efficacy when added to carboplatin and paclitaxel in the treatment of metastatic or recurrent cervical cancer. This finding was accompanied by an increase in toxic effects (mainly diarrhoea, hypertension, and febrile neutropenia).<h4>Funding</h4>Cancer Research UK and AstraZeneca.
BACKGROUND: Early stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) is potentially curable with surgery. ESMO guidelines recommend cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) for completely resected stage II-III NSCLC. There is limited evidence for the use of adjuvant CT and/or radiotherapy (RT) in incompletely resected (R1) early stage NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A European survey of thoracic oncologists was conducted to evaluate use of adjuvant CT and RT for R1-resected NSCLC and to identify factors influencing treatment decisions. Demographics and information on clinical stage, regimens, cycles planned, radiotherapy sites, multidisciplinary management and discussion about inconclusive evidence with the patient were collected. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: 768 surveys were collected from 41 European countries. 82.9% of participants were medical oncologists; 49.3% ESMO members; 37.1% based in University Hospitals; 32.6% practicing oncology for over 15 years and 81.4% active in research. 91.4% of participants prescribed adjuvant CT and mostly cisplatin/vinorelbine (81.2%) or cisplatin/gemcitabine (42.9%). 85% discussed limited clinical evidence with the patient. In the univariate analysis, a statistically significant association with CT prescription was found for medical oncology specialty (p<0.001), ESMO membership (p<0.001), activity in clinical research (p=0.002) and increased frequency of ESMO guidelines consultation (p for trend <0.001). 48.3% of participants prescribed adjuvant RT and its prescription were associated with radiation oncology specialty (p<0.001), not being an ESMO member (p<0.001), years practicing specialty (p for trend=0.001), workload of lung cancer patients (p for trend=0.027) and decreased frequency in consulting ESMO guidelines (p<0.001). In the multivariate analysis, medical oncology and radiation oncology were the best discriminator for prescription of adjuvant CT and RT, respectively. CONCLUSION: This survey demonstrates that adjuvant CT and RT are commonly used in clinical practice for R1-resected NSCLC despite limited evidence. Prospective trials are necessary to clarify optimal management in this setting.
The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) is one of the leading societies of oncology professionals in the world. Approximately 30% of the 13 000 ESMO members are below the age of 40 and thus meet the society's definition of young oncologists (YOs). ESMO has identified the training and development of YOs as a priority and has therefore established a comprehensive career development programme. This includes a leadership development programme to help identify and develop the future leaders in oncology. Well-trained and highly motivated future generations of multidisciplinary oncologists are essential to ensure the optimal evolution of the field of oncology with the ultimate goal of providing the best possible care to patients with cancer. ESMO's career development portfolio is managed and continuously optimised by several dedicated committees composed of ESMO officers and is directly supervised by the ESMO Executive Board and the ESMO President. It offers unique resources for YOs at all stages of training and includes a broad variety of fellowship opportunities, educational courses, scientific meetings, publications and resources. In this article, we provide an overview of the activities and career development opportunities provided by ESMO to the next generation of oncologists.
The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) are publishing a new edition of the ESMO/ASCO Global Curriculum (GC) thanks to contribution of 64 ESMO-appointed and 32 ASCO-appointed authors. First published in 2004 and updated in 2010, the GC edition 2016 answers to the need for updated recommendations for the training of physicians in medical oncology by defining the standard to be fulfilled to qualify as medical oncologists. At times of internationalisation of healthcare and increased mobility of patients and physicians, the GC aims to provide state-of-the-art cancer care to all patients wherever they live. Recent progress in the field of cancer research has indeed resulted in diagnostic and therapeutic innovations such as targeted therapies as a standard therapeutic approach or personalised cancer medicine apart from the revival of immunotherapy, requiring specialised training for medical oncology trainees. Thus, several new chapters on technical contents such as molecular pathology, translational research or molecular imaging and on conceptual attitudes towards human principles like genetic counselling or survivorship have been integrated in the GC. The GC edition 2016 consists of 12 sections with 17 subsections, 44 chapters and 35 subchapters, respectively. Besides renewal in its contents, the GC underwent a principal formal change taking into consideration modern didactic principles. It is presented in a template-based format that subcategorises the detailed outcome requirements into learning objectives, awareness, knowledge and skills. Consecutive steps will be those of harmonising and implementing teaching and assessment strategies.
Flagellate linear hyperpigmentation can rarely be caused by the chemotherapy agent, bleomycin. Herein, we describe the case of a 20-year-old woman treated with bleomycin for an ovarian yolk sac tumor and review the prominent features of this form of dermatitis.
<h4>Background</h4>Median overall survival (OS) for women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) is ∼4 years, yet survival varies widely between patients. There are no well-established, gene expression signatures associated with prognosis. The aim of this study was to develop a robust prognostic signature for OS in patients with HGSOC.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>Expression of 513 genes, selected from a meta-analysis of 1455 tumours and other candidates, was measured using NanoString technology from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumour tissue collected from 3769 women with HGSOC from multiple studies. Elastic net regularization for survival analysis was applied to develop a prognostic model for 5-year OS, trained on 2702 tumours from 15 studies and evaluated on an independent set of 1067 tumours from six studies.<h4>Results</h4>Expression levels of 276 genes were associated with OS (false discovery rate < 0.05) in covariate-adjusted single-gene analyses. The top five genes were TAP1, ZFHX4, CXCL9, FBN1 and PTGER3 (P < 0.001). The best performing prognostic signature included 101 genes enriched in pathways with treatment implications. Each gain of one standard deviation in the gene expression score conferred a greater than twofold increase in risk of death [hazard ratio (HR) 2.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.02-2.71; P < 0.001]. Median survival [HR (95% CI)] by gene expression score quintile was 9.5 (8.3 to -), 5.4 (4.6-7.0), 3.8 (3.3-4.6), 3.2 (2.9-3.7) and 2.3 (2.1-2.6) years.<h4>Conclusion</h4>The OTTA-SPOT (Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium - Stratified Prognosis of Ovarian Tumours) gene expression signature may improve risk stratification in clinical trials by identifying patients who are least likely to achieve 5-year survival. The identified novel genes associated with the outcome may also yield opportunities for the development of targeted therapeutic approaches.
<h4>Purpose</h4>To investigate quality-adjusted progression-free survival (QA-PFS) and quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) in a post hoc exploratory analysis of the phase III ARIEL3 study of rucaparib maintenance treatment versus placebo.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>Patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian carcinoma were randomly assigned to rucaparib (600 mg twice per day) or placebo. QA-PFS was calculated as progression-free survival function × the 3-level version of the EQ-5D questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) index score function. Q-TWiST analyses were performed defining TOX as the mean duration in which a patient experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) or the mean duration in which a patient experienced grade ≥ 2 TEAEs of nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and asthenia. Q-TWiST was calculated as μTOX × TOX + TWiST, with μTOX calculated using EQ-5D-3L data.<h4>Results</h4>The visit cutoff was Apr 15, 2017. Mean QA-PFS was significantly longer with rucaparib versus placebo in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (375 randomly assigned to rucaparib <i>v</i> 189 randomly assigned to placebo; difference, 6.28 months [95% CI, 4.85 to 7.47 months]); <i>BRCA</i>-mutant cohort (130 rucaparib <i>v</i> 66 placebo; 9.37 months [95% CI, 6.65 to 11.85 months]); homologous recombination deficient (HRD) cohort (236 rucaparib <i>v</i> 118 placebo; 7.93 months [95% CI, 5.93 to 9.53 months]); and <i>BRCA</i> wild-type/loss of heterozygosity (LOH) low patient subgroup (107 rucaparib <i>v</i> 54 placebo; 2.71 months [95% CI, 0.31 to 4.44 months]). With TOX defined using grade ≥ 3 TEAEs, the difference in mean Q-TWiST (rucaparib <i>v</i> placebo) was 6.88 months (95% CI, 5.71 to 8.23 months), 9.73 months (95% CI, 7.10 to 11.94 months), 8.11 months (95% CI, 6.36 to 9.49 months), and 3.35 months (95% CI, 1.66 to 5.40 months) in the ITT population, <i>BRCA</i>-mutant cohort, HRD cohort, and <i>BRCA</i> wild-type/LOH low patient subgroup, respectively. Q-TWiST with TOX defined using select grade ≥ 2 TEAEs also consistently favored rucaparib.<h4>Conclusion</h4>The significant differences in QA-PFS and Q-TWiST confirm the benefit of rucaparib versus placebo in all predefined cohorts.
<h4>Purpose</h4>Low-grade serous ovarian carcinomas (LGSOCs) have historically low chemotherapy responses. Alterations affecting the MAPK pathway, most commonly KRAS/BRAF, are present in 30%-60% of LGSOCs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate binimetinib, a potent MEK1/2 inhibitor with demonstrated activity across multiple cancers, in LGSOC.<h4>Methods</h4>This was a 2:1 randomized study of binimetinib (45 mg twice daily) versus physician's choice chemotherapy (PCC). Eligible patients had recurrent measurable LGSOC after ≥ 1 prior platinum-based chemotherapy but ≤ 3 prior chemotherapy lines. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR); additional assessments included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), clinical-benefit rate, biomarkers, and safety.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 303 patients were randomly assigned to an arm of the study at the time of interim analysis (January 20, 2016). Median PFS by BICR was 9.1 months (95% CI, 7.3 to 11.3) for binimetinib and 10.6 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 14.5) for PCC (hazard ratio,1.21; 95%CI, 0.79 to 1.86), resulting in early study closure according to a prespecified futility boundary after 341 patients had enrolled. Secondary efficacy end points were similar in the two groups: ORR 16% (complete response [CR]/partial responses[PRs], 32) versus 13% (CR/PRs, 13); median DOR, 8.1 months (range, 0.03 to ≥ 12.0 months) versus 6.7 months (0.03 to ≥ 9.7 months); and median OS, 25.3 versus 20.8 months for binimetinib and PCC, respectively. Safety results were consistent with the known safety profile of binimetinib; the most common grade ≥ 3 event was increased blood creatine kinase level (26%). Post hoc analysis suggests a possible association between <i>KRAS</i> mutation and response to binimetinib. Results from an updated analysis (n = 341; January 2019) were consistent.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Although the MEK Inhibitor in Low-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer Study did not meet its primary end point, binimetinib showed activity in LGSOC across the efficacy end points evaluated. A higher response to chemotherapy than expected was observed and <i>KRAS</i> mutation might predict response to binimetinib.
<h4>Purpose</h4>To provide recommendations on the use of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) for management of epithelial ovarian, tubal, or primary peritoneal cancer (EOC).<h4>Methods</h4>Randomized, controlled, and open-labeled trials published from 2011 through 2020 were identified in a literature search. Guideline recommendations were based on the review of the evidence, US Food and Drug Administration approvals, and consensus when evidence was lacking.<h4>Results</h4>The systematic review identified 17 eligible trials.<h4>Recommendations</h4>The guideline pertains to patients who are PARPi naïve. All patients with newly diagnosed, stage III-IV EOC whose disease is in complete or partial response to first-line, platinum-based chemotherapy with high-grade serous or endometrioid EOC should be offered PARPi maintenance therapy with niraparib. For patients with germline or somatic pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in <i>BRCA1</i> (g/s<i>BRCA</i>1) or <i>BRCA2</i> (g/s<i>BRCA</i>2) genes should be treated with olaparib. The addition of olaparib to bevacizumab may be offered to patients with stage III-IV EOC with g/s<i>BRCA1/</i>2 and/or genomic instability and a partial or complete response to chemotherapy plus bevacizumab combination. Maintenance therapy (second line or more) with single-agent PARPi may be offered for patients with EOC who have not received a PARPi and have responded to platinum-based therapy regardless of <i>BRCA</i> mutation status. Treatment with a PARPi should be offered to patients with recurrent EOC that has not recurred within 6 months of platinum-based therapy, who have not received a PARPi and have a g/s<i>BRCA1/2</i>, or whose tumor demonstrates genomic instability. PARPis are not recommended for use in combination with chemotherapy, other targeted agents, or immune-oncology agents in the recurrent setting outside the context of a clinical trial. Recommendations for managing specific adverse events are presented. Data to support reuse of PARPis in any setting are needed.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gynecologic-cancer-guidelines.
<h4>Purpose</h4>In SOLO1, maintenance olaparib (300 mg twice daily) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with newly diagnosed <i>BRCA1</i>- and/or <i>BRCA2</i>-mutated advanced ovarian cancer compared with placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.30; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.41; median not reached <i>v</i> 13.8 months). We investigated PFS in SOLO1 for subgroups of patients based on preselected baseline factors.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>Investigator-assessed PFS subgroup analyses of SOLO1 included clinical response after platinum-based chemotherapy (complete [CR] or partial response [PR]), surgery type (upfront or interval surgery), disease status after surgery (residual or no gross residual disease), and BRCA mutation status (<i>BRCA1</i> or <i>BRCA2</i>). Additionally, we evaluated PFS in patients with stage III disease who underwent upfront surgery and had no gross residual disease. We also report objective response rate.<h4>Results</h4>The risk of disease progression or death was reduced with olaparib compared with placebo by 69% (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.46) and 63% (HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.58) in patients undergoing upfront or interval surgery; 56% (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.77) and 67% (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.46) in patients with residual or no residual disease after surgery; 66% (HR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.47) and 69% in women with clinical CR or PR at baseline (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.52); and 59% (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.56) and 80% (HR 0.20; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.37) in patients with a <i>BRCA1</i> or <i>BRCA2</i> mutation, respectively.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer achieve substantial benefit from maintenance olaparib treatment regardless of baseline surgery outcome, response to chemotherapy, or BRCA mutation type.
<h4>Background</h4>In the phase 3 trial ARIEL3, maintenance treatment with the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor rucaparib provided clinical benefit versus placebo for patients with recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Here, we evaluate the impact of age on the clinical utility of rucaparib in ARIEL3.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian carcinoma with ≥2 prior platinum-based chemotherapies who responded to their last platinum-based therapy were enrolled in ARIEL3 and randomized 2:1 to rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or placebo. Exploratory, post hoc analyses of progression-free survival (PFS), patient-centered outcomes (quality-adjusted PFS [QA-PFS] and quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity [Q-TWiST]), and safety were conducted in three age subgroups (<65 years, 65-74 years, and ≥75 years).<h4>Results</h4>Investigator-assessed PFS was significantly longer with rucaparib than placebo in patients aged <65 years (rucaparib n = 237 vs placebo n = 117; median, 11.1 vs 5.4 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.33 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.25-0.43]; P < 0.0001) and 65-74 years (n = 113 vs n = 64; median, 8.3 vs 5.3 months; HR 0.43 [95% CI 0.29-0.63]; P < 0.0001) and numerically longer in patients aged ≥75 years (n = 25 vs n = 8; median, 9.2 vs 5.5 months; HR 0.47 [95% CI 0.16-1.35]; P = 0.1593). QA-PFS and Q-TWiST were significantly longer with rucaparib than placebo across all age subgroups. Safety of rucaparib was generally similar across the age subgroups.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Efficacy, patient-centered outcomes, and safety of rucaparib were similar between age subgroups, indicating that all eligible women with recurrent ovarian cancer should be offered this therapeutic option, irrespective of age. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01968213.
We established an international consortium to review and discuss relevant clinical evidence in order to develop expert consensus statements related to cancer management during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-related disease (COVID-19) pandemic. The steering committee prepared 10 working packages addressing significant clinical questions from diagnosis to surgery. During a virtual consensus meeting of 62 global experts and one patient advocate, led by the European Society for Medical Oncology, statements were discussed, amended and voted upon. When consensus could not be reached, the panel revised statements until a consensus was reached. Overall, the expert panel agreed on 28 consensus statements that can be used to overcome many of the clinical and technical areas of uncertainty ranging from diagnosis to therapeutic planning and treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic.
<h4>Purpose</h4>Gene expression-based molecular subtypes of high-grade serous tubo-ovarian cancer (HGSOC), demonstrated across multiple studies, may provide improved stratification for molecularly targeted trials. However, evaluation of clinical utility has been hindered by nonstandardized methods, which are not applicable in a clinical setting. We sought to generate a clinical grade minimal gene set assay for classification of individual tumor specimens into HGSOC subtypes and confirm previously reported subtype-associated features.<h4>Experimental design</h4>Adopting two independent approaches, we derived and internally validated algorithms for subtype prediction using published gene expression data from 1,650 tumors. We applied resulting models to NanoString data on 3,829 HGSOCs from the Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium. We further developed, confirmed, and validated a reduced, minimal gene set predictor, with methods suitable for a single-patient setting.<h4>Results</h4>Gene expression data were used to derive the predictor of high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma molecular subtype (PrOTYPE) assay. We established a <i>de facto</i> standard as a consensus of two parallel approaches. PrOTYPE subtypes are significantly associated with age, stage, residual disease, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, and outcome. The locked-down clinical grade PrOTYPE test includes a model with 55 genes that predicted gene expression subtype with >95% accuracy that was maintained in all analytic and biological validations.<h4>Conclusions</h4>We validated the PrOTYPE assay following the Institute of Medicine guidelines for the development of omics-based tests. This fully defined and locked-down clinical grade assay will enable trial design with molecular subtype stratification and allow for objective assessment of the predictive value of HGSOC molecular subtypes in precision medicine applications.<i>See related commentary by McMullen et al., p. 5271</i>.
<h4>Background</h4>We investigated the safety and efficacy of a combination of the oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor, nintedanib (BIBF 1120) with oral cyclophosphamide in patients with relapsed ovarian cancer.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>Patients with relapsed ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer received oral cyclophosphamide (100 mg o.d.) and were randomised (1,1) to also have either oral nintedanib or placebo. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression free survival (PFS), response rate, toxicity, and quality of life.<h4>Results</h4>117 patients were randomised, 3 did not start trial treatment, median age 64 years. Forty-five (39%) had received ≥5 lines chemotherapy. 30% had received prior bevacizumab. The median OS was 6.8 (nintedanib) versus 6.4 (placebo) months (hazard ratio 1.08; 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.62; P = 0.72). The 6-month PFS rate was 29.6% versus 22.8% (P = 0.57). Grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 64% (nintedanib) versus 54% (placebo) of patients (P = 0.28); the most frequent G3/4 toxicities were lymphopenia (18.6% nintedanib versus 16.4% placebo), diarrhoea (13.6% versus 0%), neutropenia (11.9% versus 0%), fatigue (10.2% versus 9.1%), and vomiting (10.2% versus 7.3%). Patients who had received prior bevacizumab treatment had 52 days less time on treatment (P < 0.01). 26 patients (23%) took oral cyclophosphamide for ≥6 months. There were no differences in quality of life between treatment arms.<h4>Conclusions</h4>This is the largest reported cohort of patients with relapsed ovarian cancer treated with oral cyclophosphamide. Nintedanib did not improve outcomes when added to oral cyclophosphamide. Although not significant, more patients than expected remained on treatment for ≥6 months. This may reflect a higher proportion of patients with more indolent disease or the higher dose of cyclophosphamide used.<h4>Clinical trial registration</h4>Clinicaltrials.govNCT01610869.
<h4>Importance</h4>Deficient mismatch mutation repair mechanisms may sensitize endometrial cancers to anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) therapies. Dostarlimab (TSR-042) is an investigational anti-PD-1 antibody that binds with high affinity to the PD-1 receptor.<h4>Objective</h4>To assess the antitumor activity and safety of dostarlimab for patients with deficient mismatch repair endometrial cancer.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>This ongoing, open-label, single-group, multicenter study began part 1 on March 7, 2016, and began enrolling patients with deficient mismatch mutation repair endometrial cancer on May 8, 2017. Median follow-up was 11.2 months (range, 0.03 [ongoing] to 22.11 [ongoing] months; based on radiological assessments). Statistical analysis was performed July 8 to August 9, 2019.<h4>Interventions</h4>Patients received 500 mg of dostarlimab intravenously every 3 weeks for 4 doses, then 1000 mg every 6 weeks until disease progression, treatment discontinuation, or withdrawal.<h4>Main outcomes and measures</h4>The primary end point was objective response rate and duration of response by blinded independent central review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1.<h4>Results</h4>As of the data cutoff, 104 women (median age, 64.0 years [range, 38-80 years]) with deficient mismatch mutation repair endometrial cancers were enrolled and treated with dostarlimab. Of these, 71 had measurable disease at baseline and at 6 months or more of follow-up and were included in the analysis. There was a confirmed response in 30 patients (objective response rate, 42.3%; 95% CI, 30.6%-54.6%); 9 patients (12.7%) had a confirmed complete response, and 21 patients (29.6%) had a confirmed partial response. Responses were durable; the median duration of response was not reached (median follow-up was 11.2 months). The estimated likelihood of maintaining a response was 96.4% at 6 months and 76.8% at 12 months. Anemia (3 of 104 [2.9%]), colitis (2 of 104 [1.9%]), and diarrhea (2 of 104 [1.9%]) were the most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events.<h4>Conclusions and relevance</h4>In this nonrandomized trial, dostarlimab was associated with clinically meaningful and durable antitumor activity with an acceptable safety profile for patients with deficient mismatch mutation repair endometrial cancers after prior platinum-based chemotherapy.<h4>Trial registration</h4>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02715284.
<h4>Background</h4>Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) potentially interrogates site-specific response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).<h4>Methods</h4>Participants with newly diagnosed EOC due for platinum-based chemotherapy and interval debulking surgery were recruited prospectively in a multicentre study (n = 47 participants). Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and solid tumour volume (up to 10 lesions per participant) were obtained from DW-MRI before and after NAC (including double-baseline for repeatability assessment in n = 19). Anatomically matched lesions were analysed after surgical excision (65 lesions obtained from 25 participants). A trained algorithm determined tumour cell fraction, percentage tumour and percentage necrosis on histology. Whole-lesion post-NAC ADC and pre/post-NAC ADC changes were compared with histological metrics (residual tumour/necrosis) for each tumour site (ovarian, omental, peritoneal, lymph node).<h4>Results</h4>Tumour volume reduced at all sites after NAC. ADC increased between pre- and post-NAC measurements. Post-NAC ADC correlated negatively with tumour cell fraction. Pre/post-NAC changes in ADC correlated positively with percentage necrosis. Significant correlations were driven by peritoneal lesions.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Following NAC in EOC, the ADC (measured using DW-MRI) increases differentially at disease sites despite similar tumour shrinkage, making its utility site-specific. After NAC, ADC correlates negatively with tumour cell fraction; change in ADC correlates positively with percentage necrosis.<h4>Clinical trial registration</h4>ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01505829.
Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor maintenance therapy is the latest breakthrough in the management of newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. The results of the SOLO-1 trial in 2018 led to European Medicines Agency and Food and Drug Administration approval of olaparib as first-line maintenance therapy in patients with <i>BRCA1/2</i> mutation, establishing a new standard of care. Subsequently, the results of three phase III trials (PRIMA, PAOLA-1, VELIA) evaluating the use of first-line PARP inhibitors beyond patients with <i>BRCA1/2</i> mutations and as combination strategies were presented in 2019, leading to the recent approval of maintenance niraparib irrespective of biomarker status and olaparib in combination with bevacizumab in homologous recombination deficiency-positive-associated advanced ovarian cancer. An <i>ESMO Open - Cancer Horizons</i> round-table expert panel discussed the four phase III trials of first-line PARP inhibitor therapy and how they are changing the clinical management of advanced ovarian cancer.
<b>Objectives: </b>To report clinician-perceived changes to cancer service delivery in response to COVID-19.<br><br><b>Design: </b>Multidisciplinary Australasian cancer clinician survey in collaboration with the European Society of Medical Oncology.<br><br><b>Setting: </b>Between May and June 2020 clinicians from 70 countries were surveyed; majority from Europe (n=196; 39%) with 1846 COVID-19 cases per million people, Australia (AUS)/New Zealand (NZ) (n=188; 38%) with 267/236 per million and Asia (n=75; 15%) with 121 per million at time of survey distribution.<br><br><b>Participants: </b>Medical oncologists (n=372; 74%), radiation oncologists (n=91; 18%) and surgical oncologists (n=38; 8%).<br><br><b>Results: </b>Eighty-nine per cent of clinicians reported altering clinical practices; more commonly among those with versus without patients diagnosed with COVID-19 (n=142; 93% vs n=225; 86%, p=0.03) but regardless of community transmission levels (p=0.26). More European clinicians (n=111; 66.1%) had treated patients diagnosed with COVID-19 compared with Asia (n=20; 27.8%) and AUS/NZ (n=8; 4.8%), p<0.001. Many clinicians (n=307; 71.4%) reported concerns that reduced access to standard treatments during the pandemic would negatively impact patient survival. The reported proportion of consultations using telehealth increased by 7.7-fold, with 25.1% (n=108) of clinicians concerned that patient survival would be worse due to this increase. Clinicians reviewed a median of 10 fewer outpatients/week (including non-face to face) compared with prior to the pandemic, translating to 5010 fewer specialist oncology visits per week among the surveyed group. Mental health was negatively impacted for 52.6% (n=190) of clinicians.<br><br><b>Conclusion: </b>Clinicians reported widespread changes to oncology services, in regions of both high and low COVID-19 case numbers. Clinician concerns of potential negative impacts on patient outcomes warrant objective assessment, with system and policy implications for healthcare delivery at large.
<h4>Introduction</h4>Over one million people in the UK identify as LGBTQ+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning). Research has shown that this population experience differing cancer risk factors compared with non-LGBTQ+ patients and persistent inequalities in cancer care. Literature concerning the knowledge of oncologists of this group's healthcare needs is limited; our study aimed to evaluate knowledge, attitudes and behaviours of UK oncologists about LGBTQ+ patients.<h4>Methods</h4>A 53-question survey was delivered via a secure online platform. Questions covered respondent demographics, knowledge, attitudes and behaviours with the majority of responses on a Likert scale. Oncologists were recruited via email from professional bodies and social media promotion. Informed consent was sought and responses fully anonymised. Multifactorial ordinal logistic regression and Fisher's exact test were used to assess for interactions between demographics and responses with Holm-Bonferroni multiple testing correction.<h4>Results</h4>258 fully completed responses were received. Respondents had a median age of 43 years (range 28-69); 65% consultants and 35% registrars; 42% medical, and 54% clinical, oncologists. 84% felt comfortable treating LGBTQ+ patients but only 8% agreed that they were confident in their knowledge of specific LGBTQ+ patient healthcare needs. There were low rates of routine enquiry about sexual orientation (5%), gender identity (3%) and preferred pronouns (2%). 68% of oncologists felt LGBTQ+ healthcare needs should be a mandatory component of postgraduate training.<h4>Conclusions</h4>This survey showed that UK oncologists feel comfortable treating LGBTQ+ patients but may fail to identify these patients in their clinic, making it more difficult to meet LGBTQ+ healthcare needs. There is self-awareness of deficits in knowledge of LGBTQ+ healthcare and a willingness to address this through postgraduate training. Educational resources collated and developed in accordance with this study would potentially improve the confidence of oncologists in treating LGBTQ+ patients and the cancer care these patients receive.
Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have transformed the management of recurrent ovarian cancer in patients with BRCA-mutations and beyond. Olaparib was the first PARP inhibitor to gain approval as maintenance therapy for patients with newly diagnosed, advanced BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer establishing a new standard of care. At the end of 2020, as a result of the SOLO1, PRIMA, and PAOLA-1 phase III trials, we are now in an era where three maintenance PARP inhibitor strategies have FDA and European Medicines Agency approval in the first-line setting. In this review, we provide an overview of the key PARP inhibitor trials that have changed clinical practice, discuss directing therapy according to biomarker status (BRCA and homologous recombination deficiency) and future strategies in ovarian cancer and other gynecological malignancies.
<h4>Background</h4>Recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) remains difficult to treat, with an urgent need for more therapy options. Androgens bind to the androgen receptor (AR), commonly expressed in EOC. CYP17 inhibitor abiraterone irreversibly inhibits androgen biosynthesis. The Cancer of the Ovary Abiraterone (CORAL) trial was designed to evaluate the clinical activity of abiraterone in EOC.<h4>Patients & methods</h4>CORAL was a multi-centre, open-label, non-randomised, 2-stage phase II clinical trial. Eligible patients had progression within 12 months of last systemic therapy and no prior hormonal anti-cancer agents. Patients received abiraterone 1000 mg daily plus 5 mg prednisone until progression. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) according to combined Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours/Gynaecological Cancer Intergroup (RECIST/GCIG) criteria at 12 weeks. Secondary endpoints included clinical benefit rate (CBR) at 12 weeks.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 42 patients were recruited; median age 65 (range 34-85) years; 37 (88.1%) had high-grade serous tumours; 20 (48%) had at least three prior lines of therapy; 29/40 (72.5%) were AR+. In stage 1, 1/26 response was observed (in an AR+, low-grade serous EOC); response lasted 47 weeks. Overall, 12 week ORR was 1/42 (2%), CBR was 11/42 (26%) (8/29 (28%) in AR+ patients). Disease control was ⩾6 months for 4/29 (14%). One patient (AR+, low-grade serous) had a RECIST response at 82 weeks. Four (10%) had grade ⩾3 hypokalaemia; 11 (26%) had dose delays.<h4>Conclusions</h4>CORAL represents the first trial of an AR targeted agent in ovarian cancer. While responses were rare, a subset of patients achieved sustained clinical benefit. Targeting AR in EOC including low-grade serous cancer warrants further investigation.<h4>Trial registration</h4>CORAL is registered on the ISRCTN registry: ISRCTN63407050; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN63407050.
<h4>Background</h4>The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on well-being has the potential for serious negative consequences on work, home life, and patient care. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Resilience Task Force collaboration set out to investigate well-being in oncology over time since COVID-19.<h4>Methods</h4>Two online anonymous surveys were conducted (survey I: April/May 2020; survey II: July/August 2020). Statistical analyses were performed to examine group differences, associations, and predictors of key outcomes: (i) well-being/distress [expanded Well-being Index (eWBI; 9 items)]; (ii) burnout (1 item from eWBI); (iii) job performance since COVID-19 (JP-CV; 2 items).<h4>Results</h4>Responses from survey I (1520 participants from 101 countries) indicate that COVID-19 is impacting oncology professionals; in particular, 25% of participants indicated being at risk of distress (poor well-being, eWBI ≥ 4), 38% reported feeling burnout, and 66% reported not being able to perform their job compared with the pre-COVID-19 period. Higher JP-CV was associated with better well-being and not feeling burnout (P < 0.01). Differences were seen in well-being and JP-CV between countries (P < 0.001) and were related to country COVID-19 crude mortality rate (P < 0.05). Consistent predictors of well-being, burnout, and JP-CV were psychological resilience and changes to work hours. In survey II, among 272 participants who completed both surveys, while JP-CV improved (38% versus 54%, P < 0.001), eWBI scores ≥4 and burnout rates were significantly higher compared with survey I (22% versus 31%, P = 0.01; and 35% versus 49%, P = 0.001, respectively), suggesting well-being and burnout have worsened over a 3-month period during the COVID-19 pandemic.<h4>Conclusion</h4>In the first and largest global survey series, COVID-19 is impacting well-being and job performance of oncology professionals. JP-CV has improved but risk of distress and burnout has increased over time. Urgent measures to address well-being and improve resilience are essential.
Older women with ovarian cancer have disproportionately poorer survival outcomes than their younger counterparts and receive less treatment. In order to understand where the gaps lie in the treatment of older patients, studies incorporating more detailed assessment of baseline characteristics and treatment delivery beyond the scope of most cancer registries are required. We aimed to assess the proportion of women over the age of 65 who are offered and receive standard of care for first-line ovarian cancer at two UK NHS Cancer Centres over a 5-year period (December 2009 to August 2015). Standard of care treatment was defined as a combination of cytoreductive surgery and if indicated platinum-based chemotherapy (combination or single-agent). Sixty-five percent of patients aged 65 and above received standard of care treatment. Increasing age was associated with lower rates of receiving standard of care (35% > 80 years old versus 78% of 65-69-year-olds, <i>p</i> = 0.000). Older women were less likely to complete the planned chemotherapy course (<i>p</i> = 0.034). The oldest women continue to receive lower rates of standard care compared to younger women. Once adjusted for Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status and first-line treatment received, age was no longer an independent risk factor for poorer overall survival. Optimisation of vulnerable patients utilising a comprehensive geriatric assessment and directed interventions to facilitate the delivery of standard of care treatment could help narrow the survival discrepancy between the oldest patients and their younger counterparts.
<h4>Background</h4>Aromatase inhibitors are standard of care for low-grade endometrial stromal sarcomas (LGESS), based on very high response rates reported in retrospective studies. We evaluated the activity of anastrozole in recurrent/metastatic LGESS patients enrolled in PARAGON, a basket trial of anastrozole in estrogen receptor (ER±)/progesterone receptor (PR+) gynecological cancers.<h4>Method</h4>An investigator-initiated, single-arm, prospective open-label trial of anastrozole 1 mg/day in patients with ER ± PR + ve LGESS with measurable disease, treated until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was clinical benefit (complete/partial response + stable disease) rate (CBR) at 3 months. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival (PFS), quality of life and toxicity.<h4>Results</h4>15 eligible patients were enrolled. CBR at 3 months was 73% (95% CI: 48-89.1%); unchanged at 6 months. Best response was 26.7%, including complete response in one (6.7%; 95% CI 1.2-29.8%), partial response in three (20%, 95% CI 7.1-45.2%) and stable disease in seven (46.7%). Four patients ceased treatment by 3 months due to progression. Median PFS was not reached (25th percentile: 2.9 months (95% CI: 1.2-NR)). PFS was 73.3%, 73.3% and 66% at 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively. Six patients remained on treatment for an average of 44.2 months (range 34.5-63.6) up until data cut. Toxicity was as expected, with 3 patients stopping due to adverse effects.<h4>Conclusion</h4>The 26.7% objective response rate with anastrozole is lower than reported in retrospective series, but the CBR was high and durable. The results underscore the importance of prospective trials in rare cancers.
Rapid and continuing advances in biomarker testing are not being matched by take-up in health systems, and this is hampering both patient care and innovation. It also risks costing health systems the opportunity to make their services more efficient and, over time, more economical. This paper sets out the potential of biomarker testing, the unfolding precision and range of possible diagnosis and prediction, and the many obstacles to adoption. It offers case studies of biomarker testing in breast, ovarian, prostate, lung, thyroid and colon cancers, and derives specific lessons as to the potential and actual use of each of them. It also draws lessons about how to improve access and alignment, and to remedy the data deficiencies that impede development. And it suggests solutions to outstanding issues - notably including funding and the tangled web of obtaining reimbursement or equivalent coverage that Europe's fragmented health system implies. It urges a European evolution towards an initial minimum testing scenario, which would guarantee universal access to a suite of biomarker tests for the currently most common conditions, and, further into the future, to an optimum testing scenario in which a much wider range of biomarker tests would be introduced and become part of a more sophisticated health system articulated around personalised medicine. For exploiting genomics to the full, it argues the need for a new policy framework for Europe. Biomarker testing is not an issue that can be treated in isolation, since the purpose of testing is to improve health. Its use is therefore always closely linked to specific health challenges and needs to be viewed in the broader policy context in the EU and more widely. The paper is the result of extensive engagement with experts and decision makers to develop the framework, and consequently represents a wide consensus of views on how healthcare systems should respond from push and pull factors at local, national and cross-border and EU level. It contains strong views and clear recommendations springing from the convictions of patients, clinicians, academics, medicines authorities, HTA bodies, payers, the diagnostic, pharmaceutical and ICT industries, and national policy makers.
Older women with ovarian cancer more often receive less intensive treatment and early discontinuation compared to younger women. There is little understanding of older women's treatment experience and whether this contributes to declining intensive treatment. We aimed to explore the lived experience of older patients with advanced ovarian cancer undergoing chemotherapy, their treatment preferences and treatment burden. We conducted a phenomenological qualitative study with 15 women who had completed at least three cycles of first-line chemotherapy for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, aged 65 years or older at the first cycle, at one tertiary cancer centre. We conducted interviews and focus groups and analysed the transcripts using inductive thematic analysis. Women reported a strong preference for active treatment despite treatment burden and toxicities. Participants undertook treatment to lengthen their lives for themselves and their families. Participants did not see age as a barrier to treatment. Patients expressed determination not to let cancer interfere with daily life. Women felt overwhelmed with information and struggled with daily tasks due to fatigue. Logistical issues, such as transportation and ineffective communication between healthcare providers, caused substantial distress. Despite these logistical burdens and toxicities, participants were positive about their care experience and desire for anticancer treatment. Older women may benefit from additional support to facilitate effective communication during the early stages of treatment.
<h4>Objective</h4>Adolescents and young adults with cancer face unique psychosocial and practical issues. However, patients across this group encounter different life experiences, cancer diagnoses and treatment settings given the tailored services for patients ages 15 to 24. Here, we qualitatively explore the psychosocial experiences and practical challenges of young adults (YAs) with cancer diagnosed between ages 25 and 39 in the United Kingdom.<h4>Methods</h4>We invited YAs diagnosed with cancer in the 5 years prior to enrolment at participating sites to take part in semi-structured interviews or focus groups. Transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Two YA patients reviewed the results to ensure robustness.<h4>Results</h4>Sixty-five YAs with varied diagnoses participated. Participants struggled to balance work, childcare and financial solvency with treatment. The halt in family and work life as well as changes in image and ability threatened participants' identity and perceived 'normality' as a YA, however, these also stimulated positive changes. YAs experienced social isolation from friends and family, including children. Many struggled to cope with uncertainty around treatment outcomes and disease recurrence.<h4>Conclusion</h4>The disruption of family and work life can lead to age-specific issues in YAs diagnosed with cancer. Age-tailored psychological and practical services must be considered.
<h4>Background</h4>In the phase 3 SOLO1 trial, maintenance olaparib provided a significant progression-free survival benefit versus placebo in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation in response after platinum-based chemotherapy. We analysed health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and patient-centred outcomes in SOLO1, and the effect of radiological disease progression on health status.<h4>Methods</h4>SOLO1 is a randomised, double-blind, international trial done in 118 centres and 15 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older; had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-1; had newly diagnosed, advanced, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer, primary peritoneal cancer, or fallopian tube cancer with a BRCA mutation; and were in clinical complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to either 300 mg olaparib tablets or placebo twice per day using an interactive voice and web response system and were treated for up to 2 years. Treatment assignment was masked for patients and for clinicians giving the interventions, and those collecting and analysing the data. Randomisation was stratified by response to platinum-based chemotherapy (clinical complete or partial response). HRQOL was a secondary endpoint and the prespecified primary HRQOL endpoint was the change from baseline in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian Cancer Trial Outcome Index (TOI) score for the first 24 months. TOI scores range from 0 to 100 (higher scores indicated better HRQOL), with a clinically meaningful difference defined as a difference of at least 10 points. Prespecified exploratory endpoints were quality-adjusted progression-free survival and time without significant symptoms of toxicity (TWiST). HRQOL endpoints were analysed in all randomly assigned patients. The trial is ongoing but closed to new participants. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01844986.<h4>Findings</h4>Between Sept 3, 2013, and March 6, 2015, 1084 patients were enrolled. 693 patients were ineligible, leaving 391 eligible patients who were randomly assigned to olaparib (n=260) or placebo (n=131; one placebo patient withdrew before receiving any study treatment), with a median duration of follow-up of 40·7 months (IQR 34·9-42·9) for olaparib and 41·2 months (32·2-41·6) for placebo. There was no clinically meaningful change in TOI score at 24 months within or between the olaparib and placebo groups (adjusted mean change in score from baseline over 24 months was 0·30 points [95% CI -0·72 to 1·32] in the olaparib group vs 3·30 points [1·84 to 4·76] in the placebo group; between-group difference of -3·00, 95% CI -4·78 to -1·22; p=0·0010). Mean quality-adjusted progression-free survival (olaparib 29·75 months [95% CI 28·20-31·63] vs placebo 17·58 [15·05-20·18]; difference 12·17 months [95% CI 9·07-15·11], p<0·0001) and the mean duration of TWiST (olaparib 33·15 months [95% CI 30·82-35·49] vs placebo 20·24 months [17·36-23·11]; difference 12·92 months [95% CI 9·30-16·54]; p<0·0001) were significantly longer with olaparib than with placebo.<h4>Interpretation</h4>The substantial progression-free survival benefit provided by maintenance olaparib in the newly diagnosed setting was achieved with no detrimental effect on patients' HRQOL and was supported by clinically meaningful quality-adjusted progression-free survival and TWiST benefits with maintenance olaparib versus placebo.<h4>Funding</h4>AstraZeneca and Merck Sharp & Dohme.
<h4>Aims</h4>Adolescents and young adults aged 15-39 years with cancer face unique medical, practical and psychosocial issues. In the UK, principal treatment centres and programmes have been designed to care for teenage and young adult patients aged 13-24 years in an age-appropriate manner. However, for young adults (YAs) aged 25-39 years with cancer, little access to age-specific support is available. The aim of this study was to examine this possible gap by qualitatively exploring YA care experiences, involving patients as research partners in the analysis to ensure robust results.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>We conducted a phenomenological qualitative study with YAs diagnosed with any cancer type between ages 25 and 39 years old in the last 5 years. Participants took part in interviews or focus groups and data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Results were shaped in an iterative process with the initial coders and four YA patients who did not participate in the study to improve the rigor of the results.<h4>Results</h4>Sixty-five YAs with a range of tumour types participated. We identified seven themes and 13 subthemes. YAs found navigating the healthcare system difficult and commonly experienced prolonged diagnostic pathways. Participants felt under-informed about clinical details and the long-term implications of side-effects on daily life. YAs found online resources overwhelming but also a source of information and treatment support. Some patients regretted not discussing fertility before cancer treatment or felt uninformed or rushed when making fertility preservation decisions. A lack of age-tailored content or age-specific groups deterred YAs from accessing psychological support and rehabilitation services.<h4>Conclusions</h4>YAs with cancer may miss some benefits provided to teenagers and young adults in age-tailored cancer services. Improving services for YAs in adult settings should focus on provision of age-specific information and access to existing relevant support.
<h4>Background</h4>Mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV) is an antibody-drug conjugate comprising a folate receptor alpha (FRα)-binding antibody, cleavable linker, and the maytansinoid DM4, a potent tubulin-targeting agent. The randomized, open-label, phase III study FORWARD I compared MIRV and investigator's choice chemotherapy in patients with platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).<h4>Patients and methods</h4>Eligible patients with 1-3 prior lines of therapy and whose tumors were positive for FRα expression were randomly assigned, in a 2 : 1 ratio, to receive MIRV (6 mg/kg, adjusted ideal body weight) or chemotherapy (paclitaxel, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, or topotecan). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival [PFS, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, blinded independent central review] in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and in the prespecified FRα high population.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 366 patients were randomized; 243 received MIRV and 109 received chemotherapy. The primary endpoint, PFS, did not reach statistical significance in either the ITT [hazard ratio (HR), 0.98, P = 0.897] or the FRα high population (HR, 0.69, P = 0.049). Superior outcomes for MIRV over chemotherapy were observed in all secondary endpoints in the FRα high population including improved objective response rate (24% versus 10%), CA-125 responses (53% versus 25%), and patient-reported outcomes (27% versus 13%). Fewer treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events (25.1% versus 44.0%), and fewer events leading to dose reduction (19.8% versus 30.3%) and treatment discontinuation (4.5% versus 8.3%) were seen with MIRV compared with chemotherapy.<h4>Conclusions</h4>In patients with platinum-resistant EOC, MIRV did not result in a significant improvement in PFS compared with chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints consistently favored MIRV, particularly in patients with high FRα expression. MIRV showed a differentiated and more manageable safety profile than chemotherapy.
Patients with cancer are currently prioritized in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination programs globally, which includes administration of mRNA vaccines. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) has not been reported with mRNA vaccines and is an extremely rare immune-related adverse event of immune checkpoint inhibitors. We present a case of CRS that occurred 5 d after vaccination with BTN162b2 (tozinameran)-the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA COVID-19 vaccine-in a patient with colorectal cancer on long-standing anti-PD-1 monotherapy. The CRS was evidenced by raised inflammatory markers, thrombocytopenia, elevated cytokine levels (IFN-γ/IL-2R/IL-18/IL-16/IL-10) and steroid responsiveness. The close temporal association of vaccination and diagnosis of CRS in this case suggests that CRS was a vaccine-related adverse event; with anti-PD1 blockade as a potential contributor. Overall, further prospective pharmacovigillence data are needed in patients with cancer, but the benefit-risk profile remains strongly in favor of COVID-19 vaccination in this population.
Ovarian cancer is a deadly malignancy with a growing therapeutic armamentarium, though achieving sustained benefit in the clinic remains largely elusive. Through biomarker and genetic analysis, several pathways of resistance and sensitivity to commonly used therapeutics have been identified, expanding the potential of identifying unique drug combinations and indicating new directions for improving clinical outcomes. Here, we review the mechanisms of angiogenic response and antiangiogenic therapy in ovarian cancer, as well as the interactions it exhibits with the immune and DNA damage response pathways. We discuss results from clinical trials examining the combinations of antiangiogenics, PARP inhibitors, and immune checkpoint inhibitors are also discussed, as well as several ongoing trials.
<h4>Introduction</h4>In ARIEL3 (NCT01968213), the poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor rucaparib significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo regardless of biomarker status when used as maintenance treatment for recurrent ovarian cancer. The aim of the current analyses was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rucaparib in subgroups based on progression-free interval following penultimate platinum, number of prior chemotherapies, and prior use of bevacizumab.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients were randomized 2:1 to rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or placebo. Within subgroups, progression-free survival was assessed in prespecified, nested cohorts: <i>BRCA</i>-mutant, homologous recombination deficient (<i>BRCA</i>-mutant or wild-type <i>BRCA</i>/high genomic loss of heterozygosity), and the intent-to-treat population.<h4>Results</h4>In the intent-to-treat population, median investigator-assessed progression-free survival was 8.2 months with rucaparib versus 4.1 months with placebo (n=151 vs n=76; HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.46, p<0.0001) for patients with progression-free interval 6 to ≤12 months, and 13.6 versus 5.6 months (n=224 vs n=113; HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.52, p<0.0001) for those with progression-free interval >12 months. Median progression-free survival was 10.4 versus 5.4 months (n=231 vs n=124; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.54, p<0.0001) for patients who had received two prior chemotherapies, and 11.1 versus 5.3 months (n=144 vs n=65; HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.41, p<0.0001) for those who had received ≥3 prior chemotherapies. Median progression-free survival was 10.3 versus 5.4 months (n=83 vs n=43; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.68, p=0.0004) for patients who had received prior bevacizumab, and 10.9 versus 5.4 months (n=292 vs n=146; HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.45, p<0.0001) for those who had not. Across subgroups, median progression-free survival was also significantly longer with rucaparib versus placebo in the <i>BRCA</i>-mutant and homologous recombination deficient cohorts. Safety was consistent across subgroups.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Rucaparib maintenance treatment significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo irrespective of progression-free interval following penultimate platinum, number of lines of prior chemotherapy, and previous use of bevacizumab.
<h4>Background</h4>Most patients with ovarian cancer will relapse after receiving frontline platinum-based chemotherapy and eventually develop platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory disease. We report results of avelumab alone or avelumab plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) compared with PLD alone in patients with platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer.<h4>Methods</h4>JAVELIN Ovarian 200 was an open-label, parallel-group, three-arm, randomised, phase 3 trial, done at 149 hospitals and cancer treatment centres in 24 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer (maximum of three previous lines for platinum-sensitive disease, none for platinum-resistant disease) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via interactive response technology to avelumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks), avelumab plus PLD (40 mg/m<sup>2</sup> intravenously every 4 weeks), or PLD and stratified by disease platinum status, number of previous anticancer regimens, and bulky disease. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival by blinded independent central review and overall survival in all randomly assigned patients, with the objective to show whether avelumab alone or avelumab plus PLD is superior to PLD. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02580058. The trial is no longer enrolling patients and this is the final analysis of both primary endpoints.<h4>Findings</h4>Between Jan 5, 2016, and May 16, 2017, 566 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned (combination n=188; PLD n=190, avelumab n=188). At data cutoff (Sept 19, 2018), median duration of follow-up for overall survival was 18·4 months (IQR 15·6-21·9) for the combination group, 17·4 months (15·2-21·3) for the PLD group, and 18·2 months (15·8-21·2) for the avelumab group. Median progression-free survival by blinded independent central review was 3·7 months (95% CI 3·3-5·1) in the combination group, 3·5 months (2·1-4·0) in the PLD group, and 1·9 months (1·8-1·9) in the avelumab group (combination vs PLD: stratified HR 0·78 [repeated 93·1% CI 0·59-1·24], one-sided p=0·030; avelumab vs PLD: 1·68 [1·32-2·60], one-sided p>0·99). Median overall survival was 15·7 months (95% CI 12·7-18·7) in the combination group, 13·1 months (11·8-15·5) in the PLD group, and 11·8 months (8·9-14·1) in the avelumab group (combination vs PLD: stratified HR 0·89 [repeated 88·85% CI 0·74-1·24], one-sided p=0·21; avelumab vs PLD: 1·14 [0·95-1·58], one-sided p=0·83]). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (18 [10%] in the combination group vs nine [5%] in the PLD group vs none in the avelumab group), rash (11 [6%] vs three [2%] vs none), fatigue (ten [5%] vs three [2%] vs none), stomatitis (ten [5%] vs five [3%] vs none), anaemia (six [3%] vs nine [5%] vs three [2%]), neutropenia (nine [5%] vs nine [5%] vs none), and neutrophil count decreased (eight [5%] vs seven [4%] vs none). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 32 (18%) patients in the combination group, 19 (11%) in the PLD group, and 14 (7%) in the avelumab group. Treatment-related adverse events resulted in death in one patient each in the PLD group (sepsis) and avelumab group (intestinal obstruction).<h4>Interpretation</h4>Neither avelumab plus PLD nor avelumab alone significantly improved progression-free survival or overall survival versus PLD. These results provide insights for patient selection in future studies of immune checkpoint inhibitors in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer.<h4>Funding</h4>Pfizer and Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.
<h4>Background</h4>European Society for Medical Oncology Women for Oncology (ESMO W4O) research has previously shown under-representation of female oncologists in leadership roles. As early reports suggested disproportionate effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on women, the ESMO W4O Committee initiated a study on the impact of the pandemic on the lives of female and male oncologists.<h4>Methods</h4>A questionnaire was sent to ESMO members and put on the ESMO website between 8 June 2020 and 2 July 2020. Questions focused on the working (hospital tasks, laboratory tasks, science) and home (household management, childcare, parent care, personal care) lives of oncologists during and after COVID-19-related lockdowns.<h4>Results</h4>Of 649 respondents, 541 completed the questionnaire. Of these, 58% reported that COVID-19 had affected their professional career, 83% of whom said this was in a negative way (85% of women versus 76% of men). Approximately 86% reported that COVID-19 had changed their personal life and 82% their family life. Women were again significantly more affected than men: personal life (89% versus 78%; P = 0.001); family life (84% versus 77%; P = 0.037). During lockdowns, women reported increased time spent on hospital and laboratory tasks compared with men (53% versus 46% and 33% versus 26%, respectively) and a significantly higher proportion of women than men spent less time on science (39% versus 25%) and personal care (58% versus 39%). After confinement, this trend remained for science (42% versus 23%) and personal care (55% versus 36%).<h4>Conclusions</h4>The COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected the professional and home lives of oncologists, especially women. Reduced research time for female oncologists may have long-lasting career consequences, especially for those at key stages in their career. The gender gap for promotion to leadership positions may widen further as a result of the pandemic.
<h4>Background</h4>The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant changes to professional and personal lives of oncology professionals globally. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Resilience Task Force collaboration aimed to provide contemporaneous reports on the impact of COVID-19 on the lived experiences and well-being in oncology.<h4>Methods</h4>This online anonymous survey (July-August 2020) is the second of a series of global surveys launched during the course of the pandemic. Longitudinal key outcome measures including well-being/distress (expanded Well-being Index-9 items), burnout (1 item from expanded Well-being Index), and job performance since COVID-19 were tracked.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 942 participants from 99 countries were included for final analysis: 58% (n = 544) from Europe, 52% (n = 485) female, 43% (n = 409) ≤40 years old, and 36% (n = 343) of non-white ethnicity. In July/August 2020, 60% (n = 525) continued to report a change in professional duties compared with the pre-COVID-19 era. The proportion of participants at risk of poor well-being (33%, n = 310) and who reported feeling burnout (49%, n = 460) had increased significantly compared with April/May 2020 (25% and 38%, respectively; P < 0.001), despite improved job performance since COVID-19 (34% versus 51%; P < 0.001). Of those who had been tested for COVID-19, 8% (n = 39/484) tested positive; 18% (n = 7/39) felt they had not been given adequate time to recover before return to work. Since the pandemic, 39% (n = 353/908) had expressed concerns that COVID-19 would have a negative impact on their career development or training and 40% (n = 366/917) felt that their job security had been compromised. More than two-thirds (n = 608/879) revealed that COVID-19 has changed their outlook on their work-personal life balance.<h4>Conclusion</h4>The COVID-19 pandemic continues to impact the well-being of oncology professionals globally, with significantly more in distress and feeling burnout compared with the first wave. Collective efforts from both national and international communities addressing support and coping strategies will be crucial as we recover from the COVID-19 crisis. In particular, an action plan should also be devised to tackle concerns raised regarding the negative impact of COVID-19 on career development, training, and job security.
Despite advances in the treatment of gynaecological malignancies, both recurrent endometrial and cervical cancers when not amenable to localised therapy (surgery or radiotherapy), remain incurable with limited prognosis and effective treatment options. Chemotherapy remains the standard of care for women with metastatic endometrial or cervical cancers. The addition of bevacizumab to first-line chemotherapy for metastatic cervical cancer patients represents a significant step forward in improving survival. More recently, immunotherapeutic strategies targeting the PD-1/-L1 pathway have shown clinical activity in both endometrial and cervical cancers. The increased understanding of the molecular biology of these cancers is shaping target-specific treatments. Here we summarise current treatment options and results from clinical trials of immunotherapy and other targeted therapies that have already changed, or have the potential to change, clinical practice in metastatic/recurrent endometrial and cervical cancer.
Ovarian clear cell carcinoma (OCCC) is a rare subtype of epithelial ovarian cancer characterised by a high frequency of loss-of-function <i>ARID1A</i> mutations and a poor response to chemotherapy. Despite their generally low mutational burden, an intratumoural T cell response has been reported in a subset of OCCC, with <i>ARID1A</i> purported to be a biomarker for the response to the immune checkpoint blockade independent of micro-satellite instability (MSI). However, assessment of the different immune cell types and spatial distribution specifically within OCCC patients has not been described to date. Here, we characterised the immune landscape of OCCC by profiling a cohort of 33 microsatellite stable OCCCs at the genomic, gene expression and histological level using targeted sequencing, gene expression profiling using the NanoString targeted immune panel, and multiplex immunofluorescence to assess the spatial distribution and abundance of immune cell populations at the protein level. Analysis of these tumours and subsequent independent validation identified an immune-related gene expression signature associated with risk of recurrence of OCCC. Whilst histological quantification of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL, Salgado scoring) showed no association with the risk of recurrence or <i>ARID1A</i> mutational status, the characterisation of TILs via multiplexed immunofluorescence identified spatial differences in immunosuppressive cell populations in OCCC. Tumour-associated macrophages (TAM) and regulatory T cells were excluded from the vicinity of tumour cells in low-risk patients, suggesting that high-risk patients have a more immunosuppressive microenvironment. We also found that TAMs and cytotoxic T cells were also excluded from the vicinity of tumour cells in <i>ARID1A</i>-mutated OCCCs compared to <i>ARID1A</i> wild-type tumours, suggesting that the exclusion of these immune effectors could determine the host response of <i>ARID1A</i>-mutant OCCCs to therapy. Overall, our study has provided new insights into the immune landscape and prognostic associations in OCCC and suggest that tailored immunotherapeutic approaches may be warranted for different subgroups of OCCC patients.
Few studies describe supportive care needs among young adults (YAs) with cancer ages 25 to 39 using validated questionnaires. Previous findings identified the need for psychological and information support and suggest that gender, age, psychological distress, and coping may be associated with greater need for this support. To substantiate these findings, this study aimed to (1) describe the supportive care needs of YAs in each domain of the Supportive Care Needs Survey and (2) explore the relationship between unmet supportive care needs and clinical and demographic factors, health-related quality of life, psychological distress, illness cognitions, and service needs using latent class analysis. Clinical teams from six hospitals in England invited eligible patients to a cross-sectional survey by post. A total of 317 participants completed the survey online or on paper. YAs expressed the most need in the psychological and sexuality domains. Using latent class analysis, we identified three classes of YAs based on level of supportive care need: no need (53.3%), low need (28.3%), and moderate need (18.4%). In each class, median domain scores in each domain were similar. Low and moderate need classes were associated with worse health-related quality of life and greater helplessness. Unmet service needs were associated with the moderate-need class only. Patients with unmet supportive care needs should be offered holistic care across supportive care domains.
<h4>Background</h4>ARID1A (AT-rich interactive domain containing protein 1A) loss-of-function mutations have been reported in gynecological cancers, including rarer subtypes such as clear cell carcinoma. Preclinical studies indicate that <i>ARID1A</i> mutant cancers display sensitivity to ATR inhibition while tumors without <i>ARID1A</i> mutations may be sensitive to Ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3 related (ATR) inhibitors in combination with poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors.<h4>Primary objective</h4>To determine whether the ATR inhibitor, ceralasertib, has clinical activity as a single agent and in combination with the PARP inhibitor, olaparib, in patients with ARID1A 'loss' and 'no loss' clear cell carcinomas and other relapsed gynecological cancers.<h4>Study hypothesis</h4>ARID1A deficient clear cell carcinoma of the ovary or endometrium is sensitive to ATR inhibition, while the combination of ATR and PARP inhibition has activity in other gynecological tumors, irrespective of ARID1A status.<h4>Trial design</h4>ATARI (ENGOT/GYN1/NCRI) is a multicenter, international, proof-of-concept, phase II, parallel cohort trial assessing ceralasertib activity as a single agent and in combination with olaparib in ARID1A stratified gynecological cancers. Patients with relapsed ovarian/endometrial clear cell carcinoma with ARID1A loss will receive ceralasertib monotherapy (cohort 1A). Relapsed ovarian/endometrial clear cell carcinoma patients with no ARID1A loss (cohort 2) or patients with other histological subtypes (endometrioid, carcinosarcoma, cervical) (cohort 3) will receive combination therapy (olaparib/ceralasertib). Treatment will continue until disease progression.<h4>Major inclusion/exclusion criteria</h4>Patients with histologically confirmed recurrent clear cell (ovarian, endometrial, or endometriosis related), endometrioid (ovarian, endometrial, or endometriosis related), cervical (adenocarcinomas or squamous), or carcinosarcomas (ovarian or endometrial) are eligible. Patients progressing after ≥1 prior platinum with evidence of measurable (RECIST v1.1) radiological disease progression since last systemic anticancer therapy and prior to trial entry are eligible. Previous ATR or PARP inhibitor treatment is not permissible.<h4>Primary endpoint</h4>Best overall objective response rate (RECIST v1.1).<h4>Sample size</h4>A minimum of 40 and a maximum of 116.<h4>Estimated dates for completing accrual and presenting results</h4>Accrual is anticipated to be complete by the second quarter of 2022, with reporting of results by the fourth quarter of 2022. Overall accrual targets and reporting timelines are dependent on individual cohort progression to stage 2.<h4>Trial registration number</h4>NCT0405269.
<h4>Background</h4>Aromatase inhibitors have been used empirically to treat a subset of patients with hormone receptor positive uterine leiomyosarcomas(LMS) and carcinosarcomas (UCS) mainly supported by retrospective data. We evaluated the activity of anastrozole in two rare cohorts; patients with recurrent/metastatic LMS and UCS enrolled in PARAGON, a basket trial of anastrozole in estrogen receptor (ER+)/progesterone receptor positive (PR+) gynecological cancers.<h4>Method</h4>An investigator-initiated, single-arm, prospective open-label trial of anastrozole 1 mg/day in patients with ER &/or PR + ve LMS or UCS with measurable disease, treated until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was clinical benefit (complete/partial response + stable disease) rate (CBR) at 3 months. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival (PFS), quality of life and toxicity.<h4>Results</h4>39 eligible patients were enrolled, 32 with LMS and 7 with UCS. For the LMS cohort CBR at 3 months was 35% (95% CI: 21-53%) with a median duration of clinical benefit of 5.8 months. Best response was a partial response in one patient. Two patients remained on treatment for more than one year. The median progression-free survival was 2.8 months (95% CI: 2.6-4.9). For the UCS cohort CBR at 3 months was 43% (95% CI: 16-75%) with a median duration of clinical benefit of 5.6 months. Stable disease was seen in 3 patients but no objective responses were seen. The median progression-free survival was 2.7 months (95% CI, 1.1-8.2). Safety was acceptable with 5/39 evaluable patients showing grade 3 toxicities.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Whilst objective response rates with anastrozole are low, the clinical benefit rate and good tolerance suggests that aromatase inhibitor therapy may have a role in a subset of patients with metastatic LMS and UCS.
This document provides a short summary of the GARNET trial which was published in JAMA Oncology in October 2020. At the end of this document, there are links to websites where you can find more information about this study. The trial enrolled adult participants with advanced solid tumors. This report is restricted to patients with a particular type of endometrial cancer that has a deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) status. Patients received a trial treatment called dostarlimab (also known by the brand name Jemperli). In the US, dostarlimab is approved as a single therapy in adult patients with dMMR recurrent or advanced endometrial cancer that has progressed on or after platinum-based chemotherapy. In the EU, dostarlimab is approved as a single therapy in adult patients with recurrent or advanced dMMR/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) endometrial cancer that has progressed on or after treatment with a platinum-containing regimen. The GARNET trial looked at dostarlimab given intravenously to patients with dMMR endometrial cancer from 7 countries. The trial showed that dostarlimab was successful in shrinking the tumor in 42% of these patients. In general, the percentage of participants who experienced medical problems (referred to as side effects) was low and within expectations for this type of treatment. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT number: NCT02715284. <i>To read the full Plain Language Summary of this article, click on the View Article button above and download the PDF.</i> <i>Link to original article <u>here</u>.</i>
Poly-(ADP)-ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) are a class of oral anticancer drugs first developed as "synthetically lethal" in cancers harboring BRCA1/BRCA2 inactivating mutations. In high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancers (HGOC), PARPi demonstrated benefit as maintenance therapy in relapsing BRCA-mutated and non-mutated tumors. Recently, they extended their indications to frontline maintenance therapy. This review summarizes the current place of PARPi (i) as maintenance or single agent in recurrent disease and (ii) frontline maintenance with different settings. We reviewed the course of biomarker identification, the challenge of overcoming resistance to PARPi and future combinations with targeted therapies, including anti-angiogenic, immune checkpoint inhibitors and DNA damage response inhibitors.
<h4>Background</h4>The efficacy and safety of rucaparib maintenance treatment in ARIEL3 were evaluated in subgroups based on best response to most recent platinum-based chemotherapy and baseline disease.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive either oral rucaparib at a dosage of 600 mg twice daily or placebo. Investigator-assessed PFS was assessed in prespecified, nested cohorts: BRCA-mutated, homologous recombination deficient (HRD; BRCA mutated or wild-type BRCA/high loss of heterozygosity), and the intent-to-treat (ITT) population.<h4>Results</h4>Median PFS for patients in the ITT population with a complete response to most recent platinum-based chemotherapy was 11.1 months in the rucaparib arm (126 patients) versus 5.6 months in the placebo arm (64 patients) (HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.23-0.48]), and in patients with a partial response (249 vs. 125), it was 9.0 versus 5.3 months (HR, 0.38 [0.30-0.49]). In subgroups of the ITT population based on baseline disease, median PFS was 8.2 versus 5.3 months (HR, 0.40 [0.28-0.57]) in patients with measurable disease (141 rucaparib vs. 66 placebo), 10.4 versus 4.5 months (HR, 0.31 [0.20-0.48]) in those with nonmeasurable but evaluable disease (104 vs. 56), and 14.1 versus 7.3 months (HR, 0.35 [0.24-0.51]) in those with no residual disease (130 vs. 67). Across subgroups, significantly longer median PFS was observed with rucaparib versus placebo in the BRCA-mutated and HRD cohorts. Objective responses were reported in patients with measurable disease and in patients with nonmeasurable but evaluable baseline disease. Safety was consistent across subgroups.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Rucaparib maintenance treatment provided clinically meaningful efficacy benefits across subgroups based on response to last platinum-based chemotherapy or baseline disease.
<h4>Background</h4>The COVID-19 pandemic has had a vast impact on cancer service delivery around the world. Previously reported results from our international survey of oncology clinicians, conducted through March-April 2020, found that clinicians reported altering management in both the curative and palliative settings and not in proportion to the COVID-19 case burden in their region of practice. This follow-up survey, conducted from 27<sup>th</sup> September to 7<sup>th</sup> November 2020, aimed to explore how attitudes and practices evolved over the 2020 pandemic period.<h4>Participants and methods</h4>Participants were medical, radiation and surgical oncologist and trainees. Surveys were distributed electronically via ESMO and other collaborating professional societies. Participants were asked to compare their practice prior to the pandemic to both the period of March-April 2020, referred to as the 'early' period, and the current survey period, referred to as the 'later' period.<h4>Results</h4>One hundred and seventy-two oncology clinicians completed the survey. The majority of respondents were medical oncologists (n = 136, 79%) and many were from Europe (n = 82, 48%). In the 'early' period, 88% (n = 133) of clinicians reported altering their practice compared to 63% (n = 96) in the 'later' period. Compared to prior to the pandemic, clinicians reported fewer new patient presentations in the 'early' period and a trend towards more patients presenting with advanced disease in the 'later' period.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Results indicate a swing back towards pre-COVID-19 practices despite an increase in the rate of cumulative COVID-19 cases across 2020. The impact of these changes on cancer associated morbidity and mortality remains to be measured over the months and years to come.
<h4>Objectives</h4>In the phase III SOLO1 trial (NCT01844986), maintenance olaparib provided a substantial progression-free survival benefit in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation who were in response after platinum-based chemotherapy. We analyzed the timing, duration and grade of the most common hematologic and non-hematologic adverse events in SOLO1.<h4>Methods</h4>Eligible patients were randomized to olaparib tablets 300 mg twice daily (N = 260) or placebo (N = 131), with a 2-year treatment cap in most patients. Safety outcomes were analyzed in detail in randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug (olaparib, n = 260; placebo, n = 130).<h4>Results</h4>Median time to first onset of the most common hematologic (anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia) and non-hematologic (nausea, fatigue/asthenia, vomiting) adverse events was <3 months in olaparib-treated patients. The first event of anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, nausea and vomiting lasted a median of <2 months and the first event of fatigue/asthenia lasted a median of 3.48 months in the olaparib group. These adverse events were manageable with supportive treatment and/or olaparib dose modification in most patients, with few patients requiring discontinuation of olaparib. Of 162 patients still receiving olaparib at month 24, 64.2% were receiving the recommended starting dose of olaparib 300 mg twice daily.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Maintenance olaparib had a predictable and manageable adverse event profile in the newly diagnosed setting with no new safety signals identified. Adverse events usually occurred early, were largely manageable and led to discontinuation in a minority of patients.
<h4>Background</h4>There is a high unmet need for treatment regimens that increase the chance of long-term remission and possibly cure for women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. In the primary analysis of SOLO1/GOG 3004, the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo in patients with a BRCA mutation; median progression-free survival was not reached. Here, we report an updated, post-hoc analysis of progression-free survival from SOLO1, after 5 years of follow-up.<h4>Methods</h4>SOLO1 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, done across 118 centres in 15 countries, that enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 and with BRCA-mutated, newly diagnosed, advanced, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer with a complete or partial clinical response after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) via a web-based or interactive voice-response system to receive olaparib (300 mg twice daily) or placebo tablets orally as maintenance monotherapy for up to 2 years; randomisation was by blocks and was stratified according to clinical response after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients, treatment providers, and data assessors were masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Efficacy is reported in the intention-to-treat population and safety in patients who received at least one dose of treatment. The data cutoff for this updated, post-hoc analysis was March 5, 2020. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01844986) and is ongoing but closed to new participants.<h4>Findings</h4>Between Sept 3, 2013, and March 6, 2015, 260 patients were randomly assigned to olaparib and 131 to placebo. The median treatment duration was 24·6 months (IQR 11·2-24·9) in the olaparib group and 13·9 months (8·0-24·8) in the placebo group; median follow-up was 4·8 years (2·8-5·3) in the olaparib group and 5·0 years (2·6-5·3) in the placebo group. In this post-hoc analysis, median progression-free survival was 56·0 months (95% CI 41·9-not reached) with olaparib versus 13·8 months (11·1-18·2) with placebo (hazard ratio 0·33 [95% CI 0·25-0·43]). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were anaemia (57 [22%] of 260 patients receiving olaparib vs two [2%] of 130 receiving placebo) and neutropenia (22 [8%] vs six [5%]), and serious adverse events occurred in 55 (21%) of 260 patients in the olaparib group and 17 (13%) of 130 in the placebo group. No treatment-related adverse events that occurred during study treatment or up to 30 days after discontinuation were reported as leading to death. No additional cases of myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukaemia were reported since the primary data cutoff, including after the 30-day safety follow-up period.<h4>Interpretation</h4>For patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation, after, to our knowledge, the longest follow-up for any randomised controlled trial of a PARP inhibitor in this setting, the benefit derived from 2 years' maintenance therapy with olaparib was sustained beyond the end of treatment, extending median progression-free survival past 4·5 years. These results support the use of maintenance olaparib as a standard of care in this setting.<h4>Funding</h4>AstraZeneca; Merck Sharpe & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.
<h4>Introduction</h4>We aimed to characterize real-world utilization of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) in women with ovarian cancer (OC).<h4>Methods</h4>This retrospective observational study of claims data from US MarketScan<sup>®</sup> Commercial/Medicare Supplemental databases included women with OC initiating olaparib, niraparib, or rucaparib from January 1, 2017, to May 31, 2019. Patients were observed from first outpatient prescription until at least 30 days' follow-up. Clinical events of interest (CEIs), based on adverse reactions in PARPi prescribing information, were identified from claims using ICD-9/10 codes. Other outcomes included dose modification, persistence, adherence, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and cost.<h4>Results</h4>Overall, 303, 348, and 162 women with OC received olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib, respectively. During follow-up, risk of any CEI was higher with niraparib versus olaparib (odds ratio 3.36 [95% confidence interval 2.00-5.65]) and niraparib versus rucaparib (2.09 [1.10-3.95]), with no significant difference between rucaparib and olaparib (1.61 [0.93-2.79]). PARPi dose decreases were observed in 21.1%, 35.1%, and 30.2% of olaparib-, niraparib-, and rucaparib-treated patients, respectively. Persistence (no treatment gaps of more than 90 days) was significantly higher (P < 0.05) with olaparib (62.2%) versus niraparib (35.9%) and rucaparib (48.7%); adherence (medication possession ratio, MPR ≥ 80%) was 80.2% versus 38.6% and 63.2%, respectively (P < 0.001). Inpatient admissions and outpatient service use were higher with niraparib and rucaparib versus olaparib, reflected in mean (± standard deviation) total medical costs (excluding pharmacy) of $5393 ± 8828 for olaparib, $7732 ± 14,054 for niraparib, and $6868 ± 7929 for rucaparib.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Differences between the licensed PARPi were observed in the risk of experiencing a CEI, likelihood of dose modifications, ability to receive continuous PARPi therapy, HCRU, and costs.
<h4>Objectives</h4>To characterize clinical outcomes of women with advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer (AEC) in routine practice using electronic health records from a real-world database.<h4>Methods</h4>Adult women diagnosed with AEC (stage III/IV, or early stage with locoregional/distant recurrence) between January 1, 2013 and September 30, 2020, inclusive, were eligible provided they received platinum-based chemotherapy at any time following diagnosis and had ≥2 clinical visits. Follow-up was from initiation of systemic treatment after advanced diagnosis (index) until March 30, 2021, last available follow-up, or death, whichever occurred first. Outcomes, by histological subtype, included Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival (OS) and time to first subsequent therapy or death (TFST).<h4>Results</h4>Of the 2202 women with AEC, most were treated in a community setting (82.7%) and presented with stage III/IV disease at initial diagnosis (74.0%). The proportion with endometrioid carcinoma, uterine serous carcinoma (USC), and other AEC subtypes was 59.8%, 25.0%, and 15.2%, respectively. The most common first systemic treatment following advanced/recurrent diagnosis was platinum-based combination chemotherapy (82.0%). Median OS (95% CI) from initiation of first systemic treatment was shorter with USC (31.3 [27.7-34.3] months) and other AECs (29.4 [21.4-43.9] months) versus endometrioid carcinoma (70.8 [60.5-83.2] months). Similar results were observed for TFST. Black/African American women had worse OS and TFST than white women.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Women with AEC had poor survival outcomes, demonstrating the requirement for more effective therapies. To our knowledge, this is the most comprehensive evaluation of contemporary treatment of AEC delivered in a community setting to date.
<h4>Background</h4>Exploratory research showed that female oncologists are frequently under-represented in leadership roles. European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Women for Oncology (W4O) therefore implemented gender equality programs in career development and established international studies on female representation at all stages of the oncology career pathway.<h4>Methods</h4>For 2017-2019, data were collected on (i) first and last authorship of publications in five major oncology journals and (ii) representation of women in leadership positions in oncology-as invited speakers at National/International congresses, board members or presidents of National/International societies and ESMO members. The 2015/2016 data from the first published W4O Study were incorporated for comparisons.<h4>Results</h4>Across 2017-2019, female oncologists were significantly more likely to be first than last authors (P < 0.001). The proportion of female first authors was similar across years: 38.0% in 2017, 37.1% in 2018, 41.0% in 2019 (P = 0.063). The proportion of female last authors decreased from 30.4% in 2017 to 24.2% in 2018 (P = 0.0018) and increased to 28.5% in 2019 (P = 0.018). Across 2015-2019, invited speakers at International/National oncology congresses were significantly less likely to be female than male (P < 0.001; 29.7% in 2015 to 36.8% in 2019). Across 2016-2019, board members of International/National oncology societies were significantly less likely to be female than male (P < 0.001; 26.8% in 2016 to 35.8% in 2019). There were statistically significant increasing trends in female speakers and board members across the study periods (P < 0.001 for both). Societies with a female president had a higher proportion of female board members across these periods (P = 0.026).<h4>Conclusions</h4>Reported progress towards gender equality in career development in oncology is real but slow. Women in leadership positions are essential for encouraging young women to aspire to and work towards similar or greater success. Therefore, continued monitoring is needed to inform ESMO W4O initiatives to promote gender balance at all stages of the career pathway.
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) antiviral response in a pan-tumor immune monitoring (CAPTURE) ( NCT03226886 ) is a prospective cohort study of COVID-19 immunity in patients with cancer. Here we evaluated 585 patients following administration of two doses of BNT162b2 or AZD1222 vaccines, administered 12 weeks apart. Seroconversion rates after two doses were 85% and 59% in patients with solid and hematological malignancies, respectively. A lower proportion of patients had detectable titers of neutralizing antibodies (NAbT) against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern (VOC) versus wild-type (WT) SARS-CoV-2. Patients with hematological malignancies were more likely to have undetectable NAbT and had lower median NAbT than those with solid cancers against both SARS-CoV-2 WT and VOC. By comparison with individuals without cancer, patients with hematological, but not solid, malignancies had reduced neutralizing antibody (NAb) responses. Seroconversion showed poor concordance with NAbT against VOC. Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection boosted the NAb response including against VOC, and anti-CD20 treatment was associated with undetectable NAbT. Vaccine-induced T cell responses were detected in 80% of patients and were comparable between vaccines or cancer types. Our results have implications for the management of patients with cancer during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
<h4>Background</h4>Hormonal therapies are commonly prescribed to patients with metastatic granulosa cell tumours (GCT), based on high response rates in small retrospective studies. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are reported to have high response rates and an accepted treatment option. We report the results of a phase 2 trial of an AI in recurrent/metastatic GCTs.<h4>Methods</h4>41 patients with recurrent ER/PR + ve GCT received anastrozole 1 mg daily until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate (CBR) at 12 weeks, evaluated by RECIST1.1 criteria. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), CBR duration, quality of life and toxicity.<h4>Results</h4>The CBR at 12 weeks in 38 evaluable patients was 78.9%, which included one (2.6%; 95% CI: 0.5-13.5%) partial response and 76.3% stable disease. Two additional patients without measurable disease were stable, based on inhibin. Median PFS was 8.6 m (95% CI 5.5-13.5 m). There were delayed responses observed after 12 weeks with a total of 4 pts. (10.5%; 95% CI 4.2%-24.1%) with a RECIST partial response; 23 (59%) patients were progression-free at 6 months. The adverse effects were predominantly low grade.<h4>Conclusions</h4>This is the first prospective trial of hormonal therapy in GCTs. Although there was a high CBR, the objective response rate to anastrozole was much lower than the pooled response rates of >70% to AIs reported in most retrospective series and case reports. PARAGON demonstrates the importance of prospective trials in rare cancers and the need to reconsider the role of AIs as single agents in GCTs.
<h4>Background</h4>COVID-19 has had a significant impact on the well-being and job performance of oncology professionals globally. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Resilience Task Force collaboration set out to investigate and monitor well-being since COVID-19 in relation to work, lifestyle and support factors in oncology professionals 1 year on since the start of the pandemic.<h4>Methods</h4>An online, anonymous survey was conducted in February/March 2021 (Survey III). Key outcome variables included risk of poor well-being or distress (expanded Well-Being Index), feeling burnout (single item from expanded Well-Being Index), and job performance since COVID-19. Longitudinal analysis of responses to the series of three surveys since COVID-19 was carried out, and responses to job demands and resources questions were interrogated. SPSS V.26.0/V.27.0 and GraphPad Prism V9.0 were used for statistical analyses.<h4>Results</h4>Responses from 1269 participants from 104 countries were analysed in Survey III: 55% (n = 699/1269) female, 54% (n = 686/1269) >40 years, and 69% (n = 852/1230) of white ethnicity. There continues to be an increased risk of poor well-being or distress (n = 464/1169, 40%) and feeling burnout (n = 660/1169, 57%) compared with Survey I (25% and 38% respectively, P < 0.0001), despite improved job performance. Compared with the initial period of the pandemic, more participants report feeling overwhelmed with workload (45% versus 29%, P < 0.0001). There remain concerns about the negative impact of the pandemic on career development/training (43%), job security (37%). and international fellowship opportunities (76%). Alarmingly, 25% (n = 266/1086) are considering changing their future career with 38% (n = 100/266) contemplating leaving the profession.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Oncology professionals continue to face increased job demands. There is now significant concern regarding potential attrition in the oncology workforce. National and international stakeholders must act immediately and work closely with oncology professionals to draw up future-proof recovery plans.
Patients with cancer have higher COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. Here we present the prospective CAPTURE study, integrating longitudinal immune profiling with clinical annotation. Of 357 patients with cancer, 118 were SARS-CoV-2 positive, 94 were symptomatic and 2 died of COVID-19. In this cohort, 83% patients had S1-reactive antibodies and 82% had neutralizing antibodies against wild type SARS-CoV-2, whereas neutralizing antibody titers against the Alpha, Beta and Delta variants were substantially reduced. S1-reactive antibody levels decreased in 13% of patients, whereas neutralizing antibody titers remained stable for up to 329 days. Patients also had detectable SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells and CD4<sup>+</sup> responses correlating with S1-reactive antibody levels, although patients with hematological malignancies had impaired immune responses that were disease and treatment specific, but presented compensatory cellular responses, further supported by clinical recovery in all but one patient. Overall, these findings advance the understanding of the nature and duration of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 in patients with cancer.
<h4>Objective</h4>To describe the current surgical management of stage 1 malignant ovarian germ cell tumours and correlated oncological outcomes.<h4>Study design</h4>We undertook a retrospective study of all stage 1 primary ovarian germ cell tumours treated in four major UK gynaecology oncology centres over 12 years. We assessed route of surgery, fertility-sparing approaches, ovarian cystectomy alone, and surgical staging and correlated these with clinical outcomes.<h4>Results</h4>Eighty-six patients were followed-up for a median of 4.4 years (IQR 4.3). The median age was 26 (range 11-47). There were 24 (27.9%) dysgerminomas, 13 (15.1%) yolk sac tumours, 10 (11.3%) mixed germ cell tumours, and 39 (45.3%) immature teratomas. Overall survival was 96.6% (OS, 95% CI 91.9-100%), with event free survival of 81.8% (EFS, 95% CI 72.5-92.3) at 5 years. The majority had fertility-sparing surgery (93%, n = 80). In a subset of patients with immature teratoma, there was no significant difference in recurrence or survival if patients underwent unilateral cystectomy only or salpingo-oophorectomy. Laparotomy was the most common approach (n = 66, 76.7%), used more frequently for larger tumours > 10 cm. Surgical staging procedures were undertaken in 42 (48.6%) patients with no significant difference in rates of staging across histological subtypes. Peritoneal biopsies were taken in 11 (12.7%), omental assessment in 40 (46.5%) and lymphadenectomy in 10 (11.6%). There was no significant difference in EFS between patients who underwent staging procedures (83%, CI 71-98%) versus those that did not (84%, CI 72-98%). There was no significant difference in the rate of staging procedures in paediatric (42.1% 8/19) and adult (57.9% 34/67) populations.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Across all histologies and ages, the absence of surgical staging did not impact upon disease free or overall survival in this cohort. This study also raises the possibility of a role for ovarian cystectomy in immature teratoma. These findings warrant investigation in larger prospective studies.
<h4>Background</h4>Low-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary or peritoneum is characterised by MAPK pathway aberrations and its reduced sensitivity to chemotherapy relative to high-grade serous carcinoma. We compared the MEK inhibitor trametinib to physician's choice standard of care in patients with recurrent low-grade serous carcinoma.<h4>Methods</h4>This international, randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 2/3 trial was done at 84 hospitals in the USA and UK. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with recurrent low-grade serous carcinoma and measurable disease, as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1, had received at least one platinum-based regimen, but not all five standard-of-care drugs, and had received an unlimited number of previous regimens. Patients with serous borderline tumours or tumours containing low-grade serous and high-grade serous carcinoma were excluded. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either oral trametinib 2 mg once daily (trametinib group) or one of five standard-of-care treatment options (standard-of-care group): intravenous paclitaxel 80 mg/m<sup>2</sup> by body surface area on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 28-day cycle; intravenous pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 40-50 mg/m<sup>2</sup> by body surface area once every 4 weeks; intravenous topotecan 4 mg/m<sup>2</sup> by body surface area on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 28-day cycle; oral letrozole 2·5 mg once daily; or oral tamoxifen 20 mg twice daily. Randomisation was stratified by geographical region (USA or UK), number of previous regimens (1, 2, or ≥3), performance status (0 or 1), and planned standard-of-care regimen. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival while receiving randomised therapy, as assessed by imaging at baseline, once every 8 weeks for 15 months, and then once every 3 months thereafter, in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of study therapy. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02101788, and is active but not recruiting.<h4>Findings</h4>Between Feb 27, 2014, and April 10, 2018, 260 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the trametinib group (n=130) or the standard-of-care group (n=130). At the primary analysis, there were 217 progression-free survival events (101 [78%] in the trametinib group and 116 [89%] in the standard-of-care group). Median progression-free survival in the trametinib group was 13·0 months (95% CI 9·9-15·0) compared with 7·2 months (5·6-9·9) in the standard-of-care group (hazard ratio 0·48 [95% CI 0·36-0·64]; p<0·0001). The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events in the trametinib group were skin rash (17 [13%] of 128), anaemia (16 [13%]), hypertension (15 [12%]), diarrhoea (13 [10%]), nausea (12 [9%]), and fatigue (ten [8%]). The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events in the standard-of-care group were abdominal pain (22 [17%]), nausea (14 [11%]), anaemia (12 [10%]), and vomiting (ten [8%]). There were no treatment-related deaths.<h4>Interpretation</h4>Trametinib represents a new standard-of-care option for patients with recurrent low-grade serous carcinoma.<h4>Funding</h4>NRG Oncology, Cancer Research UK, Target Ovarian Cancer, and Novartis.
<h4>Background</h4>Standard-of-care first-line chemotherapy for epithelial ovarian cancer is carboplatin and paclitaxel administered once every 3 weeks. The JGOG 3016 trial reported significant improvement in progression-free and overall survival with dose-dense weekly paclitaxel and 3-weekly (ie, once every 3 weeks) carboplatin. However, this benefit was not observed in the previously reported progression-free survival results of ICON8. Here, we present the final coprimary outcomes of overall survival and updated progression-free survival analyses of ICON8.<h4>Methods</h4>In this open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial (ICON8), women aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed stage IC-IV epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube carcinoma (here collectively termed ovarian cancer, as defined by International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics [FIGO] 1988 criteria) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were recruited from 117 hospitals with oncology departments in the UK, Australia and New Zealand, Mexico, South Korea, and Ireland. Patients could enter the trial after immediate primary surgery (IPS) or with planned delayed primary surgery (DPS) during chemotherapy, or could have no planned surgery. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London randomisation line with stratification by Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup group, FIGO disease stage, and outcome and timing of surgery, to either 3-weekly carboplatin area under the curve (AUC)5 or AUC6 and 3-weekly paclitaxel 175 mg/m<sup>2</sup> (control; group 1), 3-weekly carboplatin AUC5 or AUC6 and weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m<sup>2</sup> (group 2), or weekly carboplatin AUC2 and weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m<sup>2</sup> (group 3), all administered via intravenous infusion for a total of six 21-day cycles. Coprimary outcomes were progression-free survival and overall survival, with comparisons done between group 2 and group 1, and group 3 and group 1, in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who started at least one chemotherapy cycle. The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01654146, and ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN10356387, and is closed to accrual.<h4>Findings</h4>Between June 6, 2011, and Nov 28, 2014, 1566 patients were randomly assigned to group 1 (n=522), group 2 (n=523), or group 3 (n=521). The median age was 62 years (IQR 54-68), 1073 (69%) of 1566 patients had high-grade serous carcinoma, 1119 (71%) had stage IIIC-IV disease, and 745 (48%) had IPS. As of data cutoff (March 31, 2020), with a median follow-up of 69 months (IQR 61-75), no significant difference in overall survival was observed in either comparison: median overall survival of 47·4 months (95% CI 43·1-54·8) in group 1, 54·8 months (46·6-61·6) in group 2, and 53·4 months (49·2-59·6) in group 3 (group 2 vs group 1: hazard ratio 0·87 [97·5% CI 0·73-1·05]; group 3 vs group 1: 0·91 [0·76-1·09]). No significant difference was observed for progression-free survival in either comparison and evidence of non-proportional hazards was seen (p=0·037), with restricted mean survival time of 23·9 months (97·5% CI 22·1-25·6) in group 1, 25·3 months (23·6-27·1) in group 2, and 24·8 months (23·0-26·5) in group 3. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were reduced neutrophil count (78 [15%] of 511 patients in group 1, 183 [36%] of 514 in group 2, and 154 [30%] of 513 in group 3), reduced white blood cell count (22 [4%] in group 1, 80 [16%] in group 2, and 71 [14%] in group 3), and anaemia (26 [5%] in group 1, 66 [13%] in group 2, and 24 [5%] in group 3). No new serious adverse events were reported. Seven treatment-related deaths were reported (two in group 1, four in group 2, and one in group 3).<h4>Interpretation</h4>In our cohort of predominantly European women with epithelial ovarian cancer, we found that first-line weekly dose-dense chemotherapy did not improve overall or progression-free survival compared with standard 3-weekly chemotherapy and should not be used as part of standard multimodality front-line therapy in this patient group.<h4>Funding</h4>Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Health Research Board in Ireland, Irish Cancer Society, and Cancer Australia.
<h4>Purpose</h4>CT900 is a novel small molecule thymidylate synthase inhibitor that binds to α-folate receptor (α-FR) and thus is selectively taken up by α-FR-overexpressing tumors.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>A 3+3 dose escalation design was used. During dose escalation, CT900 doses of 1-6 mg/m2 weekly and 2-12 mg/m2 every 2 weeks (q2Wk) intravenously were evaluated. Patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer were enrolled in the expansion cohorts.<h4>Results</h4>109 patients were enrolled: 42 patients in the dose escalation and 67 patients in the expansion cohorts. At the dose/schedule of 12 mg/m2/q2Wk (with and without dexamethasone, n = 40), the most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, cough, anemia, and pneumonitis, which were predominantly grade 1 and grade 2. Levels of CT900 more than 600 nmol/L needed for growth inhibition in preclinical models were achieved for >65 hours at a dose of 12 mg/m2. In the expansion cohorts, the overall response rate (ORR), was 14/64 (21.9%). Thirty-eight response-evaluable patients in the expansion cohorts receiving 12 mg/m2/q2Wk had tumor evaluable for quantification of α-FR. Patients with high or medium expression had an objective response rate of 9/25 (36%) compared with 1/13 (7.7%) in patients with negative/very low or low expression of α-FR.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The dose of 12 mg/m2/q2Wk was declared the recommended phase II dose/schedule. At this dose/schedule, CT900 exhibited an acceptable side effect profile with clinical benefit in patients with high/medium α-FR expression and warrants further investigation.
<h4>Purpose</h4>In SOLO1/GOG 3004 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01844986), maintenance therapy with the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib provided a sustained progression-free survival benefit in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a <i>BRCA1</i> and/or <i>BRCA2</i> (BRCA) mutation. We report overall survival (OS) after a 7-year follow-up, a clinically relevant time point and the longest follow-up for any poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor in the first-line setting.<h4>Methods</h4>This double-blind phase III trial randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation in clinical response to platinum-based chemotherapy to maintenance olaparib (n = 260) or placebo (n = 131) for up to 2 years. A prespecified descriptive analysis of OS, a secondary end point, was conducted after a 7-year follow-up.<h4>Results</h4>The median duration of treatment was 24.6 months with olaparib and 13.9 months with placebo, and the median follow-up was 88.9 and 87.4 months, respectively. The hazard ratio for OS was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.40 to 0.76; <i>P</i> = .0004 [<i>P</i> < .0001 required to declare statistical significance]). At 7 years, 67.0% of olaparib patients versus 46.5% of placebo patients were alive, and 45.3% versus 20.6%, respectively, were alive and had not received a first subsequent treatment (Kaplan-Meier estimates). The incidence of myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia remained low, and new primary malignancies remained balanced between treatment groups.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Results indicate a clinically meaningful, albeit not statistically significant according to prespecified criteria, improvement in OS with maintenance olaparib in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation and support the use of maintenance olaparib to achieve long-term remission in this setting; the potential for cure may also be enhanced. No new safety signals were observed during long-term follow-up.
Novel biomarkers are needed to direct new treatments for ovarian cancer, a disease for which the standard of care remains heavily focused on platinum-based chemotherapy. Despite the success of PARP inhibitors, treatment options are limited, particularly in the platinum-resistant setting. NaPi2b is a cell surface sodium-dependent phosphate transporter that regulates phosphate homeostasis under normal physiological conditions and is a lineage marker that is expressed in select cancers, including ovarian, lung, thyroid, and breast cancers, with limited expression in normal tissues. Based on its increased expression in ovarian tumors, NaPi2b is a promising candidate to be studied as a biomarker for treatment and patient selection in ovarian cancer. In preclinical studies, the use of antibodies against NaPi2b showed that this protein can be exploited for tumor mapping and therapeutic targeting. Emerging data from phase 1 and 2 clinical trials in ovarian cancer have suggested that NaPi2b can be successfully detected in patient biopsy samples using immunohistochemistry, and the NaPi2b-targeting antibody-drug conjugate under evaluation appeared to elicit therapeutic responses. The aim of this review is to examine literature supporting NaPi2b as a novel biomarker for potential treatment and patient selection in ovarian cancer and to discuss the critical next steps and future analyses necessary to drive the study of this biomarker and therapeutic targeting forward.
<h4>Background</h4>Study 10, a four-part Phase 1/2 study, evaluated oral rucaparib monotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumours. Here we report the final efficacy and safety results in heavily pretreated patients with ovarian cancer who received rucaparib in Study 10 Parts 2A and 2B.<h4>Methods</h4>Parts 2A and 2B (Phase 2 portions) enrolled patients with relapsed, high-grade, platinum-sensitive or platinum-resistant, BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer who had received 2-4 (Part 2A) or 3-4 (Part 2B) prior chemotherapies. Patients received oral rucaparib 600 mg twice daily (starting dose). The primary endpoint was the investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST v1.1.<h4>Results</h4>Fifty-four patients were enrolled: 42 in Part 2A (all had platinum-sensitive disease) and 12 in Part 2B (4 with platinum-sensitive disease; 8 with platinum-resistant disease). ORR was 59.3% (95% CI 45.0-72.4%). The median time to onset of the most common nonhaematological treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was typically early (<56 days) and was later for haematological TEAEs (53-84 days). The median duration of grade ≥3 TEAEs was ≤13 days.<h4>Conclusions</h4>In patients with relapsed, platinum-sensitive or platinum-resistant germline BRCA-mutant high-grade ovarian cancer who had received ≥2 prior chemotherapies, rucaparib had robust antitumour activity with a safety profile consistent with prior reports.<h4>Clinical trial registration</h4>NCT01482715.
Ovarian clear cell carcinoma is a rare subtype of epithelial ovarian cancer with unique clinicopathological features. The most common genetic aberration observed is loss of function <i>ARID1A</i> mutations. Advanced and recurrent ovarian clear cell carcinoma is characterized by resistance to standard-of-care cytotoxic chemotherapy and a poor prognosis. Despite the distinct molecular features of ovarian clear cell carcinoma, current treatments for this subtype of epithelial ovarian cancer are based on clinical trials which predominantly recruited patients with high grade serous ovarian carcinoma. These factors have encouraged researchers to develop novel treatment strategies specifically for ovarian clear cell carcinoma which are currently being tested in the context of clinical trials. These new treatment strategies currently focus on three key areas: immune checkpoint blockade, targeting angiogenesis, and exploiting <i>ARID1A</i> synthetic lethal interactions. Rational combinations of these strategies are being assessed in clinical trials. Despite the progress made in identifying new treatments for ovarian clear cell carcinoma, predictive biomarkers to better define those patients likely to respond to new treatments remain to be elucidated. Additional future challenges which may be addressed through international collaboration include the need for randomized trials in a rare disease and establishing the relative sequencing of these novel treatments.
<h4>Importance</h4>Patients with platinum-resistant or refractory ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (PR-HGSC) have a poor prognosis and few therapeutic options. Preclinical studies support targeting PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling in this setting, and a phase 1 study of the dual mTORC1/mTORC2 inhibitor vistusertib with weekly paclitaxel showed activity.<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate whether the addition of vistusertib to weekly paclitaxel improves clinical outcomes in patients with PR-HGSC.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>This phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter randomized clinical trial recruited patients from UK cancer centers between January 2016 and March 2018. Patients with PR-HGSC of ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal origin and with measurable or evaluable disease (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and/or Gynecological Cancer Intergroup cancer antigen 125 criteria) were eligible. There were no restrictions on number of lines of prior therapy. Data analysis was performed from May 2019 to January 2022.<h4>Interventions</h4>Patients were randomized (1:1) to weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle) plus oral vistusertib (50 mg twice daily) or placebo.<h4>Main outcomes and measures</h4>The primary end point was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary end points included response rate, overall survival, and quality of life.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 140 patients (median [range] age, 63 [36-86] years; 17.9% with platinum-refractory disease; 53.6% with ≥3 prior therapies) were randomized. In the paclitaxel plus vistusertib vs paclitaxel plus placebo groups, there was no difference in progression-free survival (median, 4.5 vs 4.1 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 80% CI, 0.67-1.07; 1-sided P = .18), overall survival (median, 9.7 vs 11.1 months; HR, 1.21; 80% CI, 0.91-1.60) or response rate (odds ratio, 0.86; 80% CI, 0.55-1.36). Grade 3 to 4 adverse events were 41.2% (weekly paclitaxel plus vistusertib) vs 36.7% (weekly paclitaxel plus placebo), and there was no difference in quality of life.<h4>Conclusions and relevance</h4>In this randomized clinical trial of weekly paclitaxel and dual mTORC1/2 inhibition in patients with PR-HGSC, vistusertib did not improve clinical activity of weekly paclitaxel.<h4>Trial registration</h4>isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN16426935.
<h4>Background</h4>Following a European Society for Medical Oncology Women for Oncology (ESMO W4O) survey in 2016 showing severe under-representation of female oncologists in leadership roles, ESMO launched a series of initiatives to address obstacles to gender equity. A follow-up survey in October 2021 investigated progress achieved.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>The W4O questionnaire 2021 expanded on the 2016 survey, with additional questions on the impact of ethnicity, sexual orientation and religion on career development. Results were analysed according to respondent gender and age.<h4>Results</h4>The survey sample was larger than in 2016 (n = 1473 versus 482), especially among men. Significantly fewer respondents had managerial or leadership roles than in 2016 (31.8% versus 51.7%). Lack of leadership development for women and unconscious bias were considered more important in 2021 than in 2016. In 2021, more people reported harassment in the workplace than in 2016 (50.3% versus 41.0%). In 2021, ethnicity, sexual orientation and religion were considered to have little or no impact on professional career opportunities, salary setting or related potential pay gap. However, gender had a significant or major impact on career development (25.5% of respondents), especially in respondents ≤40 years of age and women. As in 2016, highest ranked initiatives to foster workplace equity were promotion of work-life balance, development and leadership training and flexible working. Significantly more 2021 respondents (mainly women) supported the need for culture and gender equity education at work than in 2016.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Gender remains a major barrier to career progression in oncology and, although some obstacles may have been reduced since 2016, we are a long way from closing the gender gap. Increased reporting of discrimination and inappropriate behaviour in the workplace is a major, priority concern. The W4O 2021 survey findings provide new evidence and highlight the areas for future ESMO interventions to support equity and diversity in oncology career development.
<h4>Objective</h4>Olaparib plus bevacizumab maintenance therapy improves survival outcomes in women with newly diagnosed, advanced, high-grade ovarian cancer with a deficiency in homologous recombination. We report data from the first year of routine homologous recombination deficiency testing in the National Health Service (NHS) in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland between April 2021 and April 2022.<h4>Methods</h4>The Myriad myChoice companion diagnostic was used to test DNA extracted from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor tissue in women with newly diagnosed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage III/IV high-grade epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. Tumors with homologous recombination deficiency were those with a <i>BRCA1</i>/<i>2</i> mutation and/or a Genomic Instability Score (GIS) ≥42. Testing was coordinated by the NHS Genomic Laboratory Hub network.<h4>Results</h4>The myChoice assay was performed on 2829 tumors. Of these, 2474 (87%) and 2178 (77%) successfully underwent <i>BRCA1/2</i> and GIS testing, respectively. All complete and partial assay failures occurred due to low tumor cellularity and/or low tumor DNA yield. 385 tumors (16%) contained a <i>BRCA1/2</i> mutation and 814 (37%) had a GIS ≥42. Tumors with a GIS ≥42 were more likely to be <i>BRCA1/2</i> wild-type (n=510) than <i>BRCA</i>1/2 mutant (n=304). The distribution of GIS was bimodal, with <i>BRCA1/2</i> mutant tumors having a higher mean score than <i>BRCA1/2</i> wild-type tumors (61 vs 33, respectively, χ<sup>2</sup> test p<0.0001).<h4>Conclusion</h4>This is the largest real-world evaluation of homologous recombination deficiency testing in newly diagnosed FIGO stage III/IV high-grade epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. It is important to select tumor tissue with adequate tumor content and quality to reduce the risk of assay failure. The rapid uptake of testing across England, Wales, and Northern Ireland demonstrates the power of centralized NHS funding, center specialization, and the NHS Genomic Laboratory Hub network.
<h4>Purpose</h4>This interim report of the GARNET phase I trial presents efficacy and safety of dostarlimab in patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (EC), with an analysis of tumor biomarkers as prognostic indicators.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>A total of 153 patients with mismatch repair deficient (dMMR)/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) and 161 patients with mismatch repair proficient (MMRp)/microsatellite stable (MSS) EC were enrolled and dosed. Patients received 500 mg dostarlimab every 3 weeks for four cycles, then 1,000 mg every 6 weeks until progression. Primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR).<h4>Results</h4>A total of 143 patients with dMMR/MSI-H EC and 156 patients with MMRp/MSS EC were evaluated for efficacy. ORR was 45.5% (n = 65) and 15.4% (n = 24) for dMMR/MSI-H EC and MMRp/MSS EC, respectively. Median DOR for dMMR/MSI-H EC was not met (median follow-up, 27.6 months); median DOR for MMRp/MSS EC was 19.4 months. The ORRs by combined positive score (CPS) ≥1 status were 54.9% and 21.7% for dMMR/MSI-H EC and MMRp/MSS EC, respectively. ORRs by high tumor mutational burden (≥10 mutations/Mb) were 47.8% (43/90) and 45.5% (5/11) for dMMR/MSI-H EC and MMRp/MSS EC, respectively. ORR in TP53mut or POLεmut molecular subgroups was 18.1% (17/94) and 40.0% (2/5), respectively. The safety profile of dostarlimab was consistent with previous reports.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Dostarlimab demonstrated durable antitumor activity and safety in patients with dMMR/MSI-H EC. Biomarkers associated with EC may identify patients likely to respond to dostarlimab. See related commentary by Jangra and Dhani, p. 4521.
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.
<h4>Purpose</h4>We present the results of a post hoc tumor tissue analysis from the phase 3 MILO/ENGOT-ov11 study (NCT01849874).<h4>Patients and methods</h4>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.<h4>Results</h4>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).<h4>Conclusions</h4>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.
<h4>Purpose</h4>Tissue factor is highly expressed in cervical carcinoma and can be targeted by tisotumab vedotin (TV), an antibody-drug conjugate. This phase Ib/II study evaluated TV in combination with bevacizumab, pembrolizumab, or carboplatin for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer (r/mCC).<h4>Methods</h4>This open-label, multicenter study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03786081) included dose-escalation arms that assessed dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and identified the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of TV in combination with bevacizumab (arm A), pembrolizumab (arm B), or carboplatin (arm C). The dose-expansion arms evaluated TV antitumor activity and safety at RP2D in combination with carboplatin as first-line (1L) treatment (arm D) or with pembrolizumab as 1L (arm E) or second-/third-line (2L/3L) treatment (arm F). The primary end point of dose expansion was objective response rate (ORR).<h4>Results</h4>A total of 142 patients were enrolled. In dose escalation (n = 41), no DLTs were observed; the RP2D was TV 2 mg/kg plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg on day 1 once every 3 weeks, pembrolizumab 200 mg on day 1 once every 3 weeks, or carboplatin AUC 5 on day 1 once every 3 weeks. In dose expansion (n = 101), the ORR was 54.5% (n/N, 18/33; 95% CI, 36.4 to 71.9) with 1L TV + carboplatin (arm D), 40.6% (n/N, 13/32; 95% CI, 23.7 to 59.4) with 1L TV + pembrolizumab (arm E), and 35.3% (12/34; 19.7 to 53.5) with 2L/3L TV + pembrolizumab (arm F). The median duration of response was 8.6 months, not reached, and 14.1 months, in arms D, E, and F, respectively. Grade ≥3 adverse events (≥15%) were anemia, diarrhea, nausea, and thrombocytopenia in arm D and anemia in arm F (none ≥15%, arm E).<h4>Conclusion</h4>TV in combination with bevacizumab, carboplatin, or pembrolizumab demonstrated manageable safety and encouraging antitumor activity in treatment-naive and previously treated r/mCC.
<h4>Purpose</h4>Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) is a human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)-directed antibody-drug conjugate approved in HER2-expressing breast and gastric cancers and HER2-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer. Treatments are limited for other HER2-expressing solid tumors.<h4>Methods</h4>This open-label phase II study evaluated T-DXd (5.4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks) for HER2-expressing (immunohistochemistry [IHC] 3+/2+ by local or central testing) locally advanced or metastatic disease after ≥1 systemic treatment or without alternative treatments. The primary end point was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end points included safety, duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).<h4>Results</h4>At primary analysis, 267 patients received treatment across seven tumor cohorts: endometrial, cervical, ovarian, bladder, biliary tract, pancreatic, and other. The median follow-up was 12.75 months. In all patients, the ORR was 37.1% (n = 99; [95% CI, 31.3 to 43.2]), with responses in all cohorts; the median DOR was 11.3 months (95% CI, 9.6 to 17.8); the median PFS was 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 8.0); and the median OS was 13.4 months (95% CI, 11.9 to 15.5). In patients with central HER2 IHC 3+ expression (n = 75), the ORR was 61.3% (95% CI, 49.4 to 72.4), the median DOR was 22.1 months (95% CI, 9.6 to not reached), the median PFS was 11.9 months (95% CI, 8.2 to 13.0), and the median OS was 21.1 months (95% CI, 15.3 to 29.6). Grade ≥3 drug-related adverse events were observed in 40.8% of patients; 10.5% experienced adjudicated drug-related interstitial lung disease (ILD), with three deaths.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Our study demonstrates durable clinical benefit, meaningful survival outcomes, and safety consistent with the known profile (including ILD) in pretreated patients with HER2-expressing tumors receiving T-DXd. Greatest benefit was observed for the IHC 3+ population. These data support the potential role of T-DXd as a tumor-agnostic therapy for patients with HER2-expressing solid tumors.
<h4>Objective</h4>The peritoneal cancer index quantitatively assesses cancer distribution and tumor burden in the peritoneal cavity. The aim of this study is to evaluate the association between the peritoneal cancer index and completeness of surgical cytoreduction for ovarian cancer and to identify a cut-off above which complete cytoreduction is unlikely.<h4>Methods</h4>This is a single-center prospective cohort observational study. A total of 100 consecutive patients who underwent ovarian cancer surgery were included. Peritoneal cancer index scores prior to and after surgery were calculated, and a cut-off value for incomplete cytoreduction was identified using a receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve. Surgical complexity, blood loss, length of surgery, and complications were analyzed and associations with the peritoneal cancer index score were evaluated.<h4>Results</h4>The overall median peritoneal cancer index score was 9.5 (range 0-36). The median age of the patients was 61 years (range 24-85). The most common stage was III (13% stage II, 53% stage III, 34% stage IV) and the most common histologic sub-type was high-grade serous (76% high-grade serous, 8% low-grade serous, 5% clear cell, 4% serous borderline, 2% endometrioid, 2% adult granulosa cell, 2% adenocarcinoma, 1% carcinosarcoma). Complete cytoreduction was achieved in 82% of patients, with a median score of 9 (range 0-30). The remaining 18% had a median score of 28.5 (range 0-36). The best predictor of incomplete cytoreduction was the peritoneal cancer index score, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.928 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.00). ROC curve analysis determined a peritoneal cancer index cut-off score of 20. Major complications occurred in 15% of patients with peritoneal cancer index scores >20 and in 2.5% of patients with scores ≤20, which was statistically significant (p=0.014).<h4>Conclusions</h4>In our study we found that a peritoneal cancer index score of ≤20 was associated with a high likelihood of complete cytoreduction. Incorporating the peritoneal cancer index into routine surgical practice and research may impact treatment plans.
<h4>Purpose</h4>Early results from the phase II MEDIOLA study (NCT02734004) in germline BRCA1- and/or BRCA2-mutated (gBRCAm) platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (PSROC) showed promising efficacy and safety with olaparib plus durvalumab. We report efficacy and safety of olaparib plus durvalumab in an expansion cohort of women with gBRCAm PSROC (gBRCAm expansion doublet cohort) and two cohorts with non-gBRCAm PSROC, one of which also received bevacizumab (non-gBRCAm doublet and triplet cohorts).<h4>Patients and methods</h4>In this open-label, multicenter study, PARP inhibitor-naïve patients received olaparib plus durvalumab treatment until disease progression; the non-gBRCAm triplet cohort also received bevacizumab. Primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR; gBRCAm expansion doublet cohort), disease control rate (DCR) at 24 weeks (non-gBRCAm cohorts), and safety (all cohorts).<h4>Results</h4>The full analysis and safety analysis sets comprised 51, 32, and 31 patients in the gBRCAm expansion doublet, non-gBRCAm doublet, and non-gBRCAm triplet cohorts, respectively. ORR was 92.2% [95% confidence interval (CI), 81.1-97.8] in the gBRCAm expansion doublet cohort (primary endpoint); DCR at 24 weeks was 28.1% (90% CI, 15.5-43.9) in the non-gBRCAm doublet cohort (primary endpoint) and 74.2% (90% CI, 58.2-86.5) in the non-gBRCAm triplet cohort (primary endpoint). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events were reported in 47.1%, 65.6%, and 61.3% of patients in the gBRCAm expansion doublet, non-gBRCAm doublet, and non-gBRCAm triplet cohorts, respectively, most commonly anemia.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Olaparib plus durvalumab continued to show notable clinical activity in women with gBRCAm PSROC. Olaparib plus durvalumab with bevacizumab demonstrated encouraging clinical activity in women with non-gBRCAm PSROC. No new safety signals were identified.
<h4>Background</h4>OCTOVA compared the efficacy of olaparib (O) versus weekly paclitaxel (wP) or olaparib + cediranib (O + C) in recurrent ovarian cancer (OC).<h4>Aims</h4>The main aim of the OCTOVA trial was to determine the progression-free survival (PFS) of olaparib (O) versus the oral combination of olaparib plus cediranib (O + C) and weekly paclitaxel (wP) in recurrent ovarian cancer (OC).<h4>Methods</h4>In total, 139 participants who had relapsed within 12 months of platinum therapy were randomised to O (300 mg twice daily), wP (80 mg/m<sup>2</sup> d1,8,15, q28) or O + C (300 mg twice daily/20 mg daily, respectively). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) of olaparib (O) versus olaparib plus cediranib (O + C) or weekly paclitaxel (wP). The sample size was calculated to observe a PFS hazard ratio (HR) 0.64 in favour of O + C compared to O (20% one-sided type I error, 80% power).<h4>Results</h4>The majority had platinum-resistant disease (90%), 22% prior PARPi, 34% prior anti-angiogenic therapy, 30% germline BRCA1/2 mutations. The PFS was increased for O + C vs O (O + C 5.4 mo (2.3, 9.6): O 3.7 mo (1.8, 7.6) HR = 0.73; 60% CI: 0.59, 0.89; P = 0.1) and no different between wP and O (wP 3.9 m (1.9, 9.1); O 3.7 mo (1.8, 7.6) HR = 0.89, 60% CI: 0.72, 1.09; P = 0.69). The main treatment-related adverse events included manageable diarrhoea (4% Grade 3) and hypertension (4% Grade 3) in the O + C arm.<h4>Discussion</h4>OCTOVA demonstrated the activity of O + C in women with recurrent disease, offering a potential non-chemotherapy option.<h4>Trial registration</h4>ISRCTN14784018, registered on 19th January 2018 http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN14784018 .
<h4>Importance</h4>Mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) occurs in various cancers, and these tumors are attractive candidates for anti-programmed cell death 1 therapies, such as dostarlimab, a recently approved immune checkpoint inhibitor.<h4>Objective</h4>To assess the antitumor activity and safety of dostarlimab in patients with advanced or recurrent dMMR solid tumors.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>The GARNET trial was a phase 1, open-label, single-group, multicenter study that began enrolling May 8, 2017. Participants had advanced or recurrent dMMR and microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) or polymerase epsilon (POLE)-altered solid tumors. The data cut for this interim analysis was from November 1, 2021, with median follow-up of 27.7 months.<h4>Interventions</h4>Patients received 500 mg of dostarlimab intravenously every 3 weeks for 4 doses, then 1000 mg every 6 weeks until disease progression, discontinuation, or withdrawal.<h4>Main outcomes and measures</h4>The primary objective was to evaluate objective response rate and duration of response in patients with dMMR solid tumors by blinded independent central review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1.<h4>Results</h4>The efficacy population included 327 patients (median [range] age, 63 [24-85] years; 235 [71.9%] female; 7 [2.1%] Asian, 6 [1.8%] Black, and 206 [63.0%] White patients), with 141 patients (43.1%) with dMMR endometrial cancer, 105 patients (32.1%) with dMMR colorectal cancer, and 81 patients (24.8%) with other dMMR tumor types. All patients had at least 1 previous line of therapy. Objective response rate assessed per blinded independent central review for dMMR solid tumors was 44.0% (95% CI, 38.6% to 49.6%). Median duration of response was not reached (range, ≥1.18 to ≥47.21 months); 72.2% of responders (104 of 144) had a response lasting 12 or more months. Median progression-free survival was 6.9 months (95% CI, 4.2 to 13.6 months); probability of progression-free survival at 24 months was 40.6% (95% CI, 35.0% to 46.1%). Median overall survival was not reached (95% CI, 31.6 months to not reached). The most frequent immune-related adverse events were hypothyroidism (25 [6.9%]), alanine aminotransferase increase (21 [5.8%]), and arthralgia (17 [4.7%]). No new safety concerns were identified.<h4>Conclusions and relevance</h4>In this nonrandomized controlled trial, dostarlimab was a well-tolerated treatment option with rapid, robust, and durable antitumor activity in patients with diverse dMMR solid tumors. These findings suggest that dostarlimab provides meaningful long-term benefit in a population with high unmet need.<h4>Trial registration</h4>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02715284.
<h4>Background</h4>The combination of monalizumab (anti-NKG2A/CD94) and durvalumab (anti-programmed death ligand-1) may promote antitumor immunity by targeting innate and adaptive immunity. This phase 1/2 study of monalizumab and durvalumab evaluated safety, antitumor activity, and pharmacodynamics in patients with advanced solid tumors.<h4>Main body</h4>Immunotherapy-naïve patients aged ≥18 years with advanced disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and 1-3 prior lines of systemic therapy in the recurrent/metastatic setting were enrolled. In part 1 (dose escalation), patients received durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) with increasing doses of monalizumab Q2W/Q4W (n=15). Dose expansion in part 1 included patients with cervical cancer (n=15; durvalumab 1500 mg Q4W and monalizumab 750 mg Q2W) or metastatic microsatellite stable (MSS)-colorectal cancer (CRC) (n=15; durvalumab 1500 mg Q4W and monalizumab 750 mg Q4W). In part 2 (dose expansion), patients with MSS-CRC (n=40), non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; n=20), MSS-endometrial cancer (n=40), or ovarian cancer (n=40) received durvalumab 1500 mg Q4W and monalizumab 750 mg Q2W. The primary endpoint was safety. Secondary endpoints included antitumor activity per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1). Exploratory analyses included assessment of T-cell and natural killer (NK) cell activation and proliferation in peripheral blood and the tumor microenvironment (TME). The study enrolled 185 patients (part 1, 45; part 2, 140). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed and the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. In part 2, the most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (12.1%), asthenia (9.3%), diarrhea (9.3%), pruritus (7.9%), and pyrexia (7.1%). In the expansion cohorts, response rates were 0% (cervical), 7.7% (MSS-CRC), 10% (NSCLC), 5.4% (ovarian), and 0% (MSS-endometrial). Sustained NK cell activation, CD8<sup>+</sup> T-cell proliferation, increased serum levels of CXCL10 (C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 10) and CXCL11, and increased tumor infiltration of CD8<sup>+</sup> and granzyme B<sup>+</sup> cells were observed.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Although efficacy was modest, monalizumab plus durvalumab was well tolerated and encouraging immune activation was observed in the peripheral blood and TME.<h4>Trial registration number</h4>NCT02671435.
<h4>Introduction</h4>DESTINY-PanTumor02 (NCT04482309) evaluated the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) in pretreated patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-expressing [immunohistochemistry (IHC) 3+/2+] solid tumors across seven cohorts: endometrial, cervical, ovarian, bladder, biliary tract, pancreatic, and other. Subgroup analyses by HER2 status were previously reported by central HER2 IHC testing, determined at enrollment or confirmed retrospectively. Reflecting the testing methods available in clinical practice, most patients (n = 202; 75.7%) were enrolled based on local HER2 IHC testing. Here, we report outcomes by HER2 IHC status as determined by the local or central test results used for study enrollment.<h4>Methods</h4>This phase 2, open-label study evaluated T-DXd (5.4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks) for HER2-expressing (IHC 3+/2+ by local or central testing) locally advanced or metastatic disease after ≥ 1 systemic treatment or without alternative treatments. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included safety, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival.<h4>Results</h4>In total, 111 (41.6%) and 151 (56.6%) patients were enrolled with IHC 3+ and IHC 2+ tumors, respectively. In patients with IHC 3+ tumors, investigator-assessed confirmed ORR was 51.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 41.7, 61.0], and median DOR was 14.2 months (95% CI 10.3, 23.6). In patients with IHC 2+ tumors, investigator-assessed ORR was 26.5% (95% CI 19.6, 34.3), and median DOR was 9.8 months (95% CI 4.5, 12.6). Safety was consistent with the known profile of T-DXd.<h4>Conclusion</h4>In line with previously reported results, T-DXd demonstrated clinically meaningful benefit in patients with HER2-expressing tumors, with the greatest benefit in patients with IHC 3+ tumors. These data support the antitumor activity of T-DXd in HER2-expressing solid tumors, irrespective of whether patients are identified by local or central HER2 IHC testing.
<h4>Background</h4>There are no approved treatments specifically for low grade serous ovarian cancer; current standard of care treatment options are limited in efficacy and tolerability. The combination of avutometinib with defactinib has demonstrated efficacy and a consistent safety profile in two clinical trials in recurrent low grade serous ovarian cancer, and a lower discontinuation rate due to adverse events compared with historical rates for standard of care.<h4>Primary objective</h4>To compare the progression free survival of the combination of avutometinib with defactinib versus investigator's choice of treatment in patients with recurrent low grade serous ovarian cancer.<h4>Study hypothesis</h4>Combination treatment with avutometinib-defactinib will significantly improve progression free survival compared with investigator's choice of treatment in patients with recurrent low grade serous ovarian cancer.<h4>Trial design</h4>GOG-3097/ENGOT-ov81/GTG-UK/RAMP 301 is a phase 3, randomized, international, open label study designed to compare avutometinib with defactinib versus investigator's choice of treatment in patients with recurrent low grade serous ovarian cancer who have progressed on a previous platinum based therapy. On confirmation of disease progression using a blinded independent central review, patients on the investigator's choice of treatment arm may cross over to the avutometinib-defactinib arm.<h4>Major inclusion/exclusion criteria</h4>Patients must have recurrent low grade serous ovarian cancer (<i>KRAS</i> mutant or wild-type) and have documented progression (radiographic or clinical) or recurrence of low grade serous ovarian cancer after at least one platinum based chemotherapy regimen. Unlimited additional previous lines of therapy are allowed, including previous MEK/RAF inhibitor. Patients will be excluded if they have co-existing high grade ovarian cancer or had previous treatment with avutometinib, defactinib, or any other FAK inhibitor.<h4>Primary endpoint</h4>Progression free survival according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, blinded-independent central review.<h4>Sample size</h4>Approximately 270 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to either the combination avutometinib with defactinib arm (n~135) or the investigator's choice of treatment arm (n~135).<h4>Estimated dates for completing accrual and presenting results</h4>The estimated primary completion date of RAMP 301 is 2028, and the estimated study completion date is 2031.<h4>Trial registration</h4>ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06072781.
<h4>Background</h4>Burnout in health care professionals (HCPs) results from exposure to psychosocial risks at work. Left unaddressed, burnout can lead to chronic health problems, increased staff turnover, reduced work hours, absenteeism, and early retirement from clinical practice, thus impacting patient care. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Resilience Task Force (RTF) was established in December 2019 to support the well-being of oncology HCPs globally. This ESMO RTF position paper aims to provide a set of recommendations to optimise well-being and mitigate burnout in oncology, and to help individuals and institutions maintain the delivery of optimal cancer care.<h4>Design</h4>Recommendations were developed by a diverse multinational panel of interprofessional experts based on the key findings from three previously reported ESMO RTF surveys.<h4>Results</h4>Several recurrent work-related psychosocial risks in oncology were identified; in particular, concerns about workload and professional development. The need for flexible work patterns, continued use of virtual resources, well-being resources, and targeted support for at-risk groups were highlighted as key considerations to safeguard HCPs' health and prevent burnout. In total, 11 recommendations relating to three priority themes were developed: (i) information and training; (ii) resources; (iii) activism and advocacy.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Optimising the well-being of oncology HCPs is essential for the provision of high-quality, sustainable care for patients globally. The ESMO RTF will continue its mission and is rolling out several initiatives and activities to support the implementation of these recommendations.
At first recurrence, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC) is frequently treated with platinum-based chemotherapy doublets plus bevacizumab, then single-agent bevacizumab. Most patients' disease progresses within a year after chemotherapy, emphasizing the need for novel strategies. Mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx (MIRV), an antibody-drug conjugate, comprises a folate receptor alpha (FRα)-binding antibody and tubulin-targeting payload (maytansinoid DM4). In FRα-high PSOC, MIRV plus bevacizumab previously showed promising efficacy (objective response rate, 69% [95% CI: 41-89]; median progression-free survival, 13.3 months [95% CI: 8.3-18.3]; median duration of response, 12.9 months [95% CI: 6.5-15.7]) and safety. The Phase III randomized GLORIOSA trial will evaluate MIRV plus bevacizumab vs. bevacizumab alone as maintenance therapy in patients with FRα-high PSOC who did not have disease progression following second-line platinum-based doublet chemotherapy plus bevacizumab.<b>Clinical Trial Registration</b>: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05445778; GOG.org ID: GOG-3078; ENGOT.ESGO.org ID: ENGOT-ov76.