Search

Mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) endometrial cancer (EC) is an inflamed phenotype with poor outcomes when meeting high-risk criteria and limited treatment options in the adjuvant setting. We report protocol-prespecified subgroup analysis of patients with dMMR tumors from the phase III ENGOT-en11/GOG-3053/KEYNOTE-B21 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04634877) in newly diagnosed, high-risk EC after surgery with curative intent. Patients were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo (six cycles) plus carboplatin-paclitaxel (four to six cycles) once every 3 weeks, then pembrolizumab 400 mg or placebo once every 6 weeks (six cycles), respectively. MMR status was a stratification factor. Patients received radiotherapy at investigator discretion. Investigator-assessed disease-free survival (DFS) was a primary end point. No formal hypothesis testing was performed for subgroup analysis. In the intention-to-treat population, 141 patients in the pembrolizumab arm and 140 in the placebo arm had dMMR tumors. At this interim analysis, hazard ratio for DFS favored pembrolizumab (0.31 [95% CI, 0.14 to 0.69]); median DFS was not reached in either group. Two-year DFS rates were 92.4% (95% CI, 84.4 to 96.4) and 80.2% (95% CI, 70.8 to 86.9), respectively. No new safety signals occurred. Longer-term follow-up of outcomes will be evaluated at final analysis. Preplanned subgroup analysis on the basis of the study's stratification factors suggests that pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy improves DFS and is clinically relevant for patients with dMMR tumors in the curative-intent setting.

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

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. The phase III, double-blind KEYNOTE-826 trial of pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo once every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles plus platinum-based chemotherapy, with or without bevacizumab, showed statistically significant survival benefits with the addition of pembrolizumab for patients with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer (primary data cutoff: May 3, 2021). This article reports the protocol-specified final overall survival (OS) results tested in the PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥1, all-comer, and CPS ≥10 populations. At the final data cutoff (October 3, 2022), the median study follow-up duration was 39.1 months (range, 32.1-46.5 months). In the PD-L1 CPS ≥1 (N = 548), all-comer (N = 617), and CPS ≥10 (N = 317) populations, median OS with pembrolizumab-chemotherapy versus placebo-chemotherapy was 28.6 months versus 16.5 months (hazard ratio [HR] for death, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.49 to 0.74]), 26.4 months versus 16.8 months (HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.52 to 0.77]), and 29.6 months versus 17.4 months (HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.78]), respectively. The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events was 82.4% with pembrolizumab-chemotherapy and 75.4% with placebo-chemotherapy. These results show that pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy, with or without bevacizumab, continued to provide clinically meaningful improvements in OS for patients with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer.

Purpose: 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)., Methods: 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)., Results: 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)., Conclusion: TV in combination with bevacizumab, carboplatin, or pembrolizumab demonstrated manageable safety and encouraging antitumor activity in treatment-naive and previously treated r/mCC.

Purpose: Despite therapeutic advances, outcomes for patients with platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian cancer remain poor. Selective glucocorticoid receptor modulation with relacorilant may restore chemosensitivity and enhance chemotherapy efficacy., Methods: This three-arm, randomized, controlled, open-label phase II study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03776812) enrolled women with recurrent, platinum-resistant/refractory, high-grade serous or endometrioid epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer, or ovarian carcinosarcoma treated with ≤4 prior chemotherapeutic regimens. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to (1) nab-paclitaxel (80 mg/m 2 ) + intermittent relacorilant (150 mg the day before, of, and after nab-paclitaxel); (2) nab-paclitaxel (80 mg/m 2 ) + continuous relacorilant (100 mg once daily); or (3) nab-paclitaxel monotherapy (100 mg/m 2 ). Nab-paclitaxel was administered on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by investigator assessment; objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), overall survival (OS), and safety were secondary end points., Results: A total of 178 women were randomly assigned. Intermittent relacorilant + nab-paclitaxel improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; log-rank test P = .038; median follow-up, 11.1 months) and DOR (HR, 0.36; P = .006) versus nab-paclitaxel monotherapy, while ORR was similar across arms. At the preplanned OS analysis (median follow-up, 22.5 months), the OS HR was 0.67 ( P = .066) for the intermittent arm versus nab-paclitaxel monotherapy. Continuous relacorilant + nab-paclitaxel showed numerically improved median PFS but did not result in significant improvement over nab-paclitaxel monotherapy. Adverse events were comparable across study arms, with neutropenia, anemia, peripheral neuropathy, and fatigue/asthenia being the most common grade ≥3 adverse events., Conclusion: Intermittent relacorilant + nab-paclitaxel improved PFS, DOR, and OS compared with nab-paclitaxel monotherapy. On the basis of protocol-prespecified Hochberg step-up multiplicity adjustment, the primary end point did not reach statistical significance ( P < .025). A phase III evaluation of this regimen is underway (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05257408).

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. We report the final prespecified analysis for overall survival (OS), along with updated progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR), and safety from the open-label, randomized, phase III Study 309/KEYNOTE-775. In total, 827 patients with advanced, recurrent, or metastatic endometrial cancer (EC) were randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib 20 mg orally once daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks (n = 411) or chemotherapy of the treating physician's choice (doxorubicin 60 mg/m 2 intravenously once every 3 weeks or paclitaxel 80 mg/m 2 intravenously once weekly [3 weeks on; 1 week off] [n = 416]). Efficacy was reported for patients with mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) tumors and all-comers, and by subgroups (histology, prior therapy, MMR status). Updated safety was also reported.Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab showed benefits in OS (pMMR HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.83; all-comer HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.77), PFS (pMMR HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.72; all-comer HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.66), and ORR (pMMR patients, 32.4% v 15.1%; all-comers, 33.8% v 14.7%) versus chemotherapy. OS, PFS, and ORR favored lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in all subgroups of interest. No new safety signals were observed. Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab continued to show improved efficacy versus chemotherapy and manageable safety in patients with previously treated advanced EC.

Purpose: Single-agent chemotherapies have limited activity and considerable toxicity in patients with platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (PROC). Mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV) is an antibody-drug conjugate targeting folate receptor α (FRα). SORAYA is a single-arm, phase II study evaluating efficacy and safety of MIRV in patients with PROC., Methods: SORAYA enrolled FRα-high patients with PROC who had received one to three prior therapies, including required bevacizumab. The primary end point was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by investigator; duration of response was the key secondary end point., Results: One hundred six patients were enrolled; 105 were evaluable for efficacy. All patients had received prior bevacizumab, 51% had three prior lines of therapy, and 48% received a prior poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor. Median follow-up was 13.4 months. ORR was 32.4% (95% CI, 23.6 to 42.2), including five complete and 29 partial responses. The median duration of response was 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 9.7). In patients with one to two priors, the ORR by investigator was 35.3% (95% CI, 22.4 to 49.9) and in patients with three priors was 30.2% (95% CI, 18.3 to 44.3). The ORR by investigator was 38.0% (95% CI, 24.7 to 52.8) in patients with prior poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor exposure and 27.5% (95% CI, 15.9 to 41.7) in those without. The most common treatment-related adverse events (all grade and grade 3-4) were blurred vision (41% and 6%), keratopathy (29% and 9%), and nausea (29% and 0%). Treatment-related adverse events led to dose delays, reductions, and discontinuations in 33%, 20%, and 9% of patients, respectively., Conclusion: MIRV demonstrated consistent clinically meaningful antitumor activity and favorable tolerability and safety in patients with FRα-high PROC who had received up to three prior therapies, including bevacizumab, representing an important advance for this biomarker-selected population.

Purpose: ATHENA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03522246) was designed to evaluate rucaparib first-line maintenance treatment in a broad patient population, including those without BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) mutations or other evidence of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), or high-risk clinical characteristics such as residual disease. We report the results from the ATHENA-MONO comparison of rucaparib versus placebo., Methods: Patients with stage III-IV high-grade ovarian cancer undergoing surgical cytoreduction (R0/complete resection permitted) and responding to first-line platinum-doublet chemotherapy were randomly assigned 4:1 to oral rucaparib 600 mg twice a day or placebo. Stratification factors were HRD test status, residual disease after chemotherapy, and timing of surgery. The primary end point of investigator-assessed progression-free survival was assessed in a step-down procedure, first in the HRD population (BRCA-mutant or BRCA wild-type/loss of heterozygosity high tumor), and then in the intent-to-treat population., Results: As of March 23, 2022 (data cutoff), 427 and 111 patients were randomly assigned to rucaparib or placebo, respectively (HRD population: 185 v 49). Median progression-free survival (95% CI) was 28.7 months (23.0 to not reached) with rucaparib versus 11.3 months (9.1 to 22.1) with placebo in the HRD population (log-rank P = .0004; hazard ratio [HR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.72); 20.2 months (15.2 to 24.7) versus 9.2 months (8.3 to 12.2) in the intent-to-treat population (log-rank P < .0001; HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.68); and 12.1 months (11.1 to 17.7) versus 9.1 months (4.0 to 12.2) in the HRD-negative population (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.95). The most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events were anemia (rucaparib, 28.7% v placebo, 0%) and neutropenia (14.6% v 0.9%)., Conclusion: Rucaparib monotherapy is effective as first-line maintenance, conferring significant benefit versus placebo in patients with advanced ovarian cancer with and without HRD.

Purpose: 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., Patients and Methods: 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., Results: 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 v 189 randomly assigned to placebo; difference, 6.28 months [95% CI, 4.85 to 7.47 months]); BRCA -mutant cohort (130 rucaparib v 66 placebo; 9.37 months [95% CI, 6.65 to 11.85 months]); homologous recombination deficient (HRD) cohort (236 rucaparib v 118 placebo; 7.93 months [95% CI, 5.93 to 9.53 months]); and BRCA wild-type/loss of heterozygosity (LOH) low patient subgroup (107 rucaparib v 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 v 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, BRCA -mutant cohort, HRD cohort, and BRCA wild-type/LOH low patient subgroup, respectively. Q-TWiST with TOX defined using select grade ≥ 2 TEAEs also consistently favored rucaparib., Conclusion: The significant differences in QA-PFS and Q-TWiST confirm the benefit of rucaparib versus placebo in all predefined cohorts.

Purpose Platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC) for patients with progressing ovarian cancer (OC) is more effective with a longer time interval from previous platinum treatment (platinum-free interval [PFI]). In 1999, it was hypothesized that prolonging PFI with single-agent non-PBC (NPBC) may offer a strategy to improve overall outcome. MITO-8 aimed to verify this hypothesis commonly used in clinical practice although it has not been prospectively tested. Methods MITO-8 is an open-label, prospective, randomized, superiority trial. Patients with OC who experienced disease progression 6 to 12 months after their last platinum treatment were randomly assigned 1:1 to the experimental sequence of NPBC followed by PBC at subsequent relapse or the standard reverse treatment sequence. Overall survival (OS) was the primary end point. Results Two hundred fifteen patients were enrolled (standard arm [n = 108]; experimental arm [n = 107]). The trial ended before planned because of slow enrollment. PFI was prolonged in the experimental arm (median, 7.8 v 0.01 months). There was no OS benefit in the experimental arm (median, 21.8 v 24.5 months; hazard ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.94; P = .06). Progression-free survival after the sequence was significantly shorter in the experimental arm (median, 12.8 v 16.4 months; hazard ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.92; P = .025). Global quality-of-life change after three cycles was worse in the experimental arm. Slight differences were observed in the incidence of adverse effects. Conclusion MITO-8 supports the recommendation that PBC not be delayed in favor of an NPBC in patients with partially platinum-sensitive OC. PBC should be used as a control arm in future trials of new drugs in this setting.

Purpose: The AGO-OVAR 2.29/ENGOT-ov14/PENELOPE prospectively randomized phase III trial evaluated the addition of pertuzumab to chemotherapy in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian carcinoma with low tumor human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) mRNA expression. We report the results of the primary efficacy analysis., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had ovarian carcinoma that progressed during or within 6 months of completing four or more platinum cycles, centrally tested low tumor HER3 mRNA expression (concentration ratio ≤ 2.81 by quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction on cobas z480 [Roche Molecular Diagnostics, Pleasanton, CA]), and no more than two prior lines of chemotherapy. After investigators' selection of the chemotherapy backbone (single-agent topotecan, weekly paclitaxel, or gemcitabine), patients were randomly assigned to also receive either placebo or pertuzumab (840-mg loading dose followed by 420 mg every 3 weeks). Stratification factors were selected chemotherapy, prior antiangiogenic therapy, and platinum-free interval. The primary end point was independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Additional end points included overall survival, investigator-assessed PFS, objective response rate, safety, patient-reported outcomes, and translational research., Results: Overall, 156 patients were randomly assigned. Adding pertuzumab to chemotherapy did not significantly improve independent review committee-assessed PFS for the primary analysis (stratified hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.11; P = .14; median PFS, 4.3 months for pertuzumab plus chemotherapy v 2.6 months for placebo plus chemotherapy). Sensitivity analyses and secondary efficacy end point results were consistent with the primary analysis. The effect on PFS favoring pertuzumab was more pronounced in the gemcitabine and paclitaxel cohorts. No new safety signals were seen., Conclusion: Although the primary objective was not met, subgroup analyses showed trends in PFS favoring pertuzumab in the gemcitabine and paclitaxel cohorts, meriting further exploration of pertuzumab in ovarian cancer., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: Carboplatin/paclitaxel is the standard first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Multicentre Italian Trials in Ovarian Cancer-2 (MITO-2), an academic multicenter phase III trial, tested whether carboplatin/pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) was more effective than standard chemotherapy., Patients and Methods: Chemotherapy-naive patients with stage IC to IV ovarian cancer (age ≤ 75 years; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 2) were randomly assigned to carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 5 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) or to carboplatin AUC 5 plus PLD 30 mg/m(2), every 3 weeks for six cycles. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). With 632 events in 820 enrolled patients, the study would have 80% power to detect a 0.80 hazard ratio (HR) of PFS., Results: Eight hundred twenty patients were randomly assigned. Disease stages III and IV were prevalent. Occurrence of PFS events substantially slowed before obtaining the planned number. Therefore, in concert with the Independent Data Monitoring Committee, final analysis was performed with 556 events, after a median follow-up of 40 months. Median PFS times were 19.0 and 16.8 months with carboplatin/PLD and carboplatin/paclitaxel, respectively (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.13; P = .58). Median overall survival times were 61.6 and 53.2 months with carboplatin/PLD and carboplatin/paclitaxel, respectively (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.12; P = .32). Carboplatin/PLD produced a similar response rate but different toxicity (less neurotoxicity and alopecia but more hematologic adverse effects). There was no relevant difference in global quality of life after three and six cycles., Conclusion: Carboplatin/PLD was not superior to carboplatin/paclitaxel, which remains the standard first-line chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer. However, given the observed CIs and the different toxicity, carboplatin/PLD could be considered an alternative to standard therapy.

Purpose: We aimed at investigating the efficacy, tolerability, and quality of life (QOL) of gemcitabine (GEM) compared with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) in the salvage treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer., Patients and Methods: A phase III randomized multicenter trial was planned to compare GEM (1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days) with PLD (40 mg/m(2) every 28 days) in ovarian cancer patients who experienced treatment failure with only one platinum/paclitaxel regimen and who experienced recurrence or progression within 12 months after completion of primary treatment., Results: One hundred fifty-three patients were randomly assigned to PLD (n = 76) or GEM (n = 77). Treatment arms were well balanced for clinicopathologic characteristics. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was more frequent in GEM-treated patients versus PLD-treated patients (P = .007). Grade 3 or 4 palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia was documented in a higher proportion of PLD patients (6%) versus GEM patients (0%; P = .061). The overall response rate was 16% in the PLD arm compared with 29% in the GEM arm (P = .056). No statistically significant difference in time to progression (TTP) curves according to treatment allocation was documented (P = .411). However, a trend for more favorable overall survival was documented in the PLD arm compared with the GEM arm, although the P value was of borderline statistical significance (P = .048). Statistically significantly higher global QOL scores were found in PLD-treated patients at the first and second postbaseline QOL assessments., Conclusion: GEM does not provide an advantage compared with PLD in terms of TTP in ovarian cancer patients who experience recurrence within 12 months after primary treatment but should be considered in the spectrum of drugs to be possibly used in the salvage setting.