Search

High grade epithelial ovarian carcinoma is an aggressive tumor. Treatment includes platinum therapy, however it recurs in most patients due to therapy resistance. In this project, we study the immunohistochemical (IHC) expression of five potential biomarkers/prognostic markers in high grade epithelial ovarian carcinoma: EGFR, HLA-G, CD70, c-MET, and NY-ESO1. A cohort of 274 patients is used. We compare the IHC expression with age, stage, ascites status, family history of cancer, disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). EGFR expression is significantly correlated with family history and worse OS. HLA-G is associated with worse OS. To confirm the results of EGFR and HLA-G, a second separated cohort of 248 patients is used. Positive EGFR expression again shows worse OS, while HLA-G expression has worse prognostic trend. CD70 has a worse OS trend. C-MET and NY-ESO1 do not have any clinical correlations. EGFR can potentially serve as target in future clinical immune therapy trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Immune checkpoint blockade has shown mixed results in advanced/recurrent gynecologic malignancies. Efficacy may be improved through costimulation with OX40 and 4‐1BB agonists. The authors sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of avelumab combined with utomilumab (a 4‐1BB agonist), PF‐04518600 (an OX40 agonist), and radiotherapy in patients with recurrent gynecologic malignancies. Methods: The primary end point in this six‐arm, phase 1/2 trial was safety of the combination regimens. Secondary end points included the objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors and immune‐related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, the disease control rate (DCR), the duration of response, progression‐free survival, and overall survival. Results: Forty patients were included (35% with cervical cancer, 30% with endometrial cancer, and 35% with ovarian cancer). Most patients (n = 33; 83%) were enrolled in arms A–C (no radiation). Among 35 patients who were evaluable for efficacy, the ORR was 2.9%, and the DCR was 37.1%, with a median duration of stable disease of 5.4 months (interquartile range, 4.1–7.3 months). Patients with cervical cancer in arm A (avelumab and utomilumab; n = 9 evaluable patients) achieved an ORR of 11% and a DCR of 78%. The median progression‐free survival was 2.1 months (95% CI, 1.8–3.5 months), and overall survival was 9.4 months (95% CI, 5.6–11.9 months). No dose‐limiting toxicities or grade 3–5 immune‐related adverse events were observed. Conclusions: The findings from this trial highlight that, in heavily pretreated patients with gynecologic cancer, even multidrug regimens targeting multiple immunologic pathways, although safe, did not produce significant responses. A DCR of 78% in patients with cervical cancer who received avelumab and utomilumab indicates that further research on this combination in select patients may be warranted. In a phase 1/2 trial of heavily pretreated patients who had recurrent gynecologic cancers, avelumab in combination with a 4‐1BB agonist, an OX40 agonist, and/or radiation was safe and had a similar rate of immune‐related adverse events compared with single‐agent immune checkpoint blockade. The combination of multiple immune‐modulating agents, however, did not result in increased efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynaecological cancer among women in high-income countries, with both incidence and mortality continuing to increase. The complexity of the management of patients with EC has evolved with greater comprehension of the underlying biology and heterogeneity of this disease. With a growing number of novel therapeutic agents available, emerging treatment regimens seem to have the potential to help to address the concerning trends in EC-related mortality. In this Review, we describe the epidemiology, histopathology and molecular classification of EC as well as the role of the new (2023) International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) staging model. Furthermore, we provide an overview of disease management in the first-line and recurrent disease settings. With increasing use of molecular profiling and updates in treatment paradigms, we also summarize new developments in this rapidly changing treatment landscape., (© 2024. Springer Nature Limited.)

Recent advances in spatial transcriptomics (ST) techniques provide valuable insights into cellular interactions within the tumor microenvironment (TME). However, most analytical tools lack consideration of histological features and rely on matched single-cell RNA sequencing data, limiting their effectiveness in TME studies. To address this, we introduce the Morphology-Enhanced Spatial Transcriptome Analysis Integrator (METI), an end-to-end framework that maps cancer cells and TME components, stratifies cell types and states, and analyzes cell co-localization. By integrating spatial transcriptomics, cell morphology, and curated gene signatures, METI enhances our understanding of the molecular landscape and cellular interactions within the tissue. We evaluate the performance of METI on ST data generated from various tumor tissues, including gastric, lung, and bladder cancers, as well as premalignant tissues. We also conduct a quantitative comparison of METI with existing clustering and cell deconvolution tools, demonstrating METI's robust and consistent performance., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The efficacy and feasibility of pembrolizumab combined with chemotherapy in frontline management of advanced high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is unknown. Additionally, modification of the tumor microenvironment following neoadjuvant therapy is not well understood., Methods: In this single-arm phase 2 trial (this study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02520154), eligible patients received up to 4 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreduction, 3 cycles of adjuvant intravenous carboplatin/weekly paclitaxel/pembrolizumab, and finally maintenance pembrolizumab until progression or toxicity (maximum 20 cycles). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included feasibility, toxicity, and overall survival (OS). PD-L1 staining, multiplex immunofluorescence staining, RNA sequencing, reverse-phase protein array analyses were performed on pre- and post-chemotherapy samples., Findings: Thirty-one eligible patients were enrolled. Median PFS and OS was 14.88 (95% CI 12.39-23.00) and 57.43 months (95% CI 30.88-not reached), respectively. Among those with PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥10, the median PFS and OS were not reached compared to those with CPS <10 (10.50 and 30.90 months, respectively). Feasibility was met, with all patients completing their planned adjuvant cycles. Treatment discontinuation due to immune-related toxicity occurred in 6 patients (20%). Chemotherapy resulted in an infiltration of anti-tumor immune cells in the tumor microenvironment. Samples of patients with the best PFS demonstrated increased expression of NF-κB, TGF-β, and β-catenin signaling., Conclusions: Pembrolizumab with chemotherapy was feasible and resulted in PFS within the historical range for this EOC population. Patients with CPS ≥10 may benefit more from this regimen, and future studies should investigate this potential biomarker., Funding: This investigator-initiated trial was funded by Merck., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests S.N.W. reports grants from NIH, GOG Foundation, Cotinga Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, and ArQule during the conduct of the study. She also reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, GlaxoSmithKline/Tesaro, Roche/Genentech, and Novartis. She reports personal fees from Merck, Pfizer, Eisai, CIrculogene, Zentalis, and Agenus outside the submitted work. N.D.F. reports personal fees from Tesaro, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, and GlaxoSmithKline outside the submitted work. A.K.S. discloses the following competing interests: consulting (Merck, GSK, ImmunoGen, Iylon, Kiyatec, Astra Zeneca, Onxeo) and shareholder (BioPath). R.C. reports the following competing interests: consulting (Clovis Oncology, Genentech/Roche, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Genmab, OncoMed, Immunogen, AbbVie, Agenus, Novocure, Merck, OncXerna Therapeutics, Alkermes, Gradalis, GlaxoSmithKline, Alkermes, Eisai, GOG Foundation, Karyopharm Therapeutics), employment (Vanium Group, US Oncology Network), leadership (Onsexo), stock and other ownership interests (McKesson/US Oncology Network), and research funding (AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Clovis Oncology, Merck, Roche/Genentech, Immunogen, Mirati Therapeutics, Amgen, Pfizer, Lilly, Regeneron, Alkermes, Karyopharm Therapeutics). A.A.J. reports personal fees from Gerson Lehrman Group, Guidepoint, Iovance advisory board, NuProbe, Simcere, PACT Pharma, Genentech-Roche, Eisai, Agenus, and Macrogenics. He also reports grants from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Iovance, Aravive, Pfizer, Immatics US, Eli Lilly, and Merck, and stock/stock options from AvengeBio outside the submitted work., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated limited responses in recurrent ovarian cancer; however, 30%-40% of patients achieve stable disease. The primary objective was to estimate progression-free survival (PFS) after sequential versus combination cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 and programmed death ligand 1 ICIs in patients with platinum-resistant high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC)., Methods: Patients were randomized to a sequential arm (tremelimumab followed by durvalumab on progression) or a combination arm (tremelimumab plus durvalumab, followed by durvalumab) via a Bayesian adaptive design that made it more likely for patients to be randomized to the more effective arm. The primary end point was immune-related PFS (irPFS)., Results: Sixty-one subjects were randomized to sequential (n = 38) or combination therapy (n = 23). Thirteen patients (34.2%) in the sequential arm received durvalumab. There was no difference in PFS in the sequential arm (1.84 months; 95% CI, 1.77-2.17 months) compared with the combination arm (1.87 months; 95% CI, 1.77-2.43 months) (p = .402). In the sequential arm, no responses were observed, although 12 patients (31.6%) demonstrated stable disease. In the combination arm, two patients (8.7%) had partial response, whereas one patient (4.4%) had stable disease. Adverse events were consistent with those previously reported for ICIs. Patient-reported outcomes were similar in both arms., Conclusions: There was no difference in irPFS for combination tremelimumab plus durvalumab compared to tremelimumab alone (administered as part of a sequential treatment strategy) in a heavily pretreated population of patients with platinum-resistant HGSOC. Response rates were comparable to prior reports, although the combination regimen did not add significant benefit, as has been previously described., (© 2023 American Cancer Society.)