Search

During a career, which spanned nearly 60 years, Professor Philip J. DiSaia (1937–2018) trailblazed a path forward in academic medicine, which would become the standard by which Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology Divisions and Cancer Centers would be measured throughout the United States, in Europe and Japan. Following his discovery of fetal warfarin syndrome as a resident, DiSaia would serve in the U.S. Navy and successfully compete for an American Cancer Society Grant that would fund his Fellowship in Gynecologic Oncology under the instruction of Dr Felix N. Rutledge at the MD Anderson Hospital and Tumor Institute in Houston, Texas. Dr DiSaia's goal to establish a traditional academic department was realized at the University of California, Irvine, where he remained active in an unprecedented, uninterrupted 42‐year run, training many outstanding obstetrician‐gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists, future Division Directors, Cancer Center Directors and Department Chairpersons. His dedication to the field and inexhaustible work ethic fueled his many successes in tumor immunology and the clinical trials of the National Cancer Institute's Gynecologic Oncology Group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the phase 3 EMPOWER-Cervical 1/GOG-3016/ENGOT-cx9 study, cemiplimab significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy for patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer who progressed after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. We present a post hoc subgroup analysis of patients enrolled in Japan., Methods: Patients were enrolled regardless of programmed cell death-ligand 1 status and randomized 1:1 to cemiplimab 350 mg intravenously every 3 weeks or investigator's choice  single-agent chemotherapy for up to 96 weeks. Primary endpoint was OS. Key secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR)., Results: Overall, 608 patients were randomized, of whom 56 (9.2%) were in Japan (cemiplimab, n = 29; chemotherapy, n = 27). The median (range) duration of follow-up was 13.6 (6.0-25.3) versus 18.2 (6.0-38.2) months for patients in Japan and for the overall population, respectively. Median OS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 8.4 (7.0-not evaluable) and 9.4 (5.4-14.9) months for cemiplimab versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.43-1.68). Median PFS (95% CI) was 4.0 (1.4-8.2) versus 3.7 (1.8-4.2) months with cemiplimab and chemotherapy (HR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.50-1.61), respectively. ORR was 17.2% for cemiplimab and 7.4% for chemotherapy (odds ratio, 2.47; 95% CI, 0.44-13.99). Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events at any grade was 79.3% for cemiplimab and 100% for chemotherapy. Grade ≥3 adverse events were 37.9% versus 66.7% with cemiplimab and chemotherapy, respectively., Discussion: While acknowledging limitations inherent to a small subgroup analysis, the HR of 0.86 observed in Japanese patients suggests an emerging survival benefit despite a 4.6-month shorter median duration of follow-up versus the overall study population., (© 2024 The Author(s). Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)