Search

Cancer-associated thrombosis is the second leading cause of death in cancer patients, and its incidence has been increasing in recent years. This survey was aimed at gathering information regarding the management of thromboembolic prophylaxis within the MITO (Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian Cancer)-MaNGO (Mario Negri Gynecologic Oncology) groups. We designed a self-administered, multiple-choice online questionnaire available only for MITO-MaNGO members for one month, starting in May 2022 and ending in June 2022. We processed one response form per center, and 50 responses were analyzed, with most of the respondents (78%) over 40 years old. We found that 82% of them consider thromboembolic prophylaxis in gynecologic oncology to be relevant. In 82% of the centers, a standardized protocol on venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is used, which is applied to both patients undergoing surgery and those undergoing chemotherapy. In the remaining 18% of centers, prophylaxis is used exclusively for patients undergoing chemotherapy treatment. Prophylaxis of patients undergoing surgery and chemotherapy treatment is managed in most cases by the surgeon (72%) and oncologist (76%), respectively. Only 26% of respondents use a thromboembolic risk assessment scale, and of these, those used are the Caprini Score (6%), Khorana Score (6%), and Wells Score (2%). The respondents have good knowledge of low-molecular-weight heparin (90%) and average knowledge of dicumarolics (40%), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) (68%), and antiplatelet agents (40%). The results of our survey indicate that there is a good awareness of thromboembolic prophylaxis in gynecologic oncology. Nevertheless, it is used less in outpatients than in patients undergoing surgery. Moreover, the thromboembolic risk assessment scores are barely used.

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the European Society of Pathology held a consensus conference (CC) on ovarian cancer on 15-16 June 2022 in Valencia, Spain. The CC panel included 44 experts in the management of ovarian cancer and pathology, an ESMO scientific advisor and a methodologist. The aim was to discuss new or contentious topics and develop recommendations to improve and harmonise the management of patients with ovarian cancer. Eighteen questions were identified for discussion under four main topics: (i) pathology and molecular biology, (ii) early-stage disease and pelvic mass in pregnancy, (iii) advanced stage (including older/frail patients) and (iv) recurrent disease. The panel was divided into four working groups (WGs) to each address questions relating to one of the four topics outlined above, based on their expertise. Relevant scientific literature was reviewed in advance. Recommendations were developed by the WGs and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment before voting. This manuscript focuses on the recommendation statements that reached a consensus, their voting results and a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation.

Background: The PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial showed that maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab increases survival of advanced ovarian cancer patients with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). However, decentralized solutions to test for HRD in clinical routine are scarce. The goal of this study was to retrospectively validate on tumor samples from the PAOLA-1 trial, the decentralized SeqOne assay, which relies on shallow Whole Genome Sequencing (sWGS) to capture genomic instability and targeted sequencing to determine BRCA status. Methods: The study comprised 368 patients from the PAOLA-1 trial. The SeqOne assay was compared to the Myriad MyChoice HRD test (Myriad Genetics), and results were analyzed with respect to Progression-Free Survival (PFS). Results: We found a 95% concordance between the HRD status of the two tests (95% Confidence Interval (CI); 92%−97%). The Positive Percentage Agreement (PPA) of the sWGS test was 95% (95% CI; 91%−97%) like its Negative Percentage Agreement (NPA) (95% CI; 89%−98%). In patients with HRD-positive tumors treated with olaparib plus bevacizumab, the PFS Hazard Ratio (HR) was 0.38 (95% CI; 0.26–0.54) with SeqOne assay and 0.32 (95% CI; 0.22–0.45) with the Myriad assay. In patients with HRD-negative tumors, HR was 0.99 (95% CI; 0.68–1.42) and 1.05 (95% CI; 0.70–1.57) with SeqOne and Myriad assays. Among patients with BRCA-wildtype tumors, those with HRD-positive tumors, benefited from olaparib plus bevacizumab maintenance, with HR of 0.48 (95% CI: 0.29–0.79) and of 0.38 (95% CI: 0.23 to 0.63) with the SeqOne and Myriad assay. Conclusion: The SeqOne assay offers a clinically validated approach to detect HRD.

Molecular biomarker testing is increasingly becoming standard of care for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Tissue and liquid biopsy-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) is now highly recommended and has become an integral part of the routine management of advanced NSCLC patients. This highly sensitive approach can simultaneously and efficiently detect multiple biomarkers even in scant samples. However full optimization of NGS in clinical practice requires accurate reporting and interpretation of NGS findings. Indeed, as the number of NSCLC biomarkers continues to grow, clinical reporting of NGS data is becoming increasingly complex. In this scenario, achieving standardization, simplification, and improved readability of NGS reports is key to ensuring timely and appropriate treatment decisions. In an effort to address the complexity and lengthy reporting of NGS mutation results, an Italian group of 14 healthcare professionals involved in NSCLC management convened in 2023 to address the content, structure, and ease-of-use of NGS reporting practices and proposed a standard report template for clinical use This article presents the key discussion points addressed by the Italian working group and describes the essential elements of the report template.

Gynecological neuroendocrine neoplasms are rare entities and can be divided into two groups: carcinoids and neuroendocrine carcinomas. Due to their rarity their management is not standardized. The aim of this work is to summarize and discuss the current literature evidence on this pathology. A scoping literature review was performed in multiple databases. Thirty-one studies were included: 30 case reports and one case series. Patients’ age ranged between 28 and 92 years. Surgery was the most used treatment and the surgical approach included local excision (N = 16/31; 51.6%) with (N = 5/16; 31.25%) or without (N = 11/16; 68.75%) inguinal lymphadenectomy. Adjuvant radiotherapy was delivered in 12 (38.7%) cases; instead, platinum-based therapies were frequently used when chemotherapy was chosen for adjuvant treatment. The overall survival ranged between 20 days to 4 years. However, further research is needed; currently, multimodal approach including surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy appeared safe and feasible for the treatment of these rare and aggressive diseases.

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the European Society of Pathology held a consensus conference (CC) on ovarian cancer on 15-16 June 2022 in Valencia, Spain. The CC panel included 44 experts in the management of ovarian cancer and pathology, an ESMO scientific advisor and a methodologist. The aim was to discuss new or contentious topics and develop recommendations to improve and harmonise the management of patients with ovarian cancer. Eighteen questions were identified for discussion under four main topics: (i) pathology and molecular biology, (ii) early-stage disease and pelvic mass in pregnancy, (iii) advanced stage (including older/frail patients) and (iv) recurrent disease. The panel was divided into four working groups (WGs) to each address questions relating to one of the four topics outlined above, based on their expertise. Relevant scientific literature was reviewed in advance. Recommendations were developed by the WGs and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment before voting. This manuscript focuses on the recommendation statements that reached a consensus, their voting results and a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation.

Purpose: Lenvatinib and pembrolizumab (LEN+PEMBRO) demonstrated clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in efficacy versus treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in patients with advanced endometrial cancer (aEC) in the phase 3 Study 309/KEYNOTE-775. Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) is reported. Patients and Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to receive LEN+PEMBRO (n = 411; LEN 20 mg/day; PEMBRO 200 mg Q3W) or TPC (n = 416; doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 Q3W or paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 [weekly, 3 weeks on/1 week off]). Impact of treatment on HRQoL assessed by the global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL) score of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) was a secondary objective; other scales of the Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30), EORTC QLQ-Endometrial, 24 questions (EORTC QLQ-EN24), and EuroQoL 5 dimensions, 5 levels (EQ-5D-5L) were exploratory objectives. HRQoL was assessed on day 1 of each cycle. Completion/compliance, change from baseline, time to first and definitive deterioration were assessed. No multiplicity adjustments were applied for HRQoL endpoints. Results: The latest timepoint at which the predefined rates of completion (≥60%) and compliance (≥80%) were met was week 12. HRQoL at week 12 between treatment groups was generally similar. Time to first deterioration symptom scales favoured LEN+PEMBRO for QLQ-C30 dyspnoea, and QLQ-EN24 for poor body image, tingling/numbness, and hair loss; and TPC was favoured for QLQ-C30 pain, appetite loss, and diarrhoea, and QLQ-EN24 muscular pain. While the QLQ-C30 physical functional scale favoured TPC, other functional scales were generally similar between arms. Time to definitive deterioration favoured LEN+PEMBRO on most scales. Conclusion: HRQoL data from Study 309/KEYNOTE-775, with previously published efficacy and safety results, indicate that LEN+PEMBRO has an overall favourable benefit/risk profile versus TPC fo

Bartholin gland carcinoma is an extremely rare disease. Information regarding treatment is scarce and there is no strict consensus on best practice. All studies reporting cases of Bartholin’s gland cancer were screened and evaluated for inclusion. Baseline characteristics of studies were extracted. A total number of 290 manuscripts collected were available for the review process. Studies included in a previous systematic review were not duplicated. In total, details of 367 patients were collected, as follows: histological features, clinical presentation, treatment, recurrent rate, treatment of recurrence and outcome. About 35% of Bartholin gland carcinoma were squamous cell carcinoma. Almost 50% of patients presented with advanced stage. The therapeutic approach was mainly surgery, and in 61% of those women lymph node assessment was performed. Recurrence occurred in 21% of cases. Bartholin gland cancer remains a challenge for gynecologic oncologists. Guidelines, centralization to referral centers and standardized therapy are needed.

Background: The PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial showed improved progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in homologous recombination deficient (HRD) positive patients treated with olaparib, but not when HRD negative (HRD tested with MyChoice CDx PLUS [Myriad test]). Patients and methods: The academic Leuven HRD test consists of capture-based targeted sequencing of genome-wide single-nucleotide polymorphisms and coding exons of eight HR genes including BRCA1, BRCA2, and TP53. We compared the predictive value of the Leuven HRD versus Myriad HRD test for PFS and OS in the randomised PAOLA-1 trial. Results: 468 patients had left-over DNA after Myriad testing for Leuven HRD testing. Positive/negative/overall percent agreement for the Leuven versus Myriad HRD status was 95%/86%/91%, respectively. Tumours were HRD+ in 55% and 52%, respectively. In Leuven HRD+ patients, 5 years PFS (5yPFS) was 48.6% versus 20.3% (HR 0.431; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.312–0.595) for olaparib versus placebo, respectively (Myriad test 0.409; 95% CI 0.292–0.572). In Leuven HRD+/BRCAwt patients 5yPFS was 41.3% versus 12.6% (HR 0.497; 95% CI 0.316–0.783), and 43.6% versus 13.3% (HR 0.435; 95% CI 0.261–0.727) for the Myriad test. 5yOS was prolonged in the HRD+ subgroup with both tests 67.2% versus 54.4% (HR 0.663; 95% CI 0.442–0.995) for the Leuven test, and 68.0% versus 51.8% (HR 0.596 95% CI 0.393–0.904) for the Myriad test. HRD status was undetermined in 10.7% and 9.4% of the samples, respectively. Conclusions: A robust correlation between the Leuven HRD and Myriad test was observed. For HRD+ tumours, the academic Leuven HRD showed a similar difference in PFS and OS as the Myriad test.

Clear cell endometrial carcinoma represents an uncommon and poorly understood entity. Data from molecular/genomic profiling highlighted the importance of various signatures in assessing the prognosis of endometrial cancer according to four classes of risk (POLE mutated, MMRd, NSMP, and p53 abnormal). Unfortunately, data specific to clear cell histological subtype endometrial cancer are lacking. More recently, data has emerged to suggest that most of the patients (more than 80%) with clear cell endometrial carcinoma are characterized by p53 abnormality or NSMP type. This classification has important therapeutic implications. Although it is an uncommon entity, clear cell endometrial cancer patients with POLE mutation seem characterized by a good prognosis. Chemotherapy is effective in patients with NSMP (especially in stage III and IV) and patients with p53 abnormal disease (all stages). While, preliminary data suggested that patients with MMRd are less likely to benefit from chemotherapy. The latter group appears to benefit much more from immune checkpoint inhibitors: recent data from clinical trials on pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib and nivolumab plus cabozantinib supported that immunotherapy plus tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) would be the most appropriate treatment for recurrent non-endometrioid endometrial cancer (including clear cell carcinoma) after the failure of platinum-based chemotherapy. Moreover, ongoing clinical trials testing the anti-tumor activity of innovative products will clarify the better strategies for advanced/recurrent clear cell endometrial carcinoma. Further prospective evidence is urgently needed to better characterize clear cell endometrial carcinoma.

Background: In the SOLO2 trial (ENGOT Ov-21; NCT01874353), maintenance olaparib in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (PSROC) and BRCA mutation significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and prolonged overall survival (OS). Following disease progression on olaparib, efficacy of subsequent chemotherapy remains unknown. Patients and methods: We conducted a post-hoc hypothesis-generating analysis of SOLO2 data to determine the efficacy of different chemotherapy regimens following RECIST disease progression in patients who received olaparib or placebo. We evaluated time to second progression (TTSP) calculated from the date of RECIST progression to the next progression/death. Results: The study population comprised 147 patients who received chemotherapy as their first subsequent treatment after RECIST progression. Of these, 69 (47%) and 78 (53%) were originally randomized to placebo and olaparib arms, respectively. In the placebo-treated cohort, 27/69 and 42/69 received non-platinum and platinum-based chemotherapy, respectively, compared with 24/78 and 54/78, respectively, in the olaparib-treated cohort. Among patients treated with chemotherapy (N = 147), TTSP was significantly longer in the placebo than in the olaparib arm: 12.1 versus 6.9 months [hazard ratio (HR) 2.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.47-3.19]. Similar result was obtained on multivariable analysis adjusting for prognostic factors at RECIST progression (HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.41-3.22). Among patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy (n = 96), TTSP was significantly longer in the placebo arm: 14.3 versus 7.0 months (HR 2.89, 95% CI 1.73-4.82). Conversely, among patients treated with non-platinum-based chemotherapy (n = 51), the TTSP was comparable in the placebo and olaparib arms: 8.3 versus 6.0 months (HR 1.58, 95% CI 0.86-2.90). Conclusions: Following progression from maintenance olaparib in the recurrent setting, the efficacy of platinum-based subsequent chemotherap

This study investigated the prognostic role of the CXCR4-CXCL12-CXCR7 axis in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) patients receiving first-line treatment within the MITO16A/MaNGO-OV2 phase-IV trial. CXCR4-CXCL12-CXCR7 expression was evaluated in the epithelial and stromal component of 308 EOC IHC-stained tumor samples. The statistical analysis focused on biomarkers’ expression, their association with other variables and prognostic value. Zero-inflated tests, shrinkage, bootstrap procedures, and multivariable models were applied. The majority of EOC (75.0%) expressed CXCR4 and CXCR7, 56.5% expressed the entire CXCR4-CXCL12-CXCR7 axis, while only 4.6% were negative for CXCL12 and its cognate receptors, in regard to the epithelial component. Stromal CXCL12 and CXCR7, expressed in 11.2% and 65.5%, respectively, were associated with the FIGO stage. High CXCL12 in epithelial cancer cells was associated with shorter progression-free and overall survival. However, after adjusting for overfitting due to best cut-off multiplicity testing, the significance was lost. This is a wide-ranging, prospective study in which CXCR4-CXCL12-CXCR7 were systematically evaluated in epithelial and stromal components, in selected stage III-IV EOC. Although CXCL12 was not prognostic, epithelial expression identified high-risk FIGO stage III patients for PFS. These data suggest that it might be worth studying the CXCL12 axis as a therapeutic target to improve treatment efficacy in EOC patients.

Introduction: The combination of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab demonstrated a relevant clinical benefit in patients with endometrial carcinoma. The safety profile was consistent with the established profiles of each drug in monotherapy, with the most frequent adverse events being hypertension, an on-target effect, hypothyroidism, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, loss of appetite, fatigue, and weight loss. Areas covered: We first review the rationale based on the combination of a VEGFR inhibitor and an immune checkpoint inhibitor, highlighting the main pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic features of lenvatinib. Next, we focus on the common adverse events associated with lenvatinib and guide how to optimally prevent, detect, and manage them, while minimizing interruptions during lenvatinib treatment. Discussion: The side effects profile of lenvatinib is very well known, being similar across different tumor types. Most toxicities can be preventable. An appropriate, proactive, and thorough management of lenvatinib toxicities during treatment is required to maximize potential lenvatinib efficacy. Adverse events should be detected as early as possible, by both carefully monitoring the patient from lenvatinib initiation and preventing their occurrence. Patients should be followed also during treatment as some adverse events, e.g., cardiac dysfunction might appear later. Increased awareness on risk to benefit ratio among clinicians would be helpful to avoid dose interruptions or discontinuation of lenvatinib, with preferring other medical interventions and supportive care.

Constitutional BRCA1/BRCA2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (PVs) are associated with an increased risk for developing breast and ovarian cancers. Current evidence indicates that BRCA1/2 PVs are also associated with pancreatic cancer, and that BRCA2 PVs are associated with prostate cancer risk. The identification of carriers of constitutional PVs in the BRCA1/2 genes allows the implementation of individual and family prevention pathways, through validated screening programs and risk-reducing strategies. According to the relevant and increasing therapeutic predictive implications, the inclusion of BRCA testing in the routine management of patients with breast, ovarian, pancreatic and prostate cancers represent a key requirement to optimize medical or surgical therapeutic and prevention decision-making, and access to specific anticancer therapies. Therefore, accurate patient selection, the use of standardized and harmonized procedures, and adherence to homogeneous testing criteria, are essential elements to implement BRCA testing in clinical practice. This consensus position paper has been developed and approved by a multidisciplinary Expert Panel of 64 professionals on behalf of the AIOM–AIRO–AISP–ANISC–AURO–Fondazione AIOM–SIAPEC/IAP–SIBioC–SICO–SIF–SIGE–SIGU–SIU–SIURO–UROP Italian Scientific Societies, and a patient association (aBRCAdaBRA Onlus). The working group included medical, surgical and radiation oncologists, medical and molecular geneticists, clinical molecular biologists, surgical and molecular pathologists, organ specialists such as gynecologists, gastroenterologists and urologists, and pharmacologists. The manuscript is based on the expert consensus and reports the best available evidence, according to the current eligibility criteria for BRCA testing and counseling, it also harmonizes with current Italian National Guidelines and Clinical Recommendations.

To find prognostic factors for advanced ovarian cancer patients undergoing first-line therapy with carboplatin, paclitaxel and bevacizumab, we investigated the expression of a disintegrin and metalloprotease 17 (ADAM17) in cancer tissues. ADAM17 has been involved in ovarian cancer development, progression and cell resistance to cisplatin. Tissue microarrays from 309 ovarian cancer patients enrolled in the MITO16A/MANGO-OV2 clinical trial were analyzed by immunohistochemistry for ADAM17 protein expression. Intensity and extent of staining were combined into a semi-quantitative visual grading system (H score) which was related to clinicopathological characteristics of cases and the clinical outcome of patients by univariate and multivariate Cox regression models. ADAM17 immunostaining was detected in most samples, mainly localized in the tumor cells, with variable intensity across the cohort. Kaplan–Meier survival curves, generated according to the best cut-off value for the ADAM17 H score, showed that high ADAM17 expression was associated with worse prognosis for PFS and OS. However, after the application of a shrinkage procedure to adjust for overfitting hazard ratio estimates, the ADAM17 value as prognostic factor was lost. As subgroup analysis suggested that ADAM17 expression could be prognostically relevant in cases with no residual disease at baseline, further studies in this patient category may be worth planning.

The present study provides evidence for a valid and reliable tool, the Academic Quality at Work Tool (AQ@workT), to investigate the quality of life at work in academics within the Italian university sector. The AQ@workT was developed by the QoL@Work research team, namely a group of expert academics in the field of work and organizational psychology affiliated with the Italian Association of Psychologists. The tool is grounded in the job demands-resources model and its psychometric properties were assessed in three studies comprising a wide sample of lecturers, researchers, and professors: a pilot study (N = 120), a calibration study (N = 1084), and a validation study (N = 1481). Reliability and content, construct, and nomological validity were supported, as well as measurement invariance across work role (researchers, associate professors, and full professors) and gender. Evidence from the present study shows that the AQ@workT represents a useful and reliable tool to assist university management to enhance quality of life, to manage work-related stress, and to mitigate the potential for harm to academics, particularly during a pandemic. Future studies, such as longitudinal tests of the AQ@workT, should test predictive validity among the variables in the tool.

Background: Homologous recombination repair (HRR) enables fault-free repair of double-stranded DNA breaks. HRR deficiency is predicted to occur in around half of high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas. Ovarian cancers harbouring HRR deficiency typically exhibit sensitivity to poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi). Current guidelines recommend a range of approaches for genetic testing to identify predictors of sensitivity to PARPi in ovarian cancer and to identify genetic predisposition. Design: To establish a European-wide consensus for genetic testing (including the genetic care pathway), decision making and clinical management of patients with recently diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer, and the validity of biomarkers to predict the effectiveness of PARPi in the first-line setting. The collaborative European experts’ consensus group consisted of a steering committee (n = 14) and contributors (n = 84). A (modified) Delphi process was used to establish consensus statements based on a systematic literature search, conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Results: A consensus was reached on 34 statements amongst 98 caregivers (including oncologists, pathologists, clinical geneticists, genetic researchers, and patient advocates). The statements concentrated on (i) the value of testing for BRCA1/2 mutations and HRR deficiency testing, including when and whom to test; (ii) the importance of developing new and better HRR deficiency tests; (iii) the importance of germline non-BRCA HRR and mismatch repair gene mutations for predicting familial risk, but not for predicting sensitivity to PARPi, in the first-line setting; (iv) who should be able to inform patients about genetic testing, and what training and education should these caregivers receive. Conclusion: These consensus recommendations, from a multidisciplinary panel of experts from across Europe, provide clear guidance on the use of BRCA and HRR de

Introduction: Standard treatment of newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian carcinoma (OC) consists of cytoreductive surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. Maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors and olaparib-bevacizumab has recently shown to significantly improve progression-free survival in the first-line setting. Some practical aspects of maintenance therapy, however, are still poorly defined. Aim of the study: To provide guidance to clinicians in the selection of maintenance therapy for newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian carcinoma. Methods: A board of six gynecologic oncologists with expertise in the treatment of OC in Italy convened to address issues related to the new options for maintenance treatment. Based on scientific evidences, the board produced practice-oriented statements. Consensus was reached via a modified Delphi study that involved a panel of 22 experts from across Italy. Results: Twenty-seven evidence- and consensus-based statements are presented, covering the following areas of interest: use of biomarkers (BRCA mutations and presence of homologous recombination deficiency); timing and outcomes of surgery; selection of patients eligible for bevacizumab; definition of response to treatment; toxicity and contraindications; evidence of synergy of bevacizumab plus PARP inhibitor. Two treatment algorithms are also included, for selecting maintenance therapy based on timing and outcomes of surgery, response to platinum-based chemotherapy and biomarker status. A score for the assessment of response to chemotherapy is proposed, but its validation is ongoing. Conclusions: We provide here consensus statements and treatment algorithms to guide clinicians in the selection of appropriate and personalized maintenance therapy in the first-line setting of advanced OC management.

Background: In the PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 primary analysis, maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab demonstrated a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer patients in clinical response after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, irrespective of surgical status. Prespecified, exploratory analyses by molecular biomarker status showed substantial benefit in patients with a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation (BRCAm) or homologous recombination deficiency (HRD; BRCAm and/or genomic instability). We report the prespecified final overall survival (OS) analysis, including analyses by HRD status. Patients and methods: Patients were randomized 2 : 1 to olaparib (300 mg twice daily; up to 24 months) plus bevacizumab (15 mg/kg every 3 weeks; 15 months total) or placebo plus bevacizumab. Analysis of OS, a key secondary endpoint in hierarchical testing, was planned for ∼60% maturity or 3 years after the primary analysis. Results: After median follow-up of 61.7 and 61.9 months in the olaparib and placebo arms, respectively, median OS was 56.5 versus 51.6 months in the intention-to-treat population [hazard ratio (HR) 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-1.12; P = 0.4118]. Subsequent poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor therapy was received by 105 (19.6%) olaparib patients versus 123 (45.7%) placebo patients. In the HRD-positive population, OS was longer with olaparib plus bevacizumab (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.85; 5-year OS rate, 65.5% versus 48.4%); at 5 years, updated PFS also showed a higher proportion of olaparib plus bevacizumab patients without relapse (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.32-0.54; 5-year PFS rate, 46.1% versus 19.2%). Myelodysplastic syndrome, acute myeloid leukemia, aplastic anemia, and new primary malignancy incidence remained low and balanced between arms. Conclusions: Olaparib plus bevacizumab provided clinically meaningful OS improvement for first-line patients with HRD-positive ovarian cancer. These prespecified expl

Background: The open-label, single-arm, multicenter ORZORA trial (NCT02476968) evaluated the efficacy and safety of maintenance olaparib in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (PSR OC) who had tumor BRCA mutations (BRCAm) of germline (g) or somatic (s) origin or non-BRCA homologous recombination repair mutations (HRRm) and were in response to their most recent platinum-based chemotherapy after ≥2 lines of treatment. Methods: Patients received maintenance olaparib capsules (400 mg twice daily) until disease progression. Prospective central testing at screening determined tumor BRCAm status and subsequent testing determined gBRCAm or sBRCAm status. Patients with predefined non-BRCA HRRm were assigned to an exploratory cohort. The co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1) in BRCAm and sBRCAm cohorts. Secondary endpoints included health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and tolerability. Results: 177 patients received olaparib. At the primary data cut-off (17 April 2020), the median follow-up for PFS in the BRCAm cohort was 22.3 months. The median PFS (95% CI) in BRCAm, sBRCAm, gBRCAm and non-BRCA HRRm cohorts was 18.0 (14.3-22.1), 16.6 (12.4-22.2), 19.3 (14.3-27.6) and 16.4 (10.9-19.3) months, respectively. Most patients with BRCAm reported improvements (21.8%) or no change (68.7%) in HRQoL and the safety profile was as expected. Conclusions: Maintenance olaparib had similar clinical activity in PSR OC patients with sBRCAm and those with any BRCAm. Activity was also observed in patients with a non-BRCA HRRm. ORZORA further supports use of maintenance olaparib in all patients with BRCA-mutated, including sBRCA-mutated, PSR OC.

Endometrial carcinosarcoma is a rare and aggressive high-grade endometrial carcinoma with secondary sarcomatous trans-differentiation (conversion theory). The clinical presentation and diagnostic work-up roughly align with those of the more common endometrioid counterpart, although endometrial carcinosarcoma is more frequently diagnosed at an advanced stage. Endometrial carcinosarcoma is not a single entity but encompasses different histological subtypes, depending on the type of carcinomatous and sarcomatous elements. The majority of endometrial carcinosarcomas are characterized by p53 abnormalities. The proportion of POLE and microsatellite instablity-high (MSI-H) is directly related to the epithelial component, being approximately 25% and 3% in endometrioid and non-endometrioid components.The management of non-metastatic disease is based on a multimodal approach with optimal surgery followed by (concomitant or sequential) chemotherapy and radiotherapy, even for early stages. Palliative chemotherapy is recommended in the metastatic or recurrent setting, with carboplatin/paclitaxel doublet being the first-line regimen. Although the introduction of immunotherapy plus/minus a tyrosine kinase inhibitor shifted the paradigm of treatment of patients with recurrent endometrial cancer, patients with endometrial carcinosarcoma were excluded from most studies evaluating single-agent immunotherapy or the combination. However, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) approved the use of pembrolizumab and lenvatinib in endometrial cancer (all histotypes) after progression on chemotherapy and single-agent immunotherapy in MSI-H cancers. In the era of precision medicine, emerging knowledge on molecular endometrial carcinosarcoma is opening new promising therapeutic options for more personalized treatment. The present review outlines state-of-the-art knowledge and future directions for patients with endometrial carcinosarcoma.

Purpose: The PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial of maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab for newly diagnosed advanced high-grade ovarian cancer demonstrated a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit over placebo plus bevacizumab, particularly in patients with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive tumors. We explored whether mutations in non-BRCA1 or BRCA2 homologous recombination repair (non-BRCA HRRm) genes predicted benefit from olaparib plus bevacizumab in PAOLA-1. Methods: Eight hundred and six patients were randomly assigned (2:1). Tumors were analyzed using the Myriad MyChoice HRD Plus assay to assess non-BRCA HRRm and HRD status; HRD was based on a genomic instability score (GIS) of ≥ 42. In this exploratory analysis, PFS was assessed in patients harboring deleterious mutations using six non-BRCA HRR gene panels, three devised for this analysis and three previously published. Results: The non-BRCA HRRm prevalence ranged from 30 of 806 (3.7%) to 79 of 806 (9.8%) depending on the gene panel used, whereas 152 of 806 (18.9%) had non-BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation HRD-positive tumors. The majority of tumors harboring non-BRCA HRRm had a low median GIS; however, a GIS of > 42 was observed for tumors with mutations in five HRR genes (BLM, BRIP1, RAD51C, PALB2, and RAD51D). Rates of gene-specific biallelic loss were variable (0% to 100%) in non-BRCA HRRm tumors relative to BRCA1-mutated (99%) or BRCA2-mutated (86%) tumors. Across all gene panels tested, hazard ratios for PFS (95% CI) ranged from 0.92 (0.51 to 1.73) to 1.83 (0.76 to 5.43). Conclusion: Acknowledging limitations of small subgroup sizes, non-BRCA HRRm gene panels were not predictive of PFS benefit with maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab versus placebo plus bevacizumab in PAOLA-1, irrespective of the gene panel tested. Current gene panels exploring HRRm should not be considered a substitute for HRD determined by BRCA mutation status and genomic instability testing in first-line high-grade ov