Phase II study of the safety and efficacy of the anti-PD-1 antibody balstilimab in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic cervical cancer

Cervical cancer; Checkpoint inhibitor; ImmunotherapyCáncer de cuello uterino; Inhibidor de puntos de control; InmunoterapiaCàncer cervical; Inhibidor de punts de control; ImmunoteràpiaObjective This phase II clinical trial evaluated the safety and antitumor activity of balstilimab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in patients with previously-treated, recurrent/metastatic cervical cancer. Methods Eligible patients were 18 years or older with recurrent and/or metastatic cervical cancer and who had relapsed after a prior platinum-based treatment regimen for advanced disease. Balstilimab was administered intravenously at 3 mg/kg once every two weeks, for up to 24 months. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR, RECIST v1.1) as assessed by an independent review committee. Results At data cutoff, 161 women (median age, 53 years [range 25–81]) were enrolled and treated with balstilimab. Of these, 140 had measurable disease at baseline and one prior line of platinum-based therapy in the metastatic, persistent, or recurrent setting; these patients were included in the efficacy analyses. The ORR was 15% (95% CI, 10.0%–21.8%) and included 5 patients with a complete response and 16 with a partial response. The median duration of response was 15.4 months. In patients with PD-L1-positive tumors the ORR was 20%, however patients with PD-L1-negative tumors also responded to balstilimab (ORR, 7.9%). Responses were not restricted to tumors of squamous cell histology, and an ORR of 12.5% was seen in the subset of patients with cervical adenocarcinoma. The disease control rate was 49.3% (95% CI, 41.1%–57.5%). Immune-mediated enterocolitis (3.1%) and diarrhea (1.9%) were the most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events. Conclusion Balstilimab demonstrated meaningful and durable clinical activity, with manageable safety, in patients with previously-treated, recurrent/metastatic cervical cancer.This study was funded by Agenus Inc

934oalienor engot ov7 randomized trial exploring weekly paclitaxel wp bevacizumab bev vs wp alone for patients with ovarian sex cord tumors sct in relapse

n/

Concordance between CA-125 and RECIST progression in patients with germline BRCA-mutated platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer treated in the SOLO2 trial with olaparib as maintenance therapy after response to chemotherapy

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists to support CA-125 as a valid surrogate biomarker for progression in patients with ovarian cancer on maintenance PARP inhibitor (PARPi) therapy. We aimed to assess the concordance between CA-125 and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) criteria for progression in patients with BRCA mutations on maintenance PARPi or placebo. METHODS: We extracted data on progression as defined by Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup CA-125, investigator- and independent central-assessed RECIST from the SOLO2/ENGOT-ov21(NCT01874353) trial. We excluded those with progression other than by RECIST, progression on date of randomisation, and no repeat CA-125 beyond baseline. We evaluated the concordance between CA-125 progression and RECIST progression, and assessed the negative (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV). RESULTS: Of 295 randomised patients, 275 (184 olaparib, 91 placebo) were included. 171 patients had investigator-assessed RECIST progression. Of 80 patients with CA-125 progression, 77 had concordant RECIST progression (PPV 96%, 95% confidence interval 90-99%). Of 195 patients without CA-125 progression, 94 had RECIST progression (NPV 52%, 45-59%). Within treatment arms, PPV was similar (olaparib: 95% [84-99%], placebo: 97% [87-100%]) but NPV was lower in patients on placebo (olaparib: 60% [52-68%], placebo: 30% [20-44%]). Of 94 patients with RECIST but without CA-125 progression, 64 (68%) had CA-125 that remained within normal range. We observed similar findings using independent-assessed RECIST. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half the patients without CA-125 progression had RECIST progression, and most of these had CA-125 within the normal range. Regular computed tomography imaging should be considered as part of surveillance in patients treated with or without maintenance olaparib rather than relying on CA-125 alone

Rucaparib maintenance treatment for recurrent ovarian carcinoma after response to platinum therapy (ARIEL3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

Background: Rucaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, has anticancer activity in recurrent ovarian carcinoma harbouring a BRCA mutation or high percentage of genome-wide loss of heterozygosity. In this trial we assessed rucaparib versus placebo after response to second-line or later platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with high-grade, recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian carcinoma. Methods: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients from 87 hospitals and cancer centres across 11 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had a platinum-sensitive, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube carcinoma, had received at least two previous platinum-based chemotherapy regimens, had achieved complete or partial response to their last platinum-based regimen, had a cancer antigen 125 concentration of less than the upper limit of normal, had a performance status of 0–1, and had adequate organ function. Patients were ineligible if they had symptomatic or untreated central nervous system metastases, had received anticancer therapy 14 days or fewer before starting the study, or had received previous treatment with a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor. We randomly allocated patients 2:1 to receive oral rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or placebo in 28 day cycles using a computer-generated sequence (block size of six, stratified by homologous recombination repair gene mutation status, progression-free interval after the penultimate platinum-based regimen, and best response to the most recent platinum-based regimen). Patients, investigators, site staff, assessors, and the funder were masked to assignments. The primary outcome was investigator-assessed progression-free survival evaluated with use of an ordered step-down procedure for three nested cohorts: patients with BRCA mutations (carcinoma associated with deleterious germline or somatic BRCA mutations), patients with homologous recombination deficiencies (BRCA mutant or BRCA wild-type and high loss of heterozygosity), and the intention-to-treat population, assessed at screening and every 12 weeks thereafter. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01968213; enrolment is complete. Findings: Between April 7, 2014, and July 19, 2016, we randomly allocated 564 patients: 375 (66%) to rucaparib and 189 (34%) to placebo. Median progression-free survival in patients with a BRCA-mutant carcinoma was 16·6 months (95% CI 13·4–22·9; 130 [35%] patients) in the rucaparib group versus 5·4 months (3·4–6·7; 66 [35%] patients) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·23 [95% CI 0·16–0·34]; p<0·0001). In patients with a homologous recombination deficient carcinoma (236 [63%] vs 118 [62%]), it was 13·6 months (10·9–16·2) versus 5·4 months (5·1–5·6; 0·32 [0·24–0·42]; p<0·0001). In the intention-to-treat population, it was 10·8 months (8·3–11·4) versus 5·4 months (5·3–5·5; 0·36 [0·30–0·45]; p<0·0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events of grade 3 or higher in the safety population (372 [99%] patients in the rucaparib group vs 189 [100%] in the placebo group) were reported in 209 (56%) patients in the rucaparib group versus 28 (15%) in the placebo group, the most common of which were anaemia or decreased haemoglobin concentration (70 [19%] vs one [1%]) and increased alanine or aspartate aminotransferase concentration (39 [10%] vs none). Interpretation: Across all primary analysis groups, rucaparib significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer who had achieved a response to platinum-based chemotherapy. ARIEL3 provides further evidence that use of a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor in the maintenance treatment setting versus placebo could be considered a new standard of care for women with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer following a complete or partial response to second-line or later platinum-based chemotherapy. Funding: Clovis Oncology

Clinical practice guidelines for BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing

BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene pathogenic variants account for most hereditary breast cancer and are increasingly used to determine eligibility for PARP inhibitor (PARPi) therapy of BRCA-related cancer. Because issues of BRCA testing in clinical practice now overlap with both preventive and therapeutic management, updated and comprehensive practice guidelines for BRCA genotyping are needed. The integrative recommendations for BRCA testing presented here aim to (1) identify individuals who may benefit from genetic counselling and risk-reducing strategies; (2) update germline and tumour-testing indications for PARPi-approved therapies; (3) provide testing recommendations for personalised management of early and metastatic breast cancer; and (4) address the issues of rapid process and tumour analysis. An international group of experts, including geneticists, medical and surgical oncologists, pathologists, ethicists and patient representatives, was commissioned by the French Society of Predictive and Personalised Medicine (SFMPP). The group followed a methodology based on specific formal guidelines development, including (1) evaluating the likelihood of BRCAm from a combined systematic review of the literature, risk assessment models and expert quotations, and (2) therapeutic values of BRCAm status for PARPi therapy in BRCA-related cancer and for management of early and advanced breast cancer. These international guidelines may help clinicians comprehensively update and standardise BRCA testing practices

CXCL12 expression by healthy and malignant ovarian epithelial cells

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>CXCL12 has been widely reported to play a biologically relevant role in tumor growth and spread. In epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), CXCL12 enhances tumor angiogenesis and contributes to the immunosuppressive network. However, its prognostic significance remains unclear. We thus compared CXCL12 status in healthy and malignant ovaries, to assess its prognostic value.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Immunohistochemistry was used to analyze CXCL12 expression in the reproductive tracts, including the ovaries and fallopian tubes, of healthy women, in benign and borderline epithelial tumors, and in a series of 183 tumor specimens from patients with advanced primary EOC enrolled in a multicenter prospective clinical trial of paclitaxel/carboplatin/gemcitabine-based chemotherapy (GINECO study). Univariate COX model analysis was performed to assess the prognostic value of clinical and biological variables. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to generate progression-free and overall survival curves.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Epithelial cells from the surface of the ovary and the fallopian tubes stained positive for CXCL12, whereas the follicles within the ovary did not. Epithelial cells in benign, borderline and malignant tumors also expressed CXCL12. In EOC specimens, CXCL12 immunoreactivity was observed mostly in epithelial tumor cells. The intensity of the signal obtained ranged from strong in 86 cases (47%) to absent in 18 cases (<10%). This uneven distribution of CXCL12 did not reflect the morphological heterogeneity of EOC. CXCL12 expression levels were not correlated with any of the clinical parameters currently used to determine EOC prognosis or with HER2 status. They also had no impact on progression-free or overall survival.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our findings highlight the previously unappreciated constitutive expression of CXCL12 on healthy epithelia of the ovary surface and fallopian tubes, indicating that EOC may originate from either of these epithelia. We reveal that CXCL12 production by malignant epithelial cells precedes tumorigenesis and we confirm in a large cohort of patients with advanced EOC that CXCL12 expression level in EOC is not a valuable prognostic factor in itself.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00052468">NCT00052468</a></p

Factors for Hematopoietic Toxicity of Carboplatin: Refining the Targeting of Carboplatin Systemic Exposure

Purpose Area under the curve (AUC) dosing is routinely carried out for carboplatin, but the chosen target AUC values remain largely empirical. This multicenter pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) study was performed to determine the covariates involved in the interindividual variability of carboplatin hematotoxicity that should be considered when choosing individual target AUCs.Patients and Methods Three hundred eighty-three patients received carboplatin as part of established regimens. A semi-physiologic population PK-PD model was applied to describe separately the time course of absolute neutrophil and platelet counts using NONMEM software. The plasma ultrafiltrable carboplatin concentration (CCarbo) was assumed to inhibit the proliferation of blood cell precursors through a linear model: drug effect = slope × CCarbo. The slope corresponds to the patients\u27 sensitivity to carboplatin hematotoxicity. The relationships between the patients\u27 sensitivity to the neutropenic or thrombopenic effects of carboplatin and various covariates, including associated chemotherapies, demographic, biologic, and pharmacogenetic data, were studied. Results The sensitivity of carboplatin-induced thrombocytopenia decreased in the case of concomitant paclitaxel chemotherapy (slope decreased by 24%), whereas it increased with coadministration of etoposide and gemcitabine (slope increased by 45% and 133%, respectively). For neutropenia, the sensitivity increased when carboplatin was combined with other cytotoxics (slope increased by 76%). Conclusion This study provides useful information to clinicians to better estimate the hematopoietic toxicity of carboplatin and thus choose more rationally carboplatin target AUCs as a function of pretreatment or concomitantly administered chemotherapies. For example, an AUC of 5 mg/mL · min is associated with a risk of grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia of 2% in combination with paclitaxel versus 38% with gemcitabine in a non-pretreated patient

European experts consensus: BRCA/homologous recombination deficiency testing in first-line ovarian cancer

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 deficiency testing for recently diagnosed patients with advanced ovarian cancer

The Influence of Number and Timing of Pregnancies on Breast Cancer Risk for Women With BRCA1 or BRCA2 Mutations

International audienceBACKGROUND:Full-term pregnancy (FTP) is associated with a reduced breast cancer (BC) risk over time, but women are at increased BC risk in the immediate years following an FTP. No large prospective studies, however, have examined whether the number and timing of pregnancies are associated with BC risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.METHODS:Using weighted and time-varying Cox proportional hazards models, we investigated whether reproductive events are associated with BC risk for mutation carriers using a retrospective cohort (5707 BRCA1 and 3525 BRCA2 mutation carriers) and a prospective cohort (2276 BRCA1 and 1610 BRCA2 mutation carriers), separately for each cohort and the combined prospective and retrospective cohort.RESULTS:For BRCA1 mutation carriers, there was no overall association with parity compared with nulliparity (combined hazard ratio [HRc] = 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.83 to 1.18). Relative to being uniparous, an increased number of FTPs was associated with decreased BC risk (HRc = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.69 to 0.91; HRc = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.82; HRc = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.40 to 0.63, for 2, 3, and ≥4 FTPs, respectively, P trend < .0001) and increasing duration of breastfeeding was associated with decreased BC risk (combined cohort P trend = .0003). Relative to being nulliparous, uniparous BRCA1 mutation carriers were at increased BC risk in the prospective analysis (prospective hazard ration [HRp] = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.09 to 2.62). For BRCA2 mutation carriers, being parous was associated with a 30% increase in BC risk (HRc = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.69), and there was no apparent decrease in risk associated with multiparity except for having at least 4 FTPs vs. 1 FTP (HRc = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.54 to 0.98).CONCLUSIONS:These findings suggest differential associations with parity between BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with higher risk for uniparous BRCA1 carriers and parous BRCA2 carriers

Identification of a BRCA2-Specific modifier locus at 6p24 related to breast cancer risk

Common genetic variants contribute to the observed variation in breast cancer risk for BRCA2 mutation carriers; those known to date have all been found through population-based genome-wide association studies (GWAS). To comprehensively identify breast cancer risk modifying loci for BRCA2 mutation carriers, we conducted a deep replication of an ongoing GWAS discovery study. Using the ranked P-values of the breast cancer associations with the imputed genotype of 1.4 M SNPs, 19,029 SNPs were selected and designed for inclusion on a custom Illumina array that included a total of 211,155 SNPs as part of a multi-consortial project. DNA samples from 3,881 breast cancer affected and 4,330 unaffected BRCA2 mutation carriers from 47 studies belonging to the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 were genotyped and available for analysis. We replicated previously reported breast cancer susceptibility alleles in these BRCA2 mutation carriers and for several regions (including FGFR2, MAP3K1, CDKN2A/B, and PTHLH) identified SNPs that have stronger evidence of association than those previously published. We also identified a novel susceptibility allele at 6p24 that was inversely associated with risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers (rs9348512; per allele HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.80-0.90, P = 3.9×10−8). This SNP was not associated with breast cancer risk either in the general population or in BRCA1 mutation carriers. The locus lies within a region containing TFAP2A, which encodes a transcriptional activation protein that interacts with several tumor suppressor genes. This report identifies the first breast cancer risk locus specific to a BRCA2 mutation background. This comprehensive update of novel and previously reported breast cancer susceptibility loci contributes to the establishment of a panel of SNPs that modify breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers. This panel may have clinical utility for women with BRCA2 mutations weighing options for medical prevention of breast cancer