Safety, Efficacy, and Biomarker Analyses of Dostarlimab in Patients with Endometrial Cancer: Interim Results of the Phase I GARNET Study

Eficàcia; Biomarcador; Càncer d'endometriEficacia; Biomarcador; Cáncer de endometrioEfficacy; Biomarker; Endometrial cancerPurpose: This interim report of the GARNET phase I trial presents efficacy and safety of dostarlimab in patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (EC), with an analysis of tumor biomarkers as prognostic indicators. Patients and Methods: A total of 153 patients with mismatch repair deficient (dMMR)/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) and 161 patients with mismatch repair proficient (MMRp)/microsatellite stable (MSS) EC were enrolled and dosed. Patients received 500 mg dostarlimab every 3 weeks for four cycles, then 1,000 mg every 6 weeks until progression. Primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR). Results: A total of 143 patients with dMMR/MSI-H EC and 156 patients with MMRp/MSS EC were evaluated for efficacy. ORR was 45.5% (n = 65) and 15.4% (n = 24) for dMMR/MSI-H EC and MMRp/MSS EC, respectively. Median DOR for dMMR/MSI-H EC was not met (median follow-up, 27.6 months); median DOR for MMRp/MSS EC was 19.4 months. The ORRs by combined positive score (CPS) ≥1 status were 54.9% and 21.7% for dMMR/MSI-H EC and MMRp/MSS EC, respectively. ORRs by high tumor mutational burden (≥10 mutations/Mb) were 47.8% (43/90) and 45.5% (5/11) for dMMR/MSI-H EC and MMRp/MSS EC, respectively. ORR in TP53mut or POLεmut molecular subgroups was 18.1% (17/94) and 40.0% (2/5), respectively. The safety profile of dostarlimab was consistent with previous reports. Conclusions: Dostarlimab demonstrated durable antitumor activity and safety in patients with dMMR/MSI-H EC. Biomarkers associated with EC may identify patients likely to respond to dostarlimab.The GARNET trial (NCT02715284) was originally designed and funded by Tesaro Inc. (acquired by GSK in 2018) in collaboration with the author

ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer – Update 2023

Cervical cancer; Pathology; RadiationCàncer de coll uterí; Patologia; RadiacióCáncer de cuello uterino; Patología; RadiaciónIn 2018, the European Society of Gynecological Oncology (ESGO) jointly with the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) published evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer. Given the large body of new evidence addressing the management of cervical cancer, the three sister societies jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines. The update includes new topics to provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in cervical cancer.To serve on the expert panel (27 experts across Europe) ESGO/ESTRO/ESP nominated practicing clinicians who are involved in managing patients with cervical cancer and have demonstrated leadership through their expertise in clinical care and research, national and international engagement, profile, and dedication to the topics addressed. To ensure the statements were evidence based, new data identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the international development group. Before publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 155 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives.These updated guidelines are comprehensive and cover staging, management, follow-up, long-term survivorship, quality of life and palliative care. Management includes fertility sparing treatment, early and locally advanced cervical cancer, invasive cervical cancer diagnosed on a simple hysterectomy specimen, cervical cancer in pregnancy, rare tumors, recurrent and metastatic diseases. The management algorithms and the principles of radiotherapy and pathological evaluation are also defined.All costs relating to the development process were covered from ESGO and ESP funds

Antitumor Activity and Safety of Dostarlimab Monotherapy in Patients With Mismatch Repair Deficient Solid Tumors: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial

Antitumor activity; Monotherapy; Solid tumorsActividad antitumoral; Monoterapia; Tumores sólidosActivitat antitumoral; Monoteràpia; Tumors sòlidsImportance Mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) occurs in various cancers, and these tumors are attractive candidates for anti–programmed cell death 1 therapies, such as dostarlimab, a recently approved immune checkpoint inhibitor. Objective To assess the antitumor activity and safety of dostarlimab in patients with advanced or recurrent dMMR solid tumors. Design, Setting, And Participants The GARNET trial was a phase 1, open-label, single-group, multicenter study that began enrolling May 8, 2017. Participants had advanced or recurrent dMMR and microsatellite instability–high (MSI-H) or polymerase epsilon (POLE)–altered solid tumors. The data cut for this interim analysis was from November 1, 2021, with median follow-up of 27.7 months. Interventions Patients received 500 mg of dostarlimab intravenously every 3 weeks for 4 doses, then 1000 mg every 6 weeks until disease progression, discontinuation, or withdrawal. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary objective was to evaluate objective response rate and duration of response in patients with dMMR solid tumors by blinded independent central review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Results The efficacy population included 327 patients (median [range] age, 63 [24-85] years; 235 [71.9%] female; 7 [2.1%] Asian, 6 [1.8%] Black, and 206 [63.0%] White patients), with 141 patients (43.1%) with dMMR endometrial cancer, 105 patients (32.1%) with dMMR colorectal cancer, and 81 patients (24.8%) with other dMMR tumor types. All patients had at least 1 previous line of therapy. Objective response rate assessed per blinded independent central review for dMMR solid tumors was 44.0% (95% CI, 38.6% to 49.6%). Median duration of response was not reached (range, ≥1.18 to ≥47.21 months); 72.2% of responders (104 of 144) had a response lasting 12 or more months. Median progression-free survival was 6.9 months (95% CI, 4.2 to 13.6 months); probability of progression-free survival at 24 months was 40.6% (95% CI, 35.0% to 46.1%). Median overall survival was not reached (95% CI, 31.6 months to not reached). The most frequent immune-related adverse events were hypothyroidism (25 [6.9%]), alanine aminotransferase increase (21 [5.8%]), and arthralgia (17 [4.7%]). No new safety concerns were identified. Conclusions And Relevance In this nonrandomized controlled trial, dostarlimab was a well-tolerated treatment option with rapid, robust, and durable antitumor activity in patients with diverse dMMR solid tumors. These findings suggest that dostarlimab provides meaningful long-term benefit in a population with high unmet need. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02715284This study was funded by GSK

A plain language summary of results from the GARNET study of dostarlimab in patients with endometrial cancer

Endometrial cancer; Gynecologic cancer; ImmunotherapyCàncer d'endometri; Càncer ginecològic; ImmunoteràpiaCáncer de endometrio; Cáncer ginecológico; InmunoterapiaWhat is this summary about? Dostarlimab, also known by the brand name JEMPERLI, is a medicine that can be used to treat certain types of endometrial cancer. GARNET is an ongoing phase 1 clinical study that is testing the safety and side effects of dostarlimab and the best way to administer it to patients. The results presented in this summary are from a time point in the middle of the study. What were the results? The results from the GARNET study published in 2022 showed how well dostarlimab worked for people participating in the study. Dostarlimab was found to reduce the size of tumors in patients with certain types of endometrial cancer. The patients treated with dostarlimab had side effects that could be managed and few severe side effects. What do the results mean? The results of the GARNET study led to dostarlimab being approved to treat patients with certain types of endometrial cancer. For patients with advanced-stage endometrial cancer, or endometrial cancer that has come back after chemotherapy (recurrent), there are few treatment options. The results suggest that dostarlimab may provide long-term benefits for these patients.This study (NCT02715284) was funded by GSK. Trademarks are owned by or licensed to the GSK group of companies. Full author disclosure information can be found in the original article

Efficacy and Safety of Mirvetuximab Soravtansine in Patients With Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer With High Folate Receptor Alpha Expression: Results From the SORAYA Study

Seguretat; Càncer d'ovariSeguridad; Cáncer de ovarioSafety; Ovarian cancerPURPOSE 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

Lurbinectedin in patients with pretreated endometrial cancer: results from a phase 2 basket clinical trial and exploratory translational study

Endometrial cancer; Lurbinectedin; Phase 2Càncer d'endometri; Lurbinectedina; Fase 2Cáncer de endometrio; Lurbinectedina; Fase 2Second-line treatment of endometrial cancer is an unmet medical need. Lurbinectedin showed promising antitumor activity in a phase I study in combination with doxorubicin in advanced endometrial cancer. This phase 2 Basket trial evaluated lurbinectedin 3.2 mg/m2 1-h intravenous infusion every 3 weeks in a cohort of 73 patients with pretreated endometrial cancer. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) according to RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety and an exploratory translational study. Confirmed complete (CR) and partial response (PR) was reported in two and six patients, respectively (ORR = 11.3%; 95%CI, 5.0-21.0%). Median DoR was 9.2 months (95%CI, 3.4-18.0 months), median PFS was 2.6 months (95%CI, 1.4-4.0 months) and median OS was 9.3 months (95%CI, 6.1-12.8 months). Molecular subtypes showed differences in PFS rate at 6 months (p53abn 23.7% vs. "No Specific Molecular Profile" [NSMP] 42.9%) and median OS (p53abn 6.6 months vs. NSMP 16.1 months). The most common treatment-related adverse events (mostly grade 1/2) were fatigue (54.8% of patients), nausea (50.7%), vomiting (26.0%) decreased appetite (17.8%). and constipation, (19.2%). The most common grade 3/4 toxicity was neutropenia (43.8%; grade 4, 19.2%; febrile neutropenia, 4.1%). In conclusion, considering the exploratory aim of this trial and the hints of antitumor activity observed together with a predictable and manageable safety profile, further biomarker-based development of lurbinectedin is recommended in this indication in combination with other agents. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02454972.The study was funded by Pharma Mar S.A, including partial funding by grants from the Centro para el Desarrollo Tecnológico Industrial (CDTI) during the conduct of the study (grant number IDI-20150006). VS is supported by a US National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant (no. R01CA242845 and R01CA273168); MD Anderson Cancer Center Department of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics is supported by the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (no. RP1100584), the Sheikh Khalifa Bin Zayed Al Nahyan Institute for Personalized Cancer Therapy (no. 1U01 CA180964), NCATS (Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences) Grant (no. UL1 TR000371), and the MD Anderson Cancer Center Support Grant (no. P30 CA016672)

Relacorilant + Nab-Paclitaxel in Patients With Recurrent, Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer: A Three-Arm, Randomized, Controlled, Open-Label Phase II Study

Relacorilant; Cáncer de ovario recurrente; PlatinoRelacorilant; Càncer d'ovari recurrent; PlatíRelacorilant; Resistant ovarian cancer; PlatinumPURPOSE 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/m2) + intermittent relacorilant (150 mg the day before, of, and after nab-paclitaxel); (2) nab-paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) + continuous relacorilant (100 mg once daily); or (3) nab-paclitaxel monotherapy (100 mg/m2). 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)

A randomized phase 2 study of sapanisertib in combination with paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone in women with advanced, recurrent, or persistent endometrial cancer

Endometrial cancer; Metastatic; RecurrentCàncer d'endometri; Metastàtic; RecurrentCáncer endometrial; Metastásico; RecurrenteObjective This phase 2 study investigated sapanisertib (selective dual inhibitor of mTORC1/2) alone, or in combination with paclitaxel or TAK-117 (a selective small molecule inhibitor of PI3K), versus paclitaxel alone in advanced, recurrent, or persistent endometrial cancer. Methods Patients with histologic diagnosis of endometrial cancer (1–2 prior regimens) were randomized to 28-day cycles on four treatment arms: 1) weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, and 15); 2) weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 + oral sapanisertib 4 mg on days 2–4, 9–11, 16–18, and 23–25; 3) weekly sapanisertib 30 mg, or 4) sapanisertib 4 mg + TAK-117 200 mg on days 1–3, 8–10, 15–17, and 22–24. Results Of 241 patients randomized, 234 received treatment (paclitaxel, n = 87 [3 ongoing]; paclitaxel+sapanisertib, n = 86 [3 ongoing]; sapanisertib, n = 41; sapanisertib+TAK-117, n = 20). The sapanisertib and sapanisertib+TAK-117 arms were closed to enrollment after futility analyses. After a median follow-up of 14.4 (paclitaxel) versus 17.2 (paclitaxel+sapanisertib) months, median progression-free survival (PFS; primary endpoint) was 3.7 versus 5.6 months (hazard ratio [HR] 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58–1.15; p = 0.139); in patients with endometrioid histology (n = 116), median PFS was 3.3 versus 5.7 months (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.43–1.03). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse event rates were 54.0% with paclitaxel versus 89.5% paclitaxel+sapanisertib. Conclusions Our findings support inclusion of chemotherapy combinations with investigational agents for advanced or metastatic disease. The primary endpoint was not met and toxicity was manageable. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02725268Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Lexington, MA, USA. This work was supported by funding from Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc. The study was designed by the authors in conjunction with the sponsors. Data were gathered and analyzed by the investigator and the sponsor; all the authors had access to the data. The authors received medical writing support for drafting the manuscript, which was funded by Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. Manuscript drafts were reviewed by all authors and the sponsor and all the authors made the decision to submit the manuscript for publication

Tolerability of maintenance olaparib in newly diagnosed patients with advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation in the randomized phase III SOLO1 trial

Olaparib; Ovarian cancer; TolerabilityOlaparib; Cáncer de ovarios; TolerabilidadOlaparib; Càncer d'ovaris; TolerabilitatObjectives In the phase III SOLO1 trial (NCT01844986), maintenance olaparib provided a substantial progression-free survival benefit in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA mutation who were in response after platinum-based chemotherapy. We analyzed the timing, duration and grade of the most common hematologic and non-hematologic adverse events in SOLO1. Methods Eligible patients were randomized to olaparib tablets 300 mg twice daily (N = 260) or placebo (N = 131), with a 2-year treatment cap in most patients. Safety outcomes were analyzed in detail in randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug (olaparib, n = 260; placebo, n = 130). Results Median time to first onset of the most common hematologic (anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia) and non-hematologic (nausea, fatigue/asthenia, vomiting) adverse events was <3 months in olaparib-treated patients. The first event of anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, nausea and vomiting lasted a median of <2 months and the first event of fatigue/asthenia lasted a median of 3.48 months in the olaparib group. These adverse events were manageable with supportive treatment and/or olaparib dose modification in most patients, with few patients requiring discontinuation of olaparib. Of 162 patients still receiving olaparib at month 24, 64.2% were receiving the recommended starting dose of olaparib 300 mg twice daily. Conclusions Maintenance olaparib had a predictable and manageable adverse event profile in the newly diagnosed setting with no new safety signals identified. Adverse events usually occurred early, were largely manageable and led to discontinuation in a minority of patients.This work was supported by AstraZeneca and is part of an alliance between AstraZeneca and MSD

Pan-Asian adapted ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with endometrial cancer

Endometrial cancer; Guidelines; TreatmentCàncer d'endometri; Pautes; TractamentCáncer de endometrio; Pautas; TratamientoThe most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with endometrial cancer was published in 2022. It was therefore decided, by both the ESMO and the Indian Society of Medical and Paediatric Oncology (ISMPO), to convene a virtual meeting in July 2022 to adapt the ESMO 2022 guidelines to take into account the variations in the management of endometrial cancer in Asia. These guidelines represent the consensus opinion of a panel of Asian experts representing the oncological societies of China (CSCO), India (ISMPO), Indonesia (ISHMO), Japan (JSMO), Korea (KSMO), Malaysia (MOS), the Philippines (PSMO), Singapore (SSO), Taiwan (TOS) and Thailand (TSCO). Voting was based on scientific evidence and was conducted independently of the current treatment practices and treatment access constraints in the different Asian countries, which were discussed when appropriate. The aim of this guideline manuscript is to provide guidance for the optimisation and harmonisation of the management of patients with endometrial cancer across the different regions of Asia, drawing on the evidence provided by Western and Asian trials whilst respecting the variations in clinical presentation, diagnostic practices including molecular profiling and disparities in access to therapeutic options, including drug approvals and reimbursement strategies.All costs relating to this consensus conference were covered by the ESMO and the ISMPO from central dedicated funds. There was no external funding of the event or the manuscript production