Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Selinexor inhibits exportin-1 (XPO1) resulting in nuclear accumulation of tumor suppressor proteins including p53 and has clinical activity in endometrial cancer (EC). The primary end point was to assess progression-free survival (PFS) with once-weekly oral selinexor in patients with advanced or recurrent EC. PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:ENGOT-EN5/GOG-3055/SIENDO was a randomized, prospective, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study at 107 sites in 10 countries. Patients 18 years or older with histologically confirmed EC were enrolled. All had completed a single line of at least 12 weeks of taxane-platinum combination chemotherapy and achieved partial or complete response. Patients were assigned to receive 80 mg oral selinexor once weekly or placebo with 2:1 random assignment (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03555422). RESULTS:wild-type (wt) EC had a median PFS of 13.7 and 3.7 months with selinexor and placebo. The most common grade 3 treatment-related adverse events were nausea (9%), neutropenia (9%), and thrombocytopenia (7%). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:wt EC showed promising results with selinexor maintenance therapy.

OBJECTIVE:This multi-center cohort study assessed associations between race, TP53 mutations, p53 expression, and histology to investigate racial survival disparities in endometrial cancer (EC). METHODS:Black and White patients with advanced or recurrent EC with Next Generation Sequencing data in the Endometrial Cancer Molecularly Targeted Therapy Consortium database were identified. Clinicopathologic and treatment variables were summarized by race and compared. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) among all patients were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models estimated the association between race, TP53 status, p53 expression, histology, and survival outcomes. RESULTS:Black patients were more likely than White patients to have TP53-mutated (N = 727, 71.7% vs 49.7%, p < 0.001) and p53-abnormal (N = 362, 71.1% vs 53.2%, p = 0.003) EC. Patients with TP53-mutated EC had worse PFS (HR 2.73 (95% CI 1.88-3.97)) and OS (HR 2.20 (95% CI 1.77-2.74)) compared to those with TP53-wildtype EC. Patients with p53-abnormal EC had worse PFS (HR 2.01 (95% CI 1.22-3.32)) and OS (HR 1.61 (95% CI 1.18-2.19)) compared to those with p53-wildtype EC. After adjusting for TP53 mutation and p53 expression, race was not associated with survival outcomes. The most frequent TP53 variants were at nucleotide positions R273 (n = 54), R248 (n = 38), and R175 (n = 23), rates of which did not differ by race. CONCLUSIONS:Black patients are more likely to have TP53-mutated and p53-abnormal EC, which are associated with worse survival outcomes than TP53- and p53-wildtype EC. The higher frequency of these subtypes among Black patients may contribute to survival disparities.

OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to analyze factors associated with concurrent uterine surgery in patients undergoing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) for risk reducing or therapeutic purposes. Additionally, trends in surgical choice and uptake of post-operative hormone therapy (HT) were examined. METHODS:A 10-year retrospective study was conducted on patients who underwent risk-reducing or therapeutic BSO at one institution. Multinomial regression analysis of patient and case characteristics was performed evaluating associations with surgery type (BSO, BSO and hysterectomy, or BSO and endometrial sampling). Trends in surgery type and uptake of HT post operatively are described. RESULTS:Among the study sample of 643 patients, 140 (22%) patients underwent therapeutic BSO for a history of hormone receptor (HR) positive breast cancer, while the remainder underwent risk-reducing BSO due to a pathogenic variant and/or family history. Pathogenic variants included BRCA1 (141, 40%) BRCA2 (173, 49%), and Lynch syndrome genes (15, 4%). Regression analysis revealed significant associations between concurrent hysterectomy and Black race (RR = 3.55, CI = 1.51-8.38, p = 0.004), history of HR positive breast cancer (RR = 1.88, CI = 1.03-3.42, p = 0.04), and surgeon (Surgeon 1, RR = 2.43, CI = 1.36-4.35, p = 0.003). Among eligible patients under age 51, 36% initiated HT. Over the study period, concurrent hysterectomy rates declined while endometrial sampling increased. CONCLUSIONS:Rates of hysterectomy declined over the study period and slightly more than one-third of eligible patients utilized post-operative HT. Further research on concurrent uterine surgery is needed to establish standardized treatment recommendations in the risk-reducing and therapeutic BSO population. Additionally, education regarding the benefits of postoperative HT in eligible patients is warranted.

OBJECTIVE:Progression-free survival is an established clinically meaningful endpoint in ovarian cancer trials, but it may be susceptible to bias; therefore, blinded independent centralized radiological review is often included in trial designs. We compared blinded independent centralized review and investigator-assessed progressive disease performance in the PRIMA/ENGOT-ov26/GOG-3012 trial examining niraparib monotherapy. METHODS:PRIMA/ENGOT-ov26/GOG-3012 was a randomized, double-blind phase 3 trial; patients with newly diagnosed stage III/IV ovarian cancer received niraparib or placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST] v1.1), determined by two independent radiologists, an arbiter if required, and by blinded central clinician review. Discordance rates between blinded independent centralized review and investigator assessment of progressive disease and non-progressive disease were routinely assessed. To optimize disease assessment, a training intervention was developed for blinded independent centralized radiological reviewers, and RECIST refresher training was provided for investigators. Discordance rates were determined post-intervention. RESULTS:There was a 39% discordance rate between blinded independent centralized review and investigator-assessed progressive disease/non-progressive disease in an initial patient subset (n=80); peritoneal carcinomatosis was the most common source of discordance. All reviewers underwent training, and as a result, changes were implemented, including removal of two original reviewers and identification of 10 best practices for reading imaging data. Post-hoc analysis indicated final discordance rates between blinded independent centralized review and investigator improved to 12% in the overall population. Median progression-free survival and hazard ratios were similar between blinded independent centralized review and investigators in the overall population and across subgroups. CONCLUSION:PRIMA/ENGOT-ov26/GOG-3012 highlights the need to optimize blinded independent centralized review and investigator concordance using early, specialized, ovarian-cancer-specific radiology training to maximize validity of outcome data.

OBJECTIVES:Although universal mismatch repair (MMR) immunohistochemistry (IHC) in endometrial cancer began at our institution in July 2015, not all eligible patients were referred for genetic testing (GT). In April 2017, genetic counselors obtained IHC data and contacted physicians to approve genetic counseling referrals (GCRs) for Lynch Syndrome (LS) in eligible patients. We assessed if this protocol increased frequency of GCRs and GT in patients with abnormal MMR IHC. METHODS:We retrospectively (7/2015-5/2022) identified patients with abnormal MMR IHC at a large urban hospital. GCRs and GT were compared between cases from 7/2015-4/2017 (pre-protocol) and 5/2017-5/2022 (post-protocol) with chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS:Of 794 patients with IHC testing, 177 (22.3%) had abnormal MMR results with 46 (26.0%) meeting criteria for LS screening with GT. Of 46 patients, 16 (34.8%) were identified prior to and 30 (65.2%) after the protocol initiation. GCRs significantly increased from 11/16 (68.8%) to 29/30 (96.7%) in the pre-protocol versus post-protocol groups, p = 0.02. There was no statistically significant difference in GT between groups (10/16, 62.5% vs 26/30, 86.7%, p = 0.07). Of 36 patients who underwent GT, 16 (44.4%) had LS: MSH6, 9; MSH2, 4; PMS2, 2; MLH1, 1. CONCLUSIONS:Increased frequency of GCRs was observed following the change in protocol, which is important as LS screening has clinical implications for patients and their families. Despite this additional effort, approximately 15% who met criteria did not undergo GT; further efforts such as universal germline testing in patients with endometrial cancer should be considered.

BACKGROUND:Dostarlimab is an immune-checkpoint inhibitor that targets the programmed cell death 1 receptor. The combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy may have synergistic effects in the treatment of endometrial cancer. METHODS:We conducted a phase 3, global, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Eligible patients with primary advanced stage III or IV or first recurrent endometrial cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either dostarlimab (500 mg) or placebo, plus carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve, 5 mg per milliliter per minute) and paclitaxel (175 mg per square meter of body-surface area), every 3 weeks (six cycles), followed by dostarlimab (1000 mg) or placebo every 6 weeks for up to 3 years. The primary end points were progression-free survival as assessed by the investigator according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, and overall survival. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS:Of the 494 patients who underwent randomization, 118 (23.9%) had mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR), microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumors. In the dMMR-MSI-H population, estimated progression-free survival at 24 months was 61.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 46.3 to 73.4) in the dostarlimab group and 15.7% (95% CI, 7.2 to 27.0) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.50; P<0.001). In the overall population, progression-free survival at 24 months was 36.1% (95% CI, 29.3 to 42.9) in the dostarlimab group and 18.1% (95% CI, 13.0 to 23.9) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.80; P<0.001). Overall survival at 24 months was 71.3% (95% CI, 64.5 to 77.1) with dostarlimab and 56.0% (95% CI, 48.9 to 62.5) with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.87). The most common adverse events that occurred or worsened during treatment were nausea (53.9% of the patients in the dostarlimab group and 45.9% of those in the placebo group), alopecia (53.5% and 50.0%), and fatigue (51.9% and 54.5%). Severe and serious adverse events were more frequent in the dostarlimab group than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS:Dostarlimab plus carboplatin-paclitaxel significantly increased progression-free survival among patients with primary advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer, with a substantial benefit in the dMMR-MSI-H population. (Funded by GSK; RUBY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03981796.).

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: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/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 4 cycles, then 1000 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. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02715284.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To report updated long-term efficacy and safety from the double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study (NCT02655016). METHODS:Patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with complete or partial response (CR or PR) to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy received niraparib or placebo once daily (2:1 ratio). Stratification factors were best response to first-line chemotherapy regimen (CR/PR), receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (yes/no), and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status (deficient [HRd]/proficient [HRp] or not determined). Updated (ad hoc) progression-free survival (PFS) data (as of November 17, 2021) by investigator assessment (INV) are reported. RESULTS:In 733 randomised patients (niraparib, 487; placebo, 246), median PFS follow-up was 3.5years. Median INV-PFS was 24.5 versus 11.2months (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.68) in the HRd population and 13.8 versus 8.2months (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56-0.79) in the overall population for niraparib and placebo, respectively. In the HRp population, median INV-PFS was 8.4 versus 5.4months (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.87), respectively. Results were concordant with the primary analysis. Niraparib-treated patients were more likely to be free of progression or death at 4years than placebo-treated patients (HRd, 38% versus 17%; overall, 24% versus 14%). The most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events in niraparib patients were thrombocytopenia (39.7%), anaemia (31.6%), and neutropenia (21.3%). Myelodysplastic syndromes/acute myeloid leukaemia incidence rate (1.2%) was the same for niraparib- and placebo-treated patients. Overall survival remained immature. CONCLUSIONS:Niraparib maintained clinically significant improvements in PFS with 3.5years of follow-up in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer at high risk of progression irrespective of HRD status. No new safety signals were identified.

The present article reviews the current evidence for antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) in gynecologic cancer. ADCs consist of a highly selective monoclonal antibody for a tumor-associated antigen and a potent cytotoxic payload conjugated through a linker. Overall, the toxicity profiles of ADCs are manageable. Ocular toxicity is a known class effect of some ADCs and is managed with prophylactic corticosteroid and vasoconstrictor eye drops as well as dose interruptions/holds and dose modifications. In ovarian cancer, mirvetuximab soravtansine, an ADC targeting alpha-folate receptor (FRα), received US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) accelerated approval in November 2022 after data from the single-arm phase III SORAYA trial. A second ADC targeting FRα, STRO-002, received FDA fast track designation in August 2021. Multiple studies with upifitamab rilsodotin, an ADC comprising a NaPi2B-binding antibody, are underway. In cervical cancer, tisotumab vedotin, an ADC-targeting tissue factor, received FDA accelerated approval in September 2021 after the phase II innovaTV 204 trial. Tisotumab vedotin in combination with chemotherapy and other targeted agents is currently being evaluated. Although there are no currently approved ADCs for endometrial cancer, there are many under active evaluation, including mirvetuximab soravtansine. Trastuzumab-deruxtecan (T-DXd), an ADC targeting human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), is currently approved for HER2-positive and HER2-low breast cancer and shows promise in endometrial cancer. Like all anticancer treatments, the decision for a patient to undergo therapy with an ADC is a personal choice that balances the potential benefits with the side effects and requires thorough and compassionate support of their physician and care team and shared decision making.