Investigator

Elise Bonnet

Oncologist · Groupe Hospitalier Mutualiste de Grenoble

EBElise Bonnet
Papers(3)
Maintenance olaparib …Improving real-world …<i>ESR1</i> …
Collaborators(10)
Philippe FollanaCoriolan LebretonFlorence JolyJérôme AlexandreFrédéric SellePierre FournelAnne-Claire Hardy-Bes…Marie-Ange Mouret-Rey…Michel FabbroLeïla Bengrine Lefevre
Institutions(11)
Groupe Hospitalier Mu…Centre Antoine-Lacass…Institut BergoniCentre François Bacle…Assistance Publique –…Groupe Hospitalier Di…CHU de Saint-EtienneDepartment Of Medical…Centre Jean PerrinInstitut Regional Du …Centre Georges Franoi…

Papers

Maintenance olaparib after platinum-based chemotherapy for advanced/metastatic endometrial cancer: GINECO randomized phase IIb UTOLA trial

Single-agent maintenance poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition may represent an effective strategy in patients with advanced/metastatic endometrial cancer responding to platinum-based chemotherapy, including for molecular subtypes with suboptimal options. To explore this approach, we initiated the randomized phase IIb UTOLA trial (NCT03745950). Female patients without progression following front-line platinum-based chemotherapy for advanced/metastatic endometrial cancer were randomized 2:1 to twice-daily maintenance oral olaparib 300 mg or placebo until progression or intolerance, stratified by p53 status, mismatch repair status, and response to initial chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints were PFS in subgroups, time to second progression or death, time to first and second subsequent therapy, objective response rate, overall survival, patient-reported outcomes, and safety. In the intention-to-treat population (n = 145), there was no PFS difference between olaparib and placebo (median 5.6 vs. 4.0 months, respectively; hazard ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.65-1.35; p = 0.74). However, intriguing numerical PFS effects were observed in exploratory analyses of pre-specified subgroups (p53-abnormal, complete response to initial chemotherapy, chromosomal instability). There was no overall survival difference between treatments. Grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 36% versus 10% of olaparib- versus placebo-treated patients and were consistent with the olaparib safety profile in other cancers. Maintenance olaparib did not improve PFS, but promising numerical effects in subsets of patients warrant prospective evaluation.

Improving real-world evaluation of patient- and physician-reported tolerability: niraparib for recurrent ovarian cancer (NiQoLe)

Abstract Background Maintenance niraparib at an individualized starting dose (ISD) is established in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (PSROC). However, patients’ perspectives on the burden of prolonged maintenance therapy have not been reported in prospective trials or routine practice. Methods In the real-life multicenter NiQoLe study, patients with PSROC received ISD maintenance niraparib. The primary objective was to describe physician-reported adverse events (AEs) leading to treatment modification during the first 3 months. Secondary endpoints included patient-reported outcomes (symptomatic AEs using PRO-CTCAE, self-reported fatigue, and impact on daily activities/function using FACT-F) collected remotely weekly using a specifically designed electronic device. Results Most (80%) of 139 treated patients (median age = 70 years) began niraparib at 200 mg/day. Median treatment duration was 5.7 (range = 0.2-21.4) months. During the first 3 months, 86 patients (62%) required treatment modification (median = 27 days to modification). Physician-reported grade ≥3 niraparib-related AEs occurred in 34 patients (24%); 68 patients (49%) had treatment modification for AEs, predominantly thrombocytopenia. The most frequent patient-reported AEs (PRO-CTCAE) were fatigue, insomnia, constipation, and dry mouth. Self-reported AEs were severe in 66% of patients. At baseline, 33% of patients reported severe fatigue (FACT-F), which generally persisted during niraparib. Physicians systematically underestimated major patient-reported symptoms. Conclusions In routine practice, niraparib dose modification was often required during the first 3 months despite individualized dosing. Physicians underestimated the burden of fatigue and symptomatic AEs. Digital self-reporting of AEs is feasible, provides patient-centered information complementing physician-reported AEs, and allows fuller appreciation of toxicity in real-world studies. Clinical trial information NCT03752216

ESR1 Mutation in Endocrine Treatment-Naïve Endometrial Cancer: Prevalence, Characteristics, and Prognostic Implications, Results from the UTOLA Phase II GINECO Trial

Abstract Purpose: Aromatase inhibitors (AI) are used to treat estrogen receptor (ER)–positive low-grade endometrioid endometrial cancer. In breast cancer, ESR1 mutations are rare at diagnosis (&amp;lt;5%) but are frequently acquired in AI-resistant cases and are considered one of the major resistance mechanisms to endocrine therapy. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of ESR1 mutations in hormonotherapy-naïve endometrial cancer samples and correlate them with molecular profiles, ER expression, and clinical outcomes. Experimental Design: A total of 147 patients with advanced endometrial cancer who had responded to first-line chemotherapy were recruited into the UTOLA trial. Archival endometrial cancer tumor tissues underwent sequencing of 127 genes, including ESR1. Only hotspot mutations in the ligand-binding domain were evaluated. ESR1 mutation prevalence was validated in the Genomics England dataset. In UTOLA, tumors were classified as POLE, MMR deficient, TP53abn, or no specific molecular profiles (NSMP) based on the Proactive Molecular Risk Classifier for Endometrial Cancer (PROMISE) classification. Results: Of 147 patients, 137 had sufficient tumor material for sequencing. ESR1 mutations were identified in eight tumors (6%), including Y537S/C/N (n = 4), L536H/P (n = 2), and E380Q (n = 2). A similar prevalence (3.5%) was found among 1,311 tumors in the Genomics England dataset. All ESR1 mutation cases were low-grade endometrioid endometrial cancer, ER-positive, and PR-positive, and classified as NSMP. Among patients with metastatic NSMP low-grade endometrioid endometrial cancer, 22% (8/37) harbored ESR1 mutations. Survival outcomes after platinum chemotherapy were similar between patients with ESR1 mutation endometrial cancer and ESR1 wild type (median, not reached vs. 25.3 months; P = 0.114). Conclusions: ESR1 mutations, while rare overall in treatment-naïve endometrial cancer, are more prevalent in patients with NSMP low-grade endometrioid endometrial cancer, potentially affecting AI efficacy. ESR1 status should be considered in selecting hormonotherapy and as a stratification factor in AI trials.

4Works
3Papers
38Collaborators
1Trials

Positions

2020–

Oncologist

Groupe Hospitalier Mutualiste de Grenoble

2020–

Medical oncologist

Centre Léon Bérard

2015–

Intership

Hospices Civils de Lyon