Eva Baxter

Phase 2b, open-label, single-arm, multicenter pilot study of the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of dostarlimab in women with early-stage mismatch repair-deficient endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma

The standard treatment for endometrial cancer is hysterectomy with or without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy; however, this may not be an optimal choice for women who have not completed childbearing or who are at a high risk of surgical complications. Conservative treatment with levonorgestrel intrauterine devices appear to be effective in patients with early-stage endometrial cancer; however, patients with mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) tumors have a low likelihood of responding to levonorgestrel intrauterine devices. To assess the efficacy of dostarlimab, an active immune checkpoint inhibitor that targets the programmed cell death protein-1 receptor, in patients with early-stage dMMR endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma. Administration of 4 3-weekly cycles of 500 mg dostarlimab followed by a 3-week rest period and 3 6-weekly cycles of 1000 mg dostarlimab will be safe and efficacious in early-stage dMMR endometrial cancer patients. Non-randomized, open-label, pilot, multicenter phase2b study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dostarlimab in 10 women aged ≥18 years with a clinically confirmed diagnosis of early-stage and dMMR endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma. Eligible patients must have histologically proven stage I, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics grade 1 or 2 dMMR endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma and desire for fertility preservation. Exclusions include, but are not limited to, patients with other high-risk endometrial cancer cell types, a poor medical risk due to uncontrolled medical conditions, or those who experienced grade 3 or higher immune-related adverse events from prior immunotherapy. The primary endpoint is the number of participants achieving investigator-assessed pathological complete response within 6 months of treatment. Ten (10) women ≥18 years of age will be enrolled. Accruals are expected to be completed by 2027, with the presentation of results by 2029. NCT06278857.

Central Pathology Review of Endometrial Hyperplasia and Adenocarcinoma Before and After Treatment With the Levonorgestrel Intrauterine Device–Results From the feMMe Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

Distinguishing endometrial hyperplasia from endometrial adenocarcinoma remains a histopathologic challenge. Several retrospective studies have reported high interobserver variability when assessing the progestin-naive endometrium, while only one study has assessed interobserver variability of postprogestin endometrial biopsies. This study quantified the interobserver variability between trial site pathologists and central pathology review of endometrial specimens taken before treatment with the levonorgestrel intrauterine device (LNG-IUD), 3 months and 6 months post-treatment as part of the feMMe phase 2 randomized clinical trial (NCT01686126). Interobserver agreement was 73% (105/143, κ=0.50) at baseline, 80% (107/134, κ=0.72) at 3 months and 77% (98/127, κ=0.64) at 6 months post-LNG-IUD treatment. Overall, 42% (45/107) site-reported diagnoses of endometrial hyperplasia and 13% (21/161) site-reported diagnoses of endometrial adenocarcinoma were discordant. Site-reported diagnoses were upgraded to higher risk pathology on central review for 77% (72/94) discordant cases. This study confirms the high rate of interobserver variability when diagnosing endometrial hyperplasia or endometrial adenocarcinoma both before and after progestin treatment in specimens collected as part of a clinical trial. It emphasizes the value of confirming diagnosis by a gynecologic pathologist and comparing specimens from the progestin-treated endometrium with the pretreatment biopsy. This study highlights the importance of central pathology review for clinical trial reporting and when deciding on treatment options and assessing response, particularly in the context of progestin treatment.

A phase III randomized clinical trial comparing sentinel node biopsy with no retroperitoneal node dissection in apparent early-stage endometrial cancer – ENDO-3: ANZGOG trial 1911/2020

Sentinel node biopsy is a surgical technique to explore lymph nodes for surgical staging of endometrial cancer, which has replaced full retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. However, the effectiveness of sentinel node biopsy, its value to patients, and potential harms compared with no-node dissection have never been shown in a randomized trial. Stage 1 will test recovery from surgery. Stage 2 will compare disease-free survival at 4.5 years between patients randomized to sentinel node biopsy versus no retroperitoneal node dissection. The primary hypothesis for stage 1 is that treatment with sentinel node biopsy will not cause detriment to patient outcomes (lymphedema, morbidity, loss of quality of life) and will not increase treatment-related morbidity or health services costs compared with patients treated without a retroperitoneal node dissection at 12 months after surgery. The primary hypothesis for stage 2 is that disease-free survival at 4.5 years after surgery in patients without retroperitoneal node dissection is not inferior to those receiving sentinel node biopsy. This phase III, open-label, two-arm, multistage, randomized non-inferiority trial (ENDO-3) will determine the value of sentinel node biopsy for surgical management of endometrial cancer. Patients with endometrial cancer are randomized to receive: (1) laparoscopic/robotic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy with sentinel node biopsy or (2) laparoscopic/robotic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy without retroperitoneal node dissection. In stage 1, 444 patients will be enrolled to demonstrate feasibility and quality of life. If this is demonstrated, we will enroll another 316 patients in stage 2. Inclusion criteria include women aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed endometrial cancer; clinical stage 1, who meet the criteria for laparoscopic or robotic total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Patients with uterine mesenchymal tumors are excluded. The endpoint for stage 1 is surgical recovery, with the proportion of patients returning to usual daily activities at 3 months post-surgery as measured with the EQ-5D. Stage 2 is disease-free survival at 4.5 years. 760 participants (both stages). Stage 1 commenced in January 2021 and is planned to be completed in December 2024 when 444 participants have completed 12 months' follow-up. Stage 2 will enroll a further 316 participants for a total of 760 patients. NCT04073706.

Improving response to progestin treatment of low-grade endometrial cancer

This review examines how response rates to progestin treatment of low-grade endometrial cancer can be improved. In addition to providing a brief overview of the pathogenesis of low-grade endometrial cancer, we discuss limitations in the current classification of endometrial cancer and how stratification may be refined using molecular markers to reproducibly identify 'low-risk' cancers which may represent the best candidates for progestin therapy. We also discuss constraints in current approaches to progestin treatment of low-grade endometrial cancer and perform a systematic review of predictive biomarkers. PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies reporting pre-treatment biomarkers associated with outcome in women with low-grade endometrial cancer or endometrial hyperplasia with an intact uterus who received progestin treatment. Studies of fewer than 50 women were excluded. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID 152374). A descriptive synthesis of pre-treatment predictive biomarkers reported in the included studies was conducted. Of 1908 records reviewed, 19 studies were included. Clinical features such as age or body mass index cannot predict progestin response. Lesions defined as 'low-risk' by FIGO criteria (stage 1A, grade 1) can respond well; however, the reproducibility and prognostic ability of the current histopathological classification system is suboptimal. Molecular markers can be reproducibly assessed, have been validated as prognostic biomarkers, and may inform patient selection for progestin treatment. DNA polymerase epsilon (POLE)-ultramutated tumors and a subset of p53 wild-type or DNA mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient tumors with 'low-risk' features (eg, progesterone and estrogen receptor-positive) may have improved response rates, though this needs to be validated. Molecular markers can identify cases which may be candidates for progestin treatment. More work is needed to validate these biomarkers and potentially identify new ones. Predictive biomarkers are anticipated to inform future research into progestin treatment of low-grade endometrial cancer and ultimately improve patient outcomes.

Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase (MAPK) and Obesity-Related Cancer

Obesity is a major public health concern worldwide. The increased risk of certain types of cancer is now an established deleterious consequence of obesity, although the molecular mechanisms of this are not completely understood. In this review, we aim to explore the links between MAPK signalling and obesity-related cancer. We focus mostly on p38 and JNK MAPK, as the role of ERK remains unclear. These links are seen through the implication of MAPK in obesity-related immune paralysis as well as through effects on the endoplasmic reticulum stress response and activation of aromatase. By way of example, we highlight areas of interest and possibilities for future research in endometrioid endometrial cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma associated with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and MAPK.

Changes and trends in endometrial cancer patterns of care: a scoping review of the literature from 2000 to 2024.

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecologic malignancy in women, and has undergone many changes in treatment and management. We conducted a scoping review of the literature examining changing patterns of care over the last 20 years. We aimed to document key trends in endometrial cancer management and identify areas where the literature is lacking to provide guidance for future directions of research, institutional needs, and policy development.