Investigator
University Of Ottawa
Should we abandon hormonal therapy in endometrial cancer? Outcomes of recurrent and metastatic endometrial cancer treated with systemic progestins
AbstractPurposeThe objective of this study is to determine primary survival endpoints in women with recurrent and metastatic endometrial carcinoma (RMEC) treated with progestins.MethodsA retrospective chart review was conducted at The Ottawa Hospital using electronic medical records. Inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of RMEC between 2000 and 2019, endometrioid histology, and ≥one line of progestin treatment. Progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method.ResultsOf 2342 cases reviewed, 74 met inclusion criteria. Sixty‐six (88.0%) patients received megestrol acetate and 9 (12.0%) received a progestin alternative. The distribution of tumors by grade was: 1: 25 (33.3%), 2: 30 (40.0%), and 3: 20 (26.7%). The PFS and OS for the entire study sample was 14.3 months (95% CI 6.2–17.9) and 23.3 months (14.8–36.8), respectively. The PFS for patients with Grade 1–2 RMEC was 15.7 months (8.0, 19.5), compared to 5.0 months (3.0, 23.0) with Grade 3 disease. The OS for patients with Grade 1–2 versus Grade 3, was 25.9 months (15.3, 40.3) versus 12.5 months (5.7, 35.9), respectively. Thirty‐four (45.9%) and 40 (54.1%) patients were treated with 0 and ≥1 line of chemotherapy. The PFS for chemotherapy‐naïve patients was 17.9 months (14.3, 27.0), versus 6.2 months (3.9, 14.8) following ≥1 line of treatment. The OS was 29.1 months (17.9, 61.1) for chemotherapy‐naïve patients versus 23.0 months (10.5, 37.6) for patients previously exposed.ConclusionsThis real‐world data on RMEC suggests there is a role for progestins in select subgroups of women. The PFS for chemotherapy‐naïve patients was 17.9 months (14.3, 27.0), versus 6.2 months (3.9, 14.8) following ≥1 line of treatment. The OS was 29.1 months (17.9, 61.1) for chemotherapy‐OS was 29.1 months (17.9, 61.1) for chemotherapy‐naïve patients versus 23.0 months (10.5, 37.6) for patients previously exposed.
Maintenance treatment with rucaparib for recurrent ovarian carcinoma in ARIEL3, a randomized phase 3 trial: The effects of best response to last platinum‐based regimen and disease at baseline on efficacy and safety
AbstractBackgroundThe efficacy and safety of rucaparib maintenance treatment in ARIEL3 were evaluated in subgroups based on best response to most recent platinum‐based chemotherapy and baseline disease.MethodsPatients were randomized 2:1 to receive either oral rucaparib at a dosage of 600 mg twice daily or placebo. Investigator‐assessed PFS was assessed in prespecified, nested cohorts: BRCA‐mutated, homologous recombination deficient (HRD; BRCA mutated or wild‐type BRCA/high loss of heterozygosity), and the intent‐to‐treat (ITT) population.ResultsMedian PFS for patients in the ITT population with a complete response to most recent platinum‐based chemotherapy was 11.1 months in the rucaparib arm (126 patients) versus 5.6 months in the placebo arm (64 patients) (HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.23–0.48]), and in patients with a partial response (249 vs. 125), it was 9.0 versus 5.3 months (HR, 0.38 [0.30–0.49]). In subgroups of the ITT population based on baseline disease, median PFS was 8.2 versus 5.3 months (HR, 0.40 [0.28–0.57]) in patients with measurable disease (141 rucaparib vs. 66 placebo), 10.4 versus 4.5 months (HR, 0.31 [0.20–0.48]) in those with nonmeasurable but evaluable disease (104 vs. 56), and 14.1 versus 7.3 months (HR, 0.35 [0.24–0.51]) in those with no residual disease (130 vs. 67). Across subgroups, significantly longer median PFS was observed with rucaparib versus placebo in the BRCA‐mutated and HRD cohorts. Objective responses were reported in patients with measurable disease and in patients with nonmeasurable but evaluable baseline disease. Safety was consistent across subgroups.ConclusionRucaparib maintenance treatment provided clinically meaningful efficacy benefits across subgroups based on response to last platinum‐based chemotherapy or baseline disease.
Tumor genomic, transcriptomic, and immune profiling characterizes differential response to first‐line platinum chemotherapy in high grade serous ovarian cancer
AbstractBackgroundIn high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC), there is a spectrum of sensitivity to first line platinum‐based chemotherapy. This study molecularly characterizes HGSOC patients from two distinct groups of chemotherapy responders (good vs. poor).MethodsFollowing primary debulking surgery and intravenous carboplatin/paclitaxel, women with stage III–IV HGSOC were grouped by response. Patients in the good response (GR) and poor response (PR) groups respectively had a progression‐free intervals (PFI) of ≥12 and ≤6 months. Analysis of surgical specimens interrogated genomic and immunologic features using whole exome sequencing. RNA‐sequencing detected gene expression outliers and inference of immune infiltrate, with validation by targeted NanoString arrays. PD‐L1 expression was scored by immunohistochemistry (IHC).ResultsA total of 39 patient samples were analyzed (GR = 20; PR = 19). Median PFI for GR and PR patient cohorts was 32 and 3 months, respectively. GR tumors were enriched for loss‐of‐function BRCA2 mutations and had a significantly higher nonsynonymous mutation rate compared to PR tumors (p = 0.001). Samples from the PR cohort were characterized by mutations in MGA and RAD51B and trended towards a greater rate of amplification of PIK3CA, MECOM, and ATR in comparison to GR tumors. Gene expression analysis by NanoString correlated increased PARP4 with PR and increased PD‐L1 and EMSY with GR. There was greater tumor immune cell infiltration and higher immune cell PD‐L1 protein expression in the GR group.ConclusionsOur research demonstrates that tumors from HGSOC patients responding poorly to first line chemotherapy have a distinct molecular profile characterized by actionable drug targets including PARP4.
