Regina Berger

GANNET53 Part II: A European Phase I/II Trial of the HSP90 Inhibitor Ganetespib in High-Grade Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer—A Study of the GANNET53 Consortium

Abstract Purpose: Mutant p53 stabilized by heat shock protein 90 (HSP90) is a novel target in oncology. The open-label, randomized phase II GANNET53 trial is the first to evaluate the HSP90 inhibitor ganetespib (G) with paclitaxel (P) in platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (EUDRACT 2013-003868-31; EU FP7 #602602). Patients and Methods: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive G + P or P alone until progression. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and PFS rate at 6 months. Exploratory endpoints were biomarkers based on p53 and HSP90. Results: A total of 133 patients were enrolled. The median PFS was 3.5 (G + P) and 5.3 months (P) (HR = 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.897–1.895; P = 0.16), and PFS rates at 6 months were 22% (G + P) and 33% (P). No significant differences were found in overall survival, objective response rate, and post-progression PFS between arms. The most frequent adverse events were diarrhea (79% vs. 26%), anemia (46% vs. 51%), nausea (41% vs. 40%), and peripheral neuropathy (36% vs. 47%). Serious adverse events were more common in G + P (39.5% vs. 23.3%). Gastrointestinal perforation was a new safety finding. Despite a high TP53 mutation frequency, HSP90–p53 complexes were detected in only 39.6% of the cases and were also detected stably during treatment. In vitro, no synergistic effects of G + P were observed, and mutant p53 depletion did not sensitize ovarian cancer cells to treatment. Conclusions: Although no major safety findings were observed, G + P did not lead to survival benefit. Our companion diagnostic program confirmed that G + P do not favorably cooperate in killing ovarian cancer cells.

Influence of Genomic Landscape on Cancer Immunotherapy for Newly Diagnosed Ovarian Cancer: Biomarker Analyses from the IMagyn050 Randomized Clinical Trial

Abstract Purpose: To explore whether patients with BRCA1/2-mutated or homologous recombination deficient (HRD) ovarian cancers benefitted from atezolizumab in the phase III IMagyn050 (NCT03038100) trial. Patients and Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer were randomized to either atezolizumab or placebo with standard chemotherapy and bevacizumab. Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) status of tumor-infiltrating immune cells (IC) was determined centrally (VENTANA SP142 assay). Genomic alterations, including deleterious BRCA1/2 alterations, genomic loss of heterozygosity (gLOH), tumor mutation burden (TMB), and microsatellite instability (MSI), were evaluated using the FoundationOne assay. HRD was defined as gLOH ≥ 16%, regardless of BRCA1/2 mutation status. Potential associations between progression-free survival (PFS) and genomic biomarkers were evaluated using standard correlation analyses and log-rank of Kaplan–Meier estimates. Results: Among biomarker-evaluable samples, 22% (234/1,050) harbored BRCA1/2 mutations and 46% (446/980) were HRD. Median TMB was low irrespective of BRCA1/2 or HRD. Only 3% (29/1,024) had TMB ≥10 mut/Mb, and 0.3% (3/1,022) were MSI-high. PFS was better in BRCA2-mutated versus BRCA2–non-mutated tumors and in HRD versus proficient tumors. PD-L1 positivity (≥1% expression on ICs) was associated with HRD but not BRCA1/2 mutations. PFS was not improved by adding atezolizumab in BRCA2-mutated or HRD tumors; there was a trend toward enhanced PFS with atezolizumab in BRCA1-mutated tumors. Conclusions: Most ovarian tumors have low TMB despite BRCA1/2 mutations or HRD. Neither BRCA1/2 mutation nor HRD predicted enhanced benefit from atezolizumab. This is the first randomized double-blind trial in ovarian cancer demonstrating that genomic instability triggered by BRCA1/2 mutation or HRD is not associated with improved sensitivity to immune checkpoint inhibitors. See related commentary by Al-Rawi et al., p. 1645

Molecular Results and Potential Biomarkers Identified from the Phase 3 MILO/ENGOT-ov11 Study of Binimetinib versus Physician Choice of Chemotherapy in Recurrent Low-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer

Abstract Purpose: We present the results of a post hoc tumor tissue analysis from the phase 3 MILO/ENGOT-ov11 study (NCT01849874). Patients and Methods: Mutation/copy-number analysis was performed on tissue obtained pre-randomization. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate progression-free survival (PFS). Unbiased univariate analysis, Cox regression, and binary logistic regression were used to test associations between mutation status and outcomes, including PFS and binary response by local RECIST 1.1. Results: MILO/ENGOT-ov11 enrolled 341 patients, ranging in age from 22 to 79, from June, 2013 to April, 2016. Patients were randomized 2:1 to binimetinib or physician's choice of chemotherapy (PCC). The most commonly altered gene was KRAS (33%). In 135 patients treated with binimetinib with response rate (RR) data, other detected MAPK pathway alterations included: NRAS (n = 11, 8.1%), BRAF V600E (n = 8, 5.9%), RAF1 (n = 2, 1.5%), and NF1 (n = 7, 5.2%). In those with and without MAPK pathway alterations, the RRs with binimetinib were 41% and 13%, respectively. PFS was significantly longer in patients with, compared with those without, MAPK pathway alterations treated with binimetinib [HR, 0.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31–0.79]. There was a nonsignificant trend toward PFS improvement in PCC-treated patients with MAPK pathway alterations compared with those without (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.43–1.59). Conclusions: Although this hypothesis-generating analysis is limited by multiple testing, higher RRs and longer PFS were seen in patients with low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC) treated with binimetinib, and to a lesser extent in those treated with PCC, who harbored MAPK pathway alterations. Somatic tumor testing should be routinely considered in patients with LGSOC and used as a future stratification factor.

First-Line Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab Versus Chemotherapy for Advanced Endometrial Cancer: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial

PURPOSE Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (len + pembro) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy in previously treated advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (aEC) in the phase III Study 309/KEYNOTE-775. We report results from the phase III, randomized, open-label European Network of Gynaecological Oncological Trial-en9/LEAP-001 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03884101 ) that evaluated len + pembro versus chemotherapy in first-line aEC. METHODS Patients with stage III to IV or recurrent, radiographically apparent EC and no previous chemotherapy or disease progression ≥6 months after neo/adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to lenvatinib 20 mg once daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks or paclitaxel 175 mg/m 2 plus carboplatin AUC 6 mg/mL/min once every 3 weeks. Primary end points were PFS and OS, evaluated in the mismatch repair-proficient (pMMR) and all-comers populations. Noninferiority was assessed for OS at final analysis (FA) for len + pembro versus chemotherapy (multiplicity-adjusted, one-sided nominal alpha, .0159; null hypothesis–tested hazard ratio [HR], 1.1). RESULTS Eight hundred forty-two patients were randomly assigned (len + pembro, n = 420 [pMMR population, n = 320]; chemotherapy, n = 422 [pMMR population, n = 322]). At FA (data cutoff, October 2, 2023), median PFS (95% CI) in the pMMR population was 9.6 (8.2 to 11.9) versus 10.2 (8.4 to 10.5) months with len + pembro versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.82 to 1.21]) and among all-comers was 12.5 (10.3 to 15.1) versus 10.2 (8.4 to 10.4) months (HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.76 to 1.09]; descriptive analyses). Median OS (95% CI) in the pMMR population was 30.9 (25.4 to 37.7) versus 29.4 (26.2 to 35.4) months with len + pembro versus chemotherapy (HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.26]; noninferiority P = .246, not statistically significant per multiplicity control strategy) and among all-comers was 37.7 (32.2 to 43.6) versus 32.1 (27.2 to 35.7) months (HR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.12]). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 331/420 (79%) versus 274/411 (67%) treated patients. CONCLUSION First-line len + pembro did not meet prespecified statistical criteria for PFS or OS versus chemotherapy in pMMR aEC.

A Study of Atezolizumab Versus Placebo in Combination With Paclitaxel, Carboplatin, and Bevacizumab in Participants With Newly-Diagnosed Stage III or Stage IV Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, or Primary Peritoneal Cancer

This is a Phase III, global, double-blind, 2-arm randomized study designed to compare the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab + paclitaxel + carboplatin + bevacizumab versus placebo + paclitaxel + carboplatin + bevacizumab. Study participants will have Stage 3 or 4 ovarian cancer (OC), fallopian tube cancer (FTC), or primary peritoneal cancer (PPC) with macroscopic residual disease postoperatively (i.e., after primary tumor reductive surgery) or who will undergo neoadjuvant therapy followed by interval surgery.

A Study of MEK162 vs. Physician's Choice Chemotherapy in Patients With Low-grade Serous Ovarian, Fallopian Tube or Peritoneal Cancer

The MILO Study (MEK Inhibitor in Low-grade Serous Ovarian Cancer) is a Phase 3 study during which patients with recurrent or persistent low-grade serous (LGS) carcinomas of the ovary, fallopian tube or primary peritoneum will receive either investigational study drug MEK162 or a chemotherapy chosen by the physician (liposomal doxorubicin, paclitaxel or topotecan). Patients will be followed to compare the effectiveness of the study drug to that of the selected chemotherapies. Patients may be eligible to crossover from physician's choice chemotherapy to MEK162 if they meet certain inclusion criteria including centrally confirmed disease progression. Approximately 360 patients from North America, Europe and Australia will be enrolled in this study.