Sandro Pignata

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.

Hormone replacement therapy in gynecological cancer survivors and BRCA mutation carriers: a MITO group survey

Early iatrogenic menopause in gynecological cancer survivors and BRCA mutation (BRCAm) carriers undergoing risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) is a major health concern. Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is the most effective remedy, but remains underused in clinical practice. The Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer and gynecologic malignancies (MITO) group promoted a national survey to investigate the knowledge and attitudes of healthcare professionals regarding the prescription of HRT. The survey consisted of a self-administered, multiple-choice 45-item questionnaire, available online to all MITO members for 2 months starting from January 2022. A total of 61 participants completed the questionnaire (47 out of 180 MITO centers; compliance: 26.1%). Most respondents were female (73.8%), younger than 50 years (65.6%), and gynecologic oncologists (55.7%), working in public general hospitals (49.2%). An 84.4% of specialists actively discuss HRT with patients and 51.0% of patients ask the specialist for an opinion on HRT. The rate of specialists globally in favor of prescribing HRT was 22.9% for ovarian cancer, 49.1% for cervical cancer, and 8.2% for endometrial cancer patients. Most respondents (70.5%) believe HRT is safe for BRCA-mutated patients after RRSO. Nearly 70% of physicians prescribe systemic HRT, while 23.8% prefer local HRT. Most specialists recommend HRT for as long as there is a benefit and generally for up to 5 years. Real-world data suggest that many healthcare professionals still do not easily prescribe HRT for gynecological cancer survivors and BRCA mutation carriers after RRSO. Further efforts are required to implement the use of HRT in clinical practice and to support both clinicians in recommending HRT and patients in accepting it.

Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD) Scoring, by Means of Two Different Shallow Whole-Genome Sequencing Pipelines (sWGS), in Ovarian Cancer Patients: A Comparison with Myriad MyChoice Assay

High-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) patients carrying the BRCA1/2 mutation or deficient in the homologous recombination repair system (HRD) generally benefit from treatment with PARP inhibitors. Some international recommendations suggest that BRCA1/2 genetic testing should be offered for all newly diagnosed epithelial ovarian cancer, along with HRD assessment. Academic tests (ATs) are continuously under development, in order to break down the barriers patients encounter in accessing HRD testing. Two different methods for shallow whole-genome sequencing (sWGS) were compared to the reference assay, Myriad. All these three assays were performed on 20 retrospective HGSOC samples. Moreover, HRD results were correlated with the progression-free survival rate (PFS). Both sWGS chemistries showed good correlation with each other and a complete agreement, even when compared to the Myriad score. Our academic HRD assay categorized patients as HRD-Deficient, HRM-Mild and HRN-Negative. These three groups were matched with PFS, providing interesting findings in terms of HRD scoring and months of survival. Both our sWGS assays and the Myriad test correlated with the patient’s response to treatments. Finally, our AT confirms its capability of determining HRD status, with the advantage of being faster, cheaper, and easier to carry out. Our results showed a prognostic value for the HRD score.