Search

Background and objectives: Endometrial cancer is a common malignancy and recurrences can be fatal. Although platinum-pretreated endometrial tumors are commonly treated with anthracyclines and taxanes, there is no current standard of care. Both immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have been extensively assessed in this setting, including tumors selected for DNA mismatch repair (MMR)/microsatellite instability (MSI) and programmed death-ligand 1 expression status. This review will provide evidence-based guidance on use of ICIs alone or in combination with TKIs in patients with pretreated advanced, persistent, or recurrent metastatic endometrial cancer. Data sources and methods: Randomized phase II–III trials in unselected populations pretreated, recurrent, or metastatic endometrial cancer and phase I–II trials in biomarker selected populations were identified from PubMed as well as conference proceedings using the key search terms 'immune checkpoint inhibitors', 'endometrial cancer', and 'advanced'. Results: A total of nine eligible studies were identified assessing ICI monotherapy for biomarker-selected or ICI plus TKI combinations and a dual ICI regimen for biomarker-unselected patients with pretreated recurrent or metastatic endometrial cancer. In MMR/MSI-selected tumors, five phase I/II studies evaluated ICI monotherapy indicating benefit in these patients. Only the phase III KEYNOTE-775 trial reported a statistically significant overall survival improvement for the combination of pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib compared with docetaxel or paclitaxel regardless of MMR/MSI status. Conclusions: Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib is indicated for patients with unselected pretreated metastatic endometrial cancer and pembrolizumab monotherapy is a preferred option for patients with MMRd/MSI-H tumors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The addition of docetaxel to cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (DCF) has shown promising efficacy in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA). Preliminary results of Epitopes-HPV01 study showed a high rate of long-lasting complete response to DCF. The prospective, multicenter, Epitopes-HPV02 trial then confirmed the high efficacy of the modified DCF (mDCF) regimen in terms of complete response rate and long-term survival in metastatic or non-resectable locally advanced recurrent SCCA. Here, we present updated results of the Epitopes-HPV01 and Epitopes-HPV02 studies. Patients & methods: Epitopes-HPV01 is a prospective study performed by the regional cancer network of Franche-Comté, France. Epitopes-HPV02 is a phase II study supported by two French collaborative oncological groups, performed in 25 centers. Both studies included patients with metastatic, or with unresectable local recurrent SCCA, treated with DCF regimen. Results: In Epitopes-HPV01, 51 patients were enrolled between September 2012 and January 2019, and 49 patients were included for analysis; while 69 patients were included between September 2014 and December 2016 in Epitopes-HPV02, and 66 patients for analysis. Pooled analysis of 115 patients showed a median progression-free survival of 12.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 10.6–16.1] [11.0 months (9.3–16.0) in -HPV02, and 15.6 months (11.2–34.5) in -HPV01, (p = 0.06)]. The median overall survival was 39.2 months (26.0–109.1) [36.3 in -HPV02 (25.2–NR), and 61.1 months (21.4–120.0) in -HPV01 (p = 0.62)]. Objective response rate was 87.7% (90.9% in -HPV02 and 83.3% in -HPV01) with 40.3% of complete response (45.5% in -HPV02 and 33.3% in -HPV01). No differences were observed between standard DCF (n = 54) and mDCF (n = 58) in terms of OS (p = 0.57) and PFS (p = 0.99). 5-years PFS and OS rates were 24.5% and 44.4%, respectively, in the whole population. No treatment-related death was observed. Conclusion: Updated results of Epitopes-HPV01 and 02 studies, as well as the pooled analysis, confirm mDCF as a standard treatment in patients with advanced SCCA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There are no randomized data to guide treatment decisions for patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma following first-line FOLFIRINOX. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using gemcitabine-based chemotherapy after FOLFIRINOX to assess treatment efficacy and toxicity. Methods: We included studies published between 2011 and 2018 that evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy after FOLFIRINOX in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. Primary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), any grade 3/4 toxicity rate, and progression-free survival (PFS). We used the random-effects model to generate pooled estimates for proportions. Results: Sixteen studies met the eligibility criteria. Overall, ORR was 10.8%, DCR was 41.1%, and any grade 3/4 toxicity rate was 28.6%. In subgroup analyses, gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel was associated with superior ORR (14.4 versus 8.4%; p = 0.038) and DCR (53.5 versus 30.5%; p < 0.001) compared with single-agent gemcitabine. Median PFS ranged from 1.9 to 6.4 months and numerically favored gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel. Conclusions: Our study suggests gemcitabine-based chemotherapy likely outperforms best supportive care after FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer. Also, gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel seems to be more active than single-agent gemcitabine (CRD42018100421). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past decade there have been significant advances in the molecular characterization of colorectal cancer (CRC) that are driving treatment decisions. Expanded RAS testing beyond KRAS exon 2 was established as crucial for identifying patients who will respond to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapies and low-frequency mutations in RAS/tumor heterogeneity are gaining recognition as potential mechanisms of resistance. Despite this progress, the fact that we do not understand why left-sided but not right-sided tumors have improved outcomes following anti-EGFR therapy highlights our superficial understanding of this disease. Even with few new targeted agents receiving approval in CRC, the incorporation of next-generation sequencing into clinical decision making represents an important step forward. Biomarkers such as BRAF mutations, microsatellite instability, and HER2 amplification represent promising molecular aberrations with therapies in various stages of development, and highlight the importance of companion diagnostics in supporting targeted agents. In this review, we will discuss the importance of incorporating biomarkers into clinical decision making and regimen selection in CRC. We will particularly focus on the recent evidence suggesting an important role for tumor location in selecting first-line therapy, the importance of recent advances in biomarker development and molecular subtyping, as well as recently approved agents (regorafenib and TAS-102) and promising targeted agents that have the potential to change the standard of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]