Search

Purpose: Vulvar squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC), a rare gynecologic malignancy, has been rising in incidence. Molecular classification on the basis of human papilloma virus (HPV) and tumor protein 53 (p53) status has identified three clinically distinct subtypes, but we still treat all VSCCs the same. Here, we review molecular classification of VSCC, outline treatment landscape, and highlight potential for targeted therapies in advanced VSCC., Design: We conducted a comprehensive review of the literature on treatment of advanced VSCC with particular focus on the implications of molecular stratification on the basis of HPV and p53 status on the treatment landscape of advanced VSCC., Results: Incorporation of HPV and p53 status in locoregional treatment decision making has the potential to advise (de)escalation strategies. The role of immunotherapy, alone and in combination, requires further exploration particularly earlier in the course of the disease. In advanced stages, potential for targeted therapies in VSCCs include inhibitors of vascular endothelial growth factor, endothelial growth factor receptor, cell cycle, and DNA damage response, particularly in HPV-negative (HPV-) VSCCs. Targeting the phosphoinositide 3 kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin pathway is attractive in HPV-positive and HPV-/p53 wildtype VSCCs. Trials incorporating antibody-drug conjugates (eg, trophoblast cell-surface antigen 2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) should be considered, and basket trials in perineal squamous cell cancers are warranted. Preclinical models are limited and should be expanded to inform trial design., Conclusion: Like other rare cancers, vulvar cancer lags behind in the identification and optimization of precision medicine strategies. Molecular-based preclinical models and rationally designed clinical trials, incorporating high-quality translational studies, are urgently required. These trials will require international collaboration to ensure feasibility and improvement of outcomes for women diagnosed with this disease.

Purpose: We assessed the efficacy of cediranib, olaparib, and cediranib/olaparib compared with standard-of-care chemotherapy (SOC) in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory epithelial ovarian cancer (PROC)., Patients and Methods: NRG-GY005 is an open-label, four-arm, phase II/III superiority trial enrolling patients with high-grade serous/endometrioid PROC and one to three previous therapies. Key exclusion criteria included previous receipt of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor or receipt of antiangiogenic therapy in the recurrent setting. Treatment arms (SOC [once weekly paclitaxel, topotecan, or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin], cediranib, olaparib, or cediranib/olaparib) were equally randomized. A preplanned interim futility analysis on the basis of progression-free survival (PFS) selected treatment arms to advance to phase III. PFS and overall survival (OS) were phase III coprimary end points, with hierarchical testing of PFS followed by OS to preserve type 1 error control, designed to have 90% power for a 0.625 PFS hazard ratio (HR). OS was tested after PFS in the multiple hierarchical testing procedure. Secondary end points included objective response rate (ORR) and patient-reported outcomes., Results: Five hundred sixty-two eligible patients were enrolled for phase II/III. Three arms met PFS criteria to carry forward to phase III (SOC, cediranib/olaparib, and cediranib). Median PFS was 3.4, 5.2, and 4 months with SOC, cediranib/olaparib, and cediranib, respectively, with a median follow-up duration of 42.2 months. PFS HR estimates for cediranib/olaparib and cediranib ( v SOC) were 0.796 (98.3% CI, 0.597 to 1.060) and 0.972 (98.3% CI, 0.726 to 1.300), respectively. Median OS was 13.6, 12.8, and 10.5 months, and of 443 patients with measurable disease, ORR was 8.6%, 24.7%, and 13.1% for SOC, cediranib/olaparib, and cediranib, respectively. No new safety signals were identified. In patients receiving cediranib/olaparib, no statistically significant difference was observed on the NFOSI-DRS-P subscale compared with SOC (98.3% CI, -1.3 to 1.5, P = .8725)., Conclusion: The cediranib-containing arms demonstrated clinical activity on the basis of PFS but were not superior compared with SOC.

Purpose: Most cervical cancers are caused by human papilloma virus (HPV), and HPV circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) may identify patients at highest risk of relapse. Our pilot study using digital polymerase chain reaction (dPCR) showed that detectable HPV ctDNA at the end of chemoradiation (CRT) is associated with inferior progression-free survival (PFS) and that a next-generation sequencing approach (HPV-seq) may outperform dPCR. We aimed to prospectively validate HPV ctDNA as a tool for early detection of residual disease., Methods: This prospective, multicenter validation study accrued patients with stage IB-IVA cervical cancer treated with CRT between 2017 and 2022. Participants underwent phlebotomy at baseline, end of CRT, 4-6 weeks post-CRT, and 3 months post-CRT for HPV ctDNA levels. Plasma HPV genotype-specific DNA levels were quantified using both dPCR and HPV-seq. The primary end point was 2-year PFS., Results: With a median follow-up of 2.2 (range, 0.5-5.5) years, there were 24 PFS events among the 70 patients with HPV+ cervical cancer. Patients with detectable HPV ctDNA on dPCR at the end of CRT, 4-6 weeks post-CRT, and 3 months post-CRT had significantly worse 2-year PFS compared with those with undetectable HPV ctDNA (77% v 51%, P = .03; 82% v 15%, P < .001; and 82% v 24%, P < .001, respectively); the median lead time to recurrence was 5.9 months. HPV-seq showed similar results as dPCR. On multivariable analyses, detectable HPV ctDNA on dPCR and HPV-seq remained independently associated with inferior PFS., Conclusion: Persistent HPV ctDNA after CRT is independently associated with inferior PFS. HPV ctDNA testing can identify, as early as at the end of CRT, patients at high risk of recurrence for future treatment intensification trials.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. We report the final prespecified analysis for overall survival (OS), along with updated progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR), and safety from the open-label, randomized, phase III Study 309/KEYNOTE-775. In total, 827 patients with advanced, recurrent, or metastatic endometrial cancer (EC) were randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib 20 mg orally once daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks (n = 411) or chemotherapy of the treating physician's choice (doxorubicin 60 mg/m 2 intravenously once every 3 weeks or paclitaxel 80 mg/m 2 intravenously once weekly [3 weeks on; 1 week off] [n = 416]). Efficacy was reported for patients with mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) tumors and all-comers, and by subgroups (histology, prior therapy, MMR status). Updated safety was also reported.Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab showed benefits in OS (pMMR HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.83; all-comer HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.77), PFS (pMMR HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.72; all-comer HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.66), and ORR (pMMR patients, 32.4% v 15.1%; all-comers, 33.8% v 14.7%) versus chemotherapy. OS, PFS, and ORR favored lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in all subgroups of interest. No new safety signals were observed. Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab continued to show improved efficacy versus chemotherapy and manageable safety in patients with previously treated advanced EC.

Purpose: The randomized Adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Versus Radiotherapy Alone in Women With High-Risk Endometrial Cancer (PORTEC-3) trial investigated the benefit of combined adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy (CTRT) versus radiotherapy alone (RT) for women with high-risk endometrial cancer (EC). Because The Cancer Genome Atlas defined an EC molecular classification with strong prognostic value, we investigated prognosis and impact of chemotherapy for each molecular subgroup using tissue samples from PORTEC-3 trial participants., Methods: Paraffin-embedded tissues of 423 consenting patients were collected. Immunohistochemistry for p53 and mismatch repair (MMR) proteins, and DNA sequencing for POLE exonuclease domain were done to classify tumors as p53 abnormal (p53abn), POLE- ultramutated ( POLE mut), MMR-deficient (MMRd), or no specific molecular profile (NSMP). The primary end point was recurrence-free survival (RFS). Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and Cox model were used for analysis., Results: Molecular analysis was successful in 410 high-risk EC (97%), identifying the 4 subgroups: p53abn EC (n = 93; 23%), POLE mut (n = 51; 12%), MMRd (n = 137; 33%), and NSMP (n = 129; 32%). Five-year RFS was 48% for patients with p53abn EC, 98% for POLE mut EC, 72% for MMRd EC, and 74% for NSMP EC ( P < .001). The 5-year RFS with CTRT versus RT for p53abn EC was 59% versus 36% ( P = .019); 100% versus 97% for patients with POLE mut EC ( P = .637); 68% versus 76% ( P = .428) for MMRd EC; and 80% versus 68% ( P = .243) for NSMP EC., Conclusion: Molecular classification has strong prognostic value in high-risk EC, with significantly improved RFS with adjuvant CTRT for p53abn tumors, regardless of histologic type. Patients with POLE mut EC had an excellent RFS in both trial arms. EC molecular classification should be incorporated in the risk stratification of these patients as well as in future trials to target specific subgroups of patients.

Worldwide, the incidence of endometrial cancer is increasing. Although the prognosis remains good for patients diagnosed with early-stage disease, for those diagnosed with recurrent or metastatic disease, options have been limited, and prognosis is short. Optimizing and identifying new well-tolerated treatments for women living with endometrial cancer is a top priority. A new era is dawning where we are starting to see the integration of clinically relevant genomic and pathologic data to inform and refine treatment strategies for women with endometrial cancer. Here, we focus on reviewing nonimmunotherapy-based targeted treatment options and emerging directions for women with endometrial cancer.

Context ERBB2 (erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 or HER2) is currently the only biomarker established for selection of a specific therapy for patients with advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA). However, there are no comprehensive guidelines for the assessment of HER2 in patients with GEA. Objectives To establish an evidence-based guideline for HER2 testing in patients with GEA, formalize the algorithms for methods to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing while addressing which patients and tumor specimens are appropriate, and to provide guidance on clinical decision making. Design The College of American Pathologists (CAP), American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of the literature to develop an evidence-based guideline with recommendations for optimal HER2 testing in patients with GEA. Results The Panel is proposing 11 recommendations with strong agreement from the open comment participants. Recommendations The Panel recommends that tumor specimen(s) from all patients with advanced GEA, who are candidates for HER2-targeted therapy, should be assessed for HER2 status before the initiation of HER2-targeted therapy. Clinicians should offer combination chemotherapy and an HER2-targeted agent as initial therapy for all patients with HER2-positive advanced GEA. For pathologists, guidance is provided for morphologic selection of neoplastic tissue, testing algorithms, scoring methods, interpretation and reporting of results, and laboratory quality assurance. Conclusion This guideline provides specific recommendations for assessment of HER2 in patients with advanced GEA while addressing pertinent technical issues and clinical implications of the results.

Surgical treatment and chemotherapy administration in women with epithelial ovarian cancer is more controversial today than at any point in the last 3 decades. The use of chemotherapy administered intraperitoneally has been particularly contentious. Three large randomized phase III studies, multiple meta-analyses, and now real-world data have demonstrated substantial outcome benefit for the use of chemotherapy administered intraperitoneally versus intravenously for first-line postoperative treatment of optimally debulked advanced ovarian cancer. Unfortunately, for each of these randomized studies, there was scope to either criticize the design or otherwise refute adoption of this route of administration. As a result, the uptake has been variable in North America, although in Europe it has been practically nonexistent. Reasons for this include unquestionable additional toxicity, more inconvenience, and extra cost. However, 10-year follow up of these studies demonstrates unprecedented survival in the intraperitoneal arm (median survival 110 months in patients with completely debulked stage III), raising the possibility that by combining maximal debulking surgery with postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy it may be possible to bring about a step change in the outcomes for these patients. In this review, we discuss the rationale for administering chemotherapy intraperitoneally, the merits of the main randomized clinical trials, the evidence regarding optimal regimes, issues of toxicity, port considerations, and reasons for lack of universal adoption. We also explore potential clinical and biologic factors that may be useful for patient selection in the future.

Despite the declining incidence of cervical cancer as a result of the introduction of screening programs, globally it remains a leading cause of cancer-related death in women. Outcomes for patients who are diagnosed with anything but early-stage disease remain poor. Here we examine emerging strategies to improve the treatment of locally advanced disease. We discuss emerging biologic data, which are informing our investigation of new therapeutic interventions in persistent, recurrent, and metastatic cervical cancer. We recognize the importance of interventions to improve quality of life and to prevent long-term sequelae in women undergoing treatment. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we recognize the need for global collaboration and advocacy to improve the outcome for all women at risk of and diagnosed with this disease.

In the era of targeted therapies, patients with gynecologic malignancies have not yet been major beneficiaries of this new class of agents. This may reflect the fact that the main tumor types-ovarian, uterine, and cervical--are a highly heterogeneous group of cancers with variable response to standard chemotherapies and the lack of models in which to study the diversity of these cancers. Cancer-derived cell lines fail to adequately recapitulate molecular hallmarks of specific cancer subsets and complex microenvironments, which may be critical for sensitivity to targeted therapies. Patient-derived xenografts (PDX) generated from fresh human tumor without prior in vitro culture, combined with whole genome expression, gene copy number, and sequencing analyses, could dramatically aid the development of novel therapies for gynecologic malignancies. Gynecologic tumors can be engrafted in immunodeficient mice with a high rate of success and within a reasonable time frame. The resulting PDX accurately recapitulates the patient's tumor with respect to histologic, molecular, and in vivo treatment response characteristics. Orthotopic PDX develop complications relevant to the clinic, such as ascites and bowel obstruction, providing opportunities to understand the biology of these clinical problems. Thus, PDX have great promise for improved understanding of gynecologic malignancies, serve as better models for designing novel therapies and clinical trials, and could underpin individualized, directed therapy for patients from whom such models have been established.

Purpose: Phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) is a tumor suppressor gene, and loss of function mutations are common and appear to be important in the pathogenesis of endometrial carcinomas. Loss of PTEN causes deregulated phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase/serine-threonine kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (PI3K/Akt/mTOR) signaling which may provide neoplastic cells with a selective survival advantage by enhancing angiogenesis, protein translation, and cell cycle progression. Temsirolimus, an ester derivative of rapamycin that inhibits mTOR, was evaluated in this setting., Patients and Methods: Sequential phase II studies evaluated single-agent activity of temsirolimus in women with recurrent or metastatic chemotherapy-naive or chemotherapy-treated endometrial cancer. Temsirolimus 25 mg intravenously was administered weekly in 4-week cycles., Results: In the chemotherapy-naive group, 33 patients received a median of four cycles (range, one to 23 cycles). Of the 29 patients evaluable for response, four (14%) had an independently confirmed partial response and 20 (69%) had stable disease as best response, with a median duration of 5.1 months (range, 3.7 to 18.4 months) and 9.7 months (range, 2.1 to 14.6 months). Only five patients (18%) had progressive disease. In the chemotherapy-treated group, 27 patients received a median of three cycles (range, one to six cycles). Of the 25 patients evaluable for response, one (4%) had an independently confirmed partial response, and 12 patients (48%) had stable disease, with a median duration of 4.3 months (range, 3.6 to 4.9 months) and 3.7 months (range, 2.4 to 23.2 months). PTEN loss (immunohistochemistry and mutational analysis) and molecular markers of PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway did not correlate with the clinical outcome., Conclusion: mTOR inhibition with temsirolimus has encouraging single-agent activity in endometrial cancer which is higher in chemotherapy-naive patients than in chemotherapy-treated patients and is independent of PTEN status. The difference in activity according to prior therapy should be factored into future clinical trial designs.

Purpose: The DNA methyltransferase inhibitor 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine (decitabine) induces DNA demethylation and re-expression of epigenetically silenced genes, and increases carboplatin sensitivity of tumor xenograft models. We designed a clinical study to determine the feasibility of delivering a dose of decitabine, combined with carboplatin, that would be capable of producing equivalent biologic effects in patients with solid tumors., Patients and Methods: In a two-stage design, 33 patients received escalating doses of decitabine administered as a 6-hour infusion on day 1 followed by carboplatin, area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) 5 (cohort 1) and AUC 6 (cohort 2), on day 8 of a 28-day cycle. Pharmacodynamic analyses included 5-methyl-2'-deoxycytidine levels, MAGE1A CpG island methylation, and fetal hemoglobin (HbF) expression., Results: The major toxicity was myelosuppression. Dose limiting toxicities, prolonged grade 4 neutropenia (one patient), and sepsis and grade 3 anorexia/fatigue (one patient), were seen in two of four patients treated with decitabine 135 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC 5. Dose limiting toxicity comprising neutropenic sepsis (one patient) and grade 3 fatigue (one patient) was seen in two of 10 patients treated at decitabine 90 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC 6. Decitabine induced dose-dependent, reversible demethylation in peripheral-blood cells (PBCs) maximally at day 10. Furthermore, decitabine 90 mg/m2 induced demethylation of the MAGE1A CpG island in PBCs, buccal cells, and tumor biopsies, as well as elevation of HbF expression., Conclusion: Decitabine can be combined safely with carboplatin at a dose and schedule that causes epigenetic changes equivalent to or greater than that observed in mice with carboplatin-sensitized xenografts. The recommended dose/schedule for phase II trials is decitabine 90 mg/m2 (day 1) followed by carboplatin AUC 6 (day 8) every 28 days.