Recurrent or primary metastatic cervical cancer: current and future treatments.

Despite screening programs for early detection and the approval of human papillomavirus vaccines, around 6% of women with cervical cancer (CC) are discovered with primary metastatic disease. Moreover, one-third of the patients receiving chemoradiation followed by brachytherapy for locally advanced disease will have a recurrence. At the end, the vast majority of recurrent or metastatic CC not amenable to locoregional treatments are considered incurable disease with very poor prognosis. Historically, cisplatin monotherapy, then a combination of cisplatin and paclitaxel were considered the standard of care. Ten years ago, the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy demonstrated favorable data in terms of response rate and overall survival. Even with this improvement, novel therapies are needed for the treatment of recurrent CC in first as well as later lines. In the last decades, a better understanding of the interactions between human papillomavirus infection and the host immune system response has focused interest on the use of immunotherapeutic drugs in CC patients. Indeed, immune checkpoint inhibitors (pembrolizumab, cemiplimab, and others) have recently emerged as novel therapeutic pillars that could provide durable responses with impact on overall survival in patients in the primary (in addition to chemotherapy) or recurrent (monotherapy) settings. Tisotumab vedotin, an antibody-drug conjugate targeting the tissue factor, is another emerging drug. Several trials in monotherapy or in combination with immunotherapy, chemotherapy, or bevacizumab showed very promising results. There is a high need for more potent biomarkers to better accurately determine which patients would receive the greatest benefit from all these aforementioned drugs, but also to identify patients with specific molecular characteristics that could benefit from other targeted therapies. The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network identified several genes significantly mutated, potentially targetable. These molecular data have highlighted the molecular heterogeneity of CC.
Competing Interests: Disclosure CG grant/contracts: Astra-Zeneca; consulting fees: Ipsen, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD); honoraria for lectures, etc.: MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Ipsen, Pfizer, Pharmamar, AstraZeneca, GSK; support for meetings and/or travel: Ipsen, Pharmamar, Pfizer, MSD; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board: MSD, BMS, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, GSK, Eisai. GJ grant/contracts: Novartis, Roche, Pfizer; consulting fees: Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Lilly, Amgen, BMS, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, AbbVie; honoraria for lectures, etc.: Novartis, Roche, Amgen, Pfizer, BMS, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Seagen; support for meetings and/or travel: Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Lilly, Amgen, BMS, AstraZeneca; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board: Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Lilly, Amgen, BMS, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, AbbVie; other financial or non-financial interests: Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Lilly, Amgen, BMS, AstraZeneca, MedImmune, Merck. FK grant/contracts: MSD, AstraZeneca, Pharmamar, Roche; consulting fees: MSD; honoraria for lectures, etc.: MSD, AstraZeneca, Pharmamar; support for meetings and/or travel: MSD, AstraZeneca, Roche; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board: MSD, AstraZeneca. IR-C grant/contracts: BMS, MSD, GSK; consulting fees: GSK, AstraZeneca, Clovis, Pharmamar, Mersana, MSD, Novartis, Deciphera, Roche, Genentech; honoraria for lectures, etc.: GSK, AstraZeneca, Clovis, Pharmamar, Mersana, MSD, Novartis, Deciphera, Roche, Genentech; support for meetings and/or travel: GSK, Roche, AstraZeneca; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board: Athena and Attend trials. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
(Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)