Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Advanced Endometrial Cancer Treated With Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab or Treatment of Physician's Choice.

PURPOSE: Lenvatinib and pembrolizumab (LEN+PEMBRO) demonstrated clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in efficacy versus treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in patients with advanced endometrial cancer (aEC) in the phase 3 Study 309/KEYNOTE-775. Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) is reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive LEN+PEMBRO (n = 411; LEN 20 mg/day; PEMBRO 200 mg Q3W) or TPC (n = 416; doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 Q3W or paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 [weekly, 3 weeks on/1 week off]). Impact of treatment on HRQoL assessed by the global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL) score of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) was a secondary objective; other scales of the Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30), EORTC QLQ-Endometrial, 24 questions (EORTC QLQ-EN24), and EuroQoL 5 dimensions, 5 levels (EQ-5D-5L) were exploratory objectives. HRQoL was assessed on day 1 of each cycle. Completion/compliance, change from baseline, time to first and definitive deterioration were assessed. No multiplicity adjustments were applied for HRQoL endpoints. RESULTS: The latest timepoint at which the predefined rates of completion (≥60%) and compliance (≥80%) were met was week 12. HRQoL at week 12 between treatment groups was generally similar. Time to first deterioration symptom scales favoured LEN+PEMBRO for QLQ-C30 dyspnoea, and QLQ-EN24 for poor body image, tingling/numbness, and hair loss; and TPC was favoured for QLQ-C30 pain, appetite loss, and diarrhoea, and QLQ-EN24 muscular pain. While the QLQ-C30 physical functional scale favoured TPC, other functional scales were generally similar between arms. Time to definitive deterioration favoured LEN+PEMBRO on most scales. CONCLUSION: HRQoL data from Study 309/KEYNOTE-775, with previously published efficacy and safety results, indicate that LEN+PEMBRO has an overall favourable benefit/risk profile versus TPC for the treatment of patients with aEC. CLINICALTRIALS: GOV: NCT03517449.

Avelumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer (JAVELIN Ovarian 200): an open-label, three-arm, randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with ovarian cancer will relapse after receiving frontline platinum-based chemotherapy and eventually develop platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory disease. We report results of avelumab alone or avelumab plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) compared with PLD alone in patients with platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer. METHODS: JAVELIN Ovarian 200 was an open-label, parallel-group, three-arm, randomised, phase 3 trial, done at 149 hospitals and cancer treatment centres in 24 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer (maximum of three previous lines for platinum-sensitive disease, none for platinum-resistant disease) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via interactive response technology to avelumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks), avelumab plus PLD (40 mg/m2 intravenously every 4 weeks), or PLD and stratified by disease platinum status, number of previous anticancer regimens, and bulky disease. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival by blinded independent central review and overall survival in all randomly assigned patients, with the objective to show whether avelumab alone or avelumab plus PLD is superior to PLD. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02580058. The trial is no longer enrolling patients and this is the final analysis of both primary endpoints. FINDINGS: Between Jan 5, 2016, and May 16, 2017, 566 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned (combination n=188; PLD n=190, avelumab n=188). At data cutoff (Sept 19, 2018), median duration of follow-up for overall survival was 18·4 months (IQR 15·6-21·9) for the combination group, 17·4 months (15·2-21·3) for the PLD group, and 18·2 months (15·8-21·2) for the avelumab group. Median progression-free survival by blinded independent central review was 3·7 months (95% CI 3·3-5·1) in the combination group, 3·5 months (2·1-4·0) in the PLD group, and 1·9 months (1·8-1·9) in the avelumab group (combination vs PLD: stratified HR 0·78 [repeated 93·1% CI 0·59-1·24], one-sided p=0·030; avelumab vs PLD: 1·68 [1·32-2·60], one-sided p>0·99). Median overall survival was 15·7 months (95% CI 12·7-18·7) in the combination group, 13·1 months (11·8-15·5) in the PLD group, and 11·8 months (8·9-14·1) in the avelumab group (combination vs PLD: stratified HR 0·89 [repeated 88·85% CI 0·74-1·24], one-sided p=0·21; avelumab vs PLD: 1·14 [0·95-1·58], one-sided p=0·83]). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (18 [10%] in the combination group vs nine [5%] in the PLD group vs none in the avelumab group), rash (11 [6%] vs three [2%] vs none), fatigue (ten [5%] vs three [2%] vs none), stomatitis (ten [5%] vs five [3%] vs none), anaemia (six [3%] vs nine [5%] vs three [2%]), neutropenia (nine [5%] vs nine [5%] vs none), and neutrophil count decreased (eight [5%] vs seven [4%] vs none). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 32 (18%) patients in the combination group, 19 (11%) in the PLD group, and 14 (7%) in the avelumab group. Treatment-related adverse events resulted in death in one patient each in the PLD group (sepsis) and avelumab group (intestinal obstruction). INTERPRETATION: Neither avelumab plus PLD nor avelumab alone significantly improved progression-free survival or overall survival versus PLD. These results provide insights for patient selection in future studies of immune checkpoint inhibitors in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer. FUNDING: Pfizer and Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

Pattern of Care and Outcomes of Adolescent and Young Adults with Lymphoma Treated in the Rhône-Alpes Region.

Background: Management of adolescent and young adults (AYAs) cancer is very heterogeneous. In the case of lymphomas, outcomes are mostly favorable but there is still room for improvement. Design: We retrospectively collected the pattern of care of all institutional 13- to 25-year-old AYAs patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) diagnosed in the Rhône-Alpes region between the years 2000 and 2005. Management, including adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs), and long-term survival were analyzed by comparing adult units (AU) and pediatric units (PU). Results: 278 patients were included: 198 treated for HL (median age of 19 years), 80 treated for NHL (median age of 20 years). Among them, 74% were managed in AU and 26% in PU. The median time between diagnosis and starting treatment was significantly lower in PU than in AU. Sixty-five patients (23%) were included in clinical trials, mostly in AU. Five-year overall survival was 96% for HL [14 deaths, median follow-up 91 months (9-180)] and 90% for NHL [nine deaths, median follow-up 80 months (3-180)]. Secondary cancers occurred for 2% (n = 3) of HL patients and for none in NHL. Other major late complications included cardiovascular accidents in two patients and fatal pulmonary fibrosis in one patient. Major differences in chemotherapy and radiotherapy use are emphasized. Global management conformed to CPGs by 56%. Conclusions: Important differences between adult and pediatric management were reported, without any impact on survival. A few patients can be included in clinical trials: Homogeneity in management could improve specific care for AYAs.

Volasertib Versus Chemotherapy in Platinum-Resistant or -Refractory Ovarian Cancer: A Randomized Phase II Groupe des Investigateurs Nationaux pour l'Etude des Cancers de l'Ovaire Study.

PURPOSE: Volasertib is a potent and selective cell-cycle kinase inhibitor that induces mitotic arrest and apoptosis by targeting Polo-like kinase. This phase II trial evaluated volasertib or single-agent chemotherapy in patients with platinum-resistant or -refractory ovarian cancer who experienced failure after treatment with two or three therapy lines. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either volasertib 300 mg by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks or an investigator's choice of single-agent, nonplatinum, cytotoxic chemotherapy. The primary end point was 24-week disease control rate. Secondary end points included best overall response, progression-free survival (PFS), safety, quality of life, and exploratory biomarker analyses. RESULTS: Of the 109 patients receiving treatment, 54 received volasertib and 55 received chemotherapy; demographics were well balanced. The 24-week disease control rates for volasertib and chemotherapy were 30.6% (95% CI, 18.0% to 43.2%) and 43.1% (95% CI, 29.6% to 56.7%), respectively, with partial responses in seven (13.0%) and eight (14.5%) patients, respectively. Median PFS was 13.1 weeks and 20.6 weeks for volasertib and chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.53). Six patients (11%) receiving volasertib achieved PFS fore more than 1 year, whereas no patient receiving chemotherapy achieved PFS greater than 1 year. No relationship between the expression of the biomarkers tested and their response was determined. Patients treated with volasertib experienced more grade 3 and 4 drug-related hematologic adverse events (AEs) and fewer nonhematologic AEs than did patients receiving chemotherapy. Discontinuation resulting from AEs occurred in seven (13.0%) and 15 (27.3%) patients in the volasertib and chemotherapy arms, respectively. Both arms showed similar effects on quality of life. CONCLUSION: Single-agent volasertib showed antitumor activity in patients with ovarian cancer. AEs in patients receiving volasertib were mainly hematologic and manageable.

Activity of eribulin mesylate in patients with soft-tissue sarcoma: a phase 2 study in four independent histological subtypes.

BACKGROUND: Eribulin inhibits microtubule dynamics via a mechanism distinct from that of other tubulin-targeting drugs, inducing cell-cycle arrest and tumour regression in preclinical models. We assessed the activity and safety of eribulin in four strata of patients with different types of soft-tissue sarcoma. METHODS: In this non-randomised multicentre phase 2 study, patients were included if they had progressive or high-grade soft-tissue sarcoma and had received no more than one previous combination chemotherapy or up to two single drugs for advanced disease. They were stratified by the type of soft-tissue sarcoma they had. Eribulin was given intravenously at a concentration of 1·4 mg/m(2) over 2-5 min at days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks to primarily assess progression-free survival at 12 weeks (RECIST 1.0), which we evaluated in all patients who started treatment. Safety analyses were done in all patients who started treatment. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00413192. FINDINGS: Of 128 patients included, 37 had adipocytic sarcoma, 40 had leiomyosarcoma, 19 had synovial sarcoma, and 32 had other sarcomas. 12 (31·6%) of 38 patients with leiomyosarcoma evaluable for the primary endpoint, 15 (46·9%) of 32 patients with adipocytic sarcoma, four (21·1%) of 19 with synovial sarcoma, and five (19·2%) of 26 in other sarcomas were progression-free at 12 weeks. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (66 [52%] of 127 patients evaluable for safety), leucopenia (44 [35%]), anaemia (nine [7%]), fatigue (nine [7%]), febrile neutropenia (eight [6%]), abnormal alanine aminotransferase concentrations (six [5%]), mucositis (four [3%]), and sensory neuropathy (four [3%]). INTERPRETATION: Eribulin deserves further study in this setting, based on progression-free survival at 12 weeks in leiomyosarcoma and adipocytic sarcoma. FUNDING: Eisai Limited, Hatfield, UK.