An umbrella study of biomarker-driven targeted therapy in patients with platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer: a Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group study (KGOG 3045), AMBITION.

A pilot study of biomarker-driven targeted therapy in patients with platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer has been started in Korea. Archival tumor samples were tested for HRD and PD-L1 status. Treatment arms will be allocated according to the test results. For HRD+ patients, we tested the synergistic effects of olaparib and other agents; treatment arms will randomly be allocated. (Arm 1: olaparib and cediranib; Arm 2: olaparib and durvalumab). For HRD- patients, we tested the role of biomarker-driven immunotherapy according to PD-L1 expression (Arm 3: durvalumab and chemotherapy in patients with high PD-L1 expression; Arm 4: durvalumab, tremelimumab, and chemotherapy in patients with low PD-L1 expression). Sixty-eight patients will be included from three Korean institutions within 1 year. The primary endpoint is the response rate according to RECIST 1.1 (6 months after treatment initiation). This trial has been registered with clinicaltrials.gov, and the registration number is NCT03699449.

Laparoscopy-assisted versus Open D2 Distal Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: Results From a Randomized Phase II Multicenter Clinical Trial (COACT 1001).

OBJECTIVE: This randomized, phase II, multicenter clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the feasibility of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) with D2 lymph node dissection compared with open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: D2 lymph node dissection has been accepted as standard treatment for AGC. Although LADG is widely performed in early gastric cancer (EGC), the feasibility of LADG in AGC has not been proven yet. METHODS: Patients with cT2-T4a and cN0-2 (AJCC 7 staging system) distal gastric cancer were randomly but not blindingly assigned to LADG or ODG groups using fixed block sizes with a 1:1 allocation ratio. The primary endpoint was the noncompliance rate of the lymph node dissection, which was used to evaluate feasibility. Secondary endpoints included 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), 5-year overall survival, complications, and surgical stress response. RESULTS: Between June 2010 and October 2011, 204 patients enrolled and underwent either LADG (n = 105) or ODG (n = 99). Of these, 196 patients (100 in LADG and 96 in ODG) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. There were no significant differences in the overall noncompliance rate of lymph node dissection between LADG and ODG groups (47.0% and 43.2%, respectively; P = 0.648). In the subgroup analysis, the noncompliance rate in the LADG group was significantly higher than the ODG group for clinical stage III disease (52.0% vs 25.0%, P = 0.043). No difference was found in the 3-year DFS rate between the groups (LADG, 80.1%; ODG, 81.9%; P = 0.448). Differences in postoperative complication rates and surgical stress response were found to be insignificant between the 2 arms. CONCLUSIONS: LADG was feasible for AGC treatment based on the noncompliance rate of D2 lymph node dissection. Subgroups analysis data suggest that further studies are needed for stage III gastric cancer.

Phase II parallel group study showing comparable efficacy between premenopausal metastatic breast cancer patients treated with letrozole plus goserelin and postmenopausal patients treated with letrozole alone as first-line hormone therapy.

PURPOSE: Goserelin and letrozole in premenopausal patients can result in clinical outcomes comparable to those obtained by letrozole alone in postmenopausal patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 73 patients with hormone-responsive MBC were included. Of those, 35 premenopausal patients received goserelin (3.6 mg subcutaneously every 28 days) plus letrozole (2.5 mg orally daily), and 38 postmenopausal patients received letrozole alone as their first-line endocrine therapy in a metastatic setting. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups, except for a younger age (median, 41 v 53.5 years; P < .001) and a shorter disease-free interval (median, 1.8 v 3.3 years; P = .03) in the premenopausal group. Clinical benefit rates were comparable between the two groups (77% v 74%; P = .77). With the median follow-up of 27.4 months, there was no statistical difference in the median time to progression between the two groups (9.5 months [95% CI, 6.4 to 12.1 months] v 8.9 months [95% CI, 6.4 to 13.3 months]). In patients who did not receive bisphosphonate, letrozole +/- goserelin caused a greater loss of bone mineral density at 6 months compared with that of patients receiving bisphosphonate treatment (premenopausal group, -16.7% v 53.9%; P = .002 and postmenopausal group, -13.3% v 17.4%; P = .04 at the lumbar spine). CONCLUSION: Clinical efficacies in premenopausal MBC patients with combined letrozole and goserelin therapy were comparable to those in postmenopausal patients treated with letrozole alone. Although letrozole +/- goserelin resulted in a modest increase in bone resorption, concurrent treatment with bisphosphonate could prevent bone loss at 6 months.