PURPOSEPatients with advanced endometrial carcinoma have limited treatment options. We report final primary efficacy analysis results for a patient cohort with advanced endometrial carcinoma receiv...

/pdf/lenvatinib-plus-pembrolizumab-in-patients-with-advanced-102pfkhemk.pdf

Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab in Patients With Advanced Endometrial Cancer

Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Over 95% of gastric cancers are adenocarcinomas, which are typically classified based on anatomic location and histologic type. Gastric cancer generally carries a poor prognosis because it is often diagnosed at an advanced stage. Systemic therapy can provide palliation, improved survival, and enhanced quality of life in patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. The implementation of biomarker testing, especially analysis of HER2 status, microsatellite instability (MSI) status, and the expression of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), has had a significant impact on clinical practice and patient care. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab have produced encouraging results in clinical trials for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Palliative management, which may include systemic therapy, chemoradiation, and/or best supportive care, is recommended for all patients with unresectable or metastatic cancer. Multidisciplinary team management is essential for all patients with localized gastric cancer. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Gastric Cancer focuses on the management of unresectable locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic disease.

Gastric Cancer, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Endometrial cancer

Genomic instability is the hallmark of various cancers with the increasing accumulation of DNA damage. The application of radiotherapy and chemotherapy in cancer treatment is typically based on this property of cancers. However, the adverse effects including normal tissues injury are also accompanied by the radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Targeted cancer therapy has the potential to suppress cancer cells’ DNA damage response through tailoring therapy to cancer patients lacking specific DNA damage response functions. Obviously, understanding the broader role of DNA damage repair in cancers has became a basic and attractive strategy for targeted cancer therapy, in particular, raising novel hypothesis or theory in this field on the basis of previous scientists’ findings would be important for future promising druggable emerging targets. In this review, we first illustrate the timeline steps for the understanding the roles of DNA damage repair in the promotion of cancer and cancer therapy developed, then we summarize the mechanisms regarding DNA damage repair associated with targeted cancer therapy, highlighting the specific proteins behind targeting DNA damage repair that initiate functioning abnormally duo to extrinsic harm by environmental DNA damage factors, also, the DNA damage baseline drift leads to the harmful intrinsic targeted cancer therapy. In addition, clinical therapeutic drugs for DNA damage and repair including therapeutic effects, as well as the strategy and scheme of relative clinical trials were intensive discussed. Based on this background, we suggest two hypotheses, namely “environmental gear selection” to describe DNA damage repair pathway evolution, and “DNA damage baseline drift”, which may play a magnified role in mediating repair during cancer treatment. This two new hypothesis would shed new light on targeted cancer therapy, provide a much better or more comprehensive holistic view and also promote the development of new research direction and new overcoming strategies for patients.

DNA damage repair: historical perspectives, mechanistic pathways and clinical translation for targeted cancer therapy.

PURPOSEDespite the tissue-agnostic approval of pembrolizumab in mismatch repair deficient (MMRD) solid tumors, important unanswered questions remain about the role of immune checkpoint blockade in ...

https://ascopubs.org/doi/pdf/10.1200/JCO.19.01021

Phase II Study of Avelumab in Patients With Mismatch Repair Deficient and Mismatch Repair Proficient Recurrent/Persistent Endometrial Cancer.

Importance Deficient mismatch mutation repair mechanisms may sensitize endometrial cancers to anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) therapies. Dostarlimab (TSR-042) is an investigational anti-PD-1 antibody that binds with high affinity to the PD-1 receptor. Objective To assess the antitumor activity and safety of dostarlimab for patients with deficient mismatch repair endometrial cancer. Design, setting, and participants This ongoing, open-label, single-group, multicenter study began part 1 on March 7, 2016, and began enrolling patients with deficient mismatch mutation repair endometrial cancer on May 8, 2017. Median follow-up was 11.2 months (range, 0.03 [ongoing] to 22.11 [ongoing] months; based on radiological assessments). Statistical analysis was performed July 8 to August 9, 2019. Interventions Patients received 500 mg of dostarlimab intravenously every 3 weeks for 4 doses, then 1000 mg every 6 weeks until disease progression, treatment discontinuation, or withdrawal. Main outcomes and measures The primary end point was objective response rate and duration of response by blinded independent central review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Results As of the data cutoff, 104 women (median age, 64.0 years [range, 38-80 years]) with deficient mismatch mutation repair endometrial cancers were enrolled and treated with dostarlimab. Of these, 71 had measurable disease at baseline and at 6 months or more of follow-up and were included in the analysis. There was a confirmed response in 30 patients (objective response rate, 42.3%; 95% CI, 30.6%-54.6%); 9 patients (12.7%) had a confirmed complete response, and 21 patients (29.6%) had a confirmed partial response. Responses were durable; the median duration of response was not reached (median follow-up was 11.2 months). The estimated likelihood of maintaining a response was 96.4% at 6 months and 76.8% at 12 months. Anemia (3 of 104 [2.9%]), colitis (2 of 104 [1.9%]), and diarrhea (2 of 104 [1.9%]) were the most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events. Conclusions and relevance In this nonrandomized trial, dostarlimab was associated with clinically meaningful and durable antitumor activity with an acceptable safety profile for patients with deficient mismatch mutation repair endometrial cancers after prior platinum-based chemotherapy. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02715284.

/pdf/clinical-activity-and-safety-of-the-anti-programmed-death-1-3m6olam522.pdf

Clinical Activity and Safety of the Anti-Programmed Death 1 Monoclonal Antibody Dostarlimab for Patients With Recurrent or Advanced Mismatch Repair-Deficient Endometrial Cancer: A Nonrandomized Phase 1 Clinical Trial

Preliminary safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic characterization from GARNET, a phase I/II clinical trial of the anti–PD-1 monoclonal antibody, TSR-042, in patients with recurrent or advanced MSI-h and MSS endometrial cancer

Purpose New immuno-oncology therapies targeting programmed cell death receptor 1 (PD-1) have improved patient outcomes in a broad range of cancers. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the PK, pharmacodynamics (PDy), and safety of dostarlimab monotherapy in adult patients with previously-treated advanced solid tumors who participated in parts 1 and 2A of the phase 1 GARNET study. Methods Part 1 featured a 3 + 3 weight-based dose-escalation study, in which 21 patients received dostarlimab 1, 3, or 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. The 2 fixed-dose nonweight-based dosing regimens of dostarlimab 500 mg every 3 weeks (Q3W) and 1000 mg every 6 weeks (Q6W) were evaluated using a modified 6 + 6 design in part 2A (n = 13). In parts 1 and 2A, treatment with dostarlimab could continue for up to 2 years or until progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient withdrawal, investigator's decision, or death. Results The dostarlimab PK profile was dose proportional, and maximal achievable receptor occupancy (RO) was observed at all dose levels in the weight-based and fixed-dose cohorts. Trough dostarlimab concentration after administration of dostarlimab 500 mg Q3W was similar to that after dostarlimab 1000 mg Q6W, the values of which (≈40 µg/mL) projected well above the lowest dostarlimab concentration required for full peripheral RO. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Conclusions Dostarlimab demonstrated consistent and predictable PK and associated PDy. The observed safety profile was acceptable and characteristic of the anti-PD-1 drug class. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02715284. Registration date: March 9, 2016.

Safety, antitumor activity, and pharmacokinetics of dostarlimab, an anti-PD-1, in patients with advanced solid tumors: a dose-escalation phase 1 trial.

Hadi Danaee

Papers

Clinical Activity and Safety of the Anti-Programmed Death 1 Monoclonal Antibody Dostarlimab for Patients With Recurrent or Advanced Mismatch Repair-Deficient Endometrial Cancer: A Nonrandomized Phase 1 Clinical Trial

Preliminary safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic characterization from GARNET, a phase I/II clinical trial of the anti–PD-1 monoclonal antibody, TSR-042, in patients with recurrent or advanced MSI-h and MSS endometrial cancer

Safety, antitumor activity, and pharmacokinetics of dostarlimab, an anti-PD-1, in patients with advanced solid tumors: a dose-escalation phase 1 trial.

Safety and efficacy of the anti–PD-1 monoclonal antibody dostarlimab in patients with recurrent or advanced dMMR endometrial cancer