Explore the vast range of titles available.

The treatment of recurrent endometrial cancer is a challenge. Because of earlier treatments and the site of locoregional recurrence, in the vaginal vault or pelvis, morbidity can be high. A total of about 4 to 20% of the patients with endometrial cancer develop a locoregional recurrence, mostly among patients with locally advanced disease. The treatment options are dependent on previous treatments and the site of recurrence. Local and locoregional recurrences can be treated curatively with surgery or (chemo)radiotherapy with acceptable toxicity and control rates. Distant recurrences can be treated with palliative systemic therapy, i.e., first-line chemotherapy or hormonal therapy. Based on the tumor characteristics and molecular profile, there can be a role for immunotherapy. The evidence on targeted therapy is limited, with no approved treatment in the current guidelines. In selected cases, there might be an indication for local treatment in oligometastatic disease. Because of the novel techniques in radiotherapy, disease control can often be achieved at limited toxicity. Further studies are warranted to analyze the survival outcome and toxicity of newer treatment strategies. Patient selection is very important in deciding which treatment is of most benefit, and better prediction models based on the patient- and tumor characteristics are necessary.

Around 20% of patients with primary high-grade ovarian cancer do not respond to chemotherapy, but predictive biomarkers are lacking. The purpose of the current study is to establish and clinically validate an ex vivo 3D micro-tumour testing platform that predicts patient-specific response to standard of care chemotherapy. 104 ovarian cancer patients with malignant ascites were included in the study. Micro-tumours enriched from ascites were exposed to standard of care chemo- and targeted therapies, imaged using a high-content 3D screening platform. Morphological features were extracted for sensitivity profiling. A linear regression model was trained to predict the patient’s CA125 decay rates, which were correlated to clinical outcomes (patient CA125 decay rate, change in tumour size, and progression-free survival). Isolated micro-tumours recapitulated ovarian cancer markers. A significant correlation (R = 0.77) between predicted and clinical CA125 rates was observed. Patients with predicted high ex vivo sensitivity to carboplatin/paclitaxel demonstrated significantly increased PFS and decreased tumour size. Complementary, patient-specific response profiles for second-line therapies were calculated and presented in integrated reports. In conclusion, an ex vivo 3D micro-tumour testing platform was established that predicted clinical response to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in ovarian cancer patients and measured patient-specific responses to second-line therapies as a proof-of-concept. The platform enabled stratification of responders vs non-responders and has the potential to support informed treatment decisions after prospective validation. Results are generated within 2 weeks after sample collection, aligning with the clinical time frame for treatment decision-making.

Background Guidelines recommend to include exercise and dietary advice in standard care for patients with cancer, based on evidence primarily derived from patients with breast cancer. Its applicability to patients with ovarian cancer is uncertain due to differences in patient characteristics and treatments. The PADOVA trial examined the effectiveness of a combined exercise and dietary intervention on fat-free mass (FFM), physical functioning, and fatigue. Methods In total, 81 patients with ovarian cancer were randomised to the exercise and dietary intervention ( n  = 40) or control ( n  = 41) group. Measurements were performed before chemotherapy, after chemotherapy, and 12 weeks later. FFM was assessed by bioelectrical impedance analysis, and physical functioning and fatigue were assessed using questionnaires. Intervention effects were assessed on an intention-to-treat basis using linear mixed models. Results FFM and physical functioning increased, and fatigue decreased significantly over time in both groups. No significant difference between the groups were found for FFM ( β  = −0.5 kg; 95% CI = −3.2; 2.1), physical functioning ( β  = 1.4; 95% CI = −5.4; 8.3) and fatigue ( β  = 0.7; 95% CI = −1.5; 2.8). Conclusions During treatment, both groups improved in FFM, physical functioning, and fatigue. The intervention group, however, did not demonstrate additional benefits compared to the control group. This highlights the need for caution when extrapolating findings from different cancer populations to patients with ovarian cancer.

Introduction Vulvovaginal cancer in pregnancy is rare. Limited data complicate decision‐making and patient counseling. Our review, coupled with new case data, fills a current gap in the literature and provides practical insights. Material and Methods Oncological and obstetric data of these pregnancies were examined by a case collection from the International Network on Cancer, Infertility and Pregnancy (INCIP) registry (vulvar n = 10, vaginal n = 5) and a literature review (vulvar n = 46, vaginal n = 37). Results Although preoperative imaging of inguinofemoral lymph nodes is feasible, only 16.1% of vulvar cancer patients underwent ultrasound or MRI. Treatment was initiated during pregnancy for 69.1% of vulvar cancer and 28.4% of vaginal cancer patients. Surgical lymph node staging of vulvar cancer was postponed until after delivery in 10 cases, although uni‐ or bilateral lymphadenectomy during pregnancy was not associated with more complications. Delivery outcomes included a live birth rate of 96.4% for vulvar cancer and 50% for vaginal cancer due to the high rate of pregnancy terminations, with most births preterm. The overall 5‐year survival rates for vulvar (81.3%) and vaginal (66.4%) cancer during pregnancy are comparable to nonpregnant populations, indicating that pregnancy does not adversely impact maternal prognosis. Conclusions This study underscores the feasibility of adapting standard oncological care for pregnant patients, emphasizing multidisciplinary teams to optimize maternal and fetal outcomes. Vulvovaginal cancer in pregnancy is rare. This pooled analysis of 15 INCIP cases and 83 cases from the literature highlights the underuse of nodal imaging, the value of multidisciplinary care, and shows that standard oncologic treatment can be safely adapted without compromising maternal or fetal outcomes.

ObjectiveTo assess the association between gastro-intestinal (GI) symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in ovarian cancer (OC) survivors.MethodsWomen diagnosed with OC between 2000 and 2010 as registered in the Netherlands cancer registry (n = 348), received a questionnaire on socio-demographic characteristics, HRQoL (EORTC-QLQ-C30), ovarian cancer-specific symptoms including GI (EORTC-QLQ OV28), and psychological distress (HADS). Data collection took place in 2012.ResultsOf 348 women diagnosed with ovarian cancer, 191 (55%) responded. Of all participants, 69% were eligible for analysis (n = 131). In 25% of all women, high level GI symptoms occurred (n = 33). In 23% of all women, recurrence of OC occurred (n = 30). Regression analysis showed that presence of high levels of GI symptoms during survivorship was associated with lower functioning on all HRQoL domains (except for emotional functioning), more symptoms, and higher levels of distress. QoL was negatively affected in those who had few and high levels of GI symptoms. QoL of those with recurrent disease was worse than those without recurrent disease.ConclusionA substantial proportion of OC survivors experience GI symptoms, regardless of the recurrence of disease. Health care professionals should be aware of GI symptoms during survivorship in order to refer their patients for supportive care interventions to reduce symptoms or help survivors to cope. Further research should examine the cause of GI symptoms during OC survivorship among those with non-recurrent disease.

Background:Gynecologic cancer during pregnancy is a special challenge because cancer or its treatment may affect not only the pregnant women in general but directly involve the reproductive tract and fetus. Currently, there are no guidelines on how to deal with this special coincidence.Methods:An international consensus meeting on staging and treatment of gynecological malignancies during pregnancy was organised including a systematic literature search, and interpretation followed by a physical meeting of all participants with intensive discussion. In the absence of large trials and randomized studies, recommendations were based on available literature data and personal experience thus representing a low but best achievable level of evidence.Findings:Randomized trials and prospective studies on cancer treatment during pregnancy are lacking.Gynecological cancer during pregnancy is a demanding problem, and multidisciplinary expertise should be available. Counseling both parents on the maternal prognosis and fetal risk is needed. When there is a firm desire to continue the pregnancy, gynecological cancer can be treated in selected cases. The staging and treatment should follow the standard approach as much as possible. Guidelines for safe pelvic surgery during pregnancy are presented. Mainly in cervical and ovarian cancer, chemotherapy and an alternative surgical approach need to be considered. Administration of chemotherapy during the second or third trimester may probably not increase the incidence of congenital malformations. Until now, the long-term outcome of children in utero exposed to oncological treatment modalities is poorly documented, but preterm birth on its own is associated with cognitive impairment. Delivery should be postponed preferably until after a gestational age of 35 weeks.Interpretation:Further research including international registries for gynecologic cancer in pregnancy is urgently needed. The gathering of both available literature and personal experience allowed only suggesting models for treatment of gynecologic cancer in pregnancy.

The Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) sixth Ovarian Cancer Conference on Clinical Research was held virtually in October, 2021, following published consensus guidelines. The goal of the consensus meeting was to achieve harmonisation on the design elements of upcoming trials in ovarian cancer, to select important questions for future study, and to identify unmet needs. All 33 GCIG member groups participated in the development, refinement, and adoption of 20 statements within four topic groups on clinical research in ovarian cancer including first line treatment, recurrent disease, disease subgroups, and future trials. Unanimous consensus was obtained for 14 of 20 statements, with greater than 90% concordance in the remaining six statements. The high acceptance rate following active deliberation among the GCIG groups confirmed that a consensus process could be applied in a virtual setting. Together with detailed categorisation of unmet needs, these consensus statements will promote the harmonisation of international clinical research in ovarian cancer.

Introduction/BackgroundClear cell carcinoma (CCC) is a rare subtype of ovarian and endometrial cancer. It carries a poor prognosis and response to chemotherapy in recurrent disease is low. As angiogenesis pathways are activated in CCC, we performed a trial comparing nintedanib (BIBF1120), an orally available, triple kinase inhibitor targeting VEGFR, PDGFR and FGFR with physician’s choice of chemotherapy. As the first randomised trial in relapsed CCC, it gives important information on the efficacy and toxicity of both nintedanib and chemotherapy. Here we report the ovarian cancer (OC) results.MethodologyThis was an international, multi-centre, randomised, open label phase II, 3 outcome design. Patients were randomised to nintedanib 200 mg PO twice daily or chemotherapy (paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 IV Day 1,8,15), pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (40 mg/m2 IV) or topotecan (4 mg/m2 IV Day 1,8,15) every 28 days). Treatment was given until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS) in the ovarian cohort. Secondary objectives included overall survival (OS), response rate (RR), disease control rate (DCR) and patient reported outcomes. With 90 OC patients, the study was powered to detect an improvement in median PFS from 3 to 5 months (HR=0.6) with >90% power, 20% 1-sided significance. A statistically significant PFS difference at the 1-sided 10% level (Nintedanib superior) would give a clear signal that a phase III study is warranted. A statistically significant result at the 1-sided 20% level would require other supportive evidence. EudraCT Ref:2013-002109-73. ISRCTN No:ISRCTN50772895.Results91 OC patients were included in the analysis. Median age was 54 years. Median number of previous lines was 2. After a median follow up of 20.7 months the median PFS was 2.3 months with nintedanib and 1.9 months with chemotherapy (hazard ratio=0.79, 80% CI=(0.58,1.06), p(1-sided)=0.1521. Median OS was 9.0 and 4.9 months, respectively. Difference in OS estimates at 6 and 12 months were 19.7% and 8.9% demonstrating non-proportional hazards. RR was 2.1% and 0%, and DCR at 16 weeks was 23.4% and 9.1% (odds ratio=5.81, 80%CI=(1.79,18.89), p(1-sided)=0.0276) with nintedanib and chemotherapy, respectively.ConclusionThe study failed to demonstrate sufficient activity of nintedanib as a monotherapy to support a phase III trial. However, the benefit in PFS, DCR and OS suggests it may be interesting to combine nintedanib with other agents in OCCC. Chemotherapy is ineffective and the outcomes for women with OCCC are extremely poor confirming the need for continued research into novel targets and therapies. Translational research is on-going (figures 1 and 2).Abstract 596 Figure 1Progression free survival Kaplan-Meier curves with 80% CisAbstract 596 Figure 2Overall survival Kaplan-Meier curves, with 80% CIsDisclosuresThe study was funded by an educational grant from Boehringer Ingelheim and supported by Cancer Research UK Grant ref: C8361/A15600.Author disclosuresRosalind Glasspool: Grant funding for clinical trials from Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly/Ignyta and Clovis. Consultancy fees, travel support and/or speaker fees for AstraZeneca, GSK/Tesaro, Clovis, Immunogen and Sotio. Site PI for studies sponsored by AstraZeneca, GSK/Tesaro, Clovis, Immunogen, Lilly and Pfizer.Samantha Hinsley: none.Jonathan Ledermann: Advisory Board and Lecture fees from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Clovis Oncology, MSD/Merck, Eisai, Artios Pharma, GSK and grant funding from AstraZeneca and MSD/Merck. IDMC fees from Regeneron.Iain McNeish: Advisory Board fees from AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Tesaro/GSK, Roche, Scancell and Carrick Therapeutics. Institutional grant funding from AstraZeneca.Jerome Alexandre: Grant funding from Janssen, MSD. Consultancy fees, travel support and/or speaker fees for AstraZeneca, GSK/Tesaro, MSD, Eisai, Novartis, Pharmamar. Site PI for studies sponsored by AstraZeneca, GSK/Tesaro, MSD, Agenus, Merck Serono, Seattle GeneticsAnneke Westermann: none.Claire Lawless: noneNelleke Ottevanger: noneMansoor Raza Mirza: Personal Financial Interests: AstraZeneca, Biocad, Clovis Oncology, Geneos, Genmab, Karyopharm Therapeutics, merck, msd, Oncology Centre, Pfizer, Roche, SeatleGenetics, Sera Prognostics, Sotio, Tesaro-GSK, ZaiLab. Institutional financial interests (study grants): AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Clovis Oncology, Pfizer, Tesaro-GSKIsabelle Ray-Coquard: Honoraria (self) from Abbvie, Agenus, Advaxis, BMS, PharmaMar, Genmab, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Roche, GSK, MSD, Deciphera, Mersena, Merck Sereno, Novartis, Amgen, Tesaro and Clovis; honoraria (institution) from GSK, MSD, Roche and BMS; advisory/consulting fees from Abbvie, Agenus, Advaxis, BMS, PharmaMar, Genmab, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, GSK, MSD, Deciphera, Mersena, Merck Sereno, Novartis, Amgen, Tesaro and Clovis; research grant/funding (self) from MSD, Roche and BMS; research grant/funding (institution) from MSD, Roche, BMS, Novartis, AstraZeneca and Merck Sereno; and travel support from Roche, AstraZeneca and GSK.

Introduction/BackgroundMedian 5 year overall survival for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer(EOC) is poor. New therapeutic options are needed. Allogeneic natural killer (NK)-cell therapy may be such an option. NK cells are tolerant to normal cells, but have killing potential against malignant cells. Our GMP compliant NK-cell product (RNK001) from umbilical cord blood derived hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells is active against ovarian cancer cells in vitro and in vivo.MethodologyThe INTRO-study (NCT03539406) is a phase-I clinical trial evaluating the feasibility, safety and toxicity of intraperitoneal (IP) infusion of RNK001 combined with IL2 without or with lymphodepletion by Fludarabine/Cyclophosphamide (Flu/Cy). EOC patients with rising CA-125 at second recurrence were eligible.ResultsSix patients without Flu/Cy and 1 patient with Flu/Cy were treated with RNK001. The infusion of RNK001 and IL2 through a IP port is feasible. There were two serious adverse events in different patients: a grade 3 (CTCAE III-IV) rise of liver enzymes, and a grade 3 ileus. After one week we detected 0.24 and 1.02% donor NK cells in the peritoneal fluid of two patients. In 5/7 patients, CA-125 serum levels decreased by 20–53% at day 14 after RNK001 from baseline. One patient had a partial response (according to RECIST) with a progression-free survival (PFS) of 9 months (median PFS of all patients was 3 months).ConclusionWe have shown the feasibility and safety of intraperitoneal infusion of in seven patients. We found a transient decline in CA-125 levels and one patient with a partial response and a PFS of 9 months. Flu/Cy in patients with second recurrence was not feasible due to refusal of the patients. We will continue clinical research with a phase 2 study investigating RNK001 intraperitoneal infusion combined with carboplatin paclitaxel.DisclosuresAuthors have nothing to disclose.