PURPOSE: Estrogen receptor (ER)–positive endometrial cancers (ECs) are characterized by phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) and receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK)/RAS/β-catenin (CTNNB1) pathway alterations in approximately 90% and 80% of cases, respectively. Extensive cross-talk between ER, PI3K, and RTK/RAS/CTNNB1 pathways leads to both ligand-dependent and ligand-independent ER transcriptional activity as well as upregulation of cyclin D1 which, in complex with cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4 and CDK6), is a critical regulator of cell cycle progression and a key mediator of resistance to hormonal therapy. We hypothesized that the combination of the aromatase inhibitor letrozole and CDK4/6 inhibitor abemaciclib would demonstrate promising activity in this setting. METHODS: We conducted a phase II, two-stage study of letrozole/abemaciclib in recurrent ER-positive EC. Eligibility criteria included measurable disease, no limit on prior therapies, and all EC histologies; prior hormonal therapy was allowed. Primary end points were objective response rate by RECIST 1.1 and progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. RESULTS: At the data cutoff date (December 03, 2021), 30 patients (28 with endometrioid EC) initiated protocol therapy; 15 (50%) patients had prior hormonal therapy. There were nine total responses (eight confirmed), for an objective response rate of 30% (95% CI, 14.7 to 49.4), all in endometrioid adenocarcinomas. Median PFS was 9.1 months, PFS at 6 months was 55.6% (95% CI, 35.1 to 72), and median duration of response was 7.4 months. Most common ≥ grade 3 treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (20%) and anemia (17%). Responses were observed regardless of grade, prior hormonal therapy, mismatch repair, and progesterone receptor status. Exploratory tumor profiling revealed several mechanistically relevant candidate predictors of response ( CTNNB1, KRAS, and CDKN2A mutations) or absence of response ( TP53 mutations), which require independent validation. CONCLUSION: Letrozole/abemaciclib demonstrated encouraging and durable evidence of activity in recurrent ER positive endometrioid EC.

High-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) remains the most lethal gynecologic cancer in the United States. Genomic analysis revealed roughly half of HGSOC display homologous repair deficiencies. An improved understanding of the genomic and somatic mutations that influence DNA repair led to the development of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors for the treatment of ovarian cancer. In this review, we explore the preclinical and clinical studies that led to the development of FDA approved drugs that take advantage of the synthetic lethality concept, the implementation of the early phase trials, the development of companion diagnostics and proposed mechanisms of resistance.

PURPOSE: In a phase II study, letrozole/abemaciclib demonstrated an objective response rate of 30% and a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 9.1 months in recurrent estrogen receptor–positive endometrial cancer (EC). While tissue-based tumor profiling revealed several mechanistically relevant candidate baseline genomic predictors of response, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is a less invasive alternative to monitor therapeutic efficacy and define acquired resistance. METHODS: Serial plasma specimens were obtained at baseline, C2D1, C3D1, C8D1, the time of objective response, and the time of progression. Samples were analyzed using the Guardant Reveal assay to assess methylation-based tumor fraction (TF), with the Guardant360 assay providing genotyping of >700 genes in samples with detectable ctDNA. Treatment response was assessed using a measure of the relative change in TF pre- versus on-treatment. RESULTS: A total of 99 of 102 (97%) samples from 28 patients were successfully analyzed. Patients with above median baseline TF exhibited worse median PFS (2.0 months v 16.5 months, P < .005, hazard ratio [HR], 24.1) and worse overall survival (OS) (10.7 months v not yet reached, P < .005, HR, 14.8). Patients with molecular response (MR) after the first or second cycle of letrozole/abemaciclib therapy had significantly better median PFS and OS regardless of the cutoff used for definition of MR. ctDNA analysis of postprogression specimens identified several acquired genomic alterations associated with resistance to letrozole/abemaciclib therapy in more than half of the patients, including PI3K pathway, receptor tyrosine kinase ( FGFR1 , 2 and ERBB2 alterations), cell cycle pathway ( RB1 and CCNE1 alterations), and ESR1 and MAPK pathway alterations. Two of the three patients with mismatch repair–deficient ECs acquired ESR1 mutations at the time of progression. CONCLUSION: Baseline and on-treatment ctDNA dynamics may provide an early indication of benefit from letrozole/abemaciclib in EC. ctDNA at the time of progression may identify resistance alterations that may inform subsequent therapy.

Based on preclinical studies showing synergism with simultaneous inhibition of the estrogen receptor (ER), CDK4/6 and PI3K pathways and based on window of opportunity studies showing that metformin suppresses PI3K/mTOR signaling in endometrial cancer (EC), we conduct a non-randomized phase 2 study of letrozole/abemaciclib/metformin in ER positive endometrioid EC (NCT03675893). Primary objectives include objective response rate (ORR) and rate of progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months (PFS6) while secondary objectives include PFS, overall survival, duration of response and toxicity. Twenty-five patients initiate protocol therapy [letrozole 2.5 mg orally (PO) once a day (qd), abemaciclib 150 mg PO twice a day (bid) and metformin 500 mg PO qd]. ORR is 32% (3 complete and 5 partial responses, 95% CI 14.9%-53.5%), Kaplan Meier estimate of PFS6 is 69.8% (95% CI 46.9%-84.3%) and median PFS is 19.4 months (95% CI 5.7 months–not estimable). No patients discontinue therapy because of toxicity. There are no objective responses among TP53 mutated ECs and among NSMP (no specific molecular profile) tumors with RB1 or CCNE1 alterations; CTNNB1 mutations correlate with clinical benefit. Pharmacokinetic analyses demonstrate that administration of letrozole and abemaciclib with metformin result in a more than 3-fold increase in metformin exposure.

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is treated in the first-line setting with combined platinum and taxane chemotherapy, often followed by a maintenance poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi). Responses to first-line treatment are frequent. For many patients, however, responses are suboptimal or short-lived. Over the last several years, multiple new classes of agents targeting DNA damage response (DDR) mechanisms have advanced through clinical development. In this review, we explore the preclinical rationale for the use of ATR inhibitors, CHK1 inhibitors, and WEE1 inhibitors, emphasizing their application to chemotherapy-resistant and PARPi-resistant ovarian cancer. We also present an overview of the clinical development of the leading drugs in each of these classes, emphasizing the rationale for monotherapy and combination therapy approaches.

This guideline has been updated. This ASCO Living Guideline is reviewed on an eight-week cycle. Please see the online dynamic version for the latest updates. PURPOSE: To provide guidance regarding the systemic treatment of patients with high-grade serous and/or endometrioid epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer (EOC) experiencing recurrence. METHODS: ASCO convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of relevant studies and develop recommendations for clinical practice. RESULTS: Eight hundred nineteen publications were identified in the literature search. After applying the eligibility criteria, 147 publications of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews comprising the entire body of evidence remained, forming the evidentiary basis, of which 36 directly informed the guideline recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS: For patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive EOC, clinicians should offer platinum-based combination regimens, specifically pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) plus carboplatin, paclitaxel plus carboplatin, or gemcitabine plus carboplatin. Bevacizumab may be added to a platinum-based doublet followed by bevacizumab maintenance. For patients who are not candidates for platinum-based therapy, clinicians may utilize recommendations for first-line treatment of patients with relapsed platinum-resistant disease. For patients with platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory EOC high-grade disease and validated folate receptor alpha (FRα) expression, mirvetuximab soravtansine is strongly recommended. Other recommended systemic options for this population include PLD monotherapy, paclitaxel (once weekly or once every 3 weeks), bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy, or the combination of relacorilant and nab-paclitaxel; gemcitabine monotherapy remains a conditional alternative. Regarding surgical interventions, there is currently insufficient evidence to recommend secondary cytoreduction or hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Clinicians may discuss secondary cytoreduction for platinum-sensitive recurrences where complete gross resection is highly achievable. Post-treatment monitoring and specialty survivorship care should be offered on a case-by-case basis, potentially including physical exams, biochemical testing, and imaging. There is insufficient data to recommend one combination versus another. Additional information is available on the ASCO Publications website . Living guidelines are developed for selected topic areas with rapidly evolving evidence that drives frequent change in recommended clinical practice. Living guidelines are updated on a regular schedule by a standing expert panel that systematically reviews the health literature on a continuous basis, as described in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Living Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy Implementation for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Living Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating clinician and do not account for individual variation among patients. Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by clinicians and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases, or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in the Appendix (online only) for more .