How Immunotherapy Modified the Therapeutic Scenario of Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review.
PD1
dostarlimab
endometrial cancer (EC)
immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI)
immunotherapy
lenvatinib
microsatellite instability (MSI)
pembrolizumab
Journal
Frontiers in oncology
ISSN: 2234-943X
Titre abrégé: Front Oncol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101568867
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
28
12
2021
accepted:
21
03
2022
entrez:
2
5
2022
pubmed:
3
5
2022
medline:
3
5
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Endometrial cancer (EC) represents the sixth most common female tumor. In the advanced setting, the prognosis is dismal with limited treatment options. Platinum-based chemotherapy represents the actual standard of care in first-line chemotherapy, but no standard second-line chemotherapy is approved, with less than 1/4 of patients responding to second-line chemotherapy. In the last 10 years, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have changed the treatment landscape of many solid tumors. The review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Database, and conference abstracts from international societies, up to November 2021. Clinical trials employing ICIs in advanced EC, written in English, were included. Reviews, letters, and commentaries were excluded. The overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety (number and grade of treatment-related adverse events [TRAEs]) were evaluated. 15 studies, for a total of 1,627 patients, were included: 14 non-randomized phase I/II trials and 1 randomized phase III trial. Anti-PD1 (pembrolizumab, nivolumab, dostarlimab) and anti-PD-L1 agents (avelumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab) were administered as single agents; pembrolizumab and nivolumab were combined with the tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKI) lenvatinib and cabozantinib, respectively; and durvalumab was associated with anti-CTLA4 tremelimumab. 4 studies selected only MSI patients. Single agents determined an ORR from 26.7% to 58% among MSI patients, from 3% to 26.7% among MSS patients. DCR ranged from 53.5% to 88.9% in MSI, 31.4% to 35.2% in MSS patients. The combination of TKI and ICIs determined 32% to 63.6% of ORR in all-comers, 32%-36.2% in MSS patients. 54.2% to 76% of patients developed TRAEs. The combination of ICIs and TKI achieved a higher toxicity rate than single agents (≥G3 TRAEs 88.9%). ICIs represent an effective option for pretreated advanced EC patients with a tolerable profile. Given the encouraging results in MSI patients, every woman diagnosed with EC should be investigated for MS status. In MSS women, the combination of ICIs and TKI is more effective than monotherapy, notwithstanding safety concerns. PD-L1 cannot predict ICI response, whereas other biomarkers such as MSI and tumor mutational burden seem more accurate. Ongoing randomized trials will further clarify the role of these therapeutic options. PROSPERO, CRD42021293538.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Endometrial cancer (EC) represents the sixth most common female tumor. In the advanced setting, the prognosis is dismal with limited treatment options. Platinum-based chemotherapy represents the actual standard of care in first-line chemotherapy, but no standard second-line chemotherapy is approved, with less than 1/4 of patients responding to second-line chemotherapy. In the last 10 years, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have changed the treatment landscape of many solid tumors.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
The review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Database, and conference abstracts from international societies, up to November 2021. Clinical trials employing ICIs in advanced EC, written in English, were included. Reviews, letters, and commentaries were excluded. The overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety (number and grade of treatment-related adverse events [TRAEs]) were evaluated.
Results
UNASSIGNED
15 studies, for a total of 1,627 patients, were included: 14 non-randomized phase I/II trials and 1 randomized phase III trial. Anti-PD1 (pembrolizumab, nivolumab, dostarlimab) and anti-PD-L1 agents (avelumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab) were administered as single agents; pembrolizumab and nivolumab were combined with the tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKI) lenvatinib and cabozantinib, respectively; and durvalumab was associated with anti-CTLA4 tremelimumab. 4 studies selected only MSI patients. Single agents determined an ORR from 26.7% to 58% among MSI patients, from 3% to 26.7% among MSS patients. DCR ranged from 53.5% to 88.9% in MSI, 31.4% to 35.2% in MSS patients. The combination of TKI and ICIs determined 32% to 63.6% of ORR in all-comers, 32%-36.2% in MSS patients. 54.2% to 76% of patients developed TRAEs. The combination of ICIs and TKI achieved a higher toxicity rate than single agents (≥G3 TRAEs 88.9%).
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
ICIs represent an effective option for pretreated advanced EC patients with a tolerable profile. Given the encouraging results in MSI patients, every woman diagnosed with EC should be investigated for MS status. In MSS women, the combination of ICIs and TKI is more effective than monotherapy, notwithstanding safety concerns. PD-L1 cannot predict ICI response, whereas other biomarkers such as MSI and tumor mutational burden seem more accurate. Ongoing randomized trials will further clarify the role of these therapeutic options.
Systematic Review Registration
UNASSIGNED
PROSPERO, CRD42021293538.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35494078
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.844801
pmc: PMC9047829
doi:
Types de publication
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
844801Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Maiorano, Maiorano, Cormio, Maglione, Lorusso and Maiello.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
J Immunother Cancer. 2022 Mar;10(3):
pubmed: 35288469
Front Oncol. 2020 Apr 30;10:632
pubmed: 32426281
Lancet Oncol. 2020 Oct;21(10):1353-1365
pubmed: 32919526
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2015 Sep;25(7):1165-72
pubmed: 26111272
Exp Mol Med. 2020 Sep;52(9):1475-1485
pubmed: 32913278
J Clin Oncol. 2020 Sep 10;38(26):2981-2992
pubmed: 32167863
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Nov 1;33(31):3535-40
pubmed: 26195695
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2021 Sep 4;113(9):1212-1220
pubmed: 33693762
Ann Oncol. 2021 Aug;32(8):1045-1046
pubmed: 33932502
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Aug 1;35(22):2535-2541
pubmed: 28489510
Cancer Sci. 2019 Sep;110(9):2894-2904
pubmed: 31348579
J Clin Oncol. 2020 Nov 20;38(33):3841-3850
pubmed: 33078978
Nature. 2013 May 2;497(7447):67-73
pubmed: 23636398
Front Pharmacol. 2018 Mar 05;9:185
pubmed: 29556198
Clin Cancer Res. 2016 Dec 1;22(23):5682-5687
pubmed: 27486176
Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Jul;114(1):105-10
pubmed: 19411095
J Clin Oncol. 2019 Oct 20;37(30):2786-2794
pubmed: 31461377
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Gynecol Oncol. 2013 Dec;131(3):567-73
pubmed: 24076450
Cancer Res. 2010 Aug 1;70(15):6171-80
pubmed: 20631075
Cancer Med. 2018 Mar;7(3):746-756
pubmed: 29436178
Genome Med. 2017 Apr 19;9(1):34
pubmed: 28420421
BMJ. 2016 Oct 12;355:i4919
pubmed: 27733354
Clin Cancer Res. 2017 Aug 1;23(15):4473-4481
pubmed: 28264871
CA Cancer J Clin. 2021 Jan;71(1):7-33
pubmed: 33433946
J Clin Oncol. 2020 Jan 1;38(1):1-10
pubmed: 31682550
Oncotarget. 2017 Aug 08;8(52):90532-90544
pubmed: 29163851
JAMA Oncol. 2015 Dec;1(9):1319-23
pubmed: 26181000
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Sep 03;13(17):
pubmed: 34503248
Ann Oncol. 2019 Mar 1;30(3):385-396
pubmed: 30657859
Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2002 Apr;21(2):147-54
pubmed: 11917224
Int J Cancer. 2019 Oct 1;145(7):1719-1730
pubmed: 30387875
J Immunother Cancer. 2021 Jun;9(6):
pubmed: 34103352
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2021 Jan;31(1):12-39
pubmed: 33397713
Clin Cancer Res. 2019 Jul 1;25(13):3753-3758
pubmed: 30787022
Endocrine. 2014 Feb;45(1):28-36
pubmed: 23640372
Int J Cancer. 2005 May 1;114(5):696-701
pubmed: 15609300
Science. 2017 Jul 28;357(6349):409-413
pubmed: 28596308
Clin Cancer Res. 2014 Nov 1;20(21):5384-91
pubmed: 25204552
J Cancer. 2020 Jan 1;11(4):776-780
pubmed: 31949479
Ann Oncol. 2007 Mar;18(3):409-20
pubmed: 17150999
Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Nov;135(2):176-83
pubmed: 25173585
Cell Rep. 2018 Dec 11;25(11):2972-2980.e5
pubmed: 30540933
J Clin Oncol. 2020 Apr 10;38(11):1154-1163
pubmed: 31961766