| Literature DB >> 29214032 |
Vicky Makker1, Angela K Green1, Robert M Wenham2, David Mutch3, Brittany Davidson4, David Scott Miller5.
Abstract
Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecologic malignancy in the United States, accounting for 6% of cancers in women. In 2017, an estimated 61,380 women were diagnosed with endometrial cancer, and approximately 11,000 died from this disease. From 1987 to 2008, there was a 50% increase in the incidence of endometrial cancer, with an approximate 300% increase in the number of associated deaths. Although there are many chemotherapeutic and targeted therapy agents approved for ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancers, since the 1971 approval of megestrol acetate for the palliative treatment of advanced endometrial cancer, only pembrolizumab has been Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved for high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) or mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) endometrial cancer; this highlights the need for new therapies to treat advanced, recurrent, metastatic endometrial cancer. In this review, we discuss current and emerging treatment options for endometrial cancer, including chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) and others are now focusing their efforts on the design of scientifically rational targeted therapy and immunotherapy trials for specific molecular phenotypes of endometrial cancer. This is essential for the advancement of cancer care for women, which is threatened by a severe enrollment decline of approximately 80% for gynecologic oncology clinical trials.Entities:
Keywords: Chemotherapy; Endometrial cancer; Immunotherapy; Targeted therapy
Year: 2017 PMID: 29214032 PMCID: PMC5712183 DOI: 10.1186/s40661-017-0056-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Gynecol Oncol Res Pract ISSN: 2053-6844
Anti-angiogenic Therapies
| Study Drug | Target | Prior Lines of Therapy | Patients | ORR | mTTP/PFS (months) | mOS (months) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dalantercept [ | BMP9/10 | 1–2 | 28 | 0% | 2.1 | 14.5 |
| Trebananib [ | Tie2 Receptor | 1–2 | 32 | 3.1% | 2 | 6.6 |
| Cediranib [ | VEGF/c-kit | 1–2 | 48 | 12.5% | 3.7 | 12.5 |
| Sunitinib [ | VEGF/KIT/PDGFR | ≤ 1 | 33 | 18.2% | 3.0 | 19.4 |
| Nintedanib [ | VEGF/FGFR/PDGFR | 1–2 | 32 | 9.4% | 3.1 | 10.1 |
| Lenvatinib [ | VEGFR/FGFR/RET/KIT/PDGFRβ | 1–2 | 133 | 14.3% | 5.6 | 10.6 |
| Aflibercept [ | VEGFR | 1–2 | 44 | 7% | 2.9 | 14.6 |
| Bevacizumab [ | VEGFR | 1–2 | 52 | 13.5% | 4.2 | 10.6 |
| Sorafenib [ | VEGF/Raf/Ras | ≤ 1 | 39 | 5% | 3.2 | 11.4 |
| Thalidomide [ | VEGFR/bFGF | 1–2 | 21 | 12.5% | 1.7 | 6.3 |
ORR objective response rate, mTTP median time to progression, PFS progression-free survival, mOS median overall survival
Single-Agent mTOR Inhibitor Studies in Endometrial Cancer
| Agent | Patients | Prior Chemotherapy Regimens | Molecular Selection of Patients | Objective Response Rate | Other Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Temsirolimus [ | 29 | None | No | 24% | SD ≥ 8 weeks: 69% |
| 25 | 1–2 | No | 4% | SD ≥ 8 weeks: 46% | |
| Everolimus [ | 28 | 1–2 | No | 0% | SD: 43% |
| Everolimus [ | 44 | 1–2 | No | 9% | SD: 27% |
| Ridaforolimus IV [ | 45 | 1–2 | No | 11% | CBR: 29% |
| Ridaforolimus PO [ | 30 | Adjuvant only | No | 9% | SD: 52.9% |
| Ridaforolimus PO [ | 64 | 1–2 | No | 0% | SD: 35% |
IV intravenous, PO oral, SD stable disease, CBR clinical benefit rate