Tailored Therapy Based on Molecular Characteristics in Endometrial Cancer

Table 3

Targeted agents in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer.

Study	Design	No. of patients	Treatment	Primary end point	Results
mTOR inhibitors
Oza et al. [83]	Phase 2	60	Temsirolimus 25 mg	RR	CTx-naïve group; RR 14%; CTx-treated group; 4%
Slomovitz et al. [84]	Phase 2, open label	35	Everolimus 10 mg	CBR	CBR 21%; RR, none
GOG-86P [85]	Phase 2, randomized	349	PC & bevacizumab vs. PC & temsirolimus vs. ixabepilone & carboplatin & bevacizumab	PFS	HR 0.81, 92% CI 0.63-1.02; HR 1.22, 92% CI 0.96-1.55; HR 0.87, 92% CI 0.68-1.11	>0.039
GOG 3007	Phase 2, randomized, open label, noncomparable		EL vs. PT	RR	RR 24 vs. 22%; PFS 6.4 vs. 3.8 mths; OS 20 vs. 16.6 mths
Anti-HER2 therapy
Fleming et al. [87]	Phase 2	33	Trastuzumab 2 mg/kg	RR	RR, none
Leslie et al. [88]	Phase 2, open label	30	Lapatinib 1500 mg	6 mths PFS	10%, 90% CI 2.3-23.9
Fader et al. [89]	Phase 2, randomized	61	PC vs. PC & trastuzumab	PFS	8 vs. 12.6 mths; HR 0.44, 90% CI 0.26-0.76	0.005
Antiangiogenic therapy
Aghajanian et al. [92]	Phase 2	52	Bevacizumab 15 mg/kg	6 mths PFS; RR	6 mths PFS 40.4%; RR 13.5%
					Median PFS 4.2 mths; Median OS 10.5 mths
Simpkins et al. [93]	Phase 2	15	PC & bevacizumab	6 mths PFS	93%, 95% CI 82-100; Median PFS 18 mths (CI 11-25)
MITO END-2 [94]	Phase 2, randomized	108	PC vs. PC & bevacizumab	PFS	PFS 10.5 vs. 13.7 mths, HR 0.84; RR 53.1 vs. 74.4%; OS 29.7 vs. 40 mths, HR 0.71	0.43; 0.24

No.: number; RR: response rate; CTx: chemotherapy; CBR: clinical benefit rate (complete response or partial response or ); PC: paclitaxel+carboplatin; PFS: progression-free survival; HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval; EL: everolimus 10 mg + letrozole 2.5 mg; PT: tamoxifen 40 mg + medroxyprogesterone acetate 200 mg; mths: months; OS: overall survival.