Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2024 Jan 20;42(3):283-299.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.23.02132. Epub 2023 Oct 21.

Durvalumab Plus Carboplatin/Paclitaxel Followed by Maintenance Durvalumab With or Without Olaparib as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Endometrial Cancer: The Phase III DUO-E Trial

Collaborators, Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Durvalumab Plus Carboplatin/Paclitaxel Followed by Maintenance Durvalumab With or Without Olaparib as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Endometrial Cancer: The Phase III DUO-E Trial

Shannon N Westin et al. J Clin Oncol. .

Abstract

Purpose: Immunotherapy and chemotherapy combinations have shown activity in endometrial cancer, with greater benefit in mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient (dMMR) than MMR-proficient (pMMR) disease. Adding a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor may improve outcomes, especially in pMMR disease.

Methods: This phase III, global, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomly assigned eligible patients with newly diagnosed advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer 1:1:1 to: carboplatin/paclitaxel plus durvalumab placebo followed by placebo maintenance (control arm); carboplatin/paclitaxel plus durvalumab followed by maintenance durvalumab plus olaparib placebo (durvalumab arm); or carboplatin/paclitaxel plus durvalumab followed by maintenance durvalumab plus olaparib (durvalumab + olaparib arm). The primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) in the durvalumab arm versus control and the durvalumab + olaparib arm versus control.

Results: Seven hundred eighteen patients were randomly assigned. In the intention-to-treat population, statistically significant PFS benefit was observed in the durvalumab (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.89]; P = .003) and durvalumab + olaparib arms (HR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.43 to 0.69]; P < .0001) versus control. Prespecified, exploratory subgroup analyses showed PFS benefit in dMMR (HR [durvalumab v control], 0.42 [95% CI, 0.22 to 0.80]; HR [durvalumab + olaparib v control], 0.41 [95% CI, 0.21 to 0.75]) and pMMR subgroups (HR [durvalumab v control], 0.77 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.97]; HR [durvalumab + olaparib v control] 0.57; [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.73]); and in PD-L1-positive subgroups (HR [durvalumab v control], 0.63 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.83]; HR [durvalumab + olaparib v control], 0.42 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.57]). Interim overall survival results (maturity approximately 28%) were supportive of the primary outcomes (durvalumab v control: HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.56 to 1.07]; P = .120; durvalumab + olaparib v control: HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.83]; P = .003). The safety profiles of the experimental arms were generally consistent with individual agents.

Conclusion: Carboplatin/paclitaxel plus durvalumab followed by maintenance durvalumab with or without olaparib demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful PFS benefit in patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04269200.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated unless otherwise noted. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/jco/authors/author-center.

Open Payments is a public database containing information reported by companies about payments made to US-licensed physicians (Open Payments).

Figures

FIG 1.
FIG 1.
CONSORT diagram of patients. AE, adverse event; DCO, data cutoff.
FIG 2.
FIG 2.
Intention-to-treat analyses of (A) PFS, as assessed by the investigator according to RECIST v1.1, and (B) OS. For the PFS analysis, the HRs and CIs were estimated from a Cox proportional hazards model stratified by MMR and disease status. For the OS analysis, the HRs and CIs were estimated from an unstratified Cox proportional hazards model. P values were calculated using a stratified log-rank test. Tick marks indicate a censored observation. Patients without an event were censored at the latest evaluable RECIST assessment. HR, hazard ratio; MMR, mismatch repair; NR, not reached; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival.
FIG 3.
FIG 3.
Subgroup analysis of PFS in (A) the durvalumab arm and (B) the durvalumab + olaparib arm. The HR and CI were estimated from an unstratified Cox proportional hazards model. An HR <1 favored the treatment arm of interest over the control arm. aStratification factors are per the randomization code. bHRs are not calculated because of the small number of patients. cIncludes patients with race not reported. dAs determined at the time of initial diagnosis of disease under investigation. ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; HR, hazard ratio; HRRm, homologous recombination repair mutation; MMR, mismatch repair; NC, not calculated.
FIG 4.
FIG 4.
Exploratory PFS analyses, as assessed by the investigator according to RECIST v1.1, in (A) dMMR, (B) pMMR, (C) PD-L1–positive, and (D) PD-L1–negative subgroups. For dMMR and pMMR subgroup analyses, MMR status is as per the randomization code. The HR and 95% CI were estimated from an unstratified Cox proportional hazards model. Tick marks indicate a censored observation. Patients without an event were censored at the latest evaluable RECIST assessment. PD-L1 expression was assessed using the Ventana SP263 immunohistochemical assay (Roche Diagnostics). PD-L1–positive was defined as TAP ≥1%. PD-L1–negative was defined as TAP <1%. Unknown included patients who withdrew consent or due to sample unavailability. dMMR, mismatch repair-deficient; HR, hazard ratio; MMR, mismatch repair; NR, not reached; PFS, progression-free survival; pMMR, mismatch repair-proficient; TAP, tumor area positivity.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, et al. : Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 72:7-33, 2022 - PubMed
    1. Oaknin A, Bosse TJ, Creutzberg CL, et al. : Endometrial cancer: ESMO clinical Practice guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 33:860-877, 2022 - PubMed
    1. Miller DS, Filiaci VL, Mannel RS, et al. : Carboplatin and paclitaxel for advanced endometrial cancer: Final overall survival and adverse event analysis of a phase III trial (NRG Oncology/GOG0209). J Clin Oncol 38:3841-3850, 2020 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aghajanian C, Filiaci V, Dizon DS, et al. : A phase II study of frontline paclitaxel/carboplatin/bevacizumab, paclitaxel/carboplatin/temsirolimus, or ixabepilone/carboplatin/bevacizumab in advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 150:274-281, 2018 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Miller D, Filiaci V, Fleming G, et al. : Late-Breaking Abstract 1: Randomized phase III noninferiority trial of first line chemotherapy for metastatic or recurrent endometrial carcinoma: A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 125:771, 2012

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data