Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain
the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in
Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles
and JavaScript.
Crossover in a randomized trial can skew the interpretation of the efficacy of a cancer drug. In this Comment, I use examples from clinical trials presented at the 2023 ASCO annual meeting to highlight why ‘allowing’ crossover in randomized trials testing cancer drugs is problematic, and propose that crossovers should either be mandated or prohibited depending on the context.
Following the recent FDA Accelerated Approval of enfortumab vedotin (EV) plus pembrolizumab for patients with advanced-stage urothelial carcinoma who are cisplatin-ineligible, herein we highlight key clinical outcomes with this combination based on results from Cohort K of the pivotal phase Ib/II EV-103 trial. We also discuss treatment sequencing, de-escalation strategies and toxicity management as EV–pembrolizumab becomes widely used in clinical practice.
Ovarian carcinoma is a highly heterogeneous tumour type, both spatially and temporally. As a consequence, these carcinomas are often associated with poor outcomes. Ovarian carcinoma comprises various subtypes with distinct complex molecular features. The authors of this Review discuss the molecular, cellular and anatomical heterogeneity of ovarian carcinoma, and outline the current and future treatment strategies for this malignancy.
According to the precision oncology paradigm, cancer therapies are increasingly being matched to specific sensitizing alterations using a biomarker-directed approach. However, the criteria for determining the actionability of molecular alterations and selecting matched treatments evolve over time. Molecular tumour boards (MTBs) have emerged as means to capitalize on the collective knowledge of various experts to interpret molecular-profiling data and to eliminate subjectivity in treatment selection. This Review describes the components, processes and increasingly important role of MTBs in optimizing the implementation of precision oncology in both clinical trials and clinical practice, as well as current and future considerations for ensuring the sustainability of MTBs and expanding their outreach to underserved populations.
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is among the most common causes of cancer-related death globally, and despite improvements in prevention and treatment strategies, continued increases in HCC incidence and mortality are predicted. Cirrhosis remains the major risk factor for HCC, although the underlying aetiology is shifting from virus-related to non-viral liver diseases. In this Review, the authors discuss the changing trends in HCC epidemiology and their implications for screening, prevention and therapy, including opportunities to further improve the management of patients with, or at high risk of, HCC.
The use of composite end points in clinical trials can expedite drug development and approval, and thus improve patient access to novel treatments, but are often vaguely and heterogeneously defined, with considerable inter-study variation in the component events that are included. The different component events can vary in clinical significance and be differentially affected by treatment but, nevertheless, are rarely reported separately. In this Perspective, Walia et al. define composite outcomes that are commonly used in oncology, discuss the advantages and challenges of using composite end points, and advocate for transparent reporting including a full breakdown of the component events to facilitate accurate interpretation of trial results and the true benefit of an intervention.
