Noelle Cloven, MD, on RAINFOL-03: Actively Recruiting Trial in Pretreated Endometrial Cancer
ASCO 2026
Noelle Cloven, MD, of Texas Oncology, discusses the actively recruiting RAINFOL-03 (ENGOT-EN-31/GOG-3128) study, a global, phase III, open-label, randomized study of rinatabart sesutecan vs investigator’s choice of chemotherapy in patients with endometrial cancer after receipt of platinum-based chemotherapy and PD-L1 inhibition (Abstract TPS5646).
The ASCO Post Staff
Evan T. Hall, MD, of Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, discusses findings from the randomized phase II MATRiX trial, which evaluated the efficacy of the ATR inhibitor tuvusertib with or without avelumab in patients with anti–PD-(L)1–refractory Merkel cell carcinoma (Abstract LBA9514).
The ASCO Post Staff
Jessica J. Lin, MD, Mass General Brigham Cancer Institute, presents data from the ALKOVE-1 study, which is looking at the investigational ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) neladalkib among patients with ALK-positive non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); Dr. Lin discusses the first analyses of phase II TKI-pretreated patients and preliminary data in TKI-naive patients (Abstract 8503).
The ASCO Post Staff
Alicia K. Morgans, MD, FASCO, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, discusses data from the phase II ARACOG (AFT-47) randomized clinical trial, which compared the two androgen receptor pathway inhibitors’ effects on cognitive function in patients with advanced prostate cancer (Abstract 5005).
The ASCO Post Staff
Linda R. Mileshkin, MD, MBBS, FRACP, of Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, shares results from the phase I/IIA BLUESTAR study on the safety and efficacy of puxitatug samrotecan, a B7-H4–directed topoisomerase I inhibitor antibody-drug conjugate, in patients with endometrial cancer or ovarian cancer (Abstract 5515).
Walter Weber, MD, of University Hospital Basel, presents data from the international randomized phase III PREPEC trial (OPBC-02), which found prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) significantly and relevantly improved long-term quality of life—at the cost of a higher risk of loss or replacement of expander or implant—compared to subpectoral IBBR (Abstract 504).