A total of 115 patients from 17 institutions across 7 countries were enrolled onto the study between February 2015 and June 2021.1 Of these, 56 patients were considered randomization failures due to PD (39.0%), no central confirmation (27.0%), and patient refusal (13.0%). The remaining 59 patients were randomly assigned to either 60 mg of cabozantinib or placebo as maintenance daily for 2 years or until withdrawal. Following documented PD per RECIST 1.1 criteria, treatment was unblinded.2 Patients received further treatment at the investigator’s discretion. Of note, crossover to cabozantinib was permitted after placebo. Criteria for withdrawal included PD, second malignancy, patient refusal, excessive toxicity, or unblinding.1
The study’s primary end point was PFS at 4 months. Secondary end points included PFS, OS, response rate, duration of response, safety, dose modifications, and quality of life.
What should be known about the patient population included in the study?
The median age of patients across both treatment arms was 57 years. Regarding histologic subtype, most patients had UUS (45.8%) followed by HGLMS (39.0%), HGESS (10.2%), and HG adenosarcoma (5.1%). Most patients had not received first-line ifosfamide (57.6%) or prior radiotherapy (81.4%), had metastatic disease (62.7%), inoperable tumors (62.7%), and had achieved a CR or PR to chemotherapy (55.9%).
Protocol treatment was administered to 94.9% of patients for a median of 4.5 (range, 1-27) treatment cycles for a median of 16.9 weeks. Dose interruptions (48.2%) or reductions (33.9%) occurred due to non-hematologic adverse effects (AEs; 79.5% interruptions; 76.0% reductions), patient decision (6.8%; 16.0%), hematological AEs (2.3%; 4.0%), or other reasons (11.4%; 4.0%).
What were the baseline characteristics of patients in the crossover cohort?
Of the 29 patients in placebo arm, 72.4% crossed over to receive a median of 8 cycles (range, 1-22) of cabozantinib. The main reason for discontinuation in this cohort included PD (85.7%), toxicity, required radiotherapy, or ongoing treatment (4.8% each). Notably, fewer patients who started crossover had adjuvant disease at randomization (28.6%) than those who did not cross over (62.5%). Age at randomization and response rates at the end of first-line chemotherapy were comparable between cohorts. Histologic subtypes present in the crossover cohort included HGUS (47.6%), HGLMS (47.6%), and HG adenosarcoma (4.8%). In contrast, those who did not start crossover had HGUS (75.0%), HGESS (12.5%) and HGLMS (12.5%).
Were outcomes with cabozantinib better as upfront maintenance or deferred therapy?
Deferring treatment with cabozantinib until after PD resulted in a trend towards improved survival compared with its use as upfront maintenance. Among patients who stopped treatment with placebo due to PD and received cabozantinib in the second line (n = 20), the median OS was 19.0 months (95% CI, 11.3-30.6). The respective 6-, 12-, and 18-month OS rates were 95.0% (95% CI, 69.5%-99.3%), 74.6% (95% CI, 45.3%- 89.8%), and 54.3% (95% CI, 27.1%-75.2%).
Conversely, patients who stopped maintenance cabozantinib due to progression and subsequently switched to another anticancer treatment achieved a median OS of 6.9 months (95% CI, 1.7-not evaluable). The 6-month OS rate was 64.8% (95% CI, 25.3%-87.2%); 12- and 18-month OS rates were both 32.4% (95% CI, 5.0%-65.4%).
How did toxicities differ with cabozantinib vs placebo as maintenance?
Treatment discontinuation occurred due to PD (64.3%), normal completion (14.3%), toxicity (12.5%), ongoing treatment (5.4%), unblinding (1.8%), or patient decision (1.8%).
Safety analyses showed that overall toxicity rates were higher with cabozantinib vs placebo as maintenance. The rate of grade 3 or higher AEs was 65.5% vs 14.8% in these respective arms. The most reported AEs were gastrointestinal disorders (any grade, 93.1%; grade 3 or higher, 20.7%) and vascular disorders (79.3%; 41.4%). One death due to pulmonary embolism occurred in the cabozantinib arm.
Disclosures: Dr Ray-Coquard disclosed receiving personal honoraria from AbbVie, Adaptimmune, Agenus, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Clovis, Corcept, Daiichi Sankyo, Deciphera, Eisai, EQRx, GSK, Genmab, Gilead, Immunocore, Lilly, MacroGenics, Merck Serono, Mersana, Novartis, Onxeo, Roche, Sutro Biopharma, Scorpion, and ITM pharma; institutional honoraria from MSD (translational research); institutional funding from BMS, DSI, and GSK; and travel funding from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, GSK, and MSD.
References
- Ray-Coquard IL, Hatcher H, Casado Herraez A, et al. Cabozantinib as maintenance therapy in high grade uterine sarcoma after stabilization or response to doxorubicin +/- ifosfamide regimen: results from EORTC 62113-55115-STBSG-GCG (NCT01979393), randomized double-blind phase II study. ESMO Rare Cancers. 2026;5(suppl 100291). doi:10.1016/j.esmorc.2026.100291
- IRCI gynae sarcomas, high grade uterine sarcoma. ClinicalTrials.gov. Updated August 1, 2025. Accessed March 17, 2026. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01979393