News
Merck’s cancer immunotherapy Keytruda shows breakthrough results in resistant ovarian cancer
Merck’s immunotherapy drug Keytruda (pembrolizumab) has shown a “statistically significant” survival benefit in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, potentially offering a new treatment path for patients with few options.
In the phase 3 Keynote-B96 trial, the checkpoint inhibitor—used in combination with chemotherapy, with or without Avastin—led to improvements in progression-free survival compared to placebo and chemotherapy alone.
These interim results mark a potential turning point. It’s the first time an immune checkpoint inhibitor has demonstrated a survival benefit in ovarian cancer, a notoriously difficult-to-treat “cold tumour” that typically responds poorly to immunotherapy.
Merck reported that Keytruda was effective regardless of patients’ PD-L1 expression levels.
The positive results from this trial add to the growing body of evidence supporting the potential benefit of Keytruda across gynaecological cancers, including this difficult-to-treat form of ovarian cancer for which patients are in need of new options,” said Gursel Aktan, vice president of global clinical development at Merck Research Laboratories.
This success comes after several high-profile setbacks in the field. Although Keytruda is approved for more than 40 indications, it previously failed to show survival benefits in combination with Lynparza for first-line BRCA non-mutated advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.
Other companies have faced similar challenges. GSK’s combination of Jemperli and Zejula also failed to significantly extend survival in first-line advanced ovarian cancer last year, underscoring the difficulty of treating this disease.
Ovarian cancer is the seventh most common cancer among women globally. In the U.S. alone, it’s expected to cause an estimated 12,730 deaths and 20,890 new diagnoses this year, according to Merck.
The company plans to present full results at an upcoming medical conference and submit data to regulators worldwide, potentially paving the way for a new treatment option in a space where few exist.
This development follows Keytruda’s recent success in another challenging cancer type—late-stage, resected, locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma—where it became the first therapy in 20 years to show a positive trial outcome.
Submitting your research project for Femtech World Awards recognition can feel daunting.
What makes one project stand out from another?
After reviewing successful submissions from previous years, we’ve identified the key elements that transform good research into award-winning work.
Innovation That Solves Real Problems
Judges aren’t just looking for novelty – they’re looking for innovation that addresses genuine gaps in women’s health.
The best submissions clearly articulate a specific problem and demonstrate how their research offers a fresh approach to solving it.
Ask yourself: Does your research tackle an underserved area? Are you approaching a known problem from a new angle?
The most compelling projects often focus on issues that have been overlooked, understudied or inadequately addressed by existing solutions.
Whether you’re investigating menopause in the workplace, developing better diagnostic tools for endometriosis, or exploring mental health interventions for new mothers, clarity about the problem you’re solving is essential.
Rigorous Methodology
Strong research stands on solid foundations. Judges carefully evaluate your methodology to ensure your findings are credible and reproducible.
This doesn’t mean your research needs to be complete – early-stage projects are welcome – but you should demonstrate thoughtful research design.
Include details about your sample size, data collection methods, controls, and analytical approaches.
If you’re conducting qualitative research, explain how you’re ensuring validity. If you’re building a technological solution, describe your testing protocols.
Transparency about limitations shows intellectual honesty and strengthens rather than weakens your submission.
Measurable Impact Potential
The research projects that win hearts and awards are those with clear pathways to real-world impact.
Judges want to see beyond the research itself to understand how your work will improve women’s lives.
Consider questions like: Who will benefit from this research? How many people could be affected? What would successful implementation look like?
Whether your impact is clinical, social, economic, or policy-related, be specific.
Instead of saying “this will help women,” try “this diagnostic tool could reduce endometriosis diagnosis time from 7-10 years to under 2 years for an estimated 200 million women worldwide.”
Inclusivity and Diversity Considerations
Award-winning FemTech research recognises that women are not a monolith.
Judges increasingly value projects that consider diversity across age, race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, disability, and geographic location.
Have you thought about how your research applies across different populations? Are you inadvertently excluding certain groups?
The strongest submissions acknowledge these considerations and, where possible, design research to be inclusive or clearly define the specific population being served.
Clear Communication
Even groundbreaking research won’t win if judges can’t understand it. The ability to communicate complex ideas clearly is crucial.
Avoid unnecessary jargon, define technical terms, and structure your submission logically.
Think of your submission as telling a story: Here’s the problem, here’s why it matters, here’s what we did, here’s what we found, and here’s why it matters for the future.
Feasibility and Sustainability
Judges appreciate ambitious research, but they also value realistic plans.
Show that you’ve thought about practical considerations: Do you have the resources to complete this work? Is your timeline reasonable?
For projects seeking commercialisation, is there a viable path to market?
Demonstrating that you’ve considered challenges and have strategies to overcome them shows maturity and increases confidence in your project’s success.
Your Passion Matters
Finally, don’t underestimate the power of genuine passion.
The researchers who win aren’t just technically proficient – they deeply care about their work and its potential to create change.
Let that commitment shine through in your submission.
Ready to submit? Find out more about the awards and enter for free here.
Transdermal HRT best protects bone density in women with functional hypothalamic amenorrhoea, a condition that stops periods, a review of trials has found.
The meta-analysis pooled randomised clinical trials involving 692 participants and found transdermal hormone replacement therapy and teriparatide increased bone mineral density by between 2 and 13 per cent.
Functional hypothalamic amenorrhoea can follow anorexia or intense exercise. Bone mineral density measures bone strength and the amount of mineral in bone.
Around half of women with the condition have low bone mineral density, compared with about 1 per cent of healthy women, and their fracture risk is up to seven times higher.
The research was conducted by scientists at Imperial College London and Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust.
Professor Alexander Comninos, senior author of the study and consultant endocrinologist at the trust, said: “Bone density is lost very rapidly in FHA and so addressing bone health early is very important to reduce the lifelong risk of fractures.
“Our study provides much needed comparisons of all the available treatments from all available studies.
“Clearly the best treatment is to restore normal menstrual cycles and therefore oestrogen levels through various psychological, nutritional or exercise interventions – but that is not always possible.
“The foundation for bone health is good calcium and vitamin D intake (through diet and/or supplements) but we have additional treatments that are more effective.”
When FHA is diagnosed, clinicians first try to restore periods through lifestyle measures, including psychological and dietary support, but these can fail. Guidelines then recommend giving oestrogen, though the best form was unclear.
The team reviewed all prior randomised trials comparing therapies, including oral and transdermal oestrogen, and also assessed teriparatide, a prescription bone-building drug used for severe osteoporosis.
They found no significant benefit for oral contraceptive pills or oral hormone therapy.
A recent UK audit reported that about a quarter of women with anorexia-related FHA are prescribed the oral contraceptive pill for bone loss; the study suggests using transdermal therapy instead.
Comninos said: “Our goal is simple: to help women receive the right treatment sooner and to protect their bone health in the long-term.
“We hope this study provides clinicians with better evidence to choose transdermal oestrogen when prescribing oestrogen and so inform future practice guidelines.
“Right now, millions of women with FHA may not be receiving the best treatments for their bone health.”
An AI tool cut interval breast cancers by 12 per cent in a Swedish screening trial of more than 105,000 women.
The study also found 27 per cent fewer aggressive breast cancers detected at screening when AI was used.
Interval cancers are cancers found between routine screening appointments because they were missed at the original scan. They are often more dangerous and linked to higher death rates than cancers found at screening.
The MASAI trial is described as the first large randomised study to test whether AI can improve mammography screening, which uses low-dose X-rays to examine breast tissue for signs of cancer.
The AI tool, called Transpara Detection and developed by ScreenPoint Medical, supported radiologists in analysing mammography images.
Earlier results from the same trial showed that Transpara Detection increased cancers found by 29 per cent and reduced radiologist workload by 44 per cent compared with standard double-reading, where two radiologists independently review each scan.
The latest findings indicate higher accuracy with AI support. Sensitivity, the ability to detect cancer, was 6.7 percentage points higher in the AI group while specificity, the ability to rule out healthy cases, was maintained. Results were similar across age groups and breast density levels.
Women screened with AI had 16 per cent fewer invasive interval cancers and 21 per cent fewer large interval cancers than those in the standard screening group.
The system also helps doctors assess risk more precisely by subdividing suspicious findings into BI-RADS 4 categories A, B and C. BI-RADS (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System) is a standardised scale that guides whether a patient needs closer monitoring, further tests or treatment.
-
Features4 weeks agoWomen’s health enters a new era – the trends shaping femtech in 2026
-
Insight4 weeks agoDesigner perfumes recalled over banned chemical posing fertility risk
-
Features4 weeks agoBest menopause apps and products for 2026
-
Insight2 weeks agoParents sue IVF clinic after delivering someone else’s baby
-
Insight3 weeks agoWomen’s health could unlock US$100bn by 2030
-
Insight4 weeks agoHigher maternal blood pressure increases risk of pregnancy complications, study finds
-
Entrepreneur4 weeks agoXella Health closes US$3.7 million in pre-seed financing
-
Insight3 weeks agoChina’s birth rate hits record low despite government fertility efforts
1 Comment