Pre-treatment prediction of chemoresistance in second-line chemotherapy of ovarian carcinoma: value of serological tumor marker determination (tetranectin, YKL-40, CASA, CA 125).

OBJECTIVE: To examine if the determination of the levels of serological tumor markers at time of relapse had any predictive value for chemoresistance in the second-line treatment of ovarian cancer patients. METHODS: From a registry of consecutive single-institution patients with epithelial ovarian carcinoma pretreated with paclitaxel plus platinum, we selected 82 patients with (a) solid tumor recurrence, and (b) second-line chemotherapy consisting of topotecan (platinum-resistant disease) or paclitaxel plus carboplatin (platinum-sensitive disease). Stored serum samples were analyzed for the biochemical tumor markers tetranectin, YKL-40, CASA (cancer-associated serum antigen), and CA 125. The serum tumor marker levels at time of relapse were correlated with response status at landmark time after 4 cycles of second-line chemotherapy. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses (chemoresistant vs non-chemoresistant disease) were performed. RESULTS: At landmark time, 26% of patients had progression according to the GCIG (Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup) progression criteria. In univariate logistic regression analysis, the tumor markers tetranectin (OR 0.4; 95% CI: 0.2-0.8; p=0.008), YKL-40 (OR 1.8; 95% CI: 1.0-3.3; p=0.045), and CASA (OR 1.8; 95% CI: 1.2-2.7; p=0.007) had predictive value for second-line chemoresistance, whereas serum CA 125 had no predictive value. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, serum tetranectin and CASA both had independent predictive value for chemoresistance. The combined determination of tetranectin and CASA had a specificity of 90% with 33% sensitivity for the prediction of chemoresistance (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.66-0.91; p=0.001). CONCLUSION: Low serum levels of tetranectin, or high serum levels of CASA or YKL-40, are associated with increased risk of second-line chemoresistance in patients with ovarian cancer.

Increased risk of ovarian cancer in integrin beta3 Leu33Pro homozygotes.

We previously demonstrated that integrin beta(3) Leu33Pro homozygotes have an increased risk of cancer, possibly most pronounced for ovarian cancer. We now test the latter hypothesis in case-control and prospective studies. We genotyped 463 Danish women with ovarian cancer, and 4291 women from the Danish general population. Calculation of odds ratios by conditional logistic regression was performed in the case-control study (n = 463 + 3543), and of ovarian cancer incidence, log-rank statistics and hazard ratios by Cox regression in the prospective study (n = 4291) with 9.5-year follow-up. In the case-control study matched for age and marital status, the odds ratio for ovarian cancer in homozygotes versus non-carriers was 1.6 (95% confidence interval: 1.0-2.6). In the prospective study with 28 incident ovarian cancers, non-carriers and homozygotes had incidences of 7 (4-11) and 30 (10-92) per 10 000 person-years (log-rank P = 0.02). The age-adjusted hazard ratio for ovarian cancer in homozygotes versus non-carriers was 3.9 (1.1-13). Risk of ovarian cancer did not differ between heterozygotes and non-carriers in either study. Integrin beta(3) Leu33Pro homozygotes have an increased risk of ovarian cancer.

Cancer-associated serum antigen level: a novel prognostic indicator for survival in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma.

The aim was to examine the value of the pretherapeutic serum cancer-associated serum antigen (CASA) level as a prognostic factor for survival in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Serum levels of CASA and cancer antigen (CA)125 were prospectively determined in 70 consecutive patients with recurrent ovarian cancer before the start of second-line chemotherapy. Univariate and multivariate analyses of survival were performed. The median level of serum CASA was 6.5 U/mL (range: 0.2-1437 U/mL). Univariate analysis showed that patients with a CASA level >10.0 U/mL had significantly shorter survival than patients with CASA level < or =10.0 U/mL (P= 0.002). Using different CASA cutoff levels (6.0, 6.5, and 10.0 U/mL), multivariate Cox analyses identified CASA as an independent prognostic factor for survival at every cutoff level. The strongest prognostic function for CASA was found at a cutoff level of 10.0 U/mL (>10 vs < or =10 U/mL; hazard ratio, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-4.7; P < 0.001). The pretreatment CA125 level was not found to be significantly associated with survival by any of the cutoffs (35, 65, 132, and 339 U/mL). A pretreatment elevated level of the tumor marker CASA is an adverse prognostic factor for survival in patients with ovarian cancer relapse.

Do CA125 response criteria overestimate tumour response in second-line treatment of epithelial ovarian carcinoma?

Recent studies indicate that cancer antigen 125 (CA125) response criteria tend to overestimate a tumour reduction measured by standard WHO response criteria in recurrent epithelial ovarian carcinoma. The aim of the study was to validate the recently introduced GCIG (The Gynaecological Cancer Intergroup) CA125 response criteria in predicting a tumour response measured by WHO (World Health Organization) criteria. Changes in CA125 levels (GCIG criteria) were retrospectively compared with alterations in the tumour load (WHO criteria) during second-line chemotherapy with topotecan or paclitaxel-platinum in 124 consecutive patients with recurrent or refractory disease. In patients assessable by both response criteria (n=72), the overall response rate using GCIG CA125 criteria was 57% (95% confidence interval (CI): 45-69%) and significantly higher than the response rate of 39% (95% CI: 28-51%) using WHO response criteria (P=0.045). The GCIG CA125 criteria had a sensitivity of 96% (95% CI: 82-100%), a specificity of 68% (95% CI: 52-81%) and an accuracy of 79% (95% CI: 68-88%) in predicting a response measured by WHO criteria. In conclusion, the GCIG CA125 response criteria seem to overestimate a tumour response by WHO criteria when monitoring the efficacy of second-line chemotherapy with topotecan or paclitaxel-platinum in patients with epithelial ovarian carcinoma.

Evaluation of sample handling in relation to levels of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-1 measured in blood by immunoassay.

BACKGROUND: The possible effect of preanalytical conditions such as blood sample preparation and handling on TIMP-1 levels in blood needs thorough investigation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Blood was collected in dry tubes and tubes containing EDTA and kept at 4 degrees C or 20 degrees C for 1, 3, 8, 24 or 72 hours before processing into serum or EDTA plasma. In addition, serum and EDTA plasma samples were frozen and thawed 1-8 times. TIMP-1 was measured by ELISA. RESULTS: Time to processing for up to 72 hours did not significantly affect TIMP-1 levels in serum. In EDTA plasma, TIMP-1 levels were stable for up to eight hours; however, if samples were kept for 24 hours or longer the TIMP-1 levels increased (p < 0.0001). Repeated freezing and thawing had a significant effect on TIMP-1 levels in serum (p = 0.04). In plasma, repeated freezing and thawing for up to six times did not influence TIMP-1. However, in plasma samples exposed to seven or eight freeze/thaw cycles TIMP-1 levels decreased, although not significantly (p = 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: Handling and processing of blood samples is crucial for TIMP-1 measurement by immunoassay. In serum, TIMP-1 levels are unaffected by time to processing. Plasma samples should be processed within eight hours to avoid a TIMP-1 increase. For the measurement of TIMP-1 in archival material, serum should not be used because TIMP-1 levels are significantly affected by repeated freezing and thawing; archival plasma can readily be used provided that samples have not been frozen and thawed more than six times.