SUCCOR Risk: Design and Validation of a Recurrence Prediction Index for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Based on the SUCCOR study database, our primary objective was to identify the independent clinical pathological variables associated with the risk of relapse in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer who underwent a radical hysterectomy. Our secondary goal was to design and validate a risk predictive index (RPI) for classifying patients depending on the risk of recurrence. METHODS: Overall, 1116 women were included from January 2013 to December 2014. We randomly divided our sample into two cohorts: discovery and validation cohorts. The test group was used to identify the independent variables associated with relapse, and with these variables, we designed our RPI. The index was applied to calculate a relapse risk score for each participant in the validation group. RESULTS: A previous cone biopsy was the most significant independent variable that lowered the rate of relapse (odds ratio [OR] 0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.17-0.60). Additionally, patients with a tumor diameter >2 cm on preoperative imaging assessment (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.33-3.5) and operated by the minimally invasive approach (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.00-2.57) were more likely to have a recurrence. Based on these findings, patients in the validation cohort were classified according to the RPI of low, medium, or high risk of relapse, with rates of 3.4%, 9.8%, and 21.3% observed in each group, respectively. With a median follow-up of 58 months, the 5-year disease-free survival rates were 97.2% for the low-risk group, 88.0% for the medium-risk group, and 80.5% for the high-risk group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Previous conization to radical hysterectomy was the most powerful protective variable of relapse. Our risk predictor index was validated to identify patients at risk of recurrence.

Pattern of relapse in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer after radical hysterectomy as primary treatment. Minimally invasive surgery vs. open approach. Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: After the LACC trial, the SUCCOR study, and other studies, we know that patients who have undergone minimally invasive surgery for cervical cancer have worse outcomes, but today, we do not know if the surgical approach can be a reason to change the pattern of relapses on these patients. We evaluated the relapse pattern in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer (FIGO, 2009) who underwent radical hysterectomy with different surgical approaches. METHODS: A systematic review of literature was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Web of science. Inclusion criteria were prospective or retrospective comparative studies of different surgical approaches that described patterns or locations of relapse in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer. Heterogeneity was assessed by calculating I2. RESULTS: The research resulted in 782 eligible citations from January 2010 to October 2020. After filtering, nine articles that met all inclusion criteria were analyzed, comprising data from 1663 patients who underwent radical hysterectomy for IB1 cervical cancer, and the incidence of relapse was 10.6%. When we compared the pattern of relapse (local, distant, and both) of each group (open surgery and minimally invasive surgery), we did not see statistically significant differences, (OR 0.963; 95% CI, 0.602-1.541; p = 0.898), (OR 0.788; 95% CI, 0.467-1.330; p = 0.542), and (OR 0.683; 95% CI, 0.331-1.407; p = 0.630), respectively. CONCLUSION: There are no differences in patterns of relapse across surgical approaches in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer undergoing radical hysterectomy as primary treatment.

The mutational load and a T-cell inflamed tumour phenotype identify ovarian cancer patients rendering tumour-reactive T cells from PD-1+ tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes.

BACKGROUND: Adoptive immunotherapy with tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) may benefit from the use of selective markers, such as PD-1, for tumour-specific T-cell enrichment, and the identification of predictive factors that help identify those patients capable of rendering tumour-reactive TILs. We have investigated this in ovarian cancer (OC) patients as candidates for TIL therapy implementation. METHODS: PD-1- and PD-1+ CD8 TILs were isolated from ovarian tumours and expanded cells were tested against autologous tumour cells. Baseline tumour samples were examined using flow cytometry, multiplexed immunofluorescence and Nanostring technology, for gene expression analyses, as well as a next-generation sequencing gene panel, for tumour mutational burden (TMB) calculation. RESULTS: Tumour-reactive TILs were detected in half of patients and were exclusively present in cells derived from the PD-1+ fraction. Importantly, a high TIL density in the fresh tumour, the presence of CD137+ cells within the PD-1+CD8+ TIL subset and their location in the tumour epithelium, together with a baseline T-cell-inflamed genetic signature and/or a high TMB, are features that identify patients rendering tumour-reactive TIL products. CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated that PD-1 identifies ovarian tumour-specific CD8 TILs and has uncovered predictive factors that identify OC patients who are likely to render tumour-specific cells from PD-1+ TILs.