"Having cancer is very expensive": A qualitative study of patients with ovarian cancer and PARP inhibitor treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To examine patient barriers and facilitators to PARP inhibitor (PARP-I) maintenance therapy in ovarian cancer. PARP-I improves survival in ovarian cancer, but these multi-year therapies cost around $100,000 annually and are under-prescribed. METHODS: We recruited patients with ovarian cancer treated with PARP-I maintenance therapy at an academic health system for a semi-structured interview. Patient demographics, including genetics and PARP-I cost, were self-reported. We assessed patient experiences with barriers and facilitators of PARP-I usage. Two team members used a thematic approach to analyze and identify key themes. RESULTS: In May 2022, we interviewed 10 patients (mean age = 65 years; 80% White; 60% with a germline genetic mutation). Patients paid on average $227.50 monthly for PARP-I, straining resources for some participants. While sampled patients were insured, all patients identified having no or inadequate insurance as a major barrier to PARP-I. At the same time, all participants prioritized clinical effectiveness over costs of care. Patients identified PARP-I delivery from specialty pharmacies, separate and different from other medications, as a potential barrier, but each had been able to navigate delivery. Patients expressed significant initial side effects of PARP-I as a potential barrier yet reported clinician communication and prompt dose reduction as facilitating continuation. CONCLUSIONS: Patients identified cost, restrictive pharmacy benefits, and initial side effects as barriers to PARP-I usage. Having insurance and a supportive care team were identified as facilitators. Enhancing communication about PARP-I cost and side effects could improve patient experience and receipt of evidence-based maintenance therapy in ovarian cancer.

Pilot randomized trial of an acceptance-based telehealth intervention for women with ovarian cancer and PARP inhibitor-related fatigue.

OBJECTIVE: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) have dramatically changed treatment for advanced ovarian cancer, but nearly half of patients experience significant fatigue. We conducted a two-site pilot randomized trial to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a brief, acceptance-based telehealth intervention (REVITALIZE) designed to reduce fatigue interference in patients on PARPi. METHODS: From June 2021 to April 2022, 44 participants were randomized 1:1 to REVITALIZE (6 weekly one-on-one sessions+booster) or enhanced usual care. Feasibility was defined as: ≥50% approach-to-consent among potentially eligible patients and ≥70% completion of 12-week follow-up assessment; acceptance was <20% participants reporting burden and <20% study withdrawal. Fatigue, anxiety, depression, and quality of life were assessed at baseline, 4-, 8- and 12-weeks. RESULTS: Among 44 participants (mean age = 62.5 years, 81.8% stage III/IV disease), the study was feasible (56.4% approach-to-consent ratio, 86.3% completion of 12-week assessment) and acceptable (0% reporting burden, 11.3% study withdrawal). At 12-week follow-up, REVITALIZE significantly reduced fatigue interference (Cohen's d = 0.94, p = .008) and fatigue severity (d = 0.54, p = .049), and improved fatigue levels (d = 0.62, p = .04) relative to enhanced usual care. REVITALIZE also showed promise for improved fatigue self-efficacy, fatigue catastrophizing, anxiety, depression, and quality of life (ds = 0.60-0.86, p ≥ .05). Compared with enhanced usual care, REVITALIZE participants had fewer PARPi dose reductions (6.7% vs. 19.0%), and dose delays (6.7% vs. 23.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Among fatigued adults with ovarian cancer on PARPi, a brief, acceptance-based telehealth intervention was feasible, acceptable, and demonstrated preliminary efficacy in improving fatigue interference, severity, and levels. REVITALIZE is a novel, scalable telehealth intervention worthy of further investigation.

Electronic medical record documentation of germline genetic evaluations in patients with ovarian cancer.

Germline genetic evaluation is indicated for all patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). For testing to have clinical utility, results must be documented within the electronic medical record (EMR) and accessible to providers at the point of care, which can be challenging in the context of current EMR limitations and genetic testing processes. We examined the receipt of genetics services and EMR capture of genetic testing results in patients with EOC. We conducted a retrospective chart review to examine germline genetic evaluations among patients with EOC seen by a gynecologic or medical oncologist at the University of Pennsylvania in 2016. EMRs were reviewed to determine: (1) if patients were referred for genetic evaluation; (2) if genetic testing was performed; (3) if results were documented in office notes, scanned third-party test reports, and/or the EMR problem list; (4) if provider notes correctly listed the variant classification. Overall, 413 (62%) of patients had documented genetic testing. Genetic testing was documented in almost all provider notes (96%) and the majority of scanned EMR reports (64%). Pathogenic variants were found in 119 (29%) individuals; the majority (70%) had genetic testing documented within EMR problem lists. Provider notes were highly accurate in describing variant classification. In this study, genetic testing was performed and documented in the EMR for most EOC patients. Approximately one-third of those tested did not have scanned test reports specifying variant found, limiting the utility of test results for cascade testing and therapeutic decisions.

Extended Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis after Robotic Staging for Endometrial Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to estimate the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after robotic staging for endometrial cancer and to compare the incidence of VTE in patients who received a single dose of preoperative prophylaxis of enoxaparin with those who received extended postoperative prophylaxis. METHODS: This study is a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent robot-assisted surgical staging for endometrial cancer. Patients were categorized into two groups: preoperative prophylaxis (PP), patients who received a single dose of enoxaparin preoperatively, and extended prophylaxis (EP), patients who received 28 days of enoxaparin postoperatively. RESULTS: In total, 148 patients were included, with 117 patients in the PP group and 31 patients in the EP group. The overall incidence of VTE within 30 days postoperatively was 0.67%. No significant difference was found between the PP and the EP groups (0.9% and 0%, respectively; P = 1.00). Most patients in the cohort had endometrioid adenocarcinoma (78%) with low-grade disease (70%), although there were a greater number of patients in the PP group with uterine serous carcinoma compared with the EP group (17% vs 10%; P = 0.034). The PP group had higher estimated blood loss (106 vs 81 mL; P = 0.009) and longer operative times (178 vs 151 min; P = 0.028) compared with the EP group. Significantly more patients in the PP group underwent lymph node dissection compared with the EP group (32% vs 7%; P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of VTE following robot-assisted surgical staging for endometrial cancer in this study was 0.67%. No significant difference was found in VTE incidence between the PP group compared with the EP group. Mechanical prophylaxis plus a single dose of preoperative pharmacologic prophylaxis may suffice for low-risk patients following robotic surgical staging for endometrial cancer.

Niraparib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Niraparib, an inhibitor of poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase (PARP), has been associated with significantly increased progression-free survival among patients with recurrent ovarian cancer after platinum-based chemotherapy, regardless of the presence or absence of BRCA mutations. The efficacy of niraparib in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer after a response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy is unknown. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer in a 2:1 ratio to receive niraparib or placebo once daily after a response to platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival in patients who had tumors with homologous-recombination deficiency and in those in the overall population, as determined on hierarchical testing. A prespecified interim analysis for overall survival was conducted at the time of the primary analysis of progression-free survival. RESULTS: Of the 733 patients who underwent randomization, 373 (50.9%) had tumors with homologous-recombination deficiency. Among the patients in this category, the median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the niraparib group than in the placebo group (21.9 months vs. 10.4 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31 to 0.59; P<0.001). In the overall population, the corresponding progression-free survival was 13.8 months and 8.2 months (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.76; P<0.001). At the 24-month interim analysis, the rate of overall survival was 84% in the niraparib group and 77% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.11). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or higher were anemia (in 31.0% of the patients), thrombocytopenia (in 28.7%), and neutropenia (in 12.8%). No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer who had a response to platinum-based chemotherapy, those who received niraparib had significantly longer progression-free survival than those who received placebo, regardless of the presence or absence of homologous-recombination deficiency. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02655016.).

Prior authorization in gynecologic oncology: An analysis of clinical impact.

BACKGROUND: Prior authorization was designed to minimize unnecessary care and reduce spending but has been associated with delays in necessary care. Our objective was to estimate the occurrence of prior authorization, and impact on cancer care, in gynecologic oncology. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cross-sectional study of patients seen in University of Pennsylvania gynecologic oncology practices (January-March 2021). Using electronic medical records, we measured the incidence of prior authorization during the 3-month period and prior experience of prior authorization for cancer care overall and by type of order (chemotherapy, imaging, surgery, prescription drugs). We assessed the impact of prior authorization occurrence on clinical outcomes (time to service, changes in care). RESULTS: Of the 2112 clinic visits of 1406 unique patients, 5% experienced prior authorization during the 3-month study period. An additional 20% faced prior authorization requests earlier in cancer care. Of the 83 prior authorization requests, imaging accounted for the majority (54%) followed by supportive medications (29%) and chemotherapy (17%). After appeal, 79% of cases were approved. For patients whose prior authorizations were approved, there was a mean of 16 days from order placement to care delivery (95% CI 11-20, range 0-98 days). Of the 17 denials, 3 (18%) led to a substantial change in care (i.e., not receiving planned treatment). CONCLUSION: 25% of gynecologic oncology patients experienced prior authorization during their cancer care. While 80% of claims were ultimately approved, patients experienced over a 2-week delay in care when prior authorization occurred. Reform is needed to reduce the burden of prior authorization in oncology.

Delay in adjuvant chemotherapy administration for patients with FIGO stage I epithelial ovarian carcinoma is associated with worse survival; an analysis of the National Cancer Database.

OBJECTIVE: The administration of adjuvant chemotherapy within 42 days from surgery is one of the proposed quality measures for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of chemotherapy delay in the survival of patients with stage I EOC. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was accessed, and patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2015 with FIGO stage I EOC who received multi-agent chemotherapy were identified. Overall survival (OS) was compared between patients who received chemotherapy <6 weeks and 6-12 weeks from surgery with the log-rank test following generation of Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox model was constructed to control for a priori selected confounders. RESULTS: A total of 8549 patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy at a median 35 days from surgery (interquartile range 19) were identified; 67.7% received adjuvant chemotherapy <6 weeks from surgery while 32.3% experienced a delay. Patients who experienced a delay were more likely to have comorbidities (18.4% vs 14.9%, p < 0.001), and be managed in non-academic facilities (57.1% vs 53.2%, p = 0.001). Patients who experienced a delay had worse OS compared to those who did not, p < 0.001; 5-year OS rates 85.7% and 89.7%, respectively. For patients with high-grade serous tumors, those who experienced a delay had a 5-yr OS of 81.9% compared to 88.6% for those who did not, p < 0.001. After controlling for age, race, presence of comorbidities, insurance status, tumor histology and grade, performance of lymphadenectomy and substage, chemotherapy delay was associated with worse survival (HR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.10, 1.42). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with early stage EOC administration of adjuvant chemotherapy within 6 weeks from surgery was associated with better overall survival, especially for those with stage IC disease.

Safety of ovarian preservation for premenopausal patients with FIGO stage I grade 2 and 3 endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the utilization and outcomes of ovarian preservation for premenopausal patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I grade 2 and 3 endometrioid endometrial carcinoma undergoing hysterectomy. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was accessed; patients aged ≤45 years diagnosed between January 2004 and December 2015 with FIGO stage I grade 2 or 3 endometrioid endometrial carcinoma, who underwent hysterectomy with or without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and had at least 1 month of follow-up, were identified. Overall survival was assessed following generation of Kaplan-Meier curves and compared with the log-rank test. A Cox model was constructed to control for a priori selected variables. RESULTS: A total of 2941 patients who met the inclusion criteria were identified; 200 (6.8%) patients did not undergo bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Rate of ovarian preservation was comparable between patients with grade 2 (n=163, 6.6%) and grade 3 (n=37, 7.7%) tumors (p=0.38). Patients who did not undergo bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy were younger (median 39 vs 41 years, p<0.001) and less likely to undergo surgical lymph node assessment (52% vs 76.2%, p<0.001). There was no difference in overall survival between patients who did and did not undergo bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (p=0.94); 5 year overall survival rates were 96.6% and 97%, respectively. After controlling for confounders, including tumor grade, ovarian preservation was not associated with worse overall survival (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.84). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with grade 2 and 3 FIGO stage I endometrioid carcinoma undergoing hysterectomy, ovarian preservation is rarely performed while no clear detrimental effect on overall survival was found.

Fertility-sparing surgery for patients with stage IC2 or IC3 epithelial ovarian carcinoma: any evidence of safety?

OBJECTIVE: Investigate the overall survival of patients with stage IC2/IC3 epithelial ovarian carcinoma undergoing fertility-sparing surgery. METHODS: Patients aged <45 years diagnosed between January 2004 and December 2015 with epithelial ovarian carcinoma, who underwent surgical staging and had tumor involving the ovarian surface (IC2), malignant ascites or positive cytology (IC3), were identified in the National Cancer Database. The fertility-sparing surgery group included patients who had preservation of the uterus and the contralateral ovary while the radical surgery group included patients who had hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Overall survival was evaluated following generation of Kaplan-Meier curves while a Cox model was constructed to control for tumor grade and performance of lymphadenectomy. A systematic review of the literature was performed and cumulative relapse rate among patients with IC2/IC3 disease who underwent fertility-sparing surgery was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 235 cases were identified; 105 (44.7%) patients underwent fertility-sparing surgery. There was no difference in overall survival between the fertility-sparing and radical surgery groups (p=0.37; 5- year overall survival rates 90.2% and 85%, respectively). After controlling for tumor grade and performance of lymphadenectomy, fertility-sparing surgery was not associated with worse overall survival (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.56, 2.62). A systematic review identified 151 patients with stage IC2/IC3 disease who underwent fertility-sparing surgery. Cumulative relapse rate was 19.3% (n=29) while 12 (6.7%) deaths were reported. Median time to recurrence was 19 (range 1-128.5) months. Tumor recurrence involved the ovary exclusively in 42% (11/26) of patients, while 15% (4/26) had a lymph node, 35% (9/26) a pelvic/abdominal, and 8% (2/26) a distant tumor relapse. CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of patients with stage IC2/IC3 epithelial ovarian carcinoma, fertility-sparing surgery was not associated with worse overall survival. However, based on a literature review, relapse rate is approximately 20%.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for stage I high-intermediate risk endometrial carcinoma with lymph-vascular invasion.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to evaluate if addition of adjuvant chemotherapy to radiation therapy improves overall survival in patients with high-intermediate risk stage I endometrial carcinoma with lymphovascular invasion. METHODS: Patients diagnosed between January 2010 and December 2015 with FIGO (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics) stage I endometrioid endometrial carcinoma with lymphovascular invasion who underwent hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy and met the GOG-99 criteria for high-intermediate risk were identified in the National Cancer Database. Patients who received adjuvant radiotherapy with or without adjuvant chemotherapy (administered within 6 months of surgery) and had at least 1 month of follow-up were selected for further analysis. Overall survival was compared with the log-rank test following stratification by type of radiation treatment. A Cox model was constructed to control for a priori selected confounders. RESULTS: A total of 2881 patients who met the inclusion criteria were identified; 2417 (83.9%) patients received radiation therapy alone while 464 (16.1%) received chemoradiation. Rate of adjuvant chemotherapy administration was comparable between patients who received vaginal brachytherapy alone (16.2%), and external beam radiation therapy (with or without vaginal brachytherapy) (15.8%), p=0.78. Rate of chemoradiation was higher for patients with grade 3 (28.8%) tumors compared with those with grade 2 (9.9%) and grade 1 (8.3%) tumors, p<0.001. After controlling for confounders for patients receiving external beam radiation, addition of chemotherapy was not associated with improved overall survival (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.46). For patients receiving vaginal brachytherapy addition of chemotherapy was associated with better overall survival (HR 0.644, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.92). Benefit was limited to patients with grade 3 tumors, p=0.026; 4-year overall survival rate was 81.1% versus 74.9%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high-intermediate risk FIGO stage I endometrioid endometrial carcinoma and lymphovascular invasion, addition of chemotherapy to radiation therapy was associated with a survival benefit for patients with grade 3 tumors receiving vaginal brachytherapy.

Oncologic outcomes of surgical para-aortic lymph node staging in patients with advanced cervical carcinoma undergoing chemoradiation.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the utilization and impact of surgical para-aortic lymph node staging on the survival of patients with locally advanced stage cervical carcinoma receiving definitive chemoradiation. METHODS: We identified patients in the National Cancer Database diagnosed between January 2010 and December 2015 with locally advanced (FIGO 2009 stage IB2-IVA) cervical carcinoma who did not undergo hysterectomy, received primary chemoradiation and had at least 1 month of follow-up. Two groups of patients were formed based on the assessment method of para-aortic lymph node status - radiologic assessment only versus surgical lymphadenectomy. Overall survival was compared with the log-rank test after Kaplan-Meier curves were generated. A Cox model was constructed to control for a priori selected confounders. RESULTS: We identified a total of 3540 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Para-aortic staging was performed in 333 (9.4%) patients. These patients were younger (median age 46 vs 52 years, p<0.001), less likely to have co-morbidities (8.7% vs 15.6%, p<0.001), more likely to have private insurance (48.9% vs 37.8%, p<0.001) and receive brachytherapy (76.9% vs 70.9%, p=0.022). The rate of para-aortic lymphadenectomy was comparable between patients with stage IB2-II and III-IVA disease (9.4% for both groups, p=0.98). Patients who underwent para-aortic lymphadenectomy were also more likely to have lymph nodes categorized as positive compared with those who had imaging only (27.3% vs 13.2%, p<0.001). There was no difference in overall survival between patients who underwent radiologic only or surgical para-aortic lymph node assessment (p=0.80 from log-rank test); 4 year overall survival rates were 62.9% and 63%. After controlling for confounders, performance of para-aortic lymphadenectomy was not associated with a survival benefit (HR 1.07, 95% CIs: 0.88 to 1.31). CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of patients with locally advanced stage cervical carcinoma, para-aortic lymphadenectomy was rarely performed and not associated with a survival benefit.

Outcomes of sentinel lymph node mapping for patients with FIGO stage I endometrioid endometrial carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Investigate the overall survival of patients with FIGO stage I endometrioid endometrial carcinoma who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNBx). METHODS: Patients diagnosed between 2012 and 2015 with pathological stage I endometrioid endometrial carcinoma who underwent minimally invasive hysterectomy and had at least one month of follow-up were identified in the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Patients who underwent SLNBx or systematic lymphadenectomy (LND) (defined as at least 20 lymph nodes removed) were selected. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated following generation of Kaplan-Meier curves and compared with the log-rank test. A Cox model was constructed to evaluate survival after controlling for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 13,010 patients with endometrioid endometrial carcinoma who met the inclusion criteria were identified; 9861 (75.8%) and 3149 (24.2%) patients had systematic LND and SLNBx, respectively. Patients who had LND were more likely to receive radiation therapy (27.4% vs 19.3%, p < 0.001) and chemotherapy (13% vs 8.7%, p < 0.001) compared to those who had SLNBx. After controlling for patient age, race, insurance status, depth of myometrial invasion, tumor grade, tumor size, presence of lymph-vascular invasion and receipt of radiation therapy, the performance of SLNBx was not associated with worse survival (HR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.80, 1.21). For high-intermediate risk patients (based on GOG-99 criteria) after controlling for confounders, performance of SLNBx was not associated with worse survival (HR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.80, 1.44). For intermediate risk patients who did not receive external beam radiation therapy or chemotherapy after controlling for confounders, performance of SLNBx was not associated with worse survival (HR: 1.58, 95% CI: 0.94, 2.65). CONCLUSIONS: SLNBx had no negative impact on the survival of patients with FIGO stage I endometrioid endometrial carcinoma who undergo hysterectomy.

An increase in multi-site practices: The shifting paradigm for gynecologic cancer care delivery.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the number of practice sites per gynecologic oncologist (GO) and geographic access to GOs has changed over time. METHODS: This is a retrospective repeated cross-sectional study using the 2015-2019 Physician Compare National File. All GOs in the 50 United States and Washington, DC, who had completed at least one year of practice were included in the study. All practice sites with complete addresses were included. Linear regression analyses estimated trends in GOs' number of practice sites and geographic dispersion of practice sites. Secondary analyses assessed temporal trends in the number of geographic areas served by at least one GO. RESULTS: Although there was no significant change in the number of GOs from 2015 to 2019 (n = 1328), there was a significant increase in the number of practice sites (881 to 1416, p = 0.03), zip codes (642 to 984, p = 0.03), HSAs (404 to 536, p = 0.04), and HRRs (218 to 230, p = 0.03) containing a GO practice. The mean number of practice sites (1.64 versus 2.13, p < 0.001) and dispersion of practice sites (0.03 versus 0.43 miles, p = 0.049) per GO increased significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2015 and 2019, an increasing number of GOs have multi-site practices, and more geographic regions contain a GO practice. Improvements in geographic access to GOs may represent improved access to care for many women in the US, but its effect on patients, physicians, and geographic disparities is unknown.

Combination ATR and PARP Inhibitor (CAPRI): A phase 2 study of ceralasertib plus olaparib in patients with recurrent, platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Platinum-resistant, high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) has limited treatment options. Preclinical data suggest that poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) and ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related kinase inhibitors (ATRi) are synergistic. CAPRI (NCT03462342) is an investigator-initiated study of olaparib plus ceralasertib in recurrent HGSOC. Herein, we present results from the platinum-resistant cohort. METHODS: A Simon 2-stage design was utilized. Platinum-resistant HGSOC patients received ceralasertib 160 mg orally daily, days 1-7 and olaparib 300 mg orally twice daily, days 1-28 of a 28-day cycle until toxicity or progression. Primary endpoints were toxicity and efficacy including objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST. Secondary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The null hypothesis (≤5% ORR) would be rejected if there were ≥ 1 responses in 12 patients. RESULTS: Fourteen PARPi-naïve patients were evaluable for toxicity; 12 were evaluable for response. Three had BRCA1 mutations (1 germline, 2 somatic). Adverse events possibly related to treatment were primarily grade (G) 1/2. G3 toxicities included nausea (14.3%), fatigue (7.1%), anorexia (7.1%), and anemia (7.1%). No objective responses occurred. Best response was stable disease in 9 patients and progressive disease in three. Five patients had a ≥ 20% to <30% reduction in disease burden, including 3 with BRCA1 mutations. Three of 11 patients (27%; 2 with BRCA1 mutations) evaluable by Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup criteria had >50% CA-125 decline, including 2 with CA-125 normalization. Median PFS was 4.2 months overall (90% CI:3.5-8.2) and 8.2 months (3.6 months-not determined) for patients with BRCA1 mutations. CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib plus ceralasertib is well-tolerated. No objective responses occurred, though a signal of activity was seen particularly in disease associated with BRCA1. Further evaluation of this combination should include alternate dosing strategies in genomically-selected populations.

Impact of Medicaid expansion on women with gynecologic cancer: a difference-in-difference analysis.

BACKGROUND: Women with gynecologic cancer face socioeconomic disparities in care that affect survival outcomes. The Affordable Care Act offered states the option to expand Medicaid enrollment eligibility criteria as a means of improving timely and affordable access to care for the most vulnerable. The variable uptake of expansion by states created a natural experiment, allowing for quasi-experimental methods that offer more unbiased estimates of treatment effects from retrospective data than the traditional regression adjustment. OBJECTIVE: To use a quasi-experimental, difference-in-difference framework to create unbiased estimates of impact of Medicaid expansion on women with gynecologic cancer. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a quasi-experimental retrospective cohort study from the National Cancer Database files for women with invasive cancers of the uterus, ovary and fallopian tube, cervix, vagina, and vulva diagnosed from 2008 to 2016. Using a marker for state Medicaid expansion status, we created difference-in-difference models to assess the impact of Medicaid expansion on the outcomes of access to and timeliness of care. We excluded women aged <40 years owing to the suppression of the state Medicaid expansions status in the data and women aged ≥65 years owing to the universal Medicare coverage availability. Our primary outcome was the rate of uninsurance at diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included Medicaid coverage, early-stage diagnosis, treatment at an academic facility, and any treatment or surgery within 30 days of diagnosis. Models were run within multiple subgroups and on a propensity-matched cohort to assess the robustness of the treatment estimates. The assumption of parallel trends was assessed with event study time plots. RESULTS: Our sample included 335,063 women. Among this cohort, 121,449 were from nonexpansion states and 213,614 were from expansion states, with 79,886 posttreatment cases diagnosed after the expansion took full effect in expansion states. The groups had minor differences in demographics, and we found occasional preperiod event study coefficients diverging from the mean, but the outcome trends were generally similar between the expansion and nonexpansion states in the preperiod, satisfying the necessary assumption for the difference-in-difference analysis. In a basic difference-in-difference model, the Medicaid expansion in January 2014 was associated with significant increases in insurance at diagnosis, treatment at an academic facility, and treatment within 30 days of diagnosis (P<.001 for all). In an adjusted model including all states and accounting for variable expansion implementation time, there was a significant treatment effect of Medicaid expansion on the reduction in uninsurance at diagnosis (-2.00%; 95% confidence interval, -2.3 to -1.7; P<.001), increases in early-stage diagnosis (0.80%; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-1.4; P=.02), treatment at an academic facility (0.83%; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-1.5; P=.02), treatment within 30 days (1.62%; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-2.3; P<.001), and surgery within 30 days (1.54%; 95% confidence interval, 0.8-2.3; P<.001). In particular, large gains were estimated for women living in low-income zip codes, Hispanic women, and women with cervical cancer. Estimates from the subgroup and propensity-matched cohorts were generally consistent for all outcomes besides early-stage diagnosis and treatment within 30 days. CONCLUSION: Medicaid expansion was significantly associated with gains in the access and timeliness of treatment for nonelderly women with gynecologic cancer. The implementation of Medicaid expansion could greatly benefit women in nonexpansion states. Gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists should advocate for Medicaid expansion as a means of improving outcomes and reducing socioeconomic and racial disparities.

Lymphadenectomy for early-stage mucinous ovarian carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: There is evidence to suggest that the rate of lymph node metastases in patients with ovarian mucinous tumors is rare. The objective of this study was to investigate the prevalence of regional lymph node metastases among patients with apparent stage IA and IC mucinous ovarian carcinoma. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed and included patients from the National Cancer Database with apparent stage IA and IC mucinous ovarian tumors who underwent surgery between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2015. Data collected included demographics, surgical procedures, and pathologic characteristics. The primary outcome was the effect of tumor stage, grade, and size on the risk of lymph node metastases. Categorical and continuous variables were compared using the χ2 and Mann-Whitney U tests, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 4379 patients were identified: 3088 and 1213 with stage IA and IC disease, respectively, with an additional 78 patients who were stage I Not Otherwise Specified (NOS). Lymphadenectomy was performed in 70.6% of patients with stage IA and 70.3% of patients with stage IC cancers. Stratifying by grade, 68.4%, 71.3%, and 72.8% of patients with grades 1, 2, and 3 tumors underwent a lymphadenectomy, respectively. Furthermore, lymphadenectomy was performed in 64.9% of patients with tumors <10 cm and 72.4% with tumors >10 cm. Lymph node metastases were identified in 1.2% and 1.6% of patients with stage IA and IC disease, respectively (p=0.063). Additionally, metastases were present in 0.6% of patients with grade 1 tumors, 1.1% of patients with grade 2 tumors, and 5.3% of patients with grade 3 tumors (p<0.001). Lastly, 0.9% of patients with tumors <10 cm and 1.4% of patients with tumors >10 cm had lymph node metastases (p=0.19). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with mucinous ovarian carcinoma, lymph node metastases are rare. However, metastases are significantly more common in patients with higher grade tumors. These factors may be considered when making decisions regarding the need for lymphadenectomy in early-stage mucinous ovarian tumors.

Ascites volume at the time of primary debulking and overall survival of patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of malignant ascites volume on the outcomes of patients with advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma who undergo primary debulking surgery. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with stage III-IV epithelial ovarian carcinoma and bulky intra-abdominal (TIIIC) disease between 2010 and 2015, who underwent primary debulking surgery followed by multi-agent chemotherapy and known status of residual disease, were drawn from the National Cancer Database. Based on available information, the presence and volume of malignant ascites was categorized as absent, low (<980 mL), and high (>980 mL) volume. Median overall survival was determined from Kaplan-Meier curves and compared with the log rank test. A multivariate Cox model was constructed to control for confounders. RESULTS: 2493 patients were identified; 31.9% (n=795) had no ascites, 40.2% (n=1001) had low, and 28% (n=697) had high volume malignant ascites. Rate of complete gross resection was higher for patients with no ascites (65.9%) compared with those with low (35.6%) and high (23%) volume ascites (p<0.001). After controlling for stage, histology, grade, age, and comorbidities, compared with those with no ascites, patients with low (odds ratio (OR) 3.49, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 2.89 to 4.26) and high (OR 6.40, 95% CI 5.07 to 8.06) volume ascites were more likely to have gross residual disease. For patients who achieved complete gross resection after controlling for confounders compared with patients with no ascites, those with low (hazard ratio (HR) 1.37, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.72) and high volume ascites (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.47 to 2.55) had worse overall survival. Similarly, patients with low volume ascites had better survival compared with those with high volume ascites (HR 0.71 95% CI 0.54 to 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: The presence and volume of malignant ascites at the time of primary debulking surgery was associated with the likelihood of achieving a complete gross resection and worse overall survival.

Emergency department utilization by patients with gynecologic cancer in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Payment reform will give oncologists increasing responsibility for how patients with cancer meet unexpected care needs. OBJECTIVE: To differentiate how patients with gynecologic cancers use emergency care, and to assess the characteristics associated with potentially avoidable treat-and-release visits. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample, a stratified sample of visits in United States hospital-based emergency departments, from 2010 to 2014. Visits by patients with a diagnosis of gynecologic cancer were selected. Sample weights were applied to calculate national estimates of care patterns and trends. Associations with treat-and-release disposition were assessed with weighted logistic regression. RESULTS: In the study period, patients with gynecologic cancer made an estimated 370 104 annual emergency department visits (95% CI 351 997 to 388 211). A total of 50.2% of patients were treated and released, 48% were admitted, 1.6% were transferred, and 0.1% died. These visits corresponded to over US$1.27 billion in annual charges, with an average charge of US$3428 per visit (95% CI 3348 to 3509). Driven by growing treat-and-release utilization, annual visits increased, while admission rates fell over time. Patients with cervical cancer represented the plurality (36%) of visits; they were relatively younger, of lower socioeconomic status, and had fewer co-morbidities. Models for treat-and-release disposition did not vary significantly across different cancer populations. In the all-cancer model, increased odds of treat-and-release disposition was associated with cervical cancer diagnosis, younger age, lesser Elixhauser co-morbidity, Medicare coverage (OR=1.19; p<0.001), Medicaid coverage (OR=1.25; p<0.001), uninsured status (OR=1.70; p<0.001), and weekend visits. Visits in the northeast, at urban hospitals, and in winter months showed decreased odds of treat-and-release disposition. DISCUSSION: Patients with gynecologic cancers have been using the emergency department at increasing rates, primarily driven by treat-and-release visits that did not result in admission or death. Patients with cervical cancer have higher rates of treat-and-release utilization and may over-use emergency department care.

Outcomes of comprehensive lymphadenectomy for patients with advanced stage ovarian carcinoma and rare histologic sub-types.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prognostic significance of comprehensive lymphadenectomy at the time of primary debulking surgery for patients with rare histologic sub-types of epithelial ovarian carcinoma and clinically advanced stage disease who underwent complete gross resection. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was accessed and patients diagnosed between January 2010 and December 2015 with stage III-IV clear cell, endometrioid, mucinous, and low-grade serous carcinoma who underwent primary debulking surgery and achieved complete gross resection were identified. Patients who did not undergo lymphadenectomy and those who underwent comprehensive lymphadenectomy (defined as at least 20 lymph nodes removed) were selected for further analysis. Overall survival was compared with the log-rank test and a Cox model was constructed to control for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 381 patients were identified; 133 (34.9%) patients underwent comprehensive lymphadenectomy while 248 (65.1%) patients did not. There were no differences between the two groups in terms of patient race, age, presence of co-morbidities, type of treatment facility, disease stage, histology, and extent of intra-abdominal disease (p>0.05). There was no difference in overall survival between patients who did and did not undergo comprehensive lymphadenectomy (p=0.42); median overall survival was 51.48 and 47.38 months, respectively. After controlling for patient age, race, insurance status, presence of co-morbidities, intra-abdominal tumor spread, stage and histology, performance of systematic lymphadenectomy was not associated with better survival (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.35). CONCLUSION: Comprehensive lymphadenectomy is not associated with a survival benefit for patients with rare histologic sub-types of epithelial ovarian carcinoma and advanced stage disease who underwent primary debulking surgery and complete gross resection.

Minimally invasive hysterectomy for stage IA cervical carcinoma: a survival analysis of the National Cancer Database.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for patients with stage IA cervical carcinoma undergoing hysterectomy. METHODS: Patients with pathological stage IA (IA1, IA2, IA not otherwise specified) squamous, adenocarcinoma, adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix, no history of another tumor, who underwent radical or simple hysterectomy with known mode of surgery, diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 with at least 1 month of follow-up, were drawn from the National Cancer Database. Comparisons of demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics were made with the χ2 test. The impact of minimally invasive surgery (robotic-assisted or traditional laparoscopic) on overall survival was assessed with the log-rank test following generation of Kaplan-Meier curves. A Cox model was constructed to control for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 1930 patients were identified; the majority (73.3%, 1414 patients) had stage IA1 disease, while 458 (23.7%) patients had stage IA2, and 58 (3%) patients had stage IA not otherwise specified. In the present cohort, 685 patients (35.5%) had open, 438 patients (22.7%) had laparoscopic, and 807 patients (41.8%) had robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy. Patients who had an open approach were more likely to undergo lymphadenectomy (58.1% vs 52.7%, p=0.021) and have radical hysterectomy (42% vs 32.4%, p<0.001). Patients who had minimally invasive surgery had a shorter hospital stay (median 1 vs 3 days, p<0.001). There was no difference in overall survival between patients who had open and minimally invasive hysterectomy (p=0.87); 4-year overall survival rates were 97.7% and 98.6%, respectively. There was no difference in overall survival between the open and minimally invasive surgery groups for patients who had simple (p=0.61; 4-year overall survival rates 97.6% and 98.7%, respectively) or radical hysterectomy (p=0.70; 4-year overall survival rates 97.8% and 98.4%, respectively). After controlling for patient age, tumor histology, and presence of lymphovascular invasion, minimally invasive hysterectomy was not associated with worse survival (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.81). In a sensitivity analysis, based on 3048 patients with clinical stage IA after controlling for confounders, minimally invasive surgery was not associated with worse survival than laparotomy (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.72). CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of patients with stage IA cervical carcinoma, performance of minimally invasive hysterectomy was not associated with a detrimental effect on overall survival.