Assessment of a Chemotherapy Response Score (CRS) System for Tubo-Ovarian High-Grade Serous Carcinoma (HGSC).

A chemotherapy response score (CRS) system was recently described to assess the histopathologic response and prognosis of patients with tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The current study was performed as an independent assessment of this CRS system. We retrospectively identified advanced stage HGSC patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and underwent interval debulking. If available, a hemotoxylin and eosin slide from the omentum and the adnexa was selected for the study. Slides were independently scored by 13 pathologists using the 3-tiered CRS system. Reviewers then received web-based training and rescored the slides. Overall survival and progression-free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. A total of 68 patients with omental (n=65) and/or adnexal (n=59) slides were included in the study. Interobserver reproducibility was moderate for omentum (κ, 0.48) and poor for adnexa (κ, 0.40), which improved for omentum (κ, 0.62) but not for adnexa (κ, 0.38) after online training. For omental slides, a consensus CRS of 1/2 was associated with a shorter median progression-free survival (10.9 mo; 95% confidence interval, 9-14) than a CRS of 3 (18.9 mo; 95% CI, 18-24; P=0.020). In summary, a 3-tiered CRS system of hemotoxylin and eosin-stained omental deposits can yield prognostic information for HGSC patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and web-based training improved reproducibility but did not alter determination of clinical outcomes. The CRS system may allow oncologists to identify potential nonresponders and triage HGSC patients for heightened observation and/or clinical trials.

Effects of comprehensive geriatric assessment-guided interventions on physical performance and quality of life in older patients with advanced cancer: A randomized controlled trial (PROGNOSIS-RCT).

INTRODUCTION: Older patients with frailty starting oncological treatment are at higher risk of experiencing declining physical performance, loss of independence, and quality of life (QoL). This study examines whether comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA)-guided interventions added to standard oncological care can prevent declining physical performance and QoL in older patients with frailty initiating palliative treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients aged ≥70 years, with a Geriatric-8 score of ≤14, initiating palliative oncological treatment were enrolled in an open label randomized controlled trial and randomized 1:1 to receive either CGA-guided interventions in addition to oncological standard care or oncological care alone. Baseline characteristics, physical performance measures, and QoL questionnaires were retrieved before group allocation. CGA was performed using a fixed set of domains and validated tests by a geriatrician-led team. The primary endpoint, physical performance, was measured by the 30-s chair stand test (30s-CST) at three months. Additional outcomes included 30s-CST at six months, handgrip strength test, and QoL. Outcomes were analyzed using linear mixed regression models. The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.org (NCT04686851). RESULTS: From November 1, 2020 to May 31, 2022, 181 patients were included; 88 in the interventional arm and 93 in the control arm. Median age was 77 (interquartile range [IQR] 73-81) years, 69% were male, median Geriatric-8 score was 12 (IQR 10-13), 69% had a Performance Status of 0-1, and the median 30s-CST was 9 (IQR 5-11) repetitions. The between-group difference in 30s-CST at three months was 0.67 (95%CI: -0.94 - 2.29) and 1.57 (95%CI: -0.20 - 3.34) at six months, which were not statistically significant. Subgroup analysis including participants with a baseline Geriatric-8 of 12-14 found borderline significant between-group differences in 30s-CST scores at three and six months of 2.04 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.07 - 4.2, P = 0.06) and 2.25 (95%CI: 0.01-4.5, P = 0.05), respectively. No within-group or between-group differences in the summary score or the Elderly Functional Index score (measuring QoL) were found. DISCUSSION: This study did not find significant between-group differences in the 30s-CST in older patients receiving palliative care. However, a tendency towards improved physical performance was seen in the least frail. These patients may represent a target group wherein CGA interventions provide particular benefit.