Implementing MyChoice® CDx HRD testing for the Nordics: lessons from 2021 to 2023.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of homologous recombinant deficient (HRD) phenotypes is key for managing Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) treatment. To accommodate the need for a validated HRD platform and enhance targeted treatment of ovarian cancer patients, a Nordic core facility for the myChoice® CDx platform was established in Denmark. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Comparative calculations and statistics are based on information from test requisitions and results (Genome Instability Score [GIS], BRCA status and combined HRD status) obtained from ovarian and breast cancer samples submitted for HRD-testing by myChoice® CDx through the Nordic core facility in the 2-year period. RESULTS: Copenhagen University Hospital received 1,948 requisitions during the 2-year period. Conclusive results were obtained in 89% of the tests, while 7% were inconclusive due to the lack of GIS and 4% were not able to be analysed. Comparing the conclusive HRD status results across countries, Sweden had the highest percentage of HRD positives (38%) compared to Denmark, Norway, and Finland (28-32%). INTERPRETATION: The myChoice® CDx Nordic core facility has been well received among the Nordic countries and provides new insights on the influence of national guidelines on HRD testing. Overall, we experienced an efficient turnaround time and a high fraction of conclusive results. Interestingly, prior somatic BRCA testing is redundant when assessing HRD status through myChoice® CDx test since somatic BRCA screening is already a significant component of the myChoice® CDx test. Thus, it should be considered to omit prior somatic BRCA testing to ensure a rationalised HRD diagnostic flow optimised for clinical use.

Management of endometrial cancer in Latin America: raising the standard of care and optimizing outcomes.

Molecular characterization of endometrial cancer is allowing for increased understanding of the natural history of tumors and paving a more solid pathway for novel therapies. It is becoming increasingly apparent that molecular classification is superior to histological classification in terms of reproducibility and prognostic discrimination. In particular, the Proactive Molecular Risk Classifier for Endometrial Cancer allows classification of endometrial cancer into groups very close to those determined by the Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network-that is, DNA polymerase epsilon-mutated, mismatch repair-deficient, p53 abnormal, and non-specific molecular profile tumors. The transition from the chemotherapy era to the age of targeted agents and immunotherapy, which started later in endometrial cancer than in many other tumor types, requires widespread availability of specialized pathology and access to novel agents. Likewise, surgical expertise and state-of-the-art radiotherapy modalities are required to ensure adequate care. Nevertheless, Latin American countries still face considerable barriers to implementation of international guidelines. As we witness the dawn of precision medicine as applied to endometrial cancer, we must make continued efforts towards improving the quality of care in this region. The current article discusses some of these challenges and possible solutions.

ENGOT-EN20/GOG-3083/XPORT-EC-042 - A phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter trial of selinexor in maintenance therapy after systemic therapy for patients with p53 wild-type, advanced, or recurrent endometrial carcinoma: rationale, methods, and trial design.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Biomarkers such as tumor protein 53 (TP53) in endometrial cancer can integrate novel strategies for improved and individualized treatment that could impact patient outcomes. In an exploratory analysis of the phase III ENGOT-EN5/GOG-3055/SIENDO study of selinexor maintenance monotherapy 80 mg in advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer, a pre-specified subgroup of patients with TP53 wild type (wt) endometrial cancer showed preliminary activity at long-term follow-up with a generally manageable safety profile (median progression-free survival 27.4 months vs 5.2 months placebo, HR=0.41). PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of selinexor compared with placebo as maintenance therapy in patients with advanced or recurrent TP53wt endometrial cancer. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: Selinexor administered at 60 mg weekly as maintenance therapy will show manageable safety and maintain efficacy in patients with TP53wt advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer after systemic therapy versus placebo. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase III study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of selinexor as a maintenance therapy in patients with advanced or recurrent TP53wt endometrial cancer. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Eligible patients must have histologically confirmed endometrial cancer, TP53wt confirmed by next-generation sequencing, completed at least 12 weeks of platinum-based therapy with or without immunotherapy, with confirmed partial response or complete response, and primary Stage IV disease or at first relapse. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: The primary endpoint is investigator-assessed progression-free survival per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 in the intent-to-treat population. SAMPLE SIZE: A total of 220 patients will be enrolled. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: Accrual is expected to be completed in 2024 with presentation of results in 2025. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05611931.

Patient care and access to clinical trials in gynaecological oncology: global implications of the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: Our prospective international survey evaluated the impact of the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management gynaecological malignancies from the multidisciplinary physicians' perspective with particular focus on clinical infrastructures and trial participation. METHODS: Our survey consisted of 53 COVID-related questions. It was sent to healthcare professionals in gynaecological oncology centres across Europe and Pan-Arabian region via the study groups and gynaecological societies from April 2020 to October 2020. All healthcare professionals treating gynaecological cancers were able to participate in our survey. RESULTS: A total of 255 answers were collected from 30 countries. The majority (73%) of participants were gynaecological oncologists from university hospitals (71%) with at least an Intensive Care Unit with cardiopulmonary support available at their institutions. Most institutions continued to perform elective surgeries only for oncological cases (98%). Patients had to wait on average 2 weeks longer for their surgery appointments compared to previous years (range 0-12 weeks). Most cases that were prioritised for surgical intervention across all gynaecological tumours were early-stage disease (74%), primary situation (61%) and good ECOG status (63%). The radicality of surgery did not change in the majority of cases (78%) across all tumour types. During the pandemic, only 38% of clinicians stated they would start a new clinical trial. Almost half of the participants stated the pandemic negatively impacted the financial structure and support for clinical trials. Approximately 20% of clinicians did not feel well-informed regarding clinical algorithm for COVID-19 patients throughout the pandemic. Thirty percent stated that they are currently having trouble in providing adequate medical care due to staff shortage. CONCLUSION: Despite well-established guidelines, pandemic clearly affected clinical research and patientcare. Our survey underlines the necessity for building robust emergency algorithms tailored to gynaecological oncology to minimise negative impact in crises and to preserve access to clinical trials.

Advances in the Management of Recurrent Cervical Cancer: State of the Art and Future Perspectives.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to give an insight into the currently available options for recurrent/metastatic (R/M) cervical cancer (CC), along with the main future, potentially practice-changing perspectives in this field. RECENT FINDINGS: Improvements in terms of tumor responses were observed with the use of immune checkpoints inhibitors (ICIs) in the previously treated CC population, followed by emerging striking data in terms of both antitumor activity and survival rates with the addition of the ICIs to platinum-based chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in the first-line setting. Furthermore, the CC treatment landscape took another step forward in 2021 with the introduction of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) in the second-line setting, a highly targeted therapeutic strategy, which demonstrated to be a valid alternative option in the recurrent setting. R/M CC is a hard-to-treat disease. However, after several years of limited systemic therapeutic options for the recurrent setting, the year 2018 marked a turning point for R/M CC patients, with the introduction of immunotherapy in the treatment paradigm, which completely reshaped the therapeutic armamentarium of the disease. Besides, another valuable treatment option represented by ADCs demonstrated its efficacy in the recurrent setting, thus further widening the treatment landscape for those patients. Yet, the introduction of immunotherapy in the upfront setting brought along new issues to be addressed such as the emerging ICIs resistance and the following need for alternative options in the post-ICIs setting. Several innovative therapeutic strategies are under investigation in ongoing clinical trials, with the aim of overcoming ICIs resistance with the addition of immunomodulatory agents or bypassing the ICIs resistance with novel alternative drugs.

Evolving treatment paradigms in metastatic or recurrent low-grade endometrial cancer: When is hormonal-based therapy the preferred option?

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecologic malignancy in developed countries, with increasing incidence and mortality rates worldwide. While most cases are successfully treated with surgery, first-line treatment options for metastatic or recurrent endometrial cancer involve significant toxicities. Imprecise classification of heterogeneous subgroups further complicates treatment decisions and interpretation of clinical trial results. Recent advances in molecular classification are guiding treatment decisions for metastatic or recurrent endometrial cancers. Integrating molecular characteristics with traditional clinicopathology can both reduce overtreatment or undertreatment and help guide the appropriate choice of therapies and effective design of future studies. Here we discuss the treatment of metastatic or recurrent low-grade endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the uterine corpus, which is distinct from high-grade tumors histologically, molecularly, and in treatment response.

The promise of combining CDK4/6 inhibition with hormonal therapy in the first-line treatment setting for metastatic or recurrent endometrial adenocarcinoma.

Metastatic or recurrent endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the uterine corpus is often incurable with limited treatment options. First-line treatment often includes cytotoxic chemotherapy, which incurs significant toxicities for many patients. Endometrial cancer, specifically endometrioid cancer, is a hormone-sensitive disease and, while single-agent hormonal therapies have demonstrated clinical benefit, resistance to these agents often leads to the use of chemotherapy. There is a lack of approved endocrine treatment options in the metastatic setting for most recurrent endometrial cancers, representing an unmet clinical need. Emerging evidence suggests that hormonal therapy in combination with other targeted treatments, such as cyclin dependent kinase (CDK)4/6 inhibitors, is well tolerated and effective in select patient populations. We discuss the clinical evidence suggesting that the combination of CDK4/6 inhibitors and hormonal therapy has the potential to represent an important addition to the first-line treatment options for patients with low-grade advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer.

European Society of Gynaecological Oncology Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Vulvar Cancer - Update 2023.

BACKGROUND: As part of its mission to improve the quality of care for women with gynecological cancers across Europe, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) first published in 2017 evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with vulvar cancer. OBJECTIVE: To update the ESGO guidelines based on the new evidence addressing the management of vulvar cancer and to cover new topics in order to provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment of vulvar cancer. METHODS: The ESGO Council nominated an international development group comprised of practicing clinicians who provide care to vulvar cancer patients and have demonstrated leadership through their expertize in clinical care and research, national and international engagement and profile as well as dedication to the topics addressed to serve on the expert panel (18 experts across Europe). To ensure that the statements were evidence-based, new data identified from a systematic search were reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the international development group. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 206 international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. RESULTS: The updated guidelines cover comprehensively diagnosis and referral, staging, pathology, pre-operative investigations, surgical management (local treatment, groin treatment, sentinel lymph node procedure, reconstructive surgery), (chemo)radiotherapy, systemic treatment, treatment of recurrent disease (vulvar, inguinal, pelvic, and distant recurrences), and follow-up. Management algorithms are also defined.

Clinical research in ovarian cancer: consensus recommendations from the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup.

The Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) sixth Ovarian Cancer Conference on Clinical Research was held virtually in October, 2021, following published consensus guidelines. The goal of the consensus meeting was to achieve harmonisation on the design elements of upcoming trials in ovarian cancer, to select important questions for future study, and to identify unmet needs. All 33 GCIG member groups participated in the development, refinement, and adoption of 20 statements within four topic groups on clinical research in ovarian cancer including first line treatment, recurrent disease, disease subgroups, and future trials. Unanimous consensus was obtained for 14 of 20 statements, with greater than 90% concordance in the remaining six statements. The high acceptance rate following active deliberation among the GCIG groups confirmed that a consensus process could be applied in a virtual setting. Together with detailed categorisation of unmet needs, these consensus statements will promote the harmonisation of international clinical research in ovarian cancer.

Comparison of global treatment guidelines for locally advanced cervical cancer to optimize best care practices: A systematic and scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Survival outcomes for cervical cancer differ between countries and world regions. Locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) is associated with poorer outcomes than early-stage disease. Country-specific variations in diagnostic and treatment recommendations might contribute to differences in LACC outcomes among countries. OBJECTIVE: We compared international and country-specific guidelines for LACC diagnostic imaging and treatment recommendations. METHODS: A systematic literature review and targeted search were used to identify cervical cancer treatment guidelines published between January 1999-August 2021. Guidelines were identified via literature databases, health technology assessment databases, disease-specific websites, and health organization websites. The targeted search included guidelines from countries in regions known to have high cervical cancer prevalence or mortality. Non-English guidelines were translated by native speakers or online translation services. RESULTS: Forty-six guidelines from 31 countries, regions, and international organizations were compared (41/46 using staging criteria, 27 of which used 2009 FIGO). Most guidelines recommended imaging tests for diagnosis and staging. Chest X-ray, intravenous pyelogram, CT, and MRI were commonly recommended for diagnosis and staging while MRI and PET-CT were recommended for the assessment of lymph node status and distant metastases, with a preference for PET-CT over MRI. There was global consensus for cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiation as primary treatment for stages IIB to IVA, with few exceptions. Treatment recommendations for stages IB2 to IIA2 varied. Most guidelines agreed on adjuvant concurrent chemoradiation after radical hysterectomy when there is a high recurrence risk, and adjuvant radiotherapy when there is an intermediate recurrence risk. Recommendations for other adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies varied among the guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Differences among treatment guidelines by LACC stage might be influenced by staging criteria used, resource availability, and prevention program effectiveness. Addressing these areas may unify guidelines and improve global outcomes. Review and update of guidelines will be important as novel LACC therapies become available.

Impact of disease progression on health-related quality of life of advanced ovarian cancer patients - Pooled analysis from the PRIMA trial.

OBJECTIVE: Progression-free survival (PFS) is an important early efficacy endpoint in ovarian cancer (OC) and its relevance to patients should be assessed. PRIMA, a phase III trial, assessed niraparib in patients with OC; this post hoc analysis examined the relationship between disease progression in OC and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: The PRIMA trial randomized patients with advanced OC responsive to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy to once daily maintenance oral niraparib or placebo. This post hoc analysis evaluated the impact of disease progression on HRQoL by comparing HRQoL at the last visit pre-progression to end of treatment (EoT), and after 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks. Assessments included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian Symptom Index (FOSI), the European Quality of Life Five Dimension Five Level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and EQ Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS), the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30), and the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire Ovarian Cancer module (EORTC-QLQ-OV28). RESULTS: This post hoc analysis included 733 patients. Mean FOSI, EQ-5D-5L, and EQ-VAS scores deteriorated from last visit pre-progression to EoT and remained low up to 24-week follow-up. Least squares mean changes from last visit pre-progression to EoT were -2.1 (95% confidence interval -2.4, -1.7) for FOSI, -4.6 (-5.6, -3.5) for the EQ-5D-5L index, and -7.9 (-9.6, -6.3) for EQ-VAS. CONCLUSIONS: Disease progression negatively impacted HRQoL in patients with OC. PFS is clinically relevant, and prolonging PFS may preserve HRQoL.

Patient perspectives and experiences of the rapid implementation of digital consultations during COVID-19 - a qualitative study among women with gynecological cancer.

PURPOSE: Due to the first COVID-19 outbreak and subsequent restrictions, standard practice for gynecological cancer quickly evolved to include additional digital consultations. Women with gynecological cancer have a high need for information and experience a high symptom burden. We aimed to explore the experiences and perspectives of the rapid implementation of digital consultations during COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted individual telephone interviews with patients with gynecological cancer 1-4 days after a telephone or video consultation during the COVID-19 outbreak in April and May 2020. We applied Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis to analyze the qualitative data. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients with ovarian (50%), cervical (35%), vulvar (12%), and vaginal cancer (3%) participated in the study. The patients experienced that, combined, cancer and COVID-19 restrictions made their situation twice as challenging. In general, the patients valued face-to-face consultations, recommending that they were ideal for the initial appointment to build trust. Overall, there was a willingness to participate in digital consultations because of the restrictions, but the results also showed varying degrees of openness and that individual solutions were favored. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study show that digital consultations were an accepted alternative during COVID-19. Even though this temporary solution was deemed to be beneficial for practical reasons, patients also experienced digital consultations to be impersonal. A key message is that face-to-face encounters create the foundation to establish a trusting relationship from where a valuable dialogue arises. Digital consultations should therefore be implemented with caution since no one-size-fits-all model is recommended. Among patients with gynecological cancer, however, digital technologies represent a promising and flexible method depending on the purpose of consultations, patient preferences, and needs.

ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma.

A European consensus conference on endometrial carcinoma was held in 2014 to produce multi-disciplinary evidence-based guidelines on selected questions. Given the large body of literature on the management of endometrial carcinoma published since 2014, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines and to cover new topics in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide.

Results of the interprofessional and interdisciplinary Berlin round table on patient-reported outcomes, quality of life, and treatment expectations of patients with gynecological cancer under maintenance treatment.

BACKGROUND: Patients' reported outcomes and their perspectives around their therapeutic management is a field of continuously increasing relevance in gynecological oncology. We report the results of the Berlin dialog on seven patient-reported parameters and outcomes concerning chemotherapy and maintenance treatment in patients with gynecological cancer. METHODS: Key opinion leaders in gynecological oncology from different European counties and representatives of leading patients' advocate groups in Berlin held a consensus meeting in Berlin on April 6, 2019. Seven topics of interest were identified in advance around quality of life, iatrogenic toxicity, treatment decision-making processes, sexuality, participation in clinical trials, second opinion, and long-term survivors with the the following standard operating procedure for processing and discussion: (1) agreement on its relevance; (2) literature review, and (3) discussion and consensus statements. RESULTS: All main topics reached a consensus approval. The defined statements emphasized the importance of patients' role in incorporating and establishing quality of life as an outcome parameter in clinical trials. Furthermore, discussants raised the importance of identifying new tools for reflecting patient-reported iatrogenic toxicity as well as emphasizing patients' rights in providing personal information, access to second opinion in the decision-making process, and their participation in clinical trials. CONCLUSION: The results of this round table meeting could help redefine perspectives on the discussed topics and the importance for therapeutic management as well as for trial designs.

Niraparib plus bevacizumab versus niraparib alone for platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (NSGO-AVANOVA2/ENGOT-ov24): a randomised, phase 2, superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Platinum-based chemotherapy is the foundation of treatment for platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer, but has substantial toxicity. Bevacizumab and maintenance poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors both significantly improve efficacy versus standard therapy, primarily in terms of progression-free survival, and offer the potential for chemotherapy-free treatment. AVANOVA2 compared niraparib and bevacizumab versus niraparib alone as definitive treatment for platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS: This open-label, randomised, phase 2, superiority trial in 15 university hospitals in Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Norway, and the USA enrolled women aged 18 years or older with measurable or evaluable high-grade serous or endometrioid platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer. Patients had to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and had to have previously received platinum-containing therapy for primary disease but ≤1 prior non-platinum-containing regimen for recurrent disease. Previous treatment with bevacizumab or first-line maintenance PARP inhibitors was permitted. Eligible patients were randomly assigned 1:1 (by random permuted blocks with block sizes of two and four, no masking), stratified by homologous recombination deficiency status and chemotherapy-free interval, to receive once-daily oral niraparib 300 mg alone or with intravenous bevacizumab 15 mg/kg once every 3 weeks until disease progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, assessed by the investigators in the intention-to-treat population after events in at least 62 patients. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02354131. FINDINGS: Between May 23, 2016, and March 6, 2017, 97 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned: 48 to niraparib plus bevacizumab and 49 to single-agent niraparib. Median follow-up was 16·9 months (IQR 15·4-20·9). Niraparib plus bevacizumab significantly improved progression-free survival compared with niraparib alone (median progression-free survival 11·9 months [95% CI 8·5-16·7] vs 5·5 months [3·8-6·3], respectively; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·35 [95% CI 0·21-0·57], p<0·0001). Grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 31 (65%) of 48 patients who received niraparib plus bevacizumab and 22 (45%) of 49 who received single-agent niraparib. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in both groups were anaemia (7 [15%] of 48 vs 9 [18%] of 49) and thrombocytopenia (5 [10%] vs 6 [12%]), and hypertension in the combination group (10 [21%] vs 0). Niraparib plus bevacizumab was associated with increased incidences of any-grade proteinuria (10 [21%] of 48 patients vs 0) and hypertension (27 [56%] of 48 vs 11 [22%] of 49) compared with niraparib alone. No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: The efficacy observed with this chemotherapy-free combination of approved agents in women with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer warrants further evaluation. A randomised phase 3 trial investigating niraparib plus bevacizumab versus chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer is planned. FUNDING: Nordic Society of Gynaecological Oncology and Tesaro.

Clinical pathways of recovery after surgery for advanced ovarian/tubal/peritoneal cancer: an NSGO-MaNGO international survey in collaboration with AGO-a focus on surgical aspects.

OBJECTIVES: This survey assessed the implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) for patients undergoing surgery for advanced ovarian cancer in three European cooperative study groups in Scandinavia, Italy, and Austria. The aim was to evaluate the landscape for future trials on ERAS pathways in ovarian cancer, because high-level evidence for such interventions is lacking. METHODS: In July 2017, a web-based questionnaire (SurveyMonkey Inc, Palo Alto, CA, USA) was sent to centers conducting surgery for advanced ovarian cancer within the Nordic Society of Gynecologic Oncology (NSGO), Mario Negri Gynecologic Oncology Group (MaNGO) and other Italian institutions, and the Association for Gynecologic Oncology Austria (AGO Austria) (n = 100). The survey covered all aspects of an ERAS pathway including surgery, nursing, and anesthesia. We herein report on the survey findings relating to surgery, including nursing care issues; however, anesthesiologic issues will be discussed in a separate report. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 62%. Only a third of the centers in Italy and Austria follow a written ERAS protocol compared with 60% of the Scandinavian centers. Only a minority of centers have completely abandoned bowel preparation, with the highest proportion in Scandinavia (36%). Two hours of fasting for fluids before surgery is routinely practiced in Scandinavia and Austria (67-57%, respectively), but not in Italy (5%). Carbohydrate loading is routinely administered only in Scandinavia (67%). Peritoneal drainage is used by 22% routinely and by 61% in cases of bowel resection/lymphadenectomy/peritonectomy. Early feeding with a light diet on day 0 or 1 is the standard of care in Scandinavia and Austria, but not in Italy. CONCLUSIONS: The degree of implementation of ERAS protocols varies across and within cooperative groups. The centralization of ovarian cancer care seems to facilitate standardization of peri-operative protocols. Currently, the high heterogeneity in patterns of care may challenge an international approach to a clinical trial.

Patterns of treatment failure in patients undergoing adjuvant or definitive radiotherapy for vulvar cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Knowledge of the detailed pattern of failure can be useful background knowledge in clinical decision making and potentially drive the development of new treatment strategies by increasing radiotherapy dose prescription to high-risk sub-regions of the target. Here, we analyze patterns of recurrence in patients with vulvar cancer treated with radiotherapy according to original planning target volumes and radiation dose delivered. METHODS: We analyzed dose-planning and post-treatment recurrence scans from patients with vulvar cancer treated at two institutions from January 2009 through October 2014. We delineated the recurrences and merged the dose-planning and recurrence scans for each patient by using deformable co-registration. We estimated the center of each recurrence on the merged scans with the goal of relating them to the original dose plan. RESULTS: We evaluated 157 patients who received radiotherapy for vulvar cancer. Median age was 68 years (range 29-91). Patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IA-IVB were included. Twenty-nine patients had recurrent disease; 156 patients had squamous cell carcinoma and one patient had adenosquamous carcinoma of the vulva. Among the 157 patients, 37 patients with recurrent disease had recurrence scans available for review, for a total of 80 recurrence sites; 53% of the recurrences were located in the region to which the highest dose (60-70 Gy) had been prescribed. Patients who received definitive radiotherapy developed failure primarily in the high-dose region (80.5%), whereas patients who received adjuvant radiotherapy had a more scattered failure pattern (p<0.0001). Among the latter group, 29.5% failed in the high-dose region. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received definitive versus adjuvant radiotherapy had different failure patterns, indicating that separate approaches are needed to improve both adjuvant and definitive radiotherapy for vulvar cancer.

The poly (ADP ribose) polymerase inhibitor niraparib: Management of toxicities.

Niraparib is an oral poly(ADP ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor that is currently approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) as well as recently approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for the maintenance treatment of women with recurrent ovarian cancer who are in complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy. The mechanisms of action of niraparib include inhibition of PARP enzymatic activity as well as increased formation of PARP-DNA complexes through "trapping" the PARP enzyme on damaged DNA. Phase I and III studies have demonstrated activity and benefit of niraparib in both BRCA mutated (BRCAm) and BRCA wild-type (BRCAwt) cancers. Phase I testing of niraparib established the maximally tolerated dose of 300mg by mouth (PO) daily, and the phase 3 ENGOT-OV16/NOVA study demonstrated the benefit of niraparib maintenance therapy compared to placebo after completion of and response to platinum-based chemotherapy in both BRCAm and BRCAwt ovarian cancer patient populations. Toxicities seen with niraparib include hematologic, gastrointestinal, fatigue, and cardiovascular. Hematologic toxicities include thrombocytopenia, anemia, neutropenia and leukopenia; upfront dose modification to 200mg niraparib for patients with baseline weight of ≤77kg and/or baseline platelets of ≤150,000K/uL should be considered to avoid significant hematologic toxicity, especially thrombocytopenia, based on recent analyses of the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA study. Cardiovascular toxicities include hypertension, tachycardia, as well as palpitations, and patients should be monitored for hypertension. PARP inhibitors have been associated with low risks of acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), and the overall risk of AML and MDS is 0.9% of all patients treated with niraparib. Niraparib testing is ongoing in newly diagnosed ovarian cancer patients as maintenance therapy following completion of platinum-based chemotherapy, in BRCAwt cancers as treatment, as well as in combinations with other biologic drugs such as immunotherapy and anti-angiogenic agents.