Targeted composite value-based endpoints in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVES: FDA-approved treatments for platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (PSROC) include bevacizumab and PARP inhibitors (PARPi); clinical decisions regarding therapy must be made prior to initiating chemotherapy. Using the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) value frameworks, we assessed relative values of concurrent/maintenance biologic therapies in PSROC. METHODS: Value scores were calculated for key maintenance therapies based on randomized controlled trials: bevacizumab (OCEANS, GOG 213); olaparib (Study 19, SOLO2); niraparib (NOVA); rucaparib (ARIEL3). Personalized value scorecards were constructed for patients with germline/somatic-BRCA mutations, homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), and wild-type BRCA (wBRCA). ASCO value scores assess clinical benefit, toxicity, long-term survival, symptom palliation, treatment-free interval, and quality of life (QOL). ESMO value scores assess clinical benefit, toxicity, and QOL. RESULTS: ASCO scores were highest for maintenance PARPi in germline/somatic-BRCA mutation cohorts: olaparib (SOLO2) = 47, (Study 19) = 62; niraparib = 50; rucaparib = 54. HRD cohorts had slightly lower scores: niraparib = 46; rucaparib = 37. wBRCA cohorts had the lowest scores: niraparib = 26; rucaparib = 26; and olaparib (Study 19) = 32, as did patients receiving bevacizumab (OCEANS) = 35, (GOG 213) = 26. ESMO scores demonstrated high-value for maintenance PARPi in germline/somatic-BRCA mutation cohorts and low-value for bevacizumab and PARPi in wBRCA cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The value of maintenance PARPi therapy depends heavily on BRCA status, with the highest value scores in germline/somatic-BRCA mutation cohorts. Personalized value scorecards provide a visual aid to assess the harm-benefit balance of maintenance PARPi for PSROC.

Disparities in the surgical staging of high-grade endometrial cancer in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) recommend lymph node sampling (LNS) as a key component in the surgical staging of high-grade endometrial cancer. Our goal was to examine surgical staging patterns for high-grade endometrial cancer in the United States. METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) was searched for patients who underwent surgery for serous, clear cell, or grade 3 endometrioid endometrial cancer. Outcomes were receipt of LNS and overall survival (OS). Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine receipt of LNS in Stage I-III disease based on race (White vs. Black), income, surgical volume, and distance traveled to care. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was used to assess OS based on stage, race, income, LNS, surgical volume, and distance traveled. RESULTS: Forty-two thousand nine hundred seventy-three patients were identified: 76% White, 53% insured by Medicare/Medicaid, 24% traveled >30 miles, and 33% stage III disease. LNS was similar among White and Black women (81% vs 82%). LNS was more common among >30 miles traveled (84% vs 81%, p < 0.001), higher surgical volume (83% vs 80%, p < 0.001), and academic centers (84% vs 80%, p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, higher income, higher surgical volume, Charlson-Deyo score, and distance traveled were predictors of LNS. Stage III disease (HR 3.39, 95% CI 3.28-3.50), age (10-year increase; HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.61-1.66), lack of LNS (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.56-1.69), and low income (HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.14-1.27) were predictors of lower survival. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical care for high-grade endometrial cancer in the United States is not uniform. Improved access to high quality care at high volume centers is needed to improve rates of recommended LNS.

Cost Comparison of Genetic Testing Strategies in Women With Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.

PURPOSE: The advent of multigene panels has increased genetic testing options for women with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). We designed a decision model to compare costs and probabilities of identifying a deleterious mutation or variant of uncertain significance (VUS) using different genetic testing strategies. METHODS: A decision model was developed to compare costs and outcomes of two testing strategies for women with EOC: multigene testing (MGT) versus single-gene testing for BRCA1/2. Outcomes were mean cost and number of deleterious mutations and VUSs identified. Model inputs were obtained from published genetic testing data in EOC. One-way sensitivity analyses and Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: No family history model: MGT cost $1,160 more on average than BRCA1/2 testing and identified an additional 3.8 deleterious mutations for every 100 women tested. For each additional deleterious mutation identified, MGT cost $30,812 and identified 5.4 additional VUSs. Family history model: MGT cost $654 more on average and identified an additional 7.0 deleterious mutations for every 100 women tested. For each additional deleterious mutation identified, MGT cost $9,909 and identified 2.6 additional VUSs. CONCLUSION: MGT was associated with a higher additional cost per deleterious mutation identified and a higher ratio of VUS burden to actionable information in women with no family history as compared with women with a family history. Family history should be considered when determining an initial genetic testing platform in women with EOC.

Robotic surgical training: Where are we?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Over the past 10years, robotic surgery has revolutionized the advancement of MIS in gynecologic oncology. As the use of robotic surgery has increased, so has the interest in the surgical training of gynecologic oncology fellows. The purpose of this review is to summarize the state of robotic surgical education in Gynecologic Oncology. METHODS: Several electronic databases were searched to identify studies that discussed robotic surgical education in gynecologic oncology. Particular attention was given to articles that discussed educational curriculum. The various curriculums were compared and summarized. RESULTS: The first reports of robotic surgery curriculums in gynecologic oncology emerged in 2008. Prior to that the early adapters had to rely on less structured curriculums that essentially used live animal models and cadaveric dissections on the robot to simulate live surgery. More recent surgical curriculums are more structured and include the same basic components: didactics and a graduated hands-on experience. There is also an accredited robotic educational curriculum, the Fundamentals of Robotic Surgery (FRS), which combine an on-line curriculum with dry lab and operating room components that can be scored using a validated assessment tool. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic surgical education has come a long way in the decade that the robotic platform has been available in the U.S. Although there is still no standardized curriculum, most fellowship training programs in gynecologic oncology have fairly consistent training. Simulation training is another tool that can help a surgeon achieve proficiency quicker.