Pembrolizumab or placebo with chemoradiotherapy followed by pembrolizumab or placebo for newly diagnosed, high-risk, locally advanced cervical cancer (ENGOT-cx11/GOG-3047/KEYNOTE-A18): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab has shown efficacy in persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer. The effect of chemoradiotherapy might be enhanced by immunotherapy. In this phase 3 trial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of adding pembrolizumab to chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 ENGOT-cx11/GOG-3047/KEYNOTE-A18 clinical trial, adults (age ≥18 years) at 176 medical centres in 30 countries with newly diagnosed, high-risk, locally advanced cervical cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive voice-response system with integrated web response to receive 5 cycles of pembrolizumab (200 mg) or placebo every 3 weeks plus chemoradiotherapy, followed by 15 cycles of pembrolizumab (400 mg) or placebo every 6 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by planned external beam radiotherapy type (intensity-modulated radiotherapy or volumetric-modulated arc therapy vs non-intensity-modulated radiotherapy or non-volumetric-modulated arc therapy), cervical cancer stage at screening (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2014 stage IB2-IIB node positive vs stage III-IVA), and planned total radiotherapy (external beam radiotherapy plus brachytherapy) dose (<70 Gy vs ≥70 Gy equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions). Primary endpoints were progression-free survival per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1-by investigator or by histopathologic confirmation of suspected disease progression-and overall survival. Primary analysis was conducted in the intention-to-treat population, which included all randomly allocated participants. Safety was assessed in the as-treated population, which included all randomly allocated patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04221945, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between June 9, 2020, and Dec 15, 2022, 1060 participants were randomly assigned to treatment, with 529 assigned to the pembrolizumab-chemoradiotherapy group and 531 to the placebo-chemoradiotherapy group. At data cutoff (Jan 9, 2023), median follow-up was 17·9 months (IQR 11·3-22·3) in both treatment groups. Median progression-free survival was not reached in either group; rates at 24 months were 68% in the pembrolizumab-chemoradiotherapy group versus 57% in the placebo-chemoradiotherapy group. The hazard ratio (HR) for disease progression or death was 0·70 (95% CI 0·55-0·89, p=0·0020), meeting the protocol-specified primary objective. Overall survival at 24 months was 87% in the pembrolizumab-chemoradiotherapy group and 81% in the placebo-chemoradiotherapy group (information fraction 42·9%). The HR for death was 0·73 (0·49-1·07); these data have not crossed the boundary of statistical significance. Grade 3 or higher adverse event rates were 75% in the pembrolizumab-chemoradiotherapy group and 69% in the placebo-chemoradiotherapy group. INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab plus chemoradiotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk, locally advanced cervical cancer. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co (MSD).

Health-related quality of life in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer treated with niraparib vs placebo: Results from the phase 3 randomized PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with ovarian cancer (OC) who received niraparib as first-line maintenance therapy. METHODS: PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 (NCT02655016) enrolled patients with newly diagnosed advanced OC who responded to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomized (2:1) to niraparib or placebo once daily in 28-day cycles until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or death. HRQoL was assessed as a prespecified secondary end point using patient-reported responses to the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), the EORTC QLQ Ovarian Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-OV28), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian Symptom Index (FOSI), and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. Assessments were collected at baseline and every 8 weeks (±7 days) for 56 weeks, beginning on cycle 1/day 1, then every 12 weeks (±7 days) thereafter while the patient received study treatment. RESULTS: Among trial participants (niraparib, n = 487; placebo, n = 246), PRO adherence exceeded 80% for all instruments across all cycles. Patients reported no decline over time in HRQoL measured via EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QoL and FOSI overall scores. Scores for abdominal/gastrointestinal symptoms (EORTC QLQ-OV28) and nausea and vomiting, appetite loss, and constipation (EORTC QLQ-C30) were higher (worse symptoms) in niraparib-treated patients than placebo-treated patients; except for constipation, these differences resolved over time. Patients did not self-report any worsening from baseline of fatigue, headache, insomnia, or abdominal pain on questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some early, largely transient increases in gastrointestinal symptoms, patients with OC treated with niraparib first-line maintenance therapy reported no worsening in overall HRQoL.

Niraparib and dostarlimab for the treatment of recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: results of a Phase II study (MOONSTONE/GOG-3032).

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the efficacy, safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of the treatment regimen of dostarlimab, a programmed death-1 inhibitor, combined with niraparib, a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, in patients with BRCA wild type (BRCAwt) recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) who had previously received bevacizumab treatment. METHODS: This Phase II, open-label, single-arm, multicenter study, conducted in the USA, enrolled patients with recurrent PROC to receive niraparib and dostarlimab until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (up to 3 years). A preplanned interim futility analysis was performed after the first 41 patients had undergone ≥1 radiographic evaluation (approximately 9 weeks from the first treatment). RESULTS: The prespecified interim futility criterion was met and the study was therefore terminated. For the 41 patients assessed, the objective response rate (ORR) was 7.3% (95% confidence interval: 1.5-19.9); no patients achieved a complete response, 3 patients (7.3%) achieved a partial response (duration of response; 3.0, 3.8, and 9.2 months, respectively), and 9 patients (22.0%) had stable disease. In total, 39 patients (95.1%) experienced a treatment-related adverse event, but no new safety issues were observed. HRQoL, assessed using FOSI, or Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Ovarian Symptom Index scores, worsened over time compared with baseline scores. CONCLUSIONS: The study was terminated due to the observed ORR at the interim futility analysis. This highlights a need for effective therapies in treating patients with recurrent BRCAwt PROC.

ARTISTRY-7: phase III trial of nemvaleukin alfa plus pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

Standard single-agent nonplatinum chemotherapy provides only modest benefit in a small proportion of patients with platinum-resistant/-refractory ovarian cancer, with objective response rates of 6-20% and progression-free survival of ≈3-4 months. Nemvaleukin alfa (nemvaleukin, ALKS 4230) is a novel cytokine designed to capture and expand the therapeutic potential of high-dose interleukin-2 (IL-2) while mitigating its associated toxicity issues. Nemvaleukin preferentially activates cytotoxic CD8+ T cells and natural killer cells with minimal, non-dose-dependent effects on CD4+ regulatory T cells. The global, randomized, open-label, phase III ARTISTRY-7 trial will compare efficacy and safety of nemvaleukin plus pembrolizumab with chemotherapy in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. The primary end point is investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Clinical Trial Registration: GOG-3063; ENGOT-OV68; NCT05092360 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

In many patients with ovarian cancer who are treated with platinum-based chemotherapy, the tumor comes back after a few months and fails to respond to repeated treatment. This type of disease is called platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC). Researchers are searching for new medicines to help more patients with PROC. One treatment approach that has shown promise in different cancers is called immunotherapy. These medicines work by helping the body's immune system attack cancer cells. One of the immunotherapies being studied is called nemvaleukin. It is designed to trigger specific immune responses that may result in the immune system attacking cancer cells while potentially avoiding other immune responses that can block the attack or cause certain unwanted side effects. Nemvaleukin is being studied in a variety of cancer types. In a worldwide clinical trial called ARTISTRY-7, researchers are investigating how nemvaleukin works in patients with PROC when given with another immunotherapy called pembrolizumab. Patients who participate in this trial will be randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups: the combination of nemvaleukin and pembrolizumab, nemvaleukin by itself, pembrolizumab by itself, or a type of chemotherapy selected by the treating physician. The main purpose of ARTISTRY-7 is to understand whether the combination of nemvaleukin and pembrolizumab helps patients with PROC live longer without their cancer getting worse. At the time of this writing, ARTISTRY-7 is open for new patients to join.

Quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease or toxicity and quality-adjusted progression-free survival with niraparib maintenance in first-line ovarian cancer in the PRIMA trial.

Background: The PRIMA phase 3 trial showed niraparib significantly prolongs median progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (OC) responsive to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, including those who had tumors with homologous recombination deficiency (HRd). This analysis of PRIMA examined the quality-adjusted PFS (QA-PFS) and quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease or toxicity (Q-TWiST) of patients on maintenance niraparib versus placebo. Methods: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive once-daily maintenance niraparib (n = 487) or placebo (n = 246). QA-PFS was defined as the PFS of patients adjusted for their health-related quality of life (HRQoL) prior to disease progression, measured using European Quality of Life Five-Dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaire index scores from the PRIMA trial. Q-TWiST was calculated by combining data on PFS, duration of symptomatic grade ⩾2 adverse events (fatigue or asthenia, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and abdominal bloating) prior to disease progression, and EQ-5D index scores. Analyses used data collected up to the last date of PFS assessment (May 17, 2019). Results: The restricted mean QA-PFS was significantly longer with niraparib versus placebo in the HRd (n = 373) and overall intention-to-treat (ITT; n = 733) populations (mean gains of 6.5 [95% confidence interval; CI, 3.9-8.9] and 4.1 [95% CI, 2.2-5.8] months, respectively). There were also significant improvements in restricted mean Q-TWiST for niraparib versus placebo (mean gains of 5.9 [95% CI, 3.5-8.6] and 3.5 [95% CI, 1.7-5.6] months, respectively) in the HRd and ITT populations. Conclusions: In patients with advanced OC, first-line niraparib maintenance was associated with significant gains in QA-PFS and Q-TWiST versus placebo. These findings demonstrate that niraparib maintenance treatment is associated with a PFS improvement and that treatment benefit is maintained even when HRQoL and/or toxicity data are combined with PFS in a single measure. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02655016; trial registration date: January 13, 2016. Plain language summary: Background: In a large clinical trial called PRIMA, patients with advanced cancer of the ovary (ovarian cancer) were given either niraparib (a type of cancer medicine) or placebo (a pill containing no medicine/active substances) after having chemotherapy (another type of cancer medicine). Taking niraparib after chemotherapy is called maintenance therapy and aims to give patients more time before their cancer returns or gets worse than if they were not given any further treatment. In the PRIMA trial, patients who took niraparib did have more time before their cancer progressed than if they took placebo. However, it is important to consider patients' quality of life, which can be made worse by cancer symptoms and/or side effects of treatment. Here, we assessed the overall benefit of niraparib for patients in PRIMA.Methods: Both the length of time before disease progression (or survival time) and quality of life were considered using two different analyses:● The first analysis was called quality-adjusted PFS (QA-PFS) and looked at how long patients survived with good quality of life.● The second analysis was called quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease or toxicity (Q-TWiST) and looked at how long patients survived without cancer symptoms or treatment side effects.Results: The PRIMA trial included 733 patients; 487 took niraparib and 246 took placebo. Around half of the patients in both groups had a type of ovarian cancer that responds particularly well to drugs like niraparib - they are known as homologous recombination deficiency (HRd) patients.● When information on quality of life (collected from patient questionnaires) and survival was combined in the QA-PFS analysis, HRd patients who took niraparib had approximately 6.5 months longer with a good quality of life before disease progression than those who took placebo. In the overall group of patients (including HRd patients and non-HRd patients), those who took niraparib had approximately 4 months longer than with placebo.● Using the second analysis (Q-TWiST) to combine information on survival with cancer symptoms and treatment side effects, the HRd patients taking niraparib had approximately 6 months longer without cancer symptoms or treatment side effects (such as nausea or vomiting) than patients taking placebo. In the overall group of patients, those taking niraparib had approximately 3.5 months longer without these cancer symptoms/side effects than patients receiving placebo.Conclusions: These results show that the survival benefits of niraparib treatment remain when accounting for patients' quality of life. These benefits were seen not only in HRd patients who are known to respond better to niraparib, but in the overall group of patients who took niraparib.

Olaparib With or Without Cediranib Versus Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Recurrent Platinum-Sensitive Ovarian Cancer (NRG-GY004): A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: Platinum-based chemotherapy is the standard of care for platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer, but complications from repeated platinum therapy occur. We assessed the activity of two all-oral nonplatinum alternatives, olaparib or olaparib/cediranib, versus platinum-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: NRG-GY004 is an open-label, randomized, phase III trial conducted in the United States and Canada. Eligible patients had high-grade serous or endometrioid platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to platinum-based chemotherapy, olaparib, or olaparib/cediranib. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary end points included activity within germline BRCA-mutated or wild-type subgroups and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). RESULTS: Between February 04, 2016, and November 13, 2017, 565 eligible patients were randomly assigned. Median PFS was 10.3 (95% CI, 8.7 to 11.2), 8.2 (95% CI, 6.6 to 8.7), and 10.4 (95% CI, 8.5 to 12.5) months with chemotherapy, olaparib, and olaparib/cediranib, respectively. Olaparib/cediranib did not improve PFS versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.86; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.10; P = .077). In women with germline BRCA mutation, the PFS HR versus chemotherapy was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.32 to 0.94) for olaparib/cediranib and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.37 to 1.07) for olaparib. In women without a germline BRCA mutation, the PFS HR versus chemotherapy was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.30) for olaparib/cediranib and 1.41 (95% CI, 1.07 to 1.86) for olaparib. Hematologic adverse events occurred more commonly with chemotherapy; however, nonhematologic adverse events were higher with olaparib/cediranib. In 489 patients evaluable for PROs, patients receiving olaparib/cediranib scored on average 1.1 points worse on the NFOSI-DRS-P subscale (97.5% CI, -2.0 to -0.2, P = .0063) versus chemotherapy; no difference between olaparib and chemotherapy was observed. CONCLUSION: Combination olaparib/cediranib did not improve PFS compared with chemotherapy and resulted in reduced PROs. Notably, in patients with a germline BRCA mutation, both olaparib and olaparib/cediranib had significant clinical activity.

Veliparib with First-Line Chemotherapy and as Maintenance Therapy in Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Data are limited regarding the use of poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, such as veliparib, in combination with chemotherapy followed by maintenance as initial treatment in patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. METHODS: In an international, phase 3, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed the efficacy of veliparib added to first-line induction chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel and continued as maintenance monotherapy in patients with previously untreated stage III or IV high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive chemotherapy plus placebo followed by placebo maintenance (control), chemotherapy plus veliparib followed by placebo maintenance (veliparib combination only), or chemotherapy plus veliparib followed by veliparib maintenance (veliparib throughout). Cytoreductive surgery could be performed before initiation or after 3 cycles of trial treatment. Combination chemotherapy was 6 cycles, and maintenance therapy was 30 additional cycles. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the veliparib-throughout group as compared with the control group, analyzed sequentially in the BRCA-mutation cohort, the cohort with homologous-recombination deficiency (HRD) (which included the BRCA-mutation cohort), and the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 1140 patients underwent randomization. In the BRCA-mutation cohort, the median progression-free survival was 34.7 months in the veliparib-throughout group and 22.0 months in the control group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 0.68; P<0.001); in the HRD cohort, it was 31.9 months and 20.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95 CI, 0.43 to 0.76; P<0.001); and in the intention-to-treat population, it was 23.5 months and 17.3 months (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.83; P<0.001). Veliparib led to a higher incidence of anemia and thrombocytopenia when combined with chemotherapy as well as of nausea and fatigue overall. CONCLUSIONS: Across all trial populations, a regimen of carboplatin, paclitaxel, and veliparib induction therapy followed by veliparib maintenance therapy led to significantly longer progression-free survival than carboplatin plus paclitaxel induction therapy alone. The independent value of adding veliparib during induction therapy without veliparib maintenance was less clear. (Funded by AbbVie; VELIA/GOG-3005 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02470585.).

Niraparib monotherapy for late-line treatment of ovarian cancer (QUADRA): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Late-line treatment options for patients with ovarian cancer are few, with the proportion of patients achieving an overall response typically less than 10%, and median overall survival after third-line therapy of 5-9 months. In this study (QUADRA), we investigated the activity of niraparib monotherapy as the fourth or later line of therapy. METHODS: QUADRA was a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study that evaluated the safety and activity of niraparib in adult patients (≥18 years) with relapsed, high-grade serous (grade 2 or 3) epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer who had been treated with three or more previous chemotherapy regimens. The study was done in the USA and Canada, and 56 sites screened patients (50 sites treated at least one patient). Patients received oral niraparib 300 mg once daily continuously, beginning on day 1 and every cycle (28 days) thereafter until disease progression. The primary objective was the proportion of patients achieving an investigator-assessed confirmed overall response in patients with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive tumours (including patients with BRCA and without BRCA mutations) sensitive to their last platinum-based therapy who had received three or four previous anticancer therapy regimens (primary efficacy population). Efficacy analyses were additionally done in all dosed patients with measurable disease at baseline. FINDINGS: Between April 1, 2015 and Nov 1, 2017, we screened 729 patients for eligibility and enrolled 463 patients, who were initiated on niraparib therapy. At the time of database lock (April 11, 2018), enrolment had closed and the study was ongoing, with 21 patients still on treatment. Patients had received a median of four (IQR 3-5) previous lines of therapy, and the median follow-up for overall survival was 12·2 months (IQR 3·7-22·1). 151 (33%) of 463 patients were resistant and 161 (35%) of 463 patients were refractory to the last administered platinum therapy. 13 (28%) of 47 patients in the primary efficacy population achieved an overall response according to RECIST (95% CI 15·6-42·6; one-sided p=0·00053). The most common drug-related grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (113 [24%] of 463 patients) and thrombocytopenia (95 [21%] of 463 patients). The most common treatment-emergent serious adverse events were small intestinal obstruction (34 [7%] of 463 patients), thrombocytopenia (34 [7%] of 463 patients), and vomiting (27 [6%] of 463 patients). One death due to gastric haemorrhage was considered treatment related. INTERPRETATION: We observed clinically relevant activity of niraparib among women with heavily pretreated ovarian cancer, especially in patients with HRD-positive platinum-sensitive disease, which includes not only patients with a BRCA mutation but also a population with BRCA wild-type disease. We identified no new safety signals. Our data support expansion of the treatment indication for poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors to include patients with HRD-positive ovarian cancer beyond those with BRCA mutations. FUNDING: Tesaro.

Suppression of ovarian cancer cell tumorigenicity and evasion of Cisplatin resistance using a truncated epidermal growth factor receptor in a rat model.

The overexpression of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is associated with a poor prognosis in ovarian cancer. The dominant-negative EGFR (EGFR-DNR) is a truncated receptor that lacks the tyrosine kinase domain and is devoid of signaling capability. This study tested the effects of a EGFR-DNR approach in ovarian cancer cells. NuTu-19, a rat ovarian cancer cell line was rendered resistant to cisplatin. Both NuTu-19 and resistant cells were infected with a retroviral vector containing the EGFR-DNR. NuTu-19 and NuTu-DNR (NuTu-19 cells expressing the EGFR-DNR) were injected into Fisher 344 immunocompetent rats. Western blot analyses were used to assess signal transduction pathways. All rats injected with NuTu-DNR cells remained healthy following tumor injection. In contrast, 100% of the rats injected with the NuTu-19 and NuTu-Sham (NuTu-19 cells expressing an empty vector) died of disease progression at the end of 15 weeks (P = 0.00009). On Western blot analysis, both NuTu-19 and NuTu-Sham cells showed a strong activation of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) after exposure to EGF. Cisplatin-resistant cell lines showed an enhanced EGF stimulatory effect via the MAPK pathway compared with parental cells. The EGFR-DNR significantly reduced the ability of EGF to induce cell signaling through the MAPK pathway. Lastly, the EGFR-DNR can partially reverse cisplatin resistance in drug-resistant cells. The EGFR-DNR approach suggests that EGFR confers a growth advantage to NuTu-19 cells in vivo. Thus, EGFR blockade may ultimately prove to be a useful therapeutic tool in the treatment of cisplatin-sensitive and cisplatin-resistant ovarian cancers.

The impact of complete surgical staging on adjuvant treatment decisions in endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the impact of complete surgical staging on adjuvant treatment decisions in endometrial cancer. METHODS: Two hundred ninety-one patients with endometrial cancer treated between 1996 and 2002 were identified through patient registry. Two hundred seventy-one (93%) of these women were completely surgically staged. RESULTS: Average patient age: 64 years (23-92); average weight: 198 lb (99-350+); median follow-up: 12 months (0-77). Eighteen percent of tumors had surgical grade greater than preoperative grade. One hundred forty-nine patients had low-risk uterine factors, three with positive nodes (2%). One hundred forty-six out of 149 patients had negative nodes, received no adjuvant therapy, and four recurred (3%). Ninety-six patients had intermediate risk uterine factors, 16 with positive nodes (17%). Eighty out of 96 patients had negative nodes. Twenty-one out of 80 patients (26%) received whole pelvis radiation or chemotherapy. Three out of 21 patients (14%) had distant recurrences. Fifty out of 80 patients (63%) received no adjuvant therapy. Six out of 50 patients (12%) recurred, three distant and three distant and in the pelvis. The recurrence rate of patients with intermediate risk uterine factors that received adjuvant therapy was not statistically different than that of patients receiving no adjuvant therapy (P = 1.00, Fisher's exact test). Forty-six patients had high-risk uterine factors, 26 with positive nodes (55%). The recurrence rate for stage I disease was 5% (11/211), for stage II disease 14% (2/14), for stage III disease 21% (11/52), and for stage IV disease 50% (7/14). CONCLUSION: Complete surgical staging adds important information that influences adjuvant treatment decisions. Patients with surgical stage I and II endometrial cancer do not benefit from whole pelvis radiation therapy.

In vitro chemoresistance and biomarker profiles are unique for histologic subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether there is a relationship between histologic subtype of epithelial ovarian cancer and chemoresistance, we evaluated ovarian carcinomas of six histologic subtypes and correlated histology with in vitro drug response. Biomarker profiles (p53, Her-2 neu, and EGFR) were also evaluated to determine if their expression patterns were associated with histology. METHODS: In vitro drug response profiles for different histologic subsets of epithelial ovarian carcinomas exposed to standard relevant chemotherapy agents were determined in the Extreme Drug Resistance assay (EDR). Immunohistochemistry techniques were employed to determine biomarker expression. RESULTS: Of 5195 referred serial cases of epithelial ovarian cancer, there were 2660 papillary serous, 303 endometrioid, 142 mucinous, 102 clear cell, 952 undifferentiated carcinomas, and 42 tumors of low malignant potential. For the samples as a whole, the incidences of extreme drug resistance to the tested chemotherapeutic agents were cisplatin 10%, carboplatin 16%, cyclophosphamide 16%, doxorubicin 40%, gemcitabine 21%, paclitaxel 22%, and topotecan 13%. When compared to papillary serous tumors, mucinous tumors were more frequently resistant to cisplatin (10% vs. 18%) but less frequently resistant to topotecan (13% vs. 5%) and doxorubicin (42% vs. 16%). Endometrioid tumors were less resistant to cisplatin (10% vs. 6%) and doxorubicin (42% vs. 20%). Clear cell and undifferentiated tumors had the lowest rates of EDR to paclitaxel (13% and 18%) and cyclophosphamide (7% and 11%), while borderline tumors showed high rates of EDR to these agents (52% and 63%, respectively). With respect to biomarker profiles, mP53 was detected in 46%, Her-2 neu in 16%, and EGFR in 30% of the cases evaluated. As compared to all other subtypes, clear cell carcinomas had significantly higher Her-2 neu expression (19%). Relative to papillary serous carcinomas, borderline tumors exhibited significantly lower rates of mP53 expression (60% vs.17%). CONCLUSIONS: We found significant differences in the frequencies of extreme drug resistance to chemotherapeutic agents and biomarker expression among histologic subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancer. The data collected in this investigation may provide a guide for stratification of patients entering clinical trials based on histology and biomarker expression.