Prognostic gene expression signature for high-grade serous ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Median overall survival (OS) for women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) is ∼4 years, yet survival varies widely between patients. There are no well-established, gene expression signatures associated with prognosis. The aim of this study was to develop a robust prognostic signature for OS in patients with HGSOC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Expression of 513 genes, selected from a meta-analysis of 1455 tumours and other candidates, was measured using NanoString technology from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumour tissue collected from 3769 women with HGSOC from multiple studies. Elastic net regularization for survival analysis was applied to develop a prognostic model for 5-year OS, trained on 2702 tumours from 15 studies and evaluated on an independent set of 1067 tumours from six studies. RESULTS: Expression levels of 276 genes were associated with OS (false discovery rate < 0.05) in covariate-adjusted single-gene analyses. The top five genes were TAP1, ZFHX4, CXCL9, FBN1 and PTGER3 (P < 0.001). The best performing prognostic signature included 101 genes enriched in pathways with treatment implications. Each gain of one standard deviation in the gene expression score conferred a greater than twofold increase in risk of death [hazard ratio (HR) 2.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.02-2.71; P < 0.001]. Median survival [HR (95% CI)] by gene expression score quintile was 9.5 (8.3 to -), 5.4 (4.6-7.0), 3.8 (3.3-4.6), 3.2 (2.9-3.7) and 2.3 (2.1-2.6) years. CONCLUSION: The OTTA-SPOT (Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium - Stratified Prognosis of Ovarian Tumours) gene expression signature may improve risk stratification in clinical trials by identifying patients who are least likely to achieve 5-year survival. The identified novel genes associated with the outcome may also yield opportunities for the development of targeted therapeutic approaches.

Obesity and survival among women with ovarian cancer: results from the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have reported a modest association between obesity and risk of ovarian cancer; however, whether it is also associated with survival and whether this association varies for the different histologic subtypes are not clear. We undertook an international collaborative analysis to assess the association between body mass index (BMI), assessed shortly before diagnosis, progression-free survival (PFS), ovarian cancer-specific survival and overall survival (OS) among women with invasive ovarian cancer. METHODS: We used original data from 21 studies, which included 12 390 women with ovarian carcinoma. We combined study-specific adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) using random-effects models to estimate pooled HRs (pHR). We further explored associations by histologic subtype. RESULTS: Overall, 6715 (54%) deaths occurred during follow-up. A significant OS disadvantage was observed for women who were obese (BMI: 30-34.9, pHR: 1.10 (95% confidence intervals (CIs): 0.99-1.23); BMI: ⩾35, pHR: 1.12 (95% CI: 1.01-1.25)). Results were similar for PFS and ovarian cancer-specific survival. In analyses stratified by histologic subtype, associations were strongest for women with low-grade serous (pHR: 1.12 per 5 kg m(-2)) and endometrioid subtypes (pHR: 1.08 per 5 kg m(-2)), and more modest for the high-grade serous (pHR: 1.04 per 5 kg m(-2)) subtype, but only the association with high-grade serous cancers was significant. CONCLUSIONS: Higher BMI is associated with adverse survival among the majority of women with ovarian cancer.

The intronic G13964C variant in p53 is not a high-risk mutation in familial breast cancer in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 account for approximately 50% of breast cancer families with more than four affected cases, whereas exonic mutations in p53, PTEN, CHK2 and ATM may account for a very small proportion. It was recently reported that an intronic variant of p53--G13964C--occurred in three out of 42 (7.1%) 'hereditary' breast cancer patients, but not in any of 171 'sporadic' breast cancer control individuals (P = 0.0003). If this relatively frequent occurrence of G13964C in familial breast cancer and absence in control individuals were confirmed, then this would suggest that the G13964C variant plays a role in breast cancer susceptibility. METHOD: We genotyped 71 familial breast cancer patients and 143 control individuals for the G13964C variant using polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis. RESULTS: Three (4.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0-8.9%) G13964C heterozygotes were identified. The variant was also identified in 5 out of 143 (3.5%; 95% CI 0.6-6.4%) control individuals without breast cancer or a family history of breast cancer, however, which is no different to the proportion found in familial cases (P = 0.9). CONCLUSION: The present study would have had 80% power to detect an odds ratio of 4.4, and we therefore conclude that the G13946C polymorphism is not a 'high-risk' mutation for familial breast cancer.