Effectiveness of the risk of malignancy index and the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm in a cohort of women with ovarian cancer: does histotype and stage matter?

OBJECTIVE: To examine the performance of the Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) and Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) by histologic subtype and stage of disease in a cohort of women with ovarian cancer. METHODS: All patients with confirmed ovarian cancer at the Princess Margaret Hospital between February 2011 and January 2013 were eligible for study inclusion. Preoperative cancer antigen 125, human epididymis protein 4, and ultrasound findings were reviewed, and the sensitivity and false-negative rates of the RMI and ROMA were determined by stage of disease and tumor histology. RESULTS: A total of 131 patients with ovarian cancer were identified. High-grade serous (HGS) histology was most frequently associated with stage III/IV disease (n = 46 [72% of stage III/IV]) vs stage I (n = 5 [11% of stage I]; P < 0.0001). Clear cell (CC) and endometrioid (EC) histology presented most commonly with stage I disease (n = 9 [20%] and n = 13 [29% of stage I cases], respectively). Median cancer antigen 125 and human epididymis protein 4 values were significantly higher for HGS than for EC or CC histology. Risk of Malignancy Index II demonstrated the highest sensitivity of the 3 RMI algorithms. All RMIs and ROMA were significantly more sensitive in predicting malignancy in patients with HGS than EC or CC histology. Risk of Malignancy Index II (n = 38) and ROMA (n = 35) exhibited sensitivities of 68% and 54% and false-negative rates of 32% and 46%, respectively, for patients with stage I disease vs sensitivities of 94% and 93% and false-negative rates of 6% and 7% for patients with stage III/IV disease. CONCLUSION: Both RMI and ROMA performed well for the detection of advanced ovarian cancer and HGS histology. These triaging algorithms do not perform well in patients with stage I disease where EC and CC histologies predominate. Clinicians should be cautious using RMI or ROMA scoring tools to triage isolated adnexal masses because many patients with stage I malignancies would be missed.

Performance characteristics of a brief Family History Questionnaire to screen for Lynch syndrome in women with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The brief Family History Questionnaire (bFHQ) was developed to identify endometrial cancer patients whose family histories suggest Lynch syndrome (LS). We compared the bFHQ, extended Family History Questionnaire (eFHQ) and dictated medical records (DMRs) to determine which family history screening strategy is superior in identifying LS in unselected women with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer that have undergone universal germline testing. METHODS: Prospective cohort study recruited women with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer to evaluate screening strategies to identify LS. Participants completed bFHQ and eFHQ, had tumor assessed with immunohistochemistry (IHC) for mismatch repair proteins (MMR) and micro-satellite instability testing and underwent universal germline testing for LS. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) were compared between the family history screening strategies as well as IHC. RESULTS: 118 of 182 eligible patients (65%) consented; 87 patients (74%) were evaluable with both family history and germline mutation status. Median age was 61years (range 26-91). All 7 patients with confirmed LS were correctly identified by bFHQ, compared to 5 and 4 by eFHQ and DMR, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV values of bFHQ were 100%, 76.5%, 25.9% and 100%, respectively, performing similar to IHC testing. While eFHQ was more specific than bFHQ (86.7% vs. 76.5%, P=0.007), 2 cases of LS were missed. CONCLUSIONS: The patient-administered bFHQ effectively identified women with confirmed LS and is a good screening tool to triage women with endometrial cancer for further genetic assessment.

Performance characteristics of screening strategies for Lynch syndrome in unselected women with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer who have undergone universal germline mutation testing.

BACKGROUND: Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for mismatch repair protein expression, microsatellite instability (MSI) testing, tumor morphology, and family history were compared to determine which screening strategy is superior in identifying Lynch syndrome (LS) in unselected women with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer (EC) who have undergone universal germline mutation testing. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed that recruited women with newly diagnosed EC. Participants completed a family history assessment with molecular characterization of EC with IHC and MSI testing and EC assessment for LS-associated morphologic features and underwent universal germline mutation testing for mutations in the mismatch repair pathway. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were compared between the screening strategies. RESULTS: A total of 118 (65%) of 182 consecutive women with EC participated. Of these, 34 women (29%) had tumors that were IHC deficient and 27 women (23%; N = 117) had tumors that were positive for MSI. Twenty women (17%) met IHC criteria and 16 women (15.2%, N = 105) met family history criteria based on Ontario Ministry of Health Criteria for the genetic assessment for LS. Seven women (5.9%) had a germline mutation: 4 had MLH1 (mutL homolog 1), 2 had MSH6 (mutS homolog 6), and 1 had MSH2 (mutS homolog 2). IHC in women aged <60 years had the best performance characteristics, with a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 86.1%, a positive predictive value of 58.3%, and a negative predictive value of 100%. Family history and tumor morphology both had the lowest sensitivity at 71.4%. Overall tumor morphology had the poorest performance, with a specificity of 42.1%. CONCLUSIONS: The mutation rate of 5.9% was higher than expected in this unselected cohort of women with EC. The superior screening strategy to identify women presenting with EC is universal IHC screening in women aged <60 years.

Lymphoid enhancer factor-1 mediates loading of Pax3 to a promoter harbouring lymphoid enhancer factor-1 binding sites resulting in enhancement of transcription.

The transcription factor, Pax3, alters transcription by binding directly to promoter regions harbouring sequences recognized by either its paired domain or its homeodomain. We demonstrated previously that the promoter regions of many of the genes whose expression was altered during a Pax3-induced mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition harboured sequences recognized by lymphoid enhancer factor-1 (Lef1). Given the apparent lack of DNA-binding consensus sequences for Pax3 in these promoters, it was hypothesized that Pax3 might alter transcriptional activity of promoters harbouring Lef1-binding sites independent of Pax3 binding to DNA. We describe here a novel mode of Pax3-dependent regulation of transcription that is mediated through DNA-independent binding to Lef1. Specifically, we demonstrate that Pax3 binds to Lef1, determined in binding assays and co-immunoprecipitation of endogenous Pax3 and Lef1. Binding assays employing deletion mutants of Pax3 and Lef1 determined that association was mediated through the homeodomain of Pax3 and the first half of the Lef1 DNA-binding domain. The significance of this association was demonstrated in transcriptional assays using a luciferase reporter gene downstream of a model promoter harbouring Lef1 DNA-binding consensus sites. Pax3 augmented Lef1-dependent transactivation from this promoter. This increase in transcriptional activity occurred in the absence and presence of added beta-catenin. Chromatin immunoprecipitation assays demonstrated further that Pax3-association to complexes bound to DNA harbouring Lef1 consensus sequences was dependent on Lef1. These data reveal a novel mode of transcriptional regulation by Pax3. This mode of transcriptional regulation suggests further that Pax3 activity may directly effect the expression of factors regulated by signal transduction pathways dependent on Lef1.