Ioana I. Braicu

Transcriptome Analysis of Matched Cohorts of Long- and Short-term Survivors in Advanced High-grade Serous Tubo-ovarian Cancer

Abstract Purpose: The late-stage diagnosis and the aggressiveness of high-grade serous tubo-ovarian carcinoma (HGSC) often result in poor survival outcomes, yet some patients exhibit an exceptionally long survival rate. This study aimed to identify molecular profiles associated with long-/short-term survival in HGSC, with the goal of better understanding protective factors and developing new treatments. Experimental Design: To discover molecular drivers causing the aggressiveness of HGSC, tumor samples from 12 long-term HGSC survivors (>7 years overall survival) and 12 short-term survivors (<1 year overall survival) were analyzed using targeted RNA sequencing followed by computational analysis. We investigated differentially expressed genes and their functional relevance, inferred differences in cell type composition and signaling pathways, as well as mutation status. To validate our findings, we simulated our study design by using HGSC The Cancer Genome Atlas dataset samples. We evaluated differential patterns of gene expression between these two groups and developed molecular profiles of HGSC that correlate with survival phenotypes. Results: Besides known molecular cancer drivers and indicators of poor prognosis, we identified specific transcriptional changes between short- and long-term survivors of HGSC, which indicate that immune processes play a fundamental role in long-term survivors. Our computational analysis reveals an important role for the ensemble of IFN-γ signaling and the RFX transcription factors, as well as the immune cell composition of the tumor microenvironment. Conclusions: Specific immunologic requirements involving IFN-γ signaling and affected pathways seem to be relevant for long-term survival in the generally considered nonimmunogenic HGSC, necessitating further research to improve diagnostic strategies and targeted therapies.

GANNET53 Part II: A European Phase I/II Trial of the HSP90 Inhibitor Ganetespib in High-Grade Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer—A Study of the GANNET53 Consortium

Abstract Purpose: Mutant p53 stabilized by heat shock protein 90 (HSP90) is a novel target in oncology. The open-label, randomized phase II GANNET53 trial is the first to evaluate the HSP90 inhibitor ganetespib (G) with paclitaxel (P) in platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (EUDRACT 2013-003868-31; EU FP7 #602602). Patients and Methods: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive G + P or P alone until progression. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and PFS rate at 6 months. Exploratory endpoints were biomarkers based on p53 and HSP90. Results: A total of 133 patients were enrolled. The median PFS was 3.5 (G + P) and 5.3 months (P) (HR = 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.897–1.895; P = 0.16), and PFS rates at 6 months were 22% (G + P) and 33% (P). No significant differences were found in overall survival, objective response rate, and post-progression PFS between arms. The most frequent adverse events were diarrhea (79% vs. 26%), anemia (46% vs. 51%), nausea (41% vs. 40%), and peripheral neuropathy (36% vs. 47%). Serious adverse events were more common in G + P (39.5% vs. 23.3%). Gastrointestinal perforation was a new safety finding. Despite a high TP53 mutation frequency, HSP90–p53 complexes were detected in only 39.6% of the cases and were also detected stably during treatment. In vitro, no synergistic effects of G + P were observed, and mutant p53 depletion did not sensitize ovarian cancer cells to treatment. Conclusions: Although no major safety findings were observed, G + P did not lead to survival benefit. Our companion diagnostic program confirmed that G + P do not favorably cooperate in killing ovarian cancer cells.

AHRR and SFRP2 in primary versus recurrent high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma and their prognostic implication

Abstract Background The aim of this study was to analyse transcriptomic differences between primary and recurrent high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC) to identify prognostic biomarkers. Methods We analysed 19 paired primary and recurrent HGSOC samples using targeted RNA sequencing. We selected the best candidates using in silico survival and pathway analysis and validated the biomarkers using immunohistochemistry on a cohort of 44 paired samples, an additional cohort of 504 primary HGSOCs and explored their function. Results We identified 233 differential expressed genes. Twenty-three showed a significant prognostic value for PFS and OS in silico. Seven markers (AHRR, COL5A2, FABP4, HMGCS2, ITGA5, SFRP2 and WNT9B) were chosen for validation at the protein level. AHRR expression was higher in primary tumours (p < 0.0001) and correlated with better patient survival (p < 0.05). Stromal SFRP2 expression was higher in recurrent samples (p = 0.009) and protein expression in primary tumours was associated with worse patient survival (p = 0.022). In multivariate analysis, tumour AHRR and SFRP2 remained independent prognostic markers. In vitro studies supported the anti-tumorigenic role of AHRR and the oncogenic function of SFRP2. Conclusions Our results underline the relevance of AHRR and SFRP2 proteins in aryl-hydrocarbon receptor and Wnt-signalling, respectively, and might lead to establishing them as biomarkers in HGSOC.

Transforming treatment paradigms: Focus on personalized medicine for high‐grade serous ovarian cancer

AbstractHigh‐grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) is the most common and aggressive subtype of ovarian cancer, accounting for approximately 70% of all ovarian cancer cases and contributing significantly to the high mortality rates associated with this disease. Because of the asymptomatic nature of early stage disease, most patients are diagnosed at advanced stages when the cancer has already spread into the abdominal cavity, requiring complex and intensive surgical and chemotherapeutic interventions followed by maintenance therapies. Although a minority of cases are associated with well defined genetic syndromes, specific risk factors and a clear etiology in many cases remain elusive. HGSOC tumors are characterized by a high frequency of somatic gene copy number alterations, often associated with defects in homologous recombination repair of DNA. All attempts to introduce an effective screening for HGSOC to date have been unsuccessful. This review elucidates the complexities surrounding HGSOC and encompasses its etiology, epidemiology, classification, pathogenesis, and the current array of treatment strategies. Understanding molecular underpinnings is crucial for the development of targeted therapies and personalized multimodal treatment approaches in centralized therapeutic structures. This review also examines the importance of the tumor microenvironment. In addition, the authors' objective is to underscore the critical importance of placing the patient's perspective and diversity at the forefront of therapeutic strategies, thereby fostering a genuinely participatory decision‐making process and ultimately improving patient quality of life.

Practical Guidelines for the Treatment of Gestational Trophoblastic Disease: Collaboration of the European Organisation for the Treatment of Trophoblastic Disease (EOTTD)–European Society of Gynaecologic Oncology (ESGO)–Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG)–International Society for the Study of Trophoblastic Diseases (ISSTD)

Gestational trophoblastic diseases (GTDs) are a group of pregnancy-related premalignant and malignant diseases with generally a favorable prognosis when treated adequately. Many different treatment protocols exist worldwide. To our knowledge, this is the first set of global consensus-based guidelines for GTD. Four international organizations (European Organisation for the Treatment of Trophoblastic Diseases, European Society of Gynecologic Oncology, Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup, and International Society for the Study of Trophoblastic Diseases) delegated 53 expert GTD clinicians from 31 countries who formulated nine consensus-based definitions and the minimum criteria required to be a GTD center. Furthermore, 18 flow diagrams were developed to diagnose, treat, and follow up all forms of primary or recurrent GTD. The definitions and flow diagrams were drafted and adapted in consecutive (online) meetings until consensus was reached followed by an external review process. Here, the final guidelines are presented together with the available supporting evidence from the literature.

First-Line Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab Versus Chemotherapy for Advanced Endometrial Cancer: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial

PURPOSE Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (len + pembro) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy in previously treated advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (aEC) in the phase III Study 309/KEYNOTE-775. We report results from the phase III, randomized, open-label European Network of Gynaecological Oncological Trial-en9/LEAP-001 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03884101 ) that evaluated len + pembro versus chemotherapy in first-line aEC. METHODS Patients with stage III to IV or recurrent, radiographically apparent EC and no previous chemotherapy or disease progression ≥6 months after neo/adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to lenvatinib 20 mg once daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks or paclitaxel 175 mg/m 2 plus carboplatin AUC 6 mg/mL/min once every 3 weeks. Primary end points were PFS and OS, evaluated in the mismatch repair-proficient (pMMR) and all-comers populations. Noninferiority was assessed for OS at final analysis (FA) for len + pembro versus chemotherapy (multiplicity-adjusted, one-sided nominal alpha, .0159; null hypothesis–tested hazard ratio [HR], 1.1). RESULTS Eight hundred forty-two patients were randomly assigned (len + pembro, n = 420 [pMMR population, n = 320]; chemotherapy, n = 422 [pMMR population, n = 322]). At FA (data cutoff, October 2, 2023), median PFS (95% CI) in the pMMR population was 9.6 (8.2 to 11.9) versus 10.2 (8.4 to 10.5) months with len + pembro versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.82 to 1.21]) and among all-comers was 12.5 (10.3 to 15.1) versus 10.2 (8.4 to 10.4) months (HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.76 to 1.09]; descriptive analyses). Median OS (95% CI) in the pMMR population was 30.9 (25.4 to 37.7) versus 29.4 (26.2 to 35.4) months with len + pembro versus chemotherapy (HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.26]; noninferiority P = .246, not statistically significant per multiplicity control strategy) and among all-comers was 37.7 (32.2 to 43.6) versus 32.1 (27.2 to 35.7) months (HR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.12]). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 331/420 (79%) versus 274/411 (67%) treated patients. CONCLUSION First-line len + pembro did not meet prespecified statistical criteria for PFS or OS versus chemotherapy in pMMR aEC.