Molecular Classification of Grade 3 Endometrioid Endometrial Cancers Identifies Distinct Prognostic Subgroups

Our aim was to investigate whether molecular classification can be used to refine prognosis in grade 3 endometrial endometrioid carcinomas (EECs). Grade 3 EECs were classified into 4 subgroups: p53 abnormal, based on mutant-like immunostaining (p53abn); MMR deficient, based on loss of mismatch repair protein expression (MMRd); presence of POLE exonuclease domain hotspot mutation (POLE); no specific molecular profile (NSMP), in which none of these aberrations were present. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method (Log-rank test) and univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. In total, 381 patients were included. The median age was 66 years (range, 33 to 96 y). Federation Internationale de Gynecologie et d'Obstetrique stages (2009) were as follows: IA, 171 (44.9%); IB, 120 (31.5%); II, 24 (6.3%); III, 50 (13.1%); IV, 11 (2.9%). There were 49 (12.9%) POLE, 79 (20.7%) p53abn, 115 (30.2%) NSMP, and 138 (36.2%) MMRd tumors. Median follow-up of patients was 6.1 years (range, 0.2 to 17.0 y). Compared to patients with NSMP, patients with POLE mutant grade 3 EEC (OS: hazard ratio [HR], 0.36 [95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.70]; P=0.003; RFS: HR, 0.17 [0.05-0.54]; P=0.003) had a significantly better prognosis; patients with p53abn tumors had a significantly worse RFS (HR, 1.73 [1.09-2.74]; P=0.021); patients with MMRd tumors showed a trend toward better RFS. Estimated 5-year OS rates were as follows: POLE 89%, MMRd 75%, NSMP 69%, p53abn 55% (Log rank P=0.001). Five-year RFS rates were as follows: POLE 96%, MMRd 77%, NSMP 64%, p53abn 47% (P=0.000001), respectively. In a multivariable Cox model that included age and Federation Internationale de Gynecologie et d'Obstetrique stage, POLE and MMRd status remained independent prognostic factors for better RFS; p53 status was an independent prognostic factor for worse RFS. Molecular classification of grade 3 EECs reveals that these tumors are a mixture of molecular subtypes of endometrial carcinoma, rather than a homogeneous group. The addition of molecular markers identifies prognostic subgroups, with potential therapeutic implications

The annual recurrence risk model for tailored surveillance strategy in patients with cervical cancer

Purpose: Current guidelines for surveillance strategy in cervical cancer are rigid, recommending the same strategy for all survivors. The aim of this study was to develop a robust model allowing for individualised surveillance based on a patient's risk profile. Methods: Data of 4343 early-stage patients with cervical cancer treated between 2007 and 2016 were obtained from the international SCCAN (Surveillance in Cervical Cancer) consortium. The Cox proportional hazards model predicting disease-free survival (DFS) was developed and internally validated. The risk score, derived from regression coefficients of the model, stratified the cohort into significantly distinctive risk groups. On its basis, the annual recurrence risk model (ARRM) was calculated. Results: Five variables were included in the prognostic model: maximal pathologic tumour diameter; tumour histotype; grade; number of positive pelvic lymph nodes; and lymphovascular space invasion. Five risk groups significantly differing in prognosis were identified with a five-year DFS of 97.5%, 94.7%, 85.2% and 63.3% in increasing risk groups, whereas a two-year DFS in the highest risk group equalled 15.4%. Based on the ARRM, the annual recurrence risk in the lowest risk group was below 1% since the beginning of follow-up and declined below 1% at years three, four and >5 in the medium-risk groups. In the whole cohort, 26% of recurrences appeared at the first year of the follow-up, 48% by year two and 78% by year five. Conclusion: The ARRM represents a potent tool for tailoring the surveillance strategy in early-stage patients with cervical cancer based on the patient's risk status and respective annual recurrence risk. It can easily be used in routine clinical settings internationally

Outcomes of gynecologic cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: an international, multicenter, prospective CovidSurg-Gynecologic Oncology Cancer study

Background The CovidSurg-Cancer Consortium aimed to explore the impact of COVID-19 in surgical patients and services for solid cancers at the start of the pandemic. The CovidSurg-Gynecologic Oncology Cancer subgroup was particularly concerned about the magnitude of adverse outcomes caused by the disrupted surgical gynecologic cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic, which are currently unclear. Objective This study aimed to evaluate the changes in care and short-term outcomes of surgical patients with gynecologic cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that the COVID-19 pandemic had led to a delay in surgical cancer care, especially in patients who required more extensive surgery, and such delay had an impact on cancer outcomes. Study Design This was a multicenter, international, prospective cohort study. Consecutive patients with gynecologic cancers who were initially planned for nonpalliative surgery, were recruited from the date of first COVID-19-related admission in each participating center for 3 months. The follow-up period was 3 months from the time of the multidisciplinary tumor board decision to operate. The primary outcome of this analysis is the incidence of pandemic-related changes in care. The secondary outcomes included 30-day perioperative mortality and morbidity and a composite outcome of unresectable disease or disease progression, emergency surgery, and death. Results We included 3973 patients (3784 operated and 189 nonoperated) from 227 centers in 52 countries and 7 world regions who were initially planned to have cancer surgery. In 20.7% (823/3973) of the patients, the standard of care was adjusted. A significant delay (>8 weeks) was observed in 11.2% (424/3784) of patients, particularly in those with ovarian cancer (213/1355; 15.7%; P<.0001). This delay was associated with a composite of adverse outcomes, including disease progression and death (95/424; 22.4% vs 601/3360; 17.9%; P=.024) compared with those who had operations within 8 weeks of tumor board decisions. One in 13 (189/2430; 7.9%) did not receive their planned operations, in whom 1 in 20 (5/189; 2.7%) died and 1 in 5 (34/189; 18%) experienced disease progression or death within 3 months of multidisciplinary team board decision for surgery. Only 22 of the 3778 surgical patients (0.6%) acquired perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infections; they had a longer postoperative stay (median 8.5 vs 4 days; P<.0001), higher predefined surgical morbidity (14/22; 63.6% vs 717/3762; 19.1%; P<.0001) and mortality (4/22; 18.2% vs 26/3762; 0.7%; P<.0001) rates than the uninfected cohort. Conclusion One in 5 surgical patients with gynecologic cancer worldwide experienced management modifications during the COVID-19 pandemic. Significant adverse outcomes were observed in those with delayed or cancelled operations, and coordinated mitigating strategies are urgently needed

The genetic landscape of metaplastic breast cancers and uterine carcinosarcomas.

Metaplastic breast carcinoma (MBC) and uterine carcinosarcoma (UCS) are rare aggressive cancers, characterized by an admixture of adenocarcinoma and areas displaying mesenchymal/sarcomatoid differentiation. We sought to define whether MBCs and UCSs harbor similar patterns of genetic alterations, and whether the different histologic components of MBCs and UCSs are clonally related. Whole-exome sequencing (WES) data from MBCs (n = 35) and UCSs (n = 57, The Cancer Genome Atlas) were reanalyzed to define somatic genetic alterations, altered signaling pathways, mutational signatures, and genomic features of homologous recombination DNA repair deficiency (HRD). In addition, the carcinomatous and sarcomatous components of an additional cohort of MBCs (n = 11) and UCSs (n = 6) were microdissected separately and subjected to WES, and their clonal relatedness was assessed. MBCs and UCSs harbored recurrent genetic alterations affecting TP53, PIK3CA, and PTEN, similar patterns of gene copy number alterations, and an enrichment in alterations affecting the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT)-related Wnt and Notch signaling pathways. Differences were observed, however, including a significantly higher prevalence of FAT3 and FAT1 somatic mutations in MBCs compared to UCSs, and conversely, UCSs significantly more frequently harbored somatic mutations affecting FBXW7 and PPP2R1A as well as HER2 amplification than MBCs. Genomic features of HRD and biallelic alterations affecting bona fide HRD-related genes were found to be more prevalent in MBCs than in UCSs. The distinct histologic components of MBCs and UCSs were clonally related in all cases, with the sarcoma component likely stemming from a minor subclone of the carcinoma component in the samples with interpretable chronology of clonal evolution. Despite the similar histologic features and pathways affected by genetic alterations, UCSs differ from MBCs on the basis of FBXW7 and PPP2R1A mutations, HER2 amplification, and lack of HRD, supporting the notion that these entities are more than mere phenocopies of the same tumor type in different anatomical sites