Modification of Homologous Recombination Deficiency Score Threshold and Association with Long-Term Survival in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer
- PMID: 33668244
- PMCID: PMC7956737
- DOI: 10.3390/cancers13050946
Modification of Homologous Recombination Deficiency Score Threshold and Association with Long-Term Survival in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer
Abstract
New therapies, such as poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi), and immunotherapy treatments have generated great interest in enhancing individualized molecular profiling of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) to improve management of the disease. In EOC patients, putative biomarkers for homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), microsatellite instability (MSI), and tumor mutational burden (TMB) were characterized and correlated with survival outcomes. A series of 300 consecutive EOC patients were enrolled. Patients underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (n = 172) or primary cytoreductive surgery (n = 128). Molecular profiling and survival analyses were restricted to the primary cytoreductive surgery cohort due to tissue availability. All patients underwent germline testing for HRD- and MSI-related gene mutations. When sufficient tissue was available, screening for somatic BRCA1/2 mutations, BRCA1 promoter methylation, HRD score (a measure of genomic instability), MSI, and TMB testing were performed. HRD score ≥33 was associated with improved overall survival on multivariable analysis. In the era of biomarker-driven clinical care, HRD score ≥33 may be a useful adjunctive prognostic tool and should be evaluated in future studies to predict PARPi benefits.
Keywords: epithelial ovarian cancer; homologous recombination deficiency; homologous recombination deficiency score; microsatellite instability; survival; tumor mutational burden.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors from MD Anderson Cancer Center report no conflicts of interest directly related to this study. Myriad Genetics, Inc. did not provide funding to MD Anderson investigators for this study. Outside of this study, A.A.J reports personal fees from Gerson and Lehrman Group, Guidepoint, Iovance Advisory Board, Nuprobe, Simcere, Pact Pharma, and unrelated research funding from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Iovance, Aravive, Pfizer, Immatics USA, and Eli Lilly. K.T., J.S.L., S.P., and C.S. are employees of, and hold stock in, Myriad Genetics, Inc. Funding agencies had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.
Figures
References
-
- Matulonis U.A. Management of newly diagnosed or recurrent ovarian cancer. Clin. Adv. Hematol. Oncol. 2018;16:426–437. - PubMed
-
- McGuire W.P., Hoskins W.J., Brady M.F., Kucera P.R., Partridge E.E., Look K.Y., Clarke-Pearson D.L., Davidson M. Cyclophosphamide and cisplatin compared with paclitaxel and cisplatin in patients with stage III and stage IV ovarian cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 1996;334:1–6. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199601043340101. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Ozols R.F., Bundy B.N., Greer B.E., Fowler J.M., Clarke-Pearson D., Burger R.A., Mannel R.S., DeGeest K., Hartenbach E.M., Baergen R. Phase III trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel compared with cisplatin and paclitaxel in patients with optimally resected stage III ovarian cancer: A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2003;21:3194–3200. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.02.153. - DOI - PubMed
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous
