Molecular Guided Treatments in Gynecologic Oncology: Analysis of a Real‐World Precision Cancer Medicine Platform. (8th May 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Taghizadeh, Hossein; Mader, Robert M.; Müllauer, Leonhard; Aust, Stefanie; Polterauer, Stephan; Kölbl, Heinz; Seebacher, Veronika; Grimm, Christoph; Reinthaller, Alexander; Prager, Gerald W.
• Is Part Of: Oncologist. Volume 25:Number 7(2020)
• Page Start: e1060
• Page End: e1069
• Publication Date: 2020-05-08
• Subjects: Precision medicine -- Gynecologic oncology -- Molecular aberrations -- Molecular profiling -- Immunohistochemistry -- Targeted agents; Oncology -- Periodicals; Tumors -- Periodicals; Cancérologie -- Périodiques; Tumeurs -- Périodiques; Oncology; Tumors; Neoplasms; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Periodicals; 616.994
• DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0904
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1083-7159

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Advanced gynecologic cancers have a poor prognosis and constitute a major challenge for adequate treatment strategies. By analyzing and targeting molecular alterations, molecular guided treatments may be a viable option for the treatment of advanced gynecologic cancers. Patients and Methods: In this single‐center, real‐world retrospective analysis of our platform for precision cancer medicine (PCM), we describe the molecular profiling of 72 patients diagnosed with different types of advanced gynecologic malignancies. Tumor samples of the patients were examined by next‐generation sequencing panel and immunohistochemistry (IHC). Results: In total, we identified 209 genetic aberrations in 72 patients. The ten most frequent alterations were TP53 ( n = 42, 20%), KRAS ( n = 14, 6.6%), PIK3CA ( n = 11, 5.2%), PIK3R1 ( n = 9, 4.3%), ATR ( n = 8, 3.8%), PTEN ( n = 8, 3.8%), BRCA1 ( n = 6, 2.8%), NF1 ( n = 4, 1.9%), NOTCH1 ( n = 4, 1.9%), and POLE ( n = 4, 1.9%), which account for more than half of all molecular alterations (52.6%). In 21 (29.1%) patients only one mutation could be detected, and 44 (61.1%) patients had more than one mutation. No molecular alterations were detected in seven (9.7%) patients. IHC detected expression of phosphorylated mammalian target of rapamycin and epidermal growth factor receptor in 58 (80.6%) and 53 (73.6%) patients, respectively. In over two thirds ( n = 49, 68.1%), a targeted therapy was suggested, based on the identified genetic aberrations. The most frequently recommended specific treatment was the combination of everolimus with exemestane ( n = 18, 25 %). Conclusion: Based on our observations, it seems that PCM might be a feasible approach for advanced gynecologic cancers with limited treatment options. Implications for Practice: Nowadays molecular profiling of advanced gynecologic malignancies is feasible in the clinical routine. A molecular portrait should be done for every patient with an advanced therapy‐refractory gynecologic malignancy to offer molecular‐based treatment concepts. Abstract : To determine the feasibility of precision cancer medicine (PCM) in gynecologic cancers, this retrospective study analyzed patients with advanced gynecologic cancers enrolled and profiled in a PCM platform, MONDTI, focusing on the technical feasibility to map the molecular profiles of advanced, pretreated, and mainly relapsed gynecologic cancers and to subsequently target the detected molecular alterations