Conrads, Thomas

Abstract BRCA-associated homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) is present in ~ 50% of high-grade serous carcinomas (HGSC) and predicts sensitivity to platinum-based therapy. However, there is little understanding of why some patients with BRCA-deficient tumors experience unexpectedly poor outcomes. We profiled 154 tumors, enriched for patients with BRCA-deficient tumors that experienced short overall survival (≤ 3 years, n = 42), using whole-genome, transcriptome, and methylation analyses. All but one BRCA-deficient tumor exceeded an accepted HRD genomic scarring threshold. However, patients with BRCA1-deficient HGSC with a more elevated HRD score survived significantly longer. Patients with BRCA2-deficient HGSC and loss of NF1 survived twice as long as those without NF1 loss, whereas PIK3CA or RAD21 amplification defined BRCA2-deficient HGSC with exceptionally short survival. BRCA1-deficient tumors in short survivors had evidence of immunosuppressive c-kit signaling and EMT. In a large HGSC cohort (n = 1,389) including 282 individuals with pathogenic germline BRCA variants (gBRCApv), the location of the mutation within functional domains stratified clinical outcomes. Notably, residual disease after primary surgery had limited prognostic effect in gBRCApv-carriers compared to non-carriers. Our findings indicate that tumor HR proficiency in the context of therapy response and survival is not a binary property, and highlight genomic and immune modifiers of outcomes in BRCA-deficient HGSC.

AbstractBackgroundCyclin E1 (CCNE1) is a potential predictive marker and therapeutic target in tubo‐ovarian high‐grade serous carcinoma (HGSC). Smaller studies have revealed unfavorable associations for CCNE1 amplification and CCNE1 overexpression with survival, but to date no large‐scale, histotype‐specific validation has been performed. The hypothesis was that high‐level amplification of CCNE1 and CCNE1 overexpression, as well as a combination of the two, are linked to shorter overall survival in HGSC.MethodsWithin the Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium, amplification status and protein level in 3029 HGSC cases and mRNA expression in 2419 samples were investigated.ResultsHigh‐level amplification (>8 copies by chromogenic in situ hybridization) was found in 8.6% of HGSC and overexpression (>60% with at least 5% demonstrating strong intensity by immunohistochemistry) was found in 22.4%. CCNE1 high‐level amplification and overexpression both were linked to shorter overall survival in multivariate survival analysis adjusted for age and stage, with hazard stratification by study (hazard ratio [HR], 1.26; 95% CI, 1.08‐1.47, p = .034, and HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05‐1.32, p = .015, respectively). This was also true for cases with combined high‐level amplification/overexpression (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.09‐1.47, p = .033). CCNE1 mRNA expression was not associated with overall survival (HR, 1.00 per 1‐SD increase; 95% CI, 0.94‐1.06; p = .58). CCNE1 high‐level amplification is mutually exclusive with the presence of germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants and shows an inverse association to RB1 loss.ConclusionThis study provides large‐scale validation that CCNE1 high‐level amplification is associated with shorter survival, supporting its utility as a prognostic biomarker in HGSC.

Abstract PURPOSE: Ovarian cancer remains the most lethal gynecological malignancy in the United States even though there are a number of treatment options. For the newly diagnosed ovarian cancer patient, treatment is standard with the majority of patients receiving first-line platinum/taxol treatment following surgical debulking or as part of a neo-adjuvant treatment regimen. Standard response assessment to this chemotherapy combination depends on lengthy clinical follow-up of at least 6 months following the conclusion of the chemotherapy. This course is initially effective in 70-80% of patients, but 20-30% will relapse within the 6 months post-chemotherapy or not respond at all. Additionally, most of the initial responders will also relapse. Early prediction of the patients whose cancers do not respond could lead to earlier intervention with more effective therapy. RESULTS: To perform this prediction, we developed a test utilizing live tumor tissue and 3D cell culture to predict the response of ovarian cancer patients to standard platinum and taxol chemotherapy along with the standard agents used for relapse patients. To validate the assay, we performed a prospective trial involving 86 women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer from whom live tumor tissue was recovered at surgical resection prior to chemotherapy. Of the 79 patients whose tissues yielded a successful assay result, 27 had sufficient clinical follow-up to determine the accuracy of the response predictions made by the assay. Assay response predictions were made within 7 days following surgery while clinical response was not determined until 6 months or more following the conclusion of first-line chemotherapy. Assay results predicted first-line chemotherapy response in 100% of clinical responders (19 of 19) and first-line chemotherapy non-response in 62.5% of clinical non-responders (5 of 8) as defined by CA-125 and radiographic surveillance. This response prediction was statistically significant by Fisher's Exact test, p < 0.001. The sensitivity of the assay was 86% while the specificity was 100%. When the assay results were examined in terms of progression free survival, 19 of 19 patients identified as responders by the assay remained progression free at least 6 months post-chemotherapy with 14 remaining progression free 10 or more months post-chemotherapy. In contrast, of the 8 assay non-responders, 3 were refractory with progression within 3 months of chemotherapy conclusion and 2 progressed less than 6 months post-chemotherapy with a mean progression free survival of 4.5 months. CONCLUSIONS: Our rapid, ex vivo, 3D cellular assay is capable of accurate patient specific response prediction of first-line combination therapy in newly diagnosed ovarian cancer patients and can serve as a prognostic indicator of progression free survival. This preliminary clinical validation shows the significant potential of this assay as a future tool in personalized cancer care for ovarian cancer patients. Citation Format: Stephen Shuford, Jeffrey Elder, Larry Puls, John Weroha, Xiaonan Hou, Valentina Zanfagnin, Alpa Nick, Michael P. Stany, Larry Maxwell, Thomas Conrads, Chris Corless, Anil K. Sood, Matthew Gevaert, Howland E. Crosswell, and Teresa M. DesRochers. PROSPECTIVE CLINICAL VALIDATION OF EX VIVO, PATIENT-SPECIFIC RESPONSE PREDICTION TO FIRST-LINE CHEMOTHERAPY [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 12th Biennial Ovarian Cancer Research Symposium; Sep 13-15, 2018; Seattle, WA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2019;25(22 Suppl):Abstract nr TMIM-069.

Abstract Background There is a critical need to identify patient characteristics associated with long-term ovarian cancer survival. Methods Quality of life (QOL), measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian-Trial Outcome Index (FACT-O-TOI), including physical, functional, and ovarian-specific subscales, was compared between long-term survivors (LTS) (8+ years) and short-term survivors (STS) (<5 years) of GOG 218 at baseline; before cycles 4, 7, 13, 21; and 6 months post-treatment using linear and longitudinal mixed models adjusted for covariates. Adverse events (AEs) were compared between survivor groups at each assessment using generalized linear models. All P values are 2-sided. Results QOL differed statistically significantly between STS (N = 1115) and LTS (N = 260) (P < .001). Baseline FACT-O-TOI and FACT-O-TOI change were independently associated with long-term survival (odds ratio = 1.05, 95% confidence interval = 1.03 to 1.06 and odds ratio = 1.06, 95% confidence interval = 1.05 to 1.07, respectively). A 7-point increase in baseline QOL was associated with a 38.0% increase in probability of LTS, and a 9-point increase in QOL change was associated with a 67.0% increase in odds for LTS. QOL decreased statistically significantly with increasing AE quartiles (cycle 4 quartiles: 0-5 vs 6-8 vs 9-11 vs ≥12 AEs, P = .01; cycle 21 quartiles: 0-2 vs 3 vs 4-5 vs ≥6 AEs, P = .001). Further, LTS reported statistically significantly better QOL compared with STS (P = .03 and P = .01, cycles 4 and 21, respectively), with similar findings across higher AE grades. Conclusions Baseline and longitudinal QOL change scores distinguished LTS vs STS and are robust prognosticators for long-term survival. Results have trial design and supportive care implications, providing meaningful prognostic value in this understudied population.