Kommoss, Friedrich

Abstract ARID1A (BAF250a) is a component of the SWI/SNF chromatin modifying complex, plays an important tumour suppressor role, and is considered prognostic in several malignancies. However, in ovarian carcinomas there are contradictory reports on its relationship to outcome, immune response, and correlation with clinicopathological features. We assembled a series of 1623 endometriosis‐associated ovarian carcinomas, including 1078 endometrioid (ENOC) and 545 clear cell (CCOC) ovarian carcinomas, through combining resources of the Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis (OTTA) Consortium, the Canadian Ovarian Unified Experimental Resource (COEUR), local, and collaborative networks. Validated immunohistochemical surrogate assays for ARID1A mutations were applied to all samples. We investigated associations between ARID1A loss/mutation, clinical features, outcome, CD8 + tumour‐infiltrating lymphocytes (CD8 + TILs), and DNA mismatch repair deficiency (MMRd). ARID1A loss was observed in 42% of CCOCs and 25% of ENOCs. We found no associations between ARID1A loss and outcomes, stage, age, or CD8 + TIL status in CCOC. Similarly, we found no association with outcome or stage in endometrioid cases. In ENOC, ARID1A loss was more prevalent in younger patients ( p = 0.012) and was associated with MMRd ( p < 0.001) and the presence of CD8 + TILs ( p = 0.008). Consistent with MMRd being causative of ARID1A mutations, in a subset of ENOCs we also observed an association with ARID1A loss‐of‐function mutation as a result of small indels ( p = 0.035, versus single nucleotide variants). In ENOC, the association with ARID1A loss, CD8 + TILs, and age appears confounded by MMRd status. Although this observation does not explicitly rule out a role for ARID1A influence on CD8 + TIL infiltration in ENOC, given current knowledge regarding MMRd, it seems more likely that effects are dominated by the hypermutation phenotype. This large dataset with consistently applied biomarker assessment now provides a benchmark for the prevalence of ARID1A loss‐of‐function mutations in endometriosis‐associated ovarian cancers and brings clarity to the prognostic significance. © 2021 The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

Abstract Purpose: Recent progress in understanding the molecular biology of epithelial ovarian cancer has not yet translated into individualized treatment for these women or improvements in their disease outcome. Gene expression has been utilized to identify distinct molecular subtypes, but there have been no reports investigating whether or not molecular subtyping is predictive of response to bevacizumab in ovarian cancer. Experimental Design: DASL gene expression arrays were performed on FFPE tissue from patients enrolled on the ICON7 trial. Patients were stratified into four TCGA molecular subtypes. Associations between molecular subtype and the efficacy of randomly assigned therapy with bevacizumab were assessed. Results: Molecular subtypes were assigned as follows: 122 immunoreactive (34%), 96 proliferative (27%), 73 differentiated (20%), and 68 mesenchymal (19%). In univariate analysis patients with tumors of proliferative subtype obtained the greatest benefit from bevacizumab with a median PFS improvement of 10.1 months [HR, 0.55 (95% CI, 0.34–0.90), P = 0.016]. For the mesenchymal subtype, bevacizumab conferred a nonsignificant improvement in PFS of 8.2 months [HR 0.78 (95% CI, 0.44–1.40), P = 0.41]. Bevacizumab conferred modest improvements in PFS for patients with immunoreactive subtype (3.8 months; P = 0.08) or differentiated subtype (3.7 months; P = 0.61). Multivariate analysis demonstrated significant PFS improvement in proliferative subtype patients only [HR, 0.45 (95% CI, 0.27–0.74), P = 0.0015]. Conclusions: Ovarian carcinoma molecular subtypes with the poorest survival (proliferative and mesenchymal) derive a comparably greater benefit from treatment that includes bevacizumab. Validation of our findings in an independent cohort could enable the use of bevacizumab for those patients most likely to benefit, thereby reducing side effects and healthcare cost. Clin Cancer Res; 23(14); 3794–801. ©2017 AACR.