Objective: Patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) have a high need for reliable prognostic markers. Since significance of primary platinum resistance (PPR) versus secondary platinum resistance (SPR) was identified for patients receiving anti-angiogenic therapy, it has not been confirmed for chemotherapy only. Methods: PROC patients from 3 prospective trials of the NOGGO study group (TOWER, NOGGO-Treosulfan, and TRIAS) were included in this meta-analysis. Exploratory Cox and logistic regression analyses were performed to correlate progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with the timing when platinum resistance developed. Results: Of 477 patients, 264 (55.3%) were classified as PPR, compared to 213 (44.7%) with SPR. For patients receiving chemotherapy only, SPR was associated with a significantly longer median PFS of 3.9 compared to 3.1 months for PPR (hazard ratio [HR]=0.78; p=0.015).SPR versus PPR was confirmed to be an independent prognostic factor for better PFS in multivariate analysis (HR=0.74; p=0.029). Benefit from adding sorafenib to chemotherapy was mainly seen in PPR (HR=0.40; p<0.001) compared to SPR patients (HR=0.83; p=0.465). Conclusions Prognostic significance of SPR versus PPR could be elucidated for patients receiving chemotherapy only. In contrast to bevacizumab, the multi-kinase inhibitor sorafenib exhibits profound therapeutic efficacy in PPR patients indicating potential to overcome this negative prognostic impact.

OBJECTIVE: Epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) has experienced a renaissance lately as a binding site for targeted therapy as well as a prognostic marker in epithelial malignancies. Aim of this study was to study EpCAM as a potential prognostic marker in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). METHODS: EpCAM expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry on paraffin-embedded primary EOC-tissue samples. EpCAM overexpression was defined as an expression of EpCAM of 76% to 100%. Tissue samples and clinical data were systematically collected within the international and multicenter "Tumorbank Ovarian Cancer" network. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients, diagnosed with EOC between 1994 and 2009, were included in the study (median age, 56 years; range, 31 to 86 years). The majority of the patients (81.1%) presented with an advanced stage International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) III/IV disease. Histology was of the serous type in 41 patients (55.4%), endometrioid in 19 (25.6%), and mucinous in 14 (19%). EpCAM was overexpressed in 87.7%. Serous tumors overexpressed EpCAM significantly more often than mucinous tumors (87.8% vs. 78.6%, p=0.045); while no significant difference was noted between the other histological subgroups. EpCAM overexpression was significantly associated with a better progression free survival and higher response rates to platinum based chemotherapy (p=0.040 and p=0.048, respectively). EpCAM was identified as an independent prognostic marker for overall survival (p=0.022). CONCLUSION: Our data indicate a significant association of EpCAM overexpression with a more favorable survival in EOC-patients. Serous cancers showed a significant EpCAM overexpression compared to mucinous types. Larger multicenter analyses are warranted to confirm these findings.
Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Antigens, Neoplasm/*metabolism ; Antineoplastic Agents/*therapeutic use ; Carboplatin/therapeutic use ; Cell Adhesion Molecules/*metabolism ; Female ; Humans ; Kaplan-Meier Estimate ; Middle Aged ; Neoplasm Proteins/metabolism ; Neoplasm Staging ; Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial/*diagnosis/drug therapy/pathology ; Organoplatinum Compounds/*therapeutic use ; Ovarian Neoplasms/*diagnosis/drug therapy/pathology ; Paclitaxel/therapeutic use ; Prognosis ; Tissue Banks ; Treatment Outcome ; Tumor Markers, Biological/*metabolism

OBJECTIVE: To show noninferiority of a limited-excision (resection of the dysplastic lesion only) vs. classical Large Loop Excision of the Transformation Zone (LLETZ). METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, multicenter trial, women with human papillomavirus (HPV) positive cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 were randomized into two groups (1:1). Primary outcome was the rate of negative HPV tests after 6 months, secondary outcomes included cone size, complete resection rates as well as cytological and histological results after 6 and 12 months. A sample size of 1,000 was calculated to show noninferiority of the limited-excision compared to the LLETZ group using a noninferiority margin of 5%. Enrollment was stopped after 100 patients due to slow accrual. RESULTS: Patients in the limited-excision group did not show a lower number of negative HPV tests (78% [LLETZ]−80% [limited-excision]=−2%; 90% confidence interval=−15%, 12%). The limited-excision resulted in a substantially lower cone size (LLETZ: 1.97 mL vs. limited-excision: 1.02 mL; p < 0.001) but higher numbers of involved margins (LLETZ: 8% vs. limited-excision: 20%). Although postoperative cytological results slightly differed, histological results were similar in both groups. One limited-excision patient received immediate re-conisation, whereas one patient in each group was scheduled for re-conisation after 6 months. CONCLUSION: The limited-excision could represent a promising option to reduce the surgical extent of conisations while maintaining oncological safety. The trial was not sufficiently powered to reach statistical significance due to early termination. Nevertheless, the study provides important insights in the feasibility of a limited-excision and could serve as a pilot study for future trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register Identifier: DRKS00006169
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia ; Conization ; Female ; Humans ; Multicenter Studies as Topic ; Pilot Projects ; Premature Birth ; Prospective Studies ; Sample Size

Objective: SHAPE (Simple Hysterectomy And PElvic node assessment) was an international phase III trial demonstrating that simple hysterectomy was non-inferior to radical hysterectomy for pelvic recurrence risk, but superior for quality of life and sexual health.The objective was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing simple vs. radical hysterectomy for low-risk early-stage cervical cancer. Methods: Markov model compared the costs and benefits of simple vs. radical hysterectomy for early cervical cancer over a 5-year time horizon. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated from health utilities derived from EQ-5D-3L surveys. Sensitivity analyses accounted for uncertainty around key parameters. Monte Carlo simulation estimated complication numbers according to surgical procedure. Results: Simple hysterectomy was more effective and less costly than radical hysterectomy. Average overall costs were $11,022 and $12,533, and average gains were 3.56 and 3.54 QALYs for simple and radical hysterectomy, respectively. Baseline health utility scores were 0.81 and 0.83 for simple and radical hysterectomy, respectively. By year 3, these scores improved for simple hysterectomy (0.82) but not for radical hysterectomy (0.82). Assuming 800 early cervical cancer patients annually in Canada, the model estimated 3 vs. 82 patients with urinary retention, and 49 vs. 86 patients with urinary incontinence persisting 4 weeks after simple vs.radical hysterectomy, respectively. Results were most sensitive to variability in health utilities after surgery, but stable through wide ranges of costs and recurrence estimates. Conclusion Simple hysterectomy is less costly and more effective in terms of quality-adjusted life expectancy compared to radical hysterectomy for early cervical cancer.

Objective: SHAPE (Simple Hysterectomy And PElvic node assessment) was an international phase III trial demonstrating that simple hysterectomy was non-inferior to radical hysterectomy for pelvic recurrence risk, but superior for quality of life and sexual health.The objective was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing simple vs. radical hysterectomy for low-risk early-stage cervical cancer. Methods: Markov model compared the costs and benefits of simple vs. radical hysterectomy for early cervical cancer over a 5-year time horizon. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated from health utilities derived from EQ-5D-3L surveys. Sensitivity analyses accounted for uncertainty around key parameters. Monte Carlo simulation estimated complication numbers according to surgical procedure. Results: Simple hysterectomy was more effective and less costly than radical hysterectomy. Average overall costs were $11,022 and $12,533, and average gains were 3.56 and 3.54 QALYs for simple and radical hysterectomy, respectively. Baseline health utility scores were 0.81 and 0.83 for simple and radical hysterectomy, respectively. By year 3, these scores improved for simple hysterectomy (0.82) but not for radical hysterectomy (0.82). Assuming 800 early cervical cancer patients annually in Canada, the model estimated 3 vs. 82 patients with urinary retention, and 49 vs. 86 patients with urinary incontinence persisting 4 weeks after simple vs.radical hysterectomy, respectively. Results were most sensitive to variability in health utilities after surgery, but stable through wide ranges of costs and recurrence estimates. Conclusion Simple hysterectomy is less costly and more effective in terms of quality-adjusted life expectancy compared to radical hysterectomy for early cervical cancer.

Objective: SHAPE (Simple Hysterectomy And PElvic node assessment) was an international phase III trial demonstrating that simple hysterectomy was non-inferior to radical hysterectomy for pelvic recurrence risk, but superior for quality of life and sexual health.The objective was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing simple vs. radical hysterectomy for low-risk early-stage cervical cancer. Methods: Markov model compared the costs and benefits of simple vs. radical hysterectomy for early cervical cancer over a 5-year time horizon. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated from health utilities derived from EQ-5D-3L surveys. Sensitivity analyses accounted for uncertainty around key parameters. Monte Carlo simulation estimated complication numbers according to surgical procedure. Results: Simple hysterectomy was more effective and less costly than radical hysterectomy. Average overall costs were $11,022 and $12,533, and average gains were 3.56 and 3.54 QALYs for simple and radical hysterectomy, respectively. Baseline health utility scores were 0.81 and 0.83 for simple and radical hysterectomy, respectively. By year 3, these scores improved for simple hysterectomy (0.82) but not for radical hysterectomy (0.82). Assuming 800 early cervical cancer patients annually in Canada, the model estimated 3 vs. 82 patients with urinary retention, and 49 vs. 86 patients with urinary incontinence persisting 4 weeks after simple vs.radical hysterectomy, respectively. Results were most sensitive to variability in health utilities after surgery, but stable through wide ranges of costs and recurrence estimates. Conclusion Simple hysterectomy is less costly and more effective in terms of quality-adjusted life expectancy compared to radical hysterectomy for early cervical cancer.