ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We sought to evaluate the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy on overall survival (OS) in patients with stage I endometrioid epithelial ovarian cancer (EEOC) or ovarian clear cell cancer (OCCC) using a national database. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was used to identify patients diagnosed with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I EEOC or OCCC from 2000 to 2013. We sought to identify predictors of chemotherapy use and to assess the impact of chemotherapy on OS in these patients. OS was compared using the log-rank test and the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: In all, 3552 patients with FIGO stage I EEOC and 1995 patients with stage I OCCC were identified. Of the 1600 patients (45%) with EEOC who underwent adjuvant chemotherapy, the 5-year OS rate was 90%, compared with 89% for those who did not undergo adjuvant chemotherapy (P = 0.807). Of the 1374 (69%) patients with OCCC who underwent adjuvant chemotherapy, the 5-year OS rate was 85%, compared with 83% (P = 0.439) for those who did not undergo adjuvant chemotherapy. Chemotherapy use was associated with younger age, higher substage, and more recent year of diagnosis for both the EEOC and OCCC groups. Only in the subgroup of patients with FIGO substage IC, grade 3 EEOC (n = 282) was chemotherapy associated with an improved 5-year OS-81% compared with 62% (P = 0.003) in untreated patients (HR: 0.583; 95% CI: 0.359-0.949; P = 0.030). In patients with OCCC, there was no significant effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on OS in any substage. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved OS only in patients with substage IC, grade 3 EEOC. In stage I OCCC, adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with improved OS.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma, Clear Cell/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Endometrioid/drug therapy , Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial/drug therapy , Ovarian Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adenocarcinoma, Clear Cell/mortality , Adenocarcinoma, Clear Cell/pathology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Carcinoma, Endometrioid/mortality , Carcinoma, Endometrioid/pathology , Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial/mortality , Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial/pathology , Organoplatinum Compounds/administration & dosage , Ovarian Neoplasms/mortality , Ovarian Neoplasms/pathology , Proportional Hazards Models , SEER Program , Survival Rate , United States/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: BRCA1 expression can be lost by a variety of mechanisms including germline or somatic mutation and promotor hypermethylation. Given the potential importance of BRCA1 loss as a predictive and prognostic biomarker in high-grade serous ovarian cancer, we sought to evaluate the utility of BRCA1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) in screening for BRCA1 loss by germline, somatic, and epigenetic mechanisms. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced high-grade serous ovarian cancer who had previously undergone germline BRCA1 testing were identified. Samples from each tumor were stained for BRCA1 and reviewed independently by two pathologists blinded to BRCA status. Tumors with abnormal BRCA1 IHC and wild-type germline testing underwent further evaluation for somatic BRCA1 mutations and promoter hypermethylation. McNemar's test was used to determine the association of BRCA1 IHC with germline BRCA1 mutations and BRCA1 loss through any mechanism. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate overall survival (OS), and the log-rank test was used to assess differences between groups. RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability between the two pathologists on BRCA IHC interpretation was very good (kappa coefficient 0.865, P = 0.16; McNemar's test). BRCA1 IHC was abnormal in 36% (48/135) of cases. When compared with germline BRCA1 status, BRCA1 IHC had a high negative predictive value (95.4%) but a low positive predictive value (PPV, 52.1%). When accounting for promoter hypermethylation and somatic mutations as alternative methods of BRCA1 loss, the PPV rose to 87.5%. Five-year OS rate was 49.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 26.3% to 69.3%] for patients with germline BRCA1 mutations, 50.4% (95% CI 27.5% to 69.5%) for germline wild-type BRCA1 and abnormal IHC, and 52.1% (95% CI 38.4% to 64.2%) for germline wild-type BRCA1 and normal IHC (P = 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: BRCA1 IHC interpretation was a highly reproducible and accurate modality for detecting germline, somatic, or epigenetic mechanisms of BRCA1 loss. These results support further development of BRCA1 IHC as a potential biomarker for BRCA1 loss in high-grade serous ovarian cancer.
