Pathological chemotherapy response score is prognostic in tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data.

Published

Journal Article (Review)

OBJECTIVE: There is a need to develop and validate biomarkers for treatment response and survival in tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC). The chemotherapy response score (CRS) stratifies patients into complete/near-complete (CRS3), partial (CRS2), and no/minimal (CRS1) response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Our aim was to review current evidence to determine whether the CRS is prognostic in women with tubo-ovarian HGSC treated with NACT. METHODS: We established an international collaboration to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis, pooling individual patient data from 16 sites in 11 countries. Patients had stage IIIC/IV HGSC, 3-4 NACT cycles and >6-months follow-up. Random effects models were used to derive combined odds ratios in the pooled population to investigate associations between CRS and progression free and overall survival (PFS and OS). RESULTS: 877 patients were included from published and unpublished studies. Median PFS and OS were 15 months (IQR 5-65) and 28 months (IQR 7-92) respectively. CRS3 was seen in 249 patients (28%). The pooled hazard ratios (HR) for PFS and OS for CRS3 versus CRS1/CRS2 were 0·55 (95% CI, 0·45-0·66; P < 0·001) and 0·65 (95% CI 0·50-0·85, P = 0·002) respectively; no heterogeneity was identified (PFS: Q = 6·42, P = 0·698, I2 = 0·0%; OS: Q = 6·89, P = 0·648, I2 = 0·0%). CRS was significantly associated with PFS and OS in multivariate models adjusting for age and stage. Of 306 patients with known germline BRCA1/2 status, those with BRCA1/2 mutations (n = 80) were more likely to achieve CRS3 (P = 0·027). CONCLUSIONS: CRS3 was significantly associated with improved PFS and OS compared to CRS1/2. This validation of CRS in a real-world setting demonstrates it to be a robust and reproducible biomarker with potential to be incorporated into therapeutic decision-making and clinical trial design.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Cohen, PA; Powell, A; Böhm, S; Gilks, CB; Stewart, CJR; Meniawy, TM; Bulsara, M; Avril, S; Brockbank, EC; Bosse, T; de Azevedo Focchi, GR; Ganesan, R; Glasspool, RM; Howitt, BE; Kim, H-S; Lee, J-Y; Le, ND; Lockley, M; Manchanda, R; Mandalia, T; McCluggage, WG; McNeish, I; Midha, D; Srinivasan, R; Tan, YY; van der Griend, R; Yunokawa, M; Zannoni, GF; HGSC CRS Collaborative Network (Supplementary 1), ; Singh, N

Published Date

  • August 2019

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 154 / 2

Start / End Page

  • 441 - 448

PubMed ID

  • 31118141

Pubmed Central ID

  • 31118141

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 1095-6859

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.04.679

Language

  • eng

Conference Location

  • United States