Home LiteratureArticle Details
PMID: 31527166 Published · ppublish English Journal Article Comment

Dilution of Molecular-Pathologic Gene Signatures by Medically Associated Factors Might Prevent Prediction of Resection Status After Debulking Surgery in Patients With Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

Heitz F, Kommoss S, Tourani R, Grandelis A, Uppendahl L, Aliferis C, Burges A, Wang C, Canzler U, Wang J, Belau A, Prader S, Hanker L, Ma S, Ataseven B, Hilpert F, Schneider S, Sehouli J, Kimmig R, Kurzeder C, Schmalfeldt B, Braicu EI, Harter P, Dowdy SC, Winterhoff BJ, Pfisterer J, du Bois A

Abstract

Predicting surgical outcome could improve individualizing treatment strategies for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. It has been suggested earlier that gene expression signatures (GES) might harbor the potential to predict surgical outcome. Data derived from high-grade serous tumor tissue of FIGO stage IIIC/IV patients of AGO-OVAR11 trial were used to generate a transcriptome profiling. Previously identified molecular signatures were tested. A theoretical model was implemented to evaluate the impact of medically associated factors for residual disease (RD) on the performance of GES that predicts RD status. A total of 266 patients met inclusion criteria, of those, 39.1% underwent complete resection. Previously reported GES did not predict RD in this cohort. Similarly, The Cancer Genome Atlas molecular subtypes, an independent de novo signature and the total gene expression dataset using all 21,000 genes were not able to predict RD status. Medical reasons for RD were identified as potential limiting factors that impact the ability to use GES to predict RD. In a center with high complete resection rates, a GES which would perfectly predict tumor biological RD would have a performance of only AUC 0.83, due to reasons other than tumor biology. Previously identified GES cannot be generalized. Medically associated factors for RD may be the main obstacle to predict surgical outcome in an all-comer population of patients with advanced ovarian cancer. If biomarkers derived from tumor tissue are used to predict outcome of patients with cancer, selection bias should be focused on to prevent overestimation of the power of such a biomarker.See related commentary by Handley and Sood, p. 9.

MeSH Terms
Biomarkers Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial Cytoreduction Surgical Procedures Female Humans Neoplasm Staging Ovarian Neoplasms
Chemicals
Biomarkers
Authors & Affiliations
27 authors, click to expand affiliations / ORCID
Heitz Florian
Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken-Essen-Mitte, Germany. florian.heitz@gmx.net. | Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Gynecology, Berlin, Germany. | AGO Study Group.
Kommoss Stefan
AGO Study Group. | Department of Women's Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, Tuebingen, Germany.
Tourani Roshan
Institute for Health Informatics (IHI), Academic Health Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Grandelis Anthony
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Women's Health, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Uppendahl Locke ORCID
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Women's Health, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Aliferis Constantin
Institute for Health Informatics (IHI), Academic Health Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Burges Alexander ORCID
AGO Study Group. | Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany.
Wang Chen ORCID
Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Canzler Ulrich
AGO Study Group. | Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Wang Jinhua ORCID
Institute for Health Informatics (IHI), Academic Health Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Belau Antje
AGO Study Group. | Ernst Moritz Arndt Universität Greifswald - Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Greifswald, Germany.
Prader Sonia
Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken-Essen-Mitte, Germany.
Hanker Lars
AGO Study Group. | Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, University of Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.
Ma Sisi
Institute for Health Informatics (IHI), Academic Health Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Ataseven Beyhan
Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken-Essen-Mitte, Germany. | Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany.
Hilpert Felix
AGO Study Group. | Krankenhaus Jerusalem Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Schneider Stephanie
Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken-Essen-Mitte, Germany.
Sehouli Jalid
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Gynecology, Berlin, Germany.
Kimmig Rainer
AGO Study Group. | Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Kurzeder Christian
AGO Study Group. | Universitätsspital Basel, Basel, Switzerland. | Department of Obstrics and Gynecology, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Schmalfeldt Barbara
AGO Study Group. | Technical University of Munich - Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany. | Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Braicu Elena I
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Gynecology, Berlin, Germany.
Harter Philipp
Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken-Essen-Mitte, Germany. | AGO Study Group.
Dowdy Sean C
Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Winterhoff Boris J
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Women's Health, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Pfisterer Jacobus
AGO Study Group. | Gynecologic Oncology Center, Kiel, Germany.
du Bois Andreas
Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken-Essen-Mitte, Germany. | AGO Study Group.
References (30)
30 references, click to expand
  1. Primary chemotherapy versus primary surgery for newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer (CHORUS): an open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial.
    Lancet. 2015 Jul 18;386(9990):249-57 PMID: 26002111
  2. Risk prediction for late-stage ovarian cancer by meta-analysis of 1525 patient samples.
    J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Apr 03;106(5): PMID: 24700803
  3. A statistical problem for inference to regulatory structure from associations of gene expression measurements with microarrays.
    Bioinformatics. 2003 Jun 12;19(9):1147-52 PMID: 12801876
  4. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or primary surgery in stage IIIC or IV ovarian cancer.
    N Engl J Med. 2010 Sep 2;363(10):943-53 PMID: 20818904
  5. Molecular biomarkers of residual disease after surgical debulking of high-grade serous ovarian cancer.
    Clin Cancer Res. 2014 Jun 15;20(12):3280-8 PMID: 24756370
  6. Intraperitoneal disease dissemination patterns are associated with residual disease, extent of surgery, and molecular subtypes in advanced ovarian cancer.
    Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Dec;147(3):503-508 PMID: 28964622
  7. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer: On what do we agree and disagree?
    Gynecol Oncol. 2013 Jan;128(1):6-11 PMID: 23006973
  8. A phase 3 trial of bevacizumab in ovarian cancer.
    N Engl J Med. 2011 Dec 29;365(26):2484-96 PMID: 22204725
  9. HITON: a novel Markov Blanket algorithm for optimal variable selection.
    AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2003;:21-5 PMID: 14728126
  10. Bevacizumab May Differentially Improve Ovarian Cancer Outcome in Patients with Proliferative and Mesenchymal Molecular Subtypes.
    Clin Cancer Res. 2017 Jul 15;23(14):3794-3801 PMID: 28159814
  11. Identification of patient groups at highest risk from traditional approach to ovarian cancer treatment.
    Gynecol Oncol. 2011 Jan;120(1):23-8 PMID: 20933255
  12. Pattern of and reason for postoperative residual disease in patients with advanced ovarian cancer following upfront radical debulking surgery.
    Gynecol Oncol. 2016 May;141(2):264-270 PMID: 26975900
  13. Specialized pathology review in patients with ovarian cancer: results from a prospective study.
    Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013 Oct;23(8):1376-82 PMID: 24257551
  14. Pre-operative serum albumin is associated with post-operative complication rate and overall survival in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing cytoreductive surgery.
    Gynecol Oncol. 2015 Sep;138(3):560-5 PMID: 26163893
  15. Early tumor regrowth is a contributor to impaired survival in patients with completely resected advanced ovarian cancer. An exploratory analysis of the Intergroup trial AGO-OVAR 12.
    Gynecol Oncol. 2019 Feb;152(2):235-242 PMID: 30466805
  16. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma.
    Nature. 2011 Jun 29;474(7353):609-15 PMID: 21720365
  17. Quality improvement in the surgical approach to advanced ovarian cancer: the Mayo Clinic experience.
    J Am Coll Surg. 2009 Apr;208(4):614-20 PMID: 19476798
  18. Prognostic impact of debulking surgery and residual tumor in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer FIGO stage IV.
    Gynecol Oncol. 2016 Feb;140(2):215-20 PMID: 26691222
  19. Thirty-day mortality after primary cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer in the elderly.
    Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Sep;118(3):537-47 PMID: 21860281
  20. Suboptimal cytoreduction in ovarian carcinoma is associated with molecular pathways characteristic of increased stromal activation.
    Gynecol Oncol. 2015 Dec;139(3):394-400 PMID: 26348314
  21. The prognostic value of residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer; A systematic review.
    Gynecol Oncol. 2019 May;153(2):445-451 PMID: 30826010
  22. Cancer statistics, 2019.
    CA Cancer J Clin. 2019 Jan;69(1):7-34 PMID: 30620402
  23. Exploratory outcome analyses according to stage and/or residual disease in the ICON7 trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel with or without bevacizumab for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer.
    Gynecol Oncol. 2019 Jan;152(1):53-60 PMID: 30449719
  24. Impact of a structured quality management program on surgical outcome in primary advanced ovarian cancer.
    Gynecol Oncol. 2011 Jun 1;121(3):615-9 PMID: 21414656
  25. Role of surgical outcome as prognostic factor in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a combined exploratory analysis of 3 prospectively randomized phase 3 multicenter trials: by the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Studiengruppe Ovarialkarzinom (AGO-OVAR) and the Groupe d'Investigateurs Nationaux Pour les Etudes des Cancers de l'Ovaire (GINECO).
    Cancer. 2009 Mar 15;115(6):1234-44 PMID: 19189349
  26. A comprehensive evaluation of multicategory classification methods for microarray gene expression cancer diagnosis.
    Bioinformatics. 2005 Mar 1;21(5):631-43 PMID: 15374862
  27. 2004 consensus statements on the management of ovarian cancer: final document of the 3rd International Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference (GCIG OCCC 2004).
    Ann Oncol. 2005;16 Suppl 8:viii7-viii12 PMID: 16239238
  28. Ovarian cancer debulking surgery: a survey of practice in Australia and New Zealand.
    Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011 Feb;21(2):230-5 PMID: 21270606
  29. 2010 Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) consensus statement on clinical trials in ovarian cancer: report from the Fourth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference.
    Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011 May;21(4):750-5 PMID: 21543936
  30. What are the current surgical objectives, strategies, and technical capabilities of gynecologic oncologists treating advanced epithelial ovarian cancer?
    Gynecol Oncol. 2001 Sep;82(3):489-97 PMID: 11520145
Article Info
Journal
Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research
Abbr.
Clin Cancer Res
ISSN
1557-3265
Published
2020-00-01
Epub
2019-00-16
Pages
213-219
Language
English
Region
United States
NLM ID
9502500
PMCID
PMC7722525
Subset
IM
Grants
NCATS NIH HHS · UL1 TR002494 · United States
Corrections
CommentIn
CommentOn
Analysis Services
Analysis Services

Contact

No. 2 Wenbo Road, Zhangqiu District, Jinan, Shandong

Qilu Normal University · Genelibs Bioinformatics Lab

750 Shunhua Rd, Jinan

2F, Bldg F, University Science Park

Tel: 0531-88819269

WeChat Official Account

Follow our WeChat subscription account for real-time updates and the latest in medical and biological research.


Business Email

E-mail: product@genelibs.com