No abstract

PURPOSE This phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label study investigated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab versus chemotherapy (gemcitabine [GEM] or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin [PLD]) in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS Eligible patients had platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer, received ≤ 1 regimen after diagnosis of resistance, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of ≤ 1. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab (240 mg once every 2 weeks [as one cycle]) or chemotherapy (GEM 1000 mg/m2 for 30 minutes [once on days 1, 8, and 15] followed by a week's rest [as one cycle], or PLD 50 mg/m2 once every 4 weeks [as one cycle]). The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate, duration of response, and safety. RESULTS Patients (n = 316) were randomly assigned to nivolumab (n = 157) or GEM or PLD (n = 159) between October 2015 and December 2017. Median OS was 10.1 (95% CI, 8.3 to 14.1) and 12.1 (95% CI, 9.3 to 15.3) months with nivolumab and GEM or PLD, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.8 to 1.3; P = .808). Median PFS was 2.0 (95% CI, 1.9 to 2.2) and 3.8 (95% CI, 3.6 to 4.2) months with nivolumab and GEM or PLD, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.9; P = .002). There was no statistical difference in overall response rate between groups (7.6% v 13.2%; odds ratio, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.2 to 1.3; P = .191). Median duration of response was numerically longer with nivolumab than GEM or PLD (18.7 v 7.4 months). Fewer treatment-related adverse events were observed with nivolumab versus GEM or PLD (61.5% v 98.1%), with no additional or new safety risks. CONCLUSION Although well-tolerated, nivolumab did not improve OS and showed worse PFS compared with GEM or PLD in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

Purpose: In this study, we examined the promoter methylation status and expression of 14-3-3 and evaluated its clinical significance in epithelial ovarian cancer.Experimental Design: Twelve ovarian cancer cell lines; 2 ovarian surface epithelial cell lines; and 8 normal, 8 benign, 12 borderline, and 102 ovarian cancer tissues were examined. Methylation-specific PCR, quantitative reverse transcription-PCR, and immunohistochemistry were used to evaluate methylation status and expression of 14-3-3 gene and protein.Results: Among the 12 ovarian cancer cell lines, the presence of a methylated band was detected in seven cell lines. Median values of relative 14-3-3 gene expression in cancers with methylation (3.27) were significantly lower than those without methylation (16.4; P < 0.001). Treatment of 5-aza-2-deoxycitidine resulted in the demethylation of the promoter CpG islands and reexpression. All of the normal, benign, and borderline tissues were positive for 14-3-3 protein, and in ovarian cancer tissues, 73.5% (75 of 102) were positive for 14-3-3 protein and was almost consistent with methylation status. Negative immunoreactivity of 14-3-3 was significantly correlated with high age and serous histology, high-grade, advanced-stage residual tumor of >2 cm, high serum CA125, high Ki-67 labeling index, and positive p53 immunoreactivity. 14-3-3 immunoreactivity was significantly associated with overall survival (P ‫؍‬ 0.0058).Conclusions: Our findings suggest that 14-3-3 is inactivated mainly by aberrant DNA methylation and that it may play an important role in the pathogenesis of epithelial ovarian cancer.

Purpose: Intratumoral metabolism and synthesis of estrogens are considered to play important roles in the pathogenesis and/or development of human endometrial carcinoma. Steroid sulfatase hydrolyzes biologically inactive estrogen sulfates to active estrogens, whereas estrogen sulfotransferase sulfonates estrogens to estrogen sulfates. However, the status of steroid sulfatase and/or estrogen sulfotransferase in human endometrial carcinoma has not been examined.Experimental Design: We first examined the expression of steroid sulfatase and estrogen sulfotransferase in 6 normal endometrium and 76 endometrial carcinoma using immunohistochemistry to elucidate the possible involvement of steroid sulfatase and estrogen sulfotransferase. We then evaluated the enzymatic activity and the semiquantitative analysis of mRNA using reverse transcription-PCR in 21 endometrial carcinomas. We correlated these findings with various clinicopathological parameters including the expression of aromatase, 17␤-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1 and type 2.Results: Steroid sulfatase and estrogen sulfotransferase immunoreactivity was detected in 65 of 76 (86%) and 22 of 76 (29%) cases, respectively. Results of immunoreactivity for steroid sulfatase and estrogen sulfotransferase were significantly correlated with those of enzymatic activity and semiquantitative analysis of mRNA. No significant correlations were detected among the expression of the enzymes involved in intratumoral estrogen metabolism. There was a significant correlation between steroid sulfatase/estrogen sulfotransferase ratio and clinical outcomes of the patients. However, there were no significant differences between steroid sulfatase or estrogen sulfotransferase and estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, Ki67, histologic grade, or clinical outcomes of the patients.Conclusions: Results of our study demonstrated that increased steroid sulfatase and decreased estrogen sulfotransferase expression in human endometrial carcinomas may result in increased availability of biologically active estrogens and may be related to estrogen-dependent biological features of carcinoma.

The antiphase expression of cry1 and Bmal1 may be preserved in ovarian cancers. The combination of cry1 and Bmal1 expression might become a possible prognostic marker in epithelial ovarian cancer.

We have previously reported on vasohibin as a novel endotheliumderived vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-inducible inhibitor of angiogenesis. The aim of our present study was to define the role of vasohibin in endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma. We collected 78 sections of endometrial carcinoma for assessment using immunohistochemistry. Twenty-seven were well differentiated (G1), 25 were moderately differentiated (G2), and 26 were poorly differentiated endometrioid adenocarcinomas (G3). We also included 12 sections of normal cyclic endometria, six of which were in the proliferative phase and six were in the secretory phase. We investigated the expression of vasohibin, and compared it to VEGF receptor-2 (VEGFR-2: KDR/flk-1), CD34, Ki-67, VEGF-A, and D2-40 (as a lymphatic vessel marker). We assessed the ratio of vasohibin-and VEGFR-2-positive vessels in the stroma of endometrial carcinoma. Immunohistochemical assessment was classified as negative or positive based on staining intensity. Vasohibin was selectively expressed on vascular endothelial cells in both cyclic endometria and endometrial carcinomas. Vasohibin was highly expressed in the normal functional endmetrium of the secretory phase, especially in the spiral artery, and was highly expressed in all grades of endometrioid adenocarcinomas. The stromal endothelial cells in G3 expressed vasohibin and VEGFR-2 more frequently than these in G1. In endometrioid adenocarcinomas, there was a significant correlation between the expression percentage of vasohibin and that of VEGFR-2 (P < 0.0001, r 2 = 0.591). This is the first study to elucidate the correlation between expression of vasohibin in the stromal endothelial cells and that of VEGFR-2 in human carcinomas. (Cancer Sci 2008; 99: 914-919)

Radical hysterectomy with SLN biopsy alone seems to be a safe and effective strategy for detection of lymph node metastasis and for reducing the number of patients with lower extremity lymphedema, but a more convenient and sensitive procedure for intraoperative diagnosis needs to be established.

Clinical practice guidelines for gynecologic cancers have been published by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the National Cancer Institute. Whereas these guidelines form the basis for the standard of care for gynecologic malignancies in the United States, it has proven difficult to institute them in Japan due to differences in patient characteristics, health-care delivery systems, and insurance programs. Therefore, evidence-based guidelines for treating cervical cancer specifically in Japan have been under development. The Guidelines Formulation Committee and Evaluation Committee were independently established within the Committee for Treatment Guidelines for Cervical Cancer. Opinions from within and outside the Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology (JSGO) were incorporated into the final draft, and the guidelines were published after approval by the JSGO. These guidelines are composed of ten chapters and comprise three algorithms. Each chapter consists of a clinical question, recommendations, background, objectives, explanations, and references. The objective of these guidelines is to clearly delineate the standard of care for cervical cancer treatment in Japan in order to ensure equitable care for all Japanese women diagnosed with cervical cancer.