Impact of hormonal biomarkers on response to hormonal therapy in advanced and recurrent endometrial cancer.


Journal

American journal of obstetrics and gynecology
ISSN: 1097-6868
Titre abrégé: Am J Obstet Gynecol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0370476

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
10 2021
Historique:
received: 05 02 2021
revised: 02 05 2021
accepted: 08 05 2021
pubmed: 22 5 2021
medline: 26 10 2021
entrez: 21 5 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Approximately 20% of women with endometrial cancer have advanced-stage disease or suffer from a recurrence. For these women, prognosis is poor, and palliative treatment options include hormonal therapy and chemotherapy. Lack of predictive biomarkers and suboptimal use of existing markers for response to hormonal therapy have resulted in overall limited efficacy. This study aimed to improve the efficacy of hormonal therapy by relating immunohistochemical expression of estrogen and progesterone receptors and estrogen receptor pathway activity scores to response to hormonal therapy. Patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer and available biopsies taken before the start of hormonal therapy were identified in 16 centers within the European Network for Individualized Treatment in Endometrial Cancer and the Dutch Gynecologic Oncology Group. Tumor tissue was analyzed for estrogen and progesterone receptor expressions and estrogen receptor pathway activity using a quantitative polymerase chain reaction-based messenger RNA model to measure the activity of estrogen receptor-related target genes in tumor RNA. The primary endpoint was response rate defined as complete and partial response using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. The secondary endpoints were clinical benefit rate and progression-free survival. Pretreatment biopsies with sufficient endometrial cancer tissue and complete response evaluation were available in 81 of 105 eligible cases. Here, 22 of 81 patients (27.2%) with a response had estrogen and progesterone receptor expressions of >50%, resulting in a response rate of 32.3% (95% confidence interval, 20.9-43.7) for an estrogen receptor expression of >50% and 50.0% (95% confidence interval, 35.2-64.8) for a progesterone receptor expression of >50%. Clinical benefit rate was 56.9% for an estrogen receptor expression of >50% (95% confidence interval, 44.9-68.9) and 75.0% (95% confidence interval, 62.2-87.8) for a progesterone receptor expression of >50%. The application of the estrogen receptor pathway test to cases with a progesterone receptor expression of >50% resulted in a response rate of 57.6% (95% confidence interval, 42.1-73.1). After 2 years of follow-up, 34.3% of cases (95% confidence interval, 20-48) with a progesterone receptor expression of >50% and 35.8% of cases (95% confidence interval, 20-52) with an estrogen receptor pathway activity score of >15 had not progressed. The prediction of response to hormonal treatment in endometrial cancer improves substantially with a 50% cutoff level for progesterone receptor immunohistochemical expression and by applying a sequential test algorithm using progesterone receptor immunohistochemical expression and estrogen receptor pathway activity scores. However, results need to be validated in the prospective Prediction of Response to Hormonal Therapy in Advanced and Recurrent Endometrial Cancer (PROMOTE) study.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Approximately 20% of women with endometrial cancer have advanced-stage disease or suffer from a recurrence. For these women, prognosis is poor, and palliative treatment options include hormonal therapy and chemotherapy. Lack of predictive biomarkers and suboptimal use of existing markers for response to hormonal therapy have resulted in overall limited efficacy.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to improve the efficacy of hormonal therapy by relating immunohistochemical expression of estrogen and progesterone receptors and estrogen receptor pathway activity scores to response to hormonal therapy.
STUDY DESIGN
Patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer and available biopsies taken before the start of hormonal therapy were identified in 16 centers within the European Network for Individualized Treatment in Endometrial Cancer and the Dutch Gynecologic Oncology Group. Tumor tissue was analyzed for estrogen and progesterone receptor expressions and estrogen receptor pathway activity using a quantitative polymerase chain reaction-based messenger RNA model to measure the activity of estrogen receptor-related target genes in tumor RNA. The primary endpoint was response rate defined as complete and partial response using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. The secondary endpoints were clinical benefit rate and progression-free survival.
RESULTS
Pretreatment biopsies with sufficient endometrial cancer tissue and complete response evaluation were available in 81 of 105 eligible cases. Here, 22 of 81 patients (27.2%) with a response had estrogen and progesterone receptor expressions of >50%, resulting in a response rate of 32.3% (95% confidence interval, 20.9-43.7) for an estrogen receptor expression of >50% and 50.0% (95% confidence interval, 35.2-64.8) for a progesterone receptor expression of >50%. Clinical benefit rate was 56.9% for an estrogen receptor expression of >50% (95% confidence interval, 44.9-68.9) and 75.0% (95% confidence interval, 62.2-87.8) for a progesterone receptor expression of >50%. The application of the estrogen receptor pathway test to cases with a progesterone receptor expression of >50% resulted in a response rate of 57.6% (95% confidence interval, 42.1-73.1). After 2 years of follow-up, 34.3% of cases (95% confidence interval, 20-48) with a progesterone receptor expression of >50% and 35.8% of cases (95% confidence interval, 20-52) with an estrogen receptor pathway activity score of >15 had not progressed.
CONCLUSION
The prediction of response to hormonal treatment in endometrial cancer improves substantially with a 50% cutoff level for progesterone receptor immunohistochemical expression and by applying a sequential test algorithm using progesterone receptor immunohistochemical expression and estrogen receptor pathway activity scores. However, results need to be validated in the prospective Prediction of Response to Hormonal Therapy in Advanced and Recurrent Endometrial Cancer (PROMOTE) study.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34019887
pii: S0002-9378(21)00554-8
doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2021.05.007
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal 0
Aromatase Inhibitors 0
Biomarkers, Tumor 0
Estrogen Antagonists 0
Estrogen Receptor alpha 0
Progestins 0
RNA, Messenger 0
Receptors, Progesterone 0
Tamoxifen 094ZI81Y45

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

407.e1-407.e16

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Willem Jan van Weelden (WJ)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud Institute of Health Sciences, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. Electronic address: willemjan.vanweelden@radboudumc.nl.

Roy I Lalisang (RI)

Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands; GROW-School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands.

Johan Bulten (J)

Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Kristina Lindemann (K)

Division of Medicine, Department of Gynecological Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Heleen J van Beekhuizen (HJ)

Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Hans Trum (H)

Center for Gynecologic Oncology Amsterdam, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Dorry Boll (D)

Department of Gynaecology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.

Henrica M J Werner (HMJ)

GROW-School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands.

Luc R C W van Lonkhuijzen (LRCW)

Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Refika Yigit (R)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.

David Forsse (D)

Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.

Petronella O Witteveen (PO)

Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Khadra Galaal (K)

Royal Cornwall Hospital NHS Trust, Truro, Cornwall, United Kingdom.

Alexandra van Ginkel (A)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, the Netherlands.

Eliana Bignotti (E)

Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, A. Nocivelli Institute for Molecular Medicine, ASST Spedali Civili di Brescia, Brescia, Italy.

Vit Weinberger (V)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Masaryk University and University Hospital Brno, Czech Republic.

Sanne Sweegers (S)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud Institute of Health Sciences, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Judith R Kroep (JR)

Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.

Silvia Cabrera (S)

Unit of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Barcelona, Spain.

Marc P L M Snijders (MPLM)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Márcia A Inda (MA)

Molecular Pathway Diagnostics, Philips, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.

Ane Gerda Z Eriksson (AGZ)

Division of Medicine, Department of Gynecological Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Camilla Krakstad (C)

Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Centre for Cancer Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.

Andrea Romano (A)

GROW-School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands.

Anja van de Stolpe (A)

Molecular Pathway Diagnostics, Philips, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.

Johanna M A Pijnenborg (JMA)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud Institute of Health Sciences, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH