Search

Simple Summary: Cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) is a protein found at a high concentration in the blood of patients with specific types of cancer, mainly ovarian cancer. In 2004, the Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) proposed criteria defining response to treatment, as well as disease progression, based on the CA-125 concentration. Ever since, for the follow-up of ovarian cancer patients, the CA-125 concentration and/or CT-scans are used. This paper aims to compare different summaries of CA-125 evolution in the 3 to 6 months following treatment initiation in newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and explore their prognostic capacity to predict overall survival. Based on individual patient data from the GCIG meta-analysis, we propose the most appropriate timeframe between follow-up and the prediction horizon in order to obtain robust, dynamic, individual predictions. (1) Background: Cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) is a protein produced by ovarian cancer cells that is used for patients' monitoring. However, the best ways to analyze its decline and prognostic role are poorly quantified. (2) Methods: We leveraged individual patient data from the Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) meta-analysis (N = 5573) to compare different approaches summarizing the early trajectory of CA-125 before the prediction time (called the landmark time) at 3 or 6 months after treatment initiation in order to predict overall survival. These summaries included observed and estimated measures obtained by a linear mixed model (LMM). Their performances were evaluated by 10-fold cross-validation with the Brier score and the area under the ROC (AUC). (3) Results: The estimated value and the last observed value at 3 months were the best measures used to predict overall survival, with an AUC of 0.75 CI 95% [0.70; 0.80] at 24 and 36 months and 0.74 [0.69; 0.80] and 0.75 [0.69; 0.80] at 48 months, respectively, considering that CA-125 over 6 months did not improve the AUC, with 0.74 [0.68; 0.78] at 24 months and 0.71 [0.65; 0.76] at 36 and 48 months. (4) Conclusions: A 3-month surveillance provided reliable individual information on overall survival until 48 months for patients receiving first-line chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynaecologic malignancy in developed countries. Most patients are sufficiently treated with removal of uterus, tubes and ovaries. It depends on the estimated risk of metastases at diagnosis if more extensive surgery (removal of lymph nodes, peritoneum and/or omentum), to detect small metastases, is indicated. Metastases are associated with a higher risk of recurrence and justify adjuvant treatment (i.e., radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy). Recently it is advised to also subdivide EC into four molecular subgroups. Each subgroup is highly associated to a certain risk of recurrence and helps to decide for adjuvant treatment. What surgery should be performed in each of the subgroups is currently unknown. Moreover, it is uncertain if integration of other factors into the molecular classification could help to improve the risk classification. This review summarizes different aspects of surgery. Moreover, the relation between metastases and other factors including molecular classification are evaluated. Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynaecologic malignancy in developed countries. The main challenge in EC management is to correctly estimate the risk of metastases at diagnosis and the risk to develop recurrences in the future. Risk stratification determines the need for surgical staging and adjuvant treatment. Detection of occult, microscopic metastases upstages patients, provides important prognostic information and guides adjuvant treatment. The molecular classification subdivides EC into four prognostic subgroups: POLE ultramutated; mismatch repair deficient (MMRd); nonspecific molecular profile (NSMP); and TP53 mutated (p53abn). How surgical staging should be adjusted based on preoperative molecular profiling is currently unknown. Moreover, little is known whether and how other known prognostic biomarkers affect prognosis prediction independent of or in addition to these molecular subgroups. This review summarizes the factors incorporated in surgical staging (i.e., peritoneal washing, lymph node dissection, omentectomy and peritoneal biopsies), and its impact on prognosis and adjuvant treatment decisions in an era of molecular classification of EC. Moreover, the relation between FIGO stage and molecular classification is evaluated including the current gaps in knowledge and future perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]