Background: How molecular profiles are associated with tumor microenvironment (TME) in high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) is incompletely understood. Therefore, we analyzed the TME and molecular profiles of HGSOC and assessed their associations with overall survival (OS). Methods: Patients with advanced-stage HGSOC treated in three Dutch hospitals between 2008–2015 were included. Patient data were collected from medical records. BRCA1/2 mutation, BRCA1 promotor methylation analyses, and copy number variations were used to define molecular profiles. Immune cells were assessed with immunohistochemical staining. Results: 348 patients were categorized as BRCA mutation (BRCAm) (BRCAm or promotor methylation) (30%), non-BRCA mutated HRD (19%), Cyclin E1 (CCNE1)-amplification (13%), non-BRCAmut HRD and CCNE1-amplification (double classifier) (20%), and no specific molecular profile (NSMP) (18%). BRCAm showed highest immune cell densities and CCNE1-amplification lowest. BRCAm showed the most favorable OS (52.5 months), compared to non-BRCAmut HRD (41.0 months), CCNE1-amplification (28.0 months), double classifier (27.8 months), and NSMP (35.4 months). Higher immune cell densities showed a favorable OS compared to lower, also within the profiles. CD8+, CD20+, and CD103+ cells remained associated with OS in multivariable analysis. Conclusions: Molecular profiles and TME are associated with OS. TME differs per profile, with higher immune cell densities showing a favorable OS, even within the profiles. HGSOC does not reflect one entity but comprises different entities based on molecular profiles and TME.

The FIGO 2018 staging system was introduced to allow better prognostic differentiation in cervical cancer, causing considerable stage migration and affecting treatment options. We evaluated the accuracy of the FIGO 2018 staging in predicting recurrence free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to FIGO 2009 staging in clinically early stage cervical cancer. We conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort study, including 2264 patients with preoperative FIGO (2009) IA1, IA2 and IB1 cervical cancer between 2007–2017. Kaplan–Meier analyses were used to assess survival outcomes. Logistic regression was used to assess risk factors for lymph node metastasis and parametrial invasion. Stage migration occurred in 48% (22% down-staged, 26% up-staged). Survival data of patients down-staged from IB to IA1/2 disease were comparable with FIGO 2009 IA1/2 and better than patients remaining stage IB1. LVSI, invasion depth and parametrial invasion were risk factors for lymph node metastases. LVSI, grade and age were associated with parametrial invasion. In conclusion, the FIGO 2018 staging system accurately reflects prognosis in early stage cervical cancer and is therefore more suitable than the FIGO 2009 staging. However subdivision in IA1 or IA2 based on presence or absence of LVSI instead of depth of invasion would have improved accuracy. For patients down-staged to IA1/2, less radical surgery seems appropriate, although LVSI and histology should be considered when determining the treatment plan.

Aim: To investigate and compare overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and toxicity of women who underwent either chemoradiotherapy with or without prior lymph node debulking or upfront chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy and hyperthermia (triple therapy) for locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) to identify a potential role for triple therapy. Methods: Women with histologically proven LACC and with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IB2 and IIA2 to IVA were included. Cox regression analyses were used for calculating hazard ratios and to adjust for confounding variables. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine the influence of covariates on toxicity. Results: A total of 370 patients were included of whom 58% (n = 213) received chemoradiotherapy (CRT), 18% (n = 66) received node-debulking followed by chemoradiotherapy (LND-CRT) and 25% (n = 91) received triple therapy (TT). Five-year OS was comparable between the three treatment groups, with 53% (95% confidence interval 46–59%) in the CRT group, 45% (33–56%) in the LND-CRT group and 53% (40–64%) in the TT group (p = 0.472). In the adjusted analysis, 5-year OS and DFS were comparable between the three treatment groups. No chemotherapy-related differences in toxicity were observed. Conclusion: This study suggests that the toxicity and survival of TT is similar to CRT or LND-CRT.

Objective: The sepsis-induced inflammatory response may potentially affect malignant cells. Recently, a case of spontaneous regression of a histologically confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) following sepsis was reported. The aim of our study was to assess the impact of sepsis on the oncologic outcomes of advanced-stage EOC patients. Methods: Gynecologic oncologic patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit of three oncologic centers between 2006 and 2019 were identified and patients who experienced sepsis following advanced-stage EOC diagnosis were selected. Survival outcomes were compared with advanced-stage EOC patients from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). To correct for case-mix differences, propensity score matching using 1:3 nearest neighbor matching was conducted after which survival analyses were repeated. Results: A total of 18 of 215 patients with advanced-stage EOC experienced sepsis. Sepsis patients had similar distributions of patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics to 3988 patients from the NCR cohort. A total of 3 of 18 patients died from the complications of sepsis. While the remaining patients initially responded to treatment, 14/15 patients relapsed. The median (IQR) overall survival was 31 (24–44) and 35 (20–60) months for the sepsis and unmatched NCR cohort (p = 0.56), respectively. The median (IQR) progression-free survival was 16 (11–21) and 16 (11–27) months (p = 0.90), respectively. Survival outcomes did not differ following propensity matching (overall survival of 31 (24–44) vs. 36 (20–56) months, p = 0.40; progression-free survival of 16 (11–21) and 16 (12–21) months, p = 0.72). Conclusion: In this observational study, the occurrence of sepsis did not affect the oncologic and survival outcomes of advanced-stage EOC patients.

Background: Modern treatment guidelines for women with advanced cervical cancer recommend staging using 2-deoxy-2-[¹⁸F]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission computed tomography ([¹⁸F]FDG-PET/CT). However, the risk of false-positive nodes and therapy-related adverse events requires caution in treatment planning. Using data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR), we estimated the impact of [¹⁸F]FDG-PET/CT on treatment management in women with locally advanced cervical cancer, i.e., on nodal boosting, field extension, and/or debulking in cases of suspected lymph nodes. Methods: Women diagnosed between 2009 and 2017, who received chemoradiotherapy for International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (2009) stage IB2, IIA2-IVB cervical cancer with an [¹⁸F]FDG-positive node, were retrospectively selected from the NCR database. Patients with pathological nodal examination before treatment were excluded. The frequency of nodal boosting, extended-field radiotherapy, and debulking procedures applied to patients with [¹⁸F]FDG-positive lymph nodes was evaluated. Results: Among the 434 eligible patients with [¹⁸F]FDG-positive nodes, 380 (88%) received interventions targeting these lymph nodes: 84% of these 380 patients received nodal boosting, 78% extended-field radiotherapy, and 12% debulking surgery. [¹⁸F]FDG-positive nodes in patients receiving these treatments were more likely to be classified as suspicious than inconclusive (p = 0.009), located in the para-aortic region (p < 0.001), and larger (p < 0.001) than in patients who did not receive these treatments. Conclusion: While existing guidelines advocate [¹⁸F]FDG-PET/CT-guided treatment planning for the management of advanced cervical cancer, this study highlights that not all cases of [¹⁸F]FDG-positive nodes received an intervention, possibly due to the risk of false-positive results. Improvement of nodal staging may reduce suboptimal treatment planning.