PURPOSE: Platinum-based doublets with concurrent and maintenance bevacizumab are standard therapy for ovarian cancer (OC) relapsing after a platinum-free interval (PFI) >6 months. Immunotherapy may be synergistic with bevacizumab and chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ATALANTE/ENGOT-ov29 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02891824 ), a placebo-controlled double-blinded randomized phase III trial, enrolled patients with recurrent epithelial OC, one to two previous chemotherapy lines, and PFI >6 months. Eligible patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to atezolizumab (1,200 mg once every 3 weeks or equivalent) or placebo for up to 24 months, combined with bevacizumab and six cycles of chemotherapy doublet, stratified by PFI, PD-L1 status, and chemotherapy regimen. Coprimary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and PD-L1–positive populations (alpha .025 for each population). RESULTS: Between September 2016 and October 2019, 614 patients were randomly assigned: 410 to atezolizumab and 204 to placebo. Only 38% had PD-L1–positive tumors. After 3 years' median follow-up, the PFS difference between atezolizumab and placebo did not reach statistical significance in the ITT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.99; P = .041; median 13.5 v 11.3 months, respectively) or PD-L1–positive (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.16; P = .30; median 15.2 v 13.1 months, respectively) populations. The immature overall survival (OS) HR was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.01; median 35.5 v 30.6 months with atezolizumab v placebo, respectively). Global health-related quality of life did not differ between treatment arms. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 88% of atezolizumab-treated and 87% of placebo-treated patients; grade ≥3 AEs typical of immunotherapy were more common with atezolizumab (13% v 8%, respectively). CONCLUSION: ATALANTE/ENGOT-ov29 did not meet its coprimary PFS objectives in the ITT or PD-L1–positive populations. OS follow-up continues. Further research on biopsy samples is warranted to decipher the immunologic landscape of late-relapsing OC.

Recently, the new 2023 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system for endometrial cancer (EC) critically integrating new pathological and molecular features was published. The present study evaluated the clinical impact of the new 2023 FIGO staging system by comparing it to the previous 2009 system. This is an international, pooled retrospective study of 519 EC patients who underwent primary treatment (and molecular characterisation) at three European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) accredited centres in Austria/Italy. Patients were categorised according to the 2009 and the 2023 FIGO staging systems. Stage shifts were analysed and (sub)stage specific 5-year progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were calculated and compared. Different statistical tests were applied to evaluate the prognostic precision of the two FIGO staging systems and to compare them to each other. (Sub)stage shifts occurred in 143/519 (27.6%) patients: 123 upshifts (23.7%) and 20 (3.9%) downshifts. 2023 FIGO staging system identified a stage I cohort with a notably higher 5-year PFS rate compared to 2009 (93.0% versus 87.4%, respectively). For stage II disease, the 5-year PFS rate was similar in the 2023 and the 2009 FIGO staging systems (70.2% versus 71.2%, respectively). The two new molecularly defined 2023 FIGO substages IAm_POLEmut and IICm_p53abn displayed distinct, particularly favourable and adverse oncologic outcomes within early stage disease, respectively. A remarkably lower 5-year PFS rate for stage III patients was revealed in the 2023 FIGO staging system compared to 2009 (44.4% versus 54.1%, respectively). All applied statistical tests confirmed a more accurate prediction of PFS and OS by the 2023 FIGO staging system compared to 2009. The new 2023 FIGO stating system led to a substantial stage shift in about one quarter of patients leading to a higher prognostic precision. In early stage disease, the new substages added further prognostic granularity and identified treatment relevant subgroups.

Purpose: The optimal application of maintenance PARP inhibitor therapy for ovarian cancer requires accessible, robust, and rapid testing of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). However, in many countries, access to HRD testing is problematic and the failure rate is high. We developed an academic HRD test to support treatment decision-making. Experimental Design: Genomic Instability Scar (GIScar) was developed through targeted sequencing of a 127-gene panel to determine HRD status. GIScar was trained from a noninterventional study with 250 prospectively collected ovarian tumor samples. GIScar was validated on 469 DNA tumor samples from the PAOLA-1 trial evaluating maintenance olaparib for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer, and its predictive value was compared with Myriad Genetics MyChoice (MGMC). Results: GIScar showed significant correlation with MGMC HRD classification (kappa statistics: 0.780). From PAOLA-1 samples, more HRD-positive tumors were identified by GIScar (258) than MGMC (242), with a lower proportion of inconclusive results (1% vs. 9%, respectively). The HRs for progression-free survival (PFS) with olaparib versus placebo were 0.45 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.33–0.62] in GIScar-identified HRD-positive BRCA-mutated tumors, 0.50 (95% CI, 0.31–0.80) in HRD-positive BRCA-wild-type tumors, and 1.02 (95% CI, 0.74–1.40) in HRD-negative tumors. Tumors identified as HRD positive by GIScar but HRD negative by MGMC had better PFS with olaparib (HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.07–0.72). Conclusions: GIScar is a valuable diagnostic tool, reliably detecting HRD and predicting sensitivity to olaparib for ovarian cancer. GIScar showed high analytic concordance with MGMC test and fewer inconclusive results. GIScar is easily implemented into diagnostic laboratories with a rapid turnaround.

Purpose: The aim of the present study was to assess the impact of postponed screening examinations and lockdown measures on gynecological and breast cancer diagnoses throughout the year 2020 in a gynecological oncological center in Austria. Methods: Data of 889 patients with either newly diagnosed gynecological or breast cancer between January 2019 and December 2020 were collected. Clinical parameters including symptoms, performance status, comorbidities and referral status were compared in patients, who were newly diagnosed with cancer in the period of the first lockdown from March 2020 to April 2020 and the second lockdown from November 2020 to December 2020 and compared to the same period in 2019. Results: Our results showed a strong decline in newly diagnosed cancers during the lockdown periods: −45% in gynecological cancer and -52% in breast cancer compared to the same period in 2019. Compared to the analogue period of 2019, breast cancer patients reported significantly more tumor-associated symptoms (55% vs. 31%, p = 0.013) during and in between (48% vs. 32%, p = 0.022) the lockdowns. During the lockdown, periods in the group of breast cancer patients’ tumor stage varied significantly compared to 2019 (T2–T4; p = 0.047). Conclusion: Both lockdowns led to a strong decrease in newly diagnosed gynecological and breast cancers. Treatment delays in potentially curable disease could lead to inferior clinical outcomes, with the risk of missing the optimal treatment window. As the COVID-19 pandemic will be a challenge for some time to come, new strategies in patient care are needed to optimize cancer screening and management during the pandemic.

The aim of this survey was to increase the knowledge on the characteristics and health concerns of long-term survivors (LTS; survival > 5 years) after ovarian cancer in order to tailor follow-up care. This international survey was initiated by the NOGGO and was made available to members of ENGOT and GCIG. The survey is anonymous and consists of 68 questions regarding sociodemographic, medical (cancer) history, health concerns including distress, long-term side effects, and lifestyle. For this analysis, 1044 LTS from 14 countries were recruited. In total, 58% were diagnosed with FIGO stage III/IV ovarian cancer and 43.4% developed recurrent disease, while 26.0% were receiving cancer treatment at the time of filling in the survey. LTS who survived 5–10 years self-estimated their health status as being significantly worse than LTS who survived more than 10 years (p = 0.034), whereas distress also remained high 10 years after cancer diagnosis. Almost half of the cohort (46.1%) reported still having symptoms, which were mainly lymphedema (37.7%), fatigue (23.9%), pain (21.6%), polyneuropathy (16.9%), gastrointestinal problems (16.6%), and memory problems (15.5%). Almost all patients (94.2%) regularly received follow-up care. Specialized survivorship care with a focus on long-term side effects, lifestyle, and prevention should be offered beyond the typical five years of follow-up care.

Introduction: Persistent tumor after combined chemoradiation for locally advanced cervical cancer is an established prognostic factor. Detection may include magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography (PET) combined with CT scan, ultrasound, or biopsies; however, no agreement about the best method and time point has been reached. In our institution, a standardized biopsy protocol of at least four punch biopsies is routinely performed at the last brachytherapy with re‐biopsies 6 weeks later in cases not showing histologic complete response (hCR). This study aims to assess the prognostic relevance of these biopsies, especially with respect to the time point of hCR. Material and Methods: This investigation was a retrospective single‐center observational cohort study that included all patients treated for locally advanced or node‐positive cervical cancer with combined chemoradiation at the University Hospital Innsbruck between 2008 and 2023. Patients with a hCR at the end of radiotherapy were classified as primary negative and otherwise as primary positive. Primary positive patients that achieved complete response at a control biopsy 6 weeks later were classified as secondary negative, and the remaining patients with residual tumor as secondary positive. Progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between all these groups. Results: We included 184 patients in this study, from which 46 (25%) were classified as primary positive. These patients experienced a significantly worse PFS compared to primary negative patients ( p = 0.008, HR = 2.03, 95% CI [1.20, 3.45]). The difference in PFS was also evidenced when comparing primary negative patients to those who had a hCR 6 weeks after radiotherapy (secondary negative) ( p = 0.018, HR = 2.00, 95% CI [1.13, 3.56]). However, in primary positive patients, OS was not significantly reduced ( p = 0.29, HR = 1.45, 95% CI [0.73, 2.86]). Conclusions: Early response evaluation using punch biopsies at the time of the last brachytherapy can identify patients with residual tumor, which exhibit a statistically significant and clinically meaningful risk of disease progression. This risk was not reversed even in the case of a delayed hCR 6 weeks after completion of chemoradiation.