ASCO Releases Studies From Upcoming 2010 Annual Meeting

Yesterday, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) made available more than 4,000 medical abstracts which are publicly posted online at http://www.abstract.asco.org. A hyperlink to the 2010 ASCO Annual Meeting ovarian cancer abstracts is provided below.  The ASCO Annual Meeting will be held June 4-8, 2010 at McCormick Place in Chicago, Illinois.

The 2010 ASCO Annual Meeting will be held June 4-8, 2010 at McCormick Place in Chicago, Illinois.

Yesterday, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) highlighted six studies in a press briefing from among more than 4,000 abstracts publicly posted online at www.abstract.asco.org in advance of ASCO’s 46th Annual Meeting.  An additional 14 plenary, late-breaking and other major studies will be released at the Annual Meeting and highlighted in on-site press conferences.

The meeting, which is expected to draw approximately 30,000 cancer specialists, will be held June 4-June 8, 2010, at McCormick Place in Chicago, Illinois. The theme of this year’s meeting is “Advancing Quality Through Innovation.”

“Our growing understanding of cancer’s complex behavior is being translated into better, more targeted drugs against a variety of tumors,” said Douglas W. Blayney, MD, President of ASCO, professor of internal medicine at the University of Michigan Medical School and medical director of the Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of Michigan. “These studies show that investment in cancer research pays off. We’re developing more personalized approaches to treating patients of all ages and across all cancer types, we’re learning how to use current treatments more effectively, and we’re identifying new ways to help patients live long, healthy lives following treatment.”

“Clinical trials are essential to continued progress against cancer. Yet, the nation’s federally funded clinical trial system is at a breaking point,” said George W. Sledge Jr, MD, ASCO President-Elect, Ballve-Lantero Professor of Oncology and professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at the Indiana University School of Medicine. “ASCO has called for a doubling of support for federally funded clinical cancer research within the next five years. We’ve made impressive strides against this disease, and it’s vital that the nation put more resources into these programs to continue the momentum.

Relevant studies highlighted in the May 20th press briefing include:

• Promising New Ovarian Cancer Screening Strategy Developed for Post-Menopausal Women at Average Risk: A promising new screening approach for post-menopausal women at average risk of ovarian cancer is feasible and produces very few false-positive results. The method uses a mathematical model combining trends in CA-125 blood test results and a patient’s age, followed by transvaginal ultrasound and referral to a gynecologic oncologist, if necessary.

• Yoga Improves Sleep and Quality of Life, Lessens Fatigue for Cancer Survivors: Sleep problems and fatigue are among the most common side effects experienced by cancer survivors. A four-week yoga program involving breathing, meditation, postures and other techniques helped cancer survivors sleep better, reduced fatigue and the use of sleep aids, and improved their quality of life.

If you are interested in reviewing the medical abstract subject listing, CLICK HERE.

If you are interested in reviewing the ovarian cancer medical abstracts, CLICK HERE.

Source: ASCO Releases Studies From Upcoming Annual Meeting — – Important Advances in Targeted Therapies, Screening, and Quality of Life, News Release, American Society of Clinical Oncology, May 20, 2010. For a complete PDF copy of the ASCO May 20, 2010 press release, CLICK HERE.

PARP Inhibitor Olaparib Benefits Women With Inherited Ovarian Cancer Based Upon Platinum Drug Sensitivity

Olaparib (AZD2281), a new type of cancer drug known as a “PARP inhibitor,” produced promising results in patients with platinum-refractory, platinum-resistant, and platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer linked to an inherited BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation.

A new type of cancer drug — known as a “PARP inhibitor” — produced promising results in patients with ovarian cancer linked to an inherited BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation. The trial results were published online in the Journal of Clinical Oncology on April 19th.

Scientists at The Institute of Cancer Research (ICR) and The Royal Marsden Hospital, working with pharmaceutical company KuDOS Pharmaceuticals, now a subsidiary of AstraZeneca, found the experimental drug olaparib shrank or stabilized tumors in approximately half of ovarian cancer patients possessing BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.

The five-year survival rate for ovarian cancer is just 40 per cent as the majority of patients are diagnosed with an advanced form of the disease. Most patients initially respond well to radical surgery and platinum and taxane-based chemotherapy, but relapse after an average of 18 months. Subsequent treatments generally become less effective as patients build up resistance.

Professor Stan Kaye, Head of Section of Medicine, Institute of Cancer Research; Head of Drug Development Unit, The Royal Marsden Hospital; and Cancer Research UK-funded scientist

“There is an urgent need to find new drugs for women diagnosed with ovarian cancer,” says Professor Stan Kaye, Head of the Section of Medicine at the ICR and Head of the Drug Development Unit at The Royal Marsden Hospital and a Cancer Research UK-funded scientist. “Olaparib is still in early-stage testing but the results so far are very encouraging. These findings raise the possibility that carefully selected patients in future may well be offered olaparib as an alternative to chemotherapy during the course of their treatment.”

Between 2005 and 2008, about 50 women with confirmed or suspected BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations began treatment with olaparib in a dose escalation and single-stage expansion of a Phase I trial. Twenty patients responded with their tumors shrinking or with significant falls in their ovarian cancer marker CA125, or both. The disease also stabilized in three patients. The drug was effective for an average of seven months. Notably, several patients are still taking olaparib (for nearly two years). Drug side-effects were generally mild, especially when compared to current chemotherapy treatments.

Olaparib is a new type of drug known as a PARP inhibitor that works by turning a tumor’s specific genetic defect against itself. In susceptible cells, olaparib prevents the repair of naturally occurring breaks in DNA, which healthy cells are able to repair. Susceptible cancer cells – those with an existing defect in a DNA repair pathway caused by a mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes – are unable to repair themselves, and therefore, die.

Platinum-based chemotherapy, particularly carboplatin, is one of the main treatments used for ovarian cancer. When this treatment ceases to be effective, theoretically, olaparib might be less effective too, so the ICR scientists examined whether olaparib would still benefit patients whose response to previous platinum-based drugs was limited. Finding new drugs to treat these “platinum-resistant” ovarian cancer patients (those who relapsed within six months of previous platinum therapy) is a particularly high priority as they have a lower chance of benefiting from re-treatment with chemotherapy and a poorer prognosis.

The research team found that the clinical benefit rate with olaparib was indeed higher — 70% — among patients with “platinum-sensitive disease” (disease recurrence more than six months after previous platinum therapy). Crucially, however, the clinical benefit rate was still 46% in platinum resistant patients.

ICR Study Findings:

• 50 patients participated in the study (13 had platinum-sensitive disease, 24 had platinum-resistant disease, and 13 had platinum-refractory disease (according to platinum-free interval).

• 20 patients (40%) achieved complete or partial responses under RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) criteria and/or tumor marker (CA125) responses.

• 3 patients (6.0%) maintained RECIST disease stabilization for more than 4 months.

• Overall clinical benefit rate (complete response + partial response + stable disease) = 46%.

• Median response duration was 28 weeks.

• There was a significant association between the clinical benefit rate and platinum-free interval across the platinum-sensitive, resistant, and refractory patient subgroups (69%, 45%, and 23%, respectively).

• Analyses indicated associations between platinum sensitivity and extent of olaparib response.

• CONCLUSION: Olaparib has antitumor activity in BRCA1/2 mutation ovarian cancer, which is associated with platinum sensitivity.

Up to 15 per cent of breast and ovarian cancers have known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations on blood testing and, importantly, laboratory data strongly suggests that olaparib may also be effective in cancers linked to DNA repair defects not caused by BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. This could apply in about half the cases of the most common histological type of ovarian cancer.

“We have good reason for thinking that the benefit seen with olaparib in BRCA mutation-linked ovarian cancer may well extend to a broader population of patients with this disease,” says Professor Kaye.

Randomised trials of olaparib – in which some patients receive the drug and others a placebo – are underway and results will be available later this year.

KuDOS Pharmaceuticals (a wholly owned subsidiary of AstraZeneca) was the major funder of the trial, along with Cancer Research UK and the National Institute for Health Research. Olaparib was identified and developed at KuDOS Pharmaceuticals and subsequently at AstraZeneca.

PARP Inhibitor Clinical Trials:

To view a list of open ovarian cancer clinical trials that are testing olaparib (AZD2281), click here.

To view a list of open solid tumor clinical trials that are testing olaparib (AZD2281), click here.

To view a list of open ovarian cancer clinical trials that are testing various PARP inhibitors, click here.

To view a list of open solid tumor clinical trials that are testing various PARP inhibitors, click here.

About The Institute of Cancer Research (ICR)

* The ICR is Europe’s leading cancer research centre.

* The ICR has been ranked the UK’s top academic research centre, based on the results of the Higher Education Funding Council’s Research Assessment Exercise.

* The ICR works closely with partner The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust to ensure patients immediately benefit from new research. Together the two organisations form the largest comprehensive cancer centre in Europe.

* The ICR has charitable status and relies on voluntary income, spending 95 pence in every pound of total income directly on research.

* As a college of the University of London, the ICR also provides postgraduate higher education of international distinction.

* Over its 100-year history, the ICR’s achievements include identifying the potential link between smoking and lung cancer which was subsequently confirmed, discovering that DNA damage is the basic cause of cancer and isolating more cancer-related genes than any other organization in the world.

* The ICR is home to the world’s leading academic drug development team. Several important anti-cancer drugs used worldwide were synthesised at the ICR and it has discovered an average of two preclinical candidates each year over the past five years.

For more information visit www.icr.ac.uk.

About The Royal Marsden Hospital

The Royal Marsden opened its doors in 1851 as the world’s first hospital dedicated to cancer treatment, research and education. Today, together with its academic partner, The Institute of Cancer Research, it is the largest and most comprehensive cancer centre in Europe treating over 40,000 patients every year. It is a centre of excellence, and the only NHS Trust to achieve the highest possible ranking in the Healthcare Commission’s Annual Health Check for the third year in a row. Since 2004, the hospital’s charity, The Royal Marsden Cancer Campaign, has helped raise over £43 million to build theatres, diagnostic centres, and drug development units. Prince William became President of The Royal Marsden in 2007, following a long royal connection with the hospital.

For more information, visit www.royalmarsden.nhs.uk

About Cancer Research UK

* Cancer Research UK is the world’s leading charity dedicated to beating cancer through research.

* The charity’s groundbreaking work into the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of cancer has helped save millions of lives. This work is funded entirely by the public.

* Cancer Research UK has been at the heart of the progress that has already seen survival rates double in the last thirty years.

* Cancer Research UK supports research into all aspects of cancer through the work of more than 4,800 scientists, doctors and nurses.

* Together with its partners and supporters, Cancer Research UK’s vision is to beat cancer.

For further information about Cancer Research UK’s work or to find out how to support the charity, please call 020 7121 6699 or visit www.cancerresearchuk.org

About Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (ECMC)

Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (ECMC) status has been awarded to 19 centres in the UK that are specialist centres conducting research into new cancer treatments. The aim is to bring together cancer doctors, research nurses and lab scientists to make clinical trials of new treatments quicker and easier. The ECMC initiative is funded by Cancer Research UK and the Departments of Health of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Together they are giving a total of £35 million pounds over five years to the 19 centres. The centres will use this money to run trials of new and experimental treatments. They will also analyse thousands of blood and tissue samples (biopsies) to help find out more about how treatments work and what happens to cancer cells.

Sources:

• Drug Benefits Patients with Inherited Ovarian Cancer, News Release, The Institute of Cancer Research, April 20, 2010.

• Fong PC, Yap TA, Boss DS, et. al. Poly(ADP)-Ribose Polymerase Inhibition: Frequent Durable Responses in BRCA Carrier Ovarian Cancer Correlating With Platinum-Free Interval. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Apr 20. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 20406929.

Elevated Proteins May Warn of Ovarian Cancer, But Sufficient Lead Time & Predictive Value Still Lacking

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center researchers discovered that concentrations of the serum biomarkers CA125, human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), and mesothelin began to rise 3 years before clinical diagnosis of ovarian cancer, according to a new study published online December 30 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. However, the biomarkers became substantially elevated only in the last year prior to diagnosis. … In an accompanying editorial to the study results reported by Anderson et. al., Patricia Hartge, ScD, of the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics at the National Cancer Institute, applauds the researchers for taking the field one step closer to successful screening study designs by showing that the levels of certain biomarkers do not increase early enough to be used for screening.

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center researchers discovered that concentrations of the serum biomarkers CA125, human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), and mesothelin began to rise 3 years before clinical diagnosis of ovarian cancer, according to a new study published online December 30 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute (JNCI). [1] However, the biomarkers became substantially elevated only in the last year prior to diagnosis.

Garnet L. Anderson, Ph.D., Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA.

CA125, HE4, mesothelin, B7-H4, decoy receptor 3, and spondin-2 have been identified as potential ovarian cancer serum biomarkers, but their behavior in the prediagnostic period, with the exception of CA125, has not been evaluated.  In the JNCI study, Garnet L. Anderson, Ph.D., of the Division of Public Health Sciences at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, and colleagues analyzed prediagnostic serum samples and patient data from the Carotene and Retinol Efficacy Trial (CARET), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled chemoprevention trial testing the effects of beta-carotene and retinol on lung cancer incidence among individuals at high risk for lung cancer. Prediagnostic serum samples (taken up to 18 years prior to diagnosis) were obtained for 34 CARET patients with ovarian cancer and 70 matched control CARET subjects. Changes in the levels of these biomarkers prior to ovarian cancer diagnosis were analyzed.

Anderson et. al. discovered that concentrations of CA125, HE4, and mesothelin (but not B7-H4, decoy receptor 3, and spondin-2) began to increase slightly in cancer patients relative to control subjects approximately 3 years before diagnosis, but became substantially elevated within one year prior to diagnosis. Thus, the diagnostic value of these biomarkers is limited because accuracy only increased shortly before diagnosis. “Although these markers are not accurate enough to prompt early intervention in existing screening protocols, the multivariable regression analyses identified modest but statistically significant increases in risk associated with CA125, HE4, and mesothelin, which are consistent with many of the established epidemiological risk factors for ovarian cancer,” say the authors of the study.

“I still think biomarkers may play a role in a cost-effective screening program, although none of these seem accurate enough either alone or together to justify their use in average-risk women,” Anderson told Medscape Oncology. “I do not know of any other currently identified biomarkers that hold more promise than these, but there has been a massive effort over the last few years to identify candidates and not all have been thoroughly vetted,” said Dr. Anderson.

One problem, cites Dr. Anderson, may lie in the approach used in identifying potential ovarian cancer biomarkers. “Most of the discovery work done so far has been conducted in women with advanced-stage disease and compared them to healthy women,” she explained. “If discovery work were done in samples like the ones we used here, representing specimens collected months to years prior to the advanced stage diagnosis, we might have a better chance of finding earlier signals of aggressive disease.”

Another opportunity for improving screening and early diagnosis lies in imaging, she adds. “Currently the most common and only affordable imaging option that could be considered for routine screening is transvaginal ultrasound, but it performs poorly in terms of accurately determining those women [who] have ovarian cancer from those who do not,” said Dr. Anderson. “A substantial improvement in this area would be very exciting.”

Study Limitations Cited By JNCI Editors

The JNCI editors state three limitations that they believe are associated with the study by Anderson et. al. First, the study sample size was small.  Second, all women who participated in CARET had a history of heavy smoking, and therefore, the JNCI editors believe that the blood serum testing results obtained by Anderson et. al. may not apply to other non-smoking groups. Third, the blood collected from women participating in CARET was collected at different times, but only a few samples were collected during the last 2–3 years before ovarian cancer diagnosis.

Designing Ovarian Cancer Early Detection Programs — Accompanying JNCI Editorial

Patricia Hartge, Sc.D. Deputy Director, Epidemiology and Biostatistics Program, Division of Cancer Epidemiology & Genetic, National Cancer Institute

In an accompanying editorial to the study results reported by Anderson et. al., Patricia Hartge, ScD, of the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics at the National Cancer Institute, applauds the researchers for taking the field one step closer to successful screening study designs by showing that the levels of certain biomarkers do not increase early enough to be used for screening. [2]

Dr. Hartge notes that despite the discovery that CA125 and other serum markers increase before the clinical onset of ovarian cancer, it has been exceedingly difficult to devise a successful ovarian cancer early screening program for asymptomatic women. Nevertheless, Hartge believes that Anderson et al. take a valuable step toward the design of such a successful screening program by demonstrating why screening regimens that are based on markers, or panels of markers, can fail. Specifically, the researchers discovered that blood levels of CA125, HE4, mesothelin, and three other promising markers did not increase early enough in the course of the disease to allow detection in early stages. Dr. Hartge emphasizes that the markers typically rose within one year of the disease symptoms that led to an accurate diagnosis, and therefore, many of the ovarian cancer patients were diagnosed with advanced stage disease.

Hartge further states “[t]hat the results of Anderson et al. are not the last word in serum markers or in combinations of markers.” “Serum markers likely will form a key element in any screening regimen, with the lead time and other parameters of each marker or combination of markers being taken into account. The careful evaluation technique applied in the current study fits into a staged approach necessary for testing performance of early markers of disease.” Hartge adds that “[o]nly the time-consuming, expensive, and demanding randomized clinical trial can reveal whether an early detection program that includes the biomarkers can save lives.”

In support of her position, Dr. Hartge observes that current randomized trials are testing the value of different screening programs that are built on combinations of CA125, ultrasound, and risk factor data (e.g., family history and age). After four rounds of screening 34,261 postmenopausal women for ovarian cancer with both CA125 and ultrasound, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine investigators of the large U.S. screening trial observed that the predictive value of a positive screen was quite low — approximately 1%. Of the 60 screen-detected cancers, 72% had already advanced to at least stage III. [3] In addition, of every 20 women who underwent surgery after a positive screen, only one women was diagnosed with cancer. Furthermore, in a recent UK trial with a slightly different design, positive predictive values from the first round of screening were higher; 35% in the 50,078 women whose risk was assessed with CA125 and risk factor data, followed by ultrasound only if indicated, and 3% in the 50,639 women screened first with ultrasound. [4] The effects on mortality in both trials remain to be determined.

Confronting The “Daunting Arithmetic” Required To Detect Early Stage Ovarian Cancer

Based upon the foregoing, Dr. Hartge highlights the “daunting arithmetic” required to detect early stage ovarian cancer. In the U.S., Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) data indicates that incidence amounts to 13 cases of ovarian cancer per 100,000 woman per year, referred to by Dr. Hartge as the “proverbial needles in the haystack.” [5] So as not to present a problem without a potential solution, Hartge provides a roadmap to additional factors that may help future researchers develop early screening methods to identify those rare cases of ovarian cancer in the general population.  Notably, SEER data also indicates that incidence of ovarian cancer steadily increases with age from 21 cases per 100,000 women per year within the 50-54 age range to 57 cases per 100,000 women per year within the 80-84 age range. [6] Furthermore, family history, low parity, and more ovulations over a woman’s lifetime predict additional risk, with the strongest but least common predictor being a mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene. Thus, the general approach suggested by Hartge focuses on women with higher baseline risks, for whom the predictive value of a positive serum test tends to increase. Dr. Hartge believes that the performance of an overall screening program will improve by targeting higher-risk subgroups of women for screening by combining personal history, genetic abnormality status, and levels of serum markers in one prediction model. With ongoing advances in understanding the origin and causes of ovarian cancer, Hartge states that the risk models that are useful for screening programs should also improve.

Further technology advancements may also improve future ovarian cancer early detection screening models, says Hartege. For example, a screening program that is based on a panel of biomarkers can be improved by developing new medical imaging technology that is more specific than current ultrasound technology.  If better imaging existed, fewer women would undergo surgery following a suspicious biomarker finding.  Similarly, development of less invasive surgery could further reduce harmful side effects.  Although Hartge observes that a highly accurate biomarker(s) or an overall screening program does not yet exist, she also explains that the current study by Anderson et. al., with its sobering implications, brings future researchers closer to understanding the crucial elements in designing an effective early detection program for ovarian cancer.

References:

1/Anderson GL , McIntosh M, Wu L, et. al. Assessing Lead Time of Selected Ovarian Cancer Biomarkers: A Nested Case–Control Study. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Advance Access published on January 6, 2010, DOI 10.1093/jnci/djp438. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 102: 26-38.

2/Hartge P. Designing Early Detection Programs for Ovarian Cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Advance Access published on January 6, 2010, DOI 10.1093/jnci/djp450. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 102: 3-4.

3/Partridge E, Kreimer AR, Greenlee RT, et al. Results from four rounds of ovarian cancer screening in a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol (2009) 113(4):775–782. [PMCID: PMC2728067; PMID: 19305319].

4/Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Hallett R, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). Lancet Oncol (2009) 10(4):327–340. [PMID: 19282241]

5/ Horner MJ, Ries LAG, Krapcho M, et al, eds. SEER Cancer Stat Fact Sheets (2009) Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/ovary.html. Accessed December 2, 2009.

6/Horner MJ, Ries LAG, Krapcho M, et. al., eds. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2006, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD, http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2006, based on November 2008 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, 2009 [See Table 21.6: Incidence & Mortality Rates By Age].

Sources:

• Biomarkers Not Sufficiently Accurate for Early Intervention in Ovarian Cancer, By Roxanne Nelson, Medscape Medical News, Medscape Today, December 31, 2009 [free Medscape registration may be required to view article].

• Researchers make progress on early detection of ovarian cancer, U.S. & World section, The Los Angeles Times online, December 30, 2009.

• New ovarian cancer findings small but significant step toward early detection, by Carol M. Ostrom, Health section, The Seattle Times online, December 30, 2009.

• Proteins show promise for ovarian cancer screening, by Joanne Allen, News, Reuters U.K., December 30, 2009.

FDA Clears Vermillion’s “OVA1” Test To Determine Likelihood of Ovarian Cancer In Women With Pelvic Mass

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration cleared a test that can help detect ovarian cancer in a pelvic mass that is already known to require surgery. The test, called OVA1, helps patients and health care professionals decide what type of surgery should be done and by whom.

First Lab Test That Can Indicate Ovarian Cancer Prior To Biopsy Or Exploratory Surgery

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cleared the OVA1™ Test, the first blood test that, prior to surgery, can help physicians determine if a woman is at risk for a malignant pelvic mass. OVA1 is the first FDA-cleared laboratory test that can indicate the likelihood of ovarian cancer with high sensitivity prior to biopsy or exploratory surgery, even if radiological test results fail to indicate malignancy.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cleared the OVA1™ Test [formerly, the Ovarian Tumor Triage Test], the first blood test that, prior to surgery, can help physicians determine if a woman is at risk for a malignant pelvic mass. OVA1 is the first FDA-cleared laboratory test that can indicate the likelihood of ovarian cancer with high sensitivity prior to biopsy or exploratory surgery, even if radiological test results fail to indicate malignancy. The test was developed by Vermillion, Inc. (formerly, Ciphergen Biosystems, Inc. ), a molecular diagnostics company, in cooperation with Quest Diagnostics, the world’s leading provider of cancer diagnostics. Quest Diagnostics, which is a long-time investor in research and development of the OVA1 technology, has exclusive rights to offer the test to the clinical reference laboratory market in the U.S. for three years.

“When combined with other clinical information, the OVA1 biomarker panel can help assess the likelihood of malignancy of an ovarian tumor before surgery and facilitate decisions about referral to a gynecologic oncologist,” said Frederick R. Ueland, M.D., principal investigator of the prospective, multi-center OVA1 clinical trial. Dr. Ueland is an associate professor gynecologic oncology at the University of Kentucky‘s Markey Cancer Center.

The OVA1 Test is an in vitro diagnostic multivariate index [assay] (IVDMIA) test that combines the results of five immunoassays using a proprietary unique algorithm to produce a single numerical score indicating a women’s likelihood of malignancy. The OVA1 Test provides a new option in the pre-operative evaluation to help physicians assess if a pelvic mass is benign or malignant in order to help determine whether to refer a woman to a gynecologic oncologist for surgery. Numerous clinical practice guidelines recommend that women with ovarian cancer be under the care of a gynecologic oncologist. However, only an estimated one third of women who undergo surgery for possible ovarian cancer are referred to these specialist surgeons for their surgery.(1)

Vermillion received the Society for Gynecologic Oncologists (SGO) Basic Science Poster Award for an abstract on the performance of its OVA1 Test presented at SGO’s 38th Annual Meeting on Women’s Cancer in 2007. In reviewing the test application, the FDA evaluated results of a prospective, double-blind clinical trial which included 27 demographically mixed sites representative of institutions where ovarian tumor subjects may undergo a gynecological examination.

“Surgery in the hands of a gynecologic oncologist is usually associated with more favorable patient outcomes,” said Jon R. Cohen, M.D., chief medical officer and senior vice president, Quest Diagnostics. “Physicians often do not know if a woman’s pelvic mass is malignant or benign until she undergoes surgery. The OVA1 Test is the first FDA-cleared blood test to help clinicians determine whether to refer a woman to a gynecologic oncologist or have a gynecologic oncologist present at the time of surgery. We believe this test will help drive more favorable patient outcomes.”

“Unfortunately, advances in ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment are few and far between. It is fitting that September, Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month, marks FDA’s clearance of OVA1, a test that represents an important step forward toward improved outcomes,” said Gail S. Page, executive chairperson of the board of directors of Vermillion. “Quest Diagnostics had the foresight to recognize the potential value of this novel multivariate assay and supported its development. We look forward to collaborating to bring this new diagnostic option to the many women who will benefit from specialist care.”

"When combined with other clinical information, the OVA1 biomarker panel can help assess the likelihood of malignancy of an ovarian tumor before surgery and facilitate decisions about referral to a gynecologic oncologist," said Frederick R. Ueland, M.D., principal investigator of the prospective, multi-center OVA1 clinical trial. Dr. Ueland is an associate professor gynecologic oncology at the University of Kentucky's Markey Cancer Center.

The FDA clearance of OVA1 makes Quest Diagnostics the only diagnostic testing company to offer FDA cleared tests for ovarian cancer in the pre- and post-surgical settings. In addition to offering the OVA1 Test, Quest Diagnostics was the first laboratory company to provide a new lab test that the FDA cleared in the third quarter of 2008 as an aid for monitoring for recurrence of epithelial ovarian cancer.

The OVA1 Test will be available for physician use in the fourth quarter of this year.

Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death from gynecologic cancers in the United States and the fifth-leading cause of cancer deaths in women.(2) Approximately 21,600 new cases of ovarian cancer will be diagnosed in the U.S. in 2009, and approximately 14,600 women will die of the disease.(3)

About the OVA1 Test

The OVA1 Test is a qualitative serum test that combines the results of five immunoassays into a single numerical score. It is indicated for women who meet the following criteria: over age 18, ovarian adnexal mass present for which surgery is planned, and not yet referred to an oncologist. The test utilizes five well-established biomarkers — Transthyretin (TT or prealbumin), Apolipoprotein A-1 (Apo A-1), Beta2-Microglobulin (Beta2M), Transferrin (Tfr) and Cancer Antigen 125 (CA 125 II) — and a proprietary algorithm to determine the likelihood of malignancy in women with pelvic mass for whom surgery is planned.

The OVA1 Test is an aid to further assess the likelihood that malignancy is present when the physician’s independent clinical and radiological evaluation does not indicate malignancy. The test should not be used without an independent clinical/radiological evaluation and is not intended to be a screening test or to determine whether a patient should proceed to surgery. Incorrect use of the OVA1 Test carries the risk of unnecessary testing, surgery, and/or delayed diagnosis.

About Vermillion

Vermillion, Inc. is dedicated to the discovery, development and commercialization of novel high-value diagnostic tests that help physicians diagnose, treat and improve outcomes for patients. Vermillion, along with its prestigious scientific collaborators, has diagnostic programs in oncology, hematology, cardiology and women’s health. Vermillion is based in Fremont, California. Additional information about Vermillion can be found on the Web at www.vermillion.com.

About Quest Diagnostics

Quest Diagnostics is the world’s leading provider of diagnostic testing, information and services that patients and doctors need to make better healthcare decisions. The company offers the broadest access to diagnostic testing services through its network of laboratories and patient service centers, and provides interpretive consultation through its extensive medical and scientific staff. Quest Diagnostics is a pioneer in developing innovative diagnostic tests and advanced healthcare information technology solutions that help improve patient care. Additional company information is available at www.QuestDiagnostics.com.

(1) Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 98, No. 3, February 1, 2006

(2) Greenlee RT, Murray T, Bolden S, Wingo PA. Cancer statistics, 2000. CA Cancer J Clin. 2000;50(1):7-33

(3) 2009 American Cancer Society [Leading Sites of New Cancer Cases and Deaths—2009 Estimates]

Contacts:
Quest Diagnostics:
Media: Wendy Bost 973-520-2800
Investors: Kathleen Valentine 973-520-2900

Vermillion:
Jill Totenberg, he Totenberg Group Tel: 212 994 7363
jtotenberg@totenberggroup.com

Select FDA Comments:

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today cleared a test that can help detect ovarian cancer in a pelvic mass that is already known to require surgery. The test, called OVA1, helps patients and health care professionals decide what type of surgery should be done and by whom.

OVA1 identifies some women who will benefit from referral to a gynecological oncologist for their surgery, despite negative results from other clinical and radiographic tests for ovarian cancer. If other test results suggest cancer, referral to an oncologist is appropriate even with a negative OVA1 result.

OVA1 should be used by primary care physicians or gynecologists as an adjunctive test to complement, not replace, other diagnostic and clinical procedures.

OVA1 uses a blood sample to test for levels of five proteins that change due to ovarian cancer. The test combines the five separate results into a single numerical score between 0 and 10 to indicate the likelihood that the pelvic mass is benign or malignant.

OVA1 is intended only for women, 18 years and older, who are already selected for surgery because of their pelvic mass. It is not intended for ovarian cancer screening or for a definitive diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Interpreting the test result requires knowledge of whether the woman is pre- or post-menopausal.

Sources:

• U.S. Food and Drug Administration Clears Vermillion’s OVA1(TM) Test to Determine Likelihood of Ovarian Cancer in Women with Pelvic Mass – First lab test that can indicate ovarian cancer prior to biopsy or exploratory surgery, Investor Relations, News Release, Vermillion Inc., 11 Sept. 2009.

• FDA Clears a Test for Ovarian Cancer – Test can help identify potential malignancies, guide surgical decisions, News & Events, News Release, U.S. Food & Drug Administration, 11 Sept. 2009.

Vox Populi*: Libby, We’ll Be Missing You

Vox Populi:  Libby, We’ll Be Missing You.

Dear Libby,

One year ago today, you left us after an extended battle with ovarian cancer.  You are missed as a wife, a daughter, a sister, an aunt and a cousin.  You were, and continue to be, a very special family member to your loved ones who remain behind.  You battled this insidious disease with courage but lost that battle in the prime of your life at age 26.

I wonder why your life was cut short by this disease.

I wonder why an effective screening test has not been discovered by a country that set a lofty goal of landing a man on the moon and accomplished that goal within a decade.

I wonder why there are so many pink ribbons yet so few teal ribbons.

I wonder how the mothers of a major Hollywood celebrity (Angelina Jolie) and the President of the U.S. (Barack Obama) could die from ovarian cancer, yet U.S. women remain generally unaware of the early warning signs and symptoms of the disease.

I have faith that you are in a much better place now.  A place that only knows pure love.  A place that knows no pain or suffering. A place where there are logical answers to my questions above.

I remember when you rode in my new red convertible sports car at the age of 11 with your blond hair blowing behind you in the wind.  At that moment, your life seemed limitless.

I remember when, as a young adult, you helped others who could not help themselves.  You chose generosity and kindness while many of your peers sought money and power.

I remember your positive attitude after initial diagnosis, despite the fact that you had every reason to blame life and others for your plight.

I remember your dry sense of humor after a doctor attempted to soften the blow of a disease recurrence diagnosis by telling you that even he could step out into the street tomorrow and get hit by a bus.  You suggested that the doctor needed serious help with his “people skills,” but joked that his insensitive statement should appear on an ovarian cancer fundraising T-shirt.

I remember how you continued to seek out medical solutions to your disease in the face of dire odds and statistics.

I remember “hearing” your smile on the telephone, regardless of our 3,000 mile separation.

I will always remember your example of love, faith, hope, courage, persistence, and ultimately, acceptance.

On July 28, 2008, I wrote about two songs that immediately came to mind after I heard about your passing.  One year later, two songs again come to mind based upon your inspiration and memory.

The first song is I’ll Be Missing You.

I’ll Be Missing You was written by Terry “Sauce Money” Carroll and performed by Sean “Diddy” Combs (then Puff Daddy), Faith Evans and 112.  Terry Carroll received a 1997 Grammy Award for the song that is based in part upon the melody of the 1983 Grammy Award-Winning song Every Breath You Take (written by Sting and performed by The Police).  I’ll Be Missing You was inspired by the memory of Combs’ fellow Bad Boy Records artist Christopher Wallace (aka Notorious B.I.G. ) who died in March 1997.  The song lyrics express what our family is feeling today when we think of you:

… Life ain’t always what it seem to be
Words can’t express what you mean to me
Even though you’re gone, we still a team
Through your family, I’ll fulfill your dream

In the future, can’t wait to see
If you open up the gates for me
Reminisce sometime
The night they took my friend
Try to black it out but it plays again
When it’s real feelings’ hard to conceal
Can’t imagine all the pain I feel
Give anything to hear half your breath
I know you still livin’ your life after death

… It’s kinda hard with you not around
Know you in heaven smilin down
Watchin us while we pray for you
Every day we pray for you
Til the day we meet again
In my heart is where I’ll keep you friend
Memories give me the strength I need to proceed
Strength I need to believe …
I still can’t believe you’re gone
Give anything to hear half your breath
I know you still living you’re life, after death …

The second song is Eva Cassidy’s cover of Over The Rainbow, which is the Academy Award-Winning song written by Harold Arlen and E.Y. Harburg, and originally sung by Judy Garland, in the 1939 Academy Award-Nominated “Best Picture” film Wizard of Oz.

Eva Cassidy, like you, died in the prime of her life from cancer.  Eva was 33 years old when she died in 1996 from melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer.  During her life, she created and sung beautiful music in relative obscurity. After her death, millions of worldwide fans “discovered” her music and today celebrate her life.  The lyrics of this classic ballad celebrate our belief that you are now at peace in a beautiful place “somewhere over the rainbow,” along with the hope that we will one day be reunited with you:

Somewhere over the rainbow
Way up high
There’s a land that I heard of
Once in a lullaby

Some day I’ll wish upon a star
And wake up where the clouds are far behind me
Where troubles melt like lemondrops
Away above the chimney tops
That’s where you’ll find me

Somewhere over the rainbow
Bluebirds fly
Birds fly over the rainbow
Why then, oh why can’t I?

In Mitch Albom’s bestselling memoir Tuesdays With Morrie, Morrie Schwartz, who was suffering from terminal Lou Gehrig’s Disease, taught Albom (his former college student) an important lesson about how death reminds us to live fully each day with love. “As long as we can love each other, and remember the feeling of love we had, we can die without ever really going away,” he told Albom one Tuesday. “All the love you created is still there. All the memories are still there. You live on in the hearts of everyone you have touched and nurtured while you were here. Death ends a life, not a relationship.”

Libby, your memory, love, and inspiration live on in our hearts and minds.  Your physical life ended one year ago, but your relationship with us is eternal.  We will forever love you.

Libby Remick (1982 - 2008) "Grieve not, nor speak of me with tears, but laugh and talk of me as if I were beside you there." -- Isla Paschal Richardson

I am requesting family members and readers to honor Libby by contributing at least $1.00 to ovarian cancer research via the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund (and PayPal).  To make a contribution, click on Kelly Ripa’s picture located on the left homepage sidebar, or simply CLICK HERE.

__________________________

• Ovarian cancer causes more deaths than any other cancer of the female reproductive system.

• In 2009, the American Cancer Society (ACS) estimates that there will be approximately 21,550 new ovarian cancer cases diagnosed in the U.S.  ACS estimates that 14,600 U.S. women will die from the disease, or about 40 women per day.

• Ovarian cancer is not a “silent” disease; it is a “subtle” disease. Recent studies indicate that some women may experience persistent, nonspecific symptoms, such as (i) bloating, (ii) pelvic or abdominal pain, (iii) difficulty eating or feeling full quickly, or (iv) urinary urgency or frequency. Women who experience such symptoms daily for more than a few weeks should seek prompt medical evaluation. To learn more about the warning signs and symptoms of ovarian cancer, CLICK HERE.

• Ovarian cancer can afflict adolescent, young adult, and mature women, although the risk of disease increases with age and peaks in the late 70s. Pregnancy and the long-term use of oral contraceptives reduce the risk of developing ovarian cancer.

• Women who have had breast cancer, or who have a family history of breast cancer or ovarian cancer may have increased risk. Inherited mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes increase risk. Another genetic syndrome, hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (or Lynch Syndrome), has also been associated with endometrial and ovarian cancer.

• There is no reliable screening test for the detection of early stage ovarian cancer. Pelvic examination only occasionally detects ovarian cancer, generally when the disease is advanced. A Pap smear cannot detect ovarian cancer. However, the combination of a thorough pelvic exam, transvaginal ultrasound, and a blood test for the tumor marker CA125 may be offered to women who are at high risk of ovarian cancer and to women who have persistent, unexplained symptoms like those listed above.

• If diagnosed at the localized stage, the 5-year ovarian cancer survival rate is 92%; however, only about 19% of all cases are detected at this stage, usually fortuitously during another medical procedure.

• For women with regional and distant metastatic disease, the 5-year ovarian cancer survival rates are 71% and 30%, respectively. The 10-year relative survival rate for all stages combined is 38%.

__________________________

*”Vox Populi,” a Latin phrase that means “voice of the people,” is a term often used in broadcast journalism to describe an interview of a “man on the street.”

In the spirit of Vox Populi, Libby’s H*O*P*E*™ searches online for original pieces of writing created by ovarian cancer survivors, survivors’ family members, cancer advocates, journalists, and health care professionals, which address one or more aspects of ovarian cancer within the context of daily life. The written pieces that we discover run the gamut; sometimes poignant, sometimes educational, sometimes touching, sometimes comedic, but always honest. The written piece may be an essay, editorial, poem, letter, or story about a loved one. In all cases, we have received permission from the writer to publish his or her written piece as a Libby’s H*O*P*E*™ Vox Populi weblog post.

It is our hope that the monthly Vox Populi feature will allow readers to obtain, in some small way, a better understanding of how ovarian cancer impacts the life of a woman diagnosed with the disease and her family. We invite all readers to submit, or bring to our attention, original written pieces suitable for publication as monthly Vox Populi features.

Early Treatment of Recurrent Ovarian Cancer Based Upon Rising CA-125 Levels Does Not Increase Survival

“European researchers report [at the 2009 American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting being held in Orlando, Florida from May 29 through June 2nd] that starting treatment early for an ovarian cancer relapse based on CA125 blood levels alone does not improve overall survival, compared with delaying treatment until symptoms arise.”

To Screen or Not To Screen? Ultrasound + CA125 Blood Test Fail to Detect Early Stage Ovarian Cancer

On March 10, 2009, Libby’s H*O*P*E*™ reported on the preliminary findings of a large British study that suggest that the combination of transvaginal ultrasound and CA125 blood test (a blood serum marker for ovarian cancer) can detect early ovarian cancer.  A recent U.S. study, published in the April 2009 issue of Obstetrics & Gynecology, found that the same combination screening regime did not detect early stage ovarian cancer and often resulted in unnecessary surgery. The U.S. and British studies, taken together, highlight the need to find an effective screening method to detect ovarian cancer.

On March 10, 2009, Libby’s H*O*P*E*™ reported on the preliminary findings of a large British study that suggest that the combination of transvaginal ultrasound and CA125 blood test (a blood serum marker for ovarian cancer) can detect early ovarian cancer.  A recent U.S. study, published in the April 2009 issue of Obstetrics & Gynecology, found that the same combination screening regime did not detect early stage ovarian cancer and often resulted in unnecessary surgery. The U.S. and British studies, taken together, highlight the need to find an effective screening method to detect ovarian cancer.

Dr. Edward E. Partridge is the Director of the University of Alabama Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center, Birmingham, Alabama.

In a recent interview with U.S. News & World Report, the lead researcher of the U.S. study, Dr. Edward Partridge, Director of the University of Alabama Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center, said, “The jury is still out on the efficacy of screening with CA125 and transvaginal ultrasound in terms of reducing the mortality rate of ovarian cancer.  In this study, we do not have mortality data on the screening versus the non-screening group, so no conclusions can be made of the impact of screening with CA125 and transvaginal ultrasound.”

Partridge noted that this study only reports data on women who were screened. “We learned that the positive predictive value for the combination of tests is pretty low — in the 1 to 1.3 percent range,” he said. “A substantial number of the tests are false positives.”  In addition, screening with transvaginal ultrasound lead to a higher rate of surgery for positive findings than positive CA125, Partridge said. “Transvaginal ultrasound leads to more ‘unnecessary’ surgeries,” he said.  Partridge also noted that a high percentage of the cancers detected through screening were late-stage malignancies.  “If you detect them at a late stage, it is unlikely that you are going to impact mortality,” he said. “In order to affect mortality, one has to detect them at an earlier stage.”

As part of the study, the U.S. researchers collected data on 34,261 women who underwent annual screening for CA125 and also had transvaginal ultrasound.  A CA 125 value at or above 35 units/mL or an abnormality on transvaginal ultrasound was considered a “positive” screen.  The researchers found that  transvaginal ultrasound produced more positive findings for cancer than CA125 screening over the four years of screening, while the CA125 positive tests decreased from 60 percent in the first year to 34 percent in the third year.  Of the 89 invasive ovarian cancers diagnosed, 60 were detected through screening. In addition, 72 percent of the screen-detected cancer were late-stage cancers, the U.S. researchers reported.

Partridge told U.S. News & World Report that even detecting cancer early may not have an impact on mortality. “In any screening trial, the ultimate test of its usefulness is does it impact mortality,” he said.  Patridge added that based upon the findings of this study and The United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) study published by Menon et. al. in the March 10 online edition of  The Lancet Oncology, the CA125 blood test & ultrasound screening method will not have any effect on mortality. “What we need is a more sensitive and specific screening test,” Partridge said.

In the UKCTOCS study, a British research team found that screening was able to identify most women with gynecologic cancer. The combination of the CA125 blood test and ultrasound found 90 percent of the cancers, while ultrasound alone found 75 percent of the cancers.  The researchers also found that almost 50 percent of all the cancers found were in an early stage (stage I or II).  And, 48 percent of the more invasive ovarian cancers detected were designated as being stage I tumors. By way of comparison, the British researchers pointed out that only 28 percent of ovarian cancers are identified in this early stage.

Dr. David G. Mutch, the Ira C. and Judith Gall Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Washington University, St. Louis, and author of an accompanying journal editorial, agreed there is no worthwhile screening test for ovarian cancer as yet.  “Patients who were screened presented at the same stage as they would have if they were unscreened,” Mutch said. “There is no good screening test at this point.”  Mutch added that there is no reason to screen for ovarian cancer in the general population at this point. “The prevalence of the diseases is so low, one in 2,500, and the specificity of the tests are so low, that we are going to operate on a lot of patients unnecessarily,” he said.

Primary Sources:

• Partridge E, Kreimer AR, Greenlee RT et. al. Results From Four Rounds of Ovarian Cancer Screening in a Randomized Trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Apr;113(4):775-782. [PDF Document].

• Combo Screening Doesn’t Spot Early Ovarian Cancer – Even finding it early may not save lives, researchers say, by Steven Reinberg, HealthDay Article, U.S. News & World Report online, March 20, 2009.

Ovarian Cancers Detected Early May Be Less Aggressive

“The biology of ovarian cancers discovered at an early stage may render them slower growing and less likely to spread than more aggressive cancers, which typically are discovered in an advanced stage, according to a study led by investigators in the Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center.  This finding has implications for the question of whether screening for ovarian cancer could save lives. …”

“The biology of ovarian cancers discovered at an early stage may render them slower growing and less likely to spread than more aggressive cancers, which typically are discovered in an advanced stage, according to a study led by investigators in the Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center.  This finding has implications for the question of whether screening for ovarian cancer could save lives.

Dr. Andrew Berchuck is Director of the Duke Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center, Durham, North Carolina

‘Our study showed that the ovarian cancers currently detected at an early stage have gene expression profiles that correlate with favorable outcome, rather than being representative of the entire spectrum of disease aggressiveness,’ said Andrew Berchuck, MD, a gynecologic oncologist at Duke and lead investigator on this study.  ‘This highlights the potential challenges of developing a screening test for this disease, because earlier detection of aggressive cases is essential if screening is to reduce ovarian cancer deaths.’

The results of this study and the implications for screening as an approach to decreasing mortality parallel the challenges seen in lung cancer and prostate cancer.  In those cancers, while screening approaches based on radiological imaging and/or blood markers detect cancers, it remains unclear whether cancer-related deaths are prevented because screening preferentially detects more benign cancers that are much less likely to be fatal, Berchuck said.

‘While these results could be seen as discouraging, it must be remembered that this information is an important piece of the ovarian cancer puzzle, and data like these that increase our understanding of the disease hopefully will eventually lead to breakthroughs in prevention, early detection and treatment of this deadly disease,’ Berchuck said.  Although there is currently no approved ovarian cancer screening test for the general population, the CA125 blood test and transvaginal ultrasound imaging currently are being evaluated in clinical trials.

The researchers looked at gene expression patterns in 166 ovarian cancer tissue samples taken from patients who were treated at Duke, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, and Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and from the Gynecologic Oncology Group Tumor Bank.  For this study, researchers examined samples of advanced ovarian cancers from patients who had experienced long-term survival — over seven years — and patients who had done extremely poorly, and died within three years of diagnosis.  The researchers used microarrays — a method for examining thousands of snippets of DNA — with about 22,000 probe sets to examine patterns of gene expression among the samples, and identified genes that were most predictive of survival.

‘We found that certain patterns predicted long-term survival and others predicted a poorer prognosis in advanced stage cases,’ Berchuck said. ‘Cancers that were detected at an early stage almost always shared gene expression characteristics with advanced stage cases that were long-term survivors, suggesting a shared favorable biology.’

The researchers published their results in the March 24, 2009, issue of the journal Clinical Cancer Research. The study was funded by the Gail Parkins Ovarian Cancer Research Fund and the National Institutes of Health.

Other researchers involved in this study include Edwin Iversen, Jingqin Luo, Jennifer Clarke, Hisani Horne, Angeles Secord, Jason Barnett, Susan Murphy, Holly Dressman, Jeffrey Marks of Duke; Douglas Levine and Jeff Boyd of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, NY; Miguel Alonso of the Universidad Autonoma de Madrid; and Johnathan Lancaster of H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute.”

Primary Source:  Spotlight:  Ovarian Cancers Detected Early May Be Less Aggressive, News Article, Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center, March 23, 2009.

Routine Screening for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Recommended By ACOG & SGO

Evaluating a patient’s risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome is an important first step in cancer prevention and early detection and should be a routine part of ob-gyn practice. Those who are likely to have the syndrome should be referred for further assessment to a clinician with expertise in genetics, according to a new Practice Bulletin jointly released today by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists [ACOG] and the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists [SGO]. The new document also provides information on how to counsel patients with hereditary risk in cancer prevention and how to perform surgical removal of the ovaries and fallopian tubes in this population

“Routine Screening for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Recommended

Washington, DC — Evaluating a patient’s risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome is an important first step in cancer prevention and early detection and should be a routine part of ob-gyn practice. Those who are likely to have the syndrome should be referred for further assessment to a clinician with expertise in genetics, according to a new Practice Bulletin jointly released today by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists [ACOG] and the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists [SGO]. The new document also provides information on how to counsel patients with hereditary risk in cancer prevention and how to perform surgical removal of the ovaries and fallopian tubes in this population.

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome is an inherited cancer-susceptibility syndrome marked by multiple family members with breast cancer, ovarian cancer or both; the presence of both breast and ovarian cancer in a single individual; and early age of breast cancer onset.

Karen Lu, M.D., Professor of Gynecologic Oncology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

‘The vast majority of families who have hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome carry an inherited mutation of the BRCA1 or BRCA2 tumor suppressor genes. Women in these families may have a higher risk of breast, ovarian, peritoneal, and fallopian tube cancers,’ said Karen Lu, MD, professor of gynecologic oncology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, who helped develop the ACOG Practice Bulletin. ‘Though having a BRCA gene mutation does not mean an individual will undoubtedly develop cancer, it is better to know sooner rather than later who may be at risk.’

Women with either BRCA mutation have a 65%-74% chance of developing breast cancer in their lifetime. Ovarian cancer risk is increased by 39%-46% in women with a BRCA1 mutation and by 12-20% in women with a BRCA2 mutation. Approximately 1 in 300 to 1 in 800 individuals in the US are BRCA carriers. BRCA mutations may occur more frequently in some populations founded by small ancestral groups, such as Ashkenazi (Eastern European) Jews, French Canadians, and Icelanders. An estimated 1 in 40 Ashkenazi Jews has a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.

The new document addresses the ob-gyn’s role in identifying, managing, and counseling patients with an inherited cancer risk. The initial screening evaluation should include specific questions about personal and family history of breast cancer and ovarian cancer. Because BRCA mutations can be passed down from both the father’s and mother’s side of the family, both sides of a woman’s family should be carefully examined. Obtaining a full family history may be impeded in women who were adopted, those from families that have multiple women who had a hysterectomy and oophorectomy at a young age, or those from families with few female relatives. The results of a general evaluation will help determine whether the patient would benefit from a more in-depth hereditary cancer risk assessment, which should be conducted by a health care provider with expertise in cancer genetics.

Further genetic risk assessment is recommended for women who have more than a 20%-25% chance of having an inherited predisposition to breast or ovarian cancer. These women include:

• Women with a personal history of both breast cancer and ovarian cancer
• Women with ovarian cancer and a close relative—defined as mother, sister, daughter, grandmother, granddaughter, aunt—with ovarian cancer, premenopausal breast cancer, or both
• Women of Ashkenazi Jewish decent with breast cancer who were diagnosed at age 40 or younger or who have ovarian cancer
• Women with breast cancer at 50 or younger and who have a close relative with ovarian cancer or male breast cancer at any age
• Women with a close relative with a known BRCA mutation

Genetic risk assessment may also be appropriate for women with a 5%-10% chance of having hereditary risk, including:

• Women with breast cancer by age 40
• Women with ovarian cancer, primary peritoneal cancer, or fallopian tube cancer or high grade, serous histology at any age
• Women with cancer in both breasts (particularly if the first cancer was diagnosed by age 50)
• Women with breast cancer by age 50 and a close relative with breast cancer by age 50
• Women with breast cancer at any age and two or more close relatives with breast cancer at any age (particularly if at least one case of breast cancer was diagnosed by age 50)
• Unaffected women with a close relative that meets one of the previous criteria

Before testing, a genetic counselor can discuss the possible outcomes of testing; options for surveillance, chemoprevention, and risk-reducing surgery; cost and legal and insurance matters surrounding genetic tests and test results; and the psychologic and familial implications that may follow. The counselor can also provide written materials that women can share with family members who may also have an inherited risk.

Screening, Prevention, and Surgical Intervention

Those with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome can begin a screening and prevention plan based on individual risk factors and family history. Ovarian cancer screening approaches are currently limited. For women with a BRCA mutation, ACOG recommends periodic screening with CA 125 and transvaginal ultrasonography beginning between the ages of 30 and 35 years or 5-10 years earlier than the earliest age of first diagnosis of ovarian cancer in the family.

Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy surgery—which removes both of the ovaries and fallopian tubes—can reduce the risk of ovarian and fallopian tube cancer by about 85% to 90% among BRCA carriers. Women who have BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations should be offered risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy by age 40 or when childbearing is complete. The ideal time for this surgery depends on the type of gene mutation.

‘In this population, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and pathology review must be extremely comprehensive to check for microscopic cancers in the ovaries, fallopian tubes, and abdominal cavity,’ Dr. Lu said. According to the Practice Bulletin, all tissue from the ovaries and fallopian tubes should be removed, and a complete, serial sectioning that includes microscopic examination for occult cancer should be conducted. A thorough visualization of the peritoneal surfaces with pelvic washings should be performed. Any abnormal areas should undergo biopsy.

Strategies recommended to reduce breast cancer risk in women with a BRCA mutation include semiannual clinical breast examination; an annual mammogram and annual breast magnetic resonance imaging screening beginning at age 25 or sooner based on the earliest age onset in the family; chemoprevention therapy with tamoxifen; and bilateral mastectomy to remove both breasts, which reduces the risk of breast cancer by greater than 90%-95%.

Practice Bulletin #103 “Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome” is published in the April 2009 edition of Obstetrics & Gynecology.”

_______________________________________________________

About the American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is the national medical organization representing over 53,000 members who provide health care for women.

About the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists

The Society of Gynecologic Oncologists is a national medical specialty organization of physician-surgeons who are trained in the comprehensive management of women with malignancies of the reproductive tract.  The purpose of the SGO is to improve the care of women with gynecologic cancers by encouraging research and disseminating knowledge to raise the standards of practice in the prevention and treatment of gynecologic malignancies, in cooperation with other organizations interested in women’s health care, oncology and related fields. This is reflected in the Society’s Mission statement to “promote and ensure the highest quality
of comprehensive clinical care through excellence in education and research in gynecologic cancers.”

Primary Source:  Routine Screening for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Recommended, News Release, American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, March 20, 2009.

Preliminary Findings of a Large British Study Indicate That CA-125 Blood Test & Transvaginal Ultrasound Test Can Detect Early Ovarian Cancer

“Ovarian cancer has a high case—fatality ratio, with most women not diagnosed until the disease is in its advanced stages. The United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) is a randomised controlled trial designed to assess the effect of screening on mortality. This report summarises the outcome of the prevalence (initial) screen in UKCTOCS. …”

“Background

Ovarian cancer has a high case—fatality ratio, with most women not diagnosed until the disease is in its advanced stages. The United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) is a randomised controlled trial designed to assess the effect of screening on mortality. This report summarises the outcome of the prevalence (initial) screen in UKCTOCS.

The United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening - Overall Trial Design

Methods

Between 2001 and 2005, a total of 202,638 post-menopausal women aged 50—74 years were randomly assigned to [1] no treatment (control; n=101,359); [2] annual CA125 screening (interpreted using a risk of ovarian cancer algorithm) with transvaginal ultrasound scan as a second-line test (multimodal screening [MMS]; n=50,640); or [3] annual screening with transvaginal ultrasound (USS; n=50,639) alone in a 2:1:1 ratio using a computer-generated random number algorithm. All women provided a blood sample at recruitment. Women randomised to the MMS group had their blood tested for CA125 and those randomised to the USS group were sent an appointment to attend for a transvaginal scan. Women with abnormal screens had repeat tests. Women with persistent abnormality on repeat screens underwent clinical evaluation and, where appropriate, surgery. This trial is registered as ISRCTN22488978 and with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00058032.

Findings

In the prevalence screen, 50,078 (98.9%) women underwent MMS, and 48,230 (95.2%) underwent USS. The main reasons for withdrawal were death (two MMS, 28 USS), non-ovarian cancer or other disease (none MMS, 66 USS), removal of ovaries (five MMS, 29 USS), relocation (none MMS, 39 USS), failure to attend three appointments for the screen (72 MMS, 757 USS), and participant changing their mind (483 MMS, 1,490 USS). Overall, 4,355 of 50,078 (8.7%) women in the MMS group and 5,779 of 48,230 (12.0%) women in the USS group required a repeat test, and 167 (0.3%) women in the MMS group and 1,894 (3.9%) women in the USS group required clinical evaluation. 97 of 50,078 (0.2%) women from the MMS group and 845 of 48,230 (1.8%) from the USS group underwent surgery. 42 (MMS) and 45 (USS) primary ovarian and tubal cancers were detected, including 28 borderline tumours (eight MMS, 20 USS). 28 (16 MMS, 12 USS) of 58 (48.3%; 95% CI 35.0—61.8) of the invasive cancers were stage I/II, with no difference (p=0.396) in stage distribution between the groups. A further 13 (five MMS, eight USS) women developed primary ovarian cancer during the year after the screen. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive-predictive values for all primary ovarian and tubal cancers were 89.4%, 99.8%, and 43.3% for MMS, and 84.9%, 98.2%, and 5.3% for USS, respectively. For primary invasive epithelial ovarian and tubal cancers, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive-predictive values were 89.5%, 99.8%, and 35.1% for MMS, and 75.0%, 98.2%, and 2.8% for USS, respectively. There was a significant difference in specificity (p<0.0001) but not sensitivity between the two screening groups for both primary ovarian and tubal cancers as well as primary epithelial invasive ovarian and tubal cancers.

Interpretation

The sensitivity of the MMS and USS screening strategies is encouraging. Specificity was higher in the MMS than in the USS group, resulting in lower rates of repeat testing and surgery. This in part reflects the high prevalence of benign adnexal abnormalities and the more frequent detection of borderline tumours in the USS group. The prevalence screen has established that the screening strategies are feasible. The results of ongoing screening are awaited so that the effect of screening on mortality can be determined.

Funding

Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK and the Department of Health, UK; with additional support from the Eve Appeal, Special Trustees of Bart’s and the London, and Special Trustees of University College London Hospital.”

Primary Source

Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS); Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS); Usha Menon MD, Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj Ph.D., Rachel Hallett Ph.D. et. al, The Lancet Oncology, Early Online Publication, 11 March 2009 doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70026-9.

Comment

During an interview with the New York Times, Dr. Ian Jacobs, director of the Institute for Women’s Health at University College London, and director of the trial, discussed the optimism and the caveats associated with the preliminary clinical study results as follows:

We have now demonstrated we can pick up the vast majority of women with ovarian cancer earlier than they would have otherwise been detected and before they have symptoms, .. and that a good proportion of those women have earlier stage disease than we would normally expect them to have. … [W]omen thinking of having this must understand and realize that there’s a possibility it will do more harm than good. We have reason to think it will save lives, … and then the question is, will it save enough lives to balance out the harm it does? [Emphasis added].

Robert Smith, director of cancer screening for the American Cancer Society informed the New York Times that “[w]e’re not even remotely close to knowing how to screen women of average risk with these tests, or even if we should.” Mr Smith added that it is important to run large clinical trials, but that the preliminary results of this study must be interpreted with caution.

Secondary Sources

• Screening Can Detect Early Ovarian Cancer, by Roni Caryn Rabin, Health Section, The New York Times Online Edition, March 10, 2009.
• Blood, ultrasound tests catch ovarian cancer: study, reporting by Maggie Fox, editing by Will Dunham and Paul Simao, Reuters Health News, March 10, 2009.

M.D. Anderson Researchers Find GM-CSF and rIFN-gamma1b Plus Carboplatin Effective For the Treatment of Recurrent, Platinum-Sensitive Ovarian Cancer

Researchers working in the Gynecologic Oncology Department of The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, reported Phase II clinical study results from their evaluation of the use of carboplatin, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) and recombinant interferon gamma 1b (rIFN-gamma1b) in women with recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer. …

Researchers working in the Gynecologic Oncology Department of The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, reported Phase II clinical study results from their evaluation of the use of carboplatin, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) and recombinant interferon gamma 1b (rIFN-gamma1b) in women with recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer.

As part of this Phase II clinical study, patients with recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer were treated with subcutaneous GM-CSF and rIFN-gamma1b before and after intravenous carboplatin until their disease progressed or unacceptable toxicity occurred. All patients had measurable disease and a chemotherapy-free interval >6 months. Response was determined using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria and CA 125 blood serum levels. Between 2003 and 2007, 59 patients received a median of 6 cycles of therapy (range, 1 to 13 cycles). The median patient age at enrollment was 61 years (range, 35 to 79 years). The median patient time to disease progression prior to clinical study enrollment was 11 months (range, 6 to 58 months).

The M.D. Anderson researchers reported the following results:

• Of 54 patients evaluable for response, 9 (17%) had a complete response, 21 (39%) had a partial response, and 24 (44%) had progressive disease;
• The overall response rate was 56%;
• With a median follow-up of 6.4 months, the patient median time to disease progression was 6 months;
• Myeloid derived cells and platelets increased on day 9 of each chemotherapy cycle;
• The most common adverse effects were bone marrow suppression, carboplatin hypersensitivity, and fatigue; and
• Responders reported improved quality of life.

Based upon the foregoing results, the researchers concluded that the pre- and post-carboplatin cytokine regimen resulted in a reasonable response and a hematologic profile that could invite further evaluation of its components in the treatment of patients with ovarian cancer.

Primary Source:  A phase II study of GM-CSF and rIFN-gamma1b plus carboplatin for the treatment of recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer; Schmeler KM, Vadhan-Raj S, Ramirez PT et. al., Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Mar 3. [Epub ahead of print].

Evaluation of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Debulking Followed by Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Women with Stage III and IV Epithelial Ovarian, Fallopian Tube or Primary Peritoneal Cancer

It is well known that intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy prolongs survival in optimally cytoreduced (or debulked) ovarian cancer patients.  For patients who can not be optimally debulked, it is possible to administer neoadjuvant chemotherapy to place that patient in a position to be optimally debulked (i.e., 1 cm or less of residual disease post surgery) , thereby allowing the use of post-surgery IP chemotherapy (assuming optimal cytoreduction is achieved through surgery). This theory was tested in a Phase II clinical study (S0009) conducted by the Southwest Oncology Group (SOG). …

It is well known that intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy prolongs survival in optimally cytoreduced (or debulked) ovarian cancer patients.  For patients who can not be optimally debulked, it is possible to administer neoadjuvant chemotherapy to place that patient in a position to be optimally debulked (i.e., 1 cm or less of residual disease post surgery) , thereby allowing the use of post-surgery IP chemotherapy (assuming optimal cytoreduction is achieved through surgery). This theory was tested in a Phase II clinical study (S0009) conducted by the Southwest Oncology Group (SOG).

In SOG Study S009, researchers sought to evaluate overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), percentage of patients optimally debulked, and toxicity in Stage III/IV ovarian cancer patients treated with this strategy.

As part of the study, women with stage III/IV (pleural effusions only in stage IV) epithelial ovarian cancer, and fallopian tube or primary peritoneal carcinoma that presented with bulky disease were treated with neoadjuvant intravenous (IV) paclitaxel and carboplatin.  If, after neoadjuvant IV chemotherapy, the patient experienced a 50% or greater decrease in her CA125 tumor marker, cytoreduction surgery was performed.  If optimal debulking was achieved, the patient received IV paclitaxel, IP carboplatin and IP paclitaxel post-surgery.

The results of the study are set forth below.

• 62 patients were registered for the study, of which four were ineligible.
• 56 patients were evaluated for neoadjuvant chemotherapy toxicities. One patient died of pneumonia. Five patients had grade 4 toxicity, including neutropenia, anemia, leukopenia, anorexia, fatigue, muscle weakness, respiratory infection, and cardiac ischemia.
• 36 patients received debulking surgery, and two patients had grade 4 hemorrhage.
• 26 patients received post-cytoreduction chemotherapy. Four had grade 4 neutropenia.
• At a median follow-up of 21 months, median PFS is 21 months and median OS is 32 months for all 58 patients.
• PFS and OS for the 26 patients who received IV/IP chemotherapy is 29 and 34 months, respectively

The researchers performing the study concluded that the results compare favorably with other studies of sub-optimally debulked (i.e., >1 cm of residual disease post surgery) patients.

Primary Source:  Phase II evaluation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and debulking followed by intraperitoneal chemotherapy in women with stage III and IV epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer: Southwest Oncology Group Study S0009; Tiersten AD, Liu PY, Smith HO et. al., Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Mar;112(3):444-9. Epub 2009 Jan 12.

Symptom Screening + CA-125 Blood Test = Better Detection of Early Stage Ovarian Cancer

” …Research has found that when used alone, a simple four-question symptom-screening questionnaire and the CA125 ovarian-cancer blood test each detect about 60 percent of women with early-stage ovarian cancer and 80 percent of those with late-stage disease. This study found that when used together, the questionnaire and blood test may boost early-detection rates to more than 80 percent and late-stage detection rates to more than 95 percent. …”

“Women’s reports of persistent, recent-onset symptoms linked to ovarian cancer – abdominal or pelvic pain, difficulty eating or feeling full quickly and abdominal bloating – when combined with the CA125 blood test may improve the early detection of ovarian cancer by 20 percent, according to new findings by researchers at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center published online today in CANCER.

Research has found that when used alone, a simple four-question symptom-screening questionnaire and the CA125 ovarian-cancer blood test each detect about 60 percent of women with early-stage ovarian cancer and 80 percent of those with late-stage disease. This study found that when used together, the questionnaire and blood test may boost early-detection rates to more than 80 percent and late-stage detection rates to more than 95 percent.

‘Of course, it is the increase in the detection of early-stage disease that is the most exciting,’ said lead author M. Robyn Andersen, Ph.D., an associate member of the Public Health Sciences Division at the Hutchinson Center. Cure rates for those diagnosed when the disease is confined to the ovary are approximately 70 percent to 90 percent. However, more than 70 percent of women with ovarian cancer are diagnosed with advanced-stage disease, when the survival rate is only 20 percent to 30 percent.

‘This research suggests that if a woman has one or more symptoms that are new for her, having begun within the past year, and if the symptoms happen nearly daily or at least 12 times a month, that may well be a signal to go in and discuss those symptoms with her doctor,’ Andersen said. ‘It’s probably not going to be ovarian cancer, just as most breast lumps are not breast cancer, but it’s still a sign that it might be worth checking with her doctor to see if a CA125 blood test and transvaginal ultrasound may be appropriate.’

Assessing the symptoms included in the symptom-screening index may already be done by some doctors based on a consensus statement issued last year by the National Institutes of Health. The researchers hope their symptom index will help doctors know which among their patients who complain of symptoms such as abdominal swelling and pelvic pain might have cancer.

The symptom-screening index, developed in 2006 by paper co-author Barbara A. Goff, M.D., professor and director of Gynecologic Oncology at the University of Washington School of Medicine, is not used proactively in clinical general practice, but Andersen and colleagues are conducting a pilot study to assess the value of using it as a screening tool among normal-risk women as part of their routine medical-history assessment.

For the just-published study, the researchers administered the symptom questionnaire to 75 women about to undergo surgery for pelvic masses who were later diagnosed with ovarian cancer (the case group), and 254 healthy women at high risk for ovarian cancer due to a family history of the disease (the control, or comparison, group). The cases were recruited through Pacific Gynecology Specialists at Swedish Medical Center in Seattle, and the controls were recruited through the Ovarian Cancer Early Detection Study, a joint project of the Hutchinson Center and the Marsha Rivkin Center for Ovarian Cancer Research.

The National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute, the Marsha Rivkin Center for Ovarian Cancer Research and the Canary Foundation supported this research.”

[Quoted Source: Symptom screening plus a simple blood test equals a 20 percent jump in early detection of ovarian cancer, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center News Release, June 23, 2008.]