Search

Endometrioid ovarian cancers (EOvC) are usually managed as serous tumors. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive molecular investigation to uncover the distinct biological characteristics of EOvC. This retrospective multicenter study involved patients from three European centers. We collected clinical data and formalin‐fixed paraffin‐embedded (FFPE) samples for analysis at the DNA level using panel‐based next‐generation sequencing and array‐comparative genomic hybridization. Additionally, we examined mRNA expression using NanoString nCounter® and protein expression through tissue microarray. We compared EOvC with other ovarian subtypes and uterine endometrioid tumors. Furthermore, we assessed the impact of molecular alterations on patient outcomes, including progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Preliminary analysis of clinical data from 668 patients, including 86 (12.9%) EOvC, revealed more favorable prognosis for EOvC compared with serous ovarian carcinoma (5‐year OS of 60% versus 45%; P = 0.001) driven by diagnosis at an earlier stage. Immunohistochemistry and copy number alteration (CNA) profiles of 43 cases with clinical data and FFPE samples available indicated that EOvC protein expression and CNA profiles were more similar to endometrioid endometrial tumors than to serous ovarian carcinomas. EOvC exhibited specific alterations, such as lower rates of PTEN loss, mutations in DNA repair genes, and P53 abnormalities. Survival analysis showed that patients with tumors harboring loss of PTEN expression had worse outcomes (median PFS 19.6 months vs. not reached; P = 0.034). Gene expression profile analysis confirmed that EOvC differed from serous tumors. However, comparison to other rare subtypes of ovarian cancer suggested that the EOvC transcriptomic profile was close to that of ovarian clear cell carcinoma. Downregulation of genes involved in the PI3K pathway and DNA methylation was observed in EOvC. In conclusion, EOvC represents a distinct biological entity and should be regarded as such in the development of specific clinical approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Endometrioid ovarian cancers (EOvC) are usually managed as serous tumors. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive molecular investigation to uncover the distinct biological characteristics of EOvC. This retrospective multicenter study involved patients from three European centers. We collected clinical data and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples for analysis at the DNA level using panel-based next-generation sequencing and array-comparative genomic hybridization. Additionally, we examined mRNA expression using NanoString nCounter® and protein expression through tissue microarray. We compared EOvC with other ovarian subtypes and uterine endometrioid tumors. Furthermore, we assessed the impact of molecular alterations on patient outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Preliminary analysis of clinical data from 668 patients, including 86 (12.9%) EOvC, revealed more favorable prognosis for EOvC compared with serous ovarian carcinoma (5-year OS of 60% versus 45%; P = 0.001) driven by diagnosis at an earlier stage. Immunohistochemistry and copy number alteration (CNA) profiles of 43 cases with clinical data and FFPE samples available indicated that EOvC protein expression and CNA profiles were more similar to endometrioid endometrial tumors than to serous ovarian carcinomas. EOvC exhibited specific alterations, such as lower rates of PTEN loss, mutations in DNA repair genes, and P53 abnormalities. Survival analysis showed that patients with tumors harboring loss of PTEN expression had worse outcomes (median PFS 19.6 months vs. not reached; P = 0.034). Gene expression profile analysis confirmed that EOvC differed from serous tumors. However, comparison to other rare subtypes of ovarian cancer suggested that the EOvC transcriptomic profile was close to that of ovarian clear cell carcinoma. Downregulation of genes involved in the PI3K pathway and DNA methylation was observed in EOvC. In conclusion, EOvC represents a distinct biological entity and should be regarded as such in the development of specific clinical approaches., (© 2024 The Author(s). Molecular Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Federation of European Biochemical Societies.)

Background: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is the most pro-metastatic form of BC. Better understanding of its enigmatic pathophysiology is crucial. We report here the largest whole-exome sequencing (WES) study of clinical IBC samples., Methods: We retrospectively applied WES to 54 untreated IBC primary tumor samples and matched normal DNA. The comparator samples were 102 stage-matched non-IBC samples from TCGA. We compared the somatic mutational profiles, spectra and signatures, copy number alterations (CNAs), HRD and heterogeneity scores, and frequencies of actionable genomic alterations (AGAs) between IBCs and non-IBCs. The comparisons were adjusted for the molecular subtypes., Results: The number of somatic mutations, TMB, and mutational spectra were not different between IBCs and non-IBCs, and no gene was differentially mutated or showed differential frequency of CNAs. Among the COSMIC signatures, only the age-related signature was more frequent in non-IBCs than in IBCs. We also identified in IBCs two new mutational signatures not associated with any environmental exposure, one of them having been previously related to HIF pathway activation. Overall, the HRD score was not different between both groups, but was higher in TN IBCs than TN non-IBCs. IBCs were less frequently classified as heterogeneous according to heterogeneity H-index than non-IBCs (21% vs 33%), and clonal mutations were more frequent and subclonal mutations less frequent in IBCs. More than 50% of patients with IBC harbored at least one high-level of evidence (LOE) AGA (OncoKB LOE 1-2, ESCAT LOE I-II), similarly to patients with non-IBC., Conclusions: We provide the largest mutational landscape of IBC. Only a few subtle differences were identified with non-IBCs. The most clinically relevant one was the higher HRD score in TN IBCs than in TN non-IBCs, whereas the most intriguing one was the smaller intratumor heterogeneity of IBCs., (© 2024. The Author(s).)