Search

Background: Patients with unfavourable subset cancer of unknown primary (CUP) have a poor prognosis when treated with standard platinum-based chemotherapy. Whether first-line treatment guided by comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) can improve outcomes is unknown. The CUPISCO trial was designed to inform a molecularly guided treatment strategy to improve outcomes over standard platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed, unfavourable, non-squamous CUP. The aim of the trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of molecularly guided therapy (MGT) versus standard platinum-based chemotherapy in these patients. This was to determine whether the inclusion of CGP in the initial diagnostic work-up leads to improved outcomes over the current standard of care. We herein report the primary analysis., Methods: CUPISCO was a phase 2, prospective, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, multicentre trial done at 159 sites in 34 countries outside the USA. Patients with central eligibility review-confirmed disease (acceptable histologies included adenocarcinoma and poorly differentiated carcinoma) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, evaluated by CGP, who reached disease control after three cycles of standard first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned 3:1 via a block-stratified randomisation procedure to MGT versus chemotherapy continuation for at least three further cycles. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03498521, and follow-up is ongoing., Findings: From July 10, 2018, to Dec 9, 2022, 636 (42%) of 1505 screened patients were enrolled. Median follow-up in the treatment period was 24·1 months (IQR 11·6-35·6). Of 438 patients who reached disease control after induction chemotherapy, 436 were randomly assigned: 326 (75%) to the MGT group and 110 (25%) to the chemotherapy group. Median progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population was 6·1 months (95% CI 4·7-6·5) in the MGT group versus 4·4 months (4·1-5·6) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio 0·72 [95% CI 0·56-0·92]; p=0·0079). Related adverse event rates per 100-patient-years at risk were generally similar or lower with MGT versus chemotherapy., Interpretation: In patients with previously untreated, unfavourable, non-squamous CUP who reached disease control after induction chemotherapy, CGP with subsequent MGTs resulted in longer progression-free survival than standard platinum-based chemotherapy. On the basis of these results, we recommend that CGP is performed at initial diagnosis in patients with unfavourable CUP., Funding: F Hoffmann-La Roche., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests All authors received research funding in the form of third-party medical writing assistance from F Hoffmann-La Roche. AK reports research funding for a clinical trial in CUP from Bristol Myers Squibb; research funding for a clinical trial in CUP from Molecular Health; and consulting fees, support for attending meetings or travel, or both, participation in a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from F Hoffmann-La Roche. TB was study oncologist for the CUPISCO trial for F Hoffman-La Roche and received remuneration for this work for the benefit of employer, and support for attending meetings or travel, or both. CP reports travel, accommodation, or expenses and additional costs linked to the study (paid to institution), and investigator fees from F Hoffmann-La Roche. K-KS reports grants or contracts (paid to institution for running trials) from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, AstraZeneca, and Merck; consulting fees (personal) from Nouscom; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events (personal) from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Servier, Seagen, and Nouscom; support for attending meetings or travel (personal), or both, from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, and Merck; and an advisory board (personal) for Mirati Therapeutics. NCo reports honoraria, advisory board membership, support for attending meetings or travel, or both, from F Hoffman-La Roche; a patent pending, application number GB2317261.2; an advisory or leadership role for CUP Foundation (Jo's Friends; unpaid); and research support to team from AstraZeneca, Orion, F Hoffmann-La Roche, Taiho, GSK, Novartis, Starpharma, Bayer, Eisai, UCB, Redx Pharmaceuticals, Stemline Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, AstraZeneca, Cancer Research UK, Orion, and LOXO-Oncology. JJdM reports support for attending meetings or travel, or both, from Bristol Myers Squibb. RAP-C reports medical writing and processing fees from Astellas, Ipsen, Roche, BeiGene, and Bristol Myers Squibb; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Eisai, Bristol Myers Squibb, Astellas, Roche, Amgen, and Eli Lilly; payment for expert testimony from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, and Bristol Myers Squibb; support for attending meetings or travel, or both, from Roche, Lilly, Astellas, and Bristol Myers Squibb; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AstraZeneca, Roche, and Ipsen. FL reports grants or contracts from Lilly and Merck Sharp & Dohme; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Lilly, Merck, Sanofi, and Roche; and support for attending meetings or travel, or both from Lilly, Merck, and Merck Sharp & Dohme. DGJR reports consulting fees from Merck, Pfizer, and Astellas; payment for honoraria, lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Gilead and Merck Sharp & Dohme; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Janssen and AstraZeneca. JT reports consulting fees from Servier and Bristol Myers Squibb; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Servier, Bayer, and Ipsen; and reports support for attending meetings or travel, or both (American Society of Clinical Oncology Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium 2022), from Zentiva and Roche. CA reports research grants from Roche, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AstraZeneca, Nektar, Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Amgen, Incyte, and Bayer; advisory boards for Novartis, Merck, AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Teva, Astellas, and Bristol Myers Squibb; and peakers bureaus for Bristol Myers Squibb, Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Teva, Amgen, and Bayer. MÖ reports an advisory board, honoraria, and travel support from Janssen; additional costs linked to the study (paid to institution), investigator fees, and honoraria from F Hoffmann-La Roche; an advisory board and honoraria from Sanofi; an advisory board and honoraria for Astellas; honoraria from Novartis; travel support from Bristol Myers Squibb; and travel support and speaker support from AstraZeneca. MS reports honoraria for lectures F Hoffmann-La Roche. FB reports additional costs linked to the study and investigator fees from F Hoffmann-La Roche; an advisory board for AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Bristol Myers Squibb; speakers bureaus for AstraZeneca and Bristol Myers Squibb; and travel support or accommodation from Takeda, Merck Sharp & Dohme. SYK reports research funding (paid to institution; principal investigator since 2019) from F Hoffmann-La Roche; honorarium for lecture (May, 2023) from LG Chem; honorarium for lecture (August, 2023) from Merck Sharp & Dohme Korea; an advisory board (December, 2021) for Ono Korea; and an advisory board (December, 2022) for Guardant Health. YN reports research funding (paid to institution) from AbbVie, Ono, Daiichi Sankyo, Taiho, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Eisai, AstraZeneca, Chugai, and Bayer; payment for honoraria, lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events (personal) from AstraZeneca, Eisai, Ono, Gardant, Takeda, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Chugai, PDR pharma, Nihon Kayaku, Taiho, Bristol Myers Squibb, Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, and Merck Sharp & Dohme. AI reports additional costs linked to the study, investigator fees, advisory role, honoraria, and research funding from F Hoffmann-La Roche; an advisory role and honoraria from Daiichi Sankyo; an advisory role for Immune Design; an advisory role and honoraria from Epizyme; an advisory role and honoraria from Bayer and Lilly; patents, royalties, or intellectual property from Bristol Myers Squibb; honoraria from Novartis and Ipsen; and research funding from AstraZeneca–MedImmune, PharmaMar, Merck Sharp & Dohme Oncology, and Merck Serono. NCh reports being an employee and holding stocks or shares at F Hoffmann-La Roche. GD-P reports being an employee and holding stocks or shares at F Hoffmann-La Roche. CM reports being an employee of F Hoffmann-La Roche. JS reports being an employee and holding stocks or shares at F Hoffmann-La Roche. MT reports being an employee and holding stocks or shares at F Hoffmann-La Roche, and patents planned, issued, or pending (antibodies against human CSF-1R and uses thereof; modulators for HER2 signalling in HER2 expressing patients with gastric cancer) from F Hoffmann-La Roche. JSR reports being an employee of Foundation Medicine; and holding stocks or shares at Roche Holdings. HM reports research funding (paid to institution), consulting fees, and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for F Hoffmann-La Roche; and an advisory role and honoraria for lectures from Amgen, Astellas, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Merck, Stemline Therapeutics. LM reports additional costs linked to the CUPISCO trial (paid to institution), support for the presentation of the CUPISCO trial results and associated publication; and travel and accommodation expenses to attend the 2023 European Society for Medical Oncology meeting and present the CUPISCO trial results from F Hoffmann-La Roche., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is defined as a primary metastatic malignancy, in which the primary tumor remains elusive in spite of a comprehensive diagnostic workup. The frequency and prognostic value of circulating tumor cells (CTCs), which are considered to be the source of metastasis, has not yet been systematically evaluated in CUP., Methods: A total of 110 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of CUP according to the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) guidelines, who presented to our clinic between July 2021 and May 2023, provided blood samples for CTC quantification using CellSearch methodology. CTC counts were correlated with demographic, clinical, and molecular data generated by comprehensive genomic profiling of tumor tissue., Results: CTCs were detected in 26% of all patients at initial presentation to our department. The highest CTC frequency was observed among patients with unfavorable CUP (35.5%), while patients with single-site/oligometastatic CUP harbored the lowest CTC frequency (11.4%). No statistically significant association between CTC positivity and the number of affected organs (P = 0.478) or disease burden (P = 0.120) was found. High CTC levels (≥5 CTCs/7.5 mL; 12/95 analyzed patients) predicted for adverse overall survival compared to negative or low CTC counts (6-months overall survival rate 90% vs 32%, log-rank P < 0.001; HR 5.43; 95% CI 2.23-13.2). CTC dynamics were also prognostic for overall survival by landmark analysis (log-rank P < 0.001, HR 10.2, 95% CI 1.95-52.9)., Conclusions: CTC frequency is a strong, independent predictor of survival in patients with CUP. CTC quantification provides a useful prognostic tool in the management of these patients., (© Association for Diagnostics & Laboratory Medicine 2024. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Cancer of unknown primary has a dismal prognosis, especially following failure of platinum-based chemotherapy. 10-20% of patients have a high tumor mutational burden (TMB), which predicts response to immunotherapy in many cancer types. In this prospective, non-randomized, open-label, multicenter Phase II trial (EudraCT 2018-004562-33; NCT04131621), patients relapsed or refractory after platinum-based chemotherapy received nivolumab and ipilimumab following TMB high vs. TMB low stratification. Progression-free survival (PFS) represented the primary endpoint; overall survival (OS), response rates, duration of clinical benefit and safety were the secondary endpoints. The trial was prematurely terminated in March 2021 before reaching the preplanned sample size (n = 194). Among 31 evaluable patients, 16% had a high TMB ( > 12 mutations/Mb). Overall response rate was 16% (95% CI 6-34%), with 7.7% (95% CI 1-25%) vs. 60% (95% CI 15-95%) in TMB low and TMB high , respectively. Although the primary endpoint was not met, high TMB was associated with better median PFS (18.3 vs. 2.4 months) and OS (18.3 vs. 3.6 months). Severe immune-related adverse events were reported in 29% of cases. Assessing on-treatment dynamics of circulating tumor DNA using combined targeted hotspot mutation and shallow whole genome sequencing as part of a predefined exploratory analysis identified patients benefiting from immunotherapy irrespective of initial radiologic response., (© 2023. Springer Nature Limited.)

Introduction: About 20% of all cancer of unknown primary (CUP) cases can be classified into favorable subgroups, which are defined by either obvious analogies to certain cancers with a known primary or amenability to local ablative treatment. In the updated European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of CUP, the definition of favorable subgroups has been revised according to the latest scientific findings. In particular, the definition and treatment of oligometastatic CUP have undergone considerable changes in recent years. Thus, we delineate the current diagnostic and therapeutic standards for the two favorable CUP subtypes single-site/oligometastatic and head/neck CUP., Methods: The classification, diagnostic workup, and treatment of single-site and oligometastatic CUP are summarized based on the current ESMO and American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines together with a literature review., Conclusions: Single-site and oligometastatic CUP is defined by the presence of a maximum of five metastases that are amenable to local ablative treatment. Median overall survival is favorable and exceeds 4 years after local ablation of all detectable metastases. Lymph node metastases in the head and neck region represent a frequent scenario of single-site CUP. They usually originate from human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated squamous cell carcinoma in the oropharynx. Diagnostic workup comprises computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) if necessary, and fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT), followed by panendoscopy and biopsies of suspicious mucosal sites. Neck dissection, potentially followed by adjuvant radiotherapy, and definitive radiotherapy represent equally effective oncological treatment options with respect to a favorable prognosis., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.)

Background: The European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) recently published extensively revised guidelines on cancer of unknown primary (CUP). The new version contains the following relevant amendments: with respect to diagnostics of CUP, the current guidelines aim for a more precise and standardized definition of CUP by establishing diagnostic algorithms. Recommendations for molecular diagnostics of cancer tissue have also been implemented. With respect to CUP classification, the favorable category has been revised. A carcinoma with immunohistochemistry typical for renal cell carcinoma (renal-like CUP) was introduced in the new definition of favorable subtypes, for which a specific treatment is indicated. Based on a newly defined oligometastatic situation a subgroup with localized cancer potentially curatively treatable with surgery and/or radiotherapy was introduced into the CUP classification. With respect to treatment of CUP, the current guidelines present options beyond empirical chemotherapy, which is still the standard of care treatment, and pinpoint indications and predictive biomarkers for targeted and immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment., Relevant Updates: The European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) recently published extensively revised guidelines on the CUP syndrome. The new version contains the following relevant amendments: the current guidelines aim for a more precise and standardized definition of CUP by establishing diagnostic algorithms with respect to the diagnostics of CUP syndrome. Recommendations for molecular diagnostics of cancer tissue have also been implemented. The classification of the CUP syndrome has also been revised. A carcinoma with immunohistochemistry typical for renal cell carcinoma (renal-like CUP) was introduced in the new definition of favorable subtypes, for which a specific treatment is indicated. Based on a newly defined oligometastatic situation a local potentially curatively treatable with surgery and/or radiotherapy subgroup was introduced into the CUP classification. With respect to treatment of the CUP syndrome, the current guidelines present options beyond empirical chemotherapy, which is still the gold standard treatment, and pinpoint indications and predictive biomarkers for targeted and immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment., Schlussfolgerung: The aim of this review is to present the current state of diagnostics, classification and treatment of CUP syndrome, with a focus on recent developments and revisions implemented in the current ESMO guidelines., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Chromosomal aberrations are known to drive metastatic spread, but their profile is still elusive in carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP). Therefore, the aim of this study was to characterize the chromosomal aberration pattern in CUP depending on histological and clinical features and to assess its prognostic impact together with chromothripsis, tumor mutational burden (TMB), microsatellite instability (MSI), and mutational profiles as potential prognostic biomarkers., Methods: Chromosomal aberrations and chromothripsis were detected by methylation-based copy number variation (CNV) analysis, whereas TMB and MSI were calculated based on large next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels. Putative primaries were assigned by consensus between two independent oncologists., Results: CNV losses varied depending on putative primaries and were more abundant in patients harboring TP53 mutations and/or deletions 17p. CNV loss was prognostically adverse in localized CUP treated with surgery and/or radiotherapy, but not in disseminated poor-risk CUP treated with palliative chemotherapy. CNV loss also worsened the prognosis in squamous cell CUP. Chromothripsis was detected in 18/59 (30.5%) patients without prognostic effect. TMB was highest in cases with MSI, squamous cell histology, and with lung, anal or cervical putative primaries., Conclusion: Overall, CNV, chromothripsis, TMB, and MSI profiles in CUP are reminiscent of biological characteristics known from other cancer entities without a unifying CUP-specific signature. Markedly, high-level CNV loss is an adverse predictive biomarker in localized but not disseminated chemotherapy-treated CUP. This implies that chromosomal losses drive CUP progression, but also increase susceptibility to chemotherapy, with both effects apparently leveling out in disseminated CUP., (© 2022 The Authors. Genes, Chromosomes and Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Single-site carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) is recognised as a distinct favourable subtype in the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) classification. There is broad consensus that these patients are candidates for local ablative treatment strategies with surgery and/or radiotherapy, but data on their outcomes are scarce., Patients and Methods: In this study, we have addressed the prospects of cure and prognostic factors in a retrospective cohort of 63 patients who were eligible for local treatment at our centre., Results: Median event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were 15.6 months and 52.5 months, respectively. Of 61 patients who received local treatment, 20 (32.8%) remained event-free over a median follow-up of 28 months. Baseline clinical parameters including affected organ, number, volume and histology of metastases had no significant impact on prognosis, whereas deleterious TP53 mutations and DNA copy number loss emerged as independent adverse risk factors with respect to EFS. Surgical treatment was associated with improved OS as compared to radiation-based therapy., Conclusion: Our study advocates to pursue localised treatment with surgery and/or radiotherapy whenever feasible and implies that genetic parameters might additionally determine the clinical course of single-site CUP patients., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: VE: advisory board and lecture fees from AstraZeneca and Thermo Fisher. AS: Advisory Board and/or Speaker's Bureau: AIGnostics, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, BMS, Illumina, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Thermo Fisher; Research Grants: Bayer, BMS, Chugai, Incyte. AK and TB work as study oncologists for the CUPISCO trial which is sponsored by Roche and have received reimbursement for study-related travels as well as remuneration for their work as study oncologists for the benefit of their employer. AK has also received research funding from BMS. The remaining authors have no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: CUPISCO is an ongoing randomized phase II trial (NCT03498521) comparing molecularly guided therapy versus platinum-based chemotherapy in patients newly diagnosed with "unfavorable" cancer of unknown primary (CUP)., Materials and Methods: Patients with an unfavorable CUP diagnosis, as defined by the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO), and available cancer tissue for molecular sequencing are generally eligible. Potential patients with CUP entering screening undergo a review involving reference histopathology and clinical work-up by a central eligibility review team (ERT). Patients with "favorable" CUP, a strongly suspected primary site of origin, lack of tissue, or unmet inclusion criteria are excluded., Results: As of April 30, 2020, 628 patients had entered screening and 346 (55.1%) were screen failed. Screen fails were due to technical reasons (n = 89), failure to meet inclusion and exclusion criteria not directly related to CUP diagnosis (n = 89), and other reasons (n = 33). A total of 124 (35.8%) patients were excluded because unfavorable adeno- or poorly differentiated CUP could not be confirmed by the ERT. These cases were classified into three groups ineligible because of (a) histologic subtype, such as squamous and neuroendocrine, or favorable CUP; (b) evidence of a possible primary tumor; or (c) noncarcinoma histology., Conclusion: Experience with CUPISCO has highlighted challenges with standardized screening in an international clinical trial and the difficulties in diagnosing unfavorable CUP. Reconfirmation of unfavorable CUP by an ERT in a clinical trial can result in many reasons for screen failures. By sharing this experience, we aim to foster understanding of diagnostic challenges and improve diagnostic pathology and clinical CUP algorithms., Implications for Practice: A high unmet need exists for improved treatment of cancer of unknown primary (CUP); however, study in a trial setting is faced with the significant challenge of definitively distinguishing CUP from other cancer types. This article reports the authors' experience of this challenge so far in the ongoing CUPISCO trial, which compares treatments guided by patients' unique genetic signatures versus standard chemotherapy. The data presented will aid future decision-making regarding diagnosing true CUP cases; this will have far-reaching implications in the design, execution, and interpretation of not only CUPISCO but also future clinical studies aiming to find much-needed treatment strategies., (© 2021 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of AlphaMed Press.)

Background: Carcinoma of unknown primary origin (CUP) accounts for 2%-5% of newly diagnosed advanced malignancies, with chemotherapy as the standard of care. CUPISCO (NCT03498521) is an ongoing randomized trial using comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) to assign patients with CUP to targeted or immunotherapy treatment arms based on genomic profiling. We performed a retrospective analysis of CUP cases referred for CGP to determine how many were potentially eligible for enrollment into an experimental CUPISCO arm., Materials and Methods: Centrally reviewed adenocarcinoma and undifferentiated CUP specimens in the FoundationCore database were analyzed using the hybrid capture-based FoundationOne CDx assay (mean coverage, >600×). Presence of genomic alterations, microsatellite instability (MSI), tumor mutational burden (TMB), genomic loss of heterozygosity (gLOH), and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) positivity were determined., Results: A total of 96 of 303 patients (31.7%) could be matched to an experimental CUPISCO arm. Key genomic alterations included ERBB2 (7.3%), PIK3CA (6.3%), NF1 (5.6%), NF2 (4.6%), BRAF (4.3%), IDH1 (3.3%), PTEN, FGFR2, EGFR (3.6% each), MET (4.3%), CDK6 (3.0%), FBXW7, CDK4 (2.3% each), IDH2, RET, ROS1, NTRK (1.0% each), and ALK (0.7%). Median TMB was 3.75 mutations per megabase of DNA; 34 patients (11.6%) had a TMB ≥16 mutations per megabase. Three patients (1%) had high MSI, and 42 (14%) displayed high PD-L1 expression (tumor proportion score ≥50%). gLOH could be assessed in 199 of 303 specimens; 19.6% had a score of >16%., Conclusions: Thirty-two percent of patients would have been eligible for targeted therapy in CUPISCO. Future studies, including additional biomarkers such as PD-L1 positivity and gLOH, may identify a greater proportion potentially benefiting from CGP-informed treatment. Clinical trial identification number. NCT03498521 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The findings of this retrospective analysis of carcinoma of unknown primary origin (CUP) cases validate the experimental treatment arms being used in the CUPISCO study (NCT03498521), an ongoing randomized trial using comprehensive genomic profiling to assign patients with CUP to targeted or immunotherapy treatment arms based on the presence of pathogenic genomic alterations. The findings also suggest that future studies including additional biomarkers and treatment arms, such as programmed death-ligand 1 positivity and genomic loss of heterozygosity, may identify a greater proportion of patients with CUP potentially benefiting from comprehensive genomic profiling-informed treatment., (© 2020 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of AlphaMed Press.)

Background: Patients with carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) have a dismal prognosis, even when treated with multi-agent chemotherapy. We hypothesised that adding the epidermal growth-factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor cetuximab to standard first-line chemotherapy with paclitaxel and carboplatin would improve PFS and RR in unfavourable CUP., Methods: This open-labelled, multicentre Phase 2 study included patients with unfavourable, untreated adeno- or undifferentiated CUP. Patients were randomised to receive either paclitaxel/carboplatin (group A) or paclitaxel/carboplatin plus cetuximab (group B) every 3 weeks for a maximum of 6 cycles followed by cetuximab maintenance in group B. The primary endpoint was PFS in the two groups. Secondary endpoints were RR, toxicity and overall survival (OS)., Results: One-hundred-and-fifty patients were randomised (group A = 72, group B = 78). The median PFS and OS for all patients were 3.8 and 8.1 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.9-4.8 and 6.8-9.5). There was no significant difference in PFS (3.7 vs 4.6 months, HR 0.98) or OS (8.1 vs 7.4, HR 1.1) between the two treatment groups. Response rate tended to be better for chemotherapy plus cetuximab compared to chemotherapy alone (22% vs 15%). Adverse events grade ≥3 were comparable between the two groups, except for significantly increased skin toxicity in the cetuximab arm., Conclusions: Cetuximab plus paclitaxel/carboplatin did not improve PFS, OS and RR in metastatic CUP compared to paclitaxel/carboplatin alone. Addition of cetuximab resulted in additional skin toxicity., Clinical Trial Registration: The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00894569.

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) denotes a malignancy with histologically confirmed metastatic spread while the primary tumor remains elusive. Here, we address prognostic and therapeutic implications of mutations and copy number variations (CNVs) detected in tumor tissue in the context of a comprehensive clinical risk assessment. Targeted panel sequencing was performed in 252 CUP patients. 71.8% of patients had unfavorable CUP according to ESMO guidelines. 74.7% were adeno- and 13.7% squamous cell carcinomas. DNA was extracted from microdissected formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues. For library preparation, mostly multiplex PCR-based Ion Torrent AmpliSeq™ technology with Oncomine comprehensive assays was used. Most frequent genetic alterations were mutations/deletions of TP53 (49.6%), CDKN2A (19.0%) and NOTCH1 (14.1%) as well as oncogenic activation of KRAS (23.4%), FGFR4 (14.9%) and PIK3CA (10.7%). KRAS activation was predominantly found in adenocarcinomas (p = 0.01), PIK3CA activation in squamous cell carcinomas (p = 0.03). Male sex, high ECOG score, unfavorable CUP, higher number of involved organs and RAS activation predicted decreased event-free and overall survival in multivariate analysis. Deletions of CDKN2A were prognostically adverse regarding overall survival. TP53 mutations did not significantly influence prognosis in the overall cohort, but worsened prognosis in otherwise favorable CUP subtypes. Although not standard in CUP, for 17/198 (8.6%) patients molecularly targeted treatment was recommended and 10 patients (5.1%) were treated accordingly. In conclusion, besides the identification of drug targets, panel sequencing in CUP is prognostically relevant, with RAS activation and CDKN2A deletion emerging as novel independent risk factors in a comprehensive assessment with clinicopathological data., (© 2020 UICC.)

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) denotes cancer cases where metastatic spread is histologically confirmed, but no respective primary tumor can be identified. The challenging diagnosis of CUP is further complicated in cases with previously identified malignancies or with dubious clonal relationship between metastatic sites due to ambiguous histology. Our study aims at elucidating clonal relationships by comparing the respective mutational spectra. Targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) employing formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor tissue was performed on 174 consecutive CUP patients. Among these, 43/174 (24.7%) patients had a documented prior malignancy. Data on pairwise targeted NGS testing to address clonal relationships between the previous malignancy and the presumed CUP (n = 11) or between different CUP metastatic sites (n = 7) was available in 18 patients. NGS could clarify clonal relationships in 16/18 cases. Among the 11 CUP patients with antecedent malignancies, four cases were clonally independent of the previous malignancy but harbored deleterious germline mutations in BRCA/BAP1/ATM genes. Seven CUP cases were clonally related to the antecedent malignancy, changing the CUP diagnosis to relapse of the prior malignancy. In the seven CUP cases, with doubtfully related metastatic sites, NGS confirmed clonal relationship in five cases and was inconclusive in two. In conclusion, NGS proved an efficient tool to elucidate clonal relationships in clinically challenging CUP cases. Our study cautions against a premature diagnosis of CUP. Relapses of antecedent malignancies should be carefully considered. CUPs clonally independent from the antecedent malignancy should raise a red flag of a potential cancer-predisposing germline mutation., (© 2019 UICC.)

This case report presents a male patient with epithelioid mesothelioma that was initially misdiagnosed as cancer of unknown primary (CUP) and correctly identified using molecular panel sequencing. The patient had a prior history of colon and breast cancer. To assess the enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes, retrosternal lymphadenectomy was performed in 2016. The lymph nodes were histologically deemed unrelated to the known breast cancer by the reference pathologist, thus leading to the diagnosis of a CUP syndrome. When the patient presented to our center, targeted deep sequencing of both breast cancer and presumed CUP was performed to address the clonal relationship between both malignancies. A missense mutation in BAP1 was revealed in both samples, with coverage data indicating a germline event. The patient was subsequently counseled by a human geneticist and underwent genetic testing, which confirmed the germline nature of this mutation. Collectively, these data led to the diagnosis of BAP1 ( BRCA1 -associated protein-1) tumor predisposition syndrome (TPDS). With the knowledge of an underlying BAP1 mutation and its known frequent association with epithelioid mesothelioma, the histology was reassessed and the diagnosis was revised to epithelioid mesothelioma. At this point, peritoneal involvement of mesothelioma could be diagnosed and histologically confirmed. This case illustrates the potential of integrated histopathologic and molecular diagnostics in helping to decipher CUP syndromes and establish the correct diagnosis. Additionally, this case highlights typical features of BAP1 TPDS with its general susceptibility to cancers, with pleural and peritoneal mesotheliomas as most prevalent clinical entities and the typically more benign course of these epithelioid mesotheliomas compared with BAP1 -unrelated cases of mesotheliomas., (Copyright © 2018 by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.)

In cancer of unknown primary (CUP), metastases are clinically and histologically confirmed, but the primary tumor site remains elusive after extensive work-up. CUPs make up for 2-3% of all epithelial malignancies. The two prevailing histologies are adenocarcinomas and undifferentiated carcinomas, whereas squamous cell carcinomas, neuroendocrine carcinomas and rare histologies account for the remaining 10%. The diagnostic work-up in CUP relies strongly on a detailed immunohistological (IHC) analysis in order to characterize the tumor type, nowadays aided by molecular techniques. Diagnostics also include a thorough clinical examination, a basic lab draw with the most relevant tumor markers, and cross sectional imaging. Additional PET-CT is recommended in cervical lymph nodes suggestive of head and neck cancer and in limited metastases potentially treatable in curative intent. As for treatment, it is paramount to identify patients who fall into one of the six well defined "favorable" subset categories, namely extragonadal germ cell tumors, adenocarcinoma with isolated unilateral axillary lymph nodes in female patients, squamous cell carcinoma with neck lymph nodes, squamous cell carcinoma with inguinal lymph nodes, serous papillary peritoneal carcinomatosis in females and blastic bone metastasis in males with elevated PSA. These subsets are distinct both regarding the required treatment and the comparably favorable prognosis. Within the remaining "unfavorable" group, patients of colon and renal cancer type should be identified based on IHC and clinical picture, since the prognosis of these patients seems to improve with the use of therapy tailored to the presumed primary as well. For the few patients with limited metastases it should be assessed whether they are candidates for surgery, radiotherapy or surgery followed by irradiation in curative intent. The remaining majority of patients are treated with empiric palliative chemotherapy, typically a platinum - paclitaxel combination, though the level of evidence for this therapy recommendation is low. Gemcitabine alone or in combination can be used as an alternative. Decoding of the molecular profiles in CUP offers the prospect of targeted therapy with novel agents. However, there appears to be no uniform molecular pattern for CUP, and the observed molecular diversity thus poses a challenge to respective clinical trials., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is defined as metastatic solid malignancy where no primary tumor is detected despite appropriate staging. About 90% of CUP represent adenocarcinoma or undifferentiated carcinoma. Since therapy regimens are only modestly effective, identification of the molecular landscape of these neoplasms might be a promising approach to direct CUP therapy and aid in tumor classification. We screened a cohort of 128 patients with adenocarcinoma or undifferentiated carcinoma meeting the definition of CUP. Massive parallel multigene sequencing of 50 genes, which had been selected due to their relevance as oncogenic drivers or druggable molecular targets could ultimately be performed on samples from 55 patients for whom complete clinical datasets were also available. Overall, 60 tumor-specific mutations and 29 amplifications/deletions, as revealed by coverage analysis, were detected in 46 cases (84%). The most frequently mutated genes were TP53 (30 cases, 55%), KRAS (9 cases, 16%), CDKN2A (5 cases, 9%), and SMAD4 (5 cases, 9%). The most frequently deleted gene was CDKN2A (8 cases, 15%). KRAS and CDKN2A mutations significantly correlated with poor progression-free survival (PFS) and, in case of KRAS, overall survival (OS). WIldtype TP53 and female sex defined a relatively favorable category, with favorable PFS and OS. 8 cases (15%) harbored mutations that may be targetable by currently approved drugs. Taken together, Mutations of relevant driver genes are present in the vast majority of CUP tumors. Some of them impact on prognosis and a subset is putatively druggable., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cancer of unknown primary site (CUP) is a fatal cancer diagnosed through metastases at various organs. Little is known about germline genetics of CUP which appears worth of a search in view of reported familial associations in CUP. In the present study, samples from CUP patients were identified from 2 Swedish biobanks and a German clinical trial, totaling 578 CUP patients and 7628 regionally matched controls. Diagnostic data specified the organ where metastases were diagnosed. We carried out a genome-wide association study on CUP cases and controls. In the whole sample set, 6 loci reached an allelic p-value in the range of 10-7 and were supported by data from the three centers. Three associations were located next to non-coding RNA genes. rs2660852 flanked 5'UTR of LTA4H (leukotriene A4 hydrolase), rs477145 was intronic to TIAM1 (T-cell lymphoma invasion and metastases) and rs2835931 was intronic to KCNJ6 (potassium channel, inwardly rectifying subfamily J, member 6). In analysis of subgroups of CUP patients (smokers, non-smokers and CUP with liver metastases) genome-wide significant associations were noted. For patients with liver metastases associations on chromosome 6 and 11, the latter including a cluster of genes DHCR7 and NADSYN1, encoding key enzymes in cholesterol and NAD synthesis, and KRTAP5-7, encoding a keratin associated protein. This first GWAS on CUP provide preliminary evidence that germline genes relating to inflammation (LTA4H), metastatic promotion (TIAM1) in association with lipid metabolic disturbance (chromosome 11 cluster) may contribute to the risk of CUP., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cancer of unknown primary site (CUP) may be called an "orphan" disease, as it is diagnosed when metastases are detected while the primary tumor typically remains undetected, and because little research has been done on its primary causes. So far, few epidemiological studies, if any, have addressed possible risk factors for CUP. We analyzed data from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort (N=476,940). During prospective follow-up, a total of 651 cases of incident cases of CUP were detected (ICD-O-2 code C809). Proportional hazards models were conducted to examine the associations of lifetime history of smoking habits, alcohol consumption, levels of education and anthropometric indices of adiposity with risk of being diagnosed with CUP. Risk of being diagnosed with CUP was strongly related to smoking, with a relative risk of 3.66 [95% C.I., 2.24-5.97] for current, heavy smokers (26+ cigarettes/day) compared to never smokers (adjusted for alcohol consumption, body mass index, waist circumference and level of education) and a relative risk of 5.12 [3.09-8.47] for cases with CUP who died within 12 months. For alcohol consumption and level of education, weaker associations were observed but attenuated and no longer statistically significant after adjusting for smoking and indices of obesity. Finally, risk of CUP was increased by approximately 30 per cent for subjects in the highest versus lowest quartiles of waist circumference. Our analyses provide further documentation, in addition to autopsy studies, that a substantial proportion of cancers of unknown primary site may have their origin in smoking-related tumors, in particular., (© 2014 UICC.)

Background: Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) now accounts for 2-3% of all fatal cases of cancer in Germany. Histologically, most of these tumors are either adenocarcinoma or undifferentiated carcinoma. Scant data on their clinical features and prognosis are now available, and the published survival times are highly variable. In this article, we document and analyze our own experience with CUP to date., Method: We took all 223 patients with CUP (adenocarcinoma or undifferentiated carcinoma) whom we saw in our CUP clinic from 2006 to 2010 as an unaltered sample for retrospective analysis of clinical data and overall survival. We performed the analysis with Kaplan-Meier plotting, log-rank testing, and Cox regression., Results: With a median follow-up time of 32.9 months, the median survival from the time of diagnosis was 16.5 months. Metastases were most commonly found in the lymph nodes, followed by the liver, bones, and lungs. The main pre-treatment prognostic variables that remained significant after adjustment for multiple testing were the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score for overall state of health and the number of organ systems involved. These variables were used to construct a practice-oriented risk stratification., Conclusion: In patients with adeno- or undifferentiated CUP syndrome, the ECOG score and the number of organ systems involved are important risk factors.