J. Clin. Oncol. 2019 Jan 17
Randomized Phase II Trial Comparing Site-Specific Treatment Based on Gene Expression Profiling With Carboplatin and Paclitaxel for Patients With Cancer of Unknown Primary Site.
Abstract
Purpose
Although gene expression profiling is a promising diagnostic technique to determine the tissue of origin for patients with cancer of unknown primary site (CUP), no clinical trial has evaluated yet site-specific therapy directed by this approach compared with empirical chemotherapy. We therefore performed a randomized study to assess whether such site-specific therapy improves outcome compared with empirical chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with CUP.
Patients and methods
Comprehensive gene expression profiling was performed by microarray analysis, and an established algorithm was applied to predict tumor origin. Patients with CUP were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive standard site-specific therapy or empirical paclitaxel and carboplatin (PC). The primary end point was 1-year survival rate.
Results
One hundred thirty patients were randomly assigned and had sufficient biopsy tissue for molecular analysis. Efficacy analysis was performed for 50 and 51 patients in the site-specific therapy and empirical PC arms, respectively. Cancer types most commonly predicted were pancreatic (21%), gastric (21%), and lymphoma (20%). The 1-year survival rate was 44.0% and 54.9% for site-specific treatment and empirical PC ( P = .264), respectively. Median overall and progression-free survival were 9.8 and 5.1 months, respectively, for site-specific treatment versus 12.5 and 4.8 months for empirical PC ( P = .896 and .550, respectively). Median overall survival (16.7 v 10.6 months; P = .116) and progression-free survival (5.5 v 3.9 months; P = .018) were better for predicted more-responsive than less-responsive tumor types.
Conclusion
Site-specific treatment that was based on microarray profiling did not result in a significant improvement in 1-year survival compared with empirical PC, although prediction of the original site seemed to be of prognostic value.
Related Questions
Can you use NGS panels or ctDNA to help you find organ of origin in the workup of carcinoma of unknown origin?
At least 2 NGS panels available in the US now offer tumor of origin (TO) profiling. Both Tempus and Caris offer such testing. There are other panels out there using different methods such as epigenetic profiling and WGS. How much this testing improves diagnosis and outcomes is not clear and 2 trials...
How would you approach treatment of metastatic signet cell carcinoma of likely gastrointestinal origin with no primary lesion identified?
I would typically like more information before proceeding. With advanced diagnostics, we have seen the incidence of CUPs fall in recent years but that said, the true CUP still exists.When stated this is "likely GI origin", I assume that there are IHC features consistent with GI origin such as CK7+ b...
In patients with cancer of unknown primary, do you routinely send molecular testing to help determine primary tumor origin?
The NCCN designates tumor sequencing and use of gene signature profiling as a category 3 recommendation. This is more or less consistent with NIH and ESMO guidelines in that that the impact on patient outcome remains questionable and unproven.There are multiple commercial assays in this space. The p...