Gynecologic Biopsy for Molecular Profiling: A Review for the Interventional Radiologist

Bradley R. Corr; Kian Behbakht; Monique A. Spillman

doi:10.1055/s-0033-1359738

Seminars in Interventional Radiology, Table of Contents

Semin intervent Radiol 2013; 30(04): 417-424
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1359738

Clinical Corner

Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Gynecologic Biopsy for Molecular Profiling: A Review for the Interventional Radiologist

Authors

Bradley R. Corr

¹Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado
Kian Behbakht

¹Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado
Monique A. Spillman

¹Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado

Abstract

The interventional radiologist is often asked to obtain multiple biopsies of gynecological malignancies for genetic profiling. This article reviews the current indications for gynecological biopsy as well as how the information gained contributes to a personalized medicine plan for the individual patient. The specific focus of this review is the current knowledge and practice of molecular profiling for gynecological malignancies.

Keywords

gynecological cancer - interventional radiology - biopsy - genetic profiling - molecular profiling

Full Text

References

References
1 Howlader NNA, Krapcho M, Garshell J , et al, eds. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2010. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 2013. ; Based on November 2012 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER Web site http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2010/
2 Cannistra SA. Cancer of the ovary. N Engl J Med 2004; 351 (24) 2519-2529
3 Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 2012; 62 (1) 10-29
4 Parmar MK, Ledermann JA, Colombo N , et al; ICON and AGO Collaborators. Paclitaxel plus platinum-based chemotherapy versus conventional platinum-based chemotherapy in women with relapsed ovarian cancer: the ICON4/AGO-OVAR-2.2 trial. Lancet 2003; 361 (9375) 2099-2106
5 Morgan Jr RJ, Copeland L, Gershenson D , et al; The National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Ovarian Cancer Practice Guidelines. Oncology (Williston Park) 1996; 10 (11, Suppl): 293-310
6 Benedet JL, Bender H, Jones III H, Ngan HY, Pecorelli S ; FIGO Committee on Gynecologic Oncology. FIGO staging classifications and clinical practice guidelines in the management of gynecologic cancers. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2000; 70 (2) 209-262
7 Bristow RE, Tomacruz RS, Armstrong DK, Trimble EL, Montz FJ. Survival effect of maximal cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian carcinoma during the platinum era: a meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20 (5) 1248-1259
8 Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Kurman RJ , et al. Relationship between surgical-pathological risk factors and outcome in clinical stage I and II carcinoma of the endometrium: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 1991; 40 (1) 55-65
9 Walboomers JM, Jacobs MV, Manos MM , et al. Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide. J Pathol 1999; 189 (1) 12-19
10 Scheurer ME, Tortolero-Luna G, Adler-Storthz K. Human papillomavirus infection: biology, epidemiology, and prevention. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2005; 15 (5) 727-746
11 Delgado G, Bundy BN, Fowler Jr WC , et al. A prospective surgical pathological study of stage I squamous carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Gynecol Oncol 1989; 35 (3) 314-320
12 Delgado G, Bundy B, Zaino R, Sevin BU, Creasman WT, Major F. Prospective surgical-pathological study of disease-free interval in patients with stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 1990; 38 (3) 352-357
13 Koyama T, Mikami Y, Saga T, Tamai K, Togashi K. Secondary ovarian tumors: spectrum of CT and MR features with pathologic correlation. Abdom Imaging 2007; 32 (6) 784-795
14 Young RH. From Krukenberg to today: the ever present problems posed by metastatic tumors in the ovary: part I. Historical perspective, general principles, mucinous tumors including the Krukenberg tumor. Adv Anat Pathol 2006; 13 (5) 205-227
15 Young RH. From Krukenberg to today: the ever present problems posed by metastatic tumors in the ovary. Part II. Adv Anat Pathol 2007; 14 (3) 149-177
16 Bristow RE, del Carmen MG, Pannu HK , et al. Clinically occult recurrent ovarian cancer: patient selection for secondary cytoreductive surgery using combined PET/CT. Gynecol Oncol 2003; 90 (3) 519-528
17 Dalla Palma M, Gregianin M, Fiduccia P , et al. PET/CT imaging in gynecologic malignancies: a critical overview of its clinical impact and our retrospective single center analysis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2012; 83 (1) 84-98
18 Husain A, Akhurst T, Larson S, Alektiar K, Barakat RR, Chi DS. A prospective study of the accuracy of 18Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18FDG PET) in identifying sites of metastasis prior to pelvic exenteration. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 106 (1) 177-180
19 Chung HH, Jo H, Kang WJ , et al. Clinical impact of integrated PET/CT on the management of suspected cervical cancer recurrence. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 104 (3) 529-534
20 Havrilesky LJ, Wong TZ, Secord AA, Berchuck A, Clarke-Pearson DL, Jones EL. The role of PET scanning in the detection of recurrent cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2003; 90 (1) 186-190
21 Malmström H. Fine-needle aspiration cytology versus core biopsies in the evaluation of recurrent gynecologic malignancies. Gynecol Oncol 1997; 65 (1) 69-73
22 Prat A, Perou CM. Deconstructing the molecular portraits of breast cancer. Mol Oncol 2011; 5 (1) 5-23
23 Tothill RW, Tinker AV, George J , et al; Australian Ovarian Cancer Study Group. Novel molecular subtypes of serous and endometrioid ovarian cancer linked to clinical outcome. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14 (16) 5198-5208
24 Gómez-Raposo C, Mendiola M, Barriuso J, Hardisson D, Redondo A. Molecular characterization of ovarian cancer by gene-expression profiling. Gynecol Oncol 2010; 118 (1) 88-92
25 Spentzos D, Levine DA, Ramoni MF , et al. Gene expression signature with independent prognostic significance in epithelial ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22 (23) 4700-4710
26 Berchuck A, Iversen ES, Lancaster JM , et al. Patterns of gene expression that characterize long-term survival in advanced stage serous ovarian cancers. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11 (10) 3686-3696
27 Spentzos D, Levine DA, Kolia S , et al. Unique gene expression profile based on pathologic response in epithelial ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23 (31) 7911-7918
28 Helleman J, Jansen MP, Span PN , et al. Molecular profiling of platinum resistant ovarian cancer. Int J Cancer 2006; 118 (8) 1963-1971
29 Dressman HK, Berchuck A, Chan G , et al. An integrated genomic-based approach to individualized treatment of patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25 (5) 517-525
30 Ferriss JS, Kim Y, Duska L , et al. Multi-gene expression predictors of single drug responses to adjuvant chemotherapy in ovarian carcinoma: predicting platinum resistance. PLoS ONE 2012; 7 (2) e30550
31 Vella N, Aiello M, Russo AE , et al. 'Genetic profiling' and ovarian cancer therapy (review). Mol Med Rep 2011; 4 (5) 771-777
32 Hartmann LC, Lu KH, Linette GP , et al. Gene expression profiles predict early relapse in ovarian cancer after platinum-paclitaxel chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11 (6) 2149-2155
33 Samarnthai N, Hall K, Yeh IT. Molecular profiling of endometrial malignancies. Obstet Gynecol Int 2010; 2010: 162363
34 Krakstad C, Birkeland E, Seidel D , et al. High-throughput mutation profiling of primary and metastatic endometrial cancers identifies KRAS, FGFR2 and PIK3CA to be frequently mutated. PLoS ONE 2012; 7 (12) e52795
35 Kernochan LE, Garcia RL. Carcinosarcomas (malignant mixed Müllerian tumor) of the uterus: advances in elucidation of biologic and clinical characteristics. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2009; 7 (5) 550-556 , quiz 557
36 Bourmenskaya O, Shubina E, Trofimov D , et al. Host gene expression profiling of cervical smear is eligible for cancer risk evaluation. J Clin Pathol 2013; 66 (4) 282-285
37 Hagemann T, Bozanovic T, Hooper S , et al. Molecular profiling of cervical cancer progression. Br J Cancer 2007; 96 (2) 321-328
38 Havrilesky LJ, Krivak TC, Mucenski JW, Myers ER. Impact of a chemoresponse assay on treatment costs for recurrent ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 203 (2) e1-e7