Next generation sequencing (NGS) has facilitated the identification of molecularly targeted therapies. However, clinical utility is an emerging challenge. Our objective was to identify the clinical utility of NGS testing in gynecologic cancers. A retrospective review of clinico-pathologic data was performed on 299 gynecological cancers where NGS testing had been performed to identify (1) recognition of actionable targets for therapy, (2) whether the therapy changed based on the findings, and (3) the impact on survival. High grade serous carcinoma was the most common tumor (52.5%). The number of genetic alterations ranged from 0 to 25 with a mean of 2.8/case. The most altered genes were TP53, PIK3CA, BRCA1 and BRCA2. Among 299 patients, 100 had actionable alterations (79 received a targeted treatment (Group1), 29 did not receive treatment (Group 2), and there were no actionable alterations in 199 (Group3). The death rate in groups 1, 2 and 3 was 54.4%, 42.8% and 50.2%, with an average survival of 18.6, 6.6 and 10.8 months, respectively (p = 0.002). In summary, NGS testing for gynecologic cancers detected 33.4% of actionable alterations with a high clinical action rate. Along with the high clinical utility of NGS, testing also seemed to improve survival for patients who received targeted treatment.

Objectives The significance of performing multistep level sections, including preparation of unstained sections in breast and gynecologic biopsy specimens, has been studied. Methods Consecutive H&E-stained level sections of 785 atypical and malignant biopsy specimens were included. The diagnostic material was categorized into present, absent, increased in size, or depleted. If the multistep level sections helped in establishing the diagnosis after a nondiagnostic material or the tissue significantly increased in size, this was considered a positive impact. Results No effect and positive impact of performing multistep level sections were obtained in 84.8% and 15.2% by preparing a second level and 97.2% and 2.8% by preparing a third level, respectively. Eighteen (2.3%) of the diagnoses could have been missed without performing a second level, while 8 (1%) could have been missed without performing a third level. The intervening unstained sections were used in 27 of 785 (3.4%) of the cases. Conclusions Staining two level sections with H&E significantly affected the diagnosis. However, preparing a third level did not improve the diagnosis. A universal protocol should be considered to standardize the handling of biopsy specimens among laboratories.

No abstract