Cervical cancer is responsible for 10–15% of cancer-related deaths in women worldwide1,2. The etiological role of infection with high-risk human papilloma viruses (HPV) in cervical carcinomas is well established3. Previous studies have implicated somatic mutations in PIK3CA, PTEN, TP53, STK11 and KRAS4–7 as well as several copy number alterations in the pathogenesis of cervical carcinomas8,9. Here, we report whole exome sequencing analysis of 115 cervical carcinoma-normal paired samples, transcriptome sequencing of 79 cases and whole genome sequencing of 14 tumor-normal pairs. Novel somatic mutations in 79 primary squamous cell carcinomas include recurrent E322K substitutions in the MAPK1 gene (8%), inactivating mutations in the HLA-B gene (9%), and mutations in EP300 (16%), FBXW7 (15%), NFE2L2 (4%) TP53 (5%) and ERBB2 (6%). We also observed somatic ELF3 (13%) and CBFB (8%) mutations in 24 adenocarcinomas. Squamous cell carcinomas had higher frequencies of somatic mutations in the Tp*C dinucleotide context than adenocarcinomas. Gene expression levels at HPV integration sites were significantly higher in tumors with HPV integration compared with expression of the same genes in tumors without viral integration at the same site. These data demonstrate several recurrent genomic alterations in cervical carcinomas that suggest novel strategies to combat this disease.

Recent studies have detailed the genomic landscape of primary endometrial cancers, but their evolution into metastases has not been characterized. We performed whole-exome sequencing of 98 tumor biopsies including complex atypical hyperplasias, primary tumors, and paired abdominopelvic metastases to survey the evolutionary landscape of endometrial cancer. We expanded and reanalyzed TCGA-data, identifying novel recurrent alterations in primary tumors, including mutations in the estrogen receptor cofactor NRIP1 in 12% of patients. We found that likely driver events tended to be shared by primary and metastatic tissue-samples, with notable exceptions such as ARID1A mutations. Phylogenetic analyses indicated that the sampled metastases typically arose from a common ancestral subclone that was not detected in the primary tumor biopsy. These data demonstrate extensive genetic heterogeneity within endometrial cancers and relative homogeneity across metastatic sites.

PURPOSE In the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01847274 ), maintenance therapy with niraparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, prolonged progression-free survival in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer who had a response to their last platinum-based chemotherapy. The objective of the study was to assess the clinical benefit and patient-reported outcomes in patients who had a partial response (PR) and complete response (CR) to their last platinum-based therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 553 patients were enrolled in the trial. Of 203 patients with a germline BRCA mutation (g BRCAmut), 99 had a PR and 104 had a CR to their last platinum-based therapy; of 350 patients without a confirmed g BRCAmut (non–g BRCAmut), 173 had a PR and 177 had a CR. Post hoc analyses were carried out to evaluate safety and the risk of progression in these patients according to g BRCAmut status and response to their last platinum-based therapy. Ovarian cancer–specific symptoms and quality of life were assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Ovarian Symptom Index. RESULTS Progression-free survival was improved in patients treated with niraparib compared with placebo in both the g BRCAmut cohort (PR: hazard ratio [HR], 0.24; 95% CI, 0.131 to 0.441; P < .0001; CR: HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.160 to 0.546; P < .0001) and the non–g BRCAmut cohort (PR: HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.230 to 0.532; P < .0001; CR: HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.383 to 0.868; P = .0082). The incidence of any-grade and grade 3 or greater adverse events was manageable. No meaningful differences were observed between niraparib and placebo in PR and CR subgroups with respect to patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSION Patients achieved clinical benefit from maintenance treatment with niraparib regardless of response to the last platinum-based therapy.

Major efforts have been invested in the identification of cancer biomarkers in plasma, but the extraordinary dynamic range in protein composition, and the dilution of disease specific proteins make discovery in plasma challenging. Focus is shifting towards using proximal fluids for biomarker discovery, but methods to verify the isolated sample's origin are missing. We therefore aimed to develop a technique to search for potential candidate proteins in the proximal proteome, i.e. in the tumor interstitial fluid, since the biomarkers are likely to be excreted or derive from the tumor microenvironment. Since tumor interstitial fluid is not readily accessible, we applied a centrifugation method developed in experimental animals and asked whether interstitial fluid from human tissue could be isolated, using ovarian carcinoma as a model. Exposure of extirpated tissue to 106 g enabled tumor fluid isolation. The fluid was verified as interstitial by an isolated fluid:plasma ratio not significantly different from 1.0 for both creatinine and Na+, two substances predominantly present in interstitial fluid. The isolated fluid had a colloid osmotic pressure 79% of that in plasma, suggesting that there was some sieving of proteins at the capillary wall. Using a proteomic approach we detected 769 proteins in the isolated interstitial fluid, sixfold higher than in patient plasma. We conclude that the isolated fluid represents undiluted interstitial fluid and thus a subproteome with high concentration of locally secreted proteins that may be detected in plasma for diagnostic, therapeutic and prognostic monitoring by targeted methods.

Germline BRCA1/2 testing of breast and ovarian cancer patients is growing rapidly as the result affects both treatment and cancer prevention in patients and relatives. Through the DNA-BONus study we offered BRCA1/2 testing and familial risk assessment to all new patients with breast (N = 893) or ovarian (N = 122) cancer diagnosed between September 2012 and April 2015, irrespective of family history or age, and without prior face-to-face genetic counselling. BRCA1/2 testing was accepted by 405 (45.4%) and 83 (68.0%) of the patients with breast or ovarian cancer, respectively. A pathogenic BRCA1/2 variant was found in 7 (1.7%) of the breast cancer patients and 19 (22.3%) of the ovarian cancer patients. In retrospect, all BRCA1/2 mutation carriers appeared to fulfill current criteria for BRCA1/2 testing. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores showed that the mean levels of anxiety and depression were comparable to those reported for breast and gynecological cancer patients in general, with a significant drop in anxiety symptoms during a 6-month follow-up period, during which the test result was forwarded to the patients. These results show that BRCA1/2 testing is well accepted in newly diagnosed breast and ovarian cancer patients. Current test criteria based on age and family history are sufficient to identify most BRCA1/2 mutation carriers among breast cancer patients. We recommend germline BRCA1/2 testing in all patients with epithelial ovarian cancer because of the high prevalence of pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants. INTRODUCTIONBreast cancer is by far the most common cancer in women worldwide, with more than 1.6 million new cases diagnosed each year. Ovarian cancer is substantially less common, with ∼ 240 000 new cases each year, but with higher mortality. 1 Most cases of breast and ovarian cancer are sporadic, but a minor fraction (2-8% and 8-15%, respectively) is caused by inheritance of pathogenic germline variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2, with variation in prevalence and relative contribution of BRCA1 and BRCA2 in different populations. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8] It is important to identify these patients because the presence of such germline variants affects treatment, follow-up and further cancer prevention in patients with breast or ovarian cancer. 9,10 In addition, it may strongly influence upon their close relatives, as BRCA1/2 testing can identify healthy BRCA1/2 mutation carriers at high risk and thereby prevent cancer and cancer-related deaths through increased surveillance and prophylactic surgery. [10][11][12][13][14][15][16] The most common current practice of BRCA1/2 testing is based on referral of suspected high-risk patients to clinical genetics services for specialized face-to-face genetic counselling. This procedure traditionally includes collection and confirmation of family history, risk