| Abstract: |
Background: Cancer of unknown primary origin (CUP) poses a significant challenge due to poor clinical outcomes and limited treatment options. As such, further definition of clinicopathological factors and genomic profile to better adapt treatment strategies is required. Methods: Medical records were interrogated to retrospectively include CUP with available clinical and genomics data at the European Institute of Oncology. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) included targeted panels. Statistical analyses were conducted with R Software 4.2.2. Results: A total of 44 patients were included. With a median follow-up of 39.46 months (interquartile range [IQR] 35.98-47.41 months), median PFS (mPFS) to first-line regimen was 3.98 months (95% CI 3.22-5.98), with a clinical benefit rate of 26% (95% CI 14%-49%), and disease control rate (DCR) limited to 48.28%. Most patients (26 of 31, 83.87%) received platinum-doublet chemotherapy, with no statistically significant difference between first-line treatment regimens. Median OS (mOS) was 18.8 months (95% CI 12.3-39.9), with a 12-month OS rate of 66% (95% CI 50%-85%). All patients received comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP). For 11 patients, NGS was unsuccessful due to low sample quantity and/or quality. For the remaining, TP53 (n=16, 48%) and KRAS (n=10, 30%) represented the most altered (alt) genes. No microsatellite instability was observed (0 of 28), while 6 of 28 (21.43%) tumors carried high TMB (≥10 mutation per megabase). Eight of 33 tumors (24.2%) displayed at least one actionable alteration with potential clinical benefit according to ESCAT. Only 2 of them received targeted therapy matched to genomic alterations, with a combined mPFS of 2.63 months (95% CI 1.84-not evaluable) as third-line regimens. Six patients received anti-PD1/PD-L1 therapy, showing a meaningful mPFS of 13 months (95% CI 2.04-not evaluable). Conclusion: CUP exhibits poor prognosis with limited benefits from standard treatment regimens. A significant proportion of CUPs carry actionable alterations, underscoring the importance of genomic profiling to gather additional treatment opportunities. In addition, immunotherapy might represent a valuable treatment option for a subset of CUP. Finally, accurate definition of sequencing methods and platforms is crucial to overcome NGS failures. © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press. |
