The O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation status and clinical outcomes of Ewing sarcoma patients treated with irinotecan and temozolomide

BackgroundThere remains an unmet need to identify molecular biomarkers in Ewing sarcoma (ES). We sought to assess the influence of the O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation on response and progression-free survival (PFS) following initiation of irinotecan and temozolomid...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy Vol. 27; no. 5; pp. 759 - 767
Main Authors: Salah, Samer, Naser, Walid, Jaber, Omar, Saleh, Yacob, Mustafa, Rawan, Abuhijlih, Ramiz, Abuhijla, Fawzi, Ismaeel, Taleb, Yaser, Sameer, Sultan, Iyad, Mustafa, Nour, Tbakhi, Abdelghani
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Via Medica 31-10-2022
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:BackgroundThere remains an unmet need to identify molecular biomarkers in Ewing sarcoma (ES). We sought to assess the influence of the O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation on response and progression-free survival (PFS) following initiation of irinotecan and temozolomide (IT), PFS following initiation of vincristine, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide alternating with ifosfamide and etoposide (VDC-IE), and overall survival (OS). Materials and methodsData of advanced ES patients, treated with IT were retrospectively collected. Patients were required to have progression after prior VDC-IE. MGMT promoter methylation was assessed on non-decalcified Formalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) tissue using methylation sensitive restriction enzyme-quantitative PCR (MSRE-qPCR). Survival was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. ResultsA total of 20 ES patients underwent MGMT promoter methylation testing, and were eligible for analysis. Five patients (25%) had methylated MGMT, whereas the remaining (15; 75%) had unmethylated promoter. Five (25%) had objective response to IT, with no observed difference by promoter methylation (p = 0.76). Median PFS from initiation of IT for methylated vs. unmethylated MGMT patients was 4.9 and 1.2 months, respectively, p = 0.69. Median PFS from date of initiation of VDC-IE was significantly superior in the methylated group; 27.8 vs. 8.6 months, p = 0.034. Median OS was superior but not statistically significant in the methylated group. ConclusionMGMT-promoter methylation did not correlate with clinical activity or outcomes following the IT regimen for advanced ES. However, methylated MGMT predicted significantly superior PFS following initiation of the standard VDC-IE protocol.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1507-1367
2083-4640
DOI:10.5603/RPOR.a2022.0084