Gene-expression profiling reveals distinct expression patterns for classic versus variant Merkel cell phenotypes and new classifier genes to distinguish Merkel cell from small-cell lung carcinoma

Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare aggressive skin tumor which shares histopathological and genetic features with small-cell lung carcinoma (SCLC), both are of neuroendocrine origin. Comparable to SCLC, MCC cell lines are classified into two different biochemical subgroups designated as 'Classic' and 'Variant'. With the aim to identify typical gene-expression signatures associated with these phenotypically different MCC cell lines subgroups and to search for differentially expressed genes between MCC and SCLC, we used cDNA arrays to pro. le 10 MCC cell lines and four SCLC cell lines. Using significance analysis of microarrays, we defined a set of 76 differentially expressed genes that allowed unequivocal identification of Classic and Variant MCC subgroups. We assume that the differential expression levels of some of these genes reflect, analogous to SCLC, the different biological and clinical properties of Classic and Variant MCC phenotypes. Therefore, they may serve as useful prognostic markers and potential targets for the development of new therapeutic interventions specific for each subgroup. Moreover, our analysis identified 17 powerful classifier genes capable of discriminating MCC from SCLC. Real-time quantitative RT-PCR analysis of these genes on 26 additional MCC and SCLC samples confirmed their diagnostic classification potential, opening opportunities for new investigations into these aggressive cancers.

Stage is not a reliable indicator of tumor volume in non-small cell lung cancer: a preliminary analysis of the trans-tasman radiation oncology group 99-05 database

Background: Tumor volume has been shown to be a prognostic factor for the response of some tumors to radiotherapy. TNM stage has prognostic value for patients treated surgically for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but its value is less clear for patients treated by nonsurgical means. This may be because tumor size is not a consistent determinant of T stage or stage group. As part of the preliminary analyses for the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 99-05 study, the authors performed this analysis to determine to what extent stage reflects tumor volume. Methods: In this prospective multicenter observational study, patients had to have histologically proven NSCLC, no evidence of disease beyond the primary site or thoracic lymph nodes, and been planned for radical radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy. Tumor volume measurements were based on computed tomography-based treatment planning images. Results: Four hundred four patients were available for analysis. There was a strong correlation between (log) maximum tumor diameter and (log) tumor volume (r = 0.93, p < 0.001). Although there was a highly significant trend of increasing volume with increasing T stage and stage group, when tumors were categorized into four groups according to increasing volume, there was only 55% concordance with T stage and 67% concordance with stage group. Conclusions: There is limited correlation between tumor size and disease stage in patients with NSCLC. This justifies documentation and investigation of size as a potential prognostic factor independent of stage. Maximum tumor diameter may be an adequate substitute for volume as a measurement of size.