Exome sequencing of prostate cancer supports the hypothesis of independent tumour origins

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) is a clinically and pathologically heterogeneous disease. The rapid development of sequencing technology has the potential to deliver new biomarkers with emphasis on aggressive disease and to revolutionise personalised cancer treatment. However, a prostate harbouring cancer commonly contains multiple separate tumour foci, with the potential to aggravate tumour sampling. The level of intraprostatic tumour heterogeneity remains to be determined.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the level of intraprostatic tumour heterogeneity through genome-wide, high-resolution profiling of multiple tumour samples from the same individual.

DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multiple tumour samples were obtained from four individuals following radical prostatectomy. One individual (SWE-1) contained >70% cancer cells in all tumour samples, whereas the other three (SWE-2 to SWE-4) required the use of laser capture microdissection for tumour cell enrichment. Subsequently, DNA was extracted from all tissue samples, and exome sequencing was performed. All tumour foci of SWE-1 were also profiled using a high-resolution array for the identification of copy number alterations (CNA).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Shared somatic high-frequency single nucleotide variants (SNV) and CNAs were used to infer the level of intraprostatic tumour heterogeneity.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: No high-frequency mutations, common for the three tumour samples of SWE-1, were identified. Ten randomly chosen positions were validated with Sanger sequencing in all foci, which verified the exome data. The high level of intraprostatic heterogeneity was consistent in all individuals. In total, three out of four individuals harboured tumours without an apparent common somatic denominator. Although we cannot exclude the presence of common structural rearrangements, a high-density array was used for the detection of deletions and amplifications in SWE-1, which agreed with the exome data.

CONCLUSIONS: We present evidence for the presence of somatically independent tumours within the same prostate. This finding will have implications for personalised cancer treatment and biomarker discovery.

Chromatin binding by the androgen receptor in prostate cancer

Alterations in transcriptional programs are fundamental to the development of cancers. The androgen receptor is central to the normal development of the prostate gland and to the development of prostate cancer. To a large extent this is believed to be due to the control of gene expression through the interaction of the androgen receptor with chromatin and subsequently with coregulators and the transcriptional machinery. Unbiased genome-wide studies have recently uncovered the recruitment sites that are gene-distal and intragenic rather than associated with proximal promoter regions. Whilst expression profiles from AR-positive primary prostate tumours and cell lines can directly relate to the AR cistrome in prostate cancer cells, this distribution raises significant challenges in making direct mechanistic connections. Furthermore, extrapolating from datasets assembled in one model to other model systems or clinical samples poses challenges if we are to use the AR-directed transcriptome to guide the development of novel biomarkers or treatment decisions. This review will provide an overview of the androgen receptor before addressing the challenges and opportunities created by whole-genome studies of the interplay between the androgen receptor and chromatin.

Pro-neural transcription factors as cancer markers

BACKGROUND: The aberrant transcription in cancer of genes normally associated with embryonic tissue differentiation at various organ sites may be a hallmark of tumour progression. For example, neuroendocrine differentiation is found more commonly in cancers destined to progress, including prostate and lung. We sought to identify proteins which are involved in neuroendocrine differentiation and differentially expressed in aggressive/metastatic tumours.

RESULTS: Expression arrays were used to identify up-regulated transcripts in a neuroendocrine (NE) transgenic mouse model of prostate cancer. Amongst these were several genes normally expressed in neural tissues, including the pro-neural transcription factors Ascl1 and Hes6. Using quantitative RT-PCR and immuno-histochemistry we showed that these same genes were highly expressed in castrate resistant, metastatic LNCaP cell-lines. Finally we performed a meta-analysis on expression array datasets from human clinical material. The expression of these pro-neural transcripts effectively segregates metastatic from localised prostate cancer and benign tissue as well as sub-clustering a variety of other human cancers.

CONCLUSION: By focussing on transcription factors known to drive normal tissue development and comparing expression signatures for normal and malignant mouse tissues we have identified two transcription factors, Ascl1 and Hes6, which appear effective markers for an aggressive phenotype in all prostate models and tissues examined. We suggest that the aberrant initiation of differentiation programs may confer a selective advantage on cells in all contexts and this approach to identify biomarkers therefore has the potential to uncover proteins equally applicable to pre-clinical and clinical cancer biology.

Molecular markers in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

Although significant progress has been made in colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment within the last decade with the approval of multiple new agents, the prognosis for patients with metastatic CRC remains poor with 5-year survival rates of approximately 8%. Resistance to chemotherapy remains a major obstacle in effective CRC treatment and many patients do not receive any clinical benefit from chemotherapy. In addition, other patients will experience adverse reactions to treatment resulting in dose modifications or treatment withdrawal, which can severely reduce treatment efficacy. Currently, significant research efforts are attempting to identify reliable and validated biomarkers with which will guide clinicians to make more informed treatment decisions. Specifically, the use of molecular profiling has the potential to assist the clinician in administering the correct drug, dose, or intervention for the patient before the onset of therapy thereby selecting a treatment strategy likely to have the greatest clinical outcome while minimizing adverse events. However, until recently, personalized medicine is a paradigm that has existed more in conceptual terms than in reality with very few validated biomarkers used routinely in metastatic CRC treatment. Rapid advances in genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic technologies continues to improve our understanding of tumor biology, but the search for reliable biomarkers has turned out to be more challenging than previously anticipated with significant disparity in published literature and limited translation into routine clinical practice. Recent progress with the identification and validation of biomarkers to the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies including KRAS and possibly BRAF provide optimism that the goal of individualized treatment is within reach. This review will highlight and discuss current progress in the search for biomarkers, the challenges this emerging field presents, and the future role of biomarkers in advancing CRC treatment.

Selecting the best targeted agent in first-line treatment of unresectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer:does the bench have the answers?

For physicians facing patients with organ-limited metastases from colorectal cancer, tumor shrinkage and sterilization of micrometastatic disease is the main goal, giving the opportunity for secondary surgical resection. At the same time, for the majority of patients who will not achieve a sufficient tumor response, disease control remains the predominant objective. Since FOLFOX or FOLFIRI have similar efficacies, the challenge is to define which could be the most effective targeted agent (anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF) to reach these goals. Therefore, a priori molecular identification of patients that could benefit from anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF monoclonal antibodies (i.e. the currently approved targeted therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer) is of critical importance. In this setting, the KRAS mutation status was the first identified predictive marker of response to anti-EGFR therapy. Since it has been demonstrated that tumors with KRAS mutation do not respond to anti-EGFR therapy, KRAS status must be determined prior to treatment. Thus, for KRAS wild-type patients, the choices that remain are either anti-VEGF or anti-EGFR. In this review, we present the most updated data from translational research programs dealing with the identification of biomarkers for response to targeted therapies.

Pancreatic cancer: medical management (novel chemotherapeutics)

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the fourth leading cause of cancer death and has an extremely poor prognosis: The 5-year survival probability is less than 5% for all stages. The only chance for cure or longer survival is surgical resection; however, only 10% to 20% of patients have resectable disease. Although surgical techniques have improved, most who undergo complete resection experience a recurrence. Adjuvant systemic therapy reduces the recurrence rate and improves outcomes. There is a potential role for radiation therapy as part of treatment for locally advanced disease, although its use in both the adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings remains controversial. Palliative systemic treatment is the only option for patients with metastatic disease. To date, however, only the gemcitabine plus erlotinib combination, and recently the FOLFIRINOX regimen, have been associated with relatively small but statistically significant improvements in OS when compared directly with gemcitabine alone. Although several meta-analyses have suggested a benefit associated with combination chemotherapy, whether this benefit is clinically meaningful remains unclear, particularly in light of the enhanced toxicity associated with combination regimens. There is growing evidence that the exceptionally poor prognosis in PC is caused by the tumor's characteristic abundant desmoplastic stroma that plays a critical role in tumor cell growth, invasion, metastasis, and chemoresistance. Carefully designed clinical trials that include translational analysis will provide a better understanding of the tumor biology and its relation to the host stromal cells. Future directions will involve testing of new targeted agents, understanding the pharmacodynamics of our current targeted agents, searching for predictive and prognostic biomarkers, and exploring the efficacy of different combinations strategies.

A review of excision repair cross-complementation group 1 in colorectal cancer

Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy is the standard of care in patients with high-risk stage II and stage III colorectal cancer as well as in patients with advanced disease. Unfortunately, a large proportion of patients offered oxaliplatin fail to benefit from it. In the era of personalized treatment, there are strong efforts to identify biomarkers that will predict efficacy to oxaliplatin-based treatments. Excision repair cross-complementation group 1 (ERCC1) is a key element in the nucleotide excision repair (NER) pathway, which is responsible for repairing DNA adducts induced by platinum compounds. ERCC1 has recently been shown to be closely associated with outcome in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): both high ERCC1 protein and gene expression are associated with resistance to cisplatin-based chemotherapy and better outcome without treatment. Therefore, ERCC1 has the potential to be used as a strong candidate biomarker, both predictive and prognostic, for colorectal cancer. This review will focus on the preclinical and clinical evidences supporting ERCC1 as a major molecule in oxaliplatin resistance. In addition, the important technologies used to assess ERCC1 gene and protein expression will be highlighted.

Predictive molecular classifiers in colorectal cancer

The introduction of predictive molecular markers has radically enhanced the identification of which patients may benefit from a given treatment. Despite recent controversies, KRAS mutation is currently the most recognized molecular predictive marker in colorectal cancer (CRC), predicting efficacy of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) antibodies. However, other relevant markers have been reported and claimed to identify patients that will benefit from anti-EGFR therapies. This group of markers includes BRAF mutations, PI3KCA mutations, and loss of PTEN expression. Similarly, molecular markers for cytotoxic agents' efficacy also may predict outcome in patients with CRC. This review aims to summarize the most important predictive molecular classifiers in patients with CRC and further discuss any inconsistent or conflicting findings for these molecular classifiers.

Pleiotropic analysis of cancer risk loci on esophageal adenocarcinoma risk

Background: Several cancer-associated loci identified from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been associated with risks of multiple cancer sites, suggesting pleiotropic effects. We investigated whether GWAS-identified risk variants for other common cancers are associated with risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA) or its precursor, Barrett's esophagus. 

Methods: We examined the associations between risks of EA and Barrett's esophagus and 387 SNPs that have been associated with risks of other cancers, by using genotype imputation data on 2,163 control participants and 3,885 (1,501 EA and 2,384 Barrett's esophagus) case patients from the Barrett's and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Genetic Susceptibility Study, and investigated effect modification by smoking history, body mass index (BMI), and reflux/heartburn. 

Results: After correcting for multiple testing, none of the tested 387 SNPs were statistically significantly associated with risk of EA or Barrett's esophagus. No evidence of effect modification by smoking, BMI, or reflux/heartburn was observed. 

Conclusions: Genetic risk variants for common cancers identified from GWAS appear not to be associated with risks of EA or Barrett's esophagus. 

Impact: To our knowledge, this is the first investigation of pleiotropic genetic associations with risks of EA and Barrett's esophagus.

Guidance for laboratories performing molecular pathology for cancer patients

Molecular testing is becoming an important part of the diagnosis of any patient with cancer. The challenge to laboratories is to meet this need, using reliable methods and processes to ensure that patients receive a timely and accurate report on which their treatment will be based. The aim of this paper is to provide minimum requirements for the management of molecular pathology laboratories. This general guidance should be augmented by the specific guidance available for different tumour types and tests. Preanalytical considerations are important, and careful consideration of the way in which specimens are obtained and reach the laboratory is necessary. Sample receipt and handling follow standard operating procedures, but some alterations may be necessary if molecular testing is to be performed, for instance to control tissue fixation. DNA and RNA extraction can be standardised and should be checked for quality and quantity of output on a regular basis. The choice of analytical method(s) depends on clinical requirements, desired turnaround time, and expertise available. Internal quality control, regular internal audit of the whole testing process, laboratory accreditation, and continual participation in external quality assessment schemes are prerequisites for delivery of a reliable service. A molecular pathology report should accurately convey the information the clinician needs to treat the patient with sufficient information to allow for correct interpretation of the result. Molecular pathology is developing rapidly, and further detailed evidence-based recommendations are required for many of the topics covered here.

Establishing the Evidence Bar for Molecular Diagnostics in Personalised Cancer Care

While personalised cancer medicine holds great promise, targeting therapies to the biological characteristics of patients is limited by the number of validated biomarkers currently available. The implementation of biomarkers has undergone many challenges with few biomarkers reaching cancer patients in the clinic. There have been many biomarkers that have been published and claimed to be therapeutically useful, but few become part of the clinical decision-making process due to technical, validation and market access issues. To reduce this attrition rate, there is a significant need for policy makers and reimbursement agencies to define specific evidence requirements for the introduction of biomarkers into clinical practice. Once these requirements are more clearly defined, in an analogous manner to pharmaceuticals, researchers and diagnostic companies can better focus their biomarker research and development on meeting these specific requirements, which should lead to the more rapid introduction of new molecular oncology tests for patient benefit.

Markers of vitamin D exposure and oesophageal cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Vitamin D has been associated with reduced risk of many cancers, but evidence for oesophageal cancer is mixed. To clarify the role of Vitamin D, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the association of Vitamin D exposures and oesophageal neoplasia, including adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), Barrett's oesophagus and squamous dysplasia. Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science were searched from inception to September 2015. Fifteen publications in relation to circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (n=3), Vitamin D intake (n=4), UVB exposure (n=1), and genetic factors (n=7) were retrieved. Higher 25-OHD was associated with increased risk of cancer (adenocarcinoma or SCC, OR=1.39;95%CI:1.04-1.74), with the majority of participants coming from China. No association was observed between Vitamin D intake and risk of cancer overall (OR=1.03;0.65-1.42); however, a non-significantly increased risk for adenocarcinoma (OR=1.45;0.65-2.24) and non-significantly decreased risk for SCC (OR=0.80;0.48-1.12) were observed. One study reported a decreased risk of adenocarcinoma with higher UVB exposure. A decreased risk was found for VDR haplotype rs2238135(G)/rs1989969(T) carriers, OR=0.45;0.00-0.91, and a suggestive association was observed for rs2107301. No consistent associations were observed between Vitamin D exposures and occurrence of oesophageal lesions. Further adequately powered, well-designed studies are needed before conclusions can be made.

Quantification of HER2 heterogeneity in breast cancer-implications for identification of sub-dominant clones for personalised treatment

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease, at both an inter- and intra-tumoural level. Appreciating heterogeneity through the application of biomarkers and molecular signatures adds complexity to tumour taxonomy but is key to personalising diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. The extent to which heterogeneity exists, and its interpretation remains a challenge to pathologists. Using HER2 as an exemplar, we have developed a simple reproducible heterogeneity index. Cell-to-cell HER2 heterogeneity was extensive in a proportion of both reported 'amplified' and 'non-amplified' cases. The highest levels of heterogeneity objectively identified occurred in borderline categories and higher ratio non-amplified cases. A case with particularly striking heterogeneity was analysed further with an array of biomarkers in order to assign a molecular diagnosis. Broad biological complexity was evident. In essence, interpretation, depending on the area of tumour sampled, could have been one of three distinct phenotypes, each of which would infer different therapeutic interventions. Therefore, we recommend that heterogeneity is assessed and taken into account when determining treatment options.

The role of glycans in the development and progression of prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is a unique and heterogeneous disease. Currently, a major unmet clinical need exists to develop biomarkers that enable indolent disease to be distinguished from aggressive disease. The prostate is an abundant secretor of glycoproteins of all types, and alterations in glycans are, therefore, attractive as potential biomarkers and therapeutic targets. Despite progress over the past decade in profiling the genome and proteome, the prostate cancer glycoproteome remains relatively understudied. A wide range of alterations in the glycoproteins on prostate cancer cells can occur, including increased sialylation and fucosylation, increased O-β-N-acetylglucosamine (GlcNAc) conjugation, the emergence of cryptic and high-mannose N-glycans and alterations to proteoglycans. Glycosylation can alter protein function and has a key role in many important biological processes in cancer including cell adhesion, migration, interactions with the cell matrix, immune surveillance, cell signalling and cellular metabolism; altered glycosylation in prostate cancer might modify some, or all of these processes. In the past three years, powerful tools such as glycosylation-specific antibodies and glycosylation gene signatures have been developed, which enable detailed analyses of changes in glycosylation. Thus, emerging data on these often overlooked modifications have the potential to improve risk stratification and therapeutic strategies in patients with prostate cancer.

Clinical Application of Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors in High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer

: High-grade serous ovarian cancer is characterized by genomic instability, with one half of all tumors displaying defects in the important DNA repair pathway of homologous recombination. Given the action of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in targeting tumors with deficiencies in this repair pathway by loss of BRCA1/2, ovarian tumors could be an attractive population for clinical application of this therapy. PARP inhibitors have moved into clinical practice in the past few years, with approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) within the past 2 years. The U.S. FDA approval of olaparib applies to fourth line treatment in germline BRCA-mutant ovarian cancer, and European EMA approval to olaparib maintenance in both germline and somatic BRCA-mutant platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. In order to widen the ovarian cancer patient population that would benefit from PARP inhibitors, predictive biomarkers based on a clear understanding of the mechanism of action are required. Additionally, a better understanding of the toxicity profile is needed if PARP inhibitors are to be used in the curative, rather than the palliative, setting. We reviewed the development of PARP inhibitors in phase I-III clinical trials, including combination trials of PARP inhibitors and chemotherapy/antiangiogenics, the approval for these agents, the mechanisms of resistance, and the outstanding issues, including the development of biomarkers and the rate of long-term hematologic toxicities with these agents.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib has recently received approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA), with a second agent (rucaparib) likely to be approved in the near future. However, the patient population with potential benefit from PARP inhibitors is likely wider than that of germline BRCA mutation-associated disease, and biomarkers are in development to enable the selection of patients with the potential for clinical benefit from these agents. Questions remain regarding the toxicities of PARP inhibitors, limiting the use of these agents in the prophylactic or adjuvant setting until more information is available. The indications for olaparib as indicated by the FDA and EMA are reviewed.