RESUMEN
AIMS: To evaluate the molecular underpinnings of the rare aggressive prostate cancer variants adenosquamous carcinoma, pleomorphic giant-cell carcinoma, and sarcomatoid carcinoma. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrieved 19 tumours with one or more variant(s), and performed ERG immunohistochemistry, a next-generation sequencing assay targeting recurrent gene fusions, and fluorescence in-situ hybridisation (FISH) for ERG and BRAF. Divergent differentiation included: sarcomatoid carcinoma (n = 10), adenosquamous carcinoma (n = 7), and pleomorphic giant-cell carcinoma (n = 7). Five patients had more than one variant. Four had variants only in metastases. ERG rearrangement was detected in nine (47%, seven via sequencing, showing TMPRSS2-ERG fusions and one GRHL2-ERG fusion, and two via FISH, showing rearrangement via deletion). ERG was immunohistochemically positive in the adenocarcinoma in eight of nine (89%) patients, but was immunohistochemically positive in the variant in only five of nine patients (56%, typically decreased). One patient had a false-positive ERG immunohistochemical result in the sarcomatoid component despite a negative FISH result. Two (11%) harboured BRAF fusions (FAM131A-BRAF and SND1-BRAF). CONCLUSIONS: ERG fusions are present in these rare prostate cancer variants with a frequency close to that in conventional prostate cancer (9/19, 47%). ERG immunohistochemistry usually detects rearrangement in the adenocarcinoma, but is less sensitive for the variant histology, with weak to negative staining. Adenosquamous and sarcomatoid variants can, particularly, occur together. Molecular assessment may be an additional tool in selected cases to confirm the prostatic origin of unusual tumours. The presence of two BRAF rearrangements suggests that this gene fusion may be enriched in this setting, as RAF kinase fusions have been previously reported in 1-2% of prostate cancers.
Asunto(s)
Fusión Génica , Proteínas de Fusión Oncogénica/genética , Neoplasias de la Próstata/genética , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Carcinoma Adenoescamoso/genética , Carcinoma Adenoescamoso/patología , Carcinoma de Células Gigantes/genética , Carcinoma de Células Gigantes/patología , Carcinoma de Células Renales/genética , Carcinoma de Células Renales/patología , Proteínas de Unión al ADN/genética , Proteínas de Unión al ADN/metabolismo , Reordenamiento Génico , Secuenciación de Nucleótidos de Alto Rendimiento , Humanos , Inmunohistoquímica , Hibridación Fluorescente in Situ , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Metástasis de la Neoplasia/genética , Metástasis de la Neoplasia/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf/genética , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf/metabolismo , Serina Endopeptidasas/genética , Factores de Transcripción/genética , Factores de Transcripción/metabolismo , Regulador Transcripcional ERG/genética , Regulador Transcripcional ERG/metabolismoRESUMEN
Mutations in RAS occur in 30-50% of metastatic colorectal carcinomas (mCRCs) and correlate with resistance to anti-EGFR therapy. Consequently, mCRC biomarker guidelines state RAS mutational testing should be performed when considering EGFR inhibitor treatment. However, a small subset of mCRCs are reported to harbor RAS amplification. In order to elucidate the clinicopathologic features and anti-EGFR treatment response associated with RAS amplification, we retrospectively reviewed a large cohort of mCRC patients that underwent targeted next-generation sequencing and copy number analysis for KRAS, NRAS, HRAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA. Molecular testing was performed on 1286 consecutive mCRC from 1271 patients as part of routine clinical care, and results were correlated with clinicopathologic findings, mismatch repair (MMR) status and follow-up. RAS amplification was detected in 22 (2%) mCRCs and included: KRAS, NRAS, and HRAS for 15, 5, and 2 cases, respectively (6-21 gene copies). Patients with a KRAS-amplified mCRC were more likely to report a history of inflammatory bowel disease (p < 0.001). In contrast, mutations in KRAS were associated with older patient age, right-sided colonic origin, low-grade differentiation, mucinous histology, and MMR proficiency (p ≤ 0.017). Four patients with a KRAS-amplified mCRC and no concomitant RAS/BRAF/PIK3CA mutations received EGFR inhibitor-based therapy, and none demonstrated a clinicoradiographic response. The therapeutic impact of RAS amplification was further evaluated using a separate, multi-institutional cohort of 23 patients. Eight of 23 patients with KRAS-amplified mCRC received anti-EGFR therapy and all 8 patients exhibited disease progression on treatment. Although the number of KRAS-amplified mCRCs is limited, our data suggest the clinicopathologic features associated with mCRC harboring a KRAS amplification are distinct from those associated with a KRAS mutation. However, both alterations seem to confer EGFR inhibitor resistance and, therefore, RAS testing to include copy number analyses may be of consideration in the treatment of mCRC.
