Evidence for shared genetic risk factors between lymphangioleiomyomatosis and pulmonary function.

INTRODUCTION: Lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM) is a rare low-grade metastasising disease characterised by cystic lung destruction. The genetic basis of LAM remains incompletely determined, and the disease cell-of-origin is uncertain. We analysed the possibility of a shared genetic basis between LAM and cancer, and LAM and pulmonary function. METHODS: The results of genome-wide association studies of LAM, 17 cancer types and spirometry measures (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), FEV1/FVC ratio and peak expiratory flow (PEF)) were analysed for genetic correlations, shared genetic variants and causality. Genomic and transcriptomic data were examined, and immunodetection assays were performed to evaluate pleiotropic genes. RESULTS: There were no significant overall genetic correlations between LAM and cancer, but LAM correlated negatively with FVC and PEF, and a trend in the same direction was observed for FEV1. 22 shared genetic variants were uncovered between LAM and pulmonary function, while seven shared variants were identified between LAM and cancer. The LAM-pulmonary function shared genetics identified four pleiotropic genes previously recognised in LAM single-cell transcriptomes: ADAM12, BNC2, NR2F2 and SP5. We had previously associated NR2F2 variants with LAM, and we identified its functional partner NR3C1 as another pleotropic factor. NR3C1 expression was confirmed in LAM lung lesions. Another candidate pleiotropic factor, CNTN2, was found more abundant in plasma of LAM patients than that of healthy women. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests the existence of a common genetic aetiology between LAM and pulmonary function.

Histamine signaling and metabolism identify potential biomarkers and therapies for lymphangioleiomyomatosis.

Inhibition of mTOR is the standard of care for lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM). However, this therapy has variable tolerability and some patients show progressive decline of lung function despite treatment. LAM diagnosis and monitoring can also be challenging due to the heterogeneity of symptoms and insufficiency of non-invasive tests. Here, we propose monoamine-derived biomarkers that provide preclinical evidence for novel therapeutic approaches. The major histamine-derived metabolite methylimidazoleacetic acid (MIAA) is relatively more abundant in LAM plasma, and MIAA values are independent of VEGF-D. Higher levels of histamine are associated with poorer lung function and greater disease burden. Molecular and cellular analyses, and metabolic profiling confirmed active histamine signaling and metabolism. LAM tumorigenesis is reduced using approved drugs targeting monoamine oxidases A/B (clorgyline and rasagiline) or histamine H1 receptor (loratadine), and loratadine synergizes with rapamycin. Depletion of Maoa or Hrh1 expression, and administration of an L-histidine analog, or a low L-histidine diet, also reduce LAM tumorigenesis. These findings extend our knowledge of LAM biology and suggest possible ways of improving disease management.

Heterogeneity and Cancer-Related Features in Lymphangioleiomyomatosis Cells and Tissue.

Lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM) is a rare, low-grade metastasizing disease characterized by cystic lung destruction. LAM can exhibit extensive heterogeneity at the molecular, cellular, and tissue levels. However, the molecular similarities and differences among LAM cells and tissue, and their connection to cancer features are not fully understood. By integrating complementary gene and protein LAM signatures, and single-cell and bulk tissue transcriptome profiles, we show sources of disease heterogeneity, and how they correspond to cancer molecular portraits. Subsets of LAM diseased cells differ with respect to gene expression profiles related to hormones, metabolism, proliferation, and stemness. Phenotypic diseased cell differences are identified by evaluating lumican (LUM) proteoglycan and YB1 transcription factor expression in LAM lung lesions. The RUNX1 and IRF1 transcription factors are predicted to regulate LAM cell signatures, and both regulators are expressed in LAM lung lesions, with differences between spindle-like and epithelioid LAM cells. The cancer single-cell transcriptome profiles most similar to those of LAM cells include a breast cancer mesenchymal cell model and lines derived from pleural mesotheliomas. Heterogeneity is also found in LAM lung tissue, where it is mainly determined by immune system factors. Variable expression of the multifunctional innate immunity protein LCN2 is linked to disease heterogeneity. This protein is found to be more abundant in blood plasma from LAM patients than from healthy women. IMPLICATIONS: This study identifies LAM molecular and cellular features, master regulators, cancer similarities, and potential causes of disease heterogeneity.

Serum mesothelin for diagnosing malignant pleural mesothelioma: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Mesothelin is currently considered the best available serum biomarker of malignant pleural mesothelioma. To examine the diagnostic accuracy and use of serum mesothelin in early diagnosis, we performed an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. METHODS: The literature search identified 16 diagnostic studies of serum mesothelin, measured with the Mesomark enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. IPD of 4,491 individuals were collected, including several control groups and 1,026 patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Mesothelin levels were standardized for between-study differences and age, after which the diagnostic accuracy and the factors affecting it were examined with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) regression analysis. RESULTS: At a common diagnostic threshold of 2.00 nmol/L, the sensitivities and specificities of mesothelin in the different studies ranged widely from 19% to 68% and 88% to 100%, respectively. This heterogeneity can be explained by differences in study population, because type of control group, mesothelioma stage, and histologic subtype significantly affected the diagnostic accuracy. The use of mesothelin in early diagnosis was evaluated by differentiating 217 patients with stage I or II epithelioid and biphasic mesothelioma from 1,612 symptomatic or high-risk controls. The resulting area under the ROC curve was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.81). At 95% specificity, mesothelin displayed a sensitivity of 32% (95% CI, 26% to 40%). CONCLUSION: In patients suspected of having mesothelioma, a positive blood test for mesothelin at a high-specificity threshold is a strong incentive to urge further diagnostic steps. However, the poor sensitivity of mesothelin clearly limits its added value to early diagnosis and emphasizes the need for further biomarker research.

Serum levels of soluble mesothelin-related peptides in malignant and nonmalignant asbestos-related pleural disease: relation with past asbestos exposure.

BACKGROUND: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) results from malignant transformation of mesothelial cells. Past asbestos exposure represents a major risk factor for MPM and other benign pleural disease. Soluble mesothelin-related peptides (SMRP) have been regarded as a promising serum biomarker for MPM. The aim of this study was to investigate serum levels of SMRP in malignant and nonmalignant asbestos-related pleural disease. PATIENTS: Four groups of patients were investigated: group 1 composed of 48 healthy subjects, group 2 composed of 177 patients with previous asbestos exposure and no pleural disease, group 3 composed of 36 patients with MPM, and group 4 composed of 101 patients with previous asbestos exposure and benign pleural disease. Serum SMRP levels were determined by ELISA. RESULTS: Serum SMRP levels were significantly higher among group 3 than the other three groups. There were no differences in SMRP concentrations between groups 2 and 4. Subjects exposed to asbestos had higher SMRP concentrations than normal control subjects regardless of the presence of pleural disease. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for SMRP values was 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.83). The SMRP level at 0.55 nmol/L/L was determined as the most optimal cutoff value with resulting sensitivity and specificity of 72% and 72% for the diagnosis of MPM. CONCLUSIONS: These data attest to good diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of SMRP for the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma. We have also shown that serum SMRP levels might serve as a marker of asbestos exposure.