Mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinomas of the gastrointestinal tract: targeted next-generation sequencing suggests a monoclonal origin of the two components.

BACKGROUND: Mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinomas (MANECs) of the gastrointestinal tract are rare neoplasms characterized by coexisting exocrine and neuroendocrine neoplastic components. MANECs' histogenetic classification and molecular characterization remain unclear, significantly affecting the identification of innovative therapeutic options for these tumors. METHODS: The exocrine and neuroendocrine components of 6 gastrointestinal MANECs were microdissected and subjected to the simultaneous mutation assessment in selected regions of 54 cancer-associated genes using Ion Torrent semiconductor-based next-generation sequencing. Sanger sequencing and immunohistochemistry were used as validation of the mutational status. RESULTS: A total of 20 driver gene somatic mutations were observed among the 12 neoplastic components investigated. In 11 of 12 (91.7%) samples, at least one mutation was detected; 7 samples (58.3%) were found to have multiple mutations. TP53 gene mutations were the most frequent genetic alterations observed in the series, occurring in 11/12 samples (91.7%). Somatic mutations in other genes were detected at lower frequencies: ATM, CTNNB1, ERBB4, JAK3, KDR, KRAS, RB1. CONCLUSIONS: Five of the 6 MANECs presented an overlapping mutational profile in both components, suggesting a monoclonal origin of the two MANEC components.

Reporting tumor molecular heterogeneity in histopathological diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Detection of molecular tumor heterogeneity has become of paramount importance with the advent of targeted therapies. Analysis for detection should be comprehensive, timely and based on routinely available tumor samples. AIM: To evaluate the diagnostic potential of targeted multigene next-generation sequencing (TM-NGS) in characterizing gastrointestinal cancer molecular heterogeneity. METHODS: 35 gastrointestinal tract tumors, five of each intestinal type gastric carcinomas, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas, pancreatic intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms, ampulla of Vater carcinomas, hepatocellular carcinomas, cholangiocarcinomas, pancreatic solid pseudopapillary tumors were assessed for mutations in 46 cancer-associated genes, using Ion Torrent semiconductor-based TM-NGS. One ampulla of Vater carcinoma cell line and one hepatic carcinosarcoma served to assess assay sensitivity. TP53, PIK3CA, KRAS, and BRAF mutations were validated by conventional Sanger sequencing. RESULTS: TM-NGS yielded overlapping results on matched fresh-frozen and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues, with a mutation detection limit of 1% for fresh-frozen high molecular weight DNA and 2% for FFPE partially degraded DNA. At least one somatic mutation was observed in all tumors tested; multiple alterations were detected in 20/35 (57%) tumors. Seven cancers displayed significant differences in allelic frequencies for distinct mutations, indicating the presence of intratumor molecular heterogeneity; this was confirmed on selected samples by immunohistochemistry of p53 and Smad4, showing concordance with mutational analysis. CONCLUSIONS: TM-NGS is able to detect and quantitate multiple gene alterations from limited amounts of DNA, moving one step closer to a next-generation histopathologic diagnosis that integrates morphologic, immunophenotypic, and multigene mutational analysis on routinely processed tissues, essential for personalized cancer therapy.

DNA qualification workflow for next generation sequencing of histopathological samples.

Histopathological samples are a treasure-trove of DNA for clinical research. However, the quality of DNA can vary depending on the source or extraction method applied. Thus a standardized and cost-effective workflow for the qualification of DNA preparations is essential to guarantee interlaboratory reproducible results. The qualification process consists of the quantification of double strand DNA (dsDNA) and the assessment of its suitability for downstream applications, such as high-throughput next-generation sequencing. We tested the two most frequently used instrumentations to define their role in this process: NanoDrop, based on UV spectroscopy, and Qubit 2.0, which uses fluorochromes specifically binding dsDNA. Quantitative PCR (qPCR) was used as the reference technique as it simultaneously assesses DNA concentration and suitability for PCR amplification. We used 17 genomic DNAs from 6 fresh-frozen (FF) tissues, 6 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues, 3 cell lines, and 2 commercial preparations. Intra- and inter-operator variability was negligible, and intra-methodology variability was minimal, while consistent inter-methodology divergences were observed. In fact, NanoDrop measured DNA concentrations higher than Qubit and its consistency with dsDNA quantification by qPCR was limited to high molecular weight DNA from FF samples and cell lines, where total DNA and dsDNA quantity virtually coincide. In partially degraded DNA from FFPE samples, only Qubit proved highly reproducible and consistent with qPCR measurements. Multiplex PCR amplifying 191 regions of 46 cancer-related genes was designated the downstream application, using 40 ng dsDNA from FFPE samples calculated by Qubit. All but one sample produced amplicon libraries suitable for next-generation sequencing. NanoDrop UV-spectrum verified contamination of the unsuccessful sample. In conclusion, as qPCR has high costs and is labor intensive, an alternative effective standard workflow for qualification of DNA preparations should include the sequential combination of NanoDrop and Qubit to assess the purity and quantity of dsDNA, respectively.