RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients may receive hypomethylating agents (HMAs) such as decitabine (DAC) as part of their treatment. Not all patients respond to this therapy, and if they do the clinical response may occur only after 3 to 6 courses of treatment. Hence, early biomarkers predicting response would be very useful. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 22 AML patients who were treated with DAC. Histology of the bone marrow biopsy, pathogenic mutations and methylation status were related to the treatment response. RESULTS: In 8/22 (36%) patients, an erythroid dominant response (EDR) pattern, defined as a ratio of myeloid cells/erythroid cells < 1, was observed. In the remaining 14 cases a myeloid predominance was preserved during treatment. No difference in the hypomethylating effect of DAC treatment was observed in patients with and without EDR, as global 5-methylcytosine levels dropped similarly in both groups. Mutational analysis by NGS using a panel of commonly mutated genes in AML, showed that patients with an early EDR harbored on average less mutations, with U2AF1 mutations occurring more frequently, whereas RUNX1 mutations were underrepresented compared to non-EDR cases. Interestingly, the development of an EDR correlated with complete remission (7/8 cases with an EDR versus only 2/14 cases without an EDR). CONCLUSION: We conclude that early histological bone marrow examination for the development of an EDR may be helpful to predict response in AML patients during treatment with DAC.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyse transcriptomic differences between primary and recurrent high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC) to identify prognostic biomarkers. METHODS: We analysed 19 paired primary and recurrent HGSOC samples using targeted RNA sequencing. We selected the best candidates using in silico survival and pathway analysis and validated the biomarkers using immunohistochemistry on a cohort of 44 paired samples, an additional cohort of 504 primary HGSOCs and explored their function. RESULTS: We identified 233 differential expressed genes. Twenty-three showed a significant prognostic value for PFS and OS in silico. Seven markers (AHRR, COL5A2, FABP4, HMGCS2, ITGA5, SFRP2 and WNT9B) were chosen for validation at the protein level. AHRR expression was higher in primary tumours (p < 0.0001) and correlated with better patient survival (p < 0.05). Stromal SFRP2 expression was higher in recurrent samples (p = 0.009) and protein expression in primary tumours was associated with worse patient survival (p = 0.022). In multivariate analysis, tumour AHRR and SFRP2 remained independent prognostic markers. In vitro studies supported the anti-tumorigenic role of AHRR and the oncogenic function of SFRP2. CONCLUSIONS: Our results underline the relevance of AHRR and SFRP2 proteins in aryl-hydrocarbon receptor and Wnt-signalling, respectively, and might lead to establishing them as biomarkers in HGSOC.
