Incidence and Outcome of Atypical Manifestations of Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease: Results From a Retrospective Single-Center Analysis.

Chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) is the leading cause of late nonrelapse mortality (NRM) after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) and defined by 8 diagnostic target organs. Recently, provisional criteria for atypical manifestations of cGVHD that include manifestations in nonclassic organs as well as atypical manifestations in National Institutes of Health (NIH)-defined organs, were proposed by a NIH task force. Little is known about the incidence, risk factors, and impact on survival of atypical cGVHD, however. The aim of the present study was to analyze these parameters in a sequential patient population. We retrospectively screened 623 patients who underwent alloHSCT at the University Medical Center Regensburg between January 2008 and December 2020 for atypical cGVHD manifestations, applying the provisional NIH taskforce criteria. A total of 102 patients (16.4%) met the criteria, representing 25% of all cGVHD cases, and 14 patients (2.2%) had only atypical cGVHD. The most frequent manifestations were immune-mediated cytopenias (24.5%), renal cGVHD (13.7%) and (poly)serositis (13.7%). Multivariate analysis identified prior acute GVHD (odds ratio [OR], 2.28 and 2.93) and infusion of donor lymphocytes (OR, 1.77 for both) as risk factors for classic cGVHD and atypical cGVHD, whereas total body irradiation was an independent risk factor for atypical cGVHD manifestations only (OR, 1.76). Compared to patients without cGVHD, those with atypical and NIH-defined cGVHD showed similarly better overall survival (P = .034 and < .001) and low relapse-related mortality (P < .001 for both). NRM was significantly increased by atypical GVHD, but not by NIH-defined cGVHD (P = .019 and .10), which was driven only by a few atypical organ manifestations (eg, renal, restrictive lung disease, peripheral neuropathy), whereas others did not contribute to NRM (eg, thyroid gland, musculoskeletal, pancreas). In summary, atypical cGVHD is more common than previously estimated and has both similarities with and differences from NIH-defined cGVHD. In particular, the increased NRM and a subset of patients with only atypical cGVHD point to the urgent need to capture these manifestations in cGVHD cohorts, including analysis of treatment outcomes.

Genomic instability influences the transcriptome and proteome in endometrial cancer subtypes.

BACKGROUND: In addition to clinical characteristics, DNA aneuploidy has been identified as a prognostic factor in epithelial malignancies in general and in endometrial cancers in particular. We mapped ploidy-associated chromosomal aberrations and identified corresponding gene and protein expression changes in endometrial cancers of different prognostic subgroups. METHODS: DNA image cytometry classified 25 endometrioid cancers to be either diploid (n = 16) or aneuploid (n = 9), and all uterine papillary serous cancers (UPSC) to be aneuploid (n = 8). All samples were subjected to comparative genomic hybridization and gene expression profiling. Identified genes were subjected to Ingenuity pathway analysis (IPA) and were correlated to protein expression changes. RESULTS: Comparative genomic hybridization revealed ploidy-associated specific, recurrent genomic imbalances. Gene expression analysis identified 54 genes between diploid and aneuploid endometrioid carcinomas, 39 genes between aneuploid endometrioid cancer and UPSC, and 76 genes between diploid endometrioid and aneuploid UPSC to be differentially expressed. Protein profiling identified AKR7A2 and ANXA2 to show translational alterations consistent with the transcriptional changes. The majority of differentially expressed genes and proteins belonged to identical molecular functions, foremost Cancer, Cell Death, and Cellular Assembly and Organization. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the grade of genomic instability rather than the histopathological subtype correlates with specific gene and protein expression changes. The identified genes and proteins might be useful as molecular targets for improved diagnostic and therapeutic intervention and merit prospective validation.

The gene expression signature of genomic instability in breast cancer is an independent predictor of clinical outcome.

Recently, expression profiling of breast carcinomas has revealed gene signatures that predict clinical outcome, and discerned prognostically relevant breast cancer subtypes. Measurement of the degree of genomic instability provides a very similar stratification of prognostic groups. We therefore hypothesized that these features are linked. We used gene expression profiling of 48 breast cancer specimens that profoundly differed in their degree of genomic instability and identified a set of 12 genes that defines the 2 groups. The biological and prognostic significance of this gene set was established through survival prediction in published datasets from patients with breast cancer. Of note, the gene expression signatures that define specific prognostic subtypes in other breast cancer datasets, such as luminal A and B, basal, normal-like, and ERBB2+, and prognostic signatures including MammaPrint and Oncotype DX, predicted genomic instability in our samples. This remarkable congruence suggests a biological interdependence of poor-prognosis gene signatures, breast cancer subtypes, genomic instability, and clinical outcome.