Tenascin-C affects invasiveness of EGFR-mutated lung adenocarcinoma through a putative paracrine loop.

Tenascin C (TNC) is an extracellular matrix (ECM) protein and a potential biomarker affecting progression of different tumor types, such as pancreatic and lung cancer. Alternative splicing variants of TNC are known to have an impact on interaction partners like other ECM proteins or cell surface receptors, including epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), leading to numerous and sometimes opposite roles of TNC in tumor cell dissemination and proliferation. Only little is known about the impact of TNC on biologic characteristics of lung cancer, such as invasion and metastatic potential. In the present study, we could link an increased expression of TNC in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) tissues with an unfavorable clinical outcome of patients. Furthermore, we investigated the functional role of TNC in LUAD. Immunohistochemical staining of TNC revealed a significant increase of TNC levels in primary tumours and metastases compared to normal lung tissue. Additionally, a significant correlation between TNC mRNA expression and EGFR copy number and protein expression levels has been determined. Moreover, inhibition of TNC in lung fibroblasts led to reduced invasiveness of LUAD cells harboring EGFR-activating mutations and to a shorter lamellipodia perimeter and a reduced lamellipodia area on the surface of LUAD cells. This study provides the evidence that TNC expression might be a biological relevant factor in LUAD progression in an EGFR-dependent manner and that it regulates tumor cell invasion by rearrangement of the actin cytoskeleton, especially affecting lamellipodia formation.

Comparison of in situ and extraction-based methods for the detection of MET amplifications in solid tumors.

In EGFR-treatment naive NSCLC patients, high-level MET amplification is detected in approximately 2-3% and is considered as adverse prognostic factor. Currently, clinical trials with two different inhibitors, capmatinib and tepotinib, are under way both defining different inclusion criteria regarding MET amplification from proven amplification only to defining an exact MET copy number. Here, 45 patient samples, including 10 samples without MET amplification, 5 samples showing a low-level MET amplification, 10 samples with an intermediate-level MET amplification, 10 samples having a high-level MET amplification by a MET/CEN7 ratio ≥2.0 and 10 samples showing a high-level MET amplification with GCN ≥6, were evaluated by MET FISH, MET IHC, a ddPCR copy number assay, a NanoString nCounter copy number assay and an amplicon-based parallel sequencing. The MET IHC had the best concordance with MET FISH followed by the NanoString copy number assay, the ddPCR copy number assay and the custom amplicon-based parallel sequencing assays. The concordance was higher in the high-level amplified cohorts than in the low- and intermediate-level amplified cohorts. In summary, currently extraction-based methods cannot replace the MET FISH for the detection of low-level, intermediate-level and high-level MET amplifications, as the number of false negative results is very high. Only for the detection of high-level amplified samples with a gene copy number ≥6 extraction-based methods are a reliable alternative.