Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Should you repeat mismatch repair testing in cases of tumour recurrence? An evaluation of repeat mismatch repair testing by the use of immunohistochemistry in recurrent tumours of the gastrointestinal and gynaecological tracts.
Aird, John J; Steel, Michael J; Chow, Christine; Ho, Julie; Wolber, Robert; Gilks, C Blake; Hoang, Lynn N; Schaeffer, David F.
Afiliação
  • Aird JJ; Division of Anatomic Pathology, Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  • Steel MJ; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  • Chow C; Division of Anatomic Pathology, Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  • Ho J; Genetic Pathology Evaluation Centre, Jack Bell Research Centre, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  • Wolber R; Department of Molecular Oncology, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  • Gilks CB; Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Lions Gate Hospital, North Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  • Hoang LN; Division of Anatomic Pathology, Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  • Schaeffer DF; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Histopathology ; 76(4): 521-530, 2020 Mar.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31677289
ABSTRACT

AIMS:

The role of mismatch repair (MMR) testing has evolved from identifying Lynch syndrome patients to predicting response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. This has led to requests from clinicians to retest recurrences of MMR-proficient primary tumours in the hope that the recurrence may show a different MMR status and qualify the patient for treatment. We aimed to determine whether repeat testing is warranted. METHODS AND

RESULTS:

We evaluated recurrent tumours (local recurrences or metastases) from 137 patients with MMR-proficient primary tumours of the gastrointestinal and gynaecological tracts. The local recurrences and metastases all occurred at least 30 days after resection of the primary tumour. We used a combination of a tissue microarray and whole slide staining to perform immunohistochemistry (IHC) for PMS2, MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6, and compared the results with the MMR status of the primary tumour. Three of 137 (2%) initially showed a discordant staining pattern. However, further investigation showed that these discordances were attributable to some of the known pitfalls associated with MMR IHC interpretation - post-radiotherapy loss of MSH6 expression and subclonal loss of MLH1 staining. We did not identify any cases with a genuine discordance in MMR status.

CONCLUSION:

We conclude that repeat MMR IHC testing of recurrences is not warranted, as MMR status does not change relative to that of the primary tumour.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Biomarcadores Tumorais / Reparo de Erro de Pareamento de DNA / Neoplasias Gastrointestinais / Neoplasias dos Genitais Femininos / Recidiva Local de Neoplasia Limite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Biomarcadores Tumorais / Reparo de Erro de Pareamento de DNA / Neoplasias Gastrointestinais / Neoplasias dos Genitais Femininos / Recidiva Local de Neoplasia Limite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article