Molecular prognostication of uterine smooth muscle neoplasms: From CGH array to CINSARC signature and beyond.
Biomarkers, Tumor
/ genetics
Comparative Genomic Hybridization
/ methods
Female
Gene Expression
Genomics
Humans
Leiomyoma
/ diagnosis
Leiomyosarcoma
/ diagnosis
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
/ genetics
Neoplasms, Connective and Soft Tissue
/ metabolism
Prognosis
Sarcoma
/ diagnosis
Smooth Muscle Tumor
/ diagnosis
Transcriptome
Uterine Neoplasms
/ diagnosis
CGH array
CINSARC
STUMP
leiomyoma
leiomyosarcoma
Journal
Genes, chromosomes & cancer
ISSN: 1098-2264
Titre abrégé: Genes Chromosomes Cancer
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9007329
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2021
03 2021
Historique:
received:
12
10
2020
accepted:
21
10
2020
pubmed:
26
10
2020
medline:
11
2
2022
entrez:
25
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Uterine leiomyoma and leiomyosarcoma are located at the ends of the spectrum of smooth muscle lesions. Leiomyosarcoma belongs to the complex genomic sarcomas characterized by complex karyotypes. In contrast, leiomyoma, has a low level of chromosomal complexity. The analysis of genomic profiles of uterine smooth muscle tumors shows that genomic complexity, which is an expression of chromosomal instability, correlates with the metastatic potential and malignity of tumors: the more genetically complex a smooth muscle tumor is, the more malignant is its progression. In uterine tumors with uncertain malignant potential, the assessment of genomic index by CGH array, that is, counting the genomic complexity of a tumor, allows tumors with a risk of recurrence such as leiomyosarcomas to be distinguished from benign tumors like leiomyomas. The prognosis of leiomyosarcoma is poor and the most powerful prognostic factor so far is stage, as the histologic grade is not informative. In the quest to find efficient molecular prognostic factors, the transcriptomic signature CINSARC Nanocind, a mirror of chromosomic complexity and instability, outperforms stage, in both overall and recurrence-free survival. Genomic index and the CINSARC signature will contribute to improving diagnoses, therapeutic strategies, and randomization in future clinical trials. The biological understanding of the links between the CINSARC signature and metastatic mechanisms may lead to the development of new drugs. Furthermore, ctDNA is a promising new technique to detect residual disease and early recurrence.
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
129-137Informations de copyright
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Bell SW, Kempson RL, Hendrickson MR. Problematic uterine smooth muscle neoplasms. A clinicopathologic study of 213 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 1994;18(6):535-558.
IP P. Smooth muscle tumour of uncertain malignant potential of the uterine corpus. In: E O Female Genital Tumours. IARC; 2020
Amant F, Moerman P, Vergote I. Report of an unusual problematic uterine smooth muscle neoplasm, emphasizing the prognostic importance of coagulative tumor cell necrosis. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2005;15(6):1210-1212. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1438.2005.00183.x.
Berretta R, Rolla M, Merisio C, Giordano G, Nardelli GB. Uterine smooth muscle tumor of uncertain malignant potential: a three-case report. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008;18(5):1121-1126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1438.2007.01125.x.
Atkins KA, Arronte N, Darus CJ, Rice LW. The use of p16 in enhancing the histologic classification of uterine smooth muscle tumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008;32(1):98-102. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e3181574d1e.
Ip PP, Cheung AN, Clement PB. Uterine smooth muscle tumors of uncertain malignant potential (STUMP): a clinicopathologic analysis of 16 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33(7):992-1005. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e3181a02d1c.
Sung CO, Ahn G, Song SY, Choi YL, Bae DS. Atypical leiomyomas of the uterus with long-term follow-up after myomectomy with immunohistochemical analysis for p16INK4A, p53, Ki-67, estrogen receptors, and progesterone receptors. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2009;28(6):529-534. https://doi.org/10.1097/PGP.0b013e3181a2b8d3.
Veras E, Zivanovic O, Jacks L, Chiappetta D, Hensley M, Soslow R. "Low-grade leiomyosarcoma" and late-recurring smooth muscle tumors of the uterus: a heterogenous collection of frequently misdiagnosed tumors associated with an overall favorable prognosis relative to conventional uterine leiomyosarcomas. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011;35(11):1626-1637. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e31822b44d2.
Dall'Asta A, Gizzo S, Musaro A, et al. Uterine smooth muscle tumors of uncertain malignant potential (STUMP): pathology, follow-up and recurrence. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2014;7(11):8136-8142.
Kalogiannidis I, Stavrakis T, Dagklis T, et al. A clinicopathological study of atypical leiomyomas: benign variant leiomyoma or smooth-muscle tumor of uncertain malignant potential. Oncol Lett. 2016;11(2):1425-1428. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2015.4062.
Gupta M, Laury AL, Nucci MR, Quade BJ. Predictors of adverse outcome in uterine smooth muscle tumours of uncertain malignant potential (STUMP): a clinicopathological analysis of 22 cases with a proposal for the inclusion of additional histological parameters. Histopathology. 2018;73(2):284-298. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.13515.
Ha HI, Choi MC, Heo JH, et al. A clinicopathologic review and obstetric outcome of uterine smooth muscle tumor of uncertain malignant potential (STUMP) in a single institution. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018;228:1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.06.003.
Longacre TA, Lim D, Parra-Herran C. Uterine Leiomyosarcoma; 2020.
Abeler VM, Royne O, Thoresen S, Danielsen HE, Nesland JM, Kristensen GB. Uterine sarcomas in Norway. A histopathological and prognostic survey of a total population from 1970 to 2000 including 419 patients. Histopathology. 2009;54(3):355-364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2559.2009.03231.x.
Toro JR, Travis LB, Wu HJ, Zhu K, Fletcher CD, Devesa SS. Incidence patterns of soft tissue sarcomas, regardless of primary site, in the surveillance, epidemiology and end results program, 1978-2001: an analysis of 26,758 cases. Int J Cancer. 2006;119(12):2922-2930. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.22239.
Burghaus S, Halmen S, Gass P, et al. Outcome and prognosis in uterine sarcoma and malignant mixed Mullerian tumor. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016;294(2):343-351.
Ricci S, Stone RL, Fader AN. Uterine leiomyosarcoma: epidemiology, contemporary treatment strategies and the impact of uterine morcellation. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;145(1):208-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.02.019.
Amant F, Coosemans A, Debiec-Rychter M, Timmerman D, Vergote I. Clinical management of uterine sarcomas. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(12):1188-1198. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70226-8.
Amant F, Lorusso D, Mustea A, Duffaud F, Pautier P. Management strategies in advanced uterine Leiomyosarcoma: focus on Trabectedin. Sarcoma 2015;2015:704124. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/704124.
Omura GA, Blessing JA, Major F, et al. A randomized clinical trial of adjuvant adriamycin in uterine sarcomas: a Gynecologic oncology group study. J Clin Oncol. 1985;3(9):1240-1245. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1985.3.9.1240.
Greer BE, Koh WJ, Abu-Rustum N, et al. Uterine neoplasms. Clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2009;7(5):498-531. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2009.0035.
Friedman CF, Hensley ML. Options for adjuvant therapy for uterine Leiomyosarcoma. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2018;19(2):7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-018-0526-0.
Bogani G, Fuca G, Maltese G, et al. Efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in early stage uterine leiomyosarcoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;143(2):443-447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.07.110.
Pautier P, Genestie C, Rey A, et al. Analysis of clinicopathologic prognostic factors for 157 uterine sarcomas and evaluation of a grading score validated for soft tissue sarcoma. Cancer. 2000;88(6):1425-1431.
Iasonos A, Keung EZ, Zivanovic O, et al. External validation of a prognostic nomogram for overall survival in women with uterine leiomyosarcoma. Cancer. 2013;119(10):1816-1822. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.27971.
Zivanovic O, Jacks LM, Iasonos A, et al. A nomogram to predict postresection 5-year overall survival for patients with uterine leiomyosarcoma. Cancer. 2012;118(3):660-669. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.26333.
Chibon F, Darbo E, Perot G. Leiomyosarcomas: whole genome sequencing for a whole biology characterization. Curr Opin Oncol. 2019;31(4):317-321. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCO.0000000000000550.
Helman LJ, Meltzer P. Mechanisms of sarcoma development. Nat Rev Cancer. 2003;3(9):685-694. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc1168.
Taylor BS, Barretina J, Maki RG, Antonescu CR, Singer S, Ladanyi M. Advances in sarcoma genomics and new therapeutic targets. Nat Rev Cancer. 2011;11(8):541-557. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc3087.
Lee-Six H, Olafsson S, Ellis P, et al. The landscape of somatic mutation in normal colorectal epithelial cells. Nature. 2019;574(7779):532-537. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1672-7.
Geigl JB, Obenauf AC, Schwarzbraun T, Speicher MR. Defining 'chromosomal instability. Trends Genet. 2008;24(2):64-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2007.11.006.
Bakhoum SF, Ngo B, Laughney AM, et al. Chromosomal instability drives metastasis through a cytosolic DNA response. Nature. 2018;553(7689):467-472. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25432.
Jackson M, Marks L, May GHW, Wilson JB. The genetic basis of disease. Essays Biochem. 2018;62(5):643-723. https://doi.org/10.1042/EBC20170053.
Davoli T, Xu AW, Mengwasser KE, et al. Cumulative haploinsufficiency and triplosensitivity drive aneuploidy patterns and shape the cancer genome. Cell. 2013;155(4):948-962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2013.10.011.
Leibowitz ML, Zhang CZ, Pellman D. Chromothripsis: a new mechanism for rapid karyotype evolution. Annu Rev Genet. 2015;49:183-211. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-genet-120213-092228.
Stephens PJ, Greenman CD, Fu B, et al. Massive genomic rearrangement acquired in a single catastrophic event during cancer development. Cell. 2011;144(1):27-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2010.11.055.
Forment JV, Kaidi A, Jackson SP. Chromothripsis and cancer: causes and consequences of chromosome shattering. Nat Rev Cancer. 2012;12(10):663-670. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc3352.
Mehine M, Kaasinen E, Aaltonen LA. Chromothripsis in uterine leiomyomas. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(22):2160-2161. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1310230.
Mehine M, Kaasinen E, Makinen N, et al. Characterization of uterine leiomyomas by whole-genome sequencing. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(1):43-53. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1302736.
de Pagter MS, Kloosterman WP. The diverse effects of complex chromosome rearrangements and Chromothripsis in cancer development. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2015;200:165-193. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20291-4_8.
Hieronymus H, Schultz N, Gopalan A, et al. Copy number alteration burden predicts prostate cancer relapse. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014;111(30):11139-11144. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1411446111.
Cancer Genome Atlas Research N. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature. 2011;474(7353):609-615. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10166.
Cancer Genome Atlas Research N, Kandoth C, Schultz N, et al. Integrated genomic characterization of endometrial carcinoma. Nature. 2013;497(7447):67-73. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12113.
Chibon F, Lagarde P, Salas S, et al. Validated prediction of clinical outcome in sarcomas and multiple types of cancer on the basis of a gene expression signature related to genome complexity. Nat Med. 2010;16(7):781-787. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.2174.
Lagarde P, Perot G, Kauffmann A, et al. Mitotic checkpoints and chromosome instability are strong predictors of clinical outcome in gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18(3):826-838. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-1610.
Lartigue L, Neuville A, Lagarde P, et al. Genomic index predicts clinical outcome of intermediate-risk gastrointestinal stromal tumours, providing a new inclusion criterion for imatinib adjuvant therapy. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51(1):75-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2014.10.014.
Orbach D, Mosseri V, Pissaloux D, et al. Genomic complexity in pediatric synovial sarcomas (Synobio study): the European pediatric soft tissue sarcoma group (EpSSG) experience. Cancer Med. 2018;7(4):1384-1393. https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.1415.
Croce S, Ribeiro A, Brulard C, et al. Uterine smooth muscle tumor analysis by comparative genomic hybridization: a useful diagnostic tool in challenging lesions. Mod Pathol. 2015;28(7):1001-1010. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2015.3.
Croce S, Ducoulombier A, Ribeiro A, et al. Genome profiling is an efficient tool to avoid the STUMP classification of uterine smooth muscle lesions: a comprehensive array-genomic hybridization analysis of 77 tumors. Mod Pathol. 2018;31:816-828. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2017.185.
Chudasama P, Mughal SS, Sanders MA, et al. Integrative genomic and transcriptomic analysis of leiomyosarcoma. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):144. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-02602-0.
Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Electronic address edsc, cancer genome atlas research N. comprehensive and integrated genomic characterization of adult soft tissue sarcomas. Cell. 2017;171(4):950-965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.10.014.
Kolin DL, Dong F, Baltay M, et al. SMARCA4-deficient undifferentiated uterine sarcoma (malignant rhabdoid tumor of the uterus): a clinicopathologic entity distinct from undifferentiated carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 2018;31(9):1442-1456. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41379-018-0049-z.
Kolin DL, Quick CM, Dong F, et al. SMARCA4-deficient uterine sarcoma and undifferentiated endometrial carcinoma are distinct Clinicopathologic entities. Am J Surg Pathol. 2020;44(2):263-270. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000001375.
Lin DI, Allen JM, Hecht JL, et al. SMARCA4 inactivation defines a subset of undifferentiated uterine sarcomas with rhabdoid and small cell features and germline mutation association. Mod Pathol. 2019;32(11):1675-1687. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41379-019-0303-z.
Lagarde P, Przybyl J, Brulard C, et al. Chromosome instability accounts for reverse metastatic outcomes of pediatric and adult synovial sarcomas. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(5):608-615. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2012.46.0147.
Bakhoum SF, Cantley LC. The multifaceted role of chromosomal instability in cancer and its microenvironment. Cell. 2018;174(6):1347-1360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.08.027.
Chibon F, Lesluyes T, Valentin T, Le Guellec S. CINSARC signature as a prognostic marker for clinical outcome in sarcomas and beyond. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2019;58(2):124-129. https://doi.org/10.1002/gcc.22703.
Lesluyes T, Delespaul L, Coindre JM, Chibon F. The CINSARC signature as a prognostic marker for clinical outcome in multiple neoplasms. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):5480. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-05726-x.
Le Guellec S, Lesluyes T, Sarot E, et al. Validation of the complexity INdex in SARComas prognostic signature on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded, soft-tissue sarcomas. Ann Oncol. 2018;29(8):1828-1835. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdy194.
Croce S, Lesluyes T, Valle C, et al. The Nanocind signature is an independent prognosticator of recurrence and death in uterine Leiomyosarcomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2020;26(4):855-861. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-2891.
Filleron T, Le Guellec S, Chevreau C, et al. Value of peri-operative chemotherapy in patients with CINSARC high-risk localized grade 1 or 2 soft tissue sarcoma: study protocol of the target selection phase III CHIC-STS trial. BMC Cancer. 2020;20(1):716. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-07207-3.
George S, Serrano C, Hensley ML, Ray-Coquard I. Soft tissue and uterine Leiomyosarcoma. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(2):144-150. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2017.75.9845.
Hensley ML, Enserro D, Hatcher H, et al. Adjuvant gemcitabine plus docetaxel followed by doxorubicin versus observation for high-grade uterine Leiomyosarcoma: a phase III NRG oncology/Gynecologic oncology group study. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(33):3324-3330. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.18.00454.
Wan JCM, Massie C, Garcia-Corbacho J, et al. Liquid biopsies come of age: towards implementation of circulating tumour DNA. Nat Rev Cancer. 2017;17(4):223-238. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc.2017.7.
Oxnard GR, Paweletz CP, Kuang Y, et al. Noninvasive detection of response and resistance in EGFR-mutant lung cancer using quantitative next-generation genotyping of cell-free plasma DNA. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20(6):1698-1705. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-2482.
Abbosh C, Birkbak NJ, Wilson GA, et al. Phylogenetic ctDNA analysis depicts early-stage lung cancer evolution. Nature. 2017;545(7655):446-451. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature22364.
Przybyl J, Chabon JJ, Spans L, et al. Combination approach for detecting different types of alterations in circulating tumor DNA in Leiomyosarcoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2018;24(11):2688-2699. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-3704.
Hemming ML, Klega KS, Rhoades J, et al. Detection of circulating tumor DNA in patients with Leiomyosarcoma with progressive disease. JCO Precis Oncol. 2019;3:1-11. https://doi.org/10.1200/PO.18.00235.