A prognostic hypoxia gene signature with low heterogeneity within the dominant tumour lesion in prostate cancer patients.


Journal

British journal of cancer
ISSN: 1532-1827
Titre abrégé: Br J Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0370635

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
07 2022
Historique:
received: 30 06 2021
accepted: 08 03 2022
revised: 10 01 2022
pubmed: 26 3 2022
medline: 22 7 2022
entrez: 25 3 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Gene signatures measured in a biopsy have been proposed as hypoxia biomarkers in prostate cancer. We assessed a previously developed signature, and aimed to determine its relationship to hypoxia and its heterogeneity within the dominant (index) lesion of prostate cancer. The 32-gene signature was assessed from gene expression data of 141 biopsies from the index lesion of 94 patients treated with prostatectomy. A gene score calculated from the expression levels was applied in the analyses. Hypoxic fraction from pimonidazole immunostained whole-mount and biopsy sections was used as reference standard for hypoxia. The gene score was correlated with pimonidazole-defined hypoxic fraction in whole-mount sections, and the two parameters showed almost equal association with clinical markers of tumour aggressiveness. Based on the gene score, incorrect classification according to hypoxic fraction in whole-mount sections was seen in one third of the patients. The incorrect classifications were apparently not due to intra-tumour heterogeneity, since the score had low heterogeneity compared to pimonidazole-defined hypoxic fraction in biopsies. The score showed prognostic significance in uni-and multivariate analysis in independent cohorts. Our signature from the index lesion reflects tumour hypoxia and predicts prognosis in prostate cancer, independent of intra-tumour heterogeneity in pimonidazole-defined hypoxia.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Gene signatures measured in a biopsy have been proposed as hypoxia biomarkers in prostate cancer. We assessed a previously developed signature, and aimed to determine its relationship to hypoxia and its heterogeneity within the dominant (index) lesion of prostate cancer.
METHODS
The 32-gene signature was assessed from gene expression data of 141 biopsies from the index lesion of 94 patients treated with prostatectomy. A gene score calculated from the expression levels was applied in the analyses. Hypoxic fraction from pimonidazole immunostained whole-mount and biopsy sections was used as reference standard for hypoxia.
RESULTS
The gene score was correlated with pimonidazole-defined hypoxic fraction in whole-mount sections, and the two parameters showed almost equal association with clinical markers of tumour aggressiveness. Based on the gene score, incorrect classification according to hypoxic fraction in whole-mount sections was seen in one third of the patients. The incorrect classifications were apparently not due to intra-tumour heterogeneity, since the score had low heterogeneity compared to pimonidazole-defined hypoxic fraction in biopsies. The score showed prognostic significance in uni-and multivariate analysis in independent cohorts.
CONCLUSIONS
Our signature from the index lesion reflects tumour hypoxia and predicts prognosis in prostate cancer, independent of intra-tumour heterogeneity in pimonidazole-defined hypoxia.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35332267
doi: 10.1038/s41416-022-01782-x
pii: 10.1038/s41416-022-01782-x
pmc: PMC9296675
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

321-328

Informations de copyright

© 2022. The Author(s).

Références

Fraser M, Berlin A, Bristow RG, van der Kwast T. Genomic, pathological, and clinical heterogeneity as drivers of personalized medicine in prostate cancer. Urol Oncol. 2015;33:85–94.
pubmed: 24768356 doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2013.10.020
Milosevic M, Warde P, Menard C, Chung P, Toi A, Ishkanian A, et al. Tumor hypoxia predicts biochemical failure following radiotherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18:2108–14.
pubmed: 22465832 doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-2711
Turaka A, Buyyounouski MK, Hanlon AL, Horwitz EM, Greenberg RE, Movsas B. Hypoxic prostate/muscle PO2 ratio predicts for outcome in patients with localized prostate cancer: long-term results. Int J Rad Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82:e433–439.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.05.037
Lalonde E, Ishkanian AS, Sykes J, Fraser M, Ross-Adams H, Erho N, et al. Tumour genomic and microenvironmental heterogeneity for integrated prediction of 5-year biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1521–32.
pubmed: 25456371 doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)71021-6
Hompland T, Hole KH, Ragnum HB, Aarnes EK, Vlatkovic L, Lie AK, et al. Combined MR imaging of oxygen consumption and supply reveals tumor hypoxia and aggressiveness in prostate cancer patients. Cancer Res. 2018;78:4774–85.
pubmed: 29945958 doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-17-3806
Harris BH, Barberis A, West CM, Buffa FM. Gene expression signatures as biomarkers of tumour hypoxia. Clin Oncol. 2015;27:547–60.
doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2015.07.004
Ragnum HB, Vlatkovic L, Lie AK, Axcrona K, Julin CH, Frikstad KM, et al. The tumour hypoxia marker pimonidazole reflects a transcriptional programme associated with aggressive prostate cancer. Br J Cancer. 2015;112:382–90.
pubmed: 25461803 doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.604
Yang L, Roberts D, Takhar M, Erho N, Bibby BAS, Thiruthaneeswaran N, et al. Development and validation of a 28-gene hypoxia-related prognostic signature for localized prostate cancer. EBioMed. 2018;31:182–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2018.04.019
Choudhury A, West CML. Translating prognostic prostate cancer gene signatures into the clinic. Transl Cancer Res. 2017;6:S405–S408.
doi: 10.21037/tcr.2017.03.13
Luca BA, Moulton V, Ellis C, Connell SP, Brewer DS, Cooper CS. Convergence of prognostic gene signatures suggests underlying mechanisms of human prostate cancer progression. Genes. 2020;11:1–15.
Pintilie M, Iakovlev V, Fyles A, Hedley D, Milosevic M, Hill RP. Heterogeneity and power in clinical biomarker studies. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1517–21.
pubmed: 19204200 doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.7393
Seoane J, De Mattos-Arruda L. The challenge of intratumour heterogeneity in precision medicine. J Int Med. 2014;276:41–51.
doi: 10.1111/joim.12240
Andreoiu M, Cheng L. Multifocal prostate cancer: biologic, prognostic, and therapeutic implications. Hum Pathol. 2010;41:781–93.
pubmed: 20466122 doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2010.02.011
Berglund E, Maaskola J, Schultz N, Friedrich S, Marklund M, Bergenstråhle J, et al. Spatial maps of prostate cancer transcriptomes reveal an unexplored landscape of heterogeneity. Nat Commun. 2018;9:2419.
pubmed: 29925878 pmcid: 6010471 doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-04724-5
Boutros PC, Fraser M, Harding NJ, de Borja R, Trudel D, Lalonde E, et al. Spatial genomic heterogeneity within localized, multifocal prostate cancer. Nat Genet. 2015;47:736–45.
pubmed: 26005866 doi: 10.1038/ng.3315
Carm KT, Hoff AM, Bakken AC, Axcrona U, Axcrona K, Lothe RA, et al. Interfocal heterogeneity challenges the clinical usefulness of molecular classification of primary prostate cancer. Sci Rep. 2019;9:13579.
pubmed: 31537872 pmcid: 6753093 doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-49964-7
Cooper CS, Eeles R, Wedge DC, Van Loo P, Gundem G, Alexandrov LB, et al. Analysis of the genetic phylogeny of multifocal prostate cancer identifies multiple independent clonal expansions in neoplastic and morphologically normal prostate tissue. Nat Genet. 2015;47:367–72.
pubmed: 25730763 pmcid: 4380509 doi: 10.1038/ng.3221
Linch M, Goh G, Hiley C, Shanmugabavan Y, McGranahan N, Rowan A, et al. Intratumoural evolutionary landscape of high-risk prostate cancer: the PROGENY study of genomic and immune parameters. Ann Oncol. 2017;28:2472–80.
pubmed: 28961847 pmcid: 5815564 doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx355
Lindberg J, Klevebring D, Liu W, Neiman M, Xu J, Wiklund P, et al. Exome sequencing of prostate cancer supports the hypothesis of independent tumour origins. Eur Urol. 2013;63:347–53.
pubmed: 22502944 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.050
Løvf M, Zhao S, Axcrona U, Johannessen B, Bakken AC, Carm KT, et al. Multifocal primary prostate cancer exhibits high degree of genomic heterogeneity. Eur Urol. 2019;75:498–505.
pubmed: 30181068 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.08.009
Wei L, Wang J, Lampert E, Schlanger S, DePriest AD, Hu Q, et al. Intratumoral and intertumoral genomic heterogeneity of multifocal localized prostate cancer impacts molecular classifications and genomic prognosticators. Eur Urol. 2017;71:183–92.
pubmed: 27451135 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.07.008
Yun JW, Lee S, Ryu D, Park S, Park WY, Joung JG, et al. Biomarkers associated with tumor heterogeneity in prostate cancer. Transl Oncol. 2018;12:43–48.
pubmed: 30265975 pmcid: 6161410 doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2018.09.003
Padhani AR, Barentsz J, Villeirs G, Rosenkrantz AB, Margolis DJ, Turkbey B, et al. The PI-RADS multiparametric MRI and MRI-directed biopsy pathway. Radiology. 2019;292:464–74.
pubmed: 31184561 doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182946
Ukimura O, Gill IS. Targeted prostate biopsies for a histogram of the index lesion. Curr Opin Urol. 2013;23:118–22.
pubmed: 23321632 doi: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e32835d4dc8
Carnell DM, Smith RE, Daley FM, Saunders MI, Bentzen SM, Hoskin PJ. An immunohistochemical assessment of hypoxia in prostate carcinoma using pimonidazole: implications for radioresistance. Int J Rad Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;65:91–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.11.044
Raleigh JA, Chou SC, Arteel GE, Horsman MR. Comparisons among pimonidazole binding, oxygen electrode measurements, and radiation response in C3H mouse tumors. Radiat Res. 1999;151:580–9.
pubmed: 10319731 doi: 10.2307/3580034
Hoskin PJ, Carnell DM, Taylor NJ, Smith RE, Stirling JJ, Daley FM, et al. Hypoxia in prostate cancer: correlation of BOLD-MRI with pimonidazole immunohistochemistry-initial observations. Int J Rad Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;68:1065–71.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.01.018
D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Blank K, Broderick GA, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998;280:969–74.
pubmed: 9749478 doi: 10.1001/jama.280.11.969
Axcrona K, Vlatkovic L, Hovland J, Brennhovd B, Kongsgaard U, Giercksky KE. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy in a 68-year-old patient with previous heart transplantation and pelvic irradiation. J Robot Surg. 2012;6:81–3.
pubmed: 22408687 doi: 10.1007/s11701-011-0270-y
Srigley JR. Key issues in handling and reporting radical prostatectomy specimens. Arch Pathol Labor Med. 2006;130:303–17.
doi: 10.5858/2006-130-303-KIIHAR
Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C (eds). TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009.
Epstein JI. A new contemporary prostate cancer grading system. Ann Pathol. 2015;35:474–6.
pubmed: 26586013 doi: 10.1016/j.annpat.2015.09.002
van der Kwast TH, Amin MB, Billis A, Epstein JI, Griffiths D, Humphrey PA, et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 2: T2 substaging and prostate cancer volume. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:16–25.
pubmed: 20818340 doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2010.156
Fjeldbo CS, Julin CH, Lando M, Forsberg MF, Aarnes EK, Alsner J, et al. Integrative analysis of DCE-MRI and gene expression profiles in construction of a gene classifier for assessment of hypoxia-related risk of chemoradiotherapy failure in cervical cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:4067–76.
pubmed: 27012812 doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-2322
Carlson M. org.Hs.eg.db: Genome wide annotation for Human [computer program]. R package version 3.7.02018. https://bioconductor.org/packages/release/data/annotation/html/org.Hs.eg.db.html
The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. The molecular taxonomy of primary prostate cancer. Cell. 2015;163:1011–25.
pmcid: 4695400 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2015.10.025
Ross-Adams H, Lamb AD, Dunning MJ, Halim S, Lindberg J, Massie CM, et al. Integration of copy number and transcriptomics provides risk stratification in prostate cancer: a discovery and validation cohort study. EBioMed. 2015;2:1133–44.
doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2015.07.017
Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate—a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc B. 1995;57:289–300.
Freedland SJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA, Eisenberger M, Dorey FJ, Walsh PC, et al. Risk of prostate cancer–specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA. 2005;294:433–9.
pubmed: 16046649 doi: 10.1001/jama.294.4.433
Roehl KA, Han M, Ramos CG, Antenor JA, Catalona WJ. Cancer progression and survival rates following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy in 3478 consecutive patients: long-term results. J Urol. 2004;172:910–4.
pubmed: 15310996 doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000134888.22332.bb
Mundbjerg K, Chopra S, Alemozaffar M, Duymich C, Lakshminarasimhan R, Nichols PW, et al. Identifying aggressive prostate cancer foci using a DNA methylation classifier. Genome Biol. 2017;18:1–15.
Parker C, Milosevic M, Toi A, Sweet J, Panzarella T, Bristow R, et al. Polarographic electrode study of tumor oxygenation in clinically localized prostate cancer. Int J Rad Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;58:750–7.
doi: 10.1016/S0360-3016(03)01621-3
Fjeldbo CS, Hompland T, Hillestad T, Aarnes EK, Günther CC, Kristensen GB, et al. Combining imaging- and gene-based hypoxia biomarkers in cervical cancer improves prediction of chemoradiotherapy failure independent of intratumour heterogeneity. EBioMed. 2020;57:102841.
doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2020.102841
Lukovic J, Han K, Pintilie M, Chaudary N, Hill RP, Fyles A, et al. Intratumoral heterogeneity and hypoxia gene expression signatures: Is a single biopsy adequate? Clin Transl Rad Oncol. 2019;19:110–5.

Auteurs

Unn Beate Salberg (UB)

Department of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Radiumhospitalet, Oslo, Norway.
Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Vilde Eide Skingen (VE)

Department of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Radiumhospitalet, Oslo, Norway.
Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Christina Sæten Fjeldbo (CS)

Department of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Radiumhospitalet, Oslo, Norway.

Tord Hompland (T)

Department of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Radiumhospitalet, Oslo, Norway.

Harald Bull Ragnum (HB)

Department of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Radiumhospitalet, Oslo, Norway.
Department of Haematology and Oncology, Telemark Hospital Trust, Skien, Norway.

Ljiljana Vlatkovic (L)

Department of Pathology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Knut Håkon Hole (KH)

Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Division of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Therese Seierstad (T)

Division of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Heidi Lyng (H)

Department of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Radiumhospitalet, Oslo, Norway. heidi.lyng@rr-research.no.
Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. heidi.lyng@rr-research.no.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH