Tumour budding as a prognostic biomarker in biopsies and resections of neoadjuvant-treated rectal adenocarcinoma.
neoadjuvant therapies
personalised medicine
rectal cancer
surgical pathology
tumour budding
Journal
Histopathology
ISSN: 1365-2559
Titre abrégé: Histopathology
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7704136
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Apr 2024
17 Apr 2024
Historique:
revised:
02
03
2024
received:
23
08
2023
accepted:
30
03
2024
medline:
17
4
2024
pubmed:
17
4
2024
entrez:
17
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Tumour budding (TB) is a marker of tumour aggressiveness which, when measured in rectal cancer resection specimens, predicts worse outcomes and response to neoadjuvant therapy. We investigated the utility of TB assessment in the setting of neoadjuvant treatment. A single-centre, retrospective cohort study was conducted. TB was assessed using the hot-spot International Tumour Budding Consortium (ITBCC) method and classified by the revised ITBCC criteria. Haematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and AE1/AE3 cytokeratin (CK) stains for ITB (intratumoural budding) in biopsies with PTB (peritumoural budding) and ITB (intratumoural budding) in resection specimens were compared. Logistic regression assessed budding as predictors of lymph node metastasis (LNM). Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses investigated their utility as a predictor of disease-free (DFS) and overall (OS) survival. A total of 146 patients were included; 91 were male (62.3%). Thirty-seven cases (25.3%) had ITB on H&E and 79 (54.1%) had ITB on CK assessment of biopsy tissue. In univariable analysis, H&E ITB [odds (OR) = 2.709, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.261-5.822, P = 0.011] and CK ITB (OR = 2.165, 95% CI = 1.076-4.357, P = 0.030) predicted LNM. Biopsy-assessed H&E ITB (OR = 2.749, 95% CI = 1.258-6.528, P = 0.022) was an independent predictor of LNM. In Kaplan-Meier analysis, ITB identified on biopsy was associated with worse OS (H&E, P = 0.003, CK: P = 0.009) and DFS (H&E, P = 0.012; CK, P = 0.045). In resection specimens, CK PTB was associated with worse OS (P = 0.047), and both CK PTB and ITB with worse DFS (PTB, P = 0.014; ITB: P = 0.019). In multivariable analysis H&E ITB predicted OS (HR = 2.930, 95% CI = 1.261-6.809) and DFS (HR = 2.072, 95% CI = 1.031-4.164). CK PTB grading on resection also independently predicted OS (HR = 3.417, 95% CI = 1.45-8.053, P = 0.005). Assessment of TB using H&E and CK may be feasible in rectal cancer biopsy and post-neoadjuvant therapy-treated resection specimens and is associated with LNM and worse survival outcomes. Future management strategies for rectal cancer might be tailored to incorporate these findings.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Tumour budding (TB) is a marker of tumour aggressiveness which, when measured in rectal cancer resection specimens, predicts worse outcomes and response to neoadjuvant therapy. We investigated the utility of TB assessment in the setting of neoadjuvant treatment.
METHODS AND RESULTS
RESULTS
A single-centre, retrospective cohort study was conducted. TB was assessed using the hot-spot International Tumour Budding Consortium (ITBCC) method and classified by the revised ITBCC criteria. Haematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and AE1/AE3 cytokeratin (CK) stains for ITB (intratumoural budding) in biopsies with PTB (peritumoural budding) and ITB (intratumoural budding) in resection specimens were compared. Logistic regression assessed budding as predictors of lymph node metastasis (LNM). Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses investigated their utility as a predictor of disease-free (DFS) and overall (OS) survival. A total of 146 patients were included; 91 were male (62.3%). Thirty-seven cases (25.3%) had ITB on H&E and 79 (54.1%) had ITB on CK assessment of biopsy tissue. In univariable analysis, H&E ITB [odds (OR) = 2.709, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.261-5.822, P = 0.011] and CK ITB (OR = 2.165, 95% CI = 1.076-4.357, P = 0.030) predicted LNM. Biopsy-assessed H&E ITB (OR = 2.749, 95% CI = 1.258-6.528, P = 0.022) was an independent predictor of LNM. In Kaplan-Meier analysis, ITB identified on biopsy was associated with worse OS (H&E, P = 0.003, CK: P = 0.009) and DFS (H&E, P = 0.012; CK, P = 0.045). In resection specimens, CK PTB was associated with worse OS (P = 0.047), and both CK PTB and ITB with worse DFS (PTB, P = 0.014; ITB: P = 0.019). In multivariable analysis H&E ITB predicted OS (HR = 2.930, 95% CI = 1.261-6.809) and DFS (HR = 2.072, 95% CI = 1.031-4.164). CK PTB grading on resection also independently predicted OS (HR = 3.417, 95% CI = 1.45-8.053, P = 0.005).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Assessment of TB using H&E and CK may be feasible in rectal cancer biopsy and post-neoadjuvant therapy-treated resection specimens and is associated with LNM and worse survival outcomes. Future management strategies for rectal cancer might be tailored to incorporate these findings.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : UCD Newman Fellowship Foundation
Organisme : Ireland Health Foundation
Organisme : Dutch Cancer Society Consortium Grant
Investigateurs
Ann Hanly
(A)
Rory Kennelly
(R)
David Fennelly
(D)
J Armstrong
(J)
G McVey
(G)
Ray Mc Dermott
(RM)
G Doherty
(G)
H Dawson
(H)
I Nagtegaal
(I)
I Zlobec
(I)
Informations de copyright
© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2021; 71; 7–33.
Segev L, Kalady MF, Church JM. Left‐sided dominance of early‐onset colorectal cancers: a rationale for screening flexible sigmoidoscopy in the young. Dis. Colon Rectum 2018; 61; 897–902.
Glehen O, Chapet O, Adham M, Nemoz JC, Gerard JP. Long‐term results of the Lyons R90‐01 randomized trial of preoperative radiotherapy with delayed surgery and its effect on sphincter‐saving surgery in rectal cancer. Br. J. Surg. 2003; 90; 996–998.
Kapiteijn E, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID et al. Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2001; 345; 638–646.
Peeters KC, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID et al. The TME trial after a median follow‐up of 6 years: increased local control but no survival benefit in irradiated patients with resectable rectal carcinoma. Ann. Surg. 2007; 246; 693–701.
Sauer R, Liersch T, Merkel S et al. Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: results of the German CAO/ARO/AIO‐94 randomized phase III trial after a median follow‐up of 11 years. J. Clin. Oncol. 2012; 30; 1926–1933.
Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W et al. Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2004; 351; 1731–1740.
Martin ST, Heneghan HM, Winter DC. Systematic review and meta‐analysis of outcomes following pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. Br. J. Surg. 2012; 99; 918–928.
Ryan R, Gibbons D, Hyland JM et al. Pathological response following long‐course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Histopathology 2005; 47; 141–146.
López‐Campos F, Martín‐Martín M, Fornell‐Pérez R et al. Watch and wait approach in rectal cancer: current controversies and future directions. World J. Gastroenterol. 2020; 26; 4218–4239.
Creavin B, Ryan E, Martin ST et al. Organ preservation with local excision or active surveillance following chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. Br. J. Cancer 2017; 116; 169–174.
Ryan EJ, O'Sullivan DP, Kelly ME et al. Meta‐analysis of the effect of extending the interval after long‐course chemoradiotherapy before surgery in locally advanced rectal cancer. Br. J. Surg. 2019; 106; 1298–1310.
Clifford R, Govindarajah N, Parsons JL, Gollins S, West NP, Vimalachandran D. Systematic review of treatment intensification using novel agents for chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer. Br. J. Surg. 2018; 105; 1553–1572.
Ryan ÉJ, Creavin B, Sheahan K. Delivery of personalized care for locally advanced rectal cancer: incorporating pathological, molecular genetic, and immunological biomarkers into the multimodal paradigm. Front. Oncol. 2020; 10; 1369.
Donnelly M, Ryan OK, Ryan EJ et al. Total neoadjuvant therapy versus standard neoadjuvant treatment strategies for the management of locally advanced rectal cancer: network meta‐analysis of randomized clinical trials. Br. J. Surg. 2023; 110; 1316–1330.
Scheele J, Schmidt SA, Tenzer S, Henne‐Bruns D, Kornmann M. Overstaging: a challenge in rectal cancer treatment. Visc. Med. 2018; 34; 301–306.
Yoo BC, Yeo S‐G. Clinical utility of pretreatment prediction of chemoradiotherapy response in rectal cancer: a review. EPMA J. 2017; 8; 61–67.
Lim SH, Chua W, Henderson C et al. Predictive and prognostic biomarkers for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 2015; 96; 67–80.
Carver EA, Jiang R, Lan Y, Oram KF, Gridley T. The mouse snail gene encodes a key regulator of the epithelial‐mesenchymal transition. Mol. Cell. Biol. 2001; 21; 8184–8188.
Jolly MK, Boareto M, Huang B et al. Implications of the hybrid epithelial/mesenchymal phenotype in metastasis. Front. Oncol. 2015; 5; 155.
Barrallo‐Gimeno A, Nieto MA. The Snail genes as inducers of cell movement and survival: implications in development and cancer. 2005.
Yang J, Mani SA, Donaher JL et al. Twist, a master regulator of morphogenesis, plays an essential role in tumor metastasis. Cell 2004; 117; 927–939.
Korpal M, Lee ES, Hu G, Kang Y. The miR‐200 family inhibits epithelial‐mesenchymal transition and cancer cell migration by direct targeting of E‐cadherin transcriptional repressors ZEB1 and ZEB2. J. Biol. Chem. 2008; 283; 14910–14914.
Kalluri R, Weinberg RA. The basics of epithelial‐mesenchymal transition. J. Clin. Invest. 2009; 119; 1420–1428.
Kahlert C, Klupp F, Brand K et al. Invasion front‐specific expression and prognostic significance of microRNA in colorectal liver metastases. Cancer Sci. 2011; 102; 1799–1807.
Long J, Zhang Y, Yu X et al. Overcoming drug resistance in pancreatic cancer. Expert Opin. Ther. Targets 2011; 15; 817–828.
Nicolini A, Ferrari P, Fini M et al. Stem cells: their role in breast cancer development and resistance to treatment. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 2011; 12; 196–205.
Hur K, Toiyama Y, Takahashi M et al. MicroRNA‐200c modulates epithelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition (EMT) in human colorectal cancer metastasis. Gut 2013; 62; 1315–1326.
Zlobec I, Berger MD, Lugli A. Tumour budding and its clinical implications in gastrointestinal cancers. Br. J. Cancer 2020; 123; 700–708.
Wang LM, Kevans D, Mulcahy H et al. Tumor budding is a strong and reproducible prognostic marker in T3N0 colorectal cancer. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2009; 33; 134–141.
Rogers A, Winter D, Heeney A et al. Systematic review and meta‐analysis of the impact of tumour budding in colorectal cancer. Br. J. Cancer 2016; 115; 831–840.
Rogers AC, Gibbons D, Hanly AM et al. Prognostic significance of tumor budding in rectal cancer biopsies before neoadjuvant therapy. Mod. Pathol. 2014; 27; 156–162.
Benson AB, Venook AP, Al‐Hawary MM et al. Rectal cancer, version 2.2018, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J. Natl. Compr. Cancer Netw. 2018; 16; 874–901.
Ueno H, Kajiwara Y, Shimazaki H et al. New criteria for histologic grading of colorectal cancer. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2012; 36; 193–201.
Lugli A, Kirsch R, Ajioka Y et al. Recommendations for reporting tumor budding in colorectal cancer based on the International Tumor Budding Consensus Conference (ITBCC) 2016. Mod. Pathol. 2017; 30; 1299–1311.
Zlobec I, Bächli M, Galuppini F et al. Refining the ITBCC tumor budding scoring system with a ‘zero‐budding’ category in colorectal cancer. Virchows Arch. 2021; 479(6); 1085–1090.
Mandard AM, Dalibard F, Mandard JC et al. Pathologic assessment of tumor regression after preoperative chemoradiotherapy of esophageal carcinoma. Clinicopathologic correlations. Cancer 1994; 73; 2680–2686.
Zlobec I, Borner M, Lugli A, Inderbitzin D. Role of intra‐ and peritumoral budding in the interdisciplinary management of rectal cancer patients. Int. J. Surg. Oncol. 2012; 2012; 795945.
Zlobec I, Hädrich M, Dawson H et al. Intratumoural budding (ITB) in preoperative biopsies predicts the presence of lymph node and distant metastases in colon and rectal cancer patients. Br. J. Cancer 2014; 110; 1008–1013.
Morodomi T, Isomoto H, Shirouzu K, Kakegawa K, Irie K, Morimatsu M. An index for estimating the probability of lymph node metastasis in rectal cancers. Lymph node metastasis and the histopathology of actively invasive regions of cancer. Cancer 1989; 63; 539–543.
Giger OT, Comtesse SC, Lugli A, Zlobec I, Kurrer MO. Intra‐tumoral budding in preoperative biopsy specimens predicts lymph node and distant metastasis in patients with colorectal cancer. Mod. Pathol. 2012; 25; 1048–1053.
Deb B, Jacob S. Predictive power of tumour budding for lymph node metastasis in colorectal carcinomas: a retrospective study. Indian J. Med. Res. 2019; 150; 635–639.
Cappellesso R, Luchini C, Veronese N et al. Tumor budding as a risk factor for nodal metastasis in pT1 colorectal cancers: a meta‐analysis. Hum. Pathol. 2017; 65; 62–70.
Trotsyuk I, Sparschuh H, Müller AJ et al. Tumor budding outperforms ypT and ypN classification in predicting outcome of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. BMC Cancer 2019; 19; 1033.
Ono Y, Cates JM, Gonzalez RS. Can histologic features predict neoadjuvant therapy response in rectal adenocarcinoma? Pathol. Res. Pract. 2021; 226; 153608.
Hasan S, Renz P, Wegner RE et al. Microsatellite instability (MSI) as an independent predictor of pathologic complete response (PCR) in locally advanced rectal cancer: a National Cancer Database (NCDB) analysis. Ann. Surg. 2020; 271; 716–723.
El Sissy C, Kirilovsky A, Zeitoun G et al. Therapeutic implications of the Immunoscore in patients with colorectal cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13; 1281.
Kai K, Aishima S, Aoki S et al. Cytokeratin immunohistochemistry improves interobserver variability between unskilled pathologists in the evaluation of tumor budding in T1 colorectal cancer. Pathol. Int. 2016; 66; 75–82.
Almangush A, Youssef O, Pirinen M, Sundström J, Leivo I, Mäkitie AA. Does evaluation of tumour budding in diagnostic biopsies have a clinical relevance? A systematic review. Histopathology 2019; 74; 536–544.
Dawson H, Lugli A. Molecular and pathogenetic aspects of tumor budding in colorectal cancer. Front. Med. 2015; 2; 11.
Okamura T, Shimada Y, Nogami H et al. Tumor budding detection by immunohistochemical staining is not superior to hematoxylin and eosin staining for predicting lymph node metastasis in pT1 colorectal cancer. Dis. Colon Rectum 2016; 59; 396–402.
Zlobec I, Lugli A. Epithelial mesenchymal transition and tumor budding in aggressive colorectal cancer: tumor budding as oncotarget. Oncotarget 2010; 1; 651–661.
Shin JK, Park YA, Huh JW et al. Tumor budding as a prognostic marker in rectal cancer patients on propensity score analysis. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2021; 28; 8813–8822.
Şirin A, Sökmen S, Ünlü S, Ellidokuz H, Sarioğlu S. The prognostic value of tumor budding in patients who had surgery for rectal cancer with and without neoadjuvant therapy. Tech. Coloproctol. 2019; 23; 333–342.
Lugli A, Vlajnic T, Giger O et al. Intratumoral budding as a potential parameter of tumor progression in mismatch repair‐proficient and mismatch repair‐deficient colorectal cancer patients. Hum. Pathol. 2011; 42; 1833–1840.
Rieger G, Koelzer VH, Dawson HE et al. Comprehensive assessment of tumour budding by cytokeratin staining in colorectal cancer. Histopathology 2017; 70; 1044–1051.