The Daily Sign-Out

Video: Dr. Jack West discusses changing views on molecular testing in NSCLC

The Lungevity blog features a video of Dr. Jack West from Swedish Cancer Institute in Seattle discussing his evolving views regarding molecular testing for actionable driver mutations in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Dr. West is a thought-leader in lung oncology and I found this a tidy and brief summary of current issues and reasonable argument for expansion of such testing.

This is important for pathologists as we are often tasked with triaging testing as the time of diagnosis, managing results reporting, and driving testing. My own views as a pathologist with a concentration on lung cancer have changed over the last two years based on clinical practice, research meetings, recent publications, and listening to clinicians' views. Initially, it seemed to me that reflex testing of all advanced stage (stage 2B and up) lung adenocarcinomas and excluding tumors with squamous histology; since we generally are unaware of the smoking history, I ignored smoking history as a criterion for testing. I okayed this with the oncologists and off we went. Dr. West succinctly contrasts the two views concerning molecular testing in NSCLC: essentially testing all patients with advanced stage NSCLC versus testing focused on "enriched" populations, e.g. adenocarcinoma histology, never/light smokers.

My own views began to change as a result of one memorable lung cancer research meeting at Rush we had when one of the thoracic surgeons related how a patient grilled him on why he received an expensive bill for all this molecular testing without any discussion with the surgeon or oncologist and, moreover, when he had already expressed his preference to not receive any further treatment following biopsy and mediastinoscopy. These aren't cheap tests and someone (not the pathologist) must explain these results to the patient. I also reviewed our experience with molecular testing and found several instances where testing was sent on early-stage patients and squamous histology tumors, which I didn't think was appropriate. Based on another round of discussions with the oncologists, I decided that we should consult with the oncologist before ordering molecular testing.

But as Dr. West says, "Some patient's cancer don't read the books." He relates several recent experiences that have caused him to revise his views: squamous tumors that show driver mutations, including one tumor with both EGFR activating mutation and ALK rearrangement. He advocates broader, more expansive molecular testing as well as consideration of testing recurrences and re-biopsy of clinically stable lesions.

The bottom line is that this is still an evolving area--we must be aware of new data coming out and be prepared to modify our views and practices.

Implications of clonality in multifocal non small cell lung cancer

About 5% to 8% of NSCLC patients present with 2 or more anatomically separate lung tumors at diagnosis. The distinction between synchronous primary tumors and intrapulmonary metastases has important implications for staging and, thus, treatment strategies.

Arne Warth and colleagues from University Hospital Heidelberg published a single institution study in the June 1, 2012 European Respiratory Journal (abstract) analyzing the clonal relationship between multifocal NSCLC with indistinguishable morphology in a series of 78 patients.  Their analysis included LOH analysis of 14 polymorphic microsatellite markers and EGFR and KRAS mutation screening using single-strand conformation polymorphism, followed by direct sequencing of abnormally migrating bands. 

This study included 58 adenocarcinomas and 20 squamous cell carcinomas; 59 pT3, 18 pT4, and 1 pM1a. 97.4% of all specimens could be classified as clonal, likely clonal, or non-clonal; only 2 cases were non-informative.

Some results--

1. Tumor nodules of 22 patients (28%) showed divergent LOH status--indicating non-clonal origin. This is a surprising finding--remember this study only included multifocal tumors with indistinguishable morphology.
2. Activating EGFR mutations were found in both synchronous tumors in 4/58 ADC but none of the SQC.
3. KRAS mutations were found in 20 patients (17 ADC, 3 SQC) but in 6 patients the mutation was identified in only 1 of the tumors and in 1 patient there were divergent EGFR and KRAS mutations.
4. With combined allelotyping of LOH and mutational status of EGFR and KRAS, about 36% of cases (28/78 cases) showed evidence that they were not clonally related, including:
5.  14/18 ADC and 6/10 SQC located in the same lobe.
6. Kaplan-Meier curves illustrating the impact of clonality of multifocal NSCLC on overall survival did not identify a statistically significant difference but did show a tantalizing trend that patients with 2 clonally unrelated tumors have a better OS; notably, this difference did reach statistical significance by univariate analysis.

Practical "take-home" points.

There is no specific anatomical or morphological criteria that reliably indicate a clonal or nonclonal origin of multifocal NSCLC tumors. The authors reasonably recommend performing predictive molecular testing (EGFR and KRAS mutational analysis) or allelotyping separately in all cases with synchronous tumors to identify clonally related tumors. This study presents some intriguing data regarding the prognostic value of identifying nonclonalty, but the prognostic impact of clonality needs to be further analyzed in larger cohorts of NSCLC patients with multifocal synchronous tumors.

New directions for lung squamous cell carcinoma

For non-small cell lung cancer patients with localized or regional disease, treatment options vary little according to histology.  For metastatic NSCLC "targeted" therapies for patients with EGFR activating mutations or ALK translocations, pemetrexed, and the addition of bevacizumab to conventional chemotherapy have improved the treatment of metastatic NSCLC.  Unfortunately, all of these improvements apply almost exclusively to NSCLC adenocarcinoma histotype.

 For squamous cell carcinoma of the lung (SQC), the standard treatment remains cytotoxic chemotherapy, usually consisting of a platinum-containing doublet (carboplatin>US, cisplatin>Europe) with docetaxel or erlotinib used as second-line agents.

Similar to adenocarcinomas, squamous cell carcinomas are a heterogenous group of clinically, molecularly, and genetically different tumors.  Current work on SQCs is focused on identifying unique molecular patterns or driver mutations that may be therapeutic targets.  Kathryn Gold, Ignacio Wistuba and Edward Kim have published an excellent review of this recent work on SQC in Clinical Cancer Research 2012 18(11); 3002–7 that I recommend if you want a state-of-the-art update.

This review is more clinically oriented (for the pathologist) but provides connections between observed molecular abnormalities with drugs in various stages of development and current trials.  One interesting development is a phase II trial opening soon looking at the agent NCT01514864 for patients with squamous cell carcinoma with a mutation in discoidin domain receptor 2 kinase (DDR2).  I previously posted on a paper that identified DDR2 kinase mutations in lung squamous cell carcinoma about a year ago--so this is some exciting stuff! DDR2 kinase mutations occur in about 4% of SQC which doesn't seem like much until you input the denominator of the number of lung SQC diagnosed per year--this is analogous to EML-ALK translocations in lung ADC. 

Establishing clonality in multifocal nonsmall cell lung cancer

Up to 8% of nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients present with 2 or more anatomically separate lung tumors.  Distinguishing between synchronous primary tumors and intrapulmonary metastases is an important clinical question because this determination significantly changes tumor staging and subsequent therapeutic decisions.

Arne Warth et al. have published a single institution study from University Hospital Heidelberg in the current issue (1 June 2012) of European Respiratory Journal (abstract) that examines the clonal relationship in a series of patients with morphologically indistinguishable multifocal NSCLC.

The authors screened their archives for synchronous multifocal NSCLC in the same lobe (pT3), different ipsilateral lobes (pT4), and bilateral lobes (pM1a).  An important part of this study is that the authors only included those cases in which morphology between the tumors was indistinguishable using published criteria from the literature (Girard et al, Am J Surg Pathol 2009--actually a great reference).  They included 78 patients in this study.

The authors performed EGFR and KRAS mutation screening by using single-strand conformation polymorphism sensitive gel elctrophoresis and then subjected aberrently migrating bands to direct DNA Sanger sequencing.  The authors analyzed 14 polymorphic microsatellite markers for loss of heterozygosity. A clever part of the analysis of clonality in this study was the utilization of individual clonality scores for each tumor pair by multiplying the likelihood of the observed findings for each informative variable.  Thus, the clonality score defines the statistical error probability of a clonal or non-clonal relationship.

Results

1. The study included 58 adenocarcinomas (ADC) and 20 squamous cell carcinomas (SQC).  59 were pT3, 18 pT4, and 1 pM1a.  The mean follow up for all patients was 25.6 months. 97.4% of all specimens could be classified as clonal, likely clonal or nonclonal.
2. Tumors from 22 patients (28%) showed divergent LOH status indicative of non-clonal origin (14/58 ADC, 8/20 SQC).
3. Activating EGFR mutations were found in both synchronous tumors in 4/58 ADC and none of the SQC showed EGFR mutation.
4. KRAS mutations were found in 20 cases (17 ADC, 3 SQC), including in both synchronous tumors in 13 cases but in only 1 tumor in 6 cases. 1 patient had divergent EGFR and KRAS mutations in separate tumors.
5. Combined allelotyping of LOH and EGFR and KRAS mutational status showed that 36% of synchronous primary tumors were not clonally related.  Remember these were tumors that were determined to be morphologically indistinguishable.
6. Impact of clonality of multifocal NSCLC on overall survival: Kaplan-Meier curves show a trend that patients with 2 clonally unrelated tumors have a better outcome but this did not reach statistical significance by univariate analysis.

Conculsions

There is no objective, specific anatomical or morphological criteria that reliably indicate a clonal or non-clonal origin of multiple NSCLC tumors.  Therefore, the authors recommend performing predictive molecular testing (EGFR and KRAS) separately in all cases with synchronous tumor nodules or allelotyping to identifiy clonally related tumors.

This paper will influence the way I approach these situations.  First, I will specifically incorporate the Girard criteria to identify morphologically indistinguishable cases.  Second, I will send out separate tumor specimens for EGFR and KRAS mutation analysis before assigning my pathologic staging to the case.  A couple practical questions are not addressed by this study.  Given the remarkable morphological heterogeneity of lung ADC--and the high percentage of "mixed" subtype tumors, isn't it possible that morphological disparate tumors could still be clonally related?  The authors don't specifically address the issue of mixed subtype in relation to "morphologically indistinguishable" tumors--but this would be a major practical issue.  Should we simply assume that morphologically different-ish tumors are non-clonal or do the testing anyway?  A great complimentary study would test all synchronous tumors regardless of histology since this study showed that morphological criteria could not predict clonal origin even in a narrow series of synchronous tumors that looked alike in pairs.  An intriguing point of this study is the possible relationship between clonal relationship and OS.  The authors rightly conclude that this should be tested in larger cohorts of NSCLC patients to identify any statistically significance to the trend that they identified.  I am perplexed as to why clonally unrelated tumors should have better outcomes.  If any one has any thoughts, I'd love to hear them--please post a comment with your thoughts. 

Possible false positive interpretation of Napsin A staining in evaluating lung non-small cell carcinomas

Dr. Nelson Ordonez (MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston) published a brief and very helpful article in the March 2012 American Journal of Surgical Pathology (abstract) that addresses a very practical issue of using IHC staining for Napsin A in evaluating primary lung NSCLC for confirmation of adenocarcinoma type.

Napsin A is normally expressed in type II alveolar pneumocytes but may also be localized immunohistochemically in intraalveolar macrophages presumably from phagocytosis.  The expression of both Napsin A and pro-surfactant protein B (ProSP-B) are regulated by thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF-1), which is one of the common IHC stains initially performed on NSCLC not diagnostic for adenocarcinoma on routine H&E.  Napsin A is localized to lamellar bodies with ProSP-B and is thought to be involved in post-translational processing of ProSP-B.

This paper must be understood in the context of new IASLC lung adenocarcinoma classification and the algorithm recommended to histological type NSCLC.  Napsin A has emerged as a useful adjunct IHC stain, such as, in those cases in which a tumor is negative or equivocal for initial screening markers for both adenocarcinoma (ADC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SQC).  Until recently, Napsin A was found to be highly specific for lung ADC.  But, as Dr. Ordonez points out, several recent publications have found Napsin A positivity in lung squamous cell carcinomas and, thus, cast doubt over the high degree of specificity of Napsin A for lung adenocarcinoma and utility of this marker in this context.

Dr. Ordonez studied Napsin A expression by IHC in 90 primary lung SQC, including whole section and biopsy specimens, and 64 non-pulmonary SQC.  None of the primary lung SQC or the non-pulmonary SQC showed Napsin A positive staining in the malignant cells.

The key observation is the identification of entrapped type 2 pneumocytes and/or intraalveolar macrophages in desmoplastic areas adjacent to the tumor and in small clusters within the tumor--which could be a source of false-positive interpretation in SQC.  Dr. Ordonez found 5 biopsies in which these entrapped cells were difficult to distinguish from malignant cells and CK 5/6 was used in 2 of these cases to rule out the possibility that these were Napsin A-positive malignant squamous cells.

This is a critical distinction and very welcome contribution to the lung cancer pathology literature.  The reader should keep point this in mind, especially when evaluating biopsy material.  The illustrations are excellent in demonstrating these points and should also be kept close at hand.  Congratulations to Dr. Nelson Ordonez for an excellent paper.

WCLC 2011 Oral Presentations: Squamous Cell Carcinoma

There were several interesting presentations regarding squamous cell lung carcinoma that are worthy of attention.

O06.02 presented in the Biomarkers I session by Selinger et al. was a study of a possible prognostic marker for SQC called Special AT-rich Binding Protein-1 (SATB1).  SATB1 is a global genome organizer that recruits chromatin remodeling proteins for epigenetic regulation of multiple genes in a tissue-specific manner.  SATB1 is normally expressed in normal respiratory ciliated columnar epithelium in bronchi and terminal bronchioles but the authors observed loss of this protein by IHC expression in preinvasive squamous lesions and in NSCLC.

In their cohort of 243 NSCLC patients, the authors found that loss of SATB1 was an independent predictor of decreased cancer-specific survival in SQC patients (HR 2.06, P=0.016).  The authors suppose that loss of SATB1, which can act as a transcriptional activator or repressor, in early lung lesions results in widespread disruption of tissue-specific epigenetic modifications, leading to activation or repression of key cancer genes and promotion of lung tumorigenesis.

This provocative study raises more questions than it can answer but is worthy of notice because of its identification of a possible prognostic marker for SQC (as opposed to ADC) but also the interesting mechanistic questions it raises with regard to changes in tissue-specific epigenetic regulation for the development of or progression of cancer.

 

O037.07 by Savic et al. was presented in the Biomarkers IV session and adds to the growing number of studies on Sex Determining Region Y-box 2 protein (SOX2) in NSCLC.  SOX2 is located on the long arm of chromosome 3, an area that has been previously identified as being associated with loss of 3q in early stages of SCQ carcinogenesis.  This study involved a tissue microarray constructed from 568 patients with stage 1 NSCLC with detailed histopathological and clinical data.  SOX2 gene data was determined by FISH and SOX2 protein expression was assessed by IHC.  This data was correlated then with clinicopathological findings and OS and cancer-specific survival.

Increased SOX2 gene amplification or polysomy was found in 4% of (17/429) evaluable samples but 16/17 (94%) were associated with non-ADC histology.  SOX2 protein expression was found in 48% of NSCLC and was associated with non-ADC histology (P<0.001): SOX2 expression was identified in 78% of SQC specimens (178/227) but only in 15% of ADC (29/191).  Further, SOX2 protein expression was significantly associated with high grade tumors, patients >50 years, and male gender.  Finally, they noted a significant association between increased SOX2 gene number and protein expression (P<0.001).

While these are some intriguing findings, this presentation doesn’t quite deliver. Unfortunately, the authors did not report any correlation data with survival (and this is a glaring deficiency) nor do they offer any speculation on the discrepancy between the few cases that show increased SOX2 gene copy number and the frequent observation of SOX2 protein expression in SQC.  Further work on SOX2 definitely seems warrented, especially because of this association with SQC histology and its location in a chromosome region frequently lost in early stages of squamous carcinogenesis.

 

WCLC 2011 Summary from Plenary Session

There were three themes from the Monday, July 3 plenery session at the 2011 14th World Conference on Lung Cancer.  First, the effect of smoking cessation on lung cancer incidence was discussed in relation to a recent study showing that women who smoke 20 cigarettes a day have a risk of developing lung cancer 30 times higher than non-smokers.  However, the study also showed that quitting before age 50 reduced the risk to sic times higher and quitting before age 40 reduced it to 1.2 times higher almost completely eliminating the risk from smoking.

The second major theme discussed the shift from squamous cell carcinoma (SQC) to adenocarcinoma (ADC) as the most prevalent histologic type of lung cancer.  The development of cigarette filters was discussed as one reason for this shift.  It was proposed that cigarette filters causes smokers to inhale more deeply which delivers smoke to areas of the lung predisposed to adenocarcinogenesis.  Further, low tar/low nicotine formulations cause smokers to inhale more often, resulting in an increased volume per puff, to achieve the same nicotine dose.

Finally, the third theme explored recent work describing the association between variants in chromosome 15q25, which encodes nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, and smoking behaviors that not only make it harder for people to quit smoking but also are associated with increased smoking intensity.

 

DDR2 Kinase Mutations in Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Yes--you read that right!

The journal Cancer Discovery reports in a publish ahead-of-print article (abstract)the discovery of mutations in the discoidin domain receptor 2 tyrosine kinase (DDR2) gene in a series of lung squamous cell carcinomas (SQC) that may identify a  potential therapeutic target similar to those described for lung adenocarcinomas.  Interestingly, DDR2 is a receptor kinase that normally binds collagen as its ligand and has been shown to promote cell migration, proliferation, and survival when activated by ligand binding and phosphorylation.

While subtypes of lung adenocarcinoma (ADC) have been increasingly better defined and characterized on multiple levels with respect to identifying therapeutic targets/responses, minimal progress has been made with squamous cell carcinoma.

The authors of this study used conventional Sanger sequencing of 201 genes, including the entire tyrosine kinome, in an initial set of 20 primary lung SQC and matched normal controls and identified 2 samples with DDR2 mutations; a secondary screen of 48 lung SQC samples identified as additional 4 DDR2 mutations.  Following this, the authors sequenced DDR2 in a validation cohort of 222 primary lung SQC samples and identified 5 additional samples with mutations.  Excluding samples from lung SQC cell lines, there was an overall frequency of 3.2% of DDR2 mutations in primary lung SQC samples--about the same frequency reported for ALK fusion mutations in lung ADC.

The authors analyzed the TKIs imatinib and dasatinib, previously reported to inhibit DDR2, to evaluate whether targeting DDR2 mutated in SQC might be a potential therapeutic strategy.  Dasatinib showed particular efficacy in inhibiting proliferation and promoting cell death through apoptosis in SQC cell ines with DDR2 mutations.  In addition, they report one of 7 subjects from an early-phase trial of dasatinib or combination dasatinib and erlotinib with advanced stage lung SQC cancer who exhibited significant shrinkage in tumor size while receiving the dasatinib/erlotinib combination.  The authors were able to perform direct sequencing of DDR2 in a pretreatment tumor specimen from this individual and identified a novel DDR2 kinase mutation.

This is an intriguing paper that you might well keep in mind.  Hopefully, this may stimulate other investigators to not only look for other potential genomic alterations that either drive SQC and/or represent targetable proteins but also go back and scrutinize histological and other clinicopathological characteristics of lung SQC that may have therapeutic or prognostic importance.

Aberrant Wnt1 and beta-catenin expression in NSCLC

This month's April 2011 Journal of Thoracic Oncology has an interesting paper by Xu and colleagues (abstract) that examines Wnt1 expression in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in relation to downstream Wnt signaling molecules, including beta-catenin, and correlates different marker expression with traditional clinicopathological parameters.

This is an immunohistochemical study of a tissue microarray composed of 262 NSCLC resected specimens.    The authors define aberrant beta-catenin expression as: 1) decreased membranous pattern in less than 70% of tumor cells, 2) cytoplasmic pattern of expression, or 3) nuclear pattern of expression.  As expected, the majority of patients are stage 1 or 2 but nearly 36% of the study population are never-smokers--over 50% in the adenocarcinoma histology group (!).  The authors found that Wnt1 overexpression was significantly associated with never-smoker status and ADC histology; aberrant beta-catenin expression was associated with SQC histology.  While each Wnt1 overexpression and aberrant beta-catenin expression were independently associated with decreased OS regardless of TNM stage, patients that demonstrated both had worse OS than other combinations of Wnt1/beta-catenin expression.  Further, Wnt1/beta-catenin expression was also an independent factor adjusted by stage, pleural invasion, lymphatic invasion, ECOG PS or stage, age, gender, histology, and p53 expression.

A few comments about this paper.  One significant caveat to the findings is the over-representation of never smokers (35%) in this Asian study population, especially nearly 54% of never smokers in the ADC group, compared to a more typical American population in a community hospital setting (about 10%).  Overexpression of Wnt1 was significantly associated with never-smoking and as well as ADC histology, but, somewhat paradoxically, Wnt1 overexpression was associated with significantly shorter overall survival.  Unfortunately, the authors do not break this further down into Wnt1 overexpression and OS with respect to histological type--perhaps some SQCs showing Wnt1 overexpression and dismal OS are skewing the data here since one would expect never-smokers with ADC to have a better prognosis in general.  Another is the usual issues with using TMAs to represent complex heterogenous tumors.  The authors do not sufficiently describe from where they target obtaining cores for constructing the TMA--are they targeting the invasive margin, the central tumor, wherever?  what about mixed histology tumors?  These are critical methodological issues--especially when extrapolating the data concerning marker expression.  One admirable feature of this paper is the clear definition, supported by appropriate photomicrographs, of "aberrant" beta-catenin expression.  As I am currently working on projects that are similarly assessing beta-catenin expression in NSCLC, I found this very helpful in assessing this paper's findings.

Optimal panel for differentiating NSCLC in small specimens

There has been a plethora of papers, abstracts, and marketing materials in the last 12 to 18 months regarding the "optimal" panel for differentiating adenocarcinoma (ADC) from squamous cell carcinoma (SQC) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).  The December 2010 American Journal of Surgical Pathology features a paper from Terry, Leung, Laskin et al. that evaluates an optimal panel and, perhaps, more importantly, a testing algorithm for differentiating ADC from SQC in small biopsy specimens.

Caveat: one of the authors is the Medical Director/Chief Pathologist for a commercial pathology reference lab specializing in IHC diagnostics (PhenoPath Laboratories).

This study makes several practical points that can be nicely summarized as bullets:

• For ADC the most sensitive marker and best negative predictor is CK7: 93% sensitivity, 91% NPV.
• For ADC the most specific marker and best positive predictor is Napsin A: 94% specificity, 90% PPV.
• TTF-1 has similar specificity as Napsin A for ADC.
• For SQC the most sensitive marker and best negative predictor is p63: 84% sensitivity, 86% NPV.
• For SQC the most spepcific marker and best positive predictor is NTKR2 (a neurotrophic tyrosine kinase receptor, rarely used outside of research labs) but CK5/6 has a nearly identical specificity and PPV: about 95% specificity, about 95% PPV.
• No single marker is BOTH highly sensitive and specific for either ADC or SQC.

The authors identified a 6-marker panel that includes p63, TTF-1, CK5/6, CK7, Napsin A, and mucicarmine has demonstrating the best AUC in ROC analysis.  Since a 6-marker panel may not be feasible (or even possible) due to various factors with small specimens with limited diagnostic tumor material, the authors develped a binary scheme using a sequential addition of markers (Fig. 3, 1809).

The authors do point out, however, that the "best" sequential order may vary by laboratory according to the actual senstitivities and specificities acheived in individual labs and this is important to remember if your lab does not perform all of the stains.

I think one important caution, however, is to note that this study was performed using tissue microarrays derived from resected lung cancer specimens and did not study or validate the performance of these markers on "real" small biopsy specimens.  The authors claim that the results are "similar" to earlier studies using actual patient biopsy material.  Given their careful statement above regarding the "best" sequential order, I think that this is somewhat disingenuous elision over important details regarding significant differences between resected tumors and small biopsy specimens.  Notwithstanding this major issue, there are some good quantitative data here that warrants your consideration in evaluating your own panels at least for comparing your own sensitivity and specificity for individual markers.