Back to Authors

Laverty, M.

Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

Citations 4

Subtype-Specific Mechanisms of Treatment Resistance and Relapse in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL)
Wenzl, Kerstin , Stokes, Matthew E. , Hopper, Melissa A. , Dropik, Abigail R. , Laverty, Miranda S., Bock, Allison M. , Sarangi, Vivekananda , Huang, C. Chris , Ansell, Stephen M., King, Rebecca L., Nowakowski, Grzegorz S. , Gandhi, Anita K. , Novak, Anne J. , Walker, Janek S. , Novak, Joseph P. , Laverty, M., Ortiz, María , Stong, Nicholas , Maurer, Matthew J. , Link, Brian K. , Ansell, Stephen M. , Habermann, Thomas M. , Witzig, Thomas E. , Cerhan, James R.

Blood | December 6, 2024 | Volume: 144 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 2977-2977

10.1182/blood-2024-208182 Get It

Introduction: Diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients experience favorable outcomes following frontline immunochemotherapy, however, 30-40% of patients will exhibit primary refractory disease or relapse (rrDLBCL). Recent studies have expanded upon well-defined characteristics of newly diagnosed DLBCL (ndDLBCL) to elucidate genomic landscapes underlying rrDLBCL; yet, high-throughput examination of resistance and relapse mechanisms within rrDLBCL subtypes, including the newly defined dark zone signature (DZsig) addition to cell of origin (COO), have yet to be described. To expand upon the current tumor etiology and define subtype-specific driving mechanisms, we describe a multi-omic analysis leveraging clinical and biologic variables in rrDLBCL. Methods: Tumor biopsies (N=228) collected at the time of relapse were obtained from n=85 participants in the Mayo Clinic/University of Iowa Lymphoma Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER), n=73 in the Mayo Clinic Biobank, and n=38 from CC-122-DLBCL-001 or n=32 CC-122-ST-001 trials. Tumor samples were analyzed by WES (n=158) or WGS (n=70) and by RNAseq (n=145). Comparative analysis against ndDLBCL MER samples (N=444) utilized WES (n=404) and RNAseq (n=321). Chi Square or Fisher's exact test was used for enrichment analysis of categorical variables, while Wilcoxon or Kruskal-Wallis test was used for continuous variables. Results: rrDLBCL samples were enriched for ABC (46% vs 33% in ndDLBCL, p=0.01), and fewer GCB (27% vs 40%, p=0.006). Amongst rrDLBCL patients, variance in overall survival (from time of original diagnosis; log-rank p=0.001) was observed between COO subtypes, with poor outcomes in patients with DZsig (median 15.0 mo) and GCB (36.5 mo) compared to ABC tumors (74.4 mo). Patients with progression or relapse within 6 months featured a more even COO distribution (ABC - 22%, GCB - 34%, DZsig - 28%) than patients with early (6-24 mo; 51%, 22%, 22%) or late relapses (>24 mo; 62%, 19%, 4%), which were predominantly ABC. Comparing mutation frequency within subtypes, rrDLBCL GCB tumors were enriched for B2M (41% vs 15% in ndDLBCL, p=0.002), EP300 (19% vs 7%, p=0.059), CIITA (19% vs 5%, p=0.02), PRKCB (11% vs 2%, p=0.035), CD79B (11% vs 0%, p=0.004), and CD83 (8% vs 1%, p=0.049) mutations, and CNV events including gains at 8q24.21 (MYC locus; 48% vs 14%, p<0.001) and 18q21.33 (BCL2, TCF4 locus; 36% vs 15%, p=0.021), and losses at 17p13.1 (TP53 locus; 40% vs 19%, p=0.035). rrDLBCL DZsig tumors featured enrichment for BCL6 (22% vs 3%, p=0.025), and SPEN (17% vs 3%, p=0.062) mutations and 2q22.2 losses (LRP1B locus; 20% vs 0%, p=0.019). Despite differential mutation and CNV profiles, gene expression analysis revealed minimal variance within COO subtypes in rrDLBCL and ndDLBCL, however upregulation of lymphoma driving genes including MYBPC2 (LogFC=1.68, FDR<0.001), MYOM2 (LogFC=1.33, FDR=0.007), MYC (LogFC=0.61, FDR=0.04), and CELSR2 (LogFC=0.53, FDR=0.02) were observed in ABC rrDLBCL. Increased frequency of LymphGen classifier A53 was observed in ABC (43% vs 17%, p=0.005) and GCB (40% vs 14%, p=0.009) rrDLBCL. Using CIBERSORTx to infer lymphoma microenvironment (LME) cell type abundance, an LME-depleted class was evident in rrDLBCL tumors, including reduction of CD8+ T cells (effect size (r)=-0.78, p<0.001) and T follicular helper cells (r=-0.48, p=0.012) in GCB rrDLBCL and reduction of T follicular helper cells (r=-0.43, p=0.023) and Tregs (r=-0.32, p=0.065) in DZsig rrDLBCL. Significance: We present an update to the genomic landscape of rrDLBCL, highlighting GCB and DZsig tumors with differential biology and advanced clinical course. Our data supports increased implementation of sequencing efforts in rrDLBCL to more broadly evaluate relapse mechanisms, with optimism that a more detailed understanding of r/r disease may guide trials for targeted treatment strategies. For example, rrDLBCL patients may be strong candidates for MYC pathway targeting agents (BETi), or a Lenalidomide-based regimen (R2 or Tafa-Len), as Lenalidomide has been shown to reprogram the LME via PD-L1 expression in addition to downregulation of MYC and MYC target genes. Or, due to enrichment of variants affecting anti-apoptotic proteins including BCL6 or BCL2 in DZsig and GCB rrDLBCL, a venetoclax-based therapeutic may be considered. Further targeted strategies should be considered as development of a more personalized approach remains an unmet need.
Truncating SPEN Mutations Highlight BN2-Subtype DLBCL with Aggressive Biology and Features of Immune Evasion
Wenzl, Kerstin , Serres, MaKayla R., Bock, Allison M. , Hopper, Melissa A. , Dropik, Abigail R. , Laverty, Miranda S., Sarangi, Vivekananda , King, Rebecca L. , Ansell, Stephen M. , Nowakowski, Grzegorz S. , Novak, Anne J. , Walker, Janek S. , Novak, Joseph P. , Manske, Michelle K. , Krull, Jordan E. , Laverty, M., Maurer, Matthew J. , Rimsza, Lisa M. , Link, Brian K. , Habermann, Thomas M. , Witzig, Thomas E. , Cerhan, James R.

Blood | December 1, 2023 | Volume: 142 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 4140-4140

10.1182/blood-2023-181974 Get It

Introduction: Molecular classifications have been developed to characterize the heterogeneity of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL), with activation of BCL6 and Notch signaling pathways acting as driving pathogenic features in C1/BN2 subtype tumors. Among C1/BN2 defining variants are truncating/inactivating SPEN mutations. SPEN regulates the Notch signaling pathway by initiating formation of a repressive complex that facilitates transcriptional repression of Notch target genes. Our group has identified SPEN mutations enriched in DLBCL cases failing to achieve event-free status at 24 months (EFS24). This contrasted with generally favorable outcomes in C1/BN2 tumors, suggesting a potential high-risk molecular feature with unexplored significance. Presenting an opportunity to expand underlying mechanisms and risk stratification in C1/BN2 tumors, we aimed to use a functional genomic approach, combined with clinical data, to characterize the alternative biology stemming from SPEN truncating mutations. Methods: FFPE tumor biopsies from newly diagnosed DLBCL cases (N=444) enrolled in the Mayo Clinic/Iowa Lymphoma Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) program were analyzed by WES (n=404) and RNA-seq (n=321). Biologic and clinical variables were annotated for all cases. CRISPR/Cas9 introduced truncating mutations to the endogenous SPEN locus in OCI-LY3 & SU-DHL-2 ABC-type human cell lines to establish models of SPEN depletion. Functional in vitro analysis utilized standard methods for RNA-seq, cell proliferation, western blot, and flow cytometry. Results: WES identified 29/404 ndDLBCL (7.2%) harboring SPEN mutations; n=17 missense and n=12 nonsense or frameshift insertions/deletions (truncating variants - [trunc]), the later considered as the focal point of our study. Against all cases, SPEN trunc cases displayed enrichment for high-risk factors including non-GCB COO (p=0.06, OR=3.7, 95% CI [0.9, 22.2]) and primary refractory disease (PTR; p=0.02, OR=5.0, 95% CI [1.05, 19.9]), and demonstrated inferior OS (p=0.06, HR=2.2), where a majority of clinical progression events occurred within 12 months of diagnosis. Leveraging RNA-seq, we observed 11 of 11 SPEN trunc cases exhibiting a double-hit negative gene expression signature, 9/11 cases with inflammatory or depleted microenvironment (LME), and 8/11 with a signature associating with intermediate/high risk of EFS24 failure. Applying the LymphGen algorithm, 5/12 SPEN trunc cases received the BN2 classification, observing co-occurring mutations with CD70 (p<0.01, OR=9.68), BRCA2 (p=0.03, OR=5.84), TET2 (p=0.02, OR=4.91), IRF4 (p=0.02, OR=7.27), and PTPRD (p<0.01, OR=8.31) genes, and were mutually exclusive with ARID1A, BCL2, EZH2, FAS, HLA-B, IRF8, and TMEM30A mutations ( Figure 1A). Isolating SPEN trunc against BN2 cases without SPEN variants (n=14), despite similar clustering of non-GCB COO (p=0.7), PTR was exclusively observed in SPEN trunc cases, accompanied again by inferior OS (p=0.07, HR=4.2; Figure 1B). In the OCI-LY3 SPEN depletion model, GSEA analysis from RNA-seq revealed activation of E2F (NES=2.7; p=9.4E-20) and MYC target genes (NES=2.3; p=4.1E-6), while both OCI-LY3 and SU-DHL-2 models featured depletion of antigen presentation genes (NES= -1.8, p=5.7E-4; NES= -2.2, p=3.8E-7, respectively). A decrease of MHC class II proteins (HLA-DR, HLA-DP) was confirmed by flow cytometry in both models (p<0.01). Hypothesizing loss of SPEN enhances reliance on the BCL6-HDAC3 axis featured in BN2 tumors, we treated both SPEN depletion models with a class-I HDAC inhibitor highly selective for HDAC3, BRD-3308, and indeed observed a 1.4 and 2.4-fold increase in sensitivity compared to WT cells (p=0.07, p<0.01, respectively). Significance: We find SPEN trunc mutations in poor acting DLBCL cases with clinical and biologic characteristics that diverge from C1/BN2 biology. The enhanced rate of clinical progression highlights urgency to better characterize these tumors. Our data suggests loss of SPEN regulatory mechanisms may act cooperatively with C1/BN2 biology to facilitate tumor immune evasion and drive progression through Notch-mediated pathways. Importantly, in vitro evidence shows SPEN deficient lymphoma cells are susceptible to targeted therapeutics against dependent pathways, providing rationale for advancing individualized care strategies for affected patients.
DEK Regulates B-Cell Proliferative Capacity and Is Associated with Aggressive Disease in Low-Grade B-Cell Lymphoma
Hopper, Melissa A. , Dropik, Abigail R. , Laverty, M., Wu, Xiaosheng , Wenzl, Kerstin , Sarangi, Vivekananda , Ansell, Stephen M. , Novak, Anne J. , Walker, Janek S. , Novak, Joseph P. , Manske, Michelle K. , Krull, Jordan E. , Maurer, Matthew J. , Habermann, Thomas M. , Link, Brian K. , Rimsza, Lisa M. , Witzig, Thomas E. , Cerhan, James R. , Jevremović, Dragan

Blood | December 1, 2023 | Volume: 142 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 4360-4360

10.1182/blood-2023-180232 Get It

Introduction: Non-Follicular Low-Grade B-Cell Lymphomas (LGBCL) are a subset of lymphomas that share overlapping clinical and histologic features. While most cases of LGBCL have an indolent course, some experience aggressive disease with no definitive biomarkers to identify aggressive cases at diagnosis. Significant advances have been made in the molecular classification of other lymphomas, yet molecular profiling and identification of mechanisms driving aggressive disease in LGBCL remain an unmet need. We previously used a multi-omic approach to characterize the molecular and immune landscapes of LGBCL tumors and identified a transcriptomic signature associated with cell proliferation and inferior overall survival (OS) in two independent cohorts (HR 7.82; 95% CI 2.4-25.4; p < 0.001 & HR 10.07; 95% CI 2.00-50.61; p = 0.005) and cases that transformed to DLBCL (Hopper et al., 2023). Here, we identify the oncoprotein DEK as a novel transcriptional regulator of this signature and use a functional genomic approach to further interrogate the role of DEK in B-cell lymphoma. Methods: Tumors from 64 newly-diagnosed/untreated LGBCL cases enrolled in the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic Molecular Epidemiology Resource were included in this study (SMZL = 48, NMZL = 6, LPL = 5, B-NOS = 3, EMZL = 2). Tumor RNA-seq and paired tumor-normal WES were used to assess DEK expression and identify copy number alterations (CNAs), respectively. DEK deficient (KO) cell line models were generated using CRIPSR/Cas9. DEK expression was assessed by western blot (WB) and immunofluorescence (IF) using standard techniques. Proliferation was assessed by MTT assay. Results: To identify transcriptional regulators of our previously identified signature, we used the tool MAGIC to mine publicly available ChIP-seq data and identified DEK, an oncoprotein associated with tumorigenesis and poor prognosis in several cancers, as a key regulator of genes in our signature (p = 0.008). RNA-seq indicated that high levels of DEK expression associated with inferior OS in LGBCL (HR 2.99; 95% CI 1.21-7.36; p = 0.02). Additionally, we identified DEK as a target of copy number gains/amps in LGBCL (7% of cases), which corresponded to significantly higher DEK expression (p = 0.04). The association of DEK with aggressive lymphoma was confirmed when we assessed its expression in public cell line RNA-seq data and observed the highest expression in lines derived from aggressive lymphomas, which we further validated at the protein level in a panel of B-cell lymphoma cell lines by WB and IF confocal microscopy. Additionally, we detected nuclear localization of DEK, consistent with its role as a transcriptional regulator. As a model of DEK overexpression for functional characterization, we used the SUDHL6 lymphoma cell line, which has an amplification of DEK at 6p22.3 and expresses high levels of DEK protein. Using CRISPR technology, we generated DEK deficient SUDHL6 and tested the impact of loss of DEK expression. DEK KO cells proliferated significantly slower than WT SUDHL6 cells in vitro (p < 0.0001)(Panel A), indicating DEK plays a role in regulating proliferative capacity in lymphoma. To identify mechanisms responsible for reduced proliferation in DEK KOs, we assessed baseline protein expression levels of apoptosis proteins in WT versus KO cells. We found near complete abrogation of anti-apoptotic protein Bcl-2 and reduction of Bcl-xL expression in DEK KO cells (Panel B). These results indicate DEK may contribute to tumor proliferative capacity by regulating susceptibility to apoptosis. Conclusion: DEK has been implicated in regulation of gene expression, but its precise role has remained elusive, with little known about its role in lymphoma. Using an integrative molecular and functional genomics approach, we identified DEK as a novel oncoprotein in LGBCL that is upregulated in cases with inferior clinical outcome and is regulated by copy number gains/amps. DEK plays a role in regulating tumor proliferative capacity by altering susceptibility to apoptosis through regulation of Bcl-2 and Bcl-xL. Collectively, this data suggests high-risk LGBCL tumors may enrich for cells with DEK overexpression or CNAs as a mechanism driving oncogene addiction, highlighting DEK, and its downstream targets, as potential therapeutic targets in a subset of high-risk LGBCL.
Molecular Classification of Relapsed DLBCL Reveals Novel Biologic Subgroups
Wenzl, Kerstin , Stokes, Matthew E. , Bock, Allison M. , Hopper, Melissa A. , Dropik, Abigail R. , Laverty, Miranda S., Sarangi, Vivekananda , Mwangi, Raphael , Huang, C. Chris , King, Rebecca L. , Ansell, Stephen M. , Nowakowski, Grzegorz S. , Gandhi, Anita K. , Novak, Anne J. , Novak, Joseph P. , Krull, Jordan E. , Walker, Janek S. , Laverty, M., Ortiz, María , Stong, Nicholas , Maurer, Matthew J. , Rimsza, Lisa M. , Link, Brian K. , Habermann, Thomas M. , Witzig, Thomas E. , Cerhan, James R.

Blood | December 1, 2023 | Volume: 142 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 2770-2770

10.1182/blood-2023-180949 Get It

Background Diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common aggressive lymphoid malignancy in adults. Though standard immunochemotherapy regimens can result in clinical remission and cure in a majority of patients, approximately 30% of patients are primary treatment resistant or eventually relapse (rrDLBCL), and their prognosis is very poor. Recent molecular classification by large scale genomic and transcriptomic profiling of newly diagnosed DLBCL tumors has resulted in a deeper understanding of disease drivers, however, the molecular heterogeneity of rrDLBCL is yet to be fully explored. Therefore, in this study, we used an unsupervised approach to better define transcriptional and genetic programs in rrDLBCL samples hypothesizing that molecular stratification within this high-risk group may lead to a better understanding of this disease, which remains an unmet need, and a more personalized therapeutic approach. Methods Data used in this study included RNA (n=143) and whole exome (n=126) sequencing data from available FFPE tumor samples at the time of a relapse (any line of treatment, r1-r10 relapse timepoints included in analysis, one per patient), consented to the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (n=61), banked in the Mayo Lymphoma Biobank (n=50), or consented to the CC-122-ST-001 clinical trial (n=32, NCT01421524). Unsupervised clustering was performed on protein coding gene expression values using the non-negative matrix factorization (NMF) approach. NMF was carried out by performing 200 runs on cluster sizes from 2 to 6. Cell of origin (COO) was determined using the method described by Reddy et al. The tumor microenvironment was analyzed using CIBERSORTx and Lymphoma Microenvironment Classification (LME). Genetic classification was done using LymphGen. Results In order to identify unique transcriptional programs in rrDLBCL, we implemented NMF and consensus clustering to define an ideal quantity of stable patient clusters. We identified 4 rrDLBCL patient clusters (rrC1-rrC4) as the most stable solution, based on consensus clustering selection criteria of iterative NMF runs. While relapse timepoint was not associated with individual clusters, we did observe significant differences in tumor characteristics between the clusters. COO classification found that rrC1 and rrC4 were enriched for GCB-DLBCL while rrC3 was enriched for ABC-DLBCL classification (P < .001). To explore the biologic programs in each cluster, we used pathFindR, which leverages protein-protein interaction networks to identify disease related pathways, rrC1 and rrC4 were defined by pathways involved in cell cycle and mismatch repair; oxidative phosphorylation in rrC2; and MAPK and NF-kB in rrC3. Next, LME classification was done to define patterns in the tumor microenvironment and we found a significant difference between groups (P < .001), with rrC2 and rrC4 tumors enriched for a depleted TME, while rrC1 and rrC3 had a more immune rich or inflammatory TME. This was supported by CIBERSORTx analysis identifying significant differences (P > .001) in abundance of CD8 T cells, memory CD4 T cells, and M1 macrophages between clusters, with rrC4 having the lowest abundance. We then explored genetic patterns in each cluster. Gene level mutation enrichment analysis showed BCL7A mutation exclusively in C4 (6/6, P = .03). The clusters were not associated with LymphGen classification. Lastly, our recently published high risk signature classification that is associated with early clinical failure and is characterized by metabolic dysregulation, a depleted TME, T53 alterations, and poor outcome, was significantly different between the groups (P = .03) with enrichment for high-risk cases in rrC4. In summary, we show for the first time that rrDLBCL patients can be classified into four gene expression clusters that are associated with distinct pathway, TME, and genetic programs. These clusters should now be tested to learn if they can help select patients for newer therapies for rrDLBCL such as CAR-T and bispecific antibodies.