Eschrich, Steven A

ABSTRACT Background Radiotherapy is a cornerstone of treatment for pediatric central nervous system (CNS) tumors, but dose selection remains uniform despite interpatient variability in tumor radiosensitivity. This is consequential in children, for whom toxicity can have lifelong effects. Genomic-adjusted radiation dose (GARD) integrates tumor genomics with delivered radiation dose to quantify the biological effect of radiotherapy and has been validated across adult malignancies. Its relevance in pediatric CNS tumors is unknown. Methods We performed a cohort study using gene expression and data from 246 pediatric patients with high-grade glioma, medulloblastoma, or ependymoma from the Children’s Brain Tumor Network. GARD was calculated using a sequencing-adapted radiosensitivity index integrated with radiation dose through the linear–quadratic model. Associations of GARD and physical radiation dose with event-free and overall survival were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models stratified by tumor type and anatomic location. Patients who did not receive radiotherapy comprised a negative control cohort (sham-GARD). Results Among patients receiving radiotherapy, physical dose was uniform, whereas GARD showed substantial interpatient variability in biological effect. Higher GARD was associated with improved event-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0·90, 95% CI 0·83–0·97; p=0·004) and overall survival (HR 0·90, 95% CI 0·83–0·99; p=0·018). Physical dose was not associated with either endpoint. Among patients who did not receive radiotherapy, sham-GARD was not associated with outcomes, supporting GARD as a treatment-specific predictor rather than a prognostic biomarker. Conclusions In pediatric CNS tumors, the biological effect of radiotherapy quantified by GARD was associated with outcomes, whereas physical dose was not. These findings challenge uniform radiotherapy dosing and support genomically informed dose individualization. Prospective evaluation of GARD-guided radiotherapy is warranted to optimize tumor control while minimizing long-term toxicity in children.

Abstract The radiation sensitivity index (RSI) and 12-chemokine gene expression signature (12CK GES) are two gene expression signatures (GES) that were previously developed to predict tumor radiation sensitivity or identify the presence of tertiary lymphoid structures in tumors, respectively. To advance the use of these GESs into clinical trial evaluation, their assays must be assessed within the context of the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) process. Using HG-U133Plus2.0 arrays, we first established CLIA laboratory proficiency. Then the accuracy (limit of detection and macrodissection impact), precision (variability by time and operator), sample type (surgery vs. biopsy), and concordance with a reference laboratory were evaluated. RSI and 12CK GES were reproducible (RSI: 0.01 mean difference, 12CK GES: 0.17 mean difference) and precise with respect to time and operator. Taken together, the reproducibility analysis of the scores indicated a median RSI difference of 0.06 (6.47% of range) across samples and a median 12CK GES difference of 0.92 (12.29% of range). Experiments indicated that the lower limit of input RNA is 5 ng. Reproducibility with a second CLIA laboratory demonstrated reliability with the median RSI score difference of 0.065 (6% of full range) and 12CK GES difference of 0.93 (12% of observed range). Overall, under CLIA, RSI and 12CK GES were demonstrated by the Moffitt Cancer Center Advanced Diagnostic Laboratory to be reproducible GESs for clinical usage. Significance: The RSI and 12CK GES are two GESs that predict tumor radiation sensitivity or the presence of tertiary lymphoid structures in tumors, respectively. These GESs were assessed within the CLIA process for future clinical use. We established proficiency, reproducibility, and reliability characteristics for both signatures in a controlled setting, indicating these GESs are suitable for validation within future clinical trials.

Abstract Introduction Men with African ancestry have the highest incidence and mortality rates of prostate cancer (PCa) worldwide. Methods This study aimed to identify differentially methylated genes between tumor vs. adjacent normal and aggressive vs. indolent PCa in 121 African American patients. Epigenome‐wide DNA methylation patterns in tumor DNA were assessed using the human Illumina Methylation EPIC V1 array. Results Around 5,139 differentially methylated CpG‐sites (q < 0.01, lΔβl > 0.2) were identified when comparing normal vs. tumor, with an overall trend of hypermethylation in prostate tumors. Multiple representative differentially methylated regions (DMRs), including immune‐related genes, such as CD40 , Galectin3 , OX40L , and STING , were detected in prostate tumors when compared to adjacent normal tissues. Based on an epigenetic clock model, we observed that tumors’ total number of stem cell divisions and the stem cell division rate were significantly higher than adjacent normal tissues. Regarding PCa aggressiveness, 2,061 differentially methylated CpG‐sites (q < 0.05, lΔβl > .05) were identified when the grade group (GG)1 was compared with GG4/5. Among these 2,061 CpG sites, 155 probes were consistently significant in more than one comparison. Among these genes, several immune system genes, such as COL18A1 , S100A2 , ITGA4 , HLA‐C , and ADCYAP1 , have previously been linked to tumor progression in PCa. Conclusion Several differentially methylated genes involved in immune‐oncologic pathways associated with disease risk or aggressiveness were identified. In addition, 261 African American‐specific differentially methylated genes related to the risk of PCa were identified. These results can shedlight on potential mechanisms contributing to PCa disparities in the African American Population.

Abstract Introduction: We investigated tumor gene expression profiling (PGx) to identify predictive classifiers of response and elucidate the mechanism of efficacy of proteasome inhibition in multiple myeloma (MM) by bortezomib, a first-in-class proteasome inhibitor. Analysis of 44 samples from the SUMMIT phase 2 trial identified predictive classifiers of response in patients (pts) with refractory MM (ASH 2002, Abstr 1519). We now report on the PGx analysis of the SUMMIT-derived classifier in an independent sample set from the APEX phase 3 trial, a multicenter randomized study of 669 pts that demonstrated the superiority of bortezomib to high-dose dex for relapsed MM following 1 to 3 prior therapies (Richardson NEJM 2005). As well, we report on a new classifier of response built by combining samples from SUMMIT and MLN34101-040 (040) (a study of bortezomib in pts who failed dex in APEX or were not eligible for APEX) and tested in the APEX samples. Methods: 93 participating clinical centers collected pretreatment bone marrow aspirates and enriched tumor cells on site before centralized RNA extraction and microarray analysis. Approximately 85% of pts consented to whole-genome analysis. Quality control for RNA integrity and quantity, microarray data quality, and tumor cell purity resulted in 129 patient samples from APEX evaluable for PGx; 67 were from the bortezomib arm and 62 from the dex arm. 48 samples were evaluable from 040. Patient characteristics of this subset were similar to those of the overall study population. Predictive classifiers were identified and tested via separate training and test datasets. Results: Consistent with the SUMMIT analysis, the APEX and 040 datasets exhibit biologic features expected of MM, including the overexpression of translocation target genes such as cyclin D1, MAF, and MMSET/FGFR3. Classifiers built using only the SUMMIT samples predict the outcome of pts in the APEX bortezomib arm with an overall accuracy of 51% (sensitivity [Sn] = 49%, specificity [Sp] = 55%; P = .81) and in the dex arm with an overall accuracy of 56% (Sn = 64%, Sp = 50%; P = .31). If the classifier was built using data from both the SUMMIT and 040 trials (87 total samples), the prediction of response in the APEX bortezomib arm was statistically significant (66% accuracy, Sn = 89%, Sp = 42%; P = .006). The same classifier only predicts the response of dex-treated pts with an overall accuracy of 46% (Sn = 72%, Sp = 28%; P = .88), suggesting specificity for bortezomib. Many of the overexpressed genes associated with bortezomib insensitivity relate to protein synthesis (EIF4B, RPL5) and RNA binding (SFRS10, CPSF6). Future Directions: This work highlights practical and scientific issues that inform future efforts to implement PGx in clinical trials. Predictive accuracy may be influenced by the clinical end point, limited sample size, and/or technical considerations associated with distinct trials and genomic data. The influence of study differences (relating to pts’ time from diagnosis, number of prior therapies, molecular subtypes, or hybridization characteristics) on the ability to build classifiers and identify biologic pathways related to response are being examined; these and potential insights on drug mechanisms will be presented.