Lin, Steven H.

Objective: To determine the impact of histology on pathologic response, survival outcomes, and recurrence patterns in patients with esophageal cancer (EC) who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Summary of Background Data: There is a paucity of data regarding comparative outcomes after neoadjuvant CRT between esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma. Methods: Between 2002 and 2015, 895 EC patients who underwent neoadjuvant CRT followed by esophagectomy at 3 academic institutions were retrospectively reviewed, including 207 patients with SCC (23.1%) and 688 patients with adenocarcinoma (76.9%). Pathologic response, survival, recurrence pattern, and potential prognostic factors were compared. Results: Pathologic complete response (pCR) rate was significantly higher for SCC compared with adenocarcinoma (44.9% vs 25.9%, P < 0.001). After a median follow-up of 52.9 months, 71 patients (34.3%) with SCC versus 297 patients (43.2%) with adenocarcinoma had recurrent disease (P = 0.023). For patients who achieved a pCR, no significant differences were found in recurrence pattern, sites, or survival end-points between the 2 histology groups. For non-pCR patients, the SCC group demonstrated significantly higher regional and supraclavicular recurrence rates but a lower hematogenous metastasis rate than adenocarcinoma patients, whereas the adenocarcinoma patients had a more favorable locoregional failure-free survival (P = 0.005) and worse distant metastasis-free survival (P = 0.024). No differences were found in overall survival (P = 0.772) or recurrence-free survival (P = 0.696) between groups. Conclusions: SCC was associated with a significantly higher pCR rate than adenocarcinoma. Recurrence pattern and survival outcomes were significantly different between the 2 histology subtypes in non-pCR patients.

Abstract Background: Tumor endothelial cells (ECs) are a population of stromal cells required for tumor growth that cooperate with tumors to form angiogenic structures. In blood, circulating ECs (CECs) are normal constituents of healthy individuals, although a Cancer Associated Vascular Endothelial cell (CAVE) subtype has been observed in cancer patients. The CAVE population has been isolated and identified using their large size or multicellular clustering and a pooled mixture of classical EC markers (i.e. CD31 and CD146). However, there has been no attempt to differentiate CAVEs from the many EC subtypes. This is not surprising as in-depth phenotyping of ECs requires an array of biomarkers that until recently has not been feasible. A multi-phenotypic screening of EC markers was tested on CAVEs from 116 blood samples in 3 types of solid tumors. This data suggests that CAVEs exist as a common and diverse subtype of tumor derived CECs that may express cytokeratin (CK) and various EC biomarkers, correlating to disease stage. Methods: Peripheral blood samples from 116 cancer patients (stage I-IV) were drawn from 2012-2014 including breast (n=42), lung (n=39) and prostate (n=35), as well as blood from 34 healthy controls. Blood was processed by an established filtration approach, i.e. the CellSieveTM microfiltration technique (Creatv MicroTech), filtering blood by size exclusion and staining cells for CK 8, 18 & 19, EpCAM and CD45. After identification and imaging, the QUAS-R (Quench, Underivatize, Amine-Strip and Restain) technique was used to remove fluorescence signal and restain all cells with CD31, CD146, CD144, & DAPI. After reimaging, QUAS-R was again used to remove fluorescence and restain the cells for CD14, CD105, CD34, & DAPI. Results: Out of 116 patient samples, we identified CAVEs in 63 patients (54%) based on positivity of CD31, CD144 or CD146, but none were found in healthy controls. CAVEs per 7.5mL sample in patients averaged 5.1 (breast), 5.6 (prostate) and 7.9 (lung). Presence of CAVEs appeared related to stage with 26% in stage 1, 61% in stage 2, 68% in stage 3, and 74% in stage 4 patients. No CAVEs were positive for CD14 or CD45. CD31 was the most present marker, found on 93% of CAVEs, followed by CD144 (85%), CD34 (64%), CD146 (45%), & CD105 (4%). In contrast with the previous study on this topic, CK was found in 67% of CAVEs, but was not a universal marker. Conclusions: It has been reported that CK+ and CD45- CECs are isolated from the blood of cancer patients in colon and lung cancers, prompting some to classify them as circulating tumor cells. However, subtyping these CECs is incomplete when characterized with only 3-4 biomarkers. A multi-phenotypic subtyping technique was used to properly identify and subtype these CECs in cancer patients. This data suggest that a subset of CECs, e.g. CAVEs, are found in circulation as CK+/CD45-, but exist as a heterogeneous population of cancer specific circulating cells that require further study. Citation Format: Daniel L. Adams, R. Katherine Alpaugh, Steven H. Lin, Jeffrey R. Marks, Raymond Bergan, Stuart S. Martin, Sarany Chumsri, Massimo Cristofanilli, Cha-Mei Tang, Steingrimur Stefansson. Identifying, subtyping and classifying tumor associated circulating endothelial cells in patients with solid tumors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 778. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-778

Abstract Background: Circulating cancer associated macrophage-like cells (CAMLs) are cancer specific giant cells circulating in the blood of patients with solid tumors. Since their discovery, few studies have been done to elucidate their lineage or phenotypic identity. The difficulty in classifying CAMLs is exemplified by their expression of multiple heterogeneous markers that defy conventional identification. Recently, we described a restaining method (QUAS-R) to screen individual cells using an array of up to 15 biomarkers. We used this method to screen CAMLs isolated from 152 cancer patient samples in 4 types of solid tumors to classify CAMLs by phenotypic immunostaining. These data suggest that CAMLs are a morphologically diverse and phenotypically heterogeneous population of cancer specific giant cells with overlapping myeloid, epithelial, and endothelial phenotypes. Methods: This multi-institutional study used peripheral blood samples from 152 cancer patients (stage I-IV) from breast (n=42), lung (n=39), renal cell carcinoma (36) and prostate (n=35). Blood was processed by the CellSieve™ microfiltration technique at 5 institutions and stained for cytokeratin 8, 18 & 19, EpCAM, and CD45. After identification/imaging, the QUAS-R (Quench, Underivatize, Amine-Strip and Restain) technique was used to quench fluorescence signal of cells and then restain with vimentin/CD146/CD144, CD14/CD11b/CD41, CD11c/CD68/TIE2, or CD34/CD41/CD61. After staining, QUAS-R was again used to remove the fluorescence and samples restained with a third panel. Each patient sample was stained, quenched and restained with the above mentioned panels. Results: In agreement with a number of studies, CAMLs were found in 86% of cancer patients (n=131/152), with increased detection from stage 1 (71%), followed by stage 2 (94%), stage 3 (88%) to stage 4 (88%). Breast cancer had the most CAMLs per sample (14.1 cells/7.5mL), followed by prostate (6.8), renal cell carcinoma (4.9) and lung (3.2). CD34 was most prevalent, found on 88% of CAMLs, followed by cytokeratin (81%), CD41 (79%), CD61 (78%), CD45 (75%), CD14 (72%), vimentin (63%), EpCAM (56%), CD146 (53%), CD68 (44%), CD11c (38%), TIE-2 (25%) and CD11b (0%). Based on our results, CAMLs seem to express overlapping phenotypes from a variety of lineages i.e. macrophage (CD14/CD68/CD11c), epithelial (cytokeratin/EpCAM), endothelial (CD146/TIE-2) and megakaryocyte (CD41/CD61). Conclusions: Although identification of CAMLs is straightforward by morphological criteria (size and nuclear profile), their identification and lineage remains undetermined. We report the first mass screening of CAMLs to determine phenotypic expression. These data suggest that CAMLs cannot be grouped into any known cell subtype based on their expression profiles and represent a heterogeneous and variably differentiated population whose biological consequences in cancer remain under investigation. Citation Format: Daniel L. Adams, R Katherine Alpaugh, Thai H. Ho, Steven H. Lin, Jeffrey R. Marks, Raymond Bergan, Stuart S. Martin, Saranya Chumsri, Cha-Mei Tang, Massimo Cristofanilli. Multiplex phenotyping of circulating cancer associated macrophage-like cells in patients with solid tumors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 3798. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-3798

Objective: To discern recurrence risk stratification and investigate its influence on postoperative surveillance in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Background: Reports documenting recurrence risk stratification in EAC after neoadjuvant CRT are scarce. Methods: Between 1998 and 2014, 601 patients with EAC who underwent neoadjuvant CRT followed by esophagectomy were included for analysis. The pattern, site, timing, and frequency of the first recurrence and potential prognostic factors for developing recurrences were analyzed. This cohort was used as the training set to propose a recurrence risk stratification system, and the stratification was further validated in another cohort of 172 patients. Results: A total of 150 patients (25.0%) achieved pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant CRT and the rest were defined as the non-pCR group (n = 451) in the training cohort. After a median follow-up of 63.6 months, the pCR group demonstrated a significantly lower locoregional (4.7% vs 19.1%) and distant recurrence rate (22.0% vs.44.6%) than the non-pCR group (P < 0.001). Based on independent prognostic factors, patients were stratified into 4 recurrence risk categories: pCR with clinical stage I/II, pCR with clinical stage III, non-pCR with pN0, and non-pCR with pN+, with corresponding 5-year recurrence-free survival rates of 88.7%, 65.8%, 55.3%, and 33.0%, respectively (P < 0.001). The risk stratification was reproducible in the validation cohort. Conclusions: We proposed a recurrence risk stratification system for EAC patients based on pathologic response and pretreatment clinical stage. Risk-based postoperative surveillance strategies could be developed for different risk categories.