Citations

186 Background: The optimal sequence strategy of BRAF/MEK inhibitors, anti-PD- 1/PDL-1 and anti-CTLA-4 in metastatic BRAF-mutated melanoma patients (pts) is unknown and no treatment guidelines exist. Therefore, we report a single-institution experience of different treatment approaches using targeted therapy (TT) and immunotherapy and its impact on outcomes. Methods: BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma pts treated with TT and immunotherapy from 2012 to2017 were analyzed. Six groups were identified based on treatment strategy. All time-to-event analyses were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Wilcoxon test. Results: Forty-four pts were identified. The median age at diagnosis was 49 years (range 21-73), 54% pts were females and 43% developed brain metastases during disease course. The most common approach strategy was immunotherapy followed by TT, the median duration of treatment was 11 and 19 weeks, respectively. Time-to-next therapy (TTNT) following 1st line treatment was similar in pts treated with TT (median 23 weeks [95% CI: 15-31]) or immunotherapy (median 26 weeks [95% CI: 10-33], p = 0.94). A trend towards better overall survival (OS) was seen in pts who received immunotherapy followed by TT (p = 0.09); patients who received salvage chemotherapy (carboplatin/paclitaxel) had significantly longer OS (median 7 years [95% CI: 3.2-7.08]) ( p = 0.03). Conclusions: No differences in TTNT were seen with immunotherapy, TT or combined (triple therapy) when used as 1st or 2nd line. The significant longer OS benefit with 1st line immunotherapy was only seen in patients who received chemotherapy later in their treatment course. [Table: see text]

AimErdheim–Chester disease represents a clonal systemic proliferation of histiocytes. Bone is the most common site of involvement, although almost any organ, including the lungs, can be affected.Methods and resultsThe diagnosis of Erdheim–Chester disease can be difficult, owing to its rarity and protean presentation. Correlation between clinical, radiological and histological findings is mandatory for identification of the disease. Foamy histiocytes, lacking Langerhans cell markers, represent the typical histological findings, although their absence does not rule out Erdheim–Chester disease. Identification of BRAF mutation can be helpful in making the diagnosis, and allows for the development and application of targeted therapies in this setting.ConclusionsHerein, we describe two cases presenting with lung involvement and vertebral lesions, lacking the more typical long‐bone involvement. One case histologically mimicked Rosai–Dorfman disease. However, both cases harboured the pathognomonic BRAFV600E mutation.

Abstract Background. Dysregulation of the estrogen receptor gene (ESR1) is an established mechanism of inducing endocrine therapy resistance. We previously discovered a chromosomal translocation event generating an estrogen receptor gene fused in-frame to C-terminal sequences of YAP1 (ESR1-YAP1) that contributed to endocrine therapy resistance in estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer models. This study compares functional, transcriptional, and pharmacological properties of additional ESR1 gene fusion events of both early stage (ESR1-NOP2) late stage (ESR1-YAP1 and ESR1-PCDH11x) breast cancers to gain a better understanding of therapeutic resistance and metastasis. Understanding the role of ESR1 fusions in inducing metastasis is critical, since the primary cause of death in breast cancer patients is through metastasis to distant sites. Methods. RNA-seq screens identified ESR1 fusions from early and late stage, endocrine therapy resistant breast tumor samples. Functional experiments were conducted using ER+ breast cancer cell lines, xenograft, and PDX models to test the ability of ESR1 fusions to induce therapeutic resistance and metastasis. ChIP-seq and RNA-seq were performed to examine transcriptional properties and differential gene expression induced by the fusions which directed subsequent pharmacological experiments with a CDK4/6 inhibitor. Results. ESR1-YAP1 and ESR1-PCDH11x promoted estrogen-independent and fulvestrant-resistant growth in vitro and induced greater tumor growth and increased metastatic capacity to the lungs of xenografted mice. In contrast, the ESR1-NOP2 fusion was sensitive to low estrogen conditions in vitro, and did not promote tumor growth. RNA-seq profiling revealed E2F targets pathway as the most highly enriched pathway induced by the ESR1 fusions. IHC revealed higher levels of pRb in ESR1-YAP1 and ESR1-PCDH11x xenograft tumors and subsequent CDK4/6 inhibition completely blocked tumor growth in an ESR1-YAP1 PDX model. Integrating RNA-seq with ChIP-seq data, we discovered a set of EMT and metastasis genes bound by all ESR1 fusions and WT-ER, but whose expression was strongly and uniquely up-regulated only by the ESR1-YAP1 and ESR1-PCDH11x fusions. These studies also revealed gained sites bound only by the ESR1-YAP1 and ESR1-PCDH11x fusions, not bound by WT-ER nor ESR1-NOP2. Genes mapping to these sites have a role in metastatic biology and were highly up-regulated by the YAP1 and PCDH11x fusions, potentially mediated by long range transcriptional activation. Conclusion. ESR1-YAP1 and ESR1-PCDH11x are driver fusions that occur in drug-resistant, advanced stage breast cancer and are a new class of recurrent somatic mutation that can cause acquired endocrine therapy resistance, yet can be treated with CDK4/6 inhibition. These driver fusions also confer increased metastatic ability through their ability to drive expression of genes that contribute to EMT and metastasis. In contrast, ESR1-NOP2 did not produce functional protein and appears to be a passenger event. These studies may provide pre-clinical rationale for targeting ESR1 translocated breast tumors, since the presence of an ESR1 driver fusion places a patient in a therapeutic category where none of the currently available endocrine therapies are likely to be effective. Citation Format: Lei JT, Shao J, Zhang J, Iglesia M, Chan DW, Cao J, Anurag M, Singh P, Haricharan S, Kavuri SM, Matsunuma R, Schmidt C, Kosaka Y, Crowder R, Hoog J, Phommaly C, Goncalves R, Ramalho S, Rodrigues-Peres RM, Lai W-C, Hampton O, Rogers A, Tobias E, Parikh P, Davies S, Ma C, Suman V, Hunt K, Watson M, Hoadley KA, Thompson A, Perou CM, Creighton CJ, Maher C, Ellis MJ. ESR1 gene fusions drive endocrine therapy resistance and metastasis in breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD8-03.

Abstract Estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer is treated with endocrine therapy but intrinsic resistance occurs in ˜1/3 of patients and acquired resistance in ˜1/5 of the remainder. While many resistance mechanisms have been explored, clinical trials testing associated therapeutics have had mixed outcomes. Understanding mechanisms of resistance and finding therapeutic strategies to target them, therefore, remain important challenges. In this study we discover an intriguing link between mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency, specifically of the MutL complex (MLH1/3, PMS1/2), and endocrine therapy resistance in ER+ disease. We find a direct role for MutL loss in inducing endocrine therapy resistance in vitro and in vivo by knocking down multiple MutL genes using CRISPR and stable shRNA approaches validated using standard rescue experiments. We identify the underlying mechanism: MutL deficiency in ER+ breast cancer abrogates Chk2-mediated feedback inhibition of CDK4/6 that appears necessary for endocrine therapy responsiveness. Consequently, pharmacological targeting of CDK4/6 in vitro and in vivo significantly inhibits growth of endocrine therapy resistant MutL-deficient ER+ breast cancer cells. These results are corroborated by data from a neoadjuvant clinical trial demonstrating that cell cycle regulation of MutL-mutant tumors is estrogen-independent but CDK4/6 dependent. The results of this study provide important biological and clinically relevant insights. 1) a novel role for MMR in endocrine therapy resistance 2) A mechanism underlying the effectiveness of CDK4/6 inhibitors in some de novo endocrine therapy resistant tumors. While there are currently no biomarkers to guide the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors for ER+ breast cancer, markers of MMR dysregulation could identify patients in whom CDK4/6 inhibition may, most effectively, prevent disease recurrence. Citation Format: Haricharan S, Punturi N, Singh P, Holloway KR, Anurag M, Schmelz J, Schmidt C, Lei JT, Suman V, Hunt K, Olson Jr JA, Hoog J, Li S, Huang S, Edwards DP, Kavuri SM, Bainbridge MN, Ma CX, Ellis MJ. Loss of mismatch repair predicts resistance to endocrine therapy and sensitivity to CDK4/6 inhibitors in ER+ breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-04-01.

The diagnostic criteria of diffuse idiopathic pulmonary neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia (DIPNECH) are not well defined, and DIPNECH can be mistaken for carcinoids associated with neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia (NECH). In this study, we compared clinical, radiologic, histologic, immunohistochemical, and molecular features of DIPNECH and isolated carcinoids with/without NECH. The study population included 151 cases (77 female patients and 74 male patients), 19 with DIPNECH and 132 with carcinoids with/without NECH. None of the cases displayed molecular alterations or anaplastic lymphoma kinase expression. Compared with individuals with carcinoids with/without NECH, patients with DIPNECH were more likely to be female individuals ( P <0.0001), nonsmokers ( P =0.021), and symptomatic, and to have an obstructive/mixed respiratory defect, peripheral location of the lesions, and air trapping ( P <0.0001) on chest computed tomography, and constrictive bronchiolitis on histology ( P <0.0001). Among immunohistochemical markers, DIPNECH was associated with higher expression of thyroid transcription factor-1, CD10, and gastrin-releasing peptide/bombesin-like peptide ( P <0.0001). Yet, when a purely histopathologic definition of DIPNECH was applied, 40% of isolated carcinoids also met the diagnostic criteria for DIPNECH, even in the absence of symptoms and/or radiologic abnormalities. Therefore, as DIPNECH represents a distinct clinical syndrome, we suggest the term DIPNECH be limited to cases presenting with respiratory symptoms, functional and/or radiologic abnormalities, and constrictive bronchiolitis on histology.

Objective To evaluate the incidence and prevalence of autoimmune encephalitis and compare it to that of infectious encephalitis. Methods We performed a population‐based comparative study of the incidence and prevalence of autoimmune and infectious encephalitis in Olmsted County, Minnesota. Autoimmune encephalitis diagnosis and subgroups were defined by 2016 diagnostic criteria, and infectious encephalitis diagnosis required a confirmed infectious pathogen. Age‐ and sex‐adjusted prevalence and incidence rates were calculated. Patients with encephalitis of uncertain etiology were excluded. Results The prevalence of autoimmune encephalitis on January 1, 2014 of 13.7/100,000 was not significantly different from that of all infectious encephalitides (11.6/100,000; p = 0.63) or the viral subcategory (8.3/100,000; p = 0.17). The incidence rates (1995–2015) of autoimmune and infectious encephalitis were 0.8/100,000 and 1.0/100,000 person‐years, respectively ( p = 0.58). The number of relapses or recurrent hospitalizations was higher for autoimmune than infectious encephalitis ( p = 0.03). The incidence of autoimmune encephalitis increased over time from 0.4/100,000 person‐years (1995–2005) to 1.2/100,000 person‐years (2006–2015; p = 0.02), attributable to increased detection of autoantibody‐positive cases. The incidence (2.8 vs 0.7/100,000 person‐years, p = 0.01) and prevalence (38.3 vs 13.7/100,000, p = 0.04) of autoimmune encephalitis was higher among African Americans than Caucasians. The prevalence of specific neural autoantibodies was as follows: myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein, 1.9/100,000; glutamic acid decarboxylase 65, 1.9/100,000; unclassified neural autoantibody, 1.4/100,000; leucine‐rich glioma‐inactivated protein 1, 0.7/100,000; collapsin response‐mediator protein 5, 0.7/100,000; N‐methyl‐D‐aspartate receptor, 0.6/100,000; antineuronal nuclear antibody type 2, 0.6/100,000; and glial fibrillary acidic protein α, 0.6/100,000. Interpretation This study shows that the prevalence and incidence of autoimmune encephalitis are comparable to infectious encephalitis, and its detection is increasing over time. Ann Neurol 2018;83:166–177