Edelmann, Dominic

Abstract Over the past decade, classification systems using high-throughput genetic data have been developed to identify molecular subtypes of DLBCL. Although not a primary goal, these classifiers were also proposed as prognostic factors in their respective publications. To date, however, no study has directly compared these classifiers' ability to predict overall (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) in the same cohort. Herein, we sought to systematically compare predictive performance, benchmarked against the IPI, of several current established molecular classifiers and evaluate if any add significant independent prognostic information beyond the IPI. WES (including paired germline filter) and RNAseq data from newly diagnosed DLBCL patients (N=432; 2018 WHO criteria) in the Mayo Clinic/University of Iowa Lymphoma Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) were available for analysis (WES n=112, RNAseq n=40, or both n=280). The number of cases able to be classified (including as unclassified) for each classifier was as follows: IPI (432, 100%), cell-of-origin (COO, by Hans algorithm; 346, 80.1%), refined COO (by gene expression with Dark Zone Signature; 320, 100%), Haematological Malignancy Research Network (HMRN; 349, 89.0%), B-cell state (320, 100%), Lymphoma Ecotype (320, 100%), Lymphoma Microenvironment (LME; 320, 100%), Tumor microenvironment (TME26; 320, 100%), SubLymE (312, 97.5%), LymphGen (358, 91.3%), and DLBclass (223, 58.2%). OS was defined as time from diagnosis to all-cause death while EFS was defined as time from diagnosis to disease progression, initiation of second-line treatment, or all-cause death. We calculated Harrell's c-statistics for each Cox proportional hazards model evaluating the discriminative performance of each classifier in predicting OS/EFS. Using bootstrap validation, we obtained optimism-corrected c-statistics, which we report in the results. We performed likelihood ratio tests (LRT) comparing a univariable Cox model with IPI alone and models including both IPI and a given classifier to assess if a classifier provided independent prognostic information beyond the IPI. All patients were treated with immunochemotherapy (IC) with curative intent, 247 (57%) were male, median age at diagnosis was 65 years (IQR 55-72 years), 390 (96%) were White, 209 (60%) had GCB subtype by Hans, 22 (5.1%) had MYC double-hit by FISH (MYC and BCL2 or BCL6), and 162 (37.9%) had an IPI ≥ 3. The median follow-up was 7.0 years, 167 (39%) experienced an event, and 137 (32%) died. In a univariable Cox model, the c-statistic for IPI predicting OS was 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.70). All other classifiers had c-statistics of ≤0.56. The c-statistic for IPI predicting EFS was 0.64 (95% CI 0.60-0.69), and all other classifiers had c-statistics of ≤0.58. The univariate DLBclass results for OS and EFS were not significantly impacted when restricted to cases with confidence >0.7 (n=136). In Cox models of IPI alone versus IPI plus an individual classifier, the only classifier that provided statistically significant, independent information for OS was TME26 (LRT p=0.02). Adjusting for IPI, patients who were TME26-negative had significantly inferior OS compared to TME26-positive cases (HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.07-2.47; p=0.02). For EFS, DLBclass (restricted to confidence >0.7) added significant prognostic information beyond IPI (LRT p=0.02). This finding was largely driven by C5 subtype; relative to C1 subtype and adjusting for IPI, C5 subtype had significantly inferior EFS (HR 5.53, 95% CI 1.81-17.0; p=0.003). In summary, we compared prognostic performance of multiple DLBCL molecular classifiers with respect to OS and EFS in a single real-world, prospective cohort of newly diagnosed, IC-treated DLBCL. Our data supports two key findings: all classifiers had modest performance for prognosis, and none individually outperformed the IPI in predicting OS nor EFS. Second, only TME26 and DLBclass (confidence >0.7) provided additional prognostic information beyond that captured by the IPI for OS and EFS, respectively. This finding suggests that the tumor immune microenvironment and characteristics of C5 DLBCLs (ABC-subtype, CD79B mutations) can potentially offer significant independent information for predicting survival and response to front-line immunochemotherapy. If replicated, these findings could inform risk-adapted treatment approaches and aid in identifying high-risk patients for enrollment in genomically-informed clinical trials.

AbstractWe conducted the first large genome‐wide association study to identify novel genetic variants that predict better (or poorer) prognosis in colorectal cancer patients receiving standard first‐line oxaliplatin‐based chemotherapy vs chemotherapy without oxaliplatin. We used data from two phase III trials, NCCTG N0147 and NCCTG N9741 and a population‐based patient cohort, DACHS. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were employed, including an interaction term between each SNP and type of treatment for overall survival (OS) and progression‐free survival. The analysis was performed for studies individually, and the results were combined using fixed‐effect meta‐analyses separately for resected stage III colon cancer (3098 patients from NCCTG N0147 and 549 patients from DACHS) and mCRC (505 patients from NCCTG N9741 and 437 patients from DACHS). We further performed gene‐based analysis as well as in silico bioinformatics analysis for CRC‐relevant functional genomic annotation of identified loci. In stage III colon cancer patients, a locus on chr22 (rs11912167) was associated with significantly poorer OS after oxaliplatin‐based chemotherapy vs chemotherapy without oxaliplatin (Pinteraction < 5 × 10−8). For mCRC patients, three loci on chr1 (rs1234556), chr12 (rs11052270) and chr15 (rs11858406) were found to be associated with differential OS (P < 5 × 10−7). The locus on chr1 located in the intronic region of RCSD1 was replicated in an independent cohort of 586 mCRC patients from ALGB/SWOG 80405 (Pinteraction = .04). The GWA gene‐based analysis yielded for RCSD1 the most significant association with differential OS in mCRC (P = 6.6 × 10−6). With further investigation into its biological mechanisms, this finding could potentially be used to individualize first‐line treatment and improve clinical outcomes.

Abstract Background: Associations between candidate germline genetic variants and treatment outcome of oxaliplatin, a drug commonly used for patients with colorectal cancer, have been reported but not robustly established. This study aimed to construct polygenic hazard scores (PHSs) as predictive markers for oxaliplatin treatment outcome by using a supervised principal component approach (PCA). Methods: Genome-wide association analysis for overall survival, including interaction terms (SNP*treatment type) was carried out using two phase III trials, 3,098 resected stage III colon cancer (rCC) patients of NCCTG N0147 and 506 metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients of NCCTG N9741, separately. SNPs showing interaction with genome-wide significance (P &lt; 5 × 10–8) were selected for PCA to derive a PHS. PHS interaction with treatment was included in Cox regression models to predict outcome. Replication of prediction models was performed in an independent cohort, DACHS. Results: The two PHSs based on the first two principal components of selected SNPs (15SNPs for rCC and 13SNPs for mCRC) were used to construct interaction terms with treatment type and included in models adjusted for clinical covariables. However, in the DACHS study, the addition of the two PHS terms to clinical models did not improve the prediction error in either patients with rCC or mCRC. PHS interaction was also not replicated. Conclusions: The PHSs derived using principal components efficiently combined multiple predictive SNPs for estimating likelihood of benefit from oxaliplatin versus other treatment but could not be replicated. Impact: These results highlight the potential but also challenges in generating evidence for a predictive polygenic score for oxaliplatin efficacy.